No Divorce?

[bmcneal]

I'm putting this here because it seems to be a belief held mostly by (at least IME) Christians. I hear a lot of people say that there is absolutely no reason to get divorced. I'm curious, then, as to what options there are. Say, a wife is getting beaten, and the husband refuses to get help or stop abusing her. What is the solution to someone who holds this belief? I know one possible "out" in a situation like that, and it's not a pleasant way to go...

I'm not trying to start a debate, I'm not saying that that belief is wrong, I'm just curious.

[doubledutch]

i don't think i've ever met anyone irl who said there is NO reason for divorce - aren't infidelity and abuse are accepted as justification for divorce by most religions/denominations?

but i did have a teacher in high school who told us this story about an abusive marriage in which the abusive husband was ultimately "saved" (became a born-again christian) after many years of whaling on his wife when he asked her why she put up with him and she said she was trying to be a christ-like example to him. i was like, "so you're saying women should stay in abusive marriages?" and our teacher was like, "well, it worked out in this case." my point being that even in a religion (this was a church school, teacher was also a pastor) that does not completely vilify divorce, lunatics abound.

[flower01]

yeah, i think you've misheard our beliefs or only heard from extreme people. I'm pretty sure that most Christians certainly believe there definitely legitimate reasons for divorce. We don't take it lightly - it's definitely not appropriate to just decide you're "out of love" with your spouse and the whole "we've grown apart" excuse is not really thought of highly, but abuse,infidelity, abandonment, etc are good reasons for divorce. Although, I do think most devout people seeking counsel from their pastor would not divorce the second they found out their spouse cheated either. In Catholic marriage prep you have to take a compatibility type test and then review it with marriage counselors. One of the questions was about your willingness to forgive your spouse in the case of infidelity. Obviously, we are supposed to be faithful, but we are also supposed to make our marriage a priority and that means forgiveness even in really tough circumstances. Again, I'm not saying it's not okay to divorce in the case of infidelity - just that many Christians would still be encouraged to try to work it out.

[mamabadger]

My church takes divorce very, very seriously, but the process is divided into three separate parts: physical separation; actual divorce; and permission to remarry.
In your example of the woman being beaten by her husband, if she went through church channels, she would easily be granted a blessing to separate from her husband, in order to protect herself and any children. Nobody would be expected to tolerate physical abuse, married or not. Once separated, the divorce would be considered more carefully, but it might be granted. However, while the woman would then probably be granted permission to remarry, the abusive husband probably would not, or at least not until he had demonstrated that he was no longer a threat to future family members.

[charleysmama23]

So personally I believe there are definitely Biblical reasons for divorce. I recently read an article, however, that pointed that the Christian church often takes a very appalling stance on this. In a survey of 6,000 pastors 26% said they would counsel an abused woman to stay and submit to her husband. 25% said they would tell the woman that at least half the blame for the abuse lay on her for not being submissive enough. A disgusting 50% said women should be willing to tolerate "some level of violence" for the sake of the marriage covenant.
It's horrible that this kind of thing going on in the Christian church, and it needs to be addressed within the church. These women should be protected and these husbands should be reported to the police, immediately.
Placing the worth and value of the marriage covenant ABOVE the worth and value of the individuals IN the marriage covenant is wrong, and not Biblical.
So I can see why you, OP, have gotten the impression that Christians think divorce is NEVER allowed. I am not one of those Christians. I do believe it's an easy way out of a bad decision for some people, but I also believe it is often necessary when one party is incapable of honoring the covenant they made to their partner.

[Smokering]

I agree that Christians who believe in no divorce ever are extremely rare. It's simply not Biblical; divorce is explicitly allowed in at least two circumstances (adultery and desertion/religious persecution by a non-Christian partner).

The answer to your question may be the distinction between separation and divorce, though. It's possible to leave an abusive husband without divorcing him; and as a Christian who takes marriage very very seriously, that's probably what I'd do in a situation which the Bible didn't explicitly say was grounds for divorce.

[cappuccinosmom]

I have never heard that there is *no* reason for divorce. And I hang with some pretty darn conservative people.

I do know some groups that forbid remarriage after divorce, as they consider marriage a binding covenant for life. They would allow remarriage only if the spouse died.

I know others who forbid remarriage after divorce unless or until the other person marries again, thus dissolving for sure the previous marriage.

Basically, the idea is that divorce is not good for families or society. But there are times when it is a "lesser evil", but it is not a step that should be taken lightly, quickly, or without a great deal of advice and counsel. Certainly not in the numbers currently in our society or for shallow reasons.

For me personally, I would separate for my physical safety of the safety of my children, but not necessarily jump to legal divorce. That would be a last, step, not a first one. In a healthy church situation that discouraged divorce, ideally the church leadership would take the offending spouse through the process of confrontation, confession, repentance, and restoration while supporting the spouse who had been mistreated or cheated on. If confession and repentance didn't happen, they would continue supporting the offended spouse and put the offender into church discipline (out of fellowship). And look at whether allowing divorce would be a "necessary evil" for the sake of safety and stability for the wife and children.

Unfortunately, not all churches are healthy. I have a friend who's husband is bipolar and unfortunately became dangerous to her and the children. He has refused medication. She has had to leave her home, and home area because their church would not support her at all. She did not want to rebel against her husband or the church, has not filed for divorce, has not stopped following any of her church's rules, but she did not feel physically safe there anymore, especially as she has no support from their home church. She moved to another state, and is in another church fellowship which is essentially as conservative, but which supports her in keeping her family safe and insisting that her husband get medical help before she goes home to him.
What should have happened is that the elders of the church should have taken this husband "out behind the barn" so to speak, and *insisted* that he leave the home for a time, get his mind and behavior straightened out, and prove to the community that he is willing and able to be a decent husband. They should have made sure this woman and her 8 kids could stay in the family home, and had enough money to eat and pay the bills. In the kind of community they have, this could have been accomplished *wonderfully*, peacefully, and efficiently, with both the mentally ill and abusive spouse, and his wife getting the help they needed. But they did not choose to go the healthy route and instead chose get picky about authority issues. :

[Theoretica]

Well, I grew up in conservative/fundamentalist Southern Baptist churches in the deep south and throughout the midwest, and divorce was definitely preached as a sin against god and 'not allowed' in all I attended. You can't be a Deacon if you're divorced, or a sunday school teacher, or any kind of church leader. They preach/ed that to remarry after divorce is an even more grevious sin because it's adultury on top of divorce, so from my estimation it qualifies you for the next level of hell or something .

If the wife is getting beaten by her husband, the churches I went to preached she should become MORE submissive. She should bring the issue to the church leadership, and they will pray for god's leadership to guide/speak to him. She should bring her husband to christ by her own virtuous following of Jesus, and pray for him without ceasing.

When I was in a terribly abusive and violent/explosive marriage I went to our church for help to leave him and be a single mom. I was told to pray for the lord's wisdom to guide me back to my husband and our marriage. I was told THEY would pray for the lord's direction in how to best help my husband lead our family. I was also told to pray for my husband during this time of turmoil for HIM.

I asked for money to help pay our bills as he was unemployed and refused to seek disability. I was told they needed to pray about that since I wasn't following my vows by seeking to end the marriage, they felt assisting me to sin would be inappropriate without god's direct guidance in the matter. I asked what there was to pray about? I'd tithed obediently my ENTIRE life, spent my entire marriage trying to attain Proverbs 31 'perfect wife status', taught sunday school for years, volunteered in the youth programs and the awanas programs, even when we didn't have food on our table I managed to give to the church, and yet when I need a few measly hundred bucks to get through the month they can't manage?? Keep in mind this was a multiMILLION dollar megachurch with glossy color photo spread bulletins each sunday and etched glass on each window.

I was counseled that by accusing my husband I was showing lack of faith in him as the head of our family. I pointed out he was breaking the law by abusing me and our children. They recommended some books about being a dutiful and submissive wife.

Here's the bible verses used to justify their belief...

Genesis 2:24 Therefore a man shall leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife, and they shall become one flesh

Gen 3:16 (NKJV) To the woman He said: "I will greatly multiply your sorrow and your conception; In pain you shall bring forth children; Your desire <shall be> for your husband, And he shall rule over you."

1 Cor 11:3-10 (NKJV) But I want you to know that the head of every man is Christ, the head of woman <is> man, and the head of Christ <is> God.

Ephesians 5:22 Wives, submit to your own husbands, as to the Lord, {23} For the husband is head of the wife, as also Christ is head of the Church; and He is the Savior of the body.

Colossians 3:18 Wives, submit to your own husbands, as is fitting in the Lord.

Eph 5:23-24 (NKJV) For the husband is head of the wife, as also Christ is head of the church; and He is the Savior of the body. {24} Therefore, just as the Church is subject to Christ, so <let> the wives <be> to their own husbands in everything.

1 Pet 3:1-6 (NKJV) {1} Wives, likewise, <be> submissive to your own husbands, that even if some do not obey the word, they, without a word, may be won by the conduct of their wives, {2} when they observe your chaste conduct <accompanied> by fear. {3} Do not let your adornment be <merely> outward; arranging the hair, wearing gold, or putting on <fine> apparel; {4} rather <let it be> the hidden person of the heart, with the incorruptible <beauty> of a gentle and quiet spirit, which is very precious in the sight of God. {5} For in this manner, in former times, the holy women who trusted in God also adorned themselves, being submissive to their own husbands, {6} as Sarah obeyed Abraham, calling him lord, whose daughters you are if you do good and are not afraid with any terror.

Prov 31 (NKJV) {10} Who can find a virtuous wife? For her worth <is> far above rubies. {11} The heart of her husband safely trusts her; So he will have no lack of gain. {12} She does him good and not evil All the days of her life. {13} She seeks wool and flax, And willingly works with her hands. {14} She is like the merchant ships, She brings her food from afar. {15} She also rises while it is yet night, And provides food for her household, And a portion for her maidservants. {16} She considers a field and buys it; From her profits she plants a vineyard. {17} She girds herself with strength, And strengthens her arms. {18} She perceives that her merchandise <is> good, And her lamp does not go out by night. {19} She stretches out her hands to the distaff, And her hand holds the spindle. {20} She extends her hand to the poor, Yes, she reaches out her hands to the needy. {21} She is not afraid of snow for her household, For all her household <is> clothed with scarlet. {22} She makes tapestry for herself; Her clothing <is> fine linen and purple. {23} Her husband is known in the gates, When he sits among the elders of the land. {24} She makes linen garments and sells <them>, And supplies sashes for the merchants. {25} Strength and honor <are> her clothing; She shall rejoice in time to come. {26} She opens her mouth with wisdom, And on her tongue <is> the law of kindness. {27} She watches over the ways of her household, And does not eat the bread of idleness. {28} Her children rise up and call her blessed; Her husband <also>, and he praises her: {29} "Many daughters have done well, But you excel them all." {30} Charm <is> deceitful and beauty <is> passing, But a woman <who> fears the LORD, she shall be praised. {31} Give her of the fruit of her hands, And let her own works praise her in the gates.



So, yes, there are a LOT of churches that teach divorce is a sin and therefore not acceptable, even in cases of abuse.

[lilyka]

if you are interpreting the scriptures for yourself things can get harry as you can interpret them any way you want.

I can see how some churches could preach no divorce ever. BUT even the most conservative fundementalist no divorce whatever churches seem to make an exception for outright adultery - the other spouse physically having intercourse with another person. some even say fornication or any sexual sin including porn or sexually mistreating the partner. and for abuse they may not think divorce is necessarily an option but definitely throw his butt in jail to keep you and your family safe. you can work things out while he is safely behind bars.

and even thouse that make exceptions and allow for divorce then say no remarriage.

my church had no problem granting me its full blessing for a divorce. and the woman of the church made short work of trying to fix me up with the two bachlors however second marriages are differnt sacermentally from first marriage and no one can marry a third time? 4th time? i forget which . . .either way there comes point where they draw the line.

and I believe if a priest gets divorced for any reason (even if his wife leaves him for no good reason) he may have to step down from the priesthood.

[fruitfulmomma]

Our church (Orthodox Presbyterian) adheres to the Westminster Confession of Faith. You can read what it states here... http://www.reformed.org/documents/wcf_with_proofs/

I believe adultery and abandonment are both legitimate grounds for divorce and in both cases remarrying on the part of the victim would be acceptable and not constitute adultery or disqualify the victim from leadership in the Church if they were otherwise qualified.

In the case of physical abuse, separation for the safety of the injured party and children would be necessary and should involve appealing to all lawful authorities - both civil (state) and ecclesiastical (church) magistrates. Any church body which refused to render help to a domestic violence victim, imo, is not acting in accordance with scriptural mandates to care for those in need.

[e(Lisa)beth]

It's important to consider that there is no such thing as a single Christian church. There are dozens of sects that follow Christ, and each one is going to have their own policy.

I attend a church that is a member of the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.). I didn't actually know PCUSA's official policy, so I looked it up in the Book of Order:

It is the Divine Intention that persons entering the marriage covenant become inseparably united, thus allowing for no dissolution save that caused by the death of either husband or wife. However, the weaknesses of one or both partners may lead to gross and persistent denial of the marriage vows so that marriage dies at the heart and the union becomes intolerable; yet only in cases of extreme, unrepented-of, and irremediable unfaithfulness (physical or spiritual) should separation or divorce be considered. Such separation or divorce is accepted as permissible only because of the failure of one, or both, of the partners and does not lessen in any way the Divine Intention for indissoluble union.

So it looks like infidelity is it - no provisions for abuse, which surprised me. However, I can't imagine that the pastor of my own congregation would ever counsel a person to stay in an abusive marriage. Also, there are plenty of divorced members of my church and they are treated just like everyone else.

[TzippityDoulah]

we have a belief that the Bible doesn't condone remarriage. if one is in a marital relationship that is truly abusive or what have you and it can not be resolved they are free to divorce if need truly be. (but it wouldn't be encouraged!!) Remarriage is where the issue comes in... as the belief is that the two become one flesh and you cannot become "one flesh" with more than one person.

I'm not sure about the "next level of hell" thing ... that's an odd commentary to what the Bible has to say on the matter. It has nothing to do with one sin being "worse" than another. it's that God created the man and woman to bond in marriage in an inseparable way. now as to why? or how? I don't know... that's His decision one of the many mysteries of God is marriage. He tells us join with our souse and become one. The husband's love for the wife is like that of God for his church... it's a spiritual significance I don't think we're able to fully comprehend on this earth.. and so when we pull it apart and say "ok this we can remarry over, but this we can't" b/c it makes sense in our own minds... we loose sight of that which God has given us for a deeper purpose.

it's not supposed to be about how much we can do without being punished, it's about the blessing we recieve through God for following His purposed even when we don't understand them.

(those are my best understandings on it... I realize not everyone would agree. not do I look down my nose on people who would disagree.)

[Theoretica]

I just was referencing the 'this sin is worse than that sin' mentality that I grew up with. So since one sin was 'worse' (in their book) than the other, I figured they must have a next level of hell to send everyone to

Adultery, in fact, was something 'hush hush' and people just whispered about it. Certainly not cause for divorce. Nothing justified divorce that I'm aware of? I wonder if I should email my old pastor and ask...LOLOL

[TzippityDoulah]

it's sick when adultery is let go in a church and swept under the rug and then a woman leaving a man would be made to seem a greater sin.

My MIL ran around with a lot of people at the church my FIL was pastoring at. had a child with one of them... and eventually felt with another when my husband was a teen and his sister was 6. and still she managed to find a church that was ok with her remarrying b/c she convinced them it was all my FILs fault. ugh.

I have no toleration for that sort of behaviour. if my FIL was trul horrid she should have left... WITH the kids. not left the kids there and ran off with a "sexier man".

but anyhow, a little off topic. I just had to share I've seen my share of this nasty disgusting "sweep it under the carpet" mentality and i find it repulsive.... but that isn't what the Bible has to say on the matter. it's one some PEOPLE have to say on the matter. or decide to think or whatever.

[Bluegoat]

The Roman Catholic Church does not believe in divorce. THe reason is related to their theology of marriage.

They believe that marriage, like Baptism, Holy Orders etc. are Sacraments. That is, ther is a certain outward sign, performed at God's command, and certian inward spiritual things occur, objectively by God. So in Baptism, the sign is water, and the inward part is that the person is grafted into the body of Christ, and is forgiven for both original sin and their own sins. Those things are accomplished by the work of God.

In marraige, the spiritual part is that the man and woman become "one flesh." They are considered to be, in a real way, one organism.

The important point with all of these is the change is considered to be permanent. A person cannot be unbaptized, a priest cannot be unpriested, and a marriage cannot be dissolved.

You could compare it to, say, a medical doctor. An MD who is being disciplined for bad doctoring loses his license to practice, not his status as MD. Unless he fraudulently received that degree, it can't be taken away.

So for Roman Catholics, a marriage may be annulled, but you can't divorce. Annulment means the marriage was somehow not real from the beginning. Maybe the woman was already married to someone else. Maybe the man didn't mean it when he said he would love and cherish his wife.

There is a lot of disagreement over how easy annulments are to get in the US at the moment. There has been some indication by the Pope that they may become more difficult to get.

Of course, a couple may separate if necessary for some serious reason, even if they can't get an annulment, but in that case they can't remarry.

[cappuccinosmom]

and divorce was definitely preached as a sin against god and 'not allowed' in all I attended. You can't be a Deacon if you're divorced, or a sunday school teacher, or any kind of church leader. They preach/ed that to remarry after divorce is an even more grevious sin because it's adultury on top of divorce,

Many churches believe this, and I don't have a problem with it as a Biblical teaching.

It sounds though, like your church was seriously toxic and picking and choosing what parts of the Bible to follow. The Bible is *very* clear that adultery and violence is unacceptable. Sweeping either under the rug, or allowing it in any way is unBiblical and sick.

[Theoretica]

Well, I went to several churches growing up in the south and the northern midwest, all Southern Baptist, and they all said the same things. So I didn't come away from it thinking it was a toxic individual church. I came away realizing it's the entire belief system that's toxic. If it had been just one church I'd agree, but to have the same litany preached in several churches on opposite sides of the country over a 25 year time span? There's more to it than just a toxic church.

[Theoretica]

Originally Posted by cappuccinosmom

The Bible is *very* clear that adultery and violence is unacceptable. Sweeping either under the rug, or allowing it in any way is unBiblical and sick.

And, in their view, the bible is also very clear about the husband's role as head of household. And that trumps all.

[Bluegoat]

Originally Posted by Theoretica

Well, I went to several churches growing up in the south and the northern midwest, all Southern Baptist, and they all said the same things. So I didn't come away from it thinking it was a toxic individual church. I came away realizing it's the entire belief system that's toxic. If it had been just one church I'd agree, but to have the same litany preached in several churches on opposite sides of the country over a 25 year time span? There's more to it than just a toxic church.

Perhaps a toxic theology would be a better way to put it. It seems to me that the premise about the man being the head as being more important than any other theological point is obviously silly. Should a wife protect a husband planning to blow up a building of people? Murdering prostitutes? Eating babies? Clearly not. (or maybe I am naive?)


If they say, well she should turn him in but must stay married, I can see a certain logic in that... but allowing clearly immoral behavior on the part of the husband is illogical. If anything, his burden for behavior should be heavier.

[TzippityDoulah]

being "head of household" is supposed to be a great responsibility for the husband/man. a blessing for the family a vessel through which God can lead the family. a beautiful relationship!

It ISN'T ever meant to be a lisence to sin against another human being. any human being that decides to take it upon themselves to teach or force this notion is unethical, immoral and anti-biblical.