I have listen many Christian apologists trying to define marriage as opposed to those who support gay marriage, or any other kind of ‘marriage’. It is good to defend marriage against the new aberrations that we see lately. But to take out such an integral part of marriage, like love, brings us to redefine marriage not in the biblical way, rather, surrendering to the customs of past times.
Let me mention some of those who use this type of argument, and based their opinions upon how some cultures view love as not essential for marriage. Among those who take such a position we can find Dr. Jennifer Roback Morse of the Ruth Institute, and Gretchen Passantino from the Answers in Action website. I have listened to both in the show hosted by Tod Wilkins, Issues Etc. This is an extreme hardline Missouri Synod Lutheran program. Although the show promotes many interesting topics, you get the feeling that if you are not Lutheran, or Roman Catholic, your salvation is dubious, at best.
The cultural position taken by these authors and commentators, is that in other cultures, love was not an integral part of marriage. Even Danish D’Souza, a famous Christian apologist, when asked about marriage on Issues Etc., answered that in his culture, love was not an integral part of marriage. He then referred to his own culture, Indian, as the reason for his position.
I find the positions held by these defenders of marriage to be a confusing one. On one hand, they are trying not to succumb to the present culture against the traditional understanding of marriage. On the other hand, rather than trying to restore the view of marriage from a biblical view, they are appealing to non-western or ancient culture in order to uphold traditional marriage.
My contention with these writers is that love is an integral part of marriage. Let’s see what Scripture says about marriage:
Matthew 19: 4"Haven't you read," he replied, "that at the beginning the Creator 'made them male and female,' 5and said, 'For this reason a man will leave his father and mother and be united to his wife, and the two will become one flesh'? 6So they are no longer two, but one. Therefore what God has joined together, let man not separate."
In this passage, Jesus goes back to Genesis as the origin of marriage. And of course, no love is mentioned here, but Paul tells us that the marriage relationship is supposed to reflect the relationship between Christ and the church, and there can be no greater love than that of Jesus to his church.
Colossians 3: 18Wives, submit to your husbands, as is fitting in the Lord.
19 Husbands, love your wives and do not be harsh with them.
It is curious, at least to me, that Paul again tells the husbands to love their wives, but does not tell the wife to love the husband. It would seem to me that men are more easily lead away from loving their wives due to their own sinful nature.
Ephesians 5:22Wives, submit to your husbands as to the Lord. 23For the husband is the head of the wife as Christ is the head of the church, his body, of which he is the Savior. 24Now as the church submits to Christ, so also wives should submit to their husbands in everything.
25Husbands, love your wives, just as Christ loved the church and gave himself up for her 26to make her holy, cleansing her by the washing with water through the word, 27and to present her to himself as a radiant church, without stain or wrinkle or any other blemish, but holy and blameless. 28In this same way, husbands ought to love their wives as their own bodies. He who loves his wife loves himself. 29After all, no one ever hated his own body, but he feeds and cares for it, just as Christ does the church— 30for we are members of his body. 31"For this reason a man will leave his father and mother and be united to his wife, and the two will become one flesh."32This is a profound mystery—but I am talking about Christ and the church. 33However, each one of you also must love his wife as he loves himself, and the wife must respect her husband.”
After reading these two passages, I don’t think that we can count out love from marriage. It is a very integral part of the equation, and if these other cultures don’t include it in their courtship or marriage, therefore, they should come under Scripture scrutiny and found less than the biblical ideal.
The reason that I think that some apologist try to rule out love out of marriage, is that those from the opposing camp use the love argument. The argument goes something like the following: “We feel love for one another regardless of gender, therefore, we should get marry”.
My answer to that sort of argument has always been the same. I give the example that there are forbidden loves, and that love alone should not give license to marriage. If that thinking would win the day, then, paedophiles would be able to marry young children, and siblings would be able to marry one another, etc.
Love is a great thing, and I guess it is the foundation of family relationships. Taking love out of the marriage turns marriage into a contract between two people, with the main incentive to remain in that marriage taken out. A house, possessions, health, are not the things that keep those married together, it is love.
Luis A. Jovel
No comments:
Post a Comment