Tag Archives: divorce

Speaking words of grace to those who have divorced

3 Replies

weddingThe ninth of ten affirmations about marriage is this:
God hates divorce; God loves divorced people.

Yesterday we talked about recovering the first part of that statement, of proclaiming and living as a church the fact that divorce goes against what God wants. Today I want to reflect some on the second part of the statement: God loves divorced people.

It’s not easy to combat divorce without communicating some sort of assault on those who are divorced. We need to remember that those people have not removed themselves from the reach of God’s love. Divorce is not the unforgivable sin. Even a divorce that was carried out in a sinful manner can still be forgiven by God.

This isn’t the post where I look at all the ins and outs of divorce and remarriage. I may do that someday, but today isn’t that day. My point today is that even as we denounce divorce as being contrary to God’s will, we need to let divorced people know that God’s grace reaches them just as it reaches us. Whether they’ve been wronged or they have wronged another, God can heal that hurt and wash away all sin. Divorce need not define who they’ve been nor who they are going forward.

If we are going to stem the tide of divorce and speak with a prophetic voice to the generations to come, we will need the help of all Christians: single, married, divorced. We all need to affirm with one voice this two-faceted truth: God hates divorce; God loves divorced people.

So again, here’s affirmation #9: God hates divorce; God loves divorced people.

God loves divorced people

3 Replies

weddingThe church needs to send a resounding message to our communities: God loves divorced people.

That message needs to be accompanied by an equally strong message: God hates divorce.

It’s really hard to communicate either message without weakening the other. It’s a delicate balance, but one we have to find. We have to be able to tell people that have gone through a divorce that life has not ended, that God has not given up on them, that they are still valuable and important in our church communities.

At the same time, we need to let our young people know that divorce is an extreme measure, one to be taken only when all other avenues have been explored, all other remedies have proven insufficient.

So how do we do that? How do we denounce divorce without villanizing those who have suffered the trauma of divorce? How do we keep our children from considering divorce as an option without making divorced people feel like second class citizens?

Part of my concern about this comes from something that happened over 10 years ago. I was teaching the high school class at our church and asked them to think about what their lives might be like in 10 years. One very spiritual young man said, “Ten years? I’ll probably be married. I may even be divorced by then!” As I thought about it, I realized that his parents were divorced. One set of grandparents was divorced. He had at least one aunt and uncle that had divorced. To him, that was a natural part of life.

What do you suggest? What should our teaching be? How do we oppose divorce while supporting those who have been through it?

 

image courtesy morguefile.com

Divorce court in church?

2 Replies

weddingIn reaction to my suggestion about divorce yesterday, I got some interesting pushback on Facebook. Since it was in a closed group, I’ll refrain from making direct quotes or naming the source. But this person said that, while my idea was nice in theory, divorce involves too many issues (property, issues with children, inheritance) that require legal enforceability.

At first I said, “Let the judges of this world sort out the property issues, etc.” But then I added, “Although I think Paul might have said let the church deal with those issues too. (1 Corinthians 6).”

Later I admitted that this man was absolutely right. And I think the church needs to be willing to address those issues as well.

Let me say, I think that the divorce rate in the church would plummet if couples thought they had to go before their Christian peers to request a divorce. And I hope that, in many cases, church leaders could help the couples resolve their problems, staving off a divorce.

In the few cases that would remain, I think the Bible tells us that we are better off having spiritual men judge such issues than to leave it to non-believers. We’re not used to dealing with such issues in the church, but in the ancient world that’s exactly what elders did. (“elders” in the sense commonly used back then, not just the church office) The church eldership was modeled off the concept of elders who served as civic leaders and judges. (See Ruth 4 for an example of that)

Obviously, this only works with Christians who value their Christianity more than their possessions, their rights, etc. It would require that both parties be committed to following the leading of the church leadership.

Is it ever going to happen in the U.S.? Seems doubtful. But it seems to me to be a spiritual approach to a spiritual problem.

Putting divorce into the church’s hands

4 Replies

weddingOK, 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.

Where church and State overlap: Marriage

4 Replies

We’ve been discussing some, over the last few weeks, Christians and social issues. I wanted to take some time to talk about marriage.

For many, this issue became of importance when some began pressing for the legalization of same sex marriage. I think things have been in a mess far longer than that.

Many countries have a clear separation of civil and religious aspects when it comes to marriage. There is a civil ceremony, which is the legally binding act. There is a separate religious service, which allows each person to have a ceremony in accordance with their beliefs.

In the United States, we have the strange situation of church and State overlapping with one another. Unless I’m mistaken, a wedding is the only officially recognized act that a minister can perform. Baptisms have no legal status. Ministers take part in funerals, but the State gives that no particular validation.

What’s even more puzzling, a minister can marry you, but he has no say in divorce proceedings. In what way does that make sense?

This has gone on for so long that the church accepts the situation as normal. It’s not. The State has no say in who can and can’t be baptized. The State doesn’t determine who is eligible to take the Lord’s Supper. If we believe marriage to be a religious act, we should not align ourselves with the State when it comes time for a wedding.

Would it be helpful if we switched to a system of dual ceremonies, a civil ceremony and a religious one? That would free the church to set its own standards and relieve ministers of the burden of being an agent of the State in any capacity. It would also empower the church, I think, to better address the question of divorce.

Or how we can we better separate that which is holy from that which is not?

photo by grietgriet on morguefile.com