Category: Family

Relationships are not efficient

Relationships are not efficient

Silva

I recently returned from a missions trip to Hamburg, Germany.  What a marvelous trip; it is remarkable (though not surprising) to witness first hand and participate in what God is doing through the hamburgprojekt, a young church there.  With a brother from my church we were able to mentor, train and visit with courageous brothers and sisters.  We hope to write more on that later, but there was one element that deserves mention ahead of those details: relational inefficiency.

Recently a pastor friend of mine remarked in my presence that as much as we would like to believe otherwise, relationships are just not efficient.  If you think about a favorite American past time, the “to do list,” versus relationships, we can see just how they differ.  To do list’s:

  • Are strictly controlled
  • Don’t surprise us
  • Don’t act in ways that are destructive
  • Don’t need to grow in holiness
  • Go away when we want them to
  • Don’t say stupid things
  • Can be delayed
  • Can be shortened
  • Take only as long as we want
  • Aren’t shy or guarded
  • Don’t yell at us…

You get the idea.  I guess it is no surprise why they are so popular to us.  All of this is probably clear, huh?  Relationships aren’t like to-do lists at all.  “Of course,” you say, “that stuff’s obvious.”

I think I underestimated how much I often put people in the same category as a to do list.  I wouldn’t really know that I had done so until I…well, left the country for another culture.  Now, no one that I know would suggest that Germans are inefficient!  Yet, one thing that became clear to us what that in their culture (perhaps it is just with Americans) they take a long time to “be known.”  They are cautious and guarded (yet polite and fun).  When it comes to intimacy, they take their time, or, are “inefficient.”

I think we get that real rich relationships take time to build.  But I wonder in our culture if we have mostly lost the ability and desire to make the investments.  Facebook demands nothing, Twitter demands less.  Email reveals little, text messages less.  I was listening to Christian radio the other day and the host was encouraging folks that if they wanted prayer to text, Tweet or Facebook ’em!  At what point did we think calling into a radio station asking for prayer was even a good idea?!  Do we do that because we knew that if we called a good friend he’d make us actually communicate in ways that would put us off our calendars?

It has taken four years for me to build meaningful trust and communication with my Christian siblings in Germany.  At times it was tiring (surprise).  But, what struck me on our most recent trip (last week) was the remarkable fruit and joy that came as a result of our investments in each other.  I never imagined that I’d be able to share such profound and impacting life and ministry with men and women from a totally different culture!  I believe it was due to the commitment to relational inefficiency that is present in the German culture.  There is a sweetness to the slowness.  There is a profound pay-out for the systematic investments in relationships over a long period of time.  Talk about delayed gratification!

In our culture, most often, we are serial-relaters.  We have efficient relationships, that is, ones that don’t cramp our style and that get us where we want to go.  I am glad that not every culture is as inane as ours.  I don’t intend this to be a German-grass-is-greener post as if one culture rises above all others.  But, clearly, ours is not a culture that places tremendous value on systematic and long-term relationships for their own sake.  How many Facebook friends do you have?

Parents’ influence on Children’s Sexual Behavior

Parents’ influence on Children’s Sexual Behavior

Silva

The body of statistics for topics like this is huge.  In fact, there are websites that are dedicated to publishing this kind of thing on a daily basis; it can be mind-numbing.  This post simply asserts the conclusions of one group of studies.  If you are interested in more of this data, go to familyfacts.org and you’ll find it.

Consider these conclusions about parent’s influence on the sexual behavior of their children:

  • “Adolescents whose mothers discussed the social and moral consequences of being sexually active are less likely to engage in sexual intercourse.”
  • “Children whose parents monitor them closely are less likely to be sexually active when they are in their teens.”
  • “Teenagers who feel their parents strongly disapprove of their being sexually active are less likely to contract a sexually transmitted infection.”
  • “Teens whose parents watch television with them more frequently and limit their TV viewing are less likely to be sexually active.”
  • “Adolescents whose parents talk with them about standards of sexual behavior are more likely to be abstinent.”

These conclusions mirror those of author Christian Smith in his book, “Soul Searching: The Religious and Spiritual Lives of American Teenagers” by Oxford University Press.  There, Dr. Smith tells us that parents are absolutely vital in the lives of their children.  Perhaps parents begin to believe over time that their children are far more likely to follow the influence of their friends or other adults.  Both the Bible and sociological studies are telling us to think again.

What if the boy is not too cute?

Silva

We’ve covered some good moral, ethical and spiritual ground in figuring out the “qualifications” of a young suitor. These are by far the most pressing issues especially in light of the culture where cranking out solid young men is not too highly esteemed (just read “Guyland” by Michael Kimmel.  Yikes.).  We must give ourselves to these things.

But we also “sort” ourselves in other ways that aren’t too savory and mostly secret like looks.  Not you?  So, there’s never been a time in your life when you turned down an offer on the basis of looks?  “Posh!  That was college when I was young and stuck-up!” OK, fine.  Why did you do it then?  And, you’re positive you wouldn’t do it vicariously through your daughter or son?  Hmm.

It is not as if “ugly” is a fictitious category.  The Fall has caused physical disfigurement: hair cowlicks, acne, big noses, spots, missing limbs, compressed spines, crooked fingers or toes.  Do these amount to “ugly”?  Answer that by asking if these things will be present in heaven?  But, more importantly, the Fall has caused a natural propensity towards ungodly sorting and categorization.  We secretly expect the pretty people to marry each other and hope the ugly ones marry each other without transgressing this boundary.  It’s terrible and it’s true (even Jane Austen thought so).

In the end, we’re not the ones who choose for our daughters and sons.  The issue is will our sons and daughters sort their suitors on the basis of looks and should they?  You and I did: what will keep them from not doing it?  This discussion borders the preposterous.  We just don’t think that poorly of ourselves that WE would be the ones to advise our children against marrying for things other than looks.  Assume for a minute that you might…

First, ugly is a part of life.  Try as we might to rationalize that ugly actually isn’t, it will still hold to be true.  Perhaps, ugly will always be with us so that we will remember that there’s a time coming when it will be no more.  In one sense, without “ugly” we’d forget about heaven.

Second, God doesn’t really care about ugly so we shouldn’t either.  Here’s a short sample:

6When they came, he looked on Eliab and thought, “Surely the LORD’s anointed is before him.” 7But the LORD said to Samuel, “Do not look on his appearance or on the height of his stature, because I have rejected him. For the LORD sees not as man sees: man looks on the outward appearance, but the LORD looks on the heart.”  (1 Samuel 16)

1My brothers, show no partiality as you hold the faith in our Lord Jesus Christ, the Lord of glory. 2For if a man wearing a gold ring and fine clothing comes into your assembly, and a poor man in shabby clothing also comes in, 3and if you pay attention to the one who wears the fine clothing and say, “You sit here in a good place,”while you say to the poor man, “You stand over there,” or, “Sit down at my feet,” 4have you not then made distinctions among yourselves and become judges with evil thoughts? 5Listen, my beloved brothers, has not God chosen those who are poor in the world to be rich in faith and heirs of the kingdom, which he has promised to those who love him?  6But you have dishonored the poor man. Are not the rich the ones who oppress you, and the ones who drag you into court? 7Are they not the ones who blaspheme the honorable name by which you were called?  (James 2)

1Likewise, wives, be subject to your own husbands, so that even if some do not obey the word, they may be won without a word by the conduct of their wives, 2when they see your respectful and pure conduct. 3 Do not let your adorning be external—the braiding of hair and the putting on of gold jewelry, or the clothing you wear— 4but let your adorning be the hidden person of the heart with the imperishable beauty of a gentle and quiet spirit, which in God’s sight is very precious.  (1 Peter 3)

Third, ugly saves and so we really can’t always judge that “ugly = bad.”  No one would say that the Cross upon which Christ died was anything but ugly.  I suppose it would be functionally equivalent to us calling a firing squad or an electric chair something other than ugly.  Yet, the work of Christ upon that Cross when united in us with faith saves to the uttermost (Hebrews 7:25).  That is hardly ugly.

Fourth, our children will naturally sort against ugly.  You did it.  The Bible warns against it.  They will do it.  Unless you teach them not to.  Of course, that would assume that you have modified your own views that sorting on the basis of looks isn’t appropriate.  If we work to inoculate our children against the fear of “ugly” in this way, then, in life when cancer or accident strikes, love will not find any obstacles to expression.

Would you really have “pretty” instead of “godly” if it came to it?