Being a minister's wife

System

The idea is that two unbelievers get married.... thats how it happened with me but then something happened and i became a believer. My husband doesnt believe, hates anything to do with religion. Do i get divorced? No, its a sin. If i had been a believer and purposely married a athiest then yes i was told it would be a sin. In theory, if i remarried then he would have to be a christian..... however, i'm already commiting a sin by not going to church so i would have to tag that on the list of sins ive already got stacked up against me.

I think the scripture to back this up is 2 Corinthians 6:14-15 about being yolked with unbelievers.

Torry_Quine

Judi wrote: »

The idea is that two unbelievers get married.... thats how it happened with me but then something happened and i became a believer. My husband doesnt believe, hates anything to do with religion. Do i get divorced? No, its a sin. If i had been a believer and purposely married a athiest then yes i was told it would be a sin. In theory, if i remarried then he would have to be a christian..... however, i'm already commiting a sin by not going to church so i would have to tag that on the list of sins ive already got stacked up against me.

I think the scripture to back this up is 2 Corinthians 6:14-15 about being yolked with unbelievers.

God is very understanding and knows the problems you have to face but you're absolutely right that divorce would be unbiblical in this instance. Not going to church isn't a sin although if we can then it's of great benefit. Don't worry, we're all sinners

Savvy_Sue

scottishlass72 wrote: »

For anyone who wouldn't believe a word my husband says as a minister because he's married to a non-believer ... I say that's great. I don't think anyone should believe everything anyone else says unquestioningly but rather should think critically about it and make sure it's something they believe is right. Otherwise when people believe a charismatic leader without questioning them we run into the problem of "groupthink" and all its associated dangers.

Now that is very true! I think in general Christians don't think enough, especially those who grew up going to church.

peachyprice wrote: »

It's this arrogant attitude that agnostics/atheists need to be convinced that they are wrong that gives religion a bad name.

An atheist is as passionate about their own beliefs as a Christian is their. Would you not find it disrespectful if an atheist belittled your beliefs and was insisitent that you needed convincing that your beliefs were wrong?

DH takes the view that he thinks he's right. If you think he's wrong, he'd be delighted if you can show him where's he's wrong, because he wants to be right. If he disagrees with what you say, he'll tell you, and ask why you believe what you believe, and produce his evidence / reasons for believing as he does.

For some reason, some people find this incredibly intimidating! But if you're not sure of why you believe what you believe, it can be incredibly stimulating.

One thing I will say to the OP: be ready for people to be "praying for you" when they discover you don't share your husband's faith.

System

To be honest ive got 15+ years of teaching in my head but not 'practised' it for years.

kaya64

maybe this would be helpful http://www.satsonline.org/userfiles/RebuliSmith_PastorsWife.pdf

kaya64

cottonhead wrote: »

Talking about religion is always going to cause arguments. What I am about to say is just me being honest and not meant to offend so here goes ! Being a minister is not just a job buit a way of life and you have to be on hand 24/7 if someone needs you. It often means getting quite involved in personal issues and sacrificing personal time as a couple so the fact that you are willing to support your husband is great.
My only comment is that as your husband will be a minister - most members of the community will assume that your share his views. I dont know what type of community you will be based in but many smaller parishes and older members of the community will frown upon Gay marriage and even Gay acceptance. I dont speak for everyone but all the major religions teach against being Gay and even state what the punishment is for it. To me thats a hard one to work with. I see that a person is either religious and follows all of what God says in which case you must be against Gays. Or you support a persons lifestyle and believe they have chosen to be Gay or been created Gay and so must surley believe that some part of the religion is wrong. I just dont personally see how you can pick and choose which part of a religion to follow.
The reason I say this is not to upset you or anyone else, but just because if you wish to work with Gay people, some of the Church community might react badly to it which could then upset you or your husband.
Good luck to both of you and hope it works out for the best.

I like this you put it across really well, I am a christian and know the scripture is against homosexuality, but I believe Jesus loves everyone and I think the church should love gays unconditionally, I would rather see a gay couple in church every Sunday listening to the sermon and not judge them and just pray that they will learn the word of God and feel accepted into the family of God, only God knows what people are like deep inside it is not for us to judge anyone , and being a minister is huge responsibility , there will be every kind of people coming to the church and you have to love them all no matter what they look or act or even smell like .
I personally believe that a ministers wife should also be a believer because the bible talks about marriage as becoming one flesh and it also speaks about what the wifes duties are towards her husband , if the wife doesn't believe what her husband does how can she possibley wholeheartedly support everything he is doing .

System

Matthew 7:1 Do not judge or you will be judged.

Hate the sin, love the sinner i was taught.:)

Person_one

cottonhead wrote: »

I dont speak for everyone but all the major religions teach against being Gay and even state what the punishment is for it. To me thats a hard one to work with. I see that a person is either religious and follows all of what God says in which case you must be against Gays. Or you support a persons lifestyle and believe they have chosen to be Gay or been created Gay and so must surley believe that some part of the religion is wrong. I just dont personally see how you can pick and choose which part of a religion to follow.
The reason I say this is not to upset you or anyone else, but just because if you wish to work with Gay people, some of the Church community might react badly to it which could then upset you or your husband.
Good luck to both of you and hope it works out for the best.

The thing is though, unless all the people who are so anti gay because God says its wrong also eschew shellfish and pork, only ever wear clothes made of one fabric and stay away from menstruating women, they're being hypocritical.

There are lots of very strict rules in the bible that today's Christians feel free to ignore, and if you're using the 'Jesus superseded all that more unpleasant stuff' excuse, then he didn't actually have much to say about gay relationships and was generally a bit of a liberal come one come all easy going type by all accounts.

coolcait

Person_one wrote: »

The thing is though, unless all the people who are so anti gay because God says its wrong also eschew shellfish and pork, only ever wear clothes made of one fabric and stay away from menstruating women, they're being hypocritical.

There are lots of very strict rules in the bible that today's Christians feel free to ignore, and if you're using the 'Jesus superseded all that more unpleasant stuff' excuse, then he didn't actually have much to say about gay relationships and was generally a bit of a liberal come one come all easy going type by all accounts.

That's a pretty fair summary, in my view - but I'm going to take it a step further .

Taking the Bible contents at face value:

You've already highlighted Leviticus - a pretty long (and fairly dull) part of the Old Testament. It covers rules on ritual sacrifice, diet and so on.

Very little of it is included in modern Christian teaching. One tiny verse, about male/male sexual relations is quoted endlessly. Yet, Queen Victoria-like, there appears to be a reluctance to accept that female/female sexual relations could even happen...

In the New Testament, Jesus of Nazareth makes no reference to homosexuality. The four Gospels, which are reports of his words and actions, do not record any statement by Jesus on homosexuality.

They do record a number of statements and actions which show that he preached and practised 'inclusiveness' - he accepted prostitutes, tax collectors and other 'undesirables' as friends. He reached out to, and accepted, those who were 'unbelievers' - like the woman of Samaria.

The New Testament verses which condemn homosexuality are contained in the works of Paul. The New Testament verses which condemn working with/marrying 'unbelievers' are contained in the works of Paul. The New Testament verses which set out 'a woman's role, and a woman's place' are contained in the works of Paul.

Paul - Saul of Tarsus - never met or saw Jesus. He was a Pharisee and a zealous persecutor of those who did not agree with his beliefs (at that point, Christians).

He fell off his horse/had a revelation/saw a vision of Christ and continued to be a zealous persecutor of those who did not agree with his beliefs. His target had now become those who were not Christians (unbelievers).

The numerous books of the Bible which are comprised of Paul's letters etc are i) not all accepted as having been written by Paul; ii) interpretations of Jesus' message, rather than accounts of what he said and did; iii) have a cumulative effect of creating a 'cult of Paul' - especially given his claim that he was effectively passing on the message given by his vision of Jesus, which is often very different from the message reported in the Gospels.

My personal view is that there is a huge difference between those who follow the message of Christ, and those who follow the message of Paul (because the messages are very different).

Jojo_the_Tightfisted

Torry_Quine wrote: »

I have rarely been as angry and upset on MSE as when I read that. I had to resist the instinct to reply immediately out of anger. I really don't understand how you could say such a hurtful thing.

Because the poster that made that link is referring to the outward image of respectability and virtue that some people can project, whilst their soul is eaten up with prejudice and hatred towards people who are not fully paid up (and probably tithing) Christians.

Whether it's due to an aversion to all non Christians or whether a sneaky touch of anti Semitism is rearing its ugly head, is neither here nor there. It's all pretty distasteful for a mere person to appoint themselves as judge of how good a Christian minister is and instantly finding them lacking in ability or faith or calling due to their marriage. Surely, in Christianity, there can be only one judge of how good a Christian is?




I wonder whether some of the posters on this thread would have told the Samaritans to bog off and not darken their day because they weren't just like them (whether the male one or the female one) - or cursed the villagers for not believing - or stopped the other guy casting out demons.


Rejecting a man with a calling - for loving someone not just like them, with all what they perceive as sin - much as their Messiah apparently had loved all, irrespective of whether they believed or not - sounds a petty, spiteful act devoid of any of their Saviour's teachings, and one which actually directly contradicts many statements in the New Testament.


But that's how I interpreted the reasoning behind their reference to the whitewashed tombs full of rotten bones, looking all respectable to the outside world, but underneath, still containing all that is reviled.



But that's just my interpretation of what the poster was thinking when they made that connection.