Let There Be Divorce
Many Christians believe divorce is always wrong except for adultery. But is that what Jesus believed?
BY: John Ortberg
A recent newspaper article told the tragedy of a husband who took his 8-year-old daughter up in a single-engine plane and deliberately crashed it into the home of his wife's mother, killing himself and his daughter. In the Christian tradition in which I grew up, if the man had survived, his wife would not have had biblical justification for adivorce
. He could steal money, molest children, and threaten to kill her—and she still would have no cause for divorce.
But if he slept with a co-worker one time, divorce would be okay.
For many Christians, sex and sex alone is the key to the dissolution of a marriage. The rub is that if you are humane about divorce you cannot be biblical, and if you are biblical you cannot be humane.
Can that have been Jesus' intent in his remarks about divorce? In Mathew 19:9, Jesus says, "I tell you that anyone who divorces his wife, except for marital unfaithfulness, and marries another woman commits adultery." Christians have understood Jesus' words here andelsewhere
to mean that divorce is never, ever allowed except for cases of sexual infidelity. Is that what Jesus' intended us to believe?
A Cambridge fellow named David Instone-Brewer thinks not. His recent doctoral work on first-century rabbinic Judaism, resulting in books such as "Divorce and Remarriage in the Church," has suggested what will certainly become an influential framework for understanding divorce and re-marriage in coming years.
How Biblical Divorce Protects Women
Instone-Brewer suggests that there were two binding texts Jewish rabbis looked to on marriage and divorce. One was Deuteronomy 24:1, which says, "When a man takes a wife and marries her, if then she finds no favor in his eyes because he has found some indecency in her . . . he writes her a certificate of divorce and puts it in her hand and sends her out of his house."
The certificate of divorce was largely a way of protecting the woman. It meant that in Jewish society—unlike in the society governed by the Code of Hammurabi—a woman's first husband could not come back and re-claim her. Divorce's main purpose was to permit re-marriage so that a woman would not starve or be forced into prostitution.
"Indecency" in this passage involves a Hebrew word that can be translated as "sexual immorality," so here the basis for divorce is sexual infidelity. But what about other issues—abuse, or abandonment in marriage? Mosaic law covers those cases as well, in a kind of roundabout way.
The other binding divorce text is in Exodus: "If he takes another wife to himself, he shall not diminish [the first wife’s] food, her clothing, or her conjugal love. If he does not provide her with those three things, she is free to go, without payment of money" (Exodus 21:10-11),
While this law initially covered a slave wife in a polygamous marriage, over time the rabbis looked at this text and figured that the rights involved would also extend to wives who were free and marriages that were monogamous. The rabbis decided that this law implied a vow for provision (food and clothing), as well as a vow to give love (sexual intimacy and affection).
So a marriage vow consisted of three promises:
1. Fidelity (no sexual unfaithfulness)
Whenever these vows were broken, the victim had the right to get divorced and re-married. Indeed, marriage—to "be fruitful and multiply"—was understood to be the first command of Torah. There was no thought of divorce apart from the right to re-marry.