“I do” by who? Rethinking the Church’s role as an extension of a changing government
Marriage is a complex thing, it is a game that follows rules and logic that are difficult to describe and it is often played differently in different cultures. But one thing is the same, there is always some kind of promise involved. Though it might be pronounced differently, though the commitment might take different forms, the goal is always ‘until death do us part.’
In present America the person that officiates this promise or vow is a member of the clergy. According to the popular authority on marriage laws within the US people getting married must find “any recognized member of the clergy” including every officially recognized religion. They, and courts, have authority to perform a marriage.[1] However, there is an additional clause that even recognized clergy must be first certified or licensed through their denomination or peers. This is a very clear picture of the government giving power to a religious institution. Though separation of church and states is officially recognized and widely supported, it was never a clean cut break. There are still a few old bridges that cross the divide between these two large institutions.
These bridges are under an increasing amount of tension. As culture continues to move into the postmodern era, people’s values are changing along with their principles and priorities. The cultural divide between society, ruled by the government, and church lead by the clergy is growing larger and that places tension on these old bridges, especially when relating to marriage.
Psychologists Bell DePaulo Ph.D. writing for Psychology Today remarks that some of these new forms of marriage include “parenting marriages” (married just to raise kids), “open marriages” (married but with extra partners), and even “starter marriages” (marriage with a predetermined date of divorce).[2]Marriage is not about commitment, rather it has evolved into a monster consumed with personal happiness, feelings, and the all abstract word love. This, and many other factors, all tally up to a nearly 50% divorce rate in the US.[3] Though the quality and length of marriage is steadily declining the biggest outside threat to the church, and the role that clergy and pastors play in marriage ceremonies, is same-sex marriage.
In the past two years several pastors across the country have gotten themselves in much trouble by refusing to marry gay couples. Clergy commonly believe that based on their religious beliefs and their rights as Americans that they cannot be forced. Those wanting to get married say that pastors in this case are simply a representation of the government and so should follow the governments recognition of same-sex marriage. Both pastors and civil leaders are responding to that tension. An extreme example is found in small town Idaho were all pastors were told by city officials via an ordinance that “if they refuse to marry homosexuals, they will face jail time and fines.”[4] The reputable fact checking organization Snoops adds a quote from a local Christian chapel owner saying that they closed their chapel due to “a constant state of fear that they would be arrested and prosecuted if they declined to perform a same-sex ceremony.”[5]
That being said Christian pastors are also joining this race to arms. Seminars are being held, books are being written and free legal advice is being offered in all sorts of forms for pastors who fear losing their constitutional rights. Christian attorney David Gibbs III is a well-known speaker and author on this topic and has fought for Christian liberty cases up to the supreme court. He is a firm believer that, especially when it concerns to marriage, Christians are to fight for their beliefs. His motto is “if it’s wrong, fight it. If it’s right, fight for it.”[6] To some this might sound opposite to what many Christians are practicing around the world when it comes to practicing their faith. As one persecuted Christian commented when attending a mission’s conference at LBC, “God did not call us to carry up a gun, court order or local militia membership. He asked us to carry a cross.” To some it may seem that Americans riding the tide of a new postmodern generation seem to want to keep their blend of Christianity and American rights.
The above taken into consideration I would beg to ask the question is it necessary? Is this a battle that we need to fight? One might answer that yes we are to do this. The Bible is very clear that marriage matters. It is not just a sociological institution; it is a sacred institution. The institution that in the first place is not supposed to care for needs or bring us happiness, although those are natural results of following God’s perspective on marriage. Rather, marriage is first and foremost for the glory of God and through the venue of displaying a living portrait of the gospel. John Piper, a famous theologian and longtime pastor, remarks in his book This Momentary Marriage that Christian marriage is “the display of the covenant-keeping love between Christ and his people.”[7] Marriage done God’s way is a wide-screen, HD display of God’s faithfulness towards us.
That being said marriage done wrong gives us a watered down, blurry image of the gospel. One that will make someone come up with a totally different idea of who God is and how he relates to us. It is like a person that only sees a green, algae invested pond while someone is explaining the ocean. It is like someone that only sees a molehill while you are describing the Alps. It is like someone who only knew an abusive dad while you are is painting God as a loving and caring father. It is like someone who only sees a broken marriage while you are telling them of God’s faithfulness. Yes, marriage does matter, and it is crucially important to the church’s testimony in our culture.
One place that the church shouldn’t be forced to fight those battles between church and society is on the tight bridge of clergy officiating marriage. Pastors should never go against their conscience, their people’s conscience or their belief of what Scripture teaches. But I believe that the church would be best served if the government would retake this form of civil responsibility of officiating two people as husband and wife. Not only does this take the social pressure off the church but it also releases the church from being an extension of the government’s policy. After all, separation of church and state is always in the first place best for the church.
This form of a government representative officiating the legal part of wedding and the pastor officiating the covenant to God, each other and a local church is a practice that is common throughout western Europe. It has not taken away premarital counselling, a Christ centered service or the role of a church help this new couple see it through. However, it has given the pastors and elders the opportunity to spread a different message, support marriage from within the local church and underscore that a Christian marriage, with the message of gospel wrapped up inside of it, is different than a ‘secular’ marriage. It has given them more freedom to exercise their faith rather than limit it.
As a church we should be eager to continue to find ways to reach our surroundings with the truth of the gospel. I believe that this is best done not in a courthouse, though there are most certainly times for that, but within a local community. If the opportunity does arise for the state to take back the officiating of weddings I think we should greet it with enthusiasm knowing that we were never meant to be the extension of our legislature.
Marriage matters and it is important that we still have the freedom to help couples put together this picture of the gospel and live it out in commitment to each other for the rest of their lives. As our influence on culture and government policy seems to slowly be lessening let us seek to identify how we can adapt to continue to use marriage as a window were the light of Christ’s message of faithfulness can shine through. Ultimately, let us not forget that we are first and foremost citizens of a heavenly kingdom and secondly of this earthly one.
[1] http://www.usmarriagelaws.com/marriage-license/officiants-requirements.shtml
[2] https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/living-single/201507/7-kinds-marriages-and-one-awesome-alternative
[3] www.apa.org/topics/divorce/
[4] http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2014/oct/20/idaho-citys-ordinance-tells-pastors-to-marry-gays-/
[5] http://www.snopes.com/politics/religion/hitchingpost.asp
[7] http://www.desiringgod.org/books/this-momentary-marriage
