Your Children and ministry.

[Carl Emerson]

Titus 1
appoint elders in every town as I directed you— 6 if anyone is above reproach, the husband of one wife, and his children are believers and not open to the charge of debauchery or insubordination. 7 For an overseer, as God's steward, must be above reproach

I invite discussion on the issue of whether the spiritual health of our offspring should impede our leadership in the Church.

I some parts of the world if a Church Elder has a child in rebellion, the matter is taken very seriously and the elders might all fast and seek God to bring repentance to the son or daughter. The leader must step down until the matter is resolved.

I have heard of this approach being employed with great effect.

This matter is not generally considered in the modern church - are we missing something - should we gather around those who are struggling with offspring who are wandering into sin and stand with them until we see matters resolved?

 

[Lost Witness]

This matter is not generally considered in the modern church - are we missing something - should we gather around those who are struggling with offspring who are wandering into sin and stand with them until we see matters resolved?

Absolutely

 

[Paidiske]

I think it's one thing to look for church leaders who have demonstrated that they are fit parents (that's important, and right). It's another thing to punish parents for things their (adult) children might do that are out of their control.

My daughter's only eleven, but of course my church leadership should be called into question should I abuse, neglect, or otherwise grossly fail her as a parent. But if she makes some poor life choices at 30, long after moving out of home, should I be held responsible for that, to the point of being stood down (which is a very different thing from being "gathered around" or having others "stand with" me)? I'm not so sure.

I would also be wary about who sets the standarf of what is acceptable or unacceptable, and whether those standards are reasonable, realistic, or indeed overly controlling.

 

[Carl Emerson]

I think it's one thing to look for church leaders who have demonstrated that they are fit parents (that's important, and right). It's another thing to punish parents for things their (adult) children might do that are out of their control.

My daughter's only eleven, but of course my church leadership should be called into question should I abuse, neglect, or otherwise grossly fail her as a parent. But if she makes some poor life choices at 30, long after moving out of home, should I be held responsible for that, to the point of being stood down (which is a very different thing from being "gathered around" or having others "stand with" me)? I'm not so sure.

I would also be wary about who sets the standard of what is acceptable or unacceptable, and whether those standards are reasonable, realistic, or indeed overly controlling.

These days our offspring can wander at a very early age - influences at school can be very strong and parental care hindered by regulations around personal privacy laws so they have no idea what is going on.

Parental care never ceases but personal responsibility transfers as you point out.

This transfer relates to a legal age in a civil sense but are we still responsible spiritually ???

How do you interpret the verse in the OP ???

 

[Maria Billingsley]

Titus 1
appoint elders in every town as I directed you— 6 if anyone is above reproach, the husband of one wife, and his children are believers and not open to the charge of debauchery or insubordination. 7 For an overseer, as God's steward, must be above reproach

I invite discussion on the issue of whether the spiritual health of our offspring should impede our leadership in the Church.

I some parts of the world if a Church Elder has a child in rebellion, the matter is taken very seriously and the elders might all fast and seek God to bring repentance to the son or daughter. The leader must step down until the matter is resolved.

I have heard of this approach being employed with great effect.

This matter is not generally considered in the modern church - are we missing something - should we gather around those who are struggling with offspring who are wandering into sin and stand with them until we see matters resolved?

Let's not blame children for Pastors that do not meet the "must be above reproach" threshold. Jesus Christ of Nazareth gave us a parable of one such child. Blessings.

 

[Paidiske]

How do you interpret the verse in the OP ???

I would hold two principles in tension. Firstly, that being an unfit parent disqualifies one from leadership in the church. But secondly, that the ancient world had very different ideas about parenting, and family structure, than our own cultures do; and that it would be a mistake to see the ancient world's norms as necessarily binding in every situation and culture. The degree of hierarchy, and control, expressed by the pater familias in Paul's culture, is not something I would endorse as either necessarily healthy or Christian.

 

[Carl Emerson]

I would hold two principles in tension. Firstly, that being an unfit parent disqualifies one from leadership in the church. But secondly, that the ancient world had very different ideas about parenting, and family structure, than our own cultures do; and that it would be a mistake to see the ancient world's norms as necessarily binding in every situation and culture. The degree of hierarchy, and control, expressed by the pater familias in Paul's culture, is not something I would endorse as either necessarily healthy or Christian.

So if your measure of what is healthy or Christian does not come from Scripture - where does it come from ?

 

[Paidiske]

So if you measure of what is healthy or Christian does not come from Scripture - where does it come from ?

That's an overstatement of my position.

That said, I'd say we need to draw on multiple sources. Scripture, sure; but also the best insights of other disciplines. So if, for example, we see that ancient familial norms were oppressive and abusive (which they often were), and we can now understand the harm that does, we know not to replicate them just because they're mentioned in Scripture.

So, for example, in this case, I'd reject the ancient patriarchal norm that literally gave the head of the household the power of life and death over his family (and slaves). And we'd need to read Paul's caution about "insubordinate" children through a lens which is critical of a culture which expected subordination of grown children.

 

[Carl Emerson]

That's an overstatement of my position.

That said, I'd say we need to draw on multiple sources. Scripture, sure; but also the best insights of other disciplines. So if, for example, we see that ancient familial norms were oppressive and abusive (which they often were), and we can now understand the harm that does, we know not to replicate them just because they're mentioned in Scripture.

So, for example, in this case, I'd reject the ancient patriarchal norm that literally gave the head of the household the power of life and death over his family (and slaves). And we'd need to read Paul's caution about "insubordinate" children through a lens which is critical of a culture which expected subordination of grown children.

So truth becomes relative to the present culture ??

The Bible is no longer the last Word on faith and practice?

 

[Paidiske]

So truth becomes relative to the present culture ??

No. Truth is absolute, but we know only in part. Sometimes we learn more than we knew before (as we have, in all kinds of ways, since the first century). It's why our understanding of Scripture is integrated with our ability to reason and learn in all kinds of fields.

The Bible is no longer the last Word on faith and practice?

The Bible is not absolute on everything. There are many areas on which it does not offer us a "last word," but does offer us some guiding principles for our ongoing reflection. I would argue that this is one of them.

Basically, I read the suggestion in the OP as amounting to a situation where some people (precisely who is in view, is not clear) get to decide what counts as "insubordinate" children, and get to use that to bully and control church leaders. I'm not a fan of the concept.

 

[Carl Emerson]

I refer you to a case in real life...

I posted this here... Jesus's Ministry Post #14

===================================================================

OK... let's consider another testimony concerning a dear brother now with Jesus.

This man left for Colombia with his wife and family from New Zealand in the early eighties. I have never forgotten this message that I heard from him first hand.

His ministry was substantial, working in districts where the police would not venture in a country with a higher murder rate than anywhere on the globe at the time - he established hospitals and schools - his influence was said to have resulted in more than a million folks coming to faith in Jesus. He is largely unknown and he wouldn't want it any other way.

This was his message...

He spoke of his daughter who I will call 'Elizabeth' who at the age of about 12 ran away from home quite un-expectantly. This is not a good call in that part of the world and is unlikely to end well...

The parents were shocked, but had a very close relationship with other pastors in the area who immediately committed to fasting and prayer. It was not just that the child had disappeared, but he Christian leaders there took the scripture very seriously and would not allow a brother to continue in Christian leadership with a child in rebellion.

I need to mention also that the pastors had been getting the same dream - of angels leaning on their swords. When they discovered this was happening to them all and prayed about it, the Lord spoke and simply said that the angels were doing this because you were not giving them anything to do...

After three days of constant prayer and fasting a particular scripture kept coming to mind from Hosea 2:6/7 which records how the Lord dealt with Hosea's unfaithful wife.
'Therefore, behold, I will hedge up thy way with thorns, and make a wall, that she shall not find her paths... then shall she say, I will go and return to my first husband; for then was it better with me than now."

The Pastors agreed that this was an important message from God for the circumstance and so the father prayed and proclaimed a proverbial hedge of thorns to come into immediate effect in Elizabeth's situation.
I no time flat - Elizabeth was back home with little more than a few proverbial scratches and bruises. The family embraced her with loving acceptance and the matter was resolved.

But the story did not end there...

A year or two later, Elizabeth flew to New Zealand for her high school education. The rest of the family stayed in Colombia. After the four years of study was completed, mother flew to NZ to bring daughter home. She was surprised to be greeted by a radical feminist with no evident Christian faith. They flew back together and on the way through Singapore airport Elizabeth had a conversation with a man and nothing more was thought of it.

Back in Colombia the family embraced the daughter, insisted that she attend church, and in a few months things seemed to be settling down. Then a letter arrived from a bible school in the U.S. - they had been praying and felt to offer Elizabeth a placement. The parents were delighted and even more so when Elizabeth expressed enthusiasm for the opportunity. So it happened that she flew North for Christian study.

After just a day or two, she completely disappeared.

Everyone was shocked.

Back to prayer and fasting for several days... Then eventually different pastors were getting the same Word - Soul Tied...

Well the Pastors were in agreement that some strong soulish force was blinding Elizabeth, so the father knew what had to be done. He stood up in the prayer room and even though he was a naturally conservative and quiet man, he felt to act out a prayer/proclaimation. Having some clear space he started praying along these lines "Lord, thank you for your love for Elizabeth and for showing us what we need to deal with. (then he holds up his hands as if grasping a pair of invisible scissors.) ...and in Jesus name I cut this soul tie and bind Elizabeth to the pillar of opportunity you Lord created for her..."

Well this prayer had a radical effect in Elizabeths world.

The man she met in Singapore was extremely wealthy with his own private aircraft. They had been communicating and planned to elope. He had flown her to a city she did not know, lavished gifts on her and was going out to buy her a car when the scissors snipped.

In that instant she suddenly realised she had made a serious mistake - she ran out of the apartment - down strange streets - running, running until a man jumped out of an alleyway in front of her, loudly and firmly saying - pointing to her - "You have got to go back..."

Not surprisingly she was back in bible school very soon, and last I heard she was strong in the faith serving on the mission field.

The Pastors back in Colombia, when told of her experience, remembered the dreams of the angels with nothing to do.

God is Good.

In summary, the father pulled a piece of grass out of his bible. He said something like this...

"I don't understand how it all works but this I know... - and he blew the piece of grass - the world and the enemy try to blow our children in a wrong direction and the prayers of the parents combined with God's Spirit and His angels - and he blew the grass back the other way - are more powerful and enduring..."

 

[Paidiske]

Whatever I might think of Elizabeth's story (and "rebellion" isn't my first thought when a 12-year-old runs away from home, but putting that aside), my issue here is solely with whether a parent's ministry ought to be held hostage to others' perceptions of their children's behaviour.

 

[Carl Emerson]

Whatever I might think of Elizabeth's story (and "rebellion" isn't my first thought when a 12-year-old runs away from home, but putting that aside), my issue here is solely with whether a parent's ministry ought to be held hostage to others' perceptions of their children's behaviour.

You seem to assume wrong motive in applying biblical principle...

Frankly I find that quite sad.

 

[Paidiske]

You seem to assume wrong motive in applying biblical principle...

Wrong motive? Perhaps not. But I've seen plenty of people with good motives, treat other people badly.

I think it's important to have in place structures and policies which protect people from that kind of thoughtlessness. Which is why I'm very cautious about how we might apply this kind of Scripture.

I mean, we are, potentially, when speaking of standing down a church leader, speaking of making them and their family homeless and destitute; the stakes are not small!

 

[The Liturgist]

So, for example, in this case, I'd reject the ancient patriarchal norm that literally gave the head of the household the power of life and death over his family (and slaves). And we'd need to read Paul's caution about "insubordinate" children through a lens which is critical of a culture which expected subordination of grown children.

It should be noted that the rapid growth of the Early Church among citizens of the Roman Empire in the period preceding the conversion of St. Constantine and the Edict of Toleration has been attributed to among other things its popularity among female converts, who converted to the Church because under the canon law of the early church, because they knew if they married within the church, the church would provide a measure of protection for their children. Specifically, their husband, who would stand to become the paterfamilias, he as a member of the church was forbidden from exercising the perverse patriarchal power granted to him by Roman law to discard infants deemed defective, or to kill or mistreat his wife, children and slaves. Bachelors in turn would join the church because that’s where ladies eligible for marriage were to be found, and also pagan men who fell in love with Christian women were obliged to convert to seal the deal.

Now the early church was not a government but was rather persecuted by the government, so it had no real power to enforce these rules, however, in those days there was a superstition that sins committed after baptism could not be forgiven, which is why many, even Emperor Constantine, did not receive baptism and the Eucharist until they were in extremis, and before and after he left the canonical Church to join the heretical Montanist cult, Tertullian was known as a rigorist who did not believe post-baptismal sins were unavoidable or forgiveable, whereas others took the view that Reconcilliation as a sacrament was available only once. Thus, any Christian man of sincere faith could be counted on to follow the rules.

 

[Carl Emerson]

Wrong motive? Perhaps not. But I've seen plenty of people with good motives, treat other people badly.

I think it's important to have in place structures and policies which protect people from that kind of thoughtlessness. Which is why I'm very cautious about how we might apply this kind of Scripture.

I mean, we are, potentially, when speaking of standing down a church leader, speaking of making them and their family homeless and destitute; the stakes are not small!

Yes... I guess the further our modern church structures depart from biblical christianity the harder it is to resolve such issues when they arise.

 

[Paidiske]

Yes... I guess the further our modern church structures depart from biblical christianity the harder it is to resolve such issues when they arise.

I don't see any departure from "Biblical Christianity" at all. And even Paul's letters reflect that there were many issues which were hard to resolve even in the earliest church. Let's not pretend we've ever had a perfect church community.

 

[Carl Emerson]

We clearly have a different opinion as to what biblical Christianity is...

 

[Paidiske]

My impression, from many of your posts, is that you enshrine a particular moment in your personal experience as the zenith of "Biblical Christianity," and judge every other church as deficient any time we're different from that. And then are surprised when we argue that wisdom is vindicated by all her children.

 

[Carl Emerson]

My impression, from many of your posts, is that you enshrine a particular moment in your personal experience as the zenith of "Biblical Christianity," and judge every other church as deficient any time we're different from that. And then are surprised when we argue that wisdom is vindicated by all her children.

Really ??? I cant think when that might have been...

All Churches are deficient as long as humans are involved.

When Jesus challenged His listeners that wisdom is justified by her children, He was saying that the soundness of wisdom can be judged by the fruit of that wisdom. The people of that generation thought they had sound wisdom and were prideful in their own ability to discern and judge. But Jesus challenged their wisdom by looking at the “children” of their wisdom—what did their “wisdom” produce? Their deeds were woeful, in that they failed to recognize both the forerunner of the Messiah and the Messiah Himself.

Nothing much has changed...

But there is hope...