The Billion Dollar Industries of Anti-Marriage

“By now, any observer with a modicum of moral insight is aware that marriage is an institution in crisis. Nevertheless, one of the most significant factors contributing to this crisis is often overlooked, and that one factor has led to the breakup of more marriages than any other–no-fault divorce.” ~ Albert Mohler-president of the Southern Baptist Theological Seminary “No-Fault Divorce-The End of Marriage?” 

No-fault divorce is relatively new to the United States of America. The first no-fault divorce laws were signed in 1969 in the state of California by then governor Ronald Reagan. Reagan would later comment that the no-divorce law was “one of the worse mistakes he ever made in public office.” It would appear that Reagan realized the damage of no-fault divorce, which in turn damages the credibility of marriage. 

Wikipedia has this to offer in an argument against no-fault divorce from Stephen Baskerville, a political scientist at Howard University.

“Baskerville argues that no-fault divorce rewards wrongdoers, reduces the need of marital binding agreement contracts at the public's expense, and helps women take custody of their children at the husbands' expense in many cases where the man has done nothing wrong. He also adds that a ban on divorce will not work, because people will separate themselves and be in a permanent state of adultery, or they will create a hostile home environment for the children.”

I thought Baskerville’s last statement was rather interesting. “Banning divorce will cause people to separate themselves and be in a permanent state of adultery” …Wait...aren’t there adultery laws in most states? 

Well…there are adultery laws in some states, and some of these are felony charges, but these have gone the way of the “outdated” and are rarely enforced. 

Could it be there is lack of interest to enforce adultery laws due to the emergence of the no-fault divorce laws? hmmm 

I would like to comment that the word of God tells us that separation and “remarriage” already puts one in a state of adultery (Mt 5:32;19:9; Mk 10:11,12; Luke 16:18; Ro 7:2,3; 1 Cor 7:10,11,39). Not to mention that “blended remarried families” are just as likely to create a hostile home environment for children.   

Maybe Baskerville’s last point would not be entirely accurate if states enforced adultery laws? Would a spouse have second thoughts on an affair if they were to spend considerable time behind bars? Imagine if marriage was a life-time contract with no exceptions to divorce?!?!?

Hey…What if the laws decided that pornography was a deterrent to marriages, and that the selling and distribution of pornographic images was unlawful? There are many reasons to associate pornography with marital discord, the exploitation of women, sexual addiction, sexual slavery, and the destruction of individual lives. After all, is not pornography acts of fornication and adultery?  

Oh yea…pornography is a billion-dollar business…  

I understand that if there was a ban on divorce we would most likely see a higher increase in cohabitation then we currently see now. I realize the fornication laws of most states are deemed unconstitutional, but wouldn’t a law defending marriage include a law enforcing cohabitation and fornication? This would deter many from having pre-marital sex and preserve sexuality for marriage. 

Oh yea…abortion and contraception are billion dollar industries…

After all, it seems that these no-fault divorce laws, not to mention divorce in general, have done considerable damage to marriage definition, let alone to individuals, families and societies. What about the children? Is a child a non-entity in the case of divorce if they want their parents to “get along” rather than break apart? What about the cost of taxpayers pertaining to divorce?

Oh yea…Divorce is a billion-dollar business…

 It would seem that marriage has lost its power in the secular societies and that no-fault divorce was a factor in destroying marriage definition. Perhaps we could put most of the blame on no-fault divorce laws; but I believe Dr. Mohler has nailed it more than he knows or cares to realize:

“That’s where the Christian church must enter the picture and provide leadership. Where are our pastors on the question of divorce? Why are so many pulpits silent on this issue? The obvious answer is fear and intimidation. Divorce has become so common that many Christian leaders fear creating a tidal wave of offense and resentment if they deal honestly with the issue–or address it at all. Accordingly, successive generations of Christians have now grown to adulthood believing that divorce is simply a lifestyle option. Where is the recognition that divorce is an affront to the glory of God and a sin that is expressly described in the Bible as an evil that God hates?” 

Mohler and Baskerville understand the evils of divorce on our society and I appreciate their candid articles on the subjects surrounding the attacks on marriage. Mohler rightly understands that the Church must be at the center of marriage definition. Unfortunately, Mohler does not entirely stand in the gap for the permanence of marriage. He believes the Westminster Confessionof Faith(WCofF) definition of divorce and remarriage, which hardly aligns with the word of God…

The compromise of divorce and remarriage began long before the 1969 law of no-fault divorce, and the redefinition of marriage during the writing of the WCofF must first be thoroughly scrutinized by evangelicals before they can ever talk about no-fault divorce.

This will not happen unless men like Mohler reevaluate their understanding of the Church and why his position as president of the Southern Baptist Seminary is the root of the problem. Seminaries make Pastors, and unless the seminary has an understanding of marriage permanence, they will continue to produce Pastors who teach and think contrary to the word of God. 

In a 2008 radio program “Divorce and Remarriage: A ShiftingEvangelical Consensus”, at the 20:50 mark Mohler to refers 1  Timothy chapter 3 scripture on the idea that marriage is one man and one woman based on the qualifications of the Elder.   

  

1 Timothy 3:1 This is a true saying, If a man desire the office of a bishop, he desireth a good work. 2 A bishop then must be blameless, the husband of one wife, vigilant, sober, of good behaviour, given to hospitality, apt to teach;  3 Not given to wine, no striker, not greedy of filthy lucre; but patient, not a brawler, not covetous; 4 One that ruleth well his own house, having his children in subjection with all gravity; 5 (For if a man know not how to rule his own house, how shall he take care of the church of God?) 6 Not a novice, lest being lifted up with pride he fall into the condemnation of the devil. 7 Moreover he must have a good report of them which are without; lest he fall into reproach and the snare of the devil.

Mohler rightly divides the word in truth when pointing to the qualification as this pertains to marriage (vs 2), but skips over the qualification as it pertains to his profession (vs 4-7). As president of the Southern Baptist Theological Seminary, Mohler is responsible in producing qualified Pastors. No matter how Mohler tries to paint the picture, a “Pastor” graduating with a doctorate degree in theology hardly fits the qualifications of an elder. If scholastics has trumped the power of the Holy Spirit, then we should abandon the thought of reading the Bible on our own time…  

This is like believing one can know the things of God simply by staying overnight in a famous hotel chain. Mohler has to sell the idea that the things of God, including marriage, are the responsibility of the “leaders” of Christianity. If he appoints himself as a leader, and he fails at understanding the definitions of marriage, divorce, and remarriage, who will correct him? 

Evangelicals are very good at pointing out the evils of no-fault divorce, they are just not very good at pointing out that no-fault divorce was their fault. The shifting evangelical consensus has gotten out of hand, and it will take full responsibility and humility from men like Mohler to admit that they were wrong all along. 

Repentance from redefining marriage will include divorce from unlawful marriages and a reaffirming of marriage permanence. One man and one woman for life. No excuses, no exceptions. Pastors, presidents, and Doctors of Theology will have to admit their faults and repent of believing that their professions make them “leaders of Christianity”. Christian publishers and theological institutes will restructure their curriculum by dissolving false teaching on divorce and remarriage and replace this with books on preserving marriage no matter the cost. And finally, Evangelicals will render unto God which is God’s. Marriage will not be up to redefinition on their watch, even it means losing their incomes, their buildings, and their congregations…

Oh yea…American Christianity is a billion-dollar industry…

I understand that there was very much sarcasm in this post, but I believe the Lord gave many parables that bordered on sarcasm. This post is not that funny. Not by a long shot. In fact, many of what I wrote was very real to me personally. I wrote to show the truth that many ignore. The follow-up truth is that once we admit our mistakes and correct them, there is ample room for mercy. The Lord Jesus Christ is the example.

I must include mercy on these admissions. If there is humility when it comes to admitting the failures of divorce and remarriage, then there is forgiveness, reconciliation and restoration. This is the foundation of both marriage and the Gospel. A man will love his wife as Christ loves the Church, and a woman will respect her husband under the headship of Christ. If the body of Christ wants to make the world see the Gospel, what better way then to show it through a witness to marriage permanence? One man and one woman for life, so help us God.

In Christ’s love,

Neil