Journey to Surrender

Saturday, June 23, 2012

Tough Decisions (Part 2)

1:08 PM | Posted by Scott | Edit Post

In my last post, “Decisions, Decisions, Decisions,” I made the provocative assertion that in the rare case when prayer, discussion and waiting has not resulted in agreement on a decision, the husband should take the responsibility to make the call, using his best judgment, which includes consideration of his wife’s needs, opinions and expertise. I see that as part of his leadership role.

If you recall, the quote that got me talking about this topic is something that Dr. Willard Harley (author of “His Needs, Her Needs”) calls his cardinal rule of marriage: Never do anything without an enthusiastic agreement between you and your spouse.

I have just a few more thoughts to share on this important and somewhat controversial topic of decision making.

The Problem With a “Rule” of Joint Agreement

Let me reiterate that joint agreement (even enthusiastic join agreement) is a great goal and is something to strive for, but I have a problem with the idea that you should do nothing without it.

My principle objection is that such a rule gives all the power and authority in the relationship to the one who says no. Essentially, one can prevent the other from deciding anything or doing anything simply by disagreeing.

For example, say the car breaks down and needs an expensive repair. He thinks they should fix it; she thinks they should operate with one car instead. The rule of “do nothing” without agreement means she holds all the cards.

Here’s another example where the rule of joint agreement doesn’t make sense. He wants to go the beach for vacation; she misses her parents and wants to go see them instead. Assuming they can’t do both, do they simply stay home because they can’t agree?

Let’s say she wants to put $200 a month into savings, but he doesn’t. The do-nothing rule says he gets his way. Similarly, let’s say he wants to have a regular, active sex life but she couldn’t care less about sex. If the couple subscribes to the idea of doing nothing without enthusiastic agreement, then he is doomed to a sexless marriage.

I realize that these are somewhat simplistic examples and that I didn’t give any background, but hopefully you see how a universal policy of joint agreement seeds the balance of power to the objector. While I don’t think that’s Dr. Harley’s intent, my concern is that it could easily be the result.

Can’t We Just Compromise?

I’ve read quite a bit about what Dr. Harley says about his POJA (see more on his POJA here), and I realize that his point is to get couples to consider each other’s needs, negotiate in good faith and find a compromise that both parties can get behind wholeheartedly. These aren’t bad ideas, but I don’t think they always necessarily lead to the best solution.

I’ve said before that I’m not a big believer in compromise, at least not as it is defined by caving in to keep the peace or backing down simply to keep your spouse from being unhappy. That kind of compromise is an intimacy killer, because it requires you to forgo your personal integrity, to pretend be someone you are not or feel something you do not. I think this is probably why Dr. Harley added the “enthusiastic” qualifier to the need for agreement. Shrinking back from expressing what you really think is not sustainable in the long run and will eventually lead to a relationship explosion.

In the case of an impasse on a decision, the better course is for both husband and wife to state their positions and reasoning clearly and without pretense, being careful to avoid using accusation or shame to try to manipulate each other. If however, through discussion and prayerful consideration, neither is convinced of the other’s position, ultimately the husband has to take the responsibility to decide the matter based on what he thinks is best. I see this as part of a husband’s mantle of leadership in the relationship. As I said in my previous post, he is scripturally required to do so in a way that maintains intimacy and protects the relationship – that’s what Christ-like love dictates.

You may think my stance is unfair and disempowering to wives; that rather than empowering the objector, I’m simply empowering the husband to make all the decisions. Let me state clearly that I do not see the husband’s God-given role as “decision maker in chief” or the “master of all decisions.” He is principally called by God to be “lover in chief” who occasionally will be required to break an impasse by deciding a matter, which is something altogether different than making every decision. And even in the one or two percent case where the decision is his to make in the face of disagreement with his wife, the basis for that decision still has to be love and has to protect the intimacy in the relationship.

I honestly expected to get more resistance to my post than I have received so far. I have also received some good feedback via Facebook and Twitter, but I’m still looking to hear from more couples about how they resolve the issue of making decisions when there is disagreement.

So please leave a comment and let us know how do you and your spouse resolve an impasse over a decision?

Labels: Authority, Difficulties, Intimacy | 7 comments

Thursday, June 21, 2012

Decisions, Decisions, Decisions

1:57 PM | Posted by Scott | Edit Post

If you read much around here, you already know that I’m not afraid of stepping on toes. Today I was given a writer’s challenge to write something controversial to provoke my readers, so I decided to write a post I’ve been putting off for a long time.So here goes.

Many of you have heard of, if not actually read, the popular book His Needs, Her Needs by Dr. Willard Harley. I highly recommend this book for couples, because it does a good job of explaining common differences between the needs of men and women.

I read something a while back by Dr. Harley that he calls his cardinal rule of marriage:

Never do anything without an enthusiastic agreement between you and your spouse.

Sounds reasonable, right? Seems fair and logical, doesn’t it?

Except it doesn’t really work.

Now before you start yelling, let me make it clear that I certainly think the best scenario is to gain agreement in all decisions. That said, however, I don’t see any scriptural basis for making agreement a universal “cardinal rule.” A worthy goal, yes. A doctrinal absolute, no.

At the Point of Impasse

In a healthy relationship, reaching the point of impasse, where agreement simply cannot be found, should be a rare thing. For most decisions, prayer, conversation and a willingness to serve and support each other will lead to agreement. That should be the 98% case.

But what do you do when you’ve both prayed and received different answers? What do you do when you genuinely disagree on the best way forward because a consensus could not be reached?

It seems to me there are several possible default approaches to such a situation:

1. Do nothing

2. Flip a coin

3. Wait for someone to change his or her mind

4. Somebody gives in just to keep the peace

And here is the point at which I provoke you:

5. The husband takes the responsibility to decide the matter by his convictions

Authority and Responsibility

As near as I can tell from my study of the scriptures, God ordained marriage as an ordered partnership, where husband and wife are equal in value, but each has differing roles. That means that the position of authority (call it headship or leadership if those words are easier for you) is assigned to a husband at the wedding, regardless of whether he recognizes it and regardless of his apparent worthiness to carry it out. Let me be clear; this position does not in any way lessen the value or worth of his wife or diminish her role or importance in the marriage. It’s just the way God chose to set it up. “The husband is head of his wife, as Christ is head of the church.” (Eph 5:23 NIV)

At the same time I believe that husbands are held accountable for walking out their authority in a Christ-like manner, with all love, strength and sacrifice that entails. The authority granted to husbands comes with an undeniable mandate. “Husbands, love your wives as Christ loved the church and gave himself up for her.” (Eph 5:25 NIV)

(If you are new here, I would appreciate it if you would take the time to explore why I believe what I believe about the role of husbands and wives and the implications of those beliefs, which I don't have room to reiterate here. You can read more on the husband’s role in my posts “Husbands, Lead with Love” and “The Question of Authority.” For more on the wife’s role read “Love, Respect and Submission.”)

Getting to the point, what does this kind of ordered partnership mean in the very small minority of cases where you are unable to agree upon a decision? I believe the husband should man-up, take the responsibility, and make the call. Right or wrong, the consequences are on his shoulders. But read on!

Decisions like these should never be made lightly or without a careful eye to preserving the connection in the relationship. That means reassuring his wife that he has her best interest at heart and that of the family, that he has listened carefully to her input and understood it, and that he bares the responsibility of his decision. If he does not take care of her heart in a Christ-like fashion, then by default he has made the wrong decision, regardless of whether it turns out he made the right call for the situation or not.

My stance on this raises lots of questions, and I’ve got more to say on this controversial topic, which I will cover in my next post. But I will stop here and (hopefully) leave you provoked.

Let me hear your feedback in the comments.