Sermon Illustrations on Marriage — page 3

Editorial: the Fall and Rise of Marriage

Rebuilding commitment in a culture of divorce.

It's enough to make you respect the social sciences. A report by the Council on Families in America, entitled "Marriage in America," declares that "the divorce revolution has failed" and calls for strong medicine: "There is no realistic alternative to the one we propose. We must, as a nation, reassess and change our basic cultural values."

This diverse and distinguished group of scholars and analysts has surveyed the hundreds of studies and declared what common sense has been shouting for some time: divorce and family breakdown are killing our culture.

While we may hail these conclusions as a victory in the culture wars, the shout will die in our throats when we ponder the realities the report points to: "We as a society are simply failing to teach the next generation about the meaning, purposes, and responsibilities of marriage. If this trend continues, it will constitute nothing less than cultural suicide."

DIVORCE'S CONSEQUENCES

The case is unfortunately easy to make: Despite America becoming much richer, healthier, more educated, and suffused with better psychological insights, over the last 30 years "child well-being" has gotten "much worse." Juvenile crime has increased sixfold. Teen suicide has tripled. Drug abuse, eating disorders, and depression among youth have soared while sat scores have dropped 80 points. Reports of neglect and abuse have quintupled since 1976.

The very institution of marriage is imperiled. Fewer people are getting married, even when there is a pregnancy. The report notes, "Nearly one third of all American children are now born to unmarried parents." More couples are getting divorced. The chances that a marriage today will break up are "a staggering 60 percent." Even for those who stay married, relationships between men and women "are becoming more difficult, fragile, and unhappy," the report says.

What is remarkable about this 20-page document is not the litany of marital woes, but that the writers of "Marriage in America" make the main culprit a change in cultural values. "Marriage has increasingly been reduced to a vehicle...for the emotional fulfillment of adult partners. 'Till death us do part' has been replaced by 'as long as I am happy.' The quest for personal fulfillment and autonomy has created a 'culture of divorce,' where marriage is often seen as "restrictive, confining, oppressive, and unliberating."

The ambitious goal of the council is to change the culture. While the council makes 62 recommendations for reviving marriage's institutional splendor, we cannot pretend that the demon of self-fulfillment can be exorcised by a good dose of common sense. Our culture has, in the words of Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn, "forgotten God" and so lost the very thing that gives meaning to our relational duties and obligations. Without accountability, without judgment, without eternity, without an understanding of our humble place in the ordered cosmos, how do we stop our ears to the siren call of personal fulfillment?

Thus the first task for the church in reinvigorating marriage is to reinvigorate people's consciousness of God and so give meaning to sacrifice, forgiveness, suffering, disappointment, and, most important, love.

But there is much more to be done. The council's general strategy is to "reclaim the ideal of marital permanence and affirm marriage as the preeminent environment for childrearing." While this sounds easy, it is not. People do not get divorced for superfluous reasons. Many couples are struggling with tremendously difficult problems.

Many churches and ministries have already caught the vision and are modeling what we can do (see "How Churches Can Be Truly Profamily," CT, Feb. 6, 1995, p. 33): make premarital counseling mandatory; establish a peer counseling program where both struggling marriages and new couples are assigned older couples to meet with; offer couples' groups, regular marriage-skills workshops, and Sunday-school electives; form volunteer swat teams for crisis intervention for couples in severe distress; encourage intact families to befriend single-parent families.

Being committed to marriage as a societal anchor means taking the time and getting your hands dirty with the pain of marital strife. And so let us begin the necessary task of changing culture. We leave you with this question: What have you done today to support marriage?

______________________

By Karen L. Maudlin, a licensed clinical psychologist in private practice in Wheaton, Illinois, and Michael G. Maudlin.

#3614

*

How Churches Can Be Truly Pro-family

Mark 5:19

In the last decade, evangelical Christians have become more politically savvy, writing letters to congressmen and newspaper editors, blasting the politicians and media for their attacks on “traditional family values.” But as Christians call for others to clean up their acts, what are churches and Christian organizations doing to help families?

Many churches have no strategy to help families except referring them to self-help books, says Dan Simpson of the Charles E. Fuller Institute of Church Growth. “Seminaries focus on academic studies and preparing sermons,” he says, “but pastors have little training in helping families.”

Walt Mueller, director of the Center for Parent/Youth Understanding, agrees. “There’s too much rhetoric about what’s wrong with the family and not enough action,” he contends. “It seems as if the church is interested only in telling families to turn back the clock 40 years to become 1950s suburban families. That’s not realistic.”

Some individuals, churches, and parachurch organizations are pioneering efforts to help families. Out of these efforts has come a strategic emphasis in the areas of marriage enrichment, remarriage and stepfamily support programs, premarital preparation, and classes and support groups for parents.

ENRICHING MARRIAGES

Parachurch organizations in particular have worked hard to build marriages. For example, groups like Marriage Enrichment and Marriage Encounter (ME) provide weekend growth retreats for married couples. Studies on ME find that 90 percent of couples returning from its retreats report they fall back in love. Since 1962, over 1.5 million couples have gone to ME weekends, and various branches of ME now span ten denominations.

Although many couples who go to ME already have good relationships, David and Sherrill Lott of Salem, Indiana, attended one of the retreats after having been separated twice and having met with a marriage counselor who advised them to hire divorce lawyers. “I’m not good at expressing myself verbally,” says David. “So periodically Sherrill would break down crying because we weren’t communicating on an intimate level. I wondered why she couldn’t be self-sufficient like me. The truth was, like many men, I didn’t know how to express my feelings. On the Marriage Encounter weekend, the leaders gave us communication tools, and Sherrill and I practiced them all weekend. On Saturday night, we cried and held each other for the first time in a long time.”

This tremendous leap in communication skills was made easier for the Lotts by the example and encouragement of Gary and Sherry Hendricks, their ME leaders. Sherry describes the ME weekend as on-the-job training: “You don’t take a notebookful of notes. You just practice the same principles and skills all weekend until it wears you out. But then you’re prepared to go on with life.”

A major part of ME’s success is found in its use of experienced married couples like the Hendrickses to conduct its sessions. And the couples being counseled are not the only beneficiaries; ME’s marital enrichment works both ways. “I come away from me weekends feeling like a missionary,” says Sherry. “I see a greater purpose for my own marriage. Together, Gary and I can touch others by being a better picture of Christ.”

Fr. Dick McGinnis of Saint David’s Episcopal Church in Jacksonville, Florida, has learned the value of experienced married couples serving as mentors to struggling couples. A few years ago, McGinnis began to feel overwhelmed with the number of couples in his church who were approaching him for counsel in solving their marital problems. As he prayed for his church’s troubled couples, he sensed God nudging him to look at what worked. So he stood up in church and asked couples whose marriages had been on the rocks and now were healed to meet with him after church. McGinnis recorded their stories -- drug addiction, alcoholism, bisexuality -- looking for common elements.

As a result, McGinnis and the couples developed 17 basic principles, and each “couple in recovery” met weekly with a troubled couple, sharing stories, explaining the principles, and listening without judgment. Those original seven couples in recovery have worked with 33 couples at Saint David’s, and, says McGinnis, there has not been a divorce in the church since 1987.

McGinnis believes his church’s program is practical for most busy pastors, because “even though pastors organize the program, they essentially put the troubled couples in the hands of the ‘experts.’”

But can couples who have nearly divorced be legitimate experts? Ted and Jean Fields, who met with a couple in recovery, believe so. “What we found most helpful was not new information, but that these people spent time with us and accepted us,” says Jean. “When we told our story, no one walked away in disgust. They understood what we were going through.”

Discipling laypeople for family ministry holds enormous promise, says syndicated columnist Michael McManus, author of the book “Marriage Savers: Helping Your Friends and Family Stay Married” (Zondervan), who, with his wife, mentors couples at Fourth Presbyterian Church outside Washington, D.C. “In every church there are couples sitting in the pew that have been married 20, 30, or 40 years. They’ve survived all kinds of problems, and they’re still in love. Many of these couples would mentor other couples if they were asked.”

(Information on other groups is given.)

________

Jan Johnson is a freelance writer living in Simi, California.

Chastity In Marriage, Because Sex Is Like Fire

One of the more helpful analogies to explain the personal and cultural damage wrought by the sexual revolution is that sex is like fire. When a fire is in the fireplace, it brings light, warmth, and ambience. It can even preserve life. When, however, a fire jumps out of the fireplace onto the curtains, it brings destruction, even death. A similar analogy compares sex to water. Our bodies need water to live, but we need water in the right place. When water gets in the lungs, it can be deadly.

One point of these analogies is that, like fire and water, sex is good. It has a design and purpose. The sexual revolution wanted sex to be “good,” but forfeited the “design and purpose” part. In fact, proponents of the sexual revolution argued that sex is only good if it is set “free” from all restraint, responsibility, and consequences.

This kind of fundamental error, like all bad ideas, is bound to have victims. With each day that passes, we meet more of them. Consider a piece published several months ago at Vice that announced a hip new way to find sexual satisfaction: “radical monogamy.” Don’t call it marriage (that’s for dinosaurs), but man, there’s something really fulfilling and safe (apparently) about sexual fidelity between two committed people. Or consider the recent book by Washington Post columnist Christine Emba. In Rethinking Sex, Emba argues that using the often vague ideal of consent as our only moral guidepost governing sexual activity has left a lot of people hurt, lonely, and frustrated.

All of this is pointing to an opportunity for the Church to offer something better. However, to do that, we must be careful and clear. If sex is designed, it is under the authority of the One who designed it. If it is, indeed, under God’s authority, and God is good, then rightly ordered sex is a good gift.

In other words, the full antidote to the toxic sexuality of the sexual revolution isn’t just to return it to the safety of the fireplace. The sexual morality we rightly talk about from Scripture isn’t the whole story of this beautiful gift. Keeping sex within the confines of a lifelong marriage between one man and one woman is a moral good, but just as loving our neighbors is much more than not actively hating them, respecting God’s design for sex is much more than not transgressing certain boundaries.

In His kindness, God has called us to the lifelong cultivation of being properly sexual. This is the virtue of chastity, something often mistaken by Christians and non-Christians alike for prudishness. Instead, the call to be properly sexual with one another is a calling for all of us, married and single, to pursue all our lives, before, during, and after marriage.

The Scriptures describe this well. Husbands should love their wives as Christ loved the Church. Christ laid down his life for His Church. And so, we give our bodies generously to our spouses, but not with degradation or violence.

Sex within marriage can still demean, degrade, and victimize. When sex is seen as nothing more than an act of mere pleasure seeking, or when sex is demanded or withheld out of anger or contempt, or when sex is pursued in body or in mind with someone who is not given to us in marriage, chastity is abdicated, and we are sinning against God, our spouse, and ourselves.

Wedding rings are not some “license to practice” in any and every way that comes into our minds. That’s reductionistic. Sex is allowed in marriage, but it is also still designed.

Often we think of biblical exhortations like the call to “love our neighbor” or to “seek the good of the other” as applying only to our actual neighbors, friends, or coworkers. But these verses also apply to our sexual relationships with our spouses. Practicing the virtue of chastity means to approach sex as an act of generosity. It’s not something to treat lightly or selfishly, even in marriage.

The sexual revolution sent the fire screaming out of the fireplace and then poured gasoline on the whole disaster. As more and more people are burned in its wake, the Church has a wonderful gift to offer, a gift that goes beyond the rules of the fireplace. When ordered rightly, the whole world will be blessed by its warmth, its light, and its life.

________

The Third Strand

Leadership magazine carried a short item sent in by Cathryn Paxton that illustrates the importance of letting God be uppermost in the marital relationship. She wrote, "A braid appears to contain only two strands of hair. But it is impossible to create a braid with only two strands. If the two could be put together at all, they would quickly

unravel. Herein lies the mystery: What looks like two strands requires a third. The third strand, though not immediately evident, keeps the strand tightly woven."

Then Paxton concluded, "In a Christian marriage, God's presence, like the third strand in a braid, holds husband and wife together."

Too Much Work To Interest Him

The pastor of a big city church ran an ad for a caretaker-housekeeper. The next day, a well-dressed young man appeared at the pastor's door. But before he could say more than, "Hello, I came to see about...," the pastor began questioning him.

"Can you sweep, make beds, shovel walks, run errands, fix meals, balance a checkbook, and baby-sit?" the churchman asked.

"Whoa," the young man said, "I only came to see about getting married, but if it's that much work, I'm not interested."

Not Quite Equally Yoked

9 attitudes to adopt when your spouse isn't growing.

1. Respect their individuality

2. Allow God to be God.

3. Compare not.

4. Take it easy.

5. Handle with care.

6. Let go of expectations.

7. Pray for your mate.

8. Walk by faith, not sight.

9. Practice unconditional love.

#4122

*

A Quiet Revolution

1 Peter 3:1

Sermon in 1 Peter series. Submission of wives. 1 Peter 3:1-6

==================

A QUIET REVOLUTION

==================

I. An embarrassing topic?

II. The position of the Bible.

III. Submit!

A. Submission is something every Christian (and Jesus) does.

B. Every team needs a captain.

IV. Evangelism begins at home.

V. What makes a woman beautiful.

A. Society has strong views on beauty.

B. Beauty is inward, not outward.

VI. A sterling example.

(untitled)

You would hardly imagine gorgeous supermodel Cindy Crawford

turning up at a seminar on dating, but in September she spent two

days at a seminar conducted by John Gray, author of Men Are From

Mars, Women Are From Venus.

During a panel discussion on communication problems between

the sexes Crawford volunteered that communication was seriously

lacking in her failed marriage to Richard Gere. To illustrate the

point she told the following story:

Because of an ulcer, she preferred hot chocolate

in the morning to coffee. Gere's favorite beverage was

tea. One morning, thinking he was doing her a favor, he

brought her a cup of tea. She got in his face and

blasted out an obscenity, followed by, "Haven't you

noticed all this time that I don't drink tea? You do."

How tragic. He thought he was being kind; she took it as an

insult. All of us, and especially married couples, need to be

slow to speak, slow to anger and eager to listen, don't we? Source: People Magazine October 14, 1996. P. 49

Talk About Spiritual Things With Your Spouse

Acts 16:1

All couples run into "touchy subjects" -- topics that stir up frustration and

lead to awkward silences. Sex and money top the list in many marriages. But

chances are good that you and your spouse struggle with a third area: how to

talk about spiritual things.

Talking in-depth about spiritual issues can create significant anxiety.

"Will I sound immature if I talk about my relationship with God? If I'm

honest about what's going on in my life, will my spouse think I'm not

spiritual enough?" Ever since sin came between the first married couple and

God, fear, self-consciousness and embarrassment have made spiritual intimacy

a difficult proposition. The vulnerability it takes to talk about matters of

faith leads many people to keep the conversation short or avoid it

altogether.

A second obstacle is the way each spouse was brought up. Maybe when your

mate was growing up, her family talked about Christianity as easily as they

did the weather. But at your house, family members rarely spoke of spiritual

things beyond saying "good sermon today" on the way home from church. And,

of course, many people never even attended church until they became adults.

Some people grew up with spiritual expressiveness being as natural as

breathing, while to others, it's still a foreign concept.

Add to that a third difference: the natural tendencies of different

personality types. In Experiencing God Together, David Stoop writes, "When

we approach the subject of spiritual intimacy, our personality differences

obviously predispose us to certain approaches to God ... and to our basic

understanding of how religion relates to life."

For instance, some people have a strong bent toward duty and responsibility.

Their spirituality is shaped by their desire to serve and make the right

choices. Others are more mystical, emphasizing the importance of experiences

and leadings from God. A third personality type is more people-oriented.

These folks think of their spirituality in terms of how it relates to the

people they care about. Still others are problem-solvers. They are most

interested in "how-to's" and identifying the best course of action from a

spiritual perspective. A fifth group is more intellectual about faith

issues. They emphasize learning facts and grasping spiritual concepts.

Different personalities use different languages of spirituality. If a

mystical type marries a problem-solver, they can easily end up talking past

each other.

Who's More Interested?

======================

Often, the sticking point comes down to an uneven level of interest. Typically, one partner feels a much stronger need to talk about God to feel close spiritually, while the other is content simply to share activities like worshiping together or spending time with friends from church. Sometimes this difference is a reflection of overall communication patterns: The more-interested partner is more expressive about all areas of life. Other times the more-interested person is experiencing a spiritual "growth spurt" while the less-interested partner is on a plateau.

But whatever the reason, this interest differential can lead to hide-and-seek

patterns. One spouse actively pursues spiritually oriented conversations by

bringing up first one subject and then another. If the other spouse "hides"

by failing to show an interest, the more-interested mate can end up feeling a

lot of resentment.

Less-interested mates see things differently. They feel pressured, making

them want to hit the "eject" button whenever a spiritual topic arises. Those

less interested can also feel they are being judged as less committed in

their Christianity simply because they don't talk about it as much.

These patterns make a tough topic even tougher. So what can you do?

The "More-Interested"

=====================

Spouse If efforts to deepen your spiritual communication have failed, it's time to take a different tack.

1. LEARN YOUR PARTNER'S LANGUAGE. By becoming more attuned to your spouse's

spiritual personality, described earlier, you can learn to use the language

that will communicate most effectively.

2. APPEAL TO YOUR MATE'S SPIRITUAL STRENGTHS. If your spouse's spiritual

focus is on people and relationships, ask for input and opinions from a

relational perspective. If he or she has a more mystical bent, you might ask

something like "How can I figure out what God wants me to do in this

situation?" When we ask questions that are tuned in to our partners'

spiritual wavelength, they may feel they have a lot more to offer.

3. BREAK THE HIDE-AND-SEEK PATTERN. Gently end conversations about spiritual

matters when you notice your mate is withdrawing or becoming uncomfortable.

It's better to try again later than to cause frustration by pressing to keep

alive a conversation that's not going anywhere.

4. CATCH YOUR PARTNER DOING SOMETHING RIGHT. When you do get spiritual input

from your mate, jot him or her a note: "Thanks for your perspective."

Expressing your appreciation can go a long way toward easing your spouse's

discomfort. When less-interested partners know they'll get credit for the

efforts they make to join in spiritual conversations, they are more likely to

open up the next time.

The "Less-Interested" Spouse

============================

Even if you don't feel an urgency about deepening the spiritual communication with your spouse, chances are good that he or she does. To meet your spouse half-way, consider some of these steps.

1. RECOGNIZE THE IMPORTANCE OF YOUR ROLE. When it comes to spiritual

intimacy, there is something your spouse values deeply that only you can

give. Though talking about spiritual matters doesn't come easily to you, God

has called you to be your mate's spiritual helper. That's an important role

that belongs only to you.

2. SHARE YOUR FEARS AND UNEASINESS. Write a letter to your spouse to assure

him or her that you know talking about spiritual things is important.

Include the reasons you find it difficult to discuss your spiritual life.

Don't assume your mate knows these things. Even the letter will count as a

spiritual connection to your partner.

3. RECOGNIZE THAT QUESTIONS ARE BETTER THAN ANSWERS. Take some pressure off

yourself by remembering that active listening and asking good questions both

make for good conversations. The role of "spiritual sounding board" is a

valuable one, and it's easier than trying to come up with a lot of

interesting things to say.

4. CULTIVATE SPIRITUAL EXPRESSIVENESS. You can even do this alone by putting

your spiritual life into written words. As you write down your thoughts

about God and his work in your life, consider which ones you could share

later with your spouse.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------

Tim Sutherland is a marriage and family therapist practicing in the Chicago

area. He and his wife, Julie, have two children.

Magazine. Spring 1997, Vol. 14, No. 1, Page 26

*

Singleness: A Biblical Perspective

Luke 18:29

How Scripture challenges our cultural assumptions about singleness.

Old Testament Background Gen 30:1, Jer 16:2, Isa 54:1, 56:5

Jesus: The Revolutionary Single Matt 22:30, Matt 12:50, Luke 18:29-30

Singleness and the Church 1 Cor 7:28,32-34, Acts 21:9

A Challenge

*

Counselor Offers Warning Signs and Vital Signs For Marriages

Half of all first marriages end in divorce or separation by the 20th year, according to a 1995 study by the National Center for Health Statistics.

When are marriages most vulnerable? Statistics are less clear about that. There are too many variables that make each marriage unique. Developmental changes or personal crises can expose weaknesses in a relationship at any time.

But counselors like Wade Rowatt agree there are some hotspots, which tend to occur around specific life experiences. They are:

-- The first three years of marriage. Divorces are a little more likely during this period, when issues of incompatibility, disillusionment and conflict often surface.

-- Year seven - for no known rational reason.

-- The first two years of the "empty nest."

-- The first few years after the death of a parent of either spouse.

Every marriage is different. But most marriages show warning signs long before trouble erupts. And all marriages can be improved by attending to certain vital signs.

Rowatt, a marriage counselor in Louisville, Ky., identifies some of both, based on years of counseling and research. He says they are not guarantees of failure or success but solid indicators. If even one of the warning signs is evident, give it attention now, he advises. The help of a pastoral counselor may keep your marriage on track.

Seven warning signs:

-- Frequent disinterest in what your spouse is doing or saying.

-- Sudden, prolonged attraction to a co-worker, friend or fellow church

member.

-- Unexplained, sudden anger at your spouse.

-- Disinterest in sex.

-- Over-involvement with children at the expense of the marriage.

-- Depression.

-- Not wanting to be touched by your spouse

Seven vital signs:

-- Talk and listen to each other daily. Listen actively, beyond the level of thought. Share feelings, dreams and emotions. The three years past empty nest are key. Develop this skill now.

-- Spend "couple time" each day. That's 30-60 minutes with the TV and computer off. Talk, touch and be present.

-- Address problems in their infancy. They grow like a cancer when kept silent. Work especially on disappointments, unmet expectations and power imbalances.

-- Commitment must be both emotional and intellectual. When the honeymoon stage is over, this will be the staying power. Partners must stay in touch with the idea that "I wouldn't dare trade my spouse in for another model."

-- Flexibility is essential. Partners change, so do vocations and circumstances. Like an oak, we must be able to bend without breaking.

-- Tend to the romance. Little things matter -- back rubs, a touch, a smile, gifts, regular dates, doing favors without being asked.

-- Cultivate openness. It let's you face problems early and head-on. Openness comes from a solid faith, so constant renewal that is individual, yet shared, is important. This will impact parenting, grief, work decisions, lifestyle and economics.

*

Desktop Divorce: Virtue In the Information Age

Back in the 1970s, the great evangelist Francis Schaeffer used to rail against the plague of what he called "easy divorce." Most people, even many Christians, seemed to have no sense of how devastating divorce is to children or how it contributes to the decline of any culture.

Well, since the 70s, social science research has borne out the negative consequences of easy divorce. Yet ironically, divorce has just gotten even easier -- thanks to the Internet.

A British entrepreneur named Richard Cohen has created a Web site that will make divorce as simple as the click of a mouse. Called Desktop Lawyer, it allows couples to bypass the time-consuming and expensive tasks of hiring a lawyer and filing a petition with the court.

Instead, for about $150, British couples can now file for a divorce without ever seeing a lawyer, or even going to court. All they have to do is click on the web site and answer a series of questions on-line. Lawyers with Desktop Divorce check the answers, prepare the appropriate pleadings, and file them with the court. You save time, money, and, most of all, the stress associated with going through the legal process.

It appears that Brits love stress-free divorce. In the first week after Cohen designed Desktop Divorce, more than 300 couples took advantage of its services. It's only a matter of time before an enterprising American lawyer follows Cohen's lead.

As you might expect, not everyone is crazy about this latest example of e-commerce. Patricia Hardcastle, a spokeswoman for the Roman Catholic Church in England, warns that the impersonal nature of Desktop Divorce is likely to encourage more people to file for divorce. As she puts it, "Nobody wants to go through it, but at least we had to do everything face-to-face, which might have made some people stop and think."

Precisely. What the West needs is not easier divorce but harder divorce. As the social science data pours in on the negative effects of family breakdown, many pro-family organizations are working to pass laws that erect barriers and slow down the divorce process -- such as requiring couples to seek counseling before splitting up.

You see, society can't make people be faithful to their spouses; that's a matter of the heart. But what it CAN do is make it harder to be UNfaithful. Society can erect legal and social structures that encourage virtue and discourage vice. People who won't be virtuous out of principle may sometimes be induced to do the virtuous thing merely because it is easier and less troublesome.

That's why there was a profound wisdom in the old system that made divorce difficult, expensive, and inconvenient. The prospect of going through a long legal process causes many couples to try harder to make a struggling marriage work. We ought to support laws designed to reinstate some of the barriers to easy divorce.

And we'd better act quickly. Even our best efforts may be undermined by the tools of the Information Age. For they are designed to make everything simple and convenient and accessible -- even the dissolution of marriage.

___________________________

Couple Teaches Others How To Learn From Their Mistakes

Six years ago Bill and Amy Chastain were watching their now 13-year marriage disintegrate around them. Today, they are hoping to teach other couples to learn from their mistakes.

"God radically renewed and changed our relationship and our lives," Bill Chastain said while leading the seminar, Breaking through Barriers to Intimacy.

"Satan's great lie is that intimacy only means having a sexual relationship with someone," he told couples who packed a Ridgecrest classroom. "Society, the media and the world tell us that."

But God has a different idea, he added.

"He tells us that intimacy is the deepening relationship with someone, of gaining a better understanding of who they are and who he is. Intimacy is the process of moving deeper into a relationship."

While the Chastains may have looked as though they had the perfect marriage, Amy Chastain said the couple was living a lie.

"We looked really good. We pretended well, even in front of our parents, our friends and our church," she said.

But the couple was too busy putting up barriers and walls around their emotions to share the intimacy that makes a marriage work, she said.

It all finally came to a head after the realization they may have fallen out of love. It was "the lowest point of my life," Bill said. "We didn't want to live the lie anymore. So we made a conscious decision to make it work."

Bill and Amy said they struggled with the reality that it's "OK not to be perfect. It's OK to hurt."

"If our inside scars were visible on the outside, people would rush to help us," Bill said. "But they don't see the scars and we don't tell them, so we suffer by ourselves."

Some barriers to intimacy the Chastains mentioned during their seminar include:

• Control.

• Inability to express personal needs.

• Anger.

• Shifting the blame or responsibility.

• Living in the past.

• Fear of being intimate out of fear of being rejected.

• Selfishness.

• Betrayal of a confidence.

• Avoidance by using distractions such as TV, sports, etc.

• Putting on masks as if everything is all right when it's not.

• Fear of honesty.

• Shame and guilt.

• Pride.

The Chastains suggested ways couples can begin breaking down barriers in their marriages. They include:

• Prayer. "Cry out to God and ask him for wisdom," Amy said.

• Ask the tough questions of yourself and others, such as "What do you

really see in me?" and "How can I please God in my life?"

• Communicate honestly with one another and others. "The only way for

people to see into you is if you tell them what's going on," Bill

said. "They're not mind readers, and even if they want to help you,

they can't unless you let them."

Amy said couples should look at the word intimacy as instruction.

"Perhaps we should see it as 'into me see,'" she said.

*

Making Six Months Seem Like A Lifetime

There is a story of a young man who was told by his doctor that he had only six months to live. In shock, the young man asked if there was anything that could be done. After all, he was still a young man and had many things left to do in life.

The doctor thought about his question for a bit, and then finally gave him a solution. The doctor told the young man to go out and find the ugliest, most cantankerous woman in the county and marry her. He told the young man to insure that he found a woman who would incessantly nag him, and complain about everything he said or did.

Then he had to go out and buy the most beat-up old pickup truck he could find, preferably one that wouldn't run all of the time. Then he needed to buy a run down old apartment right in the middle of downtown Orlando.

Somewhat skeptical the young man looked at the doctor and asked, "Doc, are you sure that this will help me to live longer?" "Not at all," replied the doctor, "but it sure will make six months seem like a lifetime!"

No Civilization Without Restraint: Wise Words From 1939

It is not normal or healthy for a culture to talk about sex this much. From Pride month to education to companies telegraphing their commitments to inclusion and diversity, to just about every commercial, movie, or TV show produced today, sexual identity is treated as if it is central to human identity, human purpose, and human happiness. And this vision of life and the world is especially force-fed to children, who are essentially subjects of our social experimentations.

If the energy spent talking about sex is disproportionate, it’s important to know there were some who saw this coming. The best example is Oxford sociologist J.D. Unwin. In 1939, Unwin published a landmark book summarizing his research. Sex and Culture was a look at 80 tribes and six historical civilizations over the course of five millennia, through the lens of a single question: Does a culture’s ideas of sexual liberation predict its success or collapse?

Unwin’s findings were overwhelming:

“Just as societies have advanced [and] then faded away into a state of general decrepitude, so in each of them has marriage first previously changed from a temporary affair based on mutual consent to a lifelong association of one man with one woman, and then turned back to a loose union or to polygamy.”

What’s more, Unwin concluded,

“The whole of human history does not contain a single instance of a group becoming civilized unless it has been absolutely monogamous, nor is there any example of a group retaining its culture after it has adopted less rigorous customs.”

Unwin saw a pattern behind societies that unraveled. If three consecutive generations abandoned sexual restraint built around the protections of marriage and fidelity, they collapsed.

Simply put, sexuality is essential for survival. However, sexuality is such a powerful force, it must be controlled or else it can destroy a future rather than secure it. Wrongly ordered sexuality is devastating for both individuals and entire societies.

Unwin’s conclusions can be boiled down to a single issue. Are people living for the future, with the ability to delay gratification, or are they focusing only on the here and now? When a culture fails to restrain its sexual instincts, people think less about securing the future and instead compromise the stability, productivity, and wellbeing of the next generation in the pursuit of sexual pleasure.

Unwin claims that he had no moral or ideological axe to grind in this research. “I make no opinion about rightness or wrongness,” he wrote. But his work is nevertheless profound, as are his conclusions, which we seem to be living out in real time.

According to Pew Research, almost 90% of children lived with two married parents in 1960. By 2008 that number had dropped to just 64%. Over the same period, the percentage of kids born to unmarried women rose from 5% to 41%. There is really no question of how this impacts children. Studies show that teens from single-parent or blended families are 300% more likely to need psychological assistance, twice as likely to drop out of high school, and more likely to commit suicide. They end up with less college education and lower-paying jobs than their parents and are more likely to get divorced themselves.

This is not because children from nontraditional homes have less potential or less value. Nor do stable two-parent families guarantee outcomes for children. Statistics do not determine the future of an individual, but they can identify the future of a society. On a civilizational level, the future is a matter of math.

The early days of the sexual revolution reframed the morality of sexual behavior, but today it’s gone further, undermining the already fragile identity in the rising generation, fraying it in the various directions of the ever-growing acronym of sexual identities. Anywhere from 1 in 5 to nearly 40% of young people identify as LGBTQ today. Or, in the case of one junior high class in the Northeast I heard of recently, “all of them do.”

Christian faithfulness in this cultural moment must involve the protection of children and a commitment to the future of society. At the very least, that means speaking up, especially when it is unpopular to do so. Along the way, we will have to reject the “inevitability thesis,” the notion that all is lost and that things will only get worse so nothing we do matters. With courage and unconditional love for our neighbor, we continue to speak the truth.

And we will need to remind ourselves and each other of something that should be obvious but is not: The ideas and behavior of the late sexual revolution are not normal. Nor is our fascination and focus on sexuality as the central defining factor in human existence and value.

Human sexuality is not some arbitrary construct like a speed limit. It is as much a part of the fabric of life as gravity. We may deny that, but we will not avoid the pain of hitting the ground if we do.

________

Heart & Soul: A Team Needs a Captain

Ephesians 5:22

A Team Needs a Captain - but can two become one if one is in charge?

When Esther and I got married, we hadn't discussed who would do what. We were in love, and in the '70s "love was all you needed." If there was such a thing as premarital counseling to help us figure this (and other things) out, somehow we missed it. The only "counseling" I recall was from my family doctor who for some reason scheduled me for a physical when I asked for the requisite blood test. Clearly uncomfortable with the topic, he mumbled that it would be wise to engage in some "fondling of the privates" prior to intercourse. With that, Esther and I headed to the altar.

We learned about fondling easily enough, but determining who does what -- and more importantly, who ultimately calls the shots -- has been harder. Both of us grew up in homes where it was clear that the man of the house was, well, the man of the house. Maybe because of that, but also because this was the '70s, neither of us was keen on my laying down the law. For one thing, the woman I married was smarter than I was, especially in the area of finances. So the "traditional" male role of controlling the purse strings fell to Esther. And as one learns in economics and marriage, whoever controls the money, controls.

So I guess you would say we have a somewhat unorthodox relationship. Esther is still the one who decides, with my input of course, which bills to pay when, how much to sock away in a savings account, and which charities, besides our church, to support.

Add the fact that I do most of the cooking, and you might think we have one of those traditional hierarchical relationships, but with the roles reversed. She does the "manly" things while I pick up the slack by doing a few things normally left to "the wife." (Don't be fooled -- I don't do windows or the laundry, or clean up after myself in the kitchen.) But given that, it might look like Esther is the man of the house.

Not exactly. We never sat down and decided who would be the head or even if the house would have a head. Instead, we sort of fell into roles that seemed to suit our strengths. The who-will-manage-the-money question settled itself about a month after we were married, when Esther discovered some uncashed paychecks I'd tossed into my dresser drawer and forgotten.

"What are these?" she asked.

"Um, paychecks," I answered vaguely, not realizing this was a big deal.

In retrospect, I can see how my lack of a financial management system was such a shock to my organized thinker of a wife. We decided she'd handle the money.

So it became divide and conquer for us. Pay little attention to traditional roles but rely on our personal gifts and interests to get us through life. Should work like a charm, right? Well, not always. You see, I'm still a man.

Whenever Esther and I had a conflict, it was usually because I needed to be in control and didn't like the feeling of letting Esther make decisions I felt I ought to be making. It was one thing to let her write the checks at the end of the month. It was quite another to let her decide that we couldn't afford a house that I really liked. Despite our efforts to forge an egalitarian relationship, I still wanted to be the final authority.

I'd like to report that after 27 years of marriage, Esther and I have it all figured out. But I can't, because we don't. We have, however, made some progress toward what I'd call an egalitarian relationship with male veto privilege. It's clear that when two reasonably intelligent people join together, it makes no sense for one person to set her gifts and abilities aside. That goes against the Parable of the Talents, where the Bible admonishes us to make the most of what God has given us. I shudder to think where we would be financially if I'd insisted on handling the money. So we still divide our duties along the lines of what we each do best. I've learned to trust Esther's ability to really MANAGE our finances, schedule maintenance for home and cars, and generally organize a six-member household. Since she also has a full-time job, that has meant that in addition to my own contribution to our income, I cook (which I love) and help out with housecleaning (which I hate).

It's a neat arrangement, actually, but does this team have a captain? What do we do about Paul's teaching that a husband is the "head" of his wife and that she must submit (Eph. 5:22-23)? We handle it by being good creationists, honoring God's sovereignty by carefully and creatively balancing his Old Testament design for marriage with his New Testament instructions for working it out.

God's original plan was for two people to become one (Gen. 2:24). He didn't tell us how to do this, which is probably why the Apostle called it a "profound mystery." For us, becoming one has meant working hard at honest and ongoing communication. Defying those natural impulses to do what's best for ME rather than what's best for WE. When we do that, one person rarely feels the need to go out on a limb and rule by edict. If you work as hard on Genesis as you do on Ephesians, you'll naturally keep short accounts with one another, making decisions by consensus rather than control.

Becoming one also makes it easier for both of us during those rare times when we face an important choice requiring one person to make a Solomon-like decision. I'm not talking about who makes lunches for the kids or who closes the deal on a car, but whether to take a job in another city or change churches. If we've been diligent about becoming one, I know exactly what Esther thinks and feels about our options. If I obey the command to love her as myself (Eph. 5:28), I'd be risking my relationship with God if I disregarded her needs.

What Esther SUBMITS to then is something we've both thought through, not some personal agenda of mine that is forged in solitude.

I've noticed that most wives are more skilled at becoming one than most husbands are -- as if it's natural for women and unnatural for men. That would explain why men so often abuse headship by distorting it into tyranny. It might also explain why God felt it necessary to command husbands to love their wives sacrificially (Eph. 5:25). And getting back to Genesis, it underscores why one of the best ways husbands can lead is by making sure both partners are enjoying the blessings of oneness.

Maybe we make too much of this issue of who's in charge. The Bible seems far more interested in a union that is lifelong and mutually beneficial -- and most important, one that honors our Lord. That doesn't happen when either husband or wife is making a lot of selfish demands on the other. It grows out of a selfless love that concerns itself with serving each other.

A few weeks ago, Esther and I were trying to decide where to go on vacation. Actually, she just wanted to make sure we took one. I was the one who couldn't decide.

"If it were totally up to you, where would you go?" I asked. I wanted her to name some really exotic place so I could "come through" for her by making it happen and leading her into her wildest dreams. Then I'd be a real hero for my wife. But as much as I wanted to choose a place that would delight her, Esther was just as determined to please me.

"I'd go wherever you would be happiest," she told me, "because that's where I like it the best."

NOW you can see why I married her.

_________________________

Lyn Cryderman is associate publisher at Zondervan Publishing House. He and Esther have four children and live in Caledonia, Michigan.

Summer 1998, Vol. 15, No. 2, Page 8

Heart & Soul: Happily Ever After?

1 John 3:2

Happiness comes and goes. I'm looking for something that lasts.

Down in Georgia they have a saying: "If Mama ain't happy, ain't nobody happy." It's a reminder that one person's moods affect the entire household, but indirectly it points to a larger problem. The truth is, Mama never can stay completely happy, and neither can Daddy. In short, ain't nobody happy for long.

I know some people who seem to be perpetually cheerful, and others who have learned to take joy in even the small pleasures of life. But that's not the same as being "happy."

Happiness is something most people pursue, and it's a big element in bringing couples together. How many marriages were born in the sincere but naive promise: "I'll make you happy"? Unfortunately, that's a commitment that can't be fully kept, and the attempt can become an impossible burden to bear.

My wife, Leisa, and I never promised to make each other happy. But after ten years of marriage, I found I had somehow assumed responsibility for her happiness. If she woke up in a bad mood, then somehow it must be my fault. If our plans didn't work out, I surely must have contributed to her disappointment. If the furniture we bought turned out to be uncomfortable, if the car we bought turned out to be a lemon, I felt bad that my wife was displeased.

I don't think Leisa was expecting me to make her happy in every way. I was the one with unrealistic expectations. In any case, it all came to a head one day not long after we'd moved to another state and built a beautiful new home. I'd made a difficult job change, taken on considerable debt and put my graduate degree on hold at least in part because I knew she longed to get out of our cramped housing situation and live like "normal" people.

The new job wasn't going well, so you can imagine my reaction when Leisa began to find fault with what I'd thought was her dream come true. The yard was poorly landscaped. The master bath window was too big. The white kitchen floor never looked clean.

I came home from work exhausted one night and asked how decorating was going. When she expressed a mild complaint about a minor flaw of the house, I exploded.

"Can't you EVER be happy?" I said accusingly. She was taken back by my vehemence, and before she could reply, I said, "From now on, I give up trying to make you happy. Never again will I take responsibility for your happiness."

You can imagine the battle royal that followed. It took us a while to sort things out, but in the end I realized something good had come out of the confrontation: I'd set myself free from the bonds of my own unrealistic expectations. I couldn't keep my wife happy. I couldn't even keep myself happy. Happiness was too perishable a substance; it couldn't be kept in the cabinet and dispensed daily like vitamins.

When I gave up on the pursuit of happiness for my spouse, I discovered that something much more satisfying could be cultivated. I mean, of course, the spiritual fruit of joy.

ETERNAL HAPPINESS

Have you ever tried to define happiness? What most of us call happiness is related to contentment, which has the same root as the word "contain." To be content is to possess something we've desired as a good. To be happy, then -- at least for a time -- is to be satisfied because we've obtained something we've desired.

In this sense, happiness is not so much a feeling as a state of being that results from acquisition. No wonder we often describe our wedding day, or the day our first child was born, as "the happiest day of our life." We deeply desired to be joined to that man or woman; we longed to hold a child in our arms. And on that wonderful day, we finally possessed what we had earnestly sought.

But the first major fight between newlyweds takes some of the glow off those wedding bands. Later, that cooing bundle of joy wakes up screaming every hour on the hour through the night. Or worse: A spouse becomes violent; a teenager ends up in prison. Great or small, happiness comes and goes. The summer of our bliss turns into the winter of our discontent.

It makes sense, then, to enjoy the happinesses of life as they come. But, at the same time, it's obvious why the PURSUIT of happiness is the unhappiest of pursuits. Such a state of contentment is at best temporary and fragile, dependent on our changing desires and circumstances. The conditions for happiness aren't always under our control; we can't always have what we want.

Is there, then, no genuine and enduring happiness? Of course; it comes with the possession of that true and ultimate Good -- God himself -- who makes other goods pale by comparison and who can never be lost. The full and eternal happiness of heaven will blossom from our being continually united to God in love while we remain on earth. Happiness comes from possessing God fully and being possessed by him fully. But for now, because our love is imperfect, even our happiness in God is imperfect.

So in the meantime, what can we pursue, if not happiness?

THE LOVE ENCOUNTER

Folks often speak of happiness and joy as if they were the same thing, but that's a mistake. Joy brings us pleasure just as happiness does, but it doesn't depend on acquisition.

We find joy in the sense of delight that comes from being in the presence of someone or something we love. It's based on our ENCOUNTER with something. Happiness possesses; joy appreciates. Happiness grasps; joy beholds.

When Leisa and I vacation at the beach and wake up to view a glorious sunrise over the ocean, the pleasure we feel at the sight isn't happiness. We can't possess the sunrise. We know the streaks of crimson and gold will fade quickly; we don't have the satisfaction of having acquired them for ourselves.

Still, the sunrise gives us joy. Looking out over the waves, we're delighted simply by encountering such beauty. We behold something good, we love it, and we feel an inner sweetness in the presence of what we love. More wonderful still, since we know and love our Creator, we find a deeper sense of joy in admiring the handiwork of Goodness himself.

See, just as the ultimate happiness comes from possessing God, the ultimate joy comes from beholding God. Our joy will be full in heaven, when we will forever behold the face of God (see 1 John 3:2). In the meantime, God is wooing us, drawing us with glimpses of goodness in this world that point us toward him as their Source.

To cultivate joy in marriage, we look for God at work in the one we love. His fingerprints are everywhere: in that wedding ring, scratched, but irremovable; in the wildflowers gathered for the dinner table; in the swelling voice in the shower, off-key but enthusiastic; in the mended clothes, the repaired appliance, the toddler's hurt finger healed with a kiss. When we turn our attention to what's good and precious in our home, when we search out and appreciate the beauty of marital love in its daily, earthy tokens, we gather God's treasure, one jewel at a time.

Even on the unhappiest day we can find a reason for joy.

__________________________

Paul Thigpen is assistant professor of religious studies at Southwest Missouri State University in Springfield, Missouri. He and Leisa have two children.

Winter 1997, Vol. 14, No. 4, Page 12

*

She Married the Millionaire

In February 2000, Darva Conger agreed to be one of the 50 women participants in "Who Wants to Marry a Multimillionaire." She said she just wanted to enjoy a free trip to Las Vegas and to get to be part of the taping of the show. Darva never dreamed that she would end up being selected by Rick Rockwell to be his bride. But she was. And she said, "I do."

Days later, of course, she got an annulment. "I committed an error in judgment," Conger says. "I have worked my whole life to be a credible person, a person of integrity, and unfortunately in two hours I destroyed much of that credibility... I'd like it back."

Conger said she felt trapped during the ceremony and decided to play the role. "I wish I would have had the moral fortitude at that point in time to just walk away, but it was an incredible amount of pressure."

Darva Conger claims to be a Christian. How is she dealing with her moral fortitude today? She is posing for Playboy…

*

[Original illustration at this number was a duplicate of HolwickID #18477]

Breach of Contract: Should We Sue Divorcing Couples?

The minister was outraged, and he didn't care who knew it. The question he had for Dr. Laura Schlessinger was this: Was he out of bounds to sue a couple he had recently married -- a couple who had promised never to divorce?

The minister's anger is a sign -- and a good one, in my view -- that the church recognizes it needs to be doing something about high divorce rates.

As this pastor explained to Dr. Laura, the divorcing couple had begged him to marry them; they promised they would never part. But part they did -- just 18 months after the ceremony.

The minister asked: "Do you think taking them to court for some token amount would be a good idea? After all, they made a promise to God, to me, and to the guests at their wedding that they would stay married until death." And he added: "I provided a service on the condition that they were marrying for life. They are breaking the contract, and I want compensation for wasting so many hours on that wedding."

Well, the minister's comments struck a nerve. When Dr. Laura posed this question to her radio audience, the response was overwhelming. One woman said: "I think [everyone] who attended should be able to sue for fraud." She labeled the wedding "a deceitful attempt to extract cash and gifts from unsuspecting friends and family."

Another had an even better idea: When one marriage partner dumps the other, she said, the minister should invite all the wedding guests back and "un-perform" the ceremony. The departing spouse would be forced to explain why he or she is leaving, buy presents for the guests, and pay all the expenses of the "un-ceremony."

Well, these ideas may sound humorous -- in a vindictive sort of way -- but they do raise a serious question. Why can't people keep their marriages together?

My friend Mike McManus, who wrote a book called "Marriage Savers," suggests that divorce is partly the fault of the church. Many do a poor job of preparing couples for lasting marriages.

Mike maintains that if churches really wanted to keep marriages from unraveling, they would introduce the bride and groom to programs with a proven success record.

For example, for engaged couples, there's a program called PREPARE. The couple fills out a questionnaire, which provides an objective snapshot of the state of their relationship. Then, older married couples teach them concrete strategies for tackling weak areas. PREPARE's questionnaire can predict with 80 percent accuracy which marriages will end in divorce.

For struggling newlyweds, there's a program called ENRICH. In this one, newlyweds work with older couples who act as mentors. By candidly sharing their own problems and solutions, the mentors offer practical examples of how to save a marriage.

The church ought to be a force for preserving the institution God has ordained as the basis of the social order. Call us here at BreakPoint and we'll send you some timely information on these Marriage Saver programs.

America's divorce rate is a tragedy. But instead of getting angry and suing couples for breach of contract, we ought to do everything we can to help build unbreakable marriages.

___________________

Don't Break Faith

Malachi 2:10

Sermon in Malachi series. Malachi 2:10-16

DON'T BREAK FAITH

=================

I. Marriage isn't what it used to be.

II. Marriage is not a contract.

A. Contracts are only two-way, covenants are three-way. 2:14

B. Malachi's view of marriage is radical.

III. What was happening in Israel.

A. Intermarriage with pagan women .

B. Divorce.

IV. Guard your spirit.

A. Our relationships have spiritual impact. 1 Peter 3:7

B. Our children are affected. 2:15

C. Withheld blessings.

V. Keep your faith through six commitments.

1: TO GROW IN CHRIST FOR THE REST OF MY LIFE.

2: TO STAY COMMITTED AND TO WORK TO SOLVE ALL PROBLEMS.

3: TO BE FAITHFUL TO MY MATE IN BOTH MIND AND ACTION.

4: TO COMMUNICATE - NO MATTER WHAT.

5: TO BE A SERVANT.

6: TO ASSUME IN EVERYTHING THAT MY MATE'S INTENTIONS ARE GOOD.

Intimate Marriage In An Age of Distance: Building Marriages For Life

Matthew 5:28

Every marriage needs six basic commitments:

COMMITMENT 1: TO GROW IN CHRIST FOR THE REST OF MY LIFE.

1) None of us has matured enough that our present state should

be permanent.

2) We must seek to grow. The result of a lifetime commitment to

growth in Christ is that we mature in every area of life.

3) Only an open, teachable person can develop the

characteristics needed in a good marriage partner.

COMMITMENT 2: TO STAY COMMITTED TO OUR MARRIAGE FOR LIFE, AND TO WORK

TO SOLVE ALL PROBLEMS THAT ARISE.

1) This commitment provides the security of permanence and

keeps us from running away from problems.

a) Either we face up to them and solve them; or...

b) We live with them.

2) Does this enslave the Christian? No!

a) Instead it gives security in the midst of a sinking

world.

COMMITMENT 3: TO BE FAITHFUL TO MY MATE IN BOTH MIND AND ACTION.

1) Unfaithful actions can be headed off by a commitment to

think romantically only about your husband or wife.

Ann Landers may say sexual fantasies involving others

are okay, but Jesus doesn't say that (Matthew 5:28).

2) To decide, "My mate is the only one I will allow myself

to think about in this way" will cut off a lot of

problems before they begin.

The result in your marriage will be a greater level of

mutual trust.

COMMITMENT 4: TO COMMUNICATE - NO MATTER WHAT.

1) Most people learn not to reveal many of their thoughts and

feelings because these are personal.

We are so easily judged by others-"You shouldn't feel

that way."

This fear of judgment from others brings an attitude of

"I'll never mention that again."

2) Communicate everything in marriage: silence, tears, anger,

defiance, defensiveness, the children, or lack of time.

a) This is a commitment to communicate not just facts and

accomplishments, but feelings, thoughts, problems,

and failures.

b) Both the positives and the negatives in our lives need

expression.

COMMITMENT 5: TO BE A SERVANT.

1) The husband and wife are equal in dignity and worth, and

work together as "joint heirs of the grace of life"

(1 Peter 3:7) to achieve common goals.

2) We fulfill different roles.

a) The husband takes responsibility as the leader in

a marriage (1 Cor. 11:3), but his success begins

and ends with a servant's attitude.

b) All Christians are to "serve one another."

COMMITMENT 6: TO ASSUME IN EVERYTHING THAT MY MATE'S INTENTIONS ARE GOOD.

1) We are told not to attribute evil to God (James 1:13), and

in marriage we are likewise to assume the best about our

partner's intentions.

2) The results of some of our mate's actions may not seem good,

but we must believe that the INTENT was good.

a) Make sure you give your husband or wife the benefit of

the doubt.

b) Avoid accusations & "keep no record of wrongs." 1 Cor 13:5

*

I'll Never Understand My Wife

I'll never understand my wife.

The day she moved in with me, she started opening and closing my kitchen cabinets, gasping, "You don't have any shelf paper! We're going to have to get some shelf paper in here before I move my dishes in."

"But why?" I asked innocently.

"To keep the dishes clean," she answered matter-of-factly. I didn't understand how the dust would magically migrate off the dishes if they had sticky blue paper under them, but I knew when to be quiet.

Then came the day when I left the toilet seat up.

"We never left the toilet seat up in my family," she scolded. "It's impolite."

"It wasn't impolite in my family," I said sheepishly.

"Your family didn't have cats."

In addition to these lessons, I also learned how I was supposed to squeeze the toothpaste tube, which towel to use after a shower and where the spoons are supposed to go when I set the table. I had no idea I was so uneducated.

Nope, I'll never understand my wife.

She alphabetizes her spices, washes dishes before sending them through the dishwasher, and sorts laundry into different piles before throwing it into the washing machine. Can you imagine?

She wears pajamas to bed. I didn't think anyone in North America still wore pajamas to bed. She has a coat that makes her look like Sherlock Holmes. "I could get you a new coat," I offered.

"No. This one was my grandmother's," she said, decisively ending the conversation.

Then, after we had kids, she acted even stranger. Wearing those pajamas all day long, eating breakfast at 1:00 P.M., carrying around a diaper bag the size of a minivan, talking in one syllable paragraphs.

She carried our baby everywhere -- on her back, on her front, in her arms, over her shoulder. She never set her down, even when other young mothers shook their heads as they set down the car seat with their baby in it, or peered down into their playpens. What an oddity she was, clutching that child.

My wife also chose to nurse her even when her friends told her not to bother. She picked up the baby whenever she cried, even though people told her it was healthy to let her wail.

"It's good for her lungs to cry," they would say.

"It's better for her heart to smile," she'd answer.

One day a friend of mine snickered at the bumper sticker my wife had put on the back of our car: "Being a Stay-at-Home Mom Is a Work of Heart."

"My wife must have put that on there," I said.

"My wife works," he boasted.

"So does mine," I said, smiling.

Once, I was filling out one of those warranty registration cards and I check "homemaker" for my wife's occupation. Big mistake. She glanced over it and quickly corrected me. "I am not a homemaker. I am not a housewife. I am a mother."

"But there's no category for that," I stammered.

"Add one," she said.

I did.

And then one day, a few years later, she lay in bed smiling when I got up to go to work.

"What's wrong?" I asked.

"Nothing. Everything is wonderful. I didn't have to get up at all last night to calm the kids. And they didn't crawl in bed with us."

"Oh," I said, still not understanding.

"It was the first time I've slept through the night in four years." It was? Four years? That's a long time. I hadn't even noticed. Why hadn't she ever complained? I would have.

One day, in one thoughtless moment, I said something that sent her fleeing to the bedroom in tears. I went in to apologize. She knew I meant it because by then I was crying, too.

"I forgive you," she said. And you know what? She did. She never brought it up again. Not even when she got angry and could have hauled out the heavy artillery. She forgave, and she forgot.

Nope, I'll never understand my wife. And you know what? Our daughter is acting more and more like her mother every day.

If she turns out to be anything like her mom, someday there's going to be one more lucky guy in this world, thankful for the shelf paper in his cupboard.

______________________

Reversing Gender Roles

Several years before the Gulf War, Barbara Walters did a story on gender roles in Kuwait. She observed women traditionally walked about 10 feet behind their husbands. Walters returned to Kuwait recently and discovered men were now walking several yards behind their wives.

Always the venerable investigator, Walters approached a woman on the street for an explanation. "This is marvelous," she said. "What enabled women here to achieve this reversal of roles?"

The woman replied, "Land mines!"

Statistics

In a recently published text book concerning marriage and the family we are informed that "in 1982, a record 2.5 million couples entered into the state of holy matrimony" (McCubbin, et al. 153). The authors also give some statistical data from the U.S. Bureau of the Census regarding the probability of those 2.5 million couples staying married. According to their findings, of every 100 couples married in 1983:

* 19 will divorce before their fifth anniversary.

* 14 more will before their tenth anniversary.

* 7 more will before their 15th anniversary.

* 7 more will before their 25th anniversary.

* 3 more will before their 50th anniversary.

Sadly enough, this information reveals that only half of the marriages in the U.S. will actually fulfill the traditional vow "till death us do part"--which the text would have us believe is "simply obsolete, no longer meeting the needs of Americans late in the twentieth century" (299).

Included in this research brief is the fact that in the 20-year period from 1960 to 1980, "the number of divorced men and women in the United States more than tripled" (299). In seeking to explain the causes of such high proportions of divorce rates in the U.S. the authors suggest several reasons. One reason given is that marriage is not providing the necessary ingredients for the fulfillment of one's own personal happiness and goals in life (299). Another suggestion given is that there is no longer the need for, or a high value placed upon, the stability provided by what is questionably described as the "normal" family--"a happily married couple, with two well-adjusted children, a dog, and a beautiful suburban home" (300). This is in part, the authors declare, due to the fact that with the increase in the number of women who work outside the home comes a greater independence of women from their husbands for financial support (300). Unfortunately, it is nevertheless true that the American model of the family has become based upon utilitarianism: ". . .a secondary relationship. . .based on services, convenience" (Enlow 8). While McCubbin and Dahl recognize that a decline in morality may also be a cause of such high divorce rates in the U.S., the authors do not give any consideration to this possibility.

Also stated is the fact that the Census data indicated that three out of four divorced women and five out of six divorced men eventually remarry (McCubbin, et al. 322). In the United States today "one out of every three marriages is a remarriage" (322). In fact, "remarried families now comprise 13 percent of all families in the United States" (323). Included in these statistics is the estimate that "one million American children

under the age of 18 become stepchildren each year" (323). It is highly likely that these remarriages include children from both partners involved (323). In spite of the complexities and deep psychological hurts of everyone involved, the authors of this secular text argue that "remarriage appears to spur on or accompany significant improvements in attitude and mental health" (324). (Taken from a scholarly paper by Jim Johnson)

Parable of Magic Eyes

In Forgive and Forget, Lewis Smedes tells the parable of the Magic Eyes. Fouke was a righteous baker and Hilda was his wife. He was cold, she was warm. He caught her in the act of adultery and forgave her ... or so it seemed. Nursed a quiet hate. Each time he felt it an angel would drop a pebble in his heart. Eventually he became so tired and weighted down that he cried out for deliverance. Angel appeared. He could make the pebbles go away, but Fouke would need to use the “magic eyes.” He would have to see Hilda not as the person who hurt him but as a weak woman who needed him. “How do I get them?” Fouke asked. “Merely ask and it will be given,” said the angel. “Each time you look at Hilda with your new eyes I will lift one pebble from your heart.” Angel kept his word. Took some time but Fouke's heart changed and he became a new man!

“THE MAGIC EYES”

by Lewis Smedes

Forgive and Forget (Harper and Row, 1984).

pp. xii-xv.

In the village of Faken in innermost Friesland there lived a long thin baker named Fouke, a righteous man, with a long thin chin and a long thin nose. Fouke was so upright that he seemed to spray righteousness from his thin lips over everyone who came near him; so the people of Faken preferred to stay away.

Fouke's wife, Hilda, was short and round, her arms were round, her bosom was round, her rump was round. Hilda did not keep people at bay with righteousness; her soft roundness seemed to invite them instead to come close to her in order to share the warm cheer of her open heart. Hilda respected her husband, and loved him too, as much as he allowed her; but her heart ached for something more from him than his worthy righteousness. And there, in the bed of her need lay the seed of sadness.

One morning, having worked since dawn to knead his dough for the ovens, Fouke came home and found a stranger in his bedroom lying on Hilda's round bosom. Hilda's adultery soon became the talk of the tavern and the scandal of the Faken congregation. Everyone assumed that Fouke would cast Hilda out of his house, so righteous was he. But he surprised everyone by keeping Hilda as his wife, saying he forgave her as the Good Book said he should.

In his heart of hearts, however, Fouke could not forgive Hilda for bringing shame to his name. Whenever he thought about her, his feelings toward her were angry and hard; he despised her as if she were a common whore. When it came right down to it, he hated her for betraying him after he had been so good and so faithful a husband to her. He only pretended to forgive Hilda so that he could punish her with his righteous mercy.

But Fouke's fakery did not sit well in heaven. So each time that Fouke would feel his secret hate toward Hilda, an angel came to him and dropped a small pebble, hardly the size of a shirt button, into Fouke's heart. Each time a pebble dropped, Fouke would feel a stab of pain like the pain he felt from the moment he came on Hilda feeding her hungry heart from a stranger's larder. Thus he hated her the more; his hate brought him pain and his pain made him hate.

The pebbles multiplied. And Fouke's heart grew very heavy with the weight of them, so heavy that the top half of his body bent forward so far that he had to strain his neck upward in order to see straight ahead. Weary with hurt, Fouke began to wish he were dead.

One night the angel who dropped the pebbles into his heart came to Fouke and told him how he could be healed of his hurt. There was one cure and one cure alone, he said, for the hurt of a wounded heart. Fouke would need the miracle of the magic eyes. He would need eyes that could look back to the beginning of his hurt and see his Hilda, not as a wife who betrayed him, but as a weak woman who needed him. Only a new way of looking at things through the magic eyes could heal the hurt flowing from the wounds of yesterday.

Fouke protested. “Nothing can change the past,” he said. “Hilda is guilty, a fact that not even an angel can change.” “Yes, poor hurting man, you are right,” the angel said. “You cannot change the past, you can only heal the hurt that comes to you from the past. And you can heal it only with the vision of the magic eyes.”

“And how can I get your magic eyes?” pouted Fouke. “Only ask, desiring as you ask, and they will be given you. And each time you see Hilda through your new eyes, one pebble will be lifted from your aching heart.”

Fouke could not ask at once, for he had grown to love his hatred. But the pain of his heart finally drove him to want and to ask for the magic eyes that the angel had promised. So he asked. And the angel gave.

Soon Hilda began to change in front of Fouke's eyes, wonderfully and mysteriously. He began to see her as a needy woman who loved him instead of a wicked woman who betrayed him. The angel kept his promise; he lifted the pebbles from Fouke's heart, one by one, though it took a long time to take them all away. Fouke gradually felt his heart grow lighter; he began to walk straight again, and somehow his nose and his chin seemed less thin and sharp than before. He invited Hilda to come into his heart again, and she came, and together they began again a journey into their second season of humble joy.

*

Wife wrecking husband's car

Bob Russell in TAKE COMFORT tells of Mary Brunson who was driving her husband's new car. She made a wrong turn and sideswiped another car. Tearfully, she fumbled through the glove compartment for the insurance and registration papers. Attached to the papers was this note from her husband: "Dear Mary, when you read these papers, remember it's you I love and not the car." (Cincinnati, OH: Standard Pub., 1991, p. 111).

"The Wall"

THE WALL: Their wedding picture mocked them from the table, these two whose minds no longer touched

each other. They lived with such a heavy barricade between them that neither battering ram of words nor artilleries of touch could bring it down.

Somewhere between the oldest child's first tooth and the youngest daughter's graduation they lost each other. Throughout the years each slowly unraveled that tangled ball of string called "self" and as they tugged at stubborn knots each hid his searching from the other.

Sometimes she cried at night and begged the darkness to tell her who she was. He lay beside her snoring like a hibernating bear, unaware of her winter. Once after they had made love, he had wanted to tell her how afraid he was of dying, but fearing to show her his naked soul, he spoke instead of how beautiful her hair was.

She took a course in modern art trying to find herself in colors splashed upon a canvas and complained to other women about men who are insensitive. He climbed into a tomb called the office, wrapped his mind in a shroud of paper figures and buried himself in customers.

Slowly the wall between them rose, cemented by the mortar of indifference, one day reaching out to touch each other, they found a barrier they could not penetrate and recoiling from the coldness of stone each retreated from the stranger on the other side.

For when love dies, it is not in a moment of angry battle, nor when fiery bodies lose their heat, it lies panting, exhausted, expiring at the bottom of a wall it could not scale.

37 things to say/not say

Steve Stephens

27 Things Not to Say to Your Spouse

There is nothing more painful than having unhealthy communication with the

one you love. It is through communication that we connect and our spirits

touch. If that connection becomes contaminated, it is only a matter of

time before the whole relationship is poisoned. In the process of

communication, wisdom is knowing what not to say rather than what to say...

Therefore, I gathered together some close friends and asked them what not

to say to your spouse. Here is their list:

"I told you so."

"You're just like your mother."

"You're always in a bad mood."

"You just don't think."

"It's your fault."

"What's wrong with you?"

"All you ever do is complain."

"I can't do anything to please you."

"You get what you deserve."

"Why don't you ever listen to me?"

"Can't you be more responsible?"

"What were you thinking?"

"You're impossible!"

"I don't know why I put up with you."

"I can talk to you until I'm blue in the face and it doesn't do any good."

"I can do whatever I like."

"If you don't like it, you can just leave."

"Can't you do anything right?"

"That was stupid."

"All you ever do is think of yourself."

"If you really loved me, you'd do this."

"You're such a baby."

"Turnabout's fair play."

"You deserve a dose of your own medicine."

"What's your problem?"

"I can never understand you."

"Do you always have to be right?"

-----------------------------

(and now the good part)

-----------------------------

Steve Stephens

37 Things to Say to Your Spouse

A healthy marriage is a safe haven where we can relax and recuperate from

the tensions of everyday life. We need to hear positive things from our

mate. Just as I gathered together some friends to tell me what not to say

to a spouse, so they also suggested what they would like to hear from their

spouse.

"Good job!"

"You are wonderful."

"That was really great."

"You look gorgeous today."

"I don't feel complete without you."

"I appreciate all the things you've done for me all these years."

"You come first in my life, before the kids, career, friends, anything."

"I'm glad I married you."

"You're the best friend I have."

"If I had to do it over again, I'd still marry you."

"I wanted you today."

"I missed you today."

"I couldn't get you out of my mind today."

"It's nice to wake up next to you."

"I will always love you."

"I love to see your eyes sparkle when you smile."

"As always, you look good today."

"I trust you."

"I can always count on you."

"You make me feel good."

"I'm so proud to be married to you."

"I'm sorry."

"I was wrong."

"What would you like?"

"What is on your mind?"

"Let me just listen."

"You are so special."

"I can't imagine life without you."

"I wish I were a better partner."

"What can I do help?"

"Pray for me."

"I'm praying for you today."

"I prize every moment we spend together."

"Thank you for loving me."

"Thank you for accepting me."

"Thank you for being my partner."

"You make everyday brighter."

Consideration

The following letter once appeared in an Ann Landers column: "Dear Ann: I was interested in the letter signed `Sizzling in Sioux Falls.' It was from a woman whose husband gave her a dollar for their anniversary and said, `Here, go buy yourself a nice card.' I can top that. I work in a bookstore that handles all sorts of

greeting cards. Last week a man came in with his wife. He smiled at me and said, `Today is my wife's birthday.' He browsed a bit. Selected a pretty card, handed it to her and waited for a reaction. `It's lovely,' she said. The man then took the card out of her hand, placed it back on the rack, and said, `That was your birthday gift this year.' Again he smiled at me and they both left.

Happy marriage contest

"Happy Marriage Contest"

Good Housekeeping magazine recently sponsored a happy marriage

contest. 12,000 entered the contest! (Would you?!) The contest was won

by Dillon and Patti Bayes from Taladega, Alabama. Dillion preaches for

the church of Christ there.

I thought you would like to hear their thoughts on what makes a happy

marriage:

We gave . . .

. . . When we WANTED to receive.

We served . . .

. . . When we WANTED to feast.

We listened . . .

. . . When we WANTED to talk.

We submitted . . .

. . . When we WANTED to reign.

We forgave . . .

. . . When we WANTED to remember.

We stayed . . .

. . . When we WANTED to leave.

Importance of faith

In his book Love for a Lifetime, Dr. James Dobson tells of receiving this letter. It illustrates what can happen when there is not a common faith to build a marriage upon: "Dear Dr. Dobson, My husband recently left me after fifteen years of marriage. We had a great physical, emotional and intellectual relationship. But something was missing........we had no spiritual bond between us. Please tell young couples that there will always be a void in their lives together without Christ. A good marriage must have its foundation in Him in order to experience lasting love, peace and joy. Since my husband walked out on me, I have tried to rebuild my relationship with God. I am now growing steadily in my walk with the Lord, but I am alone. Sincerely...." APPLICATION: This sad letter reminds us why it is so important for Christ to be the Lord of every marital relationship. Marriages that last are marriages where both man and wife have personally accepted Jesus Christ as their Lord and Saviour.

Importance of prayer

A recent article in Christianity Today gives these suprising statistics that point to a direct link between spirituality and success in forging a long-term intimate relationship. Tim Stafford's article is called: "Why Prayer Beats Playboy(CT: 2/7/94) and he quotes this finding: "....surveying married people, the most powerful correlate of marital happiness (was) praying together. Couples who pray together often are twice as likely to describe their marriages as being in the falling-in-love stage as those who pray less often. They also report higher sexual satisfaction and more sexual ecstasy." Build your marriage by praying!

Their Kiss Still Works!

I stand by the bed where a young woman lies, her face postoperative, her mouth twisted in palsy, clownish. A tiny twig of the facial nerve, the one to the muscles of her mouth, has been severed. The surgeon had followed with religious fervor the curve of her flesh; I promise you that. Nevertheless, to remove the tumor in her cheek, I had cut the little nerve.

Her young husband is in the room. He stands on the opposite side of the bed, and together they seem to dwell in the evening lamplight, isolated from me, private. Who are they, I ask myself, he and this wrymouth I have made, who gaze at and touch each other so generously, greedily? The young woman speaks.

"Will my mouth always be like this?" she asks.

"Yes," I say, "it will. It is because the nerve was cut."

She nods, and is silent. But the young man smiles.

"I like it," he says. "It is kind of cute."

All at once I know who he is. I understand, and I lower my gaze. One is not bold in an encounter with a god. Unmindful, he bends to kiss her crooked mouth, and I am so close I can see how he twists his own lips to accommodate to hers, to show her that their kiss still works. (Richard Selzer,"Mortal Lessons")

License no guarantee

Ann Landers received a letter from a reader that went like this:

Dear Ann Landers:

Why would any husband adore a lazy, messy, addlebrained wife? Her house looks as if they'd moved in yesterday. She never cooks a meal. Everything is in cans or frozen. Her kids eat sent-in food. Yet this slob's husband treats her like a Dresden doll. He calls her "Poopsie" and "Pet," and covers the telephone with a blanket when he goes to work so she can get her rest. On weekends he does the laundry and the marketing.

I get up at 6 a.m. and fix my husband's breakfast. I make his shirts because the ones in the stores "don't fit right." If my husband ever emptied a wastebasket, I'd faint. Once when I phoned him at work and asked him to pick up a loaf of bread on his way home, he swore at me for five minutes. The more you do for a man, the less he appreciates you. I feel like an unpaid housekeeper, not a wife. What goes on anyway?

-The Moose (That's what he calls me.)

Ann's response is classic. She responded:

A marriage license is not a guarantee that the marriage is going to work, any more than a fishing license assures that you'll catch fish. It merely gives you the legal right to try.

Ann Landers, "Men vs. Women--and Vice Versa," Reader's Digest, March, 1969, p. 59.

Longetivity

Every morning at exactly 7:00 I turn on the news & weather on the Today Show. After Bryant & Katie preview the show and someone does the news, Willard Scott does the weather. Part of his presentation for years has been to note the birthdays of people who've turned 100. Recently he's starting doing something else--recognizing people who've been married 75 years or longer! Can you imagine? Hard to believe that there are couples around who were married when Woodrow Wilson was president! As incredible as that sounds, there was one marriage that lasted even longer! You might say theirs was "a marriage made in heaven." No one knows their wedding anniversary, but from early chapters of Genesis we learn that Adam & Eve were married for some 900 yrs! Can you imagine! Do you have any idea how many days that is? 328,500! 328,500 days of ... morning breath ... "Oh Adam dear, can you take out the trash?"... "Hi honey, I'm home. What did you do today? Not much" ... How did they do it?

Mutual attraction

On his radio broadcast of June 28, 1993, Paul Harvey told the true story of a husband & wife who had marital problems and eventually divorced. Afterward, the man, seeking companionship, contacted a computerized dating service. He filled out a lengthy questionnaire detailing his own personality, characteristics and his description of the ideal partner.

After searching its databank of thousands of potential partners the computer presented the man with the name of his own ex-wife! But wait! The REST of the story ..... The man followed up on the computer's suggestion and arranged a date. He and his former wife discovered what attracted them to each other to begin with, rekindled their romance, and are now happily married!

No "quick-fixes"

Did you realize that there is a 50 million dollar a year SAT preparation industry in this country? SAT is entrance exam for many colleges & universities. Scores often determine acceptance. Students feel great anxiety and often attempt to "cram" for the SAT. Only problem is the SAT is not the kind of test you can cram for! No "quick fixes." Can't ignore good study habits for four years of HS and expect to do well on the SAT. Life works the same way! There are no "quick fixes" for ailing marriages. Marriages are made/broken every day in the little things that either add to or detract from companionship.

Shortest on record

A few years ago the following item appeared in a Florida newspaper: "A young British couple decided to get a divorce while their wedding reception was still in progress. Daniel and Susan Stockwell had barely started the reception before they had a furious argument that was apparently spurred when the bride saw the

groom talking to an ex-girlfriend. `I must have been mad to go through with it!' London's Daily Merit newspaper quoted the groom as saying. `I'm better off without her.'

What do I get for A rib?

"I'm LONELY," Adam told God in the Garden of Eden. "I need to have someone around for company."

"Okay," replied God. "I'm going to give you the perfect woman. Beautiful, intelligent and gracious -- she'll cook and clean for you and never say a cross word."

"Sounds good," Adam said. "But what's she going to cost?"

"An arm and a leg."

"That's pretty steep," countered Adam. What can I get for just a rib?"

-- Contributed by Martha G. Verlander, Reader's Digest, February 1991 p. 82

Wives prayer for husbands

Colossians 4:12

How To Pray For Your Husband

Sunday

That he might become a holy man, a man of prayer, mature in the Lord, growing in his knowledge of God (Thess. 5:23, Col. 4:12, Eph. 6:18, Eph. 1:18-19, Eph. 3:16-19, Col. 2:7, and John 15:7)

That he might daily seek God with all his heart, walking in the Spirit, moment by moment, growing in his dependence on Him (Ps. 119:1-2; Ps. 27:4; Prov. 3:5-6, Gal. 5:16, Eph. 5:18)

Monday

That he might learn to take every thought captive, to not be conformed to the world's thinking and to think scripturally (Rom. 12:2; 2 Cor. 10:5, I John 2:15-16)

That he would learn to not depend on his circumstances for happiness but on God alone (Hab. 3:17-19; Is. 26:3; Rom. 14:8, Ps. 34:4-5).

Tuesday

That he might have new strength in the midst of his busy schedule and that the Lord might infuse him with His strength (Is. 40:31; Eph. 3:14-19; Is. 41:10; Phil. 4:13)

That his self image might be a reflection of the Lord's thoughts toward him. (Eph. 1:17-19; Rom. 12:3; Ps. 139; 2 Cor. 3:5; Luke 12:6-7; 1 Cor. 6: 19-20)

Wednesday

That he might become a called man, not driven, with well thought-through and prayed-through goals in life. (1 Cor. 9:24-27, Phil. 3:13-14; 2 Chron. 7:14; Rom. 8:28)

That the Lord might give him wisdom to lead his family physically, emotionally, mentally and spiritually. (Eph. 1:17-19; James 1:5-7; James 3:17; Ps. 111:10)

Thursday

That he might stand firm against the schemes of the devil and resist satan in all circumstances (Eph. 6:10-18; James 4:7; 2 Cor. 10:4-5; Rev. 12:11; Rom. 8:5-6, Rom. 13:14)

That he might not be deceived in to unbelief or sin (Gal. 6:7, Acts 20:29-32; Ps. 119:9-11; Is. 59:3; Ps. 37:31)

Friday

That the fruit of the Spirit might be exhibited more and more in his life (Gal. 5:22-23).

that he might learn to love as God commanded (1 Cor. 13:4-7; Rom. 12:8-10; Matt. 22:37-40; John 15:13)

Saturday

That the Lord might protect him, guarding his course (Prov. 2:8; Prov. 16:9; Ps. 119:105)

that he might learn to manage his time well (Eph. 5:15-17)

(untitled)

Detroit, Michigan (UPI)

Clare Tommie told a Wayne county circuit court jury she doesn't feel a thing when she kisses her husband, and the jury

decided the

lack of sensation was worthy $275,000. Mrs. Tomie, who was awarded

$260,000 said a dental operation left her lower lip and lower jaw permanently

numb and had caused a strain in her relationship with her husband. The jury of

four women and two men also awarded her husband $15,000.

Montana-Rice Principle

Steve Farrar in Point Man talks about the Montana-Rice principle. One of most dangerous passing combinations in NFL history. 2 components: 1) Joe Montana has authority over Jerry Rice; 2) Jerry Rice submits to Joe Montana's authority. When Montana calls an audible at line of scrimmage Jerry doesn't yell: "That's the most stupid play I ever heard in my life!" Give & take--submission is the key.

The Beauty of Love

The question is asked, “Is there anything more beautiful in life than a boy and a girl clasping clean hands and pure hearts in the path of marriage? Can there be anything more beautiful than young love?”

And the answer is given. “Yes, there is a more beautiful thing. It is the spectacle of an old man and an old woman finishing their journey together on that path. Their hands are gnarled, but still clasped; their faces are seamed, but still radiant; their hearts are physically bowed and tired, but still strong with love and devotion for one another. Yes, there is a more beautiful thing than young love. It is Old love.”

Cohabiting Parents Do Kids Harm

Luke 20:34

Unmarried, cohabiting parents may be putting their kids at risk for a host of personal problems -- at least according to a new report from the University of Virgina’s National Marriage Project and the Institute for American Values. But are the findings in the report really as straightforward as they seem?

The report, released August 16 and entitled “Why Marriage Matters,” pulls together findings from 18 scholars to argue that kids living in cohabiting households don’t do as well socially, educationally and psychologically as kids living in intact married households. The authors point to a lack of stability in cohabiting relationships as one of the culprits: cohabiting couples with a child are more than twice as likely to break up before their child turns 12 as their married counterparts. That lack of stability -- defined as the rotating crop of parent-like figures who transition in and out of kids’ lives -- is tied to school failure, behavior problems, drug use and loneliness. The effects are especially evident in children who experience several of these transitions.

The findings are cause for concern, according to the authors, because cohabiting families are on the rise: there are twelve times as many today as there were in the 1970s. Recent statistics show that 42 percent of kids have lived in a cohabiting household by the age of twelve (by contrast, only 24 percent of kids have experienced divorce by that age). Marriage, the authors say, is the gold standard for stability and is therefore the relationship that will ensure kids have the best shot at succeeding in life.

But since the report was released, a number of critics have argued that the lack of a marriage vow alone can’t account for the problems among kids of unmarried couples. Rates of cohabitation are deeply connected to race, class, and education, they say (and indeed, poor communities have seen the biggest declines in marriage rates and the biggest upswings in out-of-wedlock births in recent decades).

We asked Bradford Wilcox, director of the National Marriage Project, to take us through the findings in the report, and respond to some of the criticism it has received:

What was the most surprising finding of the report?

That kids in America today are more likely to see mom and/or dad cohabiting, and they are less likely to actually experience a parental divorce.

We know that stability [defined as no departure of a parent/partner or entry of a new parent/partner into the family home] tends to foster better outcomes for children. One recent estimate from the National Survey of Family Growth found that kids in the mid-2000s born to cohabiting parents were more than twice as likely to see mom and dad break up by the age of 12 compared to kids born to married parents.

Based on your findings, is a child of cohabitation better or worse off than a child of a single mother?

It depends. On the economic front, kids in cohabiting households tend to do better than kids in a single parent house, in part because they have access to two adults who can bring an income or resources into the home. When it comes to other outcomes, like depression, or drug use or school failure, the outcomes are pretty similar between kids who are in single parent families and kids in cohabiting families.

What about a child of cohabitation versus a child of divorce -- who fares better there?

People are often mystified at equating divorce and cohabiting, because one is the break-up and one is the existence of a relationship. So why would I draw an equivalency between those different events? The reason is that in much of the research on child well-being, the social, the educational and the psychological outcomes for kids look quite similar for kids in single parent families, kids in families that have been affected by divorce, and kids in cohabiting families.

The one exception to that is the instance of child abuse: kids who are in cohabitation households with mom and mom’s boyfriend are much more likely to be sexually, emotionally, and psychically abused. In that regard, the cohabiting household is truly distinctive.

Divorced kids are better off if mom remains stably single or if she waits to get married before she brings a new parent into the household. The take away message here is that people should be careful before they bring someone into the home and that ideally, they should get married before they do so, in part because marriage tends to make people treat their own relationship and any kids involved more seriously.

Some people would argue that strong, committed cohabiting relationships are otherwise equal to marriage. In your opinion, what makes them different?

Marriage has a big ritual at the beginning that draws in family and friends that basically punctuates both to the couple themselves and to their community that this couple is committed to each other. There are norms that go along with that like fidelity, commitment, compromise, communication and trust. Marriage has all those things associated with it ... It’s therefore more conducive to fostering good behavior on the part of partners and parents. Because of that, we know that typically, marriages are more much more stable than cohabiting relationships.

But how do you respond to those, like Lisa Belkin of the New York Times who argued that it’s not the act of marriage that stabilizes a family, but rather, that marrying is a reflection of a positive stable relationship?

It’s true that marriage is an expression of a couple’s sense that they have the commitment and the trust and the quality of a relationship to move forward ... But the big point I’d like to make there is that marriage is also an institution that shapes men and women in ways that typically benefit them and their children because it provides a collection of rituals and a series of norms that help guide them through their adult lives.

One of those norms, for instance, is sexual fidelity. Even in a post-Tiger Woods or Arnold Schwarzenegger world, it’s still the case today that couples who are married are about four times more likely to be faithful to one another than are cohabiting couples.

That’s in part because when you stand up in a church or a synagogue or a courtroom and you affirm your devotion to one another, you are making a statement to your partner, and to friends and family. It’s much harder to break that fidelity norm as a consequence because people see you as married, and you see yourself as married.

Marriage is not just a piece of paper: it’s a social institution that is often transformative for men and women. The analogy here is that people, for instance, could contract with smart PhDs on an informal, private basis to get highly educated. And some would do just as well with that approach as people who would go to college. Nevertheless, in general, college provides people with a script and a set of norms and rituals and experience and gives them something more valuable.

Cohabiting rates are significantly higher amongst poorer and less educated communities. One might say that some families are unstable not because the parents aren’t married, but because they have a lack of education, jobs and resources, as June Carbone and Naomis Chan argued for The Huffington Post last week.

One reason we are seeing more instability in the American family, and one reason more people are cohabiting, is that the economic foundations of marriage have eroded in working class and poor communities. Decent, stable work is an important economic foundation of marriage, and it’s harder for working class and poor men nowadays to get decent stable, paying jobs.

If working class couples don’t have access to good jobs, they’re more like to cohabit, they’re less likely to marry, and they’re also more likely to divorce or break up. I agree with that point.

But, we also find that cultural shifts are driving increases in family instability in American life. Take for instance college-educated Americans whose fortunes, generally speaking, have been pretty consistent. Why is it that they’ve seen their own marriages stabilize so much since the 1980s? The evidence suggests that economic factors alone can’t account for that. One factor here is that college- educated Americans are now more marriage-minded, and that’s a cultural factor. They have become more opposed to divorce since the 1970s, and less educated Americans have become more accepting of divorce since the 1970s. That cultural shift also accounts for the growing instability of working class and poor communities.

What it boils down to is that many progressives don’t think the institution of marriage has any net benefit beyond having a decent income and strong relationships, and I think that view is naïve. In every other domain of life, they would say the state needs to do xy or z or businesses need to do xy or z to promote higher quality and more stable, healthier lives. We need to appreciate that institutions matter in the home as well, not just in the market place and the political arena.

*

[Original illustration at this number was a duplicate of HolwickID #7299]

The Perfect Girl

A friend asked a gentleman how it is that he never married? Replied the gentleman, “Well, I guess I just never met the right woman ... I guess I’ve been looking for the perfect girl.”

“Oh, come on now,” said the friend, “Surely you have met at least on girl that you wanted to marry.”

“Yes, there was one girl .. once. I guess she was the one perfect girl , the only perfect girl I really ever met. She was just the right everything .. I really mean that she was the perfect girl for me.”

“Well, why didn’t you marry her,” asked the friend.

“She was looking for the perfect man,” he said.

(untitled)

"Meeting any of the following conditions will greatly reduce the

chances of a marriage's failing. Less than one couple in two

hundred ever divorce when ALL THREE of the following three

conditions are met:

- They pray TOGETHER and ALOUD every day.

- They read God's Word TOGETHER and ALOUD every

day.

- They attend worship services TOGETHER and

REGULARLY

--Zig Ziglar quoting ??? on a

FOCUS ON THE FAMILY

broadcast 2-13-91

Quote

"A man likes his wife to be just clever enough to appreciate

his cleverness, and just stupid enough to admire it."

- Israel Zangwill

- _Instant Quotation Dictionary_, p. 62.

(untitled)

The home is your castle, but it is not a castle without a king, and

no king is complete without his queen. Your wife will be delighted to

be your queen if you treat her like one.

- Zig Ziglar

Quote

"Chains do not hold a marriage together. It is threads, hundreds of

tiny threads, which sew people together through the years." - Simone

Signoret

Poem, the Art of Marriage

A good marriage must be created.

In the marriage the little things

are the big things...

It is never being too old to hold hands.

It is remembering to say "I love you"

at least once a day.

It is never going to sleep angry.

It is having a mutual sense of values

and common objectives.

It is standing together facing the world.

It is forming a circle of love that

gathers in the whole family.

It is speaking words of appreciation

and demonstrating gratitude

in thoughtful ways.

It is having the capacity

to forgive and forget.

It is giving each other an atmosphere

in which each can grow.

It is a common search for the

good and the beautiful.

Its not only marrying

the right person.

It's being the right partner.

-Wilfred A. Peterson-

325 Sermon Illustrations on Marriage