Category: relationships

Brothers and Sisters II: Audience

Silva

We have a problem in our relationships.  If you’re single, you’ve likely struggled with this problem.  If you’re married, I could show you how you have the same issue. When it comes to relational intelligence, we stink.  I’ve mentioned several reasons for this in previous posts using K-I-S-S-I-N-G as a doorway for discussion.  My most recent post (of a similar name) pointed out that our married relational problems oftentimes stem from our pre-married relational conduct.  In other words, once you’re married, you’re playing like you practiced.

Last time, we looked at the first of three aspects of living as brothers and sisters.  Authority had to do with the playbook; the rulebook.  It’s a fair question: how do you know when you’re doing it right?

Should you kiss?  How do you know?

Should you stop your hands at hers or are her other parts within the limit?  How do you know?

Should you open up your hopes and dreams to him even though you only recently met?  How do you know?

What are the answers to the “how do you know?” questions? This is authority’s question.  Many would say, “whatever both people agree on.”  That’s the standard answer, I’d agree.  What if the two parties don’t agree?  Who is right?  Does she win or does he?  How do you arbitrate?  Most often I think the answer lingers at “whatever I feel comfortable with.”  Our “default” setting is me.  What if “me” is not right?

If I choose the wrong authority, and, therefore, the wrong standards, then at least two people are in for some trouble.  Also last time, I asserted that many Christians default to this standard and in so doing basically claim that the Bible has nothing to say to us.  That’s a serious issue as well: what else are we willing to say is outside of the reach of the Bible?

Why do we do this?  Christian, why do you turn away from the Bible’s guidance in your relationships?

Audience.  I think it has to do with audience. Now, how you answer these questions of authority reflect your intended audience.  What I mean is “who are you trying to please?”  You know what I mean by this.  Have you ever done a job for a co-worker or a friend and done something similar for a boss or authority figure?  Isn’t there a slight (or more) up-tick in quality for the latter rather than the former?  Especially when bonuses are at stake?

Who are they?  The audiences, I mean.  For whom do you do what you do?  It’s pretty simple, actually.  Whoever sits on your heart’s throne – who’s opinion matters most to you – is your audience.  Whatever rule book he (she) uses, you use.  We do all things for a reason and that reason is always a person.  Who’s the person?  Who are the choices?  There’s “me,” and “God.”  That’s it.  In other words, you do what you do either for your own good, glory and gain or for God’s.

This is seen in many places:

The Ten Commandments (Exodus 20:2-17)

The Two Great Commandments (Matthew 22:37-40)

The Royal Law (James 2:8)

The Fruit of the Spirit (Galatians 5:22-23)

The Only-Love-Matters (Galatians 5:6)

The Act-Like Men (1 Corinthians 16:14).

In these passages we are repeatedly directed first to God and then to others; never to ourselves.  There are only three personal actors in the universe and it is strange that never are we told to act only for our own good.  But we are regularly (repeatedly) told to act for God’s and for others.

In the Bible in 2 Corinthians 5, Paul tells us that we should live in such a way (by faith: 5:7) as Christ is pleased (5:9), “So whether we are at home or away, we make it our aim to please Him [Christ].”  Christians know what this is like – but we all do, really.  We all live for whoever or whatever is most important to us – our treasure drives our heart (Matthew 6:21).

Christians would say that Christ is our audience.  I would believe any Christian (at first) who made this claim.  But the issue is not so simple (says Jeremiah).  Let’s backtrack a little: say you are in a relationship with a girl (guy).  Whoever is involved competes for the title “audience.”  By that I mean the one who sits on the heart’s throne.  If you’re trying to impress her, you’ll do whatever she wants because you want her to think much of you (you’re the audience).  Her approval, affection, attentiveness – whatever – is what you long for, so you’ll shape your behavior so that you’ll get what you want.

The other way to do this relationship is that God would be the audience.  It would be for His pleasure, for the good of His church, according to His plan and His rules.  This foundational commitment is found in places like 1 Corinthians 10:31 or Colossians 3:23.

How do you know for which audience you are living?  What rules are you using?  Audience starts with authority, but you already knew that.

Old(er) People

Silva

We are in the age of assertion. Ours is probably not unique in that way, but it is certainly different.  Unlike the near-past, now, upon us are more ways to say what we think than we know what to do with. Got a blog? Post away! What about Facebook? Just update your status or write on a wall! How about Twitter? MySpace? IM? Text? Blackberry chat? Skype?

I’m not sure this is an improvement. I’m positive it’s not (it’s true that all of us – a-l-l may not really have anything worthwhile to say).  Nonetheless, part of what the ubiquity of options presents to us is the tendency to believe that we should say what we think; that we have a moral obligation to make our views known.   This especially plagues the young.

Don’t get me wrong, there’s plenty to comment on.  There are problems in the world.  There aren’t any really new problems, of course (Ecclesiastes 1:10), but problems.  My issue is about how they get addressed.  In our day and age, just as there are plenty of problems there’s a plethora of (young) people to provide answers!

Some would say this is a good thing especially in light of the commanding use of media that young people enjoy.  Maybe.

In my mind, there are, however, three main ways to handle problems: young people’s way, old people’s way and a combination way (or a compromise). Now I’m not going to define what makes young or old except to say young is under-40.

So, let’s say there’s a problem (shouldn’t be too hard to imagine).  When I hear young people pontificate wildly in the presence of older folks about problems and solutions, I often wonder at the older folks: what are they thinking about all of this?  Older people, of course, do their own pontificating and I myself wonder at that: what do I think about that?

(There’s a point to all of this and it’s coming.)

I think old people have market share on right answers and young people need to get over themselves and listen.

Yikes.  Notice I said “market share.” You know what that means, right?  (Market Share = not all of it but most of it.)

The problem is, we don’t listen and get over ourselves.  Young people, that is.  Should I?  How should I?

These are valid questions, like it or not.  We’ve got a younger man in the highest office of the land – how should he handle this? Everyone is looking to him for the answers to get us out of this mess – but the man’s barely over the median age of citizens of this county (36.4 years)!

This is relevant because so many young people are addressing issues and many older folks aren’t listening to them (us).  Of course, that chaps the young ones and they try harder usually with a little more vitriol.  Still, some (most?) problems arise when young people get the themselves in a wad because old people won’t listen to them.

What do we do?

I’m a biblical counselor and sit across from many strugglers. I find that, particularly in married couples, it is helpful to encourage people to adopt as their starting point, the following: “I am the biggest problem here.”  Let’s start there…

Next, turn in your Bibles to the 10 Commandments, specifically, the fifth commandment. I’m a Presbyterian and like things written by old dead guys so listen to some of these:

Which is the fifth commandment? The fifth commandment is, “Honour thy father and thy mother: that thy days may be long upon the land which the LORD thy God giveth thee.” (Westminster Shorter Catechism [WSC], Q. 63.)

What doth God require in the fifth commandment? That I show all honor, love and fidelity, to my father and mother and all in authority over me, and submit myself to their good instruction and correction, with due obedience and also patiently bear with their weaknesses and infirmities since it pleases God to govern us by their hand. (Heidelberg Catechism, Q. 104; see also WSC, Q. 64)

Who are meant by father and mother in the fifth commandment? By father and mother, in the fifth commandment, are meant, not only natural parents, but all superiors in age and gifts; and especially such as, by God’s ordinance, are over us in place of authority, whether in family, church or commonwealth. (Westminster Larger Catechism, Q. 124)

Why are superiors styled Father and Mother? Superiors are styled Father and Mother, both to teach them in all duties towards their inferiors, like natural parents, to express love and tenderness to them, according to their several relations; and to work inferiors to a greater willingness and cheerfulness in performing their duties to their superiors, as to their parents. (Westminster Larger Catechism, Q. 125.)

What is the honour that inferiors owe to their superiors? The honour which inferiors owe to their superiors is, all due reverence in heart, word, and behavior; prayer and thanksgiving for them; imitation of their virtues and graces; willing obedience to their lawful commands and counsels; due submission to their corrections; fidelity to, defense and maintenance of their persons and authority, according to their several ranks and the nature of their places; bearing with their infirmities, and covering them in love, that so they may be an honour to them and to their government. (WLC, Q. 127)

What is forbidden in the fifth commandment? The fifth commandment forbiddeth the neglecting of, or doing anything against the honour and duty to which belongeth to every one in their several places and relations. (WSC, Q.65)

The 5th Commandment orients our attitude as we interact with older people – many times disagreeing with them.  This matters because, as a young person who wants to make a change in a problem-filled world, if we are wrong in our pursuit of a right goal, we are still wrong.

The most common objection to my characterization of part of the problem came, expectedly, from the young: “I can see problems just like them!” This justifies my line of thinking: if solving problems is what we’re searching for, then perhaps we should begin with a renewal of our commitment to the fifth commandment.  Why?  Because old people have market share on the right answers.

Said differently, when we accuse our elders of not listening to us, I think we are guilty of the same lack of charity that we accuse them of.  They might be wrong for not listening to the young, but the young are definitely wrong for not listening to the old.  That’s the implication of the 5th commandment.

One. Recognize we have fathers and mothers in our midst (family, church) and we’re not them. This is positional humility. We are inheriting this and are not its architects. It is a talent that God is allowing us to invest before we are the fathers and mothers. In our haste to grab this out of their hands, we could be dooming it to ignominy.

Two. Honor our fathers and mothers in our heart, word and behavior. Our lives must reflect an attitude that John the Baptist (Luke 3:16-17) and Paul (1 Timothy 1:15) would’ve found appealing.  Why must we increase?

Three. Submit ourselves to their good scrutiny, instruction and correction. Do our fathers trust us to handle what they have purchased at such great price? Are they explicitly our overseers, counselors, and teachers in our efforts? What would they say?

Four. Recognize our own weaknesses and infirmities. This is where #3 is so important. It is axiomatic that we are blind to our sin and blind to our blindness. Must this point be proved?

Five. Patiently bear with their weaknesses and infirmities as children do to parents. My own senior pastor, Mike Ross, in preaching a sermon regarding different generations in our local church explicitly refused to chastise his fathers and mothers in their weakness. Does that mean they don’t exist? Of course not! Positional humility and regard for the 5th commandment guided him to entrust that generation and their weaknesses to God.

Six. Police our ranks for violators and violations of this commandment. Instead of those who disagree we must turn our renewing / reforming gaze on each other. Not that we would develop or perpetuate a spirit of elitism or divisiveness but that we would act in accord with Hebrews 3:12-13 and Galatians 6:1. This is part of the ethos that we are calling for! Let it begin with each other.

Seven. Let God police the ranks of our fathers and mothers. Nowhere in the Decalogue do we find the right or responsibility to police the sin of our parents. Paul gives us, instead the exhortation to encourage older men as fathers (1 Timothy 5:1) and teach them sound doctrine (Titus 2:2). It is through the decrees of creation and providence that God will continue to shepherd our fathers and mothers.

————————————————

Our temptation is going to believe that we exemplify these things. And of course we believe that – we’re young! But do we really fail to stumble (James 3:2)? The plague of youth is, in part, zealous blindness (Proverbs 19:2). Could we not also be like blind Israel: Romans 10:2?

Young and old have specific roles in God’s world: family and church.  We do have something to contribute.  But it is as sons and daughters contributing to the work of mothers and fathers.

Brothers and sisters, not husbands and wives Part I

Silva

Religious people should act differently than non-religious people.  Among the reasons people engage in the religious cultus is the effect is has on living.  Seems logical, right?  Active participation in a set of practices motivated by unique beliefs should mark people A as different than people B.  Clearly, Christians should be marked by a specific set of behaviors and those behaviors should set them apart from others.

Alas, one look at a barna.org survey or article in any major newspaper will reveal that in the area of relationships (marriage preeminently) there is little to no difference between professing Christians and non-Christians.  The challenges in accurately defining “Christian,” notwithstanding, we who make claims to follow Christ don’t demonstrate our faith skillfully in relationships.  Here are excerpts from data from such a survey found at ReligiousTolerance.org

Religion % have been divorced
Jews 30%
Born-again Christians 27%
Other Christians 24%
Atheists, Agnostics 21%

More specifically:

Denomination (in order of decreasing divorce rate)

% who have been divorced
Non-denominational ** 34%
Baptists 29%
Mainline Protestants 25%
Mormons 24%
Catholics 21%
Lutherans 21%

And what about region?

Area % are or have been divorced
South 27%
Midwest 27%
West 26%
Northeast 19%

So much for the “Bible Belt” having any effect….Divorce, premarital sex, extra-marital sex, hostility, coldness, late-marriage divorces, etc. mark Christian Marriage.  This is pathetic, sad and hypocritical.

Why is it that way?  What are the reasons for these startling statistics?

Of course, the diagnosis is complicated.  But, as a student of young professing-Christians adults I tend to believe part of the problem is a poorly-managed pre-married relational life. By this I mean the period of time we spent dating, pre-engaged and then engaged.

This K-I-S-S-I-N-G or PDA blog thread has been aimed at this issue.  And this particular post strikes close to the heart of the relational problems.  The character of our pre-married relational life is most often marred by the fact that we don’t view each other as brothers and sisters but rather trial-husbands and trial-wives.

As a result, this relational time is marked by “dating divorces.”  How do you know if you have had a “dating divorce” or if what you’re watching in your close friend is a dating divorce?  By how it has or will end.    In other words, you can gauge the biblical character of a relationship by how it ends.  If a “break-up” is like a quasi-divorce in many ways, then the man and the woman treated each other like spouses during the relationship rather than like siblings.

A quasi-divorce would include things like great anger at each other, follow on depression, arguing over material things, indulgent addictive behavior, rushed follow-on relationships, no communication, or splintering among friend groups along “party” lines.

Many (most) Christian dating relationships-in-progress look like marriages with minor modifications:

  • Unrestrained physical touch save (usually) only sexual intercourse
  • Vigorous exclusion of other people and relationships
  • Baring of all secrets, thoughts, and desires
  • Intense dependence
  • Presence of jealousy
  • Practice of marriage roles: heads and helpers

Many operate on the “test drive the car before you buy” theory.  On Chicago public educator who, with her fiance, waited until their wedding day to kiss (gasp!), replied, “You can’t take the car out of the parking lot until you pay for it.”  Nice.

If many of our marriage problems find their roots in our pre-married relational life, then we should be more concerned about doing that part of our life right.  Right.  What makes a relationship between a non-married man and non-married woman “right?”  Let’s consider three things: authority, audience and approach.

Authority.  The appropriate constellation of questions to ask regards the regulation of such relationships: what standards are they using?

  • What is the relational playbook being used?
  • What is informing the conduct of such relationships?
  • Where are the rules written down for them?

We don’t do anything without rules, folks.  Whether they’re explicit or not we follow some set of rules.  It could be what you grew up seeing in your parents.  Maybe you’ve had “satisfying” relationships in the past and you’re just trying to do current ones that way.  Some search through the myriad of self-help relational books you can find at any Christian bookstore.  Oprah, Dr. Phil, Judge Judy, Joyce Meyer, Joel Osteen…the list of celebrity “experts” is limitless.  Peers also provide rules – whatever my group is doing, I do.

We do all of this – Christians, now – because in some sense we believe the Bible doesn’t provide any relevant guide (save “No Sex”) for us.  Or worse, we won’t follow what the Bible does say.

Since this is part I of this particular topic, why don’t you take a minute and write down what you think the Bible says regarding non-married, heterosexual relationships.  What instructions does the Bible give to you?  How do you understand verses like 2 Timothy 3:16-17 relative to relationships?