Divorced and remarried preachers?

[Dave01]

Hey now, don't be bashing the AOG there Troubleshooter, there are a few other denominations that carry that rule also.

 

[Presbyterian Continuist]

Hey now, don't be bashing the AOG there Troubleshooter, there are a few other denominations that carry that rule also.

Of course there are.

It is just that this thread has concentrated on the AOG.
There are churches of other denominations that perform like funeral parlours as well. I belong to one.

 

[New_Wineskin]

According to scriptures

a preacher is not supposed to be remarried correct? Our church is in the midst of a transition. The pastor they have decided on (supposedly, we won't know for sure until Wed. night how the actual vote goes) was divorced and is now remarried. In his defense, his first wife had an affair and although she wanted a divorce, he didn't give her one until four years later. I don't know how long after that he remarried, but he is now remarried with 2 kids. I am really confuzzled about this. My DH thinks this is the man for our church. I believe my DH to be a Godly man. I just don't know if I can vote for a man that is going against Biblical principles. I think he is a wonderful man and he didn't hold anything back when questioned about this, but ... our church needs the RIGHT pastor now because we are in financial difficulties.

What say ye about this?

If your group is all about the Law , I would say that the only course is to vote against the person . If your group is about the Spirit , I would say to ask Him how to vote .

 

[HeKnowsMyName]

First, what's a DH????

Darling Husband

Based on what you typed previously it sounded as if that candidate was saying "the greatest failure I've ever made was the church I'm in now, because it's not close to home". All of us have failures, mistakes, etc and that's what gives us our testimony and how we are to relate to other people. How can you relate and help others walk through something if you've never been through anything or if you can't even take responsiblity for life failures due to mistakes, disobedience, bad choices, etc.

If this is not how he meant it then I was wrong in my understanding and what I said would not apply.

OK, sorry, I must have explained it wrong. He was saying he took the church he's at now because he wanted to be closer to home. I'm assuming he let himself be led by that instead of God.

 

[Trish1947]

I always thought the scriptures meant that a Pastor was to be the husband of one wife.......one wife at a time that is. There are reasons given in scripture for divorce and why they would no longer married. The non-believing spouse can fall under many guises of non-belief in their actions towards their mate. It's better to stay together if both are willing to commit themselves to God and work on it, but peace is to be maintained, and if it can't, why is a persons marriage bound by such bondage that prevents them from serving the Lord in the capasity of a Pastor because they agreed to divorce? But if your spouse is making your life a living hell, and your willing to stick it out, your allowed to serve God. Isn't that like saying you can only serve God in that capacity if you happened to inherit a good marriage, since it takes two to make one?

 

[Svt4Him]

So if it is about multiple wives, then there would be an indication that that was a problem? It seems that that hasn't really been proven. Not saying it isn't, but I think it must be shown to not mean divorced. It doesn't say the husband of one wife at a time, and it does seem to imply divorced, as it then goes on and talks about the children being orderly. Anecdotal evidence is nice, but it's still not how one examines God's word.

 

[JEBrady]

I understand that he can remarry, but as a preacher/pastor I was confused. I thought according to the scripture that I quoted that he was breaking a Biblical principle because he is a pastor, not because he remarried.

Another question I have is that polygamy is not really an issue in our society so how does that fit in with this scripture?

I hope I'm not sounding dumb.

There’s been a lot of confusion and controversy on this issue in the church. Asking about it isn’t dumb, of course!

The scriptural principle is the same for all of us, whether we be in ministry or not. Either a man’s marriage is recognized by God or it isn’t, and it’s not a light issue, considering it is fornication/adultery if God doesn’t recognize it. The way a person repents from that is to leave the adulterous relationship. If a person commits adultery, the marriage is broken. That doesn’t mean you have to divorce the adulterous person, but are free to. If God divorced us for our adulterousness, we’d all be in hell. Thank God there’s forgiveness for the repentant with Him. There are no other grounds besides fornication for divorce. Sorry, that’s the words in red. Understanding what fornication is, is an interesting study, considering there is spiritual fornication. Also, if a believer is married to an unbeliever, the marriage is recognized by God because of the believer. If the unbeliever leaves, the marriage is dissolved. Paul wrote in 1 Co 7, that if it were not for the sanctification of the believing partner, the children would be unclean, i.e. the children would be children of fornication (a union not recognized by God). There is no marriage outside of Christ. God does not recognize pagan unions. The children are unclean. Something to think about.

This issue is very serious. The AoG was right in taking it seriously, but wrong to miss the point about what constitutes a marriage. That’s why they would ordain the formerly promiscuous without thinking twice about it, but would deny those who had enough character to at least make a secular commitment.

 

[jive4005]

People (even Christian & clergy) fall down. PTL many of them get UP again... and do better!

I'm divorced... from way back when I was young, stupid and unsaved. But God fixed me and blessed me. these days I'm mightily blessed, sanctified, purified, blood-covered... and proud to call myself His servant and Minister.

Jesus can fix anything... even me! And He does it with such love. After God forgives me, who will be the one to throw the rock at me?


His,
Rev J
Sinners2Saints Ministries

 

[mrslisae]

Our pastor is remarried and spirit-filled and I believe that scripture is out of context though many of the denominations such AoG won't allow divorced pastors and won't ordain them. No big deal. God will ordain them and my pastor is full of God's wisdom and has been there 20 years and people are still shuttling in to the point we are outgrowing our building. The Spirit of God is moving in our congregation and His sermons are filled with holiness, Bible teaching, the fear of the Lord, wisdom and with a sound mind. Don't know what else I could ask for in a minister of the gospel.

I hope you will allow God to speak to your hearts regarding the new candidate. Perhaps in this day and age it is hard to find someone who isn't divorced and God has chosen him to fill the pulpit.

I don't know the answer to your question of the verses but I do know God sent His choice to us and we are blessed.

My membership lies in the file box at an AOG..The pastor there is considered temporary because he's divorced and remarried....He's been there for like 9yrs and can't be considered the church pastor..He was really there for my dad when my mom died, a real stand up kind of guy..A good pastor....Still, the church completely went down in size when he came in ( from hundreds to tens) and many have said its because he and his wife are divorced and remarried...

I don't really know my take on the matter but I know its not the church it used to be..Whether he's the reason or not I don't know...I'd certainly give it a great deal of prayer..

 

[New_Wineskin]

I consider that a divorced man who marries again has two wives ( as long as the first is alove ) . I say this because the government doesn't have a say in what marraige and divorce is - the Lord does . He joins together - no human puts "asunder" - He does . So , I consider "biblically" , such a person shouldn't be a pastor .

That being said , I don't live by the Law . If I did , I say that there are no real pastors , anyway . I say that because the groups aren't real churches based on their doctrines defining who they are instead of simply being christian and their needing membership or committment to *their* group and having doctrines concerning being joined to one particular group .

So , marital status wouldn't matter to me . How the Lord wants the person relating to me would matter . If the Lord is telling the people in a group that this person is to lead them ( whatever He means for that to be to the person ) , then that's good . If the group ( such as the AOG ) has rules concerning this - those are their rules and anyone desiring leadership with that group should know the rules .

If they don't like the rules , they can do their best to change them . Groups exist independantly from each other so that they can have their own rules . Not liking a rule that a group has only affects those in that group ( or desire to be in that group ) .

 

[imperfectchristian]

According to scriptures

a preacher is not supposed to be remarried correct? Our church is in the midst of a transition. The pastor they have decided on (supposedly, we won't know for sure until Wed. night how the actual vote goes) was divorced and is now remarried. In his defense, his first wife had an affair and although she wanted a divorce, he didn't give her one until four years later. I don't know how long after that he remarried, but he is now remarried with 2 kids. I am really confuzzled about this. My DH thinks this is the man for our church. I believe my DH to be a Godly man. I just don't know if I can vote for a man that is going against Biblical principles. I think he is a wonderful man and he didn't hold anything back when questioned about this, but ... our church needs the RIGHT pastor now because we are in financial difficulties.

What say ye about this?

Paul considered himself the chief among sinners being responsible eiether directly or indierectly of the deaths of many Christians, yet no one says anything about Him being a minister?

However I can see a point and not just Scripturally for not having as a senior pastor one who has been divorced.

Sounds like your minister tried his best to make it work. Now had he been married 3 or 4 times and it still not work then I would have serious reservations.

My suggestion though above all else is to pray about it...seek the Lord..bring it before Him. I think this the only way you will find peace in the matter one way or the other.

 

[imperfectchristian]

Hey now, don't be bashing the AOG there Troubleshooter, there are a few other denominations that carry that rule also.

Actually the AoG is spilt on the matter, they recently recended a bylaw where if the divorce was preconversion then it is permissible for them to be a senior pastor.

 

[imperfectchristian]

Actually, that scripture teaches that a bishop is not supposed to be a polygamist. It has nothing to do with divorce and remarriage.

~Jim

In your hatred of evil do not forget to love good.​

Although I would be inclined to agree with you..there is no conclusive historical evidence to support that conclusion.

 

[heron]

Now had he been married 3 or 4 times and it still not work then I would have serious reservations.

Same here. Multiple marriages could speak to one's sense of judgment, value of vows, impulsiveness, over-dependence on others, but most likely an inability to get along with people for an extended amount of time.

I apologize to anyone here who has had multiple marriages -- the statement wasn't meant to imply all of those tendencies are rolled into one. It's just a way for a congregation to assess what they're getting into.

 

[JimB]

Although I would be inclined to agree with you..there is no conclusive historical evidence to support that conclusion.

Are you saying that there is no “historical” evidence for polygamy? Heck, the Bible—one of the great “historical” records of all time—is full of polygamists from Abraham to David to Solomon.

~Jim

In your hatred of evil do not forget to love good.​

 

[jive4005]

Just seems to me (and I'm not asking anybody to agree with me... why should today be different?) that some folks are missing the forest because they can't see through the trees...

luv ya all
His,
Rev

 

[JEBrady]

Are you saying that there is no “historical” evidence for polygamy? Heck, the Bible—one of the great “historical” records of all time—is full of polygamists from Abraham to David to Solomon.

~Jim

In your hatred of evil do not forget to love good.​

Are you aware of any historical evidence of the practice of polygamy in the first century church, the time when Paul wrote this?

 

[JimB]

Are you aware of any historical evidence of the practice of polygamy in the first century church, the time when Paul wrote this?

Polygamy was a pagan societal customin first century cultures that was in danger of creeping into the church and its leadership.

Here’s what one Baptist preacher, D. A. Carson, said (here) in the face of Baptists about the “husband of one wife” qualification which Baptist doctrine holds concerns divorce and remarriage:

“Some people interpret this verse to mean that an elder must not be a polygamist; that is, not somebody who is married to two or more wives. What people object to about this interpretation is that no one in the Christian church was married to two or three wives, so why should it be stipulated at all? Moreover, it is argued, in the first century, polygamy wasn’t all that common. Why then do you have to stipulate this particular thing? But it can be shown that there was more polygamy in the first century than some people think, especially in the strata of society where people felt above the common rule. Herod the Great had ten wives. Now, he didn’t have them all at once because he murdered two of them, but he had several at a time. Both in the aristocracy and in the borderlands of the Empire – places like Lystra – polygamy was not all that uncommon. If you go to Africa today, you discover that in some tribes polygamy is still not all that uncommon. The more power you have – if you are the chief, for instance – the more likely it is that you have a plurality of wives. The number of wives is connected with your public persona; it’s almost bound up with the office, so if you’re a chief, you’re likely to have four or five wives. For a start, you can afford them. In such a culture, polygamy almost seems to be a kind of leadership qualification. But in the church, it’s the reverse: polygamy disqualifies you for leadership.”
​

I agree.


~Jim

In your hatred of evil do not forget to love good.​

 

[JimB]

Apparently, polygamy was not only common in the First Century World but it was a problem in the church that the early Church Fathers had to address:

1. Justin Martyr (c.160):

"Your imprudent and blind masters [i.e., Jewish teachers] even until this time permit each man to have four or five wives. And if anyone sees a beautiful woman and desires to have her, they quote the doings of Jacob." [ANF, vol. 1, p. 266]
​

2. Irenaeus (c.180) condemns the Gnostics for, among other things, polygamy:

"Others, again, following upon Basilides and Carpocrates, have introduced promiscuous intercourse and a plurality of wives..." [ANF, vol. 1, p.353]
​

3. Tertullian (c.207) was also explicit:

"Chapter II.-Marriage Lawful, But Not Polygamy. We do not indeed forbid the union of man and woman, blest by God as the seminary of the human race, and devised for the replenishment of the earth and the furnishing of the world, and therefore permitted, yet Singly. For Adam was the one husband of Eve, and Eve his one wife, one woman, one rib. (ANF: Tertullian, To His Wife)
​

4. Methodius (cf.290) was clear on the issue, arguing that it had stopped at the time of the Prophets:

"The contracting of marriage with several wives had been done away with from the times of the prophets. For we read, 'Do not go after your lusts, but refrain yourself from your appetites'...And in another place, 'Let your fountain be blessed and rejoice with the wife of thy youth.' This plainly forbids a plurality of wives." [ANF, vol. 6, p.312]
​

5 The Pseudo-Clementine Literature boasts about how St. Thomas taught the Parthians [i.e., an Iranian culture] to abandon polygamy:

"But I shall give a still stronger proof of the matters in hand. For, behold, scarcely seven years have yet passed since the advent of the righteous and true Prophet; and in the course of these, inert of all nations coming to Judaea, and moved both by the signs and miracles Which they saw, and by the grandeur of His doctrine, received His faith; and then going back to their own countries, they rejected the lawless rites of the Gentiles, and their incestuous marriages. In short, among the Parthians-as Thomas, who is preaching the Gospel amongst them, has written to us-not many now are addicted to polygamy; nor among the Medes do many throw their dead to dogs; nor are the Persians pleased with intercourse with their mothers, or incestuous marriages with their daughters; nor do the Susian women practise the adulteries that were allowed them; nor has Genesis been able to force those into crimes whom the teaching of religion restrained. (ANF 8: "Book IX: Chapter XXIX.-The Gospel More Powerful Than 'Genesis.'"]
​

6. The Council of Neocaesarea a.d. 315 (circa) refers to a 'purification period' for polygamists. By that time, sinners had to 'sit out' of Church activities until they had demonstrated reformation. If a sin showed up on this list of canons, it was considered a 'bad sin'--and polygamy shows up here:

"Ancient Epitome of Canon III. The time (for doing penance and purification) of polygamists is well known. A zeal for penance may shorten it." [ANF]
​

7. Basil, Archbishop of Caesarea, mentioned it a number of times in his letters, generally concerning the period for exclusion from church for polygamists, calling it 'limited fornication'(!):

"IV. In the case of trigamy and polygamy they laid down the same rule, in proportion, as in the case of digamy; namely one year for digamy (some authorities say two years); for trigamy men are separated for three and often for four years; but this is no longer described as marriage at all, but as polygamy; nay rather as limited fornication. It is for this reason that the Lord said to the woman of Samaria, who had five husbands, "he whom thou now hast is not thy husband." He does not reckon those who had exceeded the limits of a second marriage as worthy of the title of husband or wife. In cases of trigamy we have accepted a seclusion of five years, not by the canons, but following the precept of our predecessors. Such offenders ought not to be altogether prohibited from the privileges of the Church; they should be considered deserving of hearing after two or three years, and afterwards of being permitted to stand in their place; but they must be kept from the communion of the good gift, and only restored to the place of communion after showing some fruit of repentance. [ANF: (CanonicaPrima.)To Amphilochius, concerning the Canons. Letter CLXXXVIII written c.347.]
​

~Jim

Remember the weekdays and keep them holy.​

 

[New_Wineskin]

3. Tertullian (c.207) was also explicit:

"Chapter II.-Marriage Lawful, But Not Polygamy. We do not indeed forbid the union of man and woman, blest by God as the seminary of the human race, and devised for the replenishment of the earth and the furnishing of the world, and therefore permitted, yet Singly. For Adam was the one husband of Eve, and Eve his one wife, one woman, one rib. (ANF: Tertullian, To His Wife) ​

4. Methodius (cf.290) was clear on the issue, arguing that it had stopped at the time of the Prophets:

"The contracting of marriage with several wives had been done away with from the times of the prophets. For we read, 'Do not go after your lusts, but refrain yourself from your appetites'...And in another place, 'Let your fountain be blessed and rejoice with the wife of thy youth.' This plainly forbids a plurality of wives." [ANF, vol. 6, p.312] ​

Well , these show one thing , for certain ( well one thing more than what you were proving ) , ... taking the Scriptures out of context to prove a pet doctrine was alive and well at the very beginning .

Edited to add ; Opps !! ... I forgot to add a winky face .

That's more like it .