Putting
Humpty Together Again:
Reconciling the Post Affair Marriage
J. Lee Jagers
[This article originally appeared in the Journal
of Psychology & Christianity, 1989, Vol. 8, No. 4, 63-72]
Abstract
Seven issues of concern to the therapist working toward the reconciliation of a marriage torn by an affair are discussed. They include:
- options for the marriage
- ensuring closure of the affair
- trust
- amount of disclosure by the offender –
the term used here to refer to the unfaithful partner
- forgiveness
- individual issues
- renewing physical intimacy
God’s high view of marriage is set forth as motivation for the Christian therapist to favor reconciliation over other options for the marriage.
Introduction
The affair has been discovered. The shell of a marriage has fallen. That which had at least the illusion of wholeness has broken into a million pieces. The couple decides to “save the marriage” or to “make it work” for reasons
that are yet to be unveiled.
They come to a therapist that they trust has a high view of the sanctity of marriage & ask, “How can we put it back together again?”
It would be a very unusual therapist indeed who didn’t at one time wonder, “Can all the king’s horses
& all the king’s men put this marriage together again?”
By God’s grace, many marriages aren't merely patched up, but can be reconciled to a level of intimacy exceeding what either spouse had ever known before.
If God has made the family such an inviolable unit & if the quality of the marriage is so crucial to the health
of the family, then Christian therapists ought to have a unique passion for being a competent instrument of God to facilitate this healing process.
We need to be sensitive
to the key issues involved & to intervene in ways that optimize renewal of trust & vulnerability that will be lasting. Precious little is written on the practical aspects of doing therapy as compared to the statistics
of affairs, types of affairs, or dynamics of affairs.
While the motivation of the couple is a necessary condition for renewal, it isn't sufficient. “Wanting to” isn't always
enough to bring about self healing. The wisdom & skillfulness of the therapist’s interventions could be the added ingredient that enables the couple to
accomplish what they want to before the Lord.
This paper seeks to address the key issues in reconciliation & presents some ideas on how to deal with those issues.
No presumptions are made concerning
the ultimate completeness of these ideas, but hopefully they'll stimulate other therapists to think more completely, creatively & openly about their critical role.
It's toward this forum of shared experiences that this paper is written. Because most extramarital affairs are by the
husband’s unfaithfulness (Lawson, 1988), the pronoun “he” will be used, though “she”
is just as applicable.
Dealing with the options for the marriage
Each
partner eventually decides to follow 1 of 3 courses for the marriage:
At the early stages of therapy, it's important to clarify the attitude of each partner. The attitudes of the spouses toward therapy will influence their level of participation in the healing process.
Ables (1977) suggests that the 2 factors determining these attitudes are:
- the feeling of adequacy
vs. helplessness to improve their marital situation
- the degree of enthusiasm vs. pessimism that help can be achieved thru a third person” (p. 35).
The ideal situation is where each spouse wants to rebuild the marriage in line with God’s ideal. But what if one partner wants to work
& the other is more invested in looking good?
i.e., if the offender is inclined to simply tolerate the burdensome marriage to avoid hurting the spouse, he'll direct his energy differently from the working spouse. It isn't uncommon for a passive person to take this more short-term superficially compliant approach in order to avoid being decisive.
If I suspect this attitude, I talk to that person individually about the limitations of his approach. The presence of the spouse around this kind of compliant person inhibits much of the truthfulness of feelings that needs to come forth.
The offender hasn't yet let go of the idealizations underlying the affair & will most likely sabotage therapy. If the couple represents 2 differing attitudes toward the marriage, they need to make those differences clear before working further in therapy.
Another less than ideal situation that's very common is a marriage in which there's a severe discrepancy in power. Most deteriorated marriage relationships experience a tense power struggle that defies resolution.
The more negative attitude has the greater power. Even though it's not constructive power, it's nonetheless powerful. i.e., the more positive spouse who wants to rebuild the marriage is powerless in the face of the spouse wanting a divorce.
No amount of work one person does to bond the marriage will be effective as long as the other is determined to break the ties. Therefore, it's important to focus greater energy on the more negative spouse when the two positions differ.
If he's committed to divorce as an option, I work toward building a Godly, more attractive view of marriage, often separating
realities from fantasies & idealizations. To help facilitate this reorientation, I often recommend they read Petersen’s (1983) The Myth of the Greener Grass.
Conway’s (1978) Men in Mid-Life Crisis is also a helpful reference for men in that stage of life. During this period, the person’s developmental arrests will emerge
as he projects his deeply imbedded perceptions & associations.
Similarly, if he has decided to “grin-&-bear-it,” I try to highlight from his own material how incongruous
his superficial behaviors are in relations to his attitudes, which tenaciously cling to the idealizations of the affair.
When an objective therapist points out a client’s inconsistencies, the client usually experiences tension & may even feel phony. This discomfort can motivate his to give up his duplicity in favor of a more stable, single-minded attitude.
Hopefully, this nonjudgmental exposure to inconsistencies of his life will guide the negative person more toward the working orientation of his spouse.
Realistically, ambivalence is the more common position taken by a confused, angry & disillusioned victimized partner. Sally doesn't know if she wants to stay in the marriage. She isn't sure she loves Phil any more. She begins to wonder if she ever did, or if she ever could.
For this person, their Christian commitment may be the only “glue” to hold them in therapy. This is a time to praise a person’s faith for being willing to make a decision based on their faith alone, not on the weight of their circumstances.
It's also a time to discuss the purpose of marriage from a Christian view. One person offered the insight that God’s purpose for marriage isn't gratification, nor experience of love, nor sense of well-being; rather, it's for sanctification, or becoming more Christlike.
When the painful ordeals of rebuilding a marriage are seen in the light of maturing into more Christlikeness, reconciliation
may not seem so futile & James’ perspective on trials & growth can become more real.
I also have noticed that with even small gains in the genuine expression of caring, the ambivalent partner is often energized & motivated.
I've found that it's important to refrain from “preaching the truth” during these sessions. While the zealous therapist may derive a sense of gratification at exhorting the errant one,
moralizing isn't likely to be helpful for the development of the client’s personal convictions to do what's right.
I doubt that any Christian who has been involved in an affair is unaware of its wrongness. The offender is already in a mental attitude of opposition to what others (including God) say is the right way to be living. Overzealous exhortation at this point may even push the guilty party into deeper self-justification.
There's ample literature in Christian bookstores concerning God’s teaching about His desires & standards for marriage so that exhortation is usually not needed. Motivation by intimidation or shame yields only short-term
gains at best.
Although separation is often utilized as a stepping-stone to divorce, there are times when an objectively planned time
apart can be used to sort thru the issues more clearly. Particularly when a couple tends to escalate their conflicts into abusive combat, they may need a month or two apart while they work on control issues.
Separation would, in my opinion, always be designed to prepare for clarity of thought to maximize the chances of returning to the marriage. It should never be utilized as an opportunity for the
offender to maintain the relationship w/the lover.
Regardless which attitudes spouses embrace, some changes in orientation must be made if the marriage is to succeed. Tally (1985)
highlights two prerequisites to reconciliation. “First, you have to change roles” (p. 101).
i.e., if one spouse is relational & the other is task oriented, these roles must be exchanged. “Second, you have
to recognize the role of significance & security” (p. 103).
If reconciliation is to be effective, the woman must meet more of the man’s needs for significance & the man must meet more of the woman’s needs for security.
The issues that follow represent guidelines to dealing practically with these 2 prerequisite principles.
Dealing
with Ensuring Closure of the Affair
