I so wanted a bit of what everyone else got. - part 2

[Enabler]

Mod Note: this thread is a continuation of https://bpdfamily.com/message_board/index.php?topic=339885.0

I do not want the marriage to end.  You are correct. I have reintegrated that to my wife consistently by not enabling the divorce. That said, the cage door is open and she is free to leave, I do not want to force her to stay in a marriage where she does not want to.

Regarding the non-communication, I get that she might not want to communicate with me, however, what I don’t get is the degree to which she will communicate when others are around and won’t communicate when others aren’t around. It doesn’t just feel personal, it feels manipulative, as though she doesn’t want ‘others’ to see that she’s being cruel or unreasonable.

She would very much like to give ‘others’ the impression that she is not only reasonable but kind, a victim and reasonable on a ‘tough’ situation. The same applies to email communication. She appears to give the impression of being ‘reasonable’ asking is to adhere to a set of church suggested guidelines for co-parenting... yet in reality, since she’s sent me the guidelines on Monday she’s broken her own guidelines at least once.

I don’t know whether the email mask is genuine and she’s just incapable of carrying through with her intentions, or that it was just ‘for show’ and it was for me to adhere to and she had little or no intention of applying the rules to her life.

I feel inclined to highlight the deviation since I sense I don’t have much time before parental alienation becomes live since we’ll be selling the house and moving out. So I basically have... worts and all. I could never forgive myself if I never said anything to her (productive or not) specifically about how her behaviour is leading directly to our children’s harm.

Enabler

[FaithHopeLove]

Enabler, I am not sure where this fits in or if it will be welcome but, as a pastor, I want to share some of my thoughts about the sanctity of marriage. It is a covenant relationship. As such it requires something on the part of both spouses namely love, faithfulness and intimacy (not just sexual).  When those elements are not there the covenant is broken. Refusing to legally divorce after a marriage fails is not faithfulness or respect for the sanctity of marriage In fact staying in a "marriage" that is in name only is actually disrespectful of this divinely ordained institution because it means ignoring everything that marriage is supposed to be about. Of course God does not like divorce but God knows we are fragile creatures and sometimes despite our best efforts a marriage stops being a marriage. God does not condemn us for our frailty. Covenants between humans do break sometimes. Yours has broken and it is clear that it cannot be restored.. You say you don't want a divorce. The reality is, in the eyes of God, you ARE divorced. Everything that makes a marriage a marriage is gone with you two. All that is left is a meaningless piece of paper. The longer you hold on to it not wanting to move on the worse it will be for you and your kids. Living with a corpse is not healthy. You and your children deserve better. I say this with love and hope that comes across.
Faith

[sweetheart]

FaithHopeLove I often thought this  and many times over the years often felt compelled to make this comment, but never felt informed enough to do so.

Even in the eyes of the Catholic Church, where divorce was/is seen as  a mortal sin, Pope Francis has now made seeking annulment on the grounds of an extra-marital affair a much more straight forward process; He too recognised that once this is taking place inside the sanctity of marriage, that the religious bonds that join a man and woman together in the eyes of God have been irreparably broken.

I was brought up in a devout Irish catholic family.  I am an atheist now, but the developments inside the Vatican still draw me in.

Thankyou for posting this, I have found it very helpful indeed, and enlightening in a way that will help inform my responses going forward on this forum.

[GaGrl]

Faith's explanation of the covenant of marriage resonates with me. She is correct -- the covenant of your marriage has been long broken.

As to the church guidelines she sent and then broke -- FF's approach of "help me understand..." could be helpful here.

 " EnablerW, in reviewing the co-parenting guidelines you sent, help me understand how (whatever topic) works, because (her action) doesn't appear to meet that guideline. I want to make sure we're on the same page. "

Sometimes the consequence of a behavior is simply that they get called out on it.

[formflier]

Like many others have said, my intention here is to highlight important issues for discussion and thought, vice say there is right and wrong here. 

I'm interested in the Pastor's thoughts about the sanctity of the pastorship as well and how that relates to a pastors marriage and conduct within that marriage and conduct within the church.

I also agree that it appears the marriage is broken.  I would say that without forgiveness and steps of repentance on both parties, the chances of a Godly marriage covenant returning between Enabler and his wife are quite low.

My understanding is enabler wife has been put forth as a lay pastor/teacher of some sort (I'm not familiar with the traditions procedures in his church).  I also understand the church is/was aware of Enabler's wife's "affair"/"relationship" with OM and has explicitly told them to stop it and that it is inappropriate. 

I further understand that church believes the relationship has stopped or perhaps they have become deliberately indifferent to the actual status of the relationship.

I also understand Enabler doesn't feel comfortable reporting this (proving it with objective evidence he has) to the senior pastor (Enabler wife supervisor), because he believes that would "prove" that he is abusive to his wife or perhaps his wife will claim he is abusive and there is no recourse (in Enablers belief) to find the truth of the matter/have a just process.

Like many stories on this board, they are hard (impossible) to wrap up in tidy yes/no (right or wrong questions).   I think I have at least the big pieces in place

Switching gears a bit to my "advice" especially about "speaking the truth" (which I often get the vibe is misunderstood).

I totally agree that if it becomes possible through joint agreement (that is actually carried out by both parties) to keep the kids "innocent" of as many details as possible that should be done and is a worthy goal.

I think it's  a separate matter what Enabler should do if untruth is spoken in front of him to the children or if the children come to him with an untruth.  I do believe he should state that it is untrue with minimal extra explanation.

As an example I would  encourage people to watch this video at around the 50 minute point.

https://youtu.be/nUwqb-7hDjU

 Several examples are given as are several warnings about not being vindictive.

I'm not putting this forward as "the right" thing, but more as a "that's what I had in mind, if something has to be said".

There are also interesting and potentially relevant thoughts at around 47 minutes about not doing "image management" and a little later about a difference between "harming" and "hurting" (that we should usually avoid harm, yet causing "hurt" is sometimes what happens "when speaking the truth in love".

Like others have said, I'm not trying to be argumentative, rather trying to focus discussion on specific points where there will likely be massive decisions for Enabler to make, that regardless of decision will likely impact his family for a long time (perhaps forever)



Best,

FF

[Enabler]

FHL, thank you for sharing your views here, they have certainly been good for thought whilst I sit here waiting for church to begin.

I’m trying to work out if ‘the marriage’ is a separate being or entity or ‘thing’ that we both signed up to be in or stay in. Just because my W has chosen to walk away from this ‘thing’ and renege on her promises to stay in the thing does this mean that I ‘should’ also leave the thing. Or, as I’m doing at the moment (or trying to do), should I stay in the thing as I promised to do until such a time where she dissolves this ‘thing’. She can do that by completing the full process of the dissolution of our marriage. Then and only then will I no longer be preserving or standing for anything, because this thing will no longer exist.

If I consider marriage to be the covenant as you describe it, which makes sense, are not all normal married couples in and out of ‘marriage’ in gods eyes. Whenever couples have an argument, aren’t intimate or other times when we don’t display loving behaviour. Which then begs the question, is there a time limit or a degree to how unmarried people are.

I’m also prompted to think of the prodigal son and how that depicts gods view on how he treats time and level of contempt a person can yet still be accepted back into the family... or the marriage.

Thanks for your insight here it’s hugely appreciated and helps me understand why I’ve gotten conflicting advice from church leaders. Our local bishops “oh well, move on” view was perplexing.

Enabler

[babyducks]

It is a covenant relationship. As such it requires something on the part of both spouses namely love, faithfulness and intimacy.

With respect for everyone's understanding of covenant relationships, here is mine:

A covenant is a relationship of reciprocal love, caring, and loyalty.   Reciprocal being the key word.    Both sides choose to belong to the covenant.   Both sides participate in the covenant.

At any given time, at any snap shot of time,  the covenant can be functioning well or functioning poorly, but it exists because each side recognizes the obligations between and toward the other.   whether the obligations are being met or not.

If one party does no recognize the obligation of the covenant, or breaches the understanding of the covenant, it's broken.

[sweetheart]

With respect for everyone's understanding of covenant relationships, here is mine:

A covenant is a relationship of reciprocal love, caring, and loyalty.   Reciprocal being the key word.    Both sides choose to belong to the covenant.   Both sides participate in the covenant.

At any given time, at any snap shot of time,  the covenant can be functioning well or functioning poorly, but it exists because each side recognizes the obligations between and toward the other.   whether the obligations are being met or not.

If one party does no recognize the obligation of the covenant, or breaches the understanding of the covenant, it's broken.

I just want to echo what ’ducks has said above, and also add that my understanding of a covenant is that it is a reciprocal agreement, a contract if you will that holds two people together with deeper more profound obligations  than the arguments and disagreements that we all move in and out of in our intimate relationships.

My marriage ended not because I wanted it to or by way of divorce, but through my husband’s actions. He left our marriage whilst we were still to my mind a married couple.
It took me such a long time to realise that despite being married, I could also simultaneously not be married.
I didn’t even need to have considered a divorce for this to be so. My husband had left our marriage, and despite my best efforts I knew that what I thought a marriage would be was no longer possible.

[Enabler]

‘Ducks, that’s very very nicely put.

How does one know for sure for sure that this is a period where the covenant is functioning poorly, I mean really really really poorly or that the covenant has gone completely.

I know that I keep moving the bar as to what constitutes completely not recognising the covenant. Initially I thought it would have been having an affair, then framed the affair in such a way that I could see how she might think the affair was okay and even godly in a BPD context, then I thought ‘well it’ll be when she petitions for divorce’ and for a while I did... then nothing happened and she procrastinated about that as well for months and months... then I thought ‘well it’s not done done till she applies for the decree nisi, because this is all just paperwork and not living it, in some ways the paperwork side wasn’t real, it still existed in a fantasy land for her. What truly truly tells me it’s dead dead dead, there’s not a flicker of light, no burning ember there of someone who believes in the covenant?

I’ve given up really trying to tell. It’s dead when the decree absolute comes through.

Enabler

[sweetheart]

Enabler how would you ever realise when ‘the covenant has gone completely’ how could you ever accurately make that assessment, you couldn’t, you can’t, such is your desire for it not to be so.

[babyducks]

How does one know for sure for sure that this is a period where the covenant is functioning poorly, I mean really really really poorly or that the covenant has gone completely.

Thanks Enabler.

really really poorly or gone completely?    off the top of my head I would start here, because this makes sense to me.

I'm Jewish.   I have a covenant with the G-d I recognize to 'do Jewish', observe the mitzvah's, act Jewishly, etc etc etc.    These acts have meaning to me because I infuse them with meaning.      Let's say I stop lighting the Shabbes candles and going to shul on Friday nights.    and instead I go to Church on Sunday mornings and pray there.     I do this regularly.    I identify as a member of this Church.   I would say the covenant I have with the G-d of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob is broken.   I would say it's broken because I identify it as broken with what I am doing and saying. The covenant is a partnership where both have to recognize it's value, and agree to be in it.

What truly truly tells me it’s dead dead dead, there’s not a flicker of light, no burning ember there of someone who believes in the covenant?

Her actions and her words Enabler.   No she hasn't finalized the decree.    and I suppose for some one who has lower executive function and poor cognition under stress this isn't a huge surprise.   but her actions and her words say over and over again that she identifies her primary relationships in other ways now.    This isn't a fantasy land for her.   

I'm sorry.   I know this is painful.    I imagine this to be quite exhausting.    I can see that you wish it not to be this way.    I'm sure it's a lot to accept.     I wish you well.

'ducks

[Enabler]

See I am confused by her actions and her words, the two conflict and actually sometimes would suggest overly that she doesn’t want to break the covenant.

On the one hand she sends emails to push the divorce along setting dates, on the other she finds other distractions to not do divorce work and instead focus on the distractions.

In jan this year she was stuck, I get that, she didn’t want to be married (she wanted to break the covenant) but was fearful that her future looked grim. That’s nothing to do with wanting to repair the marriage that’s more fear of the future.

In may she talks about her inability to be vulnerable to me again, that she didn’t want a divorce and it’s not her choice to get a divorce, she has to because I’m abusive.

Even OM said to me that she wants nothing more than to keep her family together. Again, not sure this means she doesn’t want to break the covenant but none the less it’s highly confusing.

If you your jewish friends found out you went to church, would they instantly say you were no longer Jewish, would they ban you from the synagog forever?

Enabler

[babyducks]

If you your jewish friends found out you went to church, would they instantly say you were no longer Jewish, would they ban you from the synagog forever?

it's not about my friends or family.    it's about my feelings, thoughts, experience and what I am willing and able to commit to over an extended period of time that would bring meaning to my life.

On the one hand she sends emails to push the divorce along setting dates, on the other she finds other distractions to not do divorce work and instead focus on the distractions.

divorce is painful, shameful and full of conflict.   if she is on the BPD spectrum avoiding pain, shame is something that she would do.   it could mean she's is avoiding her feelings, regardless of what her feelings are.

we could split these hairs right down to their last infinitesimal atom.   and at a certain point the speculation becomes counter productive because no one single answer will 'fit' perfectly without contradiction.    the black and white, binary, all on or all off world is not our friend.   it seems to me that you take the preponderance of evidence and form the obvious conclusion.

'ducks

[formflier]

My understanding is that covenant relationships are modeled after God's covenant with Abraham. 

Much of the Bible is showing the effects on that covenant relationship through God's actions and through various Biblical character's actions.

The obvious major difference is that in human relationships there are two "imperfect" people and in the covenant with Abraham there is only one "imperfect" party.

Therefore, when we try to apply "Biblical wisdom" to our current covenant relationships, we can hopefully (through prayer and supplication) model our actions closer to God's or the Biblical character that God obviously favors in a particular story.

Best,

FF