Marriage & Mercy
All six Desire Mercy stories in one — reflections on traditional beliefs about marriage, divorce, and re-marriage, in light of the mercy of Jesus
Reflection 1 — “For I desire mercy…”
I learned something about a Hebrew word that translates as ‘mercy’.
I noticed a highlighted sentence in my NIV Study Bible, then checked out the note for that verse in the study notes:
Hosea 6: 6
‘For I desire mercy, not sacrifice, and acknowledgment of God rather than burnt offerings.’Note on Hosea 6: 6
“mercy. Hebrew hesed, a word that can refer to right conduct toward one’s fellow man or loyalty to the Lord, or both — the sum of what God requires of his servants.” (Bold mine)
The note continues, suggesting in this verse that hesed, “… perhaps means both”.
So the take-home point would then be that God wants us to have the right conduct toward each other; our workmates, our friends, our children, our marriage partners, siblings, strangers, and so forth, and God also wants loyalty to the Lord, as the rest of the verse indicates.
A specific area of right conduct that concerns a lot of people, is that which should be experienced between marriage partners. Some of us are particularly concerned about those marriage partners who find themselves facing the reality that their partner’s conduct is not right toward them or others, and has not resolved over time, when some traditional views of marriage, divorce, and remarriage appear to hold no mercy for their situation.
Hosea 6: 6 is in the Old Testament of the Bible, but God’s desire for mercy is also highlighted by Jesus in the New Testament book of Matthew. In Matthew 9: 9–13 and 12: 1–8, we find accounts of Jesus responding to the Pharisees by quoting Hosea 6: 6, when the Pharisees questioned his actions toward those in need and the actions of his disciples:
Matthew 9: 12–13
‘On hearing this, Jesus said, “… But go and learn what this means: ‘I desire mercy, not sacrifice.’Matthew 12: 7
‘If you had known what these words mean, ‘I desire mercy, not sacrifice,’ you would not have condemned the innocent.’
Those of us who claim to follow Jesus, need to ensure our beliefs and our mantras match up with what God requires of us regarding people in need. God desires mercy, and Jesus desires mercy. We also must desire mercy for those in need in their marriages.
Here is an image from Gretchen Baskerville, author of the book, The Life-Saving Divorce: Hope for People Leaving Destructive Relationships.
Reflection 2 — ‘Love your neighbor as yourself’
I have mentioned what I’ve learned about the meaning of the word translated as ‘mercy’ in Hosea 6: 6; to have right conduct toward our fellow man and to be loyal to the Lord. This concept is also reflected in The Greatest Commandment passages in Matthew and Mark in the Bible. After Jesus was asked what the greatest commandment was, Jesus said in Matthew 22: 37–40:
“‘Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind.’ This is the first and greatest commandment. And the second is like it: ‘Love your neighbor as yourself.’ All the Law and the Prophets hang on these two commandments.”
Both Hosea in the Old Testament and Jesus in the New Testament spoke of loving God and loving each other. Jesus even said that everything else hangs on these instructions. They are often summarised as:
Love God and love others
So what behaviors indicate we love others? Do selfishness, name-calling, coercing, deceiving, lying, manipulating and so forth fall under the definition of love? Does belittling, accusing, and misrepresenting those God made in his image, and those who God calls his children, show love to God?
An honest love toward others will surely demonstrate kindness, patience, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness, and self-control? These are some of the qualities the Bible tells us will be evident in abundance in the lives of those who are genuinely following Jesus (Galatians 5:22).
John, one of Jesus’ twelve disciples wrote a letter to some followers of Jesus, saying:
‘If anyone says, “I love God”, yet hates his brother, he is a liar.’
1 John 4: 20 (Bold mine)
That’s sobering…
Brother and sister in the Bible often refer to other followers of Jesus. Since Jesus also taught us to love our enemies (Matthew 5: 44), we can be sure he wants us to demonstrate love to all people, including our marriage partners, who as it happens may also be followers of Jesus.
Unfortunately, some marriage partners who say they love God and follow Jesus are not exercising kindness, patience, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness, and self-control toward their marriage partner.
Proverbs 6: 16–19 tells us what the Lord hates:
There are six things the LORD hates, seven that are detestable to him:
haughty eyes,
a lying tongue,
hands that shed innocent blood,
a heart that devises wicked schemes,
feet that are quick to rush into evil,
a false witness who pours out lies,
and a person who stirs up conflict in the community.
These very things are the behaviors that many marriage partners experience from their marriage partner, including those who claim to follow Jesus.
We find out in Exodus 21: 10–11 that God wanted mercy for slave wives who were unloved:
‘If he marries another woman he must not deprive the first one of food, clothing and marital rights. If he does not provide her with these three things, she is to go free, without payment of money.’
Surely if God, who is unchanging, does not expect slave wives to endure marriages that are neglectful, financially abusive, and emotionally and sexually abusive, then he must not want marriage partners who are free men and women, to endure such behavior either?
For a New Testament example, Paul, an apostle of Jesus Christ, says this in 1 Corinthians 5: 11:
‘But now I am writing to you that you must not associate with anyone who claims to be a brother or sister but is sexually immoral or greedy, an idolater or slanderer, a drunkard or swindler. Do not even eat with such people.’
There is no exception made on this for married people. Paul evidently intends it to stand for all, married or single. A brother or sister here refers to a follower of Jesus, so Paul is only saying that we should ‘not even eat’ with those who claim to believe in Jesus, but behave as if they don’t.
So then, is telling unloved marriage partners that they will be sinning, and therefore displease God if they seek safety through separation or divorce from a sexually immoral, greedy, self-idolizing, slanderous, substance-abusing, or con artist marriage partner anything close to the truth? No.
Has any one of us the right to decide if and when a mistreated marriage partner should stay or leave a marriage partner who mistreats them? No.
It is entirely for the mistreated spouse to decide, as they are the one who knows most intimately how they are being mistreated and the emotional and physical impacts of it. If they have children, their conscience and the law must also be allowed to guide their decisions about the marriage, as regards any mistreatment of their children.
I do not speak on my own; many others have recognized that God clearly desires mercy on these issues when we consider the Bible in its entirety. They have examined the various scriptures that speak of separation and divorce from a contextual and historical point of view, and their findings are compelling.
It is my hope that marriage partners in distress will hear ‘echos of mercy and whispers of love’ from followers of Jesus, that more accurately reflect the heart of God in these matters.
Here is an image from Gretchen Baskerville that calls us to sanity and mercy:
Reflection 3 — “…unless you change…”
I suggest we come to this reflection like little children, not bible scholars, though some of them have done some authoritative work on our behalf. Jesus said in Matthew 18: 3:
“I tell you the truth, unless you change and become like little children, you will never enter the kingdom of heaven.”
If we want to know what God is like, we can find from scripture that he is love, he is just, he is merciful, he is pure and holy, and he is compassionate. We can find that his children are recognizable as those who are like him — who are loving, who are just, who are merciful, who obey him to be more like him, and who are compassionate.
Scripture was written centuries ago for people whose culture and language were different from ours. They understood what was written to them so differently than we will unless we do a great amount of study or read the work of those who have. We can also remember that Jesus first took a few fishermen to be his disciples, not impeccably educated Rabbi wannabees.
When we come to the passage where Jesus answers the Pharisees’ question about divorce in Matthew 19: 3–9, I have appreciated the insights of David Instone-Brewer (Rev Dr) who has researched;
- Dead Sea Scroll fragments dealing with divorce
- Ancient Jewish divorce certificates
- Aramaic, Greek, and Latin marriage and divorce papyri
- Samaritan documents including ancient marriage contracts
- Rabbinic and Karaite marriage and divorce documents from the Geniza of the Cairo Synagogue
David is an honorary senior research fellow at Tyndall House, Cambridge.
David makes the point that not all divorce was in question in this passage, only divorcing willy-nilly for any cause at all.
“We now know that Jewish rabbis at the time of Jesus were debating a new and very popular form of divorce called the “Any Cause” divorce, which implies that their question to Jesus should be understood as “Is it lawful to use the Any Cause divorce?”
David Instone-Brewer
At the time Jesus was answering their question, David asserts that divorces for neglect and abuse were widely accepted, and Jesus wasn’t being asked about them. Jesus was essentially saying ‘divorce for ‘any cause at all’ is not permitted, only for adultery’ — in addition to neglect and abuse which went without saying in those days.
Before the ‘Any Cause’ divorce became popular, Judaism had four grounds for divorce based on the Old Testament: adultery (based on Dt.24.1) and neglect of food, clothing or love (based on Ex.21.10f). These latter three grounds were recognised by all factions within Judaism and allowed divorce by women as well as men. They were based on the Mosaic law that a slave-wife could be free of her marriage if her husband neglected her, and the rabbis assumed that if an ex-slave had these rights then so did a neglected free wife or a neglected husband.
David Instone-Brewer
It’s staggering to think how liberated and merciful this understanding was, 2000-odd years ago, compared to how Christian churches often treat abused marriage partners today.
That reminds me of one of Gretchen Baskerville’s images (below), which illustrates how contemporary people have been bound in abusive and destructive marriages by traditional beliefs and mantras, such as the notion that God hates divorce. Such beliefs have followed a diversion from scripture, rather than continuing to follow scripture as it was originally written. As it turns out, we have always been biblically free to leave destructive marriages and divorce treacherous marriage partners.
The scripture people refer to, to support the premise that God hates divorce, is Malachi 2:16. Gretchen Baskerville points out that this verse was not translated to say God hates divorce for the first 2100 years after the original author wrote it, but only for 365 years from 1611 to 1996! Thankfully, some translators have corrected the mistake in three different translations, including the New International Version (2011).
Malachi 2:16 does not refer to God hating divorce but to husbands hating their wives and divorcing them treacherously. This is in keeping with the theme of the entire passage; the treachery of the people of Judah, the priests, and the husbands.
So, now we see what God actually hates: treachery.
Thankfully, from the early books of the Old Testament, as we saw in Exodus 21: 10–11, God has mercifully provided for those marriage partners who are not cared for, honored, or loved, to go free.
Gretchen Baskerville‘s image gives a vivid illustration of the point in history at which human beings derailed God’s merciful provision for treacherously-treated marriage partners to be free from their tormentors:
Reflection 4 — “…do not let yourselves be burdened again…”
‘It is for freedom that Christ has set us free. Stand firm, then, and do not let yourselves be burdened again by a yoke of slavery.’
Galatians 5: 1
We are told in these sentences that Christ has set us free for freedom. Is that simply freedom from the consequences of our wrongdoing? If we look at the following sentence in Galatians 5 we find Paul references that the human imposition of rules will negate the value of Christ to us.
‘Mark my words! I, Paul, tell you that if you let yourselves be circumcised, Christ will be of no value to you at all.’
Galatians 5: 2
So the yoke of slavery here is not solely referring to the burden of a propensity toward doing wrong, but rather the burden of following requirements that no longer apply; requirements that are imposed by those who assume authority in the lives of others that belongs only to Jesus Christ.
Those who did not fully appreciate the freedom of the New Covenant wanted to impose the requirements of the Old Covenant on people, according to their former traditions. Paul, the writer of the letter to the Galatian people, emphasizes that it is only faith in Jesus that counts:
‘The only thing that counts is faith expressing itself through love.’
Galatians 5: 6b
— faith, expressing itself through love.
Gretchen Baskerville quotes Christian therapist, Michael Alvarez MFT in her book, The Life-Saving Divorce: Hope for People Leaving Destructive Relationships:
“A marriage must be safe and loving (or at least respectful),
where both people are grateful for the other’s capabilities.
Otherwise it is not marriage.
It could be kidnapping or incarceration or servitude,
but it isn’t a marriage.”
A marriage relationship that is not loving, in this view, is not a marriage. Such a relationship would not be worth promoting.
Promoting such an unloving relationship would encourage a disrespectful and unloving marriage partner to believe their unloving choices are acceptable and should have no uncomfortable outcomes.
Promoting such an unloving relationship would also encourage an unloved marriage partner to accept such behavior as normal, and to feel compelled to remain in an unloving situation.
Could promoting an unloving relationship then, ever be described as faith expressing itself in love?
If Christ bought our freedom both from the consequences of our wrongdoing and from the burdens placed on us by people, what can an unloved marriage partner conclude?
Is their unloving marriage partner demonstrating a faith expressing itself through love? No.
Are people in their faith community who insist they remain in an unloving relationship demonstrating a faith expressing itself through love? No.
Who are unloved believers ultimately answerable to?
For followers of Jesus, I AM that I AM is our God, not our marriage partners, nor our faith community members, and not the institution of marriage, either. Jesus the Christ, Son of God, is the one who has set us free for freedom. We are answerable to Jesus.
We are instructed in Galatians 5: 1b to:
‘Stand firm, then, and do not let yourselves be burdened again by a yoke of slavery.’
Let’s stand firm, then, and do not let ourselves be burdened again by a yoke of slavery!
Let’s not be burdened by a yoke of slavery from an unloving marriage partner who is not demonstrating faith expressing itself through love.
Let’s not be burdened by a yoke of slavery from unloving faith community members who promote the preservation of unloving marriages, and who are therefore not demonstrating faith expressing itself through love, either.
The following quotes are from Frederick Douglass (born Frederick Augustus Washington Bailey, c. February 1817 — February 20, 1895) an American social reformer, abolitionist, suffragist, orator, writer, and statesman who escaped slavery in Maryland:
“I did not know I was a slave until I found out I couldn’t do the things I wanted.”
“I prayed for freedom for twenty years, but received no answer, until I prayed with my legs.”
These are both quotes that unloved marriage partners who separate from and divorce their unloving marriage partners can relate to.
The parallels between any form of slavery, be it slave labor, sex trafficking, child abuse, senior abuse, or marriage partner abuse, are many. Praying with one’s legs is always acceptable when faced with unloving slavery.
Reflection 5 — “If you had known what these words mean…”
‘Acquitting the guilty and condemning the innocent — the LORD detests them both.’
Proverbs 17: 15
You might remember earlier, that Jesus commented in Matthew 12: 7:
“If you had known what these words mean, ‘I desire mercy, not sacrifice,’ you would not have condemned the innocent.’
We see that Jesus says that if we have understanding, we should know that condemning the innocent is definitely not acceptable. Condemning the innocent is not okay with Jesus, so it should follow that condemning the innocent isn’t okay with his followers.
We saw earlier that faith community members who promote the preservation of unloving marriages, are not demonstrating faith expressing itself in love toward an unloved marriage partner. They are in fact condemning the unloved marriage partner to further hurt and distress that they don’t deserve. The unloving marriage partner is fully responsible for their own unloving behavior, not the partner they are mistreating.
Promoting the preservation of unloving marriages also acquits the marriage partner who is guilty of unloving behavior, of the just consequences of their behavior. This in fact reduces the likelihood that the person will reform their behavior to a point of consistency so that trust might be rebuilt over time, and reconciliation could even make sense, or have any real chance of lasting.
Another issue to consider is the area of remarriage. If the unloving marriage partner has broken their vows to love, honor, and care for their marriage partner, can we condemn the unloved marriage partner to remain unmarried for the term of their natural life? That would appear to be an issue of condemning the innocent, wouldn’t it?
It was quite an eye-opener to find out that remarriage after divorce was expected in the times of Jesus. It makes sense when we know that women relied on men for protection and provision. We also know from Deuteronomy 24: 1–4 that if a man wanted to divorce his wife he was to give her a certificate of divorce. The certificate proved her eligibility to be remarried.
This commentary on Matthew 19: 9, at biblegateway.com sheds some light on this issue:
“Except for infidelity” may modify Jesus’ statement about divorce rather than remarriage (Heth and Wenham 1984:117; G. Wenham 1984 and 1986; compare against this position Murray 1953:39–43), but if it does, it does so precisely because in Jesus’ graphic statement it is the validity of the divorce that is in question. No one permitted remarriage if a divorce was invalid, but a valid divorce by definition included the right to remarry, as is attested by ancient divorce contracts (see, for example, m. Gittin 9:3; CPJ 2:10–12, 144; Carmon 1973:90–91, 200–201) and the very meaning of the term (besides sources in Keener 1991a, see, for example, Jos. Ant.4.253; Blomberg 1992:111).” (Bold added)
“…a valid divorce by definition included the right to remarry…”
That is, if your divorce was valid, you were not married, therefore you would not commit adultery if you remarried.
The possibility of committing adultery by remarriage, was only possible if the divorce was not valid, as in the case of divorcing for any cause at all, rather than for infidelity (in addition to failing to love, honor, or care for a marriage partner as in Exodus 21: 10–11, or when an unbeliever chooses to end the marriage as in 1 Corinthians 7: 15).
For those of us who truly want to follow Jesus, we really need to be careful not to blindly follow traditional beliefs passed onto us. We need to take note of the merciful and loving heart of God toward the innocent, unloved, divorced, and those who are poor and in need (also a possible result of abuse and divorce) throughout the Bible.
We must not condemn an unloved marriage partner for applying for a divorce, while ‘acquitting’ the unloving marriage partner’s abusive behavior. It really doesn’t make any sense to do that, and God detests it if we do. He desires that we have mercy toward innocent, unloved marriage partners.
Reflection 6 — Divorce & Remarriage in the Church
In this final reflection, I have summarized some key points from Divorce & Remarriage in the Church: Biblical Solutions for Pastoral Realities by David Instone-Brewer, whose work I mentioned previously.
Notably, David has studied ancient marriage and divorce documents from Jewish, Rabbinic, Karaite, Aramaic, Greek, Latin, and Samaritan sources in order to understand how the scriptures regarding divorce would have been understood by the audience they were written for.
To preface the points I wish to highlight, I want to mention two perspectives regarding children when their parents divorce:
1. Quoting from Psychology Today:
“Studies have concluded that children experience less anxiety and depression when their high-conflict, married parents divorce, and those children whose parents stay married with high-conflict experience higher levels of short- and long-term behavioral and mental health issues.
At the same time, children whose divorced parents continue their high conflict (for example, by continuing litigation) do not experience the same level of relief as those whose parents were able to minimize their conflict.
So it is the conflict, and not necessarily the divorce, that puts your children at risk.”
We often believe that conflict will be resolved if we just keep working on it. However, sometimes marriage partners find that their unloving marriage partner has not demonstrated a genuine commitment to healthy conflict resolution practices over a lengthy period of time.
This realization, along with the findings outlined in the quote from Psychology Today, may reasonably give a loving parent significant reason to consider the realities of their situation.
2. From information under the title Types of Child Abuse on the Queensland Government website, we find in summary that:
At times it is in fact for the children’s emotional safety, and therefore also for their general well-being, that a parent may choose separation and divorce. This may also be in order to avoid being complicit in their children experiencing what is considered to be a form of emotional child abuse, where the children are exposed to domestic violence due to ongoing dysfunction in the home, that they do not expect to be resolved in a timely manner.
Evidently, ‘staying for the children’ by no means brings a guarantee to protect children’s well-being in a high-conflict marriage, but could in fact jeopardize their well-being.
With the children’s well-being in mind, the following are some points from David Instone-Brewer’s book. I particularly want to note them for those marriage partners who have been mistreated by their marriage partner, and who have been kept hostage by misinformation and erroneous traditional beliefs.
I am also noting David’s points for those concerned people and followers of Jesus who have understandably had trouble reconciling prevailing misinformation and traditional beliefs, with common sense, and the mercy of God.
The Biblical principles
1. Marriage is a lifetime contract between two partners and marriage vows are the stipulations of this contract.
2. Both partners vow to provide material support and physical affection and to be sexually faithful to each other.
3. If one partner breaks a marriage vow the other has the right to decide either to end the marriage with a divorce or to carry on.
4. Divorce should only take place if vows have been broken and it is always sinful to break these vows.
5. Jesus added the caveat that we should forgive an erring partner unless they break their vows continuously or without repentance.
6. Paul added the caveat that if a divorce takes place without citing broken vows, remarriage is only allowed if reconciliation is impossible.
David states that the over-riding principle in all of these is that the wronged partner must be able to choose — they must be able to decide whether to regard the marriage contract as broken or whether to persevere with it and if they have been divorced against their will in a civil court, they should be able to decide whether to attempt a reconciliation.
Possible policies for [faith communities]
1. The Biblical grounds for divorce are adultery, neglect, or abuse, which is equivalent to broken marriage vows.
2. No one should initiate a divorce unless their partner is guilty of repeatedly or unrepentantly breaking their marriage vows.
3. No one should separate [permanently] from their marriage partner without intending to divorce them.
4. If someone has divorced or separated without Biblical grounds, they should attempt a reconciliation with their former partner.
5. Remarriage is allowed in church for any divorcee…unless they have divorced an innocent partner who wants to be reconciled.
Regarding point 4:
Bear in mind that Biblical grounds cover a wider range of concerns than many faith communities have formerly considered valid. I would say that ‘attempting’ reconciliation has more to do with a genuine desire to consider the possibility with discernment than it does with selling up and moving back in with their former marriage partner forthwith.
Regarding point 5:
David includes ‘after a service of repentance’ in point 5. Since David very reasonably distinguishes between innocent partners, who have not broken their wedding vows, and guilty partners who did break their wedding vows, I have not included it here. It is not a commandment in scripture, so a service of repentance could be included whenever appropriate, rather than arbitrarily.
My take-home points
- Marriage vows to love, honor and cherish, and be faithful, are based on providing food, clothing, and love (Exodus 21: 10–11), to love, feed, and clothe (Ephesians 5: 28–29), and to be faithful to one partner (Matthew 19: 4–9)
- Broken vows include neglect, abuse, abandonment (leaving without valid grounds), and sexual unfaithfulness
- Divorce for broken vows is valid
- If permanent separation is intended, divorce is expected to follow in order to free either party to remarry where possible
- A valid divorce automatically allows for remarriage
- Remarriage should not occur if an innocent partner who has been divorced without grounds wants to reconcile
Evidently, God has been more directly merciful to us throughout the ages than has been understood for centuries, in regard to marriage, divorce, and remarriage. God is merciful. He desires mercy for us and desires for us to be merciful to each other.
Thank you David Instone-Brewer and others for the scholarly clarification that is now available to us, and to Gretchen Baskerville and others who draw conclusions from scripture as a whole, reassure us from research and statistics, and draw the same conclusions that the ancient scrolls and papyri have now confirmed for some time.
Gretchen Baskerville’s image below reminds us that the safety of a human being is at stake when a marriage partner is being abused. Rather than block our ears against what we have not understood, surely we ought to follow Jesus’ example — and desire mercy for those who are innocent, unloved, and abused by their marriage partner?
‘It is for freedom that Christ has set us free. Stand firm, then, and do not let yourselves be burdened again by a yoke of slavery.’
Galatians 5:1
Notes
Reflection 1 — “For I desire mercy…”
Gretchen Baskerville’s work can be found at:
lifesavingdivorce.com
Facebook: Gretchen Baskerville — The Life-Saving Divorce
Reflection 2 — ‘Love your neighbor as yourself’
For further reading:
Divorce & Remarriage in the Church: Biblical Solutions for Pastoral Realities, by David Instone-Brewer
Not Under Bondage: Biblical Divorce for Abuse, Adultery & Desertion, by Barbara Roberts
The Life-Saving Divorce: Hope for People Leaving Destructive Relationships, by Gretchen Baskerville
Reflection 4 — “…do not let yourselves be burdened again…”
Many advocates are themselves survivors of abuse, and they have hearts of mercy for those enslaved in unloving marriages. A few of these advocates are listed below with their website addresses. They all have social media platforms, either public or private or both, where you can ask questions, share your story if you need to, and find understanding:
Sarah McDugal — www.wildernesstowild.com
Gretchen Baskerville — lifesavingdivorce.com
Barbara Roberts — cryingoutforjustice.blog
Helena Knowlton — confusiontoclaritynow.com
Patrick Doyle — patrickdoyle.life
Natalie Hoffman — flyingfreenow.com
Patrick Weaver — patrickweaver.org
Jenn Nestler — esther-company.com
http://lifesavingdivorce.com/pastors/ — Gretchen Baskerville’s resource article gives many links to the work of pastors that agree that divorce is an acceptable response to emotional abuse
Marriage & Mercy is one story combining the six reflections of the Desire Mercy series, with some editing for clarity. I realized that a reader who was not a member would need a minimum of two months to be able to read all six Desire Mercy stories otherwise—that was not ideal for someone who is desperately trying to make sense of their very difficult circumstances.
Sharon Roberts-Radic is grateful for life, freedom, mercy, and Jesus.
