Skip to main content

Creation in Marriage

I recently attended a presentation by Dr. Meredith Small (Cornell University) who shared some insights about marriage. She reported that she had examined marriage from evolutionary, anthropological, and sociological viewpoints and came to the conclusion that the primary purpose of marriage was for cooperation. Though cooperation serves a vital role in marriage it is only a partial picture of purpose.

Moses explained the purpose of marriage in Genesis using the idea of two people joining together to make something new. "...and the two are united into one." And some centuries later Paul referenced Moses as a support for the need for husbands and wives to be mutually submissive, "submit to one another." Marriage at its best is a denial of self (my interests, wants) for the purpose of creating a mutually beneficial relational system that transcends the individual spouses. Sacrifice is the norm. The focus is external and the question asked is, "What can I do for you?"

Our culture unfortunately makes oneness and submission in marriage difficult. Materialism and individualism become distractions. Feminism and fundamentalism, both from opposite ends of the spectrum, promote relational ideals that hinder intimacy and connection. Our cultural experience with marriage suggests the ideal is achieved when I find a soulmate who understands me and meets my needs. Self-esteem is the norm. The focus is inward and the question typically asked is, "What have you done for me lately?"

But marriage in its best moments is about the creation of something that is greater than one man and one woman. Marriage shapes and creates something greater than self. Yes, viewing marriage through the lens of cooperation can be useful, but I think it is incomplete. The cooperation view leads couples to a ledger approach in which spouses keep a tally of their reciprocal exchanges, hoping things are even and protesting when things are not (look at what I contribute, does your contribution match?). A mutually submissive view focuses on personal sacrifice for the gain of the couple as a whole. Sacrifice redeems husband and wife together.

So let me offer some questions for reflection:

1. What wounds from my past (family of origin, past relationships) make it difficult for me to sacrifice? I would suggest these wounds are core seeds for fears that keep us in a protective stance from being completely vulnerable.
2. In what ways is my marriage "more" or "greater" because "two have become one." How is the "two become one" practically played out in your married life? More specifically, what is your most recent memory of feeling connected with your spouse in a way that promoted feelings of security?

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Sacred Spaces

This is a poem composed by Dr. Mark DeYoung. All the spaces, whether filled with joy or pain in families are sacred. Families exist in all kinds of places and spaces The space between birth and death The space between a marriage and a divorce. Grief and rejoicing Attention and neglect A father's hand that can be protective and possibly violent A mother's voice that can be comforting and possibly rejecting  The space between failure and success The space between togetherness and lonliness  Siblings who can be best of friends and worst enemies Homes that can be filled with rage and laughter The space between substance abuse and sobriety Encouragement and criticism Safety and injury Being chosen and being ignored Wounds and healing The distance between these dichotomies is made sacred For it is in these spaces families express and experience, Life, Comfort, Mercy, Forgiveness, Grace, Reconciliation, Hope, and Love.

Attachment and Wild Things

As a young child I remember reading "Where the Wild Things Are" and I don't feel like I related to Max. I was a pretty easy going, compliant kid and can't remember being sent to my room without my supper. Now as a father and family therapist I have come to see that Maurice Sendak had an amazing insight into the world of children and their experiences. Max is a young boy in the developmental middle of great emotional growth and his defiance and tantrums one night lead him to episode after episode of chaos. Most parents of young children can relate to witnessing similar episodes, and we know that a young child's immature emotional brains can easily become overwhelmed, resulting in impulsivity, defiance, and tantrums. Max's final explosion towards his mother results in being sent to his room and his adventure with the Wild Things. His time with the Wild Things serves as a metaphor for every child's attempts to tame the monstrous and overwhelming feelings t...

Accept vs. Alleviate

The mental health arena is rich with references to the stages of grief that Elisabeth Kübler-Ross introduced us to way back in 1969. The final phase of her model is acceptance. When bad stuff happens, we deny, get angry, bargain, become depressed, and according to the model ideally reach a point of acceptance. Yet increasingly much of our culture refuses to accept grief and pain. We choose to alleviate our pain-loss-disappointmemt with various strategies. Acceptance (as defined by Kubler-Ross) is unfortunately an important emotional skill our culture seems to have abandoned. We have become addicted to making ourselves feel better. We don’t like hurts, and in fact we do our very best to avoid it.  Why has this happened? Can we really do anything about it? How do we develop a culture of Acceptance versus the need to alleviate or avoid pain? Attachment theory and its perspective on early childhood development might offer some insights. In at...