|
Our
delinquent age needs to regain its sense of the urgency of enforcing
parental discipline. To address this concern, let us look at two
fathers mentioned in the Bible and the harvest they reaped.
We meet
the first father, Eli, in 1 Samuel 2. He appears to have been a
weak, easygoing father. Although he did verbally protest against the
dishonest and immoral conduct of his sons, he took no further
measures nor even threatened to remove them from office. With Eli,
this had probably become a lifelong pattern. When those sons were
yet boys, he had probably protested many of their actions. "Boys,
that is wrong; you should know better! But evidently he seldom
insisted on their obedience. Words without action prove very
ineffective.
Eli did
not sense the urgency of enforcing parental discipline. Do we? Do we
side with our children against the school? Against the church? If
so, we are doing them a tragic disservice. Furthermore, we are
reflecting the permissive attitude of Eli and bringing upon
ourselves a bitter harvest.
One may
console himself in the fact that he or she, as a parent, is not at
all wicked. But to simply be a weak parent can very definitely
contribute to the permanent wickedness of one’s children and
possibly make one a partaker of their sins.
King
David is another father from whom we should learn. Toward at least
one of his sons, he was entirely too permissive. Although David was
an otherwise good man, a man after God’s own heart, he clearly
spoiled this son, Adonijah. Consequently, there were many
heartaches, and finally the premature cutting off of a life that
otherwise might have been a glory to God.
The
truth of Proverbs 29: 15 has been verified repeatedly. "The rod and
reproof give wisdom: but a child left to himself bringeth his mother
to shame" (and also his father). Here, then, are two fathers who in
other respects lived commendable lives, but they did not feel the
burden of the urgency of enforcing parental discipline. And out of
that neglect grew a long train of tragic consequences.
In any
sizable group of parents, there will likely be some inclined to be
overly harsh, and still more inclined to overly permissive. Both
extremes militate against the effectiveness of disciplinary
measures.
If you
are inclined to be a dictatorial parent, you need to be reminded
that anger and harshness may frighten, but they will not persuade
the child that you are right. Moreover, if you administer discipline
in anger, you will lose the respect of your child. Although our
children should respect us, it should not be necessary to make them
literally fear us. Such fear tends to put an end to the openness
that should exist between children and their parents. "Fathers,
provoke not your children to anger, lest they be discouraged." Our
children ought to be afraid of the rod but not afraid of us.
While
recognizing the danger of being overly harsh, the burden of this
message is the danger of being overly permissive. This was the
mistake of Eli. This was also the mistake of David. And the climate
of our day, with its emphasis upon the need to allow children to
express themselves and develop along lines of their own choosing, is
extremely unfavorable for the exercise of firm parental discipline.
Paternal
love is by nature soft. Unless it is tempered with divine love, it
tends to become permissive and sentimental. This overly tolerant
love can blind a parent to the faults of his children. It can
deceive a mother into believing that everyone but her Johnny is out
of step.
Parental
permissiveness appears in many shapes and forms. In one family,
whenever the children disobeyed, the mother would go into a closet
and pray. She tried to substitute prayer for firmer measures, and,
needless to say, it did not work.
Many a
child has been told, "If you do that again, I’ll punish you." What
happens when the child does do it again? Too often there are simply
additional verbal threats. Words become a substitute for the rod.
When the overly permissive parent finally does punish, it is likely
to be too mild to accomplish the end that it should. Normally, a
child need not be punished often if he is punished severely enough.
The hot stove serves to illustrate this point. It teaches the child
to mind with but a few applications.
Many an
overly permissive parent has said, "I don’t want my children to go
through what I went through." Consequently attempts are made to
shield his children from all forms of hardship. What a shame! Such
children remain strangers to the virtue of personal sacrifice and
hard, honest toil.
Overly
permissive parents, in a mistaken effort to maintain the goodwill of
their children, often spend a great deal of money on them. Toys and
gifts are showered upon them. Upon arriving at his sixteenth
birthday, the son is given a car. He is allowed to pocket all his
wages and spend them however he pleases.
Are you
an overly permissive parent? Do you find yourself continually
allowing your child to have his way, to get whatever he wants, to do
wrong and get by with it? If so, mark it down that you and that
child are headed for trouble.
No
matter how good your family tree may appear to be, all your children
came into the world with a wayward nature and will go wrong unless
you, by means of proper discipline, seek to alter that downward
course.
Today
much is said about the need to understand our children and reason
with them and explain the motives behind our discipline. In
childhood and adolescence there is a place for this approach, but a
child’s will ought to be broken long before he reaches that stage.
Long before you can reason with your child, you must find ways of
dealing with his self-will. A baby needs to learn the meaning of
"no" long before the mother can discuss that meaning with him.
The
enforcing of parental discipline requires parental cooperation. When
a child receives a punishment from one parent and pity from the
other, the corrective effect is destroyed. Furthermore, this affords
the child an opportunity to form the habit of pitting one parent
against the other. This contributes to the further deterioration of
the unity of the home.
Success
in the enforcement of parental discipline depends also on the
consistency of the discipline. Do not allow tomorrow what you forbid
today, and do not allow today what you forbid tomorrow. To do so
creates confusion in the child’s mind. It is only fair that he knows
where the parental bounds exist. A good disciplinarian is definite,
firm, and consistent.
The
urgency of enforcing parental control requires that parents stay
close to their children in all their activities. It is proper for
growing adolescents to assume more and more responsibilities and to
make more and more personal decisions. But in all this, parents
should be close observers. Your daughter may select an article of
clothing that is inappropriate for a Christian. Your son may come
home with a haircut that reflects a step toward the latest in hair
fads. Those are points at which you as a parent ought to lovingly,
yet firmly, assert your God-delegated parental authority. Wise
parents supervise the decisions of their growing children and thus
prevent them from introducing fads that would tempt others and mar
the witness of the church.
Leisure-time activities also call for close parental supervision. As
parents, you may rejoice when you see your son or daughter reading a
book. You may feel that now he is out of mischief; he is doing
something profitable. Your rejoicing may be well grounded, but not
necessarily so. Reading, although normally profitable, can
degenerate into a form of escapism. It can, for example, become an
escape from needful work. Furthermore, what about the content of
that book your child is reading? Is it character building’? Is it
soul enriching? Or is it written, as so much material is today,
simply to feed an unhealthy fantasy? That kind of reading has no
permanent value but rather will dissipate the benefits of other
disciplines in the life of the child. So you had better keep close
supervision over your child’s reading.
Are we
training children to save and to give as they ought? If your son is
earning and is permitted to keep any portion of what he earns, it
becomes your responsibility to see that he gives to the Lord’s work
a portion of that which becomes his. Likewise, if your daughter is
permitted to spend money of her own for personal items, train her to
give also a portion in the Sunday morning offering. How else will
they learn stewardship?
We ought
to also teach our children that they have a definite responsibility
to help along in the financial struggles of the family. For grown
children, I Timothy 5:8 has a special message. "But if any provide
not for his own, and specially for those of his own house, he hath
denied the faith, and is worse than an infidel." Too often we apply
this only to the breadwinner in relation to his wife and dependent
children. But notice, it says, "if any". The context indicates that
if a widow has grown children and grandchildren, they have an
obligation to help her financially. The principle embedded in this
passage is that the close of kin to one having financial struggles
are under special obligation to help. This we need to instill in our
children.
A
tragedy occurred sometime ago in the writer’s home community. A
young boy, while riding his motor scooter, was instantly killed. The
mother acknowledged that his death was related to parental neglect.
The preservation of even your child’s physical life makes the
enforcing of parental discipline an urgent matter. But still more
important is the spiritual well-being of your child. Proverbs 23:14
indicates that parental discipline is a means of delivering a
child’s soul from hell. More than anything else, this ought to put
into our discipline the note of urgency. This is written in the hope
that you will not need to look upon the grave of a child that went
wrong because you restrained him not, because you displeased him not
at any time. Act now and save yourself that bitter regret.
Abridged from The Urgency of’Enforcing
Parental Discipline,
Rod and Staff Publications.
|