A Woman is: Of A Quiet Spirit

Take the test if you are of a "quiet spirit" as in 1 Peter 3:4.  This character quality is related to a husband/wife relationship.  We can also be quiet outside and angrily loud in our hearts.  Here is example of what I mean shared by generation cedar:

You are walking through your house (bedroom, living room..), and your husband’s clothes and shoes are, let's just say, "misplaced"–a usual scene. Do you:

1.  Throw them all in a corner and “show him” what happens if he doesn’t pick up after himself?

2.  Pick them up grumbling as you put them away?

3.  Dwell on all the things he does for you that he doesn’t have to, and consider it a blessing to be able to serve him in such a small way? Proceed to fold/hang his clean clothes as neatly as possible for an “extra blessing”?

I know, we’ve all reacted the wrong way. I have many times.  The grumbling begins and I confess that I dwell on number 3 and gladly pick up my husbands shoes and clothes!    The same applies to chores I detest like washing dishes.  There was a time that I liked, or didn't mind, washing dishes.  But now with no dishwasher and or regular sink.  I find it a little "challenge".  I thank God I don't have to gather water from the river, well, and that I have hot water.  I thank God that I have a family that I love and uses these dishes.  I thank God for the laundry I fold with my daughters because they are for the precious family He has given me to love.

This quiet spirit will actually make us beautiful. That's right! more than make up and a stylish up-do.  The Bible says that it is an ornament.  A beautiful wife makes a husband happy and thus a happy marriage.  I bet you haven't heard this formula in the secular advises for a happy marriage.  We can be by God's grace a beautiful ornament for our  homes.

 

 

Read More

The Woman's Place

From Ladies Against Feminism, a timely word from R. J. Rushdoony

We talk a lot on LAF about the "family economy" and how it eliminates the whole mythical "work-family balance" that causes eruptions in the blogosphere every time it is raised. Family is work, and what takes place within the family unit is far more than washing dishes and making beds. Those are normal routines of any daily life. The heart of the family is really and truly economic in every sense of the word. When the whole family is involved in work (whether it's a home-based business, a ministry, home education, hospitality and charity, community service, etc.), its members grow together in amazing ways and become more involved in one another's lives, thoughts, and dreams than if each member of the family goes in a different direction each morning to different locations with differing priorities and goals. Today, this is a radical way to approach life, but our ancestors prior to the Industrial Revolution lived it, breathed it, and built nations upon it. We can, too. What could be more empowering, freeing, or exciting? Enjoy the article!]

“The Woman’s Place” by R.J. Rushdoony

The Biblical doctrine of woman…reveals her as one crowned with authority in her “subjection” or subordination, and clearly a helper of the closest possible rank to God’s appointed vice-regent over creation. This is no small responsibility, nor is it a picture of a patient Griselda. Theologians have all too often pointed to Eve as the one who led Adam into sin while forgetting to note that her God-given position was such that counsel was her normal duty, although in this case it was clearly evil counsel….

It is a common illusion that in man’s primitive, evolutionary past, women were the merest slaves, used at will by primitive brutes. Not only is this evolutionary myth without foundation, but in every known society, the position of women, as measured in terms of the men and the society, has been a notable one. The idea that women have ever submitted to being mere slaves is itself an absurd notion. Women have been women in every age.

In a study of an exceedingly [so-called] backward society, the natives of Australia, Phyllis Kaberry has shown the importance and status of women to be a considerable one. [1]



Few things have depressed women more than the Enlightenment, which turned woman into an ornament and a helpless creature. Unless of the lower class, where work was mandatory, the “privileged” woman was a useless, ornamental person, with almost no rights. This had not been previously true. In 17th-century England, women were often in business, were highly competent managers, and were involved in the shipping trade, as insurance brokers, manufacturers and the like.

 

Up to the eighteenth century women usually figured in business as partners with their husbands, and not in inferior capacities. They often took full charge during prolonged absences of their mates. In some instances, where they were the brighter of the pair, they ran the show. [2]

A legal “revolution” brought about the diminished status of women; “the all too familiar view of women suddenly emerging in the nineteenth century from a long historical night or to a sunlit plain is completely wrong.” [3] A knowledge of early American history makes clear the high responsibilities of the woman; New England sailing men could travel on two and three year voyages knowing that all business at home could be ably discharged by their wives.

 

The Age of Reason saw man as reason incarnate, and woman as emotion and will, and therefore inferior. The thesis of the Age of Reason has been that the government of all things should be committed to reason. The Age of Reason opposed the Age of Faith self-consciously. Religion was deemed to be woman’s business, and, the more the Enlightenment spread, the more church life came to be the domain of women and children. The more pronounced therefore the triumph of the Age of Reason in any culture, the more reduced the role of women became. Just as religion came to be regarded as a useless but sometimes charming ornament, so too women were similarly regarded.



These ideas moved into the United States through the influence of Sir William Blackstone on law, who in turn was influenced by England’s Chief Justice Edward Coke, a calculating opportunist. As a result, his law books of the first half of the 19th century showed woman in a diminished role. Three examples of this are revealing:

Walkers’ Introduction to American Law: The legal theory is, marriage makes the husband and wife one person, and that person is the husband. There is scarcely a legal act of any description that she is competent to perform…. In Ohio, but hardly anywhere else, is she allowed to make a will, if happily she has anything to dispose of.

Roper’s Law of Husband and Wife: It is not generally known, that whenever a woman has accepted an offer of marriage, all she has, or expects to have, becomes virtually the property of the man thus accepted as a husband: and no gift or deed executed by her between the period of acceptance and the marriage is held to be valid; for were she permitted to give away or otherwise settle her property, he might be disappointed in the wealth he looked to in making the offer.

Wharton’s Laws: The wife is only the servant of the husband. [4]

There is an extremely significant clause in Roper’s statement: “It is not generally known….” The full implications of the legal revolution were not generally known. Unfortunately, they did come to be generally supported, by men. Even more unfortunately, the churches very commonly supported this legal revolution by a one-sided and twisted reading of Scripture. The attitude of men generally was that women were better off being left on a pedestal of uselessness. At a women’s rights conference, one speaker answered these statements, Sojourner Truth, a tall, colored woman, prominent in anti-slavery circles and herself a former slave in New York state. She was 82 years of age, had a back scarred from whippings, could neither read nor write, but had “intelligence and common sense.” She answered the pedestal advocates powerfully and directly, speaking to the male hecklers in the audience:

Wall, chilern, whan dar is so much racket dar must be somethin’ out of kilter. I tink dat ‘twixt de niggers of de Souf and de womin at de Norf, all talkin’ ’bout rights, de white men will be in a fix pretty soon. But what’s all dis here talkin’ ’bout? Dat man ober dar say dat womin needs to be helped into carriages, and lifted ober ditches, and to hab de best place everywhar. Nobody eber helps me into carriages, or ober mud-puddles, or gibs me any best place! And a’n't I a woman? Look at me! Look at my arm!… I have ploughed and planted, gathered into barns, and no man could head me! And a’n't I a woman? I could work as much and eat as much as a man — when I could get it 00 and bear de lash as well! And a’n't I a woman? I have borne thirteen children, and seen ‘em mos’ all sold off to slavery, and when I cried out with my mother’s grief, none but Jesus heard me! And a’n't I a woman? Den dat little man in black dar, he say womin can’t have as much rights as men, ’cause Christ wan’t a woman! Whar did your Christ come from?… Whar did your Christ come from? From God and a woman! Man had nothin’ to do wid Him. ‘Bleeged to ye for hearin’ me, and now ole Sojourner han’t got nothin’ more to say. [5]

The tragedy of the women’s rights movement was that, although it had serious wrongs to correct, it added to the problem, and here the resistance of man was in as large a measure responsible. Instead of restoring women to their rightful place of authority beside man, women’s rights became feminism: it put women in competition with men. It led to the masculinization of women and the feminization of men, to the unhappiness of both. Not surprisingly, in March 1969, Paris couturier Pierre Cardin took a logical step in his menswear collection show: “the first garment displayed was a sleeveless jumper designed to be worn over high vinyl boots. In other words, a dress.” [6]

Thus, the Age of Reason brought in an irrational supremacy for men and has led to the war of the sexes. As a result, the laws today work, not to establish godly order, but to favor one sex or another. The laws of Texas reflect the older discrimination against women; the laws of some states (such as California) show a discrimination in favor of women.



To return to the Biblical doctrine, a wife is her husband’s help-meet. Since Eve was created from Adam and is Adam’s reflected image of God, she was of Adam and an image of Adam as well, his “counterpart….” The Biblical doctrine shows us the wife as the competent manager who is able to take over all business affairs if needed, so that her husband can assume public office as a civil magistrate; in the words of Proverbs 31:10-31, he can sit “in the gates,” that is, preside as a ruler or judge. Let us examine the women of Proverbs 31:10-31, whose “price is far above rubies.” Several things are clearly in evidence:

 

1. Her husband can trust her moral, commercial, and religious integrity and competence (vss. 11, 12, 29-31).


2. She not only manges her household competently, but she can also manage a business with ability (vss. 13-19, 24-25). She can buy and sell like a good merchant and manage a vineyard like an experienced farmer.


3. She is good to her family, and good to the poor and the needy (vss. 20-22).


4. Very important, “She openeth her mouth with wisdom: and in her tongue is the law of kindness” (vs. 26). The useless woman of the Age of Reason, and the useless socialite or jet set woman of today who is a show-piece and a luxury, can and does speak lightly, and as a trifler, because she is a trifle. The godly woman, however, has “in her tongue the law of kindness.” People, men and women, who are not triflers avoid trifling and cheap, malicious talk. Loose talk is the luxury of irresponsibility.


5. She does not eat “the bread of idleness” (vs. 27); i.e., the godly woman is not a mere luxury and pretty decoration. She more than earns her keep.


6. “Her children rise up and call her blessed; her husband also, and he praiseth her” (vs. 28).

Obviously, such a woman is very different from the pretty doll of the Age of Reason, and the highly competitive masculinized woman of the 20th century who is out to prove that she is as good as any man, if not better. A Biblical faith will not regard woman as any less rational or intelligent than man; her reason is normally more practically and personally oriented in terms of her calling as a woman, but she is not less intelligent for that.

Another note is added by King Lemuel in his description of the virtuous woman:

“Charm is deceitful and beauty is passing, but a woman who reveres the LORD will be praised” (vs. 30, Berkeley Version).



Nothing derogatory towards physical beauty is here intended, and, elsewhere in Scripture, especially in the Song of Solomon, it is highly appreciated. The point here is that, in relation to the basic qualities of a true and capable help-meet, beauty is a transient virtue, and clever, charming ways are deceitful and have no value in the working relationships of marriage.

 

Important as the role of a woman is as mother, Scripture presents her essentially as a wife, i.e., a help-meet. The reference is therefore not primarily to children but to the Kingdom of God and man’s calling therein. Man and wife together are in the covenant called to subdue the earth and exercise dominion over it…. Certainly, the command to “increase an multiply” is very important, but a marriage does not cease to exist if it be childless…. God himself defined Eve’s basic function as help-meet, important as motherhood is, it cannot take priority over God’s own declaration.

Endnotes:

 

1. Phyllis M. Kaberry, Aboriginal Woman: Sacred and Profane (London: Routledge and Kegan Paul, 1939).

2. Ferdinand Lundberg and Marynia F. Farnham, M.D., Modern Woman, The Lost Sex (New York: Harper, 1947), p. 130.

3. Ibid., p. 421.

4. Charles Neilson Gattey The Bloomer Girls (New York: Coward-McCann, 1968), p. 21.

5. Ibid., p. 105 f.

6. Time, April 18, 1969, p. 96.

7. Ibid., p. 213.

 

 

(Excerpted from Institutes of Biblical Law: Vol. I) 

Read More

Homeschool Help: What Does a “Lifestyle of Learning” Look Like?

 

Again, the Boyer's advise on homeschooling our talented children have been very helpful.   My very adventurous girl will do her homework in the great outdoors and actually do it!  she is one of those who would hate to have to sit and be stuck indoors, rain or shine.

Here is Marilyn again  (here is the last post about A Life style of learning)

We must remember that the school classroom functions as it does NOT because that has been found to be the superior method of education, but because that is the only option for mass-producing students. It contradicts, in fact, the evidence that children learn best in a realistic, life-like setting, with hands-on experience.

As John Taylor Gatto reminds:

“It is absurd and anti-life to move from cell to cell at the sound of a gong for every day of your natural youth in an institution that allows you no privacy and even follows you into the sanctuary of your home demanding that you do its ‘homework.’

‘How will they learn to read?’…When children are given whole lives instead of age-graded ones in cellblocks they learn to read, write, and do arithmetic with ease if those things make sense in the kind of life that unfolds around them.”  From Why Schools Don’t Educate

So, what does a “lifestyle of learning” look like from day to day? Different for every family. But, upon many requests, I thought I’d offer some practical ways to encourage your child to utilize his curiosity about his world. The ideas are really endless. I’d love to hear YOURS!

• Simply expose them. To books, to conversation, to places, to people, to animals, to cooking, to building, to nature. We simply cannot underestimate a child’s ability to take in, process and store information–something inherent at birth. This begins at birth and the fewer distractions like TV or phones, the better for motivating them to learn about their world.

 

• Listen and watch. A child learns things best in the context of what interests him. Find out what that is, give him experiences around his interests and then look to see the learning opportunities. For example, my 8-year-old son loves building things and he loves large machines. And by “love” I mean he’s obsessed. We have let him build a playhouse (with a little help from Sis), supervising his use of the saw and nail gun. It has taken quite a bit of thought about measurements and angles and my husband has been able to really show him the importance of “squaring” the frame, etc. It’s an excellent exercise in problem-solving. That geometry makes sense to him whereas if I handed him a geometry worksheet right now he wouldn’t have a clue.

• Bait the house with books. This is my favorite. I leave books on art, science, animals and other subjects lying around and sometimes an older child will pick it up and become absorbed and even begin to read and explain it to a younger one. Or when someone crawls up beside me, I open it and start reading. I just ordered a set of “Nature Friend” magazines from Ebay and I’m excited to see how they like those too.

• Let them learn from other people. Do you have friends or family who have a particular trade or skill? Would they mind some of your children hanging out to observe? If that isn’t an option, there are great videos that teach different skills for children who show interest.

• Build vocabulary naturally. Being intentional about the words we use with our children is the best way to build their vocabulary. Random words on a worksheet are much harder to memorize than if they learn the word in context of life and language. Conversation is the best way to improve communication skills. Something, in our technologically-filled lives, that takes deliberate attention.

• Focus on the traits that matter. Any time you research for “most important qualities of a successful person” or “qualities employers look for”, or something similar, the results that turn up always focus on character and NEVER include test scores or degrees. Do we take that to heart and intentionally teach and train character? Communication skills, problem-solving, and integrity rank at the top of almost every list.

LIVE. That’s the way to a superior education. Here is part of our check list, academically speaking:

1. Can they write well, speak well and convey their thoughts well? What are some activities that will facilitate these?


2. Are they numerate? Do they know how to handle numbers, do they understand fractions and how to work out number problems? As they get older, do they know how money works, do they understand debt and interest and budgeting? Very important.


3. Can they type?


4. Do they have a good grasp of history and the workings of the government? We especially want them to read biographies from great men and women of the past.


5. Are they exposed to art in a variety of forms, and music? (If they show giftedness/interest, are we doing what we can to help them excel?)


6. Do they have a heavy dose of common sense?

Charge ahead with confidence!

Read More

A Different Way To Homeschool: A LifeStyle Of Learning

I have a daughter who loves to learn just about anything.  Here she is flying an airplane in this plane simulator.  Life is so interesting to her except when she is sitting down on a desk and asked to do some copywork.  Well, when you're 7 or 8 years old, who wants to do that, when you can be out on a beautiful day learning about how a goat births her kids?  I went to Government schools where I was very good at sitting down and doing everything my teachers said.  Now, I have had to unlearn that this is the way you learn things.  Not so, most children are naturally explorers and are given to us with a natural love for learning.  We must be careful to not spoil it by purchasing all these expensive homeschool curriculums and expecting they follow the rigid schedule and not miss a day because they might not learn or be at the same academic level as public school kids.  Take a big breath.  Aaaahhhh, teaching has never been so much fun with my older daughter as I dropped continuous assignments.  Every year I got more and more flexible with the homeschool schedule that I don't even have it scheduled. 

Our homeschool rule is:  If there is nothing more exciting or interesting going on, then we'll sit down and do some school work.  Well, this is hardly the case.  There seems to always be something more educational going on like, attending to our vegetable garden, picking up two little birds that fell from their nest, watching the goat birth twin kids, talking to visitors, walking to a creek, building a little boat, doing art, selling craigslist items, acting out Bible stories, writing letters to Christians in Prison, cooking, excavating for dinasour fossils, singing, playing piano, helping Dad, working on our family business.....When we are not doing this, my kids favorite time indoors with Mom is to read real living books about historical biographies, God's creation, inspirational stories and of course The Scriptures.

Here is an excellent guide by the Boyer family who have gone before us and from whom I have learned a lot:

(Guest post by Marilyn Boyer of Character Concepts)

One thing I have learned?from one of my struggling learners is that unless some children?want?to learn, they just won’t apply themselves to do it. Unless they?have a desire to learn something, it’s extremely hard for some of them to be able to concentrate and focus.

Some kids are motivated and know what they have to do, set their own goals and get it done.?Other children, however, need to understand why learning is important in order to apply themselves.

If you have a child like this, train yourself to study him and see what matters to to him the most. Then, look for a way to apply what you are trying to teach him to something that he cares about.

For instance, if you are trying to teach handwriting skills and your child just doesn’t care if he writes neatly, let him write something that’s important, like a letter to the editor of the newspaper.

Letters to the editor are one of the most highly read sections of the newspaper, and we found editors love to publish letters written by kids, because it’s so unusual to have a child care enough to write.

Have your child read about an issue and write a letter to be read by thousands of people he can potentially influence. Suddenly, he will care about handwriting, grammar, spelling and communication skills.

If he struggles with math, find a use for that skill you are trying to teach. For example, if you are teaching percentages, go to a sale, let him figure out how much off you are getting on deals, or let him bake a pie and cut it up to learn fractions.

For a boy who loves to build, buy him some wood and let him use measurements to build a bookcase or birdhouse. If your child is interested in airplanes, but not in geometry, let them see the plans the Wright Bros. drew up to make their first glider. These examples are examples of projects I have actually done with my kids.

Find creative ways to apply what you teach, by connecting learning with your kids’ passions, and see if that doesn’t make a huge difference in how they learn.

If you are teaching skills for writing a paper, let your child choose the topic, whether it is about the Tuskegee Airmen or hunting white-tailed deer.

Let your children make bread and sell it, raise chickens, sell the eggs and learn about accounting and small business.

This is the beauty of home education- being able to customize your teaching to your unique child!?I admit, it takes some reprogramming on the part of you, the mom, because we do things the way we’ve seen them done, the way they were taught to us in school. But remember, if there is a better way for your child to learn, climb out of the box and train yourself to enjoy learning with your children!

Read More

Why Have Babies?

"Four is a good number, you're done, right?" This is a typical comment I get coupled with "What beautiful children you have!"  Well, these two comments don't really go together.  If my children are beautiful, why should I not want more of them?  Then, they would also say, "Wow, you have your hands full!"  Well, isn't better full than empty?

Candice Watters did an excellent job at answering the question of why have babies?  She writes:

 You may think your reasons for having babies are biblical, but if you're like me, you've absorbed a lot more culture and a lot less Bible than you realize.

Do you hope to have children? That's the question I've started asking the young married women God brings into my life. It's not as bold as the question Mary Morken asked me,^[1] but it gently opens the conversation about babies — enabling me to go, by God's grace, where most would say angels fear to tread.

Why press for information about such a personal decision? In part because I know how much I needed someone to ask me that question. Once married, Steve and I were on a path of delay. I also ask because we live in an age when there are a hundred reasons not to have babies and very little encouragement to have them; and because I'm convinced, from Scripture, that by God's design, babies are not only uniquely the work of marriage, but also a blessing from God. I want to encourage Christian couples not to miss the blessing.

What do women say when I ask? Their answers go something like this:

• "Oh, yes, we hope to have children someday."


• "We're focusing on our marriage right now."


• "We're saving for a house first."


• "We want to finish grad school before we start a family."


• "We want to pay off our loans before we conceive."

It's pretty much the same answer I gave Mary when she asked me about our plan for babies. I think that's one of the reasons I feel compelled to ask. We didn't really have a plan, but our non-plan of waiting till we reached some fuzzy financial goal was a plan of its own. Our plan was to delay. Fourteen and a half years and five pregnancies later, I know how in-the-now and incomplete our reasons were for putting off babies in our first year and a half of marriage. We thought we were being responsible, and because we deeply desired a family and were looking forward to having children someday, we assumed we were being biblical in our thinking. But we had absorbed a lot more of the culture around us than we realized.

We live in a world where people take great pains and lots of pills to prevent babies when they don't want them, and spare no expense to get them when they do. According to our culture, babies before you want them are an accident, mistake or crisis — a result of a birth control failure. And if you can't have them naturally when you decide you're ready, they're treated like a commodity you have a right to buy, as long as you can afford the price tag. Birth control is no longer a noun, something we use to prevent pregnancy; it's an adjective describing our whole culture. We live in a birth control culture, the key word being control.

Good Reasons to Ask the Question

Mary's question, "What makes you think you'll still be fertile when you decide you're ready to have babies?" jolted me because it offended my sense of control. I figured I knew best when I'd be ready to be a mom. Even though I wasn't on the pill, I was very much in the birth-control mindset. I thought this decision was up to Steve and me. We believed we were in control. Her question hit me like a bucket of ice water.

What if we're not in control? What if by saying no to children now, we miss our window of opportunity? What then? These questions raced through my mind, and later that day, they raced around our family room as we hashed them out with the Morkens. God used them to challenge our assumptions. Steve saved his best counter for last: "But, Dr. Morken, we can't afford them." Dr. Morken didn't waste time looking at our balance sheet or examining our checkbook. He knew we weren't paupers, but even that wasn't the issue. (He and Mary had a fraction of what we did when they got married and started their family, as have most human beings for all of recorded history). The point is that it's not about money. He went to the deeper issue: "Babies are wealth," he said. "Budget for everything but babies."

You can't measure the worth of a baby — a human being made in the image of God — with a spreadsheet or calculator the way you would material things, entertainment, travel or education. People have intrinsic value and worth that is unlike anything else in creation.

The truth is we weren't living on much of a budget, and we weren't really being intentional about getting out of debt. We just knew we liked our current life, our freedom to spend our double incomes the way we wanted to, to have maximum control over our schedules and time. Having a baby would certainly spin us out of control. But not like a car wreck. More like a Peter-walking-on-the-water-and-needing-to-keep-looking-at-Jesus-so-he-wouldn't-drown wreck. This would be bigger than us. And we knew it. We didn't want to lose control.

But we never had it to begin with. Ephesians 1:11 tells us, "In him we have obtained an inheritance, having been predestined according to the purpose of him who works all things according to the counsel of his will …" (emphasis added). Isaiah 46:9b-10 says, "I am God, and there is no other; I am God, and there is none like me, declaring the end from the beginning and from ancient times things not yet done, saying, ‘My counsel shall stand, and I will accomplish all my purpose…'" God is sovereign over what happens in our lives. Every bit of it.

The control we think we have is an illusion — something we realized once we started trying to get pregnant and it took longer than we imagined, and again after we had two babies, when we encountered secondary infertility. We really did think we'd be able to make babies if and when we were ready. We believed it was ultimately up to us. By God's grace and through the Morkens' challenge, however, we realized it wasn't. We stopped assuming our timeline was best; stopped basing our decision primarily on our comfort, ease and consumption patterns; and started asking God when He wanted us to start our family. We started seeking God's wisdom instead of the wisdom of men (Colossians 2:8). Scripture is sufficient for all of life — even the how, when and why of baby making (2 Timothy 3:15-17, 2 Peter 1:21).

Good Reasons to Have Babies

The world says babies are expensive, that they diminish your happiness, and that they limit your spontaneity. They are, they do, and they will — just like a whole host of other things (some worthwhile and some not) that you'll say yes to in your lifetime. Those negatives are not the whole story. And they're not reason enough to delay starting your family. Babies are wealth. They increase your joy, and any challenges they may bring are God's means for your sanctification.

Babies are God's blessing. God's first words to His newly created man and woman were a blessing but also a command, "Be fruitful and multiply" (Genesis 1:28). Children are a reward from God. "Behold, children are a heritage from the Lord, the fruit of the womb a reward" (Psalm 127:3). The blessings God promised His chosen people in the Old Testament when they entered the land always included the fruit of the womb: babies (Deuteronomy 7:12-14).

Babies are part of God's good design. The only thing that was not good at creation was man being alone (Genesis 2:18). We were designed for community, fellowship and family. Sex and babies were part of the created order, and the procreative process was in place before sin entered the world. Having babies is part of the normal order of creation. Why?

God wants the earth to be full of people. Isaiah 45:18 says, "For thus says the Lord, who created the heavens (he is God!), who formed the earth and made it (he established it; he did not create it empty, he formed it to be inhabited!): 'I am the Lord, and there is no other.'" And how will all these babies come to know God and worship Him?

Married couples are called to make babies — disciples of Jesus Christ.^[2] All Christians are called to make disciples (Matthew 28:19), that is, spiritual children. But Christians who are married have the added calling — where God enables them — to make physical offspring (Malachi 2:15). Couples are called to be fruitful and faithful to raise children in the fear and instruction of the Lord (Ephesians 6:4), to the praise of His great glory. And where will that glory be fully realized?

Heaven will be full of worshipers. Only people are made in God's image. Every baby born is an eternal being made in God's image, with the potential to praise Him. We know that one day the earth will be filled with the knowledge of God as the waters cover the sea (Isaiah 11:9). Babies born and given hope through Christ are those people who will one day enter heaven. Where there will be "a great multitude that no one could number, from every nation, from all tribes and peoples and languages, standing before the throne and before the Lamb, clothed in white robes, with palm branches in their hands, and crying out with a loud voice, 'Salvation belongs to our God who sits on the throne, and to the Lamb!'" (Revelation 7:9-10).

The Bible is full of glorious motivation for having babies. Steve and I just weren't in the habit of studying those passages. We didn't even know about a lot of them until after we started researching for our book Start Your Family. It's not that we weren't reading the Bible. We were, but we were reading with an eye toward what we hoped to get out of it, rather than coming to it to learn what the Bible says about God. We are people of our age — influenced by the world around us that says you read the Bible for what you can get from it. God calls us to something different. Scripture tells us that we are responsible for studying God's Word, for hiding it in our hearts, for knowing what God commands and obeying Him.

You don't have to be married to answer the question, "Do you hope to have children?" It's helpful to start thinking about it now. Recognize where the desire for babies comes from. Then submit your desire to God, and let Him shape it to conform with His will, resisting the pressure around you to conform it to the pattern of the world. He'll change you in the process, making you more like Him. And that's one of the best things about His good gift of children: the way they point us to our Father.

Read More

A Woman Is: Gentle

“They call woman sometimes, in thoughtless flattery, an angel, but here an angel in sober truth she is, a messenger sent by God to assuage the sorrows of humanity. The worn traveler who has come through the desert with his life and nothing more; the warrior faint and bleeding from the battle; the distressed of every age and country-long instinctively for this Heaven-provided help. Deep in the sufferer’s nature, in the hour of his need, springs the desire to feel a woman’s hand binding his wound or wiping his brow-to hear soft words dropping from a woman’s lips….Woman was needed in Eden; how much more in this thorny world outside! Physically, the vessel is weak, but in that very weakness her great strength lies. If knowledge is power in department, gentleness is power in woman’s.” From The Family by J.R. Miller. again a book I like to reread because I get convicted and inspired to be the woman God has called us to be.

We are commanded by God to be of a "gentle and quiet spirit".   This inward behavior is not easy to cultivate.  In fact, it is hard, very hard and impossible without the Holy Spirit's help.  A gentle woman is a strong woman.  It is easy and natural to be loud and boisterous.  It takes character and self control to be of a quiet spirit.   It is easy to be sloppy, and careless.  It takes patience and love to be gentle.

Too often our culture has looked down on the "gentle and quiet spirit" in a woman because it seems as a sign of weakness.  Therefore, Christian woman think they have to be loud to be heard and noticed and have a manly tomboish disposition to be strong.  Not so, it speaks the opposite, insecurity and weak spirit with no self-control.

Our families and the world need our gentle touch in their hurting lives.  Our nursing hands will bring healing to the broken hearts around us.  Let us stop and be transformed into women of a "gentle and quiet spirit which is precious in the sight of God" 1 Peter 3:4

I invite anyone who wants to participate in this topic chain about "A Woman is..."  You will pick a word about what a woman is and write a short post about it.  I will review it and post it.  This is an exiting time we live in when we have the opportunity to restore the real meaning of Biblical Womanhood.  You can be a part of this ministry.  Send me a message or leave a comment.

 

 

Read More

Baby-Led Introduction To Solids

This is a good article on starting babies on solid foods.  I don't like the idea of "baby-led" because it makes it seem like baby is in control.  But in reality, you are in control.  You decide when baby is ready to start and you decide, pick and choose baby's food.  Baby in control, in my experience and opinion, is dangerous.

**This post has been entered in “Works for me Wednesdays” at We are THAT Family!**

When it comes to solid food, all babies start eating it eventually. The typical wisdom (of late) has been to start baby on rice cereal at 4 – 6 months, the follow up with vegetables, then fruits, and later, dairy and meats. There have been different ideas through the years (including starting babies on rice cereal as early as 2 weeks old!), but one thing all these “plans” have in common are that babies are spoon-fed their early meals.

Not so in baby-led solids.

Baby-led solids is a relatively new idea. Babies are never fed from a spoon or offered any type of purees. They are also rarely offered grains as a first food, but instead are given ripe, raw fruits and vegetables, cheese, or even bits of meat. The food is placed on a tray in front of them, and the baby is encouraged to do what he will with it — play with it, smash it, lick it, and eat it. If he chooses not to eat, that’s okay.

Babies obviously have to be a bit older before they start solids for this to work. Most babies are more in the range of 6 to 8 months, and some are even older before they’ll actually eat anything this way. The idea is that if the baby refuses to eat at all, or refuses a particular food, he must not be ready for it. If he DOES choose to eat something, he must be ready for it and he clearly wants it. This gives the baby all the control over what and how much he eats. Since the baby has (hopefully) had demand-feeding up until now, he has always had control over how much he eats (and when), and he has self-regulated well. With baby-led solids, he can continue to self-regulate his eating.

We will be doing baby-led solids with Daniel. He is about 5.5 months at this time, so too young (although he does try to grab our food sometimes!). We’re hoping to hold off until 8 months. This is especially important to us because of the history of food allergies. We are hoping that he will not eat things that do not make him feel good (sometimes, kids with allergies will refuse all foods until they are over a year, or certain foods, because they seem to know it is not good for them).

So, WHY would anyone do this? And what should you feed first?

Kelly Mom has a good chart and FAQ on starting solids. She recommends no earlier than 6 months, and cautions that solids DO NOT REPLACE BREASTMILK (or formula)! Solids are only for tasting and experimenting until around age 1. (Side note: Kelly mom says that babies who start solids earlier and eat more of them tend to wean earlier, too. If you have already started your baby on solids before 6 months and s/he is eating a fair amount, and you had hoped to breastfeed for quite awhile yet, don’t worry! We started Bekah at 4 months and she ate a lot of solids, too, and she is still an avid nurser at 23 months. So, whatever “mistakes” you make, you can fix or overcome!)

La Leche League weighs in on baby-led solids, too (frequently called “baby led weaning;” I don’t like this term because it implies that you are putting the baby from breastmilk onto solids, and this shouldn’t be true — baby should continue to breastfeed while adding complementary foods).

It’s important to know how a baby’s gut develops. (Click the link for indepth information. It also thoroughly explains the “leaky gut syndrome” I mentioned in a previous post.) If a baby is exclusively breastfed from birth (no supplementation at all), his or her gut will close and begin to mature around 18 weeks. Solids should never be started earlier than this. In babies who are formula fed or who have been supplemented with formula on occasion, it takes even longer for the gut to mature. Using probiotics can help, although breastfeeding is best. The reason that solid foods can’t be started until the gut has closed and matured is that until this time, large, undigested proteins can get from the intestines into the bloodstream, where the body can begin to attack them as foreign invaders, creating an allergic reactions. When the gut is mature, proteins don’t pass into the bloodstream until fully digested, and therefore don’t create allergic reactions (this is why special formulas have pre-digested proteins or even basic amino acids, in an attempt to bypass this issue and cause no allergic reactions).

However, age isn’t the only thing to look for when starting solids. The calendar is a good start — as in, don’t start sooner than 6 months of age, unless advised for real medical reasons (a lot of doctors will say “sure, 4 months is fine!” but not have any particular reason why your child NEEDS solids so early; I would not consider this a medical reason). But also look for:

*Doubled birth weight
*Ability to sit unassisted
*Development of the “pincer grasp”
*Interest in food (watching you eat, grabbing your food)
*Loss of the tongue-thrust reflex

If your baby doesn’t have ALL of these, he’s not ready for solids. Solids, contrary to popular belief, will not help a babysleep through the night (there is controversy regarding babies with reflux, but my personal belief is that reflux is usually caused by allergies, or immature digestive system, and neither is fixed by feeding unnecessary food, or drugs). It is important to note that breastmilk contains 22 – 35 calories/ounce, and formula contains about 22 calories/ounce. Early solids will typically contain 5 – 10 calories/ounce, and should make up a very sparing part of the child’s diet. Put this way, it’s obvious that breastmilk is the fattiest and most filling food, and that solids will not “fill the child up” and help him/her to sleep longer.

Once a baby IS ready, though, here are some good first foods:

*Avocado
*Squash
*Sweet potatoes
*Chicken (cut in very tiny pieces, to avoid choking)
*Cooked apples (cut in very tiny pieces)
*Cooked pears
*Egg yolks (no whites)

You will notice that no type of grains are on this list. This is because grains are not good for young babies. The Weston A. Price Foundation recommends that no grains be introduced until around age 2 because babies have a very hard time digesting grains. They actually recommend that animal products (egg yolks, then liver, then other meats and butter) bebaby’s first foods, starting fruits and vegetables only after 10 months. Babies don’t handle “roughage” well as adults do, because they don’t produce much amylase, an enzyme required to digest grains and other roughage.

Introduce foods only one at a time, no more often than every three days. It can take awhile for reactions to show up, so iffoods are introduced too quickly, it can be hard to tell which is causing a reaction. In children with a family history of allergies (especially siblings), waiting a week between new foods is a good idea. Reactions may include the following:

*Diarrhea
*Vomitting (especially projectile)
*Constipation
*Hives
*Trouble breathing/anaphylaxis
*Eczema
*Night waking
*Screaming
*Belly pain/upset/gas
*Cradle cap

Please be aware that eczema flare-ups ARE a sign of allergy and are NOT normal (Bekah’s eczema ONLY flares up when she’s eaten a food she’s allergic to, and her doctor has indicated this is a sign to watch for). Please also be aware that some of these symptoms can be a sign that the baby is simply not ready for the food and NOT an allergy, but it still means you must wait awhile before trying it agai
n. It is a good idea to introduce filtered water and a good probiotic at the same time as you introduce solids to hopefully minimize any reactions (per Bekah’s doctors).

A lot of babies experience severe constipation when rice cereal is introduced first — Bekah did. They actually cry and strain. This is not normal, and is a sign that their bodies are not ready to digest grains. Many parents are told this IS normal and are advised to give their babies juice, or worse, medical suppositories. The best answer is to stop feeding grains and start with other foods, or simply wait longer to feed foods at all. Remember: babies are NOT supposed to be getting a large portion of their calories from their food yet. They are only tasting and learning about new textures, experimenting.

When introducing a food, cut up a small bit of it into tiny pieces and place them on a highchair tray. Sit the baby in the highchair, and encourage him/her to play with, lick, and eat the food. If s/he is not interested, don’t push him/her to try it. Just wait a couple days and try again. Always watch your child carefully when s/he is eating, especially in the first few months. If the baby indicates s/he likes the food and wants more (baby sign is really great for this), or wants some help, go ahead and help. This is BABY LED, but that doesn’t mean you can’t help if the baby would like you to.

Once you have introduced several foods, you can start to put more than one on the tray at once, or serve some of the family’s meal to the baby (for example: egg yolks cooked with some meat). Introducing butter and coconut oil early on is a good idea, too, because both provide the needed saturated fat and cholesterol to the baby ( coconut oil is cholesterol-free but does contain the medium-chain fatty acids found, besides coconut, only in mother’s milk). The Weston A. Price Foundation has lots of good ideas on feeding babies (linked above).

In case you find this article a bit strange and lest you think I feel like I’m a “perfect parent” for doing things this way (as it’s been brought to my attention that sometimes I come off that way when I don’t mean to), let me tell you about my experience feeding Bekah. She was given formula supplements from birth to 6 weeks, then exclusively breastfed until 4 months. She was started on rice cereal just prior to reaching 18 weeks. I did this because she had stopped sleeping well at night at 3 months (although she was STILL only waking once per night, which, believe me, is a whole lot better than Daniel’s doing now at almost 5.5 months) and I felt like she needed “more” and it would help her sleep through the night (it didn’t. She only starting sleeping through the night “most of the time” at 22 months). Within a week we were trying pears, peas, bananas, apples, carrots, and various other foods. We didn’t wait more than 2 or 3 days in between foods, and I didn’t note any allergic reactions as such (horrible constipation from the rice cereal, followed by diarrhea and night waking from peas, which we now know she is allergic to). By 6 months I kind of was trying to hold back, but also sort of letting her eat “whatever.” I spoonfed her everything, and made purees for her. I usually fed her either a puree of fruit or vegetable (broccoli was another common one early on) for her meals, or I fed her over-cooked, mushy, cut up fruit or vegetables. When I didn’t have any around (I never bought any jars), I would feed her whatever was around — pastacoated in canned tomato soup, cream or cheese soups, even Taco Bell cheese roll-ups once or twice. I loved that she’d eat anything. At 8 months or so I’d give her “whatever” half the time, and sweet potatoes mixed with brown rice for dinner. That stopped at 11 months after she got the stomach flu and refused to eat it anymore. Right around her birthday, she stopped eating anything except apples, bananas, bread, cheese, and potatoes, when previously she’d eaten anything. Just after this we started discovering all her allergies…and since then we’ve been on a roller coaster ride of trying to heal her, get her to try new foods, etc. etc. She is FINALLY willing to at least try most foods now, and is sleeping through the night…most of the time (she is 23 months). There were months and months where we just had to feed her more applesauce, or another slice of bread, because she literally would not eat anything else. It was very frustrating. Anyway — we’re trying really hard to avoid that with Daniel, so I’ve done all this research on how we can do a better job feeding him so that (hopefully) it doesn’t happen again. Knock on wood.

How and when did you begin solids with your baby? What did you feed first? Has this post brought new ideas to you about infant feeding?

Like what you read? Subscribe over on the right and get posts everyday in your email!

Like what you've read? Subscribe so you never miss a post! You can also follow us on Facebook or Pinterest. Thanks for reading!

 

 

 

Read More

How To Start Baby On Solid Food Safely

With the rise of food allergies on babies, it is important to understand why and how to introduce our babies to eating solid food?  Babies are started on solids far too early now days.  It was not so in past generations.  Some have even told me how they let their baby eat at three months.  This is one of the reason for many baby sicknesses and disorders like eczema, constipation, food allergy and digestive disorders and others.  Babies's stomachs are not developed enough to digest most foods until after one year old.  Even then, stomachs continue to mature so they can't fully digest many vegetables until 5 years old.  So, Mom, relax if your toddler doesn't like vegetables.  If he is over one year old, continue faithfully to offer cooked vegetables but never force them on your child.  You enjoy them as to encourage him to try them.  It will take about 15 tastes before they develop taste buds for it.  It is a battle not worth fighting in contention.

Ok, back to baby food.  Process foods have been outlawed in our home, at least by me.  The law is broken once in awhile though.  How could highly processed rice cereal be the first food I give my baby?  To be clear, babies don't need any other nutrient from solid food than breastmilk (or formula).   What you can do is introduce them to the concept of solids, different textures and tastes, and eating skills.  You can do this when baby seems ready, usually wanting to grab the food you are eating and when they have developed pincer fingering- picking up small objects.  Nothing should be given to babies before 6 months.  My ideal would be after one year.

My experiences:

My second daughter, Destiny, didn't eat until one year old.   She did great.  I didn't have to worry about food allergies.  She was ready, her stomach was moredeveloped and has been a healthy girl.



Danielle, my first one, tried out pureed carrots at 6 months.  She flared up with eczema in her face.  I stopped the food and kept her on breast milk.  After a year she resumed solid food with no problem.  She breastfed until she was 3 and a half years old.

Noah, however, would want to eat at 7 months.  That's when he showed signs of ready to start leaning to eat.  But I was so careless to let him grab pieces of bread.  This severely constipated him.  For two months he suffered from constipation.  I eliminated grains and only allowed him to try soluble fiber foods like fruit.  Drinking an herbal tea also helped him.  I had a hard time keeping him away from food.  To this point, this little boy loves to eat.  But since he was 9 months old, no more constipation.  After a year old, he was fine eating everything.  But I was always cautious on the bread.

Then Liberty here started taking food in at nine months.  At 8 months I would give her the carrot, celery, cucumber and apple sticks for her to grab and play with, not eat.  That is all they need when we sit at the table and they want to eat.  They will be content.  But at nine months, she wanted more.  So slowly I gave her some food.

Here is a list of good foods to start with:

Avocado

egg yolk (cooked, not the white)

blueberries

chicken stock

cooked vegetables

cooked apples, pear, peach

cheese

yogurt

Bananas can be constipating and create mucus, so I stay away from them until one year old.

Of course, you will introduce one at a time.  Remember, taste buds are being developed.  Try to keep the food simple without sugar and salt.

Overall, keep it simple.  Food introduction before 1 year is only for taste and learning how to eat, not for nutrition.  Breast milk is all they need at this time.  After a year, baby can eat pretty much everything.  But be cautious with anything that would upset him.  Keep vegetables cooked.

What are some ways you start your baby on solids?  What are some experiences you have had with your babies?

Read More

The Rise & Fall & Rise of Motherhood In America

Excellent article on motherhood:

Only Women Can Be Mothers Have We Forgotten This Fundamental? By Douglas Phillips Only a woman can carry in her body an eternal being which bears the very image of God. Only she is the recipient of the miracle of life. Only a woman can conceive and nurture this life using her own flesh and blood, and then deliver a living soul into the world. God has bestowed upon her alone a genuine miracle — the creation of life, and the fusing of an eternal soul with mortal flesh. This fact alone establishes the glory of motherhood. Despite the most creative plans of humanist scientists and lawmakers to redefine the sexes, no man will ever conceive and give birth to a child. The fruitful womb is a holy gift given by God to women alone. This is one reason why the office of wife and mother is the highest calling to which a woman can aspire. This is the reason why nations that fear the Lord esteem and protect mothers. They glory in the distinctions between men and women, and attempt to build cultures in which motherhood is honored and protected. In his famous commentary on early American life, Democracy in America, Alexis de Tocqueville explained: Alexis de Tocqueville Thus the Americans do not think that man and woman have either the duty or the right to perform the same offices, but they show an equal regard for both their respective parts; and though their lot is different, they consider both of them as beings of equal value. They do not give to the courage of woman the same form or the same direction as to that of man, but they never doubt her courage; and if they hold that man and his partner ought not always to exercise their intellect and understanding in the same manner, they at least believe the understanding of the one to be as sound as that of the other, and her intellect to be as clear. Thus, then, while they have allowed the social inferiority of woman to continue, they have done all they could to raise her morally and intellectually to the level of man; and in this respect they appear to me to have excellently understood the true principle of democratic improvement. De Tocqueville contrasted the American understanding of women, with European sentiments: There are people in Europe who, confounding together the different characteristics of the sexes, would make man and woman into beings not only equal but alike. They could give to both the same functions, impose on both the same duties, and grant to both the same rights; they would mix them in all things — their occupations, their pleasures, their business. It may readily be conceived that by thus attempting to make one sex equal to the other, both are degraded, and from so preposterous a medley of the works of nature nothing could ever result but weak men and disorderly women. The War on Motherhood America’s glory was her women. De Tocqueville believed this when he wrote: As for myself, I do not hesitate to avow that although the women of the United States are confined within the narrow circle of domestic life, and their situation is in some respects one of extreme dependence, I have nowhere seen woman occupying a loftier position; and if I were asked, now that I am drawing to the close of this work, in which I have spoken of so many important things done by the Americans, to what the singular prosperity and growing strength of that people ought mainly to be attributed, I should reply: To the superiority of their women. But this birthright would be exchanged during the last century for a mess of pottage. Perhaps the greatest legacy of the 20th century has been the war on motherhood and biblical patriarchy. Feminists, Marxists, and liberal theologians have made it their aim to target the institution of the family and divest it from its biblical structure and priorities. The results are androgyny, a radical decline in birthrate, abortion, fatherless families, and social confusion. Incredibly, the biggest story of the 20th century never made headline news.[1]Somehow we missed it. It was the mass exodus of women from the home, and the consequent decline of motherhood. For the first time in recorded history of the West, more mothers left their homes than stayed in them. By leaving the home, the experience and reality of childhood, family life and femininity were fundamentally redefined, and the results have been so bad that if this one trend is not reversed, our grandchildren may live in a world where the both the true culture of Christian family life and the historic definition of marriage are the stuff of fairy tales. Many “isms” have influenced these trends-evolutionism, feminism, statism, eugenicism, Marxism, and more. But in the end, the philosophical gap between the presuppositions of the Atheists, eugenicists, and Marxists of the early 20th century, and the presuppositions of the professing Church in the 21st century, have narrowed dramatically. The goals of the state and the goals of the mainstream church have so merged, that the biblical family with its emphasis on male headship, generational succession, and prolific motherhood are a threat to the social order of both institutions. Less than one hundred years ago, the architects of the atheistic communist Soviet state anticipated the death of the Christian family. They explained the need for destroying the Christian family with its emphasis on motherhood, and replacing it with a vision for a “new family.” Lenin wrote: Vladimir Lenin We must now say proudly and without any exaggeration that part from Soviet Russia, there is not a country in the world where women enjoy full equality and where women are not placed in the humiliating position felt particularly in day-to-day family life. This is one of our first and most important tasks. . . Housework is the most unproductive, the most barbarous and the most arduous work a woman can do. It is exceptionally petty and does not include anything that would in any way promote the development of the woman. . . The building of socialism will begin only when we have achieved the complete equality of women and when we undertake the new work together with women who have been emancipated from that petty stultifying, unproductive work. . . We are setting up model institutions, dining-rooms and nurseries, that will emancipate women from housework. . . These institutions that liberate women from their position as household slaves are springing up where it is in any w ay possible. . . Our task is to make politics available to every working woman. In his 1920 International Working Women's Day Speech, Lenin emphasized: The chief thing is to get women to take part in socially productive labor, to liberate them from 'domestic slavery,' to free them from their stupefying [idiotic] and humiliating subjugation to the eternal drudgery of the kitchen and the nursery. This struggle will be a long one, and it demands a radical reconstruction, both of social technique and of morale. But it will end in the complete triumph of Communism. Lenin’s comrade Trotsky played a key role in communicating the Marxist vision of what he called the “new family.” Lenin and Trotsky believed in the overthrow of Christianity by destroying the biblical family. They sought to build a new state, free from historic Christian presuppositions concerning the family. This meant denigrating the biblical notion of male headship and hierarchy within the family. It meant eliminating any sense that there should be a division of labor between man and wife. This required delivering women from the burdens of childbirth and childcare. It meant adopting tools like birth control as guarantors that women could be free to remain in the workforce. Trotsky said this: Leon Trotsky Socialization of family housekeeping and public education of children are unthinkable without a marked improvement in our economics as a whole. We need more socialist economic forms. Only under such conditions can we free the family from the functions and cares that now oppress and disintegrate it. Washing must be done by a public laundry, catering by a public restaurant, sewing by a public workshop. Children must be educated by good public teachers who have a real vocation for the work. Then the bond between husband and wife would be freed from everything external and accidental, and the one would cease to absorb the life of the other. Genuine equality would at last be established. . . The most disturbing part of quotes like those above is how similar they sound in sentiment and spirit to voices today from individuals who claim to be a part of the Church of Jesus Christ. Even more disturbing is how many of the anti-family social reforms are presuppositions of modern Christians in America. Presuppositions which have been fully accepted. How America’s Conscience Was Seared Toward Motherhood But motherhood is not easily defeated. It was here from the beginning and it has always carried the Church and civilization forward. Motherhood not only perpetuates civilization, it defines it. At first Jamestown was a bachelor society struggling for survival. But she became a civilization when the women arrived. Plymouth, on the other hand, began as a civilization-families of faith committed to fruitfulness and multiplication for the glory of God, an impossibility without motherhood. Motherhood is not easily defeated because God has placed reminders of its importance in the very bodies of the women He created. To defeat motherhood, the enemies of the biblical family must do more than make it a social inconvenience, they must teach women to despise themselves by viewing their own wombs as the enemy of self-fulfillment. This means minimizing the glorious gift of life which is only given to womankind. It means redefining what it means to be a woman. But even this is not enough. To defeat motherhood the enemies of the biblical family must sear the conscience of an entire generation of women. This is done through the doctrines of social emancipation from the home, sexual liberation, birth control, and abortion — all four of which cause a woman to war against her created nature. Instead of being the blessed guardian of domesticity for society, she is taught that contentment can only be found by acting, dressing, and competing with men. Instead of being an object of respect, protection, and virtue, she sells herself cheaply, thus devaluing her womanhood. Instead of glorying in a fruitful womb she cuts off the very seed of life. Sometimes she even kills the life. Years of playing the part of a man hardens a woman. It trains women to find identity in the corporation, not the home. It teaches them to be uncomfortable around children and large families — the mere presence of which is a reminder of the antithesis between God’s design for womankind and the norms of post-Christian societies. But women are not the only ones with seared consciences. Men have them too. Consider that fifty years ago a man would have winced to think of female soldiers heading into combat while stay-at-home dads are left behind changing diapers. Today’s man has a seared conscience. He no longer thinks of himself as a protector of motherhood, and a defender of womankind. He comforts himself by repeating the mantras of modern feminism, and by assuring himself of how reasonable and enlightened he is — how different he is from his intolerant and oppressive fathers. But in his heart, modern man knows that he has lost something. He has lost his manhood. To be a man, you must care about women. And you must care about them in the right way. You must care about them as creatures worthy of protection, honor, and love. This means genuinely appreciating them for their uniqueness as women. It means recognizing the preciousness of femininity over glamour, of homemaking over careerism, and of mature motherhood over perpetual youth. But when women are reduced to soldiers, sexual objects, and social competitors, it is not merely the women who lose the identity given to them by the Creator, but the men as well. This is why the attack on motherhood has produced a nation of eunuchs — socially and spiritually impotent men who have little capacity to lead, let alone love women as God intended man to love woman — as mothers, wives, sisters, and daughters. Motherhood Will Triumph There is an important reason why motherhood will not be defeated — The Church is her guardian. As long as she perseveres — and persevere she will — motherhood will prevail. The Church is the ultimate vanguard of that which is most precious and most holy. She holds the oracles of God which dare to proclaim to a selfish, self-centered nation: “Children are a blessing and the fruit of the womb is His reward.” Psalm 127:3. The Church stands at the very gates of the city, willing to receive the railing complaints of feminists, atheists, and the legions arrayed against the biblical family, and she reminds the people of God: “Let the older women teach the young to love their children, to guide the homes.” Titus 2:3–5. It is this very love of the life of children, this passion for femininity and motherhood which may be God’s instrument of blessing on America in the days to come. As the birth rate continues to plummet, divorce rates rise, and family life in America dissipates to the point of extinction, life-loving families will not only have an important message to share, but thy will have an army of children to help them share it. The Question Teacher: Susie what do you want to be when you grow up? Susie: I want to be a doctor. Teacher: How wonderful! And what about you Julie? Julie: I want to be a soldier. Teacher: How commendable! And what about you Hannah? Hannah: When I grow up I want to be a wife and mother! Teacher: [dead silence] . . . After years of society belittling the calling of motherhood, something wonderful is happening — something wonderfully counter-cultural! In the midst of the anti-life, anti-motherhood philosophies which pervade the culture, there is a new generation of young ladies emerging whose priorities are not determined by the world’s expectations of them. They have grown up in homes where fathers shepherd them, where children are not merely welcome, but where they are deeply loved. Some of these women have been home educated, which means that many of them have grown up around babies and their mothers. They have learned to see motherhood as a joy and a high calling, because their parents see it that way. And when asked about their future, these girls know their own minds. These are the future mothers of the Church. Young women who are not afraid to say that the goal of all of their education and training is to equip them to pursue the highest calling of womanhood, the office of wife and mother. The Cost of Motherhood Once a lady went to visit her friend. During the visit the children of the friend entered the room and began to play with each other. As the lady and her friend visited, the lady turned to her friend and said eagerly and yet with evidently no thought of the meaning of her words: “Oh, I’d give my life to have such children.” The mother replied with a subdued earnestness whose quiet told of the depth of experience out of which her words came: “That’s exactly what it costs.” There is a cost of motherhood. And the price is no small sum. And if you are not willing to pay this price, no amount of encouragement about the joys of motherhood will satisfy. But the price of motherhood is not fundamentally different from the price of being a disciple of Jesus Christ. In fact, Christian mothers see their duty as mothers flowing from their calling to Jesus Christ. And what is this cost? Christian motherhood means dedicating your entire life in service of others. It means standing beside your husband, following him, and investing in the lives of children whom you hope will both survive you and surpass you. It means forgoing present satisfaction for eternal rewards. It means investing in the lives of others who may never fully appreciate your sacrifice or comprehend the depth of your love. And it means doing all these things, not because you will receive the praise of man — for you will not — but because God made you to be a woman and a mother, and there is great contentment in that biblical calling. In other words, Motherhood requires vision. It requires living by faith and not by sight. These are some of the reasons why Motherhood is both the most biblically noble and the most socially unappreciated role to which a young woman can aspire. There are many people who ask the question: Does my life matter? But a mother that fears the Lord need never ask such a question. Upon her faithful obedience hinges the future of the church and the hope of the nation. In 1950, the great Scottish American preacher Peter Marshall stood before the United States Senate and he explained it this way: Peter Marshall The modern challenge to motherhood is the eternal challenge — that of being a godly woman. The very phrase sounds strange in our ears. We never hear it now. We hear about every other kind of women — beautiful women, smart women, sophisticated women, career woman, talented women, divorced women, but so seldom do we hear of a godly woman — or of a godly man either, for that matter. I believe women come nearer fulfilling their God-given function in the home than anywhere else. It is a much nobler thing to be a good wife than to be Miss America. It is a greater achievement to establish a Christian home than it is to produce a second-rate novel filled with filth. It is a far, far better thing in the realm of morals to be old-fashioned than to be ultramodern. The world has enough women who know how to hold their cocktails, who have lost all their illusions and their faith. The world has enough women who know how to be smart. It needs women who are willing to be simple. The world has enough women who know how to be brilliant. It needs some who will be brave. The world has enough women who are popular. It needs more who are pure. We need women, and men, too, who would rather be morally right that socially correct. As we approach America’s national Mother’s Day celebration, lets remember that we are fighting for the Lord, and it is He who prioritizes motherhood and home as the highest calling and domain of womanhood “that the word of God be not blasphemed.” Titus 2:5. May the Lord fill our churches with faithful mothers. Douglas Phillips, President, Vision Forum Ministries [1] In his 2002 book Bias: A CBS Insider Exposes How the Media Distort the News , Bernard Goldberg wrote: “They don’t report the really big story — arguably one of the biggest stories of our time — that is absence of mothers from American homes is without any historical precedent, and that millions upon millions of American children have been left, as Eberstadt puts it, ‘to fend for themselves’ — with dire consequences.” p. 166

What are some thoughts you have had lately, looking around at our culture today, about motherhood and how you "fit in"?

Read More

Mother, Always Patient, Always Kind

^" And let us not be weary in well doing: for in due season we shall reap, if we faint not." Galatians 6:9

 

Read More

The Myth Of A Mother's Paycheck

The greatest excuse women give for not staying at home is that they can't afford it.  They need two incomes to survive.  I live in one of the top 4 most expensive areas of the nation and even here, I have been able to stay home.  But for those who think they need that second job.  I would pose the challenge of sitting down and add up some numbers.  You will be surprised.  Here is a very conservative example.

Annual wage                             $14,000.00

Monthly salary                              $1,166.66

EXPENSES (Monthly)

1. Federal income tax (25%)                $292

2. State income tax (5 %)                          58

3. Social Security tax (7%)                         81.66

4. Tithe                                                           117.00

5. Gas (400 miles @ 60 c per mile)        240

6. Car (maintenance, ins., registration)  35

7. Meals ($6 a day)                                      120

8. Extra clothes and cleaning                 100

9. Forteited savings on thrift

shopping                                                   116.66

10. Hairdresser                                            20

11. Employee insurance                            80

12. Day care

($150 a week, one child)                 200

13. "I owe it to myself" expense             95        


                                       TOTAL   $1,555.32

Net Loss    ($388.66)

 

As you can see, the numbers are pretty conservative.  You may have higher numbers and higher income as well as extra unnecessary expenses.
For some reason, just because a family has two incomes they excuse having extra memberships and things that are not really needed.  Therefore, the numbers are different for each.  Even if you end up with, let's say, $388.88 positive instead of negative, is it worth it?  All that absence from your family, your children, missing out their growing up, having others enjoy them (or not) every day and not enjoying your home because you are gone all day?  Just for a few hundred dollars a month.  God is bigger than a few hundred dollars a month.  He is able to supply all our needs.  When we are face with a need, then we become creative.  Your home can become a center of industry and productivity.

How are your numbers?  Are you willing to let go and let God provide?  Is your husband supportive of you staying home?

 

 

Read More

The Home: A Center For Discipleship - Part 6

 

When we gather as a family to brainstorm for ideas to do or make for others, our mission is always before us.  Christ charged us with the Great Commission, “Go ye and make disciples of all nations…”   Therefore, everything we decide to make and do has that in mind, “to make disciples”.  That is the purpose of this site, too.  In the home, we focus on discipleling our children as they also watch us, parents, how we try to imitate Christ and be His disciples.  This aspect of the home is so critical.  It is parenting by intent rather than by default.

Parenting by default is also parenting but with no purpose or vision, just let life go by and do what you have to do to survive.  You know, sleep, eat, go to school, get a job, get married and have kids so they can go to school and continue the cycle.  Parenting by intent is having a purpose.  Our purpose for every Christian home should be to point our children to the Savior so they can have their personal relationship with Him.  Jesus commands us to let the children come to Him.  Wow to us is we are stumbling blocks for our children to come to Him.  The way we present the Gospel, our prayer life and even the way we read His Word will communicate a love for God or religion.

The home is the place where children meet and encounter God.  It is a place of Evangelism.  It is not Sunday school, youth group or children’s church.  It is the home.  The home needs to be supplying the church with the leaders, pastors, teachers, evangelists, apostles and prophets.

How do we parent intentionally?

The answer is very simple:  Just being with your children.  As Deuteronomy 6:4-6 teaches us, when you rise up, when you sit down, when you walk by the way, and when you lie down.  Everyday, there are many opportunities to disciple our children in the ways of the Lord, which is the way they should go.

I have mothers coming to me asking me to have play dates with them so their children homeschooled or toddlers can grow in their social skills.  I do like to get together with other moms who are homeschooling or have little children.  But, I am also always concerned because small children tend to learn from each other’s sinful natures.  Parents misunderstand that their children don’t need other children their age to learn social skills.  On the contrary, children need to be with older adults or mature older children who can teach them good social skills.  What is a three year-old going to learn from another three year old?  Proverbs 13:20 says, “Walk with the wise and become wise, for a companion of fools suffers harm.”

Some ways we disciple our children in a day to day basis is by simply pointing out what the Word of God says about issues that come up or about His Creation as we talk a walk.  When they disobey, I instruct the what God requires from them, to obey their parents.  When they are unkind to one another, I remind them over and over that Jesus commanded us to love one another.  As we study History, we draw lessons from His dealings with man.  As we study God’s Creation, we marvel at such powerful designs in plants, animals and the entire physical world.

Jesus certainly demonstrated it to us when he chose his twelve disciples.  They pretty much lived together.  They saw Him pray, eat, love, teach.  The disciples turned around and did the same.  It is my prayer that my children will do the same and even go beyond what we teach them.

How do you disciple your children?  How have your children encountered God in your home?

The Home - Part 7

Read More

The Home, A Garden To Grow - Part 5

3.  The Home, A garden to grow

The model we see in Deuteronomy 6:4-6 is that disciple-making goes on continuously throughout the day.  This is a great challenge!  We, as mothers ought to diligently assist our husbands in the training up of our children.

We must dedicate our day to this aspect of our home.  It is extremely important because if we neglect it, our children, church and society will suffer huge setbacks.

Our children’s hearts are like a garden.  This spring we have a garden going on which we have to tend to everyday.  We have to water it, check for weeds, protect it from predators and prune it when the time comes.  Our children too grow and need the tender nurture that only a mother can give.  We are with them most of the time.  We see the “weeds” springing up.  We take note, pray about it and pluck them out.  Those grow naturally;  it’s the sinful nature.  Proverbs commands us to diligently discipline our children (Proverbs 13:24).

Having a multigenerational vision will help us see even past our children but great grandchildren.  We want to grow a solid family legacy that will flourish in this world with the love of God.  For this, it will take diligent vigilance.  Remember that the weeds grow naturally and can choke up a beautiful plant.
When I see a mature tree that is crooked.  I like to point it out to my children and tell them,  “Do you see that tree over there?  Why do you think it just grew like that, sideways, instead of straight up to be tall and provide shade or good fruit without breaking?”  They would answer,  “It was not disciplined with the rod.”  “That’s right”, I would affirm and point to a small tree that is growing with rods tied to it so it can grow straight.  “How do you think this tree will grow?”  I ask, “Straight,  they answer.  “That’s is with us, God has to discipline us and help us through His Spirit to grow straight into His Likeness, not crooked looking like the world.”


Just this task of the home alone takes daily full attention to all your children’s hearts.   I confess, that I am nervous at times when someone wants to take my children or want them to visit.  One exposure to the world’s ways, can defile a child’s innocent mind and undermine all the work I’ve tried to cultivate for years.  I take my job very seriously before God.  That is why I don’t desire more a “Mom’s day off” from my children, as much

as a “Mom’s day off” from household duties, so I can free up more time to tend to the hearts of my children.

There is a big deception in many women who think that caring for your children at home is full of mundane activity.  This is not true.  I have even come to like washing dishes, because my precious five-year-old is

so excited to do it with me.  I take this opportunity to bind her heart to mine, and disciple her to Christ likeness.  It is when I see my daughter struggling, giving up, on a task, that I am right beside her encouraging her and reminding her of God's promises.  Of course there are chores I detest, but as I properly align my heart to His Word, I begin to thank Him for all these dishes that need to be put away or all these laundry that needs to be done.  I can’t imagine life without these children or my husband.  How sad it would be if I didn’t have dishes or clothes to clean for them.  And the more the merrier life is!



This careful tending of our children’s hearts can only be done by mother.  Even father’s role is different.  He will lead the whole family in taking dominion.  He is not so in tune with the day-to-day growth of the children because he doesn’t spend as much time with them as Mom does.  But his role is extremely important, so much so that family is dysfunctional without him.   We have a fatherless society, a broken down society.  Fathers who have abandoned their families physically or psychologically.  Yes, there are parents who have switched the responsibility of the growth of their children to school teachers, youth group pastors or Sunday school teachers, who will never be wiling or able to daily pray for them, weed them, discipline then, nurture them so they can grow into men and women of noble character.

At the same time as we devote our lives to cultivate a heart of wisdom in our children, our hearts are also growing into His likeness.  I can say, I am more patient and selfless, thanks to God who gave me these children to mold me in these areas.  My marriage is the primary plant to focus on making sure it is not drying up.  It takes more time and commitment to serve and help my husband.  This is our priority from which the rest overflow.  If we don’t tend to the garden of our home daily with sacrificial love, intentional parenting, and service, we will have a home that resembles the sluggards, full of thorns and weeds.  Our children, to my shame or careful teaching of Proverbs, are quick to point out when they see a front yard that is dry, dirty, full of weeds, thorns and thistles.  “Look, those people are like the sluggard.”

Let’s tend to our hearts, our children’s and our husbands’ with careful and faithful labor so we can grow healthy, and fruitful homes.

What is the state of your garden?  What are your favorite things to do to make it flourish?

The Home - part 6

Read More