Marriage 2

 

Marriage 2                     

More thoughts on marriage

We are sexual beings and we are distinctly male and female.               

At the very moment of our birth we are recognised as girl or boy[1].

Marriage is a unique institution whose roots reach back into the mists of history.  It is a public contract between a man and a woman who commit to live together as a unit, a family, excluding all others from the intimate centre of the entity.  This is the biblical view of marriage and has been the position of the church from the beginning. 

In recent years the dogma has evolved which says that love is all that matters.  This thinking drove the Conservative party, in 2010, to embrace same sex marriage (SSM) saying, “if two people love each other they should be able to marry”. The Cameron government made SSM civil law in 2014.

There is no dispute that love is the central, vital and most important ingredient in marriage.  But it is not the definition of marriage. 

Although marriage is the mutual giving of one person to another to the exclusion of all others, the wedding ceremony is also a formal public statement to society that these two people are one unit - one flesh.  The public element has been established to make it clear to all and sundry that these two people and any children are a family. 

If marriage was only the recognition of a ‘living together’ or an acknowledgement of a sexual relationship it would not be necessary to formalise it.  Marriage is the unique institution it has become and endures because of children.  When a man and a woman come together sexually, children come[2].   With children comes long term serious responsibility.  Many young people are dependent on their parents into their twenties and in their infant years require constant care.  Both mother and father are vital for this care and often need the support of the wider family.  But the care for infants falls most heavily on to mothers. 

Our culture does not seem to recognise or value the central role of mothers.

 Our materialistic society places a high value on achievement which can be measured in monetary terms.  This means that unless an activity yields an impressive salary it has little real value.  And parenting is an act of love which cannot be measured.

 Our materialist culture focusing on achievement has bifurcated the roles of male and female.  For countless centuries the father being the breadwinner, the home provider and maybe the protector warrior, is seen as the achiever.  Mother, conceiving, bearing, nurturing, rearing and teaching the young is taken for granted; all this is done for love and carries little material value.

Over time the split roles have seriously degraded mothering and this under valuing of the female role has caused pain and resentment among women.

This divide has become engraved in our culture so much so that men don’t know how to look after women and women begrudge honouring men.

The feminist movement, naturally, strives to remedy this injustice.  But it has chosen to downplay unique feminine qualities by emulating the male achiever model – making money.  This has accentuated the war of the sexes.   And in late 2022 we are at the place where women are, if anything, more dissatisfied than ever and men frustrated and isolated.  This confusion is feeding into all facets of our society, not least our perception and definition of marriage.

There is much serious thinking needed and not a little hard effort required to work out how men and women can relate better and to determine what marriage really means.  And the church has an important role to play.

---

[1] less than 1 in 1000 babies are born who are not distinctly male or female having atypical genitalia – Cleveland clinic.

[2] Children always come, unless: 1 the couple choose not to have children: 2 a health issue causes infertility: 3 old age.

Marriage

 What is marriage and why was it institutionalised?

We are sexual beings and we are distinctly male and female. 

At the very moment of our birth we are recognised as girl or boy[1].

 As we grow into adulthood our body size, shape and strength, our hair, our voices, our bone structure and other more subtle and mysterious features like the way we move identify us as men or women.  And as we grow from childhood to maturity we long for sustained and fulfilled relationships with our peers of both sexes.  This inbetween time between childhood and adulthood can be a disturbing and unsettling time for many of us to the extent that we may even question our sexual identity.  And with this growing maturity our genitals can come to have an almost dominating place in our lives.  So much so that we fantasize about sexual contact and run the risk of indulging in pornography and masturbation. 

Much has been said and written about the needs of the homosexual community, for example the Bishop of Oxford’s reference to the "acute pain and distress of LGBTQ+ people in the life of the Church"[2].  But there is little concern in the church, the media or the wider community for the struggles of the many millions of teenagers who are navigating their transition into adulthood. 

The purpose of this paper is an attempt to redress the balance by focusing on defining marriage as it relates to our wider community rather than concentrating on a minority.

 

What is marriage?

 It shouldn’t need pointing out, but the bodies of adult males are designed to connect with adult females and we fit together in a delightful yet profound way. 

When a man and woman come together it is the most creative act in the universe.  From time to time new people come.  We have all come to being in this way.  And this is the basis of marriage. 

Men are not designed for sexual contact with other men, nor women with women.  Our sexuality is the most private of our activities as we lose control of ourselves and can behave somewhat strangely.  Conversely sex is not something we do alone, another person is always involved.  Even if we live isolated lives with only pornography and masturbation others are involved in our sex lives if just pictorially. 

Same sex marriage (SSM), enabled in law by the Cameron government in 2014, has delighted a small section of society but brought much confusion and significant distress to our wider culture and my secular complaint with ‘new marriage’ is that it is shallow and  insufficient.  It seems to be focused only on relationship and orgasm.  There is much more.  And within some sections of the Christian church there is confusion coupled with a fervent longing to be progressive.  None more than the Church of England in late 2022. 

The rationale for promoting same sex marriage seems to be based on the doctrine of ‘inclusivity[3]’ whereby no one should be excluded from any activity.  The doctrine has been mainstream in the western world for most of this century and is affirmed by many elite in prominent institutions. Some churches, like the Methodist church, have formally supported SSM but in a half hearted woolly way. 

When it comes to sexual activity the church has always looked to the bible for affirmation of its decisions.  Although the secular view has become much more influential this century the bible still has a central place in the debate.  It is clear from the bible God intends marriage to be between a man and a woman. Genesis 2:24 states: “Therefore a man leaves his father and his mother and clings to his wife, and they become one flesh.” In Matthew 19:4-5, Jesus reaffirms this: “He answered, ‘Have you not read that the one who made them at the beginning made them male and female,’ and said, ‘For this reason a man shall leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh’?

The Cameron government in 2014, when it made SSM legal, gave scant regard for the bible, but the church is not able to be so casual and careless.  The two references above both refer to the married couple becoming ‘one flesh’.  The term one flesh holds a deep mysterious meaning referring to sexual intercourse.  Man and woman fit together perfectly.  Any other sexual bonding such as anal sexual intercourse cannot be equated with the coming together of a man and woman.

Man and woman coming together in this way is a wonder, delight, glory and mystery beyond describing.  And new people are the greatest mystery of all and are the pinnacle of marriage.

 

Why marriage is institutionalised

 Sexual activity is not morally neutral.  Sex is a powerful force in the lives of adults in their prime.  And our urges can get out of hand and we can, and do, exploit one another.  This leads to much misery and bitterness.  It can also result in unwanted pregnancy leading onto single motherhood or abortion.

It is to reduce human misery that society has established social boundaries to restrain casual sexual activity.  This is a first reason that marriage has been institutionalised. 

A second is for the protection of the mother and child.  Human young require nurture, care and protection for many years and are vulnerable in all sorts of ways up to their mid teens or later.  In a modern society most are not able to live independent lives until their twenties.  And in our early years maternal care is absolutely crucial making a mother’s role in child rearing paramount.  Thus motherhood is possibly the supreme of all human activities. 

 

Appendix

 The introduction to the Church of England prayer book marriage ceremony lays out the “causes for which matrimony was ordained”.

  ”Firstly, It was ordained for the procreation of children, to be brought up in fear and nurture of the Lord, and to the praise of his holy name”. 

 Secondly, It was ordained for a remedy against sin, and to avoid fornication; that such persons as have not the gift of continency might marry, and keep themselves undefiled members of Christ’s body.

 Thirdly, It was ordained for the mutual society, help and comfort that the one ought to have of the other, both in prosperity and adversity.  Into which holy estate these two persons present come now to be joined. 

 

---

[1] less than 1 in 1000 babies are born who are not distinctly male or female having atypical genitalia – Cleveland clinic.

[2] Daily Telegraph 03Nov22 ‘Church of England should allow same sex marriage’

 [3] the practice or policy of providing equal access to opportunities and resources for people who might otherwise be excluded or marginalized, such as those belonging to minority groups.

 

 

Feminism/Feminity

This is my response to Lionel Shriver's article in the Spectator of 11th May 2019, with the title, "Feminism has succeeded – so why don’t we call it quits?"

Lionel, we've got the feminist movement mainly because men don't know how to care for women properly and consequently women don't know how to honour men. My own experience in my callow youth was to be too focused on genitals. I exploited women who suffered, as did I. I am not alone. I can blame my upbringing - two world wars brutalised too many men, my father being one. But that is no excuse. So is there a remedy? Maybe back to first principles. We men can explore and learn what it means to be truly masculine and communicate with our youth. And is it possible that women would be willing to embrace and delight in their femininity? Feminism comes up all the time. - Femininity never.

SS Hororata

At one time ships were built in very large numbers on the island of Britain.  One of the most busy shipyards was that of John Brown on Clydebank.  And in 1941 they built TSS Hororata. (TSS turbine steam ship)

At this time much of Europe was under a unified ruler who was not well disposed towards Britain.  This ruler had banned all the countries under his control from trading with Britain.  No trade in food, medicines, manufactured goods and certainly no travel was permitted.

The SS Hororata was my first ship and I joined her in peaceful days in 1957 as an 18 year old newly qualified radio officer in Albert docks in Liverpool.  My half year voyage to New Zealand and back was uneventful but the experiences of the ship 15 years earlier is a story worth telling.

Captain F. S. Hamilton was appointed master of the newly completed Hororata in early 1942 and I will let him tell his story in his own words.

We sailed for New York with a part cargo and completed there with munitions for Auckland.  The German U boats were operating extensively off the American coast and being a fast vessel the Hororata was routed independently , well away from the coast and to the eastward of the usual track of ships bound for Panama.  When within a days steaming of the Caribbean sea I was on the bridge during the forenoon, it was a hot sunny day with N.E. Trades blowing fresh and a rough sea, the ship zigzagging and making 17.5 knots, the watch at action stations.  Suddenly the lookout posted in the crows nest reported an object din on the port bow.  This object was rapidly approached and in a short time was observed to be a ship's raft, which was frequently enveloped I spray.  A solitary figure bare to the waist and clinging tightly to a stepped oar, which apparently served as a mast, commenced waving frantically.  At a distance of  two miles it was thought the figure was that of a coloured man.

At that moment the zigzag clock rang and the helmsman automatically altered course.  This took the ship away from the plunging spray-swept raft.  The figure with a gesture of indescribable despair sank to its knees as if in supplication.  He thought he was being deserted.  The instructions to ships routed independently were quite clear and definite - survivors in boats or on rafts were to be reported to the nearest Patrol or Escort vessel, the reason being that ships' lifeboats and rafts were being used as decoys by the U boats and many ships carrying out rescue work had in turn been torpedoed.  Was a U boat lurking in the vicinity?  The lonely pathetic figure on the raft remained bowed and somehow terrible in its stillness.  It was not a question of the ship and crew against saving one solitary life.  There was something deeper, something that went back to the time when men first ventured on the sea and the Brotherhood of Seamen was established.  If we deserted that crouching figure he would be on our consciences all our lives. 

I walked to the wing of the bridge and looked down and met the tense gaze of the watch below, who lined the rail.  The zigzag clock sounded alteration of course.  I gave the order 'cease zigzagging and warn the engineroom that speed will be reduced shortly.  The Chief Officer standing close by met my eyes.  'No 5 lifeboat sir?' he asked.  I nodded.  A few moments of explanation of what was intended, 'watch below on deck, motor and no 5 lifeboat crew standby' was ordered.  The Hororata circled the raft.  The asdic searching below and radar sweeping the surface of broken waters for signs of the enemy.  The guns crews were 'closed up' and depth charges ready to be released.  The ship's speed was reduced and for a few minutes she lay stopped, a sitting target for any submarine within three or four miles of her position.  With skill and precision from much practice the motor lifeboat was lowered and cleared of her parent ship.  Then once more full speed ahead zigzagging, but in such a manner as to continually circle around the drifting raft and the motor lifeboat towards it with a fair wind and sea.

The kneeling figure remained motionless.  From the bridge we saw our lifeboat reach the raft.  Still no movement until the Chief Officer touched it on the shoulder and then it came to life only to fall prone on its face.  Ready hands lifted the body into the boat which set off on her return.  The Bosun, 'A real old Seadog', had meantime mustered all available men to haul to motorboat aboard by manpower.  No trusting to power winches at a time like this.  The Hororata again came to a stop.  The small boat suddenly came to sight around the stern and came under the boat falls.  A head line was quickly made fast and the falls as quickly hooked on.  'Haul away' came from the Chief Officer.  The boat came up as if borne on wings under the power of 50 strong men hauling on the boat falls.

No sooner was the boat clear of the water than Hororata was again surging ahead at full speed, zigzagging her way to the Panama Canal.  It was some time before the Chief Officer came to report.  As medical officer he had been attending to our passenger.  To my enquiries he stated that the man had collapsed when he had been touched and spoken to on the raft, but had now recovered and put to bed and was sleeping.  I visited the man, whose name was Edwards, some hours later and although prepared by the Chief Officer received a great shock.  The figure lying on the bed had been burnt almost black by the sun.  His feet supported by pillows were clublike and raw due to salt water boils.  He was pitifully thin and was only able to speak in halting whispers, but his eyes expressed his gratitude more eloquently than words. 

Before he was landed eight days later at the Panama Canal we learnt his story.  He came from a small town near Cape Cod, Massachusetts and was an Able Seaman aboard an American vessel bound for the River Plate.  When 10 days out from New York the ship was torpedoed without warning by a submarine in the middle of the night.  The submarine not content with this flagrant violation of international rules surfaced and shelled the lifeboats as they were being lowered.  Edwards with three stewards, who were Filipinos, and the Chief Engineer managed to launch the raft as their ship was sinking.  Thanks to the darkness the raft escaped the notice of the submarine and daybreak found them safe, but in a serious condition.  The emergency rations including water were exceedingly small; they were hundreds of miles from the nearest land and could not count upon being in the track of shipping as the usual tracks had been abandoned.  The stewards died in turn after the first 15 days and on the 21st day the Chief Engineer died of a heart attack.  Provisions and water had long before this been exhausted.  Edwards hung a singlet on an oar at night and sucked the dew it collected, and so he survived for another 13 days when the Hororata hove in sight.  He was landed at Panama Canal and Hororata proceeded on her voyage to New Zealand.  Arrived safely at Auckland, loaded homeward cargo which was discharged at Cardiff, where she again loaded war material for New Zealand and so commenced voyage 2.

On passing through the Panama Canal I had made enquiries about Edwards, but had been informed that after a short period in hospital he had returned to the States.  Voyage 2 had proceeded without incident.  Hororata her outward cargo at Wellington and proceeded to Lyttelton to load a full cargo of meat, butter, cheese, canned meat and wool.  The Hororata was the largest refrigerated vessel in the world; her cargo provided a fortnight's rations of meat, butter and cheese for the whole of the United Kingdom.  The loading was completed and Hororata sailed on 13th November 1942.  It was on this homeward voyage that we were torpedoed and it was not until Christmas morning in Horta that I received any mail from London office.  I looked at one letter that apparently followed me from one side of the world to the other and back again.  I opened it and read - "Dear Captain, I am writing to tell you that I am back in the States and am better than I ever expected to be .  I shall not be able to go back to sea because of my feet.  I am now happily married and every night my wife and I pray for the safety of you and your crew.  Yours ever gratefully, George Edwards."

As I sat in the quiet of my cabin, I heard myself repeating 'Cast your bread upon the waters'.

Mr A.D.K. Hemans continues the story.

On 13th December 1942 homeward bound from New Zealand on her second voyage, Hororata was about 240 miles northwest of Flores in the Azores when she was torpedoed by a German submarine.  The torpedo well aft on the port side in a way of Nos 4 and 5 holds making a huge hole in the ship's side.  However, although listing badly to port and settling by she stern she still answered her helm and engines. Captain Hamilton shaped course for Flores island this being the nearest land where he could obtain assistance or if necessary beach the ship.  At 7am the next morning Hororata was anchored in Santa Cruz Bay.  She was in a critical condition; her port gunwale bar completely awash and drawing 46 ft of water aft!  As there were no repair facilities and the anchorage was fully exposed to the winter gales it was decided to take the ship to Horta in Fayal Island and by the evening of the 18th December, she was safely anchored in the inner harbour there.  A survey by a diver revealed that the hold in the ship's side was approximately 23 feet long and 21 feet deep from the level of the shelter deck.  It was resolved the construct a wooden patch over this hole and to reinforce this with a cement box on the inside.  The nearest timber of sufficient length was growing on the steep slopes and around the crater of an extinct volcano 3,3351 feet high and Portuguese labourers were engaged to fell trees and the logs were hauled by teams of oxen into the town where they were sawn to the required lengths.  Whilst this work was in progress the unpleasant job of removing debris from the ship's interior was carried out.  This involved moving a large quantity of rotten meat, dunnage, insulating material etc. and dumping it out at sea from lighters.  Here a tribute must be paid to Commander Bello the Portuguese Port Captain, who had served in the Royal Navy.  He was strongly pro-British and his influence with the shore authorities was invaluable.  Without his help it is very doubtful whether these repairs could ever have been carried out.

By the 10th March, 12 weeks and three days after she had been torpedoed, the repairs were completed and a certificate of seaworthiness was granted.  On the 14th March Captain Hamilton was advised that the Admiralty was providing and escort ship HMS Burwell, an ex United States destroyer, for the passage to England.  This shows the importance attached to the bringing home of Hororata for it must be appreciated that she still had on board, in good condition, nearly 10,000 tones of her 11,300 tons of cargo. 

On 17th March 1943, Hororata left Horta and arrived in Liverpool on 23rd March.  The whole episode is best summed up in the words of a high navel authority who commented at that time, '1942 was a bad year and so every merchant ship we lose that could have been saved will further delay the end of the war'.  Hororata, one of the largest and most valuable refrigerated cargo ships in the world, was saved by the seamanlike skill, resourcefulness and devotion to duty by her master, officers and crew.

Thanks to 'Crossed Flags' the house magazine of the New Zealand Shipping company May 1966/67

The glory of Easter

At the centre of our humanity there is a great contradiction.  On the one hand we as individuals see ourselves as unique, worthy and special deserving recognition, respect, dignity and nurturing.

But on the other hand we are reminded, by those close to us, by our conscience, by other external forces that we are flawed, and often as we age seriously flawed.  We certainly see depravity in other people if not in ourselves.  And this dichotomy is never addressed by our self proclaimed progressive society.

But Christians can face it.  The Easter story looks at the clash between human dignity and worth and human depravity full in the face.  Christians can begin to see the infinite worth and value of every person yet at the same time recognise our depravity.  We don't have to deny the glorious heights or reject the abject depths of human experience.  The Christian understanding of this is compelling as Easter highlights that our creator God has reconciled these two extremes. 

God who came among us and took on our humanity also took on himself our burden of brokenness, sin and deceit which humanity shows time after time that we are unwilling and unable to bear.  This is the essence of Easter.  Instinctively we know that justice must be done, that evil must be exposed and punished and that a righteous and just God will punish wickedness.  This conviction gives us a fear and dread of death. 

But justice has been done, God who as Jesus came as one of us, took on himself the punishment meant for us and has set us free.  Because of Jesus I can rejoice in my liberty and look dispassionately at my degradation.  Without Jesus I must pretend.

Our atheistic secular society copes with this contradiction by pretending it doesn't exist.  Right and wrong are played down and distinctions between good and evil are fudged.  Unpleasant reality is ignored and denied.   ….   Statements questioning popular projects are ridiculed (eg the EU, gender issues).  …..

The highest virtue in secularism is tolerance.  The range of experience that is regarded as tolerable is determined by a person's understanding and history of what is acceptable.  That which is outside his experience might not be tolerated, might even be violently rejected.  Our tolerance threshold is complex and determined by social fashion and is variable and tolerance belongs to the same dysfunctional family as political correctness.  PC determines what is acceptable as truth in the public domain and carries with it the seeds of tyranny.  The way social media seems to operate illustrates 
this.  And Brian Wilson wrote in 1995, "Toleration is only a limited licence.  It is not an avowal of religious liberty.  It is a concession by those who enjoy power to those who are excluded from it". Concessions can be revoked.

If you are an unpleasant person outside my tolerance range I will despise you and seek to put you down in all sorts of ways.  But as a Christian I am under orders not to excuse your degradation, but with a modicum of Christian love relate to you.