Give Them Grace: A Fairly Critical Review

I recently read one parenting book that created a lot of discussion last year when it came out: Give Them Grace by Elyse Fitzpatrick and Jessica Thompson. As many of you know, this book is basically a big lesson on raising kids focused on grace rather than law.  Perhaps we could say the book is an application of the law/gospel distinction to parenting.

Before I get into a critique, I do want to make it clear that I agree with the major premise of the book: that Christian families should be families where the gospel of grace is central.  We should constantly tell our kids that Jesus died to save sinful people who deserve to be punished forever.  We should remind them of God’s forgiveness, patience, care, might, and love for his people.  Grace should reign in the Christian home.  The authors make this point well and their sharp critiques of Veggie-Tale-Mormon-home-moralism was spot-on.  I highly recommend the book for this reason: it is gospel centered.

I have a few critiques of the book as well.  First, I was very much disappointed that the authors didn’t discuss the covenantal aspects of the family.  The term “covenant” came up a few times, but there was no discussion of what it means to be a covenant of grace family.  I realize the authors might not hold the Reformed view of the covenants, but still, a parenting book without it is lacking.

Since the book is not from a covenantal perspective, the authors talk about how to deal with your unregenerate kids verses how to treat your regenerate kids.  That was very troubling to read; who are we to guess the status of our seven year old’s heart?  Furthermore, a covenantal emphasis would also include a discussion of the church in the life of a family (i.e. the church preaches grace, the family lives by grace).  I know the authors couldn’t do it all in one book, but since the church is a huge part of a Christian family’s life, some discussion would have been helpful.  One major weakness of the book is the lack of emphasis on the covenant of grace and what it has to do with our children.

A second area of weakness in this book is the lack of discussion about the third use of the law (the law as a guide for gratitude).  The authors do use the term “gratitude” around a dozen times, but nowhere do they unpack what it means.  They kept emphasizing how we should not raise our kids with a focus on the law – they clearly say “the law won’t help” (p. 63).  Again, I agree with that statement when it comes to justification: obedience to the law does not help one whit in justification.  But the Christian – and the Christian home – certainly does need the law in the area of sanctification (being set apart and growing in godliness).  The law/gospel distinction is valid, but it really gets messed up without an emphasis on the third use of the law.

The law helps us (parents and kids) know what is right and true and it tells us what is wrong and false.  We need the law to know what God wants us to do and what he doesn’t want us to do.  We need the law to show us how to thank God for salvation by grace alone through faith alone.  The Christian family can and should pray, Do not let me stray from your commandments (Ps. 119:10). This is why the Presbyterian and Reformed confessions give a commentary on the Ten Commandments. Since the third use of the law was not emphasized, the authors’ talk about rules in the home created some dissonance for me.

Again, I do recommend this book because it goes against all those moralistic Christian parenting books – even the popular ones.  However, for those of you who are familiar with Reformed theology – the covenants (works and grace), the law/gospel distinction, the difference between justification and sanctification, the uses of the law, and the doctrine of the church – you might not need to get this one.  I’d encourage you to spend time applying the areas of Reformed theology just mentioned to the task of parenting.  Teach your children the stories of the Bible, teach them about forgiveness and love, teach them about Jesus’ death on the cross, teach them about faith and repentance, teach them about gratitude.  Remind them that you too are sinful and need the cross.  And so forth.  Let grace abound!

By the way, if you do want a parenting book with a similar emphasis on grace and with a Reformed emphasis on the covenant of grace and the third use of the law, I recommend Parenting by God’s Promises: How to Raise Children in the Covenant of Grace by Joel Beeke.  (Andrew reviewed it HERE).

shane lems

sunnyside, wa

A Summary of Paul’s Evangelistic Preaching (Roland Allen)

This is another book that all missionaries and evangelists should read carefully; pastors who minister in culturally diverse areas will also benefit from it.  The book is by Roland Allen and it is called Missionary Methods: St. Paul’s or Ours?  It was first published around 50 years ago.  I liked Allen’s summary of Paul’s evangelistic preaching.  I’ve separated one longer paragraph into a few smaller ones to make it easier to read.

“We can easily understand how such a gospel would appeal to the minds of St Paul’s hearers.  To those who, among the conflicting claims and confused teachings of polytheism, were seeking for some unity in the world of nature and of thought, St Paul brought doctrine, at once simple and profound, of one personal God living and true, the Creator of all.

“To men who sought for some intelligent account of the world, its nature and its end, St Paul revealed a moral purpose in the light of which all the perplexities, uncertainties, and apparent contradictions, resolved themselves into a divine harmony.”

“To men of high moral instincts, appalled and dismayed at the impurity of society around them, St Paul offered the assurance of a moral judgment.”

“To men oppressed by the sense of sin he brought the assurance of pardon and release.”

“To the downtrodden, the sad, the hopeless, he opened the door into a kingdom of light and liberty.”

“To those who were terrified by the fear of malignant spirits he revealed a Spirit benignant [gracious], watchful and ever present, all-powerful and able at a word to banish the power of darkness.”

“To men dissatisfied with the worship of idols he taught the pure service of one true God.”

“To people whose imaginations were overwhelmed by the terrors and darkness of the grave he gave the assurance of a future beyond the grave in the bliss and peace of the Risen Lord.”

“To the weak who needed support, to sinners bound with the chain of vice, to people unable to cope with the depressed morality of their heathen surroundings, he brought the promise of an indwelling Spirit of power.”

“To the lonely he offered the friendly warmth of society of a company all eagerly looking forward to a bright day when Grace would come and this world with all its perplexities and troubles pass away.”

“It is no wonder then that this gospel of St Paul appealed to men, fired their imaginations, filled them with hope, and strengthened them with power to face persecution.”

This excerpt can be found on page 70 of Missionary Methods.  Again, even though the book and language are a bit dated, it is one of those “must reads” for those interested in missions, church planting, and evangelism.

shane lems

Warfield on Paul’s Gospel

Here’s a great line from one of Warfield’s Princeton sermons.  The text he was preaching on was Philippians 3.9: …and be found in him, not having a righteousness of my own that comes from the law, but that which is through faith in Christ– the righteousness that comes from God and is by faith (NIV).

“The Gospel, to Paul, consists precisely in this: that we do nothing to earn our salvation or to secure it for ourselves.  God in Christ does it all.”

Good news indeed – and Amen!

The quote is found on page 322 of Faith and Life.

shane lems

Evaluating Worldviews (Groothuis)

A worldview, by definition, is a set of beliefs that a person has which helps him or her make sense of the world.  It explains meaning, morality, and mortality – the very important aspects of life.  A worldview should be consistent and give a  good explanation of things.  Of course, since we’re humans, we can’t explain everything, but our worldview should help us explain the basics.  We can test a worldview by seeing if it “explains what it ought to explain,” in the words of Douglas Groothuis.  Here are eight criteria that Groothuis gives for evaluating worldviews.

1) If a worldview asserts an essential proposition X, and X is utterly mysterious or unintelligible and sheds no light on anything (it is a bare assertion), then the assertion of X is a rational strike against that worldview.

2a) if a worldview affirms X, Y and Z as essential elements of that worldview, and none of these individual elements contradicts another essential element, the worldview may be true because it is not logically inconsistent.
2b) If a worldview affirms X, Y and Z as essential elements, and any of these elements contradict another essential element (say X contradicts Y), or is self-contradictory, this worldview is necessarily false because it is logically inconsistent.

3) If a worldview’s essential proportions are coherent (meaningfully interconnected conceptually), it is more likely to be true than if its essential propositions are not related in this way.

4) The greater the extent to which a worldview’s essential factual claims can be established in various empirical, scientific and historical ways, the greater is the likelihood that this worldview is true.

5a) For a worldview to be a likely candidate for truth, its essential propositions must be existentially viable.
5b) If a worldview leads habitually to philosophical hypocrisy, it is rationally disqualified, since this indicates that it does not correspond to reality.

6) If a worldview is true, it should lead to intellectual and cultural fecundity [fruitfulness].  The greater the beneficial fecundity, the greater evidence that the worldview is true.

7) If a worldview substantially alters its essential claims in light of counterevidence, it loses rational justification.

8) Worldviews should not appeal to extraneous entities or be more complex than is required to explain what they propose to establish.

Though one might tweak these a little here or there, I believe Groothuis’ criteria are a helpful start when it comes to worldview discussion.  I encourage our readers to see pages 52-60 of Groothuis’ Christian Apologetics for more details on these eight points.

shane lems

The Intersection of Reformed Theology and Ecclesiology (Stuart Robinson)

For those of you interested in the Reformed doctrine of the church (ecclesiology), I highly recommend Stuart Robinson’s The Church of God.  Robinson was an “old school” Presbyterian pastor and professor in (West) Virginia and Kentucky in the mid-19th century.  This book, The Church of God, is based on the inagural lectures he gave on the occasion of his newly accepted role as seminary professor of Danville Theological Seminary in 1857. The general premise of the book is that theology and ecclesiology are intimately related.  In other words, in this book Robinson shows how Reformed and biblical theology works out into Reformed and biblical ecclesiology.

In roughly 100 pages, Robinson first explains how the doctrine of the church relates to the covenant of redemption (pactum salutis), Calvinism (specifically election), and the gospel.  This section reminded me of Geerhardus Vos’ emphasis on redemptive history.  The second part of the book is basically a biblical description of the church with an emphasis on the covenants.  I appreciated this section because he explained the organic, familial, and historical aspect of the church with an emphasis on the Abrahamic covenant.  The third part of the book is where Robinson explains the spiritual aspect and government of the church.  In a covenantal and redemptive historical way, this is where he explains the role of the teaching elder, ruling elder, and deaconate.  The last part of the book has to do with worship and the sacraments.  Here Robinson touches upon the regulative principle of worship along with the meaning and significance of the two Christian sacraments.

One quote worth noting here is Robinson’s affirmation of a two-kingdoms distinction as well as an explanation of natural law.  I’ve edited it very slightly to make it easier to read.

“Touching the distinction between the  ecclesiastical power and the civil power – which latter is ordained by God also – the points of contrast are so numerous and so fundamental….  For they have nothing in common except that both powers are of divine authority, both concern the race of mankind, and both were instituted for the glory of God as a final end.  In respect to all else – their origin, nature and immediate end, and in their mode of exercising the power – they differ fundamentally.”

“Thus they differ in that the civil power derives its authority from God as the Author of nature, whilst the ecclesiastical power comes alone from Jesus as Mediator.”

“[Thus they differ] in that the rule for the guidance of the civil power in its exercise is the light of nature and reason, the law which the author of nature reveals through reason to man; but the rule for the guidance of ecclesiastical power in its exercise is that light which, as Prophet of the Church, Jesus Christ has revealed in his word.”

Robinson goes on to explain a few other differences between the church and  magistrate, namely that the church has to do with spiritual and religious matters while the state deals with political matters (and not vice-versa).  He also mentions a few other differences like discipline methods and leadership.  Robinson also strongly speaks against a confusion of church and magistrate; he said a confusion is “dangerous and corrupting.” In fact, by blending the two what often happens is that “the Church of the Martyrs” becomes “the Church of the Moderates.”

This  contribution by Robinson around 150 years ago is a pretty significant discussion about the intersection of Reformed theology and ecclesiology.  Robinson shows well how the two go hand in hand.  Though the language is a little archaic, our readers who have an interest in this topic will be able to profit from it quite a bit.  It isn’t overly lengthy (though there are 100 more pages of various appendices) and therefore not overwhelming to make it to the end.  Get this one, read it, and use it in the future when you study the Reformed doctrine of the church as it relates to the covenants, election, and the gospel.

The above quotes are found on pages 65-67 and 96 of Stuart Robinson’s The Church of God: An Essential Element of the Gospel.

shane lems