Marriage and Religion: a Package Deal

June 24, 2008 in catholic, children/child, Christ, Christianity, Ethical/Moral, europe, faith, Family, God, Jesus Christ, marriage, Social, Spirituality, United States
Tags: american, bulwarks, center, deal, Family, God, marriage, motherhood, network, relationship, Religion, resilience, Social, sociology, stability, transcendence, value

New Studies Reveal Close Relationship

By Father John Flynn, L.C.

ROME, JUNE 18, 2007 (Zenit.org).- The fortunes of family life and religion may well be linked, say experts in recent studies. W. Bradford Wilcox, assistant professor of sociology at the University of Virginia, is the author of a research brief published in May by the Institute for American Values’ Center for Marriage and Families.

“Churches are bulwarks of marriage in urban America,” he affirmed in the brief “Religion, Race, and Relationships in Urban America.” Wilcox started by observing that in spite of widespread concern over the breakdown of marriage and family life in contemporary society, so far little attention has been paid on religion’s influence for the family.

His attempt to remedy this omission is based on a reading of data from the Fragile Families and Child Well-being Study (FFCW), sponsored by Columbia and Princeton Universities.

The dramatic changes in family structures are graphically illustrated by Wilcox.

— From 1960 to 2000, the percentage of children born out of wedlock rose from 5% to 33%.

— The divorce rate more than doubled to almost 50%.

— The percentage of children living in single-parent families rose
from 9% to 27%.

Poor and minority families have suffered even more. In 1996, for example, 35% of African American children and 64% of Latino children were living in married households, compared to 77% of white children.

Wilcox argued that religion can influence family life in four ways.

— Religious institutions promote norms strengthening marriage, for example, the idea that sex and childbearing ought to be reserved for marriage, and broader moral norms that support happier, more stable marriages.

— Religious faith endows the marital relationship with a sense of transcendence.

— In many religious groups there are family-oriented social networks that offer emotional and social support, plus a measure of social control that reinforces commitment to the marital bond.

— Religious belief and practice provides support to cope with stresses such as unemployment or the death of a loved one. A greater psychological resilience, in turn, is linked to higher quality marriages.

Paradox

Wilcox does, however, admit that religious participation is by no means an automatic guarantee of a happy family life. In fact, what he termed “one of the paradoxes of American religious life,” is the contradiction between the high level of religious practice among African Americans — the highest of any racial group — and the reality that they have the lowest rate of marriage of any racial or ethnic group.

Turning to an analysis of the data from the FFCW survey, Wilcox argued that it shows how religious attendance — particularly by fathers — is associated with higher rates of marriage among urban parents.

Moreover, churchgoing boosts the odds of marriage for African American parents in urban America in much the same way it boosts the odds of marriage for urban parents from other racial and ethnic backgrounds.

Paternal church attendance is particularly important for urban relationships, Wilcox maintains. If a father goes to church regularly, then he is more likely to enter into marriage and also to have a relationship of higher quality.

Benefits of belief

The arguments raised by Wilcox are similar to those put forward by Patrick Fagan in a paper published by the Heritage Foundation last December. In “Why Religion Matters Even More: The Impact of Religious Practice on Social Stability,” Fagan argued that “religious practice promotes the well-being of individuals, families and the community.”

“Regular attendance at religious services is linked to healthy, stable family life, strong marriages and well-behaved children,” he pointed out.

Numerous sociological studies, Fagan continued, show that valuing religion and regularly practicing it are associated with greater marital stability, higher levels of marital satisfaction and an increased likelihood that an individual will be inclined to marry.

Among other points, these studies reveal that:

— Women who are more religious are less likely to experience divorce or separation than their less religious peers.

— Marriages in which both spouses attend religious services frequently are 2.4 times less likely to end in divorce than marriages in which neither spouse worships.

— Religious attendance is the most important predictor of marital stability, confirming studies conducted as far back as 50 years ago.

— Couples who share the same faith are more likely to reunite if they separate than are couples who do not share the same religious affiliation.

Moreover, Fagan pointed out, religious practice is also related to a reduction in such negative behaviors as domestic abuse, crime, substance abuse and addiction.

Losing God

Mary Eberstadt looked at the other side of the coin in the relationship between family and religion in an article published in the June-July issue of the magazine Policy Review. In the article “How the West Really Lost God,” she reflected on the causes of secularization, a phenomenon particularly notable in Western Europe.

The thesis often put forward, Eberstadt observed, is that secularism came first and that this had a negative impact on family life in Western Europe. She argued, however: “At least some of the time, the record suggests, they also became secular because they stopped having children and families.”

In support of her case Eberstadt pointed out that European fertility in general dropped well before the dramatic demise of religious practice observed in recent decades. Within Europe she cited the example of France, which saw fertility decline much sooner than in many other European countries, and is also a nation where secularism is stronger.

Ireland, by contrast, withstood the winds of secularism until a short time ago, and it was also a country with strong families. The recent erosion of religion in Ireland was preceded by a collapse in Irish fertility, Eberstadt added.

Turning to the United States she commented that the higher level of religious practice could be due to the greater number of children.

Evangelicals and Mormons, who unlike Catholics are not prohibited from using contraceptives, also have larger families. Maybe, Eberstadt posited, there is something about the family that inclines people toward religiosity.

She then examined the dynamic that exists between family life and religion. The experience of birth leads parents to a moment of transcendence. As well, the practice of sacrificing oneself for the good of the family and children may lead people to go beyond selfish pleasure-seeking. In addition, the fear of death, in terms of losing a spouse or child is a powerful spur to faith.

As for the well-known fact that women tend to be more religious than men, maybe Eberstadt argued, this is due to their more intimate participation in the birth of their children compared to a man’s role.

While fertility rates in Europe and many other countries are now very low, this could change as the disadvantages of single motherhood and the social and economic consequences of shrinking populations weigh more heavily.

“There is nothing inevitable about the decline of the natural family and thus, by implication, religion too,” Eberstadt contended. While quick to admit that, “merely having families and children is no guarantee of religious belief,” a resurgence in family life could well strengthen religion.

The authors of the studies cited here would probably be the first to admit that the interaction between religion and the family is complicated and that many other factors play a part in the strengthening or weakening of both. No doubt more research is needed, but these initial efforts point to some interesting relationships.

The natural family, Ebserstadt concludes, “as a whole has been the human symphony through which God has historically been heard by many people.” A symphony unfortunately marred by many discordant notes today, but whose return to harmony would be of immense benefit.

The Abortion Lie

May 30, 2008 in catholic, children/child, Christianity, Ethical/Moral, Great Britain, Life, Political Life
Tags: abortion, archbishop, association, britain, cardinal, case, catholic, compassion, conception, edinburg, england, everlasting, evil, extreme, legalize, lie, Life, medical, million, misinformation, o'brien, people, scotland, sermon, Social, soul-destroying, truth, value, wales

Temperatures Rise in British Debate

By Father John Flynn, L.C.

ROME, JUNE 10, 2007 (Zenit.org).- The abortion debate was rekindled with a vengeance recently in Britain. In a sermon May 31, Edinburgh’s archbishop, Cardinal Keith O’Brien, strongly criticized the assurances given when abortion was legalized in Britain.

The cardinal described the claims given when the 1967 Abortion Act was approved as being “lies and misinformation masquerading as compassion and truth.” People were told that abortion would be infrequent and only used in extreme cases, he explained.

The sermon was delivered on the occasion of the Day for Life celebration of the Church in Scotland. The date was chosen to coincide with the feast of the Visitation, which Cardinal O’Brien described as “the affirmation of the immense value of life from its very conception.”

“With every life conceived God acts directly to create a new and unique human being, a person destined to life everlasting,” stated the cardinal.

He added that unfortunately in today’s world, pregnancy is not always welcomed. In the almost 40 years since the introduction of legal abortion in Britain around 7 million lives have been ended, Cardinal O’Brien noted.

Just prior to his homily, figures were published that showed an increase in abortions in Scotland. An all-time high of 13,081 pregnancies were terminated in 2006, compared with 12,603 the previous year, the BBC reported May 29. The number of abortions for teenagers under 16 also hit a new high, with 362 in 2006, up from 341 the year before.

“The scale of the killing is beyond our grasp,” Cardinal O’Brien declared in his sermon. “In Scotland we kill the equivalent of a classroom full of school children every day.”

Cardinal O’Brien also had strong words for politicians. He urged them to have nothing to do with “the evil trade of abortion,” and to find means to overturn the legislation allowing it. For those politicians who “claim to be Catholic,” the cardinal said, “I ask them to examine their consciences and discern if they are playing any part in sustaining this social evil.”

As well, he touched on a theme much debated in the United States when he also adverted that cooperating “in the unspeakable crime of abortion” implicates a barrier to receiving Communion.

Life is sacred

The very same day, the archbishop of Westminster, Cardinal Cormac Murphy-O’Connor, issued a statement on the sacredness of life. His comments were in preparation for the annual Day for Life, which the Catholic Church in England and Wales celebrates July 1.

All life, from the moment of conception to the point of natural death, is sacred, declared Cardinal Murphy-O’Connor in the May 31 press statement.

“I would urge all Catholics, especially those who hold positions of public responsibility, to educate themselves about the teaching of the Church, and to seek pastoral advice so that they can make informed decisions with consistency and integrity,” he added.

The cardinal also recalled the teaching of the Church that those who have freely and knowingly committed a serious wrong should not receive the Eucharist before having gone to confession.

These words were backed up shortly afterward by Archbishop Peter Smith of Cardiff, Wales. Politicians who vote in favor of abortion should not receive Communion, he stated, according to a June 2 report by Reuters.

Archbishop Smith said he would not actually bar such politicians from Communion, but he added that he would expect the politician involved not to seek it.

Critical reactions

The issue of Catholic politicians and abortion proved to be a sensitive point, as evidenced by a number of strong reactions by the press and commentators. A June 1 editorial in the Scotsman newspaper acknowledged Cardinal O’Brien’s right to express his opposition to abortion.

The newspaper was less approving of his words on politicians, saying he was “on dangerous ground by seeming to interfere in politics.”

A June 2 editorial in the Guardian newspaper intoned that on the issue of abortion the efforts of the Catholic Church “must be resisted.” In a somewhat patronizing concession, however, the Guardian did add that it approved of the Church’s interventions in public life when it comes to the issue of canceling the debt of the developing world.

In a June 3 opinion article for the newspaper Scotland on Sunday, Dani Garavelli, who described herself as a practicing Catholic, dismissed Cardinal O’Briens’ words as “emotional blackmail.”

Characterizing the cardinal’s admonishment to Catholic politicians as “sinister,” Garavelli derided Catholic leaders as “ideologues.”

A more favorable reaction came from Jemima Lewis, writing in the opinion columns of the Independent newspaper June 2. The freedom to voice one’s beliefs is a central feature of any democracy, she said in defending Cardinal O’Brien’s right to speak out on abortion.

Describing herself as “a pro-choice lapsed Catholic,” Lewis nevertheless acknowledged that “the pro-choice argument is riddled with dishonesty and evasion.” She agreed with Cardinal O’Brien’s argument that abortion has come to be far too freely available. Lewis also argued that not sufficient attention is paid to its side effects on women.

This issue had, in fact, been raised in an article published in the Scotsman newspaper Feb. 26. It described the feelings of misery and guilt that a woman referred to as “Sarah” felt after she aborted her baby in the 22nd week of pregnancy.

Soul-destroying

The article was published shortly after a baby, Amillia Taylor, was born in the United States at just 22 weeks of pregnancy, and survived. “It was soul-destroying,” said Sarah of her abortion experience. Public opinion in Britain was also shocked at the recent announcement that around 1 in 30 aborted babies survive the procedure. The survivors live for an average of 80 minutes, the Daily Mail newspaper reported April 20.

Most of the babies who initially survive the abortion were between 20 and 24 weeks of pregnancy, although some had been in the womb for as little as 17 weeks.

The figures, explained the Daily Mail, came from a study in the West Midlands region, where researchers looked at the outcome of 3,189 abortions performed on seriously handicapped fetuses at 20 hospitals between 1995 and 2004.

The results showed that 102, mainly aborted for reasons such as Down syndrome and heart defects, were born alive. The study was published in the British Journal of Obstetrics.

Abortion has also been a theme of debate in the U.K.’s Parliament, with three bills proposed by backbench members in the last eight months, the Guardian reported June 4. The bills, private initiatives without government support, never really had much chance of success.

In spite of knowing this, pro-life parliamentarians nevertheless attempted to gain approval for their proposals. The bills contemplated measures ranging from the introduction of counseling for women seeking abortion, to obliging a cooling-off period before proceeding with abortion, and reducing the current 24-week period during which abortion is freely permitted.

Attention will remain focused on the abortion issue, added the Guardian, because the British Medical Association’s conference, to be held at the end of June, will debate a proposal to vote in favor of liberalizing abortion regulations.

In his May 31 sermon, Cardinal O’Brien called for the building of a society, “which joyfully accepts new life,” and to fight against the culture of death promoted by the abortion industry.

“We must remain witnesses to the truth and be unambiguous in defending life in all that we do,” he concluded. Challenging words in a battle that continues to divide opinions.