The Gift of the Enemy

Continuing on, with my new best friend, Walter Wink.  LOL.  I don’t think that his ideas are that shocking, but I think it is shocking to see how few of them are applied in mainstream Christian circles.

 

So my last entry was about how we need to let go of the thought of ourselves as God’s favored, and our enemies as unloved. God loves everyone, and “is kind to the ungrateful and the wicked”, so maybe we should try a little of the same, eh?  We’re actually pretty sucky ourselves, in our natural state, so its time to get off of our high horses.

On to Mr. Wink (fantastic name, btw.)

Once the spell of the perfectionist reading has been exorcised, we begin to see just how far from perfect Jesus assumed we are.  ”Why do you see the speck in your neighbor’s eye, but do not notice the log in your own eye?  Or how can you say to your neighbor, ‘Let me take the speck out of your eye,’ while the log is in your own eye?  You hypocrite, first take the log out of your own eye, and then you will see clearly to take the speck out of your neighbor’s eye.” (Matt. 7:3-5)

I really do love those verses.  I have lots o’ logs.

This is the earliest known teaching of what modern psychologists call projection…  The “splinter” in the other’s eye is a chip off the same log that is in one’s own eye.  We see in the other what we would not see in ourselves.  But why is it a log in the eye of the beholder?  Isn’t that backward?  Normally we say, “I may be somewhat bad (a splinter), but that person is really bad (a log).”  Why has Jesus inverted that conventional way of putting it?

Again, I suck at this.  I totally do this all the time.  God is working on me, and He is changing me, but I am so prone to this type of thinking.  I apparently tend to think that my poop doesn’t stink, because that’s how I act.

Because the log in my eye totally blinds me.  I can see nothing objectively.  Remove the log, and I can see to help my neighbor remove his or her splinter.  

I am super-blinded by my logs.  Its pathetic.

In workshops on this theme I invite people to name an enemy and list all the things they dislike about that person (or group or movement or nation).  Then we ask them to go through that list and ask how many of those characteristics are true also of themselves (or our group or movement or nation).  The common elements identify our projections.  These can be taken into our meditation, prayer, and spiritual guidance, to see what they have to teach us about ourselves.  (Some things on our lists may not be projections.  There are people who are objectively hostile, even evil.  Not every enemy is a gift.  I am focusing only on those enemies that draw our projections.)

OK, so I tried this mentally, and it was pretty disturbing.  This is not my first time doing this exercise.  I remember doing it in college, and have noticed that i am most annoyed by people who have the same faults as I do.  I think this is a great gift in parenting.  I recently did an exercise for a parenting Bible study that asked me to write down the things that frustrate me most in my family members.  My family members are obviously not my enemies, so that part doesn’t apply here, but I did find the list interesting.  The things that I struggled the most with knowing how to handle are also things that I am not so great at handling in myself.  Humbling.

Walter Wink gives some examples of things that frustrate you in others that you need to work on.  Then he says:

Revelations such as these (and they are precisely that) need to be treasured, because that is the gift our enemy brings to us: to see aspects of ourselves that we cannot discover any other way.  Our friends are not good sources of information about these things; they often overlook or ignore these parts of us.  The enemy is thus not merely a hurdle to be leapt on the way to God.  The enemy can be the way to God.  We cannot come to terms with our shadow except through our enemy, for we have no better access to those unacceptable parts of ourselves that need redeeming than through the mirror that our enemies hold up to us.  This, then, is another, more intimate reason for loving our enemies: we are dependent on our enemies for our very individuation.  We cannot be whole people without them.

How wonderfully humiliating: we not only may have a role in transforming our enemies, but our enemies can play a role in transforming us.

What?  I’m not the savior of them?!  They help me?!  Craziness.

As we become aware of our projections on our enemies, we are freed from the fear that we will overreact murderously toward them.  We are able to develop an objective rage at the injustices they have perpetrated while still seeing them as children of God.  The energy squandered nursing hatred becomes available to God for confronting the wrong or transforming the relationship.

I have found this to be true, although I think I am still in my infancy in this process.  Being able to step back and still see those who hurt you as children of God is so freeing, but so difficult (at least for me.)

An understanding of the Powers makes forgiveness of our enemies easier.  If our oppressors “know not what they do,” if they, too, are victims of the delusional system, then the real target of our hate and anger can be the system itself rather than those who carry out its bidding.  ”For our struggle is not against enemies of blood and flesh, but against the rulers, against the authorities, against the cosmic powers of this present darkness, against the spiritual forces of evil in the heavenly places” (Eph. 6:12).  We can pray for the transformation of our enemies, knowing that even the most intractable opponents may be capable of complete turnabout, and that some have actually done so.

Interestingly enough, this was the topic of my Beth Moore study last night.  Once again, when Beth Moore agrees with practically anyone else that I’m studying, then I think that’s a big deal.  I’m pretty sure that pretty much the only thing that overlaps between these authors is Christ, LOL.

Joe and I had a discussion about how all of this relates to America’s position in the world, and it was really good.  We both realize how much we’ve bought into the myth of redemptive violence – the idea that violence makes peace.  Somehow it seems like so much of mainstream Christianity is saying that we can accomplish peace through violence, and yet that was not the way of Christ at all.  Are there times when we must stand up against evil and cruelty?  Absolutely.  Is violence the only way to do that?  Of course not.  

We can look to history to see example after example of nations being healed without violence.  Even our own revolution in America had many non-violent aspects.  We just abandoned them for war.  The problem is that violence breeds violence, and its not like it really even works.  Lets just look around.  Does the world look more peaceful?  Uh, no.  More civilians were killed in the 20th century than in every century before that combined.  Clearly our methods of violence aren’t making for a more peaceful world, and we know its not what Christ taught.  How is it that Christianity in America has become so entangled with the myth of redemptive violence?

I don’t know the answer.  I did find it interesting to try the above exercise with America’s enemies vs. America.  We don’t exactly come out looking like roses.  ;)  We’re not all bad, of course, and we do a lot of things very well.  I also believe that America, on a whole, is trying to do the right thing.  I think it is just easy to get misguided.

So… if I come up with a solution to world peace, I’ll let you know.  Until then, I’m going to keep working on applying these examples in my (much smaller and more manageable) day-to-day life.

God’s favor

I have two entries mulling around in my mind for tonight. I’m going to give this one a go first and then try the other one if my mind isn’t mush yet ;)

 

OK, so I’ve been reading The Powers That Be by Walter Wink. Fascinating stuff. It was recommended in the footnotes of Irresistible Revolution, and it really develops Shane Claiborne’s ideas of embracing pacifism without being passive. Good stuff.

One of the sections that I’ve really been enjoying in this book is all about God’s favor and the idea of God hating our enemies. Here’s the funny thing about that thought. God is love. He loves everyone. We know this. Let’s take a look at Luke 6.

Love for Enemies

27″But I tell you who hear me: Love your enemies, do good to those who hate you, 28bless those who curse you, pray for those who mistreat you. 29If someone strikes you on one cheek, turn to him the other also. If someone takes your cloak, do not stop him from taking your tunic. 30Give to everyone who asks you, and if anyone takes what belongs to you, do not demand it back. 31Do to others as you would have them do to you.
32″If you love those who love you, what credit is that to you? Even ‘sinners’ love those who love them. 33And if you do good to those who are good to you, what credit is that to you? Even ‘sinners’ do that. 34And if you lend to those from whom you expect repayment, what credit is that to you? Even ‘sinners’ lend to ‘sinners,’ expecting to be repaid in full. 35But love your enemies, do good to them, and lend to them without expecting to get anything back. Then your reward will be great, and you will be sons of the Most High, because he is kind to the ungrateful and wicked. 36Be merciful, just as your Father is merciful.

OK, so we’ve all read those verses a thousand times, right? So how is it that the church, and particularly “the religious right”, seem to forget about them when it comes to policy-making? God is “kind to the ungrateful and wicked”, but are we? Ha. So often the church is too busy focusing on a God that will favor the good based on their righteousness. We know from scripture that the rain falls on both the righteous and the wicked. Why does the church forget this so often? Walter Wink talks about it:

God’s all-inclusive parental care is thus charged with an unexpected consequence for human behavior: we can love our enemies, because God does. If we wish to correspond to the central reality of the universe, we will behave as God behaves–and God embraces all, evenhandly.

Well, crap. That’s not something I do very well.

Our solidarity with our enemies lies not just in our common parentage under God, but also our common evil. God “is kind to the ungrateful and the wicked.” We too, like them, betray what we know in our hearts God desires for the world. We would like to identify ourselves as just and good, but we are a mix of just and unjust, good and evil. If God were not compassionate toward us, we would be lost. And if God is compassionate toward us, with all our unredeemed evil, then God must treat our enemies the same way. As we begin to acknowledge our own inner shadow, we become more tolerant of the shadow in others. As we begin to love the enemy within, we develop the compassion we need to love the enemy without.

Let me just say that I have found this to be so true in my life. It is at my most humbled and broken moments that I can love those who hurt me. It is so much easier to have compassion for others when you realize just how much compassion you need.

If, however, we believe that the God who loves us hates those whom we hate, we insert an insidious doubt into our own selves. Unconsciously we know that a deity hostile toward others is potentially hostile to us as well. And we know, better than anyone, that there is plenty of cause for such hostility. If God did not send sun and rain on everyone equally, God not only would not love everyone, God would love no one.

I am finding this to be so true in my life. I have been through a lot of hurt in the past year, and I feel like God has really used this time to show me all of the compassion that I have (undeservingly) received.  He has also helped me to love those who hurt me. I am so far from perfect that it is not even funny, but I am really enjoying the journey. I love serving a God who loves everyone without them having to act a certain way. That’s how I want to be too. Its an amazing journey to try to get there, and I am thankful for God’s unending patience with me. He knows I need it!

I love hearing voices like Walter Wink’s in the Christian community, because I think this is an area where we could really stand to be challenged.  If we think of God as an angry deity who picks sides, then how will we ever see the image of God in those who are our “enemies”?  Its so hard, but we know that we were ALL created in God’s image, even those who hurt us the very most.  It is only when we can see that piece of God in them that we can reconcile and live the kind of life that Jesus told us to live.

Good stuff.

Cookie love


Oh man, I am in love! I am a cookie freak, and I am always looking for great cookie recipes. I found the most amazing vegan oatmeal raisin (and chocolate chip) cookies in Veganomicon. They are perfectly chewy and moist and just fantastic.

And, of course, the best part about making vegan cookies is that you get to eat the dough without any guilt ;)   No salmonella worries here!

I wasn’t sure if I wanted to buy Veganomicon right away since it is only in hard cover, but it is worth every penny.  This is definitely the kind of cookbook that you want to be able to reach for anytime you want it.

Tomorrow night I’m trying the Pineapple Cashew Quinoa Stir-Fry from Veganomicon, so I’ll let you know how it goes  :)

Homemade Baked Beans

Mmmm! I love slow cooked meals! I finally gave in and bought Fresh From the Vegetarian Slow Cooker, after years of constantly checking it out from the library. It is one of my all-time favorite cookbooks, because it is so easy and kid-friendly.

Today I decided to try the Maple Baked Beans. They are killer! I realize that beans may not exactly be the sexiest looking food, but you’ll just have to take my word on it, lol.  They were perfectly maple-y without it being overpowering.  Very yummy!

Really good in the end…

My rating:

I must admit that I was initially very skeptical of this book. I thought it might be punitive, guilt-based parenting in disguise, and I wrote about that in the past. The fact that the authors appeared on Family Life Today made me even more skeptical, haha. Mr. Turansky graciously responded to my criticisms, and I must humbly admit that I was wrong. I think I misjudged some of his words. I think that I can accept the things that I disagreed with once I look at them in the context of the entire book.

I would absolutely recommend this book to parents on either side of the parenting spectrum. I sincerely believe that my friends who are into punitive parenting would enjoy and learn from this book without being immediately turned off, and I think that my AP/GBD friends would love it just as much. I think it is fully in line with AP philosophy. I especially appreciated the final chapter. It focuses on how our children are not just our children, but also our brothers and sisters in Christ. I wish that more parents thought about this fact. I know that I am guilty of forgetting it very often. I was so impressed to see a mainstream Christian book that tackled this subject.

Overall, I would happily recommend this book to any parent. I even listed (and immediately sent out) my copy on paperbackswap, so that another parent could have access to this excellent resource. I am very strict about what I paperbackswap, because I would never want to send something on that I felt was not encouraging or uplifting for the family who will receive it. That is why I have a horrific copy of “Withhold Not Correction” sitting on my shelf that my mother-in-law gave me years ago. I do NOT want any other family to see someone suggest that you switch your children with a tree branch from your own yard!

Back on topic though… You can read my previous entries about Say Goodbye… on this page. If you end up reading the book, please post and let me know what you thought! I’d love to discuss it :)

Oh, and Merry Christmas!!!

Tolerance levels

I’m in a mad whirlwind while trying to finish up the 50 or so books that I have started but not finished in the past few years, so my posts will probably be quite a hodge-podge.  I am working on a big, long entry about Church History in Plain Language, but I shall save that for another night because I am nursing at the keyboard right now  :P

Tonight’s lesson for myself is on tolerance and comes from Turansky and Miller’s Say Goodbye…

People have an alarm in their heads that is set to a specific tolerance level.  When they’re irritated or annoyed, the alarm goes off.  Each person’s alarm is set differently…  The good news is that tolerance levels aren’t permanently set.

Recently I’ve been more tired (go figure… with a baby and all…) and I’ve noticed that my tolerance levels have gone down considerably.  At the same time I’ve noticed that my children’s tolerance levels with each other have gone down.  This is most certainly related.  I needed this little reminder tonight to let me know that I need to work on reseting my tolerance levels and not being so testy.  :P

This passage also prompted me to think about how each of my children respond to different circumstances.  For example, my son is incredibly tolerant when it comes to waiting for his turn, but he is not so tolerant when it comes to his personal space.  My daughter, on the other hand, is comfortable with people being quite close to her, but she has a tough time waiting for her turn.  My children can learn a lot from each other, and I can learn from each of them.  It is easy to forget that what may not bother you may be very annoying to someone else.

My review of Birth: The Surprising History of How We Are Born (rated 3 stars)

Birth: The Surprising History of How We Are Born

by Tina Cassidy


I just finished this book, and I was disappointed to recognize many sections of it from another book that I am currently reading, Milk, Money, and Madness. I don’t think the author exactly plagiarized, but its pretty close. For example, Cassidy says in Birth

At Dublin Foundling Hospital, of ten thousand hand-fed infants between 1775 and 1796, only forty-five survived infancy, an astounding mortality rate of 99.6 percent.

In Milk, Money, and Madness, it reads

At the Dublin Foundling Asylum during 1775-96, where dry nursing was in vogue, only 45 children survived out of 10,272-a horrendous 99.6% mortality rate.

Just a few paragraphs later Cassidy says

The ignorance and confusion surrounding bottle preparation spurred Nathan Straus, owner of Macy’s department store in New York, to give away pasteurized milk to poor children at philanthropic “stations,” a concept that had also taken hold in Europe…

Milk, Money, and Madness says

Milk stations were soon all the fashion. At the turn of the century, “milk depots” were established in France, Britain, and the United States… In New York, Nathan Strauss of Macy’s, working through health department clinics, organized milk stations where pasteurized, bottled milk was provided free for the needy and at low cost to others.

You get my point. I saw dozens of these kinds of passages, which was a real turn-off. Milk, Money, and Madness came out 11 years earlier, and apparently used fantastic sources since Cassidy lifted passages like the ones above.

My other complaint is that Cassidy swings back and forth throughout the text. First she talks about how its a miracle that any of us can survive childbirth and that we’ll soon all need C-sections because our kids keep getting bigger and bigger. Then she talks about how doctors are killing us all and homebirths with midwives are safer. Then she says she’d never homebirth.

I’m very glad that I read this after my latest pregnancy. Cassidy admits that she doesn’t trust her body, and it is evident in the text. I wouldn’t recommend this book to a pregnant woman.

Cassidy has some really cool pictures in here though. The chapter on C-sections was horrifying, but really interesting at the same time. I feel so many mixed emotions about this book. I’m glad that I read it, but I wonder if the sections that I liked could’ve been found in other books.

Fall Reading Challenge!

I’m always up for an excuse to read, so I simply had to join the Fall Reading Challenge. We’ll see how much I get done now that I have less than a month before my baby should be here….

Non-fiction

This book was introduced to me by Sarah Clarkson when she spoke in Colorado Springs a few weeks ago. It was written by an Eastern Orthodox theologian who wants to help parents make the right choices when it comes to which books and stories they should read to their children. I ordered it on ILL and it just arrived. I am anxious to read it!

This book was recommended to me by a few GCMers. It looks interesting. We shall see.

I found this book through the Making Home blog. Her entry was convincing enough for me to pick up the book.

Fiction

It is seriously embarrassing that I have not yet read this book. Its a super fast read though, and I am almost through it in a few sittings. So far I’m loving it :)

Family Reads

We started this last night. Somehow I escaped childhood without reading anything by Laura Ingalls Wilder. Sad but true… This is our current bedtime story. We quickly finished St. George and the Dragon and before that we read Pinocchio. I think this book will be a nice follow-up.

We’ve loved every d’Aulaire book that we’ve touched so far, so I’m sure that will be the case again!

Please feel free to join up and read along with me! I’ll do my best to post my progress and thoughts as I read.

Dream houses and fantasies

This is my new favorite book!  There are so many great sections, but I want to focus today on her chapter on the fantasy of housekeeping and “dream houses”.  There are all sorts of high-end gadgets that are marketed to people who don’t even clean their own households. People want to dream and fantasize about their perfect house, and yet the time that women spend on average cleaning has dropped by 50% since my Grandmother’s day. During that same time, no other members of the household have started spending more time on housekeeping. That’s not good.

Clothes and toys lie strewn from one side of the house to the other, there seems to be nowhere to put anything, and we find ourselves wondering whether the whole family is likely to come down with typhoid if the bathroom is left uncleaned for yet another day or week or month.  And in the midst of it all, there too often sits someone who is reading a magazine or watching a TV show about the dream house rather than tidying up the house he or she is in.

Our culture completely encourages this kind of fantasy life and house-porn over the real day to day, unglamorous (but worthwhile) act of keeping house.

There has surely always been a gap between the way people keep their houses and the way they would like ideally to keep them. But many of us, I suspect, are demoralized by the task of keeping house in part because we know that our houses, no matter how well kept, will never look like the palaces in the dream house publications. And so we give up, preferring unattainable ideals to less than perfect realities.

It is so easy to get caught in this trap. We moved about 6 months ago from a house that had become my “dream home” by the time we left. It had the floors I always wanted, the perfect layout, a great yard, and it was painted in my favorite colors. We moved to a great new home, but it has carpeting in the main living areas, a red wall in the living room, and a smaller kitchen. Our furniture was bought to fit in our old house, and doesn’t match properly in our new house. This house has some great new features, like we now live on an open space (a preserved nature area) and we have a full guest living area in the basement, but I found myself having such a hard time being motivated because I didn’t *love* it the way that I loved my old house. I made a few changes – first in my attitude, and then in the rooms, and it has become much easier to take care of the house. I am finally enjoying it again. I never realized how important my attitude was until we moved.

The other thing that I’ve recently learned, and that this book reinforced, is that my goal as a stay at home mom is not to have a perfect house. My goal is to take care of everyone and help them to feel comfortable. This includes a clean house, but not one with the finest furnishings or artwork. It just needs to be clean and welcoming.

I think we will realize that elaborate, spotless perfection is really not the point. The point is the continual re-creation of welcome and nurturance, not in some theoretical or disembodied sense but in simple, practical provision for the needs of the body: food, clothing, a place to sit, a place to sleep.

Ironically, perhaps (given what is often called the materialism of modern society), these basic needs are too often met with neglect (no one makes any effort to provide clean clothes or meals) or resentment (whoever is providing the clean clothes and meals sees that work, and is encouraged by others to see it, as “drudgery”). The result is that those needs become something to indulge in fits of commercialized excess (“treating oneself” to a day at a spa or a weekend at a hotel, for example) rather than through happy daily routines of baths and meals and clean sheets.

Yeah, why do we do that?!

The rest of the book goes on to talk about the simple details of sheltering, clothing, feeding, and keeping a household. It is both simple and profound at the same time. It is not the kind of book that makes you feel like you need to start working yourself into a frenzy. It is a simple encouragement to bless your family and those outside of your family by making your house into a place that will nurture souls. I really recommend this book.

Imaginative and Non-Toy Play

I’ve been thinking a lot about this topic ever since it came up on GCM. I was shocked to see that my kids are possibly in the minority when it comes to non-toy play. In that thread, which asked what kids do if they don’t have toys, I wrote

I think my kids would do great without any toys at all. They have way more fun when it is just the two of them.

We have a LOT of dinosaur play around here. They made up this one game (which is probably played for several hours a day) where one pretends to be a certain dinosaur and the other tries to guess which one. A variation on that is for them to go off and decide what dinosaur to be and then dh or I have to guess what they are.

They absolutely adore spelling things out on the refrigerator don't know They love to sing and dance if I put on music or they make up their own songs if not. They pretend to be animals, or pretend to be completely made-up things with made-up names. They tickle-fight and blow raspberries or play hide-and-seek They read books constantly. They will pretend with anything.

On our cross-country trip (5,000+ miles in the car with no toys), they made “toys” out of seatbelt ends, shoes, whatever! They do that around the house too – they’ll make pretend things out of pillows, their hands, socks, whatever. We have SO many toys here, but they just aren’t preferred don't know

They also love to practice jumping and tumbling. They jump over each other or try to do headstands or whatever happy smile

Its good stuff. Its what I remember doing as a child too

As I read through the responses, I saw that many kids do not play in that way. It has really been nagging me, because I remember how much my brother and I played that way when we were little. We didn’t need things that told us how to play, we just played. Right now, as I type, my kids are downstairs playing leapfrog and pretending to be dinosaurs. Life would be so boring if they only played with toys!

I recently started reading How to Grow a Young Reader by Kathryn Lindskoog, and I’m still withholding judgement, but this section spoke to me and made me wonder if maybe some of the kids who don’t do much imaginative play just haven’t had a chance to develop the skills yet.

Author and scientist Isaac Asimov brushed aside the menace of widespread television addiction by claiming that, without television, people who watch a lot of it would be doing other things equally as empty–such as staring into space. He assumed that they would be passive even without their television sets, accomplishing nothing.

That is a radical assumption to make… in fact, people who have to do without television for a time generally resort to reading, hobbies, games, studies, longer family dinners, earlier bedtimes, and even improved sex lives, according to some reports.

I’m sure I’ll get all sorts of great google hits now that I have the phrase “improved sex lives” on here, lol.  Seriously though, this is very true in my life, except replace the word “television” with “computer”  ;)   We do much better with less electronics.

Asimove seems to be considering children as basically inactive because children watch television more than any other group. But when they are not watching television, children are about the busiest people in the world. They are constantly exploring themselves and their environment, chattering, reflecting, insisting, and probably keeping at least one adult very busy. Their brains, the most complicated things on earth, are developing daily. Most of their healthy growth activity falls into one category — play. Play is child’s work.

So I am wondering now if there is some kind of correlation between the types of play that kids engage in and what they are doing during the day. I started thinking back to when my kids were watching a lot more tv (or it was at least on in the background). Back then, many of their games reflected what they watched on tv. They were not very imaginative, and when they played it was usually with toys. Of course, this doesn’t prove that the two are related, but I started thinking about it as I read.

So now I’ve been pondering whether or not passive activities (like tv or computer usage) can make the initial transition to free play more difficult. As my mind considered this thought, I came across this quote in The Simple Living Guide by Janet Luhrs

An added benefit to less TV is, surprisingly enough, boredom. Keep reading! Boredom is especially good for children. Jerry Mander, who wrote Four Arguments for the Elimination of Television, said this:

…Slowly, I’d slip into a kind of boredom that seemed awful. An anxiety went with it, and a gnawing tension in the stomach. It was exceedingly unpleasant, so unpleasant that I would eventually decide to act–to do something. I’d call a friend, I’d go outdoors. I’d go play ball. I’d read. I would do something.

Looking back, I view that time of boredom, of “nothing to do,” as the pit out of which creative action springs.

…Nowadays, however, at the onset of that uncomfortable feeling, kids usually reach for the TV switch. TV blots out both the anxiety and the creativity that might follow.

So I know what I’ll be pondering for the rest of the day (while keeping my tv and computer off)…