|
From time to time, our church is contacted by individuals who want me to
give them my opinion on marriage licenses. I am writing this short article
so that from now on, inquiring people can have their curiosity settled.
But
before I get to the marriage issue, allow me to make a few foundational
points.
As a pastor, I am very concerned, and
adamant, about defending the proper separation of church and state as
defined by the Word of God. In this world, there are two kingdoms, the
church and the state, each with its own sphere of God-delegated
jurisdiction and authority. As a pastor, I have an obligation to defend
the jurisdiction of Christ's church and to be vigilant to do what I am
able to keep the kingdom of this world from intruding into, polluting, and
usurping the jurisdiction of the church. Consequently, one will never find
politicians giving speeches from my pulpit, and you will not find a voter
registration table in the back of our church during election season. Yes,
our members are taught about civil government and its responsibilities and
jurisdictions. They are taught their responsibilities as citizens and do
take a very keen interest in the affairs of civil government, as does
their pastor. And I do not hesitate to frankly address from the pulpit
various issues and personalities of the day in light of God's Word.
Likewise, our members do not hesitate to become involved in political
activity outside the church. Several of our members have run for political
office, and I hope more do in the future, as they feel the Lord's calling
to serve in that area of human endeavor. We would like to see more
Christians in civil government. But the business of the Lord's church is
not political in nature; it is spiritual. For our part, we of Pilgrims
Covenant Church are greatly concerned with our duty to defend the gospel,
contend for the faith, and faithfully defend Christ's crown and covenant.
Because of that concern, Pilgrims Covenant
Church is a non-501(c)(3) and non-incorporated church. This is because we
believe to be otherwise is to violate the jurisdiction of the government
of Christ's church and, in that instance, make Caesar the head of the
church. If we are extremist in this position, then so were some faithful
and fruitful Christians from the colonial and founding era of our nation,
such as Reformed Baptist pastors John Leland and Isaac Backus.
We do not condemn, belittle, or
separate from our brethren who have not yet come to our conviction and
conclusion with regard to the 501(c)(3) or the incorporation status. With
regard to those who have shown themselves faithful in the Lord's service,
we certainly do not question their commitment to our Lord and His church.
Rather, we thank God for them and count it a joy and privilege to
fellowship with them. But we must stand on our conviction; and we do,
thanking the Lord that in America even the tax laws clearly state that a
church need not incorporate or file for a 501(c)(3) status, including for
church members to claim a deduction for their giving. But that is another
issue. The marriage license is the issue at hand.
Years ago, the State of Wisconsin certificate of
marriage did indeed license the pastor as an agent of the
state to perform a marriage in that it required that he fill in and sign
the following: "I, __________ of __________, hereby certify that the
above named groom and bride were by me united in marriage as authorized by
a marriage license issued for that purpose by __________ [county clerk] of __________
[county], State of Wisconsin." The pastor also had to record the marriage license number,
date, place, etc. and fill in this line: "My credentials are filed in
the office of clerk of court __________ County, State of Wisconsin."
I believe that old Wisconsin certificate of
marriage did unlawfully license a pastor as an agent of the state, as the
wording clearly shows. It is a violation of God-delegated jurisdiction and
a usurpation of authority given to church government. However, the
Wisconsin certificate of marriage has been changed, much for the
better. Yes, the government actually changed something for the better and
gave up some power!
The new document requires the marriage
officiant to simply provide his name, title, and address along with the
date when he performed the wedding ceremony and the county where it took
place. He then signs his name to this statement: "I certify
that the above named persons were married before me on the above mentioned
date." In other words, after the fact, at the request of the couple he
has married, the pastor simply attests to the civil government that they
have been united in marriage in the sight of God and man. Thus Caesar has
been notified of a marriage to be accorded all the legal protections and
accountability which is due. The pastor does not have to return the
document; that is up to the newly united couple. Any pastor should be able
to sign such a marriage certificate in good conscience, if asked by the
couple he is marrying to do so, since it is not a license for him to
perform a wedding and is not a violation of the church's God-delegated
jurisdiction.
From time to time persons also ask me what
I think of birth certificates. What I think of them now is what I have
always thought of them. A birth certificate simply notifies civil
government after the fact that a new citizen has been born with all the
rights and privileges due to an American citizen. I do not believe
there is anything wrong with a birth certificate whatsoever. |
