SmallGroups.com

I actually had this exact scenario in one of my small groups! The husband constantly spoke for the wife. In addition, when the wife went to make a comment, she would look at him first as if she were making sure it would be "OK" to say whatever she was going to say. She never would have said anything because she truly thought that's the type of submission we're called to. I started breaking up into men and women for prayer time for a while. This allowed the wife to speak up and it also gave her confidence that what she had to say was valid and that we genuinely wanted to hear it. That gave her the confidence to speak up to her husband when he tried to speak over her - just in a playful way saying, "Geez! Can't you let me finish a sentence for myself?" Once he saw what he was doing from her perspective (not someone else's in the group) he began to change.

Since this looks like a very sensitive issue, I would suggest that during the group process, Darryl facilitates a role play with two other members of the group, playing the same scenario which goes on between Jim, Patti and the group members should objectively critiqe it. At this point no one knows it is Jim and Patti's situation. After everything is over, depending on how the situation was handled, and if Darryl finds there is there[eautic material in the discussion, he may privately have a meeting with Jim and Patti recapping everything. The onus is on Jim as Patti has never acknowledged any discomfort with Jim's interventions. Hopefully it will be an eyeopener for them.

To answer "Is it any of his business how the couple chooses to relate with one another?"; I think since it is happening in the context of small group, it is his business. Isn't that part of why we do small groups, to hold each other accountable when we see areas of weakness, etc. Maybe a good approach without criticizing Jim as a husband or Patti as a wife would be to come at it from the angle of not being a good example to the rest of the group - interrupting, letting someone share how they feel, etc. At least it may be a good place to start the conversation. PS - If Patti is just demonstrating her view of biblical submission, I don't think bad manners is part of that definition :)

If Darryl has developed a relationship of trust with this couple, I would suggest he speak to Jim directly while Patti is not around. Perhaps they could have lunch, etc. Patti might be so used to the situation that she doesn't think it is worth expressing her irritation. I would be most concerned about her asking for prayer and his negating those requests.

Wow, that is a tough one. My husband and I just started leading a group a little over two years ago. When we first began one couple in particular was pretty irritating because the husband was so sarcastic when talking about his wife, almost condescending. The couple had been married for quite some time...high school sweethearts. We had to pray about it. We were new to the game. In praying about it we realized that before we saw that happen again, we needed make a blanket statement to the entire group that everone had to speak for themselves and not to speak on behalf of the other or to make snide, embarassing comments about each other. The only way for the group to work effectively is for everyone to speak for themselves. We never had to make that announcement and it never happened again. However, if that doesn't work, you many need to speak to him privately. Don't point fingers, but explain that groups only work when everyone can speak freely for themselves.

Like the Ones You Love

Finding Joy in the Difficulty of Marriage (6 session course)

When Life Happens … Prepare to Fight!

Treat or Refer?