Another Divorce thread

[Johnf]

I'm a member of a very conservative SBC our bylaws are spelled out clearly about who is or isn't qualified to fill positions in the church and are backed by the accepted scriptures. They are very adamant that a man who has been divorced and remarried are not scripturally qualified to be a deacon. There are several men in our church who are very active in the church who have been divorced and remarried that are not deacons and are of like mind with the church that they are not qualified. They do however do more for the church than all of the deacons, and are respected by the church as a whole more than the deacon body. I say this to establish that we as a church have set our standard and are living by it, for the most part.

Here is my issue: About 10 months ago our pastor resigned and took a job in a different state. He left of his own free will and in good standing with the church. His brother was the music minister and followed suit shortly. We did a search for an interim pastor and music minister. filled the interim pastor position fairly easily, but the music minister was a little harder to fill. We interviewed only one man for that position and the majority of the music committee decided to hire him. I did not vote for him because he told us that he was divorced and remarried. If he didn't see a problem with that, why did he tell us. Anyhow, my position is that if our church has set the standard for deacons, then anyone that stands in the pulpit in a ministerial position should also be held to that standard. I was actually ridiculed by several people on the committee who asked if the piano player or custodian should resign because they were divorced. Earlier while looking for an interim pastor, there was a divorced person that we had interviewed. We didn't know he was divorced until the interview. When I voiced my opinion the head of the deacons made the statement that we shouldn't tell anyone outside the committee that we were considering a divorced man. My reply was "Then why are we considering him"? Anyhow, the head of the deacons was ridiculing me over the same position with the interim music guy. My position was and has always been that if the church set a standard for deacons then anyone with a position above the deacons should not be even considered if they wouldn't qualify for a lower position. The response was "Well, he's just leading the music". I don't see it that way. I see it as the leader of worship in our church. He spends as much time in the pulpit leading the church as the pastor, is called "Music Minister". He leads us in prayer, quotes scripture and has even filled in on Sunday and Wednesday nights in the pulpit, giving the message.


I just can't see that this as anything but a hypocritical decision on the part of our head deacon, who pushed for the hire.

We have hired a young pastor who will be in the pulpit for the first time on Christmas morning. I have considered my options and have decided that I will no longer be a member of this church if they decide to go against their principles and against scripture if they hire this unqualified person full time, which some have eluded to. It breaks my heart because I really love this church and the family that we have grown to love there.

I am contemplating my discussion with the new pastor and how long I should wait before I talk with him about the situation.

 

[kyredneck]

They are very adamant that a man who has been divorced and remarried are not scripturally qualified to be a deacon.

Would an ex-con (you know, drug dealer, thief, murderer, etc.) be considered scripturally qualified to be a deacon as long he is married only once?

I have considered my options and have decided that I will no longer be a member of this church if they decide to go against their principles and against scripture if they hire this unqualified person full time, which some have eluded to. It breaks my heart because I really love this church and the family that we have grown to love there.

Ever hear the saying, "Cut your nose off to spite your face"? If you love it there and it's gonna break your heart to leave, why go? What are you accomplishing by leaving?

 

[Salty]

Would it be acceptable to you if the church changed the constitution so that they would not longer have those "higher" standards?

 

[Johnf]

My standards would not change.

If a church decides to start making decisions that are scripturaly unsound. Then there are two choices: join them in their decision or not. I am to willing to compromise my understanding of scripture.

 

[Salty]

My standards would not change.

If a church decides to start making decisions that are scripturaly unsound. Then there are two choices: join them in their decision or not. I am to willing to compromise my understanding of scripture.

My only confusion was your standard -
I fully agree if the church is not living up to a standard

Now if that standard is based on Scripture - that is one thing
If it is not based on Scripture - then there is no problem changing it.
(eg - we must have communion the first Sunday of every month)

I did not fully comprehend that you have a personal conviction against divorced pastors.

Thus in that case - it may be best to find for you to find a church of like Faith and Practice.

 

[Johnf]

It is not

My only confusion was your standard -
I fully agree if the church is not living up to a standard

Now if that standard is based on Scripture - that is one thing
If it is not based on Scripture - then there is no problem changing it.
(eg - we must have communion the first Sunday of every month)

I did not fully comprehend that you have a personal conviction against divorced pastors.

Thus in that case - it may be best to find for you to find a church of like Faith and Practice.

I think I made it clear. I agree with the standards of the church because they are based on scripture. I don't think the rest of the committee or the head deacon has been honest with the church body regarding this hire. I was on vacation out of state when it happened and have voiced my opinion to all who are aware. I'm not a pot stirrer at the church and will not try to cause problems, but will address it with the new pastor. Hopefully his leadership will help work the issue out.

 

[Salty]

It is not

I think I made it clear. .

Not sure how I missed it - but thank you for you clarifying.

It can be tough not to stir the pot -

I had a situational, where our church was going to vote on its first deacon.
But the pastor announced that our constitution had no provisions for deacons,
therefore we should not vote in a deacon!
I was going to say something in that business meeting, but my wife and I had just recently decided
to move to a church ( nothing derogatory- just the leading of the Lord) So I felt it best to say nothing.

I trust that things will work out for you in the near future - Keep us posted.

 

[annsni]

You are correct that if the church has that requirement for one position of leadership, it should be with ALL aspects of leadership.

In our church, divorce is not a disqualifier depending on the situation behind the divorce. We have a pastor who was divorced as a young man when he was a drug addict and alcoholic, has since been saved over 30 years and has been remarried to a woman and has been faithful to her for 25 or so plus years. In this case, we believe that the divorce does not disqualify him as it was done before he was saved and when he was in a sinful lifestyle that he fully repented of and he has shown through is life for the last decades that he is a faithful servant to the Lord. He will admit that his first marriage and divorce were all handled wrong and he is a very strong supporter of marriage and has counseled many through difficulties and helped them to avoid divorce. But a divorce under different circumstances would likely disqualify someone from ANY ministry and employment at our church based on what we read in Scripture.

But as you said, your church has a bit of a stronger stance and it is pretty hypocritical to use that stance for deacons when it should be used for ALL those in ministry. Even our custodians are held to the same Biblical standards that pastors/elders and deacons are. If you work for our church, you must sign a ministry covenant and we have removed people from employment/ministry because of known sin that disqualifies them.

 

[TCassidy]

Would an ex-con (you know, drug dealer, thief, murderer, etc.) be considered scripturally qualified to be a deacon as long he is married only once?

When a drug dealer stops being a drug dealer is he still a drug dealer?

When a thief stops being a thief is he still a thief?

And isn't a divorced man a divorced man until his divorced wife dies.

Apples and oranges.

 

[annsni]

When a drug dealer stops being a drug dealer is he still a drug dealer?

When a thief stops being a thief is he still a thief?

And isn't a divorced man a divorced man until his divorced wife dies.

Apples and oranges.

Actually, according to the law, he is still a divorced man. He doesn't suddenly become a widower when his wife dies because you still need to be married in order to be a widower.

 

[TCassidy]

Actually, according to the law, he is still a divorced man. He doesn't suddenly become a widower when his wife dies because you still need to be married in order to be a widower.

Romans 7:2 For the woman that has a husband is bound by law to the husband while he lives, but if the husband dies, she is discharged from the law of the husband.
3 So then if, while the husband lives, she is joined to another man, she would be called an adulteress. But if the husband dies, she is free from the law, so that she is no adulteress, though she is joined to another man.

 

[annsni]

Romans 7:2 For the woman that has a husband is bound by law to the husband while he lives, but if the husband dies, she is discharged from the law of the husband.
3 So then if, while the husband lives, she is joined to another man, she would be called an adulteress. But if the husband dies, she is free from the law, so that she is no adulteress, though she is joined to another man.

Does this speak to divorce/separation >another man>adultery>death of former/current spouse>no more adultery

or does this speak to:

marriage>death>remarriage?

I believe it addresses the second.

 

[TCassidy]

In pedagogy the teacher uses something the student understands to illustrate something the student doesn't understand.

Paul is using the understood fact that marriage>death>remarriage was legal, and the first marriage was nullified by the death of the spouse, to illustrate the death of the convert to the law and, as the convert is now dead to the law, is no longer under the authority of the law.

So, in order for the second to be true, the first must also be true.

 

[Bluefalcon]

If the decision of the church is such that it grieves your conscience, maybe you should leave. But if all the faithful leave, who will guide and protect the church? If you can stay, stay. Pastors come and go. The church remains. Lodge your objection during the business meeting, back it up by the church constitution/bylaws/Scripture, vote no when it comes to a vote, but if the vote for the new pastor passes, you owe it to yourself and everyone pray for the new pastor, support him as he follows Christ, and serve the church faithfully. In a couple years if things go south or whenever the pastorship is vacant again, people will remember you and look up to you for your principled objection, and you may save your church pain and loss of steady leadership in the process.

 

[JamesL]

.....a man who has been divorced and remarried are not scripturally qualified to be a deacon. There are several men in our church who are very active in the church who have been divorced and remarried that are not deacons and are of like mind with the church that they are not qualified. They do however do more for the church than all of the deacons, and are respected by the church as a whole more than the deacon body.....

I can't resist stirring the pot here...

These divorced men you speak of are your deacons. You and the whole bunch are fooling yourselves if you think a title makes a deacon.

 

[John Toppass]

Actually, according to the law, he is still a divorced man. He doesn't suddenly become a widower when his wife dies because you still need to be married in order to be a widower.

The law of man or the Law of GOD? Unfortunately, many churches yield to the law of man, instead of the Law of GOD. Who they claim to follow unless HIS law is inconvenient.

 

[John Toppass]

Romans 7:2 For the woman that has a husband is bound by law to the husband while he lives, but if the husband dies, she is discharged from the law of the husband.
3 So then if, while the husband lives, she is joined to another man, she would be called an adulteress. But if the husband dies, she is free from the law, so that she is no adulteress, though she is joined to another man.

Exactly! The law of man never trumps the Law of GOD, especially in GOD's church.

 

[Johnf]

I can't resist stirring the pot here...

These divorced men you speak of are your deacons. You and the whole bunch are fooling yourselves if you think a title makes a deacon.

I would agree with you from the point of view that these two men are doing 90% of the work that the deacon body should be doing while the ordained deacon body of the church is doing 10%. I didn't even know who most of them were until I went through a deacon study with them. I'm not sure even 1/2 of them attend on a regular basis.

One thing one of my old pastors used to say to me "You don't have to be a deacon to deak". I don't seek at title, I just do what I can when the Lord calls me to do it.

 

[Johnf]

I really don't want to cause a stink in the church. When and how should I go about talking with our new pastor about this situation?