Quote:
Originally Posted by shazeep
our law has always allowed that one may ignore legal marriage, out of necessity, i think. So i don't quite get why someone who would ignore an unjust law anyway should care if the law is changed? To God, you are "married" when you consummate a marriage.
|
That's essentially how many understand it. Outsiders sometimes criticized early Quaker couples for "living in sin" because they married each other without priests or ministers. Some couples choose to marry within the meeting without registering their marriages with the government, a tradition dating back to Quakerism's earliest days.
Here are some excerpts from "Faith and Practice": "Quaker Marriage Procedure"...
"Marriage is a sacred commitment of two people to love one another in faithful partnership with the expectation that the relationship will mature and be mutually enriching. Friends know that marriage depends on the inner experiences of the couple who marry and not on any external service or words. Thus, the ceremony in which the couple enter into this commitment is performed by the couple alone, in the presence of God, the families, and the worshiping community. Both the solemnity and the joy of the occasion are enhanced by its simplicity."
"While most Friends’ marriage ceremonies conform to civil law, couples who do not want, or are not eligible to contract a legal marriage occasionally ask for a ceremony of commitment or a wedding under the care of the Meeting. The Religious Society of Friends has long asserted its freedom to conduct under divine leading marriage ceremonies not conforming to civil law."
The point is... not every Christian holds that government involvement is a necessity for a couple to be "married" in the eyes God.