Return of the Eunuch (Part Four): A Few Final Thoughts

If you haven’t read the previous posts in this series, you’ll want to do that before reading on:

• Part 1: An Enigmatic Passage

• Part 2: The Usual Reading

• Part 3: The Proposed Reading

If you prefer to listen to this article, you can do that by heading to it in the Substack app and using the app’s text-to-voice feature

---

The Argument in a Nutshell

Ok. So, where did we leave things? To summarise:

1. Matthew 19:10-12 is NOT a proof text that justifies, highlights, idealises or celebrates the “lifelong/chosen/vocational singleness” of a special few individuals over and above or as notably separate to the singleness of those who haven’t set out to choose it or who have become single-again through death or divorce

2. And yet, Matthew 19:10-12 IS still about singleness itself. The three different types of eunuchs illustrate various situations of singleness or single-againness that many of Jesus’s followers may find themselves.

3. While there are distinctions between these three “groups” of eunuchs (and those distinctions have meaning for their illustrative role), Jesus’s aim isn’t to provide a full schema by which we might classify or rank every different kind of singleness or single Christian.

4. His point is to explain that his kingdom-ethic of marriage, divorce and (notably) remarriage is “doable” and necessary for those to whom it has been given—his disciples. Us. Just as there are Christians who have never married (which would include those who never marry because they obediently choose not to marry a non-Christian), so there ought to be disciples who do not marry again following divorce…because of their commitment to living out Jesus’ kingdom-ethic, namely that:

   • In marriage, God has joined two people together.

   • This means divorce is a tragedy

   • Divorce is only permissible in the case of sexual immorality

   • Because God has joined two people together while they are both still alive, remarriage after divorce (while one’s ex-spouse lives) is adultery. Human divorce does not alter that truth. At the very minimum, the passage is clear that remarriage after divorce for any reason other than sexual immorality is adultery.

So, where does that leave us?

Well, I want to finish by making a couple of pastorally focused observations and then one last comment about why I think we are so drawn to the “usual reading” and find the “proposed reading” so challenging.

The Messiness of Sin

Jesus’ kingdom-ethic of marriage, divorce and remarriage (and singleness) is meant to sit us back in our seats. It’s meant to be demanding. It’s meant to stand apart from the world’s ethic, and it’s meant to cause those of us who follow it to stand apart from the world. But for some Christians, it hits hard in a very personal way. In seeking to understand Jesus’ teaching here, I do not mean to minimise the pain, hurt and grief that some readers may be feeling.

So let me address two specific circumstances or situations that might be your own or that of brothers and sisters you love— starting with those who are divorced and have remarried or are thinking about remarrying.

I care deeply about you in your situation. This is why, at a number of points on the way through, I’ve encouraged anyone who is feeling perturbed by the content of this series to speak with a trusted friend or Christian leader. For almost all of you, I am not that person. I’m just an author on the internet whose words you are reading. It’s my responsibility to ensure my words are, to the very best of my ability and knowledge, truthful, faithful and edifying. It’s your responsibility to discern whether my words are, in your view, truthful, faithful and edifying.

If, in the process, you are left with questions about any of those three things, then please ask someone whose Christian maturity you trust to help you find answers to those questions. We’ve been saved into a family. We’re called to instruct, admonish, comfort and build up one another in God’s word and ways. Do not try and go it alone.

In doing so, it could be that you ultimately conclude I’ve read this passage incorrectly. And that’s OK. Perhaps I have! But let me encourage you to arrive at that conclusion through rigorous encounter and interaction with God’s word—especially when that word leaves you squirming in your seat a little. In other words, make sure you think I’m wrong for the right reasons, not just because you want me to be wrong.

Or it could be that you conclude I have correctly understood Jesus’ meaning here, but this has left you with even more questions than answers. There may be one question in particular that you are grappling with. Here it is:

“I got divorced. And I’ve since remarried. If Jesus is teaching his disciples that remarriage after divorce is adultery, what do I do?! Do I need to divorce my new spouse? Am I living in a constant state of adultery?!”

Gosh, we sinners lead complicated lives, don’t we? I mean that very genuinely, and I include myself firmly in the ranks. Sin is so messy. It makes relationships so messy. It makes life so messy. It makes knowing what is “right” to do in messy situations so messy.

Let me preface what I am about to say by repeating what I have said above. Remember, I’m just an author on the internet. If you are grappling with this question, please talk to a trusted, mature Christian person in your life about it. Preferably, your pastor.

Having said that…no.

No. I don’t believe you should divorce your new spouse. In fact, it seems to me that would only compound the messiness, the complexity and the sin. Just as I would say to a Christian who has chosen to marry a non-Christian (something I believe would also have been a sinful decision), you’ve made a (new) covenantal promise to another before God. It is right and proper and loving and faithful that you should honour that promise. Don’t compound sin by sinning further.

This what we call a “retrieval ethic”. When, as fallen people in a fallen world, we need to decide between two (or more) less than perfect options, then our goal should be to retrieve as much good as possible, love as much as possible, limit harm as much as possible… all while firmly renouncing evil.

But yeah. It’s really messy, isn’t it?

If we are to take Jesus seriously, then we are obligated to recognise that the choice to remarry after divorce (or, for those who have a less conservative exegesis of this passage than I do, remarry after divorce for any reason other than sexual immorality) was a sinful decision that God will call to account. Which, of course, means it is very important for us to grapple with Jesus’ words here before we make the choice to divorce and before we make the choice to remarry.

Yet, repentance of that sin cannot and should not take the form of an undoing of this new marriage—that is, the breaking of another set of marital promises. We must seek to act in a way that retrieves as much good and limits as much harm as we can.

It’s so messy. And so, once again, if you are grappling with this, please speak to your pastor or a trusted leader. Ask them to help you walk faithfully in the messiness. And please, never ever forget this: Jesus has come to redeem and rescue us from the penalty of our sin. Oh, what a saviour!

Intentional Avoidance

Of course, there is another very real and raw aspect of this discussion that I have not touched on during this series—and intentionally so. It’s the question of separation, divorce and remarriage in the context of spousal abuse.

Friends, I am going to keep intentionally avoiding it—or more, specifically, I’m not going to address is here at any length—precisely because it is too real and too raw for an author on the internet even to attempt to do it careful and proper justice in the context of a series of Substack posts.

You see, we are at another one of those very awkward, horribly messy intersections. In Matthew 19, Jesus clearly says that sexual immorality is the only permissible reason for divorce. He also says that remarriage after divorce is not permissible or, at the most, that it is only permissible in the case of divorce because of sexual immorality. We have to take Jesus at his word, and we have to take that word seriously.

And yet, I’ve sat with and sobbed with women who have been abused (in all kinds of God-awful ways) by their spouses. I’ve held them in my arms. I’ve arranged emergency accommodation for them. I’ve looked back in utter horror, shame and self-recrimination when I found out it had been happening to women I was in bible study group with every week, and I’d been completely oblivious.

Once, I stayed for three days in the home of a married couple. The whole time, the wife incessantly verbally abused and belittled her husband (whom I didn’t know as well) right in front of me. Once I returned home, I called the domestic abuse hotline because I was utterly sick to the stomach and shaking, and I didn’t know what to do.

Spousal. Abuse. Is. Horrific.

And then there are the kids. Oh, dear Lord, the kids.

So, no friends. I’m not going to try and simplify a discussion about divorce, remarriage and the horror of spousal abuse into a Substack post.

If you are being abused by your spouse (indeed, by anyone), please, PLEASE reach out for help. There are people wanting and waiting to help and love you.

In this very moment, don’t think about theological questions about divorce and remarriage. Seek help from a trusted, mature, loving Christian friend. Your pastor. A family member. A hotline. Get to a place of safety. Get through this moment. This day. This week.

Leave those (important) questions about “What would God have me do or not do next?” to be had in the right moment in loving discussion with the right people. This Substack series is not that right moment, and I am not that right person… at least not for you.

Making Too Much of a Good Thing

I want to conclude with a general observation (and challenge) about why I think we so naturally gravitate towards the “usual reading” of the eunuchs passage in Matthew 19:10-12.

A reminder - the usual reading takes Jesus’ comments about the indissolubility of marriage as a kind of proof that “it is better not to marry” (v.10) so as to spare yourself the complexities and hardships of that indissoluble union. (NB. The matter of remarriage doesn’t really feature heavily in the “usual reading”). It then uses the disciples’ comment that it is “better not to marry” (v.10) to affirm that choosing never to get married is:

1. Better than getting married… in theory.

2. But, in reality, something only a small number of disciples are “given” to do.

Why does this reading seem so natural to us? Well, I’d suggest that is in no small part because we’ve made too much of a good thing… that thing being marriage.

Actually, no.

It’s not so much that we’ve made too much of the good thing that is marriage, but that today, we’ve made too much of the good we think marriage is meant to bring us—namely, personal fulfilment, existential completion, the necessary satisfaction of our sexual desires, the ultimate of all relationships, the best of friendship and the pinnacle of human flourishing.

• Why else would we think that, despite everything the apostle Paul says about the goodness of singleness in 1 Corinthians 7, it is only as good as marriage in theory?

• Why else would we think that only a small number of specially called or gifted Christians are able to truly “do” singleness faithfully? Why else would we divide disciples into the “haves” and the “have nots” of celibacy?

• Why else would we think that never getting married is only really to be celebrated and honoured, perhaps even legitimated, if it is undertaken for some sort of set-apart heroic vocational gospel service?

• Why else would we existentially struggle with the idea that divorce may not be an obvious or justifiable option for a marriage that is no longer making one or both of its members happy… indeed, which may be making them unhappy?

• Why else would we recoil at the idea that Jesus closes the door on divorced disciples having the option of a take-two, even if they are, tragically, the innocent party in a divorce? Not being able ever to remarry?! Needing to remain single?! How is that fair?! How is that doable?!

Of course, I’ve slightly overstated things there. For example, a divorced single mother may be grappling with gut-wrenching grief and anxiety about her children no longer having a father’s constant love, care and discipline in their home. This may be a significant reason why she entertains the possibility of remarriage. (On that count, church… here’s another reason why spiritual fatherhood and motherhood is so vitally important!!)

But I hope you see my point. The twenty-first-century individualistic Western lens we bring to Matthew 19:3-12 really does impact the way we read it. The very idea that a divorced Christian might not be permitted to enjoy the blessings and joys of a second marriage (while their ex-spouse is alive) seems harsh, unfair, even “undoable” to many of us us. That a divorced Christian might rightly remain single?! For the rest of their life?! It leaves us aghast! (Even as our churches have many never-married “eunuchs” who model that singleness is not a life to be aghast by).

Why do we think that way?

Because we have vested marriage with so very much that we consider essential for human flourishing, and we have de-vested singleness as a life situation that can genuinely contribute to human flourishing. This is a distinctively Western way of thinking about marriage that developed from the 18th Century onwards.

That’s not to say that we are the only ones who find it difficult to take Jesus at his word here. Christian readers from an honour-shame collectivist culture (both in history and today), would have their own reading and questions for the text… they would have just looked quite different to ours. For example, rather than primarily grappling with matters of personal fulfilment and flourishing, they would likely have serious reservations about the fact that no possibility for remarriage might leave a divorced woman societally, economically, even physically vulnerable. Perhaps, an outcast. How is that fair?! How is that “doable”?! (Once again, church… here’s your call to step up. Big time.)

And so, the Challenge…

All of which is to say, as we read Scripture, we need to identify and interrogate the way our cultural context, our ideological assumptions, our philosophical presumptions and, just as importantly, our (sinful) hearts’ desires and our (corrupted) minds’ rationalisations influence our understanding and application of the text. As much as possible, we need to read the text based on it’s context and concerns in order to understand and apply them in and to our own.

In my opinion, Matthew 19:3-12 is a key example of where we so often fail to do that… and perhaps where we may even be quietly committed to not doing that.

Like the disciples, we find ourselves a bit poleaxed by the demands of the kingdom:

“My goodness Jesus! If what you are saying is true, then… wow, that’s a bit too demanding of us, don’t you think!? Not being able to divorce? Never being able to remarry? Staying single for the rest of our life?! Surely that is only something a very special few people can do?!”

But friends, “the knowledge of the secrets of the kingdom of heaven has been given to you… blessed are your eyes because they see, and your ears because they hear.” (Matt 13:11,16).

The kingdom of God is demanding. But those whom Christ has given to inherit the kingdom, he’s also given to receive its secrets and to live by its demands.

And so here’s the challenge for us all: “Let the one who is able to receive this receive it” (Matt 19:12).