My wife and I got married late last year. At the time I knew her mom regularly attended church but her father did not. Always has an excuse but most often not in town due to either work or personal travel. But it seemed as if he believed in Christ. I received news this past week that he wants to separate and possibly divorce. My question is this. Do I confront my father in law on his mistakes? And if so, how do I do it without condemning? There is no place for divorce here. Divorce is not God's design. And for more context the father in laws reason was "he hasn't been happy". Looking for some sound biblical advice.
In-Law Divorce
6,471 Views |
58 Replies |
Last: 1 yr ago by dermdoc
What does your wife think? She is their daughter.
No material on this site is intended to be a substitute for professional medical advice, diagnosis or treatment. See full Medical Disclaimer.
How about mind your own business?
He doesn't share your religious views. It's his life and a personal matter between him and his wife. It's none of your business
He doesn't share your religious views. It's his life and a personal matter between him and his wife. It's none of your business
#1 Start/keep praying for them both.
#2 Discuss with wife about how you will address it as a family
#3 Be prepared to help support your MIL (in general, not necessarily financially)
#4 Talk to a pastor about the situation? They're there to help guide in these situations.
#2 Discuss with wife about how you will address it as a family
#3 Be prepared to help support your MIL (in general, not necessarily financially)
#4 Talk to a pastor about the situation? They're there to help guide in these situations.
It is his business - he married into the family, and the FIL is his future children's grandfather. Grandpa's legacy will impact them, and they'll ask why Grandpa didn't stay with Grandma and then wonder if marriage is for life or not. This is exactly why we have family - to set us straight when we err. The "how" is another matter entirely, but I 100% support an intervention here.
File5 said:
It is his business - he married into the family, and the FIL is his future children's grandfather. Grandpa's legacy will impact them, and they'll ask why Grandpa didn't stay with Grandma and then wonder if marriage is for life or not. This is exactly why we have family - to set us straight when we err. The "how" is another matter entirely, but I 100% support an intervention here.
I don't have a problem with him talking to his father-in-law, counseling him, trying to see if there is a way to resolve this without divorce. Of course, divorce affects more than just a couple, and I should've made that clear in my reply, and I did not.
However, in the end, it's father-in-law's choice and there's nothing you can do about it if he decides to go through with it. Well, other than be vindictive and withhold grandkids, etc
You can't just go up to him and say, hey, you can't get a divorce, and expect him to obey. In the end, it's the father-in-law's call
Don't disagree with any of this! Just needed some more nuance.
File5 said:
Don't disagree with any of this! Just needed some more nuance.
When I say he needs to mind his own business, I do believe that he should not continue to badger him and beat him over the head with religion after the father-in-law has made his choice.
Talk to him, see if anything can be resolved, and then move on after the choice is made.
I understand Christianity's view on divorce, but sometimes it happens, and I am not on board with things like laws prohibiting divorce, and things like that
I tend to think we Christians stick our noses a little too much into the personal lives of others in matters such as these
Divorce sucks but it's a fact of life. It's hard enough on the people going through it as it is, they need love, understanding, and prayer. They do not need aggressive confrontation.
That is just my opinion.
I think many share your opinion.
My opinion is that lack of intervention and cultural pressure to prevent divorce is a large driver of our societal ills today. Everyone should be treated with love, but that can be done without enabling poor behavior, which is rightly condemned (hate the sin, not the sinner). Maybe a little pushback from his family is exactly what this fellow needs, who knows. I thought the OP was thoughtful and well-reasoned.
Obviously you can't force someone to stay married, although a national ban on no-fault divorce might not be a bad thing... "I'm just not happy" is not a good reason. He should man up.
My opinion is that lack of intervention and cultural pressure to prevent divorce is a large driver of our societal ills today. Everyone should be treated with love, but that can be done without enabling poor behavior, which is rightly condemned (hate the sin, not the sinner). Maybe a little pushback from his family is exactly what this fellow needs, who knows. I thought the OP was thoughtful and well-reasoned.
Obviously you can't force someone to stay married, although a national ban on no-fault divorce might not be a bad thing... "I'm just not happy" is not a good reason. He should man up.
Not meaning to derail but I have never seen a husband leave unless he is already having an affair.
No material on this site is intended to be a substitute for professional medical advice, diagnosis or treatment. See full Medical Disclaimer.
dermdoc said:
Not meaning to derail but I have never seen a husband leave unless he is already having an affair.
I've seen husbands leave because the wife is having an affair.
Happens all the time.
Fair enough. Just always seems like is some hanky pinky involved.Captain Pablo said:dermdoc said:
Not meaning to derail but I have never seen a husband leave unless he is already having an affair.
I've seen husbands leave because the wife is having an affair.
Happens all the time.
No material on this site is intended to be a substitute for professional medical advice, diagnosis or treatment. See full Medical Disclaimer.
He may have checked out a while ago. Read somewhere that after the kids leave, if the husband and wife don't have more than the kids to live/fight for- they are in trouble. Wife and I always do breakfast Saturday mornings, sometimes Sunday. Our kids already know mom and dad are getting menudo and bringing pan dulce, barbacoa, and avocados.
There was a good movie starring Burt Lancaster, "The Jeweler's Shop" I would recommend to young couples.
Praying for your Mother-in-Law, looks like she took the vows seriously.
There was a good movie starring Burt Lancaster, "The Jeweler's Shop" I would recommend to young couples.
Praying for your Mother-in-Law, looks like she took the vows seriously.
Ya this is most likely the case, especially if he's gone from home often for work/personal reasons. He's not "happy" because he wants to sleep with someone else. He's also not religious so at the end of the day he has no real justification to maintain a relationship. He might as well make himself "happy" with whatever pleasure he can find before he's dead and it all fades to black.dermdoc said:
Not meaning to derail but I have never seen a husband leave unless he is already having an affair.
I feel for the mom because I have close friends that went though similar situations. Ex wife was unhappy one day, said she wanted a divorce, found out a few weeks later she was having an affair by snooping around a bit. Better to find out the real reason instead of the poor souls who just get left with no closure. That can be a brutal mental struggle. Another friend married to a former texas cheerleader, made lots of money, seemingly happy, then bam she's gone out of nowhere. Of course she was in a relationship shortly after. The dude has not made any progress in recovery and just stays home everyday locked in depression for 5 years now.
There can also be a lot of good that comes from someone leaving though. You find out what really matters to you and the potential for finding a new spouse the correct way can be exciting and fulfilling. Prayers for the mom and that she trusts God along the way.
This board is in bad shape if "it's none of your business" gets ~20 stars.
The damage of one's sins are never isolated so to be permissive or dismissive of a divorce is wrong.
That being said, tell the man he made a covenant before God to remain with this woman, breaking this covenant means he will lose all integrity before God and man. And he doesn't care about his integrity, then why even try to reason with the reprobate?
The damage of one's sins are never isolated so to be permissive or dismissive of a divorce is wrong.
That being said, tell the man he made a covenant before God to remain with this woman, breaking this covenant means he will lose all integrity before God and man. And he doesn't care about his integrity, then why even try to reason with the reprobate?
Just curious, are you a Calvinist?TheBonifaceOption said:
This board is in bad shape if "it's none of your business" gets ~20 stars.
The damage of one's sins are never isolated so to be permissive or dismissive of a divorce is wrong.
That being said, tell the man he made a covenant before God to remain with this woman, breaking this covenant means he will lose all integrity before God and man. And he doesn't care about his integrity, then why even try to reason with the reprobate?
And for the record, we need Christians given the gift of discipline. My gift is mercy.
No material on this site is intended to be a substitute for professional medical advice, diagnosis or treatment. See full Medical Disclaimer.
Why would you think he's a Calvinist? Could be Catholic too, I 100% agree with him. No need to go soft on this guy getting a divorce, he made a covenant and is breaking it. That fits the definition of a reprobate even if it sounds mean. We're judging his actions and responding accordingly, not judging his eternal soul. It takes real love to do that. Willing the good of the other is merciful, kind, and loving - being polite while he throws away a lifelong marriage is none of those.
Things should have been addressed a while ago if he never attends church with his wife.
Gone for work/personal travel sometimes sure, every Sunday.
Good luck, be there for your wife.
Gone for work/personal travel sometimes sure, every Sunday.
Good luck, be there for your wife.
Actually after thinking about it, I agree. Marriage vows should be taken much more seriously than they have been in recent times.File5 said:
Why would you think he's a Calvinist? Could be Catholic too, I 100% agree with him. No need to go soft on this guy getting a divorce, he made a covenant and is breaking it. That fits the definition of a reprobate even if it sounds mean. We're judging his actions and responding accordingly, not judging his eternal soul. It takes real love to do that. Willing the good of the other is merciful, kind, and loving - being polite while he throws away a lifelong marriage is none of those.
No material on this site is intended to be a substitute for professional medical advice, diagnosis or treatment. See full Medical Disclaimer.
Man, just being blunt, you're less than one year into their family drama. You haven't even gone through a full rotation of family holidays as a married couple. Slow down. You're not going to convince him to not divorce his wife. Nor is that your role. Your wife can bring up her concerns to him, her mom, divorce being bad, impacting their relationship and the strain it'll put on future family relationships when you have grandkids.You sit this one out.
Usually the only stipulation you can control is access to grandkids which you don't have yet. Not fair to now have 1/3, 1/3, and 1/3 time split with FIL, MIL and then your parents. But this is the future for you and holiday seasons if the divorce goes through. Eventually the person who leaves the marriage gets the shortest end of the stick on time with grandkids when your lives actually get truly busy.
Usually the only stipulation you can control is access to grandkids which you don't have yet. Not fair to now have 1/3, 1/3, and 1/3 time split with FIL, MIL and then your parents. But this is the future for you and holiday seasons if the divorce goes through. Eventually the person who leaves the marriage gets the shortest end of the stick on time with grandkids when your lives actually get truly busy.
Always been a weird observation to me that divorce is forbidden in Christianity but is widely accepted in Western countries, while divorce is permitted in Islam and is social suicide in the Middle East, Pakistan, etc.
That being said, OP, as a newly married man myself, I would not make myself a primary aggressor in this battle. My wife and I generally team up if we need to tackle either set of our parents on an issue and if it's my parents, I will lead the charge, if it's hers, she will, etc. I feel like it's a bad idea to go heavy handed as a newlywed as just as One MEEN mentioned above me.
That being said, OP, as a newly married man myself, I would not make myself a primary aggressor in this battle. My wife and I generally team up if we need to tackle either set of our parents on an issue and if it's my parents, I will lead the charge, if it's hers, she will, etc. I feel like it's a bad idea to go heavy handed as a newlywed as just as One MEEN mentioned above me.
Forbidden isn't the right word. Even the most conservative acknowledges that Jesus makes allowance for divorce in some cases.canadiaggie said:
Always been a weird observation to me that divorce is forbidden in Christianity but is widely accepted in Western countries, while divorce is permitted in Islam and is social suicide in the Middle East, Pakistan, etc.
In Christianity, we also have forgiveness. We shouldn't make someone a pariah because they have been divorced, even for unbiblical reasons. We seek reconciliation and forgiveness.
The Church isn't always good at that no matter the cause for divorce, as my wife can attest. But Christ doesn't call us to cast out those with sin, but to love them and preach the gospel.
At what point does the person causing the divorce repent? You make it sound like it's the community's sin, not theirs. Who's going to tell him to repent and sin no more?
The thing about divorce, homosexual relationships, etc. is that they are very public and so it's easy to see if people are dealing with them or not, whereas private sins are harder to hold people to account for (but we should be!). Divorce is even more unique in that once it happens it is often final and hard to go back due to remarriage or other life events. Of course I sin as much or more than the next guy, but I try hard to self reflect to repent and confess when I should, whether it's a public or private sin.
All that being said, while the OP should perhaps not go crazy on his FIL depending on their specific situation, this is the time to try to prevent it as a family. Who else is going to help? It's what family is for.
The thing about divorce, homosexual relationships, etc. is that they are very public and so it's easy to see if people are dealing with them or not, whereas private sins are harder to hold people to account for (but we should be!). Divorce is even more unique in that once it happens it is often final and hard to go back due to remarriage or other life events. Of course I sin as much or more than the next guy, but I try hard to self reflect to repent and confess when I should, whether it's a public or private sin.
All that being said, while the OP should perhaps not go crazy on his FIL depending on their specific situation, this is the time to try to prevent it as a family. Who else is going to help? It's what family is for.
As soon as they realize it. Ideally before irreconcilable harm has been committed and the relationship can be restored.File5 said:
At what point does the person causing the divorce repent?
The community's sin is in being judgmental of people in the church, especially women, who have been divorced, as if divorce is an unpardonable sin.Quote:
You make it sound like it's the community's sin, not theirs.
Hopefully the OP, others close to him, his wife's church, other family members, and the Spirit.Quote:
Who's going to tell him to repent and sin no more?
dermdoc said:Actually after thinking about it, I agree. Marriage vows should be taken much more seriously than they have been in recent times.File5 said:
Why would you think he's a Calvinist? Could be Catholic too, I 100% agree with him. No need to go soft on this guy getting a divorce, he made a covenant and is breaking it. That fits the definition of a reprobate even if it sounds mean. We're judging his actions and responding accordingly, not judging his eternal soul. It takes real love to do that. Willing the good of the other is merciful, kind, and loving - being polite while he throws away a lifelong marriage is none of those.
I used the term "reprobate" in the common form meaning a person lacking morality. The doctrine of reprobation speaks of his eternal status; I don't think breaking marriage vows rises to the level that this sole decision has eternal damnable consequence.
If God sees fit, this uncle and aunt may reconcile, even after "the paperwork" is covered in years of dust. And if that's the case, it would be silly for me to judge him as an eternal reprobate, yes?
I do not think it is my place to judge anyone as an "eternal reprobate". That is up to the Lord.TheBonifaceOption said:dermdoc said:Actually after thinking about it, I agree. Marriage vows should be taken much more seriously than they have been in recent times.File5 said:
Why would you think he's a Calvinist? Could be Catholic too, I 100% agree with him. No need to go soft on this guy getting a divorce, he made a covenant and is breaking it. That fits the definition of a reprobate even if it sounds mean. We're judging his actions and responding accordingly, not judging his eternal soul. It takes real love to do that. Willing the good of the other is merciful, kind, and loving - being polite while he throws away a lifelong marriage is none of those.
I used the term "reprobate" in the common form meaning a person lacking morality. The doctrine of reprobation speaks of his eternal status; I don't think breaking marriage vows rises to the level that this sole decision has eternal damnable consequence.
If God sees fit, this uncle and aunt may reconcile, even after "the paperwork" is covered in years of dust. And if that's the case, it would be silly for me to judge him as an eternal reprobate, yes?
No material on this site is intended to be a substitute for professional medical advice, diagnosis or treatment. See full Medical Disclaimer.
And NO ONE ever knows all that is going on in another household. Maybe FIL is not happy because MIL has done something that has doomed the marriage but he admirably doesn't want to throw her under the bus.
If SIL wants to talk to FIL that is SIL's choice but it must be done in the right tone and with the right attitude.
If SIL wants to talk to FIL that is SIL's choice but it must be done in the right tone and with the right attitude.
SW AG80 said:
And NO ONE ever knows all that is going on in another household. Maybe FIL is not happy because MIL has done something that has doomed the marriage but he admirably doesn't want to throw her under the bus.
If SIL wants to talk to FIL that is SIL's choice but it must be done in the right tone and with the right attitude.
Agree. There are two sides to every story.
No material on this site is intended to be a substitute for professional medical advice, diagnosis or treatment. See full Medical Disclaimer.
No one knows everything in these or ANY situation, even the two people most affected. The SIL married into the family, it's his business, and he and the rest of the family is best positioned to help in the proper way (what that looks like could obviously vary). Your logic is too extreme - no one should ever help anyone overcome anything if it's the case. No sin is bad because no one "understands" the story. I reject this premise. I posit that it is our role to always love and help our family even if it's a painful process. Knowing both sides of the story should only mean that you need to work hard to understand the situation as best as possible - not that you shouldn't intervene appropriately.
dermdoc said:I do not think it is my place to judge anyone as an "eternal reprobate". That is up to the Lord.TheBonifaceOption said:dermdoc said:Actually after thinking about it, I agree. Marriage vows should be taken much more seriously than they have been in recent times.File5 said:
Why would you think he's a Calvinist? Could be Catholic too, I 100% agree with him. No need to go soft on this guy getting a divorce, he made a covenant and is breaking it. That fits the definition of a reprobate even if it sounds mean. We're judging his actions and responding accordingly, not judging his eternal soul. It takes real love to do that. Willing the good of the other is merciful, kind, and loving - being polite while he throws away a lifelong marriage is none of those.
I used the term "reprobate" in the common form meaning a person lacking morality. The doctrine of reprobation speaks of his eternal status; I don't think breaking marriage vows rises to the level that this sole decision has eternal damnable consequence.
If God sees fit, this uncle and aunt may reconcile, even after "the paperwork" is covered in years of dust. And if that's the case, it would be silly for me to judge him as an eternal reprobate, yes?
...
I wouldn't necessarily agree. In Galatians Paul had no problem anathematizing Judaizers. Their sin of distorting the Gospel, resulted in Paul, an apostle who has no authority to decide eternal damnation, to be the mouthpiece of God's judgement against these false teachers. Further, because God revealed this to mankind, it is up for His Church to likewise discern God's judgement just as Paul did.
Look at the parable of the sower. Should we not discern those who, like the seed on the rocky soil, appeared as a believer for a time but then became apostates? I have no problem saying Abraham Piper is destined for Hell. With every breath he draws he denies Christ, he is making it his personal mission to harm the Church. (Likewise, I also judge his father as unfit for church eldership, I don't buy the idea that you judge your leaders children until they are 18 then the elder is no longer responsible for the faith he succeeded/failed to teach his kids.)
In 2 Thessalonians 3, Paul instructs the believers of Thessaloniki that they are to warn the sinful brothers. If they don't change their behavior, you are to break fellowship with them (excommunicate) . And treat them as an unbeliever....thaaats judging their eternal souls....those elders had to have the hard conversation with the offending brothers and say "it is our judgment that you are not a believer and you will not receive the resurrection."
I never even intimated that SIL should not talk to FIL. Just that it needs to be done in the right tone.
Whether a talk like that should happen, and the tone of that talk, depends entirely on family dynamics and individual personalities.
I would never assume what that SIL should do. But it is a precarious and thin line.
Whether a talk like that should happen, and the tone of that talk, depends entirely on family dynamics and individual personalities.
I would never assume what that SIL should do. But it is a precarious and thin line.
File5
Joined:
Feb 21, 2021
Posts:
1,087
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Couple of things. John Piper is a five point Calvinist so I assume he believes in double predestination. By that theology, his son Abraham is either predestined to be elect or not. So it is up to God, not Piper, what the eternal destiny of Abraham is. And if we get rid of every Christian leader with rebellious kids, we are going to lose a lot of preachers, deacons, etc.TheBonifaceOption said:dermdoc said:I do not think it is my place to judge anyone as an "eternal reprobate". That is up to the Lord.TheBonifaceOption said:dermdoc said:Actually after thinking about it, I agree. Marriage vows should be taken much more seriously than they have been in recent times.File5 said:
Why would you think he's a Calvinist? Could be Catholic too, I 100% agree with him. No need to go soft on this guy getting a divorce, he made a covenant and is breaking it. That fits the definition of a reprobate even if it sounds mean. We're judging his actions and responding accordingly, not judging his eternal soul. It takes real love to do that. Willing the good of the other is merciful, kind, and loving - being polite while he throws away a lifelong marriage is none of those.
I used the term "reprobate" in the common form meaning a person lacking morality. The doctrine of reprobation speaks of his eternal status; I don't think breaking marriage vows rises to the level that this sole decision has eternal damnable consequence.
If God sees fit, this uncle and aunt may reconcile, even after "the paperwork" is covered in years of dust. And if that's the case, it would be silly for me to judge him as an eternal reprobate, yes?
...
I wouldn't necessarily agree. In Galatians Paul had no problem anathematizing Judaizers. Their sin of distorting the Gospel, resulted in Paul, an apostle who has no authority to decide eternal damnation, to be the mouthpiece of God's judgement against these false teachers. Further, because God revealed this to mankind, it is up for His Church to likewise discern God's judgement just as Paul did.
Look at the parable of the sower. Should we not discern those who, like the seed on the rocky soil, appeared as a believer for a time but then became apostates? I have no problem saying Abraham Piper is destined for Hell. With every breath he draws he denies Christ, he is making it his personal mission to harm the Church. (Likewise, I also judge his father as unfit for church eldership, I don't buy the idea that you judge your leaders children until they are 18 then the elder is no longer responsible for the faith he succeeded/failed to teach his kids.)
In 2 Thessalonians 3, Paul instructs the believers of Thessaloniki that they are to warn the sinful brothers. If they don't change their behavior, you are to break fellowship with them (excommunicate) . And treat them as an unbeliever....thaaats judging their eternal souls....those elders had to have the hard conversation with the offending brothers and say "it is our judgment that you are not a believer and you will not receive the resurrection."
Secondly, I do not think that I have the ability to know who is "going to hell" or not. That is not my call and I believe is based on the decision of every individual whether they accept or reject God. I do not know their heart.
Thirdly, you sure seem to like to judge other people a lot.
Fourthly, I believe Scripture is pretty clear everyone is resurrected.
No material on this site is intended to be a substitute for professional medical advice, diagnosis or treatment. See full Medical Disclaimer.
I diddermdoc said:
Not meaning to derail but I have never seen a husband leave unless he is already having an affair.
(as in, called it while not having an affair).
1) So?! You disregard the immutable Word of God on eldership requirements because the current crop of elders are sooo bad that they cant maintain the requisites, ergo we must keep them? That's about as bassackwards as you can get.dermdoc said:
Couple of things. John Piper is a five point Calvinist so I assume he believes in double predestination. By that theology, his son Abraham is either predestined to be elect or not. So it is up to God, not Piper, what the eternal destiny of Abraham is. And if we get rid of every Christian leader with rebellious kids, we are going to lose a lot of preachers, deacons, etc.
Secondly, I do not think that I have the ability to know who is "going to hell" or not. That is not my call and I believe is based on the decision of every individual whether they accept or reject God. I do not know their heart.
Thirdly, you sure seem to like to judge other people a lot.
Fourthly, I believe Scripture is pretty clear everyone is resurrected.
2) And that's because you have no ecclesiastical authority. Man, those who were not Christ himself, --sinful men-- absolutely declared anathema on individuals who distorted the Gospel. Read Galatians, its sitting right there for you. In fact for 2000 years the church has been excommunicating individuals who refuse to comport to the standards of orthodoxy, read 2 Thessalonians 3, its right there for you. The apostle Paul delegates the ability and authority to judge congregants on their inclusion in the body of Christ.
"you dont know their hearts." Look, Thessalonica is *chef's kiss.* If you read Acts you see how the church at Thessalonica was founded. Paul was only in the city for a short time, the Jews started a mob and Paul had to flee, the converts were fined and beaten. Paul writes the first letter. Then he hears back, then he writes the second letter. The context of 2 Thess 3 is that there were those who confessed Christ with their lips, they may have even endured the persecution from the world in Christ's name, they even had the best attendance (they were waiting for the 2nd coming, day and night). But Paul judged them as idle and despite "what they had in their hearts" and despite "what they professed" Paul STILL judged them for excommunication--if they refused to act in the ways he had given the church.
3) Im sorry I follow the instructions of the Lord. There are no crowns in heaven for being naive. Do you really want me to give you the dozens of imperatives for the church to judge and discern and to be shrewd? No. You wouldnt want that because it would go to war with the idol you old in your heart: Harmonia. She is your god. "My gift is mercy" No, bud that's not a gift described by the Scripture (Isaiah 11, 1 Cor 12). Its a cop-out. It allows you to refuse to be principled. You can peddle some milquetoast religious convictions and say "how can you judge the human heart?!" Thats simple, "the heart, above all else, is deceitful and desperately wicked." You're right, it is foolish to judge hearts, rather the Lord instructs us to judge actions and words. Those are the wellsprings of the heart.
4) Yes the unbeliever will get stand before God's judgement. But they are not in Christ, visavis Col 1:15-23 whereas Christ is firstborn of the resurrection and the reconciliation for believers. In fact, that passage details that one must endure in the faith to receive such inheritance.
Featured Stories
See All
58:45
3h ago
2.3k
13:46
6h ago
2.0k
Head coach Buzz Williams dives into Texas A&M's bye week routine
by Billy Liucci
Potent offense should be solidified by portal adds, talented youngsters
by Mathias Cubillan
17:09
6h ago
1.3k
Presenting Texas Aggies United's 'Florida Slam Dunk' Sweepstakes!
by Texas Aggies United
BOBHICA
Baseball America polled 50 coaches on the 2025 national champion
in Billy Liucci's TexAgs Premium
90
HoustonAg2021
Baseball America polled 50 coaches on the 2025 national champion
in Billy Liucci's TexAgs Premium
52
Fat Black Swan
Baseball America polled 50 coaches on the 2025 national champion
in Billy Liucci's TexAgs Premium
48