Diana Ross Lionel Richie

Rock and Religion: The Pursuit of Everlasting Love

Is it possible that humankind’s deepest yearnings for connection, unity, shared meaning, and love are the shared sacred quest of both religion and the best rock?

For two decades, we have interviewed religious wives and husbands in long-term happy marriages and we asked them how they kept their love alive. We heard relational and religious answers that reflected a variety of wisdom.

Like most Americans of our generations (X and the Boomers), we also grew up hearing the voices of classic rock and roll. Rock also has its own kind of wisdom about keeping love alive—though often profane and crass—and it too enshrines a kind of sacred quest for Everlasting Love. On Valentine’s Day these two visions of love collide, converge, and clash in unique and surprising ways.

Yes, far too much of rock and roll promotes superficial sex and a host of other ideas that militate against enduring love and committed relationships; yes, there has been a decades-long holy war between religious believers and rock music—with rock most often portrayed as a tool of the Devil. This antagonism and tension between those who rock and roll and those who sing “Rock of Ages” has been embraced (and explicitly exploited) by many, including the Rolling Stones on their audaciously titled 1967 album Their Satanic Majesties Request and their later hit “Sympathy for the Devil” featuring Jagger’s famous line, “Pleased to meet you/Hope you guess my name.” From the early metal of Black Sabbath to today, there is much in rock that diametrically opposes religion and enduring love. 

But this is not the whole story.

In his book A Mess of Help: From the Crucified Soul of Rock N’ Roll, Episcopalian minister David Zahl, the high priest of the fun-holy alliance between rock and religion, demonstrates that many of the gods of rock and roll have sprinkled messages of grace, redemption, and transcendent love throughout the lyrics of their romantic hymns. Certainly, a trainload of Woodstock-inspired rock has glorified gratuitous “free love,” but some of rock’s most soulful artists have pined instead for a very special, spiritual, and, yes, even eternal kind of love. 

Is it possible that humankind’s deepest yearnings for connection, unity, shared meaning, and love (not the ephemeral but the eternal kind) are the shared sacred quest of both religion and the best of rock? In the Bret Michaels-penned rock ballad, “Love’s a Hard Game to Play,” Stevie Nicks (fittingly without Mick and the rest of Fleetwood Mac) painfully warns in her gravely, solo voice, “Remember, starting the fire is easy; the hardest part is learning how to keep the flame.” Indeed, the flames of love and faith are not always eternal—but most of us long for them to be.

Indeed, the flames of love and faith are not always eternal—but most of us long for them to be.

No fewer than a dozen wide-ranging artists have tackled diverse songs titled “Everlasting Love.” The pantheon ranges from Latin (Gloria Estefan), Disco (Carl Carlton, Andy Gibb), R & B (Mary J Blige, Chaka Khan), and a cover of Love Affair’s 1967 version by Irish rock deities, U2. And yes, there is a Gospel version about God’s “Everlasting Love” by CeCe Winans. In his classic alternative version, Howard Jones intones, “He wasn’t looking for a cuddle in the back seat, she wasn’t looking for a five minute thrill . . . this vacancy he meant to permanently fill. . . . Something special, something pure, this is love worth waiting for.” The hook follows, “I need an everlasting love; I need a friend and a lover Divine; an everlasting and precious love; Wait for it, wait for it, give it some time.” The oblique nod to God and the pure, reverent view of love are hardly the fare of Woodstock and unfettered sex.

Although the Beatles were only willing to push things as far as to ask, “Will you still need me, will you still feed me, when I’m 64?” others, like Howard Jones, would idyllically set the bar higher. In 1981, the Lionel Richie and Diana Ross duet, “Endless Love,” would become the best-selling duet in R & B history and has been hailed by Billboard as “the greatest song duet of all-time. However, with apologies to Oscar Wilde, it is often difficult for life to imitate art. Both Lionel and Diana would personally experience divorce twice. 

However frequently it has been smashed, the ideal of “Endless Love” or “Everlasting Love” continues to serve as the holy grail of sacred romance, not only in rock but in various world faiths. In the Eastern Orthodox faith, “Love between wife and husband, as an icon of relationship between Christ and Church, is eternal.” Couples in temples of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints receive “the covenant of eternal marriage” and believe marriages can endure forever. Evangelical theologian Geoffrey Bromiley wrote, “As God made man in his own image, so he made marriage in the image of his own eternal marriage with his people” (p. 43). In Islam, “According to the statements of the Quran and hadiths, the family life that is established in the world will continue forever if both spouses deserve to go to Paradise.” Seven in ten Americans believe in heaven and nine in ten want to marry their soulmate. Whether or not it is part of religious teachings, the longing for soulmate love to last forever seems rooted in the souls of most people.

The question remains, How do we grasp the grail of eternal love? For many happily married couples we have interviewed, their shared faith is central. However, lasting faith in God and religion, like romantic love, is often difficult to sustain. Pew surveys indicate that many righteous brothers (and sisters) have “lost that loving feeling” for God or a long-term faith. Indeed, there are heartbreaks and faith crises that cause some to swear off love of God and their once-beloved faith forever. 

Whether or not it is part of religious teachings, the longing for soulmate love to last forever seems rooted in the souls of most people.

This is unfortunate because considerable recent research connects shared faith among married couples with a number of encouraging romantic benefits. Family scholars Dew and Willoughby recently summarized, “Our findings suggest that a new adjective best describes marital sex between religious couples: ‘satisfying.’” Apparently, contra-Mick Jagger, some can get satisfaction. The Rolling Stones nailed it elsewhere, however: “You can’t always get what you want, but sometimes you get what you need.” 

A study by relationship scholar Dean Busby and colleagues similarly found that “the longer a couple waited to become sexually involved, the better their sexual quality, relationship communication, relationship satisfaction, and perceived relationship stability was in marriage.” 

Continuing on the note of sex, most faiths teach the spiritual value of sexual restraint, the relational value of sexual fidelity, and the social value of sexual responsibility. However, the Rolling Stones do not provide much lyrical support here.

Where can we turn for a fusion of sonic rock, soulful religion, and spiritual romance? Emanating from the boom box of Lloyd Dobbler (John Cusak) in the romantic cult-classic film Say Anything, Peter Gabriel’s yearning voice sings, “In your eyes (the light, the heat); In your eyes (I am complete); In your eyes (I see the doorways of a thousand churches); In your eyes (the resolution of all the fruitless searches); Oh, I see the light and the heat (in your eyes). Oh, I want to be that complete (in your eyes).” 

So, is the elusive but sacred quest for eternal love in rock and religion realized in the eyes of a lover or in the eyes of the Creator? The answer from many of the happily married wives and husbands we have interviewed was that “to be that complete,” we need to gaze in rapture at both. So, grab the hands of the one you love, give thanks to the One you love above, and then… Dance.    

About the authors

Loren Marks

Loren D. Marks, Ph.D. is professor of Family Life at BYU, co-director of the American Families of Faith project, and co-author of Psychology of Religion and Families. He is a Fellow at the Wheatley Institute.

David Dollahite

David C. Dollahite, Ph.D., is professor of Family Life at BYU, co-director of the American Families of Faith project, and co-author of Strengths in Diverse Families of Faith.
On Key

You Might Also Like

Under the Banner of Heaven Episode 3 Discussion and What’s True?

Summary – The episode opens with Detective Pyre leading a group of officers up the mountain to rescue Taba, who is completely fine and sitting on the ground outside one of the cabins. (The episode doesn’t explain how he got there after having a gun pointed at his face at the end of episode 2.) Pyre calls for more backup and finds a little girl wandering in the woods, lost and scared. The officers apprehend her and she tells Pyre about how things function up at the “fort” and about “Uncle Allen and Auntie Brenda” when her mother Sara arrives. Pyre questions Sara about Brenda’s experiences in the temple. The episode then depicts the beginning of an endowment session in a pretty good imitation of the garden room in the Salt Lake Temple. Brenda shares with her sisters-in-law her worries about making a covenant to “surrender” to her husband. One of the signs is shown as well as the penalty motion. Sara claims the end of the world is nigh, that her husband Sam’s job is to separate the wheat from the tares, and that Brenda was subject to the doctrine of blood atonement. A large squadron of police officers prepares to storm the Lafferty “fort,” when Pyre realizes that the situation resembles the Haun’s Mill Massacre and decides to instead approach unarmed. A wild-looking Sam and his family are taken into custody while one man escapes into the woods.  Meanwhile, Pyre’s mother with dementia is recovered after she wandered out during the twin’s birthday party. We see a flashback to Father Lafferty confronting Dan about refusing to pay taxes and beating him with his belt. The next day, Dan receives a “revelation” that he is the rightful leader of the family. In the present, Pyre and his wife take the girls to their baptismal interview with their bishop, and Pyre stays behind to discuss his mother’s health with the bishop. He also brings up how his current case ties into difficult church history topics, which the bishop encourages him to “put on a shelf.” At home later, Pyre and his wife fight about whether to postpone the girls’ baptism until after the case is closed.  At the police station, Sam Lafferty is ranting and raving. Pyre corners Allen about his criminal record due to unpaid parking tickets. He shares how his brothers pressured him into it, and as a result, he was arrested and missed Brenda’s graduation from BYU. Brenda’s anger about this led her to confront Dan about his beliefs (which involve a lot of strange reasoning about the constitution and separation of powers), and during the confrontation, Dan reveals his plan to run for sheriff and eventually pull down most government institutions from the inside. Allen ties this story to Brigham Young encouraging Joseph Smith to fight persecution, but Allen says he made a deal with Brenda that he would leave their influence if she gave up her career to start a family.  Pyre and Tab interrogate Sam Lafferty, who claims to be the Lord’s destroying angel, murdering those who are on his “holy list.” Robin Lafferty, still in custody, overhears Sam’s rants and demands to know if Brenda and her daughter are okay. Pyre shows him pictures of their deaths and Robin breaks, revealing that the Lafferty’s are likely also planning an attack on their bishop and stake president, who tried to stop their apostasy. Flashback to Brenda finding out she is pregnant and deciding to try to help the Lafferty family back onto the path of the mainstream church. Church History – This episode has a violent depiction of the Haun’s Mill Massacre, which most members will readily recognize. Less well known is the obscure early church concept of blood atonement, which the Lafferty’s appear to believe is still in force and to be enacted by them. Allen also pins violence in the early church on Brigham Young’s influence on Joseph Smith, with Emma Smith being against it. This neatly parallels the Lafferty situation, but it’s a significant simplification of the complex web of influences and responses to constant violence against the early Saints. We also get a mention of Joseph Smith running for president, which from my understanding he mostly did to draw attention to the plight of the church rather than expecting to win and reform the government. The show also alludes to the alleged assassination attempt on Governor Boggs by Porter Rockwell. Shibboleths – Sara Lafferty asks Pyre if he “follows his covenants.” This phrasing is off: LDS members would say “keep your covenants” or “honor your covenants.” (A search for the phrase “follow the covenants” on the church website yields only one result.) In the temple, Robin’s wife remarks on the importance of “keeping our agency strong,” another formulation that makes no sense. To Latter-day Saints, agency means the God-given ability to choose. This isn’t something we can strengthen, but an inherent condition of mortality. During their fight, Sister Pyre worries that delaying the baptism will shame her in front of their “congregation.” Members would never use this word, especially in private. We exclusively refer to our congregation as a “ward.” Her concern about people wondering if her daughters “failed” their interview seems off as well. Finally, let’s talk about LDS family size. Several times in this episode we get references to “at least 10” or “dozens” of kids as though this is the typical size of an LDS family. But in actuality, in 1980, only 12% of Utahns had a family of 6 people or more, and only a fraction of that 12% would have 10+ children. The wards I have lived in have maybe one family that has more than 5 kids. It’s just not that typical. I Don’t Love to See the Temple – Alright, here we are at the biggest controversy of the series: the decision to portray sacred temple ordinances. The temple scene takes place from timestamp 14:00 to 17:00. Only three minutes long, yet

Subscribe To Our Weekly Newsletter

Stay up to date on the intersection of faith in the public square.

You have Successfully Subscribed!