By Steve A. Hamilton

Matthew 19:3-9

Introduction: There are many people in the Lord’s Church who are advocating the right of one spouse in an unscriptural divorce to subsequently marry again if their spouse commits adultery after a civil court has granted that divorce.  The most popular term applied to this teaching is called “mental divorce” because after the divorce is finalized, one must mentally divorce the other spouse on grounds of adultery though their civil divorce was for some unscriptural reason.

I. Defining the issue.

          A. “The scriptures teach that when a man puts away his wife for any cause other than fornication (and the wife adamantly objects to the divorce and remains faithful to him – no waiting game), and subsequently marries another, that his first wife may then put him away for fornication and she has the scriptural right to remarry another.” (Marshall Patton, “Marshall Patton – H. E. Phillips Debate,” Searching the Scriptures, 1987) 

          B. “But someone asks: ‘What about a woman who is put away (divorced) by a man simply because the man no longer wanted to be married? Fornication is not involved and the woman repeatedly tried to prevent the divorce, but to no avail. After a couple of years the man marries another woman. Is the ‘put way’ woman then free to marry?’ She certainly is, if she puts away her husband for fornication. She would have to do this before God in purpose of heart since the divorce has already taken place, legally speaking. She could not go through the process of having a legal document charging her husband with ‘adultery,’ but God would know…” (Weldon E. Warnock, Searching the Scriptures, November issue, 1985)

          C. “If he has unlawful sexual relations with another (whether before or after he wrongfully puts away his true mate), his true mate has scriptural grounds to reject or put him away. That might involve countersuing in the courts if he has a suit for divorce pending. But if he has already been granted a divorce by the courts of man, the laws of man make no provision for her to act. So far as the courts of man are concerned, legal issues such as property rights have already been settled and there is nothing else to be said in the realm of human law. But if he commits adultery (before or after his action in the courts of man), there is something else to be said by divine law-by the moral and spiritual law of the court of God.” (Ron Halbrook, Notes and Thoughts For Further Study, 1986)

II. Problems with the Mental Divorce position.

          A. They argue that God does not recognize a civil divorce if it wasn’t for sexual immorality.  God binds the marriage.

                   1. It is true when God joins two people they are bound for life (Rom. 7:2-3).  If she is joined to another man (via remarriage) she is an adulterous. 

                   2. However, a married couple can also be recognized by God as being divorced and unmarried (1 Cor. 7:10-11). 

                             a. If one believes this couple was properly unmarried due to the exception for sexual immorality (Matt. 19:9) then what are her only two options?  Remember the mental divorce position allows remarriage to another person.

                             b. If this couple was divorced for reasons other than sexual immorality, mental divorce advocates must agree that God recognizes all divorces by mankind.  “Therefore, what God has joined together, let not man separate” (Matt. 19:6b).   God recognizes that man can separate though He does not always approve.

          B. They like to think of the “put away” person as the innocent party as though an innocent divorcee should always have the right to remarry.

                   1. There are no passages that state a “put away” person can later “put away” anyone.  The only two passages that mention the exception permitting divorce on grounds of sexual immorality are Matthew 5:32 and 19:9.

                   2. Matthew 5:32 and 19:9 don’t even apply to the “innocent put away” person (Matt. 19:9).  The “put away” person by the exception granted is always the sexually immoral person.  We must conclude that only the person putting away a spouse for sexual immorality has permission to remarry.

                   3. In fact, the Bible forbids the “put away” from remarriage (Matt. 5:32; 19:9; Luke 16:18)!

                   4. In fact, a person doing the putting away for any cause (other than the exception) is the one who causes the spouse to commit adultery (Matt. 5:32). 

                             a. In a divorce that was not for sexual immorality both parties are guilty.  There is no innocent party.  They had no right to divorce in the first place and their joint action via a divorce is the cause for the adultery by the other mate. 

                             b. Does it make sense to allow the person who causes their mate to commit adultery to remarry on the grounds that their mate committed adultery that they caused?  That seems absurd.                 

III. Other absurdities associated with Mental Divorce.

          A. One of the absurdities of the mental divorce position is the claim that the “innocent put away” person can put themselves away at a later date. 

          B. Another absurdity is the idea that the wrong doer in the marriage (ex. abuse) who “puts away” the other mate could seek a mental divorce by waiting out his spouse to commit a sexually immoral act.  We use to call this the waiting game.

          C. If we have mental divorces we must also have mental marriages.  After all, in order to claim a mental divorce one must think he is mentally married. 

                   1. It is the marriage bond, not the marriage status, which determines whether a person could remarry. 

                   2. Only sexual immorality or death can end a marriage bound by God (Matt. 19:9; Rom. 7:2-3). Any marriage not dissolved by sexual immorality or death is the same as shacking up with God since they are still bond to their previous spouse.         

IV. Would God require anyone to be celibate or to spend the rest of their life unhappy?  In a word, yes.

          A. Life happens to us all (Eccl. 9:11-12).  The divorcee is like a fish caught in a net or a bird caught in a snare.

          B. Whatever discomfort we might feel as a result of a divorce is still worth suffering if we can obtain heaven (Rom. 8:18).

          C. Remember, Christ warned us that not everyone would accept His teachings on divorce (Matt. 19:10-12).

          D. Divorcee’s should not think their suffering is a special case (1 Pet. 4:12-14). 

V.  Passages to remember.

          A. God hates divorce (Mal. 2:16).  If we know God hates divorce, why do over half of all marriages end in divorce in the U. S.?  Is it because they don’t care what God thinks?

          B.  God joins people in marriage (Matt. 19:6).  If we understand that man has no right to separate what God joined, why does man separate?  Is it because they don’t care what God thinks?

          C. God will judge the sexually immoral (Heb. 13:4). If we know that to be true, why does mankind persistently live in fornication and adultery?  Is it because they don’t care what God thinks?

Conclusion: Do we care what God thinks?  Are you are living in adultery because someone made you think it was somehow all right?  If your previous marriage did not end in sexual immorality or death, you need to repent. 

Last modified: 05/02/08