Opinion / Columnist
Mass weddings are unbiblical, unAfrican and unconstitutional
02 Dec 2014 at 13:02hrs | Views
Just as a person cannot enter a second time into his mother's womb and be born (John 3), so no African couple can claim to have had a ‘second' or ‘blessing' marriage ceremony with the same spouse in the sight of God. Blessing or mass marriage ceremony popularized by the late Sun Myung Moon (1920 - 2012), a Korean self-proclaimed messiah, leader of the Unification Church, and a very successful businessman and media mogul is unbiblical, unAfrican and unconstitutional. It is sad to see how the apparent naïve and unsuspecting followers of the growing number of competitive self-appointed prophets or preachers fall prey to such unbiblical teaching and practices. Jesus Christ warns Christians to be on guard against such teachers and their strange doctrines and practices (Matt 10:16, 17).
Historically, before the introduction of church marriages in the thirteenth century, and later in the sixteenth century of state marriage law in Western society, the criteria for the validity of marriage in all societies were originally determined by the respective customary practices rather than by either statute law or religious regulations. The definitions of the validity of marriage changed and developed over the centuries of European history, and the outcome of such historical and theological debates on marriage was what mission organisations and colonial authorities imposed on Africans who already had their valid customary marriage system in place.
In African society, a valid marriage is said to have been contracted and considered legitimate only when the lobolo (a Zulu noun) negotiations and transactions between the members of the lobolo-giving family and the lobolo-receiving family are entered into or completed. Therefore, African couples should consummate their union following the customary marriage ceremony with clear conscience before God. Unfortunately, due to material greed lobolo which traditionally used to be a token of appreciation to the parents to the bride-giving family has been highly commercialised. It is hoped that understanding Christian parents will set a good example by viewing lobolo not as a means of getting rich, but as cultural symbol of cementing a life-long relationship between two families. By the way, it is important to point out that lobolo is not a bride-price (which is a Western construct) because in African society brides are not sold.
By African customary marriage, I mean a man-woman union that has been contracted according to African custom. Unfortunately, the nineteenth-century and early twentieth-century official missionary attitude towards African customary marriage still remains within the Christian churches in independent Africa despite the change in leadership from foreign missionaries to African Christians. African Christian leaders hypocritically demand African Christian couples to refrain from sexually consummating their valid African customary union until after a ‘white wedding' which can take place months or even years after the customary marriage due the high cost involved. Whatever arguments Christian proponents for Church weddings or mass wedding, symbols and rituals may want to generate, they cannot legitimately claim the Bible as their heritage because marriage making being a family affair required no public ceremony, religious or otherwise for its legalisation and validity. Biblically and historically, a marriage ceremony is meant to be a family affair rather than a religious or church responsibility (Genesis 24).
Legally, in contemporary urbanised African society, every marriage union should be registered if one wants the protection of state law in the event of death of the other spouse or divorce. To achieve that, African Christians can enter into marriage which acknowledges and honours God through using culturally meaningful marriage artefacts. Christianity has never existed in a cultural vacuum. That is, in Zimbabwe context biblical and culturally meaningful Christianity should express itself through acceptable African cultural norms of doing things. In African society, foreign practices will always result in artificial Christianity.
As a public recognition of the African customary marriage ceremony, marriage banns should be read or published in church for three consecutive Sundays before the lobolo transactions take place in accordance with the current laws (Marriage Act of 1964) of the land. The church pastor should regularly meet, not only with the couple for pre-marital counselling, but with family representatives of the to-be married. During these sessions, the pastor, who would need to be a marriage officer, would explain his role and responsibility in the marriage ceremony if such a marriage union is to be recognised and registered by the church and state.
On the day arranged for the customary marriage contract, the pastor and some of his church delegation should accompany the groom and some of his relatives to the bride's home where lobolo transactions normally take place. The day of lobolo transactions rather than a church wedding is the focal point of a true African marriage. Studies of African marriage agree that lobolo is the central piece of customary marriage.
At the end of the Christian customary marriage ceremony, the relatives and couple can proceed with some of the cultural rituals (for example, kupereka) towards the consummation of their marriage before returning to their urban local church. In some ways, the kupereka proceedings are like the beginning of a honeymoon in Western society. Upon returning to their urban local church after days or weeks at the groom's village, the pastor should introduce the couple to the rest of the congregation as Mr. & Mrs. If the couple want to have a marriage reception, which is often the case, weeks or even months after their Christian customary marriage ceremony, it should be made clear to the church that it will be a marriage reception for friends, relatives and the church members and not a marriage ceremony (John 2:1-10). The pastor should, in light of the already conducted Christian customary marriage ceremony in the village, make a clear distinction between a marriage ceremony and a marriage reception.
The Christian customary marriage ceremony approach to African Christian marriage in Zimbabwe has several advantages. First, while maintaining customary marriage as the essence of a valid and legitimate marriage in African society, it also takes seriously the centrality and significance of divine blessing, and the state's laws on marriage by involving the church minister. In Zimbabwe, marriages can be conducted anywhere under the Marriage Act of 1964. Second, the date which appears on the marriage certificate will be the same as the actual date of marriage, and names of witnesses on the marriage certificate will be those of the couple's parents/relatives and their pastor, as a marriage officer. Third, there will be no need for the church to discipline African Christian couples who consummate their marriage after the customary ceremonies but before a church wedding. And finally, this approach places less economic pressure on the couple than the current system which was introduced to African Christian churches by missionaries. Expensive and elaborate weddings and celebrations resulted not only from watching and imitating the Europeans, but also from the input of missionaries, who would often bake cakes, provide expensive wedding clothes and help their African Christian workers financially, in order to make it possible for such attractive weddings to take place for all to see. It is also hoped that this approach will reduce the social pressure for expensive marriage ceremonies and celebrations.
Historically, before the introduction of church marriages in the thirteenth century, and later in the sixteenth century of state marriage law in Western society, the criteria for the validity of marriage in all societies were originally determined by the respective customary practices rather than by either statute law or religious regulations. The definitions of the validity of marriage changed and developed over the centuries of European history, and the outcome of such historical and theological debates on marriage was what mission organisations and colonial authorities imposed on Africans who already had their valid customary marriage system in place.
In African society, a valid marriage is said to have been contracted and considered legitimate only when the lobolo (a Zulu noun) negotiations and transactions between the members of the lobolo-giving family and the lobolo-receiving family are entered into or completed. Therefore, African couples should consummate their union following the customary marriage ceremony with clear conscience before God. Unfortunately, due to material greed lobolo which traditionally used to be a token of appreciation to the parents to the bride-giving family has been highly commercialised. It is hoped that understanding Christian parents will set a good example by viewing lobolo not as a means of getting rich, but as cultural symbol of cementing a life-long relationship between two families. By the way, it is important to point out that lobolo is not a bride-price (which is a Western construct) because in African society brides are not sold.
By African customary marriage, I mean a man-woman union that has been contracted according to African custom. Unfortunately, the nineteenth-century and early twentieth-century official missionary attitude towards African customary marriage still remains within the Christian churches in independent Africa despite the change in leadership from foreign missionaries to African Christians. African Christian leaders hypocritically demand African Christian couples to refrain from sexually consummating their valid African customary union until after a ‘white wedding' which can take place months or even years after the customary marriage due the high cost involved. Whatever arguments Christian proponents for Church weddings or mass wedding, symbols and rituals may want to generate, they cannot legitimately claim the Bible as their heritage because marriage making being a family affair required no public ceremony, religious or otherwise for its legalisation and validity. Biblically and historically, a marriage ceremony is meant to be a family affair rather than a religious or church responsibility (Genesis 24).
As a public recognition of the African customary marriage ceremony, marriage banns should be read or published in church for three consecutive Sundays before the lobolo transactions take place in accordance with the current laws (Marriage Act of 1964) of the land. The church pastor should regularly meet, not only with the couple for pre-marital counselling, but with family representatives of the to-be married. During these sessions, the pastor, who would need to be a marriage officer, would explain his role and responsibility in the marriage ceremony if such a marriage union is to be recognised and registered by the church and state.
On the day arranged for the customary marriage contract, the pastor and some of his church delegation should accompany the groom and some of his relatives to the bride's home where lobolo transactions normally take place. The day of lobolo transactions rather than a church wedding is the focal point of a true African marriage. Studies of African marriage agree that lobolo is the central piece of customary marriage.
At the end of the Christian customary marriage ceremony, the relatives and couple can proceed with some of the cultural rituals (for example, kupereka) towards the consummation of their marriage before returning to their urban local church. In some ways, the kupereka proceedings are like the beginning of a honeymoon in Western society. Upon returning to their urban local church after days or weeks at the groom's village, the pastor should introduce the couple to the rest of the congregation as Mr. & Mrs. If the couple want to have a marriage reception, which is often the case, weeks or even months after their Christian customary marriage ceremony, it should be made clear to the church that it will be a marriage reception for friends, relatives and the church members and not a marriage ceremony (John 2:1-10). The pastor should, in light of the already conducted Christian customary marriage ceremony in the village, make a clear distinction between a marriage ceremony and a marriage reception.
The Christian customary marriage ceremony approach to African Christian marriage in Zimbabwe has several advantages. First, while maintaining customary marriage as the essence of a valid and legitimate marriage in African society, it also takes seriously the centrality and significance of divine blessing, and the state's laws on marriage by involving the church minister. In Zimbabwe, marriages can be conducted anywhere under the Marriage Act of 1964. Second, the date which appears on the marriage certificate will be the same as the actual date of marriage, and names of witnesses on the marriage certificate will be those of the couple's parents/relatives and their pastor, as a marriage officer. Third, there will be no need for the church to discipline African Christian couples who consummate their marriage after the customary ceremonies but before a church wedding. And finally, this approach places less economic pressure on the couple than the current system which was introduced to African Christian churches by missionaries. Expensive and elaborate weddings and celebrations resulted not only from watching and imitating the Europeans, but also from the input of missionaries, who would often bake cakes, provide expensive wedding clothes and help their African Christian workers financially, in order to make it possible for such attractive weddings to take place for all to see. It is also hoped that this approach will reduce the social pressure for expensive marriage ceremonies and celebrations.
Source - Dr Onesimus A. Ngundu
All articles and letters published on Bulawayo24 have been independently written by members of Bulawayo24's community. The views of users published on Bulawayo24 are therefore their own and do not necessarily represent the views of Bulawayo24. Bulawayo24 editors also reserve the right to edit or delete any and all comments received.
