pastors' theological perspective on divorce and remarriage

This article was downloaded by: [University of Connecticut]On: 11 October 2014, At: 16:22Publisher: RoutledgeInforma Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954Registered office: Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH,UK

Journal of Divorce &RemarriagePublication details, including instructions forauthors and subscription information:http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/wjdr20

Pastors' TheologicalPerspective on Divorce andRemarriageHector A. Gonzalez MS, MA aa Marriage and Family Therapy Program, Departmentof Child Development and Family Studies , PurdueUniversity , Fowler House, West Lafayette, IN,47907, USAPublished online: 17 Oct 2008.

To cite this article: Hector A. Gonzalez MS, MA (1999) Pastors' TheologicalPerspective on Divorce and Remarriage, Journal of Divorce & Remarriage, 31:1-2,141-159, DOI: 10.1300/J087v31n01_08

To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1300/J087v31n01_08

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE

Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all theinformation (the “Content”) contained in the publications on our platform.However, Taylor & Francis, our agents, and our licensors make norepresentations or warranties whatsoever as to the accuracy, completeness,or suitability for any purpose of the Content. Any opinions and viewsexpressed in this publication are the opinions and views of the authors, andare not the views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy of theContent should not be relied upon and should be independently verified withprimary sources of information. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable for anylosses, actions, claims, proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages,and other liabilities whatsoever or howsoever caused arising directly or

http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/wjdr20

http://www.tandfonline.com/action/showCitFormats?doi=10.1300/J087v31n01_08

http://dx.doi.org/10.1300/J087v31n01_08

indirectly in connection with, in relation to or arising out of the use of theContent.

This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes.Any substantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan,sub-licensing, systematic supply, or distribution in any form to anyone isexpressly forbidden. Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found athttp://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f C

onne

ctic

ut]

at 1

6:22

11

Oct

ober

201

4

http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions

Pastors’ Theological Perspectiveon Divorce and Remarriage:

Qualitative Study

Hector A. Gonzalez

ABSTRACT. Although the majority of couples believe that their marriagehas a spiritual component and that divorce and remarriage are legitimatedomains of the church, most articles on divorce and remarriage fail toconsider religious and/or theological factors in their studies. This paperwill provide information about Protestant pastors’ theological perspectiveon divorce and remarriage. In this qualitative study, twelve pastors fromdifferent theological frameworks share their understanding of this impor-tant issue. An analysis of these conversations is provided in this article.Common themes and differences within and across theological camps arepresented and implications for marital counselors are explored. [Articlecopies available for a fee from The Haworth Document Delivery Service:1-800-342-9678. E-mail address: [email protected] <Website:http://www.haworthpressinc.com>]

KEYWORDS. Theology, priest and prophets, marital death, pastoralresponsibility and grace, collaboration

INTRODUCTION

For therapists who work extensively with troubled couples, no issueidentifies the gravity of the therapeutic process more than that of

Hector A. Gonzalez, MS, MA, is a doctoral candidate in the Marriage and FamilyTherapy Program, Department of Child Development and Family Studies, PurdueUniversity, Fowler House, West Lafayette, IN 47907.

The author would like to express his thanks to Dr. Douglas Sprenkle for hisconsistent encouragement and valuable comments on the original draft of this article.

Journal of Divorce & Remarriage, Vol. 31(1/2) 1999E 1999 by The Haworth Press, Inc. All rights reserved. 141

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f C

onne

ctic

ut]

at 1

6:22

11

Oct

ober

201

4

JOURNAL OF DIVORCE & REMARRIAGE142

divorce and few issues addressed in therapy approach the level ofcomplexity as that of remarriage. Although the counseling communityhas recently focused extensively on the area of divorce and remar-riage, it appears that it has been neglectful in fully investigating theimpact that spirituality and religious institutions have on the client’semotional perception of divorce and remarriage. Even after sevenyears in which Yang and Lester (1991) directly correlated statewidedivorce rates with the person’s commitment to his/her religious be-liefs, relatively few studies have researched more deeply this complexrelationship (Medoff & Skov, 1992; Lehrer & Chiswick, 1993; Joub-ert, 1997; Vaughn & Heaton, 1997).When the focus of the research is to explore factors that either

contribute to or constrain divorce, the religious ecosystem is normallyignored, or at best, peripherally identified. It is interesting to note thatthe most common factor cited in these studies deals with relational andpersonal components, such as gender (Amato & Booth, 1995; Crane,Soderquist, & Gardner, 1995), reactions of friends (Huddleston &Hawkings, 1993), social support (Kunz & Kunz, 1995), family back-ground (Bumpass, Martin, & Sweet, 1991; Amato, 1996), and thewife’s employment (Krishnan, 1994; Lester, 1996). It appears thatthese components which are well identified in the Exchange Theorymodel as reasons for leaving a long-term relationship (Sabatelli &Shehan, 1993; Donovan & Jackson, 1990) have overshadowed theimportant position that religion occupies in peoples’ decision to di-vorce. From the literature review, it is also clear that the clergy havebeen isolated from actively participating in any research study ondivorce and remarriage. This is somewhat surprising given that inethnographic studies it is considered advantageous to have informantswho are within the leadership of the culture to comment on key socialissues of the society (DePoy & Gitlin, 1993).This qualitative research adds to our understanding of the influence

of religion on people’s decision to divorce or to stay in a marriage bytapping into the expertise of pastors who deal with these issues on adaily basis. This study will provide a unique perspective in the life ofthe local church as it affects individuals progressing through the stagesof marriage, divorce and remarriage. The findings of this study may bea valuable resource for therapists who deal with clients who have astrong identification with their denomination or church.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f C

onne

ctic

ut]

at 1

6:22

11

Oct

ober

201

4

Hector A. Gonzalez 143

PROCEDURE

Fifteen pastors from a mid-size city in Indiana were selected on thebasis of diverse theological and pastoral viewpoints on divorce andremarriage. Each pastor was contacted first by letter and then bytelephone. Three pastors originally contacted for the study were un-available because of scheduling conflicts. Due to the informality of thestudy and the time constraints of the report, it was decided that theinterviews would be scheduled for thirty to forty-five minutes. Table 1shows the demographic distribution of the pastors along with howthey defined themselves and/or their denomination from a theologicalperspective.Introductory remarks about the qualitative research were provided

before the interview and each pastor was told that they had greatlatitude in directing the pace and content of the interview. Each pastorsigned a consent form drafted in accordance with the guidelines estab-lished by the Human Subject Committee at Purdue University. All thepastors preferred a format in which they would answer questionsposed by the interviewer. The questions posed were open-ended andthe pastors were permitted to direct their comments in whatever direc-tion made sense to them. This interview technique has the advantageof exploring a wide range of issues (Patton, 1990). As per our consentagreement, it was clarified that the comments of the pastor were to beunderstood as his/her personal understanding on the issues of divorceand remarriage. Although his/her position may represent accurately

TABLE 1. Demographic Information

Church Pastor’s Civil Years in Years in Theological IdentifiedDenomination Gender Status Ministry Church Category Self

Unitarian Universalist Female Divorced 19 17 Priest SameUnited Methodist Male Married 38 5 Priest SamePresbyterian USA Male Married 9 1 Priest Conserv.Lutheran ELCA Male Married 35 27 Priest SameEpiscopal Male Married 28 8 Priest SameWesleyan Male Married 24 10 Prophet SameUnited Brethren Male Married 15 6 Prophet LiberalBaptist GARBC Male Married 14 11 Prophet SameEvangelical Covenant Male Married 19 12 Prophet SameIndependent Male Married 22 22 Prophet SameChurch of Christ Male Married 29 12 Prophet LiberalMissionary Alliance Male Married 16 15 Prophet Same

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f C

onne

ctic

ut]

at 1

6:22

11

Oct

ober

201

4


his/her denominational position on the subject, it was understood thatunless an official document of the denomination was explicitly refer-enced, all comments would be interpreted as the personal views of thepastor.

METHODOLOGY

Patton (1990) specified that informal conversational interviewmethodology relies entirely on the spontaneous generation of ques-tions in the natural flow of an interaction. It is the most open-ended ofthe interviewing techniques and thus it relies heavily on the immediatecontext of the moment and those participating in the interview. Thestrength of the informal conversational approach is that it allows theinterviewer to be highly responsive to individual differences and con-textual changes. The interviewer also has the flexibility to explore ingreater depth topics that are most meaningful to the research question.The disadvantage of this technique is the length of time requiredbefore there is data saturation. In general, this process requires multi-ple interviews taken over time. In this research project, saturation wasnot reached in any of the interviews. Another difficulty with informalconversational interviews is that it is difficult to pull together andanalyze the data. This was true in this project.The data was analyzed using content analysis technique as de-

scribed by Patton (1990). Two novice analysts independently re-viewed the raw data and identified content categories, which werethen coded. A finalized category list was obtained from cross compari-son of independent code definitions. Each analyst compiled a list ofstatements according to categories and a final list was obtainedthrough a simple matching technique.The final list of categorized statements was superimposed on the

original questions asked during the interview, and a cross study analy-sis according to Patton was performed. This provided a check forconsistency in pastors’ responses, and more importantly, a comparisonof unique contributions to the question was obtained. Since the sampleof twelve pastors was relatively small for any substantial analysis itwas decided that the answers would be linked together to see if anyconsistent theme could be determined. The results of the data analysiswere two lists of themes: those that were common to both groups ofpastors, and those that were unique to each theological camp.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f C

onne

ctic

ut]

at 1

6:22

11

Oct

ober

201

4


After the first draft of the article, a second interview was conductedto verify the accuracy of the pastors’ perspectives. This second inter-view was also necessary as it further scrutinized the interviewer’sbiases (Patton 1990). Along with the draft copy, each pastor was giveninstructions on editing the document. They were asked first to notethose sections in which they felt that they were referenced, and sec-ondly to state whether they felt that their position was identified cor-rectly. Even when their statements were accurately portrayed, pastorswere also given the option of adding comments that would help clarifytheir position. Finally, pastors were given the freedom to be includedin specific paragraphs which identified a theological group that nor-mally does not reflect their position. A completed transcript was sup-plied to each participant for a final review.A summary of the demographic information of the pastors who

participated in the research interviews is found in Table 1. All thechurches were located in a mid-size city in Indiana. All the churchesdefined themselves as coming from a Protestant historical perspective.Eleven of the churches defined themselves as creed community withone church defining no creed adherence. Of those churches withcreeds, the ‘‘Apostle’s Creed’’ was identified as their foundationalbelief statement. No Catholic churches were represented in the study.The selection criteria were as follows: (1) the churches would berepresentative of the different theological perspectives concerning di-vorce and remarriage, (2) only one church from a given denominationwould be selected, (3) the pastors responded favorably to a writteninvitation and a follow-up telephone call, (4) interviews could bescheduled within the time frame of the project. Three churches failedto meet criterion three and/or four.Eleven of the twelve pastors are males, married, and have never

been divorced. One male pastor who was divorced was not able toschedule the interview. The one female pastor is divorced and is pres-ently single. The average number of years for the pastors to be in theministry is 18.8 years. The average number of years that the pastorsare in their present church is 10.4 years. Three pastors have a Doctoralof Ministry degree, seven pastors have a Master of Divinity, one pastorhas a Bachelor of Divinity and one pastor has no formal degree indivinity. Half of the pastors have a divorce in their immediate family,which may include a child, a parent, or a sibling.The denominations were identified with an artificial label of either

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f C

onne

ctic

ut]

at 1

6:22

11

Oct

ober

201

4


Priest or Prophet. These labels are used only in reference to the theo-logical positions relative to the issues of marriage, divorce and remar-riage. The label of Priest was connected with the denomination if oneor more of the following conditions exist: (1) the pastor identified thetheological position of the denomination as liberal; (2) the pastoridentified his/her pastoral position, regardless of official title, aspriestly; (3) the written statements of the denomination were definedas a position paper, in contrast to a theological statement or doctrine;(4) the pastor specified that the church has no official statement on thesubject.Denominations were labeled as Prophet if one or more of the fol-

lowing conditions exist: (1) the pastor identified the theological posi-tion of the denomination as being conservative; (2) the pastor identi-fied his/her pastoral position as prophetic; (3) the written statements ofthe church made specific reference to Biblical texts that reflectedand/or justified the position of the church. The last column in Table 1reflects the pastor’s own identification within his/her denomination. Inthis study, one pastor indicated that he saw himself as more conserva-tive than the official position of the denomination, while two pastorsidentified themselves as being more liberal than their denominationalstatements on divorce and remarriage implied.Aside from theological labels, the pastors were asked to describe

their respective congregation demographics and their attitudes aboutthe issues of marriage, divorce, and remarriage. Most of the pastorsidentified their churches as being family oriented. The Unitarian-Uni-veralist pastor recognized that her church invites many singles andnontraditional families into its community. More than half of thechurches considered the average family in their congregations to bemiddle aged with teenagers. Two churches considered themselves ascatering to younger families, while two other churches had few youngfamilies in the congregation. All the pastors indicated that they feltthat the rate of divorce in their church was well below the national.With reference to the last ten years or since they arrived at theirrespective church, most pastors indicated that the number of activemembers who were divorced were less than one percent per year. Thisfigure did not take into account the difference between first timemarried couples and blended families.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f C

onne

ctic

ut]

at 1

6:22

11

Oct

ober

201

4


RESULTS

This section on results is divided into three parts. The first discus-sion is related to the themes that were presented across all denomina-tions. These themes were observed as a result of analyzing the audiotapes and written notes. The second subsection delineates the similari-ties and differences that were found within the categories of Priest andProphet. The third discussion deals with comparing categories.

Themes Across All Categories

A major theme drawn from the interviews was the concept of‘‘Marital Death.’’ With regards to the institution of marriage, it ap-pears that the pastors have uniform consensus. All the ‘‘creed’’ de-nominations had some formal statement expressing the sanctity ofmarriage and that the state of marriage is open to all adult heterosexualcouples who desire to commit themselves to each other for life. Acrossall categories, pastors indicated that the marriage vows utilized in theirchurches included the concept of life-long marriage that is only bro-ken by death. Thus, marital death is a way of conceptualizing the endof a covenant which was intended to go on forever but which may stillbe destroyed while the partners are still alive. In most conversationswith pastors, the end of the covenant through divorce was frequentlyframed in terms that denoted profound loss and/or a death experience.This idea of whether the marriage is truly ‘‘dead’’ is an important andthorny theological distinction that pastors of all the denominationshave had to deal with because it directly affects how they articulatetheir theology or personal policy on remarriage.All denominations recognize that divorce exists but how this legal

state translates to the death of a marriage is the major source ofcontroversy and discord. Marital death takes on one of the followingdefinitions depending on which denomination is defining the term.The first position is that marital death can only occur with the physicaldeath of one spouse. Although there are theologians within some ofthe denominations who have argued for this position, none of thepastors in the study took this stance. The second position is that mari-tal death can come about only if a very specific act or a series of actsby one or both parties causes a break in the trust bond between thecouple. All the Prophetic pastors plus one Priestly pastor took thisposition. Under this second viewpoint, remarriage is approached with

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f C

onne

ctic

ut]

at 1

6:22

11

Oct

ober

201

4


considerable caution. In the last definition, marital death is declaredwhenever the legal court grants a divorce. Priestly pastors will normal-ly remarry any couple who has been granted a legal divorce, unlessthere are other circumstances that would constrain them from partici-pating in the wedding ceremony.Another theme that flowed through most of the interviews was

pastoral balance. This concept was expressed as the tension betweenaccountability and responsibility on the one hand and forgiveness andacceptance on the other. This theme was expressed across all denomi-nations. Pastors spoke about their personal commitment to the sanctityof marriage and most pastors framed divorce as a public acknowledg-ment of personal failure by at least one of the parties in the relation-ship. In every church, there were messages from the pulpit and/orfrom different organizations within the church that convey support formarriages. All the pastors indicated that they petition couples who arehaving marital difficulties to seek counseling from either the pastoralstaff and/or from a professional therapist.On the opposite side of personal failure was the theme of healing

and forgiveness. Every pastor expressed that one of the importantministries of their church is to bring emotional and spiritual healing totheir wounded members. How the pastor saw healing, and whomhe/she felt had the major responsibility in bringing healing to individ-uals dealing with the trauma of divorce led to two general categories.Some pastors saw healing from the perspective of acceptance and loveon a one-to-one basis. These pastors depend on the congregation tobring healing to the divorced individual by coming alongside andbeing available and caring. Some pastors have small group studieswhere a divorced person can feel a sense of belonging. Other pastorssaw healing as a responsibility of the leadership along with the con-gregation. These pastors spoke about formal programs that are avail-able to divorced and hurting individuals. Some pastors also indicatedthat they had or can see the distinctive possibility of having a semifor-mal ritual or ceremony that could help the congregation recognize thesuffering of the divorced individual.The last theme was the double standard that is utilized to discipline

the clergy and the laity. In all the denominations there was a higherstandard of conduct that was expected from the clergy, especially inthe area of sexual behavior. In most of the ‘‘creed’’ denominations, thedivorce due to sexual misconduct by the minister automatically indi-

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f C

onne

ctic

ut]

at 1

6:22

11

Oct

ober

201

4


cated some form of censure. Under these circumstances, the greatestlikelihood is that the pastor is removed from his/her preaching minis-try. In some Priestly denominations, a formal procedure is availablefor reestablishing the role of the clergy in the church even if the reasonfor the divorce was adultery. In both the Priestly and Prophetic denom-inations remarried pastors are still the exception.

Comparisons Between the Categories of Prophet and Priest

Within the Prophetic denominations, one common factor is theacceptance of a relatively literal interpretation of the Bible and itsauthority to define church teaching and practice. The Biblical textsmost often cited by the pastors are Malachi 2:16; Matthew 5:31-32;19:3-12; and 1 Corinthians 7:10-16. Most Prophetic pastors used theverse from Malachi to illustrate that God hates divorce regardless ofcircumstance. The Matthew passages refer to Jesus’ teaching on thepermanence of marriage and the possible breaking of this bond be-cause of adultery. The 1 Corinthians text is used to deal with divorce incases of abandonment in the marriage.All the Prophetic pastors subscribed to adultery as acceptable

grounds for divorce. In this circumstance it may be the case that oneparty in the divorce is considered innocent while the other takes on theresponsibility for the apparent failure of the marriage. This was a pointof considerable frustration for most pastors because of the practicalcomplexities inherent in establishing true accountability and guilt.However, the designation of innocence is a very important distinctionin some of these Prophetic denominations because the guilty party isnot eligible for remarriage within the church. All these pastors weremindful of the systemic dimension of a marriage relationship and thatinnocence is only a relative term used to denote that the spouse wasphysically faithful within the marriage.Abandonment becomes somewhat more complex. All the Prophetic

pastors accept the literal translation of the Paulian passage in 1 Corin-thians which deals with a marriage in which one party is defined as abeliever and the other as a non-believer. If the non-believer abandonsthe marriage, the other is free to remarry. The implications for somepastors are that if both parties are members of their church, then thePaulian exception is not applicable and neither party is permitted toremarry after a divorce. Some Prophetic pastors prescribe to the ideathat, if one partner abandons the marriage, they then automatically

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f C

onne

ctic

ut]

at 1

6:22

11

Oct

ober

201

4


declare themselves as a non-believer and the innocent party is free toremarry.Abuse is an important issue in our society and all the pastors ex-

pressed great concern for any forms of emotional or physical abusewithin a marriage. All the pastors indicated that they would immedi-ately counsel for physical separation in the case of physical violence.However, the pastors were split on whether abuse was acceptablegrounds for divorce. The common sentiment was that the perpetratorshould be confronted by the church and that rejection of counselingand/or radical change in behavior would be grounds for at least a legalseparation. Most pastors would also support divorce under these con-ditions, although three pastors felt that there is always a possibility forreconciliation if the abusing partner does not file for divorce.Within the group of Prophetic pastors, personal positions on remar-

riage were more diverse than what was seen regarding the issue ofdivorce. All the pastors would remarry an individual if the first mar-riage was dissolved because of physical death, or if the party wasdeclared ‘‘innocent’’ in a divorce based on adultery or abandonment.The majority of Prophetic pastors would be open to remarriage if theperson demonstrates that they have had a ‘‘true’’ conversion experi-ence since the divorce, and he/she could no longer return to his/herex-spouse because of legal constraints or because of the refusal of theother party to reconcile. Half of these pastors indicated that theywould consider remarrying a divorced person if the former spouse isalready remarried and the person enters into some form of repentancecounseling in the church.Within the group of Prophetic pastors, counseling is considered an

important component of their ministry. All the pastors indicated thatthey would not marry a couple in their church unless they participatedin pre-marriage counseling. The minimum number of sessions is aboutfour with a maximum of up to twelve sessions. Most pastors indicatethat they provide pre-marriage counseling from a biblical perspectiveand they use a number of tools to help couples work through practicalissues relating to having a strong marriage. When counseling couplescoming in for remarriage, most of the pastors say that they focus moreon resolving the carry-over issues from the first marriage. Regardlessof whether the individual was considered the innocent party, mostpastors indicated that they would encourage the person to take respon-sibility for their contribution toward the failure of the first marriage.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f C

onne

ctic

ut]

at 1

6:22

11

Oct

ober

201

4


The pastors’ greatest concern in counseling these individuals was theperiod between the divorce and the remarriage and the lack of insighton what led to the failure of the previous marriage.Prophetic pastors indicated that they are very open to working with

conflictive marriages and family relations. Some pastors have foundthat many couples are mistrustful of professional therapists and active-ly seek out pastors and church trained counselors for relational prob-lems. None of these pastors shared that there would be a situationwhere they would suggest divorce as the solution to the couple’sconflict. The majority of these pastors also indicated that they hesitateto send or recommend that a couple seek a professional therapistunless they knew that the therapist was either a Christian who woulddiscourage divorce or a therapist who knew and was sympathetic tothe views of the pastor.Prophetic pastors were concerned with bringing healing to individ-

uals caught in the pain of marital conflict and/or divorce. There was aneven split between pastors who thought that healing came through theministry of the congregation on a one-to-one basis and those whothought that they were active in the individual’s healing process. Inmost cases, these pastors saw healing coming forth in part because ofthe individual’s acknowledgment of his/her personal failures withinthe marriage and his/her willingness to enter informal spiritual coun-seling. It is interesting to note that of all the pastors in both categories,only two Prophetic pastors were open to a formal ceremony in front ofthe congregation that would identify the individual as moving towardspiritual closure of the divorce. This ritual would be the culmination ofa process of spiritual counseling and restoration.Within the Priestly denominations, biblical theology covered a wide

spectrum of viewpoints. With the exception of the Unitarian-Uni-versalist church, which does not have a doctrinal statement or creed aspart of its theological structures, all other Priestly denominations indi-cated that the Bible was either a critical or authoritative source for theteaching and practice within their church. Priestly pastors utilize pas-sages which spoke directly to the issue of divorce, such as those usedby Prophetic pastors, while also referring to passages that focus onforgiveness and God’s grace. The Presbyterian pastor shared that he ismore committed to his theological understanding of the Bible than tothe official statement of the denomination. The pastor of the EpiscopalChurch indicated that as a practicing denomination they continually

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f C

onne

ctic

ut]

at 1

6:22

11

Oct

ober

201

4


readjust their position based on both the pastoral and theological im-plications of the church and its members. Priestly pastors defineddivorce in negative terminology, and yet they generally attempted tospeak positively about those who are divorced. The pastor from theUnitarian-Universalist church was very concerned about attaching anyguilt and shame to the divorced or remarried person. She framed thesituation in the light of one doing his/her best in difficult circum-stances. On the opposite side of the spectrum, the Lutheran pastordefined divorce as a sin. This idea of sin was not foreign to mostpastors, but most would prefer to use words like ‘‘failure’’ and ‘‘er-ror.’’ Most of the Priestly pastors would accept similar grounds fordivorce as defined by the Prophetic pastors, however, they were ac-cepting of situations where the damages caused within the marriageseemed to outweigh the negative effects of the divorce. The naturalimplication was that they would not have a problem with officiating ina remarriage under these circumstances.Priestly pastors indicated that there are some conditions in which

they would not participate in a remarriage. The reasons given, howev-er, were very different from those expressed by Prophetic pastors. Allthe credo Priestly pastors indicated that they understood God’s graceand forgiveness to be complete, and as such, any person who acknowl-edges God’s healing of past failures or sin could be accepted as aninnocent party in a remarriage. Most pastors indicated that they are notso interested in innocence or guilt within the previous marriage asmuch as they desire to know if the individual is honestly desirous ofhaving God be a part of his/her new marriage. When these pastors citeconditions in which they would not officiate at a remarriage, it isusually because of their concern for the success of the new marriage.Some pastors use subjective guidelines to determine eligibility forremarriage. The more common official standard utilized by some ofthese pastors is a time limit between divorce and remarriage and thetime span of the dating relationship. In the Presbyterian Church, theofficial policy is no less than two years post divorce, and the engage-ment period should be for one year or more. Most pastors also advisesome form of counseling as part of the preparation process for remar-riage.Of the Priestly pastors interviewed, counseling is a smaller part of

their ministry as compared to when they were first ordained. In gener-al, these pastors were more hesitant of seeing individuals and couples

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f C

onne

ctic

ut]

at 1

6:22

11

Oct

ober

201

4


for more than three sessions and were more open to recommendingprofessional therapists. Unless there are unusual circumstances, all thepastors require some pre-marriage counseling. For some pastors this isa shift from their earlier practice. The reasons given for the shift wererelated to their concerns about the increase in the divorce rate andacceptance that counseling could and does help some couples who arenot quite sure whether they are ready for a lifelong commitment. Mostof the premarital counseling is focused on practical issues of negotiat-ing and communicating effectively with each other. The Presbyterianpastor shared that he puts more emphasis on spiritual issues within amarriage relationship, especially the need for forgiveness and relyingon God’s grace and comfort in times of difficulties. Much of thepre-remarriage counseling is very similar to what the pastors presentto couples who come for premarital counseling. The focus in this caseonly changes with regards to processing the issues in the first marriageand the wisdom and understanding that they now bring to their presentmarriage, as well as issues that are still unresolved.Pastors from the Priestly perspective identify healing as a signifi-

cant privilege and a major responsibility within the ministry. Thesepastors were more likely to have formal programs within their churchor would recommend outside programs that aim at helping divorcedindividuals and remarried couples. Half of these pastors also indicatedthat they would be willing to continue working with a couple if theydecided to get a divorce. The same pastors would recommend profes-sional therapy if the individual complained of post-divorce stress anddepression. The Unitarian-Universalist pastor shared that her desire isfor everyone in her church to fully accept the reality of his/her self-worth, regardless of marital status.The majority of the Priestly pastors felt that a divorced person

needed to be fully accepted by the community as a first step towardhealing. They felt that this would happen in their churches if they tookthe initiative of welcoming these hurting individuals. Except for theUnited Methodist church, no other Priestly pastor has any official riteor ceremony to recognize the closure of the divorce. The majority feltthat healing could come from spiritual counseling or from informalrituals with close friends within the church. The Lutheran pastor feltthat addressing the divorce as sin actually permitted the church mem-ber to more fully move toward closure by confessing the sin andreceiving absolution from the church. Healing, he argues, first comes

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f C

onne

ctic

ut]

at 1

6:22

11

Oct

ober

201

4


from reestablishing one’s relationship with God and receiving fullyHis grace and blessings.Priestly pastors also took a philosophical and pragmatic perspective

on divorce recovery and healing. The pastor of the Presbyterianchurch indicated that he sees a problem in the transition phase whenthe individual goes from a formal/informal recovery program to his/her reentry into the life of the church. He indicated that this is the pointwhere he may lose some of these parishioners. Most of the Priestlypastors believe that there are still many negative views about divorcein their churches, and it is impossible for a divorced person to becompletely shielded from these attitudes. Some Priestly pastors, aswell as Prophetic pastors, felt that pain and suffering do not alwayshave to be framed in negative terms. Working through trials and afflic-tions has the redeeming effect of drawing one closer to God andmaking one more sensitive to the plight of other hurting people.

Comparison Across Prophet and Priest

The difference between the Priestly and Prophetic groups has beendetailed already in the previous section as a result of explaining thetheological position in each camp. In summary, it could be said thatthe Prophetic pastors have a more literal interpretation of the Bible,and for the most part, they use the Bible as their sole source of churchteaching. The Priestly pastors have a wide range of hermeneutic em-phasis, and for the most part, the Bible is the primary source, but notnecessarily the exclusive source of their teaching.One common factor that crosses the boundaries of Prophet and

Priest is the deep sincerity and profound respect for the complexity ofthe issue of divorce and remarriage within our modern society. Themajority of pastors indicated that the process of wrestling with theseissues was not at the forefront of their theological thinking until theyentered their first ministry position. The reality of having to deal withchurch members on a one-to-one basis brought most pastors to ex-amine their theological and pastoral positions very carefully. Onepastor from each category indicated that his/her position on divorceand remarriage modified somewhat due to their practical ministry. Theother ten pastors indicated that their position has not changed, but theystill struggle with these issues and anticipate that this will continuethroughout their ministry.Both groups of pastors believe that they are responsible for holding

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f C

onne

ctic

ut]

at 1

6:22

11

Oct

ober

201

4


up to their congregations the highest standards of God, as they under-stand them, while at the same time offering to each person God’sforgiveness and healing. None of the pastors identified divorce as anunforgivable sin or grounds for separating a member of the churchfrom their fellowship. At least half of all the pastors believe thatacknowledging the divorce as wrong is part of the forgiveness process.All pastors believe that one partner in the marriage could do every-thing possible to keep the marriage together and yet a divorce may stilloccur. The majority of pastors from both camps said that they werecommitted to holding lifetime marriage as the standard within theirchurch. When it comes to divorce the majority of pastors believe thatit is correct to hold the clergy to a higher standard than the congrega-tion.

COMMENTS

The first thing that I learned from this qualitative study on pastors’comments on the issue of divorce and remarriage is that pastors arevery willing to share with the community at large and with any inter-ested individuals their beliefs and the functioning of their ministry. Myfeeling is that these pastors are used to dealing with the public and aregenerally well prepared to discuss any issues within their pastoraljurisdiction. All the pastors seemed very comfortable in the interviewand they expressed their views directly without any signs of defen-siveness. Outside of the fact that almost all the pastors have very busyschedules, I believe that they make great informants within the cultureof their denominations and churches. Unfortunately, I believe that theyare an underutilized resource for social researchers.The next thing that stood out for me was the long-term consistency

of the pastors’ theological and pastoral position on the issues of di-vorce and remarriage. As indicated in the introduction, ExchangeTheory would predict that if people are leaving long-term relation-ships in greater numbers, then it might be assumed that the barriers toleaving must have decreased or have been eliminated. Consideringthat the mean years of being a pastor in this group was 18 years, andthe fact that the divorce rate during this same time frame has increaseddramatically, one would expect, according to Exchange Theory, thatpastors would have made significant changes in the way they viewdivorce. What this result may imply is that the church continues to

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f C

onne

ctic

ut]

at 1

6:22

11

Oct

ober

201

4


present the same barriers to divorce that existed from the 60s, but thatpeople no longer look to the church as an institution of compellingmoral leadership or that people are less involved with church life interms of membership and/or active participation. I believe that moreresearch is warranted on the correlation of church affiliation and atti-tudes about divorce and remarriage.I am aware that I am biased and that although the interview format

was relatively open, I accept that I had a great deal of control over thequestions I asked and did not ask. As an invited guest, I consciouslydid not pose questions that could be construed as challenging or con-frontational. I believe this was appropriate based on my research ob-ject of learning from pastors their personal views on divorce, and yet Ibelieve that I lost a level of clarity by not pursuing more deeply thoseviews that are not consistent with my own perceptions. I believe that Itook more time in the interview discussing areas of my own interestrather than encouraging pastors to pursue topics that were most ontheir mind. The length of time for the interview was too short to gointo more depth, and I was really concerned about over-extending mywelcome with the pastors.

IMPLICATIONS FOR COUNSELORS

A major part of our identity as mental health counselors who pro-vide services to troubled couples is connected to the issue of divorceand remarriage. The majority of our clients enter therapy because of aconflictive marital relationship or because of the stress that is part ofblended families. For the most part, we treat these clients as if they areself-contained units that are isolated from the complexities of multiplesystems. Unless the client brings up the subject, we rarely ask aboutthe support or barrier that they may be experiencing from a host ofexternal social units. We seem to be comfortable with issues of familyof origin and extended families, and yet we overlook social institu-tions that actively and powerfully communicate many messages thataffect the client’s perception of the problem from an ecosystemicframework.This research study indicates that pastors are very much involved in

the welfare of their congregation, and when couples and families arein distress, they are eager to participate in whatever way seems ap-propriate. One way in which pastors are willing to help is in communi-

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f C

onne

ctic

ut]

at 1

6:22

11

Oct

ober

201

4


cating to the therapist their personal position of divorce and remar-riage, and the possible implication that this may have on a member oftheir congregation if they were to choose to divorce. As this researchhas illustrated, some churches have official regulations that may havegrave implications for a divorced member of the church. From myresearch interview it seems clear to me that pastors could also explainwhat supports are available in the church while the couple may be inthe process of therapy, and what, if any, formal programs are availablefor a post-divorce individual.Another important function of the pastor when a member of their

congregation enters therapy is that of a team consultant or member.Pastors indicated that they would be willing to work in parallel withprofessional therapists if the couple or individual is open to such anarrangement. In these cases, the pastor may see him/herself as a spiri-tual counselor or as an additional resource in the couple’s therapy.Pastors also indicated that they would be willing to come into therapyas consultant. What this may entail is clarification from the pastor onthe position of the church and the resources they could offer thecouple.As this research illustrates, pastors are unique individuals and each

one may well see his/her pastoral responsibilities in radically differentways. It would be good practice, as independent professional thera-pists, to develop a relationship with pastors in the community. If this isnot possible or desirable, another option is to ask each church tosubmit a position paper on a range of issues that may come up intherapy, including divorce and remarriage. In most cases there arewritten denominational statements that the church could easily makeavailable. At the minimum, it seems advisable that clients who entertherapy be given the opportunity to identify their spiritual and/orreligious affiliation. If the client defines him/herself as such, it wouldbe important to inquire if they would want that component of their lifeincorporated into the therapeutic process.

CONCLUSION

There is a sense within the mental health community that spiritualissues will become a more important component for the next genera-tion of clients and therapists. From this brief research on pastors’comments on divorce and remarriage, it seems clear that we have

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f C

onne

ctic

ut]

at 1

6:22

11

Oct

ober

201

4


considerable overlap in our job descriptions and similar desires to helpcouples and families resolve conflict and suffering. This research sug-gests that by listening more to pastors and by being sensitive to theimportant influence they have on the lives of some of our clients, wecould mutually benefit from some form of partnership. This area ofcooperation seems to be under-explored within the counseling com-munity devoted to working with couples, and it appears that the time isripe for us to devote some of our research resource toward betterunderstanding how to conceptualize and define the appropriate inter-face between our two disciplines.

REFERENCES

Amato, P. R. (1996). Explaining the intergenerational transmission of divorce. Jour-nal of Marriage and the Family, 58, 628-640.

Amato, P. R., & Booth, A. (1995). Changes in gender role attitudes and perceivedmarital quality. American Sociological Review, 60, 58-66.

Bumpass, L. L., Martin, T. C., & Sweet, J. A. (1991). The impact of family back-ground and early factors on marital disruption. Journal of Family Issues, 12,22-42.

Crane, D., Soderquist, J., & Gardner, M. (1995). Gender difference in cognitive andbehavioral steps toward divorce. American Journal of Family Therapy, 23,99-105.

DePoy, E., & Gitlin, L. (1993). Introduction to Research: Multiple Strategies forHealth and Human Service. St. Louis: Mosby.

Donovan, R., & Jackson, G. (1990). Deciding to divorce: A process guided by socialexchange, attachment and cognitive dissonance theories. Journal of Divorce, 18,23-35.

Huddleston, R., & Hawkings, L. (1993). The reaction of friends and family ondivorce. Journal of Divorce & Remarriage, 19, 195-207.

Joubert, C. (1997). Correlates of Baptist church membership in the state of socialproblems. Psychological Reports, 30, 474-487.

Krishnan, V. (1994). The impact of wife’s employment on attitude toward divorce.Journal of Divorce & Remarriage, 22, 87-101.

Kunz, J., & Kunz, P. (1995). Social support during the process of divorce: It doesmake a difference. Journal of Divorce & Remarriage, 24, 111-119.

Lehrer, E., & Chiswick, C. (1993). Religion as a determinant of marital stability.Demography, 30, 385-404.

Lester, D. (1996). The impact of unemployment on marriage and divorce. Journal ofDivorce & Remarriage, 25, 151-154.

Medoff, M., & Skov, I. (1992). Religion and behavior: An empirical analysis. Jour-nal of Socio Economics, 21, 143-151.

Patton,M. (1990).Qualitative Evaluation and Research Methods. 2nd. edition. New-bury Park, CA: Sage.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f C

onne

ctic

ut]

at 1

6:22

11

Oct

ober

201

4


Sabatelli, R., & Shehan, C. (1993). Exchange and resource theories. In P. Boss, W.Doherty, R. LaRossa, W. Schumm, & S. Steinmetz (Eds.), Sourcebook of FamilyTheories and Methods: A Contextual Approach. New York: Plenum Press.

Vaughn-Call, R. A., & Heaton, T. (1997). Religious influence on marital stability.Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion, 36, 382-392.

Yangl, B., & Lester, D. (1991). Correlates of statewide divorce rates. Journal ofDivorce & Remarriage, 15, 219-223.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f C

onne

ctic

ut]

at 1

6:22

11

Oct

ober

201

4

pastors' theological perspective on divorce and remarriage

Documents