Traditional Christian weddings and their hymns

[Paidiske]

So you would view a marriage between two atheists as... not really a marriage?

 

[Mountainmike]

So you would view a marriage between two atheists as... not really a marriage?

I don't know......is the most honest answer.

 

[Paidiske]

Fair enough. Thanks for answering.

 

[gordonhooker]

My difficulty with that is mark 10
" what God hath joined together, let no man put asunder"

Which for me has several substantial takeaways
1/ God is the "glue" that joins it ( an imperfect analogy) , but clearly a fundamental part. So without Him it isn't marriage at all.

2/ The entering of Him as the " glue", or third party, makes it sacramental.

3/ In saying "no man ,can put asunder ", that includes the participants , so remarriage except in narrow circumstance Is not possible, So divorce is a separation not a dissolution and remarriage is not possible.

And that's what I thought long before I ever opened a catholic book! and it's why I felt the Anglican communions views on this ( and other things like Eucharist ) were designed to be a creative ambiguity.

In my view the British parliament made a big mistake in the marriage acts of 1840? When it described a civil contract using the word "marriage" And that was to come back to haunt the legislature in the last few decades , in others wanting to describe as marriage e.g. Gay something that is not.

Anyway... not trying to persuade anyone of anything other than the view from here...

You neglected to include the next two verses that say except for adultery.

Matt 19:6
So they are no longer two, but one flesh. Therefore what God has joined together, let no one separate.”

Matt. 19:7 “Why then,” they asked, “did Moses command that a man give his wife a certificate of divorce and send her away?”

Matt. 19:8 Jesus replied, “Moses permitted you to divorce your wives because your hearts were hard. But it was not this way from the beginning. 9 I tell you that anyone who divorces his wife, except for sexual immorality, and marries another woman commits adultery.”

 

[Mountainmike]

I clearly did include it I said "except in exceptional circumstances" as mentioned there.

One of the problems I see on this forum, is people end up quoting a lot of verses and end up losing the thread.

So in my view Mark 10 or Matt 19 if you wish sets the essential scene
"what God hath Joined together"

19:8 just provides a narrow get out, and even then says because of your "hardness of heart" So it clearly is not a "preferred" option, even in that situation.

I think many social evils are now precisely because of the collapse of marriage as a perpetual intention, the lack of God in such relationships and the proliferation of casual relations, the reducition of marriage to some kind of contract (with even dissolution clauses or prenups...built in ) What is too easily made with too little commitment, is even more easily broken, and often repeated several times over - and the children pay for it in spades.

I realise my last comment to @Paidiske was a little misleading. I dont think atheist marriage is valid as a general rule - when I said "dont know" - clearly God might accept some of them, it is His choice not mine.... I often think Christians are too quick to judge others even Christians. We should live out the best we can of what we believe to be true - and not speculate on the fate of others.

You neglected to include the next two verses that say except for adultery.

Matt 19:6
So they are no longer two, but one flesh. Therefore what God has joined together, let no one separate.”

Matt. 19:7 “Why then,” they asked, “did Moses command that a man give his wife a certificate of divorce and send her away?”

Matt. 19:8 Jesus replied, “Moses permitted you to divorce your wives because your hearts were hard. But it was not this way from the beginning. 9 I tell you that anyone who divorces his wife, except for sexual immorality, and marries another woman commits adultery.”

 

[gordonhooker]

I clearly did include it I said "except in exceptional circumstances" as mentioned there.

One of the problems I see on this forum, is people end up quoting a lot of verses and end up losing the thread.

So in my view Mark 10 or Matt 19 if you wish sets the essential scene
"what God hath Joined together"

19:8 just provides a narrow get out, and even then says because of your "hardness of heart" So it clearly is not a "preferred" option, even in that situation.

I think many social evils are now precisely because of the collapse of marriage as a perpetual intention, the lack of God in such relationships and the proliferation of casual relations, the reducition of marriage to some kind of contract (with even dissolution clauses or prenups...built in ) What is too easily made with too little commitment, is even more easily broken, and often repeated several times over - and the children pay for it in spades.

I realise my last comment to @Paidiske was a little misleading. I dont think atheist marriage is valid as a general rule - when I said "dont know" - clearly God might accept some of them, it is His choice not mine.... I often think Christians are too quick to judge others even Christians. We should live out the best we can of what we believe to be true - and not speculate on the fate of others.

I agree that the cutting and pasting of Bible verses when it is not necessary for clarity of your point only clutters a post. The reason I thought it necessary to comment was because I felt your post was not clear about what those exceptional circumstances were, when within a verse or two it was made clear. I believe context is always important when paraphrasing scripture.

 

[GreekOrthodox]

In the Byzantine wedding, there is no "til death do you part", as we view marriage with an eye on the eternal. Note: this is not the Mormon notion of the celestial marriage. Only laity are permitted a second or third marriage (there is no going beyond a third). Clergy are not permitted (there have been a few very rare cases but I only know of one in the United States).

 

[All4Christ]

In the Byzantine wedding, there is no "til death do you part", as we view marriage with an eye on the eternal. Note: this is not the Mormon notion of the celestial marriage. Only laity are permitted a second or third marriage (there is no going beyond a third). Clergy are not permitted (there have been a few very rare cases but I only know of one in the United States).

An additional note, the second and third apply for deaths of spouses as well. Even if a person had three spouses die, they are not permitted to remarry.

 

[FireDragon76]

I have seen a crowning done at an Anglican wedding, for a couple where at least one of the party was Greek. Also the shared cup of wine at that wedding, which I think is also an Orthodox thing? But it's not a common thing for us to do.

The exchange of rings and binding of their hands with a stole would be our main symbolic actions; but in the west the emphasis has very much been on verbal consent and vow.

Indeed, as you pointed out, for centuries much of the wedding ceremony in the west took place outside the church doors.

In the US, much of the music associated with weddings is secular in origin, such as from Mendehlsson or Wagner.

Lutherans do not consider marriage a sacrament, nor do we require people to be married in our churches. Civil marriage has always been acceptable to Lutherans. Nevertheless, I think most of us prefer to be married in a church, and we do view it as a valuable rite if it involves the community gathered in prayer and hearing God's Word.

 

[All4Christ]

Indeed. For centuries much of the wedding ceremony in the west took place outside the church doors. This did not change until the late middle ages.

In the US, much of the music associated with weddings is secular in origin, such as from Mendehlsson or Wagner.

Agreed about the Western origins and history. Regarding the Orthodox Church: early on in the Eastern Church, the actually legal wedding took place in the civil world. However, there was a church blessing and partaking of the Eucharist together that took place in the Church to confirm it and bless it. Even today, we start our marriage by going to the Church and communing together in the morning of our marriage day (prior to the ceremony). The start of the wedding ceremony in the east is earlier than the West. I’m starting work so I can’t take the time to find the exact days / timeframe right now. Some Orthodox Churches today even have the civil ceremony outside the Church and hold the Orthodox marriage ceremony before living as husband and wife. If laws at some point cause us to not be able to follow our beliefs regarding marriage, that may be a solution down the line. it’s not needed now though.

 

[Paidiske]

I would prefer the legal aspect to be handled separately from the worship service, myself.

 

[All4Christ]

I would prefer the legal aspect to be handled separately from the worship service, myself.

I lean that way as well for my personal opinion. In our Church, even now, it is sort of handled outside of it anyways since we don’t have vows affirming it during the ceremony, but it still is signed around the time of the ceremony.

 

[Paidiske]

I have been to an Orthodox wedding, but it was so long ago that I don't remember; you don't sign the paperwork during the service itself? We've kind of inserted it into the liturgy.

 

[All4Christ]

I have been to an Orthodox wedding, but it was so long ago that I don't remember; you don't sign the paperwork during the service itself? We've kind of inserted it into the liturgy.

No, it was outside of the ceremony

 

[FireDragon76]

No I did it outside of the ceremony

I've never seen a pastor sign paperwork during a church wedding. That is new to me.

 

[All4Christ]

I've never seen a pastor sign paperwork during a church wedding. That is new to me.

Me neither, though I have limited experience of weddings outside the Orthodox, Pentecostal, orthodox Presbyterians, Church of Brethren and non-denominational churches (my current and past churches and family’s churches). The priest or pastor though did act as the officiant and signed the certificate after the service.

 

[Paidiske]

I've never seen a pastor sign paperwork during a church wedding. That is new to me.

That's the way it's pretty much always done in Australia (across a bunch of denominations). The couple make their vows etc, and then there's a pause in the liturgy while they "sign the register" (in reality a bunch of forms in triplicate etc), photos are taken, and usually some sort of musical interlude. Then the service resumes with prayers for the couple or the like.