Prenuptial agreements used to be a topic reserved for the tabloids. For example, in 1988, the day before his wedding, baseball player Barry Bonds required his fiancée to sign such an agreement. She consented but seven years later, after a nasty divorce, she sued him for a portion of his seven million dollar salary. The case went all the way to the California Supreme Court, but the contract held.¹ Times, however, have changed. Today many financial experts advise couples of all ages and backgrounds to plan for divorce before getting married by entering into a prenuptial agreement.²Furthermore, prenuptial agreements are no longer simply about how to divide the house, stocks, and savings accounts. When a Florida woman moved to Philadelphia to be with her husband, she gave up a six-figure salary and demanded that her “sacrifice” be reflected in a prenuptial agreement.³ They did divorce and the husband paid a portion of her lost wages. Other prenuptial agreements may even reflect the non-monetary contributions to marriage.⁴ For example, prior to marriage lawyers may put a price tag on the value of staying home and raising children; a divorced, stay-at-home mom can be compensated for her years of domestic labor. Suffice it to say, prenuptial agreements are more frequent and more flexible.

Proponents do everything they can to cast prenuptial agreements in the best possible light. The Equality in Marriage Institute tells couples that “[b]ringing up the subject of a prenuptial agreement can be a great way to learn more about your expectations, dreams, and hopes. By starting down the communication path now, you are on your way to creating a mutually fulfilling partnership.”⁵ This sounds nice but the reality is too obvious to obscure—prenuptial agreements are about protecting one’s personal interests in the event of a divorce. What does the rise of the prenuptial agreement say about the state of marriage in the twenty-first century?

Planning for divorce is a skill in which an increasing number of married couples are proficient. Before they say “I do” many have already walked through what will happen should they conclude, “I’m done.” “Expect the best and prepare for the worst,” they may quip positively. But the fact of the matter is by preparing for divorce couples are admitting that divorce is a live possibility. When the marriage gets difficult—and every marriage gets difficult—it will be that much easier to end the relationship. After all, the groundwork has already been laid for a “successful” split. Seventy-seven-year-old Donald Absey had been married 52 years when he said, insightfully and bluntly, “Prenups stink. I believe in for better or for worse. Everyone knows marriage ain’t easy. But a prenup predisposes you to think it’s going to fail.”⁶

The rise of prenuptial agreements are also proving that society has a dwindling understanding of what used to be common knowledge—even among non-Christians—namely, that marriage is a “one-flesh” union. For generations husbands and wives within a Judeo-Christian culture have been blessed by Genesis 2:24. This passage explains that when a man and woman marry they become “one-flesh.” The connotation is certainly sexual, but it is more than that. Spouses’ lives are to overlap physically, emotionally, and even materially. They are to share themselves and their belongings. How hard it is to keep this imagery alive in the age of the prenuptial agreement! After all, how can the husband and wife truly share themselves when a contract lies in a safety deposit box emblazoned with the words, “What’s mine is mine and what’s yours is yours”? A marriage that begins with a prenuptial agreement is never able to be truly a “one-flesh” union, because a line always exists separating what belongs to him from what belongs to her.

It may be no surprise to find a growing dependence on prenuptial agreements in the culture-at-large. Having embraced divorce as a viable option, it is but a small step to start planning for it. Still, there is no room for the presumption of divorce in the Church. After all, the responsibility for protecting and modeling the “one-flesh” union rests with the people of God.

Footnotes: