Update: I received this comment from a reader today:
Sad to say, my wife and I predicted all of this years ago. We knew who Doug Phillips was, but he didn’t know who we were. We had the opportunity to watch his interaction with his wife and children over a 2-day period when no one else was around.
To this day, my wife and I remember this as one of the most difficult-to-watch episodes in our lives as Doug demeaned his wife and children, abusing them both verbally and emotionally time after time before turning to “meet his public” with an entirely different attitude.
Since then, we have watched his “public persona” and simply kept our mouths shut- knowing that this day would come… and my GUESS is that it’s just the tip of the iceberg.
One cannot say one thing and live another within the Kingdom of God indefinitely- there is eventually a day of public reckoning coming and it’s always painful to watch. Eventually it’s shouted from the housetops unless repentance deflects the judgment first.
Sad- but totally predictable to us from years ago.
***********************************************
After reviewing my article about my friend, David, and looking over my notes again, I realize that I need to make some changes, as some things weren’t as clear as they could have been. Doug Phillips’ accusations against David were so outrageous that I allowed myself to feel pressured into making a hasty response. I was in too much of a hurry to post it, so I am going to try to write it a little more clearly and will have it back up soon!
In the meantime, I will post a few links of related interest here.
Lawyer Sanctioned After Blowing Up at Process Server
Sharper Iron’s Editorial Response to Vision Forum – Notice the pattern in the four opening bullet points
Vision Forum: The Tenets of Biblical Patriarchy
More new articles on this story:
Take 3 – Jennie Chancey’s letter
Jen's Gems -- Doug Phillips' Ecclesiastical Tyranny and Abuse 
May 6, 2007 at 2:35 pm
Esther raises an excellent point when she states, “Some idols are being torn down and they do not like it. I did not like it when my own idols were torn down, either.”
I have a very good friend, who was also born and raised in a Jewish home, that recognized the Lordship of Christ later in life. We’ve had an ongoing email exchange since first meeting via email, while we were stationed in Germany (ca 1994). During these last 13 years, we’ve both changed our theological beliefs in many areas. However, I was really shocked when he boiled down Christ’s teaching to this: ALL sin is simply a failure to love.
During a late lunch this afternoon, Jen mentioned the “eternal law” (love God, love others), which Christ reminded us of in Matthew 22:37-39, Mark 12:30-31, and Luke 10:27. You don’t have to think about this too long to realize my friend may have identified the real requirements God places on Christians.
So, let’s bring this back full circle to the issue at hand – Doug Phillips’ ecclesiastical tyranny. Here are a few questions to ponder based on the above:
Did Doug Phillips love God when he conducted a malicious excommunication that violated the very beliefs Doug holds?
Does Doug Phillips demonstrate love by shunning Natasha?
Did Doug Phillips demonstrate love by removing Natasha’s essay?
Does Doug Phillips demonstrate love by defaming the Epsteins?
Does Doug Phillips demonstrate love by allowing a smear campaign to continue on his behalf?
Did Doug Phillips demonstrate love by having Bob Sarratt read Jen’s pre-conversion sins to the BCA congregants? How about Beall reading counseling notes? How about his proxies posting details on a kinist site that elicited the “Jen can only show true repentance by committing suicide” comment?
Obviously all these questions are rhetorical because Doug Phillips does NOT demonstrate love. Doug Phillips conducts himself in an antithetical manner toward the very scripture he acknowledges as sacred.
For the Phillips apologists, you need to think through what you say in light of all written here.
May 6, 2007 at 2:40 pm
All:
I’ve seen several objections that I’ve ignored source material, or am overlooking some of the evidence posted on this site. I’m not ignoring. I’ve read everything here, I’ve tried to think through it carefully, and my sweeping statements are reasoned. To justify them fully, including a bit of refutatio to anticipate objections, is difficult to do succinctly. I’m already a windbag, so I’m trying to take things bit by bit.
Jumping into the frey this late in the game, I realize I’m bound to suffer such criticism, and I don’t fault anybody for it.
Outside of a pot shot here or there, I’ll try to focus on bits of the primary documents that I think/feel speak against Jen. At the very least, I’ve got holes in understanding they haven’t been able to fill, and I’ll try to ask questions to fill those gaps. Those are the issues that are important to me anyways, so I don’t mind limiting my discussion to them.
Finally, Esther: Yes, I do find the Bad Blogs “interesting.” Compelling, no; but I think through the ugly rhetoric and guilt-by-association, some valid points here and there are being made. I’ve already talked about why I’m here – I’m concerned about blog by trial and Christians using the Internet as a proxy for church functions – and that’s why I find them “interesting.” Same goes for this site, and some of the others I’ve mentioned. Sociologically, it’s simply fascinating to me what has happened. I’m aware that this sort of detached interest seems to ignore the feelings of a lot of people that are hurt and shocked by what they are reading. So, I’m trying to have a heart about this too and put myself in the Epstein’s shoes.
So, until I get around to it, please be patient and don’t assume I’m ignoring issues. The assumption that I’m just discarding everything that speaks against Mr. Phillips isn’t a fair one to make. I’ll try to get around to it. If I miss something, please point it out, and I’ll try to answer questions where I can.
My Sunday was wonderful. Hope everybody else’s was too. I’m off to fellowship with some Saints. To the Epsteins, who seem to lack a church body right now, I pray the Lord will provide peace, joy, healing, and repentance where necessary. Our multiplication of words on this blog and elsewhere is nothing without His presence, and I find great comfort in the fact that He will repair the hurt in His time.
God bless us, every one. If Tiny Tim had a blog, I suppose I’d be Ok with that.
Red Ink
May 6, 2007 at 2:54 pm
Jen,
I want to make a quick book recommendation. Damsels in Distress by Martha Peace. Mrs. Peace comes from a Reformed, Baptistic background. She is also a nouthetic counselor. I think it might be helpful to you. I got a lot out of it, as I have all of her books.
Ann
May 6, 2007 at 3:06 pm
Ann, I had to look up “nouthetic!” Thank you for a solid recommendation. I will look up the book. However, I do have to say that I don’t consider myself to either be in distress or needing rescuing, which could easily be inferred from that title. That is one thing that really bothers me about Jonathan Park. Doug is always casting the women in a “helpless” light and the men have to go rescue them. I am certainly not a feminist, not by any means, but I am not a helpless female who needs rescuing either. Having said all that, I will go check out the book anyway! Thanks!
May 6, 2007 at 3:14 pm
Red Ink, you are welcome to ask away. I won’t claim sinless perfectionism, but maybe I can clear up some questions for you. That is why I have comments open!
May 6, 2007 at 3:22 pm
What does “nouthetic” mean? Never heard the word.
——————————-
Anyway, Red Ink… okay. I see your point of view on the last name at least a little better and I’ll drop it (I was anyway). “Whatever”… is just “shrug”. I’m good at saying what I want to say, and bad at saying how I want to say it.
I’m not having such a good sabbath with rocking thunder/lightening/wind. We just had an entire town blown away here by a tornado 3/4 mile wide *on the ground*. Everything’s just… gone. And I’m freaking out having no basement. Hope everybody else here is fairing better.
—————————————-
After reading what Doug wrote about the VT shooting, and then reading about what Fred Phelps had to say… whew, we aren’t dealing with a lion we could be dealing with. But then again, nobody holds Phelps in high regard… except Phelps!
——————————————–
Mark, you brought up some topics up there regarding Natasha. I’ve had some questions, but have decided not to ask for fear of having my head bit off. She doesn’t want her name brought up. So, I’m just respecting her wishes.
But I can say this: in none of the circumstances did Doug or Beall show love. He is so busy promoting “good Christian things” that he’s forgotten how to be a Christian altogether. I can write Fred Phelps off as an idiot, but Doug is not an idiot. Just self-absorbed up to his eyeballs.
I’m tempted to show up at a conference where he’s speaking and just observe.
May 6, 2007 at 3:34 pm
Jen,
Book is here to find out more about it:
Please read the second person’s review (C.L. Blakey).
I believe these sins are very common among women . . . I can struggle with them too.
May 6, 2007 at 3:44 pm
This book looks good for the most part, and I like Martha Peace okay, but I entirely disagree with this:
“You know you are guilty of sinful manipulation when you don’t graciously take ‘no’ for an answer and keep trying to convince the other person to let you have your way. Certainly there may be times when an appeal is appropriate, but if the answer is sill ‘no’ then you must see it as God’s will for you at the moment.”
A blanket statement like this is ridiculous.
May 6, 2007 at 4:20 pm
JP Wrote: Esther, no, I don’t think I did miss the point. I think you have made it abundantly clear that your issues with Doug have less to do with what he did than with what he and anybody more conservative than you believes and that you do not make any distinction at all between ‘hyper-patriarchy’ and patriarchy.”
It is about FALSE TEACHING and ABUSE. My issues with Doug have everything to do with what he tactics and behavior. And the fact that he can continue to do it because people follow false teachings. There is a process here: False teaching>elevation of man>Spiritual abuse.
BTW: Nice try on trying to infer that DP is too conservative for me. NOT SO. This is NOT ‘conservatism’. It is FALSE TEACHING. A true shepherd would NEVER do what he did. Therefore, he is a false teacher. When we start tagging false teachings as liberal or conservative we tend to miss the point. The point is to teach the whole counsel of God from scripture in context. (Acts 20)
” With every post you convince me that you are more interested in tearing apart fellow believers who disagree with you on patriarchy than you in anything else. Jen has asked at least twice now for the guilt by association and adhominem attacks- and broad generalizations of all things patriarchal- to stop. You seem to me to be viewing these reasonable requests from the blog-owner as an excuse to justify your use of these tactics and use them a few more times. ”
Gee, I thought you were only angry over my comments to Red Ink. Seems every comment I have made has bothered you. No, I am not interested in tearing apart ‘believers’ but ironically, scripture does that for us! It is a sword that divides. It was never intended to be used as a club as it has in Jen’s case…not only by DP but other commenters here.
“There is, at this point, very little to choose between your approach and Matt Chancey’s, to be honest. To write something like “note: he sought a wife who agreed with him doctrinally” as though this is some earth shattering indication of deep evil is worthy of Matt Chancey or the National Enquirer.”
Now, was the Chancey jab really necessary? Have I once used the words ‘internet conspiracy ring’? :o)
I have explained this….but will once again…we are seeing the fruit of his teaching and Jenny’s mothers beliefs in Jenny’s writings. That is all. Period. You can get over it now. I was never suggesting that a hyper patriarch should seek out a Saddlebacker for marriage. I made the note for Ann’s sake who seemed to be trying to distance Jenny from Ovid Need’s teachings.
“Your treatment of Red Ink was, frankly, just ugly and it’s actually embarrassing to read comments where you continue your very ill-judged misrepresentation of what he’s said. What part of “I think the rhetoric is ill-tempered, and many of the punches are below the belt” is unclear to you? He was talking about the Mrs. Binoculars site there.”
Friend, you may want to go back and read your full response to me again. If anything I said to Red Ink about DW is not factual, then he needs to call me on it.
“Ovid Need’s writings are a very good demonstration of the difference between patriarchy and hyperpatriarchy. There is a difference, just as there is are differences among feminists- there is an element of feminist thought that promotes lesbianism, for instance, and is opposed to marriage in all cases.”
JP, I think perhaps you feel the need to defend Patriarchy after some analyzed Needs writings. I can certainly understand that. I am sure there is a fine line between Patriarch and Hyper-Patriarch. I can imagine it is hard not to go over that line. I am just wondering where the line is in light of this situation and the commenters here on this blog.
My scripture says that elders/headship/pastors are not to lord it over others. As a matter of fact, these positions require men who are flat on their faces praying for wisdom and understanding of the full Counsel of God. The scriptural ones are rare but you recognize one when you come in contact. In the New Covenant they are servants.
Jen is NOT the problem because she is the victim of spiritual abuse which is false teaching and recognized it for what it was. She is NOT the problem because she makes a serious problem public. But quite a few people want her to believe she is the real problem here.
BTW: Jen is welcome to ask me not to post again. And I won’t.
May 6, 2007 at 4:21 pm
Vik,
If you like Martha Peace, you should like this newest release.
I didn’t agree with maybe 5% of what she wrote, but overall, I believe it contains very good advice . . . for any woman . . . not specifically Jen.
May 6, 2007 at 4:22 pm
Vik,
I would like to see the context of that quote but I agree that it is a blanket statement and ridiculous.
If this is the defn. of sinful manipulation then EVERY person on this blog is wracked with this sin! LOL
For the most part, I like Martha Peace’s books. I don’t agree with everything! [Suprise! ;-)] Ironic thing is that most hyper-patriarchalists don’t like her book, The Excellent Wife. You know why? Because one of the chapter outlines how to Matthew 18 your husband. As a wife, you are not allowed to question your husband’s blatant sin nor are you allowed (I guess) to confront him. I see nothing wrong with spouses confronting each other when they see blatant sin, especially when it is affecting the whole family.
May 6, 2007 at 4:28 pm
Corrie,
Just to let you know, VF does sell The Excellent Wife on their website.
May 6, 2007 at 4:32 pm
Hi Corrie — it’s so funny, this whole patriarchal thing (before anyone jumps on me, it’s mostly good, okay?!?!)
While my husband is never in blatant sin, I have no trouble saying to him at times, “Hey, cut that out, will ya!” and he can freely say, “Oh, woke up on the wrong side of the bed, didja?”
And I don’t mince words, either. Once he was going out to tell somebody off (they deserved it, really) and I blocked the door. Yes ma’am, I did. I told him that you never know when you might need somebody and this little thing was just not worth it. Later he told me I was right; now they are friends. They wouldn’t have been had I not loudly protested. Call me a feminist…
I didn’t waste time grabbing my Bible or calling my preacher. I just stopped a really stupid thing from happening. This “appeal” stuff is ludicrous.
Okay, I’m calm. 🙂
Guess I’ll just have to read the book. Right after I read the other 837 books I have on my Books to Read list.
May 6, 2007 at 5:17 pm
In reference to the above statement, ” It won’t be the Muslims prosecuting Christians it will be other Christians. Especially if the Theonomist ever get any real political power.”
So true ! For five months, when I was in my early twenties I had a roommate that was A HARDCORE Theonomist. He told me all about how one day this little wacky group from Tyler Texas would run WORLD affairs and abolish the U.N. Around that time, after learning of their philosophies I seriously curtailed my growing collection of handguns, and moved on to larger, more powerful weaponry ( AK-47’s , AR-15’s etc). Every household should be ready for the coming siege of the theonomist terrorists. Bin laden has nothing on this folks from a mentality standpoint.
May 6, 2007 at 5:21 pm
Hmmm, Scott. Wonder how this’ll all play out in the “end times”? 😀
Guess I need to get me some FLAME THROWERS.
May 6, 2007 at 6:03 pm
Red Ink said: “To the Epsteins, who seem to lack a church body right now, I pray the Lord will provide peace, joy, healing, and repentance where necessary.”
In response, Jen said: “Red Ink, you are welcome to ask away. I won’t claim sinless perfectionism, but maybe I can clear up some questions for you. That is why I have comments open!”
Here are my two cents, Red Ink.
First, if you haven’t already done so, please read my letter to Doug’s attorney dated July 31, 2006.
The lack of any response, even after we called Doug’s attorney six weeks after the letter was sent and gave him additional time to respond, is what convinced Jen that Doug was not interested in our repentance or reconciling us to BCA (note: we waited for Doug until November 26, 2006, before giving Ministry Watchman the nod to go public).
Secondly, as I’ve mentioned before in these comments, Doug’s deliberate mishandling of our excommunication must be acknowledged by Doug and BCA. In addition to this issue, Doug would also need to publicly apologize for having Bob Sarratt read Jen’s pre-conversion sin in church and Beall reading Jen’s counseling notes in church.
Lastly, I realize anyone can make an allegation. However, there is a marked difference between the documented information available on Jen’s site and the undocumented allegations laced with logical fallacies, histrionics, and emotive language on Doug’s business and church blogs. Furthermore, anyone who has to make a “public case to justify suing” those who claim Christ, but were excommunicated by Star Chamber, is already behind the power curve. Doug’s political tactics and his proxies ongoing smear campaign may keep the home team happy, but it hasn’t worked on this blog or my blog yet.
(S-B-J, how about it? When are you going to drop the National Enquirer MO and open your blogs to comments?)
May 6, 2007 at 6:52 pm
“Actually, Cynthia, if you go back and read the thread you will see that I was not the first person to read you as confounding Need’s separate points of advocating youthful marriage and pointing out that 13 was a marriagable age in Bible times. Rather than Murphy’s law, you might look at your communication.”
JP, I didn’t confound “Need’s separate points of advocating youthful marriage and pointing out that 13 was a marriagable age in Bible times.” I simply stated that he made those points.
My first posting said:
“It seems that Pastor Need comes down in favor of girls getting married at a very young age too. According to critics, in his sermon,”Long Range New Covenant Thinking: Early Marriage”, Need preaches that the sincere Christian desiring to fulfill God’s will wed at an early age. As proof, Need cites the passage in Proverbs 5:18 saying, “Let thy fountain be blessed: and rejoice with the wife of thy youth” and notes that in Bible times often people were married by the age of eighteen for boys and sometimes as young as thirteen for girls.”
Then, figuring (rightly) that someone might
confuse the two points, I wrote,
“To be fair, I do not know if Need ever said that modernday girls ought to marry at age 13. I haven’t heard the sermon, but I have read the reviews, and they point to the fact that Need preaches the desirability of youthful marriage, and notes that girls married at age 13 in Biblical times.”
… and then you accuse ME of confounding the two.
Looks like I’m ****ed if I do, and ****ed if I don’t…..
……….confound it anyhow. 😉
May 7, 2007 at 3:53 am
Cynthia,
FWIW, I don’t think you confounded what Mr. Need said at all and I think you were quite clear and actually made sure you were clear by making the second clarifying post.
I am still waiting for K. to apologize (or explain why) for accusing me of “gossip” and “slander” because she confounded what I said about the white sheet. She totally missed my point and then assumed I was saying this is what is being taught. My whole point, and I made it clear (but I don’t think people are reading before they emotionally react) that this was my point, was questioning why the do NOT use the white sheet teaching from the Bible when they will go and dig up other things to use.
I was attempting to show how often people selectively choose from the buffet (because that is how they approach it) called the “Old Testament” the rules they *want* to follow but conveniently ignore the other ones. It shows a core problem with many Christians because they do not understand how to rightly divide scripture. And, believe me, I am a student of the Old Testament and I learn a LOT from it but I also don’t presume to know which ones are important and which ones are not. If you notice, the ones that are important to follow always fit in with that particular teacher’s agenda?
May 7, 2007 at 4:01 am
Ann,
Thanks for the info. That is a surprise. I know many people who have a problem with that book and do not recommend it because of that one chapter.
Vik,
You feminist! 🙂
I am with you on the appeal thing.
May 7, 2007 at 6:52 am
Red Ink:
“I’ve already talked about why I’m here – I’m concerned about blog by trial and Christians using the Internet as a proxy for church functions”
You said “blog by trial.” I assume you meant “trial by blog.” This blog isn’t a trial. It is about exposing and warning others.
Anyway, I look forward to seeing whatever specific issues you want to raise, but meanwhile, here is something of interest to me:
” . . . but I think through the ugly rhetoric and guilt-by-association, some valid points here and there are being made.”
Such as? Like the Living Water statement, you just said something half-way, and not completely. Would you please elaborate.
I once was bowling with my father (who was a self-educated tool and die expert) and some others. Something got hitched up with the pin resetting machinery, and my father wondered what had happened. A man turned to him and said, “there’s something wrong with the mechanism.”
The man walked away, and my father made sure he pointed out to me that the man had just sounded like he explained something, but he didn’t; he just repeated my father’s question with a statement. I’ve never forgotten that instance.
Anyway, it will be interesting to read your specific concerns, Red Ink.
May 7, 2007 at 7:34 am
Situations of pastoral abuse are rather like that pin-resetter — churches can break down too, whenever something gets “hung up in the mechanism”. Jesus said that the gates of Hell will not prevail against His church, but He never said that it wouldn’t break down from time to time. In fact, break-downs are bound to happen, because Jesus has built His Church upon human rock:
Mat 16:18 And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.
Now, bowling alleys have service-people who repair their pinsetters, but did you ever see a car break down in a very small town? Before you know it, you have a crowd of locals gathered around, exchanging car-breakdown stories and ideas, and shooting the bull, and often as not, if the problem isn’t too severe, the car will be on the road again, or at least on its way to a repair shop, with the problem already diagnosed.
The church can work that way too, AS LONG AS we don’t become like that man at the bowling alley, who was content to leave the problem to the “experts.” We have people who are “experts”– ordained pastors and deacons and bishops — but they, like us, are PART of the mechanism, and can also go on the fritz. That’s why we all need to be Bereans, and educate ourselves in the care and feeding and general operation of the Faith, so that when the Church starts rattling and smoking and won’t go, we can put the hood up and stand around together, exchanging church-breakdown stories and ideas, and get Her up and running again, or at least on Her way to the “experts”, with a clear diagnosis of the problem.
May 7, 2007 at 8:54 am
Jen,
Did the BCA “session” and those who counseled you use Martha Peace’s “The Excellent Wife” for your counseling?
May 7, 2007 at 9:12 am
K???
I would like a response to this statement. I don’t want to be BEHIND the times anymore and I am really trying to catch up and be as on the ball as everyone else around here.
“Corrie, dear: You are BEHIND the times – I apologized earlier for being so hasty – Have a wonderful sabbath tomorrow!
OH and by the way: I am not offended because I don’t know of men who teach that – what you are saying is hearsay and gossip. I know certainly may family does not teach our seven girls that!!!! And by the way, we do not “hop” through the OT and pick and choose what we want – you really don’t know me now do you? J”
Can you tell me what this “hearsay and gossip” really is?
You said you apologized for being hasty. Well, it seems like you are just repeating the same thing you apologized for? Didn’t you apologize for accusing me and others of saying that these men taught this and that you practiced it? Now, after you told me you apologized, you repeated the same accusation?
I NEVER said that people are teaching us to use white sheets on the wedding night. I asked why they ARE NOT using them when they go and peck through the Old Testament for other things to use? And you do hunt and peck through the Old Testament if you lift some teachings out of it to follow while ignoring the other ones.
I don’t need to *know* you to know to know that if you follow hyper-patriarchal teachings which are heavily based on the Old Testament, then you do that. Just that you were not offended or concerned with Mr. Need’s eisegesis of Leviticus 27 shows me something.
BTW, who or what is “J”? You signed off your post with a “J”?
May 7, 2007 at 11:25 am
Corrie: “Did the BCA “session” and those who counseled you use Martha Peace’s “The Excellent Wife” for your counseling?”
No. I think you might be a little confused. I received a grand total of 6 hours of counseling at BCA -– from Beall and another lady – who only tried to teach me that all problems in the marriage are the woman’s fault, therefore they focused on trying to identify my sins. When they couldn’t find any pattern of sin, they just simply resorted to “All problems in the marriage are the woman’s fault.”
However, that book was highly recommended at BCA, as was everything else that was sold through Vision Forum.
The BCA “session” never counseled me. Doug didn’t either. He just went immediately into the “discipline” mode.
May 7, 2007 at 1:33 pm
Corrie: My “J” was simply a typo.
I am sorry that I have had NO TIME to review your comments. I have decided that my children and my husband need my attention and affection and I really do not have time for this blog. I have not even had time to keep up on my own blog. So my apology was simply an apology for not looking a little more closely to see the white sheet was only a point that we should do all or none. I was looking at it from a different point of view which please don’t ask me to go any further on this – it was simply I misunderstood – forgive me – my husband is almost home from work and I must get dinner going and get ready to run to the store myself.
In case anyone is expecting me to respond any more, I will not be responding as I just do not have time – and I really could care less if you want to “blast” me for standing behind the “I am so busy” statement – I am busy and I have wasted to much time on here. And I am afraid I need to let that poor dogs ears alone!
May 7, 2007 at 1:50 pm
K.,
I am not going to blast you for being too busy. I totally understand.
I take that you didn’t mean to say that I was guilty of passing on gossip and slander AFTER you had already apologized? I just wanted you to understand that I wasn’t saying that someone was actually teaching this.
May 7, 2007 at 2:40 pm
Yes, Corrie – that is EXACTLY what I meant. My concern is people here this stuff and they are going to think people “really” do that .; . . I understand what you are saying but as I have said our family does not pick and choose and I do not know others that do. I am sorry though for misunderstanding you.
K.
May 7, 2007 at 2:41 pm
My goodness – typos – I mean “hear this stuff” and “what I meant” eesh . . you would think I am rushing around here or something 🙂
May 7, 2007 at 3:51 pm
Cynthia said:
“…but did you ever see a car break down in a very small town? Before you know it, you have a crowd of locals gathered around, exchanging car-breakdown stories and ideas, and shooting the bull, and often as not, if the problem isn’t too severe, the car will be on the road again, or at least on its way to a repair shop, with the problem already diagnosed.”
Omegawsh — you’ve been to MY town, on MY street, in MY neighborhood!! If I’d have known, I’d have put the coffee on!
May 7, 2007 at 4:48 pm
LOL… I think it’s the same in small towns everywhere. Something breaks down, or something unusual happens, and the locals (the elders at the gate? 😉 ) have a conference about it.
This is off topic, but, what the heck:
I remember in the Kansas town where I grew up, when one of the local boys, Dennis “P” got arrested. Now, Dennis “P” came from a big hillbilly family across the river in Missouri, and his mother ran a beer joint. Mrs. P’s boys were known for getting drunk and coming over to the Kansas side of the river and raising H (she didn’t allow them to raise H in her bar) and getting arrested and thrown in jail.
Well, one weekend Dennis had a snootful, and came over into town. He got stupid — moreso that usual — and as usual, he got arrested, and the newspaper where I worked published the fact in the police report, in embarrassing detail.
Now, Mrs. P didn’t like that, and Dennis’s brothers didn’t like it either , and the newspaper started to receive threatening phone calls.
I was at my desk, the day that it all came to a head. One of the ad clerks went outside to the newspaper-selling box in front of the building to get a copy of the previous day’s paper (we were sold out inside) and she came back in, white as a ghost, and told us that there was a rattlesnake in the paper-box. Sure enough, one of the “P” boys had put what turned out to be a nearly 5-foot rattlesnake in our paper-box. The editor called Animal Control, but before the officer could arrive on the scene, a crowd of locals had gathered, pulling at their overall suspenders, peering at the paper-box, and opening it a crack to look inside and confirm that, yep, sure enough, that was a rattler inside, and a big one, too.
When the animal control officer arrived, an even bigger crowd gathered to watch her try to catch the snake and to offer their advice, but catching a snake in a paper box is no easy task. Everybody had an idea for getting him out, but somehow nobody really wanted to be the first to try. Eventually, the editor and the animal control officer managed to open the box slightly, tilt it forward, and slide a stick with a noose on one end into the box to catch the rattler. You should have seen them jump back when she pulled it out and held it up — and then everybody had an idea of what to do with it. A couple of people wanted to fetch their gun and shoot it (but that was illegal, since we were in town), and a couple of other folks thought that they ought to take it out into the country and turn it loose (but not on THEIR land, thank you very much!)
Eventually, the snake was put down, and I believe it was stuffed and used as a display in the biology department of a local school.
But OH, what a morning!
May 7, 2007 at 5:39 pm
Hey, look at this — It turns out that Matt Chancey was on the payroll for Persecution Project.
Over on MommyLife, Spunky wrote:
“Persecution Project has made its 2005 tax return. (PDF) available online. It shows Mr. Chancey in the position of Director with an annual salary of $42,500 for 40 hours of work per week.
Even if he is no longer a full time paid employee, I was still given his name as their spokesman, it is reasonable to assume he still works for them in some capacity and cannot be called “independent” in his investigation.
If Mrs. Chancey says that others are twisting their words, it may be because the words that Vision Forum uses are often ambiguous and cause even those that have heavily supported Vision Forum to wonder what they really are trying to say. “
May 7, 2007 at 5:52 pm
Cynthia — great story! When I take my son to the barber, you get to hear the farmers talk in detail about just what it took to get that calf out of its momma! 😀
——————————–
I don’t know what to say about the Chanceys anymore. If Doug ever does turn on them, their emotions will end up at the bottom of the barrel, I’m sure.
Independent, my eye.
May 7, 2007 at 6:05 pm
“I don’t know what to say about the Chanceys anymore. If Doug ever does turn on them, their emotions will end up at the bottom of the barrel, I’m sure.”
Yep, I agree 100%.
And hopefully, when that finally does happen, there will be plenty of folks around who have “been there and done that”, who will pick them up, give them a hug, (and who will not be TOO forthcoming with the I-told-you-so’s) and who will lovingly set them on their feet again.
May 7, 2007 at 6:27 pm
K.,
I truly appreciate you helping me to understand. Now I understand more where you were coming from. 🙂
You said you have 7 daughters? Well we have something in common. I have 6. Do you have any boys? My oldest is a boy and he is in his last year at college ( civil eng.). It looks like he is planning on marrying sometime in the next year. I am glad I won’t have to worry about any of my daughters getting married too soon. 🙂 My next oldest is only 16. I know you said that one of your daughters just got married. I bet that is differen? It seems like we just give birth to them and then all of a sudden they are all grown up. The older I get the more I realize that I need to cherish every moment I have with them because time goes by so fast.
Cynthia and Vik, I grew up in a small town in Wisconsin. Everyone knew everything whether you liked it or not. 🙂 My sister and parents still live there and I like to go back and visit as often as I can.
May 7, 2007 at 6:47 pm
It seems like we just give birth to them and then they give birth to daughters of their own. I attended at the birth of my first granddaughter five years ago.
It was awesome, but, MAN, I felt old (well, for a minute or two, at least. ;))
May 7, 2007 at 7:19 pm
Corrie said:
“Cynthia and Vik, I grew up in a small town in Wisconsin. Everyone knew everything whether you liked it or not.”
THIS is what makes it hard on me; I grew up in Los Angeles, Chicago, Raleigh, Pensacola, Kansas City, and various places in Texas and Mississippi. I am NOT used to this small town stuff. I swear everybody knows what I am going to wear before I do. It’s a bit clannish, but I must say, they help whenever help is needed. The Plain Folk jump right in there, too, so… so what if the women’s hair drags the floor like a train on a wedding gown.
————————————————-
Cynthia said regarding the Chanceys:
“And hopefully, when that finally does happen, there will be plenty of folks around who have “been there and done that”, who will pick them up, give them a hug, (and who will not be TOO forthcoming with the I-told-you-so’s) and who will lovingly set them on their feet again.”
Yes, and I noticed you said “when” and not “if”. That pedestal they have Doug on is going to fall out from under him sooner or later. Maybe they’ll take the sympathy of those whom they are now lashing out at.
(I ended a sentence with a preposition. Oh well.) 🙂
May 7, 2007 at 7:49 pm
Personally I think we should be praying for the Chancey’s now. 1) Doug will burn them eventually. 2) After reading her step fathers articles on a women’s 60% valuation, Jennie probably has some real deep self esteem issues. Sad to say it, but I hope none of my daughters or nieces marry men that were home schooled under such poor guidance/lack of wisdom. 3) $42,500 is not enough income to not believe in birth control.
May 7, 2007 at 8:05 pm
“3) $42,500 is not enough income to not believe in birth control.”
Agreed, but that’s just the pay for one job….
May 7, 2007 at 8:42 pm
“3) $42,500 is not enough income to not believe in birth control.”
Depends where you live. Around here people are so bloomin’ self-sufficient it puts me to shame. They seem to live off their own gardens, fishing, and hunting plus they dry everything on a clothesline. I think I’m one of the few here who can’t sew.
But anyway, about the birth control: Where do the patriarchs and catholics get the idea that you can’t practice birth control? Now there are some *methods* of it that I question, but can’t you have a quiver full without populating a whole city? How much does it take to fill a quiver anyway? Maybe they just needs skinnier quivers.
May 7, 2007 at 8:51 pm
Vik,
Rest assured. I know crusty curmudgeon who happens to be a grammar expert and he says that ending a sentence with a preposition is perfectly fine under, about, in, after, and through.
I was going to add a smiley face but then I see that I always have smiley faces. I once read that real men don’t use emoticons in their posts. I think Mahaney said that on his blog not too long ago. 😛
May 7, 2007 at 9:27 pm
Vik Says: But anyway, about the birth control: Where do the patriarchs and catholics get the idea that you can’t practice birth control? Now there are some *methods* of it that I question, but can’t you have a quiver full without populating a whole city? How much does it take to fill a quiver anyway? Maybe they just needs skinnier quivers.
Why does it matter if we want to have so many children? Corrie has 10 for crying ot loud – I tell people we do not live in China! No one has any right to tell others how many children to have. THis is a personal decision and I think better left unsaid – another one of those issues that is just plain dumb.
May 7, 2007 at 9:30 pm
Corrie – I have two boys. They are young. And yes, our oldest married last year and just had her first child. It is very exciting.
May 7, 2007 at 9:36 pm
K wrote, “Why does it matter if we want to have so many children? Corrie has 10 for crying ot loud – I tell people we do not live in China! No one has any right to tell others how many children to have.”
K, I absolutely agree with you — people should have as many or as few children as you want (as long as they don’t abort them!) without fear of being censured. That’s one problem that I have with some of the Hyperpatriarchal groups. They preach that it’s a sin not to have as many children as you can.
May 7, 2007 at 9:39 pm
Sheesh.. the typos are telling me that it’s time for bed.
“people should have as many or as few children as you want”… 😛
May 7, 2007 at 9:53 pm
Cynthia: I have never heard any “preach” this honestly I have heard the opposite – we are under attack because we do have so many children! People are very critical i think of those who have the large families.
In fact a funny story: I had a lady at a fast food place just flip one day when I went in to order our family food – nine drinks 12 sandwiches and when I said, ” well i have seven kids” of course she looked at me like I was nuts. . . So then I said well, actually there are 8 – we are on our way to see the one that is married – so then she said ” I did not think peple still “did that anymore” (she meant have large families) – so then I told her how all of our children are adopted except one . . . she got very quiet and said she did not know how to respond to that – I chuckled and told her I knew that – that is why I told her that- it quieted her very quickly. I don’t go around routinely and announce that (I don’t want my kids to feel like they are on display – they know they are adopted adn we discuss it as a family) – anyway, my only point is it is hard enough as Christians to defend ourselves to non -Christians but to defend ourselves to fellow believers. I think that is crazy – and I am talking on both sides of the coin here . . .and the people i know feel the same way our family does. I sure do hope that I would never put someone down because they only have one or two children – first of all we don’t even know “why” – maybe that is all they could have. ON the flip side, please just know we just love each and everyone of our blessings. In fact, if you had told me 8 years ago I would be the mother of 8 – I would have laughed at you! all the way home!
May 7, 2007 at 10:08 pm
There are people who preach this. But, it ‘s nobody’s business but you and your husband’s how many or how few kids you have, though some busy-body-biddies seem to make it their business, LOL.
And, congratulations on your eight — where I grew up families that size were not uncommon not so long ago. Me, I have only two, and one that I miscarried, but my girls are giving me plenty of grandchildren — 5 so far, with the youngest born just six weeks ago. 🙂
May 7, 2007 at 11:43 pm
K said:
“Why does it matter if we want to have so many children? Corrie has 10 for crying ot loud – I tell people we do not live in China! No one has any right to tell others how many children to have. THis is a personal decision and I think better left unsaid – another one of those issues that is just plain dumb.”
K, excuse me very much, but would you like to tell me exactly where I said people should tell other people how many children they should have? No, don’t waste your time. You know why? Because I DIDN’T say it. Just like with the white sheet issue, you assume people are talking about YOU or people like you. I swear you read more into what people say than ANYBODY I know. In fact, more than everybody here put together!! You make me want to swear.
I thought you didn’t have time for this blog, anyway.
To put the record straight (I almost said “knucklehead”), I wanted a lot more kids than I’ve got. I was a medical nightmare for pregancy and couldn’t. Hey, I know what! Let me pretend that you are rubbing it in my face that I couldn’t have more! Yeah yeah, that’s it. You’re bragging about how many children you got because you just kneeeew I couldn’t. How about that?
Reading into what people say goes both ways, sister!
May 7, 2007 at 11:50 pm
Now, back to the quiver issue. We’ve established that I wasn’t talking about forcing people not to have kids. I am talking about forcing women to have kids (for the record, I KNOW there are women who don’t want anymore but think it’s sin not to. This applies to those women, not people who want more, okay people?)
I was trying to make a point that even a quiver has its limits, and why can’t you have a lot of kids or as many as you want or can afford without being forced to go past that? Where is that supposed to be in the Bible?
I realize money isn’t the main issue when it comes to having kids, but it IS an issue, and sometimes it’s just wise to postpone a little. And dont’ read into that, K. Just don’t answer at all.
May 8, 2007 at 12:10 am
Corrie said:
“I was going to add a smiley face but then I see that I always have smiley faces. I once read that real men don’t use emoticons in their posts. I think Mahaney said that on his blog not too long ago.”
How did you and Cynthia get smiley faces with red mouths? I want mine to have red mouths, too. I saw on LaShawna’s (sp) post on illegals that she had an “angry” emoticon, and somebody here had a cool “shocked” looking one. How do you make the one with the glasses, with the number 8? I’ll try: 😎
le’see,
😮
:-O
😯
sorry but this is the only way I can find out since I can’t edit.
May 8, 2007 at 12:18 am
Vik,
Good questions on the Quiverfull doctrine.
I am not offended at all by your questions. I have 10 children (I have had a total of 17 pregnancies; 15 of them in 16 years- 1 was a stillborn and the rest were miscarriages from 6 to 14 weeks). So, I know a little bit about all the of the fears, struggles, doubts, questions, etc. (Ages of children are: just turned 1, 3, 5, 7, 9, 11, 13, 14, 16, and 21).
I think it boils down to one’s attitude. It is a heart issue. Not everyone’s family is going to look the same. Each person is made up differently.
I have problems with some who seem to be almost racing to have as many children as they can as close together as they can. I know people that actually limit breastfeeding or don’t breastfeed at all so they can have as many children in the least amount of time. It really is a pride kind of thing.
I have seen some situations where the children are not cared for like they should be and the moms are complaining that CPS is called on them by the neighbors on a regular basis. Well, if you have a bunch of little children hanging from trees in the wintertime with no shoes on, I can see why. 🙂
After all, you have 1 mom taking care of many little ones, trying to be the Proverbs 31 woman (from scratch food-maker, sex goddess with a sizzling hot body, patient at all times, never letting her candle go out at night, etc), many times on a very small income, with little or no help, and with the attitude that everything is her responsibility: the happiness of her husband, children, the care of her children, the cleanliness of the house is all on her shoulders (can anyone say Debi Pearl?). In fact, if a toilet needs to be replaced and your husband doesn’t want to do it, then that is your responsibility. That is what you are there for.
No one woman can do ALL this and have a ton of children. Nursing babies takes a lot of time. Children who need to be taught takes a lot of time. LAUNDRY takes a lot of time (Amen???!!!). Something has got to give. If the husband is taught that helping with the care of the children is not his job and that evenings are his to relax and lay on the couch, then you have a woman who is stretched to the limit.
There are many teachings in the *hyper* movement that hurt families and especially QF families. The big craze in the recent past has been Debi Pearl’s book, Created To Be His Helpmeet. Don’t get me started.
My children are not even that close together (the closest is 18 months, most are 20 mos. to 24 mos.) and I know I am NOT superwoman, although I try! Hardly any of the moms in the QF movement can afford help and unfortunately the ones (or their husbands) who are speaking at homeschool conventions on the “blessings of the letting the Lord plan your family” are pretty set financially and the mother has a LOT of help with childcare and housework. Just not realistic for most of us.
And then you have families that are on welfare that say that it would be sin for them to use birth control. It is not a good testimony. They just keep on having children even though the father has no job and hasn’t had one for a long time.
So, I have come to the conclusion that each family has to go before the Lord and seek His will for their lives. If they are selfish and want the big fancy house with the fancy cars and nice vacations and they don’t want children to get in the way, then I trust the Lord will work in their hearts. For the most part, there is a lot of burden put on moms in this movement and some very unrealistic and unbiblical expectations.
May 8, 2007 at 12:20 am
😦 (colon, hyphen, parantheses)
😛 (colon, hyphen, the letter ‘P’)
May 8, 2007 at 12:20 am
May 8, 2007 at 12:21 am
Oops! Not the angry one. Don’t know how to do the angry face. So, I had better just do another smiley face! 🙂
May 8, 2007 at 12:29 am
GRRRR….Where is that angry face when you need one???
I just wrote a post in response to the whole QF thing and it didn’t show up!
:X
Vik, here is the page for all the emoticons. Have at it! 😆
May 8, 2007 at 12:30 am
codex.wordpress.org/Using_smilies
Ha! WordPress just told me I am posting comments too quickly and to slow down!
May 8, 2007 at 12:48 am
http://www.credenda.org/issues/18-4husbandry.php
Vik,
Here is an article written by Doug Wilson on birth control. I think you may be surprised.
And, after I get over the frustration of having my post lost in cyberspace, I may just write up another one.
But, basically, Doug Wilson said a lot of the things I said. Motivation. Heart attitude.
I also went into a lot of the pressures and expectations put on homeschooling moms of many by books like Debi Pearls, Created To Be His Helpmeet. Don’t get me started! There is a lot of pressure to be the sizzling sex goddess with the perfect body, the Proverbs 31 woman who does everything froms scratch, has a beautifully decorated home, sews her own clothes, is always patient, kind and FULL of energy and never lets her candle go out at night. Couple this with the thoughts of *some* that it is not a husband’s job to help care for his children. When he gets home at night, it should be slippers, pipe, cool drink and couch time for him, and you have a woman bent for a nervous breakdown.
I have seen women who do not breastfeed or severely limit breastfeeding so they can have as many children in as little time as possible. They wonder why CPS is called on them all the time by their neighbors. Well, when your children are running around the neighborhood in March with no shoes on and no coats on and your toddler is in the middle of the road, that really is not a hard thing to comprehend.
I also know families where the father has not worked for a long time and doesn’t even try and get a job but they keep on having kids because it would be a sin to stop. All the while they are on welfare for the support of their growing family. It is NOT a good testimony.
I have 10 children and I try to be Superwoman (actually, it would be Elektra) but I get frustrated because I can’t be everything I am *supposed* to be and still nurse babies and teach multiple grades and have my laundry done. Right now I am painting the rooms in our new home and I have to do that when everyone is sleeping. I don’t get much sleep.
Also, the people telling us how to live, are the people who are very set financially and their wives have a lot of paid help for childcare and housework. There is no way that a woman with very little money coming in can think about trying to model her life after a woman who has this kind of advantage. But, many do.
I think there are a lot of teachings in the “hyper” side that cause a lot of problems for QF homeschooling moms.
May 8, 2007 at 1:18 am
Corrie, Doug Wilson’s article is fantastic. He said what I was trying to say, or what I THOUGHT I said, anyway. I know mothers who are expected to keep having babies, breastfeed, homeschool, AND be ready at any moment for “hospitality”.
Now my kids are 7.5, 9, & 10 and can do anything I can do. When I’m sick, they cook, clean, do laundry and dishes, take care of pets, stay quiet, and work on any school work they can without me. I taught them when they were very young, which at the time took a lot longer than doing it myself, but oh has it ever paid off. They are such good kids, and usually pretty cheerful about boring ole chores.
I mention that because I think some of these women have so many kids in a row that they hardly have time to teach the older ones before another one comes along, and they’re too busy taking care of the younger ones and being “hospitable” day and night. I think I’d secretly go have my tubes tied if it got to the point where I was going to lose my mind, like some women I know who are about to.
The thing many of these groups forget is that in Proverbs 31, that woman had SERVANT GIRLS! Sure, I have a dishwasher and washing machine, but you can’t give them orders to do anything other than they’re made to do. I don’t think having older kids always taking care of the younger ones is very kind, either. Sometimes, sure. My oldest cousin still says she will never have kids because she, at a young age until grown up, was forced to take care of the younger ones *all the time* and had little time to pursue anything for herself.
There’s just lots to look at in this subject of quivers. I had all I could, not all I wanted. Some have all they want, and not all they can. I think the Holy Spirit’s leading is a big factor here — when you start having kids out of guilt, it’s time to stop.
——————————-
Let’s see if this comes out angry: >-(
May 8, 2007 at 1:23 am
Nope, didn’t work. I’ll have to go check out the face page. Jen’s gonna kill us when she gets back and sees a hundred silly face posts!
————————-
I said:
“I know mothers who are expected to keep having babies, breastfeed, homeschool, AND be ready at any moment for “hospitality”.
Oh yeah, I forgot to add: and be an alert, alluring wife, like you said.
8-|
8-D
8-(
Just practicing, might as well not waste a post.
May 8, 2007 at 7:01 am
“I have seen women who do not breastfeed or severely limit breastfeeding so they can have as many children in as little time as possible. They wonder why CPS is called on them all the time by their neighbors. Well, when your children are running around the neighborhood in March with no shoes on and no coats on and your toddler is in the middle of the road, that really is not a hard thing to comprehend. ”
So true. And, money IS a consideration here. When a woman’s husband has a good job, and they can afford this many kids without resorting to medicaid or foodstamps (or, welfare– yes, working parents are eligible too, if they have more kids than income) that’s one thing, and everybody praises her in the gates, but just let Mom show up in the supermarket checkout line with nine kids and foodstamps, and the busybodybiddies will be tsk-tsking.
If Mom and kids have dark hair and eyes, they will also be tsk-tsking about those Mexican Catholic illegal immigrants who are taking over the country.
If the family is black, they will be muttering words like “welfare queen”, even if no food stamps are in sight and Mom is wearing head-doily and a wedding ring.
And if the Mom is white and the kids are black, better call 911, because half a dozen Mrs. Busybodybiddies will have just passed out in checkout lane # 5 from an old-fashioned attack of the vapors.
May 8, 2007 at 8:33 am
Vik,
I am glad you liked Doug Wilson’s article. I thought it was good and balanced. 😀
I know there are many who are QF to the core who think that any sort of birth control is wrong and any avoidance of pregnancy is wrong who will not like it. 😕
May 8, 2007 at 8:41 am
UMMM – Vik . . . I am SORRY. Nothing seems to come out quite right on emails or blogs – I did not say you said it – I am saying that OTHERS do to my face . . .that was my only point.
Hey if we had not adopted we only could have one because of my medical problems – sigh . . . I am sorry I offended you sweetie (and that is meant to be nice not sarcastic) I am sitting here feeling pretty bad for upsetting you 😦
May 8, 2007 at 8:45 am
“the for crying out loud” comment was unnecessary. And I am sorry for that too . . . please understand it goes both ways – I have been on both sides of this fence. And many fences for that matter 🙂
grovel, grovel, grovel (does this work?)
and no i don’t have time – I had a few minutes while I was working my home job last night so I responded – just no time during the day:) except this second!
May 8, 2007 at 8:47 am
CJ,
You know the number one comment I get when I am out in public with all of my children?
Are you ready?
“They are all SO CLEAAAANNNNN!!!!”
I think people expect children from large families to have snot running down their faces, dirty nails, dirty clothings and uncombed hair.
Anyway, I always laugh when people say that to me. They say other things to me but I cannot say them in this forum with mixed company. 😳 (supposed to be a blushing face if the text doesn’t work!)
May 8, 2007 at 8:48 am
You know, K… those folks criticized you to your face for having a big family, are just the “flip side” of the folks who would have criticized you for only having ONE child, if you hadn’t adopted the others. It just goes to show that you can’t please everybody, no matter how hard you try. There will always be nosy people who criticize and speculate.
May 8, 2007 at 8:56 am
Well, it’s hard enough to keep TWO kids clean!
I remember when Arnold and I and our two girls, ages 2 and 5, drove from Kansas to New Jersey for his brother’s wedding. It was summer, and we were hot and tired (no AC in the car), and we had just crossed the Jersey line. We decided to stop at a service station and freshen up before continuing on to Arnold’s aunt’s house. I had just washed both girls, and dressed the youngest in her new white sundress, and was buttoning her sister’s top, when I heard a splashing sound. The two year old had gone into the bathroom stall, and hooked the door behind her, and was playing in the toilet…..
May 8, 2007 at 8:59 am
K,
Great use of the emoticons! LOL
Cynthia,
You make a great point. I know so many people who just assume that people who have 1 or 2 children are limiting their children with birth control. And you are right about the nosy people who speculate and criticize.
Having a large family has broken me of my deep-seated need to have the approval of man. Well, almost broken me. I still struggle with that one, to be perfectly honest.
I get a lot of comments, mostly nice ones. Very few of them are not so nice. Sometimes I get evil looks from (usually older ladies) who look at me with disgust as I am checking out at Walmart with all my children in tow and I am big and pregnant. 😈
One time two older ladies were tittering about me and how I was pregnant again and that they were sure that those were all my children. One of them said that it was “just disgusting”. The other one said that I must not have any brains. I turned around and smiled and told them that “I may be stupid but I am NOT deaf.” You should have seen the color they turned! 😆
Then, some of them are downright crude. All of the crude comments are from men. All of them are too crude to post on this forum……even for me! (That was for you Jen!) 🙄
May 8, 2007 at 9:02 am
OK… HOW are you doing those emoticons???? ESPECIALLY the rolling eyes????
All I can manage are the basics! 🙂
May 8, 2007 at 10:10 am
You know, K… those folks criticized you to your face for having a big family, are just the “flip side” of the folks who would have criticized you for only having ONE child, if you hadn’t adopted the others. It just goes to show that you can’t please everybody, no matter how hard you try. There will always be nosy people who criticize and speculate.
That is EXACTLY what I was trying to say. And Corrie yes, you are right people say and terrible things. Mind you my children don’t really look adopted . . . somle like me, some look like my husband but people always ask if they are “all mine” – I even had an acquaintance one time ask me who was “really mine” – she was very rude nad persistent – finally I emailed her and said look if my children heard you say this it would be really upsetting for them. I agree Corrie about trying not to please man and God and yes, I struggle with that too. Busybodies is a true statement.
May 8, 2007 at 10:22 am
[Jen delete this — you don’t need any more of these]
😉 🙂 :-0 >:-) 😛 :-V :-X
May 8, 2007 at 10:24 am
[delete this one too]
:-> 😦 :-0 😕
May 8, 2007 at 10:46 am
Wow, K! That is really cruel of that person to ask you that sort of thing, especially if it would be in front of your children. That is the kind of info that YOU should volunteer, if you ask me. Of course it would be upsetting to your children, since they are ALL YOURs and you love them.
I know most people don’t mean to be rude but some of the stuff they say, especially in front of the children, is not good.
I remember a few times standing in line at a store or being out and having my 4 little girls in tow and my newly born son. (My oldest son wasn’t there with us at the time; he must have been at home or out with dad) They would say something like this, “Oh! You FINALLY got your boy! You can stop now, right?!” My girls would be having that sort of “what am I? Chopped liver? An accident? ” I would just say that we had finally gotten a baby and that if we had all girls, I would be thrilled. We weren’t trying for anything!
May 8, 2007 at 10:53 am
http://www.codex.wordpress.org/Using_smilies
Lynn,
Go to the above link and you will find all the codes for the emoticons.
I have to do this quick before Jen gets back and sees that we have been like naughty little school children whose teacher steps out for a moment! 😀
BTW, and the use of emoticons PROVES beyond a shadow of a doubt that I am NOT a feminist. 😉 Just remember that!
May 8, 2007 at 11:16 am
I see why people’s angry emoticons aren’t working. You are using a capital X instead of lower case x, according to the chart I printed out on the link up there. Let’s see:
😡
Okay I hope that works out. The “evil” and “twisted” ones are just a tad too… evil and twisted for me to use.
May 8, 2007 at 11:24 am
Yay, it worked! That’s what started this whole mess. I wanted the red-mouthed emoticon, and then thought of a few others I wanted. Didn’t know there were so many!
🙄
😆
😥
😳
Anyway, K–okay. I am sorry I said I wanted to swear and for almost calling you a knucklehead. Maybe in the future, just say (before getting angry): “So what you mean is…” or maybe, “Are you referring to me?” or something to give us a chance to vindicate ourselves. It IS hard, this kind of communication, and not being able to edit makes it harder.
If we didn’t support other family members, my husband and I really wanted to adopt a little girl or two from China. But they don’t let you after age 50 (you both have to be younger than that), and it’ll probably take that long for us to afford it. So I’ll leave that up to my kids to do.
May 8, 2007 at 11:47 am
Corrie said:
“I think people expect children from large families to have snot running down their faces, dirty nails, dirty clothings and uncombed hair.”
You have just described the large family down the street, who as of a short while ago, have been evicted. Hallegloria! I don’t like finding other people’s toddlers and preschoolers in my dogpen. They spend most of their time in the middle of the street though, and their pitbull is what has caused the mailman to skip our neighborhood numerous times. I’d have to go pick up my mail myself at the P.O.! I live a decent neighborhood except for those guys.
On the flip side, right after we moved here and before we had kids, we were visiting churches. At this Baptist church, these people had 13 kids and nine of them were on one pew with the parents, in descending order of age. Not a peep! Even the baby on the mom’s lap was quiet, though wiggly. I told myself then and there that if SHE could do it–keep all those kids in line–then I could do it (we thought we couldn’t have any kids, at the time, but I held out hope).
And ever since my kids were tots, I’ve had people give my kids money or candy on their way out at restaurants and also in stores for their quietness and cheerfulness. Once, at Christmastime, my yungins were the only ones not screaming or running around this one store–and they were the youngest–and this very distinguished looking lady came up and gave them each a quarter and was just singing their praises. My kids were young, but they knew what money was. (I told them not to get used to being paid for good behavior!).
Many people were surprised that I enjoyed my children. We never had such a thing as “terrible twos” or “horrible threes” or whatever. Maybe it’s because I didn’t really realize that kids are SUPPOSED to have those things! 😯
I nipped attitudes in the bud before they ever had a chance to escalate into anything worse.
Anyway, point is, some people get their ideas on big families based on what they see on my street. Thankfully the plain folk around here, who have large families, don’t see it that way. Most of these groups here, by the way, don’t think it’s sin to use birth control. Surprise, huh.
I think large families like you gals’ above run is what people need to see more of.