The need for evangelism is never so present in my mind as when we are caring for foster kids. We work in the Good News Club as a family, reaching kids in public schools, and the public in general, with the message of the gospel of Christ Jesus. In this avenue of our lives, we are expected to speak boldly the saving work of Jesus on the cross. No one would expect us to bridle our tongue in the setting of an evangelistic meeting. Yet, in the role we have taken on in fostering children from broken homes, we are expected to allow them to live like they lived at home, with no religious influence on any side. This has always been a quandary to me. They are taken from their birth parents and placed with us for issues of neglect or abuse usually, so I would think that we should definitely NOT treat them like they were treated at home.
In "training" to be a foster parent in the state of Maine, we have to attend classes and take tests, much of which is psychobabble and learning how to do the paperwork, all in order to be approved to provide care for children. There is no real training about parenting, so it should be called orientation. Since we have 3 children of our own, one would think that we would be qualified already, wouldn't you? So, in order to keep our license, which is going to expire in a month, we have been told to take more classes given by the state. We have no time or energy to complete any classes. Wouldn't you think that if you were approved to be "parents" that you would continue to be qualified without further training? I would. I also don't think there is much to learn from the state about how to raise children. I prefer the Word of God as a textbook, not some socialistic, atheist opinion of what children need or how to discipline them. What better authority to consult on how to raise those that the Bible calls "blessings" and "the fruit of the womb"
They tell us that we are not supposed to push our "religion" on the kids. This is one of the issues that causes such stress. If we truly care for children, and we do, then we would reasonably be expected to protect them. Part of protecting them is to let them know more about God and Jesus and their need for a savior. I would have to say that some kids are not capable of understanding, but that is up to God, not us to decide. In my opinion, to avoid talking about God, reading our Bible as a family, and living as the Lord would have us do, is to say that it is unimportant to us to live as we believe. So then, we have decided to live according to the way we ought, and if the consequence is to lose our license, then so be it. We will not compromise our family and our relationship with God to keep the state happy. That should be a given.
Herein lies the problem. Can the two sides both be done properly. Of course we can be good parents by living as God has commanded us to live. We cannot properly do our "job" according to the government, as they disagree with "proselytizing" children. So, where do you go from here? We still don't know. I would say that we have no intention of continuing to take classes and live as the state prescribes, but we do have children now that need a home and we will continue to provide it.
We will provide them with shelter, clothing, food, and treat them like our own children, and part of that is to instruct them in the ways of God. If that costs us our "job" then so be it. We must take a stand and be willing to suffer the consequences. How ironic that being a parent, a job that the state considers to be an act of natural design, with no real qualifications other than being able to carry and deliver a baby, could be taken away on the basis of a belief in morals, values, and a desire to follow the one that created us.
So, pray that this situation resolves itself. Either from being allowed to live as we know we should, or for the children in our care to be returned to a safe and happy home shortly. We will enjoy them while they are here, and pray for them long after they are gone. That is what I think the Lord would have us to do.
Mark
