Divorce disqualify an elder?

[Edward]

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]

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.

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]

(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 ----------

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]

Two words: Joel Beeke.

Is Joel Beeke divorced and remarried?

Yes.

 

[seajayrice]

(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 ----------

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?

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]

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 ----------

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.

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]

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]

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]

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]

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.

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]

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]

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.

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 ----------

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.

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]

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.