Springing off of what was mentioned in a recent post by Cally, I would like to tackle the issue of Vision Forum’s elitism in more detail. So grab a cup of tea, your lace doily, and sit down for a long rant…
Many readers of this blog are doubtless already aware of Doug Phillips and his great entrepreneurial gem, Vision Forum (www.visionforum.com). The very first thing that struck me about their website was its blatant consumerism. Buy all these toys, costumes, books, DVDs, CDs, and curricula so you can live out the real Christian life with your family! Honestly, I first had no idea it was a Christian ministry… I simply thought it was a Christian company, my mistake. I heard from someone who knows Mr. Phillips personally that the Phillips family doesn’t give gifts on Christmas. If this is true, then I can only assume it is to protest how consumerism has taken over the true message of Christmas (which is a valid point). It is ironic then that Phillips’ website is largely devoted to things you can and should buy to enhance your Christian life! (Also, I’m sure a large portion of their sales occur in December.)
The second thing that struck me about Vision Forum was their American-ness. Although they will not say it outright, their method of Christian living is not only created by Americans but also crafted specifically for Americans. Somehow I don’t see Brits getting all excited about buying American revolutionary war costumes for their boys. And Native Americans (to which group I technically belong) would not be so pleased to see VF’s array of cowboy and pioneer items for sale under “American Heroes of the West.” Granted, there is an overpriced teepee, but not even one Indian Chief costume! Oh, that’s right, by American they mean white American, I forgot.
Besides their very un-PC catalogue, Vision Forum has many more serious problems. They alienate people through their teachings by adding a long To Do list to the cross of Christ. If people are offended by the gospel, it ought to be because of the offense of the cross of Christ, not because they can’t embrace a lifestyle of hyper-patriarchy and clichéd femininity. But beyond the pharisaical elements… let’s just say, for argument’s sake, one wishes to live the VF life. You can only do this fully if you have an enormous income. Think about it this way: a couple has as many “little blessings” as God will give them (and that normally means 6 or more); mom and daughters cannot work outside the home and daughters live at home until they are married; all children are homeschooled; the arts are encouraged (think piano lessons); and there is a strict counter-cultural dress code. What family can afford that? Only upper-middle to upper-class families. VF’s solution is to become an entrepreneurial family and have everyone contribute to generating income from a home-based business. Sounds great, but what if the husband and wife aren’t very business minded (no MBAs in this crowd)?
Vision Forum likes to hold up particular families as pedestal examples of the VF way. One such family is the Botkins. In their new movie The Return of the Daughters and in their blog posts they make it very clear that their adult daughters enjoy living at home. Who wouldn’t when one’s home included such diverting things as a recording studio where you could make your own movies or a lovely, expensive harp (which you could play), an extensive library, and much more? If that was my home I wouldn’t want to leave it either.
A further problem I see is that they idealize a particular culture and a particular time period. To VF the ideal of human civilization is the time period from about England’s Georgian era until women started wearing pants (which we all know corrupted society)—with the pinnacle being the Victorian age. Countless blogs from mothers who follow VF and hyper-patriarchy are replete with Victorian art. I swear, if I see one more picture of serene, lace-clad, white, Victorian women with children in tow I think I’ll puke.
Another thing that is a red flag to me is their collection of buzz words and extra-biblical virtues. Many cults and religious sects, in order to create and maintain an identity, will create their own lingo or even re-define terms so that, when in discussion with them, apples are no longer apples. Some examples of VF’s jargon/re-defined terms are: visionary, dominion, help-meet in training, multi-generational, biblical patriarchy, and biblical family. As far as the virtues VF esteems, most of them are in fact biblical; VF, however, puts those virtues on steroids as well as adding some others such as entrepreneurialism. Ultimately it is a type of Gnostic Legalism… in order to live the Biblical way or the Christian way you must do what they say and live as they do.
So, according to VF, if you are poor, voluntarily sterile, using any type of birth control, a feminist of any shade, a female who eschews dresses for pants, a female college student, a single female missionary, an old-earth creationist, a pacifist, a working mom, a working widow, a stay-at-home dad, a tomboy, a Native American, non-white, or non-American, then you can’t really live out the ideal, visionary Christian life or enjoy the benefits of the true Christian family. My wrong… I thought John 3:16 said “for God so loved the world,” but I guess, according to Doug Phillips, it is “for God so loved the white, middle-to-upper-class, Americans, that whosoever of them believeth in Him should not perish, but have everlasting life.”
The reason I claim that Doug Phillips’ version of the gospel is elitist is best explained by transporting all these “values” and the VF type of lifestyle into southern Sudan, or rural China, or any number of places in developing countries or simply in cultures very different to ours. Can you imagine a Sudanese woman, who contracted aids from her dying husband and lives in a one-room hut with five children living out the Vision Forum lifestyle? Christ’s gospel is universal but Vision Forum and hyper-patriarchy are not.
Whatever else it is or isn’t, VF is most certainly a product of a post post-modern society. Post-modernity has stripped away objective truth and many traditional/family values. So it is natural that after post-modernity has ravaged America, movements which strive to give people a purpose and/or a method of purposeful living have become popular. Just look at the rise in Neo-Paganism and New-Age groups (think Yoga), or the popularity of Rick Warren’s The Purpose Driven Life. For many people who come from families or educations that left them adrift, VF gives them an anchor. The anchor, however, is not Christ and His gospel. The anchor is a 21st century, Americanized version of the Old Testament Law. In the end, either the anchor won’t hold the ship, or the ship will become submerged under her heavy yoke. Only the test of time will tell—something Vision Forum hasn’t had yet.
First – I will direct attention to another sidebar banner that fits well with this post.
I don’t mind VF having a target demographic. The fact that it doesn’t include certain people is fine as long as they are not saying that those certain people are less-thans. I don’t mind them choosing a counter-culture lifestyle that costs lots of money as long as they don’t hold that standard up as the way to Christ. I don’t mind them coming up with their own lingo, as long as the attempt is to clarify and not to vilify others.
Unfortunately, from what I’ve seen Vision Forum does all of the as-long-as-they-don’ts. It’s a shame that many well-meaning Christians are being sucked into this black hole.
On another matter though – John 3:16 is not saying that God loved the whole world sooooo much that he sent His Son…. It is saying “God so loved,” meaning “God loved the world in this way” Many other scriptures support the point you’re making in this post, but not John 3:16.
Ladies, this was brilliant!
Bravo, Laura!
I wonder if VFM’s ideas would change if they got involved in real ministry. Those who serve the real people in the real messy world seem to have a lot more patience and understanding than I’ve found in the VFM stance. According to them, showing grace and mercy means you will lose your saltiness.
Excellent, ladies, and Laura Croft, whoever you may be! (Is this Normal Middle’s second pen name?)
A few years ago, on a Yahoo group, certain notable people commented how Phillips raises his standing by leveling all of the competition so that his edifice and spire appears to be higher than all of the others within the landscape. In the grand summary, it is all about appearances and perception. He’s like a carnival barker running a shell game, but he also runs around the carnival, acting like he’s God’s sheriff.
This occurred to me again after reading this here.
Jesus gave us two concepts upon which the whole of the law and the prophets hinged: Love God and love our neighbors as we love ourselves. If we follow these commandments without mitigating them with a warped view of Theonomy or Natural Law or whatever else, things become quite simple. (They might be messy, but they are not all that complicated when we stay focused on these two governing principles.) This leveling of the playing field through elitism, riding on the marketing value of patriotic imagery, manipulating people by taking advantage of their idealism, and by aggression towards those who differ or present a form of “competition” follow from a different gospel than the Gospel of Jesus.
May nothing detract us from loving God with all of our heart, mind and strength and may nothing hinder us from loving our often messy neighbors just as much as we love ourselves! May we come to see this more clearly and follow it more closely with every passing day. May that be true of all who name the name of Jesus.
“Jesus gave us two concepts upon which the whole of the law and the prophets hinged: Love God and love our neighbors as we love ourselves. If we follow these commandments without mitigating them with a warped view of Theonomy or Natural Law or whatever else, things become quite simple. (They might be messy, but they are not all that complicated when we stay focused on these two governing principles.)”
Cindy, this is what Clay has been saying for as long time. These people have to complicate everything when, in reality, the pure message of the Gospel of Jesus Christ is pretty simple to understand. After all, we are to come into the KIngdom as little children, no? This is why I repeatedly try to bring these two commands back into center stage in aklk I write….when you ponder them, all else seems to fade away pretty quickly.
Hi ladies – I comment rarely, but I do so love to read you gals (including thatmom on your blog!). This bit on VF really struck a chord with me. My personal beef on their idealistic lifestyle is all the military hoo-rah in their products. My husband is in the military, and I have yet to figure out how VF reconciles military life with their militant-entrepreneurial vision. Have any of them ever actually served? Military life is not a “work out of the home” kind of life. When my husband is gone, I have to do all sorts of unfeminine things, and be relatively independent and happy without him, often in a strange new place, keeping up the spirits of the kiddos. The leadership seems to enjoy the trappings of their lifestyle without any of the actual sacrifice.
Thank you for all the positive feedback so far.
A few comments in response:
Richard, I love the “put hair on your chest” picture! Thanks! You also said “John 3:16 is not saying that God loved the whole world sooooo much that he sent His Son…. It is saying “God so loved,” meaning “God loved the world in this way” Many other scriptures support the point you’re making in this post, but not John 3:16.”
I was not modifying the type or quantity of God’s love. I was modifying the noun, world. By replacing it with “white, middle-to-upper-class, Americans” I was simply describing what type of world Jesus died for according to VF–only those in their particular socio-economic group that meet their legalistic standards of Xian living. So, I do believe the verse can still be applied here. I am, of course, quoting it without reference to its context, but it is meant to be a bit tongue-in-cheek… sorry, but its my writing style.
In response to Cindy: I don’t know to whom you are referring, but it cannot be me since this is my first real foray into the blogosphere under any name, real or fictional.
To all, again, I apologize about the pseudonym, but it is really necessary to protect my husband.
I’m a longtime lurker on thatmom & TW, I’ve been enjoying this blog so far but just had to comment.
This blog entry especially rang a bell with me when, today, I saw on DP’s blog that he’s taken his whole family on a trip to England & Scotland for a Faith & Freedom tour. I’m sure that this is a wonderful & memorable & educational thing to do for a family. Also, I don’t know mean to imply that we should judge how other families choose to spend their incomes, BUT my first thoughts were “How much does this all cost?” and then, “Who is paying for this?”
I guess I am really confounded because this trip is hardly the only one the Phillips family has taken en famille. In the past year or so, they’ve seemed to travel across country at least two or three times (Jamestown & a Faith and Freedom tour or two) and then to Hawaii (another destination that’s not a bargain).
I’m sure that many of their faithful supporters would love to have such a lifestyle – can the things the Patrio-folks tell them to do really produce the income needed for such things, let alone support a large family’s daily needs? Given that the Patrio-folks push the entrepreneurial model (read: establish a family-owned small business), I really question the economics of it all, as exemplified by Phillips. I have family who have small businesses and let me tell you, they have not taken or are not planning any trips to England for 10! Usually, making your living as a small business owner means putting in countless hours & being lucky enough to earn a net never mind profits, which usually have to be plowed back into the business.
Sorry for the length, but I have had these questions for a long, long time.
Thank all of you ladies for your courteous yet firm & determined way in trying to bring light & understanding to this whole mess.
My own answers
Sorry, that last phrase “my own answers” got left in to due to the infamous “cut-and-paste” error!
Thank you for letting me comment.
Laura – are you really Laura Bush?
Richard, LOL!!
Vision Forum’s catalogue showed up in our mailbox unsolicited several years ago. I’m Canadian. Vision Forum is culturally irrelevant to me and my family. My kids wore coonskin caps when they were little because they were pretending to be couriers des bois, not Davy Crockett.
What scares me is VF’s apparent dominionist, reconstructionist vision and the 200-year plan and what exactly all that includes and how they plan to achieve it. Aren’t these people and varying degrees of their kind, wanting to take over American government and make OT law the law of the land, hence Mike Farris and the creation of Patrick Henry College? Once their vision is no longer an abstract what then? America conquered, what next?
I know, it’s really wierd. I mean, in all the “Left Behind” pictures, the bad guys are the NON Christians, right? Well, if Doug Phillips gets his way, the bad-guys-taking-over-the-world will be from our own team. And *we’ll* be the first ones they burn at the stake.
No, no, no. Laura Croft is not me. But boy, after that post I wish she was
EXCELLENT STUFF!!!! I can’t even begin to write that well and express my loathe for VF-esque lifestyle as she did.
Good stuff all the way around (except for the fact it is so true that it is sad….)
I don’t mind BUSINESSES having a focus group or target group like Richard said. But ministries? The two don’t mesh. Instead of the saying you can’t mix business with pleasure, it should be you shouldn’t mix business with theology.
Mrs.X—
You have to sell a whole bunch of overpriced dolls and CD sets at $40 a pop to get to take a family of umpteen to England for a “faith and freedom” tour.
Again, use the money to FEED THE POOR and CLOTHE THE NAKED and LOVE THE UNLOVED. Get dirty Doug. I keep saying that….but he doesn’t seem to listen. I wonder how many opportunities for real ministry he’s passed up to visit museums and dress up in his suit and fedora?
Anne2 said:America conquered, what next?
Well, they’re scraping money together to send the Botkins to Great Britain to save them from their ignorance. They can have their own Keswick II Conference. Gnostic, Pelagian, higher life for every man that can entice his wife and daughters to make him the center of the universe.
They can scope out some options and do some prelim work during the faith and freedom tour.
Oh, so –
FIRST BRITAIN, THEN THE WORLD!
The Phillips also haul their kids along with them to the homeschooling conferences for the marketing value of their “lovely families.” I doubt that the little boy who went to the Witherspoon school and the daughter who went to the Colorado convention rode in the car for 17 hours one way to get to each destination. (Those kinds of trips make you want to leave the kids at home and not take a trip again for a year or two!)
I’ve seen blog photos of their little girl (about 2 yrs old?) on a plane and Doug commented on his concern over the airlines that charge $15 for each checked bag. “How will a family traveling by plane afford this?” or something. Oh yeah. I think more fathers are worried about filling their gas tanks than they are flying.
Well, how is it that I was not on a plane until I was 22 (having worked as an RN for 3 years)? And my mother didn’t ride on a plane until she was 45? I don’t think that many “normative” people can afford to fly let alone take their kids all over the place with them. But when your Dad’s a millionaire, life is different.
It’s like those clips of HIllary pumping gas. I bet it had been 30 years since she last filled a gas tank herself.
Wow, Laura, if this is your first real foray into the blogosphere, I am going to pull up a chair and settle in because it will only get better! This was an excellent summary of the problem with VF. Thank you!
Really good points. I am embarassed at the number of VF cds we have on our shelves. This is all seemed so great when we first became Christians. My husband mentioned to me a couple months ago that it seemed “too great”-too idealistic. We have friends who are this same way- “We’re gonna take over the world as Christians!” They seriously want to make OT law the law of the land. A huge thing for them is usury. Usury is bad, they cry! You can’t have bank accounts, for you are accruing interest on that account, etc… I seriously wonder if the Phillips family ascribe to that notion.
I totally agree with the military thing, too! It frosts my cookies to hear all that stuff. Here I am, my husband has been gone for a month and a half and I won’t see him for another month and a half. I have to do “manly” things. I can’t be in pearls and high heels with 4 kids age 6 and under and a house to take care of!
Thank you all for great thoughts to “chew” on!!
Normal Middle,
Oh, I don’t know….I think you have expressed your “loathing for the VF-esque lifestyle” really well in the past. In fact, I had had thoughts that Laura was you initially as well!
About the trip to England, flying etc. Experiencing life outside of your own country is a benefit, I believe, to any young adult. Sadly, it would be wasted on a group of small children, unlike flying to see Grandma.
I am still attempting to get my arms around the Scottish connection, the Scottish ancestry obsession, and the Scottish ancestry connection in the confederate south. It is there and I “get it” to a certain point.
By the way, we are Campbells, part of the most dreaded clan in Scotland. Just to note…
Well doesn’t the Scottish thing fit in with Dabney? Associate Reformed Presbyterians from the south are starting to make inroads in Canada. They are heavy on Dabney and their Scottish roots and their confederate roots. So much so that we felt we were in a “foreign” country while in that church, and I have Scottish roots, (Grandparents spoke the Gaelic). However, I was always uncomfortable with how much the ARP dwelt on their American and Scottish civil history as say compared to, the history of Jesus. I am a Christian first. I am a woman secondly. I happen to have been born in Canada. We are a little socialist, but so was Jesus. I have some American roots, but the earlier rebel sort, UEL.
I’m interested in a lot of things. But the package Doug Phillips is selling isn’t one of them. He’s mixing God and money. And he’s mixing an antiquated colloquial privileged way of living with the Gospel for the poor. Only he’s discarded the poor and obscured the Gospel. Talk about whitewashing.
There is a branch of Reformed Baptists that embraces a unique strain of “American Covenant Theology” that believes that when the Puritans landed on what would become known as American shores that the Puritans out of gratitude initiated a covenant with God. They believe that this covenant is actually binding and that God is now dealing with America much the same way that God dealt with the nation of Israel under the Old Covenant.
This has a lot to do with VF’s emphasis on American History. But there are more than a few major problems with this extra biblical doctrine. The primary problem with this false doctrine is that man does not have the ability to bind God to a covenant. All biblical covenants have been initiated by God and thankfully are fulfilled by God himself. The next problem with this belief is that under the New Covenant, God is calling out His “saints/called out ones/set apart ones” from all people groups worldwide. Scripture is clear that broad is the road that leads to destruction and narrow is the road that leads to life and “few” are they that find it-“the church”, God people in the New Covenant are comprised of a minority of the worlds population from every nation, tribe and tongue.
that mom-
Hutchison is from Clan Donald and we know about you Cambells!
grin.
If you have any question about who and what VF is all about, this caption from Doug’s blog says it all:
Herein inscribed in this weblog journal are the up-to-this-very-instant comments and reviews, criticisms and commentary, and reflections of Doug Phillips. Whether you are interested in his latest travels, book recommendations, historical commentary, cultural insight, encouragement for the family, or random musings, Doug’s Blog is where you are most likely to hear about it first.
Well, Hutch, as long as you know…..:)
Mrs X said, “Given that the Patrio-folks push the entrepreneurial model (read: establish a family-owned small business)”
well put … and may I add that even though the push for families to pursue “the entrepreneurial model,” they become envious if a family does well and attempts to take over that business
thatmom wrote, “About the trip to England, flying etc. Experiencing life outside of your own country is a benefit, I believe, to any young adult … I am still attempting to get my arms around the Scottish connection, the Scottish ancestry obsession, and the Scottish ancestry connection in the confederate south. It is there and I “get it” to a certain point.”
the connection is that they hold the south was settled by Celts … they are quite specific on what Celts are kewl (i.e., the Scots) and what Celts are … well, we won’t talk about those Welsh and Irish folk now will we … as far as the Dutch, Scandinavians, Germans, Greeks, Italians, and any anybody else … well they are just unimportant to Christendom don’tcha know
thatmom-
That stuff happened hundreds of years ago, we’ll just let bygones be bygones.
Thatmon @20
I’m working my way through Albion’s Seed by David Hackett Fischer. I think I might have an explanation for the whole South/Scots thing by the end of it. I’ll keep you posted.
You all sound like a bunch of jealous socialists, not Christians at all. I suppose you are as scathing in your remarks of Solomon and Job, two of God’s chosen and some of the wealthiest men in Biblical history. Our Lord does not condemn men for being wealthy; he actually blesses obedient men with wealth. Rarely does he bless gossipers and railers and often he curses them. Miriam spoke against the Lord’s anointed and soon found herself with leprosy. (Ex 15) Be careful…you just might be doing the same.
1) Cece, are you saying that Doug Phillips is the Lord’s anointed? :0
2) Let me clear a few things up.
We’re not talking politics here. We’re not talking legislation and forced redistribution of wealth by the government. Hence, we’re not talking about socialism.
Certainly, one can be wealthy and be loved by God. The examples you gave were excellent. But it is also true that Jesus said that it would be easier for a camel to pass through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to get to heaven. Jesus talks quite a bit about the corruption of wealth.
And that’s what is being discussed here. Not the wealth itself. Money in and of itself is harmless. It’s the corruption of wealth that is an issue.
I don’t see any comparison between Solomon and Job and Doug Phillips and Vision Forum Ministries. You made an important point when you said that God blesses obedient men with wealth.
I don’t know Doug Phillips, and I can’t speak to his motives or character. What I do know is what he teaches, and I have serious issues with that. Not because I’m a jealous socialist, but because I am a concerned Christian who believes that Doug Phillips teaching is in grievous error.
But I’ll be on the look out for leprosy, thanks for the warning.
Did I say that Phillips is the Lord’s anointed? Another tactic used by many contributors to this rant. Your “evaluation” of others includes twisting words, mocking, inflating and exaggerating statements to make your point.
We are not talking about politics here? I don’t know what you mean here. What does that have to do with your socialist worldview? “Worldview” means the lens through which you judge EVERYTHING else.
And yes, you are speaking of his motives and character in almost everything that is said here.
This is typical of feminism: “I, me, woman, knows best and I will be the Savior of the people (or the children, or the poor, or you fill in the blank.”
Cece wrote: “You all sound like a bunch of jealous socialists, not Christians at all. I suppose you are as scathing in your remarks of Solomon and Job, two of God’s chosen and some of the wealthiest men in Biblical history. Our Lord does not condemn men for being wealthy”
:shock”
Cece … you do not know if I am a male or a female … you know NOTHING about me whatsoever … period … I will share with you that I am VERY opposed to socialists, communists, humanistic patriocentrists, etc.
You are also WRONG to assume that I do not love Solomon and Job.
You are also WRONG when you assume that I condemn men for being wealthy
Cece wrote: “This is typical of feminism: “I, me, woman, knows best and I will be the Savior of the people (or the children, or the poor, or you fill in the blank.””
will you please define the word “feminism” and what you mean by typical “feminism”?
whoops … again … this “:shock”” should’ve been
Cece, I second “burned” request that you define feminism for us. None of the contributors to this blog are feminists of the variety I think you are referring to. We do stand for equal pay for equal work, the right to vote in both civil and ecclesiastical elections, and the right to post-secondary education. Elisabeth Elliot herself said in her “Gateway to Joy” program “Holiness in the 90′s” that she believes in those things.
I know I can speak for each of the contributors of this blog that we all have a decidedly Christian worldview.
Exactly, Cally …
I just need to know how Cece is defining “feminism” and “typical feminism” because I simply do not know if I fit in those categories or not.
• I do appreciate feminity.
• I do appreciate women that dress well (yes, MY version of well)
• I do appreciate jewelry
• I do appreciate when women know how to put on make up
• I do appreciate pretty high heeled shoes
There are many things female that I truly appreciate. If this is what Cece is referring to than I will plead “guilty” without any hesitation.
I would also like to know where anyone here has ranted. Personally, that is not my style … long winded at times … yes … rant? … no
My spouse, offspring, friends, family or origin, neighbors, colleagues, and others would be the first to say I do not rant.
oh … and just for the record … I am a Christian with a Christian worldview
If I misunderstood you, Cece, my apologies. You said, “Miriam spoke against the Lord’s anointed and soon found herself with leprosy. (Ex 15) Be careful…you just might be doing the same.“. So, it seemed to say that you thought I might be speaking against one of God’s anointed. Hence my asking you to clarify.
I thought you were bringing up socialism because you mistakenly thought we were talking politics. You must still be confused, however. Politically, I’m a republican who beliveves in capitolism. But, greater than that, I am a Christian, and my faith is what informes my worldview.
No, I’m not. I think, in fact, that would be wrong. Questioning teachings that I think are in error do not mean that I am attacking Mr. Phillips personally. I acknowledge that Doug Phillips is a brother in Christ and one whom one day I will embrace in heaven. I’m sorry if you are unable to see the difference between issues with public teachings and personal attacks.
Cece, you must have me confused with someone else. Above all, I am a Christian. I don’t know best (though I believe that’s because I’m human not because I’m a woman) and I believe that Jesus Christ is the Savior, not me, nor any other man.
I don’t know what has led you to believe that any of us here at WWF are socialists or secular feminists.
If anyone here is reading through a lens, in my humble opinion, it’s you.
I think I need to sum up a bit for you, Cece. No one is lamenting the wealth of Doug Phillips. The issue is saying that the only way to live a Christian life is if you live it as someone with much wealth does.
This post is about cultural elitism, not being rich. I can sum it up in another way:
Try transporting the Vision Forum catalog to the town of Kibera, just outside of Nairobi in Kenya. Tell those people that they are sinning by using condoms to protect themselves from AIDS or to keep from conceiving yet another AIDS baby. Tell those people that they are sinning by sending their children to the local “public” school so they can actually eat LUNCH once in a while and receive religious instruction or learn how to read.
Tell the family in China that using birth control to protect themselves from forced abortion that they are sinning.
Tell the family in Germany that they are sinning because they send their children to a government school because homeschooling is illegal.
What Vision Forum is peddling isn’t Biblical Christianity. Its White America.
That’s not feminism. That’s reality.
Cally!!!
well done!
you go girl!
Thanks, Jen, that’s exactly what this post is talking about. But I suppose if you’ve been trained to hear that everyone who disagrees with your point of view is “gossiping” or “socialists” or “feminists” it’s easy to read into things.
Just a thought for future reference:
That person from the Pacific NW who shows up from time to time crying “socialism” and “worldview” generally goes away when you completely ignore her.
Maybe it will work with our friend “Cece”?
If that’s what you prefer, I can go away. I thought I saw somewhere that some of you were interested in dialogue and discovery.
Like Phillips, if you don’t like the message, just disparage the messenger.
Native Americans (to which group I technically belong) would not be so pleased to see VF’s array of cowboy and pioneer items for sale under “American Heroes of the West.”
*groan* Of course they believe the whites had divine right to drive out the Natives. Why doesn’t that surprise me? If they weren’t so desperate to keep up their appearances, they’d probably openly sell KKK hoods.
Laura, you are AWESOME!! Excellent article; you know these people to a tee.
We are interested in dialogue and discovery. Tell me, though, what did you hope to share with us by calling us socialists, and saying that by discussing the teachings of VFM we were risking the wrath of God? What were we to learn?
I will tell you that while we’re interested in dialogue and will always attempt to do so respectfully, we don’t pull punches here. We’ll tell you what we think. If that’s not for you, that’s okay.
Isn’t that what you’ve done? You didn’t like the message, so we’re all socialists who are just jealous of his wealth.
Cece wrote: “If that’s what you prefer, I can go away. I thought I saw somewhere that some of you were interested in dialogue and discovery.”
Cece that is so unfair. When did I ever imply that I was not interested in dialogue and discovery?
Cece wrote: “Like Phillips, if you don’t like the message, just disparage the messenger.”
Nonsense! I was trying to discuss what your message was with you Cece, but every time I try you call me names that are emotionally laden. How does that establish relationships?
I ask you to define “feminist” and “typrical feminist” to try to understand what you mean and to determine if I really fit in your definition of these terms or if I need to clarify my position.
Instead, you never defined your terms and, then, you continue in your name calling! Yikes!
Cece, do you really want to work through this? If so, I am willing to try to understand you; however, I hope it would be a two way street. In order to develop a relationship it is most important to not name call without really knowing those that you are verbally berating.
Dear ladies and gentlemen,
I completely understand Laura’s “rant” concerning the ministry of Vision Forum and it’s head, Doug Phillips, but I, like Cece, would like to say a few words in its defence.
First of all, I see a lot of criticism geared toward Vision Forum’s interpretation of Scripture and how we are to view our lives in accordance with that interpretation, for example, the idea that a woman’s “place” of industry on earth is most profitably within her own home, under her father or husband’s authority. Vision Forum uses scriptural truth to back up this view, the passage in 1 Timothy being very key in the New Testament for this view, namely, men, teach your women to be keepers of the home, that the word of God be not blasphemed. To me, blaspheming the Word of God is pretty serious stuff, more serious than the sticks and stones that this culture would throw at me for taking that passage in the Scriptures seriously. Vision Forum does not teach that a woman is blaspheming that Word of God if she must work outside of the home, only if she chooses to without necessity, neglecting her children and becoming independent of her God-given, “Adam” authority. Such is their view of everything they teach, love and common sense with a foundation of Scriptural authority.
I don’t know whether or not many of the people commenting on this blog have ever read any of the arguments posed by Doug Phillips, but I would have to say that I have not received anything from them but amazingly plausible interpretations of Scripture, many of which would be difficult to counter by any of us.
As far as the military is concerned, I would like to know just what you all are talking about concerning this idea that Phillips is pro-military and pro-family, which you all seem to consider as opposing and incompatible viewopoints. As far as I know, and I know quite a bit, Mr. Phillips has shown honor to those men who have sacrificed their lives to give us and save for us a Christian nation, but as far as the present military crisis, women in combat, the neglect of single mothers and military wives, I have not heard Mr. Phillips express anything but displeasure at these things. He would be in complete sympathy with a woman who had to take care of her home and do “manly” things. I do not understand how people can take a way of life that is protective to women and interpret it to be a geisha lifestyle where women do nothing but have sex and babies. What a horrible way to view such a beautiful truth of Scripture, the truth that we as woman find our most joy and fulfillment in being wives and mothers and keepers of our homes. I say this with all sincerety.
Laura, I do understand how strange and confusing Vision Forum must be to you. I too had your opinions at one time. But as I have matured in my faith, and in life in general, I have come to realize, by the grace of God, a much better path. Not a way of life that works toward my salavtion in Christ Jesus, no, that is already accomplished in the twinkling of an eye, but a way of life that is more expedient for me, and for the Phillips family, and the Botkins (whom I know personally, they are wonderful, gracious people, you would love them too, they are full of God’s grace). We preach our beliefs because we care about the happiness of this country and of the world, about the preservation of a Christian civilization where God’s ways, which are His laws, are honored, where we are not persecuted for our faith. As the Apostle Paul once said, in other words, ‘yes, all things are lawful to me’, all ways of life I can live, even sinful ones, without loosing that sealing of the Holy Spirit for my eternal salvation in Christ, ‘but, not all things are expedient’, or profitable to my the blessing of my life here on earth. God promises that His Laws, His ways bring blessing upon the earth, the earth!–not spirits–things physical, not spiritual. Our lives are a combination of the physical and the spiritual, and there is blessing and cursing on both in God’s ways, and we have got to start realizing this in this culture.
We all want to live blessed and happy lives on this earth, but judgment and cursing is still an option, even to Christians. The ten commandments are still to be honored, we are still to conform our bodies, which are not yet redeemed, to reflect the perfect and holy state of our redeemed spririts. As Paul said, ‘so with the inward man I serve the Law of God, but with the outward man, the law of sin and death’. Therefore, Paul goes on to say that it is important for us to consider what then is the way of life God would have for us to live. If the Old Testament Law was “abolished”, then what have we left to stand upon in this wicked and sinful world without killing ourselves and others in the process, and living outward lives that are cursed by God. God’s Law is still important, because our flesh is still in the state that Israel was in before Christ came, unredeemed. The Gospel is the message of Christ and all the rest, including the commandments of Christ, who is, by the way, the Word of GOd, Old and New Testaments, never changing. Christ indeed commanded us to go unto all the nations preaching the gospel, and TEACHING THEM WHATSOEVER I HAVE COMMANDED YOU.
Please consider these things, and pass whatever judgment you deem necessary. But if you believe in Jehovah God, yu must have Scriptural authority to be the foundation of your judgment, nothing else is relevent.
With sincerety,
Emily
Hi Emily,
Thanks so much for your comment! I don’t have time this morning to respond in entirety. We’ve got a birthday party to get to. However, I wanted to respond to this right away:
All the White Washed Feminist bloggers affirm the absolute and final authority of the Holy Bible as our ultimate authority. We seek to honor God’s truth as set forward in His Word and to honor Him with our lips, our lives, and our minds. We disagree with many of the hyper-patriarchal interpretations of the Bible, but our disagreement is based upon Scripture. That’s something we hope to delve into more deeply on this blog. In fact, that was the reason I started the blog in the first place. I know that we’ve digressed quite a bit, but we are heading back into a more theological direction.
I’ll try to respond to your comment a little later if I can. We have a busy weekend ahead of us, so I may not be able to right away.
Cheers!
Cally
“Vision Forum uses scriptural truth to back up this view, the passage in 1 Timothy being very key in the New Testament for this view, namely, men, teach your women to be keepers of the home”
That is a huge load of bunk. Men teaching “their” women to be servants instead of God’s individual soldiers? Ick. The VF uses nothing but twisted Scripture. It doesn’t take much research to find this out.
“love and common sense”
Emily, have you read Phillip’s condemnation of women who get abortions to save their lives? He calls them murderers and compares them to women who throw their babies to sharks. This man has no love whatsoever.
“I have not received anything from them but amazingly plausible interpretations of Scripture, many of which would be difficult to counter by any of us.”
Their Scripture twistings, especially about women, are the easiest things in the world to counter.
“I have come to realize, by the grace of God, a much better path.”
So have I, and that path is individualism, freedom, and serving God as HE sees fit, not how the patrios see fit.
As for the Botkin girls, I’m sure they’re gracious. I just wish that they didn’t compare women they know who leave home to harlots in their book.
Wow.
I have never heard of this guy but this quote from you
Can you imagine a Sudanese woman, who contracted aids from her dying husband and lives in a one-room hut with five children living out the Vision Forum lifestyle? Christ’s gospel is universal but Vision Forum and hyper-patriarchy are not.
is going to cogitate in my brain. I think that is such a great touchpoint for how we judge EVERYTHING. It’s so easy to forget how American we are. I need to take off my America-colored glasses to be discerning regarding anything that dares to preach the gospel.
I love you ladies. I aboslutely LOVE you. Just wanted to say that
[...] I have been personally hurt by their followers and I have had my say against them (see my posts here, here, and here). Now that is out of my system, and I also feel that I have given my [...]
I’ve had it with the Vision Forum. The VF followers have taken over every homeschool conference and support group practically in the area.
I could repeat what’s been said, but the fact is… I just don’t care anymore.
But non Christmas keepers get me all upset…
it’s like Narnia under the White Witch. Always winter and never Christmas. Blech.
I know I’m just one comment in a sea of many, but I wanted to say that this article was FANTASTIC. Laura really hit the nail on the head. Not only an excellent diagnostic of the Vision Forum lifestyle and worldview but she also espoused a good law/gospel distinction, a good view of the permissibility of womens’ roles in society, and accurately debunked the elitism of this movement.
Doug Phillips is a really nice guy. I’ve met him and his boy Justice. I’ve been very much a part of this homeschool/cultural movement in the past. They’ve done a lot of good for supplying the homeschool mom with curricula and material to teach their kids well. They teach respect, honor, dignity, and well-respecting roles of Fathers/Mothers and Sons/Daughters. For that they aught to be commended.
However, where I think they fall apart is by creating a different gospel, which is self-centered, self-motivated, and adjusted so that it can be achieved by living this lifestyle. Isn’t that what legalism is?? Adjusting the requirements of God’s law so that we can achieve it on our own? How do they justify the events of this weekend (Good Friday/Easter) when we celebrate the love of Christ in drinking the cup of God’s wrath so that all we have to do to achieve salvation is… nothing! It’s by grace alone through faith alone, not the VF lifestyle.
Thank God that his Son has fulfilled the law so that we don’t have to face his wrath by falling short of his TRUE law. I hope the VF team sees that one day.
This will probably be lost in all the comments, but I just had to say that my husband and I have 6 children (and hope for more) and I am blessed to be able to stay at home and we do not have a home business. We are not at all wealthy either – but are not at all in want for anything. I believe the Bible and it does say that women should be keepers at home that the Word of God be not blasphemed – not sure how you can argue with that. I also don’t think it is very Christian-like to be slamming fellow Christians. I may or may not agree with Doug Phillips on every issue, but I’ll keep that to myself. I don’t see that they’re doing anything harmful. I’m not sure why you find these things so offensive. Also, not sure I understand the term White-washed feminism – isn’t it still just feminism?
Welcome Mandy! Poke around the site a little bit more and you may get a better idea about why we stand opposed to Vision Forum and other groups of that ilk. We expand on all of your questions in a number of our posts. I’ve got to tend to my kids at the moment, but I’ll try to get back and post a few theme articles that you might interesting.
Hello ladies -
I’m delighted to have found your site, which strikes me as notably intelligent and provocative in all the right ways. I thought I would weigh in here, because I’m often kind of stunned at how the words “socialist” and “feminist” are bandied about on the Vision Forum and by Voddie “I know the way” Bauchaum, as if anyone flying under those terms will be sent to hell and roasted quicker than a chicken at a Baptist picnic.
So let me first say – according to some, I am the devil, lol. I’m a secular, agnostic Jewish Feminist. I’m not a Christian at all (although I am often awed by faith, and support anyone’s right to believe and worship as they wish).
Why I read these sites is a long story, but suffice to say it’s interesting reading and I want to understand how other people feel about the world. What makes me sad is how boxed up women who follow the Vision Forum uh vision become. There is only ONE way, and if that way doesn’t work for you, you’re doing it wrong. They seem to not understand that the Scriptures were not, in fact, written in English, and that they were translated many times. That there are many interpretations. That no way of life is “one size fits all.” We are humans, not machines.
I’m saddened by the commentary on places like Generation Cedar, where women actually tell others in unhappy patriarchal relationships that “the way you make your bed is how you sleep in it” and you should “know the kind of man you marry before you marry him.” This is not a particulary loving way to refer to a Sister in Christ, now is it? And I wonder – if you’re following a courtship model, how do you actually GET to know this man you marry? And if the marriage is rocky, is it really because you’re “feminist” and “critical?” Seriously? I wonder at that.
Secular Feminism is really not different from what you all expouse. The right to secondary education, for example. The right to choose what works for you – I am in total favor of women staying home with their children, and I firmly believe that stay at home mothers should be supported in this endeavor. What I do not believe is what VF believes – that daughters should be raised as if they were characters in Pride & Prejudice (hello, Jane Austen was a FEMINIST in her time, and railed against the lack of options for women.)
I do not believe that the public schools are Marxist, or that the Scriptures preached against “Socialism.” You can make a good point that Jesus was a Socialist (although I am NOT a Socialist, we all enjoy the benefits of “Socialism”, such as a Public Library, a Post Office, and Medicare.) How do these people get there?
More and more, I’m astounded at the vitriol thrown at terminology that isn’t even understood! Please ladies, define your terms – as someone said above. So I applaud your site here, and I hope you will allow this small Jewish unmarried woman to visit from time to time.
I’m saddened by the commentary on places like Generation Cedar, where women actually tell others in unhappy patriarchal relationships that “the way you make your bed is how you sleep in it” and you should “know the kind of man you marry before you marry him.” This is not a particulary loving way to refer to a Sister in Christ, now is it? And I wonder – if you’re following a courtship model, how do you actually GET to know this man you marry? And if the marriage is rocky, is it really because you’re “feminist” and “critical?” Seriously? I wonder at that.
Yeah, I had a few choice words come to mind as I read that post and the proceeding comments, and none of them are probably suitable for this blog. Hello? Mercy….anyone, anyone? I try not to go to that blog at all because it usually makes me want to become an atheist (but I have that whole loving Jesus issue and all, but I swear, that blog makes me THIS CLOSE to wanting to chuck the whole thing)…but a couple friends emailed me with a, “Have You Seen This????” sort of email…
I couldn’t believe the whole, “You made your bed,” thing, and then followed with nice little, “I think it’s bad that you’re even talking about your husband” comments.
WTF??? (that’s What the Feminist, of course). So, get this, in the post and the comments, women are told they are equals, but they are not equals when it comes to who makes decisions ABOUT EVERYTHING, that their husband is to be followed, that commanding/bossy/controlling leadership is not necessarily abusive, that suffering under an abusive man is godly, that if you choose to believe your abusive husband maybe isn’t supposed to lead you that means you left God’s word, that Kelly’s interpretation of God’s word IS infallible truth, that of course, silly, you should get help if your husband is abusive, and yet somehow at the same time don’t talk about it with anyone because that’s disrespectful and gives the enemy a open door in, plus it’s your fault anyway since you should have picked a better husband (like someone PICKS an abusive husband???) so really it’s all YOUR fault, blah blah blah.
Nice. I mean, who needs a Satan around when you have “sisters” like that.
Bah.
That site grieves me to my core. My gut reaction is to get angry and rant about it. Somehow, the Holy Spirit is creeping in there and reminding me that those folks need prayer and illumination more than anything. Patriocentrism (as opposed to your average complementarianism) is cult-like at its core. I think they deserve our pity and our prayer more then anything else.