Happy Anniversary Washingtons

“Happy Anniversary Washingtons”
Next month many will note George Washington’s 286th birthday.  No one noticed that last week, January 7th, was his wedding anniversary with Martha.  Their marriage lasted over 40 years until his death on December 14, 1799.  As weddings go theirs was a “simple” affair.  That is if you think simple includes 200 guests, an almost equal number of “servants,” and bridal gowns and shoes imported from London for just such as occasion.  Oh, and it was on her 17,500 acre estate, inherited from her deceased husband of 7 years, Daniel Parke Custis, with whom she had 4 children.  Tragically none of the children would survive her and only one lived to adulthood. The late Daniel Curtis was incredibly wealthy and since he died intestate Martha inherited all the property. 

The “simple” wedding had everything available to rich folks in those days. Friends, family, important guests, and an Anglican clergyman. It had a cake and punch and dancing, just as thousands of American weddings before and since. What it didn’t have was a marriage license.  There was nothing scandalous about this.  It was perfectly normal.  These were the days before government discovered it could steal your right to do something and sell it back to you in the form of a license.  Only Massachusetts knew early on the goldmine of taxes and fees for such things, since 1639 in fact. Other states didn’t require marriage licenses until the late 19th century.  Now, to think about requiring such things as Driver’s licenses, Business licenses, Building permits (the list is limitless) as “theft,” is considered anarchy. 

As an ordained minister one of the most exciting things I get to do is participate in the special events of families.  Baby dedications, baptisms, weddings, even funerals, allow me a close look into the lives of some very special people.  I wonder if George and Martha’s officiant felt that way.? When I started over 20 years ago I followed tradition and concluded weddings by declaring, “…by the power invested in me by the State of California, and as a minister of the gospel, I now declare you Husband and Wife.” 

I don’t do that anymore.  For one thing, the State of California has not invested me with anything!  They didn’t train me, they didn’t ordain me, they didn’t license me, (at least not for this job) and they certainly didn’t hire me.  And they won’t have my back when I refuse to perform a non-Biblical union, for reasons of conviction, even though I will be following the practice of every culture for the past 4,000 years. Bowing to pressure from the State of California, Siskiyou county now, instead of husband and wife, sells permission to get married to “applicant one” and “applicant two”.  Sacramento has redefined marriage but God has not.  Once that happens why stop at two applicants?  Why not group marriage?  Why not marriage between adult and child?  Or “mommy” and her Great Dane?  Why not endorse that guy who wanted to marry his 1965 ‘stang?

Secondly, God invented marriage way before any State existed.  He defines what He invented.  Marriage is between one man and one woman.  It is intended to be fulfilling and fruitful.  It is intended to be monogamous, heterosexual, consensual, and permanent until one of the parties, such as George cited above, passes.

I don’t require a marriage license anymore before I solemnize a marriage.  My expectations are that both parties are Christians (the Bible commands us not to be unequally yoked). I assume they want to have their union blessed by God and even ask them if that is so.  Any union not recognized by God in His Word prohibits my participation. Two people can cohabitate, even if they are of the same sex, if they want to.  Many states are legalizing civil unions. But they cannot call those marriage.  Words mean something and that word marriage was defined by God way before Obergefell vs Hodges ever claimed the fundamental right to marry is guaranteed to same-sex couples under the 14th amendment. If marriage is a fundamental right then 4th graders can do it. 

I did a quick search on the topic on Wikipedia.  There was a link to “Awesome Officiants” who claim to have a sort of corner on meaningful weddings.  Some of them, I mean no disrespect, probably purchased their ordination online. From their website, replete with foul language, it is apparent they care more about receiving their fee approved by the State than receiving a reward approved by God.  It is safe to say they do not share my convictions regarding God’s definition of marriage. Without requiring a license they claim I am committing a misdemeanor and the couple is not legally married. Don’t tell George and Martha that. The “Awesome Officiants” have the right to disagree.  What they don’t have is the right to compel me to perform weddings contrary to my convictions.

These days when a couple from our Church or Community comes to me asking for my participation in their special day I recommend they carefully consider a license. It may afford them some legal protections in some places should the marriage fail or a medical tragedy befalls one, or both, of them. There may be decisions to be made or property to handle.  But if they skip paying $70 to the county, for a right that God grants freely, it won’t slow me down a bit. Spend it on shoes from London.

First posted 1/11/19


Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

“Hiroshima and the War Powers Act” Rev. Bill Hofer      December 7 th marks the 76 th anniversary of that “day that will live in infamy.” The US ended that war successfully, if success is measured by 416,800 US dead compared to 60 million for the rest of the world.  An incredible 3% of the 2.3 billion alive in 1940!  In what, six years?  The end came when “little boy” incinerated 80,000 people in Hiroshima, another bomb killed 70,000 three days later in Nagasaki, with over 250,000 total counting the radiation aftermath.  Seven decades later the debate still rages whether it was necessary. My own position has changed over the years.      Last week I commented on the increasing interest among Americans in general, and Republican Christians in particular, of another Hiroshima type attack on our perceived “enemies.” This essay, however, is about the little remembered date of December 8 th .  That was the day that Co...
Read more

God as Moral Monster

“Butler Rebuttal” Is God a Moral Monster? A few years ago a Mr. Butler wrote a guest column in the Siskiyou Daily News (2/20/12) that was brought to my attention from a parishioner.  He laid the blame for centuries of warfare at the feet of religion.  He saved his biggest shots for the Bible as a “manual of wanton bloodshed” and accused the God of the Bible to be monstrous. I responded with the following letter to the editor. It is unfortunate that Mr. Butler ascribes a moral equivalency to all religions illustrated in the history of warfare.  He has every right to his own opinion, but he does not have the right to his own facts.  Throughout America’s history she has fought many wars against nations but not a single war has ever been to spread Christianity.  Recent wars in Kosovo and Bosnia were actually fought to protect Muslim minorities from ethnic cleansing.    Butler tries to bolster his case with stories from the Old Testament and “sugges...
Read more
“The Sequence of Coming Events” Rev. Bill Hofer In 2 Thess. 2:1-5 Paul reminds his readers that he had already taught them much of the sequence regarding the coming of the Lord.  He in fact has mentioned Christ’s coming in almost every chapter of his letters to the Thessalonians.  Here he writes,                 “Now we request you, brethren, with regard to the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ and our gathering together to Him, that you not be quickly shaken from your composure or be disturbed either by a spirit or a message or a letter as if from us, to the effect that the Day of the Lord has come.  Let no one in any way deceive you, for it will not come unless the apostasy comes first, and the man of lawlessness is revealed, the son of destruction, who opposed and exalts himself above every so-called god or object of worship, so that he takes his seat in the temple of God, displaying hims...
Read more