• Biblical Families is not a dating website. It is a forum to discuss issues relating to marriage and the Bible, and to offer guidance and support, not to find a wife. Click here for more information.

Starting a church

Christiano

Christiano

New Member
Hi everyone. I'm planning on starting a new church here in Brazil. It would be the first church to accept and perform plural marriage in the country. I've met a former Baptist pastor online and I've been chatting with him through e-mail and Facebook. He has two wives and lives in the Northeast of Brazil (I don't know if I can mention the city he lives in). I imagine he left the church to start practicing polygamy. But I have some doubts since I've never visited a polygamist church (be it Biblical or Mormon fundamentalist church). I've only have information about polygamist families and churbes from what I've seen on TV -- shows about Centennial Park, Sister Wives (the Brown family), etc. I've recently trsf an article about a guy who visited the Apostolic United Brethren (AUB), the church attended by the Brown family before they moved from Utah to Las Vegas. But I'm not thinking about founding a Mormon fundamentalist church, but a Biblical one. That is, we will have the Bible as the only infallible rule of faith (not the Book of Mormon or any of the Mormon scriptures). To found this church I'm going to move to the city where the former pastor I mentioned lives, since there are other polygamist people in the state (only a few, but there are). It would be good to let them know there's a church there where they can get married to their multiple wives.

One doubt I have is: when a man is marrying the second, the third, the forth wife and so on, how could the marriage ceremony be different in relation to the one when a guy is marrying the first wife? I've never read anything about this subject and I don't know if I'm posting in the right area (feel free to move this thread ro the correct area, please), but I'd like to read ideas from others about this.
 
Well, it *can* be different, but doesn't have to be, other than removing the "forsaking all others" line from standard vows. Some people like to have a separate "commitment" ceremony in which all the adults or even the kids commit to the family.
 
I've 'officiated' at exactly one wedding and found the experience to be presumptuous. The scriptures neither command nor suggest that any pastor (or really most anyone else) has any part in enacting or legitimizing a marriage, save the husband and the bride. (Under the law, the father of the bride has a role in consent, but I'm not touching that.)

So in my incredibly belligerent opinion, a prospective officiant might inform the husband that the 'ceremony' is entirely his discretion, to take any form he desires. God commissioned men to "take a wife", He did not ordain a priesthood to 'join a couple'.

Technically speaking, for a man to throw a party, invite his friends, and plainly state that he is marrying his woman is as much ceremony as the scripture seems to require.
An officiant might go through a traditional wedding ceremony complete with some reworked vows

Or read a statement regarding marriage, either of his own devising or that of the wedded couple

Or lead the party in communion or some other such thing

I think a flexible attitude towards ceremonies is likely to be a requirement, because a christian man who is intending to marry a second wife is likely to be rabidly non-traditional and resistant to being reasoned with, and will likely have his own ideas about how the thing should go down. Also each circumstance is going to come with it's own unique set of challenges. One man may wish to include his first wife in the proceedings, because the first and second wife are BEST FRIENDS FOREVER. Another will not have the first wife present because she has inexplicably taken a sudden interest in knife throwing.
 
All true. I encourage you to build a church that is poly friendly. Much needed. The modern body of believers often shun rather than love.
 
I agree such a church is needed. I would agree with slumber though that we don't need a poly friendly modern church but rather a completely reworked Bible based church that stubbornly refuses to teach the precepts of men as doctrine. Hence there would be no prescribed marriage ceremony or even a ceremony at all really. The church has a very limited role in individual marriages from a biblical view. Good luck though. I applaud the vision.
 
Thank you all for answering the topic. Well, I'm thinking more about the role the first wife would have at the next marriage ceremomy(ies), like, giving some king of blessing to confirm she's accepting the entrance of the new wife into the family. What do you think?
 
I would not make that a standard part of any marriage ceremony personally. There are a number of reasons for that, such as its not actually biblical, or not requiring a bride to share the spotlight on her wedding day, but my primary reasoning is to break out of the mindset of "this is how weddings have to be done". If people want a big ceremony with pomp and circumstance, fine, if they want to hold hands, pray, and just agree they're married, also fine. I'd save everything else for "possible options" to suggest to the bride and groom.
 
I think Christiano has a larger point though that is valid. Is it important for prior wives to public affirm their support for the new marriage? In a day and age when they can leave any time to any reason I could see a strong argument for putting them on record as being on board.
 
Speaking for myself, the answer is no. I am almost totally at war with this day and age. These concessions sound nice, but I see a parallel between this and taxation for social programs.

Charity is good, but forced charity is not charity at all.

Being gentle to your first wife and seeking her approval is good, setting that as a ceremonial condition for a second marriage isn't gentle at all.
 
I agree that gets into some murky ground. Certainly it is difficult to justify giving the first wife control from a theological standpoint, but then from a practical standpoint it sure would make things easier if she was on board.

My point is that she should be on board both because plural marriage is scriptural and because she is submitted to her husband's will and since we are assuming that she is doing the right thing for the right reason it seems useful for me to have her declare it publicly, sort of putting her on record as being fully submitted to the process.
 
It would certainly cut down on the number of wedding guests who feel compelled to wear bullet proof vests to the proceedings!
 
The whole "it's an option" thing is where it needs to stay. The problem I have is when the word <u>should</u> gets used. That's where things get murky for me. Would it be ideal to have the first wife's blessing? Most would think so. Should she give it? No, why? Can she give it? Sure, why not? Doctrine is not ours to decide. We don't get to decide the should or should not of anything that is not biblically specified.

At the very least, it must be understood that any and all subsequent marriages are separate commitments. Any involvement whatsoever of any previous wives is of the sole discretion of the man. I will even only slightly couch that with a 'suggestion', based on Paul's teachings, that he lends an ear to the desires of his bride-to-be but still the final decision is on him and what he thinks is best.

We must break away from this idea that any officiating by anyone in any particular place is ever required. Even ceremony is not required. However, we, myself included about other things, often confuse, by word or thought, what we agree may be a good idea and what one "should" do.

What we collectively agree in general something that might be a good idea, or what we may conceive as an ideal, may be the one thing that another brother should not do.

Much love.
-Net
 
More fundamentally - I would not be even considering starting a "church" that accepts polygamy. Polygamy is one tiny little detail in a massive sea of doctrine. If you make it your focus and spend too much time thinking about how to build church ceremonies around it you'll end up a weird cult, to be frank, with who knows what beliefs on the more fundamental issues of salvation that actually matter to everyone.

Rather, I would encourage you to reconsider what "church" even is. The Bible NEVER suggests that we are to go and make our own "churches", a congregation of people who come together and have a ceremony every Sunday morning. Rather, the word "church", "ekklesia", simply means the "called-out ones". The Church is everyone who YHWH has called to be his own. The Bible never mentions building separate denominations around particular beliefs, rather it strongly states that we should NOT say "I follow Paul" etc, but should rather be in unity with all Christians, regardless of doctrinal differences. The Bible never mentions "the Baptist Church in Corinth and the Methodist Church in Corinth", just "the Church in Corinth", ie "the called-out ones in Corinth". Biblically, every Christian is in the Church, and the Church in Corinth is simply every Christian who happens to live in Corinth, regardless of how frequently they talk to each other.

Please, don't try to start a new "church". The Church that is Christ's Body is fragmented enough already. Rather, study what it means to live as a follower of Yeshua and simply do that. Meet with other believers in any setting that is convenient - homes, cafes, at traditional "church" services... Don't try to formulate your theology into a creed to build a congregation around, be flexible so you can learn over time. Just live as a called-out one of YHWH and find out what that means for your life as you go.

If you try to have a church for people who accept polygamy, you'll end up only talking to people who accept polygamy, and if there aren't many of those near you you've massively limited your fellowship. And if your local polygamists are a bunch of weirdos you could end up in deep heresy yourself. Rather, try to fellowship with those near you who appear most serious about studying the Bible and following YHWH to the best of their understanding, in all areas, regardless of their current view on this particular theological detail or any other for that matter.

If you want some reading material on what the Church should truly be, I think you'd find this very helpful:
http://www.livingtruth.com/PDF/housesthat%20change.pdf
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top