bishop williamson
#51
(09-11-2011, 11:31 AM)wallflower Wrote:
(09-11-2011, 12:17 AM)Lydia Grace Wrote: This one really gets me "Be lovable." What? Does that mean to act all cute like a teddy bear? If your husband can't love you through bad times, why did he marry you? No one is always nice and sweet and good. Husbands as well as wives need to learn to deal with the other's stress or crabbiness.

It means develop virtue. That's what makes a person loving and lovable. If she's having problems she has to think of her own possible shortcomings and fix those before she can look to others to fix theirs. So while her attitude may not be the only problem in the marriage, it's the first place she has to examine if she wants to find a solution. Trying to take the sliver from his eye while poking him daily with the beam in her eye isn't exactly going to work, we all know that. We've all met THOSE women who are like nails on chalkboard to be around and you feel sorry for their families. I don't think it's bad advice to tell someone NOT to be that person. Now she may have reason to be bitchy, we don't know, but either way, whether we have reason to be bitchy or not, true virtue and true sanctity means overcoming that and accepting the imperfections and the trials in our lives with joy. It's one thing to fail at that every now and then, which we all do more or less frequently but it's another not to even try. That makes a person unlovable.

Think of Saint Monica. If anyone had a reason to be a jaded witch it would be her. She was stuck in a marriage with a husband  who cheated all the time and a rebellious wayward son both of which looked down upon her Faith and tested it to the max. She would have had all the "reason" in the world to hold that against them. She could have had great venting sessions with the girls and garnered all kinds of sympathy for her situation and evil looks towards her husband and he would have deserved it. But she's a saint because she did not allow herself the luxury of developing negative feelings and attitudes towards them even if it would have felt like the most natural and fairest thing to do.

The reverse would be if a man finds he is not respected by his family, he has to look to himself to be sure he is being respectable.

Also, you're newly in love and engaged. It seems very easy to love your intended through thick and thin right now. But God knows which trials test us to our limits and He doesn't let anyone get off easy. Saying we must love each other through the trials is much more easily said than done, especially if the trials come from within the marriage, directly from each other's shortcomings that either never change or take years to change. The repetition of dealing with the same issue on a daily basis for years (we're human, we dont' change overnight) can get wearing to say the least. That advice may hit you differently once you've been married 10+ years and realize how easy it is to turn on each other or be less than loving or lovable when the chips are down. If it were not difficult and at times impossible, it would not be such a triumph to get through it all together and still love each other in the end.

Thanks for the post, that does make sense. LM and I actually just had a long and fruitful discussion stemming from this concept, and IO'm glad good came of it.

One thing I really appreciate (if we are talking about the original letter), that the letter lacks, is clarity. I don't understand complicated concepts as quickly as simple ones. I simplify things all the time and think that simple versions are best, but I guess when it comes down to it, not everything can be understood that way. Even if things can usually be understood simply, sometimes it is less beautiful when you don't look at something in-depth or pick it apart to see why.
Reply
#52
i surprised myself by agreeing with Bishop Williamson. :o

I realize that I'm making a guess at his intention, but having seen a friend handle her own situation where she earns more than her husband, I think I know what his excellency means when he writes, "And if you are sometimes forced to act as the head, do not let it show, BUT DISGUISE IT."

My friend's husband lost his job due to bi-polar disorder.  It was unexpected, because she had no idea this ran in his family.  he works in an environment where he must always be alert for his own and others' safety, and of course, along with bi-polar there is the sudden stoppage of medication by the sick person.  he did this a few times and  no more job. 

It did teach him a lesson, but too late.  he now works at a department store as a sales associate but earns only a fraction of the money he was earning before.  his wife now earns far more than he does, but she has NEVER, not once, told him anything that would remind him of this. He's still the final word on purchasing large items (of course they discuss it but they did before, and she always left the final decision to him), and she has never pulled the "I make the money so i make the rules" card on him. To all intents and purposes, he continues to be head of their house; the fact that she makes more is incidental.  I think that's what's meant by disguise it. 
Reply
#53
She let's a man with untreated bi-polar disorder have the final word on purchases?!  :o

I know someone who did that, and during a manic episode her husband spent all their savings on a motorcycle  :(
Reply
#54
well was it a hog or an indian?
manics are a funny bunch.
Reply
#55
(09-12-2011, 02:06 PM)ErinIsNice Wrote: She let's a man with untreated bi-polar disorder have the final word on purchases?!  :o

I know someone who did that, and during a manic episode her husband spent all their savings on a motorcycle  :(

I realize I didn't spell it out specifically, but really, I didn't think I would have to.

I said "He learned his lesson (about stopping the meds), but too late (to save his high-paying job)."

Since it's probably better to draw the conclusion rather than expect thinking adults to do it:  He learned never to stop taking his medication, but it was too late to keep his old, high-paying job.  He now works at Macys, as a salesman, making much less, but the bi-polar has not been an issue for years, because he now always takes his medication.

Hoping this is now clear ....
Reply




Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)