parenting models in the church (Karen) « true womanhood in the new millennium

April 17, 2008

parenting models in the church (Karen)

Posted by millenniumwoman under 1

Several commenters on this blog have been interested in discussing the various parenting models that are popular within the Christian church today. I am aware that this may open up the flood gates of contention but several comments on this blog and on the “millstone” thread on my thatmom blog make me think that this might be a good topic for discussion.

I just want to say ahead of time that I hope we will all be exceedingly gracious and kind as we explore the teachings that are popular within Christian circles today regarding raising, disciplining and discipling children. And I want to encourage us to not only share our own views and philosophies but also to show the Biblical precedent for our choices.

Any thoughts?

200 Responses to “parenting models in the church (Karen)”

Cynthia Gee Says:
April 17, 2008 at 9:59 pm
Well,about a year ago I was made aware of the existence of Hephzibah House, a private lock-down facility for delinquent girls in Winona Lake, Indiana, run by a patriarchal preacher, Ronald E. Williams, pastor of Believer’s Baptist Church in Winona Lake.

I had visited a blog where I read a lengthy tract on child-rearing published by Pastor Williams, which I will include at the end of this letter (hold on to your lunch, it makes the Pearls look like Dr. Spock.) I did some investigating, and was horrified to find that a man with these views actually runs a “school” and has custody of young women. I did some more investigation, and found that while allegations of abuse at the school had indeed been made over the years and some local papers had published articles about Hepzibah House, nothing much had ever come of it, as Rev. Williams is a man of considerable influence in his community and county.

Last month, nearly one year later, I received an email from a former inmate of Hepzibah House, and I recieved it under very curious circumstances.
It seems that a couple of years ago at Hepzibah House, a young lady had made friends with another young lady named Cynthia Gee, who had been detained at the school for a short time and who had either escaped or had otherwise disappeared.

In trying to contact this other Cynthia Gee, this young lady had found my name using a Google search, and had written to me, thinking that I was her friend.
We exchanged correspondence, and it seems that some of the young women who were residents at Hepzibah House over the years have started a blog where they have documented what goes on there, in hopes that people will read it and take up the cause of bringing the abuses at Hepzibah House to light.

Here is their blog:
http://www.formerhephzibahgirls.webs.com/

http://formerhephzibahgirls.webs.com/survivorstatements.htm

http://formerhephzibahgirls.webs.com/links.htm

…here is the web address of Hepzibah House (funny, it was all there when I checked a month ago, with tracts for sale and links and everything, but now only this skeleton page remains online, and it’s the same way in the Google cache):
http://www.hephzibahhouse.org/

…here is the address of William’s church (the church webpage no longer exists, though it did three weeks ago):

BELIEVER’S BAPTIST CHURCH, 574-269-2375
508 SCHOOL STREET, WARSAW IN 46580

And here, finally, is William’s lengthy take on child rearing, it’s not for the faint of heart:

The Correction and Salvation of Children
By Ronald E. Williams
Believers Baptist Church, 508 School St., Winona Lake, IN 46590 (219) 269-2376
TWO DIRECTIVES OF SOLOMON FOR THE CORRECTION AND SALVATION OF CHILDREN
“Withhold not correction from the child: for if thou beatest him with the rod, he shall not die. Thou shalt beat him with the rod, and shalt deliver his soul from hell.” Proverbs 23:13,14
THE FIRST DIRECTIVE: The perception of my duty and the promise involved if I carry out my duty
A. The perception of my duty
“Withhold not correction from the child.”
Through a negative admonition, “withhold not,” Solomon is encouraging us to perceive what our duty is with regard to our child. One might ask, Why is it necessary to be told what our duty is? Because we would naturally “withhold” instead of obeying. The Scripture indicates in Proverbs 13:24, “He that spareth his rod, hateth his son: but he that loveth him chasteneth him betimes.” Many parents today are in a position where they Biblically hate their children because they are not acting against their natural feelings and disciplining themselves towards the Godly habit-pattern of consistent correction. In other words, it takes work, wisdom, self discipline, and
Godliness to correct children the way the Lord wants.
Fight your feelings
The concept of having to be told what to do in order that we can combat our natural feelings is illustrated in other areas of our lives. The Lord Jesus, for example, taught in Matthew 5:28 that it is wrong for a man to look lustfully upon a woman, implicitly telling us to not do that. One could ask, Why does He teach such a thing? Because men naturally look upon women in a lustful way. In fact, any man who claims that he has never had a problem in this area is either a liar or he is dead! Just as the Scripture indicates “the eyes of man are never satisfied” (Proverbs 27:20). Therefore, the Lord, recognizing our weakness, has admonished men not to look lustfully at women. Men must not operate on the basis of their natural inclinations, but on the basis of what is right, controlling their feelings and the flesh in the process.
Another example would be in the area of a man loving his wife. The Apostle Paul in Ephesians 5:25 says, “Husbands, love your wives even as Christ also loved the church and gave Himself for it.” Why did the Spirit of God believe it necessary to instruct a man through the Apostle Paul to love his wife as Christ loved the church? Because a man would not naturally do this. A man is naturally in love with himself even as that same chapter indicates in 5:29: “For no man ever yet hateth his own flesh but nourisheth and cherisheth it even as the Lord the church.” A man left to his own inclinations and desires will love himself supremely above all others. A Christian, however, who is obedient to the Spirit of God and to the Word of God, will love his wife and not submit to the natural inclination to love himself first; even as the Lord Jesus demonstrated through His supreme example in His love for the church. Therefore, when the Lord gives a negative admonition to parents to “withhold not,” it is in keeping with this Biblical principle of instructing parents to obey where they will have to overcome their natural inclinations, control their emotions and do what is right even when they do not feel like.
Whose job?
Who is to perceive this duty that Solomon outlines? The Hebrew language indicates in this passage through a second person masculine singular suffix that Solomon is probably addressing a man. The context of course, would indicate that the father of the household is the subject of Solomon’s admonition. Solomon, in doing this, is underscoring and agreeing with the rest of Scripture when it teaches that child-training and education is the primary responsibility of the father of that child. The primary responsibility for this vital task is not delegated by God to the mother, Sunday School teacher, pastor, day school teacher, grandparents, or any other person, but is the primary responsibility of the father. Obviously, these other individuals are an invaluable help to the father, especially his wife, but they are helpers only. A father will stand before the judgment seat of Christ and give an account for the spiritual, emotional, and physical welfare and training of his wife and children. It therefore behooves a father to be extremely judicious and cautious in whom he selects to be his helpers in the vital task of training and educating his child. Why?
So as not to compromise the Biblical standard he must inculcate in his children.
This same principle is especially underscored in Deuteronomy 6:7–”And thou shalt teach them diligently unto thy children, and shalt talk of them when thou sittest in thine house, and when thou walkest by the way, and when thou liest down, and when thou risest up.” Moses in that Old Testament passage uses a similar ending or suffix on the words in that verse, again indicating that he is addressing the heads of Hebrew households, or more simply, the fathers of each family. Moses, as a spokesman, for the Lord, indicated that God expects the father in the home to diligently train the children in Godliness and in God’s standards.
This concept is not exclusively an Old Testament concept, but is highlighted again in the New Testament. Ephesians 6:4 states: “And ye fathers, provoke not your children to wrath, but bring them up in the nurture and admonition of the Lord.” The Apostle Paul directly addresses fathers in this verse and lays the responsibility for nurture and admonition squarely on their shoulders. So to answer the question, “Who is to perceive this duty of correction,” one must simply answer, it is the responsibility of the father to perceive this duty.
What job needs to be done?
Next we need to ask, what is the duty perceived by the father? Solomon indicates that the duty to be perceived by the father is something he calls “correction.” Correction in the Bible has two basic ideas. The first idea is training through oral instruction. This is a vital part of child- training and cannot be neglected lest the child not receive a balanced instruction from his father. The Scripture indicates that it is the rod and reproof that gives wisdom, not the rod alone (Proverbs 29:15). The other aspect of this word “correction” is training through physical scourging or chastening. Both concepts are involved.
Who is the object of our attention?
With whom is the duty of correction concerned? This passage indicates that “the child” is the object of concern with regard to Godly correction. Many young people, in learning about the Biblical standard of correction, might well ask, who is a child and who is not? The Septuagint (the Greek translation of the Old Testament Hebrew Scriptures) uses the word meaning a minor child to translate this word. One could well ask, how old a child should receive physical correction? Or, to put it another way, when is a child not a child?
It is my opinion that the parents of that youngster should decide when a child is no longer a child and when he should no longer receive the correction of which Solomon speaks in this passage. Admittedly, this is not always an easy decision inasmuch as an older child may do unlawful things that the parent believes should be corrected by the rod. I would suggest three simple thoughts as possible helps in determining when a child is no longer a child in need of physical correction. First, when that child starts paying his own bills from his own resources he has probably reached the level of responsibility wherein he will respond better to the reproofs of life given him by the Lord than he will by the rod of correction given him by his earthly father. Second, when that child starts his own household, whether it be as a single adult or as a married adult, he is quite obviously out of the realm of being physically corrected. Third, it is my suggestion that a child in your home be corrected according to his emotional age rather than his physical age.
In my limited experience, I have often encountered a child who physically has attained an age many parents would view as being too old to receive physical correction. However, that same child may be committing extremely immature and irresponsible acts in his life that could well benefit from the rod of correction. With these things in mind, you as a parent can be helped in determining when physical correction with the rod should be used and when it should not. These are not guidelines that should be chiseled in stone but might prove helpful.
One thing is certain, correction with the rod should and must start very early. In fact, correction with the rod should start much earlier than our contemporary godless and irresponsible society believes is normative. The Scripture says, “Chasten thy son while there is hope and let not thy soul spare for his crying” (Proverbs 19:18). In other words, there is a time when there is real hope that a child can be corrected and have his will broken by the parent who uses the rod of correction, and there is a time when that hope diminishes by virtue of the child’s advancing age.
In my position as the director of a rehabilitation ministry for troubled teenage girls, I receive phone calls daily from desperate parents all across the United States. They have children for whom all hope seems to be gone because they did not start the use of the rod of correction while there was hope as the Scriptures mandated. I do not mean to discourage parents with older teenagers, who have suddenly been exposed to God’s inspired instructions in this matter. As long as you have a child under your authority and your home where you can directly supervise and correct him, there still is hope that you may turn that child from his wicked ways and break his will. You may still teach him to submit to authority in his life.
A good illustration of this hope is found in the case of a mother who called me from a distant state about her troubled teenage daughter. This teenager had gotten into such continual mischief and wickedness that the desperate mother went to the local hardware store and purchased a lock and chain with which to lock the girl to her body. This unorthodox measure kept the girl in her home at night but fell far short of Scriptural methodology in changing the heart! I explained to the mother that we did not have room to receive the girl at the time because our beds were filled. However, I mentioned that I could give her a possible answer for her predicament. I also said, “But I doubt that you will follow through.” The mother, hearing that there might be a solution to her crisis, desperately implored, “Yes, I will take your counsel. What is your solution?” I then proceeded to explain that the mother should get a stick that would not break and get after that daughter until the daughter asked for peace in their relationship. The mother hesitated in silence for a time on that long distance telephone call, and then seemingly made a firm commitment before me and the Lord that she would do so. She answered, “Alright, I will!” I then forgot about the mother and her call inasmuch as we receive several calls like this daily.
Three weeks later, I received a phone call from this same mother. I had forgotten who she was and was reminded of her identity only when she reminded me of the lock and chain she had purchased to secure her daughter. I remembered who she was at that point since that was a unique method of restraining the girl. I asked, “Well, what has happened since our last conversation?” The mother replied that she had taken my advice to secure a large stick that would not break, and to quote the mother, “I wore off her behind!” I chuckled at the mother’s response and thoroughly enjoyed the rest of the story. She went on to explain that she was simply amazed and dumbfounded at her daughter’s change of heart following the severe thrashing that the mother gave her. It seems that the daughter, for the first time in sixteen years, chose to obey her mother when she realized that the mother was unflinchingly determined to break the girl’s will and to settle for nothing less than complete obedience. The mother then said, “And it has lasted for three weeks! But I think she needs it again this week.” This dramatic illustration of how one mother solved the problem of breaking the will of her daughter points up how God’s methods really can and do work. But a parent must be fully purposed and determined in his heart that he will obey God no matter what the consequences.
B. The promise involved if I carry out my duty
The second part of the first directive is the promise involved if I carry out my duty. “For if thou beatest him with the rod he shall not die.” The condition of the promise is found in the phrase, “if thou beatest him with the rod.” Who meets this condition? Again, the original Hebrew gives us the clue. Another masculine suffix is used here indicating that the father is probably the one who shoulders the responsibility of meeting this condition. The specific action involved in meeting the condition is summed up by Solomon in the word “beat.” To use this word in connection with child correction conjures up in the listening mind all manner of horrible child abuse through stories vividly displayed by our mass media and by liberal thinking do-gooders. They decry almost any form of child correction beyond praise and persuasive speech or possibly withdrawal of privilege. God however, who knows better than men, and has wisdom that men can never approach, uses a word that is very strong.
The emotional freight connected with this word causes even many fundamental preachers to withdraw from its use. But since God uses the word and the translators of the Authorized Version have used a perfectly good English word, we shall attempt to explain it in its context free of the emotional freight so often connected with its use.
The grammatical form of the word indicates that it takes effort to carry out the conditions of this promise. The Hebrew word “to beat” in this verse is a causal verb that emphasizes that a dad must bring himself to do it. This hearkens back to what was said earlier about having to force ourselves to do what does not come naturally in this area of child correction. Not only must we cause ourselves to “beat our child” but the usage of this particular word indicates that God has designed corporal punishment so that it would cause pain. The word “beat” that is used here is the very same word used in Deuteronomy 25:2,3. In this Deuteronomy passage, it is very clear that the word is used in connection with a physical beating where pain is being inflicted by the beating as a means of punishment ordered by a judge in Israel. By this Scriptural illustration we are absolutely compelled to realize that this word is used in the sense of physical pain being caused by corporal punishment, and, further, that this is God’s very objective!
If we return to our passage in Proverbs 23:13, 14, we see by the context that God is also talking about the theme of physical beating, not a beating with words, withdrawal of privilege, or anything else short of physical chastisement. Some folks have a real problem in thinking of the Lord planning to have a child experience pain during an incident of correction. Those who would have a problem in this area should quickly review Hebrews 12:6-11. There the writer to the Hebrews develops the point that painful chastisement at the hand of God is a very clear mark of being a child of God. Moreover, verse eight indicates that anyone without this chastisement, “whereof all are partakers,” is in reality not a son of God at all and therefore not an object of His filial love.
The world and humanistically-trained minds are repelled in horror at the thought of a God who would deliberately order painful correction of a child and use words as strong as “beat” in ordering parents to carry out that correction. The Scriptures make it abundantly clear that such painful correction is the most loving, wise, and responsible procedure that a Godly parent can follow in developing obedience and character in his child. Therefore, when you hear someone object, “But that will hurt my child,” you can answer, “Precisely, that is God’s goal, that the child be hurt with the pain of the spanking during a session of correction.”
What is the reason for the pain? It delivers, in some mysterious way, the heart of that child from its rebellion, stubbornness, and willfulness. Any regenerate person can see abundant testimony to how this mysterious process works by looking at his or her own life’s experience in walking with his Saviour. God reproves His children many times in very painful ways to deliver their hearts of the same ungodly characteristics.
Ideally, a child should know the reason that he is being dealt with in this way. In other words, he should know the sin or the rule he has broken. He should especially know how he has offended God and broken His moral law and then be called to repentance before God and others who are affected by his sin. When this is done the session of correction has its maximum benefit in the life of the child. “Foolishness is bound in the heart of a child, but the rod of correction shall drive it far from him” (Proverbs 22:15). Mysterious? Yes, but mysterious as it is, the promise is bound in this Scripture that Godly and consistent application of the rod of correction will deliver the foolish rebellion and stubborn willfulness from the heart of a child when his parents have disciplined themselves enough to carry it out.
Correction not a one-time affair
Another condition of the promise Solomon develops in this passage is that correction must be consistent and repetitive. The verb for “beat” that he uses in this verse is not a one-time action. The verb calls for ongoing activity of beating. Therefore a parent may not reasonably expect that one or two times of Biblically beating the child is going to deliver that child once and for all of the rebellious heart with which he was born. However in the same breath, we must emphasize that Godly parents who insist on complete obedience and back up their demands with immediate application of the rod discover to their joy that the need for the rod diminishes as the child recognizes the parents’ determination to apply it when necessary.
Many parents have said to me when being challenged about their lack of consistency in application of the rod of correction, “I have tried that; it doesn’t work.” Let us think about that response for a moment. Can it really be true that a child correction procedure that is ordered directly in the Scriptures for Godly parents will work in some cases and not in others? The earnest believer would be repelled in horror and say, “Of course not!” Then if the fault does not lie in the Lord or His Word, where does the fault lie if a child is manifesting the rebellion bound in his naturally depraved heart? I believe the answer lies with the father primarily and with parents collectively.
Whenever I have encountered such an excuse on the part of a parent, I immediately begin to ask specific questions about their child correction procedures. In each case I have examined, I have discovered that the parent who claims that they have tried the rod of correction God’s way, in reality hasn’t done so at all. Some have given their child the rod of correction with such a lack of determination and vigor that their blows could not be expected to seriously dampen the enthusiastic rebellion of the child. Other parents have tried the application of the rod at widely divergent intervals of time and have been seriously negligent in the area of consistency. Further questioning always has revealed that the correction was not done with God’s methods in mind at all. In fact, when a child is disciplined in this inconsistent way, he seems to become a worse child of the devil than he was before. In effect, as he is given half-hearted strokes of the rod by a parent who is not fully determined in his heart to break the child’s will for the glory of God, that child in his heart reasons, “I can take this. My parent has not succeeded in breaking my will and I have won.”
To carry out the spirit of this passage, a parent must immediately carry out correction with the rod as soon as practical after the offense has occurred. This is fully in keeping with Ecclesiastes 8:11–”Because sentence against an evil work is not executed speedily, therefore the heart of the sons of men is fully set in them to do evil.” God clearly states that the further correction is removed from the actual offense in terms of relative time, the less effective that correction will be. What an instructive lesson for our judicial system! How corrective can any method of punishment be when it is weeks, months, and even years after the actual offense? Therefore, a parent should apply the rod as quickly as is possible following the breaking of a rule.
For this reason, a mother who is alone with her children during the day is wise to use her delegated authority from her husband to speedily execute the correction against the erring child rather than wait the minutes or even the hours that it may take for dad to arrive home. When one keeps in mind that the greater the time difference between the offense and the correction the less effect will be gained from the correction, it is obviously wise to follow God’s method and apply the correction immediately after the offense.
Many parents in using the rod of correction on their child do so with an obvious lack of vigor and often stop short of the child’s will being completely broken. Manifestation of this error is illustrated in countless homes as a child gets up from his session of correction still spouting rebellious words and giving willful looks at his discouraged parent. The parent has no one to blame but himself for this problem since he did not completely break the will of the child during the session of correction. A child who is still willing to resist the authority of his parent after having received the rod of correction is still in need of more of that same rod.
Both my wife and I have often remarked that it is good that one of our children was not our firstborn. This particular child who came along later in our family was extremely willful and rebellious toward our authority and would often require sessions of correction lasting from one to two hours in length before the will would finally be broken! Had this child been our first, we may well have been tempted to despair of the grace of God.
Do not be discouraged, dear parent, when it appears that your Godly efforts to chastise your child with the rod of correction meet with total resistance towards your authority. This simply means that you have started on the right course and you must now pursue your objective of a broken will with great vigor until your mission is finally accomplished. This may require a great deal of self-discipline on your part but you can do it, since God requires you to do so.
God’s tool for correction
What is the tool of the condition in this passage? Solomon explains that it is “the rod.” I have spent a great deal of time researching just exactly what a “rod” is and the Scriptural usage thereof and have determined that a “rod” is simply a rod! It is variously defined as a rod, a staff, a scepter, or a wand. In short, a rod is an instrument strong enough to be used in a session of correction so that it will not be broken. It also lends itself to inflicting pain on the posterior of the child, but it is not so constructed as to break bones or tear flesh! In other words, the rod is not a pencil, or a ruler, or a pillow. It is far more severe than any of these objects. Nor is the rod a rubber hose or a length of barbed wire! A rod in most cases is probably a wooden paddle used for spanking the buttock. In my own family, we use a large hardwood paddle for this purpose. If you were to ask any of my children, “Where is the rod of correction in your house?” They would immediately know of what you are speaking and each child who is old enough to do so would be able to take you down to the master bedroom where the “family rod” is kept in a corner.
Since the Lord emphasizes the use of this inanimate object called “the rod” it is not wise for a parent to ordinarily use any other tool for correction.
Although a hand may have to be used in an emergency session of correction, this is not what the Lord had in mind. Your hand cannot do an effective job of correcting since you will inflict about as much pain on your hand as you will on the child’s buttock. Your hand should represent love and affection, not correction. The Lord prefers this inanimate object called the rod.
If a parent obeys … then what?
The promise specified to an obedient parent is “he shall not die.” A casual reader of this passage may be tempted to think Solomon is speaking about the rod of correction in a session of discipline and this session of discipline will cause sufficient crying on the part of the child that it may sound as if he is going to die but he really will not. Although many believe this to be true, this is a false and erroneous interpretation of this passage. If this were true and Solomon is making a reference to physical death in this phrase, “He shall not die,” then a parent could keep his child alive forever by giving him a daily beating! That is ludicrous you may say, and I agree. This passage is not a reference to physical death but is a very clear reference to spiritual life and death.
II. THE SECOND DIRECTIVE: THE PROCEDURE AND PRODUCT OF CORRECTION
A. The procedure of correction
The second directive found in this passage is also in two parts. They are: the procedure and the product of correction. The first part or the procedure of correction is highlighted by “Thou shalt beat him with the rod.” The one who does the beating, in other words, is the one who saves this child in a spiritual sense! Here is a very mysterious promise to a parent in the Scriptures, that consistent, Godly, disciplined correction of the child with the rod of correction will in some mysterious sense be instrumental in that child’s spiritual salvation from sin and death.
To ignore this very clear reference to the child’s salvation being related to his being disciplined is to ignore the very clear teaching of this passage of the Word of God. A parent must recognize and see clearly that Biblically beating his child sensitizes that child not only to the fact of sin but also to its ugliness. In addition, the child will see that the penalty must always be paid when we sin. The beating spoken of in this passage is done often and consistently so that the child recognizes he will always pay a price that he does not want to pay for rebellion against his authority. Such a child who is Biblically trained and corrected will be far more likely to respond to the spiritual concepts of sin and salvation when he reaches the age of understanding. A vital principle for a parent to grasp in this business of child correction is that our children will leave our house to obey their heavenly Father in exactly the same way as they have obeyed their earthly father.
If a child has been accustomed to disobeying his earthly father and was rarely corrected or corrected inconsistently at best, that child will not likely be trained to expect the hand of God to be active in his life in chastening and drawing him to repentance for his personal sin. Therefore, he will not be a very likely candidate for responding to the spiritual concepts of sin and salvation. Obviously, by the grace of God, there are exceptions to this general rule. By the mercy of God, the Lord has often reached down and saved a rebellious youngster who has left the home of parents who never corrected him in a Godly fashion. It must be remembered that he was saved by an all-wise, merciful, and loving heavenly Father who regenerated his heart even though his earthly parents were unfaithful in the area of correction.
To put it another way, the one who does not Biblically beat his child, in a loving and consistent way, in a very real sense predisposes that child for hell and even has a direct part in sending him there! This truth is precisely why the Lord says you “hate your child” if you do not chasten him betimes (Proverbs 13:24). Interestingly, the world believes a parents hates his child if he does use the rod on him!
When your child does wrong and in rebellion breaks rules that you have very clearly laid out, you should not nag him and incessantly scold him or put on your mad voice and use any threatening words. Rather, you should use a rod that has already been designated for that purpose and in Biblical love consistently beat him that his will might be broken and that repentance toward you and toward God be achieved.
Again, these concepts cause horrible thoughts and evoke dramatic reaction in those not accustomed to principles of God. Such folks may say at the top of their lungs, “That is child abuse”! My response to their cries of horror is that their methods of correction in never using the rod and never trying to bring a child to repentance for his personal sin is a horrible, hateful, and unloving method of correction. They are the ones who really are the child abusers, the parents who neglect and leave their child to his own devices. These are the parents who allow their children to express their natural depravity and become increasingly wicked and more sophisticated in their rebellion toward their authority and toward God in their advancing age.
No, God’s method is best, no matter what the wisdom of this world presents as an alternative. For a child to be confronted with his sinnand to be Biblically corrected and to be led to repentance and gaining of forgiveness for his sin is far better than all the talk, discussion, and any other substitute for Godly correction that men can theorize. In my view, any method of child correction that is presented as a substitute for God’s method is child abuse.
But these opponents of God’s methods may object, “What you are suggesting will hurt the child and may even bruise him!” My response would be, “That is correct.” A child may in fact be bruised by a session of difficult correction. In fact, the Lord has already anticipated this objection and has discussed it briefly in the Scriptures. “The blueness of a wound cleanseth away evil: so do stripes the inward parts of the belly” (Proverbs 20:30). One may say, “That is talking about a child who has bruised himself in an accident at play.”
No, the latter part of the verse explains that God is giving this passage in the context of physical chastening for correction. God makes the point that if a child is bruised during one of these sessions of correction that a parent should not despair but realize that the blueness of that wound cleanses away the evil heart of rebellion and willful stubbornness that reside in that depraved little body. I must hasten to add that no parent should deliberately seek to bruise his child nor should that be the goal of Biblical correction. I simply must agree with the Lord and declare that if a bruise does occur, God knows about it and will use it to cleanse the guilty heart of that erring child.
Bitter medicine
But the humanist or disobedient parent who does not want to use God’s method may still object and say, “I just cannot bring myself to do such a horrible thing to my child.” Let me ask this question. If your child was dying of a deadly disease and a very bitter, extremely distasteful medicine was discovered that could cure your child of the deadly disease, would you not give him that medicine? In fact, would you not get help to hold the child to even force the medicine down his throat in order that he might be saved? Most thinking menwould most readily admit that they would indeed do so even though the medicine was horribly bitter and distasteful to the child. So it is in this matter of God’s method of child correction. It is very distasteful and painful for the child involved and since this is true it has become bitter and distasteful to disobedient parents as well, but it is absolutely vital for that child’s character training and ultimate spiritual salvation.
When to begin?
When should a parent start using the rod of correction on a child that the Lord has brought into the family? There is no clear and specific answer to this very good question. However, it is my opinion that the correction of children should start as soon as the need for that correction is made manifest. Every discerning parent who has been blessed with a little child in his home realizes that his initial impression of the sweetness and the innocence of the child is in reality an illusion. A child very quickly demonstrates his fallen, depraved nature and reveals himself to be a selfish little beast in manifold ways. As soon as the child begins to express his own self-will (and this occurs early in life) that child needs to receive correction. My wife and I have a general goal of making sure that each of our children has his will broken by the time he reaches the age of one year. To do this, a child must receive correction when he is a small infant. Every parent recognizes that this self-will begins early as he has witnessed his child stiffen his back and boldly demonstrate his rebellion and self-will even though he has been fed, diapered, and cared for in every other physical way.
On what occasions should a child be corrected? Whenever a child directly disobeys authority or shows disrespect and rebellion toward authority, that child should receive correction. Lesser infractions of course would receive lesser forms of correction with the rod being reserved for the more serious infractions.
B. The product of correction
Solomon last turns to the product of Godly correction: “shalt deliver his soul from hell.” The disciplined consistent habit of Godly correction with the rod figuratively snatches that child’s soul from a real hell. The word for hell in this passage is the word “sheol.” Because of the context, we must recognize that Solomon is not only talking about sheol in terms of being the realm of the dead but rather is talking about the lower regions of sheol wherein reside the souls of the wicked dead who have died in their sins and in an unbelieving state. Solomon, in other words, makes a direct tie between Godly correction with the rod and spiritual salvation of the soul of the child.
This connection is made in a very startling illustration from the Old Testament Scriptures.
In 1 Samuel 1:12 we are introduced to an Old Testament believer who was in God’s work. This man’s name was Eli, who was a priest of the living God.
As if to reveal Samuel and Eli in startling contrast to one another, the Spirit of God introduces us to the family of Eli following the wonderful account of Hannah conceiving the child Samuel after being infertile. Hannah must have used the rod of correction on little Samuel since he is later demonstrated in the Scripture as being a totally different kind of child than were the children of Eli. We are told that “the sons of Eli were sons of Belial; they knew not the Lord” (1 Samuel 2:12). These two boys, Hophni and Phineas, were unsaved, unregenerate young men who despite the wickedness of their hearts and their unregenerate natures were made to be priests of the Lord. This unhappy and horrible testimony was an abomination to God. He goes on to say in 1 Samuel 3:13, “For I have told him that I will judge his house forever for the iniquity which he knoweth; because his sons made themselves vile and he restrained them not.” In short, Eli was judged forever by the Lord because he did not restrain the boys from their wickedness and evil-doing even though he knew they were doing wrong and violating God’s law.
Eli would be in close company with many men today, for even though they know their boys or their girls are doing wrong, they refuse to obey God in their own lives. They will not institutes the Godly, disciplined, consistent use of the rod of correction to turn the children around.
Why did not Eli follow through with what he knew he should to restrain his boys? The answer is found in 1 Samuel 2:29, “Wherefore kick ye at my sacrifice or at mine offering, which I have commanded in my habitation; and honorest thy sons above me to make yourselves fat with the chiefest of all the offerings of Israel my people.” Eli did not want to lose the riches, honor, and prestige of the priesthood in order to vindicate God’s honor. He was well satisfied with the tremendous wealth and benefits of the priest’s office and he did not want to “rock the boat.” He lived a very selfish and self-centered life rather than obey the Lord. Because he did not want to jeopardize his or his sons’ positions in the priesthood, he refused to do what he knew he should in restraining their vile, sinful habit patterns. Again, Eli was like many men on the contemporary scene who; because they do not want to “upset the apple cart of their lives,” refuse to restrain their children in order to please God.
The stakes are high
Every father and mother must recognize this all-important fact, that the very soul of their child is at stake in this matter of Godly correction with the rod. The immortal, undying portion of that child is in very real jeopardy if his will is not broken and he is not trained to respond to God’s authority in his life.
A parent must not just correct for present results. If this were true we could understand more clearly why so many parents allow their children to get by uncorrected at present only to reap sad results later on. NO, a parent must correct his children not only for present results but for results twenty years from now and for an eternity!
I am often reminded of a conversation I had with a neighbor of mine who related a very personal incident from his life with regard to the correction of his children. He mentioned to me on one occasion that he thought that he was much too hard on his son and was even accused of being too harsh with the boy by other friends and associates. However, when the boy became an adult man he became active in the Lord’s work and even chose a full-time position in Christian service. On one occasion the young man returned to his father and with tears streaming down his cheeks related to his father how thankful he was that his dad cared enough for him and his spiritual welfare that he absolutely insisted that the child do right. He was also thankful that he backed it up with the consistent and Godly use of the rod of correction even though it was extremely unpleasant and distasteful at the time to his flesh. Your children will also come back and thank you twenty years from now for making them do right if you in fact do so at this moment in their lives.
Any parent who allows the correction of his children to be regulated on the basis of that parent’s feelings and emotions will find that he only disciplines his children on a infrequent basis. This type of correction will be administered only when a parent is extremely irritated or is upset by something rather obvious in the child’s rebellion. Parents cannot afford to base their correction on feelings or on avoiding unpleasantness but must purpose in their hearts to use Godly, consistent, loving correction with the rod even though they don’t feel like it!
What do I do now?
If you are like many parents, you have not been correcting your children God’s way. If after you have read this material and you have allowed the Spirit of God to speak to your heart about your sinful failure with regard to your child’s welfare in this area, you must not simply throw yourself into a new program of child correction. You must first ask God to forgive you for your sin and your failure. Next, ask your child to forgive you for failing him as a parent in not requiring that he be made to do right in all situations. Only after these very important steps are taken may you start with Godly correction and expect your child to respond to you in a positive way.
You must be prepared however, for a very startling reaction to your Godly attempts to do right by your children in this area of correction. If you purpose in your heart to be consistent in this matter, you will soon discover as countless other Godly parents have discovered that you must endure persecution, misunderstanding, and negative reaction from others around you. Some of your friends, perhaps your parents, neighbors, and even other Christians will not agree that you should carry through with this Godly discipline. Be prepared for this reaction, for unless you are in very unusual circumstances, it is most likely to occur.
Parents must use wisdom
Christian parents must be very wise today in how they carry out Godly correction. I would encourage you to be vigorous and consistent in the application of these procedures in the privacy of your home. I cannot completely tell you the grief I have shared with so many parents who have telephoned me and asked me in tears to somehow help their daughter. They have asked to get their daughter back from the welfare authorities or other bureaucrats. You see, many parents who have educated their child with the rod of correction in order to make them do right have found out in shocked disbelief that even the authorities of our local and state governments are against the implementation of this Godly method of training a child. Countless parents could give you vivid testimony of how various authorities have come to their door and have taken away their children because the parents were observed correcting their child with the rod of correction as God ordered them to do. You must correct your child in the privacy of your home so that the fruit of your training will be so indelibly fixed on the child’s heart that you will not have to use the rod of correction in a public setting and expose your family to this very real risk in today’s permissive lawless society.
Another aspect of this is that if you carry through with Godly correction in the privacy of your home your child will not embarrass you in public. Many are the parents who are embarrassed in a church service or in a public setting by their child’s unruly behavior simply because they have not enforced rules of obedience on that child in the home.
Grandparents should also recognize one possible complication in their lives with regard to this issue of child correction. The Scripture states that the crown of older men are children’s children (Proverbs 17:6). That being the case, a grandparent is tempted not to follow through with the rod of correction being used for his grandchild. However a Godly grandparent will recognize the necessity of doing so as well as the Godly reason for doing so. The minority is right.
We must recognize that those people who disagree with what God commands parents to do in this passage are in a definite majority in our society. Perhaps as you read this material, you yourself disagree with what has been expressed. If you do disagree, you may be comforted to know that you are definitely in the majority of opinion. However, you are also very wrong.
Ten spies and all of Israel disagreed with the minority report given by Joshua and Caleb. But God vindicated Joshua and Caleb and punished the majority who chose to disobey (Numbers 13-14).
Even though you may think these methods of correction that God has ordered parents to carry out are bestial, abusive, and unloving, you are the one who is bestial, abusive, and unloving if you don’t obey God in this matter. Moreover, if you do not obey God your child likely will not be saved unless the Lord supernaturally in His mercy does so despite your disobedience.
Today there is at least one European country that has already outlawed what God has clearly commanded in this area of child training. Sweden has made it illegal for a parent to use the rod of correction on his child. If Sweden does carry through and enforce this ungodly and morally unlawful legislation, I can guarantee that the next generation in that land will likely be a nation of perverts. This will be true because of the selfish, rebellious, self-centered, irresponsible young people such sinful and wicked legislation will promote.
No matter what men or governments do or do not do with regard to this issue of child correction, God’s people by God’s grace must follow through and do it simply because God commands it and they must obey to please Him.
Emily Says:
April 17, 2008 at 11:05 pm
Wow, now that’s a comment! OK, first-time commenter here, what are we supposed to do? Just give a full description of our parenting view?
JohannaS Says:
April 17, 2008 at 11:31 pm
“would often require sessions of correction lasting from one to two hours in length before the will would finally be broken!”

That would be where I had to stop reading. Using the Lord’s loving, (emotionally!) painful discipline as a free pass to beat one’s child? That is disgusting. And very scary.
Cynthia Gee Says:
April 18, 2008 at 12:00 am
Yes. And he uses these techniqes at his “school”:
http://formerhephzibahgirls.webs.com/survivorstatements.htm
thatmom Says:
April 18, 2008 at 12:01 am
Emily, welcome as a first time commenter!

Feel free to comment on what was posted or your own views or questions about specific teachers within the church today.

We are glad you are here!
thatmom Says:
April 18, 2008 at 12:03 am
It is interesting because I just came across another article from my own files by this same
author where he is making a “biblical” case for a father being the prophet, priest, and king of his home.
TulipGirl Says:
April 18, 2008 at 12:15 am
Reflecting on where I have been and where I am now in “parenting” and my relationships with my children, I can definitely see a correlation between my beliefs about God and about theology and how that has impacted daily life.

As KatieKind has said and helped me keep in mind my goals in parenting,

QUOTE:
“And lastly, and I say this gently, as the parent of grown kids, knowing *insert parenting guru* is also the parent of grown kids: we have wonderful children–he does, I’m sure–and so do I. But without even knowing his children I can know this about them: they are not perfect. They hurt. They make mistakes. They struggle. They are prideful and overly simplistic at times; and crippled by shame and hesitancy at others. Yes–they are beautiful examples of human beings, his children (I assume), and mine (I know.) But they are not perfect. If they were, they would not be human. If it were possible to raise children to perfection, then God would have sent a parenting method, not Jesus. Our marching orders are not to raise our children by a method to be like *insert parenting guru* children. Our marching orders are to be Christians to and with our children.”
Beatrice Says:
April 18, 2008 at 12:25 am
My heart is just breaking over the material in comment 1. If I truly believed the nature of God was reflected in this, (which I most certainly do not) I would consider killing myself.

My Heavenly Father never wants to break my will just for the sake of breaking it. That would be sadistic. He is not a Person who rejoices in pain for itself.

The poet William Blake has a poem that goes

Can a father see his child
Weep, nor be with sorrow filled?

In this poem, Blake is using the general picture of what we know a human father should be like to argue for the existence of God. But if Christian fathers and mothers don’t sorrow in their children’s sorrow, but view them as alien monsters to beat down and break and subdue to their will … how will an unbeliever get anything but a warped picture of what true repentance and obedience to God is?

I am not a parent, so maybe I shouldn’t be on this thread. But I had to comment, since I feel, from my own perspective of having grown up among Christians and knowing other young people, that how children perceive their parents and that relationship with them interacts with and informs their view of God in many complex ways. I believe many people reveal their outlook on God when they begin to parent, whether they mean to or not. This is why this is SUCH an important thing to talk about.

I look forward to reading the discussion here.
Light Says:
April 18, 2008 at 12:53 am
My wife and I have a general goal of making sure that each of our children has his will broken by the time he reaches the age of one year.

Sick. Truly sick. He is a depraved man.
Alisa Says:
April 18, 2008 at 1:00 am
It’s been my experience that what this type of “spank until you hear the ‘broken’ cry” discipline really produces is a chance for the child to improve their acting skills!!!

When the child doesn’t know what they’ve done wrong or doesn’t believe that they have done anything worthy of a spanking, you are essentially giving them two options; they can either LIE and give a “false” confession (bruising and callousing their conscience) or they can be *honest* and get their backside bruised and calloused because they continue to testify to what they believe to be truthxz. I don’t see how either is a desired outcome. And if a child does know where they erred, why spank???
molleth Says:
April 18, 2008 at 2:16 am
Can you imagine the poor child of his who had a strong will? 1-2 hour sessions regularly? Unbelievable.

I so agree with TG. If perfection is the goal, then God is the worst Parent imaginable. Look—He had disobedient children from the start. Through the Law, certainly a punishment/perform method like the man above recommends, God *still* wasn’t able to get obedient children!

How deeply we show our complete lack of comprehension of the Gospel, when we think a parenting method can achieve obedient Christ-loving children. If that’s all it takes, then there is certainly no need for the Cross of Christ.

Warmly,
Molly
[A former Pearl fan]
Emily Says:
April 18, 2008 at 3:05 am
OK, well… maybe I’m just hesitant because I feel like I could write a book about what I think, not just a comment or two. =) Briefly: My daughter is 16 months-old, so the past year or so I’ve learned a lot and changed my beliefs a lot. I’ve come to a place where my husband and I have taken a definitive stance on not spanking our kids (kinda revolutionary where I’m from and in my crowd, not to mention an unbiblical one according to family members)…beyond that, our entire understanding of how the Gospel informs our parenting has been drastically changed. Not spanking is no longer the issue for us, our understanding of the Gospel makes it so that spanking her seems ludicrous. I’ve done a lot of lurking/reading at http://www.gentlechristianmothers.com and http://www.aolff.com and have learned so much. We now understand that our mission is to SHOW the fruits of the Spirit to our kids, not demand them. To love them with gentleness and grace as God loves us. To refuse to set myself as their adversary in a battle of the wills. I see now that all the sermons we hear about how God saves us apart from our actions and we can never be good enough..those apply to our parenting. We can’t punish the sin out of them, and we shouldn’t try to perfect them apart from the work of Christ. The biggest question I ask myself now is “How would Jesus parent her?” Of course I totally FAIL at living-out that answer every day, but seeing it in that perspective changes everything for me. I think most of modern “Christian” parenting is nothing more than behaviorism mixed with legalism. A little Pavlov’s dog response on top of works righteousness. Anyway, I could go on and on, but I’ll stop. =) I’m trying to slowly work these things-out in writing on my blog…slowly so I won’t lose friends and won’t alienate people when I say that I won’t punish my child. =) Maybe we can break this topic down further for future discussion?
gabbygirl Says:
April 18, 2008 at 4:11 am
well, i just stumbled across this site a second ago! i am a former hephzibah house student (run by the infamous ron williams, who’s tract cynthia posted here). i have been in touch w/ cynthia, as she explained. i was curious as to all the hits my website got today (and i saw that everyone came from truewomanhood, so i had to check it out)!
as was mentioned above, yes ron williams has disabled the hephzibah house website this week, as well as parts of the believer’s baptist church site. i do have all of the pages of those sites saved on my computer, and they are also still viewable if you google “way back machine” and type in http://www.hephzibahhouse.org.

it is truly frightening that ron williams is in his 37th year of running this abusive home…all in the name of christianity!
Corrie Says:
April 18, 2008 at 4:48 am
Funny you should bring up Hephzibah House, Cindy. I am very familiar with this man, ministry and program for “rebellious” girls. I have heard him speak, also. I have been on his mailing list for years. The threat around here is if one of my girls don’t shape up, we will ship them out to the Hephzibah House.

I had to get up and walk about one of the times I heard him speak. It was a small church and I know it was disruptive but my body would not stay in my chair to sit there and listen to what he was teaching. My mind was telling me to sit and stay but my body did not obey. It was a weird memory because it is the only time that has occurred. I had to get away from it because I felt like a ton of bricks was crushing my chest.

There were MANY flippant and derogatory comments about women but take that with a grain of salt since I am a “feminist” without a sense of “humor”.
Michael Says:
April 18, 2008 at 5:23 am
i herd theres a family in vision forum that wanted to send their daughter to hezphibah

the family wasnt so lovely then like it llooks online now
Cynthia Gee Says:
April 18, 2008 at 5:38 am
“i have been in touch w/ cynthia, as she explained. i was curious as to all the hits my website got today (and i saw that everyone came from truewomanhood, so i had to check it out)!”

Hi Gabby! I wish I could have gotten this comment about H-House onto the list a lot sooner, because I do believe that if enough people hear your story and that of the other women who have lived in that place, it will spread all around the internet and eventually cause a public hue and cry,and Williams will eventually be forced to close his doors and may even be prosecuted, as he certainly should be.

I first learned of Williams’ views on parenting after someone on an e-list which I read published his anti-television tract there.
I can’t explain why, but warning bells went off in my head — something just seemed basically wrong with it, and so I decided to learn more about the man who had written it. I found Williams’ website, and the website for the school, and that awful tract, “The Correction and Salvation of Children”.

I could only imagine the sorts of abuse that must be taking place in a school run by such a man — an man who advocates beating little babies! — and I searched the internet to see if any one had ever investigated the school, but all I could turn up were the email addresses of a couple of reporters who had written some newspaper articles about H-house about three years ago, and who had tried and failed to move the city of Warsaw Indiana to take action. I was able to contact one of them, and she had pretty much given up on trying to help.

I called the Child Protective Services in Indiana, but try as I might, I couldn’t get anyone to listen to me there — they said somethiong to the effect that Indiana really didn’t regulate religious schools — so I pretty much gave up trying to help, too, and resigned myself to praying about the situation, yet, at the risk of sounding cliched, the whole thing remained a burden on my heart.

Then your letter came into my mailbox last month, due to the odd coincidence of one of the former students sharing my name, and, here we all are.

I hope we can work some positive good here, and spread the word of this place all over the internet - if enough of you young women come forward and tell your story, and enough people read it, they will demand action, and the state of Indiana will be pressured into finally doing the right thing and CLOSING THAT PLACE DOWN.

I think that your blog has been having an effect, too, Gabby — both Hephzibah House and Williams’ church have suddenly adopted a very low internet profile.

But driving Williams and Co. underground isn’t enough, because if they can, the Williams family will lay low and continue to run their school very quietly until the hubbub dies down, and the goings-on at the school will continue.
We need to give them LOTS of publicity, and shine a big, bright, public light on them, “that their evil be reproved”, and hopefully the abuse will be stopped once and for all.

“Jhn 3:20 For every one that doeth evil hateth the light, neither cometh to the light, lest his deeds should be reproved.
Jhn 3:21 But he that doeth truth cometh to the light, that his deeds may be made manifest, that they are wrought in God.”
lazydaisydays Says:
April 18, 2008 at 9:05 am
I’m glad this topic has been raised because I had been musing on the whole to spank or not to spank issue recently. Personally I could never use any kind of implement to ‘beat’ my child, I shudder to even think of it.

I have worried though that I am not biblical enough (after reading lots of articles about the rod driving sin out of a child, etc) and that I was endangering my children’s salvation, so I bought Shepherding a Child’s Heart. But I just couldn’t even read more than a few chapters. So I kind of said “Lord if this is your way then You are going to have to give me some kind of Damascus Road type experience”. So far He hasn’t.

I just can’t see how the rod can drive sin from a child, as other commentors have said, otherwise we wouldn’t need the atoning sacrifice of Jesus. He took the beating I and my children deserved and now with the veil torn down we enter into His presence; though we don’t deserve it He welcomes us with open arms.

If I teach my children they require physical punishment for their sin it’s like I’m saying that what Jesus did wasn’t enough.

The Pearls have been recommended to me a few times, I perused their site a very little and it all seemed very nice, full of smiley faces. But I still haven’t read one of their books. I found the following site with quotes from the book and was shocked:

http://www.stoptherod.net/ttuac.html

Have any readers read the Pearl’s book? (Molly you mentioned you used to be a fan, did you read the To Train up a Child book?) Is it really as bad as reported on this website? I found the quotes rather sickening to be honest.

The stuff about Hebzibah House actually made me retch…and all in God’s name!

Daisy
Dulce Domum Says:
April 18, 2008 at 10:05 am
Daisy said:
“I just can’t see how the rod can drive sin from a child, as other commentors have said, otherwise we wouldn’t need the atoning sacrifice of Jesus. He took the beating I and my children deserved and now with the veil torn down we enter into His presence; though we don’t deserve it He welcomes us with open arms.”

I couldn’t agree more. When I read the story on ThatMom’s site about the little boy and the French toast I sighed, and thought “how sad?”. When I read the Hebzibah House stuff and the link that Daisy provided, I feel very , very worried. I see little of the fruits of the spirit in this stuff…where is the gentleness, where is the love, where is the patience, kindness, joy, where on earth is the self control?

Does Pastor Williams not understand the beatitudes? Blessed are the meek, the merciful and the pure of heart. Quite frankly I’m welling up.

Our Creator gave us all we need to be parents, because we have a saviour in our Lord Jesus Christ. We have this remarkable gift and we have the word of God, yet there are Christians out there who see it as there duty to do violence against their children; when Jesus’ message was about love, peace and service. This doesn’t mean that parenting will be easy, sometimes we do well as parents and sometimes we do badly, but we cannot resort to violence to bring about a pure heart or salvation.

Now, I do not smack (spank) my children, but I understand there are parents that do, and of course I respect their choices. However, the kind of discipline that has been highlighted on this thread is systematic and horrific and far more to do with a need for power and domination than “old fashioned” punishment of a naughty child. Is that what patriarchy is? A hierarchical structure established to dominate the small and powerless?
Cynthia Gee Says:
April 18, 2008 at 12:28 pm
“Is that what patriarchy is? A hierarchical structure established to dominate the small and powerless?”

Well, but to do them justice, I think that many of the folks in the patriarchal movement would also be made heartsick by the Hephzibah survivor stories.

I hope that Stacey McDonald and those in the patriarchal movement who “lurk” and read this blog will be just as sickened by the goings-on at that shcool as we are, and will join us (and everyone else who hears of it) in writing letters, etc and pushing the state of Indiana to close it down.
Cindy K Says:
April 18, 2008 at 1:06 pm
Corrie wrote: I am very familiar with this man, ministry and program for “rebellious” girls. I have heard him speak, also. I have been on his mailing list for years… I had to get up and walk about one of the times I heard him speak.

Corrie (and/or knowledgable others),

Did this guy do the homeschooling circuit? I’m just curious how one would find out about this organization? This is nothing like Cookie Rodriguez’ New Life For Girls or Teen Challenge or Freedom Village… I take it that this is more like reform school than it is a retreat type of place where a young girl could flee?
thatmom Says:
April 18, 2008 at 1:20 pm
Cynthia,

You brought up a couple interesting things….

Do you know who supports this man’s ministry? Is there a particular denominational affiliation? Are there any homeschooling leaders who recommend sending a daughter to this place?

As far as women in the patriarchal movement joining us to expose this group, I have my doubts about that. Just recently Stacy had an entry on her blog where a young woman had contacted her for advice. This girl said she had come to agree with Stacy that the biblical way for her would to be at home with her parents and under her father’s protection but that they had insisted she attend college and get a job. Stacy didn’t tell recommend that this girl obey her parents or stay under their authority, but rather, went on talk about parents not understanding the dangers of androgynous white-washed feminism in the culture. Stacy then told about a young girl who was from a “dysfunctional” family, which was not defined but could, I suppose,be defined as one where the girl is in college and not under a father’s protection. The girl in the example had gone to live with a homeschooling family as a mother’s helper and Stacy talked about how often they have seen this and how well it has worked out. The implication was that sometimes parents don’t know what is best for the child and relocation might be a good thing.

While I understand that these are two different ends of the spectrum and I also believe that sometimes we MUST question what parents do, as evidenced in this above article, the message I got from Stacy is that her paradigm of femininity is the ultimate goal and you do whatever it takes. I wonder if Hephzibah House would be included in that.
Cynthia Gee Says:
April 18, 2008 at 1:23 pm
Williams is a Baptist. His church is Believer’s Baptist Church in Warsaw, Indiana, and most websites that promote his tracts and materials are also Baptist sites.
Cynthia Gee Says:
April 18, 2008 at 1:26 pm
Oh, and there’s one other thing I need to mention.
There is also a Hephzibah House in New York City that has nothing to do with Williams’ school. It is a women’s retreat and from what I hear it is a lovely place.
gabbygirl Says:
April 18, 2008 at 1:49 pm
yes, hephzibah house in new york is in no way affiliated…there is also a hephzibah children’s home, and of course hephzibah, georgia, which comes up frequently in google searches.

williams is a “baptist”; although, i would not lump him in w/ others who may call themselves baptist. his brand of “baptist” is most definitely a cult based on twisted scriptures and his desire to have ultimate control. he has control over his large family and the staff at HH. he arranges all the marriages for those belonging to his cult (and living at his compound). his word is more infallible than the bible. i remember being forced to read all of his writings while i was there, and then to write a summary on each of his writings. i was in no way encouraged to “form an opinion” on his writings, or to consult the bible on his writings. i just had to parrot what he had said as if i believed every word. we were, in fact, punished for questioning his teachings or his interpretation of scriptures.
the churches that support him are typically ind. fund. baptist churches; although, he will take money from whomever is willing to give (all the while preaching against those same people)!
his believer’s baptist church does run a school, which consists of the HH girls and his children/grandchildren. most of the girls who are sent to HH are from baptist homes, and come from all across the US and even from canada.
gabbygirl Says:
April 18, 2008 at 1:55 pm
one other note (and thank you all for letting me post/vent here)!!!

williams is very much a proponent of subjugating and opressing women. we were told, and williams’ writings will back this up, that women are “less than” men. we are not made to be able to handle the same rigors and trials in life that men are equipped to handle. in fact, at HH the girls are forbidden to make eye contact with men…if a male approaches one of the girls/women, the girl must avert her eyes to the ground. communication was allowed if initiated by the man. this also included the young teenage male children of ron williams. from what i’ve heard from some other former students, this particular rule got worse after my time, but i’m not sure on how strongly it is enforced today.
Abby Says:
April 18, 2008 at 2:15 pm
I find this thread very interesting. I know some women online who subscribe to the Pearls’ disciplinary beliefs, and when some red flags came up, I brought it up to them, and they were rather defensive. I don’t know that they follow it to a “T” but from what I gathered, they were all much more proud of the Helpmeet book than TTUAC, which still bothered me, considering some of the content in that book as well.

It really scares me that there are homes like this for “rebellious” daughters. I can imagine there being a place for young girls in crisis, but this sounds more like a prison/boot camp situation than someplace for girls to really express their hearts.

About the strong-willed child. I have a rather strong-willed daughter, and I would never want to *break* her will, because I think that is the strongest part of her personality. But it is difficult to deal with. I truly believe the Pearls have a hold on the group of parents who are mostly naive. I’m sure there are others who subscribe to their methods, but parents who are clueless about what they are doing will take anything and run with it. I’m not saying I knew what I was doing, but I think good parental role models, either your parents or other good parents in the church, are FAR better than any book written by a stranger who doesn’t have a clue what my child is really like.
Abby Says:
April 18, 2008 at 2:16 pm
“we are not made to be able to handle the same rigors and trials in life that men are equipped to handle.”

I realized something the other day, and this quote reminded me, if women are not meant to handle the same kinds of trials as men, they why do women have babies and men don’t? Childbirth is a pretty tough trial, don’t you think?
thatmom Says:
April 18, 2008 at 2:43 pm
What I am wondering is if he has any ties to Hyle-Anderson College. It sounds too familiar from what I know of those people. And it is in the same general vicinity.

Right now, I am mostly interested in whether or not there are homeschooling leaders who recommend this place.
earthquake alarm clock and interesting links…a connection? « thatmom Says:
April 18, 2008 at 2:58 pm
[...] also wanted to draw your attention to a new thread on the True Womanhood blog that is discussing the various types of parenting philosophies within [...]
Cynthia Gee Says:
April 18, 2008 at 3:06 pm
“What I am wondering is if he has any ties to Hyle-Anderson College. It sounds too familiar from what I know of those people. And it is in the same general vicinity.”

Well, the present pastor of Believer’s Baptist Church, Don Williams, is a Hyles Anderson alum, according to the church website (which can only be accessed through the Google Cache). You can’t get much more connected than that:
http://64.233.169.104/search?q=cache:e1OTlXzP3vEJ:churches.kconline.com/believersbaptist/p.PastorandLocation.html+%22Hyles-Anderson+college%22+hephzibah&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=4&gl=us

This is what the page says:

OUR PASTOR

Pastor Don Williams is a graduate of Hyles-Anderson College. He served as assistant pastor of Believers Baptist Church for 11 years and as the senior pastor for 6 years. He is the father of nine children and is actively involved in directing the Printing Ministry of Believers Baptist Church, which supplies Bibles and scripture portions to missionaries around the world.

Call 574-269-2376 or 574-269-2375.

OUR SERVICES

Sunday School ………………………………. 9:30 A.M.

Morning Worship ………………………… 10:45 A.M.

Evening Worship……………………………..6:00 P.M.

Midweek Service (Thursday) …………….7:00 P.M.

Believers Baptist Church presently meets on the Hephzibah House property on Pierceton Road, about 2 blocks west of the corner of 250E and Pierceton Road, Warsaw, Indiana.
Peaches Says:
April 18, 2008 at 3:17 pm
A friend of ours introduced us to the Pearl’s materials (To Train Up a Child and their monthly newsletter) around the year 2000, just before we had our first child. I was in my mid 30’s when I had my first and was not a natural at motherhood. The Pearls seemed to have the magic formula and that was VERY appealing to me. We didn’t adhere to all their teachings (never used switches, never spanked infants)but we got their newsletter for several years and read many of their books.

It seems to me over the years, that the bigger their following got, the more prideful and arrogant Michael Pearl became. For instance, in their October 2001 newsletter, there’s an article on Biblical Chastisement describing how/when to use the rod. Michael states: “If you do not see the wisdom in what I have said, and you reject these concepts, you are not fit to be a parent. I pity your children. They will never experience the freedom of soul and conscience that mine do.”
WHOA. What kind of pressure does that put on parents?

We continued to get their newsletters for the next few years, but sort of took what seemed reasonable and threw out the things that raised red flags. I think it was helpful that we were also reading lots of other views on parenting (Tripp, Dobson, etc.). That kept us from totally falling into any single method.

I honestly think the Pearls love God and that they mean well, but they are not experts in everyone’s lives. It takes a huge amount of arrogance to send a message that implies, “I do it this way and I have a lovely family, therefore you have to do it this way.” The really messed up part is that they tie enough scripture around things and claim that their way is the “biblical” way (sounds like the patriarchy camp) that it’s easy for Christians to get sucked in because they think, “ooooh, this is biblical”.

Pick ANY Christian parenting-marriage-family-relationship author/guru who has written a book and is out doing seminars, and you’ll find they are all saying their way is the biblical way. I’m really tired of it. I have quit reading parenting books altogether. Funny how I had to take a rather winding road to figure out that the bible gives me all the guidance I need, along with my husband and advice from older, wiser parents I personally know and respect.

We finally wrote and asked to be removed from the Pearl’s mailing list a couple of years ago, right after reading Debi’s “Created To Be His Help Meet” book. I won’t even get started on that as it deserves its own thread.
molleth Says:
April 18, 2008 at 4:30 pm
I was never a 100% Pearl devotee, as we didn’t grow out our beards and/or wear long dresses, or go all KJV or anything like that, but I really did love them and their materials and would be so excited when a newsletter came in the mail.

The biggest thing I got out of the Pearls was to be “all there” with your kids, to look them in the eye often, to smile at them, to do things with them. I really needed advice like that…it was GOOD. It helped me be a better mother in so many ways…I learned to connect with my kids, in large part, through the Pearls. But, unfortunately, that came with other teachings.

We began gently training our oldest via Pearl methods around 8 months. By training, I mean teaching her not to touch certain things by using a little flick or swat, etc, and a gentle litle command of “No-no.” She learned quickly. Here’s what is interesting to me, even now: Everyone raved about what an obedient child we had. With my first couple kids, I NEVER heard one world of admonishment or anything else but how amazing our kids were and how everyone wished other parents would follow our example. I’m not joking—this was a regular thing for us (and we were SO proud…it made instant obedience that much more important to us, now that we knew everyone was watching us admiringly).

I started questioning the Pearls methods when my first son came along. My girls were pretty compliant, naturally (though I thought their “goodness” was all from the Pearls training, of course, then). My first son, though was a ball of energy, big time. When he became a toddler, it was like a whirlwind lived in our home. I remember stopping the car five times on the way to town once, to spank him for taking off his carseat belt.

I was so frustrated…consistant spanking was supposed to work, right? But here was this (bored, highly kinesthetic) kid, rebelling. The 3-5th time I stopped, I remember thinking something like, “This can’t be good for him…but I have to do this, or he’ll grow up to be a God-hating rebel…” Urgh. I was so brainwashed. It makes me sick to think about this, actually, or to write it, but I really want to try and explain.

Looking back, he was about 20-22 months old then. My goodness, he wasn’t rebelling, he was bored, and he was using his hands! I’d just been trained to think of young children as “little rebels,” trained to think of their perfectly normal activities as if they were purposely trying to disobey.

After the whole carseat thing, where spanking clearly did not work, I started mellowing out my demands for perfection at that point, though I wish it would have been a lot faster than it was. It would be the next son who would complete the job. My 4th child, one that the pastor above would have beaten for hours on end, has an incredibly strong will…and just one swat would make him literally freak out, like his heart was broken. He wasn’t manipulating me, he was literally horrified that I would hit him, EVER. My mother’s instinct knew that spanking would hurt this kid far more than it would ever help him. Plus, I didn’t want to break anyone’s will, just teach it to bend. A strong will can be a gift from God—why would I want it broken?

Here’s what is also interesting: when I began questioning the Pearls teachings and not reacting to every “rebellion” (that means anytime obedience is not instant), *then* I started having people question my parenting!

In other words, most folks seem to LIKE to be around children who demand nothing of them, who will obey instantly, on command, every time. *ahem* Children who do not require relating with.

Long story short, it took a loooooooong time for me to see where the Pearls were wrong. The biggest reason I believed them is because I believed that the Proverbs were meant to be taken literally. I honestly thought it was a sin not to do so. I thought spanking wasn’t optional, but was commanded.

So it was through reading things like “Heartfelt Discipline” by Clarkson, who was a conservative evangelical like I was, yet goes DEEPLY through the Scriptures and shows how the rod in Proverbs is a metaphor, not a literal command…all that time I’d scoffed at people like that, but he gave a careful probing analysis and showed me how I was completely wrong.

Or this article, by my good friend Ann, about her experience using the Pearls material, http://aholyexperience.com/2006/04/perfectionism.html

Or books like VanVonderan’s, “Families Where Grace is in Place” (WOWWOWOWOWOWOW—if you only get one book, make it this one), where I learned that perfection is not the goal and never will be the goal, and that operating under a performance mentality will NEVER be good for my children (or my marriage, for that matter), as it is a Fallen method of relating.

Honestly? I have no problem with spanking, when it’s seen as one of many tools in the parenting toolbox. It’s best with younger kids, never with olders, and only when nothing else is getting through, on an issue that is really important. But it’s not the norm in our house anymore. It’s very rare.

I have learned that there are SO MANY WAYS to help shepherd children into obedience. Just as there are SO MANY WAYS the Spirit shepherds us into obedience. Sometimes He does punish us. But it is so very rarely. It took me a while to learn this, and I still am…I was so trained to think, “spank,” that learning to parent differently has taken a commitment to learning to think in a whole new way.

I’m sure most of you can testify of an experience like mine with Jesus: He is gentle, good, kind, long-suffering, funny, and warm to me, as He leads me into the person He’s fashioning me. Why did I think I should ever parent in any other “method” but His?
LizJ Says:
April 18, 2008 at 5:25 pm
Another worthwhile topic! My husband and I are Ezzo survivors (I was active on the ParentsPlace board for several years).

Not only did we, for at least a time, buy into the Ezzos, but our first instructors were also into Gothard and another family/parenting guru, whose name escapes me now. They told us a story that is similar in concept to the article from Williams, about a young man whose father had to chastise and chastise for a long amount of time. When the young man had grown up, he came back to his father and thanked him for not quitting “too early” during those chastisement sessions.

This first set of Ezzo instructors also introduced us to the cottage industry of “chastisement tools” (these particular ones made from old tires). They showed us a sample in class and directed us to a web site. We were supposed to keep it on the hush-hush, though, as nasty government types
might intrude if they found out, and take away these people’s liberty to run this sort of business.

The whole rod thing failed miserably with our older daughter, who we later discovered had Bipolar Disorder. The frightening thing that we discovered later is that the discipline sessions were very likely driving her into what is called “Mixed State” where a child shows symptoms of both mania and depression at the same time.

To this day, there are some people at our church that cling to the Ezzo stuff.
TheNormalMiddle Says:
April 18, 2008 at 5:33 pm
I spent too long reading that HH survivors website and I am shocked and appalled that this place is even real, much less still in operation?

How on earth have they not been investigated and shut down?
lazydaisydays Says:
April 18, 2008 at 5:51 pm
Thanks Molly for explaining your experience with the Pearl’s teaching.

“The biggest thing I got out of the Pearls was to be “all there” with your kids, to look them in the eye often, to smile at them, to do things with them. I really needed advice like that…it was GOOD. It helped me be a better mother in so many ways…I learned to connect with my kids, in large part, through the Pearls.”

Yes, that aspect of their teaching which I found when I perused their website a little appealed to me. However, reading the quotes on the other website (which I linked to in my previous comment #17) I was shocked, the level and ferocity of the punishment advocated I find rather hard to take.

Your experience with your 4th child is exactly how my eldest daughter reacted when I even suggested I would spank her for being naughty (after reading Shepherding a Child’s Heart and feeling I ought to implement its advice). She screamed in terror, genuine terror, curled up in a ball recoiling from me with big wide eyes - I wasn’t approaching her in anger I just told her that I was going to spank her. But I couldn’t do it, I just couldn’t. Of course then, I felt a failure as if I must be letting God down because I was (according to Ted Tripp’s argument) going against scripture and therefore going against God.

Neither of my girls is rebellious in a big way, just the odd disagreement about tidying rooms, etc. My eldest in particular loves Jesus and endlessly talks about Him.

I read a review of Tripp’s Shepherding a Child’s heart, which said that his advice to hug a child with great expressions of love straight after a spanking, could cause the child associate punishment with love and for the child to need punishment in order to feel love - thus causing confusion relationships with the opposite sex later in life. Another review on Amazon, from someone who says they received regular corporal punishment as a child, said he started self harming later in life whenever he had done something wrong as he felt he needed to be physically punished in order to be ’set-free’ from his sin. These are of course anecdotal, but still worrying.

The best book I have read on parenting is Grace Based Parenting by Tim Kimmel. I actually learned so much about grace for myself from that book not just parenting advice. It was great. I haven’t heard of the VanVonderan book, I will check that out, thanks Molly.

Sorry this comment is so long, just one last thought. I remember reading that the root of discipline is disciple and that God doesn’t directly punish us because Jesus took the punishment we deserved, but He does discipline us though difficult times, hardships, etc, refining and testing us so we are discipled into obedience.

This is a very interesting discussion; I’m finding it helpful in refining my own slightly confused thoughts on the issue.

God bless you ladies, I’m so glad I found this forum!

Daisy

p.s. TheNormalMiddle - my thoughts exactly!
lazydaisydays Says:
April 18, 2008 at 5:53 pm
..sorry I should have written - I remember the root of the word discipline is disciple…
Cynthia Gee Says:
April 18, 2008 at 6:31 pm
“I spent too long reading that HH survivors website and I am shocked and appalled that this place is even real, much less still in operation? How on earth have they not been investigated and shut down?”

They haven’t been shut down because the state of Indiana doesn’t really regulate religious- run institutions, because of separation of church and state.
Back when I was first investigating HHouse, I ran across this blog, whose owner was a colleague of some reporters who attempted an exposee of the school many years ago (warning, there is some strong language on this site).
Because of the way that the state of Indiana does things,(and presumably because of William’s standing in the community) that exposee came to nothing in the end.
Maybe it’s time for another exposee, and another investigation — 2008 is, after all, an election year.
Lin Says:
April 18, 2008 at 6:40 pm
Has anyone noticed that there really is not that much in scripture specifically about raising kids? We have the basic scriptures we refer to in teaching them (Deut) and not sparing the rod (which was NOT a hard stick), some proverbs and them honoring their parents but where do these gurus get all these specifics about every little thing?

It is their interpretation. They are reading into scripture. But telling folks to study the Word prayerfully and be led by the Holy Spirit in all things does not sell books or conferences.
gabbygirl Says:
April 18, 2008 at 7:28 pm
to answer the question about hyles anderson…yes, ron william’s son is a graduate of hyles. although, i think they are now more closely affiliated w/ fairhaven baptist church/college.

as far as home schooling groups referring girls to HH…i think it is churches and pastors who are the primary referrers. there seem to be multiple girls from the same church and school that are sent to HH.
none of the william’s family home school their children, as they all attend their church run school (which uses the ACE curriculum). not sure if that answered your question.
thatmom Says:
April 18, 2008 at 7:50 pm
Gabby, do you know if there was ever any sexual abuse of the girls while they were at HH?

I am curious about the churches. We have a Hyle-Anderson church in our town and years ago one of the youth pastors who was here at the time sexually molested several girls. It was a huge scandal and he left the area. I later found out that this was not all that unusual for young men who had been trained at Hyles. I find their views of women absolutely appalling, too.

I know that many homeschooling parents have certain expectations of their children and there are other places that take “wayward” children, such as Bill Gothard’s detention center in Indianapolis. Perhaps they are there because of the state laws, too.
Theresea Says:
April 18, 2008 at 8:54 pm
thatmom,
# 13 ’s comments are rather telling. John 3:21 ” But he who does the truth comes to the light,that his deeds may be clearly seen,that they have been done in God.” Wow 37 years?…. now with blogs maybe someone can set up a web site for former students to speak out. Either that or someone can infiltrate and document what is happening. Wonder why he disabled the site?
Cally Tyrol Says:
April 18, 2008 at 9:08 pm
Perhaps the biggest problem I have with parenting models like the Pearls/Ezzo/Tripp, is that they teach that spanking is the means God has appointed to change the heart of the child. Its essentially a means of grace. The Pearls teach that spanking actually removes the guilt of sin from a child. They can’t be held responsible for their sins until the mysterious age of accountability, so we have to spank the guilt of sin out of them.

This is an AMAZING post on the subject:

http://lutherama.blogspot.com/2007/09/rod-is-means-of-grace.html

Its not even about spanking in general (although I’m opposed to it in almost every instance)- its about what these people teach is the actual effect of that spanking. Its very troubling.
molleth Says:
April 19, 2008 at 3:34 am
THAT was a major underlying concept that I inadvertantly swallowed (maybe in my childhood? or in the punishment-based books that I read as a new mom? or a combo of both?), Cally, and that article you link to really hits the nail on the head.

If the rod is a means of grace—if the rod can *truly* cleanse the soul of sin—then what mankind needed was Law, Law, and more Law.

The OT Law is essentially what many “Christian” parenting books espouse today. It goes something like: If you do well, we’ll be happy with you. If you don’t do well, we’ll hurt/punish you until you do.

The rod will change a child’s heart? Then who needs the indwelling Spirit? The rod will cleanse a child’s sin? Then who needs the Cross of Christ? The rod will cause a child to be righteous? Then who needs Jesus at all?

It’s interesting to note that the methods suggested by the Pearls as “simple child-training methods” are methods that most animal trainers say are sub-standard—methods that will do more damage than harm. The animal learns that unless he is perfect, he can expect to be hit. This is not a healthy environment for an animal to perform his best in. How much more so is this true for human children?
Cindy K Says:
April 19, 2008 at 4:17 am
Has anyone read “You Can’t Make Me, But I Can Be Persuaded” by Cynthia Ulrich Tobias of Focus on the Family fame?

My dear friend with six girls was having trouble with her youngest, and had little successs with spanking. She was exasperated and had experienced similar frustrations with an older daughter… I found a copy of Tobias’ book that was new at the time (as I enjoyed her writings about the “Concrete Random” learner that is tough and will call your bluff). It worked wonders with the younger daughter who is very “CR.”

Anyone have any opinions about Tobias and her writing?
Cynthia Gee Says:
April 19, 2008 at 4:18 am
The new website for William’s church:

http://churches.kconline.com/believersbaptist/Welcome.html
http://churches.kconline.com/believersbaptist/Pastor_Service_Times.html
molleth Says:
April 19, 2008 at 5:31 am
When I was all gung-ho about instant obedience, I was rather against Tobias. I mean, she was essentially saying that we should “give in” to the rebellion of our children. (Remember, instant obedience is the goal of discipline, and even hesitation is rebellion, to say nothing of a strong willed child!). Persuade a child? Not hardly. That would be to foster a spirit of rebellion.

Now, of course, I look at her words in a much different light. I think she speaks with a lot of wisdom. A strong will can be an AWESOME character trait! The last thing we want to do is break it (or to think it’s sinful, in and of itself). Her book is a great way to learn how to work *with* a kid, not against him/her. Good book recommendation, Cindy K! I’m glad you brought it up.

Btw, I did always think it was weird that it was on Focus, right next to Dobson’s stuff on strong-willed kids (which seemed a LOT different than what Tobias was saying…his was more a focus on *making* them than on helping them, it seemed to me, unless I’m remembering wrong…)?
Rebecca Says:
April 19, 2008 at 10:14 am
Just a question: If this Hephzibah House is run by a man who claims to be baptist, would he fall under the Baptist convention/leadership/structure (I’m not sure what they call it)? And if so, why have they not done anything about him?
Cindy K Says:
April 19, 2008 at 11:41 am
Molly wrote: Btw, I did always think it was weird that it was on Focus, right next to Dobson’s stuff on strong-willed kids (which seemed a LOT different than what Tobias was saying…his was more a focus on *making* them than on helping them, it seemed to me, unless I’m remembering wrong…)?

I think that they were both talking about different things under the same heading. What I hear Tobias saying is that the parent who takes a child who is more like a piece of fine china and puts them through the paces that one would expect of stainless steel is a fool. You don’t use a teaspoon to dig a trench, just like a surgeon doesn’t use an axe in place of a scalpel or a laser. Or as my mother used to say, “You shouldn’t throw a child into the deep end of the pool if they cannot swim.”

I know in patient teaching, the nurse is required to ensure that a patient can perform a task. The first and perhaps most critical step is determining what you have to work with before you ever can start the nuts and bolts of the task. If a family member must be taught to change a loved ones dressing, if that family member doesn’t have the fine motor control to remove the old bandage and safely do the wound care, you aren’t going to be able to meet the objective. And then the nurse must have the wisdom to know whether that person is likely to comply with the basic minimum requirements. In hispanic populations, they are really weird about “outie” navels, and it is their tradition to take a coin and bind against a newborn’s belly to prevent this from happening. If the nurse knows that this is going to happen, what does the nurse do? They had better teach that family to sterilize the coin and keep it clean! (Why a nurse is not really worth their salt until they’ve has some experience in the trenches first.) So I see Tobias saying “be wise about what you’re working with and consider the unique strengths and weaknesses of your kids. Abandon the cookie cutter.)

Dobson, I think, takes a different approach to the same subject, looking at the less specific aspects of the general topic of the strong willed. (Tobias addressed a specific aspect of the greater problem.) Dobson spoke of things in more general terms. But from my vantage, the message was similar: be informed, realistic and be wise. I didn’t see anything that was saying that said that we should excuse behavior or cater to kids or coddle them. I saw it as a call for parents to responsibly respond to problems with wisdom.

?? But then, I haven’t lived this stuff as a parent, either. Like every other human piece of advice: it probably has good stuff that you can use, but it wont have all the answers for people. There’s always an element of error and every human effort will have some error in it. And there’s never a “one size fits all” tool either. The only one that we do have is the Word. The rest is flawed by one degree or another.
Peaches Says:
April 19, 2008 at 12:21 pm
Rebecca asked: “Just a question: If this Hephzibah House is run by a man who claims to be baptist, would he fall under the Baptist convention/leadership/structure (I’m not sure what they call it)? And if so, why have they not done anything about him?”

There is no one, single Baptist organization that has authority to govern church leaders. While some Baptist denominations are quite organized, like the Souther Baptists, there are many, many churches that call themselves “Independent Baptist”. Essentially, they answer to no one.
Cynthia Gee Says:
April 19, 2008 at 1:16 pm
“While some Baptist denominations are quite organized, like the Souther Baptists, there are many, many churches that call themselves “Independent Baptist”. Essentially, they answer to no one.”

And that is a recipe for disaster.
The proliferation of independent churches who are doctrinally answerable to no one is partially why abusive situations like Hephzibah House and the aberrant doctrines which produces them have been allowed to flourish, rather than being nipped in the bud.
Independent churches are NOT scriptural — even shepherds need a shepherd to keep them in line and ensure orthodoxy — that’s why the early Christians had a hierarchy with deacons, elders, and bishops, who were answerable to the Apostles themselves.
Many of the worst aberrations of modern Christianity have grown out of the independent church movement (or out of pastors like Sproul Jr., Phillips, and MacDonald who flouted denominational authority to form their own churches); this has been especially true in the southern United States, where the Civil war resulted in divisions within several denominations, and thus gave rise to a do-it-yourself, individualistic attitude toward religion. (dare I say — if at first you can’t secede, try, try again?…. running and ducking!)
thatmom Says:
April 19, 2008 at 1:29 pm
Rebecca, since Williams is associated with Hyles-Anderson, I don’t believe there is probably any church authority above him as the pastor. These are an association of independent Baptist churches. Rev. Jack Hyles, who was the founder of the school, had a notorious history of marital infidelity. Even after it was discovered that he had a “secret” door between his office and his secretary’s office that they frequently used for their affair, some people turned a blind eye. I remember, about 15 years ago, reading an online report where several independent Baptist pastors in the northern Illinois area attempted to hold this man accountable and, as I recall, not much came from it.

There is a Hyles-Anderson founded church in my town and they do not join with any other church in town nor will they participate in anything that is para-chur