(e)mergent Voyageurs

Not Every Village Is Qualified To Raise A Child
January 2, 2005 – Winnipeg Sun
by Harry Lehotsky CM, 1957-2006

Have you ever heard the old African proverb which states, “It takes a village to raise a child?”

The proverb gained North American notoriety several years ago with the publication of Hillary Clinton’s book, It Takes A Village.

The book emphasized the impact of communities on growing children. No man — or child — is an island. No family raises children in a vacuum. Children are influenced by their surroundings, peers, extended family, media, and a plethora of other influences.  

Clinton’s popularization of the African proverb fostered a romantic notion of solidarity and community development of the family.

When I first heard the proverb, I cynically commented, “That may be true somewhere else, but we’re a long way from Africa!” I reflected on the large number of messed up children in our society.

Taking responsibility

I wondered if the misappropriation of a cultural maxim would become simply another way for errant kids to avoid taking responsibility for their own behaviour. Now they could pin their exploits on the influence of the village. And it wasn’t long before I heard Hillary’s phrase parroted by courtroom defence attorneys.

Recently, I’ve met a growing number of refugees and immigrants from other countries. And I ponder the old proverb as I listen to their stories.

Many individuals and families have come from distant villages to our North American cities. Many have left circumstances of extreme violence, poverty and political turmoil.

They come with dreams of advanced education, heightened civility, elevated culture, and hopes for accessing the success advertised so well by our society.

But as they pursue participation in our success they also discover that they are sucked into our dysfunction. There’s a flip side to the freedoms celebrated by our culture.

As I listen to their stories, some of their observations about our culture are painfully blunt.

“I’m not quite sure what we expected when we came here, but it’s harder to succeed than I first thought.”

“We thought we were leaving a land of danger for a land of opportunity. But even here, in the midst of great potential, there are new dangers for us and our children.”

I feel their frustration and fear as they share some of the ways their experience is devalued and their best values are systematically dismantled.

They are surprised to discover that our schools allow promotion through grades without passing grades.

They are shocked to hear that schools struggling to convey basic literacy and computation skills feel qualified to educate children in applying condoms and accessing abortions “necessitated” by irresponsible intercourse.

Some parents have expressed extreme dismay that schools teach their kids that gay is OK and that all authority — including that of parents — must be questioned.
Media bombards them with the commercialization of violence and promiscuity. Our free media provides daily lessons in the art of claiming rights without accepting responsibility.

They meet people who, despite their physical fitness, receive “social assistance” cheques without working. And they hear their own jobs mocked and rejected as “McJobs” by those who claim they inherently deserve more than what is offered to their neighbours.

Legally, they observe laws without consequences and courts without clout. They learn that government health agencies distribute free crack pipes and needles for illegal narcotics.

They notice that our provincial government runs casinos to squeeze more money from gambling addicts.

Our city licenses brothels in the guise of “massage parlours.” Our federal government imports strippers and routinely promotes bureaucratic graft which is obscene in its excess.

Our Supreme Court outlaws spanking, neuters youth justice, redefines pedophilia to allow sex with children, and forces conditional sentencing for offenders. Unelected officials obsess over definitions and words while ignoring the pleas of citizens for practical help on pressing issues of daily concern.

Ralph Abernathy, black civil rights leader, commented: “I’m sick and tired of black and white people of good intent giving aspirin to a society that is dying of a cancerous disease.”

Rules and schools and social workers ensure that newcomers are bureaucratized to play our cultural game and desensitized to its consequences.

Our moral incontinence masquerades as an enlightened appreciation for diversity. Newcomers are consumed by our multiplicity of standards and our duplicity of values. Dissidents are mocked as regressive, repressive and narrow-minded.

What a country!

The romantic notion, the sociological idealism of our “village” raising children is betrayed by the hard cold facts. Our North American village is in chaos.

The closest we get to a village raising children is when Child and Family Services takes custody of children in hotel rooms. And that’s little more than the child-care equivalent of hallway medicine.

We rightly bemoan the loss of culture and trampling of the identity of our First Nations people.

But we don’t consider how we continually trample the cultural identity and morality of so many other nations to accommodate prideful notions of superiority and enlightenment.

Delivering the truth

Perhaps Hans Christian Anderson was right. Sometimes it takes a newcomer to help us see that our proud emperor’s wonderful wardrobe has been spun with threads of delusion and denial. As in his fairy tale, a persistent delivery of truth is the best antidote for false pride.

Yet the newcomers are gracious. In the midst of their fears and frustrations, they are not ungrateful for the opportunity to build a new life.

They share their observations not with arrogance, but with the concern of friends who have something to contribute to our healing.

If it’s true that it takes a village to raise a child, then somebody better help us raise a better village — before our village raises too many more mixed up, messed up kids.

Perhaps we can learn a few lessons from the lands in which the old proverb actually had some meaning.

It has been just over two months since I stepped out and shared my personal experience with homosexual orientation (see my post “Homosexuality: A Personal Reflection”). As you might imagine, it was nearly a year of processing and wrestling over this decision before taking the step. You might be surprised, however, on the main cause of my hesitation.

One of my central concerns in sharing my personal experience and position on the issue of homosexuality and Christianity was how it would be perceived by those in the GLBT community. Further, I was concerned it might be used as ammunition by Christians who treat this issue with a violent and often casual bigotry. For the most part, I have been pleasantly surprised at the positive response, even helping several people find the confidence to come to terms with their sexual orientation rather than hide or ignore it.

However, last Thursday a new blog was launched called “Bad Fruit/ Bad Trees: Admonishing Those Who Preach Homophobia”. The site describes itself as follows:

“Conservative Christians go on and on and on about the alleged sinfullness of homosexuality, or homosexual lovemaking. But while same-sex coupling does not destroy lives or faith, the bias against homosexuality spawns hate crimes, discrimination, abuse, lies, and division and discord. It is long past time to call those who malign and revile homosexuals to repent of their sins against real human beings. That is what this space is about.”

In its inaugural post, “Sin of Arrogance”, a previous post of mine, “Homosexuality & the Church – Part 1″, was mentioned. It was cited in respect to the trend within Conservative Christianity to dismiss any other perspective but their own. It says:

“When challenged by evidence from the lives of GLBTQ people, or by challenges to the theology behind the condemnation, these authors consistently responded within the premise that their belief (homosexuality is condemned in the Bible) is unquestionably correct. These authors practice for themselves an intrinsic superiority – what they believe is automatically correct, they cannot be wrong, anyone who disagrees with them cannot be correct. The effort to even consider that their interpretation could be in error is simply not made.”

While it suggests that my post poses genuine challenges to these assumptions, he goes on to say that my subsequent posts dehumanize the GLBT community. My heart was crushed by this statement. Obviously, the author and I do not see eye to eye on this issue, but I am not sure the assessment is fair. I want to try and respond as best I can. However, I must first make a few things clear.

By and large, I believe the author is quite accurate it their portrayal of a large portion of the Conservative/Evangelical Christian community in its treatment of this issue and those people involved. For centuries homosexuals have suffered devastating and inhumane treatment- tortured, murdered, mocked, denied rights, etc., often at the hands of and/or with the blessing of the Christian establishment. While much has improved, too many Christians still arrogantly boast of their own moral superiority by using this issue, framed in the shallow simplicity of “black and white” language, as a way of proving their “righteousness” (and thus avoiding the deeper, far more pervasive culpability in other failings).

Further, talk about the so called “Homosexual Agenda” must stop. Portraying the work of the GLBT community to secure basic human rights and freedoms as a dark and secretive conspiracy aiming to undermine society is alarmist and offensive. Even if you do not agree with their purposes, to frame their efforts in such terms is propoganda that is patently false, manipulating people to believing dangerous untruths about the homosexual community to gain greater support for their efforts to stop this “agenda”. This technique has been used in the past (and sadly, still is in places) to perpetuate the evil system of racial segregation. As Christians we can have nothing to do with this kind of thing.

That being said, I struggled reading the post in question. While I agree with much of their critique of the typical Conservative Christian response to homosexuality, it does not allow any room for genuine dialogue. It argues that Conservatives are not willing to even consider that their position might be wrong, but I see no such willingness from the author of this post to do the same. The article uses words like “proof” and “evidence” that give more definitive authority to ideas and circumstances that are not so clear cut.

Given the history of Christian failure in our treatment of homosexuals and the current caustic atmosphere surrounding these issues, genuine and humble dialogue is desperately needed. While I convinced that, on both the merits of what our beliefs require of us and on our failings on this issue, Christians must take the lions share of responsibility in this process, it has to be a mutual commitment. For many of the Christians who believe that homosexuality is inconsistant with Christianity, it is not rooted in bigotry, fear or arrogance. Many struggle holding this belief, but in the context of their presuppositions about faith and truth cannot simply dismiss it. If this is not acknowledged by people, such as the other of the post in question, any chance for restoration or change is deadlocked.

As the blog does not provide contact information and because it is closed to outside comments, I have not been able to discuss this with the author. My hope is that they will see this post and be willing to engage in conversation. This what we all need to attempt to do. It will be risky, with both sides being very cautious, mistrusting and sensitive. However, it only in the journey through the Cross that Resurrection is possible.

So where do we start? How do bridge this very difficult gap?

Emerging Church, Missional, Homosexuality