This is just a flyby post, but I was reading on Doug’s Blog this evening and came across this quote that he provided by Cotton Mather:
“I am sure they [students at Harvard] do not show such a veneration for Aristotle as is express’d at Queen’s College in Oxford; where they read Aristotle on their knees, and those who take degrees are sworn to defend his philosophy.” Cotton Mather, Great Works of Christ in America, Vol II pg. 21,The Banner of Truth Trust, 1979. Reprint of 1852 edition.
Seriously, I get the quote, but here’s what I don’t get. Doug seems to be against college for anyone but himself. I mean, he’s a lawyer, isn’t he? He’s been through at least six years of school if he’s a member of the bar. Is college just okay for him and bad news for everyone else? Or is it because he wants people to go to Vision Forum’s “college?”
I guess it’s a little like Wilson’s pseudo-seminary that proudly isn’t accredited nor is it seeking to be, where they’re cranking out a few Wilson clones at a time, taught by teachers with no advanced degree in the subject matter they teach. I bet they collect tuition as though they were accredited, though.
If people get select and get an education at the accredited institution of higher learning of their choice, people like Doug I and Doug II are a lot less likely to hoodwink them into thinking that they have anything of value to offer academically.
And that goes double for women, I think. They appear especially fearful of women getting much of any education at all. Why, just look what even a layperson’s educated understanding of human reproduction does to the tissue of lies Phillips recently tried to peddle concerning ectopic pregnancy. (That was Phillips, wasn’t it? I’m getting my dougs and P-names and patrios a little muddled; they all sound a lot alike to me when they get to ranting…)
Psalmist,
Excellent response! It is far easier to control people when they have not been brought up with an ability to think for themselves. Intellect involves asking questions and examining different beliefs. Through higher education this is encouraged in both men and women.
People are far less likely to act as mindless sheep and simply follow the words of one man if they have been taught (and encouraged) to think for themselves. Yea, and Mr. Phillips can sell them whatever thing he wants to peddle if they have no ability to really examine the authenticity and the truth of what he is saying.
It’s a bunch of things.
Scaremongering. Self-righteousness. Advertising.
The post title is scaremongering. The quote itself is revealing in that DP choose Mather and not that of a 21st century writer or theologian. What does it prove? Nothing except that Phillips does what is expedient for business. Otherwise expound upon it, he’s a preacher isn’t he? What’s your point, Phillips? Give us some 21st century examples to back up the implied condemnation of today’s universities.
It reminds me of the way the truly arrived in a reformed group of which we were once a part, would stand around after Sunday sermons complaining about and condemning everyone but themselves. I was so bold once to ask the whiny brother of a visiting overbearing preacher, “So, what’s your point?” Without provocation, he had begun going on and on about how awful everything and everyone was outside of this particular reformed group. And how bad that group over there was and how bad X group is and how bad it all is everywhere but the very earth beneath his holy feet (I jest about his feet). His voice kept trilling up along with his nose. One man, in this post-sermon huddle comprised of myself and three men, began to laugh after I asked my question. He got it. “Ohhhh…Ohh…Ohh..” the whiner whined, “I’m just saying…”
And off he went a-whining again. The sky is falling in.
This is what the self-righteous do.
This is how the “we have arrived” behave.
Scroll down and read the plug Phillips made by posting a “rah rah letter” titled “Canadian Friends of Vision Forum”. Now this is advertising without the scaremongering.
Wedged between these two posts is a straightforward advertisement for his father’s services.
Vision Forum is a BUSINESS.
Doug’s blog is a business tool.
He will publish that which is expedient for business using various techniques. He focuses on not too recent history, creates cosy rosy vignettes or dramatic suppositional or emotional tear inducing narratives written to convince the reader of a purported truth.
Read the entry “Journey to the End of the Earth” for July 31. It begins with an odd account portrayed as true and then not as true and then switches into dreamy idealization of a wretched time in history. It becomes verbose. It becomes sappy. It almost becomes delusional. So does Martha Stewart when she writes to sell kitchen gadgetry.
They are selling. They use history to sell.
Lately VF has been fixated upon the history of the British Isles. Kings and Norsemen and dragons, oh my. They use romance to sell. They use Ionic Christianity to sell. They post photos of the faithful standing about presumably cold and wet windswept centuries old cemetaries, tots in tow. (FIV! Family integrated vacation.) Do they seem like they wish they’d been there? Does it seem a little disconnected from reality? Is this a new Christian Holy Land? Have they realized they need to sell another vision to appeal to those not American? Will I trade in my neo-Victorian Edwardian cum Hippie cum Prairie dresses for bonnie wee plaides and tweed driving hats? Will VF be selling fruitcake next?
The problem I see is the attachment of the word “ministries”, to that which is clearly a for profit business. What does Christ have to do with this is my question?
“While running a Christian newspaper in college, Doug met Beall, a young woman who ran a ministry to unwed mothers called “Alternatives to Abortion” (interestingly enough, Beall herself had been adopted). Five years later, on “the happiest day of my life — except for every day after that,” Doug and Beall were married. Doug attended law school for the purpose of developing skills that would help him defend home educators and Christian parents from State tyranny. He graduated from George Mason School of Law, where he studied under judges Robert Bork and Doug Ginsberg.” (From Doug’s bio at the Vision Forum Ministries website)
“Even more, Dr. Johnson and his bride served as a veritable covering to Beall, then living away from home and teaching in a Christian school, in the years leading up to our wedding in Believer’s Chapel, where Dr. Johnson taught.” (From Doug’s Blog, February 4, 2004, his tribute to Dr. Johnson)
Jennie Chancey — another one who speaks out frequently against college, especially for women — also earned a bachelor’s degree from King College in Tennessee. Although her webpage with this information appears to have been “scrubbed” from the internet, a biography of her father, Jeff Ethell, includes the following:
“The Ethells also home schooled their three children for 13 years, graduating each from high school with honors and college scholarships. David and Jennie graduated from King College summa cum laude with 3.9 scholastic grade point averages while Julie designed two of Jeff’s books.”
While these are examples of the “Do as we say, not as we do” mentality among the patrio-folks, I find it sad that these people are so disparaging about higher education for others. Assuming that God’s plan for *them* was to go to college, why wouldn’t God lead others to do so, in full righteousness and obedience to His will? I am truly mystified by all of this.
Yes. They should stop being hypocrites. If college is wrong, they need to repent of it. If it is not wrong, they need to stop lying and saying it is.
This is somewhat tongue-in-cheek, but I live about 3 miles from Liberty University and if their professors are indicative of the educational system as a whole, I’m opposed to college as well. You’d be better off getting your education from Life and Us magazines, maybe with a smattering of Architectural Digest thrown in for good measure.
Richard,
I live around the same area and would be interested in why you say that. We’ve lived here less than a year and I don’t know much about Liberty. If you’d rather email me privately instead of posting here, just let me know. Thanks.
I don’t get the tendency for fundies to demonize a good education.
If I was a skeptic, I would dare say he may well be intimidated by the prospect of an educated audience.
But that wouldn’t be nice, would it.
Of course, if women were to be nothing but, “Helpmeets,” (a very nasty translation of the original Hebrew, by the way,) and we are to be kept barefoot, pregnant, housebound, and mindlessly submissive why pursue an education at all?
Of course, my family will be roasting in hell because four of my five daughters is either in college or has an advanced degree (number five is going into the fourth grade.) Oh, yes, and I’m a student as well.
JohannaS – I’m on Facebook (Richard Gelina – Lynchburg), email: gelina@adelphia.net, Yahoo Messenger: gelina1961
thank you for this original post! again, it was well written
Anne2 wrote: “It’s a bunch of things.
Scaremongering. Self-righteousness. Advertising.”
Anne2 your reply was brilliant!
Along with the scaremongering, self-righteous, advertising, using a quote by Cotton Mather is the signal for others to fall down at the feet of the “all-wise” one.
All must follow what he says and does because he is so “smart” and “intelligent” … but no where (except here and, increasingly, a few other places) does any one ask where his brain or his wife brain were educated at
This Cotton Mather statement seems to me to represent Mather’s frustration at a current time over a particular situation and NOT a global, universal statement. Obviously, if folks have to scrounge around and can only come up with ONE statement without giving the supportive texts (i.e., the REST of what Mather said), they are obviously scraping the bottom of the barrell
I am so sick and tired of folks taking the reputation of others that are dead through the muck and mire to promote themselves, make themselves seem more important than they are, sell product, imply how “intelligent” they are by finding obscure quotes that may or may not support their hypothesis, and on and on …
it’s sickening
that is why web sites like this are so very, very, very important
I have always been flummoxed by the negative hypocritical attitude coming from the American homeschool community toward higher education for both men and women. It is not an attitude shared by the greater homeschool community here in Canada and certainly not the Canadian Christian community. Education in Canada is highly valued and of value. Everyone recognizes there are good schools and so so schools. But that is not the issue. This issue is not grading the education but rather, “will this pay my way through life without pushing pennies around the table?” The value of that little piece of paper is found in future paycheques not random professors or books.
Self-education will get you either limited self-employment or through the door if you fall back on “it’s not what you know but who you know”. Vision Forum adeptly demonstrates this principle. However, you will be holding down low pay part-times or on and off pogey without a college diploma or university degree. Professors and books won’t tide you over or buy your future livelihood anymore than will churches or christians who preach “go and be filled” will come to your aid when the going gets tough. When VF sets up a social welfare system to take care of all their uneducated daughters and sons who get left out in the cold because they are unprepared to make their way in the real world, I’ll sit up and take notice. The ant prepares herself in summer for the inevitable winter to come. So should we. Education is an insurance policy.
A week or so ago over on TW we were tee heeing about the armour of the Lord Pj’s. We will likely see more and more of this as proponents for no education make inroads. I can grow up to be a physician or I can market hokey Bibleware. The bottom line remains the same….the bottom line must be met. To me it makes sense to spend less time spinning our wheels wondering about the value of the education and look at the value in terms of future dividends.
I would not want to dissuade anyone from obtaining an education based soley on whether it was of inherent worth, (excepting matchbook schools or known diploma mills.) Some christians do this regarding finding a mate, no one is good enough.
When my sons would whine about some insipid professor, I’d remind them, “play the game, take the baton and keep running.” We need to emphasize, how to best use the abilities and opportunities God has given to prepare oneself and be of service to my family, others, God. If God has given one an aptitude or opportunity for X, I think it would be wrong to not go after X and fulfill this end of the deal.
I think it ironic that VF appears afraid of ideas. Big bad school. Quit blaming schools and start looking at the home.
“Obviously, if folks have to scrounge around and can only come up with ONE statement without giving the supportive texts (i.e., the REST of what Mather said), they are obviously scraping the bottom of the barrell”
I hunted up that reference before I posted last night. It’s found amongst a bunch of latin of which I never got much past in school but the conjugating of amo, amos amat. I suppose in Phillips case, veni vidi, vici would be more appropriate.
It was late and the passage wherein this quote lies is typically long-winded. (Imagine the slogging it would be had the puritans had computers.) I wouldn’t want to comment necessarily without digging through the latin.
I’m new here and learning alot…thank you for all your posts. I’m curious about you all think of the “push for Puritan ideals”….as has been said, Doug Phillips has been “educated” and many of his counterparts as well..ie..Voddie Bachum (at a Southern Baptist Seminary) These two men refer often to the Puritans and the way this group of people did things, returning to their ideals, etc., etc….I don’t hold as many degrees as these two men, but I have read enough to know that the Puritan ideal…”a city on a hill”…didn’t work…it took less than 30 years for their plan to fail…yet, isn’t this the idea that is being spread among the FIC churches…the “out breed them” mentality? Am I missing something here?
Brenda
Brenda,
Vision Forum et. al. are Johnnie-come-latelies as to promoting the Puritans. Banner of Trust, reformed presbyterians and reformed baptists have for years and years promoted the Puritan mother-lode. It is a rare Reformed conference, sermon, bookservice indeed if ever, that does not incessantly quote and promote the puritans. They will generally acknowledge that the Massachusetts Bay Colony failed but give the ubiquitous excuse, “because of sin”. In my reading it has really been that people just plain and simple refused to comply with the madness, control, legalism, abuse, hypocrisy. Read the account of Anne Hutchinson. Winthrop doesn’t come off too well.
Because one utopia failed, never gives men the reason to not try and try again. Apparently some tried a few years ago with a settlement in Virginia. Others here could fill you in better than I about that fiasco. There are rumblings that Geoff Botkin is looking to create a utopia in New Zealand.
This group also believes in taking over civil government to implement their religious view. Google up dominionism, dominionist, reconstructionists. It is not a very pretty picture what they want to do. You’ll come up with Rushdoony, Bahnsen, North and more.
When they weren’t hauling water, the Puritans spent a lot of time examining their belly-buttons or condemning those different from themselves. My experience has been that the same holds true in reformed Baptist and Presbyterian groups today. Phillips is one of these. I don’t know where Bachum comes in if he is from the SB.
For years these above reformed groups have poo-poohed the big mainstream Baptists similar to the SB.
Not Calvinistic.
Not Calvinistic enough.
Not reformed.
Not reformed enough.
Don’t practise the regulative principle.
Don’t use the BLUE trinity hymnal.
They have special music, gasp! And they don’t do it during the offering to get around the regulative principle thingy.
They clap!
They wave hands!
No creed but the Bible.
They pass the offering plate instead of discreetly putting the basket at the front of the church for all to see who goes up and contributes.
They have POT LUCK suppers gasp!…not pot providence.
They don’t somberly have evening and morning services and by golly you had better be there or your salvation is called into question.
They have fun on Sunday…GASP! I mean the Lord’s Day.
They don’t make their Lord’s Day dinner guests sit all afternoon on hard chairs in the kitchen reciting catechism.
What’s catechism? (I actually asked this of a reformed family…while still a sweet uninformed Baptist girl…I rotfl now.)
It’s ok to wear shorts and an open neck shirt. It’s ok for the ladies to go sleeveless.
It’s ok to use the pew Bible.
It’s ok to eat arrowroots or animal crackers during the service if it goes too long. But it never does, so nobody has to.
THEY GO OUT TO EAT AFTER THE SERVICE! Faint…..
They talk about their life from the previous week and don’t quote a puritan or scripture to make it pass inspection.
Their services let out at 12 o’clock noon so people’s dinner doesn’t burn in the oven at home or they can beat the lunch rush at Swiss Chalet.
They’re ideal vacation is not another church conference.
It’s allowed to have fun.
They read women authors.
They are heavy into missions.
They can’t name the big gun puritans.
They don’t practise church abuse…I mean discipline.
I once mentioned to an older christian woman in a mainstream Baptist denomination here in Canada who came from a wonderful Christian background, the man Martin Lloyd-Jones, considered by many reformed Baptists to be a 20th century puritan. They adore him. She had never heard tell of him. I then tried a more famous son, Jonathan Edwards?…nope.
How about Richard Baxter? Too obscure, I guess.
How about John Calvin? NOPE.
I was in shock. But then, that was me too when I was in a middle of the road nice Baptist church that taught Christ and the Bible. I had NEVER heard of the reformation or Luther, or Calvin et.al until I got into a reformed Baptist church.
Why Bachum or Phillips are getting on the Puritan bandwagon one can only speculate if they have not said outright why. The Puritans had some good to say. It would also seem to fit the dominionist idea, a little bit authoritarian.
People who adore the Puritans are also big book buyers…makes sense to promote Puritans if you want to gain that market.
I have a friend who is in his 40’s who graduated from college after high school and went on to become a very successful businessman. he takes at least one university class per semester in order to give another view in class than that of the professors. He is very diplomatic about it and even some of the professors have come to like the challenge. this is what is missing from higher education and what is missing in the church.
In the church, it is good to search the scriptures for answers and to challenge our teachers/preachers in loving ways. The goal is truth. The goal is not to promote the teacher.
Another point is that if you have taughtyour children to think for themselves, challenge teaching and taught them foundational truths, one should not fear them attending college.
But then, if this is done, these folks would not be so willing to follow VF teachings.
Thanks Anne for your info. My husband is a former SB pastor, and we learned the hard way that there are lots of FIC Southern Baptist Churches and the reformed Baptist theology is growing very quickly. Many of these “patriocentric” types send their sons to a SB Seminary that is now is known to be reformed in theology. ( I guess this group hasn’t jumped on the “no college” band wagon) Voddie Bauchum is also a SB and the pastor of a FIC church here in TX…he is good buddies with Doug. Also, Scott Brown, president of the National Center for Family Integrated Churches, is the pastor of a FIC Southern Baptist Church in Wake Forest, NC and I could name several more just here in my community. What you described as typically Southern Baptist is what is now deemed liberal in our association. There are two SB camps here….Supposedly split the association over doctrine. I don’t think we can go to church based on what we know of a main stream denomination anymore.
I know it’s too late to change the above note…but, I would like to rephrase the “patriocentric types”….It’s not necessarily a “bad” way to say it, but I don’t want to sound bitter…I’m working through some things…I wish no one any ill will…there are alot of nice people involved in this movement…I just haven’t seen it bring anything but division in homes, marriages and churches.
The thought of “keep your woman barefoot, pregnant, and in the kitchen” comes to mind.
Educate a woman too much, and she might just realize there is a world behind the household doors to explore! I have 2 BS degrees and am working on a masters degree AND I love being at home.
But every so often, I get the itch to go explore, see the world, take a course, do something besides wipe butts and noses full time.
And that, my friends, is OKAY. It isn’t a sin to want to be smart and learn about the world and what is in it, no matter what Doug says.
Normal, you are awesome
Is there an overview article of this Vision Forum and related issues? I’m new to these website, which I’ve read over the past months with a great deal of alarm.
As a “recovering fundamentalist” woman clergyperson who has studied fundamentalism, women’s studies, and reformation theology, this trend is both scary and fascinating (mostly the former, and I so feel for the victims of it). I’m also very serious about being a parent, and I’m strangely drawn to their ideas of family at the core of things(without the strange patriarchial twist).
Thanks for putting this out there.
Brenda,
I forgot to mention but it concurs with your reply that Calvinism and Puritanism and Reformed theology was being more and more accepted in the SB denomination. We would hear this as good things to report in the world of Christianity. Prior to this the religious rumours consisted of the huge Lordship salvation debate within the reformed baptist groups which was raging in the States, spinning out over the Lord’s Day.
I agree with you, it seems to me that these things have brought a lot of heartache. It is very discouraging when you see how things really are in the church. I’ll admit, I have to go back through my posts to “scrub” trigger words. (I just went back over yesterday’s and see a lot of grammar mistakes, Ho Hum…was in a hurry.) Sarcasm has always been a strong suit with me to begin with and add to that, incomprehensible experiences at the hands of people who say they know better. Well. I’m sure you know it better than I, being the wife of a pastor.
We just happen to be Christians who consequently have fallen through the cracks. We don’t fit ’cause we think, I guess. Had a reformed former elder in exasperation trying to defend his defenseless position, just wave his arms around in the air motioning at our book lined walls, “look, you read,” he gasped. “You read.” He was stymied to defend himself and his erring pastor against our questions from the Bible. His only defense was to attack us. I don’t want to sound down on reformed religion or puritans. My Dh still loves them. I trip over that fat butt Calvin’s Institutes all the time. (Too bad it couldn’t meet it’s demise the way most of the legos did,
) DH, HE’s still reformed. However, our experiences have given us cause to reexamine and ask how it is that the ones with all the supposed theological ducks in a row are so lacking in common sense, love, decency, common courtesy. Hypocrisy, deception, condescension, manipulation, lies, more. We’ve seen it all.
“Had a reformed former elder in exasperation trying to defend his defenseless position….”
“I trip over that fat butt Calvin’s Institutes all the time. (Too bad it couldn’t meet it’s demise the way most of the legos did,
)”
“the ones with all the supposed theological ducks in a row are so lacking in common sense, love, decency, common courtesy. Hypocrisy, deception, condescension, manipulation, lies, more.”
Interesting combination of comments in that one paragraph.
May I recommend a verse that may help you come to terms with this seeming disparity:
Matthew 7:3-5
And why do you look at the speck in your brother’s eye, but do not consider the plank in your own eye?
Or how can you say to your brother, ‘Let me remove the speck from your eye’; and look, a plank is in your own eye?
Hypocrite! First remove the plank from your own eye, and then you will see clearly to remove the speck from your brother’s eye.
Well said, Anne2. You’ve summed up the root problems of people like that perfectly.
“Had a reformed former elder in exasperation trying to defend his defenseless position….”
There’s nothing wrong or hypocritical about that statement; it was a description, and one I can easily imagine from my own experience.
“I trip over that fat butt Calvin’s Institutes all the time.”
Don’t you love how you’re being accused of hypocrisy for insulting a dead man?
“how it is that the ones with all the supposed theological ducks in a row are so lacking in common sense, love, decency, common courtesy. Hypocrisy, deception, condescension, manipulation, lies, more. We’ve seen it all.”
Yep, seen it; that sounds like the VF. It actually seems not uncommon for anyone who gets so wrapped in religion that they forget faith. I get your struggle in general, Anne: I’ve come to despise the fuss and reverence that goes to those like Calvin and Luther, the great “Interpreters” who loved causing a fuss, rather than Christ Himself.
I’m sorry, but this statement is just factually wrong. Luther never wanted to start a new church. The fuss was caused by the folks around them, but not by the men themselves. I suggest doing some reading on the lives and ministries of Luther and Calvin. They were both itinerant pastors who LOVED their congregations and worked tirelessly in ministering to them. And above all, they made CHRIST the CENTER of worship, unlike most churches today who cannot see past their own narcissistic worship.
But we’ve gone down this road before, Jennifer, and I don’t really want to argue. Its a personal fault that I can’t let others have the last word when they trash doctrines and churches and other believers so freely.
I appreciate you ladies and your discussion.
I think that the problem is that for men like Doug Phillips and Voddie Bauchum, who have college degrees and the like, they seem to be reacting from a stance of now that they have children, it’s really important to protect them from the world and this is one way that they see is a good way to go about it. (I know that there’s also an economic factor and the debate of whether it’s responsible to go into debt going to college, etc., however, it’s not at the forefront of the discussion. Even if regular college was dirt cheap or free, it wouldn’t be okay for the same reason that they would say public schools are not okay.)
They seem to start out as not approving of their own children going to college so they aren’t faced with worldly influences, but then it translates into a rule for all Christians because in their minds it doesn’t make sense that it shouldn’t be. It’s possible that it’s a legalist thing, and that it’s just the way that they view their convictions as a result of their personalities, background, and experiences. Some people have a very hard time accepting any other belief that doesn’t coincide with their convictions. However, at the same time, there is certainly no excuse for this and it doesn’t make it right. The heart of the problem in the end seems to be, as many of you ladies have mentioned, a lack of accountability. I’m not sure if Mr. Phillips really has anyone that differs from him that he would be willing to listen to that challenges his beliefs about things. And because of that, he just goes on and on how he wants and doesn’t worry about the fact that he might be and is offending people through what he teaches as a principle. When it really is a matter of an application of the principle.
I do believe that Doug Phillips does not teach against getting an education but believes that people should try to get a college degree online. And recently online school has started to become a much more viable option. However, the problem with only preaching online school that I’ve seen is that it’s probably fine for people who are more cultural arts minded, but what about someone who wants to be a doctor? What about someone who wants to be an engineer? Not everyone can or wants to start their own family business. My brother is an electrical engineer who now works with solar energy products, but he couldn’t have done his studies online. I would view online college as an option that people should seriously consider if they’re worried about finances, however, it’s definitely not for everyone and it certainly won’t necessarily be cheaper than some state schools. I’ve attended both a Christian and a state school, and I have to say that both of them have their dangers. You really have to be able to go into a college with the mindset of being a discerning person no matter where you go. The idea that because a lot of students are turning away from their faith because they go to secular college that therefore it means we must not go there or go to Christian college I think is not really addressing the issue of why college students turn away from their faith. Too be honest, students can and do turn away from their faith at Christian colleges too sometimes. Whether it happens more at secular colleges or Christian is not the point. Rather the point is, we can’t just ignore the world. We have to be able to engage it. And we can do that without becoming a part of it. I think the fear though is that it almost seems impossible to do this or at least very hard, so the idea is that children must be protected from having to do this. It’s possible to be too haughty and bold and think that nothing will affect you in the world, but this view of Doug Phillips seems a little fear-based and just the other spectrum of that view. It makes me very sad. And I wish he would be more willing to make issues less black and white when it comes to applying a principle that is not a clear command.
Just my two cents worth…probably a little more…like maybe five cents. (-:
~Amy
Oh and one other thing, I don’t believe they would see it as being hypocritical because they have college degrees, but rather it’s a matter of since they’re older they have now come to the correct view about it. They would view it as, they gained practical experience in this area and came to realize through their mistakes that this is not the way to go. In the end it just seems a rather fear-based way to approach it rather than really engaging with the culture.
~Amy
I do not trash churches and I was not even trashing doctrines, Cally. I have done plenty of reading about both men, and everything I know of Calvin I learned in college. I respect Luther’s attempts, but I do not respect Calvin’s and their motives were irrelevant anyway because I was referring to people TODAY who’ve given them and their interpretations more reverance than Christ’s. Are we done with misunderstandings now?
Anne,
Thanks for your very honest reply. I find it refreshing and not a bit hypocritical. I am happy to find a place where I hope to share, grow and relate to others with similar experiences without the fear of condemnation.
Although, I do not consider myself “fully reformed”, I must agree with Carol on the Luther/Calvin statement. I read “Here I Stand”, a biography of the life of Luther by Roland Bainton. It is a great read.
And as for Richards comments, we must remember that the scriptures admonish us to “judge with righteous judgment” and to only “cast stones” if we are without sin.
Remember…He heals the broken hearted, and binds up their wounds. (Ps. 147:3)
“I must agree with Carol on the Luther/Calvin statement.”
I guess you mean “Cally” (just a confirmation
Thanks for the recommendation on the Luther book. I just wish some modern people/churches would give the Bible itself more regard, rather than relying on the interpretations of men long dead and certainly not always correct. Even Catholicism occasionally relies on extra-Biblical understanding; when I read a document by a Catholic man about why they forbid women priests, there wasn’t a single Scripture quote in the whole thing. And to think that some people are relying more on the likes of Barack Obama’s Reverend “Wrong” than God’s example? That’s a really scary example of modern religion gone awry.
Jennifer,
You’re right…I meant Cally…thanks.
I think I understand what you are saying. As Christians, we stand on the shoulders of those who have gone before us (learning from their experiences), but we were never intended to look to them rather than to Christ. Did I “get” it?
Yep, you got it perfectly
I’m sorry, Cally. I just feel like I and my nerves have been picked apart for the last twelve hours, and I hate being misunderstood/misrepresented more than anything. Nothing you’d ever do intentionally though, I know.
Re: Richard’s comments. I didn’t look at it as his being condemning of myself. He knows somewhat of where I am coming from. I took it to mean he was referring to the clergy with whom we have had bad experiences and the influences from whence that flows. He may clarify otherwise, however, thanks Richard for your input.
If you did mean otherwise, Richard, my apologies. Those are good Scripture verses to keep in mind, whatever side you’re on.
I do understand what you are saying, Jennifer. I do wish people would turn to the WORD first and foremost above anything else, however, I think you’ll find biblical illiteracy much more prevalent in mainstream evangelicalism then you will in a Reformed or Lutheran church. I came from the Calvary Chapel movement into a Reformed church and I can tell you from my own experience that I’ve learned 1000 times more about the Bible in my Reformed church than I ever did in my Calvary Chapel. Studying Luther or Calvin or Matthew Henry or Charles Spurgeon or Chuck Smith is just a tool. It should never take precedence over the word of God.
That’s exactly how I feel, Cally. I’m not saying I don’t have my own Bible Christian models; they’re just newer. Instead of quoting Calvin or Luther, I’ve been known to quote Liz Curtis Higgs, Frank Viola or, on occasion, even Anne Coulter!
“Is there an overview article of this Vision Forum and related issues? I’m new to these website, which I’ve read over the past months with a great deal of alarm.”
Madgebaby,
Here is a link to the index on the truewomanhood blog that has more information about the Doug Phillips/patriocentric movement than you could imagine. We have been discussing this for more than a year and some contributors have been watching this movement for nigh on to a decade so there is a wealth of input….there are probably 10,000 comments by now. The index is a huge help and when Joy is done, it ought to be put into a book…seriously.
http://truewomanhood.wordpress.com/2008/06/27/index-visionary-daughters-thread-1-and-2-now-live-joy/
Cally wrote: “Luther never wanted to start a new church. The fuss was caused by the folks around them, but not by the men themselves. I suggest doing some reading on the lives and ministries of Luther and Calvin. They were both itinerant pastors who LOVED their congregations and worked tirelessly in ministering to them. And above all, they made CHRIST the CENTER of worship, unlike most churches today who cannot see past their own narcissistic worship.”
thank you … personally, I highly respect, admire, & appreciate the hard work of both of these men … it took REAL GUTS to do what they did when they did it … it is so sad that folks are twisting what they did (kinda like what folks are doing with Rushdoony)
with a little bit of knowledge of these men, some folks feel free to question their Christianity, motives, and theology … I guess it’s safe cuz they are dead
frankly, from the years of reading I have done on Luther & Calvin, I think that if they were alive today they would be leading the charge AGAINST groups like the patriocentric movement and those that say women cannot vote, be educated, receive salvation through giving birth, etc.
Are you referring to me as “some folks”, One?
I think there is especially a bias against women going to college (not just education outside of the home in general, though that exists, too).
I’ve had people say to me that they won’t send their girls to college since they’re raising them to be homemakers anyway. And what frustrates me is that these were women with college degrees. Why deny your daughters the opportunities that you had?
I feel like I’m a better mother/wife/homemaker because of my education. Just for a tiny example, when I read parenting handbooks, I find myself evaluation the philosophy and logic the same way I would evaluate a scholarly article. I have a support group all over the country from college friends that have stayed in touch over the years. I have things to talk about with my husband beyond the daily work of homemaking. And we’ve actually been able to do quite a number of scholarly projects together.
I can’t remember where I read it, I think it was C.S. Lewis, and I’m not paraphrasing it nearly as eloquently. But there was a farmer getting a liberal arts degree, and someone asked him what he was going to do after university. He replied that he was going back to farming. He was then asked why get an education to do what he was doing before. And he replied that he’d be a better person for it. Whether an art major becomes a world famous artist or not, the experience of studying art can enrich someone for the rest of their life.
I’m not saying that everyone can and should go to college, or even that traditional college is always the best way to go. But I think that it can be an incredibly valuable experience, one that shouldn’t be underestimated.
“it took REAL GUTS to do what they did when they did it … it is so sad that folks are twisting what they did”
It always takes guts to wreck people’s lives and cause a ruckus. And no, I’m not totally unaware of what these men did, nor do I entirely disapprove of it. But I do know what they believed, in more than one area, how it was accomplished, and the impact it had on others. I read a book about women pastors by a trusted female friend and she advised that, if you believe you’re called to be a pastor and your church disagrees, you should not pursue the matter with that particular church and cause disharmony within the fellowship. That’s what Luther and Calvin did: caused disharmony. Heck, I’m a protestant and I agree with Luther, but the argument that the fuss was caused by those around him does not relieve him of responsibility because he knew how the priests would react. As for Calvin, he caused disharmony within a belief system that wasn’t even in sore need of it, unlike the Catholic system that Luther changed. Calvin’s theory terrified people who thought they were saved and caused them to question their salvation, and it is still causing a certain amount of disquiet today. Plus, I’m familiar with Calvin’s views of women, and they’re downright contemptible; even patriarchals today rarely speak that outrightly in blatant hatred of the female sex. So, considering the fact that Calvinism almost ruined my faith, still makes me upset unto distraction, scares away and repulses potential believers (I’ve seen this happen repeatedly), hurt the sanity of people around when it first occured, and that Calvin himself was a class A misogynist, what recommendation does he make to me as a person and a Christian? Uh, nothing; nada. Every once in a while I see a quote from him that seems more or less spiritually nice or accurate, but that’s about it.
Just so we’re clear, I’m not trying to upset anyone here or cause disharmony myself; I know Cally and others like Calvin and I love you guys and respect that. I’m just trying to clarify that yes, I do know and have researched what the man did and no, I don’t hail him as a hero; never have and never will. I don’t respect Calvin as a great Christian. Sorry if that offends anyone, but it’s not going to change.
You’re right on all counts, Joanna. These people have college degrees and, while they no doubt claim that they “know better now”, they try to use those degrees to their best advantage and have no problem showcasing them. Double-standards abound with these folks.
I don’t expect you to change Jennifer.
And “Calvinism” saved my faith (or the biblical doctrine of God’s absolute sovereignty), and has for many, many other believers, so I guess we’re even.
I agree with you about God’s sovereignity, Cally. It’s a wonderfully comforting thought.
I was talking with Anne yesterday about this very issue. Somehow, the loss of my daughter (which nearly drove me away from Christianity) found its meaning within God’s sovereignty. I don’t know why the Lord took her. I may never know. But what I DO know is that God will work it for my good (Rom. 8:28).
But, back on topic…
I found some yummy letters written by Jennie Chancey about girls and college which I am going to comment on in the days to come. It should be fun…
When I was in college, I interviewd an alum who is local documentary film maker. She told me that no matter what I should always use my education. It could be in the way I raise children, do my job, write an article or volunteer in my community. She told me to never stop learning, to stay open-minded to new ideas and concepts and to treasure the education I was getting. Since graduation I’ve kept her advice in mind.
Just because a young lady goes to college that doesn’t mean she spends all her time getting involved in sleazy sexual hook-ups and getting drunk at keg parties. Sure, I know a lot of students that partied, but for the most part, most of them took their education very seriously. When I was in college I was an editor of the school newspaper, on the board of a school organization and a tutor. These things can aid me whether I’m a CEO or a SAHM. Education is just so cool. My own grandmother never got to go to high school and now all of her granddaughters are college graduations.
Now to be honest, I’m probably not the kind of person you’d find at this website. I’m single, no kids, Agnostic and I consider myself a feminist. However, I like to learn about different points of view. I started reading up about anti-feminism and I was sickened by some of the stuff I was reading. Sure, live a more traditional lifestyle if you want, but don’t deny me the lifestyle I want. And for all of this talk of being submissive, modest and humble these anti-feminist bloggers are some of the most arrogant, self-satisfied and mean-spirited women I have ever come across. No wonder you ladies had to start this blog. And so funny that some of these “ladies” would deny education and careers for other women and girls (including their own daughters) yet never fail to remind you of their education and the lucrative careers they left behind.
Keep up with this blog. It is comforting to know there are traditional Christian women who are smart, caring, funny and complex thinkers.
Cally, I am sorry about the loss of your daughter.
Letters from Chancey? Oh goody
Bon appetit!
Jennifer, welcome! I hope you stick around; these ladies are awesome
Thanks, Jennifer, for welcoming me. I look forward to reading new posts.
And sorry about the grammatical cow patties I stepped into in my last comment. I was writing in a hurry and didn’t bother to proofread. I’ll hang my head in shame.
“That’s what Luther and Calvin did: caused disharmony. Heck, I’m a protestant and I agree with Luther, but the argument that the fuss was caused by those around him does not relieve him of responsibility because he knew how the priests would react.”
I’ve always been interested in History, and part of that is the history of the Reformation. I learned a great deal about Luther, and I have to say, the discord was very necessary.
At the time of Luther, the Roman Catholic Church had grown to so much power that it ruled all of Europe. With the power came corruption, evil, and priests and popes turned away from God.
The common people were the ones that suffered. They were not allowed to own or read Bibles (many of them couldn’t even read at all, and for many it was illegal for them to read.. especially women) The priests were the ones that would read the Bible to everyone. They would read it in Latin, which only they understood (Latin was considered a holy language and commoners had no resource to learn it) and so they would twist the Scriptures to mean anything they wanted it to.
One of the biggest reasons that Luther ever got involed in controversy was the Catholic Church’s endorsement of the selling of indulgences. Indulgences were a pre-paid “Free Pass” to whatever sin a person wanted to commit. Want to commit a murder? Sure, twenty bucks. Rape? You got it, eight dollars.
The priests would sell indulgences to anyone who wanted to buy one, so they could go commit a terrible crime without fear of hell or the need to confess their sin.
Luther recognized this to be ridiculously unbiblical, and that is was drove him to write his 95 theses.
If he hadn’t, he would have been the fulfillment of this sentence: All evil needs to succeed is for good men to do nothing.
Don’t look down at Luther because he caused discord in the church. Discord is, at times, extremely necessary. Just what are we doing here, on this website? We are definitely causing discord, but it is extremely necessary.
Jesus Himself caused discord, and He told the disciples so.
Luke 12:
49 “I have come to cast fire upon the earth; and how I wish it were already kindled! 50 “But I have a baptism to undergo, and how distressed I am until it is accomplished! 51 “Do you suppose that I came to grant peace on earth? I tell you, no, but rather division; 52 for from now on five members in one household will be divided, three against two and two against three. 53 “They will be divided, father against son and son against father, mother against daughter and daughter against mother, mother-in-law against daughter-in-law and daughter-in-law against mother-in-law.”
Not all arguments and clashes are displeasing to God.
Just my thoughts
Oto
Oto, I’m not really against Luther; the Catholic church was corrupt back then. At the time I posted that, I just had mixed feelings because someone had told me he wasn’t the hero I thought he was and mentioned some historical tidbits about him. Of course, this person was a rather close-minded Catholic, so I should have known better
Hehe! Understood.
I’m sorry if I came off like I was lecturing you, I wasn’t trying to. I do love history, like I said, and I wanted to share some of the good that Luther did. I do know about the bad, the comments and beliefs he had that were reallly out there… but I still have a soft spot for Luther. Probably because he was a monk, and for some reason I just like monks. Maybe it’s the robes…?
Love, Oto
Oh, you weren’t in the least lecturing! Your points were great; I just wanted to clarify that I am not, in fact, anti-Luther