229 Sermon Illustrations on Children

Most of us are familiar with Grimm's fairy tale of the princess and the frog. A prince, having fallen under the hex of a witch, was changed into a frog, and a frog he would have to remain until a certain princess should take him home and share her table and bed with him. Only then would he be a prince again.

Each day the frog sat by a spring in the forest lamenting his fate. One hot day the princess retired into the coolness of the forest, tossing a golden ball into the air as she went. As she came to the spring she inadvertently dropped the ball, and it fell into the depths of the pool. All attempts to retrieve it proved in vain. Seizing the opportunity, the frog volunteered to fetch the precious ball, provided the princess would promise to grant a request of his. In hopes of getting back the golden ball, the princess hastily agreed. Thereupon the frog dove to the bottom of the pool and soon produced the golden ball. In her excitement over recovering the treasure, the princess dashed home happily, forgetting her promise to the hapless frog. As the story turns out, not until later - and after the persistent efforts of both the frog and her own father - was the princess persuaded to keep faith with the frog.

Most of us, I think, are inclined to criticize the princess for lapsing in her promise to the frog. But we know something the princess does not know: namely, that the frog is actually a prince in the shape of a frog. That, the princess does NOT know. To her the frog is merely a frog. The thought of the little beast eating off the same plate with her causes each bite of food to stick in her throat; the thought of having to share the clean linen on her bed with the cold creature throws her into spasms of repulsion.

Who of us, had we known only what the princess knew, would have reacted differently? It is hard to embrace the unlovely: not simply a frog, but perhaps a spouse in an ugly mood, or a defiant child, or a work associate who opposes us - let alone the dirty, the sick, and the dying of our world.

One cannot help being impressed in reading the Gospels that Jesus responded differently to the unlovely than we normally do. Rather than avoidance or condemnation, Jesus accepted - indeed, embraced - the unlovely. Such embraces not only broke dramatically with the people of his day, but they contributed in no small measure to his sentence of death.

JESUS AND CHILDREN

The Gospels reveal three such embraces of Jesus. The first was his embrace of children, and it represents, Jesus' concern for those who had not yet "arrived" in Jewish society. A second was his embrace of a leper. This embrace represents Jesus' solidarity not simply with those who had not yet arrived, but those who could NEVER arrive. This embrace included all who were either disinherited or outcast, ranging from women and Gentiles to the sick and lame, sinners and tax collectors, and even the leprous. Finally, Jesus embraced a cross, and in so doing he embraced the sins of the world, the very ugliness that separates us from God himself. Consider, first of all, Jesus' embrace of children.

"And they were bringing children to him, that he might touch them; and the disciples rebuked them. But when Jesus saw it he was indignant, and said to them, 'Let the children come to me, do not hinder them; for to such belongs the kingdom of God - Truly, I say to you, whoever does not receive the kingdom of God like a child shall not enter it.' And he took them in his arms and blessed them, laying his hands upon them" (Mark 10:13-16).

What, we might ask, was so unusual about Jesus putting his arms around children? And why did his disciples attempt to prevent the little ones from coming to him? Is not the maternal instinct a universal instinct of sorts, compelling us to show tenderness to children? Do not human relief organizations appeal to this instinct by showing the pitiful faces of starving children? Do not political candidates secure our votes by kissing the heads of babies?

We would be quite mistaken if we assumed that the society of Jesus' day viewed children with the same affection ours does. In her book "A Distant Mirror," Barbara Tuchman says that in the Middle Ages no element of society received less attention than children. And for good reason: with an infant mortality rate of 50 percent, adults could scarcely afford an excessive emotional involvement with the young. When a child of seven was considered a miniature adult and expected to perform a full day's work, sentimentality over children had little chance to blossom.

So it was in Jesus' day. The rabbis considered children, like women, to be members of the people of God by virtue of their association with adult male members of the family. True, a newborn boy of eight days was circumcised as a sign of this covenant relationship, but it was not until he was 13 that he was considered to have reached an age of religious maturity and granted full status in the synagogue. One would have to search long and hard in ancient Jewish society to find any benevolence toward the young comparable to Jesus' embracing and blessing of children. W. C. Fields is said to have once remarked sarcastically, "Anyone who hates children and dogs can't be all bad." Presumably, people in Jesus' day would have found little, if anything, humorous or objectionable about that quip. In Jewish society a child reached maturity when he could understand and assent to the Torah. Jesus, on the other hand, embraced the children. More than that, he declared them models of the kingdom of God-precisely because they had nothing to show for themselves and were most likely to receive God's kingdom as a gift of grace.

JESUS AND OUTCASTS

"And a leper came to him beseeching him, and kneeling said to him, 'If you will, you can make me clean.' Moved with pity, he stretched out his hand and touched him, and said to him, 'I will; be clean.' And immediately the leprosy left him, and he was made clean" (Mark 1:40-42).

We live in a society that institutionalizes the insane, deformed, and seriously crippled, and as a consequence, we may find it difficult to conceive of the vast social contrasts of Jesus' day. Much as in many Third World countries today, the rich and poor, the fit and deformed, the clean and dirty in Jewish society lived in close proximity.

But proximity did not necessarily lead to contact or community; instead, it often led to increased separation among the various social classes. In the case of leprosy, the Old Testament prescribed the following regulations: "The leper who' has the disease shall wear torn clothes and let the hair of his head hang loose, and he shall cover his upper lip and cry, 'Unclean, unclean.' He shall remain unclean as long as he has the disease; he is unclean; he shall dwell alone in the habitation outside the camp" (Lev. 13:45-46).

As if this condition were not humiliating enough, Josephus and some of the rabbis intensified the plight of the leper, referring to him as a "living corpse," whose cure was difficult as resurrection from the dead (see Num. 12:12).

In Mark's story, the leper compounded his offensiveness: not only did he embody a dread contagion (so it was thought), but, so great was his longing to be healed, he broke through the prescribed zone of separation between himself and others and came right up to Jesus. In a sense, Jesus' response was offensive also. Rather than countering this social blunder with spit, stones, or curses, Jesus reached out and touched him, saying, "Be clean." That touch did more than heal a physical ailment. It made it possible for one who had had to abandon his clothes, home, hygiene, family and friends, and even his relationship with the people of God - in short, one who had been banished to nonexistence - to return to himself, to human society, and to God.

JESUS AND THE CROSS

Finally, Jesus' strangest embrace was that of a cross.

"So they took Jesus, and he went out, bearing his cross, to the place called the place of a skull, which is called in Hebrew Golgotha. There they crucified him, and with him two others, one on either side, and Jesus between them" (John 19:17-18).

There is no record in antiquity of a nobleman suffering the penalty of death by crucifixion. On the contrary, crucifixion was reserved for the most despised elements of society - rebellious foreigners, violent criminals, and especially slaves. It was a barbaric form of execution of the utmost cruelty, and was practiced by the Romans especially as a deterrent against slave uprisings. Appian, a Roman writer, informs us that when Crassus quashed the slave revolt of Spartacus in 71 B.C. he crucified 6,000 slaves along the Via Appia from Rome to Capua, a distance of well over 100 miles. With this in mind, one can scarcely escape Paul's striking contrast when he spoke of Christ's preexistent glory compared with his earthly humility: "He was in the form of God ... but emptied himself, taking the form of a servant ... and became obedient unto death, even death on a cross" (Phil. 2:6-8).

The Gospels tell us that Jesus predicted he would go to Jerusalem to die on a cross, and that, in fact, he spent his dying breath crucified between two criminals on the Hill of the Skull. Why did Jesus embrace a cross? He embraced a cross for the same reason he embraced children, women, the poor, sick, and outcast: out of love for the unlovely. In truth, it was not his cross but ours that he bore. Peter says, "He bore our sins in his body on the cross, that we might die to sin and live to righteousness; for by his wounds you were healed" (1 Peter 2:24).

EMBRACES OF A REAL GOD

The strange embraces of Jesus! Each shares something in common with the others. Each is an embrace of those who, in the words of the Beatitudes, are "poor in spirit" (Matt. 5:3). Each is an attempt to "seek and save the lost" (Luke 19:10). And each is what may be called an "ultimate embrace - that is, either God or nothing. With each embrace Jesus conveyed the same thing, that everything can be expected from God where all hopes have been exhausted from man.

It is not surprising that the people of Jesus' day found such embraces hard to accept, for they had rejected the strange embraces of God before. Hosea writes, "when Israel was a child, I loved him, and out of Egypt I called my son. The more I called them, the more they went from me; ... Yet it was I who taught Ephraim to walk, I took them up in my arms; but they did not know that I healed them" (Hos. 11:1-3).

There is, indeed, an attitude that disdains the tangible overtures of God in human life. The elder brother in the parable of the Prodigal Son had such an attitude: his father should not have embraced such a worthless son. Once the Jews had shunned God's embrace of themselves, they found it harder to tolerate his embracing of others. In the history of religion, especially "enlightened religion," one sometimes meets the view that God is above our troubled world and too holy to condescend to real life. Helmut Thielicke has this to say in his book, "I Believe":

"Tell me how lofty God is for you, and I'll tell you how little

he means to you. ... It is certainly remarkable, but it is true.

God has become of concern to me only because he has made himself

smaller than the Milky Way, only because he is present in my

little sickroom when I gasp for breath, or understands the little

cares I cast on him, or takes seriously the request of a child

for a scooter with balloon tires.... If God has no significance

for the tiny mosaic-pieces of my little life, for the things that

concern me, then he doesn't concern me AT ALL."

The strange embraces of Jesus reach out for the needy, the forgotten, and the forsaken of each generation. They extend to those whose problems surpass human abilities to solve. The embraces of Jesus encompass both our personal and global impoverishment, if only we come, like the children or the leper, knowing our need of them. His embraces demonstrate that God is a real God, committed to the needs of a real world.

___________________

James R. Edwards is associate professor of religion and chairman of the Department of Religion at Jamestown College, Jamestown, North Dakota.

Friend named Joyce was crushed by a Mother's Day sermon on Psalm 127:3 - children are a reward from God. She felt cursed because she was childless. One in five couples cannot have children. John and wife Sylvia could not have children. They often heard well-meaning but hurting remarks from church people. Article describes tensions in marriage childlessness causes. But childlessness is not a curse - Hannah, Zechariah & Elizabeth. Gives advice for how to relate to childless couples. John and Sylvia adopted two children, then several years later had their own daughter.

YOUNG PEOPLE like Klaus Ziegler were central to the Nazi philosophy as the

heirs of the thousand-year Reich. The Nazis exploited their youthful

aggressiveness and sense of dedication, and rewarded them for loyalty and

keenness: the young had much to thank them for - camps, holidays, jobs,

education, and, of course, uniforms. Any boy who did well in the Hitler Youth

could expect to be guaranteed a place in high school regardless of his

academic record.

Many foreign observers believed that young Nazis were a greater threat than

their elders - 'more dangerous than a cholera epidemic' was how one

correspondent described them. Tom Macleod, a British prisoner of war made to

work in a gang repairing and maintaining rail tracks in Berlin, had the truth

of this brought home to him in a particularly vivid way. As his squad was

marched to work each morning, a sympathetic German couple often slipped him a

scrap of paper with news from BBC broadcasts, a gesture that he and his

companions greatly appreciated. One morning, however, they arrived outside

the station to find the couple being stood against a wall, and were forced to

watch as they were summarily executed. Turning away in horror, Macleod saw

the couple's young son on the opposite side of the square, being rewarded with

a Nazi medal for betraying his parents.

#4208

*

Mrs. Marie Winn used to use TV as a free babysitter, but noticed that her kids looked like zombies. Wrote book called "The Plug-In Drug" and now writes on how to unplug it, offering crafts and other diversions.

#190 *

Girl comes in late after talking in driveway. Father angry with her. "Don't you trust me?" "Yes, to an extent. But I was young once and know the pressures you are under, and want to protect you." ....

How we teach children about the dark side of human history. Trying to educate children about death and suffering, with a special emphasis on the Holocaust, slavery and Indians.

Involve children in your life, don't just get involved in theirs. Other ideas given on how to successfully raise kids in a church setting.

*

The lives of parents do affect the children. Children will follow their parents' sins in a bigger way. Genesis gives an example of sin being visited upon four generations: Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, Joseph. Each generation lied.

#431

*

Britt Rognaldsen's one-month-old baby, Cara, was killed by her Rottweiler in 1983. Baby was dragged from bed and chewed to pieces. Britt's response: "I can always have another baby, but I can't replace my dog Byron." She was convicted (twice) of misdemeanor negligence, fined $2,000 and sentenced to a year in jail.

*

Deals with fathers who stay home to take care of their kids. It is hard for fathers to do it all - to be "Mr. Mom." Women still do two or three times as much housework and child rearing as men. "Some fathers are downright angry about having to get involved. Studies show that marriages are more volatile when the father is forced to help around the house because the mother has taken a job. A Penn State study that followed blue-collar newlyweds for three years found that fathers in dual-earner marriages quarreled with their wives more than fathers in single-earner families."

Fathers tend to be more playful and physical, and girls are higher achievers when their fathers encourage them. Babies are more aware of their fathers than previously thought.

Side article on child-support shows that only 23% of it was paid in 1987. A 1981 study by the National Survey of Children found that nearly half of all children between the ages of 11 and 16 living with their mothers hadn't seen their father in a year.

A recent study by Professor Steven Gortmaker of Harvard blames television for a 45% increase in obesity among children and adolescents between 1960 and the early 1980s. A 1983 study indicated that children spent an average of at least 25 hours a week watching television. He personally believes the figure is much higher. This leads to a decline in physical activity; television commercials reinforce the desire for high calories foods.

Television can also lead to spiritual inactivity among young people.

California psychologist Judith Wallerstein has carefully studied a group of children from divorced homes and found lasting negative effects, some of which appear years later. Even friendly divorces cause trama.

*

Campolo is over 50 years old. One night, when his children were very small, his wife called him into their bedroom. She pointed to them stretched out in their beds. Even now, he can see the angelic expressions on their faces and their peaceful innocence.

His wife whispered in his ear, "Look long and hard, Tony, because they'll never be like that again." He wishes he had done more such reflecting.

Psalm 78 addresses the responsibility of parents.

1. Commitment concerning content. 78:1-3

2. ................communication. 78:4-5

3. .................continuation. 78:6-7

4. .....................contrast. 78:8

#1009

*

Story: A professor frequently delivered a talk titled, "Ten Commandments for Parents." After his first child he changed the title to "Seven Principles for Parents." After two more children his speech was rewritten to become, "Three Suggestions for Parents." Finally as his children reached the teen years he quit lecturing altogether!

Out of 1,000 unmarried young women, 96 will get pregnant in 1989. 40% of

all 14-year-olds will be pregnant at least once before they are 20.

Proverbs gives practical advice on illicit sex, alcohol and drugs (75% of

American homes keep alcohol in supply), peer pressure, and materialism (it is

estimated that teenagers spend close to $90 billion each year, with $30

billion going to videotapes and fast food).

A recent survey of a Midwestern suburban are found a direct correlation exists

between spiritual strength at home and avoidance of drugs and alcohol. By a

nearly 2-to-1 margin, nonusers more frequently described themselves as having

strong religious values. And by a 3-to-1 margin, nonusers reported that their

families often help them with problems.

#1013

*

Economist Walter Williams learned a principle of success by missing lunch. He wasted all his lunch money and asked for more. Finally one day his mother said, "You knew you'd have to buy lunch when you spent the money," and refused to fork over a dime. He went without lunch the rest of the week. He thought his mom was the most callous on earth, but later realized, "If you don't have the guts to hold someone accountable for his imprudence, how can he learn to do better?"

Matt Groening cartoon. (More realtistic of what childhood is like).

"Childhood Tribulations"

Forced naps

Waiting in the car

Waiting for the cartoons to come on (Farm Report)

Floating goldfish

Being given carrots instead of cookies

Being hosed off by mom

Being left behind by older siblings

"The beginning of wisdom"

(voice) Cheer up, kid! These are the happiest years of your life!

(child) -- You mean it gets worse?!!

Studies have shown that children suffer greatly in a divorce, and that the effects last a long time.

Problems for children of divorce are:

1. Low self-esteem.

2. Difficulty in forming relationships.

3. Underachievement.

Some react differently, and all can be helped to overcome the negative results. Emotional support for single parents and chldren is important.

All our children were in bed; the late television news was over, and I was putting the finishing touches to a presentation for medical students scheduled to be given the next day. As I reviewed some slides which might be used, there appeared on the screen a picture of an abortion victim, aged two and one-half months’ gestation; her body had been dismembered by a curette, the long handled knife used in a D&C abortion procedure.

Suddenly I heard, rather than saw, another person near me. At the sound of a sharp intake of breath, I turned to find that my youngest son, then a sleepy, rumpled three-year-old, had unexpectedly and silently entered the room. His small voice was filled with great sadness as he asked, “Who broke the baby?”

How could this small, innocent child see what so many adults cannot see?

(Garton’s reason for deciding to become a prolife activist)

Boswell's book analyses the ancient practice of abandoning children and

finds that Christians in the middle ages also followed the practice. The

reviewer argues that early Christians did not. One form of abandonment was to

leave the children at a monastery where they were brought up as nuns or monks.

*1161

Dobson illustration on correcting an obstinate child:

In the absence of parental leadership, some children become extremely

obnoxious and defiant, especially in public places. Perhaps the best example

was a ten-year-old boy named Robert, who was a patient of my good friend Dr.

William Slonecker. The Dr. said his pediatric staff dreaded the days when

Robert was scheduled for an office visit. He literally attacked the

clinic, grabbing instruments and files and telephones. His passive mother

could do little more than shake her head in bewilderment.

During one physical examination, Dr. Slonecker observed severe cavities in

Robert's teeth and knew the boy must be referred to a local dentist. But who

would be given the honor? A referral like Robert could mean the end of a

professional friendship. Dr Slonecker eventually decided to send him to an

older dentist who reportedly understood children. The confrontation that

followed now stands as one of the classic moments in the history of human

conflict.

Robert arrived in the dental office, prepared for battle.

"Get in the chair, young man," said the doctor.

"No chance!" replied the boy.

"Son, I told you to climb onto the chair, and that's what I intend for you to

do," said the dentist.

Robert stared at his opponent for a moment and then replied, "If you make me

get in that chair, I will take off my clothes."

The dentist calmly said, "Son, take'em off."

The boy forthwith removed his shirt, undershirt, shoes, and socks, and then

looked up in defiance.

"All right, son," said the dentist. "Now get on the chair".

"You didn't hear me," sputtered Robert. "I said if you make me get on that

chair, I will take off all my clothes."

"Son, take'em off," replied the man.

Robert proceeded to remove his pants and shorts, finally standing totally

naked before the dentist and his assistant.

"Now, son, get in the chair," said the doctor.

Robert did as he was told, and sat cooperatively through the entire procedure.

When the cavities were drilled and filled, he was instructed to step down from

the chair.

"Give me my clothes now," said the boy.

"I'm sorry," replied the dentist. "Tell your mother that we're going to keep

your clothes tonight. She can pick them up tomorrow.

Can you comprehend the shock Robert's mother received when the door to the

waiting room opened, and there stood her pink son, as naked as the day he was

born? The room was filled with patients, but Robert and his mom walked past

them and into the hall. They went down a public elevator and into the parking

lot, ignoring the snickers of onlookers.

The next day, Robert's mother returned to retrieve his clothes, and asked to

have a word with the dentist. However, she did not come to protest. These

were her sentiments: "You don't know how much I appreciate what happened here

yesterday. You see, Robert has been blackmailing me about his clothes for

years. Whenever we are in a public place, such as a grocery store, he makes

unreasonable demands of me. If I don't immediately buy him what he wants, he

threatens to take off all his clothes. You are the first person who had

called his bluff, doctor, and the impact on Robert has been incredible."

#1467

*

My husband and I try to work different hours so we can provide as much of the care of our preschoolers as possible. One night I said to him, "The boys have been asking me about religion, sex, life and death. When you're alone with them, what do they ask you?"

He replied, "They ask me, 'Where's Mommy?'"

Example of parents' relationship with kids from ancient Greek literature:

Father to son: Son, where have you been?

Son to father: I have been nowhere, doing nothing, with nobody.

I have three children. Paul, the oldest and only boy, is named for his dad. Theresa, the baby of the family, has her daddy's brown eyes and curly hair.

Eileen is the middle child. She is named for me and my mother whose name was Eileen Ann. When I was born, my mother turned it around and named me Ann Eileen. So when my first girl was born, I did the same thing, naming her Eileen Ann.

Eileen showed a streak of independence from the early age of five months. She refused to let anyone feed her, determined to do things her way.

All three kids were great fun to be around. They worked hard, had senses of humor and did well in what they attempted. Like all homes, however, there were times when we initiated a discussion of some behavior that their dad and I wanted improved. With Paul and Theresa, the reactions ranged from quiet agreement to vocal disagreements, but always with a mutual clearing of the air.

With Eileen there were never any discussions. She immediately objected to our right to have an opinion, stomped up the stairs to her room, slammed the door, turned the music up loud and announced she did not want to discuss it! Several times in the early days I tried reasoning with her, but this only irritated her further.

One day out of a need for Eileen to hear our side, I wrote her a letter. In the letter I explained her dad's and my position and what we wanted changed. I waited until she left for school the next day to put the letter on her bed. She never mentioned the letter, and I never found any evidence of it. But her behavior changed!

As the years passed, there were more letters left while she was at school, at work or on a date - probably two or three letters a year for a period of 14 years. She never acknowledged the letters or discussed what was in them, but her behavior would change. Occasionally she stated as she went upstairs, "And don't write me one of those letters." Of course, I wrote a letter.

Eileen's dad died in 1990. Three years later, she got engaged, and I was determined not to be the overbearing mother of the bride. Everything went well until about a month before the wedding. We had a disagreement. She indignantly told me she was 24 years old and a special education teacher about to be married. She also told me not to write her a letter! I wrote her a letter.

Three days before the wedding, Eileen was packing things to move to her new home. She told me there was a box in her closet that was not to be thrown away. "It contains all the letters you ever wrote me. Sometimes I reread them and someday I will read them to my daughter. Thank you, Mom."

Thank you, Eileen.

===========================

By Ann E. Weeks, from A 4th Course of Chicken Soup for the Soul, Copyright 1997 by Jack Canfield, Mark Victor Hansen, Hanoch McCarty & Meladee McCarty

#2034

*