Chronology of Kuhlmann-Ezzo correspondence
Chronology of our interactions with GFI
by Joel and Kathryn Kuhlmann
What follows is a chronology of our involvement with the GFI controversy. We have included links to the original documents. You will want to download the pdf versions if you want to see Gary Ezzo's actual handwritten comments to us.
Our response to GFI's public statement about us can be found by clicking here.
Our letter to Richard
Encinias at Calvary| PDF version (60 k)
Our first correspondence regarding the GFI curriculum
was a letter to Richard Encinias, the Assistant Pastor
at Calvary of Albuquerque in charge of family ministries.
This letter was written in May of 1996, and was based
on concerns we had after observing the teachings being
used and after watching one of the Preparation for Parenting
videos. We borrowed the book that accompanied the video,
and were immediately struck by the legalistic nature of
the material and the way it absolutely misrepresented
the attachment style of parenting. We were aware that
our church was offering these classes and thus endorsing
the program, and believed we had an obligation to voice
our concerns and make certain that the church was aware
of the controversy surrounding the material in Christian
circles. We had come across some of this controversy during
early research into GFI, but we had no idea at that time
how widespread the controversy was or would become.
We also had no idea that Richard Encinias was the New Mexico Regional Director for GFI, and were not expecting nor were we prepared for the antagonistic response we received from him. He called Kathy at work immediately after receiving the letter and was openly upset at the concerns raised. He actually challenged her (a parishioner whom he had never met before) to a debate over the materials.
We had a face-to-face meeting with Richard shortly after this, and the results were the same. He was aggressive almost to the point of being hostile, essentially saying we didn't know what we were talking about and had misrepresented what Ezzo meant; he denied that there were any problems with the materials.
Richard Encinias suggested we write to Gary Ezzo directly, and offered to hand-deliver our correspondence to Ezzo.
(August 1996)
Our letter to
Gary Ezzo | PDF version (100 K)
Between May and August of 1996 we spent a great deal of
time familiarizing ourselves with the Preparation for
Parenting curriculum. We purchased a copy of the textbook
(5th edition at that time) which we studied at great length.
By the time we wrote our letter to Gary Ezzo, we were
very familiar with the teachings in this book.
(September 1996)
1st
response from Gary Ezzo | PDF Version (1 MB)
In September of 1996 we received a response from Gary
Ezzo. His response was a photocopy of his handwritten
comments in the margins of our original letter. In addition,
we received a copy from Ezzo of the letter we had written
to Richard Encinias in May; this letter also contained
Gary Ezzo's handwritten comments. (Our
letter to Richard Encinias with comments from Gary Ezzo | PDF Version )(200K) It became obvious to
us that Ezzo discounted our letter to him based on his
reading of the letter we had written to Richard three
months earlier.
The letter to Richard was intended for Calvary of Albuquerque, not Gary Ezzo, and was written before we had studied the Preparation for Parenting material extensively. Unbeknownst to us, Richard gave this letter to Ezzo, and Ezzo based his response on this letter, rather than on the one we wrote to him.
(September 1996)
Our reply to
Gary Ezzo | PDF Version (60 K)
We were very disappointed in the inadequate and unprofessional
response that we received from Gary Ezzo, so we sent him
a tongue-in-cheek reply saying that surely there must
have been some mix-up in his correspondence department
and that we must have gotten a copy of his rough notes
instead of the final letter that he intended to send.
(October 1996)
2nd
response from Gary Ezzo | PDF Version (1.1 MB)
A few weeks later we received another response from Gary
Ezzo. It was once again a copy of our first letter to
him, but this time we received his original hand-written
comments, so at least they weren't cut off in the margins
from being photocopied. Also, he added a few more comments
and a Post-It note with the following:
"There was no mistake - this is the response. Your letter although I'm sure sincere was so badly flawed in its assertions that any other type of response was rendered useless. The very fact that you did not even get the name of the curriculum correct when writing to Richard was a fairly good indicator of what was to follow. And what follow [sic] simply lacked intellectual honesty."
Unfortunately, this seems typical of GFI's response in many cases. Ezzo is saying in a very condescending manner that our letter did not deserve any more attention than he gave it, and was not worthy of any more professional response than his scribbled comments. He also admits to using the letter we wrote to Richard Encinias as the basis for his pre-conceived notion of what our letter to him would be like.
As we said above, the letter to Richard was written three months prior to the letter to Ezzo, before we had studied the Preparation for Parenting material in detail. It was not written to Gary Ezzo. GFI consistently points to people's use of the term "Growing Kids God's Way" in reference to their entire program as evidence of ignorance and uses that as an excuse to discount anything further that person may say. In our case, the letter to Richard was certainly written before we were aware of the nuances of the entire GFI organization. Certainly Ezzo must have noticed that in the letter addressed to him we referred to their program in a correct manner throughout.
