I'm simpy going to quote an interesting argunent from a 1973 book by Jay Adams. I would be interested in your views on this. For once I intend to keep my own to myself just now!

Marriage, Divorce, and the Reconciliation/Discipline Dynamic
As a concrete example of the crucial nature of the reconciliation/ discipline dynamic, let us consider the growing problem of divorce- among Christians. This is a problem with which every Christian pastor increasingly will find himself confronted. John Murray sketches several situations in the back of his landmark book, Divorce, as paradigms for handling practical cases. They are helpful, but limited in use.

A pastor soon discovers that there are many situations that do not fit into the framework of these paradigms. However, the addition of one further factor to what Murray has said so well about marriage and divorce will bring such problem cases within their framework and will enable coun- selors to bring every case to a successful conclusion. This factor is the reconciliation/discipline dynamic.

The argument begins in I Corinthinans 7. Murray has exegeted the passage brilliantly. Paul first reiterates Christ's word concerning two believers, namely that there is no reason short of adultery for dissolving their marriage (I Corinthians 7: 10, 11). But then he takes up another question about which the Lord did not speak directly while on earth (vs. 12). By the Spirit's inspiration the Lord's Word on that new matter is now about to be written by the apostle himself. That Word deals with the additional question of the marriage of a believer to an unbeliever. The believer is to continue the marriage if the un-believer so desires. However, because his partner has now become a Christian, the unbeliever may no longer wish to continue living with him. In such cases the believer is to let him (or her) go (vs~ 15). Whenever this happens, Paul says, the believer is no longer "in bondage" (vs. 15). Murray argues successfully tpat this means that the Christian is free of his marriage bonds, may obtain a divorce and remarry.

The problem remains, however, as to what must be done when two professing Christians fail to keep their marriage together and reconciliation does not take place. Let us say that a husband who is a professing Christian refuses to be reconciled to his wife. Perhaps he has even left her. Reconciliation has been attempted by the wife. If she continues to insist upon reconciliation (according to Matthew 18), but fails in her attempts at private confrontation, she must take one or two others from the church and confront her husband. Suppose she does and that he also refuses to hear them. In that case she is required to submit the problem officially to the church, which ultimately may be forced, by his adamant refusal to be reconciled, to excommunicate him for contumacy. Excommunication, Christ says, changes his status to that of a heathen and a publican, i.e., someone outside of the church (Matthew 18:17). Now he must be treated ''as a heathen and a publican." That means, for instance, that after reasonable attempts to reconcile him to the church and to his wife, he may be taken to court (I Corinthians 6: 1 ~8 forbids brethren to go to law against one another) to sue for a divorce (only, of course, if the excommunicated one deserts his partner).

By following the reconciliation dynamic, hopefully there will be reconciliation in most cases. Whenever the principles of biblical reconciliation are followed faithfully, discipline rarely reaches the highest level of excommunication. Most marriages not only can be saved, but by proper help may be changed radically for good. But in those few cases where reconciliation is refused, the believer who seeks it is not left in a state of limbo. He has a course of action to pursue, 'and if it leads to excommunication and desertion he is no longer obligated to remain married indefinitely. This is true only if the believer's marriage partner during the whole process of discipline has failed to demonstrate evidence of repentance and faith, if that partner has been excommunicated, and if he (or she) wishes to dissolve the marriage. Continued rejection of the help and authority of Christ and His church finally leads to excommunication.
An excommunicated party who continues to be unrepentant must be looked upon and treated as a heathen and publican. He shows no signs of a work of grace. When he has been put outside of the church and still evidences no signs of salvation, the believing partner may deal with hin as with an unbeliever. This means that if he leaves the believer under those circumstances, the latter is no longer under "bondage." The word in I Corinthians 7:21ff. governing the relationship of a believer to an unbelieving marriage partner then comes into effect. By plugging in the reconciliation/discipline dynamic to the marriage-divorce- remarriage problem, the solution to ninety-nine percent of these cases that heretofore may have seemed unsolvable immediately may be seen. Most parties hopefully will come to reconciliation, but those who will not repent and be reconciled should be disciplined. Either way, matters are not left at loose ends.