What Real Life Looks Like

It is so easy to create a false world in cyberspace. It can seem like everyone else is coping well with life and raising picture-perfect families. Well, I'm here to put up my hand and say I'm not picture-perfect. Here are just a few examples of what real life looks like for us:

We have had frequent unpleasant incidents relating to free-range (not wearing a nappy) babies/toddlers and bowel movements. No, I will not go into detail.

My children sometimes pick their noses.

I lose my temper. That doesn't make it OK - it's something I'm working on overcoming.

My interpretation of the terms "regularly and efficiently" in regard to how we cover the eight key learning areas in our state's curriculum is very loose. Mostly, we do maths and english and survive... just. No fabulous science experiments (we've done one this year - putting a container of salt water on a window sill to evaporate - yay for me!), no delving passionately into history, no incredible art programs. Truly. Just maths and english.

My children often stare blankly at people who speak to them. I am teaching them that the polite thing to do when someone asks "how are you?" is to answer them.

Large expanses of my ceiling are covered in fly spots.

I often feed my children bread and butter for lunch. In fact, that and a piece of fruit is our staple diet for lunches.

My eating habits are often terrible - involving copious amounts of carbohydrates and nowhere near enough fruit. I'm seriously working on this one too.

I have had to ring the poisons hotline many times. So far we have escaped serious consequences.

We don't always wash our hands when we should.

Some days I just don't want to be touched.

And there's plenty of other stuff that I'm just not willing to write in such a public "place"...

The point is, real life is often dirty and messy and loud and uncomfortable. Real character comes from real life, though, not glossy magazines. Reading about other people's lives often makes me feel pathetic and inadequate, but that's OK, because I need to centre my life around growing through Christ, not living up to arbitrary standards that I make up based on other people's lives.

So that's me, keeping it real.

Cosleeping?!*

I think cosleeping is a lovely idea. But. I don't feel guilty about not cosleeping with my Baby. Nope. Not at all. I'm writing this for anyone who does feel guilty because they don't or (perhaps more often) didn't cosleep.

Last night Baby slept in my bed. No. She didn't sleep in my bed. She played with my hair. She kicked me. She talked to herself. She certainly did not sleep. I thought it would be a good idea to have her in bed with me because she kept waking up and I thought she wasn't quite well. It wasn't.

Some might argue that it didn't work because she isn't used to sleeping with me. To which I say "pfffft, whatEVer." When she was (really) a baby I used to try to comfort her to sleep when she started to show tired signs. It actually didn't work. She would not go to sleep with me holding or patting her. She needed to be left alone. I speak the truth! (All our children, by the way, have slept with us for the first few days or weeks after birth.)

There are many lovely ideas out there. They don't all work. For me. What will always work for me (and for everyone) are the principles of Right and Wrong. Cosleeping isn't Right or Wrong. It's nice. If you get to sleep.

*This post is not meant to "knock" cosleeping. It's just a light-hearted reflection on a sleepless night. :)

Why Are They Leaving (and does it matter)?

I recently watched an online "movie" called Divided about youth ministry in christian churches. It has ignited some passionate debate - to the point that I would like to respond both to the claims made in Divided (you can find it here) and to the resulting discussion about what makes people of all ages leave their former faith.

One of the statements throughout the movie was that youth group/sunday school is not supported in scriptures. Ephesians 6 is quoted where it says fathers should "bring up their children in the fear and admonition of the Lord". Christ explicitly told His disciples not to add to or take away from the scriptures. To use Ephesians 6 as an argument against youth groups is adding to what the scripture says (something Jesus warned against). It doesn't say "fathers teach your children and whatever you do, make sure no one else teaches them without you present at all times."

Proverbs 11:14 says that "in a multitude of counselors there is safety". Shouldn't we encourage our young people to be willing to listen to a multitude of counselors then? In Acts 17 verses 10-12 the Bereans were noted as searching the scriptures daily to "find out whether these things were so". Is it not a valuable (Biblical) principle to encourage our young people to search the scriptures to find out whether what we (their parents) teach them is true? Youth ministries may be one avenue to do this. What's more, in Titus 2 verses 3-5 the older women were instructed to teach the younger women. In verse 6 of the same chapter, Titus was told to "exhort the young men". Here is possibly a biblical model for separate groups. In Galatians it also instructs those who are spiritual to point straying brothers and sisters back to the right path... without saying "but, by the way, don't do it if they are under 18 and their parents are in the church, because then it's their parents' job".

So no, the bible does not give a command against teaching separate groups, and you might even argue that it advocates it. As someone already commented, this is a case of Christian liberty.

As for young people leaving the church, my experience was growing up in a church with a large group of first generation Christians my parents' age. When I was young and the church was immature, there was a widespread culture (unspoken) that parents were perfect. They did not admit to mistakes and there was sadly too much value placed on image. The long-term result is that (after a major split) there are many of my parents' generation left, but very few of my generation. You see, we grew up and discovered that being an adult didn't make us perfect. In time, disillusionment and disenchantment set in for many.

While our actions will never earn us salvation, they are an expression of our salvation - if (as someone on the Divided movie said in other words) we truly appreciate Christ's sacrifice and what it means for us, our lives will be ones of change (as "faith without works is dead" - James 2:14-26). When addressing the seven churches in Revelation 2 and 3, John kept saying "to him who overcomes". The book of James tells us to "lay aside all filthiness and overflow of wickedness". Jesus told us that if we love Him we are to keep His commandments and since Jesus was that same I AM as spoke to the Israelites in the wilderness (He told the Pharisees, "before Abraham, I AM"), that means the commandments of the Old Testament as well as the New. This is the narrow and difficult path that leads to Eternal life that Jesus was speaking about.

If we teach our kids that Christianity is about being instead of becoming - that it is a place, not a pathway - then we are selling them short. The proof of a changed heart is a changed life - whether they stay in "the church" or leave, if their lives don't become a living sacrifice, then they are Christians in word only. Having a bunch of warm seats at the end of a church service is not a demonstration of "success" in preaching the gospel. In fact, Jesus predicted that the world for the most part would reject the truth... but that is not the end of God's plan as so many believe!

There is another major problem with mainstream Christianity, that is nothing to do with numbers of people entering or leaving. (If you do not want to be challenged, if you don't want to reconsider what the Bible actually says, please don't read on, because you will only be angered by what I have to say.)

The doctrines of heaven and hell are unbiblical. The Bible says that Jesus was "firstborn from the dead" (obviously others had been resurrected to physical life before, but He was the first resurrected to a Spirit body). That means no one before Jesus "went to heaven" - not Moses, not Abraham, not King David. Moreover, it is "at the last trumpet in the twinkling of an eye" that the dead in Christ will rise. As for hell, the "wages of sin is death" (not burning in eternal torment, or any other form of living unhappily for eternity). "Hell" usually means the grave. "The gift of God is Eternal life" ... not something we already have, and certainly not His gift to the incorrigible wicked.

On top of that, the book of Revelation speaks of a time when "the rest of the dead" will rise - those who have not had an opportunity to truly know God in this life. Ezekiel prophesied about a physical resurrection of the people of Israel (Ezekiel 37). Isaiah is full of prophecies of a time when all nations will learn about God, but first our great Adversary will be imprisoned, no longer able to influence mankind, as explained in Revelation 12.

If you take the Bible as a whole and read it carefully, you will find that God's plan is far more comprehensive than the popular doctrines of mainstream Christianity. God has not neglected or forgotten the many - living and dead - who never had the opportunity to truly understand (or in many cases, even hear) the gospel. God has not left the salvation of billions of disadvantaged men, women and children in the hands of His followers. While He has given us a commission to preach that gospel throughout the world, He hasn't so thoroughly failed humanity that the majority still miss out on hearing and believing the truth.

I have merely skimmed the surface of this topic, but if you would like to read more about it, there are a number of free booklets that cover heaven, hell, life after death and God's plan in much more depth.

Thoughts on Crying... and Some Other Stuff too

Babies. Crying. Put those two words together and it can make for an explosive conversation. There are many opinions out there about babies crying and how bad or good it is for them... And some misinformation, including citing of non-existent research. More recently, some research has been done to follow up older children who were "subjected" to controlled crying as young babies. In all that I have found though, neither the opinions nor the research rely on the foundation of true knowledge - the "fear of the Lord".

Interestingly, the Bible has no rules on letting babies cry... or not. It does advise us to "train up a child in the way he should go" and warns that the "heart is deceitful above all things". It also provides a model for good parenting through God's relationship with His people. After all, God is the Ultimate Parent.

So what can we learn from the Bible about letting babies cry (or not)? First and foremost, I truly believe we must learn that God's work with each of us is personal. If God has not seen fit to lay out rules for parents about letting babies cry, then why should we make rules for each other - especially based on research by people who don't even believe in God?

Certainly there is a place for loving and timely advice and encouragement from one struggling mother to another. However, we can so easily become discouraging when we don't fully understand the challenges others face.

When I look at God's relationship with me, I see a pattern. When I was young in the faith, He answered my cries quickly - to show me that He was there and cared about me. As I have gotten older in the faith, He has let me "cry" for longer in order for me to learn valuable lessons and to learn that if I do things His way life will work so much better. He doesn't care about me less, but I can't grow as a child of God if He always jumps in and fixes things as soon as I start to cry. Likewise as my children have grown, I have gradually let them experience some discomfort and distress so that they can learn to take responsibility for, and ownership of, their emotions and decisions.

When have I done this? I'm not gonna tell. Each child is truly a unique individual and God has given me the responsibility to raise the children under my care through the guidance of His spirit. At times I've stuffed up - I've told children who needed my comfort to get over themselves. At other times I've comforted babies who didn't need comfort at all - they were just testing to see how quickly they could bring Mummy running.

Interestingly, I noticed with my youngest that she needed to cry herself to sleep. Believe me, her crying sounding to me, her mother, like true distress, but at a certain age I just could not comfort her to sleep. However, if I lay her in her bed and let her cry for a few minutes, she would settle herself and sleep much better than she had when I was "interfering"! My older children were all different, and looking back I'm sure I could have done better with each of them if I hadn't been so absorbed by my own comfort, but thankfully my many mistakes (and sins) aren't a death-sentence to my relationships with them or with God... as long as I stay willing to grow and change.

The sooner we recognise that every child - and every parent-child relationship - is unique, the sooner we can get on with the business of truly uplifting and encouraging one another in those unique relationships.

One mother struggles with terrible guilt because a particular method of sleep training was essential to her mental health and ability to function. Another may feel inadequate because she couldn't muster the mental discipline to help their babies develop good sleep habits early in life. Yet another may have had a baby who literally wouldn't stop crying in the early days and weeks... and sometimes even months... She simply had to shut the door and let baby cry. It is very easy to judge one or all of these mothers from an objective distance as harsh or weak or even cruel, but when we haven't lived right in the middle of someone else's life, experiencing the very thoughts in their head, we can rarely truly understand just how hard it can be to be... someone else.

In the end, the (sometimes unspoken) rules that we impose on ourselves and others can very easily break down the essential support networks that help us get through those tough early years. I know that far too often I blurt out the words of criticism and hold back the words of encouragement or admiration. It takes real humility to accept and believe that someone else's way might truly work as well as ours... perhaps even better.

On the other hand, it takes patience and love to not carry with us every judgement and criticism that we read into the words and looks of others. Motherhood - especially early motherhood - can be such a sensitive and vulnerable time that we can easily mistake loving concern for harsh condemnation. That lovely older lady at church who says: "don't you think that will spoil him, dear?" is not necessarily speaking from some lofty height of superiority, but may be absolutely aching to ease the burden of a tired and frazzled young mother. On the other hand, single guy (who has never touched a baby in his life) who expresses concern about a baby left to cry, may truly hear something in that cry that (exhausted, emotional, hormonal) Mummy can't hear.

We will all get things wrong on our parenting journey, and sometimes God will use the most unlikely of people to tell us so... And sometimes we will have to forgive those who are speaking from a lofty height of superiority or in absolute ignorance of what it really means to be a mother.

It's a tough gig, this motherhood thing, but if we come right back down to the absolute foundation of wisdom - the fear of God - and invest ourselves in growing in Godly love, then we will have success that the world can't even begin to measure.

No Box Big Enough

When Miss Curie was very young, I started reading to her every day, having been convicted by Mem Fox's Reading Magic that this was essential to her future development. Miss Curie often seemed to have little interest in the books apart from the lovely sound they made when their pages were ripped. I thought she probably wouldn't be very interested in reading when she got older. Today, however, she loves to read.

When she was less than a year old, Miss Curie would copy me when I wiped the floor, and she could spend ages smoothing out a blanket perfectly. I was pretty sure that she was going to grow up to be a neat freak. Nearly eight years later, her bed is the messiest in the house (although it is "made") and I often find dirty clothes stuffed in her drawers to the point that they won't open. The "neat freak" box wasn't big enough.

Around the same time, Miss Curie would get really grumpy and out of sorts when we took her to crowded places. As soon as we would leave a hall full of lots of chattering people, she seemed to become "herself" again. I figured she was probably an introvert just like me.

When she was just over two, Miss Curie would often ask me "who are we going to see today?" I would look at her in wonderment, amazed that I had given birth to a child who was apparently an extrovert. Now, at eight and a half, Miss Curie loves to be around other people while doing solitary activities - she loves someone to be in the room with her while she sews or reads a book. On the other hand, she loves her French class because, in her break she gets to "play with the other kids". The "introvert" box isn't big enough.

When Chatterbox was just a baby she was terrified of "creepy crawlies" of all kinds. As she got older she was scared of the dark, of water... the list of things she was scared of kept getting bigger. At the beach one day she was beside herself when she saw her older sisters actually sitting in the waves. She kept yelling at them: "Get up, girls! Get up!" I resigned myself to having an overcautious child. A year on she has suddenly discovered an adventurous spirit and enjoys touching bugs and playing in surf. The "scaredy-cat" box isn't big enough.

Angelina spoke her first words well before she was a year old and a couple of years later she started playing with rhymes. From just three years old she has loved to make up stories and songs. I was convinced that she would learn to read before her older sister. Now she will be seven soon, and learning to read has been a much longer, slower process for her than it was for Miss Curie (and that is totally OK). The "language lover" box wasn't big enough.

So what's the point in all my ramblings? Just that I'm learning not to put my kids in boxes, because no box is big enough. So often, I have thought that I know my girls, only discover that I don't - not really. If I want to know my children and enable them to grow, I can't assign them an identity based on just a few moments in time. To truly nurture them, sometimes I need to just stand back and watch without the need to pull out my field guide to children in order to work out whether they are "introverts" or "hypersensitive" or "gifted" or ... whatever.

It's essential to guide our children towards growing in character, rather than excusing immoral or reckless behaviour because "that's just who they are". However, I need to learn to accept and appreciate my children with all their harmless little quirks and eccentricities - the bits that make them unique without hurting themselves or others. I don't have to put them in a box to do that.

As for The Baby, she's a mischeivous little thing right now. She has learned to open jars, bottles, cupboards... you name it... and chaos has ensued. When Baby has had enough to eat, she indicates this by either spreading her food artistically and strategically over the table, or by throwing it on the floor (although she is rapidly learning that this is not How Things Are Done). I don't know what personality "box" she belongs in, though, because no box is big enough.

Homeschooling - It's Not Who We Are

I've been intrigued a couple of times recently when people I barely know - and to whom I didn't think I'd ever mentioned homeschooling - have asked about how I'm going teaching the girls... Intrigued, and, in a funny way, slightly troubled.

See, homeschooling is something we do, but I would hate anyone to think that it's who we are. I don't want my identity in the world at large to be encapsulated by the phrase "homeschooling mother of four".

I believe that homeschooling is best for my children, but it's not something I believe in. I hope that the defining feature of my life is my belief that the God Who created the universe has an awesome plan for every man, woman and child on the planet.

I home educate our precious daughters because the education establishment (and to be honest, I believe this is true of christian schools as well) is completely at odds with our beliefs and values - because "out there" our children would be told that they need to accept all belief systems as equally valuable... which kinda doesn't work. The God of the Bible most definitely doesn't tolerate competitors. (If I had created the universe I certainly wouldn't want a statue getting the credit for my work!)

I love having the opportunity to educate "our" girls at home and teach them Biblical values, but homeschooling isn't who we are - it's what we do because of who we are.

Our National Disgrace

I hardly know how to begin this post. This topic has weighed very heavily on my heart for some time now. As floods have swept away both lives and livelihoods, and now cyclones have battered our nations coastline, yet those natural events don't hold a candle to the destruction that is being wrought by our national disgrace.

Based on an estimate from 2005, close to 200 babies a day are killed in our country. As long as a human baby is at least partially inside the womb in the state of Victoria, it has less rights (i.e. none at all) than a chick embryo in the third trimester.

I'm not even going to publish the horrible details of what is now completely legal in the state of Victoria - it is simply too unbearable. Cold, hard facts, unembellished by pro-life proponents, can be found at this government site http://www.betterhealth.vic.gov.au/bhcv2/bhcarticles.nsf/pages/Abortion_in_Australia. For anyone who doubts just how disgusting late-term abortion is, you can search for yourself. In my mind, it amounts to nothing short of torture.

Our national disgrace is that while the rights of animals and the antics of footballers hit the front pages of our papers, abortion does not. Our national disgrace is that I received many emails asking me to attend rallies to protect the rights of mothers to give birth at home, I received none pleading with me to protect the right of a child to be born. I received numerous emails begging me to sign a petition to protect a woman in another country from being put to death, but no one has asked me to sign a petition to prevent the ... I can't even write it ... to prevent what is done to late-term babies in order to remove them from their mothers womb.

More recently, many have asked me to rally around to support those who have lost their homes and experienced terrible trauma in the recent Queensland floods, but no one has asked me to rally around to encourage and help pregnant women who believe their only support network is an abortion clinic, and who are likely to suffer years of trauma later in life.

At election time, the rallying cry of politicians has been to invest in the economic stability of our nation. There has been no mention of the emotional stability of a nation which engages in the wholesale slaughter of defenseless children (YES! They are children, not merely "fetuses" or "embryos"). I can only conclude that politicians focus on economic stability because that is what our nation cares about and that is what will get them elected.

As I cuddle my own baby girl, I feel like she is the one being threatened by our national disgrace. And the reality is that the threat to her is very real. When we hold life so cheap that it is legal to throw a living baby - surgically removed from it's mother's body - into a dumpster (or worse), what possible hope can we have for the future of our children? We can expect them, as a generation, to grow up believing in the disposability of people (while, in all likelihood, they will vehemently defend the rights of animals).

I can offer only one remedy for our national disgrace - to pray and ask God for forgiveness and healing. I know that the only true defender of the unborn can be God himself, and knowing what happens in abortion clinics across our nation (and other nations) every day motivates me to be all the more urgent in my pleas to God for HIS Kingdom to come.

Abortion is not merely the sin of a few desperate women and amoral doctors, it is the disgrace of our nation. In the overwhelming majority we have contributed to its legalization. We have rejected God, torn down the foundations of marriage and family, and invested our lives in the pursuit of physical possessions. In the process, we have relentlessly destroyed our country's single greatest resource and blessing - its children. Many have wondered aloud how "ordinary" Germans could stand by while the holocaust occurred, little realising that Australia is engaged in the barbaric elimination of the unborn. We have yet to fully realize the returns on this diabolical investment, but unless we throw ourselves on God's mercy in abject repentance, we can expect that there is going to be hell to pay.