The following position statement was sent by a friend in Philadelphia, New York.
Statement of Position on Divorce and Remarriage
Adapted from the June 24, 1983 Official statement of the Southeastern Mennonite Conference.
In approaching the problems brought on by the evils of divorce and remarriage, we need first to understand the Scriptural significance of marriage. Marriage was ordained by God in the creation and is confirmed in the New Testament by Jesus Christ. Marriage is a relationship between one man and one woman, dissoluble only by death. It involves a voluntary, unreserved commitment to each other for life and supersedes all other human relationships. Marriage is a union which is recognized and validated by God, whether the contract is solemnized by the church or by the state and whether the contracting persons are believers or unbelievers (Genesis 2:21-24; Matthew 19:3-6; Mark 10:6-9; Hebrews 13:4).
In order to establish a Scriptural position on divorce and remarriage, we must also consider the Biblical teaching on adultery. In both Old and New Testaments the unfaithfulness of God’s people is referred to as adultery in a figurative sense. Literally, adultery means voluntary sexual relations between a married man and a woman not his wife, or between a married woman and a man not her husband. However, the Scriptures teach that adultery involves more than the act of immorality. Adultery is also a breach of fidelity between husband and wife. Jesus said, “Whosoever shall put away his wife, and marry another, committeth [or continues to commit] adultery against her.” Such persons enter upon an adulterous relationship. (Jeremiah 3; Hosea 1, 2, 3; Matthew 16:4; James 4:4; Matthew 5:32; 19:9; Mark 10:11, 12; Luke 16:18; Romans 7:3) The indissolubility of the marriage bond is a principle that is basic to a consistent interpretation and application of Bible teachings in relation to problems issuing from divorce and remarriage. When confronted with the question of divorce, Jesus based His response solidly on God’s ordinance in creation when He said, “Wherefore they are no more twain but one flesh. What therefore God hath joined together, let not man put asunder [to divide or separate].”
Scripturally, there is nothing which breaks the marriage bond except death. The act of adultery does not dissolve the marriage bond, although it decidedly affects the quality of a marriage relationship and leaves a permanent scar on the persons involved. A legal document called divorce, from God’s point of view, does not break the marriage bond, else remarriage would not be adultery. Even the conversion of one of two unbelieving married partners does not dissolve the marriage bond. If the unbelieving partner should leave, the marriage bond continues. Divorced persons who enter a second marriage relation while their first partners are still living may be recognized by the state as legally married, but “from the beginning it was not so.” (Matthew 5:31, 32; 19:6-8; Mark 10:4-9; Prov. 6:32, 33; Romans 7:1-3; 1 Corinthians 10-16, 39) The church is called to minister with loving and caring consideration to those who are caught in the tangles of divorce and remarriage. Concern for their personal salvation should motivate us to lead them to a full commitment to Jesus Christ and to show them from the Scriptures those holy principles which regulate the marriage relationship. While the final decision to separate from an adulterous relationship would be voluntary, God requires it for reconciliation to Him. (John 4:13-18; 8:1-11; Romans 15:14; Galatians 6:1-3; Colossians 4:6)
Divorce was granted in the Old Testament only as a concession and was neither commanded nor commended by God. Divorce is clearly depicted in the Scriptures as being in direct contradiction to the original purpose of God and the true nature of marriage. Principles of the New Testament would allow a divorced person two options. He may remain unmarried or be reconciled to his partner. (Deuteronomy 24:1-4; Matthew 5:31,32; 19:3-8; Mark 10:2-9; 1 Corinthians 7:10,11) If the divorced person remarries, he faces far greater and more serious complications. Both single persons and persons previously married can be involved in an adulterous remarriage. Circumstances may vary but the consequences are quite similar. Complications issuing from adulterous remarriages are legion and do not have easy answers. For many, their first marriage was contracted before conversion. Since the Scriptures teach that marriage is validated by God, whether contracted by believers or unbelievers, we believe the first marriage is still binding as long as both are living. (Matthew 5:32; 19:9; Mark 10:11, 12; Luke 16:18; Romans 7:3; Hebrews 13:4)
Some couples claim that in their adulterous remarriage they have discovered real marital compatibility. This only points up a grave weakness in modern society. Marriage is depicted as an experience of selfish gratification rather than a commitment to life-long fidelity. (1 Corinthians 6:9-20; 1 Thessalonians 4:2-8; Ephesians 5:22-23)
A very real test comes when children are born in an adulterous marriage relationship. To dissolve such a family unit may cause the children extreme suffering. However, children are also caused to suffer similarly from divorce of original partners or from being born out of wedlock. Such consequences are touching, and are a grim reminder that in the wake of sin there are many innocent sufferers. (Proverbs 6:32, 33; 13:15; Galatians 6:7, 8)
To legally dissolve an adulterous remarriage relationship in our culture generally requires either annulment or divorce. If to effect either annulment or divorce means that one partner must become an aggressor at law against the other, such an action would be in conflict with the Bible teaching on nonresistance. We believe that a simple separation would be consistent with the teaching of Scripture. (1 Corinthians 6:1-8)
In keeping with the Bible principles of practical holiness, Christian expediency, and a blameless witness, we believe it would be inconsistent for couples who sincerely repent of their adulterous marriage relationship to continue to live in the same dwelling or to maintain close relationships. However, since there are often children born in adulterous marriage relationships, Christian integrity would require that a believing father bear responsibility for the material support and care of his children. (Romans 13:14; 1 Thessalonians 5:22; Hebrews 12:1; 1 Corinthians 6:9-12; 10:23; Ephesians 5:8-17; Philippians 2:15, 16; 1 Peter 2:12; 1 Timothy 5:8)
In conclusion, we believe the church is called to demonstrate the holiness and permanency of the marriage relationship. Furthermore, she is commissioned to make disciples of all nations and to teach them how to follow the commands of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ.
Reply
Keith Sharp
Thank you my friend for maintaining contact with me. I hope you and your family are doing well. I respect you and your family for your Bible knowledge and desire to live godly lives.
I appreciate you forwarding to me the official statement of the Mennonite position on divorce. Am I correct in my thinking that you and the Philadelphia Christian Fellowship are no longer connected to the Mennonites?
I do appreciate the desire of Mennonites to uphold the sanctity of the marriage relationship. Marriage is a God ordained and divinely controlled relationship. The Lord prefaced His law concerning marriage on the premise that God gave mankind marriage, and His will regulates it (Matthew 19:4-6; Mark 10:6-9).
However, I do not agree with everything in the Mennonite position statement. Before I state my disagreement and the reason, let me observe that the very use of the name “Mennonite” religiously, and the adoption of official statements of doctrine are sectarian and thus wrong (1 Corinthians 1:10-13). I am simply a Christian unaffiliated with any sect (Acts 11:26), and the only official statement I accept as binding on faith and fellowship is the Bible (2 Timothy 3:16-17; Revelation 22:18-19).
Furthermore, there is no scriptural authority for an association of congregations. Each congregation of the Lord’s people is to be completely independent of all other congregations (1 Peter 5:1-4).
If I understand the statement correctly, the Mennonite position is that there is no scriptural reason for divorce. I agree that adultery does not break the marriage bond, but it does give the innocent party the right to do so (Matthew 19:9). Actually, Jesus used the word “fornication” to describe the act by the guilty spouse that gives the innocent spouse the right to divorce and remarry. “Fornication” is the more general word that includes “every kind of unlawful sexual intercourse” (W.F. Arndt and F.W. Gingrich, A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament. 699). Thus, for example, it would include homosexual intercourse and bestiality.
The New Testament condemns divorce even if the one initiating the divorce does not necessarily remarry (Matthew 5:32; 19:3-6; Mark 10:2-9; 1 Corinthians 7:10-13) and also condemns divorce followed by the remarriage of the one doing the divorcing (Matthew 19:9; Mark 10:10-12; Luke 16:18). But the Lord plainly stated an exception. One who divorces his spouse and remarries because that spouse is guilty of fornication does not commit adultery (Matthew 19:9).
The word “adultery,” though usually employed where at least one of those involved has another spouse, can be used in a broader sense. “But I say unto you, That whosoever looketh on a woman to lust after her hath committed adultery with her already in his heart” (Matthew 5:28). If a single man looks on a single women to lust for her, he has committed adultery of the heart.
It is true that adultery can be used figuratively of idolatry or of a breach of relationship, but there is no proof the Lord used the word figuratively in Matthew 5:32; 19:9; Mark 10:11; and Luke 16:18. Words must be taken literally, in their common meaning, unless the context demands figurative usage, else we are each free to give words whatever meaning we desire, and the clear meaning of Scripture is destroyed. “Commiteth adultery” (Matthew 5:32; 19:9; Mark 10:11; Luke 16:18) is present tense and has the sense “goes on committing adultery.” It assumes sexual intercourse in the new marriage and describes it as adultery. This is taking words and verb tenses in their normal, literal meanings. In other words, adultery takes place in the bedroom rather than the court room.
Marriage should only be dissolved by death (Matthew22:23-32; Romans 7:1-3), but the Lord plainly gave the innocent party the right to divorce the spouse who has committed fornication and to remarry (Matthew 19:9).
Christians most certainly should not use the civil courts to settle their differences (1 Corinthians 6:1-8), but the Master stated an exception. The “except” clause of Matthew 19:9 plainly gives permission to the innocent spouse to divorce the spouse who has committed fornication. An exception alters a general principle without negating the principle. For example, the principle is that every man has the right to have a wife, and every woman has the right to have a husband (1 Corinthians 7:2). But the spouse who has been put away because he/she is guilty of fornication does not have the right to remarry (Matthew 19:9). And those who have divorced for a cause other than fornication may only remarry each other (1 Corinthians 7:11).
I recognize I can be wrong, and I welcome further study.
