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:
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.
<a href=”http://technorati.com/tag/no+greater+joy” rel=”tag”>no greater joy</a>, <a href=”http://technorati.com/tag/obedience” rel=”tag”>obedience</a>, <a href=”http://technorati.com/tag/reason” rel=”tag”>reason</a>, <a href=”http://technorati.com/tag/parenting” rel=”tag”>parenting</a>, <a href=”http://technorati.com/tag/michael+Pearl” rel=”tag”>Michael Pearl</a>, <a href=”http://technorati.com/tag/children” rel=”tag”>children</a>
-
I wanted to pop in and say Thank you.
vgarr -
Thank you for your kind words, IFBPreachersWife…friends? Of course. It takes a LOT to get me rattled. I used to debate in the evolution vs. creation forums and got called all sorts of nasty names. I usually only find that kind of thing amusing. You said nothing that I find offensive to me or anyone else. Disagreeing with me has never caused me to think less of anyone. There are good principles in the materials from NGJ, and I do not doubt that many a fine Christian will find much good in it. Most of us are constrained by our own reason and, if we are filled with the Holy Spirit, we should have a spirit of temperance and moderation. I’ll give you a bit of background on me, and you might understand why I cannot drop this particular issue so easily, and why I would much prefer it if these materials were not presented in such a way that really makes the reader feel like it is the only scriptural way to parent. And why I feel that they should set out a clear maximum number of swats rather than a minimum with a rather vague, “until he gives over his will.”
I used to work in a group home with abused and abandoned teenagers (ages 12-19). I moved from there into family support work with foster families through the same agency (Christian). My heart aches for the position these children are in…the throw aways of society. Little Sean was one of them. I have great respect for the family for having had the heart to take him and others in and adopt them. Adoption is such a beautiful thing…an act of the deepest love and such a wonderful expression of our own salvation through Christ.
But the family got some bad advice. I know that the Pearls did not advocate tying that boy with the blanket. And I know they are careful to point out that the discipline should not cause damage to the tissue, which it obviously did with the bruises that covered the surviving children. In a normal situation, I would have only thought the discipline measures advocated in these materials were excessive (I am not necessarily against corporal punishment, but it is a long way from scripture’s use of the rod to saying that you should strike the child a minimum of ten times). Sorry, beginning to distract myself.
In Sean’s case, he never should have been spanked. With anything, by anybody. Nor should his adoptive siblings. These children suffer terribly at the hands of their biological parents and at the hands of the state. Removal from the home alone is a traumatic offense against the child…sometimes necessary, but we cannot discount what a horror it is in the eyes of a child, no matter what loving situation he comes into. Now, if you go back to the beginning of the Pearls’ material that is online, you will find that it says something about discipline being ineffective if the relationship does not come first. They also line out some similar ideas in an article written in response to someone who has just gotten her children back.
These situations and clarifications need to be made more clear and brought more to the forefront. Striking a child with an attachment disorder will not have the same effect as it would if you were to spank your child or I were to spank mine. He will view it as a continuation of the abuse, not loving correction. The emphasis on the submission of the child is troubling to me, especially in these circumstances. The child with a reactive attachment disorder will not submit. He has the capacity to laugh at you until his death.
Have you seen “Good Will Hunting?” The main character is an excellent example of this…in fact, we used clips from it in training exercises for foster families because it so accurately describes these kids. At one point, he describes the abuse from his step-father. He was given a cohice between a belt, something else, and a wrench. He chose the wrench…
No child in these circumstances should ever be swatted with anything. It is counter-productive, and the parent will get exasperated. In these situations, there cannot be an emphasis on winning, or the child will win every time. It seems to the parent that they are ignoring the ever growing consequences, but the motivations are different…the parent gets extremely angry because of the defiance, and the child scores a victory in his little mind, despite the consequence. The parent has to be able to step away, recognize that he or she cannot control the child, recognize that the child makes his own choices and diffuse the power play.
In the group home, we used point cards. The children earned positive and negative points that went toward earning their privileges for the day. People would compliment the boys’ behavior…they were amazed at their manners when they visited. And these were young men with a history of theft, drug abuse, lying, gang related behavior, fighting, rape and even indiscriminate s** acts with animals and children. Spanking, with anything, is not the only scriptural alternative. The basics of the program are lined out in Common Sense Parenting…it is excellent and universally applicable. Whether your child is “normal” or suffers from these less known psychological disorders.
I’d prefer if they began with the relationship with the Lord, but they are purposefully secular. It is put out by Boy’s Town to help train struggling parents across the nation so that their children do not end upo in state custody…or so that they can get them back. It was designed for crisis situations, such as Sean’s, but all the parents I have worked with have stated how much doing this with the foster children has improved their parenting of their biological children.
-
I hope you didn’t misunderstand *me*. I have no intention of ‘breaking fellowship’ nor do I think that I’ll discount anything you have to say because of your views. I think I went from replying to your post to my own little soapbox based on what has been going on elsewhere. I’m sorry. That is not what I meant. I *do* understand what you’re saying and I don’t think you’re wrong. I think you just choose to parent differently than I do and as long as you’re following the Lord’s leading, than you’re doing it exactly right
It’s like those that follow attachment parenting vs those that choose to schedule or other such things that women like argue about. Many of them don’t have a right or wrong – just a different viewpoint. When I said that about the outright lies – I specifically meant in reference to using “plumbers pipe” – they purposely use that term simply to conjure up an image of this huge metal pipe being used to beat in the head of a child – or at least, that is the image I get. In truth “plumbers line” is nothing more than material that looks like a gluestick – no larger in diameter, hollow and flexible. Since I think most would agree that hands are for loving not for spanking, then something must be used. Some people use belts or wooden spoons. I don’t personally like either. Anyway, I digress…but that is what specifically was in my mind when I said that.
Anyhow, I’m sorry to go on and on. And I’m sorry that I went from posting a comment to ranting about things that had nothing to do with what you wrote. I honestly didn’t mean to. Friends?
-
Thank you for your comments, IFBPreacher’sWife. I appreciate that you did not just “go on.” Too many people are willing to close their eyes to opposing viewpoints without ever considering them for themselves. I’m glad you have found the materials useful to you. Yes, there are many good principles in the materials, which I have done my best to point out. That said, some thoughts of my own:
I don’t think that we can assume what the Pearls are trying to say any more than we can assume what God is trying to say in His Word. We only have what is written.
I disagree with the basic notion of “conditioning,” and that is pretty central to the Pearls’ idea of discipline. Conditioning is when you take a previously unrelated stimulus and make it related in the mind of an animal or child. Pavlov did it with ringing a bell…he rang a bell and then fed his dog. Soon, the dog began to salivate at the ringing of a bell, even with no presence of food. It was a conditioned response…and automatic. The same works with a child…what the Pearls line out is to lay out the object and wait. Everytime the child reaches for it, you swat them (or make a loud noise) to make the association between that object and pain (or the loud noise). I’m sure it works. I do not contest that. I contest that it is the best way to teach a child.
When I say they go from the negative, I think there might have been a misunderstanding as I was not referring to the parent-child relationship at the point. What I am referring to is teaching and practicing positive behaviors rather than conditioning children to associate certain objects with pain…The definitions of the words are important. It is not, “training/disciplining/teaching/whatever you want to call it.” When I say “training,” I mean something very different from what the Pearls mean. They speak of it as conditioning, taking the time to lay out things for your child to touch and then you swat them for it until they get it…When I speak of training, I speak of taking the time to teach expected behaviors through modeling, instruction and practice. Negative consequences come after the proper behavior has been modeled, instructed and practiced. My 10 month old pulls her hand away when I say no, and she has never been struck.
I can kind of see what you are talking about with the article. Perhaps I’ve just missed it, but I don’t see where there were any “outright lies.” Perhaps some things were taken out of context, but everything printed I’ve found in NGJ’s website.
And my daughter is a blessing to me as well…and I’ve never seen a need to condition her or strike her in the means lined out in these materials.
I don’t blame the authors for the death of Sean. That isn’t what my entry is about. In fact, I did not even mention it. My blog in general has more to do with comparing the foundational principles of scriptrue to the foundational principles of the world. One of those principles employed by the world to conform the children to it is that of conditioning. That is why I have gravitated to that aspect in this particular discussion.
And I don’t support the boycott, or I wouldn’t be blogging here.
Feel free to return as much as you like. I’m sorry that my position is enough to discount all I have to say. This isn’t a harping point of mine, by any means. It seems an odd thing to break fellowship over…That’s what leaves me saddened…the feeling that if I have a disagreement on this one issue regarding one ministry, many will never speak with me again. We should be bound by the blood of Christ, not our discipline choices.
-
You know, I *think* I hear what you're saying but I don't necessarily agree with the thought process that the Pearls teach from the negative. They *assume* the positive loving relationship of a parent and child already exists and move from there to cover the "hows" of training. No one can teach a parent how to have a right relationship with their children because unless they have a right relationship with the Lord, no other relationship will be right.
The entire conflict makes me immensely sad. I read TTUAC probably 10 times before we ever had children. What has always impressed me is their no nonsense approach to putting into right perspective what the Bible says about child training. Because of their teachings, I learned to not discipline in anger but rather to train for correct behavior early. I could probably count on one hand the # of times my 8 yo has been spanked in the past year. She's such a blessing to me!
The entire point of putting an object w/i a childs reach and teaching them not to touch it goes all the way back to the garden of Eden. God himself did that to Adam & Eve with the tree of the knowledge of good and evil. Of course, his instructions were not to eat of it but he could have just as easily not put the tree in the garden at all to avoid temptation.
I'm not trying to argue with you by any means. I just am so completely angry (to be honest) about all the ignorance that is abounding with regards to that child's death. The news article itself contained outright LIES and people run with it. I know that is not what you're doing but I will admit when I saw something about the Pearls on your blog, I was tempted to keep going w/o reading.
TTUAC is a book aimed at helping parents in training/disciplining/teaching/whatever you want to call it, their children. Like anything else, you bathe your decision in prayer, take whatever you feel is good, leave whatever you feel is bad and move on. You don't blame the authors because a person lacked such self-control and love for their own child that they could beat him to death and call it discipline. That is nothing more than a cop-out.
A boycott, while its' a persons right to do, is just a stupid waste of time. Why not boycott the big long distance companies, McD and Disney for promoting homosexuality? Or … I don't know, my brain is tired…but any # of things that are truly wicked, sinful or even illegal and stop making excuses for a dimented, out of control parent wanting to get off the hook by saying "the book made me do it". PUH-LEEZE.
Sorry to hijack
Edited by IFBPreachersWife on Apr. 1, 2006 at 1:04 PM
-
I respect your position. And I hope that HSB doesn’t choose to delete you, as they have so many others who have expressed opinions similar to yours. It’s sad when people can’t voice their opinion, especially when done as nicely has you have. Good luck.
http://intothesunrise.blogspot.com (you can read the post there, about HSB deleting anyone not supportive of the Pearls and their “ministry”)
-
Hey, Doc. I was wondering whether you would pop in seeing as my tags seem to be your calling card : ) You are welcome to add your thoughts any time, although we obviously share a very different worldview. A question: You say your boycott is about raising awareness. I have no issue with that…and it is probably the most effective means for you to do so. For me, however, it would not. I am established in this community and if I left, I doubt very many would follow.
That is about as much as I care to say at the moment, but feel free to join our little conversation.
-
nsremom asks “who believes in that?”
The owner of this website not only believes in what the Pearl’s publish, she welcomes advertising from them. The owners of this website also publish The Old Schoolhouse magazine, and their largest advertiser is “No Greater Joy” ministries. The Pearls are featured guest writers for The Old Schoolhouse magazine.
The Pearls market exclusively to Christians, and heavily to Christian homeschoolers, publishing ads and articles in homeschool mags and attending all major homeschool conventions and conferences. Because of their heavy emphasis on scripture, many Christians do not question the validity of their methods.
By continueing to blog here at homeschoolblogger, you’re all supporting the Pearls and their ministry of child abuse.
-
Thank you, Jen. And feel free to correct anything that you see as a logical or scriptural fallacy. As one of my online discussion partners is fond of saying, “steel sharpens steel.” Any time discussion and disagreement drives us to search scripture, we cannot help but gain, regardless of whether we change our minds, the other side changes theirs or all “agree to disagree.” The central message of the gospel is clear: “This is a faithful saying, and worthy of all acceptation, that Christ Jesus came into the world to save sinners; of whom I am chief.” 1Ti 1:15
-
hello my friend, i just wanted to let you know how much I appreciate the tone and the spirit this post was written in. I love having friends like you who are willing to voice differences. I love debate, but not at the sacrifice of friendships with brothers and sisters in the Lord. I am glad that I am allowed to have a different opinion and that it does not affect the unity that we should have in Christ. While I disagree with some of your premises and conclusions, this entry has blessed me because it keeps the door of fellowship open and ideas can be shared and examined in a peacable atmosphere.
love jen -
Thank you for your kind words. When I logged into my email and saw I had 23 messages, I closed my eyes and prayed. I have seen the hateful comments that others have posted against those who question these teachings and I by nature do not like that sort of conflict. I was never so thankful for spam as I discovered I had only three friendly comments. I don’t mind disagreement and actually love debate, but I do not like it when it is made personal. We’ll see how it goes as I continue…
By the way, I have seen some hateful thigs posted against this ministry, as well, and is why I do not feel I can identify with those heading up the boycott against HSB. As a Christian, I feel the first step is discussion. Breaking fellowship is serious…
-
Wonderful post, Dana, thank you for this.
-
This whole “pearl” thing has me confused. I really liked your logical and sound post. I heartily disagree with spanking a child 10 times, which is where your link took me. I’m confused as to who could agree with that? No Christian homeschooler I know.
Keep posting from your heart.
-
Thank you for posting this! I agree with you and appreciate your insight.
Blessings ~ Diane
Comments are now closed.
gottsegnet
14 comments