tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6888282.post5984927266083373701..comments2024-03-07T00:03:12.584-07:00Comments on John's Corner of the World: CHEC "Men's Leadership Summit," Part V - "Visionary Fathers"John Holzmannhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14849211055450293089noreply@blogger.comBlogger5125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6888282.post-39993956523777428362009-05-11T13:59:00.000-06:002009-05-11T13:59:00.000-06:00The most frightening thing that I see here, overal...The most frightening thing that I see here, overall, is that this view could easily be picked up by the mainstream public as what ALL HOMESCHOOLERS believe. Everyone, no matter what demographic you are from, tend to generalize (haha, as I just did). Groups of people are lumped together. Traditionally, all homeschoolers are seen as "religious". Countless times I have answered the same questions about our homeschooling... Are you really religious?... What about Soc... you know, all the same questions. Yes, we are Bible believing Christians. But to think that I am like-minded with the FIC/quiverfull movement is like saying all coffee is water. Yes, there is water IN it, but coffee is not water. Homeschoolers do not all believe in this anti-government, anti-women, anti-education line of garbage that Doug Phillips spews. I will have to make my own blog post about the manifesto. This is all just so disturbing. This man could single-handedly destroy homeschooling, all in the name of pushing his agenda. Ugh.Dawnhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10597222833825852811noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6888282.post-83868554119814690292009-05-09T23:05:00.000-06:002009-05-09T23:05:00.000-06:00You have mirrored my thoughts on many of the same ...You have mirrored my thoughts on many of the same issues I have had at the FIC my family has attended. These exclusive teachings (college frowned upon for females, women are to only follow the vision of their husband; no compromise with charter schooling because it uses public school curriculum, and on and on) are held by the leadership in the church and are caught by eager people and taught by those in the pulpit.<br /><br />Don't even get me started on how the preachers at the FIC totally ignored the Body analogy in Ephesians, but chose to focus on authority in their last few sermons, in order to put the axe to women ever having a leadership position. Men lead, women follow.<br /><br />I could have written many parts of your post, because they were the same concerns I had here:<br /><br />http://kateschosen.wordpress.com/exclusivity-condescension-preferential-teachings-and-why-i-disagree-strongly-with-these-teachings/<br /><br />My post highlights things I had struggled with for years at Mr. Harris' church. Just the focus on things that aren't the Gospel, but life preferences, for example. The fear-mongering about using charter schools, or homeschooling with charter school textbooks came up and I had to chuckle because a deacon's family uses a "charter school" program to educate one in his family.<br /><br />What I'm wondering is, since Mr. Harris has since announced he is taking a sabbatical to write a book, was he inspired from this Leadership Summit in some way and will it affect the new direction he wants to take the homeschool "movement"? And what more kind of marginialization can we expect?<br /><br />Our family has since left his congregation to attend another one of their family of churches (though I am finding some of the same problems there), and he still has not tried to address these issues I brought up on my blog. You see, we were a dedicated part of his congregation and we left, for various issues, mainly based on the teachings and "exclusive" feelings we had in certain interactions, but especially after he started to recommend the Botkin's "Return of the Daughters" video and Vision Forum stuff, and his own constant marketeering to the congregation. He/they would promote his family's own conferences, heavily encouraging the congregation that we all needed to volunteer to help the conferences be successful (um, the money/business/ministry aspect makes it really self-serving and questionable). It's a long story ... you can read about some of it in my account.<br /><br />I also agree with your assessment of Doug Phillips' remarkably narrow definition of womanhood. I always find it funny when men try to define what true, or "biblical" womanhood, because even Proverbs 30:18-19 states that "there are three things which are too wonderful to me; yes four which I know not: The way of the eagle in the air .. serpent on a rock ..ship in the midst of the sea <B>and the way of a man with a maid."</B> To try to fit every woman into one particular mold makes about as much sense as doing that to men, but that is what these self-promoted leaders do (and they have a following, because people want to follow; but when others challenge their positions, why aren't they commended for their leadership qualities instead of charged with being divisive or effeminate or whatever? .. division is what the leaders themselves are doing.)<br /><br />I wrote another blog post on another perspective on being a "biblical" woman:<br /><br />http://kateschosen.wordpress.com/2008/06/24/my-name-is-not-titus/<br /><br /><I>My identity is Christ. I’m not necessarily primarily a “Titus 2 Woman”. If anything, I want to be known as a “Luke 10:38-42 Woman“, who, like Mary, sits at Jesus’ feet and hears His word and chooses “that good part, which shall not be taken away” from me.</I>I have a long story, and want to let people know that these leaders' ideas are not just "taught" from the pulpit, (even though at Mr. Harris' FIC they certainly were and still are taught, and have some really, really bad presuppositions, like the ones you posted by Doug Phillips), but they are CAUGHT by the people who come in to these congregations, just looking to find fellowship and likemindedness (mostly, they drawn in impressionable and isolated homeschoolers who want to find community), and they are finding a whole new paradigm in which to either fit into, or feel marginialized and judged and less than "biblical". <br /><br />Any opposition to their teaching and you are viewed with suspicion, that feminism has crept in and carried you away into apostasy. They point at an enemy (the public schools, women going to college, etc.) and then they have the universal solution that's based in man-made teachings, or primarily snippets of Scripture from the Old Testament while they practically are silent on the Gospels and Jesus' ministry -- and make the answer not Jesus, but a prescribed set of "roles" and rules for people to perform, and THAT needs to be viewed with suspicion.<br /><br />So, they keep putting their stuff on the internet (Doug's and Kevin's and other's blogs, audio), for the whole purpose of getting people to either agree with them or disagree with them, and then when we comment and disagree on the content of their teaching and the way they mis-use the Scripture, they say we are gossiping. The big sin for women. But they don't gossip about us to their visionary men friends, no.<br /><br />These men/"leaders" DO use their pulpits and blogs, often, as a bully pulpit to beat on their intended broader, enemy audience, though, and to appeal to their support base. They use code speak, and those who are monitoring the content of their messages are hearing them get rebuked for questioning their authority or accuracy in their handling of the Word of God. This is the contention. <br /><br />If they want to put on conferences and write books, they can have at it! But when they become the leaders and arbiters of what is "biblical" education and what is a "biblical" woman, man and family, they have added to the Scripture and have become legalists. Or, one of my pet peeves of their teachings: a "biblical" way to earn income (as only self-employed, Christian family businessmen are truly biblical and fulfilling Eph. 4:28, as opposed to those who work for another person/company and trying to raise a family, and God-forbid your wife earn a living in a separate career field than the one that supports her husband's vision and multi-generational vision!)<br /><br />For all that I wrote on my blog, the friend of Doug Phillips -- Mr. Harris -- asked my husband to ask me (not me directly) for me to take down my blog post. That was almost a year ago. This was after I had left his congregation months before. This inability to discuss our concerns about these teachings greatly grieves me, as they hold a lot of influence over many people, but not many people who are in the congregation actually confront the error.<br /><br />There is a very controlled set of books they recommend families to read in order to line up their theology correctly with the church's leadership, and they are featured on the church book tables. "Federal Husband" is one of them. "Family Man/Family Leader" is another. <br /><br />It is a celebrity church, as are many of these homeschool churches are, I'm sad to say.<br /><br />The mainstream Christians, who love our Lord Jesus, think the celebrity homeschool churches are out to lunch. And they are also looked down upon by the FIC leadership because they have Sunday School, Youth Group, Wednesday night College age group, etc. Well, what do the FIC celebrities think all their rebelutionary-type conferences are with the hype and the T-shirts and the photo shoots and the book drives are? Let's ask this: If the Bible is silent on Sunday School, and parents are to teach our children exclusively from cradle to marriage (especially daughters), and that makes Sunday School evil, as per Voddie Baucham's assessment, then doesn't that make homeschool conferences and its marketeering and pep rallies and seminars for young rebelutionaries and visionary entreprenuerialism (as per Phillips, Harris, etc.) -- doesn't that make them equally as "evil" because they're never mentioned in the Bible? And the focus is a great big fan-fare driven celebrity attraction (with an emphasis of family, after all: who is going to drive them to the conference, but their parents/family?)<br /><br />"Oh, logic! Why don't they teach logic at these (home)schools (summits) these days!?Kathleenhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01181438211658110880noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6888282.post-19975854593010000662009-05-08T06:31:00.000-06:002009-05-08T06:31:00.000-06:00John, excellent article, two comments.
The "inter...John, excellent article, two comments.<br /><br />The "internet gossip mongers" could have written the manifesto that they all would have quickly signed. Shoot, they (we)could have written Phillips whole speech for him. No surprises, all predictable. I remember being in an FIC where one of the men would throw up his hands and whine "women, women, women" to describe his distaste for any church but an FIC. So, so predictable. "We have met the enemy and she is wearing lipstick."<br /><br />Secondly, I have shared our own family's experiences in the FIC movement for anyone who wants an inside look at the pros and cons. http://www.thatmom.com/articles/article-fic.htm<br /><br />This has become the mantra at homeschooling conferences around the nation in the past couple of years. One mom had never heard of this movement until this spring when she was subjected to railing against the traditional church. I wonder if Bible-believing pastors are aware of the division these men are causing within the body of Christ over non-essentials of the faith? Maybe those of us who are aware of these things ought to warn our own pastors and church leaders.thatmomhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05749567393301385829noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6888282.post-86433212853196639332009-05-06T15:24:00.000-06:002009-05-06T15:24:00.000-06:00As usual, Phillips is awfully long winded. If onl...As usual, Phillips is awfully long winded. If only he were more like Hemingway. My version of his meaning is this: "Homeschooling worked in the '80s, 90's. Women taught. Fruit was produced. But not good enough for me. Time to create/invent a problem. I have a solution. I will be in charge now."<br /><br />In fact, each time he opens his mouth with one of his defined problems, the example he uses doesn't support his point. It was Calvin's friend that helped him... NOT his father. It was the mothers who taught successfully, not(usually) the fathers. <br /><br />As far as all his gov't mumbo-jumbo, any Bible reading Christian knows that we are to render to Caesar what is Caesar's and to God what is God's. <br /><br />In his first talk, I believe he talks about following the Bible and knowing it. Too bad he didn't spend the 2-4 hrs (or whatever length of hot air blowing), simply teaching the Word. Unlike Phillips words, God's word does not return void.<br /><br />Susan TAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6888282.post-35366526472805445322009-05-05T12:37:00.000-06:002009-05-05T12:37:00.000-06:00" We must be involved in godly family integrated, ..." We must be involved in godly family integrated, orthodox, sound churches. Without accountability, without the love of brethren, without the nurturing and the teaching of the Bible, we will fall apart, and the homeschool movement can no longer tolerate, it can no longer handle, unassociated Christian members that are simply not willing to be part of formal biblical associations."<br /><br />More than any other, these 2 sentences give me shivers.Are we to interpret this as belonging to a "certain" Christian church? Do you think this is where we are headed? Not only will they be dictating our curriculum choices at the chec conference, but they will be deciding what 'acceptable' church associations are? Chilling.Please tell me I am reading too much into this statement.marynoreply@blogger.com