Hmmmm... This thread has touched on many of the issues facing unmarried Christians these days. We can't settle all the problems. In fact, I tend to see the point of view of each of the posters, as I read this thread -- and they each portray their own cultural and generational outlook.

In other words, I believe the legality of marriage is principally cultural. In the U.S. it's a rather "black and white" situation --easily termed "sin"-- if two people choose to live together in a committed, sexual relationship without benefit of clergy. But in Europe [as someone else pointed out here], living together without marriage is quite common; at least I personally know of several such situations in a friend's family in Sweden. The unmarried couple, who have children together, is accepted just as readily in Sweden as is the married couple in USA in which the wife retains her maiden name.

And in such countries as Africa, when our missionaries go there to evangelize, they're torn between (1)requiring the baptismal candidates to divorce their superfluous (to Western thinking) wives before they can be baptized--or (2)accepting the new believers as they are, and baptizing all the wives together. Because, in that culture, to become a divorced wife would be to lose all social standing and all means of support--reducing the divorced wife to the status of a prostitute. When I was growing up, the policy was to require all "extra" wives to be divorced. Nowadays, however, the General Conference has changed the policy to allow baptism of all wives and accepting the families in their current status when they join the Adventist church. It became clear that we needed to adapt our doctrines where needed; Adventism is not a "lifestyle" religion, or an "Americans only" religion; it should be for all people.

In the U.S. the problem with some of the older widows/widowers is that they're living on their combined Social Security benefits, calculated on their late spouse's earnings added to their own; and if they were to remarry, their share of the late spouse's Social Security benefits would be lost. They'd end up with a lower income, along with acquiring another mouth to feed in the person of their new spouse.

Things begin to look different around age 65. It's impossible for any of us to sit in judgment of another person in this regard. We can trust God, and maintain a close relationship with Him, and then just use the good judgment He's given us, in deciding what best to do. I for one will never vote to censure anyone for living together with someone else without marriage. I've lived too long and have seen too many wonderful unmarried relationships which benefited both parties, to stick my neck out and make a judgment call about their lives. It's easy to spout off on the "rules" for behavior -- and I used every single one of those rules in raising my own children -- but sometimes we have to become flexible, at times when the nuclear family can no longer be maintained, due to death or divorce.

Idea...


A friend of mine says he went to a wedding and gave the Groom & Bride a letter. In the letter it stated that if they were still married in five years, he would buy them two gifts instead of the normal one he would have purchased for the wedding. They would receive the gifts on their anniversary.


I like that, what do you think?



oG

Definitely a cute idea, and a great way to get a couple thinking practically about the things they need to do to stay together for the long run.