Are Our Standards Too Low?

[Psalm63]

I have taught kids from the book you are special, the spanish version especially on mission trips. There is a sequel even.

But your post did contradict the other points about correcting your spouse, because you are admitting there are things that are Gods standards that we owe to God and are measured BY God for, and can only TRUST God to measure our "performance".

It does indeed directly go against the idea of correcting ones spouse according to same standards. Call it judging or evaluating or whatever, its contradictory.

The fact is that I was afraid to speak the truth to my spouse before I came to understand more deeply Who I am in Christ. I had believed a lot of lies about who I am and Who God is. I was not able to be meet Help to my husband because I did not even believe I was meet.

But Con, I have to admit that I am very disappointed in you and I fear you are not really engaging in this for personal growth or self-examination, but for your own um... entertainment? at the expense of others. I have pm'ed you.

And as I said earlier, you are a brick in the "church" wall. I care about you, but I have no intention of engaging in dialogue with you.

 

[Psalm63]

I have taught kids from the book you are special, the spanish version especially on mission trips. There is a sequel even.

But your post did contradict the other points about correcting your spouse, because you are admitting there are things that are Gods standards that we owe to God and are measured BY God for, and can only TRUST God to measure our "performance".

It does indeed directly go against the idea of correcting ones spouse according to same standards. Call it judging or evaluating or whatever, its contradictory.

The fact is that I was afraid to speak the truth to my spouse before I came to understand more deeply Who I am in Christ. I had believed a lot of lies about who I am and Who God is. I was not able to be meet Help to my husband because I did not even believe I was meet.

But Con, I have to admit that I am very disappointed in you and I fear you are not really engaging in this for personal growth or self-examination, but for your own um... entertainment? at the expense of others. I have pm'ed you.

And as I said earlier, you are a brick in the "church" wall. I care about you, but I have no intention of engaging in dialogue with you.

 

[Conservativation]

Nah, just railing against mighty injustices. Its anything but entertaining.

 

[Psalm63]

I'm actually gonna suggest a fresh start and try talking about the standards/practices as a separate thread, starting with prayer.

Thank you. I will be interested to read the comments on prayer, etc.

 

[Psalm63]

So then what do these scriptures mean to me? Clearly my wife is my equal before God, yet God has placed a responsibility upon me that if I am to be a husband I must:
1. Serve her. (and by proxy our children) This means be good to her, be compassionate, keep encouraging her in her relationship with God, make our home and life as safe as I can for her to grow and thrive in spiritually.

2. Be responsible. This means that I am personally responsible for the spiritual atmosphere of my home.

I think Psalm has presented a perfectly legitimate fear in that if a person misuses spiritual authority it can become a thing of evil.

However I'm going to present a challenge. Psalm, Mkgal1, do either of you feel threatened by the concept of male leadership of a family as I have presented it?

I missed this post earlier (sorry, can't keep up with these fast moving discussions- have a new job on top of the usual responsibilites).

I just wanted to agree with mkgal that I do not feel threatened with how I hear you wielding your authority, but its not what my husband did with it and I do not intend ever to return to that paradigm.

JFYI, Here is a link which includes an example of contemporary teaching from a Focus on the Family ministry and how I followed just such teaching and it was deadly to me, our children, and our marriage. Our marriage survived, but now I make my own decisions.

 

[McScribe]

One of the standards I mentioned involves honesty and trust. How can a person submit to another's authority happily when they don't trust them? I find it makes me shake my head to hear people talking about the importance of willing submission without trust being established first. Because it strikes me that trust is what makes those hard decisions possible to face together. In the articles that Psalm you mention this lady Wilson talks a lot about trust but doesn't suggest it needs to be backed by anything but a woman's blind faith in God--who somehow rubs off on the man simply by virtue of his being a husband. I call that muck. Trust and respect have to be earned when they are in the person of a human being. I do very strongly believe that a man is called to a special role of leadership in a person's life (and I am still curious Psalm about what you think of the scriptures I quoted) but nevertheless a particular man can be talking the talk without walking the walk.

I think that trust can be reestablished in a relationship though, and that both people can work together to agree on how to do that. That takes a lot of courage and honesty and it strikes me that we (my wife and I) could not have done it without ultimately trusting in God and involving Him in our lives to the extent that we have. A lot of our honesty came from each of us individually and then together submitting to God in prayer, asking for His correction and help. It's still a struggle at times, and so I hope that those of us trying to walk this path of marriage can pray for one another to continue looking to God for guidance and understanding.

 

[Conservativation]

I differ a little. When you marry it should START with trust. Marrying someone and then making them earn your trust is a bit odd in my opinion.

 

[chaz345]

JFYI, Here is a link which includes an example of contemporary teaching from a Focus on the Family ministry and how I followed just such teaching and it was deadly to me, our children, and our marriage. Our marriage survived, but now I make my own decisions.

For those who followed Psalm's link to her own blog to read what FoTF is supposedly teaching on submission, here's a link to the whole of the advice that was given:

Practical Submission

Note especially this paragraph:

But biblically, that's a responsibility to be borne with utmost care. I would caution a couple that is at odds over these very sensitive and life-altering decisions to not be hasty in reaching an answer, but to be diligent in prayer and even fasting. It is possible for God to change hearts, of either husband or wife, and for the sake of your marriage unity is essential in such decisions.

Hardly a picture of a husband acting as dictator. And I've never, at least not in any teaching from the last 15 to 20 years, seen anything taught on the husband having the final authority that didn't include the above or something very similar.

Are there men who have a very wrong view of what their wife's submission. and what their own leadership should look like? Of course there are. BUt like I've said before, it's not the normal teaching in the church today(hasn't been for at least 2 decades) and it's not all or nearly all men.

 

[Conservativation]

Good show chaz!

I thought it was out of kilter that FoTF was saying bluntly "YES" the man is the boss.

I followed the link too but failed to follow it further. The type of leadership they espouse I would bet is EXACTLY the type that McScribe engages in. The fact, McScribe, that you have only explained the "love as Christ loves the church" part, and really havent discussed, for example, intractible decisions, in effect makes it impossible for your "manner" to be compared to what Psalm likes.

It would be interesting to see you take on major decidions that cannot be put off and when an agreement of compromise is simply not possible.

For example, a new job that will get you out of debt (not saying you are in debt..its an example), pay kids college, afford way more giving, and be close to a different side of the family.....but requires a move away from where you live now. There are only 2 choices, stay, or go. Those cannot be compromised. How is that handled?

 

[mkgal1]

Chaz~ I hope that what you quoted is the overriding teaching in the "church", and that I have just been involved with the wrong people. I do hear so often on these forums, "the man has the final decision" and things of the like....and that is where the teaching seems to stray. It is almost as if there is agreement....until there is great conflict and push comes to shove and a decision needs to be made & there is no time for conflict. THAT is where I believe the teaching is tested.

Getting off that for a bit....I just came across a good article about the avoidance of hanging our marriages on relational sky hooks...imaginary supports that don't work in real life. The entire article is here, on LifeWay. Some of what the article said was that some of these relational hooks to avoid are:

• Men will say, “I work hard to provide for my family. That should be enough.” But history has proven that successful marriages require a balance of hard work and time together focused on each other.

• Women will say, “I don’t think sex is all that important now that we have children and a full life.” But healthy marriages are consistently sexually active.

• One of the partners makes consistent demands on the other, thinking this will bring order and direction to their marriage. But the best marriages run as partnerships where responsibility and authority are strategically divided up.

The path to personal fulfillment in marriage is a commitment to the principle that we is greater than me. Think of it like a math equation: We > me. Keeping your focus on we rather than me is not easy. But it’s the foundational secret that you can rely on to build a happy home.

 

[Conservativation]

But history has proven that successful marriages require a balance of hard work and time together focused on each other.

That is just patently false. Im not suggesting time together focused on each other is not important...I AM saying history shows NO SUCH THING!

 

[chaz345]

Chaz~ I hope that what you quoted is the overriding teaching in the "church", and that I have just been involved with the wrong people. I do hear so often on these forums, "the man has the final decision" and things of the like....and that is where the teaching seems to stray. It is almost as if there is agreement....until there is great conflict and push comes to shove and a decision needs to be made & there is no time for conflict. THAT is where I believe the teaching is tested.

Maybe we just see/hear things differently because every time I've see the "man has the final say" thought, it's been accompanied with but he must be VERY careful with that responsibility and it should only be used as an absolutely last resort. And it's nearly always presented as a RESPONSIBILITY, not as a right or a license to get his own way.


I heard someone who had been married a long time, more than 30 years I think, who beleived in the man having the final say who said that that final say was actually used only twice in the entire marriage. Now I won't put a specific number on it, but I(and most people I know who do believe in the man having the final say) very strongly believe that it should only be used very rarely like that.

 

[mkgal1]

But history has proven that successful marriages require a balance of hard work and time together focused on each other.

That is just patently false. Im not suggesting time together focused on each other is not important...I AM saying history shows NO SUCH THING!

Why would you say that? Doesn't the "history" of successful marriages show us what made them successful? I equate "history" with what has already happened--the past. Like, looking at marriages in our families, or any other circle of influence, that have proven as a success...not just long-lasting....but a true intimate bond.

 

[mkgal1]

Maybe we just see/hear things differently because every time I've see the "man has the final say" thought, it's been accompanied with but he must be VERY careful with that responsibility and it should only be used as an absolutely last resort. And it's nearly always presented as a RESPONSIBILITY, not as a right or a license to get his own way.


I heard someone who had been married a long time, more than 30 years I think, who beleived in the man having the final say who said that that final say was actually used only twice in the entire marriage. Now I won't put a specific number on it, but I(and most people I know who do believe in the man having the final say) very strongly believe that it should only be used very rarely like that.

That is hopefully how it is taught in most cases, AND how your ears hear it....BUT, what I see on this particular forum--and have experienced in counseling-- is that has been heard by many just that the "man has final say"....the responsibility part has been left off. I was told, "God will deal with the husband if he makes a poor choice." Well, when you are talking about choices that affect the children, the home, and have long-lasting consequences, if the husband is dealt with...so is the rest of the family. I don't see how only the husband can experience consequences. Your translation is correct...but I do see how some have dropped the disclosure part of the teaching (or simply don't hear it).

 

[chaz345]

That is hopefully how it is taught in most cases, AND how your ears hear it....BUT, what I see on this particular forum--and have experienced in counseling-- is that has been heard by many just that the "man has final say"....the responsibility part has been left off. I was told, "God will deal with the husband if he makes a poor choice." Well, when you are talking about choices that affect the children, the home, and have long-lasting consequences, if the husband is dealt with...so is the rest of the family. I don't see how only the husband can experience consequences. Your translation is correct...but I do see how some have dropped the disclosure part of the teaching (or simply don't hear it).

It's not a disclosure part of the teaching, it's an integral part of it. Perhaps one reason you sometimes don't see it said here is that the person speaking thinks it's so obvious that it doesn't really need to be said. I know that I have sometimes not explicitly said the second part because it seems so obvious to me that it seems like a waste of time to say it every time.

 

[chaz345]

and have experienced in counseling-- is that has been heard by many just that the "man has final say"....the responsibility part has been left off. I was told, "God will deal with the husband if he makes a poor choice."

I hope this isn't seen as an attack because it's not meant that way at all even though it's going to be very uncomfortable to hear. Also note that I'm taking a bit of a wild leap here because I don't have anywhere near all the information.

But is it possible that you heard what you heard in counseling because the counselor was trying to get you to make changes to the only person that you've got the ability to change, that being yourself? I'm asking that because in talking about your own situation, your entire focus appears to me, only from what you've said here, to be on fixing the other people in your life.

I'm not saying that the problem is all yours to fix, and I'm not saying that your husband doesn't need to change, I'm simply saying that it appears to me that your focus is on how everything will be just fine as soon as HE "gets it". That maybe you approached the counseling with the mindset of getting him fixed and the counselors were just trying to adjust your way of approaching things a little. Maybe it's true that he does need fixing, but you can't fix him. And you can't make him fix himself. That doesn't mean that you have to just accept things as they are and let him do whatever he wants, but maybe things will start to get better if you changed your focus away form how much better things will be after he's fixed.

 

[mkgal1]

I hope this isn't seen as an attack because it's not meant that way at all even though it's going to be very uncomfortable to hear. Also note that I'm taking a bit of a wild leap here because I don't have anywhere near all the information.

But is it possible that you heard what you heard in counseling because the counselor was trying to get you to make changes to the only person that you've got the ability to change, that being yourself? I'm asking that because in talking about your own situation, your entire focus appears to me, only from what you've said here, to be on fixing the other people in your life.

I'm not saying that the problem is all yours to fix, and I'm not saying that your husband doesn't need to change, I'm simply saying that it appears to me that your focus is on how everything will be just fine as soon as HE "gets it". That maybe you approached the counseling with the mindset of getting him fixed and the counselors were just trying to adjust your way of approaching things a little. Maybe it's true that he does need fixing, but you can't fix him. And you can't make him fix himself. That doesn't mean that you have to just accept things as they are and let him do whatever he wants, but maybe things will start to get better if you changed your focus away form how much better things will be after he's fixed.

Oh, no....no, I don't see your words as an attack. I am open to opinions and thoughts about my situation...so, no problem. McScribe, I just hope you don't mind us going a bit off topic, although I do feel it is good to maybe have a real-live situation to deal with to see how these practices actually are lived out.

I don't think that my experience in counseling was an attempt to get me to make the changes within myself. I say that, because I was told, "You need to be submissive to EVERYTHING...it is written here....". That counselor was telling me that I needed to go along and get along with my in-laws. If my husband wanted for us to go to a function, then we should go...because he said so. She was telling me, "How difficult could it be to just go....be cordial....realize they are dysfunctional....don't expect anything from them.....". What she was missing was the root of the problem....my husband puts them before me. I never aksed for HIM to stop seeing them.....I just want for him to understand why I cannot or will not go anymore. Isn't that doing my part to control that in which I have the power to control and not imposing into other peoples rights?

But, by me setting up the boundary that I will not go visit his family....it doesn't change the fact that our marriage is broken. My husband says that I am stubborn (can't argue with that), selfish (aren't we all...but I am not acting selfishly in this situation), mean (not a very fitting adjective for me), and unforgiving. Nothing I can do will change his opinion...he needs to be the one, and I agree that I don't have either the power or authority to change his opinion (other than to do what I feel God wants me to do and to act respectfully and to keep everyone's best interest in mind).

 

[Conservativation]

MK, you essentially answered "yes" to chaz question. Thats good, its honest.

 

[mkgal1]

That doesn't mean that you have to just accept things as they are and let him do whatever he wants, but maybe things will start to get better if you changed your focus away form how much better things will be after he's fixed.

I make the best of what we have. We are kind to eachother, polite, but there is NO intimacy. I do what I can to make my existence here of little burden to him. We cannot discuss anything pertaining to opinions....it is just exchanging facts. What are my other options, as you see it? If I cannot influence the situation....which I believe I cannot.....then what am I left with besides accepting things as they are?

 

[mkgal1]

MK, you essentially answered "yes" to chaz question. Thats good, its honest.

Are you saying that I heard something different than I was being told in counseling?