Pastor with a divorced wife?

This is not necessarily true.

Take this situation of a very good friend of mine:

A man and woman were married and things went well for a while. About a year after they were married, some emotional problems the woman had (resulting from a chaotic family life when she was growing up) caused her to get very depressed and negative about life. At the same time, her husband has some difficulty in his church where false charges were made against him regarding the content of his teaching in Sunday School (some people did not like him and started wild rumors which they admitted later were completely false) and was asked to leave his teaching position and the church. Both of them were wounded by the church experience and had some difficulty finding a new church immediately. The woman was so hurt by the whole episode (compounded with her depressive feelings) she did not want to even attend another church.

They struggled on and he joined a church but she would not go with him. She refused to get counseling and after a few months, her husband caught her in the midst of a sexual act with a male friend. Obviously, he was devastated but he did not believe in divorce. He told her he would not divorce her and that they should try to work it out. She expressed the desire to go back to school and get a specialized degree so she could get a better job (a job she always wanted to do) and he took on a second job to pay all the bills and her tuition so she could go to school. When she finished her degree, the job and her first paycheck about a year later, she informed him one morning that she was moving out. By the time he got home that evening, she was gone with most of their possessions, the new car and all of their savings (over $13,000), leaving him about $200 in the bank. In addition, she charged nearly $8,000 on credit cards (a new wardrobe and furnishings for her new apartment).

He was even more devastated. When she finally made contact with him again over a week later, she was not interested in getting back together, getting counseling or working things out. They lived separately for nearly six months and he found out that she was running up debt against their credit (Texas is a community property state and married persons are both responsible for each other's debts -- there is no legal way to separate accumulating debts while married) and he was barely paying the bills she left him with.

After six months of intensive prayer, counseling by the pastor, repeated attempts at reconciliation and much soul-searching, his pastor told him one day, "She has already divorced you with adultery and desertion, all you are doing is telling the state about it." He filed for divorce about a week later. At the time he said that he had no interest in remarriage or women in general, and I believe him. He was emotionally torn apart and needed time to heal.

It has been nine years since he has seen his ex-wife and she apparently wants no contact. He does not know if she is married, single, dead or alive and has no information on her whereabouts. (I doubt she knows how to located him either.) He has moved on with his life and is working in a church, teaching a Sunday School class and serving in the community. He met a woman (never married) a few years ago and they have been dating. They will probably get married in the next few years.

He has expressed feelings about his ex-wife. A few years ago, they were still laced with quite a bit of anger, but now he seems to have completely forgiven her -- although he doesn't want to get back together with her... things could not be the same and he probably could not trust her enough to make a serious commitment.

 

Please cite the scripture that says someone who was guilty of adultery in the past cannot hold a leadership position within the church. With regard to being above reproach, why does adultery necessarily tarnish someone permanently while other sins do not? Ex. fornication, lust (consummated by self gratification), lying, drunkenness, drug abuse, etc.

If we make the jump that you have then why not disqualify everyone who has ever committed a sexual sin? How many pastors could still stand in their pulpits if the standard demanded someone who had never lusted, never self-gratified, never fornicated in any public or private way?

The scripture does not disqualify adulterers. It disqualifies those who have more than one wife (woman), however this phrase is to be interpretted. I am not diminishing sinfulness but it appears to me that you are extending the scriptures to say more than they say without building a sufficient proof.</font>[/QUOTE]Scott J. The question was not about a Pastor who committed adultery "sometime in the past" as you state in your comment. The question is about a Pastor living in open adultery in the present and future! Matt. 5:32, Luke 16: 18, Matt. 19: 9 makes plain that a man who marries a divorced woman commits adultery. I'm not asking any Pastor to abide by it. That is up to them.

1 Thess 5:22 is a very bold message to Christians (including Pastors) to "abstain from all appearance of evil" which of course, includes the sin of living in open Adultery. LIVING in sin (as opposed to commiting sin and repenting/turning away of it) is NOT good behavior, is not living above reproach, is disgraceful, and is not fitting demeanor for anyone with spiritual authority in a congregation (behavior that is demanded in 1 Tim 3 for those with overseer spiritual authority in the church). Adultery is a forbidden behavior in the Ten Commandments (Exo. 20: 14, Deut. 5: 18). Is it appropriate to be under the spiritual authority of a Pastor who openly violates these verses? I do not think so. Now Scott, if you do not believe I am correct, or do not believe that Matt. 5:32, Luke 16: 18 or Matt. 19:9 speaks to the issue of adultery, then you have nothing to worry about. We are in agreement that "sin tarnishes" as you have suggested in your comment. Thank you for that Scott J.

latterrain77

 

Interesting story Baptist Believer. However, situational ethics is something for the New Agers to ponder and not believers. I posted eleven reasons why Scripture does not justify remarriage after divorce. If your friend remarries, he will have committed adultery. No ifs, ands, or buts about it.

 

Scott J, as someone who is critically opposed to remarriage after divorce, I believe that the adultery that takes place when a remarriage happens is a one time act. I don't think we can say it is a continually act of sin.

 

Scott J. I appreciate your follow up. I am thankful to recieve your comments, and shall do my best to respond to them. First, I have not fully worked out my position as to whether an adulterated marriage is a sin that "continues" perpetually or, if its a "one time" sin - so to speak. The marriage itself is adulterated as long as the original spouse from the original marriage lives. Nevertheless, it would not really matter since EVERY sin; past, present and future, is forgiven to those who are truly saved. It is only relevant to the issue we've been discussing IF the pastor feels he is under no obligation to adhere to the various Biblical texts previously mentioned.

Divorce in marriage is wrong, should be avoided, and is hated by GOD (Mal. 2:16). It matters not if it is a first, second, third marriage or more. Divorce should not be an option for a regular marriage or an adulterated one, for a Christian.

A person who has been forgiven by GOD of adultery would naturally feel sensitive about having any spiritual authority in the church. A pastor, finding himself in this circumstance, would instantly recognize that his charge and command over the congregation has been compromised. He would readily submit to the pre-conditions of 1 Tim 3. He would feel uneasy, constantly wondering if he was giving the appearance of impropriety as emphasized in 1 Thess. 5:22. I would suspect that a saved individual in these circumstances would not WANT such authority over the congregation. There is still plenty of IMPORTANT church work that he could perform, without the "exalted title" of Pastor. Unfortunately, there are some who might be tempted to reach for power and title (or cling to it) not realizing or caring that the unsaved world outside are watching this with great delight. This is why GOD, through the Apostle Paul, provided the 1 Thess. 5:22 text, to keep us alert to avoiding even the appearance of sin within our midst.

The Biblical text that I have previously mentioned is related to the topic of Adultery. Only you can decide for yourself if the standard is too high, too low, or even non-existent! There are many, I'm sure, who would strongly disagree on this subject. Therefore, as 2 Tim. 2:15 teaches, I encourage you to study your Bible, including the verses previously mentioned, and pray the LORD for guidance. Only GOD himself can open ones understanding of the Bible (Luke 24:25).

Final thought, on the subject of finding a church: In many congregations, in many ways, there has been a falling away. In many of these places, the Bible (GOD's inerrant, perfect and Holy Word) has been relegated to second class status - to the shame and humiliation of the congregation that would dare to do so. These churches often preach "pop culture" theology, that is designed to entertain rather than SAVE. So, as we witness these stupendous events occuring right before our eyes in the church, we sense that a profound historical change is already underway. Much of that change does not benefit the glorious history of the church. You will have your work cut out for you to find a truly Christ centered, truly Bible based congregation in the year 2002. You seem to have already recognized this to be so. I prayerfully wish you all the best in your journey.

latterrain77

 

This is not necessarily true.

Take this situation of a very good friend of mine:

A man and woman were married and things went well for a while. About a year after they were married, some emotional problems the woman had (resulting from a chaotic family life when she was growing up) caused her to get very depressed and negative about life. At the same time, her husband has some difficulty in his church where false charges were made against him regarding the content of his teaching in Sunday School (some people did not like him and started wild rumors which they admitted later were completely false) and was asked to leave his teaching position and the church. Both of them were wounded by the church experience and had some difficulty finding a new church immediately. The woman was so hurt by the whole episode (compounded with her depressive feelings) she did not want to even attend another church.

They struggled on and he joined a church but she would not go with him. She refused to get counseling and after a few months, her husband caught her in the midst of a sexual act with a male friend. Obviously, he was devastated but he did not believe in divorce. He told her he would not divorce her and that they should try to work it out. She expressed the desire to go back to school and get a specialized degree so she could get a better job (a job she always wanted to do) and he took on a second job to pay all the bills and her tuition so she could go to school. When she finished her degree, the job and her first paycheck about a year later, she informed him one morning that she was moving out. By the time he got home that evening, she was gone with most of their possessions, the new car and all of their savings (over $13,000), leaving him about $200 in the bank. In addition, she charged nearly $8,000 on credit cards (a new wardrobe and furnishings for her new apartment).

He was even more devastated. When she finally made contact with him again over a week later, she was not interested in getting back together, getting counseling or working things out. They lived separately for nearly six months and he found out that she was running up debt against their credit (Texas is a community property state and married persons are both responsible for each other's debts -- there is no legal way to separate accumulating debts while married) and he was barely paying the bills she left him with.

After six months of intensive prayer, counseling by the pastor, repeated attempts at reconciliation and much soul-searching, his pastor told him one day, "She has already divorced you with adultery and desertion, all you are doing is telling the state about it." He filed for divorce about a week later. At the time he said that he had no interest in remarriage or women in general, and I believe him. He was emotionally torn apart and needed time to heal.

It has been nine years since he has seen his ex-wife and she apparently wants no contact. He does not know if she is married, single, dead or alive and has no information on her whereabouts. (I doubt she knows how to located him either.) He has moved on with his life and is working in a church, teaching a Sunday School class and serving in the community. He met a woman (never married) a few years ago and they have been dating. They will probably get married in the next few years.

He has expressed feelings about his ex-wife. A few years ago, they were still laced with quite a bit of anger, but now he seems to have completely forgiven her -- although he doesn't want to get back together with her... things could not be the same and he probably could not trust her enough to make a serious commitment.</font>[/QUOTE]Hello BaptistBeliever. I understand your comments and I'm thankful to recieve them. Your friends situation sounds very sad and extreme. His faith, as you have described it, is inspiring. It sounds like he has held up well in his Bible based beliefs concerning his wife and their marriage. As painful as his journey has been, it seems that he has taken the higher road. His "forgiving her" under these circumstances is impressive. You mention that "he has expressed feelings for her." Perhaps this is meaningful! 1 Cor. 7:11 illustrates the beauty of reconciliation, as does 1 Cor. 7:27. We Christians, while we were yet sinners, were RECONCILED TO GOD! (Rom. 5:10). Reconciliation is a beautiful thing - whether in human marriage or in GOD's merciful salvation to HIS "bride" the church (those who are saved). Perhaps, if your friend's wife is yet unmarried, there may still be some hope for their marriage. Only GOD knows the future.

latterrain77

 

Scott, I seriously feel bad for you if you believe this, which you no doubt do. There is not an honest person in the ministry that could fit the bill described above. Even though this “modern day unpardonable sin” of divorce has not happened to me, my past tense is not without reproach. Using the literal definition you used, you could also “have plenty” on me and on any other person in or out of the ministry.

Rather than talk about you or me, let’s review a few accounts from old to see if the blamelessness really includes past tense. Look at the past tense in the life of Abraham, Jacob, Moses, David, Solomon, Matthew, Peter, the rest of the disciples, Paul, etc. Just take the last one for example. Paul was a murder. He wrecked havoc in the church. Was God therefore limited to how he could use him? Not at all! In fact, God did great things with Paul in spite of his past and God’s gets the glory for it, the same as He alone gets from using the rest of us losers. The only human school that produces perfect people with perfect pasts was the Pharisee school. Problem was those people’s blamelessness was only as thin as the paint on a grave. Others might not have had “anything on them” but God saw through the paint job.

Scott, I’m truly sorry to hear about your divorce but why is that past sin any different from Paul’s murdering, Peter’s denying of Christ, or my past sin? Based on the fact you are a new creature, I don’t see how you reconcile being a new creature but yet excluded? Do divorced people only get partial forgiveness because God still holds the divorce thing against them? When is that sin or any others fully forgiven and in the past?

This one sentence describes what I think is a HUGE discrepancy within many people’s thinking. How is that going to cause problems in counseling? Does David’s counsel in the Psalms cause problems because he previously felt God had deserted him and was not afraid to admit it. How about the effect of his counseling after he committed adultery, murdered a man, and stole his wife? On the contrary, David’s counsel has meant much to many because we can relate to him being a real person who has felt the same pain, sorrow, and sickness over sin and trials that we do. We go to the Psalms many times when there are problems because they tell us about a great God who kept forgiving David in spite of his continuous failures. Paul could also relate to other sinners because he also understood what he was in God’s eyes (chief of sinners, not perfect pastor).

Scott if the divorce was to come up in my life, I’d seriously want counsel from a Christian like you who has been there. You could counsel those considering divorce from a perspective of knowing the pain and scars it leaves. You’d also, I’d hope, be more of a comfort to the guy or gal that lost a loved one in a tragic divorce situation. I’m not saying counsel from “ideal” people, who have been fortunate not to experience some of the sins of the rest us, is of no use. Textbook answers about ideal situations may sound great but we live in a sin cursed world and not an ideal one. Many will appreciate the compassion and concern that comes from you from experience in the same way we appreciate the same from David.

One of the reasons your post caught my attention was because I was reading Luke 7 last night about Jesus being in the Pharisees house while the bad reputation woman was showing affection to him. Think through this quote G. Cambell Morgan makes on that passage:

" That is the trouble with Simon, and all the tribe of Simon. They cannot see. Thinking they see everything, they see nothing. Simon could not see that woman as she then was, for looking at her as she had been. There are members of the Christian church today who look at that woman as she used to be, and never she her how Christ made her. The eyes that are Christ anointed eyes will see her as she is, and be blind of what she was. The eyes of Simon see only what she was, and are blind to what she is."

You posted with the comment, “Food for thought…” so please understand that this is just my digestion of it.

May God use your past present and future to His ultimate glory,

Steve

 

Nice rhetoric... It seems people throw around accusations of "situational ethics" when someone decides to apply biblical principles and grace to help someone rebuild a life ravaged by sin. (NOTE: All "ethics" occur in "situations") People were not made to serve the Law, but to serve God.

Actually, you posted eleven reasons why YOUR INTERPRETATION OF scripture does no justify remarriage after divorce. I take scripture very seriously, so I took a couple of hours to work through your eleven passages and think about your argument and what scripture actually says... I found my previous understand of the issue renewed and enhanced. I don't have the time to write a long treatise on the subject, but here is my take on what scripture says about divorce using your eleven points as a foundation:

ARGUMENT BASED ON THE LETTER OF THE LAW
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

My basic interpretive assumptions:
1.) Jesus does not contradict Himself in His teaching.
2.) The scripture writers do not contradict themselves in their teaching.
3.) The culture of the Old and New Testaments and the culture of the United States in the 21st century are very different, but the Lord's principles are valid for any age.
4.) We should not say more than the scriptural passage actually says and we should not say less than the scriptural passage actually says.
5.) Context is essential to properly understand the meaning of a passage.

ESSENTIAL OLD TESTAMENT TEACHING:

The Seventh Commandment -- Exodus 20:14 "You shall not commit adultery"
The Penalty for Adultery -- Leviticus 20:10 "If a man commits adultery with the wife of his neighbor, both the adulterer and the adulteress shall be put to death."

If your spouse committed adultery in the Old Testament, according to Old Testament law, you would not get a divorce, you would be widowed instead. The guilty partner would lose their life and you would be free to emotionally and spiritually heal and remarry if you desired. I'm sure that in practice, not all adulterers were executed, but the principle holds.

Adultery is not just playing around and it's not just about sex. It is just about the worst betrayal that a spouse can inflict. It destroys relationships, damages families, hurts children, shames the institution of marriage and is destructive to the community at large. And most importantly, it is an affront to God.

ESSENTIAL NEW TESTAMENT TEACHING:

Jesus said about divorce, "But I say to you that anyone who divorces his wife, except on the ground of unchastity, causes her to commit adultery; and whoever marries a divorced woman commits adultery." (Matthew 5:32) and "And I say to you, whoever divorces his wife, except for unchastity, and marries another commits adultery."

In the days of Jesus, people were probably rarely stoned for adultery. This is likely to the Roman occupation and possibly due to the realization that the laws against adultery were not uniformly enforced. (We have the incident where the woman was caught in the "very act" of adultery in John 8, but her adulterous partner was apparently ignored by the mob -- or possibly even part of the mob!) Therefore, the innocent spouse had a problem. If the marriage was too damaged to reconcile, or the spouse was unwilling to reconcile, Jesus allowed divorce as the next best option. IMPORTANT: I am convinced that divorce is never a "good" option, but sometimes it is the best option in the midst of the terrible choices that sometimes have to be made. I have yet to meet a divorced person who is happy that they had a marriage fail -- the emotional cost is just too high for anyone who has ever taken their marriage seriously.

PreachTheWord says (points not in order given):

If Jesus is giving this option as a viable alternative to those innocently caught in the wreckage of adultery based on the previous death penalty for marriage (I think He is), then the divorced person should be considered just like someone who has been widowed... no longer bound by a marriage commitment. There is much more that could be said here, but time is short...

Based on that clear statement of Jesus (and my assumption that Jesus does not contradict Himself, let's look at the rest of His statements on the subject:

Jesus is addressing this to Pharisees who were scoffing at Him with self-righteousness (see v.14-15) He is demonstrating to them their unrighteousness. Jesus does not deny that adultery is a valid reason for divorce. In Old Testament days, a man could divorce his wife for any reason, leaving the woman without any means of support. Moses made sure that the women were given a bill of divorce, demonstrating that their marriage was over, so they could remarry legally. Of course Jesus explains that Moses did this because of the hardness of men's hearts (Matthew 19:8). One has to wonder if the hearts of people are not harder today...

Again, Jesus does not contradict himself, so the adultery must be committed by those who have not lawfully divorced. The implication here is that the parties involved have divorced unrighteously.

Yes, but the very fact that Jesus commands that human beings not separate those God joined together seems to indicate that it is indeed possible to end a marriage. Another question raised by this statement is whether there are marriages that are not joined together by God but by men. And again, I'm sure Jesus does not contradict Himself, so it is still lawful to divorce on the basis of unfaithfulness.

Actually, you are saying something more than scripture here. The exception for "unchastity" is unrelated to those who are unrighteously divorced -- Jesus calls remarriage after being unrighteously divorced "adultery". If Jesus does give an exception for a righteous divorce in God's eyes (similar to those who are widowed), then obviously this charge of adultery does not apply to them!

In the context of this passage (as in much of 1 Corinthians), Paul is responding to specific questions the Corinthians have asked him in a previous letter (7:1) that we do not possess. I believe that Paul does not contradict Jesus, so this does not speak against the adultery exception. The emphasis here seems to be that Paul tells his readers that is God's command for the Corinthian believers to preserve their marriages. This seems to be the guiding principle in this passage where Paul gives his opinions regarding family relationships, and a guiding principle for today.

Neither of these passages specifically mention divorce, only the commitment of marriage They also confirm that remarriage is acceptable when the bonds of marriage are broken righteously.

QUOTE]9. l Corinthians 7:15 does not mean that when a Christian is deserted by an unbelieving spouse he or she is free to remarry. It means that the Christian is not bound to fight in order to preserve togetherness. Separation is permissible if the unbelieving partner insists on it.[/QUOTE]

This is Paul's opinion, not a command of the Lord (v.12) and actually says that the believer is NOT BOUND (that is, not bound by the bonds of marriage anymore) because we are called to live in peace. This is a very interesting passage because it seems to indicate that, in practice, the early church practiced a more liberal (and frankly, more realistic) understanding of the complexities of marriage and divorce than many interpreters in this forum. They held the ideal high, but knew that because of the greater damage that is done to family and children by parents who can't get along, that divorce is sometimes a better answer.

Again, this is Paul's opinion, not a command of the Lord (v.12), but it actually may indicate that those "free from a wife" (v.27) do not sin if they do remarry.

Actually, I think you've greatly misunderstood this passage. It is talking about a man who divorces his wife and his wife married another man - then the second man divorces her. Verse 4 explicitly teaches that, in this situation, the first husband must not remarry the woman. This prevents a legalized "wife-swapping" arrangement where people try to bend the law to their own purposes.

You don't have to reinterpret what Jesus said in Matthew 19:9 because it fits with the spirit of the Old Testament so well. At the very least, adultery is an acceptable reason for divorce that relieves the innocent person of their marital vows, giving them the opportunity to remarry (just as if their spouse had been executed according to Old Testament law).

ARGUMENT BASED ON THE SPIRIT OF THE LAW
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

Just as the "Sabbath is made for man and not man for the sabbath", marriage is made for the benefit of the man and the woman, as well as their children and community. If a marriage is characterized by major problems such as abuse, infidelity, desertion, or drug abuse that is destroying the innocent spouse and their family, the marriage relationship is binding innocent people to persons who will cause great damage. In addition, Paul describes how we are called to live in peace (1 Corinthians 7:15). Constant fighting and destructive relationships do not live up to that calling. If a lengthy and consistent good-faith effort has been made to save the relationship and all results have been negative, then divorce may be the best solution.

I have known of couples where one a spouse felt comfortable abusing his mate because "the Bible teaches against divorce." The wife is expected to be a punching bag and the children are continuously exposed to an example of abuse (which statistically speaking, is often repeated in their own lives). I've have a friend that I had to advise to leave her husband and get herself and her son out of the relationship because her husband 1) was dealing drugs from the home 2) was consistently giving her venereal diseases because of his unfaithfulness 3) (the final straw) brought home a female stripper friend of his to live with his family to be a sexual addition to their husband-wife relationship! Her best solution was to leave the household (I told her if not for her sake, for the sake of her elementary-aged son!) and file for divorce so she could gain child support for her son and get what was financially hers out of the relationship so she could pick up the pieces of her life.

God is a God of new beginnings. Reading some of the posts in this forum, I wonder where grace enters into some people's theology. There seem to be some who would demand that the prodigal son be a slave in his father's house, the sheep that wandered off remain lost, and brothers and sisters that commit sin not be restored.

God hates divorce, and most people do also (except for maybe some sleazy divorce lawyers). But we need to be careful who and what we condemn from the comfort of our armchair. We need to remember that the example of Christ is grace for those who struggle in good conscience.

[ July 12, 2002, 02:04 AM: Message edited by: Baptist Believer ]

 

And let us not forget Gomer...

[ July 12, 2002, 08:51 PM: Message edited by: browsing ]

 

I haven't finished reading all the posts yet but :What has happened to Die to self?.. lose your life to get life? etc...what happened to suffering for Christ's sake?
The world says meet your needs and do what feels good...
Why not give up the divorced woman for Christ's sake and for His sheeps sake... Why not give up the divorced woman for the sake of the weaker children and so that someone who is considering divorce can come to this pastor and not be thinking "
He sure wasn't willing to suffer for Christ's sake.. why should I?
Follow the Spirit... not the law...

 

What I was saying is that this man should not have married the divorced woman... If he was already married to her when he chose to go into the ministry he should probably take some other job and just serve as a layman...
He will probably not get many a good Baptist church to serve in and the 2 men I know of who were divorced and remarried and then went into the ministry as pastors both went into error and wrong teaching, etc. But I have seen men in this situation who served in other capacities in the church and were a blessing to many...
As i said each one must follow the Spirit and his own discernment about what the bible is saying and then be willing to obey without question while denying self...

 

Scott J.
I just remembered... C.S. Lewis was married to a divorced woman.. and after he was a Christian at that... Look how God used him.. Although he was not the pastor of a church..

 

To Scott J. .

 

I am still a little confused here. Has anyone found the passages that addresses qualifications for pastors' wives? Assuming that no one has, what is the point? Do we assert man made regulations becuase it fits our own idea of what "ministers and their families" should be?

 

Because a woman whose husband showed himself to be an unbeliever refused to obey God in his marriage and therefore left his wife?

This is what I mean by living by Scripture. People are saying a man is unqualified to be a pastor when the Bible makes no such statement.

Divorce and remarriage and qualifications for pastor are two issues that are tough enough without adding to what Scripture says.