A Fourth Church Sermon by John A. Cairns

May 20, 2001 | 9:30 and 11:00 a.m.

A Covenant of Faithfulness

John A. Cairns
Dean, Academy for Faith and Life,
Fourth Presbyterian Church

John 14:23–29
Isaiah 61:8–11

Those of us who are pastors know that weddings have become big business these days. An article in a recent issue of Atlantic Monthly reminds us that a generation ago a girl of modest means “would have been married much as her mother was: her best friend would stand up for her and everyone would look forward to a nice party afterward, often at the bride’s home. But, times have changed, and middle-class couples are routinely trading the down payment on a first house for a single eye-popping party. . . . Nowadays every aspect of a formal wedding has become so intensely merchandized as to render its original purpose almost unrecognizable” (Atlantic Monthly, Feb. 2001, p. 112–113).

Too true! It used to be that the wedding stories pastors had to tell were of cute little incidents like the very hot summer day when I gave one of the groomsmen a capsule of smelling salts just in case anyone in the wedding party got a little woozy, only to have the guy with the smelling salts pass out! But in recent years, my wedding stories run in another direction. There was the mother who was determined to bring in a large oriental rug to give the chancel a “nicer look” and the bride who was forty-five minutes late for her wedding because she refused to ride to the church in a car after her rented limousine broke down, so she just sat and waited for the company to send a replacement limo! Weddings have indeed become so intensely merchandized as to render their original purpose almost unrecognizable.

What is that “original purpose”? That may not be the simple question that it seems. I would be inclined to say that the purpose is for the couple to declare their love for one another publicly and to enter into a lifelong commitment, into what—to use the biblical language—is properly called “a covenant of faithfulness.” However, if you were to ask anyone connected with the typical wedding party these days, the answer might be a more straightforward “to get married”—and that is not necessarily the same thing.

I had that brought home to me several years ago in my previous church when, in a conversation with the bride and groom at the Friday night rehearsal, it suddenly hit them that they had neglected to get a marriage license. “What can we do?” they asked with a look of horror. “Don’t panic,” I said. “We can do the ceremony tomorrow almost as we planned it. It can still be an occasion for you to make your commitments of faithfulness to each other and then, as soon as you have a chance, you can get your license, come back in, and we’ll renew your vows and I’ll do my duty as an officer of the state—sign the license—and you’ll be legal and official.”

But the bride was not buying my suggestion. “I don’t want to make covenants of faithfulness,” she sobbed. “I just want to get married!” She didn’t really want a minister; she just wanted someone to make it official and throw a little blessing in along the way.

Now I can understand that her comment was made in a moment of sheer panic and confusion, but it caused me to wonder then—and still to this day—whether the church has ever made clear why it is involved with weddings in the first place and what, from our perspective, is the purpose of all this.

Let’s go back to the idea of a covenant of faithfulness, a concept that has its origin not in connection to marriage, but in our most basic understanding of God and in the relationship we have to God. From the very beginning, faithfulness is the primary attribute of God. The whole biblical story makes clear that any attempt to talk about the nature of God, to describe God, has to begin with faithfulness. It is the one attribute that is synonymous with God. God’s love, mercy, power, and grace are all understood within the context of faithfulness. God is faithful, and it is in faithfulness that God relates to us. When God’s people ignore God or divert their loyalty, God still remains faithful to them, inviting them back into a relationship of mutual commitment.

And that is where the covenant part comes in. A covenant is a mutual commitment, a two-way agreement, a promise, of each to the other; a promise that is lived out through stipulated behaviors. In the case of our covenant with God, that behavior is faithfulness: our expectation of God’s faithfulness, and God’s expectation of ours.

So the covenant of faithfulness is not tied specifically to marriage. It was—and is—intended to be understood in a much broader context. In fact, the way we honor the two great commandments to love God and love neighbor is through covenants of faithfulness. We vow our unflinching loyalty—we commit ourselves to the relationship—to God and to neighbor. The covenant becomes the channel through which love flows. And, because we all at times need it, the covenant also becomes the channel through which forgiveness flows. We give and receive love and forgiveness within this covenant of faithfulness.

In our scripture lesson for the morning, Isaiah delivers God’s word to the people. And what God says is, “I will faithfully give them their reward, and I will make an everlasting covenant with them.” These words come at a time when the people have been exiled from their land and severely oppressed. But God makes it clear that their future does not depend on their own initiative or on some divine whim. It will be shaped by God’s faithful adherence to the covenant relationship. The people hear this pronouncement at a time when there is a growing sentiment to ignore their ties to God and strike out on their own, but the prophet communicates God’s desire to renew the covenant, offering the assurance to the people that “all who see them shall acknowledge that they are a people whom the Lord has blessed.” So the covenant is reestablished. The people once again understand themselves to be God’s people.

God is understood, defined—God is known by—faithfulness. And so it is not surprising that the path of discipleship Jesus sets before his followers is also characterized by a commitment, a covenant of faithfulness. And likewise it should not be surprising to discover that at the heart of the church’s message through the years is also a call to faithfulness—faithfulness in any and all relationships, beginning with our relationship to God and extending from there into the full variety of our human relationships.

I noted with interest this week that the newly released figures from the 2000 census indicate that there has been a sharp increase in the number of households comprised of unrelated adults. I’m sure that population includes roommates, who stretch their dollars by splitting the rent, but it also includes gay and lesbian partners and unmarried heterosexual couples. I am equally sure that there is an expectation that very soon religious spokespersons will have something to say about these increasing numbers and the lifestyles they represent. So let me dare to step into that arena.

What I believe the church should be talking about in light of these numbers is faithfulness. It is the state’s responsibility to determine which relationships have legal status and which do not and to set out the rules and steps necessary to claim that status. The state can stipulate what needs to be done to open a restaurant or adopt a child or to be considered married. And the state has determined that when it comes to marriage, pastors can assist in facilitating or validating that procedure. But the church’s interest goes well beyond that. It focuses on the covenant of faithfulness that will exist between the parties, that will provide the context in which their love is expressed and will govern and shape the way they relate to each other through the years.

Just because a marriage is legal doesn’t mean it is good or loving or just. The state can despair when relationships break down. It can establish rules that make it harder to enter or leave a relationship. In more than a dozen states, efforts are currently underway to mandate increased premarital or predivorce counseling to do just that. But the state cannot shape the relationship, cannot set the parameters or the standards for the way these persons will live together, will treat each other, will interact with those around them, will bear up under adversity. That is the church’s role not only for couples, but for all human relationships. Whether it involves caring for an aging parent or entering into a business partnership or dealing with the neighbors or exchanging vows of love, the church has a unique and important perspective to offer.

You see, the moral issue here is not that people are living together without a marriage license. (Many immoral relationships are fully legal, and many moral ones are not.) The moral issue arises when relationships are not grounded in a covenant of faithfulness; when what we have seen reflected in God has not been reflected in our own lives in the way we live with others; when the ties and commitments we make are all viewed as revocable. The moral issue is that we have been so consumed with what is legal that we have forgotten to lift up what is right and true and intrinsic to the nature of God and to our nature as children of God. We have been created to live in faithfulness to God and one another. That is where we must stand. That is what we must model.

As a father, I hope that our children will get married rather than just deciding to live together. But my primary concern is that no matter whether they get married or live together, that the relationships they enter into be built upon a mutual covenant of faithfulness, that they commit themselves before God, family, friends, and each other to a life of unselfish love, to a relationship that does not use whim or mood or anger or disappointment or financial circumstance or health as an excuse to walk away. That does not often happen when people decide to live together. Too frequently it doesn’t happen when people decide to get married. We’ve got some work to do! If the church does nothing else it must show the world what faithfulness looks like, what faithfulness means; it must hold up God’s faithfulness as the standard for all relationships. As God is faithful to us through all circumstances and in spite of everything, so we are called to be faithful to one another—in the intensive commitments of marriage, partnership, and family and in the more general relationships we have with friends and neighbors and with our sisters and brothers in the Christian community.

The wedding article in Atlantic Monthly concluded with a sentence that I believe gets right to the point. After going on for six pages about over-the-top merchandizing and empty rituals, the author says, “One can’t help thinking that [the couple] would trade every bit of it for one simple elusive assurance: only death will part us” (p. 118).

For better, for worse; for richer, for poorer; in sickness and in health . . . in official and unofficial relationships . . . see how they love each other. In the church we call them covenants of faithfulness, and we believe it is good and just and right and necessary for us to be about the business of encouraging and celebrating those covenants as commitments that are blessed by God and to be held in honor among all people.

Amen.