Sunday Service at 10:30am
Rev. Mark J.T. Caggiano
26 Suffolk Road
Chestnut Hill, MA 02467

With This Ring

January 19, 2025

Isaiah 62:1-5; John 2:1-11

“Everyone serves the good wine first and then the inferior wine after the guests have become drunk. But you have kept the good wine until now.”

I have always loved that line. I love it because it is unexpected. I love it because it is basically a joke smack dab in the middle of the Bible. And I love it because it gives me one of the very few decent Bible passages for a wedding.

You might imagine that the Bible would be chock full of deep and meaningful bits of wisdom about marriage. And your imagination would have failed you. The Bible is oddly not the best place for finding advice about marriage.

What does it mean to get married? What does it take to have a good marriage when sadly that is not always how marriages turn out? What does marriage involve as a religious tradition? And how should we think about marriage as it has changed as an institution over the centuries? Lots of questions. But first, a little more about the Bible’s complicated lessons about marriage.

If you were an alien from another planet visiting Earth and you were to read passages only from the Ancient Hebrew scriptures about marriage you might come away thinking that if one wife is good, more wives are better. And that is because many key Biblical figures had more than one wife at any one time. I am not saying that is okay, or to encourage the practice, but to set the scene for our discussion.

For example, Jacob, also known as Israel, had two wives and two hand maidens. Hand maidens were slaves and they were forced into having relations with their masters, given to a man by his wife if she was unable to bear children—meaning bear sons. This was also true for Jacob’s father Isaac, who had one wife and one hand maiden. And it was true for his grandfather, Abraham, who two women in his life, Sarah and Hagar.

You could have a wife and a hand maiden, but more than a few Biblical men had more. Like Moses, like David. And then there was the record holder King Solomon who had 700 wives (I mean, really). The Hebrew Bible does not entirely encourage or discourage this practice, though people have argued that back and forth over the centuries.

Why this desire to have more than one wife in the Biblical world? Again, it was about having sons. We do not often hear about when people in the Bible have daughters because it seems that was not a primary goal. Sons were needed to work in the fields and to manage the herds of animals. Sons were needed to defend the homestead.

Daughters were a perceived burden because they needed to be married off. That cost money. And if things did not work out in their marriage, they bounced back to their fathers. We see this in the Book of Ruth at the beginning when Naomi is trying to send her daughters-in-law back to their fathers after her two sons die unexpectedly. This understanding of the roles of daughters and sons is the foundation upon which the image of Biblical marriage is based. And, I would argue, it is quite a faulty foundation.

In the time of Jesus, having multiple wives was less common but not unusual. How do we know this? The Romans had to pass special laws for when Jewish men became citizens because the Jewish custom allowed multiple wives, unlike the monogamous Romans. This was clearly the case until at least the 4th century, but there were even examples of this in medieval Europe.

Christians could not have more than one wife and that is likely because Paul wrote against the practice. Mind you that Paul did not really want anyone to get married. He did not want anyone to have sex. Ever. Fun guy, Paul.

Paul thought it would be better if everyone was celibate, which by the way is why Catholic priests and nuns are required to be celibate to this day. Paul wrote that it was better to marry than to burn with passion. And therefore, you should get married because Paul thought people could not otherwise control themselves.

Paul also said that a wife did not have authority over her body, meaning that her husband had a claim over it. To be fair, Paul also said that a husband had no authority over his body either, meaning the wife had a claim to him as well. This was probably the first time in Western antiquity that anyone ever said that a man did not have the right to do whatever he wanted. Paul may have been something of a prude, but to his credit he was repressed equally across the boards.

For Paul and other Christians, marriage was primarily about sex. It was the sole way in which a pious Christian could have sex, at least as taught by the church. The lesson did not always bear much resemblance to reality, however, and once again the balance of freedom generally fell to the men.

Why? Because men could act without consequences. Women, not so much. And this ties in with one of the other primary purposes of marriage: having children. Like the Ancient Israelites, European Christians married to build families. And it was not a sentimental, Hallmark card type of family, but “the tend the fields, churn the butter, defend the household” sort of family. No romance here.

So, when you look through the Bible in search of lovely wedding passages about true love, those passages are few and far between. You could however look to the book known as the Song of Songs, which is an extended poem in the Bible about romantic love.

Arise, my love, my fair one,
and come away;
for now the winter is past,
the rain is over and gone…

My beloved is mine and I am his;
he pastures his flock among the lilies.
Until the day breathes
and the shadows flee,
turn, my beloved, be like a gazelle
or a young stag on the cleft mountains.

Some have argued that the Song of Songs does not belong in the Bible because it is about two people who love each other, who enjoy the bodies of one another. So non-Biblical. Defenders say this book belongs in the Bible, but they argue for its inclusion because it is in fact a giant allegory for the love of God for his people and creation.

I suppose that could be true. But to me, Song of Songs really does seem to be about two young people who love each other. And I am more than okay with that. Because I think the Biblical themes about churning out children on the one hand and become entirely celibate on the other are historical trends that need to be left in the past.

I would be the first to admit that my interpretation of the Bible and these traditions is solely my own. You could pick up a Bible and make different choices. But I would also point out that you cannot choose both traditions. You cannot embrace the many wives and handmaidens of the Book of Genesis and then hold true to the puritanical tendencies of Paul who barely tolerates marriage as a way of taming the incorrigible, lusting hearts of the typical sinner.

Those do not blend well.

What about Jesus? What did he have to say? Not a lot, to be honest. He specifically said that divorce was prohibited. That is a bit of a problem for someone like me getting up here and making declarations about marriage, being personally divorced and all. But I agree with Jesus that divorce should have been prohibited, because divorce in the time of Jesus was terrible.

A Jewish man in the first century could divorce his wife for any reason or for no reason at all. She would be left penniless, as woman rarely had any means of supporting themselves outside of marriage. If they were fortunate, they could go back to their families and live out their lives as lonely spinsters. The husband kept the children, even though sons retained some murky obligation to care for their mothers, who just happened to live somewhere now far afield with her family. It is my theory that Jesus banned divorce because he did not want men to get away with abandoning women who had grown old or who were simply no longer of interest. Once again, Jesus is worth listening to.

Jesus also arguably thought marriage was between one man and one woman and that was it. No messing around, nothing extracurricular, which was a distinct difference from both the Roman and Jewish cultures of that time. Romans had strict laws against adultery, but they only applied to someone involved with a married woman. Married men simply needed to look elsewhere. Christian marriage shifted away from the Ancient Israelite model, but it tended to follow the Roman model instead. Adultery was bad—for women. Men were not held to account in the same way, though that view shifted back and forth over the centuries and from place to place.

But women were stuck. They could not generally support themselves in medieval society. There were no jobs or professions open to them. This remained the case for centuries. During the Industrial Revolution, there began to be work available for women in factories, but there were few legal protections for women. They needed a husband or male relative to act on their behalf.

In case anyone thinks that is a matter of quaint ancient history, a federal law was passed in 1988 that prohibited states from requiring women to get male relatives to sign business loans. That was 1988, a mere 37 years ago—I have clothes older than that. And as women gained more rights in society, the outlook for marriage also changed. Women do not need to marry to survive. So instead, they more often married out of choice and, sometimes, not at all.

Some people lament that marriages are more likely to end in divorce these days. They want to make it more difficult to get a divorce, often with some of the Biblical arguments I mentioned in the back of their minds. Conversely, one might argue it should be a lot harder to get married. Maybe there should be rules for that, like required classes or screening panels or something-something. As an actual marriage professional, I have thoughts on this.

Depending upon where you are assessing the problem with marriage in the United States, you might be surprised to discover that rates of marriages and divorces differ geographically. For example, the rate at which people get married is higher in most southern states than it is in most northern states. Massachusetts is on the lower end of this scale, with notably fewer marriages in comparison. However, the rate at which people get divorced is also different regionally, again with many southern states having higher divorce rates than northern states–Connecticut is for some reason on the high end. No theories on that one.

But there is another important statistic about marriage, the age when someone gets married. People in many southern states and states like them (i.e. states that also tend to be religiously more conservative) on average get married at earlier ages. And if we overlap age, marriage, and divorce, you might come away with the idea that people who get married at younger ages are more likely to get divorced. And that seems to be the case. According to one study, people who get married at age 20 are 50 percent more likely to get divorced than someone who gets married at age 25.

We are now zeroing in on my theories about marriage. In my 15 years of performing marriages, I have never married anyone under the age of 25. I will also observe that I have never married anyone who did not live together for a year or more. And, to my knowledge, only one of these marriages performed by yours truly has ended in a divorce. I claim no credit, but note the trend.

Why do you think “waiting” 5 years, between 20 and 25, matters so much? Because people have had a chance to figure out their pathways in life, to stabilize their sense of self. And they have taken the time to get to know the person they wish to marry. Because marriage is now a choice, not a survival tool. And 25-year-olds make better and more enduring decisions than 20- year-olds. Honestly, I would tell a pair of 20 years olds that I would not marry them, knowing full well they could go to the town hall and get married that same day. Why? Because I have a record to protect.

What is marriage about? What is marriage for?

Historically it was about having children. It was about building up what was essentially an economic unit to operate in harsh societies against the whims of misfortune. Marriage was a bunker mentality as people protected themselves against the world. We see this in a Bible passage from the Book of Ecclesiastes: “And though one might prevail against another, two will withstand one. A threefold cord is not quickly broken.”

A threefold cord–what is the third cord in a marriage? Traditionally, the third cord was God. A man and a woman weaving together their lives with God as the true binding power.

I still think that is important, though I tend to shade the meaning a little differently when I am writing my wedding homily. I do not say God is the third cord, but that love is the third cord. And yet, for any of you have heard more than one of my sermons, you will realize that when I am endlessly talking about love, I am always really talking about God. Because God is love (that’s in the First Letter of John by the way, if you are looking for the Bible passage).

For me, that is what marriage is about: love. Love and the relationship that grows out of love. I say grows out of because, to be honest, the gooey, sticky, lovey-dovey aspects of love can only take you so far in life and in marriage. The hormones wear off eventually, but the friendship, the partnership, the companionship of marriage is what hopefully grows from it. That is what matters.

That is why getting married at 25 is better than 20. Because when you are 20 you still believe that love is all you need, no thanks to John Lennon. When you are 25, you realize that love at age 20 looks a lot different from love at age 25. Building a relationship is what is most important in planning to marry and in being married.

Notice, I do not mention children. Not because I do not think children are important, but because marriage cannot only be about children. And if someone is having a child without being married, I must confess to you that I am not going to be outraged or up in arms at the prospect. Because having a child is a wonderful thing. And having two people raise a child is wonderful as well. But forcing together two people because of some tradition is a recipe for a bad relationship and a quick divorce. And all those statistics bear out my theory.

In most of my wedding services, there is one Bible passage that is generally used. And it is not the one about turning water into wine or even the threefold cord. It is this one: Love is patient; love is kind; love is not envious or boastful or arrogant or rude. It does not insist on its own way; it is not irritable or resentful; it does not rejoice in wrongdoing, but rejoices in the truth. It bears all things, believes all things, hopes all things, endures all things. Love never ends. 

That passage is a frequent flyer at weddings, which is odd because it has nothing to do with getting married. That is how we are supposed to be with everyone in our lives. We are supposed to love everyone, though we often struggle to love just the handful that we know. And you might imagine it would be easiest to love our spouses. That is the idea, but the practice of loving sometimes takes a bit of work.

Which is why I offer all my couples some advice about getting and staying married. And, as I’ve mentioned, my track record is pretty good so far. Anyway, you need to do two things, just two things to have a good marriage and a good life together. You do not even need to write them down because they are very, very simple. You need to listen and laugh.

Listen and laugh.

If you listen to someone, truly listen, you will hear what is going on in his or her world. You will understand them a little better. But you cannot listen if you stop paying attention. You cannot listen if you think yourself right all the time.

Listening is extremely hard to do because it requires you to be patient, to be kind, to not be envious or boastful, arrogant or rude. It requires you to give someone the chance to speak even when you feel like you deserve to do the talking, even if you think that you have heard it all before. It requires you to stop being excited or irritated long enough to be a part of a conversation.

Laughing is equally important. Sometimes you will forget the birthday present on your way to the party. Sometimes it will slip your mind that your anniversary is next week. Sometimes you will do something silly or annoying and sometimes your spouse will do something silly or annoying. You have to laugh because things will go wrong. You have to laugh because life is not perfect and neither are the people in it. You have to laugh because that is the only way, the only way, to let someone know that they are truly forgiven.

My other advice to marrying couples is to have a little fun once in a while. Be hard working but never become hardheaded about it. There will always be plenty of work waiting for you on life’s journey, so plan for some diversions together along the way. And, as you make choices about what to do in your lives, make them together. This way, when you do what you love, you can remember who you love. This will all take time, but there is no sense hurrying.

Marriage takes work, but it should not be work. And you should not take it all too seriously, especially when it is really serious. You will be much less stressed out. You might even be happy once in a while. This does not mean you should live a frivolous life, just that married folks should try to live together with humor and joy. You need to recall the simple pleasures of life. Simple and sweet and funny, just like love should be.

Marriage can mean a lot of different things. It can follow the Biblical models, which are complicated and illegal in most states. It can follow Roman or medieval traditions, which somehow lingered into the late 20th century.

Or marriage can be about building a relationship. A relationship of mutual love and respect, one in which you listen and laugh with each other. Because everyone likes to be heard. And pretty much everyone loves to laugh.

There is no great secret to being married. It simply takes a lifetime of working together. Amen.

 

 

 

Lord, make me an instrument of your peace.
Where there is hatred, let me sow love;
where there is injury, pardon;
where there is doubt, faith;
where there is despair, hope;
where there is darkness, light;
and where there is sadness, joy.

O Divine Master, grant that I may not so much seek
to be consoled as to console;
to be understood as to understand;
to be loved as to love.
For it is in giving that we receive;
it is in pardoning that we are pardoned;
and it is in dying that we are born to eternal life. Amen.

0 Comments

Add a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *