Were the Beall's disturbed by watching their little five year old disappear into the bowels of a big institutional facility? They should be. It isn't natural. It's actually highly disturbing and historically anomalous but people have been conditioned to think it's normal. As a Christian not only is it an abdication of parental duty and calling, it is just plain crazy to hand over your precious and innocent covenanted child to authorities that are going to spend all day, five days a week, for at least a dozen years – during your child's most formative period in life, attempting to undermine all the most fundamental things you believe in.
For those who don't understand this – they've not thought on
a deep enough level about the values being communicated in all the activities
of the school and how subjects are approached. The fear of the Lord is the
beginning of wisdom. Just because the proverb has been abused or become trite
does not make it somehow less than true – or less profound for that matter.
Reading about child discipline also needs to be re-framed.
First of all, I (once again) disagree with these checklist approaches – all the
way down to telling you exactly what a 'rod' must be and so forth. This is all
made up and in many cases what is merely descriptive is being taken as strict
prescription down to ridiculous legalist obsessions over things like length,
thickness and the like. It's ridiculous.
Many years ago (back during land-line days) we received a
prank call – someone asking us if we used a 'rod' on our children. What
prompted these people to call a local religious family and ask that? I think
the answer is obvious.
All that said, what 'experts' today consider controversial in
terms of spanking children and breaking their will was commonplace in society just
a couple of generations ago – and the world was probably better for it. There
are always occasions when this sort of thing can be abused – and I come from
such a situation. My father could be vicious and yet I also know that what he
grew up with much worse. I learned from these patterns and yet it's a struggle.
I was still learning with my oldest son and I was probably harder on him then I
was with his later siblings. I look back and sometimes I think was probably too
severe and yet I have to say that I would have rather have erred in that
direction then in terms of laxity. And please remember (and don't misunderstand
what I'm saying) severity isn't always merely a physical thing – it's how
things are dealt with, the words that are used, and the spirit in which they
are said. With consistency (which is essential) there must also be wisdom and
mercy. The balance is not easy and always dynamic.
As a parent I will say this – all the hard work in terms of physical
discipline takes place when kids are very young. We never child-proofed our
home, moved anything off coffee or end tables, locked cabinets, covered
electrical outlets, or any of it. We completely reject that approach. We taught
our kids the meaning of the word 'no' and to obey us. It requires engagement,
energy, and consistency. At the end of the day you're tired and want to let
things go – you can't. Get up and deal with the situation and be consistent.
The energy we poured into this when they were toddlers meant that by the time
they were older (say, 5-10 years) the instances of discipline were rare as the
authority was already established. And then by the time they're reaching their
teens – when they're really too big to discipline like that, it's no longer
called for as the authority is already all in place. Sure there are instances
that discipline is needed but at that point a punishment can be issued without
the kind of physical defiance and bodily resistance that becomes a problem when
it's a fourteen year old boy (or girl) that's too big to spank. We never had
that problem and contrary to what some have said – it wasn't because we were
lucky. In fact we've always considered that to be kind of insulting in light of
the work we put in.
Even looking at the little 'rod' worksheet in the Post
article I shake my head. It would have never entered my mind growing up to hit
a parent and my kids never even considered it. I can remember multiple
occasions when my father was very angry with me and wanted to punch me and
would provoke me to hit him, pushing me and slapping at my face, challenging me
to throw a punch – so he could couch his aggression as a form of retaliation,
response, or even self-defense. I couldn't do it. It was (to me) an impossibility
to even consider punching my father. Despite my non-resistance he certainly let
me have it on a few occasions and I think he felt bad about it – maybe? I think
he wanted an excuse to unleash his anger in physical terms and frankly I was completely
passive at those moments and it gave him little satisfaction. It's an
interesting lesson and in later years as a Christian I've reflected quite a bit
on those exchanges.
Temper tantrums? That sort of thing is dealt with when
they're one and two years old. They learn self-control and it's never an issue
again. Our kids did not have temper tantrums. All kids will be willful at
times, all will disobey and ignore instruction – even if they don't verbally
say 'no' to you. But guess what? Contrary to the worksheet it doesn't always
require 'the rod' – whatever that happens to mean. When wisdom is applied you
take each situation and child as it comes. In some cases, yes, corporal
punishment is called for. In others, it's not. And the same situation might
warrant a different response depending on the child and the individual
attitudes and issues they wrestle with.
Reading the Beall notes on the page – it seems clear that
they weren't really understanding what was involved. As stated, I reject the
whole worksheet/checklist approach. On the one level I too am frustrated by
such attempts to reduce everything to a formula but on the other hand I want to
say 'grow up'. Parenting is serious – the most difficult, serious, and
consequential thing you will ever do and yet it can also be rich, tremendously
enjoyable, and rewarding.
I'm no fan of the Pearls but their one statement is true –
when punishments are properly applied they reduce the frequency with which
parents must later discipline their kids.
Sometimes I watch parents with ill-behaved children and I
marvel. Why do you want to live that way? How miserable! There's nothing so
ridiculous to me as a family that can't take their kids grocery shopping or out
to eat in restaurant. We used to take our small children into coffee shops and
they would sit there quietly looking at books or whatever while we drank our
coffee and talked. I know so many people who can't even imagine it – they need
to expand their imaginations.
But not only is it miserable for the parents and detrimental
to their marriage in all aspects, you can tell the kids are miserable too and
are being set up for struggles later in life in terms of self-control. And keep
in mind, this discussion thus far is independent of more basic questions
concerning what is God-honouring and proper for a Christian home. There are the
practical aspects to be sure but on another level we need to think in 'higher'
terms – principles, ethics, godly obedience, and lives that demonstrate the
power of the Holy Spirit and Kingdom citizenship.
I must add at this point, the Baptist understanding of
children does not lend itself to this larger and frankly more comprehensive
understanding. If they're pagans, absent the Spirit, and alienated from the
life of God – then the higher ideals and doctrines I'm here alluding to cannot
apply. It is reduced to mere parental pragmatics. I'll grant that for them it's
done in a spirit of hope but I think the New Testament imperatives are couched
in much more absolute terms – children are part of the Kingdom, part of the
Body of Christ. They are baptized and it's not a mere wet dedication but an understanding
that in being baptized they are part of the Church and the communion of the
people of God. That affects how they are raised.
The 'gaps' I keep reading about in the article are unfamiliar
to me and my children. We made every effort to help them understand the culture
and what is shaping how people around them think and live. The reference to Punxsutawney
Phil for instance is exactly the type of thing I mean – my kids would certainly
know something like that – a bad example perhaps as we live in Pennsylvania.
However, they've not been isolated from that kind of pop culture Americana. I
do recall years ago before I was married, I was over at a Christian home and a
group of us decided to play trivia – there were numerous teenagers and early
twenty-somethings there. I hadn't been converted until I was around twenty-one
and spent my teenage years living like a pagan. The trivia game was awkward
because I knew all the movies and music, but more than that, even a lot of the
other stuff about products, politics, and the like. These homeschooled kids
were kind of dull – just totally disengaged and hadn't even heard of most of
this stuff. They seemed innocent and made me feel rather worldly – in a bad
sort of way. I've reflected on this and other similar episodes over the years.
I'm not saying that I was right to be the man of the world (so to speak) but
there was something missing, something lacking in their character development.
Don't misunderstand me, it's not a question of whether or not they've watched
an Indiana Jones movie or could recognize a Beatles song on the radio. It's
more than that. We needn't be afraid. Innocence is laudable but don't confuse
it with just plain ignorance – and one that will suffer unnecessarily and be at
a great disadvantage when forced to interact with the world. I would rather my
children proceed with understanding, a quiet confidence, even a type of mastery
then just a kind of dullness or a kind of misguided piety that confuses unsophisticated
or even yokel-like qualities with godliness. This can so easily be misunderstood.
Some will grasp what I'm saying – others are likely to be offended.
In the grand scheme of things it doesn't matter if my
Christian children know who Archie Bunker or Lucille Ball are, of if they've
ever watched Wheel of Fortune, or know about Motown. It doesn't matter but as
people who have to live out in the world, they are interacting not only with
people who have imbibed this stuff, it shapes how they think. There's a fine
line and a real danger in just letting them swim in the world. We always have
talked about where these things come from, what ideas shape them, the good and
the bad of what's being said or expressed. Nothing is partaken of in a purely
neutral manner and anything can be abused. And yes, some things must be
rejected outright, and they know what those things are without having to ask.
There's also a danger that they can become Pharisees and judge and despise
everyone because they think they know better. But is that more likely when they
know a little something about it or when they don't and instead just dismiss
all of it in one fell Pharisaical swoop?
Aren't all these cultural pursuits and attention just a waste
of time? It quickly can be, I will grant but they have to live in this world
and yet not be of it. That's not easy and time and again I see this done badly.
For all the socialisation arguments made in defense of public school I see a
lot of dysfunctional public school kids that can barely carry on a conversation
– let alone do things for themselves. And yet I've also see a lot of
homeschooled kids that have been ill-prepared to deal with the real world and
it engenders bitterness and as seen in the article, can result in apostasy.
Sometimes, leave the song playing and talk about it. Point out the book in the
book store that everyone is talking about and explain it to them.
But the Bealls are wrong – public school is indoctrinating.
Indoctrination is bigger than just an educational curriculum. The public school
continues its downgrade but there are strong values being conveyed. I will grant
that much of what takes place in the homeschooling community is not fostering
critical thinking. I'm accused of believing in baptismal and presumptive
regeneration and having a low view of the gospel for not demanding a conversion
experience from children raised in a Christian home. What I do say though is
that children must own the faith for themselves – probably more of a process
than necessarily a one-time event. For all the emphasis placed on experience in
Evangelical quarters and for all the talk of Christian worldview it's clear
that for many of these kids their education is about a programme of outlines
and flowcharts that are to be memorized. They don't 'own' the faith and there
isn't much there to own, and so it can quickly collapse. Regeneration isn't
just a one-time experience when you're twelve or something. A one-time event
(not always discernible apart from baptism) but also a process known as
sanctification, it's life-long – a new life in possession of heavenly vitality
and as such generates a spirit of curiosity and inquiry that ranges far beyond
the mere strictures of some curriculum or list-based understanding of life and
ethics.