Moral Dilemma (with survey)
Wednesday, September 04, 2002 (06:58:17)

Posted by Rod

Here is the dilemma John and Mary (not their real names) have been living together for several years. They recently announced their engagement to be married. They wanted to visit John's parents for a weekend. Upon asking permission to come for a visit, a dilemma was formed in John's parent's home. John's mother said they were welcome to come, but would have to sleep in separate bedrooms. John's father thought it would be alright for them to sleep together. This dilemma could potentially cause disharmony in the family.

Here are the qualifiers John's parents are both conservative Christians. The father believes John and Mary have made a lifelong commitment to each other, thus forming a bond of marriage. John's mother feels that their union has not been formed because they have not participated in a marriage ceremony and she does not want to be a part of their sin. If they are in her home, she is somehow contributing to their sin, making her guilty as well. What is the correct decision? Are they married or not? Write your decision down on a piece of paper for review later. Fundamental Christians agree that religious beliefs based on tradition are subject to question. When those beliefs are brought under scrutiny, whether we stand or fall is contingent upon our basis for those beliefs. Agreed? Sometimes what we believe can bring us to a point of dilemma because they somehow do not apply as easily as we would like. We may pound our spiritual square peg into a round hole in life. Usually some force will help, but the awkward success leaves us with a sense of unrest. If, based on your spiritual beliefs, you determine that marriages are only valid when performed in a Christian ceremony, do you consider marriages of other religions valid? Is a Moslim marriage valid in your eyes? Do you recognize that couple as being married? How about a marriage ceremony performed by a tribe in Africa? What if a couple is married in a civil ceremony? If these are also valid, then your criteria for determining marriage validity is flawed. You have a double standard. If you believe that a civil ceremony is as valid as one held in the church, your criteria is based on cultural mores (pronounced morays), or that which is deemed acceptable by the society in which you live. If you base your spiritual beliefs on societies acceptance, they are not actually spiritual beliefs at all. You have blurred the lines between civil and spiritual laws. Do your spiritual beliefs withstand this scrutiny? Are they 100% applicable or do you compromise for different situations? Thoughout the centuries, marriages have been performed in a number of ways. Some cultures performed a marriage by throwing a betrothal party for the couple. This could either be a private family affair or a major public event. "Handfast marriages" date back to the middle ages when the weddings of ordinary people left no trace because they were oral transactions. Handfast marriages involved the joining of the bride and groom's hands, as well as a public exchange of vows known as "plighting the troth," (in modern English, "pledging the truth"). Eventually, "the church" grew concerned because it was not informed of these marriages. The marriage was recognized by the couple, their families and community, but not the official church. Something had to be done to gain control of the situation. Before the Hardwicke Act of 1753, marriages did not need any kind of religious ceremony to be legally valid. Until that time, marriage was largely a private matter between two individuals and their families. Marriages done secretly were valid in the eyes of the church and the law. The act took control over marriage from the hands of individuals and gave it to the state. After the law took effect, any marriage that had not taken place in the church of England or any synagogue was considered invalid. Under the Acts provisions, religious control was brought to bear on the marriage ceremony and it was not until the Marriage Act of 1836 that the state reverted to the essential view of marriage ie. that it is effected by mutual consent and not religious ceremony. Pope Nicholas I AD 866 said "let the simple consent of those whose wedding is in question be sufficient; if the consent be lacking in a marriage, all other celebrations, even should the union be consummated, are rendered void." In other words, if the two consent to being married, they are married. If both do not consent, they are not married, even if there was a ceremony and ultimate consummation of the union. Eight hundred years later Henry Swinburne, Judge of the Consistory Court in York wrote, in his Treatise of Spousals "Albeit there be no witnesses of the contract, yet the parties having verily (though secretly) contracted matrimony, they are very man and wife before God. Neither can either of them with safe conscience marry elsewhere so long as the other party liveth." The proclamation recognized marriage even though a religious or civil ceremony had not taken place. In the 18th and 19th centuries as much as 20% of the population lived in an illegal relationship either as a prelude to getting married or as a substitute for it. In the nineteenth century, there was a tradition of besom weddings or jumping the broomstick. Unions were forged when the couple jumped over the broomstick together and dissolved by reversing the process. Some couples performed this ritual prior to their one night stand, but there are many instances of long lasting relationships beginning in this manner. Cultural mores made people more or less inclined to choose the legal marriage route, which was socially acceptable in certain subsections of society. In short, as late as the 19th century, societies could still not agree on a unified method of determining what constituted a marriage. In all instances, marriage, determined by any means, was considered irrevocable and both parties were bound by to remain together until the death of the other party. Civil laws stepped in and legal ownerships were determined for goods or properties. This type of ownership determination remains in effect until today. Different states or municipalities determine different grounds for separation of individuals and property settlements. Rebellion against the framework of church or civil marriage ceremonies brought about a new wave of legislation, recognizing a "common law" marriage, one by which there was no religious or civil ceremony. These common law marriages became subject to the same laws differentiating property settlements. A common law marriage became official after the couple had remained together for 7 years, thereby proving their marital bond. By this time, many official marriages were already beginning to dissolve. These truths indeed address the validity of marriage in the eyes of the state, recognizing that historically, much of that state was controlled by the church (of England). Consequently, we must distill our religious beliefs surrounding marriage into an acceptable doctrine. If we believe that marriages, to be considered valid, must be performed in a Christian service of some kind, then we must also embrace a doctrine that states marriages performed outside a Christian environment are invalid. Are we willing to take that stand? If, on the other hand, we accept marriages performed in other religions and cultures, then our basis for marital validity is not spiritual, but rather based on our religious culture. In light of these facts, are John and Mary married or not? Who is right? John's father, who believes they can sleep in the same bed when they come and visit, or John's mother, who believes if she allows it, she is condoning sin? Check the decision you wrote on paper earlier. Is it still valid? You may have noticed there are no scripture references in this message. Please apply scriptures that support your beliefs and see how they hold up. You may find that actual references to the exact rules of marriage ceremonies do not exist. Precise criteria for an acceptable Christian marriage is lacking in the scriptures. It has been culturally modified over the centuries. Is dogmatic proclamation of these relatively current beliefs spiritually acceptable or can we justify them with scripture? Are your beliefs founded on scriptures that spell out step-by-step requirements for marriage, or does society dictate what is acceptable for the time. Societies requirements have changed over the years. The scriptures have not. Only the spiritually mature can confidently question the basis of their own beliefs. Religious beliefs that do not withstand scrutiny are ready for realignment or abandonment. You may not be wrong. You just may need to state things differently. What do I think? Regardless of beliefs surrounding acceptable criteria for an acceptable marriage, John and Mary should sleep in different rooms, because John's mother is offended, based on her beliefs. I Corinthians 10:18-33 Participate in the online survey. - Rod No, I am not a liberal. I am a Christian conservative who asks questions. All contents Copyright (c) Rod Use without permission is prohibited