Bishops and the policy of second marriages : LUSENET : A.M.E. Today Discussion : One Thread

I am interested to find out what policy governs issues pertaining to second marriages of Bishops. To my understanding, Bishops are itinerant elders and the same policy that counts for the itinirant ministry as is captured in the book of discipline should also count for them. However, some of our Bishops are divorced and has re-married again while their previous wifes are or were still alive. I anybody aware of this and why are does it seem that the bishops are above the law? In the final analysis, what is the law? I know of some do you also?

-- Anonymous, June 06, 2001


Rev. Biwa why are you asking this question? Bishops like clergy and laity are human and divorce happens in all branches of the church. Let us pray for one another and look for the good in one another as Christ sees the good in us. We are living under grace.

-- Anonymous, June 06, 2001

Defrock all the Elders with second marriages and many of our pulpits will be empty. That would be sort of like telling the Apostle Paul that his past disquailfied him from being an apostle.


Pastor Paris

-- Anonymous, June 07, 2001

I agree with Pastor Paris that we woould not have many elders in the pulpit if we only appointed elders with one marriage. Let God decide what to do with the bishops who are married for thesecind tume. Quite frankly, it is none of our business. We never know what is going to happen in our own lives.

-- Anonymous, June 08, 2001

Rev. Biwa

As an officer in my church and an officer of the Lay Organization I am required to have some knowledge of how the church stands on issues which involve it's membership. These rules and regulations apply to every member of the A.M.E. Church regardless of rank, position, ordination, or consecration; That is, they are universally applicable to both lay and clergy and not aimed at one or the other.

Also, as I previously stated in another post, let me hasten to say that it is not mine to point fingers or cast stones. Given my knowledge of my own salvation, I would not even attempt to try. However since this is an open discussion board, your question, as all those posted here, deserves an answer as best we can give it. Therefore, I will restate what the church officially says it believes as is printed in the Book of Doctrine and Discipline.

I further believe it is ludicrous for us to reject our Doctrine and Discipline as being inappropriate for our times since it is, (1) backed by scriptural authority and, (2) open for amendment and revision every four years. The church of God MUST take a stand for right or wrong even if the stand it takes condemns what I have done or what I yet choose to do.

The A.M.E. Church does not prohibit divorce, as there are reasons beyond the control of the members, which might in fact warrant such divorce. It does however expressly forbid any divorced member to remarry during the lifetime of the divorced spouse unless the divorce can be proven to be commensurate with Biblical reasons given by Jesus and the Apostles--including Saint Paul. It further states that persons who wish to remarry and who feel these condition have been adequately met should file a transcript of divorce proceedings with the Quarterly Conference, which shall determine if these Biblical conditions have been met.

The Discipline states that any member who fails to do so or any minister who knowingly remarries a member not in compliance with this rule shall be expelled from the Church. It thus becomes the task of the Quarter Conference to accept or reject compliance.

From the records I have seen, I have found few examples of persons who ever held the Office of Bishop that were divorced. In fact I only know of two. Since every member of our church is amenable to a Church Conference, Quarterly Conference, District Conference, Annual Conference, and/or General Conference, let us hope that in each instance the conditions have been met.

-- Anonymous, June 09, 2001


In my previous post I said that the Church of God has to take a stand on what is right and wrong even if that stand condemns me of things I have done or things which I yet choose to do.

The word CONDEMN is indeed a poor choice of words, It should rather have read call out, point out, or convict. For, "There is therefore now NO CONDEMNAYION to them which are in Christ Jesus, who walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit; For the law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus hath made me free from the law of sin and death." - Romans 8:1 & 2.

-- Anonymous, June 09, 2001

Moderation questions? read the FAQ