I Now Pronounce You Goodwyfe and Goodwyfe
Working my way through Francis J. Bremer's John Winthrop: America's Forgotten Founding Father, I come by this tidbit:"[in the Massachusetts Bay colony,] [m]arriage was rejected as a sacrament and became a civil ceremony performed by local magistrates."
Fascinating. The effect of reading books like Bremer's is always to remind the reader that the history of religion is far less monolithic than one assumes at first glance. We talk about "The Puritans" and "Puritanical Morals" without understanding, or at least acknowledging, that there was no such single thing as "Puritianism." The congregations of Stour were not the congregations of Ely were not the congregations of Delft were not the congregations of Salem. Each group, indeed each Puritan, carried with them their own particular ideas of gospel. Though they agreed on major principals (e.g. predestination, the perfidy of Rome and ceremony, the depravity of the Arminian and Antinomian heresies, the primacy of scripture and the duty of good Christians to be living examples for the unconverted), they disagreed on a million minor points. They were protestants, after all!
I always have to chuckle at modern churches or religious groups who lay claim to the heritage of the Puritans. When you look closely you find funny things that subvert that aim. For example, the fact that opponents of gay marriage who object on religious grounds to that innovation frequently point to the unbroken primacy of Christian marriage under the auspices of church in Western society, (Christian nation, founded by Christians, God God God all the time forever amen etc. etc.) but in Massachusetts - the first and most serious religous experiment attempted by colonists on these shores - marriage was by law a civil ceremony divorced from the church even in 1630, a time when the Massachusetts Bay Colony was 100% Christian crusaders aiming to be a beacon of Godliness to the world and shunning from society those who fell short.
Which, by the way, I never would have suspected.
[wik] I would point out by the way to smarty pantses who would argue that civil society = religious society in the MBC that that simply wasn't true. Church leaders who became civil leaders were asked to resign one or the other posts.
[alsø wik] Am I the master of the run-on sentence with nested dependent clauses, or what? I frigging rule!!!
on
| § 2
§ 2 Comments
[ You're too late, comments are closed ]
You know another thing that's
You know another thing that's often overlooked by proponents of "traditional" marriage, that ancient and holy rite, celebrated and sanctified lo these many centuries?
It's that the ceremony we're used to is a fairly new invention. Historically speaking, up until very recently marriage was at its core a business arrangement.
Suck on that, sanctimonious holy rollers.
Uh, it's still, at its core,
Uh, it's still, at its core, a business arrangement. The distinction is that, if you do it in a church, you can waste a lot more time, money, and stress.
Or so I hear - me and the Missus went to Anguilla and were married at the courthouse. In our shorts and sandals. Just as it should be done.