Touchstone has convened a unique symposium to look at the topic of preparing for marriage in our contemporary society, covering aspects such as the role of the churches, courtship, and romance.
It starts with senior editor S. M. Hutchens's proposal that marriage should be arranged by the parents. Then, there are responses by the young-and-married Jocelyn Mathewes, long-time InterVarsity campus worker (and Touchstone contributing editor) Kevin Offner, and senior editor James Hitchcock.
It is becoming harder and harder today for Christian single adults to meet potential life partners. And this comes to them as a surprise. Fresh out of college, they land their first job in a big city that is teeming with other singles and has vibrant and large young adult groups in its churches. Surely, they think, after a year or two, they will meet someone special, begin dating, and get married. With so many marriageable single peers all around, marriage will, well, “just happen.”
To read all of Helpers Meet?, click here. Then, please join the discussion by clicking on the comments link below.
The discussion engendered by the thoughts of four different individuals was very stimulating. Thank you. I was particularly impressed, however, with the idea which Kevin Offner put forward, that of creating contexts in which young people can meet and interact in healthy and unpressured ways.
I would suggest that it not only serves as a "meeting place" but also provides the opportunity to foster a way of relating that counteracts the negative tendencies within the culture at large. In that culture patterns of relating are typically very self-centered and have no transcendent reference point, that is no element in the relationship which goes beyond the self interest of the couple itself. Whereas, in the potential culture of an intentional "meeting place" such as Offner provides in his dinner parties, young people might have the opportunity to taste the richness that comes into relationships when they are shaped around something transcendent to either party. After all, is it not in the mutual exploration and cultivation of a common calling that the deepest richness emerges? And should not this type of exploration characterize all gatherings of Christian friends?
Sometimes it happens in more formal ways and sometimes spontaneously, but the uniqueness of Christian friendship is that its focus is always beyond itself. The friendship gets taken up into something grand and glorious, something much greater than itself, and it is this that infects it with richness. Of course, the kind of friendship I speak of goes far beyond the sphere of what we call the "romantic" relationship--it involves friendship with colleagues, and with siblings, and with fellow believers--but certainly this type of friendship and interaction should form a substantial part, if not the foundational part in all relationships that end in marriage.
Posted by: Robert Wilcox | December 16, 2007 at 10:03 PM
The discussion engendered by the thoughts of four different individuals was very stimulating. Thank you. I was particularly impressed, however, with the idea which Kevin Offner put forward, that of creating contexts in which young people can meet and interact in healthy and unpressured ways.
I would suggest that it not only serves as a "meeting place" but also provides the opportunity to foster a way of relating that counteracts the negative tendencies within the culture at large. In that culture patterns of relating are typically very self-centered and have no transcendent reference point, that is no element in the relationship which goes beyond the self interest of the couple itself. Whereas, in the potential culture of an intentional "meeting place" such as Offner provides in his dinner parties, young people might have the opportunity to taste the richness that comes into relationships when they are shaped around something transcendent to either party. After all, is it not in the mutual exploration and cultivation of a common calling that the deepest richness emerges? And should not this type of exploration characterize all gatherings of Christian friends?
Sometimes it happens in more formal ways and sometimes spontaneously, but the uniqueness of Christian friendship is that its focus is always beyond itself. The friendship gets taken up into something grand and glorious, something much greater than itself, and it is this that infects it with richness. Of course, the kind of friendship I speak of goes far beyond the sphere of what we call the "romantic" relationship--it involves friendship with colleagues, and with siblings, and with fellow believers--but certainly this type of friendship and interaction should form a substantial part, if not the foundational part in all relationships that end in marriage.
Posted by: Robert Wilcox | December 16, 2007 at 10:04 PM
I was uncomfortable with the idea that marriages should be arranged. There are plenty of succesful marriages in the Bible which weren't arranged. However, I understand and respect the sentiment.
Parents these days are almost "stand offish". They do have an important role and should be able to endorse or fail to endorse their child's romantic interests, no matter how old the "child".
The church as a whole should also strive to give young one oppurtunities to get to know one another. This DOES NOT MEAN SINGLES NIGHT. That would totally defeat the purpose. But, mixed groups where romantic relationships can grow under the watchful eye of older, married, and experienced Christians is useful and loving.
Posted by: Nick | December 27, 2007 at 11:57 AM
I would suggest that anyone who thinks marriages should be arranged is unfamiliar with both the history and the present reality of arranged marriage. My children attend a high school at which many of the students, first generation immigrants from India, are ALREADY involved in arranged marriage contracts. Many have never met the man or woman to whom they have been committed by their parents, and most have no desire to enter into such an arrangement. Moreover, these arrangements are not intended to provide a proper mate but to cement familial and economic alliances--materialism at its worst. Anyone reading the doleful record of wife abuse and "dowry murder" in India ought to take note.
Historically, in the Christian world, arranged marriages were, for the most part, commercial transactions of the middle and upper classes (the lower classes, lacking property, eschewed arranged marriages, and often the formality of marriage in its entirety), intended again, to cement family fortunes with little concern for the happiness or welfare of the couples involved. Among the upper classes, it was widely understood that marriages were matters of politics, and that once the "heir and the spare" were provided, both parties could look to greener pastures, provided each acted with discretion. Among the middle classes, where divorce was anathema and respectability a mantra, men indulged the double standard, while women remained unhappily imprisoned in loveless marriages.
That is not to say that there were arranged marriages that did not work, only that arranged marriages are no guarantee of success than ones in which the couple freely choose each other.
I would also add that arranged marriages run counter to the Christian understanding of the sacrament, whether Western or Eastern. In the Western Tradition, the couple must freely choose each other, and plight their troth before the Church which blesses and sanctifies the union. In the Eastern Tradition, the man and woman come freely to the Church, which unites them in Christ.
In both cases, however, the emphasis is on the FREE UNION of man and woman. And the Church has always had an ambivalent attitude at best with regard to marriage alliances.
Dr. Hutchens may not like present American mating rituals, but his suggested return to arranged marriages is naive in the extreme, and also raises serious issues about its compatibility with the ideal of Christian marriage.
Posted by: Stuart Koehl | December 29, 2007 at 09:45 AM
I hope the learned gentleman considering aspects of marriage realise that a wholly new interpretation of the moral teachings of Christ is spreading on the web and it describes a new covenant of marriage. I quote from OVI magazine review:
The Final Freedoms ©free
On the horizon is an approaching religious [and scientific] furore so contentious, any clash of civilizations may have to wait. On one side, a manuscript titled: The Final Freedoms, against all the gravitas religious tradition can bring to bear.
The first wholly new interpretation for 2000 years of the moral teachings of Jesus the Christ is on the web. It focuses specifically on marriage and human sexuality, overturning all natural law ethics and theory. At stake is the credibility of several thousand years of religious history and moral theology and must undoubtably impact other fields of intellectual inquiry.
What first appears an utterly preposterous challenge to the religious status quo rewards closer examination, for it carries within its pages an ideas both subtle and sublime, what the theological history of religion either ignored, were unable to imagine or dismissed as impossible. An error of presumption which could now leave 'tradition' staring into the abyss and humble the heights of scientific speculation.
If this material is confirmed and there appears to be both the means and a concerted effort to test and authenticate it, the greatest unresolved questions of human existence, meaning and evil may finally have been untangled.
Published [at the moment] only on the web as a free [1.4meg] pdf download, this new teaching has nothing whatsoever to do with any existing religious conception known to history. It is unique in every respect. It would appear that the impossible has become possible!
It is the first ever viable religious conception leading faith to observable consequences which can be tested and judged; a teaching able to demonstrate its own efficacy; the first ever religious claim of knowledge that meets the criteria of verifiable, evidence based truth embodied in action. For the first time in history, a religious tenet exists offering access, by faith, to absolute proof for its belief.
Using a synthesis of scriptural material from the Old and New Testaments, the Apocrypha , The Dead Sea Scrolls, The Nag Hammadi Library, and some of the worlds great poetry, it describes and teaches a single moral LAW, a single moral principle offering the promise of its own proof; one in which the reality of God responds to an act of perfect faith with a direct, individual intervention into the natural world; correcting human nature by a change in natural law, altering biology, consciousness and human ethical perception outside all natural evolutionary boundaries. Understood metaphorically, this experience of transcendent power and change is the 'Resurrection' and justification of faith.
This is an individual, ethical conception. It requires no institutional framework or hierarchy, no churches or priest craft, no scholastic theological rational, dogma or doctrine and ‘worship’ requires only conviction, faith and the necessary measure of self discipline to accomplish a new, single moral imperative and the integrity and fidelity to the new reality.
This new interpretation identifies the moral foundation of all human conduct and the single Law finds expression within a new covenant of marriage. This human spiritual union is characterized by a new paradigm of perfect intimate union between one man and one woman; resolving the most intractable questions and confusions of sexual indentity.
Trials of this new teaching are under way and open to all. For those able to think for themselves and imagine outside the cultural box, who are prepared and willing to learn something new, the beginnings of an intellectual and moral revolution have already started with the most potent NVDA any human being can take for peace, change and progress. Interesting links:
http://www.energon.org.uk
http://thefinalfreedoms.blogspot.com
Posted by: Robert Landbeck | January 12, 2008 at 07:14 AM
Arranged marriages were based on ilmfay prestige and whatnot. That hardly matters any more. Arranged marriages can still happen though so if you are up for it, go for it. Even after marriage though, you would still have to develop a relationship with the other person. Without arranged marriage, that would all be done beforehand and you would know whether or not you could stand the person. I mean, parents can pick who they like, that person can appear to be an angel for them, but then turn out to be the most annoying person on the planet to you. Of course, I'm not saying that dating takes care of all deceit either, but meh. Just commenting on the purpose of arranged marriages~
Posted by: Cesar | March 09, 2012 at 07:29 PM
nay to the photo op BEFORE the ceremony. I think you guys are clioudlng! Although the tradition started out as something pretty nasty, I really enjoyed seeing the look on Peter's face when I first walked into the church. Potentially cheesy, but a moment I will never forget. Second, love that the puppies got to enjoy the cake .at least someone did the second time around right? Our cake lady told us to wrap it 8 times and then try to put it in a ziploc. We'll see. I have a feeling it will take on the flavors of our freezer; mainly sweet potato fries (which may not be so bad) and a salmon that Peter's friend caught and is sitting on the shelf head still fully intact (which will be really bad). I'll let you know next August.
Posted by: Steven | April 19, 2012 at 08:09 AM
I love my husband for SO many nrasoes- he has a HUGE heart, he loves me! (that's big in itself) but my husband not only loves me he loves my 2 teenage kids as his own! He is SO cute and I love the way he holds me! My husband rocks!!!
Posted by: Ryan | April 21, 2012 at 01:42 AM