Victims of the Lonely Revolution

With all of these depressing stories lately, it's time for some beauty. Anthony Esolen always writes with beauty, even if his subject matter is ugliness.

This time, he's penning about the Lonely Revolution (what we generally term the "sexual revolution) and its victims who are usually unmentioned. Victims like:

... children of divorce, who see their homes torn in two, because of a mother or a father who has shrugged away the vow of permanence. I see them straining to put a fine face on it, to protect the very parents who should have protected them, to squelch back their own tears so as not to hurt those who have hurt them. Who speaks for them, harried from pillar to post? Who pleads their case, whose parents conveniently assume that their children’s happiness must depend upon their own contentment, and not the other way around? Where is my Church’s apostolate for the children sawn in half, while the Solomons of our time looked the other way?

Or:

... the young people who do in fact follow the moral law and the teachings of the Church. Many of these are suffering intense loneliness. Have you bothered to notice? Have you considered all those young people who want to be married, who should be married, but who, because they will not play evil’s game, can find no one to marry? The girls who at age twenty-five and older have never even been asked on a date? The “men” languishing in a drawn-out adolescence? These people are among us; they are everywhere. Who gives them a passing thought? They are suffering for their faith, and no one cares. Do you care, leaders of my Church? Or do you not rather tacitly agree with their fellows who do the marital thing without being married? Do you not rather share that bemused contempt for the “old fashioned” purity they are trying to preserve?

It's a call to leaders of the Church, but really it's a call to all of us.  Read it all here, and say a prayer for those suffering from the Lonely Revolution.

An uncoupled, open "marriage's" biggest victim

 OK, so let's get this straight ... Clark and Valerie want to protect their son Jonah from divorce, so their solution is to host an "uncoupling ceremony" on a California beach, live in the same home together and date other people.  For Jonah.  

Apparently seeing Mom with her boyfriend ... or not seeing her while she spends "private time" with him at another location is not damaging.  And, I guess knowing that Dad doesn't want a third divorce but that Mom is keeping her options open doesn't hurt either.

What is it about divorce that is damaging for children?  A broken covenant, a love that has "ended," a break in fidelity ("if you promised to love Daddy forever and didn't, then do you really mean it when you tell me you will love me forever?), a turbulent, unknown rollercoaster where there should be a secure foundation.  

So, what about Jonah's situation is supposed to be different?  His parents are dating other people and divorce is still a viable option, at least for Valerie.  Clark doesn't want to get married a fourth time, but he has trouble convincing other women to see where their place will be in the relationship.  Apparently, Mom's boyfriend Joseph has no problems with greeting Valerie for a date ... and then Valerie's husband.  And apparently Jonah is "fine" with it.  Why would he say otherwise?  Does this little boy feel like weight of his parents' happiness is squarely on his shoulders?  And might be feel that he shouldn't say a word because this odd little arrangement is being done "for him"?

It's just so sad!  Who does "uncoupling" benefit?  It would seem it benefits no one.  In the end, while Clark and Valerie say they want what is best for Jonah, it would seem that this uncoupled, "open relationship" is hardest on Jonah.  Splashing in the waves together after returning wedding rings can't possibly convey the same security and love that lifelong fidelity (even if clearly sacrificial) could give a little boy who just wants (and deserves) to know authentic love. 

Divorce parties and family photographs

A divorce can bring a variety of reactions, depending upon each person affected, one's attitude toward marriage and the situation at hand.  In a Marriage in the News column I recently wrote for the USCCB's "For Your Marriage" site, I focus on the contrast between lavish "divorce parties" and an adult child of divorce who isn't sure the best way to handle childhood family photographs.  Read about it here.

"I said my vows to a person, not a computer program"

I'm not a daily Matt Walsh reader, but when his articles have been passed my way, I often find myself shaking my head in agreement.  This one really hits the nail on the head.  It's a response to the divorce-friendly culture, the oft-heard excuse, "My spouse changed."  It's one man's fierce loyalty to a person and to an institution, a Sacrament, a place that has the spouses instead of the spouses having "it."  

So, Matt Walsh has a few things to say on the subject.  To get you started:

“People sometimes change,” says the wise sage.

No, people always change. They never stop changing. Life is change. 

Everything is moving, everything is transforming. Everything is changing, all of the time. Life is more of a river than a stagnant, mosquito-infested puddle.

(Dear Lord, look at what this guy has done. He’s got me so worked up that I’m speaking in country-pop lyrics. “Life is a river.” God help me.)

The fact is that you can leave the room for ten seconds, come back, and everything will be slightly different. That’s true of the furniture, the curtains, the carpet, and yes, the people. Especially the people.

Divorcing someone because they change? You might as well divorce them because they breathe.

I’m not making light of it. I know that sometimes people change in a painful and inconvenient manner. I know that my wife could change in ways that don’t cooperate with my projections of how she should be and feel and think.

I guess that’s what people really mean when they say they want a divorce because their spouse “changed.” It’s not change itself they oppose, but changes that challenge them and make them uncomfortable. What they should say is: “I want a divorce because she changed in a way that doesn’t fit inside my comfort zone.”

It’s hard, I know. Every day I’m relearning this one basic truth: my wife has her own brain, her own feelings, her own soul. We are linked now through the bond of matrimony, but she is still her and I am still me. She is a force, a hurricane, a wildfire. She is not a puppet dancing on a string. She is a self — her own self — powerful and mysterious.

Read more at http://themattwalshblog.com/2014/05/29/wifepersonmarried/#9VscMhc3Bwpd6ksE.99.   

Big family now, less divorce later

An interesting new study has found that those with several siblings are less likely to get divorced than those from smaller families.  It's not the kiss of death for only children or those with one or two brothers and sisters.  Rather, it points to the culture of selflessness that large families must foster if they want to live peacefully.

You can read a brief recap of the study here.

Divorce Stories

The Ruth Institute recently launched a new website for adult children of divorce to share their stories.  It's a topic that's largely ignored in our culture -- how divorce really affects children -- and it seems an excellent opportunity for adult children of divorce to be able to share their experiences.  On the one hand, this can be healing for the children to be able to express what they really think and feel, instead of feeling that their opinions must be dictated by cultural lack of concern with divorce.  At the same time, it's a great opportunity for the culture at large to hear what divorce is really like for the children who witness it and experience it.  

You can check out the Divorce Stories site here.

Anti-divorce doesn't equal Pro-marriage

Have you noticed the recent trend in articles about marriage? I would say it has everything to do with the fact that I have recently come across these articles, but I suppose I should admit preparation for my own upcoming marriage probably makes the headlines appear in bold in my mind.

This piece by Eve Tushnet is a fascinating look at how our culture's more recent fear of divorce has not equated into a love of marriage. In fact, she argues, many of the ways in which people exercise their dislike of divorce set them up for a "no" to marriage.

Possibly in response to divorce scripts like “We just fell out of love” or “It just happened,” which emphasize powerlessness, the contemporary delayed-marriage script attempts to crack the code, figure out the formula, and do it right. Anxiety is managed through attempts at control. The fact that marriage, like parenting, is mostly about acceptance, forgiveness, and flexibility in the face of change and trauma gets suppressed.

But that might not matter if the script itself worked most of the time. If premarital sex and cohabitation were really the most practical paths to lasting love, our culture would look very different. Instead, these actions—valorized by young people, and often by their parents because they’re thought to prevent divorce—are divorce risk factors. Cohabitation with one partner is no longer correlated with increased risk of divorce, as it used to be, but serial cohabitation still is. In other words, if the only romantic partner you move in with ends up marrying you, your statistical prognosis is rosy; otherwise, not so much. In other words, “test-driving” the relationship only works—or rather, remains statistically neutral in terms of later divorce risk—if the relationship is already strong enough for marriage.

The whole piece is certainly worth a read.

Teen sex leading to divorce?

A new study in the Journal of Marriage and Family says yes:

IOWA CITY, June 21, 2011 (LifeSiteNews.com) - A University of Iowa study has found that women who first engage in sex as young teens are more likely to divorce.

Published in the April issue of the Journal of Marriage and Family, the analysis found that 31 percent of women who had sex for the first time as teens divorced within five years of getting married, and 47 percent divorced within 10 years. The divorce rate for women who delayed sex until adulthood was far lower: 15 percent at five years, and 27 percent at 10 years.

Author Anthony Paik, associate professor of sociology in the UI College of Liberal Arts and Sciences, examined the responses of 3,793 ever-married women to the 2002 National Survey of Family Growth.

A first sexual experience that was unwanted or not completely wanted was strongly associated with divorce. If the young woman chose to lose her virginity as a teen, the results were more nuanced.

When the first intercourse took place early in adolescence - before the age of 16 - the women were more likely to divorce, even if that first sexual experience was wanted.

Read more here.

A divorce party?

The New York Times always has some new social arrangement to discuss. This time it's a party to celebrate the divorce of Charles and Bonnie Bronfman. You see, they've decided that their differences make them better friends than spouses. And why not take a little time to celebrate with 100 of their closest friends? If you received an engraved invitation to attend the event, then you would have seen their words: “As we change the parameters of our relationship, our mutual admiration and caring is constant.”

Last time I checked, marriage was an institution whose parameters were unchangeable. Yet somewhere along the line, we've decided that marriage can morph into whatever it is we want, and that we can raise our champagne glasses to inaugurate the change.

Mr. Bronfman said in an interview with the paper:

“Our differences were in everything we do. We thought those differences could mesh, but we found out the opposite. So we thought, why not tell our friends and thank them for helping us out?”

If there is no realization from the beginning that marriage is a lifelong commitment between two people who are different (let's start with the fact that they are male and female), then I'm not sure the shocking reality of experiencing the perpetual difference of another as a blessing will ever really settle in. Marriage enables us to welcome another who is different, to see that we can never encompass the whole of reality, and to accept the invitation to be brought out of our self-centered existences into the path of another, walking together toward the same goal.

That's why the marriage party I am looking forward to attending is one in which this reality is accepted, welcomed and celebrated -- the upcoming wedding of two JPII Institute grads.

While we pray for those who are preparing to enter the Sacrament of Marriage, let's also remember people like the Bronfmans, who haven't yet realized the gift they were given three years ago.

Divorced and vacationing

Apparently it's a trend for divorced families to vacation together -- "ex"-spouses, "new" spouses, step-children. Yahoo! News reported on the topic. I found myself scratching my head throughout the piece. If these couples are able to spend an amicable week together on vacation, then what was stopping them from working on their marriage? But then the most heart-dropping line was dropped:

"When I want to be short or get irritated or whatever I can't because Ace is standing right there," she [Meredith Morton] said. "It's not like it's a huge sacrifice," she added. "Honestly, the gift that I give Ace by having us both in the same place" is worth it.

Ms. Morton, if it's worth giving your son the gift of being with your "ex"-husband for a week or two, then how inestimable of a gift to give the witness of your marriage for a lifetime?