Over in a discussion at SSM’s last night I asked a question: in this matriarchal age, how should the church act? How should we real with people when the civil courts allows one to divorce at will?
There is some basic theology we need to deal with first. And it’s fairly simple, but does fly in the face of much of modern society.
Firstly, the rich are handicapped. They are too busy managing their possessions. They have the temptation to consider, because they can have their desires, that they are self-sufficient and can flip the bird at the laws of the church. Which leads to situations like this.
So how are we to understand women like Jenny Erickson, and the many other Christian women like her, who claim that despite thousands of years of Christian and Jewish tradition, despite the clear commands in Scripture not to separate from one’s husband, despite the commandments against adultery, nevertheless the Lord God Himself has made a special exemption just for her? Because He wants her to be happy, so if she needs to be a faithless woman who breaks her vows and becomes an adulteress, then hey it’s all good? I must have missed that verse in the Bible. But you know, Jesus said don’t judge, ya’ll, which is the Christian Kosher™ version of Don’t be haters! Or something like that.
[As an aside, I saw that a local church is calling a minister who is going to leave his wife in Australia — she’s a professor — until she can find a job in NZ. Don’t man. Just don’t. Short separations and tours of duty place a marriage at risk. Long separations can be lethal. But the love of money and status drives us to such things]
In the West, our societies are rich enough that we can support women living with their children. It’s inefficient, expensive and very punitive, but we can do it. People in tougher times cannot: a mother there needs a man so the can concentrate on her children. And the man has to work, or his family does not eat. Sometimes poverty concentrates the mind.
The second point is that the Church will judge. We will judge at the last day. We are in Christ a chosen people. This leads to a couple of sub-points: we have a duty to have church discipline, and police our own; and to destroy those who God has chosen in his mercy is a most terrible thing. For like the people of Israel, God has chosen and named us, and the haters and going to hate us.
23Then Jesus said to his disciples, “Truly I tell you, it will be hard for a rich person to enter the kingdom of heaven. 24Again I tell you, it is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for someone who is rich to enter the kingdom of God.” 25When the disciples heard this, they were greatly astounded and said, “Then who can be saved?” 26But Jesus looked at them and said, “For mortals it is impossible, but for God all things are possible.”
27Then Peter said in reply, “Look, we have left everything and followed you. What then will we have?” 28Jesus said to them, “Truly I tell you, at the renewal of all things, when the Son of Man is seated on the throne of his glory, you who have followed me will also sit on twelve thrones, judging the twelve tribes of Israel. 29And everyone who has left houses or brothers or sisters or father or mother or children or fields, for my name’s sake, will receive a hundredfold, and will inherit eternal life. 30But many who are first will be last, and the last will be first.
1Rid yourselves, therefore, of all malice, and all guile, insincerity, envy, and all slander. 2Like newborn infants, long for the pure, spiritual milk, so that by it you may grow into salvation — 3if indeed you have tasted that the Lord is good.
4Come to him, a living stone, though rejected by mortals yet chosen and precious in God’s sight, and 5like living stones, let yourselves be built into a spiritual house, to be a holy priesthood, to offer spiritual sacrifices acceptable to God through Jesus Christ. 6For it stands in scripture:
“See, I am laying in Zion a stone, a cornerstone chosen and precious; and whoever believes in him will not be put to shame.”
7To you then who believe, he is precious; but for those who do not believe,
“The stone that the builders rejected has become the very head of the corner,”
8and
“A stone that makes them stumble, and a rock that makes them fall.”
They stumble because they disobey the word, as they were destined to do.9But you are a chosen race, a royal priesthood, a holy nation, God’s own people, in order that you may proclaim the mighty acts of him who called you out of darkness into his marvelous light. 10Once you were not a people, but now you are God’s people; once you had not received mercy, but now you have received mercy.
Onto my comments on church discipline and divorce. We need to remember that Peter is not originally to the Christians of the Middle Ages and Christendom, or to us living in pur post modern matriarchy, but to those of his time. These people will being killed by the civil magistrate. The parallel situation does exist in many parts of the world, where the neomartyrs (as the Orthodox Church calls them) are increasing, day by day, as the Islamics and Socialists kill Copts, Catholics, Orthodox and Protestants without discrimination.
We need to pray for them, and pray that that cup passes us ‘Lead us not into the test, but deliver us from evil”
However, we live in a matriarchy, with a civil law that allows no fault divorce, and this culture infects us. The church has a duty to act. Now, the big controversy about Jenny Erikson is that her church has excommunicated her because she divorced her husband without good cause and refused to return to her husband. If you read the board at her post, a lot of people damn the elders. And some say that if she took them to court, the church would lose.
There are two options that have existed historically.
Firstly, the Roman Catholics do not allow divorce. Period. They do allow annulment — because people in ignorance can enter illicit (generally consanguineous) marriages — which was the issue with the marriage of Henry of England and his first wife (they were cousins). And they refuse remarriage: in the event when you must separate, you have to live celibate or reconcile.
Secondly, the Anabaptist groups like the Mennonites. I’m not sure if they allow divorce or not, but they discipline their own. If you are adulterous, you will be cast out or be forced to reconcile. Since they live and work as a community and are closed off from open society, this shunning has teeth.
Dominic suggests a third way — a prenuptial agreement that brings legal teeth to a divorce, stripping the guilty party of all assets and offspring.. This would require the church to make judgments and rulings. (I can see the elders ducking for cover). And it would have to be legally enforceable — because otherwise the guilty party would “shop” for a jurisdiction that gives her or him the most favourable outcome.
At this point, theoretically, the keys (or excommunication) could act as a break: if you break your contract the church will back the contract and deny you access to the table, cast you from the church, and not associate with you, until you repent.
I can see the civil courts over ruling this, locally.
So what would I do? I would follow the puritans. I would encourage single people to ask the elders to pray and discern if they should marry this woman or man: that the men and women are pre selected for good character, and that the education about how to live in marriage should occur in general teaching within the church.
I think that once there is agreement, there should be a marriage contract and prenuptial agreement that places assets into the most robust structure in each country and keeps the civil magistrate far away. That will vary from place to place: locally it would be a trust structure. The legal people in the church should have a fairly standard contract here.
Agreeing to this should be considered betrothal, and at that point the proposed marriage should become public (the banns should be read) so any person who disagrees has time to discuss with the elders why this marriage should not proceed.
This period should be short. For we want the marriage bed to be pure, and the couple should be holding off. (the current process of living together and saving for a big marriage — the bridezilla meme — is backwards. Traditionally, you got married in your best clothes (only the rich could afford a new gown) and either in your home or in church). I would go as far to make marriage like baptism — part of the regular church service — but this is not the current practice).
And then the church should support and pray for the couple. The elders should visit the man. The older women should mentor the new wife — to teach her how to love her husband and care for her children. A lot of this is not instinctual — as anyone who has ever taught a woman how to breastfeed knows.
And the civil magistrate should be kept well away. For the civil magistrate is way off base.