Foster Children

Part 1

“Have mercy on me, O Lord, thou son of David; my daughter is grievously vexed with a devil.”* (Matthew 15:22)

“When my father and my mother forsake me, then the Lord will take me up.”* (Psalm 27:10)

God designed for children to have a father and a mother who are entrusted with their care. The children are “under tutors and governors until the time appointed.”* (Galatians 4:2) Before the child is an enormous challenge. The child will become an adult, with an adult’s privileges, responsibilities, and accountability. This is true physically, and it is even more profoundly true spiritually. To nurture the child, tutors and governors are given to the young mind and heart. The young human being needs assistance if his/her potential is to be realized. When this oversight is missing from a child’s life (such as a child of the streets), there is an inner hunger to “belong,” to have roots. This actually finds expression in gangs and idealization of various celebrities in many children who have been forsaken by their parents.

I would to God that every pair of parents felt keenly the weight of responsibility that is really involved. But many are living so selfishly that they are oblivious to the needs of their children. Others are careless and negligent. Even the more careful do not comprehend that the enemy of our souls is much smarter than we are, and that we need greatly the help of the Holy Ghost to accomplish the great task of rearing the young. The burden is so serious and weighty that no one should attempt to parent without being fully saved and established. Most parents are young and immature themselves. There are far too many attempting to raise children who themselves are merely bigger children.

Someone has observed that you need a license to drive an automobile, but there is no license required to be a parent. We would add that there is no valid comparison between the skills required for driving and the skills needed for parenting. Good parenting is one of the hardest tasks that a human being can try, and the consequences of failure are vastly worse than a car wreck.

All children are born with an enormous disadvantage—the sinful, fallen nature of Adam. It is a curse, and even the most easy-to-care-for baby has this nature of wrath (Ephesians 2:3; Romans 5:14). A minister was preaching on this subject, and a mother in the audience interrupted him. “My baby isn’t like this!” she declared. The minister went on with the message, and before the discourse was complete, that baby was throwing a tantrum, much to the embarrassment of the mother. We would be willing to say that the carnality in the little innocent children shows more in some than others, but we are confident that it is in all, just as the Bible tells us.

The Bible tells us that “foolishness is bound in the heart of a child.”* (Proverbs 22:15) There is something in each child that will frustrate and bring to naught the potential of the child to live a worthwhile life here and to make heaven their home over there. Alas, that so many lives are destroyed or fail to be what God designed us to be! Alas, that so many are raised without any oversight, or that oversight is overbearing, oppressive, and destructive.

Civil governments recognize this need of oversight in the child’s life, and there are government organizations which attempt to pick up the pieces when the parents fail the child to the extent that physical life is endangered. These government organizations are given enormous authority to interfere in the lives of others, and this authority is abused at times. However, the failure of many parents is so awful and so complete, that the only recourse of many of these greatly wronged children lies in these great bureaucracies. These government agencies are steeped in secular humanism, remarkably impersonal in many significant ways, and largely overwhelmed by the sheer magnitude of the problem. Thus men deal with men’s failures in this matter.

It is hard enough for a child to choose the right and refuse the wrong when governed wisely and carefully by loving parents. Consider for a moment the awful predicament of those children whose governors have failed them, who have a state agency for a parent. The child, already at severe disadvantage from a lack of training and lack of love, and devastated by being severed from all that was familiar, is plunged into an atmosphere of uncertainty, without any assurance that someone will be there for them. No human being can unconditionally commit to the child. The ones that should have committed are gone. No one can say, “You are my child, whether you do well or poorly. No matter what happens, you are my child.” This is what the child needs acutely. From the child’s perspective, there is no one at all for them. No one cares enough, they think. Not enough to take care of me, anyway. And out of this comes a desperate rage, a frantic struggle for affection mixed with a towering skepticism that there is any affection for them. There is jealousy of others. There are all the normal problems of a child along with much, much more. If the normal problems are represented by the varying force of the wind, the foster child has a continual hurricane. These are the results of a child being forsaken.

The plight of such a child arouses a great deal of sympathy. How could it not? If any decent, thinking person observes such things, how could it not stir pity and some desire to help? With the exception of Adam and Eve, every single member of the human race has gone through this vulnerable time of childhood. I remember reading an article about children on the streets in Seattle, Washington, some years ago. A boy had been put out of his home. His folks didn’t want him. He said, “If someone would just give me a chance!” My heart yearned to give him a chance. But I had my own responsibilities. If I attempted to take on a boy like this, with his special needs, I would have neglected my own children. I might fail at the responsibilities I already had.

If you do not raise your children as you should, then who will (attempt to) do it? If you fail, the pieces will just be there. No one can really pick it up and do it as you should have done it. (If parents won’t parent, who will parent?) So what recourse does the abandoned child have? “When my father and my mother forsake me, then the LORD will take me up.”

But the child doesn’t know the Lord. And there are many things out there that are vying for his/her attention and investment. Oh, how the child needs a governor! A wise governor. A governor endued with wisdom from above. Someone to stand in the gap (Ezekiel 22:30). Someone with power from God. Power to set the will to love. The power of patience and longsuffering. The power to set a good example under awful pressure. The power to keep one’s temper under extreme provocation. The abandoned children need someone like this. Someone who is not discouraged by the godless intervention of the state. This reality in the abandoned child’s life is an awful problem. For the most part, they think they know best. They have low goals. To them, a success is an adult who is not a criminal, and who can hold down a job and be economically self-supporting. They ignore questions of adult morality. They do not care whether one of their children is an atheist or an adulterer. In the pursuit of these inadequate goals, they exercise a god-like authority, which is frequently contradictory and whimsical. In large part, this is driven by too much to do with too few to do it. They believe that man’s hopes lie in himself, in complete contradiction of the Word of God (Jeremiah 10:23). So they faithfully apply the wisdom of men to their children, scheduling regular sessions with psychologists and other counselors. Most of this backfires amazingly (it is provocative and counterproductive), and you would think they would catch on, simply from the lack of good results, but no. This is where they put their faith. It is all that they know to do. And so, led by the wisdom of men, they continue on, mechanically scheduling required visits between the abandoned children and the people who have failed them. This reopens all the wounds of the child and exposes the child to all kinds of unrealistic promises. We understand that the state wishes to motivate the parents to do better, but it is at the expense of the child.

If the foster parent could deal with the child without the intervention of this agency, there would be more hope for the child. If the agency could even respect and esteem the foster parent more, it would be more promising. But money is involved, and most who are involved in foster care become jaded and cynical with the politics and unreasonableness of the system. The combination of all this is deadly and damages the children exceedingly. In many cases, there is little to choose between leaving the child with abusive/neglectful parent(s) or removing them to the abusive/neglectful “oversight” of the bureaucracy. Physical safety, food to eat, and a shelter over the head. These are important, but it is so low. The child needs so much more.

Parenting the Foster Child

We read of the plight of abused children of many years ago in such books as Just Mary and The Poorhouse Waif. Both are based on true stories. The latter occurred just as the Civil War was ending; the former is probably from the late 1800’s or early 1900’s. The suffering and neglect of the children is just as real, but the atmosphere is very different. There is no all-powerful state agency that intrudes on the children’s lives, but it certainly does not seem that such a thing would have made a difference for the children. The suffering of the children orphaned and abandoned as a result of the Civil War brought about workhouses and orphan institutions. Before this, such children had been indentured, that is, bound by contract to an adult for education and training. None of these methods really worked, for the child needs someone who really loves him/her.

We might say that the super-damaged child needs a super-strong foster parent, called of God to the charge. Ordinary parenting skills are not up to the task. Parenting is one of the hardest jobs in the world, and a damaged child in the custody of a government bureaucracy only makes it harder. If the foster child is to be shown their only hope—that is, that God will “take them up”—then good must overcome this enormous evil. The foster parent must demonstrate daily that “greater is He that is in you, than he that is in the world.”* (1 John 4:4)

The arrangement between the foster parent and the state is a signed, contractual agreement in which the state holds almost all the advantages. Basically, in a practical way, the foster parent has no rights. The children can be taken from the home for any reason that the state sees fit to put forth. I know of one case where the foster parent had worked for the state for years. A group of boys had been in the home for many years. The couple who took care of them loved them as their own. They were skillful in the ways of dealing with the bureaucracy. In spite of all this, some workers in the agency had it in for the foster parents; they were successful in manipulating the rules of the agency, and the children were removed from the home. A worker in one of these agencies stated, “Any child in foster care is at risk. They can be moved at any time for any reason.” This is very true. It is not even entirely up to the agency. The courts regularly interfere.

It is true that life itself is full of uncertainties. Parents may die or be imprisoned. Severe and disabling afflictions may prevent parenting. We cannot promise our children that we will always be there for them without adding, “If humanly possible….” But foster parenting is all this with more. Perhaps it is more like raising children in a concentration camp. How accurately the words of the Bible apply here: “Whatsoever thy hand findeth to do, do it with thy might.”* (Ecclesiastes 9:10) “I must work the works of him that sent me, while it is day: the night cometh, when no man can work.”* (John 9:4) The window of opportunity is very short for most of the time.

This lack of control, lack of a free hand, is one of the features of foster parenting. In this respect, it is very, very different from more normal parenting. It is far more perilous to the child and to the foster parent. To do what is right under hostile, or at least unsympathetic, scrutiny is quite different than doing right without this pressure. There is a subtle, and sometimes not-so-subtle pressure to compromise God-given child-raising standards, to conform to the secular humanism view endorsed by the agency.

Spanking

One of these issues is spanking. We will define spanking as moderate corporal punishment, communication beyond words, as administered by a parent to a child for the good of the child while the parent’s temper is under control. When the parent’s temper is not under control, spanking easily slips into beating, and beating easily slips into abuse. We do not believe in beating a child at all, in this sense; and we certainly do not believe in abusing a child. Many parents that have their children taken away claim that they were only spanking their children, when the facts are that they were beating them. It was unfair and really bullying.

Most foster children will not respond desirably to a spanking if you were allowed to give them one. They have been beaten, and the most considerate and loving discipline in the world will cause them to relive the unfairness of the abuse they have suffered, and as a result, your attempts to communicate with them through spanking will not work. “What will work then?” you might say. The somber truth is that hardly anything will work. “Surely you exaggerate,” you may be thinking. No, I am not. That little hardly anything is all you have to work with. It is hard to win their trust enough to deal effectively with them.

The Objective of Home Discipline

Let’s review for a moment the entire subject of parental/child discipline. The subject naturally breaks down into two distinct parts: (1) the objective, and (2) what it takes to arrive at that objective. The Bible calls the objective a vision. “Where there is no vision, the people perish.”* (Proverbs 29:18) We commonly say of people who have no vision that they do not know what they are doing. They are floundering, spinning their wheels, going nowhere, etc. Physically, most all of us have a pretty good vision of what a child should be. The physical boy will grow up to be a physical man. The physical girl will grow up to be a physical woman. We get alarmed if something goes wrong with the process. We know it is not working because of our vision of the end result. But when it comes to the spiritual objective, the spiritual vision, people do not do as well. There is a great deal of purposeless drifting out there. Children just growing up, without being raised. Parents who have basically abdicated their responsibilities. They have just dropped out and given up. If they get the children fed, sheltered, and educated, they think they have done their job. Many have even abandoned basic civilized morality, and they are complete strangers to what it means to be like Jesus. They have no vision to speak of, and they are perishing. The vast majority of children that are taken by the child welfare agencies come from living places like that.

Many are persuaded that if you just beat the children enough, somehow everything will turn out all right. As a defense of their vision (?), they will quote you Proverbs 23:13-14: “Withhold not correction from the child: for if thou beatest him with the rod, he shall not die. Thou shalt beat him with the rod, and shalt deliver his soul from hell.” Their vision is the beaten child. Righteousness, according to them, is only obtained by force. Then the child grows up to be a “right-by-might” person and beats the next generation into submission. Furthermore, they would have you believe (by implication) that God is like this. Might makes right, and God is mightier than us, so He beats us into submission. You can see at a glance that this false vision has little or no room for loving the truth. For following the right voluntarily. The whole issue of choice is lost in the forcing, making, compelling. This false vision of child raising is responsible for a great deal of the religious fanaticism in the world today.

What is the objective of child raising? What is the model for an adult? How should we live? Without hesitation, we would reply, “JESUS!” He is our sample, our example. “For even hereunto were ye called: because Christ also suffered for us, leaving us an example, that ye should follow his steps: Who did no sin, neither was guile found in his mouth: Who, when he was reviled, reviled not again; when he suffered, he threatened not; but committed himself to him that judgeth righteously.”* (1 Peter 2:21-23) This is very comprehensive; it covers everything. And it is where all mankind is called; God is calling and requiring everyone to follow in the footsteps of Jesus. We see readily that to follow in His footsteps that we must be like Him in heart (Matthew 10:24-25; 1 John 3:2), and it is immediately evident that there is much that the most careful training and the most careful discipline cannot impart, yet the most careful training and discipline are very important and a crucial part of the picture.

But what if I am not raised like Jesus was raised and I get really saved, thus becoming a new creature in Christ Jesus (2 Corinthians 5:17)? Is not the change of heart sufficient to make up for my undisciplined growing up? No. Living for God is a mixture of what God does and what I must do. If my ability to carry out my part is damaged, then I will struggle. For instance, if I have formed the mental habit of sloth, I will not turn suddenly industrious when God changes my heart. My motives will change, and something within me will not want to neglect prayer and spiritual activity, but something in my habits and conditioning will still be lazy. If I am to live up to what God has done in changing the motive of my heart, I will have to press out against my flesh and build an industriousness that should have been built by training in my childhood and adolescency. The same is true in all other areas. “Let the brother of low degree rejoice in that he is exalted: But the rich, in that he is made low: because as the flower of the grass he shall pass away.”* (James 1:9-10) We would apply this scripture to poverty of training and riches of training. Some are too low and need to come up; others are too high and need to come down. To be rich in training will not bring about the humility of mind and heart that is so necessary to live a saved life. To all who are rich in this way, the Bible commands, “Be not highminded, but fear.”* (Romans 11:20) (See also 1 Timothy 6:17-19.) To be raised so that you are neither too high or too low is very helpful, but real Bible salvation will cause the low to come up rejoicing and the rich (in this world) to come down rejoicing, too. It will raise the slave and lower the slave owner. It will inspire the uneducated to learn and inspire the educated to humble down.

We are told of Jesus that “butter and honey shall he eat, that he may know to refuse the evil, and choose the good.”* (Isaiah 7:15) Jesus did not live spiritually on margarine (much less imitation margarine) and saccharin. He lived on spiritual realities (butter and honey) that taught Him accurately how to refuse the evil and choose the good. We might say that He had a true vision of how to live as a child, a teenager, and as a man. He is still living (forevermore) on heaven’s butter and honey. He is the head of a great family, a multitude of spiritual children. He wants to give you a butter and honey vision of parenting.

How to Bring About the Objective

We now look at the ways and means to bring about the desired objective of raising a son or daughter in the fear, nurture, and admonition of the Lord.

“He that spareth his rod hateth his son: but he that loveth him chasteneth him betimes.”* (Proverbs 13:24) “Chasten thy son while there is hope, and let not thy soul spare for his crying.””* (Proverbs 19:18) “Withhold not correction from the child: for if thou beatest him with the rod, he shall not die. Thou shalt beat him with the rod, and shalt deliver his soul from hell.”* (Proverbs 23:13-14) “Correct thy son, and he shall give thee rest; yea, he shall give delight unto thy soul.”* (Proverbs 29:17) “If ye endure chastening, God dealeth with you as with sons; for what son is he whom the father chasteneth not?”* (Hebrews 12:7) These scriptures use the words chasten, beat, and correct. The word chasten is defined as “to correct by punishment or reproof, take to task; to restrain, subdue.” The word beat here means “to spank or apply corporal punishment with a switch or rod.” The objective in all these scriptures is to bring about a positive and desirable result in the child’s life. To use these scriptures as a justification for anger toward the child will disobey Ephesians 6:4: “And, ye fathers, provoke not your children to wrath: but bring them up in the nurture and admonition of the Lord.” This does not mean not to do anything that will make the child angry (what correction would accomplish that?), but it means not to do anything that would make the child justifiably angry. Of course, all or nearly all of the child’s anger is justifiable in his/her sight, but we are speaking of jusitifiable in the sense that all of our thoughts and actions will be answerable to God, who knows all things. If your child has a legitimate grievance against you in the sight of God, if you have been unjust to the child, then it is a provocation. This business of family discipline does not put the parents above law, but applies the laws of justice to all, parent and child alike. If you break the law while attempting to deal with the child for breaking the law, then there are two lawbreakers.

Dr. Dobson, in his book Dare to Discipline, makes this point:

The issue of respect can be a useful tool in knowing when to punish and how excited one should get about a given behavior. First, the parent should decide whether an undesirable behavior represents a direct challenge of his authority—to his position as the father or mother. Punishment should depend on that evaluation…. [A]cts of childish irresponsibility… should be handled as such…. [E]xamples [that] do not constitute direct challenges to authority….

In my opinion, spankings should be reserved for the moment a child (age ten or less) expresses a defiant “I will not!” or “You shut up!” When a youngster tries this kind of stiff-necked rebellion, you had better take it out of him, and pain is a marvelous purifier. When nose-to-nose confrontation occurs between you and your child, it is not the time to have a discussion about the virtues of obedience. It is not the occasion to send him to his room to pout. It is not appropriate to wait until poor, tired old dad comes plodding in from work, just in time to handle the conflicts of the day. You have drawn a line in the dirt, and the child has deliberately flopped his big hairy toe across it. Who is going to win? Who has the most courage? Who is in charge here? If you do not answer these questions conclusively for the child, he will precipitate other battles designed to ask them again and again. It is the ultimate paradox of childhood that a youngster wants to be controlled, but he insists that his parents earn the right to control him….

Much sound advice has been written about the dangers of inappropriate discipline, and it should be heeded. A parent can absolutely destroy a child through the application of harsh, oppressive, whimsical, unloving, and/or capricious punishment. I am certainly not recommending such. However, you cannot inflict permament damage to a child if you follow this technique: identify the rules well in advance; let there be no doubt about what is and is not acceptable behavior; when the child cold-bloodedly chooses to challenge those known boundaries in a haughty manner, give him good reason to regret it; at all times, demonstrate love and affection and kindness and understanding…. “I love you too much to let you behave like that.”

“I have never spanked my three-year-old because I am afraid it will teach her to hit others and be a violent person. Do you think I am wrong?”

I believe you are, but you’ve made an important point. It is possible for parents to create hostility and aggressiveness in their children by behaving violently themselves. If they scream and yell, lashing out emotionally and flailing the children for their accidents and mistakes, they serve as models for their children to imitate. That kind of parental violence is worlds apart from the proper disciplinary approach. However, when the child has lowered his head and clenched his fist, he is daring the parent to take him on. If the parent responds appropriately (on the backside) he has taught the child a valuable lesson that is consistent with nature’s method of instruction. Consider the purpose of pain in life. Suppose two-year-old Peter is pulling on the tablecloth and with it comes a vase of roses which tips over the edge of the table, cracking him between the eyes. Peter is in great pain. From this pain he learns that it is dangerous to pull on the tablecloth. Likewise, he presses his arm against a hot stove and quickly learns that fire must be treated with respect. He pulls the doggie’s tail and promptly receives a neat row of teeth marks across the back of his hand. He climbs over the side of his high chair when mom isn’t looking and he learns all about gravity. For three or four years, he accumulates bumps and bruises and scratches and burns, each one teaching him about life’s boundaries. Do these experiences make him a violent person? No! The pain associated with these events teaches him to avoid making those same mistakes again. God created this mechanism as the child’s best vehicle for instruction. The loving parent can and should make use of the same processes in teaching him about certain kinds of social dangers. Contrary to what it might seem, Peter is more likely to be a violent person if his parent fails to apply this principle, because he learns too late about the painful consequences of acting selfishly, rebelliously, and aggressively.

[James Dobson; Dare to Discipline, pp. 54-55]

With these scriptures and principles firmly in mind, we look at the needs of the foster child. They need discipline just as much as any child, but they are greatly damaged by inappropriate discipline before they come to the foster parent. In addition, they are not convinced at all that anyone loves them and is reproving and correcting them for their good. In effect, the foundations for a good parent/child relationship are completely destroyed, and they must be rebuilt, stone by stone, before any result will show. “If the foundations be destroyed, what can the righteous do?”* (Psalm 11:3) “The street shall be built again, and the wall, even in troublous times.”* (Daniel 9:25) You must win the child’s belief in you for their sake, and you must be completely honest with him/her. If the child is old enough, you must explain your limitations and the reality of the child’s situation. If younger, you must act in accordance with a future explanation. And, if the child still will not obey you in due time and will continue to defy you, it must be explained to the child that they will not stay with you. These are the boundaries of your relationship, and it is very important to be completely forthright and plain about those boundaries.

Then you will need a lot of patience, courage, and longsuffering to deal with the child while healing takes place. It is a most uneven process, this healing. One day, a happy, obedient child; then WHAM! All seems lost, and a little monster appears. There are bad days and good days. There are bad hours and good minutes. Far more of the former for quite a while. But after a while, some gains are noticeable. Then you will be torn the more, for all the instabilities that are the normal characteristics of the foster child’s existence are still present, and the window of opportunity may be slammed at any moment…. This is tough work. “Only be thou strong and very courageous.”* (Joshua 1:7)

The Income of the Home

The child welfare agencies typically pay well for the care of the child, but rest assured that you will earn every cent. It is very hard work, 24/7, but you will not be able to rely on having a job, no matter how well you do. The same instability that can snatch a foster child (or all of them) from the home in an instant, applies to the income, as well. Therefore, the agency requires the foster parent to have another source of income. It is nearly impossible for a single parent to foster parent a child(ren) without the financial and other support of another person. If you try it, you will find that being a keeper at home is a full time job (and more than full time). You will let some things slide that should not slide. Things will be allowed that should not be allowed. Vigilance will be less than it should be. Even in situations where a single parent does not have to earn a living, the emotional strain of one adult attempting to be mother and father to the children is formidable. Any widow or widower who has raised or is raising children will admit to the truth of the above statement.

What Is the Home?

This brings us squarely to the question of the income of the home, which in turn, comes to the question of what is a home? This is a whole subject in itself, but it is worthwhile to follow for a ways in connection with our main thought.

We will quote a little from Courtship and Marriage:

A sister told me, not long ago, that there was not a single thing in common between her and her husband—nothing. She named his three major interests in life—things in which she had no interest at all—and then said, “After these three things I come first.” These people are nearing retirement age, coming down to the time in life when they will need the comfort, sympathy, and strength of each other more than they have ever needed each other in their lives, and now, the foundation is crumbling from under them and they are actually just two people living in the same house—nothing more. There are no common bonds to bind them together in their closing years of life.

Another sister in her middle years of life, who has raised a family, has married children, told my wife a while back that she did not know why she and her husband had ever married, as they had so little in common.

Another couple that I knew quite well and I have been in their home on various occasions were just two people living in the same house—nothing more. They were married for quite a few years but the charm and attraction of those earlier years had faded away. They had separate bank accounts and separate bedrooms. When she took her vacation, she took two or three of her lady friends in her car and struck out wherever they wanted to go, leaving him at home. When he took his vacation he just took off alone and left her at home. They each contributed a certain amount for food and the other expenses of operating the home. Everything that makes a marriage a real marriage was gone and their foundation had crumbled from under them.

[Ostis B. Wilson, Jr.; Courtship and Marriage, “Understanding Marriage”]

We see that marriage is a consecration, a covenant, of a man and a woman to each other. It is exclusive of all others, and it gives rights to each of the two that they do not have toward anyone else. This is the foundation of the home, but it is not all that there is to it. God has more for the newly-established home than just each other. The precious consecrated relationship is designed so that equally precious little human souls can be added to that unique relationship. These may be children of the same flesh and bone or children of another physical origin, but the challenge that faces the home is the same in either case: will the children buy in to their home? Will they enter into the covenant as partakers and inheritors? “Now I say, That the heir, as long as he is a child, differeth nothing from a servant, though he be lord of all; But is under tutors and governors until the time appointed of the father.”* (Galatians 4:1-2) We see from this scripture that the parents (natural, adopted, or foster) are over the children until the time the child is no longer a child and is ready to take a place among the adults. It is a very bad mistake to assume that all this is happening just because the child is in the home and is fed, clothed, and educated. That is, that the child’s physical and mental needs are met. The child will not really get the benefit of the heart of the home until the child chooses to love the parents unselfishly and takes a stand to abide by the principles of the founders of the home.

This is a very difficult challenge. Will the natural selfishness of the child yield to the unselfish care of the providers of the home? Will the child willingly come under the yoke? It is a challenge in any home, but it is particularly a challenge in the foster home.

God has provided a process of bringing children into the home of biological parents and children which greatly assists in forming the bonding necessary for the home to continue to be a home. To begin with, the newly conceived child is physically as close to the mother-to-be as is possible. He/she is nourished by her very blood, constantly in closest contact possible with her emotions and heartbeat. The child-yet-to-be-born hears her voice and experiences the very rhythm of her physical being constantly, night and day. He/she is surrounded by her very presence. So profound is this beginning relationship that it is described as “a mother’s love,” as distinguished from a father’s love, etc.

When the child is born into the home, there is a great need for the father to bond with the child. He does this at some disadvantage, compared to the mother. He must love from a certain distance, while she has experienced the closest physical bond that is possible. My father told me that when I was brought into the home after being born, he sat in a rocking chair and held me in his arms. He said that I was so small, so helpless, so dependent, that it just touched his heart, and he cried as he contemplated my need. You can see that my mother had already been committing herself to me for nearly nine months with a constantly growing consecration and dedication, and my father’s consecration was greatly accelerated by the actual sight of me. I was wonderfully blessed by being born into a vital, living home. However, it took me many years before I did not take it for granted and actually bought into the values and principles of my parent’s home.

To be continued…