Today we take a closer look at a popular Bible study, Freedom for Mothers, by Denise Glenn of MotherWise Ministries, Houston, TX. Although Freedom for Mothers and its precursor, Wisdom for Mothers, are festooned with glittering endorsements from an impressive stable of Christian luminaries, one must wonder if any of those quoted actually read this material cover to cover, line by line. Freedom for Mothers purports to be "a bible (sic) study for moms based on John 15. This is an in-depth Bible study with practical mothering tips and instruction for prayer time."
Like Wisdom, Freedom for Mothers is divided into ten units. Each unit represents one week of study. Each week is divided into five daily lessons. In the interest of time and space, we'll limit ourselves to "Say What?!" examples from Units 3, 5, and 7 (there are lots more, but we'll just touch on these.)
Red flags wave vociferously throughout Unit 7, but let's start in Unit 3, The Principle of the Branch: the Root of the Problem, pp. 65 - 91. On page 71 Glenn writes:
"Jesus used an old garment and an old wineskin to illustrate our minds and hearts. Even if we get a 'patch' of His Word and 'sew' it onto our old thought patterns, it will 'tear' when 'washed' in the swirling waters of life's difficult circumstances. The new and old can't work together. We need an entirely new garment.." (Freedom for Mothers, p. 71)
If we take the old wineskin of our attitudes, behaviors, and thought patterns as a mother and pour in God's Word, the old thnking patterns won't be able to contain the new powerful truths. The old will be shattered by the new. No, we must have new wineskins and new ways of thinking and new attitudes - to contain the new wine of Jesus' powerful life within us
Drawn from Matthew 9:16-17, this paragraph opens Unit 3 of Freedom for Mothers, The Anatomy of the Flesh. Not a bad analogy. But in proper context, is it the point of Matthew 9:16-17, or another example of "Denise Digressions" - playing fast and loose with the text to make her point - rather than allowing the text to speak for itself?
In context, Jesus has just healed two deomon-possessed men in the Gadarenes, where the people begged him to leave. Gadara is about six miles southeast of the Sea of Galilee. Apparently at their request, Jesus steps into a boat and "came to his own town" (vs. 1). There he heals a paralytic and outrages teachers of the law by forgiving the man's sins (vs. 2-8). He calls Matthew at his tax collector's booth (vs. 9) and soon thereafter John 's disciples come and ask him questions about fasting. Here's where we jump in at verse 15:
"Jesus answered, `How can the guests of the bridgroom mourn while he is with them? The time will come when the bridegroom will be taken from them; then they will fast. No one sews a patch of unshrunken cloth on an old garment, for the patch will pull away from the garment, making the tear worse. Neither do men pour new wine into old wineskins. If they do, the skins will burst, the wine will run out and the wineskins will be ruined. No, they pour new wine into new wineskins, and both are preserved."
In ancient times goatskins were used to hold wine. As the fresh grape juice fermented, the wine would expand, and the new wineskin would stretch. But a used skin, already stretched, would break.
Glenn muddles the plain sense of Matthew 9 with an attempt to equate "old wineskins" with "attitudes, behaviors, and thought patterns" and the flesh. (This view may have its roots in Liberty Savard's teachings and writings, referenced in the Notes section of Freedom for Mothers. Savard's teachings are not endorsed by credible Bible scholars.)
While Glenn's interpretation is Biblically valid in a broad sense, it clearly misses the point of this passage in Matthew. Here the Lord Jesus Christ uses a word picture that He brings a newness that cannot be confined within the old forms of the Old Testament. This is Law vs. Grace 101 - defining an old wineskin as "the flesh" rather than the old forms of religiosity may be a stretch (pun intended).
In Unit 5, The Principle of the Shears: Pruning the Branch (pp. 117- 152), Glenn isn't satisfied with the Biblical list of "deeds of the flesh" noted in Galatians 5:16-21. She seems compelled to include "... a detailed list of some patterns of `flesh' or self-nature" based on Discover the Master's Plan for Mastering Life, something published by "the Association of Exchanged Life Ministries, Inc." in 1993.
Curious? Here's the list:
Anger, anxiety, argumentative, biotry, bitterness, boastful, bossy. Causing dissension, conceited, controlling, critical trongue, depression, envy, fear. Feelings of rejection, feelings of worthlessness, gluttony, hatred, idolatry, impatience, impulsiveness. Impure thoughts, inadeuqcy, indifference to other's problems, insecurity, lasy, loner, materialistics, negativism, opinionated, overly sensitive and overly submissive. Passivity, pride, profane, rebellion at authoriity. Resentment, self-centered, self-confidence, self-deprecation, self-hatred, self-indulgence, self-justification, self-pity, self-reliance, self-righteous, self-sufficiency. (Take a deep breath now. We're almost there.) Sensuality, sexual lust, slow to forgive, stubbornness, temper. Too quick to speak, undue sadness. Vaniety, withdrawal, workaholic, worrier. (Wouldn't it be easier - and quicker - to just say, "If you're breathing, you're engaged in `patterns of flesh'? That seems to be the point of this exercise.)
Well. "Argumentative", "stubborn" and "opinionated"? There goes the legal profession! And those stalwart members of the Dutch and French Underground (to cite just one example) who "stubbornly" resisted the Third Reich during WWII? Tsk! Tsk! How 'bout pro-lifers who "stubbornly" stand up for the unborn and insist on their protection? Or the apostles who "stubbornly" spoke up for Christ, obeying God's commands rather than the edicts of Rome? "Undue sadness, overly sensitive to criticism" and "overly submissive"? According to whom? What is "overly submissive", by the way? And is someone standing by with a stopwatch to determine who is and isn't "too quick to speak"? "Slow to forgive," "passive," "loner", "indifferent" or "negative" - compared to what? Who makes that call?
We could go on, but you get the point. Perhaps the biggest problem with this extra-Biblical "list" is that its contents appear in a vacuum, without context or definition. "Anger" and "temper" sans context make the Lord Jesus Christ's action in overthrowing the tables in the temple "fleshly" or proceeding from "self-nature."
See what I mean?
This list can also encourage finger-pointing at others based on some questionable calls. Also note that a hefty portion of this list can be reasonably linked to specific temperament or personality types that may have little or nothing to do with "patterns of the flesh" or "self-nature." Some "patterns of the flesh" in this list, such as depression, may arguably arise from chemical and other imbalances as well as external factors beyond one's immediate control. Does that make them "fleshly"? I understand the point Glenn's trying to make here, but this is quite a stretch.
Let's move on.
Unit 7, The Principle of the Bud: Grafted to the Vine (pp. 173 - 200) hoists offers a fleet of red flags. Glenn opens this unit on p. 180 with a brief discussion of positive and negative self-esteem. She writes:
"How a mother views herself - who she is and why she is on earth - makes all the difference in her mothering. Mothering from a poor self-image makes for poor mothering. Mothering from an overly positive self-image may be even worse.
We mothers need to know who we are. We need to know why we are here. It is the only solution in having an accurate perception from which to mother our children.
I have incredibly good news for you. I can't wait wait to share this week's lesson with you because there are some liberating truths in God's Word that can change the esteem you have for yourself forever."
Glenn uses the word "self" (or a derivative) eight times in half a page. Personally, I'd rather focus on Jesus Christ than on me, myself, and I and my "self-esteem." But here's another issue. A big one. Down a couple sentences, Glenn writes:
"Let me put it as simply as I can. You were born with a desperately sinful nature (Romans 1:18). It was not responsive to God at all. When you came to Christ, that old sinful nature died (Romans 6:6). It no longer exists(emphasis added)."
The old sinful nature "no longer exists"? Really. Then why do Christians sin? If the old sinful nature "no longer exists" as Glenn asserts, are Christians sinless? Hmmm.
A careful reading of Romans 6:6 doesn't support Glenn's claim: "For we know that our old self (the old, unregenate self in its pre-Christian state, dominated by sin) was crucified with him so that the body of sin might be done away with, that we should no longer be slaves to sin - (verse 7) because anyone who has died has been freed from sin. (NIV)"
"That the body of sin might be done away with or destroyed" is not - repeat, NOT - the equivalent of saying "the old sinful nature does not exist"!!! Paul is NOT espousing the doctrine of sinlessness here, which Glenn's comments seem to imply or infer. The word destroyed here is katargeo, meaning "to make of none effect, to be paralyzed or canceled or nullified - "that we should no longer be slaves to (or serve) sin. (emphasis added)." Don't miss verses 7 - 12 which clarify the theme. Paul is NOT saying - repeat, NOT - that the old man nature has been eradicated or that it "no longer exists." He's saying that since the old man is crucifed, the body of sin has been put out of business, so that from now on we should not be in bondage to sin. Not sinless, but free from sin's shackles and power (v. 7). That's a far cry from claiming that "the old sinful nature no longer exists." (For a thorough and Biblically sound exegesis of Romans 6, see Commentary on Romans by Anders Nygren, pp. 230 - 248.)
Additional Observations:
-- Chiefly problematic is Glenn's penchant for proof-texting and her frequent violation of the historical-grammatical method of Biblical exegesis. The presentation is zealous but sloppy (see comments above.)
-- At 270+ pages, Freedom for Mothers is twice as long and half as lucid as it could be. Newbies are likely to find this plodding tome tedious and overly ambitious. A number of women with whom I spoke dropped out around Unit 5 or 6 with comments like "too long", "don't have time", "way too many pages", etc.
-- The Contents portion of this tome (pp. 9-10) lists ten units and Mothering Skills, but lacks page numbers for easy reference. Not exactly "user friendly."
-- Utilizing the old "shotgun approach," Glenn sprays superficial "Bible bullets" all over her text rather than focusing on salient points and topics and covering them in-depth. Leaps in logic as wide as the Grand Canyon open at times between one unit, topic or text and the next, leaving the study virtually incoherent in places.
-- Much of Wisdom and Freedom is written from the perspective of a white, middle or upper-middle class American (at least in the edition noted). Assumptions are made about jobs, bank accounts, leisure activities, homeowner status, family chemistry, disposable income, etc. that are inaccurate (and possibly offensive). See the Mothering Skills Discussion, Toys and Technology: Tots to Teens in Unit 3, pp. 67 - 70a.
Another example is Glenn's "Christmas Jar Miracle" testimony (pp. 217 - 222) includes a perspective some struggling moms may find hard to swallow and/or identify with. This is perhaps best summed up in Glenn's statement on p. 219: "At the end of the next pay period, I took the surplus left in the checking account, got it in cash, and put it in the jar. I knew how much money was in the jar and it wasn't much. In fact it was one-tenth of what we usually spent on Christmas."
Glenn uses the word "surplus" five times in one page, which may leave some moms thinking, "Surplus??? What's THAT??!!"
-- Glenn has a penchant for overusing the more familiar, rather diluted "Jesus" instead of His full regal title, the Lord Jesus Christ.
-- Several ladies I spoke to indicated that they found Glenn a gifted devotional writer or storyteller, but NOT a Bible scholar. This is obvious throughout Freedom.
-- Members of the MotherWise board or review committee remain anonymous and/or inaccessible. Readers may want to keep this in mind - and wonder why.
-- Glenn's "yuck-yuck," Pollyanna persona in the accompanying video appeals to some women as "warm" or "charming," but it may turn off (or irritate) those who are more serious and scholarly. This may be compounded by the overuse of colloquialisms and vernacular, such as the cloying "love bucket" analogy in Unit 2 (pp. 41 - 45).
-- Glenn cites sources for some of her units/concepts which may give cause for pause, such as Liberty Savard and Joyce Meyer (see pages 278-79.) For example, Glenn refers to "a new way to look at Matthew 16:19" and praying Savard's peculiar interpretation of this "binding and loosing" passage "concerning our attitudes and actions concerning money" (p. 218). Savard's teaching is based on a faulty understanding of the context of Matthew 16:19 that is repudiated by credible Bible scholars.
-- Astonishingly, Glenn doesn't consult (or at least never sources) any leading Bible scholars for this study (Strong's Greek Dictionary or Strong's Hebrew and Chaldee Dictionary are not primary source materials, but reference tools). This should tell us something. Readers may wonder why authoritative evangelical sources/expositions are lacking in "an in-depth Bible study" purportedly "based on John 15." Conspicuous by its absence in Glenn's slapdash approach to Romans 6 - 9 are two of the finest scholarly commentaries ever written on the subject by C.E.B. Cranfield and Anders Nygren. We can only wonder why? (This should also tell us something.)
-- A line from the 1985 movie Out of Africa sums up most of this study. Turning to Denys Finch-Hatton (Robert Redford), Baroness Karen Blixen (Meryl Streep) inquires, "Is life really so d**n simple for you, Finch-Hatton?" The baroness has a point. We could ask the same question of Freedom for Mothers. Some may find Freedom's one-size-fits-all, formulaic approach to complex and often thorny issues and problems overly simplistic or inane.
To be fair, some of the above may be minimized or averted depending upon the skill and training of leaders at the local level. New believers or unseasoned, untrained Christians probably won't notice these deficiencies and may genuinely benefit from MotherWise materials. Women with sharp, alert minds and analytical skills should, and may opt to look elsewhere for more mature, balanced Bible studies.
Freedom for Mothers, by Denise Glenn of MotherWise Ministries. Published 1999 by Multnomah Publishers, Inc.
Posts
