Recent events have me questioning marriage. No, not my own marriage. Really it’s the marriage of marriage that has me questioning – that is, the marriage between state and church in American marriages.
In America, couples desiring to get married have to obtain a marriage license from the state. They then have to be married by a “state-approved” officiant who signs the marriage license and sends it into the state for their official records. Graciously, for a fee, the state has approved me as a minister of Jesus Christ to perform marriage ceremonies on their behalf. And because the state is so concerned about the institution of marriage, in their benevolence, they also allow select couples to be married, for an even larger fee.
That’s right, I said “select couples.” No, this is not about gay marriage (though that will come in to play later). You see, for some reason, I never questioned this happy marriage between church and state… That is, until the couple I’ve been counseling and preparing to marry was denied (delayed, really… so far) a license to marry by the state.
That’s right, a male-female couple that has expressed their desire to marry before God, family and friends has been told, “sorry, no can-do” by the state. And me, a minister of the Gospel of Jesus Christ, who has been counseling this couple and believes they are ready to be united in holy matrimony, is somehow left without authority in this relationship.
That’s it. I want a divorce.
You see, marriage used to be strictly a religious affair. Ministers were the only people who could perform marriage ceremonies and they did it freely without registering with the state and without a license. The state got into the marriage business as a means of monitoring interracial marriages and soon discovered their was money to be had and then made it a requirement for all couples to acquire licenses permitting them to marry. And ever since the state got involved there has been a widespread misunderstanding among religious and secular folks alike about the difference between the civil right of marriage and the sacred rite of marriage. (This is where same-sex marriage comes in to play, by the way).
When a minister of Jesus Christ performs a marriage ceremony it is, first and foremeost, a sacred rite – a religious union. It is not a civil union, although the state may recognize it as such. Clergy have the God-ordained right to marry or not marry whoever they choose, regardless of what the state thinks. Religious marriage is a sacred rite of the church. It is a relationship ordained by God, blessed by God, and entrusted by God to the members of Christ’s church.
Civil marriage is the binding legal contract of marriage recognized by the state. Again, it is important to recognize that what the church does is not civil, but religious. Although the church may offer the rite of marriage, the right of marriage is extended only by the state. The church must not impose the rite of marriage on the state just as the state must not impose the right of marriage on the church. They are two separate, protected institutions. So the state cannot tell me as a minister of Jesus Christ who I can and cannot marry. They can, however, decide whether or not to recognize that union as legally binding.
This begs the question: what is the benefit of a legally-binding marriage? The only benefit I can see would be in the ending of the marriage – divorce. It is only in the ending of a marriage that the civil union becomes a factor – when the court is trying to determine who gets what. But in most states, even sacred unions are considered legal unions after a certain amount of time.
So here’s my predicament: as a minister, do I observe the laws of the state in this matter and not perform a sacred rite for anyone who does not have the civil right, or do I act on God’s authority and the Holy Spirit’s wisdom to marry or not marry whomever I choose? And what are the ramifications for each?
I’m curious as to the justification for their application being denied/delayed. What were the grounds for the denial?
In the interest of privacy, I can’t say what the grounds were. But their license has since been approved (after a 3 week delay). I just have never heard of such a thing. It’s an interesting testimony to the powers of the state.
I don’t see this as a predicament. You are not being forced, or even asked, to choose between the two (sacred rite and civil right). They are not mutually exclusive.
Marry them in the sacred rite. When the government is ready to recognize the marriage that has already taken place, the government can do that. Are two people any less married because the US government won’t give them a piece of paper, considering they’ve met the criteria according to a minister ordained by God (and the State, I might add)?