Are Our Standards Too Low?

[chaz345]

IMO, in practice, "leadership" is mostly used as a deceptively sanctified trump card

What objective facts do you base that opinion on? Obviously your own experience plays a huge part in the formation of the opinion, but what do you have that shows, in any sort of objective way, that it's the widespread, nearly every marriage, problem that you seem to think it is?

 

[sdmsanjose]

Quotes by McScribe
I'm more talking here about how a couple can work effectively together. I think that the subject of how one partner or another can be badly treated is another subject altogether.



“….the way our relationship works I'm the one who courts, she is the one who invites. I'm the one who is more likely to be objective at the end of a hard long day, she is more likely on the other hand to know when the kids just need a hug. I think that this leadership in part involves being protective, making sure that your home

and indeed your arms are a safe place where she can reveal herself without dreading being judged or ill used.”



McScribe
You did a great job of answering the topic of your thread.

I can only add that my wife and I work effectively together in crises. I am the one that gets busy trying to find ways to solve the problem and taking action. My wife prays and is better at just leaving it at the alter. When we are in crises we become a stronger team. I am so glad that my wife is the way she is because sometimes I think it is all up to me to solve the crises. That is a real heavy load.

McScribe it sounds like you and your wife have the right spirit. Thanks for such a positive post!

Stan

 

[Conservativation]

I did look at them, and even talked to my wife about them. I have to say I was deeply moved by some of the stories there. I do very much understand your point of view. I'm also touched that you had noticed the story of my wife and I in the other thread.

In one sense I disagree with you in that I believe I need to take a role of leadership in our marriage. Maybe I wouldn't advocate that universally but it works for us. Bear in mind--my wife has her own job, she spends time with friends, goes on business trips, and certainly I can attribute being a christian to my relationship with her. It's simply that the way our relationship works I'm the one who courts, she is the one who invites. I'm the one who is more likely to be objective at the end of a hard long day, she is more likely on the other hand to know when the kids just need a hug. I think that this leadership in part involves being protective, making sure that your home and indeed your arms are a safe place where she can reveal herself without dreading being judged or ill used.

I wouldn't advocate this for everyone. There are couples who frankly need some form of mediation just to talk to one another; too much has happened for them to regain trust readily on their own. There are couples where it is the woman who is abusive or neglectful; there are couples where there really IS no couple, just roomates who share cost of living and sex.

Ive known psalm for awhile. I can say that hers is not based on outreach to a group of women who have been emotionally abused (whatever that means in some cases0 its based on the very powerful assumption that men , indeed Id say ALL men, NEED some kind of rehabilitation by their spiritually, and emotionally superior wives.

its not enough to not be a dominant leadere, which is an old problem that has diminished to the point where is WAY the exception and not the rule, rather that that problem ONCE existed is dragged into the present to justify the exact opposite , full on female dominance, based on the fact that they are NOT stuck in an adolescent level (or even toddler she claims) and they they are afforded PERFECT discernment about every aspect of the man and the relationship, and MUST correct him constantly lest he become an ogre dominant abusive leader and sex addict.

I invite you to consider what Im saying, and read all of her links. its not subtle or nuanced.

 

[Conservativation]

IMO, in practice, "leadership" is mostly used as a deceptively sanctified trump card


McScribe ask Psalm why the word MOST is there. I hate to bring it up but its straight out of the J and K playbook.

 

[Psalm63]

What objective facts do you base that opinion on? Obviously your own experience plays a huge part in the formation of the opinion, but what do you have that shows, in any sort of objective way, that it's the widespread, nearly every marriage, problem that you seem to think it is?

I have quoted scientific laboratory research, Chaz.
I have quoted scripture.
I have quoted Christian men for whom I have a great deal of respect who demonstrate genuine understanding of women. I was shocked when I read Ken Nair's book. He UNDERSTANDS! I say if he can do it, any Christian man should be able to with the power of God at work within them. If they choose not to live with their wives in and UNDERSTANDING way, then their prayers will be hindered. That's not my opinion. That is a promise from God in 1 Peter 3:7.

My perception is that you would dismiss my perspective no matter how ironclad of a court case I presented. You would not agree with me if Jesus Himself told you I was right. I can't recall your treating something I posted with respect and serious consideration. I have to confess that I do make judgments and assumptions about what drives such oppositional behavior from certain male posters.

((((((shrug))))))) I don't care. BUT, IF you do that to your wife and kids, I predict there will be problems in paradise. I speak from experience.

 

[Conservativation]

Te laboratory research doesnt support a prponderance of leadership being used as a trump card. The research was totally irrelevanmt to that.
Scripture doesnt NOT speak to the prevalence or scarcity, so that too is irrlevant.

There is no argument about Peter 3:7, why thats even there is beyond me.

Nothing you can ever post can show that men, as a gender must have some remediation from women. Conversely there is nothing claiming that women need remediation from men.

There are plenty of reasons to see that we all need remediation from God.

There are NO concise, succinct supporting facts from research OR scripture that show UNIVERSALLY women have some gift of discernment that speaks into a remediation role over men. You cna point to specific events, Biblically, fine. But thats very different then, say Peter 3:7 just as an example. If Peter 3:7 were not as it is, but was contained in a story about the specific actions of a specific husband and wife, then ended by saying that man X had HIS prayers hindered by God......that would not mean the same thing as it does the way its written. Its written as universal guidance.
So, when you being to show all the events you regularly go back to in the OT, no one takes issue that THAT occured. the issue is that it is a historical recounting of an event, not a general "policy" statement for life.....such as Peter 3:7

Exegeses of the manner whereby you pluck a one off event from Gods word, and conclude that its not history, but rather guidance.....can you even imagine where that leads if you were consistent in application? It would change the entire face of Christianity to something unrecognizable.

The OT isnt like docs issues from the supreme court, whereby if it was done once, by precident its not the law of the land. But even more important there is INDEED no room for penumbral derivations like the ones you make. I invite the reading of the very last admonitions in the Bible about adding and taking away.

How that belief is supposed to screw up my home life Ive yet to figure out.

 

[chaz345]

I have quoted scientific laboratory research, Chaz.
I have quoted scripture.
I have quoted Christian men for whom I have a great deal of respect who demonstrate genuine understanding of women. I was shocked when I read Ken Nair's book. He UNDERSTANDS! I say if he can do it, any Christian man should be able to with the power of God at work within them. If they choose not to live with their wives in and UNDERSTANDING way, then their prayers will be hindered. That's not my opinion. That is a promise from God in 1 Peter 3:7.

My perception is that you would dismiss my perspective no matter how ironclad of a court case I presented. You would not agree with me if Jesus Himself told you I was right. I can't recall your treating something I posted with respect and serious consideration. I have to confess that I do make judgments and assumptions about what drives such oppositional behavior from certain male posters.

((((((shrug))))))) I don't care. BUT, IF you do that to your wife and kids, I predict there will be problems in paradise. I speak from experience.

The labratory research that you quoted says nothing at all about how widespread the problem is, just what it looks like when it does happen, which I've never denied that it does happen.

Likewise with Nair. What he talks about is valid, for the cases where the problem is what he says it is. However, unlike you, he stops far short of suggesting that nearly all troubled marriages are troubled because of the inappropriate exercise of leadership.

Is that a problem? Yes and I've never suggested otherwise. But you are going to have to come up with something else entirely if you want to me to even begin to consider that such inappropriate exercise of authority is the leading problem in troubled marriages today. Something that actually looks at the rates at which it happens.

 

[McScribe]

It sounds well and good, but some men are not protective. Instead they are selfish, and sometimes even evil (I was just reading this today about some elders in a church). One of the commenters there asked "where were the mothers?". The fact is that God commands women to protect their household. HE is quite clear about that (link) though it has been obscured by translation and tradition.

Your concern though is presented as being more about what abuses have occured than over everything that has been written scripturally about male leadership. After all if you think about it in christian history for every quaker there are a hundred crusaders; for every St. Francis thousands of christians with their hand in the cookie jar. That's simply human nature. I think you'll find that while you can easily interpret that scripture that way nevertheless men as leaders over their wives is mentioned more than once.

But what of that? The standard is not despotism but rather 'as christ loves the church'. The Christ who bathed the feet of his followers, who fed the hungry, clothed the naked, healed the sick, befriended the lonely, comforted the miserable. As I have been saying, a call to a higher standard.

You are right--there are issues that a marriage may have to deal with. It may require one partner or the other or both to stand up with courage and firmness.

I also don't see how I would be encouraging the cause of goodness towards women and wives in particular if I did not advise them that there is a high call to leadership in their lives. Do you really believe that they would just use it as a trump card? In that case is there even a point to trying to involving following Jesus in our marriages?

 

[McScribe]

Ive known psalm for awhile. I can say that hers is not based on outreach to a group of women who have been emotionally abused (whatever that means in some cases0 its based on the very powerful assumption that men , indeed Id say ALL men, NEED some kind of rehabilitation by their spiritually, and emotionally superior wives.

its not enough to not be a dominant leadere, which is an old problem that has diminished to the point where is WAY the exception and not the rule, rather that that problem ONCE existed is dragged into the present to justify the exact opposite , full on female dominance, based on the fact that they are NOT stuck in an adolescent level (or even toddler she claims) and they they are afforded PERFECT discernment about every aspect of the man and the relationship, and MUST correct him constantly lest he become an ogre dominant abusive leader and sex addict.

I invite you to consider what Im saying, and read all of her links. its not subtle or nuanced.

I guess I don't feel this same sense of correction--are you saying that that is what is common? What I hear her saying is that she's afraid that it will happen, and therefore that she is reluctant to agree that men ought to act as the head of the family. For example I don't hear that either she or any of the others who apparently agree with her point of view are trying to correct me, and I am definitely all for the idea of marriage in which the husband is the definite leader, which I am.

The female superiority regarding prayer and spiritual involvement thing I have heard before, but mostly in church, along the lines of 'how to drag your hubby to church' or 'how to get him to pray more.' Maybe I'm blind or something but I haven't seen anything that really hits me like that in particular here. What I've seen are women complaining about their particular situation from time to time.

 

[Psalm63]

I think you'll find that while you can easily interpret that scripture that way nevertheless men as leaders over their wives is mentioned more than once.

Where is it mentioned? I'd like the references so I can study that. I can't find it anywhere
except Genesis 3:16- which is a description of fallen consequences not a prescription for a garden of Eden marriage
and Esther 1:22 which is the law proclaimed by a pagan king angry that his wife (rightly IMO!) refused to parade in front of his drunken buddies wearing only her crown
and if you use Eph 5:23 as your basis, what does the wife being her husband's body mean and where is all the preaching about that? A head can't go anywhere unless its body takes it there (BTW, I believe it is an intimacy/one flesh metaphor and has nothing to do with leadership nor authority)

But what of that? The standard is not despotism but rather 'as christ loves the church'. The Christ who bathed the feet of his followers, who fed the hungry, clothed the naked, healed the sick, befriended the lonely, comforted the miserable. As I have been saying, a call to a higher standard.

Now that is the kind of talk I can support! You have got it, and that is why it is not dangerous in your hands. But over and over and OVER, I see men on here who strike me as incredibly two faced in the way that assume a mantle of "authority over" their wives. On the one hand they believe they are entitled to override their wife's will when it comes to huge life decisions and the fact that she is devastated, upset, or angry and resistant, why she's just wrong and she should be submissive. (eg. whether she gets to go to school, moving decisions, where they go to church, etc). I see these same men who adamantly believe that God gave them "authority over" their wives "put the pants on" their wives by shifting all the laying down life and sacrificing.to her corner as they bask in their position of "king of the household" whose wife is there to serve him YET when it comes to discussing responsibility for PROBLEMS in the marriage, they will argue with post upon post that the BLAME MUST be shared, or that half the time marriage problems are the wife's fault or that women sue for divorce more so the breakup of marriages is women's fault. There is NO "the buck stops here" ethic whatsoever.

IF a man wants to believe they have "authority over" that their wife in a manner that she does not have in an equal measure over him,
THEN he needs to embrace 100% responsibility, "go first" to the cross, die to self, and do what you have written about

IF a man wants to blame wives for "50 percent of the marriage problems" and "divorce is women's fault because women more often file for divorce" yadda yadda yadda
THEN he needs to respect her equal authority over him and submit to her when she expresses a deep need or desire

Either of the above can work. But mixing the two up where she has little to no authority, but is nevertheless blamed for all the problems is a divorce waiting to happen.

 

[mkgal1]

Thank you, Psalm. Now the opposition I have gotten makes a lot of sense. At least now I am beginning to understand the belief system from where it is all coming from.

 

[chaz345]

Either of the above can work. But mixing the two up where she has little to no authority, but is nevertheless blamed for all the problems is a divorce waiting to happen.

As is saying that he has little to no authority but is to be blamed for all the problems. And that's exactly what you advocate.

 

[chaz345]

Thank you, Psalm. Now the opposition I have gotten makes a lot of sense. At least now I am beginning to understand the belief system from where it is all coming from.

Not really since the belief system that she portrays exists pretty much only in her mind and in the minds of maybe a VERY few very misguided men.

 

[Conservativation]

McScribe.....read her paragraph after her second quote of yours. Do you, in your servant leadership, make ANY final decisions, or see that as your role? Can you not see her attack on you in her first paragraph. Can you not see that she isnt protecting IN CASE it happens, she assumes it is our default condition.

The problem is she sees HERSELF as THE arbitur of Gods standards. This is a similarity to what ive argued with MK, and note how she reads psalm, and they just "know" US, chaz and I, now, they KNOW we are ogres and this is where we are coming from, when in this entire thread Ive made no comments on leadership at all. YOU have been the guy on leadership.

 

[Conservativation]

Where is it mentioned? I'd like the references so I can study that. I can't find it anywhere
except Genesis 3:16- which is a description of fallen consequences not a prescription for a garden of Eden marriage
and Esther 1:22 which is the law proclaimed by a pagan king angry that his wife (rightly IMO!) refused to parade in front of his drunken buddies wearing only her crown
and if you use Eph 5:23 as your basis, what does the wife being her husband's body mean and where is all the preaching about that? A head can't go anywhere unless its body takes it there (BTW, I believe it is an intimacy/one flesh metaphor and has nothing to do with leadership nor authority)



Now that is the kind of talk I can support! You have got it, and that is why it is not dangerous in your hands. But over and over and OVER, I see men on here who strike me as incredibly two faced in the way that assume a mantle of "authority over" their wives. On the one hand they believe they are entitled to override their wife's will when it comes to huge life decisions and the fact that she is devastated, upset, or angry and resistant, why she's just wrong and she should be submissive. (eg. whether she gets to go to school, moving decisions, where they go to church, etc). I see these same men who adamantly believe that God gave them "authority over" their wives "put the pants on" their wives by shifting all the laying down life and sacrificing.to her corner as they bask in their position of "king of the household" whose wife is there to serve him YET when it comes to discussing responsibility for PROBLEMS in the marriage, they will argue with post upon post that the BLAME MUST be shared, or that half the time marriage problems are the wife's fault or that women sue for divorce more so the breakup of marriages is women's fault. There is NO "the buck stops here" ethic whatsoever.

IF a man wants to believe they have "authority over" that their wife in a manner that she does not have in an equal measure over him,
THEN he needs to embrace 100% responsibility, "go first" to the cross, die to self, and do what you have written about

IF a man wants to blame wives for "50 percent of the marriage problems" and "divorce is women's fault because women more often file for divorce" yadda yadda yadda THIS IS MADE UP FROM WHOLE CLOTH, AND SHOWS THE DANGER OF YOUR "PERFECT DISCERNMENT"....YOU CANT EVEN DISCERN WHATS BEEN CLEARLY STATED. IT HAS BEEN UNEQUIVOCALLY SAID, LIKELY HUNDREDS OF TIMES SINCE IVE KNOWN YOU, THAT THE STATISTIC ABOUT FILING IS NOT CORRELATED TO IT BEING WOMENS FAULT. YET HERE YOU ARE "DISCERNING' THAT...AND IT AINT THERE, NEVER HAS BEEN THERE NEVER HAS BEEN EVEN THOUGHT BY ME
THEN he needs to respect her equal authority over him and submit to her when she expresses a deep need or desire
HERE IS ANOTHER EXAMPLE....AUTHORITY AND A DESIRE ID THINK SHOULDNT GO TOGETHER. IMAGINE IF A MAN TOOK AUTHORITY AND DEMANDED SEX...BAD IDEA, WHATS THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THAT AND THIS "AUTHORITY" WHERE HE MUST OBEY AND MEET SOME DESIRE? THERE IS NO DIFFERENCE AND IVE NEVER ADVOCATED EITHER ONE

Either of the above can work. But mixing the two up where she has little to no authority, but is nevertheless blamed for all the problems is a divorce waiting to happen.MORE MADE UP, NEVER HAS THIS BEEN ATTACHED TO BLAMING HER FOR ALL THE PROBLEMS. AGAIN, ITS THIS VERY DEEPLY FLAWED THINKING AND REACTING TO OTHERS WORDS IN WAYS THAT ARE SO FAR AFIELD FROM ANYTHING THE OTHERS HAVE EVER INTIMATED IN ANY WAY, THAT MASSIVELY AFFIRMS THE FACT THAT THIS IDEA SOMEHOW THAT MY WIFE HAS GOD-LIKE DISCERNMENT AND CANNOT EVER BE WRONG THAT SHOULD CONCERN ANYONE. IN THIS CASE ITS NOT AUTHORITY EVEN THATS THE ISSUE, ITS THIS IDEA THAT THE WOMAN IS DIRECTLY CONNECTED TO GOD IN THE MANAGEMENT (AND I DO MEAN MANAGEMENT) OF HER HUSBAND. HERE, WHEN I RAISE THIS PSALM WILL SAY YES SHE DOES HAVE A CONNECTION WITH GOD......BUT SEE, I DIDNT SAY SHE DOESNT, I SAID SHE DOESNT HAVE THIS SUPERIOR CONNECTION WHERE SORT OF GOD AND HER ARE DISCUSSING "HEY HOWS HUBBY DOING?' AND SHE IS LITERALLY, AGAIN LITERALLY ABLE TO DISCERN AND COMPARE HER HUSB ACTIONS UTTERLY AND COMPLETELY PERFECTLY TO STANDARDS THAT GOD HAS SET. IT MEANS SHE NOT ONLY CAN SEE HIS OUTWARD ACTIONS BUT CAN PERFECTLY SEE DEEPLY INTO HIS VERY HEART AND MIND AND THEREBY KNOW EVEN THE DEEPEST MOTIVES AND THOUGHTS AND INTENTIONS, WHICH ANY REASONABLE PERSON KNOWS THAT ONLY GOD IS REALLY CAPABLE OF EVALUATING US ACCORDING TO HIS PERFECT STANDARDS.

WHAT I GUESS CAN SEEM A CERTAIN WAY (THOUGH I MUST ADMIT IVE NEVER SEEN ANYONE TAKE HER WORDS QUITE SO BENIGNLY WHETHER THEY AGREE OR DISAGREE) THIS IS JUST LAYING OUT A SCENARIO....LIKE I SAID GO FOLLOW THE LINKS, READ IT ALL, READ THESE RECENT POSTS AND SEE THAT IT IS FLAT OUT ASSUMED YOU, AS A MAN WILL SCREW UP, AND DOMINATE, ABUSE, COMMIT SEXUAL SIN, ALL OF THE ABOVE, AND NEGLECT, FAIL TO MEET NEEDS, FAIL AS A HUSBAND UNLESS YOUR WIFE MANAGES YOU. THIS NOTION IS EVEN FURTHER TO THE CONTROLLING SIDE THAN THE MOST OLD FASHIONED OVERBEARING MAN WHO EVER DEMANDED SUBMISSION. BECAUSE THOSE MEN, AS FLAWED AS THEY WERE, DIDNT CLAIM TO HAVE GOD FEEDING THEM INSIGHT INTO THE VERY SOUL AND INTENT OF THE WOMAN, THEY WERE JUST TRYIMNG TO RULE OVER THEIR OVER ACTIONS. HERE PSALM IS NOT STOPPING AT THE OVERT, BUT STATING A NEED TO CONTROL EVEN THE MOTIVES AND HEART CONDITIONS OF THE MAN, AND SHE CLAIMS TO BE ABLE TO KNOW THAT AS GOD KNOWS THAT.

ITS QUITE AMAZING. AND I ASSURE YOU MCSCRIBE, IF YOU CONTINUE TO DESCRIBE YOUR RELATIONSHIP YOU WILL RUN AFOUL OF HER...NOT IF.....WHEN.

KK

 

[McScribe]

I guess I don't feel offended by Psalm's response, Cons. I'm not being deliberately obtuse, I guess I just don't see the offense. What I'm seeing her saying is:

1. If you are head of the household then be head of the household. Take full responsibility.

2. If you don't really want to take the full responsibility, then don't, and call it egalitarianism.

3. Explain to me any spiritual basis you have for your point of view on being head of the household.

BTW, here are the scriptures for support of my views:

Wives, be subject to your own husbands, as to the Lord. For the husband is the head of the wife, as Christ also is the head of the church, He Himself being the Savior of the body. But as the church is subject to Christ, so also the wives ought to be to their husbands in everything. Husbands, love your wives, just as Christ also loved the church and gave Himself up for her, so that He might sanctify her, having cleansed her by the washing of water with the word, that He might present to Himself the church in all her glory, having no spot or wrinkle or any such thing; but that she would be holy and blameless. So husbands ought also to love their own wives as their own bodies. He who loves his own wife loves himself; for no one ever hated his own flesh, but nourishes and cherishes it, just as Christ also does the church, because we are members of His body. Ephesians 5:22-30

Now on the other hand in Galatians Paul says this: There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor free, there is no male and female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus

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?

 

[sdmsanjose]

see next post

 

[sdmsanjose]

Con post 177
WHAT I GUESS CAN SEEM A CERTAIN WAY (THOUGH I MUST ADMIT IVE NEVER SEEN ANYONE TAKE HER WORDS QUITE SO BENIGNLY WHETHER THEY AGREE OR DISAGREE) THIS IS JUST LAYING OUT A SCENARIO....LIKE I SAID GO FOLLOW THE LINKS, READ IT ALL, READ THESE RECENT POSTS AND SEE THAT IT IS FLAT OUT ASSUMED YOU, AS A MAN WILL SCREW UP, AND DOMINATE, ABUSE, COMMIT SEXUAL SIN, ALL OF THE ABOVE, AND NEGLECT, FAIL TO MEET NEEDS, FAIL AS A HUSBAND UNLESS YOUR WIFE MANAGES YOU. THIS NOTION IS EVEN FURTHER TO THE CONTROLLING SIDE THAN THE MOST OLD FASHIONED OVERBEARING MAN WHO EVER DEMANDED SUBMISSION. BECAUSE THOSE MEN, AS FLAWED AS THEY WERE, DIDNT CLAIM TO HAVE GOD FEEDING THEM INSIGHT INTO THE VERY SOUL AND INTENT OF THE WOMAN, THEY WERE JUST TRYIMNG TO RULE OVER THEIR OVER ACTIONS. HERE PSALM IS NOT STOPPING AT THE OVERT, BUT STATING A NEED TO CONTROL EVEN THE MOTIVES AND HEART CONDITIONS OF THE MAN, AND SHE CLAIMS TO BE ABLE TO KNOW THAT AS GOD KNOWS THAT.

McScribe post 79
In a way I'm sorry that this thread has not been about the ideas/standards/whatever you want to call them that I originally posted. It seems to have degenerated into a conversation about what people are worried about or afraid of.
If possible I'd like to bring things back to discussion of the OP


Sdmsanjose post 104
McScribe started this thread and has made his topic very clear. He is trying to presents standards that WILL WORK to build relationships.

It seems to me that McScribe’s topics are being derailed by people bringing up WHAT DOES NOT WORK


MKGAL Post 112
Okay....let's get back to the OP. I


McScribe post 139
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


McScribe Post 141
For a moment then I am asking that we put aside the subject of confrontational approach to talk about how to reach an understanding between a couple as to how to have such standards.


Sdmsanjose post 162
Quotes by McScribe
I'm more talking here about how a couple can work effectively together. I think that the subject of how one partner or another can be badly treated is another subject altogether

 

[chaz345]

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?

Psalm has said that she's not threatened by what you present as male leadership. But she then goes on to suggest that your view somehow quite far removed from the norm. That most men have control or authority issues. Also keep in mind that she doesn't believe male headship to be a biblical concept.

If you want a better view of where she's comming from you really should read her blogs. I don't have the addresses handy right now but I'm sure she'll provide them for you.


The bottom line is that when you strip it down to what she's really saying, when it comes to the standards in the OP, she pretty much thinks they're not possible in most cases because most men, in her opinion, aren't capable of what's required. She really believes that most men are completely wrapped up headship exercised by power,control and authority.

 

[McScribe]

Chaz, I do see that in some posts she has said that. It doesn't bother me. The standards as I've spoken of them are to me just descriptions of how my love of Jesus Christ leads me in my love for my wife and children. I wish I could present that as a platitude and say that that makes it easy. I won't say that. It's sometimes painfully difficult and hard. It's my relationship that God that relieves that. And words are inadequate to describe how that is, but picture these things:

- being so thirsty you are truly desperate and fainting for a drink--and getting that drink.

- being so tired you could weep for exhausting--and ending up in bed with hours to rest.

- being so aware of the possibility of death that it literally stares you in the face. You can feel in your gut the possibility (falling, getting stabbed in the gut, hit by a car, etc) and then you realize you are alive, and are going to live.

I truly honestly believe that a man truly in love with the Lord, involved with the Lord, able to seek Him in the midst of sin and death doesn't need to be afraid that his wife might be the most radical Germaine Greer style feminist that ever walked the Earth. That man has the Holy Spirit touching his own spirit, is led by God and is able to speak words of love and authority when involved with his woman so that she loves him and trusts him.

Maybe Psalm does feel concern that not all men are going to do this. I think that that's fair enough--frankly I don't see marriage as entitlement but as privilege. It's something to be achieved and earned, and so why not set a high bar for that?

In a way this is like any authority that is based on affection and mutual understanding; I think that the leadership demonstrated by the leader produces the degree of willingness to submit on the part of those who follow.