Quoting Quiverfull: Taking The Cup?

Quoting Quiverfull: Taking The Cup? January 19, 2014

A review of the “To Be One” DVD about Courtship/Betrothal/Marriage by The Old Schoolhouse Magazine

My only reservation in recommending this video is the Lindvall story. I want to be gracious to the Lindvalls, but I was quite troubled by their story. My first concern was the process of choosing a wife for Timothy. According to all the men in the story, the Lord had “told” each of them that Brittany was the one for Timothy. The process of winning Brittany seemed to lack any emotion or feeling on the part of the prospective bridegroom, because the Lindvalls believe love should follow commitment, not precede it. I had to wonder how honest it is that we believe we can truly guard our hearts from all feeling toward someone we are considering for marriage. I also question the decision making based on personal revelation not given in Scripture.

Next, according to Jonathan Lindvall, when Jesus gave the cup to His disciples at the Last Supper, this was a wedding proposal according to the custom of the day, and this act informed the church’s understanding of the marriage of Christ and His church. Therefore, when Timothy gave Brittany a cup at a family supper, everyone understood he was proposing. If she took the cup and drank from it, she would be accepting the proposal. Of course, she did accept, but I cannot help wondering how she could possibly refuse since the Lord had “told” all the men involved that she was the one for Timothy.

Comments open below

 

QUOTING QUIVERFULL is a regular feature of NLQ – we present the actual words of noted Quiverfull leaders and ask our readers: What do you think? Agree? Disagree? This is the place to state your opinion. Please, let’s keep it respectful – but at the same time, we encourage readers to examine the ideas of Quiverfull honestly and thoughtfully.

NLQ Recommended Reading …

Breaking Their Will: Shedding Light on Religious Child Maltreatment‘ by Janet Heimlich

Quivering Daughters‘ by Hillary McFarland

Quiverfull: Inside the Christian Patriarchy Movement‘ by Kathryn Joyce

 

"'But no-one came that was sick'If only sick people could spread the virus, this would ..."

Jill Rodrigues Breaking Ohio’s Mandatory Stay ..."
"hope she gets a quantity discount, a whole case of Mary Kay is probably 30% ..."

Jill Rodrigues Breaking Ohio’s Mandatory Stay ..."
"I believe the IRS is already examining his curious company filings. Have heard it from ..."

Open Thread Covid 19, Some Funny ..."
"Better than the 3% single layer ones."

COVID 19 Open Thread – A ..."

Browse Our Archives

Follow Us!


TRENDING AT PATHEOS Nonreligious
What Are Your Thoughts?leave a comment
  • Joy

    So I take it the Lord didn’t inform Brittany of whom she was to marry? I’d have thought she was one of the two people who needed to know the most!

  • Nea

    Wow. The only thing that article missed was discussing how many cows and goats made up the bride price.

  • Saraquill

    Way to objectify Brittany.

  • Trollface McGee

    Lucky Brittany, not only does she not get any input into the whole marriage business but she gets to marry a guy who clearly does not love her and is marrying her because people told him to.
    The other thing that bugs me is that article used the term “legally binding” referring to betrothal. There is no such thing as a legally binding betrothal and it’s scary to think that there are people in that culture that might think that they are legally obligated to through a marriage in that manner.

  • Nea

    Legally binding refers to a legal contract. Which only makes it all the more naked that a woman is being sold here.

  • Nea

    To be fair on rereading this, even the fundie person reviewing it is saying “this is really creepy.” Because it is!

  • Trollface McGee

    Ah but such a contract would be void on public policy grounds(unlike these guys, the law is pretty clear that marriage is a consensual agreement and not a property transfer). Not arguing with you, it just made me curious to think whether some of these marriages happen not only because of the family pressure of everyone (but you) agreeing that you’re going to marry [x] but also because you think you’ve legally had your rights signed away.

  • Nea

    I should think the majority of them. How often have Vaughn and other of the “courtship” crew repeated that a betrothal is “legally binding” and followed that with the intimation that not only is breaking the promise illegal, but will damn you as well?

  • Catherine

    Didn’t the Chapmans’ “legally binding betrothal” consist of a JOP wedding ceremony?