# LCMS Convention Workbook_St. Louis Missouri_1983_S333 # Machine transcription, uncorrected — CHI Digital Archive (demonstration) THEOLOGICAL DOCUMENTS III. Some Problems Against the background of this discussion of marriage and its purposes we may proceed tocomment briefly ona few issues connected with marriage and sexuality. Our intention here is not to discuss fully all relevant issues, such as, for example. the problems of pornography or abortion. but instead to deal with some of the problems most frequently mentioned in requests to the Synod.?8 It should be noted that we have chosen to concen- trate first on a positive development of the order of marriage and its purposes. No discussion of particular problems, however urgent they may appear to be, is likely to be helpful if carried out in isolation from a developed theological understanding of sexuality. Furthermore, it ought to be obvious that no brief discussion of the problems taken up can be exhaustive or fully adequate. It will be enough to point out the direction in which the analysis above leads with respect to certain issues. A. Divorce and Remarriage In response to the questioning of some Pharisees. Jesus was Himself prompted to discuss the issue of divorce (Matt. 19:3-9: ef. Matt. 5:31 f.). In so doing He appeals to the primal will of the Creator that a man and woman who have become one flesh are not to be “put asunder.” Although the law of Moses had allowed divorce, this was due to the hardness of the sinful human heart (Deut. 24:1-4). But “from the beginning it was not so.” and Jesus appeals to that primal ordinance in order to demonstrate what marriage ought to be and to convict those who fall short of what it is meant to be. It is for our purposes most important to recognize the seriousness with which all traditional Christian teaching has regarded divorce. C. S. Lewis has made use of the “one flesh” imagery to provide a simple explanation of this common Christian teaching. With respect to abortion. the official position of The Lutheran Church—Missour! Synod is that “since abortion takes a human life. abortion is not a morai option. except as a tragically unavoidable byproduct of medical procedures necessary to prevent the death of another human being. viz.. the mother...“ (1979 Resolution 3-U2A. “To State Position on Abortion”) This issue is not treated in this study. since the CTCR and its Social Concerns Committee are in the process of preparing a new report on abortion When completed, it wi!l be made available to the members of the Synod for study and guidance 24 and woman who now propose to rupture their oneness. then of course we must fear for the child. What event could be more calculated to disturb the child at the very center of his personal identity? Parents are not merely a cause and children an effect which can easily be separated. Here again we must remember that our commitments in the flesh are personal commitments. The child's personhood. his sense of identity is involved. To tear the marriage asunder is in some sense to do the same to the child. Moreover. Christian parents need to remember their com- mitments to their children are also spiritual commitments. Husband and wife who have joined themselves in the one-flesh union of marriage (Eph. 5:31) are committed to fulfill their parental duty by bringing up their children “in the nurture and admonition of the Lord” (Eph. 6:4 KJV). It goes without saying that the task of bearing a credible witness to the Lord's instruction regarding the permanency of marriage and the meaning of the self-giving love which makes marriage work (Eph. 5:21 ff.) is made more difficult for divorced parents. Thirdly, marriage can scarcely function as a place of remedy or healing if we refuse its constraints and reject its disciplines. In marriage God would have us learn what commit- ment to another person involves. He offers no guarantees that such commitment will always be easy or pleasant. There is only one sure way to protect ourselves against the cost of commit- ment to others, and that—to make no such commitment at all. whether in marriage or in other ways—is to tread the destruc- tive path of disobedience and rebellion against the Creator (Rom. 1:24-32). Marriage cannot function in accord with its God-ordained purpose if it is given up whenever our desires and wishes encourage us to do so or if we merely resign ourselves fatalistically to a deteriorating relationship. There is another alternative. If, in prayer and hope, we recommit ourselves to what we have promised. those desires and wishes may be transformed and marriage will fulfill its task of healing. God is at work in history gathering a faithful community. In marriage we are given some taste of what such fidelity involves and requires. We are given an opportunity to be faithful to one person as God has been faithful to us all. This is the principle articulated in the passage which perhaps more than any other has shaped Christian thinking about marriage. 26 All (Christian churches} regard divorce as something like cutting up a living body. as a kind of surgical operation. Some of them think the operation so violent that it cannot be done at all [Catholic teaching on indissolubility]; others admit it as a desperate remedy in extreme cases. They are all agreed that it is more like having both your legs cut off than it is like dissolving a business partnership or even deserting a regiment. What they all disagree with is the modern view that it isa simple readjustment of partners... .2° We can see that the retention of this traditional view is no mere traditionalism but, on the contrary. takes seriously the will of God for marriage. as well as the needs of our human nature. We remind ourselves of some of the implications of the three purposes of marriage developed above. Consider first marriage as a union in mutual love. The promises lovers make are not foolhardy. They answer to some of the deepest needs of human beings: the need never to be left entirely alone. whatever the future may bring: the need to be sure that. whatever uncertainties the future may hold, these two people can at least say that theirs will be a future together: the need to be able to give themselves entirely and completely to another—to be naked before the other. and to be so in complete trust and confidence: the need to know that their person, not just their functions, is valued, and that they are not interchangeable with any other partner. The order of marriage instituted by God answers to these deep human needs. It gives rise to aset of hopes and expectations which ought not be disappointed. not only because we have acommandment to the contrary. but because to disappoint them is to fail in a fundamental human commit- ment answering to an equally fundamental human need. When we consider the child who is the fruit of marriage, we may also come to realize the enormous seriousness of divorce. It is fairly common to hear people say in connection with divorce that they fear especially for the children. This statement. though it may ordinarily refer only to the disruption and uncertainty which divorce brings to the life of the child. may also point to an even deeper reality. If the child is the sign of the unity—indeed more. the incarnation of the unity—of this man SCS Lewis, Mere ChrostinnitsiNew York: The Macmilian Company. 19501, p 82 to a Eph. 5:31-32:"'For this reason a man shall leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh.’ This mystery is a profound one. and I am saying that it refers to Christ and the church... .” This is the pattern of love which ought to permeate marriage. It is the only kind of love which can answer to our deepest needs. It must bea love which is willing to go as far as Christ did in His commitment to His people. a love which so commits itself to the good of the beloved that nothing short of death can break the bond of its commit- ment. It remains true. of course. that ours is a world distorted by sin. Marriages are broken daily. and our personal relationships are often characterized by something less than a Christlike fidelity. In response to this the church in its public teaching must hold up and bear witness to the need for fidelity in marriage. Yet the church must face the fact that divorce has become a prevalent practice in our society. According to the Scriptures. fornication is the only ground for divorce (Matt. 5:32; 19:9).% The act of fornication by a partner in marriage breaks the unity of the marriage. In this situation the individual offended may have the right to secure a divorce. However. this does not mean that he or she must or should exercise this right. In some cases forgiveness can save the marriage. The divorce af Christian pastors must he taken icith [tis difficult ta see how the church can ity oof its iwitnexs—especially in an age ui must SEPINUSNESS, maintain the in where divorce is prevalent—if if permits pastors who have divorced their wires for lexs than Biblical reasons to continue tn the office uf the public ministry. Generaliya pastor who has heen di partothis wife, ought notte remain inoffice nur be remmstated on the affice of pastor, However, it is possible thatunder very eres ptionaletrounistancesa former pastor mia by the grace at urced. ercept incases of waichastityor desertion an the Tradsteonals tneclogians im our Senedd nave nut HC Frit 333