OK, I had an epiphany. (Calendar says that should have happened in January, but it hit me late.) I was listening to the news about the gay marriage fight and thinking over the ridiculous situation the church has put herself in by joining hands with the State in the whole question of marriage.
Considering the benefits of separating church marriage from civil marriage, I realized one of the biggest advantages for the church: divorce. By allowing the State to determine who marries and who doesn’t, as well as who divorces and who doesn’t, we’ve placed ourselves in an extremely awkward situation when it comes to divorce.
Imagine this scenario. What if the church defined for herself who is married and who isn’t? What if, like in many countries, civil marriage was one thing and church marriage was another? Then, whenever people wanted a divorce, they would have to go through the church. If not, they would be plainly admitting that they were rejecting the church’s teachings on divorce and choosing to live in adultery.
“But that would put church leaders in the position of deciding whether or not people can legitimately divorce!” That’s nothing new. They are thrust into that situation time and again. Only problem is, they usually are dealing with that subject after the fact.
Two members get a divorce. The elders (or other leaders) have to decide whether those people remain in good standing with the church. Or people who have remarried come to place membership. The leaders have to ask some questions about the divorce(s) to determine how to receive these people. And in each of the cases, the leaders face the disadvantage that the State has already allowed the divorce.
If people had to go through the church to divorce, there would be more opportunities for counseling and ministering to hurting couples. More opportunities to stave off the travesty of divorce. And much more social cost in terminating a marriage. It would allow us to teach people that divorce is an absolute last resort, reserved for extreme cases. It would get people’s minds off of the legal side of things and back on the spiritual nature of marriage and divorce.
It’s too late to fully take back marriage, at least in countries like the United States. Even if the church begins to take a more active role in this area, we’ve given the State free use of terms like “marriage” and “divorce,” allowing it to apply those terms to whomever it sees fit. But we can make plain to our children and all our members that it is God, not Congress, who defines who is married and who is not.
Let’s stop rendering to Caesar what rightfully belongs to God.
I struggle with the whole issue of living in adultery. What exactly does that mean? Sure, I know what it has always meant in the past… but why do we treat divorce differently than any other sin? And how do you repent from divorce if if a divorced person cant remarry? Maybe this is the wrong place for these questions… and maybe my own struggle has me asking more questions than I should right now. At any rate, I so appreciate you and the work you do. Feel free to scratch this whole comment if you need!
Les,
It’s a tangent, but not completely unrelated. I wrestle with some of the same questions. It seems unreasonable that David could continue to live with Bathsheba because he killed her husband, whereas someone who divorces can’t have their relationship blessed and purified.
God looks at the heart in a way that we can’t. I can look and say, “This couple is okay, these are in sin,” but in the end, only God’s opinion will count. Therefore I have to believe it comes down to intent. If someone is set on “gaming the system,” then they may fool the church, but they won’t fool God. That is, if someone wants to change partners then “repent” of that, I think it’s condemnable. If they go through a time of sin, then come to their senses and seek God again, I think God can purify that relationship. But the difference will never be apparent to man. [Hope that isn’t too convoluted.]
As for repenting, I know what I suggested to someone close to me. I said they should move close to their ex (and kids), do everything they could to be supportive without being intrusive, and focus themselves on being a parent. To me that would show repentance. Could they eventually remarry? Maybe, but I think it would need to be down the road. And not with anyone they had a friendship with before the divorce. That’s opinion, not scripture. What I would do if I wanted to show that my heart was pure (show myself, show God, show others)
Not an easy subject. Those are some thoughts.
Grace and peace,
Tim
Tim, what an interesting idea! Some years ago I read (can’t think of the source) that the “church” made the mistake of turning over marriage (i.e. who could and couldn’t get married) to the government. Now that has come back to haunt us with the gay marriage issue. I like your thinking on this subject. Perhaps what happens now in our country may force us into rethinking our allowing the government to define marriage and by extension divorce.
Pingback: Musings | Resurrected Living