The scandal of evangelical silence on divorce

Life Site ^ | Eric Metaxas

[SoConPubbie]

Mohler is exactly right. Toleration of divorce is a huge black eye on Protestant churches.

As if the problem doesn't exist in Catholic churches.

[Jim Scott]

Divorce is problematic for Christians because the culture has made it easy to obtain and socially acceptable. In 1969, California Governor Ronald Reagan signed the first 'no fault' divorce legislation and other states quickly followed. In time, the social stigma of divorce gradually waned. With the rise of the Feminist Movement, women began seeing divorce as the solution to what was often little more than boredom with a spouse. Meanwhile, Christian churches saw their membership's divorce rate rising but were reluctant to flatly condemn it. Some Christians who were divorcing their spouse justified their decision by claiming that "God wants me to be happy" (often with someone else). Ministers counseled divorce-bound couples but had no power to stop them from divorcing and Christian Protestants do not dis-fellowship a member simply on the basis of their obtaining a divorce unless adultery is involved and the adulterer remains unrepentant. In the case of a spouse who is faithful but the victim of adultery, scripture permits re-marriage.

It all comes down to the fact that, today, the church, be it Catholic or Protestant, 'mainline' or evangelical, has far less of an influence on its members lives than it did as recently as 50 years ago. Cultural mores have replaced the church for many, especially the 'C&E Christians'. That (purportedly) Christian Americans divorce at the same rate non-Christians do is not only sad but emblematic of the tragic loss of God's influence on American lives.

[AnalogReigns]

In my opion, after 52 years in evangelical circles, the problem is:

1) Lack of catachism training. Standard Sunday school and Youth groups are not the same as catechizing children. Do you teach kids all about marriage and divorce as 6 year olds? No. But you should as 14+ year olds. And basic Christian ethics as well as doctrine should be taught to younger kids too. This simply isn’t being done today in evangelical Churches...and a simple “Jesus, Others, You” ethic doesn’t cut it in these times of ethical confusion and moral “pluralism.” This is also, in my opinion...exactly WHY so many evangelicals still vote Democrat—as they are confused on basic Christian ethics—starting from when they were kids.

2) Lack of specific biblical ethical teaching from the pulpit. Many churches pastors will preach the bible—but, when it comes to ethics, real issues of right and wrong—especially in the political realm—pastors shy away from being clear. I think I’ve heard one or two sermons (if that)—in my whole life on why and how abortion is wrong. Do the pastors I sit under firmly believe abortion is wrong? YES! Biblically literate evangelicals ALWAYS do....however, many in the pews are not biblically literate—and too many pastors assume they are—and therefore they don’t touch controversial topics, which might turn some new-comers, or baby-Christians off. The same is true for divorce.

If all members of conservative, evangelical churches can’t even submit to the idea that abortion is murder—and therefore MUST be opposed—and compromise over it, is actually SIN...how in the world can we expect them to heed biblical teaching on divorce?

Too long has ethics been ignored in evangelical churches—for fear of being labeled “legalist!” This is silly, as God’s people are called to be holy, and holiness is described in biblical ethics. The good news of Jesus saving us from sin—AND, once saved, avoiding sin to please our Savior, are both a part of the gospel.

Ethics, including especially biblical teachings on marriage and divorce, needs must be part of our preaching again.

[Mrs. Don-o]

I think you've misunderstood what I wrote. I did not state, nor even imply, that "being gay is new." I did not state, nor even imply, that gay sexual arrangements could be "accepted, condoned, or justified."

Where you got that from, I do not know. It's not what I wrote, and it's the opposite of what I believe.

[presently no screen name]

it's the opposite of what I believe.

I have no doubt about that. It's why I said don't get caught up in it. You listed them after cohabitation, abortion, etc. as if the wrongs of man/women can justify their depravity. While you showed how mighty we have fallen as a society, this article, IMO, is mocking the 'traditionalists' into accepting 'homo' marriage is just as valid - with their 'beam in their own eye' comment.

[presently no screen name]

I think you've misunderstood what I wrote.

I think are minds were on different things. Your's was on the progression of wrongs in society and mine was on the intent of this article.

[Tax-chick]

I find it unlikely that Eric Metaxas, writing for BreakPoint (Charles Colson’s old outfit), discussing Albert Mohler, and published by LifeSite is promoting the homosexual agenda.

Mrs. Don-o, I recall your mentioning the idea that all decent people are opposed to abortion, except for rape, incest, and their particular circumstance. In a similar way, it seems that most Christians are opposed to divorce, except for adultery, abuse, or their particular circumstance.

What can be done about it, with the state of the law, I don’t know. Anyone can be dumped, for any reason, at any time, and churches can’t be expected to re-litigate every divorce in order to decide whom to praise and whom to blame.

[presently no screen name]

Lack of catachism training. Standard Sunday school and Youth groups are not the same as catechizing children. Do you teach kids all about marriage and divorce as 6 year olds? No. But you should as 14+ year olds.

Your post is way too bias and all over the place besides not knowing what you are talking. The Cuomo and Kennedy kids would laugh at it. Especially, the ones whose parents marriage was annulled like it never happened.

And you go on about ethics? LOL!

[Rashputin]

The scandal of silence among "Evangelicals" is that they won't preach the Truth that most contraceptives work by causing an abortion.

All the SBC churches I'm familiar with at least make that point to couples in premarriage counseling even if they don't mention it in sermons much if ever. The "Independent Evangelicals", though, just wink and nod at two thirds of all abortions in this country and pretend they're solid pro-life Christians.

First contraception, then divorce & remarriage, then abortion disguised as contraception, and now a whole lot of "Evangelicals" are endorsing queers marrying one another because that's the "fair" thing to do.

It's just another example of how the "go along to get along" approach always leads to self-destruction.

[Mrs. Don-o]

"You listed them after cohabitation, abortion, etc. as if the wrongs of man/women can justify their depravity"

Justify? No, it's exactly the opposite. I listed homosexual intercourse together with cohabitation, abortion, etc. in order to show that NONE of them are justified. The males and females, by their depravity, degraded marriage even before gays decided to adopt pseudo-"marriage" as part of their agenda.

Through most of the 20th century, gays and sexual activists were generally anti-marriage. They described it as a regressive, bourgeois structure. They didn't make a strategic pivot toward "marriage" until very, very recently. The first laws in history enabling same-sex so-called "marriage" were not enacted during the first decade of the 21st century.

[aimhigh]

Divorce is not a sin. God does not like it and He, also, doesn't like gossip.

Jesus said, "He that has my commandments and keeps them, he it is who loves me." (John 14:21) In 1 Cor 7:10, the scripture says, "Now to the married I command, yet not I but the Lord:A wife is not to depart from her husband. But even if she does depart, let her remain unmarried or be reconciled to her husband. And a husband is not to divorce his wife."

Jesus said, "Whom The Lord brings together, let NO man put assunder." How can you say divorce is not a sin?

[Mrs. Don-o]

I agree. We're in a hell of a mess. I confess sometimes I think we'll just have to be utterly destroyed before we realize what we've done. The Muslims may be God's instruments of judgment upon us like the Assyrians in the OT, a "razor that He hired to shave us," a scourge on our backs. I see nothing in the future but the natural and logical consequences of our sex-gender-marriage-family nihilism.

Costa Rica might be the place to go, when the USA goes under. Nice Catholic people, good climate, fascinating gardening possibilities.

[jboot]

Divorce exists, but not the degree of toleration for it. It is basically a non-issue in many churches.

[Tax-chick]

The Muslims may be God's instruments of judgment upon us like the Assyrians in the OT, a "razor that He hired to shave us," a scourge on our backs.

I have thought that myself. I remember when I read Never Let Me Go, I said, "I hope the Moslems win before this happens."

Costa Rica: Earthquakes, mudslides, and incredible (largely unreported) crime. Much as I love Hispanics, there's a good reason they're all moving to North Carolina. My friend Brad from Cub Scouts has a Costa Rican maid.

You can come here! Anoreth will fortify the perimeter, and I will invent brilliant uses of kudzu. Bill will look pretty.

[CityCenter]

It’s all about the offering plate, especially in the mega-churches.

[Liberty Wins]

The ironic thing about Reagan’s divorce is that he possibly might not have become president without Nancy. Correct me if I’m wrong, but didn’t Jane Wyman list as a main complaint that he spent too much time on politics?

[ThisLittleLightofMine]

It took me years to realize that all professing “Christians” are not followers of Christ. Particularly in the South, my family for instance would say they are Christians because it the South everyone is, they all go to church but do they follow Christ? It is a social network. This is the problem with Evangelicals and SBC.

[presently no screen name]

I listed homosexual intercourse together with cohabitation, abortion, etc.

Really? I didn't see that in your post.

Cohabitation - contraception - divorce Wrecked marriage before the gays even got interested in camping out in the rubble.

They didn't make a strategic pivot toward "marriage" until very, very recently.

S&G didn't consider marriage because there was 'no freebies' in it for them back then. Evil knows no bounds when it comes to attempting to mock God - so now they will mock those who do honor God - while getting their 'married' freebies, and can by 'law' now. And that is how evil had the open door - simply make ourselves equal. man/man or woman/woman will never equal man/woman.

[presently no screen name]

And who are Mormons and Catholics following?

[presently no screen name]

I find it unlikely that Eric Metaxas, writing for BreakPoint (Charles Colson’s old outfit), discussing Albert Mohler, and published by LifeSite

You can all you want - until you get in the mind of Eric and really know. What 'scandaleous' and 'silent thing' does he have, you will never know. Calling divorce 'scandalous' and 'silent' for others is over the top and that could be that there is something brewing beneath.

Calling obama's past scandalous and his records being silent I can see - but I doubt Eric is interested in that.

And that's the beam that Eric doesn't want to discuss. Priorities, priorities.