Erik Raymond with a very insightful post that deals with the fact that we are as Luther said, "hopelessly meritorious".
He writes:
Wife: “I don’t feel like we have been spending enough quality time together recently. I feel like you are distant and distracted.”
Husband: “What do you mean? I’ve been spending a lot of time with you. I don’t see how you can say that.”
Wife: “Well, it’s how I feel. It seems like we are not connecting.”
Husband: (now becoming irratated) “I don’t know how you could say that. What did we do on Monday? I didn’t watch the game but I drove the kids to their appointment. Tuesday night? I was here the whole time. How about Wednesday? We went out to eat and then to church. Now it’s Thursday and you have already given me a list of things to do. I don’t think you are being reasonable.”
The husband has done the classic move. His wife’s observations and feelings are dismissed with a quick disagreement. Then when she persists, he calls for the merit.
Do you see this? Before even beginning to understand what his wife is talking about he starts whistling for the dump-truck of personal merit to be backed up and dumped into the middle of the conversation.Read the rest.
8 comments:
honest question:
How then can you ever suggest that perhaps someone is being unreasonable. . .or that you disagree with their diagnosis.
Of course, . . not to prove that you are a wonderful husband/you don't sin/you're the best thing that she's ever had/etc. . . .
That's deplorable. The dump truck, is indeed, the wrong way to go.
But, how can you communicate that you're sorry things have seemed that way, and you're sorry she's hurt. . . but you don't agree or see the diagnosis, (in humility).?
i'm covering my head right now. . . let me have it.
It's a pretty hard sell to ever tell someone that what they are feeling is unreasonable. An ACTION might be unreasonable, but an EMOTION; it's harder to categorize it that way.
So just "communicate that you're sorry things have seemed that way, and you're sorry she's hurt. . ." and stop there. You don't have to agree with the problem; but if one person in the relationship says there's a problem, then there IS.
I think the point is not that she is always right but just that we are so easy to self-justify. Be on guard for this all the time.
Aaron,
It's tricky. We obviously must strive to avoid being meritorious as is the prime point of this example. But, emotions can also be deceiving as we all know. Being that both sides of the marriage are broken (i.e. the wife is just as sinful as the husband and vice versa), the problem may lie on either end - or BOTH!
The husband should acknowledge the problem because there is obviously one there. Then, effective communication can help to resolve where those feelings are coming from. They may truly be based on a husband who is not available physically, emotionally, spiritually, etc. to his wife. Or, they could also be based on unrealistic expectations of the wife for her husband.
Either way, married people should not be surprised when their spouse points out flaws. We should expect it. We ARE sinners after all! Take a position of humility first and go from there. More likely than not, YOUR sin is buried SOMEWHERE in the problem. And if it's not, then your humility will only help in showing your spouse where they may have sin in their lives.
Thanks guys,
Those are helpful words. I agree (and have experienced) self-justifying helps no one.
I guess I wish there'd be some more balance in posts like this. (I've noticed in many of Driscoll's marriage talks as well). It's almost like the offended party can never be wrong, or challenged, and that the husband's responsibility extends into never challenging his wife's opinion.
Now, this is somewhat hypothetical, because it would be nearly impossible to disagree with a judgment made without at least coming across as defensive or self-justifying. So, I realize this is a near impossibility practically.
But, I wish there was more said about how to judge your spouse charitably, how to look for the good in them, how to look for the plank in your own eye, etc. . . And, the importance of being a bit reluctant in our judgments in marriage.
Good posts, Aaron. Dealing with facts is important. If we don't agree to deal with facts, there is no hope for objective evaluation. If something is demonstrably false, I don't see the utility in acting as though it's true simply to appease.
Sife,
I fear you assume way too much in terms of your own personal objectivity. I know I need to submit myself to others to help me see my blind spots. We all have them and if we don't have a context to flesh those out with people who love us and know us deeply we'll be in big trouble. Your wife is person #1 who knows you the best. She lives with you.
Our "objectivity" is sadly broken by sin and my selfish desires often color my view of things. I can so easily turn something into a "fact" because my heart is dark and selfish and I am smart enough to manipulate the situation however I please.
As the man and the leader in my home my wife needs to know that I am willing to listen. LIstening doesn't mean that I agree with her but at least that I am willing to HEAR her and demonstrate that clearly through my actions. And leader who is not willing to listen is not very inspiring to a follower. Think about that in your own life.
There was a season in our lives when we were fighting all the time about direction in life. We couldn't get pass it. We were at each other's throats. One night I just sat down and let Kim vent. Spill her guts. I could have refuted many of her points because they were "demonstrably false" but that wasn't the point. She just needed me to listen. I did and didn't even voice agreements/disagreements, but simply spoke back to her the things I was hearing her say. "What I am hearing you say is..." and that was all it took. Just a willingness to listen and not have to be defensive or refute. There is a time for that, but your wife will never be open to that sort of thing if she senses that you are not willing to listen.
She doesn't need A+B = C. She already knows that answers. She just needs a guy who will be empathetic and listen. That is servant leadership.
Can my wife be wrong? Absolutely, but again, she is probably not going to be open to me pointing those things out if she gets the sense that I am only concerned about being "right" based on the "facts" and have no concern with how she is feeling or have no concern for being humble enough to listen to her.
One thing that has radically changed our marriage is the about once a month on a date night we go out and I ask my wife what areas she sees in my life that need correction. I ask for it, she gives it with gentleness and then I listen. In this way I lead out with humility and a willingness to listen to her. I sucked at this early on and by no means have arrived but are getting better than I used to be. When I lead out in this way she obviously wants to reciprocate and asks me to do the same for her. This context has greatly deepened our ability to sanctify one another without defensiveness and fighting.
Good points all. I merely assert that if facts are wrong, then they should be discussed. Both sides should be open to contemplating that they've gotten certain facts wrong.
I'm just not certain that it's positive or healthy (long term) to treat demonstrably false facts as if they're true. It might buy temporary peace (and it does), but it sets up a situation where feelings trump facts, and they shouldn't (by either party).
In the original example, if the facts are that he husband had really been there all week, but she was accusing him of not being there, I don't think it helps anyone (again, long term) for him to say "okay, she's wrong on this, but I'm going to let her be wrong on this simply so I can buy peace in the home". Both sides let feelings and emotion overcome facts too often, and that's bad in my view.
You're exactly right about objectivity though. That's why both sides should try to discuss facts first before dealing with feelings derived from those facts.
I think the gray area is interpretation of what happened, and in that respect, you're exactly right that both can have dramatically different views of the same set of facts.
Good discussion and I agree with you about much of that.
Post a Comment