If
God really got married, the logical question is, “When?” Did I miss the
wedding ceremony somewhere? The answer emerged when I learned about an
ancient ceremony used between two nomadic tribes to make a peace treaty
or to promise a boy and girl in marriage. The fathers would slaughter a
goat or other animal, cut the carcass in half, and then at sundown walk
barefoot through the blood path. The slaughtered animals symbolized
what would happen to either party if they violated the terms of the
agreement.
This was the ceremony God chose to use when he entered into a covenant
with Abraham in Genesis 15. God asked Abram to take a heifer, a goat
and a ram, plus a dove and a young pigoen, and slaughter them. But
there was an unusual twist in this ceremony. While Abraham and his
descendents were committed to this covenant with God, only God walked
the blood path, thereby signifying that if Israel violated the
agreement, God would pay the price with His own blood.
Technically, Abram and his descendants weren't married to God in the
same sense that we understand a wedding ceremony today. It would be
more accurate to say they were betrothed, which means that they were
promised to each other. It is the same for Christ and His bride, the
church. The wedding feast celebrating this marriage remains in the
future at the wedding supper of the Lamb.
In our culture, couples are first engaged — they declare their intent
to marry — but either party may back out before the wedding day, and
there is no legal consequence for breaking an engagement. Such was not
the case with betrothal. A betrothal was an ironclad contract that
could be severed only by unfaithfulness or death. Though a couple might
not celebrate and consummate their marriage for years, legally they
were still considered married.
Such was the case with Joseph and Mary when she was found with child by
the Holy Spirit. If a girl who was betrothed was found not to be a
virgin before the wedding feast, when the marriage was consummated, she
could be executed. This explains why Joseph, upon hearing that Mary was
pregnant, decided not to make a public spectacle of his wife but to put
her away privately — that is, until God spoke to him and revealed the
identity of the child in her womb.
I wonder what the impact was on the children who witnessed a covenant
sealed in blood by their fathers. Though they might hardly know each
other, and indeed it might be years before they were ready to celebrate
the wedding, they surely understood the commitment being made. There
was only one way to escape from this marriage — by death.
Marriage Today
When a couple marries today, a lot of effort goes into the wedding.
According to Bride's magazine, when the average couple adds up the
costs of a wedding dress, tuxedos, dresses for the bridesmaids, rings,
invitations, flowers, music, photographer, wedding cake and reception,
they spend more than $19,000.
When we were married, Jo was a poor schoolteacher and I was a poor
writer. We had less than $1,000 for our wedding. Jo brilliantly
maximized the reach of our limited budget by making her own wedding
dress and soliciting help from friends and family for such things as
food preparation.
A major element of our planning was the ceremony itself. We'd both
attended many weddings, and the norm of the late seventies was for each
couple to custom-design their ceremony.
In that spirit, Jo and I sat down one Sunday afternoon to write out our
commitment to each other. We discussed what we were doing in marriage:
pledging to be faithful, to take care of each other, to support one
another during good times and hard times. We scribbled several drafts,
but none of them captured the right tone.
Finally, we settled on the following:
"I Al take thee, Jo, to be my lawfully wedded wife, to have and to hold
from this day forward, for better or for worse, for richer or for
poorer, in sickness and in health 'til death do us part."
"I Jo take thee, Al, to be my lawfully wedded husband, to have and to
hold from this day forward, for better or for worse, for richer or for
poorer, in sickness and in health 'til death do us part."
Those words or a slight variation of them have served Christians for
centuries, and we couldn't find anything that better expressed what we
were committing to each other. They expressed the vows we were making —
an irrevocable commitment to each other with God as our witness.
Covenant
Today most people don't understand what covenant means. Our culture is
built on contracts, and everyone knows that a crackerjack lawyer can
find a loophole if you really want out. So contracts get longer and
longer as the parties try to close all possible loopholes, but
litigation increases because people change their minds and want release
from their agreements.
One contract that is increasing in usage is the prenuptial agreement. A
covenant is not at all like a prenuptial agreement. For one thing,
there is no escape clause. In ancient times, a covenant was a legal
agreement, but with two major differences from contracts today. A
covenant was made before deity. And the penalty for breaking it was
death. People might negotiate out of contracts, but not out of a
covenant.
The covenant between God and Abraham was more binding than a wedding
certificate is today. God impressed on Abraham the importance of the
covenant: “As for you, you must keep my covenant, you and your
descendants after you.” While Abraham didn’t walk the blood path, there
was a symbol of his acceptance of the agreement. The proof of Abraham’s
commitment was that he and every male descendant was circumcised
(Genesis 17:9-14).
But in the covenant of blood, God traveled the blood path alone. By
doing so, he said that if Abraham or any of his descendants violated
this contract, God would pay the price with His own blood. There would
come a day when God would heroically have to keep that promise.
For centuries in liturgical churches the service of holy matrimony has
been clearly spelled out word for word. As I read several liturgies, I
was struck by the similarities between the church service of holy
matrimony and the biblical concept of covenant.
For example, the marriage service is conducted before God. Historically
a covenant was always a religious ceremony, made before God or gods as
witnesses. It was the one treaty between enemies that was enforceable,
because neither party was willing to risk the wrath of their deity.
In the English Book of Common Prayer (1662), a wedding service begins
with the minister addressing the congregation: "Dearly beloved, we are
gathered together here in the sight of God…to join together this man
and this woman in holy Matrimony." Again and again, the couple and
witnesses are reminded that God is witness to this union.
Second, a covenant had witnesses. Likewise, the marriage vows are made
before human witnesses. Why is that important? A pastor I know
challenged a friend who had just announced he was leaving his wife of
six years. "Oh no you're not!" said the pastor. "You made a vow to love
your wife until death. I know. I was there and I heard you. Now you
stay with her and work things out." The man was shocked, but he stayed,
and today their marriage is much healthier. I wonder what would happen
if, like this pastor, more witnesses challenged couples to fulfill
their wedding vows.
Third, both a covenant and a traditional marriage ceremony declared the
seriousness of the commitment. In The Book of Common Prayer, the
minister utters these words in his opening exhortation to the
congregation and the couple standing before him: "Holy Matrimony…is
commended of Saint Paul to be honourable among all men; and therefore
is not by any to be enterprised…unadvisedly, lightly, or wantonly, to
satisfy men's carnal lusts and appetites, like brute beasts that have
no understanding; but reverently, discreetly, advisedly, soberly, and
in the fear of God."
Recently, as I reflected on the vows Jo and I exchanged at our wedding,
I was struck by the one-sidedness of our commitment. There were no
qualifiers or disclaimers. I had promised to love Jo for better or
worse until death, regardless of her actions or attitude. Likewise, Jo
promised to have me for richer or poorer, in sickness and health, for
as long as we both shall live, regardless of how well or poorly I
behaved. No doubt we both assumed we would reciprocate in our love for
each other. However, our vows said nothing about being loved back. By
our words, each of us assumed 100 percent responsibility for the
marriage. That's the nature of covenant. Each party makes an
irrevocable vow.
Fourth, something of great value was exchanged. God wanted to give
Abraham and his descendents a country, but He did it in the context of
family. Did Abraham realize he was actually getting the best end of the
deal? He was entering into a long-term relationship with the God of the
universe. The land was very important, but it wasn't the most important
thing — it was a symbol of the value of their relationship.
I am impressed again by the nature of the exchange in the traditional
marriage service. It particularly struck me when I read the words
uttered by the husband when he places the wedding ring on his wife's
finger: "With this ring I thee wed, with my body I thee worship, and
with all my worldly goods I thee endow.” In other words, the husband
gave everything he had to his wife, including his body and his earthly
possessions. No longer were there his or her possessions. Everything
was theirs. Why is this important? Because in giving our all, we
actually gain what we want.
Permanence of Marriage
Obviously millions of couples chafe under the idea of covenant, feeling
that the permanence fences them in. But Jo and I feel secure within
these boundaries. Without the possibility of divorce, Jo and I know
that regardless of our problems, we will be there for each other. And
when we disagree or fight, we had better figure out a way to resolve
our differences, for we are going to be together for a very long time.
