|
|
Marriage Under Threat
Sermon during Marriage Weekend 15 February 2004
(See pictures of the Marriage Weekend.)
How can marriage survive in today's society? Should it survive? These are urgent questions. If, as Christians have believed, marriage is not only God's plan, not only the way to some of the greatest happiness men and women can experience, not only the best environment for children to grow up happy and confident, but also the solid foundation of a society, a nation, then the decline in marriage in this country is a cause for serious concern.
Can it survive? Consider these statistics:
Compared to the 1950s, there are now 25% fewer marriages but 5 times as many divorces every year. Since 1980, a divorce has taken place on average every 3 minutes. Only ¾ as many marriages, and 5 times as many divorces. Let's see some actual figures.
In 2001, there were 286,100 weddings in the UK – 6.5 per cent fewer than in 2000. This continues the long-term downward trend that began in 1973
The number of first marriages peaked in 1970 at almost 390,000, and has since fallen to less than half this number – 171,900 in 2001.
6.5 per cent drop in one year. 1860 fewer marriages. If there were 1860 fewer marriages every year, marriage would die out entirely in two decades.
What's driving this flight from marriage? Why are so many people turning away from a way of life that has been the bedrock of human society for thousands of years?
Hearing some of the chattering classes speak, you would think that marriage in the past was a miserable arrangement, with the wife being an enslaved woman. Naturally as soon as they could, people rejected marriage. Well, no doubt some marriages were miserable, but I very much doubt the majority were. As for slavery, if you watched the 1900 House on Channel 4 a year or two back, you will realise that domestic slavery was more the result of having no fridge, no central heating, no gas or electric cooker or water heater, than the result of marriage. Women in particular have been liberated socially and economically, but we have all been liberated by technology.
So what has changed? What has influenced our attitudes?
For a start, there are unrealistic, over-romanticised expectations. We've been liberated from that drudgery of the 1900 House, freed from the worries of destitution that dogged us in the 1920s, and we feel that we're due a wonderful carefree life, with little effort on our part. Hollywood for many years gave us the happy ending which was - the wedding. Happy ever after! The fairy tale come true. Remember Charles and Di? After that St Paul's Cathedral wedding, nothing could go wrong, could it?
Then our ever-growing prosperity has brought the "throwaway" instant society. If we followed the habits of our forefathers and foremothers, made do and mended, kept our furniture for a lifetime, were proud to leave our second-best bed in our will, as Shakespeare did, the economy of the west would collapse. We have to throw out the old as soon as it shows signs of wear, and buy new. Not only so, but we are led to expect that we can buy something that exactly suits our individual desires. Off the peg in no longer good enough. Give us 48 hours and we'll make up your order, using all your choices, all the boxes you've ticked, colour, size, accessories, the lot. So it's natural that as soon as our partner begins to tell the same jokes over and over again or to put on weight, we think of trading him or her in for a newer model. If that's the deal, then we don't want to take lifelong vows, do we?
A third social trend: The individual is everything, the community is not important. Maggie got criticised for saying 'there's no such thing as society', but she was putting her finger on a growing attitude, and one which you could argue she helped to encourage. We may not hear so much at the moment about those wizz-kids in the city with their huge bonuses, but the trend they set of complete, public and unashamed self-centredness is still going strong. I heard Penelope Keith speak in Bath shortly before Christmas about her year as Lord Lieutenant of Sussex. She chose voluntary service as her theme for the year, because she saw so many valuable parts of British life collapsing for lack of public-spirited people to take a lead. Next time you hear yourself complain that there's nothing on telly, remember that if you were leading a Townswomen's Guild meeting or a Scout troop you wouldn't need to be entertained. When the same individualism comes into our relations with the opposite sex, no wonder we don't want to commit ourselves - and no wonder that marriages break down.
One more trend: the concept that "change is good". Clearly change is a sign of life. If this building hadn't changed recently we couldn't have held the Marriage Show in it. But change for change's sake, change because you are slightly bored, that's not so good. It's part of the throwaway society. A few days ago I heard a politician being interviewed by a slightly hostile radio presenter about some policy, and the presenter flung the accusation that this policy was 'outdated', not because of any other reason than that it had been the practice a few years ago. So what are you doing staying with the wife you had ten, twenty, fifty years ago?
Now you and I can see through these trends. But those who have been brought up in the media age and whose views have inevitably been shaped by those media have imbibed these ideas with their mothers' milk and with their crisps and coke. Add to this the reluctance of teachers to make any child feel disadvantaged by suggesting that a stable home with two married parents is best, the reluctance of politicians to lose the votes of single parents by suggesting that marriage would be preferable, and we shouldn't be surprised that the image of marriage has taken a pasting.
We've seen the decline of marriage in this country. We've looked at some of the causes. But does it matter? Why not be happy with cohabitation? Some people deeply concerned with family life seem to think it doesn't matter. In 2002 Mary Macleod, Chief Executive of the National Family and Parenting Institute spoke at the National Marriage Week launch. She spoke of the political risk associated with a generalising from personal experience to create a marriage policy. She spoke clearly of the need to be careful not to push ideas on to people and thereby be seen to be impeding their individual freedoms. And she did not seem to differentiate between apparently long lasting and stable relationships, and the true value of commitment inherent in a marriage. So, I repeat, why not be happy with cohabitation?
Well, the Diocese of Southwark set up a a working party of people known for their diversity of views to study this very issue. In their report they wrote:
"Some members of the working party were looking for ways to affirm the value of cohabiting relationships, but in the end a consensus emerged that in fact this was not possible and marriage still represented the best and healthiest place for a couple relationship and for the bringing up of children.
The report concludes that, while there are degrees of commitment in cohabitation, society has taken on board a number of myths about cohabitation
- marriage and cohabitation are two names for the same thing,
- that cohabitation is as stable as marriage,
- a good preparation for marriage,
- can provide an equal commitment to children,
- and that it's like common law marriage with the same rights in law.
None of these myths can stand real scrutiny, yet they are widely held beliefs among the people of Britain."
And the Southwark working party said this: "...That is why, with all its fragility and risk, we are certain that marriage is by far the best framework for a man and woman to flourish and grow together in love and for their children to do the same. The Church must find a way to share this profound and joyful truth so that it is heard as good news and not as condemnation. Certainly we have to uphold an ideal, without crushing those who have to, or not yet, realised it."
Now, many of us would hold that marriage is best because God tells us so in the Bible, and because our Lord Jesus upheld it and encouraged it, affirmed it by going to a wedding as we heard earlier; but it's good to hear the findings of a group who have done the research and find that the research backs what the Bible tells us. And it can help us when we are speaking with people who don't accept the authority of God and his Word.
So what should we be doing about it? Well, this Marriage Show is one small contribution to spreading the message. That Southwark group recommended this: "The Church should endeavour to present marriage to society as something of real value with which our young people can engage." You may have been a little surprised to hear those erotic verses from the Song of Songs earlier on. It's important that we present the full message of the Bible about sex: yes, there are rules for its proper exercise, but first and foremost it's a gift of God. To quote our Southwark friends again: "The church needs to give a positive approach to sexuality and the equality of the sexes in God's eyes and in marriage."
And in the slightly longer term, our Rector tells me that he is keen on something else, something that incidentally the Southwark crowd recommend: "That the church should give priority to developing effective marriage preparation." Watch this space, and not only watch, but also have a think and a pray about whether you might have something to offer in helping with marriage preparation. It occurs to me that it might be good to ask couples: Which is more important to you, a wedding day to remember, or a long and happy marriage? With the average wedding costing more than £13,000 and many months of preparation and worry, surely even more time and effort needs to go into preparing for and maintaining a happy marriage.
Of course we hope that the wedding itself will be joyous and memorable too. I'll tell you a true story to end with, of a joyous wedding that didn't need a lot of cash. It's a story told by the minister who took the wedding - not me!
It was a rather pleasant summer! Just right for the wedding of a couple who had experienced so much personal tragedy and difficulties. Through it all both had become Christians and the change in both their lives was so obvious.
They were not well off financially and the Church members had pulled together to give them a day to remember. The photographer, a very well known local quality guy, was ready armed with all the necessary gear. Many long standing friends also turned up, but most of these were very poor and had probably never been to Church in their adult life. I was to take the service and the Bride and Groom had chosen some of the modern lively songs of worship for their ceremony.
As we began the second song, I realised that none of their friends knew these songs or understood what they were about. I stopped the service and began to explain about the joy, and happiness of knowing Jesus as Lord. I concluded with the story of David dancing and leaping before the Lord.
Well! That did it! When the music started again everybody started to dance, sing, laugh and enjoy themselves. The photographer was caught up in all this - he couldn't stop taking pictures. Each time he stood still someone grabbed him by the arm and twirled him around. This went on for some time and I can say it was one of the most real times I have experienced in worship.
Yes we did get through the service in the end and the photographer realised that instead of taking only one roll of film he had taken nine! Bless him! He developed them all and gave them all to the couple because: 'I have never enjoyed myself so much.'
The 'Joy of the Lord is my strength' was clearly demonstrated that day. It was certainly a wedding to remember!
|
Thursday 20th of November 2008
