“I Like Best to Think of Him that Way.”

The last few weeks at our house have been insanely busy. Major decisions and life choices have taken a back seat to children’s play practice, the air conditioning going out in mid-July, and babies with ear infections. Beth and I became aware of just how little margin we had for “error” in our daily routines. Sometimes it’s tough to keep your cool in those times. I sure didn’t. By the end of it all, I was raising my voice at my kids and barreling past every insight and principle of parenting I had gleaned in the past few years.

I read a book about…well…bad parenting a few weeks ago. The book spends most of his time talking about the psychological impact of  corporal punishment. And I think the book probably ends up unbalanced in its final conclusions. But the more interesting aspect of the book involves where Christianity and parenting intersect. And that was really fascinating to me. It tells a marvelous story about nineteenth century evangelist Dwight L. Moody:

In [Moody's] home, grace was the ruling principle and not the law, and the sorest punishment of a child was the sense that the father’s loving heart had been grieved by waywardness and folly.

Moody’s son, Paul, relayed an incident where he had been caught directly disobeying his father by inviting a friend over to play after his normal bedtime hour. Moody lost his cool and raised his voice:

…I immediately retreated and in tears, for it was an almost unheard-of-thing that [Moody] should speak with such directness or give an order unaccompanied by a smile. But I had barely gotten into my bed before he was kneeling beside it in tears and seeking my forgiveness for having spoken so harshly…Half a century must have passed…and I can still see that room in the twilight and that large bearded figure with great shoulders bowed above me and hear his broken voice. I like best to think of him that way. I had seen him hold the attention of thousands of people, but asking the forgiveness of a disobedient little boy for having spoken harshly seems to me now a finer and greater thing, and to it I owe more than I owe to any of  his sermons. For to this I am indebted for an understanding of the meaning of the Fatherhood of God and a belief in the love of God had its beginnings that night in my childish mind (emphasis mine).

Horace Bushnell is one of my theological “heroes.” In his book Christian Nurture (1861), he writes some of the most piercing words ever regarding parents reflecting the character of God:

[Harsh treatment by a parent] is a great discouragement of piety in children…Anything that puts the child aloof from the parent…will be a wall to shut him away from God. If his Christian father is felt only as a tyrant, he will seem to have a tyrant in God’s name to bear…But there is a kind of virtue which is not in the rod – the virtue of a truly good and sanctified life. So much easier it is to be violent than to be holy, that [parents often] substitute force for goodness and grace and are wholly unconscious of the posture (emphasis mine).

 These quotes cut me to the core. I passionately desire to be this father but often times find that I am not. Yet quotes like the ones above don’t condemn me – they give me a glimpse of what the Holy Spirit can do in my heart as I continue to seek him. They are not hollow or shallow objectives to meet; that won’t change my behavior or impact my children. But they are examples of what “Spirit-led” parenting can look like. Each scenario is always different, but the love of God can be found in everyday interactions with children. Hopefully, my children will look back fondly on a particular memory and be able to say, “I like best to think of him that way.”

Dilettante Dads

Here’s something I’ve been thinking about lately. We live in a world of specialization. The more of an “expert” you are in a particular field of interest, the more chance you have to secure your position as a person of importance and relevance. People spend their lives grasping for that level of expertise and our culture rewards those that give their heart and soul to a discipline, field, or technique. That’s easier for us. We then have a label. “Oh, he’s the medical/business/intellectual expert.” “She’s the manager/attorney/fashion expert.” We feel secure believing that we know everything we need to know about a person with one specialized label. I watch students struggle with this in college. When they ask, “What should be my major?” what they are really asking is “They are asking me to pick a label. What should my label be?”  

Fatherhood flies in the face of that notion. Fatherhood requires us to be well-rounded. A jack of all trades and a master of none. Furthermore, good fathering requires you to be present with your family rather than honing your skills of expertise. You hear this from dads all the time. They often talk about when they used to do something in particular, but the time they spent doing it was only for a few short years. Their areas of growth and knowledge center upon whether their children are into fishing or ballet or baseball or long division. And when their children move on, they do, too. So, for fathers (and many mothers), life becomes a race to cram everything they can into a work day and then shift gears by focusing on their family oriented ”expertise.” So in the end, fully invested fatherhood requires one to choose to not be an expert at anything. To be a Renaissance man. A dilettante. Someone who dabbles in areas of knowledge and skill without formally mastering any particular area. An amateur at everything.

Beth told me a story about a well-known and accomplished businessman and university president who was a guest speaker in one of her college classes. They class asked each visiting lecturer the same question: what is the single most important business advice you could give a college student? This formidable individual thought for a moment and then said, “Learn to play golf. Most business connections and profitable deals are not made in an office or over email. They are made on the golf course.”  I’m praying that this guy is wrong. Or at least that there’s another way to be successful. To me, success at my family’s expense is ultimately failure. So, I’m putting my eggs in another basket: the belief that I can remain professionally relevant and spiritually poignant while spending as much time as possible deeply invested in the lives of my children. The bigger payoff seems to lie there. Call it a hunch…but that’s what I’ll be doing. Check back in two decades and we’ll see if the gamble was worth it.

Still Driving the Minivan…

As I’ve said before, as a man who normally drives a minivan, life can be complex. Gender issues crop up on a regular basis. Now, don’t get me wrong. I like the van. It’s the people who drive in the lane next to me that I don’t like…

I pulled up to a stop light the other day. After a few seconds, someone in the other lane pulled up next to me. Initially they were out of my line of vision. But then (as all minivan drivers know) they began to creep up next to me slowly. Why? Because there were guys in the car. And guys always assume that there is some cute (and possibly bored) soccer mom driving that Honda Odyssey just waiting for the chance to flirt with them. Guys think this for several reasons (e.g. low intelligence, hormones, an over-estimation of their own good looks because they worked out earlier that day, etc.) but mostly because they watch too much TV.

Anyway – back to the story. This exact scenario happens to me at least once a day. I haven’t told my wife about it because it’s just too ridiculous to occupy our evening discussions. So, I took control of my life in that moment when those guys creeped up next to the van, craining their necks in hopes of oggling some domestic beauty. They got me instead. Before they realized I was a guy, I turned to them, pointed at myself and mouthed the words “HEY GENIUSES! I’M A DUDE!!” They quickly looked away in embarrassment.

In some small way, I hope my actions that day helped women all across America fight the prevalent minivan myth that only they can drive a van…

Godly Marriage, Pt. 2: Submission vs. Coercion

Truthfully, God calls us to submit to him and to one another, to the extent that we trust God and others are acting in our best interests. Submission merely means to voluntarily become vulnerable to the actions of another. However, in the context of relationships, God never says to follow someone who has not earned that submission. My wife is happy to follow my lead as long as she knows my intentions are for her betterment and not at her or our children’s expense. I expect her to submit (voluntarily open herself up) to me only to the extent that I am submitted to God. Furthermore, she doesn’t have to do what I say unless she believes I am fully informed of her and our children’s wishes AND actively involved in their lives. Husbands who do not fall into those categories should never ask for their family’s submission.

I want to concentrate on that famous submission passage in Ephesians 5, but a summary verse for a husband’s role in marriage is found in Galatians 5:13. “…do not use liberty as an opporunity for the flesh, but through love serve one another.” Listen up fellas – women have an internal barometer that tells them where your affections lie. Their intuition tells them whether your heart values their input or not. If they feel that you are using the headship of your home as an “opportunity for the flesh” – to meet your own short range, inconsiderate goals – they will resist your leadership every time. 

Men who “through love serve” their families never have to ask for submission from them. His family immediately supports his decision because they trust his intentions are true. A husband who has his family’s trust rarely asks anything from that trust unless its absolutely necessary. On those rare occasions, they submit – voluntarily opening themselves up to your decisions – trusting that you will prize their volition. The husband that follows God will honor that trust, never capitalizing on it. Taking their cues from Dad, the other members of the family serve each other in love as well…and the cycle for healthy family submission starts over again.

 Next post, Ephesians 5:18-33…

Jesus and Me at 33

Most folks believe Jesus entered his ministry days around age thirty and was crucified around age 33. I (regretfully) turned 33 in September. Other than the normal depressing thoughts associated with getting older, I have been thinking lately about how young Jesus was. He was a very young man. We live in a society where someone can make an impact in their thirties but most folks don’t consider you “seasoned” until your forties. Executive level jobs are normally held for those in their forties and fifties.

Churches in particular value age as a factor in determining wisdom. Elder boards are full of people in their forties and fifties. Why do we value age in that way? Well, for one, people in their forties and above have had plenty of time to “calm down.” Their children have worn them out and they’ve stayed put in a job for at least a decade. If they have stayed married to one person, they’ve put in around twenty years. They make major decisions a little slower and are prone to weigh all the consequences of their actions. They have had time to “sift” through life and see what really matters. They’ve also had the chance to “prove” themselves to others as worthy of responsibility.

Jesus did none of that. He didn’t wait on anyone for anything. He launched into aggressive ministry without the consent of or regard for his rabbinical peers. And by today’s standards, Jesus’s ministry of healing and demonic deliverance would’ve been seen as a that of a crackpot revivalist, praying on the weak minds of the underclasses and undereducated. He would’ve been considered way too young to wield that type of spiritual authority. What’s more, Jesus’s ministry was supported by contributions, a large amount of which came from women: a gender class with its own issues of persecution and representation at that time.

Though that may be shocking to think about, what really makes me wonder most is: what was Jesus’s mindset? Not what he said, but what he thought that no one ever heard. Granted, he’s the Son of God. Sure, that’s obvious. But his thought patterns (if he was fully divine and fully human) must have at least somewhat reflected that of every 33 year old man. And though Hebrew culture at that time was very different than ours today, Jesus was still a guy.

I started thinking about this in light of my own behavior at age 33. Though I have moments of maturity…I honestly try not to have too many of those. I think there’s still a lot of “my twenties” in me at 33. I still act immature. I still have a lot of energy. I still don’t like people telling me what to do all the time. I still shout at the TV when my favorite football team scores a touchdown. In other words, I’m spunky. And I imagine Jesus was, too. I’ve calmed down a lot from previous years. I’m working on getting to a decade of marriage. That’ll calm you down. My kids wear me out – I occasionally find myself begging them to go to sleep. And what energy I have left, I have the illustrious distinction of allowing church work to take the last of it.

Jesus didn’t have a wife. Jesus didn’t have kids. He was a carpenter – and most scholars see that as more than woodworking. Jesus worked a brawny, scrappy construction job and probably walked up the road five miles to Sepphoris everyday to do it. Jesus was wiry and energetic – he’d stay up at night to pray while everyone else went to sleep. He said highly inappropriate things - stuff about eating flesh and drinking blood. He called religious people older than him rude and critical names, made fun of local lawyers, dismissed the rhetoric of the local politicians, and told incredibly outlandish stories. And then he’d pray for everyone that needed physical healing. He was young, fiery, intense, and, to some, intimidating.

But I think that’s part of the reason he could make it all the way to the cross. Beth and I were talking the other day about your twenties and early thirties. It’s like God “hardwires” you to be crazy enough at that time in life to push forward with having multiple children, finishing education, marrying someone, and working your way up the corporate ladder. And in your thirties, you still think it’d be cool to be in a rock band in your spare time!  At no other time in life do you have that level of energy to simultaneously sustain that much activity at once. It’s insane. Yet, I think that’s part of the reason Jesus ministered on earth at such a young, unacceptable age. It took a certain level of youth and intensity to be the Son of God.

I guess I’m saying that I find solace in that. Older people thought Jesus was an “upstart.” If he can wrestle with his youthfulness and meet the needs of his followers, then God can use me too. In many ways, Jesus lived the life of every person in their early thirties. Hopefully, 33 will be better to me than it was to him… 

A Humbling Realization…

This week, I discovered a hangover from staying at home full time that I didn’t expect. In fact, I thought the opposite was the case.

Stay at home life is very different from the corporate world. Not worse or better – just different. Though it has it’s own tremendous obstacles to overcome, stay at home life does move slower than the office. No doubt about it. At home, I had time to be more deliberate with my actions and attitudes, particularly where the girls were concerned. To me, that’s almost by design. Time moves a little slower at home so that best choice can be made for your kids as each question you answer shapes their worldview. Thank God for that extra time. Like I’ve said before, that’s what makes stay at home parenting such a sweet gig. Of course, it’s a catch-22 – I’ve talked about boredom at home in this post.

My realization this week? I can’t remember everything. It’s not that I am forgetting everything. I remember plenty of details. The problem is that the information comes too fast. I’m having trouble wrapping my brain around the sheer number of details, dates, and names of being the family minister at a 1200 member church. I’m sure I’ll adapt over time and begin to unconsciuously filter the information by level  of importance/relevance. But right now it’s a little overwhelming. I also have a newfound respect for those working parents who can “downshift” with ease when they walk in the back door of their homes. That, my friends, is a learned art.

After this realization the first thing I thought about was my corporate executive wife. She had to deal with this almost three years ago and I had no idea how to help her. But more recently, I got to thinking about how many times I’ve forgotten details that she had told me previously while at home that completely flew right past me. Or, better yet, when I asked her for the same information three times over. Geez. At that time, she was going 80 mph while I was going 40. I have a feeling that I may have dropped the ball a good bit. She never told me if I did though.

How’s that for a good wife?

A Stay at Home Dad Goes Back to Work…

I started my position as Director of Discipleship and Family Ministries this week. It’s gonna be a great job - I have no doubt about that. But something else has occupied my thoughts a surprisingly large amount: my children.  Though I had been warned about the transition back to the workforce, I have been amused by the wealth of feelings that have accompanied my first days back in the “real world.”

The strangest sensation has been that I feel like I’m living in someone else’s life a little bit. Like I traded places with someone else and am now occupying their office. Weird. But the most interesting and (hopefully) beneficial change has been my over all approach to work. Before, I was a super-hyped-up-task-list-machine-of-a-man. Alpha male to the hilt. Most of that is gone. And that has shown up in unusual ways.  For example, I’ve been taken back by the directness of other’s comments – things I would have said in past years. Now, those things feel harsh – not wrong or out of line or inappropriate – just forceful. I had forgotten how “strongly” people use words. I’m not sure what to do about that just yet. I just ended two years of rolling on the floor with toddlers and speaking gently to set an example.

Though some people in my shoes would hope that those more gentle attributes might fade away or maybe even feel that they might inhibit the respect of peers, I hope I stay this way. I actually feel comfortable in my skin. Few people ever feel that way. I have always believed that those “home-focused” attributes are found in great husbands and fathers. I’m surprised to learn that those same qualitative traits are essential to good pastoring as well. I’ll revisit the impact of our “great experiment” in a few months to see if I feel the same way.

Ahhhhh, Vacations…

I just got back from vacationing with another family in Orlando, FL. We rented a condo and did the whole Sea World/Aquatica thing. Sea World was fine…but Aquatica rocked the proverbial Casbah. Super fun for kids and adults. However, chances are good that if you take four children under the age of five to amusement parks, you’re gonna experience some strange moments.

Most of mine came on the last day. The other dad had to head back early to minister at his church (jerk ), so I stayed with all the wives and children. That’s when the remarks about plural wives began. We were cracking up about it, thinking about how strange it must look for one guy to be walking around with two women and four children.

However, the low point of the trip came on the same day. We stopped to feed everyone at a “healthy” family restaurant – Beth and I split a sandwich and a side of pasta salad. We are trying to watch what we eat – a post for another day. I started to eat the cold pasta when I spotted something that looked like chicken in it. I told Beth, “I call this chicken!” and stuffed it in my mouth. My “wives” immediately informed me that it was not chicken – it was an artichoke. A big one. We are talking juice here, people. It was at that moment that I thanked God for my strong will that has landed me in so much trouble in the past. I conquered my gag reflex and ate the whole artichoke. It was brutal – something truly worthy of the term “torture.” I suppose this would be an appropriate place to misquote Philippians 4:19 for everybody…

Overall the vacation was great. A good time was had by all and now I get to go back to working in the real world next week…

HWJV: How Would Jesus Vote?

So, what do you do if you’ve posted the most controversial blog on WordPress? You top it by posting something more insane!

Beth and I were talking with a friend about this topic the other day and it made me think…what would determine Jesus’s voting record? Luckily, he gave us a great example in the Bible. The issue was divorce. Why divorce? Because it represents much about the issues facing our nation today: it was an area where civil legislation influenced morality, it spoke to the state of financial and material provision of Israel’s citizens, and it also impacted the livelihood of women and children. So, everything from our medicare issues to social security to domestic policy to abortion are thematically represented in the debate in some way. It was also a political “hot topic” when Jesus addressed it.

In Matthew 5 and 19 (and in Mark 10), Jesus addresses the topic of divorce. But not in the way that we have been taught in most churches. For most, marital infidelity is the only  reason that someone should divorce their spouse. Any remarriage is essentially considered adultery. That’s what Jesus said in 19:9, right? Well, not exactly. Jewish law at the time of Jesus permitted divorce for four reasons. Scholars have determined that by the Rabinical tradition of Jesus’s time, these four reasons for divorce had been established and were relatively unquestioned. And that’s why Jesus didn’t address three of them. They were: childlessness (after ten years), material neglect, emotional neglect, and unfaithfulness. The Rabbis cited these verses in support: Genesis 1:28 (childlessness), Exodus 21:10-11 (material neglect), and Deuteronomy 24:1 (adultery). They also developed emotional neglect as a symptom of material neglect which included conjugal rights, cruelty, and humiliation (m. Ketub. 5.6-7, 7.2-5). But it was adultery that had everyone’s attention during Jesus’s time.

There were two groups within the Pharisee camp: the conservative Shammai and the liberal Hillelites. Using Deuteronomy 24:1, the school of Shammai held to a conservative literal interpretation – the divorce could occur upon the knowledge of an “indecent matter” which they interpreted as infidelity. The school of Hillel reversed the words, however, calling for divorce upon “any matter of indecency.” This included any behavior deemed improper by the husband: what the Rabbis would clarify as being any time a wife “did not find favor in [the husband's] eyes.” Now, that’s a different story – women were defenseless against the “any matter” divorce decree. And that’s when Jesus stepped in.

The passages in Matthew and Mark are specifically addressing this “hot topic” (along with the issue of divorce certificates) – it was what everyone was talking about and they wanted Jesus to give his opinion as well. So, he did. In Matthew 19:1, Jesus is asked: “Is it acceptable for a man to divorce his wife for any matter?” This is not a general question – it pertains specifically to the current state of an area of public policy. So specific in fact that it would be synonymous with Jesus commenting not just on abortion, but on partial-birth abortion – a specific issue within a larger one. Or for Jesus to comment specifically on how to fund social security rather than if social security is necessary. So, that specific issue within the larger one is the context and Jesus’s response is to address the “any matter” divorce.

His answer is pretty clear in verse 9: “anyone who divorces his wife, except for infidelity, and marries another woman commits adultery.” Within the context, Jesus is saying that Deuteronomy 24:1 should be translated “indecent matter (adultery)” rather than the more liberal interpretation of “any matter of indecency.” He chose the answer that promoted family security and protected women. Divorce should not occur for any reason. But at the same time Jesus did not dismiss the other legitimate reasons for divorce – childlessness, emotional neglect, and material neglect – reasons that would be considered liberal by many conservative Christians today. Jesus would not have been okay with the material neglect of a family of emotional abuse. During that time, though the childlessness reason was still available, divorce rarely occured for that reason. And the divorce rate during the Greco-Roman period was comparable to our’s today, particularly among the upper classes.

So what does this have to do with how Jesus would vote? Everything, actually. He didn’t vote along party lines. In the illustrious words of my wife, “Jesus voted the issues.” He went with the conservatives in this case, but he went with the the liberal Hillelites at other times. He went with the Essenes at Passover – something contrary to mainstream Judaism. So was Jesus a Republican or a Democrat or a Libertarian? He was none. He approached each issue by saying, “Which stance reflects the heart of God and his love for his children?” His answer determined whether he was “liberal” or “conservative.” And that should tell you something – if he was willing to reject labels, we should do the same. We should vote the issues from our heart. And if you’re a Christian, you should vote each issue asking the same question Jesus did. “Which stance reflects the heart of God?”

One more thing. The church has been incredibly versatile in beating up divorced people. As you can tell from the reasons above, material and emotional neglect as well as physical cruelty were reasons for divorce in Jesus’s day. So, if you have been divorced for one of those reasons, then don’t beat yourself up about it. Jesus would have allowed your divorce. But Jesus also said that it is because of the hardness of our own hearts that we choose divorce over reconciliation. Now, Christians often apply this to the female who, after years of emotional abuse, can’t take it anymore. But I think Jesus was speaking to the spouse (usually male)who was giving the abuse. And that’s something worth considering. In the end divorce occurs when neither person treats the other like they are made in the image of God. But if Jesus wouldn’t comdemn you, why should his followers?

My point is this. Though I’m not into politics, I am into making decisions that support what I believe to be the heart of God. Decisions that honor people. Decisions that support goodness and life. So, as I head to the polls, I’ll be thinking, “HWJV?” I’m not sure which political party that will align me with. But as long as I vote my heart I think I’ll be okay.

What Constitutes “Good” Parenting?, Part 2

I wrote about this a while back and have since been reminded of a couple of biblical examples that spoke volumes to me.

The story of Eli and his sons is the first one (1 Samuel 2:20-36). Eli’s sons were priests and spent the majority of their time abusing their privileges in unholy ways. No one would consider them “nice, well-mannered young men.” They were first class jerks. This passage often makes it into parenting seminars as an example of a gluttonous, lazy, and personally undisciplined father and the havoc that his lack of restraint caused. In other words, Eli’s sons were horrible because Eli was a bad father. I can’t tell you the number of parents I’ve seen who, upon hearing about the inappropriate behavior of their children, are washed over with guilt for the actions of their offspring. And it doesn’t matter the age – the child could be forty years old and still the parents feel they are to blame in some way. The church reinforces those stereotypes, as if the personal humiliation isn’t enough on its own.

But here’s another biblical example we don’t talk about that much: the prophet Samuel (1 Samuel 8). Do you know about his kids? They were just as bad as Eli’s – possibly worse! In fact, their injustice and willingness to take bribes is what casued the Israelites to want Saul for a king. That may explain why Samuel was so against it. Even as Saul is being appointed over Israel (12:1-4), Samuel is still carrying on about his sons still being available to judge Israel – as if they are a better choice than Saul. By all “Christianese” standards, Samuel is what a parent should be: a mighty man of God, modeling service and sacrifice to God on a daily basis. Someone to be admired and imitated. Yet, his sons reject his example, despite his efforts to influence them for the better. By chapter 12, it’s obvious that Samuel thinks a king is a bad idea – but more importantly, he’s so blind to his own children’s behavior that he actually thinks they are still qualified to govern Israel.

Okay, Sam, so what’s your point? Well, it’s essentially what I said in the earlier post. Good parenting is not about cause and effect or “if you do A, you’ll get B.” It’s not a formula. Parents have to believe that our parenting makes a difference. Otherwise, it’s an overwhelming task. But for Eli and for Samuel, regardless of personal devotion to God, the spiritual formation of any child goes beyond what even the best parents can do. Ultimately each person has to recognize the pursuit of God in their life and be willing to respond. I can do my best to create an atmosphere where the Holy Spirit can draw my children. But in the end, each child’s response is their own. But that’s not a bad thing. God pursues relationship with our children regardless of our behavior, simply because that what he wants. And his desire for their salvation far outweighs any hopes I may have for my children. So I model my Christianity, not because it’s important for them to see it. I model it because my Christianity is important to me. And as God pursues them, one day their Christianity will be important to them as well.