Caution: Objects in anecdotes may be less glorious than they appear.
A recurring question in the comments sections of Recovering Grace and for former ATI (Advanced Training Institute) students who share their stories elsewhere, is how and why loving parents would stay in such a program. Two explanations have been explored on this site, and I’d like to posit and explore a third.
The first explanation: What parents were told in their conference sessions was not as extreme as what apprenticeship students were told in their conference sessions and at ATI training centers. It has only been in the past few months that I have realized my own parents were not getting many of the teachings or were subject to much of the moral pressure that I was and thus naturally thought I was overreacting to the type of milder material designed for parents that they were seeing.
The second explanation: Parents with established adult identities have an easier time sorting through which teachings to accept and reject than do young people, who are being pressured to accept the entirety of IBLP (Institute in Basic Life Principles) teachings while studying and serving in ATI residential environments.
The third explanation: Bill Gothard led parents to believe, through coded language and a relentless stream of anecdotes, that if they made certain efforts and sacrifices, their children would eventually meet the parents’ emotional needs for intimacy, honor, respect, a sense of control over their own lives, and public admiration for their children’s character and achievements.
Gothard seeded these promises in a way that convinced parents that not only could they have these emotional needs met without guilt, but that this was the righteous way of living. I don’t fault parents for having emotional needs, and don’t fault them for believing for a while that they could have those needs met as part of a divinely prescribed lifestyle. I do fault Bill for using this psychological tool to build his own kingdom.
A single example is ATI conflation of parts of the father/daughter and husband/wife relationships, wherein daughters are advised that they must achieve complete submission and adequate closeness to their fathers in order to have hope of a later successful marriage. I first heard this teaching from a then IBLP board member and his wife at a young ladies’ meeting, and my father came home from a father’s conference with a mandate to obtain his daughter’s heart as the “man in her life until she marries.” This teaching prescribes an emotional intimacy that is natural and mutually desired in some father/daughter relationships, but which many daughters do not want with less emotionally healthy fathers… Especially since we were told that intimacy is supposed to manifest as regular confession of secrets or sins to dad, and that any individual identity should be rooted in his goals. The threat seemed to be that if young women couldn’t work for and achieve emotional intimacy with and complete submission to our fathers, we would never earn the possibility of romantic intimacy as adults. (Let’s not get into how this father/husband conflation infantilizes married adult women into perpetual adolescence.)
When I first heard this teaching at the age of sixteen, I spoke to the speaker and his wife soon after their talks and asked for clarity on the distinction between father/daughter and husband/wife relationships, as I was sure I had misunderstood. I was told that there was no real difference aside from the physical relationship and the mother’s authority over children, and that my relationship with my father was training for marriage. Fortunately, my own father never professed to embrace the idea to this extreme, but nonetheless the idea was impressed upon him as something he should be cultivating, was to expect from me, and was remiss to not adequately pursue.
In this and several other ways, the Gothard version of the parent-centric courtship system holds young adults hostage to meeting their parents’ emotional needs before being allowed to start their adult lives or to experience romantic emotional intimacy–or rather before being allowed to experience it “legitimately” without incurring familial rejection and the threat of eventual marital catastrophe. The well-meaning parents, only human, are taught to almost always heed their natural instincts to hold on to their maturing offspring in the same way one would hold on to young children. An interesting exception is that while parental cautions are regarded as divine direction in almost all other areas such as romance, higher education, employment, and leaving home, parents who are reluctant to allow their sons and daughters to leave home to work for the Institute are advised to lay those cautions aside.
For healthy parents, this extreme grant of authority to their emotions is not a problem since they don’t take it seriously. They look to their own spouse, friendships, and faith to meet their emotional needs. These parents don’t abuse the carte blanche authority the system grants their feelings, not because of any checks built into the system, but because they don’t look to their children to fill their emotional hunger. It is a rare individual, though, who is so emotionally mature as to leave all that emotional right-of-way unused.
But for parents who have bought into the system of fulfillment and purpose through successfully-reared and adoring adult children, the parent-centric structure creates a divinely-sanctioned–even mandated–opportunity to prevent an adult child from moving on to the next stage of life until the child has achieved and finished, to put it bluntly, making the parents feel good about themselves. The godly seed must be germinated, cultivated, and pruned into precisely the right range or shape, or the gardener has failed. The adult child can either conform to the exact type of life and relationship the parents want, or sacrifice the relationship altogether.
The standards of what constitutes an adequately godly and honoring adult child are so narrow, they are rarely met to the parents’ emotional satisfaction, leaving the parent and adult son or daughter needlessly alienated from each other as failures. The parents may regard themselves as the failures, their adult offspring as the failures, or both–but failure is the uniting theme. The parents did not get the emotional payoff they felt they were promised. Their kids never made them proud on that Knoxville stage, or they appeared on that stage but then continued to change. Little do these parents realize how many of those showcased families on stage at Knoxville have either left this system or now feel the same failure.
To outright declare: “Your children should not, in good conscience, be able to pursue work, education, marriage, or even moving out of their childhood bedrooms until they have finished satisfying your emotional need for obedience, closeness, and significance; Every whim and pull of emotion you feel about their choices and character is not only legitimate but is divine insight,” would sound obviously psychopathic and narcissistic if laid out so baldly, and most parents would recoil at that kind of language. Instead the promise was delivered piece-by-piece in individual anecdotes, and a lot of parents believed (and still DO believe) that if they paid the right effort into the system, they were sure to receive this elusive happiness.
WOW. So well-stated. This is my parents....loving and well-intentioned, and convinced that my differences in opinion and independence somehow meant they failed as Godly parents. It's sad.
Well said! There is masterful mind control exerted through these anecdotes. You don't even realize what you are being taught until the expectations don't come true.
Yes, yes, yes, yes, and yes.
Reminds me of the Chinese torture "Death by a Thousand Cuts". Speaking as a former ATI parent with numerous children at various training centers including the ultimate ("Headquarters")I can identify with what the author is saying. (We were a 2nd Year Family... not quite as prestigious as the original 102 Mayflower families, but we tried harder.) We are still hearing bits and pieces of what went on and what they were taught without our knowledge. Fortunately, we have all since "escaped" and we have good relationships with our children who are all doing well, but not without some collateral damage along the way. Not every family has been so fortunate.
I wonder if this article will anger some parents. I would be interested to hear feedback from former ATI parents on this. All I can say is, as the daughter expected to meet the needs of one very needy parent, this mirrors my experience to a "T".
As a side note, I had a nonexistent relationship with my father. He was just never very interested in me. I felt lonely, and was constantly reminded by my mother that this bode very poorly for any hope of me having a good marriage. I always thought it was my fault and that somehow I should "fix" the relationship, but I didn't know how. I couldn't make him spend time with me or pay attention to me. I'm glad to now know, my mother was wrong. I am happily married to my soulmate of the last 8 years :)
Very good point Hannah! I also had a very rough relationship with my own dad until about 7 years ago when we began restoring it and rebuilding it. And yet I have been happily married for 11 years now.
OH SO TRUE!!!!!!!!! Thank you for this article!
Wow!!! What a perfect way to describe the program! It was all about the emotional needs of the parents and they didn't even know it most of the time. So sad!!! They are to blame for a great many breaches between parents and their children.
I am a former ATI parent responding to "Hannah's" request for feedback. I certainly didn't respond in anger but in sorrow in what has happened to some of these families. We left 7 years ago and I don't remember this teaching. Yet, I can see how some parents could get this idea. I can remember thinking that all the incredible work that goes into raising 7 children would be rewarded by seeing them serving the Lord. Some people have a very narrow view of what that means. After 16 years my husband and I decided it was time to leave after disappointing apprenticeship experiences. I do not know how parents coul measure whether children have met their emotional needs enough to leave. This is a ridiculous teaching. We are raising individuals who should make their own choices and enjoy life in Jesus. I pray that God brings much healing between family members and I am very grateful for this site.
Lynn, I would say that most likely you and your husband had a more balanced approach to ATI, and so much the better for you and your family! This article describes my family situation very well. It really was the perfect crutch for my parents, both of whom were very wounded individuals when entering ATI, and they fell for it, hard. I ache for them, to spend so much of their life pursuing something that ultimately tore the family apart. I don't think God uses formulas, and sometimes I still forget that.
In my foo, it was not so much about attaining a certain level of needs met, as simply not being released into adulthood, in part because, emotionally speaking, one parent "needed" me and could not let go. If that makes sense. Thank you for sharing.
Wendy as a parent I can understand your idea of what the program taught. Yet in reality it wasn't centered around the parents either. It must have been to glorify the program. When I was taking care of little children, teaching older kids, pregnant, sick, planning dinner and a thousand other things, my own emotional needs were the last thing on my mind. This was the most difficult and the sweetest time in my life. I say this with the greatest concern and kindness only to let you know we parents were hurt as well.
I do think your theory about these things glorifying the program is spot on, because in hindsight (I've been out of ATI for about 14 years now) I've seen ATI's collateral damage in a number of my friends and their families and some in my own life and family as well, yet all the while, one newsletter after the next about the latest Training Center acquired, the latest program being launched, etc.
I DO think that (subconsciously) the promise of your young people becoming bright/shining/stellar and having super-tight/harmonious families (which by implication = successful parenting in ATI) was a hook used to lure parents into the ATI program. Perhaps my circle of friends is small, but for most of them, that certainly wasn't case . . . especially if you were able to see beyond the veneer of the image good ATI families were supposed to project.
I remember that at our Law School graduation (I was in the first class), Mr. Gothard explicitly said that his desire for us was that we serve the institution. It was at that point that I first felt that it really was all about his little empire.
I was at that same graduation. I was excited because I felt like becoming a lawyer, I'd be free to move forward with life apart from ATI.
When he said that, my heart sank because I thought "He really isn't ever going to let us go, is he?" I spent the week that followed braced for my parents to be excited about Bill's "vision" and feeling like I had no choice other than to comply with their wishes because they were my authority and if they felt it, God must be speaking that through them.
Thankfully they didn't bring it up. In hindsight, it seems silly, because at the time I was 25 years old, engaged to be married, and had a decent job that could have supported me. But because of the teachings of IBLP, I still lived at home. And I really thought God would punish me if I chose to do something other than what my parents wanted. Talk about bondage!
These teachings are breeding ground for what is called "emotional incest."
I totally agree with #1. I remember several years back in the Indy training conference when Gothard separated all the 12-17 year olds and had them all "vow" never to marry a person who had been divorced. I doubt a 12-year-old could truly understand that and I seriously doubt Bill Gothard ever would have done it in front of their parents.
Ryanr, thanks for commenting on my comment.
I can agree with the "emotional incest" analysis. I was thankfully spared the experience of being an ATI child but I was formerly an Amish Mennonite convert. The Mennonite system is very similar to Gothards teachings and they use some of his materials. But they also (in my opinion) are very repressive of their women and use their teaching on 1 Cor. 11 to subject the women and girls to men's "authority) to the extreme that most Christian women who don't wear a head covering are assumed to be false or "worldly" Christians. I understand all to well now how immature and emotionally unstable men are given authoritarian style control. Emotional incest is a very apt description of the possible outcome of this unbiblical teaching.
I also agree that everything was geared to glorify the program (or Mr. G). The parents worked very hard, but did not often get the things they were promised. The young people worked very hard, and didn't often get what they were promised either. Yet, there was never any hint of acknowledgment that the program itself might be faulty.
I don't think the system was designed to teach our parents that we were to meet their emotional needs. I think it was the logical consequence of the authority teaching. If a parent had a "check" (which meant that something made them worry, fear or just not feel comfortable) then the young person simply could not do it. This could be something really small, like going shopping at a certain store or something big like marriage, college or going to the missionfield. But if your desired action concerned your parent in any way, it was not the will of God. This put young people in a lot of bondage and made the son or daughter responsible for their parents' fears, worries and comfort. I wonder now why we fell for living to please others when Scripture clearly says that if we live to please people, we aren't the servants of Christ. (See Gal. 1:10)
I identified with what you said here about the authority principle making the son or daughter responsible for their parents' worries and fears! When I finally realized honoring my dad didn't mean living according to his fears and worries a huge burden lifted off of me! I was finally able to tell him, "No, it's okay if I'm out after dark. I will be home at such and such a time and I will be safe and aware of my surroundings. And, no, I do not need you to drop me off and pick me up from the event." Amazingly enough when I replied calmly and firmly this way with my dad he had no response left and I peacefully went my way. Poor guy though, when I was home a little bit later than I'd thought one night he got worried and went driving along the road he knew I'd be traveling to make sure I wasn't broken down somewhere. When I got home, he was gone and mother told me the story. Thankfully though both my mom and I learned to show love without allowing his worries and fears to control us. :) And he has gradually learned to let go and trust me to God's hands more and more. My emotions were sometimes intense in the process, as I had to talk reason into myself that it was okay to do what I was doing and to say "no" to my dad. It really helped our relationship though when I didn't view saying "no" to him as rebelling against him. My whole way of saying no changed when I realized I didn't have to convince him to agree with me or to approve of what I was doing. It was revolutionary for me!
"The standards of what constitutes an adequately godly and honoring adult child are so narrow, they are rarely met to the parents’ emotional satisfaction, leaving the parent and adult son or daughter needlessly alienated from each other as failures. The parents may regard themselves as the failures, their adult offspring as the failures, or both–but failure is the uniting theme."
Yes!
Fear of failure, avoiding failure, seeking out failure, and affirming failure...
The Perfect Formula for wrecking relationships, and this is pushed in so many ways through IBLP/ATI teachings and practice. =(
it sounds like psychological and spiritual incest to me that is the only way I can view it
I don't mean to go all Freudian but seeing as Gothard never married and lived with his mother most of his life does anyone think He may have had mummy issues? I mean that he never separated from his mother emotionally so somehow his own distorted sense of what is a healthy relationship became the model for his whole approach in IBLP and ATI.
Note I don't agree with Freud on just about everything he said as it was subjective analysis... Bill Gothard's whole system doesn't seem to be too far removed from Freud's
I actually think it's more likely he had father issues, just from my own observations.
Excellent article!
I hope it will open the eyes of those parents who believe the lie that they are failures because their grown children made their own decisions as adults. And bring healing to families where relationships have been damaged by ungodly expectations promoted by one man.
amen Tangent
As a child of the ‘60s and ‘70s, witnessing the explosion of families all around me, drugs, immorality . . . rebellion . . . it made a person afraid to be a parent, let alone have a lot of kids. Every child you had seemed a ticking time bomb, as it were, especially if you felt inadequate to be a parent.
Mr. Gothard gave myself and a lot of my fellow ATI families hope that it didn’t have to be so. I remember a dear elderly black gentleman who was linked to the ministry for a time (with the “Quaker” type hat . . . I remember him in 1994) . . . I remember him speaking of the discouragement of, late in life, seeing the culture, the families he cared for collapsing. With IBLP, he suddenly had great hope for the future, speaking with Simeon, “Now lettest Thou Thy servant depart in peace”.
I would will lay my life down for the possibility of hope like that, hope of children that would all grow up strong and godly, in love with Jesus, their siblings, and – yes – their parents. Who in the world would want to invest the blood, sweat and tears otherwise?
Please don’t be hard on your parents . . . they may not be that much different than you are. Now you get to grapple with the same insecurities and fears as you launch your own families.
[and I want to know how “Administrator” made those cool blue letters in the article]
Alfred, I grew up in the 80's. I'm still scared to raise chidren. We are working on #4.
Mr. Gothard gave me hope, too. He gave me hope that if I just followed the formula, my kids wouldn't go through x,y,z. But I'm realizing now that it was false hope and somewhat idolatrous. It was hope that ensured my kids would miss normal, age appropriate development. It was hope that said that whatever was important to me would be important to them. It was hope that was based on a system, a formula.
Now, Jesus gives me hope for my children. I don't care if they follow my homeschool methods with their kids. I don't care if they celebrate the same holidays that we do. I trust that Jesus will draw them to Himself and that is plenty for me. But, as a grown x-ati student with lots of friends in the same ship, I can say that in many ATI families, grown children loving Jesus isn't enough. And that alone is reason to be very, very saddened by the outcome of that method.
Good thoughts, Alfred. My intention in writing this article was not to vilify ATI parents (or parents in other conservative Evangelical homeschooling subcultures), but to posit that they've been sold a bill of goods. Actually, worse, they've been sold a series of attractive advertisements without even the benefit of the formal promise of goods. Bill presents a parade of uniformly glowing sales testimonials, with negative testimonials confined to cautionary tales about those who failed to follow the ATI program and it's many specific mandates. In Bill's anecdotes there is no scenario in which his instructions do not work; the only failure can be in those who fail to heed his instructions, or carry them out the wrong way.
I have seen many examples of ATI attracting abusive parents with it's essentially idolatrous elevation of parental authority (except when that authority conflicts with Bill's authority), but that was not my personal experience. My parents were not abusive; they were sold an emotional fantasy. That fantasy was presented with enough requirements of work and sacrifice on parents' part that it seemed plausible for them to get such fantastic returns.
Going back to the three explanations at the beginning of the article: My parents did not experience the extreme pressure and emotional conditioning laid on me as an ATI apprenticeship student (and later staff member), and as adults they did not experience in the same way I did the distressing dissonance of trying to responsibly negotiate between the endless "non-optional" moral mandates from ATI and input from other trusted adults (including my own parents) while being told by ATI authorities that extra-IBLP influences invited moral compromise. Certainly my parents experienced many life stresses and pressures, but at that time they did not see or understand the nature of the emotional manipulation and spiritual abuse I experienced while participating in ATI opportunities.
They did, however, receive as many promises as I did that if our family worked hard enough in love, we would achieve the sort of success and parent/child relationships we heard about in all those glowing stories. My realizing that my parents did not understand the internal affect ATI was having on me in the way I thought they must have understood, and that they too were sold a fantasy, is one of the things putting us on the road to healing.
I'm not vilifying ATI parents, I'm humanizing their actions in the same way I want my actions and offenses when I was in ATI to be humanized. I was doing what I thought was right and necessary, as were my parents and most other ATI parents. The parents were as deceived as were the students, just in different ways.
ATI's extreme authority teachings do emotional violence not only to those under authority, but those who are burdened with such extreme versions of authority.
This is in response to both Alfred and Lynn above. While I understand the desire of a parent to have my children turn out well (I have my own kids), your responses show both the reason that IBLP is such a dangerous attraction, and also the root problem that has caused so much unnecessary estrangement between parents and children.
From Lynn: "I can remember thinking that all the incredible work that goes into raising 7 children would be rewarded by seeing them serving the Lord."
and from Alfred: "I would will lay my life down for the possibility of hope like that, hope of children that would all grow up strong and godly, in love with Jesus, their siblings, and – yes – their parents. Who in the world would want to invest the blood, sweat and tears otherwise?"
The formula is clear. "I sacrificed for you. You owe me." As many have stated above, in many cases this means that the parents expect that as their reward for all that effort and sacrifice, that the child will do things their way. I would go one step further. If you as a parent are expecting that a child owes you a relationship with God, your parenting is really just about you, not the child.
Obviously, we as parents do our best to give our kids a foundation and a good start, but their relationship with God isn't about us. It's between them and God, and it probably won't look the same as my own.
Alfred is absolutely correct about the cultural component, and I think that ATIA is very much about preserving a certain culture. It is even more explicit in groups like Vision Forum, who has developed a "200 Year Plan" to take over the world, or at least the United States. Rather explicit in the plan is that children must give way to the (multi-generational) plan of their ancestors.
This is the problem. My life, and my relationship with God, cannot be about my parents and be healthy. It doesn't matter how much they sacrificed, how much they did for me, or how many formulas they followed. I don't "owe" them, and I never want to put that burden on my own children.
Alfred, I appreciate your perspective as valid and whole. Will you appreciate my perspective as equally valid and whole? I was raised in this program. I was FAITHFUL to this program. This program failed me. And then I turned to God. He has never failed me.
I do not know what it was like to be raised in the culture you were raised in Alfred. conversely, you do not know what it is like to be raised in this program, therefore I think you will not be able to truly see the flaws in it that we can see.
This program never taught me to truly turn to God for direction, that's what the steps and convictions were for. I can accept that at a face value, IBLP didn't mean it like that, that God was to be sought in decision making. However, when applied, seeking God for direction was not an option, either for the parent or the child. And it was all so well hidden! Cloaked with pretty words designed to make one feel holy! Especially the teachings where parents make all decisions (because they are somehow wise and incapable of being biased.. what?) and young people never treated as adults. I don't think parents truly realize how damaging that is.
Parents technically couldn't seek God either, because if they heard from God and it happened to be different from what ATI espoused, they would suffer the opinions and judgment of their brothers and sisters in the program. How dreadful for everyone involved!
If my family were the only one who experienced IBLP in this way, I would have no reason to object to the program itself. The argument that, 'well, they misapplied the teachings' would be a valid argument for me. Unfortunately, most of the families I know suffered real and horrible things, directly because of these teachings, applied in the way they had been taught to apply them. So subtle. (most of these families fallout's didn't happen til years into the program. It's easy to hide until it can't be hidden anymore.)
Back to your concern about raising children in a godless world. I am married, and praying about starting a family with my husband. I am TERRIFIED at the thought and responsibility of bringing an innocent person into this world. I know from very real and personal experience that there is NOTHING I can do to make them choose Christ, EXCEPT trust in the Lord and let Him guide me, and pray my butt off about it. Even then, I know I'm not guaranteed 'success'. I'm not guaranteed that my child will get saved. As horrible as that sounds, that is the truth. Which is why I am taking this business of having kids very VERY seriously.
This world is evil. No more evil than it's ever been, just more openly evil, I think. I cannot put my trust in any church, any program, any 'solution', and rest assured in it. I've done it already, and I myself nearly took my own life because of that. I WILL not do that to my own children. I know I'll make other mistakes, and I dread that, but I know that I am not my children's salvation, or link to God.
I thought your statement about laying down your life for hope like that, to be very interesting. It's odd, cause Jesus laid down his life for us, and that WAS the hope that He left us. Jesus broke the 'program' as it were. The program said you were separated from God unless you could be holy enough by following the law, which, because of our sinful nature, we could never do. Jesus said, "I'll do it for you, and take the weight off of you." He left us His burden, which doesn't crush us, unlike the weight of being acceptable to God on your own strength will do. And that's what He shed His blood, sweat, and tears to do. It's already been done, Alfred, and that is our wonderful hope!
One last thought to follow up. The culture will self destruct. The devil will continue attacking everything that is good and holy, as the world gallops towards the end times. (Whether that's a decade, or a century away). These things must come to pass, for the great fulfillment. Perhaps that is what we've been witnessing in this century. That does not make it right to make an idol out of family, or family values. That would be us worshiping the created, rather than the creator. And that, I think, is one thing that IBLP absolutely does, even if that was not the intention.
With all kindness, I'm sure your friend was 100% genuine in his concern for this world and the culture, but I wonder if he misplaced his hope? 'He suddenly had great hope for the future." He has always had that hope, in CHRIST. Who existed long before IBLP, or any other religious organization. I am glad for his sake that he found some earthly comfort before he died, but I worry for those still living who put their hope in ANY program. They are asking for trouble, with the very best possible intentions at heart.
Wow, Heather,, very well thought out and said. Thank you.
"This program never taught me to truly turn to God for direction, that's what the steps and convictions were for"
Tremendous insight and statement on that one sentence alone----it challenges me to view my life and walk w/ Christ---just why am I doing this, and am I really enjoying the life/relationship that God wants for me?
Alfred, you said, "I would will lay my life down for the possibility of hope like that, hope of children that would all grow up strong and godly, in love with Jesus, their siblings, and – yes – their parents. Who in the world would want to invest the blood, sweat and tears otherwise?"
I'm a parent and that is not what I'm investing my parenting in. In fact, I think that's unscriptural.
I think that the Bible is pretty clear that Jesus wants my children to follow HIM, and to make their affection for me look like hate in comparison to their devotion to Him.
Sure, I hope my kids love each other, but I would never call it "in love" with each other like I hope they are in love with Christ. That actually sounds really creepy.
Alfred the ends to not justify the means It is easy to say society will ruin your kids and if someone has a magic bullet that will cure the problem then that's what we should do. The problem is there are no magic bullets there are no promises that we would have a better life if we only did A B and C to the result of X Y and Z.
Diluting relationships to a formula is not a relationship it is one or more people controlling another group of people or person. There is no real trust no real freedom no real love and In Gothards case no real faith in God simply faith in a program of non optional principles. Christ came to set us free from the curse of the law Bill Gothard obviously thinks differently so he made up his own.
He is ultimately responsible but also those who put their faith in his system gave over control of their children's lives to this monster. I am sorry to use such strong language but this man has taken advantage of the trust and to some extent the naivety of others.
And it is still going on!!
Alfred - that reason in no way validates (or excuses) the doings of Bill Gothard.
You make so many good points Beth.
I know that parents were NOT taught the same thing as the children. In hindsight I can see why. Parents are not so easily brainwashed as children.
I worked at HQ for 2 years. I distinctly remember Bill Gothard telling us at an all girls breakfast that our fathers had placed us there under his authority and we were not to call home complaining about long hours, our pay etc. Um, my father would never have agreed with that. I also think my father would have had a problem with BG and one other Staff father being present with 50 girls and no other women/Staff moms present.
Unfortunately thousands of parents bought into the idea BG tantilized them with - that you will be fulfilled through your children and it is all Biblical. It was a very costly mistake to buy this re-packaged "prosperity" teaching.
Rachel, I agree, it is very much a prosperity gospel. I've thought that for several years now.
Boy, I would fight you on that one. I have been IBLPing and ATIing for 40 years now . . . and I never expected to get rich, or any other material standard of success. Quite the opposite. I expected things to be tough. I know of no other family in ATI that would expect otherwise.
As far as other standards of success . . . John Wesley said to "anticipate the fruit of a disciplined life". Completely in line with ever so many secular perspectives. Completely consistent with this verse:
"Be not deceived; God is not mocked: for whatsoever a man soweth, that shall he also reap. For he that soweth to his flesh shall of the flesh reap corruption; but he that soweth to the Spirit shall of the Spirit reap life everlasting. And let us not be weary in well doing: for in due season we shall reap, if we faint not." (Galatians 6:7-9)
Tell me . . . in general terms, what can I expect from this? Sowing is a deliberate act without an immediate result. It is where my hope lies, that if I sow to the Spirit in my family, God will give a spiritual harvest.
So, for the sake of discussion, what, specifically, do you hope to reap? And in your opinion, why is there such a disparity in perspective on this, between former ATI students and ATI parents?
Alfred material wealth is not proof of Godliness or spiritual blessings from God. you can have all those things and still be bereft of God's grace and mercy.
"What do you hope to reap?"
Whatever the verse says . . . Life Eternal . . . spiritual fruit. The verse says I will reap if I am patient in well doing.
The Bible requires that Christian leaders have “faithful children” (Titus 1:6), literally “children of faith”, i.e. saved. Further, “One that ruleth well his own house, having his children in subjection with all gravity; (For if a man know not how to rule his own house, how shall he take care of the church of God?)” (1 Tim. 3:4-5) In fear and trembling, please tell me how else to take this other than that God holds parents responsible for their kids.
"Material wealth is not proof of Godliness or spiritual blessings from God"
Absolutely no argument on that. However . . . God blesses those that are faithful to Him. You tell me what "Bless" means. Whatever it is, I want it.
So how will you know when you've subjected your children with adequate gravity, and how will you know when you've gotten your payout?
I guess Paul assumes we are smart enough to know. Since we are the ones to identify folk like that to be our leaders.
You feel a right and obligation to retain authority over your adult children in order to meet a leadership eligibility requirement that Paul himself is not recorded to have met?
It must be a heavy burden to feel responsible to answer for children after they're grown, and for them to hold your reputation in their hands.
That is going a lot further than I would go . . . but . . . Scripture speaks. You tell me what it means.
BTW, since I referenced this scripture in a separate thread, I will park it here as well. Haven't really had anyone explain this. NT teaching (Eph. 6 and elsewhere) tells children to obey their parents. It supports this with the clear OT commandment to that end, complete with a promise that goes with it:
"Children, obey your parents in the Lord: for this is right. 'Honour thy father and mother'; (which is the first commandment with promise;) 'That it may be well with thee, and thou mayest live long on the earth.'" (Eph. 6:1-3)
Leviticus is a clarification of that command:
"Ye shall fear every man his mother, and his father" (Lev. 19:3)
That word "man" is "Ish" . . . which cannot mean "child". It means "grown man".
What is God saying here?
"Jacob obeyed his father and his mother" (Genesis 28:7) Jacob was then 75 years old (check it out)
You can tell that I understand a balance in God's Word . . . and contrary to what you may believe, I have a great deal of self-doubt about my ability to give accurate direction to grown children even if they were to have to do what I said. They need to ask and answer to the Lord - I don't want the responsibility even if I believed I had it.
But, in all seriousness, what do we make of this?
In my observation far, far, far more ATI parents have applied an adult obedience interpretation to their own adult children than to themselves. Of the hundreds of ATI families I was familiar with, I can count on one or two hands the number wherein the ATI parents took any substantial direction from their own sets of parents, and none wherein the ATI parents could be described as obedient to their own parents. A large proportion of former ATI parents demonstrate a continued expectation that they will have strong directive influence on their adult children's lives, marriages, and child raising techniques, a level of influence they rejected from their own parents.
I'll leave discussion of the nitty-gritty of context and word studies to those who have stronger linguistic backgrounds than I do, but it's hard to dispute that most ATI (and similarly inclined) parents who apply a theory of adult obedience to their own children do not practice similar obedience to their own parents.
Haha! I love it. I think you are absolutely right. The sinful heart of man revealed. Once we apply it to ourselves, we find out we don't like it very much, find it weird and offensive.
See, I believe that "ruling well your own house" has much less to do with how one's children behave (and I am referring to children, here, under the legal age of majority), as it does the way the parents respond to the child's behavior.
Let me give a hypothetical example of how I could see this working out: Say an elder's teen daughter turns up pregnant. To me, this is not the failing of the elder, but of his child, perhaps overrun with adolescent desires and compulsions. What the elder then does with this situation, will tell me loads about his character, and his ability to appropriate grace within the church. Does the elder a) shun and publicly condemn his daughter, holding her up as an example to others? Does he perhaps kick her out on the street with no money and no resources? Does he demand she has a secret abortion, so as not to embarrass him/damage his "good name"? or b) does the father respond with love and grace, assuring his daughter that they will help her through this, that they will be there for her, that they will help her raise the child, if need be?
The latter is a picture of the grace God bestows upon us, the first is not. Therefore, I would consider the second scenario to be "ruling well", and this is the sort of gracious man I would like to see in charge of the church. Because really, it's ludicrous to think we can control our children's actions at all times.
And I'm afraid I can't even begin to address the adult obeying vs child obeying. That is just beyond ridiculous to me. However old Jacob was, if he obeyed as an adult, it was due to the culture of the day. It's a doctrinal mistake to take the culture of the day and apply it as biblical mandates in all settings. Not that Gothard doesn't do this ALL THE TIME. You have learned well from him, I must give you that.
Bravo. So well and plainly stated. This was my "childhood" as well.
Good point, Beth! What if the parents of the ATI parents were very concerned about the direction their children were taking their grandchildren through following BG's teaching. What if the grandparents felt that their children were getting into a cult? As an ATI parent my own parents were quite concerned about the way we lived when we were with ATI. Basically, my husband kept them out of our lives during those years,because they were too "worldly", and I didn't protest, because I didn't want to be labeled a "rebelious woman".We missed out on years of relationships in which our children could have been getting to know them and they getting to know their grandchildren.
Let's not forget Ephesians 6:4a "And fathers do not provoke your children to anger;" or as J.B. Phillips's translation says, "Fathers, don't over-correct your children or make it difficult for them to obey the commandment."
This discussion of parents getting their emotional needs met by controlling their children reminds me of an old Bette Davis movie I recently saw. It was truly chilling because it reminded me so much of how some parents are controlling their children's lives in the name of Our dear Lord Jesus today. You all should rent it and watch it if you can. It's called "Now, Voyager".
Fortunately before we ever went to IBLP or got involved in ATI I had read Elisabeth Elliot's book, "Shadow of the Almighty." I read in there on p. 26 Jim Elliot's parents' philosophy on child raising and thought it was a great idea. "When the children reached the age of fourteen, they were told that from then on they were responsible to the Lord for their actions, since they had accepted Him as Savior and Lord of their lives. 'And don't ever think you'll get by with something because we don't know about it,' their mother told them, 'God knows, and has His own way of punishing.'
Our kids were usually around 18 when we told them they were answerable directly to God but we were available for advice and counsel. All five are walking with the Lord today.
BG gave his car to God many years ago. I believe we parents need to give our kids to God.
Sounds like wonderful parents.
I rarely hear such programs now but I heard something on the radio once about how Jim's dad had a philosophy of being involved with your kids' "gang" which in the vernacular of the time meant their circle of friends. Instead of the parent being enemies of their kids' friends, they should work to be friendly with the friends, helping to plan events, making their house a safe and warm place to hang out, going on campouts, etc. This purchases insight and influence into what is going on, not in a controlling way but in an engaged way.
Pingback : Dear Grace: Letter From a Parent | Recovering Grace
Pingback : How “Lessons From Moral Failures in a Family” Blames Victims | Recovering Grace
Pingback : When Analogies and Anecdotes Dictated the Music Standard | Recovering Grace