Sunday, July 22, 2007

Marriage

After a long, lingering, focus in close, the camera pulls back to the wider view ...

Outsiders and leavers all seem to have the impression that marriage is practically forced on all young men among the brethren at the earliest possible age. That may once have been so, but it isn't now.

These things go in cycles, to some extent, and the current rules state that nobody gets married before the age of twenty. That's been the case for some while now. The wheel has turned on asking permission, too. When I was just old enough to feel some kinship with those of marriageable age, it was universal to ask the man at the top about getting married, or at least someone close to him. That practice died off, and I remember one young brother who got through being told fairly briskly that those near at hand would know best whether he was suited for marriage. Now it has swung back the other way, and I think everybody would at least try to get a personal OK.

Interestingly, the answer is very often not a straight "yes". Many who ask about getting married, particularly those who've very obviously arranged it just as soon as they can after the permissible age, are told to wait either six months or a year. I've seen more than one girl of twenty (sorry, but they are girls, not women) in tears at that point. It seems to be thought that all, male and female alike, should have a decent amount of life experience before jumping into an irrevocable commitment. Which is sense to me.

Gradually, too, the habit of older men asking younger men why they aren't yet married has dwindled and died, mostly as the men who did it died themselves. I think that says something about the changing attitudes. After all, marriage is a very big thing to do, especially with no prospect of divorce, and it is very short-sighted to pressure anyone into it unless it is considered a useful way of caging people. Anyway, I have never experienced that pressure to get married myself, although some of my age did.

Ironically, I am personally at the point now where I would like to settle down with someone, and that is a key motivation in making the jump. I decided years ago that marriage within the brethren group was not an option. It's not fair to take that step without being prepared to commit to the way of life for good, for the sake of the family you're setting up. Besides, there are precious few people available who are able and willing to have thoughts of their own, and that, for me, is the very first requirement in a life partner. So out I must go, to seek fortune and companionship.

4 comments:

Anonymous said...

Quite responsible thinking on the longer term implications of marriage, Survivor! The littered path of broken EB relationships and the effects on children as well as the dissenting parent are well-known. Not to say that Breth divorce rates are high, but that when it occurs the consequences can be dire. In human as well as financial terms. The big money bankroll from Sydney vs Joe or Jean's modest salary doesn't bode well for Family Court representation.

Glad you have thought these various matters through. It's more than half the battle!

Jill Mytton said...

Bit confused I is Eric ! The divorce rate within the Breth is actually very low - do you mean when couples leave? I wonder if even then it is any higher than in the general population

Jill

Anonymous said...

Divorce, technically, amongst the Brethren is low, but the separation agreements seem to be fairly high. What's the point in getting a divorce if the spouse who remains "in" is not permitted to re-marry?

But perhaps this exchange would be better in another forum.

Anonymous said...

Hello,

My name is Rachel Browne and I'm a journalist in Canada. I'm writing a story on Exclusive Brethren and would be very interested in hearing more about your story for my piece. I can be reached by email at rachel.browne@rci.rogers.com.

Thank you very much for your time.

All the best,

Rachel