When was "marriage for life" introduced and why is it still practised?

[sparky_dy]

Before Christianity spread its malign influence, marriage was for "as long as love shall last between ye both", and the couple were free to separate anytime by mutual consent.

When was the concept of "till death do you part" introduced?

And why -- given that, thanks to modern medicine, many relationships will have run their course before one of the partners dies -- is it still practised today?

 

[Luke H]

From a religious standpoint, God was against divorce. So if you are a Christian, you can tell that much.

 

[alan h]

Marriage for life is far older than Christianity.
"For as long as love shall last" is a fairly modern concept.
Why should longevity quench love? After over 40 years it hasn't with me!

 

[TEH TYME KITTEH PANTHEIST]

It was primarily used as a fertility and disease control measure

 

[Rose]

Not exactly. Marriage was always usually for life... Just look at the Egyptians, Greeks, and Romans

 

[Emms]

my friend´s comment on this (as you point out,people living longer) :"for ever" was a short while 100 years ago...because people died younger.
it has to do with protection to children so they can grow up in a "family".also so that a father pays his economical dues.
people should be ready to commit...i don´t believe in the church wedding but i do believe getting married shows respect and real commitment.
i would not trust a man who said:i don´t need a paper to show my love.our anniversary is not marked in a calendar...etc.to me are excuses because a man does not love you enough.
there is always divorce!

 

[Tabetha who?]

I thought it was always 'forever.' If it were 'till the feelings of love go away,' everyone would be divorced within 7 years at best.

You're right, most people in their 40s are divorced or remarried these days. It's rare to find someone who's been married over 20 years.

I think that 'forever' is good in that it gives you a strong foundation, and stability for children. It also decreases the spread of STDs when partners remain faithful. However, this is a bit too idealistic in today's world, because there is so much temptation, we travel and meet so many new people, and people change, and we live a lot longer. It can often be more of a jail sentence than 'happily ever after.'

With the introduction of the idea that 2 people of the same sex can now marry, I think that marriage as an institution is on the way out, to be replaced by short term mutual commitments and living together. But this will bring irresponsibility on the part of fathers, because men are biologically inclined to 'spread their seed far and wide' and without any moral or marital restrictions, could wreak havoc on society.

It's a Catch 22: Ideally, committed marriage is necessary for the stability of the next generation. But realistically, 'forever' is a long time to stay committed to someone, as feelings don't last that long, and people are narcissists, loving that "in love" euphoria!

 

[Tuberoot]

I think it started with the world as a patriarchal sort of idea, where loyalty was important, if for no other reason than the proof that the man was dominant and "lord" over his people. Of course, the man could "divorce" his wife or wives, but the female was to remain submissive to the man.