Should Divorcees Be Forbidden to Teach or Lead in Local Churches?

Thank you, Aaron, I was taught a similar perspective to the one you are arguing against in my pastoral theology classes in Bible college, and I served in a church with similar restrictions in my first ministry. The reasoning given by those who taught me these things (who are beloved by me to this day) was well-intentioned. However, the more I examined Scripture on the issue of divorce and remarriage (and, frankly, came to know godly divorced people and to understand their situations), I began to look at it as “fencing the Torah”—in other words, putting extra laws in place in order to avoid breaking clear commands of Scripture. As well-intentioned as that is, it is also wrong.

I’m guessing that a lot of the rigidity really derives from the simple issue of establishing whether a divorcee is a one woman man. If we’ve done—as many/most churches have—more or less a lecture/listen format, we simply do not have the information to determine this. Hence the blanket bans that really don’t consider whether the prospective leader committed adultery, or whether his divorce really relates mostly to his ex-wife’s sins.

We want to be careful as well with the notion that the church is wronged when people are “prevented from serving in ways they ought to be serving”—that very argument is, of course, a staple of evangelical feminism. It’s certainly true as far as it goes, but it tends to be…shall we say…rather over-applied.

Personally, I’ve been on a deacon board and have been taught by a divorcee—he married a nonbeliever as a young believer and paid the price when she decided she wanted to go. Definitely a one woman man, though. So count me firmly in the camp of “do we know him well enough to know he’s a one woman man?”, and quite uneasy with blanket bans.

You and I actually agree! This is a good day.

The issue of a divorced person leading, especially pastoring, in a local church is a thorny one. Frankly, you can make a great argument on both sides of this issue.

Perhaps the best argument against a divorced man serving as pastor is the admonition that he “rules his own house well.” As well as the argument that the church needs at least a few examples of one man and one woman married for life.

David R. Brumbelow

A few thoughts:

• What if he was married and divorced before he was a Christian?
• What if he was already married, he became a Christian, his wife did not, and she left him afterwards (1 Cor 7)?
• What if he is a Christian, married, and his wife is unfaithful, and leaves him? What fault does he have?

In each of these circumstances, the man is totally disqualified from leadership? Really? I’ve never bought it. And, there is the conundrum of what a “one woman man” actually means. I’ve always thought we’re running up against tradition, not Scripture on this “divorce/remarriage/leadership” issue.

[David R. Brumbelow]

The issue of a divorced person leading, especially pastoring, in a local church is a thorny one. Frankly, you can make a great argument on both sides of this issue.

Perhaps the best argument against a divorced man serving as pastor is the admonition that he “rules his own house well.” As well as the argument that the church needs at least a few examples of one man and one woman married for life.

David R. Brumbelow

The last statement in bold is a great example of a cultural, but not a Biblical, imperative. Scripture says no such thing, nor does it suggest that further, the pastor must be one of those examples. Big gaps in logic there.

The first statement about ruling his own house well, however, I consider to be Biblical. The trick with it is even in a divorce situation, the outcome is not necessarily an indication of how well the man has ruled his home. Again, imagine an immature Christian marrying a nonbeliever who goes her own way. Is he forever disqualified, while the murderer Paul was not? Seriously?

I have a dear pastor friend - goes back 40 years.

His wife left him about 15 years ago. He stepped out of the ministry for several years. He remarried and now pastors a moderately sized (300+) in the upper Midwest.

I know the situation completely. There is no “innocent party” here. Wife # 1 had issues … he had issues.

Way back when I served along side him, he was adamant that a divorced man was disqualified from the pastorate. Funny how his view changed when he himself got a divorce.

My own view: some sins have consequences that are long. I think divorce is one of them. I don’t think he should be pastoring. I’m not even sure his new church knows about his divorce (they may).

I don’t think there should be a blanket ban on divorced serving in positions, but for the offices - why not the highest standard!

The day after I began repenting of my sins and placing my faith in the life, death, and resurrection of Jesus, I called my ex-wife and told her that I thought that we should remarry. She laughed at me.

I made that phone call because of the bad teaching in this area that I had heard while growing up. I thought that as a Christian, God expected me to remarry my ex-wife. Thankfully, the church that the Holy Spirit placed me in was pastored by a man (a BJU board member) who had much wisdom in this area. He told me that remarrying an unbeliever, even if she was my ex-wife, would be in direct disobedience to God’s Word.

By God’s grace, my “new” wife and I just celebrated our 12th wedding anniversary. We are blessed to serve God together in our local church (I’m on staff).

Thank you for writing this, Aaron.

…is Charles Stanley. When he and his wife divorced, she noted that he had his priorities, and she simply didn’t happen to be one of them. Now of course, I don’t know exactly what the ins and outs were on the deacon board’s decision to retain him, but if that perspective was known before the divorce (big IF, yes!), I would dare suggest a good look at his work and travel schedule might have been appropriate. If he was putting in 80 hour weeks and traveling > 50% of the time, I would dare say his ex-wife had a point—and the deacon board should have worked with him to rein that in.

Same thing with Jim’s friend, really. I don’t know what the issues are, and of course it would be wrong to discuss them here, but if some issues were known a priori, it’s time for the deacons to step in. And that presumes, of course, a closer relationship between church leaders than I’ve sometimes seen.

1 Corinthians 7:10-11, “To the married I give this command (not I, but the Lord): A wife must not separate from her husband. 11 But if she does, she must remain unmarried or else be reconciled to her husband. And a husband must not divorce his wife.”

Does this passage still apply?

• It strikes me that at least for believers - a marriage should be able to work! Issues should be resolvable
• While the passage does not address the husband not separating, my take is that this would also be true: “A husband must not separate from his wife. 11 But if he does, he must remain unmarried or else be reconciled to his wife. And a wife must not divorce her husband.”

What I see and it concerns me and should concern us all:

• EZ divorce standards for believers.
• Christians think they can walk away from marriage with no consequences
• And the above is very very wrong

I am reluctant to officiate at some weddings (not that I am asked much anymore b/c I am retired): (obviously never for a same sex marriage [so-called by the state] )

• Two believers first time marriage (OK)
• Two unbelievers (OK)
• Other situations - I personally do not want to be involved as an officiant

Jim, that’s what I was taught, but may I humbly suggest that your perspective is being stricter than Jesus and Paul (yes, of course I know there are different perspectives on Mt. 19 and 1 Cor. 7:15, but after considering all of those arguments it seems quite clear to me that biblically there are POSSIBLE exceptions for adultery, abandonment, and abuse).

I would honestly prefer to take your approach as it would make things much easier in my church setting. It is much, much messier to try to work through the details of a past marriage to see if it qualifies as a biblical exception so that a new marriage might take place, but I believe that is the biblical approach. I have said “no” to marrying a couple with divorce in the past, but I have also said (after much discussion and even investigation) “yes.”

Of course that’s not really the subject of Aaron’s OP, but related.

To the original point … “Should Divorcees Be Forbidden to Teach or Lead in Local Churches?”:

• No but …
• The “but”: what is their current view of divorce? Must be known! The sanctify of marriage must be held high

Answering Greg Long who said: “it seems quite clear to me that biblically there are POSSIBLE exceptions for adultery, abandonment, and abuse).” Agreed that there are Biblical grounds for divorce!

And: “try to work through the details of a past marriage to see if it qualifies as a biblical exception so that a new marriage might take place”. My take on the bolded above: As a pastor I frankly did not feel that I had either the authority or the resources to truly evaluate this!

• The pastor does not have a private investigator NOR
• The ability to subpoena
• It always seemed to be “he says” … no “she says”
• Considering my own calling and directives for pastoral ministry - I do not see that outlined anywhere in the Scriptures

[Jim] Answering Greg Long who said: “it seems quite clear to me that biblically there are POSSIBLE exceptions for adultery, abandonment, and abuse).” Agreed that there are Biblical grounds for divorce!

And: “try to work through the details of a past marriage to see if it qualifies as a biblical exception so that a new marriage might take place”. My take on the bolded above: As a pastor I frankly did not feel that I had either the authority or the resources to truly evaluate this!

• The pastor does not have a private investigator NOR
• The ability to subpoena
• It always seemed to be “he says” … no “she says”
• Considering my own calling and directives for pastoral ministry - I do not see that outlined anywhere in the Scriptures

I totally understand Jim, and respect that position. Let me give you some examples of where I’m coming from:

• One couple came to us asking to be married. She had never been married; he was divorced. He said his first wife left him for another man. He referred me to his previous pastor. I called him and confirmed the details of what I had been told. The other pastor sympathized with this man but had a personal policy of not marrying divorced people. Because I was able to verify his story I felt comfortable moving forward with pre-marital counseling.
• A woman in our church had a husband who started exhibiting bizarre and dangerous behavior towards himself and others (not going to share many details). She finally divorced him. The authorities were involved at several points including a restraining order and then ultimately some jail time. I was not in the church when all this happened but when she approached us about the possibility of remarriage we are of course able to verify all of that not only with pastors on staff here at the time who worked with her, but also if need be with the documentation from the legal system. Because of this, we are willing to consider the possibility of remarriage for her (she has agreed to submit to pastoral counsel and counseling regarding any possible mate).
• On the other hand, one time I had a couple who was fairly new to our church ask about getting married. At least one of them had been divorced. Their salvation testimonies were iffy, her story changed after I mentioned the biblical exception clauses, and I just didn’t think it was worthwhile to pursue any further so I declined their request. They left the church.

I totally agree that if it simply “he said/she said” that any pastor would do well to be extremely wary.

It’s worth noting something a good friend of mine told me when I expressed surprise at something she knew: “it’s amazing what you find out when you ask.” I don’t know the “full story” of everybody at my church by any means, but I’m just amazed at some of the things people tell me; sexual assaults, domestic issues, you name it. I’m afraid that I’ve actually bobbled a few things where I should have acted, really.

With regards to divorce or adultery, same basic thing. A man with genuine sorrow will describe his divorce in completely different terms than a man trying to justify himself. Recently went up to a guy where I’d approached him in the parking lot—he was angrily talking with his wife and I wanted to make sure things were OK—and when I’d apologized for being suspicious, he just opened up about some of his difficulties and admitted he wasn’t “ruling his own family well.”

Four issues on divorce and remarriage:

• What the state permits
• What one’s individual conscience “permits” [eg … not that I am “looking”. I’m 43 years of happy marriage. God forbid if my wife precedes me … my personal decision is that I would never marry a divorced person]
• What a church permits
• What a pastor will permit. I personally will not officiate at 2nd marriages where divorce is involved. My own conscience will not permit it! People have gotten very ticked off at me because of this and I personally have not condemned the 2nd marriages of the divorced.

As an aside: there is no Biblical mandate for any pastor officiating at weddings.

Thanks, Aaron. Great topic and you did a fine job in such a brief space.

I think that people overlap issues. If it belongs to 1 Timothy 3, then “a bishop must be” concerns what he is (present tense “be”), not what he was (or all other qualifications would be contingent on one’s past as well).

The concern that people bring up is that there may be other issues. Divorce (as I understand it) does not automatically disqualify, but neither is it irrelevant. It must be investigated. There may be other issues that complicate matters, such as “having a good testimony with those who are without,” or “having one’s household in subjection.” There is also the issue of “no guilty party” claims, which some question. It might be also that there is just enough “baggage” that comes from divorce oftentimes that it causes ongoing issues, just because the ex and the kids are part of life.

Much has come from the misunderstanding of equating “one woman man” with “married only once.” That both downplays moral behavior and raises marital status inappropriately.

I believe that divorce does not automatically disqualify someone from ministry at any level. With all of that said, I would still hesitate to be under a pastor (placing myself in that scenario) who has had a failed marriage for whatever reason (which may indicate unfounded bias, maybe from the way I’ve been taught). Mine is not a biblical objection per se. Simply put, I would want to know that a man has exemplified himself in conduct as a divorcee over an extended period of time before placing him in some lead role.

BTW, Greg Long, Dr. Walton shared the hilarity of this issue. He stated (in a seminary Pastoral Epistles class) that divorce was seen by many as the unforgivable sin (which he did not appear to embrace), but that murder was somehow something that people would forgive after repentance. He, tongue-in-cheek, suggested that the logical path forward was murdering one’s spouse (to be clear - all in jest and illustrating the absurdity of such a view).

Again, Aaron, thanks for the post.

ok - completely disclose it at candidate process. Don’t hide it

More than once, I’ve heard the jest from the pulpit, “Divorce never, murder maybe.”

[Kevin Subra] SNIP

BTW, Greg Long, Dr. Walton shared the hilarity of this issue. He stated (in a seminary Pastoral Epistles class) that divorce was seen by many as the unforgivable sin (which he did not appear to embrace), but that murder was somehow something that people would forgive after repentance. He, tongue-in-cheek, suggested that the logical path forward was murdering one’s spouse (to be clear - all in jest and illustrating the absurdity of such a view).

Again, Aaron, thanks for the post.

I wouldn’t want a murderer for a pastor either!

“I Fear You Will Die and Go to Hell”

At that point, I felt that I needed to warn him about the danger of his soul. I said, “If I’m completely honest with you, I believe that you might follow through with this divorce. If you do, I think you just might achieve your goals. You might reach a place of happiness apart from your wife and achieve satisfaction in the remaining years of your life. You might enjoy it—however temporal it might be. The problem is, when you close your eyes for the last time, you will open them in eternity—in a place called hell.” He looked shocked. I said, “I fear you will die and go to hell.”

It’s through the covenant keeping marriage commitment that the gospel is put on display without words. If we’ve ever been given a command to preach the gospel without words, it’s within the marriage covenant. In a land saturated by no-fault divorces, the church of Jesus Christ puts on display the doctrine of Christianity through marriage faithfulness. When the sanctity of marriage is upheld among God’s people, the echo of the gospel is heard and the beauty of the gospel sparkles in the world.

We (my wife and I) know something about those vows: for better for worse, in riches or poorer, in sickness and in health.

• In our 43rd year
• Kathee has seen:
  • A husband break his neck and become paralyzed. Her parents said “ought to leave him”
  • Three neck surgeries
  • Two back surgeries
  • Two rounds of C-Diff with 6 months of missed work
  • Cancer surgery - now Stage 3
  • She’s managed to keep her vows
  • And I have too

Not moved by the article John Brian provided, though I understand it. However, the context is clearly different. The man in the article is being selfish and evil, and Buice suspected the man wasn’t even a Christian. His approach there was sound, and I agree with it. Buice suggested:

Can I be brutally honest with you today? If you’re a Christian who’s planning your divorce, you could be planning the biggest mistake of your life. Why not run to God today and plead for Him to restore your marriage? Divorce is not commanded. Divorce is a decision. Why not choose to keep your marriage vows and work passionately to restore your marriage for the glory of God?

I don’t think anybody here is suggesting otherwise.

I’m saying the ​context matters, in each individual case. At this point, any pastor can bring out a whole truckload of anecdotal stories, so I’ll share mine:

• Woman with three kids from two marriages begins going to church.
• She drags husband along. He is a loser, a drunk and he beats her. She desperately hopes church will reform him.
• They attend faithfully. I meet with them often. She is not a Christian. He claims he is. He keeps beating her. She often calls me at night, crying and asking for advice. She doesn’t want to go to the police. She’s not interested in pressing charges. I’ve been in law enforcement, so I understand the futility of even calling the police if the wife won’t cooperate.
• He leaves her for another woman and abandons the children. He robs another church and goes to jail
• I meet with him in jail several times. I tell him I won’t believe he’s a Christian until he starts acting like one. I tell him to repent. Etc., etc., etc.
• He promises he’s sorry. But, his girlfriend is on the visitor’s list, and the wife accidently runs into her while she carts their kids to see the daddy in jail.
• Meanwhile, as she lives through this hell, the wife repents, believes the Gospel, and becomes a Christian
• The husband writes a letter from jail, saying he will never return to his wife, and saying he actually loves his girlfriend.
• Wife wants divorce and asks me for advise.
• I advise her to get one.

Some time later, she meets a Christian man and wants to marry him. I marry them. Later, I am approached by an elderly, nasty man in the church who tells me:

• Her divorce wasn’t justified.
• Her remarriage isn’t justified.
• I don’t know the Scriptures
• I’m a novice.
• He tells me he almost objected at their wedding.

My response? A polite, pastoral version of, “bite me.”

In 16 years in the pastorate, I personally NEVER counseled divorce.

Multiple times I advised separation: abuse/beatings, adultery, drug abuse, prostitution

In that context, I couldn’t ignore 1 Cor 7:15. I’m willing to live with the advice I gave. Never lost an ounce of sleep over it. I don’t think a spouse ought to be trapped in a hopeless situation. This context was bad. Just to throw gasoline on the fire, I also once agreed to marry a couple who weren’t even Christians. I did it so I’d have a chance to do biblical marriage counseling and give them the Gospel over the course of 8 weeks.

In situations like these, my thought process often goes like this:

• Step 1: Knee-jerk reaction according to “the way I’ve been taught.”
• Step 2: Immediate introspection, as I’m sometimes forced to actually apply something in real life I’ve never been entirely comfortable with in theory to begin with.
• Step 3: I search the Scriptures and consider, “forget my traditions - what does the Bible actually say on this issue?”
• Step 4: I sometimes end up ditching tradition for what I believe is Scriptural.

I’ve honestly wondered whether I’m meant to be a Pastor. I can be interpreted as being unduly pragmatic on some points. I’ve always been willing to toss tradition into the trash if I didn’t feel it lined up with Scripture. I suppose that’s better than unyielding stupidity. I once knew an elderly Pastor who told me that because a Pastor had to be “blameless,” a certain man wasn’t qualified for pastoral ministry any longer. I asked, “what, exactly, do you think ‘blameless’ means?” The man replied, “it means ‘blameless!’” I pressed, “it can’t mean ‘sinless,’ can it?” The man shook his head angrily, “No, but ‘blameless’ means ‘blameless.’” Cue the Twilight Zone ​theme-song …

Bottom line, I think the divorce/remarriage issue is a land mine because of inherited traditions. I suspect many Pastors privately have other interpretations, but are afraid to even touch this third rail with a ten-foot pole. Their doctrinal statements have it, and it’ll stay that way until hell freezes over. To touch it is to invite death and dismissal - perhaps even both.

As a divorced and remarried man, I’ve hesitated to re-wade back into this. As TylerR said, “the divorce/remarriage issue is a land mine.” I’ve one-ish thought and one question.

Some have mentioned the difficulty Elders face if called to “investigate” past divorces. That’s true. I would think, though, that a man who has been divorced in the past will be exhibiting fruits of the spirit and continued growth in the grace and knowledge of Jesus Christ. If a brother is living a “blameless” life in other areas, why assume that he’s not telling the truth about his past divorce? Or, rather, if you are going to assume something, why not assume that he’s telling the truth? Obviously, by God’s grace, we should do our best to never assume anything when affirming Elders or calling pastors. Since we can’t see each other’s heart, this is easier if affirming Elders from among men who have already been members of your church for years. Observing their lives, their love for Jesus, their commitment to the pursuit of holiness, etc. will be much easier if affirming from within the church. If the church is hiring a new “lead” pastor from outside the existing church membership, it’s more difficult. Even in those instances, the norm, I think, should be that the pastoral candidates are intimately connected to sister churches. In those instances, shouldn’t the church leadership (and members) be doing due diligence in seeking counsel from wise, mature believers who know the brother in question?

I know that from a human standpoint, that’s all easier said than done. This is why, whenever I’m encouraged to pursue being “lead” pastor, I usually respond that my divorce is too big of a stumbling block for too many. Even though I don’t believe that my divorce/remarriage disqualifies me from ministry, I realize that many Christians do believe that. Although, on one hand, hypothetically, if I were a “lead” pastor, I would feel as if I would have to announce my divorce to every visitor. I would hate to mislead someone into knitting their heart to the church and pursuing membership, only to discover that the pastor is guilty of something that they believe is disqualifying. On the other hand, I don’t believe that I should necessarily have to do that. Almost no one expects me to disclose my other past sins, some of which would land me a book/movie deal in certain circles. Sin has consequences, and I prayerfully understand that I can’t take it personally when others believe that I have disqualified myself from the pastorate (or even from teaching). That being said, it’s never easy to experience the change from warmth to coldness that happens from time-to-time when a brother or sister in Christ finds out that I’m divorced.

One final thought along those lines before my question - the Elders of my current church (as well as my previous church) are aware of my the ins-and-outs, so to speak, of my divorce. At my membership interview, they asked me very pointed questions. Since then, I have had one-on-one conversations with them about it. However, I do not go into details about my divorce with the other members (much less other Believers who are not members of my church). When asked, I usually say something like, “Neither one of us were Christians, and there was more than enough sin to go around on both sides.” I don’t go into detail for two reasons - 1. Two people were involved, and I’m not comfortable discussing the sins of another person. Although, I understand the necessity of it in certain situations, like when discussing it with my Elders. 2. Because two people were involved, and because of the specifics, it’s too easy to inadvertently give the impression that I was more innocent than I actually was.

Which brings me to my question:

Out of curiosity, for those of you who have expressed reticence at allowing divorced men into ministry, is your perspective different if the divorce happened before the man became a Christian?

I’ve appreciated the group’s insights into the divorce/re-marriage/and wedding officiating issues.

My take on the situation is this. If we’re unsure on whether to have a church officiated ceremony, ask ourselves… Were this same proposed couple to go somewhere else and get married, would we welcome them as a couple into the church fellowship without discipline or sanction? If the answer is yes, I don’t see any reason that the church should object to the ceremony. If the answer is no, than the marriage and the officiating of the ceremony would be unbliblical.

In other words, the biblical validity of the marriage determines the willingness to perform the ceremony.

Obvious example is the case of homosexual marriage. No orthodox church would recognize the union, regardless of who performed the ceremony.

What’s interesting is to consider cases of two previously divorced people who won’t receive a church ceremony, but when they eventually do get married (by third party), they come into fellowship and are fully recognized as Mr. and Mrs. ______. In my mind, that is simply not consistent.

You wrote:

What’s interesting is to consider cases of two previously divorced people who won’t receive a church ceremony, but when they eventually do get married (by third party), they come into fellowship and are fully recognized as Mr. and Mrs. ______. In my mind, that is simply not consistent.

That’s why I had no problem marrying the divorced Christian woman, or offering to marry the non-Christian couple. I won’t marry them, but I’ll welcome them into the church with “Christian love” if they head off to the courthouse and get married there? Sure, that’s consistent …

I know folks here have a lot more experience than I do on these matters. I’m willing to be corrected, and to listen. But, I do believe churches treat this issue as a defacto unpardonable sin. We do things a certain way because “that’s just the way we have ​to do it.” Parallel example:

• I transferred to a new duty station. A young military police officer, at her first duty station, was my section’s field training officer. THat means I had to have her sign off on the location-specific training topics to get my qualifications there.
• This woman indignantly corrected me because, after I took a statement from a victim, I drew a SOLID LINE under the last paragraph, and wrote “end of statement.” She shook her head. “That’s WRONG,” she said. “It has to be a dashed line, not a solid one!” I told her, “It doesn’t matter, trust me.” She insisted, “Legal won’t accept it if it’s a solid line.” I told her, “You’re just blindly accepting what you’ve been told, but you’re wrong. It doesn’t matter what the stupid line looks like.”
• My point? She didn’t exercise critical thought, she just plunged ahead with a script she’d been given, not realizing how foolish her inflexibility made her look to a rational person.

I think our knee-jerk reaction on this issue (“NO! They CAN’T be in leadership. They’re … they’re … DIVORCED!!!!!”) is more about conditioned reactions and inherited tradition than Scripture.

[JBL]

I’ve appreciated the group’s insights into the divorce/re-marriage/and wedding officiating issues.

My take on the situation is this. If we’re unsure on whether to have a church officiated ceremony, ask ourselves… Were this same proposed couple to go somewhere else and get married, would we welcome them as a couple into the church fellowship without discipline or sanction? If the answer is yes, I don’t see any reason that the church should object to the ceremony. If the answer is no, than the marriage and the officiating of the ceremony would be unbliblical.

In other words, the biblical validity of the marriage determines the willingness to perform the ceremony.

Obvious example is the case of homosexual marriage. No orthodox church would recognize the union, regardless of who performed the ceremony.

What’s interesting is to consider cases of two previously divorced people who won’t receive a church ceremony, but when they eventually do get married (by third party), they come into fellowship and are fully recognized as Mr. and Mrs. ______. In my mind, that is simply not consistent.

[John E.]

Out of curiosity, for those of you who have expressed reticence at allowing divorced men into ministry, is your perspective different if the divorce happened before the man became a Christian?

Thank you for your input, John. I think your attitude and actions reflect the church culture to a large degree. I commend your choices in light of how you see that it would impact the church, even though it is not a biblical requirement from a qualification standpoint.

To answer your question, I think it is harder to answer than it should be. Not speaking from a standpoint of experience but more of hearsay (other peoples’ experiences), professing Christians have abandoned their spouses, divorced, remarried, and then tried to justify things (a.k.a. reset the “conversion clock”) by getting “saved” again (so whatever I’ve done up to this point doesn’t count or matter). So a blanket statement to the before / after salvation question is also needing examination on a case-by-case basis. I have seen people use this card to explain away sin in their lives (I really wasn’t saved) or to try to “get saved” (“for real this time”) as a means to start fresh, rather than dealing with sin and sinful habits in their lives. That’s why the “when” of conversion can be problematic, at least from where I sit.

I would go back to my previous comments (and others have said it before as well) that a consistent, observable lifestyle over a long period of time (what 1 Tim 3 and Titus 1 seem to suggest) is the best indicator, not a point in time (conversion date). “And such were some of you” (1 Cor 6:9-11) is a great reminder that we all have pasts, and that we all are going through a progressive process of sanctification to align with our positional righteousness.

[John E.]

Out of curiosity, for those of you who have expressed reticence at allowing divorced men into ministry, is your perspective different if the divorce happened before the man became a Christian?

I haven’t been in this discussion, but tend to be known as fairly conservative on all issues as I am sure you know.

On the Timothy passage, I believe it is talking about the present quality of a preacher’s character, not necessarily his life story. I think that each circumstance is different, I don’t have a “one size fits all” solution. I say that to say first of all, in theory, I think it is possible for a divorced man to presently be a “one-woman man” and thus qualified.

The key words are in theory.

In my experience, I have known divorced men who have pursued the pastorate, but they have rarely lasted in the post. The circumstances varied, but generally it seems very hard to be in a pastoral ministry after having been divorced. The cases I am thinking of are all cases where in my personal opinion the man was 1) now a one-woman man and 2) had been a one-woman man in the prior marriage and through the divorce process — in other words, though not without faults, they had not been the cause of the divorce. There was nothing there that should have made the relationship end in divorce.

But… in these circumstances, the men just found daily pastoral ministry hampered by their history.

They have had other kinds of ministry, they have been able to have opportunities to preach and teach, but they have not been in pastoral ministry.

So I think that anyone who desires the office of pastor or deacon after having been divorced needs to be carefully evaluated, and there is a possibility that they could serve, but there are many challenges. They may find it simply impossible to function as such.

In the cases I am thinking of, the divorce happened after conversion. To me, if the divorce were prior to conversion, it would not make much difference - each situation would still have to be evaluated carefully.

It’s not an easy question to answer at any time, and certainly not with a blanket pronouncement of “this is the way it always is.”

For those who allow for divorced and remarried men in the ministry: Imagine a small church in a small town where the pastor’s first wife and kids start coming to the church.

First of all, regarding encouraging people to divorce, and why that is generally a really bad idea, I’ve known Jim for over a decade now, and for all the difficulties he and his wife have dealt with, I rarely see her without a little smile on her face. She’s also one—read Jim’s blog for details—who had abundant opportunities to make what most of us would consider a good life on her own. Word to the wise….even in the “best of circumstances”, divorce tends to really, really bite hard.

Regarding cases like the one that Tyler mentions, it’s certainly a judgment call, but I definitely can support separation for the spouse of an unrepentant adulterer, or even for certain crimes of abuse and violence. The judgment call comes in where we ask whether the offensive behavior on the part of one spouse is so bad that the legal and financial ties between the two must be severed. In the case Tyler describes, I think he made the right call. Single case of sin, no, but a pattern of unrepentant sin? Sometimes it’s the consequence that Jesus prescribes to bring a man to repentance.

One other thought is that this case is a LOT like the Maddi Runkles case. Statistically speaking, we KNOW a tremendous number of people are guilty of fornication, but we can see pregnancy and we can Google divorce records, so we act on the tip of the iceberg. I would dare suggest that we need to get to know each other well enough so we learn about those hidden things.

1. The Assistant Pastor (graduate of an IFB college) left his wife of 20 years/resigned/left the church, and married another woman. Divorced her after a handful of years to marry a third woman. May now be divorced for a 3rd time.

2. 18 year-old high school senior pregnant a couple of months before her graduation (father not in the church). Kept the pregnancy a secret until after she graduated from Christian school. Shotgun wedding. It didn’t last……

3. Youth Pastor married a young woman in the church. They moved to Illinois. She divorced him after 25+ years of marriage to marry another man.

Type A IFB church. Pastor’s son graduates from a good school and comes back to be appointed assistant pastor then pastor. Divorce happens. Dad steps in in as pastor emeritus and son steps down. After a little more than a year son is getting more involved in the ministry as pastor of an extension work. People understand that he will be reappointed (anointed?) as head pastor in the near future. People are leaving in droves.

Larry and Ron seem to document a few cases of divorce among pastors, all but one of them seemingly earned (caused by the pastor’s sin), and only one of which where (Ron’s example, reminds me of David Hyles’ story) the church didn’t do the right thing. Even there, the members sensed the hypocrisy and took action. The system works in such cases.

But really, the case that comes to mind is that of the (relatively) innocent pastor, and whether a new church will accept him. John’s case comes close, except for apparently he wasn’t in Christ during his first marriage, which of course makes a difference. Anybody know of a pastor divorced for reasons not his fault, and who was eventually restored through what we’d consider a good process?

The big thing I can think of that would preclude this is that if a man knows his wife isn’t along for the ride, maybe….just maybe…it is partially his fault when his wife leaves when he’s a pastor, as he knew a priori that she wasn’t following him?

Not having a divorced pastor can save a church a lot of drama. Kids, step-kids, ex-wife, ex-husband, blended family, morality or lack thereof, etc. One man and one woman married for life in a loving relationship is sure a lot simpler. You’d think God would have thought of that.

A pastor has one of the few jobs where virtually everything about the pastor’s life and family situation can have a direct and large impact on the church. And for much of the pastor’s family life, the church has a right to know.

Some would say a divorce can significantly affect a man’s judgment as well. Take a group of five adults, one has been divorced. Have a man whose having marital problems come to them for help. Usually (always?) the one of five who has been divorced will be the first to either recommend or accept divorce as the solution to his problems.

Some would even say a divorced, and now happily married pastor, is a testimony to those struggling with marital problems, that hey, I can also get a divorce and things turn out great, just like the pastor. In effect, a good second or third marriage, can be a bad testimony. From every angle, divorce is a terrible thing. If you haven’t been divorced, do all in your power not to.

A pastor who does not have a divorce in the family, rules his house well, has a loving relationship with his wife, loves and properly disciplines his kids, has a strong, positive influence. A good family, over the decades, is a notable testimony

As I said before, you can make a good case on both sides of this argument, and many divorced folks are good, godly people, despite their past. But these are just some additional thoughts.

David R. Brumbelow

David, agreed that not being divorced makes a lot of things simpler, but the simple fact of the matter is that God in His sovereign will chose to have a murderer, Paul, among the apostles. That is decidedly less simple than having all the apostles being non-murderers, and it seems to indicate that “making things simpler” may not be high on the list of God’s priorities for the church. Rather, we are to actually get to know one another and think through whether the candidate is a “one woman man”, or whether he’s got habits which suggest otherwise.

Divorce is one factor, as are fornication, adultery, and the use of pornography—the last three being far harder to detect. And as we look at the other characteristics of a good pastor—not “given to wine”, not greedy for money, faithful children, not violent, hospitable, gentle, not quarrelsome, able to teach—all of these really require a person to get to know the candidate well.

Per what Greg Long noted, “fencing off” these requirements by reducing “one woman man” to “no divorce” may actually prevent us from accomplishing this task. So while I’d agree that as a rule, a history of divorce does cast into doubt whether a person is indeed a “one woman man”, to simply use it as a black/white evaluation is missing the point.

Plus, when you claim that divorcees will usually or “always” be the ones to recommend divorce….no, a great many of them have learned by experience why it’s not a good solution. If you want to minister to those hurt by divorce, you will banish such nonsense statements from your vocabulary. Trust me on this one.

I’m sure there was a time when the men churches chose for their leadership were models of spirituality and morality (blameless?).

Have we come to the point where we have so few men of nearly impeccable character that we now have to choose men with “baggage” that put us in the unenviable position of defending our choice?

Ron, remembering that Presbyterians, Methodists, Baptists, and others split in the 1840s over the issue of slavery, it strikes me that where we have prospective deacons and elders who may have been divorced today (it was economically impractical then), they then had unapologetic backers of the peculiar institution on the deacon board and in the pulpit. After the Civil War, you found a lot of church leaders in the Klan, and during the struggle for civil rights, fundagelicals were shamefully behind the curve. Historians also point to the prevalance of adulterers, wife beaters, and the like in positions of authority. So what we have is really nothing new—it’s just new symptoms of problems in church leadership, really.

(worth noting as well is that a key figure in the development of fundagelical insistence on moral evidence of salvation, Philipp Spener, started his work in pietism in response to pastors in the state churches of Germany keeping mistresses and the like… we might argue that we’ve got it pretty good if all we need to worry about is a few deacons who have been divorced, no?)

My preacher was a serial murderer, before he was gloriously saved, and other follies

Let’s get this out of the way:

• Moses was a murderer - Exodus 2:14
• David was a murderer - 2 Samuel 11:15
• Saul / Paul was a murderer - Acts 8:1

Folks … we live in the NT era and we live in the Acts 29 world

So don’t go killing your wife to be a “one woman man”!

Image below = “The Preacher”

“If you want to minister to those hurt by divorce, you will banish such nonsense statements from your vocabulary. Trust me on this one.” -Bert Perry

Bert,

I have presented some views on this subject without any personal attacks.

Perhaps you could learn to do the same.

By the way, I do have a little experience in ministry.

David R. Brumbelow

[David R. Brumbelow]

“If you want to minister to those hurt by divorce, you will banish such nonsense statements from your vocabulary. Trust me on this one.” -Bert Perry

Bert,

I have presented some views on this subject without any personal attacks.

Perhaps you could learn to do the same.

By the way, I do have a little experience in ministry.

David R. Brumbelow

Not a personal attack at all. Now if I said “David Brumbelow is prone to making nonsense arguments”, that would be a personal attack unrelated to your claims. I am, however, saying that your claim that “Uusually (always?) the one of five who has been divorced will be the first to either recommend or accept divorce…” is nonsense.

Since I can quite easily disprove the claim by talking to any number of divorcees in my acquaintance, or by looking up research about the matter, I consider that claim to be nonsense. It also has little to do with what a Biblical approach to divorce might be.

Would anybody have a problem with:

• your children being taught by a divorced woman who fled from an abusive relationship?
• sitting under a Sunday School teacher who divorced before he came to faith?
• sitting under a preacher whose wife renounced the faith, abandoned him, and left the marriage?
• having a Deacon whose wife cheated on him and divorced him?

That is really the point of the article. There are genuine circumstances where one divorced party is not at fault. Yes, nobody is totally innocent, but you understand what I’m saying. Would you have a problem with any of these hypothetical people in leadership positions in your church? Why, Scripturally, are they at fault? Each circumstance is legitimate grounds for Christian divorce (we could quibble about #1, but bear with me), or took place before faith. What do you have beyond the appeal to “one woman man,” and the discussion about what on earth that means?

[TylerR]

Would anybody have a problem with:

• your children being taught by a divorced woman who fled from an abusive relationship?
• sitting under a Sunday School teacher who divorced before he came to faith?
• sitting under a preacher whose wife renounced the faith, abandoned him, and left the marriage?
• having a Deacon whose wife cheated on him and divorced him?

That is really the point of the article. There are genuine circumstances where one divorced party is not at fault. Yes, nobody is totally innocent.

My answers:

1. your children being taught by a divorced woman who fled from an abusive relationship? My response: No but it would be wise for her to have a hiatus in her ministry to heal emotionally and spiritually
2. sitting under a Sunday School teacher who divorced before he came to faith? My response: OK as long as he has a high view of the sanctity of marriage
3. sitting under a preacher whose wife renounced the faith, abandoned him, and left the marriage? My response: Way out of my comfort zone. Best to step aside from the vocational ministry.
4. having a Deacon whose wife cheated on him and divorced him? Same as # 1: My response: No but it would be wise for her to have a hiatus in his ministry to heal emotionally and spiritually

My take on all four is above. Think about it a moment; if we believe in repentance and restoration and not “one strike and you are out”, then we would conclude that one key issue in determining whether a person is qualified for ministry is to ask what they learned through the experience. What did they not see, and why? What did they ignore, and why? What did they do to contribute to the situation, if they did?

And if the blame is all on the other person—even in the case of adultery—then they’re most likely not eligible for ministry yet. Even if all the sin blame is on one party, there is the question of “what did you do to deal with this as the signs were presenting themselves?”.

Do objections to my hypothetical questions center on:

1. What does it mean to be “above reproach?”, and
2. What does it mean to be “the husband of one wife?”

Does unwillingness to say “yes” to any of my hypothetical come down to this?

[TylerR]

Do objections to my hypothetical questions center on:

1. What does it mean to be “above reproach?”, and
2. What does it mean to be “the husband of one wife?”

Does unwillingness to say “yes” to any of my hypothetical come down to this?

1. What does it mean to be “above reproach?”. I don’t think the Greek helps much here - ἀνεπίλημπτος: 3 times in NT - all in 1st Tim. I’ll guarantee that no matter how “perfect” a man is, one can be found who will say “he’s not above reproach”
2. What does it mean to be “the husband of one wife?” / has been debatable for some time / on this one, seems like it hinges on one’s view of divorce and remarriage

On # 2: I observe that in North America (or at least in the US), the supply / demand ratio of men who desire to be a bishop & have training TO open positions is about 10 to 1; and the vast majority of churches will eschew a divorced man.