Registration Of Marriage And Divorce

What Do Jehovah’s Witnesses Teach?

Jehovah’s Witnesses have a strict understanding of the validity of marriage. According to their teachings, marriages must be registered with the authorities, if such registration is available in the country in question. Jehovah’s Witnesses view marriage as a covenant between a man and a woman who live in fidelity to each other and are recognized by God, but they also emphasize legal recognition in order to fulfill the Bible’s principles of honesty and respect for government arrangements.

In The Watchtower, October 15, 2006, page 18, paragraph 2, Jehovah’s Witnesses acknowledge that

True, the Bible does not describe detailed procedures for entering into a Christian marriage. That is understandable, because custom and also the legal requirements vary from place to place and from one time period to another. For example, in ancient Israel, there was no formal marriage ceremony. On the wedding day, the groom simply led the bride to his own home or to her father's home. (Genesis 24:67; Isaiah 61:10; Matthew 1:24) This public act constituted the marriage ceremony itself. There was no formal ceremony, as is common today in many places.

In the same article, paragraph 4 states:

In many lands today, Christians who want to marry must meet certain legal requirements. When they do, they can marry in any way that makes it a lawful marriage.

If one is to understand the teachings of Jehovah’s Witnesses, then there is a requirement for registration where the law of the country in question requires two people of different sexes to be married in order to live together.

However, the practice of Jehovah’s Witnesses is based on a rigid understanding that marriage must be registered with the government in order to be recognized by the congregation. A concrete example of this concerns a woman from Rwanda who was disfellowshipped as one of Jehovah’s Witnesses¹. She lived in a refugee camp and married in the traditional way in the refugee camp. No registration was possible there, nor was it mandatory. She and her husband then moved to the United States with their 5 children and she applied for readmission to Jehovah’s Witnesses in the United States. She was denied resumption because her marriage was not registered. Her husband, who was not a Jehovah’s Witness, refused to register the marriage in the United States because he believed they were already married. The elders who processed her application for reinstatement received counsel from the branch office of Jehovah’s Witnesses in the United States. The resumption committee concluded that the woman can never be reinstated as long as she is married to her husband because they do not have papers on their already entered marriage.

This example shows that Jehovah’s Witnesses not only require that the marriage be registered in the country of marriage, if such registration is available, but must also remarry by public registration if such registration becomes available later.

It seems that Jehovah’s Witnesses interpret their own teachings to mean that registration must take place regardless of whether the government requires it or not. This may possibly be due to a misconception that being in subjection to the authorities means that one must register marriages even where the authorities allow one to live together without being married (Romans 13:1).

I have not found a direct quotation from the current literature of Jehovah’s Witnesses  that gives an absolute mandate for the registration of marriage. Such a practice, therefore, seems to be more of a common understanding of Jehovah’s Witnesses rather than a formally expressed doctrine. Possibly this has been an older understanding that is still practiced.

What the Bible Says About the Validity of Marriage

The Bible does not teach that secular marriage registration is essential to establish that marriage has been contracted. The Bible says that it is sexual intercourse that confirms that two people have become spouses. This is how marriage was contracted under the Mosaic Law in that the man went in to the woman and had sexual intercourse with her. This sexual act was what established marriage (Deuteronomy 5:1). —Exodus 21:11-13, 2. (see Exodus 22:16). This is still true for Christians since Paul referred to this very practice to make the point that sex with a prostitute meant that they had in effect become “one body” (1 Corinthians 6:16), just as spouses are “one body” (1 Corinthians 6:16). (see Genesis 2:24). In other words, you were a body with the prostitute because of the sexual act alone, even if they did not register a marriage. There is no Scriptural basis for registration or deregistration in a secular register to determine whether they are married or legally divorced, respectively.

Under the Mosaic Law, marriage was an agreement between a man and the woman’s father, where fidelity is central (1 Corinthians 1:1). —Exodus 2:24; Malachi 2:14). There are Scriptural examples of the woman being consulted, but it was the father who had the last word on behalf of the woman. In the Christian Greek Scriptures, there is no rule that the father is a party to the marriage contract. 1 Corinthians 7:39 says that the woman was completely free to choose to remarry, and it is possible that she was also free to choose her first marriage. The extent to which the father played a role in Christian marriages likely depends on the traditions of each family and not on Scriptural rules. The Bible never refers to formal legal requirements (formal requirements) as a necessity for marriage to be valid in God’s eyes.

There was no form of government registration in Bible times. Wedding ceremonies and celebrations were often what announced that a couple was married (John 2:1-11).

Paul teaches that Christians should respect the laws of government as long as they do not conflict with God’s laws (Romans 13:1-7; Titus 3:1). Therefore, if the law requires registration for two people of the opposite sex to live together, it is biblically justifiable to follow suit, not because the registration in itself makes the marriage Scripturally valid, but because it implies obedience to the laws of the land. In countries where it is not forbidden for people of the opposite sex to live together, this will not be considered a violation of the country’s laws to live together and consider themselves married.

To illustrate the difference between legally contracted marriages and biblical (religiously) recognized marriages, I will present a scenario: A Christian has been separated on biblical grounds, as a result of his spouse’s adultery (Matthew 19:9). Scripturally, it is the infidelity itself and the innocent mate’s decision not to remain in the marriage that together constitute a valid divorce. Scripturally, the time at which the marriage can legally end is not decisive. In the country in which he lives, the authorities require a mandatory separation period before it is possible to obtain a legal divorce and enter into a new registered marriage. The Christian person therefore marries a new partner in an unregistered marriage during this period, with the intention of registering the marriage as soon as the legal divorce is completed.

Biblical assessment of the situation:

1. The Bible allows a person who is legally divorced (adultery) to remarry. If the person makes a new covenant with his or her mate and recognizes it as a marriage in God’s eyes, this is in line with the Bible’s principles regarding the validity of marriage.
2. The legal delay (separation period) is a human requirement that does not necessarily make the new marriage less valid in God’s eyes. The important thing is that the previous marriage was terminated on a Scriptural basis and that the new marriage meets the requirements of fidelity and public recognition as far as possible.
3. If the divorce was based on Scriptural grounds, the person is free to remarry in God’s eyes. As long as the couple considers themselves married and respects the marriage vow, they meet Scriptural requirements for marriage. Whether the agreement is oral or written is not decisive for the biblical validity.
   

1. This account has not previously been published and I therefore reproduce neither the source nor the people concerned. ↩︎

Don’t miss this related study ↓