Last week we were in Searcy, Arkansas where we participated in the annual lectureship at Harding University. The Institute of Church and Family, a program of the University, invited us to offer three classes on "Mending a Broken Marriage." Our classes were well attended and we received a great deal of encouragement from those who came. Over the past several years we've shared this program with several churches and in two different university settings (Harding and Pepperdine). We are very grateful the Lord has given us this opportunity for ministry. We appreciate an old friend and former classmate, Dr. Howard Norton, for extending the invitation.

In today's newsletter, we address an issue that most people rarely think about - humorous put-downs. They create more havoc in marriage relationships than we realize. We ask you to think about what we have to say and evaluate your own marriage in the light of these principles. Admittedly, we have to work on it ourselves.

Don't miss Mikal's article, especially if you are grandparents. Her insights come from years as a therapist, wife, mother, grandmother, caretaker, and Christian. Much of her practice is working with children. Her article today draws heavily from her years of experience. Her thoughts are somewhat a follow-up to last weeks article.

Norman and Ann

For many years we've read the comics section of the daily newspaper. It's amazing how a cartoonist can give the reader a slice of life in four panels. Recently, we found ourselves frowning instead of smiling at one of our favorite strips. A wife was encouraging her husband to do something more productive than watching reruns of high-speed police chases. She suggested carving decoys as a hobby. He couldn't see the point in sitting in one spot for endless hours trying to shape a piece of wood. Here's the one liner put down from the wife, "You've already perfected the sitting part."

(This article was written yesterday. Today in the same "comic"(?) strip the husband is again the recipient of another put-down. Apparently the writer thought another was needed to get the point across, whatever the point is.)

Clever line huh? Well yes, it is. And we'll admit that it did seem funny when we first read it, but the more we thought about it, her one liner was really an attack on her husband, which she attempted to soften under the guise of good natured humor. You're probably wondering, "What's wrong with you two? Did you have sour pickles for breakfast?" We love a good laugh as well as anyone. That's probably the reason we've been reading the comics all our lives. We've followed the funnies all the way from "Lil Abner" to "Zits."

But think about it. Most punch lines are funny because it makes someone else look dumb, inept or lacking in understanding. Humor is often used as a weapon and a cowardly weapon at that. You can throw your barb at the other person with impunity. If someone takes offense, you excuse yourself by saying, "I was just teasing. Can't you take a joke?" Granted we sometimes trade good-natured barbs with friends, but they are usually friends with whom we have built a mutual trust and it's sort of a good-natured contest. We also make sure that we regularly affirm our high regard for our friends.

A lot of husband/wife humor comes out in the form of one-line put-downs. We congratulate ourselves on being able to put our spouses in their place. One person attempts to better his or her position by making the other person the brunt of a negative joke. That's really not funny. Rarely does anyone ever criticize this practice. Sitcoms thrive on it. It's an accepted way of life.

What's wrong with it?

• In the first place, it violates the Golden Rule. The next time you throw one of those clever one-liners in the direction of your spouse, ask yourself, "How would I like this if I were on the receiving end of the same remark?" If you wouldn't like it, you can be sure you're not living up to the Golden Rule.

• Secondly, it isn't kind. Scripture counsels, "Be kind and compassionate to one another, forgiving each other, just as in Christ God forgave you." (Ephesians 4:32). Someone has said that our words ought to pass three tests: (1) Is it kind? (2) Is it true? (3) Is it necessary? Clever putdowns fail all of these tests.

• Thirdly, it isn't wholesome. In Ephesians 4:29, Paul wrote, "Do not let any unwholesome talk come out of your mouths, but only what is helpful for building others up according to their needs, that it may benefit those who listen." How can put downs build others up? We love the cliché, "Sticks and stones may break by bones, but words can never hurt me." But we also know it isn't true. Many of us remember negative remarks directed our way many years after they were spoken. If we teach a class or present a seminar, a hundred people can tell us how wonderful it is, but one negative remark makes a much stronger impression, especially if we thought it was unjustified.

Nobody's going to banish one liner put-downs from the comics. Nasty insult swapping is not likely to disappear from television sitcoms very soon. But neither does anyone force husbands and wives to adopt these models of communication. Your marriage will be happier without them.

I'm "Germodder." I was given that term by my oldest grandson who is now seven. He was trying to say, "Grandmother." And "Germodder" is how it came out. That grandson is named Justin and Austin is his little brother who just turned six.

Last weekend I had charge of Austin. His older brother and mom were going on a Mom and Me Cub Scout camping trip. It was just Austin and Germodder. But we had a little incident on Sunday morning that I quickly decided would be the context of my next article. I have to say I think I handled it well. But please know that I say this only after having done so many things wrong with my own children. I only wish I had known these things thirty years ago.

Perhaps you can use them. I had my mother ready to get in the car to go to Sunday morning services. Austin was also dressed. I announced, "Austin, go to the car so we can go to church." He informed me, "I don't want to go to church." (His parents get him to church on a very regular basis.) My response was, "Well, I know. Sometimes I don't want to go, but we are going." I told him to go out to the car and I put Mother in the car. After she was loaded I opened the back door for Austin so he could get in. I said, "Austin, get in the car." His body language, which is most readable, was telling me he was going to present me with something similar to Custer's last stand. He crossed his little six-year-old arms and leaned against the car and said, "I'm not going."

I stooped down, and most calmly and calculatedly, firmly swatted his bare little leg one time. Then, I again said, calmly yet firmly, "Austin, get in the car." Austin immediately got in the car. Yes, I can hear you right now, "But my child would still not have gotten in the car." I know. I have been there with Austin before. He knew Germodder was entering an interaction that was for the long haul. He has not always changed his mind as quickly, but from past history he knew there was no future in his opposition. I would have continued the same response to him until he did decide to get in the car, one little swat at a time.

I went around to the driver's seat and positioned myself to drive to church. We were on our way. Austin soon announced, "I don't like you, Germodder. I am really angry with you." I said, "Well, Austin, I understand that you are angry and that is okay. And I love you very much." He had a couple of other things to say, like he was not going to come see me any more and he really did not love me.

His behavior still had to be managed during church and he was not pleased about that, but by lunch he was doing his usual play and teasing of me.

So what are the lessons to be learned from this interaction?

1. Austin had handed me a wonderful teaching opportunity and it was my responsibility to be up to the task.

2. I did not have to any way announce the status of the relationship. Not in the way I spoke to him nor by the words I said did I have to remind him I was the adult in control and he was the child. None of that, "You will listen to me!" or "You will do as I say!" My responsibility was to ACT in my status as the care-taking adult. He received the message a whole lot clearer this way.

3. This was not a place for anger. Anger is always a secondary emotion that comes after fear or pain or loss. What did I have to fear from this six-year-old? How could he threaten me? Did I feel diminished because he was not following my instructions? No! It was just an opportunity to teach.

4. This approach does not feed a power struggle. A parent's anger feeds a power struggle. The parent gives the child a frightening amount of power when anger is the response. In fact, anger is the emotional response desired by the child when his goal is power. (See AAF Newsletter, March 25, 1998 - "Parenting With Fear and Trembling")

5. In such a situation the care-taking/teaching adult must be confident enough to endure and accept the child's unhappiness and displeasure. Parents who are unsure of themselves find this very difficult to do.

We had a great rest of the day. Oh, and I did tell you he was six didn't I? And when I ask him how old he is, he replies, "1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6." I absolutely adore hearing it.

The Bible has withstood vicious attacks from its enemies more than any other book. Some have tried to burn it, ban it and bury the text. (I was running out of B words). From the days of the Roman emperors to present day liberal media, the Bible has been under the gun.

You can read the rest of Jerry's article