Has this been discussed? Doug Phillips *resigns* from Vision Forum (Ministries)!

[justamouse]

I can't believe all of the gossip all of you are engaging in about this topic, especially FaithManor. I know the Phillips personally, and, as others have pointed out already on this forum, they are sinners, true, but  he who is without sin, let him cast the first stone. Beall is a wonderful, warm, and gracious woman. There is not enough good that I can say about her. FaithManor had better check her facts, because some of her statements I consider outright lies!!! The women DO NOT stand behind chairs and wait to serve their "men." Quoting,  "Women literally cannot speak inside the church building...not even to shush a child." Of course, they can shush a child. If any of you know these people personally, please speak up, but having spent some time with them myself, I am disgusted by the vitriole and untruths some of you have engaged in.

 

It's not gossip when it's truth. It's actually an act of mercy to tell the truth as a warning and to spare people the heartache and error of such things. 

It's a duty of these women who have come out from this lifestyle to share their stories and warn the other women. People can be brought to healing because of this, their families can move foreword, their children and families can be set free. But only if the truth continues to be told. 

 

As hard as this whole thing is, it's a good thing that happened. 

My mother was an ER nurse, and she hated motorcycles. Why? Because when a motorcycle driver had an accident, many times he got road rash, and she often had to scrub the gravel out of their skin with a wire brush. Many times they had to be held down so their wounds could be cleaned. 

All of this aftermath is the wire brush. It hurts, and it's awful, but hopefully it will clean out the gravel and infection so this wound on Christianity can heal. 

 

[FaithManor]

http://www.patheos.com/blogs/lovejoyfeminism/2013/11/how-doug-phillips-wreaked-havoc-on-my-family.html

 

Short, but interesting blog post. Interesting is the first comment "'Michael Pearl himself has spoken out in recent years against the patriarchal ideas put out by Vision Forum.' That kind of puts a chill in your bones. Vision Forum is too misogynistic for Michael Pearl."

Ummm...yes I caught that quote too. My brain is still trying to process this.

 

The thing is mommaduck, the people who defend this kind of preaching and lifestyle have no idea just how many conservative ish Christians speak out against it. I mean, you are a lovely orthodox mamma from a tradition that some might erroneously describe as "patriarchial" though in reality while it may lay a tremendous responsibility for leadership on the men, the checks and balances system is pretty effective and the humbleness of spirit that is emphasized is just amazing....no woman hating, loving their sisters in Christ more than themselves, no extra biblical teachings on how homes must operate, etc.

 

I think that our trolls have zero idea that there are plenty of people here who really believe in the Gospel of Jesus Christ that are adamantly opposed to the teachings being discussed in this thread. They appear to be very disconcerted by Christians who do not support their extra-biblical, not rooted in Apostolic tradition worldview, and well those hivers that do not hold a Christian worldview must scare the daylights out of them in order to extract such a heated response.

 

I mean, if you really believe that this is right and good, why not discourse and debate appropriately? Why not join the board for a good reason, and figure out what makes this board tick so that one CAN engage in the discussion in a way that promotes your worldview in a positive light.  I don't know if they realize it, but they only cause more damage to the viewpoint they are trying to defend by responding so angrily on an online community they have not been a part of previously. 

 

Faith

[Laurie4b]

Um, no. There is no difference in quality. Abuse is abuse, period. It is all equally disgusting. 

 

Of course, it's still abuse. I never said otherwise.  From a clinical perspective, however, the impact on the child can be quite different depending on what was done, how intense it was, how long it lasted, whether coercion was used, whether there was violence or physical harm, closeness of relationship, etc.  That's what I referred to as a difference in quality.

[justamouse]

 

 

I think that our trolls have zero idea that there are plenty of people here who really believe in the Gospel of Jesus Christ that are adamantly opposed to the teachings being discussed in this thread. They appear to be very disconcerted by Christians who do not support their extra-biblical, not rooted in Apostolic tradition worldview, and well those hivers that do not hold a Christian worldview must scare the daylights out of them in order to extract such a heated response.

 

 

 

Faith

 

 

That's because someone tied up their salvation with their submissiveness. 

 

not submissive = not saved

 

 

A pretty Machiavellian way to exert spiritual and physical control without physical punishment. 

[Slartibartfast]

Ummm...yes I caught that quote too. My brain is still trying to process this.

 

The thing is mommaduck, the people who defend this kind of preaching and lifestyle have no idea just how many conservative ish Christians speak out against it. I mean, you are a lovely orthodox mamma from a tradition that some might erroneously describe as "patriarchial" though in reality while it may lay a tremendous responsibility for leadership on the men, the checks and balances system is pretty effective and the humbleness of spirit that is emphasized is just amazing....no woman hating, loving their sisters in Christ more than themselves, no extra biblical teachings on how homes must operate, etc.

 

I think that our trolls have zero idea that there are plenty of people here who really believe in the Gospel of Jesus Christ that are adamantly opposed to the teachings being discussed in this thread. They appear to be very disconcerted by Christians who do not support their extra-biblical, not rooted in Apostolic tradition worldview, and well those hivers that do not hold a Christian worldview must scare the daylights out of them in order to extract such a heated response.

 

I mean, if you really believe that this is right and good, why not discourse and debate appropriately? Why not join the board for a good reason, and figure out what makes this board tick so that one CAN engage in the discussion in a way that promotes your worldview in a positive light.  I don't know if they realize it, but they only cause more damage to the viewpoint they are trying to defend by responding so angrily on an online community they have not been a part of previously. 

 

Faith

 

Exactly FaithManor, if people were being genuine they would discuss things in a more respectful manner. 

 

I am a Christian and I am not going to be scolded by strangers for discussing an issue concerning a well known figure in the homeschool community who puts themselves forward as a leader and someone who tells people the "right" way of living.

 

I am a Christian but I am most certainly NOT going to attend a VF church nor would I permit my children to do so.

[Catwoman]

Separateunion is on our watch list for trolling, since he [?} appeared from nowhere to derail the thread. I have not deleted the posts and follow-ups because of many of your thoughtful and lengthy answers.

However, let's table discussion of Doug Wilson in this thread, please. It's off-topic.

Moderator

Thanks for keeping us updated! I really appreciate it that you keep such a close eye on what's going on. :)

[Word Nerd]

As many views as this thread has had, I'm surprised there haven't been more drive-by comments from VF/DP advocates.

[Catwoman]

As many views as this thread has had, I'm surprised there haven't been more drive-by comments from VF/DP advocates.

You know you just jinxed us, right? :D

[FaithManor]

As many views as this thread has had, I'm surprised there haven't been more drive-by comments from VF/DP advocates.

Now, now, now hive...let's not have FAMOUS LAST WORDS!! :lol:

[fairfarmhand]

Ummm...yes I caught that quote too. My brain is still trying to process this.

 

The thing is mommaduck, the people who defend this kind of preaching and lifestyle have no idea just how many conservative ish Christians speak out against it. I mean, you are a lovely orthodox mamma from a tradition that some might erroneously describe as "patriarchial" though in reality while it may lay a tremendous responsibility for leadership on the men, the checks and balances system is pretty effective and the humbleness of spirit that is emphasized is just amazing....no woman hating, loving their sisters in Christ more than themselves, no extra biblical teachings on how homes must operate, etc.

 

I think that our trolls have zero idea that there are plenty of people here who really believe in the Gospel of Jesus Christ that are adamantly opposed to the teachings being discussed in this thread. They appear to be very disconcerted by Christians who do not support their extra-biblical, not rooted in Apostolic tradition worldview, and well those hivers that do not hold a Christian worldview must scare the daylights out of them in order to extract such a heated response.

 

I mean, if you really believe that this is right and good, why not discourse and debate appropriately? Why not join the board for a good reason, and figure out what makes this board tick so that one CAN engage in the discussion in a way that promotes your worldview in a positive light.  I don't know if they realize it, but they only cause more damage to the viewpoint they are trying to defend by responding so angrily on an online community they have not been a part of previously. 

 

Faith

It's because we are not the "real" Christians in the world. We are liberal people fooled by "teachers having itching ears." (whatever that means)

 

(sarcasm.)

 

These folks have been told that the only way to Jesus is through their denomination.

[Aelwydd]

:001_rolleyes: There you go, Moxie ;)

 

It's funny how such things can be talked about inside of their own groups, but as soon as someone that is not inside the group or is no longer inside the group says ANYTHING, it's "gossip". Heaven forbid they be female. You know, men are only discussing "facts" and women "gossip". I call bologna. Women are the root of a community. We have every right to discuss such issues within our communities. As a first time poster, I would not expect Phillip's defender to know that WTM IS a community with many having been here for around, give or take, a decade and having developed friendships that have extended both here, irl, and other places on the web (I know some ladies that are members here IRL, have had them stay with me, I've stayed with some, developed long term relationships...some I knew for YEARS before WTM from elsewhere). THIS is a community. We have a right to discuss such issues as they do spread into various areas of our lives.

 

I always thought the religious injuction against "women's wagging tongues" and "gossipmongering" had more to do with shutting down the exchange of ideas and expression of thought among women than to achieve any sort of virtue.  The fact is, the more the underlings talk to each other, the more opportunity to fomet rebellion among the ranks.

 

Patriarchy is an elemental form of authoritarianism.  All authoritarianism is based upon keeping hierarchy strictly defined and maintained.  It is about consolidating resources from the ground up to the top, so that those at the top may wield tremedous power over those at the bottom, and against other groups.

 

This is why I object to patriarchalism, and authoritarianism, in all forms. Without it, you don't have the ability to organize complex systems into something that wields such tremedous force.  Without it, you don't have nearly the ability to oppress the individual through the force of the many, and strip him or her of the right to self-determination.

 

The egalitarian community, and meeting of minds that is equal, is the only answer to authoritarianism, and groups like Phillips'. But many people are still seduced by the attractiveness of being part of such a hierarchal system or "army."  They perceive it as making them more powerful, and bringing increased security to themselves and their families and communities. But, they do not often consider how much autonomy they give up to become part of the Borg, so-to-speak. I have always found it most ironic that the Old Testament, the source of many authoritarian hidebound teachers, contains such a profound example of this principle.

 

At one point, Israel was guided by the consel of the judges--including a woman!--but wished the power and prestige and image that came with having a king to lead them.  To them, a king represented a strong people, a focal point of their political and military might. A king was the personified ego of its people. God warned them that if he gave them the king that they desired, it would all come to naught. A king, he argued, would tax them heavily, use their resources and their sons to fight his wars, take their daughters for his purposes, and cause them much misery.

 

They insisted, and God gave them Saul.

 

Similarly, Phillips would have no power if the people were not looking for such a person, and such a power structure, in which to invest their egos.  In helping to build such a system, they feed off the power of the group, and their leader's persona, even as it divests them, and others who are unwillingly caught up in this scheme, of their own self-determination.

 

One of my favorite lines ever is stated by Cora Munro, in The Last of the Mohicans. She finally realizes, as she is being pressed by her father and her would-be suitor to trust their judgment in the face of uncertainty, that “I would rather make the gravest of mistakes than surrender my own judgment”.

 

That, to me, represents the core of the issue with groups like VF.  They would have women--and men--cede their individual judgment to someone else, to keep them safe from the uncertainty of the future.  But, it's not just individual judgment they give up--it's the wisdom of their peers, the community of like-minded that they lose as well in the deal.  The very heart of authoritarianism is so pernicious, it seeks to divide us not just from ourselves, and our own ability to choose and to think for ourselves, but also to divide us from others around us.

 

From those without the group--who are evil, and sinful, and not to be trusted.  And also from those within, who may not be true followers, and who are gossips and disloyal and always viewed with suspicion.  Those gossipers and thieves, who seek to undermine our Beloved Leader, the divine investure of all our paranoia and clannishness and every negative human trait we possess as a species.

[Harriet Vane]

I always thought the religious injuction against "women's wagging tongues" and "gossipmongering" had more to do with shutting down the exchange of ideas and expression of thought among women than to achieve any sort of virtue.  The fact is, the more the underlings talk to each other, the more opportunity to fomet rebellion among the ranks.

 

Patriarchy is an elemental form of authoritarianism.  All authoritarianism is based upon keeping hierarchy strictly defined and maintained.  It is about consolidating resources from the ground up to the top, so that those at the top may wield tremedous power over those at the bottom, and against other groups.

 

This is why I object to patriarchalism, and authoritarianism, in all forms. Without it, you don't have the ability to organize complex systems into something that wields such tremedous force.  Without it, you don't have nearly the ability to oppress the individual through the force of the many, and strip him or her of the right to self-determination.

 

The egalitarian community, and meeting of minds that is equal, is the only answer to authoritarianism, and groups like Phillips'. But many people are still seduced by the attractiveness of being part of such a hierarchal system or "army."  They perceive it as making them more powerful, and bringing increased security to themselves and their families and communities. But, they do not often consider how much autonomy they give up to become part of the Borg, so-to-speak. I have always found it most ironic that the Old Testament, the source of many authoritarian hidebound teachers, contains such a profound example of this principle.

 

At one point, Israel was guided by the consel of the judges--including a woman!--but wished the power and prestige and image that came with having a king to lead them.  To them, a king represented a strong people, a focal point of their political and military might. A king was the personified ego of its people. God warned them that if he gave them the king that they desired, it would all come to naught. A king, he argued, would tax them heavily, use their resources and their sons to fight his wars, take their daughters for his purposes, and cause them much misery.

 

They insisted, and God gave them Saul.

 

Similarly, Phillips would have no power if the people were not looking for such a person, and such a power structure, in which to invest their egos.  In helping to build such a system, they feed off the power of the group, and their leader's persona, even as it divests them, and others who are unwillingly caught up in this scheme, of their own self-determination.

 

One of my favorite lines ever is stated by Cora Munro, in The Last of the Mohicans. She finally realizes, as she is being pressed by her father and her would-be suitor to trust their judgment in the face of uncertainty, that “I would rather make the gravest of mistakes than surrender my own judgment”.

 

That, to me, represents the core of the issue with groups like VF.  They would have women--and men--cede their individual judgment to someone else, to keep them safe from the uncertainty of the future.  But, it's not just individual judgment they give up--it's the wisdom of their peers, the community of like-minded that they lose as well in the deal.  The very heart of authoritarianism is so pernicious, it seeks to divide us not just from ourselves, and our own ability to choose and to think for ourselves, but also to divide us from others around us.

 

From those without the group--who are evil, and sinful, and not to be trusted.  And also from those within, who may not be true followers, and who are gossips and disloyal and always viewed with suspicion.  Those gossipers and thieves, who seek to undermine our Beloved Leader, the divine investure of all our paranoia and clannishness and every negative human trait we possess as a species.

 

Truly an impressive post. Well said.
 

[FaithManor]

:hurray:  :hurray: :hurray: Very well done Aelwydd! Hats off to you! 

 

Faith

[Seasider]

Truly an impressive post. Well said.

I agree. Well done, Aelwydd. I felt your last paragraph hit close to home; you perfectly verbalized my personal experience in authoritarian church culture.

[Liz CA]

For Tibbie and anyone else who is interested:

 

The book on "Abnormal Psychology" by Dr. M. Stone describes pedophiles in the same vein as other serial offenders. They have usually suffered at the hands of adults / parents / authority figures and according to the psychiatrist author of this book, reversal of those tendencies are typically not sustained or frequent. Constant supervision is recommended.

[JumpyTheFrog]

Great post, Aelydd!

 

I think the women who seek out these patriarchal churches are like the Israelites demanding a king. I've even read about women trying to drag their husbands into it and then getting upset when he doesn't want the role of a "godly" king. Israel wasn't content with God being their king and neither are some of these women. 

 

At the family-integrated church I went to (which is basically a Vision Forum denomination), people had some serious cognitive dissonance. Many of the families were libertarian-ish and voted/campaigned for Ron Paul. I'm not trying to make this a political post. I just want to point out that they couldn't see the cognitive dissonance needed to politically get rid of most laws and regulations but also be Reconstructionists. One of the RP followers even wanted to go back to stoning adulterers!

 

I think what it really came down to was that many of these men wanted power over their wives and kids, but didn't want the government to have any say in their lives, short of banning violent crimes. The "head" elder (they were theoretically all equal in power, but from what I could tell, he was the one who got his way), was also a RP fan, yet wanted to control his family, too. He barely allowed his teenage daughter to play pickup sports after church, because, in his view, sports are "war games," and women shouldn't be in the military (or outside the house), so they shouldn't want to play soccer or softball.

[JumpyTheFrog]

I think I forgot to clearly make my biggest point: The VF followers I know seemed incapable of noticing major cognitive dissonance. I imagine VF followers elsewhere are much the same. The "true believers" will work hard to find ways to downplay what he did or ignore it, rather than rethink the theology they've been sold.

[Aelwydd]

:hurray:  :hurray: :hurray: Very well done Aelwydd! Hats off to you! 

 

Faith

 

No, no Faith--you're the one who gets the cupcake. :)

 

I'm really grateful for the information you have shared about this movement.  It is becoming harder and harder to follow the infiltration of groups like this into mainstream society through legal, religious, educational, and political means.  I've seen such a resurgence of these kinds of backwards and provincial attitudes towards women (and other groups) that it can't just be accidental.

 

Here in Texas, there have been a number of reports of women having trouble voting, because of the new I.D. law that passed recently. Because married and divorced women will often use their maiden names or married names interchangeably (and it is legal to do so), the names on their drivers' licenses may not match what's on their voter ID cards.  As a result, they must sign an affidavit to vote.  That seems relatively harmless, right?  Just trying to ensure no voter fraud here, folks, move along, nothing to see.

 

Except that those votes would likely be considered provisional, in that in a close election, they may be ignored or discounted, if the courts do not uphold them.

 

There will be fierce denials of this as an attempt to defraud women of their right to vote, because this has been framed in a Democrate versus Republican debate.  As if only one side stands to gain. 

 

Well, in the short term, Republicans most likely would stand to gain, because women tend to vote in favor of Democrat candidates, and the voter I.D. was conceived and passed almost entirely by Republicans.

 

But, as the current Democratic administration in the White House has greatly profited from and enjoyed the powers expanded by a Republican adminstration, I guarantee that any encroachment on women's voting rights is going to be expanded upon and enjoyed by both parties in the future.

 

How are away are we from states demanding that I.D. is not enough to ensure you are you? At what point does it become a contest to see how much proof those in authority can extract from you to determine your identify? A check on your gun registration to see if you are in compliance? A DNA sample? A scan of your RFID chip?

 

That sounds Orwellian perhaps and a diversion from the topic.  But, my point is that authoritarian is increasing, not decreasing.  We eat food that we do not grow or hunt.  We are educated in schools that, either governmental or private, have a stake in ensuring our compliance.  Self-education is considered less credible than a degree from an expensive university based upon completion of a random selection of courses and payment of a ridiculous number of fees. Make education something of a privilege, instead of a path that every person should walk to greater understanding of themselves and the world they live in.

 

We do not make our clothes. We do not fashion for ourselves our own sense of God and the cosmos--we are indoctrinated. We are wage-slaves who understand it is the right of the private citizen who can pay, and the right of wealthy corporations, and powerful politicians, to take land and water and resources for the good of a few and the expense of the many.

 

I'll say it again.  Authoritarianism is growing.  We are infected with it.

 

This is not a rant against community or government. We actually suffer from a lack of community and real government. It's just my personal disaffection with how I feel we are all being reduced to being cogs in a machine. I feel like we are losing our democracy, if we haven't already lost it, because our agency has been so effectively stifled, redirected, controlled.

 

Like those girls in QF groups, we are being reduced to having little to no skills to support ourselves.  Why do we have so few apprenticeships? As I said, most of us scarcely know how to grow our food, hunt, know how to think and evaluate information critically.  To build our houses and our communities to exist on what resources actually are available, instead of what is siphoned off by political-industrial complex from other regions or places. Our economy is anemic, not because of this stimulus, or that tax increase, but because nothing we individually do or don't do has any effect on it.  We are part of the machine. We are meant to serve.  And we are given bread and circus to keep us distracted.

 

Understand, I am not saying we must all hunt or farm or build our own houses to be autonomous.  I am saying that as a group, we have lost countless skillsets that would have been shared by a community to support itself. Growing food is not a way of life; it's a commodity.  Art is not an expression of our vision; it is a commodity. We have been undermined.

 

And as I said in my first post, the real b*tch is how authoritarianism separates us from others.  Well, how united are we now as a people? How well do we relate to our fellow citizens?  Or, are our fellow citizens reduced to, just like a VF-mindset, an "us-versus-them" dynamic?

 

I'm tired.  I see these posts on patriarchalism, as a discrete phenomenon, and I think, but I see elements of that all over.  I see authoritarianism creeping.  I see VF helping to form perspectives, along with other influential groups, and these perspectives maturing into hard line, glassy eyed malevolence that threatens to trample over anyone who fails to submit to their power.

[Slartibartfast]

Er....they check my voter registration when I renew or change my driver's license.

 

 

Do all states not do that?

[Aelwydd]

Er....they check my voter registration when I renew or change my driver's license.

 

 

Do all states not do that?

 

 

In Texas, there was a law on the books from the 60's that women had to have both their maiden and married names, even if that is not the legal name they decided to take.  That is playing into it somewhat.  I don't know how much "checking" is done, since apparently almost a third of women in Texas may be affected by the law, according to several news agencies.  If this article is to be believed, one in seven voters in Dallas County has been affected.  It is affecting male voters, too.

 

As I said, I don't find it so much the fault of one party, as I do a mostly corrupt system, from which all parties involved apparently benefit.  The affidavit idea, in fact, came from the other party. 

 

O, what a tangled web we weave, and all that.

[*Lulu*]

Er....they check my voter registration when I renew or change my driver's license.


Do all states not do that?

I don't know.

Over 7 years ago my sister married in the state she was living and on the voter rolls in. She filled out every proper form, changed her drivers license and SS card, etc., etc. she and DBIL bought a home that puts them voting at the same polling location as always......

After 7 years and a dozen complaints, my sister is in the darn rolls twice. Once under her married name, once under her maiden.

Makes me wonder how common an issue it is?

[Aelwydd]

I agree. Well done, Aelwydd. I felt your last paragraph hit close to home; you perfectly verbalized my personal experience in authoritarian church culture.

 

Thank you, Seasider. My dh and I are also survivors of an authoritarian church culture.  I don't mean to stir bad memories; it's also difficult for me to dwell too long on that period in our marriage.

[JumpyTheFrog]

I ran across a particularly pointed scripture about this time which clarified for me what was going on.  It has been a great help to me in identifying cultish behavior.  It's from the Woe to You's of Jesus in Matthew.  "Woe to you, you Scribes, you Pharisees.  Hypocrites! ... You bind on men's backs burdens too heavy for them to bear and you do NOTHING to help them lift." 

 

Yes! That's what these groups do. Apparently the Phillips family has had several nannies over the years. Either they are going against what they teach (hiring a woman to work outside the home) or else they have volunteers. Either way, most of their quiverfull followers have neither the money to hire nannies nor anybody willing to volunteer to do this. Anyone making their living off of telling people to have unlimited kids, no matter what the circumstances, ought to be willing to do the same without the help of a free nanny, while living in a (rumored to be) 6,000 square foot "parsonage."

 

At our church, most of the families were well off (programmers, doctors, engineers), with some construction workers mixed in. One family had endless money problems and was living at or below the poverty line. One elder in particular frequently said that charity should be done by churches, not the government. However, after several years of helping the family in small ways, they finally told this family "No more, the wife needs to get a job." When it came down to it, these elders, who believed that women should stay home, announced they weren't going to help the family anymore, even though the wife had nothing to put on a resume and was very ill and didn't have enough money for all the medical treatment she needed.

 

Not too long after, the husband started talking about getting into a new industry, because his job opportunities had dried up. This time the elders stuck their nose in it and said they didn't like the idea because the job could take him away from his family too much. They had no alternative ideas, so we found a way for him to get started in this new career. He has a job now - it isn't great, but it's more reliable and he can continue it far longer than he could stay in the old career.

 

These elders were like the Pharisees. They put burdens on the family and did nothing to help when they struggled. Unfortunately, the family considers all these people good friends and stays, despite the hypocrisy and the way these families look down on them.

 

I am so glad I got out of there. We've been out three years! YAY!

[Mrs Mungo]

 
One of the things I noticed about the participants in the patriarchal group is that almost without exception, all of them were raised in non-Christian homes.  They had not seen how Christian life works itself out in daily practice and were of a particularly zealous nature, and so they grabbed onto something that had a lot of rules to follow. 

This is something I have noticed as well. Strict rule followers and particularly legalistic people are often people who were not raised in the faith. They don't know heresy when they see it. This makes them vulnerable and easy to control and lead astray.

[LucyStoner]

Er....they check my voter registration when I renew or change my driver's license.

 

 

Do all states not do that?

 

Um, no.  It seems incredible doesn't it?  Not all states have this.  Being able to register at the DMV or being automatically registered unless you say no at the DMV is called "motor voter" in get out the vote/voting laws parlance and it is often lobbied against by groups that benefit from low voter turnout.  I won't say more besides that if a campaign strategy hinges on reducing voter turnout, it ought to be considered a pathetic and dishonorable strategy.  

[Aura]

My brother adheres to this patriarchal/VF view. He was raised in a Christian home, and my parents, while not VF-crazy, were/are legalistic. So it isn't just non-Christians or those from non-legalistic homes that subscribe to this view.

 

I, for a time, tried to follow this view, too. Fortunately for me, my dh was not into it, and I have since left that behind. But I realize how easy it is to get pulled into this type of thinking. I was seeking out my own spirituality: my desire to know God. I think that desire exists in many, if not most, people, but when you're raised to believe that "knowing God" or "having a personal relationship with God" comes only through following specific doctrines, then it's easy for others to manipulate scriptures and lead you further into closed* doctrines.

 

IMO, it is a very dangerous thing to believe that you have the only one correct doctrine. Jesus preached against "commandments of men," and I get angry when people use scripture to try to justify their own doctrines. Jesus's doctrine was very simple: Love God; love others; love yourself.

 

Aelwydd, I think you brought out a very good point about authoritarianism increasing. It does seem to be that way, doesn't it? I have noticed that so many people, from so many different backgrounds, beliefs, political and religious views are becoming very defensive about their way being the right way. It's very sad, and I wonder what it will take for people to realize that it's okay for others to have opposing views.

 

 

 

*closed doctrines is what I refer to as a doctrine or set of beliefs that do not allow others to disagree (i.e. if you don't believe like I do, you're going to hell)

[LucyStoner]

See, I see these movements as the last futile battle waged by overly nostalgic people who aren't willing to admit they have lost the war already.   As a few women and men become more and more comically attached to rigid, authoritarian, absolute gender roles that harken back to a greatly romanticized and inaccurate past, more and more women and men seem to be increasingly shedding these bounds and living their life as they see fit.  VF Ministries is a 2.1 million dollar outfit?  That is a teensy, almost insignificant but for the real lives hurt by it, "movement".  Gothard/ATI is substantially weakened from his height of visibility.  Women are voting, working, driving, caring for families, demanding their spouses not be jackasses.  Men are changing diapers, enjoying more family time, pursuing interests that were previously considered out of bounds for them.  Women are not going to be forced back any more than good men are willing to try and force them.  There is a huge sea change between even my progressive leaning 71 year old father and my 34 year old husband.  Is it all sunshine and roses for people who favor equal rights for both genders and consider the sexes equally important?  No.  But we've won the war.  It's only a matter of time; when, not if.  These VF dudes are all but irrelevant and caricatures of a comedy show skit.  I grew up exposed to but not in sync with these sorts and I don't dispute that it it real and troubling.  But I just don't see it as the norm at all, even in areas far more conservative than my admittedly progressive bubble.  The vast majority of conservative women I know are fierce, strong and expect good treatment from their husbands.  They tend to expect the same rights as most any woman does.  And they have the law and the culture on their side.  

 

The moral arc of the universe is long and bends towards justice and all that.  

 

 

[Slartibartfast]

This is something I have noticed as well. Strict rule followers and particularly legalistic people are often people who were not raised in the faith. They don't know heresy when they see it. This makes them vulnerable and easy to control and lead astray.

 

I think our upbringing is a bit unusual if one thinks about it. Our mom was a bit of a rebel in a home that leaned patriarchal and our dad was raised with a strong willed mother.

 

We were  raised not to tolerate this sort of thing. Not a lot of people are.

[Cricket]

I think the women who seek out these patriarchal churches are like the Israelites demanding a king. I've even read about women trying to drag their husbands into it and then getting upset when he doesn't want the role of a "godly" king. Israel wasn't content with God being their king and neither are some of these women.

This is a very interesting take on it. I easily could have gotten involved with one of these patriarchial churches. Early in my marriage my dh didn't attend church with us because he worked seven days a week. I wanted him to be a spiritual leader and resented carrying all of that responsibility. I knew some patriarchy-leaning families and was quite jealous of how they looked (on the outside at least!) as if they had it all figured out and had wonderful family dynamics. These women had supportive husbands and could just be home and homeschool and the husband took care of everything. My dh was not doing what he "should" have been doing. If I could have, I would have dragged dh to one of these churches so he could learn how he was "supposed" to be. I'm very thankful that my ideas didn't come to fruition! It would have been disastrous for us and our family. I think your take on it is exactly right.

One of the things I noticed about the participants in the patriarchal group is that almost without exception, all of them were raised in non-Christian homes. They had not seen how Christian life works itself out in daily practice and were of a particularly zealous nature, and so they grabbed onto something that had a lot of rules to follow. But that is not Christianity.

I'm not sure about it being mostly people raised in non-Christian homes but I agree that there is something about rules that attract people. I know sometimes I struggle with knowing what to do in certain situations. Having it all spelled out is easy. Also the drab, ordinary, daily Christian life is not always exciting and revolutionary. At least it doesn't feel that way. It's not radical enough. Some people are attracted to living an against-the-grain lifestyle because it proves they are more devoted, holier, and godlier than other Christians. It's not surprising many of these families are also attracted to homeschooling. :-) There also seems to be a sense of security rules provide--"if I do this or that, then God will find me worthy" and some also think this will guarantee that their children will be believers.

[HappyCrazyMama]

 

 

One of the things I noticed about the participants in the patriarchal group is that almost without exception, all of them were raised in non-Christian homes.  They had not seen how Christian life works itself out in daily practice and were of a particularly zealous nature, and so they grabbed onto something that had a lot of rules to follow. 

 

This is something I have noticed as well. Strict rule followers and particularly legalistic people are often people who were not raised in the faith. They don't know heresy when they see it. This makes them vulnerable and easy to control and lead astray.

 

That was true in my case. I had no spiritual foundation and they had *the* Godly path. :001_rolleyes: I was also one whose dh didn't agree, thanks be to God. B)

[Carol in Cal.]

Ya know, when I worked in engineering in the early 80's, I experienced the same phenomenon.  I would say something in a meeting, no one would respond, and then 3 minutes later some guy would repeat it and be a total hero.  I got to the point after a while where when that happened sometimes I would say, "Yes, exactly what I said.  Now here is how to implement my idea."  Or something similar.  So flippin annoying.

[8circles]

Ya know, when I worked in engineering in the early 80's, I experienced the same phenomenon.  I would say something in a meeting, no one would respond, and then 3 minutes later some guy would repeat it and be a total hero.  I got to the point after a while where when that happened sometimes I would say, "Yes, exactly what I said.  Now here is how to implement my idea."  Or something similar.  So flippin annoying.

 

This has happened to me in many different situations I think it's a universal phenomenon.

[WishboneDawn]

nm

[DawnM]

I have been blissfully enjoying my vacation......and now have been reading this......haven't read the entire thing yet.  

 

Whew!

 

So the photos were taken down because one of those girls is the one he was inappropriate with?  I really feel for that poor girl.

 

http://www.patheos.com/blogs/lovejoyfeminism/2013/11/how-doug-phillips-wreaked-havoc-on-my-family.html

[Blueridge]

nm

[FaithManor]

Blueridge,this is exactly what I think will happen. I do not believe his behavior will change. The cards
are stacked in his favor. Same old same and history repeats itself. It happens so often that I'd b
utterly dumbfounded if it didn't happen that way probably assuming the perpetrator was run over buy a
Mack truck or something.

Faith

[JumpyTheFrog]

Blueridge,this is exactly what I think will happen. I do not believe his behavior will change. The cards
are stacked in his favor. Same old same and history repeats itself. 

 

Yet somehow, we are branded "bitter" or "gossips" by those who believe that anyone who says he has repented is telling the truth. Sorry, no, Jesus didn't teach us to be naive. He specifically said to "Be as wise as serpents and as innocent as doves." Well, the "true believers" may have the dove part down, but they are forgetting the first part. Until they stop being so naive, they will continue to be fleeced by wolve$ dressed as $heep / $o-called pastor$.

[JaneEyre]

Years ago, before I joined the Roman Catholic Church, when I was searching for the "right" Church (and homeschool approach),  I was very drawn to this. 

 

We even visited R.C.Sproles Jr.'s church, St. Peter, in Bristol, TN.  Everyone was very nice and I received 2 or 3 invitations for dinner that night with different families.  I remember all the women and girls wore head coverings and ALL the families homeschooled.  The women from there that I talked to later at a homeschool get-together did not seem weak at all, as a matter-of- fact they seemed to have very strong views and were even a tad bossy about it, but not in a rude way if that makes sense...

 

I was leaning towards teaching my daughter that she needed to be a SAH and things like that, but what really started me questioning it, besides predestination, was when we all listened to the audio of Elsie Dimsmore together.  That story got me thinking.  I just did not think that was the way it was meant to be.

[JumpyTheFrog]

We also "got hooked" at our crazy church because of the hospitality shown by the members. We felt like they had a real sense of community that other churches didn't have. We lost it all when we left and although much of it was a facade, for a while at least, I felt like I fit in when I didn't in high school or college. That's why I think our friends stay, even though they know how poorly we were treated when we left. If they ever did decide to leave, it would be even more devastating for them than us, since it is almost their entire social circle.

DH and I learned from this that we should never have all our friends be from the same church, business, or other group. If the group blows up, we don't want to lose most of our friends again. People diversify their investments and we've decided we need to diversify where we find our friends.

[Juniper]

Hoppy, that was one of our hardest lessons as well. It wiped is out socially. We learned to never again have all of our relationships in the same basket. :(

[DawnM]

Wow.  that is awful.

 

My only true best friends are from my childhood.  We live all over the place but get together as often as we possibly can (just got back from a trip to Seattle to see a couple who live there.)  

 

I thank God for the internet and unlimited long distance, but I sometimes do long for really close friends closer by.

 

Dawn

 

We also "got hooked" at our crazy church because of the hospitality shown by the members. We felt like they had a real sense of community that other churches didn't have. We lost it all when we left and although much of it was a facade, for a while at least, I felt like I fit in when I didn't in high school or college. That's why I think our friends stay, even though they know how poorly we were treated when we left. If they ever did decide to leave, it would be even more devastating for them than us, since it is almost their entire social circle.

DH and I learned from this that we should never have all our friends be from the same church, business, or other group. If the group blows up, we don't want to lose most of our friends again. People diversify their investments and we've decided we need to diversify where we find our friends.

 

[unsinkable]

http://www.visionforumministries.org/
The Vision Forum Ministries Board has shut down the Vision Forum Ministries part of this operation. Just FYI.

What did this ministry do?

Could it be a legal CYA move?

[ZooRho]

http://www.visionforumministries.org/

The Vision Forum Ministries Board has shut down the Vision Forum Ministries part of this operation.  Just FYI.

interesting. 

[unsinkable]

It was probably the speaking tours/publishing house/convention part of the org.
And even if it is CYA, there are limitations to the effectiveness of that move. At any rate, the megaphone for their message is shut down.

I say, "Good for the VF Board."

So he was involved in this ministry part, the sales part and a separate church? I'm a bit confuzzled, not that I'll lose any sleep over it.

[JumpyTheFrog]

It was probably the speaking tours/publishing house/convention part of the org.
And even if it is CYA, there are limitations to the effectiveness of that move. At any rate, the megaphone for their message is shut down.

VF Inc, however is still open for business and still selling all their patriarchal garbage. The megaphone is still going, as far as I'm concerned, as long as they are in business.

[JumpyTheFrog]

So he was involved in this ministry part, the sales part and a separate church? .

Yes. I believe the business started first and then later the "ministry" part was added. I read the ministry ran the expensive retreats and European trips. I don't know where his church fits in on the timeline. In any case, he was very into wearing costumes and pretending like he knew what it was like to be in battle. I remember reading about him "knighting" either a son or son-in-law.

He also liked to talk about women getting a "PhD" in home economics from one of their retreats or DVDs. He must really underestimate the work involved in getting a PhD! He also liked to call himself a "bioethics expert" and wrote in the Samaritan Ministries newsletter a few years ago that women with ectopic pregnancies are guilty of abortion if they follow the doctor's advice and get treated (because supposedly one time a mother and baby both survived without treatment). I wish I were kidding, but I read the article with my own eyes. No matter where the baby is implanted, he considers it murder to have it removed.

[JumpyTheFrog]

We'll have to wait and see if VF Inc still has booths at conventions or not.

[Juniper]

I wonder if DW owns the Inc. side of things. If so, he may be the only one who could shut it down. IT would be very telling on the repentance issue, although I do feel for the families that would lose a source of income. OTOH, I hate the idea of people making money of it, I just wish there was a way to transition them towards another job. :(

[ZooRho]

I wonder if DW owns the Inc. side of things. If so, he may be the only one who could shut it down. IT would be very telling on the repentance issue, although I do feel for the families that would lose a source of income. OTOH, I hate the idea of people making money of it, I just wish there was a way to transition them towards another job. :(

I think you are confusing the two Guys, Doug Phillips is the guy with VF

Doug Wilson is a different person.

[JumpyTheFrog]

OTOH, I hate the idea of people making money of it, I just wish there was a way to transition them towards another job. :(

 

Yes, Phillips owns VF Inc and stated a few days ago he will retain ownership and continue to run it. If VF has had booths at conventions in the past (I've never been to one), I assume that will continue, even if he, personally won't be speaking. (That still doesn't rule out associated people speaking at conventions.)

 

As far as his employees, if VF Inc has to lay people off, they will be in a tough financial spot. The wives won't dare look for work and some of the men may not have many other options. VF promotes men working from home in family businesses, even though most businesses people start fail. It puts these people in a tough spot, because they've been taught they need a family business to be godly, all while being discouraged (the men) or practically forbidden (the women) from attending college or even getting a rigorous academic homeschool diploma.