A Review1 of Redemptive Divorce:
A Biblical Process that Offers Guidance for the Suffering Partner, Healing for the Offending Spouse, and the
Best Catalyst for Restoration.
Thomas Nelson. Gaither, Mark (2008-08-12).
Redemptive Divorce Premise:
In Mark Gaither’s own words: “I wrote Redemptive Divorce to help people drowning in the chaos of
dysfunction and held down by a theological conundrum. What should they do when their mate becomes impossible, even
dangerous to live with? How can they stay afloat when the commands of Christ to love and forgive feel like a millstone? I
wrote it for these people, but I wrote it to those who want to help them.”2
He later writes, “I chose the words redemptive divorce carefully when thinking of what to call this radically
different way of thinking. The phrase is deliberately paradoxical and in some ways counterintuitive.” 3 (Emphasis
added).
The phrase redemptive divorce is indeed paradoxical and counterintuitive: The book proposes that
God, in conflict with His own inspired revelation to man, now instructs believers to utilize divorce to redeem
a dysfunctional marriage. While the title of the book implies that Gaither’s focus is on restoring the marriage,
most of the book seems to focus on dismantling the marriage. The book thematically pressures churches to
advise the upright party in a troubled marriage to take the high ground and divorce the offending spouse to
alleviate their own suffering and perhaps to redeem the marriage if this motivates the offending party to
change. The book suggests that church leaders and counselors who find this approach not biblical venerate
marriage too highly.
Merits of the book: Gaither is right to state that most churches today have failed in many ways to
address the problems faced in struggling marriages. His book is a challenge to the Church to become involved
earlier in the midst of painful marriages. It should spur church leaders on to begin the discipleship and
reconciliation process long before marriage relationships become untenable.
A word to those at Fellowship Bible Church who might read Gaither’s Redemptive Divorce:
The reader who applies the principles found in this book in seeking to remedy a troubled marriage would
make life-changing decisions based on man’s ideas, rather than God’s truths. While a troubled marriage is
perhaps the most troubling state of human existence, God’s grace working through the lives of those
involved can redeem it. It is not wise to follow the principles of a book that introduces new mean ing
and unintended application from Bible texts, while avoiding other pertinent passages on the subject,
such as our sanctification and heavenly rewards through righteous suffering, simply to seek a happier,
more convenient solution than God’s.
The troubled couples who seek and accept wise counsel from the pastors, elders and counselors in this
church are in the best environment to work toward God’s solution which brings peace and
reconciliation. A simple contact with Family Life Ministries will open the door to caring counselors who
are trained to listen and advise with Biblical steps toward a life that offers safety for the endangered
spouse, mentoring for those who are willing to accept help, and that glorifies God. Empowered by the
Word and the Holy Spirit, with the support of trained godly workers, the most hopeless marriage can
become an example of God’s grace, forgiveness and purpose worked out in His plan for the family, a
reflection of the unity and permanence of Christ’s plan for His Church. God’s Word has all the answers
and engenders solutions, even when the willing spouse is daily faced with the reviling criticism and
abusive neglect of an unsupportive mate.
This Review represents the consensus opinion of the leadership of Fellowship Bible Church, Winchester, VA,
regarding the merits of the book for counseling those who may find themselves in struggling marriages. To
prepare for this review, the Elders and representative Pastors each read the book and met to discuss it on
August 25, 2012.
2 Gaither, Introduction, p. xvii.
3 Gaither, p. 11, 12.
1
1
Concerns with the book: While the book is well intended, it has crippling flaws that could mislead
anyone, causing them to stumble while trying to redeem a troubled marriage: (1) Gaither’s use of Scripture;
(2) his definition of marriage and divorce; (3) his failure to address God’s intended use of suffering in the lives
of believers; and (4) his failure to direct readers to rely on a sovereign God. Each is described in the following .
1. Gaither’s use of Scripture.
While Gaither supports his methods with Scripture, in most cases his applications are based on
incorrect (exegetical) interpretations. Generally he avoids the full council of God on the subject,
making the application error of “principle-izing” or “indirect application.”
For example in the Gospel of Mark where Jesus rebuts the Pharisees: “And He [Jesus] said to
them [the Pharisees], ‘The Sabbath was made for man, and not man for the Sabbath.’” Gaither, referring
to this, writes: “We must ask ourselves, was man made for marriage or marriage made for man? Are we
becoming guilty of venerating the institution of marriage over its original design, like the Pharisees obsessed
over the Sabbath? (Mark 2:27) Have we lost sight of the purpose of marriage in God’s ultimate program to make
us more like Christ?” 4 Yes, Christ-likeness is part of the purpose, but a passage about the Pharisaical
view of the Sabbath does not imply that Jesus’ response applies to marriage as well. Similarly, he
quotes Matthew 10:16 in his argument; that verse addresses evangelism and in no way applies to
marriage.
Concerning Jesus’ instruction on how to confront an offending brother, Gaither concludes:
“Therefore, redemptive divorce is a tough love confrontation patterned after the method of godly confrontation
described by Jesus in Matthew 18:15-17.”5 While we agree that this passage applies to all believers, even
to the confrontation aspect of marriage reconciliation, it was not divorce that Jesus had in mind in this
passage. Quite the contrary Jesus goes on in that same discourse to describe marriage as an
unbreakable bond in God’s plan. He makes that clear in Matthew 19:1-9. Jesus teaches that God’s
desire is for forgiveness of a spouse and not divorce. Gaither continues with over-reaching
assumptions about Jesus’ meaning, while really Jesus says plainly that divorce is man’s
accommodation to man’s hard hearts, but that it was not God’s plan in the beginning.
Gaither’s application of Hosea 2:1-3 and following is a straw man.6 He doesn’t mention that
Gomer was already a prostitute when Hosea married her. She was a specific object lesson to Israel all
the way through the account. She is in no way a normative illustration for how to handle
unfaithfulness. Would Gaither also include from Hosea the advice that all husbands and wives who
divorce their spouses go buy their divorced spouses as a slave? Of course not! On the other hand,
with the same treatment of Scripture, why not utilize Jeremiah 31:35-36 where God promises never to
abandon or cancel Israel from His program, staying totally faithful to the Abrahamic covenant? Using
the same hermeneutic as Gaither, one could make a case of “no divorce” on these verses. However,
even if one holds to a no-divorce position, it would be a misuse of Scripture to base that view on
Jeremiah 31:35-36.
Why is 1 Corinthians, which gives many instructive details about what to do in cases of
problem marriages, totally silent about redemptive-divorce? If there is any textual context within
Scripture that would lend itself to presenting this process in the detail that Gaither does, it would be
1 Corinthians. Would it be argued that this would be an argument from silence? No … ours is an
argument about silence.
Gaither never addresses 1 Corinthians 7:39 or Romans 7:1-5, nor in any substantive way the
other gospel accounts that clearly teach that marriage is a lifelong unbreakable bond. Nor does he
introduce 1 Peter 2:21-3:6, which deals with Christ’s example of suffering that we should follow by
example, enduring and committing ourselves to God. The passage goes on to teach the method and
purpose of how men and women should approach a less than ideal marriage, and the historical
context for doing so, even when marriages struggled.
Gaither, p. 8.
P. 80.
6 P. 60.
4
5
2
Rather than strong Scriptural support, Gaither offers examples of marriages in the throes of
struggle as his most compelling arguments for redemptive divorce. In one example, a non-believer
counsels a believer that because of her husband’s sin, he has broken their marriage already,7 and she is
left to ponder the wisdom of such counsel. (Though there is no Biblical support for it,8 Gaither adopts
that argument later in his book as part of his defense for divorce.) But the use of such stories to
emotionally involve readers in the drama can confuse and capture those whose interest in the subject
renders them sympathetic at the expense of God’s Truth and plan for their lives; to be deeply touched
by such pathos is really quite human after all.
2. Gaither’s definition of marriage and divorce.
At one point, Gaither gives full glory to marriage as a mystery and to the union of man a nd
woman as one flesh unlike all other human bonds, and adds that its unity is significant like that
of the Trinity in the Godhead. Gaither writes: “Marriage as conceived by God is a mystical union that
transcends the laws of governments and the traditions of cultures. Jesus said, ‘They are no longer two, but one
flesh. What God has joined together, let no man separate.’ Paul used this mysterious intertwining to illustrate
Christ’s union with His body of believers.” 9 Without doubt, this description would disarm any critic of
the book.
But then Gaither goes on to separate marriage into two parts: a genuine mystical union as
described above and a convenient civil contract sanctioned by the laws of the land. He prescribes
breaking the latter to save the former. He writes: “… Instead of using the documents and procedures of
civil courts to officially dissolve a marriage, redemptive divorce employs them to give the wayward spouse an
incentive to work for restoration.10 If “mystical marriage” is the only genuine component of marriage,
why does redemptive-divorce require the use of the courts, something to which Gaither devotes a
significant amount of material? Is it reasonable to argue that God uses divorce (which He clearly
hates) as a sanctioned tool by the believer for another person’s sanctification/restoration? Does
Scripture support that?
Gaither’s definition of divorce is unscriptural. He asserts that divorce occurs when the
offending partner breaks the covenant with his conduct and that the divorce decree is simply a
statement of that. Thus any movement away by the offending party (any behavior, e.g. alcohol
abuse11, reviling, etc.) breaks the marriage covenant. According to Gaither, then, “A divorce decree
doesn’t end a marriage any more than a death certificate kills a person. Unrepentant sin renders a marriage null
and void. The decree is merely a formal declaration in writing of what has already occurred in life.” 12
Gaither continues that divorce is therefore a noble venture and the failure to divorce displays
a lack of wisdom, a lack of real love, a lack of holiness and a lack of true commitment to a biblical
marriage. Gaither, rightly anticipating an objection, assures the reader that this is not a form of
manipulation as he adds: “… coercion is not the aim of redemptive divorce. Redemptive divorce is a toughlove expression of grace.” 13 There simply is no Biblical basis for this interpretation of God’s intent in
marriage.
3. Gaither’s omission of God’s intended use of suffering.
As mentioned previously, Gaither applies Jesus’ answer to the Pharisees regarding the Sabbath
in Mark 2:27 to assert that marriage likewise is for man’s benefit, and that to stoically deny
divorce of the marriage of a suffering ‘innocent party’ is characteristic of the Pharisees’
legalism. 14 He misses both the point of Jesus’ instruction, as well as the power of God’s grace
through suffering in our becoming more like Christ. In fact, throughout Scripture, and the number
P. 2.
P. 77.
9 P. 23.
10 P. 80.
11 P. 17.
12 P. 72.
13 P. 83.
14 P. 8.
7
8
3
of passages abound, there is instruction from Jesus and the Apostles that suffering is a necessary part
of the Christian life; in fact, happiness and commendation come from a believer suffering righteously.
Gaither tells us in the first chapter that when there is verbal abuse, we need to put the power
back in the hands of the offended party through redemptive divorce to restore ”… a hopeful future.”15
But Gaither fails to mention 1 Peter 2 and 3 that reveals that God has a purpose and a plan when we
suffer through obedience; that we “have been called for this very purpose, since Christ also suffered for us,
leaving us an example to follow in his steps… while being reviled did not revile in return… but kept entrusting
himself to the one who judges righteously” (1 Peter 2:21-25). Reviling, we agree, is verbal abuse, and
sinful disobedient behavior. But the next few verses, 1 Peter 3:1-6 , go on to instruct women who are
married to disobedient husbands to submit to them and fulfill God’s purpose in their suffering.
4. Gaither’s failure to direct the readers to depend upon a sovereign God.
Chuck Swindoll’s preface 16 should serve to warn the reader that this is about man’s inventions,
not God’s solution. He writes:
“Put simply, you need an advocate. You need someone who truly understands what you are enduring,
who can help you through the process, who is willing to walk beside you, and who will help you get
underway before your pain screams louder than the voice of reason. Mark Gaither is qualified to be that
advocate. He understands. Because he was, himself, once there …”
Swindoll’s endorsement is both disappointing and surprising regarding exegetical and hermeneutical
matters when one considers his reputed defense of Scripture. Clearly, Swindoll recognizes that in
man’s suffering he needs an advocate, but Christ, and the Holy Spirit are Scripturally those advocates,
not a man. Redemptive Divorce focuses solely on man’s personal happiness, and his fleshly attempts at
securing that happiness rather than on God, His will, and His divine provision in the midst of
suffering. Throughout this book the centrality of God and His Word are replaced by the centrality of
man and his desires. Gaither isolates some Bible passages and avoids others to form an unscriptural
argument for divorce that asserts: “thus saith the Lord.” But his argument misses the central truth
about God’s purpose in our lives. Even the use of the term “redemptive” is deceiving. Gaither
correctly admits in chapter seven that “redemption is costly.” 17 Indeed it is. The whole biblical notion
of redemption involves the payment of a price in order to secure someone’s freedom – Christ being
the supreme example in His suffering and dying to secure our freedom from sin and God’s wrath
against it. Gaither rightly lays out the beauty of this gospel story. He even concludes with this
explanation of grace: “The new law of grace says, Do as I do. Restore relationships with people who don’t
deserve your mercy. Trust My holy character, not only to preserve you through inevitable agony but to bring
you immeasurable blessing as a result.”18
But sadly, his entire book is a testimony against this “redemptive” grace. In chapter seven,
after saying the new law of grace says “do as I do,” Gaither takes great pains to in essence say “but you
really don’t have to.” He asserts without regarding God’s Word, sovereignty, and purpose: “While He
requires us to forgive the past, He does not demand that we expose ourselves to further injury.” 19 And again,
“Furthermore, the command to forgive frees you from the past, but it does not demand that you submit to more
destructive behavior.”20 Or elsewhere, “Having completely forgiven your mate, you may exercise your right to
keep a safe distance indefinitely . . . Whether you have biblical grounds for a divorce or not, you are not bound by
the Old Covenant to risk further harm at the hands of your mate.”21 One final quote, “God calls us to imitate
His extraordinary grace, but He does not require it.”22 These are Gaither’s words, not God’s.
P. 13.
Charles R. Swindoll: Father-in-law of Mark Gaither, Foreword.
17 P. 111.
18 P. 113.
19 P. 111.
20 P. 115.
21 P. 117.
22 P. 122.
4
15
16
And so, amazingly, after explaining the costly, self-sacrificing nature of biblical redemption as
exemplified in Christ, and even in a rare moment of biblical soundness acknowledging that the new
law of grace says, “Do as I do,” Gaither gives permission to “do as you want to do” and protect
yourself from “further injury.” So much for biblical, self-sacrificing, costly, redemptive love.
Finally: To support responding to marriage struggles with human reasoning rather than trusting fully in
God’s purpose would be to embrace a kind of “open Theism” that would lead us to believe that God does not
have a predetermined plan for our lives that includes suffering. Redemptive Divorce proffers an ungodly
solution. It conflicts with the truth and authority of God’s Word, the Bible.
5