“First they came for the Socialists, and I did not speak out—
Because I was not a Socialist.
Then they came for the Trade Unionists, and I did not speak out—
Because I was not a Trade Unionist.
Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out—
Because I was not a Jew.
Then they came for me—and there was no one left to speak for me.” -Martin Niemöller
I love C.S. Lewis’ book series, The Chronicles of Narnia. I’m sure I’ve read the entire series at least seven times, several of those aloud.
In the final installment titled The Last Battle, the dwarfs, most of whom have been sympathetic characters, refuse to take sides in the climactic skirmish between the followers ofAslan, the great Lion who rules Narnia, and the followers ofTash, the god of theCalormenes.
As much as it depends on you, try to live at peace with everyone…
Claiming that they had been equally mistreated through the years by both the Narnians and the Calormenes, the dwarfs’ rallying cry is “The dwarfs are for the dwarfs!” They even begin shooting at both sides, killing combatants from their rocky firing position.
Of course this goes badly for everyone involved, and when the dwarfs are thrown through the door of a nearby stable (that is to say, they are killed) they are in the presence of Aslan. But because they refused to be his subjects, they can’t see him — or anything else.
What Aslan can and cannot do for them.
One of the heroes takes pity on the dwarfs and asks Aslan to help them. He replies that he will show her both what he can and can’t do for them. He speaks kindly to them, but all they hear is a ferocious lion’s growl. He sets a feast before them, but they imagine it to be straw and manure. They spend their eternity blind, bickering and complaining in the presence of splendor.
It makes me wonder if we aren’t like them at times.
The error of parochialism
The dwarfs in the story succumbed to the error of parochialism — a focus on their own well-being to the exclusion — and at the expense of — everyone else. We see this all the time in our world. Despite the sizable overlap in common interests and agreement regarding what would benefit almost everyone, we see political parties and factions drawing bull’s eyes on each other.
Politicians stir up the base by painting their opponents not as honorable opponents, but as enemies — evil incarnate — and it is hard to watch without wondering if their mission is to keep people divided in order to make themselves needed. We see this dynamic at play in the fomenting of suspicion between races. Despite the communities we share, the businesses we all frequent and our common humanity, we allow ourselves to get swept up in the fervor of “The Dwarfs Are For The Dwarfs!”
Closer to home
Until they united around the pro-life cause, protestants and Roman Catholics found little to join them despite the significant number of essential beliefs they held in common.
Unfortunately, parochialism has also affected the realm of male and female. Despite our biological and spiritual complementarity, and the plain fact that in roughly 98% of our domestic arrangements men and women need each other, we find ourselves facing off over “women’s issues” or less often “men’s issues.” If you’re reading this, you had a mother. It seems ridiculous that half the population would write off the necessary other half in order to gain some advantage.
Games people play
In Dr. Eric Berne’s book, Games People Play, he describes a phenomenon known as “Let’s You And Him Fight.” In this game, a provocateur creates a conflict between two parties for his or her amusement or advancement. This dynamic can occur when a woman pits two suitors against each other with the implicit promise that the winner will be her man. It also occurs in the workplace or in civic groups where a disinterested chump finds himself goaded into a confrontation — fighting for someone else’s cause — that ends up making him look bad. And as I pointed out above, this game appears to be a favorite of those who want to rule over us by keeping us at each other’s throats. I want to offer the antidote.
The theology of the body
In the first letter to the church at Corinth, Paul the apostle wrote these words:
Now if the foot should say, “Because I am not a hand, I do not belong to the body,” it would not for that reason stop being part of the body. And if the ear should say, “Because I am not an eye, I do not belong to the body,” it would not for that reason stop being part of the body. If the whole body were an eye, where would the sense of hearing be? If the whole body were an ear, where would the sense of smell be? But in fact God has placed the parts in the body, every one of them, just as he wanted them to be. If they were all one part, where would the body be? As it is, there are many parts, but one body.” – 1 Corinthians 12:15-20 (NIV)
We can overcome parochialism when we realize that in the church we are all parts of the same body, connected to one another, and dependent on each other for our mutual health. I submit to you that we need to take this same attitude into our work and in the broader community.
Why it matters
The quotation at the top of this post is from Pastor Martin Niemöller and encapsulates the folly of thinking only about one’s own group. (Niemöller was a pastor in Germany as Hitler took power.) If we shrug our shoulders when other tribes suffer, we weaken the social fabric and become more like the benighted dwarfs in Lewis’ story. If they had joined the fight for Narnia, they likely would have died anyway, but their eternal condition would have been one of delight instead.
It takes courage and a deliberate decision to seek justice and wholeness for those who are not as obviously like ourselves, but it begins by emphasizing what we hold in common. There are legitimate causes for disagreement, and there are plenty of issues on which people of goodwill will differ. Taking a broader view can help us find a way to respect each other as we resolve conflicts.
>How do you avoid the trap
Two important ideas.
First is to deal with myself. This needs to be done first; Matt 7:1-6.
I pray, asking God to help me (1 John 5:14-15) not be bitter toward others who have harmed me. I memorize passages about not being bitter or angry, such as Eph 4:29-32, Col 3:8 and Eph 4:26-27.
And the positive side is to then also seek to love others. Merely being without hateful emotions/thoughts is inadequate. Passages include Matt 22:34-40, Matt 7:12 and Rom 13:8-10.
Choose to think about the good that you see, both in God’s world and in the people around you, rather than focusing your thoughts on the bad; Phil 4:8. Every white/black man and woman will have good and bad. Where do you focus your thoughts?
A second idea is important also however. I am not God; I do not have perfect patience or endless forgiveness. Yes, I am called to forgive. And I do. But do not mistake my attempts to add godliness to my faith (2 Pet 1:5-8) for perfection on my part.
Since I am not perfect, I seek to limit my exposure to those I know will do harm to me.
Some of these know they are out to do me harm. Examples would be dishonnest businessmen, cheating their customers.
Others seek to give harm, not necessarily out of malice, but simply as they do not value others. Like the dwarves, they do not value those outside of their own group. Women tend to be a good example of this. Several times I have seen psychological discussions, or discussions of tests, that show the typical woman cares primarily for herself and other women with whom she can identify. And of course my personal experiences with first world women confirm these discussions.
Granted, a well trained man or woman can overcome their sinful nature (Gal 5:16-18), but most women do not make this effort to face their own sin. And some men too.
And lastly, some people do harm, simply as they are so blinded by either their prejudices or principles, that they are unwilling to open their eyes and see that the reality is different than what they think it should be. Some religious people are like this. E.g., I may think that all Christians are honnest, and therefore think I should tell you to trust everything a Christian businessman tells you. Reality may be different however. This last group may be worst, as they think they are doing good, as they act on incorrect principles, while refusing to see the harm they do.
If I limit my experiences with others being hateful or harmful toward me, it reduces the extent to which I perceive those around me as untrustworthy, as people I need to avoid.
I am open with others, much more so with men, but I do not deliberately expose myself to likely harm.
>It seems ridiculous that half the population would write off the necessary other half in order to gain some advantage.
Given your prior sentence, I think you meant this about men, but it is true much more of women than the men I know. Women are the ones who gave the fish/bicycle speech.
Women ask for welfare so that they can sleep around without allowing a man to have a family with her. She lives on the welfare taxes paid by the men in the country, while giving nothing back to any man.
Women ask for the judge to evict the married father from his home, and then garnishee his wages to pay for her continued financial support after she divorces him.
These women are an example of one of the groups I avoid. I will be reasonably polite and say hello; but pursuing one for marriage is not the way to help myself have joy and goodwill towards others.
Excellent and thoughtful insights as always, Dale. Each of us must choose to think beyond his own narrow self-interest to love and serve as God intends.
The critique of feminism is apt, and it certainly is correct that feminists created the poisonous view that a woman doesn’t need a man. No one is required to agree with me, but I believe the biblical teaching on male spiritual headship explains a primary reason why a woman indeed needs a man.
But there also men teaching that men don’t need women. They are equally wrong. I would not presume to tell every man to get married, and you have encapsulated precisely why men should be wise about the risks. Even so, if Christ’s followers — the ones not specifically called to singleness — don’t marry, the individuals suffer, but so does the culture.
I’ve been married nearly 30 years and even though we have strong marriage, it has not been easy. We have overcome a lot together and there’s a lot we are looking forward to. Knowing what I know about the current dating scene, I wouldn’t want to be single. And yet, I do know virtuous young women who are attractive, feminine and godly. They do exist, so while I understand the temptation of men to go their own way, I can’t endorse this as a panacea.
In the fall I hope to publish a post or two based on an upcoming interview with a family court judge — a friend of mine who lives in another state. I’m looking forward to getting his thoughts on what legal changes he sees based on changes in US morés.
If you have any questions you’d like me to ask, please send them via email.
Thanks again for your comments. I appreciate you.
SDG,
-Geo.
Once again, I appreciate a thoughtful article where you address a problem that you see. I should have included a comment in my original post to this affect. Thanks for your time and effort.
Having a bunch of individuals running around, acting only out of self-interest is not only harmful to society, but as you noted is contrary to Scripture; Phil 2:3-8.
>But there also men teaching that men don’t need women. They are equally wrong.
I have seen some of this. I suspect these men are acting out of hurt or lack of forgiveness. I also do pray specifically about this for myself, seeking to avoid bitterness. I am aware the firmness of my refusal to accept that a woman who is consistently disobedient to Scripture is worthy of marriage may seem to be an example of such bitterness, but I disagree. (And no, I do not think you accused me of this.)
Josh 24:14-15 includes the statement, “but as for me and my house, we will serve the Lord”. This is one of the reasons for my refusal.
While I choose to refuse to pursue an unworthy woman, at the same time, I have strong desires for a wife. So this also shows that some kind of 100% shut-down or refusal is not a full solution. And yes, I am aware of 1 Cor 7:8-9, but I am limited by the actual women who are available.
>They do exist, so while I understand the temptation of men to go their own way, I can’t endorse this as a panacea.
I would have to agree, but am not sure what alternatives there are however. I have seen many women who, at least outwardly (1 Sam 16:7), obey God’s commands while I was in other cultures, but I live here.
Even by my “high” standards however, I do see some few women here that may be worthy of marriage. I knew three from my prior church, out of a few hundred, that did not exhibit obvious rebelliousness.
So I would have to agree that you are correct; there are some. Just not many. Certainly not enough for all the Christian men.
I think it is great that couples, like yours, can show an example of being together for 30 years. I suspect few new couples will reach similar levels of success. I knew two couples that were married for about 60 years. I thought they were fantastic examples of commitment.
I will be very interested in the results of your upcoming interview with the judge. People, and dwarves, respond to the environment around them. With some firm changes to the laws, we could have a far better tomorrow.
May God bless and guide your marriage and service to him.
Dale,
I appreciate your kind words, and I hope you’re mistaken about the prospects for new couples. My greatest wish for this blog is that it would create some positive momentum toward godly marriages that last. Even so, my primary purpose is to help men maximize their God-given potential — and as I think we’d agree, this doesn’t necessarily require that a man be married.
I endorse without reservation your desire to find a worthy woman, and I think your having high standards and being clear-eyed about what you want in a wife will serve you well. None of us enters marriage with all our stuff together, however, so part of the challenge for any newlyweds is learning how to be married together. If I said it was fun, I’d have to refer to it as “Type 2” fun — it isn’t all enjoyable while you’re going through it, but on reflection one realizes it was worthwhile and, therefore, fun. Even though I would take back a significant number of things I said or did early in my marriage, I still think fondly of those years.
You and don’t know each other except via the web, so I’d be interested to know more about how you measure or identify rebelliousness — or the tendency toward rebelliousness — among the women in your circle.
Even though I’ve walked with God for decades, I’m shocked sometimes at how selfish I continue to be. I say this to point out that I stand by God’s grace alone, so I have to be willing to give grace in my dealings with others. I don’t (can’t) question what you see, but are the women you know carrying a parade’s worth of red flags?
I’ve advised the young men that I meet with regularly not to over-exalt romantic love. It is a great comfort, and a real gift from God, but as you say, the way is too perilous these days to overlook serious incompatibilities.
I pray God will bless you and crown your life with faithfulness to Christ. And I pray that at the right time He will bless you with a godly woman to be your ezer kenegdo — your wife — and that he will bless you both with children who will grow up in His love.
SDG,
-Geo.
>None of us enters marriage with all our stuff together, however, so part of the challenge for any newlyweds is learning how to be married together.
I think I am hearing the voice of wisdom and experience 🙂 ha ha
>I’d be interested to know more about how you measure or identify rebelliousness — or the tendency toward rebelliousness — among the women in your circle.
I plan to write an essay on this. Hopefully in about three weeks’ time, as I am currently working to get my corporate taxes done on time. Feel free to make judgements about my priorities hah hah 🙂 Matt 22:34-40.
I’d be happy to send you a draft at that time and get your opinions/feedback.
>I’m shocked sometimes at how selfish I continue to be.
Not only is your statement no doubt true, per Gal 5:16-18, 1 John 1:8-10, etc., but your example of humility and honesty provides a great example to others (Titus 2:6-8); thanks.
>I’ve advised the young men that I meet with regularly not to over-exalt romantic love.
Dalrock, on his blog, has somewhat regularly been hitting the idea that we have love and marriage totally backwards. We think that a relationship of romantic love is the correct place in which to have sex and create marriage. A consequence of this “love first” attitude is that we think it is reasonable, and even necessary, to end the marriage if I no longer feel romantic love. Another is the idea that it is fine to have sex with various people, without “rushing” into the marriage commitment first, as long as we are “really in love”. Another is the idea that we need to feel certain emotions in order to justify starting or continuing a marriage, when the truth is that the most important thing is commitment: to God and to the marriage covenant.
As you obviously know, the “love first” idea is incompatible with Scripture. Nowhere that I am aware of, does the Bible indicate that a feeling of romantic love is a prerequisite, or even a continuing requirement, of marriage. Verses like Prov 5:18-19 and much of Song of Songs do talk about the presence of that feeling of love, but I see no command to feel such. Please let me know if you know of any verses I have missed that suggest having a feeling of romantic love is necessary.
Obviously I desire to feel love and acceptance, but divorcing because of the lack is a failure to obey God. Matt 5:31-32, Matt 19:1-12.
I made a significant mistake last year, by doing exactly what you advise against above. I had an opportunity to pursue three feminine women, who, at least on the outside, were willing to be obedient to the Scripture passages on women. (I was in another culture.) I desire only one wife, so I picked one and pursued her. But I picked the one with whom I felt the strongest emotional connection; she also demonstrated a strong feeling of connection with me.
She was not the most mature out of the three, and I knew it. And, perhaps unsurprisingly, the relationship failed. I will be more thoughtful and seek to be wiser next time.
Thanks for the blessings. May God bless you also.
Dale