The Journey from Fear to Grace: A Review of Jinger Duggar Vuolo’s Becoming Free Indeed

Image

“The Christian life was a treadmill, and I was constantly picking up the pace, pushing myself harder and harder. But like a treadmill, there was no destination, no arrival point that signaled the end of all that pushing. There was just … effort.” (116)

With these words Jinger Duggar Vuolo summarizes, in her new book Becoming Free Indeed, what life was like growing up in a family that adhered to the teachings of Bill Gothard.

Lest the mentioning of Bill Gothard’s name cause any to say they have no reason to consider this book, I would assert that any number of prominent preachers could be substituted for Gothard’s name throughout the book. Hence, it is relevant to us all—especially those of us familiar with Fundamentalism.

In her introduction, Jinger explains why she wrote this book. While attending Gothard’s Advanced Training Institute (ATI) conference in 2017, she learned that many of her childhood friends who once attended with her “no longer loved Jesus and wanted nothing to do with him … they had rejected everything they’d been taught about God, the Bible, and the Christian faith” (xi).

Many of us know people who grew up in church that no longer have anything to do with Christianity. “I’d fall off the treadmill from time to time,” Jinger admits.

Such a self-focused, effort-driven spiritual life wasn’t sustainable. I’m certain that if I didn’t have the Holy Spirit … I would have gotten off the treadmill and never gotten back on.” (116)

Today, Jinger testifies, “My faith is still intact, but it has changed” (xi). She has gone through the process of disentanglement. Whereas deconstruction involves tearing down and abandoning one’s religious beliefs (7), disentanglement is “unthreading my faith: separating truth from error” (9). This book details her disentanglement journey.

Although Jinger appreciates the blessings of growing up Duggar, her childhood was filled with fear. “By the time I was fourteen,” she recalls, “my worst, most all-consuming fear was the fear of what others thought of me” (18). She also “was afraid that I wasn’t obeying and honoring God adequately. I constantly wondered if God was displeased with me” (22).

Jinger lays the blame for her fears at the feet of Gothard. In her book, she shares some of Gothard’s teachings that flamed her fears. As a Fundamentalist, I have heard many of the same teachings parroted in pulpits.

Of all his teachings, Jinger seems most disturbed by Gothard’s Umbrella of Authority. This teaching made Christianity seem like

a transaction with God rather than a relationship with Him: If I obey the authorities in my life, then God will be pleased with me and bless me. If I disobey those authorities, God will not be happy with me and will not bless me. (63)

She asserts that “Gothard turned obedience into a matter of terror. If I misstepped in any way, I was removed from all protection, and Satan would have full access” (65).

Meeting and eventually marrying Jeremy Vuolo (raised in the home of a Reformed Baptist pastor) started Jinger on her journey of disentanglement. He began to teach her “that the Bible is more interested in telling me who God is than giving me guidance for every small decision I make” (83). He helped her to see how Gothard’s “teaching was feeding my fears and guilt, not showing me the grace of Jesus” (93).

Today, Jinger believes that “if God doesn’t tell us in the Bible that something is sinful, then He gives us freedom to decide whether or not we want to do it” (95). She labels Gothard’s proliferation of principles a “superstitious Christianity” (100).

In Chapter 7, Jinger discusses high-pressure invitations. Gothard often quoted verses like Deuteronomy 23:21 to stress the seriousness of making a vow before God. He once encouraged his audience to vow to read their Bibles and pray for at least 10 minutes every day. Jinger made that promise before God. She explains what affect that vow had on her life:

In the coming months and years, that simple vow would haunt me… . The difficult thing about that vow wasn’t the length of time required; it was the relentless nature of the guilt. The vow weighed on me. Even if I did read my Bible and pray first thing in the morning, I’d only have to wait a few more hours for that same pressure and guilt to creep back in. (107, 108)

Growing up, Jinger thought “God gave us the Bible to show us how to live. He had a bunch of commands … so people like me could know with perfect clarity what decisions were good – would please God and bring success” (109). Now, she understands “the Bible is about God and not me” (122). “Reading the Bible,” she testifies, “became an exciting act of discovery that wasn’t about me but about God and His glorious plan for the universe” (117).

Jinger notices now that Gothard used proof-texting when he spoke. She defines proof-texting as “coming up with an idea you want to promote and using a smattering of verses to support your claim” (113). Gothard “was teaching his own ideas and then pointing to verses taken out of context as proof that he was right” (113).

Another method Gothard used was “the slippery slope argument … the idea that certain behaviors may not be bad in themselves, but they can lead to other behaviors that are immoral, sinful, or harmful. These behaviors are like gateway drugs – they lead to something far worse” (159). “I’ve learned,” Jinger notes, “that if I have a conviction against something because it is spiritually unhelpful for me, that doesn’t mean the same activity is spiritually unhelpful for someone else” (159, 160).

Gothard also taught Jinger and others how to properly live as wives. He instructed them to always be “agreeable, happy, and relentlessly encouraging” (141). She has since learned that

it’s okay for me to get upset and discouraged. To have bad days. To not always be bubbly and cheery when Jeremy comes home… . I don’t want to suppress myself and all my emotions like Gothard taught. (141)

Jinger defines Christian liberty as

the idea that Christians have freedom to decide how to live, what to do, and even what to believe as long as those beliefs don’t disagree with the Bible’s essential truths about God, salvation, and Scripture. (155, 156)

This contrasts with Gothard’s definition of freedom which is “enjoying the desire and the power to do what is right rather than claiming the privilege to do what I want” (41). She claims the Bible

doesn’t say whether you should order beef, chicken, or pork. It doesn’t tell you which house to buy or what shoes to wear. It doesn’t even tell you which job to take or spouse to marry or whether you should marry at all. In those areas and so many others, Christians have the freedom to make their own decisions. (154)

Jinger mentions some of Gothard’s personal indiscretions. She reasons that if ATI’s principles did not work in his life, then they will not help others either.

Jinger cautions those oppressed by legalistic religion:

Rejecting Christianity because it’s associated with a teacher like Gothard may give the appearance of freedom, but it will not lead to true freedom. Likewise, obedience to man-made rules does not set anyone free. (129, 130)

“I am no longer being stricter than Jesus” (187), Jinger declares. She concludes,

When I look at the man-made rules I put so much hope in when I was young, I see only emptiness. More emptiness and hopelessness would have greeted me if I turned to the world … there is only one place to turn for the kind of hope that never fails: Jesus Christ. (191)

In her final chapter, Jinger lists the six basic principles for disentangling one’s faith.

Jinger currently affiliates with Pastor John MacArthur’s church and seminary. Knowing this enlightens the reader as to the theological perspective from which she writes. That being said, this is in not a theology book.

Due to its easy-to-read nature and thought-provoking subject matter, I would recommend this book for a book club or ladies Bible Study. Jinger raises issues that we need to deal with Biblically—whether we agree with her or not.

The lesson some Fundamentalists will take from this book is that they should never allow their daughters to marry a Calvinist! However, I think there are bigger fish to fry. I would much rather my children follow Jinger’s example than that of her brother Josh.

On a personal level, Jinger needs to examine her negativity towards Gothard. Gothard’s position on birth control led to her very existence. She would have likely not been interested in a guy like Jeremy had she not been raised in a conservative home inspired by ATI. Is Jinger able to thank God for Gothard’s positive influences in her life? (1 Thes. 5:18).

Jinger criticizes Gothard’s Umbrella of Authority, but she does not offer an alternative. The Bible clearly teaches that God appoints earthly authorities over us, and He expects us to submit to those authorities (Rom. 13:1-7, Eph. 5:22-6:9). The exception to that rule is when their commands directly contradict the Bible.

I am not comfortable summarily dismissing “the slippery slope argument” as Jinger does. God-positioned authority can often see our weaknesses better than we can, so we need to heed any warnings they may give us (Heb. 13:17).

In her thoughts on marriage, Jinger praises her husband Jeremy and lauds his servant leadership and attentive ears. However, she fails to consider how a woman living with an ungodly husband should conduct herself (1 Pet. 3:1-6). Perhaps this is a matter she could deal with in a future book.

Having grown up in a legalistic Church of Christ, I understand what it’s like to be on the spiritual treadmill. In such an environment, most people give up on living right (since it is impossible) and concentrate instead on appearing right (which is possible). Others, like Jinger, constantly stress over whether they are doing enough to please God. Within that group, many give up.

Thankfully, Jinger’s desperation drove her to the Cross. For those who are either pursuing God in their own strength or have fallen off the spiritual treadmill, I pray Jinger’s book will lead them to the grace and peace which comes through Christ alone.

Discussion

The lesson some Fundamentalists will take from this book is that they should never allow their daughters to marry a Calvinist!

Yeah this review made me a laugh a little bit as well. I don't think she needs to reexamine her negativity towards Gothard. He is a very dangerous teacher. He should be fully criticized. We shouldn't hold to "Gothard's teaching", but instead biblical teaching. The author should not base the fact that the only way Jenna is alive is because her parents followed Gothard's teaching. This is so backwards.

My thought on that part is that when a truth is uttered by a false teacher, it’s the truth—and the grace behind it—that we should be thankful for, not the one who happened to utter it.

But I doubt I would classify Gothard’s teaching on that point as truth.

Where I see CD’s point, broadly speaking, is that experiences like she had with Gothardism can make a person bitter and we can overlook positive ways God used the experience in our lives. I’m reminded of Joseph’s remarks regarding his brothers. “God meant it for good… to save many people alive” (I’m probably paraphrasing) is not an endorsement of his brothers’ conduct.

Jinger does seem to land on an overly broad concept of liberty. Our call to “walk worthy” goes far beyond “… as long as those beliefs don’t disagree with the Bible’s essential truths about God, salvation, and Scripture.” Liberty doesn’t extend that far. But I don’t have all the context for her thoughts on that.

There’s ‘Christian liberty relative to God’ and then ‘Christian liberty relative to other Christians.’ The latter has to do with what we ought to feel obligated to do based on pressure/judgment/teaching by other Christians. It sounds like Jinger mostly has that in mind. The former is, well… God. With Him, we don’t stop at “the Bible’s essential truths about God, salvation, and Scripture.”

Views expressed are always my own and not my employer's, my church's, my family's, my neighbors', or my pets'. The house plants have authorized me to speak for them, however, and they always agree with me.

One thing to keep in mind regarding Gothardism is that it shows up in all kinds of places where people don't even know the name of Gothard or IBLP, and that's because Gothard borrowed a lot of his ideas from a book called None of these Diseases, and others have borrowed from Gothard, while yet others borrowed from None of these Diseases, keeping a "rulesistic", Pharisaical strain strain going well in evangelicalism and fundamentalism. The Duggars subscribed to this, and another example is that of Vision Forum.

My take is that the rules of Gothardism are tremendously harmful because they very often override freedoms which the Bible gives us explicitly. More or less, the message is "you will be more holy and blessed if you don't do what Jesus and the Apostles did". Ignore Peter being told to kill and eat; you are to eschew pork and shellfish. Ignore Jesus at Cana; you are to abhor music with a beat because Bill thinks it resembles pagan music from Africa, and you absolutely must abhor wine. The list goes on and on.

Not only do you need to ignore the example of the Lord and His Apostles, but you also need to override basic logic to do so. It is, after all, the slippery slope fallacy, the guilt by association fallacy, and so on. And in that light, it's no surprise that many former Gothard disciples (two more examples are Jacob and Rachael Denhollander) become Reformed; whatever your views on the doctrines of Grace, the Reformed side of the aisle is one where you're allowed to point out basic logical fallacies and question old assumptions.

Aspiring to be a stick in the mud.

"Disentanglement" has become the word our family uses as we look at our exodus from they type of religion she describes. We were in a ministry that was strongly against Calvinism and militantly opposed Gothard yet emphasized the same type of over emphasis on "doing" and enforcement of non-Biblical rules which were claimed to be based on Biblical principles. Being a Christian primarily consisted of outward appearance and keeping the rules because that kind of obedience pleased God. (Looking back I'm somewhat amused at how they changed those "rules against worldiness". i.e. no jeans to jeans allowed, no facial hair on men to beards and moustaches, hats on women in church to no hats, No TV to TV, no guitars to guitars, etc.) This quote is a fair description of us now: “My (our) faith is still intact, but it has changed” . She (we) has (have) gone through the process of disentanglement. Whereas deconstruction involves tearing down and abandoning one’s religious beliefs , disentanglement is “unthreading my (our) faith: separating truth from error”

"Some things are of that nature as to make one's fancy chuckle, while his heart doth ache." John Bunyan

There is a lot to unpack here. Addressing just a small fragment of the review....



"On a personal level, Jinger needs to examine her negativity towards Gothard. Gothard’s position on birth control led to her very existence. She would have likely not been interested in a guy like Jeremy had she not been raised in a conservative home inspired by ATI. Is Jinger able to thank God for Gothard’s positive influences in her life? (1 Thes. 5:18)."



No. Gothard is a false teacher and is well known for adding to scripture. There is no reason to examine one's negativity towards his teachings. I would go so far as to label Gothard a Heretic. Zero apology.



Having grown up "Gothard/ATI adjacent" (my family wasn't specifically into his teachings, but we *looked* the same and many of our friends/associations were into Gothardism and thought we were the "perfect Gothard Family") the number of friends I personally have that have been permanently scarred by his teachings in so many different ways does not engender ANY feelings of appreciation towards his teachings. Even a broken clock is right twice a day, but that doesn't mean we should appreciate that clock for the two times it is right, as really, we don't actually KNOW when it is right because it is so vastly wrong the rest of the time.



I am not sure if you are aware of the VAST numbers of abuses that women (for that matter, even some men) raised within ATI circles are aware of. It is systemic, and a good amount of it covered up (and even perpetrated) by Gothard himself. A personal friend of mine went to Gothard and disclosed sexual abuse that her brother was actively subjecting her to. He informed her that it was all her fault, and dismissed her. Nothing else was ever done. Her brother went on to continue his abuse of her and eventually moved on to her other sisters as well. This is not an uncommon story or a one off or outlier situation. Sexual abuse within ATI families comes up over and over again, including in several families that I know personally.



She has no need to thank Gothard for her very existence. He was not her creator. He also is not responsible for her attraction toward her husband. These things are in the hands of God, not man.



I do not thank the Lord for the non familial abuse that I received as a small child. What was done to me was very wrong. Has the Lord allowed me to use what happened to me in positive ways in talking with others who have been abused? Yes-and I thank God that he has allowed something good to come out of what was a *TERRIBLE* wrong done to me as a child. However it does not require me to be thankful that it happened in the first place nor to put my abuser on a pedestal of some sort or thank the Lord for his (terrible) impact in my life.