Monday, August 6, 2012

3 TYPES OF RELATIONSHIPS

Each relationship is unique becaue of the various combinations of traits and characteristics of and circumstances related to the people involved. Although every relationship is different, I beleive all relationship may be categorized in these three major types. The types tend to indicate the primary reason for the relationship in the first place or at times the evloution of a relationship. They are: 1) Social, 2) Intimate, 3) Therapeutic

The social relationship's function is for friendship, companionship, socializatoin or can be forged because of a common task or purpose. Communication here may be superficial, casual and requires little emotional investment for the most part.

An Intimate relationship on the other hand is much more complex. It involves two people who are emotionally committed to each other. The individuals are interested in havinig their needs met and also meeting the needs of the other party. This kind of relationship may include the physical side of intimacy as well as a sharing of mutual goals, vision and lifestyle.

Then we have the Therapeutic relationship type. It focuses on the needs, experiences, feelings and ideas of the other party. Therapeutic relationships are usually one way, directed to support, enhance, correct, nurture or develop the other party into a better person and can be even seen in the context of mentoring or coaching.

MY OBSERVATION
Which do you want to focus on in your personal relationship and marriage? A marriage cannot be viewed as therapeutic in its entire context but there may be aspects of personal development that each individual experiences. When one person begins to correct, and provide "therapy" to another it no longer becomes a marriage but another kind of relationship. It cannot be just a social interacton either but must also have its season of intimacy.

As individuals, we all have our own boundaries, likes, dislikes and we must communicate those with those with whom we are in relationship. It is incumbent on us to always be open and sharing, listening and at least attempting to understand the context and heart of what is being communicated with us.

What challenges us, and our relatioinships is the need to control. Our empirical context of relathionships may be flawed, or it may be on target for our life as an individual. But, how does that play into a new relationship, do we carry the template of our former relationships, our family life, our personal biases (good or bad) to dictate the ongoing parameters of where we are headed in marriage or close friendships?

We read self help books, study well meaning authors, view and listen to men's experiences but does it all relate to the indivually unique bond of relationiship for us? I want to encourage each one of you to begin a new paradigm of thought for where you are headed - is this how Mom did it? is this how the book told me to do it? is this what the TV Counselor said? or we may ask ourselves, is this my own preconception of what this relationship should be.

Let's awake to the reality that the framework of your relationship depends on parameters that you define, the constrants and liberties that you decide. A clear communication of that template and its deployment will yield a great and ongoing interaction or bring misunderstandings and misinterpretations. Additionally, unexpressed expectations not included in the original framework can cause the whole house to crumble when they are introduced and our partner is blindsided by their introduction. The relationship tapestry of our life is made up of a variety of experiences, desires, thoughts, and other intangibles - where do you want to go in your life with this relationship? YOU DECIDE!

I share all of this in the context of a biblically based relationship, and many have their own interpretation of that statement. I mean one that focuses on the Lord, has Him as the head and strives to be obedient and supportive to the Lord's purpose for the relationship.

Blessings my friends, your thoughts are always appreciated.

No comments: