This summer over the July 4th
holiday, I will be performing my last marriage ceremony. I am really looking forward to this wedding
celebration. The bride is a dear family
friend that has found a good man and we anticipate many years of happiness for
the couple. I am really happy for the
bride and groom and I am vey happy that this will, I believe, be my last
wedding, well sort of.
I generally do not like
weddings. Many times at weddings I feel
the church, the minister, and the Lord Himself, are little more than props,
decorations, or peripheral paraphernalia to the grand show that is being put on
by the competitive families represented by the bride and groom.
I especially dislike having
weddings for couples that want a “church” or “religious” wedding, but who have
no, or apparently, no personal faith.
Almost every pastor can tell horror stories about weddings. I was asked to do a wedding to cover for a
friend who happened to double schedule that Saturday afternoon. The groom was so drunk he had a hard time
saying “I do” and the bride spent most of the ceremony crying, which I
understood. I did a wedding where the
bride and groom danced inappropriately out of the church at the end of the
service. I did a rush wedding for a couple
I did not know where the pianist played “Having My Baby” as the recessional. I even heard a story of a preacher who was
asked to perform a wedding for a couple who called out of the blue. He found out ahead of time, thankfully, that
the couple were nudists and were going to be married in the nude.
But a new dynamic has developed
that has caused me to reconsider the matter of performing weddings. That is the challenge of ‘gay marriage’. If there is an intersection of faith and
government that is a hotter, hot button in America right now than gay marriage,
I don’t know what it would be. The point
of this article is not to argue for or against a given governmental policy;
but, in fact, I am moving in a very different direction. Currently, we are being told that churches
will enjoy an exemption to any policy or law regarding ‘gay marriage’. We are told that there will be no connection
between a willingness to perform ‘gay marriages’ and, say, tax exempt status or
501 c3 status. As a descendant of the
Cherokees, I am not prepared to place great confidence in the promises of a
government. Should a government entity
find that it could acquire significant resources by revoking the tax-exempt
status of churches over ‘gay marriages’, some governmental agencies would jump
at the opportunity.
Am I paranoid? Am I crazy? Have I been listening to too many
conspiracy nuts? Maybe, yes, but I don’t
listen to those guys. Considering the
current debate over ‘gay marriage’, would you have imagined this in 1970 or
1980 or 1990? Can you tell me that you
are certain that your church will enjoy a tax exempt status 30 years from now
if you have a firm no ‘gay marriage’ policy?
So is there a solution? I have one that I am going to try. Beginning after this summer’s wedding, I will
delete one phase from my wedding ceremony.
To date, I have always concluded my wedding sermon with this phrase:
“Under the civil authority of the State of Florida and as a minister of the
Gospel of Jesus Christ, I pronounce you husband and wife.” What I am going to start doing is this: I am
going to remove the phrase, ““Under the civil authority of the State of ….”. Additionally, I am going to direct couples
that want me to perform a wedding ceremony to get their marriage licenses and
have the civil portion of the marriage performed by a justice of the
peace. Fill out the form, get the
signatures from the legal authority, and in the eyes of the state they are
married.
Then, I will invite the couple to
come before the Lord and to celebrate their commitment to each other in an act
of worship. The sacred event of marriage
is primarily an act of worship beyond and above the authority of the
state. As a minister of the Gospel, I
have the authority to lead in acts of worship and hold the authority to refuse
or offer the sacraments of the church.
In the same way that I do not
believe that the Lord’s Supper is purely symbolic-Paul seemed to think it was a
matter of life and death-or that baptism is purely an outward act of an inward
grace-Peter connects it with the remission of sin-I do not believe that holy
matrimony is merely a legal agreement.
It is the sacred preparation for two individuals to become one
flesh. Holy matrimony is an expression
of a unique oneness that, in some amazing ways, is a reflection of the
relationship within the Trinity. It is
so holy that no purely state sanctioned legal manifestation can express its
glory.
I recognize that this departure
from many years of traditions will not be universally well received nor is it
without some struggles. So, before you
jump on this band wagon, unsubscribe to this blog, write hate mail that I am
too conservative or too liberal, or begin a heresy tribunal, let me suggest you
read next week’s edition. At that time, I will talk about what I believe are
some of the strengths and struggles of this approach.
But, in conclusion, let me offer
this metaphor. A swamp is essentially a
very wide and slow flowing river. The
classic example is the Everglades. This
massive swamp is more or less one very wide river that flows from Lake
Okeechobee to the coast, that dissipates over a vast area and flows without a
ripple or a stir. A rapid, by contrast,
is where the water of a river is constricted into a very narrow channel, for
example, the Colorado River. The very
narrowing and restricting causes the river to flow with energy and evident
power. My goal is to see the power and
the beauty of Holy Matrimony restored by narrowing the scope.
Until next week
Charlie
No comments:
Post a Comment