Saturday, September 17, 2011

True Church Stories #38

This true story in the "True Church Stories" series comes from the Experience Conference this past weekend.  In addition to being privileged to share in the opening general session Friday morning I also was asked to teach a workshop on both Friday and Saturday afternoon entitled, "Hot and Holy Matrimony." Both times this workshop was packed, and this afternoon we even had people sitting on the floor so many had interest in this topic.  I'm just setting the tone for you here that a lot of people evidently have interest in "Hot and Holy Matrimony"!!  ::smiles::

To further set the stage, I was rolling full steam ahead in teaching, and due to the volume of material I had to present, we had no time for a question/answer session.  If someone said something during this particular session, it would be classified as an interruption.  Some who were actually in the session later referred to the interruption as "heckling" but I'll let you decide.

I was in the midst of teaching about the importance of developing a deep friendship in marriage - characterized by mutual respect.  I spoke of both husband and wife accepting and even celebrating one another's differences. I went on to give illustration of how my husband and I have learned this in our marriage, through many ups and downs over the last 25 years.  I said, "Larry and I have discovered our marriage doesn't work without mutual respect as an essential ingredient.  All of a sudden a man sitting on the back row, someone I'd describe as a "big 'ol country boy" piped up and said, "Yeah, but who wears the pants in your marriage?"  

I simply answered, "My husband actually prefers it when neither of us wears any pants."

He never said another word the rest of the time.

And yes, everyone else in the room laughed hysterically.

Judging by how many district officers who shall not be named came to me afterward to tell me word had gotten to them of my comment and found it hysterical...I don't think my credentials are in jeopardy.

6 comments:

Melissa said...

I would definitely consider what the man said as heckling and judging by the comment would say he isn't sure about woman being in a leaders role...but that's just my opinion. I LOVE, LOVE, LOVE your comment back to him! Great comeback! :)

Deanna Shrodes said...

Thanks Melissa. When people drill down on that topic, I believe most of the time (I won't say always because I can't prove it with 100% accuracy) they have an ax to grind and I refuse to entertain it or harmonize with it. One thing is for sure I won't allow a session I'm teaching to get derailed over it. I'm glad the Lord (and yes I believe it was the Lord) helped me to be quick on my feet to answer him in such a way that it was immediately diffused and I could move on to what the Lord gave me to share.

I believe the overwhelming majority of the time when you have someone who is quick to jump on clarification of "who's in charge?" they obviously have issues in that department. Clarification will never solve those issues. Only integrity solves it, not clarification. For when one lives a life of integrity the clarification of "who wears the pants" in the spirit this man was asking it in, is a question that never needs to be asked.

Kathy Whittenton said...

Wish I had been there! Bet some of those old AG guys wigged out! Or should that be hair peace out. Heard teaching you can always identify the anti-christ structure because it hates women. The explanation was given that a woman gave birth to the one who took the anti-christ out. A Christian structure would treat women as Christ treated the church. Christ died for his bride. The teacher (male) went on to ask when President Reagan was shot who covered is body with theirs. The secret service men were willing to die to protect their charge. So, then he asked, who is the more important figure - the one who is protected or the protector. Why the President of course. So, if the husband is to give his life for the wife, who is the most important figure?
Thank God for Joyce Meyers.

Deanna Shrodes said...

Actually, none of the old AG guys wigged out - all of them both old and young seemed to love the session as well as my comment. I got nothing but positive feedback from all of the men, even the ones who didn't attend the session but heard about it through the grapevine which traveled VERY fast! It was just this one man who seemed to have issue. I think we've come a long way and men who are thinking reasonably know that it is only right to give women equal respect.

Anonymous said...

Let me be the guy I'm the room that says the wearing pants thing is such an arrogant caveman way of looking at things. I must admit that I myself used to think that way. And couldn't tell you how much more wisdom God ha given me by acknowledging my wife as an equal partner. It's amazing how much of a friend you get in a woman when you respect her as Gods daughter. It was once said to me by an evangelist that " God did not make Eve from the foot so that she be stepped on by a man, and not from the head so that she be better than a man. But from the run where she equal by a mans side. Thanks for the chuckle!

Deanna Shrodes said...

What kind and accurate insight. Thank you for sharing.