The Blog

Our friend Janice opened her garage the other day and to her surprise, two ducklings came out of it.  She looked around for the mother duck, but never did find her.  She wondered what to do.  First she called some animal shelters, but they seemed to be closed for the weekend. Janice then got two boxes lined with clean paper, and put a little dish of water and some fresh chopped veggies in there.  The ducklings, though, preferred to be hand fed by Janice, as she dipped bread in water and fed it to them, along with the vegetables.

She felt sorry for them staying the night in the cold garage, so she took the ducklings into her house and put their box in the bathroom shower.  In the morning they cheeped happily as she came in.  She and her daughter took them for a walk. 

Two days later when the shelters opened, she got a referral to a place that would accept the ducklings.  She took them there and was so disappointed at the condition of the place.  There were other animals in cages and pens, and the ducklings were put in a crate with a cover over it.  She knew they wouldn’t be changing the paper every few hours like she did, and she figured they wouldn’t be getting fresh chopped vegetables either.  She hesitantly left and felt that maybe she made a mistake in bringing the ducks there.

Why do we often think some “professional” can do a better job than we can when it comes to taking care of animals or people?  I (Betty) remember working at a home for mentally impaired children several years ago and there was one little girl who worked her way into my heart.  She was so cute and nice and helpful, even though she didn’t talk.  Her family didn’t live that far away either, so they saw her every few months or so.  I couldn’t understand why they put her in this “home” in the first place.  But then I remembered that in those days, the 1970s, it was widely thought that the “experts” knew better than the parents how to help these “special” children.  The “experts” stayed in their offices and people like me worked in the homes directly with the children.  What special methods did we use?  The main goal we had was to make this institutional “home” as much like a real “home” as possible.  Isn’t that ironic, to take a child out of her home and put her in an institution that tried its best to imitate a real home?  It fell far short, just like the duck shelter.

We need to get out of the mindset that our culture has fallen into, thinking that someone else can do the job of nurturing and teaching children better than the parents.  Our son, Lael, in his last year of law school, attended a forum recently that discussed the impending dangers of this philosophy on the family.  These days the UN and the social service agencies are considered the “experts,” who know better than the parents what is right for the child.  To help our culture get out of this trap, we need to educate ourselves and others on the proper Biblical jurisdictions of state and family.

A century ago, most Americans understood that the family had an area of authority entirely separate from the state.  The state was not “over” the family; the family was independent.  The parents, not the state, were responsible for the upbringing of their children.  Since the 1840s, however, the rise of state education has increasingly moved the authority over children from the parents to the state.  Influential educators and philosophers, including John Dewey, emphasized the state’s interest in the upbringing of children.  These ideas laid the foundation for the “progressive” modern attitude that is increasingly prevalent among educators and social workers: the state knows what is best for the child, and the state’s wisdom can trump the parents’ wishes if there is a difference of opinion between them. 

There is a major threat to parental rights, embodying this dangerous idea of the state over the parents.  It is the U.N. Convention on the Rights of the Child (the “CRC”).  The CRC promises a plethora of rights to children, including access to information, freedom of expression, and free choice of religion.  While this may sound innocent at a superficial level, the implications are actually destructive for families.  The treaty essentially gives children the right to sue parents if they do not allow them to read or watch whatever they want or to go (or not go) to the church of their own choice.  And this is only the tip of the iceberg. 

Signed by President Clinton back in 1995, the treaty was never ratified.  Yet because of the presidential signature, the CRC remains available for ratification by two-thirds vote of the Senate.  The present administration seems to view this treaty favorably, and will very likely make an attempt to get it passed through the Senate.  But there are three ways to stop the CRC. 

First, don’t let it get ratified.  To this end, we can call our senators to express our strong opposition to America ratifying the CRC, which in effect gives away U.S. sovereignty and parental jurisdiction to the UN.  Timing can be crucial in opposing legislative action like this.  Watch for updates from the Home School Legal Defense Association at www.hslda.org.

Second, and more dramatic, the CRC can be preempted by passing a constitutional amendment protecting parental rights.  Such an amendment has already been introduced into Congress, the Parental Rights Amendment (H.J. Res. 42).  You can ask your congressmen to cosponsor this amendment.  For more information, visit www.parentalrights.org.

Last and definitely not least, we need to pray that America does not ratify this treaty.  We need to pray for our own children and for our rights as parents to continue to be protected so we can raise them in the nurture and admonition of the Lord, without the state’s interference.  This treaty is something to get “excited” about, excited enough to pray zealously for it not to be ratified.  Please join with us in fervent prayer. 

The CRC is really just a symptom of a deeper problem.  Most people no longer have any understanding of the God-ordained roles of the family and of the state.  The long-term solution to this problem is to wisely and prayerfully re-educate ourselves and our nation on the true jurisdictions of the state and family, as we embrace our parental rights and duties to train up our children in the nurture and admonition of the Lord (Eph. 6:4).

Recently, there has not been much activity on this blog, since the primary blogger (Lael) has been somewhat swamped with a variety of things going on.  We hope to begin putting articles by David and Betty Weinberger from the backissues of the AMHE newsletter on the amhehome.org website, and we will start by posting one here on the blog shortly!

My parents just authored a new picture book for children that provides a Messianic Jewish perspective on Passover, showing how it points to the Messiah. Our friend Melody Hemmer illustrated it with outstanding paintings.  We were thrilled to have the books arrive at our house from the press just this past Monday.  The new book, Passover Next Door, is now available!  Check out the description here.

“This month shall be unto you the beginning of months: it shall be the first month of the year to you.” - Exodus 12:2 

Passover begins tonight at sundown, the 14th of the month Nisan on the Jewish calendar.  (Biblical trivia: this month was originally known as Abib or Aviv (Exodus 13:4, 23:15, 34:18), but ever since the Babylonian captivity it became better known as Nisan (Nehemiah 2:1, Esther 3:7).  It’s also spelled Nissan.) 

Passover commemorates the redemption of Israel from slavery in Egypt, and it was so important that God told Israel that this shall be the first month (rather like a birthday).  The focus is redemption, and in Jewish tradition, the month of Nisan is the month of redemption.  Interestingly, also in Jewish tradition, the redemption from Egypt was viewed as a foreshadowing of something even greater:

The Babylonian Talmud (Tractate Rosh HaShana 11a) recounts a prevalent opinion among the sages that, “In Nissan our forefathers were redeemed from Egypt and in Nissan we will be redeemed.”

Redemption was indeed completed in Nisan, by the Jewish Messiah at Passover around 30 AD (Matthew 26:2; Luke 22:7; John 19:14). 

There’s good reason to celebrate redemption this month.

Consider this.  According to Jewish tradition, the month of Tishri was the month of creation, followed by the fall.  Then God redeems Israel, his covenant people, from slavery in Egypt, and by explicit commandment changes the first month from Tishri, the month of creation, to Nisan, the month of redemption.  And He promises a future redemption –a prophet like Moses but greater than Moses.  This was fulfilled with the redemption of Yeshua in the month Nissan a millennium later.  He came to His own people at the time that He had already taught them about. 

The psalmist twice (vv. 67, 71) reflects on the learning he received from God’s chastisement.  This reflects the teaching expounded in Hebrews 12:5–11, that God as a father corrects us, and though this does not seem “joyous” while it is happening, afterward, the good fruit will become visible.  As the psalmist was able to say, “It is good for me” (v. 71). 

An important distinction is present between pagan self-flagellation and Biblical affliction-as-discipline.  Pagans self-inflicted their suffering, in hopes of personal expiation of sins, attainment of holiness, hopes of showing spiritual superiority, and even with the desire of manipulating the gods in conformity with man’s actions.  It was all humanistic: man set his own terms for spiritual attainment.  Much of it was also prideful: man can control circumstances and even gods by his own rituals. 

By contrast, in Scripture, God administers corrections to teach us.  Self-inflicted suffering is unwarranted by the biblical conception of discipline, and is indeed meaningless in that context.  Further, it is prideful.  Man is not commissioned to determine sanctions upon himself for disobedience, and to do so claims power from God.  Where man does have the power to administer sanctions for wrongful conduct, it is expressly delegated power from God, to specific jurisdictional spheres (i.e., family, church, state).  There is no general delegation of power to self-flagellate, and to claim such a power is just as wrong as claiming any other power not delegated to man.