tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-24271776.post4167943098896844105..comments2023-04-14T04:28:54.000-04:00Comments on Reformed Apologist: Willful Desertion, Divorce & Ordained ServantsReformed Apologisthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17398596496540697639noreply@blogger.comBlogger44125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-24271776.post-55156837262745227412019-10-16T04:07:46.281-04:002019-10-16T04:07:46.281-04:00Thank you for your helpful article. It particularl...Thank you for your helpful article. It particularly gives me insight into how to approach a situation wherein one party divorces the other for unscriptural grounds but does not engage in an adulterous relationship and claims to still be a believer. You have made it clear that a divorce on unscriptural grounds is a breaking of covenant, and therefore an act of unbelief. If the divorcing party will not repent then they are to be regarded as an unbeliever, 1 Cor 7:15 is applicable and the innocent party is free to remarry. Daniel Harpernoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-24271776.post-67181559681016907042017-12-09T13:23:04.744-05:002017-12-09T13:23:04.744-05:00Regarding what Anonymous said... How would Matthew...Regarding what Anonymous said... How would Matthew 5:32 be handled with respect to desertion? "But I say to you that everyone who divorces his wife, except on the ground of sexual immorality, MAKES HER COMMIT ADULTERY, and whoever marries a divorced woman commits adultery."<br /><br />This is my understanding of Matt 5:32 & Matt. 19:8-9 -vs.- 1 Cor. 7 – In Matt, we learn that the Jews were putting away their wives for no good cause,and against God’s Law, just so they could get a younger, prettier wife. Those Jews who thought they were ABOVE the law, were here chained, or bound, by that law even more. In 1 Cor 7, we learn that there ARE "extenuating circumstances" concerning Matt 5:32 meant for those who are truly concerned about abiding by the law of God, and those folks here are made FREE-ER in that law – i.e, given a little more informational freedom). Paul details the law in 1 Cor 7 with this caveat, “Now as a concession, not a command, I say this …” AND “To the married I give this charge (not I, but the Lord):…” AND “To the rest I say (I, not the Lord) …” (Hey, Moses gave concessions in Matt 19:8-9, and here Paul gives some concessions too. Are they “legit” concessions? YOU BET!).<br />Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-24271776.post-43844183158593695412017-11-08T13:41:46.067-05:002017-11-08T13:41:46.067-05:00A more faithful translation would convey the idea ...A more faithful translation would convey the idea of stigmatized as such. Reformed Apologisthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17398596496540697639noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-24271776.post-58913565385826689312017-11-08T13:32:36.150-05:002017-11-08T13:32:36.150-05:00I guess in 1 Cor 7:15 the word "enslaved"...I guess in 1 Cor 7:15 the word "enslaved" or "bound" would at least have to include freedom to make a divorce and not be held responsible for "causing her to commit adultery". I would almost also say that the innocent party was free to remarry, for they might still be "enslaved" otherwise.<br /><br />The hang-up I still have for remarriage is in Matt 5:32 pertaining to the status of the wife.<br /><br />It's hard for me to accept that the even though the wife in Matthew 5:32 was deserted, she cannot remarry without committing adultery. Unless, it is indeed an incorrect interpretation.<br /><br />What am I missing with Matt 5:32?<br />Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-24271776.post-24926343581193638192017-11-08T07:58:35.444-05:002017-11-08T07:58:35.444-05:00If that’s the correct interpretation, then how wou...If that’s the correct interpretation, then how would you reconcile it with 1 Cor. 7 and it’s teaching on desertion? Reformed Apologisthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17398596496540697639noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-24271776.post-74641608421009996002017-11-08T07:33:06.850-05:002017-11-08T07:33:06.850-05:00How would Matthew 5:32 be handled with respect to ...How would Matthew 5:32 be handled with respect to desertion?<br /><br />"But I say to you that everyone who divorces his wife, except on the ground of sexual immorality, MAKES HER COMMIT ADULTERY, and whoever marries a divorced woman commits adultery."<br /><br />I would seem that the wife in this case, is still bound to her husband, even when improperly put away or "deserted" by the husband. She would need to remarry to survive, and therefore be forced into adultery. Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-24271776.post-43669717971725409782017-06-05T20:27:15.942-04:002017-06-05T20:27:15.942-04:00Got them. A bit to process. Give me some time to p...Got them. A bit to process. Give me some time to process... Reformed Apologisthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17398596496540697639noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-24271776.post-70573261064860104592017-06-04T18:51:26.204-04:002017-06-04T18:51:26.204-04:00To save time, why not include with your email addr...To save time, why not include with your email address a synopses of your situation and any questions you might have. Of course, I won't publish. Reformed Apologisthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17398596496540697639noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-24271776.post-90295216077973607462017-06-04T18:45:44.232-04:002017-06-04T18:45:44.232-04:00Yes. Just please post your email address and I won...Yes. Just please post your email address and I won't publish. Reformed Apologisthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17398596496540697639noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-24271776.post-34202695891194342672017-06-04T17:15:36.094-04:002017-06-04T17:15:36.094-04:00I live in South Africa so that would be a very exp...I live in South Africa so that would be a very expensive call. Could I email you? Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-24271776.post-54070695510120578292017-06-04T13:21:14.119-04:002017-06-04T13:21:14.119-04:00If you post your phone number I won't publish ...If you post your phone number I won't publish the post. I will then call you.<br /><br />RonReformed Apologisthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17398596496540697639noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-24271776.post-25839015349735752882017-06-04T10:25:17.620-04:002017-06-04T10:25:17.620-04:00Could I please contact you privately about my situ...Could I please contact you privately about my situation? If so, how? I'm so confused and heartbroken, and don't wish to discuss details openly here.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-24271776.post-84833268379395410522016-09-03T10:15:00.905-04:002016-09-03T10:15:00.905-04:00Sure thing Barbara. Leave your number, I won't...Sure thing Barbara. Leave your number, I won't publish the post. Maybe leave some times and days that would work best for you. Reformed Apologisthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17398596496540697639noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-24271776.post-33412873004687505562016-09-03T10:05:32.467-04:002016-09-03T10:05:32.467-04:00I just found this blog this morning and would like...I just found this blog this morning and would like to discuss my situation with you privately. How can we do this? I am happy to leave my phone # with you but don't want it displayed in the blog.<br />Thank YouAnonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12143340424511286065noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-24271776.post-14841864199867185792016-05-30T17:52:19.241-04:002016-05-30T17:52:19.241-04:00Given what you've said, I'd say you have g...Given what you've said, I'd say you have grounds for divorce. What concerns you seems to be that your husband was not excommunicated. Keep in mind though that your husband couldn't possibly have been excommunicated having not been a member of a church. He couldn't be declared outside the church because he hadn't yet been received into the church. Make sense? In such cases another principle applies: if an unbeliever departs let him depart... <br /><br />You were deserted by one who Scripture calls an unbeliever. What allows you to divorce would be his willful desertion that couldn't be remedied by state or church. The question you and your pastors must be sure of is whether it may be truthfully said that he willfully deserted you, which I believe includes actions by the guilty spouse that require the innocent partner to remove herself from a dangerous situation. His willful actions that result in your departing out of necessity of safety is I believe tantamount to his willful desertion. <br /><br />Blessings. Reformed Apologisthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17398596496540697639noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-24271776.post-74688077078691195202016-05-30T16:00:25.108-04:002016-05-30T16:00:25.108-04:00Hi,
I'm currently in this situation but with ...Hi, <br />I'm currently in this situation but with an interesting twist. For almost 8 months of being separated from my husband (and one month prior to that, he stopped going to church and behaved worse after I finally opened up to the pastor about repeated physical and verbal abuse, and drunkenness-alcoholism), I left the state, under pastoral counsel, (I was counseled to separate and the way to do that was to go with family out of state) I then obtained a legal separation and a one year restraining order. I recently asked for counseling by my previous pastor regarding grounds for divorce. He said that having not seen my husband at church or doing any of those things we asked of him during all this time, I did, based on abuse, and desertion. <br /><br /><br /><br />However, my husband has as of one week ago, returned to our previous church. It seems he has reached out for help, and is seemingly coming under their counsel.<br /><br />I'm confused. Even though I'd been counseled I had biblical cause for divorce now he was never excommunicated, (when this happened, he wasn't a member of that congregation and neither was I but the pastor treated me as if I was). Where does that legitimately leave me? My previous pastor told him when he met with him to respect my decision and stop contacting me (he can get obsessive about calling) and that I have grounds for it, but, my question is, if he's being brought into the fold for care and shepherding again, and was never formerly qualified as an "unbeliever" deserting me, though that was the presumption as I understood it, wouldn't that cancel the -Biblical- grounds for divorce on my end? <br /><br />Wouldn't I be considered an adulteress if I ever remarried again?<br /><br />Both my previous pastor and new pastor are in agreement if i want to pursue divorce it would be biblical, and I was very abused, no light borderline stuff, but legitimate abuse, but how can that be (that I still have Biblical gounds) if he's now being taken in as a believer? I hope you can help me. Thanks. <br /><br />To clarify, I offered forgiveness numerous times throughout, but he continued to be verbally and emotionally abusive throughout. <br /><br />I want to obey the Lord.<br />Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-24271776.post-60534695115621019062014-05-28T22:14:38.817-04:002014-05-28T22:14:38.817-04:00Must not be tracking. States typically have a shor...Must not be tracking. States typically have a short timeline. In any case, the elders must determine whether a state of affairs constitutes willful desertion. Reformed Apologisthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17398596496540697639noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-24271776.post-14138860281147815382014-04-15T06:30:08.484-04:002014-04-15T06:30:08.484-04:00If it would be easier to talk, just post a number ...If it would be easier to talk, just post a number and I won't publish it. Reformed Apologisthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17398596496540697639noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-24271776.post-62957504326796918682014-04-15T06:23:06.726-04:002014-04-15T06:23:06.726-04:00I did not take you to mean that the declaration is...I did not take you to mean that the declaration is sufficient for divorce. I was simply trying to be comprehensive as I wasn't sure what you might have thought. Per the portion of my response that you just pasted above, what I was trying to say is that the declaration is not any sort of condition, necessary or sufficient. Each one of the three is sufficient and any one of the three is necessary. In other words, if and only if one obtains, then remarriage is permissible. <br /><br />Again though, there is a misunderstanding about the declaration. The declaration should accompany (after pastoral pursuit), but delinquency on the part of the elders does not negate the condition that has been met.Reformed Apologisthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17398596496540697639noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-24271776.post-59116553542646047592014-04-15T01:12:43.062-04:002014-04-15T01:12:43.062-04:00Ron, you commented:
"There seems to be a grav...Ron, you commented:<br /><i>"There seems to be a grave misunderstanding regarding the three permissible scenarios for remarriage. Adultery and death are of course two of the three, but the third reason is not that one party be declared an unbeliever but rather that the innocent party is deserted by their spouse. Unbelief is not sufficient grounds for a believer to pursue divorce and remarry."</i><br /><br />When I re-read my previous post regarding the 3 permissive scenarios I can see how I gave the impression that I was claiming that simply being declared an 'unbeliever' was grounds for divorce. I certainly do not believe that. My apologies for the confusion, and thank you for making clarification :)<br /><br />I'll try to explain what I meant:<br />When it comes to the willful desertion of a spouse, there seems to be an implication among many Christians that the innocent believing spouse is loosed only when the deserting spouse is an unbeliever. So then, if a believing spouse deserts another believer, the guilty spouse must be declared an unbeliever in order for the third scenario to be permissible for the innocent spouse to be remarried. Is this assertion correct? Would my friend's former wife need to be declared an 'unbeliever', and if so, by whom?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-24271776.post-80692163364586831922014-04-14T05:44:36.211-04:002014-04-14T05:44:36.211-04:00Desertion while living together or under the same ...Desertion while living together or under the same roof is the same thing. Not sure whether that was clear to you. <br /><br />The blog entry pertains to the allegation of desertion while living under the same roof, which does <i>not</i> fit your scenario. Your scenario pertains to physical desertion. Your scenario is more cut and dry. Desertion doesn’t have to be established in your scenario (as it would in scenarios that fit the blog entry). Your friend was literally deserted by his wife. <br /><br />There seems to be a grave misunderstanding regarding the three permissible scenarios for remarriage. Adultery and death are of course two of the three, but the third reason is not that one party be declared an unbeliever but rather that the innocent party is deserted by their spouse. Unbelief is not sufficient grounds for a believer to pursue divorce and remarry. In fact, 1 Corinthians 7 forbids the believing spouse to divorce his or her spouse because of unbelief. But, if the unbeliever departs the believer is free to remarry. That the church in this case failed to confront the professing believer in her rebellion against her spouse does not negate the record of desertion. <br /><br /><i>What is his recourse in resolving this issue if church discipline cannot be obtained?</i><br /><br />The issue is resolved in so far that the record shows that the woman willfully abandoned her husband. It’s not likely that discipline will be obtained given the time that has elapsed. My advice would be that he seek the counsel and blessing of his current church, but given what you've said he is certainly free to be remarried given that his wife abandoned the marriage without cause. <br />Reformed Apologisthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17398596496540697639noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-24271776.post-69701956931952841382014-04-14T01:56:25.260-04:002014-04-14T01:56:25.260-04:00Ron, you wrote: "Please keep in mind that my ...Ron, you wrote: "<i>Please keep in mind that my Blog entry pertains to desertion under the same roof. If one can be constituted by the church as deserting their spouse while living together, then church discipline should obtain in such a situation, which would serve to substantiate desertion.</i>"<br />Could you please clarify examples of circumstances that would contrast 'desertion under the same roof' OR 'deserting their spouse while living together'. <br />The husband and wife were still married and living in the same house at the time the wife decided to leave him. Unbeknownst to him, some of her friends helped her move out of the house while he was at work one day. Essentially, he came home and his family was gone...<br />I'm assuming this fits the parameters of what your blog entry pertains to.<br /><br />Also, the husband and elder 'B' have remained friends even though the husband was hurt by the negligence of the elder board. <br />I don't think 'B' ever realized the extent of the ramifications until recently. He may have buried it with the past and then assumed the husband felt he was free to remarry. It was not until recently, after I confided in 'B' that I was developing feelings for this man, that 'B' casually confronted the husband about his views on ever remarrying. He replied by stating the 3 conditions that would loose him do do so: if she had committed adultery, her death, or being declared an unbeliever, and since the elders never made a declaration, how is it possible for him to be free to remarry? <br /><br />It appears the crux of the problem is he is torn between whether or not he has authority to declare her an unbeliever guilty of willful desertion OR must it come from the authority of the church that handled (or in this case, mishandled) the situation at the onset.<br /><br />I think he may also be concerned that if he were to remarry, those that sided with his wife would label him an adulterer. His wife basically dragged his reputation through the mud all those years ago with her false accusation of abuse. The people who know him well, know the truth of the matter. For one thing, her accusation was proven false. Unfortunately, there are some who will only believe what they want to believe...<br /><br />What is his recourse in resolving this issue if church discipline cannot be obtained?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-24271776.post-26772362076654301222014-04-13T20:51:24.426-04:002014-04-13T20:51:24.426-04:00From all you've said, I think the husband is l...From all you've said, I think the husband is loosed from the marriage and eligible to remarry. I thought that after your first post but just wanted to clear up some loose ends. <br /><br />That the two elders (B and C) pursued the wife indicates that she was the "guilty" party and deserted without cause. What is tragic is that the elders tacitly approved her behavior, some more severely than others. <br /><br />Please keep in mind that my Blog entry pertains to desertion under the same roof. If one can be constituted by the church as deserting their spouse <i>while living together</i>, then church discipline should obtain in such a situation, which would serve to substantiate desertion. In other words, church discipline would vindicate the understanding that one spouse has deserted the other while living under the same roof. And although the threat of church discipline should have been brought to bear in this situation, it was not needed in order to substantiate willful desertion. Desertion occurred in the most literal sense simply by her departure. Accordingly, even though the elders nodded off on this one by not moving toward exercising the keys of the kingdom, the husband was deserted and, therefore, put away without biblical cause. <br /><br />Please let me if you have any other questions. <br /><br /><br />In His grace,<br /><br />RonReformed Apologisthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17398596496540697639noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-24271776.post-49578845616758879552014-04-13T17:32:48.225-04:002014-04-13T17:32:48.225-04:00The church itself was Calvanistic, but not reforme...The church itself was Calvanistic, but not reformed. As stated in the constitution, the 3 elders were to function as a plurality, however there were doctrinal differences among them. I'll refer to the elders as A, B, and C.<br /><br />'A' was the main preaching elder.<br /><br />Both 'A' and 'B' were Calvanistic.<br /><br />'A' was not reformed, 'B' was, and was also becoming more reformed in his doctrinal position.<br /><br />'C' was neither Calvanistic nor reformed.<br /><br />All 3 elders were involved with counseling this couple. The wife brought accusations against her husband implying that he was physically abusive. This was proven to be false, and rather more her perception that she thought he had the potential to become abusive. The wife would often bring up unrelated complaints as far back as the beginning of their marriage. These included complaints about her husband's job and not making enough money, past arguments that the husband thought were resolved, and even dissatisfaction about her life.<br /><br />About a year before she separated from her husband she was in a car accident in which she received a settlement of money from. Six months later she began consulting with a divorce attorney (unknown at the time to her husband, and before they went for marriage counseling). She used the settlement money to fund her end of the divorce.<br /><br />Both the husband and wife were still attending the same church after she moved out of their home and even at the time when she initiated the divorce against the husband’s will. He wanted to continue with counseling to try and resolve their issues and save the marriage. She refused to do so. At this point elders ‘B’ and ‘C’ wanted to confront the wife for leaving her husband without biblical cause. Elder ‘A’ did not want to be involved with the situation any longer and told the husband that he and his wife should work it out between themselves. However, the wife would not even talk to her husband, so elders ‘B’ and ‘C’ decided to confront her themselves. This is when ‘B’ wrote the letter and presented it to ‘C’ for his approval before sending it. ‘C’ wanted to make some changes to the letter, but kept putting it off, and in the meantime the wife left the church after someone confronted her about the way the daughter was dressing. Basically, the wife was no longer under the church’s authority in order for them to exercise church discipline for willful desertion and also for initiating an unbiblical divorce. She has never shown even the slightest inkling of repentance, nor the desire to reconcile with her husband. She wants nothing to do with him and would not even acknowledge him at their daughter’s funeral. Because her actions were never addressed, she is under the perception that her willful desertion was acceptable to the elders authority and in the eyes of God.<br /><br />The husband has waited these past 15 yrs for some kind of resolution. The wife still professes to be a Christian, was attending a non-denominational church, but it is unclear if she is attending a church at the present.<br /><br />At this point, who has the authority to take any action such as making a declaration of where the wife stands as a believer, or to loose the husband? Is he even considered loose? If there is no church authority able to resolve this issue, how does it get resolved? What if she is attending a church that will not take action if presented with the scenario? Does the husband need the authority of a church to make this determination? I should also point out that the husband was never declared an unbeliever and remained in good standing in the church. He has since left that church and started attending another.<br /><br />I hope I was able to bring further clarity to the situation. Thanks for your prompt response to my initial post :)Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-24271776.post-9812558095041576182014-04-13T09:26:50.012-04:002014-04-13T09:26:50.012-04:00I'm a little unclear on this part you wrote: &...I'm a little unclear on this part you wrote: <i>"One elder turned a blind eye to exercising church discipline, but the other two elders felt it should be carried out. A letter was written to the wife by one and shown to the other for his feedback."</i><br /><br />The letter was shown to the other or the others (plural), or did you mean one of the others? <br /><br />Also, who is the "He [who] thought some parts were too harsh, so [he] agreed to edit it and send it to her"? Presumably it's the same "he" who "kept putting it off..." It was an elder, or are you possibly referring to the husband himself, but that wouldn't comport with the phrasing above. <br /><br />Also, I'm curious whether the woman still professes Christ and what sort of church (Reformed, etc.) was to have been overseeing this situation? <br />Reformed Apologisthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17398596496540697639noreply@blogger.com