The contradictions and fallacies in a reverend minister’s points of view

I was forced to dissect the contents of a series of videos that seem to endorse polygamy and infidelity in husbands. However, my reaction will focus on one in which a reverend minister, Rev Dr. Mrs. Charlotte Oduro literally appeals to wives to take their husbands' acts of infidelity as a given and should therefore adapt themselves to it.

I came away quite dubious not only about her assertions, which I thought were riddled with contradictions but also about the misleading arguments she puts forward to justify her assertions.

In the piece that follows, I will attempt to address the contradictions and fallacies, although I lay no claim to being an expert in marital relationships.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QP25S-NAslk

Find above the link to the video by the said Reverend Minister.

In the video, the reverend minister starts by stating unequivocally that she is not ready to lose her husband to another woman because, in general, a man’s dalliances could well be attributed to certain factors that are beyond his control.

She provided the following as examples of those possible factors:

1. the shortcomings of the man’s wife,

2. a history of cheating that runs in the man’s family,

3. the man falling victim to seduction by a lustful woman who may have spiked his drink, making him blissfully unaware of the situation.

Then, in the next breath, the reverend appears to remind cheating husbands of the curses that await them. She is convinced that cheating husbands will, with time, get their comeuppance, their just deserts (punishments or "paybacks", as she states herself).

Does she not contradict her convictions? Obviously, it begs the question of why husbands who cheat should face curses for behaviour that is essentially not of their doing.

If cheating on your spouse is wrong, as she admits, it is wrong! However, the pastor exhorts wives to deal with the pain which that wrong causes “simply” by sticking with a cheating husband. Well, if some women can do that, nothing stops them; that is their personal choice.

In contrast, other women may have no use for men who cheat, and would therefore take a different course of action: they would abandon an adulterous husband for a different man in the hope that the latter would love and appreciate them.

Contrary to what the reverend minister would have us believe, it is by no means unrealistic to think that a woman who abandons a bad marriage will, as a matter of course, harbour hopes of finding a better husband.

A woman who cannot endure her husband's infidelity should therefore pluck up the courage to make the move, instead of sticking with him, at a huge personal sacrifice.

Mind you, the step of making the move should not in any way be construed as constituting an orchestrated act of revenge, as the pastor makes out in her delivery. If anything, opting for a formal dissolution of the marriage can only be a reflection of a high degree of emotional intelligence.

In other words, some women would reason themselves into packing bags and baggage and quitting a marriage that is emotionally draining and eventually health wrecking, instead of keeping up a pretense of tolerance and sacrifice.

They would say no to slavish adherence to any false notion of traditional or cultural values. Never mind if these so-called values are backed, upheld and enforced by parents who are supposedly firmly convinced about the positive results of the “go-back-to-your-husband” commandment, as it were.

What is more, one wonders what valuable lessons a disloyal man who comes into a woman’s life as a husband is likely to offer a wife who is steadfast in her commitment to her marriage.

Ah, it may come as a surprise to the reverend minister that there is a fair number of African women, if not women all over the world, who have taken the bold step of finding success in a new relationship, and have never looked back.

In her response to the question as to what solution exists for a breach of trust in a marriage, the reverend minister does not hesitate to point out that it lies in prayers. Prayers may work. Fair enough, but “it is not easy”, she admits.

But then again, she almost immediately launches into a discourse in which she warns that a woman could be praying at home, "knees buried in the ground", but if the fancy takes her husband to go back to the club where he first met her, he will stop at nothing to do so.

She even stated that nothing would stop that husband from meting out a beating to his wife! If this is not at odds with her exhorting women to resort to prayers as the solution to the problem, then what is?

Many a listener to the pastor cannot help but ponder what earthly use it is to have recourse to praying to a listening God if it could take ages for that recourse to yield results.

Prayers might have worked for the pastor in her own experience when she was faced with her initial incompatibility problem, but prayers may not be the panacea for every woman faced with marital issues, especially those brought about by infidelity, the simple reason being that every individual situation is different, needless to say. This is by no means an attempt to downplay the power of prayers, mind you!

The reverend minister goes on to state that God allows us Christians to go through certain difficult situations for a good reason, and she quotes the Bible to buttress that point. For the sake of argument though, one might wonder: in the event that your husband is unfaithful, why go down on your knees to pray if the sacrifice of staying put will result in something that is divinely good?

That is another instance of contradiction. Why stop your husband from going to the club to pick up a lady, without regard to the possibility of his contracting an STD and coming home to infect you with it? If we go by the pastor's assertion, it is part of God’s plans for Christians to go through hardship after all.

Consequently, one would miss the intended “good” to be derived from that hardship if one were to stand in God’s way.

Now, her fallacious arguments. If, as the pastor would have us believe, sexual pleasure is NOT a man’s main motivation for stepping out on his wife by sleeping with a prostitute then I am at a loss to know what is. Her position is somewhat inconsistent with reality.

I say somewhat because one might argue that, at best, sex may help to mitigate the effects of any recurring marital problems that a man may be battling with.

In this case, that mitigation would be an end for which sex would be a means. Even so, the idea of sexual pleasure cannot be missing from the equation as the primary reason for a man's extra-marital engagement with a prostitute.

And l dare to ask: how many men go for a one-night stand with a prostitute only to end up marrying her?

Another area of apparent flaw is where the reverend minister affirms that a man who has cheated on his wife expects to find an angry wife when he gets back home. However, she advises wives on how to exploit this expectation profitably because it has the potential of mellowing the cheating husband.

The pastor, therefore, recommends that women should rather endure the pain in their heart, channel that latent anger into calmness, and treat their husbands with understanding and affection.

This treatment would involve providing them with a meal followed by sexual pleasure. This, for the reverend minister, would mean appeasing the man. Now, this is absurd. It leaves one baffled as to who the aggrieved party is in the circumstances!

If you know your husband has cheated on you and you claim he will expect you to be angry when he gets home then the cheating husband would see through any display of calmness and understanding from you towards him. Moreover, even if he has any energy left in him to engage in a sexual act with you after the night out, he would know you are putting on an act.

Additionally, the reverend minister claims that the post-cheating love-making act renders the man malleable, like a child who is ready to listen to reason!

Indeed, this suggests that women may look to a post-cheating love-making act as a golden opportunity to enhance communication and promote reconciliation. Again, this argument is flawed considering her affirmation that sex cripples men. If a crippling act is anything but positive, (if it negative, that is) the question is: what meaningful reconciliatory communication can be achieved with a man whose state of mind has been “crippled” by sex?

Without meaning to exaggerate, one would liken it to endeavouring to reason effectively with a man rendered tipsy by a glass of wine too many. And that is next door to impossible, in my book!
Furthermore, her recommendation that women should come to grips with their situation seems to suggest that it is the women themselves who may, inadvertently, bring about the atmosphere at home that gives their husbands considerable leeway to cheat.

Then there is the question of reverence. The minister forcefully reminds women about reverence to a husband being something that is divinely ordained. This may be granted within the religious framework of reference, yet the question is: how many Christian women would be so averse to the time-honoured spirit of feminism as to be ready to enter into marriage with the mind that they are duty-bound to revere their husbands because it is set down by a divine decree in Ephesians Chapter 5 verse 33?

How many women are prepared to venerate their husbands as Kings or Gods? How many are prepared to do their husband’s bidding out of fear because the latter is the head of the family, even if that means lying prostrate before their husbands for them to make a doormat of them, as the pastor insinuates?

All this submission, she believes, is supposed to be in exchange for a husband’s God-ordained love. Is this not at variance with her assertion that God meant for wives to be their husbands’ helpers or supporting mates?

The next argument that seems flawed is her stance on the role of education in marriage. She seems to place a chunk of the causes of marital problems on the doorstep of educated married women!

This assertion flies in the face of any considerations to humanity and equity. In other words, it constitutes an affront to the fight for equal opportunities for all in the framework of education irrespective of gender, tribe, social background, etc.

Does being educated jeopardize the chances of a smooth marital relationship? Should men steer clear of educated women if they aspire to enjoy a stress-free married life?

The pastor may be forgiven for dismissing the outward gym-enhanced physical attraction as irrelevant, especially as it pales into insignificance beside the deeper, inner values or qualities that are the bedrock of a lasting marriage: good character, honesty, love, tolerance, to mention but a few. After all, beauty, they say, is only skin-deep.

However, the reverend minister should not underestimate the role of education and good judgment in marriage. Educating girls is more important than she might realize: it equips them with financial independence and freedom, and makes them healthier.

Furthermore, the importance of education cannot be overemphasized if social vices such as sexism, domestic violence, etc. are to be effectively eradicated.

Last but not least, many believe that LOVE, like respect, is something that is inspired, sought, found, earned…; it is never something that you can solicit.

Apparently, this idea is lost on the reverend minister. If a woman tells a man to love her because God has ordained it, she does not automatically become the object of his love: Love, in general, takes some working at; it is not bestowed by fate or faith, although some may think that it happens because of some uncanny quirk of circumstances.

All said and done, one might ask: how many women are ready to go to the stake for the laissez-faire attitude, as it were, which the pastor seems to be promoting in favour of men? The problem is that her exhortations give a false impression that married men are still footloose and fancy-free, and can do whatever suits them with utter disregard for the feelings of their wives.

Divorce, if it is a knee-jerk reaction, may not be a solution to marital issues. Neither is the defense of infidelity the way forward, whether it be in the name of some unalterable cultural or traditional values, irresistible impulses supposedly justified by biological factors, or a divinely-inspired decree, all of which favour men, obviously.

As a friend said in jest, the reverend minister seems to have received a bribe from some men to hold brief for them. And in all sincerity, no woman bought me off for me to put this piece together. It's all a question of social justice.