Quiverful vs Gothard

I'll set aside a thread if we can keep it civil.

88 comments:

Anonymous said...

I am really glad this thread was started. I have been doing a lot of reading about Bill Gothard, his teachings, and some of the past scandals around his ministry. There are some good points, I appreciate the strong families that he seems to be building and I think that is the best thing that can come out of this. However, I am very concerned about the blatant sexism that woman are incapable of doing certain skill sets or careers and are being shunted, willing or not, into domestic drudgery.

I have done some poking around on the ATI curriculum website (http://ati.iblp.org/ati/family/articles/teaching/educationalprecepts/).

There I have found answers to many common questions asked about the Duggars on this board.

Such as: why are the older daughters teaching their siblings their home schooling work and not Michelle?

“The educational ideal is to span multiple generations. The father and mother endeavor to so teach their children in Godliness that the children will in turn be taught to train their own children. The goal is not merely to educate one’s own children, but to enable one’s children to become the educators of the next generation. As the older children grasp the opportunity to encourage, motivate, and instruct their younger siblings, they can gain the vision of training up their own children in Godliness. This allows the mother the freedom she needs to take care of other family and personal responsibilities, while providing excellent training on parenthood for the older children.”

In the section on education beyond the high school level, some of the classes aimed at females are noted as “mothers welcome” while others specify that they would be too intense for mothers with children and should only be taken by women without children, or women who have grown children. I, for one, find this to be rather offensive. Sure, it’s one thing to say it is an intensive course… it is quite another to tell a woman that she can’t learn anything simply because she has a child to care for. I’ve seen women complete a master’s degree while simultaneously raising children.

Here’s the link to the other ATI programs: http://ati.iblp.org/ati/students/

Im_in_PR said...

WOW! Thanks so much!!! I am so excited about this thread!

By way of introduction, I am a Christian, but not a Gothardite. However, I did attend a Basic seminar a few years back. I'd say I am sort of hostile to Gothardism because of the research I have done.

I homeschool, but I'm not involved in the dominionist movement and I disagree with it.

I have a tiny bit of agreement with Quiverfulls, to the extent that I think children are a blessing from the Lord, but I also think that when you have so many kids you can't obey the Biblical admonition to raise them in the nurture and admonition of the Lord, that means your quiver is full and it's time stop.

Out of interest I started studying some of these issues about 12 years ago when some people in my homeschool group went Quiverfull, and then a few years back, some Gothardites (a large group) joined my former church.

I think it is very interesting how both of these movements have effected the Duggar family, especially now that they are bringing them to the attention of the public.

I look forward to discussing this with you!!

Thanks Mods!

amberlilwood said...

I embraced the Christian faith 30 years ago during college. My husband and I were married and he did an internship in a church that strongly promoted Gothard teaching and eventually attracted families who held to the Quiverfull philosophy. We have been in full-time ministry for 25 years (currently my husband is the pastor of an evangelical church), and we have met people across the broad spectrum of Christian belief and practice.

I have mixed feelings about the Duggars. On the one hand, I find much to admire about this family, like the love and respect they demonstrate towards each other, and their commitment to financial restraint and responsibility. I think giving witness to their faith is the reason the Duggars agreed to do a reality show. Knowing their background, I can confidently state that they believe the essence of the gospel: that salvation comes by grace through faith in Christ. However, I'm afraid that TLC edits the show so that beliefs/practices of a small fringe group (Gothardism, homeschooling, Quiverfull beliefs) seem to be all that drives this family's daily life, making them an amusing curiosity to most viewers.

In fact, it is possible to believe that children are a gift from God but still take steps to limit family size. (Some Quiverfull couples use natural family planning to do this.)
I think the Quiverfull movement was a backlash to our society's casual use of abortion and view of children as "burdens." But there are committed Christians who find different ways to demonstrate their belief that children are a gift from God rather than just having as many kids as biologically possible. I thought it was telling that Jim Bob, who normally announces the size of his brood to complete strangers, was silent on the topic when he and the children visited an impoverished family in Central America.

Regarding the Gothard teachings, who hasn't longed for a program, a system, that if followed will maximize a parent's ability to raise faithful, responsible, moral children who make a contribution to the world and don't succumb to its frightening temptations? The problem, of course, is that life is messy and no single program/system can guarantee "success." For me, the Christian life consists of the two greatest commandments: love God with all my heart and soul and mind, and love my neighbor as myself. Fleshing this out in daily life, guided by the Bible, supported by a local body of believers, caring for my fellow human beings in this broken world, is what makes being a Christian so amazing, and so difficult. It's one step forward and two steps back, all the while relying on the grace of God.

luvmybabies said...

Quiverful doesn't necessarily have to do with Gothard or any other specific religion. I have personally known many families in my own church over the years, who chose not to practice birth control and to take all the children they could have. Some of these families had just 2 or 3 kids, some had 6 or 8, a few had up to 12. The philosophy is a personal decision between a couple and God, not specific just to "Quiverful" people only.

nccalgal said...

Great post amberlilwood! I have been trying to verbalize those same views for some time now. As a Christian it is hard put those thoughts into words on a blog like this without sounding preachy or that you're trying to convert others to your faith. My concern with the Gothard philosophy is that it's very legalistic and leaves very little room for grace and the work of the Holy Spirit in ones life, which to me is the essense of Christianity, that it's not how good you are or what you've done that merits heaven; it's God's grace and mercy. Parents have a great responsibility in teaching their children about God and how He wants us to live, but when you try to do it singlehandedly and not allow God to work in a child's life by letting them make their own decisions (and mistakes), you are in essense saying I know better than God what my children need.

Anonymous said...

Thanks for this topic thread! I have been interested by the movement only out of curiosity and look forward to reading different points of view. I myself could not support this restrictive ideal but appreciate it can work for some.
Thanks,

Maya

Anonymous said...

My understanding is that Bill Gothard sells his ideas through his "basic" and "Advanced Training Institutes", including his homeschool curriculum. He makes a ton of money off of people who buy into his philosophy, which a lot of people think is cult-ish, and this includes a lot of conservative Christians. People claim it is too "legalistic", and that he doesn't use the bible's words, but his own written versions, in his many pay-for-attendance workshops.

The program in Michigan, that the four older Duggar girls went to a couple weeks back, was a Gothard retreat. Gothard is all about training "warriors" to fight all the sin and immorality he sees in the world. He opposed women working, going to school, all music (anything with drums is sinful, including classical music or Christian music with a drum beat), birth control. Men have complete control over their wives. Gothard and his disciples are opposed to adoption, even Cabbage Patch kids (sinful). He thinks blanket training kids (hitting them if they leave the blanket, even as infants or toddlers) is the way to "train" children. Michelle Duggar talks about blanket training in one of her books.

Since the Duggars go to all of the ATI conferences, and seem to use Gothard's school "curriculum", it seems that they are serious followers. I think of all things about the Duggars, this Gothard believing is the thing that worries me the most.

Anonymous said...

My ex became a "devout" atheist. Yes, they have beliefs. It isn't the absence of belief but the institution of their beliefs. They try to mold everyone in their image. It is as mind controlling as people claim Gothard and ATI are if the person "gets atheism" much like some people "get religion."

Personally I subscribe to neither. Oddly even after trying to be stuffed in the atheist box, I still believe in full freedom of relition or no religion. The Duggar in not one I'd choose, but I still believe that they are fully entitled to practice it as they choose.

Im_in_PR said...

amberlilwood said... (snipped)

Wow, that was very well said and a great post!

Im_in_PR said...

Anonymous said...He [Gothard] opposed women working,

The interesting thing about Gothard's opposition to mothers working outside the home is that he is a willing consumer of the free and low cost labor provided by the young women who work in his secular programs.

Gothard is a contradiction on many levels.

luvmybabies said...

Anonymous said... "Gothard and his disciples are opposed to adoption, even Cabbage Patch kids (sinful). He thinks blanket training kids (hitting them if they leave the blanket, even as infants or toddlers) is the way to "train" children. Michelle Duggar talks about blanket training in one of her books."

This is inaccurate information...if you read in the Duggars' book about the blanket training Michelle uses, there is *no* hitting or striking involved, just using a stern voice. It actually sounds like a good idea, I'm going to try it when my baby is old enough.

Also, I have read some of Gothard's teachings, and I haven't seen anything about "opposing adoption". I have only seen where he says that adopted children may have bad energy from their birth parents,or something to that effect, that needs to be cleared out by the new family.

pogo said...

What I read is that this Gothard guy was never married, never had children(?) and preaches to people to have as many as you can(God's Army), basicly, keep women barefoot, limited education and pregnant, use religion as punishment or keep a hold on a person.Gee sounds like a cult to me. Keep your children isolated from the world, good move, what I see are victims, if your faith is strong, you have nothing to worry about, if your child/children are in the main stream. I think the Ma & Pa Duggar don't like to answer questions, that the kids bring up.

Pam said...

The Duggar in not one I'd choose, but I still believe that they are fully entitled to practice it as they choose.

I agree with this to a point. At what age do the children get to decide for themselves? Do they even get this opportunity to decide? Even Amish kids have a chance to decide what path to take. What about the older Duggar kids? Once they are 18 what if one decided he or she did not want to follow the Gothard way. What would J-B and Michelle do? Disown them? or accept it?

Anonymous said...

Anonymous 8:58, when I read your post, my jaw dropped. I LOVE the Duggars very much and disagree with very few things that they do, but when I read more about Gothard, I seriously got a chill up my spine. I really believe or have believed that M&J are wonderful people with great hearts and if anything may be just a tad misguided. Now I don't know how to feel about them. The "blanket training" and opposition to adoption and cabbage patch dolls is terrible and really, really bothers me. I know that just because the Duggars follow some of Gothard's beliefs, we can't assume they subscribe to all of them, but the fact that they even identify with a group that holds these philosophies is EXTREMELY disturbing to me. Again, this is coming from someone who really has always tried to see the best in the Duggars.
-Christina

Im_in_PR said...

What would J-B and Michelle do? Disown them? or accept it?[If any of their kids didn't follow Gothardism.]

Well, they don't seem like the type to react harshly. And all of life is a growing process. So perhaps as their kids age and they age, if there are differences of opinion, they'll handle it in a Godly manner.

One thing I remember that might have some bearing on the question at hand is something I observed on whichever TV show Josh and Anna were on to find out the sex of their baby.

Some one asked them about how many kids they wanted and Josh said "I think we'd be happy with 3 or 4, we're not going for 18, or to trying to set any kind of record." So they have clearly rejected part of JB & M's beliefs and have not been disowned by the family.

Pam said...

Some one asked them about how many kids they wanted and Josh said "I think we'd be happy with 3 or 4, we're not going for 18, or to trying to set any kind of record." So they have clearly rejected part of JB & M's beliefs and have not been disowned by the family.

No, not on this point, but I really wonder if say, one of the girls (Jinger or Jessa most likely) really strayed from the teachings, how J & M would react.

Willow #1 said...

Amberlilwood - Your thoughts were SO very well stated and I agree with you 100%. My mom raised me to read the Bible for myself and pray for guidance; that God would help me see the light that I needed in my life, but thats another story. LOL. Regarding the Duggars and the Gothard/Quiverfull movements. I can understand some of their beliefs, but I always get the brick wall when I come to a couple of things - one is the part about the women being "trained" to have a loving countenance, etc. If anyone has another view that would be in favor of this, I would like to hear it. I think that is making "Stepford wives". Teaching to have a loving and positive spirit in life is one thing, but exactly how far does this "training" go? Thank you to anyone who knows more about this. Also, THANKS for this thread.

Anonymous said...

I probably missed something, but what is "blanket training"?

kel said...

As for Gothard, It seems to me that the whole point of his teaching is for them to have tons of kids, indoctrinate them with a very strict and (in my opinion) scary form of religion, and then the idea is that each generation will have more and more children. (Jim Bob pointed out that he thinks they will have 200 grandchildren.) They seem to be wanting to form a "race" of Godly people... According to their standards of Godliness.

I guess in some ways, I see the draw and appeal of Gothard's teaching. Obedient children, happy wives, perfect finances, harmonious marriage, powerful parents, control of environment, favor with God. It almost seems a bit intoxicating and euphoric at times. Someone mentioned "Stepford Wives" earlier. I think that's a pretty good comparison. It think it all boils down to "control".

Im_in_PR said...

Luvmybabies said "I have only seen where he says that adopted children may have bad energy from their birth parents,or something to that effect, that needs to be cleared out by the new family."

Gothard teaches that you shouldn't adopt unless you are very familiar with the family history of the child. He believes (based on an Old Testament law given to the Jews in Exodus 20:5) that the sins of the fathers are visited on the children, hence making the adopted child a carrier if you will, of the biological fathers sins.


However, that law is rescinded in Ezekiel 18:20. Even the Old Testament Jew was not under that law any longer so in my opinion, it is ludicrious for Gothard to teach that Christians are under that law. Especially based on Colossians 2:13-15, which applicable to the New Testament Christian, which is what the Duggars are.

I'm not saying that Gothardism is all bad. But there is enough bad in it to make it a huge negative in eyes. I wish the Duggars would dump it.

Laura said...

Okay, I've been through Basic Seminars and the Advanced Training Institute. My parents are huge into it, and own lots of Gothard's material. Now I am an adult who completely rejects everything Gothard and fundamentalist (long story!). Gothard may not call his teachings Quiverful, but that is exactly what they are. He proposes having as many children as possible to maximize the number of descendants one has. A rose by any other name is still a rose, and Gothard embraces both the Quiverful and patriarchal philosophies.

If it's in the Bible, the man believes it. The purification rituals after childbirth, the role of women and men, etc. He is a dominionist. His ideas in psychology are flat out wrong. Women are not to wear anything "sexy", including lace around the collar. All rock music is bad, Christian lyrics or no. The Basic seminar is pretty extreme, but the Advanced seminar is even more extreme. I participated in his children's institute as well, and that was a trip and a half, let me tell you.

He is not stupid, however. The man sells a product that guarantees a fulfilling life, but you have to follow all of these lists. If it doesn't work, then it's YOUR fault for not following the formulas. How many people can sell a faulty product that buyers continually buy, believing it's their own fault it falls apart? Not many. I will give him credit for that.

Not trying to cause any trouble or make people mad, but that is just the way it is.

Anonymous said...

Never chimed in on here 'til now I love the Duggars EXCEPT for the Gothard -isms ... oh don't get me started on Gothard. All that legalistic stuff he spews forth is extreme. I doubt Jesus would even bother to attend a seminar! I went once, just couldn't agree with a lot of it and then walked out after hearing 'his' views on adoption- I am adopted and it made me feel so unloved and unworthy.

I have one 'friend' who is a Gothardite and I once asked her if you read a passage of the Bible and you felt it had a certain message to you, would you take it to heart OR would you only believe what Gothard told you to believe about it...well she said what Gothard says- so much for freedom & priesthood of the believer. Now she is a lovely persona and all, but I always feel she looks down on me because I don't subscribe to Gothard and his CULT. And I think the Duggars do this to others also to an extent.

As far as Quiverful- to each his own I guess. I know God doesn't give someone more than they can handle, but really, some of these folks might be pushing the limit a bit:)

Anonymous said...

On the Northwoods retreat that the girls just went on, aside from the obvious high cost of attendance (Gothard makes out like a bandit with the fees he charges for his "work"), fasting and guilt are a huge part of the time away.

There is a podcast of the girls talking about the retreat. I don't know if I can post the link here, but it is absolutely eye opening. Anyone who does not think that ATI and Gothard and these retreats are cultist should really listen in. It would make your hair curl.

pogo said...

I love the truthful opinions here. There are a lot of things I could pick apart of the Duggars beliefs. One thing that does nag at me is this thing about dancing(the other pants wearing). I do recall in the Bible that David danced for the Lord. You know how it was pointed out in the movie Footloose. I listen to the Duggars explaination of why, and sorry, the only thing I got out of that was that Jim-bob & Michelle could not dance or did not know how. Not all dancing promotes sex. If I'm proper dancing with my Brother or Father, sorry it's a dance nothing sexual there. It's a eeekk, it's my brother or father or some relative. Even if it's a stranger, I don't think anyone will get-off by dancing with them. Less of course it's one of thoses inappropriate type of dances(which I don't care for and have seen in some of thoses videos or concerts.) As, for the family thing I think it's great, but then I had thought that years ago with the Osmonds.

luvmybabies said...

Im_in_PR said...

"Gothard teaches that you shouldn't adopt unless you are very familiar with the family history of the child. He believes (based on an Old Testament law given to the Jews in Exodus 20:5) that the sins of the fathers are visited on the children, hence making the adopted child a carrier if you will, of the biological fathers sins."

If it is true that Gothard teaches against adoption that is truly sad. I too wish the Duggars would dump Gothard. There is a lot of good in his teachings, obviously, but it is just too narrow and misguided. I feel bad for the Duggars because they are such good-hearted people, just searching for what is best for their family, like we all are, and some of Gothard's teachings make me uneasy. He seems to be right on target with so many things but then veers off.

I think it's unlikely that each and every one of the Duggars' children will end up following all of Gothard's teachings into their adult lives, and I think the big problem with Gothard is that it is so narrow in its teachings that if a child decides to break away, they may feel they have reject it entirely and go to another extreme, thereby throwing the baby out with the bathwater.

I'm hoping that each of the Duggar kids can find their own way in the world without too much trouble, and I think they will. The biggest advantage that I see they have is that there is so much love in that family. Their parents constantly refer to each of them as gifts from God, and they are treated with so much positiveness and respect. Their parents are loving and affectionate with each other. Those things right there make a child want to recreate their own upbringing in their future home. Also, it appears that although J & M follow Gothard, they have taught them to have faith in God, not Gothard. So I really have hope that this whole Gothard thing, which is in my eyes somewhat misguided, doesn't backfire for this wonderful family.

Im_in_PR said...

Laura said... "Not trying to cause any trouble or make people mad, but that is just the way it is."

I thought that was a great comment. I love the fact that we can all use this thread to discuss what we have seen of know of Gothardism and how it relates to the Duggars show.



Laura said If it's in the Bible, the man believes it.

The fact is that while there are some outwardly seemingly positive aspects to Gothardism, the reality is quite different.

I personally think he's dangerous because of the emphasis he places on using Old Testament rules to apply to New Testament Christians. Yes, those rituals and rules are in the Bible, but they are in the Old Testament, and are given to the Jews, not the Gentiles. And even the Jews are no longer under those.

Also, the man answers to no one. He does and says whatever he wants and there is no one at all that can challenge him. If they try, he kicks them off the board of directors, or whatever office it is that they hold.

Gothard is famous for teaching people that they need to "stay under their umbrella of authority so Satan can't get to them." There is nothing at all biblical about that, including the fact that Gothard himself is under no authority except his own.

This movement is also harmful to local churches. It teaches men that if the pastor of the local church isn't in line with Gothardism, they should get the pastor thrown out and install one who is Gothard-friendly. Or just start their own church, which is then able to teach pure unadulterated Gothardism's instead of the Bible.

Im_in_PR said...

Luvmybabies said "I'm hoping that each of the Duggar kids can find their own way in the world without too much trouble, and I think they will. The biggest advantage that I see they have is that there is so much love in that family.

That was a beautiful post!

I guess in my railings against Gothard, I sort of lose sight of the fact that there is still hope for anyone immersed in Gothardism. Thanks for that reminder!

I hope that when people get curious about Gothardism and ATI and they do Google searches, they might even stumble upon this blog and read the testimonies from people who have been in it and studied it and know it. That way, all sides of the Gothard coin can be seen instead of just the pro Gothard stuff the Duggars says.

Also, could I just add how weird it is to me to see Gothard getting so much publicity now! He's been operating under the radar for so long. Even people who came out of the movement and tried to get some light shed on Gothardism were just handed a big "No thanks not interested" from most media outlets. But now, with the Duggars preaching Gothard every chance they get, people who were in it and know what actually goes on, and can talk about what he really teaches can have a voice!!!

I'm willing to bet that when Bill rubbed his hands in glee at the thought of all the free publicity he'd get from the Duggars, he never counted on the fact that others who were not followers any longer would start telling their stories!!! Go DWoP!!!

(I was never a follower, just went to one basic seminar when Gothardites infiltrated my former church.)

Im_in_PR said...

Anonymous said...I went once, just couldn't agree with a lot of it and then walked out after hearing 'his' views on adoption- I am adopted and it made me feel so unloved and unworthy.

Oh, your post brought tears to my eyes! Please know that what Gothard says about adoption has no basis whatsoever in Scripture. That is just one of many misguided teaching by him.

As a person, you are so precious in the sight of God. Please know that. After all, adoption is the method God hilself chose to bring children into his family!
See Ephesians 1:5!!!

Anonymous said...

I admit to always getting torqued when Old Testament rules are dragged out to support a person or pastor's pet idea. My response is usally the Bible says if we follow one Old Testament law then we have to follow them all. I'll start gathering stones for the corner of the parking lot and you go start designing the mikvah.

Anonymous said...

I'm finding out all kinds of things I didn't know about Gothard thanks to all the informative posters on here :) Now I can't decide what bothers me most, but I can say one thing that has always bugged me a little bit even before I knew the extent of Gothard's legalism. I looked up some of his "rules" or whatever they call them, and I remember one was about dressing neatly with the men's shirts always tucked in. This kind of offended me, because I don't believe God cares whether or not our shirts are tucked in. Not trying to write a "sermonette" at all, but it's my understanding that Jesus didn't really have nice clothes? So why then, do the shirts have to be tucked in? I just don't understand how this makes a person "godly."
-Christina

Anonymous said...

I have looked at Gothard's list of "essential character traits." I must say that obviously, all of those traits are desirable and it's understandable that parents would hope to produce those in their kids. The thing I DON'T understant, however, is that he makes it seem as if doing these things will make us more "perfect" for God or something. IMO, he leaves no room for God's grace. I'm not saying we shouldn't try as hard as we can, but the point of Christianity isn't to be perfect, and it seems that Gothard is trying to make everyone that way, just like Old Testament times.

Anonymous said...

Does anyone remember the episode in which the family went to South America and visited the orphanage? I believe Jim Bob mentioned something about the possibility of adopting one of the children in the future. As closely as the Duggars seem to follow Gothard's teachings, it seems unlikely that they would consider adoption if Gothard taught that it was wrong.

Anonymous said...

It could be that the Duggars don't slavishly follow Gothard. As some of us do with philosophies we've studied or books we've read, we take what works for us and what we see as helpful and adapt it to our lives. We then disregard what makes no sense to us or doesn't seem useful.

Anonymous said...

Anonymous 12:13, very good point! I remember the El Salvador episode very well. I don't recall whether or not JB specifically said he would like to adopt one of them, but I definitely remember all of the kids expressing how bad they felt for the other children and how they wished they could take them home or something to that effect. What you brought up was very thought provoking. It really makes me wonder whether or not JB&M would consider adopting someone out of one of these situations. They evidently feel terrible for these children, so refusing to believe that they should be adopted would be terrible and wouldn't make much sense. I really wonder now, taking the El Salvador episode into consideration, how the Duggars reallly do feel about adoption.
-Christina

Anonymous said...

anonymous 5:42...

Could you please tell us what the podcast is called at least? And/or how to find it? I would love to listen to it. Thanks!

Anonymous said...

Here is their Gothard inspired podcast:

http://www.livingthejourney.com/2009/10/duggars-on-a-journey/

Anonymous said...

This page of the Gothard website just sums it all up for me.
http://billgothard.com/bill/about/lifechapters/4/
It's pretty clear to me that Gothard takes one bad experience and turns it into a ban on something for all time. What is amazing to me is that he has so many followers who go along with this. It's not like he was reading the bible, found a passage, and from that made these decisions. If I avoided everything that had ever caused someone else pain, I wouldn't be able to do anything. It's this need for certainty that gets people I think. As another poster said, it's like if I follow all these rules, then everything will turn out right. But there are no rules like that, that can guarantee that nothing bad will happen. The Duggars would be better served to teach their children to handle adversity when it comes along than to try to prevent it at all costs. Sometimes the things that are the hardest for us teach us the most and make us more capable of compassion for others.
I listened to that podcast of the girls' post-trip and just found it sad. They have so much guilt over just being normal girls who get frustrated with their families or like fashion. They really aren't allowed just to be at ease with themselves. All that talk about wearing masks... it's just sad.

pumpkin said...

You know, when I first read about the "Character First!" program and heard that the Duggars emphasize character in the raising of their children, I thought "hey, that sounds really great, maybe I can institute some of that into my own life and my own relationships, both personally and professionally"

HOWEVER, now that I have been reading more about Gothardism, in part thanks to this board, Bill Gothard totally lost my respect when I read his views on Cabbage Patch Dolls.

Apparently because such dolls had an "adoption agreement" that the child signs and mails in, this was seen as a violation of the First Commandment. (not kidding)

"The threat as seen by Gothard was that by adopting a doll, children might not want to raise up their own godly children." (from: http://www.pfo.org/evol-fad.htm)

I certainly respect the rights of all people to believe whatever they feel provides them with spiritual comfort, but COME ON... Cabbage Patch Dolls?!

Here's some more from the same website:

"Gothard has published even more claims about Cabbage Patch Kids since that first letter. His January 1996 Basic Care Newsletter from his Medical Training Institute defines the potential of the once-popular dolls. The publication stated that there are a core of midwives that are working against “Satan’s program from Genesis to Revelation to destroy the Godly seed.” This report endorsed by Gothard and his organization then describes “cleansing the home from evil influences.” The midwives searched the homes for Cabbage Patch Kids dolls and Troll dolls. They believed the destruction of these facilitated the births. Just having these items in the home retarded a speedy delivery, said the newsletter."

Wow. Just... wow. I have no words to say to that, just to shake my head in disbelief that people in modern day America believe that a child's doll might bring evil spirits into a home a la Chucky.

Anonymous said...

I just listened to the Podcast and one of the things that really stuck out to me was when one of the girls (I believe it was Priscilla) said "God likes us just the way we are. He not only loves us, but He likes us, so we don't need to wear masks." Not only do we not need to wear masks, but going by her own words that God loves us just the way we are, why do we have to worry about adhering to so many rules? Would God like them any less if they wore pants? It was just so strange that they use that phrase so differently, because I would say that exact same phrase as proof that they don't have to live the lifestyle that they do.
-Christina

Willow #1 said...

So many thought--provoking and respectful comments. So great that this allows us to explore ideas. Thanks everyone for sharing. One thought I have is that dancing per se is not the biggest issue by a long shot. While I find most dancing harmless, I think the children could have many other activities to take its place and still have a wonderful life. Other issues, to me, are more serious. I do not mean to be disrespectful, or cynical, but my fear and belief is that a lot of these strict religions that are semi or quasi cultish, are designed by men to control their women. I am sorry,I just really have a gut feeling about this. MAYBE some of the men are truly just trying to be Godly, but I think a lot of them may follow these types of strict religions so that they can have more control over their women and children. I get this feeling more from real people I have known in my life than I do from the Duggars - I want to make that clear. I just worry about the girls being "guilted" into the stricter ways as they may not be so lucky to have a husband as nice as JB in the long run. Just some thoughts I had that I wanted to share. Not a judgement, just wondering if this could be true.

And - why do they have to use a certain vocabulary over and over? Like Michelle saying "encouragement" so often, and "little ones". I mean, there are other words with similar meanings - like "inspiration" etc. That points to brainwashing to me, or being afraid of saying something the husband or church does not approve of, so they just say the same words over and over so they don't make any mistakes. Does that make sense at all? I occasionally come in contact with a lady who is a fundamentalist (don't know if she is a Gothard follower) but she wears the long dresses, etc. She talks in the same sort of "baby" voice as Michelle and says "my little ones" all the time. It just really grates on me sometimes. Just some thoughts presented with respect for all.

luvmybabies said...

Maybe it's just me, but I thought the podcast was nice. They just seemed like girls who are looking inside themselves trying to become better people, like most people do. Very mature for teens. They mostly talked about how much they enjoyed being out in nature. They sounded like they had a lot of fun. I am leery of Gothard, but this retreat seems to have been enjoyable for them.

MomOfThree said...

luvmybabies said...

...if you read in the Duggars' book about the blanket training Michelle uses, there is *no* hitting or striking involved, just using a stern voice. It actually sounds like a good idea, I'm going to try it when my baby is old enough.

**********************************
Reading Michelle's account (in their book) of her "blanket training" of her twin sons, we are led to believe that she used only a stern voice to keep them on their blankets. However, on the bottom of page 125, Michelle herself writes, "Parents have to decide what type of correction works best with their children, depending on their personal parenting philosophy. Whatever it is should be momentarily unpleasant".

If this statement is not referring to some form of corporal punishment, I can't imagine what it IS referring to. If a parent is not to use physical punishment at all, then Michelle would not have said what she did; she would have just said that the parent is to keep their voice firm so as the child would get the message, or something to that effect. After all, except for an unpleasant, stern voice or a swift slap, what other form of "discipline" can a 1 1/2 year old child understand?

I am not against "blanket training", using "quiet time", "crib or playpen time" or whatever to teach babies that at certain times, they are expected to "settle down" or play quietly. I am not altogether against giving the occasional slap on the hand or bottom to get the point across, either, especially in dangerous situations or after repeated "gentle" attempts to get the message across has failed. This is just my opinion; I am not speaking for anyone else but myself. But again, this is MY choice, no one is telling me to do it this way.

What am I very opposed to, though, is that someone other than the parents (namely Mr Gothard) is making the suggestion to use whatever it takes to be successful in accomplishing the goal of obedience. Mr Gothard (IMO) seems to be saying: If your child responds to a stern warning, that's great. If it takes a smack or two, then so be it, also. Do whatever it takes (and do it early on in life) to break your child's will or spirit, as their obedience (or lack of it) is a reflection on you, the parent. To say nothing of not fulfilling your duty of making your child obedient to God. If you cannot get your baby to sit still on a blanket, how are you going to "train" him/her for life?

This is ridiculous that this man is being looked upon by so many people/followers as the ultimate authority on marriage, family, children, relationships, etc. Did I miss something? What are his credentials to be held in such high esteem? Does he have an exceptional marriage? Did he produce and rear exemplary children? Has he led a life above reproach?

I truly hope that Jim Bob and Michelle do not completely subscribe to all Bill Gothard's "principles". What a shame that in this day and age rational people still fall prey to "leaders" such as this and what an abomination that such things are done in the name of religion.

Laura said...

Also, David Barton was their tour guide in DC. Look up some information on him. Enough said.

Even if that's enough said, more can be said. I live in Fayetteville, so I was around when Jim Bob ran for state rep.

That doesn't mean you're not right: I bet they don't want the state in their business. But there is a profound difference for this brand of fundamentalism in the state minding its own business and the state establishing a religion. Yes, I know, it seems contradictory.

Anonymous said...

Thank you for the kindness, Im in PR...
yes Gothard made me feel so unworthy as an adoptee. But I was able to shake it off, so to speak. Thankfully In Gods' word, the Bible, there are instances of 'adopted' children! First and foremost, our Lord Jesus was 'adopted' by Joseph, so I reckon I am in pretty good company:)
Gothards' whole train of thought regarding adoption is so skewed- who really knows their past anyway! And to not encourage adoption for a child is just wrong. Didn't Jesus say something about letting the children come to Him?! I mean really! I am surprised Gothard doesn't condone abortion for those with 'shady' ancestry! SHOCK!

I wonder what ole Bill G really thinks about the Duggars being on TV, that evil tool of the debil...geeze, if ya do a google on the man, he is really out there!

One thing that worries me with "gothardites", is they spend so much time unto themselves, and so focused on the straight and narrow. I mean it is one thing to know what you stand for, but you should have some knowledge and understanding of things contary to your beliefs. I guess I am talking apologetics or something. Like how can you defend your positions if you have nothing to compare them to, in an educated fashion. For example, if you believe in creationism, you might want to have a grasp of evolution in order to defend or share you position. Oh well I am rambling.

I really hope some of the Duggar children can escape the Gothard mindset, and discover what Christianity can be all about. Free Jinger! LOL

Anonymous said...

Amberlilwood, I totally agree with everything in your post, however, I saw a rerun of the episode where the family travels to El Salvador, and JB did ask how many children they had, and said he had 17 and they were expecting. Although it was much more toned-down than the typical, "Hi, Y'all, my name is Jim Bob Duggar and my wife and I have 18 kids and have been married 25 years".

Anonymous said...

Enjoyed reading the comments on this thread. Learned alot about what Bill Gothard is about and how that may have influenced the Duggars and their way of life. But it does make me wonder how Bill Gothard feels about the Duggars doing a television show.

Anonymous said...

After listening to the podcast link mentioned here ( thanks!), I am quite sure this very restrictive type of Christianity is troubling at best. Retreats are great for energizing as time alone . I guess the Duggar girls are never alone so this was even more exciting.

I appreciate that the Duggars are good people but the way they are raising their family for the realities of life here on earth is unrealistic IMO.

I am still interested in reading all points of view and hope I have not offended anyone by my own.

Peace, Maya

Im_in_PR said...

Anonymous said..."ACTUALLY, I'm sorry to say, The Duggars DO have a problem with the separation of church and state.

No, they want church and state to stay apart.

Anonymous said...One of the websites they endorse/encourage through their website is The Allaince Defense Fund's, which actively discourages it."



From the site :The ACLU and its allies have used this phrase to persuade public officials to silence religious expression."

And "“Thomas Jefferson had no intention of allowing the government to limit, restrict, regulate, or interfere with public religious practices.”

So in reality, David Barton and The Alliance Defense Fund are protesting the attempts by the state and other entities to interfere, limit and restrict the public and their religious practices.

I don't care what side of the Duggar argument you are on, but if we care about freedom for ourselves, we should care about freedom for all, and freedom from the heavy hand of government.

As a Christian, I personally want the government to stay out of my Constitutionally protected right to practice my faith.

Don't we all want that? We want the government separate from our religions!! I do anyway. :-)

Im_in_PR said...

Laura said "But there is a profound difference for this brand of fundamentalism in the state minding its own business and the state establishing a religion. Yes, I know, it seems contradictory."

I do understand what you are saying and I am familiar with some groups that believe that if the nation was led by Christian people with good morals, it would just solve everything. And to be completely fair, there are some groups that would like to see a more "christian" type of government. I use little C because I don't really view those groups as real Christians, because they are going against everything the Bible says.

Among those groups you usually find the anti-abortion groups and even on the fringe, they ones that have actually killed doctors. Which is so wrong and so against God.

Most of those people are so fringe and I don't see any of those behaviors exhibited in anything I have seen or read about the Duggars.

Im_in_PR said...

Christiana said "I really wonder now, taking the El Salvador episode into consideration, how the Duggars reallly do feel about adoption."

Well, we know how Gothard feels about it. And we know that the Duggars mentioned adoption, but they never went through with anything other than talking about it.

Sharla said...

I'm trying to corral the discussion away from the political side. I think it started wandering a bit too far afield. Remember we started talking about quiverful and how it extends beyond Gothard. :)

pumpkin said...

Thanks to the person who posted the link about Bill Gothard's personal vows. Here they are again if ou missed them:

http://billgothard.com/bill/about/lifechapters/4/


I found these to be absolutely ridiculous. One might as well say "one time I was chopping an onion for dinner and I cut my finger, so I made a vow not to cut onions ever again".

However, I can relate these to the Duggar-mindset in so far as they talk about their miscarriage and their vow to have as many children as possible.

sandy said...

"And - why do they have to use a certain vocabulary over and over? Like Michelle saying "encouragement" so often, and "little ones". "

I agree. It's a touch annoying honestly. I've heard that they can't call their children "kids" because of the Bible verse that says sheep go to heaven, and goats go to hell. And baby goats are called kids.

Personally, I think it borders on brainwashing when even your language is regulated. Besides vulgar or obscene language, I don't see a point in deeming some words as "good" and "bad".

Anonymous said...

I was reading some of the info on the web about Gothard and I am just confused about how a regular man (weird as he may be) just starts up a movement and people follow. Particularly one that is supposed to be related to (although in my mind not the same as) Christianity. It is all very Jim Jones-ish seeming. Is he just incredibly charismatic or what? It seems that it would be no different than me deciding tomorrow to start the "church of the compassionate agnostics" using various books to back up my crazy rantings and make up random rules for others to follow. Why aren't these people just following some flavor of Christianity instead of putting some kind of power in the hands of this human man. (who, as far as I can tell, has done nothing special for the world) No disrespect to those of you who follow Gothard - just a true desire to understand?

Anonymous said...

Here's something that irritates me. A previous poster mentioned (I can't find the post now, and it may be on another thread) that JB&M had a secular background as a base for their financial stability, therefore they can't really be compared to their children once they grow up. I absolutely agree with this. Consider these points... yes, JB&M may have worked, but they had about 5 years to save and establish themselves before having any children. Now JB does not work. I'm not saying he doesn't make any money - I am well aware of how the family makes their income - I'm just saying he doesn't have a traditional 9-5 job. What I don't understand is this - Gothardites are supposed to begin having children as soon as God allows. This, in most cases, doesn't allow for the oppotunity to save money for 5 years first. This means the husband will be out of the home and working. I don't believe JB&M are setting a very realistic example for their kids about marriage, since it's not likely that their husband will stay at home like JB does. It also really disturbs me that Gothard, who makes all the rules about marriage and child-rearing, has never been married or had a child. I love the Duggars, but it seems that JB&M are in the position they are now only because they did NOT start out the way they expect their children to start out in a marriage.
-Christina

Anonymous said...

Something I wonder about Gothardism... for the women who are infertile and aren't "blessed" with children - are they still not allowed to have any hobbies outside the home? Imagine never having children and having your husband gone at work all day. You can only cook and clean for so many hours. Couples whom God has decided will have no, or fewer, children than the Duggars, can't really be compared to those who are blessed with 19. I don't think Gothard took this into consideration when making his rules. I know I would be bored to death sitting at home for 50 years if I didn't have any kids to take care of, or even if I only had a couple. I just don't understand how they claim that Quiverful or Gothardism isn't about having as many children as a person can and that each couple is blessed with what's right for them, yet all their rules seem only to pertain to families that ARE blessed with litters of children. What about the rest of us?
-Christina

Anonymous said...

Pumpkin - thank you for the link to Gothard's vows! I agree with you about your onion-cutting analogy. Since Gothard vows never to attend movie theatres, I wonder how he felt about the Duggars going to the Christian film festival and watching Fireproof in (gasp) a theatre! I will say again, that anything can be made bad or good, and it's up to us to choose what to do with it (movies, dancing, singing - as the Duggars do, etc.) rather than ban it altogether. ]
-Christina

MomOfThree said...

pumpkin said...

.....One might as well say "one time I was chopping an onion for dinner and I cut my finger, so I made a vow not to cut onions ever again".

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
It is so funny that you make an analogy about one bad experience coloring one's whole outlook on a subject. I have often thought this about alot of the things the Duggars don't "do".

Another poster once commented that perhaps Jim Bob and Michelle felt uncomfortable dancing, as maybe they were not that good at it, and this led to their feeling dancing was not "good" for people.

Getting back to Bill Gothard, my jaw dropped when I read about his disdain for adoption because of "bad" bloodlines. My first thought was that he could not be serious! Shades of the movie "The Bad Seed"! LOL! But I do agree with your comment.

CappuccinoLife said...

I would like to add my voice as a person who is both "quiverfull" and conservative Christian (call me a fundy if you like :p)...

The Duggar's connection to Gothardism has always bothered me. It seems apparent that they aren't slavish followers, but the connection still damages them, both because of his legalism and because of the light it puts their family in.

Standing alone, I really don't have a problem with any of the Duggar family's beliefs or choices, even though my beliefs and choices may differ (sometimes slightly, sometimes majorly). Connected with ATI and Gothard, they make me cringe a little.

I would also add, though, that even intelligent, reasonable people can be drawn in and decieved by cults. The one my family has experience with drew many people who were highly educated and intellectual, thoughtful, and who were deeply and passionately involved in various causes and careers before joining the cult. Doctors, lawyers, professors, career activists...all got sucked into it. It's a sneaky and insidious danger.

As to quiverfull, it is not an organized "movement". If it were, it would not be officially connected with ATI, anyway. There is a large variety of belief among QF families, and many are very opposed to Gothard's teachings. The QF belief entails viewing children as blessings and not interfering in any way with fertility (which is not quite the same as "pump out as many babies as you possibly can"). Apart from that, QF famlies run the gamut from fundamentalist to liberal in theology, "attachment parenting" to strict disciplinarians, "dresses-only" to "wear whatever floats your boat", and so on. There are a number of QF families who's beliefs to match those of the Duggars, but as many or more who look very, very different.

Im_in_PR said...

Where I live, I have seen quite a few Quiverful families and it seems to cross the spectrum of religious beliefs. Most of the ones I have met or know were homeschoolers.

Some were Independent Baptist. S0me were Charismatic/Pentacostal. Some were members of the local Bible church.

I've never met any Quiverfuls that were Southern Baptist and in my area they by and large attend public schools instead of homeschool.

The Gothardites I have met were mostly charismatics. THat's probably just because of where I live as Gothard isn't charismatic. I also knew one Southern Baptist family that had attended the Basic seminar in the '80's, and thought they learned a lot, and kept what they agreed with and tossed the rest.

A lot of the Gothardites were quiverful, but not all.

I mentally believed in Quiverful. I was exposed to it by some homeschool friends and it sort of made sense at the time. I just had one child, never used BC and never conceived again. So I was in agreement with the belief even though I never had a lot of kids. Then when my only was 12, I got pregnant at the age of 43. It never even occurred to me that I was pregnant. Went to the doc, thought it was menopause. Guess what??? It's a baby!

Yeah for us! It was a very happy and blessed event. So I am glad I wasn't using BC, although it NEVER occurred to me that I would ever be pregnant again.

HOWEVER, now that I have been watching the Duggar show, I am becoming less Quiverful. All of the Quiverful Biblical "proofs are in the Old Testament. Granted, they are in general places like Psalms and Proverbs, so there is an application for the Christian today.

But there is a more important application regarding children for the New Testament Christian: Ephesians 6:3 Fathers are to bring their children up in the nurture and admonition of the Lord.

If the father has so many kids that he can not do that, then his quiver is full and it's time to raise the ones you have in a Biblically mandated manner, instead of fobbing them and your work off on your teen aged children.

Im_in_PR said...

CappuccinoLife said...

" I would like to add my voice as a person who is both "quiverfull" and conservative Christian (call me a fundy if you like :p)...


Wow, great post, the whole thing, and I couldn't agree more!!

Anonymous said...

I just realized something! I guess you could say I was Quiverful without realizing it!!!
...after my first and only child was born,never went back to birth control. Always figured if God wanted it, I would get pregnant. Although I would have liked more children I never had them. God in His infinite wisdom knew my young'un was the only blessing I could handle ( especially after the divorce)

Anonymous said...

CapuccinoLife... I second what you said about QF families. In my hometown there was a family that was QF in their beliefs in terms of how many children to have (left it up to God), but they weren't connected in any way to Gothard (might not even have known who he was) and were very different from the Duggars as well. They were blessed with 5 children who wore whatever they wanted and went to public school. One daughter was even a high school cheerleader, and we all know what they wear! Coincidentally, the family made their money off of commercial property and a used car lot, but other than that I see no similarities :)
-Christina

Anonymous said...

In an effort to educate myself further on Quiverful, I went searching on the web. I was looking specifically for a stance on the need for BC for medical reasons. There are many women who rely on BC to lead a normal, pain-free life (myself included.) Would someone in such a situation who really would like several children just not identify as Quiverful?

On the men's side, I found links to this article on more than one site: http://www.quiverfull.com/birth_control/dangersofvasectomy.html

Good grief! I think if half of these side effects are as common as they say, vasectomy would be banned in all 50 states. My personal favorite is narcolepsy.

-Katydid

Jane in California said...

I agree. It's a touch annoying honestly. I've heard that they can't call their children "kids" because of the Bible verse that says sheep go to heaven, and goats go to hell. And baby goats are called kids.
* * * *

This is an example of not thinking logically. I don't know this particular bible verse, but I am sure it was an analogy for something else and not meant to be taken literally. I mean, sheep go to heaven but goats are all going straight to hell? Of course, that doesn't make a lick of sense - why would God create goats if only to condemn them to hell?

So therefore, knowing this verse is an analogy, it should not then be taken literally to warn you against calling your children "kids."

I think the Duggars are good people and well intentioned. I worry that they are followers, and too easily follow someone who makes up rules that often seem to make little sense.

I think the Bible also tells us that we should not focus on appearances, but rather on actions, to determine true intentions. The focus on using certain words but not others is too much focus on "appearance," rather than intentions.

I was raised Catholic but long since have left that particular religion. I would describe myself as spiritual but I don't follow any one religion. Those I feel closest to would be a more nature-based, if anything.

I think the Duggars truly love their children and the children feel safe, loved and appear happy with their homelife. I hope JB and Michelle would do their best to steer the girls towards future husbands who are kind-hearted, rather than the type of man who would lord their "dominion" over their wife.

CappuccinoLife said...

"There are many women who rely on BC to lead a normal, pain-free life (myself included.) Would someone in such a situation who really would like several children just not identify as Quiverful?"

For an unmarried woman it wouldn't be a problem (If she's QF by her own conviction, she's not likely to be having sex outside of marriage, thus it truly would be medication rather than contraception).

Many women, myself included, avoid the Pill for other reasons than our QF beliefs, even when it's the standard recommendation from doctors. And many non-QF women avoid it too. We would be looking for alternatives, or for something that would help with the root cause of our problems.

In my own opinion, though, if something medical must be done which has a secondary side effect or making one infertile, that's not "sin", it's just life. QF is about being open and welcoming to the children God gives. QF doesn't say 'I am *done*, hooray!' after a certain number of children. It doesn't mean you *have* to have a certain number, or any, for that matter.

CappuccinoLife said...

"I just don't understand how they claim that Quiverful or Gothardism isn't about having as many children as a person can and that each couple is blessed with what's right for them, yet all their rules seem only to pertain to families that ARE blessed with litters of children. What about the rest of us?"

One more reason to consider QF and Gothardism seperately.

QF doesn't have a list of rules for raising your family.

Gothard apparently does.

I'm a QF mom with only three children. :)

Cyn said...

Sure, it’s one thing to say it is an intensive course… it is quite another to tell a woman that she can’t learn anything simply because she has a child to care for. I’ve seen women complete a master’s degree while simultaneously raising children.
*********
They aren't implying that the women can NOT learn they are implying that the women should be spending all her effort in child raising and establishing the home in the early years of the child's life.


*********************************
If it's in the Bible, the man believes it. The purification rituals after childbirth, the role of women and men, etc. He is a dominionist.
********
The purification rituals after childbirth are = No sex for 7 days after the birth of a boy and 14 days after the birth of a girl and then basically a "cleansing" usually done in a bathtub or a small pool of water a Mikvah if you will.

After the birth of each of MY children the doctor told me not to have sex for so many weeks (its been to long for me to remember the exact number).... And frankly after giving birth how many of us want to go right back into having sex anyway???

AS for the blanket training... our family came up with our own version years ago... we call it the quiet game and this is how it's played... the child that can sit still the longest without talking or moving gets a prize either a small piece of candy or extra time on a game... It has come in very handy in meetings where my smaller children had to attend, or in doctors offices anyplace where the children MUST be quiet and semi still.

**********************************
Reading Michelle's account (in their book) of her "blanket training" of her twin sons, we are led to believe that she used only a stern voice to keep them on their blankets. However, on the bottom of page 125, Michelle herself writes, "Parents have to decide what type of correction works best with their children, depending on their personal parenting philosophy. Whatever it is should be momentarily unpleasant".

If this statement is not referring to some form of corporal punishment, I can't imagine what it IS referring to. If a parent is not to use physical punishment at all, then Michelle would not have said what she did; she would have just said that the parent is to keep their voice firm so as the child would get the message, or something to that effect. After all, except for an unpleasant, stern voice or a swift slap, what other form of "discipline" can a 1 1/2 year old child understand?

Could it simply be that Michelle knows OTHERS may 'pop a butt' and put that in there for those parents?

Anonymous said...

As to the blanket training and corporal punishment, I recommend looking at the resources recommended in the back of their book or on their website, particularly the Solving Family Problems link.
One of the things with Gothard and I think some quiverfull followers is that children are only a blessing if you train them correctly which requires obedience not only to God but the parents as well and their children doing a lot of the work inside the home. For most people it would be impossible to feed, bathe, clean house and clothing, schoool, care for as well as financially support the number of children that the Duggars have (which is outside the norm even for quiverfull families) without the children doing a lot of the work. Part of Gothard's ideology is that this process is good for the children, that they learn to work hard, to set aside selfishness in order to do what is best for everyone, and eventually they will make good parents and spouses because they know what to do. What bothers me is that it doesn't teach them to pursue their own goals, have their own passions, and expect others to respect that as well. It just seems to lack a sense of balance between self and others. I think Jim Bob and Michelle take advantage of this by having the older girls carry too much of the responsibility for the younger kids. Those girls have no room to protest this because it is seen as disobedience and disloyal to God to do so. That's a lot of guilt to carry around when most of us would see it as a reasonable complaint on their part. It just seems that Gothard and the Duggars have placed everything else as secondary to having as many children as possible . But those are Michelle and Jim Bob's goals, not necessarily the goals of their daughters. Claiming it is God's plan just gives it more importance than it should have in my opinion. Raising healthy daughters who respect themselves and their worth, who have a chance to explore their passions and make their mark, as well as respect and love others might be part of God's plan as well.

Anonymous said...

Gothardism unlike QF is all about following the rules, submitting to authority and never questioning the first two.

Conformaity to the degree required of Gothardites (dress, vocabulary, and gender roles are the most obvious), and the guilt and doubt imposed on individuals who vary from the course, are not reasonable. Additionaly, Gothard's views on mental health and health in general are rife with pseudo-science. No wonder he advocates narrow and limited schooling.

Anonymous said...

The danger of course, is if a Gothard follower's child needed mental or physical health services, which are nearly disallowed by the distrusting Gothard. No wonder Josh and Anna had their baby at home. Gothard shows incredible disdain for modern medicine, and again, those two were lucky that nothing terrible happened with that foolish home birth.

Gothard is just foolish in some of his teachings, but in others (like medicine) downright dangerous.

nccalgal said...

I'm having a problem with this idea that the use of certain words indicate some type of conditioning or brainwashing. That seems like reaching (nitpicking actually). Is there a reference in one of Gothard's teaching? As far as "encouragement" is concerned, it reminds me how for a time people described every experience they had as "awesome". It had nothing to do with conditioning and all to do with a limited number of words that mean "totally out of this world". That's how I see the use of "encouragement". There aren't a whole lot of other words that can be used in the manner in which Michelle and others use it. As far as "little ones" is concerned, how else do you distinguish between the older vs. the younger members of the family when there's such a large age span between the older ones and the youngest ones? They're all her children; "little ones" flows better than "the younger children". Personally, I never liked the phrase "the kids" and it has nothing to do with the Biblical reference of separating the sheep from the goats, I just feel it's a demeaning label. If someone else wants to refer to their children as kids, that's their perrogative, so if Michelle refers to the younger children as "the little ones", that's her choice.

Im_in_PR said...

Anonymous @3:45 said...The danger of course, is if a Gothard follower's child needed mental or physical health services, which are nearly disallowed by the distrusting Gothard.No wonder Josh and Anna had their baby at home.

I'm an anti-Gothard as they come, but I have never heard of Gothard or his followers being anti physical health services. I knew quite a few of them, and knew them well, and they all availed themselves of medical care whenever it was needed, even to the extent that a few of the older moms went to ob/gyns to extend their fertility.

I believe for Anna, especially knowing as we do that she availed herself of medical care throughout her pregnancy, that having a home birth had nothing to do with Gothard. She just felt very uncomfortable with Dr.'s she didn't know.

Cyn said...

Anonymous said...

The danger of course, is if a Gothard follower's child needed mental or physical health services, which are nearly disallowed by the distrusting Gothard. No wonder Josh and Anna had their baby at home. Gothard shows incredible disdain for modern medicine, and again, those two were lucky that nothing terrible happened with that foolish home birth.

Gothard is just foolish in some of his teachings, but in others (like medicine) downright dangerous.
11/16/2009 3:45 PM
*********************************
That doesn't quite track right since 1) Josh & Anna planned to have the baby at the hospital to begin with. 2) Michelle had 90% of her babies at the hospital.

There is nothing 'foolish' about home births, as long as there are plans that are followed and a trained midwife and others around to help.

Anonymous said...

Cyn said..

There is nothing 'foolish' about home births, as long as there are plans that are followed and a trained midwife and others around to help.

**********

Yes, home births in general can be very safe. Maybe it was TLC's editing, but the problem I had with Josh & Anna was that the decision seemed very last minute. Was there not even one other doctor in town Anna may have been comfortable with? They must have know when their doctor would be gone & there should have been a firm backup plan in place. And a back-up for the back-up plan, considering this young mom was having her first child on camera for the entire world to see.
-Katydid

roddma said...

Children should sit quiet without being rewarded? Isnt simple praise enough? Blanket training leaves a bad taste in my mouth even with no hitting. It sounds as if you are training a dog.

I still dont get the waitng' for relations' 40 days and 80 days after the birth of child Yea you wait a little while but I never heard that long. this is coming from a man who never married. When I first read Gothard beleived Cabbage Patch dolls were wrong I went and looked at my adoption dolls cause they are similar.Are they evil? He has some strange and dangerous teachings.

roddma said...

To continue, it isnt the sibling's job to teach the younger while Mom takes care of the rest of the family.Helping out is fine but not teaching entirely. Where do the boys fit in teaching siblings? Older siblings should be pursuing their own dreams and education. I couldnt imagine being almost 20 and having to homeschool m y siblings. Most public school techers are at least 23-25.

Cyn said...

Yes, home births in general can be very safe. Maybe it was TLC's editing, but the problem I had with Josh & Anna was that the decision seemed very last minute. Was there not even one other doctor in town Anna may have been comfortable with? They must have know when their doctor would be gone & there should have been a firm backup plan in place. And a back-up for the back-up plan, considering this young mom was having her first child on camera for the entire world to see.
-Katydid
******************************

I'm betting it was 95% editing and 5% Josh and Anna.... Michelle KNOWS better and would not endanger the first Grandchild.

Anonymous said...

If you think about it, maybe Josh and Anna didn't "feel comfortable" going to another doctor, because another doctor might not have let them film. We know, from watching Michelle's births, that Dr. Sarver allows filming for TLC, so they probably already had this arranged. I agree that they could have had a better backup plan, but I believe the not "feeling comfortable" was more about not being able to film with another doctor.
-Christina

sandy said...

Christina said.. "I believe the not "feeling comfortable" was more about not being able to film with another doctor."

I agree with you. I always wondered if THAT was what happened. One of the producers did say that the Duggars were pretty "TV savvy". Interesting.. coming from a family that condemns TV.

Im_in_PR said...

One of the producers did say that the Duggars were pretty "TV savvy"

People who are TV savy don't decide to have homebirths at the last minute because they don't have a back-up filming plan........

liamay said...

To be honest I have to laugh at the Quiverfull movement because growing up that is all I knew. I was raised Catholic, but my dads family was Methodist. (He converted to Catholism after he married my mom.) All my aunts and uncles on my mom's side had big families. My grandma was from a family of 13, my mom from a family of 9 and we were considered a small family with 6 kids. My mom wanted more, but that was all she had. I have tons of cousins on my mom's side. I only have two cousins on my Dads side of the family.The street I grew up on was mostly Catholic. Huge families there too. So to your average 50 year old Catholic, it's nothing really new. At least to me and mine.

Anonymous said...

What was I thinking! Of course the home birth was all about the t.v. cameras.

I think maybe they are getting closer & closer to the Jump the Shark episode, especially since TLC is showing more episodes of Table for 12. Maybe these type of shows have a certain life-span. The network drains everything they can out of you & then finds another family to film.

-Katydid

Anonymous said...

I really HOPE TLC isn't phasing out the Duggars. Although I agree that maybe all this exposure and fame may not neccessarily be the best for the family, I selfishly do love watching their show, because I do like them :) I really find Table for 12 boring. I know that's not what we're discussing here, but just in comparison, the Duggars are on TV not only because they have so many children, but because of their beliefs. This is what makes them special, in my opinion, and I would be sad to see them go. Although in some ways, it may be best for the family.
-Christina

Anonymous said...

I hope the Duggars go off the air. I think the exposure is dangerous and bad for their family. All the other reality families have been ruined by television exposure and the Duggars are no different. I like watching them too (like a train wreck) but I still hope they will try to regain their privacy, modesty, and beliefs. Instead, they have sold out to modern American commercialism and greed. What a shame!

MomOfThree said...

I really think that TLC purposely edits and airs things with the intent to create controversy among viewers and on blogs, such as this one. Some examples are Jordyn and the lollipop; Michelle pushing the bus, nursing on the float and at the school, feeding the baby lying down on the couch; the "pottery scene" from the movie "Ghost". I'm certain it's done to ensure ratings, but it's done at the family's expense and I wonder if the family even realizes it.

With this show and others, things are not always shown in the best light and it seems that oftentimes awkward questions are asked that appear to embarrass or stump the Duggars and it is a shame.

I suppose that when TLC has drained all they can from the family, they will move on to their next cash cow.

Diane. said...

But the show cannot edit IN things that did not actually happen. Jordyn did get a lollypop, at under a year old. She was fed lying on the couch, huge glopfuls of mush, while Michelle joked with the cameramen. The boy did eat off the floor, and Jana did cut tile without safety goggles. The list is rather endless.

Now, TLC could have edited all those less than flattering things OUT, but instead left them in. However, those things happened.

Contrary to the controversy and arguments and such seen on "other" reality programs (from Supernanny to the Roloffs), what we see on the Duggars already seems highly edited. I don't know that I believe that Michelle never, ever raises her voice, or that there is really THAT little schooling going on (I just have to believe the kids don't spend all day running around), for example.

But I do believe that the family is not at all safety conscious, because there is simply too much evidence of it. Whether or not their poor safety record show the family in a bad light, it definitely exists.

Joanna said...

At my local hospital, they don't allow filming of any kind during child birth, not even privite home video. You can video tape the baby "after" the birth, but not during it. It's a hospital policy. If a TV show was filming me and I was having a baby, they wouldn't get to film me because of hosiptal rules.