Marilyn to John:
What I do know with certainty is this. When I married, I was scared of emotional intimacy. I was frightened that I would lose my husband if he really knew who I was. So, I used periodic bursts of disrespect to push him away whenever circumstances drew us closer. I read L&R and became convicted that the disrespectful behavior needed to stop. It did, and the intimacy came flooding in. That then created a desire for intimacy with God. Based on the response in the marketplace to L&R, I believe that my experiences reflect those of literally hundreds of thousands of other couples.
If you do pick up a copy of Love and Respect, I ask one thing of you. Please read the entire book. The first third of the book focuses on how to stop the “crazy cycle” in which spouses are caught up in negatively reacting to each other. It is the last third that introduces the Rewarded Cycle, arguing that all husbands and wives should be practicing Love and Respect principles first and foremost out of obedience toward Christ. The book has been criticized for its front end. I don’t think that is fair. You have to meet people where they are, not where you want them to be. And, where most people are right now is “I have a right to…..” That’s where I was when I first read L&R.
John to Marilyn:
You describe very well the inner connection between marriage and our relationship with God. Marriage in this sense is truly a means of grace. As such, it should be emphasized, marriage can never be about coercion, and is not about mutuality, either, but about grace-alone unconditional love. Here are two quotes from the last part of Sacred Marriage:
“Christianity is one of those rare religions which marries internal reality with outward obedience.”
“A spiritually alive marriage will remain a marriage of two individuals in pursuit of a common vision outside themselves.”
Taken together, the quotes express what one might call a compegal synthesis.
Marilyn to John:
Longer than you may have time to read, sorry! But this is a topic I feel passionately about! I had hoped to have conversations about topics like the above on Complegalitarian, but too many people are in attack mode. I’ve ended up there myself, upon occasion.
John to Marilyn:
I enjoyed reading every line of your sensitive and carefully thought-out reflections!
I agree with you that [Complegalitarian blog] is not a safe place so long as its threads abound in attack mode comments. Nevertheless, in line with “Love hopes all things, endures all things, and believes all things,” I want to believe that people will not be oblivious to what this conversation has been about, and why the tone in which we have written is connatural to the content we express.
General musings ahead…
When I married, I was scared of emotional intimacy. I was frightened that I would lose my husband if he really knew who I was. So, I used periodic bursts of disrespect to push him away whenever circumstances drew us closer.
This helps me understand a little bit more about why this book affected you (positively) so much.
What you shared is not at all reflective of my experience. No wonder we have such different reactions.
Furthermore, every book I’d read on marriage prior to my marriage, and the books I read during my marriage, emphasized the need for wives to respect husbands. So respect was drilled into me from the get go and before the get go.
One of the BIGGEST problems for me was that respect seemed to include the idea of outwardly agreeing with the man’s decision, whether you internally agreed or not. THis also went along with my husbands definition fo respect. As long as I had thoughts and opinions of my own, he felt disrespected. As long as I had a personality that differed from his, he felt disrespected.
NOTHING I could do, short of literal worship, was enough to make him feel respected. I am not being dramatic, but serious, when I say that.
I have a hard time with the word respect when it comes from a comp perspective, even now, because of my experiences. Call it a knee-jerk reaction, or simply post-traumatic stress disorder…? I’m not sure what it is, but when I hear that women must take great care to respect their men (in a way that is not reciprocal), I flinch.
I guess I would say that the concept of women respecting men should always be carefully qualified.
As an egal, I am all for respecting others. The concept of respect itself does not bother me, but actually deeply resonates with me. In my abusive marriage, I was terribly disrespected. I can say with vigor that respect is vitally important in a relationship!
We all bear God’s image inside of us, therefore we all should be treated with love and respect.
Also, I am all for seeing men as different from women, in that I affirm that our hormonal make-up *is* different and, in many general ways, causes us to see the world (and eachother) through a lens that is unique to our gender.
However, it has been my experience, not just in an abusive marriage but having grown up and then been in ministry in a comp world, that when teachings about women-respecting-men (in a non-reciprocal way) abound, women are NOT viewed as creatures worthy of the same level of respect that men recieve.
You mentioned (and I loved it, and laughed/groaned at the truth of it) about the tendancy for comp women all being forced into the same Myers-Brigg personality type, regardles of their *actual* personality type.
It has been my experience in a comp church world that the female voice is only heard when it comes from that soft-spoken meek place. (And is that actually true Biblical “respect,” or is that a woman putting on an act because the males in the church world are too arrogant [in great part due to the teaching they themselves were reared on] to hear women unless the women appear subserviant enough)?
To be a strong woman is to be a Jezebel. To be a strong man is to be a David. Teachings that emphasize that men need respect and women need (an emotional-ish) love tend to reinforce those views, in my experience, not challenge them.
I think that marriages would greatly benefit from learning how to relate in ways that are respectful and loving. Absolutely!
I think that this sort of teaching would help meet the needs for each gender, WITHOUT crossing the line into the danger zones of seeing women as not needing respect.
(I would also love to see a response to some questions I asked earlier about Eggerich’s view that a man’s drive to protect his wife through financial provision is what “proves” his authority over his wife—if and/or when you get the time).
With Warmth,
Molly
Marilyn,
I am glad that L&R was a effective tool for your personal growth in becoming what God wants for you.
PS. I agree, Don. I want to reiterate, Marilyn, how much I appreciated hearing more about your background. It really helps me understand more about why you found L&R so pivitol (pivatol? pivetal? Urgh)…
Warmly,
Molly
pivotal!
LOL!
"I am glad that L&R was a effective tool for your personal growth in becoming what God wants for you."
I wish to second or third that statement. It is great to hear when a book a believer writes helps someone better their lives.
Hi Molly,
Thanks for your kind words! I'm so appreciative of your gracious spirit and gentle writing.
Molly, my heart goes out to you. You write, “NOTHING I could do, short of literal worship, was enough to make him feel respected. I am not being dramatic, but serious, when I say that.” That’s not the way it’s supposed to be, is it? I know that my response to the L&R message doesn’t reflect that of the women who most frequently comment on this blog. I’m wondering if in some sense, I’ve erred by not repeatedly emphasizing the fact that Emerson directs L&R towards spouses whom he labels as “good-willed.” Here, he is referring to I Corinthians 7:33-34, where Paul talks about the fact that a married couple has less time for doing the Lord’s work because the husband is concerned about “how he may please his wife” (v. 33) and the wife is concerned about “how she may please her husband” (v. 34).
Several women who are active in our blogging community have self-identified as victims of truly pathological abuse. It is not these spouses to whom Emerson writes. While he cautions spouses in typical “good-willed” marriages to not assume the worst about each other and to forbear, he is also explicit about the need for other spouses to protect themselves. I think I have been remiss in not emphasizing this point much earlier and much more frequently. I worry that I’ve poured salt on fresh wounds. That is not my intent. Rather, my intent to represent the experiences of the typical couple. I hope this caution helps put the L&R message in proper perspective. I agree with your statement that there needs to be qualification.
On a slightly different topic, I'm also wondering if our experiences with the earlier comp literature, per se, are really all that different? In high school, I was taught a lot about submission. The word respect was used, too, but primarily as a synonym for submission. Submission meant that I wasn't to express an opinion that differed from that of my future husband. Submission meant that I was to subsume my will to that of my future husband. Submission meant that work outside the home was prohibited per Titus 2:5b. Respect was just another word for all of the above. A good summary of what I was taught as a child is captured by a diagram from an old Bill Gothard seminar – the husband is the hammer, the wife is a cutting tool, and the child is an uncut stone. The hammer strikes the cutting tool, the cutting tool chips away at the stone, and after much labor, a gem is eventually produced. What I took away from this is that submission/respect meant I would spend my life as a hypocrite (because I knew that I wouldn't always agree with my husband) and a doormat (because I had no autonomy). From what you’ve written in the past of your hard comp background, it sounds as if you were exposed to similar teachings.
When I read L&R, I realized that what I had been taught was not true Biblical respect.
Most important, respect does not mean that my identity is subsumed into that of my husband. Rather, I am valued precisely for what I bring to our marriage. Emerson analogizes marriage to a corporate board. My husband sees himself as the one who ‘chairs’ the relationship. Perhaps because of my business background and knowledge of how boards function, I’m a huge fan of this analogy. (Note: it goes without saying that any organizational analogy fails to fully capture the one-flesh unity that should characterize Christian marriage. And, it’s also worth pointing out that Emerson is analogizing marriage to the relationship between the CEO and the board, not the org chart relationship between the CEO and the vice presidents.) A CEO/Chair selects board members, values their input, and esteems them because of their wisdom and skill. Similarly, my husband esteems me for what I bring to the table! A well-functioning board will draw out the distinctive competencies of the various members and will typically be in agreement as to how best to execute the organization’s mission. But, in the event of a difference, there is deference to the CEO. This deference is not rooted in the fact that the CEO is any way superior to the board. In fact, some of the board members may be more accomplished than the CEO with respect to a particular aspect of the organization’s function. Rather, when the board is at odds with the CEO, there is deference to the CEO because in the final analysis, it is the CEO who has the responsibility.
This is what respect means to me. I am to honor my husband for his desire to fulfill his responsibility to provide for and protect me and our children. In the event of a difference between us, I am to defer to his authority, which has been given to him to carry out his responsibilities. This does not frighten me. I am married to a sinner. But that sinner is also a man who has the basic good will towards me that Paul writes of in I Corinthians 7. He is concerned about “how he may please his wife.” Acknowledging that I understand his sense of responsibility and his need for authority to carry out those responsibilities means that my input and opinions are no longer a threat to him. As a result, he is open to me and values my wisdom and skill.
Marilyn,
Thanks for sharing your thoughts and experiences!
Molly
On p.49 of L&R in the section "RESPECT IS A MAN'S DEEPEST VALUE" he writes:
In one nat'l study, 400 men were given a choice between going thru 2 different negative experiences:
a)to be left alone and unloved in the world
b)to feel inadequate and disrespected by everyone
74% said they would prefer being unloved, that respect was more important to them.
What I am saying is this may well be true; but what about the 26% that said love was more important?
This is one reason I see it as useful to make symmetric the recommendations of Eggerichs and make them individualized, contra limiting the recommendations based on a supposed gender-specificity.
Yes, it might easily be true that MOST men want respect more, I know it is a key to my heart, for example. But that is just a generalization.
So my overall take is that Eggerichs has some good insights, and the way to get the most from them is to make them symmetric as a starting discussion point and individualize them.
IMO Things like respect versus love is an English American value system. Just another reason why we cannot use American (or any nation’s) polls from which to create a hard line doctrine .
Are American men disappointed that the greatest thing that can be said of God, is that God is Love. Within God’s pure holy Love is contained all other aspects of justice, mercy, grace, forgiveness and perhaps even respect.
Hi Don,
I hear you! I believe that comps are prone to ignoring personality differences. The result can be that people are put into boxes. On the other hand, I also believe that egals are prone to ignoring gender differences. The result can be a lack of boundaries.
This is an area where I really think we can learn from each other. I’ll try to give this some more thought and perhaps post something longer in the near future, to begin a conversation.
Hi Believer333,
I think we’re in agreement. There is an important distinction to be made between doctrine and practical application. God’s Word on marriage is found in texts like Ephesians 5. We have different theories about what the text means. In addition, sociological research is merely one piece of evidence that is useful to us as we ponder how to apply the text in the contemporary context. I.e., contemporary applications are not to be confused with doctrine!
“I hear you! I believe that comps are prone to ignoring personality differences. The result can be that people are put into boxes. On the other hand, I also believe that egals are prone to ignoring gender differences. The result can be a lack of boundaries. “
Sounds workable.
I was thinking this morning about the poll where more men stated they’d rather have love than respect. The poll is worthwhile because it tells us where many men’s heads are IF we can properly interpret what it means. I suspect it means that the average American man does not understand what real love is or is about. I suspect that the average American man equates love with emotions and physical relations with women. And with that mindset, it is a reasonable conclusion to say respect is better, but one doesn’t need marriage or emotional appreciations (lust?), especially if one had to choose between them.
The question becomes confusing for women, who also deeply desire respect (honor, appreciation, recognition). More women today realize they can get along in life without marriage, but what they sometimes miss more than the relationship is not having a child. So IF one associates love with sensual and emotional connotations, the question becomes quite different for men and women.
But I see the real problem as being a true understanding of the Scriptural meaning of love. In Greek the meaning Americans attaché to is from eros, erotic love. But the Bible doesn’t talk about that, rather speaks of phileo (friendship) and agape (sacrificial, spiritual, self giving).
So in the end all, such a poll only confuses the real issues. :^)
http://www.joelandkathy.com/boards/viewtopic.php?t=956
Interesting…
Review of Love and Respect
By Joel Davidson (Davison?)
co-author of
Man of Her Dreams, Woman of His
Joel was an abusive husband, so his perspective here is interesting. He says,
The premise is that my greatest need as a man is to have unconditional respect from my wife. I do not believe that for a second. My greatest need as a man, (I believe), is for me to learn what it means to lay my life down for my wife and love her as Christ loves the church.
Hi Molly,
I couldn't agree with you more that God's command to a husband is to love his wife as Christ loves the Church! In the context his marriage, the focus of a husband's effort is to be on loving his wife, not on having his own needs met. That is also the L&R message to husbands. So, aren't we in agreement here?
Hi Believer333,
I see your comment as pointing to the issue that any good gift from God – even our spouse and a strong marriage – can become an idol. And, we’re often blind to our own idols. It’s so difficult to hold what we have been given loosely. One of the potential benefits to the dialogue here is that if we’re open to learning from each other, we’ll gain a deeper awareness of our vulnerabilities.
“Hi Believer333,
I see your comment as pointing to the issue that any good gift from God – even our spouse and a strong marriage – can become an idol. And, we’re often blind to our own idols. It’s so difficult to hold what we have been given loosely. One of the potential benefits to the dialogue here is that if we’re open to learning from each other, we’ll gain a deeper awareness of our vulnerabilities.”
Can you hear the applause? \o/\o/\o/\o/
My cats (very intuitive bunch) are meowing, the birds are singing (I feed a flock in the backyard), the neighbors dog is “barunking” (great dane bark), and I’m smiling in broad agreement.
Holding what we have been given loosely is probably one of the most difficult tasks for an American to do. Yet if we can do it to some degree we will tend to not be as offended when others try to take it, demean it, or simply not appreciate it.
As we are open to learning from each other, we may also gain a deeper appreciation of what others have.
Hi Believer333,
Agreed!
Our interchange brought to mind one of the most moving sermons I’ve ever heard. The topic was holding things loosely, the text was Job, and the young Calvin seminarian spoke against the backdrop of the tragic accidental death of her first husband.
Now that my husband and I no longer attend an egal church, I guess I’ll have to call that sermon a testimony. How’s that for a comp-egal synthesis?
Hi, Marilynn. What I read sounded to me like Joel was picking up on what an *abusive man* hears when he is taught that a husband’s number one need is respect.
I know that the teaching of this book did not help my marriage when it was abusive. That’s not to say that the book hasn’t been helpful to couples, but it wasn’t helpful for me w/ the dynamic of abusive behavior thrown in the mix.
I will say, though, in fairness to your post above with it’s request for people to read the entire book instead of just the first half, that I think Joel only read the first half before penning his words! lol…
Molly, your post reminded me of my diving mask that has specially tinted lenses in order to pick up colors that our eyes cannot see as we go deeper than the top 10-15 ft. The fish who live there can see all the colors, but our eyes which are normally influenced by the sun, see less and less color without the sun. Everything turns green , even blood. My finger got punctured by something I shouldn’t have been touching once, and it was eerie to see green stuff seeping out. :^)
At any rate when one has not lived with abuse, they can be desensitized to it. They don’t see the warning signs. They don’t sense its approach. They will ‘color’ the picture as if it were not there, because to them it is not. In the opposite vein those who have lived in abuse have difficulty seeing the comfortability of a moderate hierarchy in which there is no obvious abuse. There eyes have been ultra sensitized and they cannot unsee what they see.
Its not a perfect analogy, but there is some truth to it I think.
One can also be hypersensitized and desensitized by trauma. In the first case, you detect it when it is not there, just possible precursors, and in the latter you do not detect it when it is there.
Does the name Pavlov ring a bell? A dog will salivate to a bell without and food given when it is trained that a bell is rung before food is given.
I am reading the L&R Book. I am past the 1st third, explaining the Crazy cycle and into the section on the Energizing cycle. It is clear he wants to help people have better marriages.
I did notice a lot that he refers to the audience as a man of honor or a woman of goodwill. I think this is important, to encourage people to try what he is suggesting in the midst of the pain. He also gives examples where, as he writes, someone "gets it". The only thing that threw me was that sometimes he slips in a hierarchical phrase, when it did not seem needed. But perhaps that was the way it was phrased to him.
There is a lot that is very helpful in the book. What he calls the Crazy cycle is something that happens a lot I am sure. I think it would be better accepted if he would identify the Crazy cycle as A possibility rather than THE possibility. After all, he gives results that say 76% of men want respect more than love (of 400 tested). And other places he mentions that the dynamic in a marriage may be reversed from what he is saying. But then he goes back to teaching it as THE dynamic. Perhaps this is his simplification.
On p. 147, he says: "Remember, the husband is the Christ figure; the woman is the church figure." It is statements like this that cause me a LOT of concern, as that is NOT what Eph 5 says at all. This statement reminds me of what Catholics claim about the pope, that he is the (supposed) vicar of Christ. Triple GACK! The husband is NOT the Christ figure in a marriage! Yikes!
How can he be so helpful in some ways, yet get it so wrong in other ways?
Hi Don,
Could you please expand on your comment? I’m not sure I understand the point you’re making. I thought egals and comps were in agreement that in Ephesians 5, Paul says that the relationship between husband and wife is to reflect the relationship between Christ and the Church. (I.e., in marriage, the husband is the Christ figure and the wife is the Church figure.)
I thought that what we disagreed about was whether Christ’s authority was scoped in or out of these Ephesians 5 references. I now hear you saying that our disagreement is more fundamental. Have I understood you correctly?
Here is how I see it.
No one who is only human can POSSIBLY be a Christ figure, as Christ was both human and God. IMO, to think such is idolatry and God is an idol smasher. I am sure you agree that anything that is not God can be an idol.
Paul is not writing that the husband is a Christ figure, he is writing to overturn Aristotle’s idea that the husband is (sole) boss of the family. So he does a mapping, pointing to Christ as servant.
If you recall, God was said to be the husband to Israel, his wife, in the OT, even so far as the prophets saying God divorced Israel and separated from Judah for a time (but did not divorce her). This is because the Mosaic covenant(s) are like a marriage covenant, in that both are covenants, so the mapping can be done on at least that level. But the prophets and Paul take it further, pointing out how God/Christ loved/loves and served/serves their wives/wife.
So Paul tells husbands to go and do likewise, serve your wives. Paul is pointing out that serving is NOT a place of less honor (as the culture taught but Paul points out that if God can do it, so can you), rather it is a normal action of a believer (as Jesus also taught); but this turns the husband’s role upside down.
But to love and serve AS Christ loves and serves does NOT warrant taking the mapping further than written. People DO take the mapping further, but I can try to encourage them not to do so. We are warned not to add nor subtract from God’s word.
MARILYN: Several women who are active in our blogging community have self-identified as victims of truly pathological abuse. It is not these spouses to whom Emerson writes. While he cautions spouses in typical “good-willed” marriages to not assume the worst about each other and to forbear, he is also explicit about the need for other spouses to protect themselves. I think I have been remiss in not emphasizing this point much earlier and much more frequently. I worry that I’ve poured salt on fresh wounds. That is not my intent. Rather, my intent to represent the experiences of the typical couple. I hope this caution helps put the L&R message in proper perspective.
Interesting that you think the “typical” marriage is “basically good”. Are you sure that belief does not come out of your advanced training in social science rather than from the Bible? Marilyn, the divorce rate is very high among “christians” and that rate is even higher among denoms which are the most vocally comp.
I disagree that “typical marriages” can be classified as “basically good”, and their members as “good willed”, etc. In the last days, abusiveness will increase and “family love” will be absent and I believe we are in those days which Paul speaks of here:
“But mark this: There will be terrible times in the last days. People will be lovers of themselves, lovers of money, boastful, proud, abusive, disobedient to their parents, ungrateful, unholy, without love, unforgiving, slanderous, without self-control, brutal, not lovers of the good, treacherous, rash, conceited, lovers of pleasure rather than lovers of God— having a form of godliness but denying its power. Have nothing to do with such people. They are the kind who worm their way into homes and gain control over gullible women, who are loaded down with sins and are swayed by all kinds of evil desires, always learning but never able to come to a knowledge of the truth.” 2 Timothy 3:1-6
That “without love” in there is astorge, and it means lack of “family love”. These perps have “a form of godliness” Marilyn, but “deny its power”. I say this is the root of the high divorce rate.
Molly, I read that book review by Joel. That was a breath of fresh air! Do men really want a wife walking around on egg shells performing a “respect” act? or do they want to be Christlike men of character, laying down their lives in sacrificial agape love in a way that actually earns respect?
Hi Gem,
You write: “Do men really want a wife walking around on egg shells performing a ‘respect’ act?”
Gem, it would really help me if you would explain to me what about the L&R teaching has led you to conclude that wives are left feeling as if they are walking on egg shells around their husbands.
I ask this because I know this is an important issue to you. You’ve made statements very similar to this before. I’m not following your point because my takeaway from the book was exactly the opposite! Emerson points out that many wives do feel this way, but ONLY when their husbands are failing to love them as Christ loves the church.
He then presents his theory: application of Christ-like love occurs when a husband reaches out toward his wife in a way that fosters closeness, openness, understanding, and peacemaking etc.
His message to husbands is not that husbands are to expect respect from their wives. Rather, it is that husbands are to obey God’s command to love their wives.
FWIW, I took a look at Davisson’s review. It helped me to better understand our differences. He writes: “Jesus gave his very life for his ‘bride’ and we respond and offer respect to him IN RESPONSE to the sacrifice he made.” (The emphasis is Davisson’s, not mine.) In one sense, I agree.
But, in another very profound sense, I disagree. I bow my knee not because of God’s performance, but because of Who He is. He is Sovereign. He is the Creator, and I am the creature. My respect for God is not to be contingent on my personal perception of whether God is performing as I think He should.
In that same review, Davisson goes on to write, “THE GOAL IS A HAPPY MARRIAGE!” [Again, the emphasis is Davisson’s, not mine.] Now, that’s consistent with Davisson’s earlier statement. It’s all about me. I don’t show respect unless I get what I want, because the goal is to make me happy. With that statement, I see Davisson encouraging idolatry.
Gem, we disagree about the interpretation of Ephesians 5:33, but on lots of other issues I see huge areas of agreement between us. Furthermore, I honor your commitment to an extremely difficult marriage and affirm your need to protect yourself in a difficult situation.
P.S. Consistent with Molly’s earlier admonishment to include appropriate qualification of these teachings, let me go on to say that I am not called upon to respect my husband’s sinful behavior. Nor am I called to submit to sin.
On the man often needing respect, I think Eggerichs has an insight where it is worth wives trying to be more aware when their words can seem disrespectful and trying to show respect when possible. This is an awareness issue and I am glad he discusses it.
I do not see him recommending fawning behavior. But for a wife to realize that her words MIGHT have a dimension that she is not aware of and that as she becomes aware of can pay big dividends in many cases.
But, in another very profound sense, I disagree. I bow my knee not because of God’s performance, but because of Who He is. He is Sovereign. He is the Creator, and I am the creature. My respect for God is not to be contingent on my personal perception of whether God is performing as I think He should.
That sounds like husband idolatry to me, Marilyn. And I have BEEN THERE AND DONE THAT! My husband complains that I “used to be respectful”. I DID WHAT EGGERICH TEACHES FOR 22 YEARS, Marilyn! And it wasn’t even an “act”. I really put him on a pedestal, thought he was godly, moved around the country and the world 25 times following his dreams, tried to encourage him through multiple job losses, kept my mouth shut when the income was down to 24K with 10 mouths to feed. Tried to ask very sweetly for heat when the house was too cold and the baby was chronically ill….
Done “one way”, its folly and takes a marriage nowhere good!
These days, I’m good and contentious and I insist our needs be met. In fact, a lot of times I don’t even ask, I just go get what we need and then ignore his judgments about it.
Another way to see it is that we are all constrained by energy. Eggerichs makes a good point that a husband being unloving can drain energy from her and a wife being disrespecting can drain energy from him. But the flip side is that by being loving/respecting a spouse can GIVE energy to the other. And assuming that other spouse is good-willed, that is, basically trying to act in faith yet admitting they sin, then the spouse giving energy might be surprised at the results in a good way.
I will repeat to you Marilyn that I was trying to “do my own homework”. I was trying to unilaterally find things which would help an extremely painful/unsatisfactory marriage with a very stubborn husband who did not want to see that he was even any part of the problem. I DID NOT READ the part about what husbands are supposed to do. Reading things like that is very upsetting to me because I don’t get any of it from mine (As I pointed out in an earlier thread, Gary Thomas’s book Sacred Marriage upset me for the same reason)
But Thomas at least strikes me as BIBLICAL, while I see Eggerish as whitewashed social science or psychology with one verse taken out of context and a huge tower of Babel built on it.
I liked what Joel said about phobeo, Marilyn. Joel sees that. What’s wrong with Eggerich? Doesn’t he have a concordance? Joel made an observation about phobeo which I hadn’t noticed. It is never once in any other scripture used positively when referring to a horizontal relationship. Hmmm.
Ephesians 5:33 Wives PHOBEO your husbands. In almost every occurance of PHOBEO/PHOBOS it is translated “fear” and “be afraid”. Among the definitions of phobeo in any of the lexicons at Tufts” respect/reverence” is not listed.
Translating the word “reverence” exclusively when it comes to marriage and the H/W relationship is not doing wives OR husbands any favors IMO.
The results:
1- misleads christian women en masse into a destructive form of “husband idolatry”
2- binds up a burden too heavy to bear on the wives of disobedient (abusive) husbands
3- robs women of their calling to be help MEET
DON: a husband being unloving can drain energy from her
you got that right!
I saw this on a patriarchal blog yesterday. Another annoying description of something I never got (((((((sigh))))))) (DO men really exist like this?)
Gem,
There’s so much we agree about. I want to take a minute to emphasize that, followed by silence as I listen to you interact with others.
We agree that God calls husbands to love their wives as Christ loves the Church. We agree that wives are not called to submit to abuse. We agree that wives are not called to respect behavior that is not worthy of respect. And, it goes without saying that what you have experienced is not the way it’s supposed to be. I believe that we agree about much, much more than we disagree.
Gem, it saddens me to know that you’ve been married for so long, but have never experienced your husband’s love.
and, Marilyn, I think we agree that men and women are different.
Sometimes the way I hear egals sounds to me as though they are wanting OUT of the unique responsibility laid upon them based on their gender. Course some comps give a lot of lip service to “husbands love your wife” and there really is no love: very sad indeed… But not a surprise, really. Jesus said: Because of the increase of wickedness, the love of most will grow cold, Matt 12:12
Don’t feel sorry for me, Marilyn. I FEEL GOD’S LOVE INTENSELY! I don’t believe I would have the relationship with HIM which I have if my marriage was filling my cup.
And I hope you don’t think I’m upset with you. I’m not. I’m very glad that YOUR husband DOES his homework and that you have a loving, successful marriage. (I must confess- as much as I have ranted here- that I did buy my own engaged daughter a copy of your favorite book because she requested it AND I gave it to her without comment. Her fiance sure seems like he will be the type to do his own homework too so I didn’t think it will be a manual for enabling in their case. Although I do dearly wish it was beside Dr. Phil in the secular self-help section instead of in Sunday schools as if it is “doctrinally correct”)
Gem,
I can’t get that link to work, the patriarchal blog link.
gem,
I really resonate with much of what you share, because I think we have a similar situation. No matter what I did, and boy, did I ever try aaaaall the popular marriage (comp) books advice, was my husband ever pleased.
So the Eggerich-style respect teaching REALLY bothers me… Is it because his teaching is flat out wrong, or because it was just wrong for my situation? That’s what I don’t know with certainty.
I am currently trying to UNlearn a lot of the stuff I learned about “respect”…such as, I am working on speaking to my husband as I would speak to any another adult, instead of speaking to him in a soft subdued child-like voice.
Why did I start speaking to my husband that way? Well, in order to make sure he feels respected, in order to keep him from feeling challenged, in order to keep him from getting angry… I didn’t even realize I was doing it…it took others to point out to me that my whole countenance changed when I was talking to my husband vs. when I was talking to others.
My husband needs to be respected because he is a human made in God’s image, not because he is a man. And in respecting him, I need to be able to respect myself. I am just discovering this. (Gar).
When you are married to someone who is sometimes abusive, you find that in order for them to feel respected, YOU have to be disrespected. You don’t notice that at first…you are too busy trying to make sure you are doing your part, trying to do whatever it takes for THEM to feel respected…
You don’t notice, until it’s far too late, that in the process, you have lost all self-respect…and that no matter how low you go, it seems like it’s never enough for them. It’s like they have an internal respect deficit, and they draw a feeling of respect by sucking it out of you. It’s weird. It would be interesting to study from afar, says this armchair psychologist, but it’s hell to live.
Eggerich’s teaching may not be harmful in a marriage with two healthy spouses. ? I’m going to take Marilyn’s word for her experience and agree that it seems to have been very beneficial for her marriage.
I am glad, Marilyn.
All I know is that it’s the kind of thing that was poisonous for mine. As gem said, and as proved true for me, it was a manual for enabling, not for blessing. 
FWIIW, I think Eggerichs has a lot of good ideas, but when it adds in male hierarchy into the mix, that is when a lot depends on the maturity of the husband.
If a wife is told she cannot say NO (and have it stick), this is a basic boundary violation; and if she is taught that saying NO is a sin, when her husband says YES (or vice versa) she is being hung out to dry by the teachers. Such should never be, it can be totally crazy making, as posters here testify.
Mara,
Sorry, Let me try that again. Here is the link longhand:
http://solofemininity.blogs.com/posts/2008/10/sometimes-when-i-speak-to-women-about-the-issues-surrounding-feminism-and-biblical-femininity-i-receive-questions-asking-who.html
Molly,
I so admire you. You really have such a gentle way! When I came out of the fog, I did not handle things so graciously as you. And it sure is a very good thing my husband did not read L & R. You mentioned that you read "Man of Her Dreams, Woman of His" My husband read that and filtered out everything except:
“The wife does not get to tell her husband ‘No!’ She does not have authority over her body. If he wants it, he gets it! The husband does not get to say ‘No’ when his wife is interested, either! If she wants his body, she gets it! She is in charge of his body and he is in charge of hers!
A man or woman should not ever hold back or be resistant; rather they are to be eager and excited participants!” This is pretty straightforward talk from the Word of God concerning a married couple’s private life!
Marriage is honorable among all and the bed undefiled… Hebrews 13:4a
If we were to paraphrase this verse we would say, “Everyone agrees that being married is honorable. The best part is that when you are married your sex life gets to be full of variety, excitement, fun and adventure!”
with which I have to disagree with J & K. Marriage does not sanctify every sexual act between the two. There can be sexual sin within a christian marriage. Does a wife get to "say no" when she just had a miscarriage??? when she is throwing up???
With filters like that, looking only at what's in it for him and not at all about his own homework, his own responsibility… marriage books become dangerous in his hands!
Gem copied from a book: ““The wife does not get to tell her husband ‘No!’ She does not have authority over her body. If he wants it, he gets it! The husband does not get to say ‘No’ when his wife is interested, either! If she wants his body, she gets it! She is in charge of his body and he is in charge of hers!”
This is a totally wrong analysis of what is being taught. The point is mutuality, made as explicit as Paul can make it. If a wife wants to decline, she just controls her husbands body away from her and vice versa. It is only when BOTH WISH it that whatever specific action can happen.
I find it very sad that Paul would be misused by that author is such a disrespectful way.
Egal Review of Emerson Eggerichs' "Love and Respect" by Don
Here is my attempt to extract the insights from L&R that could be useful for egals as well as identify those portions that are a concern to egals.
Throughout the book the author refers to people of good will doing this process. There is a basic assumption that both spouses are trying to act in faith, admitting when they are wrong,
although the more mature one is expected to initiate. As he is trying to encourage more loving and respectful marriages, he does not discuss much about marriage covenant violations that may result in divorce being the best option, so another resource should be consulted for this aspect, such as David Instone-Brewer. He does give some short examples of hopeless cases recovering.
Crazy Cycle – good insights of one possible way to go crazy with your spouse and be feeding the craziness perhaps without knowing one is feeding it.
Energizing Cycle
For husbands: COUPLE is the acronym for loving your wife
1. Closeness – good insights
2. Openness – good insights – need for emotional intimacy
3. Understanding – good insights – sometimes just listening is what is requested
4. Peacemaking – good insights – be willing to say you are sorry
5. Loyalty – good insights – commitment
6. Esteem – good insights – essentially like Respect, why use a different word?
For wives: CHAIRS is the acronym for respecting your husband
1. Conquest – good insights – appreciate accomplishments
2. Hierarchy – not egal, anti-egal discussion is weak, replace with full egal partnership
3. Authority – not egal, anti-egal discussion is weak, replace with full egal partnership
4. Insight – contrasted with her intuition, some good insights, some non-egal teaching
5. Relationship – good insights about "shoulder to shoulder" friendship
6. Sexuality – good insights – do not expect to win thru deprivation
On the aspects that contain good insights, it might well be true that they apply to most men or most women; but your specific case might be in a minority so be sure to ask each other about the 10 items about that might apply to them that are not inherently non-egal. For example, achievement may be very important for a wife and loyalty for a husband.
Rewarded Cycle – some good insights, obey God as your motive
Hi Don,
Thanks so much for taking the time to engage with L&R and to share your responses!
I feel esteemed (i.e.,honored as a fellow heir of grace) by your review!
Marilyn,
Thanks.
I was trying to show some things.
1. Even tho this is a non-egal teaching, there is much of potential value for egals in this book.
2. There can be a lot of agreement about what contributes to a good marriage regardless whether one is egal or non-egal. In this example, 10 of the 12 L&R mini-teachings can be useful regardless of one's marriage model.
MOLLY said: When you are married to someone who is sometimes abusive, you find that in order for them to feel respected, YOU have to be disrespected. You don’t notice that at first…you are too busy trying to make sure you are doing your part, trying to do whatever it takes for THEM to feel respected…
You don’t notice, until it’s far too late, that in the process, you have lost all self-respect…and that no matter how low you go, it seems like it’s never enough for them. It’s like they have an internal respect deficit, and they draw a feeling of respect by sucking it out of you. It’s weird. It would be interesting to study from afar, says this armchair psychologist, but it’s hell to live.
I likened my effort to attempting to fill a black hole by the teaspoon full. The respect vacuum in my husband’s soul was so profound that there is only ONE source that will ever satisfy him and that is God. No matter what hoops a wife and children jump through, it is never enough and when we seem to reach the bar then the bar is raised or changed.
He needed a serious wake-up call that we were not all put on this planet to fill his cup, that life is not all about him feeeeeeeeeeeeeling respected. To me, its a scary thing to hear these people on Christian radio: eggerich and shaunti something… talking about surveys which say men want respect. Carnal men want their egos stroked at the expense of everyone else around them. REAL MATURE GODLY men die to ego.
Gal 2:20 “I am crucified with Christ: nevertheless I live; yet not I (Gr. ego) , but Christ liveth in me”
And you and I, Molly, were CALLED to be help MEET for seriously wounded and broken men, and whatsoever God CALLS us to, HE is ready willing and able to EQUIP us for. I was told by a mentor that a lot of the leveling he does is because- at some level- he sees me as smarter, better, holier than himself. Since he’s an arrested toddler wanting to be the center of the world, he can’t rejoice in my giftedness, he has to tear me down to remove the threat.
I went and searched for this quote from John Hobbins to re-post because I think he speaks truth here and this pattern of how God works gives me hope for the difficult, abusive ones:
JOHN: extraordinary gifts and wounds go together. I sometimes go so far as to say that extraordinary gifts are wounds.
Sins and gifts also go together. A harder topic to broach, but it stares us right in the face if we look around. All the great saints in the Bible were also great sinners. Fancy that. It makes one wish for mediocrity at times.
It is no accident that Moses and Paul were both murderers. Was murder a necessary preparation for their life-giving subsequent missions? Murder was a misuse of the gift, the same gift of zeal and sense of justice that God went on to use in positive ways.
When you look at their weaknesses, just imagine how they could be if all that is turned around into strength! Think of Paul the apostle. God wastes nothing!
Acts 9:13 “Lord,” Ananias answered, “I have heard many reports about this man and all the harm he has done to your saints in Jerusalem. 14 And he has come here with authority from the chief priests to arrest all who call on your name.”
15 But the Lord said to Ananias, “Go!
This man
is
my chosen instrument
to carry my name before the Gentiles and their kings and before the people of Israel.
And you and I, Molly, were CALLED to be help MEET for seriously wounded and broken men, and whatsoever God CALLS us to, HE is ready willing and able to EQUIP us for. I was told by a mentor that a lot of the leveling he does is because- at some level- he sees me as smarter, better, holier than himself. Since he’s an arrested toddler wanting to be the center of the world, he can’t rejoice in my giftedness, he has to tear me down to remove the threat.
I agree and resonate with so much fo what you say, gem, but this is an area where we probably differ.
I don’t know if I feel “called.” In fact, I’m pretty sure I’m not called, at least not at this point. Because I can look back and see a lot of stupid choices I made and a lot of times I operated in denial during our engagement period, as well as our first months of marriage when the controlling stuff began. There were red flags. But I was too busy living in fantasy land to acknowledge them. “It couldn’t happen to me/us” was the name of the game.
So I don’t really blame God for this, as in assigning Him credit or assuming He was leading me into this situation OR called me to it.
I *do* thank God for pulling me out of the pit I was in when I was finally able to listen to the truth and face reality…I thank God for not being a rapist and so not forcing me to NOT get married, but instead loving me enough to let me make a huge mistake (the father in the prodigal son story is so applicable here). I thank God for being who He is—that is, speaking in a gentle whisper and being patient to wait until I was broken enough to listen for that quiet voice of His…
But, when it comes to assigning actual *responsibility* for the choices and events that would transpire, I personally put the blame on our enemy the destroyer, on myself, on my spouse, and especially on a fallen world where things are broken and sometimes don’t work right.
(Can you tell I’m not a Calvinist)? lol…
MOLLY said: I agree and resonate with so much fo what you say, gem, but this is an area where we probably differ.
I don’t know if I feel “called.” In fact, I’m pretty sure I’m not called, at least not at this point. Because I can look back and see a lot of stupid choices I made and a lot of times I operated in denial during our engagement period, as well as our first months of marriage when the controlling stuff began. There were red flags. But I was too busy living in fantasy land to acknowledge them. “It couldn’t happen to me/us” was the name of the game.
I’m not sure if we differ or not, Molly?
My sense of CALLING to be help MEET to this man does not preclude separation nor divorce. He has a choice to reject the LIFE giving help I am intended to supply to him. In my husband’s case, he has chosen to cleave, and he has also chosen to make adjustments in his behavior which I considered essential to make the marriage bearable to me.
If one thinks of the family as a body, the abuse is like gangrene. Either the infected limb submits to the treatment and removal of the gangrene or it must be cut off before it infects and kills the whole body. “Therapeutic divorce” can be consistent with being ezer IMO.
I know that I was blind to red flags before we married and I was in denial for decades. Due to the nature of my own baggage, I was bound to be blind to certain red flags. People tend to pick what is “familiar”. No point in self flagellation over blindness. Jesus came to give sight to the blind. Where I am weak, I become strong through God’s power at work within me.
Ah, now I getcha. Thanks. I misunderstood completely.
Oh, spoken as a true daughter of Alaska, perhaps a speech teammate to its governor:
Ah, now I getcha.
You betcha.
I’m so pleased that you noticed.
