God has forgiven me of much. I am a former child abuser. Never having been reported to CPS or never having a record of my crimes does not change the truth. Yes, I have sought help, and yes, I have changed by the grace of God. Although my past doesn't dictate my future, my present doesn't erase my past.
I realize not all parents are abuse survivors who struggle with breaking the cycle of abuse. But we all struggle with forgiveness from time to time.
It is so easy to get wrapped up in our injuries, the slights and disrespect toward us that we fail to see how we have injured and disrespected others.
Yes, we are all broken people. No, I am not excusing those who intentionally hurt or abuse others physically, emotionally, sexually, spiritually, or otherwise.
I think, though, that we often have an unrealistic view of forgiveness. Somehow, we've gotten the message that forgiveness not only erases a debt, it obligates us to continue to put ourselves in situations where we can again be hurt or taken advantage of. Such is not the case.
Forgiveness means forgiving a debt. When someone has wronged me and I choose to forgive, I am releasing that individual from the obligation I feel they owe me. I am choosing not to let resentment over that obligation build, and I am choosing to move on from the situation. I am NOT ignoring any damage that was done, and I am NOT going to put open myself to being wronged again, especially if that individual is in a pattern of abuse.
I have found that forgiveness, especially in cases where I have been deeply wronged, is a process. I have to continue to choose forgiveness instead of resentment. I must choose to erase the debt instead of expecting certain behaviors or responses from the offender.
I find, though, that I am quick to seek forgiveness and grace for myself, and quick to seek justice for others' wrongs against me.
The parable of the unforgiving servant in Matthew 18 always speaks to me.
Christ tells of a king who was taking account of his servants. One servant owed the king 10,000 talents. We have no idea whether the talents were gold or silver, but frankly, it doesn't matter. A talent is 57 pounds, which means in today's market, the servant owed $896,610,000 in gold or $16,530,000 in silver. For most of us, that is an unpayable debt!
The servant resorted to his only recourse: begging for mercy and promising that he would pay the debt over time. The gracious king forgave the servant's debt, no strings attached.
The relieved servant went out from the king's presence and chanced upon another servant. The second servant owed (from what I can deduce) something akin to $4,100 to the first servant. While still a lot of money to most of us, it is a debt that could realistically be repaid.
One would think the first servant, high off his recent experience with grace, would be anxious to share such mercy with his peer. Instead, he grabbed the other by the throat and demanded immediate restitution! When the second man couldn't immediately come up with the funds, the first had him thrown into debtor's prison.
The other servants saw this injustice and told their king. The king immediately called the first man to him and reminded him of the great debt that had been forgiven, and asked why the servant had not had compassion on his own debtor. Apparently, the king was so angry, he rescinded his forgiveness of the original debt and delivered the unforgiving servant to jail.
This is where the phrase "Forgive us our debts as we forgive our debtors" comes into play.
I think the take away from this parable is not just the injustice of being forgiven and refusing to forgive, but it's also how we forgive (or don't) affects how God forgives us.
That's a mind-bending concept.
One is tends to think that a gracious God forgives because He is gracious. We often forget that God is also a Being of justice.
Why, then, should I harshly punish my children for slights against me (back talk, failure to follow instructions, etc.) when God has forgiven me of so much more? Why do I expect those who have offended me to come groveling in humility while I too often wave my hand or roll my eyes when confronted with my own offenses?
"Father, forgive us our debts as we forgive our debtors." Help me to remember the debt I owe You, and let it soften my responses to others.
Sunday, March 10, 2013
Church Relationships
Relationships are messy. Church relationships can be even more so, because the spiritual and the personal, the heart, the mind, and the soul are all tangled together in one beautiful, chaotically broken, mended package.
How does one handle the minor offenses that are bound to happen when people from different backgrounds and opinions come together for corporate worship? Frankly, I think a lot of stuff that is just preference can be acknowledged and accommodated to a point.
For instance, some people don’t like having the offering plate passed in church, but prefer an offering box to sit at the back of the sanctuary. Some people prefer the offering be received after the worship portion, but before the sermon, and some people prefer to give the monetary offering at the very end of the service.
None of these are right or wrong; they are simply preferences. Perhaps a church where several people have expressed their differing preferences could compromise by changing the offering format month to month. It’s fairly simple to do and it shows that the members’ thoughts and opinions are valued.
Perhaps new members have voiced frustration that the church seems to have a lot of “unwritten rules” they are not privy to, and have asked that expectations be clearly communicated. These particular “unwritten rules” are not oppressive or bad; they are simply part of the fabric of this particular church and are well-known to the long-time members of the congregation.
A simple solution would be to write down the expectations so all members and attendees are aware of potential land mines that could cause unnecessary and unintended offense and frustration.
Or maybe, individuals have expressed concern that the church leadership seems to need exercise a lot of control over every aspect of church ministry. Perhaps communication from the senior choir director to the children’s choir director must be filtered through the pastor when it would be simpler for the two directors to speak directly to each other without a go-between.
Since a pastor is an over-seer, he could allow the music ministers to do their jobs and simply require them to submit final plans for the services to him. There is no real need for the pastor to be privy to every detail of the decision-making processes of the music ministers as they plan for choir rehearsals and church services. By reviewing the final plans, the pastor would still be involved and apprised, without being controlling.
But what if you’ve unintentionally offended someone? What if their communications with you in person are polite, but stilted? What if communication outside of church has completely ceased? What if you’ve asked for an explanation and apologized for any offense caused (and also asked to be told the offense), only to receive a terse, “Thank you for your communication.” or no response at all? What if you’ve sought reconciliation through the pastor, and the pastor (after having spoken to the other party) insists no one has issues with you and refuses to arrange or sit in on a meeting between you and the other person?
What then?
Ordinarily, I would advise continuing to go to church as usual. If the other party insists nothing is wrong and no offense has occurred, all you can do is take him at his word. Treat this individual the way you always have, with love and kindness and honesty. It could be this person has something else going on in his life that is effecting all his relationships. It is quite possible you have indeed done nothing to offend, and this individual is simply distancing himself for an unrelated reason.
But what if, after you’ve attempted reconciliation and have been told no one has cause for offense, you are invited by your church leadership to visit other churches?
What then?
I suggest accepting their invitation, hurt though you may be, and seek fellowship elsewhere. It is hard (nigh impossible) not to take such a situation personally, but do try to assume positive intent on the part of the church. Perhaps they believe that they are failing in ministering effectively to you and have concluded that a church with different resources may better meet your needs. Perhaps they see that you and they have different spiritual goals for the church and believe you would be more comfortable in a church that has goals more in line with your own. Perhaps the pastor believes what you intended as constructive criticism is a sign of your discontent or your asking “permission” to be released from membership. Perhaps the leadership believes your theology is divergent enough that in time, there could be a large, painful rift between you and they are seeking to prevent a potential church split.
It would be nice if the church leadership would assume positive intent on your part as well, but you are in control only of yourself and your decisions in this case. If the leadership sees you as either a liability or a threat when your intentions are merely to further the spread of the gospel of Jesus Christ through improvement of church ministry, there is, sadly, not much more you can do.
Remember, too, that “church” doesn’t have to look like what you are familiar with. God has promised “For where two or three come together in my name, there am I with them.” Church can happen while folding laundry with your children and speaking of God’s goodness, or while having coffee with a friend for informal Bible study. Church can happen when conversing with a stranger who is a believer in the DMV line. Church is not confined to brick walls and stained glass, a routine of singing followed by four (alliterated) points and a poem, or the daily liturgy.
Church is meeting with God, and since God is omnipresent, church can (and should) happen everywhere. I advise finding a church (in whatever form) full of broken people who not only acknowledge their own brokenness, but delight in welcoming and worshipping with other broken people. After all, Christ shines brightest through the broken places.
Friday, February 15, 2013
Spiritual Abuse
verb (used with object)
1.
to use wrongly or improperly; misuse: to abuse one's authority.
2.
to treat in a harmful, injurious, or offensive way: to abuse a horse; to abuse one's eyesight.
3.
to speak insultingly, harshly, and unjustly to or about; revile; malign.
4.
to commit sexual assault upon.
5.
Virtually everyone, if asked, would assert he is against abuse of any kind. The problem comes
when we define abuse differently. For instance, I believe spanking is physical abuse. There are
many others who disagree with that blanket statement and wish to add caveats to it: spanking is
an acceptable form of punishment unless taken too far they say. Unfortunately, what may be quite
obviously "too far" for one child is not so obvious for another.
I believe repeated teasing and mocking of children is emotional abuse. There are those who
disagree, who insist their child knows teasing is done in fun and their child actually likes it.
Frankly, there are people in this world who are so damaged by that type of thing in their childhoods,
that they do not feel truly loved unless their sexual partner mocks and ridicules them. If there is
even a remote possibility my actions or words to my children could lead to that type of dysfunction, believe me, I will do everything I can to avoid setting my child up for that type of dynamic.
I believe many well-meaning religious institutions (churches, universities, mission boards) practice spiritual abuse. I daresay most of the perpetrators of spiritual abuse do not actually intend to wound others, although there are certainly exceptions where individuals do willfully and knowingly use their spiritual authority to control others. Spiritual abuse is defined as "the mistreatment of a person who is in need of help, support or greater spiritual empowerment, with the result of weakening, undermining, or decreasing that person's spiritual empowerment." A broader definition would be "a kind of abuse which...leaves us spiritually discouraged and emotionally cut off from the healing love of God."
For churches to function properly, they need to know those to whom they claim to minister. Christians and churches can give trite "Biblical" answers to people, but often, they do not wait for a question. Jesus is the spiritual answer to dealing with the consequences of sin, yes, but "Jesus" is not always the correct answer for day-to-day problems.
For instance, I have a friend with serious health problems. In addition, she has two young children, a husband who is out of work, and a mortgage to pay. Groceries and medications are the main areas where their money goes, but she also needs gas to get to her own job, and her husband is continuing his education in an attempt to get work. Placating this family with the phrase "Jesus will take care of you." is not the answer they need right now. That answer is damaging to their souls, and causes them to wonder, "Why isn't Jesus taking care of us? What have we done wrong? Are we being punished for past sins?"
The true answer to their needs would be to act as the hands and feet of Jesus: dropping off food, offering childcare, being on the lookout for job opportunities.
Another example is my acquaintance who is a single mom to a young, school-aged boy. She has to do the work of two parents. When she tried to join an evening ladies' Bible study, she was asked not to bring her son (even though he was quietly doing homework), because it was supposed to be a time for the moms to "relax and focus on God."
Those women, because they could not see past their own preconceived notions of what Bible study is, hurt and alienated a woman who desperately needed support and fellowship from other Christians.
In my own experience with at least four different churches, I have been accused of not parenting "biblically" (because I do not spank), accused of not allowing the Holy Spirit to produce the fruit of self control in my life (if I dospank strike a child, something snaps as a result of my own abuse, and I have extreme difficulty stopping myself), accused of being selfish and not taking others' needs into account (for bringing my newborn with me to a MOPS meeting instead of leaving her in the nursery with strangers), accused of making my newborn selfish (by taking her out when she cried in church), and finally, accused of not supporting my pastor-husband by not sitting in the services and hearing him preach (I took our then four small children out to read them a Bible story book).
In churches, Christian school, and Christian college, I was told that a man's morality is dependent on how much skin I covered. (By implication, the message is all men are rapists at heart, which is both demoralizing and infuriating for normal men.) I was told that the happiness of my marriage was dependent on how much and how well I submitted. I was told that because Eve sinned by eating the fruit, and because she caused Adam to sin, women could not be trusted on spiritual matters.
Brothers and sisters, fellow believers, that is spiritual abuse.
It is spiritual abuse to say "Be warmed and filled," and not provide the means of warmth and food if you have it. If you do not personally have the means to provide for those asking for your help, you likely know to whom or to where to direct those in need.
It is spiritual abuse to treat those is need as if their souls are somehow separate from their bodies - and vice versa.
It is spiritual abuse to place the burden of your interpretation of God's law on others.
It is spiritual abuse to shrug your shoulders or turn away when confronted with a problem in your religious institution you can help correct.
Jesus said,
Obsolete . to deceive or mislead.
when we define abuse differently. For instance, I believe spanking is physical abuse. There are
many others who disagree with that blanket statement and wish to add caveats to it: spanking is
an acceptable form of punishment unless taken too far they say. Unfortunately, what may be quite
obviously "too far" for one child is not so obvious for another.
I believe repeated teasing and mocking of children is emotional abuse. There are those who
disagree, who insist their child knows teasing is done in fun and their child actually likes it.
Frankly, there are people in this world who are so damaged by that type of thing in their childhoods,
that they do not feel truly loved unless their sexual partner mocks and ridicules them. If there is
even a remote possibility my actions or words to my children could lead to that type of dysfunction, believe me, I will do everything I can to avoid setting my child up for that type of dynamic.
I believe many well-meaning religious institutions (churches, universities, mission boards) practice spiritual abuse. I daresay most of the perpetrators of spiritual abuse do not actually intend to wound others, although there are certainly exceptions where individuals do willfully and knowingly use their spiritual authority to control others. Spiritual abuse is defined as "the mistreatment of a person who is in need of help, support or greater spiritual empowerment, with the result of weakening, undermining, or decreasing that person's spiritual empowerment." A broader definition would be "a kind of abuse which...leaves us spiritually discouraged and emotionally cut off from the healing love of God."
For churches to function properly, they need to know those to whom they claim to minister. Christians and churches can give trite "Biblical" answers to people, but often, they do not wait for a question. Jesus is the spiritual answer to dealing with the consequences of sin, yes, but "Jesus" is not always the correct answer for day-to-day problems.
For instance, I have a friend with serious health problems. In addition, she has two young children, a husband who is out of work, and a mortgage to pay. Groceries and medications are the main areas where their money goes, but she also needs gas to get to her own job, and her husband is continuing his education in an attempt to get work. Placating this family with the phrase "Jesus will take care of you." is not the answer they need right now. That answer is damaging to their souls, and causes them to wonder, "Why isn't Jesus taking care of us? What have we done wrong? Are we being punished for past sins?"
The true answer to their needs would be to act as the hands and feet of Jesus: dropping off food, offering childcare, being on the lookout for job opportunities.
Another example is my acquaintance who is a single mom to a young, school-aged boy. She has to do the work of two parents. When she tried to join an evening ladies' Bible study, she was asked not to bring her son (even though he was quietly doing homework), because it was supposed to be a time for the moms to "relax and focus on God."
Those women, because they could not see past their own preconceived notions of what Bible study is, hurt and alienated a woman who desperately needed support and fellowship from other Christians.
In my own experience with at least four different churches, I have been accused of not parenting "biblically" (because I do not spank), accused of not allowing the Holy Spirit to produce the fruit of self control in my life (if I do
In churches, Christian school, and Christian college, I was told that a man's morality is dependent on how much skin I covered. (By implication, the message is all men are rapists at heart, which is both demoralizing and infuriating for normal men.) I was told that the happiness of my marriage was dependent on how much and how well I submitted. I was told that because Eve sinned by eating the fruit, and because she caused Adam to sin, women could not be trusted on spiritual matters.
Brothers and sisters, fellow believers, that is spiritual abuse.
It is spiritual abuse to say "Be warmed and filled," and not provide the means of warmth and food if you have it. If you do not personally have the means to provide for those asking for your help, you likely know to whom or to where to direct those in need.
It is spiritual abuse to treat those is need as if their souls are somehow separate from their bodies - and vice versa.
It is spiritual abuse to place the burden of your interpretation of God's law on others.
It is spiritual abuse to shrug your shoulders or turn away when confronted with a problem in your religious institution you can help correct.
The solution to this is simple:
Jesus said, "'You must love the LORD your God with all your heart, all your soul, and all your mind.' This is the first and greatest commandment. A second is equally important: 'Love your neighbor as yourself.' The entire law and all the demands of the prophets are based on these two commandments." Matt. 22:37-40
Monday, February 11, 2013
To Tell the Truth
Honesty v. Dishonesty
Truth v. Lies
We all strive to model and teach honesty to our children. And while most of us consider ourselves basically truthful, it is very easy to let the "little white lies" infiltrate our interactions with our kids. Using "Because I said so," instead of admitting we don't have a good reason not to allow a particular activity; telling little ones there is no more (candy, cheese, whatever) instead of using the moment to explain why we limit certain things; trying to convince youngsters that a favorite place (Chuck E. Cheese, McDonald's, the library) is closed, instead of explaining why visiting certain places isn't an everyday occurrence.
On the other hand, I've seen parents go absolutely ballistic if their potty-training two-year-old says, "I didn't peeeeeeee!" while simultaneously sporting a large wet spot on their pants.
In my mind there's a huge difference. And it's not that the parents' behavior is acceptable and the toddler is being deliberately deceptive. Quite the opposite, in fact.
In cognitive development, children go through various views of reality. This is not the world as we adults know it. It is the world through the child's perception. It is the child's reality.
For instance, infants know only their own comfort and discomfort, but they lack the ability to soothe and care for themselves. Infants cry not because they are sinful or manipulative (yes, that was the viewpoint I was taught and even believed in my early years as a parent), but because they are communicating their needs the only way they can.
Once language is introduced, toddlers are fascinated with their communication skills. They believe "words are magic" and can make things happen. This is one reason toddlers have meltdowns when they can't communicate well. Not only are they frustrated they aren't understood, they are also frustrated that the "magic" isn't working!
This "words are magic" stage lasts until almost age five, at which point the child has assimilated enough information to understand that s/he can't change everything by speaking it into or out of existence. Age five marks the beginning of logic and a grasp of cause and effect, which, coincidentally, is also the age most children start school in this country.
So, when a two-year-old insists, "I didn't pee!" it is because s/he believes saying it makes it true.
When an adult says, "McDonald's is closed." (when, in fact, it isn't), the adult is deliberately trying to deceive a child.
The child is being dishonest, but s/he isn't being untruthful. The child knows s/he wet his/her pants, but the child also believes that saying otherwise changes what happened.
The adult is being dishonest, and s/he is lying. The adult knows McDonald's is open, and s/he is also attempting to convince the child of something that is untrue.
Parents often find "white lies" (lies of convenience, in my opinion) acceptable, but rarely take into account their children's cognitive development before condemning the child as a liar, liar with pants on fire.
With my littles, I've found asking, "Is this true, or pretend? Is this true and what really happened, or do you want it to be true?" helpful. I also don't freak out (anymore) if my three year old insists he didn't draw on the wall with marker while sporting marks on his hand (and face, and shirt) and is still holding a marker that matches the color on the walls. I simply point out the evidence contrary to his assertion and tell him that even if he wishes he hadn't drawn on the wall, Mommy knows what he did. And when we make messes, we clean them up. I then hand him appropriate cleaning supplies and supervise his clean up, assisting if necessary. (I also confiscate the markers! If we can't keep the markers on paper, we don't have the markers for a while.)
There is no shaming and accusing. I do express dismay at the mess and gratitude toward being responsible and cleaning up, but I don't harangue or get angry that my child had the audacity to deliberately destroy property and then tell me a bald-faced lie. That's not what happened.
My child made an impulsive choice (because he's three and lacks impulse control). He doesn't understand cause and effect, so he has no concept of the potential damage markers can cause to antique wood finishes or wallpaper. He believes words are magic and that by saying he didn't draw, the marks will magically disappear. That is his reality. That is truth as he knows it.
My job, then, is to teach him about reality. Shaming isn't teaching. Punishment isn't teaching. Modeling and explaining are teaching. Enforcing rules (you make a mess, you clean it up) is teaching. What's more, I am being truthful in my teaching by not over-reacting in order to "scare" him into making better decisions "next time."
I am also being truthful by not saying, "Oh, that's ok, sweetie. Just don't do it again." It's not ok, but it's not a travesty worthy of a mommy-meltdown, either.
In closing, we as parents need to be careful to consistently model both honesty and truthfulness. We also must take care to remember things from a child's perspective are very different from our adult perspectives. A child's truth (or reality) is much different than what we adults know as truth (or reality). It's much easier to graciously correct your child's behavior once you're aware their choices are based on an alternate reality.
Truth v. Lies
We all strive to model and teach honesty to our children. And while most of us consider ourselves basically truthful, it is very easy to let the "little white lies" infiltrate our interactions with our kids. Using "Because I said so," instead of admitting we don't have a good reason not to allow a particular activity; telling little ones there is no more (candy, cheese, whatever) instead of using the moment to explain why we limit certain things; trying to convince youngsters that a favorite place (Chuck E. Cheese, McDonald's, the library) is closed, instead of explaining why visiting certain places isn't an everyday occurrence.
On the other hand, I've seen parents go absolutely ballistic if their potty-training two-year-old says, "I didn't peeeeeeee!" while simultaneously sporting a large wet spot on their pants.
In my mind there's a huge difference. And it's not that the parents' behavior is acceptable and the toddler is being deliberately deceptive. Quite the opposite, in fact.
In cognitive development, children go through various views of reality. This is not the world as we adults know it. It is the world through the child's perception. It is the child's reality.
For instance, infants know only their own comfort and discomfort, but they lack the ability to soothe and care for themselves. Infants cry not because they are sinful or manipulative (yes, that was the viewpoint I was taught and even believed in my early years as a parent), but because they are communicating their needs the only way they can.
Once language is introduced, toddlers are fascinated with their communication skills. They believe "words are magic" and can make things happen. This is one reason toddlers have meltdowns when they can't communicate well. Not only are they frustrated they aren't understood, they are also frustrated that the "magic" isn't working!
This "words are magic" stage lasts until almost age five, at which point the child has assimilated enough information to understand that s/he can't change everything by speaking it into or out of existence. Age five marks the beginning of logic and a grasp of cause and effect, which, coincidentally, is also the age most children start school in this country.
So, when a two-year-old insists, "I didn't pee!" it is because s/he believes saying it makes it true.
When an adult says, "McDonald's is closed." (when, in fact, it isn't), the adult is deliberately trying to deceive a child.
The child is being dishonest, but s/he isn't being untruthful. The child knows s/he wet his/her pants, but the child also believes that saying otherwise changes what happened.
The adult is being dishonest, and s/he is lying. The adult knows McDonald's is open, and s/he is also attempting to convince the child of something that is untrue.
Parents often find "white lies" (lies of convenience, in my opinion) acceptable, but rarely take into account their children's cognitive development before condemning the child as a liar, liar with pants on fire.
With my littles, I've found asking, "Is this true, or pretend? Is this true and what really happened, or do you want it to be true?" helpful. I also don't freak out (anymore) if my three year old insists he didn't draw on the wall with marker while sporting marks on his hand (and face, and shirt) and is still holding a marker that matches the color on the walls. I simply point out the evidence contrary to his assertion and tell him that even if he wishes he hadn't drawn on the wall, Mommy knows what he did. And when we make messes, we clean them up. I then hand him appropriate cleaning supplies and supervise his clean up, assisting if necessary. (I also confiscate the markers! If we can't keep the markers on paper, we don't have the markers for a while.)
There is no shaming and accusing. I do express dismay at the mess and gratitude toward being responsible and cleaning up, but I don't harangue or get angry that my child had the audacity to deliberately destroy property and then tell me a bald-faced lie. That's not what happened.
My child made an impulsive choice (because he's three and lacks impulse control). He doesn't understand cause and effect, so he has no concept of the potential damage markers can cause to antique wood finishes or wallpaper. He believes words are magic and that by saying he didn't draw, the marks will magically disappear. That is his reality. That is truth as he knows it.
My job, then, is to teach him about reality. Shaming isn't teaching. Punishment isn't teaching. Modeling and explaining are teaching. Enforcing rules (you make a mess, you clean it up) is teaching. What's more, I am being truthful in my teaching by not over-reacting in order to "scare" him into making better decisions "next time."
I am also being truthful by not saying, "Oh, that's ok, sweetie. Just don't do it again." It's not ok, but it's not a travesty worthy of a mommy-meltdown, either.
In closing, we as parents need to be careful to consistently model both honesty and truthfulness. We also must take care to remember things from a child's perspective are very different from our adult perspectives. A child's truth (or reality) is much different than what we adults know as truth (or reality). It's much easier to graciously correct your child's behavior once you're aware their choices are based on an alternate reality.
Saturday, February 2, 2013
When Help Isn't Helpful
I'm a helper. I prefer the term advocate, but regardless the label, I truly enjoy the feeling of helping others.
Sometimes to the point of helping because it satisfies a need in me.
Yeah. Selfishness masquerading as helpfulness. It's not pretty. In fact, it's manipulative and damaging.
This particular selfishness tells others, "You're not good enough...without me. Your failures reflect badly...on me."
Intent is important. Sometimes I jump in and help my children for the right reasons: so they learn how life works, so they learn how to accept assistance from others, so they learn the feeling of successful cooperation.
But sometimes, help looks like letting a 16 month old descend a flight of stairs by herself. She can do it, and she knows it. I supervise for safety's sake, but she needs to learn that just because a task is daunting, it shouldn't be ignored. Constantly carrying her up and down teaches her to rely on others to do the hard stuff.
Sometimes, help looks like insisting my 9 year old sort, fold, and put away an entire load of laundry by himself. He can do it, despite his protests to the contrary. And he needs to learn that everyone in a household contributes to getting the needed tasks done. Just because a task is boring doesn't mean it isn't important. Doing the task myself may save time, but it teaches him that procrastination will eventually let you off the hook.
Sometimes, help looks like standing over my 3 year old and supervising the clean up of an accidental spill. He needs to learn that a responsible individual takes care of his own messes and doesn't rely on others to fix his problems. If I wiped the spill, he would learn that the consequences of his actions do not affect him directly.
Sometimes, help looks like saying, "Thank you." to my 10 year old after she has unloaded the dishwasher, instead of telling her she put pots and pans in the wrong places. She is assisting in the running of our household, and criticizing her efforts immediately after she has performed the task will take the wind out of her sails and ensure reluctance the next time her help is needed. If I corrected her right then, I would be teaching her that only perfection is acceptable.
So if you see me standing back and watching my children instead of rushing to correct or assist, please do not assume I am doing nothing. Do not assume I don't see how they are struggling, and please, please do not assume I am being negligent.
I am teaching. I am helping. And it is oh, so hard for me to allow them to try and fail. But it is how we all learn, and I am helping them see that failure is actually a positive thing. I am helping them learn that failure is not something to be feared, but acknowledged and learned from.
Because constant success isn't reality. And helping isn't always helpful in the long run.
Sometimes to the point of helping because it satisfies a need in me.
Yeah. Selfishness masquerading as helpfulness. It's not pretty. In fact, it's manipulative and damaging.
This particular selfishness tells others, "You're not good enough...without me. Your failures reflect badly...on me."
Intent is important. Sometimes I jump in and help my children for the right reasons: so they learn how life works, so they learn how to accept assistance from others, so they learn the feeling of successful cooperation.
But sometimes, help looks like letting a 16 month old descend a flight of stairs by herself. She can do it, and she knows it. I supervise for safety's sake, but she needs to learn that just because a task is daunting, it shouldn't be ignored. Constantly carrying her up and down teaches her to rely on others to do the hard stuff.
Sometimes, help looks like insisting my 9 year old sort, fold, and put away an entire load of laundry by himself. He can do it, despite his protests to the contrary. And he needs to learn that everyone in a household contributes to getting the needed tasks done. Just because a task is boring doesn't mean it isn't important. Doing the task myself may save time, but it teaches him that procrastination will eventually let you off the hook.
Sometimes, help looks like standing over my 3 year old and supervising the clean up of an accidental spill. He needs to learn that a responsible individual takes care of his own messes and doesn't rely on others to fix his problems. If I wiped the spill, he would learn that the consequences of his actions do not affect him directly.
Sometimes, help looks like saying, "Thank you." to my 10 year old after she has unloaded the dishwasher, instead of telling her she put pots and pans in the wrong places. She is assisting in the running of our household, and criticizing her efforts immediately after she has performed the task will take the wind out of her sails and ensure reluctance the next time her help is needed. If I corrected her right then, I would be teaching her that only perfection is acceptable.
So if you see me standing back and watching my children instead of rushing to correct or assist, please do not assume I am doing nothing. Do not assume I don't see how they are struggling, and please, please do not assume I am being negligent.
I am teaching. I am helping. And it is oh, so hard for me to allow them to try and fail. But it is how we all learn, and I am helping them see that failure is actually a positive thing. I am helping them learn that failure is not something to be feared, but acknowledged and learned from.
Because constant success isn't reality. And helping isn't always helpful in the long run.
Monday, January 28, 2013
When Love Looks Like Hate
"Praise Him, praise Him, all you little children. God is love! God is love!"
I grew up singing that song, being assured that God loves me, my parents love me, my church loves me.
We learn the definition of love by experiencing it.
So when a child hears, "God loves you!" and also learns that God commanded people who didn't believe in Him to be killed, a child learns that love is conditional and harsh.
When a child hears, "Mommy/Daddy loves you," and then is struck repeatedly after some wrong-doing, a child learns that love is painful.
When a child hears, "Your Sunday School teacher loves you," and then is treated to harsh words or eye-rolling for not moving quickly enough (or for moving too much) to suit the grown up, a child learns that love is impatient.
When a child hears, "Your pastor loves you," and hears him bragging about all he has done and why the church owes him unquestioning allegiance, a child learns that love is boastful and arrogant.
When a child hears, "I love you," but then is met with a laundry list of failures, a child learns that love holds grudges.
When a child hears "I love you," followed at some point by disbelief toward the child's expression of feelings or a cry for help, a child learns that love is suspicious.
When a child hears, "I love you," but then has affection withdrawn from him when his behavior does not meet with the approval of the adult, a child learns that love gives up easily.
When a child hears, "I love you," but cannot be honest with his parents for fear of a reaction, a child learns that love is not interested in truth.
When a child hears about love, but is then shown the opposite, is it any wonder that child does not desire a deeper relationship with her parents or develops a fear of God?
Contrast that with God's definition of love in 1 Corinthians 13. In fact, because God is Love, you could replace the word love with God to get a more accurate picture of the Divine.
I grew up singing that song, being assured that God loves me, my parents love me, my church loves me.
We learn the definition of love by experiencing it.
So when a child hears, "God loves you!" and also learns that God commanded people who didn't believe in Him to be killed, a child learns that love is conditional and harsh.
When a child hears, "Mommy/Daddy loves you," and then is struck repeatedly after some wrong-doing, a child learns that love is painful.
When a child hears, "Your Sunday School teacher loves you," and then is treated to harsh words or eye-rolling for not moving quickly enough (or for moving too much) to suit the grown up, a child learns that love is impatient.
When a child hears, "Your pastor loves you," and hears him bragging about all he has done and why the church owes him unquestioning allegiance, a child learns that love is boastful and arrogant.
When a child hears, "I love you," but then is met with a laundry list of failures, a child learns that love holds grudges.
When a child hears "I love you," followed at some point by disbelief toward the child's expression of feelings or a cry for help, a child learns that love is suspicious.
When a child hears, "I love you," but then has affection withdrawn from him when his behavior does not meet with the approval of the adult, a child learns that love gives up easily.
When a child hears, "I love you," but cannot be honest with his parents for fear of a reaction, a child learns that love is not interested in truth.
When a child hears about love, but is then shown the opposite, is it any wonder that child does not desire a deeper relationship with her parents or develops a fear of God?
Contrast that with God's definition of love in 1 Corinthians 13. In fact, because God is Love, you could replace the word love with God to get a more accurate picture of the Divine.
| Love is patient, love is kind. Love does not envy, love does not boast, love is not proud. |
| Love is not rude, love is not self-seeking, love is not easily angered, love keeps no record of wrongs. |
| Love does not delight in evil but rejoices with the truth. |
| Love always protects, always trusts, always hopes, always perseveres. Love never fails. True love is more than affection and doesn't always come easily for me. I daresay, true love doesn't come easily for most people, considering how poorly love is shown to us and others. I have found that the reiki principles are basically a condensed version of how to express love. In addition to reading and trying to live the definition of love written in 1 Corinthians 13:4-8, I have also begun meditating on the following:
How much better could we be as people, as parents, friends, and community members if we stopped talking love and walking hate? How much good could we accomplish by living in an authentically loving way? How much radical change could we effect by ceasing to call hatred love and showing our world what love really means? I intend to find out. Will you join me? |
Thursday, January 24, 2013
Forgiveness. Atonement.
There's a lot in regards to forgiveness (human and divine) and Christ's atonement and application percolating in my mind right now. I'm having trouble articulating thoughts at the moment, but I wanted to record this before I forget.
Jesus didn't come to save us from God. Jesus is God; He came to show us how to live the law without legalism, how to love without condition, and how to serve without expectation.
Jesus didn't come to save us from God. Jesus is God; He came to show us how to live the law without legalism, how to love without condition, and how to serve without expectation.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)