Years ago, in my seminary ethics course, my professor (Dr. David Clyde-Jones) delved into foundational biblical grounds for divorce.

He noted that the specific grounds for divorce, clearly taught in Scripture, are adultery and desertion. But he went on to explain that the biblical foundation of those two grounds is that they are a “radical breach of the marriage covenant.”

A “radical breach” is not some disagreements or “we have just grown apart.”

When there has been a great betrayal by the spouse such as an adulterous relationship or a pattern of failure to love and care for one’s spouse (Exodus 21:7-11), the marriage covenant has been radically broken and God, in His mercy, says the offended spouse may make the radically broken covenant legal through divorce.

Going beyond the book

Unfortunately, as church leaders seek to help marriages in their congregations, they sometimes begin making extra rules, going beyond what Scripture says. A common version is suggesting—often requiring—a victim to remain in a marriage where the spouse has committed adultery and, in the leaders’ eyes, has seemingly repented.

I say this is an extra rule because Scripture says the offended spouse has every right to divorce for adultery no matter the appearance of repentance (Matthew 19:9) or even the forgiveness granted by the victim. It is the victim’s choice whether to remain in the marriage or not.

The damage has been done to what was intended to be a trusting and loving relationship.

I can only guess that God allows divorce in these cases because He knows how much of an uphill battle it is to build trust once again after such a great betrayal of trust. It can take years for the offended spouse to trust their spouse again. We even have the example of God, Himself, “divorcing” his people and sending them out into exile because of their metaphorical adultery (idolatry—Jeremiah 3:6-8).

Arguing from the lesser to the greater, how much more difficult is it for humans to simply go on in a relationship that is so badly broken than for the perfect, loving God of the universe to say enough is enough in His relationship with His bride?

Church leaders should place themselves in the place of the one whose spouse has become intimate with another.

What about repentance?

In addition, no leader in the church can know the heart of the offender.

As leaders look on, they may see a seemingly contrite offender. In their eyes they may believe that the victim should forgive and forget the evil done to them, welcoming the betrayer back with open arms.

However, be warned: it is extraordinary how contrite a person can act, and yet, have no such remorse.

The adulterer has taken all the steps of turning from their spouse, deserting them for another lover. Repentance means to turn 180 degrees from your sin. It means to be fully contrite, recognizing the sin, and turning from doing it again.

What leader can truly know that a parishioner has genuinely repented of their sin?

Trusting the victim

Abuse in marriage (physical or emotional) is also a radical breach in the covenant of marriage in that it goes against everything taught in Scripture about how a marital partner should treat their spouse (Ephesians 5:25-32). In treating his or her spouse with complete disdain, dishonor, and in fact, hatred the partner has separated themself from and deserted the spouse. They have not cared for their partner as Scripture dictates.

Again, a spouse who has radically broken the marriage covenant through patterns of abusive behavior may easily manipulate church leaders into thinking he/she is repentant, convincing them they should put pressure on the victim to let him/her back into the marriage.

I would suggest that church leaders hold to this principal: Trust the victim of abuse with the decision whether to stay or leave just as they should for those who have suffered from a spouse’s adulterous betrayal.

Church leaders do not know the heart of the offender nor usually see the abuse that happens. Most abuse takes place behind closed doors in a very targeted way. Therefore, leaders cannot make judgments about the repentance of the abuser either.

Leaders need to trust the victim’s judgment on whether it is safe to return to the abuser.

I have heard many stories of “repentant” abusers who put on the sad face for church leaders, yet continued to control, manipulate, and demean their spouses in the dark. The church leaders must look to the victim to determine if repentance is truly happening.

But, even more importantly, repentance is not a determining factor in abuse cases just as it is not in adultery cases.

The offended party needs to make the decision to stay or leave. Repentance does not overcome the damage done by adultery or abuse. For some, apparent repentance may bring reconciliation (in the sense of remaining married).

However, the Lord does not require this. He simply says where there is a radical breach in the covenant relationship (ie. abuse) there is grounds for divorce . . . no ifs, ands, or buts. Going back to an abusive spouse is a choice that only the victim can make.

Forgiveness and reconciliation

Though the Lord calls the offended party in any of these cases to forgive the offender (in time), we also need to understand that forgiveness does not necessarily bring reconciliation to the relationship. Forgiveness does not create trust and a relationship must involve trust to be . . . a relationship.

There is a distinction between forgiving someone before the Lord (as described here) and there being true repentance (on the offender’s part). Trust develops in the light of repentance matched with forgiveness.

As evidence of repentance builds over time—and it can be a long time in coming, particularly in cases of abuse—then trust can slowly develop.

Leaders in the church cannot trust the perpetrator for th e target of that abuse. That is neither their responsibility or in their wheelhouse of duties as leaders in the church.

Just as described in this blog, a leader, who is basically unaffected by the horrible sin of abuse in a congregant’s marriage, cannot forgive that abuser on behalf of the target of that abuse. Nor can he demand reconciliation when he knows little to nothing about whether behind closed doors that abuser is actively, genuinely repenting.

This is a great evil

This is a great evil as the writer of Ecclesiastes says (Eccl. 2:21). Those who are ignorant and arrogant enough to stand as judges of the repentance of an abuser in the stead of the victim are failing in the way of the book of James:

There is only one lawgiver and judge, he who is able to save and to destroy. But who are you to judge your neighbor?
James 4:12 (ESV)

Leader, you are not the all-seeing one—in fact, if you judge the repentance of the abuser you are being a blind guide to the victim. You cannot judge the repentance of abusers.

Leader, you must trust those who are actually affected by the spouse’s great betrayal in adultery or abuse. They are the ones able to make these judgements based on real sight.