Marriage and the State

2 Corinthians 6:14-18

Do not be unequally yoked with unbelievers. For what partnership has righteousness with lawlessness? Or what fellowship has light with darkness? What accord has Christ with Belial? Or what portion does a believer share with an unbeliever? What agreement has the temple of God with idols? For we are the temple of the living God; as God said,

“I will make my dwelling among them and walk among them,

and I will be their God,

and they shall be my people.

Therefore go out from their midst,

and be separate from them, says the Lord,

and touch no unclean thing;

then I will welcome you,

and I will be a father to you,

and you shall be sons and daughters to me,

says the Lord Almighty.”[1]

C

Anadians are passionate about rights. In my brief residence in Canada, I have witnessed a transition of epic proportions. When I came to Canada, though minorities were respectfully heard and due consideration was accorded them, the British North America Act enshrined collective rights. This was the heritage of centuries of British jurisprudence, founded primarily upon Christian principles. When the Trudeau government patriated the Constitution and introduced the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, I cautioned friends, colleagues and parishioners that they might be in for a stunning surprise. I had no way of knowing just how prescient my words would prove.

Activist courts, established and abetted by a naïve and acquiescent Parliament, have changed the political landscape of this once great nation. Instead of enjoying collective rights, a mind-numbing list of individual rights continually divide the nation into ever-smaller enclaves of individuals, each angrily bawling out demands arising from their “unique” situation. Today, people that choose one lifestyle over another demand that the majority accept their strange and perverted positions as normative, insisting that they are a persecuted minority. Strangely enough, we witness for the first time, minorities defined as such on the basis of lifestyle chosen in defiance of nature.

Recently, in one further act of judicial activism pushing the nation toward utter depravity, the Superior Court of Ontario ruled that the government must permit marriage for sodomites and lesbians (Halpern v. Canada). I am not exaggerating when I say that it is only a matter of time until judicial activists normalise sexual acts between adults and children and between man and beast. What business has government directing marriage? Why must I be an agent of the Province? Why must I work for the government?

The biblical proscription against mixed marriage is concisely stated by the Apostle Paul in his second letter to the Corinthian saints. Though some will undoubtedly dispute the nuptial application of this passage, the overwhelming majority of conservative scholarship recognises its application to the matrimonial union. God is pledged to bless the couple which makes Him integral to their union. I cannot understand why those who will not confess faith in the Living God would wish His blessing in a religious ceremony? Clearly, the passage prohibits the marriage of a believer to a non-believer.

My practise has been to restrict my participation in weddings to members of my own congregation. It is a courtesy to them to share in their wedding ceremonies and it is a ministry mandated by my pastoral office to my own parishioners. Other Christians who approach me have been gently directed back to their own church. If, for some good reason, their pastor is unable to care for the responsibility of officiating at their wedding, I will, as a courtesy to a fellow pastor and at his request, assist through officiating.

If the couple approaching me have no church home, I attempt to speak to them of their faith in the Lord Christ. If they have no interest in serving Him, I endeavour to assist them to discover the folly of attempting to secure His blessings without worship. Should only one member of the party approaching me concerning marriage be a believer, I become quite adamant in my refusal to participate. I take great pains to try to point to the foolishness of disobedience toward the God the believer professes to worship.

Today, I am severing my relationship with the government. I will no longer participate in the wicked union of church and state through performing weddings as an agent of government. I will request that my name no longer be gazetted in Victoria. Whether it is or not, I will no longer act in behalf of the province. Couples desiring my participation in the future will be encouraged to visit a marriage commissioner gazetted under provincial law. If either the provincial or federal government has a compelling interest in the issue of marriage, then let government representatives care for the matter. If, on the other hand, the wedding ceremony is a religious function, let the churches care for that matter without governmental interference.

As a Baptist, I am committed to the concept of religious liberty, which precludes my functioning as an agent of government. Because too many churchgoers have but a vague idea of the role of the church in society, I am compelled to carefully set forth the basis for my decision and consider the impact that choice will have on the congregation.

Origins of Modern Marriage — The modern marriage ceremony exhibits more elements of Roman and Goth paganism than it reveals Christian influence. The Bible knows little of the ceremony of marriage, which varies considerably from culture to culture. The earliest marriage recorded is that of Adam and Eve in the Garden of Eden. The account is recorded in [Genesis 2:21-25].

So the Lord God caused a deep sleep to fall upon the man, and while he slept took one of his ribs and closed up its place with flesh. And the rib that the Lord God had taken from the man he made into a woman and brought her to the man. Then the man said,

“This at last is bone of my bones

and flesh of my flesh;

she shall be called Woman,

because she was taken out of Man.”

Therefore a man shall leave his father and his mother and hold fast to his wife, and they shall become one flesh. And the man and his wife were both naked and were not ashamed.

The account is notable for its simplicity, a simplicity and forthrightness which is reflected in the brief account of the marriage of Isaac to Rebekah. Rebekah, moved by the plea of Abraham’s servant, journeyed to Canaan from Mesopotamia to be wed to Isaac. We pick up the account as she neared the settlement in which Abraham and Isaac then lived. The account is found in [Genesis 24:62-67].

Now Isaac had returned from Beer-lahai-roi and was dwelling in the Negeb. And Isaac went out to meditate in the field toward evening. And he lifted up his eyes and saw, and behold, there were camels coming. And Rebekah lifted up her eyes, and when she saw Isaac, she dismounted from the camel and said to the servant, “Who is that man, walking in the field to meet us?” The servant said, “It is my master.” So she took her veil and covered herself. And the servant told Isaac all the things that he had done. Then Isaac brought her into the tent of Sarah his mother and took Rebekah, and she became his wife, and he loved her. So Isaac was comforted after his mother’s death.

Laban prepared a feast in honour of the marriage of Jacob to Leah [Genesis 29:22], but the absence of formal ceremony is striking. What is seen throughout the pages of the Old Testament, and emphasised in the pages of the Gospels, is the communal celebration which marked marriage. Marriage, in the cultures throughout the ancient Near East, was a civil matter.[2] The celebrations were public in as much as the families involved rejoiced and wanted their friends to rejoice with them. There was, however, no religious requirement per se for a wedding to be performed. There are religious instructions surrounding marriage to protect both husband and wife, but the concept of ceremony is absent from the Word of God.

Interestingly enough, the emphasis in the Bible is upon mutual commitment and love. There is little of the emotional aspect we think of as love, but there is a great deal concerning respect and sacrifice, marks of genuine love. What should be striking to the astute listener is the absence of ceremony. Though the whole of the Canticles is a celebration of married love, there is nothing therein concerning ceremony. Though Christ uses weddings as a parabolic setting for presentation of millennial truth, the ceremonial aspects carry nothing of what could be understood as command.

Biblical marriage is noted for its simplicity and absence of ceremony. The declaration of intent to be committed to one another was sufficient to constitute a binding marriage contract. Even under Roman law, a marriage was valid as soon as a man and woman made vows to each other, even if such vows were made completely in private and at the most intimate moments. Secret marriages were thus simple to enter into.[3]

European culture no doubt had civil celebrations to govern marriage prior to the advent of Christianity. As the illicit power of church and state grew, the state increasingly became the means for enforcing the will of the churches on the populace. After the advent of infant baptism as a means of coercing membership in the church (sometime after the ninth century) citizenship and church membership were considered virtually synonymous. Citizens were born into the church and were buried in the church. All transitional events between these two great life events were controlled by the church.

The churches of the Middle Ages were each determined to impose canon law on the governments of the nations within which they severally reigned. Especially laws regulating marriage were dictated by the churches to civil governments. Marriage between close relatives was proscribed. Just how close a relationship could be before triggering governmental intervention was determined by the churches rather than through the social contract of the nations. Remarriage following divorce and/or death were likewise regulated more closely according to the Law of Moses than it was by the law of the king. The state became the agent of the churches to ensure that these various laws were enforced. Gradually, the state adopted the position that it had a compelling interest in regulating marriage, first on behalf of the church and finally on behalf of the king.

Have you ever wondered why a pastor asks if those in attendance at a wedding “know of any reason why these two should not be wed?” In Europe during the Middle Ages, all births, weddings, taxes and deaths were publicly announced through written and spoken proclamations called “banns.” In the case of weddings, the purpose of these proclamations was more than merely informational. They were intended to prevent consanguineous marriages—marriages between closely related people.

As is true in every age, extramarital affairs and out-of-wedlock births meant that parentage in the Middle Ages was sometimes less than clear. Since most people lived in small communities, and since social, economic and geographical mobility were all seriously limited, such parental confusion could easily lead to accidental half-brother/half-sister marriages. To avoid such matrimonial incest, all marriages were publicly announced, and the community was charged with policing itself. The command still heard at many weddings—“if anyone knows of any reason why these two should not be wed, speak now or forever hold your peace”—descended from this practise.[4]

What is apparent, is that prior to this day, the state adopted the position of enforcing canon law. Ultimately, the state ignored canon law in favour of evolutionary law, and thus regulated marriage simply for the sake of social peace. However, the state has increasingly redefined what makes for social peace.

Governmental Intrusion into the Realm of Worship — Marriage, as we have known it until recent days, reflected the will of society manifested through government. In the past several decades, it would appear that it is not the will of society which is being manifest in laws governing marriage, but rather decisions of activists courts permitted by craven politicians. The thought that males can cohabit is an abomination to Holy God, and the fact that some even calling themselves Christians have bought into this lie reveal the lack of character among the professed believers of this day. The fact that two women can go through a ceremony and call themselves married without a word of protest should sicken every conscientious Canadian. Worshipping at the shrine of modern science and invoking the doctrine of self-desire, our parliaments are changing marriage and worship.

At last, we have come to a day in which the state defines marriage and regulates who may and may not be married. So long as members of society reflected common agreement of what constituted marriage, there was no conflict with this situation. Marriage was understood to be the wedded union of a male and a female, singularly committed to each other for life. This view reflected the principles espoused in the Word of God and generally guided social thought.

The breakdown of the nuclear family, beginning with the necessity of women entering the workplace during the Second World War and accelerating through the revolution of thought characterising the sixties, has laid the groundwork to change society’s thinking on marriage. First, sexual union became the sole purpose of cohabiting. Building one another up, sacrifice and respect, companionship all seemed rather old fashioned as couples bought into the elusive dream of orgasmic success.

If sexual satisfaction was the primary—even the sole—reason for cohabiting, then how one achieved satisfaction and with whom was unimportant. Pierre Trudeau, when Justice Minister, declared in 1968 that the state has no business in the bedrooms of the nation as he introduced reforms to divorce, homosexuality and abortion laws.[5] Having sown the whirlwind, it was only a matter of time until government began to legitimise what had been considered deviant and undesirable throughout history.

As homosexuality is normalised, conscientious citizens are pressured to silently acquiesce to the new reality that such activity is not only normal, but must be celebrated. As sodomites and lesbians campaigned for legitimacy as a repressed minority, already the voices of activists practising other deviant behaviours were becoming more pronounced. It is only a matter of time until bestiality is acceptable among members of polite society. Princeton University ethicists, Doctor Peter Singer, already advocates sex with animals as a means of pleasing the family pet.[6] Likewise, a number of court decisions have recently raised the spectre that paedophilia is acceptable in contemporary society.[7]

Throughout the entire social-political disaster, the churches are distinguished by thunderous silence! Pulpits are inhabited by theological gophers who stick their heads out of their subterranean playgrounds to see which way the wind is blowing before they speak. If the winds are favourable, they squeak out their plaintive cry of tolerance and niceness. If the timidity of the pulpit is somehow insufficient to ensure that the prophetic voice is muted, government, through its unelected human rights tribunals, will make certain that no one speaks against their despicable agenda to utterly degrade mankind.

Someone must think! In the whole of contemporary Canadian government, there seems not one individual capable of rational thought. The whole of Canadian jurisprudence appears united in demonstrating the veracity of God’s Word which declares the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who by their unrighteousness suppress the truth. For what can be known about God is plain to them, because God has shown it to them. For his invisible attributes, namely, his eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly perceived, ever since the creation of the world, in the things that have been made. So they are without excuse. For although they knew God, they did not honour him as God or give thanks to him, but they became futile in their thinking, and their foolish hearts were darkened. Claiming to be wise, they became fools, and exchanged the glory of the immortal God for images resembling mortal man and birds and animals and reptiles.

Therefore God gave them up in the lusts of their hearts to impurity, to the dishonouring of their bodies among themselves, because they exchanged the truth about God for a lie and worshiped and served the creature rather than the Creator, who is blessed forever! Amen [Romans 1:18-25].

God insists that we work to ensure that the marriage bed be undefiled, because He is pledged by His Holy Name to judge the sexually immoral [see Hebrews 13:4]. You would think that lawyers and politicians invented sex. God gave us sex as a good gift. Woman was given to man for a purpose. Go in your mind once again to the account of the first marriage. As the woman whom God made is presented to the man, the obviously delighted man says,

This at last is bone of my bones

and flesh of my flesh;

She shall be called Woman,

because she was taken out of man.

Then, God provides this commentary. Therefore a man shall leave his father and his mother and hold fast to his wife, and they shall become one flesh [Genesis 2:23, 24].

God created sex, distinguishing gender. Woman and man were to be one flesh. God gave the good gift of sex for continuation [Be fruitful and multiply and fill the earth [Genesis 1:28]]. Sex was given for complementarity [It is not good for the man to be alone; I will make him a helper fit for him [Genesis 2:18]], for comfort [This at last is bone of my bones [Genesis 2:23]], and for companionship [they shall become one flesh [Genesis 2:25]]. There is no question but that sex was also given for pleasure. Listen to Proverbs 5:18, 19.

Let your fountain be blessed,

and rejoice in the wife of your youth,

a lovely deer, a graceful doe.

Let her breasts fill you at all times with delight;

be intoxicated always in her love.

That sex is to be pleasurable is a powerful concept, but the pleasure provided through sex is not all-powerful. It has been well stated that sex is a powerful drive, and lousy glue to hold a marriage together.

Sex is to result in perpetuation of the species and in growth of the race. Through the Prophet Malachi, God says, this second thing you do. You cover the Lord’s altar with tears, with weeping and groaning because he no longer regards the offering or accepts it with favour from your hand. But you say, “Why does he not?” Because the Lord was witness between you and the wife of your youth, to whom you have been faithless, though she is your companion and your wife by covenant. Did he not make them one, with a portion of the Spirit in their union? And what was the one God seeking? Godly offspring. So guard yourselves in your spirit, and let none of you be faithless to the wife of your youth [Malachi 2:13-15].

Sodomites are certainly not reproducing. Lesbians are certainly not reproducing. Somehow, MPs, senators and activists judges have overlooked this fact. When God made a companion to complement the man, He created a woman. It was Adam and Eve—not Adam and Steve or Audrey and Eve. If the churches will be faithful to Him who gave us our being, we must declare that the sodomite is not gay, that lesbianism is unnatural, that sex outside of marriage can never be as fulfilling and meaningful as the Creator intended it to be. Thus, if we will honour God we must always be counterculture.

Our culture is moving toward dictating to the churches how they shall conduct their services of worship. Prior to the arrival of such a day, those who are wise must see the danger and take appropriate action. Whenever the courts or the Parliament attempt to tell the churches how they must conduct their marriage ceremonies or attempt to instruct the churches in who must be married and under what circumstances, the conscientious man of God must oppose government, insisting that they have no jurisdiction over the precincts of God. No congress… no parliament… no court… no senate… can dictate to the churches of God what shall constitute worship.

Actions Demanded by the Word of God — When the people of God find themselves entangled with the affairs of this dying world, they are obligated to distance themselves from that strange alliance. When the people of God discover that they are compromised through union with the world, or when they are threatened with such compromise, they must take immediate steps to sever the union which has resulted in compromise. We are not obligated to please the inhabitants of this dying world, but we must please God.

If we will obey God’s injunction to be a holy people, we will obey His command to go out from their midst, and be separate from them. Furthermore, we must avoid contaminating ourselves through touching or coveting the unclean thing. Then, and only then, may we anticipate that God will be a true father to us and we shall enjoy the intimacy of beloved children in His presence.

It is my responsibility as a Minister of the Word to function as conscience in and for society. I do not expect society at large to exercise godly conscience, since they do not acknowledge God as holy. As our nation rushes from one disaster to the next, it grows increasingly isolated from righteousness. We have already seen that as a society exchanges the glory of God for self-worship, God gives them up in the lusts of their hearts to impurity, defined as the dishonouring of their bodies among themselves. Effectively, devoid of righteous knowledge, they worship their own lusts [Romans 1:24, 25]. What I would have you witness is the downward progression of a society which has forgotten God.

Step-by-shameful-step mankind moves steadily toward utter degradation as God surrenders self-centred society to its own devices. Unthankful to God, God surrenders society to its ungrateful condition and the people begin thinking that sex is all that matters. Soon, the schools must provide sex education because “everyone is doing it,” and we want to ensure that we protect our children from the consequences of their sinful choices. Then, we are surprised when our children begin to indulge in self-worship—the natural consequence of the education we have provided.

In The Message, Eugene Petersen captures the horror of Paul’s assessment of society without God, a picture which accurately portrays contemporary Canada. God’s angry displeasure erupts as acts of human mistrust and wrongdoing and lying accumulate, as people try to put a shroud over truth. But the basic reality of God is plain enough. Open your eyes and there it is! By taking a long and thoughtful look at what God has created, people have always been able to see what their eyes as such can’t see: eternal power, for instance, and the mystery of his divine being. So nobody has a good excuse. What happened was this: People knew God perfectly well, but when they didn’t treat him like God, refusing to worship him, they trivialised themselves into silliness and confusion so that there was neither sense nor direction left in their lives. They pretended to know it all, but were illiterate regarding life. They traded the glory of God who holds the whole world in his hands for cheap figurines you can buy at any roadside stand.

So God said, in effect, “If that’s what you want, that’s what you get.” It wasn’t long before they were living in a pigpen, smeared with filth, filthy inside and out. And all this because they traded the true God for a fake god, and worshiped the god they made instead of the God who made them—the God we bless, the God who blesses us. Oh, yes!

Worse followed. Refusing to know God, they soon didn’t know how to be human either—women didn’t know how to be women, men didn’t know how to be men. Sexually confused, they abused and defiled one another, women with women, men with men—all lust, no love. And then they paid for it, oh, how they paid for it—emptied of God and love, godless and loveless wretches.

Since they didn’t bother to acknowledge God, God quit bothering them and let them run loose. And then all hell broke loose: rampant evil, grabbing and grasping, vicious backstabbing. They made life hell on earth with their envy, wanton killing, bickering, and cheating. Look at them: mean-spirited, venomous, fork-tongued God-bashers. Bullies, swaggerers, insufferable windbags! They keep inventing new ways of wrecking lives. They ditch their parents when they get in the way. Stupid, slimy, cruel, cold-blooded. And it’s not as if they don’t know better. They know perfectly well they’re spitting in God’s face. And they don’t care—worse, they hand out prizes to those who do the worst things best [Romans 1:18-32]![8]

How can the conscientious children of God surrender to the dictates of ungodly society? It is not the responsibility of the churches to submit to the state, but they must rather stand, together with the Apostles, in saying to those representing government, Whether it is right in the sight of God to listen to you rather than to God, you must judge, for we cannot but speak of what we have seen and heard [Acts 4:19, 20].

There is a battle raging all around us. The tragedy is that too many of the saints of the Most High God are unaware of the conflict. So long as we are able to remain insulated from personal assault, we are content to pretend everything is fine. It is not fine. The world is witnessing a societal change of such magnitude as has not been witnessed since the days of Sodom and Gomorrah. Evil threatens our children and our grandchildren and the nation we love. We must resist surrender to wickedness.

I am not suggesting that we take up arms or that we engage in hatred of the wicked. God loves those who advance this current social deviance, but He loves them too much to leave them unchanged. The sodomites and lesbians are not a despised people because they are more wicked than others, but in love it must be stated that their choices are evil in the eyes of Holy God.

Our call is a call to righteousness and to courage. You who are called by the Name of the Risen Son of God must decide whether you will silently acquiesce and permit sin to continue its debilitating and devastating work, or whether you will speak out at opportune moments to condemn sin. We are told that the righteous can do nothing about what is happening. Nothing could be further from the truth.

First, we can determine that we will ourselves be righteous—godly and holy. We can determine that by God’s grace, we will live holy lives, consistent with the profession we have made. We can determine that we will make every effort to be pure and clean, refusing to surrender to the siren allure of momentary pleasure found in sin.

Again, we can pray that God show mercy on the wicked, calling them to repentance and faith. We can ask that He spare our nation and give us godly leaders, able to think and capable of acting with courage and integrity.

At last, we can seek to win to faith those for whom we pray. Ask yourself, “Who is a Christian today because of my witness? Who shares this service because of my loving invitation?” Each of us can determine that we will, by the mercies of God, tell our beloved family members how they may be saved. Each of us can determine that we will be an instrument of grace, working to bring some dear friend to faith in the Living Son of God. Each of us can determine that we will bring some someone to faith in this year.

You who share the service this day and who are angered by the pointed words you have heard, listen to these words—words spoken in love by one who cares more deeply than you could ever know. Look to the mercy of God and be saved. Look to the love of the Saviour and find life. Look to the grace of Jesus and be born into His great Family. This is the call of the church to you in this hour.

If you confess with your mouth that Jesus is Lord and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved. For with the heart one believes and is justified, and with the mouth one confesses and is saved. For the Scripture says, “Everyone who believes in him will not be put to shame.” For there is no distinction between Jew and Greek; the same Lord is Lord of all, bestowing his riches on all who call on him. For “everyone who calls on the name of the Lord will be saved” [Romans 10:9-13]. Believe and be saved today. Amen.

----

[2] P. Trutza, Marriage (article), in Merrill C. Tenney (Gen. Ed.), Zondervan Pictorial Encyclopedia of the Bible, Volume Four, M-P, (Zondervan, Grand Rapids, MI, 1975, 1976) 96

[3] http://www.knowledgenewsnet/culture/weddings.htm

[4] http://www.knowledgenewsnet/culture/weddings.htm

[5] Paul Spendlove, After Party Election, Canadians have Less Faith in Politics, Christian Science Monitor, April 11, 2002, (Net Edition) http://www.csmonitor.com/2002/0411/p07s01-woam.html

[6] http://www.animal-lib.org.au/more_interviews/singer/

[7] http://www.sweetliberty.org/issues/bless/diversity.htm

[8]Eugene H. Peterson, The Message: New Testament With Psalms and Proverbs (Colorado Springs, Colo.: NavPress, 1995).