Conclusion

From the very beginning, the idea of a human couple was designed for better relations with each another. God never created the love of Adam and Eve by force, artificially, by law and regulations. A human heart was not hard, and so there was no need for any external regulations which would supposedly make people love each other. Christ told that certificates of divorce were given because of the hard-heartedness. From the perspective of the grace, the phenomenon of the hard-heartedness has nothing to do with the very fact of a divorce, as legalism sees it. Instead, it is about the daily suppression of relations between the partners, extinguishing trust, destroying respect, etc., even long before the fact of a divorce. Hard-heartedness can happen to anybody, and hence the risk of a collapse is threatening everybody, every marriage, without exception, during all the time. That is exactly what Jesus meant when He was teaching about it. And even when the relations are to some extent destroyed, they can still be restored. That is why apostle Paul urged to try to find ways back in order not to destroy what has been already built and can be restored and further continue developed. Reconciliation will not be reconciliation if one is only paying lip service and doing nothing or doing something only at the beginning. As it is not that difficult to lose weight with the help of a diet and exercise, but it is not that easy and takes efforts to keep fit for the rest of the life.

So, if entropy appears absolutely in all the spheres of the universe for all its elements, then it is also possible that the same entropy will be in certain spheres of life of certain married partners, as they are a part of the universe. This means that everything in the universe is always declining, unless it is purposefully renewed.

Further steps and the life after divorce is a separate topic which is quite broad. Besides different kinds of rehabilitation, the key problem is as follows, "In what way should the life of the divorced continue?" Is this a secondary life, like the one "in the exile", or is it a full life, like that of the others? When searching for the answer, we need to remember that any principle should equally function for everybody at any time and without exception. When we look at the God’s plan, we see that salvation and God’s glorification is always in the essence. For example, if anybody can be fully restored in a new marriage, then it means that it does not matter whether it is a professor, a workman, a parishioner or the pastor himself. The fact is that God gives way to restoration to the equal state for everybody, so that everybody could finally see His Kingdom. It can be explained with the example when it is interpreted that a divorced "average" parishioner can remarry, and it is accepted, and then his new family can gradually blend into the mainstream. However, when it is a clergyman or a priest, then he should resign and disappear as the one. Such premise based upon statement on key extracts by Paul, where he describes a clergyman as a "husband of one wife" (1Tim 3:2, Tit 1:6). But does such an interpretation did not overlook anything important? The key essence of the Paul’s epistles is the principle "a partner of one partner". What does it mean exactly? If the Old Testament and New Testament admit and allow for a divorce, then the statement that a bishop or a priest should stay married for the rest of their life, whatever happens to a marriage contract, would clearly be a kind of double standards. The statement "to be a husband of one wife" or, vice versa, "to be a wife of one husband" does not just mean "to be married to one partner" and does not mean "doing so through the whole life exclusively", but rather to stay pure. Simply because one can have more hidden partners outside the marriage. The condition of being "a partner of one partner" may not concern only a bishop, or a priest, or a clergyman, or any other socially visible person. Instead, it concerns everybody without exception, as otherwise it would be an unjust inequality of the standards of purity. What Paul is talking about is that the higher the responsibility is, the more likely it is to be blamed for certain behaviour concerning the defined standards, and that is why a bishop or priest will be the first targets for this. That is why their purity should be impeccable. Consequently, a bishop should be "a partner of one partner" within the meaning not to have extra partners during their marriage. Paul, in his letters to Titus or Timothy, does not refer to the official marital status of any leader and does not speak about one only possible partner in the life, or about the divorce as a dirty life-long unforgivable and unforgettable label, making it impossible to be an example of dedication to God, etc., but instead he highlights the moral state of a leader as a model for others, as long as Paul also writes to Titus about the character features of the priest’s children. Did Paul mean that a man whose wife can not have children, also can not be a bishop? It is obvious that the context of this passage is not about the society and public, but about the internal, moral state and purity. So, any man as a husband of one wife (or a woman as a wife of one husband) should be committed and loyal to their partner. With the only difference that the purity of the family will more likely be pointed out, as the one better known for others. But no one is safe from collapse of their partner, who may decide otherwise. If the leader himself stays clear in his marriage, it is only the half of the process. That is why if the divorce comes to the life of a leader, it does not at all mean that his new family will not be able to glorify God. The same happened to a new marriage of God in the form of Christ and the Church.

How many times one may fail? This would be a wrong question. Because the amount of failures is irrelevant, as long as righteousness is kept. Righteous man may fall seven times and rise again. A wicked man will sling mud at everybody in order to put them at his level, so that they feel the same miserable and useless, and will blame and accuse them in order to fill his own emptiness and loneliness. That is how act those, who live according to the Law and never can fulfill it properly. But a righteous man will not do that, but will instead show the way how to restore everything and live a full powerful and fruitful life, using the acquired experience and teaching others how to avoid possible traps during the life. That is how grace acts.

If to believe that God created the universe and everything that is in it, then He also knows that an earthly human being is sinful and corrupted because of the sinful nature. And it means that such a person will always sin, even when searching for the truth in any issue, as he is going to make mistakes in order to choose the best. As God knows that any object which belongs to the universe is always gradually declining, then He also knows that any relations are possible only between the objects which are part of the universe. And if those objects are declining, then consequently the relations between them are declining too, unless the objects themselves decide to be recharged and restored. As the God-created choice lies in the very essence, it means that God provided the choice. The possible choice has at least two options, and they are always different, otherwise there would be no choice at all. Within the choice there is one more acceptable option, and the other, less acceptable one. It means that having provided the choice, God provided the possibility of a less acceptable option.

So, in the context of a marriage it can be inferred that a marriage can break up because of the very existence of a daily choice, regardless whether it is pleasant, good, right, or not. In all possible combinations of the choice, an incorrect or the worst option is always likely, and that is also provided by God and allowed to be made. In the same way, there exists a right or even the best option for any choice. To sum it up, the marriage break-up is provided by the Creator, that is why the very decline as a part of the world design, is an entirely natural phenomenon.

Any divorce is always a tragedy and a huge shock to both partners. As even if there are no children, the relatives are hurt, time and money have been lost, hopes, dreams and plans are crushed, the soul is injured for the future, and so on. So never assume that a divorce is something trivial, easy and a common practice, and that one can take radical decisions hastily. However, as there exists a choice, any marriage can go both the way of a collapse or development. And such a situation is not a forced exception but the functioning of the universe according to its design. That is why after a marriage break-up, there still remains a choice: to begin everything again, or to leave it without changes. Since everyone has the right to salvation, restoration and forgiveness, under any circumstances there should be no condemnation for a new start.

The choice will exist as long as people will be alive and able to choose in the circumstances where life has taken them.