- RSS FeedSubscribe
- « Previous PostFree Stuff Fridays
- Next Post »Preaching the Gospel to Yourself
A Humble but Flawed Servant
- 07/25/09
- 66
As George Whitefield sailed from his native England to Georgia where he was to be a missionary, he ministered to those on board the ship. Here is an excerpt from his journal where he discusses a ministry encounter with a particularly willful child:
Had a good instance of the benefit of breaking children's wills betimes. Last night, going between decks (as I do every night) to visit the sick and to examine my people, I asked one of the women to bid her little boy say his prayers. She answered his elder sister would, but she could not make him. Upon this I bid the child kneel down before me, but he would not till I took hold of his two feet and forced him down. I then bid him say the Lord's prayer (being informed by his mother he could say it if he would), but he obstinately refused, till at last, after I had given him several blows, he said his prayer as well as could be expected and I gave him some figs for a reward.
Commenting on this, Arnold Dallimore says (quite rightly) "this action seems both foolish and cruel by today's standards and it is not in any attempt to excuse it that we notice that it was in keeping with the customs of those times. ... We must deplore both the custom [of attempting to conquer a child's will] and Whitefield's action on the basis of it."
This brief encounter aside, Whitefield's period of ministry upon the boat is remarkable and this brief journey was used by God to call many to Himself through His humble but flawed servant.
I am a follower of Jesus Christ, a husband to Aileen and a father to three young children. I write books and blogs for fun while doing web design and consulting for a living. I worship and serve at 
Published in 2008, this book
This is a guide that calls men,
This review of the bestselling
New to the site? You can get
Comments (66)
We should not deplore how Whitefield behaved. He did the right thing, as exemplified by the fig reward. Boys and young men do not learn life lessons without emotional, physical, or mental pain.
Once again we are reminded why we need always look to Christ alone and point others to Him , not anyone ones testimony or even their life . Even though Whitefield was an amazing servant of Christ , this is an example of why we are not the gospel. He was a man of his times and supported slavery, so this type of of heavy handed discipline from him is not surprising . While on this side of heaven we will be as Luther clearly stated , sinners and saints simultaneous.Still an amazing preacher , but as you observed Tim,flawed like we all are.
It is too easy to judge behaviors from other times and cultures through the lens of our own times--but what would Whitefield say of how we deal with children? I think this story doesn't illustrate much of a flaw, in Whitefield; in fact, it seems like a perfectly reasonable way to deal with a rebellious young boy.
"We must deplore both the custom [of attempting to conquer a child’s will]"
Huh? We do that all the time.
At least we do in the South. The rest of y'all are on your own.
Little boys left unchallenged become evil men with no regard to the law. My humble opinion. Obviously Whitefield forgot to tell the boy WHY he ought to pray his prayers, but let us learn a lesson then.
Little boys left unchallenged become evil men with no regard to the law. My humble opinion. Obviously Whitefield forgot to tell the boy WHY he ought to pray his prayers, but let us learn a lesson then.
as a father of six boys and a firm believer in discipline (especially to drive out folly), I would commend brother Challies for pointing out that this was WRONG. A child YES must learn to SUBMIT, but a child should not be FORCED to do such a thing as pray. Perhaps an extreme case of covenant theology might lead someone to think this would be beneficial, but it would only serve to 'PROVOKE' a child. Such a means of grace forced upon a child would only confuse them. I would have liked to see Whitefield speak to the mother in quiet and remind her not to lay such a burden upon her child even though she may need to discipline him ONCE due to the child's refusal to obey and then to make it known that such a thing is no longer required.A parent must firmly uphold the authority they have been given by God yet at the same time learn what doesn't need to become a disciplinary case.REG, if I remember correctly Whitefield become unpopular in the South because he DIDN'T support slavery (at least it's abuses) in the same light the Apostle Paul didn't.
If we should someday have a chance to talk with this child, that will settle the question of merit. The value of discipline isn't likely to be apparent at the time of administration.
It is true that Whitefield did have a concern for slaves and did advocate better treatment and even education them , he failed as many of his day to take the next step and was influenced more by politics and economics on this matter than God's word. He was influential in getting slavery legal in Georgia in the late 1740's. This move was very pragmatic in that it helped support economically his orphanage . But this was typical of the day and he was in no way unique among other clergy or denominations . No Christian great is without his own flaws and unfortunately this was one of Whitefield's. But I deeply respect and admire him and love his sermons . God still uses sinners to bring about his kingdom .
For all of Whitefield's failings (of which I am aware of none, I'm just assuming that being a man he had lot's of 'em) surely this wasn't one of them.The only issue I would have here is that the child's father should have been the one involved, but as long as Scripture tells us to use the rod to drive foolishness from the heart of a child and reminds us that "if you beat him he shall not die" but that rather his soul would be saved because of it, how can we fault him for what he did there?
Children are sinners and need their wills to be broken and brought into submission. Not all children need what this little gaffer did in order to say his prayers, but they all need it sooner or later.
By Shane: "but what would Whitefield say of how we deal with children?"
Agreed. He is accused of being tainted by his culture, yet I have to believe he was convinced he was acting biblically. He even records the event without hesitation.
Perhaps if it were possible for us to step back far enough from the present, we'd see that what we now consider biblical, is more tainted by culture than Whitefield was.
Reg,What I meant was perhaps it wasn't a flaw since the apostles themselves did not try to abolish slavery, rather they gave guidelines to masters and to slaves. The slave trade was in fact the bigger problem of which I think many were pretty ignorant of the details (perhaps willfully), interesting that Spurgeon refused to come here for this reason.
As regards the 'custom' of breaking a child's will, this seems to ONLY be shocking to our time. Wisdom is justified by it's children and in a literal sense we (the character and maturity) haven't produced much fruit. That's why it's so hilarious to hear so much about children in sports and all the so-called character building it does when in reality sports is a weak substitute for godly discipline (and those most involved in sports don't shine as role models). It would be well for us to turn to the past to seek advice in this area of common failure. Praise God for men like Pastor Voddie Baucham and Albert Martin (to name a few)who give scripturally balanced treatments of such matters.
Whitefield did what my grandfather would have done. My father would have wanted to do it. And I can't imagine that being done to my son. Times they are a'changin'. The boy was either drawn to Christ or pushed away in that moment, but how are we to know. And what were the "blows" anyway? And as for slavery, what is it today that we consent to in our culture that 150 years from now Christians and non-Christians alike will find deplorable? Abortion? Poverty? Gluttony? Waste? Public education? Debt? That snapshot of Whitefield's life speaks much to our own hang-ups and excesses.
Being a history buff I realize that men in all ages are to a degree or another slaves to their environment . Whitefield was and is a great preacher . The issue of slavery is still a hard pill to swallow because it was something that other Godly men like Spurgeon and William Wilberforce openly condemned and argued very forcefully from scripture that the slave trade that was being practiced fall far outside biblical guidelines. Just like today as people starve to death , abortion mills continue we choice not to see the ugliness , probably like many did back in those days , but that does not excuse it. The last point I would like to make is what kind of blows for example did he inflict . Who knows, but beatings were common . My grandfather told me stories of the lashings he had and he vowed that when he had kids , the only discipline he would administer would be with a open hand on the back side. Plus he felt if you left a mark it was abuse . I agree . Times have changed not for the better perhaps as some would say , but surely the abuses of the past cannot be justified using scripture to break a child's will by violence and force. Discipline is needed , I punished my boys but not to break them and blindly submit. Plus we have a over glamorized view of the past . Sin has and will always be part of any generation , it just takes on different strains at times. For the record I think we could use more preachers like Whitefield . I still admire the man , the sinner , the saint in Christ.
It boggles the mind that people are giving Whitfield a virtual high five for something that seems pretty plainly out of line.
First, the whole things reeks of imperiousness. Visiting "my people". Then he asks a woman to tell her son to say his prayers. What business is it of Whitfield's? It's not his kid. But then he goes the extra mile and physically disciplines another person's child. Oh, and to what end? So he'll do some rote recitation.
I'm just imagining how I'd react if, say, my wife were on a mission trip with a group of folks from our church. Along with them on the trip is a visiting pastor of some renown. He asks my wife to have my son say his prayers. She complains that he won't. This pastor then physically forces him to the ground and demands he recite the Lord's prayer. He refuses, and is smacked a couple of times until finally relenting. (I'm giving Whitfield the benefit of the doubt here and assuming the "blows" he recounts weren't actually something I'd consider abusive.)
Suffice it to say I would have some strong words for this guy about laying his hands on my kid.
JPH- I completely agree with you . If someone had done that to my child , we would have words.
From Sussana Wesley's report on how she raised her children found in John Wesley Journals. I'm sure she would say this child's condition started with his mothers indulgent attitude.
Conquer the Child’s Will”“In order to form the minds of children, the first thing to be done is to conquer their will and bring them to an obedient temper. To inform the understanding is a work of time and must with children proceed by slow degrees as they are able to bear it: but the subjecting the will is a thing which must be done at once; and the sooner the better. For by neglecting timely correction, they will contract a stubbornness and obstinacy which is hardly ever after conquered; and never, without using such severity as would be as painful to me as to the child. In the esteem of the world they pass for kind and indulgent, whom I call cruel, parents, who permit their children to get habits which they know must be afterward broken. Nay, some are so stupidly fond as in sport to teach their children to do things which, in a while after, they have severely beaten them for doing.
“Whenever a child is corrected, it must be conquered; and this will be nor hard matter to do if it be not grown headstrong by too much indulgence. And when the will of a child is totally subdued and it is brought to revere and stand in awe of the parents, then a great many childish follies and inadvertences style="#_ftn11" name="_ftnref11">[1] may be passed by. Some should be overlooked and taken no notice of, and others mildly reproved; but no willful transgression ought ever to be forgiven children without chastisement, less or more, as the nature and circumstances of the offense require.
“I insist upon conquering the will of children betimes, because this is the only strong and rational foundation of a religious education; without which both precept and example will be ineffectual. But when this is thoroughly done, then a child is capable of being governed by the reason and piety of its parents, till its own understanding comes to maturity and the principles of religion have taken root in the mind.
“I cannot yet dismiss this subject. As self-will is the root of all sin and misery, so whatever cherishes this in children insures their after-wretchedness and irreligion; whatever checks and mortifies it promotes their future happiness and piety. This is still more evident if we further consider that religion is nothing else than the doing the will of God and not our own: that the one grand impediment to our temporal and eternal happiness being this self-will, no indulgencies of it can be trivial, no denial unprofitable. Heaven or hell depends on this alone. So that the parent who studies to subdue it in his child works together with God in the renewing and saving a soul. The parent who indulges it does the devil's work, makes religion impracticable, salvation unattainable; and does all that in him lies to damn his child, soul and body forever.
I have to agree with Julius and JPH. For all of Whitfield's honorable qualities, I think he was out of line here. That doesn't mean that the child was right. Of course children need to learn to obey their parents. But that is just the point. Whitfield was a stranger to this boy and he had no right to take over discipline.
Let me give you an example of one of my children who has refused to pray on occasion. She is 8 years old. One night, after a period of time where she was reluctant to pray at bedtime, I asked her why. She told me she was scared of God. After further discussion, I found out that our history lessons and discussions on Muslims and hell had scared her. Apparently, she was confused and felt insecure about approaching God. I was so thankful because God gave me an opportunity to minister to and teach my daughter about the kindness and goodness of God to those who know Him. We as parents need to be discerning about what's going on in our children's hearts, and not just react mechanically a lot of times assuming they are being willfully disobedient.
Man, I can't believe how many people on this blog are unwilling to state Whitefield was wrong. HE WAS WRONG, PEOPLE!!! Jeepers.
Richard - I agree he was wrong concerning slavery and even the way he dealt with this child . But as the post points out , he was a flawed saint as we all are .
Reg, absolutely right; but I guess I would call him, not a "flawed saint, " but a justified sinner, as are WE ALL. And Whitefield himself would have thought no less. As would Luther, who said the entire life of a Christian should be one of repentance. We sin because we are sinners, and remain so until our glorification.
I guess I am just amazed that some of us are so enamored with a "humble but flawed servant," that they are willing to justify a form of child abuse. God have mercy!
If pride was satan's greatest downfall, what must pride be to a child, a believer, a man or a woman left unchecked? If children are not disciplined young by those who love them, will they be disciplined later by people or a system that loves them not? I guess the real question is, what does true child discipline look like? Someone?
I haven't seen much in the way of biblical references to the matter, so here you are. Personally, I believe Whitefield did this child a great service.
Prov 13:24: "He that spareth his rod hateth his son: but he that loveth him chasteneth him betimes (diligently)."Prov 19:18: "Chasten thy son while there is hope, and let not thy soul spare for his crying."Prov 22:15: "Foolishness is bound in the heart of a child; but the rod of correction shall drive it far from him."Prov 23:13: "Withhold not correction from the child: for if thou beatest him with the rod, he shall not die."Prov 23:14: "Thou shalt beat him with the rod, and shalt deliver his soul from hell (Shoel)."Prov 29:15: "The rod and reproof give wisdom: but a child left to himself bringeth his mother to shame."
Richard- I think the term "a justified sinner" is better , totally agree.
Jason R. Kaiser - There can be be no denying that corporal punishment is biblical . But these verses have been so abused and used to justify unwarranted beatings that we must be careful in how we use them. I used corporal punishment on my boys when they were young but the number of offenses that I deemed to be needed were few and I confess at times I acted out of anger and less for the purpose of instruction , therefore violating Ephesians 6:4 about provoking your children to anger. Consistent intent in discipline is the key and agreement of both parents, so its consistent. But I have seen children who have been forced to submit and harshly treated within church by fathers who were so domineering that once the children were of age , they rebelled and as of right now I have seen none return to the faith and the respect they have for their fathers is very little. Whitefield's actions were in line with the times but that does not make them right or totally acceptable. Plus its difficult to judge the incident completely because we are not given any information concerning how the child was acting.
I don't think the question here is whether or not corporal punishment is biblical. As the passages quoted above indicate, it certainly is. Whether or not it was Whitfield's place to administer that discipline is not the main problem here, either. The real issue is whether or not one can force another to pray. It's just absurd to think that possible or right. It reminds me of one occasion when I was virtually forced to "accept Jesus." Did I recite a "prayer"? You bet I did. But, if anything, I was farther from God afterward.
I think Whitefield was quite wrong, but this doesn't decrease my respect for him. He was a godly man, and is truly giant of church history. I hope, if I'm remembered at all, it won't be for my sins, which far exceed this one episode in Whitefield's life.
It would seem to me that too many of these comments have focused on what is right in regards to the child. No one has yet mentioned what is right in regards to God. God is deserving of our prayers, our songs and our worship. And if you read the Psalms, he is deserving of that from our children and from all of the nations. The bottom line is that is RIGHT to pray to God, and it is WRONG to not pray to him. It is RIGHT to obey your parents, and it is WRONG to disobey them. This child was a) disobeying a parent (I hope everyone still agrees that this is a punishable sin); and b) dishonoring God (again - a punishable offense - for an adult, punishable by God - but for a child, punishable by God's authority in that child's life). In this instance, in the apparent absence of a father on this journey, and amidst obstinate rebellion of a child and the inability of the mother to make the child obey, this minister of God lovingly administered punishment to correct both disobedience and rebellion. And since the account is short and concise, let's give the dear man of God, sinful though he be, the benefit of the doubt that he administered the rod lovingly and with instruction with the purpose of bringing forth the desired response.
It is alarming in our day to see children in worship who are not made to sing, to revernce God and His Holy Word in the worship service and pay attention. Folks, until the glory of Almight God becomes our passion, and until we put aside the notions that it is bad to make our children do something that is contrary to their wills our of fear that it will make them hypocrites, we will never escape the spiral downward that we are currently in. If you don't believe that, then read Ken Ham's and Brit Beemer's new book "Already Gone." If God's glory was more important than our comfort (both parent and child), than maybe so many of our kids would not be leaving the Christian faith.
I will admit - it is possible that Mr. Whitefield sinned in the carrying out of this punishment. But oh how great the sin must be when the sons and daughters of believing parents are allowed to withhold due reverence from Jehovah. And before any would say, "It is not right to go through motions when the heart is not in it,' I would remind you that the majority of the time, we who are genuine Christians fail to put our heart in it. We often bring self-serving worship. We often bring the sick, the lame and the blind as our sacrifice. It is not about us. It is all about HIM !
Mike,
I agree with many of your points. On the very last though, it may be that it is next to impossible for us to put "our hearts" into God willingly at times. We are flesh and the flesh is corrupt and we struggle. I would add that it is actually necessary for the Christian to do things, whether his heart is in it or not, knowing that what he is doing is truth...be it prayer, be it praise, be it forgiveness...especially forgiveness. As someone once said, "It is better to act your way into a feeling than to feel your way into an action." Our feelings are not reliable.
Mike,God is deserving of our prayers, our songs, and our worship FREELY GIVEN. God is not honored when we beat someone into submission so they will pray to Him. Don't we sound like some of the old Catholic missionaries who forced the peoples of South America to "worship" God at the point of a sword? God is NOT glorified by that.
Renee, I whole-heartedly agree with your point.
Richard, I understand exactly what you are saying, and I am not advocating such. I was careful to point out in my comment that we have jurisdiction and authority over our kids - jurisdiction that we do NOT have over other peoples (and over our own children if they are adults and out of our house). So your example is taking my comment to extremes. I am talking about my children - the ones whom God has told me to bring up in the nurture and admonition of the Lord.
I cannot agree with the additional wording you chose. God is DESERVING of our prayers, our songs, and our worship - PERIOD. Does that mean that God is honored by it? Absolutely not . If you had stated that God is HONORED in our prayers, our songs, and our worship when FREELY GIVEN, I would agree with you 100%.
Joshua said, "As for me and MY HOUSE, we WILL serve the Lord." He did not take a poll to make sure everyone was on board. He made the statement and commitment because God was worthy. That was enough.
When I ask my children to pray or to sing or to pay attention in church, I am not trying to create little hypocrites. I explain to them what the book or Proverbs teaches - that even the plowing of the wicked is sin. But God is God - and he is deserving of their praise.
Would you require your kids to share their toys ONLY if they could so FREELY? Would you ask them to take the garbage to the road ONLY if they were so INCLINED? Would you require them to honor and respect you ONLY if such honor and respect can be FREELY GIVEN? Would you not require them to obey no matter their heart attitude? Would you not point out that thoght they obeyed outwardly, they did not obey inwardly? Would you not be requiring outward conformity of which you were deserving simply because of your authority, and at the same time pointing out the fact that you were not being honored becuase it was not freely given? Or do you dismiss them from doing what you ask simply because their heart is not in it?
Mike--I agree. I worded that badly.
All we as parents have failed in the administration of discipline. But, praise God - we have a perfect heavenly Father.
Heb. 12:10 For they (earthly fathers) disciplined us for a short time as seemed best to them, but He disciplines us for our good, so that we may share His holiness.
May God bless all of our endeavors in disciplining our children; even those times when what "seems" best is not alway what "is" best. God certainly knows my many failures. But He also know the desires of my heart - for the good of my children and for His ultimate glory.
I am surprised at how many people are quick to condemn Whitefield on so little information.
This is not comparable to some mission trip.It is likely that the woman was a widow or single mother at least for the trip (perhaps her husband had crossed that Atlantic earlier).We do not know what went on before this episode nor the details of the conversations that took place at the time.We do not know the exact behaviour of the boy."Visit ... my people" imperious? I would suggest a more gracious interpretation would be "paternalistic, pastoral and loving".
Breaking the will of a child is what every parent should do.
I think it is good and right to encourage our children to pray to God - and good to teach them a proper respect for the prayers of others etc. should they be inclined against prayer themselves. I therefore think it is an abominable thing to coerce an unwilling person to pray, whether that person is a child or not, and whether the coercion is physical or not. Forced prayer is just wrong, and we all know that without having to be told it.
For all that, Whitefield rightly identified a grievious flaw in the upbringing of this young fellow, he was being allowed to rebel.
You see, the problem with rebellion is that every time you fail to correct it, you succeed in strengthening it. I have no problem with the fact that Whitefield corrected the lad physically - as that is entirely biblical (and singularly effective) when administered in love and in the absence of anger. I just cringe at the picture of forcing a child to get on their knees and pray if they are not inclined to it. There is a time and place to deal with rebellion, but when our parenting requires our children to respond to God as an act of obedience to us - we have missed the point of our stewardship.
Let me say that at face value I find Mike and Paul's comments so repugnant that I would likely disassociate from them if we were in community. By saying that I'm not trying to imply I question their salvation; I just don't like being around people who bully their kids.
If we as parents are to emulate through our authority over our children God's authority over us, it should be noted that God, while retaining complete authority, exercises it with an extremely light hand. We are not compelled to believe. We are not compelled to worship. We are not compelled to refrain from sinning.
While I agree that children should be taught to obey their parents, I daresay there's ample enough opportunity for that in the normal course of life that one need not also compel obedience with regard to prayer.
I pray that my child's will is not broken. I pray also that he learn to yield to my will instead of his own, and eventually to God's will, as Jesus did in the garden, out of love for me and a right recognition of my position of God-given authority over him. Not because he fears getting smacked.
Daniel,
You said:
"...but when our parenting requires our children to respond to God as an act of obedience to us - we have missed the point of our stewardship."
How else does a child learn to honour God except by honouring his parents and obeying them? If I can enforce that my child honours the elderly, to say please and thank-you out of politeness and respect, why can I not enforce that my child honour God through prayers - in essence, by saying please and thank-you to Him?
So, Daniel, if your twelve year old son (let's just say you have one for the case of example) tells you Sunday morning that he is not going to churh to worship your God, then he gets to stay home?
Would you also "cringe at the picture of forcing a child" to go to church "if they are not inclined to it"? Would you "cringe at the picture of forcing a child" to ask forgiveness of his brother "if they are not inclined to it"? The child was being requested to RECITE the Lord's prayer. Would you also "cringe at the picture of forcing a child" to memorize and recite scripture "if they are not inclined to it"?
Just because a child does not have the heart to do something, does that relieve them of doing what God says or what He requires?
I am just trying to understand where you are suggesting the line to be drawn.
As I see it from Scripture - when a child has been asked by a parent to do something; and what has been required is NOT sin; and realizing that children are to obey their parents in ALL things in the Lord; how is the enforcing of that through the means of discipline bad stewardship?
Obviously, the point of Mr. Whitefield's entry is that this discipline needs to happen "betimes," so that it does not escalate to such a situation. A child's will should learn submission LONG before they are even ABLE to recite Scripture. Don't discipline childeshess; but you better deal with all rebellion.
JPH,
What is the difference between "breaking the will of a child" and "yield to my will instead of his own, and eventually to God’s will"?
I think we mean the same thing.
Are you perhaps reading "breaking the will" as "breaking the spirit"? That would be far from what I mean.
I would ask what do you understand about the Lord chastening those He loves? Is that always gentle? Praise God that often it is. But is it always and necessarily so? Does 1 Cor 11:30 sound gentle "That is why many among you are weak and sick, and a number of you have fallen asleep."? What about Ananias and Sapphira? I used to just dismiss them as simply false converts now I am not so sure. Is it possible that at times the Lord can see our sin as such a hindrance to the cause of Christ that He simply takes us out of the picture altogether? What about David and his illegitimate child with Bathsheba was that gentle? There are also a number of tales in more recent times of trouble-makers in churches who all of a sudden passed away. It is pure conjecture but I wonder if that was the Lord stopping them from sinning any further.
Lastly I find it somewhat strange that you would say that you would likely disassociate from me if we were in community? Wouldn't that be disobedience to the Lord himself? If I am wrong wouldn't the better response be to love me and over time and with grace correct my errors? Wouldn't you have some concern for my children?
My primary point was let us not be quick to condemn any man, let alone a great man of God, on such scant information.
J.P.H., my brother...to insinuate that Paul and I "bully" our kids, "break" their wills, and "smack" them around is most unfair.
Read Prov. 3:11, 12, Eph. 6:1-4 and Hebrews 12. There is a time to teach, a time to train, and a time to apply the rod of discipline. No one on this site has suggested bullying, breaking or smacking.
@ReneeI think you might be misunderstanding the direction of my point, when you ask, "How else does a child learn to honour God except by honouring his parents and obeying them?" I say that because nothing in what I wrote suggests that a child learns to honor God by any other means.
Notwithstanding, I am glad to clarify my thoughts.
I believe that children learn to honor God first by having parents who only honor God themselves and require that their children live also in a way that honors God.
I do not believe however that a child learns to honor God by obeying a parental request that dishonors God. I will use my own family as an example. If I teach my children that I expect from them what I expect from myself - obedience to God, and that I am given a stewardship as their parent, to raise them up to know and obey God, and that they are required to obey me insofar as I am a just steward of this charge; but that they are not required to obey me if I abuse this stewardship and call them to obey a command that is contrary to scripture, "just because I am their father". Every one of my children learns this as soon as they are able to comprehend it.
They learn that obeying me honors God because God has given their lives in stewardship to me. They learn that obeying me -is- obeying God, for it is God who calls them to obey me. They don't learn to "obey me" so that later they can "obey God" - rather they learn to obey God, "period."
I teach my children that in order to honor God they must honor the elderly, so that when they honor the elderly, they are honoring the God who called me to lead them in that way. Does that make sense? I don't try and teach them to obey me, so that having learned to obey someone, they can eventually transfer that lesson to God. I teach them, as best I can, to obey God through my stewardship.
Mike D,
I just read your response to Daniel and I thought you brought out some great points in those questions. Thanks for those.
Part of the problem I see here is that people are envisioning some kind of enforced religious strait-jacket that would turn anybody off Christianity because it was in the context of prayer. But I do not think we can say that.
The other part of the problem is some finding certain words repugnant assuming that what they find offensive is what the poster meant.
@Mike DMy eldest son turns 12 in a few months so your example is not far off the mark when you say, "if your twelve year old son ... tells you Sunday morning that he is not going to churh to worship your God, then he gets to stay home?"
If my old son told me one morning that he was not going to go fishing with the rest of us I would not let him stay home. He would come along, but I wouldn't make him fish. He would be expected to sit in the boat or on the dock, and behave in a manner that is appropriate to where we are, even if he personally isn't fishing.
Do you see where this is going?
In the same way my son would come to church, and I would require him to behave in a manner that respected the sacred assembly - but I wouldn't require him to pretend to worship, or even to go through the motions.
If my son had made what I believed to be a genuine profession of faith (as opposed to the "standard" I-am-doing-this-just-to-please-mom-and-dad profession of faith, I might be inclined to expect more from him, if only because he is a brother in the Lord under my care. I would not force him to repent, but I would certainly call him to do so, as scripture requires of me. To be sure, these things I say in the vacuum of an ideal situation. In the real world things are not so cut and dry. I -know- I would make my son attend with me for all the same reasons I would make him come fishing, but I would no more force him to worship than I would force anyone else in the pews to worship - it isn't our place to insist that those who are not inclined, should act as though were inclined, for I believe that hypocrisy, while it might look nice on the outside, is not pleasing to God - and requiring it of someone strikes me as less than wise.
Perhaps I can answer all your specific questions by saying that I only cringe at the thought of forcing a child to act out a faith that isn't there.
I ask you Mike - would you force our hypothetical twelve year old to be baptized if the same rejected Christ (assuming of course that you're a credobaptist)? Surely you see the difference between teaching a child to recite the Lord's prayer and demanding that the child prays it?
To use your own words, just because a child does not have the heart to obey God does not relieve them of that obedience. I think you are so right in that thought. Where I am making my point however is in the arena of coerced (and therefore false) worship. God commands us to worship Him in Spirit and in truth. Forcing a child to go through the motions of worship when their heart is not in it is forcing them to worship God in the flesh and as a lie.
That is where I personally see the line - I am willing to demand much of my children - but I do not demand that they worship God falsely.
Dallimore wasn't dilly dallying when he wrote: "We must deplore both the custom [of attempting to conquer a child’s will] and Whitefield’s action on the basis of it.” Couldn't have said it any better. Give the child a fig as a reward - please.... Make a dog jump through a hoop and give him a biscuit kind of mentality.
This so called breaking a child's will sounds like legalistic rubbish where you end up with cookie cutter church goers (who may or may not be christians) who know nothing of grace. I'm glad God doesn't treat me with the same harshness that some here believe to be 'biblical'.
Thank you Daniel post 42 for some wise words.
If anyone is interested here is a fuller quote from Whitefield's Journal. Continuing from where Dallimore left off:
And this same child, though not above four years of age, came to-night on deck, and when the other children came to say their prayers to my friend Habersham, he burst out into tears, and would not go away till he had said his too. I mention this as the proof of the necessity of early correction. Children are sensible of it sooner than parents imagine. And if they would but have resolution to break their wills thoroughly when young, the work of conversion would be much easier, and they would not be so troubled with perverse children when they are old.
Friday March 31, 1738 (it was Good Friday)
KMS,
Please don't turn this into an attack on other posters. It doesn't help anyone.
Do you have children? Have you ever physically disciplined one of them? Or do you believe that there are appropriate times to discipline a child physically? (withhold not the rod, etc)
Speaking as a grown child of God who was sorely disciplined for her rebellious and presumptuous disobedience (such as failing to obey her Heavenly Father's loving command to pray without ceasing), I can tell you with absolute certainty that He repeatedly brought me to my knees--and He was just in doing so. His stripes are good and kind and wise. His discipline was the very expression of His faithfulness to me, His unfathomable love for me, and the truest indication that I belong to Him. He did not leave me to my heart's wickedly deceptive ways and the sinfulness of my wretched flesh. He did not silently stand by until I was ready to follow HIm--for I never would have been ready but for His grace! He commanded, "Return to me!" and I now humbly and faithfully serve Him with gratitude and awe. He is the same yesterday, today, and forever. His love is steadfast. He is worthy of all praise. His precepts are wonderful. His yoke is easy and His burden is light, especially in comparison with the yoke of slavery to sin (even willing slavery).
For those who are not His children and those who refuse to willingly kneel before their Maker, it will come to pass that every knee will bow and every tongue will confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God. So, one way or another, all will be forced to their knees, made to confess, and bound to receive their stripes at His hand.
Please forgive me for being harsh, but whether you steward your parental gift wisely and administer His discipline as the Bible commands you or not will be to your glory or to your shame. He will either do it now, through you, or later without you. And your lack of faithfulness will harm your child and require the administration of far more stripes to beat out long-ingrained sin with far-reaching consequences. It is cruel of you if you do not faithfully correct your child each time he or she would veer from the path of godliness.
Brother or sister, I do not wish that any would learn the hard way, as I did. I earnestly desire that my warning would save your child the pain my folly caused me. But I would not have them spared an ounce of it if they should go astray.
I should add that, time and again, the Lord arranged the circumstances in my life so that I would be in such distress as to cry out to Him and appeal to Him in prayer. Yet, over and over, I obstinately refused to learn His lesson. If I had acknowledged my dependence upon HIm, had but repented of my pride, and believed in His promises, I would have saved myself much unnecessary suffering, I would have been able to enjoy Him as He intended. Besides that, I would have caused Him to have to discipline me so often and I would not have brought Him such reproach. I would give anything to take that back. But I look forward to serving Him more faithfully as a result of His grace and mercy.
Tim,
On what basis, or by what criteria do you condemn ["deplore"] Whitefield's actions in this instance? Please explain your moral judgment here, and present the standard upon which you're basing said judgment.
In Christ,CD
Paul: "Do you have children? Have you ever physically disciplined one of them? Or do you believe that there are appropriate times to discipline a child physically? (withhold not the rod, etc)"
Yes - 4 children. I frankly rarely had to physically discipline any of them, but they have been disciplined in many ways other than physical. Thanks be to God that all of my children have come to hold and own their own faith. They are now all adults.
Yes there had been on occasions where physical discipline was necessary but having grown up amongst believers who used physical discipline inappropriately and frankly harshly we may have erred on the side of lightness.
I have difficulty understanding parents who will push for their children's intellectual growth, enforcing their education, expecting them to read, learn, and recite all things academia while showing unusual reticence at pushing for their spiritual growth, dreading even the notion of enforcing scripture reading and daily prayers. We polish the temporal and neglect the eternal. I pity the child whose trek to God is that much harder and that less surer because of fewer pointers and fewer disciplines.