The strong support among evangelicals for Rudy Giuliani as a presidential candidate has surprised many pundits, particularly because of the divorces in his past...Why are evangelicals so willing to accept divorce among their political leaders? It seems, increasingly, that political leaders look like evangelical church members. The divorce rate among evangelicals is actually as high as that of the general population.
HOUSES OF WORSHIP
Evangelical Separation Anxiety
What the Bible says about divorce.
BY DAVID INSTONE-BREWER
Friday, April 6, 2007 12:01 a.m. EDT
The strong support among evangelicals for Rudy Giuliani as a presidential candidate has surprised many pundits, particularly because of the two divorces in his past. But among GOP presidential front-runners, only Mitt Romney is in his first marriage. Why are evangelicals so willing to accept divorce among their political leaders? It seems, increasingly, that political leaders look like evangelical church members. The divorce rate among evangelicals is actually as high as that of the general population.
The evangelical attempt to follow a literal interpretation of the Bible has always been difficult in the face of the realities of modern life. When Jesus was asked in the Gospels if he allowed "divorce for any cause," he replied that anyone "who divorces his wife except for sexual immorality and marries another woman commits adultery" (Matthew 19:3). This admonition has long been interpreted to mean that divorce, for Bible-based Christians, is allowed only in cases of adultery. Even then, the spouse who has been faithful is treated the same as the adulterer: Neither can remarry as long as the other is alive.
In modern life, of course, the reasons for divorce go well beyond adultery, and fairly rapid remarriage is common. Evangelicals are part of this modern trend: Many have privately abandoned the Bible's teaching on divorce. American law has pushed them along. For many years, divorce was a tort--legally possible only if one party to the marriage contract had violated it. Ronald Reagan, as governor of California, signed a no-fault divorce bill in 1970, and within 15 years every state in the union had a similar law. The cultural conversation shifted away from marriage's mutual obligations--codified in law--and toward personal fulfillment.
The recent emphasis on the rights of individuals has even been encouraged by the current crop of evangelical preachers. Joel Osteen, the senior pastor of Lakewood Church in Houston, and Joyce Meyer, a Christian television and radio personality, have built their ministries on promoting individual development. It seems that this development can often be found in marriage, but also, for some, in divorce.
As it happens, new scholarship supports a slightly less strict biblical understanding of divorce than the traditional one. Scrolls found near the Dead Sea, which confirm indications found in ancient Jewish authors like Philo and Josephus, show that the key phrase "any cause" was actually the formal name of a type of divorce. That is, Jesus did not reject divorce for any cause but rather, he rejected the "Any Cause" divorce.
Rabbis at the time disagreed on the validity of "Any Cause" divorce, but thanks to marriage contracts found near the Dead Sea, we know that most allowed divorce based on Exodus 21:10-11. That is, they allowed men and women to divorce partners for physical or emotional neglect, including abuse and abandonment. Jesus said nothing against this, and in First Corinthians 7:15, Paul tells those who are abandoned by their partners that they are "no longer bound."
There is now a growing scholarly consensus among evangelicals on this issue. Even evangelical professors like Craig Keener of Duke University and William Heth at Taylor University, who have each previously published books with more traditional interpretations, now teach differently. Drawing on my own work, "Divorce and Remarriage in the Bible" (Eerdmans, 2002), they conclude that Jesus and Paul would have rejected no-fault divorce and that they would have permitted a wronged partner to initiate a divorce based on the Old Testament grounds of adultery or neglect.
This new scholarship may allow evangelical leaders to say what they have wanted to say for some time--that divorce is permitted so long as there are strong grounds for it. A few, like Southern Baptist scholar Jim Denison, are already teaching that abuse and abandonment are valid grounds for divorce. Some leaders advocate a "covenant marriage" in which spouses agree not to divorce unless there is abuse, a felony conviction or adultery. Conservative Christian Mike Huckabee (former Arkansas governor and presidential hopeful) calls this "a positive pre-nup," and James Dobson of Focus on the Family promotes it as a way to oppose no-fault divorces. Evangelical preachers like T.D. Jakes emphasize a distinction between the victim and the marriage breaker.
Evangelicals may find themselves once again separated from mainstream culture on this issue, making more distinctions about when divorce is acceptable and when it is not. And political candidates like Mr. Giuliani, whose philandering apparently helped lead to both of his divorces, may fall out of favor with this pool of voters.
Dr. Instone-Brewer is senior research fellow in rabbinics and the New Testament at Tyndale House in Cambridge and the author of "Divorce and Remarriage in the Church" (InterVarsity Press).
opinionjournal.com |
