The book had the most evocative title. It really seemed like it was written for me. Parenting Without Regret. Such a powerful statement in three words. And I felt the subtitle in my gut: “Raising Kids With Purpose, Not Perfection”. Deep and poignant.

But when I picked up the book, I thought:

This is like reading a foreign language.

As an Episcopalian with a thoroughly mainline and progressive approach to Christianity, I found the version of Christianity Jimmy & Laura Seibert hold, which undergirds their writing felt foreign to me. And yet still quite recognizable. I knew it like I know tigers from the zoo or dead theologians from a textbook: from a distance. I felt as if large parts of the book required an internal translation.

For example, I don’t find the offering of tracts or leaving them for people to find is a particularly effective evangelism tool. Not for sharing the gospel as I have received it. It isn’t what we do. It isn’t what I know.

The book, full of so many personal examples, is designed to show us what such a parenting experience looks like. And yet, I needed to look past the examples to see the point.

They take parenting cues from James Dobson and suggest techniques I would never endorse. So I was often challenged by the book and by the ways they were raising their children.

Yet I also understood the ways such a different Christian worldview could speak to ours. When I began with the end in mind, I could see it. I could see parenting as focused on relationship rather than structure.

Relationship.

Given that I thought they were speaking a foreign language, I was surprised to find such kinship in the nature, if not the style or sensibility of Seiberts’ parenting style with my own. They place their relationship with their children at the center of their parenting. And helping foster their children’s relationships with GOD is seen as a reflection of their own discipleship.

They speak to the presence and the cheerleading and the support of being with their children and listening to them. The same belief I have carried since the moment my eldest was born. That she could always communicate her needs if I just listened to her.

I don’t mean that we are to see communication as my being able to understand her instantly. But that I am to stretch myself to hear, even in her infant cries, a sense of need and desire for love.

Gospel.

As Christians, we walk a particular road and follow a particular Lord. Rarely do I see us connect our own discipleship with a ministry of parenting.

• We speak of needing to raise our kids right.
• Or teach them to love GOD.
• Or prepare them for the real world.

So rarely do we see parenting as a ministry and our role as living out our discipleship. Rarely do we see how these parts connect or how we might learn from our faith what it means to parent our children.

The Seiberts made such an idea seem evident, while admitting it took them years to understand that.

More effective than their countless examples of being foolish for their kids, supporting their kids by running alongside them at track meets, was seeing how the gospel informs those actions. How the Parable of the Loving Father (otherwise called the Parable of the Prodigal Son) is an example of parenting. How a father pursues and loves and devotes himself to affirming the health of his children.

Language.

Some places language was a burden for me. Three words they used in particular, possessed some deep baggage. Baggage which they seemed almost to embrace.

Pursue.

The Seiberts often use the word pursue to describe this sense of being active and engaged with their children. Pushing past barriers or things which prevent us from being fully engaged.  Pursue also further evokes the image of the Loving Father from the above parable.

It also has a predatory side and makes me worry about unhealthy boundaries. While they don’t encourage such a reading, the word is more often used negatively or as an officer pursues a suspect. It evokes chasing and running away from.

In some cases, as a parent, this idea may actually be necessary. But the word was more off-putting than comforting. And without addressing this sense, I found it a bit creepy.

Date.

They speak throughout about dating their children. I already don’t like the word used that way. Not because it is old fashioned, but, like pursue, it means something wholly different than it might have in the past. Dating is different now. It was different for me than for my parents and it will be different for my kids. The word is already confusing.

Then you bring in how gendered the Seiberts are–Dad dates his daughters and Mom dates her sons. Dad gives the daughters promise rings, while Mom gives the boys crosses. It feels like we’ve driven past the line of psychological healthy and toward a level of direction I am not comfortable with.

Discipline.

When we use discipline as a verb, it is hard to tell what people are communicating. In part because for half of the country the word is a euphemism for spanking. It isn’t instruction or guidance or helping teach consequences. It usually just means spanking.

If someone says “I took him out of the room and disciplined him” nobody hears that word and thinks “you helped him understand what he did was wrong.” When we hear “I disciplined him,” we don’t hear loved, we hear spanked.

Much less understood are the other options for discipline. Dr. Jane Nelsen has been a great help to us. She is trying to redeem the term with her work: Positive Discipline.

Spanking.

For as much as I think we use the word discipline carelessly or indirectly, the Sieberts admit that they do mean spanking. Their view of spanking is ritualistic and instructive.

There is a mountain of evidence proving spanking is both ineffective and psychologically harmful. The American Psychological Association condemns its use. And yet, it is hard to deny that many believe it is necessary. Or that their own experience of spanking represents the norm. Or, as the Sieberts see it, as representing Biblical principles of child-rearing.

While they approach corporal punishment with a sense of passionless order and attempt to help their children understand that a hand is for love (and apparently a spoon for hitting), the evidence proves the opposite. Even when they make restoration a priority.

All the other elements of their approach to discipline show a kind of wisdom. Again, I found myself translating what they said into something with value for me. The idea that in discipline, we also seek restoration and love is valuable. Trying to foster a sense of connection and future health is important.

And while these good things are compromised by spanking, they do need to be on a parent’s mind in the midst of any discipline.

My Struggle.

As much as the first half to two-thirds of the book inspired me, it was the last third, with its support of spanking, sexual purity, and cultural avoidance, which left me angry and disappointed.

I got to a point in which I realized I didn’t want to give this book away without some kind of instruction. I began to wish I had written a great deal of notes in the margins for the next person to read. That she might understand how dangerous some of these approaches are. That not all in it would be good for their children. Or represent Christian values as I know them.

They seemed to be teetering on a knife’s edge between helping shepherd their children into a vibrant and faithful adulthood and coercing and shaming their children into a life of profound sickness.

That their kids seem to be growing into mature and decent people seems the proof of their methods. But it also feels like a counter-proof. The danger of hearing their witness and harming one’s children will be felt, not only by the Seiberts, but by the reader who implements them.

The Challenge of Parenting.

The Sieberts seem to be cutting against the grain of both progressive and conservative Christianity. While some of their methods are common in their own Christian subculture, there are parts which challenge the conservative worldview and parenting norms.

And some parts, I think are just about the challenge of being Christian and Parents.

They speak of pursuing as GOD pursues the lost in Luke 15: that we, like GOD, are always seeking out the lost and looking to bring all back to wholeness.

That our being there with our kids is a reflection of the gospel. That always being there, always picking them up when they fall is actually an important Christian principle. Our culture focuses on resilience and self-reliance. But children must also learn interdependence and compassion.

As parents, we speak identity into our children with our words and actions. We tell them who they are by how we treat them.

As Christians, we ought to speak into them an identity with intention: that they are wise and prophetic and loving and compassionate. And not with our indifference and severity and harshness. They’ll learn from us what we really think of them.

Then, with deep surprise, I turned to the last page and read that in everything, parents should show humility with their children. We should be vulnerable to them. We should apologize and show them what it looks like to reveal our own fears and challenges.

So while I need a disclaimer stamped across the cover of the book which says:

“Also consult a child psychologist while reading this book”

and wish I could annotate the text, I was moved and encouraged by this book. It has me seeing the act of parenting afresh and with new respect for different approaches to our faith.

The root of parenting, as in faith, is love.

* * *

The Book is Parenting Without Regret: Raising Kids With Purpose, Not Perfection by Jimmy and Laura Seibert. For more information, visit their website.

Disclosure of Material Connection: I received this book free from the author and/or publisher through the Speakeasy blogging book review network. I was not required to write a positive review. The opinions I have expressed are my own. I am disclosing this in accordance with the Federal Trade Commission’s 16 CFR,Part 255.