Twitter exchanges
I maintain a very
vibrant discussion network on Twitter under the handle of @forakin and it is no surprise that
the inspiration for this blog has come from discussions I had on Twitter.
I find that it is
nice to flesh out my thoughts in a blog because whilst I have somewhat mastered
concision, precision and brevity to carry a thought within 140 characters with
spare to allow for those thoughts to be redistributed by retweets, for posterity
sake and completeness of purpose, a blog brings together everything I have said
on Twitter.
The news story came
up that Pastor Creflo Dollar has been arrested for simple
battery charges with regards to his 15-year old daughter and then
additional detail was published as how he
choked her.
A clergyman’s dilemma
There is no need
for me to dwell on the substantive parts of the story, those will be covered in
extensive detail by the news wires and other low-hanging fruit commentary, but
there is much to say to create interesting debate and discussion.
I can appreciate
Pastor Dollar’s dilemma, he is the founder of a mega-church with all that it
entails, the idea that any of his children might be found in some
unconventional setting can be scandalous though nothing is said of why he
refused to let his daughter attend the party she asked to attend.
One thing is
certain, preacher kids are not genetically modified to be like their preacher
parents, in fact, whilst any child will share the genetic makeup of its parents
and might look like either or both of them, even adopt a few of their
mannerisms, they are entirely different personalities.
Children are distinct persons
Living together,
eating the same food and doing the same things will not turn the child into a
clone of the parent, they will be distinctly and noticeably completely
different people and for any parent regardless of desire, calling, occupation
or authority to think that they can shoehorn their child into some compact will
spell unmitigated disaster.
Parents have to be
constantly reminded that much as they have aspirations for their kids, they
cannot and must not try to live out their dreams through their kids; it would
eventually cause conflict, resentment, rebellion and separation.
This case also
shows that leaders of churches with their moniker of “man of God” tending
sometimes to the expression of “god of men” are in their time revealed to be
mere mortals, suffering the same pressures, issues, situations and circumstances
of life as you and I, prone to error, fallible and imperfect.
Under my roof
Then let us deal
with the elephantine monstrosity of “Under my roof.”
When a child
reaches the age of reckoning and responsibility is when parents seem to
encounter the greatest difficulty to exerting their parental influence. More
often than not you will end up hearing a sentence that contains the phrase, “Under
my roof.”
Indeed, it is under
the roof of the parents or guardians but really, when a child is brought into this world not
of its own volition but by the chemistry of procreation and every other
sentimental and complicated working of the mechanics, it is the responsibility
of the parents or whoever assumes that responsibility to care for that child until the child approaching adulthood can
fend for itself having enjoyed parental care and succour over a period that
could last two decades or more.
“Under my roof,” is
only part of the package as it deals with the matter of provision in terms of
food, shelter, clothing, education and some protection of sorts. These elements
are generally material and do not represent or fulfil the emotional needs of
the parent-child relationship in terms of love and care which might help shape
the core personality of the child in having self-esteem, confidence, drive,
ambition and purpose.
Sadly, certain
parents confuse their role of material responsibility for their children with
that which demands their emotional investment in the child which usually does
not show in tangible returns but are affairs of the heart, the soul and the
bonds that hopefully will last a lifetime of communication, understanding,
happiness and more.
It is important for
a parent to know where the limits of “under my roof” are and what extra work they
need to put into the relationship to make that phrase the last thing that will
ever be referenced or inferred in communicating with their child.
Spare the rod
And now, sparing
the rod. When the matter of child discipline comes up every parent has been so
schooled in this that it is etched in their memories literally from before they
were foetuses.
Proverbs
13:24 (NKJV) He who spares his rod hates his son, But he who loves him
disciplines him promptly.
In more
contemporary English, the
Message says: A refusal to correct is a refusal to love; love your children
by disciplining them.
We normally hear
people say, “Spare the rod and spoil the child.” It in no way completes the
context of the admonition, but we will get there. I will not argue the semantics of
beating or hitting a child, there are broader issues at play than that.
Pastor Creflo
Dollar by reason of his parental authority has inalienable and vested rights to
discipline his child, which is non-negotiable. Maybe we should question how he
goes about doing that, but we will be caught up in subjective analysis.
Discipline is function of love
However, reading
the verses in full context, you cannot administer discipline without the
purpose of correction through love and that love is not as I have clearly
illustrated earlier by reason of mere parental provision.
Maybe there is a
fine line between administering discipline that it crosses over into abuse and
consequent brutalisation, the ability to wield discipline is under the control
of the parent and the way it is administered is dependent on the maturity and
character of the parent which hopefully has clear aims and purposes.
It is hoped the
discipline is administered for corrective purposes such that the child in
taking the pain of discipline might have learnt a lesson in understanding why
the parent has been strident and corrective thus appreciating that such a
situation should never have to arise again or rarely occur.
In that case,
following the presumed guidelines, a rod, a cane, a whip or a belt might with a pre-determined number of applications to certain parts of the
body without causing undue harm suffice; if and if the rod must be used. In other
cases parents might institute authority based restrictions or activities that
will cause temporary hardship as an instrument of corrective discipline.
Pertinently, I see
no place where laying a hand on the child is sanctioned, in fact, the only
place where that might have happened is where in the bible narrative God through an angel expressly
told Abraham not to lay his hand on the child Isaac when he was about to sacrifice
him. In essence, the slap, the smack, the punch or the whack is verboten.
Losing control
Somehow, Pastor Dollar in
disciplining his daughter, matters appeared to have gotten out of hand, between
he-said and she-said, she was smacked with a shoe, thrown to the ground and
somewhat choked. You then wonder if the mother was there to observe, exacerbate
or quell the situation.
It would be
stretching the imagination to see where the rod, the discipline and the love
sits in this setting, in fact, if anyone can fit any of those components into
the context of correction, I’ll eat my hat.
It brings us to
another element of parents momentarily losing control of a discipline process
such that it is no more discipline but the parent acting out their frustration –
everyone knows including the child that the event will never be corrective.
I remember an event
with my father where he head-butted me, he was angry and probably frustrated
and that was the discipline action that came to him at that moment in time, but
as I got up from the daze of the head-butt, I looked at him as if he had gone
mad. In fact, I just dusted off myself and basically walked out of his room
because I thought if he laid another hand on me he might well go berserk.
No, that was not a
discipline moment and at that particular point in time, I think we both
realised that we would get nowhere and left the issue to another time.
Then there was
another time when both my parents ganged up on me, from my perspective but the
very interesting thing was my father stopped and my mother continued and then
he said out of really grave concern. “Mind his eyes.” Maybe that was love,
maybe it wasn’t but it was clear that he was not ready to see me brutalised
regardless of how angry and frustrated my mother felt in taking it out on me.
Engaging the child
What am I getting
at? The discipline process is not primarily a parental thing; the child can
discern if discipline is out of love towards correction or anger towards more
frustration. The former will yield the results intended, the later will just
harden the child in its resolve to the point that it might just say the worst
they can do is kill me – it should never get that far, in fact, the whole
discipline regime is completely wrong-headed at the point and some things
need to be fixed.
One admonition parents
never seem to imbibe when they seek to command their children to obey their father
and their mother is found in the three versions of Ephesians 6:4 “And, ye fathers, provoke not your
children to wrath: but bring them up in the nurture and admonition of the Lord.”
(KJV).
“Fathers, do not exasperate your children; instead, bring them up in the
training and instruction of the Lord.” (NIV).
“Fathers, don't exasperate your children by coming down hard on them. Take them
by the hand and lead them in the way of the Master.” (The
Message)
Believe it or not,
you can exasperate your children, just as you think they exasperate you and to
put that in context, I have provided definitions of exasperate.
- To make very angry
or impatient; annoy greatly.
- To increase the
gravity or intensity of.
- To cause great
irritation or anger to; infuriate.
- To cause (an
unpleasant feeling, condition, etc.) to worsen; aggravate.
Many a child has
had a parent that seems to have freshly graduated from hell and ready to use
every hellish skill on their child and then blame the child for making their
lives a misery, have we ever asked ourselves if what we do makes the lives of our
children a misery too?
Yes, children do
test their parents, the real question is whether parents will pass or fail that
test either proactively envisaging what to do correctly or reactively making a
complete hash of the situation.
Finally,
I have heard too many
times that children do not come with parental manuals, thank God, they don’t.
The manual of parenthood is borne of life and character built on strong
principles, else children will be one fit like machines and clones of each
other – we know by now, they are not.
Parenthood is a
difficult vocation just as childhood experiences can form what a person will
become. I speak from my having been a child and seeing others bring up their
children. If I could have children, maybe I will see things differently. I have
made peace with myself about the fact I could not have children and after chemotherapy life
can be just as fulfilling vicariously watching children grow into amazing
people all around me.