Above Rubies Part 7: The Theology of Child Abuse
- mercynotsacrifice
- Feb 20, 2019
- 6 min read
Updated: Jul 23, 2020
Problem #7: The Theology of Child Abuse
When ministries and their followers believe a perversion of truth, it never becomes more evident than when displayed in their deeds; this is no exception. I believe the average reader of Above Rubies is unaware that Nancy’s daughter, Serene Allison, who often writes for the magazine, and her husband lost custody of three of their adopted children after accusations of abuse and neglect. In addition, they “returned” a fourth child and attempted to erase history of the adoptions on the website and in the magazines.
The Campbell/Allison adoptions were doomed to end the way they did. When you think about the way they recommend the collection and hoarding of biological children without any thought to their wellbeing, it’s not surprising that they would apply the same mentality to adoption as well. Parents with a very limited and inflexible parenting style (that’s authoritarianism) need to put careful thought into how they are going to handle the differences that they cannot control — whether they like it or not — that come when you adopt young adults with unique needs from PTSD, food scarcity, or attachment issues. To those in Quiverfull, amassing children will always be more important than parenting them well. Kathryn Joyce does an excellent job covering this phenomenon, failed adoptions, and the Campbell’s coverup in her book, The Child Catchers, and you can also read a shorter investigative report on it here.
The behavior that the Allisons and the Campbells displayed is a symptom of the true problem. Parents in fundamentalism believe in “Biblical” authoritarian hierarchies, sometimes known as the “Umbrella of Authority”. In this system children are not seen as individuals, but rather property of the parents, who have a “God given” responsibility to “break their will” (yes, that is an exact quote) and train the “evil” out of them. Improperly applying a few verses from Proverbs enables them to condone actions that under any other name would be abuse.
I want to explain further what may have been behind the Allisons' belief that they were justified in treating their children in a manner that had such results. I’ll use Michael Pearl’s words as examples of this mentality because as of now, he is the most prolific proponent of it. I believe that the writers at Above Rubies follow his teachings; although they may deny it, as it is now common knowledge that Pearl’s ministry has been linked to the deaths of three children. Those children, from three different families, were also adopted, and their adoptive parents also applied parenting techniques that were inappropriate for any child, let alone one that may have had unique needs.
Pearl has taken the doctrine of Total Depravity and concluded from it that no child is too young to be disciplined (ie hit). He also thinks spanking itself is the best or only form of discipline that a parent should use, and that it can “cleanse” a child of guilt from their transgression:
“Christians find release from their guilt through the Savior who suffered the curse of their sins, but their children cannot yet understand that the Creator has been lashed and nailed in their place. Yet, parents need not wait until their children are old enough to understand the vicarious death of Christ to purge their children of guilt. God has provided parents with a tool to cleanse their children of guilt— the rod of correction”.
“The guilt burdened soul cries out for the lashes and nails of justice. Your child cannot yet understand that the Creator has been lashed and nailed in his place. Only the rod of correction can preserve his soul until the day of moral dawning.”
“The parent holds in his hand (in the form of a little switch) the power to absolve the child of guilt, cleanse his soul, instruct his spirit, strengthen his resolve, and give him a fresh start through a confidence that all indebtedness is paid.”
“When a child is bound in self-blame and low self-esteem, parents are not helpless. God has given them the gift of the rod. The rod can bring repentance, but it goes much deeper than that. The rod in the hands of a righteous authority will supply the child’s soul with that moment of judgment that he feels he so deserves. Properly applied, with instruction, it will absolve the child of guilt, cleanse his soul, and give him a fresh start through a confidence that all indebtedness is paid.”
“To the child, a righteous parent is a surrogate god, representing the rule of law and the bar of justice. When the child is yet too young to fathom God, he is nonetheless able to relate to his parents in the same manner that he will later relate to God. The properly administered rod is restorative as nothing else can be. It is indispensable to the removal of guilt in your child. His very conscience (nature) demands punishment, and the rod supplies the needs of his soul, releasing him from his guilt and self-condemnation. It is the ultimate enforcer, preserving the child in authority and discipline until he is old enough to submit himself to The Eternal God."
Now compare that to these words published in Above Rubies:
“Children are not little bundles of innocence but Proverbs 51:5 [sic] says that they are little bundles of depravity. If they are not trained and disciplined according to God's Word, they can develop into unrestrained agents of evil. Selfishness, violence, lying, cheating, stealing and other such behaviour are some of the foolishness from the vast store in their hearts. Spankings drive these manifestations out of the child's personality lest they become permanent fixtures.”
“Spanking deals immediately with the issue; drives the foolishness out of the heart; restores the ruptured relationship; clears the air of the anger, guilt, mistrust, frustration and disappointment generated by the sin; completely settles the issue (although restitution, a separate issue, may be required); leaves no period of grounding or restriction to worry about and reminds everyone of the misdeeds. Everyone can get on with life. Best of all, you know you have just done what is right, and they know righteousness has been upheld. That is very gratifyingly peaceful.”
“Spanking is also a better punishment than groundings or taking certain privileges away from the child. This is a humanistic way of doing things. Some parents say that it is cruel to spank, and they prefer to use other methods. However, these methods are actually more cruel. They linger on well after the incident has taken place, sometimes for weeks. God's way is the best way. When the child disobeys, you spank to teach them that disobedience cannot be tolerated, then you love and embrace the child, and the discipline is over! It is not remembered again.”
Finally, I want to make one last point. Take these telling quotes from Pearl:
“My wife immediately set up a training session. She took the forbidden object and placed it back on the floor in front of the child. ‘But that is tempting the child!’ you say. Did not God do the same for Adam and Eve?”
“As the child relates to the figurehead of parental authority, in like manner he will later be prone to relate to God. If parents allow their commands to be treated lightly, the child will take the commandments of God lightly also.”
These attitudes reveal something important: they are treating their children the way they think God treats them. Let me elaborate: the gospel changes everything, so someone who has experienced grace, free and unmerited favor, will (or ought to) turn and bestow that grace onto others. But if someone has a legalistic view of the gospel, “grace" becomes something that they deserve from their self righteous behavior. That’s why being angry that others are receiving grace is considered a symptom of legalism, as shown in this helpful article, which also says something very interesting: “a legalistic person feels like God is never happy with them”. Because of the self induced pressure to be perfect, and humankind’s inability to do so, a legalist feels like God is unreasonable, harsh, and expecting the impossible. (Read my post on the gospel of fundamentalism for more depth.)
Unfortunately, parents who feel that way often have their belief system also telling them that they are in the place of God for their children. The authority structure is responsible for that. Also, like we saw above, Pearl believes that he must use spanking as a substitute for the work of Christ for his children since they “cannot yet understand”. What happens if you combine that dynamic with someone’s idea that God is demanding and always angry? Child abuse.
Michael Pearl’s teachings are very dangerous if they are taken too far, and that is what happened when the Campbells and Allisons practiced them. The Child Catchers goes into more detail on the abuse, and the similarity between what is prescribed in Pearl’s book To Train Up A Child is undeniable. But I really don’t need to say all that. How about we just stop taking parenting (or any) advice from people who hit babies?
Other posts in this series:
Comments