# Divorce disqualify an elder?



## Weston Stoler

I have a very strong view of divorce. I have the view that no matter what you should not divorce and that it is never allowed with biblical grounds (When Paul says to love your wives like Christ loved the church all biblical grounds for divorce on that side atleast fall short) So, my question is how many of you believe that a divorced person who remarries is disqualified from being an elder (husband of one wife and all)
.


----------



## yoyoceramic

What Puritan Board thought 3 years ago:

Of the following options, who may serve as an elder or deacon? (multiple choice)


----------



## N. Eshelman

If a man is lawfully divorced and was declared the innocent party by the church, this should not disqualify him for the eldership. Looking at the phrase "husband of one wife" would also (if the poll answer is "yes") disqualify a man whose wife had died and married again.


----------



## AThornquist

Amen. 



Weston Stoler said:


> I have the view that no matter what you should not divorce and that it is never allowed with biblical grounds



You are coming to this conclusion by means of an application from what Paul meant when he says that husbands are to love their wives as Christ loved the church? Consider the context, friend. Paul isn't speaking about Christ's undying loyalty regardless of how much the church acts like a whore. Christ loved the church and _gave Himself for her_, and in this relationship we have a model for husbands ought to lovingly relate to their wives. Divorce is not the topic at hand, and to take some sort of principle from this text and have it overpower texts that directly relate to the issue of divorce is simply poor hermeneutics. Why not make a conclusion based on the texts that offer Biblically grounded circumstances where divorce is allowed?

And that is why I chose 'No.' Divorce in itself does _not_ disqualify a man from the ministry. We must consider each situation and consider if the divorce was warranted or not. If the divorce was biblically warranted, we are no better than Pharisees if we look down on the man for it. If the divorce was not biblically warranted, then it may disqualify him (depending on if he were a believer at the time, etc.). The circumstances surrounding a divorce are always regrettable, but that doesn't mean divorce is never allowed.


----------



## Rich Koster

I voted other. Each case must be closely examined. For example: If an elder was abandoned by an adulterous wife and she filed for divorce, that generally makes him free to remarry.


----------



## reformedminister

I find it quite offensive when people make bold statements without thinking things through and considering what the Bible says and what it does not say. Opinions can change, especially if you find yourself in unfortunate circumstance beyond your own control. I speak from personal experience. I hate divorce too and so does God. However, it is a part of our society and the church needs to deal with it. Many divorces have occurred within the church because the church has failed to do it's job. I think the local church needs to take a stand on the Biblical standard and do their best to help those who may be confused and mislead about the subject. Life has some hard lessons to teach and often those who are quick to judge will have the hardest ones to learn.


----------



## Scott1

The Westminster Confession summarizes the doctrine of Scripture to say: Divorce is not accepted in God's eyes except for adultery and irremediable abandonment of a believer. The innocent party may remarry.



> Westminster Confession of Faith
> 
> Chapter XXIV
> Of Marriage and Divorce
> 
> 
> V. Adultery or fornication committed after a contract, being detected before marriage, gives just occasion to the innocent party to dissolve that contract.[11] In the case of adultery after marriage, it is lawful for the innocent party to sue out a divorce and, after the divorce,[12] to marry another, as if the offending party were dead.[13]
> 
> VI. Although the corruption of man be such as is apt to study arguments unduly to put asunder those whom God has joined together in marriage: yet, nothing but adultery, or such wilful desertion as can no way be remedied by the Church, or civil magistrate, is cause sufficient of dissolving the bond of marriage:[14] wherein, a public and orderly course of proceeding is to be observed; and the persons concerned in it not left to their own wills, and discretion, in their own case.[15]



An officer (minister, deacon, elder) is held to a higher standard which makes it difficult, but not impossible to re-marry even if they are the innocent party.

In my understanding, they may never have unbiblical grounds, remarry and then be qualified for office (except perhaps if the spouse is deceased).

Even where permitted, reconciliation is always the highest goal, especially to whom much is given, much is required of church officers.

Don't let anyone say one cannot serve God if they are not an officer.


----------



## SolaScriptura

Weston Stoler said:


> I have a very strong view of divorce. I have the view that no matter what you should not divorce and that it is never allowed with biblical grounds (When Paul says to love your wives like Christ loved the church all biblical grounds for divorce on that side atleast fall short) So, my question is how many of you believe that a divorced person who remarries is disqualified from being an elder (husband of one wife and all)
> .



You have your view. But just because you have it doesn't mean it is correct. In fact, your view is wrong because it is more restrictive than Scripture and our Confession. I encourage you to reconsider.


----------



## Kim G

I voted "no" because divorce does not _automatically_ disqualify one to be an elder.

And someone may say that they "have the view that no matter what you should not divorce and that it is never allowed with biblical grounds," but that's not what Jesus said. And you can't be more holy or spiritual or righteous than He is.


----------



## Jack K

Not necessarily disqualified. Among the questions to ask:

Who was at fault in the divorce?
Had all reasonable attempts at reconciliation been pursued before marriage to another?
Do the circumstances of this divorce show the man to have not managed his household well?
And so on...

These are not simple questions that can be answered by applying an across-the-board rule. Each case must be examined by itself. A divorced man who has remarried probably should face some extra scrutiny related to the divorce, but this could be said of men who've experienced any of a number of rocky situations in their lives.


----------



## au5t1n

Weston Stoler said:


> When Paul says to love your wives like Christ loved the church all biblical grounds for divorce on that side atleast fall short



Jeremiah 3:8, "And I saw, when for all the causes whereby backsliding Israel committed adultery I had put her away, and given her a bill of divorce; yet her treacherous sister Judah feared not, but went and played the harlot also."

Back to the drawing board. God hates divorce. He hates the destruction of marriage, the untying of what He has joined together. It is Scripture's teaching that there are times when the one filing the papers is not the one who destroyed the marriage, tragic as it is.

Your question also assumes that any "divorced elder candidate" is the one who did the divorcing.


----------



## baron

I voted other. Each case should be taken seperatley. According to the WCF section 24:5-6. 

As a Baptist I was taught that divorce for any reason would disqualify a man.


----------



## calgal

Two words: Joel Beeke.


----------



## Eoghan

I recall a a young minister meeting with two divorcees to consider marrying them. As the conversation progressed it emerged that they were the guilty ones in braking up their marriages to pursue the relationship with each other. The rest as they say is history.

People not only divorce their spouses, they are divorced by their spouses. In an age of no-fault divorce is the church really prepared to set a higher standard. In my experience the church is much better at closing the door after the horse has bolted. 

1. Prepare young folks for a Christian marriage
2. Support them when they are married
3. Help them pick up the pieces if the worst happens


----------



## BertMulder

not only does God hate the putting away of one's wife, but there is no biblical warrant, ever, for remarriage while once spouse is still alive... What God has joined together, let not man put asunder.


----------



## ClayPot

Bert,

Could you please explain why you belief that your view is what the Bible teaches? Respectfully,

Joshua


----------



## Edward

A divorce by a candidate for office calls for a diligent investigation as to circumstances. Given the casual nature of divorce in modern society, it frequently should be a disqualification, as divorces are frequently obtained for non-Biblical grounds, but it is not a universal bar. I selected 'Other'


----------



## PuritanCovenanter

BertMulder said:


> not only does God hate the putting away of one's wife, but there is no biblical warrant, ever, for remarriage while once spouse is still alive... What God has joined together, let not man put asunder.



I would agree with you Pastor Mulder unless God has given allowance or prescription for such. And I believe He has. So does the Westminster Confession of Faith. This is not a point of argument. I believe the Whole of Scripture taken as the Whole Counsel of God are summed up in the WCF on this subject. I respectfully disagree with the good loving Pastor Mulder as he evidently does with the WCF and many other good men. This board holds to the WCF as the biblical understanding of the Word of God.


----------



## Weston Stoler

I need to clarify my position. I do not believe that the one in the elder position should ever initiate a divorce. Under any circumstances. However it cannot be helped if his spouse divorces him. Although I still do not see a warrant of remarriage in the scriptures as long as that spouse is alive.


----------



## RobR

Elders and Deacons are gifts God gives to his Church. I think/believe we must be VERY careful when approving an elder/deacon. I understand my view is more restrictive than most, but the wrong choice in this issue carries HUGE consequences for the church. 

Clearly, a man may be divorced once his wife is unfaithful, or should she be an unbeliever and leave him, he is free to remarry and not be guilty of adultery. No question, scripture is clear on this issue. Should she remarry, reconciliation of the first marriage is not an option anymore. But I wonder, as long as the first wife is not died, even if she has remarried, in some way is not she still a wife of sorts? The first marriage now defiled, and the second marriage honorable, providing his second wife divorced properly. God has declared what He has put together no man can/is to separate until death do they part, but divorce is permitted because of the hardness of mans heart. Until the first wife has died, I think it is reasonable to consider this man (when considering him for these two leadership roles) as the husband of 2 wives.., one honorable and pleasing to God, and the other defiled and filthy. I conclude that unless it seems clear that God is placing this man as an elder/deacon (in which case we will not be able to keep this man from that role), we should tend to wait and see regarding his approval for a role of spiritual headship. I see nothing though preventing this man from being a deacons helper, or the assistant some how of an elder. God clearly uses elect men that have suffered such adversity and persevered and matured in many different and very useful ways to support His church.

I recognize my view is different than most, probably historically as well. I am not dogmatic on this issue, but this is where I come down on the issue until God convinces me otherwise.


----------



## JML

calgal said:


> Two words: Joel Beeke.



Is Joel Beeke divorced and remarried?


----------



## PuritanCovenanter

*
PCA Historical Center 

PCA Historical Center: Index to the Position Papers of the Presbyterian Church in America

Divorce and Remarriage [1992 Report of the Ad Interim Committee on Divorce and Remarriage]*    • Click here to download the entire study as a single file [111 pp. in length] 4 [PDF]​  • Introduction and Outline --------------------------------------------------------


HTML:


[/COLOR][/CENTER]
[/TD]
[TD="class: style19, width: 34"][CENTER][CENTER][[URL="http://www.pcahistory.org/pca/2-182.pdf"]PDF[/URL]][/CENTER]
[/CENTER]
[/TD]
[TD="class: style19, width: 42"][CENTER][COLOR=#000000][[URL="http://www.pcahistory.org/pca/2-182.doc"]DOC[/URL]][/COLOR][/CENTER]
[/TD]
[TD="class: style19, width: 49"] [/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD="class: style19, width: 473"]• Chapter 1 - Historical Perspective on Divorce and Remarriage ------------------[/TD]
[TD="class: style19, width: 48"][CENTER][COLOR=#FFFFFF][HTML][/COLOR][/CENTER]
[/TD]
[TD="class: style19, width: 34"][CENTER][CENTER][[URL="http://www.pcahistory.org/pca/2-188.pdf"]PDF[/URL]][/CENTER]
[/CENTER]
[/TD]
[TD="class: style19, width: 42"][CENTER][COLOR=#000000][[URL="http://www.pcahistory.org/pca/2-188.doc"]DOC[/URL]][/COLOR][/CENTER]
[/TD]
[TD="class: style19, width: 49"] [/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD="class: style19, width: 473"]• Chapter 2 - Scriptural Perspective on Divorce and Remarriage ------------------[/TD]
[TD="class: style19, width: 48"][CENTER][COLOR=#FFFFFF][HTML][/COLOR][/CENTER]
[/TD]
[TD="class: style19, width: 34"][CENTER][CENTER][[URL="http://www.pcahistory.org/pca/2-203.pdf"]PDF[/URL]][/CENTER]
[/CENTER]
[/TD]
[TD="class: style19, width: 42"][CENTER][COLOR=#000000][[URL="http://www.pcahistory.org/pca/2-203.doc"]DOC[/URL]][/COLOR][/CENTER]
[/TD]
[TD="class: style19, width: 49"] [/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD="class: style19, width: 473"]• Chapter 3 - Pastoral Perspective on Divorce and Remarriage -------------------[/TD]
[TD="class: style19, width: 48"][CENTER][COLOR=#FFFFFF][HTML][/COLOR][/CENTER]
[/TD]
[TD="class: style19, width: 34"][CENTER][[URL="http://www.pcahistory.org/pca/2-231.pdf"]PDF[/URL]][/CENTER]
[/TD]
[TD="class: style19, width: 42"][CENTER][COLOR=#000000][[URL="http://www.pcahistory.org/pca/2-231.doc"]DOC[/URL]][/COLOR][/CENTER]
[/TD]
[TD="class: style19, width: 49"] [/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD="class: style19, width: 473"]• Appendix I - The Westminster Divines on Divorce for Physical Abuse ----------[/TD]
[TD="class: style19, width: 48"][CENTER][COLOR=#FFFFFF][HTML][/COLOR][/CENTER]
[/TD]
[TD="class: style19, width: 34"][CENTER][[URL="http://www.pcahistory.org/pca/2-267.pdf"]PDF[/URL]][/CENTER]
[/TD]
[TD="class: style19, width: 42"][CENTER][COLOR=#000000][[URL="http://www.pcahistory.org/pca/2-267.doc"]DOC[/URL]][/COLOR][/CENTER]
[/TD]
[TD="class: style19, width: 49"] [/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD="class: style19, width: 473"]• Appendix II - Divorce Reconsidered, by RE David C. Lachman ----------------[/TD]
[TD="class: style19, width: 48"][CENTER][COLOR=#FFFFFF][HTML][/COLOR][/CENTER]
[/TD]
[TD="class: style19, width: 34"][CENTER][[URL="http://www.pcahistory.org/pca/2-280.pdf"]PDF[/URL]][/CENTER]
[/TD]
[TD="class: style19, width: 42"][CENTER][COLOR=#000000][[URL="http://www.pcahistory.org/pca/2-280.doc"]DOC[/URL]][/COLOR][/CENTER]
[/TD]
[TD="class: style19, width: 49"] [/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD="class: style19, width: 473"]• Conclusion: Summary & Recommendations--------------------------------------
• Qualifications for Office of a Divorced Person (1979)---------------------------[/TD]
[TD="class: style19, width: 48"][CENTER][COLOR=#FFFFFF][HTML][/COLOR][/CENTER]
[/TD]
[TD="class: style19, width: 34"][CENTER][[URL="http://www.pcahistory.org/pca/2-289.pdf"]PDF[/URL]][/CENTER]
[/TD]
[TD="class: style19, width: 42"][CENTER][[URL="http://www.pcahistory.org/pca/2-289.doc"]DOC[/URL]][/CENTER]
[/TD]
[TD="class: style19, width: 49"] [/TD]
[/TR]
[/TABLE]

​


----------



## Pilgrim Standard

1st Timothy 3:2
A bishop then must be blameless, *the husband of one wife*, vigilant, sober, of good behavior, given to hospitality, apt to teach;

One divorced(When spouse has initiated the divorce against the husbands will) and remarried while divorced wife is still living would be disqualified. 
Would they not according to this verse?
I do not want to read into it, but I do not want to water it down to no meaning at all.
I highly doubt that this verse is speaking only of polygamy.


----------



## satz

Weston Stoler said:


> I need to clarify my position. I do not believe that the one in the elder position should ever initiate a divorce. Under any circumstances. However it cannot be helped if his spouse divorces him. Although I still do not see a warrant of remarriage in the scriptures as long as that spouse is alive.



Why don't you see any warrant for remarriage? 

Matt 19:9 And I say unto you, Whosoever shall put away his wife, except it be for fornication, and shall marry another, committeth adultery: and whoso marrieth her which is put away doth commit adultery. 

If a man puts his wife away for fornication, and marries another, there is no adultery, or sin.


----------



## PuritanCovenanter

RobR said:


> But I wonder, as long as the first wife is not died, even if she has remarried, in some way is not she still a wife of sorts? The first marriage now defiled, and the second marriage honorable, providing his second wife divorced properly. God has declared what He has put together no man can/is to separate until death do they part, but divorce is permitted because of the hardness of mans heart. Until the first wife has died, I think it is reasonable to consider this man (when considering him for these two leadership roles) as the husband of 2 wives.., one honorable and pleasing to God, and the other defiled and filthy. I



First off, I don't believe the Lord has more than one Bride. He doesn't have a defiled one and an undefiled one. Second the Lord has divorced unbelieving Israel. Third, Moses permitted divorce based upon the hardness of man's heart in a context. Whose hard heart is considered here? The adulterer's heart or the one violated? This can also be read in light of 1 Corinthians 7. It is also to be considered that this passage isn't even dealing with an adulterous person. Just that some uncleaness was found in her. The death penalty was performed for adulterers. Fourth, Divorce itself means something. It is an annulling of a union therefore making something no longer one or in union. Fifth, one needs to define husband of one wife. When one is divorced his first is no longer his wife. Especially when read in context and Deuteronomy chapter 24. He may not be a polygamist. He must be a one woman hearted man with a legal marriage if he is married. We could also make a statement here that some would suggest that an Elder must be married. That is over reaching also.


----------



## AThornquist

Pilgrim Standard said:


> 1st Timothy 3:2
> A bishop then must be blameless, *the husband of one wife*, vigilant, sober, of good behavior, given to hospitality, apt to teach;
> 
> One divorced(When spouse has initiated the divorce against the husbands will) and remarried while divorced wife is still living would be disqualified.
> Would they not according to this verse?
> I do not want to read into it, but I do not want to water it down to no meaning at all.
> I highly doubt that this verse is speaking only of polygamy.



The text is well-rendered as, "a one-woman man." My understanding is that it refers to faithfulness and exclusivity in the relationship to his wife (i.e. not a flirt or fornicator), not whether he has been divorced.

And I have a question for those of you who say that a divorced person can never remarry: are divorced people still married in some sense? If so, what do you think divorce is? Also, if they aren't married anymore, where is your Scriptural support that excludes the option of remarriage?


----------



## seajayrice

It is not biblical divorce that disqualifies a man for Elder candidate; it is his remarriage that casts doubt on his wisdom to rule.


----------



## Weston Stoler

do you think a man should seek re-marriage with his wife after a divorce has been finalized? I desperatly do. I believe the church should not only bless but fully endorse any endeavor on the part of the husband to faithfully purse his wife (in a non-stalker way) after a divorce has been completed. This should be a churches main aim. Not putting the guy in a divorced ministry where the aim of the game is re-marriage with another spouse (of which statistics show 70 percent divorce again).

My dad has been married 7 times. He is on his 8th wife. So who is his wife?


----------



## PuritanCovenanter

Weston, while your question is important the guidelines have been set. Maybe you should study a bit. There is such a thing as a lawful remarriage and an unlawful one. Take your time and read up on it. John Murray has a writing on it. John MacArthur has one. John Piper has one. The Confessional Standards and the PCA Report are very good. The reconciliation of the marriage should be pursued in love. But their is a point of no return and abandonment. God set up the guidelines. I am truly sorry about your situation with your Dad. It is regrettable and a lot to bare. My Dad abandoned my mother and remarried when I was a teen. I don't believe he is lawfully married and I have respectfully told him that. My mother never remarried but kept us kids as a priority. St. Paul would wish we were all like him. But God has given liberty. Read up on the PCA report. Read the Confessional standards. Do some study my friend. My Dad has only been remarried once. The divorce itself left a terrible taste in my mouth and scars for years. But that doesn't negate the Lord's will or his set standards. If your brother sins against you 70 times in a day you would finally most likely wear down and start making decisions based upon your emotional status. I would caution you on that. This might bare some of the same weight you are using in trying to discern this topic. But we have to accept what the Lord has said in His eternal Word. We must forgive whether we feel like it or not when they repent. 

I have seen some good things come out of ministries that help wounded and violated partners of failed marriages. A divorced person loses their equilibrium. It is like losing a part of your body. Things don't function correctly and you miss something you had. You are cheated, stolen from, lied to, and murdered. Your lilfe gets raped by a supposed friend. You get betrayed. Ministry is good to help one gain some of that equilibrium back. God does hate divorce just like he hates sin. Just be patient with trying to understand the whole Counsel of God on any subject. 

Be Encouraged brother.


----------



## Pergamum

We have encountered such "strong views" from some on the mission field as we have sought to recruit new missionaries who have had pre-conversion past histories of family disruption. 

Below is my proposed statement that has not yet been accepted by the field:




> *APPENDIX A: PROPOSED STATEMENT ON DIVORCE AND REMARRIAGE*
> 
> As the fabric of Western society unravels, an increasing number of missionaries will come from homes where divorce, abuse and dysfunctional family dynamics are the norm. Some of our candidates will have experienced these trials themselves.
> 
> ______Our field____ stresses the importance of solid families and sound reputations as a prerequisite for service on the mission field, even while understanding that we live in a fallen world and all of our lives are marred by sin and fallen-ness. We strive to both guard the high Biblical demands for holiness, even while taking note of the deep grace of God. We are not to be more lax than Scripture, nor are we to be more restrictive than Scripture on this issue, both subtracting from and adding to the Word of God being of equal guilt. Scripture gives both high qualifications and immense grace in these issues.
> 
> Pertaining to candidates who have been previously divorced, the following considerations should be made:
> 
> •	Divorced candidates who remain unmarried or couples remarried after a divorce will be evaluated on a case by case basis.
> 
> •	The passages in 1Timothy 3 and Titus 1 address the conduct and the state of a Christian after conversion. Therefore, the conduct and the state of Christians before salvation are not part of the new creation that God performed at their conversion and are not subject to the rules and commands of the above two passages. These passages deal with present-tense character traits and are not past-tense checklists of pre-conversion behaviors.
> 
> Concerning 1 Timothy 3:2, we note that these verses are all in the present tense and not the past tense. We also note that the Apostle Paul, a persecutor of the church was not disqualified due to pre-conversion sins which likewise transgress his very own written qualifications. The phrase, “husband of one wife” is most aptly rendered as the present character trait of being a “one-woman man” (_mias gunaikos andra_) and is a description of the present faithfulness of the husband and is not a wife count.
> 
> •	Special care will be taken in the cases of divorced/remarried persons who are considered for service. Personnel who were divorced after they became Christians but were divorced on scriptural grounds (see Matthew 5:32;19:9) will be evaluated by _____OUR ORG's International Office ____ on an individual basis.
> 
> •	The Bible teaches that divorce is permissible in the case of sexual immorality (Deuteronomy 24:1-4; Matthew 19:9) or willful desertion of a believer by an unbeliever (I Corinthians 7:15). The innocent party is therefore free to remarry, since they are no longer “under bondage” once properly divorced.
> 
> •	It is possible for a Christian to be an innocent victim of a spouse’s covenant-breaking sin.
> 
> •	Finally, we rejoice that God, through His transforming grace and in spite of ourselves rather than due to any inherent goodness in us, chooses to use any one of us.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *APPENDIX B: Notes and rationales for this proposal*
> 
> 
> DEEPER NOTES:
> 
> Traditionally there have been 4 views regarding Paul’s qualifications in I Timothy 3:2 and Titus 1:6 where he writes that an elder must be “the husband of one wife” or more literally a “one-women man (mias gunaikos andra).
> 
> View One is that an elder must be married. But we cannot hold this to be true or else Paul and Jesus would be disqualified.
> 
> View Two is that an elder may not be a polygamist (i.e. more than one wife at a time). But, although polygamy is to be avoided this does not appear to be the main thrust of Paul’s words. In I Timothy 5:9 he gives the qualification of widows who desire financial support to possess the same character (literally they must be a “one-man woman) and while polygamy was somewhat common in Paul’s time, polyandry was exceedingly rare. Therefore, the prevention of polygamist elders does not seem to be the main concern of the Apostle Paul.
> 
> View Three is that Paul meant an elder must only have one wife for his entire life. If this is what Paul meant, then why does Paul state that one is free to remarry upon the death of a spouse (Romans 7) and why does Paul urge remarriage if someone is having problems with sexual self-control (I Corinthians 7:8-9, 39-40)? Finally, in I Timothy 5:14 Paul urges younger widows to remarry and later charges that all widows who desire to be on the church doll possess the trait of being the “wife of one husband” (a one-man woman). It would seem odd for Paul to encourage younger widows to remarry if Paul is then effectively disqualifying them from being able to receive assistance from the church if they are widowed again. Therefore, “the husband of one wife” and its counterpart in I Timothy 5:9 of widows being the “wife of one husband” probably does not mean “the spouse of one person for all of one’s life.”
> 
> View Four is the favored view. When Paul states that an elder must be a “one-woman man” Paul is giving us a character trait of present loyalty and faithfulness in marriage and is not giving us a wife-count. This view states that an elder must possess loyalty and faithfulness towards his present wife. Paul allows for an elder to remarry after his wife has died and the allowance to remarry after a “Biblical divorce” is also present in Paul’s teaching. While the circumstances of a divorce must be ascertained it is possible for a man who is the innocent party of a spouse’s covenant-breaking sin to exercise the office of an elder, and to exercise the role of a missionary, a role equivalent to this office (an extra-ecclesiastical elder, sent across cultures for the establishment of the Church in other regions).
> 
> Concerning 1 Timothy 3:2, we note that these verses are all in the present tense and not the past tense. We also note that the Apostle Paul, a persecutor of the church was not disqualified due to pre-conversion sins which likewise transgress his very own written qualifications. The phrase, “husband of one wife” is most aptly rendered as the present character trait of being a “one-woman man” (mias gunaikos andra) and is a description of the present faithfulness of the husband and is not a wife count. These passages deal with present-tense character traits and are not past-tense checklists of pre-conversion behaviors.
> 
> •	Special care will be taken in the cases of divorced/remarried persons who are considered for service. Personnel who were divorced after they became Christians but were divorced on scriptural grounds (see Matthew 5:32;19:9) will be evaluated by ___Our international office____ on an individual basis.
> 
> NOTE: I think it can be established reasonably easy that if a man was cheated on by his wife or deserted while he was unsaved and then, afterwards, he is saved, and then later remarried and then carries on a life of marital faithfulness with his present wife, that such a man is acceptable as a missionary candidates. However, some may balk if the man was already saved at the time of divorce. But, if there are Biblical allowances for divorce (and even Jesus and Paul are looser in Matthew 19:9 and I Corinthians 7:15 than some Christian denominations and mission boards) then it would appear that, given proper cautions and checks, that even a man who is divorced under special circumstances during his post-conversion life may be qualified for elder or elder-equivalent (i.e. church planting missionary) roles.
> 
> However, I would be happy at this time to address only those who were divorced pre-conversion if all this is too much for our mission field to accept at this time.
> 
> •	The Bible teaches that divorce is permissible in the case of sexual immorality (Deuteronomy 24:1-4; Matthew 19:9) or willful desertion of a believer by an unbeliever (I Corinthians 7:15). The innocent party is therefore free to remarry, since they are no longer “under bondage” once properly divorced.
> 
> NOTE Concerning I Corinthians 7:15 and desertion: This desertion applies to a believer being deserted by a unbeliever. If a believer deserts another believer than Paul urges that the parties remain single or be reconciled (I Cor. 7:11). Believers who separate for reasons other than adultery must remain unmarried, or else be reconciled. Also, some branches of Christianity have allowed for cases of abuse and attempted murder as being equivalent to desertion. I agree with them. Finally, the innocent party is therefore free to remarry, since they are no longer “under bondage” once properly divorced.
> 
> 
> •	It is possible for a Christian to be an innocent victim of a spouse’s covenant-breaking sin. NOTE: While every human relationship is marred by sin on the part of both parties, there are and have been cases of divorce where one party did not substantially contribute to the divorce, at least it in covenant-breaking aspects. The innocent wife of an adulterer or abuser may be cases in point. She might have given the husband all that is due him emotionally and sexually and yet he may depart and initiate sin outside the marriage covenant. Willful desertion on the part of an unbeliever towards a believer is also possible, though the believer has done all in their power to preserve the marriage covenant. Other illustrations can be given as well, but should not needed to prove that one party can be the “victim” of a divorce without substantially contributing to the break in covenant.
> 
> •	Finally, we rejoice that God, through His transforming grace and in spite of ourselves rather than due to any inherent goodness in us, chooses to use any one of us.


----------



## Edward

Weston Stoler said:


> do you think a man should seek re-marriage with his wife after a divorce has been finalized?



One should also work through Deuteronomy 24:1-4 as to remarriage of a couple after they have divorced.


----------



## py3ak

Pilgrim Standard said:


> 1st Timothy 3:2
> A bishop then must be blameless, *the husband of one wife*, vigilant, sober, of good behavior, given to hospitality, apt to teach;
> 
> One divorced(When spouse has initiated the divorce against the husbands will) and remarried while divorced wife is still living would be disqualified.
> Would they not according to this verse?
> I do not want to read into it, but I do not want to water it down to no meaning at all.
> I highly doubt that this verse is speaking only of polygamy.



If this is taken as a description of a man's personal history rather than of his character, it leads to the result that a remarried widower is also excluded, as is anyone who is unmarried. The view that a remarried widower is excluded is quite uncommon; but there is something stronger than that, for we know that the unmarried are not excluded - Paul and Barnabas, for instance. So if a fair consequence is excluded, we must reexamine the premise.


----------



## Scott1

You are commended for seeking to work this difficult area out according to Scripture.

I'll offer a few comments not on the basis there is no other possible biblical interpretation, but from the standpoint of what the Westminster Summary addresses, which I believe is biblically faithful, and then go to some inferences beyond that which it does not directly address. 



Pergamum said:


> APPENDIX A: PROPOSED STATEMENT ON DIVORCE AND REMARRIAGE
> 
> As the fabric of Western society unravels, an increasing number of missionaries will come from homes where divorce, abuse and dysfunctional family dynamics are the norm. Some of our candidates will have experienced these trials themselves.
> 
> I would start with the high calling of a missionary, and compare it to the exemplary life qualifications of church office. To whom much is given, much is required. Not everyone is called to be an officer, and there are many ways to serve God without being in office. The testimony to people in the culture being reached will be looking for an exemplary life testimony. (I'm using missionary in the officer sense, not humanitarian work, support staff,etc. So this is addressing the case of a missionary family, doing a church plant.)
> 
> ______Our field____ stresses the importance of solid families and sound reputations as a prerequisite for service on the mission field, even while understanding that we live in a fallen world and all of our lives are marred by sin and fallen-ness. We strive to both guard the high Biblical demands for holiness, even while taking note of the deep grace of God. We are not to be more lax than Scripture, nor are we to be more restrictive than Scripture on this issue, Exactly right, well said. both subtracting from and adding to the Word of God being of equal guilt. Scripture gives both high qualifications and immense grace in these issues.
> 
> Pertaining to candidates who have been previously divorced, the following considerations should be made:
> 
> • Divorced candidates who remain unmarried or couples remarried after a divorce will be evaluated on a case by case basis.
> 
> • The passages in 1Timothy 3 and Titus 1 address the conduct and the state of a Christian after conversion. Therefore, the conduct and the state of Christians before salvation are not part of the new creation that God performed at their conversion and are not subject to the rules and commands of the above two passages. These passages deal with present-tense character traits and are not past-tense checklists of pre-conversion behaviors.
> 
> I could be wrong, but I don't agree.
> 
> These Scriptures you cite are about qualifications for officers. I don't think they allow anyone who had an unbiblical divorce in the past, but who has remarried to another spouse to serve as an officer as long as the original spouse is alive.
> 
> An example: Someone now professing Christ, used "irreconciliable differences" to legally terminate their last marriage, that former spouse is still alive, they remarry and now say they want to be a missionary family to plant a church in a conservative culture (or ANY culture).
> 
> That's not a hardship, it's just a qualification for the high calling of office. Practically, it is necessary to protect the reputation and witness of the Gospel.
> 
> Understand, in non-officer settings, it might be different, but all the more it applies to office.
> 
> 
> Concerning 1 Timothy 3:2, we note that these verses are all in the present tense and not the past tense. We also note that the Apostle Paul, a persecutor of the church was not disqualified due to pre-conversion sins which likewise transgress his very own written qualifications. The phrase, “husband of one wife” is most aptly rendered as the present character trait of being a “one-woman man” (mias gunaikos andra) and is a description of the present faithfulness of the husband and is not a wife count.
> 
> But that's not all there is to it.
> 
> A former spouse running around offended, for example.
> Very difficult, but in God's eyes, does God recognize a subsequent re-marriage as marriage after the previous was dissolved on non biblical grounds?
> 
> • Special care will be taken in the cases of divorced/remarried persons who are considered for service. Personnel who were divorced after they became Christians but were divorced on scriptural grounds (see Matthew 5:32;19:9) will be evaluated by _____OUR ORG's International Office ____ on an individual basis.
> 
> • The Bible teaches that divorce is permissible in the case of sexual immorality (Deuteronomy 24:1-4; Matthew 19:9) or willful desertion of a believer by an unbeliever (I Corinthians 7:15). Yes, I would add the word, "irremediably" so that the determination shows real effort by the innocent party to prevent it, and that the parties "are not left to themselves." The innocent party is therefore free to remarry, since they are no longer “under bondage” once properly divorced.
> 
> • It is possible for a Christian to be an innocent victim of a spouse’s covenant-breaking sin.
> Yes, and although Scripture is not explicit, it would seem God did this to prevent undue hardship on an innocent party.
> 
> I would add here, the highest goal and responsibility of a believer is to seek reconciliation and restoration. There is no biblical requirement even for an innocent party divorce.
> 
> • Finally, we rejoice that God, through His transforming grace and in spite of ourselves rather than due to any inherent goodness in us, chooses to use any one of us.



I would tighten this up, but that's just an outsider's two cents worth. Make the guidelines more clear so the expectations are set.

I would be looking for people who have exceeded the minimum standards, who suffered long and hard through reconciliation that ended with the other party being deceased before the missionary applicant re-married- or ones who remained unmarried until the spouse died, trusting by behavior, not mere words, for God to somehow restore.

Having seen this kind of faithfulness happen now several times, and the tremendous witness it has, I suppose it's easier for me to believe God can and will provide enough missionaries who meet this standard.


In fact, it might be helpful to put out the Westminster Summary as a faithful summary of the doctrine of Scripture on matters to which it speaks, and make that the de facto position of the mission hiring policy. It doesn't cover every part of this question, but provides clear guidance in the areas to which it speaks:



> Chapter XXIV
> Of Marriage and Divorce
> 
> ....
> 
> V. Adultery or fornication committed after a contract, being detected before marriage, gives just occasion to the innocent party to dissolve that contract.[11] In the case of adultery after marriage, it is lawful for the innocent party to sue out a divorce and, after the divorce,[12] to marry another, as if the offending party were dead.[13]
> 
> VI. Although the corruption of man be such as is apt to study arguments unduly to put asunder those whom God has joined together in marriage: yet, nothing but adultery, or such wilful desertion as can no way be remedied by the Church, or civil magistrate, is cause sufficient of dissolving the bond of marriage:[14] wherein, a public and orderly course of proceeding is to be observed; and the persons concerned in it not left to their own wills, and discretion, in their own case.[15]


----------



## nicnap

Weston Stoler said:


> (of which statistics show 70 percent divorce again).



Do statistics or Scripture determine our practice?

---------- Post added at 05:57 PM ---------- Previous post was at 05:54 PM ----------




seajayrice said:


> It is not biblical divorce that disqualifies a man for Elder candidate; it is his remarriage that casts doubt on his wisdom to rule.



Adultery or fornication committed after a contract, being detected before marriage, giveth just occasion to the innocent party to dissolve that contract. In the case of adultery after marriage, it is lawful for the innocent party to sue out a divorce: and, after the divorce, to marry another, as if the offending party were dead. WCF 24.5 ... so, if the offending party is "dead" (usually seen as spiritually) how is it unwise?


----------



## TexanRose

John Lanier said:


> calgal said:
> 
> 
> 
> Two words: Joel Beeke.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Is Joel Beeke divorced and remarried?
Click to expand...


Yes.


----------



## seajayrice

nicnap said:


> Weston Stoler said:
> 
> 
> 
> (of which statistics show 70 percent divorce again).
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Do statistics or Scripture determine our practice?
> 
> ---------- Post added at 05:57 PM ---------- Previous post was at 05:54 PM ----------
> 
> 
> 
> 
> seajayrice said:
> 
> 
> 
> It is not biblical divorce that disqualifies a man for Elder candidate; it is his remarriage that casts doubt on his wisdom to rule.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Adultery or fornication committed after a contract, being detected before marriage, giveth just occasion to the innocent party to dissolve that contract. In the case of adultery after marriage, it is lawful for the innocent party to sue out a divorce: and, after the divorce, to marry another, as if the offending party were dead. WCF 24.5 ... *so, if the offending party is "dead" (usually seen as spiritually) how is it unwise?*
Click to expand...


Just some awkward levity. I agree with the WCF. Trouble comes when defining offending and aggrieved party. Example, a man continually neglects his wife and then she finds comfort in the arms of another, was she or her husband the offending party? 1Ti 3:2 A bishop then must be blameless, the husband of one wife, vigilant, sober, of good behaviour, given to hospitality, apt to teach; 
Another question pertaining to scripture, who are these blameless men Paul speaks of? Men blameless before God or blameless relative to other sinners?


----------



## BertMulder

jpfrench81 said:


> Bert,
> 
> Could you please explain why you belief that your view is what the Bible teaches? Respectfully,
> 
> Joshua



Prof. Engelsma explains it here better than I can:

Marriage and Divorce

_But what about the remarriage of the one divorced on the biblical ground of adultery? One passage in all Scripture seems, at first glance, to permit the remarriage of one divorced on the ground of fornication, namely, Matthew19:9: "Whosoever shall put away his wife, except it be for fornication, and shall marry another, committeth adultery: and whoso marrieth her which is put away doth commit adultery." If this were the correct interpretation of the text, there would be one, and only one, ground for remarriage: the adultery of one's mate. The "innocent party" would be free to marry another. However, there is powerful biblical evidence to the contrary. There is the testimony of the Scriptures that only death dissolves the bond of marriage. There is the unqualified prohibition of remarriage elsewhere in the Bible. And there is the last part of Matthew19:9 itself. The last part of the text calls the new union of the woman divorced un-biblically, whose husband has since remarried, an adulterous union. The Lord expressly states that the "innocent party" may not remarry. The exceptive clause in Matthew19:9 ("except it be for fornication") is intended to qualify only the prohibition of divorce, in perfect harmony with the fact that the Lord is answering the Pharisee's question concerning the legitimacy of divorce (cf. v. 3).
The Scriptures draw the lines plainly. Marriage is a lifelong bond; divorce is forbidden, except on the ground of the sexual unfaithfulness of one's mate; remarriage is forbidden until death separates the two. These lines make a narrow way into the Kingdom for men and women, as regards marriage; and it is not surprising that there are only few who find it. But this is the way into the Kingdom; no adulterer shall enter. This is what the church is called to preach, publicly and privately, and when we do, we are defending marriage in the face of the all-out assault on marriage today.
_
This is plainly a hard doctrine, as also the disciples figured: _[SUP]10[/SUP] His disciples say unto him, If the case of the man be so with [his] wife, it is not good to marry.__[SUP]11[/SUP] __But he said unto them, All [men] cannot receive this saying, save [they] to whom it is given_. But, Scripture is Scripture.

---------- Post added at 06:14 PM ---------- Previous post was at 06:12 PM ----------



PuritanCovenanter said:


> BertMulder said:
> 
> 
> 
> not only does God hate the putting away of one's wife, but there is no biblical warrant, ever, for remarriage while once spouse is still alive... What God has joined together, let not man put asunder.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I would agree with you Pastor Mulder unless God has given allowance or prescription for such. And I believe He has. So does the Westminster Confession of Faith. This is not a point of argument. I believe the Whole of Scripture taken as the Whole Counsel of God are summed up in the WCF on this subject. I respectfully disagree with the good loving Pastor Mulder as he evidently does with the WCF and many other good men. This board holds to the WCF as the biblical understanding of the Word of God.
Click to expand...


I at present do not hold any church office. Under the continental reformed system, I served as ruling elder until the end of last year... so you might say, ruling elder, inactive....


----------



## nicnap

seajayrice said:


> Example, a man continually neglects his wife and then she finds comfort in the arms of another, was she or her husband the offending party?



As for the affair? She is. That is a ridiculous question. Regardless of how he behaved, she is to behave as a Christian and bear up under it. As for his lack of affection (if he is an elder) she should seek counsel from the elders, and have them address it. If he does not then act in accord with what is respectable as a husband, then he might be brought under discipline. Your illustration fails quite a bit.


----------



## PuritanCovenanter

seajayrice said:


> Another question pertaining to scripture, who are these blameless men Paul speaks of? Men blameless before God or blameless relative to other sinners?



From the text it would appear it had to do with their conduct between persons who know them. Even those who are outside of the Church. 
(1Ti 3:7) Moreover he must have a good report of them which are without; lest he fall into reproach and the snare of the devil.


----------



## Weston Stoler

I wasn't exactly trying to prove my point on this considering I know this is a confessional board and to argue against the WCF is foolishness lol I was just wanting to know who believed this and who didn't and your opinions on the matter. Would never make a post for the reason of arguing against the WCF in any fashion.


----------



## BertMulder

Weston Stoler said:


> I wasn't exactly trying to prove my point on this considering I know this is a confessional board and to argue against the WCF is foolishness lol I was just wanting to know who believed this and who didn't and your opinions on the matter. Would never make a post for the reason of arguing against the WCF in any fashion.



However, no confession is at the same level as Scripture. And this is one point where we must abide by the plain teaching of Scripture, and find the WCF in error. I am sorry, but I must take this position.


----------



## Weston Stoler

BertMulder said:


> Weston Stoler said:
> 
> 
> 
> I wasn't exactly trying to prove my point on this considering I know this is a confessional board and to argue against the WCF is foolishness lol I was just wanting to know who believed this and who didn't and your opinions on the matter. Would never make a post for the reason of arguing against the WCF in any fashion.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> However, no confession is at the same level as Scripture. And this is one point where we must abide by the plain teaching of Scripture, and find the WCF in error. I am sorry, but I must take this position.
Click to expand...


I agree with you on this one.


----------



## TimV

And on excommunicating certain Pastors who want to homeschool their kids??? Bert, your denomination is a bit radical, you know that, don't you?


----------



## Weston Stoler

TimV said:


> And on excommunicating certain Pastors who want to homeschool their kids??? Bert, your denomination is a bit radical, you know that, don't you?



Why would you excommunicate someone for homeschooling their kids?


----------



## seajayrice

nicnap said:


> seajayrice said:
> 
> 
> 
> Example, a man continually neglects his wife and then she finds comfort in the arms of another, was she or her husband the offending party?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> As for the affair? She is. That is a ridiculous question. Regardless of how he behaved, she is to behave as a Christian and bear up under it. As for his lack of affection (if he is an elder) she should seek counsel from the elders, and have them address it. If he does not then act in accord with what is respectable as a husband, then he might be brought under discipline. Your illustration fails quite a bit.
Click to expand...


1Co 7:15 But if the unbelieving depart, let him depart. A brother or a sister is not under bondage in such cases: but God hath called us to peace. 

Who said it was an affair? Is a brother or sister free to remarry in the context of the cited passage?

---------- Post added at 10:21 PM ---------- Previous post was at 10:15 PM ----------




PuritanCovenanter said:


> seajayrice said:
> 
> 
> 
> Another question pertaining to scripture, who are these blameless men Paul speaks of? Men blameless before God or blameless relative to other sinners?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> From the text it would appear it had to do with their conduct between persons who know them. Even those who are outside of the Church.
> (1Ti 3:7) Moreover he must have a good report of them which are without; lest he fall into reproach and the snare of the devil.
Click to expand...


So it would appear. Yet can it be that God would condition the qualifications of the under-Shepherd upon the characterizations of the heathen? Joel Osteen and Rick Warren being examples of such blameless men, much esteemed in the world.


----------



## BertMulder

TimV said:


> And on excommunicating certain Pastors who want to homeschool their kids??? Bert, your denomination is a bit radical, you know that, don't you?



There never was any pastor excommunicated in the PRCA, never mind for homeschooling their kids. Rev. Dick, who I presume you are referring to, was removed from his charge at Grace PRC because of unrest, by his classis, under article 11 under the church order. He was not deposed from the ministry either, and was, until he left the PRCA, a minister in good standing, eligible for call. Check your facts before shooting off your mouth.

(sounds a little like an ad hominem argument, Tim....)


----------



## py3ak

All right, this isn't a referendum on the PRCA.

And this is a confessional board - promotion of a position that is contrary to the Confession is not allowed.


----------

