What constitutes marriage in the churches eyes?

[Flynmonkie]

I am wondering now days with all the various laws that are so detrimental -when it comes to marriage and re-marriage. What the consensus is on getting an actual marriage "legal" certificate and salvation, or being a Christian.

My grandmother has outlived 2 husbands. My granddaddy went home from brain cancer. While she was in her late 40s. (married at 14!) She remarried several years later, Her second husband passed away from cancer, just a couple of years after marriage. But when they went to marry she found out she would loose all of my granddaddy’s pension, retirement, social security etc everything he worked so hard for in life to help make sure the family was never in need in this event…so the church preformed a ceremony and she had to have it annulled. A few years after he passed she again was remarried to another WONDERFUL man from a seniors church group. But again only doing the ceremony. She is very “embarrassed” about this, even though the pastor reassured her it was OK. In fact none of us realized this until she went into the hospital for tests and the only way to reach her was from my granddaddy’s last name. However her new last name is made legal from a name change. Let me tell you she is one of the most religious people I know, her entire life is Christian groups and subjects daily. It is just the “laws”

In addition, there are more and more laws for people whom end up in divorce with children. Preventing things if they remarry, loosing privileges etc…

What constitutes marriage in the churches eyes? I personally thing a vow to God is all that is needed. After all marriage is between you and God (and of course public), common law marriage sets in some states within one night. With the way the laws work now days, common law is the same as a marriage certificate! But a marriage license can really ruin things for people attempting second marriages. But some people really are dead set on an actual marriage certificate based on religious belief. I have been met with some people that say it is wrong, not putting faith in God for financial need etc.. I personally do not feel this, depending situations. I think the states/government have too much control in this area…just thought I would get others thoughts and opinions on this. I know at least three pastors that have agreed with me Fundamental Baptist. In these situations only. Not for first marriages with no strings or attachments etc… But I am very curious to the consensus out there. And I am not really finding what I need while searching scripture. Thank You in advance!

[JillLars]

I think that when we look to the bible, we find that marriage is a covenant between two people and God. It is a lifetime partnership, regardless of its legal status. For example, the bible says that if two people are divorced, and remarry, they are committing adultery. Why would they be committing adultery if they were already divorced? Because the covenant they made transcends human laws regarding marriage and divorce. God knows the promises we make and expects us to stick by them, whether we make them legal or not.

For example: It is against the law to kill people, so we don't kill people, but if it wasn't against the law, we still wouldn't kill people because God has commanded us not to kill.

If two people promise themselves to one another, to God, they keep that promise regardless of whether or not they have a certificate.

Now, obviously this doesn't always work out because we are human, and we sin, but logically one cannot simply pretend a marriage didn't exist just because it wasn't legal, because God knows the promises we make to him, and he will hold us accountable.

[ufonium2]

Ok, let me begin by saying I have no idea what the church thinks officially. Not my church, or yours, or anybody's. But, I believe very strongly that marriage is a purely religious ceremony and none of the government's business.

Since I believe marriage is a purely religious thing, as long as her church is cool with it I see no problem.

When he applied for social security at age 65, my grandfather found out he'd been using the wrong name his whole life (his mother had 14 kids and died when he was young, it's complicated.) Anyway, there was all kinds of paperwork involved in fixing things, but the thing that stressed my grandmother the most was that their marriage license was invalid. She honestly felt they'd been "living in sin" for 45 years because of the technicality. It took the whole family and her pastor to convince her that the kids were legitimate in God's eyes, and that they'd in fact been married all those years, at least where it counted.

So, in my grandparents' case anyway, the UMC decided that being married in God's eyes was all that mattered.

[Protestant Minister]

It really doesn't make any difference what defines marriage "in the churches eyes" because different churches have different eyes.Since we have now entered into the age of church apostasy,many churches encourage second (or as many as really turns you on) re-marriages in flagrent violation of Jesus' teachings.Even more of an abomination,with the great popularity of homosexuality that Satan is now is now over-powering the nation with,some churches are now responding "positively" by offering "domestic partner union ceremonies."

So the only thing that really natters is what makes a marriage valid in God's eyes.There really aren't any instructions for Christians on that except not to re-marry if the partner in a first marriage for both is still living.(THE BIBLE DOES GIVE VERY SPECIFIC PERMISSION FOR WIDOWS TO RE-MARRY)However no legal requirements are mentioned.In fact the bible doesn't even state that marriages should be performed by a minister or priest but it only makes sense for Christians to marry in a church.Because of these facts,it appears that your grandmother didn't violate any Christian teachings unless one of her husbands was divorced from a wife still living at the time of the re-marriage.But even if that's the case,that's history and a sin easily forgiven by God.

[Crazy Liz]

When he applied for social security at age 65, my grandfather found out he'd been using the wrong name his whole life (his mother had 14 kids and died when he was young, it's complicated.) Anyway, there was all kinds of paperwork involved in fixing things, but the thing that stressed my grandmother the most was that their marriage license was invalid. She honestly felt they'd been "living in sin" for 45 years because of the technicality. It took the whole family and her pastor to convince her that the kids were legitimate in God's eyes, and that they'd in fact been married all those years, at least where it counted.

So, in my grandparents' case anyway, the UMC decided that being married in God's eyes was all that mattered.

Your grandmother should have talked to a lawyer. An error in the name written on a marriage license or certificate does not make it legally invalid. She was legally married.

[Crazy Liz]

I think that when we look to the bible, we find that marriage is a covenant between two people and God.

I don't think the Bible ever says marriage is a covenant. Malachi is the only book that connects the concepts of marriage and covenant in any way, and it uses "covenant" as a way to distinguish Jewish wives from Gentile wives.

The implications of this for the covenant marriage movement have yet to be discussed.

It is a lifetime partnership, regardless of its legal status.

It is a legal status of lifetime partnership.

For example, the bible says that if two people are divorced, and remarry, they are committing adultery. Why would they be committing adultery if they were already divorced? Because the covenant they made transcends human laws regarding marriage and divorce. God knows the promises we make and expects us to stick by them, whether we make them legal or not.

For example: It is against the law to kill people, so we don't kill people, but if it wasn't against the law, we still wouldn't kill people because God has commanded us not to kill.

I think you have chosen an excellent analogy, but have incorrectly applied it. Jesus said a man who divorces his wife and marries another commits adultery. Jesus also said a man who looks at a woman with lust commits adultery. And Jesus said that a man who hates his brother is guilty of murder.

Jesus' comments about the seriousness of divorce, lust and hatred were not intended to convey any fact about status. The woman who is the object of lust is not guilty of adultery. The hated brother is not dead. And the marriage that was ended by divorce is not declared to remain in existence.

If two people promise themselves to one another, to God, they keep that promise regardless of whether or not they have a certificate.

Now, obviously this doesn't always work out because we are human, and we sin, but logically one cannot simply pretend a marriage didn't exist just because it wasn't legal, because God knows the promises we make to him, and he will hold us accountable.

In most cultures, marriage is not really a matter of promises at all. Otherwise, would you say that a marriage arranged by parents in a time and place where this is customary is really no marriage because the couple had not made promises to each other before God?

[Crazy Liz]

I am wondering now days with all the various laws that are so detrimental -when it comes to marriage and re-marriage. What the consensus is on getting an actual marriage "legal" certificate and salvation, or being a Christian.

My grandmother has outlived 2 husbands. My granddaddy went home from brain cancer. While she was in her late 40s. (married at 14!) She remarried several years later, Her second husband passed away from cancer, just a couple of years after marriage. But when they went to marry she found out she would loose all of my granddaddy’s pension, retirement, social security etc everything he worked so hard for in life to help make sure the family was never in need in this event…so the church preformed a ceremony and she had to have it annulled. A few years after he passed she again was remarried to another WONDERFUL man from a seniors church group. But again only doing the ceremony. She is very “embarrassed” about this, even though the pastor reassured her it was OK. In fact none of us realized this until she went into the hospital for tests and the only way to reach her was from my granddaddy’s last name. However her new last name is made legal from a name change. Let me tell you she is one of the most religious people I know, her entire life is Christian groups and subjects daily. It is just the “laws”

In addition, there are more and more laws for people whom end up in divorce with children. Preventing things if they remarry, loosing privileges etc…

What constitutes marriage in the churches eyes? I personally thing a vow to God is all that is needed. After all marriage is between you and God (and of course public), common law marriage sets in some states within one night. With the way the laws work now days, common law is the same as a marriage certificate! But a marriage license can really ruin things for people attempting second marriages. But some people really are dead set on an actual marriage certificate based on religious belief. I have been met with some people that say it is wrong, not putting faith in God for financial need etc.. I personally do not feel this, depending situations. I think the states/government have too much control in this area…just thought I would get others thoughts and opinions on this. I know at least three pastors that have agreed with me Fundamental Baptist. In these situations only. Not for first marriages with no strings or attachments etc… But I am very curious to the consensus out there. And I am not really finding what I need while searching scripture. Thank You in advance!

A lot of people are asking this question now that many people may be legally married that many pastors would refuse to marry, for various reasons.

The early church was not involved in marriages at all. There were no Christian marriage ceremonies until, I believe, the third or fourth century. When a couple first came to church after their marriage, it became customary to give them a blessing, but the church did not participate in the formalities of marriage at all. Whatever caused them to be considered married by society caused them to be considered married by the church.

In your grandmother's situation, my first question would not be whether or not she and her husband are married according to the church. I would ask whether it is wise for the church to compartmentalize marriage into civil and religious, so that a person may be religiously married but not legally married, or legally married but not religiously. I think this kind of compartmentalization has a negative effect on personal integrity. Is your grandmother telling the truth when she tells her church friends she is married but tells the government she is not married?

Jesus said, "Let your yea be yea and your nay be nay."

Now, I'm not saying anything about your grandmother's status before God or her church. I am simply saying I don't think it's wise for pastors to counsel people to compartmentalize their marriages for financial advantage - at least not easily or routinely.

I used to think compartmentalizing marriage in this way was OK, but now I'm not so sure because of issues of integrity. I think I recently said just the opposite to someone on this forum, so don't go looking to trap me for contradicting myself. I think I've changed my mind on this question. Does anyone else have thoughts on this?

[La Bonita Zorilla]

Interesting situation. IMO you grandmother committed no sin whatsoever.

What we as a culture need to do is orient finances toward individuals not toward marriage. The financial marriages of marriage are archaic and assume the wife will not have a separate income, which is inoperative today.

Many seniors who do not wish to lose pension benefits, etc., will choose to forego relationships and/or marriage, to their detriment.