Promises attached to faithful parenting

[au5t1n]

Please note that this question is for paedobaptists only.

I was in an interesting discussion last night with my credobaptist roommates about the nature of God's promises to bless faithful parenting with faithful children. It was not directly about baptism, but it became clear that our covenantal views were a significant part of why we were having trouble reaching agreement.

Anyway, I just want to make sure in future discussions that I am not misrepresenting the Presbyterian understanding of the promises attached to faithful parenting. I had some difficulty answering their questions, and it's a subject that sparks my curiosity. With that in mind, I have a few questions:

1. Does God promise that faithful Christian parenting can be expected to produce faithful Christian children?

2. If a child of believers falls away, is it ever the case that the parents are in no way whatsoever responsible--that God will sometimes simply just give a couple a reprobate child totally independent of their parenting? Surely we all realize that some very diligent, godly parents have had children fall away (and what a tragedy). I also realize that there is no "magic list" that if done "perfectly" (which is impossible for fallen humans) will guarantee producing godly children, but at the same time we see promises attached to faithful parenting in the Bible. "Train up a child in the way he should go: and when he is old, he will not depart from it" (Prov 22:6) being but one characteristic example. What is the right way to understand these promises?

3. Why is having "faithful children" a requirement for eldership in Titus 1?

So what exactly does the Word promise, and what doesn't it?

Thanks in advance.

 

[jwithnell]

I can be most clear on your first two questions.
1. No.
2. Yes
3. Depends on how faithful is defined (and no, I'm not equivocating)

God is never bound to the actions of man. We are fallen covenant parents. Our children are born and brought into the visible church by baptism, which is a means of grace but is not saving grace in and of itself any more than the Lord's Supper. As parents, we are commanded to bring our children up in the Lord, teaching them as a way of life, day in and day out. As a covenant parent, I command my children to obey and believe, but cannot in and of myself bring salvation about. God often brings about salvation in those so reared. Indeed my children have every benefit because they hear the word and prayer daily and are brought into the church for further instruction, worship and godly example. While this is the normal means of salvation, God may in His sovereignty withhold saving grace from a child.

Every day, as a parent, I learn more and more about the mercy God extends to us. It is by His mercy that my child obeys. It is by His mercy that we can provide for physical needs. It is by His mercy that my children ask questions and seek to understand the banquet that is set before them. I can do as God commands, then beg for his mercy. I can do no more.

 

[MW]

Isaiah 1:2, "Hear, O heavens, and give ear, O earth: for the Lord hath spoken, I have brought up children, and they have rebelled against me."

 

[au5t1n]

Isaiah 1:2, "Hear, O heavens, and give ear, O earth: for the Lord hath spoken, I have brought up children, and they have rebelled against me."

Well...that settles that, then. No one can be a better parent than God. What is the proper understanding of God's promises to reward faithful parenting, then, in light of the full counsel of Scripture?

---------- Post added at 06:44 PM ---------- Previous post was at 06:40 PM ----------

Every day, as a parent, I learn more and more about the mercy God extends to us. It is by His mercy that my child obeys. It is by His mercy that we can provide for physical needs. It is by His mercy that my children ask questions and seek to understand the banquet that is set before them. I can do as God commands, then beg for his mercy. I can do no more.

Good reminder. Thank you!

 

[Jack K]

"Train up a child in the way he should go: and when he is old, he will not depart from it" (Prov 22:6) being but one characteristic example. What is the right way to understand these promises?

It should not be understood as a promise. It is a proverb. So it is a statement of general truth, but not a promise that's always true.

 

[MW]

What is the proper understanding of God's promises to reward faithful parenting, then, in light of the full counsel of Scripture?

Rather than develop an individual theology of Christian parenting, we should seek to practically apply the doctrines of grace to the subject. We should recognise the election of grace even amongst covenant children. Concerning those who are elect, Christian parenting will be a genuine means used by Providence and Grace to bring the child to faith, repentance, new obedience, and the formation of a character which is fitted to serve God in the world and to continue on to the end. In some, the seed springs into action while they are very young. For others, the Lord seems to allow a period of time for its development. For some, the seed lies dormant until later in life, and they pierce themselves through with many sorrows before they start to consider their latter end. In the case of the reprobate, some remain in the visible church, while others forsake their parents, having loved this present evil world. It is a great sorrow to parents to see their children sell their heritage for pottage; but even then they never cease to pray for them and strive with them, knowing that there is hope while there is life. Still, the Lord's purpose prevails, and even these sorrows are sanctified to the good of the believer.

 

[au5t1n]

What is the proper understanding of God's promises to reward faithful parenting, then, in light of the full counsel of Scripture?

Rather than develop an individual theology of Christian parenting, we should seek to practically apply the doctrines of grace to the subject. We should recognise the election of grace even amongst covenant children. Concerning those who are elect, Christian parenting will be a genuine means used by Providence and Grace to bring the child to faith, repentance, new obedience, and the formation of a character which is fitted to serve God in the world and to continue on to the end. In some, the seed springs into action while they are very young. For others, the Lord seems to allow a period of time for its development. For some, the seed lies dormant until later in life, and they pierce themselves through with many sorrows before they start to consider their latter end. In the case of the reprobate, some remain in the visible church, while others forsake their parents, having loved this present evil world. It is a great sorrow to parents to see their children sell their heritage for pottage; but even then they never cease to pray for them and strive with them, knowing that there is hope while there is life. Still, the Lord's purpose prevails, and even these sorrows are sanctified to the good of the believer.

Thank you for helping me think this through. It became evident last night that I needed to put more thought into this and this is very helpful. So what do you think is the intention (and reason) behind Titus 1:6?

 

[Poimen]

“If anyone should ask, Why does God not convert all the children of the godly, since they cannot follow the holy example of their fathers without his mercy, we reply, that he will not bind or restrict his mercy to any single individuals included among the posterity of the righteous; but will reserve his election free to himself, that as he converts and saves some from the posterity of the wicked, so he will leave some of the posterity of the righteous in their natural corruption and misery which all deserve by nature, and this he does, that he may show that his own mercy is free, as well in choosing the posterity of the godly as the posterity of the wicked. Again: God does not convert all the posterity of the godly, because he has not bound himself to bestow mercy on all, or the same benefits on all the posterity of the godly.”
-Zacharias Ursinus, Commentary on the Heidelberg Catechism, page 535.

"Election and the Line of the Covenant – Not seldom it has been thought that election is of a sporadic nature so that one is elected from this family and another from that family, "one from a city and two from a generation" irrespective of family or city or generation. The fact, however, that the Lord has ever built up His Church from the seed of the Covenant teaches that as a rule predestination follows a definite course, proceeding along the line of the Covenant, so that as a rule those are elected who are participants in the Covenant. This is encouraging for the Covenant members, but, as we see from Scripture and experience that there are exceptions to this rule, it gives no ground for false assurances.”
-William Heyns, Manual of Reformed Doctrine, page 44

 

[au5t1n]

Not seldom it has been thought that election is of a sporadic nature so that one is elected from this family and another from that family, "one from a city and two from a generation" irrespective of family or city or generation.

This is the error I was trying to correct, which I have encountered a couple times among credobaptist friends. However, it is evident now that my explanation was poor and I went too far in the other direction. I knew I could count on getting good help from this board.

 

[MW]

So what do you think is the intention (and reason) behind Titus 1:6?

Comparing with 1 Timothy 3, household government and rule is the main scope of the requirement; and this is clarified by the latter part of the verse with its castigation of rioting and unruliness. Societal customs of law enforcement will need to be taken into consideration. The words of the apostle presuppose a society in which parents have full management of children's welfare and behaviour. In the event that society gives unruly children a way out from under parental authority, a number of considerations will arise with respect to the claims of justice and mercy.

 

[jwithnell]

The words of the apostle presuppose a society in which parents have full management of children's welfare and behaviour.

I had not seen this point raised previously. It is an excellent angle on this issue.

My thinking on Titus 1:6 hasn't jelled beyond the thought that a man cannot be held responsible for an action (God's mercy) that is beyond his own ability to achieve. It comes down, I suppose to a question of how well the household is managed and whether or not it is known for its piety as opposed to a general laxity where children can believe and do as they want.

 

[SolaScriptura]

I believe that with the proper degree and kind of discipline and nurture, I can produce near perfect little angels who love Jesus with all their little hearts and the only bad thing they ever did was pee their pants (because they were silently waiting while an elder used the restroom). Thus if your offspring are not saintly children of the kingdom, it is all your fault.




Just kidding.

---------- Post added at 10:13 PM ---------- Previous post was at 10:11 PM ----------

The words of the apostle presuppose a society in which parents have full management of children's welfare and behaviour. In the event that society gives unruly children a way out from under parental authority, a number of considerations will arise with respect to the claims of justice and mercy.

This is an EXCELLENT observation.