We need to be sensitive to singleness but we also need to be aware of a profound new study called When Marriage Disappears:
Here are the central theses:
1. Marriage is an emerging dividing line between America’s moderately educated middle and those with college degrees.
2. Marital quality is declining for the moderately educated middle but not for their highly educated peers.
3. Divorce rates are up for moderately educated Americans, relative to those who are highly educated.
4. The moderately educated middle is dramatically more likely than highly educated Americans to have children outside of marriage.
5. The children of highly educated parents are now more likely than in the recent past to be living with their mother and father, while children with moderately educated parents are far less likely to be living with their mother and father.
What do you see here? What do you think should/could be done?
In my judgment, one of the fundamental issues to address, which I did address from a slightly different angle in my book One.Life: Jesus Calls, We Follow , is the meaning of love. More and more Christians think of love in romantic and ideal terms and fail to grasp its true meaning. We need a generation of teaching and living what true love means.
When I was following these stats four or five years ago for my job, it was clear that single parenthood was tracking upwards and that a chasm was growing in the married/unmarried based on class (which we try to deny exists.) At that time, as now, marriage was correlated with education and money, unmarried/single parenthood with lack of ed and income. At that time, however, “moderate education” (a year or two of college) tracked with marriage. Now, apparently, that as changed.
What to do? One commonality I see in both richer and poorer families is a lack of decent-paying jobs for the early 20-somethings–or to put it more broadly–lack of that “first step” that gets adults of the age, married, out of the family of origin’s home and “on their way.” First jobs probably don’t pay that much differently than they did 50/60 years ago, but then it was OK for educated and uneducated alike to get married and start life in a small apartment without the amenities, ie to “get out and starve.” I see a link between 20-somethings from wealthier homes staying home longer and longer–which I think is not the best idea–and young adults from less wealthy homes leaving home–but not to marry, even if they are having children. In neither case do they feel able, apparently, to start independent, married life. Perhaps we need to bring back the romance of the married couple in the tiny walkup ….
And it occurs that churches have a positive role in this. I haven’t looked at any stats and can only speak from what I have seen, but it seems to me a (usually) evangelical church often makes the difference, especially for a moderately educated woman, between a life of say, single parenting, working as a waitress and drinking with her roommates/boyfriend on the weekends and a married life, staying at home with her kids (or working part-time) and having a modest home. I’ve long suspected that Dr. Dobson’s 80 percent female Focus on the Family following is comprised of this demographic–women looking around and seeing the only way “up and out” to a stable life for herself and her children as through a conservative church that supports traditional families. More churches could work as this kind of bridge between the often uncertain life of the single parent and the “Ozzie and Harriet” life. Now, not everyone wants the latter and I see that this is hardly an ideal solution, but many do want this. We know that marriage is correlated with income and upward mobility.
Is part of this a shift in culture? Is there a “Biblical” pattern for marriage and independence?
One of the issues, I’d see Diane, in romanticizing the tiny walkup is the growth of marketing the new american dream. we shouldn’t have to wait for the mcmansion, just use our ‘credit’ to get it now. after all, that’s what we really want down the road, so get it now and we’ll be happier longer. that too would be countercultural.
I think it would be interesting to know what the debt-load, financial status is among the moderately educated middle American couples. On many fronts this is a telling source of stress that negatively effects relationships.
Yes, marriage is corrolated with income, but in what direction are those arrows going? Does (1) marriage tend to cause economic stability or (2) does economic stability tend to cause marriage and family stability.
I don’t know. And there is undoubtedly some give-and-take between the two. But in church I hear #1 a LOT. My strong instinct is that it’s #2.
I need to push back on this a bit. I found myself in an emotionally, and at times sexually, abusive marriage and tried to stick it out for love; love of God, love of what we had in the beginning, love and respect for the marriage covenant. I listened to Dobson, et al and was convinced that hanging in there for the children was the best thing to do.
Along the way I lost way too much of myself, and had to finally put an end to the marriage. My household is now a place of peace and my only regret is that my 2 older children did not have this sense of stability that my younger 2 now have.
I have a MDiv and pastor a church in the midwest. I am blessed that the leadership in the church and my denomination have been so supportive, without my having to go into any details with them about the abuses I suffered.
I am also grateful for a wonderful therapist who is helping me to realize that I am a beloved child of God, even me. I think that really is where lessons about love have to start, with heart language that links us to God first and foremost – I lost a lot of myself along the way but am grateful to be on the long road back to health and wholeness.
One final thought – to be honest, I find myself at times angry at the messages from the Church and other Christian organizations to suffer and take it for the sake of the family. Taking up ones cross should not mean losing every semblance of integrity and dignity, should it?
Diane @#1: “I see a link between 20-somethings from wealthier homes staying home longer and longer–which I think is not the best idea–and young adults from less wealthy homes leaving home–but not to marry, even if they are having children.”
Why is this remaining at home longer trend that a friend of mine studies as “adultolescence,” a bad thing? Or, why is it a bad thing for Christians? I understand that it is detrimental to the American ideals of home-ownership and nuclear (as opposed to extended) family. But has the nuclear family living alone been anything more than a quirk of our western industrialized economies over the last 150 years?
Peace,
Randy Gabrielse
DC,
Thank you for sharing your experience. You are right. That is not God’s intent in taking up our cross. It took me almost 20 years in an abuive marriage to get that. How? By realizing I was loved and had great worth in God’s eyes. And I started living out “love your neighbor as yourself.”
And I think that is why so many marriages fail. We have become a disrespectful society. And we misunderstand His teachings.
This commandment given by our Lord says to love your neighbor AS yourself. This presupposes that we love ourselves well. When we do love ourselves well (not selfishly, but as a child of God made in his immage) we can love others well. And our only motive is to show God’s love to others. Not, as Scot’s picture in the other post shows, to get them to be indebted to us, but just because.
And how can we, the church, change this trend? Teach loving well. And it begins with respecting each other in everyday life. Address those things that are not loving. Support those who need support. And when there must be a divorce due to things like abuse, provide compassion rather than judgment.
Randy #7:
True, nuclear family is a recent thing. Young adults living with parents really isn’t historically very unusual, or unusual in many nonwestern societies.
That said, what we have in America isn’t the extended family support system of nonwestern socities or patrilocality/matrilocality, but rather an elongated corridor from childhood to adulthood where marriage and other committments (e.g., faith) are delayed and devalued. Options are kept open almost indefinitely. And within this corridor is a good bit of sexual experimentation. Such sustained experimentation makes eventual committment to a single marriage partner increasingly unlikely. See Smith’s SOULS IN TRANSITION and Regnerus’ PREMARITAL SEX IN AMERICA.
Something I agree with and miss from my very fundamentalist upbringing was it’s high value on the husband and wife relationship. Maybe a recovery of this is needed?
Important post, Scot (not to put down any of the rest). This is neglected, and I do so much agree with your point about true love versus the idealized, romantic kind that has won the day in our society, and has impacted all of us.
Of course it’s the churches which must make this a priority. To somehow both model and teach what real love in Jesus is.
As to the theses, I tend to see economic stability as contributing toward the well being of any family. Whereas it is known at least by observation, and I think in studies, that those who do not have that have a greater probability of suffering instability in marriages and family.
Shalom as in God’s kingdom come in Jesus does become quite practical as we see in scripture. Inside out in every way in Jesus.
More generally, I think Scot’s post brings up one of the the biggies that’s in the background of the issue:
- “More and more Christians think of love in romantic and ideal terms and fail to grasp its true meaning.” Americans’ (including Christians) definition of marriage (and love within that context) is probably pretty skewed and more American than Christian. A heavy focus on individualism and romantic ideals likely shapes notions of marital love may undercut concepts like fidelity.
But several of the comments thus far touch on another other big source of the situation we’re in:
- In America, we make marriage and having children within that context heavily dependent upon having a decent job. But the problem is that stable, humane, decent jobs have largely disappeared over the last several decades for America’s underprivileged. Not only does this state of affairs decrease the possibility of marriage and marital stability (think money stress->divorce), but it also increases the likelihood of out of wedlock births due to lopsided mating markets (see the pivotal statement “THE TRULY DISADVANTAGED” by W.J. Wilson).
#8 Thank you Kate, you said that very well – and I totally agree!
This is a fascinating topic – and the entire report (which I looked through, but didn’t study in detail) is fascinating.
I think – anecdotally – that there is one big factor here in the higher marriage rates and more stability in marriage among the “higher educated,” especially when compared with mother’s education level. There appears to be, in general, a healthier view and dynamic of male-female interactions among the more highly educated. The interactions involve a much more significant mutuality and, within marriage, vision of a team working together. This is rather ironic as empowerment and education of women was supposed (if you look at pop thought of the 50′s for example) to diminish marriage by rendering it unnecessary.
RJS:
Excellent observation, and interesting irony you point out.
Also, less educated men are arguably more embedded among more male chauvinist peers. This likely has a negative impact on men’s view of sex, marital commitment, and marital strife. And this is especially problematic in a culture where couples are expected to make it on their own without the support of extended family or faith communities.
What? The church has spent all kinds of time on marriage and look where we are today. You must be kidding.
Whether or not I am married, who’s going to teach me how to die? Who’s going to help me walk the path of holiness and honor before God?
Marriage cannot and will not save us. The problem with marriage and how we define it is a heart problem.
I just got done writing a blog entry mostly drawing from an NPR article dealing with this same story, but noting Scot’s entry here, as well. When he asks “What… should/could be done?” here’s my attempt at an answer from that entry:
If the decision to enter into marriage is linked to the amount of education one receives, and if there is any desire to see more couples with children actually make the commitment to marriage, then it stands to reason that we want to encourage people to get more education. But encouraging people to get education, itself, has economic implications. College is expensive! I’m not necessarily trying to argue that college should be free, or where any more money to make education less expensive should come from, but this is clearly something that Christians who care about making sure that children grow up in homes with both parents should be looking into.
There are several issues here worthy of comment. But the most important one to me is the most obvious: in our day and place, financial stability tends to lead to marital stability. This is a sorry state of affairs from a kingdom standpoint, I think. Isn’t Jesus forever calling us to radical fidelity, to build our marriages on our faith commitments rather than on money? And is it just my prejudices, or does the Gospel’s call tend to cut against the grain when it comes to “financial stability”? Is the church in this day and place more ill-equipped to encourage counter-cultural living than ever before?
question:
How is “moderately educated” defined vis-a-vis “highly educated”?
Nathan in #19,
Scot can correct me if he’s reading the report differently, but the report seems to be talking about “high school diploma” vs. “four-year college degree or better.”
Scot, good post and look forward to reading the study.
I have observed for a number of years now that there is quite a difference in the energy that is put into preparing for a wedding verses the energy that is often placed into preparing for a marriage.
Quite often couples will spend an incredible amount of time an energy planning for the wedding and getting every detail right. Meanwhile, couples will get married and quite often one or the other has never witnessed a good marriage up close. (Now that may be through no fault of their own. Could be their parents divorced. Or, mom and dad may have been married to one another but one or both are totally disengaged.)
A number of guys who were about to get married have basically told me “I don’t have a clue what a husband is supposed to do. I have never seen a marriage up close.” This is a real opportunity for the church to be the church and for older couples to come along-side newlyweds and mentor.
Looks like it’s time for a study on cHesed
— truly, most folks just don’t get the depth and strength of love … so they do not really even understand how God loves them … and it all goes downhill from there!
Very deep topic with lots of layers and nuance, this.
Lewis Smedes book, Love Within Limits, is a well done study of 1 Corinthians 13 … it is worth a look.
It’s interesting to contrast this study to how much push-back marital fidelity & family stability have been getting in recent years. There seems an increasing devotion in certain psycho-therapeutic professional circles to a general acknowledgment that step-families can be just as healthy as intact families for children. Certainly, as DC & Kate both expressed, abusive marriages are detrimental for the spouse & the children; however, there are therapists who teach & write that infidelity can “save” marriages because it exposes problems otherwise unacknowledged, or that infidelity leading to divorce & new relationships is fine for children, if the divorcing parents don’t carry out their pain or betrayal on the children. While there are truthful elements within their positions, there is significant knitting together of facts to norm family & marital dysfunction. (Norming immorality & infidelity relieves moral tension, shame, etc.) Perhaps some more wise & educated may be better at spotting the moral, academic & statistical horse pucky within these therapists’ circles? ugh.
Scot, I’d agree that churches need to help folks clearly define how the biblical understanding of love (& God’s love) are contradicted by the flimsy, romanticized, feelings-based imitation offered in popular culture. 15+ years ago, I led the a HS & college youth group in an interactive exercise of writing out 1) what their peers said “love” was, 2) what they’d read/heard the Bible definition of love was, 3) reasons to have sex. Most had heard 1 Cor. 13 somewhere in their church attendance. Where ALL of them had heard dozens (literally) of the abstinence based “talk” from parents & adults, none of them had worked out the foundation for themselves until then. We had an uproarious laughter-filled, tension relieving discussion of reasons (“when the jello runs out at the after-prom party” had all of us ROFL) vs. the Biblical view of love-commitment-unity-fidelity.
Kristen, #5, 1) contributes to 2) which contributes to 1). An “or” choice between economic stability & marital stability isn’t necessary. I’ve seen that financial instability and poor choices/communication can trigger marital discord, and v.v. Wise couples will seek to develop healthy financial practices & open communication about spending decisions.