Scripture: Mark 10: 2-9, Nigel Bunce
Jesus’ teaching on divorce was not as harsh as it appears at first. He actually argued in support of the (minimal) protections offered to women faced with unjust divorce by their husbands. Image from: https://www.aboutcatholics.com/beliefs/divorce-annulments-and-remarriage/
Difficlt and uncomfortable
This passage is tonight’s Gospel lectionary reading. I must admit that I have usually shied away from talking about it. But as Scott Lewis, one of my seminary professors said, if a Scripture is difficult, that’s all the more reason to talk about it. Otherwise, you leave the impression that you agree with everything in it.
Divorce is a difficult and uncomfortable subject. I cannot believe that any couple marries with the expectation that their marriage will fail. They truly intend to be together. “Till death us do part.” But yet, about 40-50% of all marriages fail. This leaves a trail of trauma, grief and loss, even when the parting has been amicable. As someone who has walked through that particular dark valley, I don’t find any comfort in Jesus’ seemingly unsympathetic words on the subject.
Wht did the Pharisees ask the question?
But let me back up. Why did the Pharisees ask Jesus the question? In his answer, Jesus referred to the ancient Biblical teaching. ‘Moses allowed a man to write a certificate of dismissal and to divorce her.’ That’s Deuteronomy 24: 1-4. However, in those days (and until very recently in the West), a wife was the property of her husband. That’s why a father “gave away” his daughter to her new husband at the wedding ceremony. It was a property transfer.
Anyway, back to the Scriptural question. In the first century BCE, there were two strains of Judaism. Their champions were Rabbis Hillel and Shammai.
Shammai was literalist on the subject of biblical law. He said that the scriptural words ervat davar [which mean “a fault or indecency” divorce] meant, literally and exclusively, “adultery.” Thus, a woman’s infidelity was the only legitimate grounds for divorce.
Contrariwise, Rabbi Hillel interpreted ervat davar to mean that anything that was offensive to the husband could be used as a reason to divorce her.
What Jesus said
That dispute was still a live issue in Jesus’ day. Most Pharisees followed Rabbi Hillel. Jesus called them hard-hearted. Because Hillel broadened the grounds for divorce. Thereby, lessening a woman’s protection from unfair and arbitrary divorce.
Jesus then quoted the verse from Genesis 2: 24. “For this reason a man shall leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh. So they are no longer two, but one flesh. “
But he added the following, which the priest recites at every Anglican wedding. “What God has joined together, let no one separate.”
In the context of Mark’s Gospel, the King James Bible’s translation is more helpful than the NRSV. “What God has joined let no man put asunder”. However, in this context, gender inclusivity leaves the wrong impression. Because there was no reciprocal right of a wife to divorce her husband. Simply put, she was his property.
But what about the later conversation with the disciples in the house? The Biblical law on divorce does not seem to have extinguished the relationship between the former spouses completely. Modern laws are different. Divorce frees the former partners from one another completely, unless children are involved. Therefore, a new marriage is not adulterous. Either legally, or for most denominations, in the eyes of the church.