What is Marriage #1B
A Letter Exchange Conversation between myself (Von) and Andrew (Dad Explains)
So, this is my first letter in this ‘letter exchange’ substack article series. I encourage you all to read what Andrew wrote in his first post, laying out the format and everything. He’s definitely a better formatter of Substacks than I am.
In his letter he lays out a bunch of questions and thoughts about what marriage is, dealing with both historical issues (how our view of marriage has changed over the years) and definitional ones (legal vs religious). But for this, my initial post, I think I would like to address first a question which, in my opinion, lays behind those questions, namely, is marriage real?
Our discussion began because of my note in response to an article. Here is what I said:
It is interesting watching halfway house conservatives addressing fundamental conservative values. Here, for example, the author gets it right that ‘family’ is a conservative value. But then, earlier in the same article he adds in ‘gay marriage’ as something that increased the remit of marriage.
So-called gay marriage is contradictory to marriage, and contradictory to family. The very same liberals which he decries here as attacking family led the charge for ‘gay marriage’, which was an ax to the root of conservatism.
written in response to:
Before I continue perhaps a couple of notes on who I am. First of all I am not OCD. Anyone who looks at my posts will see spelling and other mistakes scattered all over the place. Indeed I even have posts which somehow got posted twice, with different errors in them. Go figure. So if you can’t handle mistakes… better sign off now.
Secondly I am an unabashed Christian. I am not a quasi-Christian, or an atheist in the process of thinking about Christianity… I am a Christian. Have been since I was eight at least. Reformed Baptist, elder led, theonomic, family integrated, patriarchal, etc etc. LBC 1689 if it interests you.
Thirdly I like writing on lots of topics, but almost all of them are linked to theology in its broadest sense. A good post to read if you want to see the link would be ‘Halfway House’. Good way to be offended, too. I write a section called ‘IllAdvised Opinions’ on legal issues, especially the Supreme Court, I write a section on language learning (Parlez vous Francais?), I write a fiction section where I have put the first few of a group of stories about an oracle. Kind of Aesop’s Fableish.
And I have written a whole lot, although not much on Substack yet, on marriage. So this topic is right up my alley, and I could write for a long, long, long time on it without running out of things to say.
My position on marriage is deep and wide. However for the purposes of this discussion it might be best to begin with noting that I believe that marriage is a real thing. And that my view of issues such as ‘gay marriage’ is predicated on that idea that marriage is a real thing.
Leaving aside all of the theological issues that come with that statement, let me see if I can state what I mean by that small statement, “Marriage is a real thing”.
Suppose a bunch of kids are sitting around eating oranges. The oranges that they are eating are physical objects… unless they are kids in a story. But regardless, an orange is a real thing.[1]
Now let us say that they don’t know much about oranges. So when a kid comes by with a tangerine they say ‘that’s a funny orange’. And then a kid comes along with an apple and they say, “Wow, that’s a really funny orange.”
Now it is perfectly possible to have a word that includes oranges, tangerines, and apples. In English the word ‘fruit’ would do it. But that doesn’t mean that there isn’t something real that the word ‘orange’ is trying to get at. That there isn’t something real about orangeness that a scientist might describe by DNA, or a chef might describe more emotionally and practically having to do with its use in various dishes.
Assuming that we have a scientist on staff, it would be possible for these kids to bring by hundreds of fruit and have the scientist say ‘yay’ or ‘nay’ to each one… it is, or it isn’t, an orange. The chef could do it. Indeed probably their older brothers and sisters could do it fairly accurately. “Orange” is not a mere linguistic convention, it has reality to it.
So now lets look at marriage. Is marriage like the orange? Or is it a mere linguistic convention? Or is it merely a social habit?
When the caveman hit the other caveman on the head with his club for ‘looking at his old woman’… was that merely sexual jealousy? A mere violation of caveman custom? Or was there something real about the relationship between the caveman and his… ‘old woman’? Would it be intrinsically morally wrong for the second caveman to have sex with the ‘old woman’ or just something that made the first caveman mad?[2]
What difference does this make? All the difference in the world. If marriage is a real thing, then all we can do is recognise who is, and who isn’t, married. If marriage is just a linguistic convention, then it would depend on what language we are speaking. If marriage is a legal relationship, then it would depend on what legal system we or they are operating under. If a sociological convention, we would need to take a polls of the social sub-group and the larger culture.
Let’s say we are watching a movie about 12th century Japan. In it a man is living with, and sleeping with, a woman. They have children together and the man kills another man who tries to sleep with his ‘wife’. The two have no paper from the government, and they have been blessed in no church. Are they married? Are they husband and wife? How do we know? Do we ask their society?
When an African man comes to American with his three wives. All duly paperized and blessed in his home country. Do they stop being his wives the minute they set foot in the US?
To answer the question ‘What is marriage’ I believe you first have to ask the question ‘Is it real?’ As an orthodox (small ‘o’) Christian I have no issue with that question, or my answer. Marriage is real.
Now, having given my initial position and what I consider the foundation for the entire discussion, a couple of quick responses to Andrew might be in order.
I think he is on the right track when he looks at the differences between the religious and the legal way of looking at marriage, as well as the historical and modern. Indeed I would encourage him to look even further back in the ‘historical’ track, and look farther afield. Does his definition of marriage include husbands and wives in BC as well as AD? Does it include men and women in the darkest jungle as well as on the streets of New York? If a young man and woman were to wash up on a desert island could they get married?
You see how that relates to my question, and my answer? Since marriage is a real thing, not just some temporary idea that we have and have slapped a name on, then its definition includes (or excludes) all of those times and groups. All of human history and all human cultures. It might well mean that marriage has a purpose, and goals, and ways it can to right and wrong.
So I begin with this: marriage is real.
Links to the further series
What Is Marriage #1A (Dad Explains) Questions on what marriage is / How marriage has changed / Legal vs. Religious Questions
What Is Marriage #1B (Von) Asked and answered “Is Marriage Real?”
What Is Marriage #2A (Dad Explains) Expands on marriage being real within the framework of “names” or nomenclature.
What Is Marriage #2B (Von) Marriage is a sexual union. That’s not all it is (by a long chalk), but that is its core.
What is Marriage #3A (Dad Explains) Asks the question, “Is marriage solely about children or are children a critical part of marriage itself?” and raises the spectre of infertile couples.
What is Marriage #3B (Von) “Marriage is… ordained by God for the purpose of producing a Godly seed…”
What is Marriage #4A (Dad Explains) Andrew summarizes a bunch of his thoughts and adds several aspects
What is Marriage #4B (Von) Marriage is a covenant. Also, post more scripture!
What is Marriage #5A (Dad Explains) All about commitment.
What is Marriage #R1B (Von) A bit of a discursion deeper into covenant
What is Marriage #5B (Von) Marriage is Obedience
[1] If anyone is confused as to how I can call a non-physical thing a ‘real’ thing, I would recommend the Bahnsen-Stein debate, which you can find online in audio or written form. I could also recommend CS Lewis’s work ‘The Abolition of Man’. If you wish to discuss the issue further, feel free to leave a comment. Perhaps we can do another letter exchange.
[2] For an amusing and enlightening look at the romances of cave men and their unfortunate wives I would recommend GK Chesterton’s book ‘The Everlasting Man’.
Nicely worded. This hits on a key concept of postmodern philosophy/activism which attacks language DIRECTLY. This was explained in great detail of 1984, and we see linguistic destruction as a core strategy of those who want to unmake reality (our opponents). Thus war is peace, freedom is slavery, men are women, etc.
In every case, the enemy is concerned with not just propagandizing "goodthink" but making "wrongthink" impossible by altering (no, destroying) linguistics and thus rhetoric.
Interesting take. What I would like to know is when in history did it become the "right thing to do" by marrying only one woman. My understanding of marriage has to do with the reproductive process. Which is why a gay or lesbian person can't possibly be married in the true sense. Yes, a piece of paper may suffice, but is it REALLY a marriage? I don't thing so.
I feel that if we look at ourselves as being mammals and for all intents a part of the animal kingdom to a degree, that as mammals we are polygamists. Which is why there are 12 tribes of Israel. Which is why we see it all throughout the "old testament" and yet somehow with the new testament it was done away with? Well unless you see the "Bible" the way Mormons do.
The problem I see with monogamy is that typically the woman will in many cases rule the roost. Where with polygamy the women have to compete with each other for the attention of the mate. Is that bad? Well modern society would say yes, and most "Christians" would also. And yet, in my way of understanding what is right and what is wrong, I would say that a man who could support all his wives without having to send them to work and who could support any children born from the relationship, without expecting someone else to step in and support them, should be able to have as many wives as he wants. Think about it...if Elon Musk was a polygamist, he could have as many wives and children as he wanted and who would be damaged by that kind of activity? AND the benefit for the women would be a nice house, nice cars, nice every possible creature comfort you can imagine AND they wouldn't have to supply sex to him all the time. I mean if he had 20 wives, they would all have a break from the male hormones that are present all through marriage.
That's just my personal look at marriage and yes, it is real. It is the bonding for the purpose of procreation between two human beings and today it has become a joke. With birth control and woman's lib and all...good luck with a long marriage with the same woman. And on the subject of polygamy... many men are SERIAL polygamists. Divorce this wife after he gets bored and marry another one. I have a friend who was married five times. And birth control has turned sex into a hobby for many women. Sorry for the long rant! Thanks for subscribing.