130 Sermon Illustrations on Divorce

Pope John Paul II issued a stern reminder Thursday that only priests can celebrate Mass and divorced Catholics who remarry cannot take communion, expressing alarm over what he called unacceptable practices in his flock.

John Paul also warned Catholics against receiving communion in non-Catholic churches, an admonition that is likely to stir up protests in the United States and other countries where interfaith services are a fundamental part of efforts to bring Christians closer together.

Some Protestant officials immediately criticized the warnings as a step backward in efforts to achieve Christian unity.

The pope's denunciations of practices clashing with Vatican teaching were contained in an encyclical issued on Holy Thursday, a commemoration of Jesus' Last Supper with his apostles.

Encyclicals are a special kind of letter dealing with matters of extreme importance to the Church.

The 78-page document is aimed at combating abuses related to the Eucharist, commonly called communion, a sacrament central to the life of the Church.

“It is my hope that the present encyclical letter will effectively help to banish the dark clouds of unacceptable doctrine and practice,” the pope wrote.

“In various parts of the Church abuses have occurred, leading to confusion with regard to sound faith and Catholic doctrine concerning this wonderful sacrament.”

In parts of Western Europe, as well as in the United States, many divorced Catholics who have remarried have been clamoring for the Church to allow them to receive communion.

But John Paul cited centuries-old teaching that all faithful must confess grave sins before taking communion.

“The judgment of one's state of grace obviously belongs only to the person involved, since it is a question of examining one's conscience,” the pope said.

“However, in cases of outward conduct, which is seriously, clearly and steadfastly contrary to the moral norm, the Church, in her pastoral concern for the good order of the community and out of respect for the sacrament, cannot fail to feel directly involved,” wrote John Paul.

He reiterated Church law that those who “obstinately persist in manifest grave sin” be denied communion.

The Vatican does not permit divorce and teaches that those who remarry after divorce are living in sin unless couples refrain from sex.

While the pope didn't name any sins, his reference to divorce was unmistakable since the Church considers remarried Catholics living in a state of continued sin, and experts said his intent was clear.

“That is what the Vatican is saying for years about the non-admission of public sinners to the Eucharist whether they be divorced or Mafia or people who are notorious criminals,” said the Rev. Thomas Reese, editor of America, a Jesuit magazine.

The pontiff is “articulating a general principle of not admitting public sinners to the Eucharist, while not necessarily getting into the details of each person's life,” said Reese, based in New York.

John Paul also expressed concern about parishes which are without priests. But while he said it was “praiseworthy” that nuns or laity in these communities lead the other faithful in prayer, only priests can celebrate Mass.

The pope also warned against loose interpretations by those hoping to foster closer relations among various Christian denominations.

Specifically, he ruled out as “unthinkable” the practice of substituting obligatory Sunday Mass with celebrations of prayer with Christians from other faiths “or even participation in their own liturgical services.”

John Paul expressed dismay that sometimes the Eucharist “is celebrated as if it were simply a fraternal banquet.”

He also wrote that Catholics “while respecting the religious convictions of these separated brethren, must refrain from receiving the communion distributed in their celebrations.”

Roman Catholics maintain that they receive the blood and body of Christ in communion, but many other Christians view communion as a symbolic re-creation of the Last Supper.

Many Protestants believe that sharing in communion can help bring about unity.

But the pope wrote that “it is not possible to celebrate together the same Eucharist liturgy until those bonds are fully re-established.”

John Paul said, however, that under special circumstances, communion can be given to Christians outside the Catholic church to meet “a grave spiritual need for the eternal salvation of an individual believer,” and that in similar special circumstances, Catholics could ask that communion, confession or final rites be given by ministers from other faiths which also have “valid” sacraments.

The archbishop of Canterbury, Rowan Williams, said he welcomed “the pope's reaffirmation of his 'burning desire' for common Eucharistic celebration. This is an area of work which continues to be important for relations between Anglicans and Roman Catholics and we continue to work theologically on this.”

But in Italy, where Protestants are a tiny minority, Domenico Tomassetto, a member of the ecumenical relations commission of the Baptist, Waldensian and Methodist churches in Italy, attacked the encyclical as making “a definite cut to the entire ecumenical process.”

*

[Original illustration at this number was a duplicate of HolwickID #16222]

Recently, I read about six divorce myths. I would like to share those with you and expand on them a little.

Myth #1: The grass is greener outside my marriage. The conflict you are in may give that impression. That is seldom the case after the divorce. The truth: what looks so green is usually the weeds.

Myth #2: The kids will be better off. The truth: Divorce, even under the best of circumstances, has a devastating effect on children. Kids will always want their mother and father to be together.

Myth #3: Divorce is justified in my case because I’m not in love anymore. The world has taken over this person’s thinking. The truth: The same God who commanded people to love their enemies will gladly help couples who want to learn to love each other again.

Myth #4: Divorce will make me happy. Happiness is determined by a person’s attitude, not by circumstances. The truth: While some people subsequently come to experience happiness, most experience guilt, loneliness, and anxiety.

Myth #5: Divorce will set me free. There are all kinds of prisons. The truth: Divorce doesn’t really free you; it shackles you in a different way.

Myth #6: It is God’s will for me to divorce. Satan has told that lie millions of times. The truth: God has declared that He hates divorce (Malachi 2:16).

God wants all His children to be happy. More important, God wants all His children to be righteous. God wants all His children to be faithful. God wants all His children to be happy doing His will.

________

Gearld Elliot, Pulpit Helps, April 1996, p. 25

BY: Roger Campbell in TRUTHS, 441, December 1998

In Hebrews 13:4 it is written, “Marriage is honourable in all, and the bed undefiled; but whoremongers and adulterers God will judge.” From this verse we would make these observations: (1) There is such a thing as marriage; (2) Marriage is honourable, and we understand this to mean that marriage is honourable in the sight of God; (3) The bed plays a role in marriage. Only in a true marriage do a man and a woman have the right to have physical (sexual) relations with one another; (4) In the eyes of God some people are fornicators and adulterers; (5) God will judge those who whoremongers and adulterers (that is, they will be condemned).

People often ask specific questions about who has the right before God to be married, who has the right to divorce, and who has the right to get married more than one time. To such questions we must give an answer from the Bible, because it is written, “If any man speak, let him speak as the oracles of God” (1 Peter 4:11). We live in a time when there is a great emergency! What is it that is so urgent? The tragedy is that a very high percentage of people in the world do not know God's will as it pertains to marriage and divorce. This calls for action. All people need to be taught immediately what God's will is in this matter. Jesus charged His apostles to teach all nations whatsoever He commanded them (Matthew 28:20), so the Lord's church must tell the world what Jesus Christ teaches about all topics, including marriage and divorce. In this and the next couple of articles we want to look specifically at questions that are directly related to who has the right to marry, divorce, or get married more than one time.

Some topics that we discuss with people are very emotional ones. Marriage and divorce are two topics that involve great emotion and feelings, for in marriage and divorce there can be love, conflict, pain, even hatred. In addition, the marriage or divorce of two people influences the lives of many others around them. As we speak about marriage and divorce in this and future articles, believe us when we say that it is not our intention to cause anyone to have bad memories or unpleasant feelings. We simply want to set forth what the Bible teaches on these matters, and we believe that all of us would agree that there needs to be much teaching done on marriage and divorce so that we, our children, those that we love, and yea, all men, might better understand the Lord's will. Hebrews 13:4 (quoted above) is part of the New Testament of Jesus Christ, so we must not ignore it. The same is true of Revelation 21:8, in which it is stated that whoremongers (fornicators) “shall have their part in the lake which burneth with fire and brimstone; which is the second death.” The Bible plainly states that those who are fornicators and adulterers cannot enter the kingdom of God (1 Corinthians 6:9,1 Corinthians 6:10). In addition, the Holy Spirit clearly commands the church to have no fellowship with members of the church who are involved in such sins (1 Corinthians 5:9-11). That is how serious this topic is! This is a matter that is directly connected with our happiness in this life, the fellowship of the church, and our eternal salvation. It follows that it is necessary and wise for us to study what the Bible says on these matters with a serious and prayerful attitude.

“Wherefore be ye not unwise, but understanding what the will of the Lord is” (Ephesians 5:17). It is our obligation to know God's will, do it, and correctly teach it to others. Only the truth can make men free (John 8:32), and God's word is our spiritual truth (John 17:17). We understand that the Old Testament is the word of God, and thus is true, but we also know that Jesus abolished the law of Moses and nailed it to the cross (Ephesians 2:15; Colossians 2:14). Jesus Christ has all authority (Matthew 28:18) and with His blood established the New Testament (Matthew 26:28), under which all men live today. “Whosoever transgresseth, and abideth not in the doctrine of Christ, hath not God. He that abideth in the doctrine of Christ, he hath both the Father and the Son” (2 John 1:9). How is all of this connected with marriage and divorce? We simply want to emphasize that the New Testament or teaching of Christ is the only standard by which we must abide in all matters, including what we do and teach regarding marriage and divorce. In the past many have blindly followed their feelings, the traditions or customs of men, or what some preacher might say in these matters. None of these are acceptable standards, and we must be extremely careful that we do not allow the devil to deceive us into following them

When Jehovah called the young boy Samuel as he served Eli in the tabernacle, Samuel said to Him, “Speak; for thy servant heareth” (1 Samuel 3:10). The next morning after God revealed His message to Samuel, Eli came to Samuel and said, “What is the thing that the Lord hath said unto thee? I pray thee hide it not from me; God do so to thee, and more also, if thou hide any thing from me of all the things that he said unto thee ... it is the Lord; let him do what seemeth him good” (1 Samuel 3:17,1 Samuel 3:18). What a great attitude both Samuel and Eli had toward the word of the Lord God! They both wanted to hear what God's will was for their lives. Eli did not want Samuel to hide or hold back any part of the Lord's message. He wanted to know all that God said, regardless of what the consequences might be. How is this related to marriage and divorce? You and I must imitate the attitude manifested by the last two judges of Israel, Eli and Samuel, and long to know all of God's will about marriage and divorce. Hiding the truth on this topic from one who is ignorant or living in sin is not going to help anyone be saved and escape eternal damnation! Remember, God created man. God is the one who established marriage. God is the one who joins a man and woman in marriage (Matthew 19:4-6). Thus, God, and only God, has the right to decide what is acceptable marriage, who has the right to marry, who has the right to divorce, and who has the right to marry more than once. Therefore, in these and all affairs we must seek to learn and do His will, not ours.

All men living everywhere are under, that is obligated to obey, the teaching or law of Jesus Christ. Christ's teaching (2 John 1:9), the gospel of Christ (Romans 1:16), and law of Christ (Galatians 6:2) are one and the same. Jesus commanded His apostles, “Go ye into all the world and preach the gospel to every creature” (Mark 16:15), and, “Go ye therefore and teach all nations” (Matthew 28:19). It is thus obvious that Jesus' gospel is for all men of all nations. This is further seen in Acts 17:30, wherein it is written, “And the times of this ignorance God winked at; but now commandeth all men every where to repent.” If the God of heaven through Jesus His Son commands all men everywhere to do something, then obviously all men in every place are under obligation to obey God's law. Today God has one law for all men, and it is the gospel or New Testament of His dear Son.

What Jesus teaches about marriage and divorce is simply one part of His overall teaching or law. Since all of Jesus' teaching is for all men, then what He and His ambassadors teach about marriage and divorce must be for all men. Jesus said, “I say unto you, Whosoever shall put away his wife, except it be for fornication, and shall marry another, committeth adultery; and whoso marrieth her which is put away doth commit adultery” (Matthew 19:9). When Jesus said “Whosoever” shall put away his wife, He refers to any man of any nation, in Christ or out of Christ. But isn't marriage only for Christians? Let us look more at the conversation between the Pharisees and Jesus. “The Pharisees also came unto him, tempting him, and saying unto him, Is it lawful for a man to put away his wife for every cause? And he answered and said unto them, Have ye not read, that he which made them at the beginning made them male and female. And said, For this cause shall a man leave father and mother, and shall cleave to his wife; and they twain shall be one flesh” (Matthew 19:3-5). From Jesus' answer we see that “at the beginning” there was already marriage. When Adam and Eve were united in marriage (Genesis 2:24), were they Christians? Of course not. It is thus obvious that marriage is not only for those who are Christians or members of the Lord's church. Marriage existed long before Jesus called men to follow Him and established His church.

A woman once tried to convince me that the relationship that existed between her and her husband was not really a true marriage, because they had never been married “in a church.” First of all, in the Bible the word “church” does not mean a physical building or place of assembly, but rather the group of people whom God has called out of the world and into Christ (Matthew 16:18). Second, nowhere is it written in the Bible that a marriage ceremony must take place on the property of the church, or in the place where Christians assemble. In fact, there is nothing in the Bible that in any way indicates that the marriage of a man to a woman is directly related to the church. No, marriage is not a “church ordinance.” Well what about the relationship between a husband and wife, if one of them is a Christian and one is not? Is this really a marriage in the sight of God? The church at Corinth received this instruction, “If any brother hath a wife that believeth not, and she be pleased to dwell with him, let him not put her away. And the woman which hath an husband that believeth not, and if he be pleased to dwell with her, let her not leave him” (1 Corinthians 7:12,13). It is clear that in the eyes of the Lord it is possible for a man and woman to be husband and wife, and thus be in a true marriage, even though one of them is not in Christ... .

CHURCH OF CHRIST, P.O. BOX 828, KIEV 252067, UKRAINE

My Source:

COWAN CHURCH OF CHRIST MESSENGER

Volume 3, #43, November 2, 1997

Author: Alan Adams

:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::

MATTHEW 28:19-20, DIVORCE-REMARRIAGE

AND (AAAHHH!) GRAMMAR

by Alan Adams

For some, discussion of grammar ranks right up there with ingrown toenails. I had a teacher, who once out of frustration said, "You fellows wouldn't know an adverb from an adenoid." I've tried to do better over the years. Grammar is not just a matter of piddling with idle curiosity. There's really no choice; if you're going to read and understand the Bible, you have to deal with grammar. That's just a fact of life.

MATTHEW 28:19-20 AND ITS MEANING

IN LIGHT OF ITS GRAMMAR...

Note the key verbs in this passage as they are translated in the KJV [all caps, DRL]. "GO...TEACH all nations, BAPTIZING them... and TEACHING them..." The typical explanation and application of this passage is: Jesus said we should 1) teach people, THEN 2) baptize them, and THEN 3) teach them some more. Whereas it is certainly true that we should do just that, it is NOT true that this is the meaning of Matthew 28:19-20.

For one thing the first "TEACH" and the second "TEACHING" are not the same words. The first one is a form of the Greek verb matheiteuo and the second one is a form of the Greek verb didasko. Just looking at them, it is clear that they are not the same. MATHEITEUO is the verb form of the noun MATHEITEIS, which means "disciple." Jesus said, "Go disciple all nations," or as the ASV says, "Go make disciples of all the nations." It would be the same as saying, "Go make christians of all nations."

The logical question here would be, HOW does one make christians out of people in all the nations? Jesus says, by "baptizing [and] teaching." Paying attention to grammar, one will look at the ending of the words baptidzONTES and didaskONTES. People who spent lifetimes in Greek determined that -ONTES signifies that the verbs with this ending are present active participles. That's why, when translating into English, they put -ING on the end of the verbs "baptizing" and "teaching."

The granddaddy of Greek grammar experts, A.T. Robertson, said, "BAPTIDZONTES and DIDASKONTES in Matthew 28:19 are modal participles" [GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT, p. 1128]. "Modal" comes from "mode," which has to do with manner or method of doing something. Simply put, these modal participles, "baptizing" and "teaching," are there in order to explain the manner or means by which the apostles were to "make disciples of all the nations." It would be like saying, "Make the car look sharp: washing it, waxing it." In such a case, the meaning is not 1) make it sharp, then 2) wash it, and then 3) wax it. "Washing," "waxing," explain the mode or manner by which the car is to be made sharp. They are modal participles. Understanding this is not one whit more difficult than learning what a cam shaft is, or what valves and lifters are supposed to do. It's all a matter of desire and effort.

UNDERSTANDING AND APPLYING WHAT IS

TAUGHT BY THE WORDS AND GRAMMAR

OF MATTHEW 28:19-20 HAS GREAT

PRACTICAL BENEFIT...

First, it knocks in the head the all-too-common practice of teaching people who know zip about the Bible, that there was a man named Jesus, and then in the next breath, telling them they must be immersed in water. Jesus said, "make disciples," by not only "baptizing" them, but also by "teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you." Brother Thomas Warren has said,

Obviously, this does not mean that the one

who is teaching the prospective candidate for

baptism [must teach the candidate--AA] the

specific details of every individual or particular

instruction in the gospel ... but it does mean

that Christ expects those who preach the gospel

to the lost so to teach that, when the lost confess

their faith in Christ (just prior to being baptized,

Acts 8:26-40; Romans 10:9-10), they are to

have been taught that they are, in that confession,

publicly committing themselves to being faithful

to Christ--i.e., to all of the law (gospel) of Christ

for the rest of their lives [KEEPING THE LOCK

IN WEDLOCK, p. 125].

We simply do wrong when, in our exuberance to get people into the water, we fail to impress upon them that they are committing themselves to a lifetime effort of "observing all things whatsoever [Christ] commanded [the apostles]." The unspoken, yet practiced, doctrine of Baptize [shoot] first, then ask questions later, is false.

UNDERSTANDING AND APPLYING WHAT

IS TAUGHT BY THE WORDS AND GRAMMAR

OF MATTHEW 28:19-20 KNOCKS IN THE

HEAD A FALSE DOCTRINE RELATIVE TO

CHRIST'S TEACHING ON DIVORCE AND

REMARRIAGE...

Readers of the Bible are aware that Jesus said that SOMEBODY ["whosoever"] who divorces his spouse for any reason other than fornication, and then marries another person, commits adultery. With divorce now as common as drinking water, the teaching of Jesus has come to be seen as quite an "hard saying" with many, even preachers.

Does Jesus mean to say that 1) anybody, christian or non-christian, living this side of the First Century, who 2) divorces his spouse, 3) let's say, because they fought all the time, and then 4) marries another person, whom he loves and with whom he is happy, is 5) a person who commits adultery as long as he lives with his second spouse? The short answer is, Yes.

Some brethren do not agree with this apparent teaching of Jesus based on Matthew 19:9. The disagreement has taken many forms and comes from many different angles. Here, I am only concerned with one as it relates to the correct exegesis of Matthew 28:19-20.

THE NOTION THAT WHEN JESUS SAID

"WHOSOEVER"

THAT HE REALLY MEANT

"WHOSOEVER"

IS A CHRISTIAN MARRIED TO ANOTHER

CHRISTIAN

The late brother James Bales was a, if not THE, champion of this view. He believed, taught, and promoted the notion that a comparison between Paul's teaching in 1 Corinthians 7, and that of Jesus in Matthew 19, warrants the conclusion that Jesus, in Matthew 19:9 was speaking ONLY of a marriage between two believers.

First, the notion that there is a CHRISTIAN "adultery" and an NON-CHRISTIAN "adultery" is morally repugnant. Those who accept Bales' teaching here should answer the question. Does "adultery" have any meaning for non-christians? Is there a CHRISTIAN "fornication" and a NON-CHRISTIAN "fornication"? "Effeminancy"? "Lasciviousness"? On the surface, this doctrine (that of Bales) is false.

Second, since we are to "make disciples of all the nations": and since, a part of making a disciple involves teaching that prospective convert that he is "to observe all things whatsoever [Christ] commanded [the apostles]": and since, Matthew 19:9 is a part of all the things Christ commanded the apostles; it is therefore the case that the people in all the nations, though not christians, are under, subject to, amenable to, what Christ commanded in Matthew 19:9. Clearly, "whatsoever," in Matthew 19:9 means just that.

How can a non-christian be made a disciple by "teaching him to observe all" of Christ's commandments to the apostles, if he is not, to begin with, subject to those same commands? "To observe" translates the Greek TEIREIN which is a present active, infinitive verb. It comes from TEIREO which means to "follow, keep, abide by." Jesus did not say, Teach the non-christian, baptize him, and then teach him that he henceforth, and for the first time shall be morally responsibile to keep all my commandments. That non-christian was/is already subject to "all" of Christ's commandments. In order to become a disciple, to be saved, to receive the remission of sins, he must commit himself to bring his life into harmony with all that Christ has commanded--yes, even what he commanded about divorce and remarriage.

As to "all things whatsoever I have commanded you." Jesus "commanded" things about stealing, lying, extortion, fornication, etc. When going out among the "nations," and trying to turn them from their sins, I am to do so, not only by "baptizing" them, but also, and equally, by "teaching" them to "observe" all that Christ commanded. The notion that they only become amenable to these commands (including the command in Matthew 19:9), and their implications as regards how one would repent of their violation, AFTER becoming a christian, is flatly wrong. The grammar of Matthew 28:19-20 proves that. Brother Hugo McCord is reported to have once referred to the Bales' doctrine as "damnable heresy." I agree.

Alan Adams

Cowan church of Christ

104 S. Willow Street

Cowan, TN 37318

==================================================

DRL NOTE: An excellent study. If you didn't catch it all the first time, please re-read it.

Divorce

1960 243,000 children live with an unmarried, single parent

1993 6.3 million children live with an unmarried, single parent

1960 1.4 million children live with a divorced, single parent

1993 6.7 million children live with a divorced, single parent

The first divorce directly related to the September 11th terrorist attacks has been filed in New York. It appears a guy with an office on the 103rd floor of the World Trade Center spent the morning at his girlfriend's apartment with his phone turned off. He wasn't watching TV either. When he turned his phone back on at about 11 a.m., it rang immediately. It was his hysterical wife - "Are you OK? Where are you?" He said, "What do you mean? I'm in my office, of course!"

[I could not pin down the source. The snippet appeared to be torn from a newspaper and photographed but didn't look totally real. Could be an urban legend. 7/12/02 from Snopes Rumor Research: it is fake but still funny.]

*

The State of Marriage in America

HERITAGE FOUNDATION CALLS FOR POLITICAL LEADERSHIP ON MARRIAGE

by Mike McManus

A million children a year see their parents divorce, the impact of which is calamitous. A new report by the Heritage Foundation "demonstrates that the devastating physical, emotional and financial effects on these children will last well into adulthood and affect future generations."

Only 42 percent of teens aged 14-18 live in a "first family," an intact, two-parent married family.

Children of divorce experience "anger, fear, sadness, worry, rejection, conflicting loyalties, lowered self-confidence, heightened anxiety, loneliness, more depressed moods, more suicidal thoughts," says the Heritage report, "The Effects of Divorce on America" by Patrick Fagan and Robert Rector. Compared to kids in intact homes children of divorce face startling risks. They are:

- 12 times more liable to be incarcerated as juveniles

- 14 times more prone to be physically abused by a single mother, and 33 times more at risk if she cohabits;

- Three times more apt to get pregnant, and males commit suicide at six-fold higher rates;

- Twice as vulnerable to drop out of school;

- Four times more likely to be in poverty.

In divorce, household income in 1993 plunged from $43,600 to $25,300, a 42 percent drop.

If the parent remarries, the children's prospects grow worse. They are more likely to be disruptive in school than children of divorce, and girls are 6-40 times more likely to be sexually abused by stepfathers than by biological fathers.

Even more chilling, Fagan and Rector cite dozens of studies showing that many children of divorce become dysfunctional adults: "Even 30 years after the divorce, negative long-term effects were clearly present in the income, health and behavior of many of the grown offspring."

They have more failed romantic relationships, a greater number of sexual partners, are 2-3 times as apt to cohabit, are less trusting of fiances, less giving to them and are twice as likely to divorce.

When both are from divorced homes their risk of divorce is as much as 620 percent higher in early years of marriage. Thus the "marital instability of one generation is passed on to the next."

One reason that children of divorce do poorly is that many lose their faith. They worship less frequently which has "serious consequences because religious practice has been found to have beneficial effects on such factors as physical and mental health, education level, income, virginity, marital stability, crime, addiction and general happiness," reports Heritage. "Church attendance is the most significant predictor of marital stability...lower crime rates, better health and longevity."

Thus, divorce "weakens relationships, communities, cities, states and the nation. The increases in the rates of child abuse and neglect, crime, behavioral and emotional problems, health problems, cohabitation, future divorce and out-of-wedlock births as well as the decrease in religious worship, educational attainment and income potential should alarm every policymaker and community leader."

Heritage's surprising conclusion is that more government is needed. Though it is a very conservative think tank that usually urges less government, Heritage notes that federal and state governments spend $150 billion per year to subsidize single parent families and only $150 million to strengthen marriage. "Thus, for every $1,000 spent to deal with the effects of family disintegration, only $1 is spent to prevent that disintegration," a "folly...evident to all."

It suggests a compelling agenda to those running for state or federal government office:

1. "Establish by resolution, a national goal of reducing divorce among families with children by one-third over the next decade. It would send a clear signal to parents that society values marriage and is concerned about the effects of divorce on children."

2. "Establish pro-marriage demonstration programs to provide training in marriage skills to provide young people, dating couples and married couples with the information and tools necessary to help them build and maintain a strong marriage including an understanding of the major reasons why marriages break up. The programs also should seek to develop skills for handling conflict, dealing with change and enhancing the marital relationship. Such pro-marriage services should be offered in a variety of venues: churches, community centers, courts, maternity and childbirth clinics, health centers, welfare offices, military bases and high schools." Heritage notes state governments have $6 billion of "surplus welfare funds" to pay for these initiatives, but virtually no money has been spent on them, though one goal of the welfare reform law is to "encourage the formation and maintenance of two-parent families."

3. States are urged to "end no-fault divorce for parents with children under 18." Divorces for parents should only be granted by "mutual consent" or if fault is proven and only if "grave harm will be visited upon the children by the continuance of the marriage."

*

Millions of dads did not experience a good Father's Day last Sunday. They are divorced and deeply miss day-to-day contact with their kids. Contrary to conventional wisdom, they did not initiate divorce proceedings - but were pushed out of the marriage by their wives.

Did you know that 70% of divorces are initiated by women? That is the estimate by Dr. Sanford Braver, who studied 1,000 families getting divorced in Phoenix in the largest study of divorced dads ever conducted. The fathers were unwilling partners of the divorce.

Another myth is that women who initiate a divorce do so because their husband has been unfaithful or physically abusive. Not so, according to Braver. "Adultery is not a very important factor, ranking only 6th in the reasons wives seek a divorce and violence ranks 16th," he said.

The most important reason for the divorce, according to 57 percent of the mothers who shoved the fathers out, was "a gradual growing apart" which for centuries was not even a legally justifiable grounds for divorce. Passage of no-fault divorce allowed divorce for trivial reasons.

What about all those stories about deadbeat dads?

Of course, there are many of them, but most never married the mother of their children. Data compiled by Child Abuse Enforcement authorities lump together divorced dads and those who sired children out-of-wedlock to make the picture as bleak as possible.

Consequently, divorced dads have been given a largely undeserved black eye.

Braver's pioneering book on this subject, "Divorced Dads: Shattering the Myth," was praised by The Washington Post as "an important work which...adds a crucial element to the debate on fatherhood and on how we regard - and treat - divorced fathers in our society."

Braver asserts, "Fathers who are unhappy in their marriage back down from divorce. They foresee the loss of their entire family, with the children going with their mom, along with the house. So fathers step back from the brink. However, mothers don't fear losing their kids."

While some Father's Day stories noted that there has been a 50% Increase in the number of dads bringing up their kids, only 4 million are doing so compared to 14 million mothers.

In today's mail, I received a letter from James asking me if I could put him in touch with a church that would "stand with me in prayer for my lovely (but prodigal) wife Sharon's restoration as well as our marriage...God knows the longing in my heart to be reunited/reconciled with Sharon regardless of what took place in her life to change the way she sees me."

Several years ago, Floyd wrote to say, "I am one of those grieving fathers who was divorced from his children. Their mother remarried and took them to another state without notifying me, and the courts looked the other way when I contested the legality of this action. I did not see my children for a decade. These were their formative years." His daughter was molested by her stepfather.

Seven months later, he wrote again. He resented the phrase "deadbeat dads" which was hung around his neck, while no one talked about the "malevolent moms" who forced an unwanted divorce and then prevented visitation by moving far away.

A child needs both a mother and a father.

As President Bush said at the National Summit on Fatherhood, "We know that children who grow up with absent fathers can suffer lasting damage. They are more likely to end up in poverty or drop out of schools, become addicted to drugs, have a child out of wedlock or end up in prison."

The President added, "If we are serious about renewing fatherhood, we must be serious about renewing marriage."

It is time to consider reforms of the law which would honor such a perspective.

Ideally, if children are involved in a marriage, neither the mother nor the father should be allowed to force divorce on an unwilling partner and on the children, except for such serious reasons as adultery or physical abuse.

At the minimum, there should be a two year cooling off period, during which joint custody is required and the taking of classes by the parents to improve their communication and conflict resolution skills, with the hope of saving the marriage.

Bush said, "We all live, it is said, in the shelter of one another. And our urgent hope is that one of the oldest hopes of humanity... to Turn the hearts of children toward their parents, and the hearts of the parents toward their young."

*

Each day, radio hosts Dennis and Barbara Rainey gather together as a couple and pray.

It's something they've practiced for nearly 30 years, and it's something that Dennis believes has made their marriage last that long.

"I do not know if I would be here speaking to you this evening about marriage and family if we had not started this almost 30 years ago," Rainey told a group of married couples at Southern Baptist Theological Seminary. "I honestly believe we'd be divorced today."

Such biblical practices, he added, must be embraced if the Christian church is to be healed of the "epidemic" of divorce. Rainey and Bob Lepine, perhaps best known for their nationally syndicated radio program "Family Life Today," spoke this spring at the Louisville, Ky., school during the "Merging Marriage and Family with Ministry" conference.

Drawing a parallel to divorce statistics, Rainey said that in 12 years of schooling a typical first-grade student will see 60 percent of his classmates' parents divorce. Rainey compared that to his own situation, when as a boy in small-town Missouri, only one student out of a class of approximately 30 had divorced parents.

The culture, Rainey said, has changed drastically.

"Never before have so many Americans just given up on marriage and chosen to just live together," he said, citing statistics that 4.4 million Americans are cohabitant, "... never before has the Christian community been so silent about divorce, so paralyzed in knowing what to do about divorce."

Noting that Malachi 2:16 says that God hates divorce, Rainey gave advice on how Christian couples can strengthen their marriages. This, he said, is particularly important for ministers.

"Your relationship with your spouse is the most important sermon you will ever preach," he said. "If you do not love her, if you do not nourish her (and) cherish her, (then) whatever you say from (the pulpit) is like a noisy gong."

Rainey said a marriage can be strengthened by:

-- Putting the marriage covenant in writing.

He said that he has given framed marriage covenants to each of his married children. The covenant was written in calligraphy, signed by the couple and hung in the house.

Rainey said that the covenant can become part of the wedding ceremony by having audience members sign it, promising that they will pray for and encourage the couple.

-- Never using the word "divorce" in the heat of the moment.

"We have had some stormy fights, fierce arguments," he said of he and his wife. "... Never have either one of us used the 'd' word in the heat of battle. Research has shown that once a word passes through the lips it becomes an option. It becomes something to toy with."

-- Praying together every day.

Simply saying "grace" over a meal, he said, does not count. Instead, he said he's talking about the "husband taking his wife in his arms and going before the throne together."

Research, Rainey said, indicates that less than five percent of couples in the church pray together.

-- Intentionally investing in the marriage.

"Your covenant is not just a promise not to divorce your spouse," he said. "Your covenant is to love, honor and cherish - to care for them. ... Ask your spouse how you can better love, serve and fulfill what you have promised."

-- Asking for help if the relationship gets in trouble.

"I wish I had someone give us that advice early in our marriage," he said. "We had the same argument too many times in a row. We lived the first year of our marriage too many years in a row. No one ever forced me to grow up and face my responsibility as a man, so we had to learn some lessons the hard way."

Rainey said that once a pastor has taken steps to strengthen his marriage, he can encourage church members to do the same.

Saying that the country is facing a "crisis" within the family, Rainey challenged Southern Baptist pastors to tackle divorce within their own churches.

He said this can be done by:

-- Observing a Covenant Marriage Sunday, where those already married can sign a covenant, each re-committing themselves to the marriage.

"I believe it is time to say 'no' to divorce and 'yes' to covenant-keeping love," Rainey said. "The church is the place where it must begin. It's the leader. We've got to be courageous."

He noted that some 165,000 people have attended Family Life's "I Still Do" conferences, where husbands and wives re-commit themselves to one other.

"I believe the culture is desperate for the spiritual community to become the light," he said.

-- Preaching on covenant marriages and divorce at least once a year.

"The devil of hell is attacking the family," he said. "That is clear. It is the greatest unmet need in Western Civilization. We don't wake up wondering what our next meal is going to be. Most of us wake up wondering how we're going to make this thing called marriage and family work."

-- Refusing to marry a couple unless they sign a marriage covenant.

Marriage covenants, he said, can be downloaded off Family Life's website: www.familylife.com.

Summarizing the covenant, Rainey said it says, "If you as a couple get off in a ditch in your marriage, you do not go to the secular courts to resolve your differences. You go back to the church that married you."

Some churches, Rainey noted, will be unsure how to resolve conflicts biblically. He said one ministry, Peacemaker Ministries, helps people do just that. The web address is www.hispeace.org.

"The question is, 'Are we willing to throw a stone at divorce?'" he asked. "Are we willing to tell the ugly, dirty truth about something that God said he hated?'"

*

"I'm just not growing in this relationship," Kevin told his wife Diane. And after ten years of marriage and two kids, he left his family. And he did it, Diane discovered, with the blessing of his therapist.

If Diane had been up on the state of modern psychology, she wouldn't have been so surprised. One Christian psychologist says the spread of what he calls "the selfist philosophy" has gravely damaged many American families.

Dr. Paul Vitz is the author of a newly updated book PSYCHOLOGY AS RELIGION: THE CULT OF SELF-WORSHIP. In it he describes modern psychology's deep commitment to self-worship, or "selfism." All the major theories of motivation and personality, he says, assume that reward for the self is the only functional ethical principle.

These values are hostile to our ability to form permanent relationships, or to commit to such values as duty and self-sacrifice. Instead, he says, "with monotonous regularity, the selfist literature sides with those values that encourage divorce" and the breaking of family ties.

Part of the problem is the nature of the therapeutic process. The psychotherapist is typically preoccupied with an individual patient, and he seldom challenges his version of the facts. He doesn't listen to children, parents, or the spouse who might be involved.

Second, Vitz writes, many psychotherapists are themselves divorced or alienated from religious traditions. The temptation for them is to affirm their own choices by encouraging their patients to make the same choices.

Worse, some therapists encourage divorce on theoretical grounds. They teach that if either spouse feels the relationship has stagnated, then the marriage isn't worth saving.

Selfist ideals give some counselors a strong bias against parents. In recovery group settings, patients are under pressure to describe how badly their families treated them. Patients thus become self-pitying "victims" -- with a strong sense of moral superiority.

The result, Vitz writes, is a parody of the words of the Prodigal Son: Instead of the son saying, "Father, I have sinned ... [and] am no longer worthy to be called your son" [Luke 15:21], today's young man is likely to say, "Father, YOU have sinned, and are no longer worthy to be called my father." With its emphasis on treating individuals in isolation, and its hostility to social bonds, modern psychology has caused untold damage to our society.

Vitz invites his readers to imagine a different kind of therapy, one based on love, gratitude, respect, and forgiveness -- a therapy that strengthens a patient's family instead of destroying it.

This approach follows the biblical vision of human relations -- one that is radically different from that of the therapists. It does not give anyone an "out" if they think they're not "growing" in their relationships. Instead, we're told in First Corinthians to love one another unconditionally -- to be patient and kind and not insist on getting our own way.

The rise of selfism means that Christians need to be cautious of whom they seek counsel. And we need to see how deeply this message has permeated our entire culture.

If you find yourself asking, "What's in it for me?", stop and remember the rest of Paul's message: "Love bears all things, believes all things, hopes all things, endures all things" -- and above all, "love never fails" [1 Corinthians 13:7-8].

FURTHER READING & INFORMATION

Paul Vitz, PSYCHOLOGY AS RELIGION: THE CULT OF SELF-WORSHIP, second edition (Eerdmans, 1994). http://www.pfmonline.net/products.taf?_function=d&IC=BKPAR

Roberto Rivera, "Symbols," BREAKPOINT ONLINE, July 2002. http://www.breakpoint.org/Breakpoint/ChannelRoot/ColumnsGroup/RobertoRivera/Symbols.htm

BreakPoint commentary no. 020228, "Triumph or Tragedy?: The 'Dark Country' of Divorce." http://www.breakpoint.org/Breakpoint/ChannelRoot/FeaturesGroup/BreakPointCommentaries/Triumph+or+Tragedy.htm

_________________________

Copyright © 2002 Prison Fellowship Ministries. Reprinted with permission. "BreakPoint with Chuck Colson" is a radio ministry of Prison Fellowship Ministries.

*

Pøed mnoha lety žili manželé, kteøí se navzájem odcizili až se nakonec rozešli, opustili své mìsto a každý z nich odešel na jiný konec zemì. Mìli jediného syna, který zemøel.

Jednou musel manžel kvùli nìjakému obchodu pøijet zpìt do svého bývalého mìsta, a tak se šel podívat na høbitov, kde byl pochovám jeho jediný syn. Jak tam stál u hrobu svého syna pohroužený do vzpomínek,uslyšel za sebou kroky, otoèil se a spatøil pøicházet svou manželku. První co oba napadlo, bylo se otoèit a jít pryè. Ale spojoval je stejný zájem u spoleèného hrobu, kde se setkali. A místo toho, aby se jeden od druhého odvrátili, podali si ruce a nad hrobem svého syna se usmíøili. Nebylo to nic míò, než smrt jejich syna, která je usmíøila.

Milý pøátelé nestálo to nic míò než smrt a drahou krev Ježíše Krista, aby nás usmíøil s Bohem.Vyhlašování této zvìsti je zvìst evangelia

What the Bible teaches about Divorce And Remarriage:

1. God hates divorce (Malachi 2:16). Divorce in the Scripture is permitted as an accommodation to man's sin for the protection of the innocent party. Since divorce is only a concession to man's sin and is not a part of God's original plan for marriage, all believers considering divorce should have the same attitude toward divorce as does God. Notice that in Matthew 19:5-9, Christ teaches that divorce is an accommodation to man's sin and is in violation of God's purpose for the intimate unity of the marriage bond (cf. Gen. 2:24). It was a concession for the "innocent party" due to the insensitivity of the other partner to God. This is defined biblically as the "hardness of heart" (Matt. 19:8). Dissolution meant that the innocent party no longer had to remain in a hopeless and intolerable situation (Matt. 5:32, 19:9; I Cor. 7:12-15). It is to be expected that a believer will have the same attitude toward divorce as does God and will see it as a violation of God's expressed purpose for marriage.

2. The only biblical grounds for divorce are (1) fornication (any sinful sexual activity, including adultery--unfaithfulness of a marriage partner), or (2) a nonbelieving partner who initiates the divorce due to incompatibility with a Christian.

The first is fornication, which seems to cover a wide area of sexual activity such as adultery, homosexuality, bestiality and incest (Matt. 5:32; 19:9; I Cor. 5:1). Adultery will take place even after the "official" dissolution of the marriage if the divorce is on nonbiblical grounds (Matt. 5:32; Mk. 10:11,12).

The second reason for permitting a divorce is in cases where a nonbelieving mate refuses to live with his or her believing spouse, especially because of his or her Christian testimony (1 Cor. 7:12-15).

It is essential to keep in mind that the Bible merely permits divorce in these limited circumstances but never commands divorce. (This is clearly indicated in Hosea 1-3, where the adulterous wife is forgiven and restored.)

3. Remarriage is permitted for the innocent party when the divorce was on biblical grounds. In cases where a divorce was obtained between believers on nonbiblical grounds, the person who remarries first commits "adultery" (Matt. 19:9) and the person who marries a person who was divorced on nonbiblical grounds also commits adultery (Lk. 16:18).

According to the Old Testament pattern, remarriage was allowed after the divorce (the exception is found in Deut. 24:1-4). The New Testament allows for remarriage when the divorce was based upon biblical grounds (I Cor. 7:15). In cases where the divorce was not for the two reasons stated above, the believer is exhorted to (1) seek for reconciliation, or else (2) remain unmarried (I Cor. 7:10-11).

When one party remarries after a divorce which was on nonbiblical grounds, that person has committed adultery because God did not recognize the validity of the divorce (Matt. 5:32; Mk. 10:11). Since the remarried partner has "committed adultery," the marriage bond is now broken and the remaining partner is free to remarry.

The Bible gives a word of caution to anyone who is considering marriage to a divorcee. If the divorce was not on biblical grounds, the person who marries the divorcee is considered an adulterer (Mark 10:12).

4. Believers who pursue divorce on nonbiblical grounds are subject to church discipline because they openly reject the Word of God. The one who obtains a divorce on nonbiblical grounds and remarries is living in a state of "adultery" since God did not recognize the validity of the original divorce (Matt. 5:32, Mk. 10:11-12). That person is subject to the steps of church discipline as outlined in Matt. 18:15-17 and as illustrated in I Cor. 5:1-13.

5. Salvation means that a person begins a new life. The believer is responsible to live up to what God has revealed about marriage and divorce from the point of his or her salvation.

According to 2 Cor. 5:17, the believer has become a "new creature" when he or she accepts Christ as personal Savior. This does not mean that Christ immediately erases painful memories, bad habits or the underlying causes for past marital problems, but that He begins a process of transformation through the Holy Spirit and the Word. A sign of saving faith will be a receptivity and a willingness to obey what Christ has revealed about marriage and divorce through the Word. The apostle Paul's counsel in I Cor. 7:20, 27 is that a believer is to see every circumstance that they are in when they became a believer as from God. If they were called while married, they are not to seek a divorce (except on the grounds given in Matt. 5:32, 19:9; I Cor. 7:12-16). If they were called while divorced, they are free to be remarried to another believer (2 Cor. 6:14).

6. In cases where divorce took place on nonbiblical grounds and where the guilty party repents, the grace of God is operative at the point of repentance. It is assumed that the repentant party will endeavor to restore the marriage whenever possible as a sign of true repentance. In other words, where two believers were divorce on nonbiblical grounds, the grace of God becomes operative at the point of repentance and confession, and they can once again experience the joy of their relationship with Christ and their mate.

A true sign of repentance will be a desire to implement I Cor. 7:11. This involves a willingness to remain unmarried or else to be reconciled to their mate. In cases where a believer obtained a divorce on nonbiblical grounds and remarried, the second marriage union is recognized as living in "adultery" (Mk. 10:11-12). If repentance takes place, it is recognized that to obtain a second divorce would disobey Scripture (Deut. 24:1-4), hence, they are to remain in the second marriage.

7. The church has a responsibility to uphold the biblical ideal of marriage, especially as exemplified by its leadership. In cases where there has been a divorce in a person's past, the church has an obligation to restrict, for a period of time, the person's involvement in leadership until it can be proven that the present marriage exemplifies Christ's relationship to His church. I Timothy 3:2, 12 sets the marital qualification for leadership within the church. The phrase "the husband of one wife" does not mean that a person cannot have had a divorce in his past since none of the other qualifications listed refer to specific acts in the past (prior to salvation or subsequent to salvation) but rather to qualities which currently characterize a man's life.

It is especially important, in cases where there has been a divorce in a man's past, that there be a period of careful observation to see that his present marriage is characterized by devotion and sacrificial love.

8. If the innocent party in a divorce is seeking remarriage, it is preferable that he/she wait until the spouse has remarried in order to not preclude any possibility of reconciliation. However, the situation will depend upon a number of factors, i.e., purity of life, time, etc.

Note: This file was written by John MacArthur Jr., of Grace Community Church, Sun Valley, California. It originally was presented as non-copyrighted material in a booklet titled, "The Biblical Position on Divorce and Remarriage." Bible Bulletin Board is deeply grateful for the ministry of Grace Community Church and the truth which it has presented over the years. My own Christian walk has been greatly helped by John MacArthur and the Word of Grace Ministry. For information about the radio and tape ministries of Grace Community Church and John MacArthur, write: WORD OF GRACE COMMUNICATIONS, P.O. Box 4000, Panorama City, CA 91412, Voice: 1-800-55-GRACE

Provided by:

Tony Capoccia

Bible Bulletin Board

Box 119

Columbus, New Jersey, USA, 08022

Websites: www.biblebb.com and www.gospelgems.com

Email: tony@biblebb.com

Online since 1986

Copyright 1987

by

John F. MacArthur, Jr.

All rights reserved.

ENTERTAINMENT

Now a word from the director of the FBI: "Movies are doing more to advance crime and juvenile delinquency than any other factor today." The book writer who quoted the FBI head went on, "This is, of course, because of the steady stream of dirty sex, brutality, and violence. Millions of our young generation learn evil thoughts, evil acts, law-breaking ways, perverted sex, murder, and divorce from the films they see. The movie theater has become America's college for an education in filth and crime."

These words of warning sound contemporary, but they aren't. They were written in 1962. (Selected)

The ceremony had everything you'd expect at a wedding: a bride and a groom, rings and vows, candles and music. But this was no ordinary wedding. In fact, it wasn't a wedding at all. It was a divorce ceremony.

As Phil Penningroth gave his soon-to-be ex-wife a non-wedding ring, he solemnly vowed: "Barbara, I release you as my wife and will love you as my friend."

"Phil," Barbara replied, "I release you as my husband and I will love you as my friend." Well, as columnist and marriage expert Maggie Gallagher put it wryly, "Life is sometimes better than parody."

Maggie Gallagher recently wrote a book about how destructive divorce can be. So when the Penningroths appeared on a television talk show recently, Gallagher was invited to come along, too. She listened to the Penningroths talk about their attempts to reach healing and forgiveness with their un-marriage vows -- but she wasn't impressed.

As Gallagher later commented in the Washington Times, "There's something brutal at the very heart of the divorce process that Phil and Barbara ... were trying very hard to deny with their prettied-up ritual. Divorce says: 'I'm not going to take care of you, I won't be responsible for you. I'm free to find someone better to love.'" After dumping his wife, Phil Penningroth seemed to be saying, "Make me feel better about this," Gallagher wrote.

The spurned spouse is not the only one who suffers. Children of divorce fail in school at higher rates than children whose families are intact. They also tend to abuse drugs more and commit more crimes.

And it gets worse. Children of divorce are also at higher risk of poverty, child abuse, mental and physical illness, premature sexual behavior, and suicide. No wonder God says "I hate divorce" [Malachi 2:16].

As for the couples themselves, studies reveal that the stress of divorce puts both men and women at significantly higher risk for a whole host of physical illnesses -- not to mention emotional problems.

"How," Gallagher asks, "can a few words mumbled over a candle ... somehow massage away the sting of divorce?"

Clearly, they can't.

Studies that document this destruction put the lie to the secular teachings of the past thirty years. These teachings claimed that the route to happiness was putting personal desires above everything else -- including marital and family commitments. The effects of divorce, we were told, are minor and short-lived.

Well, Maggie Gallagher's book, The Case for Marriage, gives us a chance to do a little worldview witnessing. The book documents that couples who stay together are happier, healthier, and financially better off. In this matter, as in so many others, biblical teachings are being proven true. The claims of the Bible, you see, are rational propositions well supported by empirical evidence. And all other teachings are, in the end, deeply destructive.

The Penningroths have written a book telling couples how to plan divorce rituals. But the evidence exposes just how "healing" these ceremonies really are not. If we really love our neighbors, instead of encouraging them to plan elaborate divorce ceremonies, we ought to help them figure out how to keep their original vows: the ones they took on their wedding day.

For further reference:

Gallagher, Maggie. "Divorce Ceremonies." Washington Times. 3 June 2001.

Gallagher, Maggie and Linda J. Waite. The Case for Marriage: Why Married People are Happier, Healthier, and Better Off Financially. New York: Doubleday, 2000.

Below is a list of organizations dedicated to strengthening marriage and discouraging divorce:

For information on Community Marriage Policies and faith-based "marriage savers" strategies:

Marriage Savers

9311 Harrington Drive

Potomac, MD 20854

301-469-5873

http://www.marriagesavers.org

For information on marriage preparation and marriage education:

The Coalition for Marriage, Family, and Couples

Education (CMFCE)

Diane Sollee, Director

5310 Belt Road, NW

Washington, DC 20015-1961

(202) 362-3332

http://www.smartmarriages.com

For information on divorce law reforms intended to reduce divorce:

Americans for Divorce Reform

2111 Wilson Boulevard, Suite 550

Arlington, VA 22201-3057

http://www.divorcereform.org

_________________________

Copyright (c) 2001 Prison Fellowship Ministries. Reprinted with permission. "BreakPoint with Chuck Colson" is a radio ministry of Prison Fellowship Ministries.

"I would go days at a time without speaking a word." Even twenty-five years after her parents' divorce, twenty-eight-year-old Karen could still feel the unspeakable pain. She's one of the walking wounded; but Karen is not alone. Psychologist Judith Wallerstein found that the toll divorce takes on children can sometimes last decades.

All too often, divorcing parents who place such pressures on their kids claim they really had no choice. But as Maggie Gallagher and Linda Waite point out in their book, The Case for Marriage, "Divorce is not exactly a random event, striking some families like a bolt of lightening and leaving others miraculously untouched."

Moreover, the evidence is overwhelming: marriage is superior to any other sort of family. It's not just one of many alternatives, each of which are equally good at promoting the well-being of children and adults. Nor is marriage, as Gallagher and Waite point out, "merely a private taste or a private relation; it is an important public good." And the costs of failed marriages are borne by everyone through the costs of higher crime, welfare, education, and medical expenses.

Our fragile families are at least partly the consequence of cultural ideas, the authors write -- faulty ideas about the importance of fathers, the nature of sex and commitment, and the obligation of couples to each other and to their offspring. These ideas have arisen from our obsession, since the 1960s, with personal autonomy -- the mistaken belief that we are free of obligation to spouses, parents, children, or even God. And that we are free of all moral restraints.

What can we do to restore marriage as the normal, stable context for raising children? First, we can recover our biblical understanding of personal responsibility and help families to understand putting ourselves first always leads to disaster.

Second, Gallagher and Waite suggest that we recognize the ways that our laws often undermine marriage through tax policy and welfare legislation. And we need to push for sound policies.

We need to insist that family experts tell the truth about the importance of enduring marriages and that the government publishes information about the effects of marriage and divorce -- just as it does for unemployment and job creation.

Then, we need a tax policy that's pro-marriage. We need to restore the value of the dependent allowance for children and eliminate tax penalties on married couples. The recent tax bill takes an important step in this direction.

We can work to strengthen marriage by reforming no-fault divorce laws, especially for couples with minor children. And we can encourage judges and legislatures to hold husbands who abandon their families financially responsible.

The church has a big role to play here as well. The Marriage Saver programs, developed by my friend Mike McManus, based on solid biblical teaching, have helped to strengthen existing marriages and prevent bad ones from forming in the first place.

And I suggest you read The Case for Marriage. You'll learn about the research that confirms what the Bible teaches. If we desire enduring love and safe havens for our kids, we can do no better than the structure designed by God for that purpose: the one that urges us "to have and to hold, from this day forward, for better or for worse, in sickness and in health, till death do us part."

For further reference:

Gallagher, Maggie and Linda J. Waite. THE CASE FOR MARRIAGE: Why Married People are Happier, Healthier, and Better Off Financially. New York: Doubleday, 2000.

_________________________

Copyright (c) 2001 Prison Fellowship Ministries. Reprinted with permission. "BreakPoint with Chuck Colson" is a radio ministry of Prison Fellowship Ministries.

*

Mark and Michelle were the ideal Christian couple -- or so it seemed to their church. But in private, their lives were falling apart. Both Mark and Michelle ended up in prison -- and how God healed their broken family a wonderful story about my favorite program, Angel Tree.

On the outside, Mark, who was a pastor, and Michelle, seemed to have it all together. But on the inside, they were in total rebellion. They began drinking heavily and became addicted to prescription drugs. They even started abusing one another -- all the while passing themselves off as good Christians.

In 1994, Michelle divorced Mark, and he landed in jail -- a turn of events that drove him to finally turn his eyes back to God. Dropping to his knees in his cell, Mark began to pray. "God, I have really messed up my life," he said. "You gave me so many gifts, and I threw them all away." Mark then offered God a solemn promise. "If you can do anything with my life -- anything -- I'll give you everything."

Mark began serving a three-year prison sentence. Meanwhile, Michelle continued abusing drugs and alcohol. She lost custody of their kids, and ended up in prison herself.

But God had not abandoned Mark and Michelle. After stripping them of everything, he began rebuilding their lives.

Michelle rededicated her life to Christ and got involved with Prison Fellowship, attending parenting seminars and Bible studies. She also got involved in Angel Tree, helping other women sign up their children for gifts. As Michelle later told me, "Angel Tree gave us back our dignity. It allowed us to let our kids know that we still loved them, that we had not forgotten about them."

God used those gifts and Michelle's letters to her children to renew her son's faith in God and bring her daughter to the point of accepting Christ herself.

Meanwhile, across the state in a men's prison, Mark still worried about his kids. "I had betrayed, abused, and neglected them," he said. "I had given up hope that I would ever be able to demonstrate healthy love to my children. But I prayed for them every day -- and God sent Angel Tree [a ministry to prisoners' children by Prison Fellowship]."

Mark faithfully sent his kids gifts and letters -- and God again worked the impossible. When Mark was released, his oldest son was there to pick him up.

But God was not finished yet. Mark and Michelle began to write to one another. In time, this relationship was healed as well. Last year, Mark and Michelle were reunited in marriage. They are now Prison Fellowship volunteers helping others in need.

_________________________

Copyright (c) 2001 Prison Fellowship Ministries. Reprinted with permission. "BreakPoint with Chuck Colson" is a radio ministry of Prison Fellowship Ministries.

June 23, 2001

Living together can double separation risk

StatsCan finding applies to couples who have children

Elizabeth Levine

National Post

Parents who lived together before they married are almost twice as likely to separate, according to a Statistics Canada study released yesterday.

"People who live together first have less stable relationships," said co-author Heather Juby, "because people who were prepared to co-habitate are people who perhaps value less the commitment to marriage."

The research also found that increasing numbers of children are being born into common-law unions.

The study found that among parents who did not live together before marrying, 13.6% separated. The rate was significantly higher, at 25.4% , for those whose cohabitation began before marriage.

"We expected the child was a symbol of commitment but the couples that are more open to cohabitation are also more open to separation," Ms. Juby said.

Andrea Litvack, a professor of social work at the University of Toronto, explained, "People who live together prior to marriage are less traditional and not tied to marriage in the traditional, cultural and religious sense." When unmarried couples have children it is often an attempt to keep the relationship together, she added.

The study also found that parents in common-law unions who then marry are not only more likely to separate from their partners but are also more likely to separate in a future relationship.

Ms. Litvack had her doubts on that last point. ''People come into a second relationship with all sorts of baggage they didn't have in the first.''

The research was conducted by the University Demographic Centre, affiliated with the Université de Montréal.

The researchers argue certain people will choose cohabitation over marriage because they are less committed. "When there was just marriage, you had more and less committed individuals," said Ms. Juby. "Now the less committed don't get married, they live together instead."

In 1901, 52.1% of Canadians were married, while none described themselves as being involved in a common-law relationship. In 1996, 51.1% of Canadians were married and 8% were living common-law.

Before common-law relationships became socially acceptable, every couple was "in the same boat," Ms. Juby said.

Today with common-law unions becoming institutionalized -- after a year together, common-law couples are deemed by government to be legally married -- those who are less committed can enter a freer partnership.

Ms. Juby argues that the question should no longer be why aren't people getting married, but why they are.

"These may be individuals who are more susceptible to family or societal pressure and place more value on creating a family," she said.

In Quebec, where common-law relationships are far more prevalent, the percentage of separations is considerably lower, Ms. Juby said, although she was not able to provide statistics.

"As common-law becomes more institutionalized it attracts more of the stable committed couples," said Ms. Juby. "There is some evidence in Quebec, where common-law is the norm, that there is not such a gap between the stability of common law and marriage unions."

Chronic work stress and divorce can be a deadly combination for men, a new study has found.

Researchers from the University of Pittsburgh School of Medicine and the State University of New York-Oswego studied data from 12,366 patients who participated in the seven-year Multiple Risk Factor Intervention Trial.

The study was funded by the National Institutes of Health and will be published in the February 11, 2002, issue of the Archives of Internal Medicine.

Of 10,904 men who were married a the beginning of the trial, the researchers found those who stayed married were less likely to die from a number of causes than those who divorced.

During a nine-year follow-up period starting at the end of the trial, some 1,505 of the men with work-related stress had died, including 771 patients from cardiovascular causes.

Of those who divorced during the trial, 1,332 died from various causes, including some 663 from cardiovascular causes.

Those most adversely affected in the trial were patients experiencing both work stress and divorce, the study found.

The researchers suggested "remaining married in midlife has protective effects in the face of adverse experiences at work." They recommended counseling to help overcome work and marital stress.

*

Pastor Dick Dunn of Roswell, Georgia, didn't pay much attention when a couple in his church asked for help in dealing with hostile stepchildren. After all, the husband and wife were strong Christians. "Surely," he thought, "they could work out their problems with their two kids."

But then Dunn recalled how his own teenage daughter had nearly blown apart his second marriage -- and so he began a program to help stepfamilies stay together.

Dunn's story is recounted in a book called MARRIAGE SAVERS, written by my friend, Mike McManus. McManus says that stepparents often feel as if they're sitting on a keg of dynamite. And who lights the fuse? It's usually the stepchildren. They often scream at the stepparent: "I hate you! You can't tell me what to do!"

And that's part of the reason that sixty-five percent of marriages involving stepchildren end up in divorce court.

In his book MARRIAGE SAVERS, McManus explains why stepfamilies have such a hard time blending -- and how they can decrease their chances of splitting up.

The fact that they're having conflicts at all often takes the newlyweds by surprise. That's because during the couple's courtship, their children often get along well with both the prospective stepparent and stepsiblings. In fact, it's not unusual for children to encourage their divorced or widowed parents to remarry.

But that initial friendliness often disappears the moment the rice is thrown. Kids learn how to drive the stepparent up the wall, and they often do it without the natural parent catching on. Sometimes, the stepparent lacks the skills to deal effectively with the new spouse's children.

Before the newlyweds know it, their lovely new family has morphed into The Brady Bunch from Hell. And they have no idea how to cope with the crisis.

It's for couples like these that Dick Dunn created the Stepfamily Support Group. The group matches embattled newlyweds with couples who have lived through the very same problems. These older couples teach the bride and groom that volatile conflicts are normal in stepfamilies. After all, the established routines, traditions, and loyalties of two families are shaken to their foundations as the new family begins to take form.

The experienced couples share their own stepfamily war stories. They teach the newlyweds how to set boundaries with children. And perhaps most important of all, the younger couples are taught how important it is to set aside "couple time" for nurturing their own relationship.

Do stepfamily support groups make a difference?

Well, at Roswell United Methodist Church, some 400 couples have taken part in the church's Stepfamily Support Group over the past dozen years. Of this number, fewer than eighty have suffered divorce. That's a twenty percent divorce rate compared with a nationwide sixty-five percent divorce rate among stepfamilies.

You and I ought to be working to duplicate programs like these in our own churches. And you can learn more details about Dick Dunn's Stepfamily Support Group by reading MARRIAGE SAVERS. Call us here at BreakPoint and order your own copy of Mike McManus's important book.

You'll learn how to help turn snarling stepparents and stepchildren into loving families.

For further reading:

Michael McManus, MARRIAGE SAVERS (Zondervan Publishing, 1995).

To learn more about Marriage Savers, visit the website .

A list of Christian resources for stepfamilies can be found here .

_________________________

Copyright © 2002 Prison Fellowship Ministries. Reprinted with permission. 'BreakPoint with Chuck Colson' is a radio ministry of Prison Fellowship Ministries.

*

More than a century ago, Russian novelist Leo Tolstoy wrote, “Happy families are all alike; every unhappy family is unhappy in its own way.”

The words have become immortalized, and the unhappy story of “Anna Karenina” is considered one of the greatest novels ever written. But psychologists and sociologists are starting to question the observation.

“I think Tolstoy was totally wrong,” said John Gottman, a psychology professor at the University of Washington in Seattle. “Unhappy families are really similar to one another - there's much more variability among happy families.”

Gottman and others are trying to understand why as many as one in two marriages end in divorce and why so many couples seem to fall out of love and break apart.

Some of the most revealing answers, it turns out, come from the couples who stay together.

While conventional wisdom holds that conflicts in a relationship slowly erode the bonds that hold partners together, couples who are happy in the long term turn out to have plenty of conflicts, too.

Fights and disagreements are apparently intrinsic to all relationships, but couples who stay together over the long haul don't let the fighting contaminate other parts of the relationship, experts say.

“Why do people get married in the first place?” asked Thomas Bradbury, a professor of psychology at the University of California at Los Angeles. “To have someone to listen to, to have a friend to share life's ups and downs. We want to try to draw attention to what's valuable in their relationship.”

Researchers are finding that these other, positive factors of relationships are potent predictors of whether couples feel committed to relationships and whether they weather storms together. As long as those factors are intact, conflicts don't drive people apart.

“What we've discovered is surprising and contrary to what most people think,” said Gottman, author of “The Mathematics of Marriage.” “Most books say it's important for couples to fight fair, but 69% of all marital conflicts never get resolved because they are about personality differences between couples. What's critical is not whether they resolve conflicts but whether they can cope with them.”

“Every couple has irreconcilable differences,” agreed Diane Sollee, founder of www.smartmarriages.com, a Web site devoted to teaching couples skills to improve their relationships. She explained such differences ought to be “managed” instead of being grounds for separations, split-ups and divorce.

Almost 90% of Americans marry at some point. An overwhelming number of those who divorce marry a second time, meaning they may have lost faith in a partner but not in the promise of the institution.

At the same time, changing social mores and expectations are stressing long-term relationships. Two-income couples juggle demanding jobs and professional advancement can sometimes detract from family and intimate relationships. The rising number of women in the work force has given women the economic security to leave unhappy relationships, the sexual revolution has made sex before and outside marriage common, and divorce has lost its stigma.

Nonetheless, most Americans still seek lifelong mates - and expectations from love and marriage have never been higher.

The juxtaposition of high expectations with the stress and cycles of relationships appears to be an important reason many relationships don't work, said Ted Huston, a professor of human ecology and psychology at the University of Texas at Austin, who tracked 168 couples over 13 1/2 years.

Huston found that changes in the first two years of marriage often predicted the outcome of relationships. Almost half of all divorces occur within the first seven years of marriage, according to national census data, and many of these “early exiters” report a decline in “bliss” right after marriage.

“When you look at them as newlyweds, they look like they are mutually enchanted and deeply in love and a prototype of your perfectly wed couple - they hug, kiss, say 'I love you' all the time,” he said. “Two years later, they've lost a lot of that romance. They think, 'We once had this great romance, and now we don't.’“

“People have this fairly unrealistic idea: 'I have got to have bliss, and it's got to stay or this is not going to work,'“ he said. “At some level, you don't need the bliss. The Hollywood romance may not be the prelude to a long-term happy marriage.”

Couples who were happy over the long term reported being content at the start of relationships and still contented two years later. Some told Huston, “'I wasn't sure I was in love because I didn't have the tingly feelings you are supposed to have,'“ he said. “They worried their feelings were positive but not intense.”

Pepper Schwartz, a sociology professor at the University of Washington in Seattle, said her study of 6,000 couples also revealed that couples in long-term relationships tended to have mutual respect, took pride in each other and saw themselves as equals.

“Very successful couples we studied had something besides children that was enjoyable to their relationship,” she added. “It could be travel, hospice work, working on a summer place.... Those things bring stability because they confer pleasure and identity in the way people live together. If you don't like to be together, and don't like the same friends and don't have the same hobbies, you have a problem.”

____________

Appeared in the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel on Feb. 17, 2002.

Questions People Ask sermon series Matthew 19:3-12

TILL WHAT DO US PART?

=====================

I. A touchy subject.

II. God's ideal.

A. One each is enough - no polygamy. Genesis 2

B. Together for life - no divorce.

C. Genuine love - not just "for sake of the kids."

D. Committed love.

E. Work out problems - reconcile. 1 Cor 7:11

III. The hardness of the human heart. Matthew 19

A. Sin is real. Relationships can fail.

B. The Biblical grounds for divorce.

C. A more difficult issue - remarriage.

IV. Building better relationships.

A. God made us to need other people.

B. Sinners can be redeemed.

C. Learn how to love and forgive.

D. Build love through communication.

E. Put God at the center.

V. Are you SPIRITUALLY divorced?

*

“Marriage is for white people.” That's what Joy Jones was told when she was teaching a career exploration class for sixth-graders at an elementary school in the nation's capital. As a matter of fact, more than one student offered Jones this retort when she spoke of marriage and parenthood.

Joy Jones is author of BETWEEN BLACK WOMEN: LISTENING WITH THE THIRD EAR. In a recent article written for THE WASHINGTON POST, Jones laments the decline of marriage among African Americans. It wasn't always this way, she insists.

“I grew up in a time when two-parent families were still the norm, in both black and white America,” Jones explains. “Then, as an adult, I saw divorce become more commonplace, then almost a rite of passage. Today it would appear that many -- particularly in the black community -- have dispensed with marriage altogether.”

This nation has been witnessing (and allowing) the undermining of its marriage culture. Throughout the culture, marriage is simply not respected or expected as it once was, and the cult of personal autonomy and the rise of postmodern worldviews have only accelerated this process. Still, the decline of marriage as an institution is not uniform across the culture. As the statistics clearly indicate, marriage is losing ground among African Americans more quickly than within the society at large.

Jones' experience at the Washington elementary school tells the story. A young black boy had expressed his belief that being a good father was a very important personal goal -- “more meaningful than making money or having a fancy title.” Jones was pleased with the boy's statement. “That's wonderful!,” she told him. “I think I'll invite some couples in to talk about being married and rearing children.”

“Oh, no,” the student objected. “We're not interested in the part about marriage. Only about how to be good fathers.” Another boy quickly offered his own analysis, “speaking as if the words left a nasty taste in his mouth,” Jones laments. “Marriage is for white people,” he said.

Considering the context, that boy's statement is a tragedy in seven syllables. How could a young black boy come to the conclusion that marriage is only for white people?

In part, he is simply observing the reality. As Joy Jones confirms, the marriage rate for African Americans has been falling since the 1960s. At present, blacks have the lowest marriage rate of any racial group in the United States. According to the 2001 U.S. census data, 43.3 percent of black men and 41.9 percent of black women have never been married. In contrast, only 27.4 percent of white men and 20.7 percent of white women have never been married.

Of all demographic groups, African American women are least likely ever to marry. While the marriage rate fell for all Americans by 17 percent in the thirty years between 1970 and 2001, the marriage rate for black Americans fell by 34 percent.

This has caught the attention of many observers. Howard University's Audrey Chapman has referred to African Americans as “the most uncoupled people in the country.” Sociologist Andrew J. Cherlin points out that a black child was more likely to grow up with two parents during the days of slavery than he or she is today.

The reference to slavery is very instructive. Jones understands the argument that slavery and its lingering effects explain today's low marriage rate among African Americans. She rejects this with solid data. Indeed, she cites historian Eugene D. Genovese, who sets the record straight. Genovese, author of ROLL, JORDAN, ROLL: THE WORLD THE SLAVES MADE, points to the incredibly strong and even sacrificial commitment to marriage that most often characterized slave families. He tells of slaves who mutilated themselves and put themselves at risk, just in order to save their marriages and to continue raising their children.

“What has shifted in African American customs, in our community, in our consciousness, that has made marriage seem unnecessary or unattainable?” Jones asks.

Her argument is that the African American world has lost sight of normal marriage. Their world has been transformed by cohabitation, out-of-wedlock births, divorce, and remarriage. “Sex, love and childbearing have become A LA CARTE choices rather than a package deal that comes with marriage,” she advises. “Moreover, in an era of brothers on the 'downlow,' the spread of sexually transmitted diseases and the decline of the stable blue-collar jobs that black men used to hold, linking one's fate to a man makes marriage a risky business for a black woman.”

Beyond this, Jones argues that African American women hold different expectations of marriage than African American men. “My observation is that black women in their twenties and early thirties want to marry and commit at a time when black men their age are more likely to enjoy playing the field. As the woman realizes that a good marriage may not be as possible or sustainable as she would like, her focus turns to having a baby, or possibly improving her job status, perhaps by returning to school or investing more energy in her career.”

In other words, marriage just doesn't look like a very attractive proposition to women who have had to learn to make it on their own, and who are concerned that men really will not bring much to the marriage partnership anyway.

In an autobiographical passage, Joy Jones admits that this has been true for herself, as well as for others. She turned down a wedding proposal when it came quite late and when the man appeared to bring more problems from previous relationships than Jones was willing to accept.

“Most single black women over the age of 30 whom I know would not mind getting married, but acknowledge that the kind of man and the quality of marriage they would like to have may not be likely, and they are not desperate enough to simply accept any situation just to have a man,” she explains. “A number of my married friends complain that taking care of their husbands feels like having an additional child to raise.”

So why would a black woman get married? Jones argues that she marries when marriage is presented as more than a business alliance. “If it weren't for the intangibles, the allure of the lovey-dovey stuff, I wouldn't have gotten married,” said one black woman. “The benefits of marriage are his character and his caring. If not for that, why bother?” That's a good question. The benefits of marriage extend to far more than character and caring, but marriage surely cannot demand less of a man as husband. The absence of character and caring, this woman is keen to suggest, reduces marriage to a matter of cost-benefit analysis.

From her analysis of the state of marriage among African Americans, Jones moves to the larger culture, pointing to what she calls “the new twist.” It seems that the rest of America is following the lead of African Americans in this regard. “Often what happens in black America is a sign of what the rest of America can eventually expect,” Jones asserts. She cites Andrew Hacker, author of MISMATCH: THE GROWING GULF BETWEEN WOMAN AND MEN, to the effect that “the structure of white families is evolving in the direction of that of black families of the 1960s.” As Hacker's research indicates, “In 1960, 67 percent of black families were headed by a husband and wife, compared to 90.9 percent for whites. By 2000, the figure for white families had dropped to 79.8 percent. Births to unwed white mothers were 22.5 percent in 2001, compared to 2.3 percent in 1960.” As Jones then observes: “So my student who thought marriage is for white people may have to rethink that in the future.”

This kind of statistical analysis -- with cold mathematical precision and veracity -- tells only part of the story. Anyone who observes American society with care must notice that marriage is becoming more and more marginalized, both in terms of how it is conceived and in terms of how it is lived.

The acceptance of easy no-fault divorce, the delay of marriage far into adult years, the remarkable rise in rates of cohabitation, and the decline of marriage as a personal and social expectation all contribute to this phenomenon.

The recovery of a marriage culture demands the attention of all Americans, not just African Americans. Respect for marriage must be rebuilt group by group, couple by couple, and individual by individual. Young people must be shown that marriage is the covenant relationship that is conducive for human happiness, well being, and satisfaction and that it is the optimal context for the raising of children and for the sustenance of society.

In order for this to happen, couples of all ages, races, and ethnicities need to live out the fullness and fulfillment of marriage before the watching world. Christians have a special stake in this, because we understand that marriage is not only a social institution, but that is also the unique arena in which the glory of God is demonstrated in the holy relationship between the husband and his wife and in the proper ordering of the household as a testimony to the grace and goodness of God. Furthermore, we are the ones who know that we will give an answer for our responsibilities in marriage -- and every single Christian has an important stake in this mission of recovering marriage. Above all, the church should be the one place where healthy marriages are nurtured, expected, supported, and lived out, not only before the congregation, but before the entire society.

Something has gone horribly wrong when a young black boy believes that marriage “is for white people.” How long will it be before children his age wonder if marriage is for anyone at all?

*

[Original illustration at this number was added to HolwickID #4297]

“I don't believe in marriage. It's bloody impractical to love, honor and obey. If it weren't, you wouldn't have to sign a contract.”

-- Katharine Hepburn

"Keep your eyes open before marriage and half shut afterwards."

-- Benjamin Franklin

"There is only one thing harder than living alone and that is to live with another person."

-- Ingrid Trobisch, psychologist

"How boring it would have been for the Creator to put Adam to sleep and then fashion yet another man from his rib."

-- James Dobson

"Marriage is like flies buzzing around a screen door in the summer. All those on the outside want to get in and all those on the inside want to get out."

-- Justin Meek, SermonCentral.com 9/28/03

"A good marriage is the union of two forgivers."

-- Ruth Bell Graham, Wit & Wisdom 7/31/04

When the courthouse in Miami, Florida's Liberty City neighborhood was closed for renovations, Miami-Dade County Circuit Court Judge Joel Brown had an idea. The county was already using a bus to bring other government services into local neighborhoods. Why not use the bus as a rolling divorce court as well?

So now, once a month, the brightly painted bus pulls into a Liberty City parking lot, and those who want an uncontested divorce line up outside. On the bus, Judge Brown presides and grants the divorces. Time expended per divorce: two minutes. Now that's efficiency.

“I didn't expect something to be so unbelievably convenient,” said a twenty-three-year-old woman who had been married three months. A man in his sixties who had been married more than two decades agreed: “It was quicker to get divorced than to get married.”

For some, that's reason for rejoicing. The WASHINGTON POST described many of the men and women as being giddy with their new “freedom” as they stepped off the bus. One woman even invited the people she met at the bus to a big divorce party. Reporter Manuel Roig-Franzia writes, “It's safe to say that bailing on the 'until-death-do-us-part' thing has never been such a hoot.”

But, of course, the divorce bus isn't “a hoot”; it is deeply disturbing. There's something wrong with using a term like CONVENIENT (let alone A HOOT) to describe the ending of a covenant made with another person before God.

Unfortunately, the bus is an appropriate symbol of a way of thinking that's become all too common. Last year, a book called THE STARTER MARRIAGE AND THE FUTURE OF MATRIMONY examined a growing trend of young adults divorcing a few years after marriage. Author Pamela Paul found several factors that were instrumental in the failures of these marriages; for instance, many of the people involved grew up in broken homes with little or no understanding of how marriage works. But there was a deeper reason underneath it all. As Paul writes: “A fundamental shift in public opinion took place [during the 1970s], producing a new truism: 'People should not stay married if they're not happy.'“

Viewed in this light, divorce buses, starter marriages, Internet divorces (another hot trend), and no-fault divorce in general are themselves just a small part of a larger social movement: the movement toward self-gratification and self-fulfillment at any cost. According to this philosophy, finding individual happiness takes precedence over honoring the commitments one has made to God and to other people — hence the popularity of the two-minute divorce in the bus that arrives just minutes away from home. After their minutes in court, some new divorcées were already planning to look for someone new with whom to share their lives.

But their addiction to personal freedom makes it doubtful that they will ever find real marital satisfaction. They're still looking for someone to make THEM happy. They are not considering the hard work and sacrifice it will take to build the kind of marriage they say they want — which is why, sadly, their first trip to the divorce bus is unlikely to be their last.

For further reading:

Manuel Roig-Franzia, “IN MIAMI, A BUS STOP FOR BROKEN MARRIAGES,” WASHINGTON POST, 4 May 2003.

Nicholas Spangler, “RETIRED BUS SERVES AS DIVORCE COURT ON WHEELS,” MIAMI HERALD, 1 March 2003.

Jennifer Roback Morse, “THE LAISSEZ-FAIRE FAMILY,” speech delivered at BreakPoint's “Christians in the Marketplace” conference, April 4-6, 2003.

Bridget E. Maher, ed., THE FAMILY PORTRAIT: A COMPILATION OF DATA, RESEARCH, AND PUBLIC OPINION ON THE FAMILY (Family Research Council, 2002).

Gina R. Dalfonzo, “TEMPORARILY YOURS,” BOUNDLESS, April 25, 2002 (review of THE STARTER MARRIAGE AND THE FUTURE OF MATRIMONY).

See the NATIONAL MARRIAGE PROJECT's “TOP TEN MYTHS OF DIVORCE“ and “TOP TEN MYTHS OF MARRIAGE.”

Marcia Segelstein, “INTENTIONAL MARRIAGE,” BREAKPOINT ONLINE, 16 June 2003.

Rob Vaughn, “STILL IN LOVE,” BREAKPOINT ONLINE, 20 May 2003.

Roberto Rivera, “SYMBOLS,” BREAKPOINT ONLINE, 19 July 2002.

BreakPoint Commentary No. 030722, “DECEPTIVE RHETORIC: MARRIAGE AND THE LANGUAGE OF THE MARKET.”

BreakPoint Commentary No. 020411, “CLICK TO DOWNLOAD FORMS: DIVORCE BECOMES A SNAP.”

William J. Doherty, TAKE BACK YOUR MARRIAGE (Guilford, 2001).

Michael McManus, MARRIAGE SAVERS (Zondervan, 1995).

Paul C. Vitz, PSYCHOLOGY AS RELIGION (Eerdmans, 1994).

____________

Copyright (c) 2003 Prison Fellowship Ministries. Reprinted with permission. "BreakPoint with Chuck Colson" is a radio ministry of Prison Fellowship Ministries.

He preaches with the fervor of a prophet. She sings like an angel. Together they are so dynamic it's difficult to believe they have each experienced a bitter divorce and custody battle -- with each other.

On the outside, the Forehand family once seemed perfect. Dale was a successful businessman, a deacon at First Baptist Church in Trussville, Alabama, and a Sunday school teacher. Jena, an accomplished soloist, immersed herself in choir activities and raised their two children, Cole and Jorja. But on the inside, the Forehands marriage was dying.

Married couples, Dale said, “are looking to their spouses with unrealistic expectations, so they get very disappointed when these are not met.” This disappointment often leads to a demand that needs be met by a spouse, he said, and when this doesn't happen, the spouses feel defeated and many quit.

Dale knows the defeat all too well, because in July 1996, Dale packed Jena's bags and told her to leave their suburban home in Birmingham. What ensued the following 15 months was a showdown in the courtroom for custody of Cole and Jorja, with each parent seeking full rights and each lawyer seeking victory.

Jena said she was not shocked Dale asked her to leave their home. “I can't say it was a major surprise, because our home had the arguments and the bickering and the anger had risen to a high point,” she told the Alabama Baptist. “We had gotten so angry and tired.”

While waiting for the court date, the Forehands lived in the same home, which became their prison. Dale lived in the master bedroom while Jena shared bunk beds with Cole.

The day finally arrived when they would bring their battle to the court. With loaded emotions, the Forehands listened to each ripping word, calculating the next move. In the end, they were given joint custody. Dale and Jena each left the room feeling destroyed.

Then the unbelievable happened. Four months after the courtroom battle, Jena called Dale and an argument started. Instead of fighting, Jena asked Dale to come get her so they could repair their relationship.

“I chose to reveal myself that day so that Dale could briefly peek into my heart,” Jena explained. “I think it was the Holy Spirit speaking through me.”

She said couples get to a point where they are stripped to their bare souls when experiencing struggles.

“We had such intense pain and hurt from each other, and the thought of continuing this relationship was devastating,” Jena said. But she believes God allowed the experience to happen because it forced each person to look inward. “I had to look at what things in my life did not reflect Jesus.”

In 1997, Dale and Jena were remarried. Symbolizing the beginning of a new marriage but a remembrance of the first, Dale and Jena took the original stone from her wedding ring and put it in a new setting.

That day, Cole told his parents he wanted to know Christ as Savior. The couple prayed together for the salvation of their son.

“We have learned and continue to learn to find our fulfillment, need and satisfaction in a deep relationship with Christ,” Jena said. “It is out of this relationship we have something to give to our spouses.”

Dale said a “stained-glass marriage” gave birth to Stained Glass Ministries, their joint ministry. The name is adapted from a song by Clay Crosse illustrating an old stained-glass window in the attic of a church that is brought out, cleaned up and placed back in the light.

“As I listened to this song, it was our story,” Dale said. “Our first marriage had become dirty and dusty, full of pains and stains, but when the grace of God moved in our hearts and his light shone through, what a beautiful work of art we had just experienced.”

It was Valentine's Day in 1998 when Dale and Jena first told the world of their experience. “As God burned that entire experience in our hearts, we knew then the Scripture that spoke of what man had intended for evil, God had turned for good,” Dale said.

Today Dale and Jena lead marriage conferences and speak across the country. They also have written a book titled “Stained Glass Marriage” detailing their experience and offering insight into developing a quality marriage.

The Forehands feel it is important to share their story. Dale recently left his career of seven years in property management to devote his full time to the ministry. “Too many folks sitting in the pew are wearing masks, afraid to be real, share their struggles and ask for help,” he said.

“We have bought into the lie that if you are a Christian, you are supposed to be perfect. If this were true we would not need Jesus,” Dale said. The best advice Dale and Jena offer to couples is extensive premarital counseling. “Let [God's] character become yours, then flesh that out with the ones you love.”

__________

Theresa Shadrix is a correspondent for the Alabama Baptist.