In honor of Randy Pausch, a professor who gave a Last Lecture after a cancer diagnosis and who will have a Diane Sawyer special on April 9 at 10 EST, I am giving a Last Post because it is time for me to move on from Marriage Builders -- although I may post again on the Private Forum to Dr. Harley!

I realized I had written a last post in responding in another thread and decided to post it in its own thread. There comes a time when people realize it is time to stop posting, and I am at that point. In future, I hope people decide to give a last post which sums up what they have learned.

Here is my last post:

I think the key to marital happiness comes from an understanding of what "true love" is. Dr. Harley's program teaches that "true love" is a "commitment to extraordinary care" for your spouse, for the person you married. I once heard him on the radio show saying that "Love is a commitment to change." If you have a commitment to care for your spouse, then you are willing to discuss through problems and reach agreements that work for both. You are willing to change your behavior out of consideration for your spouse.

In our culture, Billy Joel's song "Don't go changing to try to please me" fits more with the idea that you find a soulmate and it is easy, it is natural, to love. Neither of you has to change because both believe "I love you just the way you are."

A person with that view can stumble into a friendship that turns into a passionate romance. Suddenly, it seems like you have ruined your life because you married the wrong person. What do you do? For some, the answer is to stay with the spouse and have as little to do with that person as possible. Your whole focus is on your "true love", the affair partner. The deception is necessary because of the complications associated with divorce, especially if children are involved. You are trying to find the best possible solution to the problem that you married the wrong person -- and why punish yourself for life for an error you made years ago?

As I sign off, I want to recommend Harley's Marriage Builders Weekend. While it is true, and Dr. Harley is very explicit about this, that it takes two to make a marriage work, the program educated me on the meaning of "true love". I thought that the bond of marriage is what cemented the passion, and that marriages failed because, like Scotch tape that had lost its stickiness, those in failed marriages had gone into marriage with significiant prior relationships that prevented them from experiencing the cementing bond of marriage. Oh was I wrong! I deluded myself during years when my husband was increasingly abusive and neglectful. It was the affair that forced me to evaluate my beliefs.

The affair wasn't the problem. The affair was a symptom.

With my prior view, there was no hope for marriage after an affair. With my new understanding, there is always hope as long as both of us are alive.

A priest once told me that his aunt married a man who became an alcoholic, she separated from him, and forty years later he returned to her to die from the effects of his drinking. To me, that's "true love". Plan B means you are committed to your spouse yet recognize that separation is appropriate if your spouse is hurting you. Dr. Harley recommends Plan B of two years. With my beliefs, I'll wait as long as we are both alive.

We aren't separated now, but I'm in a sort of Plan B. I'm waiting. He once said to me, "I just tune out your chirping." Now I no longer chirp. If he asks, I tell him. If he doesn't ask, I say nothing. If this sounds one-sided, it isn't because I show interest in him -- in his thoughts and feelings, in his plans...

I will pass the lessons I learned on to our children. My focus on this forum was so great that a daughter, when a pre-schooler, thought that her movie was "Scooby Doo meets Dr. Harley" instead of "Scooby Doo meets Laurel and Hardy." I hope my children some day go looking for my posts, pull this one up as my last post, and are reinforced in the belief that "true love" means committing to care for life the person whom you married.

Dr. Harley has been very upfront that his interest in infidelity came from realizing that most males in his family had had affairs and so he resolved at the outset of his marriage that he would take extraordinary precautions against ever hurting Joyce. Our children have suffered terribly from the effects of our bad relationship. My hope is that our marriage will improve and that our children, like Dr. Harley, will resolve to avoid the mistakes made by their forebears.

Cherishing

Ah, well, I have been on and off MB since I made my last post. Maybe this could be a last thread.

When you marry, you can make a commitment for life with the idea that your spouse would never hurt you. That's what I did. If your spouse does hurt you, then what? Do you try to change him? Do you accept the hurt? Do you complain but do nothing?

I think that the willingness to separate is a key factor in a happy marriage. You accept that you cannot change your spouse, but you also have the personal dignity to not tolerate poor treatment. You leave.

This is Harley's Plan B. You can still believe that marriage is a commitment for life, and you can still have that commitment.

Someone just posted a link to a woman who had made an unconditional commitment to stay with her significant other, the father of their five month old child, and she had no recourse whatsoever in the face of his neglect. She accepted his "I care for you" without any behavioral choices on his part to actually be caring towards her. This is self-deception. I had it, too.

Better to face the reality that your spouse is being uncaring towards you and to separate from him than to live in the self-deception that there is nothing you can do because you have made a commitment which means you stay with him no matter what. You have a choice. You can leave.

Cherishing

Adultery grants you the choice to walk away from your vow. But it is a choice that you are not required to make.

All the best cherishing, whatever you choose.

Larry

I don't believe it does. That is the position of the Catholic Church. A person can separate for life, but the vow is still in place.

Why would a person choose to separate for life but not be willing to marry? I think that this choice is based on the recognition that marriage is intended for life because children need the stability of a father and mother. If father and mother are distracted by dating relationships, where is the focus on the family?

Cherishing

That is accurate, Catholic dogma is exactly that, sorry. I should know better

Many Protestant denominations DO allow adultery as grounds.

And you are further right when you note that separation is an option.

Larry

I have come to respect the Catholic dogma as I have seen the devastating effect on children of parents dating. I respect that there are some things that would make reconciliation impossible, and certainly adultery makes reconciliation very, very difficult, but moving on to other romantic partners can undermine the whole idea of marrying for life.

Cherishing

Open marriages are garbage, force feeding kids the emotional garbage as a meal.

Looking for romance outside of marriage is like the meth addict looking for a hit. Matter of fact, it is EXACTLY that. I am working up a post on the subject for someone now.

Larry

It's sad. One of my best professors in college taught History and Politics. I remember his holding up his hands and saying, "You have to choose." He was 35 years old, and he had an affair with one of the other students in this seminar class -- an 18 year old. He went on to marry her, and they are still married 25 years later. He chose. It may be they have had a terrific marriage. Still, what he did by divorcing his wife was to toss aside the woman he had vowed to cherish. I don't see where that is ever justified, even in the case of adultery. Marriage is meant for life -- "till death do us part."

It is a foolish choice to commit adultery when you believe that marriage is meant for life. It means you presume the forgiveness of your spouse. It means that you are willing to cause terrible harm to your relationship -- for what? That's where separation comes in. The Catholic Church encourages reconciliation but also says it is licit to separate permanently.

It has now been more than six years since the affair was exposed. Why am I still here? My husband has told me that he was waiting for me to "settle down." I'm settled down, finally. I appreciate the selfish decisions he made not only to have an affair but also to pursue his own pleasure at my expense -- by golfing and running and playing volleyball and singing in the church choir. He left me without leaving. He could appreciate why I wouldn't put up with another woman, but he wanted to return to his old habits of doing whatever he pleased regardless of the impact on me. No.

That's where separation comes in. I have enough dignity now to do what I did not do before. I have enough dignity to separate if he chooses an independent lifestyle.

To me, what is most brilliant about Harley's work is the Policy of Joint Agreement. It seems so reasonable to think that you each should be able to make decisions which are so good for you that it is acceptable that they are negative for the other person. That sort of thinking, at least in my experience, leads to justification of more and more selfish behavior. "Mutual submission" (Ephesians 5) means you don't do what is negative for the other.

I look back over 15 years of marriage and regret not having separated literally on our wedding night. Once we went through the marriage ceremony, I was stuck with him, and he could treat me as badly as he wanted to treat me. I had the idea that I had no choice but to stay with him.

I had the choice, and I have the choice today. Separation -- even permanent separation -- does not mean that you have abandoned your marriage vows.

Cherishing

Cherishing,

I have been following your story for many, many months now, and my heart has gone out to you over and over again. As poorly as my FWH treated me, you have put up with SO much more. Being Catholic too, I had the same dogged determination to push past the betrayal and lies and stand for the marriage, but it was SO hard.

So many times when I read your posts, I said to my computer screen, "Leave him, Cherishing. He doesn't have the capacity to get outside himself and love anyone." I even got the idea that Dr. Harley was telling you to save yourself. My husband was also ruled by the "Love = Sacrifice" thing, so I would have felt like a hypocrite for telling YOU to leave when I couldn't.

Thankfully, my prayers have been answered and we are recovering. If you still aren't healed, I don't see how God could hold it against you if you let go with love. You are worth so much more than what you've been offered. You "fought the good fight" and deserve some peace.

I wish you and your children well.

rightherewaiting

Well, thank you.

Sometimes, being willing to let go is what is needed. I think that I have had to learn a valuable lesson -- that I cannot change him. He has free will.

I finally got to the point of being willing to separate. If I couldn't change him, and I couldn't tolerate his behavior, what other option was there?

He was arguing for personal running as a necessity. He needed exercise. I didn't want a return to his running as the highest priority in his life -- something I experienced before and during the affair. A few days ago he proposed camping at different state parks on the weekend with the family. I was all for that! He thought it could provide exercise for the family.

He chose to propose running a few years ago at a very vulnerable time for me. On a Friday, my father had just been through colon cancer surgery at the Mayo Clinic -- two complications were that he was 80 years old and two of his heart valves were failing. The doctor had warned my mother and brother that there was a definite risk of death during surgery, but there was a certainty of death if he didn't go through the surgery. I was to go down to stay with my mother and him just hours after the surgery, so my brother could return to London, and my sister was to fly in on Sunday from California. As I was leaving to drive the 90 miles to Rochester from Mineapolis, my husband said he was sacrificing for me (he was taking care of the kids that weekend) so I should sacrifice for him by letting him run. I stood there in shock and said I'll not go then -- he relented and let me, but I was appalled at the lack of sensitivity he showed, promoting his own interests just a few hours after my father got out of surgery.

This last week was another example, only this time I have much more understanding that you simply cannot continue in a relationship in which "balance" means that husband and wife make choices to test just how far they can go to do what they please whether or not the spouse is happy about it. Last August, I was diagnosed with a rare type of cancer which doesn't metastize but simply grows. It developed right at the site of a lump he put in my forehead 10 years ago. I spent the last year dealing with it, and in February the doctor said there was slim to no chance of recurrence. I was supposed to return in August for a check up. Two months ago, I called to set up an earlier appointment because I thought there were some lumps developing. On Monday, I went in, and the doctor said he needs to do a biopsy to see if there was a recurrence. If there was, then there are probably more surgeries in my future.

Here I am, once again vulnerable because of potential medical problems, and he brings up running. No. I'm not putting up with independent behavior. If it is negative for me, and he chooses to do it, we're separating. Period.

Remember Mulan? She hasn't posted since May. She always seemed lke she was dealing with a similar situation to mine. She threatened separation, but then she didn't follow through. I hope she comes back on the board because I'm worried about what happened with her.

In the end, I think that I had, years ago, the choice between my personal dignity and my marriage, and I chose my marriage. Now I realize that, in choosing marriage over personal dignity, I lost both. Now I choose personal dignity.

I'll be fine. I've wrestled with what to do ever since we got married, but now I feel comfortable with the choice I have made.
Cherishing

Hi Cherishing:

I find your perspective on things very interesting. My friend Aphelion is also Catholic, and similarly does not consider DV an option for him. So, he and his W have stayed 2gether and found a way 2 be satisfied with their relationship.

I'm not religious (though I was, long ago), and yet I feel that I have a very similar atti2de about what marriage means, what commitment means. I've always believed that happiness lies in taking responsibility, and was delighted when I came across this excerpt of Frank Pittman's (and so I've ordered the book):

**edit** please confine advertising about competitive websites/services to the "Other Web Sites" forum here on Marriage Builders. Thank you. Revera

be well,
-ol' 2long

2long,

To clarify: divorce is an option for me, especially if the financial responsibility to raise our children is jeopardized by my husband's decisions. What I have ruled out as an option is other romantic relationships. I wish I had separated from him on our wedding night. It was the first of many, many times when I excused his behavior. I excused his behavior as an emotional reaction to the wedding. Over the months and years that followed, there were many excuses.

The concept of "free will" is out of vogue these days. I thought I believed in free will, but actually I believed that circumstances dictated choices. It was always something else (bad job, poor sleep, high blood pressure) or someone else (me, the other woman) that dictated my husband's choices which were destructive to me. He also believed this. Once, he told me, "I had no choice but to have an affair." Oh yes he did. He had lots of other choices, including separation and/or divorce. I hadn't realized how much both of us have been influenced by the prevailing wisdom that we aren't responsible for our choices. Just yesterday, I saw an article in the Wall Street Journal on how it appears that decisions are made before the conscious choice is made -- in other words, we don't have "free will".

We have free will. My husband freely made choices that were very negative for me. My recourse is not to coerce because by coercing I am thinking that I can force him to make choices which are positive for me. My choice to is remove myself from him. I could also choose other romantic relationships if we divorced, but I believe that that choice is unethical for me, given my religious beliefs.

Cherishing

It is no more healthy to allow a religious organization to make your choices for you, than an abusive spouse.

I just hate to see someone resign themselves to a miserable, romance-free existence because someone in a funny hat decided, all on their own, that divorce was wrong.

Marriage is a man-made institution, not a creation of God.

The Catholic Church calls it natural law. No one decided this for me. I simply came, over time, to recognize the wisdom of the Catholic Church in allowing divorce and separation but saying remarriage is wrong.

No one is deciding this for me because I could leave the Church.

Cherishing

Cherishing,

I know your husband has a long history of poor choices, including abuse of every sort. He seems unyielding in his self-centeredness. I can easily see how your beliefs, which do NOT allow for remarriage (I'm with you there), coupled with your determination to make it work, kept you in chains. But he is either unable or unwilling to see what is required of a husband, so it is impossible and you are alone in the marriage.

You've seemed so close to breaking free so many times... I've been rooting for you. This time, I hope you will make it. You're worth a decent life. Love your kids. Love your God. Love you.

Love and prayers for you.

Rightherewaiting

Dr. Harley said to me that I seem to be rewarding my husband for his poor choices. I think that was a very insightful comment. The worse he treated me, the harder I tried to please him.

I now value my own dignity, my own worth. It is a wonderful feeling after years of trying to appease an angry man. What some have written here is very true: you can only change yourself.

Mulan, I'm thinking of you. I'm thinking how much you have accepted -- and you lost yourself. I'm worried about you and hope that you will come back on the board and tell us how you are doing --

Cherishing

I hope you WILL separate from hubby. He doesn't deserve you.

And before you decide that you can never marry again, I would run it by your priest.

One of my dearest friends married his old highschool sweetheart. They had broken up in highschool and she became a nun. She was a nun for 18 years. He married someone else and had a son. After 16 years, they separated.

The ex nun and he met again at their 20th highschool reunion and fell in love. He petitioned for an annulment of his 16 year long marriage (complete with a son!) and got it. He and the ex-nun went through the bans of marriage, married with the Church's blessing and have been married for 20 years.

Please don't take this as a criticism of Catholicism. I was raised Catholic. But I do know that doctrine is changing, and many things are possible today that we wouldn't have dreamed of years ago.

Cherishing Believer has it right,
below is an extract from a lecture by a Bishop who was explaining the Church Law to us lay people. I understood the whole thing after listening & reading this ... ok after a few times

There are times when a M is just not right from the beginning and frankly I'm not sure any one of us could ever really know that except in extreme cases when we were so young and thought we were invincible.

Annulment is a thorny issue for many Catholics and widely misunderstood outside the Church. When it comes to how annulments are handled, it’s important to keep in mind that practices may vary slightly from one diocese to the next, but the overall rules of the Church are the same. The doctrine of marriage is that of the universal Church. The Church’s practices around marriage and annulment are aimed at protecting the sacrament of marriage, in order to help Catholics live a fully sacramental life.

The Catholic Church presumes that marriages are valid, binding spouses for life. When couples do separate and divorce, therefore, the Church examines in detail their marriage to determine if, right from the start, some essential element was missing in their relationship. If that fact has been established, it means the spouses did not have the kind of marital link that binds them together for life.

The Church then issues a declaration of nullity (an annulment) and both are free to marry again in the Catholic Church. There is no barrier to remarriage within the Church.

1 On what grounds does the Church declare nullity for some failed marriages?

In technical language, the most common reasons are insufficiency or inadequacy of judgement (also known as lack of due discretion, due to some factor such as young age, pressure to marry in haste, etc.), psychological incapacity, and absence of a proper intention to have children, be faithful, or remain together until death.

These grounds can manifest themselves in various ways. For example, a couple, discovering her pregnancy, decide to marry; only much later do they recognise the lack of wisdom in that decision. Or one spouse carries an addictive problem with alcohol or drugs into the marriage. Perhaps a person, unfaithful during courtship, continues the infidelity after marrying.

In cases like these, the Church judges may decide that something contrary to the nature of marriage or to a full, free human decision prevents this contract from being sound or binding.

I begin this formal annulment process at the parish level for about a dozen petitioners each year. My suggestion to them as they approach the multi-page, perhaps daunting questionnaire moves along these lines:

“As you reflect upon the marriage, ask yourself: Was there something missing right from the start, something radically wrong from day one? Before the wedding, were there warning signals, red flags which you may have dismissed simply as the cold-feet anxieties rather common for couples prior to a nuptial service? Did you suffer deep difficulties early in your marital life and worry about them, but, never having been married before, judged they were merely the expected burdensome part of marriage? Now, perhaps years later, you view them as symptomatic of a much more serious problem, a radical malfunctioning in your relationship.”

2 Why must a divorced Catholic complete a complicated Church annulment process before remarrying?

Jesus himself had strong words about marriage. The Catholic Church believes it has a responsibility to follow the words of Christ, both in teaching and in practice. Jesus gave a quite blunt answer to those who raised the issue of marriage and divorce. In the Gospel of Mark (10:11-12) he declared: “Whoever divorces his wife and marries another commits adultery against her; and the woman who divorces her husband and marries another commits adultery.”

In the Gospel of Luke (16:18), written after the Gospel of Mark, Jesus’ declaration is almost identical: “Everyone who divorces his wife and marries another commits adultery. The man who marries a woman divorced from her husband likewise commits adultery.”

During the exchange recorded by Mark, Christ referred to words from the Old Testament Book of Genesis: “At the beginning of creation God made them male and female: for this reason a man shall leave his father and mother and the two shall become as one. They are no longer two but one flesh. Therefore let no man separate what God has joined” (Mark 10:6-9). Most if not all Scripture scholars today maintain that these were Christ’s original words.

The complicated process of annulment then is a response to the strength of this teaching. The Church presumes that marriages are binding and lifelong. The annulment process helps to determine if something essential was missing from the couple’s relationship from the beginning that prevented the sacramental union that the couple promised to each other.



3 Who else besides the couple seeking a declaration of nullity will be questioned during the annulment process?

The ex-spouse or respondent will need to be contacted, but not necessarily by the spouse or petitioner seeking the annulment. The diocesan tribunal office will make that written contact with the ex-spouse, with the name and address provided by the petitioner.

The respondent’s cooperation is welcome, but not essential. Simple justice, however, requires that an ex-spouse at least be made aware that the petitioner is seeking an annulment and that the respondent may be part of the procedure. It is only fair that both persons have an opportunity to present their sides of the marriage.

In formal cases the petitioner needs to supply the names and addresses of several people who are familiar with the petitioner’s earlier marriage. They must be able and willing to complete a brief questionnaire about the petitioner’s earlier marriage.

Many years ago, a man approached me about an annulment because his wife had left him, moved to San Francisco and was living the life of a “flower child,” a 1960s phenomenon. As the process progressed, the tribunal sent her the standard letter of announcement with an invitation to participate. There was no response. The office followed up with a registered letter to her. The post office returned the letter with a notation, “Refused.” His case then proceeded to a successful conclusion, and the tribunal granted the desired annulment. The petitioner and the tribunal had done all they could to solicit the input of the ex-spouse.

4 Does an annulment make the children illegitimate?

No. The parents, now divorced, presumably once obtained a civil license and entered upon a legal marriage. Children from that union are, therefore, their legitimate offspring. Legitimate means “legal.” The civil divorce and the Church annulment do not alter this situation. Nor do they change the parents’ responsibility toward the children. In fact, during annulment procedures the Church reminds petitioners of their moral obligation to provide for the proper upbringing of their children.

Nevertheless, persons pondering the Catholic annulment process do often express this concern about the legitimacy of the children after that procedure. It’s a persistent rumor.

believer and aussiewife --

Three different priests have told me that I can get an annulment, and one of them had been on his diocese's marriage tribunal board which reviews annulment cases. The most compelling reason is that the verbal abuse started on our wedding night. This priest told me that physical abuse always -- always -- gets worse.

The verbal and emotional abuse are less, and the physical abuse is completely gone. I have to credit my husband with his determination to change his ways.

I haven't been reading up on Church law regarding annulments. Instead, I've been listening to philosophy tapes on Aristotle's ethics. Much of Catholic moral law is based on Aristotle. I last read Aristotle 10 years ago and, before that, in college.

Aristotle teaches that virtuous living is a choice. This runs so counter to today's philosophy that promotes the supreme importance of feelings -- if you have the feeling of love, then you are justified in tossing aside your wife for a lover.

My freshman year History & Politics professor, who went on to have an affair with and marry one of my freshman classmates, once raised his hands and said, "You have to choose." Actually, you don't. You can muddle through life without a plan. You can blame others or circumstances. You can say, "I had no choice but to..."

My husband once said to me, "I had no choice but to have an affair." Oh yes he did. But was I any better? I kept thinking I had no choice but to stay with him, no matter how badly he treated me.

Something changed last week. I'm not certain what it was, and maybe only time will tell, but I think what it might have been is that I finaly, finally, realized that separation is a moral choice for me, for a person who believes in the permanence of marriage except in cases of outright deception at the wedding, and that was not the case for us. He did not deceive me. He simply was on his best behavior until our wedding day, and then he could treat me however he wanted and I wouldn't leave him.

I am following a course of action which Harley would call Plan C. It's Plan B in the home. I am trying to be receptive to him but not push him. If he violates the POJA, we're separating. I'm not agreeing to independent behavior for him -- running or volleyball or golf or all the other outside activities which were his way to enjoy life without me. The affair partner was just one more way for him to enjoy life without me.

Last week, he brought up running -- again. I wasn't interested in his return to an obsession with running. A few days later, he brought up family weekend camping trips in state parks as a way for the whole family to exercise. I'm all for that. I'm all for enjoying the outdoors and exercising with the family.

Is it possible for us to have a wonderful marriage? I don't know, but I'm willing to do my part. Harley rarely discusses this, but I think that there is a different role for a woman as opposed to a man in a relationship. In his encyclical On the Dignity & Vocation of Women, John Paul II wrote "It is she who receives love, in order to love in return."

I chased after my husband for years. No more. It is he who must love me, and then I will love in return. There is something unseemly about a single woman chasing after a guy. What I didn't realize is that the same applies to married women. As with dating, a woman can dump the guy or continue to date him. With my husband, I have -- in effect -- dumped him by removing myself from him even as we share a home. I am receptive.

Will this work? He's not a puppet. What he does is his choice. I have simply eliminated the circumstances in which we have lived our marriage, with me trying to placate an angry man who justifies his inconsiderate choices because I should be happy if he is happy.

If he isn't thinking about my happiness as well, then what I can do is separate, and there are many degrees of separation. I hesitated to take this approach because I characterized his approach to marriage prior to and during the affair as "He left without leaving." What I am doing is stepping back and waiting. The purity rings which single Christian women wear say, "True love waits." I think that can apply to a married woman whose husband is focused away from his wife and family. She can step back and wait. This isn't passivity. It is patience. It is receptivity.

But the key to this is the willingness to separate if the husband violates the POJA. Over time, the husband will see that he must try to focus on enjoying being with his wife and children, or he will face life as a divorced man. The wife has eliminated the option he would have chosen -- to remain married while seeking happiness in outside activities.

Cherishing

I LOVE READING YOUR POSTS!!

I gain LOTS from your perspective.

Even though it may by your LAST THREAD..please don't have a LAST POST!...