Re: Proclamation of Bans
- Thanks to everyone who replied to my message. Y'all were right about
weddings not being an act of worship, and hence not subject to the
same restrictions as worship.
1. As regards origins of football and soccer, it was my
understanding that they originated in the fifteen hundreds to occupy
ex-soldiers who would otherwise have turned to banditry, well after
the pagan era ended. I didn't know of any association with old
druidical rituals. As an Aussie, I would argue that Rugby League is
real football, and soccer is that whimpy European game, but that is
not a scriptural principle. Tossing rice goes back to the Roman Luna
gods and has long been associated with their worship.
2. I would agree that the civil courts should not be involved with
marriage, at least so long as it is unlawfully constituted.
3. On the ethnic issues, I wasn't sure whether to side with
Rushdooney or Lee. It seems that there are numerous examples of
intermarriage between people of different tribes, but not of
different skin. I guess the best approach would be to leave it in
the hands of parents and their children. If neither parent objects,
the marriage can go ahead, and the church should honour it, if one
or both parents object, then the church should not marry them. It
would appear to me that racial issues pertaining to marriage would
be generally indifferent. I mainly asked about this stuff because
there is a bloke called Harry Seabrook at Little Geneva who accuses
all intermarried couples of "adultery" and he has yet to answer any
questions on those individuals who are already mixed black and
white, or those of us who are interethnically mixed German/East
European, Scots-Irish, etc. Nor has he attempted to refute Moses'
marriage to the Cushite.
Thanks again for your replies.
--- In email@example.com, "Dan Fraas"
> --- In firstname.lastname@example.org, "Fred blahous"
> <fritzbau@y...> wrote:
> > I have noticed that the Proclamation makes no provision for many
> > things that are part and parcel of weddings today. Engagement
> > wedding rings, honeymoons, and also the state-issued marriage
> > license. Since a wedding is an act of public worship, and all
> > worship comes under the RPW, would the lack of scriptural
> > for these practises and the fact that none are mentioned in thePOB
> > make some or all of them forbidden? Is there an officialcelebration
> > Presbyterian position on this?
> Marriage is not an act of public worship, although it may contain
> some elements of public worship. A wedding is a public
> of the marriage vows, which are (the vows) an act of worship forbreakup,
> Christians. The celebration is well, a celebration. It's neither
> necessary nor prescribed worship. Hence the Directory for Public
> Worship recommends that weddings not be held on the Lord's day.
> > Also, as regards the marriage license, since it would bring a
> > under the jurisdiction of the Family Court in the event of
> > and this Court is closed, rather than public, would this violateopen
> > Confession's requirement that all such proceedings be public? If
> > should church judicatories deal with such things and make them
> > to the public? Just curious.civil
> I would think a Christian who finds it necessary to divorce for
> biblical reasons should take it to the church courts before the
> > As for throwing rice, since this is done in immitation of a
> > Roman ritual, should this practise be considered an act of paganwere
> > worship forbidden in the word?
> Since soccer is played in imatation of pagan ritual games that
> played with the heads of enemies...their
> > Finally, does the Ezra passage on the Israelites putting away
> > pagan wives restrict interracial marriage? If so, would marriagebe
> > restricted along the broad lines (Japethite, Hamitic, & Semitic)or
> > along narrower lines (Tueton, Gaelic, Slav, within theJapethitic
> > tribe)? Could a Germanic person marry a Slav or Magyar, orRoman?
> Absolutely, according to our Westminster Confession, "Israelites"
> should only marry "Israelites", and then only those who have not
> corrupted their religion with Gentile-imitating idolatry or carnal
> Blessings in Christ,