Posted on 01/04/2005 12:24:26 PM PST by Keyes2000mt
The words were said countless thousands of times last year as a minister concluded the ceremony. "What God hath joined together, let no man put asunder." But so often man and woman do.
While gay marriage has been roundly condemned in most churches (and rightly so), you will not hear much about divorce. In many cases, if divorce is discussed in church, it's talked about as this horrible circumstance that comes upon people, listed in the same breath as automobile accidents or serious illnesses.
The Bible is quite clear on the issue of divorce. Malachi 2:16 says it clearly, "For the LORD, the God of Israel, saith that He hateth putting away (i.e. Divorce)..." Hate's a strong word and Christ reiterates this in the New Testament. Yet, in the church, even in Conservative churches, a man is more likely to feel uncomfortable with pierced ear than with a couple divorces behind him.
There's good reason why the church and conservatives are skittish about this topic. There's no one who doesn't know someone who's been divorced. They fill our church pews every Sunday. We know them to be decent folks who agree with us on a lot of cultural issues. Randall Terry, Newt Gingrich, and Rush Limbaugh have all been divorced.
We also know folks who have been victimized by their ex-spouse: abused, cheated on, and treated like dirt. Or, perhaps you dear reader have had a divorce where you weren't at fault and that you didn't choose.
On the other hand, most Christians know very few homosexuals and even less know homosexuals who'd like to get married. The odds of a pastor offending a large tither whose gay and wants to get married is quite small.
To say our current divorce rate is a national sin is not to say that all divorcees are to be condemned and treated as despicable outcasts. The church should be compassionate, but even as Christ said, "Go and sin no more," It must be proactive in dealing with divorce.
Divorce must be taught against strongly in the church. The church as a community should be dedicated to helping preserve the marriages of the church. Strengthening the marriages of believers should be considered as important if not more so than evangelism. Children of broken homes often wander spiritually and in many cases fall from faith. Thus, a large church may win 100 converts, but if it produces 40 broken homes in the same year that leads to 100 angry and embittered children, it is not truly building the Kingdom of God.
Also, church discipline should be used when appropriate for those who divorce without just cause and refuse reconciliation efforts. Watching Cornerstone Television, I saw former NFL player and Pastor of Antioch Bible Church Ken Hutcherson. He organized the Mayday for Marriage rally in Washington, DC opposing gay marriage. Call him anything you like, but don't call him a gay-hating hypocrite. Hutcherson said that in the past year, he'd censured five members of the church, including some for ending marriages without just cause.
The structure of most Protestant Churches is anti-authoritarian and the idea of church discipline is scary to most of us as we've heard horror stories about how cults have abused it. However, desperate times call for desperate measures and a biblical use of church discipline could aid in preserving marriages.
Secular Action
The devastating number of divorces is an area where the interests of church and state collide. Studies have shown that divorces lead to economic problems for states and communities, as well as the long term problems that come from children of broken marriages. It's no accident that the richest states are those with the lowest divorce rates.
The fact is that anyone who finds themselves in a bad marriage made a mistake at one time or another. Half the time, their biggest mistake was getting married in the first place. To prevent these bad matches or to help get the marriage off on a better start, marrying couples should be required to undergo several hours of marriage classes and/or marital counseling from a licensed minister or marriage counselor.
Secondly, no-fault divorce laws must be reformed. Marriage is the most important relationship a person has legally, yet it has all the force and effect of a month-to-month lease thanks to no-fault divorce laws. The laws should be reformed so a no-fault divorce can only be obtained if both parties consent. This would also reduce the court costs associated with issues of custody and division of the property as a no-fault divorce could only be obtained if both parties were agreed on it.
Those who believe in gay marriage have pointed to divorce as an argument against those who seek to protect marriage from same sex unions. I reject the argument that one evil prospering requires that we allow another blow to traditional family values. However, preserving the family is about more than one single issue and if we're going to be serious about it, we have to address all the issues that threaten the survival of the Family.
"But, as I recall, Jeremiah said that the worst sin of Soddom and Gomorrah was...PRIDE"
That's a talking point of the pervofascist activists, but I doubt that there's been a more thoroughly debunked canard in history.
Actually, I'm surprised to see it still raising it's ugly head. There are three references to Sodom and Gomorrah in the book of Jeremiah:
23:14 I have seen also in the prophets of Jerusalem an horrible thing: they commit adultery, and walk in lies: they strengthen also the hands of evildoers, that none doth return from his wickedness; they are all of them unto me as Sodom, and the inhabitants thereof as Gomorrah.
49:18 As in the overthrow of Sodom and Gomorrah and the neighbour cities thereof, saith the LORD, no man shall abide there, neither shall a son of man dwell in it.
50:40 As God overthrew Sodom and Gomorrah and the neighbour cities thereof, saith the LORD; so shall no man abide there, neither shall any son of man dwell therein.
"And I don't know anyone who's been totally free of that one."
Well, I've known a couple of people who gave no indication of it. But only a couple.
I have a lot of sympathy for her, actually. But she is insisting on arguing the Christian morality of (her) divorce despite rather clear Christian scriptural evidence to the contrary. I am merely pointing this out.
It's the source of all others.
And, it got satan kicked out of heaven.
I understand your position, I think.
Yes, but outside of religious context, and as sins go, it's not very juicy. However, I will admit that Sloth is probably more boring.
And you come across as a frustratrated sanctimonious twit.
My ex-husband physically and emotionally abused me. I had to hide ammunition to protect myself and still have the scars from the stitches I received in the ER because of him and yet people on this thread have called me sinful, a sinner, and wrong for getting divorced.
If you find my disagreement with that attitude to be defensive or irrational, I will plead guilty. However, every single person who has accused me of being wrong in leaving that SOB is far more irrational than I could ever be. Including yourself.
You don't know me or what I went through........I've long been over it, as my husband will also attest to. don't talk down to me about morality until you've walked in my shoes.
hehehehehehehehehehehe
And that is where the debate comes in...interpretation, at least.
Some have read the Bible to say that you may not divorce, EVER, except in cases of adultery. FWIW, some have also read it to say that women are off the hook on that, go figure.
Others have quoted different Scriptures stating that both parties must be "pleased" in the marriage...if not, then divorce is acceptable...i.e. if he's beating you, he's obviously not pleased. Obviously, pleased can have numerous (and dubious) interpretations. So, according to you, it might be a sin (easily forgiven by God) to leave an abusive marriage, and others may not see it that way. I, for one, do not. I have been lucky enough not to experience such a thing, but if I did, I can't imagine God would want to punish my husband for beating me to death, when that can be avoided by a divorce. I also cannot imagine him thinking of saving your life by divorce as a sin, either.
Of course I mean him and not you.
I don't like taxes or bureaucracy either.
Hard to think of a lot of factors with which to influence behavior on such a scale.
"Not all homosexual men were molested."
The way I say that is "molested or seduced in their pre-adult years." I can't prove that every last one was, but I strongly suspect it.
"I don't recall the stats. But it's certainly not 100%."
How could there be valid statistics, when any statistics would depend on self-reporting by people who have an overwhelming emotional need to respond one way?
"There are a LOT of factors involved."
Yes, but I think some that are thought to be causal factors are only causal in that they make the person a more likely-looking victim for predators.
"The best insurance against it is healthy marriage of parents and lots of healthy bonding and lots of healthy affection from a healthy dad."
That's the second-best insurance. The best insurance is keeping men with SSAD completely away from boys, youths, and young men.
OK, lol!
A lot of wisdom in your post.
You had better not!
Or I'll have to take that beautiful picture of the two of you and tear it in half and send half to each of you...
No offense, sir, but it doesn't come across that way. You seem very condescending when posting to her. Is it any wonder she would react badly to that? You aren't even posting it to me, and I see it that way.
I'm still waiting for you or someone to tell me what "sin" I committed by leaving the abusive SOB?????
The only sin I committed was staying as long as I did. Every day I stayed I was placing myself in further danger.
Actually, I think it's considered NOT married period, lol. You are an adulteress, and Mr. Ex and I are living in sin. :)
If I had been in your shoes, I'd probably have done the exact same thing you did. It is the nature of this world that
a) nobody is without sin, and
b) we frequently find ourselves in the situation of having to choose between sin and life or comfort.
You made the best choice you could in a bad situation--the same one that 99.99% of all people would. I understand that. But that does not mean that the choice was in itself sinless. That's all I'm saying.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.