Hippiemommy

Category: Book Talk

  • Are we failing our boys?

    A woman on one of my email lists suggested this book, and I am loving it! I’ve already found a lot of things that I want to discuss and ponder.

    I am especially interested in his assertion that families in our country, and especially fathers, are doing a disservice to young men and boys by giving them the idea that reading is a “girly” thing to do.

    …one place where there is never a shortage of males is in our remedial reading classes, where boys make up more than 70 percent of the enrollment. In American remedial classes, that is. Boys don’t constitute 70 percent of remedial students in many other countries. In Insraeli remedial classes, there are no gender differences. In Finland, England, Nigeria, India, and Germany, the girls outnumber the boys. It can’t be genetics.

    I would’ve guessed that India would’ve had that statistic, and I honestly wasn’t too surprised about American boys being behind girls in reading. I’m trying to figure out why I just accept that though. I obviously don’t think it is genetic. Trelease has his own ideas about why this is.ร‚ย  We’ll get to that later though.ร‚ย  Back to the statistics:

    According to… research, boys are more likely than girls to repeat a grade or drop out of school, suffer from more learning disabilities, are three times more likely to be enrolled in special-education classes, are more likely to be involved in criminal and delinquent behavior, are less likely to be enrolled in college-prep classes, have lower educational expectations, lower reading and writing scores, read less for pleasure, and do less homework. Even those males who eventually reach college are less likely to graduate than females, largely due to their macho-male behavior while they are there; as Riordan notes, “while in college they spend more time than women exercising, partying, watching TV, or playing video games.”

    When it comes to schooling, its been long known that girls were better in the early years, but boys passed them in the later years. This is no longer true.

    Thanks to concerted social and academic efforts, girls’ high school and college scores have risen for the past two decades. But during the same period, the boys’ scores have taken a nosedive.

    An immediate measure of the downshift among young males in the last decade can be seen in the number of students taking the Advanced Placement exams. AP courses allow achieving high school students to gain college credit while still in high school… The girls’ rate of AP courses has shown a steady climb, while the boys rate has taken two dips and allowed a wide margin to grow between the sexes.

    In 1970, males outnumbered females in college enrollment by a ratio of 59 to 41. By 2000, that ratio had been reversed to 57 to 42 in favor of women. Granted, the women’s movement raised the bar for female achievement in the classroom, but what’s been going on with the guys?

    I was thinking about the women’s movement as I was reading this section. I’d love to see an egalitarian movement take hold for men where they could be encouraged to be smart and excel without a bunch of machismo and chest beating. That’d be nice.

    So now Trelease talks about his theory on what is happening, and it has a lot to do with a larger emphasis on sports (24-hour channels, etc) for men and a deeper encouragement (or at least modeling) that focuses on engaging athletics rather than academics. Regardless of education level, the average was the same for families: fathers read only 15% of the time, mothers 76%, and others 9%.

    The right call for fathers is to be involved intellectually as well as athletically with a child. If a child must wait until junior high or middle school before encountering a male in the act of reading, the idea that reading is for girls will already have taken deep root in his mind. We have to short-circuit that dangerous thinking and convince American males that it is not only possible but preferable for fathers to be athletically and intellectually involved in their children’s lives. A father can play catch in the backyard after dinner and, on the same night, read to the child for fifteen minutes. He can take him to the basketball game on Friday night and the library on Saturday morning.

    My dh is wonderful at this. He reads with the kids all the time, and they also see him reading. I feel so very thankful. There are some days when he reads to my kids and I don’t ::ducking my head::. And its not that I’m not a reader (obviously!), but that is something that dh makes sure ALWAYS happens at bedtime. I’m saddened to hear how rare this is ๐Ÿ™

  • Grace Vs. Works

    I had already planned on having this as my next post, but it works out really well considering that the comments from the last post went in this direction ๐Ÿ™‚

    I want to say before I even start quoting that I almost completely disagree with the author’s description of Palestinian Jews vs. Hellenistic Jews, but oh well. I’m using his version in order to discuss.

    From Chapter 2 of Church History in Plain Language

    The Palestinian Christians, steeped in traditional Judaism, said, “Tell them that unless they submit to the Jewish law, in addition to believing in Jesus, there is no hope for their faith.”

    OK, I agree with most of his description, but not so much the use of the word “steeped”.

    Paul, however, found this impossible. His own experience pointed another way. If a person could gain the righteousness of God by obeying the law, said Paul, I would have been the greatest in the kingdom. But righteousness by personal effort can only lead to failure. Man can be accepted as righteous only through God’s undeserved mercy. That is grace. And grace always arises from the life, death, and resurrection of Jesus Christ.

    Hmm, so perhaps a middle ground?

    Many Christians thought Paul was impossibly optimistic. They were deeply troubled by the decline in Christian morality they felt sure would come in the gentile churches. If you teach justification by faith alone, they argued, people will imagine that once they have accepted Christ by faith it does not really matter how they live.

    Again, this is too much either-or thinking. This is exactly what punitive parents say about grace-based discipline. “If you show grace, then people won’t behave appropriately.” Obviously God didn’t feel that way! I almost feel like Bruce Shelley is missing that you don’t have to say that the law was done away with in order to say that we are saved by grace. As I’ve heard it said before, I believe that people who are growing in Christ become more Torah observant whether they know it or not. The spirit of the Torah is all about grace, all about love, and a privelege, not a duty! As Crystal Lutton said – “To the Jewish mind the Torah isn’t restrictions, it’s guidelines, boundaries, the way to be holy in an unholy world!” And I think Shelley is missing that.

    On the contrary, said Paul, if they really have accepted Christ by faith, then they have accepted the way of Christ and the mind of Christ. The man who really loves God can do as he chooses, for if he really loves God he will choose to do the will of God.

    As my friend said

    Paul rebukes the Judaizers. They taught that Gentiles could not be saved UNTIL they became Jewish converts and were part of God’s chosen people. Peter and Paul both experienced God making himself available to Gentiles while they were still Gentiles. Pre-Cross there were Jews, there were converts, and there were God-fearers who lived according to Torah without actually converting. Cornelius was a God-fearer The Jews taught that if they were Torah observant they’d get in to heaven, but they were not allowed to be part of the community in this world. This is what the Judaizers were mixing up. They wanted the Gentiles to be part of the community of faith so they thought they had to BE Jews first. Paul and Peter taught that the Gospel was now for the God-fearer too–that conversion to Judaism was not necessary!

    BUT they NEVER taught that what was part of Torah was unimportant or not for the Gentiles too. When I studied the letter from the Council of Jerusalem I found a little gem in the discussionร‚ย  They were talking about what to require of the Gentile in order to *become* part of the community of faith and they settled on the four things. Interestingly, I did a little study into the elements of the pagan communion and it was highlighted by these four things So they had to *abandon* being pagan Then James, I think it was, says, “The rest has been taught in the Synagogues since the time of Moses.” Remember that at this time “The Way” as it was called was a sect of Judaism and they were meeting both in the Synagogues AND in home churches of only believers. (I also believe that the purpose for women being told to stay silent “In Synagogue” was because the non-Christian/Jewish women were not allowed to speak and this was giving them a bad name!). But the new believers were going to learn everything else in time and that was enough according to the Council at Jerusalem.

    The ironic thing is, once you actually go and read what is part of Torah, and start talking about the Spirit of it, most people ONLY come back with, “I do all those things already. Just don’t think I could give up pork and lobster” And, tbh, I do believe that the dietary laws are not in effect for cleanliness (though NOT based on Peter’s dream!!!) but I believe everything in Torah to be Wisdom and part of God’s standard and when I studied pork and lobster I realized I didn’t *want* to eat them

    I’ve been in the midst of a fascinating discussion with some of my friends on whether or not we have “two natures.” Once we have become a new creation in Christ, are we still naturally inclined to sin? I feel like Shelley is dancing around this topic.

    For fellow GCMers, if you haven’t seen the discussion that I’m referring to above, I can send you a link ๐Ÿ˜‰

  • Church History – Why don’t we know?

    I am once again reading Church History in Plain Language by Bruce Shelley. This is actually my second time through it, but this time I am taking notes and really studying it rather than just pleasure reading.

    This re-reading has really reminded me of how frustrated I am that we, as a Christian community, don’t know our roots. There is this ridiculous gap between the early church and the Reformation, and it seems like much of it is just skipped over or ignored. It drives me a bit batty.

    As I was reading today about the early church and how much Christian life stood out compared to pagan lives. This has given me a lot of food for thought. I had already been thinking about this after a recent discussion on standing out in the world. I think we really miss how big of a deal it was to be a Christian in the Roman empire. We are spoiled today. As Tertullian put it in Apology, “We have the reputation of living aloof from the crowds.” Is that really true anymore? Somewhere between 77% and 86% in America consider themselves Christians. Riiiight. We’re really living aloof from the crowds. :/
    Shelley discusses it as such

    The word used to describe the Christian in the New Testament is highly significant. It is the term hagios, often translated “saints.” It means holy ones, but its root suggests different. So a holy thing is different from other things. The temple is holy because it is different from other buildings; the Sabbath day is holy because it is different from other days. The Christian, therefore, is a person who is fundamentally different.

    I’ve been thinking about this ever since I read it. It seems like modern Christianity doesn’t really embrace this line of thinking except to condemn those outside of the church. We point out others differences rather than being different within ourselves.

    Fundamental to the Christian life-style and cause of endless hostility was the Christian’s rejection of the pagan gods. The Greeks and Romans had deities for every aspect of living–for sowing and reaping, for rain and wind, for volcanoes and rivers, for birth and death. But to Christians these gods were nothing, and their denial of them marked the followers of Jesus as “enemies of the human race.”

    So to be a Christian meant that you could very well be rejecting part of every aspect of life. That’s tough.

    One simply could not reject the gods without arousing scorn as a social misfit. For the pagan every meal began with a liquid offering and a prayer to the pagan gods. A Christian could not share in that. Most heathen feasts and social parties were held in the precincts of a temple after sacrifice has been made, and the invitation was usually to dine “at the table” of some god. A Christian could not go to such a feast. Inevitably, when he refused the invitation to some social occasion, the Christian seemed rude, boorish, and discourteous.

    I wish I had read this back in high school. I think I would’ve felt a little better about blowing off parties. :/

    The Christian fear of idolatry also led to difficulties in making a living. A mason might be involved in building the walls of a heathen temple, a tailor in making robes for a heathen priest, an incense-maker in making incense for the heathen sacrifices. Tertullian even forbade a Christian to be a schoolteacher, because such teaching involved using textbooks that told the ancient stories of the gods and called for observing the religious festivals of the pagan year.

    Yet another reason to homeschool ๐Ÿ˜‰

    We might think that working with the sick would be a simple act of kindness. But even here early Christians found the pagan hospitals under the protection of the heathen god Aesculapius, and while a sick friend lay in his bed, the priest went down the aisle chanting to the god.

    In short, the early Christian was almost bound to divorce himself from the social and economic life of his time–if he wanted to be true to his Lord. This meant that everywhere the Christian turned his life and faith were on display because the gospel introduced a revolutionary new attitude toward human life. It could be seen in Christian views of slaves, children, and sex.

    Can you imagine if we lived that way today? Its not like our current culture is so wonderful and “Christian” that we should be embracing it. I think that many of us have come to take our faith as just something to be weaved into the rest of life, rather than a new frame for our entire life.
    I have tons more that I want to write from the early chapters of this book, but this will do for now ๐Ÿ˜€

  • Spare the rod

    I love reading different people’s perspectives on the rod verses. Even when they don’t all agree, I find that studying the verses and the interpretations of the verses is a great way to both reinforce and rethink my beliefs ๐Ÿ™‚

    I am currently enjoying Heartfelt Discipline as one of my reads, so I thought I’d discuss his beliefs on the rod. As always, please buy the book if you want the details! It truly is excellent, even if I disagree with a few little parts ๐Ÿ˜‰

    In his book, Clarkson talks about how he spanked and even fashioned his own paddle for a “rod” for his children. It didn’t feel right though. He says

    As much as I preferred other methods, I used the paddle for one reason only: I believed it was God’s ordained method of disciplining children. I didn’t want to be disobedient to God in my role as a father, and I certainly didn’t want to contribute to my children’s becoming rebels. And yet my spirit was deeply troubled every time I used the paddle. It didn’t seem to fit the character of God or be consistent with the nature of a loving parent. It didn’t seem to be proportional discipline for a young child. Neither did it seem to have sufficient biblical support. in short, it just didn’t seem right.

    He started to research it some more. In his research, he learned several things (buy the book if you want the hebrew word study! This is just an overview):

    1. The “child” in Proverbs 22:15, 23:13-14, and 29:15 (all of the “rod” verses except for one) is the hebrew word “naar”, which means a young adult… usually mid-teens – could be 16-24 according to Jewish rabbinical law. Naar was used to describe men such as Joseph when he was sold into slavery, David when he defeated Goliath, and Joshua when he scouted the lands. The only other rod verse applied to children (13:24) uses the word translated “son” (“ben”), and there is no need to assume this means anything other than a “naar”. All other rod verses refer to adult fools.
    2. The rod is literal, but not as most Christian parents use it

      The rod is an instrument of punishment and correction. It’s not a switch or a paddle or a dowel or a wooden spoon. If you accept the rod passages of Proverbs as a divine mandate for disciplining young children and you take those passages literally, you’ll find yourself beating your child with a heavy stick or branch.

      Preach on, brother! ๐Ÿ˜‰

    3. Children are not the focus of these verses. These chapters are all about older teens who are to the point of deciding good and evil. Young children are not yet to that point. They are not yet believers and are expected to think like children.
    4. Proverbs are proverbs. They aren’t law. They should be read proverbially ๐Ÿ˜‰

    Clarkson closes the chapter with this quote

    When I finally began to “spare the rod,” I naturally wondered about the biblical alternative to rod-based discipline. Answering that question has shown me not only a heart-oriented approach to discipline, but also a biblical relationship with my children. I was missing the relational part of discipline that would enable me to open and to win my children’s hearts; I was missing the biblical picture of discipline as a journey along a path with my children; and I was missing the life of the Holy Spirit in the discipline and training of my children.

    The link above goes to my previous article on the same topic ๐Ÿ™‚

    Clarkson agrees that the rod was probably used on older children. Then again, as he also points out

    Should we use the rod on rebelious sons today? No, I think not… We are no longer bound to the Old Testament Law (for instance, we don’t stone rebellious sons). We are instead guided by the liberty and grace of the New Covenant, made possible by the shed blood of Jesus on our behalf… So should we be just as serious in dealing with rebellious sons as Solomon suggests? Yes, emphatically so! But we need to discipline our sons in light of the rest of Scripture, which was not available to Solomon. There is so much more to biblical discipline, as we will see in the chapters that follow, than what is found in a few passages in proverbs.

    And I shall write about those future chapters very soon ๐Ÿ™‚

  • Are we responsible for making sure Jesus has a good day?

    And now for my first bone to pick with Say Goodbye…

    It’s amazing what things touch a child’s conscience. Sometimes it’s a word spoken in sadness instead of anger. Other times it’s a Scripture verse graciously revealed by a parent… When disciplining his daughter, one dad said, “It makes me sad when you choose to hit your sister instead of talking things out. It also makes God sad when we don’t choose to do the right thing.”
    Appealing to the conscience is different from using guilt to manipulate. It is not a matter of telling a child, “You’re bad and you need to change.” Instead, we are trying to convey that the child is a good person who has done the wrong thing.

    Ick. I really dislike this line of thinking. As Jeff VanVonderen says in Families Where Grace is in Place, when we use scripture or guilt to change someone, then that is manipulation. I have written about this before.

    …you may get an answer like; “I’m really angry that I have to do this,”ย or the child may simply show his anger by stomping or complaining. In response, many Christian parents would say, “Don’t you ever let me hear you talk like that, [or act like that],”ย or “You are making Jesus sad by being angry,”ย or “Go to your room and don’t come out until you can be polite.”ย If so, you are provoking them to seethe.
    It is better to acknowledge their anger. Tell them that you appreciate their telling you about their anger, or the fact that they are angry, even though they may still be required to do the chore they don’t like. – Jeff VanVonderen

    Turansky and Miller must realize on some level that this is manipulative. They directly address the manipulation aspect.

    Here’s my main issue though: If kids are somehow responsible for making sure Jesus has a good day, then they should be afraid. Afraid of their power and the fact that God’s mood can change at their whim. This is not accurate! How can a child ever feel safe in this kind of God? Perhaps Turansky and Miller are of the opinion that we are responsible for others feelings, but I do not believe that at all. I think they are really off base here.

  • Honor: is it a matter of being people oriented vs. task oriented?

    As I’ve mentioned, I am reading Turansky and Miller’s Say Goodbye right now, so I wanted to keep talking about it ๐Ÿ™‚

    In Say Goodbye, there is an overwhelming theme that includes the idea that honor does more than what is expected. I really like this definition of honor, because I think it would be very easy to teach children (and adults!)ย  I’ve been working on expressing honor in my life, and I hope that my positive example will be the first way that I teach my kids about honor.ย  Reading this book has shown me a lot of places where we are honorable (and a lot of places that are lacking in honor.)

    I am a very task-oriented person.ย  I like checklists.ย  I like accomplishing things.ย  I do not like to dillydaddle.ย  Hanging around and doing stuff that is not required is a pretty difficult thought to wrap my brain around.ย  Its not that I want to skimp on things, its just that I want finish it completely and move on to the next task.ย  I like to get things done.

    This is pretty much the opposite of what Turansky and Miller are suggesting we should do in order to honor each other.ย  Honor is all about doing something extra.ย  This is a very people-oriented line of thought.ย  This has made me think.

    I am assuming that their approach will be much easier to put into action if your children are people oriented.ย  If your kids naturally want to please, want to be around people, and want to focus on people, then I think it’ll be easy to teach them to take that next step.ย  My son, for example, naturally does much of what is in the book.ย  Its his personality.ย  My dh is the same way.ย  My dd and I do not naturally gravitate towards those types of ideas.ย  We want to finish and move on.

    I guess what I’m trying to figure out is if that is really wrong.ย  I am trying to think of ways for my dd and I to use our own natural inclinations to still show honor.ย  I am sure it is possible.ย  It just hasn’t really been covered a whole lot.ย  Or maybe honor will just be more difficult for us?ย  It won’t come as naturally as it does for some?ย  Hmmm.ย  Lots to consider.

  • Equal is Less

    I am in Chapter 4 of Siblings Without Rivalry, and she is bringing up some more very interesting points. They are well worth discussing, IMHO ๐Ÿ˜‰

    I told them all the story of the young wife who suddenly turned to her husband asked, “Who do you love more? Your mother or me?” Had he answered, “I love you both the same,” he would have been in big trouble. But instead he said, “My mother is my mother. You’re the fascinating, sexy woman I want to spend the rest of my life with.”

    I wonder if this story is real ๐Ÿ˜‰ Either way, its a good answer.

    “To be loved equally,” I continued, “is somehow to be loved less. To be loved uniquely — for one’s own special self — is to be loved as much as we need to be loved.”

    I wish to continue in this line of thought.

    To meet our children’s needs is far better than trying to even everything out. Not only is that impossible, but its also not realistic. That’s not how life works. She gives examples of kids who are complaining that their sibling’s pancakes were bigger. Rather than trying to even it out, she suggests asking if they are still hungry and then either giving them another or making extra for them the next time. It doesn’t have to be equal to be fair.

    Similarly you don’t need to spend 10 minutes with each child. Instead what is needed is to meet the child’s needs at that time. If they need 5 minutes, then fine. If they need 15, that’s fine too. It lets them know that you’ll be there when they need you, and you don’t need to force extra time or cut it short in order to be fair.

    She then addresses whether or not we must love our children equally. Obviously this is a tough subject. Just like the above example of the young wife, it is important that we look for the best in all of our children, even if we have a natural connection with one child.

    Would it help… to tell yourself that it isn’t necessary to respond to each child with equal passion, and that it’s perfectly normal and natural to have different feelings towards different children? The only thing that is necessary is that we take another look at the less favored child, seek out her specialness, then reflect the wonder of it back to her. That’s all we can ask of ourselves, and all the children need of us. By valuing and being partial to each child’s individuality, we make sure that each of our children feels like a number one child.

    This is what I have always strived to do, and I think it is because I had excellent modeling from my parents. We openly admit that in our family there are certain members who have more of a spark together, but that we still love each other in our own special ways. For example, my mother is one of my best friends, and throughout my life that has been true. Although she and I are chattier and do more things together, my dad and I have a soul connection. There is a depth there that I can’t even explain with words. My brother is the opposite way. He’s friends with my dad, but his deep connection is with my mom. I don’t feel like either of them favor either of us. They just love us differently ๐Ÿ™‚

    I pray that I’ll be able to show my kids the same thing.

  • Honor vs. Respect

    I am reading Turansky and Millers’ Say Goodbye to Whining, Complaining, and Bad Attitudes in You and Your Kids right now for a reading group for homeschool moms that I joined, and I am really loving it so far.

    I have heard them speak before, and I loved the points that they made about honor vs. respect, so I want to chat about them!

    The Greek word often translated “respect” is phobos, from which we get the English word phobia. At its root, it means “to fear.” Respect is outward, focusing on a person’s position or the power of office. When only respect is emphasized in family life, it leads to outer conformity, false intimacy, and, eventually, distant relationships

    Wow, how many times have I seen that? Families focus on respect, and they end up with behaviors that, at least for a time, look respectful, but then they turn sour as the true heart is revealed in time.

    The Greek word that is often translated “honor” in the New Testament comes from timae which means “worth” or “value.” It’s one thing to respect (fear) God because of his tremendous power and greatness and another thing to honor (value) him because of those qualities.

    They mention that both honor and respect have their place, but we need to remember that we are told in Romans 12:10 to “Honor one another above yourselves.” This means “treating people as special, doing more than what’s expected, and having a good attitude (definition also from Turansky and Miller).” If we are teaching our children to honor rather than just respect, then it will go to a deeper level than mere behavior modification. Instead we are teaching their hearts.

    The goal of discipline is to help children not only act correctly, but also to think correctly and to become the people God made them to be. Honor addresses what’s going on below the surface and considers a child’s heart. When you teach children to change their hearts, you will see them make attitude adjustments, not just behavioral changes. You’ll get to the root of disobedience or immaturity, and you’ll help your children make lifelong changes.

    I can’t wait to move on to the next chapter!

    For today I am going to try to focus on honoring my husband and my children, and being a good model of honor.ย  I can already tell that this is an area that will need a significant amount of work in my life…ย  I’m looking forward to the journey.

  • The Beatitudes

    Matthew 5

    The Beatitudes

    1Now when he saw the crowds, he went up on a mountainside and sat down. His disciples came to him, 2and he began to teach them saying:
    3“Blessed are the poor in spirit,
    for theirs is the kingdom of heaven.
    4Blessed are those who mourn,
    for they will be comforted.
    5Blessed are the meek,
    for they will inherit the earth.
    6Blessed are those who hunger and thirst for righteousness,
    for they will be filled.
    7Blessed are the merciful,
    for they will be shown mercy.
    8Blessed are the pure in heart,
    for they will see God.
    9Blessed are the peacemakers,
    for they will be called sons of God.
    10Blessed are those who are persecuted because of righteousness,
    for theirs is the kingdom of heaven.11“Blessed are you when people insult you, persecute you and falsely say all kinds of evil against you because of me. 12Rejoice and be glad, because great is your reward in heaven, for in the same way they persecuted the prophets who were before you.

    Confession time: I’ve never really gotten the Beatitudes. I mean, I understand them, but I don’t think I’ve really strived to live them. Much on the contrary, I’ve used the more to help myself feel better in bad times. For example, when I was mourning, I thought “‘Blessed are those who mourn’, so this isn’t totally a bad thing.” I did NOT think “‘Blessed are those who mourn.’ I should mourn more in my regular life!

    Right now I am reading through Dr. Teresa Whitehurst’s How Would Jesus Raise a Child, and her chapter on the Beatitudes is making me think. She says

    If you want to become more like Jesus as a person and a parent, the Beatitudes are a wise and easy place to begin.

    So then she gives some examples of the way Jesus lived the Beatitudes and the way that the world lives. She says, for example, that Jesus tells us that when you’re gentle (meek), not harsh with others, you will inherit the earth. The world’s view is “Show ’em who’s boss. You gotta be cruel to be kind.”, etc.

    OK, so I understand what she’s saying there. Like I said, I don’t think I’ve done much striving to live them, but I get her point. I’ve always thought more about the Love verses or the fruits of the Spirit, etc.

    Then she starts talking about exactly the same thing as Charlotte Mason. I discussed it in my Trains of Thought entry. She says that humans have a hard time with change and are actually immune to it. The same thing CM said! Go figure

    …it short-circuits our goals. We want to lose weight, but can’t seem to overcome our immunity to change in the area of eating habits. We want to be more patient with our toddler but our “immune system” kicks in, preventing us from trying a new, calmer method for handling fussiness.

    So now I’ve read this twice in two weeks. Maybe God is trying to tell me something ๐Ÿ˜› She goes on to give a great example

    When I was getting used to my laptop, it took me several days to unlearn the placement of the keys on my familiar old desktop computer. Some moves were so ingrained that I actually had to cover certain keys with tape so as not to hit them accidentally, erasing my work each time! So it goes with the challenging internal changes for which Jesus promised blessings and rewards in the Beatitudes. They will require that we “tape over” certain habitual ways of thinking and behavior so that we can begin to learn and use what Jesus taught. It may feel awkward at first, but if you inhibit your usual ways of thinking, feeling, and behaving, eventually you will find that Jesus’ teachings are not impossible to incorporate in your life after all.

    I like the way that she built on the same ideas as CM. I like her example. I’ve experienced the same thing with a new keyboard, and I’ve also experienced that same difficulty when trying to change a bad habit. The fact is that you get used to the new way of life if you just stick with it.

    This also reminded me of when I first bought my new glasses. My dh is going through the same thing right now, so I can really empathize. I have progressive lenses. I have the strongest prescription at the bottom for reading, a moderate prescription for mid-distance (like the computer), and hardly any prescription at all for distance. For the first week or two, I felt terrible with these glasses. I kept getting dizzy. I was getting stabbing pains in my brain. It seemed bad. Then one day I could see and my brain had figured out which part of the glasses to look through for different activities. Now I can’t live without them!

    I think I need to apply some of these same principles in my life.

    So the last point that I wanted to discuss is her interpretation of Matthew 5:48 (“You, therefore, must be perfect, as your heavenly Father is perfect”. This is a tough verse. We know we can’t be perfect. That’s why we need God. So what gives?

    I used to worry about this instruction. Then, after further study, I realized that Jesus didn’t say, “So be as perfect as God.” To say this would be to imply that we are on equal footing with God, with equal powers of perfection. Rather, what Jesus was urging his listeners to do was to take his teachings seriously and strive towards the ideal that God represents.

    I’m off to digest this some more. I’m sure I’ll write about it again!

  • Comparing our children

    Never compare yourself to others. You’ll become either vain or bitter.

    I’m reading the chapter on comparing siblings in Siblings Without Rivalry and it is making me think. As she discusses the way that criticizing or praising changes the way a child views themself, I am having a lot of a-ha moments.

    I am a very competitive person, and I would be lying if I said that I don’t care what other people think or do. Not only do I care, but I also strive to one up people. It’s terrible, but true. I am really trying hard to both fix it in myself and to teach my kids to do better.

    I have told myself that it is ok to occasionally tell my children things like “You can eat so much neater than the baby” or “Look how your sister went straight to her car seat and buckled herself.” Now I am cringing as I type those statements out because I see how I was building up pride and vanity while making my kids think they were better or more loved at the expense of the other one. It is something that I’ve just recently started doing, and I am kicking myself!

    Although I’m sure it made my dd proud to hear that I was happy that she buckled herself, it made my son feel as though he couldn’t measure up. When I told my son he could eat more neatly, then he told himself he was better than she is. I’m such a dunce!

    So instead of me saying “You picked up all of your toys!” and my son thinking “I’m great at cleaning up!”, I sometimes said “You don’t leave stuff around like your sister. She’s too young to clean up after herself.” and he thought “I’m better than her!” Grrrrreat P Not exactly the lesson I was trying to teach.

    This whole DescriptivePraise thing is tough for me. I naturally slip into “Good job!” and “That’s beautiful!” instead of “You folded all of the laundry!” or “Look at all of the lines that you drew!” (I almost put “beautiful lines” in my example! Ack!) This is something I need to concentrate on…

en_USEnglish
en_USEnglish