Get PJ Media on your Apple

PJM Lifestyle

3 Steps to Rediscover the Lost Art of Mothering

"The destiny of nations lies far more in the hands of women, the mothers, than in the possessors of power, or those of innovators who for the most part do not understand themselves." — Friedrich Froebel

by
Rhonda Robinson

Bio

May 11, 2013 - 1:00 pm

2. Grasp the Brevity of Childhood.

You are the center of his world — and time seems frozen in dirty socks.

The endless chores that accompany motherhood, compounded by the busyness of childhood, obstruct our view of the time we have together.  The brevity of childhood is hard to imagine when you are in your twenties. After all — your child’s adulthood is a lifetime away.

A friend relayed a profound thought her pastor once passed along at a baby christening. As the new parents began to walk away, he admonished them:

 ”You only have 18 summers” he warned, “now go and make the most of them.”

Only 18 summers?

Actually, I think there’s a dash of wishful thinking there. It’s more like 16 summers. Those last two or three usually get stolen by summer jobs, girlfriends or boyfriends. They are too busy testing their wings to notice mom, let alone spend much time at home. When you understand the brevity of childhood, it’s easier to “make the most of them.”

In order to become ever mindful of how fast childhood disappears, I want to invite you to play a game with me. I call it my “Three to Five Year Game.” I played it often when my children were growing up. Let me pass it on to you.

Ready? Okay, let’s play.

How old will your children be in three years? Now try five. It’s a sobering thought of reality. Especially when you think of just how fast the last three years of your own life sped by.

Comments are closed.

Top Rated Comments   
I find this article to be precious, yet sadly out of date, even against "women's rights" (or today's ideology that uses such terminology), simply against the social tide. I would like to offer the author a compliment with the following thoughts. If I were once again a young man, looking for a mate, I would want to find a woman with the values manifest in Robinson's article. (Fortunately my wife, of blessed memory, did exemplify such values.) Indeed, I would not marry at all if such a woman could not be found. Why?

Is not marriage, as seemingly defined by the advocates of homosexual marriage (sic), but a function of two persons, same sex or other sex, who love each other, are sexually active and wish to live in union with the social prestige associated with marriage? The justification of homosexual marriage, if such union be accepted as marriage, excludes from its ESSENTIAL definition all the features Robinson has mentioned. Oh, they can be there, but only as accidental notes. Why have I wandered into such thoughts?

Motherhood as described in the article is in reality part of a man/woman relationship in which we men find our fatherhood-calling by aiding and furthering such motherly care for "our" children (and adding our own fatherly care to the maturing of the child). I as a man would not undertake this mission, often costly for career goals, to marry a woman unless motherhood was there to grant me fatherhood. Indeed, if friendship and sex (excluding motherhood and my fatherly carring) is what marriage is all about, then why marry, why not just sign a legal agreement for cohabiting (or "shacking up together" as we said in my youth)? Hook-up sex leads to shack-up sex relations which fade away as sexual interest shifts.

Motherly care presupposes a "mother". Being a "mother" presuposes a society in which such a fulfilment of womanhood is viewed as an essential part of being a woman. Emancipate this ideal, say for career purposes, from woman-being, and motherhood (not to mention derivately fatherhood) wanes with lethal consequences for society. Lethal??? Yes, let me explain.

I live in Germany (and am using Germany as a sign for all of Europe) in which the IDEAL for being a woman is that a woman develops her individual self via a career. This downgrading of motherhood from womanhood is becoming evidently more iimportant than the survival of the race. Does that sound odd? It is not, it is just math applied to demographics. Consult David Goldman's "Why Civilizations Die". Goldman describes the almost universal inablity of Western nations (and beyond) to reproduce themselves. Germany evinces some 1.34 children per woman and needs 2.1 children per woman to reproduce itself. In a couple of hundred years and the German DNA bearers will cease to be. German politicians know this, but the social goal is to emancipate women such that each woman's own personal and fully individual goals are supreme. Now "personal or individual goals" are admirable in themselves, although they can become LETHAL to the race if they displace the "relational goal" (and motherhood is structurally relational) as an essential value for society to realize. The downgrading of motherhood from a societally essential definition of womanhood (with the correlative downgrading of fatherhood from the essential definition of men) is leading Germany and Europe (other nations are doing the same) into demographic suicide!!! This conclusion is not a function of, say, Catholic moral values, just one of simple math. A society that does not reproduce itself, by the mathematical law of substraction, approaches 0.

I am so pleased with this article and offer profound thanks to the author(ess). She must be a wonderful mother.
48 weeks ago
48 weeks ago Link To Comment
All Comments   (11)
All Comments   (11)
Sort: Newest Oldest Top Rated
I get your point, but I got stuck on the story. Where was her mother? Where was the pediatrician? How about: Where was her own brain? Your newborn is losing weight and failing to thrive and you don't bring it to a doctor until it's too weak to suckle?

I don't know about other mothers, but I didn't need an extra day in the hospital and an extra meeting with the doctor to tell me that something is wrong. I don't care what support network one has in place this seems to me a case of it being her own responsibility. We can't blame her because she's so sad over it? Perhaps if she had had ANY other person, her own father, the father of her baby, a neighbor, a friend, who had said something this may have been averted (besides, who says there wasn't someone and she refused to listen?).

I agree that a disconnection between generations is a problem and there is a connection made when a mother is remade into a grandmother. But I am ultimately responsible for my children, and I have gotten way more good information from the internet and using my own sense than I have from my mother or mother in law. I get the most from other mothers with kids 3-8 years older than mine.

It isn't: Where was/were...? But why didn't she reach out and connect with someone? That's totally on her as the mother of the helpless baby. Even if she's a teenager and totally ignorant she should know how to ask for help. Walk into Babies r us and there would have been someone at customer service willing to talk.
45 weeks ago
45 weeks ago Link To Comment
Unfortunately, we're now on about the third or fourth generation of mothers who didn't much have their mother in their life once they went to college, began a career, or married and moved away from home. In the main, we've lost our ability to raise children. Most of the "motherly" contact most children have is in day care. There's still some day care by a woman in the neighborhood whose kids are in school and who takes in a few kids, but most is "industrial" day care with low-wage, low-skill care givers, often barely literate and often recent immigrants, maybe legal, maybe not. Whatever their background, they're not likely to do much towards inculcating middle-class American values in their charges.
48 weeks ago
48 weeks ago Link To Comment
Let's see, first off, thanks for writing this. It is so true.
I find myself being an advocate for motherhood often, which seems strange because motherhood should be the natural state of affairs for women. I find myself attempting to convince younger women that motherhood is the best goal. Do they really think that a job can come anywhere close to contributing as long-lasting benefits to society as motherhood? Most women will never have a job that can remotely compare. We pursue what might be good temporally and sacrifice the best, the eternal.
48 weeks ago
48 weeks ago Link To Comment
Good Article! It was a very risky and bold move to simply say where was her mom at... Your leaving yourself wide open to be attacked with other causes and reasons and for that I admire it! Well done!!!
48 weeks ago
48 weeks ago Link To Comment
Great article - thank you for writing this. Truly inspired!
48 weeks ago
48 weeks ago Link To Comment
"The answers were never found. Perhaps because no one asked the right question.

Where was her mother?"
Her daughter ,father starved had two children without a husband and the secret kept from the world another baby ready to be born in Dec.I lay the foundation a year before with gifts to her mother to help her bond with her daughter . Before this I lay the foundation with gifts to her brother to stop hating his sister and mother.
Without the mother and brother by now the three children would have been taken away from the young mother. What great sacrifice I made. But now looking into the eyes of these three young children every week ,the young mother smiling on her children ,her brother happy to be a young uncle and her Mother the Queen ho saved the new born baby from abortion and I so nervous holding the baby in my arms this gift from God, the Eternal Father.
48 weeks ago
48 weeks ago Link To Comment
I find this article to be precious, yet sadly out of date, even against "women's rights" (or today's ideology that uses such terminology), simply against the social tide. I would like to offer the author a compliment with the following thoughts. If I were once again a young man, looking for a mate, I would want to find a woman with the values manifest in Robinson's article. (Fortunately my wife, of blessed memory, did exemplify such values.) Indeed, I would not marry at all if such a woman could not be found. Why?

Is not marriage, as seemingly defined by the advocates of homosexual marriage (sic), but a function of two persons, same sex or other sex, who love each other, are sexually active and wish to live in union with the social prestige associated with marriage? The justification of homosexual marriage, if such union be accepted as marriage, excludes from its ESSENTIAL definition all the features Robinson has mentioned. Oh, they can be there, but only as accidental notes. Why have I wandered into such thoughts?

Motherhood as described in the article is in reality part of a man/woman relationship in which we men find our fatherhood-calling by aiding and furthering such motherly care for "our" children (and adding our own fatherly care to the maturing of the child). I as a man would not undertake this mission, often costly for career goals, to marry a woman unless motherhood was there to grant me fatherhood. Indeed, if friendship and sex (excluding motherhood and my fatherly carring) is what marriage is all about, then why marry, why not just sign a legal agreement for cohabiting (or "shacking up together" as we said in my youth)? Hook-up sex leads to shack-up sex relations which fade away as sexual interest shifts.

Motherly care presupposes a "mother". Being a "mother" presuposes a society in which such a fulfilment of womanhood is viewed as an essential part of being a woman. Emancipate this ideal, say for career purposes, from woman-being, and motherhood (not to mention derivately fatherhood) wanes with lethal consequences for society. Lethal??? Yes, let me explain.

I live in Germany (and am using Germany as a sign for all of Europe) in which the IDEAL for being a woman is that a woman develops her individual self via a career. This downgrading of motherhood from womanhood is becoming evidently more iimportant than the survival of the race. Does that sound odd? It is not, it is just math applied to demographics. Consult David Goldman's "Why Civilizations Die". Goldman describes the almost universal inablity of Western nations (and beyond) to reproduce themselves. Germany evinces some 1.34 children per woman and needs 2.1 children per woman to reproduce itself. In a couple of hundred years and the German DNA bearers will cease to be. German politicians know this, but the social goal is to emancipate women such that each woman's own personal and fully individual goals are supreme. Now "personal or individual goals" are admirable in themselves, although they can become LETHAL to the race if they displace the "relational goal" (and motherhood is structurally relational) as an essential value for society to realize. The downgrading of motherhood from a societally essential definition of womanhood (with the correlative downgrading of fatherhood from the essential definition of men) is leading Germany and Europe (other nations are doing the same) into demographic suicide!!! This conclusion is not a function of, say, Catholic moral values, just one of simple math. A society that does not reproduce itself, by the mathematical law of substraction, approaches 0.

I am so pleased with this article and offer profound thanks to the author(ess). She must be a wonderful mother.
48 weeks ago
48 weeks ago Link To Comment
Thank you for such a kind and thoughtful response. You have given me so much more to contemplate.
48 weeks ago
48 weeks ago Link To Comment
Indeed. When a nation's women turn upon the nation, however, that nation is doomed. Let's hope that the women of European Christendom choose to rejoin the struggle for survival on this planet....lest the tribes die upon the ash heap of Darwinian failure.
48 weeks ago
48 weeks ago Link To Comment
Very nice article.
48 weeks ago
48 weeks ago Link To Comment
This was beautiful and absolutely true. Thank you.
48 weeks ago
48 weeks ago Link To Comment
View All