Question:
We have received dozens of questions from priests and laypeople asking:

1- Is it permissible for a man—after the death of his brother—to marry his brother’s wife, that is, his widow? From the standpoint of the man’s conscience. And from the standpoint of the woman’s conscience, is it permissible for her to marry her deceased husband’s brother?

2- Likewise: Is it permissible for a man—after the death of his wife—to marry her sister? And is it permissible for her sister to marry her sister’s husband?

3- Is the prohibition of these marriages merely a prohibition from Roman state laws, and not a religious prohibition…? And is the reason behind it the fear that a husband may be killed by his brother in order to marry his wife, or the fear that a wife may be killed by her sister to take the husband from her?

Answer:
These marriages are religiously forbidden and fall under the category of marriage to close relatives (forbidden relations), for spiritual reasons:

1- First of all, we must understand what Christian marriage is, what its nature is, and what the work of the Holy Spirit in it is.

Christian marriage is two becoming one. The Holy Spirit unites them and transforms the two into one, and concerning this the Lord says:
“So then, they are no longer two but one flesh” (Matt. 19:6).

This unity in the sacrament of marriage was likened by the Apostle to the relationship between Christ and the Church, and he said:
“This is a great mystery” (Eph. 5:31–32).

2- In this unity, the husband’s relatives become relatives of the wife, and the wife’s relatives become relatives of the husband. His brother becomes her brother, and her sister becomes his sister…

In the English language, they say concerning this: Brother in law,
and also Sister in law, meaning that they are siblings according to the law.

The mother-in-law becomes a mother,
and the father-in-law becomes a father.

Thus marriage and marital relationships are elevated, and the two families become as though they are one family.

We have previously explained this in El-Keraza Magazine (in the issue of March 19, 1976).

A man marries: his brother is considered a brother to the wife. This brother looks upon his brother’s wife as though she were his sister, and thus she becomes to him one of the forbidden relations.

He never thinks of her becoming his wife, whether his brother died a natural death or was killed. Nor can he think of killing his brother in order to take her, because she is forbidden to him according to the law (whether during his brother’s life or after his death).

She is not forbidden to him because of Roman state laws in the days of Justinian or others, but rather in divine revelation, two thousand years before Justinian. For it is written in the Book of Leviticus (18:16) concerning forbidden marriages:
“You shall not uncover the nakedness of your brother’s wife; it is your brother’s nakedness.”

And in defense of this law which forbids marriage to a brother’s wife, John the Baptist was cast into prison and his head was cut off, because he rebuked King Herod, saying:
“It is not lawful for you to have your brother’s wife” (Matt. 14:3–4).

Since this marriage is therefore forbidden according to the law, the killing or poisoning of the husband by members of his family, so that his wife might marry his brother, would not have led to the intended result. There must be a John the Baptist to fight against this forbidden marriage.

This marriage was forbidden in the Old Testament. Is it then reasonable that it should become permissible in the New Testament, in which the Law was perfected, and in which marriages that were once permissible were later forbidden?!

The only exception to this prohibition in the Old Testament was the case of a brother who died without offspring. For fear that his name might be blotted out in Israel, and also for fear concerning his inheritance—which had spiritual symbolism—the brother was permitted to take his brother’s wife in order to raise up offspring for his brother…

That is, the son born to him from his brother’s wife would not bear his own name, but rather his brother’s name, and according to the law would become the son of the deceased brother (Deut. 25:5–10).

This exception was not merely permitted in the Old Testament, but was an obligatory duty. And the widow of the deceased brother had the right, if his brother refused to marry her, to complain against him before the elders of Israel, remove his sandal from his foot, spit in his face, and cry out saying:
“So shall it be done to the man who will not build up his brother’s house” (Deut. 25:8–10).

Therefore, let no one argue and say: “I marry my brother’s wife in order to care for his children,” for the only exception in the Old Testament was the case of a brother who had no children! And this was a matter that had circumstances surrounding it which no longer exist now.

---

An article by His Holiness Pope Shenouda III – in El-Keraza Magazine – Year Eight (Issue Thirty-One) 5-8-1977

For better translation support, please contact the center.