With a thorough understanding of biblical divorce and remarriage, what does the phrase μιᾶς γυναικὸς ἄνδρες mean? Can a man have been divorced and remarried and still be a church leader? Carl says it is a natural moral reading to understand this phrase as forbidding other current relationships rather than condemning past relationships.[1]

Les Carter accurately states, “Neither Paul nor Jesus condemned individuals because they missed the mark.”[2] While many divorcees feel like second-class citizens,[3] the church must determine that its ministry is to redemptive toward those who have failed, regardless of the nature of the category of the sin.[4] Indeed, aside from the grace of Christ, all Christians are stained by sin and imperfect. The goal of the church should be to encourage consistency in grace.[5] Christians are to view themselves as agents of grace, not God’s executioners.[6] Braun emphasizes this grace when he says, “When a sinner expresses true repentance demonstrated by a life of godliness, there is no biblical support for withholding him from full participation in that life of the Christian community.”[7]

Köstenberger states that the proposal for the disqualification of divorced men is unlikely, for if Paul intended that, he would have simply said not divorced rather than one-woman.[8] The literal reading of a one-woman man denotes marital fidelity.[9] The idea the μιᾶς γυναικὸς ἄνδρες means sexual fidelity plus the absence of prior marriages ending in divorce and the prohibition of polygamy wring more content out of the phrase than simply faithful husband; it carries a heavier burden of proof.[10] This proof would be difficult to garner from the compendium of biblical evidence.

Furthermore, the language of the surrounding qualifications all refers to the man’s present character, not his past failures. The crucial issue is not the man’s history but his character. It is not about his past but his present.[11] μιᾶς γυναικὸς ἄνδρες refers to a man’s marital fidelity to his current wife, not his past failures. Therefore, a man’s marital history is not necessarily a disqualifying factor on its own.

---

[1] Carl, Deacons and Divorce: Questioning the Consistency of Text, Tradition, and Praxis.

[2] Les Carter, Grace and Divorce: God’s Healing Gift to Those Whose Marriages Fall Short, (San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass, 2005).

[3] Ibid.

[4] George R. Ewald, Jesus and Divorce: A Biblical Guide for Ministry to Divorced Persons, (Waterloo, Ont.: Herald Press, 1991).

[5] Les Carter, Grace and Divorce: God’s Healing Gift to Those Whose Marriages Fall Short, (San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass, 2005).

[6] Michael Braun, Second-Class Christians?: A New Approach to the Dilemma of Divorced People in the Church, (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 1989)

[7] Ibid.

[8] Andreas Kostenberger and Terry L. Wilder, Entrusted with the Gospel: Paul’s Theology in the Pastoral Epistles, (Nashville, TN: B&H Publishing Group, 2010)

[9] Ibid.

[10] Ibid.

[11] Stanley Ellison, Divorce and Remarriage in the Church, (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 1980).

---

While it would be easier to say that divorce and subsequent remarriage disqualifies a man from serving in a church leadership position, this view can only be contrived by personal or traditional convictions. The church should evaluate the man’s whole character, not simply his marital history. No church can be blamed for ordaining a divorced man to gospel service, nor should they necessarily remove a man permanently from the position due to divorce ipso facto. Each church should examine the situation in detail to determine a man’s worthiness for church leadership based on his current character, not his past mistakes. Was his divorce biblical? If remarried, was the remarriage valid? Has he repented if there was so sin on his part? There is no one-size-fits-all case for this situation. Instead, each situation requires walking in God’s grace and discernment.