"laestadian, apostolic, gay, lgbtq, ex-oalc, ex-llc, llc, oalc, bunner" LEARNING TO LIVE FREE: Seeking Clarity in the Face of Tragedy

Friday, May 03, 2013

Seeking Clarity in the Face of Tragedy

I have watched a child die—suddenly, tragically, accidentally. It was the worst moment of my life, and a far worse one for the child’s parents and siblings. Left with a ghastly void in the space that a vibrant young life so recently occupied, we desperately seek to fill it—with explanations, rationalizations, comforting old sayings.

Richard George Davis, CC-licensed.
A preacher in the local congregation did his best to make sense of the senseless, a commendable and compassionate effort. His kind words of comfort at the funeral and in private conversations were pitch-perfect, offering a sense of fulfilled purpose to a devastated family. He shared a heartfelt Christian love with them, and with the shocked and grieving believers around them.

Their fondest hope for themselves and their loved ones is to reach the glory of heaven, he said. God had spared this child a lifetime of trials and temptations, bringing the reward to hand at a young age. The assurance about eternity was an attempt to offer some consolation, in the face of a very real tragedy that had been experienced right here on earth. It was religion serving its purpose, and doing it well: “O death, where is thy sting? O grave, where is thy victory?” (1 Cor. 15:55).

So what are you supposed to think when your religion is widely seen as playing a part in the unfolding of tragic events? It is hard to miss the possible connection when a mother from your church, a religion that strongly opposes birth control, reportedly tells officers she smothered the youngest of her nine children “because she thought she had too many children already and she was jealous of the attention her husband was giving to the baby” (Forghani 2013).



Clearly, the LLC and its Phoenix congregation (PLLC) condemn murder as sin, a violation of the fifth commandment as well as a crime. Its members and preachers are undoubtedly as dismayed as everyone else as they attempt to understand the alleged actions of a mother suffering “from bipolar, schizophrenia and depression” (Stout and Thomas 2013). The pastor of the PLLC wrote that “the Laestadian Lutheran Church desires to cooperate with mental health care providers, Child Protective Services, and law enforcement officials to provide care, treatment, and support following this tragic event” (Jurmu 2013).

Contending with Contraception

But Conservative Laestadianism—the revival movement of Lutheranism whose latest incarnation is the LLC and its Finnish counterpart, the SRK—has to contend with its harsh history and doctrine regarding birth control, in this case and others. It firmly rejects contraception in all its forms, not just artificial birth control but also natural family planning, coitus interruptus, or even abstinence except for limited cases of illness that are considered to fall under the “fasting and prayer” of 1 Cor. 7:5. (Hysterectomy can hardly be considered “contraception,” but even the occasional removal of a dangerously prolapsed or worn-out uterus is considered cause for sober discussion.)

The mother whose future offspring face danger from her mental illness gets no more accommodation than the one who faces the prospect of her own death from further pregnancies. At least not if the statement of the PLLC’s pastor in an infamous Mother’s Day sermon he gave nearly a year ago is any indication. He eulogized a “dear sister” who
once said, as she was struggling with her own life, she had a very difficult . . . in fact, a childbirth that was going to cause her to die. Prior to her pregnancy, the doctors had told them, husband and wife together, that if you have another child, the chances are very great that the mother will die. The husband and wife visited over this matter with the doctor and then amongst themselves personally. And they decided, amongst the two of them, that they would trust in God’s goodness. [Jurmu 2012, 38:10-39:00, emphasis added]
“God’s will” was that
this wife became pregnant. And after the birth of that child, it became evident that there was nothing the doctors could do to save this mother’s life. And in the final visit that the husband and wife had together, the husband asked his wife, “Are you bitter to God because of our decision?” The wife said, “Not at all.” She said, “I would much rather go to heaven with a clean conscience.” How simply this husband and wife trusted in the goodness and the protection and the care of the Heavenly Father. [Jurmu 2012, 39:00-40:10]
How would a mother of eight children, dreading the prospect of more and struggling with mental illness, take these words? Perhaps sitting there in the pew on her special day, not yet pregnant again, she may have heard the pastor praise a woman’s willingness to make the ultimate sacrifice for her faith, so she might “go to heaven with a clean conscience.” How would you take his words, dear believer?

Answering the Tough Questions

Jurmu’s sermon did not occur in isolation, but as one especially stark feature of a bleak authoritarian landscape. Can he be expected to shoulder individual blame for so clearly expressing the expectations of his faith? Is there anything doctrinally inconsistent with what he apparently said to a reporter, “God created Nina with her mental illness. He gave her all the children she could bear. And if she couldn’t handle more kids, God would’ve closed her womb” (Thomas 2013)?

Let’s take a look at a few of the written questions the reporter sent him (at his request), his written answers, and what the church has taught in the past several decades. The big question, of course, is the reporter’s first one:
What is the Phoenix Laestadian Lutheran Church’s stance on birth control?
The pastor’s response is a bit vague: “We believe that God is our Creator and the Lord over life and death. Regarding childbearing, we wish to accept children as gifts of God, as it is written, “Children are an heritage of the Lord” (Psalm 127:3). But then he refers to an LLC paper whose language is plenty clear:
Despite God’s command or ordinance, birth control is widely practiced. People defend their disobedience with a variety of reasons including the psychological and physical burdens of raising children, economics, pursuit of an education or a career, concerns about overpopulation, etc. These arguments are rooted in unbelief and selfishness. Believing husbands and wives know these arguments well. The threefold enemy frequently tempts us with them. We wish, however, to cast aside these arguments as well “and every high thing that exalteth itself against the knowledge of God,” and bring “into captivity every thought to the obedience of Christ” (2 Cor. 10:5). [Bloomquist 2010, 3, emphasis added]
Are there instances where you would encourage a couple to practice birth control? If so, what are those conditions and what would be an acceptable form of birth control? Have you ever encouraged a couple to use birth control—if so, why and which form?
Some online commenters have wondered why the husband of a frazzled, mentally ill mother could not “keep it in his pants.” The answer: His church tells him not to. Paul may be “cautiously allowing abstinence” in 1 Cor. 7, but he does not “encourage or give license to use abstinence as means to limit the number of our children or otherwise practice family planning” (pp. 3-4). When penis-in-vagina sexual intercourse is essentially forced on a married couple, except for a “short time” in which they might refrain (p. 3), they are being raped by their church.

And the “prevention of conception, or birth control, is contrary to God’s Word and good conscience” and “contradicts the teachings of God’s Word with regard to both creation and marriage” (p. 2). So the church’s plain answer to the reporter’s questions is, “No, none, never.”

That’s what it has been saying for the past forty years. The May 1990 issue of the LLC’s Voice of Zion newsletter equates birth control with abortion: “We know that one would not think of rejecting or destroying a gift at Christmas. Those who use birth control or abortion are rejecting the gifts God gives.” The August 1976 issue offers only pious scorn to the “lenient mind” that
sometimes puts pity for the mother before having love in the truth concerning family planning, especially then when humanly speaking, the birth could appear dangerous. We so easily forget that God has already before our birth ordained the number of our days and the form of our death.
Now, this sort of talk doesn’t go over very well when heard outside the church walls. And it has been heard recently, due to publicity and human rights concerns in Finland. In response, the SRK started playing some pleasantly soothing white noise, starting with the fifth 2009 issue of its Päivämies newsletter:
The preservation of the life of both the mother and child is important. A doctor, who has great professional ethics, helps humanity and respects a patient’s wishes by preserving life and maintaining health. Surely parents do not relate belittlingly to their doctor’s assessment given from a medical perspective. In difficult situations, faith guides us to make decisions based on preserving life according to God’s Word.
Bloomquist’s paper from a year later keeps the distraction going in the background as well:
On occasion there are also health and medical issues that may substantially increase those risks. In such circumstances a couple may face painfully difficult questions caused by the conflict between God’s command to be fruitful and multiply and their own concern for the mother’s life. Her life too is God’s gift and undeniably precious. In the face of such difficult issues, we feel our smallness and inadequacy. [p. 4]
There is no actual guidance in these words, just PR and perhaps some theological damage control. I would feel my “smallness and inadequacy” if I were tied to tracks awaiting an oncoming train. That doesn’t change the fact that my life is about to end in a messy way. But the “world” reads this stuff and feels a bit better about this odd little sect in its midst. Hey, look: They are acknowledging medical issues! Perhaps these people aren’t that unreasonable?

The harassed believing mothers who have started sneaking over to the pharmacy across town appreciate the reassuring vagueness, too. And so the suspiciously small families fill their portions of the familiar pew next Sunday. Other mothers holding toddlers against swollen bellies make silent calculations about the woman’s age (menopause already?) versus that of the scandalously mature baby of the family. Still, sometimes things go pretty well, with some version of “don’t ask, don’t tell” being practiced in the best of cases.

Not so Fast

But in the minds of Bloomquist and other vigilant watchmen on the walls of Zion, the issue really is non-negotiable. “Even in difficult situations, however, God’s children do not wish to abandon the perspective of faith for the perspective of science and reason.” What does this mean? Well, here’s what we are to understand that it doesn’t mean, somehow: “that believing fathers and mothers do not take medical information and advice into account” (p. 4).
Doctor: Sir, your wife is going to bleed to death if she gets pregnant again! Please let me explain how the birth control pill or condoms work, OK? 
Father: (Smiles, nods his head.) I hear you. But we accept all the children we’re given. Isn’t that right, dear?
See? Not ignored at all. Believers consider the information, Bloomquist says (p. 4), “in the light of God’s Word, faith, and conscience so that they might hold ‘the mystery of faith in a pure conscience’ (1 Tim. 3:9). Remember that “good conscience” Jurmu talked about on Mother’s Day 2012? The one that was preserved by the woman offering her life on the altar of unrestrained motherhood?

And remember what this “conscience” is that we hear about in the terse, vague statements that the LLC and SRK provide for public consumption. It is not an individual determination of right and wrong, but an imposed, collective sense of “what is right” or “what is taught as sin in God’s Kingdom,” as with this proclamation about the Internet, video, and video games:
We want to journey in obedience to God’s Word. If we have a different understanding of these issues than another family, we need to ask ourselves if we understand this matter as the Holy Spirit teaches in God’s congregation. There are not two different understandings of matters in God’s kingdom. [The Voice of Zion, 12/2005]
This is a church that has had little hesitation to impose a collective conscience, though Jurmu protests, “Childbearing questions vary greatly and are private matters, and we cannot give answers to cover all situations” (2013). Not to the outside world, anyhow. But inside the walls of Zion, in LLC churches and camps, during those visits about “the way and the journey” between individual believers, there is little room for variation:
Through faith we understand to abandon individual understanding and reason when it does not agree with the Holy Spirit in God’s kingdom. In God’s kingdom we have one understanding and one spirit as it must be in the living congregation of God. [The Voice of Zion, 8/2007]
And the stakes could not be higher. The martyred mother Jurmu praises may be dead, the lives of other women may be restricted and their health shattered, mentally and physically. But it’s nothing compared to what they fear most of all, the threat articulated by an article in the June 2001 Voice of Zion of eternal death, when “the loss of a soul is irrecoverable, and no compensation can be made for it any longer.” Then the “‘Son of Man’ will appear with all of His angels to execute judgment. Christ will then reward every person according to his works.”

“There is no way to escape the righteous judgment of God,” the article warns. Nor is there a way of escape from this vicious threat of damnation that was put into the minds of desperate young parents in their childhood and reinforced ever since. When the hell of eternity is the cost of disobedience, regarding birth control or anything else decided by the “living congregation of God,” it can seem like no amount of self-sacrifice in this one short life on earth would ever be too high a price to pay.

References

Bloomquist, Jon. 2010. God is Lord over life and death. Presented at LLC 2010 Ministers & Board Members Meeting, Rogers, MN. llchurch.org/topics/Lord%20Over%20Life%20Death.pdf.

Jurmu, Eric. 2013. Letter to Rebecca Thomas, April 30. Publicly accessible link provided in (Thomas 2013).

———. 2012. Sermon preached at Phoenix Laestadian Lutheran Church, May 13. archive.laestadianlutheran.org/sermons/Phoenix_2012/0513_EJurmu.mp3.

Navideh, Forghani. 2013. Phoenix police: Mom admits to smothering 6-day-old daughter. ABC15.com, April 26.

Stout, Steve and Rebecca Thomas. 2013. Woman arrested in suffocation death of 6-day-old daughter. KPHO Broadcasting Corp., kpho.com, April 26.

Suominen, Edwin A. 2012. Maternal martyrdom. Learning to Live Free blog, October 3. extoots.blogspot.com/2012/10/maternal-martyrdom.html.

Thomas, Rebecca. 2013. Ex-member: Church has “blood on its hands” in death of 6-day-old. KPHO Broadcasting Corp., kpho.com, May 2.



128 comments:

  1. All Laestadians need to read this essay.

    I'd like to point out that what is going on inside the walls of Finnish Zion regarding this issue of birth control is much different than American Zion. Yet, as is mentioned in this essay, "there can be only one understanding". This comment by Bloomquist was referencing the much LIGHTER issue of internet, video, and video games - not birth control.

    Its seems to me that the statement issued by the LLC after the news media sniffed out this story, is the most liberal statement we've ever seen, even though the content the statement references is the same traditional heavy handed LLC material. I'm in the LLC and I'm having a tough time wrapping my mind around "one understanding" and everything being the same "yesterday, today, and forever". Especially when these ideas are used to justify not using birth control and trivial things like internet, video games, etc.

    "But and if ye suffer for righteousness' sake, happy are ye: and be not afraid of their terror, neither be troubled." 1 Peter 3:14

    If Eric truly believed what he preached - which I think he does - then the above verse should be reassuring to him, and help him stand his ground. So why did he issue a statement that made the issue of birth control a complex issue, rather than the cut-and-dry issue its always been? If he had made a statement along the lines of what he preached, God would have made him happy in his suffering and not afraid of the terror of the media. At least according to the Bible verse.

    The frustrating thing to me is that our leadership represents the Mother Congregation, and now these leaders are issuing statements that I see as obfuscating the issue and talking out of both sides of their mouth. I wish they would take a stand on what they've ALWAYS preached for years and years, or else say that we've been wrong all this time. I could reconcile both options better than this double talk we are getting now. As of now, they are worse than politicians in my mind, and that is very disheartening. And everyone I know in the LLC shares my feelings, but it could be different in other areas. I'm not sure.

    Lastly, I would like to comment on Finland. Birth control, as I have always understood it, is not a matter of tradition, but a matter of faith. Yet, clearly birth control is widely accepted their amongst Laestadians in Finland. I've been to many, many, Finnish RYs and the benches are filled with small families. In the LLC, the situation glaringly opposite. So if our faith is the same "yesterday, today, and forever" and if we are of "one understanding", are the Finns our brothers and sisters in faith? or not? are we wrong? are they wrong? or is our doctrine wrong? These questions NEED to be answered by our leaders and so far they are ignoring them. All because of one reporter asking questions.

    Deep Roots

    ReplyDelete
  2. Deep Roots,
    Well said!

    ReplyDelete
  3. As a bipolar person, I found the discussion about the case quite terrifying. By blaming Nina's illness, people ignored the motivation she gave to her act. In my opinion, her reasons to do what she did don't refer to a psychosis but to this small church's horrible teaching that a woman can not decide about her body if she wants to go to heaven. As a Finnish conservative laestadian, I want to emphasize, that we don't teach that way. The "official truth" of SRK is that medical treatment preventing pregnancy is accepted if mother's life is in danger, and also in other extreme situations. I myself would also like to note that in many mental problems, avoiding stressful situations is crucial, if you want to stay balanced. Nevertheless, I think Nina had the right to get a big family. She's responsible of her decision to let her family grow to big for her.

    ReplyDelete
  4. I almost didn't want to read through all the convoluted material EOP wrote, and yet it is beautifully written, showing articulately how inarticulate the churches stance is.

    I can only imagine how disheartening it truly is, to see cracks appearing in a once solid understanding.

    I can also see why they rarely have outside scrutiny or having to respond in a reasonable manner, to justify and clarify their rules (sins).

    While it is unsettling, to put it mildly, it is also very enlightening and opens the ground for questioning and shuts off the following mechanism, and turns on the self awareness.

    It will be harder to have faith and blindly follow without questioning NoW, their (the leaders) wisdom and right knowing....NOW, that you have been witness to the double speak.

    It is this very double talk that confuses. Where is the one clear right path? How is it impossible to articulate, when you are demanding and preaching of the one way?

    Doesn't it seem like it would be not only easy, but shockingly so!

    My experience within the FALC, was this solid two sides. My mother too, had a double life.

    On one hand they both claimed high morals and high values and to extreme conservative. No TV. No Make-up. No swearing. No Birth control. No. NO. NO. But, when it came time to take a hard stance against sexual abuse, the hard wall disappeared. Blessings were handed out, his slate cleaned, time and time again.

    The weakness in knowing what to do against a man who abuses girls...compared to swearing or TV watching, was complete and utter madness.

    The preachers knew, the FALC neighbors knew, and yet no real actions were taken. Perhaps because there wasn't a clear rule to go by. The only rule they knew, was the forgiveness of sins...which was of no help to the little girls.

    I am watching this with knowing eyes...witnessing again the weak moral wall.
    I am sad for the faithful, for they now are wondering what they are faithful to?
    The double speaking inarticulate? How do you follow that, let alone have faith in it. Faith in which side?

    Thanks EOP for taking the time to wade through the swirling, twisting, sides.
    Beth Jukuri

    ReplyDelete
  5. Interesting . .

    ReplyDelete
  6. One thing I find ironic is that this woman commited a very obvious sin in killing this poor child, if she truely did so, but it did not bother her as to what others would think. On the other hand, she could not use birth control because she was supposedly worried about what others thought? Hmmm....
    -MEN

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. MEN, there's no evidence whatsoever that "it did not bother her as to what others would think." Her Laestadian upbringing would have made birth control a sin, but murder (remember, only alleged, not convicted) would of course be viewed as a sin, too, an awful one.

      Delete
    2. There is also no evidence that proves she did not take birth control because of 'concern over what others would think', yet that is seemingly fact on this site.
      -MEN

      Delete
    3. MEN, Phoenix Police reported that when Nina was asked why she killed her baby she answered, "had too many kids already". Why did Nina have too many kids?

      -Kari

      Delete
    4. Kari,
      That really was not the point of my statement, the point was they are both sin. Why was she able to do one and not the other? As far as answering your question, we really don't know. She could have been on birth control and it not have worked, likely not for all her children, but maybe for some. Perhaps at that point in her life one or two kids would have been 'too many'. I have heard of mothers of one saying they sometimes feel jealous of how much attention their significant other pays to the new arrival, most especially from mothers outside the church. Remember she was quoted as saying it all in one sentence, too many kids AND jealousy. I'm not sure if you're a mother, Kari, but have you ever felt like you have too many kids? I know mothers of two outside of the church who have expressed that sentiment, then go on to have a third. Why? I don't know myself, perhaps because they know they were stressed that day and didn't really mean it. Granted none of them have tried to kill their children as far as I know, but the point is, they have made the statements. Perhaps it was only the illness which made her different from other mothers.
      MEN

      Delete
    5. I just want to clarify that I don't mean to state that they are both sins, but that they are both supposedly preached as sins.
      -MEN

      Delete
    6. Yes, both are preached as sins within Laestadianism.

      Why was she able to do one [kill a baby] and not the other [take birth control]?
      As a Laestadian taking birth control is equivalent to killing all my future offspring I may have. This means that every time I have coitus, I will feel extremely guilty because I probably just killed my next child. If I kill one baby, I can have it forgiven and move on with my life.


      "Remember she was quoted as saying it all in one sentence, too many kids AND jealousy. I'm not sure if you're a mother, Kari, but have you ever felt like you have too many kids?"
      I am not a mother.


      "She could have been on birth control and it not have worked, likely not for all her children, but maybe for some."
      Nina is 36 years old and has birthed 9 offspring, clear evidence that she was not on birth control.

      -Kari

      Delete
    7. Convenient response. Your tone very much implies a civilized conversation (that's sarcasm). And as I Laestadian, I have to completely disagree with your statement in regards to it being equivalent to murder. Rather, it is equivalent to the acceptance that God will provide or not provide as he sees fit. It is a simple acceptance of GODS will for my life, not mine.

      She may not have started out on birth control, but you never know if she began taking it at some point.
      -MEN

      Delete
  7. I find that a difficult analogy to buy into. There's quite a difference between a few minute long act committed in a state of extreme mental delusion, than a logical decision to limit the amount of children you have that must be adhered to for many, many, years, under the scrutiny of your family and faith community. I don't think you can fairly compare the two.

    Deep Roots

    ReplyDelete
  8. Deep Roots said, "The frustrating thing to me is that our leadership represents the Mother Congregation, and now these leaders are issuing statements that I see as obfuscating the issue and talking out of both sides of their mouth." I came to realize when I was a member that your statement was the essence of the whole church by and large. Almost every subject had a double meaning-one for public or outsider consumption and then another actual belief. Even the doctrine of the church about faith had a double type of belief....'we believe in salvation through Jesus but we also believe in the necessity of confession and oh yes no TV's and by the way no dances, movies, make up etc....and that other church down the road well they do not have the Spirit as it is a 'dead faith' church. As I recall the Bible states that a 'double minded man is unstable in all his ways.' I would assume that the same would hold true for a double minded congregation. I heard quite a bit about the mother congregation and the elders in Gellivara and things like that when I was a member.....it was as if each group was trying to establish themselves as the absolute Laestadian authority. But consider that if everyone is trying to meet the standards of some elders or mother church then by definition those standards will be in conflict with the individuals standards as set by the Spirit within them. I noticed that what I call 'dual spiritualism' also spread to all other areas of life. Many were horrified that I was determined to go to college as I was told that I had to get into construction. I could go on and on. Without trying to sound critical, my whole upbringing seemed to be filled with a dual value system and my guess is that this dual kind of dual spiritualism & dual values is prevalent amongst all Laestadian groups starting with the elders & mother church types too. My somewhat limited background in psychology indicates that these double moralities, dual value beliefs with dual upbringings and preaching have all the potential to create mental instability including things like schizophrenia, borderline personality disorders and anxiety disorders. So now that the crisis has hit I am not surprised that the ministers are speaking out of both sides of their mouths as that is what they were groomed to do. Some one else might have better insights than me though. Old AP

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Old AP, I totally agree with you...And, I love "a double minded man is unstable in his ways."

      There is a cost to living in a dual moral and value system....a confused mind.

      Beth

      Delete
    2. I'm so lucky to have left the chaos way back in 1975!!!!

      Delete
  9. These conversations are so interesting, as you look upon them from various points. By comparing sin or weighing them, in how they will be seen, felt or noticed and by who....and the outcome.

    How about weighing the quality of life? Or perhaps the lack thereof?

    Interesting that sinning is easier if it can go unnoticed. Are not all sins equal in the eyes of the church? Yet the impact of them are not equal at all. Not the cost to others and certainly not the cost to your self.

    Beth

    ReplyDelete
  10. As far as birth control is concerned, I heard of a mother who felt sorry for her daughter in law, she told her son the next time you feel the urge to "do it", take your "thing" and swing it at the corner of the house like you would a base ball bat, then, if you still have the urge, go for it.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. This is still birth control and a sin.

      I am amusing that "thing" you are referring to is the husband's penis, and the "do it" act is in reference to sexual intercourse.

      Committing this type of act is not very fruitful in the eyes of God as it hinders the ability to multiply.

      Delete
  11. LLLreader wonders: If a man and women in "the church" are so concerned with their own salvation that they disregard the welfare of their children, then I really question their values. It seems to me that when people have kids their first obligation is to take care of those kids. Risking death in order to have yet another baby, because you fear getting God mad at you, is the height of selfishness. To die and leave a bunch of kids to be farmed out to relatives is hardly noble. The Christian thing to do would be to go beyond yourself and look to the needs of the children. The husband in Phoenix must have known that his mentally ill wife couldn't be doing a good job of taking care of the 8 kids she had. No doubt the older kids were taking care of the younger kids. Is the Lord actually going to be pleased with him for allowing his 8 children's needs to be ignored? A home where the mother is mentally ill is not a happy place to be. Imagine the suffering of those 8 kids--especially now. They have a father who was more concerned with himself then with his wife and kids, and a mother who is mentally ill, in jail, and had no one looking after her. The poor baby died and the other children suffer. The father didn't use birth control--so I imagine he thinks he is saved--I wouldn't bet on it!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Just a thought5/05/2013 03:01:00 PM

      I'm just wondering if you think parents who cave dive, mountain climb, etc. are also selfish? These are activities with a very high chance of death, but you know it is not just 'single people' who do this. What about parents who are cops or military persons? They also risk their lives, some of them every single day, are these people selfish? Jeez, even mothers who text and drive (I've heard the excuse that well, I only do it when my kids aren't along) are selfish in your mind! Although it is easy to imagine these children didn't get the best quality of care with a mother who was mentally ill, we actually have no idea what their day to day life was like, perhaps their childhood was better than we ever could have imagined.

      Also, no one said that mothers who choose to get pregnant with a high chance of death go so far as to disregard the welfare of their children. We have no clue as to what kind of support system these types of mothers set up for the possibility that they do die. Perhaps it is similar to a mother with severe cancer, who would, of course, be making arrangements for her children after her likely death. It may be true that no one can beat a mother for raising her children, but it seems even that isnt a very high priority in todays culture, with many kids being at daycare from the time they wake up until supper time, and then its time to go to bed. Are these parents, also, selfish for choosing to work?

      Also, I just wanted to say thank you for retracting your statement about the fathers salvation. Truely, no one here on earth has the right to judge.

      Delete
    2. EX FALC says
      I can add a little about this since I was married to someone who was mentally ill and we had two kids together when we were married. During the last few years of our marriage, the kids were being exposed to some very bizarre, strange and scary behavior. My ex was diagnosed with bipolar, obsessive compulsive disorder, post traumatic stress order, and something else that I can't recall at this time. My ex had to be put in a mental institution and put on anti psychotic medication to control this. Luckily I was not a member of a laestadian church at the time and I realized what my kids were seeing was bad and damaging to their mental and emotional development. I knew that even though I would have liked to have more children, I couldn't expose any more kids to this situation. Eventually things broke down to my ex having to be forcibly removed from our home and now I have sole physical and legal custody of the kids. I can't tell you what a relief it is for me for my kids to not be in a safe, quiet home and not be around that anymore.

      I would say in some ways the dad who continued having kids in this situation was responsible. He put how he would be viewed by members of his church in front of his kids. Now the kids have to grow up with the shame of their mother making headline news and possibly being in prison for a long time. What a shame this had to happen. I am lucky I got my kids out and would like to encourage everyone in my situation to think about your kids and yourself before everything else. If you have the ability to get out, you need to. Do you want your kids to resent you because you had the option to leave but didn't? I want my kids to have a relationship with me when they are adults and even though it was humiliating to go through a divorce I had to be an unselfish person and put my kids first.

      Delete
    3. EX FALC says
      I forgot to add that my kids are now in counseling. I am dealing with the situation the best I can. I want them to understand that what happened was not their fault. One of their parents suffers from mental illness and refused treatment and it is not their fault.

      Delete
  12. LLLreader again: I was feeling so mad thinking about those 8 kids and what they must be facing. Think of it--your mother killed the new baby and she is in jail. Tragic, tragic!! However, it isn't right for me to make a remark about the father's salvation. It's not right, and I shouldn't have done it--sorry.

    ReplyDelete
  13. There are now winners in this situation...but it can be used as an example, perhaps on the higher end of the spectrum, but it can and will lead to awareness about your own actions...what are your beliefs.

    What I had heard, is that children often suffer more deeply than adults when something tragic happens in their childhood, for they have a limited experience of 'bouncing' back after tragedy. Adults, have weathered other storms, and have gained useful tools, children are faced with things far above their level of tools.

    May we all learn by looking into our own worlds with more awareness.
    Beth

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Yes Beth, and children often take on the responsibility of family tragedy, feeling it was something they did that caused the "bad thing". I feel so sorry for those 8 kids.

      Delete
  14. Just a thought5/05/2013 10:45:00 PM

    Does anyone have proof that Nina was NOT on birth control at the time she got pregnant with her last baby? We all have made the assumption that she was not, but there ARE women within the LLC who take birth control, no matter how secretively, and birth control, as we know, is not always effective. Especially, in the case of the pill, if someone doesnt take it as regularly as they should...

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. No offense, but do you have proof that she WAS? I never seen the people in the LLC so concerned about not making assumptions than I have in the last week. Normally the gossip flies fast and thick with no regards for silly things like proof or concern for other feelings... Now all of a sudden, when something reflects poorly on the church, many say, "We better not talk about it because we don't know the minutia." Gossip about the world, gossip about ex-members, gossip about each other, but as soon as something potentially makes the CHURCH look bad, time to zip lips.

      I'm going to make the informed assumption that based on how many kids she had, and how I've never heard a single minister ever preach from the pulpit that birth control is okay in any situation (they've always preached the opposite), that most Laestadians want to conform to church norms, and my own struggles with tremendous guilt about birth control, that she wasn't on birth control.

      Done with denial

      Delete
    2. How peculiar it is, when the truth threatens your belief system. How you will search for reasons and explanations that don't touch your long held faith.

      It is how denial is born. How you will push away anything that threatens you....even when reality's events are clearly red flags waving...when you don't want to bring in the truth of what is...not because of what it is, BUT, because of what it will mean to you and your life.

      While it seems like you are 'defending' Nina, you are actually defending your self.

      What I have found so enthralling to witness is the active denial of truths....not so much in Nina's life as it is being played out in the papers, but in my experience of speaking out about sexual abuse. Speaking out about Preachers knowing and doing nothing. Speaking out about FALC neighbors knowing and keeping their own children away from our home....is not even so much that, BUT the fact they continually denied the cause of why they did what they did.

      It wasn't about saving the Huhta's. It was about saving their beliefs, their faith, their church, and their pathway to heaven. It mattered more, than the little girls in the neighborhood.

      While I write openly and clearly, STILL, they will defend their religion, while I am telling them of what is going on.

      What I was and am still completely amazed by is the deep dark depths of denial.

      It seems impenetrable.

      Beth

      Delete
    3. Just a thought5/06/2013 07:44:00 AM

      Done with denial- I do believe that I (just a thought) am the only one on this blog who has been 'concerned about making assumptions' (though I could be forgetting, my memory has not been very good lately) and you may find it interesting to know that in real life I am also 'concerned about making assumptions' about everything from 'exmembers' to 'members' to 'the goth kid' across the street ("look at that druggie" is a big no, no in my books) and I do speak up about it almost every day. I just find it interesting that we have assumed she was NOT on birth control so much so that it has pretty much become truth on this blog. Now, if I said she killed the kid, everyone would jump on me to say "supposedly" or "innocent until proven guilty" or something like that, but if I said she was not on birth control, no one would argue. The point is, we really don't know. Evidence leads to that assumption, yes, but evidence also leads to the assumption that she DID kill the baby, but I would get jumped on for one and not the other.

      Beth- though I am not a member of the FALC, or OALC, I am here and listening. I am a member of a laestadian church, am horrified to hear of peoples experiences, but feel they are not what is the true teachings of the laestadians. They are sin that we, as humans, have gotten wrapped up in, are not right in any way, but you do not need to attack the church, but rather the people who have done these things.

      Delete
    4. EXFALC Says-

      To solve problems, it is much more effective to attack the issues than to attack people. I think the church ideology does need to be scrutized and attacked because it creates a breeding ground for abuse and gives a place for the abusers to be protected. The church is what created these people so to attack those people is not solving the problem because their are many more hiding with the same problems. These issues do not occur nearly as often in mainstream churches where members are free from this collective mindset. I will never be a member of a laestadian church ever again but as someone who cares about the rest of humanity, I sincerely hope that the different laestadian branches will eventually get everything out in the open and fix these problems so people do not continue to be hurt and abused.

      Delete
    5. Just a thought - If you don't assume anything about people that is a great way to be and I applaud you for that. I do try to do the same myself. My frustration is that people are using "we don't know all the facts" as a way to avoid talking about the real issue. Saying that "We don't know so we can't talk about it",is for most people, a cop-out to protect the church. Maybe not you, but most LLC people that are saying this are more than willing to make assumptions about all kind of people while they are gossiping.

      For the sake of discussion, I think its okay to assume that she wasn't using birth control. An honest look at her life would indicate that as well. I happen to know some "inside" information about the situation, but I'd rather not share it here, because it does not matter. What I could say would have no relevance to people who are participating in this discussion, and would be contributing in a small way to the gossip surround this.

      Once again, in typical LLC fashion, the real discussion of the LLC doctrine and beliefs on birth control, and how the LLC's influence in Nina's life may have lead up to this horrific crime is avoided by getting side tracked into unrelated topics.

      Done With Denial

      Delete
    6. This insightful comment from Done with Denial really bears repeating:

      I never seen the people in the LLC so concerned about not making assumptions than I have in the last week. Normally the gossip flies fast and thick with no regards for silly things like proof or concern for other feelings... Now all of a sudden, when something reflects poorly on the church, many say, “We better not talk about it because we don't know the minutia.” Gossip about the world, gossip about ex-members, gossip about each other, but as soon as something potentially makes the CHURCH look bad, time to zip lips.

      Absolutely true. The hypocrisy is thick enough to cut with a knife. An example was at the discussion meeting I attended (to many people’s consternation!) at my former LLC congregation in February. The preacher leading the discussion made the tired old generalization that people leave “God’s Kingdom” only because of some sin. From what I recall, he listed the following as causes of recent departures:

      1. Birth control.
      2. Earrings, make-up, nail polish, etc.
      3. Social drinking.
      4. Objections by the “mind of man” or some such regarding the borders of God’s Kingdom.

      To the extreme displeasure of the woman sitting next to me, who waved her hand around asking for the mic while I was talking, I spoke up and said I disagreed with most everything that the preacher said. And I wanted to correct that particular slur about people leaving only because of sin: I have eleven kids, don’t drink, and don’t think makeup or nail polish are issues for me. I’ve heard from many people who have left or would like to leave. This is something they think long and hard about, and the costs for leaving are significant. People in the LLC disparage and cheapen the agonized deliberations these people are making about the most important matter of their lives when they attribute that drastic step of walking away to such trivial matters. Then I addressed the young people there: Don’t leave your childhood faith and make yourself lie awake nights worrying about frying in hell (my exact words), don’t lose your entire social structure, just so you can wear earrings or watch movies. Don’t make such an important decision for such trivial reasons.

      Then I handed the mic to my annoyed pew neighbor and got to hear her wonder aloud why they were even having this discussion with me there. “Why is Ed here?”, she whined, to which my reply would have been, “Because I have daughters here. They deserve better than to hear their parents spoken about like this.” The moderator was decent about it, though, saying that his understanding was that it’s open, though not a place to conduct a debate. Fair enough.

      So, yes, the generalizations and personal attacks are very much going on against those who would leave this dogmatic group, or worse yet, dare to criticize it in any way.

      Delete
    7. Just a thought5/06/2013 12:15:00 PM

      In your opinion, what 'ideology' creates this? In 'attacking' the people, it does need to become open to all as to what exactly occured, but I can think of NO sermon by the LLC which would give me the idea that it would be good to allow sex abuse to occur over and over. I can only think of times where we are told that we are not above the law. Perhaps there are many who don't practice what they preach, but that does not mean everyone within the LLC has these same 'values'. Thats a bit offensive. Its like saying every catholic is sexually abusive because of the scandals that came out there. How widespread is it? Right now, I really dont know, except to say that even one occurance is too wide spread. Is it being addressed? yes, I think it is. Perhaps not in the way, nor as quickly, as people would like, but yes, I think it is being addressed.

      Now, on a slightly different train of thought, I feel as though we need to be reminded to think of the children (even though many of you think you are). I don't know how old the oldest is, but I'd be willing to bet that at some point in their lives, each of these children will google their moms name, no matter how much it is forbidden (or not), and it is very possible they will come across this site. Do you think they will be happy reading what most of you have had to say about the dad? Do you think it will be good for them to read what you have had to say about him? Before you hit that little "Publish" button, perhaps you should read through what you have written as if you were a child in the family, it might do all some good. Blame the church all you want, but don't you think its a bit more humane to leave dad out of it?

      Delete
    8. Just a thought5/06/2013 12:28:00 PM

      I also want to tell Done with Denial: point taken. For the sake of debate, its fine to assume she was not on birth control, just keep in mind that it is not fact, unless your "inside" information proves it to be so. I am by no means perfect, but I like to think I am a humane person. I like to think I am compassionate and understanding. I think many of you have valid points and arguments. I think many of you have terrible stories to tell, and we do need to hear them. I also think many find it easy to blame the church for unhappy childhoods, when it, in essence, is really another factor all together.

      Delete
    9. Just a thought- I can tell you the ideology that creates problems is the idea that Truth resides within that Church alone, and therefor people outside of the church are mistrusted. I mean, we are going to hell, right? so why would anything we say be taken as more knowledgeable than someone say, on the church board? I know personally of a family who went to the church board because they found out their children were being abused...The board members talked about the healing of "the forgiveness of sins" and advised them, no, told them not to bring their children to a therapist because they of the worldly nature of therapy. Unbeknownst to the family, at least 2 of the board members had similar things going on in their homes. It is fact, that "closed" communities are indeed a breeding ground for abuse.

      EOP: It is interesting, is it not, that the assumption is that if people choose to leave, it is always because they have embraced sin....they cannot believe that people might leave because they come to a conviction of belief that the church is wrong in much of it's teaching.
      Brian Martin

      Delete
    10. Just a thought5/06/2013 01:32:00 PM

      Wow, everyone outside the church is mistrusted? Just because I may believe you are going to hell, does not mean I find you unintelligent, nor do I find you 'subhuman'. I am sure there is someone out there that you think is going to hell, do you treat him/her/them any less? I am sorry for the family who was unstructed not to go to therapy. I strongly encourage therapy for all who have been abused in any form, and know of others in the LLC who do as well.

      As far as believing we are the 'one true church' there are MANY church's who believe this, this is not something unique to laestadians. Just because we are a small church somehow makes this teaching not okay? I don't follow you there...

      Brian, one could argue that not believing in the teaching of the church is unbelief. And we are taught 'unbelief' is sin, therefore you have left because of sin. I do agree, however, that there are over-generalizations of those who have left, giving them a love of music and movies and other petty things, that isnt neccesarily true. However, I have heard many over-generalizations about laestadians here as well.

      Delete
    11. Just A Thought. Thank you for listening. However can you hear the context of what is being shared OR are you mostly hearing with your experience of the church?

      It is very tricky to hear negatives when you have had a positive experience about someone or in this case, the church. We hear with our experiences.

      You may not have had negative experiences from the congregation.

      I know that some do not want to hear or have us "air" our so called dirty laundry, especially IF the soiling was done by church members....and when the church members did not take up a stance to be outraged.

      It doesn't fit with the positive image you have, it is hard to hear.
      I get that.
      I have been in this battle for years. I am aware of everyone experience being different. However, your positive experience can't cancel out my negative one.

      And, I had feverishly hoped that the abuse was JUST contained to my father....but with investigations that was done by the Detective in our County, I learned it wasn't so.

      Now, the question comes. What is the real truth? Is it possible to have both experiences within these churches....AND, what ones will define it? I guess what my hope is, is that the leaders within the churches will start taking notice of the negative experiences AND, start educating and giving tools to the families within their pews.

      How can so called leaders, elders and those setting up the foundations of these churches, so nonchalantly ignore our cries and pleas? Perhaps Just A Thought, you are listening, but they are not.

      If this isn't a wake up call to listen, what will it take?
      Beth

      Delete
    12. Just a thought5/06/2013 05:36:00 PM

      Beth, it is entirely possible to have both experiences. I am here, and you are here. Of course my experience will affect how I view things, but if that means I am not able to understand the difficulties some of you have experienced, and desire change, then I guess you really are out of luck. If everyone with a positive experience will never understand your hardships, then why desire to tell your story?

      I do believe a number of these issues are being addressed, at least in the LLC, perhaps not as fast as we'd like, nor in exactly the way we'd like, but they are being noticed, discussed, and addressed. Keep telling your stories. Some of us are listening.

      I'm wondering if you listen in return? Or is it impossible for you to hear that others did not share your terror, and that the entire organization is not evil, have mixed morals, or however else you choose to label us?

      Delete
    13. Just a thought: a number of factors can come into play...which faction one is from (LLC,OALC etc) what congregation one is from, when one left. The reality is that while each story is different, there are also similarities. I am new here, and can only speak for myself and what i observe and experience. I think it is great that people like yourself are here, engaging in discussion. (as compared to some of the hysterical, semi-literate defenses)
      brian

      Delete
    14. Just a Thought, I have not heard many or any that I recall, truly getting the severity of the amounts of abuse that are in the FALC. I mostly have experienced, a complete shut down. Where I feel they are in Unbelief....about what I am saying.

      Is it possible for me to hear that you have only positive experiences. Yes. I would have said the same prior to waking up. I too would have seen only the good, for I had forgiven away the bad. With the forgiveness of sins, I saw with rose colored glasses.

      And, what also came to me is how Elie Wiesel said of the German people, "All it takes for Evil to flourish is for a few good men to do nothing." I feel that IF the ones who are blessed with being untouched and unabused, they are the ones to be the fighters against evil.

      But, like you, they just keep telling me their positive experiences and telling me that I am attacking the church and trashing 'good people'.

      I have no answers. But, I love that there is a dialogue.
      I can't know what my hearing about good will do to stop evil?

      Beth

      Delete
    15. just a thought5/06/2013 07:33:00 PM

      Beth, we like to tell our stories for a few reasons. 1. This is read by many, perhaps even some who have never heard of laestadians, and we want them to know that there are good people with positive experiences. 2. You tend to make generalized comments about people still in the church and we are, to be honest, slightly offended to hear you saying that about us, just as you are to hear us say everyone leaves to watch tv and wear earrings. 3. We want you to know that if you did not leave because you no longer believe,but rather because of your bad experience only, that it is possible to believe and have a good experience. We welcome you back.

      There is good in hearing both sides. It is good for me to hear what you went through. I can learn from it. Although I will never completely understand what you went through, I can feel for you and desire to help. a rich man will likely never understand what it means to starve to death, but that does not mean he does not want to prevent starvation. He can imagine and be horrified and try keep it from happening. Likewise, the rich man may be able to teach the starving man where to find food if he would just listen. Not always, but sometimes.

      I do not mean to offend, but I am finding it a little difficult to believe that if someone came to you while you were still in the church and spoke of abuse you would not have believed them. I can understand someone with a positive experience having this reaction, but someone who has experienced this abuse? I understand the saying goes forgive and forget, and this may mean we don't hold it against them, but it dies not mean we can simply erase it from our memories.

      Delete
    16. Just a Thought, Is it true or not true, the congregations Generally Believes the same? They have been indoctrinated into a Belief System. There is a uniform or one way, preached and adhered to. Which is why I put you in the same mind set. A mind that is believing the same way. So in matters of sin, of getting to heaven, and forgiveness, AS a Group, you all believe the same, hence I generalize about you all. Your collective actions have you together...at least for me.

      I am completely certain that I would not have been helpful to someone who came to me about abuse. I would not have reacted or responded in a normal way...for I myself was living in complete denial. I was shut down and unaware. My own mind a mess. From that vantage point and in that time of my life, I would have been of no use.

      Certainly I could have heard them. But, my compassion, my sense of what is right or helpful in handling abuse within a family, would have been all wrong for the healing of a victim.

      What perhaps you fail to consider, is that I was a hot mess FROM BEING abused, I wasn't in my right mind. How then could I help another, back then? It has taken years to find my way back to awareness, to see things I could not see before, lost in denial. It is like asking the lost how to find your way home.

      As for my leaving...it is very complex and yet very simple. Once I awoke to how much in denial I had lived for 46 years, the church was just another place that used to fit my old mind, but no longer fit my aware one.

      Denial isn't something that is thought out and well orchestrated. Denial happens while you are unaware. I didn't purposefully deny many truths in my life...my mind in order to survive, never recorded my abuse....I had no memory.

      Denial is "Refusal to admit the true or reality." Without concrete evidence IN my mind, I lived in denial. Yet, my body feared this man. A complete juxtaposition with my mind's evidence.

      With my mind believing my father was just a dad and my body acting like he was a monster, I believed my mind, not my own body. I denied my own feelings, my own truth and relied on a mind that is so complex and beautiful, it did what minds do, to to help little children survive the unspeakable. The very thing that saved my sanity, allowed me to live in denial.

      It wasn't until another little girl spoke up, that I crashed out of denial. Her story matched my body. I then knew. And unraveled from there into reality and out of denial.

      The church was perfect for my old denial self or I was a good fit for it. But, once aware, we no longer matched.

      These subjects are complicated and those of us daring to speak up are doing our best to put things into perspective from each of our own experiences. We need all voices.

      I didn't choose this journey, it chose me. I found myself with the voice of a victim, because I was one. A victim, who has walked painfully out of denial and into reality.

      Beth

      Delete
    17. just a thought5/07/2013 07:08:00 AM

      Beth, I can now understand why you say what you did. It is not that you would not have believed a story of abuse, but that you did not know what was healthy for dealing with it. I know that blocking out these memories is a true and real thing. I do believe I understand what is a healthy reaction, and feel that all of my close friends and family does as well, it is a topic that has come up often in my life for various reasons. I cannot understand why people would discourage therapy, legal action, and removal from the situation of the one who is abused. I do not know how many were involved in instructing you, but I also know that many with tales of incestual abuse say they know or feel their mom knew about it and did nothing. Why this is I don't understand, there really is no excuse for it. I am sorry you had to go through such a truly horrifying experience, and desire change which would help prevent this, but am quite offended that even though you don't know me at all, you find it so easy to dismiss me as not caring, not concerned, and unhelpful.

      I also did not choose NOT to be abused, I cannot help that I was lucky in life in that regard, and am upset that you choose to hold this against me. As far as the possibility of me repressing memories also, I have talked with many women who have experienced a variety of sexual abuse, and most, like you, who suppress these memories, experience them flooding back once they hear a similar story. You'd think I'd have remembered by now.

      Delete
  15. LLLreader thinks: EX FALC you understand what it's like to live in a house with a mentally ill person. So do I, and I'll tell you there is no peace, no safety, no stability,and it becomes a living hell for everyone, especially the kids. Just a Thought might imagine that somehow this poor sick women provided a happy home, but it's highly unlikely given her diagnosis. She had been hospitalized several times becouse of her illness, and my own vivid memories of taking a person to the psych ward are not very pretty. My experiences are probably much like what was going on in that sad home. She should have been taken care of and she wasn't.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Anonymous,
      I have to say, one must be careful about sweeping generalizations. Living in the same house as a "mentally ill" person varies greatly upon diagnosis, severity of the illness, whether they are being treated etc. Even 2 people suffering from Bipolar Disorder can display significantly different symptoms. My wife could probably say living with an ex-laestadian is extremely difficult, because of the tendency toward rigid thinking that can carry over, but that isn't to say everyone who leaves has the same problems or to the same degree.
      Brian Martin

      Delete
    2. Just a thought5/06/2013 12:36:00 PM

      Brian, isnt it also true that it can vary greatly from day to day, month to month, year to year? Perhaps one day they can provide a loving, stable home (especially if they are on meds) and the next not so much? Or if their meds arent quite right, or they neglect to take them, they can deteriorate quite quickly? Not sure on this, but it has been my understanding that this is true.

      Delete
    3. Absolutely, That is entirely possible but again, it depends upon the severity, as well as what particular illness. To say that every Bipolar is hellish to live with is like saying every Laestadian is hellish to live with. There are general themes, but not everyone with a mental illness requires medication. The stuff you hear about on the news etc. make up the hardest to treat segment.
      Brian

      Delete
  16. LLLreader again: Oh please, the bipolar diagnosis includes all levels of severity. I know that. Many bi folks manage very well with medication or just simply a calm supportive environment, with some decent counceling. That goes for depression too. Again, medication, support, and understanding enables many to manage their lives really well. Depression is so widespread that it is hardly a blip on the screen. What you might be missing here, Brian and Justa, is the diagnosis this women was given. Schizophrenia, bipolar, and depression is not a lightweight diagnosis. Periods of being in a mental hospital also leads me to believe she was having a pretty rough time. These days people are not hospitalized unless they are presenting some pretty serious behavior--thoughts of homicide or harming themselves are standard criteria for admitting patients. So again, let's look at what we know--this poor women has very serious mental issues, she has had 9 children in 14 years and some of you want to believe she will somehow be mananging her illness and taking loving care of all those kids at the same time. Not bloody likely! It's hard to be reading bedtime stories while the voices in your head are telling you people are laughing at you. If, in the future some of these kids read what I have said about the dad, and the churches roll in this tragic death, I bet they will understand that my rage over this tragic unnecessary death is that it could have been prevented. It could have been prevented!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Absolutely, my comment was about the broad generalizations...if you read my previous comments, you will see that I am in agreement that her having that many children exacerbated her mental illness. No reasonable, intelligent ethical psychologist, psychiatrist or therapist would say that it would be a good idea for her to have so many children. I work with people with these and other diagnosis on a daily basis, and have for the past 15+ years in a variety of settings.
      brian

      Delete
    2. LLLreader again: Brian you are right. As I reread my first statement about living with a mentally ill person I was being very general, and should have been more specific about this particular women in Phoenix and her duel diagnosis. I could tell you work in the field and you were correct in stating that living with a mentally ill person is NOT always hell. There is so much misunderstanding about mental illness. The person I deal with in my family has the same combination diagnosis as our poor Phoenix mother. You will recognize that it has not been an easy road, even with an excellent psychiatrist, good medication oversight, wonderful group therapy, and a calm stable living situation. The behaviors of mentally ill people are so different, so individual, that treatment has to be focused and constent. What help was our ill Phoenix women receiving I wonder? Brian, you bring a lot of valuable information to this site. I have lived this stuff, and am way too emotional about this subject. Thank you for you input. I hope you post a lot in the next few days. This is an excellent time to spread some knowledge around. Thanks

      Delete
  17. I feel like a better topic here is not whether or no the LLC is corrupt and a cult, but how we as a culture treat mental illness. It is misunderstood and stigmatized. As someone who suffers from depression, anxiety, OCD and Aspergers, I dealt with the loss of friendships and the many recommendations from people, not from my church, whose "god" was their naturopath, that I was essentially evil for taking "big pharma" drugs......How do you know this family's personal journey? whether she was on something or not? not to mention most people don't recognize mental illness right away no matter how wacky a person becomes especially if it's family.
    FALCon

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. FALCon,
      You are absolutely right about the fact that we do not know this family's personal journey other than what was said in the news, ie. her husband saying in court that she has Bipolar and Schizophrenia and that she has been in and out of treatment facilities and that they have struggled to get her help. In this case, the mental illness was diagnosed. And as I stated before, and competent doctor or therapist would have been telling them in no uncertain terms that she was jeopardizing whatever degree of stability she had by becoming pregnant, if for no other reason than because the antipsychotics she would take for schizophrenia are not safe when someone is pregnant, and the same holds true for a number of meds for Bipolar. I find a strange mix of taboo, and an unhealthy sort of normalization of mental illness in our society. The taboo you probably understand, the normalization I speak of has to do with the making it "normal" to go on meds. An example, someone dies, and the spouse is put on an anti depressant, maybe sleep meds etc. They aren't depressed, they are grieving, there is a difference. But we want to function "normally" and not deal with what we feel. The thing is, we prevent people from dealing with their emotions in a healthy way. As far as serious mental illness, you need to find what works for you, and if some well meaning moron tells you that you shouldn't take meds, ask them for their medical degree. But, don't see big pharma as a cure all either.
      Brian

      Delete
    2. She is a kind hearted woman, and her husband is a wonderful man. In another life this would have never happened to two good people like Nina and Brad. She was medicated for her mental illness and had people who cared about her monitoring her condition for years. She may have quit taking her meds in the days leading up to this, but that is unknown (at least to me) at this point.

      This was her ninth kid, not her first. She has had the mental illness her whole adult life. Everyone agrees that mental illness was the primary problem. The elephant in the room is what could have been done to prevent this tragedy. If this had been the first or second kid, mental illness would be the topic. Since it was the NINTH kid, the LLC's way of manipulating minds into using birth control to the point of being deadly, is the topic. And rightfully so.

      This could only happen in a church like the LLC, because 99.9% of the world would encourage a woman like Nina to stop having kids. Not the LLC. The topic remain the LLC's manipulative behavior and how it played a role in this child's death. The spotlight should shine brightly on the LLC, making it harder for them to perpetuate this unhealthy manipulative thinking.

      ANG

      Delete
    3. Here is what I am fighting in my mind, "kind hearted and wonderful man," and the out come is a dead child. How can this be so?

      Kind hearted folks and wonderful men....will not end up standing where they are.

      I am only stating this, so we can all look at the whole picture.

      Here is how I feel. I am more unkind to talk about evil acts...then the ones actually doing it. Why? How is that possible? How is it that it is more wrong to speak of it? Not so much this case, but for certain my own.

      I became more of a leper than my pedophile father and his accomplice my mother. Incredible it is to me. It is a good sign for the children of this family. For, in my experience, very few will actually be able to hold them (their parents) accountable. Most will speak kindly, always.

      And, those who dare speak of it, will be unkind...heartless.

      beth

      Delete
    4. Beth, as compelling as your own story may be, that’s not the topic here, nor are we even talking about sexual abuse. It is, as ANG says, “the LLC’s manipulative behavior” about birth control. Personally, as just one of many readers of this blog and an occasional contributor, I’m interested in hearing not just your own thoughtful comments, but also what the others have to say on the subject at hand.

      Delete
    5. EOP, not to be rude, but one of the first few posts in this blog back in 2004 says not to worry about being off topic in the comments, if you want to be heard, comment in the latest post. :)

      Delete
    6. EOP, thanks for attempting to keep this on topic.
      Lurk

      Delete
    7. Seconded.

      Delete
    8. Ditto!

      Another Lurker

      Delete
  18. LLLreader still talking: Brian is right, if a family member dies there will be a time of mourning. Taking pills to deal with emotional pain just prolongs the pain. It will need to be dealt with at some point. That is so different then real mental illness. Meds can make a tremendous difference in the quality of life for the mentally ill. Even then it's a hard thing to put the right combination of drugs together. It takes trial and error and strict monotoring. I remember hearing a OAL women talking about seeing a psychiatrist and how helpful he had been. Another OAL gal pipes up with, "The Elders have said the Christians don't need psychiatrists". Shamed that poor women. I saw the critical one not long ago and she is just a mental wreck, talking to herself etc. My loved one with mental illness has been subject to comments from family members who think if she would just "try harder" the voices in her head would go away. If she would only TRY to be healthy she could be. Can't happen that way any more then trying hard to heal a broken leg without medical help.

    ReplyDelete
  19. LLLreader sez to Beth--your comment speaks clearly to this situation. How will these children be treated by fellow church members? The welfare of these kids should be on all of our minds, and if that church tries to sweep it under the rug as so much abuse, both physical and sexual, has been covered up-- then these kids will have a terrible time. EOP must be having a bad day.

    ReplyDelete
  20. EOP, I thought we are discussing abuse and religion or a combination of both. You have a brilliant voice in showing the religious side and its two- sidedness. My voice isn't yours. It is about the abuse angle...the view or perhaps a side affect of believing in the double speak.

    It will take many voices from many walks of life to enlighten us all.

    Beth

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Agreed, Beth. I can see your analogy with exposing the hypocrisy of this story with that of sexual abuse. I don't have any serious, poignant tale to tell on this blog. Church was just a place I didn't fit and since I did not believe in the exclusivity doctrine, I eventually decided to leave. Of course, I also felt like there were some hypocrisies as well, like why women seemed to be socially "punished" for diverging from church norms and why men were given more leeway. And why people would continue to greet an adulterous husband but refuse to greet a remarried wife; things like that. However, this story probably illustrates the reason for this blog. Free has devoted countless hours in maintaining this blog; he has been fair, and ethical. She has done a huge service for people who have felt they had no one else to whom to turn. I've been lucky to meet her in person once in my lifetime. I have followed this blog for many years, and have laughed, sighed, chortled, and cried. I also believe that there are many current Laestadians who read this blog and have changed some of their behaviors because of it, and have become more kind, more flexible, less judgmental, and more loving because of it. One of the things I have taken away from my life in the Laestadian church is the idea that we cannot be perfect, we are all sinners, and we all fall short sometimes, despite our best intentions. May God have mercy on Nina Koistinen and her husband, and all the members of the LLC, OLAC, ALC, IALC, and whatever small remnants of other movements exist out there. I love these people, even though I do not walk with them anymore in quite the same step. I used to try very hard to march to their same beat, but I was always the one who could not keep in step and eventually I broke out of their ranks; well to be fair, at some point, I bolted like a bat out of hell, as the old saying goes. I would never have had the courage to do so if not for this blog. My life is better for it. Hugs to all followers of this blog. God's Peace. Stranger in a Strange Land

      Delete
    2. Stranger, I agree that this blog is and will be a place for great enlightenment and change, it is offering a place where the voiceless can voice, where the unspoken can be spoken, and where the dialogue has many viewpoints...and we all speak the same language in understanding the nature of abiding by these religions, how they shaped and formed our lives and the affects it has on our lives when we choose to leave.

      Thanks to this blog, we can hear how others have experienced life living in and out of these religions. We are not strangers, we are walking the same journey.

      Beth

      Delete
    3. EX FALC says-

      I agree with both of you! This blog has been a blessing to so many. It has given a voice to those who have been hurt to share their stories. I hope it is also giving those who are still in the church the strength to stand up for what is right and to be leaders for change.

      Delete
  21. I think it important to remember that we each have our path to walk and insight to share, but we also run the risk of assuming what is happening based on our experiences. I don't know beth, and can't speak for her, but her story touches mine, even though, if I understand correctly we come from different groups. Those differences also play out, however. Different groups react in different ways. Even in the LLC, different congregations, while having the same belief sets, may respond very differently because each congregation has it's own culture, if you will, depending on who is in roles of influence. So the outreach to grieving families etc. may well be different in different localities.
    Brian

    ReplyDelete
  22. EXFALC says-

    To LLLReader, yes, I do know what it is like to live in a home with someone mentally ill. It is very scary when one day to the next you don't know what is going to happen. Their was no way to predict what I would do or say that would set off the erratic behavior. We had the police come to our house several times because their was talk of killing family members (not me or my kids, but extended family). After each episode, things seemed to get better, only for something else to happen a few months later. Child protection also came to our house several times. In some ways, my situation was very much like what happened in Arizona. Luckily, I am some more common sense and knew it was a bad situation to bring more kids into. I knew I had to keep my kids away from the behavior as much as possible because it is not good for a child's mental and social development to be raised in a home with someone mentally ill. Another side effect of being married to someone mentally ill is that I had most of the burden of taking care of the kids. It was exhausting. What normal rational person would choose to continue having more kids in a situation like mine? How can you justify it knowing that kids are not being raised in a stable home? I would be curious to get some feedback from someone who believes in the LLL doctrine. How can you justify that this is a good way to live a life? This isn't what Jesus wants for us, is it? Luckily I think rationally and am now out of that life situation and life couldn't be better. If anything, now that I am out, I want to talk about what happened and be able to help others.

    ReplyDelete
  23. Free,
    In response to your "Answering the Tough Questions" sub topic: You asked if Eric Jurmu can be held accountable, followed by a accurately depicted synopsis of how doctrine is passed along.
    I have something to tell you, and all that may be wondering why Mr. Jurmu did not specifically address the issue of birth control in his response. (I certainly wondered, not because I'm not accustomed to the dodging of basic questions by the church, but because Mr. Jurmu is usually pretty straightforward, even if it makes him unpopular.)
    Eric Jurmu WAS the one that "penned" the response, but there were several other MEN that attended a meeting to decide what the response should say. So, in effect, it was the "Mother," (which is really just a group of men, not women, that are "led" by the "Spirit") that had a damage control discussion. Ironic?
    So, can Mr. Jurmu be held accountable? I'm still trying to sort this out myself. My radical crusading-for-justice side says that someone needs to be, and he is the one that has the misfortune of having had his stance and words on record. This is according to the doctrine of the LLC, which I assume he takes as his own, and projects to the members of the church, which clearly contributed to this woman's demise. There is just SO much to respond to, but I digress. You, Free, have made enough of these points to make me squirm, even as an ex.
    -Pebbles

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Correction, Ed. Duh. :)
      Such courage.
      -Pebbles

      Delete
    2. I never fully contemplated the blinding Irony of the Mother consisting entirely of men. Hilarious, if it wasn't so damn tragic.

      Of course, in their "defense," they're only doing what the Bible commands:

      1 Timothy 2:12 - But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence.

      1 Corinthians 14:34 - Let your women keep silence in the churches: for it is not permitted unto them to speak; but [they are commanded] to be under obedience, as also saith the law.

      Delete
    3. FreeThinker,
      Thanks for noticing.
      My personal opinion is that Paul may have had a bit of an inferiority complex. He was human as well, after all.
      Wow, can you imagine what would happen if there were actual mothers that were considered to be part of "The Mother?!"
      -Pebbles

      Delete
    4. Crazy, right?

      The funny thing about Paul is that he had almost ZERO knowledge of Jesus' life or story. Literally almost zero. No mention in any of his writings of the virgin birth, Bethlehem, Nazareth, Mary or Joseph, the Magi, John the Baptist, Jesus' baptism, parables, miracles, healings and cures, Mary Magdalene, Judas, Pontius Pilate, Peter's denials, an empty tomb, or his words on the cross.

      But somehow he is the creator of much of the Christian faith, and his spewings like the ones above are taken as the inerrant Words of God.

      Delete
    5. FreeThinker,
      Exactly. Although I think that Paul had a way with words, he was a lawyer, and to stereotype yet again, we could say that successful lawyers usually DO need to have that quality. As you stated, they are spewings. These chapters, and "books" in the Bible, were LETTERS! Personal correspondence between two humans. NO human is without sin, according to doctrine. A fact as simple as that should help us all to gain perspective, not force our own will on someone else under the guise of being the choosen people.
      Probably the main reason why I left the LLC was because NONE of it is Bible based anymore. Even Bible Class is composed of a selection that is selected by someone who wants to reinforce a particular message. Other versions of the Bible, even, are WRONG. Most of them don't even read the Bible at all. Hardly any of them bring theirs along to church to follow along with the sermon...?! As Deep Roots was saying below, if you actually bring your Bible to a discussion you'll probably be viewed in err.
      Birth control, be fruitful and multiply, all of the "thou shalt not" statements, every single issue is twisted and turned until it is made to fit the agenda.
      People like Ed, and you, and me, and Deep Roots, who actually are interested in history and true meaning, are cast off because they become too educated and therefore pose a threat. In my case, it wasn't to stir the pot or promote ideas that would lead people astray, only a more in depth look at where it came from. I did not even understand what having the Holy Spirit meant until I LEFT that church. I was under so much pressure to follow the teachings there was absolutely no room left for me to concentrate on my own walk. I wish the people defending the religion and saying that this tragedy had nothing to do with it would just take one minute to consider how it could have.
      I have a much easier time getting through tragic events and life in general outside of the church. I don't have to think that someday I may have to be forced into being a martyr for my faith, (or my parent's faith,) like Jesus, like Paul, like the woman Mr. Jurmu spoke about, like the baby.
      -Pebbles

      Delete
  24. LLLreader to EXFALC--yup, you sure understand the whole picture. The unpredictably of each day is so hard on children. Never knowing if what was right one day will be wrong the next. You took the responsibility of raising your children as your first concern. I hope the rest of your life beings you all sorts of blessings--you earned them. Keep talking. You may save someone's life.

    ReplyDelete
  25. Thank you Ed for writing this post and to all for the interesting discussion over this heartbreaking story. I really hope that baby's death will show people in the LLC the importance of mental health and not having more kids if you or your spouse are so mentally fragile. (And don't you need to be on birth control to take those psych drugs anyhow? She was either taking them and having kids, which is medically reckless. Or worse, not taking them, which we saw the devastating result of.) The lack of intelligent behavior, when God gave us all brains, is so stunning, and yet it is how so many were taught to operate above even common sense.
    -Flora

    ReplyDelete
  26. @Pebbles, I'm not sure Eric Jurmu is a guy who goes against what's popular. He's straightforward and a strict traditionalist, but that's what makes him popular in Phoenix.

    What I cannot understand is Eric's statement. It goes against everything he's ever preached about birth control. For him, its always been a cut and dry issue, along with many other preachers in the LLC. I've never, ever, heard a sermon about birth control from the pulpit in the LLC that lines up with Eric's statement. Eric's initial comments to the reporter about God giving Nina as many children as she could handle, and that God would "close her womb" if he felt she couldn't handle any more, were much more genuine and aligned with what he's preached from the pulpit. If Jouko, Bloomquist, Waariniemi, Jim Jurmu, Russ Roikko, Howard Parks, and any other (with very few exceptions) preacher had been asked the same question by a reporter, they would have given a similar response.

    Why didn't he answer the reporter's written questions? He gave a response in church stating that he doesn't want to get in a tit-for-tat with media. I don't understand how totally ignoring the reporter's questions, issuing a statement that contradicts everything he's ever preached, and referencing the parts of the LLC website in the statement that contradict the statement itself, accomplishes anything. Sure, the media will never catch on to that, but thinking minds in the congregation certainly will.

    The fact that he would give such a liberal response to the media, which he would never give in a sermon, or in conversation, or in discussion, bothers many. I feel that in situations where Eric does not have control, he will give statements that allow for birth control, but in situations where he has full control, his birth control position has always been "no birth control, no exceptions", to the point of glorifying a woman who choose to end her life, against the advice of medical professionals. Joukko has given similar comments, "I can't see any reason where it would be ok to use birth control". Why? Why change because of media pressure?

    The blatant malfeasance of these men is causing doubts in many. Sure, they are under pressure, not perfect, etc. I understand that. But this is the Word of God we are talking about here. The words of the preachers from the pulpit are from God himself. When I and others have tried to ask similar questions about birth control and honestly questioned the answers with no malicious intent, we've been warned of our condition by some of these very men. Having a guy who proclaims God's word warn you of your condition, is not a good feeling. Now they are issuing public statements that would've prompted a caretaking meeting, if a church member had made similar bold statements prior to this tragedy. The hypocrisy is disgusting and disturbing.

    Deep Roots

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. This leads me to ask, What is God's Word on this? Is it the same, "yesterday, today, and forever"? At the moment, it seems God's Word stays the same until the media knocks on your door. It is so disheartening. I cannot tell you how much it disappoints. Was Nina given as many kids as she could handle? Could it be possible she was going against God's will and the ministers have going against God's will in their preaching? The Bible doesn't support any of their birth control positions. It seems that Nina had more children than she could handle. Could the LLC be wrong? And the most troubling thing is why can't we talk about it openly in church? Are the preachers so self righteous that they are not willing to see their error? Instead, they choose mislead and confuse the congregation with conflicting statements? Sure many will follow because they don't think to much about these things or read the Bible, but put their trust in the preachers. I have no problems with that, but I just wonder where these ministers are leading those who follow? Where can men who cannot admit their own grievous error lead anyone? What about God's Word? Where is that in all this? What about the unerring Congregation Mother? If birth control is okay, please preach it from the pulpit.

      These questions will not go away until they are addressed, nor should they. They are matters of grave importance because they are matters of the Spirit. To ignore them invites what? what?

      I know this is coming from a corner of the internet, but I and others do not have the strength to do this publicly because of the sins of the men in question and their influence over the congregation, and the serious ramifications this has on God's unchanging doctrine. I wonder about Eric and all those leaders who have participated in this spiritual malfeasance. I pray they can see it for what it is and their consciences have not been hardened to it. If things need to change and they have made errors, I pray they approach this with a contrite heart.

      These trials are coming from a very difficult place. I dearly hope they will be dealt with, with a true Spirit.

      Deep Roots

      Delete
    2. Just a thought5/08/2013 09:51:00 AM

      Deep Roots,

      I feel you have many legitimate questions. I understand your confusion and complaints. I understand why you are concerned when you feel you cannot ask, and be answered.

      However, I would like to point out that you yourself say that every minister WITH A FEW EXCEPTIONS would preach this as a black and white issue. No matter how much the congregations and the LLC like to preach unity and understanding, there are ALWAYS a few exceptions on every issue. I have always found it to be that the only thing every LLC preacher and congregation member is united on, is the forgiveness of sins. I feel this is important to point out, and perhaps Eric is currently confused himself or changing his own personal convictions or views. Perhaps he does have an apology to make. Perhaps he is currently turning to the bible and looking for answers. Perhaps he is discussing it with his friends and relatives. Perhaps the LLC has put a hold on what Eric can say (although if Eric truly believes he is right, he should tell them no). They may be discussing these very differences in preaching styles as we speak. We do not know.

      Delete
  27. Very Well Written and Expressed, Deep Roots. I feel for you and others, as you are watching this unfold on the inside....while knowing you are part of the unfolding.

    You are very astute to recognize how his position changes depending upon where he has power...

    I wonder how your leaders would respond to your well written questions and concerns? Is it not your right to ask, for it does and will affect your life? Facing you all within the church WITH questions would be much harder to do than facing the media, or any of us on the outside. You on the inside, however, are not allowed...as I understand it. Voiceless...to those who lead.

    And your leaders are leaders to those who are voiceless....

    Deep Roots, I feel your deep concern.
    Beth



    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Deep Roots,
      Thank you so much for your thoughtful words. Maybe this will be the catalyst for change within...I pray that it is. Maybe his response to the media means that they (the elders and preachers)are being led toward a more enlightened view. The preacher's words are not infallible. Sin is sin, and all who are human sin. The reality is, the congregations are not voiceless...they elect the board members, and if there is a shift in the thinking of the people, it will be harder to run things the way they are. Years ago in Wolf Lake I remember ongoing countless Congregational Caretaking Meetings where people were being found in "a wrong spirit" and it just went on and on, and 1 or 2 people had " the ability to discern spirits" and anyone who questioned them was in a "wrong spirit" and finally at some point someone stood up and challenged them and said that he or she felt that they were taking pride in what they were doing..and people started standing up and agreeing and that put a stop to it. I also remember preachers being removed by the congregation for various things, so in theory anyway it can happen. Remember, the Holy Spirit works where it will and through who it will, and not just in preachers and elders.
      May the Peace of God be with you,
      Brian

      Delete
  28. Deep roots,
    I am a current LLC member and feel the same way you do. I presume there are many others also. What it is going to take is a few brave souls to speak up, but unfortunately I am not one of those. I have never felt comfortable with the preaching about birth control being wrong no matter what. We have to consider the health of our mothers, and what is best for our kids.
    -troubled

    ReplyDelete
  29. LLLreader to Stranger in a Strange Land--thank you for your insightful post. So descriptive of the ackwardness of trying to fit into a church that never can be the right fit for those of us that left. Wasn't it telling that a group of MEN got together to decide how to answer the reporters questions? Would be funny, if it wasn't so sad. I send God's Peace to all of you who are struggling.

    ReplyDelete
  30. to troubled and deep roots- I am also currently in the LLC, with the same concerns. I feel the brave souls are the ones who leave; there is little freedom for honest discussion, so rather than fight a losing battle they decide to move on. We all know that the flurry of recent congregational discussions are the response to people questioning "things that have always been preached as sin in God's kingdom". It is a desperate attempt to manage the flock, and to defend matters that have no biblical backing. It squelches the spirit within us, and disallows any critical thinking. It is up us to continue to ask questions when something just doesn't seem right in our hearts.
    -- NWPonderer

    ReplyDelete
  31. I don't have the nerve to speak up. I've been shut down and known others who have been shut down as well when they try to raise concerns. It seems that raising concerns these days means gets you categorized as going against the Spirit and the Mother Congregation.

    I wish these things would have been top of mind ten years ago when the LLC was more open and free. Things have definitely become more rigid and dry over the last 10 years. Sometimes I feel that we worship our traditions and culture more than Christ.

    It confounds me that most people don't really read the Bible. They take what our leaders say at face value, and end out sincerely believing things that have no Biblical support. I remember 10 years ago, when just being a believer was considered enough to have faith. Today it seems the requirements are higher. We hear a lot more about trying to be at the middle of the flock, and heeding the Mother Congregation in all areas. It seems the freedom we used to have is slowly being sucked away, and being replaced by "guidelines".

    I feel its a bit presumptuous to talk about the middle of the flock, and trying to get there. There is no Biblical support for those ideas that I'm aware of. If we all are equally sin corrupt, how is it possible to define the middle? To me the middle is defined by the Congregation as holding fast to tradition as much as possible. But traditions do not save anyone. Fitting snugly into the definition of "Laestadian" by adhering closely to culture and social norms, cannot bring anyone closer to God, because those things do not matter. But preachers would call this being in the middle. I feel that striving to be in the middle leads to a dry spirit and tinges of self righteousness. There is no "middle of the flock" because no person is righteous enough to define what that would be. Having faith is enough. We don't need to stress ourselves out by striving for more. Because to gain anything beyond "faith" is impossible for sin-fallen man.

    Deep Roots

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Deep Roots,
      Ding ding ding! You hit the nail on the head. What do you think, as a current member, can really be done? I am very interested. I seriously think that if there was a movement, a lot of the young-er people, and perhaps many of the older ones that cared about the young-ish ones, would pause in serious consideration. Do you think this recent exposure will call attention to the necessity for reform? And, what can we as outsiders do to help you, the ones who are stuck?
      -Pebbles

      Delete
    2. If you no longer believe that God's word is being spoken and trust in your own understanding (when it is contrary to the teachings) without putting it away as sin, then you certainly drift away from the middle of the flock. Being in the middle of the flock refers to where your heart is. If you still believe that God's word is spoken and is opened by the Holy Spirit at the services then you want to suppress your own understanding and will and seek for God's will. Being in the middle of the flock is when you fear sin and its consequences. The ultimate consequence of sin, sadly, is that you will lose your faith. Hopefully that serves to clarify what the middle of the flock is. Read Proverbs 3:5-6

      Delete
    3. What "center of the flock" really means is "zone of maximum BS tolerance."

      Delete
    4. "If you still believe that God's word is spoken and is opened by the Holy Spirit at the services then you want to suppress your own understanding and will and seek for God's will."

      This pretty much sums up all of Laestadianism, poor grammar included. Of course, "God's will" is whatever the Ministers' latest interpretation of the Bible is + a 150-year-old ritualistic absolution rote that wasn't even created by the religion's original namesake. But hey, go ahead and keep your flock cowed, er, "close to the middle" with that irrational fear of God's wrath.

      "“While believing strongly, without evidence, is considered a mark of madness or stupidity in any other area of our lives, faith in God still holds immense prestige in our society. Religion is the one area of our discourse where it is considered noble to pretend to be certain about things no human being could possibly be certain about.” -Sam Harris

      Delete
    5. The verses you sited don't support your statements.

      If teachings are not supported by the Bible, like your comment is not supported by the Bible, then I'll choose God's Word over the teachings. It's not my own understanding, but merely a desire to follow God's Word and Christ's instruction first and foremost. Just as the verse you sited says.

      There is no center. You either have faith or you don't. Being more "Laestadian" does not add to your faith one iota.

      Read about the woman at the well and young Jesus with the Pharasees in the temple. Being a believer has nothing to do with meeting a set of criteria defined by man. If you are defining a set of criteria which TO YOU is "the center", then you are giving yourself the role as an arbiter of faith, like the Pharasees in the temple, or the deciples at the well.

      Leave unto God, that which is Gods. You, nor I, have no business, or faith strong enough, to define the center of the flock. It is enough to simply have faith in your heart. Nothing more is required. And no matter how hard we try, nothing more can be acheived. Simple faith is enough.

      Deep Roots



      Delete
  32. just a thought5/08/2013 02:55:00 PM

    Deep roots. I completely agree! We are all equally saved through Christ, and though I don't think this gives us permission to sin as much and as often as we like, we should not have to strive towards another's idea of the perfect Christian. There is no such thing.


    Pebbles. I, too, am interested in hearing what people think can be done to change this.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I don't understand where, in the Bible, it says that a Christian isn't going to Heaven if they use birth control etc. John 3:16 states that "whosoever believeth in Him shall not perish but have everlasting life." I have never been involved in ANY church that teaches you will not go to Heaven if you use birth control, etc. No, I am not a member of the LLC church and I thank God I'm not. Yes, I do have two children (one who was brutally murdered, at age 24, two months ago) and I'm happy. Hopefully, people can come to realize that God loves you no matter how many children you do, or don't have, and He will never bar you from Heaven just because you use birth control, use makeup, dance, etc....thanks.

      Delete
    2. In looking at what I posted, it makes it look like I'm happy my daughter died. I meant that I'm happy I have two children. My heart grieves that my daughter was murdered. For me, and my entire family, it's a day by day process. My heart grieves for Nina and her family. Our children aren't supposed to die before us. I know I will see my daughter in Heaven someday....

      Delete
    3. LLLreader to Susan: God bless you Susan and know that if there were any way that we could ease your pain we would. As I get older more and more of my friends have lost children through illnesses, accidents etc. To lose a child through murder must be especially painful. To those of us that have children and grandchildren that clutch of pain and sorrow for a grieving parent is especially real. "What if it were my child" is often my first thought. That might seem selfish, but that thought also makes me feel more deeply for you. I am so,so sorry for your loss. Know that you are being held closely in the hearts of parents everywhere.

      Delete
  33. For all of you who are basing your opinions about Eric and what he said to the media: why do you think the media didn't have a 'new breaking story' on his statement to them?? Because they know that they misquoted him in their first story. That's why. Eric never said "if god would have wanted nina to stop having kids, he would have closed her womb" that is wrong, and they should be sued for misquoting him. And for all you who have these questions about birth control...have you ever personally talked to Eric about your situation to know what he would say? And you say that if you raise concerns or questions that you are shot down....have you ever asked a question at a congregational discussion regarding birth control? I'm sure the answer is no. And to EOP: you know how tragic it was to experience death there in Spokane. Ask yourself....how would you have felt if the web was filled with propel talking about it in a negative sense? This is so disgusting!
    Have a little compassion. There will be no change in the church so quit getting your hopes up. And never have we been taught that if we sin we are going straight to hell. Where did that come from?
    And for those of you who are still sitting in the church benches that don't believe what you are hearing being preached, and you have questions, this probably isn't the best place to find your answers. Eric (or any other minister) would be more than happy to talk with you honestly. How can you bash 'the church' when you are too scared to voice anything yourself?
    Jut wondering

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Just Wondering....
      I asked this before...What part of "if god would have wanted nina to stop having kids, he would have closed her womb" does not represent LLC teaching?

      I'll grant that it has been a few years since I left, however, when I was there, asking questions or voicing doubts was a very quick way to find oneself the subject of a caretaking meeting...likely in front of the entire congregation.
      As far as suggesting that the church doesn't change..that is at best intellectually dishonest and at worst a lie.
      Examples...
      When I was young women didn't cut their hair short or get perms.
      I remember when a woman wearing pants to church was "worldly"
      the women sat on one side of church, the men on the other.
      People couldn't watch school plays...then they could...then they couldn't
      It wasn't ok to be in sports..then...maybe...then not.
      One wasn't to perform...but if your last name was right, then you got to perform the star spangled banner before the forbidden sporting events.

      That was all...sin. Any time you go against the "mother" it is a sin, even if what is being spouted is completely illogical.

      I believe you see plenty of compassion here, if you look for it. It is compassion for a mentally ill mother, for children left motherless, for an infant killed, and for those people who are sincere in their belief and faith in God, yet are too scared of being told they are in unbelief, of losing family and friends, to ask questions or voice doubts, let alone dissent. But back to my first question... please..which part of that is not in line with church teaching.
      I look forward to your answer.
      Brian Martin (another point...I know why the regulars here are nameless...but I am very curious, if the defenders of Laestadianism are so sure of the truth they speak...why remain anonymous? What have you to fear?)

      Delete
    2. Have you ever heard of "sins on to death"?

      The media hasn't had a follow up because Eric refuses to answer any of the questions they asked because he knows that to answer them honestly would put him in the middle of a media firestorm. So there is not much they can do at this point. I can guarantee you that this story has not gone away.

      Despite all that, I do wish you the best. Remember Jesus loved everyone, and we should try to do the same.

      If God's Word comes from the pulpit, its pretty clear what Eric's views are on birth control. If he is making private recommendations to the contrary, then why does he preach the way he does about birth control? Same with everyone else.

      I have gone to talk to ministers, with Bible in hand. They don't like when their views are contrary to the Bible at and it is shown to them (not all of them are like this of course). So saying they are more than happy to talk to people honestly is very disingenuous. They are happy when people talk to them, and don't question them on their answer. They prefer a one way conversation. They especially don't like when questioners consult the Bible. Again, not all of them are like this, but the hardline ones sure are.

      As far as compassion, bashing, suing, and misquoting goes... I think you really need to get your head out of the sand, read the Bible, and work on some compassion yourself. The tone in which convey your message is exactly why people are scared to speak up. Little do you know, your best friend, close family member, or someone else near you may share the same concerns, but they don't dare say anything because they want to be loved by you the same way they always have been. And its clear from your comments that your love is conditional, so they're to afraid to lose it.

      Delete
  34. Free Thinker, I love the Sam Harris quote...

    Perhaps the biggest failure of religion is we want to have certainty about things that are impossible to be certain of, and then we call it Faith.

    Faith in what? Faith in certain Men having the right prediction of what is best for us, when how can they know?

    Is it better to blame the Preachers for preaching about birth control or for us believing it? Why are decisions of living our lives given over to third parties to decide? It is like living your life one step removed....placing your faith in them making the right choice. Isn't it convenient to be free from making the 'wrong' choice?

    I was 46 before I realized that I took the easy way out, by allowing others to make choices for my life. I then was never held accountable...right, wrong of indifferent.

    It leaves you out of control, but blameless....except in the end, I was the one who paid the ultimate price for my life being directed by them. I put faith in that they were making the best choices for me, it is to be a passenger in your life. And, when you have children, you are all riding on the bus behind the preachers, giving up all rights, but living the consequences of where the driver takes you.

    My faith prior was in the preachers. My faith now is in Me. I released them from the responsibility for my life, my happiness, my spiritual well being, and to be the middle man between Me and God.

    Beth

    ReplyDelete
  35. Amen, Beth.

    I think I wrote about this previously, but several years ago I took my mom to visit a friend. I will never forget her comment (I can no longer remember the context): "People of the world have it so easy. They can do anything they want when they don't have the Christianity."

    I was speechless! Imagine thinking you are the only person/group in the world with struggles and concerns, not to mention a belief in God.

    That reinforced to me the huge gulf between The World and The Christians, in their view.

    It's sad.
    SISU

    ReplyDelete
  36. LLLreader to Beth: That was so correct, so clear, so beautifully said--your post puts the whole whole situation in a nutshell. You and the kids on the bus with a preacher driving--WOW!

    ReplyDelete
  37. Brian, in your comments about compassion, one of the things you mentioned was "compassion for an infant killed". So you know what went on that morning in that house? You also mentioned compassion for a mentally ill mother...don't be so quick to judge that this mentally ill mother killed her baby because of a statement she made to her husband when she was SICK. So no more innocent until proven guilty....in this case it MUST be guilty, no question about it hey?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. It's been addressed elsewhere, and most people I think have come to accept and even hope for, the possibility that Nina did not kill her child.

      It's also been addressed elsewhere that LLC-ers are often among those quickest to judge: unbelievers, ex-Laestadians, "wrong" Laestadians, or someone who wears nail polish to church. So I hope you'll excuse a raised eyebrow or two at your indignant cries of "YOU don't know, how DARE you judge."

      Delete
    2. I'm sorry Anon, but your comment towards Brian is disgusting and unfounded.

      Deep Roots

      Delete
    3. Anon,

      I have to say I'm pretty disappointed. I do not know Brian, but he has always been respectful and civilized in discussions. Your note to him could have been a little more so.

      ~Anon also

      Delete
  38. LLLreader: Thank you EOP for this topic. It has brought out so many things that have needed to be said. I'm thinking about all the people who aren't posting, and the thoughts that must be going through their minds. I know we are holding that dear women in Phoenix in our hearts, as well as those kids. Accountability is being called for, and you have opened up this up for discussion in a way that possibly no one else could. Thank you again.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I'm one of the ones who isn't posting comments on this site, but I thought I'd respond to your comment.

      What am I thinking? I'm thinking my head is spinning from all the comments, and I don't mean that in a derogatory way.
      Everyone has their own opinions and ideas, each trying to get them across. But, I see a woman who did a horrible thing, who belongs to a religion (Laestadianism) that doesn't teach or preach on seeking professional help. I don't belong nor have I belonged to the LLC, but I did belong to another branch of a Laestadian faith.

      I can put myself in Nina's shoes, I've been there, no I never thought of killing my children, but I was that stressed out mom who had baby after baby. I did the best I could under the circumstances and so did my husband. I thought I had to be the perfect mom like all the other moms. I thought I was the only one who really couldn't handle being pregnant all the time, I envied the other mothers who looked like they had it all together. I'm finding out (through this blog) now many years later that I wasn't the only one who felt like that, it's just no-one talked about it. So what did I do? While still in the church I would tell my children when they get married that they could have as many children as they wanted, that it was their decision, them and their spouse. Did I voice that to other people in the church? No way! I don't regret having a large family as I love my children, but I didn't want that for them.

      My heart breaks for Nina, her husband and her children. I'm not thinking about anything other than what a tragedy it all is. I'm sure they were very good people, and good people sometimes do bad things. They are human after all, and humans make mistakes.

      Heartland

      Delete
    2. How many churches preach on getting professional help? This should not be a concern for our church, but rather for each to make in their own personal lives. As far as discouragement some have said they experienced on seeking help, if it's truly still happening, it does need to be addressed, but the Church should not have to "preach" to people to seek out help when they need it!

      Delete
    3. I've read that last sentence three times and still find it stunning. Why does the Church exist? What are sermons for?

      Delete
    4. While sermons can, and should, be strengthening and uplifting to us spiritually (and therefore mentally), Sermons (and ministers) are not a replacement for mental health support and evaluation. A sermon should encourage us in this life, bring us joy, and strengthen our faith (and therefore, our relationship with God). They should not say "please go get help if you are mentally unstable". Really, is this what you want your preachers preaching? Is this what the word of God means to you? If, in private conversation, it is clear you need and/or want/desire this professional help, it should be encouraged in that situation, but it should not be something expected of ministers to preach from the pulpit.

      Delete
    5. Well, if you are not a part of the llc, then you probably don't attend any comgregational discussions, or parenting evenings, or couples camp, or mothers camp. You're right, they don't preach in a sermon probably about seeking proffesional help. But I can tell you with absolute certainty, that these things are discussed in other places like I mentioned above. And there it is again....nina killed her baby! We don't know if that's what happened!
      Sad

      Delete
    6. I disagree with you. I do believe that it should be spoken about in sermons from time to time. What a way to "encourage" the ones who are struggling with life, that they can go and get help, that there are places outside the church that can help, since the church has no means to provide it. How encouraging that would be to someone, for example like Nina, to hear that's it's OK to get help. Maybe that is what is wrong with the ministers of the Laestadian faith, they really aren't in any position to be "ministering" people.

      I know what the word of God means to me. The word of God doesn't necessarily mean the same thing to everyone sitting in those pews. So therefore, you might not need to hear being preached that you can seek help for your mental state, but the person sitting in the pew in front of you or behind you may.

      I heard this second hand, but it's about a woman who told another person that "You don't need to read the bible, all you have to do is just listen to what the ministers tell you to do." If that's the case of how some people in the "Laestadian faith" think, than it's no wonder why they are the way they are in their "beliefs".

      Heartland

      Delete
    7. The LLC does in fact encourage people to see qualified professionals about mental health issues. Their attitude about that is refreshingly enlightened, I'm happy to say. And personally, I don't see it as something preachers should feel obligated to mention in sermons, so long as they aren't saying anything to discourage such treatment, which they don't.

      Delete
    8. That is good to hear EOP. In the county I live in, the service agencies from that county encourage ministers/preachers/pastors etc...to speak out about issues, and asked where do they find these people, they are told they are siting in their pews.

      Heartland

      Delete
  39. I'm not claiming to be one who never judges. I think as humans, there is no one group who judges any less/more than the next. I do know tho, that with all this discussion here, and with all these links to all the different online articles and opinions about this situation, that it is not in any way helping this father in his fight to get his kids back! But then, maybe there are those that don't think he is fit to be a father either. You know that child protective services is aware of many people thinking that the llc is a cult, and I'm sure they are using that against him. So your stance on "raising awareness" on this horrible, judge mental, cult like, church, is doing more harm than good. But then, hey, if you are helping even just one lost wayward sole who feels he doesn't have a voice, then I guess that's got to be a good thing. And sorry for going off, and I do read positive on here, I guess it's just that the negativity stands out more than the positive.
    Sad

    ReplyDelete
  40. Sad,
    You bring up some interesting points. I *don't* know if Brad is a fit father or not, and cannot comment on that one way or the other. As someone whose spouse suffered from a mental illness and a psychotic episode, I can however empathize with this poor man and what he and his family must be going through. If he is (as I believe a majority of Laestadians are) a good person at heart, I hope he is able to overcome this and live the rest of his life raising his family in a positive manner.

    You are correct in that you see a good amount of "negativity" regarding Laestadianism. That's due to the nature of the site; the people here are mostly ex-es, who have suffered at their church of origin. Consider it the "flip" side of the perspective coin; many Laestadians see only the "heads" (positive) side, and we're here to acknowledge the "tails" side does exist, and should be stopped.

    Having said that, though I am not from the LLC I don't consider it a "cult." It has some cult-like properties, to be certain, but so do most churches/religions. My hope is that CPS is able to take the time to actually examine the situation in full and determine what's right based on totality; if what's right is that Brad should retain custody of his kids, it will be a travesty if that's not the case.

    ReplyDelete
  41. Dear "sad", you have restored my belief in the compassion of most people by your comment above. The nature of this blog is from the ex LLC members who have believe they have been wronged by this faith, those who have not love, but bitterness and unrest within themselves since they freely left and claim to be happy and free. If they feel happy and free as they claim, they would find no reason to change this faith to their liking. To compare this faith to a cult is unfortunate, as cults usually prevent members from leaving, anyone is free to disbelieve and leave at any time. As far as this tragic event is concerned, you are so right in believing that it would be a travesty if this father does not retain custody of his children. I feel that CPS has not examined the situation in full, largely because of the statements to the media from people that have been former members of the LLchurch, out for what gain?? revenge, hatefulness, bitterness?? Wrongfully thinking their mission is to change the beliefs and faith among the church members? In looking at this tragic event, how can there be any compassion among those that would like to see this church destroyed. This mother has suffered from mental illness, and only in her crisis times of this disease has her world become a time of not being able to distinguish from reality and nonreality in the statements made to the media, which are being exploited by people who wish to blame the church. Thank you from the bottom of my heart for your compassion for this family, especially for the father.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I'm no longer in the church. I've given statements to the media about how good Brad and his family are & how Nina was a victim herself in many ways. I've donated several thousand dollars to Brad's fund and plan to donate more if this drags out. I've called CPS to give a statement on his behalf, encouraging them to return the kids.

      What have you done, Anon?

      Little do you realize, we "bitter" ex-members have contributed a lot of money and energy on BEHALF of Brad and Nina.

      You clearly have no understanding of how CPS works and why they took the kids. Brad will get the kids back, and the activism of ex-members will help with that.

      Get your head out of the sand, please!

      Beezlebub

      Delete
    2. Beeziebub, this is Anon. I am sure the money you donated in behalf of the this family will be greatly appreciated as the costs are going to be quite high. hOWEVER, if it was you disguised in the 1st newscast video speaking about it being the church's fault, you have caused more damage to this poor families father than you realize in the view of Cps. This father is devastated by the loss of his children, and hopefully he is given custody of them. If that isn't devastating enough, it is even more so that these children are split up . My heart cries for them, What has the church done for the family? Money has also been generously given, as well as love, support, and compassion.For you to question what I or any of the others have done to help is said in complete ignorance. I also believe that this monetary help being given in behalf of the family is very compassionate and appreciated, but we are not saved for good works, nor do we boast about them to receive personal recognition. I am so saddened ( by your disguised public media response in representing our church with all the misquotes made and representing our church as a cult in the eyes of CPS) that you have in doing so managed to cause such a magnitude of despair to this father and children in trying to get his children back. You have made this situation unbearable for this father without his children in your media statement, If you thought this would help the situation, you are sadly mistaken, hopes for this father were destroyed by you.

      Delete
  42. Many people have made statements to the media. How delusional can you be to think that third party "hearsay" has any effect on CPS decisions? They could be sued if they acted on the third party statements of outsiders. Do you really think they are that stupid? Get a clue, Anon.

    By the way, the TV interview only says good things about Brad and Nina. It's besides the point anyway because CPS does not act on anonymous comments on TV, online, or anywhere else. Clearly the most jarring quote, and an accurate picture of the world Nina experienced, was " God would have closed her womb". That has far and away received the most negative attention. Now you would never accuse the speaker of that quote of all the things you foisted on we ex-members, would you? Hypocrite.

    As far as your good works comment, I hope that you can see how foolish it is in this anonymous environment. I made the comment to show that many ex's do care, but of course with the mote stuck in your eye it seems you want to continue to falsely characterize those outside of the church. I could care less about "good works".

    The self righteous hypocrisy, with occasional personal platitudes of false humility, of many (not all) church members is nauseating. Blame, judge, blame, judge, but never confront the real problem. It's people like you, who don't bother to learn about anything, but continue to jump to their comfortable false conclusions that perpetuate all these issues.

    Do you realize, Anon, that the prosecutor in this case could go for the death penalty if Nina is found guilty? Do you know LLC members, current and former, could speak up and provide what's called a mitagating circumstance to help avoid that potential horrific outcome? It would have to done in public so you'd probably call that a "work", and blame everything on ex-members. I know ex-members would speak up because they have more compassion for Nina, Brad, and her kids, than they do in protecting the reputation of the church.

    Wake up, Anon, and start seeing things for what they really are. Maybe you could actually make a difference and not even think about things like "works".
    Beezlebub

    ReplyDelete
  43. Good news to all who know them no matter what your feelings are about the church's role in this tragedy; the kids are being returned to the Koistinen family.

    Beezlebub

    ReplyDelete
  44. That is good news.

    ReplyDelete
  45. Actually, the kids are not being returned to the koistinen family. I'm not sure where you heard that beezlebub. Actually, just the opposite. Cps wants to take away both of their parental rights now, and have petitioned to the court for that to happen, and cps wants to adopt their kids. So, their legal battle is now really just beginning!
    --sad

    ReplyDelete
  46. Sad,
    CPS doesn't "adopt" kids. Ever.

    ReplyDelete
  47. Well, they gain rights to them and put them up for adoption to foster parents.

    ReplyDelete
  48. A week ago I heard that the kids will be returned to their relatives pending a background check of the relatives. Now I'm hearing that CPS may try take Brad's parental rights and put the kids up for adoption. Regardless of what CPS does or does not do, Brad needs money for the legal issues with his kids ASAP.

    This site is set up to take donations to help the kids. Anything donated here will go towards helping the children be returned to their family. There is a letter on the site that summarizes the current situation with CPS and potential outcomes. Nina's legal defense is separate, and donations made at this site will not go to her defense.

    http://www.keepourfamily.com/

    The donation portion is not set up yet, but will be soon.

    As a former LLC member, I've been privy to many of the rumors, etc. surrounding this case. One thing I've never heard anyone question or gossip about, is Brad's love for his children and his integrity as a father. Please donate to help the children return to their father.

    Beezlebub

    ReplyDelete
  49. This is so sad! All I can add is that husbands and wives need to make the number of children they will have a private matter and not be swayed or pressured by any church or its members. Common sense has to prevail! Many people are so good and tenderhearted and want the approval of their families and the church that they overlook what is really best for THEM. Husbands, protect your wives. Stand up for what's best for her and for yourself. Don't be afraid of pressure from outside sources in any area of life. Resist it. It's nobody's business but your own. Norah

    ReplyDelete
  50. http://www.azcentral.com/insiders/laurieroberts/2013/09/02/cps-as-transparant-as-concrete-in-baby-mayas-death/

    Interesting, indeed.

    - F

    ReplyDelete