17
Aug

Arminian Ethic & Wedleases

   Posted by: Caleb Motupalli   in Christian Life, Family, Social

The Washington Post proposal on this subject has surely opened a can of worms.

As a teacher, who will be judged more severely, i take upon this subject with fear and trembling. The following analysis is just to begin the discussion and should not be construed as definitive.

A partner is either a blessing or a lesson in a person’s life that God has placed. A blessing is an encouragement to continue while a lesson is suggestive of a termination.

The crime of disrespect/lack of love may not be grounds for capital punishment as some expect to happen. God gives a second chance as He does with teeth.

Women lose their virginity after the wedding and will be the losing partners in the non-renewal of wedleases. Women will also be the bigger losers as they will not possess the graces that they once did. Shame is the intensely painful feeling they would have of believing they are flawed and therefore unworthy of love and belonging. Therefore, a divorce rather than the convenience of a wedlease seems more appropriate.

But divorce has become something of a stigma among churchgoers, so much so that the wronged party–the victim–is seen as the evil one and demonized when they ask for a divorce. Verses like “‘I hate divorce,’ says the Lord,” are invoked. And the married life, if there is one at all, goes on as a bondage rather than as a blessing.

People’s character changes and some take wedlock as a license to sin as do many a Calvinist, who believes once-saved-is-always-saved.

The relationship between a husband and his wife is likened to the relationship Christ has with His Church (Eph5:23-33). Dr. John Piper agrees that God sets aside corporate election of Israel for the sake of the election of individuals from around the world, is after the fact. What this means to a marital relationship is that there is no such thing as permanence or unconditional love. Eternal security exists only as long as the fish remains in water.

Is it not a good testimony when people renew their vows like Ram & Sita upon the expiry of a wedlease that maybe in place? Opportunity should be given to good couples to stand out in the midst of darkness. But we are not to create darkness for darkness sake. The context of an expired wedlease could exist for the renewal of vows to have any import or meaning. With a renewed wedlease, a marriage has the groundswell for happiness.

“What God has joined together, let no man separate,” holds true. But the prerogative for marriage, divorce or the establishment of a workable wedlease is with Christ, whom the Church possesses.

Children are not a side to the whole issue. Women are actually saved through childbearing (1Tim2:15). As for men, they should take responsibility for the children and not shrug from it. At this point, it seems to me that divorce, however smearing it maybe to one’s character, is the only viable instrument that society can afford to have. The Arminian freewill of renewing vows–if not a wedlease–in the context of a possible divorce, would be the only demonstration and assertion of love on the part of the husband, and respect on the part of the wife.

Tags: , , ,

This entry was posted on Saturday, August 17th, 2013 at 11:17 PM and is filed under Christian Life, Family, Social. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can skip to the end and leave a response. Pinging is currently not allowed.