Dec
05
2009
Counsel to a Young Church Planter on Marriage
The following post was first an email to a young church planter seeking counsel. He is planting a church in a rough area. Not a few of those who are getting converted have been living together, sometimes with children, sometimes for years, without getting married. His question, then, is what should be said to these couples where one of the pair gets converted, and the other, so far, does not. Should the advice be to get married? Or is that encouraging people to be unequally yoked?
***
The question you’re facing is really about what marriage is, according to the Bible. At various times, I’ve faced the same questions you are now facing. The following are some guidelines. Some of these depend directly on what the Bible says, and some belong in the domain of prudential wisdom that is itself shaped by the Bible.
(1) In the Bible, marriage is more than sexual union between a man and a woman, but it is not less. It also includes public commitment to each other in some public, legal, and culturally acknowledged way that sets this pair apart as husband and wife. In the nomadic culture of Abraham’s day, a part of the ceremony was for the groom to take his bride “into his mother’s tent” (so Isaac) — that was the equivalent of the wedding night. Under the law of Moses, if A and B sleep together, and if it is clearly not rape, the law does not say, “Oh, well, I guess that makes them married.” No, the dowry must still be paid (that was part of the public declaration of marriage under that culture), the two families are involved, etc. So today, if A & B have been living together in sexual intimacy for some time, but without benefit of public attestation (whether in a church or before, say, a justice of the peace), they are not really “married” in the full sense of that term (the sexual union is there, but not the public mutual commitment according to the laws of our day); but equally, if A & B take vows of marriage and then don’t sleep together, this is not fully “marriage” either.
(2) The right thing to do, in both cases, is usually (I can think of one or two difficult exceptions!) to finalize the other part. It is not to try to undo what has already been done! One cannot “undo” this sustained sexual, common-law, union. Thus to demand that a couple tear themselves apart after they’ve been living together for, say, five years, with perhaps a child or two, simply won’t do. What needs to be urged upon them is that they get “married” legally — i.e., publicly, according to the cultural standards of the state.
(3) But, someone asks, suppose that B has become a Christian, and A is still an unbeliever: isn’t going ahead with (the legal part of) marriage in danger of making them unequally yoked together? In response: (a) If A and B were fully married (i.e., legally, and in sexual consummation) when they were both unbelievers, and then one of them became a Christian, we would not say that this means they should break up. In fact, in 1 Cor. 7 Paul explicitly tells the Christian partner in such cases not to leave. Indeed, the Christian spouse is to be exemplary in conduct and grace, in the hope of winning over his or her family. The prohibition of being unequally yoked together, when applied to marriage, envisages two people who are not married in any sense. But if one person in a marriage of two pagans becomes a Christian, Paul never applies the “don’t be unequally yoked” command to break up a marriage that is already in place. In fact, as we see in 1 Cor. 7, quite the reverse. (b) So what’s the difference if A & B are simply living together, but not legally married? The difference, of course, is that they are not fully married as the Bible sees marriage; but they have well and truly started the process! They cannot undo what has been done. To pretend otherwise is foolish. The way ahead is to encourage the completion of the process, not the undoing of what cannot be undone.
(4) In most cases, the unbelieving partner will go along with this plan, if the matter is approached graciously, wisely, humbly. If not, then a new set of questions arises that is not addressed in your email.
(5) You may remember that in my first point, above, I included the options “whether in a church or before, say, a justice of the peace.” When A and B are both Christians, it is normal, in this country, for them to get married in a church, and then we speak of a Christian wedding. But it is important to see that, strictly speaking, marriage (despite the Roman Catholic Church), is not a sacrament to be reserved for Christians. It is a creation ordinance — that is, it is part of the plan of creation itself, something that God has ordained for man/woman pairs everywhere, not something that flows out of the life of the church and that belongs only to Christians.
In France, for example, all marriages must be performed before a civil authority. I see no objection to that; in fact, I think it is a good thing (even if it arose in France for bad reasons), for it clarifies issues. In France, where A and B are Christians, they will get married before the local civil authority, and then have a separate ceremony within the congregation — a ceremony that has no culturally-defined legal standing, but becomes an opportunity to remember how the gift of God that we call marriage is elevated and transformed when put within the framework of the gospel. We learn, for instance, of its typological connection with Christ and the church; we learn that apostasy and adultery have similar roots and condemnations; we learn that God himself dares to speak of the marriage supper of the Lamb; we are reminded of God’s wise provision of marriage, of the place and importance of children reared in the nurture and admonition of the Lord, and so on.
In America (and most Anglo-Saxon countries), when a marriage takes place within a congregation (and usually in a church building), the minister officiating is acting partly as a minister of the gospel and partly as a licensed official of the state. That is why it is not legal for anyone who chooses to do so to officiate: there must be some sort of legal standing. Fair enough; I can live with that. But my point in the case you are talking about must not be hung up on whether the legal marriage ceremony takes place in a church building under the jurisdiction of a minister, or under the jurisdiction of a justice of the peace. It will be clear by now that I do not think the minister is sinning if he legally joins A and B together, where they have been living together for some time and where one of the two has now become a Christian. But equally, if the unbeliever in this case is willing to get married, but not within the context of the church, fine — encourage them to get married, and be sure you attend the ceremony and applaud them. There does not have to be a minister in order to be “done” properly. We have no interest in preserving the vestiges of medieval Catholic theology of marriage.
(6) Earlier I mentioned a couple of exceptions. Let me take up only one. Suppose A and B are 19 and 18 years of age respectively. Suppose they have both been sleeping around for some time. Suppose B now becomes a Christian. Is she (or he) now morally obligated to marry the last person she (or he) has been with? I doubt it. What is required is the kind of deep repentance that turns from such sin and pledges celibate living until genuine marriage. Obviously you could then conjure up hard cases where you are uncertain if what you are facing is one of these exceptions or not. If the principles are clear, a great deal of prudential wisdom may nevertheless be required in the application of the principles.
I hope these reflections help. If you need to follow up with me, please do not hesitate to do so.
Warmly,
Don
25 Comments
[...] Counsel to Church Planter on Marriage In Culture, Theology on 12/05/2009 at 8:14 PM Don Carson has a good post about marriage at the GC website. I wonder if all his emails are like this. He seeks to answer the following questions. The following post was first an email to a young church planter seeking counsel. He is planting a church in a rough area. Not a few of those who are getting converted have been living together, sometimes with children, sometimes for years, without getting married. His question, then, is what should be said to these couples where one of the pair gets converted, and the other, so far, does not. Should the advice be to get married? Or is that encouraging people to be unequally yoked? Read the rest HERE. [...]
Great article Don, very thorough. I have practiced the same way in ministry, however I doubt I could haver articulated why as well as you have here.
[...] Read the whole insightful piece. [...]
Appreciated the article. One other variable I’d like to ask about. If a couple, one whose divorced, the other in divorce court (going on two years), but are living together, with children, become converted, and want to get married, but divorce isn’t final? What then? I agreed to marry them after the divorce was final, they scheduled a day, but something happened and the divorce wasn’t final. I told them I couldn’t marry them until it was finalized. They respected my posotion, but disagreed, and wanted to be married in God’s eyes, so went ahead with the ceremony, even though one was still legally married. It was complicated, but interested to hear more perspective. I wrestled with this one a lot.
[...] Read Carson’s post here. [...]
Ok, but what about if the non believer refuses to get married ?
[...] Counsel to a Young Church Planter on Marriage [...]
While I have tremendous respect for Dr. Carson and consider him one of my favorite Bible scholars I disagree with him here. He has a salient point when he mentions that marriage is culturally flexible, but is also recognized by the culture at large. In our culture, we recognize marriage as a binding commitment, an official status conferred by our society and government (thus the fight for gay marriage, where advocates are unsatisfied with mere church ceremonies or civil unions). In addition, this status can only by ruptured when the couple completes the legal procedings of a divorce. With this in mind, many people choose to avoid marriage by merely living together. They want the benefits of marriage without the commitment. Thus, they consciously reject the institution of marriage for an alternate relationship outside of the society’s view of marriage. In light of this, I don’t believe that we should tell people who have been rejecting the institution of marriage that you have actually been married, and you should strengthen your commitment to the unbeliever. I am sure St. Augustine would agree.
I have learned a great deal from Dr. Carson. I took whatever I could from him during seminary at TEDS, and often use his books. However, I had just counseled two separate individuals on this very issue in the previous week, so it has been on my mind, and I disagree with Dr. Carson’s position.
If a couple are together, and are not married, and one of them becomes a believer, he (I’ll assume it is the man) should not then compound his sin by ‘becoming unequally yoked’. Rather, he should separate from his partner, love them, care for them, provide for them (especially if children are involved) and continue to share the gospel with them. The ideal is that the other comes to Christ as well.
My reasoning for this is fairly straightforward:
1. A couple who are merely living together are not married (as Carson agrees)
2. The Bible prohibits marriage to an unbeliever (as Carson agrees)
3. Therefore, marrying an unbeliever you are living with is prohibited.
Sexual activity and having children certainly complicate the logistics of the situation, but not the morality
Still thinking and praying through it, and open to Scriptural advice
While I, too, have tremendous respect for Don Carson, I believe Rick (above comment) is more biblical in his conclusion. Not only do we have Paul’s clear command prohibiting unequal yoking, but we also have a very clear example in Ezra/Nehemiah of the Israelites being commanded to “put away” their unbelieving spouses. While in the new covenant we are told not to put away our spouse, we see in both Old and New Testaments that holiness is to be safeguarded ahead of even marriage. To ignore that biblical priority by marrying an unbeliever seems to elevate marriage above the place given it in Scripture.
Can we have a follow up post that might further explore point 4?
[...] D.A. Carson’s Counsel for a Young Church Planter and Marriage To Read the Article Go Here [...]
Rick,
I would be very cautious about viewing the children of unmarried parents as logistical complications.
Are you suggesting that since marriage to a non-believer is unbiblical, we should penalize the children (who are already emotionally attached to both their mom and dad) by refusing to help facilitate steps toward the legal and other protections afforded by civil marriage?
If marriage does in fact serve to protect children (and not merely the husband and wife), there is a lot more to consider than the sins of their parents, especially if we believe that all children have the right to be raised in the context of a lifelong commitment between their mother and father (even in a fallen world).
Perhaps our disagreement hinges on which scenario would be preferable in the event of a choice between two imperfect solutions (assuming the parents are both mature and competent adults):
A) Children are raised in one home by both of their married parents who love each other (one who is a Christian, one who is not).
B) Children are shuffled between the homes of their two single parents (one who is a Christian, one who is not).
As a Christian social worker, I would have to say that option A, while certainly less than ideal, is better for the children’s well being than option B. Family preservation for the sake of the children is a higher priority than waiting for the non-believing spouse’s conversion. Splitting up the home until the non-believing spouse converts would be detrimental to the children who did nothing to deserve this.
It seems to me that some couples who are living together without having gone through a marriage ceremony, are in fact, already married because their is sexual union and a life-long commitment. When one or both are converted, they should be encouraged to make their ‘marriag’e legal. However I think that here are also couples who are living together, and sometimes have children together, but who do not have a life-long commitment to each other. They did not go through a marriage ceremony because they did not want that level of commitment. In this case I do not believe they should be encouraged to get married to make their situation legal. I believe they should be encouraged to separate so that they can determine if they want to be joined in marriage. A study of Biblical marriage would obviously help such a couple plan for the future.
[...] 8, 2009 by Justin New Testament scholar D. A. Carson has a blog post today entitled, “Counsel to a Young Church Planter on Marriage.” It begins: The following post was first an email to a young church planter seeking counsel. [...]
Thanks for the post, also the reference to France. What do we do with countries in which common-law is also considered equal in (legal) standing as a marriage? Most people I know here in the Netherlands never get married at all, or get married after the children ask. However, they do have a legal contract that is equivalent to a (legal) marriage contract. Both are officiated by the State. Both can be annulled at the request of one party. The only difference I know is that when a child is born, in a marriage the husband is automatically considered the father, while in a common-law the man has to acknowledge that the child is his. For all other purposes (taxes, will) the two legal contracts are identical.
To start, let me say that Dr Don is one of teh greatest theologians of teh day and one whom I absolutely love to read and listen to. I will also add that any comments that I am writting here are coming from an uneducated ordinary man with no seminary training. I say that because I do not know if my analysis is correct, it just seems right. I would love to hear more of yoru thoughts. My wife and I are very close friends with Cerissa and Eric Schartner and we are moving to Boston to plant a church. I never thought I could ever disagree with Dr Don, but with much humility I seem to be against this statement (although he leaves 1 or 2 exceptions
(2) The right thing to do, in both cases, is usually (I can think of one or two difficult exceptions!) to finalize the other part (get married). It is not to try to undo what has already been done! One cannot “undo” this sustained sexual, common-law, union. Thus to demand that a couple tear themselves apart after they’ve been living together for, say, five years, with perhaps a child or two, simply won’t do. What needs to be urged upon them is that they get “married” legally — i.e., publicly, according to the cultural standards of the state.
When God transforms the heart of an unbeliever into a new believer in Christ, many things come along with that. New desires, new motives, and literally a new heart. In essence, that person is clearly a new creation and if the bible is true, they will only slightly resemble the old self. That being said, he/she is not exactly the same person who was in the previous relationship even if they had been together for 7 years unmarried with 2 kids. I humbly submit that it is the biblical responsibility for the believer to exit the relationship and seek a Godly husband or wife. In reality it is only fair for both parties because a christian wife will desire a husband who will lovingly lead her in the Gospel, Pray for her children, serve her and lover her as Christ would. We all would agree that an unbelieving husband does not have the grace to do that. The same is true for a believing husband, he will desire a Godly wife who will compliment him in his pursuit of Christ, not fight for leadership and glory in the relationship, and humbly submit to his Godly leadership and authority. Similar to the unbelieving husband, the unbelieving wife does not obtain the grace to do this as well.
In my mind this becomes a Gospel issue. Is it hard to leave a relationship of 5 years in which there was deep sexual commitments involved? Yes. Is it hard to leave the mother or father of your children who is not your spouse? Yes. Is it hard to start dating again in search of the Godly spouse that God may have for you? Yes. But, none of that is as difficult as leaving eternity in heaven to incarnate on earth and start over as a baby. None of that is as difficult as living in an evil world, being tempted in every way and having no sin. None of that is as difficult as being beaten as Jesus was and carrying your own cross to be crucified for the sins of man. None of those things are as difficult as, although being without sin, becoming sin; so that cheaters, murders, idolaters, etc can become the righteousness of God by bearing His wrath for us.
In the Gospel we see the great example of making hard decisions for glorious outcomes. It is a trust issue. Do we trust Christ enough to make the extremely difficult decision? As Pastors, do we really trust Christ enough to counsel our people in hard ways, leading them to make decisions that in light of our world seem crazy.
I would have to council to make the Gospel decision. Die to self, live for Chist.
Just my opinion. Am I way off?
didn’t spell check and typed quickly. oops
[...] Read D.A. Carson’s advice to a church planter. [...]
[...] Counsel to a Young Church Planter on Marriage [...]
I’m a pastor with such a case at hand, and this is making me think a lot. Do any other people here at the Gospel Coalition have input they’d like to give — for or against Dr. Carson’s piece. I find it quite compelling, but I’m afraid to make a mistake. I’d love to engage someone from the Gospel Coalition about this if you’re reading.
[...] Counsel to a Young Church Planter on Marriage from Don Carson [...]
[...] Counsel to a Young Church Planter on Marriage by DA Carson [...]
[...] Counsel to a Young Church Planter on Marriage [...]
[...] Back on December, the Gospel Coalition posted a helpful summary of D.A. Carson’s advise to church planters with regard to difficult questions about marriage. You can read it here. [...]