Is remarriage after divorce a sin in some Fundamentalist/Evangelical churches?

[wanner47]

In a different thread, a poster said, in response to my comment that, to my knowledge, Fundamentalists/Evangelical churches did not consider remarriage after divorce to be a sin:

Divorce/Remarriage is a debated topic amongst us fndies and evangelicals.

My understanding was that the Catholic Church was the only one that considered remarriage after divorce (without obtaining an annulment) was a sin. I know of no Fundamentalist/Evangelical church that teachings it is a sin to either (a) obtain a civil divorce and/or (b) remarry after a divorce.

(Note that (a) is not in and of itself a sin in the Catholic faith; it may sometimes be licit to obtain a civil divorce for the purposes of custody, property division, and/or safety of the spouse/children; however, the sin comes in believing that civil divorce dissolves a sacramental and/or valid marriage bond, which it does not.)

Thoughts?

 

[mozart-250]

In a different thread, a poster said, in response to my comment that, to my knowledge, Fundamentalists/Evangelical churches did not consider remarriage after divorce to be a sin:

My understanding was that the Catholic Church was the only one that considered remarriage after divorce (without obtaining an annulment) was a sin. I know of no Fundamentalist/Evangelical church that teachings it is a sin to either (a) obtain a civil divorce and/or (b) remarry after a divorce.

(Note that (a) is not in and of itself a sin in the Catholic faith; it may sometimes be licit to obtain a civil divorce for the purposes of custody, property division, and/or safety of the spouse/children; however, the sin comes in believing that civil divorce dissolves a sacramental and/or valid marriage bond, which it does not.)

Thoughts?

I looked for something on the internet that could explain the debate and the best I came up with in my limited time is here.

In short the answer to your question is yes.

 

[ScottishColleen]

Yes, and amoung some Reformed and Anabaptists as well…only they don’t believe in even obtaining an annulment…if you were married and your previous spouse is still alive, they believe it’s a sin.

 

[wanner47]

Yes, and amoung some Reformed and Anabaptists as well…only they don’t believe in even obtaining an annulment…if you were married and your previous spouse is still alive, they believe it’s a sin.

Interesting. Do you know of any specific denominations/churches that promulgate that teaching (i.e., can you provide a link to one of their websites saying as much)?

Mozart – your link was interesting, but seemed to cast a wide net in terms of if/when divorce was acceptable. Do you know if a definitive teaching by a Protestant church; i.e., one that’s promulgated on an official church or denominational website?

 

[ScottishColleen]

Most conservative anabaptist churches do not have websites (heavens, half of them don’t have cars!). Charity is an anabaptist group separate from the mennonites/amish and they hold the same. Many fundamental holiness groups and yhwhists hold to this. Independent Fundamental Baptists used to hold to it. That has been changing in the past 20 years…but there are still those that are strictly holding to it. The Reformed Presbyterian Church of North America’s clergy is not permitted to remarry anyone who has been divorced. I believe, not certain, that the Presbyterian Reformed Church is the same.

Then there are many people that hold to it, though they are within churches that don’t. In our family, we have Baptists, Anabaptists, a Greek Orthodox (but attending a Reformed church), and us (Reformed)…and all of us on this side of the family have come to believe this way despite our differences in Faith.

 

[Corki]

Before I knew better , I stood up in a wedding between a Catholic (lapsed) and a Baptist. They were married by a Methodist minister since the groom had been married previously and his Baptist pastor would not marry them. Antecdotal true but I was surprised that it wasn’t just a “Catholic” thing.

 

[Fisher]

lets see what the bible said about the subject.

Gen 2:24 Therefore shall a man leave his father and his mother, and shall cleave unto his wife: and they shall be one flesh.

Mat 19:3 The Pharisees also came unto him, tempting him, and saying unto him, Is it lawful for a man to put away his wife for every cause?
Mat 19:5 And said, For this cause shall a man leave father and mother, and shall cleave to his wife: and they twain shall be one flesh?
Mat 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.

Jam 4:17 Therefore to him that knoweth to do good, and doeth [it] not, to him it is sin.

Who cares what you denomination said or your church. What does GOD say.

 

[Contarini]

In a different thread, a poster said, in response to my comment that, to my knowledge, Fundamentalists/Evangelical churches did not consider remarriage after divorce to be a sin:

My understanding was that the Catholic Church was the only one that considered remarriage after divorce (without obtaining an annulment) was a sin. I know of no Fundamentalist/Evangelical church that teachings it is a sin to either (a) obtain a civil divorce and/or (b) remarry after a divorce.

I grew up firmly believing essentially what the Catholic Church teaches about divorce (i.e., it might sometimes be necessary for self-protection, but remarriage is always a sin), without the provision of annulments (i.e., any marriage legally entered into was presumed to be valid, unless of course there was some obvious factor such as a prior marriage). My father frequently told his (nominally Methodist) mother that she was living in adultery for having remarried.

We were more extreme than most evangelicals, but our views were by no means unknown or even particularly unusual. I would say that most fundamentalist (as opposed to evangelical) churches would hold remarriage to be always a sin (I’m taking a relatively narrow definition of fundamentalist here), as would the conservative holiness/Pentecostal churches and conservative Mennonites/Amish.

I would note that many more evangelicals consider divorce to be a sin but accept that a divorced person (after repenting of the sin they have committed) is free to remarry.

A particular issue among conservative evangelicals is whether remarried spouses are obliged to separate from the second spouse. This is where many people are unwilling to push the conservative stance to its limit, but of course logic requires it if you really think the second marriage is adulterous.

So there are three issues here:

1. Can a Christian legitimately get divorced?
2. Can a divorced Christian, after repentance, get remarried?
3. Can a divorced and remarried Christian, after repentance, continue living with the second spouse?

Edwin

Edwin

 

[ScottishColleen]

Yes, many mennonite and some holiness groups require the couple separate.

 

[jblake]

Contarini;:

1. Can a Christian legitimately get divorced?

Under very specific circumstances, yes. Adultery by one spouse is probably the most common.

1. Can a divorced Christian, after repentance, get remarried?

Neither party in a divorce may hold a position in the church.

The non-adulterous party can remarry.
The adulterous party may not remarry.
In most other instances, neither party may remarry, unless it is to each other. (If they divorce a second (¿third?) time, they may not marry anybody, including each other.)

1. Can a divorced and remarried Christian, after repentance, continue living with the second spouse?

If they can marry, then they can continue living with their spouse.

If the divorce was for illegitimate reasons, then they can’t remarry. When the divorce occurred, in relationship to their conversion, is irrelevant.

a) This is all derived from “Scriptura Sola”;
b) I have the supporting scriptures on my other system. (To get to it I have to reboot this system.)
c) I am fully aware of the fact that most Protestant churches don’t adhere to those practices, despite their claim of adhering to Sola Scriptura;

xan

jonathon

 

[Zooey]

I grew up firmly believing essentially what the Catholic Church teaches about divorce (i.e., it might sometimes be necessary for self-protection, but remarriage is always a sin), without the provision of annulments (i.e., any marriage legally entered into was presumed to be valid, unless of course there was some obvious factor such as a prior marriage). My father frequently told his (nominally Methodist) mother that she was living in adultery for having remarried.

We were more extreme than most evangelicals, but our views were by no means unknown or even particularly unusual. I would say that most fundamentalist (as opposed to evangelical) churches would hold remarriage to be always a sin (I’m taking a relatively narrow definition of fundamentalist here), as would the conservative holiness/Pentecostal churches and conservative Mennonites/Amish.

I would note that many more evangelicals consider divorce to be a sin but accept that a divorced person (after repenting of the sin they have committed) is free to remarry.

A particular issue among conservative evangelicals is whether remarried spouses are obliged to separate from the second spouse. This is where many people are unwilling to push the conservative stance to its limit, but of course logic requires it if you really think the second marriage is adulterous.

So there are three issues here:

1. Can a Christian legitimately get divorced?
2. Can a divorced Christian, after repentance, get remarried?
3. Can a divorced and remarried Christian, after repentance, continue living with the second spouse?

Edwin

Edwin

What Edwin said…

There is no system for annullments, at least not in any churches I know of. There is, however, considerable counselling & what amounts to an “unofficial” annullment process-- By this I mean, there are no papers, no court/tribunal. There are rules on what is & is not considered to be a valid marriage. Some of them are at least as strict as Catholics, though perhaps somewhat different conditions.
If you don’t meet the standards, you cannot remarry in the church, and the pastor cannot/will not perform the ceremony.
Where things get sticky, is as Edwin says: What to do with someone all ready in a 2nd marriage…
Really, a lot of the holiness groups need an annullment process, IMO; as it is, there is often no way for some people to “undo” the kind of marriage situations that the Catholic annullment tribunal is able to settle. Because with you all,there is a written standard, and an understanding that there are some folks who have gone through with a wedding with no realization of the seriousness of the commitment. The conservative holiness person who wants to remarry, is probably just going to be told “sorry”… Despite the fact that they may have been wed to someone who is mentally ill, or toatlly opposed to any Christian religious practice, etc. (All despite the fact that, these things are right there in the Bible…)

 

[wanner47]

Under very specific circumstances, yes. Adultery by one spouse is probably the most common.

Neither party in a divorce may hold a position in the church.

The non-adulterous party can remarry.
The adulterous party may not remarry.
In most other instances, neither party may remarry, unless it is to each other. (If they divorce a second (¿third?) time, they may not marry anybody, including each other.)

If they can marry, then they can continue living with their spouse.

If the divorce was for illegitimate reasons, then they can’t remarry. When the divorce occurred, in relationship to their conversion, is irrelevant.

a) This is all derived from “Scriptura Sola”;
b) I have the supporting scriptures on my other system. (To get to it I have to reboot this system.)
c) I am fully aware of the fact that most Protestant churches don’t adhere to those practices, despite their claim of adhering to Sola Scriptura;

xan

jonathon

I’d be interested in seeing this Scriptural support, because I don’t recall seeing anything of the kind in the Bible.

 

[manualman]

A hard teaching. No wonder so many disciples leave Him over it!

To gloss over or ignore that passage is to admit that one does not form one’s beliefs from scripture, but merely use scripture to justify beliefs one WANTS to adhere to.

It would be nice if Jesus were more clear on what he meant by “what God has joined…” But I guess that is what he left us an authoritative Church for…

 

[puzzleannie]

basing my comment on experience of family members in these denominations, and on some Christian radio preachers, many of the fundamentalist sects do believe in a strict biblical interpretation that marriage is for life and do not recognize divorce as ending a valid marriage. However they interpret Jesus’ teaching about marriage differently, so may accept other grounds such as adultery after the fact, as justifiable reasons to divorce for “unlawfulness” but do not have a formal process analogous to the Catholic canon law procedure. they might also permit (or even require) divorce from an unbeliever and remarriage to a believer, based on Paul’s teachings.

 

[LSK]

lets see what the bible said about the subject.

Gen 2:24 Therefore shall a man leave his father and his mother, and shall cleave unto his wife: and they shall be one flesh.

Mat 19:3 The Pharisees also came unto him, tempting him, and saying unto him, Is it lawful for a man to put away his wife for every cause?
Mat 19:5 And said, For this cause shall a man leave father and mother, and shall cleave to his wife: and they twain shall be one flesh?
Mat 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.

Jam 4:17 Therefore to him that knoweth to do good, and doeth [it] not, to him it is sin.

Who cares what you denomination said or your church. What does GOD say.

I care what The Holy Mother Church says - because she says what GOD says…

I think it is very important for those Christian denominations who share this aspect of Truth to be vocal about it, just as it is important that they are vocal about their stand on abortion or euthanasia (did I spell that right? I’m a horrible speller). It gives them a chance to see how much closer to communion with The Church they are than they realize, and it may facilitate reunification.

At least that is what I pray…

 

[DaveBj]

It was in the Church of God when I was growing up back in the '50s and '60s, back when the CoG was still a holiness denomination. It’s not any more.

 

[Tammy111]

The question is do Fundamentalist, Evangelicals, Protestants have a definitive teaching on whether marriage after divorce is a sin. The correct answer is no. Each church and individual would have to work through the issue with Scripture and the holy Spirit. There is No across the board Protestant answer. Except in the area of sola scriptura and sola fide.

 

[Yerusalyim]

For Jehovah’s Witnesses there must be “spiritual grounds” for a divorce or you aren’t allowed to remarry…or if you do you end up before a Judicial Committee explaining yourself to the Elders who will ask a LOT of questions about your sex life…in detail.

 

[Publisher]

Yes, and amoung some Reformed and Anabaptists as well…only they don’t believe in even obtaining an annulment…if you were married and your previous spouse is still alive, they believe it’s a sin.

I was friends with a Mennonite Brethren minister. Marriage is a one time deal…no way out of it once one is married. It is indisoluble except by death.

You may find the Mennonite Brethren website to be helpful.

 

[Georgia]

I grew up in a Baptist church that was very strict in its Fundamentalist interpretations and well remember sermons on the topic of remarriage and how it was handled. The general interpretation was that a person would be a sinner if there were a remarriage, but there was on exception.

If a spouse committed adultery, the wronged party could remarry in the church. There was no formal procedure in that case. The couple could meet with the minister, called “The Preacher”, to satisfy him that the earlier marriage was broken by infidelity. There was a penalty, however.

The deacons were quite different than those holding that office in the Church. Twelve active deacons formed the church board and passed the plates with the crumbled crackers and the trays with the grape juice for their monthly symbolic communion. Other than that, the deacons served no liturgical function beyond being called on for an extemporaneous prayer from time to time or an occasional sermon when the minister was out.

If a man had a previous marriage that ended in divorce, he would not be ordained a deacon. Because that formed the leadership committee, it reduced the man to a second class status. Pretty much everyone knew, therefore, who had a previous marriage and who did not.