* In March 1992, I edited this essay from excerpts of my father's unpublished monograph, "Towards an Operational Definition of Marriage and Its Implications for Divorce and Remarriage." It was his contribution to a committee of the General Council of the Assemblies of God who were commissioned to consider the credentialing of married ministers who have a living spouse; that committee, chaired by Glen D. Cole, published its report on March 30, 1990.
What is marriage?
There really is no definitive agreement
on the nature of marriage.
We simply assume that, since we all use the term "marriage," there exists a common meaning. As long as we are not confronted by problems related to its meaning, these remain confused and confounding issues. The consequences are severe. If the validity of a marriage cannot clearly be articulated, there will be both uncertainty and disagreement about what divorce is and how the dissolution of a marriage actually comes about. How can any clear guidelines be provided for the role of persons bogged down in such a quagmire?
A simple conceptual definition is inadequate.
In order to identify a valid marriage, we must progress to an operational definition to describe the composite reality we call "marriage." This beginning point is what is to be established. An operational definition is necessary for marriage so that we can measure the components of this phenomenon which we treat as a single entity. This will help us in determining the time when a marriage indeed exists, as well as the factors which can disintegrate the marital relationship.
The model developed embodies what is asserted to be
universally characteristic of marriage
in both recorded human history and myriad cultural settings.
Identified in this model are three components - coitus, commitment and culture. These components are in dynamic relation to each other through their paired elements: in coitus are the elements of procreation and pleasure; the elements of commitment are word and work; and in the cultural component we have elements that are regulatory and religious.
BIOLOGICAL: Coitus (procreation & pleasure)
interfaces with Culture & Commitment
PSYCHOLOGICAL: Commitment (word & work)
interfaces with Coitus & Culture
SOCIAL: Culture (regulatory & religious)
interfaces with Commitment & Coitus
(CHRISTIAN MARRIAGE)
When these elements are rightly related
to Jesus Christ
for the glory of God
Flowing from this model is the operational definition which establishes a basis for determining a valid marriage. A usual, normal marriage is one in which a man and a woman exchange verbal and behavioral commitment to each other, who meet the requirements of their culture, and who share sexual relations with one another. Elements of this dyad may be missing, deviant, or otherwise different due to cultural diversity. However, we still have a marriage. It may be fractured, yes, but still a marriage. With this established, the marital dyad can be assessed as whole, or, if deteriorating, as fractured, and with continued deterioration, as disintegrated.
A usual, normal marriage =
a relationship in which
a man and a woman exchange
verbal and behavioral commitment to each other,
who meet the requirements of their culture,
and who share sexual relations with one another.
It should be self-evident that we are all born strangers. We hold the power to modify that initial relationship through communication. From stranger, we may go on to acquaintance to casual friend and on to close friend. Out of nothing we create a unique relationship. Just as we can create and nurture our social relationships, we also can act to dissolve those very same relationships. After creating a close friend relationship, we can use our decision-making capability to modify it, and, instead of cultivating the friendship, cause it to deteriorate, even going on to change the relationship to enemy. But we can never be a stranger to that other one ever again.
Fractures are characteristic of,
not the exception to, all human systems.
Theoretically,
all fractures in these human social systems
can be healed.
In practice, this rarely occurs.
The dissolution of a relationship does not include being relieved from the responsibility that goes with the privilege of exercisin the power to establish the relationship in the first place. For example, with the privilege of creating a friendship come the responsibility that makes it impossible to ignore the other's person without consequently fracturing that friendship. Fractures are characteristic of, not the exception to, all human systems. Theoretically, all fractures in these human social systems can be healed. In practice, this rarely occurs. Some continue to worsen until the system no longer holds together and the relationships no longer continue to contribute to the cohesion of the group. This process of "ungluing" is the reverse of that which brought the relationship together. It accounts for a human condition that does not occur suddenly but is instead drawn out over time.
Hardness of heart begins when bitterness,
however slight, whatever its form,
is allowed to take root within a person.
Attitudinal and behavioral rather than physical, this condition involves spiritual, psychological and social factors. One might describe it as "growing cold." The biblical label is "hardness of heart." In fact, Jesus himself taught that provision was made for divorce on account of "hardness of heart." Hardness of heart begins when bitterness, however slight, whatever its form, is allowed to take root within a person. The longer the bitterness is nurtured, the colder the heart gets, until one becomes afflicted with "hardness of heart." When this process occurs and is allowed to continue in a marriage relationship, the elements of the marital dyad become anemic and weak. Such a marriage is in trouble to the point of deterioration. Trifle by trifle, in one element after another, the marital dyad becomes unglued. The process that brought it together has reversed itself. This is what conventionally is meant when we say "their marriage is falling apart."
It is possible, and preferable,
that a couple stay together
and work out their problems together.
Coming upon hard times is no ground to say a marriage is fractured beyond repair. Despite that such circumstances are often bitter and frustrating as well as emotionally and intellectually exhausting, a fractured marriage is still a valid marriage. A valid marriage constrains the pair to maintain their responsibilities towards one another so that each may derive the privileges therefrom. A spouse who is committed to the marriage relationship imagines, thinks, and behaves in a covenantal way. Relationships are created and maintained by two persons. It is doubtful that there are very many marital problems in which one party is totally innocent, that is, one did not contribute in any way to the delinquency of the mate. If both parties "will to do the will" of the laws involved in creating productive relationships, disintegration of a union may be stopped and reversed.
Marriage vows are sacred
to self and society.
In being committed to maintaing their marriage, a husband and wife must continually seek how they may enrich, encourage, enjoy and enhance one another. While it only takes one spouse to ruin the marriage, it takes both to maintain a healthy and holy marital relationship. This model has proven to be a practical clinical tool for diagnosing a developing, healthy or troubled relationship. Especially helpful is its usefulness for developing a comprehensive therapy to maintain ro restore an adequate and successful marriage. Marriage vows are sacred to self and society. Using this conceptual model of marriage may help husbands and wives facing struggle, strain and separation to keep honoring their vows together.
A man and woman, as husband and wife,
commit themselves
to maintaining their marriage
by continually seeking how they may
enrich, encourage, enjoy and enhance
one another.
While it only takes one spouse
to ruin a marriage,
it takes both to maintain
a healthy and holy marital relationship.
No comments:
Post a Comment