Church discipline, Chuck Phelps, and a Wolf

In many church discipline situations, the pastor is privy to specific details that are not shared with the congregation. I believe this to be appropriate and would support my pastor in conducting church discipline in this private manner. However, this support is contingent upon the idea that sufficient details have been shared. The congregation can only make an informed decision regarding a member’s conduct and subsequent restoration or removal if sufficient information is given.

If my pastor brought a young man before our congregation, and the young man confessed to theft, I would hope the response (and requirements) would be different if the theft was of $10 from a friend’s wallet or the violent armed robbery of a bank. I would also hope that my pastor understands that — while he needn’t share all of the gory details — indicating the level of the offense to the congregation is vital to our decision-making process.

Relate this to the recent brouhaha involving Chuck Phelps and Trinity Baptist Church in Concord, NH. (If you are unfamiliar with the case, this article provides the most complete list of allegations that I’ve found.) Apparently Ernest Willis was brought before the church, and he confessed to unfaithfulness to his wife. The church then voted to forgive Willis and allow him to maintain his membership. (I was not an eye-witness, but members of the congregation who were present have related these events.)

Chuck Phelps says he reported the incident to both the Concord Police and to the Department of Children and Youth Services. My question is: What exactly did Phelps report to them? After all, he performed church discipline on Willis for unfaithfulness without also mentioning to his congregation that the unfaithfulness occurred during the course of two rapes of a 15 year-old girl. Given this, I’m not inclined to think that he was entirely forthcoming when he reported the incident to the authorities.

And THAT, my friends, is one of the reasons many think that Chuck Phelps holds some responsibility for Tina Anderson’s continued victimization. If Phelps minimized the crime to the authorities, then he did not seek justice for her as he should have as her shepherd. When a wolf named Willis injured one of Phelps’ flock, Phelps sent the injured lamb away and allowed the wolf to remain in the fold.

That’s just poor shepherding. (At best.)

Michael Pearl Laughs at Critics

On Monday, March 1, 2010 – three weeks after Lydia Schatz was murdered by her parents faithfully following the instructions given by No Greater Joy Ministries – Michael Pearl posted the following on the NGJ Ministries Facebook fan page:

“It has come to may attention that a vocal few are decrying our sensible application of the Biblical rod in training up our children. I laugh at my caustic critics, for our properly spanked and trained children grow to maturity in great peace and love. Numbered in the millions, these kids become the models of self-control and discipline, highly educated and creative—entrepreneurs that pay the taxes your children will receive in entitlements. When your children finally find an honest mechanic or a trustworthy homebuilder, it will be one of ours. When your children apply for a job it will be at a company our children founded. When they go to a doctor, it will be one of our Christian children that heals them with cutting edge innovation. When your adult kids go for therapy it will be one of our kids-become-psychologist that directs them to the couch and challenges them to release their self-loathing and embrace hope for a better tomorrow. When your children grow old and realize their mortality and seek to make peace with their Creator, it will be one of our children that shares with them the message of God’s love and forgiveness.

My five grown children are laughing at your foolish, uninformed criticism of God’s method of child training, for their kids—my 17 grandkids—are laughing . . . because that is what they do most of the time. They laugh when Daddy is coming home. The laugh when it is time to do more homeschooling. They laugh when it is time to practice the violin and piano. They laugh when they see their Big Papa coming (that’s me) because Big Papa is laughing and they don’t care why just as long as he laughs with them.
My granddaughters laugh with joy after giving their baby dolls a spanking for “being naughty” because they know their dolls will grow up to be the best mamas and daddies in the world—just like them.
People all around the world, in places like Russia, China, Germany, New Zealand, Guatemala, Peru, Africa, and fifty other countries are laughing with joy because after applying the Biblical principles found in our books they finally have happy and obedient children.

Even my chickens are laughing . . . well, actually it more like cackling, because they just laid another organic egg for my breakfast and they know that it was that same piece of ¼ inch plastic supply line that trained the dogs not to eat chicken….” posted at 1:05pm by “No Greater Joy Ministries”

I hate to reprint his words, but I also want to make note of them in case they disappear or are edited elsewhere.

I want to note again that this statement was made just THREE WEEKS after Lydia Schatz died and the District Attorney investigating her case made Michael Pearl aware that the family had been using No Greater Joy materials. Michael Pearl released a statement saying that his ministry was not responsible…which is quite predictable, one would expect such a statement.

But it would make sense to BE QUIET after that, wouldn’t it? Releasing the above statement with its dismissive tone is unbelievable. It speaks to an arrogance that defies Christian comprehension, mercy, grace, and humility.

The content also defies comprehension, but I’m not sure my brain has quite processed all the claims made above. I will probably have to come back to that another day.

Double-Speak and Clinton-esque Definitions

May I indulge in satire? If satire offends you or you are unable to easily recognize it, I would advise not reading any further.

Quotes from a pseudo, recently-released weight-loss book:

“My husband and I have found that the key to maintaining a healthy weight is very simple. It requires some effort in the beginning, but after an initial period of consistency, the principles become so second-nature that you don’t have to think about it anymore. If you are concerned about your weight, and don’t want to be one of those disgustingly obese families, then take the time to implement our principles. We know it works. We’ve seen entire families become supermodel thin by implementing our simple methods. If you are too lazy to listen to us, then you deserve the health problems that your obese-ness will produce.”

“The answer to weight-loss is quite simple. If you fill your stomach with paper, you will eat less and will lose that weight you gained by being a disgusting slob.”

“Chewing and Swallowing Paper (CASP) is the first phase of the process. It is quite simple. Keep a small memo pad in your pocket, throughout your day rip out half-pages and chew and swallow the pieces. Look for opportunities that will reinforce the idea that paper is preferable to food. If you see a donut and find yourself reaching for it, simply rip out half a sheet of the memo pad and chew and swallow it. In no time at all you’ll find that your desire for donuts to be diminished to the point that you’ll likely never eat one again – even long after you stop the CASP phase.”

“The second phase of our weight management program is to Fill Your Stomach with Paper (FYSWP). This phase must be implemented once you find that your body will still crave nutrition, even if you’re following the CASP phase of the plan. If you FYSWP and are consistent with this, your stomach will feel full and you will not be bothered with the urge to eat other things. You’ll be amazed at how easily your extra weight comes off, and others will compliment you on your pleasing shape and weight.”

“Now, we have our detractors: people who claim that our advice and instructions are harmful. The idea is ludicrous. We have millions of people using our methods. Just look to their results if you are concerned. Entire families are able to maintain healthy weights by CASP and FYSWP. Anyone who becomes ill using these methods is taking our principles to extreme levels.”

After a recent death that some attribute to the CASP/FYSWP plan, the authors release a statement:

“We do not teach “eating paper.” We teach people how to lose weight, which sometimes requires the limited and controlled consumption of paper to keep the stomach from signaling the brain for food. Over 1,000,000 people have applied these principles with joyful results.”

[/satire]

First, let me say that the insulting tone directed at the obese in the above hurts my heart. Just as the insulting tone directed toward struggling parents disturbs me in the Pearls’ writings. We are all imperfect, struggling toward our ideals and reaching out for answers. The lack of grace and insults directed toward the hurting are inexcusable.

Second, I obviously do not suggest that anyone eat, consume, chew-and-swallow, or fill-their-stomachs with paper in order to lose weight. I chose this as an example hoping that the obviousness would keep anyone from reading half of this post and attempting this!

Now that I have those two issues out of the way, can we discuss the ideas behind this piece of satire?

If you’ve been following the activities of Michael and Debi Pearl for years, or if you’ve just been exposed to their teachings through the recent death of Lydia Schatz, you’ll be aware that there is a great deal of controversy surrounding their teachings. Both their supporters and detractors are quite vocal and passionate. If you’ve listened to both sides you know that their supporters say that any harm done by using the Pearls’ methods is due to people taking their teachings to the extreme – that the Pearls do not advocate any techniques that would result in abuse. Their detractors say that the Pearls’ teachings cause parents to become inured to the harm being committed by physical punishments in the name of consistent “correction” and that the Pearls’ theology is semi-Pelagian.

Both sides have wonderful quotes with which to back up their arguments.

From the statement released by Michael Pearl in response to the investigation by Butte County District Attorney, Mr. Ramsey:

“We do not teach “corporal punishment” nor “hitting” children. We teach parents how to train their children, which sometimes requires the limited and controlled application of a spanking instrument to hold the child’s attention on admonition. Over 1,000,000 parents have applied these Biblical principles with joyful results.
…

Likewise Ramsey, the prosecutor in the Schatz case, is quick to point out that “No Greater Joy” does not advocate spanking to the point of serious injury. If indeed these parents were abusive, and that has not yet been proven by the courts, it is regretful that our teachings were not able to turn them from their predisposition to abusive habits.”

From the Pearls’ “No Greater Joy” website:

“A swift swat with a light, flexible instrument will sting without bruising or causing internal damage. Many people are using a section of ¼ inch plumber’s supply line as a spanking instrument. It will fit in your purse or hang around you neck. You can buy them for under $1.00 at Home Depot or any hardware store. They come cheaper by the dozen and can be widely distributed in every room and vehicle. Just the high profile of their accessibility keeps the kids in line.

…

Then I would have him stand in front of me and ask him why he got the spanking. If his answer showed that he was rebellious and defiant, he would get several more licks. Again he would be questioned as to his offense. If he showed total submission, we put it all behind us, but if he were still rebellious, we would continue until he gave over his will. Only about three of our five children ever resisted after a spanking and refused to cooperate. Each of the three required only one experience of continued spankings until they surrendered. None of the three ever tried it a second time. In all cases, it was between the ages of two and four that they tried their moment of defiance.”

“See! See! Right there it says…”

Both sides have plenty of info to be quoted; mainly because the Pearls understand the value of double speak. Most harmful Christian parenting authors have absorbed this truth. If you are going to give parents instructions that are harmful and based on twisting scripture, it is best to make your case with great emotion and fear-mongering. Then you can cover yourself by disclaimers that contradict your instructions so that you can always point to your disclaimers and blame the “victims” who took you at your fear-mongering words. Most parents will walk away with the by-the-book instructions and assume that the disclaimers are for “others” who are unable to be discerning or who are inclined to unattached, abusive behavior.

Also, it is quite helpful if you want to be a harmful Christian parenting author to change the meanings of words. This way you can be quoted as NOT saying something that you actually say. “We’ve never told people to ‘eat’ paper” can be quite true if you’ve only ever said, “Chew and swallow paper OR Fill your stomach with paper.”

Just as it is quite true that Michael Pearls can say that he does not advocate “corporal punishment” nor “hitting” children if he simply calls hitting and spanking “training,” “chastisement,” and “punishment.”

It really depends on what your definition of “is” is.

The Small Moments are so Precious

Life is sweet. Both of my children are sitting on the couch, relaxing after a busy day. One is wearing a mask with feathers on it. One is reading aloud to us about Mount Rushmore. All three of us are snacking on Trix cereal. (This is a pretty big treat in our house… sugar AND nuclear-level food coloring.)

Life is sweet. Indeed, it is very sweet. Thank you for these small moments, God.

Sacred Cows

I own a few sacred cows… certain topics and causes and beliefs that I hold dear. I tend to feel a sense of solidarity with others who own these same sacred cows. I’m even inclined to turn a blind eye to some undesirable beliefs/behaviors in these “others” since the herds we both care for are so important to me.

If you find yourself defending the Pearls in the fall-out after Lydia Schatz’ death, I would humbly challenge you to assess whether your feelings stem from the desire to defend your right to spank or if you really and truly believe that the Pearls’ teachings are not harmful.

The Instrument Itself Makes it Abusive

I am shocked. Simply shocked and in disbelief at the defense of the words of Michael Pearl that I’ve witnessed these last few weeks since Lydia Schatz’ murder.

I find myself sitting here in a daze, feeling disconnected from reality, wondering what would have to happen for some people to stop supporting the Pearls’ advice.

I just witnessed a discussion where a normal, logical, loving, Christian woman stated that using a plumbing supply line to whip a child is not abusive. I cannot wrap my mind around that belief. Have I been living in a bubble? Wouldn’t most of the “progressive” Western World consider any whipping with a piece of quarter-inch rubber tubing to be abusive? Yes, yes, of course the secular world would say that (please hear the dismissive tone there )… but wouldn’t even Christians say that? Shouldn’t ESPECIALLY Christians say that?

Why are THE CHRISTIANS the ones defending people who advise beating children with plumbing supply lines to the point that the children have no breath left to complain?

Where is the overwhelming outrage? Where is the commitment to our churches only supporting authors and “experts” who have sound doctrine? (The Pearls deny original sin and believe that sinless perfection is attainable.)

I’m aghast and agog.

And, apparently my blog is still just about spanking.

Spanking as “A Tool” versus Spanking a “The Tool”

There is a difference in spanking being one of many tools in a parent’s toolbox and spanking being the ONLY tool in a parent’s toolbox.

A parent who views spanking as one of many tools will have a different mindset toward discipline than one who sees spanking as the only acceptable parental reaction to misbehavior.

A parent who views spanking as one of many tools will be open to analyzing and changing directions if a child does not seem to respond to spankings. A parent who sees spanking as the only acceptable parental reaction to misbehavior only has the option of spanking HARDER if a child does not seem to respond to spankings.

Can we all agree that these differences will have a significant impact on the likelihood of abusive beatings occurring?

So, my thoughts are:

If you choose to spank, it should not be your only parenting tool. It probably shouldn’t even be your go-to tool. Spanking HARDER or LONGER should not be your reaction if a child does not respond with repentance. And, any parenting “expert” who tries to convince you otherwise should be avoided.

In other news:  Why in the world is my blog totally about spanking? I’ll have to write about something else soon.

Spanking in Anger isn’t the Problem

All Christian parenting authors that I’m aware of say “never spank in anger.” They seem to believe that it is only physical discipline performed in anger that results in abuse. That children who are unintentionally murdered by their parents due to physical punishments were murdered because the parent was angry and was unable to see or care about the damage being done.

I believe this is a fallacy and a smokescreen.

Whenever a child dies, like Lydia Schatz and Sean Paddock, there is lots of internet discussion about these issues. And invariably the people who believe spanking to be Biblically commanded pull out the “never spank in anger” clause and use it as a shield to block themselves from the notion that they could ever find themselves in this situation. They use this clause to prove that the parenting “experts” who espouse these methods could never be culpable in these situations. After all, if a parent is using the rod “correctly” and “never spanking in anger” then they believe there is no danger.

I’d like to propose that we have NO idea the state of mind of the parents who were punishing Lydia or Sean or countless other children who are abused every day with these methods. NO idea. We’d like to believe that they are monsters because this makes us feel safe from finding ourselves in that situation. But I don’t think that we have information that supports that they are all monsters. Some are, sure. You can give me countless examples of abusive parents who perform degrading and unspeakable acts upon their children, but as of today I have seen no information that indicates the Schatz family performed any acts outside of “normal” To Train Up a Child -style punishments.

Several news articles I’ve read about the Schatz case indicate that the plumbing-supply-line whippings went on for several hours. To me, this would indicate that it is more likely that the parents were calm rather than angry. I’ve been angry with my children. I will even confess to being in a rage with them, as much as I’m ashamed to admit that. But that anger burns hot and FAST. The anger is not sustained for hours and hours. If you are brave enough to do it, imagine yourself with a piece of plumbing supply line in your hand and your child stretched out on a bed ready for a whipping. Even in your angriest moment, would the whipping last more than a few minutes? Wouldn’t your rage burn out? Even if you are heartless, wouldn’t you stop because you grew tired? Anger and rage are exhausting, and they don’t last long. A truly selfish, heartless person would lose interest and want to be doing something else like watching t.v. or working on a hobby. They would stop the whipping episode out of disinterest.

I want to suggest that only two types of people will beat their children for hours. The first type are sadists who enjoy hurting others. They get a thrill and a pleasure in inflicting pain. The second type are parents who desperately care for their children and their eternal salvation. They believe that this world is but fleeting, and that their children’s eternal salvation is the most important parenting goal.

And you know what? There are lots of us in that camp. Those of us who know Christ want to live eternally with him and with our children and loved ones. We do not want our children to be eternally damned. We do what we believe to be right in raising our children to know Christ and his offer of salvation.

Some of us believe that – as much as we would like to – we have no ultimate control over whether our children choose Christ. We must be faithful and model Christ-like behavior to our children. We must be faithful and guide them in the ways they should go (discipline). We must be faithful talking about God and his ways and laws in our daily lives. We must do all these things, and then leave the results in God’s hands.

Others of us believe that parenting “correctly” can all but guarantee that our children will become Christians. These parents desperately love their children, and will therefore go to almost any length to make sure their parenting is “correct.” Some of these parents find authors and “experts” who also believe that parenting is an equation – do A and B and your result will be C. The “experts” ideas resonate with them, and these parents begin to diligently apply A and B because they desire the promised C for their children.

Sometimes A and B are not life-threatening concepts. Sometimes A and B are things like, “Never, ever, ever allow your child to decide what’s for dinner. You are the boss.” Sometimes A and B are issues that can be life-threatening in some, or all, situations. Recent parenting advice like “Maintain four hour intervals between breastfeeding sessions” can sometimes be life threatening. This advice results in Failure to Thrive in some mother/infant pairs. Other instances of A and B are found in punishment advice available in many books written by “Christian experts” like Fugate, Pearl, et al. Michael Pearl’s insistence on a child’s complete surrender before punishment is stopped can lead to life-threatening  situations. Lydia Schatz’ death is a horrific example of this.

Based on what I’ve read and what I know about parents and our desire to raise Godly children, I do not think Lydia’s parents hated her or were even trying to injure her. They wanted to parent “correctly,” and they believed that exerting total control and seeing surrender in her were the only ways to ensure that she had a chance for salvation. Unfortunately, Lydia’s early life and adoption likely played a role in how she responded to physical pain and punishment. (KatieKind gives an excellent discussion of attachment disorders in adopted children.) Her parents killed her in their desire to save her from eternal damnation. They believed Michael Pearl:  that the only way to save Lydia was to exert total control over her and to see a repentant heart in her.

The problem wasn’t dispensing physical punishment while being angry, the problem was the belief  that ANY parenting method can save our children from eternal damnation.