Covenant Marriage Movement: What it Really Means

Although the modern Covenant Marriage Movement was begun in Dallas, Texas, in 1999, the concept is far from new. Based on the Biblical teaching "what God has joined together, let no man put asunder," the Movement began by recognizing the need for couples to be able to take a stand in making their marriages a lifetime commitment. As "no-fault" divorce has become more and more popular throughout the United States, it's time to validate the importance of covenant marriages. Currently, only three states-- Louisiana, Arkansas and Arizona-- recognize this chosen, permanent commitment.

The misconceptions surrounding what covenant marriage means and involves is one of the main reasons many people are so strongly against it. One popular misconception is that since the concept is Biblically-based, it will "force religion" onto those who want no part of it. This is not the case.

A second stand against covenant marriage is that it will "trap" a person into a marriage which has become intolerable. The fact, however, is that a covenant marriage can be terminated if one or both of the parties truly has adequate grounds to do so. The key is adequate grounds-- that an innocent party should not have to suffer being bound into marriage to a spouse who has committed adultery, abuse, a felony, or abandonment. One of the main points of covenant marriage is that a marriage cannot be dissolved for "no fault, no grounds" reasons, such as the presently-popular "irreconcilable differences." The general idea is that when a couple enters into marriage they intend it to be a lifetime commitment-- not to be lightly walked away from. In light of the majority being so steadfastly against legalizing covenant marriage, one may assume that far too many people take the vows of "'til death do us part" in full realization that there is a quick, easy "out" for as soon as everything in the relationship is no longer perfect. A covenant marriage requires that a person have, and prove, adequate grounds for its termination; in the absence thereof, a couple is to take "'til death do us part" exactly as it was intended.

The other misconception about this subject is that most people do not understand that even in states where covenant marriage is recognized, it is an option for those who wish to have it, and those who do not are not obligated to commit to its restrictions.

The continuing popularity of no-fault divorce, and both the citizens and politicians who uphold it, grants a very unfair disservice to those who see marriage as a lifetime commitment and wish the validation of such a commitment to be recognized and taken seriously. In being given the facts-- first, that neither a covenant marriage nor religion is forced on anyone against their will; and second, that there are stipulations which provide for dissolution in the event of extraordinary, intolerable circumstances-- there is no legitimate reason or excuse to deny covenant marriage to those who desire it.