assignment 7

  

ASSIGNMENT 7 

REL3851.E1 Family Relations

Read Balswick, Fourth Edition, Part 7 (chapters 19 and 20) and answer the following questions. Single space acceptable, but leave a space between questions. 

1. What do you think the authors mean by “the erosion of biblical truth” in their title of Chapter 19?

2. What is “modernity” and why is it challenging? What is the meaning of “post-modern?” Pages 339-341

3. Define and summarize the four dimensions of sociocultural life. Pages 342-343

4. Explain the dilemmas and false hopes that modernity often brings upon the family? Pages 346-352

5. Discuss whether and how a family might escape the bondage of commodities. Pages 352-359

6. Explain the possible reconstruction of community in relationship to family life. Pages 360-361

7. What is the importance of revitalized communication and consciousness? Pages 361-362 

8. What support structures are helpful to ensure solid family life? Pages 363-369.

9.  Traditionally, most churches have taken a very hard stand on the subject of divorce and remarriage, even forbidding remarriage and denying membership to people with “tainted” marital backgrounds. In a previous chapter (pages 311-312) the authors make a statement on the Christian approach to divorce. Discuss how Christians and churches as communities should respond to divorce, both among their members and those seeking membership. (This answer should be longer than the others)

NOTES: WOMEN AND THE BIBLE, CHURCH AND HOME

The Bible as a whole was written in a male centered cultural context, and there is much in both Old and New Testaments that represents and teaches the ancient concept of male dominance and female subordination. The seven classic “female subordination” passages in the New Testament are: I Corinthians 11:1-16, 14:34-35; I Peter 3:1-7; I Timothy 2:9-15; Titus 2:4-8, Ephesians 5:22-24, and Colossians 3:18. Some of these clearly reflect the Genesis story of Adam and Eve. Read them carefully.

However, the general tone of the New Testament message has values that counter and overturn injustice of all kinds. The idea of “mutual submission” in marriage, although hinted in Ephesians 5:21-25, has not been the teaching in the Church until very recent times. Equality of the sexes is suggested in Galatians 3:28, along with overcoming slavery and racial distinctions. Paul says there is no distinction in Christ. Those were ideals for life in the church, but not recognized as socially attainable until recently.

The subordination of women has been the norm in nearly every culture of the world all through history, and has only shifted toward equality in the last 150 years (beginning in the west). And it is worth noting that while these changes are evident in society, very few Christian denominations today support female equality in home and church. The largest denominations (Roman Catholic and Orthodox churches, and among Protestants the Southern Baptist churches), as well as most conservative Protestant churches, still support the traditional model of marriage (wife subordinate), and reject female leadership in the church. Some have softened their stance but have not accepted full gender equity in church and home.

Slavery itself was supported by the church for centuries because “it is in the Bible” and it was viewed as “God’s way.” In the 1800s slavery was defended by many church ministers in America based on some of the same texts that teach the subordination of women.

For those churches that see the Bible as authoritative and inerrant, the concept of gender equity is a major problem. Consequently, many who have recognized a need to change have found a way by reinterpreting key passages, to make them mean something other than what they have always been understood to say. Thus change is allowed within the authority of scripture. In reality, that is not academically honest because it intentionally promotes a false interpretation of relevant texts. Without a doubt, the writers of those New Testament texts meant what they wrote. But the real question is whether what they wrote should be considered binding universal rules.

There are a couple of simple but solid illustrations. In I Corinthians 11 Paul suggests that a woman must have a covering on her head to pray in church. That has been a Roman Catholic policy for centuries, but Protestants ignore it because “it is simply a cultural matter.” The same is true of Paul’s suggestion that it is a shame for a woman to cut her hair short. Likewise in I Peter 3 the writer speaks against braided hair, gold jewelry, and expensive garments. Most Christian women ignore that because “it’s merely cultural.” So, ignoring culturally based teachings in the New Testament is not uncommon. But for some reason, for many Christians the status of women in the church and home, which are rooted in the ancient patriarchal paradigm, remains sacred and set in stone.

Suggested reading:

Fiorenza, Elizabeth Schüssler. In Memory of Her. London: SCM, 1983.

Massey, Lesly F. Women and the New Testament: An Analysis of Scripture in Light of New Testament Era Culture. Jefferson: McFarland, 1989.

_______ Daughters of God-Subordinates of Men: Women and the Roots of patriarchy in the New Testament. Jefferson: McFarland, 2015.

Scanzoni, Letha and Nancy Hardesty. All We’re Meant To Be. Waco: Word, 1975

Witherington, Ben. Women in the Earliest Churches. Cambridge: University Press, 1988

Supplemental

notes, Famil

y

Relations,

L.F

.

M

assey, Ph.D.

DIVOR

C

E AND REMARRIAGE

My

reason

for

posting a question on

divorce

in Assignment 7 is that it is a major concern

to many sincere Christians,

and

in our culture almost everyone has been hurt by it, one way or

another.

Some of you were unaware of harsh church rule on

this

until I p

osted this question.

Allow me to share

an example. Years ago, when I was a young minister in a very conservative

church, I was present when an older minister conducted a pre

–

baptismal interview of a middle

aged couple.

T

hey openly said they had each been

married before, and now had been married to

each other for

about

eight years and had a son. The minister

asked

them

some

very personal

questions, and concluded that neither of them had divorced for “biblical grounds”

(

referring to

the

“fornication” mention

ed in

Matthew 19

:1

–

12), and therefore

he said they

were not free to

remarry.

He said t

hat before this church would accept them and allow them to be baptized, they

had to break up, try to go back to their previous partners, and if that was not possible, the

y would

have to vow to live as celibates.

He said t

he legality of their current marriage was irrelevant. In

God’s eyes (so he said) they were living in a state of adultery.

And true r

epentance means “stop

sinning.”

So to be Christians, they had to first gi

ve up this “sinful relationship.” They went away

in tears, and I went away angry. I could not see how that could be God’s way of dealing with

human problems.

The subject of divorce and remarriage is a very sensitive and difficult subject.

Traditionally,

Christians derive their beliefs about the sanctity of marriage from Genesis 2,

referred to by both

Jesus

and Paul. Christians typically believe that marriage is a divine

institution, sealed by God, a commitment for life, and the two partners become as on

e flesh.

Divorce is not God’s plan.

However, divorce happens. It was common in ancient Israel. It was common in other

ancient cultures too.

And in the Hebrew Bible (the Christian Old Testament) p

rovision is made

for divorce

in Deuteronomy 2

4

:1-4

as par

t of the Law of Moses.

T

he grounds for divorce, and

legal issues related to remarriage, were a controversial issue even among Jesus’ contemporaries

(

positions stated in writings by

Rabbis Shammai and Hillel)

.

People

asked Jesus

questions

about this

to see

which view he would support.

C

omments made by Jesus

appear in

four texts. The two

long

ones are Matt

hew 19:3

–

12

and Mark 10: 2

–

12,

and the

shorter statements

are in

Matthew 5:31

–

32 and Luke 16:18.

However, th

ese two

long

texts differ, and

should be ca

refully examined to determine exactly

what Jesus really said, and how his words might have application in a social and ecclesiastical

context.

In essence, Mark has Jesus saying that that the Mosaic clause was a concession, but

divorce was not the plan

from the beginning. He said that when you divorce and remarry, you

commit adultery.

No excuses.

It is interesting that nowhere in these Gospel texts does Jesus suggest or give permission for a woman to divorce her husband, under any circumstances. These statements are all about men divorcing wives. The reason for that is that in ancient Israel women could not divorce their husbands. Furthermore, the entire debate among the rabbis hinges on one term in Deuteronomy 24 which defined the grounds for a man to divorce his wife and marry another, but the Law of Moses did not allow women to divorce husbands under any circumstances. So, for the church to do so, while claiming to derive its rules from Jesus’ teaching here, is highly inconsistent and poor hermeneutics at best.

The Roman Catholic Church has had traditional rules on this for centuries, and many Protestant churches have followed along, with certain modifications. Some churches do not allow divorce, for any reason, and if someone gets a divorce the result is some form of rejection or repudiation, perhaps the denial of fellowship or exclusion from teaching and positions of leadership. In some churches, anyone who is divorced and then marries another person is considered an adulterer, and is not admitted into fellowship. If such people are admitted, they might not be permitted to teach or serve in any position of leadership. Some churches allow divorce for adultery (based on the passages above) but will not allow remarriage for the one who is guilty of adultery. That person has to stay single. The “innocent” party, thy say, is allowed to remarry.

But looking critically at both scripture and church doctrine, there is no just basis for the church denying fellowship to people because of their marital problems. Nor is there a basis for harsh reaction or punitive measures when divorce occurs.

Of course, when conflicts arise, preserving marriage (avoiding divorce) is generally considered to be ideal. But that is easy for any outsider to say about someone else’s situation. Thinking that we can solve all the current divorce problems by reminding young couples to take marriage seriously is naïve and simplistic.

So, since churches are faced with enormous numbers of their own people getting divorces, remarrying, and wanting to remain active in church, how should churches respond? By traditional rules, based on their interpretation of scripture, some churches would reject half the current adult population of the USA, should they want to join. Why? Because they simply don’t fit the standard. They have a lifestyle that renders them unsuitable for church membership. They are living in sin.

However, many Christians recognize that such a position cannot be the will of God or the way of Christ. People who have made mistakes, even the most serious ones, should find in the church a haven of rest, acceptance, recovery, participation, and even active ministry. And since church rules have been based more on what we think are the implications of Jesus’ teachings, we should rethink our position. Many people have suffered a lifetime of remorse, guilt, and isolation because of a failed marriage. This does not harmonize with Jesus’ words “Come unto me all ye that labor and are heavy laden.” If former sins were grounds for denying membership, or for denying leadership positions in the church, where would the Apostle Paul be in today’s Christian world?

Supplemental notes, Family Relations,
L.F. Massey, Ph.D.

DIVORCE AND REMARRIAGE

M
y
reason for posting a question on divorce in Assignment 7 is that it is a major concern

to many sincere Christians, and in our culture almost everyone has been hurt by it, one way or

another.

Some of you were unaware of harsh church rule on this until I p
osted this question.
Allow me to share
an example. Years ago, when I was a young minister in a very conservative
church, I was present when an older minister conducted a pre
–
baptismal interview of a middle
aged couple. They openly said they had each been
married before, and now had been married to
each other for about eight years and had a son. The minister asked them
some
very personal

questions, and concluded that neither of them had divorced for “biblical grounds” (referring to

the “fornication” mention
ed in
Matthew 19:1
–
12), and therefore
he said they
were not free to

remarry. He said that before this church would accept them and allow them to be baptized, they

had to break up, try to go back to their previous partners, and if that was not possible, the
y would
have to vow to live as celibates.
He said t
he legality of their current marriage was irrelevant. In
God’s eyes (so he said) they were living in a state of adultery.
And true r
epentance means “stop
sinning.”
So to be Christians, they had to first gi
ve up this “sinful relationship.” They went away
in tears, and I went away angry. I could not see how that could be God’s way of dealing with
human problems.

The subject of divorce and remarriage is a very sensitive and difficult subject.
Traditionally,

Christians derive their beliefs about the sanctity of marriage from Genesis 2,

referred to by both Jesus and Paul. Christians typically believe that marriage is a divine

institution, sealed by God, a commitment for life, and the two partners become as on
e flesh.
Divorce is not God’s plan.

However, divorce happens. It was common in ancient Israel. It was common in other
ancient cultures too.
And in the Hebrew Bible (the Christian Old Testament) p
rovision is made
for
divorce
in Deuteronomy 24
:1
–
4

as par
t of the Law of Moses.
T
he grounds for divorce, and
legal issues related to remarriage, were a controversial issue even among Jesus’ contemporaries

(
positions stated in writings by
Rabbis Shammai and Hillel)
.
People
asked
Jesus
questions
about
this
to see

which view he would support.

C
omments made by Jesus
appear in
four texts. The two long ones are Matt
hew 19:3
–
12
and Mark 10: 2
–
12,
and
the
shorter statements
are in
Matthew 5:31
–
32 and Luke 16:18.

However, th
ese two
long
texts differ, and
should be ca
refully examined to determine exactly
what Jesus really said, and how his words might have application in a social and ecclesiastical
context.

In essence, Mark has Jesus saying that that the Mosaic clause was a concession, but
divorce was not the plan
from the beginning. He said that when you divorce and remarry, you
commit adultery.

No excuses.

Supplemental notes, Family Relations, L.F. Massey, Ph.D.

DIVORCE AND REMARRIAGE

My reason for posting a question on divorce in Assignment 7 is that it is a major concern

to many sincere Christians, and in our culture almost everyone has been hurt by it, one way or

another.

Some of you were unaware of harsh church rule on this until I posted this question.

Allow me to share an example. Years ago, when I was a young minister in a very conservative

church, I was present when an older minister conducted a pre-baptismal interview of a middle

aged couple. They openly said they had each been married before, and now had been married to

each other for about eight years and had a son. The minister asked them some very personal

questions, and concluded that neither of them had divorced for “biblical grounds” (referring to

the “fornication” mentioned in Matthew 19:1-12), and therefore he said they were not free to

remarry. He said that before this church would accept them and allow them to be baptized, they

had to break up, try to go back to their previous partners, and if that was not possible, they would

have to vow to live as celibates. He said the legality of their current marriage was irrelevant. In

God’s eyes (so he said) they were living in a state of adultery. And true repentance means “stop

sinning.” So to be Christians, they had to first give up this “sinful relationship.” They went away

in tears, and I went away angry. I could not see how that could be God’s way of dealing with

human problems.

The subject of divorce and remarriage is a very sensitive and difficult subject.

Traditionally, Christians derive their beliefs about the sanctity of marriage from Genesis 2,

referred to by both Jesus and Paul. Christians typically believe that marriage is a divine

institution, sealed by God, a commitment for life, and the two partners become as one flesh.

Divorce is not God’s plan.

However, divorce happens. It was common in ancient Israel. It was common in other

ancient cultures too. And in the Hebrew Bible (the Christian Old Testament) provision is made

for divorce in Deuteronomy 24:1-4 as part of the Law of Moses. The grounds for divorce, and

legal issues related to remarriage, were a controversial issue even among Jesus’ contemporaries

(positions stated in writings by Rabbis Shammai and Hillel). People asked Jesus questions about

this to see which view he would support.

Comments made by Jesus appear in four texts. The two long ones are Matthew 19:3-12

and Mark 10: 2-12, and the shorter statements are in Matthew 5:31-32 and Luke 16:18.

However, these two long texts differ, and should be carefully examined to determine exactly

what Jesus really said, and how his words might have application in a social and ecclesiastical

context. In essence, Mark has Jesus saying that that the Mosaic clause was a concession, but

divorce was not the plan from the beginning. He said that when you divorce and remarry, you

commit adultery. No excuses.