What is marriage all about?

  • Thread starter Thread starter cheddarsox
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
C

cheddarsox

Guest
A few threads posted here recently have sparked this question in my mind? What is the purpose of marriage, and has it changed over the years.

Is it all about love and respect? Romantic love?

Are arranged marriages OK?

If people are committed to follow the “till death do us part” and the openess to children, does love, culture, finances, age differences really matter?

Once upon a time…love and marriage did not go hand in hand like peas and carrots. Marriage was about kids, and property, and responsibility. It did not matter if the partners knew one another, only that they fulfilled the legal requirements, and for marriages in a religion, the spiritual requirements. I believe that a sort of “love” as in decent human care and respect, was called for, but not romance. That, if it occured was icing on the cake.

Nowadays, there are all sorts of requirements and expectations in marriage beyond all that. Are they neccessary? or icing on the cake?

If a 50 yr old man wants to marry a 20 yr old woman…does it matter what is involved as long as they are both genuinely committed to the institution of marriage?

I am asking moral questions here, because I think most of us have preferences that would involve the best of all worlds, but morally…as long as both are committed to the institution and what is required…is it OK ?

cheddar
 
From the way you phrase your question, you seem to be asking this very deep question from a secular perspective. But this is a Catholic forum and the answer ought to be from a Catholic perspective. My answer would be that Catholic marriage is sacramental–has been, and should always be. Yet we live in an increasingly immoral, secular age so clearly even Catholic marriages don’t always succeed in being sacramental and holy.
 
No, I would be happy to have a Catholic perspective. Otherwise I wouldn’t have posted here.

Can’t a marriage be sacramental if it is done for reasons other than romantic love?

I never thought it was the romance that made the marriage sacramental, I always thought it was the deep level of commitment, enough to stand before God and man.

cheddar
 
Perhaps I should not reply because I am not Catholic. I am how ever a devoted wife and mother. I truly feel that if two people come together with the desire to love one another and do what is pleasing unto God they can have a marriage that fulfills his requirements. It can also become very strong and happy as well.
Whether they are romantically in love or not does not matter as long they keep and maintain a “Christ-like” love for their spouse.
I have fallen in and out of “romantic” love with my husband through out our marrage but it is always the christian love that holds us together. 🙂
 
The purpose of marriage has not changed over the years from God’s Design. Man, alone, has changed the purpose of marriage to suit themselves along the way. To get back to the original purpose of marriage I suggest listening to two presentations. They are available on CD:

The first is short and to the point of Catholic marriage:

Marriage and the Eucharist by Christopher West. Available for free (you pay a couple of dollars for shipping and handling) from the Mary Foundation website. I was able to listen to the entire CD while taking my afternoon walk.

For a more extensive presentation there is Naked Without Shame (a crash course in the Theology of the Body) by Jeff Cavins available from The Gift Foundation website. It’s a 10 CD set for $3.90. I’m just now starting to listen to that (so far, so good) so I don’t have any answers from that perspective for you now.

After 19 years of marriage, just discovering these resources now, my husband and I are in awe over what we’ve been missing out on all along, and now look forward to the rest of our married years together being more glorious than before.
 
40.png
cheddarsox:
No, I would be happy to have a Catholic perspective. Otherwise I wouldn’t have posted here.

Can’t a marriage be sacramental if it is done for reasons other than romantic love?

I never thought it was the romance that made the marriage sacramental, I always thought it was the deep level of commitment, enough to stand before God and man.

cheddar
Click to expand...
Hi Cheddarsox!

I always thought Sacramental Marriage came only from the Catholic Church. I could be wrong and look forward to reading some other posters’ responses to that question.

It was my understanding that Catholics are the only ones who consider marriage a Sacrament (with a capital S) as it is a covenant entered into between man, woman and God. This is what makes it ‘until death do us part’.

The reason I think only Catholics marriage is Sacramental is because the ceremony is witnessed by an ordained priest (under the succession of Peter).

Given that Christ left the care of the Church to Peter and his appointed ones then I thought only those ordained priests from that line of succession actually have the authority and gift from the Holy Spirit to make the marriage Sacramental in nature. I could be wrong.

Since other faiths are not in the apostolic succession, I was under the understanding that those marriages are contractual in nature more than covenantal. They are serious, they are reverent, they are valid according to whatever guidelines are provided by the denomination from which they are administered, but not Sacramental (capital S).

Since I’m Catholic, I’ve only focused on learning what my obligations for honoring the covenant I entered into with God when I married my husband. I’ve never looked into what a sacramental (small s) marriage means for others.

Thanks for asking the question though. Again, I hope to read other answers about it.
 
The purpose of marriage has not changed over the years from God’s Design. Man, alone, has changed the purpose of marriage to suit themselves along the way.
Click to expand...
That’s an excellent perspective.

A marriage is a covenant (note I didn’t say contract) between a man and woman and God. The covenantal nature of marriage is what makes it unbreakable. Just as God’s covenant with us is unbreakable.
Marriage is also about love…unconditional love. Romantic love is just a part of it. Marriages that are based simply on Romantic love are faced with many obstacles.

As regards
I truly feel that if two people come together with the desire to love one another and do what is pleasing unto God they can have a marriage that fulfills his requirements.
Click to expand...
I’m assuming that by two people you mean man and woman since, by definition, same sex couples cannot be open to life through the sexual union that unifies and strengthens the marriage and also reflects the union of Christ and his Church (his spouse).

Marriage is the hardest thing that a man and woman can do since it involves an incredible amount of sacrifice.
 
I am a newlywed of 8 months and am still head over heels in love with my hubby. (well most of the time anyway 😉 ) i am not so naive to think that i will always feel that way, but our biggest bond is our love of Christ and our Catholic faith. so when we fight or times get tough and we fight some more, it all comes down to “we made a commitment before God to Love, Honor and Cherish till death do us part” so we will NEVER divorce. i am not so selfish to think that i can make a promise to God for so long as it is convenient to me. so its a Sacrament and at the same time a promise that he and I made to God our Father and we will keep it.
 
I am asking here about Catholic marriage. I know it is a sacrament, when married in the church by a priest etc. What I am trying to understand is…from the teachings of the church, is romantic love neccessary for it to be a valid,moral marriage?

Could a marriage of “convenience” so to speak, where the people respect one another, truly intend to keep all the aspects of marriage, are welcome to children etc, but they are not in romantic love, is that considered OK by the church’s standards?

The thread that spawned this question concerned a couple where the man is 49 and the woman 17. If these people enter into a marriage with every good intention to honor the sanctity of the marriage, would it matter if they shared a “romantic” sort of love?If part of the woman’s motivation was that she wanted to become American and wants her children to be American. Or that this man can provide for her and their children better than another man could, is that wrong? Does that invalidate the sanctity of marriage?

I guess I am trying to figure out what makes for the sanctity, the commitment, or something more mystical and less practical.

I know in our present American culture, most people tend to look at such a partnership as suspect. In our culture we tend to focus on romantic love, rather than the other aspects of marriage, so I am wondering what the church teaches about this.

If two people covenant before God and man to love,honor, serve, take care of one another, and any children that result, is that enough?

cheddar
 
40.png
cheddarsox:
I am asking here about Catholic marriage. I know it is a sacrament, when married in the church by a priest etc. What I am trying to understand is…from the teachings of the church, is romantic love neccessary for it to be a valid,moral marriage?

It is my understanding that romantic love is not necessary, but it would benefit the couple. But I could be wrong about that. I suggest reading The Four Loves, by C.S. Lewis. I have it, but haven’t gotten around to reading it yet (on my list, though). My son’s therapist recommended it to him as he was struggling with puberty issues. Knowing what ‘love’ is seems to be the place to start.

Could a marriage of “convenience” so to speak, where the people respect one another, truly intend to keep all the aspects of marriage, are welcome to children etc, but they are not in romantic love, is that considered OK by the church’s standards?

I suppose that depends upon if this couple agrees to enter into the covenant of marriage** with God**, acknowledging and respecting that marriage is not just between him and her.

The thread that spawned this question concerned a couple where the man is 49 and the woman 17. If these people enter into a marriage with every good intention to honor the sanctity of the marriage, would it matter if they shared a “romantic” sort of love?If part of the woman’s motivation was that she wanted to become American and wants her children to be American. Or that this man can provide for her and their children better than another man could, is that wrong? Does that invalidate the sanctity of marriage?

Sanctity of marriage - by Catholic Sacramental standards or by secular sacramental standards? I believe there is a difference. Alterior motives for marriage would not be considered valid reasons for a Sacramental marriage in the Catholic Church. The couple has to at least have that desire to lose themselves for the other as that’s what takes place. The man and woman are no longer two, but ONE with God.

I guess I am trying to figure out what makes for the sanctity, the commitment, or something more mystical and less practical.

I know in our present American culture, most people tend to look at such a partnership as suspect. In our culture we tend to focus on romantic love, rather than the other aspects of marriage, so I am wondering what the church teaches about this.

In our culture, what you describe is a legal contract entered into by two adults. Sanctity is not an issue for such an arrangement. Sincerity, perhaps, but not sanctity.

If two people covenant before God and man to love,honor, serve, take care of one another, and any children that result, is that enough?

It’s not a covenant before God. It’s a covenant **with **God. Where does their commitment to Him come into play in your example?

cheddar
Click to expand...
 
40.png
Mistermerlin:
I’m assuming that by two people you mean man and woman since, by definition, same sex couples cannot be open to life through the sexual union that unifies and strengthens the marriage and also reflects the union of Christ and his Church (his spouse).

Marriage is the hardest thing that a man and woman can do since it involves an incredible amount of sacrifice.
Click to expand...
I was ABSOLUTELY refering to a man and a woman. Apparently I did not clearly state what I was thinking. I seem to do that alot.
What I was trying to say is that I think that there are to many people in this world that think that “romantic love” (by my definition that’s the giddy-gigly sexual attraction that many young couples today focus on) is the most important thing in a marriage.
In my oppinion, it is not. While it is important to have that kind of attraction I think the world gives those feelings to much power.
I completely agree with your statements about marriage and you probably stated my case better than I can.
As for homosexual couples…Well now that’s a whole other thread now isn’t it.😉 Just know that your oppinions are shared.

One more thought, I would question a mans intentions if he was 49 and had an interest in a 17-yr-old girl. Though it may happen in rare occasions, I would find it hard to believe that a man that loves the Lord as much as he should would set his sights on a child.

But that’s just my oppinion.
 
Well, the 49 yr old, 17yr old thing did start me thinking, but my question is beyond that case.

What about a 34 yr old widow and a 39yr old man? They have affection for one another, the woman would like a stable home, to be able to stay home with her 3 kids, a good Catholic man inher life and the lives of her kids. The man is happy to find a woman who cares so much for her family and faith, and he would like to be a father as well. They don’t have the giddy love of a pair of 20 yr olds, but they have a genuine compatibility, and are both Catholics.

Is it moral for them to marry? There is lots of good there. There is no intent to use or misuse the other.Can they enter into a Catholic marriage in good conscience without the thrill of romantic love?

I always thought that this sort of situation was grounds for a valid holy marriage, but over the past months, some of the things I have read on various threads has made me wonder if that is true?

I know many people who married for reasons other than the heady drive of romantic love, and they seem to have holy marriages. I thought the intent to honor god by honoring the bounds of marriage were enough(according to the church) but now I am not so sure.

Again, I am talking about Catholic marriage here. I know the state doesn’t ask or care about feelings or intentions. I want to know the church’s teachings about this.

cheddar
 
40.png
leschornmom:
One more thought, I would question a mans intentions if he was 49 and had an interest in a 17-yr-old girl. Though it may happen in rare occasions, I would find it hard to believe that a man that loves the Lord as much as he should would set his sights on a child.

But that’s just my oppinion.
Click to expand...
There have been and are Catholic cultures where such was not uncommon, for a young girl to be given in marriage to a much older man. Often, as in this case, as a second wife.

What about this makes the marriage suspect? Is it just our cultural beliefs? Is there a real spiritual issue here? Is it our own discomfort over the sexual aspect of such a union?

What makes the sexual union of two people holy and spiritual? Isn’t a valid Catholic marriage enough? If both partners willingly enter such union, are practicing Catholics, are open to children, does the age matter?

What mystical difference or quality of love is it that makes it holy and valid? I guess that is what I am trying to get at.

cheddar
 
40.png
cheddarsox:
Well, the 49 yr old, 17yr old thing did start me thinking, but my question is beyond that case.

What about a 34 yr old widow and a 39yr old man? They have affection for one another, the woman would like a stable home, to be able to stay home with her 3 kids, a good Catholic man inher life and the lives of her kids. The man is happy to find a woman who cares so much for her family and faith, and he would like to be a father as well. They don’t have the giddy love of a pair of 20 yr olds, but they have a genuine compatibility, and are both Catholics.

Is it moral for them to marry? There is lots of good there. There is no intent to use or misuse the other.Can they enter into a Catholic marriage in good conscience without the thrill of romantic love?

I always thought that this sort of situation was grounds for a valid holy marriage, but over the past months, some of the things I have read on various threads has made me wonder if that is true?

I know many people who married for reasons other than the heady drive of romantic love, and they seem to have holy marriages. I thought the intent to honor god by honoring the bounds of marriage were enough(according to the church) but now I am not so sure.

Again, I am talking about Catholic marriage here. I know the state doesn’t ask or care about feelings or intentions. I want to know the church’s teachings about this.

cheddar
Click to expand...
Well you mention there is affection…that is part of love.
The only barrier I could see to this Catholic marriage would be whether or not they can vow to remain open to children, and to follow through with consumating the marriage.
Historically there is lots of evidence to support arranged marriages, marriages of convenience…over time, more often than not, love grows out of those unions…so just because there is not romantic/passionate love in the beginning it doesn’t mean that can’t come later.

The key for a Catholic marriage to be valid is for both parties to fully know the covenant they are about to enter into with God, be willing to enter into that covenant, and then carry out the vows they made.

This widow with 3 children has to be open to having sexual relations with this man without the use of contraceptives. Since there is only affection there in the beginning, the two would need to consciously work at moving beyond that to romantic love so they can consumate the marriage with the marital embrace. It’s ok for them to practice NFP at this time should they discern they are not ready to have children together, but they still have to be open to sex within the marriage.
 
40.png
cheddarsox:
There have been and are Catholic cultures where such was not uncommon, for a young girl to be given in marriage to a much older man. Often, as in this case, as a second wife.

Yes, but it isn’t common anymore. With education being available to more people, including women, the need to marry off a young woman diminished over time. Economic circumstances have changed in many areas, as has societal norms.

What about this makes the marriage suspect? Is it just our cultural beliefs? Is there a real spiritual issue here? Is it our own discomfort over the sexual aspect of such a union?

Between the 49 year old and the 17 year old the biggest red flag is why a 17 year old woman would want to marry so early when she’s not out of high school yet, she hasn’t had the opportunity to go to college, to plan out her life. Why, in this day and age, is a 17 year old woman seeking marriage as her only option for supporting herself? You suggested she was not an american citizen and a large part of her motivation would be to have a better life by marrying one. She is young. She’s looking at an easy way out for herself. Rather than go to school, forge out a career for herself, she wants a sugar-daddy, and hey, if the most it costs her is to have sex whenever, so be it. That really isn’t in the best interest of the woman and the 49 year old man, being older, wiser, more experienced - would know that - and if he really cared for her well being he would offer to pay her tuition and get her on her feet while she applies for legal immigration status to this country without marrying her or having sexual relations with her, of course.

What makes the sexual union of two people holy and spiritual? Isn’t a valid Catholic marriage enough? If both partners willingly enter such union, are practicing Catholics, are open to children, does the age matter?

What mystical difference or quality of love is it that makes it holy and valid? I guess that is what I am trying to get at.

Then the mystical difference or quality of love would be that self-sacrificing element. The 49 year old man would rather deny himself the opportunity to have a young, vibrant, woman who needs him financially as a wife, than to see this young 17 year old not become the best person she could possibly be. He would recognize she’s young, immature at 17, and not ready to make such a permanent commitment.

The 17 year old woman doesn’t appear to be sacrificing anything in this union, except her body. What, at 17, does she have to offer this 49 year old man that will help him grow spiritually with her? If she is spiritual at all to begin with, she would already know not to be seeking out a 49 year old man to marry so that she can have a more comfortable life.

The mystical difference is in self-giving, to each other and to God. One way I can see this as being a valid Catholic union would be for the man to marry the woman, send her to school, help her discover her personal goals, practice NFP so that she does not have children before she’s in her mid 20s, attend mass regularly with her, attend religious retreats with her, pray together, etc. She, in turn would need to respect what her husband is guiding her to do, and openly embrace it all. Together, through regular prayer, mass attendance and retreats, this couple could indeed fulfill their covenant. But realistically, it’s not likely this is the intention behind this couple’s union.

The bottom line is that God knows the true intent of both parties here. That, will make the difference as to whether or not the marriage is valid, because they are entering the covenant with God and He knows their hearts.

cheddar
Click to expand...
 
YinYangMom answers in Red
cargopilot answers in Blue
Yes, but it isn’t common anymore. With education being available to more people, including women, the need to marry off a young woman diminished over time. Economic circumstances have changed in many areas, as has societal norms.
Yes, that’s true in the US and most of the so-called developed countries. But much of the worlds population doesn’t have the wonderful opportunities we have here.

Between the 49 year old and the 17 year old the biggest red flag is why a 17 year old woman would want to marry so early when she’s not out of high school yet, she hasn’t had the opportunity to go to college, to plan out her life. Why, in this day and age, is a 17 year old woman seeking marriage as her only option for supporting herself?
Again, you are speaking only from the perspective of an American. The woman referred to has completed high school and has virtually no opportunity to attend college. Where she lives, there is nothing wrong with a female having for her ‘life plan’ the once noble goal of a housewife and a family of her own.

You suggested she was not an american citizen and a large part of her motivation would be to have a better life by marrying one. She is young. She’s looking at an easy way out for herself.
As Americans, our definition of ‘the easy way out’, and theirs, is much different. I have been blessed to have seen parts of the world that most Americans will get only a glimpse of on the Discovery Channel. They have never lived the American Dream, as we have, so they cannot make the comparisons we can. Granted, their view is much more primitave, but we have to realize that there is nothing wrong with that. We have to understand that our goals are not always everybody else’s goals.

Rather than go to school, forge out a career for herself, she wants a sugar-daddy, and hey, if the most it costs her is to have sex whenever…
Again, when we make that comparison, we are assuming that everyone in the world really wants what we want. We also tend to assume that there is a University in every town, everywhere in the world. Sometimes, we Americans tend to denigrate females who’s only desire is to find a good man, get married, have kids and be ‘justahousewife’. I understand that for us Americans, that goal has become somehow wrong, and that all women, everywhere need to claw their way to the top of the worldly ladder, just as the men have done for a millinia. We should be careful when we impose our own lofty goals on everyone.

Then the mystical difference or quality of love would be that self-sacrificing element. The 49 year old man would rather deny himself the opportunity to have a young, vibrant, woman who needs him financially as a wife, than to see this young 17 year old not become the best person she could possibly be.
**
What is the ‘best person’ she could be, and who defines what that is?

*Again, I return to the argument that we Americans no longer refer to the female’s role as ‘just’ a wife and mother as a noble, worthy goal in and of itself. *

The 17 year old woman doesn’t appear to be sacrificing anything in this union, except her body.
**
What else is there and what could be more of a sacrafice than that? In a Sacramental marriage do we not give up our very body to become one flesh with our spouse?

What, at 17, does she have to offer this 49 year old man that will help him grow spiritually with her? …
She has herself to offer. I don’t know exactly what you mean, but you seem to indicate she doesn’t have much value and is somehow spiritually inferior.

The mystical difference is in self-giving, to each other and to God. One way I can see this as being a valid Catholic union would be for the man to marry the woman, send her to school, help her discover her personal goals, practice NFP so that she does not have children before she’s in her mid 20s…
Why couldn’t her ‘personal goals’ be of a wife and mother? If she desires to further her education, then fine, but what if she chooses not to, and remains fast in her desire to be only a wife and mother? Is she automatically less of a woman?

Is she unfaithful and against God if she does not practice NFP until her mid-twenties, as you recommend? I always thought there needed to be a very serious reason to practice NFP? What would their very serious reason be? I believe both of them want lots of kids, and from my view, there is no reason not to.

But realistically, it’s not likely this is the intention behind this couple’s union.
What do you base your judgement of their intention on, and what do you believe their intention to be?

*The bottom line is that God knows the true intent of both parties here. That, will make the difference as to whether or not the marriage is valid, because they are entering the covenant with God and He knows their hearts. *
**
Amen.
 
Well, heck, Cargopilot, why didn’t you say that in the first place?
Of course it makes a big difference whether or not were discussing a modern Western culture couple or one from another culture where this type of a union is common.

Most of my answers would be different once I knew what culture you were referring to.
 
Ok now I’m confused…Cargopilot, you’re responding to my posts as if you had posted an early post with more specifics about a particular couple.

My responses were to Cheddarsox’s examples…
I don’t recall anything about a couple from a differrent culture.
Certainly, it makes a big difference whether or not we’re discussing a modern Western culture couple or one from another culture where this type of a union is common. My answers you responded to would be different if I know what culture we were discussing.

But the sacramental Catholic responses I provided would remain the same anywhere, since the Catholic church is universal.
 
40.png
cheddarsox:
I am asking here about Catholic marriage. I know it is a sacrament, when married in the church by a priest etc. What I am trying to understand is…from the teachings of the church, is romantic love neccessary for it to be a valid,moral marriage?
Click to expand...
Romantic love is an emotion.

At its very base, marriage is not about romantic love, it is about choice; about self-giving. Some call this sacrifice, a word that often has a lot of emotional baggage; but when properly understood, conveys the essence of self-giving.

A marriage of convenience does not sound as if it is based on true covenant principles.

Love is a choice, as St. Paul teaches us; but Hollywood (the media, in other words) and a very large part of societal ethos tells us that marriage is about the emotional fulfillment that marriage supposedly can bring; a concept that at its heart is about self-taking, not self-giving.

Most of the emotional baggage (I would say all, but there are many who would disagree with me) of the emotional love is so thoroughly “I” centered that is should scare the daylights out of anyone getting hooked on it; it works as the antithesis of what marriage is about.

Having said that, it is not that emotions are wrong; it is that emotions are not the substance on which to base marriage. What one needs to base it on is choice; and it is the choice of both parties, clearly made, without self-centered reasons for entering the marriage.
 
I’ve scanned the discussion and so if someone has mentioned this and I missed it I apologize in advance.

A Catholic marriage is a vocation. As in any vocation the object is to obtain the joys of heaven after this life, which is union with God. In marriage, the husband and the wife help each other, their children and the wider community obtain this goal. Therefore, what young people or anyone considering marriage ought to be asking themselves is not if they will remain in love all their lives but if marriage is the vocation God wants for them, and if so that God will direct them to the right person.

Marriage between an older man and a much younger woman is perfectly fine if they are open to the possibility of having children. After all, men generally remain fertile long into their elder years. So, such a marriage would be perfectly lawful in the eyes of the Church.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top