It has been said (by me and others) that marriage is the most sanctifying of all relationships. Put together two sinners, saved sinners, redeemed sinners, and even sanctified sinners, and there will be trouble. The Taylor-Johnson temperament analysis test that Emily and I took before marriage resulted in flashing red lights for our counselor Howard Eyrich. The analysis predicted conflict between two headstrong personalities. So it was.
Heated arguments characterized our early years. Our battles were aggravated by being but six months married (and Emily but 20 years old) when thrust into the pressure-cooker of the ministry of IPC. If you think (I hope you don’t) that still today we both remain the babies of our birth-order: self-centered, impatient, demanding our way, you should have seen us 37 years ago. Many of the rough edges have been knocked off. The need to accommodate, to compromise, to put another first, to consult (especially about the children), to reach agreement about meals, social life, vacation, etc., etc., etc., has been good for us. We are less selfish. We are less indulgent of our own quirkish habits. We are more sensitive to each other’s needs and less absorbed in our own. We have a long way to go. Yet progress has been made. As a couple, we hardly ever fight anymore. We enjoy harmony and mutual understanding and mutual appreciation. Our passions have matured into deep love and still deeper mutual emotional dependence. Life without each other is only painfully contemplated.
However, growth in grace in marriage requires that both husband and wife develop the skill of nuanced intolerance. We all have bad habits, besetting sins, and glaring weaknesses. Often these liabilities hurt relatives, injure family members, offend work-mates, and alienate neighbors. No one knows our weaknesses better than our spouses. This is why marriage partners who are so intimidated by their mate so as never to confront, or who coddle rather than gently correct their offenses do them no favors. If one’s default response is to avoid conflict with one’s spouse no matter what, marriage ceases to be a sanctifying institution. If the knee-jerk response in marriage is the equivalent of the anti-anti-war slogan of the 1960s, “My country right or wrong,” bad behavior is reinforced, bad habits become habitual, and growth in grace is undermined.
Admittedly, one walks a fine line. Good wives wish not to undermine their husband’s leadership or show disrespect. Many wives have learned that their husbands don’t take constructive criticism very well. With the best of motives, they draw a harmful conclusion. They overlook bad behavior, and worse, defend their husbands to the death.
Similarly, husbands wish to avoid forfeiting wifely affection or stirring up wifely displeasure. Many husbands have learned that their wives don’t receive criticism very well. So they’ve learned to say nothing. They’d rather preserve the peace.
Meanwhile, these couples may face a growing number of alienated relatives and a shrinking pool of friends. Why? Because the sanctifying influence of marriage has been undermined by husbands who surrender leadership in the home, and wives who misconstrue what it means to be submissive.
Emily’s father said of his daughters that they needed a “strong hand.” She and I both needed a spouse who would push back, confront, argue, and fight the necessary marital battles against bad behavior so that we as a couple would win together the relational war that leads to relational felicity (as Jane Austin might say). Emily would say she needed a husband who was mean. I interpret her to say not that I am literally mean (who could be nicer?) but that she needed a husband who would be more than a step-n-fetch it, who would not indulge her every whim, or yield to her every demand.
I for my part needed a wife who was feisty. I needed a wife who would not be intimidated by me, who would not tolerate my verbal silences, or emotional neglect, or weak excuses; who would demand my attention and affection and push-back against my idiosyncracies. I would have been a terrible husband for a “sweet” Christian girl who would overlook all my bad tendencies. A recent high-profile divorce involving a prolific Reformed theologian has all the hallmarks of this very problem: busy, busy, important theologian, lecturing, writing, teaching, broadcasting, while neglecting wife and children. She accepts it for 20 years reasoning that he is doing such important work, kingdom work, God’s work. Meanwhile the children are a mess, the home is chaotic, and the family is in ruins. After 20 years she says, “Enough!” and walks out, irretrievably.
The same “my spouse right or wrong” often will spill over into childrearing: it will spawn “my child right or wrong.” Is Johnny guilty of bad behavior? Oh, he’s tired. Did he misbehave? Oh, he’s hungry. Did he start a fight with another child? Well, he never behaves this way around anyone else. Normally he’s so sweet, so tender, so kind. (Implied: it’s the other child’s fault). The lack of objectivity in marriage spills over into a lack of objectivity in childrearing and produces little monsters whose bad behavior is always excused. These children rarely face the consequences of their sins and so grow up into big monsters.
Couples that do not sanctify each other’s sins inflame each other’s faults. Selfishness, lust, rage, jealousy, avarice, worldliness, laziness, and covetousness all get reinforced. The marriage covenant becomes a compact from hell. Their vices get worse, their virtues fade.
We do our spouses no favors when we indulge their bad behavior. Granted, there is a fine line between a nagging wife or a perpetually critical husband and a properly discerning spouse. Yet it is vital that we find a place for critical nuance if our marriages are to be the sanctifying institution that they are meant to be. •
Heated arguments characterized our early years. Our battles were aggravated by being but six months married (and Emily but 20 years old) when thrust into the pressure-cooker of the ministry of IPC. If you think (I hope you don’t) that still today we both remain the babies of our birth-order: self-centered, impatient, demanding our way, you should have seen us 37 years ago. Many of the rough edges have been knocked off. The need to accommodate, to compromise, to put another first, to consult (especially about the children), to reach agreement about meals, social life, vacation, etc., etc., etc., has been good for us. We are less selfish. We are less indulgent of our own quirkish habits. We are more sensitive to each other’s needs and less absorbed in our own. We have a long way to go. Yet progress has been made. As a couple, we hardly ever fight anymore. We enjoy harmony and mutual understanding and mutual appreciation. Our passions have matured into deep love and still deeper mutual emotional dependence. Life without each other is only painfully contemplated.
However, growth in grace in marriage requires that both husband and wife develop the skill of nuanced intolerance. We all have bad habits, besetting sins, and glaring weaknesses. Often these liabilities hurt relatives, injure family members, offend work-mates, and alienate neighbors. No one knows our weaknesses better than our spouses. This is why marriage partners who are so intimidated by their mate so as never to confront, or who coddle rather than gently correct their offenses do them no favors. If one’s default response is to avoid conflict with one’s spouse no matter what, marriage ceases to be a sanctifying institution. If the knee-jerk response in marriage is the equivalent of the anti-anti-war slogan of the 1960s, “My country right or wrong,” bad behavior is reinforced, bad habits become habitual, and growth in grace is undermined.
Admittedly, one walks a fine line. Good wives wish not to undermine their husband’s leadership or show disrespect. Many wives have learned that their husbands don’t take constructive criticism very well. With the best of motives, they draw a harmful conclusion. They overlook bad behavior, and worse, defend their husbands to the death.
Similarly, husbands wish to avoid forfeiting wifely affection or stirring up wifely displeasure. Many husbands have learned that their wives don’t receive criticism very well. So they’ve learned to say nothing. They’d rather preserve the peace.
Meanwhile, these couples may face a growing number of alienated relatives and a shrinking pool of friends. Why? Because the sanctifying influence of marriage has been undermined by husbands who surrender leadership in the home, and wives who misconstrue what it means to be submissive.
Emily’s father said of his daughters that they needed a “strong hand.” She and I both needed a spouse who would push back, confront, argue, and fight the necessary marital battles against bad behavior so that we as a couple would win together the relational war that leads to relational felicity (as Jane Austin might say). Emily would say she needed a husband who was mean. I interpret her to say not that I am literally mean (who could be nicer?) but that she needed a husband who would be more than a step-n-fetch it, who would not indulge her every whim, or yield to her every demand.
I for my part needed a wife who was feisty. I needed a wife who would not be intimidated by me, who would not tolerate my verbal silences, or emotional neglect, or weak excuses; who would demand my attention and affection and push-back against my idiosyncracies. I would have been a terrible husband for a “sweet” Christian girl who would overlook all my bad tendencies. A recent high-profile divorce involving a prolific Reformed theologian has all the hallmarks of this very problem: busy, busy, important theologian, lecturing, writing, teaching, broadcasting, while neglecting wife and children. She accepts it for 20 years reasoning that he is doing such important work, kingdom work, God’s work. Meanwhile the children are a mess, the home is chaotic, and the family is in ruins. After 20 years she says, “Enough!” and walks out, irretrievably.
The same “my spouse right or wrong” often will spill over into childrearing: it will spawn “my child right or wrong.” Is Johnny guilty of bad behavior? Oh, he’s tired. Did he misbehave? Oh, he’s hungry. Did he start a fight with another child? Well, he never behaves this way around anyone else. Normally he’s so sweet, so tender, so kind. (Implied: it’s the other child’s fault). The lack of objectivity in marriage spills over into a lack of objectivity in childrearing and produces little monsters whose bad behavior is always excused. These children rarely face the consequences of their sins and so grow up into big monsters.
Couples that do not sanctify each other’s sins inflame each other’s faults. Selfishness, lust, rage, jealousy, avarice, worldliness, laziness, and covetousness all get reinforced. The marriage covenant becomes a compact from hell. Their vices get worse, their virtues fade.
We do our spouses no favors when we indulge their bad behavior. Granted, there is a fine line between a nagging wife or a perpetually critical husband and a properly discerning spouse. Yet it is vital that we find a place for critical nuance if our marriages are to be the sanctifying institution that they are meant to be. •