Given that most people seem to know that the divorce rate in contemporary America is about 50 percent for first timers (the odds for 2nd and 3rd marriages are even worse), I was curious whether some people would feel a little bit queezy about uttering the promise <\/i> Till Death Do us Part. SAM ROBERTS in today\u2019s New York Times reports that a few couples indeed try inject a bit realism in their marriage vows.<\/i><\/p>\n
THE Rev. Calvin O. Butts III, pastor of Harlem\u2019s Abyssinian<\/p>\n
Baptist Church, was stunned recently when three couples who<\/p>\n
wanted him to preside at their weddings asked if he would<\/p>\n
alter the traditional marriage vows. Forget the<\/p>\n
till-death-do-us-part injunction, they suggested. Instead,<\/p>\n
would he mind substituting a more realistic escape clause,<\/p>\n
say, \u201cas long as our love shall last\u201d?<\/p>\n
Dr. Butts did mind. His advice: Find another minister.<\/p>\n
\u201cI give them a little homily about why we say marriage is
\ngreater than love,” Dr. Butts said. “No one is forcing you
\nto get married. We want people, if they make this kind of
\ncommitment, to make it for life.”<\/p>\n
Round engagement rings, symbolizing eternity, predate the
\nRoman Empire. One version of the familiar oath – “til death
\nus departe” – was codified as long ago as 1549 in Edward
\nVI’s “Book of Common Prayer.” In one form or another,
\ncouples have customarily plighted their undying – or is it
\ndying? – troth to each other for ages. Maybe they meant it.
\nMaybe not. Regardless, historically most marriages – for
\nbetter or for worse – ended in death.<\/p>\n
Not any more.<\/p>\n
Precise figures are hard to come by, but beginning about 20
\nyears ago more marriages appeared likely to end in divorce
\nthan in death. If you’ve already been married for decades
\nthe chances of divorce are relatively slim (although as
\nlife spans stretch, compatibility is obviously put to the
\ntest longer). But the National Center for Health Statistics
\nhas projected that even with an increase in cohabitation
\nbefore marriage, about half of those marrying for the first
\ntime will wind up divorcing. Couples whose first marriages
\nend in divorce typically get the itch to separate within
\nabout seven years.<\/p>\n
“It is accurate that at least half end in divorce,” says
\nAndrew Cherlin, a sociology professor at Johns Hopkins
\nUniversity. Which is one reason many couples are hedging
\ntheir bets.<\/p>\n
When Ulcca Joshi and Christopher Hansen married at a
\nfriend’s farm in New Jersey in 2001, they composed their
\nown vows and deliberately excluded any reference to “until
\ndeath do us part.”<\/p>\n
“My parents certainly said that in their vows, but they
\ndivorced after 33 years,” Mr. Hansen recalled. “You can’t
\npromise at 25 that you’re never going to change.”<\/p>\n
“We didn’t want to make any promises we couldn’t keep,” the
\nbride said. “The way we phrased it, there’s a daily
\nrecommitment to the marriage.”<\/p>\n
Thus far, the couple are still happily married and living
\nin Britain, where both are studying for their doctorates.<\/p>\n
In law and religion, the degree of required commitment runs
\nthe gamut. In France, even death is not necessarily an
\nobstacle to marriage. Under a 1959 law, it is legally
\npossible to marry a dead person, as Christelle Demichel did
\nearlier this year when, with the president’s approval, she
\nwed her fianc\u00e9, who had been killed by a drunken driver a
\nyear earlier while riding his motorcycle.<\/p>\n
In San Francisco, typical vows for gay marriages ask the
\ncouple whether they will love, comfort and honor each other
\n“as long as you both shall live.”<\/p>\n
Jewish weddings customarily do not include any such vow,
\nbecause Jewish law has recognized divorce for thousands of
\nyears.<\/p>\n
In the Roman Catholic church, couples can pledge to unite
\n“until death do us part” or “all the days of my life.”<\/p>\n
“The permanence of the marriage vows has to be expressed,”
\nsaid Msgr. Anthony Sherman, associate director of the
\nsecretariat for the liturgy of the United States Conference
\nof Catholic Bishops.<\/p>\n
The bishops affirmed that requirement in 1969, the
\nmonsignor said, after too many couples began drafting their
\nown vows.<\/p>\n
David Blankenhorn, president of the pro-marriage Institute
\nfor American Values, maintains that vows define a marriage.
\nSaying they are just words, he says, is like saying the
\nmarriage certificate is just a piece of paper.<\/p>\n
“The vow exists on its own, exerting social and sacred
\nauthority that is independent of the couple,” he has
\nwritten. And he argues that its symbolic value has been
\nundermined by two trends: leaving the duration of the
\ncommitment vague or unstated, and allowing couples to
\ncompose their own vows.<\/p>\n
“The new vows are created by the couple and presented to
\nsociety,” he writes, “signifying the goal of conforming
\nmarriage to the couple.”<\/p>\n
While composing original vows can be liberating, it can
\nalso push law and religion into uncharted territory. In an
\ninstallment of “Curb Your Enthusiasm” on HBO, Larry David
\nand his TV wife, Cheryl, celebrate their 10th anniversary
\nby renewing their vows. Cheryl recommits herself to their
\nmarriage “not only throughout this lifetime but after
\ndeath, through all eternity.”<\/p>\n
“I thought this was over at death,” Larry says glumly. “I
\nguess I had a different plan for eternity. I thought I’d be
\nsingle.”<\/p>\n