Partial Commitment (Part 1)
I had an argument recently with a friend as we discussed the marriage of another friend. I’d like to say we “debated” or “commented on” this other friend’s marriage, but the reality is… we were arguing. In retrospect, it was only an argument because we both care about our friend’s marriage, which quite frankly is in pretty poor shape. But I’m not writing specifically about my friend’s troubled marriage (other than to ask you to pray for the couple). Rather I’m writing about one of the big root causes to their present situation: partial commitment.
Partial commitment is a killer. Keeping options open sounds wise on the surface, but in reality, it’s draining and leads to conflicted feelings. I know all too well, because I’m an options guy. I look at something and explore the different angles, possibilities and “what if’s”. It’s a great strength for problem-solving and a huge weakness in implementation. When dating, partial commitment keeps a person from jumping into a bad relationship, but by the time a couple is engaged, their individual commitment-level needs to either reach fully devoted or they should re-think the relationship.
In the above mentioned argument, my friend stated accurately: “a partial commitment is no commitment.” My friend was absolutely correct. If a person is truly committed to a cause, then there is no room for ambivalence: you’re either in or you’re out. A person who keeps their options open is not likely to follow through on their promise when the going gets tough. After all, why fight against all odds for something when you have other, equally attractive options that are easier to pursue?
In our fear of betrayal, we keep options open. The majority of adults in our culture have seen marriage after marriage die sudden and unexpected deaths. But real commitment is total commitment; it is affirmed by actions, even when confronted with uncertainty and discomfort. A committed marriage is a courageous marriage. It’s cemented in a decision to trust in a worthy cause, even at the expense of self and all other desires. Realizing the full danger and possibility of betrayal, the committed spouse makes a decision to always pursue reconciliation. And as the couple encounters rocky cycles in their relationship, they find a growing ability to trust each other more fully.
Now just to be clear: when I write “pursue reconciliation”, I’m NOT suggesting a couples need to stay in the same house. Sometimes it’s just not safe. And especially when children are involved, someone needs to be the responsible parent and provide a safe environment for the kids. However, separation should always be done with the goal of reconciliation and a plan for how the marriage can get back on track. Otherwise, it becomes an opportunity to test out the divorce option… a partial commitment to the marriage. And in the absence of all the pressures felt when living under the same roof, that divorce option will look very attractive.
Also for clarification, this message is NOT a condemnation of anyone who has gone through a divorce. Each situation is different and there are countless “What if…” possibilities that can never be pursued after the fact. The right question to ask is “What now?”.
(to be continued...)
copyright 2010 Mitchell Malloy (http://mitchellmalloy.blogspot.com)
Partial commitment is a killer. Keeping options open sounds wise on the surface, but in reality, it’s draining and leads to conflicted feelings. I know all too well, because I’m an options guy. I look at something and explore the different angles, possibilities and “what if’s”. It’s a great strength for problem-solving and a huge weakness in implementation. When dating, partial commitment keeps a person from jumping into a bad relationship, but by the time a couple is engaged, their individual commitment-level needs to either reach fully devoted or they should re-think the relationship.
In the above mentioned argument, my friend stated accurately: “a partial commitment is no commitment.” My friend was absolutely correct. If a person is truly committed to a cause, then there is no room for ambivalence: you’re either in or you’re out. A person who keeps their options open is not likely to follow through on their promise when the going gets tough. After all, why fight against all odds for something when you have other, equally attractive options that are easier to pursue?
In our fear of betrayal, we keep options open. The majority of adults in our culture have seen marriage after marriage die sudden and unexpected deaths. But real commitment is total commitment; it is affirmed by actions, even when confronted with uncertainty and discomfort. A committed marriage is a courageous marriage. It’s cemented in a decision to trust in a worthy cause, even at the expense of self and all other desires. Realizing the full danger and possibility of betrayal, the committed spouse makes a decision to always pursue reconciliation. And as the couple encounters rocky cycles in their relationship, they find a growing ability to trust each other more fully.
Now just to be clear: when I write “pursue reconciliation”, I’m NOT suggesting a couples need to stay in the same house. Sometimes it’s just not safe. And especially when children are involved, someone needs to be the responsible parent and provide a safe environment for the kids. However, separation should always be done with the goal of reconciliation and a plan for how the marriage can get back on track. Otherwise, it becomes an opportunity to test out the divorce option… a partial commitment to the marriage. And in the absence of all the pressures felt when living under the same roof, that divorce option will look very attractive.
Also for clarification, this message is NOT a condemnation of anyone who has gone through a divorce. Each situation is different and there are countless “What if…” possibilities that can never be pursued after the fact. The right question to ask is “What now?”.
(to be continued...)
copyright 2010 Mitchell Malloy (http://mitchellmalloy.blogspot.com)
