Posted by Rachel on: 02.05.2008 /
In the February 2008 issue of Sojourners, Kari Jo Verhulst examines The Heresy of the Perfect Parent. She asks “Will your own humanness really ruin your children for life?” I found this section especially thought-provoking:
This gospel of parenting my child to superlativeness - unlike the gospel and its inherent pull beyond kin and toward the stranger - justifies my own preoccupation with my own kind and thus falsely valorizes my tendency to live at arm’s length from my neighbor and surround myself with people who think, speak, eat, and now parent the way I do.
Ms. Verhulst describes well the dominant parenting philosophy in the conservative evangelical community I grew up in. The all-important task of parents was to protect their children from any negative influences or contrary ideas and to create a haven of safety, security, and uniformity. This left little room for social justice concerns or community activism.
But as Ms. Verhulst points out, an exclusive “focus on the family” is not the message of the gospel. Is it possible that by insulating our children too much we could hinder them from developing compassion or from understanding the true message of the gospel? If we abandon the heresy of perfect parenting, could we teach our children (and ourselves) more about grace?
Leave a Reply
Comment by: Pam Hogeweide
1 02/5/08 2:58 PM | Comment Link |check out kathy escobar’s hilarious blog post about “making other mommies feel better”
be sure to take time to read the comments…!
Comment by: Cristi
2 02/8/08 10:00 PM | Comment Link |Wow. After reading the article I’m rather disappointed. One of the major draws of the Emergent Conversation for me was the openness to Attachment Parenting and having your family as a holistic part of your spiritual journey. Growing up in my corner of the Conservative Evangelical world, AP was very frowned upon along with anything intergenerational (i.e. kids belong in Sunday School and service in a church is much more important than time with your children). I know there can be extremes either way, but this article just screamed at me “your kids aren’t as important as what you should be doing for everyone else”. I think one of the reasons the gospel is “stranger oriented” is that people know instinctively to take care of their families so there was no reason for Jesus to include that…not that families are less important than strangers (which was what the article implied to me). (I don’t think there was a question in Jesus’ time as to whether you should breastfeed or cosleep after all.) I think you should be able to incorporate your family into the larger community in a way that allows you to helps others as well. But I think there are also times (like those first couple weeks after having a baby!) that you still need to focus on your needs and your child’s needs before throwing someone else’s needs into the mix.
I agree that we shouldn’t insulate ourselves in an attempt to avoid community, but from personal experience most community that I’ve seen is not interested in including children and/or watching out for children. I just can’t be ok putting my 2 year old in a situation where he can harm himself (non-child-proof places) or where others can harm him just so I can do some sort of social activism. Admittedly, I’m still trying to figure out how to incorporate the gospel into my life and the life of my child. If anything, I would want my child to know that other people are important, but that he is important too. I do not neglect something that he needs (even just time with me) just so I can show him he’s not the center of the universe. I want him to understand that as a family we stand together to help others…a family is the first rung of community after all and a family teaches us how to be a part of other people’s lives (something which I still need work on as an adult anyway!).
Comment by: Rachel
3 02/9/08 5:56 PM | Comment Link |You have a good point, Cristi. It is definitely possible for a person to be so caught up in social activism that they neglect their own family. A few years ago, I read the biography of Bob Pierce, the founder of World Vision. His life was both brilliant and tragic because, while he founded what is now the largest Christian humanitarian organization in the world, he neglected his own wife and daughters. His marriage ended in a legal separation and one of his daughters committed suicide, after begging her father to spend more time with her. Many people see Bob Pierce’s life as a warning of what can happen from good intentions but misplaced priorities.
But I think that Kari Jo Verhulst’s piece really resonated with me because, in the conservative evangelical community I grew up in, no one I knew devoted so much time to social justice that they neglected their families. We didn’t even use the word “social justice” - that was a concept for liberals and Catholics. We were never taught to serve the poor or to welcome the stranger, only to protect our own families from “bad influences.” The job of mothers was to create a safe, comfortable haven of protection. Instead of reaching out, they should create an isolated cocoon.
And there was always the implication that if the parents (especially the mother) do everything in the correct Christian way, the kids will turn out perfectly. Along with that came a lot of pressure on Christian kids to live up to the standard and not embarrass their parents. I appreciated Kari Jo’s reminder that we cannot be perfect parents and that we need to give ourselves and our children the grace to be human.
Comment by: Cristi
4 02/10/08 8:37 PM | Comment Link |Hi Rachel, I agree that the Conservative Christian communities put a lot of pressure on mothers and kids to do everything correctly and to keep the kids away from anything that could influence them negatively. And we didn’t use the word “social justice” either, but you were definitely a better person (in the church) if you devoted a lot of time to church stuff (even at the expense of your kids). I totally agree that we needs to give ourselves and our kids the grace to be human. After my first reading of Kari Jo’s article it just sounded a lot like “Growing Kids God’s Way” stuff (make sure your kids know they’re not the most important thing to you…they’re at least #3 [God, spouse, maybe kids after that unless you throw in social justice before that too]), instead of simply showing each other grace and that we aren’t perfect. Frankly, all of my take-aways from Dr Sears have been permission to do things your way, permission to take it easy and advice that you need to not overdo it. Which I think is good advice for any of us - kids-wise or social justice wise…if you can’t say no and understand that you’re not perfect (and can’t do everything) you will burn out and you also won’t be very effective. Plus I think it’s a much more worthwhile thing to find ways of incorporating social justice, environmental stuff, etc. into your everday life along with your kids instead of trying to put kids into one catagory and the other “important” stuff into a different catagory.
Comment by: Rachel
5 02/10/08 9:50 PM | Comment Link |Cristi, I agree that “Growing Kids God’s Way” is awful! Yuck! I guess my impression of Kari Jo’s article was that as educated, middle class parents of an only child, their natural tendency is to let their whole world revolve around their daughter so they have had to make a deliberate decision not to do that. I could relate to that in my own experience as a mom of one.
Definitely! We’ve found that to be true with our daughter who is now twelve. We’ve made some great memories working on hands-on social justice projects as a family and with our church group. I do want my daughter to learn that she is not the center of the universe, that she is privileged, and that she has a responsibility to use her privilege to help others.