A while back, a man challenged my theology. He said I was stuck in Old Testament legalistic thinking. He believed that if his wife practiced New Testament grace and forgiveness, they would still be together. Instead, because of my teaching, they were separated.
I asked several clarifying questions, and it seemed that after an abusive incident (not the first one), he expected that as a Christian wife, she should forgive, offer a fresh start, and not bring up what happened yesterday or the day before because that’s the past.
But this time, rather than the clean slate outcome he expected, his wife told him she was separating.
She said that unless he got professional help and demonstrated over time that he could manage his negative emotions in a mature way, she would not be coming back. She said she could forgive him, but she could not live with him. He told her that her offer of forgiveness was insincere unless she was willing to reconcile fully.
Their church agreed that his behavior was sinful, but in the end, sided more with his thinking than hers. He was welcomed back into fellowship with open arms because he said he was repentant. His wife was disciplined and shunned because she wouldn’t comply with their church’s counsel to reconcile. After all, he said he was sorry and was willing to meet with the pastor for counseling.
She was labeled hard-hearted and rebellious because she refused to subject herself to the possibility of further abuse.
It concerns me how quickly the focus of the problem gets twisted. The victim is now labeled the unrepentant, hard-hearted one because she refused to reconcile without evidence of repentance. The one who sinned against her is now seen as the victim of his hard-hearted, unforgiving spouse.
Let’s wrestle with this dilemma: Do claims of repentance immediately cancel out any negative consequences for someone’s sin? Theologically, does granting grace, even forgiveness, mean that there is never any extended relational fallout or broken trust in one’s relationships after repeated serious sin? Is there ever a need for the sinner to demonstrate over time (especially when the sin has been repetitive) the fruit of repentance? Is there a place in New Testament theology for making amends to the one wronged, or is that just Old Testament legalism, as this man claimed?
When a wounded spouse bravely starts implementing boundaries and consequences for repeated sin, like the woman in this story, she has often been accused by other Christians of being unforgiving, hard-hearted and lacking grace. But is it possible that boundaries and consequences are evidence of godly love not only for her safety and stewardship but for his good as well?
Paul says that godly love does not harm (Romans 13:10), but that does not mean biblical love never hurts. Paul spoke sternly to those who claimed faith but whose actions showed otherwise and encouraged setting firm boundaries with these individuals (1 Corinthians 5:9).
Jesus often spoke firmly to the Pharisees, and Proverbs reminds us that a good friend might inflict loving wounds (Proverbs 27:6). We all find it painful to swallow the medicine of hard truth. It hurts, but like strong ammonia revives, the faint, hard truth can shock us awake so that proper healing can occur. (See, for example, Matthew 23 or Mark 7:6-12).
When a wife refuses to pretend, to placate, or continue the same destructive dance, she is not only doing that for her welfare but also for his. This is biblical love at its best. It’s risky, sacrificial, and acts in the best interests of the beloved. Once the wife clarifies her own boundaries and allows natural consequences to take place, the abuser often runs to the Christian counselor or pastor. He pleads, begs, and pours on the charm, attempting to persuade them that God is doing great work in his heart.
Listen carefully.
Tears are the language of the heart, but what exactly are his tears saying? “I’m so sorry. I’ve sinned against God and my spouse? She has every reason to be afraid of me or not trust me.” Or, is it more like, “Poor me. I’m devastated because I’ll lose my job, or I will have to live with my mother, or the kids won’t speak to me, or she’s so unforgiving.”
In discerning genuine repentance, we want to listen carefully: Is he aware of the pain he has caused, not just the pain he’s in? Does he show care for his spouse’s suffering or only his own? Is he aware of deeper heart issues such as attitudes of entitlement, selfishness, laziness, or pride? Or is he focused primarily on himself, his own pain, his own justifications, and on what his spouse is supposed to do such as forgive him, remove negative consequences, and reconcile?
Genuine repentance acknowledges that serious and repetitive sin does have negative consequences on relationships. The genuinely repentant person is willing to do what it takes to change and make amends without focusing on the response of the wounded. Like Zacchaeus, once he saw the kindness of Christ, he was changed. His first action was to make amends and offer restitution to those he had financially harmed, not demand they forgive him (See Luke 19:8).
If there is no “fruit of repentance,” then someone’s sadness is not godly sorrow. Instead, it’s legitimate suffering for what’s happened and the negative consequences they face. Don’t confuse the two. Words alone won’t always show you these things; actions over time will (Matthew 7:20; 1 Corinthians 4:20).
