Don’t Get Married Compendium

by Frost on November 29, 2011

Young men of the 21st Century, my advice to you is thus: Don’t Get Married.

If you are a Christian, look at it this way: The legal reality of sham-marriage in the 21st century would be far more offensive to God than the alternative of living in (legal) sin. Explain your concerns to your pastor, and hope that he sees the wisdom and virtue of your decision. If he doesn’t, perhaps it’s time to start looking for a new pastor.

In any case, you’ll be in good Christian company. Quoth C.S. Lewis in Mere Christianity ():

“My own view is that the Churches should frankly recognise that the majority of the British people are not Christians and, therefore, cannot be expected to live Christian lives. There ought to be two distinct kinds of marriage: one governed by the State with rules enforced on all citizens, the other governed by the Church with rules enforced by her on her own members. The distinction ought to be quite sharp, so that a man knows which couples are married in a Christian sense and which are not.”

If you missed it, here’s the Don’t Get Married Series:

Part 1

Part 2

Part 3

Part 4

Part 5

And since we’re already quoting C.S Lewis:

“So much for the Christian doctrine about the permanence of marriage. Something else, even more unpopular, remains to be dealt with. Christian wives promise to obey their husbands. In Christian marriage the man is said to be the ‘head’. Two questions obviously arise here. (1) Why should there be a head at all — why not equality? (2) Why should it be the man?

(1) The need for some head follows from the idea that marriage is permanent. Of course, as long as the husband and wife are agreed, no question of a head need arise; and we may hope that this will be the normal state of affairs in a Christian marriage. But when there is a real disagreement, what is to happen? Talk it over, of course; but I am assuming they have done that and still failed to reach agreement. What do they do next? They cannot decide by a majority vote, for in a council of two there can be no majority. Surely, only one or other of two things can happen: either they must separate and go their own ways or else one or other of them must have a casting vote. If marriage is permanent, one or other party must, in the last resort, have the power of deciding the family policy. You cannot have a permanent association without a constitution.

(2) If there must be a head, why the man? Well, firstly, is there any very serious wish that it should be the woman? As I have said, I am not married myself, but as far as I can see, even a woman who wants to be the head of her own house does not usually admire the same state of things when she finds it going on next door. She is much more likely to say ‘Poor Mr X! Why he allows that appalling woman to boss him about the way she does is more than I can imagine.’ I do not think she is even very flattered if anyone mentions the fact of her own ‘headship’. There must be something unnatural about the rule of wives over husbands, because the wives themselves are half ashamed of it and despise the husbands whom they rule. But there is also another reason; and here I speak quite frankly as a bachelor, because it is a reason you can see from outside even better than from inside. The relations of the family to the outer world — what might be called its foreign policy — must depend, in the last resort, upon the man, because he always ought to be, and usually is, much more just to the outsiders. A woman is primarily fighting for her own children and husband against the rest of the world. Naturally, almost, in a sense, rightly, their claims override, for her, all other claims. She is the special trustee of their interests. The function of the husband is to see that this natural preference of hers is not given its head. He has the last word in order to protect other people from the intense family patriotism of the wife.

{ 2 comments… read them below or add one }

MC December 1, 2011 at 6:19 pm

That second C.S. Lewis quote is great. I really wish that the “Don’t get married” crowd and the Christians could find more common ground. I am very pro-marriage, but that’s because I come from a culture (Mormon) where male authority is honored.

Aurini November 29, 2011 at 4:56 pm

How times have changed.

‘Poor Mr X! Why he allows that appalling woman to boss him about the way she does is more than I can imagine.’

This would now read as:

‘Poor Mrs X! Why she allows that appalling kitchen bitch mooch off her the way he does is more than I can imagine.’

Same complaint; more contempt for men.

{ 1 trackback }

Previous post:

Next post: