September 2007 Archives

We are hoping to announce an addition to our family in the next few months, but not in what for us has been the usual way thus far (though that is not so remote a possibility, either). God has opened some doors recently (we think) for us to adopt a sibling group, and we are taking the first step through those doors tomorrow. A gentleman (I hope) from the Illinois DCFS (Department of Child and Family Services) will be stopping by to conduct the first phase of our home study. It is the first official step toward becoming adoptive parents (or foster parents, but foster parenting isn't much of an option for us -- 6 kids is the legal limit and we're too close to it).

If you think of us, please keep us in prayer as we step out into this new adventure. Thanks!

A friend of mine recently gave me a copy of a sermon preached by a man named Dr. Voddie Baucham. Dr. Baucham gave this sermon at a pastors' conference for the Southern Baptist Church of Texas. He was called on to fill in for Tim LaHaye, who became ill and was unable to keep his commitment. Dr. Baucham filled in admirably, in my mind -- not the least because the words he spoke would never have come out of Tim LaHaye's mouth.

Here's my summary of Dr. Baucham's sermon, "The Centrality of the Home." The source text is Ephesians 6:1-4 (though he went back to Ephesians 5:15 in the sermon).

The SBC (and the church in general) is NOT reaching the current generation. Somewhere between 75 and 88% of young people (I'm not clear on whether this is for all churched young people in the U.S., or only those in the SBC) leave the church by the end of their freshmen year in college.

This is in spite (or, as he argues, because of) the rise of youth ministry in the church (specifically the SBC) over the past 30 years.

The average churched family has two children. Connect the two facts and we can conclude it takes two churched families in this generation to create one churched person in the next generation.

Dr. Baucham argues that we are birth controlling the church to death. He uses very strong language in his sermon and doesn't hold back any ammunition (remember, he is speaking to SBC pastors, about 1000 of them). He is especially crtiical of the church culture that looks down on families with more than 2 or 3 children.

Dr. Baucham eventually returns to the first issue, which is that despite the amount of energy the church has put into reaching its children, they are leaving at a rate of (at the low end) 75%. Or, as he argues, they are leaving because of the way the church has usurped the parents' authority to discple children.

Dr. Baucham derives from Eph. 6:1-4 that fathers are to be the primary disciplers of their children -- not the church. (If it's not obvious, you won't find much criticism of Dr. Baucham's exposition in this space.) He argues that because the church has told parents for the last 30 years that discipleship is the church's job, the church has made its own bed (children don't stick around) and it has to lie in it -- or change, if it likes not what it has wrought.

As he argues, this does not mean we should fire all youth pastors. But it does mean we should take a hard look at youth ministry and, if it does not place the parents first, change it. (End of my summary, start of my own comments).

I am with Dr. Baucham all the way. I do not believe that it is the church's job to raise my children in the nurture and admonition of the Lord (as I alluded to a few posts back). We took our children out of Sunday school for practical, secular reasons; they will never go back again because the Bible clearly states it is our job to teach our children, not the SS teacher's (no matter how well meaning he or she may be).

If you are or ever have been a SS teacher, this does not make you an evil person. I do not condemn you. Sunday school's origins were to teach unchurched children; but as it evolved (and fathers increasingly abdicated their position in the home as leaders of their families and teachers of their children), more and more it became a replacement for biblical parenting, until it became what it is today: an usurpation of the believing parents' place in their child's life.

If you disagree with me, find in Scripture where it says it is the church's responsibility to teach children to fear God and keep His commandments. Find in Scripture where the church is commanded to raise up children in the nurture and admonition of the Lord. While you're looking, notice how these commandments are given to fathers, not the church. If a father is too busy doing church stuff to teach his own children, he is a failure. If a father is too ignorant of the Bible and too lazy to be a disciple of Christ, such that he is incapable of teaching his own children the Scriptures and discipling them himself, he has failed. And the church should not enable his laziness.

Okay, I've offended enough people for one post. But at least, if you're angry, please don't be angry about what I haven't written. I have not asserted that the church has *no* place in the raising and discipleship of children; only that it is not intended to be primarily responsible for these tasks. Thank-you, and have a happy Sunday!

It's hard to believe, but the Phillies are going to the playoffs this year for the first time since their defeat in the 1993 World Series. Needless to say, I'm excited. Even better? My 2nd favorite team, the Chubs Cubs made it in as well. So I have a 50% chance of having a team I will enjoy rooting for make it to the World Series. That is all.

I keep forgetting to post this. . .you know how the Medieval Roman Catholic practice of selling indulgences (in a nutshell: you give us money, we give you a free pass to Heaven) was one of the triggers of the Protestant Reformation? Well, they're at it again. . .in reverse. Nice.

I'm not a big fan of buying carbon offsets. I really do see it as a modern-day equivalent of buying indulgences. Don't want to drive a smaller car? Buy a carbon offset and feel good about that Hummer. Yeah, right.

Lest the previous post was too preachy or sounded too judgemental, allow me to share why we started keeping our children with us during the church service.

When our now-3yo was about a year old, he had some serious security issues. We couldn't leave him alone anywhere. Concurrently we were potty training our two oldest children (now 5 and 6 years old). Our now-5yo had mastered staying dry 6.5 days a week, but always had accidents on Sunday morning. The now-3yo screamed incessantly when we tried to leave him in the nursery. And our now-6yo came out of Sunday School with both aggressive behavior and mean language (three cheers for socialization!) in his wake. It made for very unpleasant times on Sunday mornings.

So, we took the plunge and started keeping our children with us. Yes, it took some time for us to adjust. Yes, it is harder for us to focus on the service and to give our attention to the sermon and lose ourselves in worship. Nonetheless, our two youngest children have never known a time when they weren't fully a part of the Sunday service.

And for everything that we may have lost in terms of personal spiritual nourishment because we have been distracted while we train our children to be a part of communal worship, we have gained so much more. As I noted in the previous post, my 6yo is now taking sermon notes -- something I have not been able to do these past 3+ years since we started keeping him and the others with us -- and it brings me great joy. My 5yo sings heartily the hymns that have been sung for generations, fully participating in prayerful worship of our Father; as does our 3yo, who is still learning how to posture himself reverently in the physical manifestation of a spiritual discipline. And it brings tears to my eyes and adds untold joy to my own personal worship to see my 2yo raising his hands to our Maker and bowing his head to our Lord in imitations of my own actions as we sing praise and offer thanks communally on Sunday mornings.

I know that there are many reasons why people do things differently than we do, and I respect and honor the decisions that other fathers make for their families. And while we arrived where we are due to the specific circumstances I noted above, I believe that God used those circumstances to shape our family the way He intends. I hope our story is encouraging and beneficial to anyone who is where we were. May God bless your family as He grows you and teaches you to raise any children He may bless you with in His nurture and admonition.

I appreciated Irate Nate's recent post, "a child's place". It is encouraging to read well-written explanations of the reasons why we do things the way we do; the ones I am able to provide are often inadequate, so it is good to find like-minded believers who are up to the task.

I was reflecting briefly this morning during the service on the benefits to our children of staying with us in the service rather then sending them to their own separate time. I don't doubt the sincerity of my fellow believers who advocate a separate children's church; neither do I doubt its efficacy at reaching its desired goal, whatever such may be.

But when I look at my 6yo and see him taking notes while listening to the sermon, and know how little effort it really took to get him to this point, I really question the wisdom of training children to expect a message at "their own level." What are we really trying to accomplish here? And how does children's church accomplish it? Would he really be better served if he were singing a kids' song and participating in a kindergarten-level activity somewhere in another part of the building, rather than learning to be attentive to the Word preached clearly and accurately, without euphemism or metaphor or some other trick intending to make it more understandable but which might distort it, however innocently? (Whew, that was a run-on if I've ever written one!)

I think the greater issue is that for many children -- even children of believers -- Sunday is the only day they will hear the Word. They aren't learning verses through the week, reading through the Bible with their families, asking questions about and getting answers from God's Scriptures as part of their daily routine. And if I'm right about this, then children's church is not the answer.

It's been 3 weeks now, but I still want to post more about the kids' baptisms. We really appreciated the way in which our church imbued the event with significance and celebration. Bringing our little children before the Lord and acknowledging their portion in the inheritance of the Lord before our community of believers brought us great joy.

Since I can't seem to write much without waxing poetic (or sappy, to be honest), I'll finish by sharing with you the life verses chosen for each child:

For the 6yo: "And he will go on before the Lord, in the spirit and power of Elijah, to turn the hearts of the fathers to their children and the disobedient to the the wisdom of the righteous -- to make ready a people prepared for the Lord." (Luke 1:17)

For the 5yo: "Surely God is my salvation; I will trust and not be afraid. The Lord, the Lord, is my strength and my song; He has become my salvation." (Isaiah 12:2)

For the 3yo: "Give thanks to the Lord, call on His name; make known among the nations what He has done, and proclaim that His name is exalted." (Isaiah 12:4b)

For the 2yo: "And we know that in all things God works for the good of those who love Him, who have been called according to His purpose." (Romans 8:28)

And for the 9mo: "Do not be afraid, Abram. I am your Shield, your very great Reward." (Gen 15:1b)

I've read it.

It's great if people think they can live happier lives by following Randian ethics. But I disagree with the premise that it is better to be rational than irrational, especially when the difference between the two is often judged by the outcome of one's actions or decisions -- from our finite points of view.

For instance, Jesus' plan to be killed isn't in the least rational if you don't already know His Father would bring Him back to life.

My point is, rational self-interest is a flawed worldview. More than that, my personal opinion is, it is incompatible with the Christian worldview. The Christian ethic of personal sacrifice and humility smacks in the face of the Randian self-promotion and pride.

I understand the Randian belief in self-interest. I agree in principle with those who decry government involvement in economics. Where I diverge with Randian libertarians is the point at which people are judged by their economic output. I also disagree that our country depends on an educated elite to keep it running. But it's getting late.

I've been reading the books of Kings and Chronicles lately. My plan is to finish reading my NASB translation of the OT (got the NT covered) and then purchase an ESV Bible. But that's not the point of this post.

In reflecting on the kings of Israel, I notice two kinds of leadership. There is the leadership that the kings had over their people, and then there is the leadership that the kings had over their sons. Now, there were some kings who were good leaders, and who honored God and followed his laws; and with this type of king, Israel and Judah prospered.

Then there were kings who were good leaders, but who honored only themselves and rejected or neglected God's commandments. With this type of king, Israel and Judah plunged into apostasy and suffered.

There were also kings who honored God and desired that the people would keep His law and follow His ordinances, but they were poor leaders and the people remained apostate.

Finally, there were kings who were both apostate themselves and also inept leaders. These did not last long -- they were usually assassinated.

But pretty much without fail, from David to Zedekiah, from Jeroboam to Hoshea, the kings of Judah and of Israel failed to train up their sons both to honor God and to be good leaders. Which just goes to show you how difficult it is.

As the father of four sons so far, I feel the weight of the task before me. God's grace is my only hope!

Most people, when they think of families with small children, assume that we must go through a lot of milk. Actually, we don't. Our oldest child is lactose intolerant, and we switched him to rice milk early on. Since he's absolutely brilliant and has no noticeable issues it would seem that it has not affected his brain development thus far. But I digress.

So anyway, we don't really drink a lot of milk here. Actually, we haven't had any milk in the house for most of the summer. But recently Jamie has been craving milk, so she bought some from Oberweis Dairy. It is very tasty, and we decided we needed some cookies to go with it. Thus the previous post.

Yes, please. Surprisingly enough, monster cookies (you know, with M&M's instead of or in addition to chocolate chips) are quite tasty when they are made with Succanat and whole wheat flour substituted for sugar and refined bleached white flour. They have a rougher texture but it grows on you, and the flavor is richer.

Good, and not as bad for you. Mmmm.

. . .you do realize that if you subscribe to cable or satellite TV, or to XM or Sirius radio, that you are paying someone to advertise to you -- don't you?

Just something I was thinking about while I was listening to ESPN radio while on the road today and wondering whether or not it might not be worth it to have XM radio. . .for about 3 seconds until I realized I don't want to pay to be an advertisee. Never again!

But of course, you may make a different choice.

My parents came to town for the weekend. Dad left this morning, but Mom will be here for the rest of the week.

We went to a Cardinals game on Saturday night -- on my own dime, for the first time ever -- and had a nice time. The weather is turning beautiful here in St. Louis. Of course, we didn't all go -- just my Dad and I and the oldest two children.

All of the kids were baptized on Sunday. I'll have to write a special post about that. It was a very special occasion and we were blessed by the service.

Today we'll work around the house and then back to work for a short week. Business is picking up at the mayonnaise factory.

'Tis all for now. Have a happy Labor Day!