Should Church Weddings have Legal Authority?

I begin by confessing that I am a latecomer to this interesting topic, but because it is increasingly being discussed in the public arena, I thought it might be useful to look at from the perspective of Healthy Liberal Christianity. The basic argument includes two very different questions. The first has to do with the right of the government to put any of its own restrictions on the institution marriage whose creation has been based in primarily religious sentiments. The second question has to do with the right of a religion to sanction what turns out to be largely an economic and civil relationship.

There are some clergy who have recently made the decision no longer to act as agents of the state. They argue that a civil relationship is essentially a legal issue, and that the religious sanction of a marriage has a completely different purpose. They point to the widespread practice in Europe of having all marriages be granted by civil law, after which those people who wish it can have the marriage sanctified by an appropriate ritual in their own religious tradition.

Some would argue that such a separation is unnecessary because the state simply recognizes those marriages that clergy have blessed as well as recognizing marriages that take place before a Justice of the Peace – well, except for those relationships that a church might sanction but the state would not – same gender marriages in most places, for example. An opposite problem is created when the state sanctions a kind of marriage that violates the conscience of the minister. If the minister is operating as an agent of the state, should the minister then be required to marry all people who wish it?

I have long been a proponent of reading the First Amendment very carefully. I have argued before that both the “establishment clause” and the “free exercise clause” have validity, and can be best understood when we remember that government and religion usually have very different purposes. Still, in cases like marriage, there seems to be some overlap in purposes, inviting a spirited and mutually useful conversation between government and religion. For example, is it appropriate for the state to place limits on the legal age for marriage, or on bigamy, for that matter. Similarly, on what grounds might religion appropriately restrict the practice of marriage laws in the church?

These are complex questions that have many legitimate, though apparently contradictory answers. As I see it, the question is not about who is right. The question has to do with both sides working to clarify how far their appropriate sphere of influence extends and to clarify their respective core purposes.

Where I end up on this question from the perspective of Healthy Liberal Christianity is that government and the gospel are really not about the same thing at all, even though there is often a large measure of compatibility. With regard to marriage, the gospel addresses commitment and mutual respect in the relationship and invites people to affirm the presence of God in their midst. The government addresses the rules of property and obligations to care for offspring. Some religious perspectives try to speak for “what God wants.” They argue that God instituted the “one man, one woman model” for marriage and that if we violate that, we are going against God. Healthy Liberal Christianity takes the position that Jesus gave us the model of the Realm of God, not as a hierarchical system of dominance, but as a way of organizing ourselves around the law of love.

My point here is that we cannot even begin to address the question of marriage until we determine where our foundations of faith are. How marriage should be viewed either by government or religion is not about our personal opinions of the matter nor is it about our opinion of “what God wants.” Workable systems can only come from the deep and respectful sharing of thoughtful perspectives on the subject.

I invite you to think about these things and to weigh in to the conversation. For the time being, I will probably continue to sign marriage licenses, but the notion of leaving civil relationships to the government and then taking more responsibility as a minister for supporting commitment and spiritually-based healthy relationships appeals to me.

What do you think?

Wayne Gustafson
“No matter who you are or where you are in life’s journey, you’re welcome here.”
The United Church__of Christ