The Christian idea of marriage is based on Christ's words that a man and wife are to be regarded as a single organism-for that is what the words 'one flesh' would be in modern English. Christians believe that this is not a sentiment, but rather it is considered a fact-just as it is a fact that a lock and its key are one mechanism, or the fact that a violin and bow are one musical instrument. In Lewis' words, 'The inventor of the human machine was telling us that its two halves, the male and the female, were made to be combined in pairs, not simply on the sexual level, but totally combined'. He then goes on to describe how people who often indulge in sexual activity outside of marriage are essentially attempting to isolate one such union (the sexual) from all of the other kinds of union (the emotional, the spiritual, and etc), which were-and are-intended to go along with the first, making up the total union. Though Christianity does not condemn sexual pleasure, it does disagree with the act of isolating sexual pleasure from the whole of marriage (this is what the last post over sexual immorality covers).
Christianity views marriage as for life-not to be broken or severed at any point. The topic of divorce is for another time, but really all I want to say here is this: if Christians do not believe in permanent marriage, perhaps it is better that they live together unmarried than to make vows not intended to be kept. What is the point? When vows are broken, then so is the virtue of justice. If vows are said simply to be formal, then they are simply deceitful. My point here is not to encourage promiscuity or fleeting relationships, but rather to point out that Christianity does not take marriage lightly. Marriage is considered one of the most-if not the most-sacred relationships in human existence, and for various reasons, the biggest one being that marriage represents Christ's love for the Church-often referred to as the 'Bride of Christ' in the Bible. Marriage is a beautiful picture of God's love for His people, and God's love is not broken.
Now we must consider the reasons for being married at all. Lewis says that the idea of 'being in love', as the world often throws around the term, cannot be the only reason, because if it is, then vows should not be made. A vow is a promise to be true to the beloved, 'as long as you both shall live'. This is a commitment to being true-even if one person ceases to 'be in love'. Promises should be made about actions. They should never be based on feelings, for feelings change. Love is not simply a feeling. Love is a choice. If the vow says, 'as long as I have feelings for you', then the moment one person becomes angry with the other, then he or she is given permission to leave the other, thus breaking the promise (but really, was it ever a promise at all?).
So now, this question is raised: why should two people stay together if they have moments when they don't necessarily 'feel in love?'
Being in love is a good thing-but perhaps it is not the best thing, and that is because it is still a feeling. A feeling cannot be the whole basis for life. No feeling can be relied on to last in its full peak, or even to last at all. God love is lasting, but God's love is not merely a feeling-it is a choice, too. Love as a feeling is noble, but in that form it is still just a feeling. We must expand our view of what love is, exactly.
In Lewis' words, 'If the old fairy-tale ending, ''They lived happily ever after'' is taken to mean, ''They felt for the next fifty years exactly as they felt the day they were married'', then it says what probably never was nor ever would be true, and would be highly undesirable if it were'. This view that love is only based on a giddy feeling you have around a significant other is incredibly unrealistic. Of course, there will be joyful moments. If you know me well, then you know I have a phrase: Pink Bubble Moments. Basically, these are moments in life that I like to identify by labeling them as Pink Bubble Moments, and everytime one of these comes around, I journal about it so that I can look back on it fondly. These moments are the ones worth remembering. They are life in its sweetest form. However, I know that not every single moment can be a Pink Bubble Moment, for if every moment was like that, I would not appreciate each moment at all. The moment-and the feeling accompanying it-would be robbed of its beauty. Love is the same way. 'Being in love' must be separated from the whole act of love. 'Being in love' is a small part-a significant one, but still a part-of a much bigger whole. Love-the act and intention-is, as Lewis says, 'a deep unity, maintained by the will and deliberately strengthened by habit; reinforced by, (in Christian marriages) the grace which both partners ask, and receive, from God'. When love is viewed as a choice and not just a feeling, it can be seen as being retained even in the moments when two people do not feel like loving each other. This sort of love oversteps the moments of disagreement, or the temptations of infidelity. It moves beyond conflict and strife and chooses to exist through the thick and thin. It is a beautiful love that is true-and unconditional. It is more than just a feeling, and it is what makes a marriage last. 'Being in love' perhaps moves people to promise faithfulness, while the choice of love is what enables two people to keep the original promise.
So, earlier I said that 'being in love', though it is very good, is not best. So what is? There is a deeper kind of love. It's one that chooses to exist in the calm and stormy waters. In Greek, it's the word, 'agape', and it is the sort of love that God displays for His people. It's the love that holds on to me even when I run from my Father. It's a love that, because it has been given to me, can now be given to other people. I can love because I am loved by a God who is not ever going anywhere. It's a love that inspires. It is never-ending, shining even in the darkest of times.
This is why Christians hold such a serious view of marriage, because to us it represents the most sacred and important of loves: agape.
From here, Lewis goes a bit more in depth on the differences between 'being in love' and the whole entity of love, but I think I will just encourage you to read the novel for yourself.
Thanks for reading!
