Out of Egypt:

The Inevitability of Marriage

Original source: Wittenberg Floor, in reference to Monday's chapel talk on women's roles in the church and re-prompted by J.D. Bell mentioning stereotypes of men and women's roles.

Dr. Kathleen Nielson's chapel talk on Monday was quite good; however, one part of it made me squirm a bit. At several points during her talk, she mentioned women's responsibility to prepare for marriage and family (I apologize if that's misconstruing what she said; I don't remember exact wording) and how that affects their calling in the Church and, in some cases, to post-college academic study.

Was anyone else reminded of these words from the Apostle Paul?

¹Now concerning the things about which you wrote, it is good for a man not to touch a woman. ²But because of immoralities, each man is to have his own wife, and each woman is to have her own husband... Yet I wish that all men were even as I myself am. However, each man has his own gift from God, one in this manner, and another in that. ⁸But I say to the unmarried and to widows that it is good for them if they remain even as I. ⁹But if they do not have self-control, let them marry; for it is better to marry than to burn with passion. (1 Cor. 7:1-2, 7-9, NASB)

Paul's words, I believe, apply by extension to women as well as to men.

This is supported by verse 8, which mentions widows specifically.

I would argue that both Jesus ("eunuchs for the Kingdom of Heaven's sake," etc.) and the Apostles considered chastity and continued single life for the sake of the Lord's service to be an equally honorable alternative calling to marriage, for men and women. Now this doesn't mean that you can avoid marrying simply to fulfill your career ambitions. Paul further on in the passage I referenced above describes the situation better than I ever could:

³²But I want you to be free from concern. One who is unmarried is concerned about the things of the Lord, how he may please the Lord; ³³but one who is married is concerned about the things of the world, how he may please his wife, ³⁴and his interests are divided. The woman who is unmarried, and the virgin, is concerned about the things of the Lord, that she may be holy both in body and spirit; but one who is married is concerned about the things of the world, how she may please her husband. ³⁵This I say for your own benefit; not to put a restraint upon you, but to promote what is appropriate and to secure undistracted devotion to the Lord.

Passages like these mean that marriage isn't inevitable, something we can speak of as if it were in everyone's future, according to God's plan. I think they've been significantly overlooked in Protestantism, perhaps especially in modern evangelicalism. (And, of course, we at Covenant are quite influenced by evangelical culture as a whole, despite our connections with the historic Reformed tradition.) Just consider at the way people look at singles in the church who are over 30. I know I've wondered myself when people were going to get married, sometimes (embarassingly enough) out loud.

Part of this has to do with the sexualization of our culture and our (largely well-grounded) assumption that people who are of the age are not remaining abstinent. Part of it has to do with a justifiable fear of Catholicism, which made virginity appear to be a superior state to marriage (see the writings of Jerome for an example), which though it could be argued from this passage from 1 Corinthians it is, the order of creation (such as the command to be fruitful and multiply) would suggest that it is not.

However well-founded our fears of continued singleness may be, one must remember errors exist on both sides of truth. Singleness and marriage should be considered complementary, as different gifts in the one Body. To elevate one over the other is to fall off the narrow path of Christian faithfulness. I would argue that insofar as we assume that every Christian, or at least every Christian woman, has a responsibility to get married we have fallen off that path.

The longer I am single the more I am convinced that we should be preparing for marriage. If nothing else the marriage supper of the Lamb. Think about it -- the distinct difference between men and women. There are certain sins that specific gender roles struggle with more than than the other. There are certain gifts that each gender has almost universally, but manifested in different ways (i.e. women tend to be more compassionate and men tend to be protective in a territorial sort of way).
We should be developing ourselves as men and women of the Lord. These roles would of course be manifested in an earthly marriage. However, when they are lived in single life it (ideally) is equally as glorious.
I wouldn't squirm at what Mrs. Dr. Nielsen (or is it Dr. Mrs. Nielen??) said. She is right. Marriage is inevitable -- whether it be one way, the other, or (Lord willing) both.

Posted by: Carrie at November 15, 2005 4:27 PM

It's "Dr. Neilson."

Posted by: Krista at November 15, 2005 4:40 PM

But Carrie, should every woman be preparing to get married? That's fine if you are, I believe they're equally honorable states of Christian life. I simply don't think that we allow any space in the Church anymore for people who truly feel a calling to singleness. I'm open to the possibility of either state myself, though I admit I would prefer marriage, but sometimes I think that's out of the weakness of my flesh (as Paul would say) not because I want to learn in marriage how to be self-giving to another. Maybe that's the real point of what Paul's saying - that we should learn to get married for higher reasons than the mere curbing of desire of which he speaks.

I don't know what the marriage supper of the Lamb will be like; marriage to Christ has been a significant theme of Christian teaching from the earliest times though. Still, it obviously doesn't involve many of the elements of earthly marriage, such as sex or reproduction. And yet there's somehow an analogy. In the medieval period which, as I said, was justly criticized on their views of the special sanctity of virginity, marriage to Christ almost was set in opposition to earthly marriage. And the way Paul talks about being concerned with the things of the Lord somewhat supports that view.

I guess I can only close with a question: do you think, Carrie, that it's OK for men to think mainly of what they will accomplish in their single life whereas women should look to fulfillment in marriage and family. I suppose we could point to the verse about women being saved through childbearing to support that view. But I always felt uncomfortable about that.

Posted by: Evan Donovan at November 15, 2005 8:57 PM

Marriage is a means, not an end, just like any other "little c" calling. I have no problem saying that marriage can be a calling for women. The problem arises when our thinking subtly exchanges the capital letter for the lower case.

Usually when I hear the term "preparing for marriage," I am presented with practical skills such as housekeeping. And I think women should learn how to cook and clean, because even if they DON'T get married, they will still have to feed themselves. Maybe we should reword our skills development, calling it "preparing for life" rather than "preparing for marriage."

Posted by: funke at November 15, 2005 9:36 PM

Marriage and Covenant College, I hope those to crazy kids can get together someday. Keri, Laura, and I are on eharmony because we are certain that its God's calling for us to lose our virginity for the Kingdom. Really, I think that marriage is a beaut but so is Funky...that girl is on the money. As I stated last year on the floor
Get Marriage or Get Death because we really do need to be motavated to feed ourselves. If you have a spouce you have something to live for (unlike us Boston slobs//day in day out its all the same faces and the bitter winter slowly drains our souls) and therefore learn to cook, clean, and most importantly eat the sunshine that is sex. Eharmony people.

Posted by: hope at November 16, 2005 2:11 AM

Donovan, thanks for this -- I think *especially* at Covanant, more voices need to affirm that singleness is a legitimate calling before the Lord, and in some ways (a la I Cor. 7) a superior one. The mentality that many young women adopt that places marriage and preparing for it at the forefront of one's desires and goals is misguided. At least, it may prevent a woman from developing her spiritual gifts (OTHER than cooking), and at most, it may become idolatrous.

Posted by: Rachel at November 16, 2005 10:54 AM

Sex is great, and so far one of the greatest parts of marriage. But it's not an end in itself. Like everything else, it serves a purpose. We (married people) can enjoy it, like Ecclesiastes calls us to; we wives can use it to minister to our husbands in a way that reallllly resonates with his needs; but I find it's also a way to learn more about the delight of unity. My marriage will end at the resurrection, and that will be the end of sex for me. We don't give or take in marriage in heaven. BUT the bliss that is waiting for us in heaven, when the bride of Christ is totally united, honored and blessed by our husband the Lamb of God, and we celebrate the Wedding Feast of the Lamb...that bliss will be eternal, and more intense and more real and longer-lasting than the pleasure of the marriage bed.

Posted by: Krista at November 16, 2005 3:47 PM

I made a few posts related to marriage a while back (here and here). The whole "singleness is a legitimate calling" argument has its own kind of merit, but as it's frequently advanced as a reason why twenty- and even thirty-somethings refuse to settle down and get themselves a life, I'm increasingly suspicious of it.

It may be that the reason the church doesn't seem to have a lot of room for singles is that singles don't really have a place in adult society. I'm going to venture to say that marriage has been the norm for human society for about as long as anyone can remember, and I'm also going to say that it's been that way for good and sound economic, social, and pragmatic reasons.

Clinging to singleness as a legitimate calling seems to me like a possible coverup for frustrations with our lives not working out the way we want them to.

Posted by: ryan at November 16, 2005 5:51 PM

Ryan, I agree that there's plenty of people who use it that way. I mentioned that in most post.

Why do you think single people don't have a place in adult society? Couldn't they theoretically contribute even better vocationally, since they could focus on their job entirely? And what about on the mission field?

What is your reading of the 1 Cor. 7 passage?

Posted by: Evan Donovan at November 16, 2005 6:41 PM

Should've been "my." I have the weirdest conceptual typos sometimes.

Posted by: Evan Donovan at November 16, 2005 6:50 PM

Hope, your comment was so bizarre; I loved it :) A little shocking at first glance, too. But seriously, online dating? If you won't do blogging, I can't imagine why you'd do that. At least Facebook/blogging, etc. aren't about finding future significant others/marriage partners. Too important a decision to start the search online, I think.

Posted by: Evan Donovan at November 16, 2005 9:00 PM

And I love Hope. What are you doing trying to find someone else? Get off eharmony, girl! :)

Posted by: funke at November 16, 2005 10:46 PM

While careers are important for keeping the logistical side of civilization running, they don't seem to provide any social glue. A society would seem to be a collection of mutual allegiances, and single people don't really seem to have any of substance. Unless you start your own nuclear family, by the time you're 30 you probably don't really have one.

I'm not really sure what to do with the Corinthians passage except to point out that while there isn't much evidence that Paul was married, there isn't any evidence that he wasn't either. Paul's statement that "I wish all men were like I myself am" is frequently taken to read that he wishes everyone were unmarried, but there isn't any logically necessary reason to read it that way. If anything, he's saying that if you want to devote your whole life to the service of the church by heeding its call to full-time ministry, it's probably easier to do that while single. But Peter was married, and it's thus reasonable to assume that the other apostles were as well.

Posted by: ryan at November 17, 2005 7:17 AM

Wow, Krista. Seriously, wow. You never cease to shock, but as always it is in a good way.

Posted by: Carrie at November 17, 2005 8:24 AM

Evan, perhaps Hope DID start her search a long time ago and now she is turning to the Internet. Don't totally discount things like eharmony - while it doesn't work for everyone, and of course online stuff carries its risks, it also has some advantages, like knowing a lot about the person before even deciding to meet him/her.

Posted by: heidi k at November 17, 2005 10:01 AM

Sorry, Heidi. I didn't intend to be offensive. I just don't know whether it's possible to meet people online. I put a lot of stress on physicality and presence, despite that I'm writing my SIP on the positive aspects of the hypertext medium.

Posted by: Evan Donovan at November 17, 2005 4:03 PM