Monday, May 05, 2008

• Currently Reading Simple Secrets to a Beautiful Home: Creating a Place You and Your Family Will Love By Emilie Barnes see related

  read this at jonash's homesteading blog

  
  
  I blogged earlier about the sermon I recommended listening to, it draws a very scary parallel between children and old people . . . .
  LISTEN! Please listen! This is what we believe about children now!!! This is what all of our young people, our teenagers believe! Christian or not!
  
  #1 If you can't conviently afford children - DON'T HAVE THEM!
  
  #2 If children disrupt your lifestyle - DON'T HAVE THEM!
  
  Oh, my God! Please forgive us our sins! We as Christians have bought into a horrible lie . . . these same children are going to grow up, they are going to say "These old people - they disrupt our lifestyle. They are expensive. They complain." and they are going to start euthenizing . . . .
  
  We don't see the value in children, we aren't going to see the value in old people. If we can't sacrifice for children how will we ever sacrifice our own comfort for our aging parents with grace?
  Oh, I am broken about this . . . .
  
  I've also been reading a book which is called Passionate Housewives Desperate for God. I'm sure many of you have heard of it. While I don't agree with some of the theology in the book, the theme that housewives are doing an important task that is given them by God, and that they should turn to Him (instead of pampering themselves) when they struggle makes it a very wonderful read for me.
  
  Anyway, in one part of the book there is a brief discussion of how the Romans often either killed or abandoned their unwanted babies, and how the Christians in the area would often adopt these "unwanted" whenever they found them.
  What do you think went through these Christian's minds whenever they found a helpless, tiny baby laying somewhere in the elements? Do you think that when they saw an extra baby they just said "What's an extra mouth to feed? Bring 'em along!"? Do you think they didn't have to make a HUGE decision right then and there?
  
  Why do we read about other people and assume that they are better equiped to follow God than we are? Did every family that took in an orphan have an empty bedroom and spare change jingling in their pockets? They didn't have any trials or any difficulty feeding or clothing themselves . . . of course not!
  
  I don't think people really change. Life had just as many challenges back then, probably different ones or possibly more fatal ones... Hunger was more well known, and clothing had to be made by hand. If a fox got into the henhouse it meant nobody had eggs or chicken to eat for a while.
  
  As a mother of several back then, it'd be easy to see another child as a burden. I don't care how much of a help that baby would grow up to be on the "farm" it's still a huge investment until then. A baby has to be fed and clothed and housed and taught, or it isn't going to be any help at all! In case you didn't know, houses weren't huge back then; you'd have to build on yourself. You'd have to either spend money, or creat each piece of fabric by hand.
  I just took a spinning class a few weekends ago, and if we suddenly had to rely on my spinning and crocheting skills we'd all be naked for a long, long time. I have great respect for those that had to take nasty, dirty fleeces and pick them clean, wash them, spin them, and then turn them into fabric. The amount of work that would go into one shirt just staggers me!
  We have so many modern conviences, but that doesn't matter. The media has convienced us that we need more, more, more. You don't just need diapers and a few baby clothes and a couple of baby blankets; we need things that a generation ago were "luxeries" - you need a fully decorated, themed nursery with matching baby furniture, more toys than our parents' generation grew up with all together, and special soaps, lotions, shampoos, you name it!
  What happened to being poor but loving each other, working together? Why, I think most of us would have to be richer than Bill Gates before we even considered helping out other people, at least to the extent of adoption to say the least!
  So do you think that the Christians that added pitiful, abandoned babies to their homes were all wealthy?
  Let's say, in a modern context that we are walking along and find a baby crying in a dumpster. What do you do? What excuses could we make?
  
  "The mom is bound to come back for it soon, the wee little thing."
  
  "Oh, how sad! If I didn't have so many of my own to feed . . . ."
  
  "Well, we just had a baby. Two in diapers is just a herculene task I'd be crazy to volunteer for."
  
  "Man, things are just tight right now. The price of gas is really hurting us. Why, if it gets much worse we're going to have to cut back and just get basic cable - there is no way we can upgrade our car to hold another."
  
  "Oh, how dreadful! I'm going to take this baby to the proper authorities imediately! What? Raise it myself? But I don't have an idea what diseases the poor mother might have had or what issues this baby might grow up to posses! It's better that the state take the wee thing. They are there to handle these kind of situations."
  
  What went through a Christian's mind when they found an abandoned baby? What happened when someone brought them another because they just knew, they knew these people loved children and would give their baby a home?
  I have to stop ranting. I'm emotional today.
  I just wish more people really loved children . . . .
  Ashley
  

  • 8:43 AM
  • 6 eprops
  • 3 comments