Each individual married Christian should show serious concern that his or her marriage is honorable in the sight of both God and men. In this connection the question arises, To what extent do human authorities, including political governments and civil authorities, enter the picture? Does the validity of a marriage depend entirely upon its recognition by civil authorities and does their validation determine how Jehovah God, the Author of marriage, views the union?

2. What legal formalities regarding marriage did God’s law to Israel not require?

² In the preceding article we have seen that marriage among people of Hebrew Scripture times was at first a family or tribal affair. When the nation of Israel was formed, God gave them his law, which contained numerous provisions concerning marriage, including prohibitions of incestuous relationships, regulations governing marital duties and similar provisions. (Leviticus, chaps. 18 and 20) There was, however, no requirement that a document or license be obtained from the priesthood in order for a couple to marry, nor that a priestly representative be present at the marriage to validate it. Nor was such the case as regards representatives of the Israelite government. Rather, as long as God’s law was adhered to, the marriage was accepted as valid and honorable within the particular community where the wedded ones lived.

3. Did Israel’s coming under the domination of foreign powers affect the way in which marriage and divorce were handled?

³ In course of time, the nation of Israel came under the domination of foreign powers​—Babylon, Medo-Persia, Greece and Rome. To what extent did this affect the marriage arrangements among the Israelites? From what information history provides, it appears that they continued much as before, this being permitted by the nations dominating them.

4. When registration of marriages was first introduced, what purpose did it serve?

⁴ It is thought that in later Bible times marriages came to be registered, though there seems to be no clear evidence of this. At any rate, it appears that any registering of the marriage came into the picture only after the marriage had been effected. The civil government thus acted as a record-keeper of the fact of the marriage rather than as a judge of the morality of the marriage.

5. (a) What was the situation about licensing marriages in the early centuries of the Christian congregation? (b) When did the civil authorities begin to concern themselves with marriage and marital relationships?

⁵ What was the situation in the early centuries of the Christian congregation? As in Israel, it seems to have continued largely as a family affair. And, as back in Eden and as among the Israelites (and, in fact, most peoples of that time), there was no requirement that some religious or civil authority license the marriage or be present to make it a valid and honorable one.a

⁸ Commenting on the viewpoint of early Christians, Hastings’ Encyclopædia of Religion and Ethics (Vol. VIII, page 435) states: “Marriage is, in the first place, an affair of the family. In the earliest period the Christian congregation regarded itself as a spiritual family, and the life and concerns of every member of the congregation were of intimate interest to the whole body. . . . The testimony of the [church] Fathers, from the middle of the 3rd century onwards, shows that what we should now describe as civil marriages were not unknown, perhaps were not uncommon, but at the same time were strongly discountenanced by the Church.”

9. (a) What conclusion can we draw from the Scriptures and history about civil validation of marriage? (b) Upon what did the honorableness of marriage depend?

⁹ Thus, what evidence is available in the Scriptures and in history indicates that in early times civil marriage or civil validation of marriage did not play a very prominent part. It does not seem to have been a great issue as regards the honorableness of a marriage from the Christian point of view. Apparently the honorableness of a marriage depended most directly upon its acceptance by the Christian congregation as conforming to divine standards, with consideration also being given to attitudes and standards of people in the community where the Christians lived. Like the apostle Paul, Christians would seek to be “recommending [themselves] to every human conscience in the sight of God,” and try to “keep from becoming causes for stumbling to Jews as well as Greeks and to the congregation of God” by ‘doing all things for God’s glory.’​—2 Cor. 4:2; 1 Cor. 10:31, 32.

10, 11. (a) How is it that the civil authorities eventually became involved with marriage and its validation? (b) What view regarding the validity of marriage prevails in strongly Protestant lands?

¹⁰ However, it is a fact that, in more recent times and in many parts of the earth, the relationship of the civil authorities to marriage and its validation has taken on greater prominence. Rightly, Christians must take this fact into account in seeking to keep their marriages “honorable among all.” (Heb. 13:4) In weighing the matter, it is of value to consider how this changed attitude has come about. The Encyclopædia of Religion and Ethics says (page 437; italics ours): “From the civil side marriage is regarded as a legal contract which must be regulated for practical purposes by the State. From the Christian point of view, marriage is a holy estate which the Church may claim to regulate in the highest interests of religion and morality. Experience shows that there must ever be a possibility of conflict between the two jurisdictions, and that, consequently, difficulties in practice may often result. . . . It is in the modern period, since the [Protestant] Reformation, that the question of the two jurisdictions and the proper relations of the one to the other has come into prominence. . . .”b

¹¹ It therefore appears that the validation of marriage by civil authorities has become more of an issue in modern times than was true at any past time in history. At least in strongly Protestant lands the trend has been more and more to view the validity of marriage (and consequently of divorce) as resting almost entirely with the decision of civil authorities. The role of the congregation with regard to the validity of marriage (and divorce) has consequently waned in the eyes of many.

DETERMINING THE VALIDITY OF MARRIAGE

12. Since the civil authority has become involved with marriage and its validation, what questions does this raise for the servant of God?

¹² Faced with such circumstances, what should the Christian do? He certainly cannot ignore the existing state of affairs if he desires his marriage to be honorable “among all.” He cannot ‘turn back the clock’ to the days when civil authorities were not viewed as an important factor in the validation of marriage. However, these questions arise: Is the decision of civil authorities to be viewed as absolute in determining whether a marriage is valid​—either at its beginning or when it perhaps ends through divorce? To what extent is God affected by their decision?

13. Why cannot the view of the civil authority regarding marriage be regarded as absolute? (Acts 5:29)

¹³ In effect, do the civil authorities have the final word as to whether God accepts or rejects the validity of a marriage (or of a divorce)? We can see that if this were so there could be considerable inconsistency as to what is required to gain God’s blessing in marriage. Why? Because the views of civil authorities differ widely from place to place, often being at complete odds with one another and, more importantly, at times being in contradiction of the standards contained in the Bible.

16. How should the State’s authority in determining the validity of marriage be viewed? (Rom. 13:1; 1 Pet. 2:13, 14)

¹⁶ The evidence, then, points to the fact that the civil state’s position in determining the validity of marriage (or divorce) is only relative, while that of God is absolute. To obtain a balanced view of the relative authority of the State (designated as “Caesar” in the Bible) in this matter, it is of benefit to consider just what interest civil governments have in the field of marriage, what they are particularly concerned with, and in what way the Christian can come under obligation toward them in this field.

CAESAR’S INTEREST IN MARRIAGE

17, 18. When it comes to marriage, what has been the chief concern of the civil authorities, and why?

¹⁷ Are civil governments chiefly concerned with moral and religious issues regarding marriage or is their concern related principally to another aspect? We may recall that the earlier-quoted encyclopedia stated that, from the civil side, “marriage is regarded as a legal contract which must be regulated for practical purposes by the State.” This is borne out by the history of governmental legislation relative to marriage and divorce. That history shows that the concern of civil governments has been motivated by their involvement in such matters as inheritance and property rights, particularly when a dissolution of the marriage “contract” (by divorce or death) brings these rights into question. Confirming this as true today, the Encyclopædia Britannica (Macropædia, 1976, Vol. 7, pages 166, 167) says:

“The law . . . is concerned mainly with the rights and duties of husband and wife and parent and child, particularly in questions of financial support.” “In most countries today . . . the legal documentation of a marriage is mainly a registration of the event. So basically, in the legal sense, a marriage is the implied creation of certain rights or obligations such as maintenance, marital property and succession rights, and the custody of legitimate minor children.”

¹⁸ “Caesar” (the political state) has therefore concerned himself with marriage primarily because such legal issues have been brought to his courts for judicial settlement, not because of concern over the religious or moral aspects of marriage. He has also shown concern over the prevention of the spread of disease, particularly venereal disease, and of weakening genetic effects (as among children born to close blood relatives), this again being for “practical purposes.” That is why we find that even antireligious, atheistic governments have legal requirements for granting recognition of a marriage as valid.

19. In view of Jesus’ counsel to ‘pay back Caesar’s things to Caesar,’ what question might be raised about marriage and divorce?

¹⁹ What, then, of Jesus’ instructions to ‘pay back Caesar’s things to Caesar’? In seeking to be obedient to this command, is the Christian congregation called upon to take Caesar’s view of a marriage union or a divorce as the final, decisive, binding factor as to its validity and morality?​—Matt. 22:21.

20. (a) What prompted Jesus’ statement about ‘paying back Caesar’s things to Caesar’? (b) To what extent does this principle have a bearing on a Christian’s marriage?

²⁰ First, it should be noted that the issue provoking Jesus’ words was regarding taxation. Caesar provides many services and deserves to be ‘paid back’ for these. (Matt. 22:17-21) Caesar, however, is not the source of the right to marry. This actually comes from God, the Originator of marriage. (Gen. 1:27, 28; 2:18, 22-24; 9:1; compare 1 Timothy 4:1-3.) Hence, Caesar’s position in this field is not as the final arbiter as to what is morally right and wrong in marriage (or divorce). What Caesar can provide is legal recognition and accompanying protection of marital rights in his court systems. The Christian who wants his marriage to be “honorable among all” rightly desires such provisions to protect the rights and interests of his family. To obtain such recognition and rights he should properly ‘pay back to Caesar’ for these by complying with Caesar’s regulations for receiving them. This may include such things as license fees, the conforming to certain medical examinations, or similar requirements.

21. How should Caesar’s authority in marriage affect a Christian, and why?

²¹ Such repayment to Caesar for the advantages his legal recognition provides does not mean, however, that the Christian loses sight of the fact that Caesar’s authority in marriage is only relative. God is not bound by Caesar’s decisions and may disapprove where Caesar approves, or accept where Caesar rejects. The Christian should rightly give conscientious consideration to Caesar’s marriage and divorce provisions but will always give greatest consideration to the Supreme Authority, Jehovah God. (Acts 4:19; Rom. 13:1, 5) This will assure God’s approval and blessing.

22, 23. Why should a Christian seek legal recognition for his marriage?

²² Thus the Christian appreciates that, even though Caesar’s rulings of themselves are not what finally determines the validity of his marriage in God’s eyes, this does not thereby exempt him from the Scriptural injunction: “Let marriage be honorable among all.” (Heb. 13:4) He is obligated to do conscientiously whatever is within his power to see that his marriage is accorded such honor by all. True, in some lands where a certain race or religion predominates, marriage to anyone not of the predominant race or religion might never be viewed with popular approval. Nevertheless, the Christian should seek whatever legal recognition is possible for him so as to avoid exposing his marriage to adverse criticism or a lowering of it in the estimation of others. (2 Cor. 6:3; 1 Pet. 2:12, 15, 16; 3:16) He wants his marriage to bring honor to the Author of marriage.

²³ Those who wish to become baptized members of the Christian congregation, and who do not have legal recognition of their marital union, should properly be expected to do all that they can to obtain such recognition and registration of their marriage. This will serve to remove any possible doubts as to the honorableness of their union in the eyes of people generally.