religion & marriage. does anyone see the connection??

[Headless Rat]

Hi ABers, I've been reading the recently posed questions on the "M" word and it has struck me that no reference has ever been made to the word "religion" when discussing the topic of marriage.

To me this is bizarre.

I just wonder if anybody else thesedays sees religion as wholly inter-twined with marriage, a commitment made to each other before God to stay together forever, a promise to bring one's children up ( if applicable) to follow the faith or is marriage just seen as a chance to further one's relationship, to take "the next step", and have a big party?

Should marriage not be valued as infinitely more sacred then just co-habiting with the next boy/girlfriend that comes along??

In my opinion it should be, but I'm interested to know what others think!

Good Irish Catholic girl here- if you haven't already guessed!

[jno]

there's nothing inherently religious about sharing your life with someone else, or formalising the occasion on which you do so; plenty of agnostics do it too. Too early in the morning to google the entire history of marriage but, as I recall, as late as the middle ages most people married informally, with the church only providing weddings for the upper classes. The church did try to gain a monopoly over weddings from the 17th century or so, but never entirely succeeded.

[Headless Rat]

No there's nothing inherently religious about spending the rest of your life with someone or formalising the occasion on which you do so.T

hat's why there's a difference between seeing it as merely formalising your relationship and making a commitment before God-because that's what marriage essentially is; making a commitment BEFORE GOD.

Why do people have to belittle it and refer to it as just a piece of paper?

[catmat]

I agree with Headless Rat.

However, I can perfectly understand that people who are not religious want to formalise their committment to each other.

There are other factors in why people get married, too, which go back to ancient times - it's a way of recording who is related to who, so as to avoid more chances of inbreeding. So it can be quite biologically useful for humans to have long term or monogamous relationships. But that's another topic... :-)

[undercovers]

because people are less religious these days - so if you don't believe in a religion then marriage in the church sense can become quite meaningless - just a party and a bit of paper! 

[AliFlump]

Lets not forget that Marriage was adopted from the Pagan rite in which they promised to stay togther for life and were bound by the wrist (not forever) hence the modern wedding ring .What im trying to say is that the Christian and Catholic church adopted the rite to fit there religion and it became marriage. Is that any different to what people do today? They use marraige to show a commitment  one another to spend their life together and adpot it to fit into their way of life.

[butter1]

I'm afraid to say that I'm not religious one little bit...when I am to marry (which I would like to) I would love to have a civil marriage.  I would never like to be married in a church.  What's the point if I don't believe in God?

[CiderMonkey]

I agree with butter1. When my and my partner get married, neither of us wants to get married in church as we are not at all religious and it would seem silly. We do, however, want to get married as a sign that we are committed to each other for life.

[MargeB]

I think that when two people get married it is essential that it be done in church and in the light of christian faith. That way you can guarantee that the sprogs will be equally brainwashed by both parents and even if one of the partners does something horrific, like serial-cheating, constant alcohol or drug abuse, the other partner is perpetually chained to him/her for fear of spending eternity in a fiery pit or missing out on the 'special bread' one day a week.

[Headless Rat]

well one of the seven sacraments of the church is Marriage, so to say that religion is not connected with marriage just because of the way in which it has evolved, is wrong.

And if marriage does have nothing to do with religion, then why has there always been such pomp and ceremony attached to a church wedding and not to a registry office wedding(traditionally anyway)?

Is it not because it is a cause for celebration, joy and jubilation?

It's more than just the signing of a contract.

[Headless Rat]

What a pathetic , non-sensical answer from MargeB!

What sort of a drug-abuser, serial cheater etc instills the Catholic faith in their "sprogs"?Get real!

Furthermore, marriage is a commitment to be taken seriously, not just something you do with someone who you love at that moment in time.It should be done with someone who you know intimately and who you know will never suddenly turn into a drug abuser or a serial philanderer.

So many people enter into marriage on a whim.When this is the case then tough luck if they miss out on meeting the real thing.if they were stupid enough to marry the wrong one the first time then surely you're stupid enough to do it a second time ( and third, and fouth etc etc....hence multiple marriages and multiple divorces)

[mfewell]

Headless Rat, I think you and I may be the only people on this site who believe in God. I mean, who else could have had the delightful idea of creating a spider which lives underwater and keeps popping up for bubbles of air to take back down with it. Or robins who knock on my back door when I have forgotten to feed them.

[lozzzz]

I am not religious,I have no faith.therefore religion had no bearing on my decision to marry nor did it influence my (5 minute registry office,no party,no honeymoon) wedding ceremony...I married because after nearly losing my partner at christmas, from ongoing illness,from our point of view on paper being a Mrs is easier all round than being miss with a different name..the 17 years before that we felt no need.What other option is there.

[MargeB]

"What god has put together let no man set assunder"

We all must know at least one 'christian marriage' with a serial abuser, or drunk, or drug addict in it. Should the other party stay hitched because they made a promise to god? Under pain of mortal sin and eternal damnation in devil land? And all of this touted by a bunch of men in dresses who never get married and see it as less perfect than their way of life?

What a perfect vehicle to perpetuate the mush of catholicism: get married, but you can't split up. have sex, but you can't use contraception. So you'll probably have loads of sprogs. And when you have them, you must indoctrinate them in the same garbage you fell victim to yourself, all before they are even 12, in case they were old enough to work something out themselves.

Cycle repeats. Utter disgrace.

[Headless Rat]

MargeB

Firstly, priests don't see marriage as second best to their way of life.

Secondly, and more importantly, what is so wrong with believing that you should treat others as you would like to be treated?

This is, afterall, the fundamental teaching of Catholicsm.

In what way exactly do you think the world would be worse off if we were all practicing Catholics???

[AliFlump]

If marraige has everthing to do with Religion why are we allowed to get Married in a registry office which is not before God? Again it is the an example of the way people have adopted the ceremony to fit their life, in this case making a commintment to one another but not before God.

[MargeB]

"Firstly, priests don't see marriage as second best to their way of life."

They do. Read Number 24:

http://www.catholic-forum.com/saints/pope0260k.htm

"Secondly, and more importantly, what is so wrong with believing that you should treat others as you would like to be treated?" What? Where did this come from?

"In what way exactly do you think the world would be worse off if we were all practicing Catholics???"

Answer:

1) It is founded on the belief that God exists, and that this can be known not just by faith, but by reason based on the world around us. This has been clearly shown to be based on faulty interpretation of the evidence and a number of fallacies

2) It is secondly founded on the idea that Jesus Christ is the Son of God (see (1)) and that he came to earth to die for us and save us from original sin and our own sins, both inherent in our 'spiritual dimension, our souls'. Abundant evidence has shown that we evolved from lower creatures, and did not come from 'Adam and Eve', and that the seat of our intellect, will, and memory is not our 'spiritual soul' but the brain encased in our heads.

3) It is founded thirdly on the idea that we can rely historically on the evidence of the life of Jesus Christ from the writings of the New Testament. Most of these, especially the Gospels, have been shown to be made up, for the purposes of converting people, not as a 'Historical Life of Jesus' as the majority of catholics believe/are led to believe.

4) It is founded fourthly on the idea that in some way God speaks in a special way to the Catholic Church via 'Tradition' ie a collection of ideas which are true, because they come from God. Except when we find out they're wrong/don't like them, in which case we over ride them.

 

[MargeB]

5) The worst thing about it is its current form. You have some Nazi (I know him, I know his friends) sitting in Rome calling himself your 'leader', spouting out whatever he wants as if it came from Jesus himself, and using the 'power of the grief of the cross' and the threat of eternal damnation getting you to do whatever he wants, from worshipping Mary, believing all kinds of garbage 'private revelations' to not using condoms even when it would save your life.

Someone should call it for what it is. An utter disgrace.

Catholics were the terrorists and suicide bombers of the Middle Ages and now harp on about 'evil muslims' and building a "world of Peace and Love", just because the shoe is on the other foot. Don't make me laugh.

[WaldoMcFroog]

I did get married to a woman with whom I intend to spend the rest of my life in a ceremony with vows that I take entirely seriously. I can honestly say I've never been more serious about anything than making that committment.

However, we didn't see any point in inviting god along because he doesn't exist. For the idiots who can't concieve of the notion of marriage being entirely separate from the notion of religion, perhaps you might like to read the following:

http://www.theweekmagazine.com/briefing.asp?a_id=567

You'll probably be scandalised - it also talks of men marrying men. It's the end of the world as we know it, eh?

[MargeB]

"However, we didn't see any point in inviting god along because he doesn't exist."

Probably the best Answerbank line ever.

[Headless Rat]

MargeB, you answered my question about treating others in the same manner with which you would like to be treated, with another 2 questions, thereby never really answering my question. Interesting to note that after all your references to this that and the other, you just couldn't bear to admit that, oh, revelation, perhaps the world just might be better off if there were more people who had respect for each other, who practised some self-deprivation/ self-control from time to time, who respected the unborn's right to life, who entered into marriage with the determination and integrity to make it last a lifetime.Need i go on?

As for Catholics "harping on about evil Muslims"....well that doesn't even warrant an inteligent reply.

And, incidentally, when did the Pope order 6 million Jews to be gassed to death??You did refer to him as a Nazi didn't you?

Do you ever stop to think, to appreciate the incalcuable amount of work that priests, nuns, brothers etc do in the third world, in talks to negotiate peace between countries?(I'm not denying that lay people do less valuable work)Why must you treat that with derision and contempt?And thats what you have done by calling the Pope a Nazi and thereby calling his followers Nazis too.