Officially and Formally Announcing the Freedom for Christian Women Coalition Video Channels

Edit 8Dec11

With most of the footage from the Seneca Falls 2 Convention online, I'd like to formally announce that most all of the videos are now available.  Vimeo.com hosts the complete presentations without interruption, and both YouTube and Tangle feature shorter videos and topical clips from the conference.  Janice Levinson's presentation (co-founder of the Protective Mother's Alliance International with Lundy Bancroft) should be available by the end of the week.


Visiting the Freedom for Christian Women Coalition website (FreeCWC.com) is the best way to navigate through the videos by topic.  
 
The tabs at the top of the page also direct you to lists that feature the synopsis of each clip, and you can easily link to the topic that interests you most on YouTube or Vimeo from there.

 You can also sift through the videos at the FreeCWC YouTube Channel itself, though I find this process a bit more frenetic!

 
Some of you may prefer to use Tangle.com, and most of the Seneca Falls 2 short topical clips do appear there, too.


So there you have it!  Enjoy!

Here's a short clip to get you started, a nice response to the twisted truth and veiled lies told by the organizers of the upcoming True Woman conference.  I could add more history from the Moravian Church and my own Assemblies of God roots, but as a girl born in the Quaker State, who married a man from Quaker Town and educated in Quaker City, I'm quite proud of the rich heritage of the Quakers, too!

Versatile Blogging

A few days ago, I received an email from Paula Fether, honoring me with the Versatile Blogger Award. I am deeply honored that someone for whom I have so much respect thought to name me. Paula knows the Bible, loves it and does not compromise. I love her dearly.   Her blog is entitled "Words of a Fether."

In keeping with the versatile tradition, I'm to tell readers seven things about myself that you probably wouldn't know about me. I waited a few days to finish up my video editing for the Seneca Falls 2 Convention, as I could only think “VIDEO...”  All I could think about writing at the time had to do with video editing. (That strategy may have backfired, as I'm fixated on something else this morning...)

The Versatile Blogger Rules:

1. Thank and link back to the person who gave you the award. (Not required; we understand if you’d rather not.)
2. Share seven things about yourself.
3. Pass on the award to up to fifteen deserving bloggers.
4. Contact the bloggers you chose for the award.

Here are my seven factoids:

1. I love to knead bread – I love the feel of the dough. I like to make Pennsylvania Dutch Pot Pie (which is a type of pasta to which you don't add as much flour, kneading it until it has a bread dough-like feel to it). I love the dynamic nature of kneaded gluten. 
2. I love animals, especially cats. We once had six at one time years ago, but now we just have two – babes that my husband and I bottle fed. We named them Simeon and Anna. Simeon always meows after someone sneezes, and he occasionally will jump up our laps, pressing his paw on our forehead. We call it his “blessing” and quote an obscure variation on a line from Monty Python's “The Holy Grail” whenever he does it. (“A blessing! A blessing from the cat!”) Simeon and Anna are really the one's who write this blog! They like to either put their paws on me or the laptop while I type.
3. I've been on several foreign missions trips, two of which were in the Caribbean. I can't figure out if I just fall in love with the people because it's a missions trip (and God puts a special love in your heart) or because I love the people there so much. In both Jamaica and Trinidad, I will admit that I may have had a chemically altered brain due to the best coffee I've ever had! I found myself dreaming of my suitcase packed full of Trinidad coffee this morning, just before I awakened, recalling a now faded but fond memory.
4. My husband, Gary, and I celebrated our 20^th wedding anniversary this year in May. Oddly, during the week of our anniversary this year, we traveled back to the town where we spent the first year of our marriage together to attend a funeral of a dear friend and mentor. It was strangely bitter-sweet. (It took him a few weeks into our marriage to get used to my “night shift” strength coffee.)
5. I once jammed (on a keyboard) with a church worship team in Trinidad. I had a blast! The keyboard had a steel drum effect which they loved. (This must be about the coffee.)
6. When I wear orange or yellow, I look like I have hepatitis. I guess I thought of that because I look pale today, an accompaniment to my wicked sinus headache. (Maybe that's why I want Trinidadian or Jamaican coffee this morning??? I'll have to settle for Excedrin Tension Headache and whatever coffee I picked up at Trader Joe's instead.)
7. Autumn is my favorite season, and it is beautiful here in my adopted home state of Michigan. I love the comfort of a warm house, a snuggley sweater, and a stiff cup of good coffee that embraces me after a crisp, fall morning excursion.

After much thought, I'd like to bestow the Versatile Blogger award upon:

• Laurie M of Beauty for Ashes (I am blessed by your bravery, honesty, and love.)
• Lewis of Commandments of Men (I love Lewis! I'm so proud of him and encouraged by him. Don't miss his Stitches in the Veil!)
• Kris at SGM Survivors (I wish I had more time and energy to participate there, and Kris does an excellent job dealing with the issues and concerns of those who have exited Sovereign Grace Ministries.)
• All of the contributors at No Longer Quivering (I'm so proud of the courage and dedication of Vyckie and those who work with her to provide this resource to women who are struggling with the after-effects of patriarchy.)
• Shirley at bWe Baptist Women for Equality.wordpress.com (Shirley faithfully works at countering the lies that complementarianism tells to women.)
• Joanne at the Truthspeaker Weblog   (I don't know how she finds time or energy to keep up with all of the ongoing Pentecostal/Charismatic weirdness.) 
• Chandra at Dispelled (The blog of a young mom bravely working through her past experience in cultic homeschooling and telling the truth about it.)

I don't read their blogs as often as I would like and probably should, but I hope that my readers here will benefit from them. 

Enjoy versatile blogging!

Complementarianism, Spiritual Abuse and Undue Influence: How the Church has been Manipulated into Accepting the Traditions of Men

 Update 8Dec11

 Cindy's presentation at the Seneca Falls 2 Evangelical Women's Rights Convention on July 24, 2010.

Watch the video:

Complementarianism, Spiritual Abuse and Undue Influence  ~  Cynthia Kunsman from FreeCWC on Vimeo.


Note other references in this companion post.

And....

Please take time to watch Dr. Zimbardo's MIT lecture referenced in the session!

 

Preparing the Church to Respond to Domestic Abuse

Preparing the Church to Respond to Domestic Abuse from FreeCWC on Vimeo.

Finding Grace by the Way of Learning What Grace is Not

 What is grace and how does one find it?  We all have the sense that we have “fallen from grace,” but how can we get back to that place that we lost and that from which we feel like we’ve fallen?  What if we’ve never really known grace at all?  I find it quite easy to feel more connected to my failures and imperfections, particularly when I try to measure up to the ideal that others have created for me.  Good performance often brings good favor, but that feeling is rare and always fleeting. It never satisfies for very long.  It stops when I inevitably show my human nature and acceptance ceases, sometimes bringing the pain of rejection and disapproval.  This is not grace.  I long for unmerited favor and joy, the expression of unconditional love.

For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves:

It is the gift of God:  Not of works, lest any man should boast.

Ephesians 2:8-9

The Apostle Paul points out that to us that grace is a free gift from God that cannot be earned in any way.  Grace comes to us through faith and not by anything we can do.  We only need to believe in Jesus (God in sinless human flesh) and in the Blood He shed to pay for our sins.  God then sees our faith in Him and extends His favor to us for no other reason, for there is nothing about ourselves that merits His grace.  We then embark upon a journey of transformation as we become more like Him, the process of being made holy and set apart for Him (sanctification). 

Paul’s writings define “grace” as the antithesis of “works” and of “the Law” in a way that neither Greek nor Hebrew did before.  This grace originates unilaterally from within God Himself, favor that proceeds from God apart from anything that man does.  The understanding of grace as God’s gift describes something quite radical and difficult to understand in human terms, because everything else in life must be earned and always comes with a cost.  I believe that grace is something that the natural mind does not really comprehend, making it a true miracle when we receive it through faith and the Spirit which lets us see and understand.  Our minds of flesh cannot make sense of real grace apart from the Spirit.

Not unlike far too many Christians before him, Bill Gothard fails to fully grasp the nature of grace and sutbly redefines it improperly, understanding it in human terms.  He accepts grace as Paul defines it for one’s initial moment of conversion, but for the ongoing sanctification process of being continually changed by the Holy Spirit, he effectively teaches that grace must be earned.  In the Epistles of James and Peter, Gothard takes note of the proverb that God opposes the proud and gives grace to those who are humble. He concludes wrongly and too simplistically that grace should be sought, merited, and accumulated through acts of obedience, submission and humility.  Though these traits are desirable ones, they are not any kind of means that one uses to achieve the end of more grace and faith.  They are the effect, not the cause.  Gothard, the patriocentrics, and many of those of the Quivefull mindset reverse them, mistaking the effect for the cause.

Sadly, this makes grace out to be exactly the opposite of what grace really is, changing God’s gift of unmerited favor that comes through faith into a privilege that must be earned and merited.  Rather than the actions coming forth because of the desire of the heart to be obedient to God out of love, Gothard makes grace into a commodity that must be bought and paid for through following laws, particularly through acts of submission, humility, and suffering.  The follower believes the illusion that they are following God, but they are using God Himself as a mystical means to a desired end of power, safety, and acceptance.

Many unsuspecting and earnest people who desire to honor God unknowingly accept Gothard’s paradigm and proceed to understand saving and sanctifying grace as something that must be continually earned through good works like submission to remain in God’s favor.  Children learn that they are loved and get grace only when they perform through acts submission and duty.  Parents teach this to their children when they act out the new lessons they’ve learned, protective rules that were devised to keep safe and holy the precious things of God. Performance and comparison become the counterfeits for true intimacy and grace, but the system actually fosters duty and deadness instead.  Sometimes, it fosters bitterness because children recognize that what their parents define as love feels more to them like fear, obligation, and guilt.

These misguided parents should be shown mercy, because their own lack of understanding points out that they also do not understand love themselves, or they’ve set it aside for a plan that they believed would make them better lovers of God.  They understand that they are loved themselves only to the degree that they are able to perform and live out a list of laws and standards -- outward signs that prove that they belong to God on the inside.  Those who follow God in this way soon come to understand that can only be loved when they perform up to expectations.  They learn from their teachers to resist the true message of grace by wrongly discounting it as lawlessness.

God does not love this way.  This is NOT grace.  It is just the opposite.  Grace cannot be earned, and God offered it to us because we there was no other way to make our way to His heart of love.  He makes the way.

Grace says, "I love you, forgive you, and grant you mercy, despite your imperfections."  Grace says that though you fail and are weak, though you sin and make mistakes, I love you anyway and think you’re a most remarkable and wonderful creature.  Grace sees past the flaws and loves the good potential it sees in you, and it makes you realize that you want to be better than you are now.  It helps you see what it sees, that which you cannot yet see in yourself.  It holds out hope for you and creates a place of joy and healing, even though you really don’t deserve it.  None of us deserve it, yet it is freely, freely given to us out of love.  Grace believes the best about you until circumstances and that sanctification process can catch up to where you’re meant to be.  It is God’s willful act of mercy, giving you all the wealth of benefit that you could never earn in a million lifetimes.

If you’ve never known grace, the expression of what a friend of mine calls “ego-free love,” I hope and pray that you will begin to know it.  It makes you feel wonderful and safe, not ashamed and hopeless. This is the spirit and attitude that we should have for one another, not benchmarking and performing that we might understand from our churches and from within our families.   It is the center of the loving, forgiving heart of God who has renewed mercies for us every morning. His grace and Spirit fill our hearts so that we no longer need the lists of duty, doing the right thing out of joy because we love Him Who delights in us.  God extends grace to us, and grace makes the way for us -- for there is no other way.  Grace is God’s heart for us that delights in us, His gift to us, freely given.

A Brief Overview of the Development of Eternal Subordination of the Son Doctrine: What You Must Believe to Fully Embrace the Danvers Statement

I have stated many times that if the Council on Manhood and Womanhood (CBMW) actually came right out and stated what they believed about basic doctrines, far more people would have challenged and rejected their ideas.  By making statements vague and ambiguous and by relying on linguistic boobytraps, groups like CBMW can entice a person and get them committed to the surface doctrine, and by the time they reveal the unpleasant or questionable aspects of their beliefs, people are too deeply committed to them to just walk away.  The most troubling doctrine that is foundational to CBMWs complementarian ideology is their concept of the Trinity.

But how did this concept come about?

Attaching All Doctrine to the Doctrine of God
First, consider what J. Ligon Ducan had to say about Reformed Theology when discussing the implications of gender at the Different By Design Conference in 2008 (04Feb08, Session1).  He mentions that RC Sproul was once asked what made Reformed Theology unique.  Sproul reportedly answered, “In Reformed Protestant Theology, all other theology is seen in relation to the Doctrine of God.  That every other area on which the Bible teaches is seen in relation to the Doctrine of God.”  Duncan asserts that many of our doctrinal issues and problems in Christianity arise because we do not properly connect all other doctrines back to the Doctrine of God.  Thus, the “Biblical foundation for women’s ministry in the local church is going to root it’s teaching about Christian womanhood in the Doctrine of God.”

Covenant of Redemption
Noting that Ligon notes a standard of linking all doctrine back to the God’s identity and character in some way to be legitimate, consider Covenant Theology’s “Covenant of Redemption,” a concept that is not held by all Reformed Believers and rejected by Dispensationalists.  Monergism.com defines the “Covenant of Redemption” in this way:

In Reformed theology, the pactum salutis has been defined as a pretemporal, intratrinitarian agreement between the Father and Son in which the Father promises to redeem an elect people. In turn the Son volunteers to earn the salvation of his people by becoming incarnate...by acting as surety of the covenant of grace for and as mediator of the covenant of grace to the elect. In his active and passive obedience, Christ fulfills the conditions of the pactum salutis...ratifying the Father's promise, because of which the Father rewards the Son's obedience with the salvation of the elect. And because of this the Holy Spirit applies the Son's work to his people through the means of grace.

David Van Drunen & Scott Clark: Covenant, Justification and Pastoral Ministry, p. 168    

There are some problems with this idea.  The details of this covenant are not spelled out or told to us in any Scripture.  It depicts no scene where the Divine Persons interacted and came to an agreement, nor does it describe an account where God had a conversation with aspects of Himself before time and creation began.  It is an assumption based upon the speculation of men.

What we do know is that while on earth and while incarnate, Jesus had to empty Himself of some  divine aspects in order to be fully human, temporarily setting aside His rights to “grasp” those abilities in order to become the Son of Man (Phillipians 2).  It does not necessarily or need imply that Jesus was eternally void of this power, and the concept of the knosis or the emptying can account for this .  Jesus states in Gethsemane that He could have called twelve thousand angels to rescue Him, demonstrating that He had the option to decline the Cross and was not compelled by the order of the Father (Matthew 12:53).  His purpose in the Garden involved making the decision to go through with the process, fully committing to it because the option to decline was open and available to Him.  It all depends on your presuppositions, doesn’t it?

Keep in mind that those who govern CBMW follow Reformed Theology, noting Ligon Duncan’s words about and goal to connect all doctrines back to the Doctrine of God.  Please note again that not all who follow Reformed Theology embrace the Covenant of Redemption as legitimate (myself included).

Addition of Gender Hierarchy and the Juvenile Jesus to the Covenant of Redemption
The Doctrine of the Eternal Subordination of the Son (ESS) takes the Covenant of Redemption a bit further by adding a concept of hierarchy to it, a concept that Kevin Giles claims was introduced by George Knight in his 1977 book. It suggests that Jesus was and always will be an “eternal son,” and many who believe ESS suggest that Jesus was a youthful God that required growth and development before His incarnation.  If an agreement was made, they add to this covenant a hierarchy and a power structure.  

Some suggest that Jesus had to choose between incarnation and equality with the Father, as though he was a developing youth before the earth was created (Denny Burk at the Evangelical Theological Society).  Some homeschooling advocates claim that Jesus was homeschooled by the Father in heaven, long before creation and human history, during His development period (Doug Phillips in at homeschooling conferences in the late ‘90s).  And some maintain that Jesus does not have the authority to hear an answer prayer but only delivers prayer to the Father (Bruce Ware in private communications to verify his beliefs).

Along with the immature Jesus concept comes the idea that God the Father rules and reigns over God the Son -- that the Father always has and always will.  Why is this significant?  It allows men like Ligon Duncan to claim that their view of marriage and gender derives directly from the Doctrine of God, and it gives them the illusion that their doctrine is therefore sound and just.  It also suggests an elite status for those who agree with them or are numbered among them.

What Should We Believe and Why?
We must ask ourselves just who it is that we believe.  Do we believe what is actually written in Scripture first about who God is, or do we just trust in what people tell us we should believe?

Ralph Smith claims that there were four Reformed theologians who first accepted the Covenant of Redemption.  Three of those men were Dutch Reformed theologians (Johannes Coccieus, Herman Witsius, Gisbertus Voetius), and one was a German theologian who helped pen the Heidelberg Confession (Caspar Olevianus).  Where can you find a clear support in the Bible for the “Covenant of Redemption”?  If you do accept their concept, do you believe that this indicates that their is an obligatory hierarchy among the persons of the Godhead? (Many believe that this distorts the Covenant of Redemption and falls into a semi-Arian heresy that makes Jesus a lesser God.)   And if you go this far in your ideas, do you believe that gender is a reflection of this presumed hierarchy in the Godhead and that gender is directly connected to God’s identity?  What Scripture tells us this clearly?  Do you have to review two or three CBMW publications or published works to answer that question?  If you believe this much, do you believe that rejection of CBMW’s concept of gender renders those people open theists who reject God’s identity and those who worship a false God?  How far are you willing to follow?  Ask yourself just who and what you are following.

I believe that Ephesians 5 directs all believers to submit to one another and that wives should submit to their own husbands as husbands love their wives by treating them in the same way that they treat their own bodies.  We are called to service as Christians and to be patient as well.  We need not create doctrines or teachings that are not clearly found in Scripture in order to affirm these principles.  I do not believe that the Book of Ephesians or any other Scripture affirms any kind of intrinsic, ordained gender hierarchy based on creation order, ontology (essence), or teleology (purpose).  And I definitely deny that this hierarchy connects back to a hierarchy among the Persons of the Godhead because I deny that there is one.  Jesus was no developing youth god who had to choose between equality with and any other aspect of Himself, and as the Author of Creation, He didn’t need to be homeschooled by God the Father before the creation of the earth.  

Is this what you believe?  Think about what you have been taught and upon what principles these ideas have been constructed.  The choice is yours.

Read more about the concept of the Trinity on the archive site HERE.

Link to other posts on UnderMuchGrace HERE.


.