Marriage Matters

In his seminal work, After Virtue, philosopher Alisdair MacIntyre argues that the abandonment of Aristotelian ethics lies at the heart of modern society's slide into moral decadence and decline. Having abandoned an ontological, "is-ought" conception of the world, MacIntyre maintains that society now lacks a foundational vision to guide and order itself. Individualism, reigns supreme.

Nowhere is the truth of MacIntyre's observation more readily apparent, perhaps, than in the precipitous decline of marriage. What was once venerated as a holy, sacramental institution is now considered an optional, if slightly outmoded social convention, a stultifying but necessary financial convenience. This week's Washington Post illustrates that proposition. In a recent article, the Post discusses the increasing number of couples opting to have a friend rather then a religious officiant preside over their wedding ceremonies.

Seeking to distance themselves from any prescriptive religious connotations that may cling to marriage, self-proclaimed "hippy types" are redefining the institution along highly personalized, pseudo-spiritual, distinctly non-sacramental lines. From the article:

"Members of the American University crew shared a love of jam bands, including Phish and Moe, as well as a passion for environmentalism and nature. Their wedding ceremonies often reflected those interests.

Some of them talked about vigorously scrubbing the word “God” from their rituals; instead readings came from environmental poet Wendell Berry or novels, such as “Einstein’s Dreams,” which explores human beings’ relationship to time passing."

This trend may seem innocuous enough. After all, what does it matter how a couple chooses to conceive of their marriage. Whether ordained by God or inspired by Wendell Berry, either way they are making a commitment to each other and that's a good thing, right? What's more, it's their marriage, and they should be the ones to decide what words are spoken over their union, and by whom.

There's one glaring problem with this perspective: Because the conception of marriage as a fungible institution is not rooted in anything deeper or higher than the whims of human emotion, it's not capable of sustaining and propagating human society in the manner it was intended. As we've seen over the past several decades with the explosive growth in the rate of divorce, the marginalizing of the role of fathers in the lives of their children, and the mainstream celebration of “alternative” lifestyles, a society that spurns the traditional obligations of marriage is certain to reap a bleak harvest.

Statistics bear this out, for anyone interested enough to read them. Traditional marriage (specifically, Christian marriage) has through the centuries served as a critical civilizing force in society. It has been, quite literally, the glue that holds communities and peoples together. As traditionally understood, the bonds of marriage are forged not by man, but by God. They are not merely legal, physical, or emotional, they are spiritual and sacred. Yet the desire to wrench marriage away from its religious roots continues.

Albert Mohler, Jr., President of the Southern Baptist Theological Seminary, put it this way:

"Modern societies seem absolutely determined to undermine their own foundations. This is especially true of intellectual elites who see the traditional structures of society as repressive rather than essential. Thus, overthrowing these structures becomes an exercise in self-defined liberation. Sadly, what inevitably results is disaster."

Undoubtedly, the siren song of "liberation" is alluring to many. However, when you view marriage as nothing more than the mutual stirring of emotion accompanied by a few lines of poetry, or as the mere "making it official" formality that comes after years of cohabitation, or even as an excuse to have a good party with great friends, you are depriving it of it's full force and power as a foundational social and cultural institution. Try as you might to spin this shortchanging as an "enlightened" understanding of human relationships, you are tearing at the fabric of God's design.

It is a symptom of the malady of this modern age that influential figures within our popular culture have fallen subject to this degraded notion of marriage. Only recently, Rock singer Jack White and his wife announced that they will celebrate their sixth anniversary of marriage . . . by getting divorced. The soon-to-be separated couple is hosting party in Nashville, Tenn., to mark the auspicious occasion.

A society based upon this kind of self-centeredness and self-delusion is not a society that can thrive for long. We've already reached the point where divorce is just as common, if not more so, than marriage. A renewed commitment to the institution is necessary if we have any hope of healing the many wounds that currently plague our society.

Several decades ago I saw a TV show in which the marrying characters vowed to remain wed “for as long as you both may love.”

Which sounds okay until you realize they’re vowing to stay together as long as they feel like it. What is the point of such a vow? A vow is only meaningful if it binds you when you don’t feel like it.

the abandonment of Aristotelian ethics lies at the heart of modern society's slide into moral decadence and decline

There is no doubt whatsoever that Aristotle's Ethics has been abandoned.

Aristotle's wonderful Ethics should be taught, but it doesn't have any connection to the Bible ... So it isn't.

Go figure.

Having abandoned an ontological, "is-ought" conception of the world, MacIntyre maintains that society now lacks a foundational vision to guide and order itself. Individualism, reigns supreme.

While normally a champion of individuality, I concede that it is by definition impossible to establish a sense of community among individuals focused entirely on themselves.

The Relativist's response to the question of Right and Wrong is that Right consists of those acts which do no harm to Self or others. Wrong is all else ... an argument which dispenses with the need for any external absolute.

But we know it doesn't work. Because Man has proven himself incapable of judging what causes harm to others -- and even to himself. We are all blinded by our own pride and ambitions, and work hard to justify those things that benefit us, whatever their cost to others.

Great post - thanks.

As a “mental health professional,” and as someone who took it upon himself over a several year period to study Aristotle in depth as an adult when I realized the gaping hole left by my education, I find the tenor and content of this article nicely done.

The vows are the marriage. Everything else in the marriage changes over time, but the vows remain. They are not even just the glue that holds the marriage together - they are the marriage.

The integrity and understanding that enables a person to take the vows with the depth of clarity and resolution they require are seldom present in the young these days, and were probably only ever instilled in the young quite infrequently even the the golden ages of history.

However, with so very little societal emphasis on virtue in this era of unbridled narcissism, and indeed with an active antipathy towards virtue pressuring people from all sides, the process of ethical maturation that might lead to keeping the vows through the vicissitudes and temptations of life is all too frequently eroded and undermined.

To listen carefully to my patients, and to the vows taken and explained at the numerous weddings I’ve attended over the years, and to the words of friends and neighbors long married, and to the rich layers of thoughts and feelings that form my own mental landscape - these have impressed upon me the centrality and power and sacredness of the institution of marriage, and of the vows taken and hopefully kept. It is one of the very few recipes in life for achieving that elusive goal that our society has so cheapened with poor imitations: happiness. Happiness of the most true and deep variety.

We must get the federal government out of marriage.

The tax breaks for marriage and children should be dissolved. Those breaks cause an undue burden on those who are neither married or have children.

The same with the subsidy to homeowners.

All are clear violations of the 14th Amendment.

And so ... ?

And so we find ourselves in the amoral mess we're in. Trying to solve spiritual problems by passing laws and regulating behavior. Pretending that a collective of soulless individuals is somehow a more moral agent than the individuals themselves. Resigning responsibility for our liberties because their concomitant responsibilities are too high a price to bear.

If we are not children of a greater good, then we are merely sentient collections of random DNA, and biochemical accidents don't make good consciences.

We are all blinded by our own pride and ambitions, and work hard to justify those things that benefit us, whatever their cost to others.

A stout conservative I admire, a family man with an aircraft-engineering job in the Seattle area, embattled online with the antinomian catamites teeming on Salon's "Table Talk" single-sex marriage threads 10 years ago, once asked, along the same lines, "Who do you have to be, to say 'should'?"

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.