|
Mar. 29, 2006
On second thought, and at the encouragement of my husband, I WILL post this here
First, a note. I feel like I know many of you personally. I have read about your children, your triumphs and trials in your homeschools and your desire to live in accordance with God's will. I have learned much and greatly appreciate the fellowship we have had. I hope and pray that those who disagree with me on this subject can do so in love. I have been exceedinly careful in my attempt to take something I find very offensive and present it in as positive light as I can because I desire to emulate this spiritual principle:
Jam 3:17 But the wisdom that is from above is first pure, then
peaceable, gentle, and easy to be entreated, full of mercy and good
fruits, without partiality, and without hypocrisy.
I hope and pray that those who disagree with me can hold to the same. We are sisters in Christ. I would hope that tie is thicker than the teachings of any particular denomination or ministry. That said, here goes (it is very long):
According to Michael Pearl, the first step in child raising is to enjoy
your children. Your "right" to discipline your children extends
naturally from your love for them. He is almost right in that, and if
these were secualr materials, I would not bring this up. In truth, as
in all relationships, the parent-child relationship begins with our
relationship with Christ. Only when the parent walks in the light, can
he effectively lead the child on the path of righteousness. Second
comes the relationship between mother and father. This provides a
secure environment in which to raise happy, healthy children. The
relationship between Christ-fearing parents should be the first model
children see of Christ's loving sacrifice. (Ephesians 5:22-24) When the
parents walk with Christ and have a godly relationship with one
another, the ideal conditions are met for the child, regardless of
material concerns.
Second is training. I almost agree with this
notion, as well. I have some difficulty with the use of the word
"training." It is used in Proverbs 22:6, but in the oringinal Hebrew it
has the proper sense of "narrowing." We are to narrow the way for our
children. In that, I see the need to create clear boundaries. It is not
far from the sense that it is used in the No Greater Joy
materials In our home, we call this step modelling righteosness or, if
you go back to my training materials, preventive teaching. From the website:
Training
is done before the need to discipline arises. Training is what you do
in the moments when all is well and you take time out to condition them
to obedience. Your well-spoken words of praise and instruction will
prevent many possible acts of disobedience or foolishness. Impart an
understanding of why obedience is important. When you cause children to
understand that you will hold to your authority firmly, you are
pre-conditioning their hearts and minds to obedience. The
main principles laid out are good. As with a lot of these materials, I
object to the word choice. Discipline means nothing more than "to
learn." It is not (or should not be) equated with punishment. We are
disciples of Christ leading our children on the path of righteousness.
That is discipline. So with a little rewording, I can wholeheartedly
agree that raising disciplined children begins with training and that
this is separate and apart from punishment. This form of teaching
occurs when things are calm and children are compliant. This
instruction serves as a guard, or a narrowing of the way, preventing
future disobedience. This could almost have been taken from the steps
of preventive teaching, from Common Sense Parenting, (page 63):
1) Describe what you would like.
2) Give a reason.
3) Practice. There are two main differences, however. First, No Greater Joy
puts the emphasis on the negative. A stumblingblock is laid out to
entice the child to sin and then swift punishment ensues in order to
teach the child that this behavior is not acceptable. A toddler may be
given a book and then swatted every time he tries to tear the pages in
order to train him not to tear books. The emphasis in Common Sense Parenting,
however, is on the postive. Here, the parent will give the child a
book, tell him what it is for and show him how to turn pages. As he
practices this skill, he will be praised.
Second, is the notion
of conditioning. It is a socialist concept stemming from Pavlov's work
with dog's. Pavlov learned that he could condition his dogs to salivate
at the ringing of a bell. This philosophy is central to brainwashing
techniques and even to the way our public school system is set up. It
is a philosophy that takes the soul and sense of free will from the
individual and instead defines human action as a set of programmed
behaviors in response to environmental stimuli. The child may learn not
to tear a book, but he doesn't know why. He doesn't even know what to
do with the book. He will simply stay away from it. The conditioned
response yields a very basic operating model in his mind...book = pain.
I
desire for my children to be obedient. Scripture teaches us to honor
our parents and even to submit to those in authority over us. However,
what I advocate is reasoned obedience. Some time ago, I did a lesson
with my daughter regarding this very concept. Our scripture lessons
tend to be short...about ten minutes. Our focus is on the authority of
God's Word and on learning to reason from scripture. This may seem odd
to some, but if you look at the general course of the day, you will
notice that I teach a lot from the bible. It is our main "textbook" in
all subject areas. This is the result of one such study:
Eph 6:1 Children, obey your parents in the Lord: for this is right.
From this, my daughter reasoned that:
1) Children ought to obey their parents.
2) The Lord put parents in authority over their children.
3) The phrase "in the Lord" means that you do not have to obey if your parents ask you to sin. We
talked about other people in authority over us and why they hold those
positions. We talked about reasoned obedience. Since all authority is
ultimately derived from God, we answer to God for our actions. If
someone in authority tells us to do something we do not want to do, we
should do it because they have authority. If they tell us to do
something God's Word tells us not to do, we should not do it, no matter
the earthly consequences.
My daughter may not question my
authority. It is God-given. With that, I bear a great responsibility.
She may, however, question my instruction. And she does. And when she
does so appropriately (a skill we have practiced), we reason through
the situation. Usually it has more to do with the fairness of a
request. In such cases, I ask her to think whether I have asked her to
sin. Fairness is not a primarly issue, so she reasons through that,
yes, biblically she should comply even if it isn't fair. Other times,
it has to do with something I said and did not follow through on. In
those cases, she may hold me biblically accountable for the promises I
have made and broken.
This is exaclty how I want my children to
function in the world when they leave. Our leaders are in a postion of
authority given by God. We cannot disobey every ordinance we disagree
with. We must comply with an unfair tax code, traffic laws that may not
always make sense and (at least in my mind) register our homeschools
with the state. These are laws that do not hinder our ability to
worship God and walk in the path He has laid out for us. However, we
should hold our leaders accountable. And if a law is passed that
requires my children to sin, I do not want them to compy because they
have been conditioned to obey. I want them to know how and when to
stand their ground, accepting the consequences but not yielding to sin.
no greater joy, obedience, reason, parenting, Michael Pearl, children
|
| •
Post A Comment! •
Send to a Friend!
|
Comments
|
Posted by 
Posted by 
Posted by 
Posted by
Mar. 29, 2006 - Untitled Comment
Blessings ~ Diane