Do You Believe in Marriage?

Emperor Claudius didn’t believe in marriage; marriage impeded his ambition. Claudius needed men for his army. But Roman law forbade conscripting married men. So Claudius forbade new marriages.

A Roman priest believed in marriage. He continued marrying young couples, often secretly.  His defiance discovered, he was beheaded on 14 February 278. The priest’s name? Valentine

Historians disagree over the details of St. Valentine’s story, but clearly he believed in marriage when influential people held marriage in disdain.

Since 1980 we’ve heard half of new marriages will end in divorce. That statistic is no longer true, and it is widely disputed; in fact, Sarah Jacoby suggests,  “if [the] current trend continues, the vast majority (about two-thirds) of marriages will never divorce.” (http://www.refinery29.com/2017/01/137440/divorce-rate-in-america-statistics. Accessed 3 February 2018.) That’s still a lot of divorces but it’s clear a lot of us believe in marriage, maybe more than in 1980.

If you believe in marriage, how can you make that marriage last?  A tricky question. 

Back in the day (my high school days, at least), any lessons on making marriage last began with a warning about “unrealistic expectations.” I think they were trying to tell us happily ever after wasn’t what we imagined.

After my father died, my mother used to say, “In forty-six years of marriage we never had a cross word.”

One doesn’t call one’s mother a liar but I wonder if her memory might have been a bit blurred. No arguments? Ever?

Doesn’t seem realistic.  I suppose most people hearing her realized she was looking at a past existing only in her dreams.  They forgave her because of her grief. 

Still, I wonder if some young couple heard her and feared for the future of their marriage because they had had such a battle just that morning over the empty toilet paper roll.

I don’t have a formula for a conflict free marriage.  But I will comment on some of the ingredients seemingly associated with successful marriages.  As you will see, some of these factors are more important than others.

Maturity

Under this heading, I am including two factors usually mentioned as characterizing those whose marriages have survived.

Age.  Couples older than 25 when marrying for the first time are less likely to see their marriages end in divorce.  The optimum age for avoiding divorce is 28 to 32, according to one recent study.  Of course, if you married at age nineteen, you don’t need to worry; as with all such statistics, these are generalities.  Still, if you know a twenty-one-year-old who can’t wait to get married (to anyone), you might urge patience.

By the way, the claim that living together before marriage increases the likelihood of divorce is still valid.  A Washington-state based family law firm says it can increase the chances of divorce as much as 40%.  Perhaps living together before marriage betrays the absence of a fundamental element of maturity: the ability to postpone gratification.

Education. For some reason, still not fully explained, those with a college or university education divorce less frequently than those without degrees. 

Wendy Wang, writing for Pew Research, breaks down the figures by gender.  She first explains how college-educated women have an almost 80% chance for their marriages lasting over twenty years, compared to the national average of about 50% and then adds:

 While more-educated women have the highest chances for a long-term marriage, college-educated men also stand out. Roughly two-thirds (65%) of men with a bachelor’s degree could expect that, if they marry, their first marriage will last 20 years or longer, compared with 50% of men with a high school diploma or less. (http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2015/12/04/education-and-marriage/. Accessed 6 February 2018.)

Wang’s use of the questionable 50% national rate does not diminish the fact the marriages of college-educated people last longer.

Of course, we may assume young men and women who’ve had four years of college will know their needs and goals better than will the high-school sweethearts who marry while the echoes of pomp-and-circumstance are still bouncing around the auditorium.  But it is not as easy to explain why a twenty-five year old with a college degree is more likely to have a stable marriage than a twenty-five year old who doesn’t. One reason Wang suggests concerns financial stability: college graduates are more likely to have secure jobs than less-educated members of the workforce.  Increasingly, however, Wang’s suggestion will carry less weight as becomes clearer a traditional college education is no longer required if a young person wants a well-paying career; jobs in newer technologies, for example, do not always demands a degree.

There are, doubtless, reasons unrelated to preparation for a career that explain why an education should help strengthen marriages.  But this is not a place to explore them.

Location

I love visiting Austin, Texas. It’s a lively, interesting city. Though not as famous for its food as, say, New Orleans, Austin has some great restaurants and you can eat at many of the best without taking a bank loan.  Some of the best BBQ in the nation is available in Austin—I enjoy a place where I can also buy gasoline.  Being the capital of Texas, you can satisfy your steak cravings as well.  Of course, you can get fajitas and tacos everywhere. Looking for simpler meals?  One street has so many independent, non-franchise burger joints it would take two weeks to eat lunch at each of them. 

Even though Austin has a restaurant where servers wear shirts saying, “I didn’t get to the top of the food chain to become a vegetarian,” the city also has many vegetarian and vegan restaurants. Bouldin Creek Café is my favorite—no kidding.

Don’t make assumptions about places on the map.

Still, some surveys link the likelihood of divorce to your location. 

Here are some statistics from a 2013 survey cited by Jacoby, “States have widely varying rates of divorce. Nevada and Maine have the highest rates (around 14%)…. Other states with higher rates include Oklahoma, Florida, Oregon, and Kentucky. On the other end, New York, New Jersey, Utah, California, and North Dakota have some of the lowest rates (between 8.7% and 9.7%).”  That’s right; California has a low divorce rate. 

I’m not sure everything those figures mean. They certainly don’t mean if you live in Oregon, you should start packing to move across the country to New York to save your marriage.  They do suggest living in a “red” state doesn’t protect you from divorce and living in a “blue” state doesn’t mean you are likely to divorce. In fact, George Barna found marriages in red states are more likely to end in divorce than those in blue states.

While such snippets of information might be useful for restarting stalled conversations at a wedding reception, where you live might not be relevant to safeguarding your marriage from divorce.

Perhaps the best location is a place where you have friends and a reliable support system. 

Shared Religious Life

Just how religion helps in making a good marriage is debated.  I found statistics claiming Southern Baptists are slightly more likely to divorce than atheists.  That’s disturbing but the claim may require a little honest tweaking.  And, since I am a former Southern Baptist pastor, I think I have the right to do that tweaking.

First, claiming to be a Southern Baptist does not necessarily imply a deep commitment to the church.  With some sixteen million members nationwide, the Southern Baptist Convention is the largest Protestant group in America.  Yet, on any Sunday only half those members are in any church.  When I came to the first church I served, it was proudly pointed out that the prosperous businessman who lived across the street from the church was a member.  In his forties, married and the father of two children, he had joined the church when he was fifteen. Since the day he joined, he had never again come to a service.   

Southern Baptists spend millions producing some of the finest Sunday school literature.  Southern Baptist pastors spend many hours each week preparing to preach on Sunday morning.  That literature and those sermons will have no impact on those not present to hear the lessons or the sermons.

This points up a second issue. We Southern Baptists have not always been careful in spiritually vetting those coming for membership.  Some studies show the average age of those baptized in our churches has been steadily dropping; some of our churches have even reported baptizing four-year-olds. Phebe Bartlett, converted under Jonathan Edwards’ preaching, is probably the most famous child convert in the annals of American revivalism; her conversion seemed genuine but may have also been exceptional. While I believe we should remain hesitant about declaring who is and isn’t a believer, we need to admit that sometimes those “making a profession of faith” in response to invitations are doing little more than concurring, “This Jesus seems to be a pretty nice guy.”

Though a greater percentage of Southern Baptists may divorce than atheists, religion is not necessarily ineffective in supporting and encouraging healthy marriages.  As Jacoby says, “having a stronger connection to religion tends to keep a marriage more stable.”

In fact, important studies suggest the likelihood of divorce decreases among those who regularly attend church.  The greater the commitment shown to the local church, the greater the security manifested the marriage.

While I’d like to believe my preaching on the nuances of the parousia or the implications of Greek verbs helped keep marriages strong, I suspect it was something else.  A healthy church provides a support system (koinonia) where couples find encouragement and guidance from other, often older, couples who’ve faced and overcome challenges in their marriages.

Children

Having children also seems to be a safeguard against divorce. While “staying together for the kids” is sometimes maligned as a reason to eschew divorce, studies seem to suggest divorce is less likely when a couple has children.

The most doctrinaire Darwinist and the most unrepentant young-earth creationist understand the presence of children in the home says, “Not everything is about you.”

The common wisdom of centuries says a child needs a stable home and two parents, a mom and a dad. This doesn’t mean a single parent can’t raise a child successfully; it does mean an already tough job will be tougher.

Try as they might, moderns sociologists cannot escape this reality. Some are more honest about it than others. 

We might expect groups like Focus on the Family to defend the “traditional family,” but sometimes support comes from unexpected sources.  In 2008, the UK Daily Mail reported on a study made by researchers at Uppsala University in Sweden. The study concluded not only that children need their fathers but also “… found that children who lived with both a mother and father figure had fewer behavioural problems than those who lived with their mother only.” (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-513962/Dads-DO-matter-Why-children-brought-BOTH-parents-happier-successful.html#ixzz56GiEA5q8. Accessed 5 February 2018.)  Both boys and girls fared better if they had a positive relationship with both parents. The duration the study (20 years) is important since it predates the propagandistic furor surrounding the debate over same-sex marriage coloring many recent proclamations about the superfluous role of the father in child-rearing.

Couples staying together for the sake of their children are keeping the future in view. If the mother and father can maintain a fundamentally civil atmosphere in the home and demonstrate the give-and-take necessary to do the job of parenting, they will likely bless the coming generation. Christian couples who might have been considering divorce will inevitably realize their need for God’s help in accomplishing the goal of raising spiritually and emotionally healthy children.

At the same time, they may discover the issues feeding the impulse to divorce will recede and they will genuinely want to stay together.

Before moving on, let me offer two cautionary notes.

First, nothing I have said should imply a troubled couple should have children to forestall divorce.  That’s too risky and too unfair.

Second, several studies suggest couples with children are often unhappier after children arrive in the home.  As I read the remarks of young parents on Facebook, remarks suggesting their children are the brightest and cutest who ever toddled across the floor, those studies seem questionable to say the least.  Still, their findings are continually quoted. 

To be honest, children bring changes, sometimes stressful, changes.  The wife who accuses her husband of being infantile never really has to change his diaper.  That’s not true of the little bundle just home from the hospital.  Toddlerhood, childhood, and adolescence bring new stresses. But with time parents find those stresses diminishing or, perhaps, their skills in handling the stresses increasing.  Consequently, older parents generally can’t imagine ever feeling unhappy about having their children.

Of course, children can sometimes limit both the mother’s and the father’s opportunities for career advancement, though—to be honest—the mother is most often impacted.  But dealing with this disappointment challenges parents to carefully assess their priorities, to determine what is important.

Charles Swindoll has said, “Each day we are making deposits in the memory banks of our children.”  I certainly think that’s true.  It may also be that modeling a good marriage before our children will be the best safeguard against their own marriages ending in divorce.

This Valentine’s Day, as you gush over the candy, the flowers, or the cards, say a good word for marriage.  Let people know you believe in marriage.

What the Civil War Can Teach Us About the Bible

Today is Confederate Heroes Day in Texas; its juxtaposition with Martin Luther King, Jr. Day offends some. In fairness, Heroes Day was inaugurated in 1931, when King was two.  Many southerners once viewed Confederate soldiers not only as courageous patriots but as Christian knights defending a culture endorsed by the Scripture.

Evangelicals, northern and southern, quoted the Bible. But the pro-slavery side could muster more “proof texts” than the abolitionists. In time, evangelical abolitionists recognized we must differentiate behaviors and social structures the Bible prescribes and those the Bible simply describes. God does not necessarily approve the latter; so references to slavery usually regulated rather than condoned the practice.

Taking the Bible seriously involves reading the Bible thoughtfully.

I doubt any southern evangelicals today would insist the Bible endorses slavery.  Many might even question the wisdom of keeping a holiday like Confederate Heroes Day on the calendar.  I lived in Texas for almost two decades and never heard of the holiday.  It should be allowed to slip into the mists of best-forgotten history.

But its lessons for reading the Bible thoughtfully need to be remembered. In interpreting and applying the Bible we must consider the context of the passage and the author’s intent.  

It is unlikely Paul—who belonged to a people who had once been slaves—endorsed slavery.  He may be thought of as writing for the interim; we can imagine him looking ahead to a time when slavery was no more.  Clearly he felt slavery limited human potential.  Thus, he told Christian slaves to take the opportunity to be free should it arise (I Corinthians 7:21). Yet, he recognized an enslaved believer could still experience God’s grace and goodness, even in a less than ideal situation.  

If Paul opposed slavery, why didn’t he say more?  Telling Christian slaves to revolt would have seen thousands slaughtered; commanding Christian slave-owners to release their slaves might have led to resentment. Telling the Christian slave-owner Philemon to treat his former runaway slave Onesimus as as brother laid a foundation for a new attitude that would make Christian endorsement of slavery a contradiction.  This, combined with the declaration of spiritual equality found in Galatians 3:28, should have been enough to make any Christian take up the abolitionist cause.  Yet, southern evangelicals defended slavery, even to the point of laying down their lives.

To understand how this can be requires recognizing the power of cultural pressure.  The South thrived on slavery, slavery allowed slave-owners to imagine themselves morally and intellectually superior; it was hard to trump these factors.  To justify slavery, southern evangelicals used “proof texts” and ignored the implications of the good news brought by the One who came to set men and women free.

Again, had those Christians made a thoughtful difference between what the Bible commends and what the Bible reports (and tries to regulate), there might have been no Civil War; slavery might have never received tacit Christian approval.

Keeping the distinction between prescriptive and descriptive passages can help us in dealing with other matters.  For example, consider what was said to Eve after she and Adam fell.  God predicted there would be hostility between men and women, a constant struggle for the upper hand. Did God intend this for the crown of creation?  No.  Instead, God seems to be predicting what would happen, not what should happen.  As Christians we should strive to live as God intended, showing in our lives the transformation wrought by Christ.

For a New Year

Prompted by the two-faced Roman god Janus, for whom January is named, we usually spend awhile looking ahead and looking back as a year begins.

We’ll likely experience a mix of disappointment and satisfaction reviewing 2017; though some may feel overwhelmed with disappointment, few would claim to be completely satisfied.

Perhaps you believe in a God who so overturned the events of a day of death, injustice, and darkness we call that day, “Good Friday.” Because of this, several January’s from now you may be able to look back on some events of 2017 and say, “Now I get it.”

Eyes Open, Socks Washed

An old story tells of a little boy who misheard the lyrics of Nathum Tate’s classic carol, While Shepherds Watched Their Flocks.  The boy was heard singing, “While shepherds washed their socks at night and hung them all around….”

The little boy’s innocent mistake makes the story funny, so does the notion of shepherds wearing socks.  According to fashion designer Ramsaa B, socks were known long before the first Christmas.  In the eighth-century BC, socks made of animal skins were often worn by actors in Greek comedies (some of us still get laughs with our socks).  Yet shepherds in New Testament times wore sandals without socks; they were into cool footwear long before Birkenstock. 

Corny as the little boy’s story may be, it suggests an important point.  Just like sheep need to be watched, socks need to be washed.

Had the shepherds been washing their socks, nothing would have been wrong.  The duties of everyday life are duties.  They must be done.  Only the super rich or the super famous might wear a pair of socks once and then throw them away.  Dolly Parton claims she never wears the same clothes twice but I hope that’s not true of Bill Gates.  Though I’m certain Bill doesn’t wash his own socks.

Be you rich or poor, famous or unknown, if you wear them your socks will need to be washed.

Like sheep need to be watched. 

The shepherds did a monotonous, sometimes thankless job that had to be done.

One night, while doing that job, they witnessed God at work in a wondrous way.  Our jobs may be monotonous, repetitive, unremarkable, even thankless but the shepherds experience reminds us we may witness God at work even in a most unlikely venue.

Seventeenth century Carmelite monk Brother Lawrence is famous for addressing God as, “Lord of pots and pans and things…” Lawrence who was not a gifted theologian had been assigned to the monastery kitchen.  Yet, in that noisy place of ceaseless labor, he enjoyed the presence of God.  That enabled him to pray for God to allow him to minister to others by “getting meals and washing up the plates.” At the same time, as he stood over the steaming, soapy water he had opportunity to witness God’s grace at work in the lives of others laboring in the kitchen and in his own life.

Because the shepherds were on those hills, doing their unglamorous work, they had an opportunity to see God fulfill ancient promises and initiate a work that would change the future.

In your workplace, be it a factory, an office, a classroom, a store, or a kitchen, you have the same opportunity.  You may see God keep his promises to comfort the grieving, encourage the fearful, strengthen the weak, and forgive the penitent.  And you may see the one who has been touched by God take the first steps toward a new future. But, like the shepherds, you have to stay awake, keeping your eyes open, your ears attuned to a heavenly voice saying, “Behold.”

The shepherds were taken by surprise. They weren’t expecting to see “a vast, heavenly army.” (Luke 2:13 NET) But now, because of Christmas, we can embark on each day knowing we might see God at work somewhere. We won’t see a baby in a manger but we might see a life changed by that Babe.

That Flaming Flower

That Flaming Flower

I took two years of high school Spanish, did some online courses to review, and lived over a dozen years in a community with a fifty percent Hispanic population.  Still, fluency in the language evades me.  I can do a pretty good job ordering in a Mexican restaurant, if the server speaks English.

I do recall some stories from my classes.  Like the story of the South American country having trouble introducing traffic lights because the people refused to obey a machine. (Apparently, many of those drivers moved to Ohio.)

I remember reading how in one country a gentleman allows a woman to walk on the street side of the sidewalk.  The custom developed differently here so the woman might not be splashed with mud thrown up by passing vehicles.  Those men in the Spanish speaking country walked next to the houses because servants often threw the contents of chamber pots out the windows—without first looking.

It was in a Spanish class I first heard the story of the Poinsettia.

                                                                                                                                                                 

In sixteenth-century Mexico, according to the story, a little girl named Pepita was too poor to present a gift at the church during its celebration of Christmas.  An angel appeared her and told her to pick some weeds and present them. As she carried the weeds to the front of the church she was weeping with shame.  Her tears fell on some of the weeds’ broad green leaves.  Those leaves suddenly turned bright crimson.  Pepita’s weeds became the most beautiful flowers at the altar.

America’s first minister to Mexico, Joel Roberts Poinsett, brought the flowers and the legend back to the US in 1825.  Consequently, here we know the plant (used as medicine by the Aztecs) as the Poinsettia.  In Mexico they are known as Flor de Noche Buena (the Christmas Eve Flower).  Many plants are cultivated in Egypt, where they are known as “bent de consul” or “the consul’s daughter,” referring to Poinsett.  I guess no one thought of Flor de Pepita.

Although known to Americans for nearly a century, the Poinsettias’ popularity dates from the early twentieth century.  An additional boost came from the marketing strategy of Paul Ecke, Jr.  He sent free plants to TV stations across the nation so they could be displayed on air from Thanksgiving to Christmas.  He even appeared on The Tonight Show and Bob Hope Christmas specials to publicize the plants. At one time, the Ecke family’s business produced seventy percent of the Poinsettias sold in the US. (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Poinsettia)

Of course, Poinsettias are associated with Christmas in America.  They appear in stores around Thanksgiving and shoppers buy them as gifts, centerpieces, and to add a little color to their homes during the bleak winter.  Artificial Poinsettias are used for door wreaths and other decorations.  Christmas wrap and cards often use Poinsettias.

You might imagine no one having any negative feelings about this colorful plant, especially in light of the touching legend associated with it.  You would be wrong. 

Let’s go back a few decades, before some of you were born. 

Go back with me to 1980, the year I accepted my first pastorate, in the tiny village of Dawn, Texas.  I had preached at this little church as a favor to a friend and, to my surprise, machinations went into motion and almost before I knew what was happening I had been called as the pastor.

My family and I moved into the parsonage in the early spring and I began fumbling my way as the pastor of a church filled with farmers and ranchers.  Having grown up in the greater St. Louis area, I had a lot to learn about a new culture.  Factory workers I understood but farmers were another matter.  Fortunately, my mentor (a pastor who had started his career in a similar village) had given me a good piece of advice. “Don’t make any major changes during your first year.” I resolved to follow that counsel. He also told me never to talk to reporters; I never have—principally because reporters have never talked to me.

One Sunday a few weeks before my first Christmas in Dawn, Roger and Beryl, an older couple, approached me following the service.  Beryl said, “We’ll be bringing the Poinsettia next week.” I must have looked a little puzzled because she added, “We give one every year in memory of our daughter.”  Their daughter, a young wife and mother in her late twenties, had died suddenly about a decade before. Every Christmas since her death they had given the church a large Poinsettia.  I could see no reason why the tradition shouldn’t continue so I told them that would be fine.

A few weeks before my second Christmas at the church two women approached me.  “Pastor Jim,” they said, “several of us would like to give Poinsettias in memory of family we’ve lost.” Again, I could see no reason why they shouldn’t so I said that would be great.  The next Sunday a note appeared in the bulletin inviting any family wanting to participate to bring a Poinsettia to the church the first Sunday in December.

Roger and Beryl confronted me after the benediction.  Beryl, the church organist, may have cut the postlude short.

“This isn’t right,” Roger fumed, “our Poinsettia will be lost among all the others.”

“No, I don’t think so,” I said.  “Your Poinsettia is always so large, it will stand out.”

“Doesn’t matter,” Roger said, “we’re not giving one this year or ever again.”

And so they stopped giving their Poinsettia, refusing to grant others a right they had claimed as their own.

Beryl continued to play the organ and I believe she eventually got over her disappointment.  Roger nurtured his bitterness.  The incident fueled his continual complaining about fellow church members, complaints directed especially at the deacons whose wives had approached me about allowing others to give Poinsettias.  I visited the Dawn church several years after coming to Ohio.  Roger cornered me and without asking about my family or me began a tirade against one of those deacons.  A little bolder than I had been while living in Dawn, I walked away saying, “Roger, you need to take that up with your pastor.”

So, you will understand if my first response upon seeing a flaming Poinsettia isn’t unalloyed aesthetic delight.

In time I realized Roger’s behavior was part of his character.  If it hadn’t been the Poinsettia issue, something else would have triggered his animus.  He was allergic to onions; he once told me those who brought dishes containing onions to church suppers were trying to kill him.  His self-centeredness was matched by an inflated view of himself.  He believed he was smarter than anyone else.  Wiser than anyone else.  More spiritual than anyone else.  And, when ill, he was sicker than anyone else.  So, of course, his grief ran deeper than that of anyone else.

Many, if not most, people who lose a close loved one become more compassionate toward others who have experienced loss.  Not Roger.  Allowing others to add a flower to the memorial took the spotlight off him.  He couldn’t have that.

Looking back, I realize Beryl must have sometimes shunted her own pain aside so nothing would detract from Roger’s expression of grief.

But I digress; let’s get back to those Poinsettias.  I’ve never mounted an anti-Poinsettia campaign; you’re the first I’ve mentioned my feelings to.  I’ve never failed to see their beauty but when I look at them it isn’t long before I recall Roger’s anger. I recall anxiously realizing I had alienated an important church member, recall wondering if others would ask how I could be so insensitive to the feelings of a “charter member.”  In time, I knew I had overblown the significance of Roger’s anger—something a fledgling pastor might easily do.

More important, my feelings about the plants—feelings becoming more positive each year—remind me to be careful about assumptions.  What thrills us may chill another.  You may look forward to caroling at the nursing home.  Someone else may skip the trip but be ashamed to tell you they do so because it brings back memories of a parent languishing in such a facility.  We shouldn’t judge.

My experience didn’t cripple my ministry at Dawn.  I stayed there for another decade.  Every Christmas the chancel blazed with Poinsettias.  Some families gave a plant every year; some, just the Christmas following the loss of a loved one.  Some of the Poinsettias were lush plants purchased at a florist; some were purchased at the local Food King.  Some families never participated; all had the opportunity.  Roger and Beryl kept their promise (threat) and never again gave a Poinsettia, though I suspect Beryl sometimes wished she had the courage to defy Roger.

Christmas—that time for singing of peace and goodwill—can be a time of great tension.  Maybe it’s significant Poinsettias do not tolerate temperatures below 45°F; they are just a bit fragile, like some people’s feelings this season.  Then, too, if you are going to trim dead and dying leaves off a Poinsettia, you should wear gloves because the sap can irritate skin.  Just like some people are really irritating this time of year.

I try to keep in mind those farmer-deacons who were the objects of Roger’s vitriol.  They never answered in kind, always remained cordial, never attempted to undermine his status in the church, and always reminded me “that’s just the way he is and there’s nothing you can do about it.” 

If someone is bugging you, irritating you, driving you bonkers this season, I wish I could give you better advice than those deacons gave me.  But this is not the script for a Hallmark movie: chances are you won’t be joining your family, your friends, and your crazy-maker around the fireplace, everyone smiling and filled with goodwill.  Strangely, acknowledging there is nothing you can do about someone’s attitude and behavior frees you to focus on keeping yourself emotionally and spiritually healthy. And frees you to focus on those who get what the Season is all about.

By the way, December 12^th is National Poinsettia Day.   I get it.