Video
Twitter
Facebook
RSS Feed
The logic of Christian marriage
Chelsea Clinton, raised Methodist, and Marc Mezvinsky, Jewish, will wed this weekend.
Statistics show that 37 percent of Americans have a spouse of a different faith.
Statistics also show that couples in interfaith marriages are "three times more likely to be divorced or separated than those who were in same-religion marriages."
Is interfaith marriage good for American society? Is it good for religion? What is lost -and gained -when religious people intermarry?
Statistics indicate that a growing number of Americans are marrying someone from outside their own religious commitments. Is this a trend we should encourage? Not if you are committed to the Gospel of Jesus Christ.
The statistical trend is clear enough, but the question is more complex than may first appear. The Washington Post reported on June 6, 2010 that 25 percent of American households were mixed-faith in 2006, according to the General Social Survey. That represents a significant increase from the 15 percent of such households in 1988.
But, what does mixed-faith mean? It could mean the mixing of relatively similar Christian denominations, or it might mean the mixing of two very different systems of belief.
As Naomi Schaefer Riley reported, "In a paper published in 1993, Evelyn Lehrer, a professor of economics at the University of Illinois at Chicago, found that if members of two mainline Christian denominations marry, they have a one in five chance of being divorced in five years. A Catholic and a member of an evangelical denomination have a one in three chance. And a Jew and a Christian who marry have a greater than 40 percent chance of being divorced in five years."
That paper by Professor Lehrer is truly interesting. In "Religious Intermarriage in the United States: Determinants and Trends," published in the journal Social Science Research, Lehrer acknowledged that the span of differences "corresponds to a continuous variable." In other words, there is a huge difference between a marriage where a Presbyterian marries an Anglican and one in which a Baptist marries a Mormon.
Lehrer defined a couple as religiously intermarried if, for example, an Evangelical marries a Roman Catholic, or a spouse allied with a liberal Protestant denomination marries someone from "an exclusivist group." She then allowed, "Unions involving members of two ecumenical Protestant denominations are treated as homogamous."
All this points to a very interesting pattern. Part of the rise in the statistics about mixed-faith marriages is due to the increasing secularization of the liberal Protestant churches and denominations. To that must be added the huge increase in interfaith marriages among liberal Jews, and the more ecumenically minded among other religious bodies.
Lehrer documented the fact that the more conservative faiths were not intermarrying at rates anywhere near the more liberal groups -- and for understandable reasons. When the level of doctrinal commitment is low, the barriers to interfaith marriage are correspondingly far less significant.
Nevertheless, even with all this taken into account, it turns out that marrying outside the faith is one of the most significant risk factors for divorce. Citing the American Religious Identification Survey of 2001, Riley reported that "people who had been in mixed-religion marriages were three times more likely to be divorced or separated than those who were in same-religion marriages." Riley referred to this fact as "an open secret among academics."
Professor Lehrer described what she called the "large destabilizing effects" associated with mixed-faith marriages. Why is an interfaith marriage at such risk? The answer, in terms of the academic perspective of Professor Lehrer, is that "religion influences many activities that husband and wife perform jointly."
Or, as Naomi Schaefer Riley observed, "The differences between husband and wife start to add up." Seen in the context of the decisions that couples have to make in the course of life together, this is surely an understatement.
Putting all this together, it is clear that theological differences really do matter. These belief systems develop into worldviews that do have real consequences. It is not primarily a matter of which holidays the family observes, but how the children are raised, how the major decisions of life are framed, how the priorities of the couple are aligned.
The sociological evidence points in one clear direction -- toward the inherent instability of true mixed-faith marriages. Even among the more liberally minded, the tensions remain.
For Christians, the issue is not settled by sociological data, however. In 2 Corinthians 6:14, the Apostle Paul commands that Christians must "not be unequally yoked with unbelievers." This command reaches far beyond marriage, but it certainly includes the covenant of marriage within its span. Paul's principle is clear: The Christian's commitment to Christ is determinative of his or her other commitments. A believer must not marry an unbeliever, for this violates the very logic of the Gospel and the believer's union with Christ.
The believer in Christ acknowledges him as Savior and Lord, with an allegiance that exceeds any earthly commitment. When two believers are married, they share this mutual commitment and are commonly dedicated to the Lordship of Christ. Their worldviews and allegiances merge into the strength of mutual discipleship, and the big questions of life are answered by their common faith in Christ.
In contrast, the mixed-faith marriage lacks this mutuality of faith and commitment. Worldview divergences and issues of contrasting beliefs are almost surely to hit where they matter most -- in relation to the most significant questions of life.
The sociological research presents a clear case for social concern, but the Christian case against mixed-faith marriage emerged long before the academic discipline of sociology. That case is rooted in the logic of the Gospel itself, and in the reality of the Lordship of Jesus Christ. The Christian case against mixed-faith marriage does not end with the question of marital survival or divorce. To the contrary, the Christian concern about marriage has nothing less than eternity in view.
_____________________________________
Naomi Schaefer Riley, "Interfaith Marriages Are Rising Fast, But They're Failing Fast Too," The Washington Post, Sunday, June 6, 2010.
Evelyn L. Lehrer, "Religious Intermarriage in the United States: Determinants and Trends," Social Science Research, 27:245-263 (1998).
By
R. Albert Mohler Jr.
|
July 28, 2010; 10:01 AM ET
Save & Share:
Previous: Mixed faiths a mixed blessing |
Next: Lessons from a Buddhist/ Jewish/ Hindu/ Christian family
Posted by: PSolus | July 30, 2010 2:15 PM
Report Offensive Comment
PSOLUS,
"That's not food for thought; that's pablum for superstitious belief."
I have no idea what you're talking about...:)
Posted by: RCofield | July 30, 2010 10:47 AM
Report Offensive Comment
RCofield,
"A little food for thought:..."
That's not food for thought; that's pablum for superstitious belief.
Posted by: PSolus | July 30, 2010 6:00 AM
Report Offensive Comment
Rcofeild, the burden of the proof is upon you not me. If there were a real proof of Skydaddy's existence I would have heard about it. I don't give much credence to personal experiences. Besides I have not read a coherent and internally non-contradictory scripture so far that is good enough for me. Absence of evidence is evidence of absence me. You, I am sure have heard of the Russell's celestial tea pots, when you can show me that his celestial tea pots do not exist or for that matter my favorite mythical deity Invisible Flying Pink Unicorn doe snot exist I will prove to you god does not exist. In other words you skydaddy is as likely as my favorite IFPU. Your quoting the verses from New Testament does not further your cause, with me. It has been over ten years since I have seen the light and there is no going back. All religion does is keeps the leaches on the society the priests make a living, without having to produce anything of economic value.
Posted by: Secular | July 30, 2010 2:56 AM
Report Offensive Comment
SECULAR, my old satanic adversary,
BTW, your plagarism of Richard Dawkins' catch phrases don't come off nearly as smoothly for you as they do for him. Maybe if you paid him a usage fee he could help you polish them a litte.
Justathought
Keep your powder dry.
Posted by: RCofield | July 30, 2010 2:31 AM
Report Offensive Comment
SECULAR, my old satanic adversary,
"If anyone had provided sufficient evidence that Skydaddy exists I wouldn't be derisively calling it Skydaddy would I."
So am I to surmise that you have examined ALL the evidence that "anyone" has provided concerning the existence of God?
A little food for thought:
Romans 1:18 For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who by their unrighteousness suppress the truth.
19 For what can be known about God is plain to them, because God has shown it to them.
20 For his invisible attributes, namely, his eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly perceived, ever since the creation of the world, in the things that have been made. So they are without excuse.
21 For although they knew God, they did not honor him as God or give thanks to him, but they became futile in their thinking, and their foolish hearts were darkened.
22 Claiming to be wise, they became fools.....
Posted by: RCofield | July 30, 2010 2:24 AM
Report Offensive Comment
I still find it funny that anybody would try to link logic to love and/or marriage.
Yeah, logic plays a HUGE part in people getting married (*rolls eyes*).
Posted by: Skowronek | July 29, 2010 8:56 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Haa Mr. RCofield there you are. I have read enough of Mr. Moehler's articles on this paper to surmise what he is mad of. If anyone had provided sufficient evidence that Skydaddy exists I wouldn't be derisively calling it Skydaddy would I. So I don't think Mr. Moehler is able to show any credible evidence in that regard. As a non-existnet being cannot possible have a existing mind, I submit that Mr. Moehler has no clue about what is on the nonexistent mind of a nonexisting being aka Skydaddy.
Posted by: Secular | July 29, 2010 4:39 PM
Report Offensive Comment
SECULAR, my old satanic adversary...
You address Dr. Mohler: "It would behoove you first to establish that your sky daddy exists in the first place. Then you need to establish that you do know what your sky daddy has on his mind, assuming of course that he has a mind indeed."
Dr. Mohler has preached and written extensively over the course of two decades on the very subjects you call him to task on. Have you bothered to familiarize yourself with his position on them?
Posted by: RCofield | July 29, 2010 10:11 AM
Report Offensive Comment
Mr. Moehler it is not incumbent upon you to comment on anyone private lives, especially their choice of significant other, just because you had been invited to do so. Especially if those comments are not supportive. Ms. Clinton and her fiance are not even public figures, not to say it is permissible even if they were public figures.
That said, sir even in general who are you an authority in marriage counseling or something to be doling out your bigoted opinions. It would behoove you first to establish that your sky daddy exists in the first place. Then you need to establish that you do know what your sky daddy has on his mind, assuming of course that he has a mind indeed. Rather than wishing the couple a good happy married life, you sir are one of those despicable human beings who cannot wish goodwill to anyone else other than those who agree with you with whole prejudicial outlook.
Posted by: Secular | July 29, 2010 8:42 AM
Report Offensive Comment
My religion is ONE facet of my being, and while it does inform and influence all that I do, it is NOT the only part of my life that is important.
Would I marry someone of a different faith who expected me to convert to his faith? No.
Would I marry someone of a differnt faith and ask him to convert to my faith? No.
Would I marry someone of a different faith who followed his Path, made an effort to understand my Path even if he didn't believe in it, and did not interfere with my practice of my Path? Would I make an effort to understand his Path even if I didn't believe in it, and not interfere with his practice of his Path? I not only would, I did, and it's working beautifully.
Posted by: lepidopteryx | July 29, 2010 8:20 AM
Report Offensive Comment
Well, I hope that every non Chhristian who is just in love with a Christian doesn't miss this : In 2 Corinthians 6:14, the Apostle Paul commands that Christians must "not be unequally yoked with unbelievers." That is very straightforward and to the point. Unbeliever in this sense is anyone who doesn't believe in the divinity of Jesus. Can't imagine the longing look across the restaurant table includes describing oneself in these unflattering terms and yet the love object who is a Christian actually believes this in his heart and with certainty eventually this kind of thing comes out to ruin every dinner thereafter.
Posted by: safiyah1111 | July 28, 2010 8:33 PM
Report Offensive Comment
More for pre-marital checklist:
* If you have an annual income of over $50,000, your risk of divorce decreases by 30%.
* If you wait to marry until you’re over 25 years of age, your risk of divorce decreases by 24%.
* If your parents are happily married, your risk of divorce decreases by 14%.
* If you have strong religious beliefs, your risk of divorce decreases by 14%.
* If you’ve attended college, your risk of divorce decreases by 13%.
Posted by: Skowronek | July 28, 2010 3:08 PM
Report Offensive Comment
The two crazy kids are in love and are getting married. Much luck to them and to everyone who says with complete sincerity "I do". Marriage is hard work and even with the best of intentions, lots of ground work and counseling is may not work out. But we all hope that it does work and work well.
Variation in divorce rates by religion:
Religion % have been divorced
Jews 30%
Born-again Christians 27%
Other Christians 24%
Atheists, Agnostics 21%
Associated Press' confirmation of Barna's results:
The Associated Press analyzed divorce statistics from the US Census Bureau. They found that Massachusetts had the lowest divorce rate in the U.S. at 2.4 per 1,000 population. Texas had the highest rate at 4.1 per 1,000. They found that the highest divorce rates are found in the "Bible Belt."
According to the Boston Globe:
"The AP report stated that 'the divorce rates in these conservative states are roughly 50 percent above the national average of 4.2 per thousand people.' The 10 Southern states with some of the highest divorce rates were Alabama, Arkansas, Arizona, Florida, Georgia, Mississippi, North Carolina, Oklahoma, South Carolina, and Texas. By comparison nine states in the Northeast were among those with the lowest divorce rates: Connecticut, Massachusetts, Maine, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New York, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, and Vermont."
One reason for the higher divorce rates in the Bible Belt may be the lower percentage of Roman Catholics in the South. Their denomination does not recognize divorce. Other reasons could be related more to culture than religion:
Couples in the South enter their first marriages at a younger age.
Family incomes in the South are lower.
Educational attainment is lower in the South: One in three Massachusetts residents have completed college. while only 23% of Texans have.
Posted by: Skowronek | July 28, 2010 3:05 PM
Report Offensive Comment
"The Christian case against mixed-faith marriage does not end with the question of marital survival or divorce. To the contrary, the Christian concern about marriage has nothing less than eternity in view."
Open a window please!!! The pretentiousness and smug self-righteousness that reeks from Mohler's article is gagging me! It's a reminder that religion is bunk and serves more to divide than to unite, directing us to develop relationships only with like minded folks, which breeds ignorance and intolerance. It is this "we're right and everyone else is wrong" attitude that has caused me to reject religion and eventually to stop believing in God altogether (yes, one can still maintain a spiritual life without religion or believing in a god).
If two people of different religions want to marry, then so what? To be sure, interfaith marriages can be challenging and certainly more interesting! But they are probably not relationships fit for those intolerant "cuz the Bible tells me so" folks. I'll leave Albert Mohler to live his life according to what his Bronze Age fairy tales and Sky Daddy tell him.
Posted by: pjs1965 | July 28, 2010 1:36 PM
Report Offensive Comment
The comments to this entry are closed.
RCofield,
"I have no idea what you're talking about...:)"
Yes, I'm learning that.