No Laughing Matter

I intended to publish a post on the content in the book I recently finished, but that will have to wait.  When reading the local newspaper this morning I came across an article that brushes on a topic I am passionate about, namely marriage.  The article, entitled Kardashian's split was quick, but it wasn't the quickest asked, in jest, if the 72-day marriage for Kim Kardashian was the shortest in celebrity history.  Apparently seventy two days won't get a celebrity into the top-10 for shortest stint as a married couple.  Seven of the shortest were listed, with the gold medal going to Robin Givens and Svetozar Marinkovic, at seven minutes.

Although published as a laughable contest and all presented in a jovial manner, my emotions ranged instead from disgust and disappointment to rage.  One might ask why anyone should get so upset about such thing.  After all, it wasn't my marriage that broke up, it's kinda fun to watch these celebrities live these things out in front of us on "reality TV", and it provides a moment of levity in the middle of things like the debt crisis, the housing market crash, international upheaval and apparently the nearing end of the world with population increases and climate change.  My response would be that I don't see how anyone could ever take profanity lightly.

Profanity, you say?  Are you sure you didn't mean something else?  No I didn't.  Very clearly and with certainty it is profanity.  That opposite of sacred is not neutrality, secular or pure amusement; the opposite of sacred is profane.  It is impossible to get a real sense of where the sacred aspect comes in from the short list of fastest break-ups, but in a related article from the associated press we can see what the newly divorced woman said in her own words about the matter.  She is quoted in the article saying the following: "Kardashian says that while she "married for love"...", ""When I probably should have ended my relationship, I didn't know how to and I didn't want to disappoint a lot of people," she writes...", ""it just didn't turn out to be the fairy tale I had so badly hoped for."  


So, she married for love, she was hoping for a fairy tale and when she discovered in the midst of the "reality show" that her relationship was not a fairy tale she didn't end it for fear of disappointing a lot of people (which are now the very people to whom she is making an apology for causing disappointment). Please know that I do not intend this space as a hammer with which to bludgeon Ms. Kardashian. She is participating in, and reinforcing and continuing the profaning of the sacredness of love and marriage which began long before her time and will continue long after her fame has fleeted.

Love and marriage can only be legitimate as they are sacred and transcend human definition.  This has to be the case as what has obliterated any sense of right and wrong with respect to marriage has been humanity arrogating to themselves the authority and autonomy to define for themselves definitions of love and marriage.  Love is a fairy tale affair laced with perfect existence and constant fulfillment of physical pleasure.  Marriage is any relationship between two entities who decide they want to engage in a committed partnership.  NO, NO, NO!!!  Isn't the problem obvious?  Whose to say those definitions apply to everyone?  Who gets to decide what the boundaries of "fulfillment", "pleasure" or "committed" really means.  After all, staying with someone for two years is surely commitment enough, isn't it?  The attempt of any human being to decide the parameters of love and marriage will fail for this very reason, the definitions are arbitrary and temporal.

Love and marriage are legitimate as they are sacred and transcendent.  Therefore they must be maintained as they are consistent.  I maintain that since the Biblical Christian worldview as a system is the only one that is non-contradictory and sufficiently explains all things, and is TRUE, that love and marriage is only legitimate as it comports with Biblical understanding.  Love is legitimate only as it is a reflection of Christ.  Marriage is only legitimate as it is a reflection of the relationship between Christ and the church.  Any other understanding is not neutral or secular, it is profane.

Now, having said all that, I realize that not everyone is a disciple of Jesus Christ.  Not everyone agrees with what i've just written.  I would love a discussion on another proposed equally legitimate definition and understanding of love and marriage.  However, not everyone who performs marriage ceremonies for people who do not agree with the Biblical Christian understanding, who are themselves both disciples of Jesus, whose understanding of their individual responsibilities to love, honor and cherish one another as modeled by Christ and His relationship with the church are justices of the peace.  In other words, there are ministers who are performing marriage ceremonies for individuals by the power vested in them by the state and under the authority of God without giving due consideration to such matters, without going through counseling sessions to make sure the new couple recognize the sacredness of what they are engaging in, and committing themselves to stay with the couple to encourage and challenge them continuously to improve and stay strong through the trials and issues that will inevitably surface.  Love and marriage, these things are not trivial they are sacred and it would be will with us if we would not treat them with such disregard.