Divorce: Scartlet Letter or Valid Option?, pt. 3

This is the third of a four-part series; here are the links to part 1, part 2 & part 4.

In my two previous posts, I have presented information about the Hillel-Shammai divorce debate in Palestine, at the time of Christ. Both Hillel and Shammai were so venerated in their time that they had followers and disciples who came to them for teaching and instruction. The School of Hillel and the School of Shammai were both physical (disciples) and ideological (interpretations of Torah). That these two men lived and debated at the same time in history had the result of reshaping Judaism.

For our contemporary world, and for the Church, their teachings have had and still has impact on marriage.

Divorce: Scarlet Letter or Valid Option?, pt. 2

This is the second of a four-part series; here are the links to part 1, part 3 & part 4.

Well, I’ve gone and opened up one of the biggest can of worms in Christendom; I wrote a post in which I didn’t call down anathemas upon the idea of divorce. I actually had the temerity to say that divorce is a valid option for a spouse, so it’s going to be interesting to see if decent folk will return my phone calls.

To begin with, we all know that even Jesus said that there was one case in which divorce is allowed, but we also know that He wasn’t all that thrilled about having to say so, right? I mean, we know that Jesus told the Pharisees God allowed Moses to slip divorce into the Law over His objections, because the Hebrews were so hard-headed and -hearted that even He had to bow to their wishes, right? After all, “Because of your hardness of heart Moses allowed you to divorce your wives….” right?

Do you not see just how big a wussy that makes God out to be, that He can’t stand up to marital bullies?

Nah, something else must be going on here.

Divorce: Scarlet Letter or Valid Option?, pt. 1

This is the first of a four-part series; here are the links to part 2, part 3 & part 4.

This is going to be interesting, folks. Because of the comments by a couple of guys in response to a few of my posts, I realized that I am going to have to address THAT monster: the bad teachings about divorce that have been handed down to us as gospel. I have kinda, sorta, almost, ‘in a roundabout way’  taught about divorce in past posts (see my Idolatry and Covenant or Contract series for the ‘almosts’.) But comments by these and other recent posters make me think I’ve got to come out in the open and stop with the veiled hints.

Re-addressing “What God Hath Joined”

Last month, I wrote a post about the bad teaching that says that God brings two people together and joins them. A brief synopsis of the article is that

• Marriage is intentional, without an ontological essence
• God should not be blamed for our choices
• “What God hath joined” is accomplished by our I do’s, not His fiat.

A reader made a response that had several good points, and he has given me permission to use his ‘post’ at length in order for me to address them.

“Expectations”

As I read around, I come across stories of wives who seems puzzled, even flummoxed, by their husbands’ need  for sex. It’s as if having a libido, a desire (or even need) is an alien concept. We all know the song, don’t we?

“What’s the big deal? It’s only sex.”

And with that statement, with that attitude, a great chasm is opened that seems as great as Darmok and Jalad at Tanagra. (My favorite Next Gen episode!)