View source for Does the divorce of the foreign women in Ezra 9-10 show that civil government has authority to dissolve marriages or preside over "divorce trials"?

<languages />{{:Navleft|Category:Answered Questions|{{:AnsweredQuestionsname/{{PAGELANGUAGE}}}}}}
<div class="questionbody">
<translate><!--T:1--> Quick answer: No. Biblical law nowhere gives civil government the authority either to dissolve marriage covenants or to require that husbands get civil government permission before divorce. The divorce of the foreign women in Ezra 9-10 shows nothing resembling either of the above cases.</translate>

<translate><!--T:2--> The actions in Ezra 9-10 are a narrative which clearly have Biblical law as the backdrop (particularly Deut. 7:1-3). The "divorces" must be understood against this legal framework, which differs somewhat from our modern preconceptions.</translate>

<translate><!--T:3--> This may surprise some people, but under Biblical law, men were not required to get permission from the civil government to divorce their wives (Deut. 24:1). Christopher Wright explains:</translate>

<translate><!--T:4--> {{:Quote|A man did not have to &lsquo;go to court&rsquo; to get a divorce. Those laws that do refer to divorce are concerned either with circumstances where divorce is prohibited or with regulating relationships after divorce has already happened. In both cases the protection of the woman seems to be the main point of the law. ... What [Deut. 24:1-4] does require is that a man who divorces his wife must give her a &lsquo;bill of divorce&rsquo;. This would have been for the woman&rsquo;s protection. It was documentary proof that she had been divorced, so neither she nor any future husband could be accused of adultery if she married again.<ref>Christopher J. H. Wright, <em>Old Testament Ethics for the People of God</em>, pp. 331-332</ref>}}</translate>

<translate><!--T:5--> According to Peter Craigie:</translate>

<translate><!--T:6--> {{:Quote|If the man decided to divorce the woman, he was to write out a bill of divorce and formally serve it on the woman. She was then sent away from the man's house, but possession of the bill of divorce gave her a certain protection under law from any further action by the man.<ref>Craigie, <em>Deuteronomy</em>, p. 305</ref>}}</translate>

<translate><!--T:7--> Biblical law does not require a husband to prove publicly, before a judge, the crime of adultery or fornication on the part of a wife, before issuing a "writ of divorcement." This "writ" has no legal power over a marriage covenant. The marriage covenant would have to already be broken by fornication on the part of the wife. The "writ of divorcement" is simply an official declaration by the husband (not by the civil government) that he has "put away" his wife, an assertion that the marriage covenant has already been broken, and that he did not attempt to re-establish it. This legal writ protects the wife from a future accusation by her former husband, in case he got jealous or angry when she got remarried. Under Biblical law, a judge would only be sought out (by a wife, presumably) if the former husband refused to give her the writ, as required by Biblical law.</translate>

<translate><!--T:8--> Nowadays, the civil government has become so involved in the marriage and divorce process, that Christians no longer question whether the state has the power to "license" marriage, or "grant" divorce. This is a thoroughly modern phenomenon, and it is anachronistic to read our modern marriage ideas back into Biblical law.</translate>

<translate><!--T:9--> The action by Ezra described in Ezra 9-10 dealt with Israelites who had returned after the Babylonian captivity, and had married foreign wives, presumably in violation of the law in Deuteronomy 7. Notice the clear parallel between these two parts of scripture:</translate>

{{:Scriptblock|Deut 7:1-4}}

{{:Scriptblock|Ezra 9:1-3}}

<translate><!--T:10--> These marriages were clearly <em>illegal</em> by the standards of Biblical law. Some people note that Ezra 9:1 mentions "Egyptians", "Ammonites," and "Moabites", people groups that were not in the Deut. 7:1 list. But this does not change the illegal nature of the marriages, because the point of the original law was to prevent God's people from "following the abominations" (Ezra 9:1: e.g. idolatry, incest, etc) of the Canaanite peoples (see Deut. 7:4, Lev. 18:26-30). There were probably many Egyptians, Ammonites, and Moabites who had intermarried with the Canaanite peoples and would therefore endanger anyone who tried to form a covenant with them. All such joining of covenant members with idolaters was illegal. This was Ezra's concern.</translate>

<translate><!--T:11--> Some commentators read "divorce trials" into Ezra 10:14. For example, Philip Kayser claims: "Ezra tried each case of improper marriage on its own merit."<ref>Kayser, <em>Is the Death Penalty Just?</em>, p. 25</ref> This is a false claim, which anyone can tell, simply by reading the text of Ezra 10:</translate>

{{:Scriptblockformat|{{#scripture:Ezra 10:3}} ... {{#scripture:Ezra 10:7-8}} ... {{#scripture:Ezra 10:14}}|scriptref=Ezra 10:3,7-8,14}}

<translate><!--T:12--> There was no divorce "trial" here, as Kayser asserts. These "marriages" where prima facie <em>illegal</em> according to Biblical law. No (legal) marriage covenant had been broken. No (legal) marriage covenant had even been created. The legal term to describe this is "void <em>ab initio</em>" (invalid from the beginning).</translate>

<translate><!--T:13--> This was simply a case of a lot of prominent Israelite men committing fornication with foreign woman (as if they had been prostitutes). This presentation of each man before the community leaders was a public "putting away" (divorce) declaration, required "according to the counsel of my Lord" (Ezra 9:3). Neither the men nor the community leaders had any choice or discretion in this matter. It was part of their public act of repentance for a sin (entering an illegal marriage) which might have brought judgment upon the community. No one participating in this process claimed that these marriages were ever legal. A claim like that would have denied the truth of Biblical law (Deut. 7:1-3) and nullified their repentance.</translate>
</div>

{{DISPLAYTITLE:<translate><!--T:14--> {{PAGENAME}}</translate>}}

[[Category:Answered Questions]]
[[Category:Divorce]]
[[Category:Ezra 10:14]]
[[Category:Questions about civil government formation, powers, and limits]]
[[Category:Questions about marriage and family]]
[[Category:Questions about the historical application of Biblical law]]