Not every Christian parent
uses this phrase, but just about every Christian parent I know forces
their children to share in this same spirit. This will not
teach Christian charity.
Scenario #1. "Johnny,
you have 20 legos and Toby doesn't have any. You need to share with
him. If you don't, I won't let you play with any legos (or some other
punishment)."
Scenario #2. (Without
letting Toby hear, if possible) "Johnny, you have 20 legos and
Toby doesn't have any. It would be wonderful if you could find it in
your heart to share yours with Toby. He might be very grateful, and
he'll enjoy playing with you much more if you are able to do that."
There are, of course, many other benefits to giving to others, so the
parent has many options from which to choose.
In which situation is
Johnny more likely to learn Christian charity? I'm sure you have
guessed from the context that this is Scenario #2.
In which situation has
the parent maintained control? Scenario #1. Unfortunately,
control over your children, while helpful in the moment on most
occasions, does little to train their character. In fact, it leads to
resentfulness, among other less-than-savory character traits.
I. The Effects of
Scenario #1...
...on Johnny
If Johnny has ownership of
the legos, taking them from him to give to Toby is not just. It is
STEALING. Yep, I just accused parents in Scenario #1 of stealing from
their own children. You just taught your child that stealing is OK,
as long as it evens out the quantitative ownership. Wow. Is that the
message you want to send to your children?
Secondly, Scenario #1
will likely lead Johnny to a state of self-preservation. The
parent obviously has no respect for his property, so Johnny is now
going to focus his energy on making sure he has a way of maintaining
ownership of his toys. Instead of learning Christian charity, Johnny
has now learned the importance of protecting the interests of Self*.
Thirdly, Johnny now resents
Toby. Toby represents an entity whose existence leads to fewer toys.
Finally (for now), if the
parent habitually takes the decision-making responsibility away from
Johnny, he will have difficulty in life once he is in a position
where he must actually make his own decisions. He hasn't been able to
practice!
...on Toby
Toby
has just learned that the mere fact that he has less entitles him to
other people's property.
Secondly,
Toby will learn not to be content with what he already has, however
little that may be.
Thirdly,
Toby will not see Johnny as a caring person who, out of the goodness
of his heart, has shared his things. Instead, because Johnny has
more, he must give some up or be punished. Johnny therefore
represents an entity from whom stuff
can be extracted as long as the proper authority is present.
II.
The Effects of Scenario #2...
...on
Johnny
God
has taught us to take care of those in need, so the right decision
for Johnny is to share his toys with Toby. It is very possible that
in Scenario #2,
Johnny will fail to make the right decision. There are innumerable
benefits to making the right decision, and many negative consequences
to making the wrong decision, and it is the parents' job is to help
Johnny to become aware of them. This should be done in a
matter-of-fact manner, simply laying out the possibilities.
By
giving Johnny the power to make his own decision, you have left the
door open for him to learn what it means to be charitable. This will
take different amounts of time for different children, but when given
time, with proper (read: not coercive or manipulative) guidance, the
child will have the best chance to learn Christian virtue.
...on
Toby
Toby
will learn all the opposite lessons from what he learned in Scenario
#1.
He is much more likely to learn to be content with what he has.
Conclusion
Some
of the time, when parents force their children to share, it is
because they are afraid of what other parents will think of them if
they don't. However, showing children the way instead of forcing them
will develop the good character you so greatly desire them to learn.
They will also trust you more and look to the interests of others
instead of just their own.
Full agreement.
ReplyDeleteAnd actually, scenario #1 also teaches that vengeance is the acceptable response to wrongdoing. Johnny hasn't shared, so he has his toy taken away. This is akin to striking Johnny because Johnny struck Toby and Johnny needs to "see what it feels like". In both cases, the lesson is vengeance.
ReplyDeleteI understand how parents default to this. They're tired, they lack support from a spouse, they are outnumbered by their kids, etc.
I appreciate that your article helps point out the wrong in a very positive and helpful way. Parents can perhaps identify this in their parenting style and begin to root it out.