Protestant View of Marriage

[rocketman]

I have a question for Protestants...if marriage is not a sacrament, as the RCC and to what extent I know the EO hold, what exactly is it?

And what is the purpose, constitution, and ideal of marriage?

[elysian]

Most Protestants view marriage as a three-way covenant, between God and a husband and wife. To Lutherans a sacrament involves both the Word of God and a physical element- such as Baptism (the element of water and the Word) and Communion (the Word in the elements of bread and wine.) These are the two sacraments that Lutherans observe.

Marriage is not considered a sacrament among Protestants (many Protestant denominations do not observe sacraments at all) because there is the promise- the three-way covenant- but no physical element such as bread and wine or water.

Most Protestant denominations do acknowledge that we are fallen sinners and that in extreme situations (infidelity or abuse) that divorce may be a sad necessity. We do not take breaking the marriage covenant lightly, but we do understand that there is forgiveness, hope and restoration in Christ for those who have been through the pain of divorce.

[Amazing Rando]

Most Protestants view marriage as a three-way covenant, between God and a husband and wife. To Lutherans a sacrament involves both the Word of God and a physical element- such as Baptism (the element of water and the Word) and Communion (the Word in the elements of bread and wine.) These are the two sacraments that Lutherans observe.

Marriage is not considered a sacrament among Protestants (many Protestant denominations do not observe sacraments at all) because there is the promise- the three-way covenant- but no physical element such as bread and wine or water.

Yes elysian, I like that definition of marriage as a covenant. Why does a sacrament involve a physical element? I'm United Methodist, and I've never heard that idea before.

Most Protestant denominations do acknowledge that we are fallen sinners and that in extreme situations (infidelity or abuse) that divorce may be a sad necessity. We do not take breaking the marriage covenant lightly, but we do understand that there is forgiveness, hope and restoration in Christ for those who have been through the pain of divorce.

Unfortunately, so many Christians (both Catholic and Protestant) do take marriage much more lightly than they should. Our divorce rate is embarassing! A byproduct, perhaps, of an increased level of selfishness among our society, in my opinion.

[rocketman]

Okay, thanks for the replies.

The reason I ask is because Catholicism attempts to maintain the traditional marriage against all modern "innovations", including contraception, expanded divorce laws, and gay marriage. It seems this is best done through a sacrmental understanding of marriage as a tri-partite union between man, woman, and God for the purpose of raising children.

Now, socially, marriage has always been about raising children, and it is proven across time and culture that the man-woman relationship is the ideal environment in which children should be raised. If you advance the sociological argument against gay marriage (which, after lots of deliberation, appears to be the only irrefutable argument against gay marriage in a secular society, as it does not ultimately dissolve down to a church-state issue...i can elaborate if you wish...), then this same sociological argument also binds you to an anti-divorce and anti-contraception stance. The Catholic sacramental view of marriage essentially espouses this sociological argument and then houses it within a religious framework. But ultimately, this sociological view can stand on its own, whereas any other argument against gay marriage ultimately stems from some religious basis.

[Amazing Rando]

Good thoughts, rocketman. I guess I don't really have a good concept of the Catholic idea of a sacrament either.

Why don't you try expanding on that view in the Poly-Sci forum? We love talking about gay marriage over there!

[elysian]

Yes elysian, I like that definition of marriage as a covenant. Why does a sacrament involve a physical element? I'm United Methodist, and I've never heard that idea before.

The idea of marriage as a covenant (personally I like the three stranded cord quote from Ecclesiastes, verse 4:12 as a good explanation) goes back to Adam and Eve- woman was created for man by God to complete him. Jesus also says:

"So they are no longer two, but one. Therefore what God has joined together, let man not separate." Matthew 19:6 (NIV)

The teaching that a sacrament involves a physical element may be a distinctly Lutheran teaching. It is taught in the Lutheran Confessions:

For when we are baptized, when we eat the Lord's body, when we are absolved, our hearts must be firmly assured that God truly forgives us for Christ's sake. And God, at the same time, by the Word and by the rite, moves hearts to believe and conceive faith, just as Paul says, Rom. 10, 17: "Faith cometh by hearing." But just as the Word enters the ear in order to strike our heart, so the rite itself strikes the eye, in order to move the heart. The effect of the Word and of the rite is the same, as it has been well said by Augustine that a Sacrament is a visible word, because the rite is received by the eyes, and is, as it were, a picture of the Word, signifying the same thing as the Word. Therefore the effect of both is the same. The Book of Concord, Defense of the Augsburg Confession, Article XIII, (VII) http://www.bookofconcord.org/augsbur...acraments.html

Some Protestants do not recognize any sacraments. But for Lutherans, Baptism qualifies (use of water) and Communion (use of bread and wine.)

Marriage (at least for Christians) is the intangible covenant between a man, a woman and God.

[Dave G]

That is making me wonder why all the covenants with God aren't sacramental, since marriage traditionally involves the exchange of rings, or the binding of the forearms with a sash, or something like that. Abraham's covenant with God included the passing through the divided animals, which is another material element.

[Patroclus]

That is making me wonder why all the covenants with God aren't sacramental, since marriage traditionally involves the exchange of rings, or the binding of the forearms with a sash, or something like that. Abraham's covenant with God included the passing through the divided animals, which is another material element.

Well, it isn't just that the ceremony involves symbols (phyiscal elements). In fact, all ceremonies involve symbols. The determining factor is the sacrament's connection to the doctrine of grace. In Lutheran theology, Baptism and The Lord's Supper both have a part in the doctrine of grace.

[Jezz]

Hey rocketman,

I have a question for Protestants...if marriage is not a sacrament, as the RCC and to what extent I know the EO hold, what exactly is it?

And what is the purpose, constitution, and ideal of marriage?

First, a clarification: yes, the EO hold that marriage is a sacrament (they hold the same 7 sacraments as the Catholics, to my knowledge).

After my investigations, I have come to the conclusion that the only real difference between Lutheran and Catholic/EO understanding of marriage is in their understanding of the word "sacrament". As elysian pointed out, Lutherans hold to a specific definition of the word "sacrament", which means that marriage is not a sacrament.

However, in Lutheran theology marriage is still an institution that was ordained and blessed by God. So, if "sacrament" is understood to mean "a sacred institution ordained and blessed by God" (which seems to be closer to the Catholic understanding of the word - correct me if I am wrong), then Lutherans would agree that marriage is a sacrament. So I think the difference between Lutheran and Catholic/EO is really only one of terminology.

I cannot speak for other Protestant denominations, but I suspect that most of them would make the same argument.

[kofh2u]

Yes elysian, I like that definition of marriage as a covenant. Why does a sacrament involve a physical element? I'm United Methodist, and I've never heard that idea before.

Unfortunately, so many Christians (both Catholic and Protestant) do take marriage much more lightly than they should. Our divorce rate is embarassing! A byproduct, perhaps, of an increased level of selfishness among our society, in my opinion.

DIVORCE!
That's the embarrassment?

THE CHURCH OF CHRIST OUGHT DIVORCE THE INSTITUTION OF MATRIMONY.

What the church pretends is Marriage condons the real cultural process in action.

Regardless of church recommendations, what plainly IS courtship/marriage/divorce speaks gor itself. These are the components of the pagan Institution of Matrimony in our western culture.

The whole process begins in adolescence. Our children anticipate entrance into a pagan fite which is tacitly accepted in a taboo of silence, regardless of sermons.

Here, in the waiting period before narriage, adolescence, we see social problemd directly associated eith how we culturally progress from single childless people to coupled parents. This waiting period is now @16 years, the average age of first marriages now age 28.

STD, to include AIDS, is a minor problem compared to 1,500,000 abortions each year.

These are by single, unmarried, white girls under the age of 24. (Two or more abortions by the same girl helps keep these figures high enough to support a billion dollar medical industry.)

The black community is either moral, or finds abortion more costly, welfare more lucrative, and shame inappropriate.

Paganism:
While this is repugnant to the religious community, the church nevertheless holds the Institution of Matrimony in a sacramental place in our society, either overtly in their church doctrine, or, more subtly, in their unanimous defense and recommendation of it.

In spite of those who see the Institution of Matrimony as exclusively the property of single heterosexuals, the system already was/is/has been immoral.

Long before the issue of gay inclusion, a culturally supported highly promiscuous courtship period, identical to Roman Paganism, has long been a part of institutional process leading to marriage. How is this not Paganism in practice with marriage the ends in a church?

Though the church has and will, here, distance itself from the evils of this paganistic Courtship, the path that our culture uses which leads to matrimony, the church will defend it!
Overtly or subtly, the Christian community will evidence FAITH in a broken down institution, hold the Institution of Matrimony in a sacramental place in its doctrine or practice. They will argue that it doesn't have to be this way if people would act Christian, say no, abstain.

But, these good men, Christians, will let evil prevail by doing nothing, except condon the ends, a first, second, third marriage... in church.

Now we see singles waiting until age 28 before taking vows. Jesus specifically instructed against vows, and his recommendations cause second thoughts concerning marrage in the mind of his own disciples.

The whole pagan ritual is tied to the beast of economic realities,$$$, money, the realm of Mammon.
Parent see this as wise, a way to make sure what their daughter gets is a good deal. College and jobs and such is what is under consideration.

This 16 year wait (supposedly) offers time to experience a sexual freedom. This sexual freedom is known to terminate in marriage, where bookshelves on the subject testify to no sex after marriage.

During this adolescent, a 16 year period, between the ages of 12-28, the girls have the license to drive the boys crazy.

They, in effect, direct the economic system. From this chase and competition, the culture initiates shopping into a pastime.
"Shop 'til you drop" is the mantra of our women who, by clever choices, have made men subconsciously cater to a subservience in general.

The men in the end are pagan worshipers of Baalzebub, God of Gardens. We see tgem, too, on their expensive lawns and gardens which they work and mow. Like Priapus, pot bellied, chained by their fences, so as not to wander too far from the Hacienda of Mega Mortgage. Pagans before matrimony, pagans after, Sunday church not withstanding.

What we need, what the Christian church ought supply, is a social statement, a turn of 360 degrees, one whole revolution.

The New Testament prediction is about to become true. Deny prophecy all you want, the hand writing IS on the wall:

Rev. 17:16 And the ten horns which thou sawest upon the beast, TEN SUCCESSIVE POLITICAL POWERS, these shall hate the whore, THE INSTITUTION OF MATRIMONY, and shall make her, SEXUALLY DEVIANT, YET SEXLESS, and ADULTEROUS, and FAILED WITH DIVORCE, and LITIGIOUS.

[Mujibur]

I'd respond to this, but I don't know what you are saying. Are you saying that marriages are pagan, and the church shoud abandon them? What are you basing your comments on?

[Pilgrim]

Yes that was realy hard to follow and didn't seem to really address the thread topic.

Protestant theology considers sacraments to be those things specifically commanded of Christ of all members of the community of faith. Marriage does not fall into that category.

There is a real difference there in the way in which protestants and catholics understand sacrament. Catholics believe that real grace is imparted at the sacraments. That is to say, there is a saving nature to the sacraments. Which is why divorce is such a big deal. You not only lose grace but you are denied access to the grace offered at Communion.

For protestants the sacraments do not impart grace in a salvific way. In the sacraments we feel that we are lifted in mystery into the real presence of God but not that the sacraments in and of themselves impart to us special grace.

So for us marriage is a covenant as has been stated before. It is yet another way in which we try to reflect God and God's character here on earth.

[themuzicman]

Okay, thanks for the replies.

The reason I ask is because Catholicism attempts to maintain the traditional marriage against all modern "innovations", including contraception, expanded divorce laws, and gay marriage. It seems this is best done through a sacrmental understanding of marriage as a tri-partite union between man, woman, and God for the purpose of raising children.

If "divorce" weren't winked at through the lense of "annulment" (like the marriage was never consumated after three kids.. Riiiight....) you might have some standing, but a rose by any other name....

Michael

[rocketman]

If "divorce" weren't winked at through the lense of "annulment" (like the marriage was never consumated after three kids.. Riiiight....) you might have some standing, but a rose by any other name....

Michael

No argument there. But then again, annulments weren't rubberstamped through before VatII...used to be at 10% the number of Catholic legal divorces pre-VatII. Unfortunately, we have weak bishops in the the USA church (AmChurch) and all they care about is not being a nusance to the secular authorities and people's wishes. If they'd only grow some backbone...sheesh.

We faithful Catholics need to take our Church back from those bootlickers.

[Pilgrim]

I was under the impression that it was still pretty hard to get an anullment. That they were still pretty rare.