"is it possible to have a successful marriage without a "leader"?

[Rhea]

edited to add: Please note I have requested a change to the title to


Is it possible to have a successful marriage with no designated "head" or "leader"?

Because I see that we have differences of what "equal" means". So allow me to withdraw the word "equal" and make the title as stated above to reflect the actual question inside the post, which is less ambiguous.

~~~~original post below~~~~

in the submissive Bachmann wife thread the topic of submissve wives comes into discussion. It made me curious about people's views on this in terms of whether it is necessary. So my question.

Is it possible to have a successful marriage if it DOES NOT include the agreement that one partner is the "head" or the "final say"?

If so, why/how?
If not, Why not/how not?

 

[Danus]

Re: Is it possible to have an equal marriage?

I think people confuse the term "Submissive" as to mean inferior.

I am the spiritual leader of my house, but that does not mean I am lord of my wife, or that she takes a back seat to me. My role is to love my wife as Christ loves the church. In that I am submissive to God. I have to be or I will fail.

Is my wife submissive to me? She may be submissive to my spiritual leadership of our marriage, but that's my job. It's what she would expect of me and If I let her down I let God down, but I will hear it from her loud and clear.

We have an equal marriage in as much as our value and obligation to God and to each other. We set each other straight based on God's plan for us, not our plan to ourselves.

When a marriage is not structured, or centered around an individual, but around God then it is an equal marriage. As soon as the other person decides it's about them, then there are problems.

Marriage is not a man made construct. It's designed by God to a man and a woman. When two people follow God's plan they will succeed. I'd bet my life on that. So to answer your question; Yes. :yes

 

[handy]

Re: Is it possible to have an equal marriage?

Good answer Danus!

Rhea, I don't know if you meant it or not, but you've kind of put forth a sort of false dichotomy here...that a marriage must either be husband/head wife/submissive or equal.

Danus said it quite well, "When a marriage is not structured, or centered around an individual, but around God then it is an equal marriage. As soon as the other person decides it's about them, then there are problems."

I have a very "equal" marriage...Steve fulfills the godly role of husband/head, I fulfill the godly role of wife/submissive...and we both spur one another equally to be the best we can be. I'm not "less" than my husband, nor is he "more" than me.

 

[Rhea]

Is it possible to have a successful marriage with no designated "head" or "leader"?

Good answer Danus!

Rhea, I don't know if you meant it or not, but you've kind of put forth a sort of false dichotomy here...that a marriage must either be husband/head wife/submissive or equal.

That wasn't my question, though. My question was...

Is it possible to have a SUCCESSFUL marriage if there is not a designation of one partner having FINAL SAY ("head")?

You answered, "my marriage is successful, and we have a 'head' person".

But my question is, do you think a marriage can be successful with no designated "head"?

I apologize for muddying the waters with the ambiguous term "equal". I am using it to mean, "no one is the head" and you are using it to mean "do we have equal respect for our defined roles". So please allow me to withdraw the word "equal" and ask a mod to change the title to read,

Is it possible to have a successful marriage with no designated "head" or "leader"?

 

[jasoncran]

Re: Is it possible to have an equal marriage?

no, someone has to lead. would the countries goverment if all the workers in the goverment lead at the same time?

 

[handy]

Re: Is it possible to have an equal marriage?

OK, new question then:

Is it possible to have a successful marriage with no designated "head" or "leader"?

I'm turning 50 on Sunday...so, I've been around the block a few times in my life. I'm sure we can discuss this from theoretical and theological terms....but in my real life, in 50 years, all I can say is that I've never seen one that has done so.

I saw it most when I was working at the computer company during the 90's, before I married Steve. I worked with a number of married women, each of who would describe their marriage as having no "head" or "leader". These women varied in age, income levels, education, intelligence (not the same as education), religious views and political views.

Without exception, each and every one of those women are now divorced. Even the Catholic and Mormon women...I mention that because Catholic and Mormon culture is very much against divorce.

I've now been married longer than I worked there. In my married life, I honestly don't get "out and about" as much as I used to (has much more to do with where we live than anything else.) So, most of the people I now do most of my socializing with is my own family. In my own family, as well as the social circle that I now do have...which includes my best friend, and mainly Christians who are conservative enough to hold to this idea of "husband/head, wife/submissive" not one couple is divorced. However, I am fairly active in my little community way out here in the middle of nowhere, and I know enough folks in the community (well, everyone) to know that there are plenty who have this idea that there is no "head" in a marriage. And, again, without exception, each of these marriages have either broken apart since we've moved here, 13 years ago, or they are on their second or third marriage.

This of course is anecdotal. But, I've lived in Central California, North Carolina, and Idaho...with family members in Arizona, Pennsylvania, Michigan, Illinois, Washington, Oregon, Missouri, Arkansas, and Florida. I've known a fairly broad spectrum of people across a variety of lifestyles. Now, I do know of some that have had the "husband head/wife submissive" mentality that have ended in divorce. But, try as I might, and I have sat here for a bit and carefully thought it through...I cannot think of any marriage that has lasted without the "leader" mentality. Three of the couples that I'm now thinking of aren't even Christian...but their marriages have lasted 15, 17, and 23 years respectively. And, even though they aren't Christians, and probably wouldn't admit that their marriage is a "leadership" type of marriage...in each marriage, the wife is submissive to her husband (whether she admits it or not). This is just by observation...and quite frankly, with the one...the 17 year marriage...I couldn't hack it myself. (I don't really like the husband and wonder why she put's up with it since she doesn't have the religious convictions to stay.)

My mother-in-law is a ardent feminist, liberal, leftist, you name it...she is a Christian as well, but her views are definitely to the left. Anyway, I'm sure she would be one to decry the very idea that my f-i-l is her "head" and that she "submits" to him...but she does! I precipitated a family crises when I insisted that a calf pen be built a certain way. He refused to speak to me for 4 days, was actually talking of moving back to Arizona, just because I insisted upon having the pen built a certain way. He is really not used to having a woman say no. Don't get me wrong...he's generally a good guy and I do love him as a father...but if my m-i-l gets on one of her feminist rants, I have to smile, because as much as she'd like to say that she doesn't "submit" to him...she does...boy does she ever. When they lived down in Arizona, I truly thought that after all the years, I had found a family that lived according to "modern" principles...no spanking of children, no one yells, all speak "respectfully", everything gets discussed and decided on an equal basis....

....then they moved next door to us, and I got to "really" know them. ;)

 

[Rhea]

Is it possible to have a successful marriage with no designated "head" or "leader"?

(~smile~ well, it's not a new question, it's the original one in the original post. The title of the thread gave ambiguity by not expecting the different meaning of "equal", but since I didn't use the word "equal" in the OP, you are answering the original question now. ~friendly smile~ just sayin'.)

So, for the sake of discussion, my personal experience is exactly opposite Handy's. So now we have equal anecdotes.

Now, my pondering is not whether a husband/head leads to fewer divorces, since I know of so many marriages where I wonder why they stay together, as you wondered, Handy, about one of your relatives. There are plenty of strife-ful marriages that last a long time.

I suppose that's my bad for not defining "successful", so it was assumed that "successful" meant "still married". What I was thinking when I used that word was:

• Successful marriage = one in which the partners are happy with each other, respect each other and decisions are made that promote the welfare of the family.
  
• Successful marriage /= one in which they stay together and the home is in anger and the direction of the decisions is destructive. For example, a home in which the family stays together and the man gambles away all the earnings and they lose their house and the wife is depressed from the stress is not "successful" in my opinion.

This definition may be a stumbling block, it had not occurred to me that just staying married would be the measure of a successful marriage, so that might make for answers that don't address what I was wondering about. That's okay, that can happen when people define success differently, and I'll have to take whatever flavor is offered in the answers.

But - if you want to answer the thing I was wondering about, that's the gist of it. Can a marriage create a warm, safe, friendly, productive and cooperative atmosphere when there is no defined "head". Not "will it always create", but can it create. Not "is it the only thing that creates", but can it create.

 

[Danus]

Re: Is it possible to have an equal marriage?

It's a flawed question. It's not defined enough. You're eluding to biblical principle about marriage and asking the question which does not really fit to the biblical principle or definition, but could depending on the meaning you pour into words and terms like successful marriage and leader, or head.

You made a few observations, that I think deserve more thought.

• Successful marriage = one in which the partners are happy with each other, respect each other and decisions are made that promote the welfare of the family.
• Successful marriage /= one in which they stay together and the home is in anger and the direction of the decisions is destructive. For example, a home in which the family stays together and the man gambles away all the earnings and they lose their house and the wife is depressed from the stress is not "successful" in my opinion.

You asked now.....But - if you want to answer the thing I was wondering about, that's the gist of it. Can a marriage create a warm, safe, friendly, productive and cooperative atmosphere when there is no defined "head". Not "will it always create", but can it create. Not "is it the only thing that creates", but can it create.

Sure I suppose anything is possible, but again we need to define the dynamics a little more. Are we talking about marriage in general or are we specifically talking about God's plan or biblical principles of marriage?

 

[handy]

Re: Is it possible to have an equal marriage?

Just to clarify as well....no, I don't define a successful marriage as one that simply doesn't end in divorce. Obviously all marriages that end in divorce are unsuccessful by definition, but the opposite doesn't define a successful one. When I was thinking of "successful" marriages...I was thinking of the marriages I know with the qualities you list...warm, safe, productive, cooperative.

:gah My worst failing here is a tendency to be too long-winded in my posts...which causes a certain amount of totally understandable confusion. And, I see I did it again:

Now, my pondering is not whether a husband/head leads to fewer divorces, since I know of so many marriages where I wonder why they stay together, as you wondered, Handy, about one of your relatives.

I wasn't speaking of any of my relatives here...just a couple that I know that have "stuck it out for the children" (which I don't disagree with, but that's probably a different topic) for 17 years, and I honestly don't know why. They're both miserable, and neither are Christians so they don't have a compelling religious reason to stay. Well, I just said, they stay together for the sake of the kids, and irregardless of their unhappiness with each other, both are very good parents and their kids would suffer if they got a divorce. But, no, they don't have a successful marriage.

Can a marriage create a warm, safe, friendly, productive and cooperative atmosphere when there is no defined "head". Not "will it always create", but can it create. Not "is it the only thing that creates", but can it create.

I have to stand by my original answer...I know of none. If I knew of some, I'd have more input to the question as stated...and obviously the input would be ...yes...

Frankly, the only long-term relationship (6 years) that I can think of that has no defined "head" but the two are obviously successful in the way you've defined it above is a lesbian couple I'm friends with. But...(outside of the obvious religious restrictions that would have for Christians)...they did not become a couple until after their children were raised and gone and after they had retired, each financially stable in her own life, from successful careers. So, a lot of the stresses that many marriages face that can cause a lack of success, building a career, working through financial hardships, raising children...are not an issue in their relationship. Also, it really should be considered that their "success" in their relationship came at the cost of their respective marriages being broken.

 

[Rhea]

Re: Is it possible to have an equal marriage?

It's a flawed question. It's not defined enough. You're eluding to biblical principle about marriage and asking the question which does not really fit to the biblical principle or definition, but could depending on the meaning you pour into words and terms like successful marriage and leader, or head.

[...]

Sure I suppose anything is possible, but again we need to define the dynamics a little more. Are we talking about marriage in general or are we specifically talking about God's plan or biblical principles of marriage?

Good questions for deepening the discussion. 'Kay, I'll try to offer my thoughts, and you can see if that turns into a good question.

I'm not trying to elude biblical principal, I'm ignorant of it. So consider my pondering to be outside of biblical principal.

However, if you feel marriage MUST be defined in terms of biblical principal, then feel free to offer your definition of "successful" and "head" so that I can ponder them.

So my pondering is marriage in general.

And you can all probably guess that one very strong anecdote that I'm weighing is my own marriage, which I consider to be very pleasant and safe and cooperative and productive - and no one person is designated as "head". There is never an underlying assumption or baseline that one of us will "be the tiebreaker". There is simply no leader; it's a partnership of equals.

And I happen to know of many many others who operate the same way. There's never one spouse who is the "go-to" person when disagreements occur.

So given that, I read here that a marriage "must" have a head or it will be a disaster. And I wonder, "you all really think that?" and "I wonder how they look at things to make their belief still true when they meet marriages with no "head" that are successful?"

So I'm asking. Just curious. (If you're curious how a marriage can be successful with no one person defined as the "head" then I'm happy to answer questions.)

Now, interestingly, in your definition of a marriage (Danus and Handy) I find that the successful marriages are, indeed, about thinking outside of ourselves. For you it's God's marriage, if I have that right. For us, it's The Marriage as a third partner in this cooperative enterprise. Where the protection of The Marriage itself becomes more important than either individual's ego. And once children are involved, The Marriage is an entity that includes them, too. So we have similar external "pull" to be humble, and I agree that's a big part of how to be humble in a marriage. So on an emotional level, I "get" the marriage-is-god's perspective, and probably make many of the same compromises that you all do. But there is no defined "head" here, and it still works.

 

[BobbyKing]

Re: Is it possible to have an equal marriage?

Hi

I ask my wife of 18 years concerning the question, "Is it possible to have a successful marriage with no designated "head" or "leader"?" This is her reply,

'Yes, it is possible to have a successful marriage with no designated head or leader, though the term 'successful' may vary according to people's expectations."

Before I could ask her to elaborate her answer, she added this remark:

'But why settle for 2nd best, when God's institution of marriage is husband leads and wife, co-leads?'

Putting her remarks aside, I am surrounded by couples where husbands either refuse to lead or dominate with absolute control. At the same time, I know of wives who insist that they lead because their husbands lack 'leadership' quality. It is truly a major concern and problem, and pastors in my church continue to reach out to help them.

As for myself, being married for 18 years, I really have to work very hard to play the role of the leader in my marriage and my family. Both of us work, so when we come home, I try and learn to be sensitive to her needs. We have three daughters, so every night, we talk to them, about their school, friends, spiritual growth. I plan bible study for them and recommend biblical books to read.

Please don't get me wrong, I am not boasting here. On the contrary, as I look back, I have felt overwhelming many times but satisfied and fulfilled that my wife and kids are taking care of.

Each night, when we go to bed, I see her either sleeping soundly or quietly reading a book. This thought always come to my mind,

'What can I do without her?'

 

[Rhea]

We're now in the "General Discussions" forum since I felt this might be more appropriate as an open discussion not confined to marriage support. Also anyone can weigh in - whether married or not.

 

[childeye]

Satan viewed God as on the top and the boss of everyone, never having to take an order from anyone. For God alone got to tell everyone else what to do, and so Satan greatly desired to improve his station under God and wanted to be God.

And when Satan saw man in the garden, he noted how man was content with his station in innocence of such lowliness, and he became jealous because he was not content albeit higher than man. And so he conspired the downfall of man to assuage his own lust.

Jesus however, as the mind of Christ, is sanctified. For he knows God is at the bottom holding everybody else up and that He serves all in a pure love that only the Creator can know. Hence Jesus counts it not sin to count himself equal to God yet presents himself as a servant to all and therefore has no lust.

Which spirit is guiding your marriage?

 

[childeye]

This is taken from another thread but I felt it would be applicable:

When Adam was made he was alone and God took a piece from Adam and made woman. And Adam beheld woman and he loved her more than anything else God had created. But the woman could not reciprocate being that she had never been alone like Adam and she regarded Him no more than anything else she beheld. This is not fair for Adam who esteems more than He is esteemed, after all she is a piece of He. But it is not her fault seeing that both her and Adam's lot are a matter of circumstance. But woman will come full circle when she has a child which will be a piece of her. For she will Love that child more than anything in the world, and yet she will be taken for granted by that child, and she will think of the man.

I say this because I think man is a piece of God that takes God for granted much the same way. And so this betrothal with God is built upon trust from faith to faith. So it begins amid the prospect of doubt in one another, and this doubt was played upon by Satan working both sides against the middle. Hence he is hypocritically both tempter and accuser. While it is undeniable that we were made for Christ so that he may be the firstborn of the dead, he is the Word made flesh that destroys the spirit of enmity between man and God. For this purpose he was manifested, to destroy the works of the devil. Ahhh the many manifold ways of God., who can know His ways?<!-- google_ad_section_end -->

So also is Satan the enmity between Man and Woman. All is built upon faith.

 

[ronniechoate34]

Here's the thing, wives don't have to be submissive to their husband in all things. And men, don't have to love their wives the way that Jesus loves the church. No it's not a have to situation, but because God asked us to do these things we should want to carry through with them, and gladly so.


Isaiah:3:12: As for my people, children are their oppressors, and women rule over them. O my people, they which lead thee cause thee to err, and destroy the way of thy paths.


It is possible that we could be living in a time like that to day, a time in which the children oppress the parent and the elders, and the women have usurped powers away from men.


Chaos, that's all we get when we don't obey God and we try to do things our own way. If you don't believe it take a look around you at all of the broken homes, broken dreams, and broken lives that are accumulating everyday.

 

[Christ_empowered]

I'm an unmarried ex-gay, so keep that in mind as you read my input.

I think marriage works best when you follow God's plan. Often--and I know this is going to sound bad, but here it is--women will submit to the men in their lives without any religious/spiritual reasons. Maybe its gender role socialization, maybe its some sociobiological things, I don't know, but it happens. My own take on it is that Christianity instituted certain rules so that the women would be protected. Yes, it says submit to your husband and respect him, but Christianity is big on the idea of men and women being complimentary; women might be in more of a supportive position than men, but there's the understanding that both the male and female roles are absolutely vital.

In my own life, I've watched my parents take on more of what I would consider a healthy Christian pattern after years of fighting. Both of my parents are well-educated professionals, so there's a certain amount of equality there, but they fight a lot less now that my mother lets my dad lead in some aspects and my dad supports my mother as she does certain things. I don't think they made an agreement to act in such a way--they've just been married for so long that this is the pattern they've hit on that works, and it lines up with Biblical principles.

Even in the most egalitarian relationships I can think of--gay relationships--there's usually a more dominant and more submissive partner. I know, it sounds cliche, but as an ex-gay I've seen it; long-term gay partnerships are often able to survive because, it seems to me at least, they create a certain dominant/submissive dynamic that is, at best, a caricature of God's plan for a healthy marriage.

So, I do think you can have a good time without having a leader, but I don't think it will last, I don't think its God's will, and I don't think the warm and fuzzy feelings that fueled the beginning of the relationship will prove to be sufficient to keep it healthy, happy, and functional.

 

[childeye]

It's about which spirit rules in your marriage as said in post 13. We all become according to what we believe to be true, and so we are ruled according to which spirit you believe to be true. Satan and Jesus are diametrically opposed. That is to say faith precedes obedience, so you are either obedient to Christ or obedient to sin and sin is of the devil.

 

[ronniechoate34]

It's about which spirit rules in your marriage as said in post 13. We all become according to what we believe to be true, and so we are ruled according to which spirit you believe to be true. Satan and Jesus are diametrically opposed. That is to say faith precedes obedience, so you are either obedient to Christ or obedient to sin and sin is of the devil.

Yeah, if the Holy Spirit rules you then you will submit yourself to God, if He don't, you won't, and chaos will rule instead.


That's what I said.

 

[childeye]

Yeah, if the Holy Spirit rules you then you will submit yourself to God, if He don't, you won't, and chaos will rule instead.


That's what I said.

I know. I didn't mean to pick you out as if to correct you. Anticipating it may come across like that I removed your quote from my post, apparrantly not quick enough.

 

[Rhea]

Do any of you who have stated it is not possible to have a successful marriage without one partner being designated as "leader" have any comments about the marriages that serve very long term without a "leader"? Do you think ... well, I don't know what you think. What do you think of these people who are not acting as you say they will?