Essential Oils, Choices, and Fighting for the Little Guy

I recently made an informed decision based on research, thought, and theory.  I'm rather excited about it, but more importantly, I want to share the why behind my choice with you.  Many of you will know that previously I have *not* supported this company so it may seem a bit like I've "gone out of my gourd" but bear with me for a few moments.

This is a conversation I've been having in my head for over 2 years.  Many of you know I use essential oils in my home.  In fact, last May I rescued our family tent using them and those who know me personally have often seen me pull a small blue or green bottle out of my purse for various reasons.

I'm generally not a huge fan of MLM companies.  I'm *really* not fond of being associated with what can be (at best) high pressure sales tactics and (at worst) outright lies and fabrications.  Unfortunately MLM essential oil companies have sadly fallen into a category of people who make me cringe.  I've literally been badgered, verbally beaten up, and physically CHASED by representatives from both doTERRA and Young Living.  Who wants to be associated with that kind of behavior???

With that background I offer you my tale.

Essential Oils University is an organization I have chosen to follow very closely.  In January they began doing FREE ($150 value) testing on Blue Tansy due to the adulteration and outright lies in the market.  They are single-handedly ferreting out the charlatans and rubes among the industry one test at a time.  For that, I applaud Dr. Pappas and his team.  I'm always a fan of consumer protections and those who fight for the little guy.

I watched over the past month as friends cheered on Dr. Pappas as one test after another was released (in another group) for those who were submitting samples and exposing fraudulent companies.  Go Get 'Em!  A rally the size of the Super Bowl was going on across the internet among oil enthusiasts.  Companies are threatening to sue Dr. Pappas...it's been a zoo.

As I sat and watched all this unfold I came to two very important conclusions:

1. I wanted to find a way to support Dr. Pappas and *know* that the oils he's tested are the ones in my collection because I *trust* his ethics and I want to support him being able to provide testing like this to expose charlatans.  After all, if we're all cheering him on from the sidelines, shouldn't we be backing that up with our choices for purchasing?
2. There is only 1 company I knew of that has 100% of their oils tested by Dr. Pappas.

This put me in a dilemma.  Do I switch my oils to a company that frankly I've previously outright bashed???  Am I really going to *gasp* make the conversion to this company?  It was a thought that made me cringe.

One of their "Wellness Advocates" had been in constant contact with me recently.  It doesn't hurt that she's also a dear friend who's son is my son's best friend.  Our circles constantly cross each other and at times are barely distinguishable.  She'd made the choice recently to make her oil business her full time job and has been doing a wonderful job.  She's well educated on oils and chooses to know what she's doing instead of putting her head in the sand and blindly recommending the latest photo on Pintrest without discerning the accuracy of the information.

So, I had a stable upline to join - now....what about the ridiculous statements sadly made by those "Wellness Advocates" without ethics and education?  Moms actually burning and harming their children with oils due to inappropriate usage (primarily lack of proper dilution rates).  The list could go on. I took some time to watch some footage from what is being put out by the organization to the "top off the food chain".  

Guess what?

They're pushing proper (ALERT - there are *many* different standards) dilution rates.  They're advocating the "Wellness Advocates" to understand their responsibility to their clients and recruits.  I'm seeing seminars and webinars about how to properly promote the products to avoid FDA lawsuits AND I'm seeing websites, promotional materials, and literature connected with the company and "Wellness Advocates" changing to comply with current federal law!

WOW!  Looks like someone is at least attempting to clean up their act!  Now it comes down to the individual "Wellness Advocate".  Is he/she going to take the reins, learn the new material, and put him or herself in a protected place where the business can still thrive?  Some are, some aren't.

There are horrid reps in every company.  We've all met them.  They're the same people from this company who literally chased me through a parking lot.  They're the cosmetics rep who doesn't understand "I have an allergy to red/blue mica, please stop trying to sell me purple eyeshadow!".  They're the kitchen gadget pusher who brings her entire kit to *every* pot luck and proceeds to lecture you on how you made your own offering vs. how you *should* have done it.  They're the home decor rep who you no longer allow in your home due to her sighs and shaking of her head.  These idiots cannot be avoided no matter what company you choose to work with.  They're everywhere - and they definitely overpopulate the MLM industry.

Do I let the bad eggs separate me from the potential?  Do I go with what I *know* is a safe oil (based on everyone loving this scientist...) and simply adjust the usage to my own personal dilution standards I have adopted for my family?  Do I put myself out there as a "Wellness Advocate" who is willing to give you the TRUTH and help you learn to educate yourself?

Yes.  I did.  Introducing my new dōTERRA site after ALL this crazy (aptly named for my miliary family "Semper Gumby").  Stay tuned as we talk more in the next few weeks about a wide variety of things but the ONE thing that matters to me most - my family.  I hereby promise this site will *never* be "all dōTERRA, all the time" but you will hear when something works....and when it doesn't.  And you will also hear the amusing anecdotes you have come to rely on, gardening information, and a wide variety of other happiness from the middle of nowhere which I am blessed to call home.

TRUTH: The New Super Power

This morning a good friend of mine asked me to read and give her my take on an article on The Daily Beast entitled "Jesus Christ Wasn't Down with Marriage".  She felt I was the best she personally knew to pick apart this particular atrocity of "journalism".

First off, propaganda isn't journalism.  These are two very different things.  If you're going to call yourself a news source, then please learn the difference and behave accordingly.  This article is atrociously slanted toward the LGBT movement.  There's nothing wrong with that - but it does tend to taint the reader in one direction or the other straight off the cuff.

If you're going to refute Christianity using the Bible, stick to the actual facts.  The Biblical implications in this article are simply partially correct.  The author chooses to pick and choose her battles...and does not pick them very wisely. 

Let's tear into this with the meat of her "defense" that Jesus was not in favor of marriage.  I'm going to skip the political posturing on both sides of  facts and break this down into the 5 major claims made by the author, starting with the portion on the New Testament since according to this author only the Old Testament supported the institution of marriage:

1. Wedding of Cana

Claim: "facilitating drunkenness at the Wedding at Cana is less evidence of Jesus’s support of marriage than of his desire to keep the party going"

Ummm.....no. First off this miracle was performed at the request of Mary, not on Christ's whim. Secondly if the family could not provide an adequate feast, it was a shame upon the entire family within their community. Imagine going to a wedding, being told there's a full reception, and you get there and it's fish sticks, mac and cheese, and watered down lemonade with only enough to feed 1/2 those in attendance. It doesn't look kindly on the bride, groom, or their families. Some things don't change.

2. The disciples abandoned their wives to follow Christ.

Claim: "Jesus promises the disciples that anyone who leaves “brother or sister or father or mother or children” for his sake would be rewarded in the age to come. And he’s not just a home wrecker in theory; tradition maintains that some of Jesus’s disciples were married, but their wives are not mentioned in the Gospels."

Mute point. All of the disciples were SINGLE MEN. They were not married and none had children. So.....not so much. How does one establish a celibate priesthood by bringing married men and their children on the road?

3. Be celibate if you can. If not, get married.

Claim: "Paul is clear that he would prefer that followers remain unmarried and celibate like him. If you really can’t handle celibacy and find yourself on fire with lust, then you should marry."

TRUTH. Finally - a piece of this that actually WORKS. Yes, Paul called all people to celibacy but if they could not, then they should marry. Easy enough. In fact, the Church STILL does this today, calling noble men and women across the globe into holy servitude as priests, nuns, friars, brothers, sisters, and a myriad of other things.

4. Romans were pro "Traditional Marriage".

Claim: "In the first two centuries of the Common Era the real advocates for “traditional marriage” were the pagan Romans. The Christian tendency to reject marriage was one point of contention between the imperial authorities and the fledgling religion. In the legends that describe the activities of the Apostles, Jesus’s followers preached celibacy and sexual abstinence to the Roman aristocracy. And according to Christian apocrypha, sabotaging the sex lives of Roman officials was a surefire way to lose your head."

Ummm.....no. I'm 100% certain St. Valentine of Rome who was martyred in approximately 380 AD would help me refute this as well. He was martyred for performing Christian marriages, primarily for the soldiers of Rome. Christians rejected Roman marriage - which allowed for easy and simple divorce, was often prearranged between families, and contained very little, if any, moral obligation. They favored (as the Church does today) Sacramental Marriage.

The easiest way to break this down is to look at the Church today in Europe. Marriages *must* be performed by an agent of the State in Germany (and other European countries). They cannot be legally performed by clergy. They must take place in the courthouse and are more legal proceedings than "weddings". So those who are getting married in the Church go first to the courthouse and then go to the Church and get married in the eyes of God. You get married twice in order for a marriage to be Sacramental. This is even common among those who are not of the Catholic faith.

So......same thing. You can be married as a Roman, but to be Christian (Catholic) you must be married in the Church and follow HER rules for marriage, not just Rome's (which were severely lacking).

5. Young Christian women were encouraged to abandon their families and husbands for missionary work.

Claim: "There’s no shortage of stories of young Christian women who abandoned their families and husbands in order to join Christianity and branch out on their own as missionaries. When she overheard the Apostle Paul preaching through a window, a young woman named Thecla was inspired to abandon her fiancé, cut her hair short, and dress as a young man spreading the good news. A cross-dressing single woman with a successful career?"

The closest to proof this author can provide is Thecia leaving a FIANCE to follow the Apostle Paul. Ummm....if all these wives were abandoning their children and husbands, why not use one of THEM who is well documented as an example....?

Oh....wait.....that's because there aren't any. This is a favorite passage of the Bible for me. Thecia chooses to be one of the first female religious! She sets a pattern we still follow 2000 years later! She followed her heart, found the strength to tell her fiance "Sorry, but this isn't a good idea" and off she went. Talk about the strength of women through Christ!