Those of you familiar with the Botkin sisters and Vision Forum will be aquainted with the idea that a daughter is supposed to be practicing her “helpmate” skills on her father. These groups believe that women are in the submissive position in a God-ordained heirarchy: the husband is prophet, priest and king of the house, and the wife is his submissive assistant, there to fulfill whatsoever duties the husband decides she should perform. She was made to serve him.
The Botkin sisters have written an influential book including chapters where, oh, say, readers learn “facts” like how Karl Marx got feminism going (oooh, that lovely either/or argument: either you agree with Karl Marx and the Communist revolution that killed millions of Russians, or you are completely against feminism).
The Botkins, published and highly lauded by Vision Forum, also teach us that women should not want to be treated as equals to men, that women were not created to operate outside of male authority. They spend time criticizing single women missionaries like Amy Carmichael, since, after all, she left home and was thus operating outside of a father or husband’s authority. Vision Forum and the Botkins believe that daughters are helpmates to their fathers until they are married upon which the authority is then transfered to the new husband. They preach against daughters moving out to “be on their own,” claiming it an unBiblical lie, etc.
I really don’t want to bash the Botkin girls. They are very young women, they’ve been brought up in the hyper-patriarchal subculture… I mean, come on! They are simply strong women who needed something to do, and so picked one of the few things available for women who need to speak up in that little boxed-in world. The only “speaking up” allowed is the sort that approves of the system, so of course they’re going to promote the views of their father. I knew everything when I was in my early twenties too, and if I’d had the access to a publisher like they did, you’d better believe there would be a book or two out there that I’d be mightily regretting right now. I want to offer them the same grace I’d wincingly be hoping for now.
That said, I still think their book is full of misapplied zeal, “way big” twisting, tweaking, and flat-out bodyslamming of Scripture and some horrific historical revisionism, to boot. Grace doesn’t take back the fact that a lot of young women have read the book and are following it’s advice, thinking themselves in sin if they entertain thoughts of leaving home, thoughts of having a life beyond that of what is allowed by father. How many young women have I heard trying to shove down the idea that they are called to be missionaries, thinking themselves rebellious and/or tempted all because they are single, so God can’t possibly be calling them to the mission field, right? Books like these have an effect, and it’s not a good one.
For those of you familiar with this interesting subgroup, you may have some encouragement or words of wisdom to share with this reader. She writes below,
Molly,Hi! Thanks so much for posting your e-mail address. If you aren’t able to address this, I understand completely; I just thought it was worth a try! I actually only recently stumbled across your blog and have found that it’s exactly what I need right now. I’ve been knocking my head against Ephesians for some time now, and a few other verses as well, and I’ve found your reflections and research especially useful.I followed your links to the True Womanhood blog as well, and the discussion topic on the Botkin girls’ book and video was also something I needed to hear. I’ve been a commenter for some time on a blog called Domestic Felicity; it’s actually run by a very sweet girl who is an Orthodox Jew, but because she took a little while to identify as such, she unintentionally built up something of a Fundamentalist readership as wellOne of their number is a girl who is fifteen years old, and an ardent devotee of the Botkins’. Some of her comments just break my heart because it’s so abundantly clear she truly believes everything they teach, and I have an almost inexplicable grief for her right now.
I finally did speak up the other night when one of her posts likened a girl’s time at home being a help(meet) to her father as preparation for marriage, and after exchanging two more comments I told her I felt that that blog probably wasn’t the best forum for discussion because Anna, who runs it, doesn’t believe what we do, and I felt we were a bit out of line having that particular discussion on her blog.The actual point of this e-mail is that the young lady, [Name Withheld], has asked me to e-mail her and discuss this further. So far, I have only contacted her concerning two passages she brought up as examples for stay-at-home-daughterhood (Psalm 45 and Proverbs 7:11. Neither one actually seemed to apply, and I was more confused than anything!) and as much as I want to explore this with her,I really am not sure if it’s best. I have next to no experience with Fundamentalist Christians, and everything I do know is gleaned second hand from blogs like yours and comments like [Name Withheld]. I am also extremely wary about acting as any kind of counselor to a girl who is still under the authority of her parents (I did tell her that before she read the actual e-mail I wanted her to grab the nearest parent and clear it with him/her. I don’t even know if they believe as she does or not; I just know she read and tries to follow the Botkins’ teachings, and she believes they’re what God wants for her life).I guess what I’m asking you is, do you have any idea at all how I might best approach this? I don’t actually desire to change her mind; I just want to be in a place that God might be able to use me to open her eyes and her heart, if it’s His timing for it. I did link her to that first post in True Womanhood on visionary daughters and I might try to start there, discussing that, but . . . I really have no idea how. I’ve been pretty bound up in this for the past 48 hours, and after praying about it for a long time and looking up some pretty scary threats of what happens to teachers who lead people astray(!) I finally came upon 2 Timothy 4: 2-4 and thought that was scary too, so I do feel it might be possible I am meant to do this (such conviction, eh?!)If you are too busy to answer this, I do understand; even a general blog post on how to approach this sort of thinking would be a great help, really, since I’ve had so very little exposure to it, and am really at a loss as to how to proceed.With love,[Name Withheld]
The Botkin Girls Website
Posted by Anette on January 8, 2008 at 11:18 pm
Molly,
I,ve been reading your blog for some time now. Found you via my husband’s blog – Windblownhope.wordpress.com .
After reading this post and the letter by this incredible caring person, I wanted to comment. Not that I have any real advice, except that I will pray for her for wisdom. I’ve been a social worker for 15 years and the little bit that I have just now read, give me goosebumps. It open so many doors for the abuse and misuse of innocent young girls.
My father has taught me that every girl has the same value as any boy, and that a girl has the right and the ability to do anything with her life and reach any goal. It gave me so much courage and made it possible for me to also trust our Heavenly Father.
One of our favorite bible qoutes in regard to the relationship between the husband and wife is that the wife should submit to the husband, AND he should love her as Jesus loves the church. For me, it is easy to submit to somebody that loves you so much that he would sacrifice everything for you. It makes you feel safe and it helps you to grow towards the fullness of what God wanted for you. (yes He wanted more for you, as a girl, than to always be a secondrate citisen to all the men in His kingdom – He paid the same price for you that He paid for every man!)
My heart go out to all the girls who is falling into this misconception. I will pray for you for wisdom and I will build, with renewed strengh, this freedom and knowledge into my own two daughters.
Thanks for an incredible blog
Anette
Posted by pistolpete on January 9, 2008 at 12:13 am
You clearly identify and appropriately critique teachings on “womanhood” that pervert the core gospel teaching on our relationship with Christ and with each other. I’m not familiar with much of these writings, but as you describe them, I become both saddened and upset at how Scripture can be so distorted.
I would say, however, that the idea of “voluntary submission” need not be either demeaning or abusive. There are many intelligent, self-actualized, spiritually mature women, who are freely opting to take a “complimentary” stance toward their husbands. Many couples are finding this mutually rewarding, contributing to a long-lasting, loving relationship
The Bible says we are to “submit to one another”. First, to submit to God in Christ. Submission itself is God’s expectation for us (both men and women). The question becomes how we submit – to whom and in what way.
When we submit first to God in Christ, all other forms of submission tend to fall into place in healthy ways. The boundary lines fall in pleasant places.
But what about when a husband fails to love his wife “as Christ loved the Church”. What if he abuses her? Does she still submit to him? As a pastor, I’ve felt led to step in and help a woman physically, emotionally, and spiritually separate from an abusive relationship. I would in no way tell a woman in such a situation to “submit” to a man who is violating the temple of the Lord that is her body.
But these abusive cases shouldn’t set the rule. Healthy, holy relationships can and do emerge out of mutual, complimentary submission to God – and to each other.
Posted by barbara on January 9, 2008 at 5:25 am
i am appalled, sadded and frightened out of my wits that this is becoming the face of Christian Homeschooling
thanks Molly for your courage to speak out, and post about your struggles.
blessings
Barbara
Posted by Headmistress’s Office » warning: controversy ahead on January 9, 2008 at 6:24 am
[...] http://adventuresinmercy.wordpress.com/2008/01/08/readers-write-advice-for-talking-with-im-daddys-he... [...]
Posted by One who has been burned on January 9, 2008 at 6:32 am
It is so sad and frightening to witness this type of totalitarianism arise within Christianity. These individuals that love to micromanage those of others is manipulatingly obnoxious at best and horrifying to say the least. Whatever happened to women being joint-heirs in Christ?
The Lord does not give us all the same gifts and abilities. I am not Roman Catholic, but look at Mother Theresa! The fruits of that woman’s labor and her love of Christ are still a witness to many and a conviction to more.
Even looking at the Bible we have been given many examples of talented women that were all submitted to God first.
This whole thing of submission has been totally warped by these sick minds that want power. Submission is to Jesus Christ … both male and female.
Saddened …
Posted by Psalmist on January 9, 2008 at 6:48 am
Bottom line, for me, is that NO ONE is supposed, according to the Bible, to be a man’s EZER KENEGDO (strong help exactly corresponding [to him]) except his wife. Not his daughters. Not his sons. Not his sisters, not his friends or neighbors or the women of the church. Wife ONLY.
Sorry, but I believe this “daughter as helpmeet to father” teaching is fundamentally wrong and a danger both to families and to the integrity of the true gospel of Jesus Christ. It needs to be exposed (thanks for doing that, Molly!) and refuted.
Posted by sue on January 9, 2008 at 7:24 am
Off topic..But what about the boys?? Are they allowed to be normal? Do they get to play baseball, go to college, meet their spouse without their fathers approval? I can’t seem to wrap my head around the way the girls are treated. When the boys go off to the real world, how can they reconcile between the way their mom and sisters are treated and the rest of the world? Or do they have the “Boys rule and girls drool” imbedded so deeply that it doesn’t bother them??
Posted by Shauna on January 9, 2008 at 7:42 am
Let’s not be hasty in suggesting that this extreme view is becoming “the face of American homeschooling.”
Posted by bonnie on January 9, 2008 at 8:32 am
I’m glad you brought this woman’s question here, Molly. In *my* (Christian) homeschooling group many women are involved in “Bible” studies like Created to be His Helpmeet. I want to gag every time a post comes through the forum. I want to write emails exposing this distorted way of living “biblically,” but for obvious reasons I don’t! I’ve often thought of exposing this way of thinking for what it is, and wondered if it would do any good.
I heard (on the God journey [thanks!]) the other day that “living in the freedom of grace” is sometimes a hard place to get to. I had to go through similar legalism within this Vision Forum/Patriarchal/ Fundie-con stuff just so God could *teach* me, and make me look a little more like Him. I see now that God often times will lead us through these places because there is much work that needs to be done!
Concerning what pistolpete said, it sounds good, and it sounds right, but I think something is amiss. The problem with “voluntary submission” toward husbands- (apart from the call for all believers to submit to one another) is that it starts as a false teaching. To misconstrue what the Bible is saying and overemphasize the “woman is to submit” part (while de-emphasizing other parts), leadsto a “voluntary submission ” based on a misunderstanding.
I might be way off, but this is how I understand it.
Posted by Jemila on January 9, 2008 at 8:47 am
What a twisted understanding of life, the bible and God. Molly, I think you are exactly right that the young women who promote such views with ardent passion are young women with…PASSION…and leadership gifts, who have been led to the believe this is the truth, with their genuine idealism and strength are set about changing the world, in their own way.
Saying a woman *should* submit to her husband pretty much takes the *voluntary* out of it where a woman desires to please and to be godly.
Anyway, the interpretation of submission as husband=tie-breaker and (hopefully benign) ruler isn’t in the bible at all! Whatever form of submission/sacrifice is in the bible is both cultural and undefined either for what it meant then or if it means anything now.
Why can’t we all love each other with a hear of seeking the wellbeing of the Other instead of arguing about rules and roles? Is that not the freedom of Christ?
Posted by Lindsey @ enjoythejourney on January 9, 2008 at 9:39 am
It cerainly is not the face of American homeschooling but it is getting more and more attention in the homeschooling circles. NCHE (the biggest hs’ing advocate in NC) advertises Vision Forum stuff constantly. We have the “patriocentric” type speakers at our conferences now, and it is quickly becoming a more than tiny fringe group among conservative Christian homeschoolers.
.
Sure, there is no major crisis but I’m keeping an eye on it. Those folks at VF do not represent me or my family, or our homeschool by a LONG SHOT.
Posted by sunniemom on January 9, 2008 at 9:45 am
The Bible is full of “Thou shalt not” and “Thus sayeth the Lord” and “As it is written”. Our obedience and/or application of those principles is always voluntary- it is the consequences of those choices that are usually unavoidable.
It is, IMO, an aspect of human nature (not just Fundies or evangelicals) to take a perfectly valid idea and jump off a cliff with it. It doesn’t negate the validity of the original concept, but it does illustrate the need for moderation and balance- which are also advocated in the Bible.
Jesus Christ was the perfect example of a ’servant-leader’. While He had all authority as God-manifest-in-the-flesh, He humbled Himself again and again- ministering to those the world had rejected, washing the feet of His disciples, and offering Himself up to an undeserved death. We are not abdicating our own free will or individualism by choosing to live our lives as examples (leadership) *and* as servants to others. That IMO is the principle of ‘voluntary submission’.
As for the posted email, I understand the trepidation of being a ‘counselor’ to a girl who is still a dependent at home. My advice is prayer and discretion- it is always safe, IMO, to point folks to the Bible, and let the Holy Spirit do His job- to lead and guide unto all truth.
Posted by Alaina on January 9, 2008 at 9:59 am
I really appreciate that this issue is being brought to light in many different arenas. Saying that young girls are supposed to be their father’s ‘helpmeet’ is not in line with biblical teaching and really scares me. Not only is this taking the word ‘helpmeet’ and applying a gender specific definition, but it is also scary what this teaches young men and boys in the home. They can play, have fun, go out, but young women must stay at home?
.
If young women do not feel the desire to go to college, fine. If they live with their parents until getting married, fine. But it is in no way okay to say that this is how women MUST be.
.
Regardless of views people have on gender submission in marriage, young girls are not wives, they are young girls and should have opportunities.
.
This makes me nervous, very nervous.
Posted by tiffany on January 9, 2008 at 10:42 am
I only had time to skim the other comments, so I may be repeating what has already been said. But I though I should chime in as one of the resident vocal conservatives around here.
First to say I wholly believe that the Bible teaches that Wives are to submit to their Husbands as unto the Lord. And the Husbands are to Love their Wives as Christ loved the Church. I don’t think it is cultural or anything of that nature.
But to the best of my knowledge (and I’ll be the first to admit it isn’t perfect) no where does it say Daughters submit to your Fathers as unto the Lord. It DOES say Children honor your Father AND your Mother that you might dwell long in the land. To me the Bible is clear that the Husband is the head of the wife and the PARENTS are the head of the CHILDREN (not just daughters) although the relationship between parent and child is not described in the same way as that between Husband and Wife by a long shot.
This is what I think it comes down to: Principles vs. Methods. The principle of children honoring your parents is a good and right one. A few families chose the METHODS of having their daughters stay at home. I can see this working great for certain families depending on their circumstances. (Family business to participate in? Health concerns that would make a career difficult? No real direction yet on a career? A great desire on the daughters part to be with her family as long as possible knowing that the season will be ending shortly? Poor health of another family member? The list could go on and on). So I totally see where a daughter staying at home could be a wonderful and beautiful and God-honoring fulfillment of “Children Honor your Father and your Mother”. What I fear has been done here though is a sort of “This method worked great for us. This is the way that it NEEDS to be done.” Thus turning a perfectly acceptable METHOD into a PRINCIPLE.
The huge problem with this is something I usually refer to as First and Second things. (borrowed from Lewis). The basic idea is that in life there are things which are more important than others. And as such those are the things to be of First importance. But there are other things which are important and should be treated as such, but they need to remain as second importance. When you elevate something of seconded importance over that of something of first importance you loose the good of both. In this case I think it has been the First thing of Principles has been elevated over the Second thing of Methods and then being taught to others and thus are loosing the good of both.
Sorry to write a book. Been meaning to blog about this for awhile.
Posted by tiffany on January 9, 2008 at 10:43 am
Forgot to put in paragraph breaks. Sorry. Kinda hard to read.
Posted by Shauna on January 9, 2008 at 10:59 am
The ideas are being promoted by our state’s Christian homeschooling association as well, and it is definitely something I’m keeping an eye on, although I haven’t noticed it getting as much support in the city- and county-level homeschooling support groups (although that’s to be expected in the secular/inclusive group I’m in).
Kevin Swanson is CHEC’s executive director, and two guest speakers on his podcast “Preparing Daughters with an Economic Vision for the Household” used the terms helpmeet-in-training and helpmeet junior to describe how they are raising their daughters, the goal being to prepare them to be future helpmeets to their husbands rather than to be career women. Although I object to how they describe this as being the only biblical way to raise daughters and the compassionate condescension with which they seem to view women, it does sound like the financial management and business skills they’re teaching their daughters are valuable outside as well as inside the home and would be transferable to a career if they ever wanted or needed to work outside the home. They will probably have more practical, real-world skills than the majority of those who have received a “normal” education, although unfortunately, they’ll also have been exposed to some warped views.
Posted by mtash on January 9, 2008 at 12:14 pm
I’m not familiar with the Botkin sisters, but I am familiar with many families who undoubtedly are.
I was homeschooled in highschool. I remember being scolded once by a friend’s mother for winning a game of foosball against a male opponent. Apparently competitiveness is unfeminine. I had a hard time reconciling this mother’s idea of who God would have me be with the person that God had in fact created me to be.
I’m fiercly competitive. God made me this way. It’s not a flaw in my character, it’s a facet of His design. Praise the Lord that I didn’t allow my friend’s mother to press me into HER mold.
Today God allows me to use my competitive nature in a “helpmeet” capacity to my husband when we pursuing business for our web development company. Oh, and my hubby and I play racquet ball on a regular basis and hubby thinks the whole competitive thing is hot. His words.
Molly, I apologize for blogging on your blog, but I’m going to use your blog comments as a bit of a soap box for a moment…
Here’s the thing, the church is like a symphony. There are many, many different instruments and many different parts to be played. God is the composer and only He best knows how each part ought to be played. My job is to look to Him. I can’t just imitate the notes that my brother or sister in Christ is playing.
The amazing thing about all of this is, a harmony is more forgiving than a melody or a solo.
If we as the church continue to try to fit one another into our own molds–this is what a Christian mother looks like, this is what a Christian daughter looks like,–we lose precious parts of His glorious symphony.
Personally, I didn’t go to college and I didn’t leave home before getting married. I didn’t stay home because “that’s what women do”. I stayed home because I knew that I was just too vulnerable to the flattery of my male peers. I knew that my heart would latch on to the first guy to tell me that he loved me, so I asked my parents to help me stay away out of those situations. Interestingly, my husband didn’t tell me he loved me for the first time until two (extremely long) days after we were engaged. Not all young women are vulnerable in the same way that I was though.
Thanks, Molly. And thanks to William P. Young for the symphony analogy…
http://www.windrumors.com/9/uniformity-and-harmony/
Posted by Cassandra on January 9, 2008 at 1:30 pm
Tiffany, well spoken. I agree. I wish I could add my two cents, but with a three year old tugging on me, and supper to prepare, I am in a rush. One thing, however. I don’t believe that these women telling girls to be ‘helpmeets’ to their father is going to harm them for the rest of their lives. I don’t believe it is heresy, I don’t believe that it is distorting Scripture. It is different than the common view today, yes, but I don’t believe that it will ruin their lives. I don’t agree with all their teachings, but the outrage over them seems, somehow, misplaced to me. There are so many bigger things happening in this world…. terrorism, abortion, souls dying and going to hell. Why spend our time arguing over whether girls should stay home until they get married, or go to college? I, for one, didn’t go to college… but that’s becuase I met a man and fell in love. = ) Going to college might work for some girls. I don’t become outraged when I read about other views, however. I think there are more important things to become outraged about. = )
Posted by Leigh Ann on January 9, 2008 at 1:56 pm
I think Tiffany must be my twin or something because she took the words right out of my mouth–some ESP thing. So nice because now I don’t have to type anything at length.
Posted by Lindsey @ enjoythejourney on January 9, 2008 at 2:18 pm
Cassandra,
.
Forgive me for sounding crass, because it is really not my intention. But, I would suggest that if you did go to college or do something else when you were a young lady, you might feel differently.
.
I don’t think Molly (or me, for that matter) is outraged. We simply do not think it is good teaching to push on girls that they’re to be Daddy’s little helpmeets and not persure their OWN dreams and desires.
.
It isn’t a bad thing, no. In fact, I think that girls staying home until marriage or not going to college if that is their choice is a pretty good thing….we each have our own strengths and weaknesses.
.
But is it a good “prescription” for ALL girls to live that way?
.
No.
Posted by Kyla on January 9, 2008 at 2:36 pm
Cassandra,
This is a very potentially damaging thing to teach young women. I was homeschooled and graduated in the mid 90s, these teachings were prevalent then and I saw firsthand its destruction. The issue, in my opinion, isn’t in having your daughter stay home until marriage the danger is in how they teach young women to view themselves. Its that they are teaching impressionable young women that their self worth and purpose can only be found in pursuing a man’s vision, their husbands or their fathers. In theory it does look like a good idea. Its when these issues are played out in real life that the heartache happens. I think that a strong Father/Daughter bond is a beautiful thing, only when the father is encouraging his daughter to find her value in Christ, not in service to her father.
Posted by Cassandra on January 9, 2008 at 2:50 pm
Lindsey, I didn’t sense outrage from Molly or you, just from the whole underlying current in the comment section. Well, sometimes I do sense outrage from Molly. =) And I don’t think the fact that I didn’t go to college plays into how I feel. I almost did go to college- to major in music education, but I fell in love instead. So I see nothing wrong with girls going. I just can’t see how teaching daughters to have a strong relationship with their fathers is detrimental.
Posted by Psalmist on January 9, 2008 at 3:13 pm
The danger I see, Cassandra, is in teaching that daughters should cultivate with their fathers a relationship that Scripture shows us clearly can exist only in the husband-wife relationship.
The other danger is that the above teaching depends upon an understanding of EZER KENEGDO that is diametrically opposed to what that phrase actually means.
Posted by Lindsey @ enjoythejourney on January 9, 2008 at 4:06 pm
So Cassandra, what happens to the girls who do not have a strong father figure, yet are in the homeschool community and are told by either teaching and/or example that they’re to grow up and be Daddy’s little helpmeets?
.
Just curious. Not all homeschooling Dad’s are Doug Phillips or anything of the like. What about the Dad who gets up every day and works a factory job?
.
And for the record, I fell in love and went to college. You can do both, you know. Life isn’t as either/or as some folks in the church would have us believe.
Posted by tiffany on January 9, 2008 at 5:00 pm
Ok here, lets not put words into Cassandras mouth. I don’t think she was advocating that anyone necessarily go along with the daughters as helpmeet idea, just rather that a strong father-daughter relationship is a good thing. As such I don’t think she should be called upon to defend it.
.
Also, I don’t think she even insinuated that one can’t go to college and fall in love. But rather for her she fell in love before going to college and then opted to not go to college. I think her main point in even bringing it up in fact was that she pointed out she had planned on going to college and as such is not opposed to girls going college.
.
Lindsey, I think your suggestion that Cassandra would feel differently if she had gone to college is one based on very little fact. It assumes first of all that the college experience or experience on ones own is going to be more widely enjoyed/appreciated/desirable than that of staying home. For some this most certainly is true. But for other college was a wretched experience and an extreme waste of time and money. Beyond on that the statement (if she had done something different as a young lady she would feel differently) is a Bulverism: a logical fallacy impugning another’s arguments based upon some intrinsic part of their make up. It is like saying “you only think that because you’re a girl” Well, what can I do? Go out and change that I am a girl? No.Even if the Bulverism is true (I maybe only think that because I am a girl)no point has been proven by using it. Just because I believe that X is true only because I’m a girl, doesn’t make X automatically false. Bulverisms have no place in a discussion that hopes for any sort of understanding of each others view points. Ultimately they simply distract one from the main point and the debate turns on the origins of the beliefs rather than the if the beliefs themselves are true or false.
Posted by Lindsey @ enjoythejourney on January 9, 2008 at 5:06 pm
Tiffany I can say with absolute authority that the reason I’m so passionate to see girls go to college (if that is their wish) is because I was GIVEN the opportunity to go, and had parents who supported my doing so.
.
I also, for the record, have a child who may not ever be able to go to college due to disability.
.
So I am not a “college for everyone” advocate.
.
But as with anything else in life, you really don’t know what your talking about unless you experience it. I can say with complete confidence that having the college experience helped mold me into who I am today. I don’t even use my degree, and may never use it. I’m a stay at home mom who homeschools (and my degrees are in Elem. Ed and mathematics)
.
Again, what I’m saying is that I WAS NOT “Daddy’s little helpmeet” and I am still a very firm Christian lady. Going to college didn’t corrupt me and make me an abortion-loving feminist like the Botkin sisters and their counterparts are quasi selling in their literature and products.
.
Girls don’t need to be “protected” from a college education. If they want to stay home until marriage, that is perfectly fine if it is THEIR desire to do so. But because Daddy thinks girls shouldn’t go to college? That’s oppression.
.
Call me a feminist, or whatever you’d like, but it is oppression to teach girls they shouldn’t aspire to do things beyond being at home.
Posted by molleth on January 9, 2008 at 5:10 pm
I only have a second, but wanted to chirp in to say that I believe submission is a Christian virtue and I’m 100% not opposed to submission. Put that down in the record book, okay?
(I think what I’m opposed to is some people’s idea of what submission is).
Have you guys met girls who think their desire for missions is a sin? I have. A handful, in fact. Instead of being excited about their calling and beginning preperations, they struggle with it, thinking it a sin, worrying that if they will lose their salvation by going to the mission field!!!
.
On telling women that they are their father’s helpmates. It’s…not Biblical. The Bible doesn’t say that daughters are to fulfill the vision of their father, period. So it’s an extra-Biblical prescription, being taught *as* Biblical. (I wouldn’t really care so much if it was taught accurately, as in, “the Bible doesn’t ever say this, however we think it’s just a really darn good idea.”).
.
Teaching young women that they are in sin if they have a vision of their own…if they are not happy under the roof of their father…etc… I know some REALLY awesome fathers, and I also know some abusive and/or domineering fathers. For girls who read the Botkins, girls in BOTH homes are now going to believe that they are to stay under their father’s authority.
.
Girls with good fathers, well, they’ll probably USUALLY be set free to thrive and grow and develop into who they are. Girls with bad fathers? Fathers on a power trip? Well, it might not be so pretty. And now, thanks to the Botkins, these girls think that escaping Dad’s domain is sin.
.
Not cool. The Botkin’s teaching isn’t “dangerous” to girls from good homes who WANT to stay home anyway. The Botkin’s teaching is dangerous for other situations, though.
.
Have you ever met any young ladies who felt that they weren’t allowed to leave home? I have. I know some that are not young anymore, that live very secluded lives, women who were told that God would send them their mate if He wanted them to have one AND that leaving father’s roof is not allowed, so they stay home, mostly in the backwoods, and has God magically dropped a suitor down into their lap? Gee, funny, but He seems to have forgotten. One of these girls wanted to go to Bible College back in her early twenties, but her parents felt it would be a sin. She’s still home, and believe me, she’s bitter, but tries to stuff it down.
.
For those of us who don’t believe that woman was made to be ruled by man, the problems with the Botkin’s theology run even deeper. But even for those who DO believe that females were designed to be ruled, I would still think that the extra-Biblical stuff in the Botkins/VF camp would be a bit troubling.
.
That said, even if you are the world’s greatest VF fan, I appreciate your commenting here. I think it’s productive to hear from ALL sides on things, and I thank you guys for having the guts to speak up yo’ minds!
.
And now, back to my WAAAAAAAAAAAAY too busy life!!!!
Posted by Beth on January 9, 2008 at 5:59 pm
Well…I’ve never put a blog on my “favorite links” before, so this is new. Someone on gentlechristianmothers.com posted a link to this and I started reading and had a hard time pulling myself away to play with my six month old.
I remember reading some of “Created to be His Helpmeet” in my first year of marraige. I also remember my husband looking at me with the oddest expression when I basically asked him if he thought I was called to be dirt beneath his feet. I used Debbi’s words of course, so the question sounded better but apparently my husband saw right through the garbage. After reassuring me of my incredible worth as his wife and a gift from God (I LOVE that man), he asked me where I had gotten that nonsense. And I told him. And then I did a bit of digging and found their website and felt ill….and the rest is history.
Anyway, what a terrific, inspiring breath of fresh air.
~Beth
Posted by Kyla on January 9, 2008 at 6:17 pm
Molly: ” The Botkin’s teaching is dangerous for other situations, though. Have you guys met girls who think their desire for missions is a sin? I have. A handful, in fact. Instead of being excited about their calling and beginning preperations, they struggle with it, thinking it a sin, worrying that if they will lose their salvation by going to the mission field!!!
.
Have you ever met any young ladies who felt that they weren’t allowed to leave home? I have. I know some that are not young anymore, that live very secluded lives, women who were told that God would send them their mate if He wanted them to have one AND that leaving father’s roof is not allowed, so they stay home, mostly in the backwoods, and has God magically dropped a suitor down into their lap? Gee, funny, but He seems to have forgotten. One of these girls wanted to go to Bible College back in her early twenties, but her parents felt it would be a sin. She’s still home, and believe me, she’s bitter, but tries to stuff it down.”
Well said Molly! This is what I was trying to say. I have met these girls and its scary and heartbreaking!
Posted by Barb on January 9, 2008 at 7:14 pm
I have little to no contact with this world – the world of Vision Forum and the Bodkin Sisters. I never heard of them until I began reading blogs – I think your’s Molly was one of them, back in the day.
But all this discussion brings to mind the verse, Luke 17:2
It would be better for him to be thrown into the sea with a millstone tied around his neck than for him to cause one of these little ones to sin.
I think the sin which VF and the Bodkins is causing women (and men too if you think about these fathers placing themselves before God in their daughter’s lives) to fall into would be idolatry – placing the father before the Father.
I believe the best line of defense is to be in prayer for folks who are teaching these fallacies and treating them as Biblical imperatives.
And not that this camp of patriarchists are the enemy but Proverbs says to treat them with hospitality (25:21,22), kindness. It will be like heaping burning coal on their heads and the Lord will reward you.
I applaud your efforts to bring men and women out of this bondage of lies, Molly. I was re-born and discipled in the community of cross-cultural missions. In that community there seems to be little need or desire for patriarchy. There is a clear understanding that God uses, joyfully, men and women to bring glory to Him, directly to Him, not through another. This, what you bring to light, is saddening and maddening.
Posted by Cassandra on January 9, 2008 at 7:55 pm
Lindsey….as I pause…. I think you are taking my words the wrong way. I have said before that I don’t agree with all of their teachings. I do think that different situations call for different solutions. I do believe that you can fall in love and go to college- just for me, it was falling in love. I know many, many girls that fall in love and go to college. My life just didn’t take that turn. I am not opposed to girls going to college. I don’t advocate all of Vision Forums teachings. However, I do beleive that in the world we live in, the father/daughter relationship is looked down on, sometimes even scorned. I think Vision Forum, and the Botkins sisters are trying to restore that relationship. Now, I want to emphasize again… I don’t agree with %100 of their teachings, hey, even %50 of their teachings! But I get a little of what they are trying to do. I know that a daughter is not to fill the role of wife, but there is a different relationship there than that of a father/son. I can see it in my own children’s lives. My husband just gets this gentle look in his eyes when he gazes on our daughters. That’s why I take what I like, and leave the rest. That’s also why I say that I don’t think that all of their teachings are evil, and dentrimental to all girls of the world. You have to use discretion.
Posted by Catherine on January 9, 2008 at 8:44 pm
Cassandra,
I think your question here really gets to the heart of the matter: “Why spend our time arguing over whether girls should stay home until they get married, or go to college?”
It does seem that this is an area where people should have freedom to choose – God may lead different individuals down different paths – and we shouldn’t let it be a source of contention. I’m an unmarried full time graduate student – it’s just how my life has ended up, but when I read that you were blessed to be married young – well, I just thought that was wonderful
Like, what is grace for, if we can’t be happy for our sisters in Christ, even if our lives are very different?
More generally – regarding the rest of the comments…
I absolutely believe in fighting FOR a girl’s right to go to college, as well as FOR a girl’s right to stay home, should she so choose. I just think that people sometimes get insecure and anxious about their own choices, and instead of fighting TO make choices available for girls generally, they feel the need fight ABOUT a particular girl’s choice to go to college, or to stay home – even if it’s God’s calling, and even if SHE freely made the decision.
I think fighting ABOUT the path a person is taking should be limited to certain situations – when their decisions are dangerous, when they don’t have all the facts at their disposal, when someone is forcing them to go down a certain route, etc. By insisting too often that people’s choices are invalid simply because they differ from the ones you would make, you risk writing them off as less informed, less moral, etc. – and it makes it more difficult, I think, to spot the cases where concern REALLY is called for, and where intervention may actually be needed.
Sorry that was so long!
Posted by molleth on January 9, 2008 at 10:13 pm
Cassandra,
I agree that the role father’s play in their daughters life is pivotal (as is a mothers role) and I agree that it needs to be recognized as such. Dad’s teach their little girls, not so much by what they *say* to them but more so how they *treat* them, that they are precious (and that a man should see them as such) and worth being valued, or that they aren’t worth much at all, etc…
.
Catherine,
I so agree, and I think that’s what true feminism is: simply advocating the *right* for women (and men) to choose what they want to do with their lives (for example, choose whether or not college would be right for them or not), as opposed to have their gender dictate to them what they can and cannot be/do.
Posted by Leah on January 9, 2008 at 11:54 pm
I just deleted my long-winded and wordy comment. Because I hate being longwinded. And wordy.
.
So I’ll simply say, I truly believe these ladies (the Botkin sisters) love the same Lord that I love. Their hearts are in the right place. And I don’t have any problem with the fact that I’ll be spending eternity with them.
Posted by Charis on January 10, 2008 at 7:24 am
Dear Name Witheld,
~
Titus 2 calls upon the older women to teach the younger… not the daddy, nor the young women (eg. the Botkin sisters). You can stress this to your friend via Titus 2:3-5. I am convinced that God has His reasons for His instructions and we had best take His Word for it!
~
I have an older woman to recommend: someone who will not raise eyebrows and will give her sound thoroughly biblical teaching as to a woman’s worth. As your young friend is travelling in fundamentalist circles, I would recommend that she look for any Beth Moore bible study available to attend (they are run by churches using a video curriculum). Beth Moore is Baptist and socially and theologically acceptable to fundamentalists. She is also anointed, powerful, and biblical and I know your friend would not be disappointed.
~
Bless you for your caring and concern for this young lady!
~
Love, Charis
Posted by sue on January 10, 2008 at 7:58 am
Excellent advise Charis!
Posted by Cassandra on January 10, 2008 at 11:20 am
To become more informed, I listened to a Botkin’s interview on one of the links posted. My thoughts…
1. I don’t agree with the assumption that if a girl goes to college, she will have abortions, become trapped in a corporate job, and end up getting divorced. That’s just garbage. It does happen to some girls, yes. But… it also happens to girls that have stayed at home their whole lives as well.
2. I agree that the family structure in America is taking a turn for the worse. I agree with the idea of building that family structure up, and treasuring it.
3. I do not believe in treating your father like your future husband. That’s, umm…. strange. I do believe that there is a special bond there, but not a bond like husband/wife bond.
4. I do not believe that you are either a feminist/or a helpmeet. You can have ‘feministic’ ideas while being a great wife and helpmeet to your husband.
5. I believe that these girls have guts, and their heart is in the right place.
6. I agree with them that a stay at home mother and wife should be educated- by reading, learning and studying.
7. I agree that the role of housewife and mother is looked down upon by many people. I get it all the time. I believe that you do not have to work a job to have ‘fulfillment’.
8. I do not believe in how they belittle women who do have jobs.
9. I do not believe that not going to college is for every single girl like they imply.
10. I admire them, but I do see some fallacies in what they are teaching.
11. They are not God, nor the Bible. So, like I said before, take what you like, leave the rest.
I think that’s it. =)
Posted by tiffany on January 10, 2008 at 12:19 pm
Good thoughts Cassandra.
Posted by Lindsey @ enjoythejourncye on January 11, 2008 at 6:28 am
Hey Cassandra, for the record, it seems we’re more ALIKE than different
Good for you for doing some research and digging deeper. It never hurts to find out more and process things.
.
I for one am ALL FOR a deeper relationship between Dads and Daughters. Even though I’d never classify myself as a helpmeet to my Dad at ANY time in my life, we have an incredibly close and wonderful relationship. It has had ups and downs, but we remain close.
.
I’m going to quit hijacking Molly’s comment box now! But I wanted to say that I’m proud of you and I’m sorry if you thought I was coming across as judgemental.
Posted by molleth on January 11, 2008 at 11:20 am
There’s no such thing as high-jacking around here, and I’ve enjoyed the exchange between you all. (Wish I had more time to participate).
Posted by Atlantic on January 14, 2008 at 3:21 pm
I’m very late to this thread, but I wanted to mention a couple of things that are really side issues to the main point of the post, but I think might be germane to other issues that have been raised on this blog.
.
Just to get it out of the way, my reaction to the main issue in this post is: the idea that unmarried daughters must stay in their parents’ home and be a helpmeet to their fathers is seriously unChristian and unscriptural, and probably psychologically unhealthy too. However, the Botkin sisters and hyper-patriarchalism in general are totally outside my personal experience, and I haven’t read any of their books.
.
Back to the side-issues. The first thing that caught my eye was a comment in the original post:
.
.
I would certainly agree that if the Botkin sisters (or anybody) is stating that anyone calling themselves a feminist is morally equivalent to an actual Marxist / Communist Party member / Stalinist apologist, then they are way, way off base, and this would definitely qualify as ridiculously black-and-white thinking. Also, I seriously doubt that “Karl Marx got feminism going” in the sense that if Marx (or others like him) had not promulgated communism, then feminism never would have happened.
.
However, there are in fact fascinating connections between Marxism and radical feminism, and certainly Marx’s collaborator and mentor Friedrich Engels had a good deal to say about the “domestic slavery” of women and his intent to break down the traditional family. There are similar underlying principles and common goals between Marxism and radical feminism, and plenty of synergy between these ideologies.
.
(I do note from Googling that the Botkin sisters’ father is actually an ex-Marxist, which makes me wonder how the Botkin sisters address this issue exactly.)
.
Now, I certainly believe that it’s possible to oppress women for real, and one can protest such oppression (ideally from within a Christian worldview) without being a feminist of the radical/Marxist stripe.
.
Since it sounds like the Botkin sisters belong to this hyper-patriarchalist movement that I do think oppresses at least some women, I think it’s entirely possible that Molly’s characterisation of their writing on Marxisms and feminism is correct.
.
So, I was just going to leave this mention of Marxism completely alone.
.
However, way down in the comments, I noticed something that (in conjunction with the original comment) raised a tiny red flag for me.
.
.
The reason this comment worries me is that this is pretty much the core idea of radical feminism: that is, the idea that gender should be irrelevant to the ordering of society and to the course of one’s life.
.
Such a statement is a classic example of a liberal ideology. I’m not an advanced student of this, and I know it’s a disputed topic, but here’s how I would put it: an ideology is a limited set of explicit principles, and its proponents seek to re-order society, root and branch, based on those principles.
.
I’m sure that the comment above wasn’t meant in the sense that a radical feminist would mean it, but if we claim to believe statements that can be interpreted in the radical sense, then it’s a bit of a problem – and at worst, something that can be used as a tool in the Gramscian subversion of traditional society and Christian values.
.
(Which is why I’ve gone on at such length. My apologies.)
Posted by mtash on February 17, 2008 at 8:13 pm
Rather than advocate for a woman’s right to choose what she/he wants to do with her life, wouldn’t it be wiser to simply encourage one another to seek God’s will on the matter? And to stop trying to sway others to do as we’ve done by condemning them if God persuades them to do something differently?
Posted by Michelle Frevert on April 8, 2008 at 6:45 am
I recently moved out of a vision forum household. I was helping them out in exchange for room and board. It got to the point where I either follow their vision forum ideas or move out. I moved out last week. It has been the hardest transition. I feel guilty for everything I do (it seems). I lived with them for almost 2 years. I learned a lot from them and am trying to forget the bad.
Since leaving, I feel like a burden has been lifted from me. Unfornuately though, I am having to cut all ties with them. Even that I am out, they are still trying to control my life.
I am praying that the Lord will give me wisdom in how to handle them.
Posted by Charis on April 8, 2008 at 6:18 pm
Hi Michelle.
Welcome!
Could you copy your comment on a newer thread so Molleth sees it? I’m sure you will be warmly embraced here if you need someplace to help you process.
~
“it is for freedom that Christ set us free” Gal 5:1
Posted by molleth on April 9, 2008 at 8:14 am
Hi, Michelle! I am so impressed with you for getting up the guts to move out. I recommend spending a LOT of time in the book of Galatians (a book written to folks who were trying to add law-keeping to their Christianity). Another awesome resource is a book (cheep on Amazon, if you get it used) called, “Families Where Grace is in Place” by Jeff VanVonderan. It can help “de-program” your brain and probably help you understand a lot of things that went on in that house.
.
When most people leave a cult or a cult-like situation, it takes a long time to recover (particularly depending on how long you were in it). So don’t be shocked if you find yourself taking some time to process this all and to get healthy again. The Spirit will gently lead you and getcha all healed up, but it won’t be overnight. In the process, though, you’ll probably learn a LOT and be able to help others in similar situations (and I’m convinced we are going to be seeing more and more of those kinds of people, unfortunately).
.
Big hugs,
Molly
Posted by GiGi on October 13, 2008 at 12:50 pm
I was raised under a subtle form of this false theology. I don’t think my parents ever read any of the books you mentioned (my father rarely read anything outside of the Bible), but it is very similar.
From the time I was little, my dad told me that he had a vision before I was born of what I would look like and that I was exactly what he dreamed. Later I was told that he had a vision for who my husband would be. Tall, quiet, a musician, finishing a degree in New York, and (surprise, surprise), both my husband and I would be working for his ministry.
I was not strongly discouraged from dating (not that there were many boys around that made me want to challenge this). My parents said that when I finally get engaged, they will sit down my fiance and tell him all of my faults so that he knows what he’s getting into (divorce prevention). I firmly believe that a soft form of this oppressive doctrine is being spread under the guise of “courtship” rather than dating – and this is mainstream – as well as “I kissed dating goodbye”.
I went to Bible College (at age 20) because my father worked at the school and had a discount. Everyone was hunky dory with that until I decided to move off-campus. Dad was very upset by this.
I got a call once saying that I need to move home now, because he won’t be able to walk me down the aisle unless he knows me. I didn’t acquiesce, so then at the end of the conversation he said that I had to come home and give him my car and take his for a few days. I have no idea how that related to our conversation (and it wasn’t about fixing the car) so I can only take it to have been a power play to show that he can take things from me.
I got a call saying that I had to get married by age 25… the same (approximate) age as my parents were.
I quit college and after living on my own for a while, moved back home (this would be repeated several times). Once I got angry and needed some space so I offered to house sit for a friend. I think dad sensed that I wanted to move out again and I got a call at work to tell me that he’d had a dream that the gas stove in the place I was staying was going to explode.
These are just a few of the things I’ve dealt with – and am still dealing with in different ways.
The danger of this doctrine is not apparent on the surface… it’s not really about strengthening family bonds or finding the best place for your child. It’s about a deliberate habit of taking over the holy spirit’s job to counsel and guide your child in their own right as a believer – well past when it is appropriate.
I’m only now realizing that the whole time I thought I was working for God I was really working for and aiming to please my father. Once I left the home I realized that although I was saved – I didn’t no much about God or how to follow him while walking in grace.
Over-involvement is bad enough in a secular family (see books like “if you had controlling parents” “emotional incest syndrome” and “too perfect”), but it is doubly worse in a christian home because parental authority is raised to the level of God – multiply that by 10 if you’re a child of a minister.
I think one of the key indicators of the failings of this doctrine is that it totally focuses on the daughters and not on the sons (and marginally on wives). My dad has basically NO relationship with my brother at all, except to yell at him when he does something wrong. Yet he has an elaborate and vivid vision of what I’m supposed to be.
That’s not healthy.
Sorry for rambling… I hope that made sense.
Posted by GiGi on October 13, 2008 at 12:51 pm
I meant to say I “WAS” strongly discouraged from dating… Sorry
Posted by Headless Unicorn Guy on November 24, 2008 at 11:53 am
Vision Forum and the Botkins believe that daughters are helpmates to their fathers until they are married upon which the authority is then transfered to the new husband.
Is that “helpmate” or “property”?
“The authority” or “legal ownership”?
“Transfer of authority” or “transfer of legal title”?