[athanatos]

On marriage compatibility....
RELEVANT Magazine - You Never Marry the Right Person

[Thrash]

I read most of the article and didn't find much to disagree with. Did you not like it?

[MtlMom]

Yep, that's pretty accurate.

[bobthecockroach]

"The Bible explains why the quest for compatibility seems to be so impossible." But no quotes from Scripture?

One of several problems in this article.

[Pauler]

what other problems do you see?

[bobthecockroach]

Originally Posted by Pauler

what other problems do you see?

The author sets up a straw man. No one seriously ends a relationship over a mispronounced archaic German name. The author even admits his source is a *humor* piece. A relationship ostensibly ended over mispronunciation had deeper issues which are the real reason it was ended.

The conclusion is formulated in a very negative way. As best I can guess, the formulation was chosen to get attention. No one is compatible? Do you really believe that? I believe my wife and I are very compatible. Partly because of who we are and partly because of the compromises we make, the work we put into our marriage. A better formulation might be "compatibility takes work, it isn't automatic no matter who you marry."

But I think even that misses the point.

The problem isn't a lack of perfectly complimentary spouses, the problem is thinking the purpose of a spouse is to compliment you. The (improperly cited, yet another problem) quote from Stanley Hauerwas seems to recognize this, but quickly moves on to less important points. The first sentence of that quote is what this article should be built on, not the sentences that follow it. Your spouse is not an accessory which should be selected to look good on you, nor a tool selected to work well for you. Your spouse is a person. Their needs and thoughts and feelings are just as real and just as valid as yours.

Which makes all talk about "compatibility" in the sense mentioned in the article moot. But it does allow us to redeem the term. Compatibility is being similar or complimentary in personality and goals. And people do vary in compatibility in that sense. And it's important, because it's part of what draws us to another person in the first place. It also provides a base on which to build a relationship. You shouldn't marry someone you don't even get along with.

But to return to the main point. If someone is looking for a spouse that suits them, the problem isn't that they can't find one.

And I guess that point is in the article, but it's buried.

[BillSPrestonEsq]

I think the attitude behind the article is dangerous to a degree.

It assumes a marriage held up as just two people working together, and that pretty much any two good Christians would work together.

I think I married the right person. We are almost 7 years in, and I still think I married the right person. Have we changed? Yes. Are we the same basic people? Yep. Are we basically better versions of our former selves? II would like to think so and it seems that way to me.

I think the key is not assuming marriage will be brutal and painful. Quite a few people with even a cursory knowledge of my background could not accept me as I am. I know that all too well. I have quirks, I have scars and flaws and I think this article goes too far in suggesting these things are unimportant, followed by a fairly depressing and generic affirmation of how horrible and sinful and flawed we are.


We are all fallen people. But some people work well together. My wife and I have backgrounds that are opposites. However, it has been for the most part fairly easy. We also knew each other fairly well. I say fairly, but for the last 10 years, if you ask one of us a question and then the other, and the answers differ, the other spouse is generally more accurate than the one asked of themselves. For example if you asked us what our favorite food is, my wife would give you an answer I likely had forgotten but would agree it was something I preferred to my own answer.

I think the problem is that this article starts with the picky thing. (I think most dating couples are not picky enough about what matters and are far too picky about what does not.) Then it assumes that everyone is incompatible. It presents a defeatist view of marriage that seems entirely lacking in the fact that the two shall become one flesh.

I think the biggest key is not finding compatibility in your marriage, but rather seeking to be complimentary to your spouse. Being a model of 1 Corinthians 13 to your spouse and seeking not your own, and putting them first.

For me, this does not reflect my experience and maybe I am just darn lucky to have my wife.

[athanatos]

The overall point of the article is that we can't get into the relationship to be self-serving: expecting the mate to fulfill you, make you happy, be there for your utmost convenience, etc.

Which is, in reality, what many people mean by finding "the one" (almost Matrix-esque) or "the right one" to marry. They think they need to keep looking according to the incorrect standards that they have set up. Sure, there are people who just don't work together. That's okay. I don't think that's what this is about. It is addressing the issue of people looking for the right one to mean someone who'll serve you and make life convenient. What one ought to do, instead, is have an attitude toward the marriage, which I think Bill put nicely, of "seeking to be complimentary to your spouse. Being a model of 1 Corinthians 13 to your spouse and seeking not your own, and putting them first."

[BillSPrestonEsq]

Originally Posted by athanatos

The overall point of the article is that we can't get into the relationship to be self-serving: expecting the mate to fulfill you, make you happy, be there for your utmost convenience, etc.

Which is, in reality, what many people mean by finding "the one" (almost Matrix-esque) or "the right one" to marry. They think they need to keep looking according to the incorrect standards that they have set up. Sure, there are people who just don't work together. That's okay. I don't think that's what this is about. It is addressing the issue of people looking for the right one to mean someone who'll serve you and make life convenient. What one ought to do, instead, is have an attitude toward the marriage, which I think Bill put nicely, of "seeking to be complimentary to your spouse. Being a model of 1 Corinthians 13 to your spouse and seeking not your own, and putting them first."

I agree, but one of the other issues I had was just that marriage felt like it was portrayed in a very dour sort of light.

The idea of the one might be silly, but there are very serious compatability issues. I can't say some of the stuff my wife has to deal with in my own emotional baggage and guilt. I can also say we are both fairly quirky and could get on a large percentage of the population's nerves quickly, and yet, we work. Don't ask me how, I don't know, but we do.

But on the other side, sure there have been a few rough patches, but the majority of our marriage has been very, very fun.I would also state the quote seems a bit misguided. There is a sense in which marriage does make us whole The whole garden thing about it not being good for man to be alone is true.

But overall I feel like in a lot of circles marriage gets a bum rap. Weddings get a lot of crazy positive press, but marriage not always so much, and marriage can be wonderful, and fulfilling, and really, really fun. I live with my very best friend. It is actually pretty awesomely great.

[Thrash]

Originally Posted by BillSPrestonEsq

But overall I feel like in a lot of circles marriage gets a bum rap. Weddings get a lot of crazy positive press, but marriage not always so much, and marriage can be wonderful, and fulfilling, and really, really fun. I live with my very best friend. It is actually pretty awesomely great.

Yeah, just turn on the television. Most sitcoms paint a picture of marriage as a terrible burden.

Unfortunately, marriage in America seems to following in the footsteps of our brothers across the Atlantic.

[slap_j]

Originally Posted by BillSPrestonEsq

I agree, but one of the other issues I had was just that marriage felt like it was portrayed in a very dour sort of light.

Probably because the author is working against the popular romanticist ideals most Americans (and American Christians) buy into.

There is a sense in which marriage does make us whole

What sense? Tell this single person.

[SccHarpGirl]

I will preface my post by saying that I"m engaged, going through marriage prep, and all that good stuff. So I'm no expert at all on the subject, but it's one that's been on my mind a lot lately.

I did not care for this article. I had to read it a few times to figure out what was so off-putting about it to me. I think the author sounds very bitter. The general theme is "After you get married, your partner will change into someone you barely recognize, and certainly do not love, but you need to stick with them anyway".

I find that in Christian circles far too much emphasis is placed on "Marriage is painful and hard". I know that many people feel the need to combat the disney-esque mentality of "And they lived happily ever after" by providing a dose of reality, to warn people not to split the first time they have a real fight, or wonder just what they've gotten themselves into.

I remember growing up and wondering why people would ever get married if it's so awful. But the thing is, I don't believe that people are never compatible. I've dated a few people in my life, and I can definitely say that I'm more compatible with my fiance than anyone else I've ever been with. Are we 100% compatible? Certainly not. Of course, there are things about him that annoy me, and vice versa, we both have interests that the other one tolerates but doesn't love. I recognize that we're going to change, but I hold out hope that we can change together. I guess I believe that in marriage, your partner should help you change to be a better version, a more complete version, of yourself than you could become on your own. And I do think that if you pick the right person, you will have an easier time of it than if you pick the wrong person. I agree that no two people will be perfectly in sync, I don't believe there is "The one" out there, but I do believe that some people you'll get along with better, and have a better time coming together and functioning as a couple.

I do think that love is a choice, but I don't think it's necessary the grueling, painful choice popular Christian media presents it to be. Obviously there will be hard times, but I really think that it's really, critically important for Christians to address the wonderful parts of marriage as well, and that while it's unrealistic to expect people not to change, I think that in a proper marriage the marriage doesn't suddenly transform people into complete strangers to each other (the vibe I was getting from the article), but each partner should help the other grow into their full potential - which should lead them closer to each other and to God.

I just feel that the Christian media has swing so far the oppose way - to the point where very rarely do I ever read anything about what's good about being married.

I'm marrying my fiance not because I think that things will be perfect in the future. I realize that we'll fight. I realize we'll both have moments that make us question whether or not we made the right decision. Not because I'm settling, but also not because I think he's "The One". I'm marrying my fiance because he understands me like no one else. Because he challenges me to be better than I am. Because I think we work better as a team than either of us on our own. Because I love him - both the emotional aspect of love, but also because I make the choice that he is "The One" for me - the article mentions self sacrifice and self denial as if it's a hardship, and yes, at times it is - but a lot of the time, the more I make the effort to love him and try to put his wishes above my own, the easier it gets, and the happier we become. I think it's important to remember the joy of relationships as well as the hardships.

That's the end of my rant

[bobthecockroach]

Originally Posted by SccHarpGirl

I find that in Christian circles far too much emphasis is placed on "Marriage is painful and hard". I know that many people feel the need to combat the disney-esque mentality of "And they lived happily ever after" by providing a dose of reality, to warn people not to split the first time they have a real fight, or wonder just what they've gotten themselves into.

Right. Which misses the point that what marriage *should* look like is "They lived happily ever after *because* of commitment and work."

But we have depressingly few examples (in media or real life) of what that looks like. Media either paints marriage in a negative light or not at all. Movies are made about falling in love, not about living in love. Movies don't show the 6th year of marriage, or the 16th, or the 26th, or the 66th. They show the dating or the divorce.

Real life isn't much better. Divorce statistics are truly staggering. If we aren't there yet, we're reaching the point where the number of terminated marriages exceeds the number of active marriages.

I'm treading on thin ice here, but I think part of the problem is the attitude that if you don't feel something, you don't have to do it. That somehow not feeling something makes it fake. When I was a kid, if I hurt someone, I had to apologize. It didn't matter if I meant it or not. When I received a gift, I said thank you, whether I liked it or not. Now we think that feeling apologetic or grateful is more important than *being* apologetic or grateful.

And so "because she's your wife" is no longer a good enough reason to help out, or write love notes, or give up behavior that bothers her, or take her out, or have sex, or stay faithful. The only reason recognized for doing any of those things is because you feel like it.

And so...

TV taught you how to love, it showed you what love looks like, feels like. But when you're actually in love, it doesn't look like that, so you secretly suspect you don't have the capacity for love, that there's something wrong with you....

The problem isn't that you don't know how to connect; it's that when you do connect at all, you don't know what to do next. It's your unrealistic expectations of what connecting is supposed to be. TV is always about beginnings, not middles. Like love. The love you feel doesn't resemble the TV love because the TV love is the first three days of love, copied and pasted into a decade of episodes. But since you have no other reference point, after a real decade, you think, "I guess must not be in love anymore."

You are so unsure of your own identity that you don't know if you are supposed to be feeling, what you are supposed to be feeling, when you are supposed to be feeling....

The problem wasn't TV, the problem was the absence of adults, real adults who took seriously their responsibility to the next generation, who lead not by words, but by behavior. Who, even if miserable or unfulfilled or unconnected had the decency to fake it for the next generation, for the people they touched. Who didn't cheat on their wives not just because they loved them, not just because it was ethically wrong, but because what kind of an example would that be to their daughters?

I know, everyone will disagree. Everyone, except daughters under 20....

Instead of trying to stop playing a role-- again, a move whose aim is your happiness-- try playing a different role whose aim is someone else's happiness. Why not play the part of the happy husband of three kids? Why not pretend to be devoted to your family to the exclusion of other things? Why not play the part of the man who isn't tempted to sleep with the woman at the airport bar?

"But that's dishonest, I'd be lying to myself." Your kids will not know to ask: so?

The narcissist demands absolutism in all things-- relative to himself.

And so "being who you are" becomes not just the primary, but the *only* virtue.

And so when staying with your wife requires doing things you don't want to do or accepting things you don't want to accept, you leave.

[slap_j]

Originally Posted by bobthecockroach

Right. Which misses the point that what marriage *should* look like is "They lived happily ever after *because* of commitment and work."

Why should it look like "happily ever after" at all? Maybe you married someone who turned out to be carping, bitter, frigid, etc. Is the marriage then considered unsuccessful even if you were faithful and all that good 1 Corinthians 13 stuff?

[bobthecockroach]

Originally Posted by slap_j

Why should it look like "happily ever after" at all? Maybe you married someone who turned out to be carping, bitter, frigid, etc. Is the marriage then considered unsuccessful even if you were faithful and all that good 1 Corinthians 13 stuff?

Yes?

Proverbs 5:18-19
Let your fountain be blessed,
and rejoice in the wife of your youth,
a lovely deer, a graceful doe.
Let her breasts fill you at all times with delight;
be intoxicated always in her love.

1 Corinthians 7:1-3
Now concerning the matters about which you wrote: “It is good for a man not to have sexual relations with a woman.” But because of the temptation to sexual immorality, each man should have his own wife and each woman her own husband. The husband should give to his wife her conjugal rights, and likewise the wife to her husband.

Ephesians 5:22-33
Wives, submit to your own husbands, as to the Lord. For the husband is the head of the wife even as Christ is the head of the church, his body, and is himself its Savior. Now as the church submits to Christ, so also wives should submit in everything to their husbands.

Husbands, love your wives, as Christ loved the church and gave himself up for her, that he might sanctify her, having cleansed her by the washing of water with the word, so that he might present the church to himself in splendor, without spot or wrinkle or any such thing, that she might be holy and without blemish. In the same way husbands should love their wives as their own bodies. He who loves his wife loves himself. For no one ever hated his own flesh, but nourishes and cherishes it, just as Christ does the church, because we are members of his body. “Therefore a man shall leave his father and mother and hold fast to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh.” This mystery is profound, and I am saying that it refers to Christ and the church. However, let each one of you love his wife as himself, and let the wife see that she respects her husband.

I'm not saying you can't be a good husband in such a marriage, but I can't see calling it a good marriage. Marriage should involve mutual delight and edification. If it doesn't, it's lacking. That doesn't make it any less valid or make your responsibility any different. It just means the marriage is falling short of the ideal. That's not to place any blame. It may be through no fault of your own. It's just a description.