dann,It's lovely to hear how the Lord met you and how willing your wife was also to believe. I'm going to trust to your strength here, in what I say next.I take it from what you've said, that you'd have thought it very unreasonable for her to leave, if God had not intervened so soon. You believe a man has a right, because he's a man, to treat a woman like you treated your wife, because you could - and if it had gotten too much for her, well, that would have been nothing to do with you - it would have been her fault for not being able to stand another 25 years of mistreatment. I know you said you would have denied being abusive and I truly respect your honesty here in sharing that. Truly. But have you no compassion for a woman who has lived as your wife did, for 5 times longer than your wife did, and the man has no intention of giving up his mysogyny or turning to Christ? Are you suggesting her salvation depends on her staying with this man?With one breath you accept a Christian woman is free because she is Christ's. You also accept that no-one (her husband) has to turn to the Lord if he doesn't want to, but with the same breath, remove the Christian's freedom in Christ. This ceases to become a secular choice, if the Lord leads this lady out of the bondage her marriage vows now represent. I don't mean she should go find another man. All I'm saying is, there is not good reason in the Bible, for her to stay.The instructions about submission all presuppose that both parties are loving Christians and that is a whole lot different. The vows which people make to each other before God, are not in the Bible, actually, which is why there is a great deal of room for manoeuvre if one partner doesn't keep them. In this case, the husband is not fulfilling his role as lover, layer-down of his life. It's worse than that. He is rejecting her. It is to this that the woman is responding.1 Corinthians 7 (Young's literal translation)10 and to the married I announce--not I, but the Lord--let not a wife separate from a husband: 11 but and if she may separate, let her remain unmarried, or to the husband let her be reconciled, and let not a husband send away a wife. The above appears to pertain when both are Christians.12 And to the rest I speak--not the Lord--if any brother hath a wife unbelieving, and she is pleased to dwell with him, let him not send her away; 13 and a woman who hath a husband unbelieving, and he is pleased to dwell with her, let her not send him away; 14 for the unbelieving husband hath been sanctified in the wife, and the unbelieving wife hath been sanctified in the husband; otherwise your children are unclean, but now they are holy. 15 And, if the unbelieving doth separate himself--let him separate himself: the brother or the sister is not under servitude in such [cases], and in peace hath God called us;There is another point in this particular situation, to look at. The lady is now ill. Her mental health has suffered. Her husband's responsibility is to care for her. If he changes (without becoming a Christian) out of respect for his vows, maybe she could stay. But, by this stage in their relationship, it has ceased to be about a marriage and has become a discussion about survival. If the man doesn't 'care' for his ill wife, he is again failing to keep his vows. I understand, dann, everything that you're saying, but in the end, it appears (to me) that it is the husband who has already 'left' this marriage long ago, and the lady is in need of being released from the formality of it. I can't believe the Lord or her Father in heaven, would wish it otherwise. Marriage is supposed to be a picture of Christ and the Church. This has gone so far the other way, that the justifications for carrying on the facade, are largely theoretical.But experience shows that a person who has stayed so long in a relationship, who is finally taking a more realistic look at it, is unlikely to leave quickly, if at all. Anyway, it's her decision.