CrossCurrents A Catholic Reflects on Faith in Our Times

#152 Bernard F. Swain, Ph.D. www.CrossCurrents.us

Marriage: Business or Sacrament?

I might just as well have written last Sunday’s Boston Globe story myself:

“In a novel approach to the tensions that have accompanied the same-sex marriage debate in many religious denominations, the Episcopal diocese of Massachusetts this month will consider getting out of the marriage business.”–Michael Paulsen

You see, it’s been almost three years since I first wrote a CrossCurrents column suggesting that the Church “get out of the marriage business”—my words exactly—except, of course, I was talking about the Catholic Church!

The context for my remarks was Catholic opposition to same-sex marriage. The context for the Episcopal proposal is some clergy’s controversial support of same-sex marriage – the flip side of my coin. But context aside, I believe a good case can be made for all Churches, and especially ours, to get out of the “marriage business.”

When I say “marriage business,” I really mean three things rolled into one:

The Party: This is the social celebration with family and friends by a couple committing their lives to each other. Such celebrations these days tend to involve an elaborate party costing up to $60,000.00 or more.

The Civil Contract: This is the decision by the couple to enter a legal contract before a civil magistrate, which entitles them (as “spouse”) to certain legal, tax, and other benefits. In most places access to this civil contract is a civil right.

The Sacrament: This happens when a couple decides that, in addition to contracting a Civil Marriage, they will also enter a sacred covenant together through the Sacrament of Matrimony—a sacrament they themselves administer to each other publicly in the presence of witnesses, including an ordained “official witness” of the church.

In American practice, all three events are usually combined in one long gathering that moves from church to a reception space.

This has the effect of blurring the three pieces in many minds. Most people know the difference between the ceremony and reception, but most people overlook the fact that what they saw in church was really two ceremonies at once, the civil marriage and the sacramental one.

And this means that most people also don’t realize that the presiding clergy is playing two roles at once. Not only is he the (1) official witness for the Church, but that he is also acting as (2) an agent of the state.

I call it the “wedding business,” because in fact these combined events have become a major U.S. industry. In 1999 a prominent business journal reported that “U.S. weddings amass $38 billion to $42 billion in sales annually.” Undoubtedly this figure has grown significantly in the current decade.

I know lot of clergy deeply troubled about the church’s participation in this industry. It is a cliché among the clergy I know to say “I would rather do ten funerals than one wedding.” Perhaps the problem is they know too much.

They know that the majority of couples seeking marriage in the Church are already living together.

They know the majority are choosing a church wedding with the flimsiest of motives: often to please parents or simply because a church wedding seems more romantic or yields prettier pictures!

They know most “marriage preparation” programs provide no such thing.

They know the wedding reception gets more attention, care, and spending from most couples for the obvious reason that the party matters more to them than the ceremony or the sacrament.

They know most of these couples will disappear from Church until the Baptism of their first child, and then they’ll disappear again until First Communion time or the next Baptism.

And they know that the divorce rate among Catholic couples is approaching the rates for non-Catholics.

The net result: sacramental Matrimony has become a near-meaningless formality for large numbers of Catholic couples. To me, after more than 30 years in Church work, this abuse of the sacrament seems virtually scandalous. And while our Bishops mount massive public campaigns to thwart any revision of civil marriage, they do next to nothing to address the widespread abuse of the sacrament of Matrimony itself.

In recent years the habit of combining all three marriage pieces – the Party, the Contract, and the Sacrament – has led to even greater problems. It links the Church (via the party) to a consumerist excess that is nothing short of shameful in a country where wealth is more and more concentrated in the hands of the few. And it also links the Church (via the civil contract) to a civil institution being reshaped by forces the church cannot control.

But there is no need for our clergy to act as agents of the state, and as far as I can see, there is no good reason for it other than convenience. In most other western countries , couples marry in two steps. First they go through a legally-required civil ceremony before a civil magistrate. Second, and only if they want to, they may choose the additional option of a church wedding.

We Americans may take our “one step” system for granted, but within the Catholic Church universal it is unusual for Catholics to marry this way. I see no benefit in maintaining our strange “one-step” U.S. customs, whereby the Civil Marriage Contract, and especially the Church’s role as civil agent, have become virtually invisible—as though Civil Marriage and Matrimony were the same thing!

As the Boston Globe story pointed out, this custom goes beyond mere convenience, or even the same-sex marriage controversy, to a basic question about the church’s role in our society:

“This resolution is for us in the Episcopal Church, but I think it will have ramifications for our brethren in other denominations, by raising questions about our acting as agents of the state,” said a sponsor of the resolution, the Rev. Robert (Skip) G. Windsor . Windsor said the resolution really has nothing to do with the same-sex marriage issue, but is about concerns over the separation of church and state.

Contrary to the conventional wisdom, the sacrament of Matrimony is not the historical basis of our marriage practices. Civil Marriage is significantly older than the Church itself, and it has taken different forms in different ages and cultures. We can surely expect that Civil Marriage will continue to take on new and different forms. Some of these will be compatible with Christian faith and practice, but others may not fit our faith so well.

As a sacrament, Matrimony must reflect our teachings beliefs and traditions as Catholics. But Civil Marriage must fit the beliefs of all faiths, and even the beliefs of people of no faith. By playing agent of the state for Civil Marriage, the Church confuses its mission and its people, blurring the boundary between what marriage means for our faith and what it means for our society.

Our young couples, our clergy, and our Church communities will be better off when getting married takes two steps. When it is no longer a question of City Hall or the church, but becomes a matter of going to City Hall and the church, then we will find out how many couples care enough to take both steps. This is certainly the view of the Episcopal leaders proposing a change:

Under the current system, many couples seek to have church weddings because they like the setting...If the church stopped officiating at [civil] marriages, couples that sought a religious ceremony in addition to the civil procedure would be doing so as a reflection of faith.

These Church leaders, unlike our own, seem to have latched onto a practical way to begin restoring the place of faith in marriage. We might do well to follow their example.

© Bernard F. Swain PhD 2006

Send Your Comments and Questions to bfswain@juno.com

Dr. Swain’s opinions do not represent the views of this parish or any other official body.

Bernie Swain has devoted more than 30 years to adult spiritual formation in dioceses in the US, Canada, and France. Since 1991 he has maintained a private practice as trainer, teacher, and consultant to leaders in parishes and other religious organizations. He holds degrees in theology and political science from Holy Cross, Harvard, The University of Paris, and The University of Chicago.

His writings include Liberating Leadership (Harper & Row, 1986) and more than 200 articles in periodicals such as The National Catholic Reporter, Commonweal, The Miami Herald, The Catholic Free Press, The Pilot, Harvard Theological Review, and Liturgy.

A lifelong layperson, he lives in Boston with his wife and three children. Visit his website at:

http://www.CrossCurrents.us

CrossCurrents

Is a weekly subscription service for parish websites.

Individual Subscriptions are also available.

For Information, contact bfswain@juno or call 617-282-0183

#152