Few, if any, marriages could conform to Biblical standards

Spectrum/Rev. Howard Bess

I confess. I have some major problems. First, I read. Second, I read the Bible. Third, I actually study the Bible. Fourth, I read "Context," the Martin Marty commentary on religion and culture. Articles from his December 2004, edition have motivated me to organize and write my own commentary about Biblical marriage.

These days we hear a lot about maintaining traditional marriage. The people who talk this way end up making some reference to the Bible. Each time I hear this kind of talk, I suspect that 1.) The person does not read the Bible, 2.) The person certainly does not study the Bible and 3.) Possibly the person does not read.

First, we should recognize how marriage worked in the Bible. Marriage was a union between a man and one or more women. Let's face it. The biggest names of the Old Testament were polygamists - Abraham, Jacob, Moses, David, Solomon. A man owned as many women as he could afford. He owned them in three categories. He owned wives, he owned concubines and he owned slaves. He regularly had intercourse with all the women he owned. He had children by all the women he owned.

Second, adultery was punishable by death. When the Ten Commandments were given, the commandment about adultery had a specific meaning. Adultery occurred when a man had sexual intercourse with a woman he did not own. The sin was not against the woman, not even against his favorite wife. The sin was against the man who owned the woman. It was a very serious matter. The Mosaic law is very clear. Adultery was punishable by death.

To have sexual intercourse with an unowned woman was also serious. The punishment was simple. He had to marry her.

By this standard, Bill Clinton's punishment would not be impeachment. He would have been forced to marry Monica. Move over, Hillary.

Third, divorce is prohibited. What you got is what you get. Jesus really came down hard on this one. The Old Testament allowed a man, if he was unhappy with his wife, to get rid of her by writing a bill of divorcement. However, Jesus rejected that and said that no divorce is allowed, ever!

I know a lot of men who would like to exercise the Old Testament standard. However, Jesus did not hesitate to say "but I say unto you" when he disagreed with Old Testament standards. He cut no one any slack. Divorce was out!

Fourth, women had no say about the selection of a husband. In fact, she did not have a say about much of anything. A woman was owned by her father until title was transferred to a husband. The deal was between two men. Women were property. A woman's place in society was set by the man who owned her. This arrangement is defined in the Old Testament property codes in the book of Leviticus.

The truth is that the standards for marriage, which are usually identified with Christians, have been constantly evolving for thousands of years. In more than 45 years of pastoral responsibilities, I have not known a single person, man or woman, who would commit to Biblical standards for marriage.

In my ponderings, I have wondered just how a marriage amendment to the U.S. Constitution would be worded to fulfill the Bible traditions and standards for marriage. I can't get anything to work. I have concluded that the idea of a marriage amendment should be dropped.

Life would be so much simpler if I stopped reading.

The Rev. Howard Bess is the pastor of Church of the Covenant, an American Baptist Church in Palmer.