Showing posts with label Abuse. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Abuse. Show all posts

Tuesday, April 15, 2014

Doug Phillips = Pervert

I never really thought I'd title a blog post with that phrase... but this is a new era. Doug Phillips is going to court. But this time, he's the one on trial. See the news article here and the official legal complaint here. (Trigger warning: Both links contain graphic details about sexual and spiritual abuse.) I knew it already but this just cements the fact that Doug Phillips is a freaking pervert. Can I just say that again? Doug Phillips is a freaking slimy pervert!

Most of you know the story: On October 31, 2013, Doug Phillips confessed to a "lengthy, inappropriate relationship" with another. See my brief post here, with a link to his statement. Since then, there has been much speculation about the details. What did Phillips mean? Who is "the woman"? Was this all that happened or was there more? More than one person tried to unravel the details and one blog in particular, (*cough* Jen's Gems *cough*), was rather invasive and emotional about the whole thing. I stayed out of it... mostly because I knew a bit more than I was able to disclose.      

Lourdes Torres c.2007
Now that the details are public, I can state that I've known that the "mystery woman" was Lourdes Torres for several months. When Phillips' confession was posted, I immediately thought the woman was probably Torres. Soon after, I received the information confirming this from one of my sources who also told me that a lawsuit was in the works. However, I did not feel it was my place to disclose that information until Torres chose to release details. I just kept praying that she was recovering from her experience and receiving counseling. I encourage everyone to continue to pray for her and her family. I'm very glad she's taking Phillips to court. I praise her bravery in speaking out. Doug Phillips can be an intimidating man... but maybe not as much as we once thought. Phillips is far more of an idiot than even I imagined. I mean, knocking on Torres' window in the middle of the night? Going to talk to Torres' parents, with Beall? What a creepy idiot! And Beall's sending threatening e-mails to Torres was hilariously stupid of her. Very incriminating. It's such perfect evidence of the sickness that is Doug and Beall Phillips and Vision Forum. Though Beall meant to be intimidating, her efforts backfired beautifully and will now be extremely valuable in court.

The fact that the Vision Forum Board is implicated and that the likes of Scott Brown, Voddie Bauchum, and etc. are mentioned in the complaint, may turn out to be a good thing. Maybe all these so-called ministries can go down together.

On a side note, I am both amused and aghast at Michael Ferris' distancing himself from Doug Phillips and Vision Forum. Ferris is himself a fundamentalist, has espoused some parts of the patriarchy movement, and I recall reading about the courtship of one of his daughter's in Josh Harris' Boy Meets Girl. Ferris was freakishly controlling and separated his daughter from her future husband while they were in college. He made his daughter cut off contact with the young man and manipulated the couple's feelings and actions. The couple finally reunited when Ferris decided it was time. They could have had a happy, normal relationship all through college but oh no, Ferris had to be in control. It was totally ridiculous and a terrible waste of everyone's time and energy. In fact, it was emotionally abusive. And if Ferris didn't like Phillips' teachings, why didn't he tell the homeschool community sooner? That would have been helpful! In addition, Michael Farris has handled reports of rape on the Patrick Henry campus in a completely antiquated and dismissive manner. See this link. This is completely unacceptable and disgusting. Thus, I have a very difficult time respecting Ferris and believing anything that he states.

There's more to come I'm sure... this issue is far from over.

Ingrid

P.S. Does anyone else find it funny that the lawsuit was filed on April 15th? The 102nd Anniversary of the sinking of the Titanic?

Saturday, June 1, 2013

Please Tell Me More...


I've decided to respond to these comments in a post and plan to do the same with similar comments in future. If I have time, I may do this with all anonymous and cranky comments in the future. However, I'm still moderating the comments and all the rules in the comment form still apply. Normal commenters are still safe from trolls and are welcome to have open discussions. 

So trolls, you have been warned. Comment at risk of being made an example and given a nickname you'll probably hate.

Dear Warmly, my own personal troll of the week,

(Since no name was provided, I dub you Warmly, after the convivial valediction in your comments.)

Thank you for providing several perfectly, articulated examples of trolling. Seriously, that was grotesquely impressive. In the course of a few hours, I think you managed to commit every one of the things that I find disturbing.

I’ll be honest: it is hard for me to see this from your point of view. I found your tone to be very accusatory, invalidating, and at times, downright bonkers. I’m going to try to address some of your points but, it’s hard to know where to start.

First, what right do you have to be so upset with me? I’m not talking about you, in fact, I’m writing about very personal issues and hurts in my life. I have been personally injured by the patriarchy movement and I don’t want others to experience the pain of legalism and false teaching. That’s why I work on this blog. Maybe you don’t agree with that but I think you could respect it. I’ll admit it, my writing isn’t perfect―I openly admit that it’s always a work in progress. Still, that does not give you the right to act in this manner.

Of Trolls and Hatemail

You wrote, “it's impossible for you to know their hearts and by slandering them with your one-sided research is childish and ungodly.” I never claim to know the hearts of these leaders/teachers nor judge their faith/salvation. However, I can see their fruit and I will point it out when I can clearly see that it is rotten. (Matt 7:15-20)

“It's just plain wrong for you to be saying most of what's on this blog; you have no right, so quit whining when others criticize you and buck up if your going to continue your pharisaical rantings. [sic].” To quote you again, “This is a free country and conservative Christians ought to be given the same right to living as they believe God is directing them.” I am a conservative Christian and I believe God has called me to write on these matters. Why will you not give me the same rights you claim for yourself? Are you given the right to decide who can speak up and who can’t?

“If you're a Christian, as you state,” It is impossible for you to know my heart just as I cannot see the hearts of the leaders in the patriarchy movement.

You wrote, “people…don't need a professional research assistant to do it for them.” I disagree… and you took my meaning out of context. Busy homeschool moms and dads don’t always have time to pull all the pieces together and do the research required to present a wider picture. I compile the information and provide background. Yes, I include my own analysis but I encourage people to think critically about all the information presented. My words were never meant to suggest that I think people cannot find these things or interpret them on their own. I know nearly everyone could find all the information but some people simply do not have the time to do so. Plus, if these leaders continue to post things and then take them down, it is important that someone holds them accountable by saving the information.

"I feel sorry for you, Ingrid. You must be miserable; I'll be praying for you." How touching! Please refrain from praying the incendiary Psalms down on my head.

Learning to Fly

“You're grossly mistaken, Ingrid. Unless someone has specifically explained to you that that is the reason they ask you how you're doing with your sister's marriage, you should not make premature assumptions (which are extremely biased, I might add) as to what people mean by their questions. Now, I'm no expert on reading peoples' minds as you seem to qualify yourself; so this is my human opinion….” I find it intensely amusing and weird that you believe yourself qualified to not only read my mind, but also explain how I was wrong in interpreting a personal experience/conversation. Were you there? Did you see and hear the conversation? Did you examine the non-verbals and the feedback? What did the kinesics show you? Tell me more about your “human opinion” of something that happened to me since I clearly can’t interpret conversations without your help.


"Think about it: you and your sisters are probably really close; one of you is getting married; can't you put two and two together and realize that most of the time a sister's sister is marrying the other sister is, excited, yes! But also a bit saddened?" Oh, now you're telling me how I should feel! Thanks so much!

"Maybe I'm wrong and your relationship with your sisters is not a very good one, so perhaps you instinctively knew that there were unspoken, hidden meanings behind their questions after all." Nope. My sister and I have a good relationship. But even if we didn't, I doubt my friends would try to pry into it.

“But I don't think that is a good topic to be covering here if it's your own personal relationship and trying to apply it to other unmarried young women is unfair.” Your sentence structure makes this hard to read but again, I find it amusing that you’re telling me not to write about my personal experiences (which, as any writer will explain to you, is the best source of all) and that I have nothing in common with other young women. Wow. You must know so much about me.

“Then, you go on to describe and critique what these single girls are THINKING. Goodness! You must be a mind reader! Or, perhaps you've spoken with girls who tell you these things, and even in that case, why are you trying to put all of us single girls in a box and assume that we all have the same problem?” *sigh* Damned if I do and damned if I don’t. Let me just say that I used my own thoughts and struggles for this article and wrote to help other girls like me. If none of it applies to you, then don’t put yourself in that box and don’t read about my experience.

“Honestly, Ingrid, when I read your posts I only need to read through two paragraphs to write an entire article on.” It’s probably a good idea to read each article in it’s entirety before writing a rebuttal. But if you don’t want to do that, you could stop reading them altogether.

“Have you EVER considered doing something "honest and true" with your life? ... You have grown a deep, deep root of bitterness in your heart, Ingrid, and trying to find comfort in nit-picking other people's personal decisions as to how they dress, live and love is never going to make you feel better.” Since you don’t actually know me and all the different facets of my life, I think you should stop before you embarrass yourself. And then you go on to describe and critique what I'm THINKING. Goodness! You must be a mind reader! Sound familiar? It works both ways you know.

“First of all, Ingrid, why do you so readily assume that girls in conservative Christian homes live and breathe only for the goal of marriage?” Because it is such a clear focus on blogs, in books, and in the conferences that these families read/attend. There’s a whole book titled “Before you meet Prince Charming” and discussions by the Botkins of “How to occupy ‘till he comes.” Why did Anna Sofia Botkin write an entire article about her issues with turning 25 and not being married? (Maybe she shouldn’t write about her singleness and try to apply it to other girls? Isn’t it unfair of her to try to apply her struggles to others? :-D You see, Warmly, it again works both ways.) And if marriage isn’t the goal, why in heck are all of you preparing to be “helpmeets?” If you never get married, how do you justify all this training to be a “helpmeet?” Spending your whole life serving your father is not in the Bible, it's just not there and those who believe it is are taking Scripture wildly out of context.

“But where do you get the idea that if we never marry we think our life to be worthless (maybe these are your thoughts and you feel that way)?” Haha. No. I love not being married, it gives me freedom to travel the world and write all the time. But I wouldn’t mind getting married someday if the right guy asked me.

“From my perspective within a loving, conservative Christian home (not fundie, not part of a Patriarchy "Movement", not bewitched), life is about serving, loving and ultimately glorifying God in everything we do, say and think. Do you not agree? It's not about marriage.” Yes, I do agree. I’m glad you have this perspective.

“So when you see a 30-something single woman joyfully serving and living with her family, stop to think: maybe, just maybe she is doing God's (not Ingrid's) will. Maybe God has other plans for her than marriage, or He's using her in other ways before marriage and she's passionate about those things. Maybe, just maybe, Ingrid, God's right and you're wrong...just this once.” I’m sorry but I would probably stop and feel sorry for any woman who is 30+, single, without a self-supporting job, and living with her parents.  Maybe, just maybe she is living out her father’s will rather than God's? I find this an extremely narrow idea of God’s calling for women and refuse to believe that it is God's will for most of the young women involved in the movement. "If anyone comes to me and does not hate father and mother, wife and children, brothers and sisters—yes, even their own life—such a person cannot be my disciple. And whoever does not carry their cross and follow me cannot be my disciple." (Luke 14:26-27)

“What "system"? Scriptural Christianity should not be considered a ‘system.’” Scriptural Christianity? Really? Where in the Bible does it say that women cannot go to college? Where does it state that they must serve their fathers until marriage? Where is courtship? Where is militant fecundity? Where is the family integrated church? These things are a system. The gospel of Jesus Christ is Scriptural Christianity and it is a relationship, not a list of hoops to jump through and visions of men to fulfill.

“Oh, and you're right- this is a "tricky situation"; for you. Because you can't seem to wrap your mind around the "whys" that girls are choosing to stay with their parents at home until marriage. And if that is the case, you have no say on the subject.” I live with my parents. Mostly to save money and save for travel and my future. However, I will move out eventually, married or not. Is that what you’re asking? It’s nice to know you won’t let me have a say on the subject, but then, I can choose not to listen to you.

“…the only thing that truly cuts it in God's eyes is who we really are; deep down inside, are you really saying these things for Him?” Yes.

“Or does it make you feel all warm and fuzzy to put others down?” No.

“Is your goal to truly help and love conservative Christian girls and their families?” Yes.

“Or are you trying to take revenge on them for past hurts and disappointments?” No.

“It's not your job; let it go.” Yes, actually it is and no, I will not stop. Who are you to tell me God’s will for my life? Do you really think He would tell you and not me? Stop and think: What if God has called me to write these articles? Would that change how you respond to me?

Grace’s Story

I will respond for Grace as she is lately married and also, I don’t want her to have to read your hurtful words right now. I cannot believe how you invalidated her experience. Not cool.

“Grace, I'm sorry that you took godly books meant to be used as guidelines (not law) so legalistically.” Was that meant to be kind? It didn’t sound like it.

“But please don't slander the Biblical wisdom laid out in them.” Biblical wisdom ? Are you crazy? You think these books contain biblical wisdom? Again, show me in the Bible where it talks about courtship and where it explains the concept of emotional purity laid out in these books.

“God wrote the Bible; not you. So no matter what went wrong in your thinking, God's always right.” What does this even mean? Grace isn’t talking about the Bible but books written by fallible human beings. You do know the authors could be wrong, don’t you? Are you getting these books and the Bible confused or equating them on the same level?

“And those of us who live by His Word are living vibrant lives.” So we didn’t follow the system correctly and that’s why we were so hurt? Ouch. You just completely invalidated this deeply personal experience. Do you go around saying this to other hurt and broken people? Do you think you’re only blessed by God if you do everything right? That sounds like a prosperity gospel. Further, how do you explain Job’s situation?

Have you ever considered the minute possibility that YOU were wrong and not the books/authors? That YOU took things too literally and YOU are the one to blame for your difficulty in conversing with young men?” Certainly, there is a margin for error on Grace’s part… but don’t you think the authors of these books could also have made some mistakes? Do you think they might have overstepped their authority and made up rules not found in scripture? Do you really think giving impressionable fourteen-year-olds these books is a good idea? While I don't like to think of myself or my sister as victims... don't you think it's wrong to blame the victim?

“I think you and your sister must be incapable of taking responsibility for your own actions, thoughts and decisions in the past and are attempting to play the blame-game on Christian authors and single girls who "actually" choose to save their first kisses for marriage and take seriously the amount of influence we have on young men's fight with lust (oh, I do hope you believe Matt. 5:28; otherwise I see how it would be hard for modesty to be an important issue to you).” Wow, that was a long sentence. As for blaming others, we do take responsibility for our own actions. However, those who have set themselves up as teachers are here being held accountable for their words. If they set up stumbling blocks and tie up heavy burdens for others then they are very much accountable for these actions. (Matt 18:6 and 23:4). I think that filling a young person’s head with false teaching is just as bad as dressing immodestly and produces a similar stumbling block. Finally, what’s wrong with you? Just because Grace and I don’t agree with legalistic approaches to relationships doesn’t mean we’ve gone off the deep end and are kissing every guy in sight and dressing immodestly. Not everything in life is extreme and dramatic. To quote my own article, “Please stop acting like a hormonal teenager and realize that there is indeed a middle ground.” In fact, Grace did save her first kiss for the guy she married; she just didn’t make a big production out of it. And I’m still saving mine and I’ve been complimented and thanked many times for my modest apparel. These things are just a part of my life—they don't define me—and I just don’t make a big deal out of them.

Really though, it’s probably not going to do any good that I just refuted your words. You have your opinions about me and frankly, will anything I say change them? All I can say is that “by the grace of God I am what I am, and His grace to me was not without effect.” (1 Cor. 10) I’m a sinner, saved by grace, and that’s all that matters. Even if I am all that you believe me to be: miserable, bitter, controlling and etc.; God still loves me, accepts me, and will never forsake me. I don’t know what happened to you to cause you to respond to me this way. I’m sorry if you have been the recipient of such words… it’s not an enjoyable experience. Yet, God is greater than any of the storms we face and He will never let us down.

“What, then, shall we say in response to these things? If God is for us, who can be against us? He who did not spare his own Son, but gave him up for us all—how will he not also, along with him, graciously give us all things? Who will bring any charge against those whom God has chosen? It is God who justifies. Who then is the one who condemns? No one. Christ Jesus who died—more than that, who was raised to life—is at the right hand of God and is also interceding for us. Who shall separate us from the love of Christ? Shall trouble or hardship or persecution or famine or nakedness or danger or sword? As it is written: ‘For your sake we face death all day long; we are considered as sheep to be slaughtered.’ No, in all these things we are more than conquerors through Him who loved us.” (Rom 8:31-37)

Ingrid
P.S. Your warmth burns like fire... maybe you should reconsider your valediction in the future.


Saturday, March 2, 2013

Of Trolls and Hate Mail



I’ve had this blog for nearly seven years and there have been times when I have been very tempted to stop writing. None of these moments were very recent… in fact, most took place six months to three years ago and that’s why I can talk about them now. To be honest, I’ve received a lot of hate mail from multiple sources (some published, some not) and even several uncomfortable threats because of the things that I’ve challenged on this blog. Honestly, there’s been a few times when I was so scared, I wanted to stop. At times, it’s been really hard to keep blogging. I get the idea that people think I’m some kind of sarcastic nut with a lot of time on my hands (I’m not!)… I’ve had commenter’s question my salvation, I’ve had barrages of 10+ angry comments within an hour, and I’ve been told by complete strangers that I need to repent. It’s crazy! I don’t mind when people ask intelligent questions and politely disagree or want to discuss, heck, I actually like it, but this is wrong on so many levels. It’s not always easy to keep working on this blog. Don’t get me wrong, I like being able to help people and provide resources for those who need them, and I’m not meaning to complain. But I have to be honest and tell you that it’s really hard sometimes. For the record, over the last seven years, I’ve been called: a worker of iniquity, immature, cynical, caustic, angry, deceiving, lying, conniving, “so mean,” lacking in humility and love, bitter in heart, accused of being Jennifer Epstein (that made me laugh actually), and told that I am glorifying satan. I didn’t make any of those up and believe me, there are lots more.

I talk about a lot of upsetting stuff on this blog. Do you honestly think I enjoy this? I used to like Vision Forum and Doug Phillips and Little Bear Wheeler. I read Josh Harris books and thought Emotional Purity was the way to go. But then I learned it was all a lie. And I don’t want anyone else to be deceived. Do you think I like having to write about Kelly Bradrick’s near death experiences or that men in many churches abuse their authority? Because I don’t. It makes me sad. Things aren’t meant to be this way and I can’t believe that the name of Jesus Christ is being used for such evil purposes. I can’t understand how people can act like this in the 21st century. But if I don’t say anything, who will? There’s a lot of sheep out there who can’t seem to think critically about the right things and there are a lot of people, some of them even my friends, who fail to notice important issues and take a stand. Sometimes, I feel like Aragorn in The Fellowship of the Ring when he speaks of his efforts to protect the Northern part of Middle-Earth, “And less thanks have we than you. Travellers scowl at us and countryman give us scornful names. “Strider” I am to one fat man who lives within a day’s march of foes that would freeze his heart, or lay his little town in ruin if he were not guarded ceaselessly” and sometimes I also feel like Sherlock, “Is it nice not being me? It must be so relaxing.”

Anyway, I’ve been thinking about this lately, because I’ve gotten a lot of comments over the years and read a lot of “woe is me posts” written by leaders in the patriarchy movement. Frankly, I think people should be aware that it is hard to keep up an anti-legalism blog and the tactics resorted to by followers of patriarchy and legalism. Not every follower of patriarchy has been like this, but unfortunately, the majority have been.

So, here’s a list of the things that Patriarchy followers tend to do as they comment on my blog:

1. Question my salvation. This. Makes. Me. So. Mad. Who are you to judge my salvation? I may criticize the teachings and actions of people like Peter Bradrick and Doug Phillips but I will never question their salvation. Only God can see a person’s heart and know where they are with Him. I can jolly well evaluate their teachings, words, and actions, but I can’t see anyone else’s heart. You can evaluate my words and decide you don’t agree with me but that doesn’t give you a right to play god and declare that I’m not a Christian or need to repent. It absolutely disgusts me when this happens. Therefore, I expect that those who consider themselves Christians will treat me with the respect that is owed to another believer. So, don’t be like this…just don’t do it. It weakens your credibility. And if you're saying I'm not a Christian just so you can be mean to me... wow. Like, really, wow. That is some perverted theology there. I can only imagine how you treat non-Christians.

2. Claim to be persecuted or spiritually abused while actually dealing out persecution and spiritual abuse. See #3. This is so annoyingly hypocritical. So it’s okay to be horrible to me and say all kinds of nasty things but when someone so much as questions you, you’re all up in arms? Oh and you should know: people questioning your beliefs is not a form of persecution. It’s perfectly okay to have legitimate questions and concerns and if you’re a Christian, you should have an answer for your faith. However, treating me and other bloggers terribly and then being very sensitive about how you’re treated is just nauseating.

3. Threaten me. Threatening to call my pastor(s), bring me before church councils, take me to court, have me kicked out of my church, or thrown to the lions is not okay. In fact, it was horrible. There have been times when commenters have been so vicious and intrusive that I’ve been afraid of physical harm. Lying awake worrying about knife attacks is not something that I should have to deal with… frankly; it reminds me of the persecutions that the early church faced from the Jewish religious authorities. I should probably note that it wasn’t really the government persecuting the early church, it was another religious organization. Come to think of it, a lot of persecution in the past has come from other religious bodies trying to correct or “save” one another. (Jews/Christians, Catholics/Protestants, Puritans/Quakers, etc.) It’s a pretty ugly past. So knock it off and don’t be like them.

4. Love-bombing. Try to act loving and write things about being kind and loving towards you when they are clearly so angry that they cannot see straight. Maybe it would be better to just say, “I’m feeling very angry with this right now!” instead of “I’m lovingly trying to discuss this with you.” You don’t love me, you really don’t, so don’t try to act as if you do. Why don’t you cool off a bit and find some perspective before you write to me.

5. Patronizing and/or accusing me of gossiping. This happens all the time… commenter’s act like I don’t know what I’m talking about or that I cannot possibly be credible so they have to explain things to me in small words. Look people, I have a college degree in research and I’m really good at it. I use lots of credible sources, check it a half-dozen times, and make sure it’s right. If I’m wrong, I admit it and I’ll correct it. Stop telling me I’m making all of it up and gossiping. All of the information I found is well documented, still available in multiple palaces, and/or posted by the people themselves. If they didn’t want it discussed, they shouldn’t have put it out there.

6. Defend people they don’t know/barely know. This boggles my mind. Why would you defend Doug Phillips, the Botkins, or etc. when you don’t even know them! I’ve had people who know me actually take the side of the person whom they’ve never met and probably never will meet. What is it that makes these distant pastors/teachers more important than someone you’ve known for years? Don’t you have any respect for your friends? Any loyalty that drives you to try to understand my concerns? Haven’t I been there for you? This is just so disappointing. And may I say that the sin of partiality is a very real issue in the church today. (See James 2.)

7. Think that just because they are Christians, their motives are pure and right and therefore, it is okay to harass me. Prefacing scathing comments with “it’s for your own good!” and “I’m writing because I want to lovingly correct you!” does not make them okay. On several occasions, I’ve had barrages of angry comments that were really consistent with stalking and harassment but when this was pointed out, those responsible could not believe that their actions were, in fact, criminal. Being a Christian does not make you above the law and certainly does not exempt you from practicing common decency and respect. If an abusive husband is a Christian, he’s still an abuser and he’s still accountable for his actions. No matter how good you think your motives, you’d better consider your actions from several angles before proceeding. As C.S. Lewis said, "Of all tyrannies, a tyranny sincerely exercised for the good of its victim may be the most oppressive. It may be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron’s cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated, but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end for they do so with the approval of their own conscience."

8. Enlist other people to help you when you think you’re losing a discussion/argument. Bringing in other random people to yell at me doesn’t help your case at all. And trying to involve my parents (or significant other when he appears) is just silly. I’m an adult and I can take care of my own problems.

9. Don’t take the time to organize their thoughts and end up word vomiting every incoherent, sleep-deprived thought in their head into a comment. I’ve gotten lots of angry comments that were submitted late at night and, from what my stat counter tells me, immediately after reading a post. If you’re upset about something, it’s a good rule of thumb to wait at least one day before commenting. You’ll be more coherent and rested and maybe I’ll actually learn something from you instead of wondering a: why you’re so impulsive and b: if you were drunk, in pms, high on caffeine, or a professional hit-man.

10. Flounce after leaving a scathing comment or conversely, constantly monitoring my blog so you can leave nasty comments on every new post. My stats reveal a lot and I can tell if you come back or don’t come back. Why bother to leave a comment that requires a response if you’re never going to read my response? You might be wrong you know and maybe you should listen to my side, even if just to be polite. Goodness knows, I read every comment I receive, no matter how awful may be. On the flip side, constantly checking my blog so you can critique me is creepy. You’re turning into a stalker so just stop it.

11. Misquote scripture and/or take it out of context in a desperate attempt to validate your beliefs. This happens all the time, to the point that it would be funny if it weren’t so serious. Sometimes I wonder if patriarchy followers even read their bibles because many of the ones who comment do not understand/apply scripture correctly at all.

12. Think that teachers/leaders cannot possibly be questioned. Ever. But then again only certain leaders who have been deemed worthy (mostly due to celebrity status, wealth, and/or number of books/cds sold). Hate to break it to you but Jesus made it clear that it is perfectly acceptable to question religious leaders and hold them accountable. He even called them snakes, hypocrites, and broods of vipers. (Please don’t decide to call me that! :-) I already know I’m vicious and conniving *rolls eyes*) He told us how to judge the teachings of others. Multiple passages in scripture speak of holding teachers to account for their actions and teachings. (1 John 4, James 3, Luke 12:47-49). I take this very seriously because I think that includes me too. Plus, all Christians are supposed to be wary and act as Bereans so my questioning shouldn’t be this big of a shocker to you.

13. Not catching sarcasm and/or completely lacking a sense of humor. I’ve had commenter’s take my jokes and sarcasm seriously. This is usually followed by a very awkward, condescending lecture by comment on their part and hysterical laughter on mine. Seriously people, learn to laugh at yourselves. Life is hard enough already without taking ourselves and our lives so darn seriously.

14. Claim and cling to a lofty ideal or vague hurt while dishing out a steaming personal attack. Focus on the problem, not me. Calling me names does not make you seem like a victim to anyone, it just makes you a bully. Clinging to your own faith and idealism while attacking me is also very wrong, not to mention disturbing. As a matter of fact, stay away from personal attacks all-together, it’s not fighting fair and will not accomplish anything. If I’ve hurt you personally, talk to me about it calmly in one coherent e-mail, devoid of threats, patronizing, and the like, and I will be willing to listen.

15. Jump to conclusions/extreme thinking. This ties into #1 and it happens all the time. Why is it that when you point out one fault in a leader, patriarchy followers assume that you’re a horrible, vindictive person? Just because I discuss Peter Bradrick or the Botkin sisters and point out their errors, does not mean I viciously hate them, am scandalously trying to tear them down, ruin their testimony, or blah, blah, blah. (They’re doing a pretty good job of ruining things on their own; I’m just making it more visible.) Sorry to disappoint you but I actually just believe that their teachings are wrong and that this should be pointed out. I’m also very concerned for them and wish that I could help them escape from their controlling influences. Please stop acting like a hormonal teenager and realize that there is indeed a middle ground.

16. Trying to sidetrack me with another issue or little, nit-picky details that don’t matter. This isn’t fighting fair, in fact, it’s called kitchen-sinking in communication terms. You say you’re a Christian, so please act like one and focus on the gospel and the issue at hand.

17. Throw out all logic, reason, and common sense in their desperation to justify their leaders. I got this a lot with my post about Kelly Bradrick. Several commenter’s seemed to think it was okay for Kelly to be emotionally and physically abused as long as it was okay with her. NO! It’s NOT okay! Stockholm Syndrome is a real thing! Abuse is wrong, it has been wrong, and will always be wrong. Your desperate attempt to justify Scott Brown and Peter Bradrick is extremely disappointing and pathetic.

18. Tell me to just contact that person or just go meet with them and it will all be okay. *insert cynical laugh here* Yes, because it’s so easy to go out to lunch with Doug Phillips or Kelly Bradrick. Most of these people never respond to e-mails or phone calls that question them, if you can even find an e-mail address or phone number at which to contact them. I wrote to Shelley Noonan nearly two months ago, she isn’t even that high on the ladder, and I still haven’t gotten a response. These people are very insulated and not accessible at all. It’s not that simple. Plus, these teachings are very public and if no one refutes them publicly, how will anyone know they are wrong and/or realize that there are others who do not follow them?

19. An incredible, passionate, furious desire to defend their favorite leader(s) from any and all criticism and questioning. Seriously people, if these leaders were upset with me for calling them out, they would have taken care of it themselves and contacted me directly. It is truly astonishing how sensitive patriarchy followers and even evangelical Christians can be. Quit acting like these people are your “gifted” children and protecting them. They are all adults, with lawyers no doubt, and can take care of themselves. So, save all these defensive instincts for protecting your family and real, close friends. And maybe you should examine why you’re so darn protective and touchy about these people. Perhaps you’re making an idol out of them and that’s what makes you so very sensitive to my criticism of their actions?

Honestly patriarchy followers, you’re a pretty vicious bunch. Who would have known that so much venom lies behind those sweet facades and pretty pictures! I’m not impressed with you. You should be secure and cemented in what you believe, not flying into a mad panic at the slightest bit of questioning. If you’re so secure in your beliefs, why do you lash out like you’re afraid of something? And if someone asks you something that makes you question or makes you mad, why do you flounce? What are you afraid of? Of finding out that the people you admire and/or follow are sinners and maybe even false teachers? Jesus never lets you down… if you’d just focused on Him in the first place, you wouldn’t be so scared, confused, and angry now. Try thinking critically and taking a step back to see things from other people’s perspectives for a change and stop lashing out like a bunch of wounded tigers. A couple years ago, I decided one thing, even if I have been scared sometimes; I’m not going to stop writing. I began this blog to protest the injustices of courtship. That was the main goal. I was personally injured by the courtship movement and I’ve seen the inside of all of it. It’s not the pretty, little picture they try to sell and it doesn’t work all the time. I do have to remind myself to deal with the message and not the messenger. That’s why I’ve edited some posts over the years to remove nitpicky things, though sometimes those lines blur and you have to discuss a few issues that are more personal. There’s a place for standing up for what you believe in but it should still have a sense of decency and respect. And if you don’t like something on my blog, that’s okay. I never expected everyone to agree with me or see things exactly the way I do. My articles are open to discussion but my personal life is not. You can disagree with anything I write but if you’re attacking me personally, save your fingers. I’ll probably post it and I’ll respond if I feel it is worth the fight. If only one thing has come from this, I am more interested in my blog than ever and more determined to keep fighting against rules and formulas and legalism―and arguing for the gospel of Jesus Christ. Honestly, I don’t really mind that I’ve faced name-calling and threats as I’ve pointed out false teachings. It doesn’t worry me anymore and truthfully, I’ve moved on. It’s made me a lot stronger and even more willing to stand up for truth. And be warned, God keeps on giving me the strength to write and thanks to all of you, I have developed a very, very thick skin. So don’t expect me to stop anytime soon.

Ingrid

P.S. Don't think I am the only anti-Patriarchy writer who deals with hate-mail. All of the people I know who have blogs and/or help those caught in Patriarchy movement have endured similar situations. Some have even dealt with lawsuits and far worse attacks than those that I have experienced. We just don't talk about it a lot and we definitely do not mean to complain. 

Monday, February 4, 2013

Paradise Recovered


I don't usually recommend films, especially Christian ones, as I find that most self-styled "Christian" films can be very trite, over-sentimental, rigid, contain poor production values, and can have fundamentalist overtones. You're far better off watching films like Chariots of Fire or The Blind Side than Courageous. (Especially since the Kendrick brothers, the filmmakers behind Courageous, Fireproof, Facing the Giants, and Flywheel, have documented ties to Gothardism, Vision Forum, and other fundamentalist groups, see here and here.) That being said, I am happy to find a film that is relevant to what I write on this blog. Paradise Recovered is an excellent film that clearly portrays the dangers and allure of fundamentalist cults, as well as the journey taken to escape from them. After sitting through many fundamentalist films and documentaries, such as Return of the Daughters (and usually yelling at the TV the whole time :-D)it was refreshing to see that there are filmmakers who are Christians who want to share truth and use film to raise awareness about real problems. In addition, since I've worked in independent film, I'm very sensitive to elements of production and find it grating when they're not right. I was very happy to see that Paradise Recovered has excellent production values and the music was really good too. All in all, I highly recommend this film and I'm so happy that there's finally a film that I can give to friends who wonder why I'm so fussy about theology, courtship/dating, and gender issues within the church.  

Watch the Trailer here:


And, here's the link to the film's website: http://paradiserecovered.com/

Ingrid

Monday, June 25, 2012

Portrait of a Lady

Last night, for some reason, I was thinking about Kelly Bradrick. You may not have heard of her but she was a poster girl for Stay at Home Daughters and then for the large Vision Forum “conference wedding” with lengthy, manly monologues and a first kiss at the altar. Kelly is the daughter of Scott Brown, the founder of the NCFIC and she married Peter Bradrick in August of 2006. Who could forget? Doug Phillips featured the wedding in an e-mail newsletter and raved about getting a bird’s eye view of Peter and Kelly’s first kiss. He still talks about it to this day. I don’t really know who Kelly’s mom is… I think her name is Deborah and the only thing I remember about her is that she has a bad habit of wearing white to her children’s weddings. Oh and she looks really sad in videos… but I digress. As I was thinking about Kelly last night, I was also thinking about the inability of the men in her life to respect and protect her. I like her, I honestly do, but I hate the way her Dad and husband treat her.
First, we have her Dad: “In 2003, I took my daughter with me on a mission trip to Romania. On the plane, there was a drunken man flirting with her in a very aggressive way. Unfortunately for him, there were 535 pounds of manhood in our party ready to protect her. Believe me, we were exercising much Christian patience with this man who persisted throughout the entire flight. He did not realize that he was facing deadly force, if he persisted. He actually touched her once and was making bold advances. He even continued the pursuit after the plane landed. I am convinced that, if we had not been with her to protect her, she would have been in serious danger.”1 Sounds to me like she was already in serious danger! It also sounds like she didn’t receive ANY protection from her father or anyone else traveling with her. I mean come on, change seats or have her sit in a window seat and have your entire party surround her. If you must, enlist the flight attendants to help you! Better yet, get right in the guy’s face and tell him you’re going to kill him if he doesn’t leave her alone. That usually works. It honestly sound like all the guys just sat there and did absolutely nothing except mutter under their breaths about their “Christian patience.” Kelly might have been better off traveling by herself because she could have enlisted the flight attendants to help her as well as the passengers sitting around her. In any case, it was really stupid of Scott Brown to include that story in an article about protecting women when he did such a woeful job of protecting his own daughter.
Even during Kelly’s courtship with Peter Bradrick, both her father and Peter did not protect her very well or treat her with respect. According to Peter Bradrick in “Courtship and Marriage”2 Kelly did something that impressed him during their courtship. Then, Peter relates a story about an afternoon when he was at the Brown’s farm, walking with Kelly and Scott Brown. “Scott Brown’s giving me a tour of his farm yard and I see this girl that has always, in my experience, been dressed perfectly a model of feminine virtue and poise, drop down and roll underneath a hot wire fence while Scott Brown and I jumped over the fence, which we could do in our blue jeans, and get right back up and walk like a lady.” Then Peter goes on about noticing Kelly’s “very rare balance between beautiful femininity and sturdy womanhood” and how rare this combination is in his mind. (Actually, I know dozens of young women who can dress to the nines and still love going hiking and camping. Peter just wasn’t looking very hard.) Now, Peter’s comments are strange on a number of levels. For one, Kelly Bradrick was very slender and delicate looking before she was married (just look at the first picture I posted and her wedding photos) and I would never have classified her as “sturdy.” Plus, that’s a pretty strange choice of words for a future wife―it reeks of marrying only so you can have someone to clean your house and do your laundry for you. Further, why didn’t Peter or Scott help Kelly over the fence? It’s kind of strange and sad that she felt like she had to drop to the ground and roll under a fence rather than hike her skirts up or ask for help. It sounds to me like Kelly’s self-esteem/worth was so low that she didn’t even think of asking for help.

Moving forward, Kelly’s husband, Peter Bradrick hasn’t done a much better job of protecting her. Or as he promised in his marriage vows on August 26, 2006: “To lay down my life for you; to wash you with the water of the word; to love you as my own body and to nourish and cherish you even as the Lord the does the church….” You see, on May 15, 2011, Kelly had a baby girl, Geneva Constance; her fourth child in four and a half years. She already had an emergency c-section in January 2010 with her third baby so one would think that Peter would have been very protective and concerned about his wife. Even while Kelly was expecting this fourth child, Peter tromped off with Doug Phillips on an expedition “Into the Amazon” which isn’t exactly awful but isn’t very loving either. But then, it gets worse. On May 26, 2011, Scott and Deborah Brown left for a tour of Europe with Doug Phillips’ “A Final Farewell” event. According to pictures taken in Rome and Normandy, Peter and Kelly Bradrick went along as well. Only 11 days after Kelly gave birth. Now, most doctors will tell you to wait 2 weeks after giving birth normally and 4 weeks after a c-section to travel. Most women who have one c-section will continue to have them unless they specifically find a doctor who is willing to help with a VBAC or Vaginal Birth After Cesarean. (I know this because a friend had a terrible time finding a doctor willing to help her try a VBAC.) So it is highly possible that Kelly had a C-section and should have waited 4 weeks to travel, especially to Europe. As it was, she didn’t even wait two weeks and was highly at risk for hemorrhaging, infection, and thrombosis. It is also recommended to keep a newborn close to home for the first 6 weeks so that their immune system can develop. The Phillips’ posted a video of being delayed on the way to Europe and stuck in the airport sleeping in chairs and on floors. I certainly hope Kelly Bradrick didn’t have to sleep in an airport less than 2 weeks after giving birth! Phillips’ tour was first in Rome and then in Normandy, France from June 4-6, 2011. Here’s a picture of Peter and Kelly in Rome:
On June 11, 2011, Kelly Bradrick had to be life-flighted to a hospital and given a D&C. The doctors did not expect her to make it but thankfully, she did pull through and recover. It is not certain whether she was still in Europe at the time of her medical emergency. However, according to Joshua Phillip’s blog, the Phillips’ family did not return to the U.S. until around June 16, 2011 so it is highly probable that Kelly was in Europe at the time of her emergency. 3
What did Scott Brown, Doug Phillips, and all the other bloggers have to say about Kelly’s near death experience?
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
Absolutely nothing. The blogs were silent. Not one request for prayer or praise for healing from the men. The only person to thank God for His protection was Kelly Bradrick herself, on Facebook. Screenshots here:




And what’s more, all the pictures proving that Kelly was along on the trip have been taken down.

Here’s a screenshot of Liberty Phillips’ Picasa album:
Notice the comments asking if the baby is Geneva. That’s right, there was a picture of Geneva Bradrick in Scotland but it was removed. Joshua Phillips had an entire album entitled “RomeAndPompeiiEurope2011” but it mysteriously vanished. The silence (of all the men especially) and then the cover-up really disturbs me. We, as Christians especially, should be transparent and no matter who we are, we should admit to our mistakes. This whole issue could even have been a teachable moment for why not to travel after you’ve given birth―or why you should truly love your wife as your own body. Asking your wife to accompany you on an overseas vacation soon after she’s given birth is not laying down your life for her or loving her as your own body. No matter how “sturdy” Peter believes his wife to be, he should have known better than to allow her to go to Europe. It’s not like Peter and Kelly had never been to Europe; they already went in 2008 and 2010, as shown by this photo of their 2010 trip to Scotland.

Just because the door is open doesn’t mean you have to, or even should, step through it. “But,” You say, “God protected her! God will provide!” Yes, God does provide and He did protect Kelly when no one else was doing so but He also provides us with minds and common sense. What the Bradrick’s did was like walking out into the middle of a busy highway without looking both ways or choosing to go without a seat belt and saying, “God will protect me!” That is a very arrogant and dangerous path. As it says in Deuteronomy 6:16, “"You shall not put the Lord your God to the test.” Jesus quotes this same verse when He is being tempted by the devil: “Then the devil took Him to the holy city and had Him stand on the highest point of the temple. “If you are the Son of God,” he said, “throw yourself down. For it is written: ‘He will command His angels concerning you, and they will lift you up in their hands, so that you will not strike your foot against a stone.’ Jesus answered him, “It is also written: ‘Do not put the Lord your God to the test.’” Matthew 4:5-7.
Now, Kelly Bradrick has given birth to her fifth child, Michael Courage Bradrick, less than a year after her last medical emergency. This time the baby was five weeks early and is currently in the NICU. Frankly, I’m horrified. If Michael was due in June, then that means there was only a four-month gap between Kelly’s pregnancies. I’ve never heard of such a thing…even among my mom’s friends who did not use birth control and had 5+ kids. What is the point of all of this? I know Scott Brown coined the term "Militant Fecundity" but this is ridiculous! Take a look at this video that Peter and Kelly made to wish Doug Phillips Happy Birthday from the NICU:

(Oh, the lengths people will go to impress that wretched man! There’s something completely wrong about making someone a happy birthday video from a place as serious and private as your baby’s hospital room.) Kelly looks emotionally and physically exhausted and her body must be absolutely depleted. I hope she is receiving a lot of help from family and friends because I don’t know how else she could manage difficult pregnancies and five children under the age of five. Just look at the difference in Kelly between her wedding in 2006, a photo taken in 2009, and a recent photo of the Brown family taken in late 2011.





I wish I could say I’m disappointed in Kelly for not standing up for herself and her children, but I don’t know how much of a voice she is allowed. I don’t know what her life is like with so many little children and if she has any strength of character after being raised by Scott Brown and then married to Peter Bradrick. Even before her marriage, it seems her self-esteem was very low. I’m really disappointed in the men in Kelly’s life, especially Peter Bradrick. I don’t expect Kelly to try to protect herself since she’s been taught to expect absolute care and protection from men but I do expect Peter Bradrick, Scott Brown, and even Doug Phillips to step up and put her above themselves and their desires and concerns. That is, of course hypothetical and unlikely to happen because their track records for truly valuing and respecting women are low. There’s a lot of talk going on but not very much action. When it comes down to it, these men don’t seem able to live up to their lofty goals. I hate to be negative but I don’t see a lot of sunshine in Kelly’s future. Something tells me that things will only get worse for Kelly before they get better… if they get better at all.

Ingrid

1.http://www.visionforumministriesDOTorg/issues/family/living_in_sodom_a_case_study_p_1.aspx

2. Return of the Daughters, DVD extra, "Courtship and Marriage."

3. “…flying directly to the Denver homeschool conference without even setting foot outside the airport in between jaunts.” http://www.ballantynethebraveDOTcom/blog/home/

Spring 2013 Addendum - There has been a little confusion about this article and I would like to explain a few things. First, I love large families, some of my closest friends come from families of six to ten children, and I think choosing to have many children is a wonderful thing. However, I believe that this is a decision made by both parents and should be driven by their love of children; NOT from a desire to follow any programs or legalistic rules about the family.Also, care should be taken to ensure the health and emotional well being of the mother.  See this post: A Desire to Control Second, I wrote about Kelly Bradrick because Peter Bradrick and Scott Brown not only act abusively toward her but also promoted the very ideas that nearly killed her. The men and women who teach and promote "militant fecundity" are to be held accountable for this unbiblical teaching. Moreover, if the dangers of this movement are "covered-up" and remain unknown to others, then other women could be injured or killed. That's why this article had to be written.  

Monday, May 14, 2012

I Can See the Light... Can They?



Dear Anna Sofia and Elizabeth,

I'm writing in response to your article "Our Response to Rapunzel" (1) which is in italics below and my questions/comments are in normal typeface :)

Dear Rapunzel,

Thank you for your email. We happen to already be familiar with your story as presented in “Tangled,” and even know a little more about your backstory than you do, and so we do have some thoughts for you.

We will be unusually blunt, because we know you are not a real person with feelings; you are the carefully written, cast, voiced, sketched, sculpted, scanned, painted, rigged, animated, rendered, and composited brainchild of John Lasseter, Glen Keane, and the Disney scriptwriting committee. We’re talking to you, polygons.

First off, when are you not blunt and commanding? It seems to me, by looking at your blog, and So Much More (which I have read) that you really love telling people what they can and cannot do as Christians. You seem to be trying to get back at Disney here, because as far as Tangled is concerned, you seem to think that Disney is attacking your lifestyle. Do you really think Disney knows about you/the stay-at-home daughters movement? Obviously, this lengthy article is a way for you to "get back" at Disney and defend your lifestyle.

And not only were you meticulously handcrafted by others: Your entire universe was built around you, detail by detail, by these same imagineers. Your particular situation, down to Flynn’s serendipitous appearance in your window – your moral dilemmas, down to your conflicts with your mother – the characters you ran into, down to the last pub thug – didn’t just happen, but were deliberated over by a bunch of businessmen for approximately ten years. Everything about your world, including the ethical system by which it operates, came out of somebody’s head.

I find it interesting that you have to use such big words to get your point across… really serendipitous isn’t it? Notice the sentence that is bolded above… yes, you ladies wrote it and first it makes me laugh, because you are assaulting a make-believe character, but then, it makes me sad, because I think you need to take your own advice. Anna Sofia and Elizabeth: Everything about your world, including the ethical system by which it operates, came out of somebody’s (Your father’s and his associate’s) head.

But here you are, in the middle of it, and you need advice. Let’s get down to helping you out! We would like to propose the following course of action for you:

Kill your mother with her own dagger (for poetic justice), run away from the tower once and for all, reunite with Flynn Rider (and propose to him – why not?), rally the thugs to your side, storm the castle together, throw out the authorities that were trying to imprison Flynn (doesn’t that make them the villains?), and establish yourselves as the ruling elite, where your word can be law, now not only for you, but for everyone.

No, of course that’s not the right answer. But why not?

Some might say that since your universe is a fantasy universe, God’s ethical system does not apply. But if His moral standard doesn’t have jurisdiction over this film – if, since this film isn’t a “Christian” film, we shouldn’t require it to line up with the Bible – then who could dare say bumping your mother out of the way would be wrong? Who’s to say any other solution would be morally better? Are we admitting that there is some overarching standard after all?

There is no connotation in the movie to Rapunzel or Flynn killing Mother Gothel. Rapunzel confronts her “mother” to try to find out the truth. Her “mother” is the one that reacts violently by chaining up Rapunzel and making her submit to a lifetime of slavery- yes, that is what it is. The definition of slave is: somebody forced to work for another. Rapunzel will be forced to keep her “mother” young. She is chained up and being dragged to another hiding place as Flynn arrives. Can you imagine what would happen if Rapunzel wouldn’t sing the song to her “mother” anymore? I imagine beatings, pain, injuries, and starvation. That’s right: physical abuse, in addition to the other abuse that she has already experienced.

We’ve got good news for you: You, Rapunzel, imaginary creature though you are, are not ultimately under the lordship of Disney Studios, but of Christ. 2 Corinthians 10:5 commands all men to “take every thought captive to the obedience of Christ” – which means every imagination, every script page, and every film frame. Christ demands that every man’s mind and the stuff in it bow the knee, and that would include you. And His moral system – His law – is still the standard by which your moral system must be measured. In other words, stabbing your mother would be wrong, not because it’s not the sort of thing a nice girl with a dream would do, not because it would be politically incorrect, not because it would disturb children – but because it breaks one of His commandments (Ex. 20:13). And that’s why, even though you’re a fairy tale creature, we’re going to respond to you as though you were a real person.

You really don’t like Disney, do you? The way you write, it makes me wonder if you are a little jealous of Disney Studios and their ingenuity? After all, your family does make movies and how successful can documentaries be?

I’m not sure where the whole stabbing your mother thing came from, because if you watch the movie, you will see that Mother Gothel actually stabs Flynn to kill him!

It is not Rapunzel trying to stab anyone- least of all her “mother.” Nor does the movie imply that that Rapunzel is thinking of stabbing her “mother,” but ladies, you have thought that up yourselves to fuel your argument. Therefore, the commandment: Thou shall not murder (Exodus 20:13) does apply to the movie, not to Rapunzel as you imply, but to Mother Gothel. Why do you keep acting like Mother Gothel is good?

What makes advising you tricky is that the brains who crafted your universe and situation never presented you with a good option. The film offered you two choices at the beginning: 1. Rot your useless life away in the tower with the world’s most detestable mother; or, 2. Defy your mother and run away from home with a thief. Your only visible choices now are: 1. Rot your useless life away in the tower with the world’s most detestable mother; or, 2. Follow your feelings, denounce your mother as a kidnapping imposter with no evidence, and leave again. Yes, it does occasionally seem that the only options life presents are bad ones, but in reality, doing right is always an option. Film has the power to create dishonest moral scenarios, forcing its characters to play a version of the lifeboat game (Who will you throw overboard, passenger A or passenger B?) and never offering a third option. And by making your option A look unspeakable, while making your option B look irresistible, “Tangled” draws us in so deeply that by the time your first moral dilemma comes around, we’re rooting for you to do (what we would normally call) the wrong thing.

No good option? What about returning to loving parents who both long for their kidnapped daughter to return home? What about forgive the person that helped rescue you, because obviously he doesn’t desire to be a thief any longer? The quote: 2. Follow your feelings, denounce your mother as a kidnapping imposter with no evidence, and leave again is incorrect. Rapunzel has evidence, just not documented and notarized- memories and a really good a gut instinct. And if she is wrong, why does her “mother” react the way she does? A little violent, don’t you think?

So what is the right (biblical) thing for you to do, now? Here are a few (serious) suggestions:

1. Check the facts regarding your identity.

Feelings, hunches, and childhood drawings are a bad guide (and insufficient evidence), especially in such high-stake situations. There are ways to figure out who you are. We, the audience, of course know that your Mother is actually an evil kidnapper and the villain of your story; but you, the protagonist, currently have about as much reason to suspect this as every girl in the audience does her own parents. 

If you were wrong, and she turns out to have been your biological mother all along:

She does check the facts. She confronts her “mother” about it. Her mother doesn’t deny it, but starts schmoozing Rapunzel and then becomes hostile. (I’ve just re-watched the scene to make sure I’m right, since I have the movie on my iPod) :)

2. Apologize sincerely for disobeying, deceiving, and defying her.

Some protest that you were justified in breaking the 5th commandment because she wasn’t really your mother, but let’s be honest: You didn’t leave because you knew that. You didn’t leave because you knew your mother’s command was biblically unlawful. You didn’t leave because you thought it would be wrong to stay and submit to the unbiblical tyranny of a kidnapping sorceress. You left because there was something you really wanted to do, the authority over you forbade it, and you decided to do what you wanted to do it anyway. You actually believed, and said, that it would be wrong for you to go. In your mind, you were as guilty of rebellion as the girl whose parents forbid her to go to a wild party and who sneaks out to go anyway: You left because you didn’t care.

We’re truly sorry that the filmmakers gave you such a loathsome creature as a mother. But if it’s wrong for her to be a law unto herself, you need to hold yourself to the same standard. “For rebellion is as the sin of witchcraft, and stubbornness is as iniquity and idolatry.” (1 Sam. 15:23)

Rapunzel was being held against her will, she is almost 18. She is an adult. How long must she have stayed in the tower to “obey her mother?” What’s a good age Anna Sofia and Elizabeth? You ladies are both in your mid-twenties, quite obviously living at home under your father’s protection, so maybe thirty or even forty years of age is more acceptable to be able to leave the few rooms that you have never left (in your memory)? Is doesn’t seem unrealistic to want to leave the tower, especially when you have never touched grass. By the way ladies, I really would like a response to this question!

Actually, FYI Mother Gothel isn’t her “mother”! So I'm not sure why you keep referring to her as such. Her mother is a very sweet, beautiful, yet sad queen who hasn’t seen her daughter since she was an infant. I like how you picked a verse out of the Old Testament that really is out of context here. The verse in 1st Samuel is when Samuel is confronting Saul with his sin of disobedience to God’s command on how to fight in a war. Now, I’m not saying that we can’t learn from the stories of the Old Testament and that we should rebel, practice witchcraft, etc…. but Scripture passages can’t be bent to help make a point for our own agenda.

3. Biblically examine the legitimacy of her commands.

Even if she is your biological mother, however, that doesn’t mean you have a duty of unconditional submission to her whims. “The requirement of unquestioning obedience by any human authority is a sin and defiles the very intent of God’s Word,” writes R.J. Rushdoony. “The unquestioning obedience which Scripture requires is only to God, never to kings, rulers, employers, husbands, or parents. To render unquestioning obedience is a sin.”

There comes a time when, in the words of our founders, “Resistance to tyrants is obedience to God!” What you need to ask yourself is: Is your mother forcing you to sin, or is she forbidding you to do something God has commanded? In either case, you must disobey. (By the way, God didn’t command you to go see the floating lights.) And if she is physically abusing you or endangering your life, you have a duty to not be an accomplice to her crimes. You need to get out of there. Thankfully, you are fit and resourceful, as well as handy with your lasso hair, and you’ve gotten out of tougher scrapes. We’ll root for you.

You contradict yourselves here. In #2, you say You didn’t leave because you knew your mother’s command was biblically unlawful. You didn’t leave because you thought it would be wrong to stay and submit to the unbiblical tyranny of a kidnapping sorceress. You left because there was something you really wanted to do, the authority over you forbade it, and you decided to do what you wanted to do it anyway. Now you say in #3 that she does need to question her mother’s decision (so that she doesn’t submit with unquestioning obedience!). What if, since all of this has to be Biblical, it is God’s plan for her to leave her “mother” and see the floating lanterns? You can’t deny that it isn’t. Are the floating lanterns perhaps an allegory for the Light of the World—that is Jesus? The lanterns presence saves her from the abusive tower! She says that she feels that they are "meant for me" (and they are!) Hmmm…

4. Appeal to her regarding her sins against you in the spirit of Matthew 18:15:

“If your brother sins against you, go and tell him his fault, between you and him alone. If he listens to you, you have gained your brother.” If she refuses to be reasonable, the biblical answer is not to simply walk away from her forever. Verse 16 continues, “But if he does not listen, take one or two others along with you, that every charge may be established by the evidence of two or three witnesses.” Use your resourcefulness to bring in some authorities to handle the situation – and, yes, submit yourself to them. Unaccountable autonomy is an alternative Scripture never offers anyone, man, woman, or child.

Okay, so since she does confront her “mother” and her “mother” doesn’t deny it. How would she go about getting some other people to help her confront her “mother,” especially since her “mother” won’t let her leave the tower? Should she rebel and run away again? Oh wait, she can’t… her “mother” chains her up!

However… If she is not your biological mother, but instead a kidnapper:

2. Employ your resourcefulness to go to the authorities.

God condemned kidnapping as seriously as murder (Ex. 21:16, Deut. 24:7), and she needs to be brought to justice. This is bigger than you and your feelings; she has sinned against God and your parents as well as you, and right must be done.

Again, how is she supposed to leave and get help when her “mother” chains her up?

However, if justice is really your concern, then…

3….You also need to report the most wanted thief in the kingdom, who has also stolen precious items (the tiara) from your parents.

Flynn has also sinned against God and your parents, and again, this is bigger than you and your feelings. Biblically, he wouldn’t be hung or have his hands cut off, but there are consequences for stealing (Ex. 22:1-4, Lev. 6:1-7, Prov. 6:30,31).

This is not, of course, to assume that Flynn couldn’t repent of stealing. If he did, though, he would certainly go further than saying he’s sorry and never doing it again: He would make restitution to everyone he robbed, as many times over as biblically required. It would be nice if repenting meant not having to suffer the consequences, but God is a God of justice Who requires that things be made right. That He is also a God of mercy means that He does give second chances to those who repent, confess, make things right, go their way, and sin no more… and we can too.

First off, don’t you think that Rapunzel’s parents know that Flynn is a wanted thief? They also would end up hearing the entire story of how Rapunzel initially got out of the tower, so that would include the tiara. You might argue that they could leave out the tiara part- but that wouldn’t happen because they would be bringing the tiara back with them. :) So, in the end, he is turned in. He does repent from stealing- he doesn’t steal anymore, he turns into an accepted and respected member of the community, and most importantly: he is forgiven!

4. Don’t embrace thugs just because they’re nice to you.

This film for young girls contained an interesting message: That everything your mother taught you was wrong. One interesting example was your mother’s caution that the world contained dangerous men. No one would dispute this fact in the real world, but it was a point the film pulled some tricky stunts to prove wrong. At the end of the day, the openly brutal and violent thugs were proven to be harmless to pretty blond girls. The ones shown to be the real villains were parents.

As regards both Flynn and the pub thugs – of course they have souls! But it’s no amazing discovery that the more villainous elements of society also have feelings, dreams, even artistic impulses. Hitler was sensitive and introspective, wrote poetry, loved music and art, collected artifacts, had a dream (a big one), and liked pretty blonde girls. A penchant for collecting ceramic unicorns doesn’t make a criminal innocent. It also doesn’t prove that your mother was wrong about the world – even if she was wrong about how people should respond to it (i.e. hiding in a tower). Unfortunately, neither you nor she figured out what it means to be in the world but not of the world, or the right way to be a light in the darkness.

Ladies, you are being pretty stereotypical here. There are plenty of people who are lost in this world or don’t look clean and fresh with a suit coat on to run to the market. You went from one extreme to the other- there is a middle ground. There are bad men in this world, but there are also men who could seem a little scary or different, but are very nice people who happen to be Christians. My uncle could be considered a little scary to you: He has tattoos, ear piercings, and unkempt curly dark hair. But he is a Christian and would never hurt anyone. Don’t judge a book by its cover ladies!

So Rapunzel’s parents are villains? Mother Gothel is not her real mother and she is the villain of the movie, so your statement The ones shown to be the real villains were parents is incorrect. (And some of the thugs aren’t good- the ones who used to be in cahoots with Flynn aren’t good, nor does Rapunzel trust them.)

Doesn't she look like a villain to you? Yikes!

5. If you are found to be the Lost Princess, step up to the role of royal daughter, and all that that involves.

As the daughter of such obviously wonderful parents, you will obviously not have any excuses for running off to attend events they forbid, or becoming romantically entangled with young men they disapprove of. (If you never had an “authority problem” to begin with, this shouldn’t be a problem for you.) As a princess, however, your new responsibilities go even further than this. As soon as you put on that tiara, you have to stop being the main character of your story and let your subjects take that place. Instead of being slave to a tyrannical mother’s whims, you must now be a slave to duty and the needs of your people. Dancing with the peasants and drawing pictures with them on the sidewalks will not be enough. Whatever your feelings may be, you have to set an example of law-upholding conduct to your people. Whatever your (or others’) dreams may be, you have to impartially uphold justice. Whatever your diplomatic power may be, your word cannot be law.

And Rapunzel, we’re afraid this means that you are going to have to become a different kind of girl.

Sorry, but this made me laugh. Why does she need to change? Surely Rapunzel is embracing her new life as a Princess, Daughter, Friend, Leader, and Example to others. Since she spent the better part of 18 years perfecting her homemaking skills, she definitely has time to devote to serving her kingdom. Maybe she will be more willing to take a few risks and sure she’ll make some mistakes, but we all do. No one is above fault. Plus, since her Father is still the King, she won’t have to lead for a few years at least, so she can continue to grow and mold herself into the woman that she is meant to be. No changes needed.

Your example, unfortunately, can no longer be what it has been throughout the whole movie. You may be one of Disney’s most appealing recent characters, and you may have done some admirable things (such as try to sacrifice your life for Flynn). But your character is nonetheless an extremely dangerous one for girls to relate to.

Why? Because although your situation is so different from ours (our parents generally are our biological parents, and they generally aren’t locking us up in towers), and your universe operates so differently from ours (none of us have magic hair), your struggles, feelings, and questions are just the same. “Tangled” tackles the biggest issues in a young woman’s life: relationships with parents, attitudes toward authority, relationships with young men, the outside world, the use of our time, and our bigger purpose in life. It raises the questions every young woman is asking. Then it gives the exact wrong answers.

It only gives the wrong answers from your serve-your-father lifestyle and upbringing. I wonder what would happen if one day either or both of you announced to your parents (since you are well-over 20 and adults) that you were going to move out of their home, get a job, and maybe even take a few college classes. *gasp*How would your parents react? You are grown adult women- so maybe it was time that you did something on your own without your parents guiding your every step and protecting you from evil like they did when you were a child. (If Proverbs 22:6 is correct, then if your parents taught you well, you won't depart from your beliefs just because you don't live with them any longer or serve your father.)

When a girl sits down to watch your movie, she is about to vicariously live your story with you, feelings, attitudes, romance, temptations and all. She is “you” for the next 90 minutes. And what is she learning along with you? That our parents are wrong about everything. That all will turn out well if we just follow our hearts. That no man is so bad he wouldn’t “turn it all around” just for us. Through you, we tangibly feel the temptation to reject our parents’ instruction, keep secrets from them, and defy them – and then, through you, we give in to temptation. Through you, we feel pangs of guilt, shame, and fear of hurting people we love – and then, through you, we learn to stuff those feelings down and ignore them. Through you, we learn: What I want is more important than what I believe is right.

And at the end of your story, everything turns out beautifully to prove that when you chose to follow your heart rather than your conscience, you made the right moral decision.

Some might still point out that, in order for your story to work out, you had to. True, but next time any of us want to “pull a Rapunzel,” and do something we know is wrong to make things right, let’s remember that our stories are not Disney movies; that our world is not populated with Disney characters; that we are not Disney heroines whose universes revolve around us; and that our Creator has rigged things to work differently. We’ve had to watch girl after girl after girl make the same decisions you did, give in to temptation the way you did, sear her conscience the way you did, and run off with scoundrels like the one you did. Unlike you, they discovered that the real world revolves around a God Who isn’t them, and that He has built into His world rewards for sin that don’t generally include “Happily Ever After.”

If you were a little brainwashed into believing that the outside world was a “dangerous place,” you would be a little torn too. If suddenly you decided to leave a sheltered place, where lies were taught to you, you would be confused as to what to do. That’s part of the emotional abuse in the film. Then, when finding out that there is some good in the world after all, you might just have a mini-breakdown. :)

We admit, we don’t typically write emails to CG models representing imaginary people. The reason we’re writing to you is because for many girls, you’re much more than that. Though you’re just a figment of someone’s imagination, a mere idea – ideas are real. And that’s why “Tangled” matters. After all, girls don’t really love “Tangled” because it’s “just a movie.” The reason we love it isn’t because we just can’t, practically or morally, put ourselves in Rapunzel’s shoes. We don’t love it because it’s a totally un-relatable fantasy that has no connection to our lives. If we love it, it’s because it does strike a chord with our lives. We laugh and cry along with Rapunzel’s joys and woes because we can relate to her. And when we passionately, emotionally tell critics to leave it alone because “It’s just a movie!” we are proving that down inside our hearts, it’s much more than that.

Maybe you ladies are feeling a little torn? I feel sorry for you! I personally love this movie- for it’s elements, style, dialogue, and story; but I don’t feel emotionally drawn to it. It doesn’t make me feel like running away or disobeying, I’ve asked my friends too and none of them feel this way. But maybe it makes you feel a little confused? Are you or your friends feeling convicted and that’s why you seem so angry and on-fire about this movie? I’m praying for you both: praying that you can enjoy freedom in Christ. That you can live freely—able to not always focus on the negative, realize that you are the ones persecuting yourselves, that you can become free of the snares that entangle you (see verse below), and most importantly that you can feel the peace of Jesus without the weight of your pressured father-made rules. Hebrews 12:1-2 says “Therefore we also, since we are surrounded by so great a cloud of witnesses, let us lay aside every weight, and the sin which so easily ensnares us, and let us run with endurance the race that is set before us, looking unto Jesus, the author and finisher of our faith, who for the joy that was set before Him endured the cross, despising the shame, and has sat down at the right hand of the throne of God.”

Galatians 5:1“Stand fast therefore in the liberty by which Christ has made us free, and do not be entangled again with a yoke of bondage.”

You don’t have to be weighted down by the constant pressure to submit to your earthly sinful father and his will for you. Instead submit to your perfect Heavenly Father and live a life free from the burden of guilt and pursuing perfection. I recommend that you read Philippians 2—and memorize, think, ponder, pray, and look for God’s will in your life—not your father’s will. You know, Ephesians 2:8-9 states, “For by grace you have been saved through faith, and that not of yourselves; it is the gift of God, not of works, lest anyone should boast.” So nothing that you do for your personal or for your father’s glory is going to get you into Heaven. Only Jesus Christ’s death for you on the cross for your sins and your belief in Him is going to save you- by His grace and your faith.

You may be just an idea, an imagination, a thought – but thoughts (not people) are exactly what we’re commanded to take captive (2 Cor. 10:5). “Arguments and every lofty opinion raised against the knowledge of God” are exactly what we are supposed to destroy (v. 5). Strongholds are exactly what we are supposed to tear down (v. 4).

Rapunzel, Rapunzel, we’re not condemning you.

We’re just trying to take you captive.

Oh dear… that is kind of scary! Thankfully you can’t take Rapunzel captive, Mother Gothel is gone and so are the ties to the abuse that she perpetrated. Anna Sofia and Elizabeth- I am not condemning you. I just want you both to experience the grace and love of Jesus Christ and the freedom that He has waiting for you!

Love,
Anna Sofia and Elizabeth

*hugs*

Love, Grace

~~~~~

1. http://visionarydaughtersDOTcom/2012/04/our-response-to-rapunzel

Note: I did send this letter to the Anna Sofia and Elizabeth Botkin last week. I have yet to receive an answer to my questions.