During my many years of being a pastor, I officiated dozens of weddings. When I met with couples to work through logistics for their special day, I inevitably would ask them about the vows they planned. I usually needed to reassure the bride that the promise “to obey” was removed from the traditional wedding vows several decades ago. Sometimes I also found myself reassuring the couple that the “if anyone has objections to why this couple should not be married. . .” part is more Hollywood RomCom and doesn’t happen in contemporary weddings.

Some couples choose to write their own wedding vows rather than use the traditional option. When this happens, I usually offer something along the lines of, “I think it would be beautiful and meaningful for you to write your own vows. However, let me give you my pitch as to why you should consider using both your own vows and traditional vows: This wedding is not just about you two. Yes, you are the ones who will be making the vows but there may be dozens, perhaps hundreds of people who will show up to support and encourage you in your journey. Many of these people stood in front of a congregation in a very similar fashion and as you repeat the traditional vows, your wedding will become tied to their wedding, in their minds. They will remember the vows they said, they will remember why they fell in love, and they will begin to re-commit themselves to the vows they made. Your wedding does not happen in a vacuum. Your story is tied to dozens, perhaps hundreds of other stories.”

In recent years, some weddings I officiated revived the ancient Celtic tradition of handfasting in place of the unity candle. In the Celtic tradition, weddings included a ritual of binding the hands of the bride and groom with lengths of cloth, cord, or ropes as a symbol of their lasting union. We get our modern idiom for marriage, “tie the knot,” from this ancient practice.

Weddings, like the marriages they create, are an amalgamation of old and new, ancient and modern, rich tradition and modern innovation. In some ways we are forever tied to marriage’s past. However, our bonds to each other are often stronger than our traditions and this allows us to transcend what was to create new possibilities of what could be. Marriage at its best allows us to be tied to each other without being tied too tightly to the past. It allows us to separate the knot from the not any longer.

Religion has traditionally been about binding together. The word “religion” comes from two words: “lig” (from which we get our English word “ligament”) which means to connect, to tie together, to unite, to bring everything together in wholeness; and the word “re”--which means “again.” So, the original meaning of the word “religion” amounts to “connecting us together again.” Or connecting us together with God, with creation, with each other. Religion helps us find again that vital binding makes us whole. Nadia Bolz-Weber elaborates on this biblical image:

In ancient Greek, the root of demon means “to throw apart.” That which causes us to fracture, to become less whole, is demonic. . .I like to think that when Jesus sent the disciples to cast out demons in his name, he intended for them to look with so much love upon those who had become fractured that their neglected pieces returned to the center of their being. (Nadia Bolz-Weber, Shameless, p. 70).

Religion is supposed to heal. However, sometimes it promotes conflict and selfishness rather than generosity and love. Certain teachings of religion, as we’ve seen, can prioritize one’s own personal salvation over the well-being of others. Sometimes religion teaches people to fear, dehumanize, and judge others. When it does, religion strains or tears the ligaments of creation rather than strengthening the ties.

The church’s history with marriage has been a mixed bag. Though this might surprise, for some of church history the Christian church was apathetic towards the institution of marriage. At its worst, the church’s relationship with marriage has sometimes functioned to control and to preserve social order. At its best, the church has been at the forefront of re-thinking and re-imagining how marriage could be expressed in more loving and empowering forms. As we stumble into the future, my hope is that instead of “de-ligmenting” people through an alienating, ahistorical, and rules-based approach to marriage, we will pursue new, more loving forms of marriage. That we will allow people to “re-ligament” or knot their worlds back together again - to God, to others, and to the center of their own beings.