A Response to: "A Response To: 'Marriage Isn’t For You'"
Original Blog Post: http://sethadamsmith.com/2013/11/02/marriage-isnt-for-you/
Response: http://triathletewithacollar.wordpress.com/2013/11/03/a-response-to-marriage-isnt-for-you/
First off, I want to talk about the author of the article.
Not only is this guy not married, or even in a relationship for that matter, he never will be. And that's not me being mean, I did my research (aka stalking). He is studying to become a single, celibate priest for the rest of his life. Him writing an article on what marriage is about is like me writing an article on what being the president is about. Can I read about it? Yeah. Can I talk to people who have experienced it? In theory, yeah, though getting access to past presidents would probably be pretty difficult. But could I truly give an honest account of what being the president means and how every future president should treat their role? No.
I'm not saying that he's wrong that marriage is about God because, for some people, their marriage is centered around God. For this guy, if he did get married, it'd certainly be all about God.
Though I don't want to make this about my own religious ideology, I do want to challenge his words, especially since they're coming from someone who will never know what it's like to love someone in the way that a husband loves his wife.
"True love is focused on God, and that sometimes means making people unhappy in order to draw them closer to God."
That sounds to me like you should piss your wife/hubby off so they pray to God for a better marriage. I don't know how else that sentence could be taken. I don't know why a wife (I'm just going to keep writing wife because that's what I'm going to be...eventually) would ever intentionally make her husband unhappy (I'm also going to keep using husband as the S.O. because that's what I'm going to have). That seems manipulative... There's nothing wrong with encouraging your husband to better his relationship with God, but is making him unhappy in order to do so really necessary? Wouldn't, I don't know, being supportive, be a little more effective and make for a happier marriage?
It continues: "Marriage is not only about making your spouse happy, it’s about making them holy.
Truthfully, this means that sometimes you will make your spouse sad, sometimes you will make your spouse angry, and sometimes you will make your spouse cry. However, the beauty of marriage is in these moments, where you challenge your spouse to better love God even when it makes them unhappy."
Sam and I had a.... disagreement..... last night. Was it on purpose? Certainly not. I know of couples that create fights on purpose to make the other person show they care and this seems like the same philosophy. The part from "Truthfully, this means" to "make your spouse cry" makes sense out of context. Couples fight. I'd be lying if I said Sam never made me mad. But the beauty of our relationship isn't when we're not getting a long, when we're making each other mad or sad. It's when we're happy together. For us, that doesn't happen very often because of the whole long distance thing but when it does, it's the best thing in the world and I wouldn't put anything before that. This person's God is selfish if he wants that to be taken away.
"Rather, the [original] article claims, marriage is about your spouse—about making them happy and helping them to actualize 'their wants, their needs, their hopes, and their dreams.'"
Seriously though, how beautiful is that? That's what anyone wants out of a marriage. I know Sam's going to be a great husband because he gives me all of those things (plus cuddle :) but I guess that goes under "making them happy"). And you know what, that works with the person who wrote the response article's view of God's place in marriage. Some people's wants and needs include getting closer to God and for the author, that's what a wife or husband is for so it works. But for me, I don't want a God Coach, I just want someone who someone who loves me and wants be to be awesome at whatever I'm doing. And luckily, I have that.

No comments:
Post a Comment