Conference yukon::christian_v7

There is a husband topic early in this conference.  The responsibilities of
a husband are simple: "love...as Christ loved the church."

If you want to know what this means, you have to study Christ and what he
did for the church, then do as Christ did in your attitude towards being
the husband you ought to be.

It is similar for the responsibility of fatherhood (parenting, more 
appropriately).  We have an example of the ideal Father in the Bible.
Study Him and then be like Him.

Now, I have often felt cheated by such answers because they never outlined
some of the things I should >do<.  But when you consider what the greatest
commandment says regarding our responsbilities to God, it also is not a list
of what to do to "Love God with all your heart, soul, mind, and strength."
Yet we are to seek it diligently (Hebrews 11:6) even without prescribed
instructions.

Hi Steve,

You highlight a significant balance to be maintained between theory and 
practise.  In this day of rebellion, the instruction of the Word is 
misrepresented in the world to appear oppressive or demeaning to one group 
or another.  In actual fact, equivalencing the sexes is demeaning, because 
it represents neither as having any distinctive function or virtue, as a 
sex.

This makes it more difficult to establish the wider principles without 
being regarded as backward, or blinkered.  Even within any one church,
there are wide differences in understanding - or at least in outworking. 

I remember some years back, a few months after there had been several
weddings in our church, the pastor was on this topic, and mentioned that 
someone he carefully wouldn't identify had come to him in concern, because 
his wife wouldn't do as he told her....  There was an immediate gust of 
laughter from the gallery, as the unfortunate guy reacted to identify 
himself...

To me, being the head primarily means responsibility.  I don't have to make 
the decisions or suggestion, but I have to be ready to assume responsiblity 
for them.  It is on my head if they go wrong; I don't have scope to blame
those who live under my covering.  Therefore an unsafe (in my view)
decision on the part of another in the family may mean that I mentally or
spiritually gear up to face redressing the situation.  Not that it is 
inevitably so - they might turn out right, in which case well and good.  I, 
on the other hand, may make my own mistakes, and have to try to shield the 
rest of the family from their effects.  But I have to make my decisions 
with them in view, and review their decisions likewise.

If I feel that a bad decision is being made, it can fall into many 
categories, principally depending on the attitude of the person making the 
decision, and the likely impact of an error in this area
  � it's open to review - easy
  � it's held strongly - to be handled sensitively, depending on the age, 
    sex, stability, etc of the decider...
  � it's expressed lightly, but the decider feels defensive, and could 
    possibly accept suggestions easier from another quarter...
  � it's expressed and held lightly by the proposer, but other members opf 
    the family might react to personalities if an alternative is put 
    forward...

And the husband has to hold all these in view, and try to walk with his 
family through this minefield...

Ideally the personality clash aspect doesn't come into a loving, united 
family.  But that's only in theory.  In practise, and especially as teh 
children mature, sensitivities are aroused in unexpected areas...

Tread lightly, and lead by example.  If you want obedience, bend over 
backwards to give your wife's perspective preference.

My wife quoted a situation between friends of ours, where the wife wanted
an ordinary light bulb in the kitchen, and the husband wanted fluorescent
lighting, and asked who I thought should make the choice.  My view was that
if there were no overriding safety etc factors, the husband should decide
to instal the light of his wife's choice (especially as she would
principally use the kitchen, but even that is only incidental - his care 
should be for her comfort rather than his own).

Awareness of law makes disobedience is sin.  To hold 'obedience' as law 
over the family is almost to go back to the old covenant, and make life a 
burden for them.  If you wish to be a blessing to your family, give them 
plenty of room to live, recognising and admitting your own fallibility.  

There is then a hope that in recognising your loving humility, they will be 
encouraged to emulate it, and feel free to obey, not as an order, but 
knowing that your trusted opinions are expressed from a heart of love for 
them.

Delegation is a perfectly valid aspect of headship.  Congratulations on the
birth of your daughter, by the way!!!  A lot of the decisions about her
upbringing will be made together, but with you choosing to give extra
weight to your wife's view, as one who (a) has experienced first-hand what
it is like to grow up through girl-hood, and (b) has to carry out much of
the domestic application of them.  As your wife realises that her view is 
given due respect, she will feel the more comfortable in sharing it with 
you.  And with sharing any aspect of her life with you.

�    Finally, is this a spiritual matter. Is this responsibility more in
�    matters of faith than anything else?
Certainly, the spiritual aspect is of supreme importance.  For instance,
you should lead your family in daily worship, in prayer and in the Word. 
That doesn't always mean that you have to be the one to read and pray (now 
my lads are bigger than me, an assortment of us pray at breakfast.  Though
sometimes someone has to shoot off to an early job instead...).  Oh - and 
size isn't really the criterion!  ;-)

I've skimmed a bit on this topic - it's several hours since I started it, 
and I don't know what else may have gone on in the conference meantime.  
But a family is a precious gift, and administering it before the LORD is an 
awesome task for a fallen man. So glad of His promises!

		May God bless you in the fulfillment, bro...
								Andrew

    A man who reads other conferences in which I write asked me a question
    about his marriage.  Almost the same question as the one .0.  He asked
    me when as a husband he should make decisions without his wife's
    input.  I said never.  Occasionally decisions can be made but typically
    that's after the husband KNOWS his wife so well that he can anticipate
    her actual input.
    
    She has a rather heavy load at home with 3 small children and an
    illness that keeps her emotionally and physically up and down.  He is
    immersed in church activities so that when he's not at work, on the
    weekends he is rather busy with the church.
    
    She has asked that he spend Sunday evening at home instead of going to
    church.  And was in a quandry about if that would be the spiritual
    thing and isn't she rather  backslidden to consider this.
    
    I then asked one question;  if you saw someone lying and bleeding on
    the way to church, would you stop and help this person?  It's the same
    thing with a spouse.  She is emotionally and spiritually bleeding for
    the unity of her home WITH her husband.
    
    The FAMILY comes first; church second in this life.  If your family
    taking second seat to a Sunday School Class, Bus Route, deaconship,
    etc., you are not right with God.
    
    Marriages are failing in our churches and I've heard too often one
    spouse comment on the other; She just doesn't have her heart right with
    God or she'd be supporting in this ministry.  But when I look at their
    family; he's failed his first ministry, the family.
    
    

>    The FAMILY comes first; church second in this life.  If your family
>    taking second seat to a Sunday School Class, Bus Route, deaconship,
>    etc., you are not right with God.
 
True, but there does need to have some balance.  This is only mentioning
second and third place but doesn't mention our first priority, which is to
God.  Family is not first; God is.  Some people mistake that for "church"
and thereby allow the family to suffer, as in the case of bypassing the
wounded person on the road.  It is not a simple order of "family vs church"
but what would God have me do when I have competing demands.  SOMETIMES,
the family must come after the church, especially of someone is "bleeding
to death" at church while a family member is "nursing a flu."

The point is that God wants us to put Him first, before church and before
family.  In doing so, He may want us to minister to our family and back off
of some church responsibilities.  In other cases, He may want us to minister
to people who need Him more, and in doing so you may be the example to your
family, you may be the cause for your family's ministry.

So how do you tell when to do what?  First, make SURE and CERTAIN that God
*IS* first in your life, then ask Him what to do.  He may indeed tell you
to spend time at home on Sunday evening with your wife.  I doubt this will
be a permanent adjustment.  When healing begins, your wife may be ready to
return to church with you.  Ask God for direction and do not rely on 
ready-to-serve answers of priorities regarding family, church, and life.
   
>    Marriages are failing in our churches and I've heard too often one
>    spouse comment on the other; She just doesn't have her heart right with
>    God or she'd be supporting in this ministry.  But when I look at their
>    family; he's failed his first ministry, the family.

He's failed to apply the proper perspective on ministry, which includes 
being the spiritual leader of the family, too often mistaked by doing
"spiritual" and good things in isolation from the family unit and then
expecting them to sign on to his ministry (when they likely have other
callings).

The family is an important ministry; one that ranks up near the top.
But it is not the first (and this comes from a very strong family leader.)
"Seek ye first the kingdom of God and His righteousness, and all these
things shall be added unto you."  These are not idle words.  I've tested 
them and restest them all the time.  I thank God for my family and how
He has kept them by showing me how and when to minister to them.

Mark

    .5
    
    Mark,
    
    God is of course first that was an understood, but in our EARTHLY
    ministries the family is the single most important spiritual unit.  And
    a husband is to love the WIFE as CHRIST loved the CHURCH and gave
    himself for it.
    
    When a family is neglected due to "spiritual church" activities;
    whether it be husband or wife; they have broken God's order.  It most
    definitely is on this earth; FAMILY, CHURCH and then SOCIAL.
    
    I'm finding the problem being with people interpreting the CHURCH as
    being GOD and that they are obeying the commandment to put God first
    via church.
    
    What does putting God first mean?  How does one put God first?  Is it
    by going to church or is it in your personal relationship with Him?
    

>    When a family is neglected due to "spiritual church" activities;
>    whether it be husband or wife; they have broken God's order.  It most
>    definitely is on this earth; FAMILY, CHURCH and then SOCIAL.

Sometimes, God calls people away from family, Nancy.  After having done
what they can, some are called to follow Christ, even forsaking those we
have closest to us.

It is not most definitily on this earth family, church, then social.
It may be definite for you.  Be in the world but not of it.  Now
do not mistake my words for saying that family isn't important.  I have
already stated, and we agree, that it is wrong to equate church (work) 
with (pleasing) God.  However, sometimes the work of the Church (captial C)
is outside of the organization, the job and responsibilities of the church
we attend.  

>    What does putting God first mean?  How does one put God first?  Is it
>    by going to church or is it in your personal relationship with Him?

One puts God first by placing him above the family, above the dearest
thing on earth, above Isaac the miracle son of promise.  What does God
require of us but to do justice, love mercy, and walk humbly with Him?
You're asking me whether it is right to stay home from church to nurse
a wife or go to church to perform my responsibilities.  The answer is 
not as cut and dried as you would seem to make it.  I might guess that
in many or most cases, we'd agree.

The relationship between you and God, between me and God, must have no
other gods in between us, including family members, however dear.  The 
beauty of God's love in us is that in God's economy, when we give all our
love to Him, He supplies us with the love we need - that love of Christ
for the church - to love our wives as we should and to make the difficult
decisions that may "keep us home."

I am reminded of the axiom that says, "Don't be so heavenly minded that
you're of no earthly good."  Wise words.  The converse is true, "Don't
be so earthly minded that you're of no heavenly good."  The fact is that
the redeemed have dual citizenship and cannot separate the "spiritual"
from the "earthly" because they are as integral as body and soul.  So,
the priority most definitely on this earth is GOD, then "all these things"
(which often places the family in a high priority).

Mark

I become more and more convinced that if people actively pursued the "God
first" attitude, instead of running around "doing good things that must please
God", that God's Word will bear out that "all these things will be added
unto you."

"How do I put God first?" is an often-asked question?  And the answers
often defeat the commandment because too often we want to respond with
a list of things to do ("read your Bible, pray every day, do community
service, spend more time with your family, take time for yourself once
is a while, tithe ten percent, go to church, work at church, eat at 
church, church, church, church...").

There are an infinite number of expressions of loving God and yet there
is ONLY ONE way for each individual: with all your heart, with all your soul,
with all your mind, with all your strength.  It takes a lifetime to conquer
these battelfields, but it is your calling to pursue.  God is a rewarder
of them that diligently seek Him.

One is mistaken to think that the sincere pursuit of putting God first in
any way conflicts with what is best to do.  We need to begin to understand
that we don't see things as clearly as the One who has perspective on all
things.  Putting God first is to love one's wife as Christ loved the church,
even though loving your wife isn't what puts God first.  Putting God first 
is to read your Bible, even though reading your Bible isn't what puts God first.

We must put the horse before the cart.

Mark

    Re: Note 622.6 by 19632::METCALFE

�Sometimes, God calls people away from family, Nancy.
    
    Scripture reference?
    
    	BD�

    Mark you and I agree about putting God first... really we do.
    
    However, creation alone testifies as to the place of the family in the
    sight of God.
    
    Nancy

Matthew 10:34-39, 19:29,
Mark 10:29-30,
Luke 12:51-53, 18:29-30.
 - and I'll leave Mark to pull out the concordance for these ;-}
	- it's late and I should have gone... 

But while these stress that allegiance to God is paramount - with which 
none of us would disagree, the discussion is how to exercise our family 
responsibilities within this context.  Not to look for break points in the 
God-ordained order.

The principle here is how the God-centred family should work, in our
present fallen age, where none of us are perfect.  Even within the family, 
while each wishes to follow the LORD, our individual vision clashes, as we
- inevitably - see the shortcomings of the one who is closest to us; for
whiom we care the most, yet have to identify with the sharp corners as well
as the parts which are more comfortable... 

This is the context we are trying to express; which hurts in the living, as 
we are moulded into His image by contact with one we thought was 'on our 
side' so to speak, both personally and spiritually....


							Andrew

    
    
    Mark you say:
    
    >Putting God first is to love one's wife as Christ loved the church,
    >even though loving your wife isn't what puts God first.  Putting God
    >first is to read your Bible, even though reading your Bible isn't what 
    >puts God first.
                   
    Which is basically saying your family isn't God.
    
    My note:
    
>    I'm finding the problem being with people interpreting the CHURCH as
>    being GOD and that they are obeying the commandment to put God first
>    via church.
    
    And I said the same thing here only using church as the example.
    
    Then I asked,
    
    >What does putting God first mean?  How does one put God first?  Is it
    >by going to church or is it in your personal relationship with Him?
    
    :-)
    
    I think we agree albeit looking at it from different angles for the
    most part.  However, I don't believe God calls a person away from their
    families.  As a matter of fact, the Bible says our spiritual leaders
    called into the ministry must have their families under control first.
    
    1Timothy 3:1  This is a true saying, If a man desire the office of a
    bishop, he desireth a good work.
      2  A bishop then must be blameless, the husband of one wife,
    vigilant,sober, of good behaviour, given to hospitality, apt to teach;
      3  Not given to wine, no striker, not greedy of filthy lucre; but
    patient,not a brawler, not covetous;
    
    ***
      4  One that ruleth well his own house, having his children in
    subjection with all gravity;
      5  (For if a man know not how to rule his own house, how shall he
    take care of the church of God?)
    ***
    
    

>�Sometimes, God calls people away from family, Nancy.
>    
>    Scripture reference?

The Father was not dead.  The reference here is to wait until this man's
father dies which can be somewhere in the future:

Matthew 8:21  And another of his disciples said unto him, Lord, suffer me
first to go and bury my father.
Matthew 8:22  But Jesus said unto him, Follow me; and let the dead bury their
dead.

Reaffirmed in Luke:

Luke 9:59  And he said unto another, Follow me. But he said, Lord, suffer me
first to go and bury my father.
Luke 9:60  Jesus said unto him, Let the dead bury their dead: but go thou and
preach the kingdom of God.

----------------------------------------

Luke 14:26  If any man come to me, and hate not his father, and mother, and
wife, and children, and brethren, and sisters, yea, and his own life also, he
cannot be my disciple.

This is a hard saying for some people, but Jesus is drawing the emphasis
on the importance of placing God first.  So much so that by comparison, all
else that is held dear pales.  The good news is that pouring ourselves out
to God enables Him to fill us up with His Spirit, which will provide much
more love for our family than we could ever do on our own earthly power,
which is all a "family-first" attitude can give you.  If you REALLY love
your family, you put God first.


Luke 16:13  No servant can serve two masters: for either he will hate the one,
and love the other; or else he will hold to the one, and despise the other. Ye
cannot serve God and mammon.

This talks about God and mammon (money) but it also applies to anything
that is set up in God's rightful number 1 place.

Would you like more references?

Mark

Andrew puts it well: 

>But while these stress that allegiance to God is paramount - with which 
>none of us would disagree, the discussion is how to exercise our family 
>responsibilities within this context.  

WITHIN the context of God first, family is often very high on the 
list.  

>    However, I don't believe God calls a person away from their
>    families.  As a matter of fact, the Bible says our spiritual leaders
>    called into the ministry must have their families under control first.

The verses you quote indeed deal with church government.  Let me use 
Pilgrim's Progress to illustrate a case where God calls someone away from
his family.

Christian was a citizen of the City of Destruction, along with his family.
When Christian was told of the Celestial City by Evangelist, he determined
that he would go there.  He tried valliantly to get his family to go with
him.  They thought he was mad.  In fact, they tried to stop him.  He left
his family behind, brokenhearted.  (As good stories happen, the family
followed after Christian in a sequel. ;-) )

The horse MUST come before the cart, Nancy.  You attempt to justify the
position of being a good spiritual leader by having the family under control,
but this is listed as a quality of a spiritual leader - an attribute and
not a cause of good spiritual leadership.  How does one obtain these
attributes?  Not by doing them.

You see, the common misperception in this is that it lies so close to the
truth.  Yes, spiritual leaders will possess these attributes and will care
for their families, etc. etc.  but the way they do this is by making God
first - even before the things he does to make God first.  It is an attitude
and not an action.  The action is in the CONTEXT (thanks, Andrew) of the 
attitude which MUST, MUST, MUST precede the action.  You cannot perform
the action to get the attitude, just as performing good works does nothing
to earn one's way to heaven.

>However, I don't believe God calls a person away from their families.

I believe God calls individuals to follow Him no matter what the cost.
Couple that with God's love and the knowledge that He cares more about
my family than I ever could, I am confident that God will do what is best,
which, in my case is to be that Spiritual leader in 1 Timothy, among other
things.

mark

Matthew 10:34-39, 19:29,
Mark 10:29-30,
Luke 12:51-53, 18:29-30.
 - and I'll leave Mark to pull out the concordance for these ;-}
	- it's late and I should have gone... 

Matthew 10:34  Think not that I am come to send peace on earth: I came not to
send peace, but a sword.
 35  For I am come to set a man at variance against his father, and the
daughter against her mother, and the daughter in law against her mother in
law.
 36  And a man's foes shall be they of his own household.
 37  He that loveth father or mother more than me is not worthy of me: and he
that loveth son or daughter more than me is not worthy of me.
 38  And he that taketh not his cross, and followeth after me, is not worthy
of me.
 39  He that findeth his life shall lose it: and he that loseth his life for
my sake shall find it.

Matthew 19:29  And every one that hath forsaken houses, or brethren, or
sisters, or father, or mother, or wife, or children, or lands, for my name's
sake, shall receive an hundredfold, and shall inherit everlasting life.

Mark 10:29  And Jesus answered and said, Verily I say unto you, There is no
man that hath left house, or brethren, or sisters, or father, or mother, or
wife, or children, or lands, for my sake, and the gospel's,
 30  But he shall receive an hundredfold now in this time, houses, and
brethren, and sisters, and mothers, and children, and lands, with
persecutions; and in the world to come eternal life.

Luke 12:51  Suppose ye that I am come to give peace on earth? I tell you, Nay;
but rather division:
 52  For from henceforth there shall be five in one house divided, three
against two, and two against three.
 53  The father shall be divided against the son, and the son against the
father; the mother against the daughter, and the daughter against the mother;
the mother in law against her daughter in law, and the daughter in law against
her mother in law.

Luke 18:29  And he said unto them, Verily I say unto you, There is no man that
hath left house, or parents, or brethren, or wife, or children, for the
kingdom of God's sake,
 30  Who shall not receive manifold more in this present time, and in the
world to come life everlasting.

I had a very difficult time putting God ahead of my wife.

I can see, touch, and experience Joy in a real, tangible way.  And God has
asked me to put Him before her!  He's the One who made us One Flesh. 
He is the One who brought us together and made us for each other!

I tell you that when I finally resolved to put God ahead of the dearest
thing on earth to me, I was able to love Joy like I ought to.  There is
a terrible fear that God will take that thing that He asks of us.  Is
it really God's?  Am I really willing to give it up to Him?  And if He
calls me on it and takes her from me?  How can I do this!?!??

There is an anecdote in 272.10 that applies here.

Mark

    .15
    
    
    All of your notes add to the attitude of one's heart; not the position
    of the family as God has called our responsibilities.
    
    The attitude is to be WILLING to give it all to God, not that He has
    given us the ability to sherk our familial duties and then say I did it
    for God.
    
    If I were the wife of a man that God called from me in my youth, not in
    death but to serve someone else; I dare say that my husband's ability
    to be Christ to me and give him life for me would be taken.  And I
    would question just from whom was this calling.
    
    With this thought, I'd then say that God lied in the scripture where he
    commands a husband to be willing to give his life for his wife.  And
    further I'd declare that God wasn't loving towards me, if this calling
    were really from God.
    
    I think you tread a very fine line when you leave open a door that
    wide, Mark.  Perhaps, I read more then what you intended.
    
    Nancy
    

    I believe that oftimes we treat Church and other things as serving God
    more then finding our service within our own homes to be serving God.
    
    Let me explain... for I've found myself to be lacking in this area as
    God has revealed much to me.
    
    This weekend I taught the lesson of John 13, by washing the feet of my
    children.  As young men I taught them that while God has called them to
    a position of leadership, that leadership meant servitude.  I also was
    able to impart to them God's revelation to me when in John 13, Peter
    refused Jesus' foot washing.  Only to have Jesus reply, v,8 - "Peter
    saith unto him, Thou shalt never wash my feet. Jesus answered him,
    If I wash thee not, thou hast no part with me."
    
    For you see without the washing of Jesus, you cannot have part of the
    kingdom of God... there is no other one who can do the washing.
    
    In today's society with the New Age Movement leading us towards the
    religion of the Antichrist it is important that my boys not be swayed by
    the false doctrines in the air today.  
    
    Now, I could in fact leave that lesson for my Sunday School and really
    neglect the teaching of my own family. This is something I think many of 
    us do.  
    
    I, for one, have seen 3 solid families in our church fall apart because
    the church received more attention then the spouses and children.
    
    

    I'm with Nancy on this one.  God judges the heart, but man judges the
    outward appearance.  If you neglect your family, it ruins your
    testimony.  Putting God first is one thing, putting the church ahead of
    your family is another.  You can put God first without putting the
    church ahead of your family.  Our immediate family is a higher priority
    than our church family.
    
I Timothy 3:4
One that ruleth well his own house, having his children in subjection with all
gravity;
I Timothy 3:5
(For if a man know not how to rule his own house, how shall he take care of the
church of God?)

Proverbs 22:6
Train up a child in the way he should go: and when he is old, he will not
depart from it.

Deuteronomy 6:4
Hear, O Israel: the LORD our god is one LORD:
Deuteronomy 6:5
And thou shalt love the LORD thy God with all thine heart, and with all thy
soul, and with all thy might.
Deuteronomy 6:6
And these words, which I command thee this day, shall be in thine heart:
Deuteronomy 6:7
And thou shalt teach them diligently unto thy children, and shalt talk of them
when thou sittest in thine house, and when thou walkest by the way, and when
thou liest down, and when thou risest up.
Deuteronomy 6:8
And thou shalt bind them for a sign upon thine hand, and they shall be as
frontlets between thine eyes.
Deuteronomy 6:9
And thou shalt write them upon the posts of thy house, and on thy gates.

 When I was first saved, back in 1979, I immediately jumped in and
 got involved in just about everything I could get involved in..my 
 family suffered.  I didn't see it.  My wife would tell me..I felt
 she was wrong, I was serving God and she had the problem..I blame it
 on my immaturity as a Christian, but I wish I had listened back then.




Jim

    I also think that too often churches need the volunteer help of it's
    members to keep it going.   Because of the change in our families
    from one into two person working homes the church has greatly suffered. 
    You'd think the church would be more enhanced and able to hire more
    full time workers with two people homes, as the tithe should be greater
    as the income is greater.  But the truth is faithful tithing is only 
    about 15% of the church membership.
    
    Thus the need to recruit more volunteer personnel.
    
    
    

 That's the tough part (recruiting new people)..during our recent
 Mission's Conference, we set up booths for various ministries of the
 church, seeking volunteers..to the best of my knowledge, no new people
 signed up. (I know they didn't sign up for the bus ministry).

 I attend meetings for the various ministries I'm involved in..and each
 time its the same people at each meeting..the same people pretty much
 involved with all of the ministries.



Jim

    .21
    
    Exactly... and oftimes there's a mate at home saying, "You volunteered
    for what now????" and looking at the home wondering when he/she is
    going to fix that area that's needed attention for some time now.
    
    Priorities...

Nancy and Mark, from reading both of your notes, I think you are in greater
agreement than you each seem to think.  (did you follow that?)

This discussion bears a great resemblance to a "faith vs. works" argument.  It
is true that we are justified completely by faith, we do not work our way to
heaven.  It is equally true that genuine faith will (nearly?) always be
accompanied by a changed life, evidenced in works.

In the same way, it is true that we must put Christ first, before even our
family.  The whole Bible tells us that we must put nothing in our lives as a
higher priority than God, and Christ tells us explicitly that we must put Him
ahead of even our spouses and children.  Yet it is equally true that as we
follow Christ, (nearly?) always, the first thing He will call us to do is
support, love, and cherish our family.  It is true that often people put
church ahead of family, which is not Christ's calling.

I see tremendous agreement between you, not disagreement.

Paul

    re: .21
    
    I agree that most of the time, it is the same people volunteering for
    all the committees/organizations in the church.  I think you will find
    in ANY church that is the case (i.e. 10% of the people do 90% of the
    work.)  Many people have left the church because of burn-out.  The ones
    doing all the work need to analyze what their committments are/should
    be, in accordance with God's will for their life and those doing none
    of the work should also examine themselves.  Just because we are
    involved in something (or not) for a period of time doesn't mean it 
    should always be so.  As we change as individuals, as families, we need 
    to re-examine our priorities. 
    
    Speaking for myself, for the past four months I have been involved with
    the music ministry at our church.  This requires 2 practices a week
    (usually week nights.)  This obviously impacts the amount of time I
    have to spend with my husband, since we both work full-time and he is
    also involved with the Royal Ranger program.  The key here is that I
    have my husband's SUPPORT.  Despite the fact that sometimes I am tired
    and don't want to go out at night or other personal/selfish reasons, I 
    know that God is giving me the strength and grace to take on
    this task, because it's for His Glory.  Unlike the other examples seen 
    here where one spouse is too involved in church activities and their home 
    life is suffering, ours is not because we have UNITY; not dissension.
    
    I agree with Nancy that if a family is suffering because a man is very
    involved in the church and his wife has let him know and he's not
    responding to that, he needs to examine wheather what he's doing is in
    obedience to God or putting his own desires ahead of his family.
    
    Karen
    

.16 (Nancy Morales)

>    If I were the wife of a man that God called from me in my youth, not in
>    death but to serve someone else; I dare say that my husband's ability
>    to be Christ to me and give him life for me would be taken.  And I
>    would question just from whom was this calling.
>
>    With this thought, I'd then say that God lied in the scripture where he
>    commands a husband to be willing to give his life for his wife.  And
>    further I'd declare that God wasn't loving towards me, if this calling
>    were really from God.
>
>    I think you tread a very fine line when you leave open a door that
>    wide, Mark.  Perhaps, I read more then what you intended.

Then you haven't been reading carefully.  You must be still equating
putting God first with church service, or giving one's life for his wife.
Neither of these things puts God first.

You know, I do attempt to walk a fine line through a wide door.  There
are many expressions of putting God first.  Mine is unique; yours is unique.
There is danger in prescribing, Nancy.  

.17 (Nancy)

>    I, for one, have seen 3 solid families in our church fall apart because
>    the church received more attention then the spouses and children.

Coming from a Pastor's home, no one is more keenly aware of this than I am
because a Pastor is called to many people an not just his family.  However,
proper priorities allow God to prove Himself through His Word and not be 
subject to human prescriptions for happy living.

.18  (Mike Heiser)

>    I'm with Nancy on this one.  God judges the heart, but man judges the
>    outward appearance.  If you neglect your family, it ruins your
>    testimony. 

No one ever said that a person who follows God neglects his family.  HOWEVER,
some are called to follow God and leave the family, or would you dispute
those scriptures?  In other words, don't be guilty of seeing only one side
of the issue.

.20 and .21 and .24 (recruiting people for service)

Perhaps we should examine the need for the Organized Church.
Perhaps we should examine the purpose of a church,
the purpose of belonging to an organized church, and
the responsibilities it involves, versus what we want to
do for ourselves.  This is not often a binary issue between
church and family, if people were honest.  A lot of energy is
spent on entertainment and other things that may be cut out so
that "more important" things (like church *and* family) are
attended to.

.23 (Paul Weiss)

Thanks.


Mark

.24 (Karen Mossey)

>    I agree with Nancy that if a family is suffering because a man is very
>    involved in the church and his wife has let him know and he's not
>    responding to that, he needs to examine wheather what he's doing is in
>    obedience to God or putting his own desires ahead of his family.

Nancy and I have not disagreed on this as you state it.  You are correct:
he does need to examine what he's doing.

I will put the question to you, though.  What if the examination shows that
what he is doing is DEFINITELY in obedience to God?

We have this knee-jerk reaction that says the family is our first priority
to God.  THIS IS NOT SO.  Obedience to God is our first priority which often
will mean attending to the family.

I have seen a pendulum swing in the church and people herd like cattle to 
the latest fad of doing what God wants us to do.  We need workers for 
Sunday school so lets have a hype campaign telling people how important 
it is, and people then see how important it is and herd on over.  We need
workers in outreach, and people see the need, God wants us to reach out, and
people herd on over.  We see people in every ministry shouting to get people's
attention as to what God has laid on their hearts for ministry and that
everyone should also have this burden; surely, God *has* ordained this
ministry so we all should be in it - so we herd on over.

Some people don't know how or when to say "no".  Sadly, many people don't
know how or when to say "yes" either.  And the herd excuse is trotted out,
such that I don't have time because I'm working and I need family time, and...
And to many these are LEGITIMATE REASONS why they cannot serve.

However, the person who puts God first will hear His voice in regards to 
where He wants them to be.  And it may mean that a person must rearrange
life and leave their COMFORT ZONE.  If Legitimate Reason keeps you from
doing what *GOD* wants you to do, then you need to examine those reasons
for their validity in the priority list.  maybe some of those legitimate
reasons need to be changed.

For example (picking on one not so close to home), "I can't give more 
because my expenses are currently tapped out."  A legitimate reason 
why a person can't give more.  However, examine why that legitimate reason
exists and you may see cable television, wasting electricity and heat, 
and other ways to cut down expenses.  Now, the giving MUST be what God
has called you to do.  Don't herd on over; this is an example of examining
legitimate reason for being unable to do God's will.

Now, let me use Scripture.  Some Pharisees really did NEGLECT their familial
responsibilities.  They had legitimate reasons because what they had to
take care of their families was dedicated to God.  Jesus was harsh with these
people, with exclamation points!!!!  He didn't say to stop dedicating their
goods to God.  He told them that they should be caring for their families
AND dedicating their goods.  Sometimes, that means examining our priorities
and finding out where we indulge the self to the detriment of God's
desire for our life.

Mark

    Mark,
    
    If you spent more time at church then at home, how would Joy feel?
    
    

    Re: Note 622.25 by 19632::METCALFE
    
�No one ever said that a person who follows God neglects his family.  HOWEVER,
�some are called to follow God and leave the family, or would you dispute
�those scriptures?
    
    I must not be understanding what you're trying to say, Mark, because I
    wholeheartedly disagree with what I *think* you're saying. I do intend
    to get to the verses you posted earlier, but until that happens I want
    to voice my disagreement with what I think is your position.
    
    I know of a certain evangelist who divorced his wife to marry someone
    else. He claimed that God told him his wife was holding him back from
    properly ministering, so he should leave her and remarry. I don't mind
    saying that I think this "evangelist" is dead wrong. If this is your
    opinion, then I think you're dead wrong, too. (Nothing personal.)
    
    	BD�

    I have to agree with Nancy here.  I think that God does not want us to
    neglect our families in order to meet church commitments.  I think that
    serving God means we meet the needs of our families, then the needs of 
    church and community.  Admittedly, I don't have much scripture to offer
    here.
    
    Leslie

1 Timothy 5:8

  "If anyone does not provide for his relatives, and especially for his 
   immediate family, he has denied the faith and is worse than an 
   unbeliever."

								Andrew

    Thanks Andrew.
    
    Leslie

>    If you spent more time at church then at home, how would Joy feel?

A hypothetical question that misses the point of putting God first.
I can answer your question (in a number of ways) but none or all
of the answers might show or miss the point.  So what's the point?

A hint at the answer has to do with Karen Mossey's unity, for my case.

Mark

>    I know of a certain evangelist who divorced his wife to marry someone
>    else. He claimed that God told him his wife was holding him back from
>    properly ministering, so he should leave her and remarry. I don't mind
>    saying that I think this "evangelist" is dead wrong. If this is your
>    opinion, then I think you're dead wrong, too. (Nothing personal.)

This is certainly NOT my opinion, and frankly I'm a bit upset by being
understood this way.  It is PREPOSTEROUS.

I was asked on Sunday about the guy who shot the abortionist.  I think
he was DEAD WRONG, too, despite the idea that he felt he was doing God's
will.

The evangelist's claim to do something in the name of God is no more    
convincing than the person who claims to be a Christian.

Now, despite this, the call to "leave" family is the same call to put
God first.  It don't mean "leave" as in leave your wife for another
woman; that's OBVIOUSLY NOT WHAT IS INTENDED!   OBVIOUSLY!  The song,
"though none go with me, still I will follow" comes to mind.  And this
is the "leaving the dead to bury the dead" to which I speak.

Mark

>    I have to agree with Nancy here.  I think that God does not want us to
>    neglect our families in order to meet church commitments.  I think that
>    serving God means we meet the needs of our families, then the needs of 
>    church and community.  Admittedly, I don't have much scripture to offer
>    here.


Hello!??!  WHO SAID THAT GOD DID!?!?  WHO SAID THIS IS A BINARY ISSUE?

I think that serving God means doing whatever he asks us to do in whatever
order He asks us to do it at the time he asks us to do it.  Don't you?

God MAY place a priority on some service to church or community for a time
above "family time."  Or do you all preclude this notion?

Mark

Putting God first in in being, not in doing.  Doing is expressed through
the being.  Has anyone seen me write that a person should NEGLECT his
or her family IN ORDER TO perform service to church or community?

Has anyone seen me write that a person is ever called to NEGLECT his
or her family?

Can we talk on the same wavelengths here?


Will any one of you place your family, husband, child, wife, ahead of God?
Step forward.

Will any of you equate putting God first with church service?  I won't.
Will any of you equate putting God first with loving your family?  I won't.

You WILL do these things when you put God first!  Be careful to understand 
that it is NOT what you do, but what you are to God.  Obedience is NOT in
doing something all the time, but doing what you are asked to do.  If two 
aspirin take away a headache and make you feel better then 200 aspirin 
should make you a 100 timess better.  This is the logic you people are 
employing in saying that you are neglecting your family to do church service
when God calls you to do so.  Where is your faith in God to order your lives?
Is this a binary issue?  I either must see to my family or neglect them?
When there is conflict, God always wants me to be physically present with
my family?  It's presumptious on God and stunts the communication and growth
between God and man because it does not put God first and we then act in
ignorance and wonder why life is so unfair.

I'm not talking son-of-sam whispers in the brain that "God told me he 
wants me to blah-blah."  I'm talking about knowing that what God tells
you is consisitent with His nature and His purpose for your life and
those in your families.  And IF and WHEN He asks you to do something,
do it.  THAT's putting God first.

Mark

Freedom and the law:

>    I think that
>    serving God means we meet the needs of our families, then the needs of 
>    church and community.

Not picking on Leslie because she wrote this; this is the popular view.
Jesus said that "these things ought ye do without neglecting the other."

So we're faced with some tough choices when available time does not
allow for meeting all the needs presented to us.  Right?

Our tendency is to prioritize when supply (time) and demand (need) is out
of balance.  And so we can *generalize* according to these lines: family,
fellowship, community.  It matches the concentric circles of concern for
the individual.  It's natural and logical.  NO ONE has disputed this,
least of all me.

Now, generalizations are never all-inclusive.  "Meeting the needs" is 
undefined and vague.  It can mean just about anything we want it to mean.
I can make it mean that my service to my church organization meets the
spiritual and physical needs of my family because of the example I give,
and the exercise it gives them, and blah-blah-blah.

Because it is undefined and vague, we begin to ask "what ifs" providing
hypothetical or non-hypothetical case scenarios.  At this point we can
come closer to saying, "this is the right thing to do" and "this is not
the right thing to do."  But even that depends on the context of the
situation and not merely what we see on the surface.

In addition to this, people will shirk and neglect their duty to God in
the name of these natural priorities; in the name of meeting "other"
and "more important" needs.  Who said they were more important needs?
("Why, the natural priority of nature says that some things are more important
than others, and many agree on this natural order.  In fact, because we
all agree and it is a natural order, God ordained it, so it must be so!")

I believe the point of contention here is not so much violent agreement
as it is my unwillingness to say that family ALWAYS comes before other
things, and Nancy's (and agreers) unwillingness to say that there are 
times when God calls a person to follow Him, sometimes even at the 
[vehement] disagreement of a spouse.  I have seen people do this, and
have the spouse leave because of it.  The Christian would not leave but
by not denying her faith and following Christ, it broke up a home (for
a time).  Tell me: should a spouse deny Christ for a spouse?  Would you?

We have agreed that church service is not as important as service to 
family.  And if you perform "church service" to church and community, 
you may be missing out on the purpose of service to God and in His name.
That's why I have been so adamantly trying to get across the horse
before the cart that putting God first MUST, MUST, MUST be paramount,
so that you won't perform church service or service to family or spouse!
Perform service to God and show His love to your family and the fellowship!
The difference is attitude towards the doing - not because of some
"natural order" of family, fellowship, community - but because these
are enveloped by God's love expressed through those who put Him first.

People fail, and pastors fail, and leaders fail, trying so hard to do
good things to have God approve of us.  We are free when we allow God
to order it, folks.  Until then, we will never have enough time to 
do all that we "ought" to do, and we will be neglecting something or
other.  When God aligns the priorities, we will have enough time to 
do exactly what he wants us to do.

Mark

    ummm... Mark ummm hello??? Hi Bro... wanna come over and have some ice
    cream and uh cake?  Sup with me a while, sit down, take your shoes off,
    I'll wash your feet Bro.  No reason to be offended at this discussion;
    I think it's a wonderful look at how we practice Christianity and apply
    it our lives.  
    
    Like Paul Weiss said, I really think we agree more then disagree.  You
    used the word NEGLECT in one of your previous writings.  I believe that
    you are correct at saying this is not what you are asking.  And I think
    I'd be correct in saying that IS what I'm referring to.
    
    The next question is who defines neglect?  And when a choice is given
    between church activities and a spouse who feels neglected, what should
    that choice be?
    
    Nancy

>    Like Paul Weiss said, I really think we agree more then disagree.  You
>    used the word NEGLECT in one of your previous writings.  I believe that

Really?  Let's check it out, shall we?

Search for string "neglect" in 622.*

First occurs in 622.5 (Nancy Morales)
Next is in .6 (but it is the snippet from nancy)
Next is .17 (Nancy Morales)
Next .18 (Mike Heiser)
Next .25 (Mark Metcalfe)
   Here's what I said:

    "No one ever said that a person who follows God neglects his family."

I stopped searching after this.

>    And when a choice is given
>    between church activities and a spouse who feels neglected, what should
>    that choice be?

It all DEPENDS on what God has to say about the situation.  Each one is
as individual as the next.  There will be cases where "feeling neglected"
does NOT warrant avoiding a "church activity."

Mark

    re: .26 (Mark M.)
    
    > Nancy and I have not disagreed on this as you state it.  You are
    > correct: he does need to examine what he's doing.
    
    > I will put the question to you, though.  What if the examanation
    > shows that what he is doing is DEFINITELY in obedience to God?
    
    Mark-
    
    I was not saying that you disagreed with Nancy; I was only making my
    opinion known on the issue and using Nancy's example as my reasoning
    point. 
    
    As to your question about a person's examination and knowing that they
    are in obedience to God:  Do you think there would be strife within the
    relationship (in this case, a marriage) if the man was in line with
    God's will? 
    
    As for the rest of your note .26 - I fully agree.  The point of people
    in the church "jumping on the bandwagon" for the "ministry of the
    month" (i.e. the one getting the most press/visibility) is well put. 
    People need to start looking to God to show them where they will be
    most effective for His Kingdom, not a church elder.  We (christians in
    general) need to be still, know that he is God, and listen for the
    still small voice within to guide us.  And sometimes, the voice isn't
    small - it's a loud roar that has been commanding us to go/do <insert
    ministry/calling/His Will> for quite sometime and we have been 
    resisting.  We would never grow if we only stayed in places that were
    comfortable for us - He does s-t-r-e-t-c-h us!
    
    Karen

.26 (Mark Metcalfe)

Some Pharisees really did NEGLECT their familial
responsibilities.

.28 (Barry Dysert)

Clip from my posting

.29 (Leslie Johnson)

I think that God does not want us to
    neglect our families in order to meet church commitments.

.30 (Mark Metcalfe)

Clip from Leslie Johnson

.35 (Mark Metcalfe)

 Has anyone seen me write that a person should NEGLECT his
or her family IN ORDER TO perform service to church or community?
Has anyone seen me write that a person is ever called to NEGLECT his
or her family?

.36 (Mark Metcalfe)

Jesus said that "these things ought ye do without neglecting the other."

We are free when we allow God
to order it, folks.  Until then, we will never have enough time to 
do all that we "ought" to do, and we will be neglecting something or
other.

    Karen,
    
    I apologize that this discussion feels like a "fray", it's so typical of
    notes communiques.  I'm really getting tired of it myself.  
    
    Mark,
    
    >It all DEPENDS on what God has to say about the situation.  Each one is
    >as individual as the next.  There will be cases where "feeling
    >neglected" does NOT warrant avoiding a "church activity."
    
    In this discussion, I'm using church as the "given" cause for a spouse
    to feel neglected.  With this in mind, what should the offending spouse
    do?
    
    

    What bothered me is how my former church would pressure people, who
    were already working in the church, to fill a need because they knew
    nobody else would.  Even if you weren't suited to fill that need. 
    Needless to say we weren't burnt out pretty quick.  After a while I
    began to pray about such opportunities.  If I didn't feel God leading
    me to fill the need, I would tell the pastors/officials.  They never
    did seem to like that very much, like it should be any other way.
    
    The most effective ministries are where God places you there instead of
    some person pressuring you into it or using a guilt trip.
    
    Mike

>    As to your question about a person's examination and knowing that they
>    are in obedience to God:  Do you think there would be strife within the
>    relationship (in this case, a marriage) if the man was in line with
>    God's will? 

This is often the case!  You talked about you and your husband in unity
and I am thankful that my wife and i share this unity, too.  One-flesh is
another of the many expressions of putting God first.

However, there are times when people are "unequally yoked" in marriage
but married nonetheless.  And strife over one spouse's Christianity
has caused severe trouble.  It is a delicate and difficult position
for the Christian to be in.  One that calls for God's wisdom as to
when to stay home (for example) and when to "go to church" (or whatever).
I think Nancy can give us some examples where she was asked to compromise
her beliefs - and what she felt was God first attitude and action - that caused
strife in her family.

>    People need to start looking to God to show them where they will be
>    most effective for His Kingdom, not a church elder.

...and do not judge others for their involement or *seeming* lack of 
involvement.  (Another difficult tightrope.)  We don't always know
the legitmate and sometimes important reasons behind what we see.

>    We would never grow if we only stayed in places that were
>    comfortable for us - He does s-t-r-e-t-c-h us!

You ain't just whistling Dixie, sister.  ;-)

Mark

>    >It all DEPENDS on what God has to say about the situation.  Each one is
>    >as individual as the next.  There will be cases where "feeling
>    >neglected" does NOT warrant avoiding a "church activity."
>    
>    In this discussion, I'm using church as the "given" cause for a spouse
>    to feel neglected.  With this in mind, what should the offending spouse
>    do?
   
Still a dearth of information.  What does God have to say to the spouse?
Is the feeling of neglect justified?  Is it the tug of an unchristian 
spouse attempting to wean the other from "foolish" Christianity?  Or is
it a hurt that requires some "time out"?

I agree that there are times to "time out."  But I will not agree to pat 
answers based on priorities that are not necessarily ordered by God in
a given situation.

Mark

    .45
    
    This is where we disagree in your last paragraph.  I think God has
    given an order.  He is an orderly God.  My Pastor just taught a series
    on the family.  And his diagram is simply this;
    
    GOD - FAMILY - CHURCH  - SOCIETY; in that order.  It's a very
    compelling series that lasted for 8 or 10 weeks.  
    
    I can order these tapes ... for anyone who's interested, let me know.
    They are simple and practical to managing our families.  As I stated,
    we've had 3 stable, solid families fall apart because the priorities
    were wrong.
    
    There is a crisis in families today and as both Karen and Mark have
    stated the secret is unity.  We must build unity in our homes.
    
    Love in Him,
    Nancy

.43    
    Mark you are right I can give you examples.  And had I the wisdom then
    that I have today, I'd have stopped for the bleeding spouse on the side
    of the road instead of high-mindedly walking past him to church.
    
    
    
    

mm>I agree that there are times to "time out."  But I will not agree to pat 
mm>answers based on priorities that are not necessarily ordered by God in
mm>a given situation.

>    This is where we disagree in your last paragraph.  I think God has
>    given an order.  He is an orderly God.  My Pastor just taught a series
>    on the family.  And his diagram is simply this;
>    
>    GOD - FAMILY - CHURCH  - SOCIETY; in that order.  It's a very
>    compelling series that lasted for 8 or 10 weeks.  

Please read: *PAT* answers... *in a given situation*

On the face of it, the widow who made some food for Elija shouldn't have,
because she should have given it to herself and her son.  Instead, on the
face of it, she gave it to a spiritual leader, a man who represented God,
but a man, nonetheless.  On the face of it, she violated the order you 
claim to be God's.  We know that she did the right thing and she and her
son and Elijah were provided for.

On the face of it, the widow who gave her two mites shouldn't have.
Jesus commended her for giving from her lack and not from her wealth.
On the face of it, she shouldn't have given it to the church.

There are a LOT of things that at face value would conflict with this
so-called order.  But the face of things does not necessarily always show
what God's will and purpose are for individuals.

mark

>    Mark you are right I can give you examples.  And had I the wisdom then
>    that I have today, I'd have stopped for the bleeding spouse on the side
>    of the road instead of high-mindedly walking past him to church.

{e-mail exchanged to be okay with each other}

And in this specific case, with the wisdom you have now, you would
have been right to tend for "the bleeding spouse on the side of the road."

MM

    .48
    
    >On the face of it, the widow who made some food for Elija shouldn't
    >have, because she should have given it to herself and her son.  Instead, on
    >the face of it, she gave it to a spiritual leader, a man who represented
    >God, but a man, nonetheless.  On the face of it, she violated the order you
    >claim to be God's.  We know that she did the right thing and she and
    >her son and Elijah were provided for.
    
    But there was AGREEMENT to this.  Elijah did not force this woman to
    give of her last bit of food to him.  
    
    When there is DISagreement is when a spouse needs to evaluate his/her
    behavior and choices. 
    
    This goes back to the unity statement.
    
    Nancy
    

I'm afraid this topic has rather lost sight of where it was coming from,
and appears to have degenerated into rather a ding-dong thump.....  This
might just be the misperception of my over-sensitivity ;-)  I hope so... 

The query raised in .0 was how to effectively balance responsibilities in 
the home.

God has put us into all of our situations - work, home, church, all the 
lobes of expanding family circles, neighbours, etc....

To each of them, we represent the LORD.  Not in a "slug-it to 'em; preach
them into a coma" type responsibility, but in a "live among them as I
would" type responsibility. 

So when a new responsibility opportunity comes along, rather than 
responding as *I* would like, it is taken before the LORD, as 
"Is this part of the realm where You would have me involved?".
  Just a specific application of 2 Corinthians 10:5 :
  "...we take captive every thought to make it obedient to Christ."

God has given us our spouse (for those who are married) as a personal 
responsibility.  While that spouse has their own priority in our lives, 
that does not supersede God's priority.  But it is God Who has given us 
that spouse to take care of; He can show when practical priorities have to 
adjust to accomodate personal or spiritual needs.

This is a matter of testing individual situations; not just of generalities. 
If a wife (for instance) says "I'm too tired to go to the service, and need 
you to be with me", the situation needs to be taken before the LORD for His 
guiding (I don't mean a heavy "We have to pray about THIS!" -type 
disapproval! - a mental arrow prayer to the LORD can suffice).
It may be a perfectly genuine instance of need for time together. 
Some years ago we had parked the car, and were walking to the church, when 
crisis hit ;-} and we went out for a cup of coffee and talked instead 
(although I would normally totally avoid 'buying' on Sunday).
Sometimes the other decision is appropriate - maybe when the request
comes in a very different spirit, and is apparently consistently triggered 
by a certain call from, or response to the LORD.

But ultimately, He gives us our family to take care of, as well as the 
other areas of our life, and to think of one as 'more spiritual' than 
another is inappropriate.

The examples of two people spring to mind....

The first is Abraham, in Genesis 22.  I've often wondered how much Abraham
told Sarah in advance about God's instruction to sacrifice Isaac...  I
think the domestic atmosphere would have been electric.  Possibly, though
maybe 1 Peter 3:6 indicates otherwise....  But Abraham's responsibility was
to put God first.  The fact that it was a test, and that Abraham's hand was
stayed at the point of sacrifice is irrelevant to the principle.  Too often
we put our valuation of temporal life above God's eternal values - we shall
see His perspective fully, but not in (during) time.... 

The question of Elisha's widow and the woman who gave her last mite at the
temple, etc have been raised.  Their principle is the same again, like that
of Hananiah, Mishael and Azariah, in Daniel 3:17-18.  Our God is able to
save us [in this humanly dead-end situation], BUT - that is in His hands;
if He chooses not to, that's ok - our part is not to make His decisions,
but to obey.  

I see both the ladies mentioned as acting as much from faith as did the
three, in accordance with Romans 14:23b.  I believe that is why they were
singled out to be used by the LORD, and why their example is preserved for
us in scripture (as per Matthew 26:13, where the lady who anointed Jesus'
head is condemned by the mercenary, but Jesus says: "I tell you the truth,
wherever this gospel is preached throughout the world, what she has done
will also be told, in memory of her" - NIV). 

The other person whose example came to mind is the LORD Jesus.
His potential for ministry was enormous.  And undeniable.  Yet for 20-
something years He remained an unknown carpenter, fulfilling family
responsibilities, fulfilling a place in the community, being a person in a
world of people, and above all, and including all of these : 
				doing His Father's will perfectly. 

We see Him again in John 19:26-27, in the torment of an agonising death for 
the sins of the world; fulfilling the peak of what His purpose on earth.
And His concern? - for the mother who cared for Him through infancy,
childhood and even adulthood; for ensuring the provision of the domestic
responsibilities that were His mortal sphere.  In that moment, he turned to
His mother Mary, and the disciple, John, and, addressing Mary by that
intimate word of personal relationship, entrusted her to the care of the
trusted disciple who was so aware of Jesus' love that he referred to
himself in this light, rather than by name, throughout the gospel he
penned. 

This is the balance we are called to apply when we read Ephesians 5:25 : 
 "Husbands, love your wives just as Christ loved the church and gave  
  Himself up for her to make her holy." 
Jesus' love for the church was/is perfect.  He sacrificed His life for us.
But even at that moment, the lesser responsibility - that for his mother -
was not omitted.  That's how high He placed family relationships.

Remember also 1 Timothy 3:4-5, where a criterion of serving as a deacon is 
that he should manage his own family well, as if he can't mange them, how 
can he be trusted to manage the church's affairs!

					God bless
							Andrew

    Andrew!  Very well put my friend. Appreciated was the fact that you and
    your wife did take time out for coffee. As trivial as this may appear,
    it is a good example of proper priorities. I believe that just because
    one puts his spouse before church, it does not indicate that he is
    putting her before the Lord.  Service to church and service to the Lord
    are 2 different issues.
    
    
        Time doesnt afford me the oppurtunity to say anymore at this time.
    Getting busy, but thanks for sharing your heart here.  :)
    
    
    Sylvain

Having been brought up in a christian home with two completely 
opposite parents I would just like to add my tupence to this 
discussion. Firstly, I will say that I agree with both Mark and
Nancy as I think they are looking at an issue from different 
angles and different situations. Therefore I think like most 
christian life dilemas they are situational.

My father was more commited to the church than to his family. 
He would always come out with phrases like "it's the Lord's work".
My brother Mark and myself grew to resent this phrase and even 
though we had made commitments we both believed that our family
would be happier if we weren't christians as so much emphasis
was put on "the Lord's work".

My late mother's number one priority in life was to bring up her
two sons. She worked part time (once we were at school) and the
rest of her time was totally dedicated to spending time with us.
I will never forget an answer she gave me one night when I was
about 18 and trying to work out the meaning of life. I asked her
what her ambitions and dreams were in life (as I didn't seem to
have any myself ;-(). Her answer was that "her two sons would
grow to be men of God". This was here calling in life and one
which I thank God for daily.

I don't need to tell you which parent influenced me most 
spriritually. Had it not been for my mother I honestly believe
that I would not have continued to follow the Lord. 

On the other hand maybe a child like myself only needed one
parent to bring him up spiritually, and because of that, yes
maybe my father was of more use doing the Lord's work out of
the house. My father is now a full time worker in Bolivia with
his new wife, and when I see him all he talks about is the work
they are doing. I don't resent this at all as it is a great work
he is doing but I feel sad everytime we meet as we can't have a 
normal conversation. I guess my wish would be if he just sat down
one day and said to me "so how are you really getting on son?".

I guess what I am saying is that a father may well be called to
do things for the Lord but I don't think it is right when a few
years down the line he doesn't really know his own son. 

n.b. I do not mean to be critical of my father as I respect the
fact that he genuinly believes in what he is doing.

Erich

Amen Erich....  The heart of the LORD's work is in His people, and the 
greatest joy is in personal ministry.  The closer a person is to you, 
humanly speaking, the greater are the two joys combined.  To sacrifice the 
fullness of ministering the LORD in your own home, prefering the work with 
those outside, is to lose sight of God's best....  Obviously this is where 
it's a personal choice, rather than the LORD's direction....

There was a missionary (who's name always eludes me) who went out to Africa
for many years.  He did a great work, and is very highly thought of today. 
However, he left his wife back in Britain - they only met once again (and
that in company) after he went.  The spiritual morality and responsibility
of that situation troubles me greatly, but I can only leave it with the
LORD.  They have been there for many years now... 

							Andrew 

    Erich,
    
    Thanks for sharing what is obviously to yourself a highly sensitive 
    and personal issue.
    
    I guess that there are many things you have left unsaid, but can you
    recall any times when you were aware that your father made any positive
    input and influence into the mission field on his own doorstep - that
    of the salvation of his own family? For instance did he ever pray,
    either on his own or with your mother, for you. Did he ever talk,
    however indirectly, about your own need for salvation? Would you have
    ever been brought into conversations he might have had with other
    Christian folk, thereby causing them to pray for you?
    
    Erich, I am by no means wishing to undermine or belittle what you have
    said thus far, because I recognise the obvious and deep impact this has
    made on your thoughts and feelings. I am simply trying to gain a better
    understanding (not that I am about to spring forth an all encompassing
    and possibly glib reply) of the background.
    
    Paul

    I would like to thank Mark, Andrew, Nancy and everyone else who replied
    for some very honest and difficult replies/discussions. I received some
    valuable new insight. One that strikes me at the moment is that of
    taking responsiblility for your family regardless of who is to blame.
    
    I beleive for a man or women to be of any use to his/her family that
    person needs a relationship with the Father through Jesus and the
    Holy Spirit. Without that relationship we are lost. We all desire
    His will on earth as it is in heaven. If we don't have that
    relationship with Jesus how will we know the Father's will. Putting
    God first is paramount.
    
    Can God create a rock so big that he can't move it? Is simalar to -
    Can God put me in a situation that separates me from my spouse?
    The answer is NO. Only satan. He is the prince of lies and deception.
    We need to trust fully in the Lord even when we don't understand.
    
    Too often we get caught up in this world, in our own pleasures and
    we don't see the warning signs (from ourselves or maybe our spouse). 
    We take on so much garbage and excess bagage we become over burdened 
    or burnt out. We forget to give it to Jesus to trust in Him. To wait
    for Him, to be still and know that I AM. I would think that all crisis
    situations are avoidable.
    
    One thing I've learned is to pray daily with my wife. We pray first
    thing in the morning and just before going to bed. It is not always
    an easy thing to do but it does force us to settle are differences. Its
    impossible to come before the lord with anger or unforgiveness in your
    heart. 
    
    One thing I do as head of the family which gives me great joy is
    blessing our daughter with holy oil each and everyday. Often she would
    be asleep when I do this and on ocassion when touched with the holy
    oil a smile that goes beyond description would appear quickly then 
    dissappear in maybe half a second.
    
    But for His grace and mercy wear would I be.
    
    I wish I had more time.
    
    God Bless this notes file and its readers. 
    
    Steve D.

    Thank You Erich. I love it when people are honest and open. It takes
    a certain courage and strength/trust in the Lord to do what you did.
    May God Bless You. 
    
    

    Well, I'm glad after all that the basenoter (sorry, I forgot your
    name!) was able to glean some new insight on how to handle his role 
    as head of his family! :-)  Not that my opinion matters one whit to
    you, but based on your notes, I think you're on the right track! 
    
    I think the point of dissension for Mark and Nancy was that Nancy was
    looking at the the example of the married couple as both being
    christians and having conflict over more/less church activities and
    Mark was assuming one partner was not a christian and therefore the
    conflict in general?  (Please clarify if I'm wrong.)  I think, for 
    those of us that know something of Nancy's testimony, we understand 
    why she feels as strongly as she does about this issue.
    
    Getting back to Mark's question in .26 and his answer in .40? re:
    husband is positive he is in God's will and there still is conflict: I
    can see this happening initially, say husband wants to sign-on to X
    committee, really feels this is what God wants him to be part of and
    wife is resistant at first - but after discussion and prayer between 
    themselves they would come to a mutually agreeable solution (yea or
    nay).  I think where the conflict would not be resolved is if the
    husband makes the decision on his own, without consulting/discussing
    with his wife and basically runs his household in an authoritarian
    manner (i.e., "case closed!")
    
    Andrew:  thanks for your last reply - full of wisdom and insight!
    
    Karen

Re : Note 622.54      
     42139::ELFORDP 

>    I guess that there are many things you have left unsaid, but can you
>    recall any times when you were aware that your father made any positive
>    input and influence into the mission field on his own doorstep - that
>    of the salvation of his own family? For instance did he ever pray,
>    either on his own or with your mother, for you. Did he ever talk,
>    however indirectly, about your own need for salvation? Would you have
>    ever been brought into conversations he might have had with other
>    Christian folk, thereby causing them to pray for you?
 
  Paul, I hope I haven't painted the picture of my father being a big
  bad wolf, far from it. I have tried to point out some positive
  aspects of what has happened. I guess my answers to your questions
  are yes, yes, yes and yes.

  Yes, my father was involved in running sunday school and youth work 
  of which I attended and may well have contributed to my own and my
  brothers conversion. His involvment may be the reason why I am now
  heavily involved in childrens' work myself.
  Yes, prayers were said once a week every Sunday morning at breakfast.
  Yes, I know that atleast one of his friends prayed for me and my
  brother every day.
   
>   Erich, I am by no means wishing to undermine or belittle what you have
>   said thus far, because I recognise the obvious and deep impact this has
>   made on your thoughts and feelings. I am simply trying to gain a better
>   understanding (not that I am about to spring forth an all encompassing
>   and possibly glib reply) of the background.
    
    Paul, thanks for highlighting some things that I may have overlooked.
    I hope I have not sensationalised the situation unintentionally. As I
    say I think many positive things have come from my fathers work.

Erich
    

Note 622.49  31224::MORALES_NA
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>    >On the face of it, the widow who made some food for Elija shouldn't
>    >have, because she should have given it to herself and her son.  Instead, 
>    >the face of it, she gave it to a spiritual leader, a man who represented
>    >God, but a man, nonetheless.  On the face of it, she violated the order y
>    >claim to be God's.  We know that she did the right thing and she and
>    >her son and Elijah were provided for.
>
>    But there was AGREEMENT to this.  Elijah did not force this woman to
>    give of her last bit of food to him.

Not the point, is it?  Did the woman have the prior obligation to her son
(the family member) over Elijah (the church or community member) on the face of
it?

Elijah, the representative of God, told her not to worry.  God would take
care of things.  Then the widow acted on faith going OUTSIDE what you
have stated to be God's ordained priority of responsibility.

Mark

    Erich, 
    
    Your note really moved my heart this morning.  Thank you so much for
    your entry.  It really reflects great insight.
    
    In His Love,
    Nancy

    .59
    
    Yes it is the point, Mark.  That is where the disconnect comes from in
    our communication.
    
    If the wife is in agreement, then there is no conflict, no neglect, no
    problem.  When the wife *feels* neglect, in conflict and hurt is when a
    husband needs to pay attention to those symptoms and meet HER needs as
    Christ gave himself to meet the needs of the church.
    
    The commandment to the husband is to make the wife his ministry as God
    calls her the church.  
    
    Husbands love your WIVES, as Christ loves the CHURCH...
    
    Husbands = Christ
    Wives = Church
    
    This in no way says
    
    Wives = God
    
    Nancy
    

>To each of them, we represent the LORD.  Not in a "slug-it to 'em; preach
>them into a coma" type responsibility, but in a "live among them as I
>would" type responsibility. 
    
    YES YES YES YES YES YES !!! 

>So when a new responsibility opportunity comes along, rather than 
>responding as *I* would like, it is taken before the LORD, as 
>"Is this part of the realm where You would have me involved?".
>  Just a specific application of 2 Corinthians 10:5 :
>  "...we take captive every thought to make it obedient to Christ."
    
    YES YES YES YES YES YES !!!

>God has given us our spouse (for those who are married) as a personal 
>responsibility.  While that spouse has their own priority in our lives, 
>that does not supersede God's priority.  But it is God Who has given us 
>that spouse to take care of; He can show when practical priorities have to 
>adjust to accomodate personal or spiritual needs.

    AMEN! HALLELUJAH!
    
>It may be a perfectly genuine instance of need for time together. 
>Some years ago we had parked the car, and were walking to the church, when 
>crisis hit ;-} and we went out for a cup of coffee and talked instead 
>(although I would normally totally avoid 'buying' on Sunday).
    
    UH-HUH, yeah this is what I'm talking about!
    
>But ultimately, He gives us our family to take care of, as well as the 
>other areas of our life, and to think of one as 'more spiritual' than 
>another is inappropriate.

    YES YES YES, That's it...you say it so much better than me Andrew!
    
    What a blessing to read this note this morning!
    
    Nancy

622.50  43755::YUILLE

>This is a matter of testing individual situations; not just of generalities.

Quite correct, Andrew.  And well said for the rest of the note.  Well balanced
and true on the mark.


Note 622.52

>I guess what I am saying is that a father may well be called to
>do things for the Lord but I don't think it is right when a few
>years down the line he doesn't really know his own son.

Erich,

Having grown up in a preacher's home, I can empathize with this
sentiment. However, I determined some years back to forgive my father
for what he likely was not aware of, or only vaguely aware of.  It
emancipated me to begin loving him as I ought to love him, despite not
feeling it in return (immediately).  In time, my father has learned to
express his love in a more demonstrable way.  I learned that he did
not learn demonstrative love from his parents and this explained a
lot.  I wrote about this experience before:

                       FORGIVING OUR PARENTS

   My father spoke to me one day and said that his parents were not
   perfect, and there were things he remembers about his parents that
   hurt him. "But," he said, "there comes a time in a man's life when
   he has to forgive his parents for the perceived wrongs. And I know
   I haven't been the perfect father. And you'll have to deal with
   it and hopefully forgive me for it, as your children will deal
   with your imperfections and hopefully forgive you."

   My father's words to me were liberating because, even though I
   honor my parents, there were incidences that I can remember with
   feelings of hurt associated with them-and the truth that he spoke
   enabled me to forgive those incidences. Before, I didn't know how
   to deal with them; I simply repressed them.

   Forgiveness is liberating because it sweeps the dirt out the door
   and enables us to begin the task of improving and learning from
   the experiences we grew up with.

   I realize that some of us grew up in less fortunate, perhaps abu-
   sive, familial surroundings. Having an abusive parent can emo-
   tionally cripple someone; their vision of God is distorted, among
   other things.

   Forgiveness does not erase the hurt one feels, but it releases
   it for God to deal with. We hold on to hurts (call it carrying
   a grudge) as if it was personal property. Forgiveness is an act
   of the will and not an act of emotion.

   By forgiving our parents for their mistakes, we begin parenting
   with a clean slate and understanding of our frailties.

I hope you get to have that heart to heart talk with your father, 
Erich, as I have been blessed to have, and that you hear his interest
in how you are doing.

Mark

.53>

Didn't the wife of one of the Wesley brothers leave because of his
evangelism away from home?  This one mystified me, because God used
Wesley to bring mighty revival to Britain.

MM

>    Yes it is the point, Mark.  That is where the disconnect comes from in
>    our communication.
>    
>    If the wife is in agreement, then there is no conflict, no neglect, no
>    problem.  When the wife *feels* neglect, in conflict and hurt is when a
<    husband needs to pay attention to those symptoms and meet HER needs as
<    Christ gave himself to meet the needs of the church.

With whom was the widow in agreement?  Her son?  He had no say in the
matter.  Did she have the responsibility to feed her son before Elijah,
or not?

Mark

    .65
    
    Mark your pulling teeth here for no reason.  She was in agreement with
    God, hearing his voice in this matter.
    
    If a wife cannot hear the Spirit in agreement with her husband.  What
    is the husband's responsibility towards the wife?  Does this not raise
    a flag that some "evaluation and consideration" should be given to the
    situation?
    
    Nancy

    >Didn't the wife of one of the Wesley brothers leave because of his
    >evangelism away from home?  This one mystified me, because God used
    >Wesley to bring mighty revival to Britain.
    
    I've never heard this.  But supposing it were true.  What is your
    point?  Do you think that Wesley will not be held accountable to God
    for the spiritual condition of his wife?
    
    I think he will.  This just shows us God's mercy, forgiveness and
    restoration for when one makes mistakes [and yes I believe if this were
    true, it'd be a mistake].  Look at David, Abraham and Lot.  These men
    sinned, but their lives were still blessed later on.
    
    Nancy

>    Mark your pulling teeth here for no reason.  She was in agreement with
>    God, hearing his voice in this matter.

There is most certainly a reason, Nancy.  You said that a family comes
before church and social obligations.  I said that putting God first may
cause a person to put something ahead of family for a time.

By this, you agree with me, now, because hearing God's voice caused her
to put something (Elijah) ahead of her son, and herself.

>    If a wife cannot hear the Spirit in agreement with her husband.  What
>    is the husband's responsibility towards the wife?  Does this not raise
>    a flag that some "evaluation and consideration" should be given to the
>    situation?

Indeed it does.  I have NEVER disputed this (even though you were wrong in
indicating that I did in .37).  All I have said is that God may ask a person
after this evaluation and consideration to place a different priority than
what you have indicated should be the priority.  It is situation-dependent.

Mark

>    >Didn't the wife of one of the Wesley brothers leave because of his
>    >evangelism away from home?  This one mystified me, because God used
>    >Wesley to bring mighty revival to Britain.
>    
>    I've never heard this.  But supposing it were true.  What is your
>    point?  Do you think that Wesley will not be held accountable to God
>    for the spiritual condition of his wife?

My point is that perhaps Wesley should have handled the situation better,
indicated by my mystification of the tidbit.

As for being held accountable for another's spiritual condition: no I do 
not.  We are accountable to God for obedience or disobedience only.  This
includes responsibility for others, including and especially our spouses.
but ultimate responsibility rests on each individual.

If the tidbit about Wesley is true, and I think it is, I find it tragic
and very puzzling and agree that something better could have come from
it.  Ignorance and blinders make poor governors.

Mark

Hi Mark,

Glad you enjoyed the note.

� Having grown up in a preacher's home, I can empathize with this
Amazing!!! ... I did too!!!  Different preacher, though ;-)

But it never occurred to me then, that there was any hardship associated with
the situation.  This was in spite of key years (in my youth) which he spent in
an itinerary capacity, travelling round a group of churches in the UK,
alternating with my mother's visitation for an adoption society. 

In fact it was only years later that I realised my older brother felt he
(we) had missed out at all in attention etc. 

I wouldn't change my experiences with anyone ... If I wish I were at all
different, it's between me and the LORD, and for me to listen and conform,
rather than nurse any concern about things which are ultimately between
someone else else and the LORD.  He gave me this life, and all the experiences
I've walked through with Him at my side.  He has fashioned me so far, and
while I might not be over-thrilled at some personality aspects, etc, they
don't just happen to be ones I can blame Him for ... and He's putting them
right as fast as I can take it....  ;-} 

No.  With that Father, I've no complaint.  And He entrusted me to the earthly 
father, as personally selected, by Him too.

Meanwhile, it's my turn to concentrate on what sort of a father (husband, etc) 
*I* am turning out to be..... ;-}

								Andrew

    The husband is the spiritual head of the home, Mark.  To say that you
    do not have the same responsibility towards your wife as say a Pastor
    does towards his church, is to me shortsighted.
    
    I believe I've heard and can't remember the scripture about presenting
    your wife blameless before the Lord in many a sermon.
    
    This does not preclude individual accountability.

>Amazing!!! ... I did too!!!  Different preacher, though ;-)
>
>But it never occurred to me then, that there was any hardship associated with
>the situation.

A lot of factors come into play: having three brothers, no sisters, being 
third of four, in the 60s rebellion, in unfavorable situations, etc.

Like Erich, it is not nearly as bad as it is painted, but the feelings
are very real.

>In fact it was only years later that I realised my older brother felt he
>(we) had missed out at all in attention etc. 

Yup.  My wife and her two sisters (no brothers) had different viewpoints
of the same parents.

Mark

>    The husband is the spiritual head of the home, Mark.  To say that you
>    do not have the same responsibility towards your wife as say a Pastor
>    does towards his church, is to me shortsighted.

Nancy, ***WHO*** has said this?  Again, you are misrepresenting me.
I have never said this.  Am I being unclear?

Mark

    from your .69
    
    >As for being held accountable for another's spiritual condition: no I
    >do not.
    
    Guess I misunderstood?

N>    Do you think that Wesley will not be held accountable to God
N>    for the spiritual condition of his wife?

M>As for being held accountable for another's spiritual condition: no I do 
M>not.  We are accountable to God for obedience or disobedience only.  This
M>includes responsibility for others, including and especially our spouses.
M>but ultimate responsibility rests on each individual.

N>    The husband is the spiritual head of the home, Mark.  To say that you
N>    do not have the same responsibility towards your wife as say a Pastor
N>    does towards his church, is to me shortsighted.

M>Nancy, ***WHO*** has said this?  Again, you are misrepresenting me.
M>I have never said this.  Am I being unclear?

N>    >As for being held accountable for another's spiritual condition: no I
N>    >do not.
N>    
N>    Guess I misunderstood?


Yes, you did.  Did you read the rest of it?

How you jump from my statement to what you said was my statement is 
another mystery.

Mark

    Mark,
    
    I read all of .69 and don't believe you and I have the same
    understanding as to the spiritual position of husband to his wife.
    
    Nancy
    

>    I read all of .69 and don't believe you and I have the same
>    understanding as to the spiritual position of husband to his wife.

Maybe you are right.  I believe the spiritual position of the husband
is FIRST to God and then his wife, for in this only can the husband truly
hold the proper spiritual position to his wife.

Mark

    >We are accountable to God for obedience or disobedience only.  This
    >includes responsibility for others, including and especially our
    >spouses. 
    >but ultimate responsibility rests on each individual.
    
    This is where we disagree.  I believe the husband has a much larger role,
    spiritually speaking towards his wife.  I believe that the husband has
    the SAME responsibilities as Christ does towards the church.  He is to
    be Christ to her.  Which means to serve her, wash her feet, and build
    her up spiritually and to present her blameless before the Lord.
    
    If you don't get this from your personal study.  We can agree to
    disagree.  
    
    Nancy

>    This is where we disagree.  I believe the husband has a much larger role,
>    spiritually speaking towards his wife.  I believe that the husband has
>    the SAME responsibilities as Christ does towards the church.  He is to
>    be Christ to her.  Which means to serve her, wash her feet, and build
>    her up spiritually and to present her blameless before the Lord.

You seem to have not understood my replies, and you have accused me of
things I have not said.

Mark

    .78 addendum 
    
    I don't believe that Christ put the Church ahead of God. As neither
    should the husband.

    Mark, I'm not accusing you of anything... please - I don't mind the
    struggle, but my notes are not accusational - or at least not meant to
    be.
    
    You made a statement that your responsibility is obedience to God. And
    that you don't believe that you have any spiritual accountability for
    anyone but yourself.  You have said you have responsibilities to your
    wife.  But to me this is not the same.
    
    Can you be specific about what you believe a husband will be
    accountable for to God regarding his wife?
    
    Nancy
    
    
    

>what is OBEDIENCE to you when it comes to your wife?

You know that we agree: to love her as Christ loved the church.

As I have stated before - what this means in expression can be so many
different things.  It is situation dependent.  And what I should do
today (go out for coffee, instead of to church) may not be what I
do tomorrow (go to church, and leave coffee [for later]).

"as Christ loved" and "meeting the needs" are wonderful and accurate
phrases to describe our responsibilities.  We AGREE!  No one disputes it!

We do dispute what these things mean for every unique context.  You 
CANNOT generalize and say that "at all times when my wife feels neglected
on Sunday morning, we should skip church and go out for coffee."  This
is wrong and would apply a prescription for all situations that might 
not fit.

Therefore, there may be times when *on the face of it* putting a priority
on things other than family members is actually placing things in God's
perspective - and all these things shall be added unto you - like actually
doing the right thing for that family member.

Mark

    I'm a tad confused. When you're talking about marriage, you're talking
    about two people, each with their own wills and responsbilities - to
    God, to each other and to their other varying roles. If you take the
    hypothetical case of Wesley (not knowing whether it's true or not), but
    knowing that he was called and was effective in a great ministry, and
    if indeed his marriage ended in divorce, the assumption that y'all seem
    to making is that the failure was Wesley's. However, his wife had a
    responsibility to him as well. If a spouse sees clearly another's
    calling, but chooses themselves to rebel against God and God's calling
    for their spouse, what then? What if the wife flat out rebels against
    God and what God is jointly asking of them as a couple, (through placing
    a calling upon her husband)? Knowingly doing wrong in so doing, but
    having had enough of God and His "interference" in their lives? Does
    the husband then bow to the will of the wife, or does he go on and
    answer God's call, praying all the while that his wife will ultimately
    move forward with him? Consulting her and loving her, but ultimatley
    answering God's will? She has choice and she may choose to leave
    him, no?  He may shine God's light and love to her, but if she prefers
    blindness, is the husband then guilty?
    
    Rebecca 
                   

Well, the story I got was that Wesley's wife "left him" (a bit different
than a divorce; more like an annulment).  I was under the *impression* 
that it was because he was away so often.  I'll check with my dad, who
told me this stuff, but any historians up on this subject are welcome!

You make a very good point about both spousal responsibilities.  However,
"on the face of it" when I say that "perhaps Wesley should have handled 
the situation better" (note .69), I do agree with some here that a wife
in need should be attended to and addressed by her husband and not
neglected.  Now, this is "on the face of it" with very scanty details.

If his wife left him due to her own unwillingness to obey God, and not
due to his unwillingness to be Christ to her, and yet remain faithful
and holy to God, then Wesley did what he could and should, and she
is responsible for her actions.  (Please note that little word at the
beginning of the paragraph, folks.  Thanks.)

Mark

    I agree with you Rebecca.  And honestly, don't believe I've stated
    differently.  But the question is did he try to attend to her spiritual
    needs prior to her "leaving him"?  
    
    It comes back to the question would God call a person into the ministry
    without calling the spouse?  I believe that when husband and wife are
    in UNITY this doesn't happen.  If husband and wife aren't in unity,
    then this *can* happen... and has happened.
    
    There was a note started in here once about a man who felt called into
    the ministry, but his wife wasn't up for it... and then he testified
    how he waited for her to come around.  And when she did all else fell
    exactly into place!
    
    I don't think a wife should be a hindrance to her husband and many
    factors can play into this; however, I know that men tend to plunge
    ahead oftimes without really thinking through all things and
    considering their mate.  
    
    Nancy

    >I know that men tend to plunge ahead oftimes without really thinking 
    >through all things...
    
    NEVER ::-)
    

 I'm shocked that anyone would think such a thing!

    0:-)

Mark, your last paragraph (starting with the 'If...') in 622.84 is an 
interesting one, particularly in the light of 1 Corinthians 7:12-13...15

These verses cover the case where a married unbeliever is converted.  If
the spouse can accept the new marriage state, well and good; stay together.
However, if the unsaved partner finds the new state of their spouse to be
more than they can live with, they are at liberty to leave, and the 
believer is considered single in such a case.

In this note we have been considering exclusively Christian marriages, but 
sadly there are cases where, while the marriage is on the basis of both 
being Christians, the standard of commitment and behaviour does not bear
this out on both sides.  I have known grievious cases where one (at least)
partner, without any overriding justification, has refused to commit to the
continuing relationship, yet still calls themselves Christian.  In such 
cases one (or both) partner(s) do tend to lose any Christian stance or
witness.  It's beside the point to conjecture about the underlying spiritual
reality of these relationships.  But it underlines that God comes before
our social and temporal commitments, and where these commitments try to
take precedence over Him, a very painful conflict will result.  He gives
them as a delightful responsibility, but they must not presume on that
responsibility to rise above the One Who established them. 

The same applies to our allegiance to our country.  We are urged to submit 
to the governing authorities (Romans 13:1), yet where these conflict with 
God's law, even they have to bend the knee.... (Acts 5:29).  The same 
principle applies.

	-------------------------------------------------------

If any brother has a wife who is not a believer, and she is willing to 
live with him, he must not divorce her.  And if a woman has a husband who 
is not a believer, and he is willing to live with her, she must not 
divorce him ... but if the unbeliever leaves, let him do so.  A believing 
man or woman is not bound in such circumstances....

						1 Corinthians 7:12-13...15

    Andrew,
    
    I was thinking of those very same verses last night in respect to this
    topic.  Even this seems to demonstrate the "spiritual" union of husband
    and wife.
    
    Nancy