In which the Author, Being of Sound Mind and Body, shall Endeavor to execute Flawless Feats of Peril and Risk and moreover Defy Stereotypes
To all newbie homeschoolers,
Congratulations! You have made an excellent choice in choosing to homeschool your children. Whether that decision was recently, or five years and four children ago, I can say from experience: homeschooling is great. You have more time with your children. You don’t need to face as much atheism, pagan sex education, ungodly peer pressures and other garbage. Homeschooling seems to fit closely with the Bible’s ideal.
I’m a homeschooled graduate myself.
Where you are in the early Hundreds, newbies, my parents once were in the late Eighties, back during the homeschooling “pioneer” days. Ask them.
Been there, done that. Lifepac English, Saxon1 math, Bob Jones history. Paperback books by Mary Pride, large family, public comments (some positive) or stares (most negative), and becoming an oldest brother all over again at age 17. Along with that, a snarky stage of aren’t-I-the-fine-decent-homeschooled-kid that I blame only myself for having, and which I hope I’m mostly through with today.
In 2001 I finished homeschool and started college. About ten years later, I have a print journalism degree, a job at a small-town community newspaper, a young wife, bills to pay, and everything.
So in 15 to 20 years, your young children may resemble me. By then they may have the same challenges, reactions, struggles and positive development as I can report now.
This brings me to the fact that I don’t find myself in the position of hating homeschooling or my Christian upbringing. In fact, my wife and I hope to homeschool our own children when we have them. Even when we began courting2, I recall, one of our first discussions was what we liked and what we would do differently.
From your perspective, I suppose, all this brave new homeschooling world looks very new and shiny, revolutionary, exciting and more than a little scary. Especially if you were not homeschooled yourself, you are following in the footsteps of the original homeschooling pioneers.
Yet these same pioneers, looking back now, would surely do things differently, not just with teaching methods, but in many assumptions they had at the first.
My suggestion: learn from their mistakes and negative experiences, and carry forth the lessons into future generations. But were there negative experiences? Can you place yourselves in that frame of reference, and ask this question:
What are the unique pitfalls of homeschooling?
This has an inherent pre-question: Are there any pitfalls?
The reason I ask is because most newbie homeschoolers, in their it’s-all-so-shiny-and-amazing stage, may see only the good reasons, and fewer pitfalls.
That’s understandable! Compared with public schools, the pitfalls may seem shallow.
Of course, everything has pitfalls, but that’s not reason enough to avoid doing something. Christianity itself has pitfalls (such as losing your life for Christ’s sake to save it). Homeschooling has pitfalls, too — lots of them.
But before considering them, and especially the main one I’ll describe here, the above question and frame of reference is vital. Without recognizing these homeschooling pitfalls exist, you’ll have blind spots. You may repeat the errors of previous generations.
Unfortunately, I see a lot of that happening in the modern homeschooling movement.
So much could be said here. But if I tried to cover all the pitfalls, without balance on the other side, it would likely look like a long screed against homeschooling altogether. Instead I will focus on what I consider the number 1 pitfall in homeschooling today.
It’s an annoyance at least, and at the most, it’s hideously dangerous.
In the worst cases, it flatly contradicts the Gospel.
Pitfall no. 1: un-Biblical “patriarchalism”
This is not the same as Biblical husband/wife roles. This is not the same as Biblical husband/wife roles. This is not the same as Biblical husband/wife roles.
Without that insistence in mind, anything here will seem like it’s advocating feminism!
For years, organizations such as Vision Forum have been pushing “patriarchy” as the essential component of homeschooling family structure. Doug Phillips is one such leader; others, such as Douglas Wilson3, comprise a growing movement known as “federal vision.” Women such as the Botkins form the female side.
Again, by patriarchy I don’t mean merely husband-leadership, wife-submission, or children-obey-your-parents. All of those are Biblical concepts. Rather, the word denotes a father-ruled system, in which wife and children, especially daughters, are meant to submit to the father and support his vision for the family. This includes not just spiritual growth, but his career, likely a home-based business, and keeping the family stable.
Another term is patriocentric, or father-centered. For many, these are interchangeable.
And they are un-Biblical, for they equate all kinds of notions about what submission should and should not mean, with legitimate Biblically defined husband/wife roles.
Rather than upholding Biblical guidelines for a husband/father’s spiritual guidance, this view turns him into a default “high priest,” between God and his family. That includes his wife. That includes his children — no matter how old they are. It overextends the metaphor of Ephesians 5, and considers the father as in charge, not just a means of, his wife’s and children’s sanctification. And what his “vision” is, theirs should be too.
In these circles, a father is also said to have a special role in the lives of their daughters, being the main man in their lives until such time as he gives them to actual husbands of their own. Daughters in turn serve as their father’s “help-meets.” This includes a lifestyle beyond normal learning of home-making skills; daughters should supposedly serve their father in ways like their own mother. And the most vocal of patriarchalist leaders, male and female, insist that anything otherwise is rebellion.
A young woman once asked me how, if the daughters-as-helpmeets view is wrong, the Bible says daughters should be interacting with their fathers. The answer is that the Bible is completely silent about daughters specifically! “Children, obey your parents in the Lord, for this is right” (Ephesians 6:1) and related verses about children, sons and daughters, are as close as you get. Daughters don’t get specific instructions about getting along with Dad, any more than sons get specific instructions about Mom.4
Clearly, fathers should serve as examples of Godly men to their daughters. But patriarchalist teachings, specifically those of Vision Forum and “Visionary Daughters,” go too far — beyond what is right, beyond grace-based living, beyond Biblical balance.
Encouragements for newbies
Again, this is not the same as Biblical husband/wife roles. Read John Piper’s and Wayne Grudem’s big book on the subject, Recovering Biblical Manhood and Womanhood, with essays from many writers. Piper also has excellent sermons on roles, based in the Bible and on grace. Complementarianism is Biblical. Neither feminism nor patriocentrism are.
So what does all this have to do with brand-new homeschoolers?
Many of you grew up with wrong or un-Biblical assumptions going the other way. Maybe to you, hearing about a movement that puts men front and center is such a refreshing change. There’s much that’s good about that. But as described above, so much of it is not good. Rather than a return to Biblical balance, it’s an overcorrection.
A related question then becomes: can someone react from feminism too much?
In so many situations, I have seen the answer is yes.
My advice is then, as a homeschooled graduate who hopes to stay Scriptural in the way a home is run and children raised: test everything with the Word. Patriocentrism doesn’t pass the test. But so many newbie homeschoolers don’t know that, because it all looks so shiny — and better than feminism and secularism.
But both of those are un-Biblical. Don’t overcorrect for one and slide to the other extreme. Be vigilant! And maybe someday, you’ll have a family whom God has ultimately raised and guided, as their only Mediator, to thank Him for giving you.
More to come on homeschooling pitfalls, depending on reactions from readers.
Your thoughts?
- Fortunately not authored by this Mr. Saxon, though I daresay it felt like it at times. ↩
- AKA “dating”; and if someone asks, I don’t mind writing more on that simple little subtopic. ↩
- Appended Dec. 18, 2009: the original version of this column included the name of R.C. Sproul Jr., along with Wilson, as a “Federal Vision” advocate. However, Sproul has disavowed belief in “Federal Vision.” He was quoted as such in a Jan. 1, 2008 entry at Family Reformation, and asked for a correction in a comment written Dec. 18, 2009 on this page. Sproul is a teaching elder at Saint Peter Presbyterian Church (SPPC) in Bristol, Virginia, and leads Highlands Ministries. ↩
- Even the only passage that talks about fathers and daughters, 1 Corinthians 7: 36-38, stumps scholars: it could mean a father and his virgin daughter, or a betrothed couple. ↩
Great stuff, Stephen. Federal Vision could have been expounded a bit more, though, especially as it relates to (i.e. flatly contradicts) fundamentals such as “sola fide”. I wouldn’t be a bit surprised if some of these Federal Vision leaders go RC–the view of family is extremely similar.
Great comments, brother. I agree that we have overreacted to feminism. I would say that the husband/father’s role is a bit stronger than mere guidance towards their family, but not like many have it today. “Leading a family” is not the same as being “dictator of a family”.
The three main errors of this movement, that you touched upon, but I wanted to point out as I have noticed them, are the following.
1. Not including the sons under the leadership of the father, but giving them some “special” role, which they do not have.
2. Not stopping the authority when the children grow up, which should happen at that point. A parent is not the boss of their adult child, nor should they be.
3. Leader becoming dictator. Paul compares husbands leadership of their families to Christ’s towards the Church. Christ, who lets us make our own choices, died for our sins, and advocates before the Father for us, and served His disciples. These people make “leadership” into unquestioned, authoritarian control, which it clearly is not in the Bible.
Again, very great piece. I really enjoyed reading it and your insights, brother. The fact that I was slightly uncomfortable with what I knew was Biblically accurate as I read your piece, shows just how much this insidious philosophy has infected our churches.
Quick note: The moment I saw in your footnote that you said, “Not this Mr. Saxon”, I knew before clicking on the link, what you were referring to. Does this mean that I’m a bit *too much* of a Doctor Who fan?
Phillip, I’d love to include more here about “federal vision,” “dominion” overcorrections and their related flaws. Methinks I could use the unique help provided by someone with a Presbyterian upbringing, and who enjoys philosophy and writing on such subjects …
Timothy, I am curious to know more about what you mean — what was the source of the slight discomfort levels, even if you saw past it?
Godly male leadership — especially as a husband/father — imitating Christ, and pointing everyone — especially wives and children — to Him, but not in place of Him: that is what is important here. In their haste to avoid Feminism and The World, too many miss that.
Several Questions:
Have you sent the link to this blog to Todd Friel over at Wretched?
Have Piper, Grudem, Mohler, or anyone of note in the Reformed camp commented on Federal Vision so that they can be quoted? Inquiring minds want to know…
Aren’t there laws in the OT that relate to father/daughter relationships?
Re: Pitfalls to homeschooling…if you want help making that list, I’d be glad to contribute, being both a homeschooling mom who has graduated 2-soon-to-be-3 students and seeing other homeschools operate more or less successfully.
Stephen. I think the source of the discomfort level was the fact that even though I know what you are saying is correct Biblically, that is had me thinking of some sort of idea of feminism, or of husbands not leading their wives. I grew up with the mindset ingrained in me that anything other than women being “subject” to their husbands will lead to rampant feminism in the church.
Growing up, my mother and many of the ladies at the church I attended were former feminists who left the movement because of the switch-over from “equality” feminism to “gender” feminism, and all that entails, including abortion support, theological liberalism, and what not. They had this view that anything opposing a very rigid structure of roles for men and women would lead to the danger of feminism. My discomfort is from the fact that I know you are right, but I still have that fear of feminism taking over the church. I don’t know if that makes any sense at all.
I have seen feminism snake it’s way insidiously into other institutions, including even the military. I am very fearful of it succeeding in more and more aspects of church life in various denominations. I tend toward the extreme anti-feminist stance you spoke of, unless I take a moment to think it through, and realize I should not go that far.
Great piece. Thank you for responding to these notes. God bless.
Stephan, good thoughts.
Having been homeschooling mom for the past 25 years and having researched the patriarchy/patriocentric movement in depth for the past 5 years, I would note that you have only scratched the surface of scary, unbiblical doctrine that is coming out of this branch of homeschooling. I have written on this topic and have linked to many direct quotes that show what is being taught. Vision Forum president, Doug Phillip, for example, has recently named the agenda for “Christian homeschooling” that includes getting ALL homeschooling families out of traditional churches and into family-integrated churches and seeing that no daughters leave home for college or otherwise until they are given in marriage by their fathers.
For a good introduction into this movement, I would encourage your readers to listen to the series of podcasts I did on the patriocentric movement:
http://www.thatmom.com/?page_id=2659
There are so many tentacles of this movement that it is difficult to grasp how far-reaching it is and the various related areas of life it includes: militant fecundity, kinism, clanism, etc.
Thatmom…just wanted to let you know that I listened to your podcasts at Stephen’s suggestion (they are, in fact, still on my blackberry), and found them very informative on this subject.
Brother,
I am grateful to see a homeschool grad writing about some of the pitfalls of homeschooling. My biggest concern is the problem of pride. We need to be warned. I am saddened, however, to see a homeschooled journalist make unwarranted and undocumented accusations. While you could certainly link me with patriarchy (though nothing I believe about patriarchy is terribly different from what you expressed) but where did you get the idea that I believed in Federal Vision? That is simply false, and given the circumstances of our day, tantamount to libel or slander (feel free to accuse me of not knowing the difference. I can’t remember which is which at present.) Please either provide evidence for this most damaging charge, or recant and repent.
Hello back to you. If the charge cannot be substantiated, then I’ll certainly make that correction, and publicly repeat this (because the inclusion of your name was public). Thank you for stopping by.
From what I have read, the relationship between some patriarchal leaders and “Federal Vision” teachers is a complex one (one of the elders at my church once said it would take a while to explain). It seems many others have also unfairly, incorrectly, equated the two. Here’s one site I found, quoting R.C. Sproul Jr. on the “Federal Vision”:
http://familyreformation.wordpress.com/2008/01/01/rc-sproul-jr-on-the-federal-vision/
If you still believe that, sir, then indeed the above article, as originally written, wrongly equated your views with those of others. Though we might still disagree on “patriarchy” and some aspects of the “family-integrated church” movement, if you would like to provide more details for a correction, and encouragements for readers, it will be published on this site’s front page tomorrow.
Thank you, and Godspeed to you.
Brother,
Are comments moderated? I sent one yesterday and it is not here.
RC Sproul Jr.
It would seem not. What happened to my comment from yesterday?
RC Sproul Jr.
One comment from R.C. Sproul Jr., posted yesterday, Dec. 18 at 9:30 am, is visible on this very page, right here. If you are referring to some other comment you tried to make, it did not go through; this was the only one posted yesterday to this page.
Stephen,
Thank you and sorry I had trouble finding your response, and my original comment. Yes, I still believe every word of what I wrote that James MacDonald republished. And would love to see you run the whole article with your retraction. I would also like to see some explanation as to how you thought it legitimate to tar me with that peculiar brush with no evidence whatever. Thanks much, and God bless.
It is hard enough to defend what one actually believes, without having to answer for what does not believe! Though I am not a pastor or “official” ministry leader (in quotes because all of a true Christian’s life is in effect ministry), this has happened to me enough in personal situations that I can empathize.
It can be very frustrating, especially if one has a better-known name, more-”official” ministries to lead, and the truth of the Proverb that “a good name is better than riches.”
Many others have evidently been mixing-and-matching “Federal Vision” and some views of patriarchy. That and your friendship with Douglas Wilson (whose views on many things I appreciate, along with especially his sense of humor that more Christian leaders could use!) have led many to wrongly conflate the two systems of thought and thus their advocates. Originally I did the same, in the above article, and it has now been changed.
For that I do apologize, and yesterday appended the correction — see the footnote here (you may not have noticed it before). The James McDonald article will soon be quoted on the front page, along with the text already posted in comment form here. That will make the correction complete. Our correspondence here also supports the correction.
I would be remiss not to take this opportunity to ask you: what are some of the most prevalent myths, in “miniature” or bigger, that you in your work have seen among Christians? Verses out of context? Wrong views of how to follow God’s will (a friend and I will explore this topic next month in an email exchange)? Legalisms, antinomianisms, imbalanced views of Christ’s nature or the new lives His people have in Him? Extreme views of God’s sovereignty, or man’s free will? Liberalism? Cultural fundamentalism?
This site hopes to correct with grace and truth those little errors that “fall between the cracks.” Such views will not disqualify someone from being a true Christ-follower, but they can prevent growth in some areas (and can be annoying to other Christians!).
Again, thank you for stopping by and for reading, and I also wish you and yours God’s best and blessings as we celebrate the Advent of His Son.
Good thoughts. I was a homeschooler from kindergarten up, and I definitely agree with your points here. I would, however, like to encourage you to reconsider your dismissive use of the term “feminism.” You seem to use the term in a decidedly negative way, and while there are certainly feminists out there with ideas that go against God’s teaching, the movement is much broader than a secular/Christian dichotomy would allow. I would like to (gently) challenge your thinking and suggest that many feminist aims are actually in accord with our what we know of God and His desire for humans in the Bible—basic issues of respect, of fair treatment, and the bettering of some truly staggering global statistics on issues like rape, abuse, and murder.
It’s popular in Christian circles to bash the feminists, but I think we need to be careful to separate out the valuable pieces of the movement from that which is Biblically wrong. It’s important not to simply repeat what we hear from other pastors or conservative Christians but to take the time to actually be informed about the ideas and arguments of the feminist movement.
Best wishes!
Apparently this is still the most popular post here so far.
Thanks for your encouragements, Kathryn! If I write about this topic again soon, many of your suggested qualifiers will be addressed: that we must be careful how we define feminism when and if we critique its tenets and effects.
Unfortunately, this is why some “patriarchy” advocates have gotten so far, by letting “feminism” become the villain — with the silent assumption that therefore, most anything that opposes The Villain is acceptable.
I have known of families in which a father is nearly autocratic, and in which children (especially daughters) are not encouraged to go out on their own to fulfill their own callings for the Kingdom. “Patriarchy” advocates such as Vision Forum often encourage this. And while I am sure many leaders would not condone spiritual or physical abuse, I also ask: do they say as much against it as they do in support of “patriocentrism”? No — because perhaps to them, abuse is not nearly as significant a problem as “feminism.”
Friends and acquaintances of mine have said that they haven’t seen the less-Biblical teachings of Vision Forum, et. al. Therefore to them, they can see the good stuff on the surface and “pick out the bones” while dining on an otherwise decent fish dinner.
I’m still divided on that view; after all, do we not risk endorsing the foundationally bad teachings along with anything that is good? At the very least, if we read or recommend a patriarchalist leader’s book, teaching MP3, etc., we ought to issue heavy disclaimers. But I think it’s much better to get the solid and more Gospel-based teaching on male/female and husband/wife roles elsewhere, such as Grudem’s or Piper’s or others’ teaching.
I was not homeschooled, but I knew kids who were… either because their parents eventually put them back into public school or because I met them at church functions. Anyway, I am only speaking from observation, but from what I have seen I think you hit the nail on the head as far as the most likely personal or spiritual pitfall for a homeschooled student.
Don’t get me wrong. I was friends with all of these people, and am not someone who looked at them as “different and bad” because they were homeschooled. However, I did often notice a great deal of spiritual pride and a judgemental (condemning) nature in these kids… especially the males, for some reason.
I have continued to know a couple of them as we’ve grown up. (We are all in our late 20s now.) One reassuring thing is that they now seem totally aware of the error in that behavior and have tried to move away from it. Sadly, one of them suffered a crippling fall off of a roof he was working on and was forced into a state of dependence. It seems it was after this that he began to reflect on his own pride.
One other point… or rather, question. I am curious why you stated you had a “young wife” when you were listing the positives in your life. I hope you won’t find it offensive for me to ask about that. Obviously I understand why you would list your wife as a positive in your life; but what is the need to state “young” as a positive? Something about that doesn’t sit well with me. Why should your wife’s age have anything to do with the level of happiness and blessing she brings to your life?
[...] thoughts on VF’s views, and especially its misuse of Scripture to support them. Further reading:An open letter to newbie homeschoolers, Dec. 2, [...]
Holly, from what we’ve read the attitude is at least equally prevalent in some homeschooling-oriented young women. Their blogs are all over, blogs in which they rather aggressively promote their submission (and less actively engage in debate with true, non-feminist Christians who disagree). I do not blame this on homeschooling as a practice, any more than I could blame Satanism on Harry Potter books or New-Age religion on Star Wars movies. Instead, the sin comes from within. All humans, even professing Christians, are prone to pride, if they stop focusing on Christ and instead focus on The Crisis to which they must devote all their attention in fighting.
As for my brief reference about my “young wife,” I only call her that because — in popular perception — she is young, and so am I (just two months and 23 days older, actually). We have now been married for a year. Nothing was meant to connote (I am only guessing why you asked?) that age necessarily matters one way or another in a marriage. I’ve known women who married younger men, and men who married younger woman, and God works in all their marriages to echo His love for His church.
[...] a recent column here, An open letter to newbie homeschoolers, posted Dec. 2, included Sproul’s name along with Douglas Wilson’s as a supporter of “Federal [...]
Hello, Stephen,
Glad to see another successful Christian who didn’t have to run the government school gauntlet! However, I don’t think you’ve accurately characterized Douglas Wilson in any way. In terms of the unique role of fathers, Douglas Wilson teaches that the husband is spiritually responsible for his whole family and is a covenantal head of that family. He’s the one on whom the blame falls when there are problems, and it is his job to be a leader. However, he must lead with love and be quick to love his wife and ask her for advice.
I think you’ll find these teachings clearly stated in his books “Reforming Marriage” and “The Federal Husband.” I have never heard him teach, or read anything he wrote, which supported patriarchy or patriocentric families as you stated here. Would you please substantiate your claim with quotes? Assuming you agree that fathers are primarily charged with the responsibility of their children’s sanctification (Ephesians 6:4), Doug Wilson teaches precisely what you said was biblical: “husband-leadership, wife-submission, or children-obey-your-parents.” Doug Phillips may teach patrio-centric family life, but where did you find this in Wilson’s writings?
Also, all due respect, I believe you are incorrect when it comes to the Bible being silent on father-daughter relationships. Numbers 30:1-6 gives us some pointers: responsibility. Thsoe verses make it quite clear that a father is responsible for a young woman’s decisions (with veto power) until she is married to her husband, who then receives the weight of that responsibility.
Your brother in Christ,
Luke Nieuwsma
Luke,
Later research has shown me that “federal vision” and “patriocentric” notions, while overlapping here and there, aren’t one and the same. While “federal vision” may call into question where exactly a Christian’s righteousness comes from (not imputed from Christ?), and thus I may still disagree with Wilson on that, I agree that from what I’ve seen from him he does not go for the anti-Biblical patriarchy ideas to the extent that Douglas Phillips does. In fact, I’ve appreciated a lot of Wilson’s wisdom many times! (Most recently, I loved his excellent rebuttal to the whole idea that C.S. Lewis was a universalist and Rob Bell is just following in his footsteps.)
Also noted about the Biblical instruction in Numbers 30: 3-5 regarding fathers and daughters within the Old Covenant. However, I found nothing in that passage pertaining to a father having “veto power” over all a woman’s decisions until she’s married. Rather this portion was about woman’s optional vow “to the Lord” (verse 3).
Perhaps you were thinking of another passage, though? I noticed your original reference was slightly off. But even then, many Christians who seem to think the Bible is just full of ways fathers should specifically guide/raise daughters may want to consider a) that’s not the thrust of even the Old Testament Law, b) we must certainly not ignore the Old Testament, but see Who it was always about: Christ Himself and the Gospel. That, at the very least, makes its specific law tenets slightly more difficult to apply today, and exactly how/when/why (or why not) we follow such codes is a conversation to have.
Thanks much for your comments and encouragement, and for helping me to keep thinking — optimally for the goal of glorifying God through careful reasoning and delight in Him.
Any helpful links to therapy, or emergency help, for women who are trying to change things in their household in regards to un-Biblical patriarchalism? For 22 years I have been trying to get help for our marriage from church leadership with their only answer being “change yourself”. I’ve armed myself with books about control-type men, evil people, demonic warfare, but am still stuck with someone who treats me as the slave, he does not provide for me or the kids except for food and shelter, he does not recognize my birthday yet we must treat him as special on his day(s), and more. I haven’t left or divorced because of the Christian “law” to submit, which he uses against me even if I am incapacitated medically. Recently he’s been listening to Messianic teachers online, and one day said to my older boys (now ages 19 and 20) that the Ketubah (Old Covenant) was like a Middle Eastern marriage where the wife just waits to be told what to do and how, and that is how a wife should be. He told my daughter (age 17) that she can never move away, she must stay home to serve him. Lord help us.
Ruth,
First, I apologize for a delay in responding. Due to my efforts at the Christian-speculative-fiction-focused SpeculativeFaith.com website, YeHaveHeard has unfortunately fallen by the wayside. Your comment reminded me of the continuing need to write on topics like this. Thanks for posting it, and I hope this helps.
My background: I’m a lifelong Christian, journalist, web designer, husband, and an aspiring fiction author. Perhaps more helpful to you, I’m a member of a solid, Gospel-proclaiming and –living local church.
Second, I’m very, very sorry to hear of your situation. Even over long-distance, it makes me angry and wish I could do more to help — both to practice justice against sin that honors God and strengthens His Church (as in 1 Cor. 5), and to be a reflection of the grace of our slain and risen Christ, Who has taken the penalty for sins and now through His Spirit changes us from the inside out. (We do not change ourselves!)
In the rest, I’ll interact with your thoughts in a style approximating a real-life conversation.
I’ll do my best. Of course, long-range help can only go so far. Take what I offer, interact if you like, and Lord willing, find a local and Biblical, Gospel-proclaiming and –living church that can help you even more.
Mind if I ask what kind of church that is, that would not point to Scripture, Christ, His grace and the Gospel (according to your word here)? Again I would suggest: find a more-Biblical church that points not to human willpower to fix surface problems, but the flawed human heart (Romans 7) that needs the Spirit’s work! Nine Marks Ministries, whose statement of faith is Biblical and available, has a fairly good database of such churches, as they identify themselves, across the U.S. This is at http://www.9marks.org/churchsearch/ .
Based on Scripture, controlling folks, with evil in their hearts, egged on by demons, are only the sick fruits of the real problem: personal, indwelling sin. Does your husband profess to be a Christian? Has he put away all his own “righteousness” that God counts as “a polluted garment” (Isaiah 64:6), and instead repented and bowed before Christ as the only righteous One Who died for sin and lived for his life? If not, he is not a true follower of Christ. (Of course, I would also ask the same questions of anyone else!)
You may already know of the corresponding Biblical truth that husbands are to love their wives sacrificially just like Christ loved the Church (Ephesians 5). Christ gave His life for the Church. This tells us two things: 1) Your husband should be willing to die for you, not just literally, but daily, in Biblical servant-leadership. 2) Your husband is part of Christ’s “bride,” the Church, and therefore should obey the Church’s Husband. As noted above, is he? As you mention below, it does not sound like it. None of these beliefs are Biblical.
This is un-Biblical. Are you familiar with the book of Galatians? There, the Apostle Paul lashed out at false teachers who were trying to add Jewish Law practices to the Gospel. In his case, these laws, such as for the practice of circumcision, had been fulfilled in Christ. But in your husband’s case, “patriarchal” treatment of daughters was never even required in Scripture. It is Jewish tradition. When did Jewish tradition become equivalent to what the Bible says, much less binding on any Christian today? I say this not simply to agree with you in annoyance and outrage, but to confirm that your apparent disagreement with this stuff is valid. However, this stuff is not wrong simply because it’s outrageous and abusive. It’s wrong because it violates Scripture, opposes God’s grace, and draws the focus from Him as our glorious King to self on the throne.
Again, two approaches may help here. The first would be to continue reading Scripture. Meanwhile, also read books about how to read Scripture, to try to screen out the mystical, anti-Gospel stuff you may have been hearing. A reader-friendly, basic overview is in the book How to Read the Bible For All Its Worth. Or for a survey of Biblical doctrines, try Bible Doctrine by Wayne Grudem. Another book that helped changed my life and understand why God does what He does, and the greater reason behind why He loves us, is Desiring God by John Piper. (It’s also absolutely free online.) I’ve also benefited much from a book called The Subtle Power of Spiritual Abuse, which seems specifically written to people like you in such situations.
All that may help you arm you with not just opposition to your husband’s stuff, but with Biblical truth that implicitly shows that this is false teaching. But far better would be, as I’ve said, would be the second need: finding a local church that teaches the Scripture. At your current church, do they teach the Gospel? Is there a place for church discipline in the way that Jesus describes it (Matthew 18) and Paul echoes (1 Cor. 5)? Do they correct false legalistic teachings as Paul did (Galatians 1-2) and point to the Gospel of grace that leads to changed living, not just to oppose the world, but out of love for the Christ Who saved us? If not, that is not a Biblical church. Thus, based solely on my limited information, that means you would be fully justified, under the authority of Jesus as the Church’s Husband, to find a Biblical church. There you can, I hope, begin to heal, get more-Biblical teaching, and “detox” — and get marriage help.
While my role is, again, limited, I’ll do whatever I can to help with that, even long-range.
God bless, and my wife and I will be praying for you and your family, and your husband.
Thanks Burnett for taking the time to type that out and for sharing the book titles, like The Subtle Power of Spiritual Abuse. I think most people have been affected by it in one way or the other if they’re a believer, and don’t even realize it. Scripture says the truth will set you free. It’s great to see the activity of other believers out there trying to give a chance for people to hear the truth, versus the so-called “Biblical” message of strong personalities.
P.S. The ketubah is the marriage contract. They’re still used today and good ones are a really great picture of what marriage was created to be. I would like to draw attention to sections of the Talmud (man-made add-ons to what God gave, and puts the same emphasis on extra-Biblical ideas that fundamentalism today does in all of it’s forms except the original one – simple belief in fundamental doctrines such as love, joy, peace, etc. and Jesus value of people for example) that give great liberty and value to women. One section teaches a man to love his wife as he would love himself and respect her ideas and thoughts and listen to her as he would listen to his own thoughts. There are some very cool rabbi’s wives in history who had huge – and rightfully so – influence in their husbands’ work teaching Torah because their husband’s were open to a voice other than their own. Just wanted to say that barrel isn’t all bad apples. After all, the New Testament is simple a continuation. Jesus was a Jew and thought as one as did the writers of the New Testament. If you haven’t already gotten into this subject, you might find some of David Stern’s books interesting, because he has really done a lot of work and study and has written a lot of balanced things that kind of help put the faith back on it’s moorings.
Something I forgot to mention that I know you’re probably aware of by now, is a pitfall of homeschooling: indoctrination vs. belief. I grew up around a lot of parents who indoctrinated and didn’t encourage their children to go through the process of learning and belief (how faith is formed). These parents were trying to create their kids in their own image. If that sounds OK to you because parents are told by God to rear their children well, then you either haven’t seen it happening which is a blessing, or you have accepted that ideology. This means allowing your children to recognize that just because something was done a certain way in the past doesn’t mean it’s right.
Would you consider just removing the word “courtship” and just leaving it at “dating?” I noticed you footnoted it, but again it could be perceived many different ways.