The Ideal Modern Marriage

The secret of a happy marriage has changed, reports
the UK’s Independent in a story on a recent presentation to the American
Association for the Advance of Science. In former times, marriage was for food,
shelter, and physical safety. Then, as society moved from a rural economy to an
industrial one, marriage involved men as providers, women as homemakers. Now,
in our post-industrial world, marriage is all about each partner finding their
own potential.

The argument, such as it is, is replete with the usual
portentous gibberish about “inner cores,” “core essence,” “voyages of
self-discovery, “ and “finding oneself.” I confess I find it very hard to take
seriously anyone who uses the words “voyage” or “journey,” other than to refer
to physical movement from geographical Point A to geographical Point B. And as
to self-discovery, I recall going to Morocco in 1987 in order to “find myself,”
only to come to the startling conclusion that I had known where I was all the
time, located in that space between the soles of my feet and the top of my
head. The trip was indeed a lot of fun, but staying at home and looking in the
bathroom mirror would have been much cheaper.

Gibberish aside, the article is instructive in a number of ways.
First, it is a reminder that when Christians now try to discuss marriage in the
public square, we are likely to be speaking a dead language. Our assumptions
are fundamentally antithetical to those of the wider cultural consensus. The
traditional Christian concept of marriage differs from the new not simply in
terms of gender politics but in terms of its most fundamental purposes. No
longer is marriage for procreation and companionship. It is about providing me
with a context for my own satisfaction, fulfillment, and success.

Second, it is clear that contemporary thinking on marriage is
emblematic of the wider attitudes of this present age. It is all about me—my
fulfillment, my satisfaction, my self-esteem. One wonders what the consequences
of such a view of marriage will be as partners grow older. When I recall the
elderly people I have known over the years, and how many of them have cared
patiently for an ill or dying spouse, I am not sure that finding their “inner
core” was ever a particular priority in their marriage. In fact, I suspect
marriage was one way in which they were weaned of such selfishness. When I
vowed to love my wife “in sickness and in health, till death do us part,” I was
not referring to her ability to help me achieve some nebulous “voyage.” I meant
that I would love her and care for her until death parted us, whatever terrible
toll aging and illness might take. But that was apparently long ago and far
away. I wonder: Should we now vow to love our spouses “as long as they are
useful in connecting us to our inner cores”? Apart from being liturgically
inelegant, the idea is drivel.

Third, we have yet more evidence of that which sociologists have
been noting for some time: the extension of childishness into adulthood. The
notion that marriage is all about me is a remarkably youth-oriented approach,
taking no account of the fact that age and illness will ultimately take their
toll on us all. “The world revolves around my existence” should be a belief we
start to lose as soon as we acquire the ability to speak. Now, it is being
presented as the secret to a happy marriage. Except, as the article
unconsciously acknowledges, it is not so

Indeed, the article contains two glaring problems which subvert
its case in its entirety. First, it points out the obvious fact: Divorce rates
are high and satisfaction in marriages which do survive is lower than it used
to be. Second, I was struck by the truly tragic illogicality of the concluding
thoughts:

In 1800 you didn’t have to have profound insight into your
partner’s core essence to tend the chickens properly or build a sound physical
structure to keep out the snow. In contrast, in 2014, you are really hoping
that your partner can help you on your voyage of self-discovery and personal
growth.

Your partner can’t do that unless he or she really knows who you
are, and really understands you. That requires much greater investment of time
and psychological resources in the quality of the relationship per
se.

Indeed. One might even say that this new type of marriage
requires an attitude towards one’s spouse which is focused on them and not on
one’s own needs. But that is precisely what is being denied—indeed, dismissed
as “old hat”—throughout the article. Thus, in the end, this “secret” to a
happy marriage in the modern world looks more like the reason so many marriages
are so very unhappy. In short, on this account, modern marriage seems to be an
exercise in utter futility.