Marriage Rejuvenation?

[TK Burk]

Originally Posted by Aquila

We had a "Quaker wedding" with friends and family. Afterwards we began considering the civil the marriage option and I began calling her my fiancé again.

Since you two chose a "Quaker Marriage", why did you return afterward to calling your wife your "fiancé "? Wasn't the QM a real marriage?

[Evang.Benincasa]

Originally Posted by TK Burk

Since you two chose a "Quaker Marriage", why did you return afterward to calling your wife your "fiancé "? Wasn't the QM a real marriage?

His marriage was illegal.

This guy is a mess.

My question is, why in heaven's name did this flake post his naked waffle eating in marriage rejuvenation? He wasn't even married to his girlfriend. This is the same guy who runs all over this forum giving advise. Sweet love of God, who is he kidding. He left the apostolic church and became preaching material. Good grief.

[Evang.Benincasa]

Originally Posted by Aquila

We had a "Quaker wedding" with friends and family. Afterwards we began considering the civil the marriage option and I began calling her my fiancé again.

Aquila?

Were you legally divorced when you had the Quaker Wedding? Is that the reason you weren't legally married to your girlfriend in the first place?

[Aquila]

Originally Posted by TK Burk

Since you two chose a "Quaker Marriage", why did you return afterward to calling your wife your "fiancé "? Wasn't the QM a real marriage?

There is an entire thread on marriage licensing wherein Quaker tradition is covered in more depth. Traditionally Quakers refused to participate in civil marriage licensing in both England and the United States. Their marriage customs also do not have an officiant. The couple stands before friends and family declaring their desire to marry. A clearness committee counsels them and a date is set. At the wedding, the couple stands together before friends and family and gives their "promises" (Quakers don't perform oaths or vows). They exchange rings (sometimes) and sign a Quaker marriage certificate. If the couple wishes to have their marriage filed with the government, they have a committee member file paperwork with the state. If not, the are considered married in God's eyes and it's done. The clearness committee helps them attain all necessary powers of attorney, wills, etc., to secure most rights of couples in a civil marriage, but the union isn't contracted with the state. They also handle their divorces in house, thereby obeying Paul's admonition not to go before unbelieving courts (I Corinthians 6:1-8).

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."

Today, some Baptist and other fundamentalist churches have similar arrangements that have become known as "Quaker Marriages", based on origin. Some call them "Covenant Marriages" seeing that they are not civil contracts but spiritual covenants.

http://www.truthinliving.org/Marriage_Covenant.php

http://ncrenegade.com/education/how-...out-a-license/

http://www.mercyseat.net/marriagelicense.html

So, a Quaker marriage is indeed a real marriage. However, it isn't necessarily a civil marriage under government authority and bound by the civil laws and definitions of the state.

[Aquila]

Originally Posted by Evang.Benincasa

His marriage was illegal.

What law was broken?

You're confusing "illegal" (legally prohibited) with "private" (as in, without state involvement).

Quaker marriages, covenant marriages, sovereign Christian marriages, commitment ceremonies, etc. are all terms for such unions.

Oh, these marriages become legally binding in states that still recognize marriage under common law, which is older than civil marriage, which really want popular until after the Emancipation. Remember, the primary reason states began requiring a civil marriage license was to prohibit mixed marriages. When a mixed couple applied for license, they were denied. Mixed couples didn't win the right to the civil marriage license until 1963, Loving s. Virginia.

[TK Burk]

Originally Posted by Aquila

There is an entire thread on marriage licensing wherein Quaker tradition is covered in more depth. Traditionally Quakers refused to participate in civil marriage licensing in both England and the United States. Their marriage customs also do not have an officiant. The couple stands before friends and family declaring their desire to marry. A clearness committee counsels them and a date is set. At the wedding, the couple stands together before friends and family and gives their "promises" (Quakers don't perform oaths or vows). They exchange rings (sometimes) and sign a Quaker marriage certificate. If the couple wishes to have their marriage filed with the government, they have a committee member file paperwork with the state. If not, the are considered married in God's eyes and it's done. The clearness committee helps them attain all necessary powers of attorney, wills, etc., to secure most rights of couples in a civil marriage, but the union isn't contracted with the state. They also handle their divorces in house, thereby obeying Paul's admonition not to go before unbelieving courts (I Corinthians 6:1-8).

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."

Today, some Baptist and other fundamentalist churches have similar arrangements that have become known as "Quaker Marriages", based on origin. Some call them "Covenant Marriages" seeing that they are not civil contracts but spiritual covenants.

http://www.truthinliving.org/Marriage_Covenant.php

http://ncrenegade.com/education/how-...out-a-license/

http://www.mercyseat.net/marriagelicense.html

So, a Quaker marriage is indeed a real marriage. However, it isn't necessarily a civil marriage under government authority and bound by the civil laws and definitions of the state.

I am familiar with the Quaker Marriage, but thanks for the info.

But your response did answer what I asked you, which is this:

Since you two chose a "Quaker Marriage", why did you return afterward to calling your wife your "fiancé "? Wasn't the QM a real marriage?

[Aquila]

Originally Posted by TK Burk

I am familiar with the Quaker Marriage, but thanks for the info.

But your response did answer what I asked you, which is this:

Since you two chose a "Quaker Marriage", why did you return afterward to calling your wife your "fiancé "? Wasn't the QM a real marriage?

I tended to call her my fiance on occasion when we began to seriously consider a civil marriage. So, there was no nefarious agenda involved.

[TK Burk]

Originally Posted by Aquila

I tended to call her my fiance on occasion when we began to seriously consider a civil marriage. So, there was no nefarious agenda involved.

I'm still not sure what you mean.

If you were "married" according to Quaker custom, wouldn't that make your fiancée now your wife? If that is true, why would you ever return to calling her your "fiancée"?

I've known a few couples that were married in a courthouse who later had a second "church wedding." None of those men went back to calling their courthouse-married-wives their "fiancée."

Since you admittedly returned to calling her "fiancée," did you stop seeing her as your wife until after your civil marriage?

Have the two of you had your civil marriage? If so, do you still "on occasion" call her your fiancée? If not, why? What would be different now that wasn't back during your Quaker marriage?

[Aquila]

Originally Posted by TK Burk

I'm still not sure what you mean.

If you were "married" according to Quaker custom, wouldn't that make your fiancée now your wife? If that is true, why would you ever return to calling her your "fiancée"?

I've known a few couples that were married in a courthouse who later had a second "church wedding." None of those men went back to calling their courthouse-married-wives their "fiancée."

Since you admittedly returned to calling her "fiancée," did you stop seeing her as your wife until after your civil marriage?

Have the two of you had your civil marriage? If so, do you still "on occasion" call her your fiancée? If not, why? What would be different now that wasn't back during your Quaker marriage?

The Quaker wedding was beautiful in its simplicity. And knowing that we were not entangled in the civil marriage system gave us much peace. And we were very much secure in our faith and understanding of being in covenant in God's eyes after the Quaker tradition. However, after Christina's father died and her mother had to work out some legal complications in order to begin receiving a portion of his Social Security, Christina began to have some concern because she won't be able to receive any Social Security from me upon my passing. So, we began tossing around the possibility of going downtown and getting a "civil marriage". During that period we felt like we were in limbo. At times we felt especially blessed to be in a covenant marriage, but at other times we felt that maybe we should consider a civil marriage. And I even proposed a second time to try to cheer her heart, telling her that if she felt the civil marriage was necessary, I'd gladly take her to be my fiancé again. We it was a gushy moment, but that's how that evolved. In the context of our consideration of civil marriage, I called her my fiancé. However, I also never ceased to call her, or consider her, my wife.

Although it is an entirely different tradition, ancient marriage custom is similar in its interchangeable terms. For example, when a couple were betrothed to marry they were said to be espoused or betrothed to one another, or they could also be addressed as husband and wife, even though they were not formally married yet.

So, one can dig up my words to throw stones if they like. I guess I just didn't make a big deal out of it either way.

[Evang.Benincasa]

Originally Posted by Aquila

What law was broken?

You're confusing "illegal" (legally prohibited) with "private" (as in, without state involvement).

Quaker marriages, covenant marriages, sovereign Christian marriages, commitment ceremonies, etc. are all terms for such unions.

Oh, these marriages become legally binding in states that still recognize marriage under common law, which is older than civil marriage, which really want popular until after the Emancipation. Remember, the primary reason states began requiring a civil marriage license was to prohibit mixed marriages. When a mixed couple applied for license, they were denied. Mixed couples didn't win the right to the civil marriage license until 1963, Loving s. Virginia.

You are a hustler. Plain and simple. You had your "Quaker Marriage" and then after a while you start calling her your fiance' again? Chris, the calling her your finance later is the issue. That's the joke, what is even funnier, is that we get to see you fabricate an entire circus act to get around what you got caught in. Bro, you are the sorriest liar I have ever has the misfortune in holding a discussion with.

Were you not divorced from your first wife?

Therefore you came up with an idea to have a make believe marriage outside of a license? Hey, people do that all the time. They don't get a legal divorce, and they end up shaking up with their new found woman. So, were you LEGALLY divorced from your wife when you had the "Quaker Wedding?"

Again, the big water melon drop is that you started calling your new WIFE your fiance again?

Chris, people must talk to you and turn right around and walk away.

Here, you sadly have a captive audience.