34
WHAT CONSTITUTES ABANDONMENT BY AN UNBELIEVING SPOUSE?
While most evangelicals agree that abandonment by an unbelieving spouse provides grounds for divorce and remarriage, there is disagreement about exactly what behavior constitutes desertion. Must the unbelieving spouse physically leave the home and file for divorce, or could other behavior qualify as desertion of the believing spouse?
DEPARTURE AND DIVORCE
When an unbelieving spouse permanently leaves the home, or forces a believer to depart and then files for divorce, the believer is not to fight against the divorce, but rather is freed from the marriage obligation: “Yet if the unbelieving one leaves, let him leave; the brother or the sister is not under bondage in such cases, but God has called us to peace” (1 Cor. 7:15). There are also situations in which the unbeliever physically separates from the believing spouse, making it clear that he or she is done with the marriage, but does not choose to go to the trouble of filing for divorce (perhaps to avoid financial obligations). In this case, the believer would be free to file for divorce to formalize what the unbeliever has initiated. Frame writes, “An unbelieving man may leave his believing wife and go to live with another woman, without filing divorce papers. Where does that leave the innocent, believing spouse? She may accept the situation of a broken marriage, as Paul says. Thus she may regard herself as free from the original marriage obligation. But in order to secure recognition of that freedom, she may need herself to file divorce papers with the state.” 1
CAN SOMEONE ABANDON A MARRIAGE WITHOUT LEAVING THE HOUSE OR FILING FOR DIVORCE?
Some have suggested that a spouse can be guilty of abandoning a marriage through a gross failure to fulfill marital responsibilities, even if the person doesn’t physically depart from the house or file for divorce. Under the old covenant, the basic duties of a husband were defined as providing food, clothing, and conjugal rights (Ex. 21:10). Under certain conditions, a wife could be freed from a marriage if her husband refused to do these things for her (21:11). Some would reason that in the same way, when a spouse deliberately and willfully refuses to fulfill one’s basic marital duties, the other spouse could be considered free to divorce. 2
THE TOUGH CASES
Situations I have encountered in which this principle of abandonment might apply include:
  1. The wife tells her husband after the first year of marriage that she will never again be willing to have sexual relations and that they will be sleeping in separate bedrooms for the duration of the marriage. She does, however, want to remain legally married.
  2. The wife works as a nurse, making a good income. The husband refuses to work (see 1 Tim. 5:8). He takes the money she earns and buys illegal drugs to party with his friends. By his own choice, he lives in the garage and has very little contact with his wife. He does not want to leave or divorce her, however, because he is living in the house she pays for and spending the money she earns.
  3. After ten years of marriage that were blessed with the births of two children, the husband declares that he is a woman trapped inside a man’s body and that he intends to have a sex-change operation. He announces that he wants to remain in the marriage with his wife and his children. His wife, weeping, says that she doesn’t want to be in a lesbian relationship.
  4. The husband, without his wife’s knowledge, has been involved in illegal financial activities, including investment scams and tax fraud. He is being sent to prison for the next twenty-five years. The family is bankrupt and on the verge of homelessness.
  5. The wife goes away for months at a time, during which she refuses any contact with her husband. Sooner or later, she returns home (usually when she has run out of money) and wants to live with him again. She won’t talk about why she left, where she went, or whether she might leave again. This has happened several times over the past five years.
  6. The wife sits at home, watching television and drinking liquor all day while the husband is at work. He tried restricting her access to credit cards and cash, but then she actually pawned the silver to get more booze.
PROCEED WITH CAUTION
When dealing with the tough cases, we should first ask, “What can be done to heal this marriage?” before we ask, “Are there grounds for divorce?” Why is one spouse refusing marital intimacy? Did the other partner do something hurtful (Prov. 18:17)? Does the person require help in overcoming the effects of past sexual abuse? Another thing to keep in mind is that these grounds apply only to an unbelieving spouse. When a professing believer is guilty of significant failure to keep the marriage covenant, the person should be confronted through the process defined in Matthew 18:15–20, which ideally would result in repentance, but could result in expulsion from the church and thus being treated as an unbeliever.
Another concern is that once the definition of abandonment is expanded, almost any failure to keep the marriage covenant could be used as an excuse for divorce. Murray warns, “It is, however, of the greatest importance to maintain that . . . the application of this liberty must be limited to the precise conditions specified or implied by the apostle.” 3 What if a man is willing to work, but is a very poor provider? How often must a wife make herself available sexually to fulfill her conjugal duties? These are some of the very issues that the Jewish rabbis argued about in Jesus’ day. 4 The Greek word chorizō, which is translated “leave” in 1 Corinthians 7:15, is the word used for divorce, implying that the unbeliever is willfully abandoning his or her commitment to the other spouse—not merely coming up short in meeting covenant obligations. There is also a difference between being unable (e.g., because of physical disability) to fulfill conjugal duties or the duty to provide, as opposed to a person who is able but unwilling.
In these cases of willful rejection of the marriage covenant by unbelievers, the believing spouses may, after making great effort toward reconciliation, consider themselves abandoned. Frame writes, “The ‘separation’ in [1 Cor. 7] verse 15 may or may not be geographical. The important thing is that it is a renunciation of one’s marriage vows.” 5 In doubtful cases, I have found it wise to directly ask unbelieving spouses about their commitment to the marriage and their willingness to make an effort to fulfill their basic duties: “Do you want out of this marriage?” If they make it clear that they have no intention to make any effort to fulfill their duties as spouses, the believing spouses may, after making every effort toward reconciliation, consider themselves abandoned.
SUMMARY
While we should be very cautious about expanding the definition of abandonment to include any failure to keep the marriage covenant, there are situations in which a believing spouse may consider himself or herself deserted, even if the unbeliever was not the one who physically moved away from the home and filed for divorce. People facing situations of possible abandonment should seek godly counsel from their church leaders as they strive to honor God through very difficult circumstances.
— QUESTIONS FOR REFLECTION —
1. What are some dangers of expanding the definition of abandonment beyond physical departure and filing for divorce?
2. What biblical basis could be given for saying that a spouse who willfully refuses to fulfill marital duties has abandoned the marriage?
3. Which of the difficult cases described in this chapter would qualify as desertion?
4. What role might church leaders play in helping a believer determine whether his or her spouse has provided grounds for divorce for desertion?
5. What should be done if a professing believer abandons his or her marriage?
______________________
1. John M. Frame, The Doctrine of the Christian Life (Phillipsburg, NJ: P&R Publishing, 2008), 229.
2. David Instone-Brewer states that both Jewish and Greco-Roman courts would have allowed for divorce on such grounds and argues that Paul may have had this in mind when he was writing 1 Corinthians 7 (especially the call to fulfill conjugal duties in verses 3–5 and the reference about duties to meet the needs of one’s spouse in verse 33). Divorce and Remarriage in the Church (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 2003), 96–102.
3. John Murray, Divorce (Philadelphia: Presbyterian and Reformed, 1961), 76. Murray continues that the desertion that Paul is speaking about is limited to that which is for religious reasons (ibid., 78).
4. Instone-Brewer, Divorce and Remarriage in the Church, 74, 101.
5. Frame, The Doctrine of the Christian Life, 781.