Love and Respect

[LinkH]

My wife and I have been reading Love and Respect by Eggerichs and we started a class on it.

I do like the book. One idea that he promotes that seems unusual to people is 'unconditional respect.' We have no problem with the idea that a husband should love her wife unconditionally. His book is based on a verse in Ephesians that says husbands are to love their wives and wives are to respect their husbands. And he argues that wives are to have 'unconditional respect' for their husbands.

In our culture, people often say respect is earned. So I think he makes a good point. Respect in a marriage from wife to husband is commanded, not given on the condition of being earned. Men also don't only love their wives if they earn it. If we withhold these things, it is bad for the marriage.

The book talks about a 'crazy cycle' where the husband does something unloving, so the wife responds with a lack of respect, and the husband responds with a lack of love. Really, it's about doing things where the wife feels unloved and the husband feels not respected.

The really cool thing about the class is to see how people relate to the book and how much we learn about the other gender. I was surprised at how accurate the author was about the way women are in their thinking. My wife is a sample size of one. In any book like that, some things are true of one woman but not another. Women seemed to get insight into the way men are. The way women address their concerns with men, for example, could be perceived as harsh criticism and be perceived as disrespect when the wife doesn't mean it that way. She's just talking about a problem the way she would with her girlfriends.

Part of the book deals with communication. A man says, "I have nothing to wear" and he means he doesn't have anything that is clean. If a woman says, "I have nothing to wear", she's talking about fashion-appropriateness. He gets her a marriage book, and she thinks this is wonderful. He wants to work on our marriage. She gets him the same book and he thinks, O no, she thinks there is some kind of problem with our marriage.

The book also talks about an energizing cycle. This is where the husbands love energizes his wife's respect and her respect energizes his love.

Before we took the course, my wife and I were talking about how we were enjoying our marriage. We've both grown a lot over the years, and on her end she is getting better and better as a wife as she matures. Kind of like cheese or wine. So we wanted to study the book and take the course to improve our own marriage and to be able to help other married couples we know as we get older.

One thing I don't necessarily agree with about the book is that stonewalling or breaking off of conversation if a man feels disrespected is 'loving.' The crazy cycle chart describes actions as being unloving. Really it's about doing things your partner perceives as unloving or disrespectful. Much of it can be unintentional, and if you learn what makes the other person tick, then you can avoid the cycle.

There are some broad overgeneralizations and things that may not fit with your individual partner in the book, but overall, it's a good read.

 

[Inkachu]

My first instinct was that it sounded a bit one-sided. Most "marriage" books written by one gender are going to favor that gender within its pages. This is why I prefer books written by couples rather than just a man or a woman (unless the book is specifically targeting the author's own gender; ie, "Men, This Is How You Love Your Wife"). Anyway, I went and started reading reviews of the book and sure enough, this is the #1 complaint. It's too one-sided, and some say downright sexist in favor of the men.

This review summed up my concerns pretty well:
As mentioned by several reviewers already, the book is incredibly sexist. I started making a `W' in the margins when Dr. Eggerichs blamed the wife for the problem and a `H' when he blamed the husband. Skimming back through, it's about 90% W's. Just about any time he says something negative about the husband, you are almost guaranteed to get a follow-up sentence about how his wife's pettiness or nagging or belittling comments or criticizing or bitterness or whatever was really the root cause of the husband's behavior. At times, it was to the point I thought he was emasculating men by making us out to be powerless -- we can't take responsibility for our own behavior because every issue is probably our wife's fault anyway.


And just for the record, the above review was written by a man.

 

[ValleyGal]

I did not like the book because I do not believe in unconditional love OR unconditional respect. Additionally, we have no control over what our spouse feels. We can influence how s/he feels, but we can't control it. Iow, I can respect IDay as much as I do, and yet all of that respect can be undone if he chooses to misinterpret or misread or misunderstand intentions/deeds....his frame of mind factors into it, and the book overlooks that. Not only that, but the book also says that the word "submit" in Eph 5:22 is more accurately translated into respect - and I believed that for a while. However, more digging on my part yielded the truth that the word is not even in verse 22, but the concept is "borrowed" from verse 21 where both men and women submit to one another - so the author has taken that whole thing out of context as a starting point. And my last critical review of the book is along Inka's - it is entirely lop-sided and favors male hierarchy and makes women subordinate as well as responsible for his feelings and behaviour.

 

[LinkH]

I did not like the book because I do not believe in unconditional love OR unconditional respect.

I don't like the term 'unconditional love' that much because people apply it to God, and Jesus said this,

" 21 Whoever has my commands and keeps them is the one who loves me. The one who loves me will be loved by my Father, and I too will love them and show myself to them.”"

But in the context of marriage, men are commanded to love their wives and women are commanded to love their husbands.


>>>Additionally, we have no control over what our spouse feels. We can influence how s/he feels, but we can't control it. Iow, I can respect IDay as much as I do, and yet all of that respect can be undone if he chooses to misinterpret or misread or misunderstand intentions/deeds....his frame of mind factors into it, and the book overlooks that.<<

In some places I agree with you, like the crazy cycle wheel. A man who stonewalls may not be reacting with a lack of love, for example. His wife may just feel that way. Feelings and fact aren't the same thing. A wife may say something that the husband takes as disrespectful, when it isn't meant that way. The book does point out that men and women interpret the same facts differently at times and can both be good willed. But I think he could have kept up that point in parts of the book, like when talking about the crazy cycle.

>> Not only that, but the book also says that the word "submit" in Eph 5:22 is more accurately translated into respect <<<

There are some parts I skipped over that I'll have to go back to since we were reading with a group. Do you now where the book says that? I don't recall that. Verse 33 is more his theme verse, the one that talks about respect. The book doesn't focus on submission much.


>>- and I believed that for a while. However, more digging on my part yielded the truth that the word is not even in verse 22, but the concept is "borrowed" from verse 21 where both men and women submit to one another - so the author has taken that whole thing out of context as a starting point. <<<

Can we talk about this here or does it need to be on the other thread? The word does show up in verse 22 in some manuscripts but not in others in Greek. So it's not just totally made up. The verb from verse 21 applies to 22 also, so it's not some kind of bad translation to repeat it if it makes the passage work better grammatically in English.

And my last critical review of the book is along Inka's - it is entirely lop-sided and favors male hierarchy and makes women subordinate as well as responsible for his feelings and behaviour.

As far as hierarchy, one thing I liked about it is that it soft-peddled some Biblical concepts to women in a society that is opposed to them, in a way that some women will receive. I liked that about the book. As far as making the spouse responsible for the other's feelings, I felt that went both ways. Some men just do need to shut down in an intense conversation. It's a way of controlling their temper or just to keep from saying things they don't regret. I don't think that part is just one-sided. But overall, it's still a good book. Repeating the pink versus blue glasses in those sections instead of blaming the spouse for the others emotions would have improved the book, IMO.

 

[LinkH]

My first instinct was that it sounded a bit one-sided. Most "marriage" books written by one gender are going to favor that gender within its pages. This is why I prefer books written by couples rather than just a man or a woman (unless the book is specifically targeting the author's own gender; ie, "Men, This Is How You Love Your Wife"). Anyway, I went and started reading reviews of the book and sure enough, this is the #1 complaint. It's too one-sided, and some say downright sexist in favor of the men.

I see what you are saying, but God used a single man to write some instructions on marriage. He had Moses and Jesus give commandments about Jesus. Zipporah didn't co-author or co-prophesy (as far as we know) the Torah. Peter doesn't co-author his epistle with his wife.

This review summed up my concerns pretty well:
As mentioned by several reviewers already, the book is incredibly sexist.

If it's fair and balanced, I'd expect that anyway because the Bible on this topic goes against the cultural grain.

I started making a `W' in the margins when Dr. Eggerichs blamed the wife for the problem and a `H' when he blamed the husband. Skimming back through, it's about 90% W's. Just about any time he says something negative about the husband, you are almost guaranteed to get a follow-up sentence about how his wife's pettiness or nagging or belittling comments or criticizing or bitterness or whatever was really the root cause of the husband's behavior. At times, it was to the point I thought he was emasculating men by making us out to be powerless -- we can't take responsibility for our own behavior because every issue is probably our wife's fault anyway.

I hadn't gone through it with a fine tooth comb. I'd like to see his notes like that. If the author's examples are skewed in terms of quantity, that doesn't mean the message of the book is all bad or that it isn't helpful. Next time, the couple could read a book that gives the husband a harder time than the wife. Plenty of sermons do that anyways, unless you go to a really fundie church.

And just for the record, the above review was written by a man.[/QUOTE]

 

[Autumnleaf]

My first instinct was that it sounded a bit one-sided. Most "marriage" books written by one gender are going to favor that gender within its pages. This is why I prefer books written by couples rather than just a man or a woman (unless the book is specifically targeting the author's own gender; ie, "Men, This Is How You Love Your Wife"). Anyway, I went and started reading reviews of the book and sure enough, this is the #1 complaint. It's too one-sided, and some say downright sexist in favor of the men.

This review summed up my concerns pretty well:
As mentioned by several reviewers already, the book is incredibly sexist. I started making a `W' in the margins when Dr. Eggerichs blamed the wife for the problem and a `H' when he blamed the husband. Skimming back through, it's about 90% W's. Just about any time he says something negative about the husband, you are almost guaranteed to get a follow-up sentence about how his wife's pettiness or nagging or belittling comments or criticizing or bitterness or whatever was really the root cause of the husband's behavior. At times, it was to the point I thought he was emasculating men by making us out to be powerless -- we can't take responsibility for our own behavior because every issue is probably our wife's fault anyway.


And just for the record, the above review was written by a man.

The ancients understood a thing or two about love and marriage.

Proverbs 21:19

It is better to dwell in the wilderness, than with a contentious and an angry woman.

 

[HannahT]

I see what you are saying, but God used a single man to write some instructions on marriage. He had Moses and Jesus give commandments about Jesus. Zipporah didn't co-author or co-prophesy (as far as we know) the Torah. Peter doesn't co-author his epistle with his wife.

I would say that most women of that day never were taught to read or write, and even if they could? I'm not to sure they would be taken seriously even if they had something GOOD to say. So, those types of opinions don't really get much traction.

I realize its a popular come back, but its rather silly when you think about it.

so, in that case the comments about Moses, Jesus, Zipporah, and Peter they don't really apply. Nor do they fit the context of the comment - they more divert from it.

If it's fair and balanced, I'd expect that anyway because the Bible on this topic goes against the cultural grain.

Legitimate critism doesn't always have to be something against the cultural grain either.

I find in most cases when culture is used its normally a way to shut down the conversation down more than giving people benefit of the doubt - and/or accepting their point of view.

You can't have a healthy sense of banter when people are offering their legitimate POV, and they are told in return they just go with the world...and can't accept God's way.

People tend to stonewall in that way regularly, and its very disrespectful. They may have some very legitimate things to say, but people aren't heard when the 'culture' aspect is thrown out there.

I find the approach very disingenuous for the most part, but its a very churchy stereotypical approach that is encouraged. It should be used sparingly, but sadly its not.

Lastly, this idea of unconditional respect isn't unusual at all. Its been around for ages, and its been taught its a command, etc. as well.

I hadn't gone through it with a fine tooth comb. I'd like to see his notes like that. If the author's examples are skewed in terms of quantity, that doesn't mean the message of the book is all bad or that it isn't helpful. Next time, the couple could read a book that gives the husband a harder time than the wife. Plenty of sermons do that anyways, unless you go to a really fundie church.

The delivery of the message is very important, because if majority of your delivery smells like rotten fish? It doesn't matter if majority of your principal is good when no one really hears it.

The author - and the book - received some legitimate concerns about the content. Since the world generally isn't going to read it, because its Christian in nature?

Stating that those Christians are buying into culture as a response to me is rather arrogant. lol I mean so is getting defensive due to criticism...no?!

The bible to me is very balanced. Majority of the time it instructs both sides - or all sides - at the same time.

I found plenty of men being taken back by the book, because they felt they were being presented like little boys. How the women that they love were to treat them with kid gloves, since women tend to be (enter plenty of stereotypes) which shows their disrespect towards them.

So, if they feel the book was skewed or to much undue emphasis on certain aspects made it extremely unbalanced - it could mean it translates as 'unhelpful' and not 'bad' as you mentioned.

Sounds like they are asking for balance - not giving the man as hard of a time. There is a HUGE difference between the two!

 

[RedPonyDriver]

I read that book. My biggest objection to it is that it purports to fix ALL marriage problems. It's supposedly one-stop shopping to fix a marriage in trouble. The premise is that if ONE partner takes the advice in the book, the other partner will get the hint and change behavior accordingly. It doesn't work.

My other objection is that love is freely given, and respect is earned. I do not see where having a Y chromosome automatically earns respect. Respect is earned by showing certain character traits and when there's someone who doesn't show any of those traits, they do not automatically get my respect.

 

[LinkH]

My other objection is that love is freely given, and respect is earned. I do not see where having a Y chromosome automatically earns respect.

The Bible commands wives to respect their husband. It doesn't say the respect has to be earned. We owe God our obedience and respect, and if he wants us to respect someone, we can do it 'as unto the lord.' Peter said, "honor the king." Paul said that the ruler was the minister of God. Nero wasn't a very nice guy back then, and neither were some of the other rulers.

Men generally have Y chromosomes. But a woman doesn't marry every man. She marries her husband. A woman must honor her father, respect her husband, and honor the king (if there is one.) She doesn't have the same obligations to all the other guys with Y chromosomes.

 

[RedPonyDriver]

The Bible commands wives to respect their husband. It doesn't say the respect has to be earned. We owe God our obedience and respect, and if he wants us to respect someone, we can do it 'as unto the lord.' Peter said, "honor the king." Paul said that the ruler was the minister of God. Nero wasn't a very nice guy back then, and neither were some of the other rulers.

Men generally have Y chromosomes. But a woman doesn't marry every man. She marries her husband. A woman must honor her father, respect her husband, and honor the king (if there is one.) She doesn't have the same obligations to all the other guys with Y chromosomes.

No...a husband does not automatically command respect. He earns it. How does he earn it? By loving his wife as Christ loves the church. Then she grows to respect him, as she knows he is worthy of the respect and trust she places in him. However, if he does not show that he loves his wife as Christ loves the church, then he is not worthy of her respect or trust.

Its a two-way street. If the wife treats the husband like rubbish, then he does not have to "love" her.

Anyway, as a woman, I'd much rather be respected than loved. Respect signifies, to me, recognizing my worth as a person and as a spouse. Professionally, I want to be respected. I don't automatically get respect as a project leader...I earn the respect of my team...by treating them right.

 

[mkgal1]

For one thing.....respect cannot be torn from love (IOW.....there's no such thing as love without respect). I have no idea what the purpose is (beyond selling books) to try to separate the two.

The other thing that isn't often mentioned is that there are levels of love/respect. I think that's important. ALL people deserve love/respect (dignity).....we are to love even our enemies---right (that gets mentioned on this forum a lot)? However.....we don't marry our enemies (well.....not intentionally ). There's a difference between playing favorites and recognizing when certain people are especially loving and compassionate (and when they *aren't*). Even Jesus had his close circle of friends (even within the 12 apostles---He normally was found with just three most of the time-- Peter, James, and John).

 

[LinkH]

No...a husband does not automatically command respect. He earns it. How does he earn it? By loving his wife as Christ loves the church. Then she grows to respect him, as she knows he is worthy of the respect and trust she places in him. However, if he does not show that he loves his wife as Christ loves the church, then he is not worthy of her respect or trust.

That's not Biblical. A wife is supposed to do what God requires of her toward her husband even if her husband does not obey the word like I Peter 3 says. A man is also supposed to love his wife, even if she isn't respectful. The other person acting badly doesn't justify our rebelling against God by sinning and not doing what he requires of us.

Some people have bad parents, but they still need to honor them, too. Some kings are bad, but the Bible says honor the king. You could have lousy neighbors (or 'fellows') but the Bible still says to love them, too. The Bible says not to commit adultery. A husband doesn't get a free pass on this because his wife is bad and because his neighbor is a lousy husband. We still have to do what we are supposed to.

Its a two-way street. If the wife treats the husband like rubbish, then he does not have to "love" her.

That's a way to make marriage problems worse. If he doesn't love her because she doesn't respect him, things get worse and work. Love and Respect calls that the crazy cycle.

I agree that what he presents is presented as a bit of a 'cure all', but he does couch it in the context of a good-willed husband and wife who are trying to get along, but don't communicate or interpret things in the same way.

Anyway, as a woman, I'd much rather be respected than loved. Respect signifies, to me, recognizing my worth as a person and as a spouse. Professionally, I want to be respected. I don't automatically get respect as a project leader...I earn the respect of my team...by treating them right.

The book does sort of treat everyone alike based on their gender, even though there is a comment in there that not everyone fits the exact mold every time. I think his survey showed a majority of women voted for love over respect and a majority of men voted for respect over love, but there were still large minorities in his survey that did not conform to the results.

I think he puts a little too much emphasis on what husbands and wives desire with the 'air hose' metaphor. That's okay, but it's not about our desire, but what the Lord wants us to do. If I care little for respect, my wife should still respect me. Our marriage is supposed to reflect the relationship of Christ and the church, not only satisfy some emotional desire of mine.

In our culture there is too much of an emphasis on marriage satisfying emotional needs, as if that is what marriage is all about, and it's disposable if it doesn't fit those requirements. We should get our needs met in marriage, but there is more to it than that.

 

[WolfGate]

Been a while since I read the book, but as I recall it did deal in generalizations - and was open about that fact. I recall them indicating each gender wasn't homogeneous and acknowledging generalizations aren't universal. If you could only write about things that are universal, no relationship books would ever be written.

I do agree that the book could have most use with couples that are generally healthy and desiring to understand how to focus on their spouse to improve the marriage.

Again, it has been a while since I read it, so perhaps I overlaid my understanding of relationships over what the book was saying. I do also know of several couples who found the book helped enrich their marriage - so it has some benefits in a generalized sense.

 

[Hetta]

Husbands and wives should both love and respect each other. The end.

 

[RedPonyDriver]

That's not Biblical. A wife is supposed to do what God requires of her toward her husband even if her husband does not obey the word like I Peter 3 says. A man is also supposed to love his wife, even if she isn't respectful. The other person acting badly doesn't justify our rebelling against God by sinning and not doing what he requires of us.

Some people have bad parents, but they still need to honor them, too. Some kings are bad, but the Bible says honor the king. You could have lousy neighbors (or 'fellows') but the Bible still says to love them, too. The Bible says not to commit adultery. A husband doesn't get a free pass on this because his wife is bad and because his neighbor is a lousy husband. We still have to do what we are supposed to.



That's a way to make marriage problems worse. If he doesn't love her because she doesn't respect him, things get worse and work. Love and Respect calls that the crazy cycle.

I agree that what he presents is presented as a bit of a 'cure all', but he does couch it in the context of a good-willed husband and wife who are trying to get along, but don't communicate or interpret things in the same way.



The book does sort of treat everyone alike based on their gender, even though there is a comment in there that not everyone fits the exact mold every time. I think his survey showed a majority of women voted for love over respect and a majority of men voted for respect over love, but there were still large minorities in his survey that did not conform to the results.

I think he puts a little too much emphasis on what husbands and wives desire with the 'air hose' metaphor. That's okay, but it's not about our desire, but what the Lord wants us to do. If I care little for respect, my wife should still respect me. Our marriage is supposed to reflect the relationship of Christ and the church, not only satisfy some emotional desire of mine.

In our culture there is too much of an emphasis on marriage satisfying emotional needs, as if that is what marriage is all about, and it's disposable if it doesn't fit those requirements. We should get our needs met in marriage, but there is more to it than that.

Given that I am currently separated from my husband due to physical and verbal abuse...I can tell you that the nether regions of hades will freeze over before I give someone who has treated me like garbage for the last 16 years any respect whatsoever. I will not automatically respect someone who treats me like garbage, whether it's a spouse, a co-worker, a superior or a subordinate.

Let me tell you what "respecting" my husband would have looked like:
approving of alcoholic rages where he destroyed personal property
approving of spending ridiculous amounts of money on rubbish
silently standing by as he called me every name in the book and accused me of things I never considered doing.
standing by as he destroyed our home and attempted to physically abuse me.

Sorry dude...I can't and won't respect someone who does that stuff. Nope...not happening. Some husbands are not worthy of respect. Period. I don't give two hoots and a holler if it's "biblical" or not.

 

[LinkH]

RedPonyDriver,

I'm sorry you went through those things. Respect and approval are different things. I don't think respect in the Ephesians 5 passage is the same thing as thinking someone is a great person because of the wonderful character they have demonstrated. I think that's a different kind of respect, btw.

The most important thing in terms of respect is that we respect God. One way to do that is to appreciate what He has revealed and to seek to follow His ways.

 

[RedPonyDriver]

RedPonyDriver,

I'm sorry you went through those things. Respect and approval are different things. I don't think respect in the Ephesians 5 passage is the same thing as thinking someone is a great person because of the wonderful character they have demonstrated. I think that's a different kind of respect, btw.

The most important thing in terms of respect is that we respect God. One way to do that is to appreciate what He has revealed and to seek to follow His ways.

Thank you...

This is why I say that just because he's the husband he does not automatically have respect. I still believe respect is earned.

The Ephesians 5 passage states that the husband should be respected, however, I would still think that respect would have to be earned by the husband following the rest of the passage where it says "Husband love your wives as Christ loves the church...". Its a two way street, and must be mutual, not one-sided.

 

[mkgal1]

Respect and approval are different things. I don't think respect in the Ephesians 5 passage is the same thing as thinking someone is a great person because of the wonderful character they have demonstrated. I think that's a different kind of respect, btw.

I agree that's what respect is *not*.....can you describe (since this is your thread) what you believe respect *is*?

 

[Hetta]

My first instinct was that it sounded a bit one-sided. Most "marriage" books written by one gender are going to favor that gender within its pages. This is why I prefer books written by couples rather than just a man or a woman (unless the book is specifically targeting the author's own gender; ie, "Men, This Is How You Love Your Wife"). Anyway, I went and started reading reviews of the book and sure enough, this is the #1 complaint. It's too one-sided, and some say downright sexist in favor of the men.

This review summed up my concerns pretty well:
As mentioned by several reviewers already, the book is incredibly sexist. I started making a `W' in the margins when Dr. Eggerichs blamed the wife for the problem and a `H' when he blamed the husband. Skimming back through, it's about 90% W's. Just about any time he says something negative about the husband, you are almost guaranteed to get a follow-up sentence about how his wife's pettiness or nagging or belittling comments or criticizing or bitterness or whatever was really the root cause of the husband's behavior. At times, it was to the point I thought he was emasculating men by making us out to be powerless -- we can't take responsibility for our own behavior because every issue is probably our wife's fault anyway.


And just for the record, the above review was written by a man.

That's interesting. So the reviewer is saying that husband's responses are seen as reacting to events, whereas the wife's responses are instigating events? That is sexist. There is no way that any husbands are perfect - although I understand that some of them think they are little gods - any more than the wives are perfect.

I hate 'one size fits all' books. I never read Christian books at all. I just can't get past this concept that we are cookie cutter people, when the Bible states that we are all "fearfully and wonderfully made" i.e. not cookie cutter people.

 

[RedPonyDriver]

That's interesting. So the reviewer is saying that husband's responses are seen as reacting to events, whereas the wife's responses are instigating events? That is sexist. There is no way that any husbands are perfect - although I understand that some of them think they are little gods - any more than the wives are perfect.

I hate 'one size fits all' books. I never read Christian books at all. I just can't get past this concept that we are cookie cutter people, when the Bible states that we are all "fearfully and wonderfully made" i.e. not cookie cutter people.

That IS the problem with these books...it is always assumed that the wife instigates events...she nags, she doesn't "submit", whatever, and the hapless husband is reacting to those things. The authors fail to understand that there are times the husband instigates and therefore gets what he deserves. He drinks too much, he has temper tantrums, he is a jerk, he ignores the kids, kicks the dog, whatever...and he does it because he believes that he is King Baby of the universe and therefore must be bowed to. The minute the wife tells him his behavior is unacceptable, then she is a nagging, unsubmissive shrew.

The truth is that there are times when both spouses are not responsible for marital problems...unfortunately, the misogyny in the Christian world tends to place the blame almost entirely on the wife and the husband is always right. Not so in the real world. There are times when the husband deserves the left foot of fellowship and get tossed out of the house.

I truly wish these Christian authors (mostly men) would realize that not all women are whining shrews and not all husbands are men worthy of respect.