Are Our Standards Too Low?

[Conservativation]

Personally, I believe God would NEVER call a man to something He cannot-or will not- enable him to do.

Cons, you do not have to understand ME...but a husband is called to understand his wife.

In Ephesians 1 it says:
7In him we have redemption through his blood, the forgiveness of sins, in accordance with the riches of God's grace 8that he lavished on us with all wisdom and understanding. 9And he[d] made known to us the mystery of his will according to his good pleasure, which he purposed in Christ, 10to be put into effect when the times will have reached their fulfillment—to bring all things in heaven and on earth together under one head, even Christ.

Two different concepts.

The scripture speaks of EMPATHY...which is often refered to as "understanding". Its very different than to say I UNDERSTAND you...to say I UNDERSTAND how you feel......VERY different.
So, no, the type of understanding Im mentioning is not the same thing as the scripture.
Even the verbs in the sentence are different than just very simply stating he is to understand. I was responding to you and how you seem to use it, saying he needs to "understand you". Actually he needs to BE understanding TO you. Big difference.

 

[chaz345]

What I'm confused by is why this is an issue. It seems like there's a fear that inevitably spouses--particlarly women I get the impression--will be saying things like "you're not praying enough" as the particular example mentioned. I agree that that would be a bad thing to do, when you could so easily say "This issue has come up/I'm concerned about/This is worrying me/I'm wondering about...will you pray with me about it?" I think that possibly the problem here is rooted in my #2, which is about respect. There is no respect in "You aren't praying enough!!!!" There IS respect in "Will you pray with me." It's the equivalent of this in a marriage:

"Will you please take out the garbage" vs. "WHEN are you going to take out the garbage?" one is a polite request, the other is a demand. No respect in that, see.

So I think that really we're not as much in disagreement as we might think we are.

It's an issue because this place, and any other Christian forum I've ever been in, is full of threads with marriages that are deeply troubled over the dynamic I'm describing.

No it's not inevitable, but it is common.

 

[chaz345]

In an effort to understand you both....are you saying that unless something can be clearly defined....it shouldn't be confronted?

Right, it shouldn't be CONFRONTED. Mentioned, discussed, brought up? Of course, but not in a confrontational manner.

To be even more specific, statements that you find offensive are, "You don't listen to me"...."You don't try to understand me enough"...."You don't love me the way you should." Is that correct?

Yes those statements are offensive because they effectively tell someone else how they feel/what they mean, and almost always they are the result of things where there is much room for interpretation/perception to play a big part.

 

[chaz345]

Okay....let's get back to the OP. I found it interesting that you made references to appearance when speaking about honesty.

Something I am seeing with your stance (or at least what I can try to figure out your stance even IS) is that a wife wouldn't have the freedom to come to her husband and say, "I am not feeling that you are taking the time to genuinely listen to me in an effort to understand me."

Is that true? Do you feel that is too judgmental and too subjective for her to bring that up?

No there is a world of difference between that and "you don't love me" (which is her bottom line feeling in that case) or comming here and asking what you can do to get your husband to love you.

The problem comes, not in bringing it up in the way you frame here,it comes in the confrontational way it's often brought up/addressed. Look at how often boundry setting and the like are suggested as solutions for problems that basically amount to something on this list of standards and one person's perception that the other isn't meeting them.

 

[chaz345]

If opinions and subjective thoughts can’t be discussed without defensiveness, then how is a husband to live in understanding of his wife? If all she can discuss with her husband are basically facts, then isn’t everything she is discussing with him things he already knows? In that, I don’t agree.

See here's an example of very clear words apparently not being heard. I've said several times, in as man words, that the subjective things can be discussed, but that they should not be CONFRONTED. Seriosly, go back and read my posts and you'll see that Ive said it no less than at least 3 or 4 times. Cons has said it too although maybe not quite as straight out as I have.

I see a big problem with the opinion that only clearly defined behaviors may be discussed,

I'd have a big problem with that too. But no one is saying that, so what's the point? Anything can be discussed, only clearly defined behaviors should be CONFRONTED.

I see the scenario played out like this, “Hun….I am feeling as though you haven’t been taking the time to understand me.” He responds with a line of questions that basically asks her to “prove” what he has done to make her feel that way. He will ask her things like, “ when did I do that?” “What exactly did I say?” putting her in the position of building a sort of case to prove her point…. He is kind of forcing her into attacking his behavior…. do you see that?

The dynamic happens when the raising of the point is framed in terms of the listener's actions rather than the speaker's feelings. Another thing that will very quickly raise defensiveness is the words always and never becuase as soon as most people hear them the first thing they do is stop listening and start trying to find the one or two exceptios that disprove the accusation that is nearly always in the statement.

 

[Conservativation]

trying to find the one or two exceptios that disprove the accusation that is nearly always in the statement.


This is essentially why communication via forum is so hard, this urge to dwell in exceptions.

I keep repeating, I am not concerned about being agreed with, but as chaz says, I think I (we) have been crystal clear. The examples that come as responses to the posts are simply not addressing the posts. The things we are saying are just not that complex or nuanced, nor are they onerous on one spouse or the other...they are fair....UNLESS you are someone who tends to, as I keep saying, DWELL in turning your feelings into action intems for your spouse to fix.

 

[mkgal1]

The dynamic happens when the raising of the point is framed in terms of the listener's actions rather than the speaker's feelings. Another thing that will very quickly raise defensiveness is the words always and never becuase as soon as most people hear them the first thing they do is stop listening and start trying to find the one or two exceptios that disprove the accusation that is nearly always in the statement.

No, this dynamic occurs when the listener is defensive and in need of concise and clearly defined behaviors. It isn't enough that the one spouse making the observation feels something....they have to PROVE it. That says their opinion doesn't matter, that they need to have a case built before things can even be brought up. Even if it is framed with, "Hun, I am feeling as though...." The listener doesn't regard "feelings" as enough to go on.....there has to be something tangible...and then I can see the dynamic occuring that you say is so common (although I don't *see* that as common)...the attacking of behavior...the searching for wrongs....because it was asked for. THAT is where humility can reverse that dynamic.

 

[chaz345]

No, this dynamic occurs when the listener is defensive and in need of concise and clearly defined behaviors. It isn't enough that the one spouse making the observation feels something....they have to PROVE it. That says their opinion doesn't matter, that they need to have a case built before things can even be brought up. Even if it is framed with, "Hun, I am feeling as though...." The listener doesn't regard "feelings" as enough to go on.....there has to be something tangible...and then I can see the dynamic occuring that you say is so common (although I don't *see* that as common)...the attacking of behavior...the searching for wrongs....because it was asked for. THAT is where humility can reverse that dynamic.

It can happen both ways, but in my experience it more often starts with the speaker, the one with a difficulty they want to express, comming in with an attacking stance. Maybe not intentionally, but if they come in talking mainly about the other person's actions, and making no room for the probability that their own perceptions of the other person's actions may be a little but responsible for the what they feel, it raises defense.

I've seen it in countless marriages, including my own, where the simple change from "you don't love me" to "i feel unloved" has completely changed the entire tone of the marriage. Are there some who will take the "i feel unloved" and demmand proof as you put it? Probably, but in my experience with 50 or more marriages, I've never seen it. In general people aren't defensive until after they feel attacked. And if they feel attacked by their spouse bringing something up, is it not likely that the way that it's brought up may have something to do with that?

 

[Conservativation]

No, this dynamic occurs when the listener is defensive and in need of concise and clearly defined behaviors

Yep, you bet. For example, ever heard someone say they are together with their mate all the time but FEEL lonely? I have. So, tell them you feel lonely and they are gonna go "Okay, whats shall we do about that?" Is that defensive? IDK. So she says "we need to talk more" "OK well it seems THIS what we are doing right here and now is what you consider talking....IOW talking is when YOU tell ME that YOU are not happy with ME...soooooo, this talking thing may be a little overrated unless we can actually TALK about something other than my failures"

You are stuck seeing this as a kind of court room drama where we are demanding evidence. Thats just not the case. Anyway, do you honestly think if we all go 10 more pages we are going to find agreement?

I dont. So isnt the best thing to just let it go?

 

[mkgal1]

No, this dynamic occurs when the listener is defensive and in need of concise and clearly defined behaviors

Yep, you bet. For example, ever heard someone say they are together with their mate all the time but FEEL lonely? I have. So, tell them you feel lonely and they are gonna go "Okay, whats shall we do about that?" Is that defensive?

Maybe not defensive, but it is passive and putting the solution solely on the one bringing up the issue. Maybe instead of looking for the requestor to solve the issue at that point, the listener should ask more questions....and seek God in prayer, asking Him to help resolve the issue. Ask HIM to help *see* what is going on and ways to resolve it. That is where a lot of the ideas mentioned in the OP can come into practice. Here is what was presented in the OP:

1. How genuinely humbly do couples pray to God about their marriage--like with all openeness and honesty before God?
This would be a perfect situation to apply this.

2. How much do we respect our spouses? From the little things (please and thank you) to genuinely listening to them and trying to understand them?
By taking seriously what our spouse is saying and committing the issue to prayer, we are showing a genuine concern and respect for them.

3. How truly honest are we with one another?
If a situation like this is handled routinely in this way....honesty is going to feel *safe*...it is only going to encourage more honestly and issues will be dealt with as a united couple...BEFORE things have an opportunity to fester and grow into bitterness.

4. How brave are we? Do we have the courage to say what's true? Do we have the courage to hear things that may be uncomfortable? Do we have the courage to try when it seems emotionally dangerous to do it?
Humility IS courageous. Truth can only thrive when there is no defensiveness.

 

[Conservativation]

Okay, whats shall we do about that?"

I hardly think telling the other person that you are going to pray about it will sort the issue long term.

 

[Conservativation]

Okay, whats shall we do about that?"

I hardly think telling the other person that you

 

[Conservativation]

Okay, whats shall we do about that?"

 

[Conservativation]

Okay, whats shall we do about that?"

I hardly think telling the other person that you are going to pray about it will sort the issue long term

 

[Conservativation]

Okay, whats shall we do about that?"

I hardly think telling the other person that you are going to pray about it will sort the issue long term. While I think thats a GREAT

 

[Conservativation]

Okay, whats shall we do about that?" WE means, well, WE...not YOU

I hardly think telling the other person that you are going to pray about it will sort the issue long term. While I think thats a GREAT response and a GREAT strategy, will it work the next 10 times they bring it up?
NOPE....folks who come to the well regularly on these things are near insatiable...thats the point.

 

[mkgal1]

Okay, whats shall we do about that?" WE means, well, WE...not YOU

I hardly think telling the other person that you are going to pray about it will sort the issue long term. While I think thats a GREAT response and a GREAT strategy, will it work the next 10 times they bring it up?
NOPE....folks who come to the well regularly on these things are near insatiable...thats the point.

NO, simply telling them you are going to pray about probably WON'T sort the issue out long term.

BUT....actually praying about it will. Seeking God earnestly for answers will. He has promised to give us those answers and is faithful to do so.

When the issue is resolved, there shouldn't BE a next time, and if there IS...there were probably things revealed the first time it was brought up, and maybe those things can be more easily spotted and recognized and all that was necessary this time would be the mention of it & they can just realize the couple slipped back into their old ways. It would be known what was necessary to turn things back around and it would be simpler this time.

 

[Conservativation]

Circular reasoning.

Sure prayer works, and can change the one doing it.
It WONT change the perception of the other person. THEY must do that.

 

[McScribe]

I think that this thread has gotten hijacked by this issue. There's been such a terror that people MIGHT get emotionally bullied that there has been almost no actual discussion of the standards themselves, just what is seen as their inevitable abuse. More than one person, mkgal1 included, have tried to bring things back to discussion of the OP only to have this whole confrontation thing brought up over and over again. Furthermore, I feel that more than one person has agreed "Unpleasantness in discussion of an issue is bad" only to insist that it is the idea of aiming for good communication, mutual respect and prayer that are being discussed as standards.

And yes, chaz brought up the idea that confrontations about someone else's prayer life are really unpleasant. I really wish that both of you would get this: this thread is about AGREEMENTS, not about one person tyrannically imposing standards on someone else. It's about a couple at some stage in their relationship finding compromise and understanding.

As I'm writing this I'm thinking that the praise reports I've put on this forum about my marriage have come with difficulty. There are times even lately when it's hard to keep trying, just because of the sense at times of being overwhelmed. Part of what has helped is raising the bar for our marriage as part of an agreement I have with my wife that is constant effort at humbling ourselves, being willing to try harder next time, praying with greater wisdom and understanding and many other things. It may seem like I'm being pat or smug or something, but I'm not. What I've been trying to do is share my own struggle with the idea that it might help someone else.

So when I came up with these standards I have been trying to share what I thought was effective for us. We've agreed that we will always bring prayer into problems that are not easily solved by something routine; we've agreed that we will always respect one another, not treat one another with any form of contempt. (even when it comes to teasing--no teasing that is really a form of insult) We've agreed that we will be honest with one another and have the courage to receive that honesty from the other person; we've agreed that we will not be an emotional island but will reach out to others and minister to them.

In other words we are trying to put what the Bible says about love into practice for one another and for ourselves, frankly. I think that this is a standard people can live up to. I don't intend to say things like "Hey, you're not praying enough" but I will say things like "Honey, I would like for us to pray about this." I think that frankly if she had to confront me on whether or not we were praying it would probably be because I wasn't holding my end up. It would probably mean that I wasn't responding to her requests for prayer, or failing to lead the children in prayer at bedtime or all of us at saying grace or whatever, roles I have already agreed to do.

 

[chaz345]

I think I've said, more than once that the standards as stated are a good thing, that should be strived for through agreement by both people. There's really not much to discuss about them on a nuts and bolts, "how do we do this" type of level since that's going to vary so greatly from couple to couple.

Maybe I shoulkd have just said the above and left the thread. But I can't do that when I see the huge majority of issues here involve one spouse being dissatisfied by how their spouse is living up to one or more of the standards in the OP and the advice is very often to take a very confrontational approach. And the real kicker is that I'd bet that in many of those cases, what meeting those standards looks like for that couple was never really discussed beforehand.