Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
Or 3, his wife wants to build a marriage of equal partnership, where both can contribute of their best in leadership, rather than leadership being confined to one person, while the other is prevented from contributing.If the husband leads the family not in his own interests, but based on the interests of the whole family, and the wife does not want to obey him, then there are 2 options: 1) he does this out of lust for power and then, perhaps, the wife is right; 2) he does it out of love, and his wife, out of pride, does not want to obey.
But how is this possible? It seems to me that situations often arise when someone has to give in. The Gospel describes only one occasion when Jesus Christ yielded: it was when the Blessed Virgin Mary asked Him to help with wine at a wedding. Although Jesus protested that His time had not yet come, he relented and turned water into wine.Or 3, his wife wants to build a marriage of equal partnership, where both can contribute of their best in leadership, rather than leadership being confined to one person, while the other is prevented from contributing.
I don't understand why anyone would think it is not. It's as if people can't believe two people can actually live and work together in partnership and harmony, without one controlling the other.But how is this possible?
Only if you see every situation as holding only two possibilities; what I want and what they want. And if one wins, another loses. But in fact, every situation holds many possibilities, and generally most situations can be navigated with the needs of both being met, and the values of both being respected.It seems to me that situations often arise when someone has to give in.
I do hope most husbands realise they are actually not the messiah, and God in the flesh.None of them said to Jesus Christ: now you will do what I said.
How then to behave in controversial moments? If both spouses strongly disagree with each other on a certain issue? Jesus Christ said to the apostles: if you do not agree, then you can leave, just as others left Me. But a husband and wife cannot do this, because there is a commandment to be together.I don't understand why anyone would think it is not. It's as if people can't believe two people can actually live and work together in partnership and harmony, without one controlling the other.
Here I agree that we need to look for an option where both sides win. Stephen Covey wrote in his best-selling book, The 7 Habits of Highly Effective People, that if one side always wins and the other always loses, then confrontation is inevitable, with both sides trying to make the other lose (even if I lose). This is true both in wars between states and in conflicts between people. There is a compromise option here, where both sides gain partly and lose partly, but there is an even better option when both sides only gain. We must strive to find such an option.Only if you see every situation as holding only two possibilities; what I want and what they want. And if one wins, another loses. But in fact, every situation holds many possibilities, and generally most situations can be navigated with the needs of both being met, and the values of both being respected.
It's right. Unfortunately, there are even cases where women are more spiritually developed than men. But here’s the paradox: It’s the spiritually developed women who submit to their husbands for Christ’s sake, while the less spiritual women want to lead. Such women always know better than their husbands and are also right in all cases of life and do not admit their mistakes.I do hope most husbands realise they are actually not the messiah, and God in the flesh.
It all depends on the motive. If a wife does not dare to contradict because her husband is a tyrant at home, then this is terrible. But if the wife walked with God all the time and did not dare to contradict her kind and meek husband, knowing that God was pleased with her obedience, then this is a different matter. The Apostle wrote:St. Paisios might have thought it was wonderful when a wife never dared contradict a husband. I suspect he has a rather unrealistic sense of how that was experienced by all concerned.
There's not only one right answer for decision making. But how to behave? Love one another. Not, one person automatically gets a trump card for every time the discussion gets difficult.How then to behave in controversial moments? If both spouses strongly disagree with each other on a certain issue? Jesus Christ said to the apostles: if you do not agree, then you can leave, just as others left Me. But a husband and wife cannot do this, because there is a commandment to be together.
A completely unfounded claim. And besides, leadership can be exercised in a number of ways; some of them not at all incompatible with submission. So...It’s the spiritually developed women who submit to their husbands for Christ’s sake, while the less spiritual women want to lead.
I am not at all sure that God is pleased with a wife never contradicting a husband, or believing that this is what God requires. That goes well beyond anything in Scripture.But if the wife walked with God all the time and did not dare to contradict her kind and meek husband, knowing that God was pleased with her obedience, then this is a different matter.
These are common beautiful phrases about love. Give a specific example.There's not only one right answer for decision making. But how to behave? Love one another. Not, one person automatically gets a trump card for every time the discussion gets difficult.
Of course, the best type of leadership is the ability to find options every time that would give a win to both sides. But this is not always possible.A completely unfounded claim. And besides, leadership can be exercised in a number of ways; some of them not at all incompatible with submission. So...
It doesn't say everything, щтдн that which has no sin. Jesus Christ said that He is humble because He obeys the Heavenly Father. He also calls us to be humble, that is, obedient. When a person obeys an elder, he shows humility, which pleases God, and when he does not obey, he shows pride. God said that people should not eat from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, but Eve showed pride and decided that she could disobey, because she saw with her own eyes that the fruit was pleasant to look at, looked tasty and gave knowledge. “Why obey God?” - thinks Eve. This is pride. Adam followed her - and this is also pride. But Jesus obeyed the Heavenly Father - and showed humility.I am not at all sure that God is pleased with a wife never contradicting a husband, or believing that this is what God requires. That goes well beyond anything in Scripture.
Of a vague hypothetical? I think your expectation is a bit unreasonable, there.These are common beautiful phrases about love. Give a specific example.
Hmm. I think there's some truth to that, and also there are some problems with that, if it is taken as an absolute without any nuance. Self love is not always wrong, and submission is not always healthy.At the same time, the holy fathers of the Orthodox Church write that there is a root of sinful passions - self-love, from which branches grow - sinful passions (they are divided into 7-8 divisions: gluttony, lustful passion, anger, love of money, sadness, despondency, vanity and pride ). And these branches are cut off from the root when a person subordinates his will to another, an elder: children to their parents, the wife to her husband, the husband to his presbyter, etc.
Obedience and humility are related, but not the same thing. It's possible to be humble but not obedient. It's also possible to be obedient but not humble.He also calls us to be humble, that is, obedient.
This is complete speculation. The text says nothing like this.If it were the other way around, then Joseph would have been forced to obey the Virgin Mary, but He wanted her to show humility and obey Joseph.
Marriage as a partnership of equals is not "complete discord."... and complete discord ensues.
You give me beautiful words about love, and I give you specific sad examples. Yes, if everyone always acted out of love, then there would be no need for commandments. The commandments are given because people, even Christians, are not inclined to love God and their neighbor and should have beacons that show how much they are going astray.Of a vague hypothetical? I think your expectation is a bit unreasonable, there.
Hmm. I think there's some truth to that, and also there are some problems with that, if it is taken as an absolute without any nuance. Self love is not always wrong, and submission is not always healthy.
Obedience and humility are related, but not the same thing. It's possible to be humble but not obedient. It's also possible to be obedient but not humble.
This is complete speculation. The text says nothing like this.
Marriage as a partnership of equals is not "complete discord."
But you speak as if this is the only alternative to one-sided submission. It is not. It is quite possible to have a partnership of equals in which this kind of behaviour never takes place.Wives not only are not afraid, not only do they not obey, but they are already intimidating their husbands in public, without being ashamed of anyone.
This is complete speculation. The text says nothing like this.
Marriage as a partnership of equals is not "complete discord."
I didn't see anything in your post about the actual dynamic of headship/submission and what that means for roles, decision making, power sharing (or not) etc.Regarding roles, ....
In some ways, it does. Equality is stressed, mutuality is stressed, reciprocity is stressed.But the text does not say marriage is a "partnership of equals" either.
Is that it? Is that what headship means to you; "setting the tone"? What does that mean in practical terms?But the text does still speak of headship, and the husband is seen to have a role of setting the tone for the family.
Because I ground my understanding of the marriage dynamic in submitting to one another.I don't see how you are coming to this notion of a "partnership of equals" in the text.
You keep talking about some kind of alternative that does not contradict Holy Scripture, but you haven’t given a single example.But you speak as if this is the only alternative to one-sided submission. It is not. It is quite possible to have a partnership of equals in which this kind of behaviour never takes place.
I don't know whom I could point to that you would know. I mean, my family is like that, and most Christian families I know are like that, but it's not like you know us. And as for public figures, who knows how happy (or equal) they really are in private?You keep talking about some kind of alternative that does not contradict Holy Scripture, but you haven’t given a single example.
Please give an example of a real-life family that:
1) the family must be Christian;
2) the family should be happy in their relationships with each other;
3) so that there is no hierarchy in it, there is no main or senior person.
Your family, where you grew up or where you married?I don't know whom I could point to that you would know. I mean, my family is like that, and most Christian families I know are like that, but it's not like you know us. And as for public figures, who knows how happy (or equal) they really are in private?
Oh, not growing up. That was neither particularly Christian, nor particularly happy!Your family, where you grew up or where you married?
Is this family Christian, happy and without hierarchy?
And what do you do if, for example, you and your husband have different wishes regarding spending a day off?Oh, not growing up. That was neither particularly Christian, nor particularly happy!
No, I meant my family now. Christian, happy, and without hierarchy.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?