A committed Christian we will call Reza was happily married to a girl we will call Maryam – also as the time of their wedding a committed Christian. After a few years, people began to notice that Maryam was attending church less often, and her husband noticed traits of her former non-Christian life-style returning. He prayed for her to come fully back to Christ, but things grew worse and then she dropped a bomb shell. Maryam told Reza that she had been having an affair with one of Reza’s friends – and she was filing for divorce. Reza pleaded with her to thing again, but Maryam was determined to end the marriage and so Reza’s life entered a dark and tortuous tunnel. And in that tunnel many Christians did little to give comforting light. One wrote to him saying they would not talk to him till he was reconciled to his wife, something he knew she refused, and a number of churches refused to ‘take sides’: in other words Reza was as guilty as Maryam. Sadly Reza’s case is not isolated and the fact is that a lot of discouraging ambiguity hangs over divorced people in the church.
With divorce running in some Western countries at around 40% and in Iran there has been a steep increase: the official rate is now around 13% the Iranian church, both inside and outside the country is bound to have divorced people in their midst who also might be facing the sort of situation Reza faced.
So as well as the pastoral need to deal with all the tortuous pain that divorce spits out at the couple, their children and all the wider family, the church also has to have clear policies regarding such questions as whether it is right to accept divorce as having Scriptural validity: whether divorced people can be re-married, not just in a civil setting, but in a church; and whether divorcees can have an official ministry in the church. Regarding what happened to Reza the cruellest approach for any church to take is not to tackle the issue in a clear way
, leaving people to make up their own minds about others according to their own reading of the Scriptures.
This article will not attempt to comment on how pastorally churches should deal with the agony of those caught up in divorce, what some people describe as being worse than experiencing death, except to say it is not an area for amateurs. Nor will this article attempt to suggest ways churches can go about strengthening marriage and so fighting the likelihood of divorce, except to say it should be an absolute priority as strong marriage make strong churches. However the article will seek to provide a biblical and historical basis for forming church policies regarding divorce and re-marriage.
Divorce and re-marriage was not new in Jesus’ day, and he specifically addressed the issue. In the Gospels there are four references to the matter (Matthew 5:31-32 and 19:3-12, Luke 16:18, Mark 10:2-12, and Jesus’ basic position is very clear. When asked by the Pharisees in Matthew 19 whether divorce was acceptable he took them back to the original scheme of things in Genesis where God made man male and female who became one flesh, adding, ‘Therefore what God has joined together let no one pull asunder.’ So on this basis of God’s original intent Jesus condemns divorce and re-marriage; however he does include an exception clause: ‘I tell you that anyone who divorces his wife, except for marital unfaithfulness, and marries another woman commits adultery.’
Ministering in sex soaked cities like Corinth, there was nothing new about the issue of divorce and re-marriage for the Apostle Paul either. His line is exactly the same as Jesus’: Christians must not divorce (I Corinthians 7: 11), but he too has an exception clause. If a Christian has an unbelieving spouse who wants to leave the marriage then his ruling was that ‘A believing man or woman is not bound in such circumstances; God has called us to peace.’ (1 Corinthians 7:15).
Regarding ministry in the church Paul’s rules, for both bishops and deacons, is that they should be ‘the husband of one wife’ (1 Timothy 3:2, 12). Whether this applies to those who have remarried as they therefore have had more than one wife, or whether it just means having one wife in the present, i.e. they are not polygamists, is a matter of some debate.
From these texts the church in history has arrived at three slightly differing positions. The Roman Catholics believe that marriage after consummation is indissoluble because Jesus said, ‘What God has joined together, let not man pull asunder.’ Indeed pointing to Paul’s analogy of human marriage with that of the church’s relationship with Christ (Ephesians 5), Roman Catholics see marriage as a sacrament, a divine presence and reality is involved. Since marriage is an act of God, absolute divorce is impossible while either partner is alive. There is therefore no divorce or remarriage for those who marry as baptised Roman Catholics. This was the view of all the church fathers, and all the popes. However in line with Paul’s teaching in 1 Corinthians 7 Catholicism has what it calls the ‘Pauline privilege’ whereby a Roman Catholic may approach the church authorities if they are married to a non-Catholic and if the non-Catholic confirms that they are unable to live in peace with the Catholic, then that marriage ends, and the Catholic is free to re-marry, but only to a baptised Catholic. Regarding Jesus’ ‘immorality’ clause the Roman Catholic position is that as this exception is only recorded in Matthew, it is not right to let this teaching overrule the statements in Mark and Luke where there is no such clause, therefore the word ‘divorce’ used is interpreted to mean dismissal. So if one partner commits adultery and this is proven, then the innocent one has a right to immediately dismiss them from the family home: but there is no right to break the actual marriage bond and re-marry. They can separate, but not divorce. Though there is no divorce in Catholicism, marriages can be nullified, that is to say if approached with valid reasons, known as impediments, the ecclesiastical authorities can declare that the original marriage was not valid. The main impediments the church court would consider as grounds for annulling a marriage are: when spouses are relatives; madness when taking vows; having no intention to either remain faithful or have children; the use of deceit to gain consent; marrying in order to kidnap; not having a proper priest at the wedding; and perpetual impotence. In Catholic thinking a marriage is not utterly indissoluble until it has been consummated, so it is also possible for someone to marry and then if they decide they want to become a monk or a nun they can get special permission from the church to do so, and their unconsummated marriage is dissolved. So though divorce does not legally exist in the Roman Catholic Church, given the right of Catholics to either exercise the ‘Pauline privilege’ or the wide range of impediments that give grounds for an annulment there is in fact limited room, albeit limited, for what in practice amounts to divorce and re-marriage. The issue of whether a divorced person can minister in the Roman Catholic Church does not arise as all her priests must be celibate men.
The Eastern Orthodox Churches, including both the Nestorian Assyrian and the Armenian Orthodox who have a presence in Iran, agree with the Roman Catholics that marriage is an indissoluble covenant as set out in Genesis. So the married couple are crowned during the wedding ceremony to signify their eternal union. However there is a consensus that while recognising God’s perfect will, nevertheless He and therefore His Church also recognise that they operate in a fallen world where human weakness must be taken into account. And so there is the rule of ‘Economia’ whereby the bishop is allowed to show compassion to weak and sinful people. ‘Economia’ can be used by the bishop not just in cases of immorality, as supported by Christ in Matthew 5 and 19, but also when one of the spouses is permanently absent, or mad, or physically threatening. Once the church has validated a divorce – then re-marriage is possible. Regarding ministry, Eastern bishops are traditionally celibate, and though a married man can become a priest, on the basis of 1 Timothy, 3 a man cannot become a priest if either his wife has committed adultery, or he has divorced or remarried. A priest can only divorce his wife on the grounds of proven adultery – and he is obliged to do so: if he remains with her he cannot remain a priest. If it is proved that he has committed adultery, he is automatically defrocked.
Protestant Churches do not regard marriage as a sacrament and so indissoluble, nevertheless on the basis of Scripture mainline churches teach that divorce is utterly against the will of God, except in the case of adultery, as stated in Matthew. Also from the earliest days of the Reformation there has also been a willingness to accept divorce when one partner leaves the marriage. So in the 1647 Westminster Confession which influenced the Presbyterian, Congregational, and Baptist Churches it is written – ‘yet, nothing but adultery, or such wilful desertion as can no way be remedied by the Church, or civil magistrate, is cause sufficient of dissolving the bond of marriage’. In response to the prevalence of divorce since the 1960’s in the West some churches have been less strict and usually ready to accept all who have obtained divorces from the state. Regarding re-marriage there is a wide range of views within Protestantism. Some strict Reformist churches interpret Jesus’ teaching as stating that all re-marriage is adultery and will not allow it until the original spouse has died. Influenced both by Catholicism and the early Reformation the Church of England still will not marry divorcees in a church, though they will give a blessing. The view of the Reformist leader Calvin was that the state should execute adulterers, so they should be dead anyway, which means the innocent party is free to re-marry. That is a slightly extreme position. Most other Protestant denominations teach that if the divorce was valid, i.e. due to immorality or one partner leaving, then re-marriage is valid. As the official policy of the Assemblies of God Churches states – ‘It is clear that in Matthew 19.9 Jesus assumes the man will remarry. The verse deals with divorce and remarriage, and the laws of grammar make the exceptive clause apply to both.’ While John Wesley and the early Methodists only allowed divorce on the grounds of adultery (not cruelty), and condemned all re-marriage as adultery today’s Methodists are much more pragmatic and marry many divorcees in their churches even if the original cause for the divorce was not immorality or cruelty.
There is also a wide range of views within Protestantism regarding whether divorced and re-married people can have an official ministry in the church. As mentioned a lot depends on how the interpretation of the phrase, ‘the husband of one wife’, Paul’s condition for deacons and priest in 1 Timothy 3,. The Assemblies of God Churches rejects the argument that the verse applies to polygamy on the grounds that while divorce and re-marriage was very common among Jews and Gentiles in the 1C, polygamy, which was against Roman law, was not. For them the phrase reads – ‘husband of one wife in a lifetime’. Their rule therefore is ‘that candidates for elders and deacons are to be persons in a faithful heterosexual marriage with neither partner having been previously divorced, except where the divorce occurred prior to conversion.’ So in this church divorcees may become members and be active in other ways – but they cannot become deacons or elders. This would also be the view of many Presbyterian and Baptist Churches. However there are other churches who would either see Paul in 1 Timothy 3 primarily directing his prohibition towards polygamists (or those with concubines), or would simply be willing to consider each man’s situation and calling individually. This is the stance of the Church of England: if a divorcee has re-married, but his former spouse is still alive, then special permission is needed before he or she can apply for ordination. As with other social issues, many Methodist churches are more relaxed and have a number of clergy who have divorced and remarried.
Conclusion – Grace and Clarity
From this overview of the Bible and Church’s teaching on divorce and re-marriage it is possible to suggest some guide lines for new churches to follow today, guide-lines determined by grace, i.e. a readiness to forgive and move on when possible, and clarity, so everyone, both those caught up in the marital breakdown, and the wider church, know exactly what the situation is.
It is quite clear from both the Biblical text and church history that adultery has always been recognised as having a deadly effect on the marriage contract. And as Jesus actually used the word immorality (pornei) in Matthew it is right to broaden the exception to include any sexual behaviour that is inviting a third party into the marriage. In the spirit of grace a church should first encourage forgiveness and reconciliation between a couple if adultery occurs, but if this is impossible, then the church should be clear and recognise that sexual infidelity is a legitimate reason for a valid divorce. And, as the Protestant churches have always accepted in accordance with the spirit of the New Testament text, if a divorce is valid, then re-marriage for the innocent party is also valid.
If this is the position of the church, then it is very important that when a divorced person is accepted into membership it is clearly explained to other members that they are the innocent party in the divorce and that the church accepts the divorce – and therefore re-marriage if it happens. To remain silent on this issue is to invite gossip and judgement as many falsely assume that it always takes two to bring a marriage down. And if such a person then believes they have been called to ministry, it would seem illogical to bar them on the grounds that they were an innocent party in a marriage that somebody else destroyed. Obviously the Scripture in 1 Timothy Chapter 3 must be taken seriously, but as established the phrase, ‘the husband of one wife’ does not have to apply to divorcees and the most important thing in this passage is that prospective ministers should be ‘above reproach’. To follow the spirit of this injunction, each case should be considered separately.
If the church is involved with someone who has engaged in sexual infidelity and so killed their marriage, then according to the Gospel of grace there is forgiveness and full acceptance for that person – if they repent. This repentance will mean that they should try and be reconciled to the spouse they have betrayed – whether Christian or not. If though the guilty person has re-married, they should stay faithful to his or her second spouse, as the Bible teaches we must remain faithful to a contract even when entered into wrongly, as with Joshua and the Gibeonites. If they were Christian when they committed adultery and then repent, but their first partner will not be reconciled, and they then want to re-marry there is no indication in Scripture that this is possible. The only grounds Jesus gives for divorce is immorality which then frees the innocent party to re-marry. There is no such freedom expressed for the person who commits adultery, breaks up his or her marriage, and then repents. So as their original divorce was not valid, so there can be no valid second marriage for them. Some might protest that such a ruling rejects the spirit of grace – but though sin when repented of is forgiven, there is the grace, sin still has consequences and one of them is that an adulterer who repents and then wants to re-marry cannot be treated in exactly the same way as another single person: he or she has violated a holy contract, betrayed his or her spouse, and devastated the childhood of any children involved. The only exception to this would be for when the infidelity happened prior to conversion as they might then have had no sense of morality in these matters. Nevertheless still the church should not treat such a person in the same way as other singles. It is especially important that the feelings of the betrayed partner and the children are taken into account, and also whether the second marriage will in anyway impact the financial support for the original family. If it is clear that a second marriage would be deeply upsetting for the betrayed and they are going to suffer financially it would be completely wrong for the church to bless such a union. And when a second marriage goes ahead, then still in the actual service there should be vows of penance for the one who was treacherous towards his or her first partner. If the church has a lax attitude to re-marrying those who have broken up homes, then they are contributing to the suffering innocent people have already had to endure. Regarding future ministry in the church, this would again depend on each individual situation. However it would be much more unlikely that someone involved in adultery would be eligible for a senior position in the church. In all of this it is again crucial that the church clearly communicates to its members what the situation is. This of course can be painful, but the Kingdom of God is not making people feel good, but about ‘righteousness, peace and joy in the Holy Spirit’
Tragically the issue of divorce and re-marriage will be with us till the end of time. For many churches it is perhaps easier to hide behind the text, ‘thou shalt not judge’, stay silent, and treat all divorcees as if nothing has happened. But this is not a loving option, especially for the innocent party. It is much better if a church has a clear policy about divorce and re-marriage, communicates these policies to the church, and publicly affirms their acceptance of divorcees who join the church, either because they were the innocent party, or because they have repented and the elders of the church
accept that repentance as genuine.
At a glance
Key Bible Texts
Jesus: Matthew 5:31-32 and 19:3-12, Luke 16:18, Mark 10:2-12
Paul: 1 Corinthians 7:11 & 15; 1 Timothy 3:2, 12
Crucial controversies
How valid is the ‘exception clause’ in Matthew?
Does the condition for deacons and bishops, ‘Husband of one wife’ apply to divorcees or polygamists?
Church Positions
Roman Catholic: marriage indissoluble; no divorce, no re-marriage; annulments possible
Orthodox: marriage indissoluble; but divorce and remarriage possible at discretion of church authorities; innocent divorcees can become priests.
Protestants: marriage contract can be dissolved for immorality and desertion; now more lax; valid divorce allows for re-marriage; divorcees often not allowed to minister
Key Advice for New Churches
Establish grounds for a valid divorce and re-marriage
Establish need for repentance for adulterers to be accepted in church family
Establish right of church to prohibit some second marriages
Communicate clearly to all members
All Rights Reserved
T.G.S. Hawksley
With divorce running in some Western countries at around 40% and in Iran there has been a steep increase: the official rate is now around 13% the Iranian church, both inside and outside the country is bound to have divorced people in their midst who also might be facing the sort of situation Reza faced.
So as well as the pastoral need to deal with all the tortuous pain that divorce spits out at the couple, their children and all the wider family, the church also has to have clear policies regarding such questions as whether it is right to accept divorce as having Scriptural validity: whether divorced people can be re-married, not just in a civil setting, but in a church; and whether divorcees can have an official ministry in the church. Regarding what happened to Reza the cruellest approach for any church to take is not to tackle the issue in a clear way
, leaving people to make up their own minds about others according to their own reading of the Scriptures.
This article will not attempt to comment on how pastorally churches should deal with the agony of those caught up in divorce, what some people describe as being worse than experiencing death, except to say it is not an area for amateurs. Nor will this article attempt to suggest ways churches can go about strengthening marriage and so fighting the likelihood of divorce, except to say it should be an absolute priority as strong marriage make strong churches. However the article will seek to provide a biblical and historical basis for forming church policies regarding divorce and re-marriage.
Divorce and re-marriage was not new in Jesus’ day, and he specifically addressed the issue. In the Gospels there are four references to the matter (Matthew 5:31-32 and 19:3-12, Luke 16:18, Mark 10:2-12, and Jesus’ basic position is very clear. When asked by the Pharisees in Matthew 19 whether divorce was acceptable he took them back to the original scheme of things in Genesis where God made man male and female who became one flesh, adding, ‘Therefore what God has joined together let no one pull asunder.’ So on this basis of God’s original intent Jesus condemns divorce and re-marriage; however he does include an exception clause: ‘I tell you that anyone who divorces his wife, except for marital unfaithfulness, and marries another woman commits adultery.’
Ministering in sex soaked cities like Corinth, there was nothing new about the issue of divorce and re-marriage for the Apostle Paul either. His line is exactly the same as Jesus’: Christians must not divorce (I Corinthians 7: 11), but he too has an exception clause. If a Christian has an unbelieving spouse who wants to leave the marriage then his ruling was that ‘A believing man or woman is not bound in such circumstances; God has called us to peace.’ (1 Corinthians 7:15).
Regarding ministry in the church Paul’s rules, for both bishops and deacons, is that they should be ‘the husband of one wife’ (1 Timothy 3:2, 12). Whether this applies to those who have remarried as they therefore have had more than one wife, or whether it just means having one wife in the present, i.e. they are not polygamists, is a matter of some debate.
From these texts the church in history has arrived at three slightly differing positions. The Roman Catholics believe that marriage after consummation is indissoluble because Jesus said, ‘What God has joined together, let not man pull asunder.’ Indeed pointing to Paul’s analogy of human marriage with that of the church’s relationship with Christ (Ephesians 5), Roman Catholics see marriage as a sacrament, a divine presence and reality is involved. Since marriage is an act of God, absolute divorce is impossible while either partner is alive. There is therefore no divorce or remarriage for those who marry as baptised Roman Catholics. This was the view of all the church fathers, and all the popes. However in line with Paul’s teaching in 1 Corinthians 7 Catholicism has what it calls the ‘Pauline privilege’ whereby a Roman Catholic may approach the church authorities if they are married to a non-Catholic and if the non-Catholic confirms that they are unable to live in peace with the Catholic, then that marriage ends, and the Catholic is free to re-marry, but only to a baptised Catholic. Regarding Jesus’ ‘immorality’ clause the Roman Catholic position is that as this exception is only recorded in Matthew, it is not right to let this teaching overrule the statements in Mark and Luke where there is no such clause, therefore the word ‘divorce’ used is interpreted to mean dismissal. So if one partner commits adultery and this is proven, then the innocent one has a right to immediately dismiss them from the family home: but there is no right to break the actual marriage bond and re-marry. They can separate, but not divorce. Though there is no divorce in Catholicism, marriages can be nullified, that is to say if approached with valid reasons, known as impediments, the ecclesiastical authorities can declare that the original marriage was not valid. The main impediments the church court would consider as grounds for annulling a marriage are: when spouses are relatives; madness when taking vows; having no intention to either remain faithful or have children; the use of deceit to gain consent; marrying in order to kidnap; not having a proper priest at the wedding; and perpetual impotence. In Catholic thinking a marriage is not utterly indissoluble until it has been consummated, so it is also possible for someone to marry and then if they decide they want to become a monk or a nun they can get special permission from the church to do so, and their unconsummated marriage is dissolved. So though divorce does not legally exist in the Roman Catholic Church, given the right of Catholics to either exercise the ‘Pauline privilege’ or the wide range of impediments that give grounds for an annulment there is in fact limited room, albeit limited, for what in practice amounts to divorce and re-marriage. The issue of whether a divorced person can minister in the Roman Catholic Church does not arise as all her priests must be celibate men.
The Eastern Orthodox Churches, including both the Nestorian Assyrian and the Armenian Orthodox who have a presence in Iran, agree with the Roman Catholics that marriage is an indissoluble covenant as set out in Genesis. So the married couple are crowned during the wedding ceremony to signify their eternal union. However there is a consensus that while recognising God’s perfect will, nevertheless He and therefore His Church also recognise that they operate in a fallen world where human weakness must be taken into account. And so there is the rule of ‘Economia’ whereby the bishop is allowed to show compassion to weak and sinful people. ‘Economia’ can be used by the bishop not just in cases of immorality, as supported by Christ in Matthew 5 and 19, but also when one of the spouses is permanently absent, or mad, or physically threatening. Once the church has validated a divorce – then re-marriage is possible. Regarding ministry, Eastern bishops are traditionally celibate, and though a married man can become a priest, on the basis of 1 Timothy, 3 a man cannot become a priest if either his wife has committed adultery, or he has divorced or remarried. A priest can only divorce his wife on the grounds of proven adultery – and he is obliged to do so: if he remains with her he cannot remain a priest. If it is proved that he has committed adultery, he is automatically defrocked.
Protestant Churches do not regard marriage as a sacrament and so indissoluble, nevertheless on the basis of Scripture mainline churches teach that divorce is utterly against the will of God, except in the case of adultery, as stated in Matthew. Also from the earliest days of the Reformation there has also been a willingness to accept divorce when one partner leaves the marriage. So in the 1647 Westminster Confession which influenced the Presbyterian, Congregational, and Baptist Churches it is written – ‘yet, nothing but adultery, or such wilful desertion as can no way be remedied by the Church, or civil magistrate, is cause sufficient of dissolving the bond of marriage’. In response to the prevalence of divorce since the 1960’s in the West some churches have been less strict and usually ready to accept all who have obtained divorces from the state. Regarding re-marriage there is a wide range of views within Protestantism. Some strict Reformist churches interpret Jesus’ teaching as stating that all re-marriage is adultery and will not allow it until the original spouse has died. Influenced both by Catholicism and the early Reformation the Church of England still will not marry divorcees in a church, though they will give a blessing. The view of the Reformist leader Calvin was that the state should execute adulterers, so they should be dead anyway, which means the innocent party is free to re-marry. That is a slightly extreme position. Most other Protestant denominations teach that if the divorce was valid, i.e. due to immorality or one partner leaving, then re-marriage is valid. As the official policy of the Assemblies of God Churches states – ‘It is clear that in Matthew 19.9 Jesus assumes the man will remarry. The verse deals with divorce and remarriage, and the laws of grammar make the exceptive clause apply to both.’ While John Wesley and the early Methodists only allowed divorce on the grounds of adultery (not cruelty), and condemned all re-marriage as adultery today’s Methodists are much more pragmatic and marry many divorcees in their churches even if the original cause for the divorce was not immorality or cruelty.
There is also a wide range of views within Protestantism regarding whether divorced and re-married people can have an official ministry in the church. As mentioned a lot depends on how the interpretation of the phrase, ‘the husband of one wife’, Paul’s condition for deacons and priest in 1 Timothy 3,. The Assemblies of God Churches rejects the argument that the verse applies to polygamy on the grounds that while divorce and re-marriage was very common among Jews and Gentiles in the 1C, polygamy, which was against Roman law, was not. For them the phrase reads – ‘husband of one wife in a lifetime’. Their rule therefore is ‘that candidates for elders and deacons are to be persons in a faithful heterosexual marriage with neither partner having been previously divorced, except where the divorce occurred prior to conversion.’ So in this church divorcees may become members and be active in other ways – but they cannot become deacons or elders. This would also be the view of many Presbyterian and Baptist Churches. However there are other churches who would either see Paul in 1 Timothy 3 primarily directing his prohibition towards polygamists (or those with concubines), or would simply be willing to consider each man’s situation and calling individually. This is the stance of the Church of England: if a divorcee has re-married, but his former spouse is still alive, then special permission is needed before he or she can apply for ordination. As with other social issues, many Methodist churches are more relaxed and have a number of clergy who have divorced and remarried.
Conclusion – Grace and Clarity
From this overview of the Bible and Church’s teaching on divorce and re-marriage it is possible to suggest some guide lines for new churches to follow today, guide-lines determined by grace, i.e. a readiness to forgive and move on when possible, and clarity, so everyone, both those caught up in the marital breakdown, and the wider church, know exactly what the situation is.
It is quite clear from both the Biblical text and church history that adultery has always been recognised as having a deadly effect on the marriage contract. And as Jesus actually used the word immorality (pornei) in Matthew it is right to broaden the exception to include any sexual behaviour that is inviting a third party into the marriage. In the spirit of grace a church should first encourage forgiveness and reconciliation between a couple if adultery occurs, but if this is impossible, then the church should be clear and recognise that sexual infidelity is a legitimate reason for a valid divorce. And, as the Protestant churches have always accepted in accordance with the spirit of the New Testament text, if a divorce is valid, then re-marriage for the innocent party is also valid.
If this is the position of the church, then it is very important that when a divorced person is accepted into membership it is clearly explained to other members that they are the innocent party in the divorce and that the church accepts the divorce – and therefore re-marriage if it happens. To remain silent on this issue is to invite gossip and judgement as many falsely assume that it always takes two to bring a marriage down. And if such a person then believes they have been called to ministry, it would seem illogical to bar them on the grounds that they were an innocent party in a marriage that somebody else destroyed. Obviously the Scripture in 1 Timothy Chapter 3 must be taken seriously, but as established the phrase, ‘the husband of one wife’ does not have to apply to divorcees and the most important thing in this passage is that prospective ministers should be ‘above reproach’. To follow the spirit of this injunction, each case should be considered separately.
If the church is involved with someone who has engaged in sexual infidelity and so killed their marriage, then according to the Gospel of grace there is forgiveness and full acceptance for that person – if they repent. This repentance will mean that they should try and be reconciled to the spouse they have betrayed – whether Christian or not. If though the guilty person has re-married, they should stay faithful to his or her second spouse, as the Bible teaches we must remain faithful to a contract even when entered into wrongly, as with Joshua and the Gibeonites. If they were Christian when they committed adultery and then repent, but their first partner will not be reconciled, and they then want to re-marry there is no indication in Scripture that this is possible. The only grounds Jesus gives for divorce is immorality which then frees the innocent party to re-marry. There is no such freedom expressed for the person who commits adultery, breaks up his or her marriage, and then repents. So as their original divorce was not valid, so there can be no valid second marriage for them. Some might protest that such a ruling rejects the spirit of grace – but though sin when repented of is forgiven, there is the grace, sin still has consequences and one of them is that an adulterer who repents and then wants to re-marry cannot be treated in exactly the same way as another single person: he or she has violated a holy contract, betrayed his or her spouse, and devastated the childhood of any children involved. The only exception to this would be for when the infidelity happened prior to conversion as they might then have had no sense of morality in these matters. Nevertheless still the church should not treat such a person in the same way as other singles. It is especially important that the feelings of the betrayed partner and the children are taken into account, and also whether the second marriage will in anyway impact the financial support for the original family. If it is clear that a second marriage would be deeply upsetting for the betrayed and they are going to suffer financially it would be completely wrong for the church to bless such a union. And when a second marriage goes ahead, then still in the actual service there should be vows of penance for the one who was treacherous towards his or her first partner. If the church has a lax attitude to re-marrying those who have broken up homes, then they are contributing to the suffering innocent people have already had to endure. Regarding future ministry in the church, this would again depend on each individual situation. However it would be much more unlikely that someone involved in adultery would be eligible for a senior position in the church. In all of this it is again crucial that the church clearly communicates to its members what the situation is. This of course can be painful, but the Kingdom of God is not making people feel good, but about ‘righteousness, peace and joy in the Holy Spirit’
Tragically the issue of divorce and re-marriage will be with us till the end of time. For many churches it is perhaps easier to hide behind the text, ‘thou shalt not judge’, stay silent, and treat all divorcees as if nothing has happened. But this is not a loving option, especially for the innocent party. It is much better if a church has a clear policy about divorce and re-marriage, communicates these policies to the church, and publicly affirms their acceptance of divorcees who join the church, either because they were the innocent party, or because they have repented and the elders of the church
accept that repentance as genuine.
At a glance
Key Bible Texts
Jesus: Matthew 5:31-32 and 19:3-12, Luke 16:18, Mark 10:2-12
Paul: 1 Corinthians 7:11 & 15; 1 Timothy 3:2, 12
Crucial controversies
How valid is the ‘exception clause’ in Matthew?
Does the condition for deacons and bishops, ‘Husband of one wife’ apply to divorcees or polygamists?
Church Positions
Roman Catholic: marriage indissoluble; no divorce, no re-marriage; annulments possible
Orthodox: marriage indissoluble; but divorce and remarriage possible at discretion of church authorities; innocent divorcees can become priests.
Protestants: marriage contract can be dissolved for immorality and desertion; now more lax; valid divorce allows for re-marriage; divorcees often not allowed to minister
Key Advice for New Churches
Establish grounds for a valid divorce and re-marriage
Establish need for repentance for adulterers to be accepted in church family
Establish right of church to prohibit some second marriages
Communicate clearly to all members
All Rights Reserved
T.G.S. Hawksley
Nice!
ReplyDeleteA divorced against his will former Catholic.