It is the morning after Christmas. This Christmas turned out to be an exceptionally pleasant one. Unfortunately, I sometimes have a bad habit of making holidays not-so-fun for those around me when I get stressed when things don’t go exactly as planned. Let’s be honest, even when things do go right, I can still be irritable and impatient with my family (especially the kids, sadly). But, the past few years I have been working extra hard at following my wife’s lead in grabbing hold of happy moments with the kids and staying as calm as possible when things get hectic. This year it really paid off; everyone had a wonderful evening it seems. And so, waking up (with a slight hangover from the Christmas dinner libations) to the frustrated screeching of a four (almost five)-year-old girl and a rhythmic smacking sound was less than ideal.
We rent our finished basement out so, in the mornings especially, we try to avoid loud activities. I dragged myself from the bed to investigate the whacking sound and I see my youngest daughter sitting alone in front of her older brother’s very delicate, brand new slot-car racetrack, still set up in the breakfast nook from yesterday’s festivities. She was smacking the controller on the ground over and over again because the “cars wouldn’t drive”, understandably frustrating for a little girl but definitely not what I wanted to see. I was mad, not just disappointed. Like, take-your-favorite-toy-away-for-a-week-mad. After inspecting the track for damage, I noticed some of the wire contact on the track itself was damaged from what I suspected to have been her smashing the car and controller on the track to “fix” the problem and to “teach the cars a lesson in staying on the track”. Now, she knew she was not allowed to play with it without assistance from a parent or her brother but, to her credit, after a little coaxing, she came clean about smacking the track. I instructed her to take a short timeout so I could assess the damage to the toy and cool off before properly addressing her behavior which although unacceptable, is typical kid stuff. She is still learning self-control and how to respect others. Her brother, the proud owner of the racetrack (his favorite Christmas gift, he told me) leisurely came into the room to look at the track. He had been blissfully tuning out her pleas for help with the slot car until he heard me intervene. We found that the track was still fully functional and that it only needed a few minor repairs. Whew!
With the youngest still on timeout, I decided to make my morning coffee to ease into the already rough start of a morning. While the coffee was brewing I reflected on the “materialism” and “consumerism” of Christmas which is apparently the downfall of humanity, according to almost every pastor I’ve met. Being a messianic believer (born again, but Torah observant) I also reflected on the irony and obvious contradiction of me celebrating the “pagan” holiday, according to almost every messianic rabbi I’ve ever met. I could personally could do without Christmas (although I admit it is a guilty pleasure) but I’m not the Grinch. My wife is not messianic, but she is very supportive of the unusual holidays I celebrate like Passover so I try to do the same for her. This got me thinking about my two options in celebrating Christmas with my family:
a.) not tell my kids the typical nativity story of Christmas and point to historical and scriptural inaccuracies of Christmas like the pretentious, egalitarian non-Jewish messianics tend to do (Jews don’t tend to be threatened by it at all); making Christmas truly not about Christ
b.) I could recount the Christmas story each year with them and try to find a lesson in the gift giving and in our broken racetrack.
Option “a” was clearly the one that offered my kids no real lesson and brought them no closer to God. Option b.) while perhaps technically unkosher, redeemed the holiday and would facilitate a conversation that could go beyond mere broken toys and timeouts. But what is the lesson?
I have found recently that employing libertarian legal theory and jurisprudence has made parenting easier. It sounds weird, hear me out. When I concentrate on “who owns what” with my kids, I can help them solve problems more peacefully and teach them to respect other people’s boundaries. We have all heard that one mom say “now sweetie, you need to share your toys”, maybe you have said this yourself. Hey, I’m not judging. I definitely have said it in the past as well, but I don’t’ really anymore. I think that “ordering” my kids to share their toys against their will causes nothing but conflict and it sends mixed signals to the kids. Instead what I do now is ask “who owns this?” Once the little-ones agree who owns the toy they quickly agree on who should get to decide how it is used and who “gets it”. This isn’t to say I encourage selfishness, not at all. But I address the issue of generosity and sharing separately, after the conflict over a toy has been resolved. I rarely, if ever, overrule the decision of the owner of the toy and “make them share”. And if I do, it usually takes the form of a suggestion rather than a command which usually gets the desired outcome.
So, as the coffee was brewing, I ponder the biblical and libertarian concepts of jurisprudence and punishment. Like my attitude on stressful holidays, I hope to model justice and “fairness” to the kids while also maintaining a sense of forgiveness. I don’t want them to learn to be exacting and selfish but I also want them to be able to protect their own interests later in life. I want them to be firm but kind, just but forgiving. Reflecting on justice (and smelling the coffee beginning to brew), I considered a consequence for the little one who was still on timeout. I realized I didn’t want to punish her. I don’t want to be the one to enforce a consequence. I considered that biblically, the victim of a tort should be compensated for damage or injury; the biblical edict “an eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth” came to mind. Those same egalitarian pastors who complain of consumerism on Christmas would, no doubt, conclude that Jesus overturned this concept as “judgmental” or even wicked. The edict is judgmental in the strictest sense of the word, after all, in order to find justice one must judge. But this edict is also the foundation of fairness in punishment. An eye for an eye simply means that the punishment must never be more severe than the crime. Far from overturning the edict in legal affairs, Jesus asks us to take it even further; He asks us to be lenient, not “fair”. There must be some consequence for kids in order for them to learn of course. but, again I didn’t want to decide the consequence and it wasn’t my toy that was (kinda) broken. I turned to the biblical (and libertarian) approach to punishment. I employed an approach to justice that most westerners are neither comfortable nor familiar with: allowing the victim to choose a punishment. Westerners are used the state decreeing what the punishment should be so we tend to reject the idea of an alternative, even if it is more just. As the sitting judge in this case, I would not allow an overly harsh punishment if my son asked for it but I wanted to see what he would say. Personally I wanted to take her favorite gift away for a week. Coffee is in my mug but I need to sort this mess out before I can put my feet up.
While the coffee was cooling on the end table, I sat on the couch and called the kids over. I reiterated who the owner was explained the concept of compensating someone for a loss. I asked my son what he thought was a fair punishment. I gave examples of some possible punishments ranging from a mere apology, taking a toy away for a while, breaking one of her toys a little (fair, an eye for an eye), or taking all of her Christmas toys away permanently (an overly harsh consequence which I would not have allowed). The burden of proof for demonstrating a punishment is too severe is on the perpetrator, not the victim for it is truly a burden for a kind-hearted person to decide on a punishment. My son thought for just a second and concluded: “how about 3 more minutes of timeout”. “That’s it?” I asked. “You don’t want one of her toys?” He said “naw, that is too mean; I don’t like being mean, I like being silly instead.” (Remember my punishment was going to be much harsher, like taking a toy away for a few days). There it was. The lesson. He showed her mercy. She “deserved” to have one of her toys broken or taken away (an exacting, but absolutely fair consequence) but instead my son found a consequence that was far more lenient than I would have given.
The lesson (in addition to crime and punishment) was “mercy”. Just as my son didn’t want to exact the full consequence, God too is merciful. Just like my daughter may have “deserved” to have the punishment of having one of her toys broken, likewise we deserve harsh consequences for sin. But the good news is that Jesus was born on Christmas (well not really, but I won’t tell if you don’t tell) as an act of mercy. He spared us from what we deserve.
After the timeout, we hugged it out, smiled and went on with our day. While I am now (finally) enjoying my coffee and nursing the dull headache, I’ll conclude that I also learned a lesson this morning. Thanks to broken toys and consumerism, grace to not indulge in excessive spiritual elitism, the kids heard the gospel in a different way and my daughter saw Christ-like mercy exhibited by her tender-hearted, older brother.
Time for another cup of coffee.
Ungoverned Radio 