on Tuesday, October 26, 2010 at 10:07am
Because we wish that once - just once - the "unassailable truth" ascribed to and evidenced by the looks we see in the eyes of the bride and groom would STAY true forever.
The misguided, often unspoken, ALWAYS untrue hopes are these:
1. If I love you this much at the start of our marriage, I will love you so much MORE with every year we spend together!
2. It all comes down to love: the strength of our feelings for each other today will enable us to handle anything fate may throw at us in the future!
3. This person looking into my eyes right now - the one crying and getting all choked up over our marriage vows - loves me and cares for me so very deeply, he (or she) would rather DIE than hurt me!
THE SAD REALITY:
1b. The truth is that most married people report feeling "in love" with their spouses more during their first year of marriage than at any other time in the marriage relationship.
2b. Love - especially FEELING "in love" - is no substitute for commitment, forgiveness, and the mutual allowance of a grace that's Higher and Wiser than our own abilities to negotiate marriage's deep, murky, and often turbulent waters.
3b. On at least one occasion in your lives together, your spouse will not only hurt you, he or she will cut you to the bone; to your very core; below the belt. The treachery is that it may even be intentional. We are only human, after all, and are incapable of giving perfect, unconditional love.
I don't care who disagrees with me. I have a lot of first and second-hand experience in the Heart Department, and the REAL TRUTH is this:
- "1+1=0", and
- "It takes a THIRD for two to stand."
COMMENTS from FB FRIENDS:
Mary Lindow likes this.
Stanley Gilbert:
The guy who led me to Christ (in high school) told me that I should never forget that no matter how much I loved someone or how sweet the woman was that I wanted to marry, that both of us were potential adulterers. I thought that harsh, cynical and very preachy. But years later Dennis went on to have a strong marriage and become a speaker and writer of many books on the subject and I - altho never an adulterer - came to understand the universal (and scriptural) truth of the matter.
You are absolutely correct, Jenn. We make heartfelt but impossible promises to each other and ourselves at the alter. Just as we do, I suppose, when we give ourselves to Christ. We give our all and then spend the rest of our lives trying to take pieces of ourselves back without anyone noticing.
Someone said that the marriage ceremony is too much of a celebration...as if the couple had finally arrived at a glorious destiination when in fact they are only just embarking on an unknown journey they may not have the fortitude to make.
Perhaps , he said, the ceremony should be humbler and quieter to reflect and remind all of us of the somberness, sacredness and stormy nights ahead. Perhaps we should use that time not in eating and drinking, but more in prayer and a renewal of the families and friends support for the roads ahead.
I read somewhere that the first purpose of marriage was not happiness, per se. But Holiness. That God uses the yearnings, intentions and failings of who on the anvil of an intimate relationship to drive us closer to Him and make us the Bride we are called to be to Him.
Great post. Thank you for your candidness and truth.
Jennifer Thomas:
Yes, so so True!! ALL of it! We use too many superlatives in our speech; we talk if "always!" and "never!" with fire in our eyes; and we now are taught that if we pass 60 seconds outside of the pursuit of our "purpose" or our "destiny", we... are wasting valuable time! As a child, I was taught to pray "for The One God had chosen" for me (while all around me, divorce was the status quo). How can we possibly live up to the expectations we set for ourselves? How can our chosen mate? There's far too much focus on goals, where we're going, finding -rather than being - a good spouse, immediate gratification, and entitlement. My life has been lab experiment that has proven the faulty construction - and eventual destruction - of a life lived on such terms.
October 26 at 2:26pm
Craig Kalsa:
Whew! Wore me out, girl. I can't speak for why "we" cry at weddings, but I cry because words are not an adequate response to the awesome compassion expressed in His presence.
Regarding "sad realities": as long as love is expressed only as ...a feeling, you will certainly be disappointed; try expressing is as a verb, instead, or any other of the "2b" dimensions mentioned. Don't confuse romantic love and compassion. Nobody can hurt you unless you let them; the nature of intimacy is allowing yourself to be affected by the feelings of others. Of course it can hurt, but you must choose it...for without night, we cannot appreciate day.
October 26 at 4:04pm via Facebook Mobile Craig Kalsa:
Oh, and by the way, MY 1+ My 0 = about a quadrafuckingazillon (still lacking without the bit One, however)
October 26 at 6:44pm
Jennifer Thomas:
Craig, Well, I don't quite get what the second part means (are you speaking of something biological?), but as to the first part: Yes! I get it...I didn't write that from an "I'm so sad" position. Instead, I wrote it from a "I thought i wa...s so smart back in the day - and I was - but not about matters of the heart.". It's more of a "break your high expectations so you can actually be happy, not always feeling you're falling short" kinda sorta thing. See? For some reason, I always remember this line from Desperately Seeking Susan, the movie. One housewife is talking to another one, and I think one of them is agited about something, so the first one yells at her to "Take a 'Val-Yum' like a Normal Person!". I love that line - and I've lived it - but it only works temporarily. Then you gotta get outta you what you gotta get outta you. I know: not so brilliant, but true.
October 26 at 6:45pm
Jennifer Thomas:
Craig - thank you for taking the time to write down your thoughts. I like them and agree with all of them except "Nobody can hurt you unless you let them.". We don't say that to children who've been abused. So when did we cross the thresshold and lose the ability to be hurt, disappointed, gutted? It's a risk you take when you make yourself vulnerable. Hopefully, the benefits outweigh the risks.
October 26 at 9:14pm via Facebook Mobile
Stanley Gilbert:
I was about to say what Jennifer picked up on, Craig. You can't have intimacy without vulnerability and vulnerability means leaving yourself open to someone who has the ability to hurt you. That's why there has to be trust in marriage and ...why its dissolution is inevitably painful. So should it be.
Children are by nature open and trusting, which is why they can be so authentically themselves and open to life and love. Which is why the abuse of a child is such a great betrayal. That abuse causes a small death to take place so that not only are they damaged in soul, but they learn - as you say - to never allow themselves to be hurt again. And thus they become not only closed off to others, but ultimately to themselves.
I think I know what you may have meant when you said a person can only allows others to hurt them. That might be true in the workplace or a social situation when we let others define us with their words or treatment of us, but that doesn't make us closer to them.
Too, that is how we know Christ loved us, because He opened Himself up to be totally rejected and He did not turn from the pain of it, not even when offered an intoxicant on the cross. To be open to that in our lives, instead of closing ourselves off from the hurt of others, is how we share in the "fellowship of His suffering" so that we may then symbolically through grace, also share in the fellowship of His resurrection.See More
October 26 at 9:22pm via Facebook Mobile
Jennifer Thomas:
Bravo, Mr. Gilbert! We three should just have our own radio program; a vehicle for listening to OURSELVES even if no one else wants to! And something you said, Stanley, brings to mind a fourth philosopher for our show: my FB friend, John B. who talks about the "authority of suffering" - not quite the same thing, but close. Of course our program could never compete against "Dancing with the Stars," but that would make it even more profoundly gratifying!
October 26 at 10:52pm
Stanley Gilbert:
LOL. Maybe we can call it "Dancing With Our Scars".
October 26 at 11:20pm via Facebook Mobile
No comments:
Post a Comment