Tag: Family

Guest Post: Redeeming Halloween

~ Evan Lenow

This is a guest post from my wife, Melanie. She originally wrote this post for Biblical Woman, the blog site for the Women’s Programs at Southwestern Baptist Theological Seminary. The post originally appeared here.

Then Jesus again spoke to them, saying, “I am the Light of the world; he who follows Me will not walk in the darkness, but will have the Light of life.”  John 8:12

 “You are the light of the world. A city set on a hill cannot be hidden.”  Matthew 5:14

I admit it. I really do not like October 31. I do not enjoy scary.  Call me 100% wimp, but the scariest thing I have ever willingly sat through is Michael Jackson’s “Thriller” video and I had nightmares for days. Therefore, Halloween is my least favorite holiday of the entire calendar year. For me, it is the sharp thorn on the beautiful rose bush named “autumn.”

However, after having our first child, I discovered the innocent, child-like aspect of Halloween.  With her first princess dress at 18 months, our oldest daughter fell in love with playing dress-up. In her mind, Halloween was a time where she could wear her princess dress outside with her princess shoes. All of her friends would join us, wearing their princess dresses too.  Don’t forget the candy! If you are polite and say “please”, people give you lots of candy. This is Halloween through a young child’s eye.

Now, that little 18 month old is almost 9 and we have had to reevaluate how our family handles a holiday that is steeped in evil, yet has the potential to be redeemed for a holy purpose.  That holy purpose is reaching people who live in the darkness and sharing with them the Light.  So how can our families participate Halloween in a way that shares the Light and shuns the dark?

Halloween, by nature, is a dark celebration. But as God’s children, we are to be the light in a dark world. My children always dress up in a way that brings light and smiles to the darkness and scariness. What could break up the darkness, but a cute little preschooler twirling in a ballet costume? Or a little boy dressed as superman ready to fight the bad guys?  Because we are representing the Light, we do not dress in any way that resembles darkness or death. Our home is decorated with the bright red, orange and yellow hues of fall.

As a side note, I do warn my children that there might be others in costumes that make them feel uncomfortable. I am vigilant to watch for scary things where I either distract my children or remove them from the situation entirely. My kids always have the option to stay behind and not approach someone who is dressed up. Aside from saying “thank you for my candy,” this is not a time to work on manners. In other words, if my kids want to run away from someone or climb into my arms, they have full freedom to do this.

As we are on mission to take light into the darkness on Halloween, a wonderful thing happens. Those who are lost and need Jesus actually come to you. This is the reason why I cannot justify sitting inside my home and hiding out the night of Halloween – There are lost parents and children out there, and they are coming to my doorstep. If I would only open my door, I can share with them the precious Light.  This is an area where I am very grateful for the mission mind of my church home.  Our church puts on a “Trunk or Treat” time every year. This is an event where church members line up their cars, raise their trunks, and distribute candy. Our church has the privilege of being surrounded by apartment complexes. Halloween is a great opportunity to reach out to the children within those apartments.  The church members have a chance to talk with them and even put Scripture on the candy that is distributed. We take our children around to receive candy as well, but my kids know the main reason we are there is not to get candy, but to minister to un-churched families who need to know about Jesus.

My goal is to develop within my children a compassion for the lost.  So, the Lenow family gets all dressed up in our happy, cute costumes, packs our candy with Scripture verses on it, and goes to our church where we will meet hundreds of children who do not know Jesus.  During this time, we pray to impact families with the ultimate Light of the World. We also have good friends who are members of our church, but instead of coming to the Trunk or Treat at the church, they stay home and welcome their neighbors on their front door step. They know their neighborhood is full of lost people, so they pray that some will come to their door where they are able to minister to them in a way they haven’t done before.

Even if your church does not do an organized outreach during Halloween, you can have a night of outreach yourself on your doorstep.  Simply entertain trick or treat-ers at your front door and take the opportunity to talk with them or add something about your church or a tract to their candy. The parents and children who come to your door expecting candy can be changed by a loving smile and a friendly attitude that gracefully begins to talk with them about a God who loves them.

My goal for Halloween is to redeem the day to mean something that can be used for God’s glory. Yes, the day has evil roots. But God can still use me and my family to spread light in a dark world. Halloween is not a holiday to be celebrated by believers, but an opportunity that is not to be missed to radiate into a dark, lost world the bright light of the Gospel.

_________________________

Once again, this is a guest post from my wife Melanie. In addition to putting up with me, she diligently works to train our four children. If that were not enough, she also leads the One Heart women’s ministry at our church, Birchman Baptist Church. She holds a Master of Arts in Biblical Counseling from Southeastern Baptist Theological Seminary.

Can a Child Have More Than Two Parents? California Says “Yes”

~ Evan Lenow

Earlier this month, California governor Jerry Brown signed into law a piece of legislation that allows children to have more than two legal parents. Since that time, there has been some legal wrangling over what the practical application of the law will be and whether similar laws will be passed in other states.

The law in California came as a response to a legal case where one partner in a lesbian relationship had been impregnated by a man. Sometime after the birth of the girl, the couple got into a domestic dispute, and one of them landed in jail while the other was in the hospital. The girl ended up in foster care. Since her biological father had terminated parental rights so that the non-biological mother in the couple could legally adopt the girl, the daughter was not placed in his care—despite the fact that he was still actively involved in her life. In order to rectify this situation and others like it, California has now passed a law that legally recognizes more than two parents for custodial purposes.

This is one of the unintended consequences of the legalization of same-sex marriage. Since revisionist marriage definitions no longer make a connection to biology, gender, and procreation, children have been placed in the awkward circumstance of not knowing who their parents are. Are their biological parents really their parents? What about the non-biological-parent same-sex partner of their mom or dad?

Those who supported the law claim that it protects the best interest of the child. However, it is difficult to say that such a worthy goal is the actual outcome of the law for at least a couple of reasons.

First, this law will most likely add confusion to the mind of the child when she attempts to identify her parents. In situations like the one that inspired the law, the child was given the impression that she had two mothers and one father. Even though she did not live with her father, he was actively a part of her life. Imagine the confusion in her mind over why her father did not live in her house. Did he not love her enough to live with her? Did her mother not love her father? This situation is ripe for confusion on the part of a child.

Second, what happens when one biological parent has different hopes or aspirations for the child than her other biological parent and non-biological-parent same-sex partner? Who is given preference when that occurs? In a traditional marital relationship, the father and mother (i.e., husband and wife) work together to iron out their own differences over the goals they have for their children. In this situation, the non-resident biological parent is most likely the one left with a diminished voice in childrearing. Is this really in the best interest of the child when research proves that children fare better when reared in the married home of their biological parents?

Even though our culture was assured by proponents of same-sex marriage that it would not change the fabric of marriage and family, such assurances were empty and false. In fact legal professionals fully expect similar laws to be passed in states that have legalized same-sex marriage.

With the legalization of same-sex marriage in fourteen states, the change not only to marriage but also to the institution of the family is already well underway. However, this should not discourage us from standing for God’s design for marriage and family. As it relates to this law in particular, we should stand for God’s design for the sake of the children.

_________________________

Patrick McGreevy and Melanie Mason, “Brown signs bill to allow children more than two legal parents,” Los Angeles Times, October 4, 2013.

Jeremy Byellin, “More than two legal parents? A new California law makes it possible,” Legal Solutions Blog, October 15, 2013.

When a Man Is Not Really a Man

~ Evan Lenow ~ 2 Comments

No MenWomen have been giving birth to children since the beginning of the world. Men, however, have apparently figured out how to accomplish this feat only recently. In fact, it seems quite popular these days for media outlets to plaster across their pages a headline that includes some version of “Man Gives Birth.”

The latest account of this comes out of Germany via UK’s The Telegraph. The headline reads, “Transgender man gives birth in Germany.” Below the headline, the paper adds this description: “A transgender man has given birth to his first child in Germany and wants to be registered as the baby’s father.”

To the typical reader, such a headline and description sounds ludicrous. How can a man—even one who is described as a transgender man—give birth to a child? Isn’t childbirth a biological impossibility for a man?

Here is the rest of the story. The Telegraph reports:

Although the birth took place on March 18 of this year the news has only just come to light. The baby was born at home, in the Neukoellin district of Berlin, attended only by a midwife.

The father had insisted on a home birth to avoid being listed as the mother on hospital documents—a German legal requirement.

Although the father has been taking hormone replacement therapies for years he elected to retain the reproductive organs of a woman.

Because he physically gave birth to the child the unidentified man is seen as the mother, however by law he is recognised as a man.

The reality in this situation is that the person who gave birth to the child is physiologically a woman who happens to self-identify as a man. She has been taking hormone treatments (testosterone) in order to develop some traits of a man (e.g., facial hair, deeper voice, etc.), but she is still biologically female. In fact, she most likely had to stop the hormone treatments to get pregnant and give birth.

So what should we think of this?

This news report is evidence that our culture is attempting to strip words of meaning. The term “man” has always included biological and genetic markers distinguishing it from “woman.” One of the clearest markers is that men do not have the biological capacity to bear children. In this case, however, the mother wants to be officially recognized as the father.

In his book, On the Meaning of Sex, J. Budziszewski proposes definitions of womanhood and manhood with respect to identifying what makes each unique. Regarding the term “woman” he writes:

We can say that a woman is a human being of that sex whose members are potentially mothers. The broad category here is human beings; an essential characteristic that distinguishes some human beings from others is the potentiality for motherhood.

Budziszewski explains that potentiality for motherhood is more than the biological possibility of giving birth, but it certainly includes the biological. Even when a woman is physically incapable of bearing a child, it does not negate the potentiality of motherhood.

In addition, he offers a definition of manhood that is more than just a negation of the definition of woman. He states:

These few paragraphs about womanhood may have given the impression that men are to be defined negatively. Someone reading them might suppose that if a woman is a human being of that sex whose members have the potentiality for motherhood, then a man is simply a human being of the sex whose members lack the potentiality for motherhood—making the man a sort of incomplete woman. On the contrary! A man, like a woman, is correctly defined only when he is positively defined. He is a human being of the sex whose members have a different potentiality than women do: the potentiality for fatherhood.

In the same respect as before, Budziszewski considers fatherhood to be broader than merely the potential to sire children. It also includes the way a father relates to children, cares for and protects his family, and relates to women. Budziszewski laments that men have been taught not to be men by false and deluded teachers in the culture. He concludes his description of true manhood by noting:

Unlike the achievement of biological maturity, the achievement of manhood is hard work, labor that requires a firm hand with the desires and devices of the heart. Alas that the carving and shaping of these impulses is so unfashionable. . . . The truth is that not to endure being carved and shaped well is unnatural, and a source of numberless miseries. The best instance of an oak is not a gaudily decorated acorn, but a tree; in the same way, the best instance of a human male is not a glorified, walking packet of urges, but a man who, for the sake of the highest and greatest goods, commands himself, strengthens his brothers, and defends his sisters, regarding even the meanest of women as a lady.

According to biological descriptions and on the basis of a fuller vision of manhood, this “man” in Germany who gave birth is not really a man. She is a woman who sees manhood as a self-identified packet of urges as desires.

Words have meaning. Manhood means something, and this woman in Germany is attempting to remove that meaning.

God established the differences between man and woman at creation. “God created man in his own image, in the image of God He created him; male and female he created them” (Genesis 1:17). God intended differences between male and female from the beginning. These include biological, genetic, emotional, and other differences. The terms “man” and “woman,” or “male” and female,” are not interchangeable because someone feels like he or she wants to be the other.

In the face of stories like this one, we need to stand up for the real meaning of manhood.

_________________________

Jocelyn Spottiswoode, “Transgender man gives birth in Germany,” The Telegraph, September 11, 2013.

J. Budziszewski, On the Meaning of Sex (Wilmington: ISI, 2012).

Where Are All the Children? The Shrinking of Deutschland

~ Evan Lenow ~ 3 Comments

It is no secret that the European economy is struggling. In the face of failing banks and bankrupt governments, however, the European Union has always looked to Germany as the lone economic bright spot in the continental economy. But can Germany sustain its economic prominence? According to a recent article in The New York Times, the answer is “No.”

The problem for Germany (and most other European nations) is that fertility rates have been so low that their populations are aging and shrinking. As populations shrink, there are not enough productive workers to maintain economic growth. Therefore, economies begin to falter.

The Times describes the situation in Germany this way:

There is perhaps nowhere better than the German countryside to see the dawning impact of Europe’s plunge in fertility rates over the decades, a problem that has frightening implications for the economy and the psyche of the Continent. In some areas, there are now abundant overgrown yards, boarded-up windows and concerns about sewage systems too empty to work properly. The work force is rapidly graying, and assembly lines are being redesigned to minimize bending and lifting.

Germany has already lost 1.5 million in population according to a recent census and expects to lose another 19% (approximately 16 million) over the next 45 years. According to the Times, this attrition can almost exclusively be attributed to the low birthrate in Germany—around 1.43 children per woman. Most demographers identify a “replacement fertility rate” at 2.1 children per woman. This replacement rate is just enough to keep a population size stable.

For Germany and the rest of the European Union, the shrinking population and falling fertility rate spells economic doom for the Continent. As subsequent generations become smaller and smaller, the economic promises made to previous generations (e.g., pensions, social services, socialized medicine) become impossible to keep. Most of these social programs require more than one worker for every recipient to ensure the tax base is large enough to support the programs. Since people are retiring earlier and living longer, the number of recipients is outpacing the number of workers at an unprecedented rate.

The German government has made a few attempts to correct this problem. First, they have invested $265 billion per year in family subsidies to encourage people to have more children, but they have seen few results. Second, they are gradually raising the retirement age from 65 to 67. The Times reports:

Another way to adjust to the population decline is to get older workers to postpone retirement. The German government is raising the retirement age incrementally to 67 from 65, and companies have moved fast to adapt. The share of people ages 55 to 64 in the work force had risen to 61.5 percent in 2012, from 38.9 percent in 2002.

Volkswagen has redesigned its assembly line to ease the bending and overhead work that put excessive strain on workers’ bodies. About three years ago, they began using reclining swivel seats that provide back support even for hard-to-reach spots in the automobiles they are building, and the installation of heavy parts like wheels and front ends is now often fully automated.

Ultimately, the problem we see in Germany—and across most of the developed world—related to falling fertility rates is a values issue. In the article, the authors state that “the solution lies in remaking values, customs and attitudes in a country.”

For the authors, the values that need to be remade relate to immigration and the acceptance of working mothers. However, the values problem is much deeper than that. The value that truly needs remaking is the way a culture views children. The German culture, and that of most Western countries, is to see children as burdens and consumers rather than producers. The reality is that we all go through stages of consuming and producing. And an economy needs both.

From a biblical standpoint, children are a blessing rather than a burden. In Psalm 127:3–5, Solomon writes:

Behold, children are a gift of the LORD,
The fruit of the womb is a reward.
Like arrows in the hand of a warrior,
So are the children of one’s youth.
How blessed is the man whose quiver is full of them;
They will not be ashamed
When they speak with their enemies in the gate.

Certainly children consume more than they produce in their early years. However, as they grow and mature, they become producers and strengthen the family and social economy through their prime years until their production decreases at the latter stages of life. This is a natural progression.

The problem is that most people only consider the early stage of life when thinking about children. They are short-sighted, seeing only the consumption and not the production later in life. The other perspective that is often missed is the role of children and parents as the parent age. These children then become the care-takers of aging parents. Without these children, the elderly are left without the comfort and care of their children at the end of life.

Solomon’s wisdom speaks to more than just the perspective on children when they are young. At the end of life, these “arrows in the hand of a warrior” circle back to care for aging parents just as the parents cared for them as children. They are a blessing early in life and a blessing later in life.

We must not lose sight of the value of children from both biblical and economic perspectives.

_________________________

Suzanne Daley and Nicholas Kulish, “Germany Fights Population Drop,” The New York Times, August 13, 2013.

The Prince and the Golfer

~ Evan Lenow ~ 2 Comments
*Co-authored with Waylan Owens.

Hunter Mahan and Prince William. Not two names you would put together naturally. But the two have caused a stir in the name of fatherhood by their respective decisions that place family ahead of their other responsibilities.

We applaud the commitment to family exhibited by Mahan and the prince, and we think it will be helpful to look a little more closely at what the two men did and what all this means.

First, Prince William announced that he was taking two weeks of paternity leave, an option provided in Britain by the government that comes with a $210 per week stipend. We doubt William was after the money, so it is obvious that he wanted to be with his wife and child.

Then, Hunter Mahan learned that his wife was about to give birth to their new daughter, Zoe, and went to her side. That is not so unusual, except that Mahan was firmly in the lead, halfway to a $1,000,000 payday in the RBC Canadian Open golf tournament. “Would you give up $1,000,000 to see your baby born?” has been the question of the day for sportscasters and news anchors alike.

A poll by NJ.com asked the question, “Do you applaud Hunter Mahan for leaving golf tournament for baby’s birth?” At the time of this writing, an astounding 92% had responded yes.

So how do we view all of this as Christians? Is it “great news” of a world returning to its moral, family underpinnings? Or is there something more to these stories?

Embracing Fatherhood

The first observation we can make is that both men seem to have embraced the idea of fatherhood fully. In a day where more than 40% of all children in the United States are born out-of-wedlock, most of whom do not have fathers in their lives, we can rejoice that Prince William and Mahan have accepted their responsibilities as husbands and fathers for rearing their children in the context of marriage.

Scripture is replete with references to a father instructing his children. Six of the first seven chapters of Proverbs begin with Solomon telling his son to listen to his words (Prov 1:8; 2:1; 3:1; 4:1; 5:1; 7:1). He then proceeds to give specific instructions to his son about pursuing wisdom and avoiding folly. The contrast between these two paths is then highlighted in 10:1 where Solomon says, “A wise son makes a father glad, but a foolish son is a grief to his mother.”

While simply being present at the birth of a child does not insure that one will instruct his child faithfully to pursue wisdom, it does offer an initial indication that a father is taking an interest in the development of his child at the earliest stages.

Family Over Profession

Our second observation is that they appear to have placed family over professional success. While William’s actions do not bring any detriment to his future as king of England, Mahan certainly suffered the loss of potential earnings and ranking in his career.

Many men find their identity primarily in what they do. When asked to describe ourselves, many of us start with our profession and may even include some of our accomplishments. However, the role of husband and father is even more important than a career. For Mahan specifically, he sacrificed the advancement of his career to care for his family.

In Psalm 128, the blessings of the Lord are defined in terms of family. The psalmist writes, “How blessed is everyone who fears the Lord, who walks in His ways. … Your wife shall be like a fruitful vine within your house, your children like olive plants around your table. Behold, for thus shall the man be blessed who fears the Lord” (Ps 128:1, 3–4).

Sacrificial Love

A third observation must be made. While a prince took a brief maternity leave, he did not leave his wealth and luxury behind. We have a King who did. Jesus left it all behind in Heaven to live with us, not for a few weeks, but unto his own death. He did not turn away from his family. Rather he died for his family. And even now, he is working to prepare a place to “receive you to Myself; that where I am, there you may be also,” for all eternity. (John 14:1-3)

Two unusual allies, a prince and a golfer, have turned the world’s focus toward a man’s responsibility to support his family by his presence and engagement without suggesting that a man should shirk his obligation to support his family by his hard work and ingenuity. We join in calling all fathers to note and to honor their examples. And we call all people to note that Jesus beat them to it, that he is with his children always, that he works on his family’s behalf, and that soon his children will be with him forever.

_________________________

Follow Waylan Owens on Twitter @WaylanOwens and check out his blog at http://waylanandbetsyowens.com/.