Anonymous Asks (380)

“Does a Christian marriage have to be romantic?”

Men and women born much prior to the ‘Summer of Love’ — like, say, those who managed to live through a World War, the Great Depression or any of the plagues and famines of prior centuries — would probably find this question hilarious. Even today, in cultures where the social or financial advantages of being married outweigh any potential negatives, a deficiency of romance in a marriage rarely amounts to a stopper.

However, we live in an era in which a young person’s view of marriage is often wildly unrealistic. Feminist media propaganda shapes the expectations of most young women — and many men.

No Ruth, No Rebekah, No Tamar

Let’s stick to the New Testament for our discussion of Christian marriage. Old Testament marriages were generally pragmatic, occasionally dysfunctional and/or polygamous, and more likely to come about via negotiations between the prospective husband and the girl’s father than between the parties. Men needed housekeepers and heirs in order to function and prosper. Women needed food, clothing and protection to survive. People of either sex who didn’t marry were frequently considered defective in some way. Security and lifestyle were by far the biggest considerations for women in looking to marry, and virginity and the ability to bear children the biggest considerations for men. The stakes were just that much higher. Nobody particularly cared about romance unless they were affluent enough to indulge in the search for it as a luxury item.

There were exceptions, of course, but the vast majority of marriages in centuries past were necessary in ways marriages simply are not today, the emotional state of the parties inevitably backgrounded to other considerations or considered entirely irrelevant.

Love and Marriage

But that was then, this is now. There are not many passages in the New Testament that deal with the process of choosing whether to get married (1 Corinthians 7 being the exception), though there are plenty about how husbands and wives ought to behave once they have tied the knot. Paul’s much-quoted instructions to the Ephesian Christians about marriage put the onus on the husband to love his wife, and on the wife to respect her husband.

I should point out that biblical love and romance are two very different things. The Greek word Paul uses for “love” is agapaō, a term that has little or nothing to do with sentiment or feelings and much to do with the active pursuit of its object’s best interests. Love like this is self-sacrificing, patient, resentment-free, honest, loyal and enduring. Such love need not be squishy or sentimental, but it takes into account at all times the needs and nature of the wife.

There Must Be Some Misunderstanding

Peter comments that the husband is to live with his wife “in an understanding way”, literally “according to knowledge”. We might say biblical love, at least in its male aspect, is attentive. It observes what the wife needs and desires, makes a mental note, and tries to meet those needs and desires (assuming they are moral and appropriate).

Some women are quite pragmatic, and may laugh off a husband’s romantic gestures. I work with a couple of these. In such cases, it is probably prudent for the man to go with the flow rather than try to introduce elements into the relationship with which his wife is not comfortable, or which she doesn’t appear to prize. Other women greatly value that sort of behavior, in which case the husband is wise to do what he can to accommodate her preferences, even if that goes against his personal inclinations. That’s what a sacrifice is, and marriage is certainly that.

So no, a Christian marriage does not have to be romantic, but the ability to pull off the occasional grand romantic gesture in a timely fashion is advantageous to any prospective husband.

Romance as a Prerequisite

The question arises whether a Christian couple today should consider marriage if one or both lack strong feelings about the other. Here’s where we come back to the wildly unrealistic expectations of marriage created and perpetuated by modern media, social and otherwise.

A woman convinced romantic feelings are a prerequisite for a happy marriage should probably wait for someone who inspires them, or else will feel she is “settling”. Of course, the real possibility exists that by being too choosy, she will die alone in an apartment full of cats. (Not, I hasten to add, that there’s anything wrong with cats; I may well do the same.) Alternatively, if she enters into a marriage she considers beneath her potential, be certain her poor husband will shortly become fully aware he is living with a terminally disappointed wife. That will not end well. Moreover, even if she successfully marries “for love”, time will disabuse her of the notion that romance persists in all (or any) marriages past the first few years, after which the best ones become efficient and functional friendships with the occasional exciting and unexpected late Saturday night. I’m not sure there’s an answer for that beyond Christian maturity and being faithful to one’s vows. Or, preferably, adjusting your expectations to something remotely realistic prior to marrying. Sound advice from older Christian women is always a blessing, if the younger set are ready and willing to receive it.

Do men exist who are convinced romantic feelings are a prerequisite for marriage? Perhaps, but if so, I sincerely doubt they are fit to lead one.