The kind of marital agreement that most of us think of turns marriage into a contract rather than an alliance. Rather than reaffirming a single Meat Union, it suggests that a man and a woman are rather trading partners who protect their own interests without fully trusting each other. We have some points of agreement, but our biggest divergence seems to be your pragmatic view of how marriage interacts with the law (since the right of divorce is not in our favor, we need a written contract to circumvent it as much as possible) and my theological perspective of marriage, which says that we reflect the relationship between Christ and the Church. to trust the Lord, to preserve our marriage without the help of the state, and to trust his destiny, even if our spouses turn away from him. When all is said and done, the matrimonial agreement is a treaty that must be imposed by the state and not by God. At the end of the day, I stand where I have been for years on the issue of marriages – they don`t exactly represent the biblical vision of marriage. When man and woman meet in marriage, they reflect the mystery of the relationship between Christ and the Church. By giving himself for the Church, Christ has abandoned everything. The Church then submits to Christ. This is the model of marriage that was found in Ephesians 5:22-33. As Christians, we are called to present this relationship in our marriages. As sinners, we are called to holiness.
Our faith in Christ is sufficient to unleash the power of marriage. No legal document is necessary to protect God`s plan for marriage. It is true that the standard prenup most people know is an agreed contract created before marriage, which clarifies how money and possession are shared when the couple divorces. However, there are limited cases where a marital agreement could be justified. A marital agreement assumes that there are two separated persons in the marriage and tries to protect the interests of each party. It presents marriage as a contract rather than an alliance. The Bible, on the other hand, is very clear: when two people get married, there are no longer two, but only one. Biblically, a treaty says I will keep my word as long as you keep yours. An alliance, on the other hand, claims that I keep my word, no matter what you do. Unfortunately, I think that trust in the marital agreement has no place. She has elevated the marital agreement instead of an alliance and does not distinguish the practical effects of what she calls a “Christian” marriage agreement from the effects of a secular marriage. What is the commitment of a Christian man and a Christian woman? Should they be 50% obliged? 70% ? Is a 90% commitment enough? Isn`t the answer 100%? When God teaches us about marriage, when he uses these words “one flesh,” it seems to me that God wants husbands and wives to be 100% obligated to each other.
But the existence of a pre-nup puts the couple in conflict. It is as if you were saying to your beloved future spouse, “Honey, let us accept in advance that we do not necessarily commit 100% to each other.” That is why I am very reluctant to support the use of pre-marriage agreements. To me, they simply do not seem compatible with God`s plan for Christian marriage. If you find yourself in a situation where your fiancé`s family asks for a pre-nup, start with a deep breath and think about the love and worry his family has for him. Approach the request with kindness and say you will discuss it with your fiancé and pray about it. Often, men and women can exert great family pressure on them to ask for a pre-Nup – especially if wealth is hereditary – even if it`s not their true desire to have one, so while you`re discussing it with your fiancé, you keep an open mind for his feelings in the matter. Pray assiduously for the decision, both alone and with your fiancé, and if the decision is contrary to the agreement, think about the best way to address his family, whether your fiancé should go home alone or with you.