Common-law marriage and remarriage
Forum category
We live and minister in Quebec where common-law marriage is not only widely practiced, but is also protected by law (although not to the same degree as legal marriage). Whereas many pastors face the issue of divorce and remarriage, we face the issue of common-law marriage rupture and legal remarriage.
Scenario: A woman lives with a man in a common-law union for 15 years and has several children with him. They break-up and several years later she meets another man and they decide to marry legally. Both claim to be Christian. The woman was saved while living with her common-law partner and this was not the cause of the break-up.
Questions: From a biblical perspective, should the couple marry? What is the difference (in any) between this situation and divorce/remarriage situation? If they marry, can the man serve as a deacon? Could the man serve as a pastor?
With the increasing numbers of common-law unions in the US, this is rapidly becoming an issue for American pastors, just as it has been an issue for those of us working overseas for many years.
Scenario: A woman lives with a man in a common-law union for 15 years and has several children with him. They break-up and several years later she meets another man and they decide to marry legally. Both claim to be Christian. The woman was saved while living with her common-law partner and this was not the cause of the break-up.
Questions: From a biblical perspective, should the couple marry? What is the difference (in any) between this situation and divorce/remarriage situation? If they marry, can the man serve as a deacon? Could the man serve as a pastor?
With the increasing numbers of common-law unions in the US, this is rapidly becoming an issue for American pastors, just as it has been an issue for those of us working overseas for many years.
- 1 view
I think the difference is the vows. In one instance, a couple was treated like they were wed; in the other instance, vows were exchanged before God and man. While I do not condone premarital sex, the Bible does not limit marriage based on copulation (whether a one time event or an ongoing 15 year relationship). It is the vow made to one man/woman for life that changes things.
Why is it that my voice always seems to be loudest when I am saying the dumbest things?
I would treat her as already legally married to the first man, especially if they are married via common law in the eyes of the state. With a common law marriage, how are such marriages ended in Canada? Does she need a legal divorce, or was the separation from the first spouse enough of a reason to put a legal end to the first marriage?
If the first man has abandoned her and has no interest in repairing the first marriage, then I would say that she is free to remarry. If the common law marriage ended because of both parties agreement, then it gets dicey and I’m not sure that I’d advocate a second marriage. I think 1 Cor. 7 and other passages apply:
I would also very, very strongly recommend that they get considerable premarital counseling ahead of a second wedding to iron out wrinkles and problems that may have been developed prior to or during the first marriage. You don’t want her (or him) to bring issues from their previous marriages into a new one, especially since (step-)children are already a part of the equation.
If the first man has abandoned her and has no interest in repairing the first marriage, then I would say that she is free to remarry. If the common law marriage ended because of both parties agreement, then it gets dicey and I’m not sure that I’d advocate a second marriage. I think 1 Cor. 7 and other passages apply:
[1 Cor. 7:10-23] To the married I give this charge (not I, but the Lord): the wife should not separate from her husband (but if she does, she should remain unmarried or else be reconciled to her husband), and the husband should not divorce his wife.So if the first marriage is ‘ended’, then I see no problem with her marrying this second man.
To the rest I say (I, not the Lord) that if any brother has a wife who is an unbeliever, and she consents to live with him, he should not divorce her. If any woman has a husband who is an unbeliever, and he consents to live with her, she should not divorce him. For the unbelieving husband is made holy because of his wife, and the unbelieving wife is made holy because of her husband. Otherwise your children would be unclean, but as it is, they are holy. But if the unbelieving partner separates, let it be so. In such cases the brother or sister is not enslaved. God has called you to peace. For how do you know, wife, whether you will save your husband? Or how do you know, husband, whether you will save your wife?
Only let each person lead the life that the Lord has assigned to him, and to which God has called him. This is my rule in all the churches. Was anyone at the time of his call already circumcised? Let him not seek to remove the marks of circumcision. Was anyone at the time of his call uncircumcised? Let him not seek circumcision. For neither circumcision counts for anything nor uncircumcision, but keeping the commandments of God. Each one should remain in the condition in which he was called. Were you a slave when called? Do not be concerned about it. (But if you can gain your freedom, avail yourself of the opportunity.) For he who was called in the Lord as a slave is a freedman of the Lord. Likewise he who was free when called is a slave of Christ. You were bought with a price; do not become slaves of men. So, brothers, in whatever condition each was called, there let him remain with God.
I would also very, very strongly recommend that they get considerable premarital counseling ahead of a second wedding to iron out wrinkles and problems that may have been developed prior to or during the first marriage. You don’t want her (or him) to bring issues from their previous marriages into a new one, especially since (step-)children are already a part of the equation.
"Our task today is to tell people — who no longer know what sin is...no longer see themselves as sinners, and no longer have room for these categories — that Christ died for sins of which they do not think they’re guilty." - David Wells
Discussion