I once heard a priest say that when we entered in the state of marriage our lives as we knew it was over. We no longer lived for ourselves, but for the other person.
I was shocked in a way when I heard this because I assumed that he was talking about the women’s role in marriage.
Yet he wasn’t, he went on to add that this worked fine as long as the couple shared this same view. The wife lived for the husband, but also the husband no longer was his but hers. They both would live through the other. He went on to add that this was the only way marriage would work.
With the soaring statistics of divorce I wonder if he was true.
Would marriage work better if we approached it with this mind frame?
Let’s break it down to life.
I cook, clean and raise my children to be well-behaved and have an organized household that runs smoothly to what my husband will be appreciative because he has time on his hands to simply relax when he gets home. To be able to do this, I would have to be a stay at home mom, with no other job than slaving over my house.
On top of that, I wouldn’t argue or fuss about anything my husband does or says because I’m living entirely for him. It won’t matter if he criticizes my food, or any other thing because it doesn’t bother me. My marriage would work perfectly basically because I’m making it work!
Who’s living through who here?
No life at all.
Now the husband here has the winning cards because he only is in charge of paying the bills at watching television. Does this ring a bill for anyone here?
However, this is not what the priest was trying to convey. If both would live through the lives of the other.
My husband would come from work and help me in the kitchen because he knows I’m tired. He would also help me around the house with the endless things that need to be done in any given household of five with a two-year old baby included. He would sit down to watch television because he also is tired after coming home from work, but invite me to sit with him and say screw the house.
He would know I haven’t gone out of the house in a week, and it’s driving me nuts, so he would take me out to dinner at least once during the weekend.
He would tell me how much he appreciates all that I do and make me feel loved and cherished. He would never criticize my food and set up channels of communication where I can actively participate in all our decision making even if he is the only one that brings the bread to the table.
I thank God my marriage looks more than the latter because I’m not sure I could make it work if it was the other way around. I’ve been married for +25 years and hopefully will stay married until the “may death do us apart.”… kind of thing.
We’ve kind of done what the priest tried to convey. I’ve lived through him, but he has lived through me. Both of us has the well-being of the other very close at heart.
Some women carry the burden on their shoulders of making it work and it’s not fair. I don’t blame them if they want to bail out, what worries me the most are the casualties of any marriage, their children.
I don’t like divorce, but either do I agree on just staying married because I have to make it work.
With all the sacrifices being held on only one of the parts.
Marriage is about balance, care, liberty, and mostly of love. Probably the secret lies on these things channeled through one another. Which means that balance isn’t sought individually but as a couple, care is professed one for the other, liberty is lived together, and love is engine that makes them move because people get married only for love.
Basically they divorce because they kill through the ups and downs and down in life what united them in the first place.
Bottom line, if you chose to bail out or make it work depends only on you. However it’s always worth trying to live through each other because you maybe surprised of the effects it may have on any marriage or relationship.