It is a sad fact of the Christian faith that, after two thousand years, most churches have yet to develop a clear and robust theology and pastoral strategy for dealing with divorce. It would be audacious and unwise to think that we can propose a full-fledge solution here. Nonetheless, we propose here a number of suggestions for such a theology upon which we hope a God-pleasing strategy may be developed.
We begin by setting down a number of biblical-theological principles, having surveyed the biblical teachings on divorce, which we believe should serve as the architectural framework for our pastoral stretegy. In doing so, however, we should keep in mind the nature of theology. Theology is a map; in fact a very essential and vital map, that guides us in the way we should live our life. That map is drawn up from all the data concerning our subject—divorce in this case—that we can find and interpret as faithfully in Scriptures. But, because Scriptures does not always speak exhaustively on every subject, our theology will always be imperfect, and there will always be blanks in our maps. The challenge to pastoral leadership is then what do we do. The temptation, especially when it comes to divorce, is to do nothing and leave our struggling couples to find their own way through the morass. As shepherds of our flock, we must do better.
The church is a covenantal community. We are not just a gathering of persons living individual lives but congregated (and, in light of the Covid19 pandemic, only virtually through Zoom) for the purpose of each worshipping on our own the same god . We are rather a gathering of the elect people of God living out a shared vision and purpose of asserting the presence of God in our midst and proclaiming his Kingdom in the locale in which we live. The metaphor the New Testament uses of the church is a body, each part having a God-endowed place and role but united together in mutual working together for a common purpose. It may be said that the primary purpose of the apostolic letters in the New Testament is to explain and to illustrate how this common life is to be lived out. In this body we are all responsible for the good and welfare of each other, and together accountable to the leaders and shepherds over us. The elders and leaders in the church are not janitorial administrators and event organizers, but shepherds responsible for the physical welfare and good—not just the spiritual nourishment—of every member of our the congregation.
Within this context, the church stands as a witness to every marriage—whether the wedding took place in a church or not—not simply as by-standers who affirm they saw it happen but as the body that affirms that their marriage is sacred before God and is to be embraced and taken in to her nurture with all the resources at her disposal, as well as stands accountable before God for how she has responded to their joys, needs and pains. This is where the church has most often failed the married couples in their midst; when marriages are imperiled and threatened we do not speak up, choosing instead to leave them to their private struggles. Being pastorally proactive in situations like these cannot and will not be easy but we must do better. We, who are pastors and church leaders, in particular, must repent and exercise our pastoral charge more seriously. It is a responsibility laid upon us from which we cannot turn a blind eye.
To work towards this, the first thing we leaders in the church must do is to model strong satisfying marriages. We are in the habit of reading Paul's injunction that "the overseer must be above reproach, the husband of but one wife, temperate, self-controlled, respectable, hospitable . . . not given to drunkenness, not violent but gentle, not quarrelsome . . . He must manage his own family well and see that his children obey him with proper respect . . . or if a man does not know how to manage his own household, how can he care for God's church? (1 Tim 2 1-5) as qualifications to be read out just before domination of possible candidates for the election of church leaders and forget that Paul's point is that these are to be the things leaders must model. If you preach regularly and members of your church cannot say that you model a godly marriage, you should seriously reconsider taking a step backwards and work at your marriage. This is not to imply that preachers are required to be perfect; it is to say that the life of a preacher speaks much louder than his words. If the members of our flock cannot see that we are working at our marriage, they may overlook our failings but we will always lack that full measure of credibility that is needed to make us effective as preachers and leaders in the church as well as a credible counselors to get involved in their lives of a couple who are struggling with their marriage.
The next important thing we need to do to encourage strong marriages is a strong marriage enrichment and educational programme. We do not have to reinvent the wheel here, for many Christian organizations, including Alpha and Focus on the Family, have excellent resources to help us do this and do it well.
Secondly, divorce is a breach of God's intention for marriage. Some North American preachers have suggested that divorce should be permitted because it frees the couple from their toxic relationship and often brings so much happiness and fulfilment for them as individuals afterwards.1 But no matter how much they may be seen as bringing such "happiness and fulfilment" to those involved, divorces is contrary to God's will. It is a failure to feel the pulse of God's heart to even think of divorce as "a blessed new beginning,"" no matter how 'happy' the practical outcome. This devolves into a number of practical issues for the church.
1. The best way of 'fighting' divorce is sound teaching on the sanctity of marriage. This teaching cannot, however, be confined to our sermons or Bible-studies. It must include a robust pastoral culture that affirms and concretizes the importance of marriage. Pastors and leaders cannot only remain faithful (though that is essential) they must also model at least two other traits. First, our own marriages must reflect the facts of strong marriages: the joy of companionship, the unity of purpose as a couple called by God in a shared life, the loving-kindnesses and sensitivity that must be evident in our relationship with our spouse that reflects the fruit of the Spirit in us. To those who are men reading this, I want particularly to ask, "Does your love for your wife reflect the love of Christ for the church? Can you wife honestly say to others that you listen to her and regards her as Christ regards the church?" Sound teaching must not only be 'done,' it must always also be 'seen.'
2. Sound teaching must be accompanied by a pastoral vigilence over the married couples in our congregation. As shepherds, we must be quick to recognize the couples in our flock who are struggling in their marriages, and pro-actively come alongside them to walk with them through their struggles, helping them to learn to resolve their conflicts amiacably in the spirit of love and the grace of forgiveness. This is never easy. Dysfunctions, especially in marriages, are always messy; helping will always be inconvenient, but it is a responsibility we cannot ignore.
3. Divorces will happen, even when every effort have been expended on helping the couple mend and heal. When that happens to one of our flock, we can cry. We should cry. Divorce is a sin, and God hurts for it. But we must also remember that though divorce is a sin, it is not an un-pardonable sin. At the heart of the Christian gospel is the grace of forgiveness. Just as our pastoral ministry will emphasize on love and grace to forgive an erring spouse, so too must our pastoral culture be characterized by the love that is prepared with the grace to forgive those who sinned in divorcing their spouses.
Marriage is such a sacred undertaking and divorce so hateful to God, it is beyond our powers to speak of circumstances, beyond what is explicit in Scriptures, in which it is right to leave a marriage.2 There may, however, be circumstances where resolution seems unlikely and—as long as they remain un-resolved—so destructive of life for those involved that it obliges the church-leadership to come alongside those caught up in it and say to them that the sinning involved (and the destructiveness that it continues to effect) are so hateful to God that they—the church leaders, ideally speaking on behalf of the church—will stand alongside them and be held accountable to God if they should choose to leave the marriage. It is, however, beyond the power of the church, and very poor and audacious theology, to speak of these actions as "right." When our Lord Jesus was asked about Moses's law on divorce, Jesus said that what Moses offered was simply a concession given, "Moses permitted [it] because of your hardness of heart. It was not so from the beginning" (Mt 19:8). Divorce under any circumstances is a breach of God's intention and cannot, therefore, be right. Under certain circumstances where the hardness of human heart makes the marriage more hateful to God, then we, as leaders and pastors, must have the courage to protect those suffering its effects by sharing in the responsibility for the divorce sin though it may be. This is authentic pastoral ministry, choosing to walk with the sheep that is lost in a fearful terrain uncharted on the map of our theology.
The decision to leave a marriage, however, cannot be a individual decision. A marriage, whether the wedding took place in a church or not, is sacred in God's sight and the church is its witness, not as by-standers so affirm they saw it happen but, as the body of Christ. This means that she takes upon herself the responsibility of nourishing the marriage with all the resources at her disposal but also will stand accountable before God for how she has responded to the joys, needs and pains of the couple through their journey as man-and-wife and woman-and-husband. This is where the church has failed most often; when marriages are imperiled and breaking up we do not speak up, and leave the decision to the couples. Church leaders must repent and exercise their pastoral charge more seriously. This cannot be easy but it is a responsibility whose failures we leaders must not countenance.
To conclude this section let me suggest two points to keep before us as we decide the actions we take with regards to our members struggling with their marriage to the point of contemplating divorce. First, we—as a pastor or board of elders—have no right to counsel an action deemed to be biblical if we are not prepared to say to our church members, and to the affected persons involved in particualr, that we will hold ourselves accountable to God for what happens if he/she accepts and acts according to our counsel. Even fools can give advice. As leaders we are God's shepherds; we do not give advice. It is the counsel of God we give or we have no right to expect the member to accept them. And if it is God's counsel, then we must first hold ourselves accountable for them. Far too frequently, and to our Lord's sorrow, pastors and leaders of His church have acted as if they are private agents while they enjoy the prestige of God's appointment. Second, and as follow up of the first, we—as a pastor or leaders—have no right to counsel one action or another if we are not prepared to step in with real and practical help for the problems and needs that the member will face as a consequence of accepting our councel. As shepherds we cannot say to any member that the action she/he took as a result of our counsel is her private affair. This, too, is where far too many churches and pastors have failed their duty.
We have surveyed the biblical teaching on divorce. In order to develop a pastoral strategy that will enable us to deal effectively with divorces in the church we need now to establish the main theological markers that will delineate the space within which we may obediently act.
We recapitulate the essential points from our survey of the biblical evidence here:
1. Though no specific instruction can be found in the Old Testament that explicitly permits divorce it, nonetheless, assumes divorce and remarriage to be facts of life and provides instructions that restrict them in certain circumstances.
2. Jesus and his Jewish audience inherited a common tradition that Moses permitted divorce and remarriage. Jesus rejected this so-called 'Mosaic concession,' asserting that, because of God's original intention for marriage, divorce was a sin, except in the case of marital infidelity where divorce it may be permitted, though he did not insist on it.
3. Paul was faced with two issues that required two different takes on divorce. First with regards to marriages in which both spouses were Christians, Paul took as his starting point Jesus' teaching on divorce and taught that they should not divorce and, if for some unstated reasons they should, then they should seek to be reconciled with one another. Then, with regards to those Christians who were married to non-believing partners, Paul instructed that they should not seek to divorce their spouses, but if their non-believing spouses should divorce them then they werre to accept their decisions.
While these teachings on divorce are clear, there remains the question of remarriage. On that there are two main schools of thought. One view, held by the early church, believes that Jesus' 'exception clause' applies only to divorce; it, therefore, believes that Jesus did not permit remarriage. The so-called 'Erasmian' view believes that Jesus' teaching permitted remarriage to the offended partner after a divorce on the grounds that the right to remarry was implied in the concept of divorce shared by Jesus and his Jewish audience. We have argued that the reasoning for the Erasmian position lacks cogency, and that the no-remarriage position receives further support from Paul who, though not saying so explicitly, counsels the Christians in Corinth who were divorced to remain in the status God has called them to.