by Allison Tannery

Created on: June 13, 2008

There is but one definition of marriage. It may not be the one you believe, but it is truth, none the less. The arguments surrounding the myriad of the issues of marriage have largely become secular, or, apart from the original, biblical intention our Creator designed with intense purpose.

"So God created man in his own image, in the image of God he created him; male and female he created them. God blessed them, and said to them, be fruitful and increase in number". - Genesis 1:27, 28

And the first marriage was born. Apart from God's sanctification of this union, marriage would not exist. This conversation is moot without this understanding. Without God, there is no marriage. What, as a people, we have done with it, is turn it into a series of arguments centered more on individual rights, than the original concept of union. The definition of union is "something formed by joining two or more things, a combination". This definition is the perfect idea of the sum of the whole being greater than the individual parts. To be married is to be united. Conjoined. Consider this, "but at the beginning of creation God 'made them male and female'. For this reason, a man shall leave his father and mother, and be united to his wife, and the two will become one flesh. So they are no longer two, but one." - Mark 10:6-8

So whether or not you acknowledge the fact that marriage is not only a physical union, but a mystical spiritual one, where does this argument of last names belong? And the other divisive points, like separate finances, or prenuptial agreements? Why is someone willing to commit their life to another's, if they remain concerned about the smaller points such as these? Aren't there higher stakes at hand? Emotionally, mentally? If you are truly ready to pledge your life to another, till parted by death, then where is the place for dickering over a last name? There is none. I contend, based on a biblical world view of the very origins of marriage, that if you are worried about "losing yourself" in your spouse, so much so that you need to retain your maiden name, then you should seriously reconsider the entire proposal. If the groom to be is requesting a prenup (or the bride to be, for that matter), then it speaks volumes about the level of faith each has in the upcoming marriage. Meaning, there really is none. Creating the out-clause before the I do is even uttered belies the idea that the relationship is ready for the step of marriage.

The very core of marriage is "losing oneself" into a greater, more beautiful creation, than the two of you are individually. Marriage at its heart is about the tie of fellowship, not two people sharing a house, family holidays and possibly the raising of children. Marriage requires real love, as defined by commitment and sacrifice, both of which cannot be rooted in one's concerns about maintaining self. The self is the primary barrier against successful marriages in our current culture. And this certainly does not refer exclusively to women and the issue of name-taking. It is wide sweeping, and detrimental to our relationships, our families, our children, and our culture as a whole.

If you really can't decide that you can accept your husband's name, then I suggest there are much larger issues at hand. It is not about the name, it about the level of willingness to become that "one", with him. However that takes form. The name is just the outward symbol that you are capable of going the distance, and excited to start that journey.

Learn more about this author, Allison Tannery.
Click here to send this author comments or questions.