It's been quite a while since I blogged semi-regularly. It's been so long that Blogger has come up with all sorts of cool new features since I last did anything but a quick post. It's also been a long time since I was active in the world of blogs. There are a few I keep up with sporadically, but I rarely comment. I have no idea what new controversy has everyone's knickers in a twist in what used to be my corner of the blogosphere. I am utterly and completely out of the loop. For all I know, some new wacky teacher may have arisen and convinced the gullible that patriarchy -- true, Biblical patriarchy!!! -- requires living in tents or that the reason men don't have concubines today is all the result of some vast feminist conspiracy.
I miss some of the people in that world, but I don't miss that world. It feels good to be free of it.
A lot has happened in my life and in the life of my family since those days. Life and death stuff, or I should say, near-death stuff. Crises. Heartbreak the likes of which no one should ever have to suffer. Anguish. Dark nights of the soul. But also incredible joy in the midst of that sorrow.
In other words, real life. Real nitty, gritty life.
When life gets that in-your-face overwhelmingly real, despite all the chaos and confusion that might ensue for a season, some things become really clear. You re-examine a lot when you're treading through deep waters. You begin to realize what and whom -- and Whom -- you can grab onto for safety and what and whom will only pull you down further. You realize who you can go to with your burdens...those who will weep with you and rejoice with you...those who will hold your darkest secret heartaches as sacred trusts...those who will walk with you through the darkest valleys.
There aren't many of those sorts of people.
Years ago, back in the day, I remember an online discussion of homeschooling mothers during which one brave soul dared mention a minor issue she was having with her teenage daughter. This girl was no longer content to play "Little House on the Prairie" and read Elsie Dinsmore for the 20th time; she wanted more out of life; she longed to do something that made a difference and was exciting at the same time. A number of the other moms, who only had young children, tore into this mother and her daughter. You would have thought this girl had announced, "I want to be a harlot" and that the mother had answered, "Whatever you want, dear, is fine with me; let me buy you some harlot clothes" -- that's how these other moms carried on. They gave advice that this girl's "rebellious spirit" needed to be rebuked and punished, that the mother shouldn't listen to her nonsense, that both were in sin, etc., etc.
Needless to say, these are not the sort of people you turn to in a crisis.
A few years went by, but it was still back in the day, when the son of a homeschooling family died under unfortunate and disturbing circumstances. The parents decided to alert other families to what had happened, so that others might be spared their tragedy. I was horrified at the lack of empathy, at the other callousness, in which some in the online world responded. There was much holier-than-thou shooting of the wounded.
Needless to say, these are not the sort of people you turn to in a crisis.
More than one mother, way back in my days of writing about my concerns regarding the Ezzos' teachings, insisted that they had the whole parenting thing down and would never have to deal with any problems because their one-year-old was already "characterized by first-time obedience".
Needless to say, these are not the sort of people you turn to in a crisis.
Also, back in the day, there were certain online teachers, some of them leaders in their own churches, who thrived on controversy, who loved to declare their authority over anyone who commented on their blogs, who sounded convinced that they held a special corner on doctrinal correctness, and who loved to argue until they didn't have the upper hand, in which case they banned people from their blogs.
Needless to say, these are not the sort of people you turn to in a crisis.
In May of this year, I went to a retreat. It was my second year going. I wouldn't have missed it for the world. When my mother heard of my plans, she asked with some trepidation, "Is this the same retreat you went to last year? the one with the...troubled people?"
It's always after the fact that I think of what I should have said. In this case, I should have said, "Yes, that one...because I am one of those troubled people."
Jesus said, "In this world, you will have trouble..." Some people are just more honest and open about their trouble than others. Some people know what it is like to be broken, wounded, and lost. Some people know what it means to find joy after sorrow. Some people aren't afraid of messes. Some people will let you grieve in ways that wouldn't look pretty in a movie, and they will sit with you in your pain, without condemnation. Some people know the joy of finding hope after despair, and they share it with you. Some people will walk with you as you try to find your way out of the darkness, out of the deep waters, and they will carry you when you are tired. Some people are like beacons in the night. Some people will give you permission to fall apart if need be. Some people will let you be real, as real as real can be, without any pretense, without any self-protection, and their complete and total loving acceptance of you will be like a healing balm to your soul. Some people will love you so much and so obviously that they earn the right to speak painful truth into your life, and they will do it with tears in their eyes. Some people will, with a hug and some whispered words, give you hope to sustain and encourage you for another year.
There aren't very many of those people, but I've been blessed beyond words to have found some.
Needless to say, those are the sort of people you turn to in a crisis.
And they are also the sort of people you turn to during times of joy and laughter, because they will celebrate with you like no one else will. They totally get the "rejoice with those who rejoice" part because they already have the weeping part down.
When I grow up, I want to be that sort of person.
This post, along with my entire blog, is copyrighted. Please read and honor the copyright notice at the bottom of the sidebar. Thank you.
Showing posts with label mothering. Show all posts
Showing posts with label mothering. Show all posts
Saturday, July 23, 2011
Monday, July 04, 2011
My grandchild
This is a picture of my first grandchild. He/she is still in hiding. I think my daughter is the cutest pregnant person ever.
-- Posted from my iPhone
-- Posted from my iPhone
Thursday, June 30, 2011
New season of life
We have entered a new exciting phase as parents. Last October, Offspring #3 was married. If I have any readers left, you may remember him as Strapping Young Man. He made a handsome groom with his beautiful bride:
In January, it was Offspring #2's turn. She took my breath away.
I danced with the love of my life at the wedding reception:
Next up: grandchildren! My daughter is expecting our first. I am so looking forward to this new adventure!!
A friend of mine once said that grandchildren are the closest we get to a "do over" in life. As young, earnest parents desiring to raise godly children, too many of us -- myself definitely one -- erred too much on the side of fear, legalism, strictness, impatience, and insensitivity. As grandparents, we can shower grace, love, compassion, and understanding on the little ones in our lives. We can lavish affection and well-deserved praise. And we can be humble enough to tell our children, "This is how I should have treated you. I can't turn back the clock but please know that when I show love to your children, I'm doing those things for you too."
-- Posted from my iPhone
In January, it was Offspring #2's turn. She took my breath away.
I danced with the love of my life at the wedding reception:
Next up: grandchildren! My daughter is expecting our first. I am so looking forward to this new adventure!!
A friend of mine once said that grandchildren are the closest we get to a "do over" in life. As young, earnest parents desiring to raise godly children, too many of us -- myself definitely one -- erred too much on the side of fear, legalism, strictness, impatience, and insensitivity. As grandparents, we can shower grace, love, compassion, and understanding on the little ones in our lives. We can lavish affection and well-deserved praise. And we can be humble enough to tell our children, "This is how I should have treated you. I can't turn back the clock but please know that when I show love to your children, I'm doing those things for you too."
-- Posted from my iPhone
Monday, October 05, 2009
Yes, it's been a loooooong time
A quick update...
1. My husband's health is much, much better. Despite the surgeon's ominous prediction that there would be no return of pituitary function, he now has almost full function. The endocrine system is doing great, except for a slightly sluggish thyroid. This is a huge answer to prayer, and I am thankful for all of you who prayed for us.
2. Life has been busy. At times it has been both sad and stressful. I wrote, months ago, about "deep waters". While the waters are not quite as deep as they were, and we're not spending as much time in them, they're not exactly shallow yet either.
3. We are part of a wonderful fellowship of believers. I can't begin to describe what a blessing they has been. Did I mention that these people are wonderful?
4. Life has not been all stress and work. We've carved out time for fun and relaxation too, and made some hilarious family memories...and a few are even captured on video.
5. Coffee is good. Still. Always. That is yet again proof that the natural order of the universe is still intact.
6. I saved the best for last: Offspring #3 (aka, "the strapping young man") is ENGAGED!! But it gets even better. He's not just engaged to anyone; he's engaged to a terrific young woman that people can't seem to say enough good things about. We love her! Is that cool or what?
This post, along with my entire blog, is copyrighted. Please read and honor the copyright notice at the bottom of the sidebar. Thank you.
1. My husband's health is much, much better. Despite the surgeon's ominous prediction that there would be no return of pituitary function, he now has almost full function. The endocrine system is doing great, except for a slightly sluggish thyroid. This is a huge answer to prayer, and I am thankful for all of you who prayed for us.
2. Life has been busy. At times it has been both sad and stressful. I wrote, months ago, about "deep waters". While the waters are not quite as deep as they were, and we're not spending as much time in them, they're not exactly shallow yet either.
3. We are part of a wonderful fellowship of believers. I can't begin to describe what a blessing they has been. Did I mention that these people are wonderful?
4. Life has not been all stress and work. We've carved out time for fun and relaxation too, and made some hilarious family memories...and a few are even captured on video.
5. Coffee is good. Still. Always. That is yet again proof that the natural order of the universe is still intact.
6. I saved the best for last: Offspring #3 (aka, "the strapping young man") is ENGAGED!! But it gets even better. He's not just engaged to anyone; he's engaged to a terrific young woman that people can't seem to say enough good things about. We love her! Is that cool or what?
This post, along with my entire blog, is copyrighted. Please read and honor the copyright notice at the bottom of the sidebar. Thank you.
Wednesday, March 25, 2009
Long overdue update
Yes, it's been a long time since I've posted. Here's just a little of what's been going on:
1. I still drink coffee.
2. We've been going through some...er...interesting times in our family.
3. Jesus truly is Lord...and a faithful Friend like no other. He keeps His promise to never leave us nor forsake us.
4. My marriage is all the more precious to me during some current rough times, especially as my husband has had a season of ill health.
5. I still teach martial arts.
6. Mothering doesn't become easier when the children leave home. It's different, less hands on, but sometimes more heartbreaking.
7. Twitter can take up a lot of time, but it's also a great way to follow current events, trends, etc.
This post, along with my entire blog, is copyrighted. Please read and honor the copyright notice at the bottom of the sidebar. Thank you.
1. I still drink coffee.
2. We've been going through some...er...interesting times in our family.
3. Jesus truly is Lord...and a faithful Friend like no other. He keeps His promise to never leave us nor forsake us.
4. My marriage is all the more precious to me during some current rough times, especially as my husband has had a season of ill health.
5. I still teach martial arts.
6. Mothering doesn't become easier when the children leave home. It's different, less hands on, but sometimes more heartbreaking.
7. Twitter can take up a lot of time, but it's also a great way to follow current events, trends, etc.
This post, along with my entire blog, is copyrighted. Please read and honor the copyright notice at the bottom of the sidebar. Thank you.
Monday, October 27, 2008
Still not sure how to vote?
Well documented and a must-read before heading to the polls: over 100 hundred reasons to vote against Obama.
One example out of many:
As many of us have read repeatedly by now, in his July 17, 2007 speech to the Planned Parenthood Action Fund, Obama said,
As a mother, I simply cannot vote for this man, for this reason alone. Then there are, of course, many other reasons. Please follow the link I've posted and consider these matters carefully and prayerfully.
This post, along with my entire blog, is copyrighted. Please read and honor the copyright notice at the bottom of the sidebar. Thank you.
One example out of many:
Barack Obama supports the extreme Freedom of Choice Act (FOCA). If enacted, FOCA would obliterate hundreds of state laws that protect women, parents, children, and health care workers, while forcing taxpayers to foot the bill for millions of abortions. It would overturn commonsense laws like parental notification, conscience protections, abortion waiting periods, informed consent, and regulations for women's health: http://www.lifenews.com/nat4056.html
Estimates are that if Obama becomes President and signs FOCA it will lead to 125,000 more abortions each year: http://www.lifenews.com/nat4359.html
As many of us have read repeatedly by now, in his July 17, 2007 speech to the Planned Parenthood Action Fund, Obama said,
We know that a woman's right to make a decision about how many children she wants to have and when — without government interference — is one of the most fundamental freedoms we have in this country. . . . I have worked on this issue for decades now. I put Roe at the center of my lesson plan on reproductive freedom when I taught constitutional law. . . So, you know where I stand. . . The first thing I'd do as president is sign the Freedom of Choice Act. That's the first thing that I'd do.Is that who you want for President? A man who is so dedicated to abortion being without restrictions or safeguards, a man who is so adamantly opposed to states' rights, a man who is so opposed to any attempts to protect unborn children, that his promised first order of business as your President would be to sign the radical Freedom of Choice Act?
As a mother, I simply cannot vote for this man, for this reason alone. Then there are, of course, many other reasons. Please follow the link I've posted and consider these matters carefully and prayerfully.
This post, along with my entire blog, is copyrighted. Please read and honor the copyright notice at the bottom of the sidebar. Thank you.
Thursday, October 23, 2008
Still thinking of voting for Obama?
If you are not 100% pro-abortion (as opposed to pro-life or undecided...or genuinely pro-choice...) you may want to consider this before casting your vote.
This post, along with my entire blog, is copyrighted. Please read and honor the copyright notice at the bottom of the sidebar. Thank you.
This post, along with my entire blog, is copyrighted. Please read and honor the copyright notice at the bottom of the sidebar. Thank you.
Tuesday, October 21, 2008
More powerful than a sermon
A brief life, lived for only 99 days, yet a life that continues to touch hundreds, if not thousands, others...yet a life that too many in our country feel never should have been allowed to survive beyond the womb...a life that brought --- and continues to bring --- glory to God...
Can you watch this and say, along with too many Americans, that we are the better for allowing and encouraging women to choose to have the lives of children like Eliot snuffed out in the womb?
This post, along with my entire blog, is copyrighted. Please read and honor the copyright notice at the bottom of the sidebar. Thank you.
Can you watch this and say, along with too many Americans, that we are the better for allowing and encouraging women to choose to have the lives of children like Eliot snuffed out in the womb?
This post, along with my entire blog, is copyrighted. Please read and honor the copyright notice at the bottom of the sidebar. Thank you.
Thursday, September 25, 2008
Why I can't vote for Obama
Even if our politics were in agreement (which they are not) my mother's heart would simply not allow me to vote for him.
More from Gianna Jessen:
On Fox News:
What can you do about it? Begin by visiting the Born Alive Truth website.
Updated to add:
Testimony from the nurse who was behind the Illinois bill. This also includes Obama in his own words defending his stance on abortion. A must see before you vote in November.
This post, along with my entire blog, is copyrighted. Please read and honor the copyright notice at the bottom of the sidebar. Thank you.
More from Gianna Jessen:
On Fox News:
What can you do about it? Begin by visiting the Born Alive Truth website.
Updated to add:
Testimony from the nurse who was behind the Illinois bill. This also includes Obama in his own words defending his stance on abortion. A must see before you vote in November.
This post, along with my entire blog, is copyrighted. Please read and honor the copyright notice at the bottom of the sidebar. Thank you.
Friday, September 05, 2008
In the public eye
Ack! Someday this blog will be less about politics, I promise!
Yesterday I made another trip around the blogosphere, to see what people were writing about Governor Palin. I also read some of the articles in the media, both mainstream and otherwise.
And you know what? I got really excited. Not so much about the politics, but about the tremendous opportunity we, as Christians, have been given to be salt and light before a watching world. Governor Palin has suddenly brought all sorts of issues out in the open, issues that are now being discussed widely, in a more public way than I can ever recall, issues such as:
1. Outside of the pro-life movement, it is shocking news that 80-90% of babies known to have Down syndrome are aborted. The response has been interesting --- I've been amazed to read how many of those who are not opposed to abortion are still very troubled by this.
2. Suddenly the pro-life movement has a different public face. It's not just a bunch of white males who want to keep all women barefoot and in the kitchen.
3. The hypocrisy of many liberals is being exposed. It's not really about choice, after all --- people are more than willing to attack Palin for her choices.
4. We're all forced to face reality: not every women is liberal. Even more shocking, not every feminist is liberal and pro-abortion. You can be feminine, articulate, intelligent and politically conservative.
5. Having a baby with Down syndrome is not a horrible, life-consuming tragedy. It will not ruin your life or your family. Even if angry bloggers refer to your child disdainfully as "that child", and suggest it is unseemly for him to be seen in public, you and your family will love and unashamedly enjoy your special child --- at least that is the testimony that the Palin family lives out, loud and clear. (Other families live this testimony too, of course, but they don't get to do so on TV, in front of the entire nation.)
6. There is nothing shameful or degrading about being an involved mother. You don't have to be a crunch granola Birkenstock earth mama to wear your baby in a sling. Nor does wearing your baby in a sling turn your brain to mush or turn you into a primitivistic marsupial mother. You can be bright, successful, charming, and attractive --- and mother your baby right out there in the open, without apology or shame.
7. Not everyone who has five children is some sort of cross between Ma Kettle and a faceless, downtrodden cult member. Having more than the socially acceptable number of children does not rob you of brain cells, turn you into a boring drudge, or make you spend the rest of your life in shapeless dresses and/or frumpy sweatpants.
Many of us who are conservative Christians, pro-life, and who have dared to have more than 1.8 children could never have dared hope that we would ever have a "poster child for our cause" capture the national attention like Governor Palin has. Whether or not we agree with her politics, whether or not we think women should be vice presidents, we have to agree that she has been a remarkable public advocate and shining testimony on a scale that none of us could ever hope to be.
But there is more. I saved the best for last...
8. Over the past two to three days, I've had the amazing experience of reading in newspapers and hearing on the radio people trying to explain why evangelical Christians are not suddenly dropping Governor Palin like a hot potato after hearing that her teenage daughter is pregnant out of wedlock. And do you know how some of these journalists and commentators --- a number of whom I have no reason to believe are Christians --- are explaining it? With the gospel. Suddenly, people are feeling a need to explain why evangelicals are not shocked about sin, why we take sin so seriously, and why we are so forgiving! It is both deeply moving and, at the same time, amusing, to read/hear people in the secular world actually defending and explaining our beliefs (e.g., "Few people seem to understand what the Christian faith is all about...")
Do you realize what a tremendous opportunity Governor Palin has given us? The opportunity that I believe God has given us through her?
The world is watching. They are watching her. But they are also watching those of us who they believe she represents.
Think of this, fellow bloggers. What is our message to the watching world? Will we join many of them in condemning Governor Palin? Will they discover that our main message to them is angry words about what women can't and shouldn't do? Or will they discover that, as followers of Jesus, as recipients of His saving grace, we are known for being serious about sin and yet forgiving and gracious...the people who rejoice in that truth, "There is therefore now no condemnation for those who are in Christ Jesus". Will we be known as those who make love their rule? Will we be known as those who stand for truth? Will our words be so seasoned with grace as to be able to be used of God to win hearts for Him?
Or will we be known as being harsh, strident, judgmental, hateful? Much of the world already thinks that about us. Now, perhaps, we can, prayerfully, try to become better ambassadors and representatives of Jesus Christ.
I write this as much for me as for my fellow bloggers. And yes, I know I fail in this. Constantly.
Most of us cannot capture the attention of a nation. Most of us will never walk in the corridors of power, or have the ear of our nation's leaders --- or even be one of those leaders ourselves. But we can pray for those leaders and for those potential leaders. And we can rejoice in this wonderful window of opportunity, in our much smaller worlds, to echo the messages of grace, forgiveness, the sanctity of life, and the blessings of motherhood.
And we can thank God for the powerful and unexpected way in which He is using Governor Palin's life and testimony. May we be faithful in the little things, in our small arenas, and pray for Palin to be faithful in the big things, in her big arena.
Updated to add:
Here is Governor Palin's testimony of her faith in Christ.
This post, along with my entire blog, is copyrighted. Please read and honor the copyright notice at the bottom of the sidebar. Thank you.
Yesterday I made another trip around the blogosphere, to see what people were writing about Governor Palin. I also read some of the articles in the media, both mainstream and otherwise.
And you know what? I got really excited. Not so much about the politics, but about the tremendous opportunity we, as Christians, have been given to be salt and light before a watching world. Governor Palin has suddenly brought all sorts of issues out in the open, issues that are now being discussed widely, in a more public way than I can ever recall, issues such as:
1. Outside of the pro-life movement, it is shocking news that 80-90% of babies known to have Down syndrome are aborted. The response has been interesting --- I've been amazed to read how many of those who are not opposed to abortion are still very troubled by this.
2. Suddenly the pro-life movement has a different public face. It's not just a bunch of white males who want to keep all women barefoot and in the kitchen.
3. The hypocrisy of many liberals is being exposed. It's not really about choice, after all --- people are more than willing to attack Palin for her choices.
4. We're all forced to face reality: not every women is liberal. Even more shocking, not every feminist is liberal and pro-abortion. You can be feminine, articulate, intelligent and politically conservative.
5. Having a baby with Down syndrome is not a horrible, life-consuming tragedy. It will not ruin your life or your family. Even if angry bloggers refer to your child disdainfully as "that child", and suggest it is unseemly for him to be seen in public, you and your family will love and unashamedly enjoy your special child --- at least that is the testimony that the Palin family lives out, loud and clear. (Other families live this testimony too, of course, but they don't get to do so on TV, in front of the entire nation.)
6. There is nothing shameful or degrading about being an involved mother. You don't have to be a crunch granola Birkenstock earth mama to wear your baby in a sling. Nor does wearing your baby in a sling turn your brain to mush or turn you into a primitivistic marsupial mother. You can be bright, successful, charming, and attractive --- and mother your baby right out there in the open, without apology or shame.
7. Not everyone who has five children is some sort of cross between Ma Kettle and a faceless, downtrodden cult member. Having more than the socially acceptable number of children does not rob you of brain cells, turn you into a boring drudge, or make you spend the rest of your life in shapeless dresses and/or frumpy sweatpants.
Many of us who are conservative Christians, pro-life, and who have dared to have more than 1.8 children could never have dared hope that we would ever have a "poster child for our cause" capture the national attention like Governor Palin has. Whether or not we agree with her politics, whether or not we think women should be vice presidents, we have to agree that she has been a remarkable public advocate and shining testimony on a scale that none of us could ever hope to be.
But there is more. I saved the best for last...
8. Over the past two to three days, I've had the amazing experience of reading in newspapers and hearing on the radio people trying to explain why evangelical Christians are not suddenly dropping Governor Palin like a hot potato after hearing that her teenage daughter is pregnant out of wedlock. And do you know how some of these journalists and commentators --- a number of whom I have no reason to believe are Christians --- are explaining it? With the gospel. Suddenly, people are feeling a need to explain why evangelicals are not shocked about sin, why we take sin so seriously, and why we are so forgiving! It is both deeply moving and, at the same time, amusing, to read/hear people in the secular world actually defending and explaining our beliefs (e.g., "Few people seem to understand what the Christian faith is all about...")
Do you realize what a tremendous opportunity Governor Palin has given us? The opportunity that I believe God has given us through her?
The world is watching. They are watching her. But they are also watching those of us who they believe she represents.
Think of this, fellow bloggers. What is our message to the watching world? Will we join many of them in condemning Governor Palin? Will they discover that our main message to them is angry words about what women can't and shouldn't do? Or will they discover that, as followers of Jesus, as recipients of His saving grace, we are known for being serious about sin and yet forgiving and gracious...the people who rejoice in that truth, "There is therefore now no condemnation for those who are in Christ Jesus". Will we be known as those who make love their rule? Will we be known as those who stand for truth? Will our words be so seasoned with grace as to be able to be used of God to win hearts for Him?
Or will we be known as being harsh, strident, judgmental, hateful? Much of the world already thinks that about us. Now, perhaps, we can, prayerfully, try to become better ambassadors and representatives of Jesus Christ.
I write this as much for me as for my fellow bloggers. And yes, I know I fail in this. Constantly.
Most of us cannot capture the attention of a nation. Most of us will never walk in the corridors of power, or have the ear of our nation's leaders --- or even be one of those leaders ourselves. But we can pray for those leaders and for those potential leaders. And we can rejoice in this wonderful window of opportunity, in our much smaller worlds, to echo the messages of grace, forgiveness, the sanctity of life, and the blessings of motherhood.
And we can thank God for the powerful and unexpected way in which He is using Governor Palin's life and testimony. May we be faithful in the little things, in our small arenas, and pray for Palin to be faithful in the big things, in her big arena.
Updated to add:
Here is Governor Palin's testimony of her faith in Christ.
This post, along with my entire blog, is copyrighted. Please read and honor the copyright notice at the bottom of the sidebar. Thank you.
Thursday, September 04, 2008
We don't lose our minds when we become pregnant
Really, we don't. Even when we sometimes feel that way or possibly even act that way.
Having more than the socially acceptable number of children, contrary to what many might think, did not reduce my IQ to below room temperature.
But you'd never guess that from the way people have treated me and other mothers, especially in light of the ridiculous questions I've been asked. When I announced my pregnancy with Child #4, guess what question I was asked more than any other: "Have you even thought about where you will put this child?"
Come on, our house was small, but not that small. Another mom, much in the same sort of situation, gave me her answer. She would gasp, open her eyes wide in shock, and exclaim as dramatically as possible, "Oh, no! We never even thought of that! Whatever will we do? I guess we'll just have to stick the baby...on the back porch!"
Other questions/statements I've had to endure:
"I suppose you've never given any thought to what you will do if you are ever in an accident or incapacitated."
"Have you considered what you will do if your husband dies?"
"You might want to think about how you and your husband will manage to pay for all these children."
"Have you even thought about finding someone to deliver this baby?" (I kid you not --- I was about two weeks away from my due date, and as hugely pregnant as could be, when I was asked this question.) Despite the fact that I'd chosen the birth attendants long before conception, and was more than fully prepared to have the baby right that minute, I was tempted to give my blankest look and ask, "Huh? Deliver this baby? What do you mean?"
"What are you going to do with your other children after this baby is born? Have you even thought about how you're going to take care of them?"
"I don't think you have any idea of what it's like to try to handle six children." (Said by a father of two, who seemed oblivious to the fact that I had two years of full-time experience handling five children, and about 12 years of full-time mothering experience to his three years of part-time fathering!)
"Have you and your husband ever thought to discuss whether or not a large family is a good idea?"
"Have you even considered, for a moment, whether it's fair to your older children to keep bringing more children into the family?"
"I suppose you've never thought about what it will be like when all these children are teenagers."
Newsflash: Women are not stupid. Mothers are not stupid. We do think about these things. In fact, we tend to think about them far more than our husbands do. We lose sleep over such questions. We spend the "night watch hours" in prayer. We read; we study; we research; we consult trusted advisers; we plan. If anything, we spend too much time on these questions, not too little.
"Does she have any idea what she's going to do with her children once she's vice-president?"
I'm sure she does. After all, she's had a workable plan in place while being governor. Yes, handling six children was more of a challenge than handling five. Yes, being vice president will be more of a challenge than being governor. But I doubt that Governor Palin is a fool or an idiot. I doubt that you know more about combining family with governmental responsibilities than she does. I certainly doubt that you have given more thought to the issue than she has.
She has a husband, a man who is obviously no stranger to holding and tending his baby. That doesn't make him a "mom"; that makes him an involved father. She has experience working with babies in her office --- probably far more experience than you do.
I'm sure she answered that question, with much careful consideration, long before you even knew she was being considered for vice president. In fact, this is what her answer looks like.
Another friend of mine came up with a standard answer to what she termed "I know you're an idiot so I need to ask you" questions: "Don't worry. We already have all sorts of plans and contingency plans in place. I know the idea of this is new and overwhelming for you, but it's old hat for us. Thanks for your concern."
This post, along with my entire blog, is copyrighted. Please read and honor the copyright notice at the bottom of the sidebar. Thank you.
Having more than the socially acceptable number of children, contrary to what many might think, did not reduce my IQ to below room temperature.
But you'd never guess that from the way people have treated me and other mothers, especially in light of the ridiculous questions I've been asked. When I announced my pregnancy with Child #4, guess what question I was asked more than any other: "Have you even thought about where you will put this child?"
Come on, our house was small, but not that small. Another mom, much in the same sort of situation, gave me her answer. She would gasp, open her eyes wide in shock, and exclaim as dramatically as possible, "Oh, no! We never even thought of that! Whatever will we do? I guess we'll just have to stick the baby...on the back porch!"
Other questions/statements I've had to endure:
"I suppose you've never given any thought to what you will do if you are ever in an accident or incapacitated."
"Have you considered what you will do if your husband dies?"
"You might want to think about how you and your husband will manage to pay for all these children."
"Have you even thought about finding someone to deliver this baby?" (I kid you not --- I was about two weeks away from my due date, and as hugely pregnant as could be, when I was asked this question.) Despite the fact that I'd chosen the birth attendants long before conception, and was more than fully prepared to have the baby right that minute, I was tempted to give my blankest look and ask, "Huh? Deliver this baby? What do you mean?"
"What are you going to do with your other children after this baby is born? Have you even thought about how you're going to take care of them?"
"I don't think you have any idea of what it's like to try to handle six children." (Said by a father of two, who seemed oblivious to the fact that I had two years of full-time experience handling five children, and about 12 years of full-time mothering experience to his three years of part-time fathering!)
"Have you and your husband ever thought to discuss whether or not a large family is a good idea?"
"Have you even considered, for a moment, whether it's fair to your older children to keep bringing more children into the family?"
"I suppose you've never thought about what it will be like when all these children are teenagers."
Newsflash: Women are not stupid. Mothers are not stupid. We do think about these things. In fact, we tend to think about them far more than our husbands do. We lose sleep over such questions. We spend the "night watch hours" in prayer. We read; we study; we research; we consult trusted advisers; we plan. If anything, we spend too much time on these questions, not too little.
"Does she have any idea what she's going to do with her children once she's vice-president?"
I'm sure she does. After all, she's had a workable plan in place while being governor. Yes, handling six children was more of a challenge than handling five. Yes, being vice president will be more of a challenge than being governor. But I doubt that Governor Palin is a fool or an idiot. I doubt that you know more about combining family with governmental responsibilities than she does. I certainly doubt that you have given more thought to the issue than she has.
She has a husband, a man who is obviously no stranger to holding and tending his baby. That doesn't make him a "mom"; that makes him an involved father. She has experience working with babies in her office --- probably far more experience than you do.
I'm sure she answered that question, with much careful consideration, long before you even knew she was being considered for vice president. In fact, this is what her answer looks like.
Another friend of mine came up with a standard answer to what she termed "I know you're an idiot so I need to ask you" questions: "Don't worry. We already have all sorts of plans and contingency plans in place. I know the idea of this is new and overwhelming for you, but it's old hat for us. Thanks for your concern."
This post, along with my entire blog, is copyrighted. Please read and honor the copyright notice at the bottom of the sidebar. Thank you.
Where are the tears for the Obama children?
If I read one more blog commenter going on and on about how he/she weeps for the Palin children, I'm going to be awfully tempted to begin spamming the internet with the following reply:
This post, along with my entire blog, is copyrighted. Please read and honor the copyright notice at the bottom of the sidebar. Thank you.
Have you also been weeping for the Obama children? They have been dragged into the public spotlight. They have had to deal with an absentee father and a mother on the campaign trail. There are no hundreds of heartwarming pictures showing the parents working with their daughters at their sides and in their arms --- because the Obama family does not live this way. These little girls have had to hear that babies are a "punishment" and will no doubt some day wonder if their parents regarded them as punishments as well.
Where were your posts about weeping for them? And, since you haven't been weeping for them, what am I to assume?
- You don't concern yourself with the children of those who are democrats.
- You don't concern yourself with the children of those of other races than your own.
- You don't concern yourself with the children of men who are running for office.
- You don't concern yourself with the children of those you don't particularly like.
- It's really not about the children. It's about a woman doing something you don't think women should do.
This post, along with my entire blog, is copyrighted. Please read and honor the copyright notice at the bottom of the sidebar. Thank you.
More silliness on the campaign trail
On this the patriarchal crowd and the ultra-liberals agree: bashing mothers is always fair game, even if one has to be illogical and hypocritical to do so.
On this the patriarchal crowd and the ultra-liberals also agree: no one really cares if a father is a "bad father" or not. Fatherhood is, for the most part, usually not even worth thinking or talking about, especially in light of more "serious concerns".
So today I've learned, from both the patriarchal crowd and the ultra-liberals, that Governor Palin is a bad mom for bringing her family up on the stage with her after her speech. Supposedly she should have left her children at home --- or, at least, she should have left her 17 year old daughter and her youngest child at home.
She did nothing different from what all other candidates for political office have been doing ever since I can remember. Where was the criticism for all these men? Why are they not being accused of being bad dads? You would think the patriarchal crowd, who do like to go on about superior upper body strength making men naturally suitable to be leaders and protectors, would at least wonder aloud why all the male candidates are not protecting their families from the grave harm of appearing on stage at conventions! But, no...it is only mothers who are expected to protect their children and who fail by not doing so.
This "it's harmful for children to receive national attention" idea must be some kind of odd, new-fangled notion. Or maybe the patriarchal crowd was simply too young (or not alive yet?) to raise their strident protests against Jackie Kennedy when she exposed her grieving tots to national scrutiny at her husband's funeral. No one seemed to think that abusive. Can any of us who watched it on TV ever forget the sight of tiny John, in his short suit, saluting his father's casket? I don't recall, then or since, anyone castigating Mrs. Kennedy for being a bad mom that day.
So...why not have at it now? And why stop there? Why not attack all the wives of politicians for being bad moms and allowing their children to be dragged on stage? Why not attack all the pastor's wives for not protecting their children from being used as sermon illustrations or, worse, having to stand at the door of the church and shake everyone's hand in the dreaded pastoral family reception line Sunday after Sunday? (I think I'm seriously dating myself here!) Why not attack all wives of public figures whose children are not being protected from having to appear at public functions, pose for the obligatory family pictures, and serve as props to further their father's professional image?
And the fathers who insist on these things? Why, they get a free ride, of course. Because they are only fathers. And what they do doesn't impact their children as much. What they do as fathers interests us less than their all-important careers and professions.
But let a mother get on our bad side! Why, it's open season!
This post, along with my entire blog, is copyrighted. Please read and honor the copyright notice at the bottom of the sidebar. Thank you.
On this the patriarchal crowd and the ultra-liberals also agree: no one really cares if a father is a "bad father" or not. Fatherhood is, for the most part, usually not even worth thinking or talking about, especially in light of more "serious concerns".
So today I've learned, from both the patriarchal crowd and the ultra-liberals, that Governor Palin is a bad mom for bringing her family up on the stage with her after her speech. Supposedly she should have left her children at home --- or, at least, she should have left her 17 year old daughter and her youngest child at home.
She did nothing different from what all other candidates for political office have been doing ever since I can remember. Where was the criticism for all these men? Why are they not being accused of being bad dads? You would think the patriarchal crowd, who do like to go on about superior upper body strength making men naturally suitable to be leaders and protectors, would at least wonder aloud why all the male candidates are not protecting their families from the grave harm of appearing on stage at conventions! But, no...it is only mothers who are expected to protect their children and who fail by not doing so.
This "it's harmful for children to receive national attention" idea must be some kind of odd, new-fangled notion. Or maybe the patriarchal crowd was simply too young (or not alive yet?) to raise their strident protests against Jackie Kennedy when she exposed her grieving tots to national scrutiny at her husband's funeral. No one seemed to think that abusive. Can any of us who watched it on TV ever forget the sight of tiny John, in his short suit, saluting his father's casket? I don't recall, then or since, anyone castigating Mrs. Kennedy for being a bad mom that day.
So...why not have at it now? And why stop there? Why not attack all the wives of politicians for being bad moms and allowing their children to be dragged on stage? Why not attack all the pastor's wives for not protecting their children from being used as sermon illustrations or, worse, having to stand at the door of the church and shake everyone's hand in the dreaded pastoral family reception line Sunday after Sunday? (I think I'm seriously dating myself here!) Why not attack all wives of public figures whose children are not being protected from having to appear at public functions, pose for the obligatory family pictures, and serve as props to further their father's professional image?
And the fathers who insist on these things? Why, they get a free ride, of course. Because they are only fathers. And what they do doesn't impact their children as much. What they do as fathers interests us less than their all-important careers and professions.
But let a mother get on our bad side! Why, it's open season!
This post, along with my entire blog, is copyrighted. Please read and honor the copyright notice at the bottom of the sidebar. Thank you.
Tuesday, September 02, 2008
Why do "conservatives" sound so much like feminists?
It's really starting to both annoy and amuse me. In all the hooplah about the Palin nomination (and now the teen pregnancy) coming from the conservative side, I'm noticing something startling: they sound a lot like feminists. Oh, of course, they wouldn't admit it. And they certainly don't sound like feminists when they are saying that Governor Palin should stay home full time, and/or that her daughter's pregnancy is a result of the mother being outside of the home.
How do they sound like feminists?
They really don't act as if the role of the father is at all important. They ignore Governor Palin's husband entirely, unless it is to feel sorry for him for having an "unsubmissive" wife. His presence in the home, or his absence from it, seems to have --- at least based on what they are writing --- no influence on the children at all. Or at least it's not even significant enough to mention. He's not even significant enough to mention.
No one asks, where was the father? No one asks, should he have been more involved in his daughter's life? Could her pregnancy be a sign that he has failed her in some way?
No one asks these questions because...well, despite giving the rare lip service to the contrary, no one really thinks the role of the father is that important in the home. Most complementarians and patriarchalists really don't think that marriage and the raising of children is that tremendously important. Oh, sure, it is very important for women --- for them, it is their highest (and should be only) calling. But men have far more important work, dominion work, grand vision work. Being a husband and father is not a calling. It is something to be done as a sideline, almost like a hobby. Of course, the husband/father had better make sure he is "in charge", but no one really expects a father to make all that significant of a difference. Oh, sure, they'll tell women that they need to get married and that children need fathers, and that everyone needs to submit to the husband/father, but when they place blame for things wrong in the family, it's the wife/mother who gets blamed. That's where the buck almost always seems to stop. The husband/father escapes their notice.
And that's very telling.
This post, along with my entire blog, is copyrighted. Please read and honor the copyright notice at the bottom of the sidebar. Thank you.
How do they sound like feminists?
They really don't act as if the role of the father is at all important. They ignore Governor Palin's husband entirely, unless it is to feel sorry for him for having an "unsubmissive" wife. His presence in the home, or his absence from it, seems to have --- at least based on what they are writing --- no influence on the children at all. Or at least it's not even significant enough to mention. He's not even significant enough to mention.
No one asks, where was the father? No one asks, should he have been more involved in his daughter's life? Could her pregnancy be a sign that he has failed her in some way?
No one asks these questions because...well, despite giving the rare lip service to the contrary, no one really thinks the role of the father is that important in the home. Most complementarians and patriarchalists really don't think that marriage and the raising of children is that tremendously important. Oh, sure, it is very important for women --- for them, it is their highest (and should be only) calling. But men have far more important work, dominion work, grand vision work. Being a husband and father is not a calling. It is something to be done as a sideline, almost like a hobby. Of course, the husband/father had better make sure he is "in charge", but no one really expects a father to make all that significant of a difference. Oh, sure, they'll tell women that they need to get married and that children need fathers, and that everyone needs to submit to the husband/father, but when they place blame for things wrong in the family, it's the wife/mother who gets blamed. That's where the buck almost always seems to stop. The husband/father escapes their notice.
And that's very telling.
This post, along with my entire blog, is copyrighted. Please read and honor the copyright notice at the bottom of the sidebar. Thank you.
Monday, September 01, 2008
Let's be honest...and humble...
Edited to add this introduction to my post:
Yes, this is my response --- as a conservative, Christian mother --- to the announcement that the single, teenage daughter of Governor Palin (McCain's choice for vice president) is currently pregnant and planning to marry the father of her child.
I am open to suggestions that a Christian response should be something different...and Biblical reasons as to why.
I'd also like to hear from those, especially conservative Christian mothers, who either agree or disagree with the substance of my "confession". Do you relate? Why or why not?
I am freely confessing the following to my half-a-dozen or so readers, and urging that other mothers join me in being both honest and humble. Let us not rush to judgment. Let us not hold other mothers to impossible standards. Let us realize how much we all need Jesus, how much we all benefit from His grace.
So, on to the confessions:
1. I am not a better parent than God. Beginning with Adam and Eve, all of His children have sinned. Every single one, except for Jesus. So have mine. While at times I wish we didn't have free choice and sinful natures, I am so thankful for the remedy for sin that God provided through His Son Jesus. I stand in desperate need of that remedy. So do my children.
2. Like every mother of many who has neither been born to privilege, nor been able to afford household help, nor has had a husband who enjoyed paternity leave, nor has had the luxury of extended family/church members with no other responsibilities, I have had to return to work fairly soon after the births of my babies. Meals needed preparing, children needed tending, raising, and feeding, babies and toddlers needed changing, the house needed cleaning, and my host of responsibilities to my husband and children didn't abruptly end just because I had a newborn. That's life, especially for the middle-class and working class. Sitting in an office doing paperwork and answering phones, with my baby in a sling, would have seemed like a welcome break on many days. But envy should not make me attack a mother who ventures to her office, just like it should not make me attack mothers whose husbands are able to wait on them hand and foot for six weeks post-partum. God chose my path for me. It's one I don't regret.
3. I have ignored doctors' advice and even direct orders. I willingly, no eagerly, got pregnant with my first child. I have refused pre-natal testing. I have had more than two children. I have breastfed my children. I have given birth in my late 30's. I have not hired a nanny. Etc., etc. While many viewed me reckless and irresponsible for these choices, they were made after much prayerful research. I don't regret any of them. In fact, they all turned out to be, even more so in hindsight, the best choices in our particular situation.
4. I have sinned. Yes, even today. Without the grace of God, I am ruined. Utterly without hope. Not only am I a sinner but, even when I mean well, I am not all wise. I don't have perfect understanding. I make mistakes. I fail. I fall down. But...God still loves me. Someday, when I get to Heaven, it will not be because my theology was correct, or because I wasn't a feminist, or because I stayed home with my babies. It will not be because of my own efforts. It will not be because I meant well or was sincere. It will not be because my good deeds outweighed my bad. It will not be because I am basically a good person, because I'm really not. It will be only because of Jesus.
5. And the few good things about me? The few good things I may accomplish along the way? Jesus deserves all the credit for that as well. I am weak; He is strong. The right things I do are only through Him Who strengthens me.
What about you?
This post, along with my entire blog, is copyrighted. Please read and honor the copyright notice at the bottom of the sidebar. Thank you.
Yes, this is my response --- as a conservative, Christian mother --- to the announcement that the single, teenage daughter of Governor Palin (McCain's choice for vice president) is currently pregnant and planning to marry the father of her child.
I am open to suggestions that a Christian response should be something different...and Biblical reasons as to why.
I'd also like to hear from those, especially conservative Christian mothers, who either agree or disagree with the substance of my "confession". Do you relate? Why or why not?
I am freely confessing the following to my half-a-dozen or so readers, and urging that other mothers join me in being both honest and humble. Let us not rush to judgment. Let us not hold other mothers to impossible standards. Let us realize how much we all need Jesus, how much we all benefit from His grace.
So, on to the confessions:
1. I am not a better parent than God. Beginning with Adam and Eve, all of His children have sinned. Every single one, except for Jesus. So have mine. While at times I wish we didn't have free choice and sinful natures, I am so thankful for the remedy for sin that God provided through His Son Jesus. I stand in desperate need of that remedy. So do my children.
2. Like every mother of many who has neither been born to privilege, nor been able to afford household help, nor has had a husband who enjoyed paternity leave, nor has had the luxury of extended family/church members with no other responsibilities, I have had to return to work fairly soon after the births of my babies. Meals needed preparing, children needed tending, raising, and feeding, babies and toddlers needed changing, the house needed cleaning, and my host of responsibilities to my husband and children didn't abruptly end just because I had a newborn. That's life, especially for the middle-class and working class. Sitting in an office doing paperwork and answering phones, with my baby in a sling, would have seemed like a welcome break on many days. But envy should not make me attack a mother who ventures to her office, just like it should not make me attack mothers whose husbands are able to wait on them hand and foot for six weeks post-partum. God chose my path for me. It's one I don't regret.
3. I have ignored doctors' advice and even direct orders. I willingly, no eagerly, got pregnant with my first child. I have refused pre-natal testing. I have had more than two children. I have breastfed my children. I have given birth in my late 30's. I have not hired a nanny. Etc., etc. While many viewed me reckless and irresponsible for these choices, they were made after much prayerful research. I don't regret any of them. In fact, they all turned out to be, even more so in hindsight, the best choices in our particular situation.
4. I have sinned. Yes, even today. Without the grace of God, I am ruined. Utterly without hope. Not only am I a sinner but, even when I mean well, I am not all wise. I don't have perfect understanding. I make mistakes. I fail. I fall down. But...God still loves me. Someday, when I get to Heaven, it will not be because my theology was correct, or because I wasn't a feminist, or because I stayed home with my babies. It will not be because of my own efforts. It will not be because I meant well or was sincere. It will not be because my good deeds outweighed my bad. It will not be because I am basically a good person, because I'm really not. It will be only because of Jesus.
5. And the few good things about me? The few good things I may accomplish along the way? Jesus deserves all the credit for that as well. I am weak; He is strong. The right things I do are only through Him Who strengthens me.
What about you?
This post, along with my entire blog, is copyrighted. Please read and honor the copyright notice at the bottom of the sidebar. Thank you.
Sunday, August 31, 2008
The two shall become one
And, as the old joke goes, "But which one?"
I believe it is a new one, a one which never existed before. Some say this mystery speaks only of the fact that the married couple has sex. I've written about this elsewhere.
I believe it speaks of unity.
The two become one, and that one is a sum greater than its parts. No one dies; no one disappears. In fact, you become more. You become completed in this other person. In Christ, you become the three-chord strand that is not easily broken.
It's a good thing.
Yes, because we are sinful creatures, there are struggles along the way. Sometimes we want selfishness, power, laziness --- whatever --- over unity. Sometimes our natural inclinations make us seek out friends and advisers who encourage us to set other things ahead of unity. Marriage is not so much about unity, they will say. It's really about who is the boss. It's about a CEO and a plant manager and a bunch of employees-in-training. It's about a commanding officer, an enlisted soldier, and a bunch of raw recruits in boot camp. It's about getting what you want. It's about manipulating your husband into doing whatever you don't want to do, and being all self-righteous about how submissive you are. It's about the fact that men and women are so different that they can't possibly be one in any way other than through sexual intercourse. It's about having babies and little else. It's about the superiority of all males over all females. It's about winning in the culture wars. It's about providing men with an alternative to prostitutes and pornography, with the added benefit of a live-in cook and maid. It's about providing women with a free ticket to easy street, so they'll never have to work at a real job again. It's about me, me, me, and whether I am fulfilled and whether my needs are met and whether my spouse does what I want.
And, if it is about being one, let's make sure that I am THE ONE. I won't see beyond me. When I look at my spouse, all I see is me. It's all about me, me, me, me, me...
You know what? I don't get any of that when I read the Bible and see what it actually says about marriage. I don't read about business plans and military conquests and husbands wielding swords against their wives. I don't read about selfishness becoming sanctified and acceptable in marriage. I don't read that it's suddenly OK to seize authority and to ignore Christ's example of coming to serve rather than to be served. I don't read that passivity and weakness and manipulativeness and guile are wifely virtues.
Instead, I read about unity. I read about love, the sort of love that is described in 1 Corinthians 13. I read about living together in understanding. I read about respect. I read about submission. I read about being one. Not being one person or the other. Being one, both together in unity.
Recently I heard a husband who said that, no, he didn't submit to his wife. He didn't believe that was Biblical. But he did submit to the Lord and to his marriage. Specifically, he submitted himself to maintaining and increasing unity and intimacy with his wife. His wife submitted to him and, since that was his goal for their marriage, she was happy that it was her goal as well. In fact, that is a big factor in why she married him. They both believed that, in unity with Christ and with each other, they could serve Him far better than they could separately.
I've worked in the business world. I really am not looking to pretend to be a plant manager and to have a respectful, professional relationship with the CEO of the company. Because, the truth of the matter is that I know this is, at best, a distant relationship. I never wanted to have sexual relations with any of my bosses. It would have been unseemly and inappropriate and an abuse of his power. So why pretend this is a model for marriage? I don't want a business arrangement. I want a real marriage --- a Biblical marriage. The corporate world holds no appeal for me.
I believe in the order of creation. I take it literally. All six days. I honestly believe that it all happened in just that order. God can set me straight when we get to Heaven, and He can chuckle at my naive simplicity. But, in the meantime, I'll take His Words at face value. I also believe Him when He declared it all good.
That's not all I believe. I also believe that the husband should leave his parents and that he should become one with his wife. For some men, that has meant giving up their dreams, their entitlements, their friends --- all for the sake of unity with their wives. All for the sake of loving their wives as Christ loved the Church, giving up His life for it.
I also believe that God meant what He said when He declared that a man who finds a wife finds what is good, and finds favor with God. And I believe His warnings against husbands dealing treacherously with their wives. And I believe that a man's poor relationship with His wife can directly hinder his prayer life.
There is so much more that I believe...
I also believe that we are to die to ourselves, take up our crosses daily, and live for Christ.
And I believe that there is only one God, and that He is a jealous God.
I believe that, as wives, our desire for our husband can be so strong, so overwhelming, that we are tempted to make an idol of this man. Even though the Bible teaches us to be one with our husbands, it does not teach us to put this unity, this intimacy, ahead of God. God is a jealous God. He does not take kindly to idolatry, whether it is self or another that we worship.
I believe that husbands are tempted to rule over their wives, and that too many of them far prefer this over intimacy and unity. It is safer for them, more comfortable, and gets them what they want. Very few want true servanthood. They especially do not want to serve a woman.
But I believe that Christian marriage is different --- or should be different --- from what so many are stridently claiming marriage should be.
It's so much better. So much better. On the day I was married, I thought my father-in-law sweet but quaint and idealistic when he prayed a prayer over us that included the word "bliss" to describe marriage. Yes, he was sweet. Perhaps a bit quaint and idealistic as well. But not so much as I thought at the time. He knew. He grew into being a good husband. He laid down his own life. He gave much and served much, especially in his later years. He knew. He had experienced that bliss first hand --- the rewards of his obedience to Christ.
May we give up on the world's ideas of marriage, even if they are trumpeted forth loudly and eloquently and convincingly by those claiming to be Christian. May we instead submit to Christ and follow Him in all things, especially in our marriages. May we discover the bliss, the good thing, that God has always intended marriage to be.
This post, along with my entire blog, is copyrighted. Please read and honor the copyright notice at the bottom of the sidebar. Thank you.
I believe it is a new one, a one which never existed before. Some say this mystery speaks only of the fact that the married couple has sex. I've written about this elsewhere.
I believe it speaks of unity.
The two become one, and that one is a sum greater than its parts. No one dies; no one disappears. In fact, you become more. You become completed in this other person. In Christ, you become the three-chord strand that is not easily broken.
It's a good thing.
Yes, because we are sinful creatures, there are struggles along the way. Sometimes we want selfishness, power, laziness --- whatever --- over unity. Sometimes our natural inclinations make us seek out friends and advisers who encourage us to set other things ahead of unity. Marriage is not so much about unity, they will say. It's really about who is the boss. It's about a CEO and a plant manager and a bunch of employees-in-training. It's about a commanding officer, an enlisted soldier, and a bunch of raw recruits in boot camp. It's about getting what you want. It's about manipulating your husband into doing whatever you don't want to do, and being all self-righteous about how submissive you are. It's about the fact that men and women are so different that they can't possibly be one in any way other than through sexual intercourse. It's about having babies and little else. It's about the superiority of all males over all females. It's about winning in the culture wars. It's about providing men with an alternative to prostitutes and pornography, with the added benefit of a live-in cook and maid. It's about providing women with a free ticket to easy street, so they'll never have to work at a real job again. It's about me, me, me, and whether I am fulfilled and whether my needs are met and whether my spouse does what I want.
And, if it is about being one, let's make sure that I am THE ONE. I won't see beyond me. When I look at my spouse, all I see is me. It's all about me, me, me, me, me...
You know what? I don't get any of that when I read the Bible and see what it actually says about marriage. I don't read about business plans and military conquests and husbands wielding swords against their wives. I don't read about selfishness becoming sanctified and acceptable in marriage. I don't read that it's suddenly OK to seize authority and to ignore Christ's example of coming to serve rather than to be served. I don't read that passivity and weakness and manipulativeness and guile are wifely virtues.
Instead, I read about unity. I read about love, the sort of love that is described in 1 Corinthians 13. I read about living together in understanding. I read about respect. I read about submission. I read about being one. Not being one person or the other. Being one, both together in unity.
Recently I heard a husband who said that, no, he didn't submit to his wife. He didn't believe that was Biblical. But he did submit to the Lord and to his marriage. Specifically, he submitted himself to maintaining and increasing unity and intimacy with his wife. His wife submitted to him and, since that was his goal for their marriage, she was happy that it was her goal as well. In fact, that is a big factor in why she married him. They both believed that, in unity with Christ and with each other, they could serve Him far better than they could separately.
I've worked in the business world. I really am not looking to pretend to be a plant manager and to have a respectful, professional relationship with the CEO of the company. Because, the truth of the matter is that I know this is, at best, a distant relationship. I never wanted to have sexual relations with any of my bosses. It would have been unseemly and inappropriate and an abuse of his power. So why pretend this is a model for marriage? I don't want a business arrangement. I want a real marriage --- a Biblical marriage. The corporate world holds no appeal for me.
I believe in the order of creation. I take it literally. All six days. I honestly believe that it all happened in just that order. God can set me straight when we get to Heaven, and He can chuckle at my naive simplicity. But, in the meantime, I'll take His Words at face value. I also believe Him when He declared it all good.
That's not all I believe. I also believe that the husband should leave his parents and that he should become one with his wife. For some men, that has meant giving up their dreams, their entitlements, their friends --- all for the sake of unity with their wives. All for the sake of loving their wives as Christ loved the Church, giving up His life for it.
I also believe that God meant what He said when He declared that a man who finds a wife finds what is good, and finds favor with God. And I believe His warnings against husbands dealing treacherously with their wives. And I believe that a man's poor relationship with His wife can directly hinder his prayer life.
There is so much more that I believe...
I also believe that we are to die to ourselves, take up our crosses daily, and live for Christ.
And I believe that there is only one God, and that He is a jealous God.
I believe that, as wives, our desire for our husband can be so strong, so overwhelming, that we are tempted to make an idol of this man. Even though the Bible teaches us to be one with our husbands, it does not teach us to put this unity, this intimacy, ahead of God. God is a jealous God. He does not take kindly to idolatry, whether it is self or another that we worship.
I believe that husbands are tempted to rule over their wives, and that too many of them far prefer this over intimacy and unity. It is safer for them, more comfortable, and gets them what they want. Very few want true servanthood. They especially do not want to serve a woman.
But I believe that Christian marriage is different --- or should be different --- from what so many are stridently claiming marriage should be.
It's so much better. So much better. On the day I was married, I thought my father-in-law sweet but quaint and idealistic when he prayed a prayer over us that included the word "bliss" to describe marriage. Yes, he was sweet. Perhaps a bit quaint and idealistic as well. But not so much as I thought at the time. He knew. He grew into being a good husband. He laid down his own life. He gave much and served much, especially in his later years. He knew. He had experienced that bliss first hand --- the rewards of his obedience to Christ.
May we give up on the world's ideas of marriage, even if they are trumpeted forth loudly and eloquently and convincingly by those claiming to be Christian. May we instead submit to Christ and follow Him in all things, especially in our marriages. May we discover the bliss, the good thing, that God has always intended marriage to be.
This post, along with my entire blog, is copyrighted. Please read and honor the copyright notice at the bottom of the sidebar. Thank you.
Thursday, July 03, 2008
You've got to be kidding!
For this post to make any sense whatsoever, you need to read "Problem Children" first.
It probably should go without saying that not everyone agrees with the way we taught our toddlers to interact with our babies. In fact, we've heard several common objections:
You must be crazy. Why on earth would you go through all this huge lengthy process? Why not just spank the toddler the first time he even looks crossways at the baby?
First of all, it really wasn't a huge lengthy process with the only intent being to prevent the toddler from hitting the baby. If our desire was behavioral conditioning of the toddler, we certainly would have gone about it an entirely different way. But we were setting the stage for a relationship that will last, we hope, our children's entire lives.
My mother was my inspiration for this. She nurtured a very strong bond between my older brother and me. I'll admit that I took her ideas and ran with them.
Frankly, although I may have made our preparations sound tedious and boring, they weren't. It was both fun and easy to talk about the upcoming baby, to practice "gentle", to reminisce about when the toddler was a baby, to laugh about toothless babies, etc.
Weren't you being dishonest when you made it seem as if the newborn baby adored his older siblings?
You know what? I'm really not sure. I do know that my newborns have reacted differently, with something like a focused fascination, to their siblings. And it seems like only a moment before our babies are obviously gaga over the "big kids". If you want to get a tiny four or five week old to laugh out loud, I've noticed, just call in the toddler. It works every time.
Plus, we do all sorts of silly stuff with our newborns. We talk in goofy voices, pretending to be them. We had one put the first ornament on the Christmas tree, despite the fact that he was only about a day old, and sound asleep at the time. We blame the newborn for eating the last of the leftovers or drinking the last of the juice. We pretend the newborn can read. What can I say? We're kinda weird and it's quite possible we were very short on entertainment during our season of having babies. Maybe that's why we saw the enormous entertainment value of our newborns.
But none of our children have complained, "You deceived us! We really believed that Newborn #5 got up in the middle of the night and cooked himself a snack!" And, while our children laughed at the pretend newborn antics and giggled at the idea of the newborn being all crazy about them, none of them ever thought the latter was make believe --- since, before long, it became truly obvious that they baby was crazy about them!
What's the big deal about toddlers hitting babies? Isn't it perfectly normal? Besides, I don't want to raise wimpy kids. I think getting smacked around as a baby helps kids toughen up.
We're just as concerned about what the hitting does to the toddler as about what it does to the baby. To be frank, I abhor bullies. I don't want to raise children who think it is OK to bully tiny, helpless newborns. I don't my children's relationships with each other to be marked by bullying.
Plus, I really don't buy into the idea that being bullied will make someone tougher. I was bullied quite a bit in school, and it turned me into a timid little mouse who, by the time I was in junior high, tried to sneak down the halls as silently and unnoticed as possible, just to avoid my tormentors.
Several studies confirm that being the victim of ongoing bullying typically has two consequences: either the victim becomes somewhat of a wimp, or the victim turns into a bully himself.
But even if that were not the case, I don't see how allowing kids to smack tiny babies is something that fits into a Christian ethic. If offending little children is worthy of millstones, what would Jesus think about us allowing our children to hurt the tiniest and weakest among us? What would He think about our attempting to justify this by claiming it is in the helpless baby's best interest?
Why don't you just admit it? You baby your babies!
Uh, well...yes, I do. And I'll freely admit that I think that babies should be babied. After all, they are babies!
This post, along with my entire blog, is copyrighted. Please read and honor the copyright notice at the bottom of the sidebar. Thank you.
It probably should go without saying that not everyone agrees with the way we taught our toddlers to interact with our babies. In fact, we've heard several common objections:
You must be crazy. Why on earth would you go through all this huge lengthy process? Why not just spank the toddler the first time he even looks crossways at the baby?
First of all, it really wasn't a huge lengthy process with the only intent being to prevent the toddler from hitting the baby. If our desire was behavioral conditioning of the toddler, we certainly would have gone about it an entirely different way. But we were setting the stage for a relationship that will last, we hope, our children's entire lives.
My mother was my inspiration for this. She nurtured a very strong bond between my older brother and me. I'll admit that I took her ideas and ran with them.
Frankly, although I may have made our preparations sound tedious and boring, they weren't. It was both fun and easy to talk about the upcoming baby, to practice "gentle", to reminisce about when the toddler was a baby, to laugh about toothless babies, etc.
Weren't you being dishonest when you made it seem as if the newborn baby adored his older siblings?
You know what? I'm really not sure. I do know that my newborns have reacted differently, with something like a focused fascination, to their siblings. And it seems like only a moment before our babies are obviously gaga over the "big kids". If you want to get a tiny four or five week old to laugh out loud, I've noticed, just call in the toddler. It works every time.
Plus, we do all sorts of silly stuff with our newborns. We talk in goofy voices, pretending to be them. We had one put the first ornament on the Christmas tree, despite the fact that he was only about a day old, and sound asleep at the time. We blame the newborn for eating the last of the leftovers or drinking the last of the juice. We pretend the newborn can read. What can I say? We're kinda weird and it's quite possible we were very short on entertainment during our season of having babies. Maybe that's why we saw the enormous entertainment value of our newborns.
But none of our children have complained, "You deceived us! We really believed that Newborn #5 got up in the middle of the night and cooked himself a snack!" And, while our children laughed at the pretend newborn antics and giggled at the idea of the newborn being all crazy about them, none of them ever thought the latter was make believe --- since, before long, it became truly obvious that they baby was crazy about them!
What's the big deal about toddlers hitting babies? Isn't it perfectly normal? Besides, I don't want to raise wimpy kids. I think getting smacked around as a baby helps kids toughen up.
We're just as concerned about what the hitting does to the toddler as about what it does to the baby. To be frank, I abhor bullies. I don't want to raise children who think it is OK to bully tiny, helpless newborns. I don't my children's relationships with each other to be marked by bullying.
Plus, I really don't buy into the idea that being bullied will make someone tougher. I was bullied quite a bit in school, and it turned me into a timid little mouse who, by the time I was in junior high, tried to sneak down the halls as silently and unnoticed as possible, just to avoid my tormentors.
Several studies confirm that being the victim of ongoing bullying typically has two consequences: either the victim becomes somewhat of a wimp, or the victim turns into a bully himself.
But even if that were not the case, I don't see how allowing kids to smack tiny babies is something that fits into a Christian ethic. If offending little children is worthy of millstones, what would Jesus think about us allowing our children to hurt the tiniest and weakest among us? What would He think about our attempting to justify this by claiming it is in the helpless baby's best interest?
Why don't you just admit it? You baby your babies!
Uh, well...yes, I do. And I'll freely admit that I think that babies should be babied. After all, they are babies!
This post, along with my entire blog, is copyrighted. Please read and honor the copyright notice at the bottom of the sidebar. Thank you.
Wednesday, July 02, 2008
Problem children
"When I grow up," Youngest Child said yesterday out of the blue, "my children are going to behave. I feel sorry for problem children." He then went on to recount some of his observations of a particular "problem child".
I found his comments interesting, especially since he was not the only one with concerns about this particular child, who is mostly sweet but whose biggest problem, at least in my opinion, is that he lacks discipline --- and by this, I especially mean discipline of the discipling and teaching sort.
Back when our oldest two were little, someone (I think it was Gregg Harris) impressed me with the idea that we should treat our young children as newly arrived immigrants who needed to be taught our culture's norms. That made a lot of sense to me and, coupled with what I learned from a number of older and wiser mothers, convinced me that a lot of behavior problems could be prevented with teaching, training, and advanced preparation.
After all, we had already done this sort of thing to prepare our oldest to welcome his new usurper...er, younger sibling. So we began preparatory training for all sorts of things, from trips to the grocery story, to church, to visits to other people's houses, etc. We would roleplay before hand --- which the children loved --- and let them know just how they were expected to behave. The whole process was fun, much like a pretend game, and it certainly made life far easier in the long run for our growing family.
A while back, someone asked me how I taught my toddlers not to hit, slap, scratch, or pinch the baby. The toddler's training really began while my pregnancy grew more noticeable. I would talk about how the baby was "hiding" and I would already be teaching and modeling the concept of "gentle". The toddler would get to practice "gentle" in the way he touched my belly. "You need to be very gentle," I would tell him, "because the tiny baby is hiding inside me."
We would show the toddler pictures of himself when he was a tiny baby. We would point out other tiny babies, and we would always remind the toddler of "gentle". We would roleplay with dolls. We would guide the toddler's hands in how to touch and where to touch. In order to avoid toddler eye-poking (even the most well-trained toddlers seem drawn to touch babies' eyes) we didn't allow our children to touch babies in the face.
During this time, we also prepared our toddlers for what newborns could and couldn't do. We laughed over the fact that they had no teeth. (I'm not sure why my toddlers found this so amusing, but they did.) We had a few books about babies that we read over and over.
We also taught our children that newborns were sensitive and easily startled, and that we needed to use our "quiet voices" around tiny babies. So we would practice that as well.
I also began what I jokingly refer to as my propaganda campaign. Because we were always so excited about the new baby, our children always were excited. It wasn't difficult to convince them how wonderful it was to be a big brother or big sister.
Then there were the t-shirts. The best set of shirts were the ones I made in anticipation of Youngest Child's birth. Not only were they hand-painted and actually somewhat artsy, but they amused us as well with what I hand-lettered on them: "Biggest Brother", "Big Sister", "Bigger Brother", "Big Brother", 'Littlest Big Brother", and "Baby". Our children couldn't wait to pose for a picture with all the siblings in their shirts, and they had great fun wearing them on our first post-baby excursions.
Those first weeks with a newborn, at least with the youngest three, seemed like a grand celebration, what we referred to as the "babymoon". By this time, the toddler fully understood what the word "gentle" meant, but we still supervised him carefully whenever he was around the baby. In fact --- and this was very important to me --- I never left the baby unsupervised around the children until Youngest Child was getting a bit older and I felt my daughter could handle him for a few minutes while I went to the bathroom. When I say "never", I mean just that. When I showered, the baby was in his little babyseat in the bathroom with me. If he was napping in the crib, I made sure that the toddler didn't have access to the room. Some might call me paranoid, but I was never amused at all the stories other parents told me about discovering the toddler trying to drag the newborn out of the crib by the feet. I didn't want the same thing to happen to my baby.
The "babymoon" was a peaceful, relaxing time when we got to know our new baby and enjoyed being a family together, while we kept noise and outside distractions to a minimum.
The propaganda machine was also in full force. We convinced the toddler that the tiny baby just about worshiped the ground he walked on. Also, since were practiced responsive parenting, our toddlers were never desensitized to babies' crying; in fact, it was usually the toddler who was most insistent that I quickly feed or hold the baby the moment he seemed remotely unhappy. We encouraged this sensitivity; we knew it would become even more important as the baby grew older and might do something that annoyed his older siblings. The idea of actually causing a baby to cry is still abhorrent to our children.
In anticipation of the baby crawling, we taught our children not to run in the house, and not to leave items on the floor that might be dangerous to the baby. We taught them the word "careful". We reserved the concept of "gentle" for living things, but taught our little ones to be "careful" with things that might be fragile or might get damaged by over-exuberance.
With that sort of preparation --- that might sound much more difficult than it was --- and our constant supervision of baby-toddler interactions, there was no hitting or pinching of the baby. It simply couldn't happen. Instead, gentleness with the baby became a habit. Tender-heartedness towards baby discomfort became a big part of how our children reacted to their youngest siblings. Once when I jokingly asked Eldest Son what he would have thought if I'd decided to "Ezzo" Child #5, he said, "We wouldn't have let you. Can you imagine four children clamoring 'Don't let the baby cry!' and praying aloud with desperation when you didn't listen to us? There's no way you could have done the Ezzo Method with our baby!"
So that's the long answer to another question I was asked a while back. Someone had seen a three year old slap his baby sister hard in the face, for no discernible reason. "What did you do when your toddlers hit the baby?" I was asked.
"They didn't," I answered. "I didn't let them." And, quite honestly, I'm not sure the desire ever crossed their minds.
This post, along with my entire blog, is copyrighted. Please read and honor the copyright notice at the bottom of the sidebar. Thank you.
I found his comments interesting, especially since he was not the only one with concerns about this particular child, who is mostly sweet but whose biggest problem, at least in my opinion, is that he lacks discipline --- and by this, I especially mean discipline of the discipling and teaching sort.
Back when our oldest two were little, someone (I think it was Gregg Harris) impressed me with the idea that we should treat our young children as newly arrived immigrants who needed to be taught our culture's norms. That made a lot of sense to me and, coupled with what I learned from a number of older and wiser mothers, convinced me that a lot of behavior problems could be prevented with teaching, training, and advanced preparation.
After all, we had already done this sort of thing to prepare our oldest to welcome his new usurper...er, younger sibling. So we began preparatory training for all sorts of things, from trips to the grocery story, to church, to visits to other people's houses, etc. We would roleplay before hand --- which the children loved --- and let them know just how they were expected to behave. The whole process was fun, much like a pretend game, and it certainly made life far easier in the long run for our growing family.
A while back, someone asked me how I taught my toddlers not to hit, slap, scratch, or pinch the baby. The toddler's training really began while my pregnancy grew more noticeable. I would talk about how the baby was "hiding" and I would already be teaching and modeling the concept of "gentle". The toddler would get to practice "gentle" in the way he touched my belly. "You need to be very gentle," I would tell him, "because the tiny baby is hiding inside me."
We would show the toddler pictures of himself when he was a tiny baby. We would point out other tiny babies, and we would always remind the toddler of "gentle". We would roleplay with dolls. We would guide the toddler's hands in how to touch and where to touch. In order to avoid toddler eye-poking (even the most well-trained toddlers seem drawn to touch babies' eyes) we didn't allow our children to touch babies in the face.
During this time, we also prepared our toddlers for what newborns could and couldn't do. We laughed over the fact that they had no teeth. (I'm not sure why my toddlers found this so amusing, but they did.) We had a few books about babies that we read over and over.
We also taught our children that newborns were sensitive and easily startled, and that we needed to use our "quiet voices" around tiny babies. So we would practice that as well.
I also began what I jokingly refer to as my propaganda campaign. Because we were always so excited about the new baby, our children always were excited. It wasn't difficult to convince them how wonderful it was to be a big brother or big sister.
Then there were the t-shirts. The best set of shirts were the ones I made in anticipation of Youngest Child's birth. Not only were they hand-painted and actually somewhat artsy, but they amused us as well with what I hand-lettered on them: "Biggest Brother", "Big Sister", "Bigger Brother", "Big Brother", 'Littlest Big Brother", and "Baby". Our children couldn't wait to pose for a picture with all the siblings in their shirts, and they had great fun wearing them on our first post-baby excursions.
Those first weeks with a newborn, at least with the youngest three, seemed like a grand celebration, what we referred to as the "babymoon". By this time, the toddler fully understood what the word "gentle" meant, but we still supervised him carefully whenever he was around the baby. In fact --- and this was very important to me --- I never left the baby unsupervised around the children until Youngest Child was getting a bit older and I felt my daughter could handle him for a few minutes while I went to the bathroom. When I say "never", I mean just that. When I showered, the baby was in his little babyseat in the bathroom with me. If he was napping in the crib, I made sure that the toddler didn't have access to the room. Some might call me paranoid, but I was never amused at all the stories other parents told me about discovering the toddler trying to drag the newborn out of the crib by the feet. I didn't want the same thing to happen to my baby.
The "babymoon" was a peaceful, relaxing time when we got to know our new baby and enjoyed being a family together, while we kept noise and outside distractions to a minimum.
The propaganda machine was also in full force. We convinced the toddler that the tiny baby just about worshiped the ground he walked on. Also, since were practiced responsive parenting, our toddlers were never desensitized to babies' crying; in fact, it was usually the toddler who was most insistent that I quickly feed or hold the baby the moment he seemed remotely unhappy. We encouraged this sensitivity; we knew it would become even more important as the baby grew older and might do something that annoyed his older siblings. The idea of actually causing a baby to cry is still abhorrent to our children.
In anticipation of the baby crawling, we taught our children not to run in the house, and not to leave items on the floor that might be dangerous to the baby. We taught them the word "careful". We reserved the concept of "gentle" for living things, but taught our little ones to be "careful" with things that might be fragile or might get damaged by over-exuberance.
With that sort of preparation --- that might sound much more difficult than it was --- and our constant supervision of baby-toddler interactions, there was no hitting or pinching of the baby. It simply couldn't happen. Instead, gentleness with the baby became a habit. Tender-heartedness towards baby discomfort became a big part of how our children reacted to their youngest siblings. Once when I jokingly asked Eldest Son what he would have thought if I'd decided to "Ezzo" Child #5, he said, "We wouldn't have let you. Can you imagine four children clamoring 'Don't let the baby cry!' and praying aloud with desperation when you didn't listen to us? There's no way you could have done the Ezzo Method with our baby!"
So that's the long answer to another question I was asked a while back. Someone had seen a three year old slap his baby sister hard in the face, for no discernible reason. "What did you do when your toddlers hit the baby?" I was asked.
"They didn't," I answered. "I didn't let them." And, quite honestly, I'm not sure the desire ever crossed their minds.
This post, along with my entire blog, is copyrighted. Please read and honor the copyright notice at the bottom of the sidebar. Thank you.
Friday, May 23, 2008
Old folks & life experience
When we're young, immature, and inexperienced, we tend not to value those things that we don't think we need. One of those is life experience.
Back in my single days, I worked for a specialized employment agency. I would interview lots of college grads who, despite their lack of work experience, would grow almost angry that I couldn't place them with any of our client companies. "Our clients want us to provide them with experienced people," I would explain, only to have the interviewee argue with me about how work experience wasn't necessary.
One time I actually read out loud the job description for the position one young grad was applying for and asked, point by point, "Have you actually done this?"
"Well, no," was the answer, "but it shouldn't really matter. Here, let me show you my college transcript. I got excellent grades!"
"That's wonderful, and I'm sure you'll have no trouble finding work elsewhere, but our clients want someone who has actual experience and who already possesses these important skills. Otherwise, you won't be able to do this particular job. It's not a trainee position."
I had more than one college grad throw a bit of a tizzy fit at me for not letting them interview with the prospective employer. They thought I was being unreasonable. They were convinced that they knew more than I did! Their knowledge and their diploma, they told me again and again, was far more valuable than work experience --- why couldn't I see that?
A number of our clients specifically asked us that we not ever send them anyone "fresh out of school". The lack of experience, coupled with a youthful arrogance, made for poor employees --- or at least that's what I was told over and over.
Often, when we don't know much about a particular thing, we tend to think that thing is much simpler than it really is. We tend to think we know more about it than we do. That's where the expression, "a little knowledge is a dangerous thing", comes from. Or, as an old friend of mine used to say, "I was too stupid to know how stupid I was."
There are some things you simply cannot learn from a book, or from observing others. It is always unwise to attempt to teach something we ourselves have never actually done.
Unfortunately, when we old folks try to explain this to young folks, the young 'uns often don't get it. They think they know more than they do. They have no experience, so they don't value the experience of others.
Many of us more experienced parents will often joke that we were "parenting experts" before we had children, but now we realize how little we know! My sister-in-law was once rebuked for her choice in strollers by a man who told her haughtily, "I am a parenting expert." When asked how many children he had raised, he had to confess that he didn't have any children --- but that didn't matter! He was an expert because he had written several books!
Lack of experience doesn't stop some people from giving advice. I've actually been given breastfeeding advice by bottle-feeders and homeschooling advice by public schoolers! While I've listened politely, I've often had to suppress the urge to giggle at how silly their advice was. They literally had no idea what they were talking about, but they were so sure of themselves.
And now, egged on by the internet and a culture that values youth over experience, we have children thinking that they can give marriage advice. Sigh...we have children thinking that we old folks are doing such a terrible job in following Jesus that the children need to step in and take over.
The only thing we can hope for these brash young things is that they become teachable very quickly. Some people only learn from painful experience. May these zealous youth be humble enough to learn from every day experience, lest God have to discipline them more severely.
This post, along with my entire blog, is copyrighted. Please read and honor the copyright notice on the bottom of this page. Thank you.
Back in my single days, I worked for a specialized employment agency. I would interview lots of college grads who, despite their lack of work experience, would grow almost angry that I couldn't place them with any of our client companies. "Our clients want us to provide them with experienced people," I would explain, only to have the interviewee argue with me about how work experience wasn't necessary.
One time I actually read out loud the job description for the position one young grad was applying for and asked, point by point, "Have you actually done this?"
"Well, no," was the answer, "but it shouldn't really matter. Here, let me show you my college transcript. I got excellent grades!"
"That's wonderful, and I'm sure you'll have no trouble finding work elsewhere, but our clients want someone who has actual experience and who already possesses these important skills. Otherwise, you won't be able to do this particular job. It's not a trainee position."
I had more than one college grad throw a bit of a tizzy fit at me for not letting them interview with the prospective employer. They thought I was being unreasonable. They were convinced that they knew more than I did! Their knowledge and their diploma, they told me again and again, was far more valuable than work experience --- why couldn't I see that?
A number of our clients specifically asked us that we not ever send them anyone "fresh out of school". The lack of experience, coupled with a youthful arrogance, made for poor employees --- or at least that's what I was told over and over.
Often, when we don't know much about a particular thing, we tend to think that thing is much simpler than it really is. We tend to think we know more about it than we do. That's where the expression, "a little knowledge is a dangerous thing", comes from. Or, as an old friend of mine used to say, "I was too stupid to know how stupid I was."
There are some things you simply cannot learn from a book, or from observing others. It is always unwise to attempt to teach something we ourselves have never actually done.
Unfortunately, when we old folks try to explain this to young folks, the young 'uns often don't get it. They think they know more than they do. They have no experience, so they don't value the experience of others.
Many of us more experienced parents will often joke that we were "parenting experts" before we had children, but now we realize how little we know! My sister-in-law was once rebuked for her choice in strollers by a man who told her haughtily, "I am a parenting expert." When asked how many children he had raised, he had to confess that he didn't have any children --- but that didn't matter! He was an expert because he had written several books!
Lack of experience doesn't stop some people from giving advice. I've actually been given breastfeeding advice by bottle-feeders and homeschooling advice by public schoolers! While I've listened politely, I've often had to suppress the urge to giggle at how silly their advice was. They literally had no idea what they were talking about, but they were so sure of themselves.
And now, egged on by the internet and a culture that values youth over experience, we have children thinking that they can give marriage advice. Sigh...we have children thinking that we old folks are doing such a terrible job in following Jesus that the children need to step in and take over.
The only thing we can hope for these brash young things is that they become teachable very quickly. Some people only learn from painful experience. May these zealous youth be humble enough to learn from every day experience, lest God have to discipline them more severely.
This post, along with my entire blog, is copyrighted. Please read and honor the copyright notice on the bottom of this page. Thank you.
Young whippersnappers & whippersnapperettes
I was reading Internet Monk recently and ran across a wonderful comment. Unfortunately, I can't copy it here this morning because the website seems down. But it, and some conversations I've had recently online and in the real world, did get me to thinking.
There are two growing trends I've observed in Christian circles over the past few years. While they may seem polar opposites, I suddenly realized they are really stemming from the same source. See if these sound familiar to you:
1. The very young pastor or youth pastor who delights in his in-your-face, stick-it-to-the-man approach to church life. No matter what anyone says, he is going to sport his wild tattoos, piercings, and odd hair, and he's going to shake things up by using obscene language in church, showing R-rated movies, and doing whatever he can to offend the sensibilities of just about anyone older than him. He simply won't listen to his elders because they are...well, old! Even worse, they are fuddy-duds, culturally irrelevant, and don't know what they are talking about.
2. The even younger girl who delights in her know-it-all approach to godly womanhood, even though she has not yet achieved womanhood herself. She loves to expound on blogs, in self-published newsletters and books --- anywhere she can --- about how older women are sinning by not doing what she thinks they should be doing. She loves to quote Titus 2:3-5 and sometimes even will go so far as to claim that she is an "older woman" who is called to teach even younger girls. However, that will not stop her from refusing to listen to anyone who disagrees with her, no matter their age, nor will any Scripture or anyone convince her that perhaps she needs to be learning at this stage in her life, rather than trying to teach what she doesn't yet know. She simply won't listen to her elders because they are...well, old! Even worse, they are fuddy-duds, probably feminists, worldly, and don't know what they are talking about.
It's really the same basic sinful attitude. On the one hand, it's very blatant and rebellious looking. On the other hand, it's hidden behind a sweet facade. But the pride and arrogance, the delight in telling off one's elders, is unmistakable, whether the language is profane or pseudo-polite.
Recently I encountered the blog of a young 15 year old. She is definitely a good writer, and I'm sure she has heard this many times. Like many young teenagers being raised in this age of self-esteem and encouraged free expression, she seems to think that the world is eagerly awaiting her "wisdom" on any number of topics. She actually solicits questions from her audience and seems to think she is capable of teaching anyone, of any age, about how to be a homemaker, how to be a good wife, etc.
Several of us have been both concerned and somewhat amused over her excessive arrogance and pride. I would point you to her blog to read for yourselves but, frankly, I don't want to encourage her any further.
She may be an extreme example, but unfortunately, she is not alone. Even worse, some of us adults are guilty of fostering and even provoking this sort of attitude and behavior among children and youth. It starts when we smile, chuckle, and allow them to expound on topics they know nothing about when they are tiny. "Why, you're right!" we find ourselves saying. We forget to add, "But it's really not your place to tell your father how to drive, especially since all you've ever driven is a tricycle." What seems cute for a toddler grows into a prideful, know-it-all sort of attitude, where a child becomes puffed up with what they think is some sort of superior knowledge and wisdom. They mock experience as being irrelevant. After all, they have READ THE BIBLE! And, why, just this past year, they READ A WONDERFUL BOOK THAT CHANGED THEIR MINDS! And besides, older women are all feminists!
When this one child began rebuking her elders for being in sin, because she believes the Bible commands a woman to be a homemaker only, and never to add any other activity to her homemaking, lest she cease to be a homemaker --- and when she refused to listen to the most polite entreaties and cautions coming from her elders --- I felt it was time to take off the gloves, so to speak.
So I wrote the following comment, knowing full well that she might never post it, and also knowing full well that it that she would not have ears to hear. But I believe that we who are really older women have a duty to let children know when their arrogance and pride have made them become disrespectful to their elders, and when these children are usurping a role that God never gave them. There is a reason that God, in His Word, urges us not to give new converts or the immature roles of prominence. So I wrote:
I followed this up with another comment:
Am I saying we have nothing to learn from young children? No. I learn from my children all the time! But they do not presume to think that they are my teachers. They do not set up blogs and solicit questions, as if they were some sort of experts on things that they themselves have never experienced. My capable 15 year old, for example, does not presume to tell men how to be truly manly, how to manage career and family, or how to be a good husband and father. He has opinions on those topics, sure, but he knows enough --- and respects enough --- not to set himself up as a teacher of the very people he should be learning from. And he certainly knows enough not to rebuke his elders for sinning when they disagree with his interpretation of Scripture.
Youthful zeal is a good thing. Youthful pride is not. God withstands the proud. Let's be sure we are not encouraging them.
Edited to remove sentences that indicated my comments had not been posted, since they have since appeared on the blog in question.
This post, along with my entire blog, is copyrighted. Please read and honor the copyright notice on the bottom of this page. Thank you.
There are two growing trends I've observed in Christian circles over the past few years. While they may seem polar opposites, I suddenly realized they are really stemming from the same source. See if these sound familiar to you:
1. The very young pastor or youth pastor who delights in his in-your-face, stick-it-to-the-man approach to church life. No matter what anyone says, he is going to sport his wild tattoos, piercings, and odd hair, and he's going to shake things up by using obscene language in church, showing R-rated movies, and doing whatever he can to offend the sensibilities of just about anyone older than him. He simply won't listen to his elders because they are...well, old! Even worse, they are fuddy-duds, culturally irrelevant, and don't know what they are talking about.
2. The even younger girl who delights in her know-it-all approach to godly womanhood, even though she has not yet achieved womanhood herself. She loves to expound on blogs, in self-published newsletters and books --- anywhere she can --- about how older women are sinning by not doing what she thinks they should be doing. She loves to quote Titus 2:3-5 and sometimes even will go so far as to claim that she is an "older woman" who is called to teach even younger girls. However, that will not stop her from refusing to listen to anyone who disagrees with her, no matter their age, nor will any Scripture or anyone convince her that perhaps she needs to be learning at this stage in her life, rather than trying to teach what she doesn't yet know. She simply won't listen to her elders because they are...well, old! Even worse, they are fuddy-duds, probably feminists, worldly, and don't know what they are talking about.
It's really the same basic sinful attitude. On the one hand, it's very blatant and rebellious looking. On the other hand, it's hidden behind a sweet facade. But the pride and arrogance, the delight in telling off one's elders, is unmistakable, whether the language is profane or pseudo-polite.
Recently I encountered the blog of a young 15 year old. She is definitely a good writer, and I'm sure she has heard this many times. Like many young teenagers being raised in this age of self-esteem and encouraged free expression, she seems to think that the world is eagerly awaiting her "wisdom" on any number of topics. She actually solicits questions from her audience and seems to think she is capable of teaching anyone, of any age, about how to be a homemaker, how to be a good wife, etc.
Several of us have been both concerned and somewhat amused over her excessive arrogance and pride. I would point you to her blog to read for yourselves but, frankly, I don't want to encourage her any further.
She may be an extreme example, but unfortunately, she is not alone. Even worse, some of us adults are guilty of fostering and even provoking this sort of attitude and behavior among children and youth. It starts when we smile, chuckle, and allow them to expound on topics they know nothing about when they are tiny. "Why, you're right!" we find ourselves saying. We forget to add, "But it's really not your place to tell your father how to drive, especially since all you've ever driven is a tricycle." What seems cute for a toddler grows into a prideful, know-it-all sort of attitude, where a child becomes puffed up with what they think is some sort of superior knowledge and wisdom. They mock experience as being irrelevant. After all, they have READ THE BIBLE! And, why, just this past year, they READ A WONDERFUL BOOK THAT CHANGED THEIR MINDS! And besides, older women are all feminists!
When this one child began rebuking her elders for being in sin, because she believes the Bible commands a woman to be a homemaker only, and never to add any other activity to her homemaking, lest she cease to be a homemaker --- and when she refused to listen to the most polite entreaties and cautions coming from her elders --- I felt it was time to take off the gloves, so to speak.
So I wrote the following comment, knowing full well that she might never post it, and also knowing full well that it that she would not have ears to hear. But I believe that we who are really older women have a duty to let children know when their arrogance and pride have made them become disrespectful to their elders, and when these children are usurping a role that God never gave them. There is a reason that God, in His Word, urges us not to give new converts or the immature roles of prominence. So I wrote:
My dear young girl, perhaps I need to speak more bluntly with you because it is obvious that my words of warning to you fell on deaf ears, as have the words of others.
God inspired the author of Titus 2:3-5 to write those words, did He not? And you are how old, fifteen?
You are obviously not an "aged woman" or even, by any stretch of the imagination, an older woman. God has not asked you to attempt to teach anyone anything. God, in fact, commands that you respect those that are older, especially those with grey hair.
He has wisely ordained that older women are to teach younger women the very things that you are attempting to expound, very dogmatically, here on your blog. You are out of line. God never anywhere in His word suggested that precocious young girls, no matter how clever and bold they are, no matter how cute and sweet, no matter how full of themselves they are, no matter whether or not they are good mommy's helpers and homemakers-in-training, should ever be expounding on homemaking, loving husbands, or the ways of godly women to anyone. You, my dear, should be sitting at the feet of older women, and learning from them in all meekness and quietness and reverence. Your role, at this stage in your very young life, is not to exhort and edify. It is to learn. It is to be exhorted and edified.
Frankly, I fear for you. Talk about the Word of God being blasphemed!
Normally I do not speak so harshly to children, but it is obvious that you did not listen to others who have warned you in much milder terms. Please repent. Let the older women teach. Do not usurp their role. Live about 30 more years, and then --- should you have proven yourself --- God may want to use you in this way.
I followed this up with another comment:
From Titus 2:
1 But as for you, speak the things which are proper for sound doctrine: 2 that the older men be sober, reverent, temperate, sound in faith, in love, in patience; 3 the older women likewise, that they be reverent in behavior, not slanderers, not given to much wine, teachers of good things— 4 that they admonish the young women to love their husbands, to love their children, 5 to be discreet, chaste, homemakers, good, obedient to their own husbands, that the word of God may not be blasphemed.
6 Likewise, exhort the young men to be sober-minded, 7 in all things showing yourself to be a pattern of good works; in doctrine showing integrity, reverence, incorruptibility, 8 sound speech that cannot be condemned, that one who is an opponent may be ashamed, having nothing evil to say of you.
9 Exhort bondservants to be obedient to their own masters, to be well pleasing in all things, not answering back, 10 not pilfering, but showing all good fidelity, that they may adorn the doctrine of God our Savior in all things.
While we all know, of course, that the topic headings in our Bibles are not part of the inspired Word of God, it is interesting that a number of Bibles head this passage with something along the lines of, "Duties of younger and older". This passage is addressed, as is the entire epistle, to Titus, so we can't pretend that it gives each one of us carte blanche to usurp a teaching and/or admonishing role that is not ours.
It is interesting to note that no role is given to children in this passage. The young women mentioned are assumed to be adult women, with husbands and homes. It is the responsibility of the older women to set a godly standard of behavior and to teach the younger women, both in example and in word.
The young women are to apply those lessons in their own lives. They are not given a teaching role.
The children aren't even mentioned.
I realize that I'm way over the hill. Times have changed. I know. I know. I'm not sure that this comment, or my previous one, will ever be posted. I addressed my previous one to young Rebekah, because I felt it was my duty as an older woman. Now I'd like to issue a caution to the women who have read and commented on this blog.
My fourth child is Rebekah's age. He is quite the capable fellow. He has skills and abilities that not that many grown men possess. In fact, he is sometimes pressed into service by men who need his help. Because of the way in which we are raising him, he would never presume to tell a grown man what to do. I've warned all of our children that, as the Bible says, "Knowledge puffs up." He offers his physical help in a humble way and knows when to keep his mouth shut. He is respectful.
Back in my day, in the circles in which I traveled, there was not this huge emphasis on self-esteem. Children weren't encouraged to express themselves freely. Children were taught their "place". We were expected to respect adults.
Today, people think it's "cute" when their tot is a backseat driver or when little Melissa or Buford tells an adult how to do something. I never did think it was cute. But even if it is cute when a little tot lisps out a Bible verse and utters her precocious interpretation of it to adults, it has long ceased to be cute by the time she is 15 and has the --- why mince words here --- arrogance and outrageous gall to rebuke her elders for sinning.
We could try to set her straight. But I really don't think Rebekah is respectful enough, humble enough, mature enough, or teachable enough to listen. I think we are wasting our time.
What we should not do is humor a little girl who sets up a blog and solicits questions --- as if she has answers at her inexperienced and unfinished age! We should not tolerate her and the many others like her who presume to take on a teaching role and then claim coyly, "All I did was quote a few verses!"
We should not give girls like this an audience. In a sound church, they would not have an audience. In another 30 years, perhaps Rebekah will have something to say to younger women, something borne out of her own walk with the Lord.
Right now, all she has is her blog. Being able to write does not make one worthy of an audience. Let's not encourage her in usurping the role of older women and in her ongoing disrespect for God's Word and for God's people.
Of course, what do I know? I'm horribly old-fashioned and I've long outgrown the arrogance of youth, when I thought I knew it all!
Am I saying we have nothing to learn from young children? No. I learn from my children all the time! But they do not presume to think that they are my teachers. They do not set up blogs and solicit questions, as if they were some sort of experts on things that they themselves have never experienced. My capable 15 year old, for example, does not presume to tell men how to be truly manly, how to manage career and family, or how to be a good husband and father. He has opinions on those topics, sure, but he knows enough --- and respects enough --- not to set himself up as a teacher of the very people he should be learning from. And he certainly knows enough not to rebuke his elders for sinning when they disagree with his interpretation of Scripture.
Youthful zeal is a good thing. Youthful pride is not. God withstands the proud. Let's be sure we are not encouraging them.
Edited to remove sentences that indicated my comments had not been posted, since they have since appeared on the blog in question.
This post, along with my entire blog, is copyrighted. Please read and honor the copyright notice on the bottom of this page. Thank you.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)