Conclusion
There has been much controversy in recent years regarding Biblical putting away. The question at the heart of the issue is this: Can one put away their spouse for fornication and remarry after their spouse put them away for just any cause? As we've turned to the Scriptures, we have seen that one in the situation described is given permission by God to put away their spouse and remarry. How did we arrive at that conclusion?
A Review
The situation described in our question is not specifically addressed in Scripture. The situations in the New Testament in which one put away their mate for fornication contain no mention of them having been previously put away by their mate. The situations described that resulted in the one who was put away committing adultery, do not have that one putting away their mate for fornication. In our question, one puts away their mate for fornication and has already been put away by their mate. Without a parallel situation, we must look to the principles and precepts of God's word to answer the question.
Marriage is a divine institution governed by His laws. The word of God teaches us that He intends marriage to be for life. There is only one cause that will prompt God to grant one the permission to put away their mate and remarry. That cause is fornication. If one puts away their mate for a cause other than fornication, the two are still bound to each other by God's marriage law. And in regards to putting away, Jesus addressed the lawful cause. Neither He, nor anyone else in the New Testament, specified any lawful procedure or timing.
Based on those truths from God's word, we must conclude that one who puts away their mate for fornication (regardless of what procedure they use, or timing of the action) has the right to remarry. The one in our question fits into this category. They put away their mate for fornication and remarry. Jesus said this is permitted in Matthew 19:9.
Who's Adding to the Word of God?
Many reject the conclusions stated here. They call it "mental divorce." Not that it's truly "mental divorce," where putting away involves no action, merely thinking. It's just that it doesn't fit into their definition of putting away. They advocate that a certain procedure and/or timing must be used or else one does not have a right to put away their mate for fornication and remarry. They say there is no "second putting away" in the Bible. They say we have to obey the civil authorities in order to have the right to remarry. They make broad generalizations and declare that "no put away person can remarry." We've discussed these claims already.
Remember that Jesus spoke of the lawful cause for one to put away their mate and be able to remarry. He did not address procedure or timing. Nowhere else in the New Testament are these addressed either. But those who oppose the teaching here, must do so on the basis of either procedure or timing.
Let's say one denies that one has the right to put away their mate for fornication and remarry after their mate put them away for some other cause because "no put away person can remarry." What are they appealing to? We know they don't truly believe that statement (most anyway), because they would say the one whose spouse has died and the one who would be reconciled to their mate can marry (Rom. 7:2-3; 1 Cor. 7:10-11). But if they argue that one cannot put away their mate for fornication and remarry simply because they have been previously put away, they're making their case on the basis of timing.
When someone says that one must follow the civil divorce procedure in order to put away their mate, they are appealing to procedure.
When someone says that one cannot put away their mate for fornication after their mate put them away, because there is no "second putting away," they are making an argument based on timing.
When someone denies that the innocent spouse can put away the guilty fornicator simply because they are the put away person, and claim this would be nothing more than "mental divorce," they are being misleading. This isn't "mental divorce." It's just putting away that doesn't fit their contrived definition. It doesn't follow the procedure or timing they advocate.
Can one put away their spouse for fornication and remarry after their spouse put them away for just any cause? Those who answer no must do so on the basis of procedure and/or timing because the cause of fornication is there. Jesus addressed the lawful cause for divorce. Yet some are insistent upon adding extra stipulations.
All Christians need to be careful that they do not impose their opinions and scruples upon others. To do so, elevates (at least in their mind) their wisdom to the level of God's. The two are not in any way comparable (Is. 55:8-9; 1 Cor. 1:25). One may have their opinions, provided they do not bind them upon others. One may choose to follow what they believe to be "safe," but err when they condemn those who do not also follow their "safe" way.
The Scriptures teach that one who has been faithful to their marriage vows can put away their mate for fornication and remarry (Mt. 5:32; 19:9). No procedure or timing is ever specified. Those who teach that a certain procedure and/or timing must be used need to reexamine their teaching in light of what the Scriptures actually teach. We should not let our opinions carry the same weight as Scripture. Remember the words of the proverb: "Do not add to His words or He will reprove you, and you will be proved a liar" (Pr. 30:6).
