Monday, February 13, 2006
Today is Valentine’s Day, so I’ll take the occasion to address something that has bothered me for some time now—pre-nuptial vows. Not that I’m against vows, mind you. It’s just the legal contract this term has come to mean that I question. I realize that, most often, it involves individuals of means, and, therefore, I may not be as sympathetic as others might be. My husband and I have had enough money through the years to quibble over from time to time but certainly not enough to warrant taking someone to law! But the idea has always seemed to me to be a presumption of failure.
Actually, my husband and I did make some pre-nuptial vows. They went something like this:
“I,_____, take thee,_____, to my wedded husband/wife, to have and to
hold from this day forward, for better for worse, for richer for poorer,
in sickness and in health, to love and to cherish till death do us part,
according to God’s holy ordinance, and thereto I plight thee my troth.”
Those quaint words, “plight thee my troth,” mean “to pledge one’s faith in solemn agreement or undertaking.” A vow, or a covenant, is only as good as the good faith of the ones who enter into it. The health, wealth, or temperament of the other party is of no consequence. When I entered into the covenant of marriage, it was “according to God’s holy ordinance,” therefore, to breach that agreement involves not only my husband, but God.
I am blessed that the one with whom I joined in the sacred covenant of marriage is still the sweetheart of my life. Love is a choice, and I made a good one!
Living for one another,
Observing kindness true,
Vowing unending devotion,
Enjoying each day as new.