A Desire to Control

It is difficult for me to read about women in the Quiverfull/Militant Fecundity movement. Aside from the not being allowed to vote, go to college, or get a job; there’s also the fact that some of the women have a baby nearly every year. It might seem strange to be writing this article when I’m not married but believe me; I have a good grasp of anatomy and have done my research. (I’ve also posted links at the bottom to other resources.) One young Quiverfull/Militant Fecundity mother has given birth to four children in four and a half years, at risk to her health due to requiring an emergency c-section for baby #3 and a life flight trip to the hospital for a D&C after baby #4. Quite frankly, this is not normal or natural! Don’t get me wrong, I love children and I want to have as many as God wants to give me…. (The Quiverfull/Militant Fecundity crowd has an annoying way of taking something good and making it an ugly, idolatrous route to "perfection".) However, when the time comes, I want to have children naturally. “Wait, stop!” You say, “Quiverfull is natural! They’re not using birth control!! It is God’s design!” Uh, no, it is not God’s design for a woman to give birth every year or to be pregnant again within 6 months of her last pregnancy. Women’s bodies are simply not designed to have children this quickly. When I see that a woman has four children in four years, I don’t see God’s design for family; I see a desire to control. It is known that many Quiverfull proponents are not exactly proponents of attachment parenting. I highly doubt that many Quiverfull women co-sleep, exercise, eat correctly, or do anything to maintain a healthy body. I also doubt that they continue to nurse for an extended period of time. It saddens me to write this but most of the women in the movement look as if they never lose their baby weight―a fairly telling sign that they aren’t nursing correctly. My guess is that early weaning and blanket training is the norm for most Quiverfull mothers. In fact, an old friend of my mother’s is a proponent of attachment parenting and is in with the Vision Forum crowd; she was very sad to find that many women in the Vision Forum crowd are fairly hands-off with their babies. Purposely weaning your child, making them sleep in a crib, and blanket training them is a way of controlling how many children you have. It is birth control… in reverse. It’s not in line with biblical custom either if you want to think along the lines of their culture. Hebrew children were not weaned until they were at least two; most commentaries on the first book of Samuel agree that Samuel was at least three by the time Hannah brought him to Eli. Again, women’s bodies are not designed to give birth every year; it is unhealthy and risky for both mother and child. God is good and He knows that having a child every year is not good for a woman’s body or for the wellbeing of her other children. He has designed a healthy, simple way of controlling fertility. “How food-foraging peoples regulate population size relates to two things: how much body fat they accumulate and how they care for their children. Ovulation requires a certain minimum of body fat, and in traditional foraging societies, this is not achieved until early adulthood. Once a child is born, its mother nurses it several times each hour, even at night, and this continues for a period of four or five years. The constant stimulation of the mother’s nipple suppresses the level of hormones that promote ovulation, making conception less likely, especially if work keeps the mother physically active, and she does not have a large store of body fat to draw on for energy. Continuing to nurse for several years, women give birth only at widely spaced intervals.” (1) When a woman breastfeeds on demand, her fertility declines. If she carries her baby with her in a sling, sleeps beside her baby and nurses him or her at night, doesn’t use a pacifier, or even continues to nurse a toddler or young child, her fertility will decline sharply. (2) “It has long been observed in cultures where breastfeeding is common that nursing a child has a prophylactic affect against conceiving. In fact, this phenomenon has been so consistent and observable that it has been named: lactational amenorrhea, the absence or suppression of a woman's menses (or menstrual flow) due to breastfeeding…. Studies show that this method provides more than 98% protection against pregnancy during the first six months after birth. Many women find that breastfeeding is effective as a prophylactic against getting pregnant well beyond this six month period. Sound incredible? There is actually a perfectly logical, or, more to the point, physiological explanation for this phenomenon. Here's how it works. As a baby nurses at its mother's breast, the sucking action stimulates nerve endings in the areola, which send messages to the hypothalamus, a part of the brain that controls metabolism. This in turn signals the pituitary gland to release two hormones (oxytocin and prolactin) which work together to produce and release the mother's milk. However, in addition to contributing to milk production, prolactin has another effect: high levels of prolactin in a woman's body helps to suppress ovulation.” (3) We in the U.S. are pretty culture bound (4) when it comes to babies, as this quote from the Anthropology textbook will tell you: “As a case in point, consider the fact that infants in the United States typically sleep apart from their parents. To most North Americans, this may seem normal, but cross-cultural research shows that co-sleeping, of mother and baby in particular, is the rule. Only in the past 200 years, generally in Western industrial societies, has it been considered proper for parents to sleep apart from their infants…. Recent studies have shown that separation of mother and infant in Western societies has important biological and cultural consequences. For one thing, it increases the length of the child’s crying bouts. Some mother’s incorrectly interpret the cause as a deficiency in breast milk and switch to less healthy bottle formulas; and in extreme cases, the crying may provoke physical abuse. But the benefits of co-sleeping go beyond significant reduction in crying: infants also nurse more often and three times as long per feeding; they receive more stimulation (important for brain development); and they are apparently less susceptible to sudden infant death syndrome (SIDS or “crib death”). There are benefits to the mother as well: frequent nursing prevents early ovulation after childbirth, and she gets at least as much sleep as mothers who sleep without their infants.” (5) And this is in a secular textbook!! :-D Perhaps one truly unfortunate aspect of young women not going to college is the fact that they are less likely to be exposed to sociology and psychology classes which contain a lot of useful information about marriage and family. I never thought I would learn so much about childrearing as I have in my Psychology and Sociology survey classes. Did you know that people of other cultures consider cribs to be “cages”? One missionary to New Guinea who visited my church explained that the people there wanted to know why she put her baby in a “cage”. Take a moment to study all the other cultures that practice co-sleeping including Korea, China, and Thailand, and allow your eyes to be opened to how the rest of the world functions. And for the “you’ll roll on your child!” crowd, here’s information on sleep cycles from a psychology textbook, “Even when you are deeply asleep, your brain somehow processes the meaning of certain stimuli. You move around on your bed, but you manage not to fall out of it. If you sleep with your babies, you will not roll over and suffocate them (assuming you are not intoxicated). The occasional roar of passing vehicles may leave deep sleep undisturbed, but the cry from a baby’s nursery quickly interrupts it. So does the sound of your name―a stimulus our selective attention responds is ever alert for. EEG recordings confirm that the brain’s auditory cortex responds to sound stimuli even during sleep.” (6) Yes, I am a proponent of the family bed. (Read some articles by Dr. Sears and you will be as well.) I believe that babies and children are entitled to as much love and cuddling as they want and I believe they should be allowed to nurse as long as they want to nurse. I believe that blanket training and letting a child “cry it out” is neglectful and even abusive. Now, I know not all Quiverfull proponents wean early or blanket train but I ask you, can you name one? My Mom’s friend in the Quiverfull/Vision Forum crowd who was a proponent of attachment parenting did not speak up! She was and still is too intimidated to say anything! If there are those who understand natural child spacing or attachment parenting in the Quiverful/Militant Fecundity movement, they need to speak up! Can you imagine how wonderful it would be for mothers and babies across this country if Michelle Dugger was a proponent of attachment parenting? A perfectly good opportunity lost! Militant Fecundity (I hate that term!) really is a good name for this type of child raising/training because it is much more akin to a military campaign than normal living. It is also just as toxic as a war zone to mother, child, and family. Quiverfull and Militant Fecundity are NOT pro-family nor are they Biblical; those who believe that these movements are beneficial are sorely mistaken.

Ingrid

Addendum

November 5, 2014,

I’ve gotten so many comments on this post that I feel a few explanations are necessary. So, I’m taking a minute here to address a few things that have confused several readers…

1: I’m not advocating NFP here. I’m explaining how patriarchy claims to be “natural” and “God’s design” but really is not at all. I truly believe that God designed women’s bodies to self-regulate and space out pregnancies. However, we live in a fallen world and sometimes things just don’t work how God planned due to genetics, disease, and etc. So, while NFP can be a good option, I don’t think it’s for everyone. 

2: I think some forms of birth control are a perfectly fine option and plan to use some sort of control when I get married. The reason? I don’t want to spend 10-15 years of my life able to become pregnant at any point. There are many personal reasons for this but one of them is simply practical: I have seasonal allergies and I take medications for them. I get migraines sometimes and take ibuprofen. I wouldn’t want to worry about unknowingly becoming pregnant and having medications affect the baby. Because I care about stuff like that and I think it matters.

3: Let me make something clear. In this article, I’m taking about parents within the patriarchy movement… not parents in general. There’s a big difference. I don’t care if you have one child or ten or how closely spaced they might or might not be–unless you’re having all of them because some system made up by random people told you that you should. You should have children because you want to have them and love having them–not because some guy somewhere decreed that you needed to have kids. But please, space your kids out as much as possible, for your own sanity, there’s usually no need to have them all at once. ;)

4. Seriously, I don’t care about your baby weight. Like really. Please stop telling me about your baby weight. Life happens. I believe in being healthy and keeping a healthy weight, even during pregnancy. I do firmly believe that pregnancy is not an excuse to eat whatever and whenever you want. That is a recipe for disaster. It’s actually one of the times when you should be most health conscious. And any doctor you ask will back me up on that. Just please, I beg you, no more comments about your baby weight. That gets awkward for me and for you and it just ends badly. So please no more. :D 

Works Cited

1. Haviland, William, et al. Cultural Anthropology: The Human Challenge. Belmont, CA: Thomas Wadsworth, 2008. Print. Page 9.

2. Now please, don’t start giving me the, “Well my sister/friend/cousin tried the nursing thing to limit her fertility and it didn’t work. She ended up with another baby 11 months later!” I’ve heard that many times before and all I want to say is: “But did she co-sleep? Did she use a pacifier instead of nursing? What about slings?” All of the mothers I know who nursed on demand, co-slept with their babies, didn’t use pacifiers, nursed more than one child, and etc. had child spacing of 2-3 years. It is always possible that one spacing might be closer than another just as another could be longer.

3. Overton, Larry G. Breastfeeding and the Bible.
4. Culture Bound - “Theories about the world and reality based on the assumptions and values of one’s own culture.” As defined in Cultural Anthropology.

5. Haviland, William, et al. Cultural Anthropology: The Human Challenge. Belmont, CA: Thomas Wadsworth, 2008. Print. Page 9.

6. Myers, David G. Exploring Psychology. New York, NY: Worth Publishers, 2005. Print. Page 210.

Resources

1. Family friend with 10 children (who is not Quiverfull influenced!) Proponent of the family bed and natural child spacing via extended breastfeeding. http://www.themotherscompanion dot org/index.php

2. I <3 Dr. Sears! http://www.askdrsears.com/topics/sleep-problems/co-sleeping-yes-no-sometimes

3. Has a great article right now about not letting your baby cry it out and co-sleeping. http://parentingfreedom.com/

The Story

Pride and Prejudice, 2005

I’ve been writing this story since before I started this blog and now I think I can finally post it. It’s been alluded to in many posts, especially my earlier ones. For a long time, I held back in telling this story because of own pain and not knowing for sure what was going to happen. I also wanted to protect my friend Jason’s privacy. Just reading it over again still hurts a little.

“A book by the name of Emotional Purity came out several years back; I purchased and read it, at about the age of fourteen. My ideals were being shaped at that age, for I also bought at the same time, Passion and Purity by Elizabeth Elliott. And, I had in my possession, I Kissed Dating Goodbye and Boy meets Girl by Joshua Harris, and The Dating Trap by Martha Rupert. At first read, Emotional Purity seemed to have its philosophy straight and I agreed with much of what it said. Then when I was sixteen, I began to reexamine my foolproof system and the books that had influenced my thinking. No book was safe from my sharp critique and I found many flaws in the teaching they presented; in Emotional Purity especially.” – Part 1, Let It Be = Love3

Now, what I didn’t explain in Let it Be = Love3 was the reason why I began rethinking my trust in the formulas prescribed by I Kissed Dating Goodbye, Emotional Purity, and various speakers in the homeschool realm. At the time, it was all still too fresh and too painful. Here’s the story…
When I was fifteen, I began e-mailing a good guy friend of mine who lived in another state. Let’s call him Jason. He and I had many similar interests and ideals, we were both homeschooled, and both of our parents thought that courtship was the way to handle relationships. Jason and I were friends and had been all our lives but there was always a little something special between us and that began to blossom over the next 10 or so months. We e-mailed everyday and we saw each other several times that year during family visits and our friendship grew deeper and deeper. I knew I was in love with him and knew that he likely felt the same way about me―some feelings can be exchanged with looks and words are not necessary. Then, all at once, the day after Christmas, he wrote and told me that he thought we should stop e-mailing. He said it didn’t line up with the Josh Harris books and the Little Bear Wheeler tapes (i.e. Dating is No Game tape set) he’d been listening to and thinking over. We were still technically “friends” and so applying these ideas to a “friendship” didn’t really work or make sense. I was completely confused. I asked him to call me and he did… but only after his mom called my mom and made it clear that the correspondence was over. No discussion, no chance for hope. It was over. Talk about feeling like Mr. Bingley!



Pride and Prejudice, 1995

When I was able to talk to Jason, we stayed on the phone for a really long time and he sounded so sad. He mentioned Emotional Purity and the Little Bear tapes but didn’t really have a coherent argument. Then, it was over. I cried myself to sleep for several nights afterwards and spent the next few months trying to figure out what had gone wrong. At first, I blamed myself. I blamed my parents. But then, I realized who (and what) was to blame. Upon closer examination and from what I know now of Jason and his family, his parents must have decided that I wasn’t right for their son. Or they thought he was “feeling” too much because love is a deadly sin. (*rolls eyes*) So they made him stop e-mailing me…likely by making him confused and guilty about it.

"Do you deny it, Mr. Darcy? That you separated a young couple who loved each other, exposing your friend to the censure of the world for caprice and my sister to its derision for disappointed hopes, and involving them both in misery of the acutest kind?" - Elizabeth Bennet (Keira Knightley), Pride and Prejudice, 2005

As the years went on and Jason and I saw each other again from time to time… he grew more and more distant from me. I don’t even know him now. The person that he has become is not the young man I loved. But that’s another story entirely.

It was after this experience that I realized that the books and formulas weren’t working and didn’t work. In fact, they could even be used as ammunition to ruin friendships or allow parents to manipulate relationships. Even Josh Harris is aware of this possibility and mentioned it in Boy Meets Girl. I wanted to burn my books but ended up putting them in a box in the basement.

“Writers of these type of books need to be blatantly honest...it's okay to "flower-up" a novel but writers shouldn't flower-up real life...and they need to state over and over that this is just one story and that everyone's story will be different. I'm tired of the authors never saying that. Why? Because I'm concerned that young people (or their parents) take these stories and believe that their (or their children's) future will or should look like that...and that belief, I know from experience, can cause a lot of pain. Sometimes, people who are married forget how much singles hang on every word in these books and stories...they need to remember what it felt like to be 14 and impressionable.” - Re: Let it Be = Love3

Something that has bothered me since the whole thing went down is the fact that instead of being concerned that our relationship lined up with the Bible and the words of Jesus, Jason was only concerned about how our relationship related to I Kissed Dating Goodbye, Emotional Purity, and the thoughts of Little Bear Wheeler. When we allow books, speakers, music, or anyone other than Jesus Christ to be our guidance for life, we have strayed from the truth. The next time you want advice, don’t pick up a book or listen to a tape… read the Bible and pray.

The ideals of the courtship movement were indeed to blame for what happened to me and by the summer, I knew I didn’t want anyone else to be as misled as I had been. So I started this blog. Without those ridiculous theories, Jason and I would likely have dated or at least talked about dating instead of dancing around the subject and acting like nothing was happening because it was a “sin” to fall in love at 15. Perhaps he would have broken up with me and then at least I would have known the boundaries and rules I had to follow. As it was, after it broke off, I wasn’t sure if we were still friends or… what? Courtship’s ideals can create a very unnatural strain and lack of openness between young people themselves and in their interaction with their parents. For some reason, in a courtship mindset, parents seem shocked to discover that their teenager actually has romantic feelings for a guy/girl and forget that crushes and young love are common. This stuff is all normal! The shutting off of emotions only causes confusion, guilt, anger, and pain and it’s not right to expect perfection from another human being.

Another thing…don’t be afraid to suffer. I never sought out these trials but I learned to accept them when they came. God will allow you to be tested at some point and He may choose to do it with a relationship. Sure, if I'd followed all the principles of those books I'd be a safe, happy, girl, (well maybe) who has never had her heart broken.

But I wouldn’t have learned anything either.

Now, I'm a strong, content, young woman who had her heart broken and has found that it's been glued back together with no more than a little scar. I'm happy for my sufferings, because God used them to teach me more than any safe times ever could have. I took a risk—got hurt—but ended up with wonderful blessings.

And I'd never trade those wonderful years of friendship with Jason for all the so-called "safety" that emotional purity brings. Love can be painful but it is also fun and beautiful in its time.

Why post this?

I want to help parents not to make the mistake Jason’s parents made and I want to help young people in the same situation. This is my way of saying, you're not alone. God's with you and there are others with similar heartaches or who have had them. You're not the only one.

This word to parents, don't ever take matters of the heart into your hands. Give them to God. Don’t lock your child into a box of perfection. Look for the good in people. Pray and pray some more. This is why I wrote Seeking Perfection. Don't ever put your child or the person of their choice through what Jason and I went through. In most cases, if you've taught your children correctly, they will not disappoint you. "Train up a child in the way he should go: and when he is old, he will not depart from it." —Proverbs 22:6. Trust God.

This word to young people, if you love someone…don't be afraid to show it. I'm not talking about infatuation. I'm talking about love and if you're ever in love, you’ll know what I mean. Don't take anything for granted, that's one of the things that God has taught me through this. You've got to live, laugh, and love while you can…because tomorrow everything could be gone forever.

And now, it honestly doesn’t matter. I’ve moved on and I’m interested in another guy. God is bigger than all of these things that have happened to me and He has sustained me through all of them. I’m glad he saw fit to test me and show me that I am to trust in Him alone―not live by self-help books and formulas. It doesn’t matter that Jason and I don’t speak now or that his parents turned him against me. In the light of eternity, it doesn’t matter. It doesn’t matter when people attack me or accuse me of things I didn’t say or do…. Life is too short. I still pray for Jason and his family. I hope that they will find peace and freedom as they walk with Christ.

“I am not saying this because I am in need, for I have learned to be content whatever the circumstances. I know what it is to be in need, and I know what it is to have plenty. I have learned the secret of being content in any and every situation, whether well fed or hungry, whether living in plenty or in want. I can do all this through Him who gives me strength.” Philippians 4:11-13.

Ingrid

Interesting...

I found Katie Botkin's blog awhile ago; it is an interesting read. She's Anna Sofia and Elizabeth's cousin and doesn't agree with their outlook on college or daughter hood. (Katie has a master's degree and taught at the University of Idaho for a time...definitely not actions condoned by the Botkin sisters.) The blog is a bittersweet read... I can only imagine how I would feel if my cousins were in such a legalistic lifestyle.

Here's Katie's post about her cousins:
http://missthewind.blogspot.com/2007/11/on-daughters-college-and-nouveau.html

And about women and the church:
http://missthewind.blogspot.com/2010/07/in-which-i-react-to-20-years-of.html

Ingrid

Some Numbers For your Edification

Currently on Facebook

8,638 people like Vision Forum.

There are over 1.5 million homeschoolers in this country.

Even with another 1000 or so not on Facebook, not even 10% of the homeschool population likes Vision Forum.

*normal people rejoice now*

Isn’t that the most encouraging thing you’ve heard in a long time? :-)

Random note: Most of the recent questions and posts on the VF Facebook wall are written by women. I thought men were supposed to be leading this? Hmmmm…. *weird*

Also, on Facebook,

The Visionary Daughters – So Much More group has only 232 members.

The two So Much More pages only have 32 likes between them.

The National Center for Family Integrated Churches is only liked by 1,477 people.

I think this shows what I’ve been thinking for a long time, to quote George Bailey in It’s a Wonderful Life, “You sit around here and spin your little web and you think the whole world revolves around you and your money. Well it doesn't, Mr. Potter. In the whole vast configuration of things I'd say you're nothing but a scurvy little spider." Amen.

:-D

Ingrid

Anne the Queen

http://visionarydaughters.com/2009/07/resurrecting-two-great-queens

This article by Anna Sophia and Elizabeth Botkin is from 2009 and I remember seeing it then and thinking I should respond to it…. Then I forgot about it. However, I found it again recently and decided that I should correct the errors found in it. I am often annoyed with how badly history is portrayed, researched, and documented in patriarchal circles. See: Of Daughters of Destiny and Watered Down History My favourite history professor would either laugh or cry if I gave her the Botkin’s article. I’m a student of history and Tudor England my favourite area of concentration. I’m aghast at the lack of historical knowledge and research shown by the Botkin sisters in their discussion of Anne Boleyn. (And of course, there’s the all too common dig about Disney…. :-( *sigh* Oh well) Unfortunately, I don’t know enough about Jeanne D’Albret, to comment on the treatment of her and I don’t have time yet to dig deeper. Maybe this summer.... By the way, don't just take my word for all this stuff on Anne Boleyn...look her up in several different biographies and see what you think. :-)

First, the Botkin girls' article quotes no sources, except John Foxe (and who knows what book of his they are referring to because they don’t say), and this seriously wounds its credibility. Any historical article must have sources! If you don’t cite your sources, it is considered plagiarism. Secondly, the facts are just plain stretched or missing.

“During her years of education in France, through exposure to men such as Jacques LeFevre and Guillaume Farel, Anne’s love for the pure gospel was fanned into flame, and she returned to England an ardent reformer during a time when England was violently persecuting its Protestants.”

Even the year of Anne Boleyn’s birth is still a matter of debate among historians and we don’t know when Anne went to France (and/or the Netherlands) or when she returned to England. One of my best sources: The Life of Anne Boleyn by Phillip W. Sergeant devotes almost a whole chapter to discussing the different ideas and dates assigned to Anne’s time in France. We only know that she was there at some point in her childhood. It would have been hard to return and be an ardent reformer if she was only 12 or 13! And historians aren’t even sure where in France Anne was or what she did while there and it is pure fancy to say that she was exposed to reformers because we simply do not know.

“Upon being crowned queen, Anne used her position to promote and defend reformers such as William Tyndale, Thomas Cranmer, Hugh Latimer, Matthew Parker, and Miles Coverdale, to encourage the translation and dissemination of Scripture into English, and to make England a refuge for persecuted Protestants from around Europe. The martyrologist John Foxe called Anne “a special comforter and aider of all the professors of Christ’s gospel… What a zealous defender she was of Christ’s gospel all the world doth know, and her acts do and will declare to the world’s end.”

Ehh… sorry… we don’t know if she did that either. While she did authorize an English translation of the Bible before she fell from favour1 and gave to the poor, we don’t really know very much beyond these few facts. Anne was a protestant and could have been saved by grace through faith. I like to think that she was but we honestly don’t know. Almost none of her writings exist anymore. John Foxe describes her as a martyr but that’s really best left to one’s own conclusions. Most historians agree that Anne died because her husband wanted to marry someone else―not directly due to her faith.

“Brought down by a conspiracy of her papist enemies, who called her “the principle cause of the spread of Lutheranism in this country,” Anne was beheaded on false charges of adultery, incest, witchcraft, and “high treason against the King’s person.”

Again, no sources are cited, even for direct quotes. (I looked up the first quote and it is credited to the Spanish Ambassador who obviously hated Anne for supplanting the Spanish Catherine of Aragon.) Again, Anne was arrested because her husband wanted to marry someone else and decided to fabricate charges of adultery. I’m not sure what papist enemies they are speaking of, for sure Anne did have enemies, but evidence is scarce in showing that they were solely responsible for her death. Henry VIII was said to be “the most dangerous and cruel man in the world”2 and Anne’s death was entirely his doing.

“- From the last letter Anne wrote to her husband Henry VIII, while imprisoned in the Tower. This letter was recently found among the personal papers of Thomas Cromwell, likely to have never reached Henry.”

This letter, quoted in the article, is regarded by many historians to be a fraud. And it wasn’t found recently either; Sergeant knew of it when he wrote Anne’s biography in 1924 and he says in a postscript, “It may be noted that I have made no reference, in the account of Anne Boleyn’s last days, to her alleged letter to Henry VIII from the Tower. All evidence for its authenticity is lacking, neither the handwriting nor the style being Anne’s.”3

Anne Boleyn is a fascinating figure in history but her record is not as pure as Anna Sophia and Elizabeth Botkin would like to make it. Yes, Anne was a reformer but she did not accomplish much on her own. God did use her in extraordinary ways but I’m not so sure she sought these opportunities out. Yes, Henry VIII broke with Rome to marry her and then he tolerated protestant views but he never truly embraced them. Anne mistreated Mary, her stepdaughter, and caused the annulment between Henry and his first wife, Catherine of Aragon. Also, Anne was likely sleeping with Henry before they were married because Elizabeth (later Queen Elizabeth I) was born only six months after their wedding. Also, this article mentions nothing of Anne’s scheming father who used his daughters to climb the social ladder. Even Anne’s own headstrong personality and defiant voice have been silenced. In any case, Anne Boleyn is not someone I would expect the Botkin girls to like very much. Maybe it’s good that they can see past her faults but I wish they wouldn’t try so hard to make her good. The Botkin girls greatly stretched the truth in this article and completely made Anne Boleyn into a martyr of the reformation. It’s a great example of hagiography or “treating its subject with undue reverence.”4 It would be nice to see more historical method in this work and a quest for accuracy and balanced portrayals of historic figures. I can only hope the Botkin’s other historical endeavours are accurate but somehow I doubt that they are. :-/ (That’s kind of scary when you think that they sell history CD's and etc.) I know from experience… I can catch myself trying to make historical figures “good” and it's a silly thing to do. When you start twisting history to suit your own ideas, it can be difficult to stop.

Ingrid

Works Cited
1. Sergeant, Phillip W. The Life of Anne Boleyn. Hutchinson & Co., London. 1924. Print. Page 262.
2. Weir, Allison. The Six Wives of Henry VIII Grove Press, 1991. Print. Page 283
3. Sergeant. Page 309.
4. Encarta English Dictionary.

Creed

I believe in God the Father Almighty Maker of Heaven and Maker of Earth

And in Jesus Christ His only begotten Son our Lord

He was conceived by the Holy Spirit

Born of the virgin Mary

Suffered under Pontius Pilate

He was crucified and dead and buried

And I believe what I believe is what makes me what I am

I did not make it no it is making me

It is the very truth of God and not the invention of any man

I believe that He who suffered was crucified buried and dead

He descended into hell and on the third day rose again

He ascended into Heaven where He sits at God's mighty right hand

I believe that He's returning To judge the quick and the dead of the sons of men

And I believe what I believe is what makes me what I am

I did not make it no it is making me

It is the very truth of God and not the invention of any man

I believe it

I believe it

I believe it

I believe in God the Father Almighty Maker of Heaven and Maker of Earth

And in Jesus Christ His only begotten Son our Lord

I believe in the Holy Spirit One Holy Church

The communion of Saints

The forgiveness of sin

I believe in the resurrection

I believe in a life that never ends

And I believe what I believe is what makes me what I am

I did not make it no it is making me I did not make it no it is making me

I said I did not make it no it is making me

It is the very truth of God and not the invention of any man

I believe it I believe

I believe it I believe it

I believe it I believe it

Rich Mullins

Cease and Desist

To whoever left several hateful, confusing comments on older posts in the last 24 hours: this behavior constitutes harassment and Cyberstalking.

“Cyberstalking is the use of the Internet or other electronic means to stalk or harass an individual, a group of individuals, or an organization. It may include false accusations, monitoring, making threats, identity theft, damage to data or equipment, the solicitation of minors for sex, or gathering information in order to harass. The definition of "harassment" must meet the criterion that a reasonable person, in possession of the same information, would regard it as sufficient to cause another reasonable person distress.” Wikipedia.

Don’t have time to deal with bizarre behavior now, leaving on vacation.

Ingrid

Losing Your Life

Maybe I’m idealistic but I keep hoping that the Botkin girls will eventually realise that their way of life is dysfunctional. So occasionally, I read their blog. Unfortunately, it never fails to sadden me and the article written by Anna Sophia and Elizabeth on marriage has to be one of the saddest and most disappointing articles I’ve ever read. Why Am I not Married? In this article and the defence of it, Is it my fault that I'm not married? the Botkin girls seem to suggest that marriage is in the future of every girl when it may not be at all! Lifelong singleness is given only a passing reference before it is suggested that marriage is the chief end and goal of life. Instead of pointing young women to Jesus as the fulfilment of every hope and the answer to every need, the Botkin girls suggest that 1: the problem lies with the young women and 2: still seem to suggest that marriage is the ultimate glory of life.* It is not. Marriage is very important but it may not be God’s plan for your life at all. “The disciples said to him, “If this is the situation between a husband and wife, it is better not to marry.” Jesus replied, “Not everyone can accept this word, but only those to whom it has been given. For there are eunuchs who were born that way, and there are eunuchs who have been made eunuchs by others—and there are those who choose to live like eunuchs for the sake of the kingdom of heaven. The one who can accept this should accept it.” Matthew 19:10-12. I wrestled with that verse a few years ago because I couldn’t understand why some people could be bound to a life of singleness. It seemed cruel of God to doom some to being single...or so I thought. Mostly I was just afraid that I was going to be single. The meaning of Jesus’ words did not come clear to me for a long time but I finally realized that he honestly meant it when he said: “Not everyone can accept this word, but only those to whom it has been given.... The one who can accept this should accept it.” If you are meant to be single, you will be able to accept this and though it will hurt sometimes, you will be content. If that is what God has for you, it is not a curse. You have no “right” to marriage. God will place you in the path that He has chosen for you regardless of your own ideas. ““For my thoughts are not your thoughts, neither are your ways my ways,” declares the Lord. “As the heavens are higher than the earth, so are my ways higher than your ways and my thoughts than your thoughts.” (Isaiah 55:8-9) Remember, Jesus wasn’t married either. God knows exactly what you need and He will be with you every step of the way. Married or not, you are to focus on Jesus and find your identity in Him; not in your relationships or home or family or accomplishments. Sadly, the Botkin girls are misleading young women and telling them that they only need to perfect themselves rather than look to Jesus Christ and trust him completely with their lives. While it's actually okay to prepare and become a girl that someone will want to marry; that is not your chief end and goal in life. Your goal is serving Christ and living for Him and loving Him so much that you are willing to say "yes, Lord," if a young man never shows up. It’s not that what the Botkin girls say that is terribly wrong... it’s what they don’t say. Once you've left Jesus out of the mix and stopped focusing on him it’s not Christianity, it's Humanism. Worshipping your skills, father, mother, husband, or future husband is not going to bring you peace and eternal joy. Setting up a human being in God's place only sets that person up for failure and you will eventually be disappointed. It's regrettable that the Botkin sisters take a teachable moment, while discussing a real and painful issue that many girls face, and instead of giving true hope, only encourage these young women to try to perfect themselves and continue to further the idea that marriage is a right that all are entitled to receive.

“Anyone who loves their father or mother more than me is not worthy of me; anyone who loves their son or daughter more than me is not worthy of me. Whoever does not take up their cross and follow me is not worthy of me. Whoever finds their life will lose it, and whoever loses their life for my sake will find it.” Matthew 10: 37-40.

Ingrid


* Of course, many would say that in the Botkin view of things, acknowledging that some women may never marry is detrimental to their worldview and their business. I mean, who would buy the Botkin books and tapes on how to prepare for marriage if they thought they were going to be single? For that matter, who would want to remain in their father’s household preparing for a marriage that may never come? The Botkin girls have to assume that all girls will marry because if they don’t, what is the point of everything the Botkin’s teach and sell? Since their teachings are so wrapped up in one area of life, they seem helpless to answer questions alternatives or other areas of life. I wonder how they handle these words of Jesus: “Large crowds were traveling with Jesus, and turning to them he said: “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: 25-27) Very likely, they just avoid them since they don’t fit into their own worldview.

Of Visions and Humanism

I’ve been clicking around on the Botkin’s websites lately and I came across this page: http://westernconservatory.com/content/vision

Vision

"Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you..." - Matthew 28:20
The Western Conservatory of the Arts and Sciences has been established by Geoffrey Botkin's seven children to honor his vision in regard to Christendom. We believe the foundations of civil society can be improved for the future and must not be surrendered to a cultural way of thinking that is hostile to the past.
The vision is simple: that scriptural wisdom must be applied for maturity and leadership in all areas of society, including the gates of business, media, jurisprudence, science, the fine arts, education, and church reform. We believe these disciplines must integrate and should be mastered by all leaders, each of whom has personal duties to the King of kings.

So is Geoffrey Botkin the king of kings? Since no other name or person is mentioned, we must assume that all honour is to be given to him. "...has been established by Geoffrey Botkin's seven children to honour his vision in regard to Christendom." In other words, his children are speaking in his name in order to honour his vision? Where is Jesus Christ? Should we not be honouring Christ’s vision? It seems to me that Jesus is relegated to a backseat and His words are taken out of context to be the words of Geoffrey Botkin to his children. It almost seems that Botkin is the “I” speaking in the Bible verse! "Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you..." That's only the last verse of the Great Commission! Elsewhere on this site, on the About page, under "How We Do It" there is this statement: “We stay focused on the main challenge of the Great Commission.” Oh really? Then why is the full text of the Great Commission nowhere to be found on the conservatory’s site? And the main challenge of the Great Commission is found below:

Matthew 28:18-20
Then Jesus came to them and said, “All authority in heaven and on earth has been given to me. Therefore go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, and teaching them to obey everything I have commanded you. And surely I am with you always, to the very end of the age.”

The Conservatory’s vision is not a vision for Christ. It is a vision for man. Or more accurately, a man.

And it's not Christianity, it's humanism.

Galatians 1:6-12
I am astonished that you are so quickly deserting the one who called you to live in the grace of Christ and are turning to a different gospel—which is really no gospel at all. Evidently some people are throwing you into confusion and are trying to pervert the gospel of Christ. But even if we or an angel from heaven should preach a gospel other than the one we preached to you, let them be under God’s curse! As we have already said, so now I say again: If anybody is preaching to you a gospel other than what you accepted, let them be under God’s curse!
Am I now trying to win the approval of human beings, or of God? Or am I trying to please people? If I were still trying to please people, I would not be a servant of Christ. I want you to know, brothers and sisters, that the gospel I preached is not of human origin. I did not receive it from any man, nor was I taught it; rather, I received it by revelation from Jesus Christ.

Humanism: 1. A system of thought that rejects religious beliefs and centers on humans and their values, capacities, and worth. Found here: http://www.answers.com/topic/humanism

Ingrid

The myth of having to learn to run a household

Recently, while on the blog of a young couple lately married, I was reading the post telling of the couple’s first few months together and all those fun little things like meals and house hunting. But, I found one comment on this post highly amusing. Basically, the young woman commenting said that when she married she was surprised to find how little time it took to cook, clean, and do laundry for only two people. Yeah, only two…. You see, it’s what I’ve been saying for a long time about all this “preparing for marriage hoopla” that is constantly being pressed upon young ladies in the homeschooling community. There’s this strange amnesia that comes over these “daughters at home” speakers and they seem to forget that when you first marry…there are only two of you. That’s right. Two. And then, there may be three…. Just how much laundry do you think you’ll do when you first get married? It seems to me that those touting the “daughters at home” ritual have either brain injuries…or no imagination… or they want young women to be prepared to have triplets. Apparently, multiple births must be normal in such cases since it’s important for the daughters to know in advance how to do laundry for twelve people. :-D Only eventually, over a period of years, there may be more children―in which case, both the amounts laundry and food preparation gradually increase. Kids come in one or twos (and maybe threes but not often)…not fives and sixes and tens! They train you! Which means, and hang on to your hat now, a woman can learn as she goes (and her new husband can too… don’t these guys know how to wash dishes?). *gasp* Could it be? You don’t have to know how to cook for 10 before you’re married!!?? No! Alas! It is true! Even you can learn how to be a homemaker and parent by being one after you’re married!!
Look, there’s nothing wrong with being accomplished…. I know how to cook and sew and do laundry…and I’m not married yet. My guy likes that I’m accomplished, he says it challenges him to learn be accomplished himself… accomplishment is a good thing. But it’s not my chief end and goal in life. I don’t find my fulfillment in making the perfect turtle cheesecake. Being accomplished is not the only thing that matters. The thing that matters most in anyone is his or her faith in God and having a personal relationship with Jesus. People, of any age, should also be working on their character and growing in maturity and knowledge. Knowing how to run a household and take care of children is just one little tiny part of what anyone should know before they marry. It is totally wrong and unbiblical for anyone to make an idol out of a young lady’s ability to cook, clean, and do laundry. It’s not who they are...a young lady’s worth is not measured by how well she can cook for ten. Shame on anyone who thinks that cooking and cleaning is all a girl can do with her life and that it’s the only thing that matters.

Ingrid

Love is Not a Sin

I wrote this last summer and with a bit of editing, I decided to post it. I do feel guilty about not being able to write but college coursework drains so much of my time…. Hopefully after finals I can find time to think out more posts. :-)

My friends are really into courtship and I’m not…I mean courtship has its good points but I don’t really care about methods anymore… and when I talk to them about certain subjects they can be expected to react the same way every time. Basically, even though I’m happy with my life, people assume that I must secretly be miserable. After all, love (especially the emotion part) is such a *cough* bad *cough* thing that it must be squelched. And the easiest way to squelch me in peoples minds is to say, “Well, I’m sure you’ll meet someone else… just ask God to take your “feelings” for _____ away and then you can be open to anything.” Hello? I’m not upset, angry, or even worried―I’m happy with my life! Don’t even bring up anyone else!! Aack!

I hate this phrase so much that I’ll write it again. (It seems to be the pat answer in courtship circles about romantic feeling.)

“Just ask God to take your “feelings” for _____ away and then you can be open to anything.”

My response?

“What if He doesn’t want to take them away?”

Well, really, what if God doesn’t want to take your feelings for someone away? What if he wants to work on you through that person? I’ve found that romantic entanglements are one of God’s greatest teaching tools. (Not that you should seek them by any means, I mean when they come because God wants them to come.) Sometimes God doesn’t take them away―sometimes they’re meant to stay because you’ve met the right person.

And if you do have these “feelings” why do they bother you so much? They’re natural and when God brings them they’re amazing. (You don’t seek feelings, God provides them: they’re either there or they’re not. So if you’re into courtship and your parents are recommending some guy to you, it’s doubtful that you’re going to be able to pray for feelings for him and have them come. If you have to think about it that much, it’s not really what I’m talking about.) If you obsess about them it’s only going to make them worse and you’ll be focusing on them more and more.

When did we get onto this remedy of, “Well just pray and God will take these emotions, feelings, thoughts, etc away.”

Why do we need them to go away?

Is love so awful that you think it has to be gotten rid of or is love so meaningless that it can be removed effortlessly?

It is as if in response to the world’s selfishness in relationships we have become selfish in our “Christian” relationships and decided to withhold love in order to protect ourselves. In other words, both dating and courtship can be completely self-centered in an effort to satisfy and/or protect one’s own precious self. Is this not a paradox?

Loving is giving of yourself without desiring anything in return… when did loving someone become a sin in our eyes?

Nowhere in the Bible does it state that romantic love in its essence is a sin. (Hello? Have you read Song of Solomon?) If it were a sin, I think the Bible would be pretty clear on the subject. Romantic love is a gift and love, real love is not a sin. So then, why are you trying to pray it away like one?

Ingrid

10 Reasons to Read Betsy-Tacy

The Betsy-Tacy books were written by Maud Hart Lovelace and were based upon her childhood and young adulthood in the early 20th century. There are four books about covering her years from 5 to 12 and these are suitable for all ages. The next six books cover her high school years, travel, and marriage and are suitable for 14+. (The reason? Well, Betsy can be a little silly about boys…but really, you’ll just appreciate them more if you’re in high school yourself or have been in it.) There are also 3 Deep Valley books about other people that Betsy knows. They are delightful books and worth reading again and again…and here are 10 reasons why.

1. The characters are hopelessly flawed but always learn from their mistakes and become better people. Which is so nice, yes? :-)

2. Betsy and Tib are a little boy-crazy but Tacy isn’t.

3. The characters have loving relationships with their families (and their fathers!) but it’s not sickly sweet or obsessive.

4. College and education are viewed as good and beneficial things. Most of the girls go to college and then get married.

5. Betsy learns to keep house after she’s married and makes it a priority. But, she doesn’t give up her writing to do so. They’re some of the few books I’ve read with a healthy balance between homemaking and having dreams and pursuits as a married woman.

6. Betsy’s life doesn’t end with her marriage: the wedding is in the beginning of the last book.

7. The books make a statement against sororities and fraternities which shows some greatness of mind on Mrs. Lovelace’s part, I think.

8. The characters eat so well! Warning: These books will make you hungry!

9. Betsy doesn’t like Elsie Dinsmore (and neither do I)!

10. They show that heartache (even over, (horrors!) boys) is normal and can be a beneficial thing to growing up and maturing.

And the 11th reason to read Betsy-Tacy is….

After a long sojourn in the world of “out of print”… the high school books are being re-released on September 29th! And Carney’s House Party and Emily of Deep Valley will be out next year!







So now instead of having to track them down on Abebooks and paying $25 for one paperback you can find them on BN.com for 11.99 (for 2 books actually). Dreeaming.... :-)

And if you want to know more about Betsy-Tacy follow these links:

http://www.maudhartlovelacesociety.com/

http://www.betsy-tacysociety.org/

Ingrid

Mere Decorativanity

In homeschooling circles these days, there seems to be an inordinate amount of costume making going on. One glance at a few young ladies blogs (who shall remain nameless, you can make your own lists) and you will read of making a new costume either for fun or for an event. Now, don't get me wrong, I like costumes and sewing; one of the few websites I visit regularly is The Costumer's Guide to Movie Costumes. I have made two or three reproductions—all of them to be used daily or for a special event. So, I know how fun costuming can be. However, all things can cross the line. Many times as I read these young ladies' blogs, that's all there is: costume making. (Oh, and a strange obsession with food too…but I digress.) And make-up…that's another puzzler. It just seems weird to me that people that laud the Victorian age would wear make-up…something that was taboo back then. Take the Botkin girls, for example. I've often wondered how long they spend every day on those hairstyles and their perfect make-up. Maybe you've never noticed, but I can tell you that their hairstyles look easy but are not simple at all. It can take hours to make your hair look so perfectly lovely with every strand in place or a little tousled in a perfect way—they must spend lots of time on it. Also, they obviously wear layers of make-up. They look like the sort of girls you could tease by saying, "We're out of foundation and eye shadow" and could really freak out about it. :-) I have not been able to find a picture of the Botkin girls in a non-made up state. Do you think they ever get really dirty or exerted? I mean, like have they ever gone kayaking, hiking, trail riding, and swimming all in one day? (I have, in that order; it was exhausting, messy, and totally fun. :-)) There’s nothing wrong with make-up (I wear it myself sometimes :-)) or styled hair but I really don’t think it should be so important to us. Also, I am growing tired of hearing about dressing feminine because ladies should be feminine. They should be yes, but I am sooo sick of hearing about it! There's nothing wrong with being a girly girl and there's nothing wrong with being a tomboy—I'm an even mix—but, there is something wrong with focusing so much on outward appearances. It doesn't seem that many young ladies are actually focusing on running a household, it seems to me that they are simply studying the art of looking perfect all the time. It makes you wonder…are they being trained to be just delicate ornaments hanging on their husband's arm? (Many people would say yes, and I agree but I like to ask rhetorical questions.) Why is being decorative so important to these young ladies? Why are some of them so wimpy? (You read things like: "I am terrified of bugs" "I hate math" "I don’t like the outdoors"… it would be funny if it was only occasional but it's to the point of being unnatural now.) It always reminds me of this quote, "If you feel your value lies in being merely decorative, I fear that someday you might find yourself believing that's all you really are. Time erodes all such beauty, but what it cannot diminish is the wonderful workings of your mind. Your humor, your kindness, and your moral courage; these are the things I cherish so in you." ― Marmee, Little Women, 1994. They, meaning the Botkin girls and other patriarchy influenced girls, quote the verse, "Charm is deceptive and beauty is vain but a woman who fears the Lord is to be praised." Proverbs 31:30. But they don't mean it. There's nothing wrong with being beautiful and trying to look your best but if that's all you talk about and present to others; it really is all that you care about and all that anyone will take away from knowing of you.

Ingrid

Guys

Young men are widely misunderstood—especially by young women...and especially, in the courtship movement. Most of the time, girls are completely clueless about guys and their feelings and, really, mystifyingly so. Take several friends of mine, for example, they seem totally and completely clueless about young men…yet most of them have brothers and/or are close to their fathers. It is as if they cannot believe that other men do indeed have similar feelings to that of their associates. There's a lot of talk about treating young men as brothers in Christ…but I don't think very many young ladies even understand or think about how to do that. These same friends are crazy about Vision Forum and Courtship and everything that goes with it―they can recite all the steps in their courtship plans (though they deny having one…have you ever noticed how courtship people deny having a plan yet still have one??) but really cares nothing about understanding guys. It’s so unfair. I have a father, brothers, guy cousins, and a few close guy friends—I’ve talked to them and I’ve studied them… and have come to the conclusion that my friends and all the girls like them are very mistaken about guys. Below is a list of mistaken beliefs and behaviors that I noted that many of them hold on to and my comments (if I have them) on the items noted.

—Girls with a strong courtship mindset often:


1. Seem afraid of guys; as if they think every young man they meet is going to want to marry them or at least try to ask them out.

I’ve known a lot of guys…as friends. Some are nice and some are kind of Charlie Sloanish (read the Anne of Green Gables books to see what I’m referring to) but not one of them has ever done anything that was truly startling. :-) It might have been annoying or even aggravating but nothing to be scared of or worried about. I just keep other people around when I’m talking to a guy...it’s not a big deal at all.

2. Don’t give guys a chance or the benefit of the doubt.

3. Have over-blown expectations about guys between the ages of 14-18 especially.

Do you really think he’s going to brave all and hasten to your rescue when he’s 16? Is he really going to be perfectly polished or romantic? This is your chance to be encouraging towards guys; they need your support. Just don’t expect perfection from them. You wouldn’t want them expecting you to be perfect all the time, would you?

At a homeschool convention that happened recently, there were a lot of young men who were trying to be “cool.” You know the type, acting like surfer dudes on the wrong beach. Maybe the reason they were acting like that, trying to be tough, was because they are terribly insecure. Adolescence is a tough enough time for young men even without heaping expectations upon them that they cannot measure up to. There is no way a normal guy can be everything Vision Forum wants them to be…I know there are guys who appear to be everything and more. But inside, they must feel hollow.

I've also noticed that at many conventions there are far more young women than young men attending and as I pondered this, I wondered....

Could all this “vision casting” be having a negative effect upon young men?

That’s a whole other post and I’m not sure that I have enough information to write it.

4. Don’t understand real love; it’s either sappy romance or having to make a formal decision...both things can be part of love but neither is all of it.

5. Don’t apply their knowledge gained from father/brothers/cousins to guys they are not related to.

6. Seem shy, cold, or rude towards young men in their effort to keep their distance.

7. Obsess over marriage but don’t understand what marriage is.

A lot of girls are in love with love or they want to have children. They don’t truly want to get married. I know they say they do…but they really don’t. My friends say (quite often) that they want to marry young and have lots of kids…but what they really talk about are the kids. The guy rarely comes into the discussion―they say nothing him and what they hope he’ll be like. When I think of marriage, words like; “being able to read his mind”, companionship, humor, and love come to mind—thoughts of children follow afterwards. I really like children but they’re not my motivation for wanting to get married.

If all you think about in marriage is children or mushy romance...then you’re not ready to marry.

Marriage is, to alter a Jack Sparrow quote, “It's not just a man and a woman and a house and some kids, that's what a marriage needs but what a marriage is... what a good marriage really is... is a miracle.”

8. Think that love can be turned off and on like a light switch.

Well-meaning family and friends have sadly been guilty of telling me that I should just pray “that God will take your feelings for so and so away .” And my response is, “What if He doesn’t want to take them away?” That always floors them :-)

9. Treat God like a vending machine… saying things like, “Well God gave me a desire for marriage so I’m sure I’ll get married really soon.”

Honey, you’ve got a lot to learn. God gives you desires and dreams to test you and is watching to see how you handle them. They are wonderful things but have to be handled properly to be of any use. Saying things like, “But what if God doesn’t want you to marry soon?” is always amusing. Especially, because the young lady normally cannot think of any reply to this but repeating the avowal in #9.

It’s also like saying, “God has given me the desire to have a handsome guy for my husband...so I’m sure my guy will be gorgeous!” Sheesh. And I always wonder, “What about the homely man with a beautiful heart?” (Elizabeth Elliot relates a conversation similar to this in Passion and Purity...I think.)

10. Are unwilling to even think about having to be bold with a guy at any time.

There are times when you’re going to need to make a move and go after your guy…they’re rare but they exist. Think Ruth. :-)

11. Think that there are very few nice guys out there.

The world is full of nice guys…stop being so pessimistic!

12. Thinks that guys are “heart-stealers”.

I've heard a speaker about courtship say, (I'll paraphrase) "If a young man comes to you after he's already stolen your daughter's heart then he can't court her." Many people seem to agree with this but my mind always yells: "STOLEN!!! What the heck?? The poor guy!! Who would want to marry your daughter… you, you reprobate!!" Ahem, anyway.... :-D

First off, there's that word. Steal. That means to take something without the owner's permission. God should be the owner of a person's heart and when a Christian young lady gives her heart to someone, it should be because it's God's will. There's no stealing involved. No one can force you to love someone anymore than anyone can force you to stop loving someone.

"It is mine to give to whom I choose…like my heart," – Arwen Evenstar, in the movie of The Fellowship of the Ring.

Understand this: your heart is a gift and you give it to whoever you choose. It cannot be stolen without your permission. So stop acting as if the exchanging of hearts is a robbery!

Then, there’s the obvious question: Do you honestly think that a normal young man actually tries to steal a girl's heart?

Do you think that a guy wakes up in the morning and thinks “I’ll make so and so fall in love with me today!”

Get real!

13. Think that all guys are Casanova heartbreakers that lead girls on.

A girl I knew once told me, "Any guy who leads a girl on and can't make a commitment is a jerk." I didn't agree with her then and I still don't now.

Because, I mean really, does a guy actually, purposely lead a girl on?

Think about it…if he knew what he was doing…would he actually do it?

I doubt it. In reality, I think most nice young men…the kind that are worth noticing…are just as nervous about girls as we are about guys. Maybe even more so…because after all, the guy is the one who has to lay his whole heart out on the line. Whenever he asks a girl out or talks to her Dad or asks her to marry him…he's giving her the chance to completely and totally wound him.

14. Use the excuse “he led me on!”

You can’t be lead anywhere unless you move your feet. Basically, unless he's asking you out, NEVER assume he likes you!


—And girls of any mindset seem to think:

15. That guys have no emotions.

I don’t know what idiot started that idea but womankind has been believing that’s it’s true for generations. For one thing, I can tell you that guys are sensitive and emotionally vulnerable―but they don’t talk about it all the time…if ever. Guys feel...deeply. I know they do. Have you ever seen a teenage boy after his team lost a ballgame and he thought it was his fault? Or when they’ve gotten really injured (but are trying to pretend they’re not really injured)? It’s worse for them...because they tend to stuff it and therefore, can suffer much more and for a longer time than girls. Stop seeing young men as shyster Casanova heart-stealers who are out to get you and start seeing them as human beings. They’re people too after all and have the same essential needs that girls have. Moreover, you may want to marry one someday and likely will end up being a mother... I think making an effort to understand guys is worth your time. So, give the guys a chance...before it's too late.

Ingrid


P.S. I don’t recommend books very often but if you need help understanding guys...this is a fairly good (clean) book: http://www.amazon.com/Secrets-About-Guys-Shouldnt-Secret/dp/0784715440/ref=pd_bbs_sr_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1196786739&sr=8-1

There are a few things I've discovered to be untrue or exaggerated in it but it's a good book to get you started being more empathetic towards young men. As with any self-help book though, it’s best to read it once and then refrain from referring to it unless you really need to. :-)

While the Fellowship is Faithful

"You would not ask me to break faith with him?” “No,” said Faramir. “But my heart would. For it seems less evil to council another man to break his troth than to do so oneself, especially if one sees a friend bound unwittingly to his own harm.”1

I’ve made decisions in my life. Not unusual. But one of them is to be loyal, in all things that matter but in point, to be faithful to a certain person. From this decision, I have discovered something. Other people have a problem with loyalty. Not their own―however, I suspect it is actually a reflection of their own―but with the loyalty of someone else. Now that I’ve clearly made this decision and am sharing it as a testimony—almost anyone that I tell of it will try as hard as they can to convince me to change my decision. Why do people act like this? If God has called me to loyalty and I’m fine with it and its effects…if it doesn’t bother me, why should it bother anyone else? I guess they care about me…but I’m happy and if it’s God’s will then it’s not going to kill me. I might get bruised a little but I’d rather God let me be bruised for His purposes than to be safe and boring…and disloyal―therefore, disobeying what I know God has called me to do. People fret and fume over me messing up my life...it actually gets rather funny at times. But really, they’re worrying over themselves; it’s a fear reaction of sorts, they are worried that their life might end up like mine. Stupid―since they’re not me―but true. When I’m trying to explain my position and how God is working in my life the thing I hate more than anything is the irrational, foolish advice I’m given when I don’t ask for it nor do I need it. Apparently, they’ve never heard this Lord of the Rings quote, which I’ve used on my blog before because it’s one of my favourites. "Elves seldom give unguarded advice, for advice is a dangerous gift, even from the wise to the wise, and all courses may run ill. But what would you? You have not told me all concerning yourself; and how then shall I choose better than you?"2 I use Lord of the Rings as an example because it contains so many cases of people who have a chance to be unfaithful but decide to do the right thing. Nearly every character is given an opportunity to go their own way but chooses to go on with their mission; Frodo with the ring, Sam with his duty to Frodo, the Fellowship’s responsibilities to one another, Arwen’s devotion to Aragorn…and the list goes on. That’s what makes the Lord of the Rings such a perfect case in point. Moving on, I don’t often give advice but I will say this to all of you. When someone else is doing something that they are confident in (granted that’s it’s not a sin) but that you personally think is crazy, remember this: Don’t give them advice―for they do not need it and if they do they will ask. Pray for them instead––but not selfishly, meaning you shouldn’t pray that they’ll magically see things as you do but rather pray for God’s will––and don’t pity them. As a Lord of the Rings analyst–of sorts–writes, “Faithfulness is a mighty virtue, requiring stern character, but to see others struggling under the weight of it moves us as often to pity as to respect. When we have the opportunity to give council to such a one, we may do well to remember Gandalf’s admonition that “even the very wise cannot see all ends.” 3

Ingrid

“Let love and faithfulness never leave you; bind them around your neck,

Write them on the tablet of your heart.”

Proverbs 3:3.

Works Cited -

1. Frodo and Faramir, J.R.R Tolkien, The Lord of the Rings: Two Towers, Book 4, Chapter 6.
2. Gildor Inglorian, J.R.R Tolkien, The Lord of the Rings: The Fellowship of the Ring, Book I, Chapter III, Page 83.
3. Mark Eddy Smith, Tolkien’s Ordinary Virtues, Chapter 18 – Trustworthiness, Page 89.

Of Daughters of Destiny and Watered Down History

I was eleven or twelve when I first read several stories in Daughters of Destiny, written by Noelle Wheeler Goforth. Her father, Little Bear Wheeler, had been in our area at a home school convention and we purchased the book from him. Now, I like Little Bear; he’s a very entertaining storyteller and a neat guy. But, of course, Daughters of Destiny was also sold by Vision Forum, which is enough “to give sober men pause.” (Actually, I believe DOD is out of print now, as I cannot locate it on the Vision Forum or Mantle Ministries websites.) I liked Daughters of Destiny when I was younger...but there was always something missing. Now, I know what it is.... I do a lot of histrical research and some of my pet projects/interests have been Queens of England; such as Elizabeth I and Victoria. In Daughters of Destiny, there is a story about Victoria in the “Daughters of Royalty” section and it is full of conflicts with the actual historical record. While DOD paints Victoria’s Mother, the Duchess of Kent, as a kind, intelligent woman who wished to shield her daughter from the court—she was in actuality, quite a silly, unkind woman; being manipulative and domineering towards her only daughter. Daughters of Destiny avows that the reason that the Duchess of Kent kept Victoria near her at all times, even having Victoria sleep in her room up until the girl became Queen, was that "she believed that no nurse or governess, however skilled she might be, could take the place of a Mother."1 The truth is that Victoria did have a governess named Louise Lehzen who was far closer to her than the Duchess of Kent. And the real reason the Duchess was so involved in Victoria's life was because she was a control freak and was also hoping to become regent. Of course, Victoria turned eighteen before becoming Queen and one of the first things she did was ask that her bed be moved from her Mother's room. Unfortunately, Daughters of Destiny bypasses such conflicts entirely. Many other stories in Daughters of Destiny suffer from this saccharine portrayal and end up making the “heroines” look quite wimpy—when in fact, most of them were strong, courageous women. They are “wimpy” because they actually have nothing to triumph over—even if problems are mentioned there is no real conflict, only melodrama. As in the Queen Victoria story, their future is obviously happy from the first sentence. By smoothing out their stories and eliminating the villains and bumps in their roads, the historical women are reduced to being merely docile, boring creatures who just expect everything to have a happy ending. As James Loewen says of textbooks, “The stories that history textbooks tell are predictable; every problem has already been solved or is about to be solved. Textbooks exclude conflict or real suspense. They leave out anything which might reflect badly upon our national character. When they try for drama, they achieve only melodrama, because readers know that everything will turn out fine in the end.” 2 “The optimistic approach prevents any understanding of failure other than blaming the victim.... After a thousand pages, bland optimism gets pretty offending for everyone.” 3 These excerpts weirdly fit for a book written by a homeschooler for homeschoolers and that's rather discouraging. I thought we homeschooled people were supposed to pursue the truth not regurgitate the same old legends.

Now, this may not be all Noelle Goforth’s fault. I remember Little Bear saying something like, “I encouraged Noelle to use all of the girl books in our library to compile a book to encourage young ladies.” She must have used their personal library because in the bibliography, there are 16 sources listed (with only titles and dates—no author or publisher names, unfortunately, which would make tracking them easier), and of those sources I could only locate 4-5 in my tri-county library system. Why? Well, they were all written before 1935; nine were written before 1900, three between 1900-1910, one between 1910-1920, and three between 1930-1940. Fitting in with this, I also recall Little Bear recommending the buying of old books, written in the 1800's especially, because "they will have a biblical worldview." Now, there's nothing wrong with old books but you have to be careful with their take on history and life in general. Why? Because they moralize everything. As with Victoria's mother being held in honour, even though the historical record shows that she was far from saintly, the history books (especially the ones for children) tend to twist away from facts in an effort to moralize or make them melodramatic or just stick to legends that have been proven false. I don't know why they did that back then but I can tell you that books written after 1930-40ish have a greater chance of being accurate. The reason for this, I think, is that the authors decided to go back to the historical record of first-hand accounts, letters, and diaries while researching them. When I'm researching something, if I can't find copies of original documents and such, I always pick out books written sometime after 1930 to the present and I check their bibliographies for strong sources. For a good example of what you can find in older books, I have a book from 1922, about Queen Elizabeth I. In this volume, it asserts the Victorian idea that "women do not experience the slightest desire before marriage."4 That idea is laughable at best, infuriating at worst—all of such research has been proven wrong and was an entirely male assumption anyway. (Don't get me started on what I call, "The Victorian Repression Doctrine: tell women nothing about anything and leave them in ignorance and fear for the greater part of their lives. You know, they might think about things and that would just be wrong." No wonder women were so afraid of childbirth if no one told them what to expect! *rolling eyes*)

Older books are also terribly racist—not just to African Americans in regards to slavery but also to American Indians. In Daughters of Destiny, Pocahontas and Sacagawea are portrayed as good, which they were; but in other parts of the book, words such as "savages" and "red men" are also used in reference to Indians. I'm a European American but I don't like the white supremacist or Eurocentric viewpoints one bit—in anything—and especially not in "Christian" publications.

Martha Finley is given a glowing story in Daughters of Destiny and it is even said, "Because of the strong Christian content that surfaces throughout Elsie's life, Miss Finley was blackballed. She was ignored by contemporary critics and by such popular children's magazines of her day as St. Nicholas and Youths Companion." 5 First off, I doubt that she was blackballed because of the Christian content of the novels—as I've already said; almost all books for children in the ninetieth century were written with extremely moralistic views. So, I don't know why she was blackballed or if she even was…I can hope it had to do with the melodrama or racism in the Elsie books. Yes, there's racism in the Elsie Dinsmore series…does that really surprise you? Here’s an Elsie review if you're not familiar with these books or if you are and you don't believe me about the racism. http://www.keepersofthefaith.com/category/ElsieDinsmoreAnEnigma (I don't know anything about this site but I thought the review is quite interesting.)

Older books may be written from a biblical worldview but how can that help anything if they are incorrect in their facts or racist. Use them at your own risk and be very careful with any historical books recommended by Vision Forum. The Henty series, Beautiful Girlhood series, and many other old or historically-inspired books sold by Vision Forum have incorrect historical material and white supremacist overtones. They are also inclined towards "heroification" of historical figures. As a matter of fact, most of Vision Forum's and even Mantle Ministries' "historical" teachings are full of errors, legends, and Eurocentric assumptions. (Even though we're Americans most of us are technically European Americans and therefore, can still be Eurocentric.) Remember, a book (or even a lecture) can only be as good as its sources and Daughters of Destiny has very poor ones. The only reason I still have it is because I like some of the poetry selections—at least they can be taken at face value.

Definitions -

White supremacy: racial view; the view that white people are supposedly genetically and culturally superior to all other people or races and should therefore rule over them.

Eurocentric: Focusing on Europe; focusing on Europe or its people, institutions, and cultures, often in a way that is arrogantly dismissive of others.

1: Daughters of Destiny, Noelle Wheeler Goforth, page 130.
2: Lies my Teacher Told Me: Everything your American History Textbook Got Wrong, James
W. Loewen, Introduction, Page 5.
3: Ibid; Introduction, Page 6.
4. The Private Character of Queen Elizabeth, Chamberlin, Frederick.
5 Daughters of Destiny, Noelle Wheeler Goforth, page 208.
“That's the sort of thought that gives sober men pause” – Linus Van Pelt

Two books I recommend:

- Lies my Teacher Told Me: Everything your American History Textbook Got Wrong by James W. Loewen. I absolutely loved this book and it was a very fast read. Do keep in mind though, that you may not agree with everything Mr. Loewen says, mostly in the last few chapters. The sections on Columbus, Vietnam, the Reconstruction, and American Indians were very informative and intriguing.

- The Good Old Days: They were Terrible! by Otto Bettmann. If you're as tired of I am of people talking about "the good old days" especially homeschooled girls (mostly sighing about the clothes people used to wear) and patriarchy type people, then you'll love this book. Once you read it, you'll know what Solomon meant when he said, "Do not say, "Why were the old days better than these?" For it is not wise to ask such questions." Ecclesiastes 7:10.

Ingrid

Sheep in Need of Shepherd: Apply Within – Part Two

This builds upon my last post...so, if you're new I'd suggest reading Part One first.

"As the letters poured in, I realized that while God had graciously used my book to help some people, it had also raised a lot of questions…." "The main point of I Kissed Dating Goodbye was: "If you're not ready for marriage, wait on romance." But now my fellow singles were asking, "How can you know when you are ready for marriage? And once you're ready, what should you do?" To be honest, I hadn't figured that out yet. I never meant to become an expert on relationships…."– Joshua Harris, Boy Meets Girl. 1
Okay, I do appreciate Josh Harris. I like his book I Kissed Dating Goodbye; it helped bring people back to common sense. It's a big duh to me that if you're not ready to get married, (basically between the ages of 14 and 18, most people would agree that you're not going to marry at 15!) it's smart just to abstain from romantic relationships. Just wait until you're more mature and can handle the pressures. Smart. Great Idea. Bravo Josh for having some sense. Now, back to the subject at hand, Josh had some major sheep writing to him. No, I'm not being mean, I'm stating a fact. Why would anyone be so needy as to feel the have to contact the author of the book for advice on their romantic relationships? Why did Josh even write Boy Meets Girl? All I would have said is: "Sorry, guys, you're going to have to make it up as you go. Read your Bible and talk to God. Be an adult and use your head." No one can lead you by the hand as you grow up. That's something I've learned more and more as I become an adult. One thing I've learned is to rarely ask for advice, to rarely accept advice, and to only give advice when pressed. It's not to be cocky or because I think that I'm above other's advice…it's that experience tells me to listen to God and my own instincts. As I was reading Lord of the Rings, I was reminded of this by a certain quote. "Elves seldom give unguarded advice, for advice is a dangerous gift, even from the wise to the wise, and all courses may run ill. But what would you? You have not told me all concerning yourself; and how then shall I choose better than you?" 2 Advice is a dangerous gift. Use it wisely.
Back to Josh Harris, why did he write Boy Meets Girl? I can think of a few reasons…the chief one being…uh, money. The first book sold well…people seem to need guidance…a new book will likely do very well…it's tempting to write more. Do you really blame him? Well, I guess I do. Personally, I wish he'd stopped while he was ahead. Courtship and Dating are so complicated that writing a book about how to do it will always be controversial and subject to lots of criticism. Well, it should be; because, there is no correct way, there is no easy way, and there is no method for success. Love is not a thing that you can diagram like a weather pattern. You don't wake up in the morning and think, "I'll fall in love today and it'll all work out beautifully." If you read a love story somewhere, you may as well say, "Well, it won't happen to me like that,"—because it won't. No two stories are ever exactly alike. You could live for a hundred years, travel the earth, hear many stories, and still not have scratched the surface of possibilities. The Gospel doesn't give us a list of do's and don'ts—it gives us principles for life and everything attached to it and that's called flexibility. God knew that rules don't work for everything and part of his plan is to make every person's story different. Love is a strange thing. "There are three things that are too amazing for me, four that I do not understand. The way of an eagle in the sky, the way of a snake on a rock, the way of a ship on the high seas, and the way of a man with a maiden."3 If the Proverb writer could not understand it…you're not going to be able to either. But when the time comes, God will give you understanding and then you'll know what it's all about. "Therefore do not worry about tomorrow, for tomorrow will worry about itself. Each day has enough trouble of its own."4

Ingrid

1: Joshua Harris, Boy Meets Girl: Say Hello to Courtship, Moltnomah Publishers, 2000. Quotation from Chapter 1, page 19.
2: Gildor Inglorian, The Lord of the Rings: The Fellowship of the Ring, Book I, Chapter III, Page 83.
3: Proverbs 30: 18-19.
4: Matthew 6:34.