For several years I went to a lot of weddings. I was playing in a musical group which provided pre- and post-wedding music. So I got to see a lot of weddings in a lot of different churches. There were two features which were almost entirely consistent. First, the vows were identical. Second, the ring was addressed as a symbol of undying love, a circle with no beginning and no end, something made of a metal that is imperishable. The ring thing is kind of nice but a little cheesy. How about the identical vows? Those have bothered me for a long time. If men and women are different from each other, if they have different roles in society and marriage, why are they promising exactly the same things?
Hoger discusses Thomas Cranmer's work from 1549, included in the Book of Common Prayer. This service, The Forme of Solemnizacion of Matrimonie has a tremendous impact on us. This is where we get "Dearly beloved, we are gathered here." This is where we get "to have and to hold from this day forward." This is where we get the typical order of events in a wedding ceremony. What are some of the significant aspects of Cranmer's wedding ceremony which could stand to be rediscovered?
1) Cranmer gives us three reasons for marriage: procreation, "a remedie agaynst sinne" and "mutuall societie, helpe and comfort." Oh, I've got to interject that I love the way people spelled in English at this time period! My computer software doesn't seem to think too highly of it.
2) Cranmer has an emphasis against marriage to satisfy our carnal lusts. We are not "brute beasts."
3) In the speech accompanying the ring, Cranmer said "With thys ring I thee wed: thys golde and siluer I thee giue: with my body I thee wurship: and withall my worldly Goodes I thee endowe." He then has a prayer asking God's blessing and mentioning Isaac and Rebekah's exchange of jewelry as a sign of economic alliance. In the intervening years we seem to have lost the idea that marriage is at least in part an economic relationship, as well as one in which we give ourselves wholly to the one we marry. In fact, in the 1549 service, it was quite obvious that the giving of "jewelry to the woman was a statement of material providence" (p. 141).
4) The vows made by couples have changed a great deal. Cranmer's vows for the husband were to love, comfort, honor and keep the wife. The vows for the wife were to obey, serve, love, honor, and keep the husband. These are significantly different vows, and they are in a different order. Recalling the historical meaning of "comfort" we see that the man's role involves love, protection, honor and provision. Protection is high up on the list of things a husband does. It is absent from the wife's role. The husband is to "comfort" his wife though she does not do the same for him. Notice that first and foremost the wife is to obey? This isn't too hard provided the husband keeps his vows. See how the husband is first to love his wife, but the wife is to love her husband but obeying and serving him are ranked above that love? Both lists end with "honor" and "keep" - vows which remain in most wedding services but which many married couples seem to ignore.
Hoger observes that our emphasis on the husband and wife having the same roles tends to erode the idea of gender identity. It opens the door to practices such as homosexual marriage, as well as less oddities of egalitarianism. Rather, we should try to show a distinctively biblical view of gender roles and the nature of marriage when marrying couples.
--
Dave Spotts
blogging at http://capnsaltyslongvoyage.blogspot.com and http://alex-kirk.blogspot.com
No comments:
Post a Comment