The order of Service for the SOLEMNIZATION OF MATRIMONY

Lighting the Candles

The parents may each light one of two candles from which later the couple will light their unity candle.

Seating of Parents

Involving parents in the service brings a special blessing and lifts up the continuity of the generations. The groom’s father acts as best man. The parents of the groom could accompany him in, and the parents of the bride accompany her. Grandparents could be included in this also, as honored guests.

Call to Worship

Dearly beloved, we are gathered here in the presence of God to join together this Man and this Woman in Holy Matrimony, which is an honorable estate, ordained of God unto the fulfilling and perfecting of the love of man and woman in mutual honor and forbearance, and in the hallowing of the home, and therefore it is not by any to be taken in hand lightly or thoughtlessly, but reverently, discreetly, soberly, and in the fear of God. Into this holy estate these two persons come now to be joined. Therefore, if any one of you can show any just cause why they may not lawfully be joined together, let him/her now speak, or else hereafter for ever hold peace.

Invocation Prayer

Let us pray.

O God, who in Thy loving kindness does both begin and perfect all good things; grant top this Man and this Woman that, as by Thy holy inspiration they make their vows before Thee at this time, so by Thy grace they may be able to perform the same; through Jesus Christ our Lord. Amen.

Charge to Bride and Groom

I require and charge you both, in the presence of God, that if either of you know any impediment why you may not be lawfully joined together in Matrimony, you do now confess it. For be ye well assured that so many as are joined together otherwise than God’s word doth allow, are not joined together by God; neither is their Matrimony lawful in His sight.

The Pledge/Betrothal

¶ The Man shall then say, as required by law, in the presence of the Authorized Person or Registrar, and two Witnesses,

* I do solemnly declare that I know not of any lawful impediment why I, A.B., †[1] may not be joined in Matrimony to C.D. ††[2]

¶ In like manner, the Woman shall say, in the presence of the same Persons,

* I do solemnly declare that I know not of any lawful impediment why I, C.D., ††

may not be joined in Matrimony to A.B. †

¶ If no impediment be alleged, the Minister shall say unto the Man, A.B.,

Wilt thou have this Woman to thy wedded Wife, to liove together according to the law of God in ht holy estate of Matrimony? Will you love her, comfort her, honour and keep her; and, forsaking all other, keep thee only unto her, so long as ye both shall live?

The Man shall answer,

I will

¶ Then shall the Minister say unto the Woman,

C.D.,

Wilt thou have this Man to thy wedded Husband, to live together according to the law of God in ht holy estate of Matrimony? Will you love him, comfort him, honour and keep him; and, forsaking all other, keep thee only unto him, so long as ye both shall live?

¶ The Woman shall answer,

I will.

¶ Then may the Minister say,

Who giveth this Woman to be married to this Man?

¶ The Father or Friend shall answer,

I do.

The Wedding Vows

¶ Then the Minister shall cause the Man with his right hand to take the Woman by her right hand, and to say after him in ht presence of the Authorized Person or Registrar, and two Witnesses,

* I call upon these persons here present to witness that I, A.B., † do take thee, C.D., †† to be my lawful wedded Wife, to have and to hold from this day forward, for better for worse, for richer for poorer, in sickness and in health, to love and to cherish, till death us do part, according to God’s holy law; and thereto I give thee my troth.

¶ Then shall they loose their hands; and the Woman, with her right hand taking the Man by his right hand, shall likewise say after the Minister, in the presence of the same Persons,

* I call upon these persons here present to witness that I, C.D., †† do take thee, A.B. † to be my lawful wedded Husband, to have and to hold from this day forward, for better for worse, for richer for poorer, in sickness and in health, to love and to cherish, till death us do part, according to God’s holy law; and thereto I give thee my troth.

Exchange of Rings

¶ Then shall they again loose their hands; and the Man shall give unto the Woman a Ring, first laying the same upon the book. And the Minister, taking the Ring, shall deliver it unto the Man, to put it upon the fourth finger of the Woman’s left hand. And the Man, holding the Ring there, shall say,

With this Ring, a token and pledge of the Vow and Covenant now made between me and thee, I wed you, in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Ghost.

The Woman may give to the Man a Ring, using the same form of words.

Wedding Prayer

Then, the Minister having joined their right hands, shall say,

Forasmuch as A.B., † and C.D., †† have consented together in holy wedlock, and have witnessed the same before God and this company, and thereto have pledged their troth either to other, and have declared the same by giving and receiving of a Ring, and by joining of hands; I pronounce that they be Man and Wife together, in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Ghost.

Those whom God hath joined together let no man put asunder

God the father, God the Son, God the Holy Ghost, bless, preserve and keep you; the Lord mercifully with His favour look upon you; and so full you with all spiritual benediction and grace that ye may have life everlasting. Amen.

¶ Then, all kneeling, the Minister shall say,

O Eternal God, Creator and Preserver of all mankind, Giver of all spiritual grace, the Author of everlasting life; send Thy blessing upon these Thy servants, this Man and this Woman, whom we bless in Thy Name; that thy may faithfully live together and may surely perform and keep the vow and covenant between them made, and may ever remain in perfect love and peace together, and live according to Thy laws; through Jesus Christ our lord. Amen.

Unity Candle

¶ As the candle is let by the couple the Hymn is sung

Hymn

O Perfect Love, all human thought trancesending,

Lowly we kneel in prayer before Thy throne,

That theris may be the love which knows no ending

Whom Thou for evermore dost join in one.

O perfect Life, be Thou their full assurance

Of tender charity, and steadfast faith,

Of patient hope, and quiet brave endurance,

With childlike trust that fears nor pain nor death.

Grant them the joy which brightens eartly sorrow;

Grant them the peace which calms all earth’s rife;

And to life’s day the glorious unknown morrow

That dawns upon eternal love and life. Amen.[3]

Scripture Readings

1Corinthians:13:4-8, 13

Love suffereth long, and is kind; love envieth not; love vaunteth not itself, is not puffed up, doth not behave itself unseemly, seeketh not her own, is not easily provoked, thinketh no evil; rejoiceth not in iniquity, but rejoiceth with the truth; beareth all things, believeth all things, hopeth all things, endureth all things. Love never faileth. Now abideth faith, hope, love, these three; but the greatest of these is love.

In addition to the scriptures, classical and contemporary literature provides many passages whose theme of love and marriage are appropriate for a Christian wedding.

Pronouncement

Theme: Successful Family

COMMUNICATION IN MARRIAGE

The elements of communication are talking, listening and understanding.

Communication problems:

ILLUSTRATION
One of the key problems in communicating is making yourself understood. A placard frequently seen posted on office walls reads:
“I know you believe you understand what you think I said, but I’m not sure you realize that what you heard is not what I meant.”[4]
We often do think we understand what our spouse is saying, but often what we heard is not what he/she means at all.

Someone has pointed out that man has one mouth and two ears and that this is probably a good indication of the fact that man has been designed to do more listening and less talking.

Young married couples should begin their life together by keeping open, at all costs, the lines of communication. However, it often happens that communication lines are down. These breaks in communication are often a result of one of two things:

1. Husband or wife not being able or willing to talk about what’s happening in his/her life.
2. Marriage partners not really listening when the other talks.

James 1:19 “...Everyone should be quick to listen, slow to speak and slow to become angry.” (NIV)
“....It is best to listen much, speak little,......” (TLB)

Too many of us are ready talkers, but we have little or no desire to listen. Yet one of the keys to a successful marriage is wanting to hear your spouse out. This will help to build your spouse’s self-esteem. (A person’s self-esteem is his overall judgement of himself - how much he likes his particular person). When a spouse’s self-esteem is high, he/she will feel important, wanted and loved and as a result will be a better marriage partner..

Effective Listening/....

Strong communication lines can only exist where there is real listening. Listening intently with one’s mouth shut (except for responding periodically to show that you are indeed listening) is a basic communication skill needed in marriage.

Think about your own communication habits.
- Do you really listen to your spouse?
- How much of what is said by your spouse do you hear?


THE POWER OF WORDS

Words can and do hurt a person.

Words can help or harm a partner; heal or wound; build up or break down.

Ephesians 4:29 “Do not use harmful words, but only helpful words, the kind that build up and provide what is needed, so that what you say will do good to those who hear you “ (GNB)

Proverbs 18:21 “Death and life are in the power of the tongue” (NASB)

You can help your partner experience life by using the right words and so build his/her self-esteem or you can be responsible for causing death in your partner to the extent that he/she feels utterly worthless and withdraws into a shell.

Job 19:2 “How long are you going to trouble me, and try to break me with your words?” (TLB)

Think before you speak
Husbands and wives should not just blurt out whatever they are thinking or feeling.

Proverbs 29:20 “Do you see a man who speaks in haste? There is more hope for a fool than for him” (NI V)
The Christian partner is able, through the grace of God and the strength which the Holy Spirit gives us, to choose words that are kind and suitable for the time and purpose. For,

“if you want a happy, good life, keep control of your tongue, and guard your lips...” (TLB)

Wait for the right time

Let love be your guide as to where and when you share bad news or discuss a difficult subject with your partner. E.g. Sharing bad news with your spouse first thing in the morning when he/she wakes up would put a definite damper on your spouse’s day. Speaking the right words at the right time will enhance dialogue between you and your spouse.

Proverbs 25:11 “Timely advice is as lovely as golden apples in a silver basket” (NASB)

Proverbs 15:23 “How wonderful it is to say the right thing at the right time” (NASB)

TAMING THE TONGUE

James 3: 1-12
Jas 3:1 Not many of you should presume to be teachers, my brothers, because you know that we who teach will be judged more strictly.
Jas 3:2 We all stumble in many ways. If anyone is never at fault in what he says, he is a perfect man, able to keep his whole body in check.
Jas 3:3 When we put bits into the mouths of horses to make them obey us, we can turn the whole animal.
Jas 3:4 Or take ships as an example. Although they are so large and are driven by strong winds, they are steered by a very small rudder wherever the pilot wants to go.
Jas 3:5 Likewise the tongue is a small part of the body, but it makes great boasts. Consider what a great forest is set on fire by a small spark.
Jas 3:6 The tongue also is a fire, a world of evil among the parts of the body. It corrupts the whole person, sets the whole course of his life on fire, and is itself set on fire by hell.
Jas 3:7 All kinds of animals, birds, reptiles and creatures of the sea are being tamed and have been tamed by man,
Jas 3:8 but no man can tame the tongue. It is a restless evil, full of deadly poison.
Jas 3:9 With the tongue we praise our Lord and Father, and with it we curse men, who have been made in God’s likeness.
Jas 3:10 Out of the same mouth come praise and cursing. My brothers, this should not be.
Jas 3:11 Can both fresh water and salt water flow from the same spring?
Jas 3:12 My brothers, can a fig tree bear olives, or a grapevine bear figs? Neither can a salt spring produce fresh water.

Verse 3-4 Husbands and wives can steer their marriage in the direction they want it to go! Christian couples should guard their tongues so that their marriages may be steered in the direction that will bring glory to God.
Verse 5 Marriage can be irreparably damaged through one remark or continual criticism, insults or blaming one another.

Verse 8 James continues to highlight the difficulty of taming the tongue. Every spouse must work hard at controlling his/her tongue so that it becomes a gentle organ, full of praise and blessing rather than a restless evil, full of deadly poison.

SEEK TO UNDERSTAND

When husbands and wives become concerned about their partner’s interests and ideas and not just their own, they will be making great strides towards understanding each other.
Seeking to understand your mate will build his/her worth, dignity and value. (Also do your best to speak in such a way that your partner can understand what you are saying.) Amen

Benediction

The Grace of our Lord Jesus Christ, and the love of God, and the fellowship of the Holy Spirit, be with us all. Amen.

Presentation of the Couple

"May I be the first to introduce Mr. and Mrs. _______" the pastor say this as the couple faces the congregation.

Participation of the Congregation

A wedding is not a private act. Even when it is small, a group gathers to signify their support and to add their blessing. A wedding in our church involves a congregation of people who, in a sense, surround you with Christian love. It must be understood that a Christian Wedding is not a performance or a show, it is an act of worship by God’s people. Thus it is appropriate to include those gathered for the service as more than merely onlookers. This can be done through the singing of hymns, or more specifically through a litany or response in which those gathered add their affirmation of your marriage covenant. Those who love you appreciate having an opportunity in worship to somehow speak or show this love, beyond just attending and bringing a gift

Music

Worship Order Prepared By: Ajay Varghese, BD II

---

[1] A.B † represents the Bridegroom

[2] C.D. †† represents the Bride

[3] Words: Mrs. Dorothy B.Gurney, 1883

Music: Joseph Barnby, 1890

[4] (Communication, Key to your Marriage by Norman H. Wright,)

Theological anthropology

resurrection of the body in the context of theological anthropology

Before beginning to develop this subject, it should be recalled that the truth about the resurrection had a key meaning for the formation of all theological anthropology, which could be considered simply as anthropology of the resurrection. As a result of reflection on the resurrection, Thomas Aquinas neglected in his metaphysical (and at the same time theological) anthropology Plato's philosophical conception on the relationship between the soul and the body and drew closer to the conception of Aristotle.(1) The resurrection bears witness, at least indirectly, that the body, in the composite being of man as a whole, is not only connected temporarily with the soul (as its earthly "prison," as Plato believed).(2) But together with the soul it constitutes the unity and integrity of the human being. Aristotle taught precisely that, (3) unlike Plato. If St. Thomas accepted Aristotle's conception in his anthropology, he did so considering the truth about the resurrection. The truth about the resurrection clearly affirmed, in fact, that the eschatological perfection and happiness of man cannot be understood as a state of the soul alone, separated (according to Plato: liberated) from the body. But it must be understood as the state of man definitively and perfectly "integrated" through such a union of the soul and the body, which qualifies and definitively ensures this perfect integrity.

At this point my reflection is on the words spoken by Christ about the resurrection.

1. "When they rise from the dead, they neither marry nor are given in marriage" (Mk 12:25). These words have a key meaning for the theology of the body. Christ uttered them after having affirmed, in the conversation with the Sadducees that the resurrection is in conformity with the power of the living God. All three synoptic Gospels report the same statement, except that Luke's version is different in some details from that of Matthew and Mark. Essential for them all is the fact that, in the future resurrection, human beings, after having reacquired their bodies in the fullness of the perfection characteristic of the image and likeness of God—after having reacquired them in their masculinity and femininity—"neither marry nor are given in marriage." Luke expresses the same idea in chapter 20:34-35, in the following words: "The children of this age marry and are given in marriage, but those who are accounted worthy to attain to that age and to the resurrection from the dead neither marry nor are given in marriage."

Definitive fulfillment of mankind

2. As can be seen from these words, marriage, that union in which, according to Genesis, "A man cleaves to his wife, and they become one flesh" (2:24)—the union characteristic of man right from the beginning—belongs exclusively to this age. Marriage and procreation do not constitute, on the other hand, the eschatological future of man. In the resurrection they lose, so to speak, their underlying principle. "That age," of which Luke spoke (20:35), means the definitive fulfillment of mankind. It is the quantitative closing of that circle of beings, who were created in the image and likeness of God, in order that, multiplying through the conjugal "unity in the body" of men and women, they might subdue the earth. "That age" is not the world of the earth, but the world of God, who, as we know from the First Letter of Paul to the Corinthians, will fill it entirely, becoming "everything to everyone" (1 Cor 15:28).

3. At the same time "that age," which according to revelation is "the kingdom of God," is also the definitive and eternal "homeland" of man (cf. Phil 3:20). It is the "Father's house" (Jn 14:2). As man's new homeland, that age emerges definitively from the present world, which is temporal—subjected to death, that is, to the destruction of the body (cf. Gen 3:19, "to dust you shall return")—through the resurrection. According to Christ's words reported by the synoptic Gospels, the resurrection means not only the recovery of corporeity and the re-establishment of human life in its integrity by means of the union of the body with the soul, but also a completely new state of human life itself.

We find the confirmation of this new state of the body in the resurrection of Christ (cf. Rom 6:5-11). The words reported by the synoptic Gospels (Mt 22:30; Mk 12:25; Lk 20:34-35) will ring out then (that is, after Christ's resurrection) to those who had heard them. I would say almost with a new probative force, and at the same time they will acquire the character of a convincing promise. For the present, however, we will dwell on these words in their pre-paschal phase, referring only to the situation in which they were spoken. There is no doubt that already in the answer given to the Sadducees, Christ revealed the new condition of the human body in the resurrection. He did so precisely by proposing a reference and a comparison with the condition in which man had participated since the "beginning."

Renewed in resurrection

4. The words, "They neither marry nor are given in marriage" seem to affirm at the same time that human bodies, recovered and at the same time renewed in the resurrection, will keep their masculine or feminine peculiarity. The sense of being a male or a female in the body will be constituted and understood in that age in a different way from what it had been from the beginning, and then in the whole dimension of earthly existence. The words of Genesis: "A man leaves his father and mother and cleaves to his wife, and they become one flesh" (2:24), constituted right from the beginning that condition and relationship of masculinity and femininity, extended also to the body, which must rightly be defined as conjugal and at the same time as procreative and generative. It is connected with the blessing of fertility, pronounced by God (Elohim) when he created man "male and female" (Gn 1:27). The words Christ spoke about the resurrection enable us to deduce that the dimension of masculinity and femininity—that is, being male and female in the body—will again be constituted together with the resurrection of the body in "that age."

Like the angels

5. Is it possible to say something more detailed on this subject? Beyond all doubt, Christ's words reported by the synoptic Gospels (especially in the version of Luke 20:27-40) authorize us to do so. We read there that "Those who are accounted worthy to attain to that age and to the resurrection from the dead...cannot die any more, because they are equal to angels and are sons of God" (Matthew and Mark report only that "They are like angels in heaven"). This statement makes it possible above all to deduce a spiritualization of man according to a different dimension from that of earthly life (and even different from that of the beginning itself). It is obvious that it is not a question here of transforming man's nature into that of the angels, that is, a purely spiritual one. The context indicates clearly that in that age man will keep his own human psychosomatic nature. If it were otherwise, it would be meaningless to speak of the resurrection.

The resurrection means the restoring to the real life of human corporeity, which was subjected to death in its temporal phase. In the expression of Luke (20:36) just quoted (and in that of Mt 22:30 and Mk 12:25), it is certainly a question of human, that is, psychosomatic nature. The comparison with heavenly beings, used in the context, is no novelty in the Bible. Among others, it is said in a psalm, exalting man as the work of the Creator, "You have made him little less than the angels" (Ps 8:5). It must be supposed that in the resurrection this similarity will become greater. It will not be through a disincarnation of man, but by means of another kind (we could also say another degree) of spiritualization of his somatic nature—that is, by means of another "system of forces" within man. The resurrection means a new submission of the body to the spirit.

Bibliography

Carolyn Osiek, David L Balch, Families in the New Testament World, Westminister John Knox Press, Louisville, Kentucky USA.

Jenson W. Robert, Systematic Theology Vol 2, The Works of God. Oxford University Press, NewYork 1999.

Westermann Claus. Creation SPCK London, 1971.

FROM YOUR STUDY OF GENESIS CH 1-11, WHAT ARE THE WAYS IN WHICH GOD RELATES HIMSELF TO CREATION AND HUMAN BEINGS? IT’S ENDURING VALUE FOR TODAY’S WORLD

Introduction

“The texts of Genesis chapter 1-11 contribute to what might be called a relational model of creation. That is, both God and the creatures have an important role in the creative enterprise, and their spheres of activity are interrelated in terms of function and effect. It seems clear that God is not just independent and the creatures just dependent. God has shaped the created order in such a way that there are overlapping spheres of interdependence and creative responsibility shared between Creator and creature. At the same time, God is God and freely brings into being that which is not God. A deep dependence of the creatures upon the Creator for their existence and continuing life is apparent and creatures can be assured that this God is unalterably committed to their continuing life and will be deeply immersed in that life for the sake of a new creation.”[1]

“God does more than speak and act. In evaluating, God sees, indeed experiences that which has been created and is affected by what are seen, thereby revealing an ongoing relationship of consequence with that which has been created.”[2]

“This portrayal of God, the creator of heaven and earth, leading all the animals one by one, and then the woman, to a face to face meeting with the Adam is truly remarkable. This activity suggests the image of God as a servant: God the Creator places the divine self at the service of the “good” of the human being, indeed at the service of creaturely creativity. God’s role is the placing of various creative possibilities before the human being, but it is the creature that is given the freedom to decide. God so values human response that God will take into account the free human response from within the creative process in shaping the future.”[3]

“God involves the human in creational tasks; God walks in the garden and engages the human; God ameliorates judgment (4:15); God suffers a broken heart (6:6); God limits the divine options in relating to sin and evil (8:21-22). And readers are not yet to Abraham!”[4]

“Development and change are what God intends for the creation, and human beings are charged with intra-creational development.”[5]

“This perspective is testimony to a fundamentally relational understanding of the way in which God acts in the world. There is an ordered freedom in the creation, a degree of openness and unpredictability, wherein God leaves room for genuine human decisions as they exercise their God given power. Even more, God gives them powers and responsibilities in such a way that commits God to a certain kind of relationship with them. This entails a divine constraint and restraint in the exercise of power in relation to these agents. They overdid it!”[6]

“In this concluding chapter, I draw on some biblical texts that relate to this human vocation, but I think it is finally important to speak of a mutuality of human vocation and nonhuman vocation.”[7]

“All creatures, of course, are deeply dependent upon God for their existence and continuing life. At the same time, God has freely chosen to establish an interdependent relationship with the creation, with respect to both origins and continuation and with overlapping spheres of responsibility. Indeed, God has freely chosen to be dependent upon both human and nonhuman in the furtherance of God’s purposes in the world.”[8]

Creation and Redemption

“This divine creative activity is an indispensable for the later work of redemption, without which there would be no people to redeem. God’s redemptive work does not occur in a vacuum: God’s work in creation provides the basis for God’s work in redemption; God’s work in redemption fulfills God’s work in creation.”[9]

“Egypt is considered a historical embodiment of cosmic forces of evil, threatening to undo God’s creation.”[10]

“God’s redemption is an overcoming of anti-creational forces at every level, including the cosmic.”[11]

“Redemption as well as distinguishable continuing creative acts (e.g. in the wilderness) are the means; creation or new creation is the end. Redemption is the service of a creational end, ultimately a new heaven and a new earth (Isa 65:17; cf. 2 Cor 5:17)”[12]

“The redemptive victory of God frees the creation to become what God intended. Redemption, for all its decisiveness, does not cancel out the becoming character of creation, a becoming in which God continues to be active as the creator of the world. The gift of God in the wilderness, by which God enables new life and growth for Israel and the nonhuman order, are the initial stages of the history of God’s continuing creative giving to the community on its way.”[13]

Freedom

“Israel’s God is intensely and pervasively present in the created order but in such a way that God allows the creation to be what it was created to be without strict divine control.”[14]

“The kind of relationship God established with the created order necessarily entailed risk; genuine relationships always entail risks (at least pre-eschaton). What creatures do with their God given freedom makes a difference regarding the course creation will take.”[15]

“God has freely chosen to share the continuing process of creation with the creatures, especially human beings.”[16]

“The creation is a highly dynamic reality in which the future is open to a number of possibilities and creaturely activity is crucial for the becoming of the creation.”[17]

“In conclusion, God’s way into the future with this creation is dependent at least in part on what human beings do and say. This state of affairs brings human responsibility brings human responsibility to the forefront of the conversation.”[18]

In ch. 3 we will seek to show that the Genesis texts made this point, namely, that there is a temporal distinction between creation and the entrance of sin into the life of the world.”[19]

Sin and Evil

“At the same time when sin and evil do enter into the life of the world, they do not become constitutive of what it means to be human (or any other creature). That means that we are not so permeated with sin and evil that we cannot name such forces or work against them. At the same time, it needs to be said that evil is a powerful reality in the world and has become systemic, built up over time into the very infrastructure of creation. Reclamation of creation will be necessary.”[20]

“I claim that to designate this reality as ‘evil’ is not supported by the text; yet, in some sense ‘chaos’ persists. A key to considering this issue is the divine command to ‘subdue the earth’.”[21]

“W. Sibley Towner is right to say (also calling attention to Job 38-41): ‘If there were no freedom in this creation, no touches of disorder, no open ends, then the moral choice, creativity, and excellence could not arise. The world would be a monotonous cycle of inevitability, a dull-as-dishwater world of puppets and automatons.’”[22]

“The traditional interpretation closely links sin and death, commonly formulating an ontological change: humans who are not immortal become mortal. Most scholars now conclude that the text makes no such claim; I would agree, given certain clues.”[23]

“I would speak of death in two ways, as the experience of death within life and as realized mortality. If human beings were created immortal, the tree of life would have been irrelevant. Death per se was a natural part of God’s created world. Yet, the tree of life was a potential vehicle for receiving some form of ongoing life. Now, even in sin, this remains a possibility (3: 22). So God makes a further move beyond death within life, namely, exclusion from the tree, so that their mortality is realized. The upshot of this interpretation is that Paul’s understanding of sin and death in Rom 5:12-21, while developing these themes beyond the scope of the story, is right to read the story from an etiology of the full reality of death, if not mortality per se.”[24]

“The effects of sin and its aftermath are now extended to the cosmic sphere, first in 6:1-4 and then in the flood itself. The first text has never been satisfactorily explained by interpreters.”[25]

“In sum, Genesis 3 witnesses to an originating sin that begins a process, an intensification of alienation, extending over chapters 3-6, by which sin becomes “original” in the sense of pervasive and inevitable, with effects that are cosmic in scope.”[26]

“Mindful of their created status, they are still called to be co creators with God, in and through whom God will work. Divine activity does not entail human passivity in working toward God’s goals for creation. Human beings become sinful and this development darkens everything they say and do, but they remain God’s good creation, in the divine image, with the same call to responsibility (3:22-24; 5:1-3; 9:1-7).”[27]

“Make no mistake, sin has the effect of breaking down harmonious relationships at multiple levels; it creates divisions between human beings and God, among human beings (men and women, siblings, parents and children), between human beings and the land (‘thorns and thistles’), and within oneself (shame). Sin adversely affects the spheres of family and work, of culture and community (4:17-24), of national life (chs 10-11), indeed the larger creational order (the flood). In fact, sin is so deep-seated that “every inclination of the thoughts of their hearts was only evil continually” (6:5); even the flood does not change that (8:21). Yet, human beings can act against such inclinations (4:7; cf. Deut 30:11-14) and decide for that which is life-giving rather than death-dealing. This tension regarding human beings who are both good and sinful, including both chosen and non-chosen will pervade the texts in Genesis 12-50.”[28]

Diversity

“God counters these efforts by acting in such a way - confusing languages - that they have no choice but to scatter and establish separate linguistic communities. God thereby promotes diversity at the expense of any kind of unity that seeks to preserve itself in isolation from the rest of creation at risk.”[29]

“The genealogies and stories of these outsiders demonstrate the extent to which God’s life-giving and life-preserving work in creation extends well beyond the borders of the chosen family.”[30]

“At the same time, the Egyptians treat the chosen family is such a way that their lives are preserved and they are able to develop as a community in an alien land (47:27); their grieving of Jacob’s death (50:7-14) witnesses to possible relationships that can be developed between the chosen family and outsiders. Given this basically positive portrayal of the Egyptians, readers will have difficulty demonizing them when they come to the book of Exodus. These texts clearly witness that God has been at work among the Egyptians for good. Such is the activity of the Creator God.”[31]

“But especially noteworthy are the stories of God’s speaking relationship with outsiders such as Hagar (Genesis 16; 21), Laban (Gen 30:27; 31:24, 29), Abimelech (Gen 20), and the dreams of Egyptians (Genesis 40-41).”[32]

“Divine election does not entail having a corner on participation in the goodness of God’s creation.”[33]

God and humans create together

“Both human and nonhuman creatures are called to participate in the creative activity initiated by God.”[34]

“The common notion that the Creator is completely external to the creation, perhaps in the interests of avoiding pantheism, amounts to a concealed deism.”[35]

“Unlike the view of other ancient Near Eastern creation texts, human beings were placed in Eden, not to serve the Gods but to serve the creation.”[36]

“The creation accounts demonstrate that God chooses not to act alone in bringing the creation into being. While God is certainly the initiator and primary actor in creation, God certainly involves both the human and the nonhuman in the continuing process of creation; it is important to stress that human beings are not unique in having the powers of creative activity.”[37]

“The very first words that God speaks to the newly created human beings assume the gift of power and its (potential) exercise: be fruitful, multiply, fill the earth, have dominion, subdue the earth (1:28). Given the imaging of God we have discerned up to this point, these words of commission should be interpreted fundamentally in terms of creative word and deed and not domination or violence. God’s relationship with the world is such that God, from the beginning, chooses not to be the only one who has creative power and the capacity, indeed the obligation, to exercise it. God certainly takes the initiative in distributing this power to the creatures and God is the one who invites their participation in the use of power. But, having, done so, God is committed to this way of relating to them in such a way that forfeiting or suspending this role is not a divine option. God is a power sharing God, and God will be faithful to that way of relating to those created in the divine image.”[38]

“God remains in the process (see Ps 139:13) but not in a micromanaging way so that human decisions or actions do not count or potentially random events cannot wreak havoc (e.g. the randomness of the gene pool). Humans will do the procreating, not God! Reproduction is a responsibility that human beings have in order to be the image of God they were created to be.”[39]

Conclusion

Genesis 1-2

“For all the importance of historical and literary work on Genesis 1-2, interpreters should not forget that these texts are most basically the product of a community of faith engaged in theological reflection on creation: God is the primary subject in these accounts. This is true of both creation accounts in their own way, as we shall see.”[40]

“Some twenty images of God the Creator can be discerned in Genesis 1-2"[41]
The following are images discussed by the author:

Creator
Maker
Potter
Builder
Architect
Speaker
Surgeon
Molder of Existing Matter
Evaluator
Consultant of Others
Victor
King

“The common notion that the Creator is completely external to the creation, perhaps in the interests of avoiding pantheism, amounts to a concealed deism.”[42]

“After each creative act (except day two) God responds to that which has been created: ‘And God saw that it was good.’”[43]

“Notably, God does not remain removed or uninvolved with the creation once the creature comes into being. God does more than speak and act. In evaluating, God sees, indeed experiences that which has been created and is affected by what are seen, thereby revealing an ongoing relationship of consequence with that which has been created.”[44]

“The ‘let us’ of Gen 1:26 (and the following ‘our’) images God as inviting that which is not God to participate in the creation of human beings; and the ‘us’ (also in Gen 3:22; 11:7; Isa 6:8) is commonly understood to be a reference to divine or semi divine beings of the heavenly realm or divine council/assembly (see 1 Kgs 22:19; Job 38:7; Ps 8:5-6; Isa 6:1-8; Jer 23:18-23). The creation of humanity is thereby shown to be the result of a dialogical act -- an inner-divine consultation -- rather than a monological one. Such an understanding has immense significance for how one views the stature of the human being.”[45]

“In response to arguments for God as king, it should be stressed that no specific monarchial language for God is used in Genesis 1-2 or associated with the image/likeness language of 1:26-27. Moreover ‘image of God’ is never used of a king in the Old Testament (so the only evidence comes from ‘outside the text’), and creation in the image of God is not found in the texts with royal connections.”[46]

“Genesis 1 stresses this divine initiative, imagination, transcendence, and power in a way that Genesis 2 does not. The placement of Genesis 1 suggests that these divine characteristics should stand at the beginning and in the foreground in any discussion of creation. Yet, no simple or static hierarchy emerges, as there is already a leaning toward Genesis 2 in some features of Genesis 1.”[47]

Bibliography

Bolton Davidheiser, Evolution and the Christian Faith, Presbyterian and Reformed, Phillipsburg, N.J., 1969, 1971.

Henry Morris, The Bible Has the Answer, Creation-Life Publishers, San Diego, Ca., 1971.

John Whitcomb, The Early Earth, Baker Book House, Grand Rapids, Mi., 1972.

Paul R. Sponheim, “Sin and Evil,” in Christian Dogmatics ed. Carl E. Braaten and Robert W. Jenson; Philadelphia: Fortress, 1984.

Paul R. Sponheim, The Pulse of Creation: God and the Transformation of the World Minneapolis: Fortress, 1999

Robert Benedict, Journey Away from God, Fleming-Revell, Tappan, N.J., 1972.

---

[1] Henry Morris, The Bible Has the Answer, Creation-Life Publishers, San Diego, Ca., 1971. pp.27

[2] Ibid., 40

[3] Ibid., 57

[4] Ibid., 109

[5] Ibid., 140

[6] Henry Morris, The Bible Has the Answer, Creation-Life Publishers, San Diego, Ca., 1971. pp. 163

[7] Ibid., 269

[8] Ibid., 270

[9] John Whitcomb, The Early Earth, Baker Book House, Grand Rapids, Mi., 1972. pp. 112

[10] Ibid., 124

[11] Ibid.

[12] Ibid., 126

[13] Ibid.

[14] Robert Benedict, Journey Away from God, Fleming-Revell, Tappan, N.J., 1972. pp. 23

[15] Ibid., 69

[16] Ibid.

[17] Ibid., 277

[18] Ibid., 278

[19] For a thoughtful reflection on the range of creation thought, using biblical resources, Paul R. Sponheim, The Pulse of Creation: God and the Transformation of the World (Minneapolis: Fortress, 1999), 18-21.”

[20] Paul R. Sponheim, “Sin and Evil,” in Christian Dogmatics (ed. Carl E. Braaten and Robert W. Jenson; Philadelphia: Fortress, 1984), 1:385-403.” Pp.13

[21] Paul R. Sponheim, “Sin and Evil,” in Christian Dogmatics (ed. Carl E. Braaten and Robert W. Jenson; Philadelphia: Fortress, 1984), 1:385-403.” Pp.44

[22] Ibid.

[23] Ibid., 76

[24] Ibid., 77

[25] Ibid

[26] Ibid., 79

[27] Ibid., 93

[28] Paul R. Sponheim, “Sin and Evil,” in Christian Dogmatics (ed. Carl E. Braaten and Robert W. Jenson; Philadelphia: Fortress, 1984), 1:385-403.” Pp.298

[29] Paul R. Sponheim, The Pulse of Creation: God and the Transformation of the World Minneapolis: Fortress, 1999. pp. 89

[30] Ibid., 92

[31] Ibid., 96-97

[32] Ibid., 102

[33] Ibid., 103

[34] John Whitcomb, The Early Earth, Baker Book House, Grand Rapids, Mi., 1972.pp. 38

[35] Ibid., 39

[36] Ibid., 47

[37] Ibid., 48

[38] Ibid., 49

[39] Ibid., 50

[40] Bolton Davidheiser, Evolution and the Christian Faith, Presbyterian and Reformed, Phillipsburg, N.J., 1969, 1971. pp. 31

[41] Ibid., 36

[42] Ibid., 39

[43] Ibid., 40

[44] Ibid.

[45] Bolton Davidheiser, Evolution and the Christian Faith, Presbyterian and Reformed, Phillipsburg, N.J., 1969, 1971. pp. 42

[46] Ibid., 47

[47] Ibid., 271

The Role of the Church in Society

Introduction

Why is there a Church? The Church exists in every society. One can travel the world and find the Church in every one of the over 200 sovereign nations that exist today. Why?[1]

Every society, which honors basic human rights, has a role for the Church and the Society. In this segment what is the role of the Church in society. In another segment what will be the role of the Society. The Church and the Society should always be found together.

The Church Endures While Societies Come and Go

The past 20 centuries, the Christian centuries, provide many illustrations of Church and Society relations. I will go into this more later when dealing with the Society, but here it is important to note that the Church has lived with, and under, every form of civil government known to man. Nations and governments come and go. The Church endures; it is the oldest living institution known to man.[2] The Church has a history of some 20 centuries, maintaining the same hierarchical structure, the same doctrine on faith and morals, the same sacramental system, the same Lord and Master. The Church is a living witness to Christ's promise that He would be with us until the end of time (Mt 28:20).

Christ entered into our humanity and into human history when He took on our flesh, by the help of His human mother, Mary. He came among us to save us from our sins. He taught us the ways of God, a way of life that leads to eternal life in the Kingdom of God. He gave us those special helps we need to live the Christian life by giving us the sacraments, especially the Eucharist and the sacrament of Reconciliation. He established His Church to continue His mission on earth throughout the ages, generation after generation, from one culture to another.

Church and Society

What is the difference between the Church and the Society? Why can't we combine the two, or eliminate the one of the other? Recall the Statement of our Lord when the Pharisees asked him if it was lawful to pay taxes to Caesar, or not. He replied: "Render to Caesar the things that are Caesar's, and to God the things that are God's" (Mt 22:17). Clearly there is a difference between Caesar's Society and God's Church. Who gets what? What is the role of the Church and the role of the Society in any society? If a healthy society requires a vibrant Church and an energetic Society, what services do these two provide? What are their distinct functions?

Here is a simple way to explain the different roles of the Church and Society. The Church deals with the eternal order, our eternal salvation, which is to be found ultimately in the Kingdom of God. The Society deals with the temporal order, which is concerned with the here and now, the material well-being of citizens. God made us material bodies and immortal spirits. We are incarnate spirits, and spirit-filled bodies. Both dimensions of our being must be attended to. The spiritual well-being is by far the more important, but we cannot neglect the material needs of our bodied existence.

We are really citizens of two worlds. We live on earth for 70-80 years and then die. We were created to spend eternity either with God in Heaven, or without God in Hell.

The Society looks after our temporal material needs. The Church must be equally concerned about getting us into Heaven, about sharing in God's eternal life. Generations of men and women have passed this way before us and are dead. The only thing that really matters to them now is whether they accomplished the purpose for which they were created.

The Church continues the work of her Lord and Master. She continues His work throughout the centuries. The aspect of the Church which concerns us here is her role as a teacher and moral guide. Jesus gave His authority to teach to His Church: "All authority in heaven and on earth is mine. Go, therefore, and make disciples of all the nations... teaching them to observe all that I have commanded you" (Mt 28: 19-20).

A Religious Mission

"Christ gave His Church no proper mission in the political, economic or social order. The purpose He set before her is a religious one. But out of this religious mission itself came a function, a light, and an energy which can serve to structure and consolidate the human community according to the divine law".[3] Politics and economics, then, are the prerogatives of the Society. How and when does the Church get involved with the activities of the Society?

Church Proclaims the Moral Order

The clearest articulation of this is found in when the world was in the throes of a depression. Pius explains.[4] The Church proclaims the moral order of the human universe. She is to proclaim and explain every aspect of the moral order. The moral order is something like the plan of an architect for a great project. God is the architect, and the human race is His great project. God has a design for His human universe. We are free agents, with intelligence and free will. We can discover the moral order and choose to abide by it, or we can ignore it and make up our own plan. Attempting to improve upon God's moral order is a dangerous undertaking. We have seen many examples of social engineering in this century alone, and know the disastrous results of Nazism, Fascism, and Marxism. [5]

The moral order is based upon the dignity of every human person. That dignity flows out of the fact that each of us is created in the image and likeness of God, with an immortal destiny. All our human rights flow out of this dignity. Only God can give us this dignity, no one else. The Society does not grant us our human dignities; it can only recognize and honor them and help to protect them.

For it is the moral law alone which commands us to seek in all our conduct our supreme and final end,[6] e. g., God, and to strive directly in our specific actions for those ends which nature, or rather, the Author on Nature, has established for them, duly subordinating the particular to the general. If this law be faithfully obeyed, the result will be that particular economic aims, whether of society as a body or of individuals, will be intimately linked with the universal final order, and as a consequence we shall be led by progressive stages to the final end of all, God Himself, our highest and lasting good.

Negative Service

Whenever any component of society, e.g., the economic order, a political system, education, etc., debases human dignity by violating basic human rights, the Church becomes involved. How? By upholding the full truth of the moral order and clearly calling real abuses of this by name. This is a negative, critical service of the Church. We see examples of this when Pius XI, in 1937, wrote encyclicals highly critical of National Socialism in Germany and of atheistic Marxism in Russia. More recently we say Pope Paul VI doing this in his social encyclical On the Development of Peoples (1967), and John Paul II in his On the Social Concerns of the Church (1987). Very often, the Church is the only voice available to the poor and exploited. [7]

Positive Service

Much more important is the Church's positive role in explaining and promoting the various components of a just social order. She does this through her social teaching. This is the role of a social teaching. Whenever the social, political, or economic order touches the moral order, then the Church speaks out of her competency.[8] Since the moral order affects and touches everything in society that has moral implications, the opportunities for the Church to address society are many. Church people do not claim to have the expertise of economists, political scientists, or military strategists. Their strength lies in the moral order. As moral teachers they point to what fosters morality, and what destroys it. Like our Lord, they are a light in the darkness.

The Church is Hierarchical

The Church is a hierarchical organization.[9] She is not a democracy. Some people think that the political order of a country should be the model for the Church, e. g., a democracy in the United States, a one party system in the Soviet Union, and a military dictatorship in Cuba. The Church must live with every form of government know to mankind, but identifies with none of them. Governments are designed by their citizens.[10]

The Church was designed by Christ. Public officials are chosen by the people to perform the service of the Society. The hierarchy of the Church[11] is chosen by God to carry out His work. Because church people (bishops, priests, deacons) teach and act on behalf of Christ Himself, they are accountable directly to Him, not to the people. Priests are not allowed to run for public office, since the art of politics often jeopardizes the clarity of principles which the priest must defend. If a priest were perceived to be defending the alleged right to have an abortion, it would create a terrible scandal. Jesus once took Peter to task. "Get behind me, Satan! You are a hindrance to me; for you are not on the side of God, but of men" (Mt 16:23; Mk 8:33).

The Pharisees once said to Jesus: "Teacher, we know that you are true, and teach the way of God truthfully, and care for no man; for you do not regard the position of men" (Mt 22:16). The hierarchy will have accomplished their mission in life only if they help their people get to heaven. Present popularity with the people is not the best criterion of success. Very often a good bishop or priest must confront sinful practices of their people, and call for conversion. Like parenting, pastoring is a service which usually is not appreciated until many years later.

Conclusion: Church is Both Human and Divine

The Church’s social teaching is found primarily as such when it shares in the teaching authority, or Magisterium of the Church. Jesus promised us that He would remain with His Church until the end of time (Mt 28:20), and that He would send His Spirit to teach us the full meaning of His revelation (Jn 16). A person of faith places great trust in the Church's moral teaching, both in the private and the public spheres.[12] He does so because of the promises Christ made to us. That is why he informs his conscience with the principles of this teaching. [13]

Some people, even some Catholics, look upon the Church and its leaders as mere mortals, frail, fallible human beings, whose opinion are no better than anyone's else's. Here we must be very clear. The Church is both human and divine.[14] It is like our Lord Himself, who while being one divine person, had a human nature as well as a divine nature. The great mystery of the Church is that God chooses to work through human instruments. God reaches us through the humanity of Jesus. We reach God through the humanity of Jesus and through His Church. Jesus is present to us today where He chooses to be found, and that is in His Church where He employs flesh and blood persons in His service. Why do we look to the Church for moral direction? Because she speaks on behalf of Christ, not of herself. She claims Christ's authority, not her own. She is under God's law, subject to it, not above it, or able to change it. The Church is a reliable moral guide. We can sink absolute confidence in her.[15] The Church is human, in that she is made up of people like us. But she is also divine: she is the body of Christ. Christ is the head of the Church. We have every reason to trust in Jesus' promise to His disciples: "He, who hears you, hears me, and he who rejects you rejects me, and he who rejects Me rejects Him who sent Me" (Lk 10:16). This is why the Church exists in every society, and in the world at large.

Bibliography

Amalorpavadass, D.S. Indian Church in the struggle for a New Society. Bangalore: NBCLC, 1981.

Barot, Madeleine. Cooperation of Men and Women in Church, Family and Society. Geneva: World Council of Churches Publications, 1964.

Bridston, Keith R, Foulkes, Fred K and Myers, Ann D. Case-Book on church and society. Nashville: Abingdon Press, 1974.

Castro, Emilio, Shinn, Roger L and Wiesen, Thomas. Church and Society: Ecumenical Perspectives: Essays in Honour of Paul Abrecht. Geneva: World Council of Churches Publications, 1985.

Cooley, Frank L. Indonesia: Church and Society. New York: Friendship Press, 1968.

Coulson, John. Newman and the common Tradition: a study in the language of Church and Society. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1970.

De Souza, Alfred. Church and Society: Sociological Perspectives on lay participation. New Delhi: Indian Social Institute, 1984.

Fergusson, David. Church, State and Civil Society. Cambridge:Cambridge University Press, 2004.

Garvic, Alfred E. Fatherly Rule of God: a study of Society, State and Church. London: Hodder and Stoughton, 1935.

Sullivan, Francis and leppert, Sue. Church and Civil Society: a theology of Engagement. Adelaide: ATF Press, 2003.

Vissert Hooft, W A and Oldham, J H. Church and its Function in society. Chicago: Willett Clark and Co., 1937.

Wolfgang, Grieve. Communion, Community, Society: the Relevance of the Church. Geneva: Lutheran World Federation, 1998.

Articles:

1) Pope Paul VI's Ecclesiam suam (1964)
2) Vatican II document Lumen gentium (On the Church)
3) Vatican II document Gaudium et spes (The Church in the Modern World)
4) Social Justice Review Nov. - Dec., 1989

---

[1] Grieve Wolfgang. Communion, Community, Society: the Relevance of the Church. Geneva: Lutheran World Federation, 1998. pp. 28.

[2] Amalorpavadass, D.S. Indian Church in the struggle for a New Society. Bangalore: NBCLC, 1981. pp.76

[3] The Second Vatican Council (Gaudium et spes 42).

[4] Pius XI's social encyclical, Quadraqesimo anno, promulgated in 1931,

[5] In paragraphs 41-3,

[6] Paragraph 43 of Quadragesimo anno:

[7] John Coulson. Newman and the common Tradition: a study in the language of Church and Society. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1970. pp. 34-46

[8] W A Vissert Hooft, and J H Oldham. Church and its Function in society. Chicago: Willett Clark and Co., 1937. pp. 65.

[9] Alfred E. Garvic, Fatherly Rule of God: a study of Society, State and Church. London: Hodder and Stoughton, 1935. pp. 143-146.

[10] Madeleine Barot. Cooperation of Men and Women in Church, Family and Society. Geneva: World Council of Churches Publications, 1964. pp.45-48

[11] Alfred De Souza, Church and Society: Sociological Perspectives on lay participation. New Delhi: Indian Social Institute, 1984. pp. 76-85

[12] Frank L. Cooley. Indonesia: Church and Society. New York: Friendship Press, 1968.pp. 37

[13] Keith R Bridston, Foulkes, Fred K and Myers, Ann D. Case-Book on church and society. Nashville: Abingdon Press, 1974. pp.42

[14] Castro, Emilio, Shinn, Roger L and Wiesen, Thomas. Church and Society: Ecumenical Perspectives: Essays in Honour of Paul Abrecht. Geneva: World Council of Churches Publications, 1985. pp.176

[15] Sullivan, Francis and leppert, Sue. Church and Civil Society: a theology of Engagement. Adelaide: ATF Press, 2003. pp.16