Marriage is Not a Contract

Marriage is often described as a contract between two people, but this view fails to capture the true nature and significance of marriage as a social institution. While marriage does involve legal elements, it is much more than just a contractual agreement. There are several important reasons why marriage should not be reduced to a mere contract:

Marriage as a Covenant, Not a Contract

At its core, marriage is better understood as a covenant rather than a contract. A covenant is a sacred commitment that goes beyond the transactional nature of contracts. As one marriage counselor puts it, “Marriage is far more than something comparable to their contract with the lawn maintenance company”. Contracts are based on an exchange of services or goods, but marriage is founded on love, devotion, and lifelong commitment.

The covenant of marriage involves promises of faithfulness and care “for better or for worse.” Unlike a business contract that can be easily terminated if one party fails to deliver, marriage is meant to endure through challenges. When spouses face difficulties, the solution is not to “fire” them as one would a lawn company, but to work through issues together.

The Spiritual and Emotional Dimensions

Viewing marriage solely as a contract neglects its profound spiritual and emotional aspects. For many couples, marriage has deep religious significance as a sacred bond blessed by God. Even for non-religious couples, marriage represents a spiritual union of two souls coming together as one.

Emotionally, marriage creates a unique intimacy and vulnerability between partners that goes far beyond contractual obligations. Spouses share their deepest fears, dreams, and inner lives with each other. This level of emotional connection and interdependence is not captured by legalistic contract language.

Marriage as a Social Institution

Marriage is not just an agreement between two individuals, but a social institution with broader implications for society. As sociologist Steven Nock explains, marriage is “governed by legal, moral and community expectations” that give it “clear meaning to others” beyond just the couple.

As an institution, marriage provides a template for family life and child-rearing that benefits society. It creates kinship between families and establishes a stable foundation for raising children. The public nature of marriage, with its legal recognition and social rituals, reinforces its role as a cornerstone of social order.

The Limitations of Contract Law

Contract law is ill-equipped to govern the complex realities of married life. Contracts typically spell out specific obligations and remedies, but marriage involves countless unforeseeable situations that cannot be stipulated in advance. The fluid nature of marital roles and responsibilities does not fit neatly into contractual terms.

Additionally, contract law is based on the notion of self-interested parties negotiating at arm’s length. But marriage ideally involves self-giving love and sacrifice for one’s spouse. Reducing marriage to a contract can promote an attitude of “what’s in it for me?” rather than mutual care and compromise.

The Problem with Viewing Marriage as a State Creation

Some argue that marriage is purely a creation of the state that can be redefined at will. But this overlooks marriage’s nature as a “pre-political institution that emerges spontaneously from society”. Throughout history and across cultures, marriage has existed as a natural social arrangement prior to state recognition.

Viewing marriage as merely a bundle of legal benefits misses its deeper purpose of uniting couples in a lifelong bond. It opens the door to redefining marriage in ways that undermine its stabilizing social role. A libertarian perspective recognizes marriage as an organic institution to be respected, not a government program to be redesigned.

The Dangers of the Contractual View

Treating marriage as just another contract can have detrimental effects:

• It promotes a consumer mindset toward relationships, where spouses are viewed as disposable if they don’t meet one’s needs.
• It encourages a self-centered approach focused on personal gratification rather than commitment and sacrifice.
• It fails to account for the interests of children, who are profoundly impacted by their parents’ marriage.
• It neglects marriage’s public nature and reduces it to a purely private agreement.
• It provides less stability and security, especially for women and children.

Benefits of the Institutional View of Marriage

In contrast, viewing marriage as a social institution with spiritual and emotional dimensions offers several advantages:

• It promotes commitment, stability and security for couples and children.
• It reinforces marriage’s role in binding extended families and communities together.
• It encourages spouses to work through challenges rather than easily dissolving the relationship.
• It provides a coherent framework for family life and child-rearing.
• It recognizes marriage’s importance to society, not just the couple.

Marriage as Relationship + Institution

A balanced view recognizes that marriage has both contractual and institutional elements. There are legal aspects to marriage, but these serve to reinforce its nature as a social institution. As the Hoover Institution puts it, marriage is a “naturally occurring, pre-political institution” that is then given legal recognition by the state.

The relational and institutional dimensions of marriage are complementary. The personal commitment between spouses gives life and meaning to the institutional structure. And the institutional nature of marriage reinforces and stabilizes the couple’s relationship. Understanding marriage in this holistic way captures its full significance.

Practical Implications

Recognizing that marriage is more than a contract has important practical implications:

• Couples should approach marriage with a mindset of lifelong commitment, not a trial arrangement.
• Premarital counseling and education should emphasize marriage’s institutional nature, not just relationship skills.
• Public policy should aim to strengthen marriage as a social institution, not just a private contract.
• The law should continue to treat marriage as a unique status, not reduce it to a contractual agreement.
• Couples facing marital difficulties should seek counseling and support, not just consider “breach of contract.”

While marriage does have legal elements, it is a profound mistake to view it merely as a contract between two people. Marriage is a multifaceted institution with spiritual, emotional, and social dimensions that transcend contractual agreements. It is a covenant of love, a union of souls, and a foundation for family and community life.

Reducing marriage to a contract diminishes its significance and undermines its stabilizing role in society. Instead, we should recognize marriage as a vital social institution – one that emerges naturally from human society and is then reinforced by cultural and legal recognition. This richer understanding of marriage is essential for strengthening this cornerstone of social life for generations to come.