Dads, Don’t Go
June 25, 2010
Joe Carter
“Are fathers necessary?” asks Pamela Paul in the latest issue of The Atlantic. That she considers the question worth asking is a clue to how the article will conclude: “there’s nothing objectively essential about his contribution.”
Published just before Father’s Day, it would be easy to dismiss such cheap contrarianism as an attention-getting stunt. (The empirical claims presented in Paul’s article—and the research it was based on—have been adequately rebutted. W. Bradford Wilcox and others have already pointed out that most of the studies relied upon small, unrepresentative samples of same-sex and heterosexual couples.) But the fact remains that in America we act as if fathers are unnecessary. We enjoy a fit of pique when Heather has two full-time mommies, yet only respond with a sad shrug when Heather has one part-time daddy. But if fathers are necessary, they have to be completely involved in the lives of their children—and living at home with their children’s mothers.
As David Blankenhorn notes in Fatherless America: Confronting Our Most Urgent Social Problem, “The evidence shows that the great majority of visiting fathers are not—indeed, cannot be—good-enough fathers to their children. The deck is stacked against them. Too much has changed, too fast; too much will continue to change.” In theory, he continues,
it may be possible to restructure everything else about a family while maintaining fatherhood as a constant. In practice, it is hardly ever possible. Visiting fathers have lost the bases of fatherhood. As Bronislaw Malinowski put it in his classic cross-cultural analysis of parenthood, “the child is linked to both its parents by the unity of the household and by the intimacy of daily contacts.” But for the Visiting Father, both aspects of this linkage are irrevocably shattered.
I first read that passage in 1995, the year I myself became a “weekend dad.” In February my wife told me she was gay. In March she left our home and took my daughter with her.
At the time I was on recruiting duty for the Marine Corps, on an unforgiving assignment that required working fourteen-hour days, six days a week. I could only see my little girl on Sundays after making the ninety-mile trek from Olympia to Everett, where my soon-to-be-ex-wife had moved.
I’d pick up my two-year-old daughter, strap her into the car seat, and we’d set out on our weekend routine: to the park, if it was sunny and warm; to the play-land at McDonalds if it was rainy and cold. (In Everett, it is always rainy and always cold.)
Over the next several years, I was the one who moved—to Japan, San Diego, Dallas, Chicago, and Washington, D.C. I went from being “weekend dad” to being “summer-and-holiday dad.” Through it all I tried my best to be a “good-enough father.”
A few years ago I met Blakenhorn and talked to him about his book. I wanted to tell him that he was wrong. I wanted to tell him the base isn’t always lost and that the linkage is not always shattered. I wanted to tell him that it was indeed possible—because I was one—to be a “good-enough father.”
But it isn’t true. As much as I wanted to believe otherwise, Fatherless America was devastatingly prescient about my own experience as a “visiting father.” My experience was one more data point in the reams of empirical studies that show what millions of part-time dads before me have learned: Our children always need more than we can give them in a few weekend hours.
Of course, visiting fathers aren’t the only ones aware of the damage being done to our country’s children. Almost everyone acknowledge the harm in treating dad as if there is “nothing objectively essential about his contribution.”
Yet if we’re too specific, too personal, we may offend some poor hapless father who is doing the best he can. And who are we to judge any individual’s family situation? America’s true religion—unfettered individualism—requires that we find some way to justify everyone’s choice and ignore or play down the damage that results from such choices.
Although it is tempting to join in bending a knee to the cult of individualism (I’m an American, after all), I want to take a different approach. I want to directly address the specific, narrow audience who can do more than anyone else to change this destructive cycle. I want to make a policy proposal to the fathers who are on the verge of leaving their families.
As with all policy proposals, certain assumptions must be shared before agreement can be reached. My proposal is based on a simple argument: When your first child is born, your life stops being about what you want and starts being about what they need. If you disagree, you can stop reading now.
Here is the only way to fix the problem of fatherlessness: You must find a way to stay with your children. You may be having a tough time in your marriage. You may be thinking that you no longer love or can live with your spouse. You may believe that divorce is the only remaining option.
I don’t know your situation. I don’t know what you are going through. I only know that your children need you at home. Your sons and your daughters need your presence. They need you around, all the time, and not just for regularly scheduled visits. If you want to be a good father, don’t leave your children.
I’m fully aware that such a suggestion will be unpopular and that it will be deemed impractical. Our society tells us that you shouldn’t “stay together just for the kids.” Some social scientists will tell us that staying in an unhappy marriage will hurt the kids. Our culture tells us that progress has made fatherhood a vestigial artifact. Our hearts tell us that we deserve to pursue our own bliss. Even our churches can tell us that marriage is about being happy and that we deserve to be happy no matter what.
But again: When your first child is born, your life stops being about what you want and starts being about what they need. They need you at home. If you’re a good man and aspire to be a good father, that is all you need to know.
If your wife is physically abusive to you and the children, you need to get out—and take your kids with you. Otherwise you stick it out, and try to love your wife in every way possible. Maybe the marriage will heal (they sometimes do). Maybe it won’t. It doesn’t matter. If you have to stay in your marriage for one year or for eighteen, you stick it out until your children are grown.
What do you do, though, if you’re wife wants a divorce? You beg her to stay. You change what you have to change. You use guilt if necessary, and try to get her to “think about what is best for the kids.”
If nothing else works, then you ask her to commit to six months of marital counseling before she files for divorce. If at the end of the six months she’s still resolved to end the marriage you ask for another six months. You keep asking for as long as it takes. You may lose the fight eventually, but if you’re a man you will not give up on your family until you are bloodied and broken.
Don’t kid yourself that your divorce will be different because you have a good relationship with your children’s mother. My ex-wife has become a dear friend and a superb partner in parenting. Despite the peculiar circumstance that ended our marriage, I couldn’t ask for a more thoughtful, accommodating woman to be my former spouse.
But as hard as we work to make it easier on our daughter, everything we can do is not enough. Even though my daughter has lived with me for the past couple of years, her being with me hasn’t changed the fact that our child lives in a house where one of her parents is missing. Divorce doesn’t just end a marriage—it ends a family.
By now I’ve lost almost everyone who has followed me this far. Most people will pity my naivete or denounce my blanket recommendation as insensitive and idiotic. So be it. It may not even be the type of argument that we can comprehend in our individualistic culture. We’ve become so accustomed to politically-oriented solutions for societal problems that we’ve forgotten that sometimes the only way to fix what we’ve broken is by individuals making tough choices. In this situation, there is no other way.
I can’t convince everyone, of course, but my hope is that there is at least one father left—even just one—who will seriously consider what I’m saying. I hope that he will go into his child’s room tonight and watch them while they sleep. I hope that he will think about what it means to his babies that he is there for them when they go to bed and that he is there for them when they wake up.
Finally, I hope he’ll realize he has the power to retain a precious gift that we visiting fathers have lost and that we can never get back. He still has the opportunity to be a good father.
Joe Carter is web editor of First Things.
Comments:
6.25.2010 | 5:56am
Carole says:
Dear Joe,
Thanks so much for this heartfelt and important article. I am one of the lucky ones who had my dad around all the time when I was growing up, and I am absolutely positive that his presence was essential in my life, essential in me being able to negotiate the visicitudes of life with dignity. His affirmation of me as a person and as a woman mattered, and continues to matter.
Thanks so much for this heartfelt and important article. I am one of the lucky ones who had my dad around all the time when I was growing up, and I am absolutely positive that his presence was essential in my life, essential in me being able to negotiate the visicitudes of life with dignity. His affirmation of me as a person and as a woman mattered, and continues to matter.
6.25.2010 | 7:51am
Karen says:
You could do worse than advise fathers to treat their families decently. My husband fliies into irrational rages at the most pointless provocations. He has decided that my parents, my sons' grandparents, are no longer welcome in our house. He refuses to visit them with me, either. There is no reason for this attitude other than my husband's own stupide stubborness. He was, once, a loving person, but that man died years ago. I am in a state of constant misery, relieved only by my fervent prayers that he dies very soon and in a way that doesn't exhaust our life savings. I genuinely and thoroughly hate him, but since he doesn't beat me or cheat on me I can't divorce him and leave him to rot.
6.25.2010 | 8:33am
spedmom says:
Thoughtful piece. Unfortunately, now that my state NY has followed the rest of the country over the cliff into No-fault divorce, it will be impossible (legally) for parents who are willing to try to stay and work it out for the sake of the kids to stop their spouse from obtaining a divorce if they want to. I hope Mr.Carter's article turns some people's hearts towards their children. There isn't much the law can do to stop a divorce once no-fault is the law.
6.25.2010 | 10:18am
Ars Artium says:
To paraphrase Mother Theresa, if wives are informing their husbands that they are "gay" and leaving their homes, taking the children with them, "what is left to save?" I realize that we must have hope that all is not lost but, at least for now, it seems that the ground beneath our feet is crumbling - fast. This article brings to mind "The Nature of Desire" by Paul J. Griffths. He writes that "The range of things on which human desire is focused is, as a matter of fact, infinite, and the plasticity of desire is distinctively human." In other words we are the species whose desires "are capable of formation, reformation, and deformation, to the point of their own erasure." Dr. Griffths teaches that "Following hard on the expulsion from the Garden (a place where both human desires and the things on which they focused were arranged beautifully and cultivated in accord with God's passions), the Bible tells us, Cain envied and killed Abel." So much for "natural" desires. Paul Griffths does mention "reformation" and that gives us hope. He offers a suggestion: that we take responsibility for ourselves in the sense that we must "cultivate ourselves [and our children] in response to divine gift" rather than relying on a natural law that has been obscured by time and sin, that we grasp the terrible price of that obscurity. He writes that we "receive form only by looking away from [ourselves] and receiving the gift of being looked at by God." We cannot help but fear for the future when our culture affirms the exact opposite. In another article, a review of "The Beauty of the Infinite" Geoffrey Wainwright refers to a "palimpset of violence" that overlays the peace of God". We seem to be living through a time that seeks to reject the palimpset of violence and replace it with a palimpset of deformed sexual desire.
6.25.2010 | 10:24am
Jim says:
A great and important article. I coach a 10 year old little league team. Only 3 of the 11 players live in a household with both biological married parents. The disparity in the quality of parenting which kids receive now as compared to the 1950s has widened tremendously. The split between the haves and the havenots will, I expect, increasingly be derived from family structure.
Undertaking behavioral strategies to stay married for the sake of the kids does involve sin, most frequently the sin of dishonesty, and for Catholics, violation of the sacrament of marriage. Once children are born, a husband acquires a new moral duty, which modifies his pre-existing duty to his wife. The overall welfare of the family supersedes the duty to seek the wife's welfare, though of course efforts to achieve both should be sought first. Though this "family net benefit" approach is very defensible, it is not morally easy in light of sacramental vows and specific moral direction from the Bible and the Church.
Mr. Carter tighly synopsizes much of the cause of modernity's "slouching toward Gomorrah" with his statement: "America’s true religion—unfettered individualism—requires that we find some way to justify everyone’s choice and ignore or play down the damage that results from such choices."
Undertaking behavioral strategies to stay married for the sake of the kids does involve sin, most frequently the sin of dishonesty, and for Catholics, violation of the sacrament of marriage. Once children are born, a husband acquires a new moral duty, which modifies his pre-existing duty to his wife. The overall welfare of the family supersedes the duty to seek the wife's welfare, though of course efforts to achieve both should be sought first. Though this "family net benefit" approach is very defensible, it is not morally easy in light of sacramental vows and specific moral direction from the Bible and the Church.
Mr. Carter tighly synopsizes much of the cause of modernity's "slouching toward Gomorrah" with his statement: "America’s true religion—unfettered individualism—requires that we find some way to justify everyone’s choice and ignore or play down the damage that results from such choices."
6.25.2010 | 10:35am
Craig Payne says:
So sorry about everything. At least to have brought this life into the world is a blessing that cannot be erased.
6.25.2010 | 10:59am
Jim N says:
Great article. Very thoughtful and based on personal experience. Best lines: "When your first child is born, your life stops being about what you want and starts being about what they need", and "if you’re a man you will not give up on your family until you are bloodied and broken". Amen. Marriage can be very difficult. Let's pray for troubled marriages and families with spouses considering separation.
6.25.2010 | 11:35am
Todd A says:
Thank you for sharing that, Joe. I made a similar plea to my brother when we decided to leave his wife and son, but I wasn't as eloquent or as thoughtful. Now my nephew (and godson) has a "visiting father", which will always weigh heavily on my heart.
6.25.2010 | 11:55am
Ed S. says:
Careful, thoughtful, and courageous article. I took a quick look at US Census Bureau poverty statistics for families with a child under age 5. The rate for married-couple families was 8.5%, and for families with no husband present, an astonishing 46.4%. Fathers and mothers are the adults in these families and need to act like it. Fathers may stay because of their sense of duty and honor, and mothers may stay because of their need for security and protection. Both work for the natural protection of children, as it should be. Women who "don't need a man" should have that conversation with their father. Or perhaps that's the problem. But to assert that "there's nothing objectively essential" about a father's contribution to a family ignores the facts.
6.25.2010 | 12:07pm
Max says:
Mr. Carter,
Thank you for speaking a hard truth on a difficult subject. God bless.
Max
Thank you for speaking a hard truth on a difficult subject. God bless.
Max
6.25.2010 | 12:31pm
Fred says:
Like spedmom, I live in a no-fault divorce state. When my ex-wife decided to leave me, there was absolutely nothing I could do. I was required by my state's law to attend a "divorce class." Though it was, like most such government-required "classes," a monumental waste of time, there was one moment I will never forget. The instructor was enumerating the terrible effects divorce has on children, the sadness, the anger, the acting out, the regression, etc. When she finished this terrible list, she told the class, "But don't worry, this is all normal." To this day (that was ten years ago) the thought of that moment brings tears of rage and grief to my eyes. I remember thinking at the time, "My God, what kind of people are we that we do this to our children and call it 'normal'?" Fortunately, I was attending school and working part time at that time, so I had my son nearly every day, not just every other weekend. Two years later my ex-wife took ill and gave me custody of my son, who was five at the time. So I have been able to be a real father, raising my son rather than visiting him. My heart truly aches for people like Joe who are not as fortunate. But most of all, it aches for all the children suffering the "normal" consequences of divorce.
6.25.2010 | 12:37pm
Jessica says:
Thank you, Mr. Carter, for a beautiful article. This hit particularly close to home for me, having recently lost my father to prostate cancer at the far too young age of 56. During the last months of his life, I had the opportunity to reflect on his life and his meaning to me. And what I've found is that, beyond just being a good man (which he was), he was simply there. There for me when I needed him, whether by phone or in person. Though I never asked him, I'm sure he had dreams and hopes and plans for his career and life that changed drastically when my sister and I were born. But he made his family, my mother, my sister and myself, the center of his life and, in the end, he was sad to die, not so much because it was the loss of his life, but because he had to leave us. I see so much of my own selfishness in comparison to his selflessness. I pity those who have never known a good father in this life (though we all have a good Father, whether we acknowledge this or not) because I cannot imagine my life being what it is today without the solid base and assurance and steadiness that my father gave me.
There are questions in this world that cannot be answered by randomized controlled trials or the scientific method. There are important and beautiful aspects to human relationships that science simply is not designed to see. And in the end, the important "fact" (though I can't prove it to you with science) is that, as much as mothers, fathers matter. My father died last year on Thanksgiving Day, which is fitting, because I am so grateful to have had him as a father. And he mattered.
There are questions in this world that cannot be answered by randomized controlled trials or the scientific method. There are important and beautiful aspects to human relationships that science simply is not designed to see. And in the end, the important "fact" (though I can't prove it to you with science) is that, as much as mothers, fathers matter. My father died last year on Thanksgiving Day, which is fitting, because I am so grateful to have had him as a father. And he mattered.
6.25.2010 | 1:08pm
andrew says:
thank you for the article.
on a related note, having read her article, i find pamela paul's "insight" concerning "nothing objectively essential" about fathers' contributions utterly discouraging.
let me clarify: for most of my life, i have lived under the assumption that public discourse could be reasonable -- i.e. that discourse could operate under the guidance of reason. perhaps i have spent too much time at school, but i have always thought i and others to be under the judgment of clear and reasonable thinking.
i am beginning to believe that this assumption is false. indeed, i've met and read more and more people whose thinking is so muddy as to be beyond reasonable persuasion.
am i the only one who finds this situation frightening?
on a related note, having read her article, i find pamela paul's "insight" concerning "nothing objectively essential" about fathers' contributions utterly discouraging.
let me clarify: for most of my life, i have lived under the assumption that public discourse could be reasonable -- i.e. that discourse could operate under the guidance of reason. perhaps i have spent too much time at school, but i have always thought i and others to be under the judgment of clear and reasonable thinking.
i am beginning to believe that this assumption is false. indeed, i've met and read more and more people whose thinking is so muddy as to be beyond reasonable persuasion.
am i the only one who finds this situation frightening?
6.25.2010 | 1:41pm
Fred says:
Jessica, your post is beautiful.
Andrew, I think Jonathan Swift said it best when he pointed out "the falsity of that definition animal rationale (man is a reasoning creature) ... it should only be rationis capax (man has the ability to reason)." It's an ability far too rarely exercised.
Andrew, I think Jonathan Swift said it best when he pointed out "the falsity of that definition animal rationale (man is a reasoning creature) ... it should only be rationis capax (man has the ability to reason)." It's an ability far too rarely exercised.
6.25.2010 | 1:50pm
Albert says:
Joe, thanks for this article.
I grew up in a home of extreme verbal abuse and, thankfully to a lesser extent, physical violence. So many times I wished and imagined how life might have been different had my father not married my mother.
As I've grown older, I still do question what they were thinking, but I have never questioned their continuing decision to stay together. I am extremely grateful that even when things were terrible, they chose to stay. For good reasons and, I'm sure, for bad reasons, they stuck it out. As a result, I did not have to deal with the destruction of a home and family on top of the recurring trauma of witnessing relational evils.
They were imperfect people, filled with self-righteousness and wrath; but they gave a testimony about how important the marital union is, one that has provided a deep experience illustrating how difficult marriage can be and also ultimately what it is for. It shows the commitment of Christ to never leave or forsake his Bride, but to pursue her even unto death and even in death to be raised to life and victory.
Some might feel condemned by this, but my intention is not to do so if only because I do not know the lives behind these nicknames. Sin is really sin, failure is failure, weakness abounds and yes, often divorce is because of this. Yet, condemnation of people is not the main point. The main point is that even though we fail, Jesus Christ succeeded. He actually did it. He obeyed and made life happen for his people again and forever. And he offers us participation in his life through faith in Him--even while we are sinners.
My parents, complex figures with both evil and by the grace of God good running through their hearts and lives, gave me a picture both of the sin that destroys the world and yet the promise and victory of Jesus Christ. And for that I am grateful.
I grew up in a home of extreme verbal abuse and, thankfully to a lesser extent, physical violence. So many times I wished and imagined how life might have been different had my father not married my mother.
As I've grown older, I still do question what they were thinking, but I have never questioned their continuing decision to stay together. I am extremely grateful that even when things were terrible, they chose to stay. For good reasons and, I'm sure, for bad reasons, they stuck it out. As a result, I did not have to deal with the destruction of a home and family on top of the recurring trauma of witnessing relational evils.
They were imperfect people, filled with self-righteousness and wrath; but they gave a testimony about how important the marital union is, one that has provided a deep experience illustrating how difficult marriage can be and also ultimately what it is for. It shows the commitment of Christ to never leave or forsake his Bride, but to pursue her even unto death and even in death to be raised to life and victory.
Some might feel condemned by this, but my intention is not to do so if only because I do not know the lives behind these nicknames. Sin is really sin, failure is failure, weakness abounds and yes, often divorce is because of this. Yet, condemnation of people is not the main point. The main point is that even though we fail, Jesus Christ succeeded. He actually did it. He obeyed and made life happen for his people again and forever. And he offers us participation in his life through faith in Him--even while we are sinners.
My parents, complex figures with both evil and by the grace of God good running through their hearts and lives, gave me a picture both of the sin that destroys the world and yet the promise and victory of Jesus Christ. And for that I am grateful.
6.25.2010 | 2:03pm
John Cummins says:
Good one.
But such articles also deserve a sarcastic response: Are mothers necessary? And demonstrate, just as soundly, that there's nothing objectively essential about their contributions.
But such articles also deserve a sarcastic response: Are mothers necessary? And demonstrate, just as soundly, that there's nothing objectively essential about their contributions.
6.25.2010 | 3:31pm
Eric says:
This article is especially pertinent to non-Christians, who may rely more on the consequence of divorce on Children rather than the sin of divorce itself.
Divorce is not made wrong because it tears into children's souls; it tears into children's souls because it is wrong.
For Christians, the question requires a few steps back and a closer look at our vows. Indeed, "when your first child is born, your life stops being about what you want and starts being about what they need." But even before that, when you make a vow of love and fidelity and a lifetime of support and union, your life stops being about what you want and starts being about your spouse and your marriage, and what each of these needs. The two become one flesh. In this SACRAMENT there is dying to self and giving in self-sacrifice. And, as will all sacramental grace, this involves unity with the cross of Christ.
As with marriage, so with children. Grace is received through death to self.
Divorce is evil, the bad fruit of a rotten tree. For the sake of the God who calls the little-ones to his feet it must be kept whole and holy.
Divorce is not made wrong because it tears into children's souls; it tears into children's souls because it is wrong.
For Christians, the question requires a few steps back and a closer look at our vows. Indeed, "when your first child is born, your life stops being about what you want and starts being about what they need." But even before that, when you make a vow of love and fidelity and a lifetime of support and union, your life stops being about what you want and starts being about your spouse and your marriage, and what each of these needs. The two become one flesh. In this SACRAMENT there is dying to self and giving in self-sacrifice. And, as will all sacramental grace, this involves unity with the cross of Christ.
As with marriage, so with children. Grace is received through death to self.
Divorce is evil, the bad fruit of a rotten tree. For the sake of the God who calls the little-ones to his feet it must be kept whole and holy.
6.25.2010 | 4:42pm
Edward Alleyn says:
Great piece. Thank you.
I don't think that Ms. Paul's piece is "cheap contrarianism" or "an attention-getting stunt." I'm convinced that she is sincere. Nevertheless to ask the question “Are fathers necessary?” is to exhibit an idiocy, not to mention a stupidity, that is beyond the pale.
To be less harsh, maybe she's just naive; so many people on the Left these days are simply clueless because they have not yet understood that ideas, especially dopey ones, have consequences.
I don't think that Ms. Paul's piece is "cheap contrarianism" or "an attention-getting stunt." I'm convinced that she is sincere. Nevertheless to ask the question “Are fathers necessary?” is to exhibit an idiocy, not to mention a stupidity, that is beyond the pale.
To be less harsh, maybe she's just naive; so many people on the Left these days are simply clueless because they have not yet understood that ideas, especially dopey ones, have consequences.
6.25.2010 | 5:40pm
Karl says:
I did not read all of you article and likely will not.
To this day, now after more than twenty years, our valid sacrament is violated by my wife and her lover with the full support of the State and the Catholic Church.
I stayed broke to maintain my relationship with our children and have seen my be manipulated by my wife, her lover, the State and the Catholic Church.
Go ahead and delete this comment. The Catholic Church is in the business of destroying marriage and encouraging adultery. If the Pope had the guts to hear it from me in his face, I would tell him exactly that and name names.
He doesn't.
Enough said.
To this day, now after more than twenty years, our valid sacrament is violated by my wife and her lover with the full support of the State and the Catholic Church.
I stayed broke to maintain my relationship with our children and have seen my be manipulated by my wife, her lover, the State and the Catholic Church.
Go ahead and delete this comment. The Catholic Church is in the business of destroying marriage and encouraging adultery. If the Pope had the guts to hear it from me in his face, I would tell him exactly that and name names.
He doesn't.
Enough said.
6.25.2010 | 6:55pm
Gil Costello says:
When I tried everything you recommended and it failed, my wife still insisting on a divorce, I said to her, “What if I give you half of all that I make instead of a much lesser amount that the court would require, could I come by every morning and take our daughter to the park for two hours before she goes to kindergarten? She agreed. And now I have three grandchildren, and as blessed as I am, I can still see the damage done. You're right: it's not just about an amicable divorce; it's about the destruction of a family. Only my life in Christ's healing forgiveness and love saves me from what you accurately perceive.
6.25.2010 | 10:08pm
JayStanley says:
Excellent article and many excellent responses. My wife, although she loves me, is quite abusive both mentally and, at times, physically. After sixteen years of this, I'm certain that she is mentally ill, at least to some degree. She has repeatedly threatened me with divorce, told me to get out and threatened to call the police (for what, I'm not sure). I simply refuse to leave. I'm not sure I will be able to keep this up indefinitely, but I keep taking it one day at a time, while I pray for her. There are many days when I imagine what an immediate relief it would be if we separated, or if she got hit by a bus. But I keep on sticking it out for my kids (and for her and me to be honest). Your article is heartening.
6.26.2010 | 1:40am
jdc says:
This is a heart felt article, no doubt. It is much too catagorical, however. To imply that divorce is always wrong is unbiblical and dangerous. You say it takes a man to hang in even when marriages go horribly wrong. I agree that a husband (or wife) must do everything possible to salvage the family as it was meant to be, under one roof. However, it also takes a man to admit when he made a mistake in marrying his spouse. What if God didn't join the spouses together and there is undeniable evidence to that effect? Wouldn't it be contrary to God's will to stay in the marriage? Indeed, wouldn't it be prideful?
Further, Mr carter seems to assume that all divorced fathers see their children on weekends and therefore aren't major presences in their lives. This simply isn't the case in many arrangements these days. I'm a divorced father of one and care for my daughter 3-4 days per week. That comes out to 50% of the year. In all honesty, I have a MUCH better relationship with her than I had when I was married because my time with her is much more focused. That is, I don't have a wife to rely on to take care of the kid when I come home from work and am tired. No, I have to do it. This structure has made me into the father that I am today. So, your point that you have to live under the same roof as your child to be a good father doesn't hold in all cases. Don't project your guilt in being a divorced father on the rest of us. We have more important things to worry about - like raising godly children.
Further, Mr carter seems to assume that all divorced fathers see their children on weekends and therefore aren't major presences in their lives. This simply isn't the case in many arrangements these days. I'm a divorced father of one and care for my daughter 3-4 days per week. That comes out to 50% of the year. In all honesty, I have a MUCH better relationship with her than I had when I was married because my time with her is much more focused. That is, I don't have a wife to rely on to take care of the kid when I come home from work and am tired. No, I have to do it. This structure has made me into the father that I am today. So, your point that you have to live under the same roof as your child to be a good father doesn't hold in all cases. Don't project your guilt in being a divorced father on the rest of us. We have more important things to worry about - like raising godly children.
6.26.2010 | 3:27am
Aimee says:
You are absolutely right. Sorry, but I've experienced this as a child, and nothing makes father absence ok. Nothing. Part-time is part-time, and the child knows what's going on, and how broken it feels, even if the time is split exactly in half, etc. I would only add to your plea that fathers also be there when they are there--no pretending you're present when you're really absent, at work, out with your freinds nights and weekends, having an affair but staying in the marriage, etc.. Be There, At Home, With Your Kids.
6.26.2010 | 3:41am
Bret Lythgoe says:
Joe: Thanks for your heartfelt, and intelligent letter. I, too, am sorry to hear of your circumstances. And, I thought it was settled, in sociology, that Dan Quayle was right, to borrow from, I think, a title from an article, from The New Republic, a few years back.
It's suprising that this issue is being revisited. All of the relevant empirical data shows that two parents are the best, for a child's optimal development.
But we do have to be practical. It makes no sense to live in a loveless marriage. In fact, this is no marriage at all. Yes, one must never give up easily on a marriage, but if it's really over, your'e essentially roommates, and does THIS set a good example, for children, to follow, about how marriages should work?
It's suprising that this issue is being revisited. All of the relevant empirical data shows that two parents are the best, for a child's optimal development.
But we do have to be practical. It makes no sense to live in a loveless marriage. In fact, this is no marriage at all. Yes, one must never give up easily on a marriage, but if it's really over, your'e essentially roommates, and does THIS set a good example, for children, to follow, about how marriages should work?
6.26.2010 | 8:26am
Maria says:
Attacks against Fatherhood had started right in The Garden , when the enemy told our first parents that we were not loved enough by The Father , for Him to share the divine nature with us and all the while they were right in it - Bl.Emmerich's book mentions that they were in such glory that their hairs were like beams of light , that they were going to be given power , to bring forth holy children, through the power of the spoken word , in perfect harmony , just like The Father !
Our Trinitarian God ..thrice holy ..may be also thrice Fatherly, in relationship with us ...
and our Lord revealing what Father love is all about ..what a real Father , in flesh can be ...thank God there are many such who show this heroic side ..
Yet , may be lots more need to be done , esp. in prevention , as seen in the pain and brokenness in many lives ...and to keep up the hope that there is still time , yes, even to restore and replenish what seem lost ...those are basic gifts of our faith .
Deep seated hatreds against one's own parents may be at root of many problems in relationships and we in The Church have been given many arsenals , to root this out - regular family prayers , worship together, scripture readings and discussions togehther , use of sacramentals - esp.like the green scapular from the Vincentians ( the legitimate ones to spread the devotion - they have a center in Baltimore ) these can be left in the vicinity or given even hidden , in a small gift , such as a small purse ...and recite out the prayers often enough - ' Immaculate Heart of mary , pray for us now and at the hour of our death ' ...even those we wish should be hit by a bus can be prayed for , when our/ their Mother is with us all ...
Other such powerful prayers too - chaplet of St .Michael , rosary ... recognising that our strugles are not against flesh and blood ...and that each of us , when in The Kingdom , has been given more than what even John The Baptist had ..
Good warfare sites available on internet too , asking our Father, to take back ground gained by the enemy through our own sins, ancestral bondages ..and such meausres may be what would do away simmering hatreds, which can be very unhealthy for one's own soul health !
Gazing at our Father's Face , in an image of the Sacred Heart , the Divine mercy pictures ( and should not every house have such ! ) hearing Him tell us - yes, He understands ...and that the outpouring of The Father love, in Him, through HIm can heal all ...and all our efforts to establish this solid Father tie , that may do much to prevent much too !
Thank God The Church provides the means ....and let us hope that some of the best memories for each of us and our spouses /children would be our moments spent , in a foretatse of heaven here , in worship of our Father !
Our Trinitarian God ..thrice holy ..may be also thrice Fatherly, in relationship with us ...
and our Lord revealing what Father love is all about ..what a real Father , in flesh can be ...thank God there are many such who show this heroic side ..
Yet , may be lots more need to be done , esp. in prevention , as seen in the pain and brokenness in many lives ...and to keep up the hope that there is still time , yes, even to restore and replenish what seem lost ...those are basic gifts of our faith .
Deep seated hatreds against one's own parents may be at root of many problems in relationships and we in The Church have been given many arsenals , to root this out - regular family prayers , worship together, scripture readings and discussions togehther , use of sacramentals - esp.like the green scapular from the Vincentians ( the legitimate ones to spread the devotion - they have a center in Baltimore ) these can be left in the vicinity or given even hidden , in a small gift , such as a small purse ...and recite out the prayers often enough - ' Immaculate Heart of mary , pray for us now and at the hour of our death ' ...even those we wish should be hit by a bus can be prayed for , when our/ their Mother is with us all ...
Other such powerful prayers too - chaplet of St .Michael , rosary ... recognising that our strugles are not against flesh and blood ...and that each of us , when in The Kingdom , has been given more than what even John The Baptist had ..
Good warfare sites available on internet too , asking our Father, to take back ground gained by the enemy through our own sins, ancestral bondages ..and such meausres may be what would do away simmering hatreds, which can be very unhealthy for one's own soul health !
Gazing at our Father's Face , in an image of the Sacred Heart , the Divine mercy pictures ( and should not every house have such ! ) hearing Him tell us - yes, He understands ...and that the outpouring of The Father love, in Him, through HIm can heal all ...and all our efforts to establish this solid Father tie , that may do much to prevent much too !
Thank God The Church provides the means ....and let us hope that some of the best memories for each of us and our spouses /children would be our moments spent , in a foretatse of heaven here , in worship of our Father !
6.26.2010 | 8:48am
Maria says:
Wanting jusitice is part of our Godly nature ..and time and again we see that when God allowed calamities , the intent was always that hearts would be turned back to Him !
( True , many calamities are from the evil one's malice only , because we have chosen to let it be the father ! )
Yet , when we pray that those who hurt us be blessed and given grace to repent , it can set justice in motion in Godly way, since repentance is also painful and can bring forth good fruit that can help all , even us who have been hurt and atleast remove any ill effects from the malevolent prayers / thoughts of others and bring us blessings for bringing more of Godly reign !
( True , many calamities are from the evil one's malice only , because we have chosen to let it be the father ! )
Yet , when we pray that those who hurt us be blessed and given grace to repent , it can set justice in motion in Godly way, since repentance is also painful and can bring forth good fruit that can help all , even us who have been hurt and atleast remove any ill effects from the malevolent prayers / thoughts of others and bring us blessings for bringing more of Godly reign !
6.26.2010 | 9:40am
Gail F says:
Thank you for this thoughtful article. I agree completely with the premise -- that once a child is born, his/her needs come first, and with the premise Eric wrote in his comment -- that once a couple is married, the needs of the marriage come first. The fact that many people find these principles hard to live by does not make them wrong. Likewise, the fact that individual marriages and/or families may have had different experiences does not make the general principle wrong. Especially in the case of difficult situations -- such as mental illness -- what works in general may not work in particular.
Nevertheless, every reputable study on family life confirms that children do best raised by their married, biological mother and father -- even when the marriage is not happy, and (except in extreme cases, such as abuse) even when the parents aren't great parents. Children removed from "bad" families by the courts, for example, tend to do worse than children who stay with their dysfunctional families. Both do poorly, but children removed from their families tend to do even more poorly.
Of course single parents or divorced parents can raise happy, well-adjusted kids. But it's not as likely to happen, and it requires heroic efforts from those parents -- while children raised in intact families tend to turn out better even when raised by indifferent parents. It is criminal to encourage the break up of so many families and to pretend that raising their children in the circumstances is no big deal. It is a big deal.
It's possible, for example, to pass the bar exam without going to law school. But is it likely? No. And does it require much more effort and discipline from the student? Yes. Law schools are set up to ensure people do what's necessary to pass the exam and practice law. Some law students won't pass, some who pass won't be good lawyers, and some can pass without going to school. But barring those exceptions -- and there are always exceptions to everything -- which way is the best choice for the most people?
Nevertheless, every reputable study on family life confirms that children do best raised by their married, biological mother and father -- even when the marriage is not happy, and (except in extreme cases, such as abuse) even when the parents aren't great parents. Children removed from "bad" families by the courts, for example, tend to do worse than children who stay with their dysfunctional families. Both do poorly, but children removed from their families tend to do even more poorly.
Of course single parents or divorced parents can raise happy, well-adjusted kids. But it's not as likely to happen, and it requires heroic efforts from those parents -- while children raised in intact families tend to turn out better even when raised by indifferent parents. It is criminal to encourage the break up of so many families and to pretend that raising their children in the circumstances is no big deal. It is a big deal.
It's possible, for example, to pass the bar exam without going to law school. But is it likely? No. And does it require much more effort and discipline from the student? Yes. Law schools are set up to ensure people do what's necessary to pass the exam and practice law. Some law students won't pass, some who pass won't be good lawyers, and some can pass without going to school. But barring those exceptions -- and there are always exceptions to everything -- which way is the best choice for the most people?
6.26.2010 | 9:57am
Diane says:
My dad died when I was 10.
My memories of him are from others and through a 10 year old's memories.
He was such a great caring and great dad. From others, I know him as an adult would, his actions and how he treated others. he was loved and admired by others.
After my mother died, I found the letters written to her after his death.
I was astounded at how many people cared enough about him to write her.
I learned things about him that I never knew.
I miss him even today. I am so sorry my husband and children never knew him.
My memories of him are from others and through a 10 year old's memories.
He was such a great caring and great dad. From others, I know him as an adult would, his actions and how he treated others. he was loved and admired by others.
After my mother died, I found the letters written to her after his death.
I was astounded at how many people cared enough about him to write her.
I learned things about him that I never knew.
I miss him even today. I am so sorry my husband and children never knew him.
6.26.2010 | 10:41am
Laura says:
Mr. Carter,
Thank you for this article. My husband and I are expecting our first baby at the end of September, and although I cannot imagine the trials--and the joys--that are ahead of us, your article is heartening. More than ever, I think that we young people need reminding that, as you said, When your first child is born, your life stops being about what you want and starts being about what they need."
God bless.
Thank you for this article. My husband and I are expecting our first baby at the end of September, and although I cannot imagine the trials--and the joys--that are ahead of us, your article is heartening. More than ever, I think that we young people need reminding that, as you said, When your first child is born, your life stops being about what you want and starts being about what they need."
God bless.
6.26.2010 | 11:40am
JayStanley says:
Bret Lythgoe:
Yes, being married, in a loveless marriage where you are essentially roommates, sets a better example than divorce.
Yes, being married, in a loveless marriage where you are essentially roommates, sets a better example than divorce.
6.26.2010 | 6:38pm
Bret Lythgoe says:
JayStanley: Here's part of the problem though. We often learn in subtle, even seemingly unconscious ways, and a child, seeing parents who really don't love each other, may mimick that later, and marry someone he/she really does not love.
I'm an advocate, a strong one, of having a mother and father, in the same home. But like with most moral ideals, they conflict with other moral ideals, like I mentioned above, as well as not staying in an abusive and/or loveless marriage.
I'm an advocate, a strong one, of having a mother and father, in the same home. But like with most moral ideals, they conflict with other moral ideals, like I mentioned above, as well as not staying in an abusive and/or loveless marriage.
6.26.2010 | 8:13pm
Bob G says:
Touching article--but no one has mentioned what may be an important consideration.
In earlier times pressures inside the family could often be relieved by close relatives and contacts in a more communal society. Spouses were not dealing only with each other. Today the typical family is a solitary island in a wide faceless sea and the pressures on the spouses can become enormous and unsustainable. An essential part of any general solution to the problem Joe Carter discusses may be a real surrounding community, not just a rhetorical one. I'm dubious that just sticking it out can usually work.
As for the Atlantic, they have a little stable of "relationship" writers who pride themselves on pushing the envelope. One of them has just revealed that women are giving up on men in favor of--real estate. She apparently sees this as a real advance. Let's wait another ten years to see how happy these trend-setters turn out to be, if any of them actually survive.
In earlier times pressures inside the family could often be relieved by close relatives and contacts in a more communal society. Spouses were not dealing only with each other. Today the typical family is a solitary island in a wide faceless sea and the pressures on the spouses can become enormous and unsustainable. An essential part of any general solution to the problem Joe Carter discusses may be a real surrounding community, not just a rhetorical one. I'm dubious that just sticking it out can usually work.
As for the Atlantic, they have a little stable of "relationship" writers who pride themselves on pushing the envelope. One of them has just revealed that women are giving up on men in favor of--real estate. She apparently sees this as a real advance. Let's wait another ten years to see how happy these trend-setters turn out to be, if any of them actually survive.
6.27.2010 | 12:36am
GaryT says:
Reading the article and the comments are heartbreaking. I am blessed to have a father who always looked out for his family first and I am blessed to have a loving marriage.
Marriages are always worth fighting for. I agree that one should not give up. Even a loveless marriage can be repaired, and there are some wonderful programs out there. I personally know of 3 couples who have attended retrouvaille and were able to renew and repair their marriages.
Children are always the victims in bad marriages. Rather than asking "is this marriage working for me?", we must ask "is it better for the kids"? - to which the evidence is pretty overwhelmingly answered "YES!!!"
No marriage is perfect and it takes work by both spouses and especially God's grace to make it joyful. But it is always possible.
Those of you who are struggling; you are in my prayers.
Marriages are always worth fighting for. I agree that one should not give up. Even a loveless marriage can be repaired, and there are some wonderful programs out there. I personally know of 3 couples who have attended retrouvaille and were able to renew and repair their marriages.
Children are always the victims in bad marriages. Rather than asking "is this marriage working for me?", we must ask "is it better for the kids"? - to which the evidence is pretty overwhelmingly answered "YES!!!"
No marriage is perfect and it takes work by both spouses and especially God's grace to make it joyful. But it is always possible.
Those of you who are struggling; you are in my prayers.
6.27.2010 | 1:17am
Eric says:
Marriage it not primarily about love, and certainly not about the feeling of love. Bret Lythgoe's track follows from this assumption. The feeling of love is irrelevant. We are called to love, as in the verb. One can and must love, even in the absence of the feeling of love. Children need to see the action of love more than the subtle expressions of sentiments. And, frankly, the feelings associated with love are engendered, in both the actor and the recipient, by acts of love.
What lesson is this? If you lack the feeling of love for those closest to you, the best course of action is to act on your unloving feeling, which is to say, act unlovingly.
The false ideal is expecting that we feel love at all times for our spouse. This is fundamentally unchristian and reflects a type of self obsession that is the opposite of Christian love, which is self-giving and self-emptying.
"Father, why have you forsaken me", makes audible the sense of having been absolutely abandoned. In the depths of the greatest act of love there is no sentiment but sorrow.
Thank the Good God that not all marriages are a crucifix. But insofar as they are sacramental they are all cruciform.
Let's get past thinking so much about our feelings in these relationships and start thinking about others, about our husbands and wives, sons and daughters. We are here for them, not them for us. We are called to love them as Christ calls us to love, not to an entitlement of the feeling of love.
My parents divorced when I was 5 and I remember vividly the day they told us my father was moving out. My heart was rent and for years I and my sisters suffered from it.
Now I have two small children and, on reflection, I am astounded that anyone would choose their feelings over their own little child's well being. They are blinded by their excessive self-concern.
For myself and each of my sisters the wounds still run deep, and my father was present, and involved, and caring, and supportive.
Do not fool yourselves, divorce is, simply put, evil.
What lesson is this? If you lack the feeling of love for those closest to you, the best course of action is to act on your unloving feeling, which is to say, act unlovingly.
The false ideal is expecting that we feel love at all times for our spouse. This is fundamentally unchristian and reflects a type of self obsession that is the opposite of Christian love, which is self-giving and self-emptying.
"Father, why have you forsaken me", makes audible the sense of having been absolutely abandoned. In the depths of the greatest act of love there is no sentiment but sorrow.
Thank the Good God that not all marriages are a crucifix. But insofar as they are sacramental they are all cruciform.
Let's get past thinking so much about our feelings in these relationships and start thinking about others, about our husbands and wives, sons and daughters. We are here for them, not them for us. We are called to love them as Christ calls us to love, not to an entitlement of the feeling of love.
My parents divorced when I was 5 and I remember vividly the day they told us my father was moving out. My heart was rent and for years I and my sisters suffered from it.
Now I have two small children and, on reflection, I am astounded that anyone would choose their feelings over their own little child's well being. They are blinded by their excessive self-concern.
For myself and each of my sisters the wounds still run deep, and my father was present, and involved, and caring, and supportive.
Do not fool yourselves, divorce is, simply put, evil.
6.27.2010 | 10:08am
Maria says:
One fascinating factor in all this could be how Ham who treats his father Noah disrespectfully gets to pay the price that lasts for generations !
We quite do not know how/why this happened and what the role of the mother was ...
We all are concerned about the threat of Islam ...
and there in comes the fascinating factor ..
we hear of what a decadent character Mohammed was ..yet , the movement he started has grown ..true, there could be many factors ...yet, could one of it be the resepct , mercy and forgiveness his followers give him ...just to be an example for us ..to make us jealous ..
We have the case of Fr.Maciel and others like him in front of us ...true , while justice need to be carried out , let us not forget the good God has allowed to happen even through these persons , esp. when we consider persons like Mohammed ..and may be that is the lesson of mercy that Pope John Paul 11 wanted us to take in - even mercy towards the Holy Father , for his seeming lack of action ( even though being such a man of prayer and sacrifice , how could any one accuse him of doing 'nothing ' ! )
Now , there are also allegations of improper money transactions ...again, like St.Paul warns us , let us not be quick to judge ...did some of that money go for rightful use in countries under communism that needed it - to make friends using dishonest wealth ...did that then move some hearts who were cynical , distrustful ..to come around , to accomplish some worthwhile and very needed objectives, to take the world back from even the brink of nuclear war ..
We would not know here ..
Such attitudes of focusing on the good God does in lives then hopefully would trickle into our hearts and families too ...to set us free ..to 'save' us from our hatreds and accusations against us and others ...to make us a people of praise and gratitude ..
We see this even in Old Testament , in passages where they mention nothing of the faults of the leaders !
May we wives and mothers , the ' weaker ' sex who should know our frailiteis and need for mercy well enough , be able to show same to those in their lives , asking The Holy Spirit to take over - for all the joy and peace it can bring !
We quite do not know how/why this happened and what the role of the mother was ...
We all are concerned about the threat of Islam ...
and there in comes the fascinating factor ..
we hear of what a decadent character Mohammed was ..yet , the movement he started has grown ..true, there could be many factors ...yet, could one of it be the resepct , mercy and forgiveness his followers give him ...just to be an example for us ..to make us jealous ..
We have the case of Fr.Maciel and others like him in front of us ...true , while justice need to be carried out , let us not forget the good God has allowed to happen even through these persons , esp. when we consider persons like Mohammed ..and may be that is the lesson of mercy that Pope John Paul 11 wanted us to take in - even mercy towards the Holy Father , for his seeming lack of action ( even though being such a man of prayer and sacrifice , how could any one accuse him of doing 'nothing ' ! )
Now , there are also allegations of improper money transactions ...again, like St.Paul warns us , let us not be quick to judge ...did some of that money go for rightful use in countries under communism that needed it - to make friends using dishonest wealth ...did that then move some hearts who were cynical , distrustful ..to come around , to accomplish some worthwhile and very needed objectives, to take the world back from even the brink of nuclear war ..
We would not know here ..
Such attitudes of focusing on the good God does in lives then hopefully would trickle into our hearts and families too ...to set us free ..to 'save' us from our hatreds and accusations against us and others ...to make us a people of praise and gratitude ..
We see this even in Old Testament , in passages where they mention nothing of the faults of the leaders !
May we wives and mothers , the ' weaker ' sex who should know our frailiteis and need for mercy well enough , be able to show same to those in their lives , asking The Holy Spirit to take over - for all the joy and peace it can bring !
6.27.2010 | 12:17pm
Colin Kerr says:
I whole-heartedly agree with Mr. Carter. Like most of us, our marriages are far from ideal. In fact, they down-right suck sometimes and you wish you could get out of them and just run in the opposite direction as fast as you can.
You can just feel his deparation as he talks about the "six months at a time." I stayed because of my children, even while love seemed all but extinct, when friendship totally lost, when it seemed I was living with a stranger who hated me, and she was too. I stayed because of the kids. My wife is not mentally ill nor abusive, and neither am I. Mr. Carter gives fair allowance for unfixable situations, and they do exist. And, staying 'for the kids' was all we needed to start on our road to repair what seemed irreparable. I thank God every day that I was given this grace, and that she was too.
We are not people "ready for others" anymore. We are individuals entering into marriage to have all our dreams fulfilled. When we realize the other can't or won't fulfill them, the problems emerge.
I've discussed stuff like this a number of times in my blog: http://thetheologyofdad.blogspot.com/ if anyone is interested.
How did it ever get to be that moms own the kids? Probably this more than anything else has lead to the marginalizing of the role of dad.
You can just feel his deparation as he talks about the "six months at a time." I stayed because of my children, even while love seemed all but extinct, when friendship totally lost, when it seemed I was living with a stranger who hated me, and she was too. I stayed because of the kids. My wife is not mentally ill nor abusive, and neither am I. Mr. Carter gives fair allowance for unfixable situations, and they do exist. And, staying 'for the kids' was all we needed to start on our road to repair what seemed irreparable. I thank God every day that I was given this grace, and that she was too.
We are not people "ready for others" anymore. We are individuals entering into marriage to have all our dreams fulfilled. When we realize the other can't or won't fulfill them, the problems emerge.
I've discussed stuff like this a number of times in my blog: http://thetheologyofdad.blogspot.com/ if anyone is interested.
How did it ever get to be that moms own the kids? Probably this more than anything else has lead to the marginalizing of the role of dad.
6.27.2010 | 1:18pm
Carole says:
I would like to see someone design a "Vows Retreat" for people who are preparing for marriage. Religious orders have these before people make their profession, and they do them over and again. I think it would be great if there were a retreat designed around the meaning and consequences of the vows, and one that can be re-visited in later years of marriage.
For me, it has always been contemplating the meaning of the vows that has given me pause in relationship consideration. (Do you come freely and without reservation? That's been a real show-stopper...)
I ended up single, so far anyway, but I'm happy never to have gone through a divorce.
For me, it has always been contemplating the meaning of the vows that has given me pause in relationship consideration. (Do you come freely and without reservation? That's been a real show-stopper...)
I ended up single, so far anyway, but I'm happy never to have gone through a divorce.
6.27.2010 | 8:03pm
Bret Lythgoe says:
Eric: I understand your perspective. Certianly, one must never give up on a marriage, when time are tough. and, yes, love is much more than just romantic love, or emotional attachment. But, to deny these essential components of love, is unrealistic. They're essential neurobiological features.
6.28.2010 | 12:00am
GaryT says:
Bret,
the feeling are certainly real and yes a real part of marriage. When we act as servants to our spouse, the benefits they receive will certainly be emotional as well as any other tangible help we provide. This discussion reminds me of the "Five Love Languages" book - which is excellent reading for anyone who would like to explore the more practical ways of how to show your love to your spouse.
Carole,
My wife and I have been part of a group that meets monthly with the very intent of reflecting on exactly what it means to be living in a Christian marriage - and yes it is very powerful.
the feeling are certainly real and yes a real part of marriage. When we act as servants to our spouse, the benefits they receive will certainly be emotional as well as any other tangible help we provide. This discussion reminds me of the "Five Love Languages" book - which is excellent reading for anyone who would like to explore the more practical ways of how to show your love to your spouse.
Carole,
My wife and I have been part of a group that meets monthly with the very intent of reflecting on exactly what it means to be living in a Christian marriage - and yes it is very powerful.
6.28.2010 | 3:43am
Dennis says:
It's a moving and well-motivated article, and I think it's right for most cases. The author's position should be taken as innocent until proven guilty, but not, I think, taken as the way, period. My dad was irritable, easily angered and emotionally abusive, but probably not quite _physically_ abusive. As far as I understand Mr. Carter, my parents should have stayed together, but I thank God that they did not. Of all the ways in which I'm screwed up, they are far more obviously the result of my being like my dad and too much in his presence rather than too little. I often regret that my wife and I have never had kids, but I'm too much like the person who sired me to inflict myself on a precious child.
I needed a dad, but since my dad didn't really fill the role - or did so in a very negative way - I was better off seeing him no more than once a week. (And frankly, that was too much some years.) Arguing that children need fathers is very plausible; arguing that the biological entity that contributed the sperm must fill that job is another matter entirely.
I needed a dad, but since my dad didn't really fill the role - or did so in a very negative way - I was better off seeing him no more than once a week. (And frankly, that was too much some years.) Arguing that children need fathers is very plausible; arguing that the biological entity that contributed the sperm must fill that job is another matter entirely.
6.28.2010 | 9:14am
Wolf Paul says:
I have a few questions and/or observations:
1. I am puzzled that no-one replied to Karen (comment #3 above) and the issues she raised (which are echoed by another poster, Dennis). But then I don't have an answer for her, either.
2. Mr Carter, your article is very poignant and probably very true; but given that, why didn't you quit your Marine career when your wife left you to find a job near her so that you could continue more frequent contact with your daughter?
3. And finally, all your encouragement to stay together notwithstanding, your own situation demonstrates that this is sometimes impossible -- if one of the spouses decides s/he is homosexual and will not be persuaded otherwise (and it may become increasingly difficult if not illegal to attempt such persuasion), what can one do?
Please don't read this as an accusation but rather as questions to point out that the situations and required decisions are rarely simple and do not lend themselves to "ideal" answers and solutions.
1. I am puzzled that no-one replied to Karen (comment #3 above) and the issues she raised (which are echoed by another poster, Dennis). But then I don't have an answer for her, either.
2. Mr Carter, your article is very poignant and probably very true; but given that, why didn't you quit your Marine career when your wife left you to find a job near her so that you could continue more frequent contact with your daughter?
3. And finally, all your encouragement to stay together notwithstanding, your own situation demonstrates that this is sometimes impossible -- if one of the spouses decides s/he is homosexual and will not be persuaded otherwise (and it may become increasingly difficult if not illegal to attempt such persuasion), what can one do?
Please don't read this as an accusation but rather as questions to point out that the situations and required decisions are rarely simple and do not lend themselves to "ideal" answers and solutions.
6.28.2010 | 9:38am
Joe Carter says:
Wolf Paul why didn't you quit your Marine career when your wife left you to find a job near her so that you could continue more frequent contact with your daughter?
At the time of the divorce, I still had a few years left on my contract. By the time I could leave the Corps, staying in seemed like the only way to ensure that I had a steady income and good medical benefits. (I eventually did get out—four years short of retirement eligibility—in part so that I could make arrangements for my daughter to come live with me.)
if one of the spouses decides s/he is homosexual and will not be persuaded otherwise (and it may become increasingly difficult if not illegal to attempt such persuasion), what can one do?
I'm not sure I did all I could in my own situation, but sometimes there really isn't much you can do. We live in a fallen world and there are times that no matter how much you try to do the right thing, it doesn't work out. I certainly don't fault anyone for failing—only giving up without a fight.
At the time of the divorce, I still had a few years left on my contract. By the time I could leave the Corps, staying in seemed like the only way to ensure that I had a steady income and good medical benefits. (I eventually did get out—four years short of retirement eligibility—in part so that I could make arrangements for my daughter to come live with me.)
if one of the spouses decides s/he is homosexual and will not be persuaded otherwise (and it may become increasingly difficult if not illegal to attempt such persuasion), what can one do?
I'm not sure I did all I could in my own situation, but sometimes there really isn't much you can do. We live in a fallen world and there are times that no matter how much you try to do the right thing, it doesn't work out. I certainly don't fault anyone for failing—only giving up without a fight.
6.28.2010 | 1:27pm
Lancelot Lamar says:
Joe,
What a beautiful and honest article. The wonderful comments reveal the deep chords of hurt and hope you evoked with it. Comments by Eric and Jessica are both heartfelt and true.
I was grateful when the pastor who tied the knot between my wife and me told us: "Marriage is not primarily about 'love' as it is understood today, as a personal feeling of happiness. Marriage is primarily about commitment, which forms a deeper kind of love, one that trancends feeling and circumstance and unites us to God, for this is how He loves: faithfully, steadfastly, forever."
To reference Kierkegaard, marriage, at least Christian marriage, must be seen as an "ethical" commitment, not an "aesthetic" indulgence. People who go into marriage looking to have their "felt needs" met will certainly fail.
Eric's comments on this are first rate, but I would qualify his statement about "dying to self." It is not so much that we die to self in marriage and parenthood, but that we die to our worldly, external, superficial, aesthetic selves. In doing that we can begin to realize and live in our deeper self, our self and life in Christ and the Holy Spirit. In doing that we are "born again" into a deeper, truer life in God, which is our true destiny and joy.
Sadly, however, most of us spend most of our lives gaining the world and losing our souls, rather than losing the world and gaining our souls.
What a beautiful and honest article. The wonderful comments reveal the deep chords of hurt and hope you evoked with it. Comments by Eric and Jessica are both heartfelt and true.
I was grateful when the pastor who tied the knot between my wife and me told us: "Marriage is not primarily about 'love' as it is understood today, as a personal feeling of happiness. Marriage is primarily about commitment, which forms a deeper kind of love, one that trancends feeling and circumstance and unites us to God, for this is how He loves: faithfully, steadfastly, forever."
To reference Kierkegaard, marriage, at least Christian marriage, must be seen as an "ethical" commitment, not an "aesthetic" indulgence. People who go into marriage looking to have their "felt needs" met will certainly fail.
Eric's comments on this are first rate, but I would qualify his statement about "dying to self." It is not so much that we die to self in marriage and parenthood, but that we die to our worldly, external, superficial, aesthetic selves. In doing that we can begin to realize and live in our deeper self, our self and life in Christ and the Holy Spirit. In doing that we are "born again" into a deeper, truer life in God, which is our true destiny and joy.
Sadly, however, most of us spend most of our lives gaining the world and losing our souls, rather than losing the world and gaining our souls.
6.29.2010 | 6:42pm
Kat says:
Karen, your letter made me sad. No one here can tell you what to do about your marriage. But hate can destroy you from the inside. Please consider finding someone; a counselor or pastor; who can help you sort through the issues you are facing. If your husband won't go with you, go by yourself. Life is too short to spend it like this. I'll pray for you.
10.12.2010 | 11:20pm
ad says:
Thanks for your piece. I am going through the decision process now. My marriage is a shambles. My wife had an affair and has distanced herself from me despite my forgiveness. I have two wonderful kids. Let me back up and say that my parents were divorced when I was 5. I think I turned out fine. Everything was pretty normal in my own marriage. Then after kids came we changed and focused obviously more on our kids than ourselves. My wife's parents both passed away from colon cancer and I was a rock for my very young kids and wife. Our relationship suffered because my wife could not cope very well with the tragedy surrounding her. I have put in my dues and because of my own fear of failure in marriage and refusal to quit trying I will not ever leave my kids. I will have to put up with whatever comes. I defeated an affair, I will be there for my kids when they walk in the door from school every day until they are 18. I will be there for them 100%. Maybe my wife will change, maybe she won't, but I will be the strong one as always. I will use your ideas if I need to since they are very clear and strong. Thanks.
10.17.2010 | 11:26pm
Eugenia Iversen says:
At the time of the divorce, I still had a few years left on my contract. By the time I could leave the Corps, staying in seemed like the only way to ensure that I had a steady income and good medical benefits. (I eventually did get outfour years short of retirement eligibilityin part so that I could make arrangements for my daughter to come live with me.) Thanks so much for this heartfelt and important article. I am one of the lucky ones who had my dad around all the time when I was growing up, and I am absolutely positive that his presence was essential in my life, essential in me being able to negotiate the visicitudes of life with dignity. His affirmation of me as a person and as a woman mattered, and continues to matter.
10.21.2010 | 6:16pm
Rikki Veneable says:
1. I am puzzled that no-one replied to Karen (comment #3 above) and the issues she raised (which are echoed by another poster, Dennis). But then I don't have an answer for her, either. on a related note, having read her article, i find pamela paul's "insight" concerning "nothing objectively essential" about fathers' contributions utterly discouraging.
10.17.2011 | 1:54pm
Sherry Weddell says:
To all interested in this issue, I would strongly recommend the book "I Will Never Leave You" by Hugh and Gayle Prather. The Prathers were (Hugh died last year) liberal Christian/New Age persuasion (and would support same - sex marriage) but in this area of life-long commitment, they lived, with great creativity, devotion, and intentionality what orthodox Christians say they believe. Gayle stayed through 15 years of constant infidelity on Hugh's part and when he woke up to the consequences of what he was doing, the two of them set out to intentionally re-build their marriage and succeeded. Then they spent several decades working with a wide variety of couples gratis as part of their spiritual path. Their hard won wisdom permeates the book. Especially the idea that the you can't experience a relationship until both parties are committed to it and that the person who chooses devotion and commitment is not a deluded victim but will become stronger, more integrated, and more loving by doing so - even if the relationship does not ultimately survive. That you ultimately can't lose by choosing devotion and faithfulness. The Prathers assert that nothing short of real physical danger (not affairs, not realizing that you are gay, thinking you have nothing in common, your sex life is terrible, etc.) is a good enough reason to abandon the one to whom you have made a sacred commitment and unless one partner is crazy, almost any two people who commit themselves to stay, to persistant kindess and devotion, can ultimately build the kind of "real" relationship that they initially dreamed of when they fell in love. It isn't a book I'd recommend to everyone but it can be extremely helpful for those who are past the honeymoon phase and are struggling.
However, scripture bids a believing spouse to not hinder an unbelieving spouse from departing. Agreed, all possible attempts must be made "as far as it depends on you", but some of your advice goes over the edge.
When my bitter, unbelieving wife left and took our son, I tried my best to convince her but couldn't. Now, because of her betrayal, I have slowly found myself in a new place that, had our marriage stayed intact, I'm not sure I'd have ever found-- the place where I can teach my "weekend son" about his TRUE father.
While we were together, this was impossible and led only to storms. Now, divorced, my son actually has some (dwindling) constitutional, legal protections for me to teach him the gospel without undue hindrance.
Ironically, a more blessed arrangement could not have been imagined. God is pleased to display his glory through weakness and brokenness.