homepage
  roll on christmas  
click here to find out more about ship of fools click here to sign up for the ship of fools newsletter click here to support ship of fools
community the mystery worshipper gadgets for god caption competition foolishness features ship stuff
discussion boards live chat cafe avatars frequently-asked questions the ten commandments gallery private boards register for the boards
 
Ship of Fools


Post new thread  Post a reply
My profile login | | Directory | Search | FAQs | Board home
   - Printer-friendly view Next oldest thread   Next newest thread
» Ship of Fools   »   » Oblivion   » Evangelical marriage (Page 1)

 - Email this page to a friend or enemy.  
Pages in this thread: 1  2  3 
 
Source: (consider it) Thread: Evangelical marriage
would love to belong
Shipmate
# 16747

 - Posted      Profile for would love to belong   Email would love to belong       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Forgive me if this is the wrong Board. Also, forgive me if this is theologically illiterate or just immature.

I have for a long time envied those who enjoy a Christian marriage in its envangelical format (the only type which I have heard enough about).

I know envy is a sin. Its not envying any particular marriage or spouse, just the concept.

But what I'd like to know is: is it just a concept or does it really exist in more than a tiny minority of evangelical couples?

What I mean is that you marry young to a like-minded evangelical believer. Both parties are virgins on marriage but nevertheless develop a wholly satisfying physical relationship. Both demonstrate humility and Christian self-sacrificial love towards the other as they grow in Christian discipleship. There is no I fidelity or lack of trust. In due course, children appear who are healthy, well adjusted, unselfish, loving and godly. Health and financial and other challenges are overcome by spousal praying together. The marriage endures until death does them part.

That is wonderful but does it exist today, or has it ever existed? Life is messy and always has been. Wars, famines, child deaths, illness, early death, infidelity, selfishness, financial hardships, want, ignorance etc etc. Even if a young evangelical sets out to "make the choice" of a godly marriage, there is no certainty of achieving it. Everything depends on finding a suitable partner of steadfast faith who won't stray and is in it for the long haul.

I wonder if those Christians who are married are prone to comparing their own relationships against this ideal, and finding them wanting. Is this a discouragement from making the best of what you have?

Apologies if this has all been discussed before.

[ 06. August 2013, 11:12: Message edited by: would love to belong ]

Posts: 331 | From: Lost and confused | Registered: Oct 2011  |  IP: Logged
Matt Black

Shipmate
# 2210

 - Posted      Profile for Matt Black   Email Matt Black   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
It's bollocks IME but YMMV...

--------------------
"Protestant and Reformed, according to the Tradition of the ancient Catholic Church" - + John Cosin (1594-1672)

Posts: 14304 | From: Hampshire, UK | Registered: Jan 2002  |  IP: Logged
Gwai
Shipmate
# 11076

 - Posted      Profile for Gwai   Email Gwai   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
In my opinion two broken humans who love God may join together to become one, and have a beautiful marriage, but it will be a broken marriage too, because nothing besides God is perfect. They may be very happy, of course. (And some people with perfect-seeming lives also are just uncomplaining.)

--------------------
A master of men was the Goodly Fere,
A mate of the wind and sea.
If they think they ha’ slain our Goodly Fere
They are fools eternally.


Posts: 11914 | From: Chicago | Registered: Feb 2006  |  IP: Logged
seekingsister
Shipmate
# 17707

 - Posted      Profile for seekingsister   Email seekingsister   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
I think it's incredibly rare. And of course the reason many young evangelicals struggle in marriage is that they've been sold this ideal version, so when they have marital problems, they feel like failures.
Posts: 1371 | From: London | Registered: May 2013  |  IP: Logged
daronmedway
Shipmate
# 3012

 - Posted      Profile for daronmedway     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
It's one thing to have an ideal.

Living up to that ideal is quite another thing.

We don't don't lower the bar because the standard is high.

But we shouldn't pretend things are better than they really are, or that we have achieved a degree of sanctification that we haven't.

Oh, and finally. Don't fall into the trap of thinking that aiming for such a high standard will lead to instant happiness and an easy life. It won't and it doesn't.

Posts: 6976 | From: Southampton | Registered: Jul 2002  |  IP: Logged
Ged
Apprentice
# 16049

 - Posted      Profile for Ged   Email Ged   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Please forgive any "ooh look at me" that might inadvertently come across in what I've said below - I'm just giving you a straight answer.

I think most of your "What I mean..." paragraph describes my marriage, as well as the marriages of my parents, uncle and aunt, and several friends. Caveats, in our case:

1. Children happy etc. but too young to fully satisfy your description.

2. Health and financial challenges mercifully limited so far (8 years).

3. I don't think either of us would claim to be doing very well at the growing together in Christian discipleship. We are too knackered all the time (kids are 5, 2 and 7 weeks). But we are faithful members of a living low Anglican congregation.

4. I don't know if we were young within your meaning, but at 23 and 25 we were the youngest among our peers.

This was what I was drawn to (after some low-level teenage messing about) following the example and encouragement of my parents.

I acknowledge that many strong Christian marriages (in our own church and more generally) are second marriages, and many Christian first marriages break down. Still, I think that the proportion of couples satisfying most of your criteria would be much higher than a tiny minority.

--------------------
"I really agonised a bit."

Posts: 5 | From: Gloucester, UK | Registered: Dec 2010  |  IP: Logged
beatmenace
Shipmate
# 16955

 - Posted      Profile for beatmenace   Email beatmenace   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
would live to belong posted

quote:
What I mean is that you marry young to a like-minded evangelical believer. Both parties are virgins on marriage but nevertheless develop a wholly satisfying physical relationship. Both demonstrate humility and Christian self-sacrificial love towards the other as they grow in Christian discipleship. There is no I fidelity or lack of trust. In due course, children appear who are healthy, well adjusted, unselfish, loving and godly. Health and financial and other challenges are overcome by spousal praying together. The marriage endures until death does them part.

I think this is almost entirely a myth. The big danger i see here and i think i experienced it in part, with that kind of model you carry around a VERY unrealistic expectation of what being married is going to be like - and those false expectations can bring a lot of pain to the relationship later on.

The 'health,financial and other challenges' - particularly if you have been primed to not expect them, can make or break the relationship. So the more grounded you are the better.

Having said that - no Marriage Preparation Course in this country would tell you its going to be like that. However i imagine in the States it could be different.


quote:
In due course, children appear who are healthy, well adjusted, unselfish, loving and godly.
What planet are you on?

--------------------
"I'm the village idiot , aspiring to great things." (The Icicle Works)

Posts: 297 | From: Whitley Bay | Registered: Feb 2012  |  IP: Logged
The Midge
Shipmate
# 2398

 - Posted      Profile for The Midge   Author's homepage     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
For richer or poorer
In sickness and in health

And as for Christian self-sacrificial love: That only really comes into play when the other half is being an inconsiderate, selfish git and does not respond likewise.

So to paraphrase what you said "life is totally FUBAR." Things go wrong but God redeems.

Good marriages require more grace than sex.

--------------------
Some days you are the fly.
On other days you are the windscreen.

Posts: 1085 | Registered: Feb 2002  |  IP: Logged
The Revolutionist
Shipmate
# 4578

 - Posted      Profile for The Revolutionist   Email The Revolutionist   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
I've a classic "evangelical marriage" - my wife and I met through the Christian Union at university, got married shortly after, both saved sex for marriage. Four years in, it's been good but far from problem-free.

I don't know where the expectation of a problem-free evangelical marriage is coming from - it's certainly not one an expectation that we had or were given. We knew going in that we live in a fallen, broken world, and that affects everything, including marriage. We knew we'd need to work at it. We didn't expect to have a perfectly satisfying physical relationship straight off - it would take time.

That said, married life has been a lot tougher than we expected in many ways. I don't think our churches and fellow evangelical Christians idealise marriage, but I don't think that we were as well prepared or supported in the challenges of marrying young as we could have been.

But for all its problems, there are lots of blessings. We are completely committed to each other and trust each other, so that's made facing the difficulties we've had that much more bearable without having any insecurity about whether the marriage will last to worry about.

We pray together, and that's really good - that doesn't result in God removing all our problems, but does help us to stay close to each other and to God through our problems.

We each have our ups and downs in our Christian life and discipleship, but we do support one another and marriage has certainly been a big training programme in unselfishness for each of us.

All marriages have their problems and difficulties. But I believe that marriage "till death us do part", with sex kept for the marriage relationship, and with both partners following God, is the best context for facing life's problems within a relationship. "Evangelical" marriages have some problems and difficulties that other marriages don't have, of course, but I'd rather have these problems than the problems that come from doing it other ways.

In short, in my experience, "evangelical" marriage is good but no fairy-tale. No-one has the fairy-tale, but I think there are lots of solid evangelical marriages with their normal share of difficulties and joys.

Posts: 1296 | From: London | Registered: May 2003  |  IP: Logged
Hawk

Semi-social raptor
# 14289

 - Posted      Profile for Hawk   Author's homepage   Email Hawk   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by would love to belong:
What I mean is that you marry young to a like-minded evangelical believer. Both parties are virgins on marriage but nevertheless develop a wholly satisfying physical relationship. Both demonstrate humility and Christian self-sacrificial love towards the other as they grow in Christian discipleship. There is no I fidelity or lack of trust. In due course, children appear who are healthy, well adjusted, unselfish, loving and godly. Health and financial and other challenges are overcome by spousal praying together. The marriage endures until death does them part.

When me and Mrs Hawk were doing our marraige prep we did it with a lovely evangelical couple who seemed to exhibit such wonderful traits as you describe. There are others in my church as well we have got to know who also exhibit this. Yet what we discovered on speaking to our marriage-prep friends was that this didn't just happen automatically. And it isn't always the case every day. When they first got married there were some significant problems that needed to be worked through that drove one or the other of them to tears. And these were just the ones they chose to share with us. I am sure their marriage isn't always 100% bliss even now, with other issues arising that need to be worked through, both with their own relationship, and with that of their two lovely young children.

I don't accept that your description is an unatainable myth, or an impossibly high ideal. Of course maintaining such an ideal at full throttle 24/7 is impossible, but in general it should be true of every marraige IMO. But it is one that only comes through hard work, humility, good communication, and putting God at the centre of your life. And even then not every day matches the ideal. Somedays one spouse gets tired and ratty and doesn't display due Christian self-sacrifical love and they get on their spouse's nerves. Another day their child may bully their younger sibling. A good marriage is built day by day, it doesn't appear on one's wedding day already complete.

--------------------
“We are to find God in what we know, not in what we don't know." Dietrich Bonhoeffer

See my blog for 'interesting' thoughts

Posts: 1739 | From: Oxford, UK | Registered: Nov 2008  |  IP: Logged
Kwesi
Shipmate
# 10274

 - Posted      Profile for Kwesi   Email Kwesi   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Of Ronald Reagan it was said:" Born again, and married again."

" Let him that thinketh he standeth take heed lest he fall.

Posts: 1641 | From: South Ofankor | Registered: Sep 2005  |  IP: Logged
Erroneous Monk
Shipmate
# 10858

 - Posted      Profile for Erroneous Monk   Email Erroneous Monk   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
As a Roman Catholic, my understanding is that the model for marriage is the marriage between Christ and his Church. That marriage has been flawed - marked by betrayal and constant need for reconciliation - throughout the ages, right from the start. It is, therefore, a very good model for a Catholic Christian marriage.

The interesting thing about the OP-er's model for marriage is that it *doesn't* seem to feature betrayal, and therefore doesn't seem to feature mercy and reconciliation either. That wouldn't work for me. But each to their own.

--------------------
And I shot a man in Tesco, just to watch him die.

Posts: 2950 | From: I cannot tell you, for you are not a friar | Registered: Jan 2006  |  IP: Logged
Spiffy
Ship's WonderSheep
# 5267

 - Posted      Profile for Spiffy   Author's homepage   Email Spiffy   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
I get a little bit annoyed by this idealization of marriage that I see in (primarily) evangelical circles. Particularly the part where it's expected that every single person will find their partner and live happily ever after.

Because I've seen people fall in love with this ideal and berate themselves for not being able to follow the "heavenly guideline" and jump into relationships and fall apart when it turns out this person isn't "the one", and get desperate because they're getting old (they're be 25 in TWO YEARS!)

And then a week later they're in love again and it's the one this time, I promise, Mary Sue! And they've got a sibling who is just perfect for you because of course a single person can never be happy, even after being single for pretty darn close to a decade. Cue the crazy cat lady jokes.

It's really hard to be a good supportive friend when all you want to do is grab them by the shoulders and shaaaaaaaake them and scream, "Being single is not a death sentence! Now go get a new hobby, like gardening or miniature painting or something!"

And I know, I just know, when these friends do finally get married, the falling out and crying and screaming on my couch won't end. Because they've idealized the concept of a perfect marriage and don't realize there's nothing perfect this side of Heaven, no matter how much you pray for rightness.

--------------------
Looking for a simple solution to all life's problems? We are proud to present obstinate denial. Accept no substitute. Accept nothing.
--Night Vale Radio Twitter Account

Posts: 10281 | From: Beervana | Registered: Dec 2003  |  IP: Logged
Doc Tor
Deepest Red
# 9748

 - Posted      Profile for Doc Tor     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Erroneous Monk:
As a Roman Catholic, my understanding is that the model for marriage is the marriage between Christ and his Church.

If I read it right, marriage is the model of the relationship between Christ and his Church. It gives an earthly metaphor for something ineffable, to help us understand how Christ and the Church interact, and not a heavenly metaphor as to how husband and wife are supposed to interact.

--------------------
Forward the New Republic

Posts: 9131 | From: Ultima Thule | Registered: Jul 2005  |  IP: Logged
Snags
Utterly socially unrealistic
# 15351

 - Posted      Profile for Snags   Author's homepage   Email Snags   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Ref the OP, I would say that's at best the Hallmark version, not the real version. Hopefully one doesn't go into marriage thinking "Well this will be shit", but equally one should be going in eyes open that there will be problems, there will be hardships, and there will be times when you seriously wonder whether it was a smart move. And all of that in a healthy marriage that from the outside might superficially look like the one described in the OP.

So yes, it sort of exists, but only as the edited highlights version. The twee Facebook status update version. The one with all the references to hard graft, swallowing pride, eating shit, and just plain knuckling down and exercising your will to honour the vows and build the thing that is stronger. And that only when it goes well and both partners are "on message" about what's involved in making it work.

And as Spiffy says, it's not the only Good Option out there.

Disclaimer: I'm notionally an evangelical, and my marriage kind of fits, minus the kids. We were married in our mid-twenties, were "virgins but not naïve" (cough), had a strong realisation that it takes effort to make it work and both committed to putting the effort it.

If I look at my life/marriage I don't think we've had much hardship - we have been hugely blessed. But if I was writing the book, I could spin it a bit differently (infertility, good friend/business partner killed soon after new venture started, financial uncertainty etc.). What's made it work isn't the ideal, or the fact that the faeries take Mrs Snags farts away.

What makes it work is we were on the same page when we got engaged, and we've worked hard to keep ourselves on the same page all the way through. But that can feel like flowers and sunshine too. Go figure [Smile]

--------------------
Vain witterings :-: Vain pretentions :-: The Dog's Blog(locks)

Posts: 1399 | From: just north of That London | Registered: Dec 2009  |  IP: Logged
daronmedway
Shipmate
# 3012

 - Posted      Profile for daronmedway     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Doc Tor:
quote:
Originally posted by Erroneous Monk:
As a Roman Catholic, my understanding is that the model for marriage is the marriage between Christ and his Church.

If I read it right, marriage is the model of the relationship between Christ and his Church. It gives an earthly metaphor for something ineffable, to help us understand how Christ and the Church interact, and not a heavenly metaphor as to how husband and wife are supposed to interact.
You have it precisely reversed.
Posts: 6976 | From: Southampton | Registered: Jul 2002  |  IP: Logged
Stejjie
Shipmate
# 13941

 - Posted      Profile for Stejjie   Author's homepage   Email Stejjie   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by daronmedway:
quote:
Originally posted by Doc Tor:
quote:
Originally posted by Erroneous Monk:
As a Roman Catholic, my understanding is that the model for marriage is the marriage between Christ and his Church.

If I read it right, marriage is the model of the relationship between Christ and his Church. It gives an earthly metaphor for something ineffable, to help us understand how Christ and the Church interact, and not a heavenly metaphor as to how husband and wife are supposed to interact.
You have it precisely reversed.
Just had a look at the Ephesians passage and while most of the time Paul does seem to be using the relationship between Christ and Church as the model for human marriages, as daronmedway and others suggest, suddenly by v32 he's saying that he's applying the earthly model to the "mystery" of the Church-Christ relationship. Which suggests a) it's intended to be understood both ways or b) Paul got hopelessly confused halfway through that passage and forgot the point he was trying to make. I couldn't possibly comment.

(Though I do think v33 should begin "What was I saying? Oh yeah, er... you should love your wives. Yeah, that was it!" But that may just be me...).

--------------------
A not particularly-alt-worshippy, fairly mainstream, mildly evangelical, vaguely post-modern-ish Baptist

Posts: 1117 | From: Urmston, Manchester, UK | Registered: Jul 2008  |  IP: Logged
The Midge
Shipmate
# 2398

 - Posted      Profile for The Midge   Author's homepage     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Stejjie:
Just had a look at the Ephesians passage and while most of the time Paul does seem to be using the relationship between Christ and Church as the model for human marriages, as daronmedway and others suggest, suddenly by v32 he's saying that he's applying the earthly model to the "mystery" of the Church-Christ relationship. Which suggests a) it's intended to be understood both ways or b) Paul got hopelessly confused halfway through that passage and forgot the point he was trying to make. I couldn't possibly comment.

(Though I do think v33 should begin "What was I saying? Oh yeah, er... you should love your wives. Yeah, that was it!" But that may just be me...).

It probably took him about 15 minutes to write which probably meant that he (being male) started to think about sex, because it is at least an urban myth that men think about sex every 15 minutes. IME that may be more true below a certain age.

--------------------
Some days you are the fly.
On other days you are the windscreen.

Posts: 1085 | Registered: Feb 2002  |  IP: Logged
Doc Tor
Deepest Red
# 9748

 - Posted      Profile for Doc Tor     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by daronmedway:
quote:
Originally posted by Doc Tor:
quote:
Originally posted by Erroneous Monk:
As a Roman Catholic, my understanding is that the model for marriage is the marriage between Christ and his Church.

If I read it right, marriage is the model of the relationship between Christ and his Church. It gives an earthly metaphor for something ineffable, to help us understand how Christ and the Church interact, and not a heavenly metaphor as to how husband and wife are supposed to interact.
You have it precisely reversed.
No, you do. [Razz]

--------------------
Forward the New Republic

Posts: 9131 | From: Ultima Thule | Registered: Jul 2005  |  IP: Logged
the giant cheeseburger
Shipmate
# 10942

 - Posted      Profile for the giant cheeseburger     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by The Midge:
IME that may be more true below a certain age.

No. Desire is constant while it's just capacity that diminishes.

--------------------
If I give a homeopathy advocate a really huge punch in the face, can the injury be cured by giving them another really small punch in the face?

Posts: 4834 | From: Adelaide, South Australia. | Registered: Jan 2006  |  IP: Logged
The Midge
Shipmate
# 2398

 - Posted      Profile for The Midge   Author's homepage     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by the giant cheeseburger:
quote:
Originally posted by The Midge:
IME that may be more true below a certain age.

No. Desire is constant while it's just capacity that diminishes.
Oh Shit.

--------------------
Some days you are the fly.
On other days you are the windscreen.

Posts: 1085 | Registered: Feb 2002  |  IP: Logged
Mudfrog
Shipmate
# 8116

 - Posted      Profile for Mudfrog   Email Mudfrog   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
I think the premise in the OP and especially in the subsequent ones, is actually an insult to non-evangelicals. What are you suggesting by calling your description of the blueprint marriage an 'evangelical' marriage? Are you not suggesting that non-evangelicals are making do with lower expectations or have fewer morals?

My mother attends an Anglican church, has deep but not extensive beliefs, is far from evangelical but when my sister got pregnant and then married, told her it was 'the wrong way round.' I think most people have this idealised view but are probably aware that it won't happen.

It's like our hopes for the family holiday or the perfect Christmas; we all know what the blueprint is but we quickly excuse ourselves from living up to it - but even those who were active sexually before marriage still have their hopes for the 'perfect' marriage subsequently.

It was more common in our grandparents' day to be virgins when people married - and we might sneer at that and say, 'Oh it's a myth' but for a short time it was possibly expected and maybe we in the church should encourage that. Fornication seems to be in fashion and maybe we've given up on teaching Biblical morality with the defeatist and false attitude of 'oh well why bother it'll only happen anyway?'

Should the church not offer a better morality rather than just following public opinion? Should we not encourage our young people to wait?

[ 07. August 2013, 07:06: Message edited by: Mudfrog ]

--------------------
"The point of having an open mind, like having an open mouth, is to close it on something solid."
G.K. Chesterton

Posts: 8237 | From: North Yorkshire, UK | Registered: Jul 2004  |  IP: Logged
Arethosemyfeet
Shipmate
# 17047

 - Posted      Profile for Arethosemyfeet   Email Arethosemyfeet   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
I would suggest that there is a difference between the pre-marital sex of a previous age (where, I understand, it was common outside of the upper class to start having sex with your intended and then marry when pregnancy occurred) and today's promiscuity with no intention of a lifelong relationship.
Posts: 2933 | From: Hebrides | Registered: Apr 2012  |  IP: Logged
birdie

fowl
# 2173

 - Posted      Profile for birdie     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by would love to belong:
Even if a young evangelical sets out to "make the choice" of a godly marriage, there is no certainty of achieving it. Everything depends on finding a suitable partner of steadfast faith who won't stray and is in it for the long haul.

No, not really. Having a 'suitable partner of steadfast faith' etc etc doesn't guarantee a good sex life, healthy children, any children at all, the overcoming of health challenges, or anything that isn't within human control.

It's all part of the 'god as vending machine' thinking that pervades some parts of the church - put 'two virgins on their wedding night' in the machine, and out comes 'wild and fulfilling sex life' as a reward. Luckily, even though we did get told this sort of stuff, mr b and I were well aware it was bollocks and ignored it.

Good job really, as when our two children, both with health problems and disabilities, came along, we had enough to deal with without feeling that we somehow 'deserved' healthy children because we'd done everything 'right'.

--------------------
"Gentlemen, I wash my hands of this weirdness."
Captain Jack Sparrow

Posts: 1290 | From: the edge | Registered: Jan 2002  |  IP: Logged
Avila
Shipmate
# 15541

 - Posted      Profile for Avila   Email Avila   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Arethosemyfeet:
I would suggest that there is a difference between the pre-marital sex of a previous age (where, I understand, it was common outside of the upper class to start having sex with your intended and then marry when pregnancy occurred) and today's promiscuity with no intention of a lifelong relationship.

As opposed to the traditions of the upper classes to have sex with the servants then throw them out if they got pregnant?

I suspect that many of those 'marry when pregnancy occurred' examples of yours didn't start with lifelong intentions but the pregnancy pushed them into it.

--------------------
http://aweebleswonderings.blogspot.com/

Posts: 1305 | From: west midlands | Registered: Mar 2010  |  IP: Logged
Cara
Shipmate
# 16966

 - Posted      Profile for Cara     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Yes, I too am a bit confused about why the OP is just talking about "evangelical" marriage.

Isn't any Christian marriage--Roman Catholic, Orthodox, whatever--and Jewish as well for that matter--ideally meant to be living in the eyes of God, both partners seeing God as hugely important to them individually and also to the marriage, demonstrating humility and self-sacrificing love, etc etc?

And ideally both partners are virgin on marriage--but this ideal of course is rarely held to any more--personally I feel if a couple is committed, it's fine to make love before marriage--it's promiscuity that's disturbing and an abuse of the gift of sexuality--but anyway.

This Christian ideal of marriage is just that, an ideal. As we are all human, and as marriage is often very very difficult, even those most committed to the ideal fall short of it sometimes.

The contemporary culture's idea of marriage is also an ideal--that one's spouse can be everything, and fulfil every emotional and intellectual need.

It's easy, yes, to compare one's marriage to either of these ideals and find it wanting--and end up not making the best of what one has. I agree this is a trap all too easy to fall into.

Re children, if any evangelical church or leader is implying that healthy, happy, well-adjusted children will naturally follow as a matter of course, this is a misleading and evil message!

--------------------
Pondering.

Posts: 898 | Registered: Feb 2012  |  IP: Logged
anoesis
Shipmate
# 14189

 - Posted      Profile for anoesis   Email anoesis   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Mudfrog, I thought your post was interesting, and perhaps I don't, in general, disagree with it, but I really think your analogy needs unpacking...

quote:
Originally posted by Mudfrog:
It's like our hopes for the family holiday or the perfect Christmas; we all know what the blueprint is but we quickly excuse ourselves from living up to it - but even those who were active sexually before marriage still have their hopes for the 'perfect' marriage subsequently.

The first thing that occurred to me when reading that is that the common things that mar family holidays or Christmases are totally outside of our control (poor weather, illness, etc.), so 'blaming' or 'excusing' ourselves is relatively pointless exercise, and secondly, that what constitutes a perfect holiday or a perfect Christmas is going to be different from one person to the next - including, based on my experience, the two people in a marriage - so, sure, we all think we know what the blueprint is, based on our life experiences up to that date, our temperament, etc., but if I as an individual insist on living up to some perceived standard of 'what a marriage should be', that I am enforcing on my partner by suggesting that he shouldn't be 'excusing' himself like this, how does that make things any better?

It's not some ideal you 'live up to', it's a state you 'live in'. A continuous process of adaptation so that you can get as near as realistically possible, for each person, in that particular relationship, to the perfect holiday, or the perfect Sunday afternoon, or whatever, whatever. It's no use looking at someone else's marriage and saying, 'well, we are failing because we don't do it like that'.

Now I should really go and apply some of shite I am spouting to my own life, I suppose.

--------------------
The history of humanity give one little hope that strength left to its own devices won't be abused. Indeed, it gives one little ground to think that strength would continue to exist if it were not abused. -- Dafyd --

Posts: 993 | From: New Zealand | Registered: Oct 2008  |  IP: Logged
Pomona
Shipmate
# 17175

 - Posted      Profile for Pomona   Email Pomona   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Mudfrog:
I think the premise in the OP and especially in the subsequent ones, is actually an insult to non-evangelicals. What are you suggesting by calling your description of the blueprint marriage an 'evangelical' marriage? Are you not suggesting that non-evangelicals are making do with lower expectations or have fewer morals?

My mother attends an Anglican church, has deep but not extensive beliefs, is far from evangelical but when my sister got pregnant and then married, told her it was 'the wrong way round.' I think most people have this idealised view but are probably aware that it won't happen.

It's like our hopes for the family holiday or the perfect Christmas; we all know what the blueprint is but we quickly excuse ourselves from living up to it - but even those who were active sexually before marriage still have their hopes for the 'perfect' marriage subsequently.

It was more common in our grandparents' day to be virgins when people married - and we might sneer at that and say, 'Oh it's a myth' but for a short time it was possibly expected and maybe we in the church should encourage that. Fornication seems to be in fashion and maybe we've given up on teaching Biblical morality with the defeatist and false attitude of 'oh well why bother it'll only happen anyway?'

Should the church not offer a better morality rather than just following public opinion? Should we not encourage our young people to wait?

Christian attitudes to sex (and marriage and childrearing) have varied a lot over the centuries and there has never been one single idealised form of sex/marriage/childrearing.

--------------------
Consider the work of God: Who is able to straighten what he has bent? [Ecclesiastes 7:13]

Posts: 5319 | From: UK | Registered: Jun 2012  |  IP: Logged
seekingsister
Shipmate
# 17707

 - Posted      Profile for seekingsister   Email seekingsister   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Mudfrog:
Fornication seems to be in fashion and maybe we've given up on teaching Biblical morality with the defeatist and false attitude of 'oh well why bother it'll only happen anyway?'

Should the church not offer a better morality rather than just following public opinion? Should we not encourage our young people to wait?

A good number of Christians are unconvinced that fornication describes sex between committed partners who are not yet legally married.

The church should teach Biblical morality. What it should not do is approach those who fail to live up to those standards with judgment. Many people come to Christ as adults or older teens and have already been sexually active. Many people come to Christ while in a cohabiting sexual relationship.

quote:
Originally posted by Mudfrog:
It's like our hopes for the family holiday or the perfect Christmas; we all know what the blueprint is but we quickly excuse ourselves from living up to it - but even those who were active sexually before marriage still have their hopes for the 'perfect' marriage subsequently.

I'm unaware that the blueprint for a "perfect marriage" is based primarily on pre-marital virginity. Anyone who believes so is setting themselves up for some major disappointment.
Posts: 1371 | From: London | Registered: May 2013  |  IP: Logged
The Midge
Shipmate
# 2398

 - Posted      Profile for The Midge   Author's homepage     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Jade Constable:
Christian attitudes to sex (and marriage and childrearing) have varied a lot over the centuries and there has never been one single idealised form of sex/marriage/childrearing.

The same could be said to Israel's attitudes to the worship of God/ gods in the old testament. There are deliberate parallels drawn between fornication and idolatry. The thing is that their unfaithfulness to God wasn't right. Hosea's marriage to an adulterous wife (Gomer)at God's command being the most extreme example.

I think their is a difference between pragmatic expression and ideal. The former is how we live as a broken people in a broken world and the latter being God's design or intention. Season to taste with cultural preferences which don't matter all that much.

I hasten to add that God's design is not that we all become evangelical husband and wife. Other lifestyles are available, each with limitations and boundaries. Biblical examples (such as polygamous marriages) also have a huge health warning. Just look at Solomon and Jacob etc.

--------------------
Some days you are the fly.
On other days you are the windscreen.

Posts: 1085 | Registered: Feb 2002  |  IP: Logged
Hawk

Semi-social raptor
# 14289

 - Posted      Profile for Hawk   Author's homepage   Email Hawk   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Cara:
personally I feel if a couple is committed, it's fine to make love before marriage

If the couple is that commited to each other why aren't they married already?

Its a nice idea that sex is fine if you're commited to marriage but very easily abused. Throughout history there has been so many cases of women believing the man when he professed undying love and promised marriage, but after he had his fun he was off, leaving the woman heartbroken and sometimes pregnant as well, just to add injury to insult.

To prevent this a couple who is committed enough to marry should prove it to each other by actually marrying, before having sex. Before the ring is on the finger either one of them can change their mind and run off. (Nowadays of course even marraige isn't a secure promise but it is still more secure than mere promises of 'commitment').

quote:
Originally posted by Arethosemyfeet:
I would suggest that there is a difference between the pre-marital sex of a previous age (where, I understand, it was common outside of the upper class to start having sex with your intended and then marry when pregnancy occurred) and today's promiscuity with no intention of a lifelong relationship.

Which previous age was this? Speaking to my Grandma, it was very much the norm for her generation in the 40's and 50's to not have sex before marraige. And she was certainly not upper class. I think this was the expected and practiced norm for the majority of people of all classes for quite a large proportion of western Christian history.

--------------------
“We are to find God in what we know, not in what we don't know." Dietrich Bonhoeffer

See my blog for 'interesting' thoughts

Posts: 1739 | From: Oxford, UK | Registered: Nov 2008  |  IP: Logged
Arethosemyfeet
Shipmate
# 17047

 - Posted      Profile for Arethosemyfeet   Email Arethosemyfeet   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Hawk:
quote:
Originally posted by Cara:
personally I feel if a couple is committed, it's fine to make love before marriage

If the couple is that commited to each other why aren't they married already?

Its a nice idea that sex is fine if you're commited to marriage but very easily abused. Throughout history there has been so many cases of women believing the man when he professed undying love and promised marriage, but after he had his fun he was off, leaving the woman heartbroken and sometimes pregnant as well, just to add injury to insult.

To prevent this a couple who is committed enough to marry should prove it to each other by actually marrying, before having sex. Before the ring is on the finger either one of them can change their mind and run off. (Nowadays of course even marraige isn't a secure promise but it is still more secure than mere promises of 'commitment').

quote:
Originally posted by Arethosemyfeet:
I would suggest that there is a difference between the pre-marital sex of a previous age (where, I understand, it was common outside of the upper class to start having sex with your intended and then marry when pregnancy occurred) and today's promiscuity with no intention of a lifelong relationship.

Which previous age was this? Speaking to my Grandma, it was very much the norm for her generation in the 40's and 50's to not have sex before marraige. And she was certainly not upper class. I think this was the expected and practiced norm for the majority of people of all classes for quite a large proportion of western Christian history.

I was thinking much further back than that - pre industrial revolution. I'm afraid I can't support it, it was an off-hand comment from one of my history lecturers 12 years ago.
Posts: 2933 | From: Hebrides | Registered: Apr 2012  |  IP: Logged
Albertus
Shipmate
# 13356

 - Posted      Profile for Albertus     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
No, I think you're right, arethosemyfeet. Before the evangelical revivals of the mid C19 it was I think in many places the norm, among the working classes, to take pregnancy as the cue for marriage- often between people who had intended to marry each other anyway.

--------------------
My beard is a testament to my masculinity and virility, and demonstrates that I am a real man. Trouble is, bits of quiche sometimes get caught in it.

Posts: 6498 | From: Y Sowth | Registered: Jan 2008  |  IP: Logged
Boogie

Boogie on down!
# 13538

 - Posted      Profile for Boogie     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Albertus:
No, I think you're right, arethosemyfeet. Before the evangelical revivals of the mid C19 it was I think in many places the norm, among the working classes, to take pregnancy as the cue for marriage- often between people who had intended to marry each other anyway.

The vast majority of my friend's young adults and my sons friends live together first, then get married when they intend to have children. (In fact, I can't think of any who didn't)

Seems like an excellent plan to me.

Posts: 13030 | From: Boogie Wonderland | Registered: Mar 2008  |  IP: Logged
Chorister

Completely Frocked
# 473

 - Posted      Profile for Chorister   Author's homepage     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
I've often heard the argument from people who were young in the 1940s-50s that nobody 'did it' then. However, if you look at the statistics for the number of children who were adopted during that time (often tidied away so that it was kept hushed up) it is obvious that rather a lot of people 'did it' then. I used to buy a magazine where, every month, there was a whole long list of people trying to find their birth parents, who had to give them away. And that's only the ones who wanted to know, and only the ones who bothered to write in to the magazine.

I guess there were those who lived a very sheltered life who thought that everyone was the same as them, and those who lived in a much less cocooned world.

--------------------
Retired, sitting back and watching others for a change.

Posts: 34626 | From: Cream Tealand | Registered: Jun 2001  |  IP: Logged
Doc Tor
Deepest Red
# 9748

 - Posted      Profile for Doc Tor     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Hawk:
quote:
Originally posted by Cara:
personally I feel if a couple is committed, it's fine to make love before marriage

If the couple is that commited to each other why aren't they married already?
They are.

At least according to St Paul, and local custom.

--------------------
Forward the New Republic

Posts: 9131 | From: Ultima Thule | Registered: Jul 2005  |  IP: Logged
SvitlanaV2
Shipmate
# 16967

 - Posted      Profile for SvitlanaV2   Email SvitlanaV2   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Spiffy:
I get a little bit annoyed by this idealization of marriage that I see in (primarily) evangelical circles. Particularly the part where it's expected that every single person will find their partner and live happily ever after.

Because I've seen people fall in love with this ideal and berate themselves for not being able to follow the "heavenly guideline" and jump into relationships and fall apart when it turns out this person isn't "the one", and get desperate because they're getting old (they're be 25 in TWO YEARS!)

And then a week later they're in love again and it's the one this time, I promise, Mary Sue!

I don't know much about these things, but this approach sounds very superficial to me. I thought evangelicals were supposed to be serious-minded people when it came to serious things like marriage. Do the churches really encourage this kind of carry-on?
Posts: 6668 | From: UK | Registered: Feb 2012  |  IP: Logged
Karl: Liberal Backslider
Shipmate
# 76

 - Posted      Profile for Karl: Liberal Backslider   Author's homepage   Email Karl: Liberal Backslider   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Explicitly no, implicitly yes. When you add together the following common themes:

1. No tab A into slot B until you're married, you horny teens and twenty somethings;
2. If you obey 1. above then your sex when you do get to it will be brilliant (actually, given 1., it's got a good chance of being a cross between a Comedy of Errors and Love's Labours Lost, but I digress);
3. God has the right person for you and you just have to find them;

the end result isn't hard to predict.

--------------------
Might as well ask the bloody cat.

Posts: 17938 | From: Chesterfield | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Ahleal V
Shipmate
# 8404

 - Posted      Profile for Ahleal V     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Boogie:
The vast majority of my friend's young adults and my sons friends live together first, then get married when they intend to have children. (In fact, I can't think of any who didn't)

Seems like an excellent plan to me.

Really? I used to think this, but after observing others, it looks far more like like a mini-divorce each time one of these 'long-term relationships' dissolves?

x

AV

Posts: 499 | From: English Spires | Registered: Aug 2004  |  IP: Logged
Doc Tor
Deepest Red
# 9748

 - Posted      Profile for Doc Tor     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
The first ever homegroup I went to as an adult (ConEvo church) consisted of four couples and a few singles. Three of those four couples - all mid-thirties or younger - were divorced within ten years.

Each divorce had its different reasons, but collectively makes a bloody depressing statistic.

--------------------
Forward the New Republic

Posts: 9131 | From: Ultima Thule | Registered: Jul 2005  |  IP: Logged
The Midge
Shipmate
# 2398

 - Posted      Profile for The Midge   Author's homepage     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider:
Explicitly no, implicitly yes. When you add together the following common themes:

1. No tab A into slot B until you're married, you horny teens and twenty somethings;
2. If you obey 1. above then your sex when you do get to it will be brilliant (actually, given 1., it's got a good chance of being a cross between a Comedy of Errors and Love's Labours Lost, but I digress);
3. God has the right person for you and you just have to find them;

the end result isn't hard to predict.

Or to put it more pragmatically.

1) If you do put tab A into slot B before you are married it could cause problems further down the line. Do your best to lay the foundations for a committed long term relationship before you do. Guard yourself against feckless individuals who will take you for granted. This is called self control. It is a desirable character trait.

2) 1 is a skill that you will need to learn just like any other. The chances are that it will be a lot better and more frequent if you get other expressions of love and affection right too.

3)If there is a perfect partner for you the chances are that you have not found them and if you are so lucky your are not their perfect partner. Love takes a lot of hard work, determination and forgiveness. Concentrate on being the best partner you can.

4) Even if you do 1 to 3 there is still a chance of your beloved being a complete bastard. Sorry about that, but some times life is shit. We promise to support you through all life trials regardless.

--------------------
Some days you are the fly.
On other days you are the windscreen.

Posts: 1085 | Registered: Feb 2002  |  IP: Logged
Boogie

Boogie on down!
# 13538

 - Posted      Profile for Boogie     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Ahleal V:
quote:
Originally posted by Boogie:
The vast majority of my friend's young adults and my sons friends live together first, then get married when they intend to have children. (In fact, I can't think of any who didn't)

Seems like an excellent plan to me.

Really? I used to think this, but after observing others, it looks far more like like a mini-divorce each time one of these 'long-term relationships' dissolves?


They didn't dissolve, they got married when they decided they wanted to 'try for a family'. All, so far, are still married. I have been counting the couples and it is 20. Not a big survey, but IME that's what seems to happen.

I lived with my husband for two years before we were married, but that was reasonably unusual back in the mid-70s.

--------------------
Garden. Room. Walk

Posts: 13030 | From: Boogie Wonderland | Registered: Mar 2008  |  IP: Logged
Matt Black

Shipmate
# 2210

 - Posted      Profile for Matt Black   Email Matt Black   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by The Midge:
We promise to support you through all life trials regardless.

And who might this 'we' be?

--------------------
"Protestant and Reformed, according to the Tradition of the ancient Catholic Church" - + John Cosin (1594-1672)

Posts: 14304 | From: Hampshire, UK | Registered: Jan 2002  |  IP: Logged
seekingsister
Shipmate
# 17707

 - Posted      Profile for seekingsister   Email seekingsister   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
If the couple is that commited to each other why aren't they married already?
In my case, we wanted to meet each others' families (who live in all sorts of different countries) before he proposed, and then we were engaged for a year due to the logistics of planning a wedding accommodating so many geographies.

My hard-core evangelical mother said she was unhappy we were living together, and I asked her if she'd be OK with us getting a registry marriage without her in attendance. And she said no! I was pretty surprised by that.

Posts: 1371 | From: London | Registered: May 2013  |  IP: Logged
SvitlanaV2
Shipmate
# 16967

 - Posted      Profile for SvitlanaV2   Email SvitlanaV2   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Cohabitation can lead to different outcomes. What I've read is that in the UK it's increasingly less likely to lead to marriage, which is understandable, because the social pressure to marry is declining. Middle class people in general are more likely to end up married than people lower down the social scale.

Re the American evangelical divorce rate, one explanation I came across was to do with class; low income and education levels tend to lead to more divorce, and American evangelicals suffer from these social problems more than other American Christians. Some commentators blame the excessive individualism in American evangelical theology.

Posts: 6668 | From: UK | Registered: Feb 2012  |  IP: Logged
The Midge
Shipmate
# 2398

 - Posted      Profile for The Midge   Author's homepage     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Matt Black:
quote:
Originally posted by The Midge:
We promise to support you through all life trials regardless.

And who might this 'we' be?
In the evangelical context? I would say the church. A marriage is a communal sacrament is it not?

Though being pragmatic I would have to admit that a cold shoulder might be more likely to one or both parts of a failing partnership.

--------------------
Some days you are the fly.
On other days you are the windscreen.

Posts: 1085 | Registered: Feb 2002  |  IP: Logged
would love to belong
Shipmate
# 16747

 - Posted      Profile for would love to belong   Email would love to belong       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Lots of interesting comments and experiences.

My OP wasn't to suggest that only evangelical marriages aspire to high ideals. My parents were happily married for 59 years (father died in February) and only had a nominal church connection to sustain them, yet somehow managed to get along and survive the inevitable downs (of which there were many). So it can be done, evangelical or not.

My experience of evangelicalism is that marriages are expected to last (even if they don't in reality) and that the scenario in my OP is the aim (sorry, the bit about kids was poorly expressed; the evangelical view is that having kids is a blessing, you may not be blessed with them even though you do everything marriage and sex-wise within your own power "right", and if you are blessed with kids they may not be healthy etc but you should seek to raise them in a godly way).

The replies have convinced me that the ideal is definitely worth seeking, but you can never say that you have reached it (or at least not until the moment of death of the first partner to die). It requires hard work, perseverance, fidelity etc on the part of BOTH parties over the long term.

What I was most interested in, however, was perhaps the demoralising effect of the ideal on all people ie singles, divorced, widowed after a less than happy marriage, those struggling in marriage (ie everyone currently married). I think only one poster addressed tghis directly. Life is never as good as it could be. We make the best of it. My old granny had a set of bridge cards on which was printed "Life ain't about holding the good cards, it's playing a bad hand well".

[ 07. August 2013, 13:26: Message edited by: would love to belong ]

Posts: 331 | From: Lost and confused | Registered: Oct 2011  |  IP: Logged
Erroneous Monk
Shipmate
# 10858

 - Posted      Profile for Erroneous Monk   Email Erroneous Monk   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by would love to belong:
My parents were happily married for 59 years (father died in February) and only had a nominal church connection to sustain them, yet somehow managed to get along and survive the inevitable downs (of which there were many). So it can be done, evangelical or not.


This is a rhetorical question rather than a challenge to your relationship with your parents but how do you know they were happily married?

--------------------
And I shot a man in Tesco, just to watch him die.

Posts: 2950 | From: I cannot tell you, for you are not a friar | Registered: Jan 2006  |  IP: Logged
would love to belong
Shipmate
# 16747

 - Posted      Profile for would love to belong   Email would love to belong       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Well, okay, they sustained a marriage for 59 years in the sense of living together, sharing a household and being friends. And raising 2 kids, but that was all over after the first 20 years. I dont think either of them looked for or considered happiness.
Posts: 331 | From: Lost and confused | Registered: Oct 2011  |  IP: Logged
Erroneous Monk
Shipmate
# 10858

 - Posted      Profile for Erroneous Monk   Email Erroneous Monk   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by would love to belong:
Well, okay, they sustained a marriage for 59 years in the sense of living together, sharing a household and being friends. And raising 2 kids, but that was all over after the first 20 years. I dont think either of them looked for or considered happiness.

I'm in the raising kids phase, which I expect to take another 15 years (which will take me up to a grand total of 30 years of marriage, God willing). But I already wrestle with the question of whether it is an unarguable good, and if so, why, to remain married thereafter, if that isn't bringing me happiness.

The Church teaches that it *is* an unarguable good, and I assent to that. But it is becoming increasingly difficult to believe something that flies in the face of logic, reason and, possibly, my own well-being.

I am no longer sure I know what a long marriage "proves".

--------------------
And I shot a man in Tesco, just to watch him die.

Posts: 2950 | From: I cannot tell you, for you are not a friar | Registered: Jan 2006  |  IP: Logged



Pages in this thread: 1  2  3 
 
Post new thread  Post a reply Close thread   Feature thread   Move thread   Delete thread Next oldest thread   Next newest thread
 - Printer-friendly view
Go to:

Contact us | Ship of Fools | Privacy statement

© Ship of Fools 2016

Powered by Infopop Corporation
UBB.classicTM 6.5.0

 
follow ship of fools on twitter
buy your ship of fools postcards
sip of fools mugs from your favourite nautical website
 
 
  ship of fools