http://72.14.203.104/search?q=cache:HlvofSfrikEJ:www.ttc.edu.sg/csca/CS/2002-Dec/Marriage%2520and%2520Divorce.pdf+divorce+christian&hl=en&gl=sg&ct=clnk&cd=9
how abt this from TTC? should be very orthodox also...
Summary and Conclusion The exegetical difficulties surrounding
those passages that deal with divorce notwithstanding, the main
thrust of the scriptural teaching is clear. Christian marriage
between a man and a woman was ordained by God from the very
beginning. In the covenant of marriage, the husband and his wife
become on flesh, joined together by God. [b]Divorce, as the putting asunder of the union which
God has willed, is not part of the original plan of the Creator. It
is itself an adulteration of the divine will for the man and the
woman.[/b] In the Mosaic legislation, divorce was allowed.
But this permission, Jesus pointed out, was granted because of the
hardness of mans heart, and therefore does not reflect the
original intent of the Creator. Nor can divorce disrupt the ontic
foundation of marriage, for marriage is permanent in this temporal
world and cannot be annulled by any human law. The issue of divorce
and remarriage therefore points to the perversity of man, and
Jesus statements regarding both must be
seen as a call to repentance because it measures the realities of
this present age with the original order of creation, and human
rebellion against the divine will. Jesus prohibition of
divorce, except for sexual infidelity, is actually a statement
about marriage: marriage is a divine institution that does not
therefore rest on the will of man and cannot be dissolved according
to arbitrary discretion. Only sexual
infidelity provides justification for divorce, although even this
does not make it mandatory. Similarly, Jesus prohibition of
remarriage must be seen as an interpretation of divorce. Because
divorce is an adulteration of the divine will, it inflicts a wound
on the order of creation. Abstention from a second marriage is the
way in which the possibility of healing and reconciliation is kept
opened. Hence the Shepherd of Hermas poignant statement: for the
sake of repentance, the husband must not remarry. Also as a call
to repentance, Jesus prohibition of remarriage is meant to prevent
the illusion that with remarriage everything is in order. The
difficulties that this interpretation poses to the pastoral
ministry should not be in any way ignored. The fact remains that
marriage in the concrete human situation is always sinful98and
therefore falls short of the ideal here presented must never be
brushed aside. The Protestant ethic has come to see that there are
some circumstances in which divorce is a moral duty. Is it not the
case that here theological decisions must be tempered with pastoral
sensitivity99? Can there not be situations in this fallen world of
ours when what is called and has the appearance of marriage may
really be no marriage, that it may stand under the judgement of
God and that this marriage is condemned by God and therefore
dissoluble, and to draw the final conclusion from this recognition
by making use of the possibility of legal divorce100. Even with
regard to remarriage, should we not ask questions along similar
lines? Just as in divorce God may be more merciful than the usual
theological ethic, may we not say the same for remarriage? In this
less-than-ideal world, there is yet forgiveness of sin for those
who repent, because the God who comes to our concrete situation is
a gracious God. Could this gracious God bless a second marriage in
this life lived below the ideal? Is there no place for a gracious
second chance in this life below the ideal? The Orthodox tradition
allows it by condescension to human weakness, as expressed by one
of its most eminent theologians, John Meyendorff: We have
mentioned several times already that the Church very consistently
in its entire canonical and liturgical tradition maintains that
second marriage is inconsistent with the Christian norm and is
tolerated only by condescension to human weakness (1 Corinthians
7:9). But Meyendorff continues: It also may be recognised as a
second chance, given to man or a woman, to enter into real marriage
in Christ when a first union was a mistake (for even Church
blessing cannot always magically repair a human mistake!)101.
These are the difficult questions that theology must ask and for
which it must provide answers after it has completed its work of
exegesis.
