Skip to main content

Relational Keys

There are few indications in my life that I am “with it.”  I remember that term from my growing up days.  Being “with it” was something most of us aspired to achieve, but most of us never made it.  I don’t even think I came close.  I suspect that one of the problems was most of us would never quite be sure what “it” was that we were supposed to be “with!”  Was it the clothes to wear?  Sometimes it seemed like it must be the hairstyle.  All I knew was farm guys probably did not have a chance.

Many of us never outgrow this aspirational quest to be “with it.”  I am sure the “it” changes.  It might be the place you go to college, the car you drive, the one you date.  Again, I was never sure about it.  Fortunately for myself, I felt the urgency to be “with it” subsides over the years.  I hope it is because I gave “it” up, rather than simply gave up!  I did feel more free as a result.

Although I don’t consider being on Twitter “with it,” it is not something I would likely have done without the effective cajoling of my very competent secretary.  Like many things, Twitter is whatever you make of it.  I do a great deal of news and follow people I never would get a face-to-face meeting.  I see things presented in a brief package that I probably never would have run into otherwise.  Recently one of these caught my attention.  The headline simply said, “Science Says Lasting Relationships Come Down to 2 Basic Traits.”  I could not resist.

The tweet took me to a piece that Emily Esfahani Smith did for the Atlantic.  Of course, I wanted to know what those two things were.  I have been in some long lasting relationships.  I have had relationships I hoped would be long blow up too quickly.  So I was open to learn.  I went to the site and began reading.

Typically, we are given tantalizing tidbits to draw us into the meat of the article.  Quickly I learned that every June 13,000 couples get married---beginning what they hope is a long-term relationship.  13,000 couples: Wow!  I read on to learn that according to some experts only three people of ten who get married have a happy marriage.  All this was interesting and the supporting research to get to the results, but I was in a quest to find those two basic traits that build lasting relationships.  Of course, near the end I found them.

When I found them, I laughed because I was not surprised.  The two basic traits of long relationships are kindness and generosity.  I was happy these were the two traits.  I was happy because they really are special, to be sure, but they really are not special.  What I mean by saying they are not special is anyone can be kind and be generous.  They are not like IQ or something that many people don’t have.  Being kind and generous is not having superior talent.

Knowing these are the two basic traits was not surprising because I realized my parents were teaching me these two traits from an early age.  And I certainly was trying to instill these characteristics into my two girls when they were small.  The good news about kindness and generosity is they can be learned.

To be kind is to be other-focused.  Being kind is not about you.  It is about the other person.  No wonder this is a key to long-lasting relationships.  Of course, in a relationship, kindness is reciprocal.  I am intent on being kind to you, but you have the same intent toward me.  So paradoxically, I wind up getting what I gave.  Kindness is a form of love.  I love and am loved in return.  That is a good deal!

The same goes for generosity.  Generosity is related to liberality.  The opposite is selfishness and hoarding.  You ask for one and I give two.  Generosity is always more than enough.  And frequently, generosity is more than I can even have imagined.  How many times when someone has been generous with me, I say, “Oh, you shouldn’t have.”  And that’s correct.  They did not do it because of a “should.”  They gave out of the generosity of their hearts.

Kindness and generosity are not the privilege of a few or the lucky ones.  I can choose either or both any time I want.  And if I enter a relationship, I can practice being kind and generous.  If I am committed to being kind and generous, I am not in a conditional, tit for tat relationship.  Generosity and kindness are not bargaining chips for getting something I want.  They are not coercive.

Most of the major religious figures model kindness and generosity.  I know there are times I do it.  But I want to grow up and do it more consistently and do it better.  I want to be able to be kind and generous to a broad range of people.  It is easier with the ones I like or want to impress.  Like Jesus, I want to be able to grow my capacity to be kind and generous to those more on the margin of my relationships.

This reflection on a tweet will become a blog and perhaps give the wrong impression that I am “with it.”  I aim instead to get “with it” as I grow into a more kind and generous person.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

I-Thou Relationships

Those of us who have read theology or, perhaps, those who are people of faith and are old enough might well recognize this title as a reminder of the late Jewish philosopher and theologian, Martin Buber.   I remember reading Buber’s book, I and Thou , when I was in college in the 1960s.   It was already a famous book by then.   I am not sure I fully understood it, but that would not be the last time I read it.   It has been a while since I looked at the book.             Buber came up in a conversation with a friend who asked if I had seen the recent article by David Brooks?   I had not seen it, but when I was told about it, I knew I would quickly locate and read that piece.   I very much like what Brooks decides to write about and what he contributes to societal conversation.   I wish more people read him and took him seriously.             Brooks’ article focused on the 2016 contentious election.   He provocatively suggests, “Read Buber, Not the Polls!”   I think Brooks puts
1 comment
Read more

Spiritual Commitment

I was reading along in a very nice little book and hit these lines about commitment.   The author, Mitch Albom, uses the voice of one of the main characters of his nonfiction book about faith to reflect on commitment.   The voice belongs to Albom’s old rabbi of the Jewish synagogue where he went until his college days.   The old rabbi, Albert Lewis, says “the word ‘commitment’ has lost its meaning.”    The rabbi continues in a way that surely would have many people saying, “Amen!”   About commitment he says, “I’m old enough when it used to be a positive.   A committed person was someone to be admired.   He was loyal and steady.   Now a commitment is something you avoid.   You don’t want to tie yourself down.”   I also think I am old enough to know that commitment was usually a positive word.   I can think of a range of situations in which commitment would have been seen to be positive.   For example, growing up was full of sports for me.   Commitment would have been presupposed t
6 comments
Read more

Inward Journey and Outward Pilgrimage

There are so many different ways to think about the spiritual life.   And of course, in our country there are so many different variations of religious experiences.   There are liberals and conservatives.   There are fundamentalists and Pentecostals.   Besides the dizzying variety of Christian traditions, there are many different non-Christian traditions.   There are the major traditions, such as Islam, Buddhism, Hinduism, and so on.   There are the slightly more obscure traditions, such as Sikhism, Jainism, etc.   And then there are more fringe groups and, even, pseudo-religions.   There are defining doctrines and religious practices.   Some of these are specific to a particular tradition or a few traditions, such as the koan , which is used in Zen Buddhism for example.   Other defining doctrines or practices are common across the religious board.   Something like meditation would be a good example.   Christians meditate; Buddhists meditate.   And other groups practice this spiri
3 comments
Read more