Показват се публикациите с етикет брак. Показване на всички публикации
Показват се публикациите с етикет брак. Показване на всички публикации

понеделник, 31 март 2014 г.

Marriage and Divorce


The destructive consequences of secularization  
of the family values from a pastoral perspective




Where we are?

The last 23 years Bulgaria has been shifting from rather conservative mentality to more and more liberal thinking in the area of marriage and divorce. Before the fall of communism in the late 90's, the divorce, although allowed by the law, was considered as a social crime. The predominant thinking was: "You have to stay with your wife/husband no matter how she/he treats you. It's about the children you have to keep the marriage. What would people say if you divorce?" Now we change more and more our thinking on this issue and as a whole we have moved to the opposite pole: "He/she treats me bad (don't want to fulfil all my whims), I don't love him/her any more, so I'll seek for another one. Actually what's the marriage about? It's just a contract, a paper." These two attitudes towards marriage and divorce are predominantly non-Christian's, but are finding more and more ground in the church, among Christians. What I'm really interested in and want to search for is where is the border between the two opinions or more - has the divorce on mutual consent grounds in the Bible or the Church Tradition.
The surveys made by Bulgarian National Statistic Institute show that 13 % of Bulgarians in 2001 live as family without having civic and church marriage. The number of children born outside the marriage increased from 0.4 % in 1901-1905 to 42.1 % in 2001. Half of the children are born out of marriage. In 2012 the rate of divorces in Bulgaria was 56% (21167 marriages, 11947 divorces). 10 % of the marriages include one or two divorcees. The women identifying themselves as Bulgarian Orthodox Christians are in the end of the chart of giving birth to children compared to other religions. These frightening numbers show that the holy institute of marriage in Bulgaria is in crisis. "The trend in modern society is to make divorce easier, as was the case in both Jewish and Greko-Roman societies. ... In the first-century Greko-Roman world the "free marriage" had almost completely replaced the 'manus' marriage, and so divorce had become simply a matter of separation. In modern societies the number of grounds for divorce steadily increased up to the end of the 1960's when the concept of the no-fault divorce was introduced in both the United States and the United Kingdom, as well as in other countries."1 My thesis in this paper is that the marriage crisis is directly connected to the secular view of it, that is spread intensively even among Christians all over the world. I argue in this work that divorce for the reason other than adultery have never been and would never be Christian option. Today’s trend of divorce on mutual consent is a mindset adopted gradually during the centuries, when the Church ethics in this area has been highly dominated by the Roman Civilian Law.
Today, where the official church has a strict teaching on the marriage and divorce as with the Roman-Catholic Church much rarely the married can decide to separate with divorce. I will not try to defend the RC teaching but to make a call with this paper to rethink our teaching on the issue of divorce. Obviously when a country's religion is Roman-Catholicism the rates of divorce are considerably lower compared to the other countries that are Protestant. The restored Early Christian sacramental view of the marriage would be the remedy for this secular alternative, which is destructive for the Christian marriage, especially the Methodist Christian marriage2.

Two cases of divorce

     To illustrate the problem with divorce I will give two authentic cases.
     First case: The wife commits adultery. The husband has the legal right to divorce, but he wants to keep the marriage. His wife, however doesn’t. She wants divorce, but he refuses to agree to sign. In the end he decides to divorce. Now he is determined to divorce after these eight months of attempts to keep the marriage. The wife who at this time has quited her relationships with the other guy wants to stop him from divorcing, but he does it officially. He has already found another woman and does not want to go on with his marriage anymore.
     Comment: Nobody would argue if adultery is legal reason to divorce. Due to the adultery, the man has his right to divorce according to God's Law and the Gospel. But when there is possibility the marriage to be saved, isn't it a duty of spouses to give their best to do it? The way divorce is given so easily shows spouses doesn't value the marriage highly as they have to.
 
    Second case: The wife is faithful to her husband, but he is deeply disappointed, offended by her attitude towards him and wants divorce. In the end he divorces her.
     Comment: Every married person expect to receive respect and love from his/her partner. But when it's not the case is it reason for divorce? The Bible has a lot to say about family relationships, especially between the spouses. And it never encourage divorce in case of mistreatment or offensive attitude. On the contrary, if the husband is disobedient to Christ and His teaching and even terror and threaten his wife (1 Peter 3:1,6) she is expected to be with him, to obey him in everything which is not contrary to Christ's teaching. The same can be said for the wife. If she treats badly her husband, he is expected to continue to love and take care of her (Eph. 5:28-29), to be not bitter against her, to give her protection, affection and assistance, and not bitter or offensive words (Col. 3:19).
In these two cases the result of the sin of the spouses is divorce. But are the problems of the partners irresolvable? Is divorce the only solution? Is it a solution? In the most cases divorce is the easier decision, not the ultimate solution.

The nature of marriage

In the Christian understanding of marriage the connection between Ecclesiastical and Civilian Law, although complicated is direct. When seen in the biblical perspective marriage have three dimensions: spirit, soul and body.
  • Mystery (Eph. 5:32) – it’s the spiritual dimension of the marriage. The same way Christ is connected inseparably, unchangeably with the Church, the man is one with his wife; sex is not the beginning of the marriage (Gen. 2:23).
  • Covenant (Mal. 2:14) – life-long dedication and faithfulness, it’s dimension of the soul
  • Social contract, deal, act, feast (Gen. 24; ) – there are public promises they give to each other, gifts they give to each other, feast that signs the beginning of their marriage. The consuming of the marriage is the normal end of this process of entering into marriage. Obligation of the man to nurture and lovingly care of his wife is part of this social visible side of it. This is the bodily dimension.
     Marriage in the Roman Civilian Law is recognized by the law factual relationships between a man and a woman, leading to life-long co-habitation3. It begins with agreement between both of them. It had always been seen as a contract.
     The Byzantine understanding of marriage was much influenced of the bible teaching. The divorce was not allowed. Whoever divorced without respectable reason was excommunicated. After the decree of emperor Leo VI (912) which changed the way of adopting a child and of marriage, these were not counted as purely civilian proceedings. From then on they had to be blessed by the church. Without church blessing the union between man and woman was not counted legal marriage, but illegal co-habitation. This was a regulation confirming sacramental part of the marriage. Christians could not marry with just signing a marital contract. The legalization, materialization and fulfillment of the marriage was in and through the God’s Spirit, acting in the Church. Regrettably due to this new law, Church had to bless every marriage, no matter if it's according to church norms, and was forced to tolerate and allow divorces which were inseparable part of Roman Law. The Church turned into a tool in the hand of the state.
     Different churches see the marriage as a whole alike. Despite the emphasis is on different parts of the nature of marriage, we can see they understand marriage as mystery(sacrament), covenant, lifelong dedication, union or/and a contract.
  • Roman-Catholic understanding - RCC sees the marriage as a sacrament of the covenant of Christ and the Church, and as a bond established by God Himself - indissoluble4. It is very typical for a sacramental church as RCC to seek and see connection between the sacraments. So they see internal and necessary connection between Baptism and the Christian Marriage: "The entire Christian life bears the mark of the spousal love of Christ and the Church. Already Baptism, the entry into the People of God, is a nuptial mystery; it is so to speak the nuptial bath which precedes the wedding feast, the Eucharist. Christian marriage in its turn becomes an efficacious sign, the sacrament of the covenant of Christ and the Church. Since it signifies and communicates grace, marriage between baptized persons is a true sacrament of the New Covenant."5
  • Eastern-Orthodox understanding - The marriage is a sacrament, established by God, announced by God in the OT (Gen. 2:23-24) and reaffirmed by Christ. "There is no “legalism” in the Orthodox sacrament of marriage. It is not a juridical contract. It contains no vows or oaths. It is, in essence, the “baptizing and confirming” of human love in God by Christ in the Holy Spirit."6 The civil "marriage" is not real marriage. "A civil marriage or one by common law is not recognized by the Church. Christians should keep all the laws of our Church regarding the sacrament of marriage so that they do not sin, and so that they have the blessing of God for the betrothed to live honourably and happily, and to raise children in "the knowledge and teachings of the Lord.""7
  • Methodist understanding – Christian has to marry Christian. The Christian Marriage is a covenant between a man and a woman, as is written in the Book of Discipline: We affirm the sanctity of the marriage covenant that is expressed in love, mutual support, personal commitment, and shared fidelity between a man and a woman. 8 "The covenant of marriage was established by God" (Book of Worship[BOW], p.116).
     It is a lifelong dedication: "Will you love him, comfort him, honor and keep him, in sickness and in health, and forsaking all others, be faithful to him as long as you both shall live?"(BOW, p.117). In the marriage vows bridegroom and bride dedicate themselves to each other: "until we are parted by death" (BOW, p.120). 
    That the marriage is a mystery is clearly seen in the connection made in the blessing and exchange of the rings between: the "inward and spiritual grace, signifying to us the union between Jesus Christ and his Church" (which is named in the Scriptures 'mystery', see Eph. 5:32) and the "inward and spiritual grace, signifying to all the uniting of Name and Name in holy marriage" (BOW, p.121). 
    In the Service of Chistian Marriage I it's an union: "declare your intention to enter into union with each other through the grace of Jesus Christ, who calls you into union with himself as acknowledged in your baptism." (BOW, p.117) 
    Our Methodist tradition clearly draw the same connection between the mystery of Christian Marriage and the Baptism as an union with Christ and His Church, which can be seen in the RCC Cathechism. This same connection between the sacrament of Baptism and Christian Marriage is drawn also in the Report of the Baptism Study Committee "By Water and Spirit": "Marriage is to be understood as a covenant of love and commitment with mutual promises and responsibilities. For the Church, the marriage covenant is grounded in the covenant between God and God’s people into which Christians enter in their baptism."9
     The civil marriage is a solemn contract, but the church marriage is covenant. (BOW, A Service for the Recognition or the Blessing of a Civil Marriage, p.133)



What about divorce?

     Methodism in America experienced significant change of attitude toward marriage after the World War II. Earlier the adultery had been the only acceptable ground for divorce, and the ministers could remarry only the innocent party of a divorce. "Divorce rates doubled between 1950 and the 1980's. The image of marriage shifted from enduring covenant to limited contract - and later, under no-fault divorce laws, to a contract that could be dissolved by either partner for any (or even no) reason whatever. ... At the 1968 union the Methodist "Social Creed" ... said nothing about grounds of divorce."10
     What would happen if Adam divorced Eve after they've sinned? What would happen if he had said: "I don't love her anymore. She is the cause of all my suffering. She is guilty of murder, because she seduced me to eat what's forbidden and now we will die. She is the reason I live now miserable life."? Now all the human race would not exist. Adam had a really good reason to divorce, but he didn't. Thank God for it!
     Possibility for divorce was unchangeable part of Byzantine civic law in all the times. The divorce was divided into four categories: Divortium consensu (mutual consent); Divortium bona gratia (for respectable reason); Divortium ex justa causa (for legal reason); Divortium sine justa causa (without legal reason).11 The materialization of divorce happened through repudium, bill of divorce, given before 5 to 12 witnesses.
     According to the Holy Scriptures marriage as a mystery, which signify the unity of Christ with His Church cannot be erased by a court decision. The Early Christian fathers stick to this biblical view. All of them have accord in the opinion, that no-fault divorce is not allowed for the Christians. John Chrysostom opined that Christians have to follow ecclesiastical and not secular norms. Gregory of Nyssa argued that divorce contradicts completely to the Church law. Ambrose of Mediolano insisted Christians to stop following civilian laws, and that divorce and second marriage allows human, but not God’s law: "The divine law has bound together husband and wife by its authority, and yet mutual love remains a difficult matter. For God took a rib from the man, and formed the woman so as to join them one to the other, and said: “They shall be one flesh.” He said this not of a second marriage but of the first, for neither did Eve take a second husband, nor does holy Church recognize a second bridegroom."12 Augustine of Hippo, in his work, Of the Good of Marriage, was explicit: "The compact of marriage is not done away by divorce intervening; so that they continue wedded persons one to another, even after separation; and commit adultery with those, with whom they shall be joined, even after their own divorce, either the woman with a man, or the man with a woman."13 He also taught that a man must not put away his wife, even if she is barren, and he wants to marry one of whom to have children.14
     The Reformers were also in accord with the Fathers on this matter. For example, according to John Calvin, divorce was forbidden, "but an exception is added; [when, add. mine] for the woman, by fornication, cuts herself off, as a rotten member, from her husband, and sets him at liberty. Those who search for other reasons ought justly to be set at nought, because they choose to be wise above the heavenly teacher."15
     John Wesley experienced a lot of problems in his marriage, but never divorced. He lived in separation with his legal wife, because of her overwhelming jealousy which tended to hinder the work of Wesley as a leader of the Methodist movement. In his Thoughts upon Slavery he says something that reveals his attitude to human laws which try to weaken and even reject God's supreme justice and principles: "The main argument of the oppressors is that slavery is authorized by law. But can human law change the justice of God's created order? Can it turn darkness into light, or evil into good? By no means! Right is right, and wrong is still wrong."16 It sounds quite similar to the arguments against divorce of the Early Fathers.
     Official statements of the churches for the right of divorce and reasons for it differ, sometimes drastically.
  • According to the Roman Catholic Church divorce is theologically inadmissible, so if "there are some situations in which living together becomes practically impossible ... the Church permits the physical separation of the couple and their living apart. The spouses do not cease to be husband and wife before God and so are not free to contract a new union. In this difficult situation, the best solution would be, if possible, reconciliation. ... Today there are numerous Catholics in many countries who have recourse to civil divorce and contract new civil unions. ... The Church maintains that a new union cannot be recognized as valid, if the first marriage was. If the divorced are remarried civilly, they find themselves in a situation that objectively contravenes God's law. Consequently, they cannot receive Eucharistic communion as long as this situation persists." RCC seems to has preserved the Early Christian and biblical understanding of divorce and remarriage.
  • The teaching of the Eastern Orthodox Church is, that "According to the teaching of Christ, the sacrament of matrimony is indissoluble. For only one reason is marriage dissolved and divorce granted. Let us listen to Christ: "But I say to you that every one who divorces his wife, except on the ground of unchastity, makes her an adulteress"" Divorce is not allowed, except on the biblical ground. These who have not fulfilled the ideal conditions of marriage have the right through penance, sincere confession of sins and genuine promise of good life together for second marriage. "The Holy Orthodox Church does, however, permit divorce and remarriage, quoting as her authority the words of the Savior: For your hardness of heart Moses allowed you to divorce your wives ... While in principle the church regards the marriage bond as lifelong and indissoluble, and condemns the breakdown of marriage as a sin and an evil, she still desires to help the sinners and to allow them a second chance. Thus, when a marriage has ceased to be a reality, the Church does not insist on the preservation of a legal fiction. Divorce, therefore, is seen as an exceptional, but necessary concession to human weakness. Yet, while helping men and women to rise again after a fall, the Church does not view a second or third union as being the same as the first and thus, in the ceremony for a second or third marriage, several joyful ceremonies are omitted and replaced by penitential prayers. Orthodox Canon Law permits a second or third marriage, but more than that is strictly forbidden."17 Remarried persons are not excluded from the sacrament of Eucharist.18
  • According to United Methodist Church "God’s plan is for lifelong, faithful marriage. The church must be on the forefront of premarital, marital, and postmarital counseling in order to create and preserve strong marriages. However, when a married couple is estranged beyond reconciliation, even after thoughtful consideration and counsel, divorce is a regrettable alternative in the midst of brokenness". The Book of Discipline of The United Methodist Church - 2012. 16119

     So after so many different views, can we be steady on our opinion when is divorce necessary and can be approved of by the church? In the EOC when one of the spouses chooses to become a monk, respectively to "marry" God, this higher marriage quits this between the spouses. This happens with the agreement of the other partner and with blessing of the bishop. But UMC is not EOC, so we have different Ecclesiastical rules. In my opinion the church should never give her approval of mutual consent divorce no matter how broken are the relationships of the spouses. The divorce have always been human invention, consequence of the sin (Mt. 19:3-12; Mk. 10:2-12), and God have never approved of it (Mt 19:6; Mk. 10:9).

Sacramental view of the Marriage - a possible remedy against divorce?

     We are a protestant church. Some say the sacramental view on marriage is not compatible with our Protestant identity. Their question is: Is it not an Eastern-Orthodox or Roman-Catholic perspective? I would answer: Yes, it really is EO and RC Christian perspective, but isn't the understanding of marriage as a mystery a serious challenge to our Protestant liberalism?
     We, as Protestants, say we believe God's word - the Bible. But it seems that traditional, obsolete and "superstitious" churches as EO and RC accept the words of the Bible more seriously than many "Protestant" churches. Not everything "Protestant" is really helpful or contents the Truth. As a whole, some aspects of the Protestant understanding and exegesis can't endure a serious critique. For example the Eastern-Orthodox Fr. John Whitefield criticize the consistency of the protestant interpretation of the Bible, and some Protestant Scholarship "scientific" approach: "Drowning in a sea of subjective opinion and division, Protestants quickly began grasping for any intellectual method with a fig leaf of objectivity. As time went by and divisions multiplied, science and reason increasingly became the standard by which Protestant theologians hoped to bring about consistency in their biblical interpretations. This "scientific" approach, ... is generally referred to as "Historical-Critical Exegesis. ... Like all the other approaches used by Protestants, this method also seeks to understand the Bible while ignoring Church Tradition. ... While claiming to be objective, they rather interpret the Scriptures according to their own sets of traditions and dogmas ... If Protestant exegesis were truly "scientific," as it presents itself to be, its results would show consistency."20 It's a good thing when experience confirms the Scripture, but it's never better option to face the experience against the Scriptures, in order to prove that something is not sinful and not forbidden when it is. Regrettably this happens when we say that divorce on mutual consent, because of incompatibility in the character, in certain cases is necessary or permissible. We can see modern Christian scholars who argue from psychological point of view that the divorce can be a good thing when in the marriage have physical and emotional abuse or neglect. But when we juxtapose their opinion with the clear biblical Old and New Testament teaching on the marriage and divorce, especially the unambiguous words of Jesus in Mt. 19:3-12 and Mk. 10:2-12 and the written in Malachi 2:16, they don't change their mind. On contrary, they try to prove these are cultural opinions, only applicable to a certain historical time and circumstances. These words of Jesus tend to be interpreted from a situationist point of view. This humanistic interpretation says: "The issue is not whether divorce is hurtful or a result of sin. It is usually both. The focal question is this: among the available options (desertion; separation, divorce, homicide, suicide, continuation of the marriage), which is the best and most humane solution? The situationist recognizes that divorce, painful as it is, may well be the least harmful option in some situations, and thus it may best fulfill the Great Commandment."21 In other words, the main idea and goal here is to equate fulfillment of God's commandment for loving your neighbour with giving him divorce. Without undervaluing the attempt to find the most humane solution, sometimes the best solution is not what we count best. The same logic use the defenders of abortion: when, for example, a woman has been raped and became pregnant by the offender she does not have to keep the baby, does she? But it's a murder. Is it right to oppose evil with evil? They would say it's better for the woman and the baby to make an abortion. Apostle Peter in his first epistle, exhorts Christians to effectuate the grace they've been given as suffer for doing well: " For this is thankworthy22 if a man for conscience toward God endure grief, suffering wrongfully. For what glory is it, if, when ye sin, and are buffeted for it , ye shall take it patiently? but if, when ye do well, and suffer for it , ye shall take it patiently, this is acceptable with (or commendable before) God. ... but if, when ye do well, and suffer for it, ye take it patiently, this is acceptable with God23." (1 Peter 2:19-20)
     The UMC believes strongly in marriage, but the struggle for how to deal with divorce was one that has evolved over the last 100 years. "The 1944 Discipline expressed concern for the increase in divorce in the United States. At the 1952 General Conference the church again affirmed that divorce was not the answer, while also expressing concern for those who had experienced the break-up of a marriage. By 1960, the United Methodist Church declared its position of support for marriage while allowing for divorce. However, many congregations still struggle with how to be supportive to individuals in the midst of divorce, and individuals still leave congregations when they divorce."24 This allowing for divorce maybe is one of the reasons that lead to a big problem in our church. A research of Barna Research Group made on 21st of December 1999, shows that 1/4 (26%) of the American Methodist couples divorce25, compared to 21% for Lutherans and Catholics, and 23% for Presbyterians. The Confessing Movement within the UMC, which strive to overcome the crisis in the church, defend the primacy of Scripture and reject beliefs incompatible with our Articles of Religion and Confession of Faith, in its confessional statement declare: "We repudiate teachings and practices that MISUSE principles of inclusiveness and tolerance to distort the doctrine and discipline of the Church. We deny the claim that the individual is free to decide what is true and what is false, what is good and what is evil. We reject widespread and often unchallenged practices in and by the Church that rebel against the Lordship of Jesus Christ. For example: ... accommodating the prevailing patterns of sexual promiscuity, serial marriage and divorce"26 There are no easy answers how to do that, but the opinion of Gary Thomas, author of "Sacred Marriage" and director of the Center for Evangelical Spirituality in Bellingham, Washington, would be useful in this direction. He believes the Christian church contributes to divorce by being too tolerant. "We have bent over backwards not to be judgmental," he said, "A Christian who gets divorced puts their happiness before their devotion to Christ."27 We have to preach and be consistent in our teaching that reconciliation and forgiveness, not divorce is the answer, and not to leave place for the thinking like "in my case its the second best". Seeing the marriage as a mystery of spouses being "one flesh" which signifies Christ's indissoluble unity with His Church, can be a strong impulse of keeping the marriage. So can sacramental view on Marriage be a remedy against divorce in certain cases? Why not?
     The marriage is a good gift from God that we have to keep well and be responsible for it. “The prudent wife is from the Lord” (Pro. 19:14), “Whosoever finds a wife finds a good thing, and obtains favour of the Lord” (Pro. 18:22) and “Every good gift and every perfect gift is from above, and comes down from the Father of lights” (James 1:17). We are stewards of our family relationships and God expects from us to be good stewards. He expects this from men (“Husbands, love your wives, even as Christ also loved the church and gave Himself for it” Eph. 5:25) and from women (“A virtuous woman is a crown to her husband” Pro. 12:4; She will do him good and not evil all the days of her life.” Pro. 31:12). Even if the marriage is not going well, we have to do our best to change the situation. We don’t just throw something we have bought with lots of money, because we value it. We have to value even more the gift of marriage, to keep it, make it better, reflect God’s glory and perfection in this world through it. God's intention has always been to serve Christ through our marriage and give glory to Him as we reflect in the family relationships His moral perfection and kindness.





1David Instone Brewer, Divorce and Remarriage in the Bible: The Social and Literary Context, Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing, 2002, p. 308
2As seen in the following quotation: "Perhaps it is because of this more liberal approach to divorce that the majority of marriages in the Methodist Church involve at least one partner who has been divorced. In a 2001 survey, it was recorded that around 70% or marriages involved at least one divorced party." http://www.bbc.co.uk/religion/religions/christianity/ritesrituals/divorce_1.shtml
3Dilyan Nikolchev, Marriage, Divorce and Subsequent Marriage in the Orthodox Church (A canonical research), University Publishing House "St. Clement of Ohrid", 2007, p. 57 (Original name: Дилян Николчев, Брак, Развод и Последващ Брак в Православната Църква, Университетско Издателство „Св. Климент Охридски“, 2007).
4Catechism of the Catholic Church, II, section 2, ch. 3, art. 7, IV. The Effects of the Sacrament of Matrimony, 1640: "Thus the marriage bond has been established by God himself in such a way that a marriage concluded and consummated between baptized persons can never be dissolved. This bond, which results from the free human act of the spouses and their consummation of the marriage, is a reality, henceforth irrevocable, and gives rise to a covenant guaranteed by God's fidelity. the Church does not have the power to contravene this disposition of divine wisdom" (http://www.vatican.va/archive/ENG0015/__P54.HTM)
5Catechism of the Catholic Church, II, 2, 3, 7, I. Marriage in God's Plan, 1617
6Fr. Thomas Hopko, The Orthodox Faith, Vol. II - Worship, The Sacraments, Marriage.
8The Book of Discipline of The United Methodist Church - 2012. Social Principles 161, The Nurturing Community (http://www.umc.org/site/apps/nl/newsletter.asp?c=lwL4KnN1LtH&b=5065913).
9By Water and Spirit: A United Methodist Understanding of Baptism, Baptism in Relation to Other Rites of the Church, Baptism and Christian Marriage (http://archives.umc.org/interior.asp?ptid=4&mid=992)
10Russell E. Richey, Kenneth E. Rowe, Jean Miller Schmidt, American Methodism: A Compact History, p.227
11Dilyan Nikolchev, Marriage, Divorce and Subsequent Marriage in the Orthodox Church (A canonical research), p. 248.
12Ambrose of Mediolanum, Concerning Widows, Chapter XV, pt. 89 (http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/npnf210.iv.viii.xvi.html)
13Augustine of Hippo, On the Good of Mariage, 7 (http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/1309.htm).
14 "... it is never permitted one to put away even an unfruitful wife for the sake of having another to bear children. And whosoever does this is held to be guilty of adultery by the law of the gospel; though not by this world’s rule, which allows a divorce between the parties, without even the allegation of guilt, and the contraction of other nuptial engagements", Augustine of Hippo, On Marriage and Concupiscence, Chapter 11 [X.]—The Sacrament of Marriage; Marriage Indissoluble; The World’s Law About Divorce Different from the Gospel’s.
15John Calvin, Commentary on Matthew, Mark, Luke - vol. II, Mt. 19:3-9; Mk. 10:2-12, pt. 9.
16"Thoughts upon Slavery," §4.2, Works (Jackson) 11:70.
17"These Truths We Hold - The Holy Orthodox Church: Her Life and Teachings"- compiled and edited by A Monk of St. Tikhon's Monastery. South Canaan, PA: St. Tikhon's Seminary Press,1986, Holy Matrimony. (http://sttikhonsmonastery.org/about_orthodoxy.html)
18Fr. Thomas Hopko, Op. cit.
19"UMC Social Principles"
20Fr. John Whitefield, Sola Scriptura-In the Vanity of Their Minds. (http://orthodoxinfo.com/inquirers/tca_solascriptura.aspx)
21Roberts G. Sinks, A Theology of Divorce, pt. 3 Responsible Decisions.
22 The greek word translated thankworthy is χαρις, which is translated consistently in the NT as grace, gift. I think KJV and ASV does not render the most proper meaning of the greek word.
23 Or more correctly χαρις παρα Θεου - grace before God.