Instone-Brewer wrote on divorce in the October issue of Christianity Today, arguing that divorce (and remarriage) is permissible in cases of adultery, emotional or physical neglect, or abandonment and abuse. John Piper responded, rightly chastising Christianity Today for putting the careless phrase “When to separate” on its cover, even thought the matter being debated is whether separation is ever permissible, and if so, under what circumstances.
Then Andreas Kostenberger entered the fray, representing the majority opinion among evangelicals: that divorce is only permissible in cases of adultery or desertion.
I commend these three articles for all who are wrestling with the issue. Each is an articulate spokesman for their respective position.
Update: I think Instone-Brewer goes too far. I’m wrestling between Piper’s and Kostenberger’s views. Many find that Piper’s translation of “porneia” in Matt. 19:9 as referring narrowly to fornication, rather than more broadly to adultery, has weak lexical support. On the other hand, I find it difficult to apply the so-called adultery exception. For example, when does one commit “adultery”? According to Jesus, it can be committed while checking out at the grocery store. In other words, what constitutes “adultery”? Must it be physical or can it be imagined? For example, one pastor I respect told me that viewing pornography on a regular basis would constitute adultery and thus be legitimate grounds for divorce. So where does it end? Sounds like a slippery slope. It also seems that once you tell a grieving, wronged spouse that they have legitimate grounds for divorce, it predisposes them to select that option. Even in an extreme situation (a violently abusive husband), it seems that separation can accomplish everything (in terms of the wife’s safety, etc.) that divorce accomplishes while making it more clear that repentance/reconciliation is the goal.