Divorce

[Toddsda]

I have 3 daughters from a previous marriage. My current wife is incredibly verbally abusive to my 9 year. She is terrified of her. I cant allow my child to be bullied. Can i divorce my wife or am i stuck with this horrible person forever?

[rudywoofs (Pam)]

I don't know exactly what the church's stance on your situation might be, but I'd drop the current wife like a hot potato if she isn't interested in changing her behavior.  Who knows what damage she may have already caused your young daughter...

[Gregory Matthews]

Your primary concern should be your daughter.  She cannot defend herself.  She looks to you and needs you as her protector.

As to what you should do to protect your daughter is a second issue that you must deal with.

NOTE: I was once involved in a case where a man molested his step-daughter.  The girls mother decided that it was in her best interests to support her husband.

With that decision on the part of the mother, a decision was made that she should give up her parental rights and the girl should live with relatives.

 

 

 

 

[Green Cochoa]

As I understand the Bible, the only legitimate cause for a divorce is fornication/adultery (see Mt. 5:32).  However, separation is always allowed.  Unless your spouse has committed adultery, you are not free to divorce her and to marry someone else.  But you may certainly separate from her for awhile.  In Mrs. White's writings, we find an additional circumstance or two where she accepted someone's remarriage without fornication being the cause of separation.  For example, in one case the wife had become insane on account of the measles having gone to her brain and was committed to an insane asylum, leaving the five children with no mother to care for them.  When the husband remarried, some church members complained, and Mrs. White said "Let them alone."  Obviously, that was a special case.  I can think of a few other special cases that might be cause for a divorce/remarriage, but only a very few.

Your question implies, however, that you are not following the Biblical command which says "husbands love your wives" (Eph. 5:25).  If you loved her, you would never call her a "horrible person."  Women need affection and love.  Your wife may simply be lashing out at your daughter on account of her own emotional starvation from affection.  As a loving husband, you have the privilege and duty of commanding your household to be obedient to God's will, leading your family by your own righteous example.

Separation/divorce should always be a last resort--the furthest thing from our minds in trying to solve a problem.  No one is perfect, and perhaps no two people are perfectly matched.  I have often wondered about the honesty of couples who claim to have never argued.  As the minister said in a wedding I recently attended, arguments are natural, and will sometimes occur, but how they are handled is the important thing.  He urged the couple to follow the Bible in resolving their disagreement and forgiving each other before going to bed that night (see Eph. 4:26).  Very good advice.

 

 

[Gregory Matthews]

Toddsda:  You will note that I did not advocate divorce.  There are potentially other options that you have in order to resolve the issues.  As Green said, separation may be one of them. 

Included in the options that you have is that of enlisting the aid of child protective services.  The potential is there for them to be helpful:

1)  They can help to effect a separation between your daughter and your wife that will protect your daughter.

2)  They also can arrange for your to be placed in a situation where she cooperates in learning new behavior and modes of relating to your daughter.

3)  They can help both you and your daughter to better relate to the situation.

 

However, there is a reality as to the legal situation in which you may be in.  There are cases where a separation, to include one that is a legal separation enforced by a judicial order, may not be  all that is needed.  I am not attempting to give you legal advice.  But, there are times when a couple may need to obtain a legal divorce rather than a legal separation.

NOTE:  I disagree with Green on one (or more points).  I believe that his speculation about the circumstances of your marriage are purely speculation and not grounded in facts that are known to him.  His advice to be a loving husband is simply specious.

 

[Gregory Matthews]

Toddsda:  Your OP implied a question as to how the SDA denomination would respond in a case like you described.  I had planned to leave this aside for a while.  But, as Green has responded to it I will also join in:

1)  In the SDA denomination, right or wrong, the local congregation decides issues that involve church discipline.  How your congregation would respond will depend in major ways on:  a) Your relationship in the congregation.  'b) The doctrinal views related to marriage and divorce in that congregation.

2)  In his response, Green tied divorce and remarriage together.  This is not typically done in many SDA congregations in the United States of America.  IOW, a more typical response would be to express sorrow at the divorce, but not to involve discipline. 

3)  If discipline were to be involved it would most likely be involved at the time of your remarriage.

4)  Green correctly mentioned that EGW did allow some leeway and was not totally rigid in response to remarriage after divorce when adultery was not involved.

5)  While Green might disagree with my next statement,  many SDAs today would believe that the circumstances that you describe might fit the category in which EGW would  allow for remarriage.    NOTE:  I am not holding EGW up as the one to arbitrate your situation.  I simply am responding to Green's comments as he brought her up.

6) The reality is that many SDA clergy and congregations would leave the decision as to divorce and remarriage to that of being between you and God.

NOTE:  My comments assume you do not at this time have someone in mind to marry if you were to divorce.

 

[Green Cochoa]

6 minutes ago, Gregory Matthews said:

Toddsda:  You will note that I did not advocate divorce.  There are potentially other options that you have in order to resolve the issues.  As Green said, separation may be one of them. 

Included in the options that you have is that of enlisting the aid of child protective services.  The potential is there for them to be helpful:

1)  They can help to effect a separation between your daughter and your wife that will protect your daughter.

2)  They also can arrange for your to be placed in a situation where she cooperates in learning new behavior and modes of relating to your daughter.

3)  They can help both you and your daughter to better relate to the situation.

 

However, there is a reality as to the legal situation in which you may be in.  There are cases where a separation, to include one that it a legal separation enforced by a judicial order, may not be  all that is needed.  I am not attempting to give you legal advice.  But, there are times when a couple may need to obtain a legal divorce rather than a legal separation.

NOTE:  I disagree with Green on one (or more points).  I believe that his speculation about the circumstances of your marriage are purely speculation and not grounded in facts that are known to him.  His advice to be a loving husband is simply specious.

 

Todd has free choice, Gregory, whether or not to trust to God's Word, which I referenced, or to the arm of the law, to which you inclined.  Personally, I would never trust CPS to do more than tear families apart for the slightest infraction.  The Bible gives good advice in saying we should not take a brother to the law to resolve our disputes.  Perhaps that applies here with a wife as well, don't you think?

Quote

1 Corinthians

 6:4    If then ye have judgments of things pertaining to this life, set them to judge who are least esteemed in the church.  
 6:5    I speak to your shame. Is it so, that there is not a wise man among you? no, not one that shall be able to judge between his brethren?  
 6:6    But brother goeth to law with brother, and that before the unbelievers.  
 6:7    Now therefore there is utterly a fault among you, because ye go to law one with another. Why do ye not rather take wrong? why do ye not rather [suffer yourselves to] be defrauded?  
 6:8    Nay, ye do wrong, and defraud, and that [your] brethren.  
 6:9    Know ye not that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Be not deceived: neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor abusers of themselves with mankind,  
 6:10    Nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners, shall inherit the kingdom of God. 

The Word of God is clear that we should not seek a worldly judge, but rather look for wise believers to help us with issues of arbitration.  Why, Gregory, do you not recommend a good Adventist elder?  "Is it so, that there is not a wise man" in the church? "no, not one that shall be able to judge between his brethren?" Paul says "I speak to your shame."  I echo his sentiments.

As Paul clearly brings the conversation on this to the focus of one's eternal salvation, it is obviously a matter of importance.  The exclusion of fornicators and adulterers from the kingdom of God are among the very first things he lists after teaching that we should not go to the law, but rather seek the wisdom of believers in the church. And Jesus taught that anyone who divorces his wife, except for fornication, causes her to commit adultery, and anyone who marries the one who is divorced commits adultery.  Strong words.  From our Creator.

[Green Cochoa]

10 minutes ago, Gregory Matthews said:

2)  In his response, Green tied divorce and remarriage together.  This is not typically done in many SDA congregations in the United States of America.  IOW, a more typical response would be to express sorrow at the divorce, but not to involve discipline. 

...

5)  While Green might disagree with my next statement,  many SDAs today would believe that the circumstances that you describe might fit the category in which EGW would  allow for remarriage.    NOTE:  I am not holding EGW up as the one to arbitrate your situation.  I simply am responding to Green's comments as he brought her up.

6) The reality is that many SDA clergy and congregations would leave the decision as to divorce and remarriage to that of being between you and God.

NOTE:  My comments assume you do not at this time have someone in mind to marry if you were to divorce.

 

Regarding #2, Jesus did this.  As His disciple, I accept His instruction.  See Matthew 5:32.

Regarding #5, I do disagree, completely.  Mrs. White would not allow a divorce/remarriage in this case given the stated circumstances.

Regarding #6, what you say may be true, but only reflects the neglect of the church to do its duty.

Regarding your note, why should it make a difference whether or not the gentleman has his eyes on someone else?  Either it is valid to divorce based on the current circumstances, or it is not.  According to the Bible, for those still wishing to follow it, it is not.  Therefore, having eyes for someone else would simply violate the Ten Commandments and increase the suffering/dissatisfaction of all involved.

[Gregory Matthews]

Green, you did not understand the point that I was making.

 

Child Protective Services dues more that take people into court.  They can serve as a helpful agency.  I have used them as such in the past.

The other day I injured myself and was in pain.  I went to a hospital to be evaluated and treated.  I did not ask the physician if he was a SDA.  I simply accepted his services.

There are secular, civil, agencies who can do the same.   There would be nothing wrong in Toddsda using their services.

No, a good SDA Elder would not have the ability to resolve some of the potential issues and  that ability rests with civil government, which Christians should use as God has ordained that civil government has some functions.

 

 

[Gregory Matthews]

Green.  I have used CPS to help struggling single parents together as a family. 

One example was my next-door neighbor in one place where I lived.  She made some mistakes.  CPS came in in a helpful way had helped her to get he act together.  Not once was her young son taken from her.

CPS got involved when her very young son was picked up one day walking down the side of a busy highway.  DPS came in.  She cooperated and CPS Was very helpful.

 

 

[Green Cochoa]

Gregory,

The Witch of Endor kindly took care of Saul, being very hospitable, cooking him a warm meal and making sure that he would take some strength from it.

The point is, one's goodness at certain times does not recommend their services to the Christian who has been given other instructions.

Our church has come short of doing its God-intended duty.  We could have our own people doing a better job than CPS ever dreamed of.  I've also worked with CPS.  The experience was mixed.  I did not call CPS.  I had no involvement in the problem for which CPS was called.  However, I had a Christian desire to help the one in distress, and was uniquely qualified to do so.  CPS prevented all contact for awhile, and later its policies rather limited it.  Did CPS take care of the persons affected? In a way, yes.  They separated the family in a sort of "restraining order" fashion, and, having only ever heard the side of the one they came in to defend, I cannot know how fair their judgment was.  But it was a situation where our church lost an opportunity to shine for God in coming to the aid of the ones in distress.  Instead, people placed their reliance on the government.

[Gregory Matthews]

A lot depends upon the reaction of the parent involved as to how CPS reacts and what CPS does.

In the case of my net-door neighbor, she cooperated in every way with CPS.  This allowed them  to fully work in a helpful way.

I am thinking right now of two cases in which I was involved.  One involved young children and one did not.   One involved a SDA and one did not.

In one case, in order to get through to the two adults involved (no children were involved), the adults had to be forceably separated.   NOTE::  This was not a judgement call as to who was in the wrong.  With the forced separation, the adults got the message to get their act together and some behavior was not allowed.  At that time civil authority was able to work with the couple in a helpful way.

The SDA one involved young children.  A single parent was struggling and failing in major ways.  I visited with him on three occasions.  I told him that if he would come to me, share what he needed I would get him that help.  But, I also told him what I would do if he refused to ask for help.  He lied to me each time.  After three visits I had had enough.  I put him in a position where he realized that he was not only going to lose custody of his children, but he was going to lose much more.  The choice was his.  He agreed to cooperate with those agencies who were able to help him.  He did.  He did not lose his children.  He got the help that he needed and the children stayed with him.

 

[Gregory Matthews]

Green:  I have been involved in multiple situations where civil agencies had to get involved and/or take action in order to protect children and/or relationships between husbands and wives.  In some of those, I instigated the civil agency involvement.  IOW, I turned them in.    In all of them, issues were involved that were beyond the power of a congregation of religious people to resolve.  Civil government had to step in with its authority in order to bring about resolution.  I have personally witnessed families being kept together because civil authority stepped in took the immediate action that needed to be taken.  Sometimes force is needed to get the attention of people.  Congregations of people do not have that force available to them.

 

 

 

 

 

[LifeHiscost]

   Sometimes force is needed to get the attention of people.    

Sounds like the reasoning for some more spiritually fulfilling conclusions by more despotic powers. See Theological Townhall, The Time of the End.

God is Love!~Jesus saves!  

[Gregory Matthews]

Green asked:

Regarding your note, why should it make a difference whether or not the gentleman has his eyes on someone else?  Either it is valid to divorce based on the current circumstances, or it is not.  

A valid question.  The answer is simple.  If the gentleman, while married, has his eye on someone else, the following can be questioned:

1)  Whether or not his description of the conduct of his wife is accurate.

2)  His willingness to seek for a resolution of the issues that does not involve divorce.

 

[Gerr]

When Todd married this woman, she could not have been the "horrible person" that he claims she is now.  What caused the change?

There is a natural law that for every action, there is an equal and opposite reaction.  I would suggest to Todd to fiirst examine his relationship with his wife and how to mend it rather than finding ways to end it. Has she received the love and affection and attention that she craves for and deserve?

I see nothing in the op that an attempt has been made to get to the root of this dislike for the 9 yo.  Breaking/wrecking anything is always easier than restoring something which takes more time & effort. If the root cause is not dealt with, it's a guarantee that it will raise its ugly head again into the next relationship.  Here is a tremendous opportunity for growth for all involved and to show the power of grace at work.

[Gregory Matthews]

Gerry:

I say again that my original response did not mention divorce.  I am not convinced at this point in time that divorce if the ideal resolution.  There may be resolution by other means.

Rather, I suggested that his most immediate decision must relate to the protection of his daughter.  Abuse must be dwelt with immediately.

I do not say that she is a horrible person.  However, I will disagree with you on a point.  What she is today is probably what she was when he married her.  There are two possibilities:

1) He did not really know what she was like.

2) Her relationship with the one daughter developed over a period of time and is not today what it was when he married her.  NOTE:  This is potentially a  subject for therapy.

I do not judge the relationship in any way.  It may be exactly as he describes it and it may not be such.  I do not know.  Yes, I do agree with you that as part of this all aspects of the relationship, to include his role in the marriage, need to be explored.  However, your comment to the effect of focusing on the extent to which he has given his wife the love and affection that she needs is judgmental.  It reflects a bias.  That may (?) not need to be a focus.  Without more knowledge, I am not going to generally suggest such a specific focus.  In looking at the overall relationship one can determine specific needs.

NOTE:  The focus of therapy should not be to determine who is in the right and who is in the wrong.  Rather it should be to determine what is going on that is painful and what needs to be done to resolve it.

 

[Outta Here]

DO NOT ALLOW YOUR WIFE TO ABUSE YOUR 9 YEAR OLD DAUGHTER. REGARDLESS OF YOUR DECISION TO REMAIN MARRIED OR SEEK DIVORCE. IT IS YOUR PRIVILEGE TO BE A PARENT AND YOUR DUTY TO BE YOUR DAUGHTER'S PROTECTOR AT ALL TIMES.

[Gerr]

Greg, although my post followed yours, mine was not meant to be a reply to yours.  In no way shape or form was I condemning Todd for anything.