As of the latest Intelligence Report from Southern Poverty Law Center, the American Family Association and Family Research Council are now listed as anti-LGBT hategroups--in part for promotion of literal Holocaust revisionism regarding gays and calls for their denationalisation and deportation (and worse).

(Of personal note--this is simultaneously vindicating and a bit clue-by-fouring. I grew up in, and walked away from, a church that was (and is) the state AFA affiliate's de facto headquarters; I can now legitimately say I was raised in a hate group, the same as a kid who was raised in a neo-Nazi group or a Klavern. I am unsure what to feel about this. :P)

HAMILTON — Solid Rock Church co-pastor Darlene Bishop has settled a bitter, years-long estate battle with the four children of her deceased brother, a hit Nashville songwriter.

Bishop has signed over control of Darrell Wayne Perry's estate and music catalog to Perry's son, Justin Jones. She filed Monday, July 26, to settle the account in Butler County Probate Court.

(Submitter's note: Solid Rock Church (best known as the home of the now-melted "Big Butter Jesus" of comedy song fame) is a NAR, neopente-dominionist church that has been the de facto center of the dominionist movement in southern Ohio. Among other things, they're linked to the "Gothardisation" of the city of Cincinnati via Gothard's frontgroup "International Association of Character Cities".

(There have also been reliable reports that Solid Rock Church extensively uses coercive tactics--many of which were documented in the lawsuit by the songwriter's family (which involved, among other things, a potentially forged will essentially giving his estate to Solid Rock). -dogemperor)

A new UNICEF report says accusations of child witchcraft are on the rise in Africa — leaving kids vulnerable to abuse, abandonment, and horrific "exorcisms"

(Submitter's note: Another report on the increasing crisis about child "throwaways" being accused of witchcraft or "ndoki"--a crisis definitively linked to the activities of NAR and neopente-dominionist "missionary" groups in sub-Saharan Africa.

(NGOs focusing on the needs of these children estimate that thousands (UNICEF estimates over 20,000 children in Kinshasa, Democratic Republic of the COngo alone)of children end up dead or as internally displaced persons--effectively orphaned--as a result.

(This is, unfortunately, also likely to lead to further condemnation of the UN by dominionists worldwide; in fact, it is primarily dominionist lobbying that has kept the US as the sole functioning UN-recognised state that has failed to ratify the Convention on the Rights of the Child; even the provisional government of Somalia (the other non-ratifying nation) has agreed in principle to ratify it once Somalia has a unified government. --dogemperor)

A Jacox Elementary teacher who anointed students with "holy oil" in the classroom has resigned.

School officials say she may have performed inappropriate religious practices during her three years with the division[...]

[...]Earlier this year, the division conducted an investigation at Oakwood Elementary after teachers told the state that their principal had led staff and students in prayer prior to Standards of Learning testing. Teachers also said they felt pressured by the principal, Sheila Tillett Holas, to attend prayer or Bible sessions before school.

(Submitter's note:

(This is indicative of possible widespread NAR infiltration of the school. The style of "annointing" here is NOT the use of sacramental chrysm (as is common in Catholic and Episcopalian/Anglican/CoE churches) but rather is a form of "spiritual territorial pissing" that is a veritable hallmark of NAR and neopentecostal groups. (Often the "oil" used is Wesson oil straight off the shelf; supposedly its very use by NARasites in "territorial pissing" supposedly blesses it.)

(Probably the best discussion of this form of "territorial pissing" in print, besides one of my artlcles here (which discusses the supposed theology behind the practice), is in the article "Soldiers of Christ" by Jeff Sharlet (published in the May 2005 issue of Harper's and available courtesy of Sharlet's website here). Sharlet, who went on to do an expose of the secretive "Family"/"Fellowship" dominionist group, describes an incident involving the NAR-linked New Life Church (yes, Ted Haggard's former church) wherein a massive "territorial pissing" of this type was done by spraying entire city blocks in Colorado Springs with a 5-gallon garden sprayer full of Wesson oil, in what is probably one of the more extreme versions of NARasite "annointing".)

[editor: This story is about a radical right wing movement in charismatic Christianity that claims to fight demons but, leaving demonology aside, is demonstrably close to seizing the reigns of power in entire US states.]

They claim to be able to raise the dead and cause miracles, such as the multiplication of Thanksgiving turkey dinners. They burn "witchcraft items" and "idols." They hold mass exorcisms to cast out alleged evil spirits they say cause lust, pornography, addiction, homosexuality, bisexuality, and perversion. They claim to be able to heal HIV, AIDS, Hepatitis C, Glaucoma, and cancer, and to break "generational curses" and "witchcraft curses." Who are they? Here are a few overviews[...]

Recently, the IRS has started to take the entire area of illegal electioneering by dominionist churches and 501(c)3 nonprofits rather more seriously, and in a tit-for-tat move dominionist groups are now going after blogs of progressive organisations--in essence threatening lawsuits and hinting at complaints to the IRS to have their 501(c)3 statuses removed. (In fact, a blog operated by a friend has recently been targeted in such a fashion.)

In this article, we give a bit of info on the new tool that dominionist and even some racist groups are using in attempts to stifle dissent--and the ongoing campaigns to make certain dominionist groups follow the law.

Blogs and electioneering and fun with finance law

The first part of this story comes in back in 2006, stemming from Bush-era initiatives to expand electioneering laws to private blogs (these in general have failed so far) stemming from a 2004 court decision that the FEC could not exempt blogs from regulations i regards to promoting candidates.

In general, the FEC has been using a press exemption since 2005 for blogs, but this has not stopped groups on occasion from threatening progressive blog sites, but there is still some legal uncertainty if a blogger who puts more than $5000 in "work" or funds on a site is considered to be going over the "in kind donatin limit".

It doesn't help that FEC rulings during the Bush era have generally been unfavourable to blog sites even with traditional grassroots fundraising.

Ironically, the rule that has led to this mess was a 2002 campaign financing act that was originally designed to prevent overt electioneering by corporations and unions close to campaign time (ironically, the court decision upholding this law resulted when Mitch McConnell--GOP ringleader and friend to the dominionist GOP wing in KY--attempted to have it overturned as the law was essentially interfering with ongoing "astroturf" campaigns.)

The rulings in the Obama administration, including the most recent ruling that essentially states that private blogs in support or opposition to a candidate are okay, have tended to be more favourable towards private advocacy of candidates. (The latest court decision involved a notably conservative group which supported candidates in favour of major relaxations of campaign finance rules.)

Attacks against blogs and bloggers

Dominionists and other groups have taken advantage of this to start targeting progressive organisations explicitly fighting dominionism--usually claiming that a progressive group or blog site is engaging in electioneering, and essentially threatening they will target the group to force them to register as a PAC or to have their tax-exempt status removed.

A number of sites have been threatened with this, including DailyKos (because of advocacy of progressive Democratic candidates by independent bloggers on the site), Americans United, People for the American Way, Military Religious Freedom Foundation, Southern Poverty Law Center (which increasingly has been reporting on distressing trends among dominionist groups, including virulent anti-LGBT hate-speech and association with neo-Confederate groups) and even some independent anti-dominionist blog sites.

In other words, they are threatening a variation of what has been termed a SLAPP--Strategic Lawsuit Against Public Participation, essentially a form of censorship-by-lawsuit. (It's been described as the legal equivalent of "Shut up and sit down", after an infamous quote by one of the NAR-linked steeplejackers of Singaporean women's NGO AWARE; aforementioned head of the board was trying to stifle dissent in the emergency board meeting where "people power" successfully took control back.)

Of note, the use of SLAPPs to shut down criticism is not only NOT unknown by dominionists, but is a common tool across coercive religious groups in general. An anti-dominionist group on an independent forum which I participate in was threatened with a SLAPP by a dominionist "deliverance ministry" promoter (who claims to be an ex-Mafioso who had a religious conversion) when information on his site and a linked site was posted; Operation Save America (a group that is essentially the modern continuation of Operation Rescue and which has such extensive linkage to the Army of God domestic terror network that both it and its "parent" Operation Rescue can legitimately be described as the Sinn Fein to the Army of God's "Real IRA") regularly has threatened SLAPPs against critics, particularly those connected to reproductive-rights advocacy; dominionist coercive "Messianic" group Jews for Jesus has engaged in not only SLAPPs but attempts at domain hijacking to shut down a walkaway forum critical of the group; the Assemblies of God has regularly attempts SLAPPs against walkaways in Oz (including an attempt, via a threatened SLAPP against her original publisher under the broadly abusable libel laws in Australia, to squelch publication of Tanya Levin's expose of Hillsong Community Church entitled "People In Glass Houses") and against pastors who got expelled due to reporting to the church administration about religious abuse simply for writing about the NARasitisation of the denomination; and finally even a company responsible for what amounts to "Joel's Army endtime fanfiction" threatened SLAPPs against not only every anti-dominionist site that had reported on "Left Behind: Eternal Forces" (a tactical RPG where one literally played a dominionist "endtime army" which did include a feature where one could convert--or kill--"unbelievers") but even against an independent game review blog that had given it a poor rating.

There may in fact be a reason that dominionist groups are using the threat of tax exemption revocation on progressive non-profits in particular (many of which have blogs, and some of who have staff that blog independently or on independent sites NOT associated with the nonprofit they work for)...namely, this is an increasing, and far more legitimate threat, against dominionist groups themselves.

Electioneering starts to get risky for dominionists

Since 2006 (when the "new generation" of anti-dominionism activism started ramping up)--and particularly since the Obama administration--the IRS has become increasingly intolerant of nonprofit groups engaging in explicit political electioneering, even issuing explicit warnings to churches and to political parties in 2008 to remind them that electioneering for specific candidates, parties, or bills was prohibited.

The last major wave where the IRS gave the hairy eyeball to dominionist groups was during the Clinton administration--during that period, the Christian Coalition lost their tax-exemption (and essentially ceased to exist as a major force in the dominionist movement), the Kentucky-based NAR-linked "Freedom's Heritage Forum" was stripped of its tax-exemption and actually legally required to reorganise as a PAC (and now operates as a shell PAC of AFA-KY, the state American Family Association affiliate), and Focus on the Family nearly lost its tax-exempt status due to activities of the then-affiliated Family Research Council (thus forcing FotF to spin this off as a supposedly-independent group, and promptly forming the shell org "Focus on the Family Action" for the identical purposes of FRC).

As it turns out, the IRS is again turning its eyes to major dominionist groups--among other things, Focus on the Family has undergone some major reorganisation (including spinoff of at least one group that promoted "degaying" and separating itself on paper from James Dobson's massive dominionist publishing empire) and there have been rumours that FotF is being investigated by the IRS. In addition, thanks to the revelations of the "C Street" shenanigans, possibly the most secretive and oldest political dominionist group in the US--the Family aka the Fellowship--is reportedly under IRS investigation thanks to efforts by anti-dominionist activists and the anti-corruption organisation Citizens United.

A surprising amount of the efforts to fight abuse of tax exemptions by dominionist groups has been by evangelical Christians and faith groups. An ongoing Congressional investigation of several televangelists connected to an embezzlement scandal at Oral Roberts University was launched by Senator Chuck Grassley--normally a friend to dominionist initiatives, but apparently not a friend to institutionalised corruption by dominionist groups.

An even more notable example is with a growing coalition of anti-dominionist pastors and other religious leaders in Ohio who have (since 2006) been recording violations of electioneering law and challenging the tax-exempt status of churches in Ohio that are the center of the dominionist electioneering engine--including World Harvest Church of Columbus, which is not only at the heart of the dominionist movement in Ohio but is behind a growing movement to encourage illegal electioneering from the pulpit, particularly in Texas.

Perhaps as a result of the busts in the 1990s and the threat of busts nowadays of tax-exemption revocation, dominionist groups (most notably the "American historical revisionist" and NAR-associated group Wallbuilders) are explicitly organising as churches themselves; much of the actual electioneering has also been ongoing for decades within NAR-linked churches and "cuckoo church" laymen's "cell churches". This is to take advantage of a specific tax loophole for churches--alone of all 501(c)3 nonprofits, churches do not have to file a form 990 (the equivalent for nonprofits of a 1040 form) meaning it is very easy to hide the profits and sources of funding and who the group itself is funding. (This is actually why Chuck Grassley has had to issue a Congressional subpoena to many of the televangelists he's investigating for possible embezzlement; there are no public records available because they don't have to file a form 990.)

Needless to say, the threat to their funding would be substantial if they had their tax-exempt revoked. Focus on the Family has historically pulled in upwards of $140,000,000 US (this year, between the economy and reorganisations, it may be less, but still in the high tens of millions US), and most other political dominionist groups pull in tens of millions of dollars US. For the VERY few NAR-linked groups that financial info is available for--such as the Lausanne Conference--the figures tend to dwarf even those of Focus on the Family; some pull in $240 million yearly.

And this is still dwarfed by the worst offenders--dominionist denominations themselves such as the Assemblies of God and the Southern Baptist Convention. Based on known finances of frontgroups of the Assemblies (such as known funding for the publically documented parts of Teen Challenge and Mercy Ministries), the figure is potentially in the billions of dollars US of taxable income. (We can't say for certain, though--this is just estimated based on what precious little is available.) It's actually been stated by multiple researchers that removal of the "Form 1023 Loophole" (the form 1023 being the statement to the IRS that a group is a church, essentially the "get out of jail free" card) would do wonders in shutting down much of the dominionist engine simply because the funding sources of the "dominionist engine" would suddenly be tracable for the first time.

(Of note here: The Assemblies in particular has a very good case of having its own tax-exempt status revoked as it is not only consistently ranked as one of the worst offenders by Americans United for electioneering violations but has engaged in direct funding of GOP candidate's election campaigns, been a recipient of non-negligible largesse from known friendlies (up to and even including giving the legislative equivalent of a "get out of jail free" card to one of the most confirmedly abusive "faith based rehab" chains in the US which is one of three separate Assemblies frontgroups in that sector worldwide) and even explicitly encouraging dominionist pastors to disregard Congressional subpoenas in Grassley's probe. The situation is even worse if international electioneering--including the Family First party in Australia, a de facto official Assemblies political party that in itself is a front of Hillsong Community Church, is considered.)

It's also not coincidential that a lot of the progressive groups being threatened due to their blog sites--or due to employees having blog sites--is because these groups themselves are among those who regularly challenge the tax-exempt status of dominionist groups engaging in illegal electioneering.

Probably one of the main questions--right next to "How do we stop dominionists?"--I'm asked when writing is "Why do into coercive religious groups in the first place?"

One thing to note is that, in general, people less join a coercive group and more are recruited into a coercive group or are raised in a coercive group.

A new article by Jonathan Rice and Vyckie Garrison--the latter of whom runs No Longer Quivering, a support forum for ex-Quiverfull survivors--gives a glimpse of how coercive group recruitment works from a first-hand view.

A glimpse on a disturbing dominionist movement

Some of my longterm readers may be familiar with the term "Quiverfull"--I've mentioned it in my series on religiously motivated child abuse in relation to Michael and Debi Pearl (a series that is, unfortunately, timely again due to the recent death by chastening rod of a seven-year-old girl) and particularly in regards to my writing on Bill Gothard's "Bible-based" coercive group empire.

For those uninitiated, "Quiverfull" is a movement within both "independent fundamentalist Baptist" and neopentecostal-dominionist (including New Apostolic Reformation/Joel's Army) circles that promotes the idea of dispensing with any form of contraception whatsoever--even the rhythm method is prohibited--and actively attempting to have as many children "as God will allow".

In NAR circles in particular, this is explicitly seen as a method to breed as many future members of "God's Army" as possible using justification not dissimilar to that of the King of England in "Braveheart" ("If we can't burn them out, we'll breed them out"); segments of the Quiverfull movement also increasingly push for home births without medical assistance and even "unregistered births" (where the birth is never registered with the state Department of Human Resources or other state birth registries and where the child is never signed up for Social Security).

In fact, the term in its modern use does have NAR-ish roots--the term "Quiverfull" denotes having a "full quiver" of arrows to defeat The Enemy (in this case, secular society)--only in this case, the metaphorical "arrows" are children who are reared from birth onwards in a regimented, socially isolated manner. (In general, the only typical contacts kids in "Quiverfull families" have are with families of other members of the movement.) The term ultimately stems from a scripture-twisting of Psalms 127:4-5:

[4] Like arrows in the hand of a warrior

are the sons of one's youth.

[5] Happy is the man who has

his quiver full of them!

He shall not be put to shame

when he speaks with his enemies in the gate.

(RSV. In context, this is a psalm of Solomon stating that true protection is in the hands of God and that true preparedness and security only comes from God. Prior verses explicitly note that a watchman's duty is in vain unless God is the foundation of the country, among other things.)

Promotion of "Quiverfull" is commonly done via dominionist correspondence-school circles promoting themselves as "Christian homeschooling"; the Pearls' and Gothard's empires have largely grown, in fact, through dominionist correspondence-school support networks.

A related phenomenon is that of "purity balls"--also written about in part one of my series on religiously motivated child abuse--where daughters sometimes as young as four are symbolically "married" to their fathers until such time as they are married legally--often to an arranged spouse.

As I've noted, the movement is heavily connected with dominionism and would constitute a coercive group in and of itself. As the article notes:

These children are homeschooled for the most part, in the hopes that they'll become an army of the Lord's mighty warriors who, through sheer demographic force, reclaim America for God. Females are kept in perpetual servitude from earliest childhood, where they are considered the property of their fathers and spend their days caring for younger siblings. When a girl reaches puberty she must pledge her virginity/purity to her father (often in writing). Once the father finds a suitor to his liking, he transfers his ownership of the young lady to her husband. Adult women in the movement are not allowed to work outside the home, and usually forbidden to speak in church (obviously, they can never be ordained!). And based upon a quirky interpretation of an obscure biblical passage (Isaiah 3:12), they are also forbidden to vote.

Lurking beneath the QF/CP lifestyle lies the teachings of R.J. Rushdoony, the leading exponent of a dire and militant form of Calvinism called "Christian Reconstructionism." In his massive tome Institutes of Biblical Law, he advocated the overthrow of modern democracy, replacing it with a theocratic state in which all the laws of Leviticus are imposed (including the death penalty for disobedient children, adulterers and homosexuals). Also, as per his reading of the Bible, the theocratic state would reintroduce slavery. Hard-line QF/CP believers think that creating a population explosion of their own is the most effective means of bringing this dystopic vision to fruition.

It is not an exaggeration in some cases--particularly Gothard's program--to compare the general setup to a dominionist version of Taliban-era Afghanistan.

* * *

Surprisingly enough, most people have seen a Quiverfull family on TV--though they might not have known it.

And, of note, there is at least one Quiverfull family that has become famous--the Duggar clan, who are known Gothard acolytes and whom are presented as pretty much the poster children for the Quiverfull movement.

Another Quiverfull family, alas, became quite infamous. This was, unfortunately, the family of Andrea Yates--who was involved in a dominionist church that promoted Quiverfull theology, and who ultimately ended up drowning five of her young children as a result of postpartum depression complicated by what may well have been cult-related complex PTSD.

* * *

As with most coercive religious movements, there are walkaway networks for support. The best known by far is No Longer Quivering, run by Vyckie Garrison (who is herself not only an ex-Quiverfull survivor, but prior to walking away was a major promoter in the movement). The images one gets are of a highly patriarchial, overtly female-hostile, coercive religious movement (and it does meet the characteristics of an overt coercive religious group, particularly in its isolation of members) in which women are expected to give all, up to and including their bodies and health, for the whim of their leaders.

And it's through these forums that we get a rare glimpse into what it is like to be recruited into a Bible-based cult.

Like a frog being boiled in water

People have asked me repeatedly how folks get recruited into coercive groups. As I am a multigenerational walkaway--that is, I was raised in a coercive group rather than joining one as a teen or adult--it's hard for me to answer this personally; pretty much, most of my life "Jesus Camp life" was all I knew, and my experiences have been more of essentially resocialising myself (not unlike a kid who was raised by wolves and having to figure out human culture).

Johnathan W. Rice's recent article in Salon Magazine, Fear And Loathing In Jesusland, describes a story I've heard across ex-cult forums from recruitees who became walkaways--that you're never given the "Full Monty" straightaway but are gradually inducted.

The big difference, here, is that--for one of the first times since Matt Taibbi's "The Great Derangement"--this is talking about a non-negligible part of the dominionist movement:

In mid-February 2010, a thread title on the forum caught my eye: How did you get yourself into this mess? The author, a female refugee from the movement, was wondering how she and so many others could have fallen for it in the first place.

After reading it, I again realized how closely the QF/CP movement intersects with mainstream evangelicalism and fundamentalism; and how easily I too could have been recruited, given the wrong circumstances. How, one may ask, do people get into such a seemingly bizarre religious movement? And how had I (in the past) been in danger of being sucked in myself?

The answer boils down to one simple word: "gradually."

The substance of my gradual experience, which I'll summarize here, is the shared story of countless rank & file believers who come under the broad labels "Pentecostal," "charismatic," "evangelical," and "fundamentalist."

In the beginning, as a teen in the mid 1970s, my cousin, followed by my mother, became born-again Christians. It was really positive in those days: God loves you and has a wonderful plan, and so forth. It was all about having a new life, full of purpose and meaning. A life in which the very Creator of the Universe actually cared about little people like us!

Among other things, a big thing that the more coercive groups in the movement (including not just Campus Crusade and YWAM, but the infamous Maranatha) were involved in was "love-bombing"--smothering people with affection, making them feel wonderful and loved. The author himself experienced some of this, and also describes how after the "love-in" the indoctrination started to trickle in, eventually becoming a torrent:

It was all really positive in those early, idealistic years. Loving Jesus, hoping to save the world, helping homeless people, having an abundance of real friends who stood with me through thick and thin: it was all good; really good. The song that often brought tears to my eyes in the early days was written by Keith Green immediately upon his conversion (before he'd entered into his extremist phase): Like waking up from the longest dream How real it seemed Until your love broke through

But gradually...

A radio program called Focus on the Family that I used to hear doling out advice to crisis-wracked families, was becoming politicized. Through the show, and then through the warnings of Tim LaHaye and others, I began learning of sinister threats being hatched against us by people called "Secular Humanists." LaHaye, in a breathless, frenzied spiel, warned of the threat as follows. Humanists, he said: have been "planted" in strategic places in the United Nations, they teach children in public schools "to read the words scientific humanism as soon as they're old enough to read," and 275,000 humanists control the American government, education, and media.[2]

As conspiracy-paranoia mounted, politics in church began to subvert the innocent, Jesus-loving expressions of faith I'd known in the beginning. Our churches started distributing candidates' score cards in the foyers, telling us to vote accordingly.

And then there was a radio preacher, William Steuart McBirnie, whose Voice of Americanism program daily rehashed senator McCarthy's and Carl McIntire's Red Scare fundamentalism, updating it for the mid-1980s. We had much to fear and many to loathe.

([2] Tim LaHaye, The Battle For the Mind (Old Tappan, NJ: Revell, 1980), pp. 27, 74, 97, 179. Summarized in George M. Mardsen, Understanding Fundamentalism and Evangelicalism ( MI: Wm.B. Eerdmans Publishing Co, 1991), p. 109.)

In addition to describing a phenomena I've witnessed myself--the increasing radicalisation of "Christian Contemporary" performers, including Steve Taylor and Carmen (the latter of whom actually co-published (with Ron Luce of Teen Mania Ministries, an infamous NAR group targeting--naturally--teenagers) a guide for teenagers on how to recruit fellow teens into Bible-based coercive groups using love-bombing and harassment)--he notes personally meeting Francis and Frank Shaeffer, two major leaders of the dominionist movement in the late 70s and early 80s. (Frank Schaeffer later left the dominionist movement and has written a tell-all book, "Crazy for God", describing his own experiences; reportedly, per the book, he initially recruited his own father into the movement.)

Of note, the author almost makes a point I have been writing about for well over five years--that dominionism is less a political movement and more of a series of Bible-based cults that have as a common goal the establishment of a dominionist-supremacist government:

Most cults have a well-planned program for the indoctrination of new recruits, in which they deceitfully hide their more bizarre teachings from seekers (an exoteric/esoteric truth divide). The new convert is only taught the vision piecemeal; gradually gaining deeper (and weirder) knowledge over a period of months or years.

But with us, although it may have appeared that way, it wasn't exactly so. I later realized I was living in the midst of a drastic change in popular American Christianity. The movement still really was (for the most part) benign when I joined. The resentful loathing was added gradually, not as a planned indoctrination program, but because the church genuinely was in the midst of radical transition during 1980s and '90s.

I myself would agree and disagree with his statement--what he may not have been aware of is that, particularly during the 80s and 90s, there was an organised campaign (beginning as early as the waning days of the Latter Rain movement in the 40s) to explicitly steeplejack the non-Christian-Nationalist segment of the evangelical movement. Legitimate "Charismatic" movements in Catholic and Protestant denominations were taken over from within by neopentecostal "cuckoo churches".

In this case, the cult recruitment was less of individual people and more of a takeover-from-within and indoctrination of a very large chunk of the evangelical movement--one particularly mediated by New Apostolic Reformation groups as well as a group calling itself the Institute for Religion and Democracy that was closely connected to Christian Reconstructionists. (Probably the prototypical example, in fact, was the ultimately successful steeplejacking of the Southern Baptist Convention--formerly a conservative but relatively mainline denomination, it has gone hard-dominionist and is now quite possibly undergoing a second "consolidation" steeplejack by NAR-linked groups.)

The NAR takeovers and plans for steeplejacks--particularly of non-NAR-linked charismatic worship groups--is, to this day, woefully under-documented (about the only people who've written on this regularly are myself, Bruce Wilson, Rachel Tabachnik, and Katherine Yurica and to a lesser extent Sara Diamond), so that's an understandable lapse--to someone who didn't grow up in one of the major foci of the NAR movement (as I did), it would appear that the evangelical movement just "radicalised slowly".

Interestingly, it turns out I'm not the only one to make that argument--theologian Richard T. Hughes noted in a recent article the likelihood that the evangelical movement had essentially been steeplejacked by Christian Reconstructionists and the NAR for purposes of promoting "Christian supremacy":

This definition of the kingdom of God as a kingdom of political power helps explain why so many fundamentalist and evangelical Christians lent such broad support to America's war against Iraq. It also helps explain the rise of the Christian Reconstruction Movement led by the late R. J. Rushdoony, a Calvinist who argued that Christians should control civil government and that biblical law should govern the United States. It also helps explain a large and thriving contemporary network, closely akin to the Christian Reconstruction Movement, called the New Apostolic Reformation (NAR) -- a network that works through business, politics, religion, and the media to promote Christian control of the United States and even the world.

And by 1985--and definitely by 1992--Rice was experiencing a classic hallmark of coercive religious groupthink: An "us versus them" seige mentality, a Culture Of Fear, that every researcher on coercive religious groups from Robert J. Lifton on has defined as a red flag warning of a cult:

And thus by 1985, my original faith, though still there, was mixed with anger, resentment and fear—a sense of being under siege.

After another few years, the Rev. Don Wildmon, who Max Blumenthal would later describe as "churlish,"[4] started telling us to boycott Mennon Speed Stick deodorant because it was advertised on a TV show which he, and therefore God, didn't approve of.

Then, in 1990, James Dobson openly began using the language of civil war: "Nothing short of a great Civil War of Values rages today throughout North America. Two sides with vastly differing and incompatible world views are locked in a bitter conflict that permeates every level of society."[5]

Whether the timing of Dobson's drum beating was cunning or just plain lucky, I don't know. But it certainly was fortuitous.

. . .

Civil War. What a great idea! Brother against brother. A woman against her coworker. Neighbor against neighbor. Divide and conquer. A nation's unity destroyed. And when all was said and done, Dobson emerged from the fray as the new Republican Kingmaker.

In such a milieu, those negative traits of resentment and fear had become almost central, my original faith being sickly, barely alive and far beneath the surface. We were now in the midst of full-blown culture-war. And all that the churches and Christian mailing list materials were trumpeting was also confirmed by an outside source: The Rush Limbaugh show.

By 1992 I'd made the full transition from a spirituality of awe, joy and wonder to one of hatred, fear and all-around loathing. We Christians were under siege.

"They" were taking away our freedoms. "They" had planted Secular Humanist agents in every 'government school,' brainwashing the next generation. Not only that, The New Age Movement (painted as a well-organized conspiracy rather than the loosely knit spiritual fad that it was) was out to forge a One World Government and wipe the final vestiges of Christianity from the face of the earth.

([5] James Dobson, Children at Risk (Dallas: Word Publishing, 1990), pp. 19-20.)

In noting that the movement was increasingly trending towards "two-minute hates", Rice also notes how the "Rambo Jesus" meme was becoming increasingly popularised:

As the content of our faith changed, so did our conceptualization of Jesus. He was no longer a God of love, but a muscle-bound tyrant. Speaking of the Christian Right in 2009, journalist Max Blumenthal's following description also summarizes the view of Jesus that was gaining ascendancy among us in the 1990s:

The movement's Jesus is the opposite of the prince of peace. He is a stern, overtly masculine patriarch charging into the fray with his sword raised against secular foes; he is "the head of a dreadful company, mounted on a white horse, with a double-edged sword, his robe dipped in blood," according to movement propagandist Steve Arterburn. [Mega-church pastor] Mark Driscoll…stirs the souls of twenty-something evangelical men with visions of "Ultimate Fighting Jesus…"

A portrait of virility and violence, the movement's omnipotent macho Jesus represents the mirror inversion of the weak men who necessitated his creation. As [Erich] Fromm explained, "the lust for power is not rooted in strength, but in weakness [italics in original]. It is the expression of the individual self to stand alone and live. It is the desperate attempt to gain secondary strength where genuine strength is lacking." [8]

([8] Max Blumenthal, Republican Gomorrah, pp. 9, 10.)

Rice also notes that he now considers himself lucky that he was not within proximity of the more charismatic promoters of Quiverfull--as he, already inducted within what he has all-but-admitted was a coercive religious group, would have been the perfect recruit:

I knew three Quiverfull families back in those days, though I didn't yet know the term. Two of them had become discredited in my sight, one badly so. The other had moved far across the country to the Bible Belt, and thus their influence on me was minimal.

But: supposing a well-spoken, polished QF/CP promoter, who in outward appearance had an exemplary life and family, had befriended me then. And supposing this theoretical person had possessed a charismatic personality. Had this happened, I very well could have bought into the QF/CP vision.

The angry and ever-intensifying Christian Right machine had changed our churches into pre-stocked ponds in which QF/CP and other extremists fished. I was one of those pre-stocked fish.

I just happened (by no virtue of my own at the time) to always be on the other side of the pond when people like Nancy Campbell, R.C. Sproul Jr., Doug Phillips, et al., went fishing.

That's why I find it no surprise that so many of the former QF/CP people (like Vyckie Garrison, for example) are so smart and articulate. People don't join the movement because they're idiots. On the contrary, they join because they're thoughtful, intelligent human beings who really care about their country; who are concerned about the kind of world in which their children and grandchildren will live.

But these same good qualities became a curse when cunning fascist leaders subtly began to channel them for their ends. And thus over the gradual course of time—sometimes even a decade—we (both "regular" believers and QF/CP Christians) became foot soldiers in a zombie-army, doing the political bidding of our Christian Right masters.

In other words...the process of recruitment is a gradual one. People generally don't join knowing the "full deal"--they are recruited with something innocuous, then the indoctrination begins over time until they've been recruited and are marching lockstep to a leader's command.

The process is not unlike the old yarn on how to boil a frog. Put a frog in boiling water, he'll jump right out (just like nobody would willingly join a coercive religious group if they knew it was coercive).

Put a frog in body-temperature water, though, and slowly turn up the heat...by the time the frog realises what's going on, he's cooked.

And so it is with recruitment in coercive religious groups...and the "Bible-based" coercive groups at the heart of the dominionist movement are absolute masters at turning up the water very, very slowly for a whole kettle of frogs.

And how the frog realises, "oh dear, I'm in a pot"

Interestingly, Rice ended up walking away in a similar way to myself--only in his case, he ended up going to the Emerald City of the dominionist movement, Colorado Springs, and saw for himself that the Emerald City isn't nearly as pretty without the glasses on:

As I headed toward Colorado in a U-Haul van, my knowledge of that city was minimal. I knew it was America's new evangelical Mecca, populated with scores of Christian organizations; and I loved the beautiful Front Range Mountains I'd seen on my visit a month before.

But my main source of information was a book I'd read seven years prior, Ted Haggard's, Primary Purpose: Making It Hard for People to Go to Hell from Your City.[9] In it, I'd read the amazing story of how Haggard and his initially small band of followers had transformed the supposedly pagan, anti-Christian city into God's own country. Through spiritual mapping (identifying the ruling demons in a given area) and systematic warfare-prayer walks through each neighborhood (in which those demons were expelled from the region, presumably to resettle in Washington state, California, New York and Massachusetts), Colorado Springs was now the godliest place in America: truly a city that was "hard to go to Hell from."

Or so I thought…

Although the organization that employed me was benign and apolitical, through my involvement with it I was exposed to the other big ministries in the area. Year after year I witnessed countless episodes of hypocrisy and self-congratulatory backslapping amongst Christian Right leaders.

I soon felt uneasy amongst people I'd once greatly admired. The church we attended turned out to be a de facto outpost of the Republican Party, and according to the pastor's bizarre interpretation of an Isaiah passage, God had foreordained Republican Jesus to defeat Babylonian Saddam Hussein.

By 2005, the church was showing a smiling picture of Sam Brownback each Sunday on the large overhead screen. The pastor would then instruct us to stretch forth our hands and pray fervently for him. Brownback, dubbed "God's Senator" by Jeff Sharlet, was a near-perfect embodiment of America's new civil religion. He was a syncretic marvel who could glide effortlessly between his (Fundamentalist) Topeka Bible Church, Roman Catholicism, and a smattering of Orthodox Judaism.

One cold winter Sunday, the pastor excitedly told us of the senator's latest mystical experience: Brownback, the pastor claimed, had just been to Valley Forge with a group of prayer leaders. There, he knelt at the exact spot where George Washington had once famously prayed. While on his knees in the snow, Brownback had received "the spiritual mantle of George Washington," an anointing which would send him to the Whitehouse in 2008—but only if God's people prayed long and hard enough.

Growing weary of weekly political rallies, we soon dropped out of the church. As the Iraq War went sour and the federal deficit went into the trillions under the "godly" Bush, I became increasingly disillusioned. Then came wave upon wave of varied Republican scandals; so many that they soon became an endless blur in my mind, and would have remained so to this day had Max Blumenthal not compiled them all under one cover in Republican Gomorrah.

I realized that we'd been duped by the Christian Right: the politicians they promoted were not godly at all. They'd exploited a few causes that people felt passionately about, using them to con millions of voters. It had nothing to do with God's will, only the will to power.

([9] Florida: Creation House, 1995. Of note, the book wass a major "how to" guide for NAR churches, though a bit less so now due to Haggard's outing as gay.)

In addition to finding out that the local dominionist churches were essentially doing political stumping disguised as sermons, he also made the unhappy discovery (through his daughter, no less) that Colorado Springs was considered the methamphetamine capital of Colorado; even worse, around the time he left (in 2007) a major scandal broke regarding a human-trafficking ring where Asian women were being kidnapped and forced to work as de facto indentured servants in massage parlors.

More to the point, his breaking point was, interestingly, the same as mine--discovering that the moral crusaders were lying out their teeth:

During that season I also learned we'd been lied to. Contrary to the jeremiads of the Christian Right's propaganda industry, it wasn't "America's godless, secular intelligentsia" who had removed the Bible and the knowledge of God from our educational system. In reality, Christians themselves had caused it nearly 200 years ago.

By the 1820s, America's public schools were in a dilemma. Calvinists wanted the schools to teach only Calvinism, but Arminians (mostly Methodists) wanted them to teach only their doctrines. Several other sects were making demands of their own. And all of them agreed that no matter which version of Christianity won out in the classrooms, it should never be Roman Catholicism, which they all abhorred with equal passion. The endless infighting overwhelmed school authorities, who eventually gave up on the teaching of religion, substituting a vague, generic moral science in its place.[10]

The same thing goes for taking Bible reading out of public schools. No, it wasn't a cabal of Secular Humanists in the early 1960s, but Christians themselves who brought it about, through viscous infighting between Protestants (most of whom championed the King James Bible) and Catholics who could only accept the Douay-Rheims translation.

Speaking of the "Bible Wars" in the mid-nineteenth century, Stephen Prothero writes, "The most visible battlefield in these early culture wars was Philadelphia, where Protestant-Catholic riots over whose Bible would be read in public schools left over a dozen people dead and Catholic churches burned to the ground in 1844."[11] In addition to outright violence and murder, the endless polemical clashes between these groups caused school administrators to become weary and wary. As a result, by the 1870s, public schools in many states had not only done away with Christian education, but Bible reading and hymn singing as well.

Contrary to what we'd learned from the Christian Right, the rulings of 1962 and '63 were merely the final few nails in the coffin—not the beginning of a cultural decline engineered by Secular Humanists.

. . .

Living in Colorado Springs and learning what I did there was like Neo swallowing the red pill. I'd seen the truth about The Matrix. I could never go back; life couldn't continue as it had before.

([10] Stephen Prothero, Religious Literacy: What Every American Needs to Know—And Doesn't (New York: HarperCollins, 2007), pp. 109-120.

[11] Ibid, pp. 121-127.)

It was much the same with me--finding out I was being lied to was the "red pill" that eventually led me to reality in the end.

And it is precisely this breeding of a Culture of Fear that causes thousands--if not millions--of children to be subjected to religiously motivated child abuse; the same one that forces women to live under a system of religiously motivated patriarchy that places them at grave risk of religiously motivated spousal abuse...

...and it can be said that the Fear Engine, at its core, and the hypermasculine bravado is the very engine running the dominionist movement.

Over the past few days, I've been writing a series of articles on religiously motivated child abuse, largely focusing on the "Bible-based baby beating" empire of Michael and Debi Pearl (whose tactics have been linked to multiple deaths).

They are, sadly, by far not the only promoters of these tactics. One of the best known promoters of religiously motivated child abuse, in fact, has a network of hundreds of radio stations, a column carried in no less than 400 papers, and an international dominionist lobbying empire that has been linked to everything from the Justice Sunday events in the US to the attempted steeplejacking of the women's NGO AWARE in Singapore.

The folks behind Stop The Rod have been some of the best folks around at exposing this dirty secret of dominionism and keeping the promoters of "Bible-based baby-beating" from sweeping the subject--and the occasional corpse, and the scores more psychically and physically wounded from this--under the rug. Among other things, they were among some of the first to do an expose of the works from the Pearls now linked to the death of a child, and have done valuable work in also exposing the promotion of religiously motivated child abuse by Tedd Tripp (whose methods in some ways are even more abusive than the Pearls'!), Richard Fugate, Reb Bradley (who at times literally commits plagarism of Fugate's baby-beating manuals), Lisa Welchel (who became quite infamous when she promoted the use of "hot saucing"--placing hot-sauces and extracts--on the tongues of small children for things like "sassing"; Tabasco's manufacturers (McIlheny Inc.) and Texas Pete's makers both issued statements calling the practice "strange and scary" and giving strong warnings about it) and has a heartbreaking and horrifying story from a survivor of--and the main test subject for--Roy Lessin's baby-beating books.

And now the folks at Stop The Rod have begun their same stellar work at exposing abuse from probably the most well known name in religiously motivated child abuse--none other than Dr. James Dobson.

Yes, that Dr. Dobson. As in the guy behind "Focus on the Family" Dobson. Sit tight--this is going to be a heck of a ride.

* * *
Dr. James Dobson has made a career off of two industries--running the largest dominionist political group in the US (one which was recently found to have registered itself as a church with the IRS--this should hopefully lead to some investigation).

His other major business is targeting families--and particularly children. Some of it is in the method of recruitment of kids--most infamously in the giveaways of CDs from "Adventures in Odyssey", a radio programme produced by Focus on the Family and targeted at the elementary school set.

The other way he targets kids isn't so innocuous; in fact, he is one of the primary promoters--and probably the most successful--of "Biblically based child-beating". In fact, he makes a healthy living by it--over $25 million dollars of Focus on the Family's income yearly is from royalties from Dr. Dobson's "child-training" manuals, all of which are used to fund dominionism and printing of more of his books.

In my initial series on the subject of religiously motivated child abuse, I mentioned some of the more well-known "highlights" of Dr. Dobson's material that had been documented by watchdog groups concerned about religiously motivated child abuse. A review starts out with possibly the most infamous quote reported--the literal use of the beating of a Dachsund to show how children's wills should be broken in the introduction to his book "The Strong-Willed Child":

"Please don't misunderstand me. Siggie is a member of our family and we love him dearly. And despite his anarchistic nature, I have finally taught him to obey a few simple commands. However, we had some classic battles before he reluctantly yielded to my authority.

"The greatest confrontation occurred a few years ago when I had been in Miami for a three-day conference. I returned to observe that Siggie had become boss of the house while I was gone. But I didn't realize until later that evening just how strongly he felt about his new position as Captain.

"At eleven o'clock that night, I told Siggie to go get into his bed, which is a permanent enclosure in the family room. For six years I had given him that order at the end of each day, and for six years Siggie had obeyed.

"On this occasion, however, he refused to budge. You see, he was in the bathroom, seated comfortably on the furry lid of the toilet seat. That is his favorite spot in the house, because it allows him to bask in the warmth of a nearby electric heater. . . "
. . .
"When I told Sigmund to leave his warm seat and go to bed, he flattened his ears and slowly turned his head toward me. He deliberately braced himself by placing one paw on the edge of the furry lid, then hunched his shoulders, raised his lips to reveal the molars on both sides, and uttered his most threatening growl. That was Siggie's way of saying. "Get lost!"

"I had seen this defiant mood before, and knew there was only one way to deal with it. The ONLY way to make Siggie obey is to threaten him with destruction. Nothing else works. I turned and went to my closet and got a small belt to help me 'reason' with Mr. Freud."
. . .
"What developed next is impossible to describe. That tiny dog and I had the most vicious fight ever staged between man and beast. I fought him up one wall and down the other, with both of us scratching and clawing and growling and swinging the belt. I am embarrassed by the memory of the entire scene. Inch by inch I moved him toward the family room and his bed. As a final desperate maneuver, Siggie backed into the corner for one last snarling stand. I eventually got him to bed, only because I outweighed him 200 to 12!"

After describing thrashing the family dog, he notes this in the context of childrearing:

"But this is not a book about the discipline of dogs; there is an important moral to my story that is highly relevant to the world of children. JUST AS SURELY AS A DOG WILL OCCASIONALLY CHALLENGE THE AUTHORITY OF HIS LEADERS, SO WILL A LITTLE CHILD -- ONLY MORE SO."

"[I]t is possible to create a fussy, demanding baby by rushing to pick him up every time he utters a whimper or sigh. Infants are fully capable of learning to manipulate their parents through a process called reinforcement, whereby any behavior that produces a pleasant result will tend to recur. Thus, a healthy baby can keep his mother hopping around his nursery twelve hours a day (or night) by simply forcing air past his sandpaper larynx."

Dobson, much like other promoters of "Bible-based baby-beating", claims that if you don't whack the hell out of your kids (literally) they'll be damned:

"Perhaps this tendency toward self-will is the essence of 'original sin' which has infiltrated the human family. It certainly explains why I place such stress on the proper response to willful defiance during childhood, for that rebellion can plant the seeds of personal disaster."

Dobson has, previously, been considered one of the "kindler and gentler" promoters of "whacking your kids for Jesus"; Stop The Rod, however, is showing that in many ways the "Dr. Spock" of the dominionist set is just as bad as the Pearls and more infamous "child training" manual authors.

In what is an appropriate start for an expose of Dobson, Stop The Rod--a group that has been successful in getting a bill in Congress that may finally stop the marketing of devices as "chastening rods"--begins with a review of "The New Strong-Willed Child". Of course, the Scourging of Siggie is covered with the observation that this would be considered animal abuse. (Not only that, but it's also the observations of people I've know who have worked in humane shelters that beating dogs like that tends to turn them into fear-biters--which, sadly, often have to be put down as unadoptable.)

The article also notes, of interest, how Dobson really seems to feel about kids--and, much like the Pearls, apparently he thinks that all infants are in a great conspiracy against their parents for World Baby Domination (and he even has a nice little bell graph to explain his original views, followed up with a graph showing most kids as "defiant" as his present view:

(from page 7)

However, having talked to about 100,000 harried parents, I'm convinced my supposition was wrong. The true distribution looks more like this...

The fun continues with the claims of Infantile Tyranny, as documented by Stop The Rod:

Dobson calls children many insulting names in this book: brat, bratty, pugnacious, spitfires, defiant, confirmed anarchists, hot lava, Goody Two-Shoes, sneaky, horrid, little revolutionaries, defiant, contentious, double trouble, hardheaded as mules, tough-minded, little fat-fingers, defiant, toughie, irritating, pack of adolescent wolves, confirmed revolutionary, Hurricane Hannah, little chameleon, negative, sour, sullen, ill-tempered, prissy, stick of dynamite, flighty, spoiled brat, goof-off, obnoxious, fireball, snippy, defiant, rambunctious, difficult, testy, groaning lump, nasty, all legs, all nose and ears, cantankerous, rude, unruly, stubborn, defiant, hostile, mischievous, gangly legs, foolish, selfish, insane. Did I mention "defiant"? On p. 6 he makes the bizarre claim that some children have "crooked wheels" and that's why they are "defiant"!

Dobson has some particularly disturbing ideas about infants, claiming that some are "defiant upon exit from the womb" (p.x) "They come into the world smoking a cigar and yelling about the temperature in the delivery room" (back cover). Dobson also says "A healthy baby can keep her mother or father hopping around her nursery twelve hours a day (or night) by simply forcing air past her sandpaper larynx" and "Don't be afraid to let her cry." (p.94)

Dobson says children cause "constant battles" (p.xii) they "pull stunts" and "they just love to go toe-to-toe with their parents. They get their kicks by playing power games." (p.17). Dobson claims "most children seem to have a need to take on those in authority." (p.39) He says "children are naturally inclined toward rebellion, selfishness, dishonesty, aggression, exploitation, and greed." (p.45)

Frighteningly, the theme of "tyrant babies" and the need for children to be broken is a recurrent theme in these books--and a recurrent theme in dominionism in general.

Of course, the recommended tactic is to whack the kid, starting at around fifteen months of age (incidentially, the age at which children start recognising themselves as separate beings from their parents) on page 136. Dobson even recommends making kids cut their own "chastening rods" to be used on them, a common tactic among dominionist "child training" manuals to make kids an active participant in their torture:

My mother always used a small switch, which could not do any permanent damage. But it stung enough to send a very clear message. One day when I had pushed her to the limit, she actually sent me to the backyard to cut my own instrument of punishment. I brought back a tiny little twig about seven inches long. She could not have generated anything more than a tickle with it. Mom never sent me on that fool's errand again.

(Some of the "chastening devices" sold by groups promoting religiously motivated child abuse are around 12 inches, and a switch can cause injury even if it is small. This is completely aside from the whole aspect of making the kids pick their own switches; I remember I would be beat rather severely for attempts to bring in logs or very thin switches in an attempt to avoid a "switching"--once for having misbehaved (which could be as simple as not responding right away), and once for trying to be "defiant" in getting out of the original beating.)

Of course, Dobson's typical argument is "if it was good enough for the Good Old Days, it's good enough for kids now":

On p.120 Dobson quotes an anonymous poem "Grandpop seized a slipper and yanked Junior `cross his knee. Grandpop hasn't read a book since 1923." Then Dobson says "Dear ol' Grandpop. He may have been a little old-fashioned in his ideas, but he certainly knew how to handle Junior."

Dobson even suggests some things that could put parents at risk of visits from the local child-protective services:

On p.15 Dobson tells the story of a mother who spanks her 5 year old daughter and locks her in the garage for throwing some stones at cars. On p.18 he tells the story of a mother who slaps her 18 month old 9 separate times for reaching for a candy dish. On p.20 he tells the story of a mother who counts to three "and if the kids had not minded by then, they would have to face the wooden spoon."

On p.61 Dobson says to spank a 6 year old for calling his parents "hot dog" or "moose" and on p.63 Dobson says to spank a 7 year old for lying.
. . .
On p. 135 Dobson is asked this question: "Q: How long do you think a child should be allowed to cry after being punished or spanked? Is there a limit? A: Yes, I believe there should be a limit. As long as the tears represent a genuine release of emotion, they should be permitted to fall. But crying can quickly change from inner sobbing to an expression of protest aimed at punishing the enemy. Real crying usually lasts two minutes or less but may continue for five. After that point, the child is merely complaining, and the change can be recognized in the tone and intensity of his voice. I would require him to stop the protest crying, usually by offering him a little more of whatever caused the original tears."

On p.136 Dobson recommends using a switch or paddle to beat children. (link above)

On p.137 Dobson says "The spanking may be too gentle. If it doesn't hurt, it doesn't motivate a child to avoid the consequence next time. A slap with the hand on the bottom of a diapered two-year-old is not a deterrent to anything. Be sure the child gets the message."

When it's been pointed out to Dobson that research is showing that religiously-motivated child abuse (and, increasingly, even moderate to severe corporal punishment) causes longterm harm, he boils it all down to a conspiracy and basically accuses accredited researchers of making things up from thin air:

On p.123 Dobson states his beliefs about corporal punishment: "Many children desperately need this resolution to their disobedience" and says spanking actually prevents child abuse because when parents spank they don't "get more and more frustrated" and "blow up". However, research by Dr. Murray Straus and others show that 70% of child abuse cases start out as spanking!

On p. 125-130 Dobson inserts an article that claims the research on corporal punishment is mostly "opinion-driven" and "flawed" and "spanking is not abuse" if done "appropriately and not in anger". This article also recommends hitting a toddler who hits, or the toddler's "hitting will persist or even escalate".
. . .
For the record, Dobson calls positive discipline "repackaged permissive claptrap" "ridiculous advice" "horse manure" and "wimp parenting" (p.37-39).

Were this just one book, it'd be bad enough--especially considering Dobson's multimillion-dollar media empire and the fact he runs the single largest dominionist group in the country (giving him a very large platform indeed to promote this stuff).

Unfortunately, it's not isolated. Stop The Rod has also evaluated another Dobson book, The New Dare To Discipline. If anything, it's actually worse in that it uses some of the same hard-sell tactics of fear to promote what is, in fact, religiously motivated child abuse.

Chapter 1 begins with a round of Tyrant Infants Part 2, this time involving a three-year-old who has the audacity to not want to take a nap when she isn't tired--and Dobson's recommendations to beat the poor tyke into submission:

On p.4 the story is told of a 3 year old girl whose mother tries to force her to take a nap when she is not at all tired. This is a daily occurrence; the girl doesn't want a nap and is never tired at the mother's designated "naptime". The absurdity of the mother expecting her to sleep anyway is never commented on by Dobson. Instead, he describes the girl as "defiant," a "tyrant," a "dictator," and her mother as "hopelessly beaten." The child was crying from her crib. Dobson says she "was brazenly rejecting the authority of her mother."

A lonely, not-at-all tired, three year old kid is crying for her mom who is trying to force her kid to a specific schedule (a tactic often promoted in dominionist baby-beating books to "break" children and get them used to regimentation; the Ezzos are particularly infamous with this with the "Babywise""Growing Kids God's Way" books, and multiple cases of malnutrition and failure to thrive have resulted when those books were used as recommended). Oh, the /humanity. :P

Dobson confuses the home and family with boot camp in chapters 2 and 3:

p.11 Dobson decries the lack of discipline (spanking) from the "unstructured permissiveness we saw in the mid-twentieth century." This is when 99% of parents spanked their children, according to surveys! Dobson is making absolutely no sense here.

p.13 Dobson says a child must obey or he has "utter contempt and disrespect for those closest to him" and "anarchy and chaos reign in his home" and his mother will be "nervous, frustrated" and "embarrassed," enduring "hardships."
. . .
p.18 "My primary purpose...has been to record for posterity my understanding of the Judeo-Christian concept of parenting that has guided millions of mothers and fathers for centuries." and "It is imperative that a child learns to respect his parents." Dobson says a child must not "defy" parents, "laughing in their faces and stubbornly flaunting their authority," and developing a "natural contempt" for parents.
. . .
p.20 Dobson says to hit a child for "willful, haughty disobedience" and when a child says "I will not!" Dobson says to "respond to the challenge immediately." Challenging authority and "disrespect" deserve corporal punishment.

p. 21 Dobson turns parenting into a contest of wills: "You have drawn a line in the dirt, and the child has deliberately flopped his bony little toe across it. Who is going to win? Who has the most courage? Who is in charge here? If you do not conclusively answer these questions for your strong-willed children, they will precipitate other battles designed to ask them again and again." Dobson never considers that children might have good reasons for not wanting to go along with everything a parent wants them to do.
. . .
p.25-6 Dobson says "Parents should be gentle with their child's ego, never belittling or embarrassing him or her in front of friends." Contrast these words of Dobson's with all the belittling names he calls children, like "tyrant, brat, terror, little fat-fingers." Dobson also says "A father who is sarcastic and biting in his criticism of children cannot expect to receive genuine respect in return." Yet in the very next paragraph, Dobson says: "A toddler is the most hard-nosed opponent of law & order" is "selfish" "demanding" "rebellious" "destructive" "a tiger" "a butterball" an "anarchist" and has "fat little legs."
. . .
On p.28 Dobson says "If discipline begins on the second day of life, you're one day too late."

p.29 Dobson says parents must not "yield authority to their infants." "A child's resistant behavior always contains a message to his parents, which they must decode before responding. That message is often phrased in the form of a question: `Are you in charge or am I?' A distinct reply is appropriate to discourage future attempts to overthrow constituted government in the home."
. . .
p.34 Dobson claims "Nothing brings a parent and child closer together than for the mother or father to win decisively after being defiantly challenged."

In chapters 2 and 3 he gives the usual cure--literally knocking the hell out of Junior:

p.28 Dobson describes a mother shaking her 3 year old for spitting. The child spat again. This was "embarrassing" to the mother; she was "too weak or tired or busy to win." Shaking can cause brain damage and death, but Dobson doesn't comment on this.
. . .
p.34 Dobson sends wife Shirley on a "seek and destroy mission" when their 2 children are noisy in a church balcony.

p.35 Dobson says "spanking should be of sufficient magnitude to cause genuine tears." Afterwards when the child crumples "to the breast of his parent, he should be welcomed with open, warm, loving arms." "Tell him how much you love him."

p.36 Dobson's wife whipped their 15 month old daughter for going onto the patio in the rain. Dobson says to show "parental warmth after such discipline" and to have a "Loving conclusion to the disciplinary encounter." This is what leads to S & M behavior.

p.36 Dobson recommends painful squeezing of the trapezius muscle on the neck to obtain "instant obedience." Dobson does this to a teenager on p. 41, as well as hitting him.
. . .
p.57 Dobson says "sick and deformed" children can be hit too.
. . .
On p.64 Dobson recommends using "switches" and "paddles" to hit children.

On p.65 Dobson recommends starting whipping at age 15-18 months, and "there is no magical time at the end of childhood when spanking becomes ineffective."

p.66 Dobson recommends hitting a toddler when he "defies his parents' spoken commands!" He says to hit toddlers when having a tantrum, and when a toddler "hits his friends." Toddlers should be "taught to obey." Toddlers can be given a "firm rap on the fingers."
. . .
p. 68 Spank children if their bedwetting is an "act of defiance."
p. 70 If a child cries more than a few minutes after being spanked, hit them more.
p. 71 If spanking a child doesn't produce "obedience," parent needs to "outlast him and win, even if it takes a few rounds." Parents must always punish "acts of defiance."
p. 72 Spanking should not be "too gentle."
p. 73 Dobson recommends a child should respond to a hitting playmate by hitting back.
. . .
p. 108 Dobson says "With most children, tantrums are a form of challenging behavior that can be eliminated by one or more appropriate spankings."
p. 115 Don't pick up crying infants right away, to minimize "reinforcement of their tears."
p. 117 If child loses lunch money, "let her skip a meal."
p. 122 Justice should "sting the child who has challenged authority."

At one point, Dobson literally blames the decline and fall of Western civilisation on working mothers (most of whom must work now to put food in the bellies of their children!) and on abandonment of abusive childrearing tactics:

pp. 156-158. Blames the supposed crumbling of "moral values" and "anarchy that is now rumbling through the midsection of democracy" on working mothers and "permissiveness."
. . .
p.249-250 Dobson quotes the "rod" verses in Proverbs. (There is not a single quote from Jesus in the entire book, and not a single verse from the Gospels).

p.250 Dobson states: "From Genesis to Revelation, there is consistent foundation on which to build an effective philosophy of parent-child relationships. It is my belief that we have departed from the standard which was clearly outlined in both the Old and New Testaments, and that deviation is costing us a heavy toll in the form of social turmoil. Self-control, human kindness, respect, and peacefulness can again be manifest in America if we will dare to discipline in our homes and schools." But where is the "human kindness" and "respect" for children? Not in this book!

One of the more interesting notes, IMHO, in Stop The Rod's evaluation is the fact that Dobson himself--in a case all too sadly familiar in the dominionist community--seems to have been the victim himself of some pretty horrific child abuse and now thinks this is "normal". Examples from the book:

p.23 Dobson says "I learned very early that if I was going to launch a flippant attack on her (Dobson's mother), I had better be standing at least twelve feet away. This distance was necessary to avoid an instantaneous response--usually aimed at my backside." Dobson here admits his normal fear of being hit when he was a child - and his efforts to avoid the hitting. But it doesn't stop him from the behavior that triggers the hitting.

p.23-24 Dobson's mother once whipped him with a girdle that had "a multitude of straps and buckles." "Believe it or not, it made me feel loved." (!!)

Pretty much ANY child protection agency nowadays would see being literally flogged with a girdle as being sufficiently abusive as to remove the child from the home. One only wonders now how things could have been different had Dobson been removed from that abusive situation as a kid and taught that such things are not normal. (Frankly, this is something I'm still learning to this day, partly because of my own experiences with religiously motivated child abuse.)

Dobson also expresses an interesting commentary in the book which could be taken in his direction--but not in the way he presumably would like:

p.19 Once when Dobson is out of town, his 2 year old son is asked by Dobson's wife to pray before dinner. The toddler was "startled" but then said "I love you, Daddy. Amen." Because the tiny child said "Daddy" instead of "Our Father" Dobson decides his tiny son's mistake means the child has identified Dobson with God. He takes this idea even further, concluding that ALL children believe Daddy is God.

It's been quipped before that "The name for 'God' on the lips of all children is 'Mother'". If anything, especially based on his abusive treatment growing up and his recommendations to parents now--their God is a wrathful, borderline sociopathic creature who pretty much believes in "the ends necessitate the means", no matter how unethical those means may be.

I wish I could say this is exaggeration, but one only needs to look at the activities of Focus on the Family in promoting dominionism, in the demonisation of their critics and LGBT people and women and anyone who ISN'T a dominionist, to see it. If their is truth to the concept that the first image of God to a child is in a child's parents, it's probably no wonder that they are in a path of hatred and fear and have hatred and fear towards others.

I write this series on religiously motivated child abuse and on coercive tactics within dominionist groups in part to show this, and partly in the real hope that their kids might not grow up knowing God--and their first image of God in their parents--being hateful, wrathful, hurtful. That there's a better way to things, and hopefully someday kids won't grow up with the scars that persons like me, like Beth Fennimore, like the three successful walkaways from the Phelps'...that we deal with every day.

And maybe, just maybe, there won't be any more James Dobsons either.

Awareness of the sad subject of religiously motivated child abuse within the dominionist community--in a series I began writing on her and which is now being reported on by the likes of Salon Magazine--is now going international...unfortunately due to Americans exporting the problem of religiously motivated child abuse worldwide.

The Guardian Unlimited, a British newspaper which has reported on dominionism in past, has an article in regards to religiously motivated child abuse that brings a unique perspective.

The article starts out with descriptions of British canings in schools, a practice which was eventually ruled illegal and abusive within the UK:

Pretty much all I remember from my prep school are the beatings: that lonely wait outside the headmaster's study; the cane, the slipper, the table tennis bat. I remember my underpants filled with blood. I remember seething with frustration when they beat my brother. My mother had asked me to look after him. But there was nothing I could do as he was led towards the study in his little tartan dressing gown.

That was 30 years ago, but in time measured out by the psyche it was yesterday. Thank God such things are now illegal. But there remain those determined to turn back the clock. "We are told that in England it is a crime to spank children," writes Debbi Pearl from No Greater Joy Ministries, following a row that has erupted over the distribution of their literature in the UK. "Therefore Christians are not able to openly obey God in regard to biblical chastisement. They are in danger of having the state steal their children."

The "row" in question involves promotion of the Pearl's books in a British homeschool association--specifically through a magazine targeting dominionist correspondence-schoolers in the UK called "The Old Schoolhouse" (the publishers of "The Old Schoolhouse", of note, are actually based in the United States--another example of dominionism being exported to other countries). The group has promoted the Pearls in their literature, and is even going on tour in the UK to promote the Pearls. And the article linked above includes a description of the Pearls whacking an 11-month-old child they were babysitting:

"As I was writing this I was interrupted by a child screaming. Deb is baby-sitting an eleven-month-old little boy. I let him scream for about five minutes, as I wrote the last lines of the above paragraph, and then I left my office and went to investigate. Deb was doing business on the phone--talking to a missionary, long distance. The child was clawing at the back door, trying to get it open so he could go outside.

I picked up a switch and walked over to where he was conducting his scream-in. In a calm but firm voice I said, "No, stop crying." I didn't expect him to respond, but I wanted to establish the rules. When he failed to respond, I switched him twice on the only exposed skin--about three inches between his sock and pants leg. Again he did what I expected, what he does when his mother swats him--scream in defiance. But I have seen her swat him, and it never even gets his attention, other than a signal to scream louder. But when I switched his bare skin, he looked shocked and started to rub it. He continued to cry in protest, so I gave him two more licks on the bare leg.

This time, he was convinced that I meant business. I know that he understood the issue, because he crawled past me, away from the door. Again I commanded him to stop crying, brandishing the switch. He stopped crying immediately, continuing to rub his leg while staring at me."

The "row" is in fact a boycott of Old Schoolhouse Magazine and its associated websites by homeschooling parents who feel promotion of the cruel tactics of the Pearls is in fact wrong and even Un-Christian.

The Guardian article continues, noting that the Pearls recommend the whacking of infants under the age of 1 year with 1/8" diameter switches:

Chastening begins early. "For the under-one-year-old, a little, 10- to 12-inch long, willowy branch (stripped of any knots that might break the skin) about one-eighth inch diameter is sufficient," writes Michael Pearl. With older children he advises: "After a short explanation about bad attitudes and the need to love, patiently and calmly apply the rod to his backside. Somehow, after eight or 10 licks, the poison is transformed into gushing love and contentment. The world becomes a beautiful place. A brand-new child emerges. It makes an adult stare at the rod in wonder, trying to see what magic is contained therein."

Needless to say, the author is completely and utterly shocked:

It's incredible to me that books such as this are readily available on Amazon; it is little short of incitement to child abuse. What makes the whole thing doubly sick is that it's done in the name of God. Apparently, the "proper application of the rod is essential to the Christian world-view". Note "essential". Perhaps it shouldn't come as a surprise. For, as evangelicals, the Pearls believe that salvation only comes through punishment and pain. God punishes his Son with crucifixion so that humanity might not have to face the Father's anger. This image of God the father, for whom violence is an expression of tough love, is lodged deep in the evangelical imagination. And it twists a religion of forgiveness and compassion into something dark and cruel.

It's terrifying how deep this teaching penetrates into a philosophy of child rearing. Just as divine anger is deemed to be provoked by the original sin of human disobedience, the beating of children is seen as punishment for rebellion. According to Ted Tripp, in his monstrous bestseller Shepherding a Child's Heart, even babies who struggle while having their nappy changed are deemed to be rebellious and need punishment.

It is extremely gratifying to see more attention--even on an international level--being brought to the "dark secret" of religiously motivated child abuse in the dominionist community.

Unfortunately...the Pearls, even with the recent tragedy bringing new awareness, aren't the only ones promoting--or exporting--what amounts to "Bible-based" baby beating.

They aren't even the richest or most well known.

That would be the one we focus on tomorrow--James Dobson, head of the $140 million Focus on the Family publishing empire and dominionist lobbying group, and whom (as we shall see tomorrow) uses his own history of being abused as a child as an example of how to raise children...perpetuating his own multigenerational history of child abuse across countless generations.

Over the past few days, I've written a series of articles on the subject of religiously motivated child abuse, in part inspired by the recent tragic death of a child who was literally flogged to death based on instructions from Michael and Debi Pearl's "No Greater Joy" publishing empire.

Salon Magazine--one of the few American media outlets to actually do any writing on religiously motivated child abuse--has two separate articles on the Pearls--one dating from the last death in February 2006 linked to the Pearls' books, and a newer article published today--almost six years to the day after the last "death by chastening rod" attributable to the Pearls, and sadly necessary because of yet another death.

Far from the first time the Pearls have been under the microscope

The first article starts out with the story of Meggan Judge, who was a former user of the Pearls' techniques until she had a case of post-partum depression--and realised the techniques were inherently abusive and dangerous.

Much of the article covers some of the same ground that articles I have written; the article does give a few new frightening facts, though:

While the Pearls are not in direct competition with Christian media juggernauts such as Veggie Tales or "The Purpose-Driven Life," they are part of the booming religious publishing and products market, which hit $7.3 billion in 2005 -- a 28 percent increase since 2002, according to an April 2006 report by Packaged Facts, the publishing division of MarketResearch.com. Among Christian books, the "Christian Living" subcategory, which includes parenting, is one of the most popular sub-segments; products for children are expanding as well. The Packaged Facts report, titled "The Religious Product Market in the U.S.," cites "the culture wars" as being one reason for this overall growth. "What has until recently frustrated evangelicals is their difficulty in translating political power into social and cultural clout," states the report. "In addressing and attempting to redress this problem, evangelicals are increasingly turning to publishing."

As for their position on corporal "chastisement," the Pearls are following in the footsteps of their forebears -- and are not out of step with most of their peers. "The tradition of 'breaking the child's will' using physical punishment is long-standing among evangelical, fundamentalist, Pentecostal and charismatic Protestants," says retired Rutgers University historian Philip Greven, author of "Spare the Child: The Religious Roots of Punishment and the Psychological Impact of Child Abuse." "It's associated with a very strong patriarchal authoritarian tradition," he adds, along with a belief in the literal truth of the Bible. Greven found calls to physically punish children in 17th and 18th century American Protestant texts; he was surprised, in the course of his research, to see that they'd persisted into the20th century and even today.

Of particular note--the original article links to a series of articles from Focus on the Family wherein the use of "switches" is advocated on small children that kids are forced to get themselves (thus becoming an active participant in their abuse), among other things.

The article also notes that it's not just the Pearls advocating this stuff, and that this stuff is all too screamingly common in the dominionist community:

Indeed, not sparing the rod is the norm among Christian parenting books. Ted Tripp's 1995 book "Shepherding a Child's Heart," which endorses judicial spanking, was recently at No. 37 on Christian Retailing magazine's list of bestsellers; the same magazine, last October, called W Publishing "one of the first major Christian publishing houses to publish a book that is opposed to spanking children." (The book is "Grace-Based Parenting" by Dr. Tim Kimmel.) And today, there are not only texts, but also products, such as "The Rod of Discipline" (see Proverbs 22:15 ) and a plastic "chastening instrument" said to "fit easily into purse or travel bag."

The article also notes that the Pearls have advocated the literal use of meter sticks and rulers as tools for beating children who have not yet celebrated their first birthday:

"Select your instrument according to the child's size," writes Pearl. "For the under one year old, a little, ten to twelve-inch long, willowy branch (stripped of any knots that might break the skin) about one-eighth inch diameter is sufficient. Sometimes alternatives have to be sought. A one-foot ruler, or its equivalent in a paddle, is a sufficient alternative. For the larger child, a belt or larger tree branch is effective." Additional advice from their Web site: Switching with a length of quarter-inch plumbing supply line is a "real attention-getter."

The article also--notably--notes the use of scripture-twisting in justification of religiously motivated child abuse, a subject rarely touched upon.

It also notes that--of particularly interesting note--some of the most vociferous opposition of the Pearls and other hawkers of religiously motivated child abuse is coming from people who are homeschooling their kids (this is of note because dominionist "homeschool" associations promote these books heavily):

While supporters of child-training see the Paddock case as a tragic misuse and misrepresentation of Pearl principles, some of their opponents have taken it as a call to arms. Recent protest has perhaps been loudest and most organized among home-schoolers. "Most home-schoolers, secular and Christian, are familiar with the Pearls, and speaking out never made a difference. Now a child has died and public scrutiny is on the Pearls. Strike while the fire is hot," says a home-schooling Oregon mother of 16-year-old triplets who blogs under the name "Doc Smith." (She requested that her real name not be used because of the threatening comments she and others have received in response to their anti-Pearl posts.)

Following in the footsteps of a British blogger known as Carlotta -- who, pre-Paddock case, worked to draw attention to the association between the Old Schoolhouse Magazine, a popular Christian quarterly for home-schoolers, and the Pearls' ministry, one of its advertisers -- Doc launched a boycott of the magazine and its partner blog services, Homeschoolblogger.com and Homesteadblogger.com. Other bloggers picked up the banner. (One printed anti-Pearl T-shirts. ) As a result of such efforts, Doc estimates, at least 250 bloggers have left Homeschoolblogger.com. Rumors abound that the Old Schoolhouse's subscriptions have dropped since the boycott -- its current readership is around 100,000 -- but according to the magazine, business is booming. "Subscriptions are actually up," says Nancy Carter, marketing manager. "With bad P.R. I think you also get folks saying, 'Hey, we want to show you we support you.'"

Doc admits that this boycott is but a "small battle" in the fight against child abuse. Ideally, she'd like to see the Old Schoolhouse -- a major market source for an often-isolated community -- stop printing articles by the Pearls and advertising their wares. But she hopes at the very least to draw attention to the methods espoused by the Pearls -- and distinguish them from other branches of the home-schooling community. "When a secular person/parent whips a kid, they're doing it because they're ignorant or just a jerk. They don't say God gave them permission or commanded them to do it," she says. "Home-schoolers who beat their kids make all home-schoolers look like freaks."

One home-schooling/blogging mother went so far as to buy the plumbing hose and try it on herself. "What I did was take the small supposedly 'harmless' tube and LIGHTLY tap myself on the forearm with it," she reports. "Not only did it sting like an SOB but it also left welts on my arm for TWO hours afterwards."

The article also notes some interesting statistics, which are especially relevant as many of the same folks hawking books on how to beat your baby for God are also hawking books on how women should "submit to their husbands" and how "God hates divorce" even in the case of abusive spouses:

"The evidence is that any corporal punishment, on average, is harmful down the road," says leading family violence researcher Murray Straus, professor of sociology and co-director of the Family Research Laboratory at the University of New Hampshire. Among other problems, it has the potential to threaten the parent-child bond, inhibit the development of conscience, lead to juvenile delinquency, and even partner violence, Straus says. (Some disagree, saying -- for example -- that children who grow up with an understanding or fear of "consequences" are less likely to get into trouble down the road.) "There are now three very good studies showing that the more someone was spanked as a child, the more likely they are to hit their partner as an adult," says Straus. (Some suspect that spanking at home, or paddling at school, may be particularly harmful to girls.)

The article also notes on how dominionists are coached in these books, and also coach each other, on how to hide the signs of baby-beating:

Her father goes farther. "Don't be so indiscreet as to spank your children in public -- including the church restroom," he writes on his Web site. But discretion, here, is more than just the better part of embarrassing your kid. "I get letters regularly telling of trouble with in-laws who threaten to report them to the authorities," he goes on. "Parents have called the Gestapo on their married children. Church friends who have noses longer than the pews on which they perch can cause a world of trouble. If you cannot get [your children] trained before going out in public, stay home and read our four books again. If the Federal or State agencies take me to court over advocating corporal chastisement, this will be part of my defense: 'He that spareth his rod hateth his son: but he that loveth him chasteneth him betimes (Prov. 13:24).'"

For similar reasons, the Home School Legal Defense Association recommends spanking only in private. (The HSLDA is a Christian organization, though it serves home-schoolers without regard to affiliation. It is dedicated to preserving the "fundamental right of parents to choose home educations, free of over-zealous government officials and intrusive laws.")

All in all, a very good article, and a good introduction for those who are wishing to research--or wishing to work against--religiously motivated child abuse in the dominionist community.

Unfortunately, history repeats if we don't remember

Ultimately, the mother in question was convicted of first degree murder and felony child abuse; she is presently serving life plus 83 years in the North Carolina women's prison system.

The amazing thing--the tragic thing, considering the events of February 12 when yet another child suffered "death by chastening rod"--is that the Pearls were not considered accessories to murder and also placed in prison.

There has been surprisingly little criticism in the media, or even reporting on religiously motivated child abuse (one is, sadly, more likely to find objective reporting OUTSIDE the US, particularly in the British media); again, Salon Magazine is the exception and notes that most criticism in print Stateside has actually been from evangelical Christians opposed to religiously motivated child abuse:

It's one thing for those of us outside the fundamentalist Christian/Christian home-schooling world to point fingers at the Pearls and voice outrage at their methods. What really matters, and what stands to have actual impact, is the outrage inside the Pearls' world. And right now, more than ever, an anti-Pearl movement within the conservative Christian community is rising up in heated, if sometimes whispered, fury. Some say -- even pray -- that Lydia Schatz's death will bring Michael and Debi Pearl exactly the kind of attention they deserve.

"I think many in the Christian and/or home-school community wanted to see Sean Paddock as an 'extreme' example. Lynn Paddock was 'just' a foster mom. She already had issues. Whatever someone could use to rationalize away the influence of Michael and Debi Pearl, they would. Because they did not want to admit that a 'normal' home-schooling mom could abuse her child to death, they did not want to admit that a book that has been normalized in home-schooling circles was a factor in the death, they did not want to admit their own vulnerability to being deceived or hurting their child," says Alexandra Bush, 35, a "home-schooling mom and theologically conservative Christian" in Sarasota, Fla., who grew up with Pearl-style teaching around her (though not in her family) and who is an oft-heard anti-Pearl voice online. "Now, with Lydia Schatz, it is harder to explain away. I have seen a stronger response than before to her death and her sister's hospitalization. The defensiveness has cracked a bit. This is the logical outcome of the spank-until-submissive teachings of the Pearls. People are no longer able to see it as just an 'exception.'"

Interestingly--and disturbingly, and in line with something I myself have observed--Salon's report, in its interview with various Christians opposed to religiously motivated child abuse, notes that the Pearls may be forming a de facto personality cult around their practices:

Also, the particulars of child-training are only one aspect of the Pearls' ministry. "The focus when their teachings are promoted isn't on the spanking, but on the 'tying heartstrings' and enjoying your kids," says Alexandra Bush. "It is easy to filter out the harsher teachings, the extremism, when surrounded by word pictures of peaceful, loving, fun families. The Pearls seem to tell parents that they just have to 'win' once and make sure their children know who is in charge, and then they will never have to spank again. That's how parents get sucked in -- promises of a fun, peaceful home, minimal confrontation, doing the 'right thing' for their children. Basically, the BS detectors are turned off by the pretty promises that are made."

Bush believes that's why the Pearls' teachings hold so much appeal for conservative, home-schooling parents who are, overall, "highly motivated to spend time with their children, love their children, willing to make sacrifices for their children, want the best for their children. They are not, in general, people prone to neglecting their kids or motivated by abuse and anger," she says. "So when people criticize the Pearls and in the same breath misrepresent parents who use Pearl parenting, those parents easily tune out the criticism."

And that's where the Pearls get their relatively "free pass," she concludes: "People know parents who are amazing and love their kids and don't abuse them -- and recommend the Pearls -- and so they have trouble believing the truth about the awful teachings. After all, if your home-school neighbor family looks like they have it all together, has sweet children and a calm mother -- and they use the Pearls, and they don't beat their kids -- then obviously it must be the critics who are wrong. Add to that the loyalty home-school parents have to the home-school movement -- hard to criticize one's own. Finally, even if someone can see the problems with the Pearls' words, they may be unwilling to admit that the Pearls are completely wrong and off their rocker, because that would be admitting that they themselves were susceptible to bad advice and may have harmed their own kids."

In other words, says Diamond, Pearl devotees are "loving people, people who take joy in their children, in their marriages, who like to participate in the community and do good for others. They aren't monsters. It would be easier, I think, to speak up loudly if they were."

To anyone who is a walkaway from a coercive group, or who is aware of how coercive groups work, this in and of itself is a red flag warning--one of the first things coercive groups do (and what the Pearls explicitly do) is set up an "us versus them" meme, literally demonising critics (the Pearls have publically stated in past that critics of their "Bible-based" domestic violence regime--including not only abuse of children but a program almost expressly designed to sanction religiously motivated spousal abuse as well--are possessed by "Jezebel spirits").

The second article is encouraging in that there is increasing criticism--most critically within "Christian homeschooling" circles, heavily infiltrated by dominionists and a major source of promotion of religiously motivated domestic abuse programs:

Christian and home-schooling bloggers are also voicing increasing anti-Pearl sentiment, and not just the ones who already reject any form of punitive parenting, Bush notes. Timberdoodle, a highly regarded and influential resource for conservative home-schoolers, responded to Lydia Schatz's death by exhorting its community to speak up: "Read, be informed, and share with your friends. There are many new, well-meaning parents who are looking for instruction and help in parenting. Use your knowledge to help them keep away from this dangerous path."

Unfortunately, I do agree with a final commentary by Alexandra Bush of TulipGirl:

But discrediting the Pearls shouldn't depend on word-of-mouth or the grass roots, Bush argues. "As a Christian, I believe it has been a failing of the evangelical church in the U.S. as a whole for not warning their members about this type of harmful teaching. It is something the church cannot, biblically, ignore," she says, noting that increasing resistance to the Pearls comes at a time when even those in the most conservative Christian circles are reevaluating, on theological grounds, the evangelical movement's embrace of the practice of corporal punishment.

I would go further, in fact--it's not just a failing, but the promoters of religiously motivated child and domestic abuse are just the most notable and infamous of those within evangelical circles working to turn them into dominionist circles--dominionism, in and of itself, is fundamentally a culture of fear.

The very same circles that promote the Pearls et al are those who increasingly call for isolation of their children from mandatory reporters, who are part of multi-million-dollar media empires who have worked to scuttle existing laws and prevent the US from being a signatory to the one international treaty designed to protect children from abuse.

It goes, I'm afraid, beyond mere failure. It is the "suffering of the children" on a level Jesus himself would have never intended and would be most horrified to witness.

So far, I've written several stories on what is probably one of the major "deep, dark secrets" of the dominionist movement--namely, the promotion of religiously-motivated child abuse as a form of "child training", the idea being that one can literally beat the devil out of your child and make him a good little "God Warrior" in doing so. (Much of the more hardline material is largely promoted within the "spiritual warfare" movement in dominionism.)

We started initially with an expose of the worst offenders, including some well-known names like James Dobson and Lisa Welchel; we also covered the considerable legal roadblocks that dominionist promoters of "Bible-based baby beating" have put up to make prosecution of religiously motivated child abuse as difficult as possible.

Over the past two days, I've focused on a promoter of religiously motivated child abuse whose tactics have resulted in the deaths of at least two children in as many years that have been reported to media--Michael and Debbie Pearl, who have promoted an empire based on whipping children like recalcitrant mules (a tactic, of note, not likely to work on mules much less children; usually a mule has a perfectly good reason for balking, often the fact he's overloaded).

Today's post goes into a more in-depth look based on an article in the Raleigh-Durham News-Observer detailing a history of the Pearls, and giving some unique--and disturbing--insights as to the persons using these books.

A warning: the stuff I'm about to talk about here is almost guaranteed to be upsetting to most of you, and is potentially triggering to walkaways and survivors of childhood abuse.

To remind you all of the general context here:

In this small, rural community (Pleasantville, TN--ed.), Pearl tends a modest flock. It's through a satellite Internet connection and a traveling road show that Pearl captures a following he pegs at more than half a million people. From military bases in Europe to a Pentecostal church in Smithfield, N.C., parents spank their children with rods, "switching" out their bad attitudes, just at Pearl advises. His books on child discipline are sold at home-schooling conferences, delivered to the doorsteps of new moms and passed from pastors to parents in churches across the nation.

That's how Lynn Paddock, a Johnston County mother accused of beating her children with plastic plumbing supply line and suffocating the youngest, learned of Pearl's child-training methods, according to her attorney Michael Reece. He's popular in her church circle, Reece said.

She scoured his books and Web site a few years ago looking for tips on how to control her growing brood of adopted children. Paddock began whipping them with the thin, flexible pipe Pearl heralds as a good substitute for the "rod" described in the Old Testament.

Paddock, 45, is behind bars, charged with first-degree murder in 4-year-old Sean's death. She also faces felony child-abuse charges in connection with the welts that covered the backsides of two of her other five adopted children.

(The original article had noted that only one other child had been flogged along with Sean.)

I've described these "rods" in the other article and even included a photograph of them in my other article focusing on the Pearls, "Death By Chastening Rod"; these "rods" are capable of causing serious injury.

Interestingly, Michael Pearl himself may be called to the witness stand because of his specific promotion of PVC "chastening rods":

Reece said he is considering ordering Pearl to testify if the case goes to trial.

"She wouldn't have come up with using plastic pipes on her own," Reece said.

One of the more notable things about this article is how it details some of the Pearls' more abusive techniques. Among other things, it's revealed that they promote the use of willow-branch "switches" on young infants.

It also--in something that should genuinely scare everyone involved in the movement against dominionism--gives a frightening quote from Michael Pearl himself regarding the extensive use of their methods in the dominionist correspondence-school "homeschool" community:

By Pearl's math, one-sixth of the nation's estimated 3 million home-schooling families use his training methods.

(emphasis mine)

Yes, you read that right. Fully 500,000 households in the US are regularly using Pearl's methods of "chastisement" on their children.

Pearls' children, interestingly, defend his promotion--but there is good evidence (via nospank.net) that those children were not subjected to the methods in his books.

Very interestingly--and in frightening parallel to another infamous figure, Fred Phelps--Michael Pearl may lead a church that is largely a familial coercive religious group. The article notes:

There's no sign welcoming visitors to Pearl's Church at Cane Creek. Getting there means driving down a steep ridge where the Tennessee foothills begin fading to plains. Then, it's a left at the hand-painted signs advertising vegetables, crafts and furniture. As the blacktop turns to dirt, a bridge leads to the Pearls' farm. At the foot of a cow pasture, on the bank of a rippling stream, Pearl's loyal base gathers on Sundays.

A private property warning is tacked to a sturdy oak at the foot of the church: a weathered red assembly hall perched on 10-foot stilts to survive floods. On a crisp Sunday morning earlier this month, Pearl, in muddy boots and a bright orange shirt, chirped "good morning" to a wobbly toddler as he strode to the front of the drafty room. Debi, his wife of 35 years, hugged every neck and patted every little head in sight.

Three dozen or so locals -- a third of them Pearl's kin -- settled into plastic garden chairs in the one-room sanctuary. Debi Pearl, perched delicately beside her husband, smiled brightly as her granddaughter fished for a raisin from a snack bag. Older children sat as still as statues.

Yes, you read that right--the same place where, as the Pearls have claimed, "jezebels" protested their practices is essentially a "congregation" of around 36 people, at least 12 of which are related to the Pearls. (Even Phelps' familial cult Westboro Baptist Church is larger.)

Disturbingly, Michael Pearl may be involved in "faith-based coercion" in the prison system, especially disturbing in light of the fact that fully 83.8 percent or more of people in the prison system who are incarcerated for violent offences have histories of severe child abuse and there is increasing evidence that severe abuse may in fact cause criminal behaviour in a percentage of the population (this based on a NZ study showing that for the one third of the human population having low levels of monoamine oxidase A, 85% of boys with low MAOA who have suffered physical abuse have gone one to commit antisocial and criminal behaviour as adults):

Pearl prayed for the souls of the murderers and rapists he preaches to each week at a state prison; another man read an e-mail message from a congregation member on a mission in Southeast Asia. Long silences separated their discussions as they waited for one of the men to pick a hymn or read Scripture.

Speaking of abuse, the Pearls seem to have little concern that they could be potentially causing criminality with their "child training" techniques (much less thousands, thousands more examples of "spiritual warfare collateral damage"):

"The chances of one of them committing a crime is pretty good," Pearl said, shrugging at the question in his churchyard after Sunday services and refusing to say much more.

As it turns out, the Pearls are making a surprisingly tidy earning off of promoting literally beating the hell out of kids:

No Greater Joy Ministries is doing a brisk business. The ministry earned just over $1 million last year from sales of a half-dozen or so books, said the general manager, Mel Cohen.

Up a hill from the Pearls' home, 11 employees answer letters and design six newsletters a year for more than 70,000 readers, Cohen said. "To Train Up a Child," their first and best-selling book, has sold more than 500,000 copies. Used copies are also sold on the Internet and grabbed up at yard sales. Debi Pearl's first solo book, "Created to be His Helpmate," sold 150,000 copies since publication 14 months ago. Business grew so rapidly this past year that the Pearls hired Cohen, a businessman experienced in running Christian ministries.

Cohen said practically all proceeds go right out the door -- to pay for foreign missions, to cover printing costs for the newsletter and translation services to print the books in 25 other languages. The ministry also ships free copies of the books to American soldiers.

Despite Pearl's international recognition among Christian fundamentalists and home-schooling parents, people hardly know him in the community he has called home for nearly two decades. Natives scratch their heads as they try to place him. A cluster of men loitering outside a country store in Pleasantville can't decide whether he's the fellow with the bushy white beard or the lanky guy who used to work at the lumberyard.

Stella Rhodes, postmaster in the nearby town of Lobelville, say most folks around the region figure Pearl is a "half-Mennonite," the kind, she said, that gave in to modern luxuries enough to buy a car.

"Most people around here don't have a clue how big their business is," Rhodes said. "To tell you the truth, I think that's just the way they like it." A decade ago, when the couple started selling their books, Rhodes used to hand-stamp every package the Pearls mailed.

(emphasis mine)
Yes, you read that right--they have earned over a million dollars from their books, sold 500,000 copies alone of the very book linked to the death of young Sean Paddock, and are giving guides on baby-beating and making your wife be a "submissive helpmate in a Christian family" free (and potentially unrequested) to our servicemen in Iraq and Afghanistan (and potentially Iran, too, in the next few months).

The article also gives a good idea of the Pearls' techniques in action, and the mindset of the dominionists who use the Pearls' techniques. One particularly disturbing report shows that even county-supported nonprofit groups are promoting "Biblically sanctioned" baby-beating:

Highlighter and pen scribbles mar the pages of Joel Killion's copy of "To Train Up a Child." The Wilson father's only daughter, Moriah, is just 2, and already Killion has read Pearl's discipline book four times.

"We're preparing her to be someone's mate one day," said Killion, who works in the banking industry.

Killion picked up a copy of "To Train Up a Child" years ago at a yard sale, before he met his wife, Lauren. He finally read it when Lauren became pregnant. When he saw the book stashed in a goody bag for new parents delivered by a Nash County nonprofit after Moriah's birth, he felt even more confident in its methods.

Applying Pearl's training techniques wasn't easy, Killion admits. Letting his baby girl cry it out from her lonely crib nearly broke the young father's heart.

The regimen was even tougher on his wife, who majored in child development at East Carolina University. "No spanking" had been drilled in her head. Lauren Killion, a stay-at-home mom, said she would sit on the couch and wince while her husband switched Moriah's hand with a twig from a bush.

"I used to think the switch was so mean and cruel," she said. "But all in the hands of a loving parent, it's right."

Moriah is docile, and the Killions say everyone asks their secret. The Killions believe in Pearl's methods so much, they snatch up copies of "To Train Up a Child" and give them to other young parents.

(Emphasis mine)

So let's review so far--we have parents whose solitary goal for their child is to be a housewife and breeder of "God Warriors", which in and of itself is not encouraging--and, sadly, is quite common in dominionist "spiritual warfare" communities. The only role for women is to breed, "obey her husband as her husband obeys God", and homeschool (and beat) the younguns.

They leave a young infant to cry in her crib, which is now known to be potentially damaging to bonding--much less potentially dangerous (the kid could have laid on a sharp object, rolled over and gotten herself trapped, etc.)

They whack a child who is less than two years old with a "switch" from the yard.

The child is "docile", but most pediatricians will tell you docility is one of the two possible consequences of abuse--essentially the kid withdraws. One pediatrician (whose wife is a regular poster on Dark Christianity) has reported that some children from dominionist households that use these sorts of "chastening" methods have withdrawn to the point they have symptoms almost indistinguishable from higher-functioning autism. Even for kids who deal with abuse by being docile and withdrawing, there are severe, lifelong trust issues that can prevent them from establishing stable relationships with other people.

Another parent quoted has also unknowingly crossed over to the level of abuse:

Beck relied on his advice to teach her daughter, then 3, to stay in bed after being tucked in. After 23 nights of getting switched with a willow tree branch, her daughter, now 12, finally relented. "Mike Pearl taught me my daughter needed to know there was a limit," Beck said.

(Nowadays, in many jurisdictions a report that a three-year-old child was being "switched" on a nightly basis for 23 days for getting out of bed would trigger at least investigations of abuse by the parent.)

"Spiritual warfare" groups promote the books and by their own statements don't care about the "collateral damage" and "friendly fire":

Berry Byrd, a Pentecostal minister in Smithfield, says "To Train Up a Child" is the most brilliant parenting book he'd ever read. This month, he ordered 25 copies and passed them out to young parents in his congregation.

"I sure wish I had this book when my boys were growing up," Byrd said. "This 'timeout' business just doesn't work."

Byrd doesn't worry that a mother less than 10 miles away hurt her children after reading Pearl's books. He urged his parishioners to use common sense.

In some cases, this has caused parents to seriously rethink the methods--and question their "Biblical" justification:

"I was sucked in. I wanted to be happy and wanted happy children," said Chris Jones, a mom from Georgia who eventually gave up Pearl's techniques. "He makes you think he has the ear of God."
. . .
"You have people that are so needy, and there's such danger in them going too far," said Jones, who says she abandoned Pearl's training regimen after realizing she had alienated her small children.

"You have to suppress your natural instincts and natural mothering to be able to do this," she said. "I learned that there is a good reason something is trying to stay your hand."

(emphasis mine)

The article also gives info on how the Pearls (and by extension a lot of dominionist "family" groups) recruit:

Mothers never suspect a backlash because Pearl's books and newsletters are filled with stories of happy, godly children. The trick: training them while they are young. He urges fathers to tempt the little ones with an off-limit toy. When the child reaches for it, the father is advised to swat his hand or leg with a rod.

Pearl explains in "To Train Up a Child" that he used this strategy to keep his kids from going near a shotgun. Pearl also gets creative: When his children were toddlers and strayed to the pond's edge, he pushed them in and let them flounder to prove how dangerous the pond could be.

(Needless to say, the taunting of a kid with a toy and whacking Junior with the chastening rod when he grabs for it is both physically and emotionally abusive. You're flat out teaching kids not to want anything or trust. The pushing of kids into a lake and letting them "flounder" to teach them to stay away from it is amazingly dangerous--the kids could well have drowned.)

One mother expressed regret about having used the Pearls' methods and is grateful she stopped using them before potentially maiming her child:

Meggan Judge, a mother in Alaska, wishes someone had stopped her from following Pearl's instruction sooner.

"Thirty times a day, I was striking my son. He wasn't even 2 years old," Judge said. "I kept waiting: Where is this joy we were promised?'"

She slowly gave up Pearl's methods three years ago after locking her son in his room one afternoon for fear that she would hurt him.

Years later, hearing of Lynn Paddock's story, Judge knows she's lucky. She suspects she could have been driven to such lengths if she hadn't met a community of other Christian mothers on the Internet who urged her to abandon Pearl's teachings.

"Without a doubt, I know I would have been capable of that," Judge said. "Anyone who says they wouldn't is a liar. I never knew I had anger issues until I started using his methods."

(emphasis mine, and--having also been subject to multiple-times-a-day "chastenings" as a kid, I can definitely believe it)

The newspaper article also gives some notable examples of abusive childrearing techniques promoted by the Pearls:

This is a sampling of Pearl's advice from "To Train Up a Child" and his newsletter, "No Greater Joy":

PROBLEM Baby bites during breast-feeding

SOLUTION Pull baby's hair

I've noted this abusive practice in my article "Death by Chastening Rod"; a child who bites during breastfeeding is often not aware he is causing pain. The appropriate response is to remove the child from the breast, not to yank baby's hair.)

PROBLEM Boy is a crybaby

SOLUTION "When he begins to scream his defiance or hurt, just ignore him. ... If he demands attention to a supposed wound, then reach in your purse, pull out a terrible tasting herbal potion and give him a spoonful. After he gets through gagging on the vitamin and mineral supplement, tell him that he is now completely healed, and invite him to come back for another dose if he again gets hurt."

This is abusive and dangerous.

Firstly, if a child is demanding attention to a supposed wound, the appropriate response is to check the child and--if he is not hurt--reassure him he's okay.

Secondly, it is not appropriate to dose a child with a "terrible-tasting herbal concoction" or "vitamin and mineral supplement" as a punishment; firstly, if a kid cries a lot, you run a real risk of potentially poisoning Junior. Secondly, you teach him that medicine is Bad and is a form of punishment (not what you want to teach him if, say, you need to get meds into him to treat an illness). Thirdly, this is a thinly-veiled version of "hot saucing"--the tactic of placing Tabasco or a similar hot-sauce on the tongues of children for "sassing", "lying" or "backtalking". (Hot-saucing is itself considered abusive by many CPS agencies, both Tabasco and Texas Pete have issued formal statements condemning the use of their products as "chastening aids", and most child experts outside the dominionist community also find it cruel and potentially dangerous due to both swelling from the "heat" and the risk of a possible allergic reaction.) Some of you who are sufficiently old enough may remember when castor oil was used as a similar punishment--there's a reason stuff like this was left behind in the fifties!

PROBLEM Rebellious child who runs from discipline

SOLUTION "If you have to sit on him to spank him, then do not hesitate. And hold him there until he has surrendered. Prove that you are bigger, tougher, more patiently enduring, and are unmoved by his wailing. Hold the resisting child in a helpless position for several minutes, or until he is totally surrendered. Accept no conditions for surrender -- no compromise. You are to rule over him as a benevolent sovereign. Your word is final."

Firstly, benevolent sovereigns generally do not hold someone down forcibly to show they are bigger or tougher. (The US embassy recently had to be reduced to essential personnel, and all non-essential personnel and families evacuated, and an order was sent to all Americans to leave Nepal quite recently because of a sovereign trying to show his subjects he was "bigger and tougher". The French Revolution happened in part because of efforts to quell dissent. Heck, in America's own mythology the American Revolution happened largely because King George and Parliament tried to hold down the Colonies to show who was "bigger and tougher".) Truly benevolent sovereigns listen to their subjects, and will try to assist them for the betterment of their countries. (There's actually an entire concept called "noblesse oblige" that states a good king must--as an obligation of being king--treat his subjects with respect and work for the whole good of the country; in return, the king gets privileges, but this is purely dependent on helping and looking out for his subjects and not mistreating them.)

Secondly, this is abusive, and (as noted above) is at minimum going to engender resentment towards the parents. If the parent breaks the will successfully of the kid, this makes it very difficult for the kid to learn to trust, say, a future wife or equal. It can leave girls open to exploitation of all sorts. (Unfortunately, the Pearls promote the idea of women being subservient to men as "men are to God" so this is likely by design.)

This is one I myself was subjected to as a kid.

PROBLEM Child whines to mother after father disciplines him

SOLUTION Mother must go over to child and "give him one or two licks on his exposed ankles or legs while commanding, 'Obey your father.' "

Abusive; a better response is to explain to the kid what he did wrong and that you agree with the other parent that he misbehaved. (I myself was subjected to this one a lot.)

PROBLEM Child lies

SOLUTION Switch him 10 times at noon each day. Make him pick the tree branch.

A better response is to explain to the kid how lying is hurtful, including asking him how he would like it if other people lied to him.

Dominionists, as an aside, use this for a lot of things other than "lying", and very often a part of dominionist "discipline" involves making the kid get the very tools of their own "chastening"--making them an active participant in it. (There are two parallels I know of in the adult world--in some states, making a condemned prisoner choose his own method of execution; in states that practice torture, forcing the tortured to choose the manner of torture or forcing them to get the implements of torture. In the latter case, it is explicitly meant as an additional form of psychological torture and survivors report it as damaging and humiliating as the physical torture itself.)

I myself, as well as my sister, were often subjected to the "get yourself a switch because you're going to be whupped till you cry" method of "chastening" for offenses as simple as yelling too loudly in the backyard or the usual sibling scuffling or even walking outside of the yard without permission to the next door neighbour's.

In fact we got whacked enough that we started becoming minor experts in the strength of wood, etc. Thin switches hurt more, thick switches a bit less, and old wood would often break. (My sister also notably learned to cry on command to stop the beatings sooner; I ended up telling my folks at age four that they could "beat me till their hands fell off but they weren't making me cry" and I've pretty much held to that.)

One time (I was possibly all of four years old) I picked a log that was so large that I could not pick it up but had to drag it as the "switch"--my child brain figured if the beater couldn't pick it up, they couldn't whack me till I cried.

Unfortunately, this did not work in practice--I got whacked with a separate, parent-picked switch not only for the original transgression, but got whacked again for being "willful" in picking a log to prevent a "switching".

PROBLEM What to use for a rod

SOLUTION For babies under age 1, a footlong willow branch shaved of its knots. For older kids, plastic plumbing pipe, a 3-foot shrub cutting or a belt to help turn a child "back from the road to hell."

THIS is likely the quote that could potentially cause the Pearls to be listed as an accessory to manslaughter or even murder (depending on whether child abuse deaths are considered manslaughter or murder in the state of North Carolina).

Note that beating of children under the age of 1 is advocated with willow-switches, and the beating of children older than 1 with PVC "chastening rods", large sticks, or belts.

Again, I've been subjected to all of this--when I first reported I had been hit with some of this to my high school counselor (at age 16, not realising before then that it was abusive or even particularly weird for kids to be hit with belts even at the age of 14-16) they called CPS. (Unfortunately, CPS in my area was unaware of religiously motivated child abuse and tended not to trust any reports from teenagers. :()

I've been told by a therapist that I could potentially retroactively file charges, but I'm not sure it's worth it--as it is, I still don't trust the system to help me. And that's one of the big things that these "child training" techniques do--destroy any trust in the idea that people might help you when you're down. If anything, it teaches you that the very people who are supposed to protect you are going to be the very ones causing harm.

There's a quote from "The Crow" that comes to mind--"'Mother' is the word for 'God' on the lips of all children". If so, parents who use the techniques of the Pearls and other promoters of dominionist "baby-beating" guides are teaching their kids that God is a horrible, vengeful, abusive entity not to be trusted. They're making people who either are afraid God is going to smite them for the smallest transgression--or they are making people who question the necessity of a God at all.

It is notable to see the idea of God of the dominionists--vengeful, smiting at the smallest transgression, sending disasters to people, the "Jesus soaked in blood and splitting his enemies in twain" as depicted at the end of the "Left Behind" books. Hating people for how they were when they were born, hating them for things they can't control, cursing people who aren't as vengeful.

It is probably the case here, sadly, that there may be truth to the quote from "The Crow" about Mother being the word for God on the lips of children--and they are learning their terrible lessons about the dominionist God in infancy, as their Mother thrashes them with the willow chastening-rod for the wails of a seven-month-old child who just misses the closest thing he knows to God in the world.

As I noted in the opening post of this series, the "Bible-based baby beating" methods of Michael and Debbie Pearl are now linked to yet another death--this time, a literal "death by chastening rod" in which a child was beaten so viciously that their muscles were literally tenderised like a sirloin steak.

This is, alas, far from the first case where a child has died because of Michael and Debbie Pearl.

In 2006 I had the misfortune of reading, via the following news article, of a death directly attributed to childrearing methods promoted by dominionist child-rearing authors Michael and Debbie Pearl--who operate a website called No Greater Joy and who have published several books.

These books and online guides are nothing more or less than a guide to religiously motivated child abuse--as even the state of Tennessee and numerous child welfare agencies have testified.

And the Pearls, sadly, are by no means alone at promoting this. The article sadly reports:

A few years ago, Lynn Paddock sought Christian advice on how to discipline her growing brood of adopted children.

Paddock -- a Johnston County mother accused of murdering Sean, her 4-year-old adopted son, and beating two other adopted children -- surfed the Internet, said her attorney, Michael Reece. She found literature by an evangelical minister and his wife who recommended using plumbing supply lines to spank misbehaving children.

Paddock ordered Michael and Debi Pearl's books and started spanking her adopted children as suggested. After Sean, the youngest of Paddock's six adopted children, died last month, his older sister and brother told investigators about Paddock's spankings.

Sean's 9-year-old brother was beaten so badly he limped, a prosecutor said. Bruises marred Sean's backside, too, doctors found.

Sean died after being wrapped so tightly in blankets he suffocated. That, too, was a form of punishment, Johnston County Sheriff Steve Bizzell said.

The Pearls' advice from their Web site: A swift whack with the plastic tubing would sting but not bruise. Give 10 licks at a time, more if the child resists. Be careful about using it in front of others -- even at church; nosy neighbors might call social workers. Save hands for nurturing, not disciplining. Heed the warning, taken from Proverbs in the Old Testament, that sparing the rod will spoil the child.

Just how bad is the Pearls' childrearing advice? The article gets into detail:

Paddock seems to have carefully followed the Pearls' teachings. Investigators found 2-foot lengths of plumbing supply line in several rooms of her remote farmhouse.

The Pearls offer shopping advice on their Web site, www.nogreaterjoy.org: "You can buy them for under $1.00 at Home Depot or any hardware store. They come cheaper by the dozen and can be widely distributed in every room and vehicle. Just the high profile of their accessibility will keep the kids in line."

For those interested, here's a picture (courtesy of Home Depot's website) of the PVC supply line in question they advocate beating kids with:

I have done research on religiously-motivated child abuse, and one of the true examples of "Talk To Action" is Stop The Rod which was founded by Christian parenting groups who were gravely concerned about the techniques promoted by the Pearls.

As I have documented in a thread on Dark Christianity as well as on Talk 2 Action and will now document here, "highlights" from the Pearls include:

Examples from the Pearls (which also have published a series of baby-beating manuals popular in the dominionist community and which are often included with the sale of chastening rods and similar "Biblical chastening devices"; they operate a website, No Greater Joy (also the title of one of their manuals on baby-beating the dominionist way) that promotes the same advise online; the Pearls are under investigation by the state of Tennessee for child abuse based on the material in their books):

woman is told to stay with abusive husband because "God hates divorce"

assertive women are accused of having a "Jezebel spirit" (in dominionist groups into "spiritual warfare" there are even exorcisms in attempts to drive "Jezebel spirits" out of women who are seen as being too "uppity" and not "staying in their place")

woman is literally told it is her HUSBAND'S decision, not HERS, whether or not she is to practice birth control and how many children she is to have

In some of the links at stoptherod.net noted above, it's detailed how the Pearls have advocated beating infants as young as eight months old with "chastening rods" for playing with their food and advocate pinching infants as young as four months.

more on tyrant babies! (Did these people watch too much "Family Guy" or something?) Yes, this is very sadly a TYPICAL attitude))

techniques practiced in dominionist households to break will of kids (who are termed "Twinkie twerps" by the Pearls)

the Pearls (who, incidentially, are under investigation by the State of Tennessee for child abuse--in part because of material from the books) actually try to defend their child abuse manuals

advocates being extremely strict from birth; also claims kids being bullied somehow deserved it

yet more fantasies of babies plotting to take over the household from "parental rule"

advocating using a "chastening rod" on a seven-month-old child who will not get to sleep (it's on page two)

advocates beating of children with "chastening rods" made from PVC plumbing pipe for thumbsucking

claims that people who have criticised the Pearls for their extreme methods of childrearing are literally demon-possessed (sadly, a common form of "dead agenting"/"character assassination" in the dominionist community and one reason why it is at times next to impossible to debate dominionists heavily into "spiritual warfare")

Putting some of the quotes from these articles puts them in light. To give some examples when someone on the Dark Christianity thread asked how much more extreme than merely beating with a length of PVC pipe can be:

Try using one of those PVC "chastening rods" on a seven-month-old BABY just because it won't get to sleep:

If the child has been mistrained, or if you have failed to provide a good prelude to sleep, and the child rises up to fight and resist, you should evaluate your whole procedure so as to improve your pre-sleep ritual for tomorrow night. But for the moment, you must constrain the child to obey authority and remain lying down. As a last resort, you may have to prove the power of your word by enforcing it with one or two stinging licks (applied with a small flexible switch) to the child's leg that says to the child, "There is no reward for getting up; Mama means business; she is not going to give over to my demands; the path to greatest pleasure is to go to sleep; there is no alternative; my parents always get their way; what can I say? Good night."

Again, you are reminded that this was in reply to a letter complaining that a SEVEN MONTH OLD BABY was waking up at night.

Or how about whacking two-year-old and four-year-old kids with one of these PVC pipe "chastening rods" for sucking their thumbs or picking their noses:

Please give me a description of the switch or rod of which you so often speak. I wish you could send me one so I could see it.

The rod we speak of is a plumbing supply line that can be bought at any hardware store or large department store. It is a slim, flexible, plastic tubing that supplies water to sinks, and toilets. Ask for "¼ inch supply line." They cost less than one dollar. I always give myself one swat before I swat the child to remind myself how much force to exert. It stings the skin without bruising or damaging tissue. It's a real attention-getter. Michael demonstrates its use in our new Seminar videos.

Or, how about yanking baby's hair to discourage hair-pulling:

A child left to himself in a crib or a room is being trained. All child-initiated events that have consequences, be they pleasant or unpleasant, are training. If a child stumbles into an experience and finds the consequences pleasurable, he is trained to repeat it. If the consequences are unpleasant, then he seeks to avoid it. If an infant sticks his finger in his eye, the pain will discourage him from repeating that on himself, but he may try it on you. That is unless you should make his unwelcomed advances unpleasant for him. The first time an infant pulls your hair, if you pull his, he will never be a hair-puller. One taste of a plastic toy communicates that it is not made to eat. These experiences are physical, and are easy to understand, but what about soul training?

It gets worse. According to the Pearls, kids who surreptitiously steal cookies from the cookie jar (or Twinkies)--whom are termed "Twinkie Twerps"--need a good whacking with a 2-foot length of 1/4" PVC pipe:

What if he should continue to scream and protest when you give the Twinkie to the other children? Lead him to the place where the "magic wand" is kept and give him respect for the "Powers that be."

What if he should continue to steal sweets and make demands? Simply tell him that his actions have led you to see that his addiction must be broken, so you will not buy anything sweet for one month--and stick to it. The worst thing you could do is to make an exception or to give-over after a week or two.

If that's not enough, the Pearls literally advocate yanking the hair of tiny four-month-old babies for being a bit rough in nursing even as they attempt to defend the very manuals that have gotten them prosecuted for child abuse (yes, the Pearls have been investigated by the State of Tennessee for child abuse, as will be noted below):

For example, if a 3 month-old nursing baby bites, don't spank. She does not know she did bad. Just gently pull a hair on her head. She will startle back in momentary discomfort and immediately start nursing again. The tiny bit of discomfort makes the baby relate the biting down with the gentle pulling of the hair. You have not made her obey, you have only conditioned her to respond differently. That is training.

(The same article also refers to "popping the leg" of a thirteen-week-old infant not being quite so effective--the fact that it's mentioned at ALL is disturbing. This was in regards, incidentially, to a letter from a concerned reader who had noted that kids raised strictly by the Pearls' methods had literally lost "the spark of life". Very similar things have been reported by people who've been tortured or severely abused.)

And if that's still not enough, if you ain't with 'em, you're with Da Debbil Hisself and even encourage frank harassment and "spiritual warfare" against their critics:

For the last year or so, we have had a group of about eight "damsels" working overtime trying to disrupt our ministry.

Acts 16:16-18 - And it came to pass, as we went to prayer, a certain damsel possessed with a spirit of divination met us, which brought her masters much gain by soothsaying: The same followed Paul and us, and cried, saying, These men are the servants of the most high God, which shew unto us the way of salvation. And this did she many days. But Paul, being grieved, turned and said to the spirit, I command thee in the name of Jesus Christ to come out of her. And he came out the same hour.

For the last year or so, we have had a group of about eight "damsels" working overtime trying to disrupt our ministry. When we advertise for a Seminar, they call the church where we are scheduled to be and warn them that their tax-exempt status could be in jeopardy, or that we are being watched by the authorities. One pastor, believing their lies, almost canceled a seminar 24 hours before it was to take place. We explained the situation, so he let it go on, but he stayed home so he could not be implicated. Recently, when we held a seminar in Chattanooga, Tennessee, being warned by these damsels, the Department of Human Services of Tennessee sent a "spy" to observe. We welcomed him readily. We have nothing to hide. A few weeks later, the head detective for the state of Tennessee dropped by our place to visit. We knew we did not have to talk to him, but again, having nothing to hide, Michael answered all his questions for about an hour, gave him our booklet "Biblical Chastisement," our DVD set, The Joy of Training, and several of our books. Biblical Chastisement was written for just this purpose--a defense of Biblical child training. He talked to Deb for about an hour and also spent time with our office staff. He then called and spoke with one of our grown, married children. So the nice detective left, having come to the conclusion that the ladies who were reporting us did not KNOW us. He was satisfied that everything we do and teach is within the law. Since he left, I have honestly been expecting him to invite us to teach foster parents how to train the State's children. We welcome cooperation with them. They need direction desperately. So, we would like to thank the "damsels" for helping to give us a clean bill of "child-training" health. We are now officially investigated and approved, however unnecessary it was. Thank you, damsels.

The damsels are apparently on a campaign to load up web sites that sell our materials with bad (sometimes vulgar) reviews. Feel free to crowd out their bad reviews with your positive ones. Since there are only 8 of them, and 150,000 of you, it should be quite easy for the Saints of God to disrupt the "ministry" of these ungentle damsels. They must not have much of a love life or family life, because they spend so much time bashing us.

Also, someone has (perhaps these same damsels) started messing with our website. It adds extra work for us, just trying to pull down orders and e-mails. Someone has sent messages in our name wanting credit information. We NEVER ask for credit information from you, so please, NEVER give out information thinking we have asked you for it. One man contacted us, complaining of the nasty e-mail we sent him. We did no such thing! If it was nasty, it certainly didn't come from us!

So, we really feel a kindred spirit with Paul and Silas, which is very encouraging. We ask that you do remember to pray for us and to stand in prayer against the forces of darkness that would hinder our ministry. We are just two old folks, and we need an army of young, strong families standing with us in prayer, including their active participation in combating these grievous damsels and any other tools of Satan he may use.

You might be interested in reading the rest of the story in Acts. The possessed damsel was in the hire of someone, and when she lost her devils, that employer took legal action against Paul and Silas. These men of God ended up in jail. God caused an earthquake, setting them free, and when the jailer saw the power of God he and all his family were saved. As I said, pray for us. Mike likes to go to prison every week to preach, but neither of us wants to live there, although Mike would enjoy the excitement of an earthquake (not me, I'm a sissy).

Yes, you're reading this right. Not only are they making themselves out to be martyrs, not only have they called people who have (legitimately) called the authorities complaining of child abuse being promoted by the Pearls, but they are actively encouraging dominionists to harass people who criticise them.

Even more frighteningly--the children aren't the only ones to suffer (turning the admonition of Christ on its head)--women, too, must suffer.

One of the more frightening examples is where the Pearls literally tell a woman not to leave their abusive husband and even claim she's being abused because she's not submitting enough:

The Scripture makes it very clear how God feels about divorce, He hates it. It is an Old Testament passage, but God has not changed his mind. He still hates divorce. It is not His will, it wasn't so from the beginning, and it is not so today. There have been occasions, both in Scripture and in our ministry, where a man was so vile that God has killed him. A woman can come to God asking Him to deliver her from a man if he will not repent, but a woman should be sure she has obeyed God in her relationship to her husband, before she asks such a thing.

God has given us several promises concerning marriage to unbelievers. I Peter 3:1-6 tells us how to win our unbelieving husband, and in 1Cor. 7:14 God promises that our children will be holy if we stay with our unbelieving spouse and honor God in our relationship with him. That is a promise from God. These Scriptures give us the "how to" on our end and the expected results. I have seen God keep His word. I have also seen many who would expect God to keep His word when they did not obey their end of the "how to."

(Note the lovely bit of scripture-twisting. 1 Peter 3:1-6 is essentially used in the dominionist justification of "submit to your husbands as they submit to God":
1: Likewise, ye wives, be in subjection to your own husbands; that, if any obey not the word, they also may without the word be won by the conversation of the wives;
2: While they behold your chaste conversation coupled with fear.
3: Whose adorning let it not be that outward adorning of plaiting the hair, and of wearing of gold, or of putting on of apparel;
4: But let it be the hidden man of the heart, in that which is not corruptible, even the ornament of a meek and quiet spirit, which is in the sight of God of great price.
5: For after this manner in the old time the holy women also, who trusted in God, adorned themselves, being in subjection unto their own husbands:
6: Even as Sara obeyed Abraham, calling him lord: whose daughters ye are, as long as ye do well, and are not afraid with any amazement.

Notably, the rest of the chapter--also containing an admonition for husbands to support their wives and the church community to support each other--is not included.

1 Corinthians 7:14 is similarly abused:

14: For the unbelieving husband is sanctified by the wife, and the unbelieving wife is sanctified by the husband: else were your children unclean; but now are they holy.

Very interestingly, this is part of a series of verses which have been interpreted as a condemnation of divorce. The full context is actually recommending people not marry at all, because it might distract them from being missionaries!)

Later, they subtly suggest she pray for her husband to die as a method of escape:

You say your husband is just "too vile," that it would "take a miracle" or him "dying and being born all over again." Yes, now you are beginning to understand. God has a miraculous plan to make it possible. You are part of that plan. Every day, minute by minute, as you respond to the living God in obedience and thanksgiving, you make that plan unfold. "That, if any obey not the word, they also may without the word be won by the conversation of the wives." He has given you the power to overcome the reactions (lust) of the flesh and to see that plan become a reality in your life. Will you?

Even in the case where physical abuse is occuring or (Gods forbid) sexual abuse of their children, they recommend that dominionist women "stand by their man":

If you or your children have been hit (other than the children being spanked) so as to leave discernable marks two hours later, and you genuinely fear that he will repeat his battering, you can take legal steps without divorcing your husband. In a moment when he is not angry, calmly inform him that the next time he physically assaults you or the kids, you are going to call the law and have him arrested. You must first resolve in your heart that you are willing to prosecute him and see him go to jail. I visit prisons every week. It is a great place to mull over the consequences of one's deeds. And I have never met a prisoner that turned down a visit from anyone. Think about it, lady; it is a great time for writing love letters and sharing a three-minute romantic phone call once a week. Guys who get out of prison run straight home to their ladies and treat them wonderfully—for a while anyway.

If your abusing husband fully understands that you have the power of the law behind you, he will learn to keep his hands in his pockets. I am not suggesting you do this to be vindictive or to get even with him. It must be done in humility and love. If your husbands knows that you are the weaker vessel, desperately seeking your survival and that of the kids, and that you are not trying to punish him, but that you are going to stand by and continue to love him, that you are going to wait for him to get out of prison and then try to start over again, it may move his heart to fear if not to repentance. You say, he cannot help himself. Does he help himself when his peers—other men his own size—make him angry? Does he fly out of control and start hitting his boss or his employees? No? Then he has self-control when he must. The law can make it a must, which will allow you to continue with him and demonstrate your womanhood and win him to yourself and then to your God.

But if your husband has sexually molested the children, you should approach him with it. If he is truly repentant (not just exposed) and is willing to seek counseling, you may feel comfortable giving him an opportunity to prove himself, as long as you know the children are safe. If there is any thought that they are not safe, or if he is not repentant and willing to seek help, then go to the law and have him arrested. Stick by him, but testify against him in court. Have him do about 10 to 20 years, and by the time he gets out, you will have raised the kids, and you can be waiting for him with open arms of forgiveness and restitution. Will this glorify God? Forever. You ask, "What if he doesn't repent even then?" Then you will be rewarded in heaven equal to the martyrs, and God will have something to rub in the Devil's face. God hates divorce—always, forever, regardless, without exception.

Even worse--and which shows very clearly the direction dominionists would love to place women--the Pearls literally tell a woman that her husband, not herself, has ultimate control over whether she may or may not have children:

The Bible clearly teaches that your husband is your head. He has the rule over you. You are to submit to him, obey him, honor him, and never usurp authority over him. I fear you have not submitted, not obeyed, and not honored. You got your "conviction" someplace other than the Bible. The Bible does not state that it is sin to use natural means to space your children, but it does state it is sin not to obey your husband. He should have the final say in birth control, unless he would employ a method that would abort a fertilized egg. It is your duty to trust God to direct your man.

Instead of your children being a blessing, they are an unwanted burden. To your husband they have become a symbol of your dishonor to him. You suffer, your children don't have a daddy, and not much of a mother, and your marriage is failing. Go to your husband and tell him you are sorry, and humbly ask him to help you learn to honor him. When he sees your broken submission and willingness to honor his will, he will stop being so angry and, hopefully, begin to take more interest in the children.

(Ironically, this is to a woman who didn't want to go on the pill because she believed the dominionist line about the pill being an abortifacient!)

There's still more. This time we go to their actual baby-beating manuals (that are referenced in the newspaper article). Courtesy of Stop The Rod (who has probably done the best job documenting the abuse promoted by the Pearls) there's some interesting quotes.

First, with the book "No Greater Joy" (of which some stuff has been excerpted directly from the Pearls' website), here's a lovely list of quotes:

"My two-year-old will not stay in bed when I put him down. It seems like I am whipping him too much. No matter how many times I whip him he still gets up." This is their recommendation: "If your spankings are too light to gain his respect, an increase in the intensity might be more persuasive." p.6 "If he gets up, when his feet hit the floor, spring into the room with your little switch and pop him on the bare leg one or two times." "Never allow him to get his way." p.7

If a child screams or cries "Just ignore him. Don't be moved by it. Don't pick him up." If the child says he is hurt give him "a terrible tasting herbal potion." p.9

On p.19 Michael Pearl jokes about a "tot" getting "half a dozen little spankings a day."

Michael Pearl praises parents who for a year kept their young son from medical treatment and who "was so sick that when he finally got to a doctor, the doctor expressed amazement that he was still alive." p.20

To the question "Should a mature ten-year-old be allowed to switch a two-year-old if the mother is unavailable?" Michael Pearl says sure!: "Ten-year-olds ought to be mature enough to discipline a smaller child. In our house, there was no difference between the parents and the older children in enforcing the rule of law over the younger children." p.24-25

When a 3 year old screams the Pearls recommend: "without saying a word go straight to the switch. Spank her where she stands." "Never threaten, and never show mercy. One squeak of a scream gets a switching." p.26 The Pearls apparently have never read the Sermon on the Mount, in which Jesus says "Blessed are the merciful!"

Here is some crazy teaching about violence from Michael Pearl: If a child hits, bites, kicks or shoves he should get "a thorough spanking. Children must be taught that violence is never an acceptable alternative in personal conflicts." ??? p.27

When a 4 year old screams "Turn and walk away. If she were to scream again, turn back and give her a spanking." p.30

On p. 33 "A mother describes her dilemma: `I get so frustrated with the children. No matter how many times I tell them or spank them, they just do the same thing again. We just go around and around.'" Michael Pearl recommends "meeting every transgression with a swift penalty." "They will obey."

On p. 34 Michael Pearl relates the story of a mother hitting her 11 month old who doesn't want to eat any more "spinach-squash-mush" and pushes it away. The mother "picked up her little enforcer (whip), which was lying on the table, and swatted the child's hand." When the baby tries again to push the unwanted food away she "received another spat." Michael Pearl says about this scenario: "I loved it. It was beautiful." (p. 35) And then on p. 36 he says "I must encourage those of you with small children, train up your children now. Don't want until they are one year old to start training. Rebellion and self-will should be broken in the six-month-old when it first appears. Take this young mother's example and think of ways you can train your child. (smiley face)"

On p. 46 a mother is described as ignoring her crying 3 month old, until the baby "became cheerful." The story ends with Michael Pearl's comment about a teenage girl visiting this mother and baby: "Maybe when this young girl becomes a mother she will have the wisdom to begin training her newborns and not wait until they are three months old."

On p. 47 a 9 month old is left crying, sitting alone and ignored. Pearl recommends coming by to pat her on the head every 10 minutes. This is cruel and neglectful, and dangerous.

On p. 72 Michael Pearl says "switches and rods make many things mighty inconvenient (for the child). (smiley face)"

On p. 85 Michael Pearl recommends giving a little girl who won't get into her car seat "five licks with a stinging switch." If the girl still doesn't get in the seat "repeat the switching." If the little girl continues to refuse to get in the seat he says to take the seat into the house and strap the girl in it for "two or three hours."

On p. 96: when one of the Pearls' children tattled on another child Debi Pearl "spanked both of them regardless of who did the tattling."

The Pearls also have a second book out, "To Train Up A Child" (a reference to the Biblical injunction to "train up a child in the way he should go, so that he may never stray from the path of righteousness"). The full text of the book is available at the following link (in case anyone wants to read the whole vomitous thing) but again Stop the Rod gives its selection of the worst of the Pearls here:

1) The Pearls recommend whipping infants only a few months old on their bare skin. They describe whipping their own 4 month old daughter (p.9). They recommend whipping the bare skin of "every child" (p.2) for "Christians and non-Christians" (p.5) and for "every transgression" (p.1). Parents who don't whip their babies into complete submission are portrayed as indifferent, lazy, careless and neglectful (p.19) and are "creating a Nazi" (p.45).
2) On p.60 they recommend whipping babies who cannot sleep and are crying, and to never allow them "to get up." On p.61 they recommend whipping a 12 month old girl for crying. On p.79 they recommend whipping a 7 month old for screaming.
3) On p.65 co-author Debi Pearl whips the bare leg of a 15 month old she is babysitting, 10 separate times, for not playing with something she tells him to play with. On p.56 Debi Pearl hits a 2 year old so hard "a karate chop like wheeze came from somewhere deep inside."
4) On p.44 they say not to let the child's crying while being hit to "cause you to lighten up on the intensity or duration of the spanking." On p.59 they recommend whipping a 3 year old until he is "totally broken."
5) On p.55 the Pearls say a mother should hit her child if he cries for her.
6) On p.46 the Pearls say that if a child does obey before being whipped, whip them anyway. And "if you have to sit on him to spank him, then do not hesitate. And hold him there until he is surrendered. Prove that you are bigger, tougher." "Defeat him totally." On p.80 they recommend giving a child having a tantrum "a swift forceful spanking." On the same page they say to whip small children on their bare skin until they stop screaming. "Don't be bullied. Give him more of the same." They say to continue whipping until their crying turns into a "wounded, submissive whimper."
7) On p.47 they recommend their various whips, including "a belt or larger tree branch" to hit children.
8) The Pearls recommend pulling a nursing infant's hair (p.7), and describe tripping their non-swimming toddler so she falls into deep water (p.67). They recommend ignoring an infant's bumped head when he falls to the floor, and ignoring skinned knees (p.86). They also say "if your child is roughed-up by peers, rejoice." (p.81) And on p.103 the Pearls say if children lose their shoes, "let them go without until they (the children) can make the money to buy more."
9) The Pearls claim their "training" methods are Godly, yet they have no religious training or credentials They never mention Jesus' injunctions to forgive "seventy times seven" and be merciful, and they decry the "extraordinary ingnorance of modern psychology."

Frighteningly, the Pearls' guides--and "chastening devices" as documented on Stop The Rod--are promoted in dominionist "homeschool" programs and church groups, as documented in the original news article:

Gena Suarez, publisher of a magazine for home-schooling parents that publishes advertisements for the Pearls' books, said their teachings are often inappropriately used to defend child abuse.

"[The Pearls] are talking about something that would fit in a purse," Suarez said. "The only way you can kill a child with that is by shoving it down his throat."

Even more disturbingly, some "faith based" social services groups funded with your tax dollars have been promoting the Pearls' methods:

Christian evangelicals who, like the Pearls, teach the importance of corporal punishment have loyal followers. The results are tangible, said Dot Ehlers, executive director of a Smithfield nonprofit who teaches parenting skills to mothers and fathers referred to them by the Johnston County Department of Social Services. She said about a quarter of the 60 parents she instructs each week say their faith defends and encourages corporal punishment.

The Pearls' techniques helped Sandy Hicks, a mother in Texas who said she was desperate to restore peace in her home.

"Some people would rather spend an hour reasoning with a defiant 5-year-old instead of requiring the kid to behave and giving him a swat if he doesn't," said Hicks, who said she has used a peach-tree switch to spank her four children. "Some people are just queasy about swatting their kids."

If the Pearls were the only ones promoting these childrearing methods, this would be one thing. Sadly, they aren't.

James Dobson--and it should be noted that Dobson is on the liberal end of things when it comes to Dominionist Discipline--has used the beating of a Dachsund to show how children's wills should be broken in his book "The Strong-Willed Child":

"Please don't misunderstand me. Siggie is a member of our family and we love him dearly. And despite his anarchistic nature, I have finally taught him to obey a few simple commands. However, we had some classic battles before he reluctantly yielded to my authority.

"The greatest confrontation occurred a few years ago when I had been in Miami for a three-day conference. I returned to observe that Siggie had become boss of the house while I was gone. But I didn't realize until later that evening just how strongly he felt about his new position as Captain.

"At eleven o'clock that night, I told Siggie to go get into his bed, which is a permanent enclosure in the family room. For six years I had given him that order at the end of each day, and for six years Siggie had obeyed.

"On this occasion, however, he refused to budge. You see, he was in the bathroom, seated comfortably on the furry lid of the toilet seat. That is his favorite spot in the house, because it allows him to bask in the warmth of a nearby electric heater. . . "

. . .

"When I told Sigmund to leave his warm seat and go to bed, he flattened his ears and slowly turned his head toward me. He deliberately braced himself by placing one paw on the edge of the furry lid, then hunched his shoulders, raised his lips to reveal the molars on both sides, and uttered his most threatening growl. That was Siggie's way of saying. "Get lost!"

"I had seen this defiant mood before, and knew there was only one way to deal with it. The ONLY way to make Siggie obey is to threaten him with destruction. Nothing else works. I turned and went to my closet and got a small belt to help me 'reason' with Mr. Freud."

. . .

"What developed next is impossible to describe. That tiny dog and I had the most vicious fight ever staged between man and beast. I fought him up one wall and down the other, with both of us scratching and clawing and growling and swinging the belt. I am embarrassed by the memory of the entire scene. Inch by inch I moved him toward the family room and his bed. As a final desperate maneuver, Siggie backed into the corner for one last snarling stand. I eventually got him to bed, only because I outweighed him 200 to 12!"

After describing thrashing the family dog, he notes this in the context of childrearing:

"But this is not a book about the discipline of dogs; there is an important moral to my story that is highly relevant to the world of children. JUST AS SURELY AS A DOG WILL OCCASIONALLY CHALLENGE THE AUTHORITY OF HIS LEADERS, SO WILL A LITTLE CHILD -- ONLY MORE SO."

. . .

"[I]t is possible to create a fussy, demanding baby by rushing to pick him up every time he utters a whimper or sigh. Infants are fully capable of learning to manipulate their parents through a process called reinforcement, whereby any behavior that produces a pleasant result will tend to recur. Thus, a healthy baby can keep his mother hopping around his nursery twelve hours a day (or night) by simply forcing air past his sandpaper larynx."

Also, like the Pearls, he emphasizes that parents risk the damnation of their kids if they do not literally beat the hell out of them:

"Perhaps this tendency toward self-will is the essence of 'original sin' which has infiltrated the human family. It certainly explains why I place such stress on the proper response to willful defiance during childhood, for that rebellion can plant the seeds of personal disaster."

Keep in mind that Dobson is actually considered liberal for a dominionist "Dr. Spock". Most are far worse.

More typical, sadly, is a book by Tedd Tripp called "Shepherding a Child's Heart". Tripp has written several books on dominionist childrearing and--in a trend mirrored by that of the Pearls' books--is promoted on sites catering to dominionist "homeschool" programs. A Google search shows the level of promotion of Tripp in the dominionist community; Stop The Rod has begun documenting the promotion of abuse.

Quotes from Tripp's book are telling:

1) Parents are "God's agents"

p.xviii "You exercise authority as God's agent. You must require obedience of your children because they are called by God to obey and honor you. Parents should be `benevolent despots'".

p.34 "It is sobering to realize that you correct your child by God's command. You stand before him as God's agent to show him his sin. The parent must be aware of the fact that he is God's representative to the child."

p.139 "Obedience is not simply an issue between the parent and the child. It is an issue between the child and God in which the parent is God's agent."

2) Parents should have total control

p.xx "You need to direct not simply the behavior of your children, but the attitudes of their hearts. You need to show them not just the `what' of their sin and failure, but the `why.'"

p.23 "You want to control the flow of events so that it is never chaotic, but rather a well-structured home." "I am interested in helping parents engage in hand-to-hand combat on the world's smallest battlefield, the child's heart."

p.133 From birth to age 4, "The most important lesson for the child to learn in this period is that HE IS AN INDIVIDUAL UNDER AUTHORITY."

p.134 "Acquaint your children with authority and submission when they are infants. This training starts the day you bring them home from the hospital."

p.135 "It is imperative that children learn to honor and obey. The disobedient child has moved outside the place of covenant blessing."

p.138 "Obedience means more than a child doing what he is told. It means doing what he is told---

Without Challenge

Without Excuse,

Without Delay."

p.139 "When your directives are met by a discourse about why what you have asked is not fair, your children are not obeying. When you are met with excuses or explanations, they are not obeying. When they refuse to respond at once, they are not obeying. When you say to your child, "Dear, I want you to go to bed now," there is only one appropriate response. It is not, "I'll go after I finish coloring this page." There is only one obedient response. It is to go to bed without delay. If you accept any other response, you are training your children to disobey. You must challenge disobedience and persevere until the lessons of submission are learned. Victory does not come to the faint of heart. Never allow your children to disobey without dealing with them."

p.142 "You must provide examples of submission for your children. Dads can do this through biblical authority over their wives, and Moms through biblical submission to their husbands."

p.145 "Don't waste time trying to sugarcoat submission to make it palatable. Obeying when you see the sense in it is not submission; it is agreement. Submission necessarily means doing what you do not wish to do. It is never easy or painless."

p.151 "Your children must understand that when you speak for the first time, you have spoken for the last time."

p.155 A parent poses the question "What if my child says, `But I didn't hear you'?" And Tripp's answer is "One of our children seemed to have much trouble with `hearing.' We sat down with this child and had this conversation: `You are having trouble hearing. I think, therefore, that you better start to develop the ability to pick my voice out of the other noise in your world. When you hear my voice, you should perk up your ears. From now on, if you fail to obey because you `did not hear', I will spank you for failing to listen to my voice.' We only had one spanking for failure to hear. After that the hearing problem cleared up."

3) Children are sinful, idolatrous and "fools"

p.6 "Your concern is to unmask your child's sin, helping him to understand how it reflects a heart that has strayed."

p.21 "Even a child in the womb and coming from the womb is wayward and sinful. One of the justifications for spanking children is that `Folly is bound up in the heart of a child, but the rod of discipline will drive it far from him' (Proverbs 22:15). The point of the proverb is that something is wrong in the heart of the child that requires correction."

p.24 "Since it is the Godward orientation of your child's heart that determines his response to life, you may never conclude that his problems are simply a lack of maturity. Selfishness is not outgrown. Rebellion against authority is not outgrown. These things are not outgrown because they are not reflective of immaturity but of the idolatry of your child's heart."

p.54 Children "need to understand subtleties of the malignancy of their own hearts. They need to know the dangers of trusting in themselves."

p.67 Children must have their "character flaws" addressed, and understand the "deceitfulness" of their hearts.

p.105 "The child is a sinner. There are things within the heart of the sweetest little baby that, allowed to blossom and grow to fruition, will bring about eventual destruction. The rod functions in this context. It is addressed to needs within the child. These needs cannot be met by mere talk. Proverbs 22:15 says, `Folly is bound up in the heart of a child, but the rod of discipline will drive it far from him.' God says there is something wrong in the child's heart. Folly or foolishness is bound up in his heart. This folly must be removed, for it places the child at risk."

p.106 "The fool's life is run by his desires and fears. This is what you hear from your young children. The most common phrases in the vocabulary of a 3-year-old are, `I want...' or `I don't want....' The fool lives out of the immediacy of his lusts, cravings, expectations, hopes and fears." "Watch a baby struggle against wearing a hat in the winter. Even this baby who cannot articulate or even conceptualize what he is doing shows a determination not to be ruled from without. This foolishness is bound up within his heart. Allowed to take root and grow for 14 or 15 years, it will produce a rebellious teenager who will not allow anyone to rule him. The spanking process drives foolishness from the heart of a child. Confrontation with the immediate and undeniably tactile sensation of a spanking renders an implacable child sweet."

p.143 "Show (children) how they are inclined to disobey and turn irrationally from what is good for them."

p.174 "Children need to be convicted that they have defected from God and are covenant-breakers. You must deal with the child in a deep way that enables him to see the implications of his behavior and to indict himself."

p.177 "You cannot, with integrity, tell your child that if he tries hard enough, if he is good enough, if he really wants it, he can be what God has called him to be. He can't."

4) Don't encourage children's self-worth

p.51 "When I ask parents why they put their children in these dance classes, they explain that it has helped their child's sense of self-worth. Are there any passages (in the Bible) that make the development of self-worth a biblically mandated goal? Are we not encouraging pride that comes from the capacity to perform?"

5) Parents don't protect children when they are abused

p.16 "Your children are responsible for the way they respond to your parenting."

p.53 Regarding schoolyard bullies: "You should instruct your children to entrust themselves to God in the face of unfair treatment, to face injustice without retaliation, and see the needs of those around them."

p. 58 "Faced with being kind to one who abuses you, there is nowhere to go but to God, who alone can enable a person to respond in love. When your child's heart desires revenge, when she must love an enemy, when her faith demands she leave room for God's justice--there is no place to go but to the cross." "Getting help from Christ was powerfully illustrated in the life of our daughter. As a ninth grader she seemed to get on the wrong side of her Spanish teacher. Through four years of high school she struggled with feeling angry over being sinned against. We spent many hours talking about how to respond. We discussed the impossibility of her loving this lady apart from God's grace. We encouraged her to find hope, strength, consolation and comfort in Christ."

6) Using "the rod"

p.31 "I recall many conversations that went like this:

Father: You didn't obey Daddy, did you?

Child: No.

Father: Do you remember what God says Daddy must do if you disobey?

Child: Spank me?

Father: That's right. I must spank you. If I don't, then I would be disobeying God. You and I would both be wrong. That would not be good for you or for me, would it?

Child: No. (A reluctant reply)"

p.36 "The child learns to receive correction, not because parents are always right, but because God says the rod of correction imparts wisdom."

p.74 "A biblical approach to children involves two elements that you weave together. One element is rich, full communication. The other is the rod. `Do not withhold discipline from a child; if you punish him with the rod, he will not die. Punish him with the rod and save his soul from death.' Proverbs 13-14."

p.104 Tripp describes spanking his son while guests are over: "Nick, a friend from church, and his girlfriend, Angela, were visiting for a Sunday afternoon. During our meal, one of our sons was disobedient. I took him to a private room upstairs to discipline him. "What's he going to do with him?" Angela inquired. "Probably spank him," my wife responded matter-of-factly. At that moment my son's cry could be heard upstairs. Angela went running from the house in a state of great agitation."

p.110 "The rod is a rescue mission. The child who needs a spanking has become distanced from his parents through disobedience. The spanking is designed to rescue the child from continuing in his foolishness. If he continues, his doom is certain. Thus, the parent, driven by love for the child, must use the rod." "Failure to obey Mom or Dad is failure to obey God. This is the issue. The child has failed to obey God."

p.112 "I know of nothing harder than spanking my children. It is difficult to hold your own child over your knee and purposefully inflict pain on him. Who benefits if you do not spank your child? You do. You are delivered from the agony of inflicting pain on one who is precious to you."

p.114 "I have witnessed spankings administered through a double layer of diapers to a child who never stopped moving long enough to know he had been spanked. The spanking was ineffective because the parents never made the rod felt."

p.115 "The rod returns the child to the place of blessing. Left to himself, he would continue to live a lust-driven life. He would continue to seek comfort in being a slave to his desires and fears. The rod of correction returns him to the place of submission to parents in which God has promised blessing."

p.149 "The `when' of spanking is so simple that parents miss it. If your child has not obeyed, he needs to be spanked."

p.151 Tripp describes the whipping procedure: take the child to a private place (so nobody can stop the abuse), make the child confess, tell the child "how many swats he will receive", put the child over your lap (as Tripp says, to "put the spanking in the context of your physical relationship" (!!)), pull the child's diapers or "drawers" down and whip them. Then pull the child up and show affection.

p.152 If the child is angry about being whipped, then "the discipline session is not over" and Tripp says to whip them some more until they are "sweet".

p.153 "Because you are dealing with young children, there is a heavy emphasis on the undeniably tactile experience of spanking."

p.154 "When your child is old enough to resist your directives, he is old enough to be disciplined. Rebellion can be something as simple as an infant struggling against a diaper change or stiffening out his body when you want him to sit on your lap. When our oldest child was approximately 8 months old, we were confronted with parenting our first mobile child. We had a bookshelf constructed of boards and bricks. Fearing the shelf would fall on him, Margy told him not to pull himself up by the shelf. After moving him away from the shelf, she left the room. As she peeked in on him, she observed him surveying the room. Not seeing her, he headed back toward the forbidden bookshelf. Here was a young child, not yet able to walk or to talk, looking to see if the coast was clear so he could disobey. Obviously, he was old enough to be disciplined." (He's not old enough to even understand English! - my comment)

7) Hide the whippings from others

p.114 Tripp answers the concern of a parent: "I'm afraid of being arrested for child abuse." This is his answer: "There is validity to this concern. You must be careful to avoid unnecessary exposure to being reported by someone who does not approve of spanking. Spanking should be done in the privacy of the home."

There are others promoting similar works--Stop The Rod links to the poignant letter from a survivor of similar tactics promoted by Roy Lessin (author of a large number of dominionist child-spanking manuals, some of which have promoted the use of "chastening rods".

One particular group of "spare the rod" dominionists--the Ezzos--are so infamous that entire entire websites have sprung up to warn against their tactics. (The Ezzos promote a book called "Babywise" in secular circles and "Growing Kid's God's Way" in dominionist circles; the only differences between the two are that Biblical scripture-twisting has been largely stripped from the secular version, whilst the original verses justifying things like extremely strict scheduling of infant feedings and punitive spanking of tiny infants are in the dominionist versions. This is actually a similar pattern to those that occur in many dominionist groups setting up "bait and switch" evangelism, like the "Character First!" campaigns which have been written about here.)

Gentle Christian Mothers is another site which, much like Stop The Rod, is set up by largely Christian, largely homeschooling parents who are gravely concerned about dominionist child abuse manuals.

One of the grave concerns these groups have had was that someone was eventually going to be killed by these manuals.

Sadly, they have been proven all too correct.

In fact, in the more hardline dominionist community--the same ones promoting "deliverance ministry"--it's all too common.

So far in what will be a continuing series on religiously motivated child abuse, we've been focusing on the most popular promoters of religiously motivated child abuse in the dominionist community.

People have asked two very good very good questions related to this--"Why aren't the promoters in prison yet?" and "How does this relate to dominionism?"

There are many reasons--the dominionist "parallel economy" is increasingly a large reason why, as is the reluctance to prosecute by CPS agencies--and even a few cases of quisling CPS agencies who see nothing wrong with this sort of abuse. Also--as incredulous as it may seem--in many cases, the promotion and even execution of this madness is legal--including the giving away of tools designed for abuse.

The "How does this relate to dominionism?" section

The relationship to dominionism is multifold. Among other things:

a) Some of the same folks promoting this are the very same groups promoting political dominionism--including some of its leaders.

b) A disturbing number of dominionist "parallel economy" institutions exist in part to protect religiously motivated child abusers.

Two leaders known for political dominionism and religiously motivated child abuse in particular are Bill Gothard and James Dobson.

Dobson in particular is head of Focus on the Family--one of the largest, at this point probably the largest, dominionist group in the United States if not the world. Dobson's empire includes a programs from his network being broadcast on practically every major dominionist "parallel economy" radio network of note; it also includes a book, media, and electioneering empire worth over $140 million dollars (according to their last form 990).

And yes, Focus on the Family very much engages in electioneering for dominionist candidates. In essence, they now hold the position that the Christian Coalition held in the dominionist community back in the 80s; much like the Christian Coalition, they've had their tax-exempt status threatened at least once as a result. (That threat led to the formation of the Family Research Council, now a separate organisation.)

FotF's primary electioneering has been through Focus On The Family Action: CitizenLink; FotF Action is a 501(c)4 that was spun off as an explicit electioneering arm of Focus on the Family (to try to save their 501(c)3 status when Federal investigators came sniffing around a second time). In violation of regs for both 501(c)3 and 501(c)4 groups, FotF Action CitizenLink regularly promotes electioneering for specific bills in Congress that are friendly towards dominionism. (I have multiple specific examples in the note on FotF's worth.)

FotF also promotes some rather explicit political content in its radio programming, which is often the primary source of radio news for dominionist families.

Bill Gothard's role in promotion of dominionism is not as obvious--but is definitely very much in play, if more insidiously. As has been noted previously, Gothard is heavily promoted in Assemblies circles, as recounted by an ex-Assemblies pastor who was literally driven out of his own congregation:

I was finally pulled out by a lovely woman who had heard that Jimmy Swaggert, at that time (early 1980's), was calling the UPC a cult. This woman got me involved in an AG Church in Bellevue, NE. From there I went to college and became a minister in the AG.

My first church was quite an experience. I was an associate working with 2 other associates and a workaholic senior pastor. One by one, the associates quit. I was the last to quit, being new and uninvolved with what was going on and absorbed in my own ministry with inner city children.

I didn't pay too much attention to what was happening until one day, my wife and I had had enough of the demands of trying to build this pastor's vision of having a 5000 member church. The 80 plus hour weeks almost flung us into divorce court. I resigned and was immediately called into a meeting with the elders.

The meeting was rough and during the meeting, I was accused of not coming under the umbrella of authority of the senior pastor (Bill Gothard teaching). One of the elders was a Gothard worshipper. This elder accused me of practicing witchcraft - he deduced that since I used illusions to illustrate Bible stories to the kids that I must be doing witchcraft because "rebellion is as the sin of witchcraft".

The senior sat up in his chair and pointed his finger at me and said, "Do you realize that if you resign, God will curse you?" I almost fell off my chair! He suggested that if we left without his "blessing" then my wife could bleed to death! (My wife has a bleeding disorder.) We ended up leaving, but not without an all-church meeting. Everyone was invited to learn what was going on. I was made out to be the bad person - being rebellious and as this was going on during the time that Swaggert and Baker were national news; I was likened to the status of them.

This is particularly notable due to the Assemblies' status as the inventors of modern political dominionism.

Gothard, as previously noted, has been heavy into the "faith based initiatives" thing--infamously being responsible for running a highly abusive "Bible boot camp" in Indianapolis and more recently promoting dominionist "character education" courses in public schools.

Gothard's http://www.gentlespirit.com/gs6n10/HSH2.pdf">program for homeschoolers is especially explicit in its promotion of dominionism, as detailed in a history of the hijacking of home education by dominionists (again, of note, by a group friendly to the interest of legitimate home education).

Two other groups--HSLDA and ACPeds--also linked to protecting and sheltering the parties responsible for religiously motivated child abuse are also heavy promoters of dominionist causes themselves. (I have noted HSLDA's involvement in particular below; they are, among other things, closely connected with the LaHayes of Coalition on Revival, Concerned Women for America, CNP, and "Left Behind" infamy.)

The "Why the hell aren't they in jail?" section

People have asked a very good question in regards to the entire issue of dominionist child abuse, both in the home and in "Bible boot camp" type facilities:

Why the hell are these smegheads not in jail yet?

The sad thing is, there are some signifigant roadblocks even in regards to prosecution of regular child abuse cases (including a general assumption on the part of the court that the parents and parties the parents place in loco parentis usually know what is best for the kid and a pressure to not break up families).

There are, even more sadly, a plethora of issues that exist very specifically in regards to the type of "Bible-based" child abuse promoted in dominionist groups that complicate even finding out about abuse, much less prosecuting it:

a) Kids subject to "Bible-based" child abuse are, increasingly, being isolated from practically all mandatory reporters who are likely to actually report abuse.

You know the segments in my "dominionism's parallel economy" series on dominionist medical associations and especially dominionist alternatives to mainstream mental health groups? You know how increasingly there is a heavy, heavy push for dominionist parents to pull their kids out of the public and even private school systems in favour of dominionist correspondence-schooling promoted as "Christian homeschools"?

Those aspects of the dominionist "parallel economy" take on a very, very frightening aspect in that schools, mental health professionals, and pediatricians are often the three main groups of "mandatory reporters" (outside of the church) that a kid in a dominionist household is ever likely to see in their childhood...and all three are being very systematically shut out, with "parallel economy" alternatives explicitly promoted in dominionist circles as ways to avoid prosecution for child abuse.

We've already seen (to a frightening degree this week) how "Bible boot camps" and other dominionist "parallel economy" alternatives to mental health facilities are extremely abusive in practice (some responders actually compared the conditions to Abu Ghraib); pediatricians in dominionist circles aren't much better. From the post on dominionist "parallel economy" alternatives to the legit American Academy of Pediatrics:

And here, we get to focus in detail on the first of the dominionist "parallel economy" medical groups--the American College of Pediatricians.
...
(T)heir positions on things are...shall we say...more than a bit skewed towards dominionist positions that most legit doctors would probably find a bit horrifying.

Among other fun statements:
. . .

2) ACPeds has literally lobbied the UN to exempt almost all physical punishment from the UN's working groups on child violence. This is not surprising, seeing as:
3) ACPeds actively promotes the works of James Dobson, a leading promoter of religiously motivated child abuse. They also have used info from Family Research Council to promote the idea of Bible-based baby-beating.

(Seriously, it is very hard to overstate how bad this is. Physicians are mandatory reporters for child abuse, and are often the first (and increasingly only) persons outside of closed communities to see signs of abuse. There is a very real risk that ACPeds docs will not report religiously motivated child abuse (not seeing it as abusive); already, dominionist groups are referring parents explicitly to ACPeds pediatricians as a method of avoiding reports of religiously motivated child abuse, and seeing as it is almost impossible otherwise for kids in abusive dominionist households to report abuse without being subject to retaliatory abuse by other mandatory reporters such as pastors--there is a very real risk that these kids will in fact not have abuse reported at all (with potentially very serious or even fatal consequences--religiously motivated child abuse is one of the horrible, dark secrets of dominionism today.)

Sadly, it's not just pediatricians (which are, I'm afraid, probably the last reliable "mandatory reporter" most dominionists' kids come in contact with).

Dominionist "homeschooling" groups as well as dominionist private schools actively advertise that they not only practice religiously motivated beatings themselves but that parents wishing to use even fairly extreme methods of religiously motivated child abuse can do so with near impunity. In fact, many of the most egregrious offenders in regards to promotion of "Bible-based" child abuse (including the Pearls, the Ezzos, and Tedd Tripp's literature) are promoted primarily in dominionist "homeschool" support groups.

In fact, dominionist homeschooling associations actively will coach their members on how to handle visits from child welfare agencies if a concerned neighbour tips off CPS:

Scenario 2: In which the agent encounters a prepared parent, aware of his rights.

[It is 3 o'clock in the afternoon, and a knock comes at the door. WISE opens the door and finds an agent from Child Welfare Services on the doorstep.]

WISE: Can I help you?
ORWELL: Yes, are you Mr./Mrs. Wise? I work with the local social services agency. There's been an allegation made that you've been abusing and neglecting your children....
WISE: Wait a minute. Do you have a business card? We don't just talk to anybody. We want to know who you are, and that, in fact, you work there. Do you have a card, sir?
ORWELL: Uh, yes, just a minute....but, I want you to understand that this is a very important matter. As you can see, I'm from the Department of Social Services.....
WISE: Hmmmm. [Reads name on card.] How long have you been working there?
ORWELL: I ask the questions here. You've been turned in for abusing and neglecting your children.
WISE: Well, what are the allegations specifically?
ORWELL: I'm not in a position to share those with you until I have met with each of your children privately for questioning. After I've talked with them, then I'll tell you.
WISE: Well, I appreciate your interest, and I too, want to get to the bottom of this. I assure you, nothing is going on. There's nothing that we're hiding here. However, I can't even proceed until I know of what I'm being accused.
ORWELL: As I said, I am not going to tell you the allegations until I meet with your children. If you're not willing to cooperate, I'll have to get a police officer. If necessary, we'll obtain a search warrant or court order, and we'll come back and talk to each one of your children privately. It would be much easier though if you cooperated with us here and now, so that we could avoid the unpleasantness of bringing in the police. What's it going to be?
WISE: Well, you obviously have to do what you need to do, and I'm not in a position to stop you. However, you'd be making a major mistake, and I'd hate to see you get in trouble over something like this. As I said I am more than happy to work this out. We'd be glad to meet with you. But I do need to talk to my attorney first. We could possibly set up a mutually convenient time when we could meet to resolve this. But right now, I can't let you into my home. I don't even know what the accusations are!
ORWELL: Good day, then, I'll be back.
WISE: I've got your card here, and I'll call you as soon as I have contacted my attorney.

[After the social worker leaves, the prepared parent calls HSLDA and gets counsel for the next meeting with the social worker. The prepared parent is able to do this because he joined HSLDA as a member in advance! The HSLDA attorney will generally call the social worker on behalf of the member family. He will find out the allegations and try to resolve the situation. If he can't resolve it over telephone, he will set the parameters for a meeting. This meeting is never held in the home, but rather in a designated place away from the home. The HSLDA attorney prepares the parent on what to say at the meeting and recommends bringing a witness or a tape recorder.]

[It is now another day, and the social worker meets with the prepared parent to follow up.]

WISE: Well, it's good to see you again. I understand now that you can let us know what the allegations are.
ORWELL: All right. We received a telephone call from a person who was "concerned because the children were all thin. This person thought that the removal of food was probably a form of child discipline and was under the impression that this discipline may have been a practice of your religion - some "born-again" ideology, or something. The caller cited that the parents give a lot of money to the church and spend little money on groceries, and the caller also mentioned that the mother home schools her children." [This comment is in quotation marks because it came from an actual case.] Are these allegations true?
WISE: They are not true --except for the fact that we are homeschooling our children and we are born again. Do you know what born again means?
ORWELL: Uh....no, but...
WISE: Let me explain. You see, in John 3, Jesus told Nicodemus he must be "born-again" in order to enter the kingdom of God. Since the wages of sin is death, we all need a Savior. Do you know where you are going when you die?
ORWELL: Look, are your children healthy?
WISE: You bet!!
ORWELL: Do they eat enough food?
WISE: Yes. We believe children are a gift of the Lord, and as a result, we have to take care of them, giving them the best possible. Part of that is how we feed them - we make sure they have plenty of nutritious food to eat.
ORWELL: Do you ever deprive them of food as part of your religion, or part of your born-again beliefs, or part of your child discipline, or any of that?
WISE: No, we don't. We can, as our attorney has probably told you, offer you references from individuals in the community who would vouch for the good care we give our children.
ORWELL: Now you realize that we are going to have to have your children meet with our physicians so that they can evaluate whether or not the children have been properly fed.
WISE: I've talked to our attorney about that also, and we have already had our children go to see our personal family physician, and he is putting his report in writing for you. Our children have a clean bill of health.
ORWELL: That report does not remove the need for me to personally interview your children.
WISE: Well, I think we went over this before, but our position is that we cannot take that risk. Besides, we've already provided this other information so that you can really close this file because you're going to have references from individuals, the doctor's report, and our own assurance that everything is fine. The reason we don't want you to talk to our children, frankly, is because we don't trust the system. We're aware of statistics that show that 60% of children that are removed from home by the social welfare system shouldn't have been upon later review. We just can't take that risk because sometimes those children are put into foster homes where they are abused. So it has noting to do with hiding anything, it's just that we care so much for our children that we can't take the risk. We don't know you.
ORWELL: Everyone else cooperates, Mr./Mrs. Wise. If you have nothing to hide, then why are you hiding so hard?
WISE: As I said, we'd be more than happy to cooperate if you could guarantee that you would find this "unfounded." But since you can't, and we don't know how you're going to interpret this, and the studies show that many, many families' statements are misinterpreted, how can we take that risk? Would you take that risk with your children?
ORWELL: [Hesitates in knowing how to respond.]
WISE: Please understand, we appreciate your great interest in our family. We know you're just doing your job, and sometimes that can put a person between a rock and a hard place. But we've got certain rights that we talked to out attorney about. We have the right of privacy which comes under the Fourth Amendment which protects us from state officials coming into our home at will, and we're standing on that right. Are you familiar with the Fourth Amendment?
ORWELL: Uh...we did not learn about the Fourth Amendment in Social Workers School. However, I am familiar with the Second Amendment....do you have any guns in your house?
WISE: That's really irrelevant. I'll take the Fifth on that one.
ORWELL: Let's talk about your homeschooling. I have to see your curriculum and facilities. I need to verify that you have enough light for these children to read. For all I know, you're ruining their eyesight by reading to them on a couch or something.
WISE: Well, I've talked to my attorney again about this, and we are legal. We're legally home schooling, and in this state, we're allowed to home school. We've followed the necessary requirements under the law. If you have a problem with this, you need to let the school district know because it's not really in your jurisdiction. Meanwhile, our attorney would be glad to send you a letter verifying the legality of home schooling.
ORWELL: Just because you're legal doesn't mean you're not neglecting your children.
WISE: If you have a problem with our educational program, you'll need to contact the local superintendent. We're on file. I can assure you that we're educating our children. It's part of our religious beliefs. We must teach our children to the best of our ability so that they can become productive citizens. Our philosophy is to provide them the best quality education that we possibly can.
ORWELL: Look, I have specific charges against you: You're starving your children, you're giving all your money away, your neglecting their education, and you're not willing to cooperate with me.
WISE: As I stated, we are going to provide you evidence so that you can find the allegations "unfounded." We're going to provide a statement from our doctor and various references. You have our word on it, and we're known in the community. Besides, we base our decisions in our family on the Scriptures, where we are clearly instructed that "if you harm one of these little ones, it's better a millstone be tied around your neck and be thrown in the deepest part of the ocean." That's a responsibility we take seriously in raising our little ones - that God would hold us accountable - in fact, we would be sinning before Him if we harmed them in any way in discipline, or withholding food as we've been accused of...we would never do those things.
ORWELL: Mr./Mrs. Wise, look, I can tell that you're sincere. I don't know....I'm really concerned about this situation. I wish you would cooperate with us instead of making our jobs so difficult.
WISE: Let me assure you. We care for our children, too, and we appreciate your care. And I believe that you will find this can all be resolved and you can put on file that it is "unfounded." In fact, we'd like something in writing, describing your finding. By tomorrow we should be able to get that statement from our doctor, so we just ask that you hold off any further decision until you can look at this. And if there's still a problem, we'll cross that bridge when we get to it.
ORWELL: It's obvious that you're not willing to do anything more than you've done. So I'll look at your doctor's report...I just want to say, for the record, that this kind of attitude is what makes it so hard for us to protect children. While you may be very sincere, there are real kids out there who are getting hurt. Your way of dealing with this matter ties us up with lawyers and reports when we should be resolving serious crisis. Good day, Mr./Mrs. Wise.

(Disturbingly, this is from a dominionist "homeschooler" group focusing on the needs of special-ed kids. One of the things that is emphasized in that entire screed is that the CPS workers are not allowed to contact the kids at any time lest they get any info that may reveal signs of abuse.)

In regards to the "HSLDA" mentioned above--that would be a dominionist group known as the Home School Legal Defense Association. (We will focus in a future segment on how they are in fact a dominionist group masquerading as a homeschooling defense organisation--suffice it to say that they've supported explicitly dominionist causes in past and have deliberately tried to lock inclusive homeschoolers (that include non-dominionist homeschoolers like "unschoolers") out of state recognition as a legit form of home education. Homeschooling Is Legal (a site set up by a legit, inclusive home educator's association who details the explicit dominionist agenda of HSLDA) has much more info.)

And as it turns out, HSLDA is one of the very groups seeking to gut the present protections that kids have under the law (and make it next to impossible for CPS agencies to investigate religiously motivated child abuse). In fact, much of its recruiting is via the use of scare tactics to literally frighten home educators into joining by using fear of CPS visits:

Words That Strike Terror:

* "A truant officer is at the door. He pushes his way in. He will not leave until he can take your children to the public school..."

* "A police officer is at your door with an arrest warrant to take your six year-old child..."

* "The local public school official insists that your home school arrangement is not legal and threatens you with criminal charges..."

* "More and more frequently, home schoolers are turned in on child abuse hotlines to social services agencies."

These scenarios were presented on the first page of the Dealing With Social Services Contacts section of the fall 1999 HSLDA Support Group Seminar workbook, below the heading, "The Social Worker at Your Door."

The Seminar workbook also contained two lengthy fear-inducing skits titled "How to Handle Visits from Social Service Agents," by HSLDA attorney Christopher J. Klicka. According to the document, these skits have been performed at homeschooling conventions since 1993. The characters' names are "Orwell" the Child Welfare Services worker, "Innocent" the hapless homeschooling parent, and "Eager-to-Please," a homeschooled child.

The skit begins with "Innocent" opening the door to "Orwell's" knock, and learning that the Welfare agency has received a report that the "children are being abused or neglected."

By page 4, "Orwell" tells "Innocent" that the Welfare worker must view the children stripped, "so I can see if they have any bruises."

Portraying these scenes incites the kind of fear that propels homeschoolers to buy what they perceive as legal protection: membership in an oganization such as HSLDA. Frightening sketches invoke visions of authorities run amok whisking our children away, but even HSLDA admits that homeschoolers are highly unlikely to face such predicaments.

(Part of that skit is included above.)

I had noted above HSLDA promotes some pretty explicitly dominionist causes. Among dominionist causes HSLDA has officially lobbied for are DOMA laws and amendments including on a federal level; various laws restricting "partial birth" abortions (which were rare to begin with); pushing for John Ashcroft's nomination (Ashcroft is probably the most explicitly dominionist Attorney-General we have ever had and has very, very extensive connections to the Assemblies of God); fighting the ratification of a UN convention on chemical weapons; and even stumping for a Constitution Party candidate:

The Case of Michael New

In 1995, HSLDA was criticized for representing 22 year old, home schooled Texan Michael New who refused to wear "a UN insignia on his sleeve and wear a UN blue baseball cap". (Cliff Kincaid, "Patriotic GI Gets Taste of Clinton 'Justice'," Human Events Magazine, Vol. 52, Issue 4, February 2, 1996, page 1.) Michael New was found guilty of failure to obey a lawful order and dishonorably discharged. ("Michael New Convicted" Home School Court Report, Vol. 12, No.1, page 21.) He is appealing his discharge and his defense team includes lead counsel Ronald Ray, David S. Sullivan, attorneys Henry L. Hamilton, Michael Farris, and Herb Titus. Michael Farris continues to use HSLDA's address and phone number as his own on Mr. New's court filings. (Institute for Media Education Distribution, First Principles Press, P.O. Box 1136, Crestwood, KY 40014; 1-800-837-0544; fax; 502.241.1552.)

While Michael New does not fit the description of a homeschool family whose homeschool is challenged by authorities, the political implications of Michael Farris choosing to represent him are difficult to ignore. In 1996, Michael New nominated Howard Phillips for President at the U.S. Taxpayers Party convention in San Diego, California. Phillips then named Herb Titus, another of Michael New's attorneys, as his Vice Presidential running mate. ("Taxpayers Party Picks Howard Phillips Again", Human Events Magazine, Vol. 51, Issue 33, 8/30/96, page 7.) Herb Titus is a strict dominionist (or reconstructionist) fired by Pat Robertson in 1993 from his post as dean of Regent University's School of Law. (Alan Foege, op. cit., page 176.) Michael New's father, Daniel, is the Chairman of the U.S. Taxpayers party in Texas and former primary candidate for U. S. Congress.

In 1995 HSLDF gave the Michael New Defense Fund a $1,000 contribution. (Home School Legal Defense Foundation, Form 990, Return of Organization Exempt from Income Tax, individuals or organizations receiving money as a grant or contribution 1995.) In 1996 the Michael New Defense Fund received $9,607 in contributions from HSLDF. (Form 990, Return of Organization Exempt from Income Tax, Internal Revenue Service, HSLDF, 1996.)

In 1996, Daniel New ran for the U.S. Congress in the 8th district of Texas, but was defeated in the Republican primary. Howard Phillips was a contributor and a recipient of campaign disbursements in Mr. New's bid for office through his T. C. Concepts organization. (Report of Receipts and Disbursements, Daniel New, Texas Ethics Commission, Disclosure Filings Division, P.O. Box 12070, Austin, TX 78711-2070.)

Kentucky Attorney Ronald Ray has set up a legal defense fund for Mr. New that solicits homeschoolers (and other conservative groups) for donations. (Michael New's Petition Denied, Home School Court Report, Vol., 12, No. 4 page 4.) HSLDA has also participated in soliciting funds for Mr. New's defense through their Court Report publication.

On March 12, 1997 the New Action Fund of Conroe, TX issued a press release announcing that "the U. S. Court of Appeals has denied the Department of Defense's request to throw S.P.C. Michael New's case out with a 'summary affirmation' and has granted New a full hearing. Michael Farris is head of the Home School Legal Defense Association, and is New's lead attorney in the civilian courts." ("New Appeal Granted", press release, New Action Fund, Conroe TX, March 10, 1997. For more information contact (540) 338-1835 or Daniel New (409) 539-1917.)
-Mary McCarthy

(I've written rather extensively on the Constitution Party--formerly known as the US Taxpayer's Party--here. Suffice it to say that the Constitution Party is as close as one gets to an official Christian Reconstructionist political party in the US.)

As it turns out, HSLDA's leader is also a major player in dominionist circles, specifically as a member of the Council for National Policy (reportedly HSLDA pays his membership dues). HSLDA itself supports a whole plethora of causes totally unrelated to home education including truly tinfoil-hatter claims in regards to United States Census surveys and sections on how to opt out of immunisation requirements; they also offer info on how to make sure homeschooled kids still get their SSI checks. (In fact, if people want to know what HSLDA has lobbied Congress on in past, they have a convenient page for that too.)

There is probably a good reason why HSLDA caters to the "Left Behind" fandom--HSLDA founder Michael Farris has very, very close links with Tim and Beverly LaHaye who are central to the modern wave of dominionism and may have in fact been formative in some of the earliest political dominionist groups.

Another site aimed at dominionists (the page is from a dominionist group called "Child Protection Reform" which wishes to utterly gut child protection laws) also gives explicit coaching to "homeschool" kids to hide signs of religiously motivated child abuse and also advises people to pick dominionist "parallel economy" counselors who are likely to approve of religiously motivated child abuse:

Step 2: Be careful in your application of physical discipline

* Regardless of what's right, of your own past experiences, of anything you believe – understand the system, in the words of one counselor we've contacted, "clearly hates spanking. The system wants spanking eliminated from the face of the Earth." In using physical discipline, you are indeed in the mainstream. You are also at odds with the governing elite. They're convinced they know best. They will get you if they can. They won't be sorry.

* Don't spank in public. A classic is the "grocery store parking lot spanking". Some busybody Boomer is sure to get your license plates. And the cops, lacking serious bad guys to chase, will be waiting for you at home.

* Don't spank in ways that leave bruises. The system treats a welt on the posterior with the same seriousness as a cigarette burn, a broken bone, or a severe beating. State laws provide NO distinction between a single mark from legitimate discipline, and devastating injuries from willful, sustained torture.

Step 3: Protect yourself

* If, Heaven forbid, you do bruise your child – do NOT allow him/her to attend school the next day. Services to Children and Families (SCF) indoctrinates teachers to turn OFF the brain and get ON the phone to report "any" suspected child abuse. As mandatory reporters, teachers are told they are at serious risk of prosecution for not reporting. That is not true. However, most teachers believe it is true; they will act accordingly.

* If you spank, strongly consider taking your kids out of public schools. Statistics verify what we've been told by SCF caseworkers: most reports of child abuse come from public school teachers. Further, a recent study of Oregon SCF indicated the agency regularly questions and removes children from public schools without parental permission or notification. If you choose to homeschool, spend the $100 to join the Home School Legal Defense Association. They have a website: www.hslda.org

* Be an active member of a community of faith. Your local church or synagogue is a family of faith who will come to your aid in your time of need. They are the second part of your support network. Through prayer and physical support, fellow Christians will prevent far greater damage to your family.
. . .
Step 4: Respond to the attack
. . .
* Comply fully with any ordered counseling. If the idea of being at the mercy of some bearded, Marxist counselor makes you wretch, realize you have a choice of counselors. Pick a good one. Fully attending all counseling doubles the chance your child will be returned to you, according to Oregon 1995 stats.

Lest anyone doubt the site's agenda:

Isn't a bruise from
discipline, clearly abuse?

Most system professionals say, "yes.". They are mistaken.

Consider the following:

* Balanced, thorough studies show spanking in loving homes has not been shown to cause
long-term emotional damage, and that charges of spanking as abuse are junk science. Visit an excellent site for more information.
* System professionals also say it's okay for a mother to hire a man to crush her newborn's skull, then suck out its brains (conduct a late-term abortion). If society is going to place any stock in what system professionals think, shouldn't it at least demand a little consistency?
* The "bruise as abuse" position lacks historical standing. Only since the late 1960's has a hard spanking been defined as a crime. Hundreds of generations of bright, happy adults have grown up with some variant of "spare the rod, spoil the child". This includes the much-respected WWII generation, and may even include your own. Was spanking then so wrong?&
* None of the world's major religions say so; Like it or not, God pretty clearly says a bruise given during legitimate punishment is okay. After all, He gave His own Son to the cross.

Consider the Doctrine of Competing Harms: SCF intervention doesn't start with a nice
grandmotherly social worker asking if she can help. It most often begins with sudden,
forcible removal by law enforcement, which nearly always causes serious, lasting
psychological trauma to parent and child alike.

Finally, in America, spanking is legal. More than half of all parents spank. Numerous polls reveal most adults believe spanking is sometimes necessary. We need to acknowledge no parent comes with a calibrated arm.

(Let's review: apparently the existence of third-trimester abortions (and the "partial birth" abortion of which they speak is actually illegal now in the US) and the crucifixion of Christ make religiously motivated child abuse OK; one is in fact Biblically mandated to use abusive forms of discipline; things like broken bones can be dismissed as "not everyone has a calibrated arm"; and discredited studies from the Family Research Council (a dominionist group) are used as well as a UK study promoting the return of caning in public schools. Of note, the FRC is a sister-org of Focus on the Family (and originally started out as FotF's electioneering wing); needless to say, they are quite a bit in support of religiously motivated child abuse.)

Ministers are certainly not a safe bet in regard to mandatory reporters (which they are in 25 states)--not only do dominionist ministers typically not report abuse, quite often they are the very promoters of religiously motivated child abuse (Michael Pearl, among others, is a pastor of a small church) and all too often ministers of dominionist churches target kids for abuse themselves for reporting:

The pastor of an Elgin church has been charged with battery after it was alleged that he repeatedly used a piece of wood to discipline a 12-year-old girl.

Police said the girl's mother took her to the pastor because she doubted the girl's claim that she was being sexually abused by another man.
. . .
Elgin police said Thursday they believe the girl's original allegations are true. On Wednesday they charged Daryl Bujak, 30, pastor of First Missionary Baptist Church, with misdemeanor battery. He was released after posting $500 bail. He has a June 16 court appearance in the Elgin branch of Kane County Circuit Court, said police Lt. Mike Turner.

"It's unbelievable," he said. "It's a sad case for this girl."
. . .
Bujak's church, at 385 Silver St. in Elgin, describes itself as a fundamentalist and independent Baptist congregation.

Elgin police said the girl's parents took her to the church after she alleged she was being sexually abused.

Bujak told the parents that she was lying and privately disciplined the girl on Wednesday evenings between March and May of 2005. The girl, now 13, was struck with a 3-foot strip of wood molding, causing welts and bruises on her legs and buttocks, according to police and the girl's mother.

"He took her in the ladies room, across from his office," the mother said in an interview Thursday. "I was downstairs in the Fellowship Hall." Afterward, the mother said, "Her face was red, and I could see that she'd been crying.

In other words...increasingly, kids in families that practice religiously motivated child abuse may not have anyone--save for the neighbours--that they can even safely report things to in the first place. And especially if the moms promote "tomato staking" and families live in heavily dominionist towns--kids may not even have that option.

b) There is a considerable bias against reporting religiously motivated child abuse.

Among other things, one of the legitimate fears is that First Amendment lawsuits will be filed against CPS agencies who remove kids from homes on the basis of allegations of religiously motivated child abuse. As noted previously, HSLDA is especially notable in filing lawsuits against child welfare agencies; there are also explicit dominionist "parallel economy" alternatives to civil rights groups (like the American Center for Law and Justice and Alliance Defense Fund) which are all too willing to take cases of this type in the courts.

Partly because these cases very rapidly are promoted for their "martyr status" value (both in dominionist publications produced by CWFA, AFA, and FotF CitizenLink and on shows like Bill O'Reilly's as evidence of "the war against Christianity"), many CFS agencies are understandably very reluctant to make themselves targets.

c) There is a considerable bias against adolescent reporting of abuse.

Too often, people who make their initial reports of child abuse in adolescence are seen as malingerers by CPS agencies--it's assumed the kid is going through an "I hate my parents" phase rather than the kid being in a situation for the first time that they have access to a mandatory reporter who may take them seriously.

As a result, kids who report abuse as teens are often directed to very inappropriate forms of "resolution" like family therapy (which is not likely to be effective in the case of religiously motivated child abuse) rather than getting the kid out of a potentially dangerous situation.

In the case of "Bible-based boot camps" and "degaying facilities", this is often sufficiently serious of a problem that kids have to literally run away from home for their own protection (thus putting them in danger related to living on the streets) or--increasingly--file for legal emancipation as the only way to protect themselves from an environment that can be potentially lethal.

d) CPS agencies are often not aware of religiously motivated child abuse.

In particular, they are not in general aware that there is a definite "adolescent reporting" bias (because most of these kids do not in general realise they grew up in an abusive household); they are not in general aware that family therapy is wildly inappropriate; and they are not in general aware that even things like parenting classes and conventional therapy are likely to be rejected by the parents (due to the parents feeling they literally have a biblical mandate to abuse their kids).

In general, this parallels a general lack of understanding in society of specific issues relating to coercive religious groups in general. (Of note, even researchers into coercive religious groups have not in general paid much attention to the issue of multigenerational walkaways until recently, and there is much research in progress. One of the things being found out is that there are often comorbid conditions causing complex PTSD (religiously motivated child abuse and the initial cultic environment) and one of the biggies that survivors deal with is in fact resocialisation issues.)

e) In some areas--sadly--police and CPS agencies may be sympathetic to abusers.

in many areas of the country, parties investigating religiously-motivated abuse may themselves be sympathisers and dominionists (this is not uncommon in the midwest US, where they may see this as merely "tough love" discipline and in some cases people have been recommended to send their children to coercive "boot camp" facilities like Love In Action or the WWASPS facilities).

One of the most blatant examples is the DPS chief in Missouri--this is the head of the agencies who would be doing initial investigation of most child abuse. (Of note, Missouri also has some of the most lax laws in the US in regards to "Bible-based boot camps"--they are almost totally unregulated.)

Not only that, but in areas with large dominionist influence the existing laws on the books either have large enough loopholes to sail the HMS Queen Mary II through or are extremely laxly enforced. An example is the following list of Tennessee Department for Youth and Families intake records where it was specified in section D(1)(b) that "developmentally-appropriate, discipline-related marks and bruises on the buttocks or legs" of children over 5 should not be regarded as evidence of abuse. (The same agency also eventually ruled that the Love In Action/Refuge facility had "insufficient evidence" of abuse; it was eventually the state medical licensure board that got them shut down for operation of a mental health facility without a license.)

Another document, this from the state of Colorado, states that whacking adolescents with the metal buckle of a belt used in flogging is permissible.

f) Dominionists are actively working to gut existing laws and prevent new laws from being passed.

An example of a website run by dominionist groups working to gut existing laws in the US is Family Rights Association; we've mentioned the role of HSLDA and Child Protection Reform in attempts to gut laws. Many of the major dominionist groups--notably Focus on the Family and Family Research Council--have also explicitly lobbied to remove the very few protections kids have.

Dominionist interference with child protection laws isn't just limited to the US. The United States and Somalia are the two solitary countries that have not yet ratified the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child.

Somalia has the valid excuse that the country (outside of Somaliland and Puntland) has been in a state of anarchy since 1992.

The US does not have that excuse. The sad truth is that the reason the US hasn't signed on yet is because dominionists object to a section stating children have the right to grow up without being subjected to abuse--and this might slam the doors on the "Bible-based" baby-beating industry:

Article 19:
"States Parties shall take all appropriate legislative, administrative, social and education measures to protect the child from all forms of physical or mental violence, injury or abuse, neglect or negligent treatment, maltreatment or exploitation, including sexual abuse, while in the care of parent(s), legal guardian(s) or any other person who has the care of the child. Such protective measures should, as appropriate, include effective procedures for the establishment of social programs to provide necessary support for the child and for those who have the care of the child, as well as for other forms of prevention and for identification, reporting, referral, investigation, treatment and follow-up of instances of child maltreatment described heretofore, and, as appropriate, for judicial involvement."

Needless to say, dominionist groups do not like this. So far, they have been successful at keeping the US as the only nation with a functioning government in the world to not ratify the Convention on the Rights of the Child.

One of the big opponents has been, not surprisingly, none other than the same HSLDA that promotes dominionist home-education as a way to avoid CPS investigations:

If ratified by the U.S. Senate, the United Nations Convention on the Rights of a Child would undermine families by granting to children a list of radical "rights" which would be primarily enforced against the parents. These new "fundamental" rights would include "the right to privacy," "the right to freedom of thought and association," and the right to "freedom of expression." Such presumptions subvert the authority of parents to exercise important responsibilities toward their children. Under the UN Convention, parental responsibility exists only in so far as parents are willing to further the independent choices of the child.
. . .
Severe Limitations Placed on the Parents' Right to Train Their Children

Under Article 13, any attempts to prevent their children from interacting with material parents deem unacceptable is forbidden. Children are vested with a " freedom of expression" right, which is virtually absolute. No allowance is made for parental guidance. Section 1 declares a child's right to "seek, receive and impart information and ideas of all kinds, regardless of frontiers, either orally, in writing or in print, in the form of art, or through any other media of the child's choice."

In Article 14, children are guaranteed " freedom of thought, conscience and religion." Children have a legal right to object to all religious training. Alternatively, children may assert their right against parental objection to participate in the occult.

Article 15 declares "the right of the child to freedom of association." Parents could be prevented from forbidding their child to associate with people deemed to be objectionable companions. Under Article 15, children could claim a "fundamental" right to join gangs, cults, and racist organizations over parental objection.

The Convention Would Entrench the Right of Teenagers to Abort Their Babies

Under Article 16, the "right to privacy" is granted to children. This UN sanctioned "privacy" would seemingly establish as the child's right to obtain an abortion without parental notice, the right to purchase and use contraceptives, and the right to pornography in the home.

New Bureaucracies Would Be Created to Monitor Families

Article 19 mandates the creation of an intensive bureaucracy for the purpose of "identification, reporting, referral, investigation, treatment, and follow-up" of parents who, in violation of the child's rights, treat their children negligently.

To insure State and U.N. control over their development, Article 7 requires all children must be immediately registered at birth.

A Prohibition On Corporal Punishment

Articles 3, 19, 37 require all ratifying countries to protect children from "degrading punishment" and "physical violence" which includes corporal punishment. The U.N. Committee of Ten (pursuant to Article 44) must oversee the implementation of the treaty. Over the last several years, the Committee published reports criticizing several countries (including Canada and Great Britain) for allowing corporal punishment to continue.

(HSLDA seems to fail to realise that registration of children is already mandatory at birth in the US--states require the issuance of birth certificates. Many dominionist families do not register their kids for Social Security cards (so as to avoid "the number of the beast"); there is a push in some circles for home births; I've not yet heard of a push to not have a kid issued a birth certificate, but I honestly would not be surprised to find this out either.)

This is sadly not an uncommon sentiment; at least one page aiming UN conspiracy theory at the "Left Behind" reader crowd (who largely think the UN is satanic anyways) has promoted similar folderol.

g) Tools of abuse are as close as the local hardware store and are even available for free online.

I had joked in my last post in regards to "Bible-based" child abuse as to whether Lowe's or Home Depot would have to start registries for buying plumbing equipment (similar to those used to track purchases of Sudafed).

The sad truth is, pretty much that is all that is needed--if that much (in suburban areas, it's not uncommon to make kids pull their own "switches" from trees and bushes--or for parents to make their own "chastening rods" from felled branches).

Much of the reason that the site Stop The Rod exists is because the founder of the site (a "Christian homeschooler" mother, though apparently not a dominionist homeschooler) was horrified to see marketing of various "chastening devices" in "Christian" homeschooling circles. (Very often these would be sold with Tedd Tripp's or Richard Fugate's material as instructions for use.)

The sad thing is, parents don't even have to pay for this stuff--a site calling itself Spare Rods actually gives away large paddles as "chastening devices" complete with "appointment slips" and instructions for use. (Lest one doubt these types of paddles are dangerous, a five-year-old kid was recently killed by being beaten to death by a paddle.)

As of right now, promotion and sale (and giveaways) of these devices is all too legal.

h) Compared to other forms of child abuse, there is a high risk for persons committing religiously motivated child abuse to target multiple kids and to fail to comply with instructions in CPS hearings due to specific circumstances that do not exist in "conventional" child abuse.

One thing that makes religiously motivated child abuse especially difficult to treat is that, in many cases, the system of abuse is in fact tied into a larger "culture of abuse" that mandates that children be subjected to abusive forms of discipline as a literal divine mandate. These same churches also often teach that civil authority may be disobeyed if it comes in conflict with "God's commandments".

In other words, even if CPS does successfully manage to contact the kid, does manage to get a hearing, and does manage to get a consent decree with parents--the parents are very likely to keep on doing what they will when CPS isn't looking, because they very much believe that if they do not knock the hell out of their kids their children will be utterly ruined and doomed both in the physical and spiritual realms. It's often taught that kids will not only become criminals and "wastrels" if not beaten, but that they will become non-dominionists and even actively on the side of the devil--an even worse fate, as far as dominionists are concerned.

In fact, part of why dominionist groups so insistently promote abusive forms of discipline and are among the most likely to sue CPS agencies if a prosecution ensues is that they literally believe--very sincerely--that CPS is in fact endangering their kid (to both become a statistic in either the criminal or rehab systems and--worse yet--to burn in Hell, be "left behind", etc.). In their minds, to risk their kid's exposure to Outside risks the ultimate annihilation of their kids in both body and spirit.

Ironically, this makes it even more important to get the kids out of those situations.

And things you can do to help

I am not one for dumping this metric tonne of horridly depressing stuff on DailyKos for no good reason

Among other things, I think you guys and gals can actually help out. :3

So I am providing a little bit of homework for you all. :3 Here's a list of action items:

Legislative action:

1) Contact your congresscritters and ask them to support laws banning sale of "chastening rods". Rep. Ed Markey has a bit of example legislation that needs cosponsors that would essentially ban the sale of "chastening rods" and similar devices used for religiously motivated child abuse under consumer product safety regs. Stop The Rod, a group working to spread awareness of religiously motivated child abuse (and, equally, the fact that most Christians do not support this being done in their names), has a handy form to automatically contact your legislator about this.

2) Ask your congresscritters to reintroduce--and vote for--an HR 1738-type bill regulating the "Bible-based boot camp" industry. HR 1738 (introduced by Rep. George Miller (CA) in 2005, so it may well need reintroduction) is also a bill that would essentially shut down the more abusive "Bible-based boot camps"--among other things, it prohibits sending US national kids to offshore facilities and requires states set up regulation of "behaviour modification" facilities and children's homes (with mandatory inspection, including federal funding). You can also contact your congresscritter in regards to reintroducing HR 1738 at ISAC's website.

3) On a state level, contact your state reps to pass state level versions of HR 1738 and Markey's bill; also work with state General Assembly folks to get rid of the wide "religious exemption" loopholes in regards to child protection laws.

Advocacy action:

1) Inform and educate your state and county child protective services agencies about religiously motivated child abuse--including the special circumstances that are involved with abusive methods of discipline promoted in dominionist groups.

2) Support advocacy groups working to inform and protect kids. Advocacy groups that really deserve your time include ISAC, Children's Safe Passage Foundation, http://www.teenadvocatesusa.homestead.com/">Teen Advocates USA, Project NoSpank (which is a general anti-corporal-punishment group, but which is involved in a great deal of awareness activity in regards to religiously motivated child abuse), Stop The Rod, and others.

3) Warn folks about abusive childrearing practices. Among other things, reviews warning about the content of books promoting religiously motivated child abuse can be given at Amazon (and in fact Stop The Rod provides links to review forms for practically all of the books it has reviewed); another tactic is (if you know anyone who is using these forms of abuse) is to steer them to alternative methods of discipline like "Grace-Based Discipline" (a non-abusive form of discipline increasingly promoted in "Christian Mommy" circles as an alternative to religiously motivated child abuse). Stop the Rod in particular has a good resource list for people who know "soft dominionists" who might be amenable to gentler forms of "Christian parenting".

4) Support groups fighting dominionism in general. As much of this is tied into the theological bases for dominionism (especially Gothard's obsession with "authority"), it helps to make people aware that this is a parenting practice primarily promoted in dominionist churches. I have a good list of blogs on the right hand side of folks who work against dominionism, but two good groups in particular are Talk to Action and Committee to Defend the Constitution. Some of the older-guard religious freedom groups like Americans United, People for the American Way, and The Interfaith Alliance can always use help too; more focused groups like Texas Freedom Network, Southern Poverty Law Center (recently threatened by a Klan group with being bombed because of the stellar job it's doing in shutting down hate groups) and Jews On First are also good groups to support in the general fight.

5) In the immortal words of Anthrax and Public Enemy--"Bring the noise". Inform folks about this yourself. If you're a survivor, write about your experiences. If you're a parent who formerly used these methods and abandoned them, write about it. If you're an EMT or a social services worker or someone on the front lines who's seen the tragic consequences, write about it. Notify the media. Mirror posts others have done. Make such a huge goddamned stink that it can't be ignored.

Tomorrow, we begin a special focus on the "Bible-based baby beating" promoters most recently linked to the death of a child--Michael and Debbie Pearl.

In part 1 of an ongoing series on religiously motivated child and domestic abuse, we've focused on the truly fatal tactics of the Pearls and Ezzos as well as other promoters of regimented childrearing and even the creepy, quasi-pedophiliac "purity balls" held by some of the same communities promoting religiously motivated domestic abuse.

Today, we wrap up the focus by looking at the strange demon-haunted world of Bill Gothard (who also promotes abusive "Bible boot camps" and paramilitary training for "Joel's Army" kids, as we'll see in the next few days), Lisa Welchel (yes, folks, Blair from "The Facts of Life" likes to use Tabasco as a discipline aid), James Dobson, and a web promoter of childrearing advice for the "Quiverfull" set.

As Bill Gothard and James Dobson are particularly influential--in fact, Dobson heads the largest dominionist group in the US--this has frightening implications for kids raised in these groups.

Demons? In your Cabbage Patch Kids? (According to Bill Gothard, it's more common than you think)

Bill Gothard has been all too familiar on these pages. From his promotion of the bizarre concepts that Cabbage Patch Kids are possessed by demons, to his Joel's Army paramilitary camp, to his Joel's Army gulag he formerly ran in Indianapolis--you could say ol' Bill has been quite the regular here.

Today's post is not going to be the exception here, either. As it turns out, Bill Gothard is also big on handing out advice to parents, especially in the "Quiverfull" movement--including to none other than the very poster-children of "Quiverfull", the Duggar clan--already up to seventeen little God Warrior sproglets.

For those unfamiliar with the whole Quiverfull thing, here's a mini-primer. In essence, "Quiverfull" promotes women doing without any form of birth control or regulation of the number of kids one has at all (not even by the rhythm method) and even promotes quite explicitly having as many future God Warriors as is possible.

The "Quiverfull" movement is very closely connected to the scarier parts of the Joel's Army movement--which teaches explicitly that the generations of kids growing up nowadays are a "Joshua Generation" meant to establish a dominionist reign of terror over the rest of us to "Secure God's blessing" before the Rapture occurs--and, after the Tribulation, to come back down from heaven and throw the lot of us into the Lake of Fire.

In other words, the view is not dissimilar to that stated by the King of England in the movie "Braveheart" to justify "first night" (the rape of women on their wedding night by the English): "If we can't burn them out, we'll breed them out."

Anyways, back to Gothard--and why I fear for the Duggar kids and anyone else who is using his writings to raise their kids.

Now, we've covered the "deliverance ministry" stuff and the Joel's Army paramilitary training and the gulag he ran. What I've not quite noted is that Gothard has a very, very extensive history of promotion of religious abuse and specifically religiously-motivated child abuse in general.

Gothard is known to have set up an extensive system of control that rivals the cultic systems in Scientology or the Moonies for levels of coercion; in addition, he claims that illnesses are caused by "generational curses" (in "deliverance ministry" circles, caused by something as simple as your mom having worn a peace sign in the 60's or your great-grandmother having had her fortune read at Coney Island--or your great-great-great-great-grandmother having been a Cherokee or being brought across the oceans from Africa in a slave ship and not having been Christian in the first place), has promoted involuntary exorcisms on the unwilling (which is not only incredibly abusive and capable of causing permanent psychiatric injury but is actually fatal to a known ten to fifteen people a year in the US), is known to use abusive "shepherding" tactics (of the sort that are now widely recognised as highly abusive), runs front groups to try to market dominionism in public schools as "character education" programs, will in general not discuss his tactics unless you have been recruited into his programs (a dead giveaway we are dealing with a frank cult here), and promotes "Quiverfull" stuff in his own way by claiming in essence that "God will provide" for women having extreme amounts of kids and that parents shouldn't have Caesarian sections (and again attributes infertility to having Cabbage Patch Kids in the house)...among other things.

In addition to all the other fun stuff I've mentioned, Gothard is also very explicitly dominionist (as if you hadn't yet guessed this), has encouraged others to set up incredibly abusive "Bible boot camps" not unlike his Indianapolis misadventure, and attempted to suppress publication of a guide critical of his tactics.

In other words, if you know someone involved in the whole "Quiverfull" thing--they've been very likely getting a whole earfull of Gothard stuff.

Gothard's teachings have in fact been described as those of a Bible-based cult--which I am inclined to agree with, having grown up in a coercive group where Gothard's writing was heavily promoted and having written on the subject of abusive dominionist groups throughout most of my diary entries on DailyKos. My experiences aren't unique--apparently Gothard's stuff is heavily promoted within the Assemblies of God in particular (which is the denomination I am a walkaway from); disturbingly, Gothard is also heavily promoted within the dominionist "home education" movement.

And knowing this, it is probably not going to come as too much of a shock to find that Bill Gothard is also one of the major promoters of religiously motivated child abuse.

One of the earliest documented reports of religiously motivated child abuse in neopente dominionist groups is in a "Working Together" article from February 1983. (Yes, you are reading that right--nearly 25 years ago.) Even at this early date, Gothard gets prominent press:

Not all child abusers are Christians, and not all Christians are child abusers. But a surprisingly high number of reported child abuse cases occur in Christian families. Moreover, the abuser often bases the justification for their behavior on Christianity. A father, when confronted by state child abuse prevention workers, resisted their assistance and said: "What do you mean I can't beat my child? I'm a Christian." This Christian father who had paddled his son with such force that he caused injury, had not been confronted by his church, had not repented, had not sought help to control his anger and violence. He had been taught that his responsibility as a parent involves the regular use of corporal punishment and used it to the extent that it was abusive. Herein lies the problem.

The Christian community must face these facts and determine why circumstances of severe child abuse are occurring in Christian contexts. We must challenge the teachings (that children need corporal punishment) which have been adhered to so long that they have come to be associated with orthodox Christian belief. This mistaken belief leads, in too many cases, to child abuse.

There are two sources of the theological justification for the use of corporal punishment. First, the belief held by some conservative Christians that children are evil, i.e., that because of Original Sin children are by their very nature evil beings. Thus, beatings are regarded as a way of chastising a child so as to bring him/her to righteousness. Related to this theological underpinning is the "spare the rod and spoil the child" theology frequently invoked by Christian child abusers. The most common understanding of this scripture is that all children need to be hit with a rod in order not to be spoiled. Both these theological assertions are distortions of the Biblical tradition.

The quasi-religious teaching which reinforces Christian child abuse is the hierarchy of power relationships in families. One of its most famous contemporary proponents is Bill Gothard, developer of the Basic Youth Conflict Seminars. Gothard teaches that women and children should submit to the authority of the father. Ironically, he offers as an image of appropriate parental roles the father as hammer and the mother as chisel. The child is to be shaped by parental tools. That this imbalance of power and perpetuation of male supremacy in the family is part of the problem is undeniable. An imbalance of power creates the conditions for abuse of power and authority which can lead to the abuse and exploitation of children.

Another site highly critical of Gothard notes that he may have been among the earliest promoters of religiously motivated child abuse, dating all the way back the the 60's:

In the late '60s most seminars were small enough to fit into school gymnasiums, and the audience could ask questions. During one Q-and-A session, a mother of two from Gothard's home church disagreed with his insistence that children always be spanked when they disobey. She argued that all children are different, should be treated as individuals, and presented examples from her own family. But the never-married, childless Gothard was sure the Bible taught otherwise. Fortunately for him, seminar attendance would soon become so large that Q-and-A sessions would be impossible.

The same site notes that Gothard has been an early promoter of isolating kids from a major source of mandatory reporters--teachers in public and private schools--and having kids taught within the dominionist home-education industry:

This must have been a very unpleasant experience for someone who has since proven himself to be a very driven, goal-oriented individual. Perhaps it also (at least partially) accounts for Bill Gothard's antipathy for traditional formal education. While he himself has the benefit of a Masters degree, he now openly discourages families from sending their children to school, promoting his own home-schooling curriculum instead.

In a pattern that would be repeated by James Dobson (and most other books promoting religiously motivated child abuse), Gothard promoted his works as dominionist alternatives to the works of Dr. Benjamin Spock (who is pretty much seen as a godless "hippie" among dominionists):

To understand the tremendous popularity and growth Gothard's seminar enjoyed in the late 1960s and early '70s, you have to know something about the social turmoil of those years. Gothard titled his seminar, "Institute in Basic Youth Conflicts," and it would have been difficult to find a more marketable name for many parents who felt helpless to deal with strange new influences over their children. Conflict between youths and the over-30 generation dominated American society, and even caused problems in other countries.

By 1967 the United States looked as though it was about to become a wholly-owned subsidiary of The Baby Boom Generation. Fully 50% of all Americans were 21 or younger. By the end of 1968 the ability of this age-group and those who influenced them to turn the socio-political landscape upside-down and change the direction of governments had been dramatically demonstrated on the streets, in newspapers, and on TV screens.

In 1968 it seemed as though "Murphy's Law" was operating in full force. Everything that could go wrong did, and at the worst possible moments. As the year began, "The Baby Book Doctor," Dr. Benjamin Spock was indicted with four others on January 5 for conspiring to encourage draft law violations. For older Americans Spock became a symbol of the problem of "permisiveness" in society. Perhaps the real problem, many speculated, was that millions of youngsters were simply spoiled by Spock's methods, and current expressions of civil disobedience were merely mass post-adolescent temper tantrums.
. . .
For all too many people, long after the images of violence in Viet Nam faded away, the images of hippies and yippies brawling with police lingered in the minds of the older generation. After all, they would encounter these kids in America's cities and suburbs on a daily basis, and had been warned that many of them were drug-crazed. Violent scenes from both inside and outside the Democratic National Convention in Chicago did little to change anyone's mind. People in the anti-war camp tried to use those events as evidence that the American government had become an out-of-control authoritarian regime, while those who were convinced that the war was right saw the protesters as an unruly band of trouble-makers who had no respect for authority.

Bill Gothard basically took the status quo's propaganda and gave it pseudo-biblical underpinnings. Millions of American Christians seized upon it as a kind of "Anti-Hippie Insurance" and began sending their kids to the Basic Seminar in droves.
. . .
Gothard's magic cure for all the problems that ailed the youth of the late '60s and early '70s could be summed up in one word: "Authority." Everything he taught flowed into or out of the central principle of submitting to authority.

Gothard made authority such a basic principle to all of life that even faith itself — considered by evangelical Christians to be the most basic life pricinple — was based on it. And Gothard wasn't talking simply about submitting to God's authority as the basis of faith. Rather, he was talking about submitting to human authority — i.e., "those in authority" that God has placed over us. Gothard told his audience that the secret for achieving "great faith," spiritual growth, protection from temptation and guidance in life, was complete, loyal submission to the following human authority figures: parents, government leaders, church leaders, and employers.
. . .
Gothard's system is based on the assumption that human authority structures are a central moral and spiritual principle. His corrective measures for dealing with abusive authority is a system for "making a proper appeal" that discourages disobedience to corrupt authority with its complexity and burdensome introspective requirements.

(Interestingly, you see the whole obsession with "Authority" also in the neopente "cell church" movement and within dominion theology in general and its Joel's Army variant in particular. The whole obsession with authority, in fact, pretty much is at its core the central dogma of the Assemblies and its daughter churches, far more than the Bible.)

At least one expert has expressed grave concern that this could lead to coverups of child abuse and spousal abuse, among other grave concerns:

Gothard has been accused by fellow Christians of everything from misinterpreting the Bible to ignoring spousal abuse to being a borderline cult leader. According to materials Gothard has published, his more radical ideas come from his belief in a "chain of command," which holds that authority figures -- from preachers to politicians to middle managers -- are put in their elevated positions by God. Mess with your boss, you're messing with Christ. Women are taught to be submissive and obedient to their husbands. He teaches his followers that political leaders are ordained by God and therefore to be obeyed. Gothard doesn't focus on the Ten Commandments -- he teaches his seven "universal, nonoptional Principles of Life," and he extends those principles to what food to eat and what clothes to wear. Breaking any of Gothard's principles leads to the highway to Hell, quite literally. Another path to Satan is the drums. The "backbeat" common in rock music is evil, according to his teachings, as are chords played in the minor key, which is a subversion of God's harmony.

Follow the rules, go to Heaven. Break them, and Satan will get a foothold on your soul.

Gothard disdains "knowledge," which he says only "puffs up a man," in favor of the more abstract "wisdom." "The reasoning of man will bring destruction," he tells people during seminars. To guard his followers from the evils of public schools, Gothard sells his own brand of Bible-based home-schooling. He also has his own unaccredited law school and college where his unique brand of Christianity is taught.
. . .
When asked about Bill Gothard, both Stafford and Forman are stumped. Neither did his homework on the curriculum -- they've never heard of Gothard and weren't aware that the man behind Character First! is an evangelical minister. When told about Gothard's emphasis on the "chain of command," Stafford immediately recognizes the danger in such teachings. "I can see how that could lead to a continuation of child abuse," he says.
. . .
According to IBLP pamphlets, Gothard, who has a habit of unconditionally labeling things either right or wrong, began ministering in high school in reaction to his classmates' "wrong decisions." He spent years ministering to youth gangs before developing the seminar in 1964. Gothard has never been married and has lived most of his life with his parents. His institute was rocked by scandal back in 1980 when it was discovered that his brother, who helped create IBLP, was having sex with a half-dozen of Gothard's female employees, according to news accounts. Both Gothard and his brother resigned, but Gothard soon came back to his ministry, and it has since grown enormously.

Gothard's seminar is focused on his seven principles: design, authority, responsibility, suffering, ownership, freedom, and success. Violating the rules will lead, he says, to a "life of continuous failure." But if the rules are followed, wealth will likely follow (he teaches "20 Aspects of Financial Freedom"), and bad habits will be broken.

Several times throughout the seminar he mentions "wrong clothes," and says that when a teenager is wearing them it means he or she has deep spiritual problems. Same with rock music. Teens are told not to date but instead to "court," a process by which "two fathers agree to work with a qualified young man to win the daughter for marriage."

Gothard teaches in his seminars that obedience brings godliness. Authority figures -- the father, the politician, the minister, and the boss -- are to be obeyed as if Christ were giving the orders. Gothard's ideas of family life are rigid, as wives are taught to be submissive and men are encouraged to be the absolute head of the household. Quotes from the Bible are used as backup to his assertions. The biblical justification for always being subservient to the boss comes from 1 Peter 2:18: "Servants, be subject to your masters with all fear."

Authority figures, according to Gothard, are on a higher spiritual plain than ordinary folk, and obeying them will help one get closer to God. He tells his followers that they are to obey everything, except orders to do "evil." If your boss is dead wrong, Gothard says it's OK to make a "Godly appeal" to him, but if the appeal is refused, the worker must live with it.

"Suppose Jesus Christ Himself was the manager of that store," Gothard asks a teen in one of the stories he tells. "Would that make a difference in the quality of your work?"

"It sure would!" answers the teenager.
"Do you realize that God expects you to consider that you are actually working for Jesus Christ on your job?"

As far as "wrathful" parents, Gothard teaches that they serve to develop character in children: "God even works through the wrath of parents to reveal character deficiencies in the son or daughter to develop additional character strengths or to reflect healing."

A number of ministers and theologians have found defects in Gothard's teachings. Christian scholar and psychologist James Alsdurf wrote a book in the late '80s about domestic violence among churchgoers and came to a conclusion: Bill Gothard's teachings can lead to a continuation of domestic violence.

Gothard is "a good example of how a segment of the church deals with this issue," Alsdurf told the Washington Post. "What he does is totally dismiss it as an issue by saying there are no victims."
. . .
Baptist pastor G. Richard Fisher wrote in a published article called "The Cultic Leanings of Bill Gothard's Teachings" that Gothard has a habit of "legislating, directing, and regulating just about every phase of life." Some of Gothard's rules that Fisher, a former enthusiastic follower of Gothard, and others have noted:

*Married couples are never to divorce for any reason, including adultery.

*Adult children are told not to leave home or get married without parental consent.

*Married couples must abstain from sex during the following times: during the wife's menstrual cycle; seven days after the cycle; 40 days after the birth of a son; 80 days after the birth of a daughter; and the evening prior to worship. Gothard claims that periodic abstinence will help produce healthier children, can cure infections, and decrease "the danger of genetic abnormalities."

*Listening to rock music, even Christian rock, is forbidden.

*Borrowing money or buying on credit is forbidden.

*Married women aren't to work outside the home.

Gothard even has rules on selecting makeup, preparing shopping lists, planning meals, picking dental plans, and choosing hairstyles, clothes, and vacation spots. Followers have said in published reports that he bans televisions in homes that buy his home-schooling program and that his ministry denounces almost every book but the Bible.

Adopted children, Gothard teaches, carry the sins of their biological parents with them. According to Fisher, Gothard wrote a letter to his followers in 1986 warning them of the evils of Cabbage Patch Dolls, which were very popular then. The dolls, which are "adopted" by their buyers in a written contract, caused strange, destructive behavior, according to the letter.

"It gets very, very weird," Fisher says. "And these people who follow him are frightened to death that they might break one of his rules."

In fact, it is hard to overstate the level of coercion in Gothard's programs:

For those who want to opt out as far as possible from participation in the world around them Gothard has constructed his own cradle-to-grave (or womb-to-tomb) spiritual environment — an alternate reality with its own jargon, customs and institutions. In his culturally monastic Christian utopian vision, large homeschooling families abstain from television, midwives are more important than doctors, traditional dating is forbidden, unmarried adults are "under the authority of their parents" and live with them, divorced people can't remarry under any circumstance, and music has hardly changed at all since the late 19th century.

Among other things, Gothard's empire now extends to a bogus medical academy which is in fact a fraternal organisation of doctors who push his bogosity, he pushes the dominionist "parallel economy" even moreso than most (even "Christian Contemporary" music is seen as Satanic), and (in a move that is designed to even further isolate kids with the misfortune to be born into a "Gothard household") even promotes the use of home births as a method of avoiding the medical system altogether:

Bill Gothard also pushes the evils of hospital births. One should give birth at home with a midwife. Gothard wants to train future doctors by watching other doctors, not by going to medical school which is wrong.

And now you know why I mortally fear for kids like the Duggars.

"The Facts Of Life" never covered Tabasco abuse (though don't put it past Lisa Welchel)

Lisa Welchel is probably best known (in the non-dominionist world, anyways) for her role as Blair Warner in the television show "The Facts Of Life".

In the dominionist parenting community, though, she's also known for her book "Creative Correction".

That book--also featured on Stop The Rod--could be better described as "101 Ways To Torment The Living Hell Out Of Your Kids".

Whilst some of the suggestions aren't as extreme as those promoted by the likes of the Tripps or Pearls or Gothard (or even James Dobson), she does incorporate some pretty bizarre things in her books:

a)"Dear God, Thank you that my parents love me and that because they love me, they correct me when I sin. Thank you that the spankings drive out the foolishness in my heart." (p. 265, from a sample prayer for kids)
b) "Having a struggle at bedtime? Try this: Next time you're dealing with the usual bathroom trips, cups of water, giggling, and talking, call off bedtime. Declare, 'Nobody has to go to bed tonight!' Inform them that they may stay up as long as they like—the operative words being stay up. Then have each child stand still in the middle of a separate room of the house." (pp. 143-144. Of note, sleep deprivation and forced standing in one position are two common torture tactics that are outlawed in most civilised countries--and which are noted to have been used at Abu Ghraib and Gitmo.)
c) "As we walk along together shopping, I will suddenly give them silly commands that they must obey without arguing, such as 'Walk backward,' or 'Stop and touch your toes,' or 'Give me a kiss.' Occasionally I'll throw in a real command, like 'Don't touch that,' or 'No, you may not have an Icee.' My favorite curve, however, is to say no to some reasonable request, like 'May I go to the bathroom?'" (p. 138. Not allowing kids to use the bathroom when needed is abusive.)
d) "Two summers ago I drove with the kids, my mother, and my grandmother in a camper from California to Texas. My grandmother, 'Nanny,' asked me not to spank the children while on the trip because it upset her." (p. 157. This is rather telling; corporal punishment tended to be rather accepted by the "Greatest Generation" and earlier as a rite of passage, so it must have been a real "whuppin'" to upset 'Nanny'.)

Welchel is probably best known for her promotion of "hot saucing"--placing hot sauce on the tongue of a young child (often as young as two years old) for cursing, "sassing", lying, or "backtalking". In essence, it's a modern version of the practice of making kids eat hot peppers for these things (which has been promoted in the southeast US for some time) but with far stronger pepper extracts and targeted at far younger kids.

Hot-saucing is itself considered abusive by many CPS agencies, both Tabasco and Texas Pete have issued formal statements condemning the use of their products as "chastening aids" (with McIlhenny, the makers of Tabasco, describing it as "strange and scary"), and most child experts outside the dominionist community also find it cruel and potentially dangerous due to both swelling from the "heat" and the risk of a possible allergic reaction.

The Washington Post has more:

Hot sauce adds a kick to salsa, barbeque, falafel and hundreds of other foods. But some parents use it in a different recipe, one they think will yield better-behaved children: They put a drop of the fiery liquid on a child's tongue as punishment for lying, biting, hitting or other offenses.

"Hot saucing," or "hot tongue," has roots in Southern culture, according to some advocates of the controversial disciplinary method, but it has spread throughout the country. Nobody keeps track of how many parents do it, but most experts contacted for this story, including pediatricians, psychologists and child welfare professionals, were familiar with it.

The use of hot sauce has been advocated in a popular book, in a magazine for Christian women and on Internet sites. Web-based discussions on parenting carry intense, often emotional exchanges on the topic.

But parents aren't the only ones asking "to sauce or not to sauce?" Several state governments have gotten involved in the debate. In Michigan in 2002, a child care center was sanctioned for using hot sauce to discipline a child. The mother of the 18-month-old boy reportedly gave the child care workers permission to use the sauce to help dissuade her son from biting other children.

Virginia's child protective services agency lists hot saucing among disciplinary tactics it calls "bizarre behaviors." The list includes such methods as forcing a child to kneel on sharp gravel, and locking him in a closet.
. . .
Lisa Whelchel, actress and author of "Creative Correction: Extraordinary Ideas for Everyday Discipline" (Focus On the Family/Tyndale House), defends the practice.

"A correction has to hurt a little," she said. "An effective deterrent has to touch the child in some way. I don't think Tabasco is such a bad thing." Her book suggests a "tiny" bit of hot sauce be used, and offers alternatives such as lemon juice and vinegar.

Discipline involves "drawing a line to protect the child," Whelchel said, "and if they cross that line, there will be pain." Whelchel said she believes that disciplinary methods should be left up to parents -- who know their child best, are devoted to the child's well-being and can administer punishment with love.

But Betty Jo Zarris, manager of Virginia's child protective services program, said: "We have to have some community standards for what's appropriate to do to children. Common sense would tell you [hot sauce] is not appropriate for a child. The common man on the street would know this is offensive."
. . .
Carleton Kendrick, a family therapist in Boston, fielded occasional questions about hot sauce when he was resident therapist for the Web site Family Education Network. "Tabasco is the most mainstream iconic punishment in our culture," he said.

Like many people, Kendrick uses the brand name "Tabasco" as a shorthand. Tabasco is the proprietary name of a single brand of sauce, made by the McIlhenny Co. of Avery Island, La. The owners of the company condemn the use of their products for child discipline. In an interview, company president Paul McIlhenny called the practice "strange and scary" and "abusive."

Kendrick says parents who use the technique are "at the very least . . . ill-informed." He pointed out that many parents are not aware that hot sauce can burn a child's esophagus and cause the tongue to swell -- a potential choking hazard.

"There are many different kinds of hot sauce on the market, and parents who say they know the dilution to use so it won't sting, or say they only use one drop, are wrong," Kendrick said. "It's done because it hurts. It stings. It burns. It makes you nauseous."

Capsaicin, the substance that makes peppers hot, inflames membranes in the eyes, nose and mouth. While many adults find this feeling pleasurable, capsaicin can cause negative reactions even in the third of the adult population that has no tolerance for ingesting it, according to Joel Gregory, publisher of Chile Pepper magazine.

There are additional risks for children. Giorgio Kulp, a pediatrician in Montgomery County, said that the risk of swelling as well as the possibility of unknown allergies make the use of hot sauce on children dangerous.

And rest assured, parents have been charged with abuse even for following the relatively mild (well, mild in comparison to some authors) suggestions by Welchel, as demonstrated in Tacoma, Washington in 2005:

Police found the children, a 9-year-old girl and a 10-year-old boy, tied to a water heater in their family's garage after a neighbor reported hearing "muffled screams."

Court documents obtained by KIRO 7 Eyewitness News described other allegations of mistreatment by the children's father and stepmother, Brad and Rachel Lambert.

Bonney Lake police said Rachel Lambert claimed the children's behavior had gotten progressively worse over the past month and that she disciplined the children by feeding them jalapeño peppers, the documents indicated.

The 10-year-old boy said "he had a hot pepper placed in his mouth and then had his mouth taped shut," the documents indicated. He told police "he swallowed the pepper so it would not be in his mouth anymore."

And sadly, they are far from alone

I wish I could say it was just these authors promoting this type of abuse.

I really wish I could say it was just these authors promoting this type of abuse.

Unfortunately, I'd be lying.

An example of the kind of childrearing abuse rife in the dominionist community--and not published in specific books--is Raising Godly Tomatoes, a website aimed for the "Quiverfull" set. (It is explicitly promoted on the Livejournal "Trainupachild" community, among other places.)

The advice on this page is a hodgepodge of not only advice from the Pearls and Gothard, but also some pretty horrifying homegrown advice as well. Among other things, the page uses the charming example of the rape, pillage, murder and enslavement of Israel's people as an example of how discipline should be done in the home:

(after a long segment of scripture-twisting of passages relating to the punishment of Israel for turning away from Judaism)

COMMENT: When the Lord punished a nation, it was severe, disobedience was not taken lightly. When a nation was defeated, they were murdered, raped, pillaged, and enslaved.

(after scripture-twisting involving the sons of Eli, who were specifically being punished by God for attempting to take a temple offering to eat it before the fat had been burnt off of it in specific violation of religious law (temple offerings were traditionally consumed by the priests after having been offered in fire and the fat melted off as God's portion)):

COMMENT:
Eli warned his sons of their shameful ways, but he did not rebuke them with the severity their deeds merited. Instead, Eli mildly reasoned with his sons, saying, "Why do you do such things?" But the sons no longer heeded their father, and he didn't restrain them. Consequently, his entire family was judged, including his descendants, forever.

Much like the other sites, it promotes whacking kids for tantrums as well as "retaliation whackings" for kids who complain about "chastenings"; punishing kids for being in bad moods (this is disturbingly common); promoting literal thought reform techniques directed at kids to "change emotions" about situations; promotes outright religious coercion of kids that is more likely to make her kids walk away as adults; and finally also promotes hiding kids from potential reporters before whacking them.

The page also promotes a concept known as "tomato staking"--in essence, not allowing a child "not to be trusted" to have any privacy whatsoever and requiring them to be within a three-foot radius of the parent. Among other things, the site does not specify an upper age limit for this; among other things, the page describes the "tomato staking" of a ten-year-old child, and also promotes tactics used in "discipling and shepherding" cell-groups for raising kids. (Yes, we're talking the same tactics now known to change basic personality types in grownups--and may well permanently warp little kids exposed to this.)

And last but not least...James "Dogfighter" Dobson

I am not going to write too extensively here, partly because I will be doing a specialised post dedicated to James Dobson's promotion of religiously motivated child abuse (and thus I risk repeating myself)--the scary thing is, he's actually a relative lightweight compared to some of the stuff promoted in dominionist childrearing circles.

This is, of course, not to say he's all that warm and friendly either.

This is a man who (in the intro to his most famous childrearing guide, The New Strong-Willed Child) literally used animal abuse as an example of how children's wills should be broken (featuring him literally beating the hell out of poor Siggie, the family Dachshund, in a manner that should make anyone who's so much as watched "Animal Cops" on Animal Planet recoil in horror) and also reminisced fondly on how his mother used to flog him with a girdle on a fairly regular basis. (If anything, Dobson is a veritable walking study in multigenerational child abuse--only in his case, he's transmitting it through a publishing empire that pulls in close to $140 million a year.)

Much of the advice is rather similar to the advice given in the other books--the claims that infants and children are "manipulative", the advice to start whacking kids well into the early toddler stages with "chastening rods", the deliberate humiliation of kids and making them think they have wronged God as well as Mom when they misbehave, and so on.

For example, after describing the incident that I refer to as the "Scourging of Siggie", Dobson quips:

"But this is not a book about the discipline of dogs; there is an important moral to my story that is highly relevant to the world of children. JUST AS SURELY AS A DOG WILL OCCASIONALLY CHALLENGE THE AUTHORITY OF HIS LEADERS, SO WILL A LITTLE CHILD -- ONLY MORE SO."

"[I]t is possible to create a fussy, demanding baby by rushing to pick him up every time he utters a whimper or sigh. Infants are fully capable of learning to manipulate their parents through a process called reinforcement, whereby any behavior that produces a pleasant result will tend to recur. Thus, a healthy baby can keep his mother hopping around his nursery twelve hours a day (or night) by simply forcing air past his sandpaper larynx."

And yes, this pretty much is a summary of the tone of Dobson's works. One expects to see this sort of thing in "hardcore childfree" columns; one does not expect to see it in the writings of someone described as "Dr. Spock for the dominionist set", a guy who has a syndicated newspaper column in many papers across the US promoting this stuff.

One of Dobson's favourite tactics is something that is very common in the dominionist community--namely, making the kid get their own "chastening rod" to be beat with:

My mother always used a small switch, which could not do any permanent damage. But it stung enough to send a very clear message. One day when I had pushed her to the limit, she actually sent me to the backyard to cut my own instrument of punishment. I brought back a tiny little twig about seven inches long. She could not have generated anything more than a tickle with it. Mom never sent me on that fool's errand again.

(I myself attempted to get out of one of these "beatings" by bringing in a log--figuring in my four-year-old wisdom that if my mother couldn't lift it with one hand she couldn't beat me with it. I got *two* beatings for that one--one for the original misbehaviour (the usual sibling rivalry), and the second for bringing in a log in an attempt to avoid a "switching" until I cried. And yes, Dobson does rather explicitly promote whacking kids to the point of tears on page 36 of "The New Dare To Discipline".)

Dobson also believes in retaliatory spankings for kids crying after a spanking beyond a certain time limit:

Q: How long do you think a child should be allowed to cry after being punished or spanked? Is there a limit?

A: Yes, I believe there should be a limit. As long as the tears represent a genuine release of emotion, they should be permitted to fall. But crying can quickly change from inner sobbing to an expression of protest aimed at punishing the enemy. Real crying usually lasts two minutes or less but may continue for five. After that point, the child is merely complaining, and the change can be recognized in the tone and intensity of his voice. I would require him to stop the protest crying, usually by offering him a little more of whatever caused the original tears.

(p. 135, The New Strong-Willed Child)

One of his other books (The New Dare To Discipline) is not any better:

a) Three-year-olds who aren't tired are seen as "brazenly defying" their parents.
b) Dobson literally attributes the decline and fall of Western civilisation to the failure to whack kids. An example:

From Genesis to Revelation, there is consistent foundation on which to build an effective philosophy of parent-child relationships. It is my belief that we have departed from the standard which was clearly outlined in both the Old and New Testaments, and that deviation is costing us a heavy toll in the form of social turmoil. Self-control, human kindness, respect, and peacefulness can again be manifest in America if we will dare to discipline in our homes and schools.

(p. 250, The New Dare To Discpiline)
c) On page 28, he recommends forcefully shaking a child for spitting. (Hello? Shaken Child Syndrome, anyone?)
d) Page 36 describes giving "Vulcan death grips" as a method of chastening (squeezing the trapezius muscle of the neck can incapacitate ADULTS much less kids--it is extremely painful)
e) Page 65 recommends to start beating kids at 15-18 months of age (yes, admittedly, not as extreme as the Pearls or Tripps, but not good either). This includes whacking for incidents of toddler "defiance" which are generally recognised by child development experts as the first signs of children establishing their own autonomy and identity as individuals (yes, it's actually a good thing when your toddler says "No!"--it means she's developing as a person).
f) Incredulously, Dobson claims that bedwetting can be an "act of defiance" and recommends whacking kids for wetting the bed "if an act of defiance". (Last I checked, most every legit pediatrician agreed that bedwetting was the result of physiological issues--the kid's nervous system and bladder aren't mature enough to maintain nighttime continence. Late bedwetting tends to be the result of physiological problems like nerve issues, small bladders, or antidiuretic hormone deficiency. All are able to be treated or mitigated and are not the fault of the kid.)
g) In a manner almost identical to that of the Pearls, Dobson promotes the dominionist myth of "Tyrant babies":

A child's resistant behavior always contains a message to his parents, which they must decode before responding. That message is often phrased in the form of a question: `Are you in charge or am I?' A distinct reply is appropriate to discourage future attempts to overthrow constituted government in the home.

(p. 29, The New Dare to Discipline)
h) Dobson advocates tough-love from the time Junior exits the womb:

If discipline begins on the second day of life, you're one day too late.

(p. 28, ibid.)
i) Like every other promoter of religiously motivated child abuse, Dobson promotes his abusive tactics as a religious mandate:

My primary purpose...has been to record for posterity my understanding of the Judeo-Christian concept of parenting that has guided millions of mothers and fathers for centuries.

(p. 18, ibid.)
j) Disturbingly, he uses his own history of rather extreme child abuse as an example (in the same manner that he used the Scourging of Siggie in The New Strong-Willed Child). He begins a rather wistful recollection of his own beatings by his own mother:

I learned very early that if I was going to launch a flippant attack on her, I had better be standing at least twelve feet away. This distance was necessary to avoid an instantaneous response--usually aimed at my backside.

(p. 23, The New Dare to Discpipline)

On pages 23-24 Dobson recounts being flogged on a regular basis with a girdle "with a multitude of straps and buckles" by his own mother; at the end, he states "Believe it or not, it made me feel loved."

Tomorrow (unfortunately, there's no room for it in today's discussion) we go into just why the religiously motivated child abuse industry has not been shut down.

Over the past few days, I've written articles for Wayang Party on the international involvement of Joel's Army groups in the steeplejack of AWARE ¹ and the actual agenda of the American-based "Christian Nationalist" group Focus on the Family ². From the responses received here, it's obvious that steeplejacking and the growth of "Christian Nationalism"--especially the Joel's Army variety--is of such a national concern that even the Home Affairs Minister has issued a statement warning of the threat to the secular state ³.

In this particular article, I wish to present essentially a layman's guide to the internal mythology of "Joel's Army"--and how it tends to radically differ from mainstream Christianity or even evangelical Christianity.

A "Joel's Army" mythological primer

Firstly, just to note--in this particular sense, I'm using the term "myth" in the way sociologists use it, not in the term that it's used in common parlance. Basically, in social sciences, "mythology" and "myths" are used to refer to stories people tell to teach a certain cultural and spiritual path--there's no value judgement made on this. (I note this, as an aside, because people in modern living faith systems sometimes get offended when sociologists refer to their religious or spiritual paths as "mythology" or "myths".)

Anyways, much like other faith systems (including mainstream Christianity), "Joel's Army" groups have their own faith system that is often at radical odds with mainstream Christianity.

One area where the Joel's Army groups diverge from mainstream Christianity is with the common Christian story of the fall of man from grace--where Eve and Adam were tempted to eat the fruit despite God's warning. Joel's Army groups tend to teach that at this moment Satan was given dominion over the world ⁴--this becomes very important later, because it can be argued the whole general theme of Joel's Army theology is dominion--literally a Biblical mandate to take over the world.

The Wagner-linked Joel's Army groups, as well as some of the older Assemblies-linked "Joel's Army" groups, go even further and promote concepts not noted in the Bible at all. Specifically, they rely on a very odd claim by William F. Branham ⁵--an early "Latter Rain" preacher ("Latter Rain" was a sort of proto-"Joel's Army" movement popular in the 30s and 40s)--that claims that Eve made love to the Serpent and that Cain and his descendants were, literally, sons of the Devil.

Branham's concept of interspecies and interplanar adultery--what he termed the "Serpent Seed" theology--ended up going in two different directions. One branch, promoted by racists (Branham was a known member of the Ku Klux Klan) became the racist theology known in the US as Christian Identity; the other branch--which held that people who opposed the "Latter Rain" and its agenda were the "sons of the Devil"--became what we know now as Joel's Army or Elijah's Army. (Interestingly, Branham himself may have well coined the "Elijah's Army" branding--he promoted himself as a reincarination of the prophet Elijah. ⁶)

This isn't the only area at variance with traditional Christian eschatology. In traditional Christian belief, Jesus' death and resurrection ultimately defeated the devil. "Joel's Army" churches have a decidedly neutered interpretation of this--usually they preach that Jesus was tortured in hell or wrestled the devil in hell for three days (the so-called "Harrowing of Hell"), and his death and resurrection only merely bought the keys for man to take back dominion--and it is "Joel's Army", acting as "regents for Christ", who must reclaim the world and society for God. (Yes, you're reading this right; essentially these groups promote Christ as being too weak to free humanity. Christians may be free to be utterly mortified at this.)

In "Joel's Army" theology, the world is at perpetual war, with the "Army of God" at one end, the literal sons of the devil at the other, and most of humanity and humanity's diverse societies seen as literal battlefield "territory" to be "named and claimed". This is, in part, why there's such a heavy emphasis on steeplejacking and taking over institutions (including other churches) from within--in their viewpoint (as I'll note in the next few paragraphs), the people within aren't really "Saved" and thus are seen as legitimate territory to "name and claim". ⁷

In addition, the "Joel's Army" groups tend to be neopentecostal (often labeled as "charismatic" in denominations that aren't traditionally part of the pentecostal movement)--and these tend to have some rather unique claims regarding salvation, especially those close to traditionally neopentecostal denominations.

Most mainstream Christian churches either believe one is saved at baptism (the Baptists and a number of other "adult baptism" Protestant groups) or upon confession and formal dedication to the church including first Communion (Catholics, Anglicans, and most of the Christian denominations that practice infant baptism). Most Christian churches also tend to believe that once one has been saved, one retains that salvation short of really messing up (things like mortal sins like murder, etc. or outright conversion to another religion).

"Joel's Army" groups, and neopente groups in general, are a little different. In these groups, you are not seen as truly saved unless one has had an additional "baptism in fire" or "baptism in the Holy Spirit"--and in these groups, the invariable sign of this is some form of supernatural manifestation. In pentecostal churches, this has traditionally been "speaking in tongues" (usually without someone translating what is being spoken, and usually noted as being a "heavenly language"); in the "charismatic" groups in "non-denominational" churches and steeplejacked churches, this tends to be in regards to other "divine gifts" (usually someone being a prophet or an "apostle")--you hear a lot about something called the "fivefold ministry" ⁸, which is a term used for a specific division of "divine categories" of preachers and pastors in these groups.

Even in the mainstream churches that do accept "speaking in tongues" and divine gifts of the Spirit, the practice is a lot different. Typically "speaking in tongues" requires the tongue to be in an earthly language and translated to be accepted (for example, this is how it works in evangelical Methodist churches in the US); other divine gifts also have similar "testing of the fruits of the Spirit". There is little or none of this testing in churches infected with Joel's Army theology; in fact, people who attempt to do so are often accused of "denying the river" or of being possessed by the Devil and trying to "rob God's blessing" ⁹.

In general, there is a huge emphasis (compared to mainstream Christian churches) of "signs and wonders"--up to and including claims that the "outbreaks of miracles" are proof that these groups are the only ones truly saved, and that only they have the "key" to thwarting the Devil and unlocking all the blessings that are rightfully theirs (as direct descendants of God via Adam). In Singapore itself, this imagery has even included references to the "red packets" traditionally given out at Lunar New Year's ¹⁰.

Conversely, it's also taught that it is very easy to lose salvation, to "backslide", to even lose one's blessing if it is not aggressively "named and claimed". This leads to things like 40-day "fasting and prayer marathons" (where they don't eat for 40 days in fasting that is more severe than Puasa/Ramadhan fasting) where people pray for wealth or healing, the "prophetic conferences"--and massive calls for censorship of anything that could be opposed to their theology, because the mere act of being exposed to such things can lead to "demonic oppression"--essentially remaining not-rich and in strife--or even frank possession by the devil. (This, incidentially, may be why AWARE itself was targeted--not only is LGBT tolerance considered controlled by demons, but feminism in and of itself is promoted as being controlled by "Jezebel spirits".) The term for this is "deliverance ministry", and in practice tends to lead to people being isolated from all info sources other than that led by the church ¹¹.

It's not only what you do that may mess things up as well. Even "saved" people can be "demonically oppressed" due to the actions of their ancestors up to seven generations back, according to their theology--there's even a term for it called "generational curses". (Those of you who have respect for the ancestors are free to be rightfully horrified.) This has led to literal purges of pre-Christian cultural references en masse in some countries (sub-Saharan Africa in particular as well as in Guatemala ¹²).

This has led to another thing at wide variance to mainstream Christianity--the practice of Joel's Army exorcisms ¹³. Most Christian churches do not conduct the rite of exorcism, or tend to have only specific people trained in the rite who have also had psychological training to be able to differentiate mental illness from potential "spiritual illness"; Catholic priests trained in the Rite of Exorcism are essentially to a one licensed psychologists in their countries. "Joel's Army" groups conduct it all the time, and for such perceived things as being a feminist (and thus being possessed by "Jezebel spirits") or a child being "willful" or someone being depressed; this has led to suicides and worse in the US and elsewhere ¹⁴.

The demon-haunted world of Joel's Army also directly leads to their "mandate from God" to steeplejack everything.

In Joel's Army theology (unlike mainstream Christianity, which typically teaches--even in its evangelical variants--that the kingdom of God is not one of this world) it's taught that businesses and countries and entire cultures, just like people, can gain and lose God's blessing depending on how strictly they follow the "battle plan"--and that just like people, businesses and countries and cultures can be literally possessed by Satan en masse. (In the States, it's popularly promoted by Joel's Army groups that Moslems as a whole are possessed; this, despite large populations of moderate Moslems in Singapore and Malaysia.)

In order to secure not only their own "blessing" but "blessings for their nation", Joel's Army groups feel they must take over all institutions, essentially "exorcise" them, and "name and claim" them for God--converting everything to a Joel's Army owned-and-operated tool for theocracy that, taken to its ultimate extent, forces non-NAR people--including Christians not part of steeplejacked churches--to submit or die. (And yes, they have stated rather blatantly internally this is the intent.) There are even specific seminars on this subject--the "Transformation" conferences (of which a branch is held in Singapore sponsored by LOVE Singapore) promote a particular branding of this strategy called the "Seven Mountains Strategy" ¹⁵ that goes into rather graphic detail on how not only governments but NGOs, schools, entertainment industries, the military, and all pillars of society must be taken over as "strongholds from the enemy".

Other uniquely "Joel's Army" theologies

The evidence of "Joel's Army" and "Christian Identity" groups being "brothers" shows up in other ways as well that don't show up in any other group claiming to be Christian.

"Joel's Army" groups have been documented promoting the "Phinehas Priesthood" (named after a famous Israeli priest who impaled a man and his Midianite lover in the temple, led a bloody revolution, and went on to almost cause fully a fourth of the tribes in Israel to be slaughtered over a misunderstanding over building a second temple) as an example of the levels of dedication needed to take over the world ¹⁶; there's a Christian Identity group in the US that has used the same name as a call for extermination of interracial couples (and has occasionally committed pro-racist domestic terrorism here in the US) ¹⁷.

In addition, the endtime theology of these groups is so variant that it deserves a special mention.

Most mainstream Christian groups tend to fall in one of three categories regarding their concept of the end of the world: postmillenial (meaning that Jesus reigns for 1000 years and then the end of the world comes), premillenial (meaning that Jesus "raptures up" the Faithful, seven years of literal hell on earth breaks out in what is called the Tribulation, and then evil is defeated and Jesus reigns for 1000 years) or amillenial (in which the millenial reign is seen as rather irrelevant and the important thing is "doing what Jesus would do"). Typically most Protestant groups trend towards postmillenial or amillenial thought, with evangelical groups trending towards either being postmillenial or premillenial.

The denominations that spawned "Joel's Army" (the Assemblies of God and Foursquare) started out as premillenial--and some of the unique quirks in their versions of premillenial theology come from a particular reference bible called the Scofield Reference Bible ¹⁸. Premillenial theology, more often termed premillenial dispensationalism, is actually pretty young as a theology (dating back to John Darby in the 1820s and with what would become the Brethren), and Scofield's version even younger than that (1907 at its earliest). Much of Scofield's version did become the basis for the theology promoted in "Assemblies linked" groups like Campus Crusade and FGBMFI, and later on Youth With A Mission.

The Wagner line started out as postmillenial--with a unique twist, based on a version of Latter Rain theology called "Manifest Sons of God", that claimed that in essence the church was the "corporate Christ" and that the millenial reign could not begin until everything was "named and claimed".¹⁹

There's been quite a lot of cross-fertilisation, and now the dominant theology can't really be said to be premillenial or postmillenial--more of "quasi-premillenial" theology that goes something like this ²⁰:

a) Satan has dominion over most of the world, so "strongholds" and in particular spiritually powerful areas known as "gates" have to be secured, purged of Satanic influence, and converted to "Godly strongholds" to secure blessings for those peoples in the area. (Of note: Singapore has been mentioned as a "gate" in Wagner's "Joel's Army" groups ²¹.)

b) Areas "named and claimed" will be sites of great miracles and "outpourings" which will cause people to convert en masse, adding foot soldiers to "Elijah's Army". It's taught that until a critical mass of people are converted ("every nation", and/or 144,000 Jewish people, and/or 1/3rd of the human population total--there's a huge emphasis on "second billion" (as in "second billion Christians") in some Joel's Army circles) Jesus cannot return--hence there's the whole "regents and holding army for Christ" thing going on.

c) Rapture happens, two people convert post-Rapture and are martyred in Jerusalem (where every Jewish person in the world has been herded by the Russians--this is one of the Scofield weirdnesses that was originally a reference to Tsarist progroms) and this causes a massive revival about three and a half years into the Tribulation

d) At the end of the Tribulation, all the Raptured along with General Jesus descend from Heaven and join the convertees, who all proceed to slaughter the rest of humanity, consign them to Hell, and are granted a "new heaven and new earth" as reward.

Amazingly enough, this very scenario has been laid out for public view in a book series. Tim LaHaye, who has not only written several books on this particular endtime scenario but has co-published (along with Jerry Jenkins) what amounts to Joel's Army fanfiction (the "Left Behind" series). It's a wildly popular series among the Joel's Army set in the US, and a writer called "Slacktivist" has been conducting a read-through including notes on the rather bizarre theology promoted therein (at least from a mainstream Christian viewpoint) ²².

Scofield's contributions bear special note. Among other things, Scofield is directly responsible for claims that Russia and Iran will go to the Final War with the US and Israel; this was used to frighteningly good effect by early Joel's Army groups who promoted themselves as "anti-Communist" (and now are being promoted as "anti-Islamist" as well, though being arguably as dangerous). This has led to some very interesting conspiracy theory, including claims that the United Nations is run by the Russians or is otherwise secretly a Soviet plot. In addition, Scofield's view of how the world will end can literally be described as a sort of "Hopscotch with the Bible"--hopping to one verse, then another, then another, often in separate testaments much less books or chapters, and typically taking verses wildly out of context ²³. (This has often led to even evangelical Christians wondering just where they're getting this stuff.)

In addition, Joel's Army groups also have a heavy emphasis on "divine revelation" completely outside of the Bible altogether--they put as much stock in utterances of "prophets" and "apostles" (as long as their utterances fall under the general "party line" of the Joel's Army group in question) as the Bible itself, and if the "prophecy" is justified at all it's often in terms of other "prophecies" or a Bible verse taken out of context. (There's an amazing amount of examples of this "in action" over at the main Joel's Army site online, "Elijah's List" ²⁴.)

All in all, Joel's Army groups can legitimately be said to be about as divorced from mainstream Christianity--or even mainstream, non-NAR evangelical Christianity--as, say, the Unification Church or other "Bible-based" groups. (Many Biblical scholars at the least state they should be essentially treated as a third denominational grouping separate from Catholicism/Orthodoxy and Protestantism; some have more recently argued that these groups should be considered a religion wholly separate from historical Christianity ²⁵.)

_Footnotes:

_{1) http://wayangparty.com/?p=9047 "The AWARE steeplejackers and their deep connections to Joel's Army and American dominionists", self, 10 May 2009.}

_{2) http://wayangparty.com/?p=9175 "Focusing on 'Focus On The Family': An export of American-style 'Christian Nationalism'", self, 12 May 2009.}

_{3) http://wayangparty.com/?p=9337 "Wong Kan Seng sends a stark warning to religious fundamentalists: don't mix religion with politics", Wayang Party admins, 15 May 2009 (also reported in Straits Times and other Singaporean news sources).}

_{4) http://tinyurl.com/dominionist-mindsets "Dominionist Mindsets (a prelude)", self, 24 July 2007. This is part of a series on the "parallel economy" promoted by "Christian nationalist" groups in the US. Also discussed much further in detail in http://www.talk2action.org/story/2005/12/19/155228/97 "A history of Dominion/'Kingdom Now'/Restoration Theology", self, 5 October 2006. Aspects also treated at http://www.dailykos.com/story/2006/10/3/114749/049 "Dominionism as a coercive religious movement (part 2)", self, 3 October 2006; http://www.dailykos.com/story/2007/7/17/11272/3341 "'Deliverance', involutnary exorcisms, and abuse", self, 17 July 2007.}

_{5) A history of Dominion/'Kingdom Now'/Restoration Theology", plus http://www.apologeticsindex.org/b05.html Apologetics Index, "William Branham" article; http://tinyurl.com/branhamquote1 "An Exposition of the Seven Church Ages", William M. Branham (Jeffersonville IN, WBEA, 1965) p.98; Burgess and McGee, editors, Dictionary of Pentecostal and Charismatic Movements, Zondervan Publishing House, Grand Rapids, Michigan. p.96; http://www.letusreason.org/Latrain4.htm "The Teachings of 'the Prophet' William Branham", Let Us Reason, undated; http://www.letusreason.org/Latrain6.htm ibid.}

_{6) Apologetics Index ibid from D.R. McConnell, A Different Gospel, Hendrickson Publishers Inc., Peabody, MA, 1988. p. 166; http://watch.pair.com/rain.html "The Latter Rain Revival", Barbara Aho. A large number of articles referencing William Branham is at http://community.livejournal.com/dark_christian/312350.html?thread=1928222#t1928222 (Of note, a great number of sites focusing on Joel's Army groups are from conservative Evangelical Christian groups in the US opposed to the movement; very little writing in non-apologetics circles has been done until fairly recently.) Also extensively documented at http://www.letusreason.org/Latrain6.htm ibid, http://www.letusreason.org/Latrain3.htm "W. Branham's History", ibid.; http://www.letusreason.org/Latrain9.htm "William Branham's basic beliefs" ibid.}

_{7) http://www.dailykos.com/story/2006/10/4/102528/740 "Dominionism as a coercive religious movement (part 3)", self, 4 October 2006; also some discussion on this by Jeff Sharlet, "Soldiers of Christ", Harper's Magazine, May 2005 (Internet Archive copy at http://web.archive.org/web/20070307090843rn_1/www.harpers.org/SoldiersOfChrist-20061103288348488.html) in regards to New Life Church of Colorado Springs. Also discussed in part in "A history of Dominion/'Kingdom Now'/Restoration Theology" and "Dominionism as a coercive religious movement (part 2)". The general neopentecostal/"Joel's Army" concept of territorial "marking" is discussed at http://www.talk2action.org/story/2006/1/14/232742/509 "Senate 'annointer' curses WV mine families", self, 14 January 2006 (in relation to imprecatory prayers and an attempt to "name and claim" the Chambers of the US Senate by a Joel's Army group).}

_{8) A plethora of links on this are at Eastern Regional Watch (http://www.erwm.com/Latter%20Rain.htm), a conservative Christian organisation opposed to Joel's Army groups. Explicit description of the "fivefold ministry" in regards to Joel's Army groups is available at http://tinyurl.com/fivefoldministry "Fivefold Ministry Makes A Comeback", Christian Research Journal, Vol. 22 No. 1 (1999); http://www.cephasministry.com/toronto_background_of_holy_laughter.html "Background to the Holy Laughter Movement", Tom and Sheila Smith; http://members.ozemail.com.au/~rseaborn/New_Apostolic_Reformation.html "The New Apostolic Reformation", Orrel Steinkamp (particularly relevant re Wagner-lineage Joel's Army groups and Assemblies/"Australian Community Churches" linked Joel's Army groups); http://www.talk2action.org/story/2008/9/24/82239/9750 "The Lions In The Pews", Ruth (of New Apostolic Reformation Research Team), 24 September 2008; http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=10167 "Christian Fundamentalism Permeates The Republican Party: Sarah Palin's Links to the Christian Right", F. William Engdahl, Global Research, 12 September 2008; http://www.talk2action.org/story/2008/9/8/114332/7479/Front_Page/Sarah_Palin_s_Demon_Haunted_Churches_The_Complete_Edition "Sarah Palin's Demon Haunted Churches: The Complete Edition", Bruce Wilson (of NARRT), 8 September 2008 (of note, NARRT is probably the sole secular group doing fulltime research on Joel's Army groups, and in the nature of full disclosure I do resarch for NARRT); http://www.discernment-ministries.org/content/dominionism-and-rise-christian-imperialism "Dominionism and the Rise of Christian Imperialism", Sara Leslie, Discernment Ministries (of note, Sara Leslie is also a walkaway and now operates an anti-Joel's Army apologetics group). C. Peter Wagner himself is shown to make direct reference to the concept of the "Fivefold Ministry" in http://www.talk2action.org/story/2008/12/28/13255/764 "C. Peter Wagner Fights The 'Religious Spirit'", Bruce Wilson (of NARRT), 28 December 2008.}

_{9) Numerous examples of this exist that have been documented on websites of walkaways and parties critical of Joel's Army theology, particularly the use of the term "in the river" as a eupehemism for being "manifesting". An example of an ex-Assemblies of God minister who was expelled from the denomination for raising concerns re spiritual abuse related to Joel's Army groups has compiled a list of articles regarding this (http://www.timefortruth.com/ForYourSpirit/StateOfChurch.aspx), and another site has noted that criticism of pastors is generally not allowed (http://endtimespropheticwords.wordpress.com/2008/05/19/the-new-revival-characteristics-the-third-wave-outpouring/?referer=sphere_related_content/); I myself have noted this as a defining characteristic of these groups in http://www.talk2action.org/story/2005/11/24/235826/75 "Dominionism and Coercive Tactics (part 1)", self, 24 Nov 2005 and http://www.talk2action.org/story/2005/11/21/103824/67 "Dominionist groups as coercive religious groups?", self, 21 Nov 2005. Documentation of these tactics by recently disgraced Joel's Army promoter Todd Bentley is noted at http://www.letusreason.org/Latradir.htm (Let Us Reason Ministries' extensive archive on Latter Rain and "Joel's army" promoters); Jacob Prasch has also attempted (unfortunately without much success) to stop the steeplejack of the entire Australian A/G by NAR promoters (http://www.hnlc.org.au/rensford/toronto_footnotes.htm).}

_{Groups in the Assemblies targeting youth seem to be especially "NAR-infected" in this manner and there are indications the denomination as a whole has been well and truly taken over by the NAR proponents (particularly damning info on this at http://www.deceptioninthechurch.com/youthalive.html from "Deception In The Church"); the same site has descriptions of the Brownsville A/G "Pensacola Outpouring" (a major Joel's Army revival in the 90s) at http://www.deceptioninthechurch.com/pensacola.html including resignation statements of deacons forced out of their own churches by NAR proponents, and info on the "Third Wave" branding of Joel's Army theology at http://www.deceptioninthechurch.com/gen_thirdw.html including, again, information from walkaways including a former Assemblies pastor in the UK (http://christian-witness.org/pdf/TheUK%20Assembliesof%20God-ADifferentMovementwiththeSameName.pdf "The UK Assemblies of God: A Different Movement With The Same Name", Phillip L. Powell, Christian Witness Ministries, October 2008). Of particular note here with this last article is revelation that the Assemblies of God as a whole apparently have a book, "The Seduction of Christianity" by Dave Hunt (which is critical of Joel's Army theology from a conservative Christian perspective), on its list of books officially forbidden for members or pastors to read; there are indications that C. Peter Wagner's works are also being given official sanction on a denomination-wide level.}

_{10) http://www.coos.org.sg/resource/index.php?coospg=ce2008/ce2008janmay.html Church Of Our Saviour "Cell Edification Notes", with 14 March and 11 April lectures entitled "Heaven's Red Packet" (http://www.coos.org.sg/resource/index.php?coospg=ce2008/ce2008janmay.html#14mar); the notes for the 14 March lecture are especially egregrious in this regard (http://www.coos.org.sg/resource/ce2008/cenote_20080314_a_people_of_blessing_pt2.pdf). Of note, these are lesson plans designed for use by "cell church" leaders for cell churches, and similar appropriations of "gifting holidays" have tended to occur with NAR groups (including Christmas, New Years Day in eastern Europe, and Ephiphany/"Los Tres Reyes" (Three Kings' Day) in Spanish-speaking countries).}

_{11) A far more in-depth discussion of "deliverance ministry" is included at "Dominionism and coercive tactics, part 2" (link above); of note, experts in coercive religious groups have made direct comparisons between tactics common in groups using "deliverance ministry" and those used in the Church of Scientology, a group considered so coercive and such a threat to public safety that it is banned in Germany under its laws against extremist organisations. A very in-depth discussion of these coercive tactics in practice is included in Sharlet's article "Soldiers of Christ" (link above), and also at http://www.dailykos.com/story/2008/5/9/511990/-A-weekend-at-Hagees-Jesus-Camp-for-grownups and http://www.dailykos.com/story/2008/5/10/511810/-God-of-Chunder:-McCains-spiritual-advisor-will-make-you-puke,-literally. self, May 9-10 2008 (and based in part on information from http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/story/20278737/jesus_made_me_puke/1 Matt Taibbi, "Jesus Made Me Puke", Rolling Stone, 1 May 2008 and excerpted from Taibbi, The Great Derangement: A Terrifying True Story of War, Politics, and Religion at the Twilight of the American Empire, Spiegel & Grau, 2008).}

_{12) Sources regarding sub-Saharan Africa and "spiritual warfare" campaigns include: http://tinyurl.com/muthee1 "Palin, dominionist intimidation, and actual witch-hunters", self, 22 Sep 2008; http://timesonline.typepad.com/uselections/2008/09/palin-linked-el.html Hannah Strange, "WBLG: Palin linked electoral success to prayer of Kenyan witchhunter", Times Online, 16 Sep 2008;http://irregulartimes.com/index.php/archives/2008/09/15/sarah-palin-and-the-thomas-muthee-witch-hunt/ "Sarah Palin and the Thomas Muthee Witch Hunt", J.Clifford, Irregular Times, 15 Sep 2008; http://www.csmonitor.com/1999/0923/p15s1.html "Targeting cities with 'spiritual mapping', prayer", Jane Lampman, Christian Science Monitor, 23 Sep 1999; http://www.choicesforliving.com/spirit/part4/kenya.htm "The power of prayer over witchcraft", Choices for Living (pro-Joel's Army magazine), undated; http://community.livejournal.com/dark_christian/946438.html (archive of "Christianity vs. the Old Gods of Nigeria", Dulue Mbachu (via AP), 4 Sep 2007).}

_{Documentation of destruction of cultural artifacts and "witch hunts" in Guatemala include: http://www.talk2action.org/story/2008/9/20/171755/145/Front_Page/Palin_Muthee_and_the_Witch_Journalists_Miss_the_Major_Story "Palin, Muthee and the Witch: Journalists Miss The Major Story", Ruth (of NARRT), 20 Sep 2008; http://barthsnotes.wordpress.com/2004/05/31/doug-giles%E2%80%99s-brother-in-law-wants-men-to-fight-demons/ "Doug Giles' Brother-in-law Wants Men To Fight Demons", Bartholomew's Notes on Religion, 31 May 2004; http://www.dailykos.com/story/2006/10/20/2406/2232/786/259560 "Rios Montt, Yonggi Cho, New Life, and the strange history of dominionist juntas", self, 19 Oct 2006; http://dogemperor.livejournal.com/122935.html "Guatemala: a case history of dominionist hell", self, 7 April 2007 (and sourced in part from "Accounting for fundamentalisms", Martin E. Marty, R. Scott Appleby, American Academy of Arts and Sciences, University of Chicago Press, 2004; in particular chapter 5 of this book, "'Jesus Is Lord of Guatemala': Evangelical Reform in a Death-Squad State", David Stoll; pp99-100 describes an incident where members of the Joel's Army linked El Shaddai attempted destruction of a pre-Columbian monument to Quetzalcoatl; in a perhaps ironic footnote, Quetzalcoatl aka Kukulcan is the god of learning and enlightenment in most Mesoamerican mythologies).}

_{Examples in the US include, again, Sharlet's "Soldiers of Christ" (link above) and numerous book-burnings (http://www.dailykos.com/story/2007/10/21/400793/-Albus-Dumbledore-publically-outed;-dominionist-apoplectic-fits-imminent and http://www.dailykos.com/story/2008/9/12/596291/-More-info-comes-out-on-Palin-and-dominionism,-Armageddon,-and-book-bans to list but two major categories of examples); in the case of a pastor in the Wasilla, AK area who authored a book entitled "Pastor, I'm Gay" (designed to assist mainstream Christian pastors with assisting LGBT parishoners) the local Joel's Army groups (heavily active in the area since the 1960s) went to the point of harassment of bookstores and attempts at picketing the pastor's home and church (personal communication with author Howard Bess as well as http://www.libraryjournal.com/index.asp?layout=talkbackCommentsFull&talk_back_header_id=6554706&articleid=CA6594759 and http://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/story?id=5766173&page=1).}

_{Of note, this is one example where a direct parallel can be made to the tactics of another extremist group in a different Abrahamic faith, namely, the Taleban and its destruction in 2001 of the famous Buddhas of Bamyan, Afghanistan (one of the very few "Western-style" representations of Buddhas known to have survived to that period) by order of a fatwa declaring them "idols"; this is precisely the same argument used in "deliverance ministry" NAR-linked groups to justify destruction of cultural artifacts.}

_{13) Cases targeting adults are well known; aside from the information in "Dominionism and coercive tactics, part 2" there are numerous court cases resulting from attempted neopente "exorcisms" (http://www.dailykos.com/story/2007/7/17/11272/3341/129/358866 "'Deliverance', involuntary exorcisms, and abuse", self, 17 Jul 2007 just covers a few of these including the Laura Schubert case, now heading to the US Supreme Court). Other notable examples described include http://www.skepticfiles.org/fw/exorcist.htm Skipp Porteous, "The exorcist", Walk Away Magazine, undated (and this is, sadly, typical of such an "exorcism" in a cell church). Exit counselor Rick Ross in particular has dealt with several cases of persons requiring inpatient hospitalisation due to severe PTSD and mental breakdowns resulting from "exorcisms" of this sort (http://www.rickross.com/reference/about/about2.html Interview w/ Ross, Walk Away Magazine, Summer 1990); not noted in the interview with Ross is the fact that Phoenix First Assembly is the largest Assemblies of God church in the US and operates its own "faith based detox center" chain called Dream Center.}

_{On occasion, "exorcisms" and even imprecatory prayers--prayers designed for the explicit purpose of cursing someone to suffer until conversion or death--are done using the names or belongings of targets (an example noted at http://www.talk2action.org/comments/2006/1/6/103519/9115/11?mode=alone;showrate=1#11 "'Annointing' as territorial marks", self, 6 Jan 2006 and http://www.talk2action.org/comments/2006/1/6/103519/9115/19?mode=alone;showrate=1#19 describes the general theory; I have personally witnessed this type of "praying over" someone numerous times). This has, in Joel's Army circles, included claims that their imprecatory prayers led to the death of Mother Theresa (http://www.talk2action.org/story/2008/10/20/195730/89).}

_{Cases targeting children are particularly egregrious and include: http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2007/dec/09/tracymcveigh.theobserver Tracy McVeigh, "Children are targets of Nigerian witch hunt", originally printed in The Observer, 9 Dec 2007; http://www.bbc.co.uk/london/content/articles/2007/01/30/kurt_belief_law_feature.shtml (BBC articles summary regarding child abuse cases related to Joel's Army churches targeting West African emigre communities in the UK); http://www.religioustolerance.org/chr_exor5.htm (Ontario Consultants on Religious Tolerance report on the Joel's Army related child abuse crisis in the UK and sub-Saharan Africa); http://www.dcsf.gov.uk/research/data/uploadfiles/RR750.pdf (British public aid agency document on how to spot religiously motivated child abuse); it is estimated by some resources that upwards of fifteen known cases of "exorcism related death" occur in the United States yearly and probably far more cases go unreported (especially if figures from the UK's working group at Scotland Yard who reported 50 cases of exorcism-related child abuse are anything to go by).}

_{It can also be argued that the majority of cases of "religiously motivated" child abuse, and its general promotion, are intimately linked with the promotion of "deliverance ministry" as a whole (http://www.dailykos.com/story/2007/8/13/370953/-Dominionism-and-child-abuse,-part-1 and http://www.dailykos.com/story/2007/8/14/371430/-Dominionism-and-child-abuse,-part-2 note several popular promoters of "Bible-based baby beating" that explicitly promote caning of children as young as six months old using "deliverance ministry" as an explicit reasoning).}

_{The problem of religiously motivated child abuse, particularly in sub-Saharan Africa where much abuse is directly linked to NAR "revivals" in these countries, is severe enough that a dedicated NGO (RISE International: http://www.riseinternationalcic.org/) has been formed specifically to assist these children with their rights under the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child. The US is presently the sole UN member with a functional government that has not ratified the Convention on the Rights of the Child, explicitly due to political pressure by "religious right" and "Christian nationalist" groups who legitimately fear lawsuits under the Convention (specifically over cases of religiously motivated child abuse) and who claim the Convention will "take away the right of parents to discipline their children" (documented http://www.dailykos.com/story/2007/8/15/371898/-Dominionism-and-child-abuse,-part-3:-Why-they-arent-in-jail "Dominionism and Child Abuse, part 3: Why they aren't in jail", self, 15 Aug 2007); even Somalia's provisional government as well as the provisional governments of the unrecognised Somali breakaway countries of Puntland and Somaliland have agreed in principle to ratify the Convention once their governments are recognised or the country is sufficiently stable. NAR-linked "Christian Nationalist" groups are also behind moves in Australia and New Zealand to call for these countries to revoke their ratification of the Convention (in exactly the same way that North Korea "revoked" its ratification of the Convention on Non-Prolifieration of Nuclear Weapons).}

_{14) Porteous' "The exorcist" (ibid.) notes a case of suicide; Rick Ross (ibid.) has noted cases of suicides and inpatient hospitalisation; Laura Schubert (noted in "Deliverance, involuntary exorcism and abuse" ibid.) has longterm PTSD that is disabling; and Ontario Consultants for Religious Tolerance have noted a very conservative note of 15 reported deaths yearly from exorcisms of children in the US (other NGOs, such as RISE International, estimate the numbers are far higher; possibly thousands in sub-Saharan Africa alone). A particularly sad and infamous case here in the States of what could be worse than suicide is the eventual "mental breakdown with automatic weapons" of Matthew Murray, who was a regular on several walkaway forums, particularly those for survivors of NAR promoter Bill Gothard's coercive groups; Murray had been raised under Gothard's extremely coercive tactics and was involved with Youth With A Mission when he started having psychotic PTSD manifestations (http://www.dailykos.com/story/2007/12/14/421737/-Matthew-Murray:-an-American-tragedy and http://tinyurl.com/murray2 "Matthew Murray: An American Tragedy" series, self, 14-17 Dec 2007; in the interest of full disclosure, I was a regular of one of the walkaway boards Murray was a member of and hence saw the full reality of what happened).}

_{This is, of course, completely aside from the near epidemic of LGBT kids who are forced out of their homes (either kicked out or forced to flee for their lives) in the US, largely from homes where "Joel's Army" theology is promoted. It is estimated according to an increasing number of studies that LGBT youth in the US have close to a 30 percent suicide rate (http://www.outproud.org/article_suicide.html and Mays,V.M. & Cochran, S.D. (2001). Mental health correlates of perceived discrimination among lesbian, gay, and bisexual adults in the United States. American Journal of Public Health, 91(11), 1869-76), and that this may be a conservative estimate due to kids in "Joel's Army" households remaining closeted until the time of their death; the virulently anti-LGBT rhetoric in Joel's Army churches, including involuntary "outings" of gay youth for public "exorcisms", surely has much to do with this. Kids who are LGBT and who grow up in anti-LGBT religious groups (and Joel's Army groups are easily among some of the most virulently anti-LGBT groups ever documented) are known to be at higher risk for suicide even compared to most LGBT youth. Interestingly, Joel's Army groups including frontgroups for Campus Crusade for Christ try to debunk this info (http://www.leaderu.com/jhs/labarbera.html). Upwards of 20-40 percent of homeless youth in the US identify as LGBT (versus the estimated number of people in the US identifying as LGBT as a percentage being around 1 to 2 percent), indicating a lot of LGBT kids are having to flee their homes for safety or are being kicked out (http://www.thetaskforce.org/blog/20070130-jason-cianciotto-lgbt-youth-homelessness and http://www.wcsap.org/pdf/RAD%207-1.pdf) and in some areas the problem is regarded as sufficiently serious that specialised LGBT-friendly youth homeless shelters are in operation (http://www.aliforneycenter.org/resources.html being but one example).}

_{The fear of abuse is legitimate; in addition to religiously motivated child abuse and abusive "exorcisms", there also exists a system of "faith based rehabs" and "degaying centers" which children are often forced into involuntarily (and often subjected to exorcism-related abuse within). Exorcism-related abuse has been documented at all three Assemblies-operated "faith based mental health centre" chains, notably with Mercy Ministries (http://www.mercysurvivors.com as well as http://ruinedbymercy.co.cc/ and http://mmoa2.blogspot.com/ particularly have information) and Teen Challenge (http://www.dailykos.com/story/2008/4/27/503961/-Teen-Challenge:-Coercive-groups-disguised-as-rehab and in general http://teenchallengecult.blogspot.com/2008/05/daily-kos-dogemperor-teen-challenge.html) but similar reports also exist re Dream Center indicating a systemic problem. The "Joel's Army mental health system", of note, includes almost an entire "parallel mental health network" designed as an alternative to legitimate psychiatric care (http://www.dailykos.com/story/2007/7/27/363063/-Dominionisms-parallel-economy,-part-4:-Dominionist-social-services); this may in fact have been a direct contributing factor to the murder-suicide of Matthew Murray, as his only options for psychiatric care were Joel's Army "theophostic counselors" rather than legitimate psychiatrists) and as a direct result he disregarded the advice of multiple members of walkaway communities to seek professional help for his increasingly violent thoughts.}

_{15) http://dogemperor.newsvine.com/_news/2008/10/06/1960547-thomas-muthees-seven-mountains-and-coded-messages and http://dogemperor.newsvine.com/_news/2008/10/07/1963800-seven-mountains-and-the-joels-army-plan-for-takeover in particular (self, Oct. 6-7 2008). Some of the initial documentation of "Seven Mountains" strategy has been noted by Bruce Wilson (of NARRT) in http://www.talk2action.org/story/2008/9/24/13112/0816 "In Video, Pastor Annoints Palin, Urges 'Infiltration' of Schools, Government, Business" (24 Sep 2008). Joel's Army sites explicitly promoting "Seven Mountains" strategy include the site "Reclaim Seven Mountains", used as source material for "Seven Mountains and the Joel's Army Plan for Takeover" (http://www.reclaim7mountains.com/apps/articles/default.asp?articleid=41538&columnid=4347).}

_{16) "Dominionism as a coercive movement, part 3" (link above); http://www.dailykos.com/story/2008/5/21/519046/-Joels-Army-and-omnicide-in-the-name-of-God "Joel's Army and omnicide in the name of God", 21 May 2008; http://web.archive.org/web/20071220065238/http://www.pawcreek.org/articles/endtimes/DominionTheologyandJoelsArmy.htm "Dominion Theology and Joel's Army", Paw Creek Ministries, undated (via Internet Archive); http://www.letusreason.org/Latrain10.htm "Joel's Army", Let Us Reason, undated; http://www.letusreason.org/Latrain11.htm "A New Thing", ibid; http://www.onlinethoughts.com/Prophesies/vision_of_the_harvest.htm "A Vision of the Harvest by Rick Joyner", "Online Thoughts" (a pro-Joel's Army site) and excerpted from Joyner's The Harvest. "Joel's Army and omnicide in the name of God" gives much more detail on how the Phinehas reference is a very nasty coded phrase.}

_{17) Noted in context of hardline Joel's Army groups partnering with far-right orgs linked to domestic terrorism in http://www.dailykos.com/story/2006/10/10/10638/489/534/255752 "Racists and dominionists, part 2: a true gallery of rogues" (self, 10 October 2006); Christian Identity groups known to use "Phinehas Priesthood" imagery for racist domestic terrorism noted by Anti-Defamation League (http://www.adl.org/backgrounders/an_phineas.asp). There is some evidence that both Joyner and Christian Identity promoters may have used the same source for the term, namely Richard Kelly Hoskins' "Vigilantes of Christendom: The Story of the Phineas Priesthood" ("Dominion Theology and Joel's Army"); Hoskins' book is a manifesto for Christian Identity proponents to commit domestic terrorism, indicating very close links yet exist between racialist "Christian Identity" promoters and Joel's Army despite claims of "interracial reconciliation". Of particularly disturbing note, the book explicitly calls for the killing of LGBT people and interracial couples.}

_{18) Most extensively noted in http://www.dailykos.com/story/2007/8/4/366484/-Dominionisms-parallel-economy,-part-8:-Dominionism-and-the-Scofield-Reference-Bible "Dominionism's 'parallel economy', part 8: Dominionism and the Scofield Reference Bible", self, 3 August 2007.}

_{19) The term "Corporate Christ" had its earliest origin in the writings of Watchmen Nee (and has been continued in the writings of his protege Witness Lee, particularly the book "Life-study of Exodus"); it can be seen as an alternate branding of what has been termed "Manifest Sons of God" theology (http://www.apologeticsindex.org/c137.html). (Joel's Army theology has undergone numerous renamings, including "Manchild Company" and the modern rebrandings of "Elijah's Army" and "Gideon's Army".) In Joel's Army circles, this is termed nowadays the "corporate church" (http://www.apologeticsindex.org/c138.html) and essentially teaches that the church essentially is the Second Coming, or at least triggers it.}

_{C. Peter Wagner explicitly uses the term "corporate church" in his book Freedom from the Religious Spirit (Gospel Light, 2005); this book essentially claims that all "denominational" churches--all those outside the Joel's Army "post-denominational" movement--are literally possessed by the demon of "religion" and must be "exorcised" forcibly. The term also has been used by lesser-known Joel's Army proponents, explicitly in the context of steeplejacking mainstream Christian churches (http://www.crossroad.to/articles2/007/discernment/3-28-networking-church-3.htm discusses its use by Peter Whitehouse among others, and http://www.deceptioninthechurch.com/thirdwaveteachings.html notes its promotion in early Latter Rain/Manifest Sons of God writings). Sarah Leslie, a noted expert on Joel's Army and a walkaway herself (who still writes extensively for Christian audiences warning about Joel's Army), has documented that cell churches are an essential part of this model and that the concept of the "corporate church" can be said to be core theology of these groups (http://www.deceptioninthechurch.com/cellcurch.html "Notes On Analysis Of The Cell Church Model", Sarah Leslie, Christian Conscience, 1999).}

_{20) Described in "Dominionism and coercive tactics, part 3" in large part, as well as "Seven Mountains and the Joel's Army plan for takeover". The aggressive targeting of government in particular is described at (http://firstplumbline.blogspot.com/2008/04/deceptions-of-matt-willson-and-hope-08.html) and (http://pjmiller.wordpress.com/2008/01/01/2008-the-year-of-the-great-shift/?referer=sphere_related_content/).}

_{21) Joel's Army promoter Shawn Bolz has apparently labeled Singapore specifically as a targeted "spiritual gate", particularly in the field of animation--which is rather bizarre as Singapore is not exactly internationally known for anime (http://endtimespropheticwords.wordpress.com/2009/04/06/angels-angels-angels-index/ and comment 3). C. Peter Wagner has explicitly set up in Singapore under the belief that it was a "gate" since at least 2000 and documentably far earlier (http://www.cephasministry.com/apostles_c_peter_wagners_endorsements.html); also noted in http://www.intotruth.org/res/latterrain.pdf "Annointing or Apostasy? The Latter Rain Legacy", Charles S. Graves, pp.91) There are indications, particularly a "prophecy" by Rick Joyner on "Elijah List", that indicate that quite possibly all former British colonial holdings in the East Indies are being targeted as "gates", including Sydney (a known Joel's Army hotspot and headquarters of Hillsong Community Church) and Hong Kong (also experiencing its own problems with a "Joel's Army" invasion) per (http://www.elijahlist.com/words/display_word_pf.html?ID=645).}

_{22) Fred Clark's reviews are at his website (http://slacktivist.typepad.com/slacktivist/left_behind/index.html); reviews so far include up to the second (in sixteen) books in the series. Other reviews of books in the series exist, a brief list including: http://www.harpers.org/archive/2004/11/0080291 "The apocalypse will be televised: Armageddon in an age of entertainment", Gene Lyons, Harper's, November 2004 (including excerpts from the final book of the series, "Glorious Appearing", featuring people literally exploding and Jesus riding literally hip-deep in the blood and gore of the dead); http://girardianlectionary.net/res/left_behind_resacralizing_violence.htm "Re-Sacralizing Violence in the Left Behind Books", Girardian Lectionary, 18 May 2004 (also including other excerpts from the same section of "Glorious Appearing"); http://www.beliefnet.com/Entertainment/Books/2004/04/Killer-Ending.aspx "Killer Ending", Paul O'Donnell, BeliefNet, April 2004 (again, focusing on the gory-as-all-getout "Glorious Appearing" and including excerpts).}

_{There is also a considerable media empire surrounding the "Left Behind" "Joel's Army endtime fanfic" series including a series of movies, a spinoff series aimed at children, and a highly controversial video game called "Left Behind: Eternal Forces"; this game is referred to in part in "Joel's Arm and omnicide in the name of God", and discussed in far more detail on the "Religious War" section on Talk to Action (http://www.talk2action.org/section/religious_war). Especially controversially, the game (a strategy RPG which included literal "convert or die" options) was designed to be marketed to children as young as six years of age and was to have been marketed in megachurches. The producers have also attempted "SLAPPs"--the lawsuit equivalent of "Shut up and sit down"--against parties who have done negative reviews of the game (http://www.talk2action.org/story/2007/10/12/161855/92).}

_{23) Most extensively noted in http://www.dailykos.com/story/2007/8/4/366484/-Dominionisms-parallel-economy,-part-8:-Dominionism-and-the-Scofield-Reference-Bible "Dominionism's 'parallel economy', part 8: Dominionism and the Scofield Reference Bible", self, 3 August 2007; also noted specifically by Fred Clark in wonderful fashion (http://slacktivist.typepad.com/slacktivist/2009/05/tf-bible-studies.html "TF: Bible Studies", 15 May 2009 in noting the leaps and bounds used to promote the very theology fictionalised in "Tribulation Force").}

_{24) Multiple examples noted already, but those wishing to get an eyeful can visit the site directly at http://www.elijahlist.com (assuming it's not already been blocked); there is also the (saner for one's sanity) option of reading the NARRT report (http://www.talk2action.org.nyud.net/pages/docs/Transformation.pdf). Let Us Reason also has compiled a report on the extensive role played by Elijah List in promotion of Joel's Army theology and "prophecies" (http://www.letusreason.org/Latrain36.htm "The ElijahList: the biggest distributor of false prophecies in hyperspace", Sandy Simpson, Let Us Reason, April 2008).}

_{25) Bruce Wilson (of NARRT) (http://www.talk2action.org/story/2009/4/13/195435/702/Front_Page/NAR_Show_and_Tell_Bianca_Decries_Joel_s_Army_amp_New_Apostolic_Militancy and http://www.religiondispatches.org/archive/religiousright/1273 and http://www.talk2action.org/story/2009/4/5/172139/5062/Front_Page/The_Renewalist_Christian_Explosion_Worldwide) via "World Christian Trends, AD 30-AD 2200" (David B. Barrett, Todd M. Johnson, Christoper R. Guidry, Peter F. Crossing, William Carey Library, 2001) beginning on page 299. Also explicitly noted by René Holvast, http://igitur-archive.library.uu.nl/dissertations/2008-0710-200706/holvast.pdf "Spiritual Mapping in the United States and Argentina, 1989-2005: A Geography of Fear" (Brill Publishing, 2009 and originally published as dissertation for the University of Utrecht, 2005), excerpts used by NARRT in "Transformations" expose ibid; Alix Spiegel, http://www.thisamericanlife.org/Radio_Episode.aspx?episode=77 National Public Radio programme "This American Life", 26 Sep 1997 and reaired 12 October 2001 (of disturbing note, Spiegel notes she had to undergo informal exit counseling during the course of researching New Life Church for the programme); Phillip Jenkins, http://www.theatlantic.com/doc/200210/jenkins "The Next Christianity", The Atlantic, October 2001; Jane Lampman, "Targeting cities with 'spiritual mapping' and prayer", CSM, 23 September 1999, link previously noted; http://www.csmonitor.com/1999/0916/p11s1.html "Operation Prayer", ibid, 16 Sep 1999--among many others (it can be legitimately argued that all of the numerous conservative Christian apologetics sites who have the most information regarding "Joel's Army" groups--largely to keep their own Evangelical churches from steeplejacking by "Joel's Army--definitely count in this regard as well).}

Disturbing new evidence suggests that the anti-gay dominionist hate group "Watchmen At The Walls" may have quite a bit of official support from the largest pentecostal denomination in the United States.

More below...

As one of my continuing "side series" (along with the Gothard research), I've been writing up on the virulently anti-LGBT "Joel's Army" group "Watchmen At The Walls"--a group linked with no less than one death and multiple assaults as well as an attempted progrom against a Pride parade in Riga, Latvia, and which is now officially listed as a hate group by Southern Poverty Law Center.

One thing I've focused on is the rather disturbing official support by Assemblies of God regional head Joseph Fuiten--and those of you who've read my previous articles know Fuiten is far from the only virulently anti-LGBT leader in the Assemblies.

Now comes disturbing news that the Assemblies of God may be embracing hate as a whole--it turns out the Latvian head of "Watchmen" was front and center at a major conference of Assemblies preachers in Atlanta recently. (Apologies to readers--we do have a lot to cover here, so pardon the length.)

A history of hate

I've noted before that "Watchmen's" public face is, sadly, just publically showing what the Assemblies has promoted rather privately for decades (I myself remember involuntary public outings and "exorcisms" of LGBT youth who were unfortunate enough to be born to dominionist parents in the church I escaped from). This includes one of the truly nastier practices, that being not only "pedo-smearing" LGBT people but using frank Holocaust revisionism to do so (the book "The Pink Swastika", published by Scott Lively's Abiding Truth Ministries (also newly listed as a hate group by SPLC), claims that not only were LGBT people not targeted for extermination in the Holocaust but that the Nazis were all gay and the actual architects of the Holocaust and that LGBT people are inherently criminal and corrupt; other books by Lively published by Abiding Truth Ministries have gone on to claim that Al Quaida (and Islam in general--neopentes tend to lump *all* of Islam together with Islam's own equivalent of dominionists) and practically every despotic regime since the time of Christ was part of a "gay conspiracy" against the rest of humanity--yes, he's trotting out pretty much the same bogus claims that were made against Jewish people in "Protocols of the Learned Elders of Zion", but replacing "Jew" with "gay").

It's bad enough that this sort of thing gets promoted in megachurches and on a regional level. However, Richard Bartholomew (of Bartholomew's Notes fame) recently has noted on Talk to Action how support for hate seems to be getting quite official support on a fairly wide denominational level.

Specifically, Bartholomew had noticed this little blurb in the AFA's official press agency on the "Synergize" evangelism conference--what "Synergize" is, is a conference held in Atlanta by the pastor of "God's Embassy Church" for neopente and neopente-friendly pastors and other folks.

For those of you unaware, God's Embassy Church is the largest neopentecostal dominionist congregation in Ukraine; they quite explicitly promote themselves as promoting "Joshua Generation" stuff for "reformation of society"--Joel's Army codewords for rasslin' up a posse of God Warriors to convert the country, and eventually the world, to a theocratic dictatorship where such crimes as not being able to spout the appropriate shibboleths may well result at best in having your citizenship revoked and you ending up interned in a camp somewhere--and among their own, they do speak of the possibility of "cleansing with the sword", so to speak.

The pastor, Sunday Adelaja, is originally from Nigeria (the same country, of note, which is in a belt of countries in sub-Saharan Africa where literally thousands of children are being driven out of their homes and beaten under the accusation of being "witches" after revivals by neopentecostal dominionist preachers); he operates a small Joel's Army denomination which has been reported to use coercive tactics and (incredulously) has claimed credit for the "Orange Revolution" in Ukraine (the "Orange Revolution" was much more of a spontaneous "velvet revolution" movement which broke out when the incumbent president essentially tried to steal the vote and poison the opposition). Adelaja has connections with New Life Church in Colorado Springs (Ted Haggard's former stomping grounds and a supposedly independent neopente church that maintains such close connections with the Assemblies that it is hard to determine if it is in fact an "Assemblies daughter" or a "stealth Assemblies" church); Adelaja also happens to have connections with none other than Alexey Ledyaev--the primary ringleader behind the virulent "Watchmen At The Walls".

A veritable "Joel's Army" powwow

Anyways, back to the conference. The list of attendees includes not only Ledyaev--who apparently is not officially listed (probably due to the publicity in Bartholomew's Notes; just to show they can run but they can't hide, http://synergize.tv/speakers-schedule.html">here is the original version courtesy of the Wayback Archive of the speaker's list--complete with Ledyaev listed as doing a conference on "Developing Political Leaders")--but a veritable who's who of dominionism.

It is not a terribly huge shock to me to find the very pastor of the church I am a walkaway from at this conference (who has not only spread anti-LGBT santorum but has helped his deacon Simon do so as well) was a major speaker at the conference; the conference he hosted was "Turning Obstacles into Opprotunities" (aka "How to conduct spin control"). Other conference speakers were Truett Cathy (head of Chick-Fil-A, a major corporate funder of dominionism; Pat Williams, owner of the Orlando Magic (who play in the recently-renamed AmWay Arena--*not* noted in that brochure is that Williams is *very* high up in the AmWay Hierarchy, second only to DeVos himself--yes, this *would* be the same AmWay that is not only the largest corporate funder of dominionism in the US but which (in particular with the Dexter Yager upline) acts as a "Siamese twin" with the Assemblies with both groups cross-recruiting for each other); Ron Luce, head of Teen Mania Ministries (who has connections with Hobby Lobby, a company that effectively operates as a funding front for the Assemblies' international ministries, via his "Wild Injun" promotional shows for Bearing Fruit Communications; he's led rallying parties for young "Jesus Camped" God Warriors and has even published a "Joel's Army" manual for youth which includes tactics on how to literally harass and stalk people as well as get into dangerous situations for the purpose of harassing people into conversion); the president of Daystar Communications (a dominionist television network and an increasingly large part of the already large dominionist "parallel economy" of media); the heads of no less than three steeplejacked churches (including the head of the SBC in Nigeria--a *very* dangerous sign, and one which gives very ill portent in regards to the steeplejacking of the SBC here in the States), and no less than thirty Assemblies and Assemblies-daughter churches. (No, I was *not* making things up. Literally *every* pastor or person otherwise hosting a talk at that conference has a first-degree link back to the Assemblies.)

The partners list is also interesting--as if you needed any more reasons *not* to eat at Chick-Fil-A, it would appear that conferences where leaders of hate groups (and general "Joel's Army" powwows) get paid for with those chicken sandwiches and waffle fries. No less than two dominionist TV networks (The Inspiration Network--which is pretty much the old PAX TV--and Daystar), a passel of Assemblies fronts (including several targeting Jewish people for conversion to "Messianic Jews"), one mutual insurance company (Add "Brotherhood Mutual Insurance" to your "do not do business with" list), and (disturbingly) the Israeli tourist board (whom I presume is grateful for the tourism dollars, but the Israeli government *is* starting to get a little concerned about the devil's bargain that has been made to *get* those tourism bucks from neopentes going on "Bible tours" and using the time to try to convert the Jewish population).

And I honestly wish I could say that it was just localised Assemblies support--a megachurch here, a megachurch there.

Unfortunately, I'd be lying.

Official Assemblies sanction for hate?

Possibly one of the more disturbing things about this conference--where Ledyaev apparently was leading a talk on how to politically organise "Joel's Army"--was the number of *official* Assemblies regional and national heads who gave talks, much less those giving official support otherwise.

Amongst the minor herd of Assemblies-linked attendees was Zollie Smith--who is head of the US Missions office of the Assemblies of God (the US Missions office is basically the "man behind the curtain" behind the literally tens to hundreds of Assemblies of God frontgroups nationwide; their portfolio includes Royal Rangers (an Assemblies-run "Christian alternative" to Scouting who has had members protesting along with Fred Phelps against Gay/Straight student alliances (you thought Watchmen At The Walls, Family Research Institute, Traditional Values Coalition, and Abiding Truth Ministries were the *only* SPLC-listed hate groups the Assemblies partners with?) and which has operated a paramilitary training camp for its equivalent of Eagle scouting), Chi Alpha (an Assemblies-run "fraternity, but not really" founded by John Ashcroft's father--yes, that John Ashcroft, Mr. "I got Wesson oil smeared on my head in a neopente mockery of King David's coronation when I became US Attorney-General" Ashcroft, Mr. "Covering up Lady Justice's bewbs" Ashcroft...yeah, him), and Teen Challenge (an Assemblies "faith based rehab" that led to the near-total deregulation of "faith based" children's homes including "Bible boot camps" when Dubya essentially gave a "get out of jail free" card to them; Teen Challenge's facility in Texas was at threat of being shut down due to repeated allegations of abuse and failure to meet minimum standards for education)...oh, and they also pretty much program the official material for Sunday schools, "Jesus Camps", and the official newsletters and magazines for pastors here in the States).

Yes, this would in fact be the same US Missions office where Joseph Fuiten (yes, the same Joseph Fuiten who is head of the Assemblies in the northwest US and also has links to "Watchmen At The Walls") gave seminars on how to set up front groups for "bait and switch" evangelism.

And by *no* means does the official Assemblies endorsement stop there (though, short of an endorsement by the president of the denomination, it's hard to get much more official endorsement than by the home missions office).

The conference is held technically by a frontgroup calling itself Second Billion (this being a reference to how it is estimated that 1 billion people worldwide are members of a Christian denomination). That site lists as partners Assemblies of God regional heads in Texas (Stephen Banning), Virginia (Larry Hickey), Fiji (Sani Matalomani), and Kenya (Peter Njiri).

In addition, the head of the largest Assemblies of God church in the US is listed (Dan Briles, linked with First Assembly in Phoenix--Ted Haggard's present congregation). In addition to *that*, pretty much all of the top ten largest Assemblies megachurches in the country are linked (including the church I am a walkaway from).

In addition, several "Assemblies daughters" are represented--the group has official sanction from International Foursquare as well as Rhema Church (a "Joel's Army" denomination in South Africa) as well as the head of the Alpha courses (developed by a pastor of a steeplejacked CoE church--the church in question was steeplejacked by Vineyard and Assemblies members into the "Toronto Airport Revival", is essentially a "Joel's Army" church, and the Alpha "parachurch" ministry is best qualified as an "Assemblies daughter" operating primarily through cell churches). A few notable steeplejacked congregations (including the head of Nigeria's branch of the SBC, apparently totally steeplejacked by the Assemblies to a far more extreme manner than even the ongoing conversion of the SBC to a neopente dominionist denomination) are also listed--but again, save for maybe four or five churches (and that's counting the Assemblies daughters), practically *every* church listed is an Assemblies church (generally a large Assemblies megachurch) or are actual regional or national heads of the Assemblies' operations worldwide.

And even more damning here is a link that the parent org *didn't* expurgate--it would appear that Alexey Ledyaev (yes, Mr. "Watchmen At The Walls" himself) would appear to be prominently noted as head of Global Media for Second Billion (and disturbingly also indicates he and his Nigerian buddy may largely be the face of neopentecostalism in eastern Europe; he claims 100,000 members via satellite churches, though this is likely inflated).

And the rest of the board of directors shows even more terribly damning info that the head of "Watchmen" is only part of what amounts to an Assemblies powwow group for theocracy and hate for all--and one with an impressive amount of very official Assemblies of God support. No less than Michael Chowning, the head of the Assemblies of God in Russia is involved (with Western Russian ops), as well as Larry Hickey (district head of the Assemblies' operations in the Potomac region--disturbingly, he is listed as head of ministry ethics for Second Billion), (again) the head of the Assemblies in Kenya (East African ops), and the head of Christian Men's Network (a known Assemblies front).

And--if there is a single person out there still using Real Media for anything--here's a reason to drop it; it would appear that Real Media is one of the larger fronts for dominionism funding. (Martin Schwartz of Real Media is listed as head of technology operations for Second Billion. He is also senior officer at Real Media.)

It would also appear that this is *not* going to be the last of this by any means--Second Billion has a second site where it lists its conferences, including several conferences where Ledyaev will be attending.

And it's via a look at the listed founder of Second Billion--a James O. Davis--that we go even further into linkages between the Assemblies and Ledyaev. It appears that not only is James. O. Davis heavily connected with Campus Crusade for Christ (specifically its frontgroup Global Pastors Network, but apparently officially has taught courses at the Assemblies' seminary on theology and practice and is yet another major Assemblies head (specifically with the National Evangelism office)--specifically, he was "professor" of some of the Assemblies of God's infamous mail-order "seminary" courses.

Again, short of the president of the denomination himself being a member, it's very difficult to get much more official.

In addition, another Assemblies regional head shows up--this time, Greg Beggs (the East African director for the Assemblies, and Peter Njiri's superior officer).

Another sad example of the SBC being borged by the Assemblies is apparent official SBC involvement as well--specifically with the North American Mission Board for the SBC and its national strategist. (This could be a sign of very bad things to come as far as the SBC is concerned. If the NAMB is steeplejacked, so goes the denomination.)

And a little more on "Second Billion"

Now, all that is pretty damning in and of itself. But there's more.

Second Billion is, at its heart, essentially a "denomination within a denomination" of explicitly Joel's Army churches in Assemblies and Assemblies-daughter churches (as in even more so than the typical neopente dominionist church). In part, it exists as a brotherhood of extreme churches within a hard-dominionist community.

Much of the group's stated plan is to get explicitly "Joel's Army" churches in *every* community by 2100 (this should give you all a concept of just *how* far in the future neopente dominionists plan for--and why we can never say in our lifetime, or our children's, or their children's, that "the religious right is dead"). The fact that they have political organisation committees--and have a head of one of the most violent neopentecostal dominionist groups ever documented as director of their media communications--would strongly indicate that they are not above the use of takeover of countries to force "winning souls" by gunpoint if necessary. They certainly don't object to the tactics taken by "Watchmen At The Walls"--and if some of their own literature is any guide, they hope to expand the poop-flinging and literal gaybashing to both other countries and other populations seen as evil.

The group is even kind enough to note what cities they plan to focus on particularly aggressively (in part because of the existence of large "Joel's Army" churches there).

And make no mistake--they are *highly* political. A sermon off Second Billion's page makes that abundantly clear--one of their "Three battles we can't afford to lose" is apparently against the entire of Iraq, with the head of the org even going to the point of stating that Iraq should have had the bejeezus blasted out of it in Gulf War I:

One of the many lessons we have learned from the recent Iraqi war is that we could have taken care of this global issue more than a decade ago. Often times, human nature tells us that "it will go away" or "someone else will take care of it" or "it will not become any worse than it already is." We have learned a hard lesson that says, "Do not pick a fight that you are not going to finish." If a fight is not worth fighting tomorrow is most likely not worth fighting tomorrow. We must chose our fights carefully, taking into account all
of the issues.

It is one thing to begin to apply the principles for victory in the Christina life; but another thing to follow through to complete victory. I am thankful to be able to say that president George W. Bush and enough tenacity to see us through this war.

(And now you know why there is a 19% "approve" rating for Dubya; those "nineteen percenters" are almost all Joel's Army faithful.)

It gets worse. Not only is there almost a constant reference to Joshua in here (which is in line with the present rebranding of "Joel's Army" to the "Joshua Generation"), but apparently they proceed to slag off Joshua for not having committed genocide against the entire population of Gaza in the past:

Also, in Gaza, Samson ripped the gates of that walled city down. Then, the took the post and iron bars and carried the gates more than 20 miles away—up a mountain. However, it was in Gaza that Samson went from victor to victim; from being an overcomer to becoming overcomed; from hero to zero.

He met his match in the life of Delilah. No doubt you know the story. There were several warnings that preceded his defeat. We must always remember that sin will bind you (Judges 16:21), will bind you (Judges 16:21), and will bury you (Judges 16:22-31).

Even though I believe that I will meet Samson in heaven, he failed to master himself while he was endeavoring to master others. Yet, if Joshua had follow through to completely conquer Gaza, and then most likely this story would have never happened.

(Yes, you read that right--the writer blamed the seduction of Samson on Joshua not having had the sense to exterminate every man, woman and child in Gaza. Also, nice scripture-twisting of Judges 16:21-31 (which is where Samson asked to feel the pillars and proceeded to squish a few hundred Philistines to death with a large building collapse in what amounted to an early version of a suicide bombing, "World's Strongest Man" style).)

The author also proceeds to blame Joshua not genociding the population of Gath for the event where David needed to slay Goliath in the first place:

II. WE NEED TO LOOK AT THE PLACE OF DEFIANCE (I Sam. 17)

Here is another familiar story to most of us. It is the story of Goliath and David. Goliath was raised in a Gath, a city that Joshua failed to completely conquer during his lifetime.

During Joshua's day, a small militia could have defeated Gath. However, since Joshua and succeeding generation were content to allow the enemy to live within their boundaries, there came a time when an entire Israelite army cowarded before one man, Goliath. For many years, God had been preparing David for the battle between him and
Goliath.

(No matter that it would have been rather doubtful that David would become a founder of what was known as the greatest dynasty in Israel's history--and one which Christians trace Jesus Christ's lineage back to--had he *not* whacked Goliath with a well-aimed rock to the head. More scripture-twisting here, of the story of Goliath getting aforementioned high-velocity rock to forehead and falling down going boom.)

Joshua is also blamed for the entire Diaspora (and the loss of the Ark of the Covenant) because he didn't exterminate every non-Israeli in the Arabian Peninsula and Levant, and it's warned that if "Joel's Army" isn't arse-deep in blood by the time things are over with that the US will be even more screwed:

III. WE NEED TO LISTEN TO THE PLACE OF DEFILMENT (I
Sam. 4--:5:2)

There is one place where God will not work. He will not work in "second place." At this time Israel wanted what God could do for them, not what they could do for the Lord. They made a false assumption (vv. 3-9). They believed that they could live any way they desired and that God would deliver them. If we want God to give us victory in every area in our lives, then we must have a heart after God. Israel lost their most sacred object, the Ark of the Covenant.

The false assumption led to a fatal affliction (vv. 10-18). This affliction affected Israel's people (v. 10), provision (v. 11), and priests (vv. 12-18). It has been said time and time again, that sin will take us further than we want to go, cost us more than we want to pay, and will stay longer that we want it to stay.

Then, on the heels of fatal affliction came fierce abomination (4:19-5:2). God's anointing departs and the ark is defamed. This is the account of the lowest time in Israel's history. God had called them to change their world but they had chosen to allow their world to change them. The Glory of God departed and someone wrote, "Ichobod."

Can you imagine what history would have recorded if Joshua had defeated Ashdod? Would Israel have ever lost the Ark of Covenant? What would the world be like today? Joshua never imagined what the outcome would be because he failed to follow through on his commitment to God.

(Again, the pattern of some pretty rampant defense of wholescale genocide, and some pretty inventive scripture-twisting. Not noted is the part after 1 Samuel 5:4 (where the Philistines had a statue of Dagon repeatedly faceplanting when the Ark was placed by it), nor the minor cancer outbreak and mouse plague that occured in Philistine lands afterwards, and ending up with the Philistines begging the Israelis to "take back their ark already" and aforementioned Philistines being made to pay the rather bizarre tribute of 5 golden tumors and 5 golden mice per Philistine lord as a guilt offering to stop the plagues. Also rather glossed upon is the killing of Phineas--no relation to the Phineas back in Numbers 25, who is considered a Good Example in both Joel's Army and Christian Identity circles due to his shish-kebabbing an Israeli who dared introduce his Midianite girlfriend to the family *and* the aforementioned girlfriend.)

Yes, if you're curious, this *is* pretty much the general tone of the sermons by James O. Davis. This includes the Joel's Army view of the end of the world (recently fictionalised in the "Left Behind" books), and in particular a "Journey to Victory" organisation manual (which again heavily plays upon Joel's Army/Joshua Generation imagery).

Needless to say, this is extremely distressing and extremely disturbing--the "private face" for many years is becoming increasingly public, and if people do not organise in time, we may well be too late to stop the ultimate steeplejack.

And having lived in such a world...trust me when I state that this is a place you do *not* want to go to.

Friday, I began the first part of a three-part series on the tragedy of Michael Murray--a man raised in possibly one of the most coercive neopente dominionist environments imaginable, one who may have had pre-existing tendencies towards mental illness--and who eventually snapped in violent and bloody fashion by killing five people and himself on a Sunday afternoon in Colorado.

Today, we look into some of what sort of pressure he was under in the group he desperately was trying to walk away from--and where his one chance at escape went desperately wrong when his only route of escape--led him to a dominionist cult which may well have been the straw to break the camel's back.

. . .

A look into the bowels of the hell Michael Murray tried to escape

Michael Murray--as I've noted--may well never have had a chance, not without outside assistance to get him out...outside assistance that, in general, has only been available for about a year or so courtesy of groups like International Cultic Studies Association or Safe Passage Foundation. At the time Murray was trying to escape, the very recognition that neopente dominionist groups could be as abusive as Scientology or the Moonies was a very, very new thing indeed; literally the *only* "halfway house" for walkaways from coercive groups that existed was Wellspring, a facility that has enough Christian overtones to be potentially triggering in and of itself to an escapee from a "Bible-based" coercive group.

And more and more, especially with the release of posts that Murray made on another walkaway forum--the Association of Former Pentecostals forums, a survivor community for those who have escaped abusive neopente dominionist groups--the impression I keep getting of Murray is as a panicked, trapped animal ready to chew off his leg if necessary.

Some of the forum posts from Murray are telling as to the environment he grew up in--an environment which in many ways is all too eerily similar to my own 26-year horror:

nghtmrchld26
Friend
Posts: 3
(1/14/07 2:17 am)
Reply

the "Council for National Policy" and evangelicals

I remember growing up in pentecostalism/evangelicalism, we were always told to support the republicans/conservatives and to "hate those evil satanic democrats." Jesus never said to put our trust in any political leader, yet we see so many christians trying sooooo hard to believe that "America was founded on fundamentalist evangelical christianity and we must turn america back towards God!!!(the evangelica/fundamentalist/pentecostal version nontheless)"

This ties right into what is known as Dominionism.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cou...nal_Policy

www.sourcewatch.org/index...nal_Policy

www.au.org/site/News2?pag...9&abbr=cs_

www.alternet.org/story/21372/

I find this "Council for National Policy" interesting.

One of the things I want to know is:

Why do these evangelical/pentecostal leaders condemn "the occult"/"freemasonry" yet they themselves are part of or at least completely ignore a group that itself has secret membership, secret meetings, and is invitation only.

Of course, this secretive christian/evangelical "CNP" group raises many questions.......

Ah, yes, this is so familiar from my own past too--as I've noted on here, I'm an escapee from a politically active Assemblies church too (in fact, our local dominionist rabblerousers happen to be run by a deacon of the very church I am a walkaway from--a deacon who is happily provided airtime and frank assistance by the very pastor of the church I walked away from, the same church that likes to occasionally perform involuntary outings and "exorcisms" of gay youth in the church.

Our church also liked to condemn Freemasons, too--actually terming them and anyone else in a "secret society" as flat out devil worshippers. (Needless to say, I was amused when I found my grandfather's Masonic guides and found the basis was the builders of the Temple on the Mount. :D)

It was also ultimately the hypocracy that turned me away--and one of Murray's other entries on the Ex-Pentecostals forums in particular hits all too close to home for me in being so similar to my own life as a teen:

nghtmrchld26
Friend
Posts: 12
(3/14/07 8:52 pm)
Reply

pentecostal insanity regarding media/entertainment

Growing up, TV, Internet/computers, video games, music, Christian contemporary music, movies and books were all extremely restricted. All those things carried this......mystique about them. They were like these mythical things imbued with incredible power straight from Satan, all run by Satanist covens operating out of Hollywood, Washington D.C.(when Bill Clinton was in office), and abortion clinics. Except there was one problem............the senior pastor and his close church friends and their families all watched TV/Cable TV, had the internet, listened to at least some non-Christian music and all listened to CCM, video games(including those satanic "T" and "M" rated ones), and all, especially the senior pastor, had "R" Movie collections. Me and some of the other non-elite church youth and members asked about these contradictions but never received any answers.

I still remember how we were told that "The Simpsons" was a very evil and Satanic TV show with the intent of causing people to leave Christianity (as if that's a bad thing). As a teenager my mother had the TV tuner removed by a TV technician so that it could only receive from the AV inputs, meaning, could only watch VHS and DVDs. I remember me and the other church youth would go over to the Senior pastor's house and ask to watch the very same movie that his 10 year old son or daughter had told us they'd watch and be told "sorry guys, that's rated 'R,' it's not Godly." Of course we'd ask "but then why do you have it?" Sometimes he'd lie, other times he'd just say "sorry...you can't."

I remember wanting to listen to Christian music and be told by my parents and other church members that we couldn't, EVEN THOUGH the senior pastor's and other church leader's families did.

Internet was treated as one of Satan's special weapons in the "end-times" to promote sex(which everyone knows is of the Devil.....) Everyone was terrified that one of us teenagers might get a glimpse of a naked body and become demon possessed. This always confused me for how can viewing what God designed be satanic at the same time? And if we "lust" are the demons able to read our thoughts and somehow know to seize upon us? Isn't it possible to see nudity without lusting somehow? Of course, the senior pastor's two oldest children, one male the other female, got someone pregnant and got pregnant; the other two younger ones were proven to be sexually active. Other church leader's children were sexually active.

Music was VERY restricted of course. We got all kinds of lectures on how Satanist covens had some kind of backmasking technology and were partnered with all the artists, including Iron Maiden, Motley Crue, Britney Spears, Madonna and N'sync. Amy Grant and Michael W. Smith were said be in on it too...even though the "elite" members of the church listened to them. Growing up, I was restricted to listening to....sermons on the radio or through tapes.

Books were VERY restricted. We were only allowed to read Christian books and forced to memorize the bible. When Harry Potter came out we were all given lectures about how "we're living in the end times and Satan is trying to capture the children and make them all witches!!!!" I knew of a few people who got harassed for letting their kids read Harry Potter.

I remember with all these different forms of media it was like I was always in Mission Impossible. We were either at church or being brainwashed in Christian home school. When we did have free time...we were either forced to pray, read the bible, do chores, or.....well nothing since we were not allowed to do anything. We were all being trained to "become the future of Christianity." "The chosen generation that is going to turn America back to God in these last days."

"The chosen generation who are going to become great prophets and pastors and evangelists and missionaries in the world."

"The chosen generation who are going to take over the world and do away with everyone else's false satanic religion and take dominion until Jesus returns!!!!!!"

Well, I got all fed up with the insanity, hypocrisy, conflicting doctrines, the and lack of absolute answers in regards to "salvation," heaven and hell and other theological issues, the child abuse, brainwashing, lies, gossip, scandals, threats and fear mongering. I got tired of always hearing "oooohh, you're saved by grace, not by works!" "Everybody loves you! Jesus loves you!" only to hear about how I was going to hell for watching "The simpsons" or could lose my salvation and could never be certain if 30 years from now I might lose it due to some odd sin and die in an accident and end up in this eternal hell preached to us day and night.

Me, I found a new Law to live by and I realized......I don't have to be abused nor submit to these liars and their lies nor do I have to be afraid of this make-believe hell and false theory of salvation which no fundamentalist Christian could ever give solid answers on.

Me and many others are waking up.
We will rise up above and against these abuses against humanity.
Men will no longer be ruled by fear and superstition, oppressed by bigotry and tyranny.
. . .
nghtmrchld26
Friend
Posts: 13
(3/16/07 7:21 am)
Reply

Re: pentecostal insanity regarding media/entertainment

Yeah Diamond girl, when I was a teenager my mother would do a pat down to check for music, DVDs and video games whenever I came out of an electronics store like Best Buy or Circuit City. I'd still obtain things anyways, it was like getting drugs from a drug dealer, EVERYTHING had to be done in secret. lol

I remember getting thrown around the room and hit while getting interrogated about whether or not I had video games and DVDs. Then there were the constant interrogations by the church pastors. @#%$ hypocrites.

I remember having to listen to everything in secret, at very low volume levels or with headphones, whether it was video games, TV, DVDs, or music/radio. Every day was like Mission Impossible, as even ONE mis-step and it could be all over.

My mother would search EVERYWHERE on a regular basis. You'd have thought I was hiding methamphetamines(which her favorite pastor, Ted Haggard was found guilty of) or something serious....but it was all over DVDs, Cds, and video games, the issue of drug abuse or the like never came up. And when she confiscated something, she'd almost never tell me. She'd always pretend like she had no idea what I was talking about, until I had her cornered with evidence....so much for "Liars go to the lake of fire."

I too remember sneaking in secular music, too--there were the claims in my church as well that "Christian heavy metal" and even a lot of "Christian contemporary" artists were "sellouts" because their stuff sounded too much like "secular music" and they dared to sell their music to secular audiences, the claims that practically all music contained "backwards masking" meant to make you worship Satan and which could be used as a "gateway for Satan to enter your life", the occasional searches--and fears of being searched for--forbidden music. (I myself had quite the collection of music carefully dubbed on casette and carefully hidden away.)

We too were explicitly trained as the "last generation", the generation that would finally "conquer America for Christ", the ones who would finally take back the nation from the "godless" and the "forces of Satan" (yes, folks, they liked to literally demonise both the DNC *and* the Log Cabin Republicans).

I also remember the having to sneak to watch non-vetted media--and the hypocracy of church members who'd happily engage in "sins" themselves.

We didn't have "Internet panics" for obvious reasons, but there WERE similar panics over computer usage in general--it was being preached that the "mark of the beast" could be computer usage, for starters.

The strange parallels with Matthew Murray's early life and my own even continue to some of the frankly bizarre things we dealt with in growing up, supposedly being "prophesied" as being "great leaders" of "Generation Joshua":

nghtmrchld26
Friend
Posts: 58
(9/7/07 9:13 pm)
Reply

"Prophetic Child"

Since I was at least age 6 my mother and her church friends have always told me about how my birth was "foretold." They say that while I was still in my mother's womb a "prophet" told my mother that I was to be, quote, "a prophet to the nations" and something along the lines of the next Billy Graham/Peter Wagner.

They said that the following verses applied to me:

Mat. 12.18 and Ezk. 36:26-28

Basically, they believe that I am their "chosen one" for "the end times" and according to the Ezekial passage they believe that I am going to go back to their church/system.

The problem right now is the fact that it appears that they are always going to pursue me throughout life(and they have said so), as I am supposedly the "chosen one." As far as I can tell they did not treat the other youth the same way.

Well, I don't want to be their "chosen one" at all. I just wish I could find some way to wake up from this nightmare.
. . .
nghtmrchld26
Friend
Posts: 60
(9/8/07 3:46 pm)
Reply

Re: "Prophetic Child"

Yeah.

And I was supposed to keep this "calling" completely secret from outsiders. Like even other christians were not supposed to know if they were not a part of the "church elite" at that church and with my mother.
. . .
ghtmrchld26
Friend
Posts: 87
(11/4/07 12:14 am)
Reply

Re: "Prophetic Child"

In this prophecy, they also believe that it was "prophesied" that I would rebel, but then RETURN to their church and that's helping to drive me crazy.

They will always be targeting me,hoping and praying I'll come back, waiting for some weakness(financial, health, or otherwise) so they can move in and re-convert me. Sometimes I fear I'll end up going back. Sometimes the depression gets so dark, and trying to live in the "real unsheltered world" gets so hard I start to think about returning back to what is at least "familiar," into a system I at least know how to behave and live in. I know there is a way out of this nightmare

It's just so f***ed up that this is the whole reason I was born.
The virgins are feeling cheated and there is an exit here,
Don't say it isn't it's true......

I went to God just to see.........
. . .
nghtmrchld26
Friend
Posts: 88
(11/4/07 1:36 pm)
Reply

Re: "Prophetic Child"

ok yeah, all these crazy memories. I can't fully remember and if i try too hard the room will start spinning and I'll go crazy. but yeah.....

Yeah I agree. No matter how hardcore cult-like these end of days dominionist pentecostal charismatic church members want to be...I'll never give in. They can make fun of me, harass me, and even break my back...but they won't break me.

I'm working on a way out here, time is going to wash away all pain.

As amazing as it may sound, he's not the only one to have gotten this sort of thing. I was so often told (from the time I was born, just about) that God had supposedly "promised" me to my mother, that my birth was foretold, that I was supposed to be a great "healer", that I'd eventually return to the fold, etc.

I also remember the fear that they would drag me kicking and screaming back in--in fact, in large part, it's because of that fear (which I deal with everyday and probably always will deal with in some manner or another) that I fight, that I educate. The thought they could drag me back into that terrifies me like few other things.

And many of us who were raised as the child soldiers of "Joel's Army" deal with this every day. We don't shoot up churches, no. We have, in general, more appropriate ways of dealing with this.

But we all pretty much deal with that baggage and that fear.

In another forum (a survivor forum for escapees from Gothard's cultic tactics), Murray also discusses the perpetual fear that every multigen walkaway--hell, every walkaway from a coercive neopente dominionist group--experiences now and again:

Thread: End Times/Left Behind Insanity (Truth or Error) (Posted on: 26 Nov : 16:56)

I remember as a child laying awake at night, terrified that I was going to "get left behind" for some childish bad thing I'd done or thought or some mistake I'd done. That was around age 8-12 and I would continue to have similar fear through my teenage years. I remember being terrified around year 2000 and always worried about this..."antichrist" who was going to somehow do all these terrible things to people who weren't "born again" AND had not lost their salvation/committed some sin. I'd lay awake at night and be terrified during the day asking over and over "what if I commit a sin, and don't have time to confess and ask God forgiveness and repent and get...left behind?!" "what if I'm in some sin that I don't even recognize and I get......left behind?" "what if I'm watching something on TV that's somehow a "sin" and Jesus returns and I get......left behind?" "what if I commit the unpardonable sin and get....left behind?"

Some days I'd even lay awake worrying that I had dropped a few cents while placing my 10% tithes into the offering plate or that I had miscalculated my tithes and....something bad would happen........

Then there was all the Eph 6:1-3 teachings which caused me to worry since no one could answer the question "what if a child rebels against a parent or pastor who is being abusive?"(no, not just a little strict or "setting some standards".........) and "why don't all these rules of non-violence and other rules apply to church leaders and parents?"

(A minor aside: the "Eph. 6:1-3 teachings" noted are a specific "scripture twisting" promoted quite heavily in Gothard circles, and in neopente dominionist circles in general. The text:

(RSV)
[1] Children, obey your parents in the Lord, for this is right.

[2] "Honor your father and mother" (this is the first commandment with a promise),
[3] "that it may be well with you and that you may live long on the earth."

(NIV--an explicitly dominionist modern translation which would likely be used in Gothard circles)

[1] Children, obey your parents in the Lord, for this is right.
[2] "Honor your father and mother"—which is the first commandment with a promise—
[3] "that it may go well with you and that you may enjoy long life on the earth."

In general, "scripture twisting" of Ephesians 6:1-3 is used to stifle any complaints of abuse by children or even any opposition of parental will; notably not included is the admonishment in Ephesians 6:4 (to advise parents not to provoke their children to wrath) nor are instructions in Ephesians 6:5-9 that would be considered highly politically incorrect nowadays (admonishing slaves to happily serve their masters and their masters to treat them well; this particular section was in fact used pre-Civil War to justify Biblical sanction for slavery). The rest of Ephesians (regarding the "armour of God") has been heavily misused in "Joel's Army" circles; sections of Ephesians 5:22 (relating to women "submitting to their husbands") have been misused in almost identical fashion, as have Ephesians 5:18 (used for justification of teetotalism *and* "Holy Laughter"-type Joel's Army movements--notably the "Brownsville Revival" which was a major conduit for popularising Joel's Army theology), other sections of Ephesians 5 (to justify the dominionist "parallel economy"); the entire book of Ephesians is in fact a message from an imprisoned Paul to the church regarding "keeping the faith" and regarding specific issues that were threatening to split the church at the time (including, notably, whether marriage should be an institution at *all*). It can be argued Ephesians was an attempt at setting up an initial church hierarchy; the latter two books have been rampantly abused by "Joel's Army" groups in particular, however.)

One of the main differences between my escape and Murray's dark fate--I, first of all, had a chance TO escape. My folks were too poor to afford dominionist private school (even with financial assistance) and dominionist "home education" was not yet popular.

This meant, in large part, that I had a support network of people from Outside--despite the best efforts of my family and the church to cut me off, I *did* have a network, at least one or two people along the way who were there to reassure me they were with me, that I was loved, that what I grew up with was not normal, that they'd stick by me in my wolf-child period of readjusting to society.

I still have that--I was able to escape, finally, dating for eight years and then marrying my husband with a week's notice to my family, after having pre-arranged the marriage with a justice of the peace to defuse any attempt by my mother to derail the proceedings.

Matthew Murray, sadly, was not so lucky. Even before he escaped, he was starting to show signs of cracking under pressure:

All that insanity along with some other pentecostal/Bill Gothard doctrines at one point made me to want to die since......"there's no point in living anyways since I'm going to be left behind or end up in hell no matter what I do"....there might have also been some....uh...self-mutilation in all that too.

In fact, Matthew Murray was downright unlucky--being born in that period where dominionist "home education" was the New Hotness, by using Bill Gothard's curriculum (recognised as pretty much the "worst of the worst" as far as dominionist home education curricula goes), and--ultimately--by his sole options for escape being a Southern Baptist college and ultimately to his involvement with Youth With A Mission.

Murray--unlike myself--never had the chance to escape. From another post on Independent Spirits:

Thread: We are the Nobodies (General) (Posted on: 31 Oct : 17:17)

So many people don't have any clue about The Nightmare we've grown up in. I mean, it's not my fault I was raised in homeschool for 12 f***ing years and that I'm not able to "socialize normally." How am I supposed to socialize and make new friends when I'm always left out of everything, and always made to be the outcast? I'm nice, I'm considerate, a lot of people tell me I'm intelligent and kind....so why the f*** must everyone think they have some right to abuse and reject me?

I hate you people for leaving me out of so many fun things. Never inviting me to all your fun parties, never inviting me to hang out. And no, don't say, 'Well, that's your fault' because it isn't. You people had my phone number, and I asked and all, but no no no no no don't let the weird kid come along, oooh f***ing nooo

Right now I'm trying to get laid and to finish up some sh**. Why the F**k can't I get any? I mean, I'm nice and considerate and all that s***, but nooooo.... it's not my fault I was sheltered my whole life and wasn't given a f***inkg clue about sex and dating.

No one really gives a f*** about me....everyone thinks they have it soooooo bad.... going to their little church, going to work, hanging out with their long list of friends that care, taking the life they have for granted......

From the frying pan into the fire

It helps to know a little bit of backgrounder regarding YWAM to understand why his involvement with them may well have broken him.

Youth With A Mission is one of the older of the neopente dominionist "parachurch" groups--however, in truth, YWAM may be considered legitimately to be one of the earlier front-groups of the Assemblies of God; its core theology is essentially Assemblies theology, its founder was an Assemblies pastor, and it was formed as essentially a means of making young "Joel's Army" members into missionaries and pastors. (And no, the "Assemblies front group" thing isn't just me; the Assemblies themselves frankly acknowledge YWAM as an affiliated group. Further evidence is revealed by YWAM's links with Paul Yonggi Cho; Cho essentially was the Assemblies of God for all intents and purposes during most of the 1990s and is still highly influential in the denomination, and essentially invented the abusive "discipling and shepherding"/"cell church" movement.)

Contrary to what has been reported in the media as a whole, Youth With A Mission is far from a mere innocuous youth ministry. Much o YWAM's focus is targeting other "people of the book"--Jewish and Moslem peoples in particular--for conversion to "Messianic Jews" and "Messianic Moslems". Multiple exit counseling groups, including Rick Ross Institute, International Cultic Studies Association, Steven Hassan's Freedom of Mind Institute, and many others have received multiple, consistent reports of coercive tactics and religious abuse within the organisation itself; in fact, YWAM is one of the most consistently reported "Bible-based" groups in regards to use of coercive tactics.

One major "danger sign" of a coercive group that YWAM displays is that of the use of front organisations--and YWAM uses those in spades. A group called "Mercy Ships" promoting itself as a "Christian alternative" to Doctors Without Borders is a YWAM frontgroup; another YWAM frontgroup is The Film Institute which produced the infamous "Path to 9/11" pseudodocumentary which falsely claimed that Bill Clinton ordered US solders not to shoot Osama bin Laden.

One site documenting both abuse and apologetics concerns with YWAM has several instances on record of coercive tactics being promoted within YWAM--in addition to the frank promotion of neopente dominionist "Moral Government" theology (in fact, YWAM is one of the longest-term and most persistent and insistent promoters of neopentecostal dominionism of any group). Apologetics Index, a site which documents spiritual abuse as well as apologetics concerns with dominionist and other coercive groups, is in fact run by a person who has personally witnessed coercive tactics within YWAM, and at least one survivor story from a person who witnessed systematic abuse within YWAM's facility in Maui has been noted.

YWAM in particular promotes two documented harmful practices--namely, abusive "discipling and shepherding" movements and a particularly extreme version of "deliverance ministry" in which it is claimed that entire areas can be possessed by "territorial spirits"--and neighbourhoods, entire cities, are "spiritually mapped" by YWAM's cadre of young God Warriors to know which areas to concentrate "spiritual warfare" on. Both tactics are known to be quite harmful indeed--"discipling and shepherding" are known to cause documented personality type changes, and "deliverance ministry" in and of itself is known to occasionally cause mental breakdowns severe enough to require hospitalisation in mental wards.

Persons who have commented on spiritual abuse within YWAM have found themselves drummed out in case after case.

And--sadly--it seems Youth With A Mission is *not* an exception in that all of these abusive tactics occasionally result in frank psychotic breakdowns. Dave Andrews, author of Christ-Anarchy (a book describing his experiences in, and eventual castaway/throwaway status from, YWAM) details:

It almost destroyed my life. What I haven't said in the book is that I became suicidal because all the significant people I turned to denounced me, no one else would speak to me, and the people who had promised to protect me ended up having psychological breakdowns. One guy was taken away to an asylum.

It was absolutely devastating. I had a pain in my chest for six months after that and every time I encountered somebody from YWAM for the next year after that I started shaking. So it was a pretty traumatic experience.

How did I deal with that? In myself it was very difficult because God and 'God language' had been used to denounce me and destroy my life so it was very hard to pray or to read the Bible because it was redolent with memories of oppression. But I still trusted that somehow God was big enough and good enough to bring me through.

(emphasis mine)

Sadly, we may have to add Matthew Murray to the tally of people who--if not driven completely insane by coercive tactics in dominionist churches--were certainly pushed over the precipice.

* * *

Murray describes his own experience at YWAM thusly on Ex-Pentecostals:

nightmrchld26
Friend
Posts: 25
(5/8/07 5:34 pm)
Reply

Re: My YWAM Horror Story

I did my DTS at YWAM Denver and Dale Lambert was my DTS school leader. I witnessed all kinds of insanity. Men would be making out with other men in the hallways, listening to all kinds of "metal music"(non-christian), smoke pot with each other while off base, there were rumors of sexual activity, both hetero and homosexual.

Not that any of those things are bad...but.......
Why was I told that I couldn't be a missionary because I wasn't "social enough"? I was told that I was "an introvert."
Everyone else got to go on their outreaches except for a few who lied about smoking (cigarettes).

The authoritarianism and hypocrisy is outrageous. The YWAM leaders would always believe that they had some special "connection to God" to be able to dictate and rule over student's lives. I'm not talking about simple rules like "no drugs allowed" but rather "we prayed and we feel like the spirit says that you're not loyal enough" or "we prayed and we feel like God says you're not to go on any outreaches." For just asking the question "why are we having a special group meeting tonight?" I was told "we prayed and we feel that you have a spirit of rebellion and if you ask or question anything any further we may have to send you home..." I was told that I could not watch an "R" movie at a movie theater even though several of the other students did...and yes, the leaders knew full well about it.

The lack of knowledge and thinking is another story. Almost none of those people ever questioned the things they were taught. They always assume it's true and in matters of contradictory teachers and teachings, they'd just believe and follow whatever everyone's emotions were feeling. I remember "holy spirit week" where they tried to get everyone "baptised in the holy spirit." I went along with it just to stop people harassing me and asking me "are you still speaking in tongues? you better not stop doing that or you might lose the holy spirit....." I now know that the Divine Spirit is within all of us no matter what our religion is. Very few actually had answers in regards to salvation or "hearing the voice of God." A lot of the "prophesy" in those groups was/is nothing more than lower psychism. Sure, they can be accurate once in a while, but even then it's on a lower level. Just because someone is psychically/spiritually sensitive doesn't mean they know how to exercise it or have a trained mind. It also does not mean that they understand spiritual principles. It only means that they are sensitive to the lower astral levels.

1 person did get sent home for making an amateur sex video of homosexual nature....6 or 7 people were involved but only that one person got sent home. I know 3 or 4 others were sent home simply for smoking a legal nicotine cigarette. A few people got "talks"(slaps on the wrist) about their openly homosexual behaviour in front of everyone. They all went on outreach. For the record, when I was told by the YWAM staff 1 week before I was to leave on outreach that they did not want me on outreach, I asked them if I had done anything wrong. I ask them to clarify their reasons and they did make it clear to me that I had not commited any "sin" or done anything wrong...except for the one time I questioned, but that that was not the reason they were sending me home. They made it clear that they were sending me home because they "prayed to God" and felt that I was "not social enough" and was "an introvert." After having left I of course found out how true all those words about "we all love and care about you very much" and "we do care about you." really were.......
I never heard back from them and when I got home....well.....back to the usual christian insanity at home and my parent's church.

The fact is, in YWAM, and christianity, it's all about the Beautiful People. No, it's not just "one group of bad christians" but rather....almost every group of christians except for a few open minded non-evangelical churches. If you're an extrovert, and popular, then yes, there is plenty of love waiting for you in christianity. If you ask questions and want to understand things and/or desire a real and deep spirituality, or if you're just not popular...well.......you are considered as one of the horrible people and are either going to be abused or kicked out by "holy spirit love filled" christians. it's all about......
the Beautiful People........

If any YWAMer believes that I'm on the wrong path and that they have "The Spiritual Truth" and answers then feel free to send me a message, I'd love to discuss these things with you and discover "truth"(If I indeed have not found it yet).

Not noted in Murray's post are indications he may have been in the initial stages of a psychotic break. Youth With A Mission only has attributed his being tossed out due to "health issues"; a CNN article notes (in discussions with co-workers of his) that he may have been in a fullblown psychotic breakdown:

Matthew Murray was kicked out of a missionary training program five years ago for strange behavior, and talked about hearing voices, according to a man who served at the center with him.

Murray was the gunman who killed two people at the Youth With A Mission center on Sunday and two others at a Colorado Springs megachurch later that day, police said. He was shot by a church security guard and died of his wounds.

Richard Werner, 34, said Monday he was a worker at the center in Arvada, Colorado, in 2002, the same time as Murray.

He said Murray was told in December 2002 he would not be allowed to join a mission trip to Bosnia. That was five days after Murray performed a pair of dark rock songs at a concert at the mission that made fellow workers "pretty scared," according to Werner.

The performance -- which included a song by rock band Linkin Park and another that had been recorded by controversial rocker Marilyn Manson -- followed months of strange behavior, Werner said.

Werner, of Balneario Camborius, Brazil, said he had a bunk near Murray's and that Murray would roll around in bed and make noises.

"He would say, 'Don't worry, I'm just talking to the voices,' " Werner said. "He'd say, 'Don't worry, Richard. You're a nice guy. The voices like you.' "

Werner said he instantly suspected Murray when he heard the news of Sunday's shootings.

"I turned to my wife and I said, 'I know who did it. It's Matthew,' " he said. "It was so obvious.

"For four months, he was sleeping right next to me. Those are the things you don't imagine, but when it happened it was so obvious."

Whether Murray was presenting with the initial signs of serious mental illness (psychotic depression or schizophrenia), was suffering a bona fide psychotic mental breakdown, or both...we will probably never know for certain. YWAM involvement, and coercion of the level that occurs in YWAM, has been known to cause psychotic breaks even in apparently otherwise mentally healthy individuals; perhaps they had a pre-existing tendency to mental illness or perhaps it was a particularly severe psychiatric injury. (This is presently something of debate even in psychiatric circles--whether sufficient psychiatric injury can cause psychotic breaks. There is some indication that the answer to this is "yes".)

At any rate, he was kicked out of YWAM; in the last few weeks of his life, he sent multiple rage-filled letters to the Arvada YWAM post headquarters.

As I'll note in the final installment tomorrow, it appears Murray never received formal therapy or exit counseling--despite the urgings of people on multiple walkaway forums; sadly, severe trust issues common across walkaways and especially throwaways/castaways may have been responsible.

It has taken me several days to be able to work myself up to a post on this, because in all too many ways it hits very much at home for me.

Most of you by now have heard of the tragic church shootings by Matthew Murray in Arvada and Colorado Springs. Many of you have even heard about how he supposedly "hated Christians".

What most of you have *not* heard yet--Matthew Murray is possibly one of the most tragic results of coercive tactics in dominionist churches. In essence, it appears that he may have essentially had a mental breakdown with semiautomatic weapons--despite the best efforts of at least two walkaway forums he was a member of to try to talk him down from the bloodshed.

The breeding of a killer begins at home

As a walkaway and survivor of much of the stuff Matthew Murray experienced, every day I am thankful for the chance I had to see "the outside world"--I grew up just before dominionist "home education" really caught on, for instance. Had correspondence schools been in vogue in the 70's and 80s, there is a very real chance I may not have ever escaped.

Compared to my own experiences, it's probably not an exaggeration to state Matthew Murray never had a chance. :(

From what we know from various sources, Matthew Murray was apparently not a member of New Life Church, but per media sources was a member of Faith Bible Chapel in Arvada; reportedly the church has an extremely heavy emphasis on Christian Zionism and especially in targeting Jewish people for conversion, and also seems to have been heavily involved in dominionist politics as well. Faith Bible Chapel appears to be a neopentecostal church whose affiliation is not broadcast on its website, and it uses quite a lot of "Joel's Army" buzzwords in its website; based on the church's history page, it seems to be a daughter of Bethel Biblical, a neopente church in the area that is likewise heavily into conversion of Jewish people. Both are likely "stealth Assemblies" congregations; "Faith Bible Chapel" seems to be a very popular and common name for Assemblies churches in general, and there are indications that the Dream Center of Denver, CO is run by Faith Bible Chapel ("Dream Center" is a chain of "faith based rehabs" run by the Western Conference of the Assemblies of God, and any linkages between churches and "Dream Centers" are in fact dead giveaways these are in fact Assemblies-affiliated).

Not only this, but apparently the shooter was largely homeschooled and the state of Colorado has no educational records of him past the third grade. And according to a recent Associated Press article, his parents couldn't have picked a more coercive curriculum:

Most information about Murray has become known in recent days through ranting Internet posts that appear to be the shooter's words. On one, a poster called Chrstnghtmr complained of not being able to "socialize normally" after being home schooled and described being an outcast who was always left out of everything.

One posting obtained by the AP was to a site called Independent Spirits, a gathering place for those affected by a strict Christian home schooling curriculum.

The author, again going by the handle Chrstnghtmr, describes going with his mother to a conference at New Life. The poster said he "got into a debate" with two prayer team staff members, who monitored him, then tracked down his mother and "told her a story that went something along the lines of I 'wasn't walking with the lord and could be planning violence.'"
. . .
Other posts also complain of an overbearing mother. At one point, the author said his mother patted him down for CDs, video games and DVDs whenever he returned from an electronics store. In another post, the author lambasts Bill Gothard, a Christian evangelist who developed a strict Bible-based home school curriculum.

Kevin Swanson, executive director of the Christian Home Educators of Colorado, of which the Murrays were members, said just 1 percent or 2 percent of the group's 16,000 families use the curriculum described in the posts.

As it is, Independent Spirits is a survivor forum for those who grew up in the "Gothard Cult" (and it is accurate to describe it as a bona fide cult); it is one of at least two walkaway forums Murray is known to have been a member of.

And yes, I've written about Gothard before. Extensively. Not only has he been a major force in the dominionist "Bible boot camp" industry, he also has promoted some fairly extreme types of religiously motivated child abuse in the context of a general coercive system. How coercive? This article gives an overview of what Matthew Murray likely experienced:

Gothard has been accused by fellow Christians of everything from misinterpreting the Bible to ignoring spousal abuse to being a borderline cult leader. According to materials Gothard has published, his more radical ideas come from his belief in a "chain of command," which holds that authority figures -- from preachers to politicians to middle managers -- are put in their elevated positions by God. Mess with your boss, you're messing with Christ. Women are taught to be submissive and obedient to their husbands. He teaches his followers that political leaders are ordained by God and therefore to be obeyed. Gothard doesn't focus on the Ten Commandments -- he teaches his seven "universal, nonoptional Principles of Life," and he extends those principles to what food to eat and what clothes to wear. Breaking any of Gothard's principles leads to the highway to Hell, quite literally. Another path to Satan is the drums. The "backbeat" common in rock music is evil, according to his teachings, as are chords played in the minor key, which is a subversion of God's harmony.

Follow the rules, go to Heaven. Break them, and Satan will get a foothold on your soul.

Gothard disdains "knowledge," which he says only "puffs up a man," in favor of the more abstract "wisdom." "The reasoning of man will bring destruction," he tells people during seminars. To guard his followers from the evils of public schools, Gothard sells his own brand of Bible-based home-schooling. He also has his own unaccredited law school and college where his unique brand of Christianity is taught.
. . .
Gothard teaches in his seminars that obedience brings godliness. Authority figures -- the father, the politician, the minister, and the boss -- are to be obeyed as if Christ were giving the orders. Gothard's ideas of family life are rigid, as wives are taught to be submissive and men are encouraged to be the absolute head of the household. Quotes from the Bible are used as backup to his assertions. The biblical justification for always being subservient to the boss comes from 1 Peter 2:18: "Servants, be subject to your masters with all fear."

Authority figures, according to Gothard, are on a higher spiritual plain than ordinary folk, and obeying them will help one get closer to God. He tells his followers that they are to obey everything, except orders to do "evil." If your boss is dead wrong, Gothard says it's OK to make a "Godly appeal" to him, but if the appeal is refused, the worker must live with it.

"Suppose Jesus Christ Himself was the manager of that store," Gothard asks a teen in one of the stories he tells. "Would that make a difference in the quality of your work?"

"It sure would!" answers the teenager.
"Do you realize that God expects you to consider that you are actually working for Jesus Christ on your job?"

As far as "wrathful" parents, Gothard teaches that they serve to develop character in children: "God even works through the wrath of parents to reveal character deficiencies in the son or daughter to develop additional character strengths or to reflect healing."
. . .
Baptist pastor G. Richard Fisher wrote in a published article called "The Cultic Leanings of Bill Gothard's Teachings" that Gothard has a habit of "legislating, directing, and regulating just about every phase of life." Some of Gothard's rules that Fisher, a former enthusiastic follower of Gothard, and others have noted:

*Married couples are never to divorce for any reason, including adultery.

*Adult children are told not to leave home or get married without parental consent.

*Married couples must abstain from sex during the following times: during the wife's menstrual cycle; seven days after the cycle; 40 days after the birth of a son; 80 days after the birth of a daughter; and the evening prior to worship. Gothard claims that periodic abstinence will help produce healthier children, can cure infections, and decrease "the danger of genetic abnormalities."

*Listening to rock music, even Christian rock, is forbidden.

*Borrowing money or buying on credit is forbidden.

*Married women aren't to work outside the home.

Gothard even has rules on selecting makeup, preparing shopping lists, planning meals, picking dental plans, and choosing hairstyles, clothes, and vacation spots. Followers have said in published reports that he bans televisions in homes that buy his home-schooling program and that his ministry denounces almost every book but the Bible.

Adopted children, Gothard teaches, carry the sins of their biological parents with them. According to Fisher, Gothard wrote a letter to his followers in 1986 warning them of the evils of Cabbage Patch Dolls, which were very popular then. The dolls, which are "adopted" by their buyers in a written contract, caused strange, destructive behavior, according to the letter.

"It gets very, very weird," Fisher says. "And these people who follow him are frightened to death that they might break one of his rules."

In other words, Gothard's basic model of interaction with other people is a particularly extreme version of the highly coercive "cell church" and "discipling and shepherding" model in Assemblies of God and "Assemblies daughter" churches--a tactic that is known to cause documentable changes in personality type, a sign of potentially grave harm.

In fact, Gothard rather explicitly based his models of "shepherding" off an originator of the "cell church" model, Watchmen Nee (whose protege Witness Lee created one of the most abusive "cell church" groups known):

One of the authors Gothard listed in the bibliography of his thesis was the popular Keswick teacher, Watchman Nee. Nee was the main leader of China's Little Flock movement which, depending on whose statistics you believe, may have been the largest Christian denomination in China. It continued to grow even after the Communist takeover.

Like all Keswick teaching, Nee's theology was highly mystical, and he departed from traditional Protestantism in one key area: spiritual authority.

During the Protestant Reformation a great deal of blood was spilled over the question of whether God had delegated His sovereign authority to human beings. The Reformers said, "No," and many of them paid for it with their lives. Oblivious to this lesson from church history, Nee imported Confucianist ideas about human authority into Christianity. After Nee's death his follower, Witness Lee, used this doctrine to create a highly authoritarian denominational hierarchy, with himself at the top.

(Of note, Witness Lee was himself influential on the neopentecostal "cell church" movement as a whole.)

Gothard is, quite possibly, the earliest documented promoter of the more extreme forms of religiously motivated child abuse (in a cultic context). An article dating back from 1983 notes:

The quasi-religious teaching which reinforces Christian child abuse is the hierarchy of power relationships in families. One of its most famous contemporary proponents is Bill Gothard, developer of the Basic Youth Conflict Seminars. Gothard teaches that women and children should submit to the authority of the father. Ironically, he offers as an image of appropriate parental roles the father as hammer and the mother as chisel. The child is to be shaped by parental tools. That this imbalance of power and perpetuation of male supremacy in the family is part of the problem is undeniable. An imbalance of power creates the conditions for abuse of power and authority which can lead to the abuse and exploitation of children.

Gothard is also one of the major promoters of the highly abusive "deliverance ministry" tactics which use methods of coercion that are almost identical to those used in Scientology. And the Associated Press article notes that Matthew Murray may have in fact been subjected to "deliverance" services:

Chrstnghtmr writes that at age 17, after an attempt at going "all out for Jesus," he plunged into a "dark suicidal depression" because he somehow couldn't live up to the rules. He wrote he felt he was "failing God." Chrstnghtmr describes his parents putting him on two antidepressants after he shared his feelings.

None of it helped, he wrote. "Everyone prayed, they laid hands on me, spoke in tongues over me, I sought out every kind of spiritual help I knew of in charismatic christianity," the post said.

This is the same Bill Gothard, of note, who runs a paramilitary training camp for the "Joshua Generation" which recently got props from the commander of the Air Force division responsible for SIGINT.

At least one Christian homeschooling site rather explicitly warns against Gothard:

As a homeschool leader, you may have heard of Bill Gothard, who is one of the most popular teachers in the homeschooling movement. He has had a vast influence on how homeschooling families order their lives, through his ministry, the Institute in Basic Life Principles, and his homeschooling arm, ATIA (Advanced Training Institute of America). He encourages parents to keep their families safe, and his teaching through his seminars, books, and homeschooling curriculum is very appealing, because parents very much want their children to be safe. These parents are wonderfully devoted Christians and many are homeschooling parents. They have the best interests of their children at heart.

Gothard is a Christian teacher who believes God has promised physical safety as well as spiritual safety to those who follow his rulebook for life. The most important basis for attaining this safety, according to Gothard, is for a homeschool family to come under the "umbrella of protection." This concept of a protective umbrella arises from Gothard's belief about authority in a Christian's life, combined with his belief in God's promise of safety for those who follow certain procedures.

"...according to Gothard, all human relationships are governed by a chain of command similar to that in the military. It is only when we find our place in God's chain of command and get under our proper authority that God will be able to protect us. Once we get under proper authority and implement the proper amount and types of mechanical steps and principles that Gothard prescribes, we ensure God's blessing in our life and family."1

In Gothard's teaching, as long as everyone follows all the rules Gothard teaches, tragedies like what happened to Job just won't happen. It's like a contract with God. "I do this, God, and you'll do that in return."

That sounds wonderful doesn't it? I would like to have an umbrella of protection against pain and suffering in this world, wouldn't you? How do we get that umbrella? How much does it cost? Is that umbrella really from God?

Remember what I said earlier about people who long to take away the freedom of homeschooling in order to protect the safety of children from child abuse? Such people weigh safety on the scale more heavily than freedom.

There really are unfortunate cases of people who are abusing children using the cover of "homeschooling" – people who are not true homeschoolers. Some believe we could stop all harm to all children at the hands of their families if we established a big enough hedge – a big enough fence. That fence is called a police state. Many millions of people have lived in such police states under totalitarian regimes. The problem with that idea is that the solution is far more severe in its consequences than the problem ever was.

(Footnotes: 1) Don Veinot, Joy Veinot and Ron Henzel, A Matter of Basic Principles: Bill Gothard and the Christian Life, Midwest Christian Outreach, Inc., Lombard, Ill. 2003 p. 251-252.)

Another group critical of Gothard's teachings has noted that extreme religious coercion is part of the plan with the Gothard homeschool curriculum, and practically makes BJU and A-Beka sound like the works of Stephen Hawking in comparison:

To enroll in Gothard's ATI home schooling program, parents and enrolling children are required to complete the Basic and Advanced IBLP Seminars (and pay the yearly $675 per family tuition fee). Families must agree to many guidelines in order to be accepted into the school and continue in it. At the yearly ATI conference, the dress code is nearly a uniform consisting of a white shirt and navy blue pants or skirt. They must follow a dress code while they are homeschooling, and the curriculum itself describes in detail what is required for proper and modest dress and grooming. Beards are not allowed, but an exception is granted to those who have one because of religious conviction. Once in ATI, a family is sent the curriculum on a regular basis. The curriculum consists of 52 Wisdom Booklets, which provide nearly all that is required to complete the education. These booklets make a stack just over a foot high. When a family has completed all the booklets, they start again from the beginning. The curriculum is intended to be used for all ages simultaneously -- K-12.

Gothard claims that "As students explore information, it passes (consciously or unconsciously) through a grid of presuppositions in their minds. After the information is evaluated by this 'grid,' it is acted upon." (Emphasis added.) One of the goals of the training is "To identify each son and daughter's purpose in life and establish direction for their training." One of the "Tools" to accomplish this is a "Life Purpose Appraisal," which sounds much like personality testing! (Source: IBLP Internet web site, 8/97.)

(Yes, you're reading this right. The Gothard "curriculum" is essentially a dominionist version of the "Little Red Book" infamous in Maoist China or the books promoted in the personality cults of the Kim family in North Korea or Saparmurat Niyazov in Turkmenistan.)

We only know this, of note, because of homeschooling moms (who were recruited into Gothard's cult and later walked away) and evangelical Christian groups critical of dominionism--and the walkaways who were raised using Gothard curriculum--speaking out: Gothard actively tries to suppress any outside publication of his materials in methods reminiscent of Scientology's efforts to squelch the Fishman Affidavit which contains OT VII.

A Denver Post article also notes the abusiveness of the curriculum in ATI--so extreme that even the state's primary HSLDA affiliate--a dominionist home education group itself--tells people to avoid it like the plague:

The ultra-religious home-school curriculum that Matthew Murray ranted about in Web postings before he opened fire at two Christian centers forbids dating, rock music and "wrong clothes." It advises young men and women to live at home until their parents release them and counsels parents to choose marriage partners for their offspring.

That kind of strict, rule-driven home-schooling is not the norm and, if used without considering students' individual needs, is not recommended by many educators, according to Kevin Swanson, executive director of the 15,000-family-strong Christian Home Educators of Colorado.

"I know just a few folks who use this curriculum," Swanson said. "It is more rule heavy."
. . .
The curriculum Murray decried in his postings was developed by evangelist Bill Gothard as part of The Institute in Basic Life Principles. The Bible-based curriculum is contained in "Wisdom Booklets" — 3,000 pages of instruction that "views academic subjects through the grid of Scripture," according to the institute's website.
. . .
Gothard's teachings have been criticized by other conservative Christians who allege he has deviated from true Bible teaching and that his stand against rock music — even Christian rock — suspicion of modern medicine, belief in spiritual roots of disease, and opposition to women working outside the home and "evil" toys are wrong. Gothard warned followers in a 1986 letter that Cabbage Patch dolls can cause "strange, destructive behavior."

It can, in fact, be quite legitimately argued that Gothard's curriculum has but one primary purpose in mind--getting people into his own post-secondary education and "Joel's Army" groups and turning out multiple generations of people in his cult.

Of note, Gothard's teachings also happen to be very popular in Assemblies circles--especially in the "Stealth Assemblies" churches of the type that Matthew Murray was apparently raised in.

Sadly, it seems that Murray was in fact subjected to the very sorts of religiously motivated child abuse promoted by Gothard--abuse that could well have been the kindling to start the flame of Murray's fatal rage:

Murray mentions Gothard by name in a later post. "Me, I remember the beatings and the fighting and yelling and insane rules and all the Bill Gothard (expletive) and then trancing out . (expletive) . I'm still tranced out."

In a bit of irony, the extreme isolation of the Gothard program--in which even "Christian contemporary" music is banned, children are regimented almost military-style in their own homes, TV and radio and practically all media outside of Gothard's own teachings are prohibited--was subverted in part by the very method used to deliver the "schooling". Gothard runs an Internet correspondence school, and it is likely through this Internet connection that Murray first discovered walkaway forums--forums which were, likely, his sole connection to the outside world:

A search-warrant affidavit for the Murrays' home said he had been using a computer "to attend a home-based computer school" for three to five hours daily for the past two years.

And no, I'm not exaggerating when I note that this was his sole way of reaching out to the outside world.

In an increasing trend in dominionist homes--as if the substandard education in the Gothard curriculum (which is unaccredited) wasn't enough to limit his educational choices, it seems Murray's parents laid down the law that the only acceptable post-grammar-school path was the missionary path:

On another Web posting, a person believed to be Murray said that his post-graduation options were limited to missionary work or attending Oral Roberts University, the flagship university of charismatic Christianity. A fast-growing subset of evangelical Christians, charismatics and Pentecostals believe the Holy Spirit continues to show signs and wonders in the world, including speaking in tongues, prophesy and miraculous healings.

Murray ended up enrolled in "disciple training school," a sort of Missionary 101 program run by Youth With a Mission, one of the world's largest evangelical Christian mission groups.

(And yes, it is very common anymore that college is *not* an escape for these kids--increasingly, the goal is to keep them isolated until they are married.)

An interview with Gothard indicates that the Murray family stopped using the Gothard curricula in 2003--roughly about the same time that Murray would take the next step on a path which would ultimately become fatal.

2003--as we'll note tomorrow--is the year in which Matthew Murray joined Youth With A Mission: a ministry with a long history of abuse and quite possibly the point in where Murray began to have the psychotic breakdown that would end in the tragic deaths of no less than six people on a Colorado afternoon.