Editor's note: This article is taken
in it's entirety from the website www.policyofliberty.net. I have changed
only the name of YHWH and Yeshua to their rightfull places.
A Case for Evangelical Covenant Marriage
March 21, 2002
John Cobin, Ph.D.
Copyright © 2002 by John Cobin
This brief paper attempts to set forth the biblical and legal rationale
why Evangelical Christians should reject the use of the state marriage
license and favor the use of a marriage covenant.[1] Essentially, the
marriage covenant is formalized in a marital document (or certificate)
that states the vows made publicly, and both the groom and the bride
sign it. In addition, the pastor(s) presiding over the ceremony, and
at least two witnesses (friends) of the groom and two of the bride also
sign the document. For “by the mouth of two or three witnesses
every word may be established” (Deuteronomy 19:15; Matthew 18:16;
II Corinthians 13:1) and “a threefold cord is not quickly broken”
(Ecclesiastes 4:12). As with government-sanctioned marriage (and weddings),
the public ceremony and celebration remain intact, although the preacher’s
words “by the powers vested in me by the state of…” are
eliminated. As a result, there is little visible difference between
the modern state-sanctioned marriage and a covenant-based marriage.
The formal process of marriage is little changed by replacing the government-issued
marriage license with the marriage covenant certificate. That fact should
hopefully serve to set at ease the minds of many traditionalists who
might balk at the notion from the start. An example of a marriage covenant
document is included in the appendix below.
Having set forth the basic idea of covenant marriage, what remains is
to flesh out the idea behind the institution of lawful marriage, the
history of government-sanctioned marriage in the United States, the
modern use of covenant marriages as a marital alternative to government-sponsored
marriage, and why the issue should be important to modern Evangelicals.
Let the reader be careful to note that the kind of marriage heralded
here is not the same thing as the super-governmental “covenant”
marriages legislated in some U.S. states lately (e.g., Louisiana [1997],
Arizona [1998], and Arkansas [2001]).[2] A biblical marriage by covenant
is nothing more than an old-fashioned marriage by public vows. These
vows are recorded in a formal contract or pact and witnessed (signed)
by qualified individuals, just as the marriage bond between Boaz and
Ruth was contracted (in detail) publicly before formal and qualified
witness (Ruth 4:1,10,11).
Who founded the marital institution? What is marriage¾biblically
speaking?
William Smith, in his entry for "Marriage" in Smith's Bible
Dictionary (1901), provides the following helpful synopsis of the origin
and purpose of marriage.
The institution of marriage dates from the time of man’s original
creation. (Genesis 2:18-25). From Genesis 2:24 we may evolve the following
principles: (1) The unity of man and wife, as implied in her being formed
out of man; (2) The indissolubleness of the marriage bond, except on;
the strongest grounds, (comp. Matthew 19:9); (3) Monogamy, as the original
law of marriage; (4) The social equality of man and wife; (5) The subordination
of the wife to the husband. (1 Corinthians 11:8,9; 1 Timothy 2:13);
(6) The respective duties of man and wife…Yeshua and his apostles
re-established the integrity and sanctity of the marriage bond by the
following measures: (a) by the confirmation of the original charter
of marriage as the basis on which all regulations were to be framed
(Matthew 19:4,5); (b) by the restriction of divorce to the case of fornication,
and the prohibition of remarriage in all persons divorced on improper
grounds (Matthew 5:32; 19:9; Romans 7:3; 1 Corinthians 7:10,11); (c)
by the enforcement of moral purity generally (Hebrews 13:4) etc., and
especial formal condemnation of fornication (Acts 15:20).
R. A. Torrey, outlines the theme in The New Topical Text Book (1897).
He notes that marriage was a divinely instituted relationship between
one man and one woman (Genesis 2:24). It is a covenant relationship
(Malachi 2:4) which was designed for the happiness of man (Genesis 2:18),
the increase of the human population (Genesis 1:28; 9:1), raising up
godly seed (Malachi 2:15), and preventing fornication (1 Corinthians
7:2). It is lawful and honorable for all people (1 Corinthians 7:2,28;
1 Timothy 5:14; Hebrews 13:4) but Christians must marry “only in
Yeshua” (1 Corinthians 7:39).[3] Torrey goes on to say that marriage
in the Bible is expressed by a joining together (Matthew 19:6) which
can at times result in the creation of special affinities elsewhere
(1 Kings 3:1). The consent of the parites to be married is also essential
(Genesis 24:57,58; 1 Samuel 18:20; 25:41).[4]
In short, marriage was instituted by YHWH in Paradise when man was in
innocence¾before there was any civil government. It is to be
a solemn, public, contractual relationship entered into voluntarily
by an eligible Christian man and an eligible Christian woman. The state
had nothing to do with valid marriage at its inception and it need not
have anything to do with legitimate marriage now. Furthermore, the state
need not have anything to do with the oversight of the purposes of marriage:
companionship, happiness, procreation, legitimate sexual relations,
and the resulting promulgation of gospel truths to children. It is YHWH
who has established and ordained that marriage¾and its normal
result, the family¾be the cornerstone of all social bonds and
human activity. Therefore, the existence of marriage ultimately depends
neither on the state’s approbation nor its protection of the institution.
Indeed, since marriage is honorable (Hebrews 13:4) and necessary for
a healthy society, prohibition of marriage by the state or a religious
authority is one of the marks of degenerate times (1 Timothy 4:3).
What is a “license” and what is a “marriage license”?
The Merriam-Webster Dictionary defines license as “1 a : permission
to act b : freedom of action 2 a : a permission granted by competent
authority to engage in a business or occupation or in an activity otherwise
unlawful b : a document, plate, or tag evidencing a license granted.”
In general, a license is a certificate or document that grants someone
permission to do something (see Black's Law Dictionary, 4th Edition,
p. 1067), and without such permission the act is deemed to be unlawful.
A marriage license (p. 1124) is “a license or permission granted
by public authority to persons who intend to intermarry, usually addressed
to the minister or magistrate who is to perform the ceremony, or, in
general terms, to anyone authorized to solemnize marriages.”
Immediately, we see two conceptual problems with marriage licensing.
First, marriage is lawful because YHWH said it is lawful, despite any
view of bureaucrats to the contrary. The state has nothing to do with
ordaining marriage or sustaining it as an institution, no matter how
important it deems the institution to be socially. It makes little difference
that the state says a marriage is unlawful apart from its sanction,
any more than if the state were to say that gospel preaching is unlawful
without its sanction. Second, YHWH nowhere ordains the state to oversee
or regulate marriage. The fact that the state has usurped this role
does not legitimize its licensing practices or give it a place in YHWH's
economy for marriage.
Moreover, technically speaking, law is antecedent to the state. Thus,
the marriage law has its origin in something else (i.e., YHWH Himself).
States enact legislation and issue decrees, but neither of these things
can abrogate or modify the law of marriage established by YHWH.
When did civil (state) marriage begin in the United States?
The whole idea of marriage licensing is a relatively new phenomenon.
While states began registering marriages during the nineteenth century,
full-scale licensing did not begin until around the time of the Great
Depression. Complete New York City license records began in 1930. However,
some U.S. counties claim to have begun marriage licensing earlier. For
instance, Platte County, Nebraska’s website notes that “the
first marriage license issued in Platte County was issued in 1858 by
A.B. Pattison.” Without seeing the document, it is hard to know
whether this document was really a license or just a registration. Further
complicating the matter is the fact that Nebraska did not become a state
until March 1867¾nearly a decade later¾and was under federal
jurisdiction at the time the "license" was issued. Similarly,
the Marion County, South Carolina website notes that “The first
marriage license issued in Marion went to Adeline Beal and James C.
Ballard on Nov. 29, 1844. The wedding was performed by John Tucker,
who signed himself ‘Regular Ordained Minister of the Gospel’.”
Likewise, the Anderson County, Texas website says: “John Grigsby
served as the first county clerk of Anderson County. He issued the first
marriage license to James M. Martin and Martha M. Metcalfe, on August
20, 1846.” (Texas had finally become a state a year earlier¾in
1845¾after years of dispute over its admission). Again, these
statements are not conclusive evidence that the documents referred to
were actual licenses where the state granted permission for the couple
to marry, or if they were just some sort of civil registration that
recognized what was sanctioned by the local preacher. By and large,
before the twentieth century, most marriages¾if formally recorded
at all¾were noted in the family Bible or expressed in a formal
marriage covenant.
According to Pastor Matt Trewhella, in his online article 5 Reasons
Why Christians Should Not Obtain a State Marriage License, there were
nineteenth-century marriage licenses granted, but only to people of
different races who wanted to marry. Couples of the same race did not
have to get a marriage license. For instance, Oregon had racial ordinances
regarding marriage licensing in 1862 and 1866. Other states, especially
in the South, had decrees throughout the nineteenth century. It was
this racial “angle” that provided the means to greater government
authority over marriages. Trewhella says, “Give the State an inch
and they will take a 100 miles (or as one elderly woman once said to
me '10,000 miles.') Not long after these licenses were issued, some
states began requiring all people who marry to obtain a marriage license.
In 1923, the Federal Government established the Uniform Marriage and
Marriage License Act (they later established the Uniform Marriage and
Divorce Act). By 1929, every state in the Union had adopted marriage
license laws.”
Is it possible to be lawfully married in the sight of YHWH without a
state marriage license?
One might immediately respond rhetorically to this question by asking
if Abraham, King David, the Prophets Ezekiel and Hosea, the Apostle
Peter, Martin Luther, and George Washington lawfully married? None of
them had a government-issued marriage license. Yet YHWH still deemed
them married men rather than fornicators. A man recently wrote (December
28, 2001) to Ann Landers in the Sacramento Bee regarding his concerns
over the legality of a covenant marriage.
DEAR ANN: My stepdaughter said she was married in August, but neither
I nor her mother was present. Also, she never obtained a marriage license
from the state. Her fiancé’s father, who claims to be a
preacher, performed the ceremony, although I have no idea what church
he is affiliated with. When I told her she needed a state license, she
said they were "married in the eyes of YHWH."
The groom's family thinks this is just fine and dandy, but our family
is hurt and bewildered. They are currently living near his family and
seem happy. Should I accept them as a married couple, even though I
suspect that is not the case? Do I welcome him as my new son-in-law,
even though, legally, he is not related to me? Please tell me what to
do.
¾Confused Stepdad in Kentucky
DEAR KENTUCKY STEPDAD: Welcome him into the family with open arms, and
don't ask any questions. If the couple seems happy, everyone should
be pleased. If, down the road, the legality of the marriage should be
questioned, it will be their problem -- not yours. If ever there were
a time when you should MYOB, this is it.[5]
An Evangelical might offer a more succinct and cogent reply than Lander’s:
“Of course it is possible!” In fact, it is the most appropriate
means (or form) for Christian marriage. Why should the last century
of human history in Western Civilization trump YHWH's design for marriage
that He instituted many millennia ago? Practical theology and Christian
practice are hardly subordinate to modern state mandates. Furthermore,
many if not all of the common law rights pertaining to inheritance,
next of kin, and adopting the husband's surname, can be initiated (if
not obtained) by carefully constructed contractual language in the marriage
covenant document.
Is it sinful for Evangelicals to marry by covenant?
If YHWH ordained the institution apart from the state as good, holy
and useful, then it is not sinful to enter into it. Thus, the 1689 Baptist
Confession of Faith (chapter 25) declares: “Marriage was ordained
for the mutual help of husband and wife, for the increase of mankind
with a legitimate issue, and the preventing of uncleanness. It is lawful
for all sorts of people to marry, who are able with judgment to give
their consent; yet it is the duty of Christians to marry in Yeshua.”
Covenant marriage can provide a legitimate, objective document, and
a ceremony, that indicate that a couple is married. According to Black's
Law Dictionary, 4th Edition (p. 285), a certificate is merely "a
written assurance, or official representation, that some act has or
has not been done, or some event occurred, or some legal formality has
been complied with.” A marriage certificate (p. 1124) is an “instrument
which certifies a marriage, and is executed by the person officiating
at the marriage; it is not intended to be signed by the parties.”
The marriage ceremony is the “form, religious or civil, for the
solemnization of a marriage.” Certainly, a marriage ceremony can
occur and a marriage certificate (covenant document) can be issued through
an Evangelical service of marriage by covenant. Records of these declarations
would be used to evince the lawfulness and validity of the marriage.
It is certainly possible to have a marriage ceremony and to issue a
certificate of marriage that affirm the marriage vows and stipulate
that YHWH's requirements for a lawful marriage have been complied with.
Is state (civil) marriage licensing in reality innocuous (or harmless)
and not worth protesting?
There are several problems that arise on account of government marriage
licensing. Indeed, marital public policy implies far more than a merely
benign registration formality that Christians can participate in without
concern. First, the Oregon Revised Statutes (section 106.210), for example,
says that through a marriage license not only is the marriage “validated”,
but also the children that issue from the marriage are declared to be
“legitimate”. The state in effect grants people the privilege
to reproduce! But YHWH granted people this right (and duty) in Genesis
1:28. The state need not grant a privilege where a divine right already
exists.
Second, under a marriage license (at least theoretically), children
become the produce of a privilege granted by the state. Thus, they come
under the special dominion or care of the state. This aspect might provide
special concern to Evangelicals when considering policies dealing with
spanking and child discipline, the proper age of emancipation from minority,
obedience to parental authority, requirements to attend public schools
(e.g., truancy rules) or to take certain courses, and the control of
child custody rights in case of biblical divorce.
Third, the marriage license might be construed as a quasi-contract that
obligates the parities to obey the issuer’s (i.e., the government’s)
rules for marriage and family. Surely, this outcome is dangerous and
pernicious for the Evangelical Christian. Contrariwise, the marriage
covenant document, which sets forth the agreement of the parties in
the strongest terms and obligates each party to legally abide by his
side of the “contract”, provides greater facility to write
sanctions, and wider options to enforce them, than a quasi-contract
legislated by an often times wayward civil government. Indeed, the language
contained in a marriage covenant can be very comprehensive and biblically-based,
approved both by those who take the vows and by their elders and/or
Evangelical scholars.
Fourth, YHWH's judgment for breaking the marriage covenant is far more
stringent than the state’s condemnation for so doing. One might
think he can get away with breaking the government license decree with
virtual impunity nowadays, but YHWH's displeasure with such deeds is
unabated. El Shaddai takes the marriage vows more seriously than the
civil government does. “When you make a vow to YHWH, do not delay
to pay it; For He has no pleasure in fools. Pay what you have vowed.
Better not to vow than to vow and not pay. Do not let your mouth cause
your flesh to sin, nor say before the messenger of YHWH that it was
an error. Why should YHWH be angry at your excuse and destroy the work
of your hands?” (Ecclesiastes 5:4-6). Indeed, YHWH says to Evangelicals
“let your 'Yes' be 'Yes,' and your 'No’” (Matthew 5:37;
James 5:12).
Fifth, preachers marry couples on the basis of their divine call to
Gospel ministry rather than some government privilege. Otherwise, the
state might authorize too (and perhaps pre-approve) what preachers may
say during wedding ceremonies wherein a government license is granted.
Preachers serve a far higher calling than to become de facto government
agents or bureaucrats.
Many derivative principles are worth fighting for, especially when the
relative cost of doing so is not great. The state marriage license is
an aberration from YHWH's decree and as such can be expected to lead
to increasing abuses. The state’s usurpation of YHWH's ordinances
is wrong and perhaps immoral. Thus, Evangelicals should disabuse themselves
of it whenever possible. By doing so, Evangelicals can make a “statement”
by “taking a stand” and they can show YHWH and men the seriousness
of their commitment to please Yeshua haMasshiach. They may also show
their obedience to Pauline doctrine: "Were you called while a slave?
Do not be concerned about it; but if you can be made free, rather use
it" (I Corinthians 7:21). When Christians have a means to be freer,
they should avail themselves of it.
Why do Evangelicals use state marriage licenses, seldom questioning
their validity?
For that matter, why do Evangelicals incorporate their churches by state
franchise (instead of using private trusts) or put the American flag
up in the sanctuary? Why do they ask for permission to meet (in some
countries) or get building permits to enlarge the sanctuary? One simple
reason, however, might be Evangelicals’ ignorance of public policy
issues. Another might be pragmatism. Nonetheless, these questions open
up even larger public policy issues for Christians than can be addressed
here. Suffice it to say that sometimes practices are done out of convenience,
and other times out of a more naïve patriotism. Still other times,
Evangelicals do things because they are so commanded by the civil government.
However, Christians should not blindly obey whatever edict comes down
from the state. Surely, they would disobey any decree prohibiting Gospel
preaching or demanding that they work on Sunday or hire a certain quantity
of homosexuals. Clearly, there are many instances in which Evangelicals
must disobey the state.
The marriage license issue is a bit more complicated than more "obvious"
public policies because it does not appear to be such a “big deal”.
Nevertheless, the fact is that Evangelicals are not bound to obey any
ordinance of man that usurps an ordinance of God, including the government-mandated
marriage license. Whether or not one chooses to disobey the state and
marry without license is a matter of conscience. The fact that the marriage
license seems so innocuous is probably in large measure why the institution
has undergone such little scrutiny by Evangelicals. Yet relative inconsequentiality
alone does not mean the issue is unimportant and not worth bothering
with.
Should people with marriage licenses get divorced?
In the same way that missionaries who encounter polygamist tribes do
not and should not require divorcing all but one wife upon conversion
of a man with multiple wives, Christians need not be under obligation
to get rid of their government marriage license. They are still married
in spite of it, and until such time as public policies on account of
it become onerous, there is really no need to spend a lot of time expunging
it from their folio of legal documents. Certainly, they may do so on
account of conviction and principle, but not because of obligation.
Is it sinful to marry with a state marriage license?
This matter may be best addressed by asking three preliminary general
questions. (1) Is something that is unnecessary sinful? Probably not¾at
least not in all cases. (2) Is using some otherwise harmless thing sinful
if others use it in a way that leads them to sin? Usually not. (3) Is
using something sinful if it is designed to displace or usurp a YHWH-given
means, such as worshipping an idol, building a tower of Babel, etc.?
Always.
It seems that plausible arguments could be made by different Evangelicals
of good will that place marriage licenses in any one of the three categories
above. Obviously, if the marriage license falls into the third category
it would be sinful for an Evangelical to use one. However, it seems
that the first category is the most likely category for the marriage
license. Public policy is riddled with institutions that partly or wholly
usurp divine prerogative. Many of these things are evil: social security,
welfare, public schools, etc. However, many are not purely evil, but
rather are inefficient or ineffective attempts by the state to attain
the “common good”. The marriage license does not appear to
have a nefarious beginning (or overarching goal) as other public policies
do. Thus, it is probably not sinful to utilize one.
That is not to say that Evangelicals should encourage its use. On the
contrary, there is no good reason that they should utilize marriage
licenses. There is no purpose in doing so that is YHWH-glorifying or
marriage promoting. Consequently, Evangelicals would do well to jettison
the practice and free themselves from a potential tyranny of the state.
The Apostle Paul sums it up well: "You were bought at a price;
do not become slaves of men" (I Corinthians 7:23).
Notes
APPENDIX: Sample Evangelical Covenant Marriage Document
Covenant of Marriage
This document certifies a Covenant of Marriage between
Dr. John Macarewich Cobin
and
Dr. Lesle Dean Long
The above individuals were joined in the Holy Bonds of marriage on the
thirteenth day of the year of our Lord two thousand and two, in Taylors,
South Carolina, United States of America.
Preamble
John Macarewich Cobin and Lesle Dean Long, believing that marriage is
a covenant relationship created by El Shaddai between a man and a woman,
knowingly and voluntarily vow to unite as husband and wife before YHWH
and these witnesses according to the Commandments of YHWH given in His
Word.
We believe that El Shaddai, who sovereignly manifests His goodness and
wisdom in all His works and ordinances, from the beginning created marriage
when He formed Eve as a helper and companion for Adam. We believe the
state of marriage is pleasing to YHWHthe Lord and that He through His
Word provides the divine laws and ordinances for the governance of marriage.
We believe each of us is given individual and mutual duties in this
covenant of marriage and we vow to earnestly fulfill the responsibilities
given to us by YHWH. We acknowledge that alone in our sinful nature
we are incapable of fulfilling these duties as declared in the Word
of YHWH but that through the work of grace by the Holy Spirit in our
hearts we possess the means to overcome our natural state and thus be
obedient to YHWH’s commands.
Our Solemn Vows
We vow to love, comfort, honor, and keep each other in sickness and
in health, for richer or for poorer, for better or for worse; and forsaking
all other, to keep each other, so long as we both shall live. Moreover,
we freely and joyfully vow the following individual pledges to each
other and to El Shaddai:
I, John Macarewich Cobin, born on the tenth day of March in the year
of (our Lord) the Common Era one thousand nine hundred and sixty-three,
and residing in Ventura County, California, being a believer in Yeshua
haMasshiach who is biblically eligible to marry, do voluntarily, humbly
and solemnly vow to take this woman, Lesle Dean Long, to be my lawful
wife, promising never to forsake her; to love her faithfully, and to
maintain her, as a faithful and pious husband is bound to do in following
the example of the great Bridegroom Yeshua towards His bride the church;
to live holily with her; keeping faithful and true to her in all things
according to the holy gospel of YHWH.
In accord with biblical standards for what a husband should be, I promise
to lead you, Lesle, as my glory (I Corinthians 11:3,7), and to provide
for your sustenance (I Timothy 5:8), working diligently, and committing
my works to YHWH that He might establish my thoughts regarding our union
and family (Proverbs 16:3). I promise to earnestly maintain a sacrificial
love for you (Ephesians 5:25,28; Colossians 3:19) and to dwell with
you with understanding (I Peter 3:7), so that I might adore and cherish
you rather than arbitrarily rule over you in some harsh or dictatorial
manner.
I, Lesle Dean Long, born the fifth day of June in the year of (our Lord)
the Common Era one thousand nine hundred sixty-two, residing in Greenville
County, the state of South Carolina, being a believer in Yeshua haMasshiach
who is biblically eligible to marry, do voluntarily, humbly and solemnly
vow to take this man, John Macarewich Cobin to be my lawful husband,
promising to love him and to be joyfully obedient to him in following
the example demonstrated by the church in her love and obedience to
Messiah, to serve and assist him, never to forsake him; to live holily
with him; keeping faithful and true to him in all things, as a loyal
and pious wife is bound to do for her husband according to the holy
gospel of YHWH.
In accordance with biblical standards for what your wife should be John,
I promise to be as well organized, trustworthy, and hard-working as
the virtuous women described in Proverbs 31:10-31 and Ruth 3:10-11,
never forsaking my faithfulness to YHWH, to you, or to my household
(Proverbs 31:11-12). I promise to be submissive to you¾even to
the point of adopting your will and desires as my own (Ephesians 5:22,
Colossians 3:18, I Peter 3:1), to be domestic (Titus 2:5) and care for
you and the children entrusted to me, to seek the incorruptible beauty
of a quiet and gentle spirit (I Peter 3:4), and to always love and defend
you (Titus 2:4) as your supportive companion.
In submission to my husband, therefore, I hereby affirm my desire and
intention to take his surname. Hence, from this day forth, let it be
known that I, Lesle Dean Long, voluntarily choose to call myself, and
to change my legal name, that I will forever be known as Mrs. Lesle
Long Cobin or, if I prefer to use my given middle name informally, as
Mrs. Lesle Dean Cobin. I would that others likewise recognize my change
of name. My decision is in conformity with our American cultural tradition
based on the biblical principle given in Numbers 36:3 and elsewhere
in the Scriptures, which indicates that a woman from one Israelite tribe
who married a man from another tribe would become, along with her children,
part of her husband's tribe.
Prayer and Benediction
We ask that El Shaddai, who has called us into His kingdom and has united
us in the bonds of marriage, may grant us the presence of the (Holy)
Spirit of YHWH, so that we, in true love of our Master and Saviour Yeshua
ha Masshiach and in firm faith of the promises of YHWH the Father, may
live holy lives according to His divine will. We ask for YHWH's blessing
as co-heirs of the covenant He established first with Abraham, Isaac
and Jacob, and then with our Master and Saviour Yeshua haMasshiach and
His Apostles for the universal church, that we may bring up children
in the fear of YHWH, to the honor of His name, and to the edification
of the gospel of Yeshua ha Masshiach. We beseech YHWH Elohim to replenish
us with His grace and grant that we may long live together in all godliness
and holiness.
Agreement Regarding Children, Property, and Common Law Matters
We affirm that all of our real and personal property shall be owned
jointly, unless specifically registered and titled in our names individually
or in trust. We shall affirm this contract even if we choose to live
in a community property state (viz. Arizona, California, Idaho, Louisiana,
Nevada, New Mexico, Texas, Washington, or Wisconsin), that would deem
all property acquired by either of us, as well as together, to be jointly
owned and equally shared. The laws of the state of South Carolina shall
govern the property provisions in this section, unless written consent
by both of us is given to place them under another jurisdiction.
On the basis of our solemn marriage vows, we affirm that John’s
present six children and any children that may issue as a result of
our physical union¾or by means of adoption by both of us together¾shall
be our lawful and rightful heirs in the sight of YHWH and, therefore,
ought to be in the sight of men. They ought to all participate equally
in such rights. Any attempt to deny them their right to inherit property,
take their father’s name, or make decisions for their parents as
“next of kin” shall run contrary to our express intent and
wishes.
We declare that upon the death of either one of us, the property owned
by the deceased that does not have a beneficiary designated shall immediately
become the property of the surviving spouse, if living, otherwise to
the aforementioned children, equally and per stirpes. If both of us
die simultaneously, our property that does not have a beneficiary designated
for it shall immediately become the property of all of the aforementioned
children, equally and per stirpes. If the these children and us should
die simultaneously, our property that does not have a beneficiary designated
for it shall immediately become the property of all of our nephews and
nieces, equally and per stirpes. Otherwise, if we have no surviving
children, grandchildren, nephews, or nieces, our property shall pass
to the dominion, possession and control of our current or most recent
Evangelical Christian church where we were both members.
We further affirm the common law rights that we as rightfully and lawfully
married have: to not have to testify against one's spouse, for the wife
to be able take the surname of her husband (which she has declared to
be her desire and intention), and to maintain an insurable interest
in each other as beneficiaries or co-participants (or dependents) for
insurance coverage purposes. Accordingly, we would entreat those courts,
government agencies, and insurers to accept our solemn promises contained
herein as necessary and sufficient causes for the acknowledgement of
these common law rights and benefits.
Closing
In consideration of the mutual bonds of service and affection that will
be rendered to one another from this point forward, it is our express
desire that each of the aforementioned provisions be enforceable at
law and effectual in practice. Accordingly, we hereby attest to these
solemn vows and covenant obligations, with all the associated rights
and duties corresponding to them, looking to the manifest grace of YHWH
to lead and care for us, as His most holy and wise purpose deems best
for His glory. Signed and subscribed this thirteenth day of April, in
the year of our (Savior) the Common Era two thousand and two.
By Husband and Wife:
_______________________________ _________________________________
John Macarewich Cobin Lesle Dean Long
Before these Witnesses:
________________________________ _________________________________
Thomas Rush, presiding Pastor Phillip J. Temple, Esquire
________________________________ _________________________________
Joan Cobin, mother of the groom Sylvia D. Long, mother of the bride
________________________________ _________________________________
Paul F. McClellan, groomsman Francis M. Long, bridesmaid
America's
inflation-proof currency 100% backed and redeemable in gold & silver.
