* * *
Doug Phillips: a timeline of events, understanding true repentance and question about Phillips’ teaching elder position at Boerne Christian Assembly
* * *
“Over the years, my sensitivity to these problems has only heightened, until several years ago, I set about to align with men who were sounding the alarm of truth and offering Biblical answers to the problems we are facing. Doug Phillips was one of those men, and Vision Forum was one of those ministries which the Lord has providentially raised up at this time in history to rebuild our Christ honoring foundations, one family at a time.” Scott Brown, director of National Center for Family-Integrated Churches
I’ve gotten a little flack from various well-known names regarding the comments on my previous post, Doug Phillips Resigns from Office of President at Vision Forum, Discontinues Speaking Engagements. One thought is about how wrong it is to “chortle” over the news of Doug Phillips stepping down as president of Vision Forum Ministries (he did not mention stepping down from the for-profit arm of Vision Forum). I don’t think anyone has been doing any chortling (gotta love that word), but people might be glad that truth is exposed because that is the beginning of healing. But some have been saying people should remain quiet and pray for him and his family as he has shown great humility by his public statement.
We all want a happy ending which includes repentance and restoration, but it’s important to test the waters and see the fruit evidenced. Part of that evidence included this:
Is Doug Phillips still a teaching elder/pastor at his church, Boerne Christian Assembly?
This was first question that came to my mind after the big news this week of Phillips stepping down. If this man, who taught others how to have godly families, how men should be godly husbands and fathers, had fallen into sin – – so much that he felt the need to resign his Vision Forum Ministry position as president, then what about the even more important ministry work – – that of shepherding of God’s flock?
I checked the Boerne Christian Assembly website when the news broke and saw Phillips’ name still listed as elder (elder is the same as pastor in family-integrated churches):
* * *
* * *
The question as to whether or not Phillips remains in his position as teaching elder is an important question as it helps people to be able to examine the validity of his statement of repentance. If families are looking to this man for godly teaching, yet he has recently been living a life contrary to what he is teaching, this is a problem of integrity and moral character.
Someone left this comment on my previous article about Phillips stepping down from his elder position at his church:
* * *
* * *
I’m uncomfortable posting an anonymous comment as fact. I need more than that. Well, yesterday, more credible information came in via Voddie Baucham’s Facebook page. If you recall, Baucham and Phillips are good buddies. They both follow the family-integrated church model, are into similar ideologies of Patriarchy, Homeschool Movement, courtship, etc. They speak together at conferences. Here’s a snippet of screenshot from a father/daughter retreat in which both Phillips and Baucham spoke.
* * *
* * *
(By the way, if you want to get a good idea of what these guys teach at a father/daughter retreat, check out the message titles.)
Ok, so now that we have established that Baucham and Phillips have pretty close ties, I think Baucham is a pretty credible source when he says this on Facebook, not once, but twice – that Phillips has in fact stepped down as elder from his church.
* * *
* * *
Take a look at this, however. Phillips must have felt like his life was in order enough to speak at a conference put on by FORGE Ministries held less than two months ago: “Engage the Battle” and “Master’s Plan for Fatherhood,” which included familiar names, Kevin (Embedded-Fetuses) Swanson and Scott Brown.
* * *
* * *
This female blogger has questions.
What compelled Phillips to resign this week? Why didn’t he step down from the Vision Forum Ministries president position in February when he allegedly stepped down from his teaching-elder position? Why, if he felt the necessary to step down from his elder position, did he continue speaking on topics such as godly fathering, godly husbands when his own marriage and home life were going through their own battle?
We talk about spiritual abuse here. We study false teachers. Many of us missed the warning signs in our own churches. So now, in order to prevent that from happening again, we study so as not to repeat the same mistakes. We watch Christian leaders use their positions of leadership inappropriately, say one thing, do another, etc. Some of us probably have trust issues. We want to see the fruit in a leader’s life, which is a Biblical response. We want to see true repentance before we can trust.
What does true repentance look like?
I typed a phrase for a Google search: “what does repentance look like?” and found a sermon entitled, “What Does True Repentance Look Like?” by none other than Scott Brown, Doug Phillips’ friend whom he recently spoke with at the fatherhood conference shown above.
The date of the posting was February 28, 2013 (sermon was actually given April of 2011). I have no way of knowing if Brown knew of Phillips stepping down from his elder position around that time, or of any personal matter, but find the February timing strangely coincidental.
So, what does repentance look like? Let’s see what Mr. Brown said:
How do you define repentance?
Notice that John uses a verb metanoew (meta-no-eh’-o) which means to turn and change. In this sense, John has a turning ministry. And in many ways we have that same kind of ministry. Our job is to go out into the world to call for repentance – for turning, because repentance is turning. Most people are turning from either an intentional lifestyle of irreverent God hating wickedness or, religiosity and moral fakery. These are the two kinds of people that were actually out coming to John in the wilderness.
Having experienced a 7.9 earthquake, I appreciated this word picture when describing repentance:
True repentance is like an earthquake of the soul that changes the configuration of your life. And it is like the restructuring of the earth happens when the hills are brought down and the valleys are raised up. This is the radical restructuring of life that is true Christianity.
Brown continued with the earthquake illustration:
So these are the earthquakes of the soul, that come from the pressure points that are building in people’s lives. At some point there is a breaking point, a metanoeo, a restructuring of life. These changes all come from the question, “What do I do with the things that God has given me?” The answer is, repent and let the landscape change. You may ask, “What do I do with my job?” Repent; let the landscape of your labors change. You may ask, “What do I do with my family?” Repent; let the landscape of your family change. You may ask, “What do I do with my church?” Repent; let the landscape of your church life change.
Those are strong words. You can find Brown’s complete sermon on repentance here.
Scott Brown does a good job describing repentance. A lot of people have been hurt by Phillips directly and indirectly. There are many personal accounts scattered throughout the internet. At some point you have to say either they are all bogus or there is a pattern. Well, now he has publicly confessed to an affair with a woman. Yes, I think we are looking for these signs of repentance from this very prominent and respected Christian leader. Should we not expect any less?
Interestingly, just recently, in August of 2013, Doug Phillips himself wrote on the topic of repentance in a blog article. Here is an excerpt:
Restitution: Those who experience godly sorrow and true repentance will desire to make restitution to the victim. There is a spiritual debt to God himself which they can never pay and which only the blood of Christ will satisfy. But there is a temporal debt to their fellow man which they must be willing to pay. It is not enough that they will cease and desist from the wrongdoing. They will do whatever is necessary to heal those they have injured by restoring to them what they have taken. Godly sorrow produces such compassion for the injured party that the penitent man aches to bring health and wholeness to those he has injured.
Phillips’ public ministry and pastoral ministry has affected many lives. We are all hoping and praying that there is complete repentance, including restitution to those harmed.
* * *
Spiritual Sounding Board 
As odd as it was, I am reminded of the Ted Haggard situation. He admitted his sin, he followed the prescriptive actions from the church and his churches councilors and has now started a new church several years later. ChristianityToday published this.
http://www.christianitytoday.com/le/2012/december-online-only/going-to-hell-with-ted-haggard.html
LikeLike
Joel – I remember reading that story when it came out and I think there was a documentary on tv. He seems to have changed, but I don’t know if it was right or appropriate for him to get back into ministry again considering the damage done. On one hand, we extend grace and forgive, yet we have to consider those who have been harmed. The reputation of Christ and His church should be paramount as well as those lost and hurting sheep.
LikeLike
Julie Anne
Are you being called a “chortler?” Or just accussed of “chortling?”
Maybe you can add this to “The list of Names” at “Sticks and Stones?’
chor·tle – verb
3rd person present: chortles;
past tense: chortled;
past participle: chortled;
gerund or present participle: chortling
1 – laugh in a breathy, gleeful way; chuckle. – “he chortled at his own pun”
Synonyms: – chuckle, laugh, giggle, titter, tee-hee, snigger More
“they were chortling behind their hands, as if we didn’t notice”
chortle – noun — plural noun: chortles
1 – a breathy, gleeful laugh. – “Thomas gave a chortle”
LikeLike
Julie Anne
And – Being a “Chortler” or “Chortling” might have some health benefits. 😉
Pr 15:13 “A merry heart” maketh a cheerful countenance..
Pr 15:15 …he that is of “a merry heart” hath a continual feast.
Pr 17:22 “A merry heart” doeth good like a medicine:
LikeLike
One of my favorite Bible stories is that of Zacchaeus. The people murmured about Jesus eating with a sinner. Zacchaeus’ response was to give half of his possesions to the poor, “and if I have taken anything from anyone by false accusation, I restore fourfold.” It was then that Jesus said, “Today salvation has come to this house.”
There are fruits to bear in keeping with repentance. None of us is perfect, but our repentance drives us to make right our wrongs. Not out of duty, but because we love the Lord so much.
LikeLike
“What compelled Phillips to resign this week? Why didn’t he step down from the Vision Forum Ministries president position in February when he allegedly stepped down from his teaching-elder position?”
These are all semantics games. What on earth did he resign from? People are saying he resigned from VF “ministries” but what does that mean in practical terms? That seems to be a non profit and not his church or his business. I suspect the organizational structure of all of this would look a lot like the org chart for Obamacare.
BTW: 7 years or so ago, I was of the understanding “his” church met in his home so there goes this idea of him “stepping down”. As to resigning from “teaching elder” does that mean he does not speak at the church that meets in his home? He lets someone else come in and be in charge of what goes on in his home when church meets?
LikeLike
Am I the only one who finds it interesting that supposedly he stepped down from his pastor position in Feb, and this is the first the public is hearing of it? The question has been asked all over the place. And to come Baucham?
LikeLike
BTW: I fully admit and take responsibility for being delighted when a charlatan is unmasked. Mocking God and misusing Grace is a particularly odious position to me.
That is one of the tactics used by many of these cults. Accuse those who dare discuss their guru’s PUBLIC announcement as being gleeful about his fall. That is to them, a bigger sin. (they always get to define)
For the record, I would be gleeful if VF and it’s many tentacles was out of business completely. I have serious concerns for the children raised in that environment. Especially the girls. I knew a couple that helped some young women escape from Scott Browns cult. It was horrible. These were 20 something girls who had never been to a gyn and had the emotional mentality of 12 year olds. What they do to young women is stunting their maturity by keeping them isolated in that bubble. All to make some insecure men feel like they are somebody. And what they do to young men is basically teach them to disrespect and even hate women.
LikeLike
Lydia: There was a reason I used both of those articles on repentance. Phillips described exactly what it looked like. We can follow his notes to see how he does.
LikeLike
“Lydia: There was a reason I used both of those articles on repentance. Phillips described exactly what it looked like. We can follow his notes to see how he does.”
These are not transparent people. They operate in secrecy and have all sorts of tangled webs of income sources, organizational structures, yes men, etc. They will claim restitution and their followers will claim it is none of our business because it involves his family. In fact, I will wager at some point Beall will do a Hillary and stand by her man publicly to help things along. The “the other woman” is a whole other issue in light of his teaching on repentance. She is most likely one who was raised in that closed system and is emotionally stunted in maturity.
The problem is a lack of transparency in these cultic groups. They are isolated and closed when it comes to how they operate. Doug has big problems because his main source of income is wrapped up in all this. He needs for people to buy into the cheap grace he is hawking. Even though he had no grace for so many for lots of years as he was building his earthly kingdom.
LikeLike
Julie Anne wrote: “Am I the only one who finds it interesting that supposedly he stepped down from his pastor position in Feb, and this is the first the public is hearing of it? The question has been asked all over the place.”
I agree… An interesting question and possibly relates to your reply to me.
First the church hates airing it’s dirty laundry. I think that is a fault as it makes it look arrogant & hypocritical rather than righteous.
As far as whether anyone should, after a sexual sin (or in this case not quite the physical act?) be allowed into ministry are we not…
1) Categorizing sin and ranking it in seriousness? In other words, why are we not throwing gluttons out of the pastorates or, for that matter, abusers.
2) Not giving the sinner the same grace God has given us?
3) Communicating that forgiveness is not real — at least as far as humans are concerned?
I realize that teachers are supposed to be held to a higher level of accountability but…
If someone becomes a Christian after a rough life (Nicky Cruz – http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nicky_Cruz ) for example they allowed to become ministers, where is that line drawn?
LikeLike
“If someone becomes a Christian after a rough life (Nicky Cruz – http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nicky_Cruz ) for example they allowed to become ministers, where is that line drawn?”
The key word you wrote is AFTER. If they continue then they are saying there was no real sacrifice. See Hebrews 10 and all of 1 John.
Christians are not called to be perfect but pure. The dichotomy is not sinless perfection or totally depraved. The standard is walking in the Light. Growing in Holiness. Not perfection which is impossible since we are born into corrupted bodies onto a corrupted earth.
We are to be “new creatures” in Christ. That does not happen overnight but in a constant abiding in Christ. We ARE responsible for our behavior after we claim to be saved. We are to seek guidance by the Holy Spirit. So many Christians want to claim extra special grace for professing believers who commit the same base sins as unbelievers. It really is odd.
And as for rating sin, you do see God dealing with sins differently in the OT. The child molester should be dealt with the same as the gossip? The glutton the same as the adulterer? Paul even has some sin lists in certain places giving advice on who to separate from who call themselves believers.
LikeLike
Are there more people like me who don’t believe Dough should step down because of his emotional affair?
I believe he should step down because his whole message is man-centered, not God-centered. He should step down because the girls whose parents follow his message is prevented from reaching emotional maturity, because he oppose the existence of child protection services, because his “ministries” are not of God.
The wrongness of an emotional affair (all he admitted to this far, and nobody except him is talking) is small fry compared to the wake of pain he caused and the simple fact that his message is not a Christian one.
LikeLike
Why had BCA’s website not been updated in the nine months since he stepped down? Granted, I know a lot of these ultra-conservative churches are not very tech-savvy (though at least BCA’s website has advanced past the “ugly repeating wallpaper that clashes with the colored 72-pt. bold Comic Sans and the animated pulpit-pounding preacher GIF” stage), but if Doug Phillips is one of your pastors you’d think you’d be more on-the-ball.
Also, are we sure BCA is still meeting in his house? I had heard that, but I thought they had acquired a building. The picture on the header of their site is the same church that’s on many of the FIC-themed CDs I have from Vision Forum, so I assume it’s actually BCA…? The surrounding landscape definitely looks flat enough to be TX.
LikeLike
Followup to previous comment: Google Street View is available for the address of BCA. There is a small church on the street but there’s no sign so I can’t tell if it’s that or one of the houses.
LikeLike
I think he was right to step down from VFM, given the nature of his sin, but I don’t understand this comment at all. What is man-centered about his message? He taught fathers to be loving leaders of their homes, which is servant leadership in response to God’s love. I am not a regular follower of Doug Phillips but I have purchased products from VFI and read his blog on occasion and I have never seen him write anything that could not be backed up by Scripture. Are you saying that he recommends that fathers and husbands lead their families in such a way that men receive some kind of supposed benefit at a cost to wives and children? If so, would you kindly link to where he has written this because frankly, I do not believe you.
LikeLike
First, a few words about chortling. Any friends from other neighborhoods who’ve seen chortling (if any) from these neighbors– do you mind quoting a few examples for me here? Any friends (if any) in this neighborhood who have expressed glee about evil– this is your opportunity to say “I’m sorry!”
Next, a few words about Name-Calling. Didn’t I teach you all it’s not nice? But today– I have seen a good deal of name-calling. Folks in this neighborhood, who are NOT public figures, have been called witches, wenches, a cesspool, effeminate men hissing from porches, etc. by other folks who don’t know them– who have never even had them over for milk and cookies. Again– any folks in this neighborhood who’ve called names– time to say “I’m sorry”. I think more leeway is allowable if the name-calling is describing a public-figure evil-doer. Just my heavenly perspective, there. Sunshinemary– thanks for asking your friends to play nice! Invite the Mablog proprietor to ask the same of his friends, if you get the opportunity!
Finally, a few words about “what does true repentance look like”. I wrote and sang a song, back when I was alive—- just a portion:
“Saying I’m sorry is the first step
Then how can I help
Saying I’m sorry is the first step
Then how can I help
I spilled my milk when I was having my breakfast
I said sorry to my mom, asked how I could help
So I cleaned up all the mess”
True repentance for the man who’s “spilled the milk” will include clean-up. And there is a much bigger mess, believe you me, than a little misplaced romance and affection. I can’t prove all that the mess might entail, but there’s ALWAYS a bigger mess than kids admit to at first.
Disclaimer–I’m not really THAT Mr Rogers.
LikeLike
He taught fathers to be loving leaders of their homes, which is servant leadership in response to God’s love.
That’s not what he teaches. He is absolutely obsessed with his version of “daddy-daughter” relationships to the point of sounding like a pedophile. And the results can be seen in the girls raised under his “teachings”. These girls are stunted, as the above commenter stated — 20-something girls who are still mental 12-year-olds, and this is celebrated as “protecting their hearts”. It’s really just about oppressing them until their spirits are stunted and destroyed.
Real women aren’t little baby girls who can’t think for themselves. Real women are strong, know the Word, can think for themselves, feel appropriate emotions, make decisions, seek guidance from God on their own, and live without a man whether by circumstance or by choice, because they drink from the well of Christ first — not dad. Or hubby.
Think Deborah. Abigail. Rahab. Mary the mother of Christ. these women were all considered righteous.
As for true repentance — Diane Langberg (Christian counselor) gave an excellent talk on domestic abusers and what true repentance looks like in practice. She said you have to see fruit, and it has to be continual and consistent. Not “look see I’m all better now, because I’ve nurtured you for 10 minutes, now give me forgiveness”.
LikeLike
sunshinemary said:
Yea, that’s part of the problem. You want to see it in writing or hard facts. Sadly, that shows that you do not understand abusers and how they work. They have a public face and a private one. They are too smart to sabotage the empire/system they control. That is why they are able to continue to abuse for such a long period of time.
LikeLike
@Katy:
When my mother died in 1975, I found myself thrust into that exact predicament (though for completely-different reasons). Having to grow up literally overnight from an emotional/personality age of 10 to your chronological age of 20 is no fun. It’s been almost 40 years and the scars are still there.
LikeLike
@Julie Anne:
Sunshine Mary reminds me so much of the “Red Fanboys” I ran into in the Social Justice Movement in the Eighties. You know, apologists for the Glory of Communism? Like Sunshine Mary, they were VERY good at Semantics, redefining words on-the-fly to prove the Intellectual and Moral Superiority of the Soviet System. And they also wanted to see PROOF in Writing or Hard Facts from Soviet Sources themselves — from a system whose bureaucratic tradition from the time of the Tsars was “Plausible Deniability: Never write anything down; if nothing’s ever written down, IT NEVER HAPPENED AND YOU CAN’T PROVE A THING.”
LikeLike
@ JA
Actually, I have a pretty good idea of what serious abuse looks like, having grown up in a home with some pretty significant domestic violence.
So I want to be clear: the problem here is that certain proponents of biblical patriarchy are putting forward a model that in your view seems extreme and unhealthy. May I ask if you disagree with the notion that there is a biblical hierarchy of authority that is to be observed in Christian homes, or do you reject that?
@ HUG
Calm down. I’m just trying to have a conversation with Julie Anne (and anyone else who cares to participate). You don’t have to go all blog-o-pitbull on me. After this conversation is done, I won’t be hanging around to bother you folks; I’ll go my way and may you all be blessed as you go yours.
LikeLike
sunshinemary: Ever since I was involved in a spiritually abusive church and was sued by my former pastor, I have been re-evaluating everything that he stood for. I am not settled on the topic of “biblical hierarchy or authority” you discuss. I have close friends who say they are complementarian. The husband treats his wife with such love and respect. He never demands or lords his “position” over her. His love for her is so evident, it naturally draws her towards him. This has worked beautifully for them. Any time a husband feels the need to announce “his position of authority,” I think he has gone into “authoritarian” mode. I do not see that kind of behavior from Jesus. He was the humble servant leader who guided.
LikeLike
A message teaching men, but not women, to lead is man-centered. A message teaching women, not men, to follow and submit is man-centered. The man gets a more central role than the woman.
Messages telling children to obey fathers, not mothers, in spouse-seeking is man-centered. The father gets a more central role than the mother.
Messages telling daughters to obey fathers, not mothers, in spouse-seeking, while boys can start looking on their own (tenet 23) is man-centered. Young women should be less central to to their spouse-seeking process than young men.
Your first answer will probably be that he calls men to lead lovingly. Loving lead is still male centered. And never standing up to a leader will usually bring out his worst:
Assume Husband A and wife B, both imperfect people who are sometimes loving and wise and sometimes not. It will sometimes happen that A will be more loving and wise in a matter. Sometimes B will be more loving and wise. Under male lead, every time that the man is unloving or unwise, things will go the unloving and unwise way – he is the leader. He is not called to be unloving and unwise, but she is called to one-sidedly submit when he is. This will not encourage him to go beyond his stupidity or selfishness.
I heard much testimony that Doug has selfish man-centered messages, including teaching daughters to stay at home and serve fathers untill they marry.
You may say he also teach fathers to serve daughters. But do the mathematics: In large families like he proposes, a man may have 8 children of whom 4 are daughters. With daughters and Mum taught their main purpose is to serve Daddy, he could have 5 “servants”. If you teach him he should serve his family, and he listens, each of these daughters have 1/9th of a “servant”. That is man-centered, and has definite benefits to the male over the females.
LikeLike
What is man -centered, you ask?:
> In the tenets of Biblical Patriarchy, Tenet 1 gives God a gender: Male. That is man-centered – it imply that being male is being more like God. (Read the tenet 1 discussion here to see why this is not a standard idea in theology. http://tenetsofbiblicalpatriarchy.blogspot.com/2011/08/tenet-1.html In fact, if you think evering he say can be backed up by scripture, then back up the things in all these tenets of his, that this blog that evaluates the tenets say is not backed up by scripture.)
> Tenet 2 say that the man is the image of God in terms of authority, and events are usually centered more around authorities with non-authorities on the side.
>Tenet 3 imply male headship was established before sin enered the world, and gives the meaning leadership to headship, unlike what the Greek term head probably meant.
>Tenet 4 re-affirms the man-centered messages of tenets 2 and 3.
> Tenet 5 calls a husband and father the head of his household, a family leader, with the authority and mandate to direct.
> Tenet 6 re-affirm the assumption of tenet 2-5.
>Tenet 7 also assume the authority of fathers.
>Tenet 11 calls for male leadership in the church and civil spheres, making men more central than women in church and politics.
> Tenet 12 say men who lead well at home should lead in public.
> Tenet 13 say women are a helper to the husband and a keeper at home, and with their understanding of helper it keeps her centered on male commands and second in command even in the domain she is limited to. (A doctrine that the home is the female domain would have avoided being man-centered if this was actually the place where she is boss, but since man is called the “head” of the home in these tenets, it is man-centered.)
> Tenet 14 say it is not fitting for women to work as men’s equals. By the wording it could have meant women should work as superiors, but the real meaning is man-centered.
> Tenets 17 calls fathers sovereign in training children. Sovereign. You cannot get more man-centered than that!
Tenet 21 focuses that fathers should turn their hearts toward children for good things to happen, with no focus on mothers.
> Tenet 22 say children are under their father (not mother) ‘s command, and talk of leaving the house of their father. If the home is the dominion of women, and you are not man-centered but still relegating people to spheres, you’d call it the house of the mother – it is her sphere.
> Tenet 23 calls fathers – not mothers – to oversee the seeking a spouse for daughters. They could seek one for their sons, but sons may take initiative. As such, girls seeking spouses is a man-centered process. The father is the authority. Boys seeking spouses is obvously and rightly man-centered – the boy go out looking, and artificially too – the father, not mother, may find a wife.
> Tenet 25 imply fathers should make decisions for their families, including decisions on world views like egalitarianism and individualism.
> VF changes a picture where a knight kneels before a queen to put the man higher than the woman. (See the cover of “sleeping beauty and the 5 questions”).
> It is even alleged that he teaches men at retreats to have their daughters stand behind them until her bedtime, just so she can immediately get him whatever he needs. Who is the servant then? Certainly not the so called “servant leader” who does not have to let his whole evening revolve round his daughter. http://forums.welltrainedmind.com/topic/492983-has-this-been-discussed-doug-phillips-resigns-from-vision-forum/page-2#entry5280822
> Courtship teaches that even the decision of who to marry should revolve round her father – he finds the groom, not she.
> His statements about not having surgery in the case of fallopian pregnancies hurts and kills women, not men.
This is probably a very incomplete list.
LikeLike
His message is also man-centered in the sense that it is works-centered: Parents can get their children to follow God, and families could build up society by their works, by following rules. Not by introducing them to a Jesus who changes from the inside. It is the works of man (in this comment “man” is used in the general sense of humans) and not the Holy Spirit.
LikeLike
Hmm. Okay, I just found your blog for the first time a couple days ago, so I don’t really know your story or what you’ve dealt with, but I do know one thing about recovering from abuse. There is a danger in swinging way to the other side, and it can be just as damaging as the abuse was.
My father had a serious problem with his temper and was very violent (he is a Christian now and has gotten control of his temper with God’s help and is no longer violent). When I moved out to go to college, I became extremely feministic as a reaction against my father. That ended up causing a lot of damage in my life because the opposing position was still false.
So if you were in some kind of damaging spiritual situation where there was preaching of an unbiblical form of authority or family structure, then sister, I pray that you will look to God to save you from just reacting against that and throwing out the entire idea of husbandly authority. I assume your husband was not the source of whatever bad thing happened to you, right? So, you can still trust him to have your best interests at heart, can you not? Usurping his God-given authority won’t bring healing from past abuse.
My husband makes mistakes and sins, but he is always striving to lead well out of love for his family and his desire to serve God. I honor that by submitting to his leadership, knowing that even if he makes the occasional mistake, he still is owed my obedience and respect and that he will in turn honor that by loving me as Christ loves His Bride.
Out of curiosity, what does your husband say about this topic?
LikeLike
Dear sunshinemary,
Speaking as a single Christian man in his 40s (i.e. a total novice on the subject of marriage), I see no basis for the idea of a “biblical hierarchy” within the home. At least, not for one that is scripturally mandated for all Christian couples. As JA just said, if a couple finds that such an arrangement works for them, well and good. But to force that on all husbands and wives is going beyond what is written, I think.
I know that that are some verses that can be used to support such a notion, but applying them this way has always felt… wrong to me, somehow. Daisy and Lydia have commented on a few of those verses, and their thoughts make a lot more sense to me. (oops, I’m allowing women to teach me… guess I’m not a Real Man(TM) 😉 )
I think that when you introduce an arbitrary hierarchy into a situation (especially one that doesn’t need it), it inevitably leads to the formation of arbitrary, extraneous rules to support that hierarchy. And when I see some of the rules that some in the patriarchy camp insist on — no wives working outside the home, no college for daughters, or even forbidding wives asking their husbands to do something for them — it leaves me scratching my head and saying “D’wah??” Not least of all because rules like these are an implicit insult or condemnation towards people in my own family.
Again, if something like complementarianism works for you, go with it. But I hope you won’t accuse me of not being a Christian (or not being a Real Man(TM)) if I don’t agree.
LikeLike
“Out of curiosity, what does your husband say about this topic?”
It appears to me that you have made this issue of male hierarchy one of salvation. Our Lord did not command male headship in order for anyone to be saved.
If your conscience is so weak as to judge other’s freedom in Christ, then perhaps you should examine your own judgmental spirit. For you do the very thing you come here to accuse the rest of us of doing.Live by your legalistic rules if you must. Just realize that your dogma is not the final word on what defines a Christian.
LikeLike
sunshinemary, Thanks for sharing your suggestions and questions freely here. Helpful resources regarding the topics of male headship and biblical equality can be found at the Christians for Biblical Equality website. I hope you will check it out: http://www.cbeinternational.org
There are free articles found in their Resources:
http://www.cbeinternational.org/?q=content/free-articles
This is an excerpt from an article by Mimi Haddad, President of Christians for Biblical Equality that you might find helpful.
http://www.cbeinternational.org/?q=content/what-male-headship
“Love, intimacy, oneness, and union are underscored throughout Paul’s discussion of headship in marriage in Ephesians 5. While many wish to ascribe authority and rule to male headship, I believe Paul is suggesting just the opposite. It was common during the first century for rulers to expect subjugation, even the laying down of their subject’s lives—Roman subjects were required to lay down their lives for their “head,” the emperor. And, as Jesus said, the rulers of the Gentiles lorded their authority over many (Matt. 20:25). Those in positions of authority, such as husbands, would anticipate complete obedience from their wives. But in Christ’s kingdom, those in positions of cultural authority should be the first to serve, even to the point of death. For Christians, authority was countercultural. Christ said that “…whoever wishes to be great among you must be your servant, and whoever wishes to be first among you must be your slave; just as the Son of Man came not to be served but to serve, and to give his life a ransom for many” (Matt. 20:25-28, NRSV).
Similarly, husbands, though endowed with cultural power like rulers, are called to imitate Christ who, though endowed with all power in heaven and earth, came not to rule, but to serve and to lay down his life for others. What might husbands expect in the new covenant community? They can anticipate a cross, a place to lay down their needs and self-interest for the needs of their wives; loving them as Christ loved the church by denying even their own lives should it be required.
Friends, for Paul, male headship is primarily about love, demonstrated by sacrifice and an abandonment of cultural authority. Love is the foundation of headship, exhibited in Christ’s headship of the church—built through sacrificial love.”
LikeLike
I think I misspoke when I named Doug Philips as the man I spoke with at Homeschool convention. I don’t recognize him from the photo. I believe it was Doug Wilson. I gave away my CD’s so can’t make sure. Did they work together?
Maybe I spoke to Wilson but it was Phillips who gave the lectures.
What would they say about women being judges in the OT? And Prophetess’s?
I was thinking while reading the posts that at my old Calvary Chapel, the Pastor was enamored by most women (His own doing , I believe) and sort of took the place of the husbands as spiritual head of the home. Very different from what I read here.
LikeLike
“There is a danger in swinging way to the other side, and it can be just as damaging as the abuse was.”
You need to define what “swinging way to other side” means, specifically?
“When I moved out to go to college, I became extremely feministic as a reaction against my father. That ended up causing a lot of damage in my life because the opposing position was still false.”
Again, what constitutes extreme feminism in your view?
“Out of curiosity, what does your husband say about this topic?”
Typical tactic from that movement and inappropriate.
LikeLike
@Lydia – Sunshine Mary doesn’t need me to defend her. She’s a grown woman after all (and older than me besides), but I think your response to her post was uncharitable. While perhaps inelegantly phrased, it is true that persons who have been subject to abuse can and do often respond by rejecting wholesale the philosophy or practices associated with their abusers. This is what I believe SSM is cautioning against.
Further, to ask, ‘what does your husband say about this topic’ isn’t necessarily a ‘tactic’ designed to silence or shame, though of course it can and often is used that way. It may be a simple question since presumably both the blog hostess and her husband were together in the abusive environment and the blog is about recovering from such abuse. For me it may be a question born of curiosity, though I understand the sensitivity such a question may provoke given how frequently the ‘husband’ is mentioned as a means of shutting down conversation, labeling a woman as ‘unsubmissive’ and therefore unworthy of a hearing, etc. A couple that is married is (hopefully) working through these issues together, not in isolation, so it is entirely appropriate to ask how one’s husband is interacting with an issue. Certainly it is the hostess’ prerogative to decline to share, or to simply say, “my husband and I are on this journey together and haven’t figured things out yet,” or even to say, “I’d prefer to leave my husband out of this.” But the asking itself isn’t always a tactic and isn’t always inappropriate. I do understand though why this question is so provocative.
LikeLike
I honor that by submitting to his leadership, knowing that even if he makes the occasional mistake, he still is owed my obedience and respect and that he will in turn honor that by loving me as Christ loves His Bride.
He is not “owed your obedience” when he does something foolish, Abigail certainly didn’t follow that teaching. This idea is not found in scripture, you cannot get “absolute obedience no matter what he does” from Ephesians 5. This is the foolish mentality that keeps women trapped in marriages to the most wicked men (who just need to claim Christianity, and then church will enforce her bondage for him)
This is wrong wrong WRONG. Absolute obedience no matter what ALWAYS results in terrible things. Absolute obedience to a husband does NOT inspire love in him. He either loves you or he doesn’t, end of story. You cannot make him love you or treat you right by laying down at his feet.
I am so sick of this stupid teaching in the church. It leads to all manner of death and destruction.
LikeLike
“My husband makes mistakes and sins, but he is always striving to lead well out of love for his family and his desire to serve God. I honor that by submitting to his leadership, knowing that even if he makes the occasional mistake, he still is owed my obedience and respect and that he will in turn honor that by loving me as Christ loves His Bride.”
sunshineMary, This statement leads me to think you believe authority trumps right. Is that what you really think? When this is what’s preached to the world to follow Christ, the world rightly turns away in disgust. Male wrongdoing is not better than female wrongdoing.
There is a serious error in understanding when one comes to a spiritual abuse blog & tells women to agree when their husbands make “occasional” mistakes. These camps teach that women should submit & are less than other men & boys in church. I wonder if you are naive to abuse or just don’t care? There are women, men, young people lurking here who have been hurt and/or are still hurting as a result of this wrong teaching. They need to be free of this bad thinking.
It is not following Christ to leave one’s brain at the door in order to nod a head while sitting under the authority of a pastor delivering a sermon which can’t be questioned because of your gender. Yikes!
Agreeing to any kind of wrongdoing, because the person has male body parts, is insane & irrational. To say it’s a Christian virtue misrepresents those who follow Jesus.
Folks, this road will lead you to the haunted house where all sin is the same. Where authority trumps doing right. That is a house of horrors, not a meeting place for Christians. Run with your wallets & children. There will be cries of agony coming from within.
JA, you mentioned you get emails on a regular basis. Thank you for helping those who are crying out. They don’t need to try harder or agree more. They need to run from these churches & these places of danger need to be exposed.
LikeLike
Oookaay. Do you not discuss things with your husband? Even in the most egalitarian of marriages, people usually ask one another’s opinions on things. It’s not that odd to ask what her husband’s opinion is and doesn’t imply anything in particular. Anyway, I don’t know anyone here, including Julie Anne, so for all I know she doesn’t have a husband to ask. But if she has one, it would be interesting to know what he thinks their roles should be, just like it’s interesting to hear what she thinks their roles should be.
It’s hard to have a conversation, like an actual back and forth discussion, when you are so intent on attacking, Lydia. Notice how Barb Orlowski was able to disagree by communicating her thoughts in response to my thoughts. That is what a conversation is.
Anyway, I’ll bow out now. I don’t agree with Julie Anne but I have no personal quarrel with her. Thank you for letting me say my piece, JA; you’ve been a gracious hostess. May the Lord bless you and your family.
LikeLike
So is a wife ‘owed’ love by her husband when she does something foolish? Or is his love towards his wife likewise conditional? Logically that would seem to be your position.
This is (partially) true, but is also not at all what she was addressing. Spiritual abuse needs to be stopped, corrected and called out. Fine. No disagreement with me on that. Yet spiritual abuse is NOT what she was talking about. She was discussing simply the fact that her husband’s errors do not result in an automatic abrogation of his authority as a husband, any more than those of a parent would result in such abrogation of authority vis-a-vis their children. Children in those unfortunate cases are suffering because of the abuse of authority by their parents, not because the parents have authority at all.
It is important to separate the issues.
LikeLike
A Mom,
“There is a serious error in understanding when one comes to a spiritual abuse blog & tells women to agree when their husbands make “occasional” mistakes. These camps teach that women should submit & are less than other men & boys in church. I wonder if you are naive to abuse or just don’t care? There are women, men, young people lurking here who have been hurt and/or are still hurting as a result of this wrong teaching. They need to be free of this bad thinking.”
You are so right.
I’m putting enough personal detail out about my former “church” that I may never be able to call them out by name.
There was a father in my former “church” who molested his own daughter. (One of her brothers subsequently molested her as well.) Even after he confessed to his minister, and his wife was aware of the abuse, NOBODY reported it to the authorities for a whole year! His wife said they simply cried and prayed together, and hoped that something would change. This is what happens in Patriarchal constructs where the woman is taught to submit to her “head” even if he makes “mistakes.” This wasn’t the only incidence of incest or child molestation either. These girls and women feel like they have no power or voice in these teachings.
LikeLike
Somebody help me out here, but haven’t we heard reports that the thes advocates of phallocentric leadership in all areas of life are now teaching that women who blog, or maybe just read blogs, are committing the moral equivalent of men viewing pornography? I, of course, do not believer that. Neither do I have any problems with women coming here to make the case for patriarchy.
Nevertheless (and I will try to make my point in a less controversial manner than on the previous thread), it seems to me that for female adherents of patriocentrism to participate in the debate on public blogs is inconsistent with the ideological dogmas of patriocentrism. Where are their husbands, fathers and/or pastors? According to their own dogma, shouldn’t the male authorities in these women’s lives be the ones who are coming here to engage the debate. Aren’t these women supposedly so susceptible to deception that it is dangerous for them to come-a-teaching? If I am right in thinking that “church” means the assembly of all believers, and if I am correct in thinking that those of us who participate here are, therefore, part of the church, am I not correct in thinking that, according to patriocentric dogma, these women should be quiet, that they are not allowed to speak.
LikeLike
Not surprised. Multiple comments about authority in the absolute sense. Then in order to explain that position she switches to say she’s all about healthy discussion & opinion in marriage. This is a great case study in disconnected thinking. As if absolute authority (wife must agree with husband’s wrongdoing) & healthy discussion/opinion are one in the same!
Another typical tactic from that movement. Pushing their phallocentric, men over women agenda. When pressed they will concede, as we’ve seen several times here. It’s good that they come to defend authority over right because every time we stand our ground, then ask for explanation, we learn they don’t practice or mean what they preach to others. We see the hypocrisy & it is yet another confirmation to all that they don’t even believe it enough to follow it in their own homes.
They know better. Authority does not trump right.
What’s truly troubling & damaging is that she still holds to the authority trumps right doctrine & will probably continue to push it. Like some of the others who have defended it here. But once they learn we will not be deceived, they don’t want to stay. They decide to move on to see who else they can deceive.
LikeLike
Yesterday at 6:45 PM Katy says, ” He is absolutely obsessed with his version of “daddy-daughter” relationships to the point of sounding like a pedophile.”
In my view, this is one of the areas in which the proponents of patriocentrism are doing great harm, drawing well meaning and innocent followers of Jesus into profound error. My first hint that this is the case was when I observed an otherwise mature and truly Christ like father engage in a prolonged full-body hug with his post-pubescent daughter which, if it had been with his wife, would have been a quite embarrassing public display of affection. Creepy.
Although I am not aware of particular instances, I cannot believe that this kind of emotionally oedipal bonding does not regularly cross the line into full blown incest.
LikeLike
“I don’t agree with Julie Anne but I have no personal quarrel with her.”
Even though you include her in the “clucking hen-o-sphere”, as you so poetically phrased it? 😉
LikeLike
Good morning Gary W
Your comment caused me to “Chortle.” 😉
“am I not correct in thinking that, according to patriocentric dogma, these women should be quiet, that they are not allowed to speak.”
Seems it’s tough for these folks to keep ALL the rules straight. 😉
LikeLike
Be sure to check out the 2 comments above by “tbc.” I just approved them and they are posting between comments above.
Ok, to this business of this question:
sunshinemary asked:
Lydia responded: “Typical tactic from that movement and inappropriate.”
Yea, that does feel familiar like: does your husband give you permission to blog? does he know about your blog? It’s basically asking: are you obeying your husband?
Anyway, back to the question. I have no qualms about sharing my personal stories to a certain degree – keeping in mind that my first/last name and picture are posted here. (I notice 2 people asking the question hide behind a pseudonym. Interesting.) However, I’ll let him decide if he wants to respond to that personal question. He subscribes to the blog and can make that call himself.
LikeLike
No kidding, Serving, and did you check out the tone of the commenters there?
LikeLike
Not only that, Gary. Apparently, sunshinemary thinks it’s wrong for Christian women to participate in public protest or even vote. (See her reply to Guest’s comment at 1:18 p.m. on her most recent post. P.S. the echo chamber is something else on that comment board. So are the leaps of logic.)
Does she want to take all women back to the 19th century, the Dark Ages, or the Bronze Age? I honestly can’t tell.
LikeLike
If you think that is bad, sunshinemary mentioned something about there being no such thing as marital rape. After that comment, I hit the little “x” on my window. My blood was boiling.
I need to issue the strongest warning about reading that thread at sunshinemary’s blog. Some of the topics that came up:
– marrying girls off young (teens)
– no such thing is marital rape
– basically no credibility for spiritual or emotional abuse unless you can cite stats.
– Courtship is the right way
Hmm, does this sound familiar – – – kind of like Vision Forum, Homeschool Movement?
LikeLike
My panties are officially in a wad.
LikeLike
TBC:
Jesus taught against the concept that one person has authority over another, and warned his followers not to exercise authority over others. Submission as used in the NT is not obedience, and it is taught as mutual. The passage in Ephesians 5 is misunderstood. A woman’s mutual submission, in the culture of that day, was to be to her own husband as he was to be in mutual submission with her, and that was being distinguished from being in mutual submission with some other woman’s husband to the level that she and her husband would be in mutual submission.
Christian women are adopted into the kingdom of God, and God is the author of their faith, just as He is of a man’s faith. She has no need of an earthly authority over her; she has God, in the person of the Holy Spirit. Any one who seeks to have authority over her in matters of religion and faith, including her husband, is attempting to supplant God, which is blasphemy.
LikeLike
Non-consensual sex is rape. Always. Period. I don’t care if people can show me scripture that says neither party is to deny the other in such matters. Even if these verses could be viewed as imposing an obligation on the wife to always consent to sex, and they cannot, the imposition of a duty on one person does not grant correlative license to the other. Being instructed to walk the second mile does not grant anybody the right to REQUIRE anybody to walk the second mile.
An instruction to submit does not grant corresponding authority and power to the person to whom one is instructed to submit. If a husband is aggrieved by his wife’s refusal in any given matter, his remedy is to turn the other cheek. Even where we are admonished to submit, Christian relationships are always and only to be founded on love, not on authority and power.
Non-consensual sex imposed upon one’s wife is rape. Just in case anybody missed the point.
LikeLike
Also note that SSM says “Notice how Barb Orlowski was able to disagree by communicating her thoughts in response to my thoughts. That is what a conversation is.” Yet, she then fails to engage in the dialogue with Barb, or address any of the points Barb quoted. Instead she accuses others of attacking her and then bows out of the discussion. Personally, I don’t believe she is capable of discussion about these issues. She simply came here to “straighten us out.”
LikeLike
Gary W. – here is a comment about that from sunshinemary’s site:
LikeLike
Gary W, Your observation (on both posts) is an important one.
My response is simple: Hypocrisy. Hypocrisy of not practicing what they preach while condemning others for it. Kinda like DP, who she came to defend? Yuck!
Some of these women are truly sinister in these camps. Some prop up their husbands as the authority, while they are the real authority. Their husbands go along with whatever their wives say. That’s not right either, BTW. These women exalt themselves as the model & get a sick payoff from it, as they chide other women for not “falling in line” & submitting like they do. These women are destructive. They are control freaks. Do not underestimate the damage they do. I have no patience for this kind unless they change their destructive ways. I reserve my sympathy & patience for those who have been damaged by these types.
These types of churches are chock full of control freaks: both the male & female kind. These kinds of churches are for the power-hungry. Talk is constantly focused on authority. These types of churches & people need to be exposed & stood up to. Listen very closely & you will find they expose themselves by word. And then they expose themselves by deed & action.
Far from what we read in the 4 gospels. We should read them over & over for clarity.
Flee. One life on earth & we are to make it a good life by virtue of right actions. The cost for staying is too much.
BTW, why is virtue by right action distainful in much of Christiandom? Virtue should be applauded & encouraged of all men, women, children. I guess virtue isn’t “sexy”. I guess male-centered control command center sells more books & makes more money…. The violent take it by force (reconstructionism?) was not a directive but a warning from Jesus (Matt 11).
LikeLike
Oh, and here’s sunshinemary’s own quote:
LikeLike
“Would now be a good time for me to once again expound upon Why There Is No Such Thing As Marital Rape, or does everyone think I should hold off on that for the time being? You know, just so I don’t scare our guests and all.”
Now, combine this mentality with the courtship process, whereby the father chooses a suitable husband for his daughter, and you begin to grasp the entrapment the daughters of this movement face. This is exactly why I believe this lifestyle is abusive to its very core.
LikeLike
uh-oh, someone is giving me a warning from sunshinemary’s site.
LikeLike
Is not patriocentrism the ideology relied upon by sects/cults that practice polygamy? So far as the treatment of women is concerned, it seems to me the only difference between polygamous patriarchy and non-polygamous patriarchy is the polygamy.
A Scriptural case could be made that non-polygamous patriarchy is inherently hypocritical, or at least inconsistent.
LikeLike
“This is also a warning for Julie Anne, Pastor Greg, and all those who seek to distort the Scriptures for their own gain.
To be clear: Feminism = spirit of Jezebel = a “secret” or “deep thing” of Satan.
And the fulfillment of this passage is already occurring.
I pray you listen.”
LOL
Oh, yes. This is the next step. Prophesy curses on you for disagreeing with their POV. This exposes SSM’s contention that she sought honest dialogue.
It’s like sitting in my former “church” all over again. At least they are making the case for those of us who have been trying to bring these cults to light. Now you see why Lydia approaches them the way she does.
LikeLike
“This is also a warning for Julie Anne, Pastor Greg, and all those who seek to distort the Scriptures for their own gain.”
Looks to me like attempted ideological coercion masquerading as concerned, loving admonition.
LikeLike
Oh, shoot, that was not a comment from SSM, but one of her readers. Sorry about that.
LikeLike
What Julie Anne is exposing here is the dark underbelly of the Patriarchal world. The quotes she’s pasting are just the tip of the iceberg. Do not be fooled by their carefully crafted image of loving families lined up like obedient ducks in a row.
I’m glad they’re venting THEIR spleen on SSM’s blog. Most people can’t believe this stuff is real when you try to explain it. It’s better that they show it themselves.
LikeLike
“To be clear: Feminism = spirit of Jezebel = a “secret” or “deep thing” of Satan.”
‘To be clear’ to you — What is your proof text to back this quote up?
This appears to be someon’s strange and personal definition of feminism 😦
Many who call themselves feminist have done much to stop the abuse of women, children, and others. Of course, you will also find those who are neo-feminists just as you will find new-Calvinists and many other ‘neos’ to boot 🙂
LikeLike
“Do you not discuss things with your husband”
Isn’t that response a perfect example of “swinging way too far the other way”? Or jumping to conclusions? Discussing things with one’s husband has nothing to do with him having authority. Now, you are simply trying to reframe the debate for your ends. Opps, that is “uncharitable”, I suppose but sunshine mary is showing us her true colors.
I do not know about others here but I see marriage as a “blessed alliance” which better fits the various uses of Ezer in the OT. Carolyn Custis James has written extensively on this and worth checking out as she does her homework herself.
LikeLike
One reason why folks should also be on guard when engaging folks from that movement is they have a very strange position on “Rahab’s lie” they use to affirm being deceptive for others own good.
It is sort of Islamic in principle. It is virtuous to lie to what they think are infidels. Rahab’s lie works sort of the same way. If we are considered to be liberal or feminists then lying to us is ok. Lots of similar thinking with the Patriarchal movement and Islam when you take a real close look and strip away some of the cultural accroutements. When you do that the basic foundational principles are the same. And their god does look more like Allah. it is uncanny. And scary.
LikeLike
“uh-oh, someone is giving me a warning from sunshinemary’s site.
This is also a warning for Julie Anne, Pastor Greg, and all those who seek to distort the Scriptures for their own gain.
To be clear: Feminism = spirit of Jezebel = a “secret” or “deep thing” of Satan.
And the fulfillment of this passage is already occurring.
I pray you listen. ”
JA, Thank God we do not have a state church.
LikeLike
“Personally, I don’t believe she is capable of discussion about these issues. She simply came here to “straighten us out.””
Bingo.
Just go back and read the last thread where she showed up and the trajectory. I find it a bit disappointing they are still using the same tired tactics I saw over and over in 07-08. You would think they would get new material and tactics.
LikeLike
Here is another formula to think on:
Nicolaitan = conqueror of the people= God says He hates it and it is good when we hate their practices, too.
LikeLike
tbc,
People shake their heads at how some churches & Christians get to the point where up is down & down is up, right is wrong & wrong is right. How abusers are supported & the abused are told to abide in “love”. You clear the fog & answer the whys that people have on this head-scratching belief system. For that, thank you.
Tbc, You said, “So is a wife ‘owed’ love by her husband when she does something foolish? Or is his love towards his wife likewise conditional? Logically that would seem to be your position.”
You need to read 1Sam25, the gospels, the whole of the Bible. You also have conscience, observation, Holy Spirit to help you. You are without excuse. You may not realize it but what you said offers a clear explanation & insight into how wrong becomes right. It’s your definition of love that’s WAY off. True love corrects, instructs & agrees with consequences. True love does not condone, accept, agree, joins hands with wrong AKA sin. NO MATTER THE GENDER of those involved! EVER! You label blind submission as love. Do you have jails & laws in your community? Why not spend your time practically living your “love” belief system out by working to get rid of them?
tbc said, “Yet spiritual abuse is NOT what she was talking about. She was discussing simply the fact that her husband’s errors do not result in an automatic abrogation of his authority as a husband, any more than those of a parent would result in such abrogation of authority vis-a-vis their children. Children in those unfortunate cases are suffering because of the abuse of authority by their parents, not because the parents have authority at all.
It is important to separate the issues.”
Don’t agree. It is spiritual abuse to hold someone in an abusive chain of command situation for religious reasons. Period. It is spiritual abuse when a religion tells women they are subject to boys & men. It is spiritual abuse when a child is told to submit to an abusing adult because Jesus wants them to! Wake up! Do you even hear yourself, tbc?
What I find most troubling in all of your comments is that you apply it to children, the innocents. I vehemently disagree with you. Abrogation of parental right is 100% appropriate when children are suffering at the hands of their parents. This is your justification of phallocentric authority in a marriage? OH MY GOODNESS!
One friend of mine gave me similar advice she was told by a “wise older woman in her church” when I was engaged to my husband: “If your husband is wrong go along with him. Even if he has to learn the hard way you’ll be covered, it’s God’s way.” Her husband has made errors. Not only has he suffered, she & the kids have suffered as well. Extended family & friends ache for them. And to top it off, I’m not sure he’s learned a thing except that his family functions in a “godly” praiseworthy manner. His actions aren’t the point… he has final authority. And he has the maturity of a teen boy. A “godly” teenager, of course.
I can’t help but be afraid for the women who prescribe this as Godly. It is spiritual abuse. Loving action helps one another avoid wrong. Love discerns. Love is not blind. Hide the kids. Hide your family.
LikeLike
‘Now you see why Lydia approaches them the way she does.”
Yep. They are bullies.Have had a lot of experience with them. It takes a while but the true colors always come out. I just recognized the tactics and words. My responses are based upon experience and wasting less time. She finally got someone to come over and say my responses are “uncharitable”. hee hee. Yet “sunshine” has truth for us. ooookaaaay.
It is the only language they understand in their bubble. If you spend your time trying to engage nicely, your niceness is twisted and used against you. In fact, that is what they want to do: Make you look ignorant.
So best to cut to the chase……so I just admit I AM mean right up front on this subject. Ha!!
Divide and conquer is how they operate— EVEN in marriages.
That is why I cautioned JA to even allow her marriage to be brought up here. None of sunshines business nor mine. Oh yes, they are soooo innocent when they ask such things….just out of curiousity. Sure. Remember, they believe they are deceived women. So they cannot help all of this, I suppose.
LikeLike
@Julie Anne – thank you for approving my comments. Allow me to say that I represent no one’s opinion but my own. I don’t (nor can I) speak for SSM, for ‘patriarchy’, for homeschoolers, quiverfullers, or anyone else. I’m just a man with thoughts.
@Attorney — It is a bit of a stretch to say that Jesus taught his disciples not to exercise authority or that submission and obedience are not correlate in the NT. Jesus did warn against the disciples seeking to lord over one another — which is not the same thing as exercising authority.
As for Ephesians 5, I agree that it needs to be read and understood in context as a household code — a not uncommon kind of instruction to households in that time and cultural context. I am familiar with the various debates over the ‘submission’ clause that is the immediate precedent to the instructions given to wives, husbands, children and slaves. Ephesians 5 is similar to Colossians 3 in that way, except in that case there is no preceding clause that mentions ‘submit to one another’ as in Ephesians. Suffice it to say I disagrees with your reading of the passage, though I do so charitably.
As for the issue of women needing no earthly authority — well that is simply false. All people, Christian or not, male or female, bond or free (to borrow biblical language) live under the constraints of various types of authority, both secular and religious. There is no indication in scripture that these structures are evil nor that they will pass away before the advent of the kingdom in its fullness (which is an authority structure of another kind). The authority of the apostles (to stay with the NT for a moment) was certainly exercised within the community of faith, up to and including excommunication. We do all have direct access to God the Father through our Lord Jesus Christ. It does not then follow that we are not under any earthly authority.
The question about authority then is twofold (at least): 1) whether that authority is legitimately constituted, and 2) whether that authority is being exercised appropriately.
In every case though authority is not ever to be understood as absolute, that is, in having no bounds. By its very nature authority is a delegated thing and cannot be exercised in a way that is beyond bounds, so to speak. In some cases the authority is itself illegitimate (as when a minor child is kidnapped by an adult, or in the case of the trans-Atlantic slave trade which was kidnapping writ large). In that case it doesn’t matter what the kidnapper does afterwards. The power (or authority) they have over the other is not and cannot ever be legitimate and must be resisted. In cases where authority is abused however, it is the abuse that must be corrected and, if necessary, the authority under which the abuse occurs must be curtailed or even in some cases, terminated.
EDIT: I was going to post this before I noticed the most recent response from A Mom, so let my addendum address that.
I am 110% against abuse of any kind, for any reason, and with any justification, religious or otherwise. I have read the Bible through and through and I do NOT believe that the Bible condones or endorses abuse. I do know and have seen people twist scripture to justify wrongdoing. My point is this (and chiefly this): the fact that people use something (like the idea of the husband’s headship in marriage) to justify abuse does not mean that the idea of husband’s headship or authority in marriage is therefore wrong. Both my father and my grandfather had authority in marriage. One of them abused it terribly. The other used it to bless, honour and uplift
LikeLike
@A Mom:
As in “Everything revolves around MEEEEEEEEE!”?
And “I HAVE TO GET MY OWN WAY — ALWAYS!”?
Or the Angst that’s always Someone Else’s Fault?
LikeLike
@Lydia:
The “wide-eyed, butter-wouldn’t-melt-in-my-mouth, soooo innocent” act is another mark of a Sociopath. Every word and question vetted in advance for a Plausibly Deniable, Sooooo Innocent fallback meaning. Sign of a Master Manipulator.
LikeLike
@GaryW:
Yet another mark of a Sociopath and Manipulator.
Especially what immediately follows:
Invoking Prophecy and reeking of Spiritual Pride and Uriah Heep/C.J.Mahaney Humility. “I pray you listen (because I’M RIGHT AND YOU’RE WRONG AND AREN’T *I* SO SPIRITUAL?)”
LikeLike
@Lydia:
That’s what Christian Reconstructionism, Quiverfull, and 200-year-plans are for.
LikeLike
@BTDT:
It’s like what C.S.Lewis wrote in the preface to Screwtape Letters, about how Screwtape is so polite and courteous until the façade cracks and “the scalding lava of his hatred bursts out.”
Not abusive to the Patriarch, of course. More like Win-Win: “I’m Personally Benefiting from this, so I Pronounce it Good.”
“I Got Mine,
I Got Mine,
I Don’t Want a Thing to Change
Now that I Got Mine…”
— Glenn Frye
LikeLike
@Joel Frederick,
We watched the Ted Haggard issue unfold from our back yard. Pastors all over the county were crushed as they had looked up to him and been mentored by him.
Though Ted initially agreed to the oversight, he did not follow through. He was asked to leave the state and stay out of ministry, due to the longevity of the sin and deceit, as well as the nature of it needing to be broken long term. The people from his congregation and of the area needed to heal. His presence would be a distraction and disruption of that. Yet, he returned to within 5 or so miles of the church and started up a new church in his barn. He lured immature followers who did not grasp why Ted needed to not be a leader in ministry. In order to go back into the ministry he asked to be released from his oversight committee that was put in place to help him to be fully restored spiritually. That was red flag enough to show most that he was not truly repentant.
Since that time, Ted has circulated throughout Colorado Springs, actively advertising in the neighborhoods of other churches to get people to come to his. It’s more like sheep stealing. Local pastors have been stunned by his brazen actions.
This area has been a harbinger of many men like Ted, fallen with “repentance” that was never shown long term, followed by an unloving act to set up shop within the same area, thus causing undue pain all over again.
Don’t listen to what these “caught” men have to say … watch what they actually do. Remember, these guys know what they have to say, they’ve been preaching it to others for a long time. I guess they just think they can be the exception to the rule when it comes to actions to back up those words.
LikeLike
Tbc said, “My point is this (and chiefly this): the fact that people use something (like the idea of the husband’s headship in marriage) to justify abuse does not mean that the idea of husband’s headship or authority in marriage is therefore wrong. Both my father and my grandfather had authority in marriage. One of them abused it terribly. The other used it to bless, honour and uplift”
Let me explain it to you this way:
A righteous man working in a bank with no safe will not steal money.
A thief working in a bank with no safe will ALWAYS steal money.
A thief working in a bank with a safe can’t steal money.
This is the difference between your father & grandfather. One was righteous, the other was without checks & balances & free to abuse terribly.
Someone else mentioned “checks & balances” in a comment. This is what the safe represents.
Which bank would you put your money in? Are women & children less than money? You already know from the personal experience you mentioned that all are not righteous & that damage WILL ensue in your construct. Yet you still prop up this construct as godly. That’s crazy.
Your very premise is unloving to women & children. You know it. But authority still comes first for you.
I hope you think about this. Following Jesus does not mean we remove our brains. Desire wisdom. Teach what’s right.
LikeLike
A Mom — to follow your analogy through, the real problem is thieves, not banks nor safes. I have authority over my children. They are my wards. I could certainly abuse that authority and them by treating them terribly, forcing them to do awful things, and generally sinning against them and against God in the process. Of course you, ‘A Mom’ presumably have children and likewise have authority over them. You could also use your authority to treat them, train and correct them to do the right things, and generally do right by them in the sight of God. Is the problem that we both have authority or is the problem that I (in this example) would be abusing my authority?
LikeLike
Lydia,
You are included in the list of those who have enough, knowledge, experience and insight to write a book exposing the tactics of these extremists. There are other books available, but I would rather see you collecting the royalties than the likes of, say, Saul Alinsky.
LikeLike
Headless Unicorn Guy:
@A Mom: And he has the maturity of a teen boy. A “godly” teenager, of course.
As in “Everything revolves around MEEEEEEEEE!”?
And “I HAVE TO GET MY OWN WAY — ALWAYS!”?
Or the Angst that’s always Someone Else’s Fault?
HUG, The sad thing is I don’t think he is evil or demanding. It’s just that he grew up in church to believe he should make the decisions. And his wife taught he should as well.
Instead of being taught that marriage is a “blessed alliance” where both benefit from each other’s abilities & work together to make best decisions for family, they all suffer because of his immaturity & unwise choices. The wife is much more mature, but their lives haven’t benefited from it. 😦
Abilities aren’t gender-specific. That’s a lie that demeans both men & women. What about returning disabled vets? It really get’s my dander up.
Really, no one has any business assigning duties within someone else’s marriage. A married couple is free to decide what’s best for them based on their abilities, which may change over time. Reminds me of church-state or theocracy.
LikeLike
Katie – -Thanks for additional background on the Ted Haggard situation. I think your added information is helpful and explains the wisdom of 1 Timothy on elder qualifications. Hypocrisy taints the Church. If you look at the “nones,” most of them have problems with the hypocrisy they see among church leaders.
LikeLike
“Of course you, ‘A Mom’ presumably have children and likewise have authority over them.”
I used to buy into this drivel. Now, however, I have come to the conclusion that parents only have duties to children — specifically, the duty to love. Love may include the exercise of what looks like authority, but the word authority is just too corrosive. If what is being done does not fall within the requirements of love, then the thing done is bad.
LikeLike
SSM –
What happened to the discussion? You wanted a discussion, you instructed everyone on what a discussion should look like (in your world), you invited anyone to partake. People started discussing with you, and then you took your leave without responding to those who took you up on your offer. What’s up with these actions of yours?
LikeLike
@Gary W — then you have misunderstood both love and authority. Parents do have duties towards their children, duties which are effectuated by the authority they possess, just as the state (which has no concern or love for her citizens) has duties towards them that are effectuated by the authority the state possesses. A duty without the power (authority) to complete it is nonsensical. If it is the word ‘authority’ that troubles you then that is another issue altogether though certainly understandable if you’ve been in situations or seen situations where the very notion of authority has been corroded.
LikeLike
“@Gary W — then you have misunderstood both love and authority.”
How patronizing of you. And you are going to enlighten us with the truth? Because we should all trust you to never abuse your authority?
LikeLike
Gary @ 10:43 –
I tend to agree with you here. I prefer the idea of having responsibilities toward people that we are in relationship with be it at home, work, charity, church, society, etc. The responsibilities that I have taken on by way of commitment verbally, contractually, or by being born in the image of God, should be fulfilled in love, not because of ‘authority.’
LikeLike
tbc,
No time right now to respond to you with the depth your comments deserve. That said, yes I have trouble with the notion of authority as a principle on which relationships between Christians are to be based. I have come to the conclusion that love is to be the basis of all Christian relationships.
LikeLike
Gary W,
Then please allow me to correct one notion before you start. I don’t believe that authority is the the principle upon which Christian relationships are to be based. It is one of the organizing principles of human relations generally and Christian relationships are no exception to that. Christ is the supreme example of this of course, for he has full authority and yet wields all of his power with and through love. The two concepts are not mutually exclusive. It is regrettable that they are often separated.
There are other principles as well: unity, honor, deference, humility, truth-telling, self-control, forgiveness, forbearance, etc. all of which are (or should be) the principles upon which Christians operate with one another.
LikeLike
tbc on November 4, 2013 at 10:22 AM
“A Mom — to follow your analogy through, the real problem is thieves, not banks nor safes. I have authority over my children…. I could certainly abuse that authority and them by treating them terribly, forcing them to do awful things, and generally sinning against them and against God in the process. … Is the problem that we both have authority or is the problem that I (in this example) would be abusing my authority?”
Tbc- you offer something of a false choice. You suggest that the problem is the person engaging in abuse of authority, but not with the system. I agree there is a problem with people who steal and abuse.
However, i submit to you that (unless they are stupid), thieves steal when they think have the opportunity to do so without getting caught; and abusers abuse when they are operating in a system in which they can get away with it. Thus, although not everyone in a bank will steal, there is a problem with the system in a bank that does not secure its cash. Not only does such a bank enable theft, it also practically invites thieves in as flies to honey.
Similarly, not every patriarchist father is an abuser–some are well-intentioned–but i have seen firsthand that the patriarchal system enables those inclined to abuse their authority by, among other things, requiring a wife to submit to her husband, and children to their father, even when he is biblically, sinfully wrong. In fact, it absolves a wife of her husband’s sin when she submits, and children of their father’s wrong choices if they obey them. A “righteous” woman would submit to her husband’s sin (even toward the children) if the husband so led, although she is allowed to pray privately that her husband will not do that anymore. If you cannot see how this enables abuse and discourages resistance, you are blind to a very real systemic problem. You fail to see how this problem is tailor-made for textbook abusers.
In fact, as the bank with unsecured cash invited opportunistic theives, this patriarchal system has a certain allure for abusers because it enables them to require submission to sin.
So, yes, you speak truth in saying that the problem is indeed the thief or the abusive parent. But when a system is built in a way that enables the problem, there is also a problem with the system. It isn’t either/or. It’s both.
I will add, the typical patriarchal arguments that a loving christian father would not do such things, or that the abusive father is somehow accountable to the church, inherently miss the real flaw in the system. Some fathers abuse. When the victims are required to submit, they are silent. Even if one of them were to buck the chain of command and complain to the elders, the system is set up so that church discipline favors the patriarch. Yes, on rare occasions, a man will meet with church discipline (often a slap on te wrist and returning him to the abusive situation) for abusing his authority. If the elders erroneously believe the man (whose word is presumptively more authoritative than his wife and children’s), he is also returned to the situation. Elders are ill-equipped to deal with abuse and tend not to want to recognize it because of the cognitive dissonance it creates between what they know is right, and the system they so dearly believe in.
Because of the systemic requirement of willing submission even to wrong or sinful authority, you will not hear the victims’ stories inside your world. Because, to be heard, we have to first escape from the system. The silent ones remain.
LikeLike
Free at Last – thank you for your extensive and thoughtful reply. I agree with you in large part; some systems encourage (or at least fail to discourage) abuse and those who are of such a bent of mind or habit will often gravitate towards those places. It is a serious problem and not an easy one to solve.
I would hate to be in a situation like that as an elder (I mean a situation where abuse is alleged) because it is very difficult to suss out exactly what to do. It would be irresponsible to do nothing. It would also be wrong just to take one person’s word. Calling in social services is not likely to necessarily improve the situation (and may not even be what the victim wants). I ‘think’ what I would counsel though would be an immediate separation while trying to sort out next steps, though of course if the accuser appears to be in immediate harm then more drastic measures might be needed (e.g. asking her / him to call the police or I will)….
Even saying all of that though, I do not believe that abusers cannot be reformed. I believe in the gospel too much for that, though it may not be (and probably isn’t) the role of the person being abused to be the main person assisting them to reform.
Anyway… general principles have specific applications that vary in the details, so saying that I believe the husband is the authority and that the wife should submit is a general statement, and generally true. How that is applied in difference circumstances is a point that requires the fine tuning of the Holy Spirit through prayer and wise counsel.
LikeLike
I meant to reply to this specifically. I DO NOT believe that a woman is required to sin because her husband instructs or commands her to do so. That idea (though promulgated by some) I find to be singularly unbiblical and unhealthy. If I order my wife to inflict some harsh punishment on my child (by say burning his hand on a hot stove or starving him for several days) and she complies with that… I shake my head to think of the consequences spiritually for me AND for her. In fact she should indeed disobey me. To do otherwise would be unloving in the extreme towards me and towards our children and even disrespectful. I would hope she would steadfastly refuse, entreat me to repent, and if I persisted, leave and remove the children from harm all the while praying and hoping for my repentance.
LikeLike
“I would hate to be in a situation like that as an elder (I mean a situation where abuse is alleged) because it is very difficult to suss out exactly what to do. It would be irresponsible to do nothing. It would also be wrong just to take one person’s word. Calling in social services is not likely to necessarily improve the situation (and may not even be what the victim wants)”
That decision is beyond the scope of what an elder is to ascertain. It is not an elder’s responsibility to investigate abuse. It is (by law in some states) an elder’s responsibility to report alleged abuse to the proper authorities who are trained to determine whether or not it can be verified.
LikeLike
“I would hope she would steadfastly refuse, entreat me to repent, and if I persisted, leave and remove the children from harm all the while praying and hoping for my repentance.”
I would hope she would report you to the local police dept.
LikeLike
Seems like the website has been updated….
http://boernechristianassembly.org/about/
Elders
Bob Sarratt
Jeff Horn (provisional elder)
LikeLike
Firstly, God ordained the civil authority structure for a purpose. If there is suspected illegal activity, it should be reported so that justice can be served. If you live in some states (Oklahoma comes to mind) and fail to report suspected abuse, you could be arrested for failing to report.
LikeLike
Thanks for that update, Brian. That was recent. Hmm, do you suppose some powers that be are reading blogs?
LikeLike
JA – Seems a little too coincidental…
LikeLike
tbc observes, “There are other principles as well: unity, honor, deference, humility, truth-telling, self-control, forgiveness, forbearance, etc. all of which are (or should be) the principles upon which Christians operate with one another.”
I suggest that the virtues you list are but aspects or sub-categories of love. It would be difficult, if not impossible, to abuse these virtues. Authority, on the other hand, is so easy to abuse that I am not willing to include it in your list. Authority connotes coercive power and is, therefore, not compatible with love. Love does not insist on its own way. 1 Cor 13:5.
It may be that some will attempt to justify the imposition of authority (and, therefore, power) by insisting that it be exercised in love. That, however, is only a conflation of the two concepts. Any act that is justified by authority, without reference to love, is corrupt. Any action that is justified by the requirements of love, even coercive actions (e.g. forcibly prohibiting a toddler from playing with rattle snakes), does not need to be justified by an appeal to authority.
LikeLike
Brian said:
Ya think? LOL. I see this thing all the time. Those dang women bloggers.
LikeLike
Gary W – You’re flatly wrong on the issue of authority, as Christ himself most definitely exercises authority. He taught with authority, has all authority given to him, has given authority to believers, enjoins submission to authorities, himself submitted to religious authority (specifically that of the high priest), etc. Governments exercise legitimate authority (as in dealing with domestic assault as the blog hostess herself mentions) without any reference to love and are not thereby corrupt. You are just wrong logically and biblically on this issue.
Julie Anne – the reason I mentioned that calling in social services may not make things better is because honestly domestic situations are quite complex and such agencies are usually only equipped to deal in black and white legalities, which are not always the best methods of dealing with issues, though at times it is needed. It is an elder (or any mature Christian) responsibility to investigate abuse to the extent that it is a discipleship issue with legal / criminal implications. That is why I said it isn’t always easy to suss out what is really going on. People do lie (unfortunately) and they lie about things like rape and abuse which is quite terrible for all involved.
BeenThereDoneThat — . I would think what she would likely do is call her father (and mine) and try to sort out when exactly I had lost my mind. BUT your substantive point is well taken. Still though, her call to the police notwithstanding, I should hope that she would love me enough to pray for my repentance. I would do the same for her.
In any event, I find it rather telling that there has been little engagement with the substance of what I’ve mentioned… only niggling over details around the edges in effort to find fault rather than find a way forward.
LikeLike
“In any event, I find it rather telling that there has been little engagement with the substance of what I’ve mentioned… only niggling over details around the edges in effort to find fault rather than find a way forward.”
Niggling over details? I find it rather telling that you consider the responsible reporting of abuse to the proper agencies “niggling over details.” Anyone who has followed the SGM debacle, or other abuse stories on this blog, would never consider the protection of the church’s most vulnerable to be “niggling over details.” On the contrary, this gets right to the very heart of why your perspective on authority is so dangerous to the well-being of women and children in our churches.
LikeLike