When I was a young man there were no divorced clergy or bishops, divorced people could be and were refused the Holy Communion, and there was no thought that divorced people could be remarried in church. Marriage was once, for life, and any deviation from that standard was thought to threaten the whole institution. It is certainly the case that there is apparently substantial Scriptural backing for that position – where Jesus says that anyone divorcing, except under very prescribed circumstances, is committing adultery.
Very slowly and painfully, and with great attention to the pastoral difficulties that this policy was creating in a society with significant numbers of divorced people not only on the streets but also in the pews, the Church has revised its understanding of marriage, divorce and remarriage. There are now hardly any voices to be heard to say that the new policy is unbiblical and sinful, and quietly, up and down the land, divorced people are marrying for the second time in church. We have among us divorced and remarried bishops and clergy. So the transition, the revision of our sexual ethics, in a way that honours the Lord of the Scriptures and also the society in which we are asked to exercise our ministry and mission, can be done, and unity and charity in the church can be maintained.
Friday, August 7, 2009
What about divorce?
From a sermon at Southwell Minster by Jeremy Pemberton about the Abps reflections on GC. Mimi has already posted much of this, but I really, really want to return your attention to this bit because the argument about divorce seems to be very important. Undeniably there are a lot more Biblical strictures explicit against divorce (and no arguing required about translations), yet movement on that issue occurred as described. Why are other issues that are much less clear Biblically, so much more intransigent?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
9 comments:
Awww, come on. The answer's easy:
Not being able to divorce* would threaten/inconvenience straight "conservatives." So of course we have to allow it. But they can dump on LGBT all they want and it doesn't affect them.
*(note: Just so you know, I agree with the current, pastoral response to divorce we have in the modern Episcopal church.)
As do I. It's rather hypocritical, though, and I don't think we should give them a bye on making the argument.
I believe some Anglican Communion churches still prohibit divorce and remarriage. Some also may have differing rules for laity and clerics or 'innocent' versus 'non-innocent' parties.
The Anglican Church of Canada website has a a page on remarriage and divorce history which is interesting reading though it does not describe the situation in Africa or Asia.
I believe Nigeria is still against divorce/remarriage (except for extra wives in polygamous marriages, but, it probably doesn't consider those divorces). So using divorce as an example probably won't wash with Nigeria/Uganda.
Actually, erp, it does. Because Nigeria did not refuse communion with churches that DO allow divorce. If they use as their excuse the failure of the church to follow scriptural authority in allowing gays to be full members, it cannot then ignore the failure to follow a much MORE explicit scriptural authority re. divorce.
"There are now hardly any voices to be heard to say that the new policy is unbiblical and sinful?"
Well, actually that's not true. There are plenty of howls on that score at places like SF. They just have it ass-backwards (sorry I couldn't resist), saying that it is "da Gays" who are leading straight folks through the gates of hell and into promiscuity (and thus divorce -- of course no one divorces for any reason but the quest for extra-marital bodily pleasure - but that's another matter).
The problem is that while divorce seems to be the big elephant in the theological the living room, not many are willing to speak strongly in its defense, either, for many of the same reasons why many shy away from supporting legal rights to seek and obtain abortions -- both are tragic consequences to be avoided whenever possible. And while it is both hypocritical and downright illogical to pass on divorce but stumble over committed, faithful same-sex marriage, I'm not sure it is a point that is likely to sway many people who hang on to the fantastic man-woman ideal (and its "holy union" of "complementary" bodies, minds, and souls, surrounded by the beautiful 2.5 fruits of unprotected genital-on-genital "union").
Snark aside, I'm afraid us hetero folks (and yes, caveat, I am twice-divorced and thrice-married to two different husbands - if anyone can follow that) get slammed with the divorce issue on both sides. One of the personal reasons why I am supportive of same-sex marriage is out of grief over my own first marriage and the twenty-odd years (and two marriages) during which I tried to hold it together. I look at same-sex couples who have lived together for years, with and in love and hard work, despite all odds, and especially those who have stuck with their churches, despite the lies and condemnations from church officials, and I am in awe and wonder of what they have achieved and would hope that we all could celebrate and emulate them. I want to first of all stop the discrimination, and then humbly ask for a sharing of wisdom and experience about what has kept partners together through the best and worst of times.
Now approaching my old age, however, I am more and more aware of how and why that is, in part, yet another romantic ideal (small and large "R"). The problem, as I see it, is that marriage (at least in its real-world manifestations as a civil, social institution) has never been the appropriate boundary for determining what is and is not ethical sexual and emotional behavior. Women of all kinds of sexual orientation have suffered disproportionately from time immemorial from unhappy and often forced marriages, plagued by sexual incompatibility, economic and personal powerlessness, and sometimes brutality. Men, too, have suffered. While there may be good reasons for continuing to support the institution of marriage (preferably in more liberal, equal, and gender-blind forms), and it certainly may make good political and practical sense to advocate for same-sex marriage to advance the rights of same-sex couples overall, I think what is needed at the end of the day is a more comprehensive view of human sexuality and its role in all parts of human life, not just partnership or marriage. That's why I think that parts of the Lutheran statement currently under consideration (if you re-write the "man" "woman" stuff to apply to all -- which is how most of it reads anyway) is extremely valuable.
I think I'm going OT here. Mind is very scattered lately, but hope you get my drift. Yes, the larger church is hypocritical about the Bible, sex, marriage, and divorce, but, no, I don't think the divorce issue is truly settled in most people's minds, no matter what the mainstream Protestant theologians and officials say. I just wish I knew how to get people to move away from gay scapegoating and get to the heart of what ails human relationships, sexual and otherwise, and in the meantime, just learn to get along and respect one another.
Very good comment, Klady!
I have always said that when an anti-civil union or anti- marriage equality propsition comes up on the ballot (like Prop 8 in CA), gays and lesbians and their friends should get a petition to get and anti-divorce proposition on the same ballot. That'd bring out the voters and the hypocricy.
Kahu Aloha
Ah, divorce, divorce, divorce: I doubt I'll EVER be able to speak coherently about it. [About 8 years on, I'm still too traumatized by having pleaded to my ex "Don't divorce me!" in open court, to get past it... :-( ]
Yes, JCF, that must have been traumatic. I think Klady hit the nail on the head several times in her post,
The problem is that while divorce seems to be the big elephant in the theological the living room, not many are willing to speak strongly in its defense, either, for many of the same reasons why many shy away from supporting legal rights to seek and obtain abortions -- both are tragic consequences to be avoided whenever possible....
I don't think the divorce issue is truly settled in most people's minds, no matter what the mainstream Protestant theologians and officials say. I just wish I knew how to get people to move away from gay scapegoating and get to the heart of what ails human relationships, sexual and otherwise, and in the meantime, just learn to get along and respect one another.
Post a Comment