Another Interesting Quote from Pearl

My friend, Rebecca Diamond, brought this quote from Michael Pearl to my attention.  It is from his website: Rodless Training from June 1999 (emphasis mine):

“There will be times when a spanking is appropriate. But you are prevented! Then use your power as the caretaker and dispenser of all privileges and responsibilities to make his actions totally counterproductive. If you can’t spank the flesh, starve it with an embargo. Stand your ground and do not let the little fellow find satisfaction in his pursuits. Stay on duty, demanding obedience until he surrenders his will to your persistence. If there is a way to deny him access to some means of indulgence that relates to the offense, then by all means as governor of the island on which he lives deny him normal privileges until he complies.”

The reason I find this quote so interesting is that the bolded reminds me so much of the Williams Tragedy. For more posts about the Williams see here.

The Pearls Remain In The News

Lisa Belkin of The Huffington Post asks, Can Adoption Lead to Child Abuse?

Elizabeth Esther explains why we should hold the Pearls accountable for their teachings in Are the Pearls to blame for child spanking deaths?

Clay Duda of the Juvenile Justice Information Exchange takes a look at the history of corporeal punishment in Spanking at Home and in the Classroom, What’s Right and Wrong?

The story has gone international as this post in the Belfast Telegraph demonstrates.

In fact, the story is so big that even Psychology Today is writing about it.

Oh, and by the way, the NY Times Article and its spawns showed us the happy congregation and their happy children.  Read Dulce De Leche’s explanation of why they look so happy.

 

Hana “Williams” Story on CNN

Gary Tuchman of CNN covers the case of Hana Alemu (legally Hana Williams as she was adopted by Larry and Carri Williams) on A360 in Ungodly Discipline. They plan to look closer at the book, To Train Up A Child by Michael and Debi Pearl.

The next day they featured an interview with Michael Pearl.   Here is the transcript. The part in question is about half way down.

Also  on CNN, Dr. Drew interviews Michael Pearl about his book, To Train Up A Child, in an episode called, Preaching discipline that can kill?  This video seems to be just an excerpt.  If I find the entire show, I will replace the link.

Pearl’s Official Response to Hana’s Death

Michael Pearl  has released an official statement on the tragic death of Hannah Williams on his No Greater Joy Facebook Page.  This time he is not laughing.  He explains that he tells parents not to abuse and gives some quotes to back that up.  He didn’t even quote where he said not to use punishment on a child who has medical issues for not obeying, which I consider to be his best defense.  However, I do not agree with him that anyone can follow his advice without being abusive, as he and I do not agree on our definitions of abuse.  In fact, he never actually gives his definition of abuse, which is part of the problem.  He says not to abuse but never tells them how far to go (other than to be 100% consistent) nor what constitutes abuse.  Then, every time someone crosses the (invisible) line, he blames them for not doing it correctly.

Here is his statement for those who can’t or won’t visit Facebook:

Hanna Williams’ Death – Official Statement

by No Greater Joy Ministries on Thursday, October 6, 2011 at 12:07pm

We share in the sadness over the tragic death of Hanna Williams. What her parents did is diametrically opposed to the philosophy of No Greater Joy Ministries (NGJ) and what is taught in the book, To Train Up a Child (see quotes below). We are grieved by Hanna’s death as well as the nearly 1,700 other children that die in this country every year as the result of neglect or abuse. This is part of the motivation of NGJ to provide materials that are helping parents to raise healthy and happy children.

Here are quotes from the book that actually warn against abuse.

“Train up-not beat up. Train up-not discipline up.” “A child needs more than ‘obedience training’, but without first training him, discipline is insufficient” page 4

“Disciplinary actions can easily become excessive and oppressive if you set aside the tool of training and depend on discipline alone to do the training.” Page 9

“Parent, have you trained yourself not to discipline immediately but to wait until your irritation builds into anger? If so, then you have allowed anger to become your inducement to discipline.” Page 25

“Parent, if you are having problems with your children, you can be assured that you are not alone. Your children are also having problems with you. You are going to have to make adjustments in your own life if you are going to help them with their problems.” “… the responsibility for making a significant change is completely yours.” Page 32

“There are always some who act in the extreme. These individuals are capable of using what has been said about the legitimate use of the rod to justify ongoing brutality to their children.” page 50

“The rod should never be a vent for parents’ anger. Where the supreme motivation is anything other than the child’s good, it is inevitable that such behavior by the parent will assuredly create problems.” page 51

These quotes and the rest of the book are about turning the hearts of parents to the children and the hearts of children to the parents.

If, as alleged, Hanna’s parents owned a copy of the book, it is obvious from these quotes and their actions, that they either have not read it or totally ignored its contents. The book repeated warns parents against abuse and emphasizes the parents’ responsibility to love and properly care for their children, which includes training them for success. There are thousands upon thousands of parents (the book has sold over 660,000 copies) who have and are properly applying the philosophy in the book with the joyous results of happy, productive, well-adjusted children in loving successful families.

The alleged presence of the book makes it no more responsible for Hanna’s death than the presence of a weight loss book in the home of an overweight person is responsible for their obesity. Its presence is actually recognition that there was a problem and obtaining the book was an effort to solve it. Unfortunately, if Hanna’s parents own a copy they chose to ignore (or twist) the contents of the book that could have corrected their poor parenting and prevented the abuse and her death.

It is our desire to redouble our efforts to help families and to prevent future tragedies.

Michael Pearl, President

No Greater Joy Ministries

He is wrong about the Williams obtaining the book in an effort to solve the problem.  They were using the Pearls’ materials for years before they adopted Hana and Immanuel.  I don’t know how long ago they last read the book, but I have said many times that they twisted the advice therein.  The only reason I link the Pearls to this tragedy at all is because of their Parents Must Win Every Battle At All Costs mindset which I feel could have something to do with the Williams’ need for control.  I suspect that after all those years of Perfectly Obedient Children resulting from following the Pearls’ teachings, the fact that they were unable to get results from their adopted children pushed them off the deep end.  I could be wrong, but this is how it looks to me.  I thought that back  on Sept 6 and the more I learn, the more it looks that way.

The Pearls’ Book NOT Banned in New Zealand (Working on Amazon)

New Zealand’s Censorship Compliance Unit has decided not to ban nor restrict Michael and Debi Pearl’s book, To Train Up A Child, according to this article in the Marlborough Press.  While I don’t believe in book banning, it seems to me that if a country has that policy, this book should fall into that category and I am a bit confused as to how they reached their decision.

I do believe in encouraging book sellers to stop selling offensive books and so does  Milli Hill at Peaceful Parenting who explains why Amazon should stop selling books which promote Child Abuse, especially To Train Up A Child. This piece includes a long quote from Debi Pearl in which she explains how one should use the switch on a child under one year old.

Note: The petition to which she links is the same one to which I link in my side bar. If you have not signed it, please sign it and share the link. Thank you.

Why Blame The Pearls At All?

 

Many people question why anyone could possibly blame the Pearls at all for the death of Lydia Schatz. I totally understand the question. No matter what the Pearls teach, they did not actually hit the child. And they insist that the Schatz family did not follow their instructions properly.  So, did they? Well, we can’t really know for sure. I would like to explain here how I  believe that the Schatz parents could have been following the teachings of Michael and Debi Pearl to the letter and still killed Lydia Schatz.

First of all, let’s look at who Lydia Schatz was. This post explains her background. She was adopted from Liberia at the age of 4. She did not learn to obey at an early age, she learned to be stoic in an orphanage where showing weakness could be fatal. She might even have had Reactive Attachment Disorder (RAD).  It is important to note that all the children who have died at the hands of parents who were following the Pearls’ teachings have been adopted.

Now, let’s look at the Pearls’ teachings.  Pearl teaches that the parent must be 100% consistent. Here is a rather long quote from the book, To Train Up A Child to show this teaching in context:

BE ASSURED OF TWO THINGS:

1. Every small child will have one or two times in his young life when he will decide to take hold of the reins. The stubbornness is profound–amazing–a wonder that one so young could be so dedicated and persevering in rebellion. It is the kind of determination you would expect to find in a hardened revolutionary facing enemy indoctrination classes. Parents who are trained to expect it and are prepared to persevere still stand in awe at the strength of the small child’s will.

2. If you are consistent, this test of authority will come only one, two, or, at the most, three times in each child’s life. If you endure, conquering the child’s will, then in the long run the child wins. If you weaken and let it pass to the victory of the child’s will, then by winning it is a character loss for the child. You must persevere for the both of you. The household cat who, regardless of protest, door barring and foot swinging, is occasionally allowed to stay in the house will take the occasional success as impetus to always try to get in. If he is consistently kept out (100% of the time), he will not come in, even when the door is left open. The cat, allowed to occasionally get its way, is trained, despite your protests, to come into the house. If you kick it hard enough and often enough, it will become sufficiently wary to obey while you remain on guard but will still bolt through the door when it sees the opportunity. On the other hand, dogs, thirty-five times smarter than cats, can be trained either to come in or stay out upon command. The key again is consistency. If the dog learns through conditioning (consistent behavior on the part of the trainer) that he will never be allowed to violate his master’s command, he will always obey. If parents carefully and consistently train up a child, his or her performance will be as consistently satisfying as that rendered by a well trained seeing-eye dog.

Note that they are saying that the parents must win every battle or all is lost. Now lets look at how one must respond to rebellion and/or disobedience. Consider the advice in this article from the Pearl’s website, No Greater Joy. Read that and consider how the parents can obey that advice if the child were to continue being rebellious without ceasing.

Now, on to the speculations. I (and many others) speculate that Lydia knew how to pronounce the word in question. I suspect that she had said it many times correctly, as it was a fairly common word, “pulled.” I believe that in the case of this homeschool lesson, she showed with body language or tone of voice that she was playing around or being rebellious and refusing to comply. She did not obey so they switched her. The problem is that she refused to submit. She did not pronounce the word correctly. She also probably thrashed and fought. Now the parents were put in the uncomfortable position of not knowing when to stop.   I’m guessing that they had read the article, In Defense of Biblical Chastisement and were following it.  I am  having trouble choosing a quote, I think you should go read the entire thing.  Ok, it is very long, so I will quote the main important parts.  Since Michael Pearl has accused us of taking his words out of context, I am going to take that as permission to include very long quotes:

How many licks?

There is no number that can be given. It would be better to administer more licks that are less forceful than to administer few licks that hurt severely. It is much more effective to administer chastisement or punishment in a slow thoughtful fashion. Our goal is to cause the child to voluntarily surrender his will. We want to impress upon him the severity of his disobedience. It takes time and thoughtfulness for the child to come to repentance. I have told a child I was going to give him 10 licks. I count out loud as I go. After about three licks, leaving him in his position, I would stop and remind him what this is all about. I would continue slowly, still counting, stop again and tell him that I know it hurts and I wish I didn’t have to do it but that it is for his own good. Then I would continue slowly. Pretending to forget the count, I would again stop at about eight and ask him the number. Have him subtract eight from ten, (a little homeschooling) and continue with the final two licks. Then I would have him stand in front of me and ask him why he got the spanking. If his answer showed that he was rebellious and defiant, he would get several more licks. Again he would be questioned as to his offense. If he showed total submission, we put it all behind us, but if he were still rebellious, we would continue until he gave over his will. Only about three of our five children ever resisted after a spanking and refused to cooperate. Each of the three required only one experience of continued spankings until they surrendered. None of the three ever tried it a second time. In all cases, it was between the ages of two and four that they tried their moment of defiance.

If you ever have a child who stands his ground of defiance and you let him win, you have lost his heart forever—unless you are able to go back and win a confrontation and keep on winning. If you ever let his rebellion triumph just one time, it makes it much harder to conquer in the future. After he gains the upper hand, one victory on your part will not be sufficient. You will have to persevere in several contests of wills until he is convinced that he can never stand against your authority.

Where on the body?

The Bible says, “the rod is for the back.” That would include anything that is not the front—the back from the shoulders down to the feet. When training, and not chastening or punishing, any convenient place on the body is effective. When you have told a child not to touch, and he reaches out, you can thump or swat his hand. If he is trying to climb down from his chair after being told not to, you can swat his legs. But when you are engaging the child in serious chastisement, the small of the back down to the thighs is the most effective. You can spank half as hard on the back with a light, stingy switch and be more effective than spanking harder on the bottom or thighs.

What if they fight back?

Children fight back because they think they have a chance of forestalling the spanking. First make sure the child never gains anything by fleeing. Second, cause the child to understand that he is further hurting himself by resisting. Slow down, stay calm. If you are in a frenzy, the child will respond in kind. If a child flees, don’t chase him. Wait and allow time for the tension to go out of the air. Slowly pursue him, explaining that he cannot win. If it takes a long time, that’s fine. Go to his hiding place and laugh at his frail attempts. Explain that if it takes fourteen days to bring him to justice, he will be brought to justice. Patience. Calm. Dignity. Wait until he calms down in the back of the closet, or under the bed, and as you sit outside, or just beyond him, quietly tell him that you are coming to give him his ten licks, but that since he has fled, he is now going to get one extra lick. Wait several minutes for him to calm down and listen with reason, and ask him how much ten plus one is. “That’s right, eleven. Would you rather have 10 licks or 11?” He answers “10.” Then tell him that it is too late to get just 10, but if he doesn’t come out immediately you will raise it to 12. He must have calmed down for him to make a rational choice. If not, then wait a little longer. Keep this up until you raise the stakes to about twenty licks, explaining to him that when you get to 20 licks you are coming after him. If he is locked in his room, explain that you will unlock the door. There is no escape. Be calm, non-threatening in tone. Just quiet dignity. Think of yourself as a high-ranking government official in charge of negotiations. Know that in the end you will win. It is the quality of the win that counts. You want him to voluntarily surrender. There is no “violence” that way. It is a great victory if you can get him to finally give over and take the few steps toward you. One win like this and you are likely to never have this problem again.

The Schatz parents continued to spank for 7 hours, taking breaks for prayer. Mr. Pearl does not say to do this. In fact, he warns parents not to abuse in that same article.

How often?

Each child will be different. Some four-year-olds will need five spankings a day, whereas others will need only one a month. Some children hardly ever need a spanking after they are seven or eight; others still need one after they are married. Not that anyone is going to spank him.

You should not spank beyond your fellowship with the child. If you feel that your spanking is excessive, it is because it is not working. If it is not working to produce happy, creative kids, then you are missing one of the other elements we discussed. You have probably forgotten how to relax and enjoy your children. Or perhaps you have failed to train. The bottom line is that if other things are equal, and you give a child a spanking every time he needs it, the time will soon come when he will not need to be spanked so often, and eventually not at all.

When is it abuse?

You are abusing the child when it starts doing harm to the child. Listen to your friends—especially to those friends that share your philosophy. Ask the opinion of people you respect. If they think you are abusive, get counsel in a hurry. Ask the opinion of your older children. If your child is broken in spirit, cowed and subdued, you have a problem. Children should be happy and cheerful, full of enthusiasm and creativity. If your children are fearful or anxious, you should get some counsel.

It’s too bad that his warning is very vague.  Apparently the Schatzes did not understand how to reconcile that warning with the insistence that they needed to continue giving licks until she submitted.   Maybe they were following this advice from the book, To Train Up A Child (page 80)

PERSISTENCE

Some have asked, “But what if the child only screams louder, gets madder?” Know that if he is accustomed to getting his unrestricted way, you can expect just such a response. He will just continue to do what he has always done to get his way. It is his purpose to intimidate you and make you feel like a crud pile. Don’t be bullied. Give him more of the same. On the bare legs or bottom, switch him eight or ten licks; then, while waiting for the pain to subside, speak calm words of rebuke. If the crying turns to a true, wounded, submissive whimper, you have conquered; he has submitted his will. If the crying is still defiant, protesting and other than a response to pain, spank him again. If this is the first time he has come up against someone tougher than he, it may take a while. He must be convinced that you have truly altered your expectations.

There is no justification for this to be done in anger. If you are the least angry, wait until another time. Most parents are so guilt laden and paranoid that they are unable to carry this through to the end.

If you stop before he is voluntarily submissive, you have confirmed to him the value and effectiveness of a screaming protest.

The next time, it will take twice as long to convince him of your commitment to his obedience, because he has learned the ultimate triumph of endurance in this episode in which he has prevailed. Once he learns that the reward of a tantrum is a swift forceful spanking, he will NEVER throw another fit. If you enforce the rule three times and then fail on the fourth, he will keep looking for that loop-hole until you have convinced him it will not work again.

Now, I truly believe that the Schatz did not have any idea in the world that this calm, methodical spanking could kill her. Let’s look at the cause of death, Rhabdomyolosis. Please read the linked post for an in depth explanation. Here are the pertanent quotes:

Rhabdomyolosis describes the condition which follows massive skeletal muscle deterioration, liberating large amounts of muscle cell waste into the bloodstream… “Rhabdo” refers to skeletal muscles. “Myo” means muscle. “Lysis” means rupture, creating the word “rhhabdomyolysis.” Rhabdomyolosis is the condition that results from rhabdomyolysis (the process). When muscle tissue breaks down, if it is in small quantities as happens naturally, the cells themselves contain enzymes (a natural digestive substance) which digest the tissue into very tiny particles. When exceptionally large numbers of muscle cells break down or are broken open due to great stress or trauma from beating, the muscle cells enter the bloodstream because there are so many and muscles have lots of blood vessels in them. When the blood becomes overloaded with these broken muscle cells (called myoglobin), they travel through the body. When they get to the kidney, these big broken cell pieces get pushed into the kidney and clog it. Within each kidney, there are one million tiny, very fragile structures called nephrons, tiny little special tubes which not only remove fluid and protein waste products but also absorb nutrients, acids, and bicarbonate back into the body. Each of the yellow tube-like structures (we each were given two million of them) regulates what remains in the tube, eventually becoming urine.

The muscle cell breakdown products look something like the broken muscle fragments that appear in the figure displayed above. The kidney is designed to handle only tiny particles that are dissolved in fluid, not cells or tissue breakdown products. These cellular byproducts get squeezed into the tiny tubes and clog them. During treatment in the hospital, patients are administered huge amounts of IV fluids to keep the pressure high, pumping constant fluid through the tubes so that debris does not lodge in them.

What happens when the tubes get blocked so much that fluids cannot open them? Each one of those affected tiny tubes dies, a condition called acute tubular necrosis. Necrosis means that something is dead and rotting. Those tiny little marvelous and fragile structures die. They die, turn black and rot. They don’t grow back. These patients will be compromised for the rest of their lives. If too many of those tiny tubes die, the body cannot process nutrients and wastes, it cannot balance acids in the body, and the kidney failure causes anemia, because another part of what the kidney does involves telling the bone marrow to make red blood cells.

So, yes it was totally the parents’ fault. They took bad advice, and took it to an extreme which the author did not intend. Mr. Pearl did not consider adopted children who will resist to the point of death. He still does not understand this or he would clarify, modify or add a disclaimer to his teachings. As far as I know, all he has done is to say that the Schatz couple was out of control and did not follow his teachings correctly. I submit that they followed his teachings too correctly. Mindlessly following a man’s teaching is not what Christians are called to do and for that they will answer to God.

(In Part 2  I discuss the deaths of Sean Paddock and Hana Williams.)

For more discussion of this topic, I recommend this post from Rosecommon Acres.

I also recommend this post from Created To Be His.

Recovering Grace from Bill Gothard

I was not aware that there is a site devoted to Shedding Light On The Teachings of IBLP and ATI (Bill Gothard’s Teachings.)  These sites are popping up faster than I can keep track of them, Praise the Lord.  I don’t have enough categories for all these abusive teachings, just tags, so  I’m happy to have these more organized sites to which to send people and which should pop up on search engines.

Along similar lines, Libby Anne looks at the promises made by No Greater Joy and Vision Forum and analyzes her Patriarchal parents’ inability to trust God with their children, realizing that it all boils down to A Trust Problem.

New Site: “No Greater Joy?”

beatenwithplumbingline has just started a new blog called, No Greater Joy?   The first, and so far only, post shows how the Pearls’ teachings violate Matthew 18:2-6.  This post also states the purpose of the new blog which is.

…to warn parents, pastors, and law enforcement of the dangerous and abusive parenting methods of Michael and Debi Pearl, as presented by their webside “No Greater Joy” and espoused in their book To Train Up a Child.  

Another purpose of this website is to preserve the memory of the children who have died at the hands of parents who abused them using Michael and Debi Pearl’s methods.

The blog contains 2 links, one to a news article about the Schatz story and the other to a news article about the death of Hana Grace-Rose Williams. What does her death have to do with the Pearls’ teachings? Probably nothing, but it remains to be seen. I have heard murmurings on the internet that her parents were Pearl followers, but it is all officially hearsay at this point.

Here is another article about Hana Grace-Rose Williams which includes a News Video from KomoNews.com and here is an article from Fox News which mentions that the family homeschooled all their children.

 

NoGreaterJoy.info

I have great news!  A like-minded person purchased the domain http://nogreaterjoy.info a while ago and after not getting around to making the site finally found mine.  By the grace of God, that URL now redirects to this one.  So, if anyone finds WhyNotTrainAChild.com hard to remember, they can give out NoGreaterJoy.info instead.    :-D

By the way, if that url gets enough sites linking to it, it will show up on the first page of a Google search for “No Greater Joy.”  ;-)

In other news, Steph is working on her next series, The Effects of Spanking.    Please pray that God will be glorified and that He will use her series to help children and their families.

Review of No Greater Joy Child-Training Doctrine

Scita>Scienda has finally released their eBook, Parenting In The Name of God.  Click on the link to see the table of contents and for a link to download the FREE pdf file.  Donations to defray the costs are gladly accepted.

Deb’s Review of TTUAC – Part 3

Deb has posted the 3rd and final part of her review of Michael Pearl’s book, To Train Up A Child. In this post she looks at how Pearl prevented “sissies” and trained his children to always be happy. She also looks at what he teaches about the rod. She says that what Pearl teaches about persistence bothered her the most. I totally understand that. It is exactly this emphasis on persistence which I suspect killed Lydia Schatz.

For your convenience, here are Part 1 and Part 2 and here is the Intro.

Spanking to Remove Guilt?

Back in October of 2010, Michael Pearl published an article where he claimed that he had never taught that spanking absolves a child of guilt.  He does, however, teach in that same article that they need the spanking in order to absolve themselves of guilt.

It is clear in all my writing that the forgiveness of which I speak is the parent forgiving the child. The two-year-old does not feel guilt before God. When he has willfully transgressed against his parents’ rules and he hides his misdeeds in shame, he has a psychological need to be cleansed of his guilt and restored to fellowship. This the parent can do through the proper application of the rod and reproof.

I guess we’ll have to agree to disagree on that point.  However, in his latest article of Feb 2011, he says that spanking can heal a child’s very soul. I don’t believe that anything or anyone but Jesus can heal our souls.

What a joy to possess the ability to instantly gain compliance and instill discipline in our children. However, the most mysterious, almost miraculous, fruit of the properly applied spanking is its ability to heal the child’s soul and create a sweetness of spirit.

I have here some quotes from other teachers which show this same doctrine about spanking being taught:

[Read more...]

Schatz One Year Anniversary

On February 6, 2010, Lydia Schatz died from kidney failure allegedly brought on from corporal punishment. Her parents were arrested and her siblings were questioned. The other children co-operated fully with all adults. They answered questions calmly and completely, explaining how Lydia had been having switching sessions because she would not comply. They explained how they were all chastised with plumbing supply line when they did not obey and how their parents got their parenting advice from the No Greater Joy website.    Sunday marks the first anniversary of this incident. As I do not post on Sundays, I am posting this today.

At the time of the tragedy, I was running a small site where I put all my links on the same page.  I was soon overwhelmed by the quantity of links relating to the tragedy.  On top of that, the server I was using had some problems and kept going down.  A good friend helped me move here by the grace of God.  I figured out how to organize better, but my early work was moved in large chunks.  All that to say that in order to commemorate the first anniversary of the Schatz Tragedy, I am reposting my links regarding it.  Please report any broken links by commenting or you may email me at hermanalinda@whynottrainachild.com

My first collection of news stories.

Reactions in the blogosphere.

More news stories and reactions..

CBS did an investigative report about the Schatz and other child abuse stories.

Newer stories about the Schatz story can be found under my Schatz tag.

Kevin and Elizabeth Schatz were charged with murder and torture. The trial is scheduled to start on Feb 28, 2011 after a trial readiness hearing on Feb 17th.


Another Pro-Spanker speaks out against Michael Pearl

Emily shares a quote from Michael Pearl and her response to it.  Ah, but she did not share where the quote can be found.  Lest anyone insist that they do not remember Mr. Pearl ever saying such a thing, I will share the citation.  It is from an article on the No Greater Joy Website called, Angry Child and was written by Michael Pearl in August of 1998.

Edited to add:  Emily has removed her blog post so I removed the link.  Here is the quote which upset her so, “I could break his anger in two days. He would be too scared to get angry. On the third day he would draw into a quiet shell and obey.”

The Schatz Abuse Story and the Paradise Post

As 2010 winds to a close, I am reflecting on the changes to this website.  I moved to this blog in March during the thick of the Schatz story.  Over the months I found more and more time passing between posts and started filling that time with posts about other controlling groups such as the Patriarchy Movement as well as helpful posts about Gentle Discipline.  I am very thankful to God for how He has been using this blog.  I wish my readers many blessings in 2011.

And now, The Paradise Post has released its Top 10 news stories of 2010 and the Schatz Abuse Story was number one.   I  post an excerpt from their story here for permanence:

Schatz, Smith lead top 10 news

Posted: 12/30/2010 01:00:00 AM PST

Once again the Post staff voted on the Top 10 stories of the Year. This year, the top story is the Schatz family abuse case.

1. Parents arrested in child abuse case

The ugliness of humanity reared its head in Paradise this year when two local parents allegedly beat their adopted daughter to death for mispronouncing a word.

Lydia Schatz, 7, died in February and her parents, Kevin and Elizabeth Schatz, are accused of killing her by using controversial disciplinary methods outlined in a religious training book, “To Train Up A Child,” by Michael and Debi Pearl, founders of the No Greater Joy Ministry.

In the aforementioned book, the Pearls recommend using a rubber quarter-inch plumbing supply line for disciplining a child. Elizabeth called emergency crews on Feb. 6 to report that Lydia was not breathing.

A storm prevented the girl from being airlifted to the hospital by the LifeFlight helicopter. Lydia was being rushed by ambulance to Chico Municipal Airport, but died en route. The autopsy of Lydia shows that the girl died of Rhabdomyolysis, a rapid breakdown of skeletal muscle due to injury to muscle tissue.

Lydia’s 11-year-old sister was also discovered with injuries and sustained kidney failure. She was not originally expected to survive, but made a full recovery after treatment at Sutter Memorial Hospital.

The Schatzes have six biological children and adopted Lydia, the 11-year-old, and a 3 month-old from the Republic of Libera in Africa.

Police said all the children made statements affirming being disciplined by rubber tubing found in the Schatz home.

The parents were charged with murder and torture, each facing life in prison. Kevin and Elizabeth retained separate lawyers and pled not guilty to the crimes.

The case has not been resolved. The Schatzes are scheduled to appear in court on Feb. 28, 2011 for a jury trial.

Good and Evil

I have come across a discussion of Michael Pearl’s book, Good And Evil, which is a comic book version of The Bible.

Actually, she mainly discusses their efforts to turn this graphic novel into a feature film and the video designed to raise funds for that project.

‘Good and Evil,’ the Graphic Bible, Considered With Dismay, by Stephanie Varnon-Hughes

What Does Mr. Pearl Really Believe?

Michael Pearl has a very interesting article on his website where he responds to Pastor Raley‘s warning against his teachings in his church bulletin.  Now, in this article, Mr. Pearl says that he did not say what Pastor Raley says that he said.  I found that very interesting and so I decided to go through the articles and get to the bottom of this.

I clicked on the links where Pastor Raley cites his quotes and used CTRL F to search for them.  Here are the quotes Mr. Pearl claims that he did not write and my findings.

When a descendant of Adam reaches a level of moral understanding (sometime in his youth) he becomes fully, personally accountable to God and has sin imputed to him, resulting in the peril of eternal damnation.

When man reaches his state of moral accountability, and, by virtue of his personal transgression, becomes blameworthy, his only hope is a work of grace by God alone.”

These quotes are found in Mr. Pearl’s article, What We Believe.

If you put yourselves under my authority, you can learn the secret to getting rid of your sins.”

This was a generalization which I don’t believe that Pastor Raley meant to attribute to Mr. Pearl.

…age of accountability.”

I do not believe that this was meant to be a quote from Mr. Pearl either.  I think Pastor Raley meant these as “scare quotes.”

…a work of grace by God alone

This was found in Mr. Pearl’s article, What We Believe.

In the next 4 paragraphs are quibbling about whether or not he used certain words which he certainly did use in the article, In Defense of Biblical Chastisement.   Michael Pearl says,

The next paragraph attributed to me contains 118 words. The first 50 words are entirely false and certainly do not represent anything I have ever written or said. It contains words I have never employed and concepts I have never endorsed, like “To the child, a righteous parent is a surrogate god.”

It is especially interesting to me how he protests that he never used the words, “Eternal God,” when he certainly did. He says in the article,

I wrote “the higher powers” with “powers” in plural and in all lower case letters. If I had wanted to say “The Eternal God” I would have done so. I ask, why does my critic want me to say something different from what I said? Why did he find it necessary to change my words in order to find fault? His quote is a lie, his criticism slander. Why? To what end?

The quotes are there, exactly as Pastor Raley quoted them, in In Defense of Biblical Chastisement.  I think that Mr. Pearl owes Pastor Raley an apology for accusing him of lying and slander.

He also claims to have not used the word, “give,”  although he uses it 8 times in that same article.

Apparently there was some confusion as Mr. Pearl thought that his book were being referenced and in actually it was his website. It seems a bit odd to me that he forgot to check the website, especially as it will pop up in a Google search of the first quote, but maybe I’m missing something.

In the rest of the article, Pearl argues that what he said is not really what he meant and that he fails to see how anyone could possibly think that he could have meant what we accuse him of meaning.  He further insists that to even suggest that he means such things makes it obvious that we have evil intent.  Ok, he did not actually say those words, I am paraphrasing. Of course, I’m probably misunderstanding him, so I’d better stop putting words in his mouth and quit while I’m ahead. I have proven that did write the quotes which he claims to have not written. I’ll leave the rest of the article for someone else to answer.


Update:  On Dec 10, 2010 Michael added a retraction to the bottom of this article to explain that he did, indeed, write one of those quotes.  He still maintains that he did not write the rest, especially the one which was meant to be a paraphrase.

Back to the Schatz case

This was posted back in May 2010, but I missed it.  It is good coverage of the Schatz story from a Christian news site.  The Schatz family has been on my mind lately since their trial is scheduled for Nov 1, less than 6 weeks away.  They have their trial readiness hearing on Oct 21st.

Here is another old article which I missed back in July.  It brings up the interesting question of a Venue Change.  As far as I know, that is the most recent news.

Call Me a Feminist…

Lisa at Unfiltered Insanity explains how she stumbled into a greater knowledge of the Pearls’ teachings which have greatly offended her. She explains why and is even willing to risk being called a feminist because of her stance in this blog entry: Call Me a Feminist.

Quotes from NJG website

This Review of the Pearls is from someone who agrees with many of the Pearls’ teachings (including the concept of training) but cannot get past some of the more outrageous quotes on their website.

Secular Homeschooling Magazine

The homeschooling movement is taking notice of the Pearls. Secular Homeschooling is a rather large magazine and they have written an exposé of the Pearls and their teachings. She looks at all aspects of the Pearls and gives some advice on how to respond when offered the book at a homeschool gathering.

To Train Up a Child: The Greater Problem by Deborah Markus

Parenting In The Name of God part 9

Parenting in the Name of God, Part 9 is up. To pique your interest, here is an excerpt:

At this time, we want to review the anecdotes offered by No Greater Joy’s articles and books of newsletter reprints. If anything, the theology of conditioned morality and holiness is fully connected in the object lessons and examples offered by the Pearls. We’ll see if we can trace the doctrinal threads of:

–revision of the moral nature of man
–revamping the nature of God
–restructuring the work of the Cross
–redefining human holiness

Parenting In The Name of God Part 4

Parenting In The Name of God Part 4 is up at Scita Scienda. If you have missed any part of this series, there is a link to it in my sidebar under Anti Pearl Resources.

Link to “Pearls” of Wisdom?

Just added to In-Depth Analysis links

“Pearls” of Wisdom? by Woman Uncensored includes numerous quotes from NGJ site