A letter writer to Dear Abby was divorcing her husband of 10 years for
infidelity. The writer wanted advice on letting other people know the reason
for the divorce and that she was not responsible. Abby’s advice was to consider
the feelings of the children and take the more dignified high road by saying
that it was a mutual decision. I am so glad Abby wasn’t handing out advice to
those who wrote the Bible. Somehow I can’t imagine Paul looking the other way
in regard to sin in order to take the high road.
1 comment:
Gail;
-----Nothing in life is homogenous. Whether it be matter made of protons and electrons, or concepts and words made of systems of ideas, thoughts, and feelings, or history made of events, attitudes, and reactions, everything is complex and can be broken down into components. It is true on the very general level that divorce is a mutual decision: both parties eventually decide to sign the paper. Such a generalized answer given to a toddler might be completely appropriate for the toddler’s main concern - affection and security. Any detail beyond that may introduce emotional struggles concerning concepts beyond his comprehension. But as the child grows, or if the child is already grown, affection and security become vastly more complicated by the different people and events fulfilling his life’s various relationships from which affection and security come, even down to the person of Christ fulfilling eternal affection and security. Knowing some reasons for some historical things deeply effecting his own emotional and mental affinities becomes important for his discovering further realities into which his relationships must grow. That a child knows, “why mommy and daddy won’t live for each other like they do for me,” is critically important knowledge at the same detailed level as is what bothers the child’s thinking about them being apart. So at ten years old the toddler will have grown into a need to know more intimately about why the divorce, and he has a right to know more at that time of his need.
-----Maybe Abby merely was thinking about the static situation of the moment, trivializing life’s changes by presuming a trite patch sewn over a living issue would have lifelong hold. I think she’s brighter than that. In a way the Bible is like Abby’s answer - it does not go into infinitesimal detail about every issue concerning God and man. It’s information is limited - generalized to the degree in which it abandons further detail lest it be an infinitely large library instead of a handheld book. This limitation is an unspoken statement about our needlessness for revelation beyond its given detail and our needfulness of ambition for truth, careful thinking, and refinement of integrity enabling further, personalized discovery of both God and neighbor. In short, there is a place for receiving from Scripture reading, and there is a place for receiving from Scriptural doing. The place of doing is acutely individuated beyond Scriptural specificity because it is from your distinct relationship with the Lord that it personally extends service into your neighbor’s life. Nobody else can be that way exactly; nobody else needs to be; the Lord’s got you for it.
-----So there only is so much a child needs to know about a divorce, and from there on he must become an individual. But the child must know what he needs to know. The making of the child was in essence the parents’ sharing their lives with him. Since the aspects of their lives will effect his aspects, the reasons behind their aspects must be open to his understanding so he can figure out his aspects. Embarrassment is an aside. Such openness alleviates unrealistic pressures pent up within the “life is out of control” perception by trading in the “mysterious causelessness of happenings“ sensation for a mental awareness of life's understandable causes. I assure you, it will be easier for the child to think his problems through than to just feel them out.
Love you all,
Steve Corey
Post a Comment