Gospel discipline in practice
What makes gospel discipline different from the kind of wise discipline that a non-Christian parent would exercise?
I think that there are several key elements to wise discipline:
- Clearly name the offense.
- Secure admission of the offense.
- Find out why the child committed the offense.
- Ensure understanding of why a particular action is wrong.
- Offer alternative holy actions.
- Pray together: for grace for the parent to exercise wise discipline, and for the child to be enabled to submit and obey.
So why am I so passionate about Gospel discipline? If a parent does the first five steps, or some good variation of them, but omits prayer, there is the tacit assumption that their offense is not against God, and that it is within the power of the child to change himself or herself. It is also the tacit assumption that wise methods will lead to necessary moral improvement.
Both of these assumptions are antithetical to the Good News of Christ. The announcement of the Gospel of Christ entails the bad news that "no one does good, not even one" (Romans 3:12). Therefore we need two things: forgiveness (which is freely given, not purchased by repentance) and reformation of the heart (which mere behavior change cannot achieve). If any parent, Christian or not, leads a child through a discipline process that leaves the child with the impression that she or he is not in need of divine forgiveness, and divine power for a change of heart, the natural response of the child will be to put confidence in his or her ability to repent.
For this reason, every discipline encounter is an opportunity to present the Gospel to our children. We stand in desperate need; He is rich in mercy and abundant in power. Prayer in discipline is the inescapable outcome of the Gospel permeating our lives. With our children, we come before Christ's throne seeking forgiveness of sin and divine power without which we may reform the behavior but can never change the heart that manifested in this behavior.
Gospel discipline is in many respects like wise discipline, and yet at its root is entirely different. Its assumptions about human nature, the nature of sin are antithetical. This is what makes it so critical that our discipline be permeated by the Gospel, so that our children learn to rely on, and hope in God, and not in themselves.
4 comments:
Where do consequences, when needed, come in? How have you decided what consequence "methods" were appropriate at different ages, for different offenses, and for different causes/reasons/intents behind the offense? How do we think specifically about consequences (as well as the broader process of discipline) in light of the Gospel?
Those are big questions, I know, and perhaps beside the point of your post, but I'm curious about what conclusions you've come to as you've thought about biblical discipline and about what/who has been influential in that process.
Haley
As a high school teacher I really like the first five steps (I teach in the public school system, so step 6 prayer would get me fired). I am just thinking how I could modify the steps so that I can apply them in a classroom setting and without disrupting the entire lesson. Have you thought about how to apply this to a classroom setting?
Yes, I have thought a lot about it, wondering what I could/should have done differently in the classroom.
I think the Turanksy/Miller concept of a "break" is a great one. (I need to put up a thorough post on that . . .) The idea is that the child (or in the classroom setting, student) needs time in which to calm his/her emotions in order to productively discuss the conflict. Only when the student is ready does the conversation proceed: hence the concept of a "break."
The beautiful thing about the concept is that it addresses the heart attitude, and not merely the flash point. So if the student says, "I'm ready to talk," but then is snide or sarcastic, the authority figure says, "Being ready to talk means being ready to speak respectfully. Do you need more time?" Then the student can say, "Yeah, I'm still fired up," or "No, I think I can talk about it now."
It also means that the resolution conversations don't have to be "on stage" in front of the class. You can finish any whole-class part of the lesson and set the students to work individually or in groups while you debrief the conflict with the student.
For classroom management, I think it would take a week, or maybe two, to set the precedent of working this way. At first students might be a bit confused by it, but when I did something like this in the classroom, my students learned that I was going to have an authentic conversation with them, and not just punish them. And most of those who caused conflict most often were also the ones who needed the time to cool down before having anything like a nice conversation.
Haley, let me try to answer your (very good) questions in a separate post, because I think they're worthy of a longer treatment.
Post a Comment