Book Review Series – Lori Alexander’s “The Power of a Transformed Wife” – The Chapter that Doesn’t Belong

The Power of a Transformed Wife, Lori Alexander, Dating, Sexual Purity

Screenshot 2017-09-03 at 9.36.35 PM

Screen shot from The Transformed Wife’s Facebook Page


-by Kathi

This is a book review series of The Power of a Transformed Wife by Lori Alexander. If you are just joining us, you may click on previous chapter reviews if you’d like to catch up.

Introduction & Chapter 1   Chapter 2   Chapter 3   Chapter 4   Chapter 5   Chapter 6  Chapter 7   Chapter 8 – Part 1   Chapter 8 – Part 2    Chapter 9  Chapter 10

****

Chapter 11 – The Dating Scene and Sexual Purity

I included the above screen shot for today’s book review post because Lori mentions how her editor doesn’t understand why her book is receiving so many bad reviews. I have one question for her editor: Why did you allow this chapter to be included in the book? Chapter nine talked about raising children, then chapter ten talked about birth control, and now we are back to raising children. If Lori wanted the thoughts of this chapter in her book, they should have been placed in other chapters. Instead, the thoughts are so disorganized and everything circles back around to how pornography is bad. But, no, this chapter remained, so that means this book is at least ten pages longer than it needs to be.

Lori starts this chapter by telling a story about about a speaker who came to her Sunday school class around the time that her oldest was sixteen. This is what stood out that day:

“Nothing good comes out of dating – only broken hearts and all too often, purity is lost,” he said. “Dating also prepares children for a divorce type of mentality. When things aren’t working out or you’ve lost feelings for each other or get angry, you call it quits. Easy in, easy out.”

What this speaker said made a lot of sense to Ken and me, so we decided to encourage our children not to date during high school.

Lori’s concession to dating was that her children could go with a group or a close friend, but never one-on-one with someone of the opposite sex (does that include the “close friend?”). I understand encouraging kids not to date during high school. I’ve said this to my own kids by encouraging them to focus on school, enjoy friendships, and having time to work or participate in school activities. The thing is, a lot of kids want to date during high school, so it’s better to teach them about healthy relationships instead of the doomed marriage that may happen ten years later.

That being said, this thought of dating-without-the-intent-of-marrying-only-encourages-a-divorce attitude is one that purity culture likes to propagate. It’s designed to keep kids pure and reduce sex outside of marriage. Has anyone been to a marriage ceremony where part of the vows include concession for divorce when feelings fade? Reality is that most people don’t think about divorce when they get married.

On a side note, I think Lori forgot what she wrote in her book when she provided space for a guest post this summer about how women were created to marry young. In her book she wanted her children to be sexually pure and not date, yet the author of this guest post states:

I do not believe that God made a mistake when he designed our bodies to mature fully by the mid teens. This is when we were designed to meet the person we were to marry and begin life together and that has not changed despite our culture changing. The undisputed optimal age biologically for a woman to have a baby is around age 16. This age demonstrates the very best outcomes for mother and baby.

Moving on, Lori talks about how parents must protect their children from sexual abuse. Finally, something worthwhile here! She states:

A parent must be diligent about protecting their children from sexual abuse. With sexual immorality and pornography rampant, you cannot sit by and do nothing. Sex predators are abusing little girls and boys even in the bushes at the park! They do it when your children are out playing with their friends. It’s really happening, and I hear about it way too often.

You must instruct your children from a young age so they will be well educated in what is proper behavior as a teenager and then as an adult. That way a child can recognize and respond to aberrant behavior.

Oh. My. Word. Is she serious?! I hope she never has a speaking gig regarding child sex abuse. She is at least thirty years behind and is extremely clueless. Lori isn’t the first I have come across that blames child sex abuse on the stranger in the bushes. People like Lori have difficulty admitting that child sexual abuse happens in the church, in Christian homes, and usually by someone the child knows. She also mentions two books by Debi Pearl: Samuel Learns to Yell and Tell and Sara Sue Learns to Yell and Tell. Has anyone read these to offer an insight about Debi’s views and knowledge of child sex abuse?

In true Lori book fashion, she includes a long blog post by another writer and ends this chapter with a blog post of a letter that was written by her daughter-in-law, Emily. A lot of Lori’s early blog, Always Learning, was filled with posts about her children and their spouses. I wonder how they feel about being used as examples of her teaching.

There are two take-aways that I gained from this chapter: 1. It is a useless chapter that the editor managed to keep in the book, and 2. Don’t listen to Lori when it comes to understanding child sex abuse.

41 comments on “Book Review Series – Lori Alexander’s “The Power of a Transformed Wife” – The Chapter that Doesn’t Belong

  1. Well, I am very glad to see that people are panning Lori’s book. There is such nonsense posted therein. I sort of got a kick out of her statement that she did not write the book to make money……sure! Since I have not read her book, I don’t know as I should join in the online Amazon reviews but I have been exposed to so much of her text here that it seems almost as if it would be appropriate to do so. I have not read her book – nor would I ever do so – so it is not exactly ethical to go online and negatively review it. Too bad because I would love to writing a searing criticism of the book. Ethics, however, would suggest otherwise. Most of what I know of her book comes from second hand info gleaned from this website. I don’t have time to waste actually reading her nonsense nor would I wish to support her in anyway by purchasing the book. Worst of all, I would not like to be seen with it in my home library. I should not want anyone to think I was into that stuff. I got rid of a whole lot of books which I had bought in my younger days (for example books on astrology, as but one example) for that very reason. I would not want persons to see such items on my bookshelf should they visit my house.

    BTW – off topic but, Marc, if you are around reading this comment, I am still waiting for you to respond to my post about why you did not ask these desirable girls you spoke about out on dates. These would be the ones which you met in in college. You said that they married jerks. I am sure they did but you can hardly blame them if desirable men like yourself are not pursuing women in college.

    Like

  2. “Nothing good comes out of dating – only broken hearts and all too often, purity is lost,” he said. “Dating also prepares children for a divorce type of mentality. When things aren’t working out or you’ve lost feelings for each other or get angry, you call it quits. Easy in, easy out.”

    I am so confused by this weird anti-dating stance. How are you supposed to get to know someone without dating? What do they think dating is? I have heard people online refer to dating as if it’s just a bunch of sleeping with random people without thought of it going any further. Now, sometimes it might be that but most of dating is just getting to know people and seeing if you are compatible. What on earth is wrong with that? I think there is some fundamental (fundamentalist?) disconnect here.

    Liked by 2 people

  3. “Nothing good comes out of dating

    Also, um, don’t they think marriage is ‘good’. I would wager that the VAST majority of marriages come from dating. So major logic fail…

    Liked by 1 person

  4. The person who wrote that guest post was not a medical expert. The statement that the optimal age to have a child is 16 is completely inaccurate. It may be safer to have a child at age 16, because most girls have stopped growing by then, but that is in comparison to adolescents (12 to 15) who are still growing so that having a child is incredibly hard on them. That does not mean, however, that 16 is the optimal age. Not every girl will have stopped growing by then and crucial brain development is still taking place. In addition, there is a statistically higher risk of premature births and low birthweight babies for teen mothers, and worldwide, the second leading cause of death for 15-19 year old girls is complications surrounding pregnancy and childbirth: http://www.who.int/mediacentre/factsheets/fs364/en/. If there is an optimal age for having children (every woman’s experience is unique, and those who seem to be optimally healthy may have unexpected complications), it would be in the early to mid twenties.

    Liked by 2 people

  5. I guess the pervs in the bushes also wear old raincoats…Just about every child sex abuse case I’ve been familiar with in almost 40 years of teaching, the abuser has been well-known by the child-a parent, a “trusted” neighbor, a teacher, another relative, a babysitter. All the people you should respect and obey in the good, ‘ole evangelical bubble. We need to be aware of the outside world, but we also need a better look in our own world to even adequately begin to protect children.

    Liked by 1 person

  6. I had a pastor who preached “Dating is going to a movie and then driving somewhere, making out and having sex in the car.” I figured, first of all, nothing I’ve ever done could be considered dating, and second of all, of course dating is wrong if that is the definition. Of course it was a straw man that led to a false dichotomy where he then proclaimed how wonderful courtship was vs. dating.

    Linn, so true. I’m guessing Uncle Buck the child molester wouldn’t make a good movie, so all of the movies focus on the stranger rape corner cases, and we somehow think that life is like the movies. The statistics are pretty staggering that most sexual violence is perpetrated by family members, family friends and authority figures. It’s the very people that the Evangelical church is pushing us to blindly obey. I’ve said before, we left a church because one of the authority figures felt he deserved the blind obedience of our children. He was upset that we told our children they could always come to us if an authority figure asked them something that made them uncomfortable. The other leaders refused to take a stand against him and we decided our children could not grow up in that church.

    There was a courtship proponent that got dissolutioned and ended up writing an article about his grandmother’s experience with dating. Essentially, the point of dating was searching the pond for potential fish rather than focusing on “THE ONE”. The church seemed to reject that idea and has become more and more focused on the idea of “THE ONE”, which has led, I think, to a lot of major relationship issues. For example, how do you know if the guy you’re courting is respectful or a jerk, if you haven’t dated both respectful men and jerks?

    Like

  7. I had a pastor who preached “Dating is going to a movie and then driving somewhere, making out and having sex in the car.”

    What??? I mean…the movie part might be right. Or sometimes making out. But most dates, especially first dates!, do not end in sex. Even for people who have no problem with sex outside of marriage. Stuff like that just sounds so stupid to me.

    And courtship just seems like putting the cart before the horse, or getting engaged to a total stranger. How is that supposed to be better?

    Like

  8. Lea – Lori’s thought is that the sole purpose of dating is finding a suitable marriage partner. Which, your thought of dating to get to know people sounds exactly the same. I think she’s against the idea of teenagers dating, but then her thoughts about that are confusing given the fact that she allowed space to advocate for teenagers to marry. I would guess these young teens marrying must be done by parents arranging meetings? Would they allow a teen who is going to marry (most likely an older person) to date then?

    Liked by 1 person

  9. For example, how do you know if the guy you’re courting is respectful or a jerk, if you haven’t dated both respectful men and jerks?

    And the subtler things take a lot longer to come out. A lot of men seem to like to denigrate women for dating jerks, as if they acted that way towards the women and from day one. Is it HUG that likes to talk about sunk costs? By the time you someone starts acting like a jerk, you may have lots of memories of them not acting like a jerk. If you give them the benefit of the doubt or think it was a bad day or something, it might take you a while to realize, hey, maybe I shouldn’t be with this guy?

    Which is why you need time to really get to know people. And make decisions about their suitability. Time you won’t have if you jump straight from 0 to 1000.

    Liked by 2 people

  10. Lea – Lori’s thought is that the sole purpose of dating is finding a suitable marriage partner. Which, your thought of dating to get to know people sounds exactly the same.

    I think figuring out who is UN-suitable is equally, if not more important. Maybe that’s the difference?

    Like

  11. Lea – I’m certainly not disagreeing with you. It seems that a lot of these purity folks make relationships more difficult than they need to be.

    Liked by 1 person

  12. Optimal (undisputed?) age to have a baby is 16? She’s nuts and hasn’t had even a cursory look into human biology. Good grief.

    Like

  13. Lois: ” Since I have not read her book, I don’t know as I should join in the online Amazon reviews but I have been exposed to so much of her text here that it seems almost as if it would be appropriate to do so.”

    If you look at either of her blogs you pretty much have read the book. She has nothing new to say in her book because she’s already been writing about it for years. Plus, she mirrors her “mentor” Debi Pearl. If you have read “Created to Be His Help Meet” you’ve read Lori’s book. But, trust me, you’re not missing out on much with either book.

    Like

  14. Lori had LOTS of push back last week when she had a post titled “Women are not Made in the Image of God” up. The final straw that made her delete the post was a pastor who told her that he was not going to allow her to speak at his church, was discouraging the women’s group from reading her book, and nicely told her that she was wrong with her theology.

    Lori believes that because of Titus 2:3-5 she is bound by God to teach younger women “God’s ways.” She has done some one-on-one mentoring, but her blog post, book, Instagram,YouTube, Twitter and Facebook accounts are meant to reach a wider audience – people that she has no relationships with. Whenever she receives push back she says that she is being persecuted and she comes out with statements to help support her command by God to teach younger women.

    Liked by 1 person

  15. Lea – I’m certainly not disagreeing with you. It seems that a lot of these purity folks make relationships more difficult than they need to be.

    I feel like they took dating, renamed it ‘courtship’ and upped the ante. I don’t think that was an improvement. Especially since courtships still break up for the same reasons as dating! Sheesh.

    Liked by 2 people

  16. Lori’s guest blogger:

    The undisputed optimal age biologically for a woman to have a baby is around age 16. This age demonstrates the very best outcomes for mother and baby.

    Men remain fertile well into their 50’s and even 60’s. A 91 year old in India has fathered another baby. Why shouldn’t biologically capable men father babies? If their wives are too old, then, 14-16 year old brides for 50+ year old men? That is how “traditional marriages” used to work even in the West. And they still do in many parts of the world including America.

    Like

  17. In reality, Lori isn’t being “persecuted” because of her belief and faith in Jesus Christ, alone for her salvation, she’s being called out for her heretical teachings, her double mindedness, her double standards, her personal instability, and also for just plain being wolf in sheep’s clothing! She is actually replacing the doctrines of the Word of God, twisting the Scriptures in support of her own personal views and now is crying “persecution, persecution” because people are calling out her heresy.

    I have personally come to the conclusion, that Lori may in fact, hate herself, projecting that hatred through her teachings onto folks who don’t read the understand the Scriptures for themselves. Her self loathing is becoming more and more apparent through her books, her personal videos, and especially through her blog. I believe she needs mental/emotional help is coming to grips that she (and women in general) are not worms, nor are we dogs with regards to the teachings of Jesus Himself.

    Scriptures clearly state, “Love your neighbor as you love yourself.” How can one love their neighbor if in fact, they hate and loathe themselves? One cannot. And I’m not talking about an unhealthy selfish type of love here, but a genuine Christ centered love for oneself and others.

    Lori’s ratings aren’t “tanking” because of her persecution, they are declining because folks are finally understanding the Scriptures for themselves and finally, seeing the light through Christ…..and perhaps Lori is “offended” by that.

    Liked by 2 people

  18. Katy, Lori isn’t being persecuted for righteousness’ sake, but for her love of being weird. One of the head loony matrons of the Odd for God Squad. Maybe she will have to find an attorney and sue the meanies who have quit following her and are therefore causing her ratings to tank.

    Like

  19. Btw, I tend to loath myself. This isn’t due to low self esteem but a lack of faith. God says that He loves me, but because crap keeps happening and many people hurt and betray me I find His love hard to believe in.

    I try not to take it out on others. Especially others who have been walked all over and mistreated for being weak.

    Like

  20. Off topic– posting here since my tweets are totally unbelievable–
    Tom R of FBC Jax Watchdogs is just writing satire, His article about Collaberation Church is not real!!
    Now I’ve got to get busy writing my tweet about God sending hurricanes to punish Lutherans or to get Pastor John’s attention.
    Hedonistically yours, Pastor John

    Like

  21. A post wherein she denies that women were made in God’s image as well as men?! That is so obviously contrary to the very plainest reading of Gen. 1:27. How in the world did she support her position? Would it be possible to access that post via the internet Wayback Machine? I have a morbid curiosity.

    Like

  22. puritangirl – Here is a screen shot of the post:

    This post went through a lot over 24 hours. The title went from a statement to a question. Rice’s words went from authoritative to “interesting.” Lori received a lot of push back on her theology – including a pastor who told her she was not allowed to speak at their church, and Lori made a comment that she did not care if she was created in God’s image because it was not essential to salvation.

    Liked by 1 person

  23. *I had a pastor who preached “Dating is going to a movie and then driving somewhere, making out and having sex in the car.” *

    I wonder what kind of dates this pastor went on as a young man. Really.

    On the other hand, sounds like a pretty good idea for a date night for me and the hubby. Except we won’t have to use the car or get a room or something. We already have a room, LOL !!

    Like

  24. Lori actually said that Dr. Rice is very knowledgable on the Bible? Oh dear. Well, turns out that I have actually read the book that Lori referenced: The Home by John Rice. The whole book is pretty shocking to read. If Lori is reading THAT for instruction, no wonder she’s saying so many off the wall things:

    John Rice writes,

    “Fine Christian women do much of the singing and praying and serving in the churches. Yet it remains the clear teaching of the Word of God that a man is the highest work of God.”
    (The Home p. 86)

    “Even a women’s duty to God is controlled by her father or her husband.”
    (p. 95)

    “The rebellion of a wife against her husband is exactly the same in spirit as the rebellion of a disobedient child against his father.”
    (p. 109)

    Just for the record—NONE OF THAT IS IN THE BIBLE! That is just one person ranting and raving their own feelings from the pulpit—while actually turning their back on the Bible.

    Yes, Lori it really does matter that you wrote a whole insane blog post saying that women aren’t made in God’s image. That’s directly attacking our whole identity in Christ. We are valued because we are made in God’s image. We matter because we are the apple of God’s eye.

    “This is what the Lord of heaven’s armies says: “Whoever hurts you hurts what is precious to me.””
    Zechariah 2:8(ICB)

    Liked by 1 person

  25. It is obvious to me which spirit John Rice is following per his quotes, Thank-you Avid Reader, and it isn’t God, the Holy Spirit either. For a clear, concise image of how women were treated in the Holy Scriptures, I personally look to Jesus and the Way in which He treated, regarded, and instructed humanity how to live.

    John Rice’s penned words, resourced from his heart, are clearly anti-Christ (in place of Christ), and it is becoming increasingly clear that Lori is expounding upon “worm theology” regarding women. Shame on those who believe they are believers and followers of Jesus Christ, for teaching women this garbage from the pits of hell, to young women in their churches. Shame on you!!!

    My last Baptist church with an Assembly of God pastor taught the “second class citizenship” of women heresy, where eldership rule gives itself permission to meddle in telling wives how to live, even the wives of others within their cult. The rate of husbands abusing their wives is high within their congregation and their membership has decreased to half in less than ten years. What Christian woman in her right mind, with the Holy Spirit living inside of her, desires to be ruled by an abusive tyrant who doesn’t have his own house in order? My husband and I attended a marriage conference sponsored by Family Life/Dennis Rainey, it was all directed towards “male headship/male leadership” and “woman/wife submission in all of her ways” and was difficult for me to sit through without vomiting. We were instructed to go to our rooms and have a Bible study with our spouses each evening and the first evening my husband opened up their penned curriculum boldly announcing, “Okay, let’s see how we can fix you.” I wanted to cry for I was devastated and beyond being beaten up by the Family Life seminars attended that day. Word of caution, Family Life Marriage Conferences are not designed to treat the wives as equals, nor as co-heirs in the Kingdom of God, but as subordinates and non-intellectuals (no minds).

    Leaving this worm/dog/lower laity theology based on the doctrines of demons has been such a rewarding decision, for now I am free in Jesus Christ and His burdens are far lighter than the drudgery of man/male dominated churches.

    Liked by 1 person

  26. John Rice writes,“Yet it remains the clear teaching of the Word of God that a man is the highest work of God.”(The Home p. 86)… “Even a women’s duty to God is controlled by her father or her husband.”(p. 95)

    Ew, ew, ew.

    I wonder what kind of dates this pastor went on as a young man. Really.

    Right? I’ve been doing online dating and most guys don’t even kiss on a first date. It was different in high school when you knew people well enough already before you went out with them, but still.

    Like

  27. Yes, Lori it really does matter that you wrote a whole insane blog post saying that women aren’t made in God’s image. That’s directly attacking our whole identity in Christ. We are valued because we are made in God’s image. We matter because we are the apple of God’s eye.

    If she does not think we are made in God’s image, does she think we are human? If we are not human, why do we need salvation? Do puppies need salvation?

    Liked by 1 person

  28. Katy,

    Sorry to hear that you went through that humiliation. There’s too much of that in the church.

    Lea,

    Best wishes with the online dating. Hope you find someone really special.

    Researching Me? Obey Him? led me to studying John Rice who is the father of the author of Me? Obey Him? This is the same guy who wrote that it was a sin for women to cut their hair and that the sin of women preaching in the pulpit was causing millions of people to go to hell!! I’m pretty sure that it’s the exact opposite—women ministers like Amy Carmichael and Gladys Alyward led many people to the Lord.

    Anyway, the kind of gloating in Rice’s books reminded me of the gloating heard too often in the pulpit. It’s really just a form of pride that enjoys cutting other people down. Reminds me of a Civil War era quote about how people know its wrong, but “at the bottom of their hearts is pride in being the master.” That’s the same spirit behind all of this—the pride of life.

    “For all that is in the world–the desires of the flesh, the desires of the eyes, and the pride of life–is not from the Father but from the world.”
    1John 2:16 (BSB)

    Like

  29. Many of the early church fathers thought the same way as John Rice. Augustine is full of wonderful quotes about the state of women. As the saying goes, there is nothing new under the sun.

    Like

  30. Here is what I don’t get. The vast majority of spiritual traits, if that all, that Jesus and the apostles taught were gender neutral in that they are open to be pursued by both genders. Consider the fruit of the Spirit: love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness, and self-control. Neither gender is better positioned to acquire these virtues.

    Also, there is no scriptural basis to support the eternality of one’s gender identity (or other biological and hereditary traits such as race). We will all get new bodies (2 Corinthian 5:5) and our earthly bodies will burn away. Will the new bodies take on our genders? Nobody thinks that.

    Remember “Wild at Heart” that took the Christian subculture by a storm? The book’s subtitle is “Discovering the Secret of a Man’s Soul.”

    Somehow the gender of my present earthly body is the magical key to open spiritual secrets? It says everything about my spirituality. By tapping into the proper belief about being a “man” of God, the sky becomes the limit in spiritual growth. It’s just bizarre.

    Like

  31. Lori has just written another blog post—this time trying to convince us that the Proverbs 31 woman wasn’t actually planting her own field like the Bible specifically says! So this time I couldn’t stay quiet. I posted this on Lori’s blog. Can’t wait to find out if she will approve my comment. 🙂 Here’s it is:

    Those of us who believe firmly in the authority of Scripture simply don’t understand the way that this passage is being watered down. Why can’t we just believe what it says? Why try to explain away the whole context of the passage which is that she’s making money from her own projects!

    Is there something wrong with the Biblical story of Lydia the cloth merchant? What about the prophet Elisha telling the widow to go and sell the oil in the market place and live on the income?

    “Every wise woman builds her house.”
    Prov 14:1

    “She considers a field and buys it; From her earnings she plants a vineyard..”
    Prov 31:16 (NASB)

    Forgot to include this one too:
    “She works late into the night to make sure her business earns a profit.”
    Proverbs 31:18 (ERV)

    Like

  32. *I had a pastor who preached “Dating is going to a movie and then driving somewhere, making out and having sex in the car.” *

    I guess the ex and I did dating and engagement wrong, because…

    We had zero sex on, before, and after dates over the several years we were a couple.

    No sex.

    I didn’t know we were supposed to be having sex on or after dating.

    Like

  33. Avid wrote,

    Lori has just written another blog post— this time trying to convince us that the Proverbs 31 woman wasn’t actually planting her own field like the Bible specifically says! So this time I couldn’t stay quiet. I posted this on Lori’s blog. Can’t wait to find out if she will approve my comment.

    Here’s it is:

    Those of us who believe firmly in the authority of Scripture simply don’t understand the way that this passage is being watered down. Why can’t we just believe what it says? Why try to explain away the whole context of the passage which is that she’s making money from her own projects!

    Is there something wrong with the Biblical story of Lydia the cloth merchant?…

    Wait. What? I’m confused. Not by Avid, but by Lori’s remarks.

    On just several threads ago, I asked,
    “What does Lori teach women who are never married or widowed to do? They have to get a job and work outside the home to pay the bills. They have no husband to rely on financially or otherwise. They cannot live as June Cleaver. What does Lori advise single women to do?”

    Then one of you said that Lori said that in order for an un-married woman (never married, divorced, whatever) to pay her bills, she must stay at home and earn money over the internet herself.

    But now she’s saying a woman earning any money at all is bad, even though there are examples in the Bible of women who earned their own money?

    If a woman never marries, is widowed/ divorced, and Lori is saying women should not earn their own money, what does she propose?

    Is Lori going to pay any bills un-married women have?

    Does she suggest all single women quit their jobs and live off welfare indefinitely?

    Like

  34. I’m sure Lori doesn’t support welfare, either. It’s a burden to tax payers and violates that verse in Thessalonians that says that those who work shouldn’t eat.

    There really isn’t much logic to anything Lori says, and she is constantly contradicting herself. That’s why it’s so easy to poke holes in her arguments!

    Like

  35. Linn – Lori stated a few years ago on her blog that it was okay to use welfare. However, she thinks it is better for families and churches to help support women. I don’t know of many churches that can help financially sustain a single parent for an extended period of time, and, I’m sure that many families are able to help to an extent. Lori will tell women they need to trust that God will supply their needs because staying home full-time with children is important. There may be verses in the Bible that support “trust in God” but no where does it state that God wants people to neglect their needs or the needs of their children by not taking any action.

    Like

  36. Daisy,

    That’s a really good point. Lori isn’t thinking about all the single women, especially single mothers who struggle to survive against the rising cost of living.

    This whole discussion reminded me of the story of (according to the Guinness Book of World Records) the first woman in American history to become a self-made millionaire. What makes her story so remarkable is the intense difficulties that she faced. Madam CJ Walker was born into desperate poverty right after the Civil War. She escaped a difficult home situation by marrying her sweetheart at fourteen. Few years later, her husband passed away, leaving her to raise their daughter alone. At twenty-one years old she facing the harsh reality of very few, if any, jobs open to women.

    This was in the days before washing machines or electricity existed. The only way she could survive was by doing laundry for people. That meant boiling the water over a hot fire, stirring the clothes/sheets/towels, etc with a long wooden stick, and having to scrub the clothes with harsh chemicals that caused her hair to fall out.

    Day after day of back breaking labor was wearing her out. In her own words, she would later describe,

    “I was at my tubs one morning with a heavy wash before me. As I bent over the washboard, and looked at my arms buried in soapsuds, I said to myself, ‘What are you going to do when you grow old and your back gets stiff? Who is going to take care of your little girl?’ This set me to thinking, but with all my thinking I couldn’t see how I, a poor washerwoman, was going to better my condition.”
    (NY Times 11/4/1917)

    Her strong faith in God led her to cry out to God for the way out. One night she had a dream about inventing a hair care product. Now today’s historians refuse to believe this part of the story. They can’t seem to accept that a woman could invent her own product—so they claim that a chemist showed her how to do it. My gut feeling is that she had a lot more to do with developing her own product than they give her credit for.

    So she began developing this hair product while continuing to work really long hours. There were people in her church that helped her put together the details of starting a business. She began marketing it door to door, then by developing other sales ladies to market it. Remember this is back before indoor plumbing and running water. Most women didn’t have the luxury of being able to wash their hair very often. Scalp problems were common. So she pioneers the hair care industry with a series of products that made a real difference for women.

    Long story short, she becomes so successful that she launched hundreds of other women into successful sales careers. She built a factory that employed many others. She launched highly successful cosmetology schools. The money kept pouring in until eventually she was able to buy a mansion in Rockefeller’s neighborhood. When the NY Times newspaper reporter came to her house to interview her, he was totally shocked. Marveling at her quarter of a million dollar mansion, he couldn’t believe that only, “Twelve years ago she was a washerwoman, glad of a chance to do anyone’s family wash for $1.50 a day.”

    In the article she said,
    “If I have accomplished anything in life, it is because I have been willing to work hard. Perseverance is my motto. I got my start, by giving myself a start. It is often the best way.”

    With all that money, she helped many other people. Meanwhile she continued to walk with the Lord and had a tremendous heart for God. Visitors to her mansion at Christmas time noticed how she insisted on everyone kneeling in God’s presence to give thanks for His many blessings. “The theme of her prayer was humility and awe in the presence of God.” (On Her Own Ground p. 247)

    In her own words she said, “It was through His Divine providence that I am what I am, for all good, perfect gifts come from above.” (Ground p. 269)

    Anyway, if there’s any skeptics who want to verify the facts—here’s a link to the actual 1917 New York Times interview with her:

    http://query.nytimes.com/mem/archive-free/pdf?res=9B01E6DB163AE532A25757C0A9679D946696D6CF&mcubz=0

    There’s also a great bio on her life called On Her Own Ground. Just wanted to share something uplifting with you all after all the depressing stuff from Lori that we’ve been reading!

    Like

  37. Lori must live in the land of unicorns and rainbows! Many years ago I attended a church where a family had five children, and the father was always chronically unemployed. The church was kind enough to take him on as a janitor. When wife became pregnant with baby #6, they were told very kindly that, if they expected to get help from the church, they would have no more “surprises.” They took care of it.

    Like

  38. Well,

    Looks like Lori has officially ignored my comment. She’s posted other comments but seems afraid to address my comment.

    Lori, if you’re reading this right now—since you won’t allow me to respond on your own blog, I’ll respond here. I’d love to discuss all this with you directly. Anytime you’re open for a real conversation—let’s talk. Remember that conversation is a two way street—that means you’ll have to do some listening. Not just all the talking!!

    Like

  39. Pingback: Book Review Series – Lori Alexander’s “The Power of a Transformed Wife” – When Proverbs 31 Becomes a To Do List | Spiritual Sounding Board

Thanks for participating in the SSB community. Please be sure to leave a name/pseudonym (not "Anonymous"). Thx :)

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s