That’s the scholarly question posed by an article in New Atlantis: A Journal of Technology and Society (Summer 2025), authored by Debora L. Spar and Aryanne Garber, which I happened to notice not too long ago. This is how the authors summarize their own work:
The article explores how technology is reshaping the institution of marriage, highlighting significant changes in societal norms and personal relationships. It discusses the decline in marriage rates in industrialized nations, particularly Japan and the United States, and links these trends to technological advancements such as online dating, reproductive technologies, and artificial intelligence. Historically, marriage has evolved from a contract for economic and reproductive security to a more personal commitment centered on love and companionship, as traditional roles and expectations have shifted. The article suggests that as technology continues to influence social interactions, marriage may increasingly focus on emotional connections rather than economic or reproductive functions.
I will repress any extended scholarly account of my own reaction to this study. Rather, I will just summarize what I felt when I first read it: duhhh!
I do this with some self-disclosure: I myself have been married twice, once for seven years, and the second time for sixty years and counting. Whether that personal history gives me more or less perspective I have no idea. But the thought that “marriage may increasingly focus on emotional connections rather than economic or reproductive functions” astounds me. Does two plus two equal four? Does the sun set in the west?
True, I vividly remember the time when my current spouse, Laurel, early on in our marriage, grabbed my shoulders and yelled at me at the top of her voice: “Talk to me! Talk to me!! Talk to me!!!” Of course, she was right, but typically I have been a slow learner. Still, I think I have learned a few things about what used to be called this “Holy Estate” over the years.
In particular, there’s this factoid, for better, for worse, for richer, for poorer, in sickness and in health. As a practicing pastor for forty years, I was called upon, as a matter of course, to do a lot of marriage counseling. Early on, I discovered that, unfortunately, men often do tend to behave like men, wanting to be tough guys, say, not always a good thing. But I also soon discovered that that problem can be dealt with, once that it’s been identified, as long as both partners are committed to work on it.
The real challenge to a responsible and fulfilling marriage, it now appears to me in retrospect, is the “Til death do us part” theme of traditional Christian theological rites. That lifelong bond! Is that outrageous, or what? I once attended a marriage of friends (I won’t reveal in which church) who promised to each other to be married “as long as love shall last.” Not a huge commitment, to be sure, but probably realistic, given divorce statistics in our time. Yet, notwithstanding its liturgical trappings, that wasn’t a Christian marriage in any identifiable sense, which is always intended to be lifelong.
Consider this thought, then, in conclusion. A rabbi I knew once told me that he never encourages anyone to convert to Judaism. “Being a Jew,” he said, “is just too difficult.” Maybe Christian clergy these days should generally not encourage people to get married: because for all its sweet joys and intense delights and perhaps even for the better health for both partners that it regularly seems to occasion, marriage is really difficult.
That much being said, I believe that marriage, as long as it’s entered into with open eyes, does have a future. And I recommend that future to anyone who’s seriously thinking about getting married.
Comments are closed, but trackbacks and pingbacks are open.