Bill Gothard

, , , , , , , ,

Why is Amazon Prime trashing the Duggar parents and the wide world of homeschooling?

, , , , , , , ,
Why is Amazon Prime trashing the Duggar parents and the wide world of homeschooling?

This past week or so has been a bad media moment for homeschooling. First there was a Washington Post expose on “the revolt of the Christian homeschoolers” that ran May 30.

Mind you, this is a time when homeschooling in America is at all-time highs. Then, starting last Friday, Amazon Prime premiered “Shiny Happy People,” its four-part series on the woes of the Duggar family, the stars of the long-running reality TV special “19 Kids and Counting.”

The latter is one of the more bizarre examples of circumstantial evidence, imputed (but not proven) guilt and overkill that I’ve seen in a long time. I’ll get to the Post piece in a moment, but the pile-on @AmazonPrime simply must be addressed.

For starters, not only does the series go after the Duggar parents Jim Bob and Michelle, but it also trashes the Institute in Basic Life Principles (IBLP) or what a lot of us who attended it in the 1970s used to call Basic Youth Conflicts. Bill Gothard, its founder, resigned in 2014 after being accused by multiple women of sexual abuse.

The series starts with a number of unidentified people (we learn their names later in the series but still) accusing IBLP of “spiritual, emotional, physical, psychological abuse” and essentially being the spiritual engine that fed the Duggar family empire. That and the fact that the Discovery TLC Network became a multi-billion-dollar company partly due to them.

“Homeschooling is the linchpin of this whole project,” said one woman.

Does that include all the homeschoolers who made it into Harvard and other forms of elite education? There are many facets to this nondenominational, multiracial movement.

“World domination is their goal,” intoned another man.

The series (I’ve watched two of the episodes so far) careens back and forth from homeschooling to the Duggars to conservative politics to the IBLP, trying to throw as much dirt as possible on them all. Is everyone who was ever involved with the IBLP and homeschooling a wacko?


Please respect our Commenting Policy
, , , , , , , , ,

Purity culture questions: A friendly, but crucial, dialogue between two evangelical thinkers

, , , , , , , , ,
Purity culture questions: A friendly, but crucial, dialogue between two evangelical thinkers

The purity culture wars continue over on Twitter, where a crucial question — from a journalism perspective — can be seen in the following sequence.

There is no question that some church leaders went too far with purity culture themes and rites, including hellish actions by abusive men. Can anyone deny that? However, can journalists (and their academic and activist sources) assume that because evil happened in some cases means that it happened in all cases? And, to be specific, do journalists have on-the-record evidence that the alleged shooter in Atlanta was, in fact, warped by abusive people at an abusive church?

GetReligion published two posts linked to these debates. Check out Julia Duin’s post here: “Panning purity culture: What the press doesn't get about basic Christian doctrines on sex.”

Then, I raised other basic journalism questions here: “Wait a minute: How is a sermon on the Second Coming linked to shootings in Atlanta?”

Before we get to this weekend’s two “think pieces” on this topic — by religious-liberty activist David French and Crossway books executive Justin Taylor — here is a flashback to a key passage in my post, which is linked to some of Taylor’s constructive criticism of the French piece.

It’s not enough to say that this or that conservative congregation, or counseling center, or parachurch ministry is “evangelical” and, thus, the public can assume that Christian doctrines were used in manipulative ways. …

Ponder this equation: Journalists cannot assume that a specific evangelical flock advocates dangerous doctrine X, simply because there are experts (progressive evangelicals even) who insist that all evangelicals teach dangerous doctrine X and, thus, we know that dangerous doctrine X causes broken, manipulated individuals to do hellish things.

At some point, journalists need to find specific people advocating specific ideas and actions — using research methods that are deeper than second-hand reports and the convictions of hostile experts on one side of fights about the Sexual Revolution.

This brings us to French’s must-read piece:


Please respect our Commenting Policy
, , ,

Panning purity culture: What the press doesn't get about basic Christian doctrines on sex

, , ,
Panning purity culture: What the press doesn't get about basic Christian doctrines on sex

Here we go again.

Evangelical “purity culture” is getting royally trashed these days for being responsible for a multiple murder last week in Atlanta. If only, these stories suggest, this man hadn’t been so messed up by primitive Christian morals, he might not have gunned down eight people.

Members of the GetReligion team have written before (in this 2019 piece by the Religion Guy) about how reporters consistently don’t get the doctrinal issues that are linked to purity culture. Here we are again with a string of murders by a Southern Baptist man who had a sex obsession. Suddenly, the national conversation is about the Christian teachings that might have driven him to it.

A number of media took a whack at the topic. I’ll start with Business Insider, which, in a piece headlined “The Atlanta shooting and the dangers of American evangelicalism’s trademark purity culture,” commits tons of journalistic sins starting with its fourth paragraph:

"It's not a jump to say white conservative Christianity played a role here," said Joshua Grubbs, an assistant professor of psychology at Bowling Green State University. "The facts need to come to light, but all the facts that are in the light right now suggest it's at play." …

Huh? All white conservative Christians are now complicit in the shootings? This whole marrying of what various writers hate about Christianity to “white evangelical culture” shows a massive ignorance of evangelicals.

First, a lot of evangelicals, especially younger ones, aren’t white. Show up at a college InterVarsity meeting sometime (that is, those that are still are allowed to use university facilities, which many aren’t these days because of their views on gay marriage) and take a look at the variety of folks there.

Back to the Business Insider piece:

Two key concepts here are "temptation" and "sex addiction." Both feature heavily in evangelical "purity culture," a set of rituals and beliefs around gender roles, designed to encourage believers, especially young men and women, to abstain from sex outside of heterosexual marriage.

The article marshals a list of scholars to trash white supremacy, the boogeyman in all this.


Please respect our Commenting Policy
, , , , , , , , , , , ,

Wait a minute: How is a sermon on the Second Coming linked to shootings in Atlanta?

, , , , , , , , , , , ,
Wait a minute: How is a sermon on the Second Coming linked to shootings in Atlanta?

The hellish shootings in Atlanta have unleashed fierce debates combining questions about sex, sin, salvation, repentance, race and various combinations of all of those hot-button topics.

The debates center, of course, of statements by Robert Aaron Long — the suspect in the killing of eight people, including six Asian women — and his complicated and troubled history as a young member of Crabapple First Baptist Church in Milton, Ga., a Southern Baptist congregation.

Eventually, court testimony will provide hard facts about this case. At this point, all the evidence is that Long was raised as a conservative Christian, was active in his church youth group and that he abandoned his faith and then, quite literally, all hell broke loose in his personal and family life. Long has said that a “sex addiction” drove him to frequent massage parlors and his family, apparently, sent him to a Christian counseling center for treatment. His conservative Christian parents “threw him out of the house” the night before the shootings, according to reports in the Washington Post and elsewhere.

Like I said, on-the-record details will emerge. Right now, I want to raise a journalism question or two about coverage of the SBC congregation that is involved in this story. What do we know about this church and, well, how do we know what we know? One Post story notes the following, quoting a solid, factual source:

The evangelical congregation’s minister, the Rev. Jerry Dockery, is an energetic preacher who advocated for a socially conservative brand of Christianity that, as the church bylaws put it, views “adultery, fornication, homosexuality, bisexual conduct, bestiality, incest, polygamy, pedophilia, pornography, or any attempt to change one’s sex, or disagreement with one’s biological sex” as “sinful and offensive to God.”

This isn’t shocking material, if you know anything about traditional forms of Christianity. It would be easy to find specific quotations from recent Catholic popes — including Pope Francis — condemning behaviors such as these, and more.

This congregation is also connected to several doctrinally conservative organizations or movements linked to SBC life, such as the Founders Ministries. All of this leads me to a specific sermon reference discussing the end of the world and Christian teachings about the second coming of Jesus Christ. Oh, and if you stop and think about it, this includes the church’s pastor — indirectly — offering a warning about Christians worshipping political leaders such as Donald Trump.

Say what?


Please respect our Commenting Policy
, , , , , , , , ,

Washington Post gets it: The Duggar TV empire made all kinds of people nervous

, , , , , , , , ,

In recent days, I have had quite a few emails asking what the GetReligionistas think of the fall of Josh Duggar of the Family Research Council and then the whole "19 Kids and Counting" TLC reality-television empire.

As always, people seemed to be asking what we thought of the story itself, as opposed to our reactions to the mainstream news media coverage of the story. That's two different issues.

As always, most of the coverage has looked at the story through a political lens, asking how this scandal among hypocrites on the Religious Right would impact public debates about same-sex marriage, same-sex marriage and same-sex marriage.

That's an interesting angle, since I never got the impression -- as someone who has never seen a complete episode of the show -- that the Duggars were the kinds of folks who were very effective as apologists, when it came time to changing many minds on the cultural left. They seemed, to me, to be the ultimate preaching-to-the-choir niche media product. For those who are interested, here is the family's public statement on the controversy.

It's safe to assume that folks on the cultural left pretty much hated these folks, with good cause. The more subtle point is that the Duggars were also very controversial among evangelicals, including among folks who are often accurately described as very traditional, or even patriarchal, on family issues. This television empire made all kinds of folks nervous, with good cause.

Here is the key, if you want to dig into the serious coverage. How early does the name "Bill Gothard" appear and to what degree does the coverage make it sound like Gothard and his disciples represent mainstream evangelicalism or even orthodox (let alone Orthodox or Catholic) Christianity?


Please respect our Commenting Policy