|
BACK |
|
Matthew 5:31-32 ~ This section on the putting away of a wife by her husband appears in a passage where Christ is saying things which go beyond what his hearers had received as having been said to 'the ancients'. In the Mosaic law the husband was allowed to put away his wife if she, according to his judgement, was unfit to be his wife. It was, so to speak, left to his conscience whether what he was doing was right in the sight of God. Had he taken into account what was said in Genesis chapter 2 he would have seen that putting away was not something approved of by God and would not have done so, except where his wife had committed fornication, that is, she had broken the marriage bond herself by sinning - the marriage relationship being essentially a sexual one, having intercourse with another party is effectively a repudiation of the bond, that is, the right of the husband to have exclusive use of his wife's body. If the prescriptions of the Mosaic law were carried out the woman would suffer capital punishment and the husband in such cases would then be free to marry another in any case. Just because the Mosaic law was not in Christ's day carried out (as today in the Western world there is no penalty for adultery) it would not be reasonable to expect the husband to have to put up with his wife's behaviour. |
|
It is to be noted that Christ does not forbid the husband to take additional wives, though it appears that one wife at a time was the general rule in the Roman Empire at the time of Christ. What Christ condemned was the sending away of a wife; turning her on the street, so to speak, and thereby repudiating his duty as a husband to maintain her. Because she would probably have no one to maintain her she would, if put away, probably marry again. Christ says that if she did this she would be committing adultery. The act would be hers though the sin would be that of the first husband for he "makes her commit adultery". The case would be rather like that of a child who is put through a small window to do the thieving by his father who is a thief. However, it may be that in the case of the wife, as being of a responsible age, she would not be completely exonerated in judgement day. If, of course, the putting away was justified by the wife's fornication then she would not be fit to be the wife of anyone else. ("Makes her commit adultery" is rather like the JND note to Deuteronomy 24:4 which says that the alternative rendering of "is defiled" is "been made to defile herself".) |
|
The reference to fornication by Matthew, but not by the other Gospel writers connects with what we have in Chapter 1:18-21. Joseph was concerned that his wife (Joseph is spoken of as her husband though they had not yet come together) was having a child which had been conceived before the actual marriage had taken place and was not his. He, no doubt, thought he ought to put away his wife and it was only the intervention of the angel that stopped him from doing so. He no doubt loved Mary and did not wish to expose her publicly. If it would have been wrong for Joseph to put Mary away, the situation being as it appeared to be, then Scripture would hardly have spoken of him as being a righteous man (verse 19). It is clear from what Christ said in Matthew 5 and what is said in Matthew 1 that for fornication a wife should be put away. As will be clear from the law of Moses it was as serious an offence for a woman to commit fornication once betrothed as it was for her to do it after the actual marriage had taken place (Deuteronomy 22:22-27). The position of a virgin not betrothed was not so serious (Deuteronomy 22:28/29); no contract to marry had been made in this case. |
|
In the present dispensation of grace it may not be necessary to put an erring wife away where there is contrition on her part. The husband may, when his wife has repented, forgive her. The repentance may not be immediate and patience may need to be exercised (God gave Jezebel time in which to repent of her fornication - Revelation 2:19-21). However, it is not right to simply condone conduct which is wrong and the time may come when action has to be taken (2 Corinthians 12:21 & 13:1/2). |
|
It may be noted that if a husband could put his wife away at will the practical effect would be that the marriage bond would be meaningless and promiscuity would reign. Two husbands could agree to swap wives and so on, and simply legitimise the arrangement by each writing letters of divorce. It would become virtually a game of "pass the parcel". It is this sort of thing, no doubt, that Christ was condemning. |
|
Matthew 19:3-12 ~ The passage in Matthew considered above was in an address of Christ to his disciples (the so-called sermon on the mount). Christ was speaking authoritatively as God's anointed king (Matthew 7:28/29). In chapter 19, however, Christ is answering a catch question from the Pharisees. I say catch because it was not a genuine enquiry; they were tempting him (see verse 3). They asked him if it was lawful for a man to put away his wife for every cause. Christ in answering says not for |
|
|