E
EasterJoy
Guest
Right. But when we talk to the kids about shooting sprees, for instance, we would be careful to say that the shooters aren’t necessarily monsters. We talk about how isolation and bullying can warp a person’s thinking. We talk about how important it is to have adults to talk to, both parents and otherwise. We talk about how important it is to talk to an adult when a friend even jokes around about doing something violent to themselves or others. Our kids know that they can arrange to talk to our pastor at any time–an adult whose discretion is beyond question–and there will be no questions asked. Maybe that would be to talk about contacting the parents of a suicidal classmate, maybe about their own struggles with chastity, maybe about questions having to do with a vocation to the priesthood. The main thing is, they know they can have that talk and we’re going to help them without butting in and wanting to have a reason.…EasterJoy, I appreciate your comment. It gives me something to think about, i.e. what kind of discussions could strengthen and affair-proof a marriage. The fictitious discussions I created were totally tongue-in-cheek, wondering at how surreal it would be for someone to suddenly and abruptly approach their spouse about the subject. But frankly, I did not have a really useful idea about how to start such a conversation.
I would like to think that if you are in a marriage (and in a good marriage, not something ugly and beyond repair), you would daily pay attention and talk as necessary about your spouse’s and your own needs and well-being, and such communication should ideally (most of the time) prevent tensions from ever escalating to the point at which one spouse cheats on the other. Kind of like parents having a good communication with their children should ideally (most of the time) prevent “Columbine High School shooting sprees”. But maybe not all the time.Tragedies happen despite our best efforts.
Trying to translate your advice to a “Columbine shooting spree” - just to make sure I understand it right - a discussion shouldn’t start with something abrupt us “OK, Son, so if you are going to shoot up your high school”. It’s more like there should be more frequent, ongoing communication about how your child feels at school, whether the atmosphere is good or is there any tension or bullying, etc…
I’ve always thought it important to teach my kids that good kids are capable of getting into drugs, that good people sometimes become alcoholics or addicts, and that nice families have problems that lead to divorce. Rather than preventing falls, I think that to pretending otherwise courts arrogance before the fall and despair afterwards. IMHO, pride and shame get many people into deep holes that they didn’t ever need to dig themselves into.
I think that good marriages and good families have to have boundaries in place…but if you can’t talk about the fact that a fall is possible for a “good person,” how do you talk about boundaries? If you can’t admit that decent people have affairs, how can you ask “Something is wrong. Are you seeing someone else?” without also saying “Are you a terrible treacherous person who is doing something unthinkable?” Perhaps no one can guarantee that he or she would be able to get past an affair, but how could a spouse come clean after a fall, if he or she knows that condemnation for the act will be swift and automatic? In that case, it is not realistic to think that an adulterer will ever confess.
Even if my husband is going to have lunch out in a public place with a woman, even for business, he always tells me, and vice versa. Generally speaking, it is assumed that we are invited, as well. That’s what we’re comfortable with. Other couples don’t admit any socializing except same-gender or couple socializing. I think that is the right way to approach it…talking about the falls that can happen in otherwise good marriages and deciding together what boundaries are prudent. Approaching it that way requires communication, though.
As for your dad, my kids know what a sociopath is, too, although not by that name. They know that there are people out there that can lie as easily as they can give you the time, because they just don’t connect with others. They know that some people are this way from birth, but that addiction can do it to nearly anyone.
I remember Craig Ferguson saying that the difference between an alcoholic and a meth addict is this: An alcoholic will steal your purse and punish themselves with guilt over it. A meth addict will steal your purse, then help you look for it. The message to me is clear: Addiction spawns liars. Curing the addiction requires somewhere safe to tell the truth…I don’t mean a place that is safe from consequences, but a place that is safe from being rejected as a person. If a person is both addicted and can’t tell the truth without being totally rejected, what is the way out? Yet the Lord wants no one in chains. The way to tell the truth has to be there, somewhere. I think that accepting that anyone can sin is that way, and that the consequences of coming clean are far to be preferred over the consequences of continuing in chains.
PS I’d not want to know, but I think my husband would have to tell, anyway. He just doesn’t do well in keeping anything from me…or anyone else, for that matter. That’s OK, too, and he knows it. I am more likely to keep things to myself when it would do me good to talk to somebody. I’m trying to get over that. I would hope that if I were ever to have an affair, I would not presume to keep that information to myself on my own discretion. I think having that confirmed by a second opinion from a confessor is* de rigeur*.
If you are interested in this, EasterJoy also mentions things about HPV in her posts.
