Adrian Guy Etchells is quite right that the prohibition was based on the theological view (both Catholic and Protestant) that a husband and wife became 'one flesh' on marriage, and the prohibited degrees listed in Leviticus. This was a well-thought out theological position that dates back to the 13th centuryiof not earlier (and was used by Henry VIII to justify one of his divorces/annulments).Practice was another matter - as with anything else including the Ten Commandments. The interesting point is that practice varied significantly from the theological view that was incorporated into the law. Clearly most people did not regard it - or cousin marriage - as inappropriate, yet alone incest. There are very few cases where someone was prosecuted - it usually crops up in civil disputes about inheritance as a ploy to disinherit children of such a marriage as they would then be illegitimate and to justify the annulment of a marraige instead of a divorce. The repeal of the law that prohibited it was a very bitter dispute. John

Among the benefits of belonging to a forum such as this and some others is how a relatively basic question and some simple responses can expand into a very thorough and educational discussion. I didn't ask the question but I appreciate the thought and effort going into the replies. My thanks to you all. On 8/2/2011 1:21 PM, John Hardy wrote: > Adrian Guy Etchells is quite right that the prohibition was based on the theological view (both Catholic and Protestant) that a husband and wife became 'one flesh' on marriage, and the prohibited degrees listed in Leviticus. This was a well-thought out theological position that dates back to the 13th centuryiof not earlier (and was used by Henry VIII to justify one of his divorces/annulments).Practice was another matter - as with anything else including the Ten Commandments. The interesting point is that practice varied significantly from the theological view that was incorporated into the law. Clearly most people did not regard it - or cousin marriage - as inappropriate, yet alone incest. There are very few cases where someone was prosecuted - it usually crops up in civil disputes about inheritance as a ploy to disinherit children of such a marriage as they would then be illegitimate and to justify the annulment of a marraige instead of a divorce. The repeal of the law th! at! > prohibited it was a very bitter dispute. > John > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to [email protected] with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message >

>From Leviticus Ch.18 V.18 Neither shalt thou take a wife to her sister, to vex her, to uncover her nakedness, beside the other in her life time. In other words you can't marry your wife's sister, while she is alive. So did the church get it wrong, or choose to ignore the "in her life time" part. Colin On 2 August 2011 20:47, Wallace Fullerton <[email protected]> wrote: > Leviticus