Christians are an interesting group of people. We have broken up into various denominations based on different interpretations of the Bible. And it seems that most, if not all, denominations seem to have their own list of rules, whether written or unwritten. We know some of these generalities, like Church of Christs don't play instruments in worship and Baptists don't dance (at least not in church!). Some of these sound silly and some don't seem to have much basis in Scripture (or a weak base in Scripture, hinging upon a single verse) yet they live on. When one abides by these rules to the point of being more about the rules than about God's love, that is when we face legalism.
Some Christians have individual convictions that are not necessarily based on their denomination's rules. Some Christians choose to abstain from drinking. to not watch rated R movies, or to abstain from the use of contraceptives. These are neither wrong or right positions to have, seeing as these are not issues brought up in the Bible like drunkenness, extramarital/premarital sex, and stealing are. These and other issues can be left up to the individual to ask God what is best for them. For example, when I was younger I felt convicted to not date... at least not until God said so. Not too long before Garrett and I started dating, my conviction turned into a legalistic rule which ultimately resulted in pride, which is how Satan can take a good thing and turn into a not good thing. But God convicted me of this as well, and in His perfect timing, it was also time for me to start dating Garrett.
Would I recommend to others to pray about their dating lives? A thousand times yes. Would I recommend my approach? Yes, with caution, knowing pride can creep up. Would I say it is wrong to date more than one person? No. This was my personal conviction, not a verse in the Bible, and acting as it is such would be legalistic.
So back to the nature of the article. I don't feel like the families in the article are saying, "Oh, you have to do this," but the idea of reproducing a large herd of children dressed alike is something that sounds... Well I don't know what word to use. I am not necessarily here to rebuke this family that I do not even know, though the matching clothes and calling their father "sir" weirds me out a little. However, I respect that they adopt as well, that they want more than just white American Christians. I guess I'm trying to say I don't know their hearts, but it's possible this is legalistic for them. Even if not, what they are doing is appearing very, very different to the world. Dare I say too different?
Obviously Christians are supposed to be different. We are instructed to not act like the world (i.e. sin), talk like them (i.e. curse), etc., yet I don't believe we are supposed to be totally detached, not appearing modern or aware of the world's current state. But then there's the other end of the spectrum, trying so hard to look like the world that we fully embrace it and forget that there is supposed to be some distance, saying things like, "Well Jesus would have hung out with these people," or whatever. Some things we can't do just because Jesus did; he was God personified and a lot stronger than us. I'm not saying we can't have non-Christian friends, because if we don't then we go back to the problem of being detached and living in a Christian bubble. There's a fine line between "in, but not of." We have to stand out a little bit, but we don't want to be so out there that we're out of touch.
While thinking about all this, I looked up the TLC show 18 Kids and Counting. If Garrett and I had cable I probably would have watched a few episodes of this by now, but I had merely heard about it before and never got around to watching it, though I did watch the original special program about the Duggars a few years ago called "Fourteen Kids And Pregnant Again." Here's what they looked like then:
And now, a few kids and years later:
Some of this may change may have to do with income level before vs. after signing to do the TLC show "18 Kids and Counting," but regardless, it's nice to see that they're still sticking with to their convictions while looking more like a modern, albeit very large, family. I don't care how many kids the Duggars have, as long as they can discipline them all. I don't care how they dress, as long as they are truly trying to glorify God and not being legalistic. I don't know their hearts, but they seem genuine, and I truly hope they are.
All this is to say conviction is one thing, but legalism is another. If you feel God wants you off birth control and will provide for your family, that's fine. The Duggars have decided to embrace what God gives them, and that is for them, but not everyone. I think they know that. I hope the families in the aforementioned article know that. And I hope they raise children who know that, and who are true ambassadors of Christ who love those around them and change the world that way, not just legalistic Christians looking to point fingers and condemn others.
Because the world will never, ever embrace these sorts of Christians:
And they shouldn't, because that isn't God's love.
4 comments:
`18 Kids and Counting is the only show I do my best to watch each time it comes on. The biggest thing I love about this family is Jim Bob and Michelle's ability to maintain their marriage and parent their children without ever (and I mean ever) raising their voice, without growing angry or impatient, and without disrespect. . . something dear ol' Jon and Kate never seemed to get the hang of. I don't disagree with how the Duggar's live their life-- I've watched closely, and nothing they do is contradictory to scripture-- but my convictions are different than theirs, so I would do things a little differently (i.e. having shorter hair, wearing jeans, etc.).
As for the article. . . the statement that annoys me most is the argument against the husband as the spiritual and household leader (which was referred to as male headship-- a phrase that was probably purposely written to sound more sexist than it really is). Gr.
hmm.
i watched the little film, read the BBC article, and read your commentary.
i will also add that my uncle has one such "quiverfull" family, and all of those kids seem to be developing fine with adequate attention from the parents--which would have otherwise been my biggest concern.
you had a point when you spoke about the fine line of "in, not of."
personally, i think such families as the Duggars are a little too extreme. by cloistering their kids, they are preventing them from establishing a realistic view of the world or encountering people of different beliefs. so what happens when the kid meets someone who is totally different later in life? someone who doesn't fit into what they know?
i also think that having 18 kids is environmentally and economically irresponsible, but that's probably just me.
also, in relation to the comment you left on my site, i think you do a good job of mixing the professional and the personal in your blog layout. if only i were as talented!
i definitely agree with brian in that having such large families is economically and environmentally irresponsible.
as for legalism, in many cases parents either breed spoonfed christians or alienate the ones who "rebel."
Post a Comment