"This attack was not initiated to right an ongoing wrong or to establish justice and purity; the critics have unwittingly joined the last-days, Satanic attack on God’s people to denigrate the very name of Christ."
Debi Pearl on the recent criticism of Bill Gothard
Cover of To Train Up a Child book by Michael & Debi Pearl
Last month Bill Gothard resigned from his long held post with the Institute in Basic Life Principles (IBLP). This was due in large part the painful testimonies that were shared on a website called Recovering Grace. We are grateful that a number of 'alleged' victims of Gothard and his highly legalistic training system are coming forward, and we expressed our support of their efforts in a post entitled Recovering Grace Confronts Bill Gothard.
It didn't take long for one of Gothard's 'cheerleaders' to come forward and defend him. Debi Pearl, wife of Michael Pearl, issued a statement last week that included the following excerpt (as well as the quote at the top of the post):
Whose side are you on?
On Facebook last week I read these words: “I just rejoiced to see that huge ministry fall and I helped.”
I trembled as I read this. Shock, disbelief, and then sadness enveloped me as I realized it was not CNN with all their exaggerations, deceit, mockery and twisting of facts that brought an end to a work God used to set thousands of people free from bitterness, it was not the Homosexual websites coming together to launch war against an old man accused of things done over 35 years ago, limiting his ability to defend himself. No, it was a “Christian” website that asked believers to speak out if they had been hurt in anyway, and spew their bitterness so many could share in the rock throwing. Yes, you read it correctly, it was a Christian website propelled forward by Facebook and Twitter that defamed a ministry that helped millions come to know the Lord.
Her response is so predictable! Satanic Attack? Why would she make such an accusation? We'll share our theory…
If you are not familiar with Michael and Debi Pearl, they published a book twenty years ago called To Train Up A Child, which they continue to publish and sell it. In recent years, it has been purported that a number of children have died because their parents read To Train Up A Child and allegedly attempted to implement the Pearls' methods of discipline.
The Pearls claim that they do not advocate for harsh discipline as you will see in this segment which aired a few years ago on CNN.
We wrote an entire series on the Pearls, which included a three-part review of Train Up A Child. Here are the posts we published.
Are Plumbing Lines Weapons of Child Destruction?
A Review of To Train Up a Child by the Pearls
Spare the Rod, Spoil the Child and a Trip to Home Depot
The Pearls' Profit-Sharing Program
Getting back to why Debi Pearl would come to Bill Gothard's defense, could it be that their ministry business is being negatively impacted by the recent accusations against Gothard? Perhaps their profit-sharing program and books aren't as popular as they once were. We are left wondering…
And if you're not famililar with Bill Gothard, we hope you will take the time to read a guest post that we published almost a year ago entitled A Mom Shares Her Regrets about Following Bill Gothard. It's a heartbreaking story that is a must read.
Not only are the Pearls loyal to Bill Gothard, but Jim Bob and Michelle Duggar are as well. In fact, the Duggars are currently promoting the Advanced Training Institute's (ATI) 'family conferences' on their website (see events). More info here. One just concluded about a week ago. It appears that Bill Gothard and the Duggars have been friends for quite some time. Here is an article that includes photos of the Duggars with Bill Gothard. It is entitled: Duggar Family Continues To Embrace Ministry Mentor On Their Website, Despite His Resignation Due To Sexual Harassment Allegations From More Than 35 Women
Our hearts break for those who have 'allegedly' been hurt by these individuals and/or organizations, and we dedicate this song (which would likely be condemned by Gothard) to them.
We will continue to follow the Bill Gothard debacle and bring you any updates.
Lydia's Corner: Ezekiel 21:1-22:31 Hebrews 10:1-17 Psalm 108:1-13 Proverbs 27:12
No shock here, none whatsoever. To borrow from Brave New World, Bill Gothard is an Alpha Double-Plus, and the women who accused him are Beta-Minus. Thus they are not his equals and people don’t have to believe them.
The problem is, this attitude is far more prevalent than you’d think.
Second! :-p
Oh well if Debi Pearl is going to defend Gothard, I will change my mind about him.
This is classic Pearl: pure and undefiled in their belittlement of anyone who disagrees with them, solidly supportive of other self made dictators who subscribe to similar systems of authoritarian power. I wouldn’t “train up” a dog using their methods.
It was because of the Pearls that I began reading blogs that covered abuse in the church. I read about Hana Williams murder in the news and of course I was sad and horrified. Then more came out about the parents and instead of some meth addicts, they were a couple described by their pastor as the most devout people he knew. I wanted to know how it happened, how so-called committed Christians could torture a child to her death over a period of months. I found out that they were followers of the Pearls and that poor little Hana wasn’t the first child murdered by parents ‘training’ their children using the Pearls’
methods. I discovered a part of Christianity I had known nothing about – patriarchy, the quiverful movement, homeschooling not as a way to ensure quality education but to keep children away from the world, courtship, stay at home daughters, church covenants, legalism instead of grace, and churches who covered up child molestation and threw the victims under the bus. I had no idea.
Does anyone know anyone who became a Christian through Bill Gothard’s ministry? Debi Pearl says millions were helped to come to know the Lord. The only people I’ve ever known who followed Gothard were already believers.
I’m getting mixed signals here. Is it consistent with true Biblical Manhood And Womanhood™ for a woman to defend a man?
Well, it fits, doesn’t it? Dictators of all “Christian” persuasions, unite!
What I find so frustrating is the kind of people many Christians follow.
Paul said that the cross would be folly to those who do not believe, and Christians being willing to be laughed at for following Jesus and believing in being saved by his death on the cross – that I can understand.
But being the laughingstock of the world because so many of us follow these self-appointed “spiritual leaders” makes me angry, because we should have enough discernment to laugh these would-be mini-dictators out of the room.
Churches should teach their members enough to enable them not to fall for the pied pipers who want to establish their authoritarian rule over the lives of their followers and milk them for all the money they’re worth.
Instead, many pastors fear and condemn critical thinking, seeing anyone who thinks for themselves as divisive.
AARRRGH! (Sound of head banging table)
I’d been wondering if there were links between the Peatls and Gothard’s organization. So many teachings seem similar: total, unconditional and cheerful submission to your husband or parents, the catch phrase “delayed obedience is disobedience,” and something else that has slipped my mind while writing. Also, it appears that Gothard was the first to speak out about the evils of gossip, which he defined as “giving a bad report.” I’m now wondering how many of the embattled ministries that are currently in the spotlight have been influenced by Gothard’s teachings. We know there was a connection between Gothard and Philips; was there a connection with CJ/SGM, too? Former SGM members speak frequently about being admonished to “believe the best,” and that’s another Gothardism. How far doses his reach extend?
If I were Bill Gothard I wouldn’t WANT Debi Pearl defending me. 🙂 Talk about guilt by association.
If anyone here hasn’t already signed it, here is a petition asking Amazon to stop selling “To Train up a Child.”
http://tinyurl.com/m5d7jn3
BeenThereDoneThat wrote:
Exactly. The phrase, “damning with faint praise” comes to mind.
@ gus:
Yep.
Great post, Deb.
@ BeenThereDoneThat:
I just signed it. Thank you.
The evil defend the evil. No surprise here. And if the downfall of Bill Gothard helps to take down the Pearls, then there’s all the more reason for me to be grateful for it.
@ Nancy:
I could have written so much more here, but much of what I would have said had already been discussed in our previous posts. Hope our readers will read them when they have time.
For those of you who want to see a picture of Dee investigating the Pearls, you need to read this post. Read the last 3 paragraphs.
http://thewartburgwatch.com/2011/03/24/spare-the-rod-spoil-the-child-and-a-trip-to-home-depot/
@ BeenThereDoneThat:
While I too find the Pearls book appalling and dangerous, I don’t know if getting it yanked from Amazon is a good thing. Do we really want it to go underground and without the easy access to criticism that Amazon reviews provide?
Albuquerque Blue wrote:
That’s a valid question. Though I cringe at the easy access that Amazon provides, not to mention the money the Pearl’s are making from it.
This is why I despise most of evangelical ‘Christianity’. There is a significant segment of it that is grounded in a totalitarian culture with cruelty and abuse used to enforce obedience, even among children. This culture attracts more than it share of power-hungry pedophiles and sadists who want nothing more than to indulge their perversions, particularly with women and children. This is so far from God as to be Satanic.
And yet, the rest of evangelical ‘Christianity’ stands idly and keeps silent.
“We must always take sides. Neutrality helps the oppressor, never the victim. Silence encourages the tormentor, never the tormented.”
Elie Wiesel
@ JeffT:
Yep. Can I get an automatic reply thing that says “yep?”
@ dee:
The Home Depot associate’s response is very telling. It’s such a natural, visceral response.
The people steeped in certain movements (as I once was) don’t react that way, though they should.
Nick Bulbeck wrote:
Bahahahaha! I needed a laugh today.
Is it just us, but does the average person in The pew not realize this is all about money and power?
You know, years ago in the seminary I saw this coming. Sure there are preachers who are good guys, but when I was there the ” unsaid” movement was, ” we leaders need to take control, “they” are not smart enough to lead.”
It made me sick to my stomach. I skipped graduation ceremony just so I wouldn’t be ordained…
Patti wrote:
Then you have to factor in the number of people who may have left the Christian faith due to their teachings.
I wouldn’t be surprised. After people have been in very rigid, strict, fundamentalist systems for years, they sometimes have a paradigm shift and walk away from environments or teachings like that.
“Dear” Debi: None of us want to attack the name of Christ. We attack wolves in sheep’s clothing, not Jesus.
@JeffT: Thanks for the Elie Wiesel quote. I just posted that one to Facebook.
BTDT – Thank you for the link!
I worked for a maternity home for several years and someone “lovingly” donated a box of To Train Up a Child to the home. It took me two years, but I finally got that box of books dumped.
I don’t believe any of the stories that Debi Pearl tells. I would bet anything that she never saw the comment from the person talking about how they helped to bring down Gothard.
And, by the way Debi, this was not something that an “old man did 35 years ago.” This is an ongoing problem that a sick man has been doing for over 30 years!
@ JeffT:
Excellent post, JeffT.
Nick Bulbeck wrote:
That is a good point.
On a similar note, I’ve seen people online who admit to being women show up to anti patriarchy or anti gender complementarian threads on other blogs who bicker and fight with males who are egalitarians, which everyone points out is a case of them being rather inconsistent with their own gender role views.
These are women (gender complementarian) who are teaching, rebuking, preaching at, and correcting (egalitarian) men about gender roles.
On a related note, Julie Anne not too long ago (on Spiritual Sounding Board, I think) featured a Tweet or Facebook post by Tony Miano where he said it’s okay for women to blog (which sort of contradicted his previous position on the matter).
Even when these guys deign (ed.) to permit a woman to blog (or to do “X”), I find that very condescending. Like I need this guy’s approval to blog or “X” in the first place.
Daisy wrote:
That should be “deign” not “design”
“I trembled as I read this. Shock, disbelief, and then sadness enveloped me as I realized it was not CNN with all their exaggerations, deceit, mockery and twisting of facts that brought an end to a work God used to set thousands of people free from bitterness, it was not the Homosexual websites coming together to launch war against an old man accused of things done over 35 years ago, limiting his ability to defend himself. No, it was a “Christian” website that asked believers to speak out if they had been hurt in anyway, and spew their bitterness so many could share in the rock throwing. Yes, you read it correctly, it was a Christian website propelled forward by Facebook and Twitter that defamed a ministry that helped millions come to know the Lord.” Debi Pearl
What do CNN or Homosexual websites have to do with the price of beans? 🙄 (Maybe Pearl had to take a swipe?)
Did (and how did) Gothard’s ministry set thousands free from bitterness? (Seems it created many bitter adults and harmed children to me.)
The old man did things 35 years ago (accuracy?) and now is too old to defend himself? (Logic anyone.)
Speaking out about being hurt by this ministry is equated to “spewing bitterness” by Debi Pearl. (So much empathy.)
Millions(?) have been come to know the Lord through Gothard’s ministry. (Really. Where are those websites?)
The complete article at Debi Pearl’s website has more detail on the bitternes aspect if anyone cares to read it. Only those with strong stomachs are advised to proceed.
Sorry, Deebs. I know ‘bitter’ is a no no, but I couldn’t get around it this time. Debi made me do it 🙂
K.D. wrote:
I have wondered if with some of them, it’s about genuinely wanting to defend their world view. Or it could be both, love of money and a desire to defend their principles.
I do think some of these strict religious types do sincerely believe that they are doing the work of God and promoting a godly worldview. Some of them view the entire world as being the enemy of God or of Christians.
I do understand there are biblical passages that talk about the world being at enmity with God, but some fundamentalists go overboard with it, IMO.
I do think some fanatics are motivated by principle and convictions, and not money, or not primarily money.
Kathi wrote:
Good points. (I’m also not sure if it would be okay to dismiss it even if it was only one time 35 years ago.)
Daisy wrote:
I’m also not sure if it would be okay to dismiss it even if it was only one time 35 years ago.)
I agree that it should not be dismissed even if it was only one time 35 years ago. I strongly dislike the way she characterized the situation. She made it sound like it was a passing incident when actually it has been an ongoing problem for decades.
“EES PARTY LINE, COMRADES!”
Jeri from Heresy in the Heartland has another excellent post on this.
http://heresyintheheartland.blogspot.com/2014/04/not-on-your-side-debi.html
What struck me while reading her post was a paragraph at the very bottom. She provides the link to the No Greater Joy website, and then includes this quote:
“None of my daughters or their husbands asked the state of Tennessee for permission to marry. They did not yoke themselves to government. It was a personal, private covenant, binding them together forever—until death. So when the sodomites have come to share in the state marriage licenses, which will eventually be the law, James and Shoshanna will not be in league with those perverts. And, while I am on the subject, there will come a time when faithful Christians will either revoke their state marriage licenses and establish an exclusively one man-one woman covenant of marriage, or, they will forfeit the sanctity of their covenant by being unequally yoked together with perverts.”
Some of you here know that my former cult also did not do wedding licences. I ran in some strange circles, I tell ya.
JeffT wrote:
Culture War Without End against the Heathen.
“Enemy of my Enemy is my Friend.”
BeenThereDoneThat wrote:
Note invocation of Teh Fag Card in most every sentence. Homosexuality(TM) — the word whose very mention disconnects every neuron above the Christianese reptile brain and waves the Bright Red Murder Flag in front of what’s left.
Michael Pearl had some interesting things to say about Patriarchy several years ago (2009 and before). He did not agree with Gothard and/or Phillips in their application of “patriarchy.” I know there are issues around the Pearl’s, but in this case I think many are missing something about their beliefs.
see:
http://nogreaterjoy.org/articles/the-balanced-patriarch/
JeffT wrote:
That’s why it has lost all power to talk to the surrounding world in a prophetic voice. It’s easy to dismiss it – “Just look at all the clowns and criminals in your midst. Why should I accept anything you say if you can’t even rein THEM in? Why should I accept you have anything worthwhile to say while you listen to and idolize THEM?”
gus wrote:
That is probably why Paul wrote what he did in
1 Corinthians 5:12,13
What business is it of mine to judge those outside the church? Are you not to judge those inside? 13 God will judge those outside. “Expel the wicked person from among you.”
Nick Bulbeck wrote:
Lol! Well, she can, BUT ONLY HER! Same goes for the Prophetess Phoebe. She’s the ONLY one ALLOWED to be a PROPHETESS, at least, that’s what a former pastor of mine said.
Ahhhh, can’t make this stuff up…..
She released a statement, having found dissenting points of view on Facebook and Twitter.
I’m surprised she took time away from genuflecting for the men in her circle to do so.
Palmations 3:16-18 “And it was released to many through multimedia, and the gullible were deceived. And though the gullible did believe, it caused many skeptics to facepalm. And they did facepalm until their foreheads were red, for the ignorance of the gullible was much.”
Cassie wrote:
Didn’t John Piper recently make some strange comments about how women cannot be prophets even though the Bible says they can, because anything a female prophet says is false? John MacArthur was also involved.
Fallibility and Female Prophets – Grace to You
i will never understand anyone who will dismiss a victim of abuse. The Pearls are evil.
Sabrae wrote:
Genuflecting? Is that what they call it these days?
Kathi wrote:
We have discussed here before about whether to have a book burning. Someone suggested using the books for worm composting. After reading about it (see below), I think it's the best way to go. 😆
Composting with worms
@ Bridget:
Excellent questions! Pearl begins by *quoting* someone’s Facebook as, “I just rejoiced to see that huge ministry fall and I helped.” This is very unusual wording. The quote shows up NOWHERE on the Internet except Pearl’s article (and now TWW). A private FB, perhaps?
Or, just maybe, she’s *paraphrasing* this from a former IBLP staff member:
“As satisfying as it feels to be validated and to watch Gothard’s house of cards collapse, it is exquisitely painful at the same time. I rejoice to see his empire fall, much as a former prisoner would applaud the demolition of the walls of his captivity. And yet, that empire was built of my blood, sweat, and tears. Thousands of us can point to pieces of our selves that we sacrificed to advance that sick man’s vision. We lost much of irreplaceable value.”
http://www.recoveringgrace.org/2014/04/on-feeling-betrayed-validated-and-brave/
Notice a few minor differences?
Sidenote:
“The NBA announced today that it has banned Los Angeles Clippers owner Donald Sterling for life and fined him $2.5 million, the maximum amount, after he was recorded making racist comments”
So why won’t the SBC and other churches ban pedophiles? Seems shameful that the NBA sets a better example of morality than the SBC.
@ Sabrae:
Did you just make up that Palmations quote? I can’t stop rereading it and relaughing over it. Love it!
BeenThereDoneThat wrote:
Probably because the Holy Spirit has left the building and their moral compass is broken. :/
nmgirl wrote:
Here's the end game as I see it Numes. Sooner or later the Pearls and their followers will start howling 'persecution' to the rafters. Bring it! I say. I hope they do make a court case out of it so that it can be made abundantly clear to them that their religious freedom ends where the laws of our land begin. We don't allow female genital mutilation, animal cruelty, animal sacrifice, and a host of other behaviors that a humane civilization does not allow — Nor will we allow corporal cruelty to children.
Sorry nmgirl, I didn’t pay close enough attention to who the commenter was, thought it was numo.
@ gus:
Absolutely agreed.
Dave A A wrote:
I think that Debi left this part out.
Guess that part wasn’t important to her.
Only the part that she twisted a bit to make it look like it came from a little horned minion rubbing its hands in glee at the fall of such a great and worshipable. man.
For those interested, here is a brief yet thorough history of the patriarchal takeover of large portions of the homeschool movement.
http://www.thatmom.com/2014/04/28/patriarchy-on-trial-part-two/
Most disturbing visual is with that long white beard Pearl looks like a cross between Gandalf and an Old Testament Prophet.
Or the old artistic convention of God the Father with the Long White Beard.
nmgirl wrote:
Anyone got Tom Lehrer on speed-dial?
“Bow your head with great respect and —
Genuflect! Genuflect! Genuflect!”
— Tom Lehrer, “Vatican Rag” (I used to listen to a LOT of Dr Demento…)
As if the fact that it happened 35 years ago makes it okay somehow.
Mara wrote:
We homeschooled our children from 1984 – 1996. The Moore’s influenced our decision to begin our home education. In the beginning we used materials from the Calvert School (Catholic) Rod and Staff, (Mennonite) and A Beka. (A real eclectic mix) Around 1991or 1992 I attended the first Massachusetts home schooling conference, where a speaker from AZ. (With Alpha Omega) strongly suggested “girls” were under the authority of their father until they married.
Gave me and the woman I attended with,the creeps.
I am sorry to see that H/S has been hijacked by the patriarchy/quiverful brigades.
Slight topic change, but related – Noel, Wallace and I attended the Secrets/G.R.A.C.E. conference this weekend. The statistics on child sex abuse are alarming and very depressing. The highlight of the conference was hearing from the heroes in our midst who are doing all they can to stand up for victims. Survivors who now travel to colleges and speak to groups, an advocate mom who became an attorney after her own struggle to protect her child, groups of bikers who accompany children to their court hearings. (If you haven’t heard of B.A.C.A., Bikers Against Child Abuse, check them out online and grab tissues, these men and women have been known to sleep outside the home of a frightened child) The hardest part of the weekend was hearing a pastor from NY share how he’s come across many victims who’ve shared that the treatment they received from their church was as challenging as the abuse itself.
Al F wrote:
The article is quite long, and I didn’t take time to read the whole thing, but my impression is it’s more of a “do as I say, not as I do.” It’s good that Pearl is disclaiming affiliation with VF-type “father rule,” but how is his teaching of discipline by “breaking the child’s will” ultimately any better?
VF patriarchy sets families up for dysfunction by not allowing anyone to grow up and develop emotional independence. But Pearl-style spanking (aside from the danger of a child’s death!) has the potential to create other kinds of dysfunction. Pearl goes on and on about the positive effects of an involved father who sets an example; he says such a man’s children will be loyal to him even after they grow up and start their own happy, productive lives. But could this loyalty have something to do with the “breaking of the will” in early childhood that creates a kind of codependence wherein the child’s happiness is carefully manufactured? He really emphasizes making your child believe you have their best interests at heart and will stand beside them at every stage to help them grow. If the child’s will is already “broken” from an early age, will he/she consider believing any alternative besides this one, that Daddy/Mommy is doing EVERYTHING For My Good?
Sounds disconcertingly like some brands of Augustinian-Calvinistic belief…e.g. that I am so Depraved that God in His Infinite Wisdom and Goodness could not break through to me but by Chastening Me with some Grievous Circumstance (or series of circumstances) wherein my will is broken, and I am Eternally Thankful, etc. And in fact Pearl supports his teachings by stating that children have a depraved will from birth that MUST be broken so they have a chance to be fit for heaven.
Not saying that God doesn’t chastise His children; He can and does. But He doesn’t inspire us to love Him by smacking us upside the head just so we’ll ask Him for an aspirin.
Daisy wrote:
I personally know a guy who not only repudiated Christianity and is now a practicing Jew because of the damage caused by the Independent Fundamentalist Baptist/Bill Gothard axis of evil, he even dropped his father’s last name (an IFB preacher) and goes by his mother’s maiden name.
Knowing what I know about the family, I cannot blame him.
Debbie Pearl IS a satanic attack. And frankly, her endorsement is all I need to condemn Gothard, guilty or no.
@ KayJay:
Best I could do… but glad to be of service!
Daisy wrote:
Daisy, I went to school with a bunch of these guys and they were nuts then. I am shocked when I see the big churches in which they are pastor/ on church staff…..trust me, there needs to be a psychological profile in the SBC for some of these guys…
Dave A A wrote:
Doubt it (as, if I’m not mistaken, do you!). I knew a similarly-minded church CEO who couldn’t quote accurately, back to me, a letter I’d written when it was right in front of him.
To a certain kind of person, “truth” means nothing. It’s just whatever they need it to be at this moment.
Headless Unicorn Guy wrote:
The long beards give them the “authentic” patriarchal, manly leader of the tribe, look.
AmyT wrote:
According to one book that written as an expose on Gothard, the teaching on not “giving a bad report” or hearing one came out when there was immorality being exposed in the group including with Bill Gothard’s brother. Apparently Bill Gothard wrote this as a way to try and stop people from spreading reports about all that went on in his group including Gothard knowing about his brother’s actions and doing nothing for over a year.
Thus this teaching has roots in being used to conceal sin rather than something meant for good.
I would also add that people’s reactions to Gothard’s fall be like Samuel was after he prophesied about God rejecting Saul as a king. The bible says that Samuel mourned for Saul and God even came to Samuel asking how long he was going to mourn but to then go and anoint a new king over Israel.
People should mourn that Gothard was a man that apparently hardened his heart and refused to listen to correction. The fact that his ministry became so big made him have a large ego.
In other manhood/womanhood/marriage/family confusion news: Here in South Carolina we have a former lawyer/pastor running for the senate. He has said in a sermon: “I find that in about 95 percent of broken marriages, though the husband’s the one that ran out on his wife, the wife loves her children more than she does her husband.”
Bowers added, his voice rising: “Do you hear me ladies? It is an abominable idolatry to love your children more than you love your husband, and it will ruin your marriage. And yet you blame it on him because he ran off with some other woman! He did run off with some other woman, and you packed his bags. All of his emotional bags, you packed for him. Is that true in every case? No, but it’s true in the vast preponderance of them. You just ran him off.”
Did you get that Wartburg moms? Your excessive love of YOUR children causes 95% of divorces.
You can hear this at: http://www.politico.com/story/2014/04/lindsey-graham-det-bowers-south-carolina-senate-2014-elections-106007.html
I thought it must just be something in our South Carolina water but no this theory is held as far north as Pennsylvania. I’ve engaged the editor of the site in a discussion which seems to be going nowhere. Read his endorsement of Bowers divorce theory at: http://newslanc.com/2014/04/27/lindsey-grahams-rival-blames-women-for-cheating-husbands-there-is-some-truth-here/
Has anyone ever known of a single divorce where this was the cause?
__
Muff,
Hey,
Thanks for your well wishes and your kind thoughts. i’ze bedder. There is a soft wind blowing upon my back, and the Great Spirit has provided an fighting chance…
(tears of joy)
Blessings, Friend!
You Matter.
Sopy
__
Of interest? Thomas Jefferson: “Influence”
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g64uP0xKUcM
Comic relief: The Honeymooners : “A Dog’s Life”
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7Iv_zHJY2dM
;~)
—
Sopwith wrote:
Great to hear from you! Still praying…
Steven wrote:
How ridiculous! Thanks for sharing this.
This idea of breaking the will of a child by messing with his mind is horrendous. However and whenever it is done. Imagine starting with a young child and trying to destroy him. Sheesh! Who would want to emotionally or mentally castrate a kid? God may forgive these people (though I wonder what Jesus meant about millstone therapy), but I just have to grit my teeth.
Sad to say, the local SBC mega just had a weekend seminar with some preacher who had written a book on child training. I checked out the author and the book on line and some reviews talked about some scary stuff either in the book or which this man had said in the past. Like the idea of the rebellious six month old who won’t hold still for his diaper to be changed. Apparently one needs to start some serious discipline right there. Creep! Not at my house! But the really disturbing part was how many of the reviewers thought that stuff was really great.
This local church seems to be going in some disturbing directions under the new preacher. So why on earth don’t the good folks just park their cars in some other parking lot and throw their offering is some other plate? I have no idea. Maybe they are not really “good folks”?
nmgirl wrote:
Happens all the time. I learned the hard way to be careful who I share my past with. People will believe the stereotype over someone’s personal story, such as abuse survivors never go get help, abuse survivors cannot be trusted, they cannot function as people, and if they would *ONLY* do what some well-meaning, otherwise kind-hearted person recommends, they would be a-ok.
Marie2 wrote:
Sadly it is a lot easier and thus many times prefer to dismiss or deny what happened to someone rather than acknowledge it. It can ruin what they see as a perfect world. Especially when you add the investment someone has in a person or a group they are all the more likely to want to deny rather than face reality.
Mara wrote:
I believe she summarizes/mistranslates this part as “And I helped”. Making it appear that the writer helped cause the ministry to fall, when in truth she helped build it up.
@ Steven:
No, but I do know of families where the parents self-consciously love each other more than their children. I’ve also seen a huge number of FB posts talking about how husbands should prioritize the three most important things in their lives in this descending order: 1. Jesus; 2. their wife; 3. their kids.
Maybe the marrieds here can explain this to a befuddled single? Why are spouse and kids being pitted one against another?
Nancy wrote:
I suspect that these ideas have so proliferated throughout certain segments of the church that it’s hard to pin down where they all came from. Even before “To Train Up a Child” circulated through the parents in Homestead (my former cult), they held child training classes instructing us on how to discipline our kids. After reading your comment I dug out my notes from those classes. We were instructed to swat our babies at 3-4 months if they would not sit still during a diaper change.
Calling them creeps is being kind and warm hearted.
BeenThereDoneThat wrote:
This is so wrong!
@ Hester:
Dunno, Hester. It’s silly, as though the love one has for one’s spouse is of the same order as the love for a child, and that they NEEDED somehow to be pitted against one another? I’ve always told my kids (when they have brought it up) that I love them, and their Daddy in different ways. No comparisons need to be made.
In case people haven’t seen this. Interesting article:
Why Predators Are Attracted to Careers in the Clergy
http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/spycatcher/201404/why-predators-are-attracted-careers-in-the-clergy
This was posted on another blog and found it quite informative. I see a lot of the points the author makes with C.J. Mahaney, Doug Phillips, Bill Gothard as well as others.
Nick Bulbeck wrote:
Yes, I believe she’s being … um … economical with the truth. If I’m mistaken, all she needs do is provide a link, and I’ll apologise.
Deb wrote:
It also created a lot of angst among new mothers who were afraid of “doing it wrong.” We couldn’t just relax and enjoy our babies. I would just love to give the proponents of this kind of “child training” a taste of their own medicine.
Dave A A wrote:
I think she needs to give ‘several links’ to back up her statement(s) 🙂 before apologies are made.
@ Hester:
I remember when I was pregnant with my second child, and still feeling very new at this mothering-and-marriage thing, and one of my acquaintances said, “Don’t worry so much–there’s enough love to go around for everyone.”
She was right. In other words, if you think love is a finite resource that must be rationed out, competed for, and accounted for each day, like tick marks on a chore chart, you’re doing it wrong for Pete’s sake!
In reading a lot of “biblical” foundations in childrearing, I have found several being horrible in prooftexting passages. Prooftexting means that the passage is understood in its cultural context and passage are understood clearly. The passage “train up a child” is another that phrase not understood clearly and in several books it is actually dealing with a young teen in formative years not a child. Legalism runs rampant in some of the “biblical” books I have read where grace and faith are not appropriately coinciding with the appropriate teaching of rules. The trust based approaches that I have read like those that Karen Purvis and Tim Kimmel teach a more correct view of child rearing. Jesus sought to restore the trust of God’s word to people that were being taught man made fences in order to comply to God’s standards. Jews will tell you that “spare the rod” in child rearing is also taken out of context. Child does not mean “child” but a young man more than likely.
Deb wrote:
Sounds like Ezzo
@ Nancy:
@ BeenThereDoneThat:
Hmm…when I first began my journey toward healing 7 years ago, one of the things I did was get out my baby book (my mother had given it to me a while before saying she was going through things and thought I might want to keep it). I had stored it…but I sat down and read. Among many other things that fleshed out what I had never been able to articulate, one entry said, “At 5 weeks, the baby is spoiled by her grandparents as she sometimes cries when I put her down.” This statement still causes me pause – realizing that in my mother’s eyes, it was wrong for a 5 weeks old baby to cry because it wanted to be held. This idea that babies are ‘sinful’ – if I remember correctly, one of the terms used by Michael Pearl was “little vipers” – is so harmful to the emotional development of the child. Believe me, I know.
Nancy wrote:
I’ve recently spoken with my daughter in law on this issue. She’s working on her Master’s in Marriage & Family Counseling so she can get licensed. She tells me that the group think dynamic is often more powerful than the moral compass even ‘good folks’ have within. We are social beings who need to be wanted by others, and if we can find a ‘fitting in’ with those of our ‘feather’ so to speak, all the better, even if it involves compromise with our inner selves. She cautions me however that this thesis is by no means exhaustive and that its parameters can have complex variables. But it’s a start.
Jeannette Altes wrote:
“You see a cute little baby — GOD SEES AN UTTERLY DEPRAVED SINNER!!!!!”
— some radio preacher I heard in the Seventies
lemonaidfizz wrote:
If it’s a finite resource, you’ve triggered the Zero Sum Game — where since there’s only so much to go around, the only way to get more for ME is to take it away from YOU.
texaswildflower wrote:
More like Triumph of the Will — the father/Fuehrer’s Will.
Birds of a feather…
Seems to me the Pearls system, after breaking the will and spirit of girls, then leaves them the perfect objects for the attentions of a predator like Gothard.
@ Happymom:
Oh I love BACA! Tissues are entirely appropriate. Now that is what real goodness looks like: the protection of heartbreakingly vulnerable children, inducting them into their new ‘gang’ of big kind adults, who will have their backs, & will fill a courtroom so a traumatised child finds the courage to speak in front of their abuser. It gives me great joy to think of an abuser who has threatened a child to silence to see a bunch of bikers there to back up their new ‘member’. And the contrast to CJ & his cowards could not be greater, totally blinking pitiful. I know which group Jesus stands with.
Oh & yeah, the Pearls. FFS. They are loons & child abusers. Debi Pearl’s defence is just want this needs, it will sink their cause quicker than a well articulated argument 🙂
@ Steven:
Over the years I have heard about every excuse I can imagine used to try to justify bad behavior. Maybe there is a market here for another home business. “For a fee I will “sell” you a really good excuse, tailor made for your situation. Extra fee for arguments to defend the excuse. ” Oh, oops, it has already been done. “Read my book, listen to my presentations, read my blog.”
One last thing and then I am out of here. I agree somewhat with the Calvinists about the depravity thing when it comes to whappin’ around on infants and children. This is about depravity. But it is not the kids who are depraved.
@ lemonaidfizz:
Well, a lot of these guys say the same thing about the heart in dating/courtship – if you have too many girlfriends/boyfriends, you won’t have any heart left to give to your spouse on your wedding day because everyone else will have all the “pieces” of it you gave away – so maybe this is some kind of deeper misconception across subjects. And speaking of chore charts, I also once saw a female patriarchy blogger claim that women have to earn their husbands’ love through obedience.
Cassie wrote:
Not sure if anyone has corrected me yet, but Phoebe was a DEACONESS. Whoops, my bad 😉
She’s still the only one allowed. Lol.
Beakerj wrote:
…and even giving the child a “vest” and a new identity.
When I have heard BACA members speak in person, they have noted that most girls want the name “Angel”, so they have biker vests ready with that name on them….Some children wear their vests to the trial……Some children wear their vests to school…..helps with the bullying…..In one case that I heard of, a school bully was confronted by BACA and stopped his bullying, and became a good friend of the child…
I tried to leave a comment on Debi Pearl’s blog, but it seems to have been rejected. Maybe because I supplied a fake e-mail address — I don’t know. Anyway, it went something like this:
Mrs. Pearl, I understand that Jesus sometimes used hyperbole, but I think that you’re taking it too far. Seriously? Millions of people now have no one to tell them about the Good News? Gothard is all they’ve got? I find that more than just a little hard to swallow. Melodrama won’t help your case.
Even a man who has done the kinds of things Gothard is accused of doing? And to children, no less? You’re free to choose your poison, but I wouldn’t want to be in his shoes. I recall Jesus said something about those who offend against little ones…
And, no, apparently he didn’t pour “his whole life” into ministry. It seems he had at least some energy left for “affectionate touching” with underage girls.
And anyway, if Gothard’s downfall means the end of his ministry, it suggests one of two things to me: either 1) he made himself far, far too important to his own organization, or 2) his ministry was built on sand, not on the Rock.
@ Serving Kids in Japan:
Amen to that! Glad you posted this here.
__
Deb,
HowDee!
Thanks for provid’in a TWW place to rest my widdle head. Thank -You 4 da continue’d prayers dat rest ma soul! Je suis en coton haut ! (grin)
*
Da victims of spiritual abuse are set free; in this I will continually rejoice! Praise You Jesus! You have bound da strongman, You have spoil’d his goods! Your holy ones see it and find solas and relief! They will lift their hands in da praise of You!
*
Lord, hear my wee cry for mercy as I call unto you for help! I lift up my hands and worship you when the spring rains fall…It is You, Oh Lord, who have filled my cup, it is You who have deliver’d me from da snare of da fowler! In You will I continually place my trust! Hidden within your pinions, and your wings, Your faithfulness is my shield & bulwark!
(smiley face goes here)
Sopy
__
Intermission: Count Basie – “Tall Cotton”
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zj0rjyuglcM
Just because: Kari Jobe – “Oh The Blood”
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wxeVrMC1qVY
;~)
—
Brian wrote:
Yes, it does. To all the new parents out there, DO NOT LISTEN TO THESE LOONS! You will damage your children for life.
I have absolutely no patience for this nonsense, and I am so grateful that the internet allows us to expose them.
Please cuddle your babies. They grow up so fast!
Happymom wrote:
I really wanted to come to that conference! Instead, my family rescued two Golden Retrievers puppies that were abandoned near our farm. They are eight weeks old and so cute! We have turned them over to a Golden Retriever rescue group in Raleigh who will find them loving homes. Please let me know if there will be a follow-up conference.
Regarding the Debi quote at the very top of the page….I find it astounding and ironic that she says this wasn’t about righting ongoing wrongs. I mean, is today opposite day and I just missed it?
That’s like saying that the Apollo space missions weren’t about going into space, or that eating isn’t about consuming food, or that mowing the lawn isn’t about cutting the grass. You can’t just take something’s true purpose and put the word “not” in front of it and have that somehow affect the reality of the situation.
To put it another way…if there were ongoing wrongs that needed righting, how do you suppose Debi would suggest that we DO go about righting them?
Oh, that’s right….by talking directly to the people who caused the hurt (who’ve already proven they don’t care and won’t do anything). How convenient.
@ Deb:
So er, um, Deb, if you came, would you be wearing your “blogging uniform” of a robe, Captain Kirk t shirt, and have cheetos for everyone? I hope to make the next conference, too, but I have not decided what to wear…
@ Marie2:
PS I figured that Dee and Deb dress alike, since you are both blogging queens?
PPS Dee I was howling with laughter reading your Home Depot post. I hope that poor clerk who waited on you has made a full recovery from his shock. Glad the police were not called. 🙂
Sopwith wrote:
Je suis tres heureuse to hear this news Sopy. 🙂 Bad rhyme fully intended.
In Debi’s article she says, “Am I saying I was a part of the ministry thus am struggling to protect it from gainsayers? No! I have no connection to it.” She is not exactly being upfront when she says she has “no connection” to it. NGJ does have some connection – they have allowed Bill Gothard to write an article for their magazine http://nogreaterjoy.org/articles/response-from-bill-gothard/ And in another article they mention that their daughter spent a summer at the International Home for Children in Indianapolis, which is/was connected to Gothard’s ministry. I can’t find an active link on the home (maybe it is closed), but it is mentioned in this article on Gothard’s website http://billgothard.com/news/mexicanorphans
Debi’s response is one I would expect from a woman who wrote in “Created to Be His Help Meet” that mothers should take their kids to prison to visit fathers who have molested them, and then welcome the father back in the home after he has “done his time”.
M. Joy wrote:
MJoy – jaw-dropping.
And utterly vile.
Here is the article that mentions the Pearl’s daughter spending a summer at Gothard’s International Home for Children in Indianapolis. http://nogreaterjoy.org/articles/summertime-at-the-pearls/
Another person who commented on Debi’s article mentions that the Russian orphans the Pearls cared for came from Gothard’s IBLP. I’m surprised they allow comments http://nogreaterjoy.org/2014/04/24/debi-pearl-weighs-iblp-situation/ on their page because many of them clearly do not agree with the Pearls.
Rafiki wrote:
Rafiki, I wouldn’t have believed it if I hadn’t read it with my own eyes. If I had time, I’d look it up to find the chapter and page number, but I’ve got work to do.
M. Joy wrote:
That’s patriarchy in all it’s glory.
@ M. Joy:
MJoy – believe me, no worries, back to the salt mines for you! 🙂
As an aside, I read direct quotes from these phallocrats printed by the Deebs or in other IMO reputable publications. I refuse to click on links to these disturbed individuals because a) I don’t wish to have to pour bleach in my eyes; and b) I do not wish to give these freaks any unique page hits.
If the slightly-more-tech-savvy-than-I crowd wishes to correct and/or assuage my fears of “b” above, please do!
Rafiki wrote:
Absolument!! Je suis vraiment content!!!
Thought I would continue the rhyme……
And one possible interpretive translation:
Sopy: I am in high cotton!!
Rafiki: I am very happy to hear this news!
Me: Absolutely! I am very happy, content!
Apologies if that translation was not precise enough for all the francophiles out there….. 🙂 And yes, the rhyming gets lots in translation….
Marie2 wrote:
Oops….should be truly happy!! What’s wrong with my brain this morning???
Right on, K.D., it’s all about money, but we don’t know the ins and outs. I would hesitate to call this woman “evil”, though. Scared, confused, worried about livelihood; we just don’t know, as she is probably not being candid.
Just curious…has anyone seen this word broken down this way before???
http://www.godswordtowomen.org/ezerkenegdo.htm
Word Study
EZER KENEGDO
Usages of ‘ezer in the Old Testament show that in most cases God is an ‘ezer to human beings, which calls to question if the word “helper” is a valid interpretation of ‘ezer in any instance it is used. “Evidence indicates that the word ‘ezer originally had two roots, each beginning with different guttural sounds. One meant “power” and the other “strength.” As time passed, the two guttural sounds merged, but the meanings remained the same. The article below by William Sulik explains this point quite well. He references R. David Freedman and Biblical Archaeology Review 9 [1983]: 56-58).
“She was to be his “helper”–at least that is how most of the translations have interpreted this word. A sample of the translations reads as follows:
‘I shall make a helper fit for him’ (RSV); ‘I will make a fitting helper for him’ (New Jewish Publication Society); ‘I will make an aid fit for him’ (AB); ‘I will make him a helpmate’ (JB); ‘I will make a suitable partner for him’ (NAB); ‘I will make him a helper comparable to him’ (NKJV).
[Source: Hard Sayings of the Bible by Walter C. Kaiser, Peter H. Davids, F. F. Bruce, and Manfred Brauch]
However, the customary translation of the two words `ezer kenegdo as “helper fit is almost certainly wrong. Recently R. David Freedman has pointed out that the Hebrew word ezer is a combination of two roots: `-z-r, meaning “to rescue, to save,” and g-z-r, meaning “to be strong.”
@ Sopwith:
Salut, Sopy. Il me plait d’ecouter que tu te sens mieux. (I’m pleased to hear that you’re feeling better.)
Jeannette Altes wrote:
In the notes I took from Homestead’s child training class was this beaut: “Certain types of crying in newborns and toddlers can indicate a need to break their will.” The idea was that, even at a young age, children use crying to manipulate.
And these notes are downright scary now that I know there were fathers molesting their daughters: 1)Teach kids to honor dad as priest and king in the home. 2)Wives, bring your hearts to wholeheartedly support your husbands. 3)Do not cover children from father’s authority or from God. 4)Wives should never argue with husbands. Teach children not to argue with dad.
Nancy wrote:
Great question. I’ve often wondered about this. I’ve come to the tentative conclusion that its complicated, but that the main factor is probably the presence of common pathologies.
Wacky views always come from some underlying problem. The Pearls are clearly suffering from some pretty serious mental health problems, Mr. Pearl in particular. It just bleeds through every page of this book! Hyper-controlling, grandiose self image (a sovereign king?!), and of course the violence used against little ones (just to name a few). I don’t want to psychoanalyze him, but it’s pretty clear that the man has some very twisted internal thoughts and feelings regarding himself, the world around him, and children.
His “teachings” flow from these deeper problems. Thus, others who have similar underlying problems also connect with his teachings, which are designed to address those problems (albeit very dysfunctionally). Like attracts like.
On a related note: has anyone else noticed the similarities between, on the one hand, how the Pearls conceptualize themselves and their kids, and on the other hand, how Calvinistas conceptualize themselves and their “flock?”
@ Sopwith:
Love Basie Sopy! Without black Bluesmen and Jazzmen, there could have been no Gershwin.
Mr.H wrote:
“There is no Right, there is no Wrong, there is only POWER.”
— Lord Voldemort
“The only goal of Power is POWER. And POWER consists of inflicting maximum suffering among your inferiors.”
— Comrade O’Brian, Inner Party, Airstrip One, Oceania, 1984
BeenThereDoneThat wrote:
“YOU WILL RESPECT! MAH!! AUTHORITAH!!!!!”
— Cartman from South Park, the time he was a cop
Even if Daddy Dearest is pulling a Craster’s Keep. “WOMAN, SUBMIT!!!!!”
Serving Kids in Japan wrote:
Don’t the two tend to go together?
@ Marie2:
Great stuff Marie2! The works of Katharine Bushnell helped me to break the strangle hold of the Calvary Chapel schtick I got whirl-pooled into as a young fella.
Headless Unicorn Guy wrote:
Ha, ha. One of my favorite episodes. My siblings and I pull that line on each other to this day.
@ M. Joy:
Yes!!!! If this thread is still active when I get home, I’ll find a YouTube and post it… Just to hear that voice again.
Headless Unicorn Guy wrote:
You are good. I had to google that. It’s a perfect comparison.
What’s always bothered me about those who teach this ideology is they never assume any responsibility when things go south. (It reminds me what my father quoted to me when our crisis began, “Success has many fathers, but failure is an orphan.”) When kids died as a result of the Pearl’s “child training” techniques, the Pearl’s claimed they were doing it wrong. If the kids don’t grow up to be perfect soldiers in the Lord’s army, the parents must have failed somehow. http://tinyurl.com/o7k9vat
And when someone in our church was found to be molesting his own children? Just claim that the ministers were the ones to uncover the abuse and urged the perp to turn himself in. Nothing wrong with our teachings. Nothing to see here. Never mind that one little girl had been trying to tell her mother what daddy was doing to her. Her mother wrote her off as lying. Why? Because we were taught to “never accept a child’s word over an adult’s.”
I believe that these teachings are creating an environment that is ripe for abuse. It’s interesting to watch the rats as the Phillips and Gothard ships go down. Most of them are distancing themselves. Debi steps in to defend. But, they’ve all got a stake in this that they’re trying to protect one way or another.
BeenThereDoneThat wrote:
If you think about it – OF COURSE THEY DO. A baby can’t do anything to feed herself. A very young baby can’t even hold a bottle. He can’t change his diaper either, or help himself in any way if too hot or cold, sick, frightened, or just positioned badly so that his muscles are cramping. The ONLY thing that baby can do is try to get somebody else to meet her needs so she doesn’t ACTUALLY DIE of hunger and thirst and so she doesn’t lie in her own filth. And the ONLY thing that baby can do to alert anyone that she needs help is to cry. That’s IT. Toddlers aren’t much better off. I suppose that if an adult who is quadriplegic asks somebody to feed him, that’s manipulative. If an adult who is bedridden asks for a bedpan so she doesn’t soil her bed.
Sorry for shouting. This drives me nuts. I don’t know how you can be any less loving and charitable. Some people need to be kept far, far away from babies and children and helpless folks.
That’s how *a person* can be, not you, BTDT.
BeenThereDoneThat wrote:
My roommate’s a big Game of Thrones fan.
The only thing we ever did as parents, to my knowledge at least, that is “Pearl-like” is to teach the kids and grandkids that obedience must be immediate. But then again, we don’t give a lot of orders, preferring to explain as we go what needs doing and why.
Plus we lived in an area pockmarked with old mine shafts and full of scorpions and rattlesnakes. So in the rare occasion where we needed to give an order, their very life could depend on immediate obedience.
Never a problem since they trusted us and we did not over use it.
All that said to say apparently some people may have mined some gold themselves from these movements without going overboard, and hence don’t see the fuss. And others who bought the whole deal lock stock and barrel now know how foolish that was!
linda wrote:
There are some things that must be immediate. If I tell a child, “Stop,” they must stop. They may be headed toward danger. There is no discussion here and there will be punishment if they don’t stop. All else can be discussed.
M. Joy wrote:
Ok here are a few links to some related YouTube videos….
Cartman Respect My Authoritah – South Park
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gx4jn77VKlQ
Respect My Authoritah!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rIVHNylH1Mk
Bennett Willis wrote:
Yes, that’s a great policy! I can only imagine the amount of anxiety in a child being raised to think that every time the parents say Stop they are in danger….Ugh….That’s what these people appear to be advocating, that all events are code red….How horrible for an innocent child….I can only believe that children raised this way end up with messed up nervous systems….
@ Marie2:
And PS that’s not meant to say that the poster who had dangerous elements – scorpions, mines, etc was abusive because stop did mean danger – I doubt that the children wanted to test things that much.
When I have been around people who firmly believe this, the children get a diet of “No” and “Stop” all day long – no rewards for curiosity or encouragement to explore….
Marie2 wrote:
I definitely need to give this some thought… Cheetos are a must! 😆
“obedience must be immediate” AKA “first time obedience”
Here is one of my favourite authors, Sally Clarkson, talking about that idea.
“Formulas like “First Time Obedience” do not necessarily reach the heart!
I was speaking at a conference once and the speaker before me was plying the audience with all sorts of guilt. This speaker said, “If you don’t require first time obedience every time from your children, then you are disobeying God and you will be responsible for losing your child’s heart and tempting him to rebel against God!” Many men in the audience cheered loudly and clapped. I could just see the harshness that would follow in their homes because a speaker had given them permission to be harsh and demanding, every time with children, without ever teaching these parents sympathy, wisdom, skill and understanding with their children, their ages, their paths of life.
But Really? Can you cite me verse and give context that says God always requires first time obedience without mercy? I am thankful that He is much more patient with me than that in my own life. I have made so many mistakes over the years and done such foolish things, and still He is there loving me, instructing me, showing me his compassion and gently leading me daily to better understand His holy and righteous standard for me. God reveals one issue of immaturity at a time and I learn slowly. He has never pointed out all of my weaknesses and disobedient attitudes at once–and if He did, I would be devastated.
– See more at: http://www.itakejoy.com/first-time-obedience-really/#sthash.GlsWUMiA.dpuf“
Nancy wrote:
So true!
Muff Potter wrote:
Cool!!! I’ll look at her stuff some more!!
And in response to something else that you had shared, from weeks ago, (if I haven’t already) I just wanted to say that yes, there should be many more trade schools for young folks, instead of college! And, eliminate seminary for young people!! In order to qualify, they should follow the Apostle Paul’s example, and spend 10+ years unknown in Asia Minor, only relying on a trade like tent-making for a living! 🙂 Skip the cushy life that fast tracks someone to great honor and power at 25!!
Happymom wrote:
Ty 4 the update!!! Sounds like a terrific conference!! Just out of curiosity, was it the case that your feelings were a bit mixed after, in that some things were absolutely upsetting to process, and other things were breathtakingly great? I hope to attend another one of these conferences soon, but definitely grab some friends and allies to process things after….It’s all good, though, it’s definitely a topic worth dedicating a weekend to!
@ Marie2:
And PS I hope I am not too forward to ask this….If you are not comfortable saying much, I totally understand….It’s not an easy thing to talk about, especially online.
The problem with these gurus of Christian™ child rearing is that, quite apart from them injecting their depraved notions of depravity into the equation, they have no freaking idea about normal child development. As in — learning is incremental, not instantaneous; that it requires trial-and-error, many mistakes, two-steps-forward-one-back, apologies, celebration, tears, rejoicing — not a perfectionist system, in other words, but a life lived in humility and thankfulness — particularly on the part of the parents. I am so glad that my dear Heavenly Father is so forbearing and kind with me. If I am less so with my children, it is to my shame.
Hippimama wrote:
Beautifully said, hippimama! Rearing children is never a one-size-fits-all task. Each child should be treated as an individual with individual personalities, needs, strengths and weaknesses.
To our readers
I am continuing to be in and out. It should all settle down on Sunday and then I will be back to normal. I have written a post for Friday and am trying to keep up with reading some of the comments, etc.
Heather wrote:
The first thing that came to mind in reference to “first time obedience” being required by God was…..
@ Jeannette Altes:
Forgot to add my point – which is: I don’t believe that God does require / demand ‘first time obedience.’
@ Jeannette Altes:
I thought of that parable right away.
There is a kernel of truth here. If you let a kid keep on with stuff while you keep ineffectually telling him to stop, eventually you get the point that you snap and over-react. Or your kid gets into a situation that is actually dangerous, like another commenter said, and you don’t have that instant obedience when you need it. Or the kid wears you down and you let stuff slide that you shouldn’t, for his benefit. Ineffectually whining “stop that, I really mean it this time” while your kid safely ignores you is just nowhere. Or the kid keeping on until Mom throws a really interesting tantrum, which is amusing for her but bad for Mom’s blood pressure. But you can’t impose first-time obedience until a child is mature enough for it, and you seriously have to be reasonable in your requirements, and listen to your child if she’s trying to tell you there’s a reason why she doesn’t want to do X thing.
The flip side, of course, is that parents need to pay heed to their kids who are nicely and earnestly trying to tell them something. I was in the produce section of a grocery store once; man and woman pushing a cart, little girl asking for bananas, which is a perfectly reasonable thing to want. They’re pretty, and inexpensive, and they taste good, and they’re good for you. She kept asking “Can we get some bananas?” as sweet as could be, and they were acting like it was just the wind blowing. So faced away from them and studying the spinach, I started counting out loud. “Can we get some bananas?” “Seven.” “Can we get some bananas?” “Eight.” “Can we get some bananas?” “Nine.” “Can we get some bananas?” “Ten.” “Can we get some bananas?” “Eleven.” At that point I saw out of the corner of my eye the man’s head jerk up, and then he walked over to the bananas and got a bunch to put in his cart. I can’t stand for people to ignore kids like that.
Nick Bulbeck wrote:
Touché!
Deb wrote:
yes, cheetos are a must… Maybe they can provide you with free samples, since you give them a fair amount of free advertising here. ..
@ Jeannette Altes:
Jeannette Altes wrote:
Jeannette, I completely agree with you and with Sally. (Both paragraphs were her words.) Not only does God not treat us this way, but as a parent I know I forget things. I screw up. So a parent might tell a child to always put the lids on the markers when they are done drawing, but then be demanding the child come attend to something else without delay. What is the child to do? I know there are children out there who are punished for this kind of “failure”. God forgive me for ever being that parent.
I’ve done a little reading on Pearl in the last 30 minutes. That’s not much in the way of research but, in my defence, it’s been rather like searching for coins in a cesspit.
One thing I haven’t been able to trace is the story of how Pearl himself was broken. Who beat and broke him as a baby, on whose authority, by what means, and to what end? What, in other words, legitimises him as an authority whose prerogative it is to instruct parents to break their children? Because if Pearl was not broken as a baby, how can I be confident that he is truly submitting to God’s Holy Word™ now, and not merely pretending to do so in order to sell books?
There is a rather strange comment here on Janet Heimlich’s blog in which the commenter claims to have known Pearl at Bible college, whatever that means in this particular context. And the commenter, whilst broadly and warmly supportive of both Pearl and spanking, admits that even then, Pearl was
Sounds like somebody needs to give Pearl a dose of his own medicine.
@ Nick Bulbeck:
I nominate you. But caution is advised! From what I can tell, you might not be welcome and end up with a knife between your feet. I could barely peruse at the Pearl website. It had the feel of disturbed individuals.
__
Muff Potter,
Solid, Jackson! 🙂
—
__
Estelle ,
Salut
Merci de penser de moi et soulevant mes esprits !
Je suis reconnaissant.
Bénédictions !
Sopy
—
Marie2 wrote:
It’s true. If I had a nickel for every time I’ve heard a chuckle, followed by the comment, “Oh it couldn’t have been THAT bad….”
__
@ Marie2 ,
Thank you for making me smile!
ATB
Sopy
__
In step: George Gershwin – Second Rhapsody for Piano and Orchestra
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WahtvH16Ihc
—
__
@ Rafiki ,
You are Golden!
http://www.ftdimg.com/pics/products/FK417_330x370.jpg
🙂
Sopy
—
@ Nick Bulbeck:
As we all remember or have read, after WWII there was a lot of questioning about how this sort of thing could happen in and to and from a civilized and christianized advanced civilization and people. Lots of books and articles and research and such were available looking at various aspects; political, economic and such. Bonhoeffer wrote some about the condition of the state church at the time. In the midst of all that research there was some talk about child rearing ideas and techniques in those of teutonic heritage. Some of it sounded a lot like what we are seeing praised by these folks now. Beat. Break. Humiliate. Isolate. Train for unquestioning and immediate obedience.
So, yes, surely there is a history of abuse in Pearl’s past. I remember the movie “Sling Blade” about an adult abused as a child. That does not prove anything, I just thought to mention it.
I do note that the last in that list, about just following orders, did not play too well at Nuremberg.
chris wrote:
I can only imagine what it must be like when an adolescent or teenage boy is preyed upon by a woman. Especially if she is young and “hot”. The emotional fallout could be devastating, yet there are so many people out there who will tell you confidently that they should be grateful and, if male, that they themselves wish they had been so victimized.
Marie2 wrote:
Cindy Kunsman has begun to share her own abuse story on SSB: http://tinyurl.com/mz2tb4c She has an amazing (and sensitive) way of explaining how a child processes such abuse, and why they often tell no one about it.
__
The common denominator to many recant religious establishment breaches of moral behavior is the lack of 501(c)3 organizational board member(s) holding the top name accountable.
hmmm…
Has a type of spiritual Roto-Rooter (TM) ( i.e. external accountability stimuli) become necessary to holding certain religious 501(c)3 establishments and their leaders, within acceptable perimeters?
—
Sopwith wrote:
The short answer is yes. Especially when you learn that “clergyperson” is number 8 on the list of professions that have the most psychopaths.
http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/spycatcher/201404/why-predators-are-attracted-careers-in-the-clergy
BeenThereDoneThat wrote:
Cindy’s story is harrowing. I told my daughter over and over as she was growing up, “You can tell me anything. There is nothing you could not tell me.” And I meant it 100%, keeping in mind all the time that things can happen that you never could have predicted, like a nice neighbor with a nice family molesting your kid. But as I said it, I knew that if something terrible really did happen to her, it was anybody’s guess whether she would tell me, or whether she would think “when Mama said I could tell her anything, she didn’t mean this.” Cindy explains how a child reasons with a child’s understanding. There’s nothing you can do about that.
@ Sopwith:
Between today’s lovely onset of what counts for rains here, and the gorgeous flower bouquet from Sopy, I can truly say it’s been an excellent day. 🙂
Nick, I thought I’d mention that Sopy’s flowers also proved a balm to the grievous wound of Tuesday evening’s Champions League massacre of Bayern by Real Madrid. 🙁 Just awful – I curled up into the fetal position when Manuel Nuer started screaming at his defenders mere minutes into the Death Match.
At least Atletico beat Chelsea last night!
@ Rafiki:
It was certainly a curious round of Champions’ League * semi-finals this year. The extraordinary thing is that, even at the Allianz, Bayern dominated possession. The BBC pundits wondered aloud whether Bayern were too dominant in the Bundesliege; having won it with games to spare, they promptly lost the next match (if I recall correctly) and have been somewhat off the boil since. Hard to say.
It is hard to be sympathetic to Jose Mourinho, who famously coined the phrase “parking the bus” in criticism of Chelsea’s opponents during his last spell there. As somebody texted into the Beeb: that’s what happens when you don’t play football, or even try to score an away goal.
Be which as it may, Chelsea have ended the season without silverware, even with the win at Anfield, as a result of which Manchester City cannot now be caught barring an improbable avalanche of Liverpool goals.
Nick Bulbeck wrote:
* or, as the late Jimmy Greaves used to call it, the Give Us Yer Money Cup.
One last fitba’ lament… I have to admit I was slightly disappointed at Brendan Rogers’ complaining about Chelsea parking two buses. Two things:
1) A 0-0 draw would have suited us fine; one dull match seems a small price to pay for a league title.
2) Chelsea weren’t parking the bus when they scored against us, twice; we weren’t ready for a counter-attacking game, but we should have been.
Nick Bulbeck wrote:
Miracles do happen!
Other sporting news: the 140th annual running of the Kentucky Derby/Oaks is tomorrow and Saturday. Fascinating field this year and I have good friends with family connections to a Derby entrant. Have not completely settled on my picks but will be consulting the Weather Channel for Louisville, KY to keep up with the track conditions. 🙂
I SO prefer talking about the fitba’ and thoroughbred handicapping as opposed to Debi Pearl. 🙂
Rafiki wrote:
Agreed – we’re off-topic, but in a good way!
Though I ken hee-haw aboot racing. Other than that horses are bigger than jockeys and have twice as many legs.
As to the immediate obedience thing, I think most healthy parents want to have trained their children to obey a direct command immediately.
They just don’t use direct commands except when necessary.
Examples: if you don’t expect immediate obedience, just how many times WILL you tell your two year old not to pick up the intriguing object at the park when it is a used needle? (It happens, even in nice neighborhoods.) What if it is an unknown pill someone dropped on the floor of wallyworld that your four year old is going for?
What works is generally talking your way through the day. You might tell a small tot that “in five minutes we will pick up the toys and it is nap time.” Then remind them at three minutes, then go cheerfully to help pick them up when the five minutes are up. Of course, if the child disobeys or throws a fit you will use a time out, or loss of the toys for the day, or some such discipline fitted to the child’s age and abilities.
But you need to have worked with your children, teaching them that if you give a sharper “stop” or “no no” or “don’t touch” there is some sort of danger and they need to stop and look to you to know how to proceed.
That is very different than the drill sergeant parent always barking orders and beating for not giving obedience immediately.
I do think the same applies to our relationship with God. Sometimes that still small voice is leading us INTO obedience and He doesn’t wallop us for not obeying immediately. But sometimes there are direct, horrendous consequences for not obeying Him immediately.
Like, for instance, how many times does He say “Do not commit murder” before we obey? Do we really think the first few times are freebies with no consequences?
My personal opinion is that we want to stay out of both ditches–neither parental Nazis nor never disciplining and teaching our children.
linda wrote:
Excellent illustration of this point! You explained this much more clearly than I did.
I believe that the Pearls and their followers treat everything as high priority dangerous, which can be quite unsafe for a child – the child does not learn that there are grey areas to life, that not everything is super dangerous, or super safe, sometimes there is ambiguity, and learning to navigate that is important. How scary to believe, as one poster pointed out, that if I don’t put the cap on the magic marker right away it will be a deadly dangerous situation!!
Paul said it best:
2 Corinthians 11:19-20
19 For you put up with fools gladly, since you yourselves are wise!
20 For you put up with it if one brings you into bondage, if one devours you, if one takes from you, if one exalts himself, if one strikes you on the face.
NKJV
The blind loyalty to these corrupt individuals is what is frightening. They blame Satan when in reality they approve of anything their “hero” says or does.
@ Marie2:
What is really super dangerous for the Pearls and their ilk is the danger that the child might actually learn independent thinking skills. All hyper-whatevers fear this.
@ linda:
Well said!
In my thirty years of parenting eight children I have moved from the “Strong-Willed Child” view of children being little buggers who are out to rule the parents, to attachment parenting where I am in charge and I work hard to help my child behave appropriately and be respectful, and I do the same.
My life as a child of God is much the same. I believe the Holy Spirit is always “attachment parenting” me, prompting me to live the way God is directing me, not because I fear his punishment, but because he loves me and I trust he is in control and knows what is best for me.
This news article is very interesting: http://tinyurl.com/pvrvg7p
“Calling the abuse of their very young children on religious grounds “absurd” and “obviously dangerous,” a Dane County judge on Friday sentenced a Black Earth couple to a jointly-recommended 18 months of probation, but made it clear to them that more severe punishment could have awaited them.
Dane County Circuit Judge Ellen Berz said that regardless of what their church taught them, Matthew Caminiti, 30, and his wife, Alina Caminiti, 27, should have known that striking their children, including infants, on their bare bottoms with wooden dowels was wrong and misguided.”
I know this has no direct link to the Pearl’s teachings. But, does anyone think they’ll be able to use “To Train up a Child” as some sort of defense “exhibit A” when they are charged with child abuse?
Heather wrote:
Because with “the Strong-Willed Child” view, EVERYTHING ends up reduced to Power Struggle. Power Struggle Without End, Amen.
From 1975 to about 1979, I lived in a family situation (a Power Struggle between sociopath baby brother and tough-as-nails stepmother) where everything — EVERYTHING — was a never-ending “dick-swinging contest” 24/7/365. It was like High School Hell all over again.
You sound like you agree with Pearl. (deleted by editor) @ Nick Bulbeck:
The basic concept most of you posters accept is that “God” wants you to behave in certain ways — therefore, absolving yourselves of responsibility for your actions, or lack of them.
It is possible to be a decent human being, treat others well, love your family, not abuse anyone and most certainly not try for “dominion” or power over others.
Religion has done so much harm that it boggles the mind that people are still looking for instant salvation through some church, sect, “prophet”, or any other type of self-proclaimed “holy” teachings.
YOU are responsible for leading a decent life, raising your children well and with love, not injuring others. That does not require some religion or a god — it is simply the right thing to do.
Even if you must have some sort of religious teachings, best to just do what Jesus and Hillel before him preached – that which is hateful to you, do not do unto your neighbors. How hard is that?
Religion has always been an excuse for hurting others, going to war, burning heretics, domination by patriarchs, in short — power plays to be top dog.
It’s as simple as that.
This Pearl/Gothard/Quiver thing is just another pernicious way of being “right” and putting others down, it’s sicker than most mainstream religions which have evolved to be less offensive, but are still about “God’s will” – meaning the will of the reigning religious leader and the slant he puts on it.
Wake up people, take responsibility for leading a decent life and stop looking to religion to take that responsibility away from you.
Religion is, and has always been no different from cave people worshipping fire, lightning, and the unknown that scared them so they sought to appease it by making up some God or other.
Religion is at best mass delusion, at worst insanity — all too often mass insanity that does great harm.
Get these Duggars off t.v.- they are not some cute “Christian” family with lots of well behaved kids, they are cult worshiping fundamentalists who follow a perverted patriarchal old lunatic, child hating/beating sadists, and the Quiver concept of breeding their own “army” to take over the government in order to restrict the rights of others.
Couldn’t be any more obvious that they are racist, sexist, white supremacists who want to outlaw birth control, abortion, do away with gays/lesbians — doesn’t get any more racist or fascist than that.