RONALD M. ENROTH
Written 1992
Preface
This has been a difficult book to write because it is a book
that is critical of other Christians. One always runs the risk of
being misunderstood and labeled "judgmen tal" or arrogant when
you make evaluative statements regarding Christian believers and
organizations outside your own immediate circle. The book is
about churches and other Christian organizations that inflict
psychological and spiritual abuse upon members through the use of
fear, guilt, and intimidation.
However, when we refuse to pass judgment on any religious
phenomenon for fear that such judgments might violate the norm of
tolerance so prevalent in our culture, we abdicate our
responsibility to the body of Christ to sound a warning where a
warning is justified. Some boats need to be rocked, even
Christian boats. The years of research that have gone into this
book have validated for me the truth of a placard I display in my
office: "Those who make it hardest to be a Christian in this
world are the other Christians."
I can safely predict that not one of the groups discussed in
these pages will agree that they deserve such mention. They will
protest that they have been unfairly portrayed, that I have
listened to "a few disgruntled former members" whose words should
not be trusted, and who are not representative of the membership.
Let me assure the reader that the information I convey in this
book is based not on my own fanciful imagination, but on the
actual experiences of real people whose accounts can be
independently verified and who, to the best of my knowledge, have
been truthful about their encounters with churches that abuse.
Despite the defensive protestations of authoritarian leaders that
exmembers of their churches lie, distort the facts, and are
"accusers of the brethren," there is abundant evidence that a
serious problem of abuse exists in the Christian community.
Researching and writing Churches That Abuse was often a
depressing experience because in recounting their days in abusive
environments, the survivors I talked with had to re-live the pain
and confusion, and, yes, the anger. Sometimes they were
embarrassed to admit that they had allowed these things to happen
to them. They felt the absence of understanding people willing to
help them "pick up the pieces."
It is my hope that this book will provide a context for
understanding. If we have basic information about a subject, we
can sometimes take preventative action. Regrettably, it is not
always possible to "get through" to people already caught up in
abusive churches. They do not see themselves as being
manipulated, or in any danger of spiritual abuse. Hence, the
frustration of parents, relatives, and friends who try to reach
or "rescue" them. There are no easy solutions to this problem.
In the final analysis, the book presents a hopeful outlook. Not
only can individuals leave abusive churches and achieve recovery
and restoration, but there are encouraging signs that some groups
are themselves recognizing the need for change and are moving
away from the fringe toward the center. May their numbers
increase.
It is customary for authors to say that without the help of
many people their books could not have been written. That is
especially true with regard to this book because so much of it is
comprised of case histories. My greatest debt of gratitude,
therefore, is to the dozens of individuals who have shared freely
with me their personal, often painful, odysseys in abusive
churches. Only a few of their stories can be told in these pages.
But each one has contributed to my understanding of the topic
and, hopefully, all will feel they have had a part in this
project. I have tried to convey as accurately as possible what
they have told me, but I alone am responsible for any errors.
My gratitude extends to the following people who each contributed
in various ways to the success of this effort: Jamey Robertson,
Kara Bettencourt, Rebecca Coons, Hubert Merchant, Betty Fleming,
John Rodkey, and Anne Anderson.
I owe special thanks to Kevin Liu, whose assistance was
invaluable, and for whom this book has unique meaning. I remain
grateful to Herbert and Louise Moeller and to David and Dore
Charbonneau for their years of encouragement. Warren and Barbara
Landon demonstrated stability and caring when I felt alone. Thank
you, friends.
I continue to be grateful to J. Whitney Shea, who many years
ago introduced me to sociology and modeled for me not only
scholarship, but Christian compassion and a steadfast faith.
Acknowledgment
Finally, I thank the staff at Zondervan Publishing House,
especially my editor, Len Goss, and Zondervan's publisher, Stan
Gundry. Thank you both for your supportive encouragement and your
willingness to take on this topic.
INTRODUCTION
Abusive Churches: A View From Within
Pastor Phil was in the stands watching his team participate
in a church league softball game. The game was going great, but
for some reason Pastor Phil asked the coach to substitute a
number of men in the next inning. The coach complied but left the
assistant pastor in the game. This evidently infuriated Pastor
Phil. According to the (former) coach, "He called me with his
bull horn to come to the spectator stands immediately. He was
extremely angry and asked me why I had disobeyed him about the
substitutions, pointing out that the assistant pastor was still
in the game. Without any provocation on my part, Phil was
attempting to intimidate me publicly before many people. I was
stunned! His outrage continued for the rest of the evening as he
attacked me and the team members."
The following week Pastor Phil was unable to attend the ball
game, but he gave orders to play the game "backward." That meant
the players had to bat left-handed if they were right-handed and
vice versa. All field positions were switched so that everyone
was playing in an unfamiliar location. Since the pastor couldn't
be there, he sent someone with a camera to videotape the whole
game to make sure his decree was obeyed. The point of all of
this, he said, was to "humble" the team because they were getting
too proud from winning so many games. The team members were, in
fact, humiliated and embarrassed.
The coach later confronted Pastor Phil and told him that he
was shocked and offended by his behavior. "I pointed out that I
had always done what he had asked in regard to coaching any
teams, and that his sudden outburst of rage toward me was totally
uncalled for. His only response was that I did not obey him and
therefore was not submissive to him." The coach teamed later that
most, if not all, of the team members had gone to Pastor Phil and
apologized-even though they really had nothing to apologize for.
The scene was quite different a few weeks later when television
evangelist Paul Crouch and his wife Jan were present to watch
their son Matt play ball and to shoot a video spot for their
Trinity Broadcasting Network. Pastor Phil was now "Mister
Personality," greeting all of the players, cheering them on to
victory, calling the play-by-play action while the video cameras
rolled, giving "Jesus cheers," and focusing his attention on Jan
and Paul Crouch. At the end of the game, he gathered the team
members around him, and, ever mindful of the cameras, prayed and
thanked Jesus, tears rolling down his face.
Pastor Phil is the unquestioned leader at Set Free Christian
Fellowship in Anaheim, California. He likes to present the image
of being a "cool" pastor. No jacket and tie for him. Wearing the
obligatory sunglasses and earring, he leaps to the platform, his
dark hair pulled back into a pony tail, and grabs the microphone.
"I want to welcome you to Set Free Christian Fellowship-a place
where people who love Jesus come, a place where people who don't
know Jesus come, a place where people who want to find out about
Jesus come. And it's the place, too, where a few troublemakers
come, just to try to stir up trouble. I would point out a few of
them right now, but I won't. We'll let God take care of them,
amen?"
Then Pastor Phil invites his audience to "get high on
Jesus." "Jesus Christ can just bless your brain to bits," he
tells us. "Jesus Christ can make you fly. Jesus Christ can
totally set you free-this morning."
As I glance around the large, old warehouse that is the
setting for this 10 A.M. Sunday-worship service, I am reminded of
the informal atmosphere that characterized the so-called Jesus
People gatherings that I attended and wrote about in the late
1960s and early 1970s. In fact, I felt catapulted back into that
time frame this late October morning in 1990 as I joined the
largely youthful throng walking from all directions toward the
big old building with the words SET FREE emblazoned on its side.
Men from the church were directing auto and pedestrian traffic. A
few people warmly welcomed me as I approached the entrance.
Before the service begins, the sounds of a Christian rock band
announce to the visitor that this is no ordinary church. People
are noisily milling everywhere, searching for the hard-to-find
seats on the folding chairs cramped across the floor. Around the
sides and back of the building, bleacher seating is also rapidly
filling up.
The crowd of several thousand is composed primarily of young
adults, with some people in their middle years, but very few over
sixty. The audience is a mixture of Hispanics and whites, with a
scattering of blacks. Quite a few children are there, many of
them in the company of single mothers. Most of the folks at Set
Free this morning are casually dressed-shorts or jeans, a few
women displaying bare midriffs. What is especially noticeable is
the presence of many males dressed in biker garb-black motorcycle
vests and sleeveless denim jackets, some with "Jesus" inscribed
on the back. Others proclaim, "Trained to Serve Jesus at Set
Free." Beards on the men and heavy make-up on the women are the
norm. Except for the biker crowd, the atmosphere is again
reminiscent of the earlier Jesus People rallies, complete with
the "one-way" finger sign popping up here and there throughout
the audience.
The music is raucous and the crowd is enthusiastically
responsive. They love the rock 'n rap gospel music. They cheer,
whistle, and stomp when Pastor Phil says, "You don't have to wear
a holy face here." No sir, this is California casual. Pastor Phil
urges his audience, many of whom have backgrounds on "the
street," to feel at home, and to forget about hymnals and fancy
clothes. He promises us that we will not be hearing a three point
sermon. And no poems. Just sit back, relax and enjoy "The Lord's
Most Dangerous Band." "We're family," Pastor Phil reminds us.
Loud, upbeat music dominates the first half of the service. The
Set Free Gospel Choir is introduced and Phil banters with his
audience. "I'm gonna dedicate this in prayer for Mick Jagger that
he get saved; he might be able to sing here at Set Free one of
these days." The performers on the platform are "jumpin' for
Jesus." One of the female vocalists sports a broad-brimmed hat
that rivals the $1.98 special wom by Minnie Pearl of the Grand
Ole' Opry. Other performers wear Jesus T-shirts.
Just before testimony time, Pastor Phil brings on the
popular rap group, the Set Free Posse. He alerts the audience to
"listen up" for the "heavy" doctrine contained in the lyrics. For
those unfamiliar with the term "doctrine," he explains that in
"regular" churches it means "teaching." Then he announces the
title of the song: "Don't Be a Wimp!" "Wimp" is one of Pastor
Phil's favorite words. From the response of the congregation, it
is obvious that most of them know he is mocking traditional
churches and their concern for doctrine. It soon becomes apparent
how lightweight the lyrics are. The audience claps rhythmically
in approval. Everyone is having a fun time.
Just before his morning talk, Pastor Phil introduces two
young women who give dramatic testimony to Christian conversion.
One claims that her recent past had included involvement with
drugs and Satanic cults. She says that she had been a "breeder"
Satanist and that one of her babies was a victim of child
sacrifice.
Pastor Phil's talk is brief and undistinguished. He wants to
preach the simple Gospel in a way that relates to some folks that
conventional evangelical churches can't relate to or even
overlook. He is effective as he stands before the crowd with open
Bible in hand, informally commenting on several verses. At the
conclusion of his talk, he gives an altar call and quite a few
people file to the front for brief counseling and a prayer,
followed by an announcement that they are now in the family of
God.
Phil Aguilar, 43, does not fit the stereotype of the typical
evangelical pastor. He is an ex-convict, a former drug addict, a
"macho" man who rides a Harley Davidson motorcycle with a license
plate that reads, "BIKER PAS," for biker pastor. His dark glasses
and black leather are almost trademarks for a ministry that
includes outreach to bikers and gangs ("Servants for Christ") as
well as to miscellaneous street people and the homeless. As drugs
increasingly penetrate the middle class, Set Free tries to
minister to the young people from the more affluent suburbs. On
Sunday mornings cars of all descriptions and dozens of
motorcycles can be seen parked in the vicinity.
Set Free also operates a network of rehabilitation homes and
ranches. Several hundred church members live in a dozen communal
residences located in an area adjacent to the Set Free building.
The ministry operates about twenty additional houses nearby, two
of them owned by the Trinity Broadcasting Network (TBN). Most of
Set Free's homes are leased at low rates from the City of
Anaheim's Redevelopment Agency. Mayor Fred Hunter, an ardent
supporter of Set Free, rents two houses he owns to Pastor Phil
and his Set Free Christian Fellowship.
The Set Free rehabilitation program also includes small
ranches located in Perris, California, one near Dallas, Texas,
and another near Chicago, Illinois. These ranches, plus the urban
residential program, involve approximately five hundred people.
And it is this segment of Set Free ministries-the rehabilitation
and communal dimension-that has stirred up controversy. Some
critics have questioned the nature of the rehabilitative effort,
the physical facilities themselves, and the lack of professional
oversight. But most of the concern has revolved around the
leadership style and suffusive influence of the man in black-Phil
Aguilar. Here is an account of what happened to one couple.
Tina and Art first joined Set Free Christian Fellowship in April
of 1987 because of drug and marital problems. They had hopes of a
restored marriage and of starting a better life together. Pastor
Phil Aguilar regularly appeared on the TBN network, announcing
that anyone with problems, either drug, alcohol, or personal,
could come to Set Free for counsel and assistance; no one would
be turned away.
Tina and Art did go to Set Free and they were not turned
away. However, by the time their stay at Set Free was over, they
had divorced, Art had lost his faith and left the ministry, Tina
had remarried one of Set Free's inner circle of leaders who took
her money and possessions for a drug binge and left her pregnant
and alone with four other children. All of this occurred with
Pastor Phil's knowledge, counsel, and blessing.
When Tina and Art first moved into the Set Free homes, they
were living together in the same house and had no thoughts of
separation or divorce. Soon, how ever, when they started to
argue, they were separated by Pastor Phil into different
households. They were not in agreement with this forced
separation, but they submitted to Pastor Phil's supposed wisdom
and discernment. According to Art, "instead of us getting
together to try to work out our problems, we got separated."
Art was also not allowed to see his own children without having a
permission slip. If he saw them at church, he could watch them
from fifty feet away but was not allowed to talk with them.
Feeling frustrated and powerless, Art watched his wife become
increasingly influenced by Pastor Phil. As a young Christian, she
could neither discern nor distinguish biblical truth from Set
Free doctrine. She drifted further and further from her husband
until, because she and Art "didn't get along," Pastor Phil
counseled her to get a "worldly divorce," since a "spiritual
divorce" was not possible without having committed adultery. Tina
says about her experience at Set Free, "When you first start to
get involved, you're so naive about things, and it's really easy
to fall into becoming part of Pastor Phil's 'clique,' especially
when you're just coming off of drugs and having a lot of
problems." Art adds, "At the time, Tina and I were new Christians
who didn't know very much about the Lord, and we could have
followed any kind of cult without even knowing it. There are a
lot of people out there who twist the Word around, and there are
a lot of false prophets."
At no time did Art and Tina ever receive counsel together,
nor did Pastor Phil ever pray or share the Scriptures with them.
Art asked many times to be able to sit down with his wife so they
could talk out their problems. Each time Pastor Phil would say
that they were not yet ready. Then he counseled the divorce that
neither of them wanted. Tina thought that this was God's word. If
Pastor Phil sanctioned the divorce, then it must be right.
Set Free claims that it ministers to many downtrodden
individuals with alcohol, drug, or relational problems. Few have
anything beyond a high school educa tion. Few are Christians
before coming to Set Free. According to former members and other
sources, Pastor Phil himself has only two semesters of Bible
school education and is very negative toward formal schooling.
The theological "Master's degree" that Set Free's official
spokesman claims Aguilar was awarded is in fact a certificate
from a correspondence school in Florida, called International
Seminary. Given this information, it is entirely understandable
how individuals like Tina and Art can be swayed by Phil Aguilar's
philosophy, doctrine, and practices. Tina says, "There were a lot
of things Phil kept me from doing, and, at the time, I thought it
was okay, but I just couldn't see what he was doing. I thought
what he was doing was good for my life, and I didn't realize how
bad it is to keep someone away from her family, or to keep
grandchildren from seeing their grandparents." Tina wanted to
leave Set Free several times. Each time she was told that she was
weak and that her return to drugs was inevitable. Despite the
internal struggle, she remained in the organization, fearing a
return to drug abuse and godlessness.
At the time of her divorce, Pastor Phil came to Tina and
told her that he cared for her, that he was with her, and that he
backed her all the way in her decision to get a divorce. He also
indicated that he wanted her to stay in Set Free forever and to
make a life for herself there with her children. His counsel to
her was to stay single for at least two years so that she could
get closer to the Lord and be near her pastor. So Tina ended up
living near Phil Aguilar and his family. He would frequently come
to her room to talk with her whenever she was feeling down, and
would tell her that she "trade beautiful babies and things like
that." Phil counseled her to tell her children that their father
was "backslidden and not doing the things of the Lord."
Tina ended up getting remarried in Set Free to Peter, who,
at the time, was one of Aguilar's lieutenants. She thought that
everything was fine, but deep down began to feel that something
was wrong. However, she didn't question too much because she
thought that since Phil Aguilar was a pastor, anything he did had
to be right. "I never questioned divorce and remarriage because I
thought Phil knew what he was doing and everything was okay."
Peter and Tina also ended up leaving Set Free because they
had planned on going to Hawaii for their honeymoon-without Phil's
permission. Phil caused most of their wedding and honeymoon plans
to be cancelled, and said that if they wanted to get sun or look
at palm trees that they could spend time in the backyard of one
of the Set Free houses. They ended up living in a single room
with four children. Shortly after the wedding, Peter and Tina
moved to another city, where Peter returned to drug abuse. In the
eleven months that they were married, Peter went on four drug
binges each of several days' length. The last time, he took
Tina's personal possessions and money. When he returned from the
last binge, he declared that he was going back to Set Free to
serve God. He left on a Wednesday and on Friday he was at TBN
doing phone counseling, something that Set Free members regularly
volunteer to do. After that, Tina started to question God, but
only, she says, "because I had made Phil my god. I couldn't
understand how a pastor could allow these things to happen. I
couldn't understand how Phil could allow my husband to be lifted
up again right after he had just ripped off his wife and had been
shooting up drugs for two days. I was pregnant at the time, and I
had to have all my utilities turned off because he had stolen all
my money and I wasn't able to pay our bills." The child was not
planned; Pastor Phil would not allow Tina to use birth control.
Peter was received with open arms upon his return to Set Free. He
was never counseled to take responsibility for his pregnant wife
and children. He did attempt to return to his family but was
ridiculed and mocked for. such sentiments. Phil said, "Peter, you
wimped out on me again." Tina and the children are still alone.
Tina's brother and mother became involved in Set Free during the
same period of time that Tina and Art were involved. All have
been devastated. Louise, Tina's mother, joined because of her
concern for her children and grandchildren. A daughter-in-law and
grandchildren are now lost to her. Robert, Tina's brother, went
to Set Free for help with drug abuse. At this writing, Robert's
wife and children are still very much a part of Set Free. He is
allowed to see them for only one hour on Sundays-but only at Phil
Aguilar's Set Free Christian Fellowship.
A former Set Free staff member, who came to the organization
from the outside and who was filled with idealism over the
possibilities for service, soon discovered nothing but
frustration.
"The whole emphasis at Set Free is the idea that everybody
should live in one community. However, at that particular point,
my wife and I had just sold our house and had begun living in an
apartment. Phil was constantly pressuring us to break our lease
on the apartment and move into the Set Free homes. At that time
they had twelve homes that housed about two hundred people. He
said if I would move in, I wouldn't have the responsibility of
having to raise any more support or have to work a part-time job
in order to pay my bills, and I could be there twenty-four hours
a day ministering and having the freedom to do what God called me
to do. He also pointed out that if I ever had to leave town for
any reason, my wife would have people to fellowship with. We
became convinced that it was the right thing to do. My wife and I
took that as being wisdom from the Lord and from our pastor, so
we broke our lease and mo-ed into the homes. We also sold most of
our possessions. And, thinking that we would be there for the
rest of our lives, we took our remaining possessions and
remodeled the home which we moved into. We gave them all of our
furniture, our refrigerator, and a variety of household goods."
This was the beginning of Pat and Kerry's ordeal as youth pastors
at Phil Aguilar's Set Free Christian Fellowship. During their
stay they feel they were "used" to lend an air of respectability
to the Set Free ministry, were tom apart as a family, were
systematically removed from responsibilities when they were
becoming too successful in the youth ministry, and suffered the
loss of Kerry's sister, Stacee, to the intense thought reform of
the group and to Aguilar's son, Geronimo.
Pat was a youth pastor at an Anaheim church when he met Phil
Aguilar. He was full of zeal for God, was considering full-time
ministry, and had numerous non traditional ideas that he believed
were needed in order to reach the youth of today. He was having a
hard time finding a church that would be willing to implement
activities that would make church exciting and a place where
young people could go and feel like they could belong twenty-four
hours a day.
Pat's father-in-law introduced him to Phil Aguilar. All that
they knew of Set Free at the time was that it was an inner-city
ministry that helped the poor and needy and reached out to the
afflicted and those in prison. According to Pat, "From the
outside, everything seemed to be exactly what I was looking for."
At their first meeting, Pastor Phil impressed Pat as being a very
charismatic type of person. "He was very lively and full of
enthusiasm. He was very non-traditional: an ex-gang member,
ex-drug addict, ex-con, a Harley Davidson biker who wore all
black, always wore his dark Ray-Ban sunglasses without taking
them off, had tattoos all over his body, and was of Mexican
descent." Pat shared with Pastor Phil his vision concerning youth
and his desire to open a youth center in Anaheim. He also shared
with him the fact that he had a possible invitation from a church
in Northern California to go and minister there. Aguilar declared
that Pat would not be going there, but that God was going to call
him to stay in Anaheim, and that he would ultimately be working
with Set Free.
Initially discounting Pastor Phil's predictions, Pat and
Kerry began attending Set Free, and, at first, it appeared to be
a "real Christian utopia." Phil would call Pat's family on stage
and introduce them as the "Boone family" or "the clean-cut
family." This was in a congregation consisting primarily of
ex-gang members, ex-drug addicts, and ex-alcoholics. Pat's family
was given exceptional treatment during that initial period, and,
over the course of weeks, began to grow very attached to Phil
Aguilar and Set Free. Then Phil offered to make Pat Set Free's
very first youth pastor. However, he would have to live by faith
and raise his own support.
Immediately after this offer, Pat and Kerry were
"coincidentally" visited by a member of Set Free with a word from
the Lord concerning their staying in Anaheim, as well as offers
of financial support. They were convinced they should stay at Set
Free.
For the first three months, life and ministry were great.
Pat was having great success, ministering to two hundred high
schoolers and being asked to consult with state agencies.
According to Pat, "Things were perfect, and we thought we had
found the place that the Lord had told us to go and spend the
rest of our lives." However, things changed once they decided to
move into the Set Free homes.
Although Pat was eventually appointed overseer of the three
main Set Free homes that housed about eighty persons, he and
Kerry began to notice inconsistencies in both the Set Free
Fellowship and in Phil Aguilar's life. The red lights began to go
on. Phil surrounded himself with non-educated and court-appointed
individuals needing supervision. Many could not read and depended
on Phil for teaching and the interpretation of Scripture. These
persons were not afforded any education at Set Free and,
according to Pat, they "literally fear Phil and they serve Phil."
New Christians would be sent to TBN (the Trinity Broadcasting
Network) to staff the telephone counseling lines-a "blessing"
that was required of Set Free members, even if they were not yet
completely free of their own addictions. Any questioning of
Phil's decisions or any indications of "irresponsibility"
resulted in a stay at "the Ranch," a five-acre dirt facility
outside of Perris, California, consisting of a few
ten-by-ten-foot modular rooms and an outdoor woodheated shower.
The times away from Set Free at the ranch were ordinarily set
aside for spiritual growth, a place where "you could go to be
closer to the Lord." But sometimes it was used just as a place of
punishment. Phil would separate parents and children by sending
young children, he would separate husbands and wives by sending
one or the other, and he would separate mothers, daughters,
brothers, and sisters. People put up with such treatment and
stayed with Set Free because many knew that if they left, they
would not have anywhere else to go.
Things were no more consistent with the Scriptures in
Aguilar's personal life, Pat soon learned. While claiming that he
had taken a vow of poverty and that he had had to move forty-two
times in his ministry, he would go out to eat lunch and dinner
frequently, wear fifty dollar shirts, outfit his children in
expensive shoes and clothing, and buy various accessories for his
motorcycles. Meanwhile, Pat and Kerry's weekly food budget for
the twenty-five persons in their communal house was two hundred
dollars. Phil also had access to many different motorcycles and
cars. He headed up car and motorcycle "ministries" and would give
motorcycles to devoted followers so that they could participate
in these church-sponsored "outreach" activities. To downplay his
expensive habits, Aguilar would dress in cutup t-shirts, shorts,
and army boots, according to Pat.
Perhaps reflecting on his own meager theological education,
and revealing his personal feelings of inadequacy, Pastor Phil
would sometimes comment that "the only thing worse than an old
Christian was an educated Christian." Yet, he would discipline
his followers by calling them "spineless wimps," "babies," or
"uneducated." He would sometimes ridicule and humiliate people in
public.
Personal quirks also resulted in inconsistency in practices
as well as doctrine. Persons seeking assistance at Set Free
received differential treatment according to their connections
with influential people and how much they could benefit Pastor
Phil. Pat's youth ministry was severely curtailed when the former
youth director, an influential and financially supportive woman,
wanted her position back. Pat and Kerry believed that their
family was being used as a public relations tool to further
Pastor Phil's ministry and offset his biker image.
Pat and Kerry's relationship with Kerry's parents was
severely strained to the point that, at the end of their time
with Set Free, they were told essentially that Kerry would have
to choose between her parents or the Set Free ministry. Kerry's
parents could only see their grandchildren when they worked as
nursery volunteers on Sunday. They were labeled as being a
hindrance to the work of God.
Kerry's sister, Stacee, is still a member of Set Free,
having married Phil Aguilar's son, Geronimo. She has been turned
against her family, and, on several occasions when visiting with
Stacee, Kerry and Pat have been told that they "stir up trouble"
and "cause division" by wanting to see her. They feel that Stacee
has succumbed to the "Christian macho" environment promoted by
the Aguilars. She is "supposed to treat her husband as if he were
the Lord," according to Pat. She was up, serving her husband food
and drink, hours after the birth of their first child. Her
husband does not participate in the care of the baby, preferring
to wait until the time the child can communicate with him.
Speaking of her brother-in-law, Kerry observes: "He continually
goes off and does whatever he wants, which usually doesn't
include Stacee." Stacee continues to defend and build up her
husband. A common complaint of former Set Free members is that
many of the men in the church treat women like doormats.
Phil allows no elders in the church, claiming that he alone is
responsible before God for all of his flock. Thus, internal
accountability is nullified. Also, as shepherd of the communal
flock, Phil requires permission notes for all aspects of life.
Pat was not allowed to oversee his family as husband and father,
but was expected to consult with Phil on all matters.
According to Pat, because of these and other areas of
disagreement, "I finally got to the point where I was about to
lose my wife and child. Kerry was being tormented psychologically
and was increasingly negatively affected by the ministry."
Eventually, Pat was taken to a football practice to be told that
he was being a "wimp" because he wasn't able to control his wife
and keep her away from her mother. He was told that he had to
decide whether he was going to be in control of his family and
"get some guts," or leave the ministry. After consulting with two
other Set Free leaders who also admitted that they had considered
leaving, Pat was told that if he was going to leave he must do so
very quietly so that he didn't stir up any problems.
One evening Pat and his wife did leave very quietly, but
when they returned to pick up their furniture, they found that
everything had been removed from their room and locked up. As
they began to load what was left of their belongings, Pastor Phil
came by to help them pack. Here is Pat's account of what
followed.
"I told him that he didn't have to help us. His response was
that the sooner he got us out of there the better. After we had
loaded everything, he began to verbally attack me, hoping to get
me to physically attack him. He began to discredit me by calling
me a spineless wimp and a baby. He said that I was sowing discord
in the ministry and causing other people to leave. When I
responded using Scripture, he didn't answer, but continued to
belittle me in front of my wife and all the people in the homes.
I am sure he was trying to provoke me to anger so that I would
physically attack him. That would prove to all the observers that
I was indeed an `outlaw,' which is Set Free jargon for a
backslider or a rebellious person."
Six months after Pat and Kerry left to become involved in
another Christian ministry elsewhere in the state of California,
they returned to Set Free to visit Kerry's sister, Stacee, who
was now pregnant with her first child. Phil eventually showed up
and the first thing he said to Pat was, "Hello, el wimpo. Wimpo
is back in town." He came up to Pat, gave him a hug, and asked
him what he was doing there. "I told him that I was just visiting
and then he told me that I better leave right away. He again said
that I was trying to sow discord. He called me a loser and a
spineless wimp. He proceeded to inform me how God wasn't doing
anything with my life and how miserable I was. He said that my
family life was down the tubes and that was the reason I was back
in town. After a few more minutes of his verbal abuse, Phil's
secretary, Lois, joined in and began to tell, me that I was
treading on dangerous ground. She said that if I continued to act
that way toward Phil, God would probably take my life because I
was messing with a man who was anointed by God."
As Pat tells it, Phil became even angrier. "He started to
pat me on the head and make some kissing gestures at me. Then he
came up and kissed me right on the lips and said, `Now what are
you going to do about that?"' Pat told Phil that he would pray
for him because he was really confused_ and: that God was going
to deal with him severely if he chose to continue on his present
path. That was the last time Pat and Kerry saw Pastor Phil
Aguilar.
It is Pat's opinion that "Phil Aguilar is a very confused
individual who is selfish, chauvinistic, prideful, jealous,
arrogant, and extremely authoritarian. He will do anything to
advance his organization, his ministry, or his business." Before
Phil became a Christian, he was nicknamed "King Cobra." The day
that e kissed Pat on the lips, Pat remarked that the "Cobra" had
never died, but still lived on. Pastor Phil turned, looked at
Pat, and walked away.
This book is about people who have been abused
psychologically and spiritually in churches and other Christian
organizations. Unlike physical abuse that often results in
bruised bodies, spiritual and pastoral abuse leaves scars on the
psyche and soul. It is inflicted by persons who are accorded
respect and honor in our society by virtue of their role as
religious leaders and models of spiritual authority. They base
that authority on the Bible, the Word of God, and see themselves
as shepherds with a sacred trust. But when they violate that
trust, when they abuse their authority, and when they misuse
ecclesiastical power to control and manipulate the flock, the
results can be catastrophic. The perversion of power that we see
in abusive churches disrupts and divides families, fosters an
unhealthy dependence of members on the leadership, and creates,
ultimately, spiritual confusion in the lives of victims.
And victims they are. In this book you will meet some of the
casualties of spiritual abuse. They will tell you in their own
words why they were attracted to authoritarian religious groups
and what the impact of that involvement has meant. They will
share the pain of leaving an abusive church and the struggle to
readjust to life on the "outside." For many of them, life in an
allencompassing Christian environment has been so devastating
that they find it difficult sometimes to read their Bibles,
attend church, or even believe in God.
Much has been written about battered wives and child abuse.
Here you will read about battered believers and abused
Christians. The people in this book, for the most part, define
themselves as born-again Christians.
The churches and leaders that abused them are evangelical or
fundamentalist in theological orientation. However, churches that
abuse are on the margins, or just outside the circle, of the
mainstream evangelical subculture as it exists in North America.
That is, they would not ordinarily seek membership in
organizations like the National Association of Evangelicals or
financially support missionary and humanitarian organizations
such as World Vision International. Their children would not
participate in Young Life or Youth for Christ, and they would not
encourage their young people to attend mainstream evangelical
colleges like Westmont and Wheaton, or even Bible schools like
the Moody Bible Institute. Their pastors would not read
Christianity Today magazine.
I have spent several years researching this book and have
interviewed hundreds of abuse victims in order to learn about
their experiences. I have also talked with many other people
whose lives have touched former and current members. I have used
a tape recorder consistently, but not always. As much as possible
in this book, I want to convey the feelings, the attitudes, and
the experiences of the people themselves - in their own words - a
view from the inside. There will be a minimum of analysis and
commentary. In terms of methodology, my mentor is Harvard social
psychiatrist Robert Coles, author of the celebrated series
Children of Crisis. Like him, my aim is "to approach certain
lives, not to pin them down, not to confine them with labels, not
to limit them with heavily intellectualized speculations but...
to approach, to describe, to transmit as directly and sensibly as
possible what has been seen, heard, grasped, felt...."
Each chapter contains one or more case studies as well as
anecdotal material from interviews and other sources.
Occasionally I have presented a composite case history; that is,
I have combined two or three people into one individual.
Sociologists are concerned about the validity and reliability of
their data. I feel that the case studies presented here are
reasonably representative. I believe that the people who shared
their experiences with me were being truthful and I am equally
certain that the leaders of their former churches would assert
that these ex-member accounts are exaggerated or, at the least,
distorted. Although I did not use formal questionnaires and do
not claim that my findings have any "statistical significance," I
feel that I have identified patterns of behavior that can be
independently verified using standard behavioral-science
methodology.
In addition to employing informal, in-depth interviews of
former members, I have visited some of the churches mentioned,
listened to countless hours of taped sermons and talks by the
pastors under discussion, and talked with relatives and friends
of individuals who are currently members of such groups. Whenever
possible, I have attempted to interview those in leadership. In
all but a few instances, I identify the pastors and churches
referred to in this book by their actual names. The names of all
former members have been changed.
Sociologists look for patterns in human behavior and in
social institutions. As you read the following pages, a profile
of pastoral and spiritual abuse will emerge. Abusive churches,
past and present, are first and foremost characterized by strong,
control-oriented leadership. These leaders use guilt, fear, and
intimidation to manipulate members and keep them in line.
Followers are led to think that there is no other church quite
like theirs and that God has singled them out for special
purposes. Other, more traditional evangelical churches are put
down. Subjective experience is emphasized and dissent is
discouraged. Many areas of members' lives are subject to
scrutiny. Rules and legalism abound. People who don't follow the
rules or who threaten exposure are often dealt with harshly.
Excommunication is common. For those who leave, the road back to
normalcy is difficult.
The patterns of abuse, the mechanisms of response and
coping, and the similarities in outcome have become clear to me
as I have attempted to understand the phenomenon of authoritarian
churches. At times, when hearing a person's odyssey for the first
time, I am tempted to say, "Stop, let me tell you the rest of the
story." I am reminded of a comment made by Robert Coles regarding
his research experience. He notes that "some observations and
considerations keep coming up, over and over again-until... they
seem to have the ring of truth to them. I do not know how that
ring will sound to others, but its sound after a while gets to be
distinct and unforgettable to me " 2
...........................
To be continued
Churches that Abuse #2
It is out there STRONG as ever!!
RONALD M. ENROTH
Written 1992
FRINGE AND
FANATICISM
Abusive Churches Can Go Over the Edge
On March 20, 1986 Janet Cole drove from Seattle Portland and
drowned her five-year-old daughter, Brittany, in a motel bathtub.
The attractive thirty-seven-year old mother, described by friends
as the ideal Christian woman, was convinced that she was demon
possessed and that a similar fate would probably befall her
daughter. She wanted the little girl to go to heaven a
so committed an act of love by killing her.
Janet Cole was also a member of a large Pentecw church,
Community Chapel, in south Seattle that ex- members and other
critics claim was preoccupied with demons and "deliverance
ministry." The tragic dro ing resulted in the first of a series
of media reports dun brought unwanted publicity to the church and
its former pastor, Donald Lee Barnett. In addition to the
emphasis on exorcism, a swirl of controversy emerged as a rest of
Barnett's teaching on "intimate dancing" and "spirit- ual
connections" with members of the opposite sex.
Barnett claims that this "move of God" had origin in a
series of mystical experiences he had, including an encounter
with a "dancing angel." His "revelation teaching" was derived in
part from heavenly vision in which God told him that he would
give him truth that he had not given to any man before. "God let
me know that no man had entered that highest realm that I saw. He
allowed me to experience things that no man has ever seen. I was
connected with God; I had revelation, I was one with Jesus
Christ."
Robin and Matt were two people who were swept away by Pastor
Barnett's "revelational teaching." Their lives have never been
quite the same since. They are among dozens of people I have
interviewed at length about the almost unbelievable events that
transformed Community Chapel from an unknown church on the fringe
of fundamentalism into a fanatical, spiritually abusive
organization. You will find it difficult to believe that what
happened to Robin and Matt is quite typical of the upheaval
experienced by hundreds of other people in this "move of God."
"I'd call Jen [a friend in the church], screaming, crying,
because I knew what I was experiencing was spiritual; I knew
there was deception somewhere. But I didn't know where or how I
was being deceived. The church was pulling me one way, Matt was
pulling me one way, my own heart was saying something else, my
husband was in love with one of my best friends and she was now
living upstairs with him. I had had some surgery, and I was
distraught. So I ended up living in the basement going out of my
mind, while they played mom and dad upstairs and took care of the
kids. I was like Cinderella in the cellar, losing my bananas.
Matt would, sometimes in the middle of the day, come home and
come to my house to take care of me. He ended up staying with me
every night because I couldn't sleep. I was skin and bones. I
couldn't eat; I couldn't sleep; my skin got bad; my hair started
falling out. I was tormented, and I was planning and plotting how
I could murder my children and take my own life to get out of the
insanity, because I was in love and totally dependent
for my sanity upon a married man who had two children."
This was the culmination of Robin and Matt's story of their
many years of involvement with Donald Lee Barnett's Community
Chapel. Barnett, 62, began Commmunity C hapelin 1966 as small,
basement bible study. By mid 1980s, attendance at Sunday services
was over two thousand, not including the network of twelve
satellite churches that were at one time associated with
Community Chapel. Today, the Chapel is only a shadow of what it
was in the 1970s and 1980s. Membership dwindled to about two
hundred, legal battles have divided the congregation, the pastor
is gone, and part of the church property has been sold to pay
bills. What described here is the Chapel at its zenith, just
before collapse. It's the incredible story of what can happen
when a church becomes abusive and slides toward spiritual and
moral chaos, when a church already on the margins of conventional
evangelicalismsm goes beyond the fringe.
The organization had a ten-million-dollar complex where
members, including Robin and Matt, not only learned about God and
the Bible, but spent hours in protracted "intimate dancing" with
their "spiritual connections." As a result of this church and its
pastor, Robin and Matt are now divorced from their spouses,
separated from their children, and married to one another.
Members of Community Chapel were instructed by Barnett about
every aspect of life, spiritual and temporal. Church bulletins
frequently included "pastoral admonitions" that were unusual. For
example, one Sunday bulletin warned men against using unisex
styling salons. "Our church stands opposed to any hair style on
men which tends toward the mod, rebellious, or effeminate! As
pastor I am very much against a fad that is growing for men to
get permanents at unisex styling salons. Please do not identify
with the effeminate, unisex, homosexual fashion trends. Mothers:
even though it may be convenient, it is unwise to take young boys
to the beauty shop (or unisex styling salon) for their haircuts.
While there, they will see the 'big boys' getting their fancy,
poofy, effeminate hairstyling. Years of such practice could cause
them to be ensnared, too. These places are not without homosexual
demons just waiting to influence the gullible."
Seminars offered by the church leadership covered topics
like, "How to Keep Your Yard," "Masturbation," "Child Rearing,"
"Dress Standards," "How to Be a Good Wife," "How to Be a Good
Employee," "How to Be a Minister's Wife," "How to Choose
Make-up."
If there is just one word to describe Don Barnett and his
church, it would "control" -- autocratic control over the lives
of the individual members.
Barnett's pastoral "concerns" went so far us to dictate how
close together people should sit in the pews of the church, He
also expressed concern in a church bulletin over the fact that he
had received "reports of a number of people experiencing insomnia
night after night for no apparent reason." Among other things, he
recommended that his parishioners take a hot bath immediately
before bedtime, along with some warm milk. "Ask the Lord, in
faith, for a good night's sleep; taking authority over physical,
emotional, and possible demonic influences. Then let your body go
limp." The advice was signed, "Your pastor who cares for you."
That "care" also extended to divorced persons and the question of
dating. "Because the potential for sin, abuse, and demonic attack
in this area is immense, we must maintain a strong position in
order to uphold godliness, and insure as far as is reasonable
none among us is overly hurt." Therefore, members of Community
Chapel were asked to comply with the following two rules "in
order to be in this church": "(1) A divorced person may not date
or begin building a relationship with a member of the opposite
sex without first obtaining permission to date from the pastor.
Address your request for such permission to his wife, to whom he
has delegated oversight in this area; (2) Nobody who is in the
process of separating or divorcing may date or begin to build a
new relationship with a person of the opposite sex. No
exceptions."
Most members experienced a totalitarian system of control in
which all free time, outside of employment, was given to the
"assembly," or church. The epitome of being spiritual, in fact,
to have a job at Community Chapel. Most evenings were given to
church activities. It was not at all unusual to spend five or
six nights a week in church. When asked what members did for
fun, Robin respended, "That is what we did for fun, we went to
church."
Community Chapel had not always been so controversial and
controlling, although its pastor had promoted various unorthodox
concepts from the beginning. As a youngster, Barnett and his
family belonged to the United Pentecostal Church, a small
denomination isolated from the Christian mainstream because of
its rejection of the traditional concept of the Trinity. Barnett
still preaches a non-trinitarian message.
Although never ordained a minister, he did attend
unaccredited Bible seminary in Idaho and began his ministry as a
Sunday school and Bible study teacher in a series of Assemblies
of God churches in Washington. Barnett left each of these
churches because of doctrinal disagreements. Meanwhile, he worked
as a draftsman. By 1967, Barnett and his wife Barbara began a
home Bible study that attracted newly born-again Christians
eager for fellowship. The group quickly grew; the Friday-night
"Singspirations" and Barnett's approach and teachings were
attractive to new converts. As one former member says, "The
teaching didn't seem bad at first. He was preaching the Gospel
and the church was growing. But everyone who came in was a new
Christian and they didn't know the Word of God. Everything they
knew came through Barnett's teaching, and they had to totally
submit to him."
The Friday-night Bible study grew into a church with a Bible
school, funded largely by the sacrificial offerings of its
members. Early services at the chapel were fairly typical of
Pentecostal services, including speaking in tongues, and "words
of knowledge" from God. As the church grew and the number of
employees increased, Barnett's sense of power and need for
control grew accordingly, say former members.
Barnett imstituted "Operation Rescue" in which members were
instructed to report each other's faults to pastor. A dress code
for both men and women was begun as well as a dietary code
restricting pork, shellfish, alcohol, all based on Barnett's
interpretation of the Old Testament laws. Oreo cookies were
outlawed because they contained lard. Interracial dating
was proscribed. Certain Christian books and bookstores were to be
avoided because they promoted "false" creeds. However, Barnett
approved of and quoted from a weekly publication by it" neo-Nazi
group.
Celebrating Christmas and Easter was discouraged because
Barnett considered them secular holidays. Engagements could not
be announced until Barbara, the pastor's wife, was informed.
Every indication of a negative or "rebellious" attitude or
unapproved opinion was attributed to demons.
By the time Robin and Matt became involved in 1972, Barnett
was beginning to promote the first in a series of "corporate
moves of God." The first was the "white room experience,"
......
To be continued
Note:
Like all false Christian religions or denominations, there is
truth, but mixed with much error. Even the Roman Catholic church
has truth, but the errors are many and large.
Keith Hunt
Churches that Abuse #3
Fanatic People!
RONALD M. ENROTH
Written 1992
FRINGE AND
FANATICISM
Abusive Churches Can Go Over the Edge
CHURCHES THAT ABUSE
Fanaticism continued
"white room experience," introduced by Barbara Barnett as a
result of a vision she supposedly received from God. This
mystical place enabled one to become especially intimate with the
Lord, but could only be reached through a progression of
different stages of spiritual maturity. Robin recalls that there
was much talk about it and other "super-spiritual" experiences by
people who had access into the white room.
This was only one of many spiritual fads that would sweep
through the Chapel, exciting many of the faithful but confusing
many others. For example, there was the "pillar of holiness"
movement, but, "if you didn't get into the white room, then you
couldn't get into the pillar of holiness." This was followed by
additional waves of highly emotional experiences, including
"singing in the Spirit" in which the congregation would sing in
tongues together. Then there was something called "spiritual
surgery" in which individuals were encouraged to "completely
yield to God," so that inner healing could result. This was
accompanied by individuals being "slain in the Spirit," a
phenomenon common in some Pentecostal circles in which persons so
overwhelmed by God appear to faint away in a trance-like state.
Finally, "dancing before the Lord" was instituted in 1983,
the precursor to "intimate dancing" and "spiritual connections."
A former elder and Community Chapel Bible College teacher offers
this explanation as to what happened: "We put a premium on
spiritual experience. It's shocking to me to see what transpired.
Once you're out in the realm of experience, you can't talk
Scripture anymore because there's no Scripture that's relevant to
something as wild and bizarre as this."
Robin compares these so-called movements of God to the story
of The Emperor's New Clothes: " . . . nobody wants to confess
that they're the only one in the group that doesn't have any
clothes on, so they just kind of jump on the band wagon. They get
into it even if it doesn't seem right to them because they don't
want to miss out on what God has for them. They don't want to be
left out of 'the bride,' left out of the 'rapture,' not be part
of the 'man-child ministry.' She believes that these fears of
losing out are real to the people involved and that Barnett used
the fear along with heavy doses of guilt and emotional
manipulation to control the congregation. "Everyone was ready to
go for anything that seemed spiritual."
Matt believes that these spiritual and emotional experiences
over the past years were the key community builders of the
church. They drew the people closer through shared experience.
However, they have also left individuals terribly confused and
families sometimes broken beyond repair. The practice of
"spiritual connections" had a particularly demonic impact. There
were numerous accounts of adulterous relationships, sexual
assault, harshly shunned and rejected dissidents, child abuse,
suicides and attempted suicides, broken marriages, child-custody
battles, and lawsuits, several of which were aimed at Pastor
Barnett for alleged sexual misconduct.
Robin reports that Chapel women had a reputation around the
Seattle area as the women who walk around in a trance. Some of
them worked in the food-service department of a major hotel where
the other workers viewed the Chapel Christians negatively. One of
the waitresses said, "We can't even stand to work with them
because they're out to lunch. They've got a loose screw
somewhere, and they don't pull their share of the weight. They're
off in unreality somewhere."
The "moves of God" at Community Chapel did indeed leave many
in just such a state of unreality. The dramatic and
ever-accelerating barrage of sensual and spiritual experience
caused many people to have their discernment ability dulled to
the point of no longer being shocked at anything. As one former
member put it, "Unless it was horrible, perverted, kinky sex or
adultery, or somebody sexually abusing a kid, I was not shocked
anymore by it." Exposure to extremes of behavior and belief at
Community Chapel had desensitized members to the point where
conscience and morals were anesthetized.
Contributing to this state of unreality among members of
Community Chapel was what psychologists call the "double bind"
theory of mental dysfunction. "We were told one thing and then
what is done is totally opposite, and so you're trying to
redefine terms to apply to something that is not real." Robin
gives the example of Barbara, Don Barnett's wife. Barbara was
held up as a model for Community Chapel women. While Barnett
preached that "you don't want to draw undue attention to yourself
... you want to look feminine, and you don't want to dress in a
seductive way ....," his wife presented a different image.
According to Robin, "She wore a wig, she had false eyelashes; she
wore spiked heels ... you see her on the street and people turn
around and gape and stare." In the view of some Chapel
parishioners, the pastor's' wife looked more like the prostitute
Jezebel than the godly wife of Proverbs 31.
Community Chapel women were expected to dress in very
feminine attire, not the "jeans and sloppy shirts" that "worldly
women" were seen in. Barnett reportedly told the congregation,
"It may come to the point in this world where the only women who
dress in a feminine way are the prostitutes." Matt says that
because of this and many other irreconcilable contradictions,
"our friends were going insane."
"Connections" and "intimate dancing" nearly caused Robin to
have a mental breakdown. Instituted between 1983 and 1985, the
"dancing before the Lord" evolved into a teaching with specific
rules that encouraged members to find a "connection," or dance
partner. Soon partners were instructed to stare into one
another's eyes, eventually known as "connecting." Partners were
told they would see Jesus in each other's eyes, and that they
were to love their spiritual connection in order to express the
love of Jesus. During the week, both in church and outside the
church, members were encouraged to spend time with their
spiritual connections in a kind of quasi-dating relationship. As
might naturally be expected, physical intimacy often accompanied
these "spiritual" connections. "Connection love" was supposedly
more intense, and even more desirable, than marital love.
Robin graphically describes what it was like at church during
sessions of intimate dancing. "Picture your typical
forty-year-old wife who's out of shape and has six kids. There
she is watching her husband dancing with this little
twenty-year-old perfect beauty-long blonde hair, big bust, little
waist-in his arms, gazing at her for hours. And meanwhile the
wife is going insane." Spouses were taught that they had to
"release their mates unto the Lord" if they experienced feelings
of jealousy. At the same time, Pastor Barnett made clear from the
pulpit, they were not to view the connections "carnally." What
the people were doing physically, hugging, holding, fondling,
kissing - was not to be viewed with the eyes of the "flesh."
"What's happening is they're having spiritual union," said the
pastor. "It just looks the same on the outside, but what's really
occurring is spiritual, so don't judge them or their motives."
God, it was said, was using the connections to break lawn the
barriers and inhibitions within the congregation in order to
bring about greater "unity within the body." "We're gonna fall in
love with everyone," was the message. Although this inevitably
led to marital friction, the members were told that intimate
spiritual experiences with members of the opposite sex, other
than one's spouse, could help defeat the demons of jealousy and
open up the person to a deepened experience of the love of
Christ. Participants were actually instructed to diversify.
"Don't conunit yourselves to any one person." It was not unusual
for members, including the pastor and his wife, to connect with
more than one person at a time.
Those considered most spiritual were invited to dance in the
front of the church with Barnett. All his connections were
described as "beautiful, well-endowed, and young." Robin and Matt
believe that Barnett "obviously has some sort of sexual
problem.... He's so preoccupied with women's bodies." Barnett
discussed oral sex in Sunday school and was "inappropriately
explicit" regarding sexual matters from the pulpit.
Community Chapel has reportedly paid for abortions for
members, including teenagers, and Barnett has preached that "God
never did really say 'thou shalt not have an abortion.'" Those
who say abortion is murder are said to be guilty of a "legalism,"
a term used to refer to an incorrect or overly literal
interpretation of biblical, civil, or moral law. He reasoned that
if "adultresses" were forced to have babies, the children raised
by them, or given up for adoption, would grow up to lead sinful
lives and end up in hell. If aborted, they would return to God.
Robin and Matt say that the extreme emphasis on sexual issues
impacted the children and adolescents of Community Chapel in one
of two ways. "Either they were really into it or they think it's
junk." The entire eighth grade class at the church's Christian
school refused to have dancing chapels because they believed that
it was "ridiculous." Matt is afraid that an entire generation is
being lost because of Community Chapel's aberrant former pastor.
What went wrong at Community Chapel? How can one explain the
bizarre series of events that led to Barnett's eventual downfall?
According to former members Robin and Matt, "Don Barnett
lost his grip on the Bible. It was that Book which kept the place
reasonably sober over the years. He gradually diminished and
deemphasized the Bible as something to preach from, as something
to live by. He had to get rid of the Book."
Much of the problem can also be attributed to the deceptive
nature of Barnett's sensual theology. He and his wife, over a
period of several years, drew the congregation into the trap of
believing that the sexual and the spiritual realms were
innocuously intertwined. Barnett increasingly relied on mystical
and subjective religious experience to convince his followers
that he was indeed in touch with God. He gradually, cleverly, and
subtly prepared his audience for what would be considered
outrageous pronouncements in more conventional evangelical
churches.
One such bizarre event took place in 1983 when Barbara
Barnett shared a vision she supposedly received from God. Robin
was present when the pastor's wife told the story and here is her
account of what transpired. "Barbara had a vision of herself
standing before the Lord, and we, her spiritual children, were
all there. As she was standing before the Lord, he asked her to
disrobe and come to him. She was very embarrassed and reluctant
to do so, but she said, 'I never say no to Jesus. I always obey
him and so I just fixed my gaze on him and knew I could do
anything he asked.' She started to disrobe and then he asked her
to dance and come to him. So she started to dance. He took her
into a chamber and she said, 'Oh, I'm so glad to be alone with
you, Lord.' And he said, 'No, I want them to come too.' She said,
'Oh, I just don't know how I can do it; it's just way too hard.
But I knew that Jesus wanted me to.' He then lay her down on this
beautiful bed that was strewn with rose petals. As she was lying
there, she looked at the walls and ceiling and they were covered
with flowers. He was beginning to make love to her when she
noticed that each flower was a face - a face of a person from the
congregation. She was mortified at first, but he said, 'I want
you to be willing to let them watch you yield to me so that they
can learn how to do it.' Barbara went on to say, 'There's nothing
sexual about this at all, there's nothing romantic. It's just a
picture of what is occurring spiritually when you yield your
heart to the Lord.'"
Most evangelical Christians would probably conclude that
Barbara Barnett had an occultic experience rather than an
encounter with the Jesus of the Bible. It was this kind of
mystical experience, elaborated on in countless sermons by the
pastor, that set the stage for the congregation to believe that
they could encounter Jesus through other individuals. Jesus was
identified with the men of the assembly, and the women
constituted the bride.
As the teaching about spiritual connections began to evolve,
people were told that they could even experience a kind of
mystical union with their connection while making love to their
spouse. "It is so far beyond anything that anyone has experienced
sexually that we know it's spiritual," said one of Community
Chapel's elders. Other members have reportedly communicated with
the spirits of their absent connections, and been made love to by
their connections who "embodied" their spouses. Some have danced
with the spirits of deceased members. Barbara has also testified
about having connections with David, Abraham, and Moses.
Matt and Robin say they have experienced the "demonic,
occultic power" of the connection phenomenon. They believe that
it is more than just people "going insane, becoming
schizophrenic, or making it up." The people involved in what were
termed "mega" or main connections (primary pairings), supposedly
experienced the greatest power. Matt says, "It's not just people
having infatuations or even just falling in love. It was an
intensely psycho-spiritual experience. I couldn't live without
her [Robin]. I couldn't work; I couldn't eat; I was literally out
of my mind."
Matt describes how it all got started. "Though I'd attended
church there for eight years or so, I never knew Robin. I had
jumped into this latest 'move of God' right away, something that
was not unusual for me to do. Anyway, I was doing a lot of
dancing with a lot of people and Robin first came and said she'd
like to dance with me. That's how it happened. I danced with
Robin, maybe twenty minutes, and I was so hooked on what I had
experienced that, well, ... We were both married at the time.
It's so difficult to describe the intense emotions, the passion,
the longing. I consider it entirely or almost entirely demonic.
We knew at the beginning that we were surrounded by demonic
power. We sensed it, but we couldn't define it."
Robin's children suffered as a result of the connecting
experience. She says, "The kids went through hell." She believes
that she was literally going out of her mind at that time and
would have benefited from "involuntary incarceration" if there
had been some way to provide for the children. Her ex-husband and
his "connection" took on the child-care responsibilities.
An interesting postscript is that, in Robin's opinion, those who
were considered to be the most spiritual at Community Chapel and
who supposedly had the most contact with God were those who had
come out of deep occult backgrounds. Those persons who resisted
getting involved in the dancing phenomenon were told that their
refusing to dance was the result of "demonic oppression."
As for herself, Robin said, "I was having lots of
supernatural experiences; I assumed and was quite sure it was all
of God." Although it took her a year to get herself to dance in
the congregation, she finally began when she saw a
nineteen-year-old dancing. "I felt like I was Jesus and I saw him
as the bride, and I thought, 'I've gotta get to him; I've gotta
dance with him.'" She danced for four straight hours and felt
that when she looked at him, she was "looking right into the eyes
of Jesus.... I felt totally free to be vulnerable to Jesus
through him, and I had this powerful experience with the Lord
while dancing with him." Now she is not sure if it was Jesus of
Nazareth that she saw in her partner's eyes, or his voice that
spoke through this man while she danced with him, telling her of
things that no one could know. "Every time I would look at this
guy, especially if I'd look at his right eyebrow.... I could see
Jesus looking through his eye at me. We didn't have a physical
relationship at all, but it was an intense emotional bonding."
Robin also states that the connecting experience was so
intense that she and other women would experience orgasm without
ever having any physical contact with their connections.
Robin's connection with Matt was at first just an "intense
spiritual union... there was nothing physical at all about it,
not a shred, but we became locked into each other, and I've been
with him every single day since. We could not stay away from each
other. We became so emotionally tied, and I'm not talking just
infatuated and wanting to be together, I mean not being able to
live. It got to the point where he would leave for work, and then
he'd call me as soon as he'd get there, and I'd be OK. He'd work
for maybe ten or fifteen minutes and then he'd go in and he'd
call me up again. By the time he got to me on the phone, I was an
emotional wreck, crying, totally confused, out of my mind. He'd
talk to me for ten, fifteen, maybe thirty minutes, and get me
sane again."
Robin and Matt finally escaped Community Chapel and Don
Barnett. They are now married to one another and Robin is
pursuing a doctorate in counseling psychology.
What contributed to Community Chapel's slide into what
observers agree is false teaching and deception? Virtually all
ex-members agree with the conclusion of a founding elder of the
church that an over-emphasis on experience began a drift away
from the Bible. "It was the experience focus that got us off the
track more than any other thing." "People need to be reminded,"
commented another former member, "not to put their confidence in
a set of criteria put forth by a man who is simply relating his
observations, but to place their confidence squarely on the Bible
as the only infallible standard for judging truth."
The tragedy of Community Chapel goes back to a misplaced
loyalty. People, thinking that they were placing their allegiance
in the Word of God, were actually placing their allegiance in a
man and his interpretation of the Word of God. That is crucial to
understanding why people were so easily deceived. They thought
that they were really obeying the Word of God.
The comments of a former elder who was associated with the
church for eighteen years before resigning are insightful: "As I
look back on it now, it is clear that, subtly at first, there
began to be a feeling of superiority and exclusiveness among the
people. This was more evident in some than in others, but I think
we all were affected by it. There began to be a feeling that this
church was unique, and that while we loved other brothers in
Christ, to leave Community Chapel would always be a step down
spiritually. "The pastor rarely had other preachers in to
minister to us, feeling that they really couldn't add anything to
us, and might only foster divisions and problems. I feel that
this is one of the critical factors in the sad things that
happened later: no checks and balances with the rest of God's
people, and no accountability to other men of God outside our own
little circle."
Quite clearly, the excesses at Community Chapel demonstrate
what can happen when spiritual experience dictates theology and
then necessitates a re-interpreta of Scripture. Subjective
experience takes care of the theological loopholes that the Bible
seems not to address. The leadership of Community Chapel promoted
the view that one could accept certain doctrines and practices if
they could not be disproved from Scripture, rather than accept
them because of a strong conviction they were right because they
were taught in God's Word. It has been said that commitment
without careful reflection is fanaticism in action, and that
certainly was the case at Community Chapel.
Another problem was the abdication of personal moral
responsibility for sin, blaming it instead on the work of demons.
There was a tendency to attribute any problem, interpersonal or
otherwise, to demons. Members would spiritually psychoanalyze one
another with regard to what specific demons were troubling them
and then point to the need for "deliverance." This would be the
case frequently between marriage partners. Common, natural
emotions were more often than not attributed to demons. Members
were told that when they saw their spouses dancing in an intimate
manner with some other person, they were not to feel any
jealousy, resentment, or hurt. The natural tendency in such a
situation is to feel possessive of one's spouse. Yet, when they
experienced those feelings, they were accused of having a demon
of jealousy.
The teaching on spiritual connections or spiritual unions
quite obviously was not scriptural. It violated the biblical
teaching on the sanctity of marriage and confused the expression
of spirituality with human sexuality. It was a blatant attempt to
justify a sensual theology by cloaking it in so-called
"revelational teaching." The abusive marital and relational
problems that emerged were all conveniently spiritualized by the
pastor in a classic example of what sociologists call deviance
neutralization, or rationalization.
Scripture tells us, "By their fruit you will recognize them"
(Matt.7:16). From whatever perspective you view it, the fruit of
Community Chapel was bad. Family boundaries were broken down,
conventional biblical understandings were turned inside out
resulting in moral chaos, and hundreds of individuals suffered
psychological impairment of indescribable proportions. It is a
sobering lesson in what can happen when abusive churches go over
the edge.
......
To be continued
Note:
Well, if any of you out there went through the Worldwide Church
of God experience in the 1970s through to 1990 or so, you can
relate to what we have seen so far with abusive churches, many
likenesses indeed. The bottom line being the power and vanity of
a man, supported by other men, in putting aside the word of God
and having people believe they and their organization has some
'special' connection with God. It is the end result of putting a
person or persons between you and your Savior Jesus Christ. It is
people who are drugged on thinking their leaders are above the
Bible and God is inspiring them to dictate how every facit of
their lives should be lived. It is "religious" leaders being as
little (or big) Hitlers - doing the work of the Lord, and they
themselves being taken over by demons in their mind, where they
can set up their own laws and commandments based upon supposed
revelations of the Lord. The human mind has two weaknesses that
are exploited by the demons - the power trip, having power over
other individuals like Hitler and his clones had over millions of
Germans, and people having the need, for them at least, to follow
a man, to give up their personsl responsibility and let other
humans tell them how to act, talk, think, and conduct their
lives.
Both sides are sinfully WRONG!!
You need to make sure you can detect BOTH sides and avoid the
trap of deception that Satan and the demons are so willing to
have you fall into.
Keith Hunt
Churches that Abuse #4
Fanatic People! Fanatic Deception!
RONALD M. ENROTH
Written 1992
Abusive Churches Can Go Over the Edge
PAST AND PRESENT
Abusive Churches Are Not New
It is tempting to think of extreme authoritarian sects as a
symptom of modern intellectual and religious aliments. We live in
a complex world where personal security is a rare commodity. Pick
up any national paper or magazine and you will find articles on
stress, marital problems, substance abuse, and the increase of
gangrelated violence. Contemporary preachers warn us that
materialism and consumerism draw us away from God; we have become
an ego-centered society that shuns the simple values and simple
faith accepted by citizens one hundred years ago. It is no wonder
then that immorality in the church itself is becoming more
visible. It is no wonder that people, beset by anxieties and
confused by scandal, should find shelter in the more structured
environment of an authoritarian church.
In America, which has been a haven for numerous small
religious sects, there are important historical precedents for
abusive churches. Most sects offered variety rather than
aberration, but a few could be categorized as extreme. As with
their modern counterparts, they often began with noble
aspirations and biblical foundations, but were led astray through
human frailty. The whole of church history has indeed been one
it.
The object of Frank's authority was to break down individual
will and self-identity. At various times Sandford laid hands upon
the heads of members who exhibited too much individuality and
exorcised the demons of independent thinking and reasoning. The
only thing that mattered was faith. Thinking accomplished
nothing. The "death of self" became a spiritual goal for full
members of Shiloh. If Sandford asked them to suffer in the
process, they admired him even more for pulling holiness out of
them.
There was little privacy in Shiloh and Sandford did not
hesitate in becoming involved in peoples' personal relationships.
He encouraged Eliza Leger to leave her husband who had recently
left the movement. She was torn between obeying Sandford the
anointed leader and her duties as a wife to her husband. In a
letter to Eliza, Sandford wrote, "The act of your husband is so
dastardly... so utterly unscriptural that there is not the
slightest reason that he should have the slightest
consideration." Engaged and married people who began
relationships without Sandford's permission, when he was abroad
or, later, imprisoned, were told to "separate" until he had given
them their blessings. It was not uncommon to see separated
couples walk on the same road without speaking.
As the movement grew, its spiritual elitism became more
pronounced. Their physical isolation on the hill was just a part
of their separateness from the rest of the world. A visitor to
Shiloh would notice immediately that Shilohites were different.
They spoke differently. Their clothes were old, simple, and well
mended, and their lifestyle certainly was unusual. From the
beginning of the Holy Ghost and Us Bible School, David's Band was
the spiritual elite. Only the fittest warriors were selected.
Frank wrote later that he had to literally scare some people
away. The rigors of his community discouraged all but the most
worthy. He wanted no ordinary Christians. Shiloh was to be the
focal point of the kingdom of God.
When the movement experienced opposition and criticism,
their very elitism became a defense against the arrows of the
Devil. In 1901 Sandford closed Shiloh's communion and worship
services to all but full members. If families opposed their
relatives giving all their possessions to Shiloh, the members
"must be ready to slash every natural tie - turn their backs on
their families, if families should oppose obedience to God,
Stanford wrote, "You are actually to hate, WITH A PERFECT HATRED,
your father, mother, brother, sister, child, and even your own
life, in so far as these are not in conformity with the word of
God."
Many families did dissolve, marriages broke up, and children
abandoned Shiloh only to be disfellowshipped by their parents.
There was no higher allegiance than to Sandford, for allegiance
to him was allegiance to God. Frank warned his followers:
First you will be out of joint with the world, then out of joint
with the professed Christian world, then out of joint with
consecrated people, and then sanctified people, and then people
that believe in Divine Healing, and then the Holy Ghost people
you know, and THEN you will find a few other people who have gone
on alone with God.
One of Sandford's greatest weaknesses as a leader was his
lack of compassion. He enjoyed the simple exercise of power and
authority. The people at Shiloh rarely were given any meat. They
lived mainly on cornmeal. When some members prayed for meat
during one of Sandford's trips to Palestine, Sandford arranged
for a side of beef to be delivered. He made everyone eat nothing
but beef until the entire 1,425 pounds were finished. That much
meat, after a vegetarian diet, made everyone sick, but it ended
prayers for meat. He seemed willfully ignorant of the pain his
followers endured for his sake while living the good life
himself.
Even though Shiloh averaged around four hundred people
throughout most of its history, not all those who experienced it
were happy. A few did rebel. Most were bitter when they left and
went to the newspapers with their stories. Some even filed
lawsuits against Sandford. Ex-members told stories of physical or
psychological manipulation and abuse.
Former members remembered subtle means for disorienting the
members. For example, there was no schedule for work or prayer.
At any moment during the day or night a loud alarm bell would
call members to prayers or to other work. Members worked hard at
keeping up the grounds and constructing new buildings. They were
hungry, often overworked, and spiritually intimidated. Eliza
Leger said she was "metaphysically stoned." She lay prostrate on
the floor for many hours while fellow members circled her body
shouting and screaming as they accused her of "spiritual lapses."
She was then banished to a room for two weeks of fasting.
Sandford interpreted any dissent as the work of Satan. John
Douglas was one of Frank's earliest converts and most of Shiloh
stood on land donated by John and his family. When John left
right after the first building had been raised, after a
disagreement over ownership of a small boat, local reporters who
were critical of Shiloh, and who had been watching Sandford and
his group, picked up the story of Douglas' defection and gave
Sandford his first dose of public criticism. Frank answered the
papers in his magazine, "[Satan] has used godless editors and
reporters to write up the most sensational and glaringly false
statements concerning this work... thus poisoning the minds of
the people all over the country against God's movement."
Ex-members were called quitters, turncoats, and traitors. At
first they simply lost their place in the Lord's roll call, but
gradually the act of leaving became an act of disloyalty.
Ex-members were not to be spoken to or about. Georgia Sheller was
told to have no fellowship with her parents who had left angrily
and bitterly. She wrote to her parents, "I am following Elijah,
and since you have deserted him I cannot and do not have anything
more to do with you." This treatment extended to members of
Frank's own family. Two of his daughters, Marguerite and Deborah,
left as teenagers. They were both shunned, and Helen was
forbidden to answer their letters. It was expected that you would
stay with the community, even if it meant leaving your family
behind.
To break away from the group required more effort than to
join. After Eliza Leger left she said that "the hypnotic spell
began to break as soon as I dared decide that something was wrong
with this man.... I know that it is a part of that dreadful,
subtle snare that some have broken away from, but that holds so
many still under its power."
Staying was painful, but leaving was even more so. Members
were told that to leave was to invite certain punishment and
divine retribution. After Albert Field left with his family, he
had a family portrait taken in case they should all perish from
God's wrath. Leaving also involved some real risk. All
possessions were left at Shiloh. People left only with the
clothes on their backs. Every member deeded their businesses,
family farms, and all other assets to Shiloh to qualify as full
members. When they left, they left destitute.
Some were unable to face the real world again and returned
to Shiloh. Years of dependence did not make it easy for people to
make their own decisions and fend for themselves. Those who did
return were shunned, isolated in remote houses until they had
earned forgiveness. Merlyn Bartlett left twice. She could not
endure the condemnation after her return. When she left the
second time, she was followed by Shiloh ministers who rode with
her in the train denouncing her to the other passengers as "a
whore."
The wrath of God fell not only upon those who dared to leave
Shiloh. Parents of children who escaped were punished, and so
were those who failed at parental discipline. Those questioning
any aspect of the ministry were severely reprimanded and
punished. Dissent became synonymous with demon possession. It was
a convenient way to bring dissenters back into fellowship. It was
easier to blame a demon than to admit you had disagreed. Only a
person exorcised could be fully forgiven. More often than not,
demonic possession was evident when a man simply thought for
himself. Sandford said, "Think clearly as he may... he cannot get
anything correct... there is only one way out, the person has to
submit or is sent away in disgrace."
Periods of dissent, grumbling, or restlessness were followed
by purges. The threat of being excommunicated and thrown out of
the kingdom resulted in a renewal of allegiances. These purges
were known as "the siftingout process" or "cleaning-out time."
Sandford was looking for only the "fair, clear, and terrible."
The first purge in 1890 was meant to purify the members. The
purge was a ruthless examination of character and soul. If you
passed the test you were allowed to attend a special service for
which you were given a ticket. Members considered the tickets to
be beyond price. On the ticket were printed the words "fair,"
meaning no blemish, "clear," meaning no guile, and "terrible,"
referring to the face of Satan when he met a child of God. This
purge, like the others that followed, was less a spiritual
purification process than it was a reindoctrination, a means to
solidify Sandford's authority. The purges lasted for weeks,
representing long grueling hours of prayer and fasting followed
by intense interrogation. Only the submissive and defenseless
were accepted.
Sandford interpreted every criticism as a demonic attempt to
destroy the kingdom of God. "The malevolence of our detractors
only shows that the devil fears the work that we are doing and
will take any means to balk US." He did not seem to worry about
legal prosecution because God would deliver him from his enemies
and detractors. He believed himself to be the prophet Elijah, and
as Elijah, he expected to be persecuted and scorned. But he would
prevail. Sandford threatened reporters who mocked him, "before
long [they] will meet the God of judgment."
Sandford was arrested on January 23, 1904 on charges of
manslaughter in the case of Leander Bartlett, and child abuse in
the case of John Sandford. The case of John Sandford was over in
a single day, February 3rd. Sandford was found guilty of abuse
and neglect in requiring his son to fast with neither food nor
water for three days. The manslaughter trial began the next
morning.
Leander Bartlett had died of diphtheria that January 25th in
Bethesda, the Shiloh infirmary. He had come to Shiloh with his
mother and sister, and he was a lively and good-natured boy. He
was fourteen years old when he died. Leander had fallen suddenly
ill in the middle of January. He became so weak that he could not
stand and was carried to Bethesda in the middle of the night. It
came out at the trial that Leander had received no medical or
spiritual help during the next week, the last week of his life. A
week after Leander was admitted, Joseph Sutherland was admitted
with small pox. Joseph had refused to obey Sandford's order to
cover his face while visiting small pox victims. Sandford heard a
message from God, "Dead. He said he would hearken unto thee, and
he hearkened not." It was revealed on Sunday, January 25 that
both Leander and Joseph had died that day. Helen wrote to the
overseas missions, "God has been showing His jealousy for David
Truth [Sandford]... the curse falling on those who deviate from
it in the least degree."
Leander's death was also seen as a punishment as he had
confessed before dying that when he became ill he had been
planning to run away.
The offenders had been punished. No one was allowed to
grieve for Sutherland. Sandford had "separated" Mrs. Sutherland
from her husband while he lay dying in Bethesda. He told her that
even though he had married them, he wasn't happy about their
relationship. While her husband died, she sat in a public chapel
listening to Sandford tell her that she was now married to Christ
because Joseph had been struck down for spiritual pride and
seeking popularity. Mrs. Sutherland never fully recovered from
the blow. Leander was buried in the Shiloh cemetery. Where other
graves bore loving epitaphs, Leander's bore only a name and a
date.
The definition of manslaughter in the trial hinged on the
interpretation of death by negligent omission. The prosecution
had to prove that Leander was denied care and treatment. The
matter of faith healing was really not the central issue.
Sandford was convicted because he withheld not only medical
treatment, but faith healing as well. Leander, who had planned to
run away, was denied a doctor and a minister. Diphtheria at the
time was treatable and almost one hundred percent curable if an
antitoxin was given at the onset of the disease. In the end, the
jury had to decide if Sandford had withheld faith healing out of
spite or ill will, in order to make an example of what would
happen to disobedient members. Current and former members took
the stand verifying that Leander received no substantial care for
the week he was sick before he died. In fact, he had been denied
food and water during a seventy-two hour fast. Some testimony was
especially damning. "He [Sandford] stretched his hands out before
him and said he wouldn't care, or he would like to see... his
dead corpse before him.... He said he couldn't pray for him."
During his court appearances Sandford took a passive role,
neither conferring with his attorney nor taking the stand in his
own defense. He seemed completely at ease and unperturbed by the
possibility of a conviction. The people of Shiloh flocked to the
courthouse to watch the proceedings quietly, trying to avoid the
reporters who surrounded the building. In less than two hours the
jury returned the verdict of guilty.
It took two years and many appeals before the verdict was
overturned (the prosecution was not able to prove "culpable
indifference"). During those years Sandford became convinced that
the Tribulation had begun and if they were to be the refuge in
the wilderness, Shiloh needed to be self-sufficient. Shiloh was
incorporated as the Kingdom of David. More property was
purchased, including dairies and farms. Only a self-sufficient
community would be able to ride out the Tribulation. Sandford
began asking families to join the movement. People across the
nation, eager to be a part of the true church, sold their farms
and transferred their assets to the Kingdom. They had been
promised farms in Durham purchased by the Kingdom in their names.
In fact, only seven of the twenty-two donors arrived to find land
in their names.
Sandford's second trial followed the disastrous voyage of
1911. Sandford had felt it difficult to deal with the problems at
Shiloh and retreated to his yacht, The Coronet. He selected the
best and most loyal members of Shiloh to serve as his crew. After
a long, tedious voyage around the globe in an overcrowded boat,
Sandford at last returned home to the Atlantic coast. He was
wanted by the police on a kidnapping charge made by Florence
Whittaker, who had been detained against her will on board one of
the Kingdom yachts before being rescued by the local sheriff.
Although most of the passengers had not known, Sandford was on
the run from the law. The Coronet shuttled up and down the coast,
across the Atlantic to Africa, trying to stay in international
waters. When supplies of food and water were almost gone,
Sandford still refused to land, even in a foreign port. The boat,
built to house a maximum of thirty people, was being occupied by
more than fifty. Some crew members and passengers fell ill, and
some died. For the last few months the passengers survived on
biscuits and rainwater rations. The boat had to be pumped
twentyfour hours a day. Men became so weak that they could not
climb up on deck. The men, women, and children aboard lost their
will to live. The constant storms broke the schooner's masts, and
it became impossible to keep warm and dry in the middle of the
storm-tossed North Atlantic. The passengers and crew began to
lose their teeth and suffer constant diarrhea. By the time scurvy
was suspected, it was too late. Much later, Roland Whittom
remarked that he "could not understand how we could have allowed
the man to dominate us so." Only when faced with a possible
mutiny did Sandford agree to return.
When The Coronet tinally limped into a Maine harbor on
October 21st, six people had died of scurvy and many more were
critically ill. Sandford was immediately arrested for kidnapping,
but when inspectors saw the condition of the boat and crew,
Sandford was arrested for more serious charges, "that he did
unlawfully, knowingly, and willingly allow a ship to proceed on a
voyage at sea without sufficient provisions." At his trial he
admitted his guilt to the jury but claimed he was only doing what
God had ordered. He was sentenced to ten years in the Atlanta
Federal Penitentiary. Three years were cut off from his sentence
for good behavior.
The final blow to the movement occurred after Sandford
returned from prison. He was unhappy with the poverty and
listlessness at Shiloh and retreated to Boston in 1919. He became
increasingly paranoid, driving in cars with shades pulled down
and keeping all the curtains in his house drawn. Despite being
abandoned by Sandford, Shiloh still numbered almost four hundred
members.
In February 1920 a civil suit was brought against William
Hastings, a member of Shiloh, for the custody of six of his eight
children who were still living in Shiloh. Their mother had died
and her family, along with the two eldest children, sued Hastings
for nonsupport. Although Sandford was not a defendant in the
trial, this was the case that would finally bring his church
down.
On the stand, the Hastings children recounted the poverty
they had experienced. Ten-year-old David said he couldn't ever
remember having had breakfast before school, although he did have
lard on his bread as a Christmas present. His older sister Mary
recounted how, because she was too malnourished, she was hidden
in the woods when Child Welfare inspectors came. Neighbors
testified to feeding starving children. In his testimony William
admitted that they did not have enough to eat, but he refused to
work for wages as it was against God's law. He was living on
faith even if his children starved, indeed, as they had most of
their lives. Hastings lost the battle and his children were taken
from him.
Shiloh stood at a turning point. Sandford's attorney warned
him that other families would use the Hastings case as precedent
and that soon most of the children would be taken from Shiloh.
God then sent word to Sandford in Boston that it was now
acceptable for fulltime members to earn a wage. It was a simple
thing really, but it destroyed the movement. When men went to
work in the mills and farms surrounding Shiloh, the atmosphere of
holiness and separateness was removed. The Bible School closed,
and in one month the population was down to one hundred members.
Members who had listened to Sandford's words finally wondered why
God would change his mind on something so pivotal to the
movement. If they could earn a wage, they could wait for the
Lord's return in more comfortable settings. It was no longer
necessary to suffer in order to live the Christian life. The
purpose for Shiloh's existence simply evaporated. A short time
later Sandford ordered everyone to abandon Shiloh.
Sandford remained a leader of a small group of loyal
followers, many of whom had endured through many hardships and
tragedies. A small group of believers continues to be known as
"The Kingdom." The Shiloh complex has long since disintegrated,
but in a few homes Sandford is still revered as a prophet and man
of God. Shirley Nelson, whose family history is part of the
history of Shiloh, puts the purpose of remembering Shiloh in
perspective: "I tell it for all the innocent, for those who ...
are bound to be the victims, destined to fall from the cliffs of
someone else's ascent toward the highest and the best."
The story of Shiloh is not unlike other nineteenth century
American religious experiments that emerged around a single
authoritarian leader. One way to achieve an understanding of
current abusive movements is to step back and take a broader,
historical perspective. An examination of Sandford's Shiloh
reveals amazing parallels to the spiritually abusive groups of
today.
The lesson we learn from Frank Sandford is that there is
indeed nothing new about "new" Christian movements. Now, as in
the past, the spiritual power holders exert strong
control-oriented leadership and exercise immense influence in the
day-to-day lives of adherents. In the present, like the past,
Christian groups claim new divine revelation through inspired
prophets or preachers who "receive a word from the Lord"
regularly. Like Sandford and his predecessors, today's movements
express the conviction they alone are the repository of "truth,"
or that they have been chosen by God to restore a lost or dormant
spiritual vitality. Both groupings share a strong consciousness
of persecution; both illustrate attitudes of negativity toward
established churches; both view their "spiritual family" as
superior to the biological family; and both have exhibited
concern about the role and fate of ex-members. In short, the
narrative of churches that abuse has important beginnings in our
past.
......
To be continued
Note:
The shame of all this is that churches that abuse turn hundreds
or thousands OFF from God and His Word - they turn their back on
God and Christ - they throw the Bible out of the window - they
walk away from salvation and the Kingdom of God - they go back
into the world of sin and "doing their own thing" - they are like
the dog that returns to its vomit. Men and organizations that
leave such a pathway in history .... well, as Jesus said, "You
shall know them by their fruits." The end fruit is decay and rot.
Then often such church organizations leave behind "offshoot"
organizations with leaders and people who will not admit the
errors and fanaticism and corruptness and false teachings of the
man and organization they came from, and so in a more subtle way
Satan continues to weave his tangled web over the lives of
people.
I suppose it must be so. I suppose it is so because the wheat
must be separated from the chaff. I suppose it must be so that
the very elect who cannot be deceived must be shown, must stand
up and be counted, must be witness to the falsehood and errors of
men who are led astray by their own self-righteousness and
vanity.
God knows who are His, and He will have them stand and witness to
the truth that shall indeed set you free!!
Keith Hunt
Churches that Abuse #5
Power and Authority Abuse
RONALD M. ENROTH
Written 1992
AUTHORITY AND POWER
Abusive Churches Misuse Spiritual Authority
"It took some time for me to adjust after leaving the Church of
Bible Understanding. When I first began attending church again
and meeting with Pastor Tom, I found it very difficult to relax
around him. Sometimes I would cringe and freeze up when seeing
him walk down the hall, and Pastor Tom is one of the kindest,
most disarming people I know. It took a few months for me to
relax. Even now, when attending a church service, I may feel like
I should be participating in some way, or I may get extremely
paranoid, start worrying about my true spiritual condition and
dive into an intense self-examination. These experiences have
lessened as time has gone by, and I have confidence in God's Word
and in my own relationship with the Lord."
Thus ends Betty Donald's personal account of her
fourteen-year experience with the Church of Bible Understanding
(COBU).
Started by Stewart Traill in 1972 as the "Forever Family,"
the Church of Bible Understanding now numbers approximately one
hundred members living in a number of properties in the northeast
United States. Membership peaked in 1978, with several houses and
nearly a thousand members. Betty, along with thirty other
members, left COBU in April of 1989, after a March 4 meeting in
which Stewart claimed he had been teaching in error for
twenty-five years, and that he had totally omitted grace in all
his teaching. He claimed that he was more a victim than those he
had deceived. In what appears to be an attempt to control
damages, Mr. Traill then went on, in June of the same year, to
tell everyone to forget everything they had ever been taught on
the topic that one must be perfect to be born again (using 1 John
3:9, "No one who is born of God will continue to sin, because
God's seed remains in him; he cannot go on sinning, because he
has been born of God"), and that he himself had just been born
again in February 1989.
Betty, like all other COBU members, was afraid to do
anything without Stewart Traill's stamp of approval. As one of
the "Gayle Helpers" (assistants/"slaves" to Traill's second
wife), she enjoyed certain privileges that others did not. Yet
she was "scared to death of him." A member never felt truly
faithful to God "unless Stewart accepted you." This acceptance
evidently waxed and waned, depending on how useful one was to
Traill's business or how threatened Traill began to feel by the
favored one.
Stewart was in complete control of the money in the communal
organization. Betty never cashed one of her own paychecks. All
money was turned in and no accounting was ever given of where it
went. At one point, when appointed to the Board of Directors, she
did see that as much money was spent on COBU telephone calls as
on the group's ministry in Haiti, where they had a missionary
outreach. Traill made sure that all persons handling group
accounts had no experience in financial matters. Any questioning
of this policy brought immediate confrontation and public
humiliation. Additionally, members were required to submit a
special request to one of the Special Request Committees if they
wanted to purchase a pair of shoes, pants, jacket, or other
article of clothing. The committee would determine if the need
was justified. During lunch hours and off times, members were
expected to solicit donations from individuals and organizations
for "the ministry in Haiti."
COBU members staffed a number of businesses, including S & G
Cameras, one of Traill's enterprises, and Christian Brothers
Carpet Company, a carpet-cleaning business run by nearly all COBU
men. Betty, as a Gayle Helper, had signed a Gayle-Helper
Contract, and worked in the camera shop. Everything from
purchasing stock to attending trade shows to cleaning dishes and
bathrooms was done by the Gayle Helpers, usually on a full-time
basis with no compensation. Although privileged to live at
Traill's $900,000 estate in Princeton, New Jersey, the Gayle
Helpers on the camera-show circuit were expected to sleep in
their vans. According to Betty, "These women were called gypsies.
They would wash their hair in sinks at gas stations, use the
pools at hotels they didn't stay at, and change clothes in
bathrooms in restaurants where they wouldn't think of eating.
They would pack food to take along and would eat in the van.
Everything was written off to the church." In addition, Traill
would use COBU's Christian Brothers Carpet Company accounts as a
personal bank, using funds freely.
The plan was for COBU members to live as in the days of the
apostles, with "all things in common." According to Betty,
members believed that they had a "higher calling" because of
their deep knowledge, especially the deep knowledge of human
nature and the Bible. They considered their understanding of
human nature unmatched, giving them spiritual eyes to see into
others' consciences and thoughts. As a result, COBU members were,
as Betty describes them, "extremely self-righteous and puffed
up." Stewart would continuously speak to them of his great
expectations for them and their future plans.
Although he was unable to reconcile a drop in membership of
nearly nine hundred in twelve years, he did claim that his new
teaching was very near to the true apostles' teaching. "Jesus
showed me the secret behind everything." Highly critical of other
churches, Traill would call ex-members "enemies of the Cross," or
"losers trying to throw stones at a winner." According to Betty,
whenever COBU was in the news, they considered it persecution
because "we were truly following the right way and the devil was
angry."
Looking back at it now, Betty believes that the
communal-living arrangement was one of the main ways that their
lives were controlled. Living on one's own was considered less
spiritual as well as dangerous - you were asking for trouble by
leaving the "sheepfold walls." Not only were members expected to
live together, but all men were expected to quit their outside
jobs and work in the group's carpet-cleaning business. Failure to
do so resulted in a person being mocked, publicly humiliated, and
looked down upon. Normal office jobs were seen as "working for
Pharoah." Working for Stewart or COBU, on the other hand, was
seen as doing God's will so that members could make the most of
their talents rather than helping their employers get rich. Thus,
even one's working life was controlled and regimented. Betty
reports that males who leave the church have a harder, time
reentering and adjusting to the outside world because so much of
their daily life was sheltered and controlled. Not all "sisters"
were expected to work in COBU or Traill-related businesses.
As is often the case in abusive churches, family ties were
severed. When members were notified that relatives had died, they
were told to "let the dead bury their own dead." Members needed
approval to visit family. Betty remembers, "There was always an
uneasiness after going to visit your family because of the
scrutiny you were put through when you returned." It was expected
that COBU members would consider one another as family, and
Stewart would often ask, "What would have become of you if Jesus
hadn't brought you to this fellowship?" The expected response
was, "We'd probably be dead."
Implied guilt and Scripture twisting were often used to
manipulate members. Mr. Traill would take Scripture out of
context in order to make members do what he wanted. "In the
abundance of counselors there is safety," and "He who trusts in
his own mind is a fool," were two verses that were often directed
at a person who didn't agree with others' opinions of what should
be done.
Marriage was discouraged to such an extent that no weddings
have been held since 1978. However, Traill divorced his first
wife and married Gayle in 1977. Betty recalls that Gayle was set
up as the example for all women in the church to follow. "She
would walk around in the slinkiest outfits that sometimes made
many people blush. Stewart would flaunt her in front of the
brothers and tell them, "Look what you could have."
It was Traill's custom to hold late-night meetings that
would end anywhere from 1:00 A.M. to 5:00 A.M. Members were then
expected to work and function normally the next day. Leaving
these meetings for any reason whatsoever, including the use of
the rest room, was highly discouraged. During these meetings,
"catching and pointing out someone else's wrong behavior was how
we proved our desire to be with Jesus, because Jesus hated the
wrong, but, of course, not the sinner. This always ended up in
public verbal executions that would lead to standoffs and long
silences until late in the night." Since women, according to
Traill, were naturally manipulative, devious, and maneuvering,
they were often the targets for these late-night confrontations.
Each woman would then, according to Betty, "have the task of
apologizing so that everyone would believe her, so that she could
be forgiven for whatever horrible crime she had been accused of
and keep from being lynched." A ritual was begun in 1988 in which
members who needed to "make their behavior right" in front of the
group, were required to have four to five witnesses who would
vouch for their sincerity. Insincerity led to repeated
humiliation and/or being put "out of fellowship."
Stewart, however, was above scrutiny. According to Betty,
"Stewart will only accept 'corrective criticism' coming from a
'right spirit.' Of course, he is the judge of 'right spirits' and
whether any criticism is truly constructive." Stewart has also
complained at meetings that no one ever tells him what they think
of him; yet he makes sure no one has such an opportunity. In a
classic double bind, Stewart tells his members that rebellion is
the ultimate sin so that if you question him, you are charged
with rebelling against the truth and that means rebelling against
Jesus!
After leaving COBU, Betty described herself as a "basket
case." She found herself in a totally new and strange environment
with a few friends who had left with her, and filled with
feelings of paranoia. "Here you are, thirty years old, single,
alone, and ashamed of the way you have been taken advantage of.
After having spent fourteen years with COBU, I felt stupid
telling my parents that they had been right. Trying to adjust,
even opening a checking account, was hard. It was like dropping
off the moon. After quitting my job without notice, and because
of the way I had quit my jobs before, I knew it would be very
difficult to get established. I hadn't held a job for more than a
year at any one place in the past seven years. I had virtually no
stability - physically, emotionally, and barely mentally. I had
an interest in going to a church, but I was very suspicious and
didn't think they'd ever understand. Unfortunately, due to the
lack of understanding on the part of most members of the church
and their inability to deal with someone like me, I received what
amounted to a pat on the head and a wellintentioned 'that's nice,
but now you're out and you have to go on with your life.' After
ten years of isolation and indoctrination in which you think,
live, eat, and breathe COBU, it doesn't just go away."
(Thank God, with His help you can be healed; you can see truth;
you can be free; you can find peace and rest; you can find
freedom from abusive authoritarian church power and control. Cry
out to the Lord for His help and His mind and His strength to put
away all the emotional slop and dirt and deception of the abusive
church. He will heal you! You can be free! - Keith Hunt)
Betty's experience with authoritarian leadership is,
unfortunately, not unusual for people who have been a part of
spiritually abusive groups. Control-oriented leadership is at the
core of all such churches. These spiritual power holders become
strong role models, and their dogmatic teaching, bold confidence,
and arrogant assertiveness become powerful forces of influence.
They use their spiritual authority to intimidate the weak and
those who consider leaving their flock, as the following letter
demonstrates. It was written by Don Barnett to several members of
Community Chapel who were contemplating leaving. Not only did the
pastor warn the members that they would lose all their friends in
the congregation, but he threatened that demons would harass them
and that they would lack power with God.
"As your pastor, I warn you that you are headed for the bottom of
the sea.... God has called you to this assembly to furnish you
with that which you need. Do you have His permission to leave
this assembly? When you take yourself out of this move of God...
you are going to go downhill spiritually.... When you run from
God, you go to the bottom of the sea.... You could lose your
souls through this. The Devil can take you down, down, down.
I ask you to repent before God ... follow your pastor, stick with
him, stay in the boat and God will forgive you. You are following
emotions and reasoning that has been infiltrated by the Devil...
you are going to lose eternal rewards. You will not be the
same... you cannot just walk into any church and think you are
safe. God won't honor that. He called you here and I am your
pastor, no one else. You must follow me or you will answer to
God."
A former associate of Don Barnett describes his style of
leadership: "He's ousted everyone who has taken exception to his
teaching. He's been a very autocratic leader. Even though he says
he allows differences of thought on issues, it's very difficult
for him, really, to allow his leaders to view things differently
than he does. He'll say from the pulpit that he does, but he'll
tell you in person that it's his God-given duty to revise your
thinking.
Pastor Phil Aguilar of Set Free Christian Fellowship has
been known to say, "You need to trust God through me; I know
what's best for you." That same attitude was communicated in one
of his sermons when he was discussing his own responsibility as
shepherd of Set Free: "People in this church, don't you say
anything about each other. I can say anything I want. I can call
you anything I want because I have the responsibility and the
accountability according to God's Word for each and every one of
you. I can say what I want. 'Well, if you can say it, I can say
it.' Well, no, you don't know the scriptures. You don't have that
responsibility and accountability; I do. So when I get in your
face, receive it from the Lord or let your tail wag and go home
and cry. Go try and find a TV pastor so that you can turn him on
and off anytime you want."
Unhealthy, authoritarian leadership encourages people to
place their pastors on pedestals. This is illustrated by the
comments of one ex-member of a church located in a major
midwestern city. "Little by little this man became the standard
by which we all sought to live. The wisdom that poured forth from
his lips left us in awe." An ex-member of an east-coast fringe
group commented that her tiny church was believed to be the full
expression of God and had the mind of Christ. "When the
leadership said something, it was taken very seriously as the
absolute truth. I was part of what I totally believed was a sold
out, godly, and committed church. However, after I left the
church, my life was totally shattered."
Evan and his family had a shattering experience as members
of the Church of the Great Shepherd, a largely Asian-American
congregation located in the greater Los Angeles area. Here is
their 'story.
In a scene reminiscent of a spy thriller, Evan agreed to
take his two children to meet with his estranged wife, Stacy, at
a neutral location, hopefully secure against any attempts by her
to kidnap the children. Evan was to be accompanied by Doug, one
of the brothers from the Shepherd's Training Center. Stacy was to
be accompanied by Doug's ex-wife, Sandy, and the two Tong
brothers, Dirk and Denny, all of whom had been kidnapped and
deprogrammed by the mysterious Hill Spaniels within the past
three months. Evan was worried about a kidnapping attempt and the
inevitable tortuous and abusive deprogramming process of which he
had been repeatedly warned by the leader of the Church of the
Great Shepherd and the Shepherd's Training Center's (STC), Mrs.
Jean Chao Liang. They agreed that Evan's parents' house, three
hours from Los Angeles, would be the meeting spot the next day.
Evan, with his two children Kelsey and Janna, and Doug, left at
2:00 A.M. the next morning in order to have the opportunity to
scout the area of Evan's parents' home for signs of Mr. Spaniel's
white panel van. They were armed with anointed prayer, on guard
against evil spirits of deception and lust, and under
instructions to manipulate their wives with specific songs during
a time of worship in order to bring them back and into submission
to the "Body."
The meeting took place during the late morning. Evan's
parents watched the children, whom they had only been able to
meet briefly twice before. The two women were not swayed by the
manipulative "worship," but began speaking to their husbands
about what they had all experienced in the Shepherd's Training
Center in light of the Scripture: would Jesus ever force a couple
to divorce because one partner was against communal living? Would
Jesus send a brother out onto the streets of East Los Angeles, or
drug-ridden Northwest Pasadena, for weeks without money or even a
jacket in order to teach him to repent of alleged sins? Is there
any sin in the Bible called "reaction" or "identity"? Would Jesus
use a spatula to force food down a six-month-old's throat in
order to teach her submission to authority? Would Jesus ever
berate a follower into performing lewd acts in front of him in
order to show that individual how depraved he is and to "free"
him from a lustful or homosexual spirit? Would Jesus ever tell a
married couple how and when to have sex?
After discussing the bare facts, looking at the Scriptures
(not someone else's interpretations in light of "context"), and
having a few hours away from the thought-reforming influence of
the communal group, Evan and Doug realized the deception they had
been under and the fact that the Scriptures had been twisted in
order to get them and the other members of the STC to submit to
Jean Liang's wishes. The anger and horror over lost years, and,
in the case of Doug and Sandy, lost marriage, did not set in for
a couple of days.
Thus began the end of over five years of what was sincerely
believed to be "ministry" in the name of God. When Doug and Evan
did not return to the STC, and when outside pressures became too
intense, Mrs. Liang began sending individuals back to their
parents' homes for a cooling off period in order to placate
parents and minimize damages to the group. According to former
members, they were supposed to return to the STC when the
situation was not so volatile. Meanwhile, Hill Spaniels was
working with the recent former members, meeting them as they
arrived at their parents' home. Each, in turn, was freed from the
effects of the thoughtreform process by a discussion of the facts
and Scripture. Within the month, the Shepherd's Training Center
had been reduced to little more than Jean Liang's family of
seven.
The Church of the Great Shepherd began in 1985 under the
leadership of Stephen Liang, Jean's husband, Doug Yasui, and Roy
Chan, all graduates of a well known evangelical seminary. It
began under the name of Asian American Grace and Faith Church, a
nondenominational, independent church with an emphasis on
worship, an openness to the gifts of the Holy Spirit, and an
increased recognition of the place of women in the church. Within
a year, Sunday attendance rose to one hundred and fifty, and the
church enjoyed a growing reputation as an exciting, charismatic
outreach to young adult and college-aged Asian-American
Christians.
The next year the name was changed to Asian American Christ
Church and Mrs. Liang began preaching occasionally as well as
directing the high-school fellowship. The tone began to change,
with greater and greater emphasis on absolute obedience to God
(through obedience to the leaders God has placed over his sheep).
A new emphasis was also placed on the importance of
spiritual authority, tithing, and ministry to the poor.
Attendance began falling. Mrs. Liang, after facing much
opposition, was successful in having herself ordained in a formal
service officiated by her father and a local Vineyard pastor.
By this time, an "unintentional community" had begun at the
Liang's household, composed of the Liang family and persons
interested in communal living (based upon Acts chapters 2 and 4)
or doing seminary internships through the church, or simply
needing a place to stay. The active life of the church was moved
to the Liang household, with Jean taking greater and greater part
in the ongoing work of the ministry.
During this time, Stephen Liang began undergoing a period of
"spiritual discipline"; God was supposedly bringing him to
account for his lack of love and concern for his wife and five
children. This discipline, administered by Jean and another
"shepherd," consisted of removal from all ministry, public
humiliation, and a separation of Stephen from any relationship
with his family, particularly Jean. By the time this period was
over, Jean was the effective head of the church and the
community. Stephen, reportedly by his own choice, no longer slept
with his wife, nor was he involved in any outward ministry of
preaching, counseling, or teaching. He was relegated to
administrative duties. Stephen also began Shepherd's Services, a
carpet-cleaning and homerepair business.
By 1988, the church had been reduced to approximately
thirty-five persons and services were held at the communal house,
rather than at a rented church building. The group's name was
changed to Church of the Great Shepherd, and the community had
become a legal entity as the Shepherd's Training Center. Jean
Liang was now the single shepherd of the STC, having either
forced out or disciplined all other potential leaders in the
group.
As the head of the STC, Mrs. Liang dictated every aspect of
life, whether spiritual, physical, or relational. Doug and
Sandy's divorce came about through a twisting of Matthew 5:27-30.
Although neither had committed adultery, because of Sandy's
reticence to move into the STC, Doug was told that she was
causing him to stumble. He must cut her off as he would cut off
his hand, so that he might at least enter heaven maimed. Even
after they moved into the commune, they were forced to divorce.
Doug spent months on the street and was labeled a "pervert" by
the leadership. He would be brought back periodically to see if
he was sufficiently "repentant." If not, he was turned out again.
Members shared a common purse, with Stephen Liang as head
treasurer under Jean's direction. Numerous questionable expenses
for the community, and especially for the Liangs, were considered
"ministry" write-offs and attached to the tax-exempt church
account. Monies were regularly shifted from one account to
another. Jean reviewed the accounts and set financial goals for
the STC. No money was released without a voucher.
Evan and Stacy's two daughters almost died as a result of
Jean Liang's influence, the oldest from being force-fed at six
months and routinely beaten, the youngest because of premature
birth due to Stacy's being overworked in the communal house. In
addition, Roy and Mandy Chan's young son and daughter were
severely abused, being regularly beaten or shaken for such
offenses as wetting, crying, not keeping their eyes closed, or
falling asleep. After a severe shaking of their three-month-old
daughter, Jean said that it would be better for her to grow up
submissive and retarded than intelligent and rebellious. At the
time of this writing, the oldest child is approaching his third
birthday.
The bonding of mothers and children was seen as a great sin.
Jean regularly separated nursing mothers and their infants, even
going so far as to take them from the breast, saying, "You are
tying your child to yourself and not to the Lord." This "tying"
supposedly endangered the child's salvation. However, former
members state that Mrs. Liang's five children are strongly bonded
to their mother, but have little respect for their father.
Husbands and wives were also separated for long periods. Their
relationships supposedly were impure and ungodly, based upon lust
and manipulation.
Public times of confrontation, confession, and repentance
were common, lasting anywhere from four to twenty hours. These
sessions usually took place at night. The airing of the most
intimate details of one's life was seen as opening the way for
God to take one deeper into the spiritual life. All participants
were victimized because of their idealism and desire to more
fully serve and love God. These intimate details, including those
related to one's sexual behavior, were brought up over and over
again to produce feelings of deep guilt. "It amounted to
spiritual blackmail," states Evan. Many persons were labeled as
homosexuals and were required to write letters to old associates
confessing this "sin." Old "sins" were never forgotten nor
forgiven.
Also branded as sin was "introspection" - a term given
negative connotations by the group, but that in reality meant
using one's mind to think critically and being open to the
warnings of the Holy Spirit. Members were required to put aside
all that they had ever been taught, seek a new salvation
experience, and receive the "truth" in one's "gut" (spirit)
without the impure filterings of intellect and reflection.
Ties with family and outside friends were severed or
severely limited and monitored. It was said that "spirit is
thicker than blood." In other words, one's spiritual family, with
whom one shared the same calling and vision, was more important
than one's natural or biological family.
Eventually, Mrs. Liang was successful in nearly erasing
every member's sense of autonomy and personal identity. Members
dressed alike, carried the same Bible, the same bag, wore the
same glasses, and had the same hairstyles - all for the sake of
the "unity of the Body." Any personal belongings of sentimental
value were labeled as idolatrous and either thrown away (as in
the case of Doug and Sandy's wedding rings), sold very cheaply,
or given to the "poor." Interestingly, Mrs. Liang retained many
of her personal belongings, and unlike other members, carried a
leather bound Bible, a leather organizer, and wore jewelry. It
was believed that she was no longer subject to vanity and pride
and thus such things were not "idols" in her life. Her children
also retained their personal belongings, their own hairstyles,
and they received the best clothing and privileges. They were
rarely disciplined or required to participate in the work of
maintaining the household, a task that was seen as "learning
servanthood" and regularly took till 1:00 A.M. every day.
These and many other inequities and atrocities, so easily
recognized by the uninitiated, seemed completely justified
behaviors to the members of STC because of the influence of Mrs.
Liang's spiritual thought-reform program. In obedience to what
they presumed was God's will, they obeyed their shepherd without
question.
Evan and Stacy are slowly getting their lives back in order.
They started with $23.00 in the bank, thousands of dollars of
debt to the hospital for Janna's premature birth, and two
toddlers whom they barely knew. Nearly everything else was lost
to the STC and Jean Liang. They have repeatedly asked themselves,
"How could we have gotten involved in such a fiasco?" Both are
college educated, Evan only one year away from a Ph.D. degree.
Both had been heavily involved in evangelical campus and camp
ministries.
As is the case with most former members of abusive churches,
they have had to deal with guilt over leaving the group. People
who left were said to have committed the sin of blasphemy.
Compounding that is the guilt over having joined in the first
place and allowing themselves and their children to be so
terribly abused.
On looking back, both Evan and Stacy understand the
vulnerable position they were in upon joining the STC. They had
lost much of the connectedness they had known during their
college-ministry years, and were looking for significant
relationships. Unfortunately, they and their closest friends were
sucked into the group. They were also at major crossroads in
terms of career and family. Evan's career was just beginning to
take off; they had been married three years and were struggling
through normal marriage adjustments, as well as considering
having a family; they had just bought their first home and were
having major difficulties with the builder; and they were
beginning to learn that their early idealism and zeal for God
were not easily reconciled in a world full of conflict and doubt.
The STC offered a place of definite black-and-white answers, a
haven from doubt, a place where idealism for God could flourish,
an opportunity for relationships deeper than they had ever known,
and an outlet where their desire to love and serve God could be
fully expressed. Unfortunately, such an ideal place does not
exist in the real world.
As of this writing, only one young man remains under Jean
Chao Liang's influence in the Shepherd's Training Center. Other
former members have either gone back to their parents' homes or
set out on their own to reestablish their lives. Mrs. Liang's
promise to reestablish members upon dissolution of the group by
selling the communal house has yet to be realized.
Speaking of Jean Liang, Evan says: "She never claimed to be
God, only that she had a special calling and relationship with
him. She never claimed to be a prophet or apostle, yet acted with
that authority and rarely expressed doubt." According to former
members, Jean Chao Liang has yet to acknowledge the devastation
she has brought to their lives, and may even believe that she is
being persecuted for righteousness' sake. On chance meetings with
ex-members on the street, she exhorts them to "Go on with the
Lord."
Jesus Christ is to be our ultimate role model and our only
Shepherd. Jesus refers to himself as the Good Shepherd (John
10:11). A good shepherd leads rather than controls his flock. I
have talked to many former members of what is commonly, referred
to as "the shepherding movement," and they all share the opinion
of one man who said, "If your shepherd said jump, your only
response was, 'how high?'" It is indeed ironic that an honorable
biblical concept like shepherding has taken on such distorted and
abusive meanings in some Christian circles.
Pastor Phil Aguilar views himself as the unquestioned leader
of his Set Free flock. Sometimes "shepherds" see their umbrella
of oversight extending to the most mundane of life experiences.
Such was the case when Pastor Phil was watching a high-school
football game one evening in Anaheim, California. An ex-member
recalls that Aguilar, his assistant pastor, and a rather large
number of men were sitting together near the top of the stadium.
The game ended and several of the men, along with the assistant
pastor, started casually walking down the stadium steps toward
the exit. Pastor Phil suddenly called out to them, "Don't follow
Aaron, follow Moses!" The little group had to return to where
Phil was sitting and stand there for about fifteen minutes before
he led them out.
Authoritarian pastors frequently use militaristic imagery to
illustrate their strict systems of authority and discipline. In
1986 Pastor Don Barnett sermonized about his spiritual soldiers
doing the will of the heavenly commander. He made it clear,
however, that he was their earthly commander-in-chief.
"I have always wanted an army under me that would do what I ask -
just like that. Not for me. A general never fights for himself;
he fights for his nation. He fights for the commander of the
state.... I don't want to be eulogized. I don't want to be lifted
up.... But I am the commander of this army. I'm willing to lay on
the ground in my sleeping roll with the rest of the troops; I
don't need an officer's tent. But I'm telling you - and I want
you to hear me - and I know I speak not just after the manner of
men, but I know that I speak from the Spirit of the Lord when I
say, even as Jesus wanted those to imitate him and follow him
carefully, and the Apostle Paul also, that I am not wrong in
asking that of this congregation. We're going through a battle,
and you're going to see that those who have brought themselves to
the place of discipline and submission, who are really and truly
behind their pastor, are going to be the people who are behind
God.... Those who will not submit will be on the second team, and
they probably will be split off eventually.... I am asking for a
new submission to your pastor.... I'm asking that you hear what
he's saying and do it.... I know that God wants you to do what I
ask you to do, and I know that if you don't, you are going
against God himself."
(Some have less brashness and "in-your-face approach"
to power and authority as like the Pope and the Roman Catholic
church. But it is there in full strength as to the bottom line -
the RC church still claims the Pope is directly under Jesus
Christ, and that they as an organization are the "true church of
God" to which others must one day return - Keith Hunt)
Abuse of the shepherding or discipleship principle is
certainly not new. It began in the first century church. In Acts
20:30-31, Paul the apostle warns that "Even from your own number
men will arise and distort the truth in order to draw away
disciples after them."
So be on your guard!
......
To be continued
Note:
You have a great blessing today! You have the Internet! You have
this Website and all the truth it contains! You never have to meet
me, see me, write to me. You can be on your own, be it one of you,
two or more of you, a single congregation, a group of congregations.
You can have and live the truths expounded on this Website and some
other Websites of the true servants of the Lord, and never be abused
unless one of you in your circle tries to abuse the others. Then I
hope you will know what to do about it.
The family of God through the worldwide Internet can all be part of
the body of Christ without abuse .....PRAISE the Lord, and praise Him
again!
Keith Hunt
Churches that Abuse #6
Manipulation and Control
RONALD M. ENROTH
Written 1992
MANIPULATION AND CONTROL
Abusive Churches Use Fear, Guilt, and Threats
Tom Brown's story of his involvement in the Korea-based
University Bible Fellowship (UBF) typifies the victimization of
young, idealistic college students on campuses across the
country. In their intense desire to seek and serve the true God,
they are taken advantage of by sometimes sincere individuals who
exploit their ideals to achieve personal goals and fulfillment.
Fortunately for Tom, he was not left with a "shipwrecked faith"
as so many others have been.
Tom's involvement with UBF began in 1979, during his junior
year at Northwestern University. His fraternity roommate of the
previous year had been studying with UBF missionary "Sweety"
Rhee. When he roommate did not return to school, Sweety turned
her attention to Tom. Although at first he hesitated to accept
her invitation to attend a UBF worship service, Tom felt that God
may have been answering his prayer for a good Bible study to
attend. So he accepted the invitation. Ile was impressed by the
earnestness that UBF members displayed, as well as their
spiritual intensity, which he found very refreshing. Most of the
congregation happened to be Korean missionaries who had come to
evangelize on American college campuses.
During his years at Northwestern, Tom had been struggling to
grow as a Christian and sincerely desired to find a Bible study
in which he could participate and minister to other college
students like himself. UBF seemed to be an answer to prayer.
Sweety "took very good care" of Tom during this initial phase,
teaching him to write "sogams"-personal confessions based on
Bible passages selected by the leader-calling him every week,
walking him home, and buying him dinner.
Tom now realizes that he was "love bombed" by Sweety during
this phase, particularly since Sweety was derogatively known as a
"no-sheep missionary" among the other UBF Korean staff. Tom was
her only student in an organization where individually teaching
the Bible to many students is the chief goal. Along with the
"love bombing" came initial subtle manipulations of Tom's time
and behavior, as well as mystical stories of God's providence and
judgment toward the Fellowship. All of this left a deep
impression on Tom.
Over time, Sweety learned all about Tom, including his
desire to earn a Ph.D. degree and become a nationally recognized
expert in his field of study. It was at this point that "Sweety
told me that I should give up my own plans because they were a
result of sinful selfishness. She said that I should serve Jesus
instead." Having set the barb of guilt, Sweety waited until Tom
"made the decision to cut off my own future direction and wait
for God's new direction for my life." Tom suffered a good deal
due to that drastic decision. "Sometimes I cried because of my
sense of loss and frustration."
After his first four months with UBF, Tom met the leader,
Samuel Lee, a short man who spoke broken English. Lee began doing
things that made Tom feel special. In turn, Tom responded to the
attention and recognition, and, for the group's Spring Conference
of 1980, he was asked by Lee to deliver a message. At this point,
Tom's intense indoctrination began.
"Message training" is one of the ways UBF leaders "help"
students to deepen their commitment to the group. Tom began by
studying 1 Corinthians 15 with Samuel Lee. He was required to
memorize and recite the passage for Lee each time they met. Tom
was then to write his own message on the passage using Lee's
previously written message as a guide. After several revisions,
essentially Tom had Samuel Lee's own message to deliver at the
Spring Conference. The point was that he had had the opportunity
to "struggle with the Word of God and learn from Samuel Lee" as
all the Korean missionaries already knew. What Tom and the other
Americans did not know at the time was that the Korean
missionaries considered Americans to be spiritually inferior to
them. "Many of the Korean UBF members call Korea 'Mt. Zion' and
refer to non-Koreans as 'Gentiles.'"
As Tom acknowledges, his behavior and perceptions were
already changing by the time of the conference. He had
manipulated a number of his friends to attend, and, when one
balked at the registration fee, Tom told him that payment was a
sign of his "commitment to God" and a measure of his "spiritual
desire." By the end of the conference, Tom was praying that God
would establish him as a Bible teacher for American college
students, all past aspirations of doctoral work having been put
aside as fleshly, human pride.
Further indoctrination was carried out when Tom and several
other American UBF students were invited by Lee to accompany him
on his annual "world mission report" journey to Korea. Tom began
preparing on his own for the trip by sleeping on the floor,
knowing that Koreans did not sleep in beds. He was quite
disappointed when Lee and his entourage stayed in hotels
and slept on the beds. He was also instructed to write an
autobiography of his life, which would be the basis for the
testimony he would give in Korea.
Although his parents were terribly concerned about his
making the trip, given the civil unrest in Korea at the time, Tom
put aside their fears as evidence of their lack of faith. During
the flight and the first day after their arrival, Lee made the
students share their autobiographies, after which he would
comment about their characters and basic problems. They were then
told to condense their writings down to a six-page testimony. It
was at this point that Lee began comparing Tom to the apostle
Paul; hence one of Tom's UBF nicknames, Tom Paul.
While in Korea, Lee focused his attention on Tom's
"training." He made Tom team leader over the other students,
encouraged him to focus more on the other students than on his
own testimony, and yet continually had him revise and rewrite his
testimony, which by this time was retitled, "True Greatness." Tom
explains the point of the title: "I had lived my life up to this
time seeking human greatness for myself. My decision now was to
live as a great servant of God like the apostle Paul."
Lee also began to drive wedges between Tom and his parents,
telling Tom that they didn't want him to become a man of God but
only a dutiful son. By the end of the journey, Tom had a great
vision to become the apostle Paul for the 21st century-through
UBF, of course.
Upon returning to Illinois, Tom commuted one hundred miles
each day to minister to his sheep in Chicago. Because it was
summer break, he lived at home with his parents and worked for
his father, but was committing all of his extra time to UBF and
the Summer Conference. Sweety put great pressure on him to leave
his home to minister full-time in Chicago, and, after a few
weeks, he told his parents that he was leaving. His parents, not
understanding the power of UBF influence on Tom, spoke to him
about his responsibility to make money for his senior year. After
Tom responded that he must also do the work of God, his father
gave him an ultimatum. Tom packed and left the next day, fully
believing that to stay would mean going against God's will. He
reasoned that this was part of the persecution ene must expect
when serving God. Further, his action insured that his "human
relationship" with his parents was severed. As Tom says, "Now I
was only a servant of God."
After his move, Tom suffered a great deal over his emotional
separation from his family. Several of the women missionaries at
the UBF center consoled him. According to Tom, many male students
in UBF develop a kind of maternal dependency on the women
missionaries, related perhaps to the sexually repressive
atmosphere of the organization.
He also began to have an attraction for Lee's teenaged
daughter, Sarah. At this point, another form of spiritual
discipline became an integral part of Tom's indoctrination.
"Sweety hit the roof. She harshly rebuked me over and over for my
'sinful desires' for Sarah. Whenever I opened my mouth to
protest, she rebuked me more." This response, according to UBF
philosophy, was actually demonstrating love for the American
students who were lost in their "fleshly desires." Sweety was
eventually rebuked-by Samuel Lee-for badgering and rebuking
Sarah.
Tom, not able to control his feelings for Sarah, entered
into a pit of guilt, shame, and depression. Sweety continued to
berate him. He became physically ill. Lee entered into "no-mercy
message training" with him. He was given the passage Mark
8::27-38, on Peter's confession of Christ, to prepare for the
Summer Conference. Tom was required to write and rewrite the
message many times. Each time, Lee would rebuke him more and give
him additional rewriting directions. As Tom says, "This served to
completely break down my ego. After a week of this training, I
felt like I was at the bottom of a deep pit of my sins and
weaknesses. No one could help me. I felt I had betrayed God in my
sinful life. All I had were sins and sinful desires." He was now
ready for additional "training."
Preparation for Summer Conference usually reached fever
pitch the three weeks prior to the event. It was during these
times that extensive spiritual manipula tion and indoctrination
occurred. Lee would meet nightly with all the UBF staff, accusing
some of "playing Satan," and actually saying that he had prayed
they would die if they did not repent. He rebuked some, praised
others, and made the "no-sheep" missionaries get together to
repent, ridiculing the students' personal problems. He led them
all in shouting prayers of repentance that sometimes lasted for
hours. These prayers, when spoken correctly in a group of people,
could communicate a great deal without one's ever having to speak
directly and substantively. Lee would often pray, "Our Father,
have mercy on Shepherd Tom Paul (Tom's nickname). He has no
spirit." That kind of ambiguous prayer left the victim in a state
of confusion and guilt, especially, "when you ask God to forgive
someone of something of which they are not aware." Tom himself
was to use this same technique later on in his "ministry"- with
UBF.
After struggling a great deal over whether to complete his
college studies, Tom decided to finish out his last year.
However, since up to this time his parents had supplemented his
income, he was now forced to make up the difference by working as
a park grounds keeper. This was heavy work for a man of only 121
pounds. It was at this point, after the rigors of the Summer
Conference, that Lee entered Tom into "eating training" and
"international stomach training." That meant he was forced to eat
far beyond his capacity and to "eat all kinds of foods so that I
could become a missionary." Lee would make comments about his
picky eating habits and encourage Tom to "overcome" himself by
eating foods he knew were too much for his digestive system.
Although he did gain fifteen pounds, he suffered greatly. "I ate
so much food at dinner that my fraternity brothers could not
believe it."
Believing that equipment failures at the park were God's
message to him about his unbelief in providence - an emphasis on
suffering typical of UBF - Tom quit his job and wrote home
demanding that his parents support his schooling. His parents did
not budge. In the fall, after completing his "eating training,"
Tom embarked on "hair training," supposedly to give him a more
pleasing appearance. He was given a permanent and was not allowed
to cut his hair. He also had it curled before every worship
service. According to Tom, "My hair grew longer than everyone in
my fraternity except the house hippie." His appearance was
further altered by his wearing of suits (the pants of which
always had to have belt loops according to Leeone of Lee's
idiosyncratic and unexplainable quirks). "Voice training" was
next, in order to make Tom's speaking voice more powerful,
especially since he was beginning to preside over many meetings.
Lee would alternately tell Tom after each of these meetings that
he "did not have enough spirit" or that he was "grandstanding"
and that "he needed to repent." The inner conflict and confusion
left Tom baffled-and open to further "training."
At this point, Tom was in his last year of school. He
refused to return home for Thanksgiving since it was purely a
"human" celebration and not one of God's concerns. He had given
up all extracurricular activities and had thrown away his entire
collection of classical and Christian music and most of his
books, and he sold his guitar. This last sacrifice was the result
of his decline into poverty - he needed the money to survive. He
was tithing twenty percent of his income (which increased to
forty percent upon graduation) and was pledging $50 per month to
the UBF world mission offering. Sweety often had to supplement
his "offering" because Tom's income was so minimal. Failure to
meet the monthly offering resulted in severe rebuke. Tom himself,
at Lee's direction, would shout and pound on tables in his rebuke
of a student's "bad attitude toward the offering."
In the spring of 1981, his last quarter at Northwestern, Tom
moved into an apartment with his UBF sheep, Mark, partly due to
perceived persecution on the part of his fraternity brothers,
who, at this point, were sure that he was in a cult. Tom also
believed that the "spiritual environment" of the fraternity house
was too decadent.
Lee began "testing" Tom in different ways to determine the
extent of his commitment - and indoctrination. Once, he was told
that he was to leave North western to go and pioneer the UBF work
at Harvard University. He was ready to go the next day. Lee also
would say things in order to see others' reactions and thereby
assess their "spiritual condition." At one point, he told a
missionary to give Tom his new car. The "test" got to the point
of Tom nearly driving away before Lee was satisfied with the
missionary's loyalty.
Upon graduation, Tom visited his parents who again debated
his involvement in UBF. His mother expressly stated, to no avail,
her view that he was in a destructive group. Tom was unaffected
by her concern and her emotional distress. "I told her that I did
not want their human (as opposed to spiritual) love, and that
human love had made me very sick in my soul." The next day he
returned to Chicago to begin life as an "intern" in UBF.
The main emphases of UBF intern training are service and
learning "faith." In preparing for leadership positions, interns
must learn to serve others and to obey their leaders. The
training may last several years, and may involve even more severe
spiritual and psychological abuse. Tom had heard that interns in
Korea may be beaten by their shepherds in order to break them of
their stubbornness and independent spirits.
In the United States, during weekly meetings, the American
leaders are required to share their sogams on the passage they
had been studying the week before. They use Samuel Lee's messages
as the basis of their sogams. Their "sharing" gives the Korean
leaders an opportunity to "check their spiritual condition."
By the 1981 Summer Conference, Tom's internship experience had
intensified. He was rebuked by Lee as having "life security" and
"marriage" problems, accusa tions not hard to understand when one
considers that Tom was living in poverty, often skipping meals,
and, because of his experience with Sarah, afraid to even talk
with any young women. "All through the conference Lee rebuked me
and prayed for me to repent. When I told him 'I am a great
sinner,' he said, 'No, you are only a small sinner.'" Tom slept
only four hours in four days and finally had to have Lee dictate
the message he was to deliver. It took him almost two weeks to
recover from the humiliations he had suffered.
Tom then entered into "driving training" and "humanity
training." Because of a car he received as a result of someone's
UBF-arranged marriage (dating is considered sinful indulgence and
a lack of trust in God for one's future), he became chauffeur for
the Chicago chapter of UBF. This he found hard to do, but he was
told "to do it for the glory of God." Also, because of his
supposed legalistic character and lack of human compassion, he
was told to "listen closely to many life test imonies and sogams,
read books, and see certain movies." (The "certain movies" were
intended to inform members about society, the nature of people,
and so on. These movies included "Ben Hur," simply because it was
a favorite of the leader, "Ordinary People," and "ET," which
supposedly depicted the alienation and plight of the American
teenager!) He thus learned to understand people - for the sake of
manipulating them.
Tom began finding that he was adopting the same methods that
had been used on him in order to "train" his sheep. He would make
people stay up all night to repent, hit them with sticks for not
remembering passages, force them to run distances to "restore
their spirits," and squash "rebellion" in the same way that his
own abilities to think independently had been squashed. "At that
time, I was working out many of my personal frustrations on those
who were under my authority."
Lee decided to deal with Tom's "marriage problem" once and
for all. He forced him to deliver a sogam entitled "Not a Dog but
a Shepherd" to the entire congregation of the Spring Conference
of 1982. Supposedly, he was "like a dog barking around a hen
house." After delivering that message before hundreds, Tom was
numb for almost two weeks. "My feelings were totally burned
away."
Two weeks after that, Lee allowed Tom to go to Michigan
State University as part of the pioneering team (which also
included Sweety Rhee and her husband, who had joined Sweety in
the USA after living in Korea for some time). Without the
"protective environment of Chicago" and no more strong people to
depend upon,
Tom began to have a difficult time and began losing his
direction as a "campus pioneer." The MSU Summer Conference,
designed both as a training conference for younger leaders and as
an opportunity for evangelism, was "long on rebuking and short on
sleep," and Lee dictated another message for him to deliver. Tom
began to wonder if he was being used.
Tom got a full-time job as a maintenance man for a group of
apartments and worked for two months prior to the beginning of
the fall quarter. He gave up full-time campus pioneering for the
time being. By the time Spring Conference rolled around, his life
had become somewhat smoother, but he had actually run away from
the dissonance his doubts had caused, and was again struggling to
keep up his "ministry." Samuel Lee then "decided that he should
fight a fire under me." Tom was told by one of Lee's messengers
that "if I did not have seven one-to-one Bible studies each week,
I would have to come to Chicago for additional training."
Tom went out every day to invite students to study the Bible
with him. After two weeks, he had twelve Bible students. He also
was successful in recruiting three women students, unusual in
that UBF has proportionately more men than women (the goal being
to raise up male leaders). Sweety strongly disapproved, but Tom
had declared that "by faith I would be the 'father of all
American women.'" And Samuel Lee had approved.
Summer Conference of 1983 was pivotal for Tom. He was to
prepare a message on Luke 5:1-11, the calling of the first
disciples, and, for the first time, Samuel Lee did not want to
check it before delivery. As Tom says, "It was sink or swim."
Because of car problems and the need to get visas, he and his
passengers arrived almost a day late to the conference site in
Canada. Lee was livid. Tom was asked to write a sixty-page sogam
of apology for disappointing all those who had prayed so much for
him over the last year. Lee told him that "the most important
thing was for us as God's servants to participate in God's
history. There was no excuse for being late." Tom was told, "You
should have left three foreigners behind in a different country
and hitchhiked to the conference in order to arrive on time." He
wrote all night to prepare his message. Fortunately, Lee thought
that he was able to deliver it "with one main point and with
spirit." Tom was spared for the final round.
In September, Tom was told by Lee that he should have a new
car for his ministry since his old one was out of commission. Lee
personally promised him four thousand dollars and UBF would also
contribute five hundred dollars. However, he was told to ask his
father or an additional four thousand dollars because "a young
man like you should have a new car." His parents, of course,
refused, saying that UBF should be responsible. After several
rounds of pointless negotiation, Tom began to get the idea that
he was being tested again. Lee told him, "You are very sharp."
Tom was to use any means available to extract the our thousand
dollars from his parents. Lee did not care how it was done. After
several attempts. Tom began to realize that "Not only was I
beginning to attempt to exert control over my parents, but I was
also beginning to actively try to control the students at the MSU
- chapter. I used my position and the Bible to get them to make
'decisions of faith' that would conform them to the image of a
servant of God that I held. I even began to rewrite messages that
students were to deliver, just as Samuel Lee had rewritten mine.
Those students who accepted my direction in writing were 'good.'
Those who did not were 'rebellious.'" Tom had become a little
Samuel Lee, and he was appalled.
On April 1, 1984, after four years in Samuel Lee's
University Bible Fellowship, Tom was convinced to leave through
the efforts of his parents and several other concerned persons.
He says, "I give thanks to my parents for the best April Fool's
joke of my entire life."
Spiritually abusive groups routinely use guilt, fear, and
intimidation as effective means for controlling their members. In
my opinion, the leaders consciously foster an unhealthy form of
dependency, spiritually and interpersonally, by focusing on
themes of submission, loyalty, and obedience to those in
authority. In all totalitarian environments, dependency is
necessary for subjugation. Jerry MacDonald, a student of
autocratic religious movements, noted in a 1986 paper that
authoritarian religious groups manipulate "rewards, punishments,
and experiences to systematically sever from members their past
support systems, which include their own powers of independent
and rational thinking, their ability to test, define, and
evaluate, as well as their ability to freely interact with others
about their experiences. These internal support systems are
replaced with exterior support systems under the control of the
leaders."
(How true all this is. I well remember about 1970 the WCG under
Herbert Armstrong had "secularized" the Plain Truth magazine. You
could not find the word "Christ" or "Jesus" in it. Not even the word
"God " was there. It was supposedly so the magazine could reach
more of the "unconverted" world and the "high officials" of the
world, including Presidents and Prime Ministers. At that Feast of
Tabernacles up gets Hermon Hoeh (a top guy alongside HWA) and
shouts out to us, "I know some of you are questioning the new
state of the Plain Truth magazine. Well let me tell you if you
disagree with the way it is now being written, then you are
disagreeing with God and the man God is using to do
this end time work." I sat there and said to myself, "Say what
you want Hoeh, I do disagree and this is NOT the way to spread
the Gospel of Christ." - Keith Hunt)
One of the areas in which manipulation is exercised in a
number of the groups discussed in this book is dating and
marriage. Young people who were members of Maranatha Christian
Ministries, also known as Maranatha Christian Churches (MCM),
including the former Miss America, Debbye Turner, were not
permitted to date. As a result of a so-called "dating revelation"
received by the leadership, MCM discourages dating practices and
cites extreme examples of sexual misconduct in the collegiate
subculture (including Christian college students) to justify its
stance. Instead, members were told to focus on serving God and
then he would bring a mate into their lives. An ex-member of MCM
comments: "The doctrine is put into practice by church members
submitting the names of other church members whom they feel God
may be leading them to as potential mates, and if the leadership
confirms the name submitted, you wait on God to speak to the
other person. If God speaks to that other person, he or she will
submit your name to the church leadership and you will get
married."
Pastor Phil Aguilar also does not permit dating. A woman who
had been a member of Set Free Christian Fellowship from its
inception, gives this account of her daughter's pairing. "In the
fall of 1989, my daughter expressed an interest in a young man,
and the young man was instructed by Phil to propose to my
daughter. She accepted. Of course, they never dated. Phil planned
the entire wedding, changing the date several times. They were
finally married about six weeks after the proposal.
"Prior to my daughter's wedding, she was advised to quit college
and her job. When I questioned Phil, I was simply told that they
wanted to see how obedient she would be." When the mother asked
her son-in-lawto-be why the daughter needed to quit school, she
was told, "... the only things we need to know are what Pastor
Phil tells us."
Pastor Phil demonstrated his need to control in the case of
his own son's wedding. The bride's parents state that "Phil
transformed what should have been the beauty and joy of our
daughter's marriage into a nightmare, a personal tragedy of such
magnitude that only the grace of God could get us through." Phil
asserted that the bride's side of the family was to have no input
into any of the wedding plans. He explained his thinking by
noting that the earthly wedding is a picture of the bride being
given over to the Bridegroom. Therefore, since the Bridegroom in
Scripture is a reference to Christ, who is the Head of all
things, it is the earthly bridegroom (and his father) who is to
be the dominating factor in the earthly wedding event. When the
wedding took place, the bride was allowed to be dressed in white,
but all attendants wore black. Black balloons and black crepe
paper were used as decorations since black is Pastor Phil's
favorite color. The ceremony was performed in a black asphalt
parking lot.
(Talking about dating and marriage. The WCG under HWA had also
this cult type "dating and marriage." It was all guided by the
local minister/s in the local congregations. And at Ambassador
College/s it was very much guided and ruled by whoever head-
minister was put in charge of that department. Needless to say
all dating and especially marriages were "ordained by the
minister/s." I had a friend in the WCG local church. He was a few
years younger than I, and I was only in my early 20s. He was
accepted to go to Ambassador College. Two years later he came
back into town, only called me to come and have a visit with him.
We sat there in his parent's car and he revealed to me his
depression and why. "Keith, I was dating this girl in College. I
was in love with her and she with me. When the ministry found
out, I was hauled in and they told me, 'You will not date this
young lady again, you will have nothing more to do with her. You
are not ministrial quality, but she is ministrial quality to be a
ministers wife.' I am deverstated Keith, just deverstated." I
tried to understand his position. I tried to put myself in his
shoes. Our visit was never forgotten. I never did see my one time
friend again. But when other things began to unravel in the WCG
like the Plain Truth going secular, you can bet that visit with
my friend was fully in my mind once moret - Keith Hunt)
Traditional evangelical churches value and respect
individual differences. For the most part, they encourage people
to become unique persons in their own right, not mere photocopies
of someone else. Authoritarian, manipulative fringe groups, on
the other hand, encourage clones and promote cookie-cutter
life-styles. Flavil Yeakley, in his book "The Discipling
Dilemma," suggests that such groups value conformity, not
diversity. "They tend to make people over after the image of a
group leader, the group norm, or what the group regards as the
ideal personality.... They are made to feel guilty for being what
they are and inferior for not being what the group wants them to
be."
Yeakley discovered in his research that the Boston Church of
Christ (also known as the Boston Movement) was producing in its
members the very same pattern of unhealthy personality change
that is observed in studies of well-known manipulative sects.
"The data... prove that there is a group dynamic operating in
that congregation that influences members to change their
personalities to conform to the group norm..... The Holy Spirit
changes people when they become Christians, but not by making us
identical in psychological type. The growth that comes from the
Holy Spirit produces a body with many different members that
perform many different functions in many different ways."
Another effective control mechanism employed by abusive
churches is fear; fear of not measuring up, fear of losing out
with God if one leaves the group, and fear of spiritual failure.
As one observer colorfully described it, "An incredible
environment of fear is created where the hens huddle together
within the walls to protect themselves from ravenous wolves,
while allowing weasels to guard their chicken coop."
Kim, an ex-member of Maranatha Campus Ministries, clearly
recognized one of the tactics of control used in that group - the
fear of demons and spirits of deception. "Fear also that if you
don't straighten up, God will step on you." Kim's overseer
determined that she had a "spirit of deception" that was causing
her to be "rebellious." The leadership concluded, "We'll pray
over you and cast out this demon." But Kim protested, "'Wait a
minute. There's no demon; you don't need to pray.' For a moment I
was scared. I thought, well, what if there is?"
Several times that night, Kim woke up terrified, scared that
she had fallen from grace and was doomed to go to hell. "In my
mind, I had equated my salvation with my membership in MCM, even
though I had become a Christian two years before I had ever heard
of Maranatha."
Kim explains how the process of "deliverance" and "inner
healing" was facilitated in Maranatha. "It's the belief of the
group that although our sins were dealt with at the cross and our
freedom gained at the Resurrection, there is still a big clean-up
job that remains. Since a11 of the saints came out of the world,
they are packed full of demonic influences, and are still in the
believer until properly dealt with.
"The overseer would usually 'discern' a demon or maybe would
receive a revelation about their disciple while in their prayer
closet. What was required of the deliveree (the one with the
demons), was to pray and think way back to when this particular
demon could have gained entry. Sometimes these memories were of
the womb when, perhaps, the mother would think something sinful
and the demon would enter the unborn child. Ironically, it was
usually the overseer who 'remembered' this incident for the
disciple. Also required was an admission to guilt. The disciple
had to confess all the sins that he had done in that particular
area in order for the deliverance to work. This usually was
accompanied by a barrage of tears and humiliation, since these
memories were often painful. The disciple was instructed to then
repent from those past sins and renounce the demon. Then the
overseer proceeded to cast it out. As far as control is
concerned, I believe two things are accomplished with
deliverance. First, the disciple feels a certain bond to the
person confessed to, a pseudo parent whom he can respect as an
authority and someone who cares about his personal interest.
Secondly, at any future date, the overseer may drag out this
dirty laundry to discredit the disciple or make him feel guilty.
That happened to me when I was trying to explain my position. My
overseer blurted cut, 'I hate to bring this up, but. . . .' and
this was done in a room full of people. My immediate reaction was
to curl up and shut up. I had nothing on her but she had a lot on
me. That's how it is in Maranatha. The bigger the sheep, the more
infallible he is. In short, dirty information about someone
travels up the ranks, never down."
(The "fear" tactic was mightily used in the WCG. People
were told that leaving the WCG was leaving the one and only true
Church of God, that they would be outside of salvation; they
would be in the clutches of Satan the Devil. - Keith Hunt)
Most abusive churches make use of some kind of reporting
system or surveillance pattern to insure conformity with group
norms. Don Barnett's Community Chapel was very blunt about the
mechanics. They put it in the Sunday bulletin. "It is a worldly
concept, inspired by the devil, which makes us think it is doing
someone a favor to keep their sins hidden from those who are in a
position to help. Remember we are our brother's keeper. Please do
your friends a favor when you see them making serious mistakes;
tell your pastor or an elder so something can be done in time."
(Wow....you ex Worldwide Church of God people...is this sounding
bells in your mind. You talk about the secret SS, the "reporting
system" the WCG had. If you cannot remember it or you
do not think it was there in no uncertain terms, then you are
either in full self-denial or you've got Alzheimer's disease -
Keith Hunt)
An obvious form of control is the teaching or preaching from
the pulpit. According to a former member of the shepherding
movement, so-called because its members had "shepherds" who
required full submission and taught the need for "spiritual
authority," these "leaders had the true story of what was going
on. Pastors exercised control and manipulation through their
sermons. Certain themes came through regularly: covenant,
authority, obedience, submission, serving, honoring. . . ."
Another more subtle control mechanism was identified for me
by an ex-member of a well-known network of shepherding churches
known as the Fellowship of Covenant Ministries and Churches
presided over by Charles Simpson ("brother Charles" as he is
called). "There were promises on the part of leadership to
individual members, like: 'It won't be long before you'll be
married.' Well, here it is fifteen years later and I'm still
single. My pastor said that some men have the capability of being
a captain of tens, but he had a vision of my being a captain of
hundreds. That's a promise that's been largely unfulfilled. He
told me, 'Wait until you're thirty.' Things were deferred until
the age of thirty. I was told I would be a leader by the time I
was thirty. So I was really looking forward to being thirty.
Well, at age thirty, I was still not a leader."
(Yes abusive church are full of promises and lies, held out to
keep the people. One apple given to the WCG memebers was the
"place of safety" promise. If you remained faithful to them, God
would use HWA to lead the people to the ONE place on earth where
they would be protected from the Great Tribulation and have a
special training time to be mighty great leaders in the World
Tomorrow. I well remember this fellow I was interviewing to do
some construction work on my apartment building I had in 1984.
One thing led to another and he finally said he was a member of
the WCG. He told me....
HWA was the Elijah to come and that HWA would take them to
a place of safety from the Great Tribulation. I looked at him and
said, "Well I will give you a prophecy. HWA will be dead and
buried LONG before Jesus returns." In less than two years Herbert
Armstrong was dead in 1986. Jesus has still not returned. Now
whose the true prophet of God? - Keith Hunt)
Control also can be exercised by regulating contacts with
family members and friends from the past. Members who go home to
visit friends and relatives are encouraged to keep the visits
brief because, "you may lose the vision." When prospective
members consider joining Emmaus Christian Fellowship in Colorado,
they are told to read a document that spells out the
ramifications of their baptismal vow. "Because our lives become
intimately intertwined with others in our new family, our lives
will profoundly affect our new brothers and sisters. We recognize
any disobedience to God's patterns [read: patterns of that group]
will necessarily affect others. This makes it necessary that we
should submit to God's discipline in our lives not only for our
own sake, but for all others as well.... God tells us that no
earthly relationship should draw us away from our commitment to
His covenant Body, thereby bursting through the covering of the
Body and making both our own life and the entire Body vulnerable
to infection. We must instead be willing to lose our family, our
friends, our nation, even our own life if we are to be worthy to
be His disciples."
(The WCG had no such document to sign but the teaching of the
above was certainly there. People were inevitably pulled away
from family and friends. There is a time when family and friends
must come second. But by and large that is not the case for most
of us in this age. Certainly when such times come, usually under
great persecution by the secular powers, like as it was in the
dark ages when the Holy Roman Empire beast was ruling the hub of
the world, then ALL things must take second place to living and
following the way of God and Christ. But for now it is "as much
as lies in you, live peaceably with all men" as the apostle Paul
was inspired to tell us. You should love your family and friends.
You should explain to them in kind words your way of life under
Christ, that it may be different than how you lived before. But
you should try to keep their friendship. If you are as wise as a
serpent and as harmless as a dove, you will be amazed how many
will understand and still desire to be close to you. Any group
that tells you to denounce and cast away your family and friends
(and of course we are not here talking about family and friends
that are into crime and drugs and the obvious sick way of life),
well they are abusive and wrong - Keith Hunt)
Members of a now defunct Southern California fundamentalist
group had to sign a covenant promising to date only Christians,
and then only Christians within that particular group. "I will
keep these dates 'clean' and refrain from any kissing until six
months of dating the same person. I promise God I will not go
steady without the approval of those in authority. . . ."
Members of this same group had to "agree to get prior
approval from those in authority before making any engagement or
marriage plans. The timing of any engagement or marriage plans
will be coordinated with those in authority." Members also
promised God in writing "to try to take vitamin supplements every
day" and to refrain from "watching channel 40 on television" (the
TBN charismatically oriented channel in Southern California).
......
Note:
Well such are the crazy ideas and teachings and control tactics
of churches that abuse. The Word of God is truth. You are to live
by it not the dictates of men or organizations. I hope and I pray
as you study from this Blog, you will not only find the truths
of God, but will also see clearly how to live a BALANCED life. I
believe as you read all that I have written, from mine own hand,
that you will see I've done my best to bring out to you, that I
am a balanced person, with a balanced life, and that YOU should
be also. God is a BALANCED person. He has a balanced nature. Look
at the creation around you, see the balance of the Lord, when
mankind does not mess it up. Read the Gospels, see that Christ
was a balanced human person when in the flesh on this earth. You
are to be a LIGHT to the world, but a good balanced light. The
spiritually blinded of the world may not understand your
"religious beliefs" or practices, but they should be able to say
about you when you depart this life in death, "I was sure glad I
knew him/her - they made my life better, yes it was a pleasure to
have known him/her."
Keith Hunt
To be continued
Churches that Abuse #7
Elitism and Persecution
RONALD M. ENROTH
Written 1992
ELITISM AND PERSECUTION
Abusive Churches See Themselves As Special
CHURCHES THAT ABUSE
by Enroth (1992)
ELITISM AND PERSECUTION
Abusive Churches See Themselves as Special
Barbara Harold was almost twenty-one in the summer of 1988,
living in Tempe, Arizona, and attending nursing school in Mesa.
While running in the park one night, she was approached by a
harmless-looking couple who invited her to attend a "Bible Talk."
She declined. The woman pursued her and asked to at least have
lunch together so that they might talk. Intrigued, and not having
any really close friends, Barbara decided to accept. Within a few
weeks, she was attending a regular Bible study with three other
girls from the Phoenix Valley Church of Christ, an affiliate of
the socalled Boston Movement. Although brought up a Baptist,
Barbara had not been to church in four years and was looking for
something to which she could belong, to feel a part of. She was
looking for friends with whom she could bare her soul and be
secure. She joined Phoenix Valley Church of Christ in July of
1988, was baptized in November of that same year, and became an
assistant Bible Talk leader by the following June. When she left
the church in June of 1990, she was "totally devastated, afraid
to be alone, severely depressed, and on the verge of suicide."
While a part of the Phoenix Valley Church of Christ,
Barbara's life was very full. After classes and work at the
hospital, every evening was filled with activities. Monday and
Tuesday she and her friends went "door knocking" (street
evangelism) or "blitzed" the local malls. Wednesday they were at
church. Thursday was "Bible Talk" night (their term for Bible
studies). Friday they had activities with visitors. Saturday was
"date night," when all single members of the church were expected
to be out on group dates. Sunday night was either Bible Talk
leaders' meetings or activities with roommates. Such a schedule
left no room for non-church activities.
In addition to this full evening schedule, Barbara was told
that she must have an hour of quiet time with God each day. Given
that she had to be at the hospital each morning at 6:30, Barbara
would rise by 4:15 to spend her "quiet time." Invariably, because
of the demands of her heavy schedule, she would fall asleep
unless someone else was with her. This led to her being called
"weak hearted" and lacking in zeal for God by her disciplers
(those more mature Christians who supervised her spiritual
activity) and the other women in her Bible study. A vicious cycle
of emotional highs and guilty depressions resulted.
Her disciplers also told her to quit exercising, something
she did four to five times a week, unless she was using it as a
means to reach out and share the Gospel. Her regular exercise
regimen was seen as being "too self-focused." She was told, "You
must live for God's kingdom only." Because she came to believe
that her whole family would be lost if she didn't try to convert
them (the Boston churches constituted the only "true Church"),
Barbara was constantly speaking to them about their salvation.
Her family grew tired of the spiritual barrage, as did her old
friends, so Barbara ended up moving into an apartment with four
other women from the Phoenix Valley Church of Christ. Although
she enjoyed the activities and the peprally-like church sermons,
Barbara was under constant pressure to be something she wasn't.
She was always required to confess sin to her discipler. Not
being a very extroverted person, Barbara found it hard to meet
the requirement to constantly evangelize. Times with her
discipler were like interrogations: How many persons did you
reach out to today? Barbara's answer was invariably one, two, or
none. She was told that because she didn't desire to reach out
and witness that Satan was in her, that she didn't have Jesus'
heart for the lost, and that she needed to be more like Jesus.
Finally, the pressure became so great that she began making
up sins to confess so that she would at least have something else
to say. She constantly felt guilty.
Members of the Phoenix Valley Church of Christ would compare
their "Bible Talks" with the Bible studies of other campus
fellowships, and comment on the amount of sexual immorality that
must be going on in these other groups. Members of their church
never went on single dates, but always in groups of four to
eight. "Sisters" were never to be alone in a room with "brothers"
for more than fifteen minutes. Members required permission to
call one another for dates, and, after going out, were grilled by
their disciplers about lustful thoughts during those dates.
Couples going steady were allowed to hold hands and give one
another pecks on the cheek. No solo dating by individual couples
was permitted. There was a strong emphasis on getting the
brothers married, as "It is not good for the man to be alone
(Gen. 2:18)." Consequently, no single sister was ever to be home
alone on a Saturday night.
The amount of control exercised over Barbara's life and the
life of some of her friends extended to extremely personal
levels. Members would quit very good jobs to be "in the ministry"
full-time. It was a sign of their dedication to God. Disciplers
would tell married couples when and how to have sex, a fact that
caused one of Barbara's best friends to leave the church with her
husband. Disciplers would require that every single sin, even
negative thoughts, be confessed to them. If you "stuffed" bad
feelings toward someone down in your heart, that is, if you
didn't confess them, you were in sin. This would obviously lead
to more sin since a root had already taken hold.
Barbara's last night with the Phoenix Valley Church of
Christ was one of severe reprimand and interrogation by the
members of her Bible study because of her alleged "stuffing" of
bad feelings. The Bible study was not "advancing" (growing in
numbers), and she was obviously at fault. What bad feelings and
thoughts was she stuffing? Why wasn't she having quality quiet
times with the Lord? How many persons was she really reaching out
to each day? One by one, each member told her what her
shortcomings were. Yet they all declared their support and love
for her, along with their great desire to see her grow.
Barbara asked to move back with her parents that same night.
"It was the hardest decision I ever made," she said. She was
emotionally unstable, and didn't even know how or what she felt,
since she was so used to having someone else tell her that what
she was feeling was wrong and of Satan. Her guilt increased,
exacerbated by the fact that members contacted her and asked,
"How could you allow Satan to harden your heart so much to do
this to your friends?" She was told to remember that her heart
was "exceedingly deceitful."
That same night she also phoned one of her old disciples, a
woman who had been "marked" (shunned) by members of the church
for marrying the wrong man.
Although one was not supposed to talk to ex-members because
they would "try to pull you away," Barbara found it a relief to
have someone to talk to. Getting a better perspective by talking
things out with her friend, Barbara's resolve not to return grew.
Even though at times she felt like she was leaving the "true
Church" or turning her back on God and heading for hell, Barbara
knew that the "unconditional love" preached by the Boston
Movement churches was very conditional when it came to
ex-members.
Barbara returned to her shared apartment the next morning to
gather her things. She ignored the "love bombs" that members and
leaders attempted to throw at her - things like invitations to
activities, reminders of good times together, and words of
encouragement. Somehow she found the strength and courage to walk
away from the highly controlling and manipulative environment in
which she found herself; she returned home to her family. She had
been in the Boston affiliated Phoenix Valley Church of Christ for
two years.
Barbara is concerned for her friends still in the group.
Although she knows that she would be indulging in blasphemy in
the eyes of the members by calling the Boston movement a
destructive group and warning her friends, she realizes that her
severe depression, attempted suicide, and sleeping sixteen to
eighteen hours a day with no hope for the future are not the
results of a ministry centered around Jesus' Gospel of grace. If
it was such a wonderful thing that God could lead her and others
into such a movement, why must it be of Satan to feel that God
has saved her and led her out? She now hopes that others in the
Boston Movement will have the strength and courage to question
whether they really are right in their convictions, whether God
is truly blessing their ministry, and whether they really do
belong to the only "true church" on earth.
Barbara knows that one day she will be seeking God and
wanting to know the truth again. She believes that God himself
will lead her to the right place. But right now she is burned out
on church and she knows she is not ready to get involved in any
kind of church. After twelve weeks of therapy, Barbara is now
just beginning to make simple decisions on her own and is
attempting to make a normal life for herself.
(Again, any of you reading this that were ever in the Worldwide
Church of God under Herbert Armstrong from 1967 to his death in
1986, this should be all too familiar. Certainly the so-called
hours of "dedicated work for the Lord" and "elitism" and time
consumed in "church activities" to the casting away of other
people, relatives, and "worldly clubs" so-called, together with
the indoctrination of the WCG being the ONLY true church
organization on earth, was indeed all part of that organization
from 1967 to 1986 - BIG LOUD BELLS should be ringing in your
head, you ex WCGers - Keith Hunt)
The Boston Movement, earlier known as the "Crossroads
Movement" and "Multiplying Ministries," had its origins in the
Crossroads Church of Christ in Gainesville, Florida, under the
leadership of Pastor Chuck Lucas. He stressed personal
discipleship training, a variant of the shepherding philosophy so
popular during the 1970s. This philosophy stressed the need for
every believer to have a "covering" in the Lord, a delegated
authority who must be unconditionally obeyed and consulted for
even the most personal decisions. One of Lucas' own disciples,
Kip McKean, became pastor of a small Church of Christ in
Lexington, Massachusetts, in 1979 and transformed a group of less
than one hundred members into a thriving congregation worshiping
on Sundays in Boston Garden, home of the Celtics. It has been
under the leadership and influence of this young evangelist that
the Boston Church of Christ has developed into what one observer
calls the "Jerusalem" of one of the most controversial and most
publicized of the authoritarian movements discussed in this book.
Unlike the mainline Churches of Christ (which have distanced
themselves from this rapidly growing offshoot), the congregations
affiliated with the Boston Movement answer to their mother church
in Boston. The doctrinal areas that have caused most controversy
are those dealing with authority, discipling, baptism, autonomy
of congregations, and the role of the leadership, especially the
leadership of Kip McKean.
Central to the Boston Movement's belief system is its view
of authority. The leaders have justified the use of abusive
authority in order to follow Jesus. They demand submission even
if the leaders are sinful and un-Christ-like. Here are examples
of statements made by various Boston leaders that illustrate
their position:
Often we are afraid to submit to authority because it might
be abusive. Jesus was not afraid of abusive authority; he
was even willing to submit and obey authority that was
abusive (Philippians 2:6-11; Matthew 27:11-50).... When we
trust God, we do not have to be afraid of abusive authority.
Just as in the times of the New Testament, there will be
people who are hurt and killed by abusive authorities, but
God is still in control; if they were right with Him, and
they will be ultimately rescued to the supreme
security--home with God.... It is not an option to rebel
against their authority.... God's people must be aware that
they have a responsibility before God to respect, obey, and
submit to His anointed servants.... Far too many with the
church of Christ have imitated the words of Korah and other
leaders of Israel who said to Moses, 'You have gone too far!
The whole community is holy, everyone of them, and the Lord
is with them. Why do you set yourself above the Lord's
assembly?'.... It is true that all Christians walking in the
light are holy and God is indeed with everyone of them.
However, it is also true that through His spirit certain men
have been assigned responsibilities to lead in the Kingdom
and that to oppose them is to oppose God who anointed them.
The Boston Movement teaches that each member should be
answerable to another disciple in order to provide nurturing
for new Christians. Members are encouraged to imitate and
trust their disciplers.
A disciple is one who obeys his discipler even if he doesn't
comprehend what he's told. Because he wants to have a
teachable heart, he will fully obey and be totally obedient
even if what he's asked to do is contrary to what he would
normally do or think. To distrust the person God had put in
his life is equal to distrusting God and his faith in God is
shown by his faith in his discipler.
(WOW!! This is like reading about the teaching and attitude of
the WCG under HWA from 1967 to 1986. They taught the very same
thing - that to obey the leaders was to obey God, to disobey the
leaders was to disobey God - such was classified as the sin of
rebellion, and if continued in you would be "marked" and put out
of the church, then everyone you had come to know would shun and
ignore you, and you would be in the hands of Satan the Devil. You
were taught that the leaders were specially guided from God, and
that HWA was directly under Christ - whatever he decided was the
guiding inspired hand and mind of God. You were in many ways
pumped with this talk and attitude at every church meeting -
Keith Hunt)
In 1987, evangelist Kip McKean gave a talk entitled, "Why Do
You Resist the Spirit?" in which he said, "No one can do it on
their own. Everybody needs ongoing discipleship. You are a
disciple of God until you die and you are a disciple of someone
else until you die."
The Boston Movement demands "Lordship baptism." In other
words, one must confess Jesus as the Lord of every area of his
life and demonstrate that he is a disciple before being baptized.
This has resulted in a wave of rebaptisms, since new adherents
who may have been baptized in another Christian church find that
their previous baptism is not acceptable to the Boston Church of
Christ. Even those people with backgrounds in the mainline
Churches of Christ find themselves needing rebaptism.
The Boston Movement is an example of the elitist orientation
that is so pervasive in authoritarian-church movements. It alone
has the Truth, and to question its teachings and practices is to
invite rebuke. As Jerry Jones observes:
When the Boston Movement is confronted with their wrong
teachings, its practice is to attack the character and life of
the questioner by claiming that he has "sin in his life." Such
terms as "prideful," "independent spirit," and "rebellious" are
used in answer to the inquirer. The Boston Movement believes that
being "independent" or "critical" is sin.
(Ah so it was in the WCG under HWA - no independent spirit was
allowed - no questioning of the leaders was allowed - no
questioning of the teachings - no questioning of the decisions
made was allowed, especially if they came from the very top - HWA
himself. It was a church of "be quiet - pray and pay" - Keith
Hunt)
Yeakley's research on the Boston Movement concluded that the
disciple/discipler relationship was potentially manipulative and
destructive. Because members are required to confess their sins
to their disciplers, the emphasis on such self-disclosure can be
dangerous.
The discipling hierarchy thus becomes a glorified informant
network. As such, it is an effective means of control.... Those
being discipled were told what courses to take in school, what
field to major in, what career to enter, whom to date or not
date, and even whom to marry or not marry.
(Yes, whatever the exact form it took the bottom line was
CONTROL, control and more control - such indeed was it in the WCG
- Keith Hunt)
The spiritual elitism of abusive churches can be seen in
some of the terminology they use to refer to themselves: "God's
Green Berets," "God's End-Time Army," the "faithful remnant," the
special "move of God." As one ex-member put it, "We believed we
were on the cutting edge of what God was doing in the world. I
looked down on people who left our movement; they didn't have
what it took. They were not faithful to their commitment. When
everyone else got with God's program, they would be involved in
shepherding just like we were." A former member of a group known
as The Assembly (headquartered in Fullerton, California, and
discussed later in this book) said, "Although we didn't come
right out and say it, in our innermost hearts we really felt that
there was no place in the world like our assembly. We thought the
rest of Christianity was out to lunch."
(That was certainly the case with the WCG under HWA - every other
church organization was "out to lunch" - not being a part of
them, all others were not of the "true church of God" - Keith
Hunt)
Community Chapel's Pastor Barnett regularly reminded his
followers that their church was special. "We've got to go on into
a new thing that God has promised in his Word that no church has
ever come into yet.... Do you know of any other church in which
people are loving each other with that same kind of unconditional
love? I don't."
If abusive churches are exclusive and special, it follows
that they will be targets for persecution, or so their leaders
seem to feel. "It is the earmark of the last day church that if
God has promised it, and we are beginning to experience it, you
know the devil's going to fight it."
Pastor Barnett would tell his flock: "You'll be a laughing
stock, a mockery. You will find that there will be hatred toward
you and it will come from the church world. You are sheep among
wolves, and the wolves are the religious ones, the church world."
The leader of one controversial group named Aggressive
Christianity Missions Training Corps complained, "The churches
are full of sinners. We don't want to be hypocrites. You try to
be strict and keep people clean, and everybody crucifies you.
We're strict and we're not going to apologize for it. If we're
crucified, we're crucified."
(It comes from a VANITY that in their mind makes then "special" -
they have a connection with God that no other church has, hence
they will suffer persecution. They do not stop to think that the
persecution is maybe coming from what they themselves say about
others and how they vainly act towards others, words they say to
others, always trying to preach to others, always trying to "get
people saved" and nobody is saved unless they are in their church
organization - they are bringing about a self-fulfilled prophecy
- Keith Hunt)
Jan was a member of a group that felt it was being unjustly
persecuted by its critics, including the press. Here is her
account of life with The Piecemakers, a small southern California
communal-Christian group.
Jan had had all she was going to take. Eleven years of
frustrated emotion, suppressed anger, and mental anguish came
boiling out, and she began to swing her purse and bags of
groceries at her tormentors - two "sisters" in the Body of Christ
Fellowship, the informal name for The Piecemakers. They were
"loving" her to repentance by screaming obscenities at her and
attempting to "break through" to the point where she would again
be submissive to the words and teachings of their unofficial
leader, Marie Kolasinski. Although one of the women was nearly
twice her size and holding her arms, Jan managed to break free,
run to her room, and lock the door. Later, when her husband
joined her, she said, "Mark, you have to get us and the kids out
of here and away from these people."
The next morning Jan insisted that the six adults in her
household meet to discuss who would be moving out. The two
"sisters" wanted to postpone the meeting until the next day when
Marie would be home from her family vacation in the mountains.
Saying that she was "no fool," Jan stood her ground. The
"sisters," as well as Jan's natural sister and brother-in-law who
were also a part of the Fellowship, declared that they were
staying and "claiming the land for God." Jan, as holder of the
lease, knew otherwise.
That afternoon, twenty members of the Body of Christ
Fellowship came to move the women out. In the process, they took
everything that they believed had been bought with "God's money"
- sheets off the beds, toilet paper holders out of the bathrooms,
bolts and screws ripped right out of the walls. Jan's house was
ransacked. Unfortunately, Mark was not home at the time.
Later, in the early evening, five of the "brothers" came
back, saying they had come to claim "God's bed" - a youth bed on
which Jan's youngest daughter slept. Not wanting them to trash
the children's room, Jan asked if she could bring the bed
downstairs. She was pushed out of the way by her brother, also a
member of the Fellowship, and the men headed up the stairs.
Grabbing her brother's arm and pleading with him, Jan was beaten
to the floor. Another relative, who had come to stay and help Jan
out, had her arm twisted behind her back until she cried, and was
told to "Keep out of God's way!" Meanwhile, Jan's
thirteen-year-old son, eldest of her six children, had run down
to the kitchen, grabbed a butcher knife, and was on his way up
the stairs to protect his mother. In the resulting chaos, the men
left with the bed, and Jan and her children were left crying on
the floor.
When Mark returned home, Jan asked the children not to tell
him how roughly she had been treated, but the children told all.
Mark responded by gathering his six children into his arms,
saying, "It doesn't matter. We've only lost material things. I
have what I've been praying for. My family is now free."
This dramatic account, tearfully related to me by Jan one
month after her departure from the Body of Christ Fellowship,
exemplifies the trauma of involvement in even the smallest of
aberrational, abusive groups. The Body of Christ Fellowship, also
known by their business name of Piecemakers Country Store, is
located in Costa Mesa, California. Unofficially headed by
grandmotherly Marie Kolasinski, who denies her leadership role
("God would strike me down if I took credit for his beautiful
work"), the Body of Christ Fellowship is unique in its use of
profanity, for Marie's edict that required vasectomies for male
members, and for their claims that the second coming of Christ
has "already come and gone."
Jan and her family were members of the Fellowship for eleven
years. Most of her children were born during their involvement
with the organization, which first began because Jan believed
that members of the Fellowship had a "greater Christian walk."
She felt that they were "walking in the fullness of life," and
were growing closer to Jesus than was possible in other groups or
churches. Her first encounter with Marie (she is known by no
other title) came about through a mutual friend. Marie said,
without ever having met her before, "Oh, Jan, take off your shoes
for you are standing on holy ground."
In the early days, the group experienced healings, spoke in
tongues, and conducted baptisms in a local wimming pool. However,
somewhere along the line, Marie and the Fellowship began changing
from a charismatic Bible study to a strict, authoritarian
communal group. The change occurred gradually, with Marie slowly
introducing teachings that contradicted the Bible.
(Yes, and so with the WCG, changes brought in on
"church government" were the opposite from the Bible and from
what he himself taught back in the 1930s. Fear tactics, elitism,
power in one way or another over the people of the church is what
makes that church become a cult - Keith Hunt)
While the group claims to live peacefully as a communal
witness (they own several houses in the Costa Mesa area), their
doctrine and practices have evolved over the years to a point of
drastic departure from orthodoxy. Marie believes that she has
"come through the veil" - that she experienced the death of her
flesh in 1978 and now walks in sinless perfection. As the only
one to have yet begun to "walk in the fullness," she dictates
every aspect of the lives of her followers so that they too, some
day, may join her in her exalted state. Consequently, she is
beyond confrontation and in total control. "If you are sitting in
this room today, and you are doubting whether or not these are
the words of the Father, you better check to see if you are doing
the will of God." She adds, "I always marvel at people who will
come and hear the truth of what is going on in this fellowship
and reject it."
As the only one yet to achieve sinless perfection, Marie is
God's mouthpiece to her followers. Any questioning of her
decisions or dissent is defined as the rebellion of the original
sin nature in her followers and an indication of their lack of
perfection. "Words" from God, received by Marie, are obeyed by
her followers without question. Members have been known to
surrender wedding rings, forsake their children, and move to
different states, in obedience to Marie's received "words." Marie
has also reportedly received "words" telling members to give
money to her husband for his failing business, or to refrain from
styling another's hair after she received a poor haircut.
According to Marie's philosophy, growing closer to God requires
suffering. This means the travail and pain of letting go of
everything of one's old life - family relationships, both
immediate and extended; personal belongings of sentimental value;
and the ability to control one's life and make personal
decisions. The more broken her members, the closer they are to
"entering into God." Therefore, every aspect of their personal
lives and egos is systematically assaulted.
(So was it also, in one form or another, in the WCG under HWA. He
it was taught was God's appointed end time Apostle, with all
inspired authority for all decisions in the church - spiritual
and physical. Such are the ways of false dictatorship people who
come in the name of God, claiming they have a special "anointing
of the Lord" that makes them infallible and unable to make
mistakes or errors in understanding the Scriptures correctly. And
true to form they claim they have the right to govern your every
part of your life. Hundreds of examples could be given as it was
applied in the WCG under HWA. I'm sure many of you reading this
can well think of examples of how the ministry ruled many facets
of the lives of members of the WCG - Keith Hunt)
One of Marie's assistants indicated that members cry and go
through so much emotional and spiritual torture because it is a
painful process to shed all of life's pleasures in order to serve
God. Jackie Kindschi, Marie's childhood friend and former member
of the Fellowship, was quoted in a local newspaper as saying:
"Marie believes, and so do the others, that when they pick
on a person and break them down, they are helping them get
closer to God. She really thinks she is doing the right
thing.... When I look around my apartment and see all the
things I "idolize," like my children and grandchildren, my
memories and my material items, all the things that Marie
says we shouldn't have, I say hallelujah.
Marie's brother and sister-in-law are also very concerned.
Somewhere along the line Marie got messed up with drugs, and
the next time we saw her, she was the leader of this group."
They did attend some of the meetings at the fellowship but
decided the group was not for them. Everything is contrary
to scriptural teachings and she twists them to fit her
cause. She is holding those people hostage and threatens
them with God."
Marie now believes and claims that she "holds the keys to
the Kingdom," and has the power to regulate who and who will not
have the opportunity to go to heaven. Jan says that her
manipulation is "total and complete," and that there is no
possibility of members winning against her. In the "fullness"
there is neither right nor wrong, good nor bad; therefore,
anything that Marie does or says is perfect.
Since "dying to the flesh" allows Jesus Christ to be born in
a person in fullness (the supposed second coming of Christ
according to Marie), those individuals who have come or are
coming "through the veil" should no longer live "fleshly" lives.
Therefore, members of the Body of Christ abstain from sexual
relationships with their spouses since there is neither male nor
female nor marriage in the Kingdom of God. "Natural man must shed
all his ways to reach God. The flesh must die in order for us to
gain entry into the Kingdom of God. I'm celibate and am no longer
a slave to any man, lust, or desire. Only God is in my thoughts
now."
Conceiving and bearing children are both considered to be
sorrowful ordeals. Marie believes that humankind evolved from the
animals, so that having children is "reproducing after one's
lustful flesh." Children therefore keep one from seeking God; one
needs rather to have "spiritual children." Needless to say, the
children in the Body of Christ Fellowship do not lead normal
lives, usually being separated from their parents. Marie states
that God himself is "trying to tear down the family unit."
Living out their commitment to God, members rise each day at
5:15 A.M. They meet at 5:30 A.M. to walk for two miles, then
receive the day's instructions from Marie at her home. Members
are assigned to either work at Piecemakers, do manual labor
through the Village Tilers, a home improvement arm of
Piecemakers, or baby-sit a host of children. Members' weekly
salary is ten dollars and no free time is allowed. Jan says that,
"Every minute of the day was accounted for. If you were supposed
to be somewhere, you were there and no one argued."
Portions of the day are spent in meetings to learn
about God and scold errant members. These "scoldings" can last
for hours and include being labeled a "slut" or a "whore," if one
is a woman, or being convinced that one is weak and worthless, if
one is a man. Accompanying the scoldings are outpourings of
profanity, the use of which, one therapist believes, breaks down
religious training so that victims are more open to Marie's
influence.
Those who supposedly attempt to usurp Marie's authority are
the most severely abused by brutal grouphumiliation tactics and
peer pressure. "They would hit you blindside, and you never knew
it was coming. All the members would gather around and begin
screaming and hollering obscenities until you broke," says one
former member. There are also allegations of physical beatings.
However, Marie claims that only by their strength and adherence
to the word of God, and submission to her authority, will members
overcome and be successful. Success is defined as the return of
all that one has given up to "go through the veil."
Interestingly, Marie's husband, Ray, is Catholic and not a
member of the Body of Christ Fellowship. Jan states that while
Marie preaches against family, she is a submissive wife to Ray,
cooking his dinner, keeping his house, and attending Mass at his
side. However, Jan also notes that at the point Marie received
the word about communal living and the pooling of resources, Ray
needed money to pay his taxes. The pooled funds allegedly went to
pay Ray's tax debt, among other things.
(You are seeing how absolutely CRAZY minded some of these leaders
can be - and how what is good for the gander is often not good
for the goose. Leaders who are truly FRUIT-NUT-CASES that should
be in the "insane" lock-up section of the mental hospital. The
sad thing is they are not and they get others to be as insane as
they are - Keith Hunt)
The straw that finally broke the camel's back for Jan was
watching her own sister and another woman verbally abuse and
attack her mother with gross profanity. Why? Because she wanted
to bring Christmas presents to her grandchildren. Jan thought,
"This can't be what religion and Jesus are all about. This isn't
what he died on the cross for. Her altercation with the other
persons of her household came shortly thereafter. Within a few
days, she and her family had escaped.
Marie claims that Jan is bitter because she was not strong
enough to "walk with God." She told Jan that she would "turn into
a whore, an alcoholic, and a drug addict," that she would be
"crazy within six weeks, just like your mother," and that her
husband would be "chasing everything in a skirt."
Jan and her family had to move out of the area to escape
constant threats and harassment from members and Marie. Although
they have been away from Marie Kolasinski and the Body of Christ
Fellowship for over six years, the emotional scars and spiritual
turmoil are only now fading away. There is still guilt over
influencing four of her siblings to become involved in the group.
She has only recently regained her "vision for God." And she and
her family have only just recently returned to church. But they
are free.
......
To be continued
Note:
It is hard for some to beleive such people in charge of such
organization actually have and do exist. But it is very much so.
I have seen it. I have gone through it. I have seen it develope
right under my nose. I have been witness to all these things,
some in different forms, that make a religious organization into
an abusive church, and actually in plain language a CULT!
But you knowing what to look for; you knowing what true church
government is, for I have given it to you on this Website; you
can be made FREE!! God has so determined in these last days that
His truth will be proclaimed on the Internet - this Website is
part of that plan of God, the door open for the people of God.
Now truths can be expounded in great detail, all the truths of
the Word of the Lord, and you are free to study them, come to
know them, decide to obey and serve Jesus as your Lord and
Savior, and never get mixed up with others that do not speak and
act in word and life according to the truths of God.
I am just a man, a voice crying in the wilderness of deception,
sin, wickedness, and false teachings. That is really all you need
to know about me, if you want to know no more. And you can study
every study on this Website and come to the knowledge of the
truth. Then I pray YOU will live it, be as wise as a serpent but
as harmless as a dove. And you and I do not have to talk or see
each other until the resurrection day. But on that day I hope you
will introduce yourself and tell me how you found the Lord or
came to the correct understanding of God's truths from this
Website I've been blessed to be custodian of.
Keith Hunt
To be continued
|
Churches that Abuse #8
Lifestyle and Experience
RONALD M. ENROTH
Written 1992
LIFESTYLE AND EXPERIENCE
Abusive Churches Foster Rigidity
Tom and Pam Murray are still searching for God and the truth
after their seven-year experience with what has been called the
No-Name Fellowship, or C-U (Champaign-Urbana) Ministries, titles
that originated with the media for a group of Christian believers
who considered themselves to be just a "part of the body of
Christ and therefore did not believe a name for [our] group was
necessary." Tom says that even after two years out of the group
he is still working through a lot of experiences in his mind,
"trying to discern what was good and what was bad; attempting to
save and retain that which was profitable and releasing that
which was unprofitable." Of one thing he is sure, sincerity does
not guarantee that God will always honor your actions.
What began as a Bible study, organized by a few students who felt
the established churches were weak and ineffectual examples of
Christianity, evolved into a rigidly structured group with one
man giving basically all the direction. As is typical of some
authoritarian groups, the No-Name Fellowship consisted of white,
middle- to upper-middle-class young people from eighteen to
twenty-five years of age, of above-average intelligence, well
educated, and highly idealistic.
Doug Kleber was chief elder in all but name. It was
generally recognized that he had experienced a "greater calling
of God" than had the other elders and, conse quently, much of
what the members practiced in the daily routine of their lives
stemmed directly from "revelation" that Doug received, or from
additional "revelation" that was received by others on the
subjects on which he had broken ground. These extra-biblical
"revelations" dictated how members were to property eat, dress,
discipline their children, decorate theirhomes, clean their
homes, and behave in the marriage bed. Because of the group
members' love of the Lord and their genuine seeking to know and
do what he wanted, they submitted to Kleber's self-appointed
spiritual authority, even though at times Pam knew that he was
wrong. As time went on, she eventually convinced herself that she
"was the one that was s always wrong."
It was generally recognized that Kleber had always had a
dominating presence about him, even from youth. It was said that
at one time a number of prophetic words had been spoken over him
indicating that God had called him to lead people. Tom never
believed, nor does he now believe, that there was any
"deliberate" motive to coerce or control people on Kleber's part.
"I still believe that this man's heart was free from any
deliberate intention to lead us in any way for his own personal
gain, financially or psychologically."
Pam, however, knew that something was "off," but she
couldn't label what was wrong. "I appreciated receiving
direction, being a new wife and mother. I felt so loved by the
brethren. We were all in it togher. I don't believe that all the
fault for the group lies i the leader's lap."
Consistent with a number of similar groups. Pam and Tom's
fellowship attempted to live according to "first-century-church"
standards. They believed that "the stain of the world" was upon
the established church. "Many of us who were zealous for God
found it easy to separate ourselves from other churches, other
Christians, families, and friends because of what we saw
happening in the mainline churches."
In a very revealing statement, Pam and Tom observe: "If
there didn't exist a real lack in the organized church today, you
probably wouldn't have the 'backlash' effect involving thousands
of well-meaning young Christians." This "backlash" resulted in
members of the NoName Fellowship believing that they were the
only devoted and pure body of believers around. They became
distrustful and contemptuous of almost everyone, and believed
that most people were wicked or misguided hypocrites destined for
eternal damnation. "We became victims of zealousness without
knowledge." Tom now takes a more balanced approach to the
biblical notion of separation from the world. "There is a place
for elitism in the church if it's wrapped in wisdom and
understanding."
As Pam looks back on the experience, she finds it hard to
believe that when people called her brainwashed, she took it as a
compliment. "We were blessed to have a clean mind. But it did
reach a point where I didn't decide things on my own. Even
vacations had to be cleared with the leadership. You wouldn't
dare leave without God's blessing. And the elders would be called
to okay the house we wanted to rent." She now understands that
"trying to make thirty-five housewives clean, decorate and dress
the same way didn't leave room for expressions of individuality"
that are a normal part of the diversity of the Christian church.
She also understands that the enforced cutting of almost all ties
with family and friends outside of the fellowship was not God's
way of "separating oneself from the stain of the world."
As parents and others began to react to the isolationist
stance that the fellowship was taking, members began to believe
that the "world was out to get them." "Parents kidnapped their
kids to have them deprogrammed, which in turn stirred up the
media and local authorities with the end result being that all
these circumstances only solidified our initial convictions. No
one thought that this was anything but the normal sequence of
events that an end-time church was supposed to go through." As
far as those on the inside were concerned, the critics "just
didn't understand." Members felt that "no one could ever get the
full story unless they came in person to find out for themselves
how we lived." Of course, no one was ever given the opportunity
to see the real group dynamics.
Over the course of time, as Kleber received more and more
"revelations," life became increasingly rigid and difficult. The
control mechanisms employed by the leadership covered a broad
spectrum of behavior includ-ing dress, diet, work habits,
personal style or mannerisms, prayer, Bible study, fasting,
entertainment, jobs, and whether or not to have children. "There
wasn't one area in our lives where we weren't legalistic about
something." Tom reflects, "It seems strange that during our time
in the fellowship, you would think that the overwhelming evidence
in the New Testament concerning grace would have had some effect
upon our minds concerning these rigidities." However, there was
so much "revelation" coming that the average member found it
impossible to take the time necessary to carefully study the
Bible to determine for him or herself that what was being taught
was the whole truth of God. In addition, as Pam notes, "I lived
in fear of correction, while Scripture tells us to embrace and
love it." Also, many of the rules and regulations were never
actually spoken or articulated as a command. One simply knew
from experience that something was a rule, and, if not adhered
to, discipline resulted.
Given the overwhelming amount of "revelation" that Kleber
supposedly received, "the tendency was to trust first and then
hope that you could find the time to search the Word in prayer
and verify or refute whatever particular issue was being
discussed." The term "revelation teaching" as used in the group
did not signify a special, dramatic, prophetic utterance, but had
to do with accumulated spiritual knowledge and insight from the
Bible that the leadership claimed to receive from the Holy
Spirit, some of which was merely the pastor's attempt to relate
Scripture to everyday life. For these folk, the meaning of
Scripture is not simply that which the intellect understands from
reading, but is apprehended ultimately by revelation from the
Holy Spirit. For example, when it was announced that women should
not wear jeans, it came not as an isolated pronouncement, but was
based on a continuing series of "revelational teachings" that,
layer upon layer, gradually readied the congregation for
directives that might seem strange to outsiders.
Life became increasingly based on experience and not on the
standards of Scripture. Conscience became externalized and
embodied in Kleber and the other elders. At the same time members
were taught not to trust their feelings, intuition, and emotions,
lest they find themselves "walking in the flesh." "We stifled the
voice of God within, mistaking common-sense reactions for the
'rising up of the flesh.'" Tom believes that "It was probably
this very doctrine that disabled most of us from ever obeying the
'gut feelings' of apprehension within. Many times we stifled our
own conscience in the desire to walk spiritually." For Pam, who
had had an active prayer life before the fellowship, "God turned
into an unreachable spirit. It was like playing a game that I
could never win." She has lost all desire to share Jesus with
others.
If members ever did decide they had reason to disagree with
Kleber and his "revelations," they quickly found reason to stop.
Pam knew that even when she desired to stand and say, "This is
crazy!" or, "I don't agree!" she would have been disciplined for
disrupting and coming against authority.
Women of C-U Ministries were totally submissive to males and
were barred from leadership or decisionmaking roles, as well as
from work outside the home. Pam says that, "It got to the point
where what I had to say usually got suppressed because I knew it
was a waste of time to discuss it. I'd lose." Tom, no doubt
reflecting his status as a male in the group, takes a more
moderate view on how dissent was handled. "There never seemed to
be a great deal of major dissent on most issues, and when dissent
did appear, it wasn't of the type that endangered the fabric of
the fellowship. In fact, it occurred rather often in the course
of meetings and was generally settled by the breaking of the
Word."
Although the "breaking of the Word" may have been a part of
the settling of dissenting opinion, outrageous discipline of
members was the order of the day according to Pam and other
ex-members. These measures included the spanking of adults with
hands, belts, wooden paddles, or other objects; the drinking of
salt water; having liquid soap squirted into a woman's mouth for
inappropriately addressing her husband; and lying at someone's
feet in order to apologize. Pam recalls a women's prayer meeting
at which one woman was told to remove her dress in order to
become "more vulnerable."
Fear, guilt, and intimidation all played a role in the
disciplinary process. Obedience to the standard of the group was
secured by the fear of divine judgment. For the most part, the
internalized psychological and spiritual discipline applied by
the group was enough to bring about the desired results. But on
quite a number of occasions, verbal public humiliation and
sometimes physical public humiliation were used to help
straighten out deviant behavior. Tom adds, "Many, but not all, of
these disciplinary measures took place in front of the entire
body, because we regarded ourselves a family. Many times the body
was asked to judge whether they thought the offender had found
repentance."
Unfortunately, the harshness of the discipline extended to
the children as well. Pam says, "I could cry over some of the
spankings they received. Bruised bottoms. They were even
calloused." The eventual disbanding of the church was in large
part related to a tragic event that took place in another branch
of the organization in Spokane, Washington. (At one point the
group also had outposts in Passaic, New Jersey, and Piano,
Texas.)
In December of 1987, ten-year-old Aaron Norman died as a
result of medical neglect and a beating administered by his
father and Doug Kleber. The boy suffered from juvenile diabetes
but his parents did not obtain medical care for him, preferring
to rely on the healing power of prayer. When his physical
condition worsened and prayer did not seem to be effective,
elders of the church were consulted to determine what the problem
was. According to a story in the June 21, 1988 issue of the
Chicago Tribune, the elders determined that Aaron had sinned. The
sin was masturbation, but Aaron would not confess to the sin. His
father decided to spank Aaron with a board because the Holy
Spirit had told him that he had been masturbating. As the Spokane
County deputy prosecutor stated, "His father and the elders
'rebuked' Aaron to confess, but he wouldn't. Aaron's father and
Kleber then beat the child. . . . A wooden paddle was used at
some point until Aaron confessed. On Sunday morning when his
parents awoke, Aaron was dead. There were severe bruises on his
buttocks."
The Murrays left the fellowship when it "all blew up in our
faces." If the fellowship hadn't broken up, they feel they would
probably still be there. "We really didn't have a clue that
anything was wrong." They have had a difficult time since leaving
because they had been programmed to believe that to exit the
group was to leave family. Members who had left previously were
said to be "deceived and going to hell." The faithful who
remained prayed that the defectors would suffer calamities to
prove to them that they had been wrong. According to Pam, "Since
we believed so strongly that the group was 'The One,'
contemplating leaving wasn't even in your thoughts. Rather, we
had a fear of doing something wrong and being told to leave!"
Pam went through a time after leaving when she wondered if God
even existed. They both have had difficulty in returning to
church. Tom admits, "I'm not sure if I'll ever understand why God
allowed it to happen, but his grace and mercy are sufficient
enough to satisfy us when there aren't any answers to the
questions that we still ask."
Tom Murray gives a final warning: "It is foolish to think
that you can remain objective in an abusive-church situation for
any length of time without being subtly influenced. No one can
consider themselves above the possibility of deception."
There is another "nameless" group, much larger than the one
just discussed, which also engages in various forms of spiritual
and physical abuse. Very little has been written about this
obscure worldwide church which is said to have as many as one
hundred thousand members. It was founded at the turn of the
century by a Scottish coal miner named William Irvine who was
later joined by Edward Cooney, an Irishman. In the early days,
the group was referred to as the "Cooneyites," and later became
known both as the "Two-by-Two's" (because its itinerant preachers
or "workers" travel in pairs) and the "Nameless House Sect." The
group deplores denominationalism and "man-made" doctrines. It
identifies with no name and claims only to follow Jesus Christ.
Former members, who often refer to it as "the Truth," claim that
a great number of children raised in the movement are subjected
to stern discipline from an early age in order that their "wills
can be broken." Exmembers report that infants as young as three
months old are swatted. One said that fussing of small children
is an unacceptable disruption of the meeting, so children must be
taught quickly and firmly how to behave and be silent. Children
are expected to behave as miniature adults and whatever must be
done to achieve this end is done. One common discipline is to
expect children to eat everything on their plates, to train them
for the task of being in the "work." Forcing children to eat is
considered part of breaking their wills and teaching them to
submit to parental authority. If they refuse or cannot, the
workers view it as rebellion.
Like many other abusive churches, the Two-byTwo's impose a
restrictive and rigorous life-style on the membership. Women
adherents shun makeup and wear long, uncut hair wrapped tightly
in buns on the tops of their heads. Jewelry is proscribed, while
plain dresses are the norm. Slacks, shorts, and sleeveless
blouses are forbidden in public. They submit to the men of the
group who tend to wear dark-colored clothes and carry
black-covered King James Versions of the Bible. Marriages are
performed by civil authorities only, since church "workers" do
not register with state officials.
Conformity to a strict life-style is expected of all
children and young people in the Truth. They are discouraged from
participating in after-school sports and other social activities.
Their circle of friends does not extend beyond the group.
They often grow up ignorant and unaware of current affairs around
them. One woman remembers taking her young son to the doctor who
was astonished that the boy knew nothing about Big Bird or other
Sesame Street characters. Another woman relates that her son's
kindergarten teacher was shocked that he hadn't ever heard of
Easter. . .[most Two-by-Two's do not observe Christmas or
Easter]. This lack of awareness, culturally, religiously,
politically, and socially, severely stunts their perceptions of
the world around them.... Emotional withdrawal and social
isolation are typical responses among children in the Truth which
are carried forward into adulthood.
Members of the University Bible Fellowship were encouraged
to get rid of their stereos. One student threw his
six-hundred-dollar stereo receiver into Lake Michi gan and
exclaimed, "I felt so free after that." An exmember of another
abusive church tells of being advised to get rid of her dead
husband's spirit by burning her wedding pictures, selling her
wedding ring, and giving away their bed. "Our children watched
their baby dolls and stuffed animals get fried in a bonfire,"
reports one ex-member, whose former church taught that such
attachments could become "idols" and therefore represented
potential sin.
Life-style rigidity in abusive churches often mani-
fests itself in a curiously reactive mode with regard to
sexuality. Proscriptive measures reveal a sometimes bizarre
preoccupation with sex that mental-health professionals would no
doubt conclude gives evidence of repression. For example, an
ex-member of Faith Tabernacle, a now defunct California church
pastured by Eleanor Daries, was told she had to give up playing
the cello because of the "sexual positioning" required to play
the intrument. Members of the University Bible Fellowship (UBF)
were urged to repent of their sinful desires and cut off their
relationships with boyfriends and girlfriends. Those who dated
were called "wolfy men" or "foxy women" and were considered to be
full of "flesh desires." Another authoritarian group provides
written guidelines for male/female behavior in church: "Limit
physical contact in church to hand-holding. Snuggling, cuddling,
laying the head on his shoulder, if longer than a second or so,
is not appropriate. Excessive massaging of one another is not
appropriate."
The women of Community Chapel, in printed instructions dated
September 1975 and titled, "Perspectives on Dress Conduct," were
given detailed guidelines about underwear, fingernails, and
make-up. Under the heading, "Breasts," we read: "No exposure of
cleavage showing. Examine what is exposed when bending over;
nothing should be seen. Consider also exposure when sitting and
swinging around. Small-chested gals need to be extra careful."
Under the entry on fingernails: "Color should be subtle and
natural, not deep, bright, or unusual colors." Women of Community
Chapel were instructed to "let the Pastor take the initiative to
hug, but feel free to hug him if there is a great, proper need."
In view of what transpired in that particular church a few
years later, these kinds of "guidelines" appear now to be rather
tame. In that same church, Community Chapel, the pastor at one
point included these specific regulations in the Sunday bulletin:
"Remember our rule: All women who show up at the church offices
should be dressed femininely, and if they are wearing slacks,
those slacks should be definitely feminine, complemented by
feminine tops and feminine shoes. . . . Please respect the right
of your shepherd to guide you into more appropriate,
conservative, and feminine dress." Men of the church were not
overlooked. The church bookstore sold a pamphlet entitled, "Jesus
Had Short Hair!" The bulletin advised males to "avoid low cut and
unbuttoned shirts, jeans, beards, unkempt hair, long fancy
sideburns, and frizzy hair." Neither sex could wear amulets or
crosses.
While mainstream evangelical churches have always encouraged
a life of holiness before the Lord and urged moderation in dress
and other aspects of life-style, authoritarian churches
demonstrate an excessive focus, on such concerns. The restricted
life-style and limits on personal freedom that follow are just
other examples of the need to control that all abusive churches
exemplify. Conformity to prescribed standards is achieved, more
so than in mainline churches, through peer pressure and pastoral
directives.
As we have already seen, some of these pastoral directives
and announcements border on the ridiculous, and to the outsider
they are both puzzling and amusing. For example, Hobart Freeman,
former pastor of Faith Assembly (not affiliated with the
Assemblies of God), told his flock that wearing striped running
shoes was considered to be homosexual fashion. He also announced
that members should not use the terminology "pregnant woman."
According to Freeman, only cows become pregnant; women are "with
child." The Sunday bulletin of one California church contained
the following announcement: "Mrs. Blank [I have changed her real
name] refuses to stop the soul-damning sin of gluttony. She uses
every excuse to stay fat. She also has a bitter, complaining
attitude toward this church. The Board of Elders recommends that
she be transferred to [another church] until she is willing to
stop her sin of gluttony. The members of this church will vote on
dropping and barring Mrs. Blank next Sunday.... If Mrs. Blank
wishes to repent, she needs to see [the leadership] and express a
willingness to stop complaining and lose weight."
In my research of abusive churches, I never cease to be
amazed at the degree to which private and personal concerns are
made public and brought to the attention of the congregation. In
a relatively small organization known as "Rejoyce [sic] in Jesus
Ministries," the members were asked to pray for two named
individuals "and their finances." Then the bulletin proceeded to
announce: "This past week, checks that they wrote out to RJM
bounced. Note: If you have written a check to RJM that has
bounced, please get in touch with the RJM Office regarding
repaying the original amount plus charges resulting from your
bounced check."
Seattle's Community Chapel distributed a bulletin insert
entitled, "Guidelines for Dancing Before the Lord." It contained
detailed instructions for adults and children pertaining to the
expected conduct of members while participating in dancing during
the worship services. "Do not obstruct aisles or block vision;
return immediately to your seat after dancing. Keep 'locked into'
Jesus during worship, but be watchful for collisions. If it is
crowded, confine your movements to a smaller area. . . . Watch
where you swing your arms."
The guidelines also provide for those who are not physically
fit. "If you are new to the athletic moves of dancing in the
Spirit, be careful of overdoing it at first. Stretch tight
muscles before and after use. Some people find that elastic ankle
and knee braces help if these areas are weak or sore." The policy
statement also notes that, "Because of the limited space and the
number of those wanting to dance during the service, the pastor
wants the most gifted to be in the front area during service, and
not more at once than the area can accommodate without the
dancers having to fear collisions." And finally, "Ushers and
elders should be notified when people violate our rules. We do
not want to allow misconduct to continue or proliferate."
A final example of legalism within authoritarian churches
can be seen in the list of regulations that one particular
network of churches imposes on those who attend "training"
sessions. I have selected just a few from a lengthy list to give
you a sense of the control exercised by this group:
* No unexcused absences from any of the meetings will be
tolerated.
* All the trainees must be seated in the meetings in strict
accordance with their assigned seat number.
* All the trainees must be in their seats at least five minutes
before the start of each meeting.
* No eating, drinking, or gum chewing will be tolerated after the
start of the meeting.
* No trainee is allowed to leave his seat for any reason
(including rest room) during the course of a meeting, except for
emergency.
* All the trainees are charged to participate in no gossip or
negative talk against any individual or any church.
* All the trainees must rest each afternoon and not go out to
visit, shop, etc.
Although most authoritarian churches adhere to a strict
regimen of do's and don'ts, there are a few exceptions. I have
talked to a number of former members of the Christian Growth
Ministries shepherding movement who have indicated that quite a
bit of flexibility was applied to the area of drinking behavior.
In fact, in some shepherding circles, drinking was almost
promoted and drunkenness trivialized. One exmember of a church
affiliated with Charles Simpson, who at the time was still with
Christian Growth Ministries, describes it this way: "In the early
1980s, a bunch of us began to go out drinking for some innocent
fun. Even drunkenness was not looked upon as a bad thing. One of
our sayings was, 'It's not what you do, it's who you do it
with.'"
If life-style rigidity is a characteristic of most abusive
churches, the role of subjective experience is equally crucial in
understanding how such groups drift toward religious marginality.
In the second chapter we discussed the pervasive influence of
spiritual experience in the life of Community Chapel. Earlier in
this chapter we noted how the lives of Tom and Pam Murray were
impacted not only by outrageous discipline, but also by
"revelation teaching," and the primacy of experience. Another
group that recently dissolved as an international federation of
churches, but which illustrates the importance of subjective
experience, is Maranatha Christian Ministries. Here is the
account of one young woman's spiritual quest in that
organization.
Karen Moore left Maranatha Christian Ministries (MCM) after
three years of dedicated service to what she believed was God's
work. Having moved up in the ranks of leadership, she was
responsible for the lives of fourteen other young women as their
"discppler," or "shepherdess." She could no longer reconcile the
dichotomy between the God she once knew and the one she served
with fear in MCM.
Karen joined MCM after two years of experiencing depression
and a sense of purposelessness that came on the heels of several
life changes. She had graduated from nursing school, ended a
seven-year relationship, and began to lose her network of friends
after the disbanding of her campus fellowship. She was at an
extremely vulnerable stage in her life, in need of some stability
that her new-found Maranatha friends seemed to provide. Through
MCM she found loving people, a Christian value system, goals and
direction, leadership, and tremendous support. In exchange, she
gave up her will, her ability to think critically, and her
relationships with family and former friends.
Karen came to MCM with numerous doubts and reservations
concerning the teachings in the group, although she was impressed
by its radical nature. She believed in being totally committed to
God, but was concerned about what she perceived as an excessive
emphasis on holiness, faith, victory, "overcoming," and a lack of
balance with regard to mercy, grace, and love. She initially
believed that she could provide this balance for the group.
Her early skepticism was labeled as "mind idolatry" accompanied,
the leadership told her, by spirits of critical thinking,
independence, rebellion, and mistrust. These so-called "spirits"
were exorcised from her at the beginning of her time with MCM,
and any further objections to MCM doctrine or practice were
merely recurring manifestations of those very same spirits. Thus,
Karen's abilities to think critically and evaluate were
effectively stifled.
As she was further indoctrinated into God's "higher plan,"
she learned that her mind had been totally perverted by the Fall
and that it was completely unreliable. Depression, she was told,
was a sign of spiritual oppression. Anger was sin, unless it was
directed at outsiders, in which case it was probably righteous.
Above all, she came to understand that submission to MCM
leadership was essential.
Each member of MCM was under the direction of a "discipler"
or "shepherd" who, in turn, was under the authority of other
leaders in a pyramidal, hierarchical structure. Robert Weiner,
MCM's founder, was at its head. Every aspect of life was to be
under total submission to the leadership, whether having to do
with family visits, "acceptable" literature, marriage, and even
female hygiene. Disobedience to the leaders was seen as
rebellion, which was equated with the sin of witchcraft.
As time went on, Karen discovered that whereas she once
loved God with open affection and awe, now she was scared and
intimidated by him. As she moved up in leadership, she found
herself explaining the teachings of MCM to new members so that
they sounded less harsh, reassuring them that abiding by the
teachings was really pleasant and fulfilling. At the same time,
she realized that while she once was able to discern God's will
personally, she now was told that her leaders knew God's will for
her better than she knew it herself. Unfortunately, their answers
supposedly representing God's will were often contrary to those
she knew deep down to be biblical. Examples of such "answers"
were that "reading books by non-Christians would reap
corruption"; that she had "to get permission to visit my
grandmother, or to travel at all. If I wanted to visit relatives
out of town, I was to submit that to my shepherdess who would
take it to the pastor for confirmation. If he agreed it was from
God for me to visit, I was then permitted to do so"; that "I was
no longer to be alone on my days off or anytime" [because, the
devil was trying to attack her]; and, that "I could more easily
be deceived because I was a woman." Friendships outside of MCM
were terminated, except within the framework of evangelism. One
was permitted to develop friendships only for the purpose of
witnessing. To "draw life from" loving relationships outside the
group was felt to contradict the command to keep oneself
unstained by the world. Other Christians could conceivably
fellowship with members of MCM, but it was believed that they had
such a lower revelation of God that it was repeatedly asked, "How
can two walk together who do not share the same vision?"
In time, Karen felt that love became wholly conditioned upon
her behavior. She was no longer heard unless she was presenting
the party line, all else being considered evil and severely
confronted as rebellion against the leadership and ultimately
against God. The MCM vision became god, and everything was to be
sacrificed to it. "The work" was imponant, but individuals were
not. Members were expected to dress like overcomers, smile like
overcomers, serve like overcomers, and behave like overcomers.
Outsiders, particularly Christians who did not know them well,
marveled at members' faith, victory, generosity, and obedience.
Maranatha members had a high view of their own organization,
considering themselves "God's Green Berets."
Upon making her decision to leave, Karen was overcome with
thoughts of guilt and doubt as she agonized over conflicting
feelings. To leave was to break covenant with MCM - an
unforgiveable sin. To leave was to jeopardize the movement of God
in MCM, and to endanger her salvation as well as the salvation of
her outside friends and family. An overreaction to problems
within the group could be costly. Was she lost in carnal,
soulish, selfish pride? And, as a woman, was she as easily
deceived as her MCM brothers had said? Her fourteen disciples
might backslide. She also knew that her character would be
defamed by the leadership if she left. They would announce that
she was a false teacher, a false prophetess, one who never knew
the Lord, just like others who had left before her. Her publicly
confessed "sins" would be brought up as evidence against her.
Perhaps Satan had come against her with great force to keep her
from her ministry. Maybe a strong spirit of deception had come to
blind her to God's mighty call upon her life, to distract her
from her obviously close relationship with him.
As these doubts filled her mind, her pastors fed her
additional guilt and psychological intimidation. Regardless of
the doubting, after many days of fasting and prayer Karen could
not honestly say that God had shown her any sip of which to
repent, contrary to the counsel of her pastors. She had not read
any non-Christian books, nor was there anything which she was not
willing to give up for God that had become an idol. Yet she had
been told that she had let Satan have an open door to her heart,
and that she must repent and renounce him so that she could get
on with God's will and continue as a full-time worker in the
ministry.
Karen's decision to leave, as told to her small group of
disciples, was quickly communicated to her pastor, Mark. Initial
attempts to sway her with kindness and encouragement soon gave
way to accusations of lack of trust for the leaders God had given
her. There were dark predictions of her future, veiled threats,
and eventual disfellowshipping. There was no place for her in MCM
unless she repented - and submitted. Eternal damnation hinged on
her decision.
Karen fully expected her plane to crash as she flew home to
her parents. The wrath of God, according to her pastors in MCM,
was upon her. Gone were the smiles, the assurances, the optimism
for an alternate life-style that was far superior to ordinary
life. Gone were the prophesies about being part of God's end-time
army, and the supposed opportunities to reign with Jesus in the
Holy of Holies reserved for His called-out ones. The young people
in MCM were to be "the future great Christian leaders, full of
power and grace and truth, that would lead the other
unenlightened Christians through the coming Tribulation." Karen
was told that all she now wanted was "to be married and to be a
rich, mediocre suburbanite." Feeling that she could not continue
in the group and maintain her relationship with God, Karen was
forced to choose between serving him and "breaking covenant" with
"his people." On January 18, 1981, Karen Moore walked away from
"the Vision" of Maranatha Christian Ministries.
To conclude this chapter, I share the articulate and
insightful commentary of a young man who was also a Maranatha
member. In so doing, I also share his "prayerful hope" that all
those involved in authoritarian movements will "earnestly seek to
prove all things, holding fast to that which is good."
The most significant problems with Maranatha stem directly
from its interwoven concepts of discipleship and submission
to authority, which, I feel, have resulted in serious,
destructive abuse.
In Maranatha the centrality of authority is a natural
consequence of a military self-perception. Greater emphasis
is placed upon building the "army of God" than nurturing and
developing the "family of God." The leadership sees itself
as setting up a new order on earth in the prospect of
bringing in the kingdom of God, thereby establishing an
external purified order in this age.
Preparation of leaders is obtained as quickiy as is
physically possible under the guise of ministry or spiritual
expertise culminating in a sink-or-swim survival of the
fittest environment. The often painful results in Maranatha
include a lack of leaders with a mature understanding of the
Bible. Because of this, unwarranted authority is attached to
the contemporary spoken word, the rhema, going so far as to
hold that it is equal to the written Word, the logos.
All too often the public revelation in the Bible is
subordinated by the private revelations of the leadership of
Maranatha, pointing not beyond themselves to Christ
crucified and risen, but to the leadership's own experience.
Unfortunately, this can lead to setting goals to possess the
life of God in exclusively ecstatic experience.
On the emotional or mental level, the Maranatha environment
encourages spiritually and experientially oriented persons
to allow phenomena to determine their faith instead of
interpreting experience with reason in light of Scripture.
The "swallow-follow" concept, the "mind idolatry" teaching,
and the overall dictatorial exercise of authority all
combine to form a totalitarian attitude that behavior is
determined solely by unfettered and thoughtless obedience
and submission to authority. When the mind and the values of
knowledge and understanding are rejected, downplayed, and
scorned as being "rebellious," the mind becomes subverted
and the will is subdued into passivity, producing a
dangerous phenomenon many refer to as "mind control." The
potential and, in fact, recurrent result is a mass
production of stymied personalities. Consideration and
appraisal of the individual by authority is effected through
the capricious, demanding, and judgmental eyes of
condemnation rather than the eyes of compassion,
understanding, and mercy. Motivation becomes fear-oriented,
not loveoriented.
Faith is transformed from an adventure into a duty as
concern for righteousness through holiness and blind
adherence to proscribed behavioral codes begin to envelop
the individual's identity. Holy living becomes a pretext for
a new legalism; keeping "the law" tends to become an end in
itself rather than a means of service to God.
.........
Note:
You ex WCGers can identify with many things
brought out in this chapter, then you are truly blinded to the
ways of Satan the Devil, or you just will not admit and REPENT of
being under the influence of an organization that became a cult.
It is very hard for some people to admit they were under
deception; that they were part and parcel of corruption, false
attitudes, some false teachings, power control, of abuse in mnay
ways, and that they had for a length of time given their minds
over to a man [and his clones] and had come to practice loyality
to and organization above the admonition of Paul, when he said,
"Prove all things and hold fast to that which it good" (1 Thes.5:21).
It is sad for me to have to repeat----
Many from the WCG will not admit they need to REPENT
of following a man, of looking to men, of placing men before the
Holy Scriptures of God, and giving their minds over to a man and men.
If YOU are still in this boat of self deception, I pray all that
is written in this book you are reading, will strike a cord in
your heart and mind. And if the shoe fits - wear it. Then admit
your past mistakes; come to God in repentance; ask for His
forgiveness. He will forgive. He will grant you a new start. He
will lead you into the truth that will make you free.
Keith Hunt
To be continued
Churches that Abuse #9
Dissent and Discipline
RONALD M. ENROTH
Written 1992
DISSENT AND DISCIPLINE
Abusive Churches Discourage Questions
"I'll never forget, as long as I live, that feeling the first
morning when I woke up there at the [River of Life] ranch and
stared at that ceiling. I said, 'Oh God! I've really done this.'
And, after a couple of days, I remember thinking to myself, 'Boy,
I've really blown it.' But it was kind of like, 'Well, here we
go, I'm just gonna trust God.'"
This was only the beginning of Paul and MaryAnn Hasting's
negative experiences with Ed Mitchell's River of Life Ministries.
Months of preparation had gone into their being influenced to
"lay down everything they had to walk with Jesus." They were
wooed and courted by Mitchell and his indoctrinated followers
with publicrelations techniques that would rival those of Madison
Avenue. Eventually, their succumbing cost them everything,
including their home, retirement monies, jobs, lost wages, and
very nearly their family. They also exited River of Life almost
eight thousand dollars in debt and with River of Life creditors
after them for organizational purchases.
Paul, an educator of thirteen years experience with a
master's degree in educational psychology and a professional
credential in pupil-personnel counseling, had limited Christian
experience before his involvement with River of Life. He and his
wife MaryAnn had been brought up Catholic, but they were not
devout adherents. Their involvement began when River of Life was
called The Centurion Door, and was based in Thousand Oaks,
California. Attendance at that point was some three hundred
persons. MaryAnn was the head of a liturgical-dance troupe called
Hallelujah Dancers, and was having some personal difficulties
when she heard of The Centurion Door as being a place to go for
"counseling." As her involvement increased, the Hastings opened
their home to prayer meetings. It was at that point that Ed
Mitchell became involved in their lives and began inviting them
to River of Life's ten-acre Apple Valley Ranch.
Mitchell, "tall, good looking, and charismatic," was
developing an "end-times ministry" at the ranch, a place where
people could come when society fell apart. There, Paul, MaryAnn,
and their family found the people to be very loving and
accepting. "We played volleyball, had barbecues, and had
tremendous religious experiences. Over the period of the next
couple of months, we would go out there on weekends. It was
wonderful. It was something I had never experienced in my life
before."
Over the months, as the Hastings' longings for significance,
friendship, and "a return to Eden" were seemingly fulfilled,
there were also subtle messages given concerning their commitment
to Christ. Thcre was the constant pressure to join "the group
that had laid down everything they had to walk for Jesus Christ."
Eventually they concluded, "What could be greater than to give
one's life to Jesus Christ and the spread of the Gospel." Paul
turned in his letter of resignation to the school district; they
began the process of selling their home. Then the real pressures
started.
Paul's resignation was extremely difficult for him.
He had been told by Ed Mitchell that when he quit he would
experience great emotional turmoil, but that he should realize
this was Satan's ploy to keep him from accepting "God's call."
Having internalized the group's initial indoctrination, Paul
spiritualized his anxieties as the devil's attacks and then
interpreted chance readings of scriptural passages as messages
from God to go to the ranch. He was anointed as "pastor of the
ranch" by Mitchell, who then began speaking of himself as "the
major end-time Apostle."
(Oh, oh oh, sounding familiar ex WCGers? It should be - others also
called themselves the "end-time Apostle." - Keith Hunt)
Paul was also going to be the principal of the ranch's new
school, and also the counselor to the many seekers who came to
the facility. However, as Paul states, "Everything inside of me
was just screaming out against it. Everything. I woke up that
night ... and I lay there for three hours rebuking Satan. I felt
sick to my stomach. And then I had what I felt were some visions
that were pointing me to the ranch. But everything inside of me
resisted." Ed Mitchell was smart enough to notice that Paul was
wavering after making the initial commitment, so Mitchell sent
one of his people to stay with the Hastings for the two weeks
before they left for the ranch. Paul continued to have grave
doubts, but he was convinced that it was Satan trying to block
him. "Now, as I look back, I think it was the Holy Spirit trying
to say 'Hey, this is not of me at all.'"
Paul continued to resist the indoctrination process upon
their arrival at the ranch. "It almost became a daily ritual
where I'd get called 'on the carpet' one way or the other in what
they call 'truth sessions.'" These sessions, which at first began
with just a few persons, devolved into hostile verbal beatings
before the entire group. Paul would be grilled, yelled and
screamed at until he finally began yelling and screaming at
himself and rebuking Satan.
Other members were also subjected to this "hot seat." Paul
says, "To stay sane, you turn on other people. If you don't jump
right in during the 'truth sessions,' and yell and scream as hard
as the next guyeven though you don't know what in the world is
going on - then you haven't 'supported' the group properly."
Three weeks after the Hastings committed themselves to the
River of Life Ministries, Paul read newspaper accounts of a
former member's death and the defection of ninety percent of
Mitchell's following. The dead individual was a diabetic who had
gone off his insulin after having been prayed over by River of
Life members. He "stood by his healing," as did others in the
group, regardless of his deteriorating condition, and
consequently died. Most members left immediately after the
tragedy; the few remaining loyalists were those who recruited the
Hastings. As Mitchell began to see "persecutors" everywhere,
Paul's indoctrination became even more difficult.
After the setback, because of the diabetic's death and the
loss of the majority of his following, Mitchell began to believe
that a conspiracy against him had begun, consisting of all
evangelical churches that had hundreds of airplanes and
four-wheel drive vehicles at their disposal. He began sending
groups of his followers to hide in the California desert. Paul
notes: "The whole persecution thing, as I see it, is just a
self-fulfilling prophecy. You do a bunch of off-the-wall,
bizarre, crazy things, and sure, people are going to come after
you and ask, 'Hey, what's going on here?' That's not persecution
- not as Jesus experienced it."
In their desire to serve the Lord, the Hastings continued in
River of Life and came increasingly under Mitchell's sway,
primarily due to the constant barrage of guilt and spiritual
hype. As MaryAnn indicates, "They have a public relations side
... so warm and loving. And then there's the inner workings of
the group, which included public humiliation and sometimes
screaming sessions that would go on for two or three hours."
As the group deteriorated, these inner workings came to
include physical abuse. "There was punching, hitting, children
were whipped with belts, women were whipped with belts." This
behavior was defined as "love" for the victim, because, "if you
really love someone, then you're going to pay the price for that
person to be set free. You're not going to compromise; you're
going to confront them with their sin or their area of weakness
and get them straightened out." Of course, the majority of this
"love" came from Mitchell, who also constantly reminded the
members how much he "suffered" by having to chastise the people
and treat them the way he did. "He was always telling us how
difficult it was for him to take all the steps that he took. And
if you ever challenged him on anything, you wouldn't be
challenging a human being, you'd be challenging the Holy Spirit
because of his 'apostolic authority.'"
MaryAnn's experiences were even more traumatic than Paul's.
Having been accused of being in league with the "evil spirit of
Jezebel that controls every woman unless she is submitted to the,
spirit of God in her husband," MaryAnn was isolated from Paul and
the children. She was dressed in "sackcloth and ashes" by
Mitchell, called a seductress and a temptress, not allowed to
bathe, forced to do heavy physical activity in the desert sun,
and forced to confess that she had lustful desires for all the
men and boys, including her own son. She was also accused of
having a "spirit of motherhood." This meant that she "idolized"
her children and focused too much attention on them. "I was
absolutely terrified to even talk to my children, show any kind
of concern for them," even when her son fell and split his head
open.
Eventually, because of the level of abuse, Paul and
MaryAnn's children were taken from them, first by the Arizona
Department of Public Social Services (at times the group moved
around the Southwest quite a bit), and then, upon their return to
California, by California authorities. The children were in
foster homes for six months before MaryAnn left the River of Life
Ministry. Paul left the following month with their oldest
daughter, a teenager who did not leave willingly. "She was one of
the ones Mitchell would surround himself with - certain people he
knew could be manipulated. He just poured everything into these
teenagers. They became even more valuable to him than the adults.
And, it was an unwritten rule that one of their jobs was to
report on their parents at all times."
Before their escape, Paul had been made president of the
River of Life Corporation by Ed Mitchell. Mitchell told him,
"Well, I've been freed of this; I want you to have this
experience, Paul." Consequently, Paul would meet with the press
to defend the group, talk with the attorneys, confront the
sheriffs department - and shoulder all final fiscal
responsibility for the group. He is still being followed by bills
that haven't been paid. As Paul says, "It was just a total
set-up. He used me because of my talents."
Paul, MaryAnn, and the children have put their lives back
together in spite of the tremendous financial problems that Ed
Mitchell and his River of Life Ministries left them. Paul says,
"The Lord has really opened up a lot of doors for us. He found a
school for me last year, kind of by accident, and now, in my
second year, I can say without doubt that it is the nicest place
I've ever been."
With his strong academic background in psychology and years
of experience, Paul gives this warning: "I've been involved with
kids all of my life, dealing with different kinds of unusual
behavior, and all that this experience says to me is that nobody
is really immune; nobody is really safe from being sucked into
something like this."
(Whoever you are reading this, from whatever background, let me
tell you, the Worldwide Church of God----
had MANY leading men, full time ministers, who were VERY WELL
EDUCATED - some with letters behind their name - some with a PhD.
Many were at one time very high up in the company they worked
for; they were very bright minded, very successful in various
parts of society before becoming baptized members and full time
ministers in the WCG. It is not just the uneducated and below
average wage earner that enter these abusive churches, not at all
as you have just read - Keith Hunt)
Virtually all authoritarian groups that I have studied
impose discipline, in one form or another, on members. A common
theme that I encountered during interviews with ex-members of
these groups was that the discipline was often carried out in
public - and involved ridicule and humiliation.
Discipline resulting from the infraction of rules or
"failure to keep with the program," as well as "spiritual
disciplines" imposed for one's spiritual betterment, have been
reported by former members of the Community of Jesus, a
controversial charismatic Christian group located in the Rock
Harbor section of Orleans, Massachusetts, on Cape Cod. The
Community of Jesus (COJ) exemplifies commitment to self-sacrifice
and a semimonastic life-style in the context of what The
Christian Century referred to as "tasteful affluence." The COJ
accommodates resident members, associate members, and nonresident
members, as well as the many middle and upper-middle-class
Christians who journey to the Cape each year to participate in
retreats sponsored by the organization. Some of the evangelical
notables who are associated with the Community include Peter
Marshall, Jr., William Kanaga, formerly Chairman of the Advisory
Board of the New York firm Arthur Young, and at least one member
of the Rockefeller family.
Two laypersons, Cay Andersen and Judy Sorensen, founded the
Community around 1970 (Mrs. Andersen died several years ago).
They soon became affectionately known as "Mother Cay" and "Mother
Judy," and were at the center of the controversy that has swirled
about the organization in recent years. In addition to what one
churchman called its "lack of ecclesiology," the COJ has been
accused of promoting a "theology of control" that focuses on
attitudinal sins like jealousy, rebellion, willfulness,
haughtiness, and idolatry. Critics and former members have argued
that the Community has shifted toward an unbalanced, unbiblical,
and highly structured program resulting in some people being
abused emotionally and spiritually. There have also been reports
of some forms of physical abuse. Media accounts, including an
extensive article in Boston magazine, have aroused suspicions.
These have been denounced by the COJ leadership.
According to a lengthy article appearing in the April 19,
1985 edition of the Cape Codder, former members stated that one
of the cardinal sins at the COJ is to talk against Community
disciplines in public. A group of exmembers have shared their
concerns with reporters. "All of them had tales of being yelled
and screamed at. All of them said they had been disciplined, in
one way or another."
I have extensively interviewed a number of former members of
the Community and have no reason to believe that they were being
untruthful. Independent verification from various other sources
has confirmed to me the questionable behaviors at the COJ, and
has led me to include here a brief discussion of the problem. I
do this despite repeated assertions to me by the leadership that
the reports are invalid, and that they represent the complaints
of only a handful of "disgruntled" ex-members. Several children
of the founders have also departed the Cape and their leaving is
dismissed by the leadership as a result of "family squabbles." It
would seem that since reports of abuse continue to surface, to
completely discount the experiences of these former adherents is
to question the motives of an increasingly large group of people
who have been, from their perspective, deeply hurt as a result of
their association with the COJ. Because of its proximity to
elements of the mainstream evangelical subculture, the Community
of Jesus represents an unusual example of what many Christians,
including many church leaders, see as a troublesome and
unsettling phenomenon.
Since 1982, several presbyteries have initiated studies and
critical assessments of the COJ, including the Presbytery of
Boston and the Presbytery of Genesee Valley (NY). These studies
were undertaken because of the heavy involvement of members and
pastors of certain Presbyterian churches in various COJ programs
and retreats. In a report dated June 1987, the Synod of the
Northeast concluded, among other things, that "There is some
evidence that in the use of authority, some of the disciplines
and practices of the Community of Jesus have been appropriated by
individuals in less than helpful ways. The Agency [Synod Vocation
Agency] is particularly conscious of the authoritarian nature of
the Community of Jesus."
The comments of Don, an ex-member, demonstrate why there is
an uneasiness among many secular and Christian observers
regarding the Community. "While the leaders continue to say that
they don't force anybody to do anything, there is such moral
persuasion and such peer pressure that there's no question that
you would do whatever you were expected to do. The alternative
would be anything ranging from a beating to being sent away from
the Community, which meant, separation from Jesus. None of us
wanted that, so therefore we would do what we were expected to do
- not because they stood over us with a whip, but because of the
psychological control they used in giving us the fear that
we would miss our calling or that we would be lost to Jesus if we
ever left."
Like members of other abusive groups, Don was led to believe
that he was joining an elite team. "We were often told that there
was no place in the world like the Community, that it was
special."
Don believes that many people who join the Community have
problems beforehand, or are spiritually immature, and therefore
vulnerable to manipulation. "People who were there all had
reasons for joining. Perhaps life was not going well for them, or
they were searching for something they couldn't find. By clever
manipulation, the leadership convinced them that they could find
it at the Community. I was a new Christian, and they convinced me
that I would best find Jesus at the Community. To leave the
Community was to get out of God's will."
Don experienced firsthand the discipline that the Community
administers. "I was told I talked too much. I was directed not to
speak more than three sentences at any one time. And I had to
wait until someone else had said something before I could say
three more sentences. There were also dietary disciplines. One
time we were all expected to go on a grape diet. For forty days
we had grapes, grape juice, and raisins - that's all. A few were
excused for medical reasons. But the great majority of us were
expected to 'go on the grapes.'"
Don's wife was placed on what is known as the "silence
discipline." She reports, "I was placed 'on silence' for six
months, except for certain times when there was company in the
house, or they decided I could be let off it, which wasn't very
often. Once I had been sent to pull carrots and when I brought
them back, I had, unfortunately for me, pulled up some small ones
with the larger ones. I was verbally chastised for this and was
told that I was not 'in the Spirit' and what did I have to say
about it. They said I could speak and I fell into their trap; I
began to defend myself and then I got another lambasting."
(You talk about crazy control geeks and demon inspired
authoritarians - it is in all cults - Keith Hunt)
Don pointed out that no negative criticism of the Community
was tolerated, a distinguishing feature of most totalitarian
groups. "No one dared to say anything negative of any kind. I was
actually afraid of being beaten up physically by members of the
Community if I got out of line. No, you learned not to raise
questions. We learned to keep our mouths shut. If someone
questioned what the Community did, they were ridiculed and
humiliated. That effectively shut up everybody else."
Members of the Two-by-Two's also experience the subtle
effects of not making waves. "They struggle in vain to sort out
what they believe, only to give up in frustration and confusion
if they hope to survive. They are taught: 'When in doubt, do
nothing,' 'do not question,' 'doubt is sin,' 'if you have a
problem, go to more meetings,' and 'if you are unhappy, you need
to count your blessings, sacrifice, suffer or submit more.' The
resulting guilt, confusion, indecision, depression and low
self-confidence become lifelong burdens one must bear in order to
have hope of salvation."
A former elder at Seattle's Community Chapel also discovered
that you could not question the pastor. "The only way you can
minister there is to stroke Don Barnett's ego. But once you cross
him, that's it for you. There's no way that you can tell him that
he's wrong. I flat out told him that what the church was involved
in was sin, that it was an affront to a holy God. That was my
demise as an elder."
In 1984 Pastor Barnett sent a memo about "Undermining the
Pastor" to his elders and their wives. It read, in part, "I am
alarmed to see a new trend which I believe the devil is in. A
number of you to whom this letter is being sent have been
privately sharing with others your personal opinions of how the
pastor has given you wrong advice, the mistakes that we have made
concerning revelations, and so forth.... To do this is to
undermine the church; it is contrary to the church and the Word
of God, and it is the devil's business. Those who are appointed
to be representing the church have no business undermining the
very church and pastor they represent, the one who has hired them
to do their job...."
Members of all abusive churches soon learn that the pastor
or leader is beyond confrontation. As one former member of an
abusive congregation put it, "Since no one in the church was
allowed to murmur and complain, or to disagree with the pastor,
there were many, like myself, who suffered in silence lest we
incur God's anger." All problems that befall the group are the
fault of members who violate the infallible rules. Accordingly,
members experience increased self-doubt, helplessness, and
insecurity. As Jerry MacDonald wrote in 1986:
Oftentimes the deviant is barraged with attempts to get him
to admit that he is guilty of crimes that he does not see.
If he says that he is doubting the leadership, he has sinned
because you are never to doubt the leadership. If he has
talked to someone else about his concerns, he has sinned
because you are never to plant "seeds of doubt" in others'
minds about the leadership and/or the sect. If, however, the
deviant does not agree with the definitions of his behavior
that is placed by the group, he is immediately considered
"unrepentant" and "unsubmissive."
The ultimate form of discipline in authoritarian churches is
excommunication or disfellowshipping, followed by strict
avoidance procedures, or shunning. As MacDonald correctly noted,
"Once the deviant is labeled as factious and is denounced, he is
cast aside as thoroughly as one would throw out a dirty diaper
... [the deviant] is no longer considered even to be an exmember,
but a wolf in sheep's clothing. He is referred to and looked to
as how not to be." When a rebellious individual leaves an
abusive group, he is labeled as a traitor, a reprobate, a sinner,
a backslider, or, in the case of Set Free Christian Fellowship,
an "outlaw." The congregation is told to disassociate from such
persons. "Friends of long standing will ignore him. They will
turn their faces away. They will go to great lengths to avoid
him. They will walk on the other side of the street, hang up the
phone, or not answer the door."
It is one thing to live through the devastation of an
abusive-church environment. It is another thing to jump from the
frying pan of one aberrant group into the fire of another abusive
experience at the hands of one's supposed rescuer. Ed and Carolyn
Roberts's story is another example of the very destructive and
evil nature of abusive-church leadership.
Carolyn, the granddaughter of missionaries to Tibet, grew up
in a very psychologically and physically abusive home. Her mother
and stepfather had left by the time she was a teenager, and she
moved in with her father and his wife at age sixteen. Feeling
trapped in poverty and powerlessness, she turned to God and
prayer. Carolyn believes that she was filled with the Holy Spirit
and received the gift of tongues during this period of time.
At age eighteen, she went to work at a state mental hospital in
California, but felt that God was calling her to Mexico. During a
phone conversation in the middle of the night, she found out that
her mother was going to Mexico to begin an orphanage. Believing
that her termination from her job was a sign from God to go, she
joined her mother who promptly suggested that she attend a
"school for discipleship" in Mexico. It was at this point, at
nineteen years of age and with very little Christian experience,
that Carolyn encountered Benjamin J. Hyde (not his real name) and
Witness to the World (not the actual name).
B. J. Hyde, fifty-six years old and blind, ran a small
school in Juarez, Mexico, where he was "training people to be
disciples and to become the bride of Christ." Carolyn admits that
she went there in part to get away from a young man who was
pursuing her. "I was so mixed up. I was having a lot of problems
with demonic spirits trying to make me think that I was going to
go crazy." Carolyn came from an abusive family situation, and
knew very little love, but the school provided an environment of
total love and acceptance. "It just sucked me in." Of course, she
did not see the real dynamics of the group until much later.
Indoctrination began immediately. Being a rather stubborn
individual, Carolyn would approach the woman in charge of the
disciples-in-training wherever she saw things occurring that she
did not agree with. She was told, "Well, that's okay. Don't worry
about it. God'll give you the understanding of what is going on."
In time, Carolyn became one of seven women who were supposed
to be "spiritual wives" to B. J., as he was called. She took a
vow of celibacy and wore a ring that had "Jesus" written in the
center. She was to learn submission, humility, and obedience
through her special relationship with B. J. In public circles,
the "wives" were supposed to be wedded to Jesus, but in the inner
circle, they belonged to Hyde.
Hyde believed that the Lord had given him a new vision and
shown him a new thing. He was to prepare people for the bride of
Christ. Because he had "the mind of Christ," his followers put on
different garments according to the extent of their humility.
"When he deemed us humble enough, we could put on another
garment." The members were always striving to be submissive,
always working to be humble, and always working to be acceptable
in their leader's eyes. They gave up all their worldly
possessions to "apostle" B. J. Hyde, whom they also
affectionately called "Papa."
The group moved to El Paso where they had an "outreach" to
servicemen, drug addicts, and runaways. It was at this
"Lighthouse" that Carolyn began crying out to God, saying, "Lord,
I cannot stand this anymore. I can't do this. I can't put up with
this. He is such a mean, cruel man." People, like herself, with
torn pasts and abusive histories, were the kinds attracted to
Witness to the World. It was among the hurting and the unlearned
that Hyde exercised his most abusive spiritual authority.
As a part of his "discipleship training," Hyde continually
insulted his followers, because "we needed to learn submission,
humility, and these were humbling things." Although he belittled,
insulted, and berated the members, he would "respond to us with
the right spirit if our spirit was right." Their spirits were
rarely "right."
Ed, who joined the group a number of years after Carolyn,
also became subjugated to Hyde. At first he thought that "Papa"
Hyde and his seven dedicated spiritual wives were going to
instruct and teach him in the ways of Jesus Christ. That's why he
joined the little band. Now, in retrospect, he comments: "It's
pretty amazing how a person can be drawn into such a group and be
totally overcome and confused." Hyde would come across in the
morning as sympathetic, constructive, benign, and benevolent. But
by afternoon, if something had gone wrong or had not been carried
out exactly the way he had intended, it would result in severe
anger and chastening. Even when Hyde was clearly wrong, members
got to the point of saying, "He's not at fault. I'm here because
God has put me here, and he is going to refine and perfect me so
that I will be ready when Jesus comes. So, I am going to humble
myself under this absurd type of inquisition in order to purify
my character weaknesses."
Hyde received the majority of his financial support from a
woman named Emily Fuller, who, reportedly through some miraculous
intervention and word, was shown that she was to give her
substantial savings to him. Her on-going support, plus initial
real estate investments, supplied Hyde and Witness to the World
with sufficient funds for daily expenses. But members were put on
food stamps. In addition, one of the "wives" worked as a
secretary, and, if extra monies were needed for down payments on
land or other purchases, members were sent to harvest tomatoes or
do other menial work.
Regardless of one's position in Hyde's hierarchy, relations
with family and close friends were cut off because "allegiance
had to be to our spiritual family." Even though Carolyn was
"third down on the list" of spiritual wives, under "Mother
Superior" and "Mother Efficiency," there was no exception. When
family members were questioned about their "worship" of Hyde, B.
J. would respond: "They won't understand that all that is
happening is God using me to perfect you and get you ready for
the bride of Christ." The "bride of Christ" was supposed to be a
very small number, only two out of every two million according to
Hyde. Members were told that they would miss all the tribulation
if they were willing to submit themselves as the bride of Christ
now. "So we were willing to do anything to get ready to be right
with the Lord." This included the loss of one's children.
Carolyn's sister joined the group two months after Carolyn,
bringing with her an illegitimate baby who was just a few months
old. "The baby was taken away from my sister and given to another
woman. This is what he would do; he would break up the family
like that." When Carolyn asked, "Why are you doing this?" he
answered, "This bondage is not healthy. She has to look to me for
everything, and this bondage between the mother and the son is
too great. If she can't submit herself to me totally and allow me
to do this with her child, then she's not totally submitted to
the Lord." Carolyn laments, "It was pitiful because the little
child was just thrown from one person to the next." Hyde also
separated another family with four children, parceling out each
child to one of his "spiritual wives."
Because of this and other incredible experiences, Carolyn
began to balk at Hyde's authority. She became known as the
"rebel" because she was constantly being chastised. Hyde would
use the writings of William Branham, John Robert Stevens, and
Lester Sumrall to support his positions, although he would not
allow writings or teachings from more balanced perspectives to
enter the group.
Carolyn, in her "rebellion," was subjected to physical abuse
as well. Hyde allegedly hit her and broke her eardrum. He also
put her on a total food and water fast because she came to the
aid of her nephew, whom Hyde was tormenting. The cruelty
increased upon their relocation to Alabama. He would beat, or
order the beating of, children who wet their beds. He would not
allow disciplined members to bathe for several weeks, and,
because of Carolyn and Ed's growing relationship, told Carolyn
"to wash with my tongue every place that I had stepped with Ed in
my 'adulterous path.'" She was forced to clean the floor of
Hyde's very dirty trailer bathroom with her tongue because she,
as a "spiritual wife," had committed "spiritual adultery" in her
relationship with Ed. "I didn't want to go to hell," she
explained.
(Some of this is hard to believe that cults would go so bonkers
and people would obey such orders, I shake my head - Keith Hunt)
Eventually Witness to the World began to deteriorate. In
order to stop Joyce, Carolyn's sister, in her growing
relationship with Dan, another man in the fellowship (dating was
considered demonic), Hyde sent her to a ministry run by Phillip
Benson. Carolyn had convinced him that Benson was sympathetic to
their "cause." There, she learned that Hyde had allegedly engaged
in unspeakable sexual conduct and had had relations with a number
of women in the group. Carolyn, Ed, Joyce, Dan, and the majority
of the rest of the fellowship left Witness to the World upon
hearing about these allegations and went to Benson's camp on his
invitation.
Benson performed the marriage ceremony for Carolyn and Ed,
as well as for Joyce and Dan. He also helped them set up
housekeeping. "We went to Bible study every day because he said
that we had to learn the Bible without this twisted slant."
However, Carolyn and Ed began to see that staying at Benson's
camp was in many ways similar to their experiences with B. J.
Hyde. Benson claimed to have the same "psychic abilities" as B.
J. claimed to have. He told his congregation that Ed was jealous
of his "water witching" skill. He attacked one of his members in
front of the congregation, bringing up his "past sins," because
he disagreed with Benson. Things did "not line up with the
Scripture." Ed and Carolyn began to see the exercise of authority
and the use of manipulation and abuse in this congregation as
well.
Carolyn and Ed escaped and were later disfellowshipped from
Benson's church. They were told that he told the others, "Don't
pray for Carolyn and Ed anymore." He didn't want his church
members "spending their spiritual energy" on them. Unfortunately,
most of the ex-members of Witness to the World are still in
Benson's camp, and they are now hostile toward the Roberts.
Carolyn and Ed have worked through their experiences with B. J.
Hyde and Phillip Benson, and they have grown as Christians.
Carolyn says, "I am not angry with God. I am not angry with
Christ. I don't understand it all. I don't know how all of this
fits, but I still trust him."
Ed adds, "I know that there is a lot of flexibility within
the body of Christ and even in the theology of the church. I have
tried to sharpen my senses to know what is on the 'outside' and
what is on the 'inside.' I am more intense toward his Word and am
a lot more protective of it, because when it is used properly, by
the guidance of the Holy Spirit, it brings life and joy. When it
is distorted, it's a monster."
Unwavering obedience to religious leadership and
unquestioning loyalty to the group would be less easily achieved
if analysis and feedback were available to members from the
outside. It is not without reason that leaders of abusive groups
react so strongly and so defensively to any media criticism of
their organizations. Don recalls what happened when adverse
publicity about the Community of Jesus began to appear in the
media. "We were told in a meeting by Mother Cay and Mother Judy
that we were not to read the article in Boston magazine and the
newspaper article because we didn't need to know about it. They
said it was all baloney and that we were above all that sort of
thing. We would stand for the persecution in the same way Jesus
did." But then Don adds: "Some of us who were rebels did read it,
and in our brainwashed state, swept under the rug a good bit of
what was said. But I think it did lay some of the groundwork for
later questioning."
In response to questions submitted by The Cape Codder to the
Community of Jesus, the leadership issued a statement that
essentially denied the allegations made by ex-members, claiming
that the Community "stands in the long and honored tradition of
monastic and semimonastic communities, which have existed since
the early days of Christianity." Regarding the role of founders
Cay and Judy, the statement said that members "certainly do not
regard them as infallible or surrogates for God." The statement
also made reference to Jesus' words, "By their fruits you shall
know them." "We submit that the fruit of this Community's life
can be seen in the incredible abundance of creativity - music,
drama, art, crafts of every description, gardening, and writing
(to name a few)..."
Regarding the latter reference about being known by one's
fruits, a former COJ member remarked to me, "The fruit of the
Spirit is well outlined in Galatians chapter five and has nothing
to do with gardens, music, drama, art, and crafts." Another
ex-member, reacting to the statement, commented: "The leadership
has done a beautiful job of putting together a large number of
words that say nothing. They have never in any way responded
directly to any of the facts which were stated as facts by
various individuals in the media coverage. They always come out
with a straw man that they set up and then batter down. 'Oh, we
don't know of any of these things which the former members
allege.' But they were not allegations, they were facts. We
witnessed the events, we knew they took place, and they happened
to US.
No one was more vociferous in his denunciation of the media
than Hobart Freeman, pastor of Faith Assembly. Here is a sampling
of his comments extracted from several of his sermons:
"I don't care what the media says because it isn't true. It's
110% false."
"The spirit of the anti-Christ is in the news media. N.E.W.S.
means Negative Expression of What's Seen."
"Your responsibility on behalf of this Body is no comment to the
news media, ever!"
"You're not obligated to answer one question to the media. They
will turn everything you say against you."
"When you feed information to the media, you're asking for
persecution you don't need."
"They don't know which end is up, spiritually, those religious
reporters. Even when they try to report what they see, they can't
see right. They're cross-eyed."
When authoritarian churches are subjected to what they
perceive to be negative press, they invariably interpret the
results as the "work of Satan." This is true even if the report
appears in a Christian periodical, or when Christian observers
are quoted.
I well remember the response of a columnist in the December,
1984 issue of Charisma magazine to a report authored by an ad hoc
committee of evangelicals who had investigated allegations about
Maranatha Christian Ministries. I was one of the authors of that
report. We were all cast into the role of unwitting agents of
Satan because we had critically evaluated Bob Weiner's
organization. "How can one group of Christians be attacking a
ministry which other respected leaders have called one of the
most significant movements in America?" the columnist asked. The
devil, he asserted, "attacks any vigorous expression of
Christianity - by persecution and slander...." He concluded his
article by stating, "Wherever Maranatha is going in the future, I
would like to go with them." I have often wondered how the
columnist, seminary professor Richard Lovelace, felt a few years
later when Maranatha was shut down as a ministry (to be discussed
in chapter 11). Ironically, some of the reasons cited for
Maranatha's demise were the very problems that we had identified
in our report, which was so roundly denounced by Maranatha and
others at the time of its release.
Criticism, whether its source is Christian or secular,
sincere or superficial, is always viewed by fringe churches as an
"attack" - and dismissed as more evidence of Satan trying to
discredit "a good Christian work." In no way would I defend all
that is passed off as investigative journalism aimed at Christian
organizations. But I am aware of numerous instances where
carefully researched, accurate reporting has been totally
rejected by the evangelical Christian community without ever
considering the possible merits of the reporting. It is almost
automatically attributed to Satan. That is unconscionable.
A case in point involved the publication of an extensive
journalistic investigation into Set Free Christian Fellowship,
located in Anaheim, California. Following publication of the
report in The Orange County Register on June 9, 1991, members of
the Christian community appeared on the Trinity Broadcasting
Network to denounce the article as an unjustified journalistic
attack, a contrivance of the Adversary. Pastor Phil Aguilar was
being interviewed and consoled by the hosts because of the
"vicious persecution" he had endured at the hands of the press.
The cohost made this incredible statement: "I've never read the
article about you Phil, but I know that it's untrue." When
Christians refuse to listen to "the other side," to say nothing
of reading the material under discussion before commenting on it,
they lose credibility with everyone. And let's not forget, there
are almost always reasons why abusive organizations do not want
exposure.
..........
Note:
All that you have been reading so far from this book by Enroth,
should be blowing you away. It is like a dream that such abusive
churches are out there, living, teaching, practicing, such horrid
theology. If you read through the Gospels there is NO WAY you can
try to claim that this kind of abusive conduct is of Christ or
any of His apostles of the first century.
These leaders of abusive organization are truly fruit-nut cases
from planet Pluto. You need to be able to recognize them, and run
as fast as you can from their influence. They are crazy men or
women - they are the blind leaders of the blind, and if you are
blind to them, then THEY and YOU will end up in the ditch along
with the demons who have captured their minds.
THIS WEBSITE IS DEDICATED TO FREE YOU FROM ABUSIVE CHURCHES AND
FROM ALL FALSE THEOLOGY. YOU CAN KNOW THE TRUTHS OF GOD AND YOU
CAN BE MADE FREE!!
Keith Hunt
To be continued
Churches that Abuse #10
Leaving Abusive Churches
by Ronald Enroth (1992)
EXIT AND ADJUSTMENT
Abusive Churches Make Leaving Painful
"I feel lost. I don't know where I'm going; I don't know
what I'm supposed to do; I don't know what I want; I don't know
who I am, and I want to know who I am ... it was just like one
morning I woke up and collapsed ... I don't understand why it
seemed to work before, and why it's not working now. There's a
lot of confusion ... And I want to tell you something about my
husband - he's gone. There's not anybody there in him - he's a
void. He just can't communicate ... A lot of my life's gone ... a
great portion of it is gone ..."
As Beth Farrell described her exit process from Hobart
Freeman's Faith Assembly, it almost seemed as if she was trying
to retain her grip on sanity. Having lived for several years
almost entirely enveloped in Freeman's anti-intellectual,
isolationist, name-it-and-claim-it subculture, she, her husband,
and their tenyear-old son were in agony as they attempted to
return to normal society and regain some sense of themselves. Her
son, having been born and raised in Faith Assembly, has never
known anything but spiritual legalism, and, consistent with the
group's beliefs, is deathly afraid of physicians.
Hobart Freeman began Faith Assembly (not affiliated with the
Assemblies of God) after both his dismissal from the faculty of
Grace Theological Seminary and his excommunication from the Grace
Brethren Church in Indiana in 1963. Holding a doctorate in Old
Testament Theology and Hebrew, Freeman was a successful minister
of a large congregation and the author of several books. However,
he held some variant positions on doctrine and practice that
became increasingly extreme over the years.
Of greatest significance was Freeman's position on medicine
and physicians. He referred to doctors as "medical deities" and
claimed that medicines had demonic names and, if taken, opened
one up to demonic influence. Members of Faith Assembly were, and
still are, strongly discouraged from seeking medical attention
for any maladies suffered. As a result, at least ninety persons
of Faith Assembly have died of preventable and treatable
illnesses. One report indicates that the church has averaged
about one preventable death per month since 1978. These deaths
include forty-two infants, ten children between the ages of one
and seventeen, seven mothers who died of complications related to
home births, and numerous adults who suffered illnesses that were
inadequately treated.
According to Freeman's "faith-formula theology," God is
obligated to heal every sickness if a believer's faith is genuine
- so that Faith Assembly members felt they could actually avoid
death. After a "positive confession" is made concerning the
healing, symptoms of illness or injury that remain are viewed as
deception from the Devil. If death occurs in spite of this
positive confession, it is seen as either discipline from God or
a lack of faith, or even, as in Job's case, a testing of faith.
Freeman himself died of severe cardiovascular disease and mild
bronchopneumonia in 1984, an embarrassment to his church. No
Faith Assembly folks attended his burial. Leadership has been
passed on to his sons-in-law. Although Faith Assembly is most
noted for its positive-confession approach to healing, where
believers must "claim" healing by acknowledging that it has taken
place before any indication of the fact, its members also follow
a number of other questionable doctrines and practices. They are
discouraged from reading newspapers, watching television, and
meeting with members of other churches. They buy no insurance,
wear neither glasses nor contact lenses, and remove the seat
belts from their cars, preferring to "live by faith alone." Wives
are expected to be submissive, obedient homemakers who practice
no birth control. All members are to put the "Body" first and
their familial relationships second (Beth's own husband and
another Faith Assembly elder caused her to be disfellow-
shippedshunned - for months). Higher education is strongly
discouraged, and, because most members give the bulk of their
income to the church, they live in relative poverty - in contrast
to the allegedly wealthy life-styles of Faith Assembly leaders.
......
Now this should be smashing some of you ex WCGers between the
eyes, although I will say even the WCG dod not go to
some of the extremes just noted above - Keith Hunt
......
Celebrations of Christmas and Easter, considered pagan
customs, are forbidden.
......
There is always SOME truth..... why even the Roman Catholic
church has SOME truth in its Mystery Babylon teachings -
Keith Hunt
......
Freeman's teachings are to be accepted without question, no
matter how twisted the scriptural basis. To question Freeman, a
self-acknowledged "prophet of God," is to risk the charge of
blasphemy.
......
Wow indeed that was also part of the WCG - Keith Hunt
......
Since Freeman believed that the Trinitarian formula of
Matthew 28:19 is improper, although he held to a traditional,
orthodox view of the Trinity, members are baptized in the name of
Jesus only. Members are told to pray only once concerning a
matter to avoid "vain repetition." Married individuals should not
have sexual foreplay, or sex for pleasure, so as to avoid
inciting "lust." Members are not to swear any oaths in a court of
law, and they are prohibited from consulting attorneys.
This is only a sampling of the types of strictures under
which Faith Assembly members live, but, looming above them all,
is the constant need to have a "positive confession." "We were
taught to practice thought control... to deliberately empty our
minds of everything negative concerning the person, problem, or
situation confronting us."
Out of this maelstrom stepped Beth and her family. Already
having experienced the pain of the break up of their house
fellowship in 1975, they are now devastated by this most recent
event in their pursuit of faith. Ten years of study and work had
enabled them to become leaders and teachers in Faith Assembly.
They learned Hebrew and Greek for Bible study and a whole
theological system interpreted according to Freeman's personal
beliefs. Having left Freeman's fold, they were in a quandary. No
other fellowship of Christians could possibly measure up. Other
believers do not show the same sincerity and seriousness about
their faith. Consequently, Beth and her family do not know where
to go. The mainline denominational structure is what drove them
to an informal home fellowship and then to Faith Assembly in the
first place. However, they realize there is no going back to a
group where dead newborn babies are secretly buried by their
parents for fear that the "Body" will find out and their lack of
faith become evident to all.
Beth had never been able to attain "the faith" as did her
Faith Assembly leader models, and therefore she was unable to
garner the benefits of a fulfilled life. Even though at the
beginning of their involvement, she and her family would buy
Freeman's tapes and books before they would buy food, her zeal
never measured up to the standard. At this point she feels as if
she is "leaving the truth... leaving the Word of God... leaving
everything, and there's no Christianity outside. I guess that's
why I feel lost. I don't know where I'm going; I don't know who I
am."
Beth now feels extremely, guilty for having minor surgery,
for getting contact lenses as soon as she left Faith Assembly,
and for being "sentimental" about her son. In Faith Assembly,
showing strong affection and protectiveness toward one's children
is tantamount to idolatry. She feels guilt because of the number
of physical ailments her son has had to suffer over the years -
without treatment - and for the fact that he has never visited a
dentist. She harbors guilt for feeling angry toward the Faith
Assembly leaders and toward herself, and most especially for
having left the only anointed work of God on earth.
Unfortunately, not only is guilt a terrible burden, but
there is a lack of trust toward anyone who is a religious
authority figure. Having been leaders and teachers in Faith
Assembly, Beth and her husband now have no one to turn to for
guidance and support. All of their significant relationships of
the past years are still within the group. Who counsels the
counselors? Beth wants to speak with someone who is "safe," but
she is unable to trust her own abilities of discernment and
evaluation since they were so long labeled as unspiritual.
Consequently, she says she "goes into these periods where all
I'll do is feel like I've died."
Beth's husband is also having great difficulties. Although
capable of functioning at work, all emotional moorings are gone
in other aspects of his life. He and Beth have very little
relationship, and he has lost what she terms "aspects of his
personality." No longer having a context in which to place
himself outside of his work, he is emotionally isolated and
unable to sort out his experiences with Faith Assembly. He is in
shock.
Beth's son is also having a hard time. The context of his
entire life has changed. Having grown up within Faith Assembly,
nothing is familiar or comfortable now. He had to have all of his
childhood shots in order to enter the sixth grade at a public
school and went into hysterics during his first physical
examination. He refuses to take vitamins or medications, and has
had great difficulty socializing at school. Because his parents
are still emotionally unstable, he has a tenuous and shaky home
life. Many childhood ailments, including a broken foot, have gone
untreated and are still in need of attention.
Beth, having stifled all of her maternal, affections over
the past ten years, is not even sure if she knows how to love her
son. Within Faith Assembly, she says, "your children are under
subjection to you and you teach them that. If they don't submit
[appropriately] ... if you don't take care of your children, then
the church will ... It breaks you all up!" Beth is confused about
how to raise her son within a new and entirely different world -
the world outside of Faith Assembly.
Beneath the insecurities of all the sociological and
psychological changes that Beth and her family have experienced
are the shaky underpinnings of a faith in God that is no longer
firmly anchored. Theology, doctrine, and works have been ends in
themselves over the past years. Although the Faith Assembly motto
is "God is faithful," the outworkings of that motto required an
unswerving and unquestioning obedience to Freeman's doctrines and
beliefs. Members, not God, were required to be faithful. So the
"overcomers" and "manifested sons of God" of whom Beth and her
family were supposed to be a part, have experienced neither
freedom in Christ nor liberation from the oppressive
works-not-grace orientation.
Restoration, after experiencing the effects of an
abusive-church situation, can be a long and painful process. This
can be true even if the exposure to that influence was only of
short duration. Individuals have even been devastated after only
a few short months. Much assistance from family, friends, and the
church is needed.
Beth and her family were for over ten years exposed to toxic
faith - the sort of abusive religion that made them sick. But now
they are beginning to receive the help that they need. They are
rebuilding relationships and addressing such practical issues as
insurance and health care. And they are in the process of finding
God again - in a new and different light.
......
And frankly it is so for many ex WCG people. They need to be able
to wash away many false attitudes drilled into them under the WCG
leadership. Such people need to re-read the Bible with a cleaned-out mind.
Hopefully this blog will assist - not throwing out the baby
with the bath-water, but throwing out the dirty bath-water and
having the baby lovely and clean - Keith Hunt
......
As one can see from Beth's case, leaving an abusive church
situation can be extremely difficult, calling into question every
aspect of life members may have experienced for the period of
time they were involved. I want to discuss the range of emotions
and issues that exmembers may face when they exit an
abusive-church situation. Then I will provide a general overview
of the changing experiences, feelings, and needs that emerge over
the course of weeks, months, and even years after departure.
Leaving a restricted and abusive community involves what
sociologists call the desocialization process whereby the
individual loses identification with the past group and moves
toward resocialization, or reintegration into the mainstream
culture. There are a number of emotions and needs that emerge
during this transition process. How one deals with these feelings
and affective experiences has a significant impact on the overall
healing that is required.
Many have described the aftermath of abusive church
involvement as comparable to that of rape victims, or the delayed
stress syndrome experienced by war veterans. It is recovery from
what might be called spiritual rape. You feel like something has
been lost and you will never be the same again.
Initially, victims may have a total lack of feeling
regarding their experience. They may not evidence pain, anger,
sadness, or even joy at being free. Such lack of feeling may be a
protective mechanism from the strong surge of emotion that is
sure to come. Victims need a safe and secure environment in which
to vent their emotions. Such venting was often labeled as "sin"
in their previous environments, and it may take some time until
they give themselves permission to allow these feelings to
surface.
Whether or not they show any emotion, victims are in great
need of empathetic, objective individuals who will not treat them
like spiritual pariahs or paranoid storytellers. The events they
have just been through are as unbelievable to them as they are to
their listeners. They have experienced great social and
psychological dislocation. An open attitude on the part of
friends, family, and counselors greatly assists the healing
process.
Feelings of fatigue are common among people when they first
disengage. It is not unusual for them to need to sleep for long
periods. As one former member recalls, "Emotionally drained, I
was often physically impaired ... As a result, it was sometimes
difficult for me to function ... I was frequently emotionally
unavailable to my husband and children, and much of the time I
simply wanted to be left alone."
Victims are extremely vulnerable at this point. They have
come out of an all-embracing religious environment where there
are no grays, only blacks and whites. While members of
authoritarian groups, they have had to put aside their old
relational and coping styles and learn the ones acceptable to the
group. Often these are antisocial and confrontational. And coming
out of a context where they developed strong dependency needs,
they are extremely suggestible and vulnerable to those whom they
feel they can trust, whether counselor, immediate family member,
or pastor. Betraying that trust can wreak havoc on them, only
validating the warnings of their previous leader concerning the
"outside world," and perhaps driving them back into another (or
even the same) regimented environment where they feel they can at
least control some of the variables. Lack of control can be
terrifying.
Having been in an environment that frequently includes
spiritual manipulation, emphasis on experience, and focus on
demons, victims of abusive churches may experience a lack of
reality upon leaving the group. They may believe that they can
easily pick up where they left off before entering the group,
regardless of the changes in the larger society and in their
friends and family. They soon discover that reentry does not
involve simply returning to one's previous life-style. In short,
they can't go home. The future may appear to be unrealistically
bright or ominous, depending on the condition in which the person
reentered the mainstream. As one ex-member of the Church of the
Great Shepherd states, "It is an extremely important factor
whether a person leaves an abusive-church situation knowing that
the group was wrong, or believing that he was wrong and is now
sinning against God."
Vague and undefined anger is common at this point. Victims
may be easily upset and frustrated, yet they have no focus for
their anger. They may also be strongly repelled or fascinated by
spiritual issues, either completely rejecting or consuming
literature that might explain and give reasons for the ordeal
they underwent.
A letter I received from a woman in the midwest describes
some of these feelings. "It's only been a year since we've left
and there are days when I still feel I have had the air punched
out of me. The cult books really don't address the issue that I
find hardest to reconcile: I can't dismiss these people
completely because, while they are 'cultic' in terms of
psychological control, they still claim Christian doctrine and
therefore they are still my brothers and sisters in Christ."
Feelings of isolation can be devastating, especially for
those who have walked out of abusive churches on their own
without any support. Victims may feel a sinking sense of loss and
be unable to relate to other people, even in the midst of a
crowd. They are lonely and alone. Very few can understand what
they have been through. As one woman describes it, "The
complexity of the experience is so great that it is impossible to
adequately communicate it to someone who has not gone through
it." Vietnam veterans have expressed very similar feelings.
If the group from which they defected was tightly
structured, and the victims have cut off all previous ties to
friends and family, they may come out into the real, cold world
without any support systems whatsoever. Consequently, they may
have great difficulty trusting those with whom they have no
history. They have left behind their best friends, their
spiritual family, with whom they have shared intimate, daily
experiences for years. Those same friends now shun them and treat
them as enemies and traitors. Without help, victims may become
suicidal or severely ill, either physically or mentally.
Depression is almost inevitable.
As one ex-member of a small, East coast church stated, "When
I left the group, I experienced hell. I felt an unbearable
separation from God. I felt that God had left me, that I was
divorced from someone I was deeply in love with. My whole life
was over. I felt like a floating cloud. I felt extreme guilt over
leaving my 'family' and betraying those I loved. I felt that God
would kill me ... I used to take long drives and just scream as
loud as I could, the pain and the guilt were unbearable."
It is possible, though difficult, to come through such an
experience without a support system of any kind. However, victims
who have not had the opportunity through a support system to sort
through their varied emotions, thoughts, and spiritual confusion,
may end up with deep, unresolved hurts. The development of a new
social-support structure, therefore, is crucial.
I have had the opportunity to follow the progress of one
young woman who left an abusive-church group on her own. She has
finally reached a point where she understands what happened to
her, but it has taken her several years to sort it all out. "The
majority of my recovery took four years," she writes. "It took me
two and a half years of continual searching for the truth,
gradual healing, encouragement, reading the Bible, and spending
much time alone with God before I was healed and renewed in my
mind enough to face the fact that I had been deceived. The
mental, emotional, and spiritual hold that the group had on me
was not broken until I personally renounced them and divorced
myself from them. It took two and a half years to be ready to do
that. When I did, I was able to see that they had gradually
become my God and took the place of my relationship with him. It
was so painful to face the truth. I remember feeling like God was
watching me and longing for me while I was pouring out my love on
someone else. I'm so glad that he never left me, but was waiting
the entire time for me to come back to him even though I was
convinced while in the group that I was serving him with my whole
heart."
......
How many former WCG people have done that? Sadly to say many just
left and went back into the unconverted world - threw the Bible
and God out of the window and far away. Some have moved into the
off-shoot groups of the WCG, and are still blinded to what they
were once part of, and have never come to see or admit they were
decieved in many ways, especially over believing that organ-
ization was at the time the ONLY true church of God on earth. It
is sad to say that most did not do as this lady above that you
have just read about. On this Website you can read about Jesse,
and how she had to work her way through the experience of the WCG
leadership. It took her years also, but her love for
God and the Bible won out in the end. So if you are needing to do
a private personal connection once more with God, then I can tell
you He is there. He will help you; He will give you the strength
to work your way through whatever you need to work your way
through. You CAN find a PERSONAL relationship with Him and with
Christ Jesus. You need to find that personal relationship, the
rest will come in time. You need to WALK with Him first, cry out
to Him for help and strength; He will give it to you. You can be
free from deception. You can be healed from doubt, confusion, and
bewilderment. The TRUTH is in God's word (John 17:17) and if you
will hunger and thirst for it, if you will love the truth, you
can find it! Then in time God will lead you to others that also
love the truth and the freedom that truth brings. Then in time
God will lead you to those that He has called to minister in His
work. Jesus said He would build His church and the gates of hell
(death) would never prevail against it. Jesus also said His
disciples would be the "little flock" - "the salt of the earth" -
but His church is out there, scattered maybe, some here and some
there, a few here and manybe more than a few there. God and
Christ STILL have their faithful ministers who are there to feed
the flock; not rule over the flock; not beat down the flock; but
lovingly teach and guide and lead the flock into the sheepfold of
God. If you are in doubt about where God is, then I ask you to
right now get down on your knees and cry out to Him for help and
for guidance and for strength to search for Him, the true light,
and you will find Him and you will find the light - Keith Hunt
......
Every person exiting an abusive-church situation has a
different story to tell, and they have differing needs and
emotions. The immediate post-involvement phase may last for weeks
or months, depending on the trauma experienced and the amount of
assistance received. Although there are no clear-cut boundaries
between one wave of experiences and emotions and the next,
exmembers soon begin to have a secondary set of issues to deal
with, particularly as reality begins to set in.
The real world of conflict, bills, crime, diapers, inlaws,
auto repairs, and employment may have been very far removed from
some victims. Upon their return to life in the "real world,"
defectors will experience a variety of emotions - the strongest
being depression, frustration, and alienation. The world often
appears to be cold and uncaring.
Individuals exiting after a span of years may come out in
completely different life contexts, bringing with them an
entirely different set of experiences and values. Single persons
may exit married, or, conversely, married persons may leave
divorced. Couples may exit with children, some of whom may be
damaged because of exposure to the group. Parents may have no
idea how to care for their children. They have guilt feelings
over holidays missed, birthdays overlooked. There is a mourning
over lost years, and a desire to return to life-as-it-was. One
ex-member, reflecting on Joel 2.25, told me that he would pray,
"Lord, return those wasted years."
Along with the need to recapture the past and rebuild
relationships, the ex-member experiences a growing level of
anger, frustration, and powerlessness. The vague anger associated
with first leaving becomes more focused and intense. There may be
strong desires for revenge along with guilt and self-condemnation
for having such feelings. The frustration and powerlessness of
knowing that one has been taken advantage of, and the awareness
that there is little that can be done about it, are very
difficult emotions to handle.
Questioning one's past experiences also becomes more acute.
Victims begin to experience guilt over a variety of issues. How
could I have let this happen to me? How could I have treated my
parents that way? Have I really left the Lord? Am I in sin and
committing blasphemy at this moment? How could I have let my
children be so abused? What's wrong with me? Was it really all
wrong?
Alternatively, ex-members may assume a posture of avoidance,
desiring to retreat from their painful experiences in the group
and wanting to maintain a certain level of anonymity in their
life circumstances. They are not yet ready to handle all of the
issues that seem to be assaulting them. They do not question the
past, and they prefer to lose themselves in harmless and
engrossing diversions like sports, shopping, crafts, novels, and
games.
If they have been able to maintain employment independent of
the group, ex-members might use their careers as anchors,
something in their lives that has not been turned upside down.
They will throw themselves into their work with abandon, getting
"lost" in their jobs for a period of time in order to sort out
the many problems of transition. Some will seek an entirely new
identity by acquiring a new occupation with its attendant
opportunities to gain new friends.
During this phase, professional or pastoral counseling can
be of great benefit. Victims begin experiencing a growing
awareness of their own needs. They are not as confused as when
first exiting, and may very well be in need of more than just a
listening ear. Complicated issues need to be addressed and worked
through. Relationships are in need of repair. A safe environment
is essential for venting their feelings, doubts, and questions.
Therapists who blame them for their involvement in the
abusive-church situation, or, who attempt to focus on the
dysfunction that led to their victimization, may hinder the
process of reintegration.
I have found that individuals often experience great
embarrassment at being so "taken in" by the leader of the group,
and for acting so foolishly during their time of membership. A
Baptist pastor from Massachusetts, the Reverend James Wood, has
counseled at least twenty former members of the Community of
Jesus; he has noticed the same phenomenon. "There is also a sense
of shame, an embarrassment for the things they allowed themselves
to be manipulated into doing." Reverend Wood also observes that
ex-members have a difficult time committing themselves to
anything again. "They feel betrayed. Their commitment was abused
and now they are reluctant to commit again."
A caring and competent counselor can help sort through these
post-involvement feelings, as well as the anger, frustration, and
depression. It is important for the counselor to keep in mind
that the decision to join probably came out of a sincere desire
to love and serve God.
However, the ex-member may very well be doubting the
existence of God at this point, and may have focused his or her
anger at God. People should be permitted to express that anger.
They may also be ambivalent about their past commitments and have
mixed feelings about their past membership. One former member
described a canopy of diverse feelings during this phase of her
readjustment, including "intense humiliation, guilt for leaving
loved ones, condemnation, hopelessness, confusion, fear, lack of
purpose for living, deep depression and despair, distrust of
other Christians, abandonment, and betrayal by God."
The experience of a former member of the communal Emmaus
Christian Fellowship in rural Colorado illustrates many of these
feelings and is typical of the many accounts I have documented in
various groups during years of research. "Two of the elders
yelled at and talked to me for four hours," she reports. "I was
told I was a stubborn, rebellious woman, that I was throwing away
my salvation, hanging onto pagan holidays [Christmas and Easter],
and wanting my boy to play baseball." One elder also told her
"that when he stood before Jesus Christ on judgment day, he would
tell Jesus that I didn't really want to make it to the kingdom of
heaven."
Like so many of the ex-members of spiritually abusive groups
that I have interviewed, this woman left with a heavy load of
guilt, somehow feeling that she was to blame and at fault for
what had transpired. "I doubted my salvation. I had lost all my
best friends whom I had shared my life with for five years. I was
literally devastated. I was pregnant at the time, and I lived in
mortal fear that something would be wrong with the baby, that God
had cursed me and my child."
This woman lived in a very small town. Following her
departure from the group, she found it difficult at first to
confront her former church members in public. "I just couldn't
face anyone. I dreaded going to the post office or the store,
afraid I would run into someone." Then, when she was able to
reach out to them, her efforts were rebuffed, "with either
excuses or by their outright ignoring me." The reason: "I had
broken covenant. I had turned my back on God. I was the worst
kind of heathen there was. I was lost and there was no hope for
me in their eyes."
As we have already seen, this kind of spiritual intimidation
was also commonly used in Maranatha Christian Churches. "If you
leave without the leader ship's approval," states one former
Maranatha member, "condemnation and guilt are heaped upon you. My
pastor told me he thought it was satanic for me to leave and he
wondered whether I could continue in my salvation experience."
This kind of teaching was used as spiritual leverage to keep
people in the church.
......
Many were taught this in the old WCG - if you left you
were putting yourself out of salvation with God, cutting yourself
off from the only true church of God on earth; you were looked
upon by the remaining membership as something to aviod, as
something dirty and contaminated by Satan the Devil - Keith Hunt
......
In a now-defunct ultra fundamentalist group in California,
members were informed in writing of the only acceptable way to
leave their church and remain "in God's will":
"1. Pray about the matter alone for three months (husbands and
wives only may consult each other during this period).
2. Bring the matter to the superintendent and leaders for their
guidance. They will pray over the matter for another period of
one to three months. (You are not to mention your desire to leave
to anyone other than your husband or wife during this period as
well).
3. You must abide by the decision of the leaders whether to leave
or not at the end of their deliberation."
As one former member of this organization commented to me,
"Why bother to pray; the leaders make the final decision in any
event."
Former members of extremist Christian churches often compare
the process of leaving to marital separation. As one ex-member of
a church in the South describes it: "We who left were labeled
'rebels against God' and cut off from fellowship with those who
remained, those we had worshiped, worked, and prayed with as a
close-knit family for five years. It was like a divorce."
In a 1985 report about past practices in Great Commission
International (GCI), an organization founded in 1970 by "apostle"
Jim McCotter, former member Jerry MacDonald noted that the group
compared its leadership structure with a marriage. "GCI elders
frequently refer to ones that have left the church as divorcing
themselves from their family. They twist Scripture on God's
hatred of divorce and use it as a coercive technique to keep
people from leaving their churches. Thus, ones who leave are
taught that they have actually left God and sinned. What it
really means is that the elders have usurped the loyalty and the
devotion that is due Christ alone and refocused it on
themselves."
......
The exact same thing was done in the WCG -
"the apostle" and his "right hand men of the
ministry" were where your loyaly was to be directed. People were
taught loyalty to the organization. The "apostle" and the elders
had usurped the loyalty and the devotion that is due Christ alone
and refocused it on themselves - Keith Hunt
......
MacDonald pointed out that the proof-text for the idea of
"marriage" in relation to elders and leaders in GO is found in
Ephesians 5:22-6:9. The group cited 5:22 ("Wives, submit to your
husbands as to the Lord") as the key to its hierarchical system
of authority. "Just as wives are to be in subjection to their
husbands, so the church is to be in subjection to the elders. It
seems that the elders are the physical manifestation of the
authority of Christ. Just as a family mirrors the church's
relationship to the elders, so a wife and husband in the bond of
marriage reflect the subjection the congregation should have to
the elders."
In the Great Commission International, much emphasis was
placed on "trusting God's leading through others" - the "others"
being those in leadership. In reality, that meant surrendering
one's independence, obeying in all things, and submitting to the
leaders. As numerous ex-members of GCI have told me, it amounted
to the subjugation of members to the leadership. Failure to
comply with the authoritarian dictates of the group led in some
cases to excommunication, at one time a common practice in GCI
and still a common practice in many abusive-church groups. As
MacDonald noted in 1985:
If you do not give up your independence and follow in
harmony, you will be reproved for "sowing discord in the
body," and if you still do not "harmonize," you will be
excommunicated for faction-since, according to GO,
there is no difference between trusting God and trusting a
GC1 leader.
......
Those who have gone through the experience of the WCG ....
well this should be ringing home to you, if you can admit
to thinking back on how it all went down as they say, before HWA
died - Keith Hunt
......
Many people have told me that excommunication is almost
always accompanied by shunning behavior instituted by the
leadership. For example, whenever members were disfellowshipped
from Community Chapel in Seattle (and that was a regular
occurrence), this action was mentioned in the Sunday bulletin:
"The pastor requests that members of our congregation have no
further contact with [names of the persons involved are listed];
they have been disfellowshipped from this church. Do not call
them for advice or ask their opinion about spiritual and soulical
[Pastor Barnett's own term, equivalent to "fleshly"]
relationships, the church leadership, or any other matter. If
they call you, politely hang up as quickly as possible. These
people are not - and never have been - in a position to give
direction or advice regarding the move of God in our church. Your
cooperation in this matter will help you, and is greatly
appreciated by the pastor."
......
Wowwww..... sounds very much like the leaders of the old WCG.
This indeed was what was taught to the congregations
- Keith Hunt
......
One need not have psychological training to understand that
such a procedure also operates as an effective control mechanism
within a church. Those who are the "boat-rockers," those who
raise uncomfortable questions and who challenge the leadership in
any way, are prevented from sharing their legitimate concerns and
criticism with other members. Dissent is muffled, and
disinformation can be "spiritualized" or manipulated by the
leadership.
......
My oh my....how true this is, and how effective it was used by
the WCG - cast out anyone who "questioned" anything
about "the apostle" or how the "ministry" was ruling and
governing things - mark then and cast them out quick as the blink
of an eye, that way the rulership keeps tight rule and keep
"loyalty" to them and the top leader - Keith Hunt
......
Even while admitting how badly they have been treated by an
abusive church, former members may vacillate between rejecting
the past and defending the group they have left. In the latter
instance, they may feel like they are betraying their old
"spiritual family." Many times while talking with ex-members I
have heard them speak positively about the close, interpersonal
ties that they developed while in the group and how difficult it
is to recreate that intimacy on the outside. Or they defend the
worship style of the group.
Another common response I have noticed among former members
is the feeling that they were alone in their struggle - even
thinking they were perhaps "a little crazy" for having had such
experiences. "Am I the only one to have experienced this kind of
thing?" many would ask. Discovering a published article on the
phenomenon has also benefitted some victims greatly because they
realize that they are not alone. Even more effective is
encountering someone who has experienced the same abuse. "There
is actually someone else out there like me who understands!"
The best persons to reach out to church abuse victims are
former victims. As one ex-member puts it, "The two main things
that helped me more than anything were reading the Bible
frequently and talking to people who had had similar
experiences." I am aware of several informal support groups that
have formed to serve the needs of individuals leaving specific
organizations. The Wellspring Retreat and Resource Center in
Albany, Ohio, is a unique, residential counseling facility that
provides professional assistance to victims of spiritual abuse.
Its capable director, Dr. Paul R. Martin, psychologist and
evangelical Christian, was once a member of Great Commission
International (GCI), an organization mentioned in this book.
It may take victims years to sort out experiences, begin to
make definitive choices for themselves, and reach a point of full
integration into the mainstream culture. This is especially true
if they have received no support or assistance. One ex-member of
the Church of the Great Shepherd reports, "During the first year
after leaving, all I did was hide from everyone. I grew a beard
and a moustache, let my hair grow long, and took nondescript,
low-paying jobs. I didn't see my parents, my brother, no one.
And, I thought God was going to kill me. The second year, I
planned on leaving for Alaska, but then a job dropped into my
lap, and I took it. I started looking around for a church to
attend, but I just couldn't take it. I moved into my friend's
garage, remodeled it, and just lived day-to-day. This is my third
year out, and I feel like I can finally look back on the
experience and say that God is using it to teach me wisdom about
the world. I know that God is not condemning me and I can go on.
I am attending a church now, have made some new friends, and feel
like I can live again."
......
It took Jesse (her experience on this Website) many years to "get
it sorted out" but she finally did, and she finally came to God
and Christ and the Bible with a new heart and mind. She still
loved truth, did not throw out the baby with the bathwater. It
was my pleasure to have her as a friend and co-worker in the Lord
for the last 5 years of her life - Keith Hunt
......
Even as victims begin to assimilate their abusive
experiences and adjust to normal life, certain problems may
persist, stemming from the programming they experienced while in
the group. There may be difficulty relating to supervisory
personnel in the workplace. Understandably, religious authority
figures represent a major source of uneasiness on the long road
back. Victims may also have difficulty trusting new friends,
workmates, and acquaintances, all the while feeling guilty for
having a judgmental attitude. There may be deep fears -
abandonment by a spouse, death of one's children, or never again
having a date--that are triggered by certain circumstances.
Additionally, healing may need to occur between victims,
friends, and family, including spouses who were pitted against
one another by the church leader, children who verbally abused
their parents, and friends who were rejected when they expressed
concern.
As confidence grows and decisions become easier to make, the
reawakening of spiritual needs and desires will occur. After
months or years apart from conventional Christianity, former
members may again want to ask questions like, What does it mean
to love God with all my heart, soul, mind, and strength? How do I
love God more than my own life? Can I really live out
discipleship without being hurt again? Can I share all things in
common with others and not be part of an abusive church?
The idealism and zeal for God that initially drove these
persons into abusive-church situations is now coupled with
insights on distorted spirituality and human manipulation that is
more than academic. They feel "wiser for the experience."
However, a benign naivete on the part of both old and
potentially new friends regarding spiritually abusive churches
often makes it difficult to establish understanding
relationships. By this I mean that ex-members often sense that
they are the objects of uncertain acceptance when they try to
share what they have been through. Unstated though clearly
communicated sentiments like, "There had to have been something
wrong with you to get involved in a church like that," can be a
real discouragement to those hoping to regain normalcy.
A bit of advice for those of us who have been fortunate
enough to avoid any experience of spiritual abuse: When you
encounter someone from an authoritarian church background, listen
to them with an open mind, and don't perpetuate unkind
stereotypes. Above all, they need our love and acceptance.
......
To be continued
Churches that Abuse #11
Discernment and Response
by Ronald Enroth (1992)
DISCERNMENT AND RESPONSE
Abusive Churches Present a Warning
A central theme of this book is that spiritual abuse can
take place in the context of doctrinally sound, Bible preaching,
fundamental, conservative Christianity. All that is needed for
abuse is a pastor accountable to no one and therefore beyond
confrontation. Witness Bonnie Mason's fifteen-year experience in
Midvale Bible Church (not the church's actual name), an
independent, Midwestern, Baptist-oriented church with a
pulpit-thumping, fire-and-brimstone preaching, fundamentalistic
pastor who believed himself to be beyond question - until the day
he died, which was the day Bonnie and her family were freed.
Bonnie and Keith Mason came to know the Lord the day before
they met Pastor Carl Plummer (the names of the pastor and his
wife are pseudonyms). Although Keith had been raised in a
Christian home, he had never made a commitment of faith and had
spent his years becoming an accomplished rock musician. Bonnie,
on the other hand, had had no exposure to Christianity
whatsoever. Together they saw a Christian film so powerful in its
impact that they wanted to commit their lives to Jesus Christ.
The next day, on advice from friends, they called Carl, a
new pastor in town. He came over immediately, and the Masons
received Jesus as their Lord and Savior.
Keith immediately asked Carl if he thought he should quit
his career in music. Although Carl never came out and openly
stated that Keith's career was ungodly, Keith felt from his
statements that to remain in rock music would be to somehow
"compromise his witness." Keith gave in to Carl's oblique
suggestions and counsel. This type of indirect "wisdom" from Carl
was to control the Masons' lives for the next fifteen years.
Bonnie fell completely under Carl's influence. She felt she
had been saved by Pastor Carl Plummer, and she began looking up
to him as a father figure, one who could answer all of her
questions about her new life. Carl responded, again with oblique
comments, expressing general "concerns," preaching in pointed
generalities from the pulpit, so that, without ever having to say
so directly, he communicated to Bonnie, and to others, that his
way of doing things was the right and godly way. Bonnie was never
taught that there is diversity in the body of Christ, that
differences of opinion are allowable and healthy, and that one
can follow the Lord in a number of different contexts and
different churches. This "missing ingredient," as Bonnie calls
it, kept her doubting herself and in literal slavery to Carl and
his family until he died.
(I would agree but disagree here. Jesus said He was THE way, THE
truth, THE LIGHT. To gives ones self over to a man and become a
none thinking clone of a man and/or an organization is one
thing, but there are obvious jobs in life that a Christian cannot
work in. Today's "rock music" world is one of them, as is the
"strip club" work or working as a printer or any part of the
magazine publishing world of "Playboy" and such like magazines.
Such jobs right on the face of it should be obvious that a true
Christian cannot work in such professions - it really should not
have to take "going to the minister" to make such decisions to
leave certain jobs. On the topic of "rock music" - it does not
take a rocket-science mind to see that the 21st century "rock
music world" is not the rock n' roll music of the 1950s or 1960s.
Paul McCartney was asked a few years back why he though the music
of the Beatles was still so popular today. He paused for a few
seconds and then said, "Because we had MELODY in our music." And
that is truly the correct answer. You compare the rock music
world of today, with its screaming and shouting (and often
profane words), screeching and over-amplification of guitars and
eletronic whatevers, and the whole scene is utter confusion and
noise that just about blows your ear-drums. It is also the scene
of teens and young people drinking too much alcohol and often
spaced-out on drugs of one kind or another, not to mention the
moving up to illicit sex and fornication sex that often takes
place after a "rock concert" - Keith Hunt)
A wall began to form between Bonnie and Keith as they became
more and more involved in the church in which Carl was serving as
pastor. On one hand, Carl would tell Bonnie to love and obey her
husband. On the other hand, Bonnie knew that if Keith did not do
things exactly as Carl did them, he was obviously not being
committed to God. He ought to be living his life exactly like
Carl. The distance between them widened when the church split and
Pastor Carl took those loyal to him to form Midvale Bible Church.
Although Keith protested, Bonnie convinced him to go along. Up to
that point, Carl Plummer had not served in any given church for
more than two years without leaving for one reason or another.
From the beginning, Carl preached on submission to
authority. He told his people that a pastor is responsible to
speak for God and should not be questioned.
(This is where such pastors cross the line - when they brain-wash
you to accept them as some "special" person with a unique phone
line to God that nobody else has - Keith Hunt)
As their pastor, he was extremely burdened because of the
sins of God's people, and, when he fell ill from heart disease,
he told them that it was their responsibility because of the
great load he bore for them before God. Over time, this guilt and
pressure mounted to intolerable levels.
During the first few years, Midvale met in a series of
motels and homes, never constructing a building of their own.
Meanwhile, the Plummers were given a large parsonage on six
acres. At this point, three years into this ministry, Carl began
rebuking the women of the congregation from the pulpit for not
befriending and reaching out to his wife, Eileen. Why had they
not been meeting with her? Why had they not asked her to go
shopping?
Bonnie, by this time fully under Carl's influence, responded
immediately. Up till now, she had been emulating Eileen and her
children in every respect. Since Eileen wore no makeup or
earrings, neither did Bonnie. Since her children wore a
particular brand of clothing and had their hair styled a
particular way (even though they were years older than Bonnie's
kids), Bonnie had her children dressed and coiffed in like
manner. Now the opportunity had arisen to do an even more godly
thing. She began taking Eileen shopping (Eileen couldn't drive).
And, she even begged the Plummers to allow her to help clean
their home when they knew that Eileen's sister was coming to
visit. The Plummers had been so good to her, had instructed her
in the faith, and helped her to grow as a Christian. It was the
least she could do.
This was the beginning of Bonnie's becoming the "handmaid"
to Eileen Plummer and her family. The onetime assistance grew
into a daily ritual. She began to deceive her husband, who knew
nothing of the extent of her bondage. Bonnie would go over to the
Plummer's home at 11:30 A.M. and arrive back home in time to
prepare dinner and meet Keith at the door. Her children became
"latchkey kids," since Mom was away taking care of the Plummer
children. Keith knew nothing, and Bonnie believed that she was
serving God. She felt she was working out her salvation because
she was not loving "son or daughter more than me ...." (Matt.
10:37). To be enslaved to the Plummer family was to love God.
Meanwhile, because the children were getting older and because
money was getting tight, Keith began talking to Bonnie about
going to work to supplement their income. However, Carl would
speak to her about how much her children needed her at home, even
while knowing that she was at his house, caring for his children.
He would praise her from the pulpit, holding her up as an example
of servanthood.
(Now of course any sane minded person should be able to see this
kind of life-style was not only stupid, it was beyond stupid, it
was drug abuse of the mind; the minister had become another
Hitler dressed in Christian theology, now in control of a
person's mind who had twisted that mind into believing such an
abnormal way of living (neglecting her own husband and children,
and/or trying to turn her children into clones of the minister's
children) was "godly" and "serving the Lord" - Keith Hunt)
Bonnie's confusion grew, and she began crying out to God
each day, praying that Eileen would not have another task for her
to carry out. She wondered why other women, with fewer
responsibilities at home, were not offering assistance. She found
out that two others had offered, but were turned down by Eileen,
saying "Bonnie will do it." Her reputed example of spirituality
caused the other women of the church to hate and envy her.
Meanwhile, she was in emotional agony. Bonnie felt that she had
to confide in Carl Plummer about every aspect of her life. Using
Psalm 51, Carl had preached that not exposing one's sins to the
world was trying to hide them from God. Consequently, Bonnie told
all, including the most intimate details of her life. She knew
that she had already told God herself, but Carl never said she
didn't need an intermediary.
When Bonnie's father was dying of cancer, she felt guilty
when she would take time to go see him, only fifty miles away.
She felt that she was putting her father before God, and putting
her family's interests before her commitment to the Lord. Plummer
did nothing to discourage such thinking. She knew it was a sin to
visit her father on Sunday, and she asked her pastor if he would
go visit him. He refused, saying he didn't want to infringe on
another pastor's territory. When her father died, the Plummers
comforted her by telling her to come back and throw herself into
servanthood. It would be the best therapy for her.
Bonnie became so confused that she stopped wanting to follow
Carl Plummer, no longer wanted to listen to him preach, and
stopped wanting to attend the mandatory meetings - even though
she knew she would be castigated from the pulpit for lack of
commitment. She began to realize that there was no consistency in
what Carl taught. Why did he allow women to get permanents but
not color their hair? Why did he allow necklaces and finger
rings, but not earrings? What was wrong with open-toed shoes? Why
were her daughters not allowed to share clothing since they were
the same size, and how did such sharing cause jealousy? Why was
the assistant-pastor's wife allowed to wear the same dress that
Bonnie had bought for her daughter but had had to return because
it was "inappropriate"? Why was Carl allowed to break every one
of his own child-rearing mandates with his own grandchild? Why
were the children not allowed to visit other churches, and why
were families not allowed to visit relatives during the
holidays? What was so wrong about missing one church service?
Bonnie began realizing that Carl's interpretation and practice of
doctrine were not consistent with the Scriptures. There was an
extreme emphasis on attitudinal sins such as rebelliousness and
pride, and an unhealthy dependence among the congregation on
their pastor. There was a total lack of accountability to any
elders on Carl's part, a defensiveness of his ministry that grew
over time, and a strong attitude of superiority and exclusivity.
"No one else teaches the whole counsel of God like this." "Carl
Plummer is our Apostle Paul."
(Well, I will say it sounds like Bonnie was "wising up" to the
situation. It is sad to say that many do not wise up and can
never come to admit they were brain-washed and had given
themselves over to a man, his clones, and an organization.
- Keith Hunt)
Finally, shortly after Carl Plummer died, Keith and Bonnie
Mason took their family out of Midvale Bible Church. The Masons
have suffered much. Keith had written a secular song shortly
before meeting Plummer. His pastor had told him to get rid of the
"worldly" song, and Keith sold his rights for thirty-four
dollars. To date, it has been recorded by three groups and has
sold over three million copies. Fortunately, after a fifteen-year
hiatus, Keith's music career is again on the rise.
(Hopefully not the modern rock scene - Keith Hunt)
Keith and Bonnie have been shunned by their former friends.
Longtime associates of fifteen years turn their heads when they
walk down the street. Bonnie says she does not care. She is glad
to be free. She is, however, feeling very badly about her
children. Both daughters became extremely rebellious when they
moved away to college. They are doing things that she knows are
wrong. Bonnie regrets not having had the opportunity to raise her
children in a normal, healthy, Christian home, free of
condemnation and the competition fostered by Plummer's teachings.
She is jealous of others who have lived normal, Christian lives.
She would like to regain the lost years.
Although Bonnie is not angry at God, she cannot yet forgive
the Christians who have hurt her. The Plummer family has denied
any wrongdoing and any manipulation or inappropriate actions on
Carl's part. Bonnie blames them for the rebelliousness that her
children are experiencing.
(Yes of course such ministers and their die-hard followers will
never admit they did wrong, for them it is always "God was
working in a special way through them." It is very hard indeed
for people to admit they were duped and had turned their mind
over to a man and his organization - Keith Hunt)
Bonnie knows that there is still much residual confusion and
doubt to work through. She doesn't understand why God allowed the
experiences of the past fifteen years. She is desperately looking
for God to show her a way to go on with her life and to put the
past behind her. As she says, she earnestly desires to "forget
what is behind and strain toward what is ahead, to press on
toward the goal to win the prize for which God has called me
heavenward in Christ Jesus."
(It was also for Jesse, my co-worker for 5 years till her
untimely death. She was able to come out of an abusive church
that the WCG had become, but it took her many years to work
through it all. When I met her she had worked through it all and
was back serving the Lord in spirit and in truth. Her Website
[what she was able to accomplish with it before her death] is
here on my Website, and her story is there for all to read and
learn from - Keith Hunt)
Bonnie's story, as well as the other case histories
presented in this book, points to the need on the part of
Christians for discernment. At what point does biblical authority
turn into spiritual violence? When does a church cross the line
between conventional-church status and abusive-church status?
What are some signals or indicators that a given group is headed
for the margins?
It goes without saying that the pastoral leaders we have
examined here are power-seeking individuals. In their attempts to
control and manipulate others, they reveal much about their own
personality and identity. Behavioral scientists view the desire
for power as the result of a deep-seated insecurity or need. It
is my impression that abusive pastors often come from troubled
backgrounds and are very insecure persons despite the "take
charge" image they may project. They are power-hungry people who
crave visibility. Leaders who inflict spiritual violence often
hide behind the smoke screen of authority to gain power.
However, as Cheryl Forbes correctly points out, the words
power and authority are not synonymous.
Power means insistence on what we want for no other reason
than that we want it; it means making other people follow us
despite their own wishes. Power is assumed, insensitive,
dehumanizing, and ultimately destructive. Authority, on the
other hand, is positive, and usually involves a conferred
right within strictly controlled bounds.
Although she is not addressing specifically the topic of
abusive churches, Forbes' analysis is directly applicable to the
material I have presented in this book. Note this insightful
observation:
The exercise of power always implies coercion and violence
because the purpose of power is to reproduce itself.
Whatever tries to prevent this reproduction must be disposed
of. An exercise of authority, however, should have nothing
to do with coercion, violence, or manipulation. Yet in our
zeal for God's work we decide that if someone won't
recognize our authority, we will force him with our power.
Jesus is our ultimate role model when it comes to the
exercise of power and authority. Even though unlimited power and
authority in heaven and on earth were at his disposal, the
Scripture clearly demonstrates that he was never on a power trip.
"You know that the rulers of the Gentiles lord it over them,"
he once told his disciples, "and their high officials exercise
authority over them. Not so with you. Instead, whoever wants to
become great among you must be your servant, and whoever wants to
be first must be your slave - just as the Son of Man did not come
to be served, but to serve, and to give his life as a ransom for
many" (Matt. 20:2528).
John White and Ken Blue in their book, "Healing the
Wounded," address the problem of the spiritual tyranny that
results when leaders abuse their authority and seek to subjugate
Christians.
There is a tension among Christians that arises from what
might be called a high view of the church and a high view of
Scripture. Both have their dangers. The first emphasizes the
authority of the church over the lives of God's people.
Similarly a high view of Scripture emphasizes the need for
Scripture to control the behavior of Christians. Both
emphases are found in Scripture. There is no tension between
them. The tension arises in the minds of leaders who try to
use either church or Bible or both to control God's people.
Church leaders are themselves under the authority of
Scripture, but its authority is never to be coercive: it
does not make leaders into rulers.
"Ruler" is the right term to describe the kind of people in
authoritarian leadership roles who are a focus of this book. They
are spiritual tyrants who take unholy pleasure in requiring
obedience and subordination of their followers. It is important
to recognize that leadership depends on followership, and from a
truly Christian perspective, that means cooperation with the
leader rather than domination and control by the leader. The
source of legitimate Christian leadership therefore lies in
"entrusted authority."
The spiritual autocrat, the religious dictator, attempts to
"compel" subordination; the true Christian leader can
legitimately only " elicit" followership.
Church leaders must be accountable both to God and to the
congregations that they lead. They must strive to exemplify the
qualities of our Lord Jesus Christ, "that great Shepherd of the
sheep." "Leaders are meant to be facilitators not despots. Their
role is essential. But they must use their authority in the way
Jesus did. And they must never forget that while (like all of us)
they have aline tp heaven, unlike Jesus they are open to the
wiles of the devil."
It is common practice for pastors in abusive churches to
fail to distinguish between spiritual and worldly authority. As
John White and Ken Blue write:
Occasionally, especially if they are young in age and
inexperienced, they may say, "You must submit to me because
God has placed me over you." Now while such words may be
true, they are words that never fall from the lips of true
leaders because the authority of true leaders springs from
spiritual power. Such words prove the speaker's unfitness
for his task. They too can enslave us to another gospel
rather than draw us to the freedom of the cross.
Pastor Phil Aguilar of Set Free Christian Fellowship likes
to say, "It's my way or the highway." The arrogance of such a
statement contrasts with the gentleness and humility of Christ's
way. Pastor Don Barnett of Community Chapel communicated the same
attitude: "I have the anointing and because I have the anointing,
I know what I'm doing." That kind of thinking is obviously
dangerous, but to many members of authoritarian churches it
doesn't appear inappropriate. They look at their pastor and say,
"How could a Spirit-filled, anointed pastor ever be wrong?" The
young man whose case history follows found out the hard way what
it means to be in the wrong church at the wrong time.
Bruce Hogan says that he has been "recovering nicely" after
six terrible years in the very militant Potter's House, also
variously known as La Puerta (or, The Door), Victory Chapel, or
Christian Fellowship Church, based in Prescott, Arizona. His
involvement came about as the result of a spiritual quest he
undertook after dropping out of high school. Having been brought
up in what he terms a "traditional multidivorce family," with a
father who left when he was three, Bruce says that he was
searching for a real father. He has finally found his heavenly
Father, but not before experiencing a great deal of pain and
suffering at the hands of an abusive church. "I had no prior
Christian experience or training and I didn't know how to spot a
counterfeit. My home life was typical of the divorce and MTV
generation, and I suppose I was looking for something like an
artificial, ready-made family. Ignorance coupled with desire
always results in trouble."
Bruce, now "twenty-eight and looking like forty," had just
left his job as a nightclub entertainer when he first encountered
the Potter's House. He had found God on his eighteenth birthday
while using "recreational chemical substances," and was
"supernaturally saved" after years of delving into the occult,
like his father before him. He believes that God did a real
miracle to save him because the occult influence of his father
had been passed down generationally.
Bruce, with no grounding in the Bible, had decided that he
had better quit his wild life-style and go to college. He had
passed the GED, and was just beginning Southeast Missouri State
University when members of the Potter's House first arrived in
town. Impressed by their zealousness, and influenced by their
concern, he joined their ranks in 1984.
Being a very intelligent and discerning person, Bruce was
concerned, even at the beginning of his involvement, about the
emphasis on authority, submission, and spiritual headship. But he
also thought that they might help him overcome his terribly
rebellious nature.
Bruce was self-supporting while at Southeast Missouri State.
Not only did he work full-time and take a full course load, he
also became involved in all the fellowship activities,
outreaches, revival meetings, and regular services of the church.
After a few months of little sleep and failing grades, he landed
in the hospital from sheer exhaustion. The attending physician
told him to stop the whirlwind of activity or he would be dead in
weeks.
However, with his salvation at stake, Bruce continued, and,
as he puts it, "sacrificed my higher critical thinking faculties"
to the leadership of the Potter's House. Week after week of
meetings and revivals that lasted late into the night had done
their job and caused him to "just stop thinking." "I had
surrendered the lordship over my life to a reprobate mind" [that
of the Potter's House leadership], and came to recognize that
"even the elect can be deceived."
(Well for a time maybe the elect can be deceived, but the true
elect cannot be deceived but only for a relative short time. Yes
Jesus said that before He came again deception would be so great
that IF it was possible even the elect would be deceived
[Mat.24:24], but the elect will know the truth and the truth will
set them free - Keith Hunt)
Bruce believes that at its peak the Potter's House had a
network of hundreds of congregations. Committing very little to
paper, the leadership limits access to information to a select
few. Run by Wayland Mitchell out of Prescott, Arizona, local
congregations have no say as to who will lead them. Bruce's local
fellowship had three different pastors during his stay, all of
whom were sent from Prescott. He describes the Potter's House
movement as very aggressive, strong on church planting,
militantly committed, and very anti-intellectual. He was called
an "educated idiot with a high IQ," and was told, "You obviously
have a call on your life, son. You should be pursuing ministry
and submitting yourself to our discipleship."
Bruce's inquisitive nature and analytical mind were always
considered a manifestation of rebellion. When he attempted to
show one of the elders that his teaching was not in line with the
Scriptures, he was violently rebuked and told, "I am the
shepherd. You are the sheep. God is my head covering, and I am
answerable only to Him. And don't you forget it." Bruce says, "I
wished John the Apostle were there. He'd be kicking some butt...
Pardon me. He would be setting things in theologically correct
order."
It is Bruce's opinion that the Potter's House attracts those
with altruistic natures who know little or nothing about God and
the Scriptures but who are on a spiritual quest. It reaches
"those strata and segments of society that no one else can
touch." The problem is, Bruce says, that when people join, "they
kill them," and if they ever leave the Potter's House, it is
unlikely that they will ever serve the Lord again. The majority
of the membership come to know God while in the fellowship -
there is no Christian foundation outside of their Potter's House
experience.
Bruce believes that his involvement in the Potter's House is
his own fault. He has no excuse. "I had the Bible. I had the
witness of the Holy Spirit. I knew something was wrong, but I
thought it was just my own rebelliousness.... I fired the little
lawyer inside me that tried to save me."
After six years of pastoral and psychological abuse, Bruce
and his new wife left the Potter's House. He was "rescued" by
George Orwell's "Animal Farm," a book about totalitarianism, that
Bruce also feels accurately describes the Prescott-based
fellowship. He admits that this was a unique aid to his exit, but
reading the book sparked his abilities to think critically and
independently.
(And my friends that's where the rubber meets the road - you must
ever keep your nose and eyes in the Bible. Yes you need an open
mind to prove all things, but not so open that your brains fall
out - Keith Hunt)
The Potter's House, "first to condemn, first to judge, and
last to show any mercy," shunned the Hogans. They were told that
they were going to hell and that they had never been saved. They
were also slandered by the leadership. "I was sacrificing babies
in my basement or was a homosexual, or whatever." Eventually they
left everything and moved away. Having no church to go to that he
felt he could trust, Bruce said, "The heck with it. I'm going to
stay at home and read my Bible. "Every man to his tent." Over six
month's time, primarily because of being laid up from a severe,
work-related back injury, Bruce came to know the truth in
Scripture. Feeling very old now, he says, "God's people are
destroyed for a lack of knowledge. I would have become a heretic
if God had not put me on my back for six months. All I did was
read the Bible."
(Oh, I do not know what truths Bruce found, but reading the Bible
is sure the start to find the pathway to God's truth...keep your
eyes and mind in the Bible friends, keep it in the Bible; I'll
say it over and over again, your defense for not being deceived
is KNOWING what's in the Bible - Keith Hunt)
Bruce, understandably, had difficulty with forgiveness. "In
order to survive the ordeal of withdrawing from an authoritarian
church, you have to admit that you have been taken and forgive
from the heart. Otherwise, in the words of our Lord, you will be
'delivered to the tormentors.' When I finally forgave from my
heart, I began to recover." His wit, though not as acerbic as a
year ago, is still sharp. Paraphrasing Luther, he says, "If there
be a hell, Prescott is built over it."
As Bruce indicated, the membership of authoritarian churches
is frequently comprised of young, spiritually immature
Christians. This kind of church is successful because it is
meeting basic human needs - the need to belong, the need to be
affirmed, to be accepted, and to be part of a family. It is not
unusual for the leaders to assume the role of surrogate parents,
especially for those young adults who come from dysfunctional-
family backgrounds. Speaking of the woman who was pastor of the
Church of Jesus Christ Forever, a small, authoritarian con-
gregation in the Midwest, one ex-member says this:
"She really cared about us. We were young, looking for something,
and she really took us under her wing." Echoing similar
sentiments, a former member of an east coast group sums up the
appeal of the abusive church she joined: "I never felt I had a
family until I became part of this church. Never before had I
felt so loved and cared for in every way. They were the first
family I ever had."
Although they may be on the fringe of mainstream
evangelicalism, spiritually abusive churches usually are closer
to biblical orthodoxy than they are to outright heresy. Yet,
there is often a subtle distortion of biblical teaching. Looking
back at her experience at the Community of Jesus on Cape Cod, a
former member relates an all-too-common realization.
You allow yourself to be blinded, and you bend over
backwards to believe it's for your own good .... I think for
me and a lot of other people who were perhaps recently
converted Christians, they have taken biblical truths, and
the twist isn't very great, but they are twisted, all
twisted. Somehow you're not aware of the twisting so that
you accept it as being from God because you see them [the
leaders] as speaking the truth that God's given us in the
Bible .... everything they say makes a good deal of sense.
But there's something in the application of it - and it's so
subtle it's hard to put into words - something in the way
they apply it that turns it the wrong way.
A key element of discernment, then, is the recognition that
potentially abusive churches foster an unhealthy form of
dependency, spiritually and otherwise, by focusing on themes of
submission and obedience to those in authority. They create the
impression that people just aren't going to find their way
through life's maze without a lot of firm directives from those
at the top. They promote what MacDonald called a form of "learned
helplessness." In 1985 he wrote, "Remarkably, many intelligent
Christians actually enjoy being told what to do. In GCI churches,
people seek the elders for permission to go home and see their
parents or friends, and to inquire for how long they may stay;
they go to them for permission to go to a party with unbelievers.
..."
The disquieting truth is that many Christians do indeed fall
into the trap of authoritarianism because of an inclination
toward the black-and-white mentality that abusive churches cater
to. If you have the type of personality that is drawn toward
groups that offer wraparound security and solutions to all your
problems, you are vulnerable to spiritual abuse. If you value
your spiritual autonomy, you must resist any teaching that brings
into question Christ's role as the sole mediator (go-between)
between God and humankind. No Christian is ever called upon to
give unquestioning obedience to anyone. Only Jesus Christ
deserves disciples.
If you are a new convert, reaffirm the freedom that
characterizes the new life in Christ. Ironically, exmembers of
Set Free Fellowship have an expression: "We've cut loose from Set
Free." They found themselves in bondage rather than true freedom,
subjected to spiritual infantilism and dependency rather than
growth. However attractive and upbeat the group in question may
at first appear to be, follow the example of the diligent Bereans
who "examined the Scriptures every day to see if what Paul said
was true" (Acts 17:11).
(Oh friends around the world. What a blessing [used rightly] you
have today in the Internet. You can read your Bible, study your
Bible right there in your chair, on a rock, sitting in the sand,
under a tree, out in a boat on a lake, at the top of a mountain,
wherever. Then you can go to the Internet and find who is
teaching and preaching the truth of God's word. You have my
Website and others that are co-workers with me, their Websites,
and you never have to meet me or them. You are free in every way
today, free to find God's truth, free to live it, and free from
organizations of men. You are free from ever having to email me,
phone me, write to me, just free to be fully free from contact in
any way with God's true servants. You can, if you like, just live
your Christian life and God's way, all alone. And I know some of
you have no choice but to be alone, as there are few true
Christians near you. But you can still be just as much a part of
the body of Christ as those who are in a position to fellowship
with others in a personal way - Keith Hunt)
The discerning Christian must also beware of the trap of
legalism. We have seen numerous examples throughout this book of
how life-style rigidity and the keeping of a set of rules can
stifle spiritual liberty and encourage abuse. Preoccupation with
keeping Christian rules enhances guilt feelings in members, and
it acts as an effective control mechanism for power abusers.
"Legalism is never corrective church discipline. For legalism
pulls us away from following Christ toward another gospel,
another gospel that says the cross is not enough."
(Now, if those who say "the cross is enough" mean you are free to
"do your own thing" - free to NOT keep the commandments of God,
then they like maybe you are NOT reading the Bible, not reading
every word of it; not doing as Jesus said we should: living by
every word that comes from the mouth of God [Mat.4:4]. And while
I'm mentioning God's commandments, you may like to buy Tara
Chapman's new book on the "Ten Commandments - the law of
Liberty." You can find it on Amazon.com - Keith Hunt)
Another quality that can lead to abusive behavior in a
church is the tendency toward isolationism, a conscious effort to
limit input from outside the church - in other words, information
control. Beware of the church where outside speakers are
consistently denied access to the pulpit, and where other
Christian churches are regularly denounced, belittled, or
ridiculed. Competing authority figures, whether from within or
without the church walls, are rarely welcomed in abusive
churches. No one can measure up to their exalted standards. In
the words of Marie Kolasinski (see chapter 6), "Ninety-nine
percent of the people who profess to be Christians are really
enemies of the cross."
(Wow, and that is quite the true statement, though Marie
Kolasinski probably does not realize the full truth of the matter
as she stated it. Jesus said His flock would be the "very little
flock" as the Greek has it, and they would be the salt of the
earth, scattered here and there. Truly I say to you, true
Christianity is as the salt on a meal, and that should relate how
little there is of it in the world - Keith Hunt)
It is my opinion, based on extensive research and informal
observation, that authoritarian leaders are ecclesiastical
loners. That is, they do not function well or willingly in the
context of systematic checks and balances. They are fiercely
independent and refuse to be part of a structure of
accountability. To put it crudely, they operate a one-man (or
one-woman) spiritual show. And God help the person who gets in
the way or makes waves. Yes, sometimes they will point to a board
of elders or its equivalent, but more likely than not, this turns
out to be a faithful inner circle of clones that implicitly
accepts all that the leader sets forth.
(My oh my what a truth! One man shows like HWA had and even his
son Garner Ted [whem he founded his organization] had puppet
"boards" who really were the "yes men" the "rubber stamp" men of
the one man in charge - Keith Hunt)
As we have seen, another sign of impending trouble in a
church is an obsession with discipline and excommunication.
Beware of churches that warn of certain doom if you leave their
"covering," or if you "break covenant." Once banished from the
group, little compassion is shown the wayward one. An
overwhelming majority of the ex-members I have interviewed
expressed the opinion that abusive leaders are cold, almost
cruel, in their treatment of people who leave - whether that
departure was voluntary or involuntary. Almost without exception
they report that the leadership made no attempt at reconciliation
and made no effort to heal the wounds inflicted. Instead,
defectors are held up to the congregation as warnings to
potential "sowers of discord." As the leader of one small group
in Delaware County, Pennsylvania, the Church of Our First Love,
was quoted as saying, "Anyone who hinders the work I do, God will
remove him."
Once he had decided to seek his spiritual food outside the
Boston Movement, a former member of that group says he
experienced the full force of friendly persuasion, peer
pressure, righteous indignation, and eventually a form of
"shunning," where one exists, but for all intents and
purposes is "dead" in the eyes of the brothers and sisters.
To leave the Boston Church of Christ - even to leave for
another congregation of the Church of Christ - was not a
recognized option; to leave was a weak, sinful thing to do,
tantamount to opting for perdition.
He adds, "Not once did I ever hear from a member of the
Boston Church of Christ again."
A sure sign that a church is headed for the fringe is when
family relationships are significantly disrupted and the
leadership encourages the severing of ties with relatives outside
of the group. "Be prepared to switch your loyalty from your
natural family to God's family," advises Marie Kolasinski of the
Body of Christ Fellowship. "Those blood ties are filthy rags unto
God. So if you are experiencing great upheaval in your
well-ordered natural family, BE OF GOOD CHEER." When a Christian
is asked to sacrifice family relationships for church loyalty,
it's time to bail out. In abusive-church situations, the
"spiritual family" often displaces the biological family, and
church leaders assume the role of surrogate parents. Prior to his
departure from the Great Commission International in 1988, Jim
McCotter, the group's founder, is said to have usurped "the very
authority of parents over these young people" by allowing
youthful "elders" to exercise greater influence in the lives of
the young adults than did their own parents.
On the day after Mother's Day, 1991, two young members of
Set Free Christian Fellowship, one of them the pastor's
daughter-in-law, telephoned their Christian mothers to tell them
they never wanted to see or hear from them again, in part because
they (the mothers) had expressed their concerns about Set Free to
newspaper reporters and to the author of this book. When one of
those mothers and her husband later dropped off presents for
grandchildren they were not permitted to visit, Pastor Phil
Aguilar's son filed charges of trespassing with the local police
- against his own in-laws. The gifts were returned to the
grandparents in a large carton along with a note that read, "No
thanks!"
(Let me be as BLUNT as I can be: You NEVER have to break ties
with your family members when you become a true Christian. Oh
they may not like your way of life and your practices and customs
you have now moved into as you see the truth of God's word. But
YOU can still do it right; YOU can explain with LOVE, why you
have become this follower of Christ and what the Bible teaches.
You do not have to preach or write a sermon to them. In loving
and kind words, you can explain to them your new life. You can
tell them you still love them dearly; you can tell them you still
want them in your life; you still want to visit them, and they
visit you. Be loving and tender, as you do this, be as Jesus said
as wise as a serpent but as harmless as a dove. As the apostle
Paul was inspired to write as much as is in YOU, you try to live
peaceably with everyone. And if indeed anyone tells you
differently, you need to pack your Bible under your arm and get
as far away from them as possible - Keith Hunt)
When an evangelical church institutes a surveillance system
and encourages its members to keep close tabs on one another,
it's time to look for another church. A former member of the
Boston Movement describes a scenario common to most abusive
churches.
Everyone's Christian life was under scrutiny by someone,
assigned by some level of authority; each member was
confronted with observed faults, issued counsel, and
followed up; each was encouraged to know the true state of
his own soul, its sins and weaknesses, and to confess these
openly and honestly to others who have ministry and
authority over him.
(Yes again, you ex WCGers should well know what this was all
about, as it became everyday practice to "keep an eye on others"
and "report concerns" - an open but secret spy-agency, where
everyone was spying on everyone. It all started from about 1967
and forward in the WCG. I was there I speak from being
one of the leading men in our local congregation. I speak from
first hand experience. And such an attitude in any church
organization is not only DISGUSSING it is SATANTIC!! -
Keith Hunt)
The warning lights should register when a mainstream
Christian church begins to show signs of an unhealthy elitism.
This characteristic is related to the isolationist attitude I
discussed earlier and is well illustrated by another example from
the Boston Movement. A former member speaks of the Boston Church
of Christ:
setting itself in bold, confrontational opposition to
everyone not directly affiliated with itself ... Access to
this elite community is through the narrow gate of a baptism
that is at once the product of an intensive "cost counting"
process that results in a fully conscious subjection of
one's entire self, as a repentant sinner, to Jesus'
Lordship, a lifelong commitment to needs of the Body, and
absolute obedience to the leaders of the movement.
(I've related to you how, years afer leaving the WCG, God led me
to turn on the TV on a Sunday [which I rarely do until evening]
and flip the channels, and at that very time of flipping I hit a
station that was carrying HWA and the WCG TV program; and it was
at that second the WCG threw up a chart for worldwide viewers to
see - the name at the top was "God the Father" the name
underneath was "Jesus Christ" and the name under Jesus' name was
"Herbert W. Armstrong." The pinical of elitism blasphemy. God the
Father wanted me to see this with my own eyes - Keith Hunt)
To the average Christian person reading this book, the
examples of pastoral abuse and spiritual exploitation should
represent a patent breach of biblical teaching. You may even feel
that the abusive practices described in these pages appear to be
far removed from the world of conventional churchgoers, and, it
is hoped, they are.
Yet, I am convinced that tendencies toward abusive styles of
leadership are more prevalent than most Christians realize. If we
are honest with ourselves, we might admit that at least the
potential for authoritarianism may exist in some of our own
backyards.
I will discuss the problem and the challenge that this
represents in the concluding chapter, but allow me to comment
briefly here on a troublesome trend I see in the evangelical
community today. It seems that we have a need to create
evangelical gurus, Christian celebrities, super-pastors in
megachurches, and miscellaneous other "teachers" and "experts"
that we place on pastoral pedestals. What is it about people,
including evangelicals, that explains this apparent need for
authority figures, the need to have someone cosign for our lives?
As David Gill noted years ago:
We want heroes! We want reassurance that someone knows what
is going on in this mad world. We want a father or a mother
to lean on. We want revolutionary folk heroes who will tell
us what to do until the rapture. We massage the egos of
these demagogues and canonize their every opinion. We accept
without a whimper their rationalizations of their errors and
deviations.
Christians, as well as other members of society, live in a
culture that is rapidly changing and confusing. Many experience
real insecurities and are attracted to organizations and churches
that offer systematic approaches and clear-cut answers to life's
problems. For people who come from dysfunctional families, or who
have lacked structure in their lives, authoritarian churches are
a haven, a womb of security. It is sometimes comforting to have
others make decisions for you, tell you how to live, and tell you
what to believe.
As James I. Packer reminds us in "Christianity Today," the
evangelical world is plagued by "the personality cult." We, the
mainstream evangelical public, elevate certain individuals to
virtual infallibility. "On issue after issue people reason thus:
Billy Graham / Martyn Lloyd-Jones / John Wimber / John Stott /
Chuck Swindoll / Elisabeth Elliot / R. C. Sproul / (write in here
your own preferred authority) says it; I believe it; that settles
it. "
In our homes, in our churches, and in our programs of
Christian education, we must strive to cultivate critical,
discerning minds if we are to avoid the tragedy of churches that
abuse.
..........
Note:
It is so true, the human mind, human nature likes to have a hero,
and when it comes to Christian religion, and Bible study and
reading, human nature tends also to be LAZY! "Oh let the full
time paid minister/priest tell me what God says, that's their
work, that's what we pay them to do is it not." That attitude is
all too common. And so personal Bible reading and study ....
"Well, I've got too much to do, my work, my family, my sports
club activities, my favorite TV program, my surfing the Internet,
my emailing to friends and family, this appointment, and that
appointment .... oh just way too busy to stop and study my Bible.
And to take a day of rest and worship God and study His word ...
my that was for the dark ages; I'll go to church, but after that
I'm just too busy once more, ain't got enough hours in the week
to do all I want and need to do." This is another modern attitude
of our fast-space-age world.
So it's no wonder Jesus said that religious DECEPTION would be so
STRONG in the last days before He returned, that IF it was
possible even the elect would be deceived. But thank the Lord the
elect cannot be deceived. I pray you are one of those elect.
Keith Hunt
Churches that Abuse #12Challenge and ChangeCHURCHES THAT ABUSE #12
by Ronald Enroth (1992)
CHALLENGE AND CHANGE
Abusive Churches Will Always Exist
"We repented and were accepted back into fellowship, but
they were afraid to associate with us again. When we came back,
they didn't know what to say. They didn't know what was really
wrong, what we'd done, or what they could say or shouldn't say
that might make them fall from favor. They didn't know how to
relate to us because I had been a 'leading brother' and had
'failed.' But, what really bothered me was, if our repentance was
accepted and we were back, why didn't any other workers or
leading brothers call to see how we were doing or drop by for tea
or anything? They showed very little compassion."
Kyle Larson's story of his eleven-year involvement with
George Geftakys' "Assembly" demonstrates every aspect of the
psychological, emotional, and spiritual abuse that is
characteristic of many fringe fundamentalistic churches. Kyle and
his wife were "workers" responsible under shepherds - in The
Assembly's hierarchy of command. As such, they gave away eleven
years of their lives, including their college careers, to follow
"Brother George's" interpretation of the way to eternal life. Not
once in their married life did they have any privacy, but lived
with and spiritually directed as many as seventeen "brothers or
sisters" at any given time. The Assembly is based in Fullerton,
California, where Brother George Geftakys, 64, a graduate of
Talbot School of Theology and former Baptist minister, provides
the model for his followers across the country. Strongly
influenced by Plymouth Brethren thought and anti-denominational
teaching that condemns organized Christianity, Brother George
began his ministry among the students of the hippie generation of
the early 1970s. Drawing his following from Fullerton Junior
College and California State University at Fullerton--"because
the older people don't want to change and are set in their ways"
- Brother George began by speaking to house meetings of loosely
knit young Christians who had come to Christianity out of the
hippie movement. As Kyle says, "We were willing to have anyone
come speak to us who wanted to address a group of Christians."
None of these young people knew much about the Bible or had
any developed discernment skills. All were "on fire for God," and
desired a life-style of total commitment, including lives as
missionaries if that was God's will. Brother George would speak
to two southern California communes called the House of Christian
Love and the House of the Lord's Grace on a regular basis. Kyle
was impressed. "He could really preach a sermon." On New Year's
weekend of 1971, Brother George invited his new following to a
seminar at Hillcrest Park in Fullerton. This included members of
the two communes as well as a few young families who had been
following him around to the different Bible studies where he
would teach. At that time, Kyle and his contemporaries had been
Christian believers for about six months. "He began opening the
Scriptures to us and showing us what it meant to be involved in a
corporate testimony." By February of that year the thirty-five
persons in attendance began to meet regularly under George's
teaching. The recreation center of Hillcrest Park had been
offered by the city to the fledgling church free of charge on
Sundays in hopes that they would be a positive influence on a bad
neighborhood.
Kyle recalls that within six months a leadership board
composed of "leading brothers" had been chosen by Brother George.
The initial authority exercised by George seemed to be good.
Brothers and sisters were separated into different houses located
in the area, and a strict regimen of activities was begun. This
was all completely opposite to the laid-back life-style to which
the members had been accustomed. The Christian communes of the
earlier period had been very loosely structured. "We didn't have
rules or regulations; we came and went as we pleased. We just
lived together because to us, it was a very normal outgrowth of
the kind of life-style we had had before."
The new "brothers' houses" were very regimented with nightly
meetings, shared expenses, and shared tasks around the house.
(Similar "sisters' houses" came into being a few years later.)
Everyone was expected and required to attend all meetings, and
there were at least six of them each week. All of this was in
addition to being full-time students. Consequently, many never
finished college.
Kyle says that "George has a very domineering personality
and is extremely opinionated and dogmatic. He has a way of
looking at the world that's not quite real, and he's also
extremely intelligent." Although he always refers to himself as a
"brother among brothers," there is no question in anyone's mind
who is in charge of The Assembly. As Kyle states, "It was clear,
without a doubt, who the leader was, who was giving the
direction, the counsel, the teaching. It was George. That
position, from the very beginning, was secured. I don't think
that it was ever relinquished for even a moment." Brother George
asserts that he runs a "prophetic ministry." He teaches a great
deal on how believers are to relate to him as "The Lord's
Servant" who has been anointed by God. While he never refers to
himself as the servant of the Lord, and does not claim to have a
unique anointing himself, he doesn't have to. For his followers
there is an implicit understanding that Brother George is "the
Lord's Servant" in the ministry to whom all are subject and to
whom each is loyal.
The group's name, "The Assembly," came about as a reaction
against the organized church. It was said that the word "church"
had a bad connotation. "Church is a building and it's used
wrongly. We are the Assembly; we are the ecclesia [the 'called
out ones' - the assembly of God's peoplel; we take no name other
than Christ - no name, just 'The Assembly'." Their anti-
denominational stance has gotten them confused with Witness Lee's
"Local Church" at times, and, as Kyle indicates, they have had
some "very big clashes" with members of the "Local Church"
movement. Both groups disdain organized Christianity (reflecting
Plymouth Brethren influences on both), but The Assembly does not
engage in "pray reading" and other practices associated with the
"Local Church" movement.
Kyle and his wife were known as "workers." Workers were the
ones most closely associated with Brother George and constituted
his "inner group." A list of twenty-eight characteristics was
developed to describe the requirements for workers. Set within
these guidelines is the key notion that, in effect, Brother
George is "The Lord's Servant" to whom everyone must be subject
and to whom everyone must be loyal. The inner core of workers
oversees the whole ministry of The Assembly, while each local
Assembly is directed by a leading brothers' council.
Kyle states that during the early years, "Brother George
spoke on Sunday morning, Brother George spoke on Sunday
afternoon, and Brother George spoke on Wednesday night. Brother
George spoke at the prayer meetings, and he spoke on Saturday
morning." He spent those first years indoctrinating the workers
into "all his thoughts, his ideas, everything, until the brothers
were 'developed.'" Thereafter, some of the more "mature" brothers
were allowed to "get a word" and preach. However, no one from the
outside was ever allowed to address The Assembly. Brother
George's followers regarded him like the apostle Paul, his role
being to plant Assemblies, preach, and give the vision.
Kyle now realizes that much of what he and the other members
did was a direct result of what George said they could do - or
had to do. "Although we were getting older and were no longer
kids anymore, we were still treated very much in that same
manner." Those who fell from favor with George, particularly the
older members who persisted in questioning his teaching and
authority, were ostracized and ridiculed. "You don't have a
relationship with George unless George dominates."
Brother George would save his most extreme indoctrination
for the workers' meetings - because workers were supposed to
develop "thick skins." Although he reserved much of the verbal
and psychological abuse for private sessions, he would ridicule
dissenters in these closed workers' meetings, gatherings to which
the general congregation was neither invited nor allowed to
attend.
The average members, according to Kyle, don't see the
underside of the organization. "They see the enthusiasm, the
tremendous amount of outreach that goes on, the impressive amount
of personal involvement, and the companionship as you labor
together with them." But they were not privy to the inner details
of "The Work" - leading, discipling, decision-making, problem
solving, and indoctrinating. The written code of requirements for
workers states that, "The Work is not conducted on the basis of
democracy.... We have the right to demand loyalty in The Work....
We come into The Work ... with a commitment to The Work...."
Supposedly, any Christian is welcome to attend meetings at
The Assembly, and to partake of the Lord's Supper with them. No
one is turned away, and, "God's family and God's purpose are
inclusive of everyone." However, former members say the principle
is not carried out in practice.
Kyle and his wife had a difficult time leaving The Assembly
because to leave was to lose one's "covering." To leave would be
to subject oneself to physical danger from the Adversary, or to
the defilement of one's testimony by Satan. Members are
continually taught that "there is no place else in the world like
this Assembly in Fullerton." Kyle says that the spiritual
intimidation employed can be severe. Members are brought before
the leading brothers' council and "talked to" for violations such
as displaying a desire to hear other Christian preachers, having
a "rebellious spirit," disagreeing with authority, lack of
subjection to the leadership, questioning one of Brother George's
teachings, or desiring to go to another church. "You have one
person on one side of the table, with an array of men on the
other side. A domineering person is telling you you're wrong, why
you're wrong, that you need to repent, and then, one by one, all
the rest of them agree wholeheartedly. The targeted person has a
tremendous psychological onslaught to deal with. More often than
not, he ends up in tears and repents, and is either eventually
restored to favor or leaves the fellowship." Additionally, peer
pressure among the general congregation is an extremely effective
tool used to control the wayward.
......
Wow, are you ex WCG people seeing this? Are bells ringing in your
head? Does it all sound very familiar? Did you not see all this
kind of thing going on in the WCG under HWA? If you did not you
truly had your head in the sand - Keith Hunt.
......
Although members are taught that it is perfectly legitimate
to have differences of opinion between "godly men," in practice
it is not allowed. Brother George himself claims to be
accountable to the leading brothers, and that he doesn't do
anything without their approval. However, "they always agree
with him," because, "Brother George has insight to see things
that we don't see." As a result, Brother George and a few of his
underlings exercise unrestrained control in the lives of Assembly
members. Followers are told what occupations are God-honoring,
whether or not they may practice the professions for which they
have been trained, whom they can marry and when, where they can
live, whom they can date, what they can do with their money, and,
in some instances, what they can and cannot eat.
Members of The Assembly are in a real double bind when it
comes to family and children. Although there is a great emphasis
on homes and the need for family life, activities are so frequent
and so intense that children are neglected. Families are lucky to
have two Saturdays a year to spend together, Kyle observes. From
birth children are expected to attend all meetings and to remain
quiet "in the presence of the Lord." "You would feel guilty if
you went off with your family or just wanted to hang out. If you
took off on a holiday to visit other family members, you just
didn't want what the Lord wanted, and you were just going the way
of the world."
The requirements on workers are the most intense and
burdensome, often entailing voluminous correspondence, outreach
efforts, and meetings. And, of course, Sunday is reserved
entirely as a day for the Lord. Brother George teaches in "broad
strokes" - a whole chapter from the Bible at a time. He may use
three or four hundred Scriptures in a two-hour meeting, and in
the midst of all the Scriptures he is attempting to identify a
general pattern or teaching. He tells his followers that he
believes that the vast majority will "forsake him in the end,"
but that if only one or two remain loyal it will have been worth
his effort. In the end, "tremendous persecution" will inevitably
be his lot. Members are encouraged not to miss out, but to
overcome and receive their "inheritance."
Brother George believes that the greatest part of salvation
is yet to come. According to his theology, only overcomers -
those in The Assembly - will reign with Christ in the millennial
kingdom, which is their inheritance for appropriating God's
grace. At the end of the millennium and after the destruction of
Satan, all believers will gain entrance to the eternal kingdom,
but only those having an inheritance will reign first.
In order to maintain full control over the lives of his
followers, Brother George instituted a reporting system by which
he rewards those who inform him of any questionable activities
among the membership. Although "everyone would deny that flatly,"
it was understood that those who informed on others were "truly
godly," and that the "dedicated ones told all." Consequently,
Kyle, and many others, confided in no one, including even their
spouses at times. Special friendships were said to cloud one's
ability to really discern the Lord. Affections might get in the
way of making an objective spiritual judgment or decision
concerning someone in The Work.
......
More of the same tactics as used in the WCG under Herbert
Armstrong - Keith Hunt
......
Brother George has developed a teaching that refutes all
criticism. He encourages members to listen to no criticism of or
accusations against that teaching whatsoever, even "the Enemy"
lurking in one's own thoughts. The result of this teaching,
according to Kyle, is the "subtle cutting off of any kind of
critical thinking, any kind of analytical thinking." Members
therefore listen to nothing but the teachings of Brother George.
......
Ahhhh, same thing employed by the WCG under HWA - Keith Hunt
......
Kyle and his wife believe that they remained with The
Assembly as long as they did because they were away from
Fullerton and the full impact of George's influence for six of
their eleven years. During that time they ministered to
Assemblies in several states. Kyle says, "When we started
thinking that we were going to be coming back to Fullerton, we
very seriously considered not even leaving the Midwest, just
because we had personally been out from under all the control for
so long. It was a lot easier to deal with a long-distance phone
call than it was to deal with discipline day-by-day,
face-to-face. When we were told to move to another city, we
thought that that was a little bit better. But, what it comes
down to is that there are always ways for control to be
established and perpetuated no matter where you are. The
appropriate thing to say to Brother George was always, 'Brother,
whatever you want me to do, I'll do it.'"
Eventually, Kyle "fell into sin" and was excommunicated. In
actuality, he left the movement for a period of time because he
was "fed up." He had begun to see the subtle indoctrination
process involving heavy scheduling, constant teaching, unending
meetings, and the partisan viewpoint being presented while passed
off as inspiration from God. He saw the "tremendous psychological
chains" that were being put on the people, and he was also aware
that most people who leave The Assembly drift away from the Lord.
They give up, believing that God himself has laid on them
unachievable expectations.
......
And so it was the same with the WCG, most eventually drifted
away, they closed their Bible, decided God was really not there
in their lives, and walked right back into the world - Keith Hunt
......
Unable to reconcile his thoughts and sort out his emotions,
Kyle "repented" and went through a yearlong process of proving
his repentance to the leading brothers. He was passed up for four
months during communion, and the condition of his repentance was
based on how willing he was to do whatever he was told. Even when
his repentance was accepted, he and his wife were still shunned,
because members were afraid of associating with a fallen worker.
After six months of this treatment, Kyle and his wife left to
begin a new life.
Leaders who are abusive usually develop their heavy-handed
style over a period of time. Churches that abuse are the result
of an ever-accelerating emphasis on the kinds of control
mechanisms I have discussed in this book. People who have been in
close contact over a period of years with some of the pastoral
leaders we have discussed have told me that their ministry was
far more benign and subdued at the beginning. Gradually, as the
pastors became aware of the influence they could exert and the
power they could wield, they and their ministries began to
change. Consciously or unconsciously, they took advantage of
vulnerable people, and convinced them that God had given them,
the shepherds, the right to exercise authority over the flock.
People who abuse power are changed progressively as they do so.
In abusing power they give themselves over to evil, untruth,
self-blindness, and hardness without allowing themselves or
anyone else to see what is happening. The longer the process
continues, the harder repentance becomes. Church bosses must be
spotted and rescued early, or they may never be rescued at all.
They have caused inconceivable havoc among churches throughout
history.
......
Yes indeed the WCG under HWA did not start out as "authoritarian"
and "ruling people" with a rod of iron - it was a gradual
process. It's like the frog in the water that is slowly heated,
and does not see that change is taking place and he'd better jump
out. The church work started by Jim Jones started out as helping
and serving hundreds - a good charity church. It was over a
period of time that Jones turned his church into a cult of
control and eventually into hundreds of his followers willing to
kill themselves and their children, in the now imfamous story
that you can no doubt look up on the Internet - Keith Hunt
......
Pastoral abuse can be spotted quite easily, at least in its
advanced stages. Abusive religion substitutes human power for
true freedom in Christ. Unquestioning obedience and blind loyalty
are its hallmarks. Leaders who practice spiritual abuse exceed
the bounds of legitimate authority and "lord it over the flock,"
often intruding into the personal lives of members. God's will is
something that they determine for you rather than something you
individually seek to know. Abusive leaders are self-centered and
adversarial rather than reconciling and restorative.
But what about rescuing the leaders and salvaging the
followers? That is a major challenge facing the conventional
evangelical church. Most of the abusive churches I have studied
are independent, autonomous groups. They are not a part of a
denomination or network that could provide checks and balances or
any kind of accountability. As we have seen over and over again
in these pages, their leaders are accountable to no one and
resist any outside scrutiny. How can such independent groups
themselves be disciplined or even investigated for aberrations?
Because we value freedom of religion for all people and because
we are reluctant to get involved in someone else's vineyard, even
if we know it is "off the wall," the problem of abusive churches
is likely to continue.
The key to understanding the whole phenomenon is within the
human psyche - the desire to control others and to exercise power
over people. That has always been a part of the human experience
and it will continue to be. All of us have been exposed to the
temptation of power, whether as parent, spouse, teacher, or
worker. It has been said that human nature is always ready to
abuse its power the moment it can do so with impunity. It should
not be surprising, then, that the will to power sometimes invades
the religious realm, and specifically the church.
The respected Christian writer and physician, Paul Tournier,
writes that "there is in us, especially in those whose intentions
are of the purest, an excessive and destructive will to power
which eludes even the most sincere and honest self-examination."
He makes the point that people in the helping professions -
social workers, physicians, psychologists, and pastors -
especially need to be aware of the temptation of power, the
temptation to manipulate, and to control those who come seeking
help. "To be looked upon as a savior leaves none of us
indifferent."
Although he was not specifically addressing the problem of
contemporary pastoral abuse, Tournier's comments about the
possibility of misusing spiritual authority are a timely warning.
They look upon us as experts, God's mouthpieces, the
interpreters of his will-to begin with for ourselves, but
very soon, before we realize it, for other people too,
especially since they insist on requiring it of us. Very
soon, too, we find ourselves thinking that when they follow
our advice they are obeying God, and that when they resist
us they are really resisting God.
While we probably cannot prevent individual power-seekers
from getting entangled in their own authoritarian excesses, we
must remind all who will hear, including mainstream Christian
leaders, that weakness and dependence on God's strength are the
hallmarks of true greatness. As Harold Bussell writes in Unholy
Devotion:
The antithesis of the misuse of power is gentleness, which
is best seen and understood within the framework of
strength. Gentle leaders, pastors, or teachers do not force
their insights and wisdom on the unlearned, nor flaunt
their gifts before those in need. They are patient. They
take time for those who are slow to understand. They are
compassionate with the weak, and they share with those in
need. Being a gentle pastor, shepherd, leader, or teacher is
never a sign of being weak, but of possessing power clothed
in compassion.
This is in stark contrast to the style of abusive leaders,
who, as we have seen, often lack compassion and a gentle spirit.
Power has a way of blinding the conscience so that those who
spiritually and psychologically abuse others (like abusive
parents) show little sign of remorse and repentance. They deny
any guilt for what they have done to people. And they project
their own weaknesses onto others.
If we are in positions of power over others and we fail to
place controls on ourselves, we subtly and unknowingly start
to control others. Power that elevates a leader beyond
contradiction ... will lead both the leader and the
followers down a road marked by broken relationships,
exploitation, and control. Power that tempers and checks
itself and is wrapped in compassion is the pathway to
gentleness, caring, and maturity. Jesus said, "I am the good
shepherd. The good shepherd lays down his life for the
sheep" (John 10:11). He is our model of service and
leaderships.
One of the pressing needs of the Christian church is to
assist in the development of discernment skills among believers
so that the likelihood of following an aberrant teacher or a
false doctrine is diminished. The need for discernment was
impressed on me by a former member of Hobart Freeman's Faith
Assembly. He told me how the emphasis on the "faith message" or
"faith walk" eventually diverted his focus from the centrality of
Jesus Christ.
"The faith message is a counterfeit, unbiblical faith," he
said. "It takes the place of relationship with Jesus. Christ
became a secondary figure. We were taught that if you produce the
works of faith, God will bless you and you will have definite
proof that you are following Jesus Christ. These people would
say, 'I believe with all my heart that I'm on the right track
because Jesus healed me. Jesus gave me a promotion. Jesus gave me
a new car. He gave me the desires of my heart.' It becomes a
matter of the work of faith, doing some kind of faith formula.
What you do is important proof of your salvation, not what Jesus
did for your salvation."
This young man described the appeal of emphasizing positive
thinking or "positive confession," as it is known in the faith
movement. Many new Christians that he knew in the movement were
not only attracted to Hobart Freeman, but to the prospect of
supernatural, extraordinary experiences. "People look for
teachers who claim special revelations, who promise signs and
wonders. They've got to have something more than just a
relationship with Jesus Christ."
One survivor of an abusive-church situation told me how she
had been exposed to "every movement or fad that has crossed
America in the past decade." Initially influenced by John
Wimber's "signs and wonders" teachings, her church moved from an
emphasis on healing to inner healing, visualization, the healing
of memories, deliverance, positive confession, covenant
relationships, prosperity teaching, discipling/shepherding, and
even community living. She left confused and suffering from
spiritual bum-out. "It's still difficult for me to read my old
Bible, you know, the 'cool' one that's all marked up. I have to
read a different translation. I can't sing the same worship songs
and I have difficulty going to church."
This woman's comments about the progression of spiritual
fads she encountered brings to mind a book that has not received
wide circulation, but which I believe deserves thoughtful
consideration by every Christian interested in the topic of
current evangelical/charismatic movements. It is entitled
"Wonders and the Word," and is a collection of essays that
sensitively and discerningly critique the Vineyard movement
founded and headed by John Wimber. (There are now more than two
hundred Vineyard fellowships throughout North America and
Vineyard-sponsored seminars are held throughout Europe, the
United Kingdom, South Africa, Australia, and New Zealand.)
Although the book focuses on the "signs and wonders"
emphasis within the Vineyard fellowship, I feel its message has
wider implications for understanding any new religious movement.
I receive many inquiries about the Vineyard movement. Based on
extensive conversations with both current and former members of
Wimber's fellowship, I believe that the issues raised in "Wonders
and the Word" are valid concerns and that this rapidly growing
movement has great potential for problems similar to those I have
been discussing in this book. Indeed, there is some evidence of
abusive practices already taking place within Vineyard churches.
Let it be clearly understood that I agree with one of the
contributors to "Wonders and the Word" when he states that:
the Vineyard movement is impacting many people both inside
and outside the church. We cannot deny its existence as a
genuine work of the Spirit, and so should not discredit
it.... At the same time, we need to be aware of some of the
extremes to which such a movement can go.... Most new
movements of the Holy Spirit are embraced by eager
followers, many of whom tend to push the ideas of the
leaders to extremes. However, rather than write off the
movement because of excesses, we should draw alongside to
render guidance and counsel where it is needed and welcomed.
It is precisely this need and desire to provide counsel and
guidance that constitutes the challenge to the larger Christian
community as we reflect on the problem of abusive churches and
the prospect of potentially abusive groups. As I shall point out
shortly, there are some groups that are open to dialogue with
more mainstream churches. Others are extremely defensive and
resist any overtures from traditional churches, considering them
to be apostate and outside the circle of the elect.
Another challenge to the larger Christian world includes the
recognition that at least some of the members of abusive groups
are refugees from more conventional evangelical churches. They
are sincere, earnest seekers after God who, for a variety of
reasons, have become disillusioned with mainstream
evangelicalism. Many are seeking an intimacy and a kind of
fellowship that traditional churches often do not provide. As
Yeakley admits, "In the modern church, people come together as
strangers and leave as strangers and their lives never touch."
Others seek a more informal, charismatic worship style that
many traditional evangelical churches do not offer.
Interestingly, it is this dimension-worship style - that
former members of abusive churches tell me they miss the most, as
they reflect back on their experience. Still others mention the
appeal of a family-like environment. I have in my files a letter
from a man whose comment is not at all unusual: "One of the good
things about the group was that it gave people like me a sense of
'family' and 'belonging' to an extent that I haven't had before
or since."
......
And so it was also in the WCG under HWA - people felt a family
connection, that became so strong it blinded them to what was
taking place in the organization and also in their mind-thinking.
The tie of "belonging" and "family" together with the idea that
"this organization" had a special connection to God - they were
slowly brainwashed into believing "their organization" was the
"apple" of God's eye, and that He had sent them an end-time
apostle to lead them into the Kingdom - Keith Hunt
......
Why are Christians being attracted to nontraditional
groups? In addition to the reasons just cited - greater freedom
in worship, acceptance, fellowship, and a sense of family - there
is the appeal and excitement of experience, the desire for
something new, something more, as illustrated by this observation
concerning the Vineyard: "Dissatisfaction with a lack of
spiritual power, a feeling of unfulfillment in one's relationship
to Christ and a hunger for a new and deeper experience with
God.... The Vineyard's emphasis on power, signs and wonders has a
definite appeal to those who are searching for something more."
I have already noted the role of subjective experience in
the devolution of many abusive churches. It is understandable,
then, that I voice my concern over the current preoccupation in
some Christian circles, including the Vineyard movement, with the
exorcism of demons, the pronouncements of "prophets" like Paul
Cain and Bob Jones, the talk of a "new breed" of people ("Joel's
Army" - a unique end-time army of believers endowed with
supernatural power enabling them to perform "signs and wonders,"
purify the church, and overcome all opposition to the Gospel),
the appearance of the "Manifest Sons of God," the unorthodox
Godman theology of Benny Hinn, and the "revelation teaching" of
assorted "end-time prophets" in charismatic circles. Space does
not permit discussion of these phenomena, but let the reader
beware.
As Dr. Paul G. Hiebert of Trinity Evangelical Divinity
School correctly observes:
Like most movements in the church, the current emphasis on
healing, prophecy and exorcism has both positive and
negative sides to it. It reminds us of the need to take
seriously the work of the Holy Spirit in meeting everyday
human needs. It is in danger, however, of placing primary
emphasis on what is of secondary importance in scripture and
of bending the gospel to fit the spirit of our times. Satan
often tempts us at the point of our greatest strengths. His
method is not to sell us rank heresy, but to take the good
we have and distort it by appealing to our self-interests.
Abusive churches are not, for the most part, promoting rank
heresy. But their human leaders seem ever willing to make
pronouncements in the name of God, thus "mistaking what God is
saying in Scripture for their own particular brand of
interpretation of Scripture." This sets the stage for the
possibility of outright heresy being introduced, as well as the
kind of abusive practices we have discussed.
Is it possible for authoritarian churches to change
direction? There are several fairly recent examples of leaders
who have announced changes and confessed to error. One of the
leaders of the discipleship/shepherding movement officially known
as Christian Growth Ministries, Bob Mumford, made a dramatic
about-face after issuing a public statement of repentance in
November of 1989. Mumford, one of the "Ft.Lauderdale Five" (so
named because of the group of the five founders of Christian
Growth Ministries of Ft.Lauderdale - Don Basham, Ern Baxter, Bob
Mumford, Derek Prince, and Charles Simpson), acknowledged abuses
that had occurred because of his teaching on submission. This
emphasis resulted in "perverse and unbiblical obedience" to
leaders. He publicly repented "with sorrow" and asked for
forgiveness. He also admitted that families had been severely
disrupted and lives turned upside down.
In an interview with "Christianity Today" magazine, Mumford
indicated that the abuse of spiritual authority led to "injury,
hurt, and in some cases, disaster." Leaders, he said, were
operating at a level where biblical limitations on their
authority were not clear. "Part of the motivation behind my
public apology is the realization that this wrong attitude is
still present in hundreds of independent church groups who are
answerable to no one."
Jack Hayford, whose counseling of Mumford was instrumental
in the decision to issue a public apology, said in "Ministries
Today" magazine that he was one of hundreds of pastors who had
spent fifteen years "picking up the pieces of broken lives that
resulted from distortion of truth by extreme teachings and
destructive applications on discipleship, authority, and
shepherding."
In November of 1989, Maranatha Christian Churches, founded
by Bob Weiner, announced that it was disbanding and dissolving
its international federation of churches. The youth and
inexperience of its pastors, along with the controversial
shepherding practices of the group were some of the problems that
led to the demise of the organization (although MCM spokespersons
denied those allegations). Most of the churches themselves did
not close, but instead became even more independent and
autonomous bodies.
One of the most encouraging evidences of change is taking
place within the Great Commission Association of Churches,
formerly named Great Commission International (GCI). Founder Jim
McCotter is no longer associated with the organization. The
current leadership (which includes many of the original leaders)
has been consulting with evangelical pastors, lay persons, former
members, and various well-known Christian organizations in an
effort to chart a new course. I have met with several of the
national leaders on two occasions, and they shared with me their
commitment to a process of restoration and healing, as well as
their desire to chart an organizational change.
The Great Commission leadership has identified a number of
past "errors and weaknesses" that they feel were caused by
incorrect or imbalanced teaching, the youthful immaturity of some
leaders, and a number of other factors. In personal
correspondence with me, one of their national leaders stated, "We
have a desire to forthrightly acknowledge errors and problems
that existed and yet not inaccurately or needlessly dishonor what
the Lord has done in our past...."
Former members of GCI are cautiously optimistic about the
unfolding events and, frankly, they are a bit surprised. Others
are more cynical, fearing that the effort is an insincere gesture
in order to achieve acceptance and legitimation from the
evangelical mainstream without fully acknowledging the depths of
the hurt which has been caused over the years. At this writing,
the effort at reconciliation and restoration is in process. Many
will be watching to see the outcome and the nature of change that
emerges. The Great Commission Association of Churches may well
prove to be a model for other groups to emulate.
Major change is also taking place within a network of
charismatic Catholic communities because of the efforts of former
members to expose the excessive control and abusive practices
alleged to have occurred. The Word of God Community in Ann Arbor,
Michigan, has undergone a split, and cofounders Ralph Martin and
Steve Clark have experienced a parting of the ways. Word of God
leaders, in a March 1991 letter to members, expressed a desire to
repent of "spiritual pride and arrogance, elitism, legalism and
an overbearing exercise of pastoral authority." Several months
later the same leaders told assembled members that people were no
longer to be under anyone's control, in effect renouncing the
shepherding practices of the past. The basic issue that divides
Martin and Clark is the nature of pastoral care and authority in
Christian community.
Martin's faction has opted for a more moderate pastoral
system with less emphasis on submission, while Clark maintains
that covenant community leaders have been entrusted with the
spiritual and material welfare of the members, and therefore must
exercise responsible pastoral authority over those members.
Former members of several other charismatic Catholic
communities told the "National Catholic Reporter" stories of the
extreme submission of women to men, and life-style conformity
that included the wearing of shoes and hairstyles similar to
those of the leaders. One group celebrated the birth of boys but
reportedly only "tolerated" newborn girls. A former member of one
group was "discouraged" from visiting his dying mother. "He was
told to repent for spending a Sunday morning with her."
Roman Catholic Bishop Albert Ottenweller of Steubenville,
Ohio, ordered an investigation of Servants of Christ the King, a
charismatic covenant community affiliated with the Sword of the
Spirit, a network of communities scattered throughout the United
States and abroad. Bishop Ottenweller criticized the Servants of
Christ the King for "an arrogance that is elitist ...." and a
"lack of compassion and love for those in need." He charged that
the lives of members had been controlled through the manipulation
of marriages and life-style patterns. "Great psychological harm
has been done to members."
While not all groups affiliated with the Sword of the Spirit
have recanted their clearly abusive methods, the actions of Word
of God leaders in Ann Arbor appear to be sincere and will have an
uncertain but dramatic impact on that organization's future. In
an interview with Fidelity, a conservative Catholic magazine,
Word of God senior head-coordinator Ralph Martin admitted that
the community had had problems from its earliest days.
I think a small group of people basically took control of
the whole thing early on. And I was part of that group.... I
think [we] took the place 'of the Lord Himself, in a certain
kind of way. Instead of trusting in the Lord and being
docile to the Lord....[we] basically got into protecting our
thing, our work, in a way which led to excessive exercises
of authority, controlling people's lives.
While these examples of repentance and change are welcomed
and praiseworthy, we must not forget those whose lives have been
damaged, some irreparably, during the long years when the
now-repentant leaders were unresponsive to warnings and reluctant
to admit weakness. It is easy for us who have not experienced the
pain and turmoil of their followers to say, "Forgive and forget."
We all struggle on in a fallen world, seeking to test the
voices that call to us, to discern whether they are, indeed, from
God. The ultimate challenge is to fix our eyes on Jesus, the
Great Shepherd, who knows his sheep and who will never abandon
us.
The word of the LORD came to me: "Son of man, prophesy
against the shepherds of Israel .... 'This is what the
Sovereign LORI) says: Woe to the shepherds of Israel who only
take care of themselves! Should not shepherds take care of the
flock? .... You have not strengthened the weak or healed the sick
or bound up the injured. You have not brought back the strays or
searched for the lost. You have ruled them harshly and brutally.
So they were scattered because there was no shepherd ....
Therefore, you shepherds, hear the word of the LORD .... because
my shepherds did not search for my flock but cared for themselves
rather than for my flock .... I am against the shepherds and will
hold them accountable for my flock. I will remove them from
tending the flock .... I myself will search for my sheep and look
after them .... I will bind up the injured and strengthen the
weak .... I will shepherd the flock with justice .... I will save
my flock, and they will no longer be plundered .... You my sheep,
the sheep of my pasture, are people, and I am your God, declares
the Sovereign LORD.'" (Excerpts from Ezekiel 34)
.............................
NOTE:
You should certainly see by now that the Protestant and Roman
Catholic world of Christianity has its "churches that abuse" -
indeed they do, and probably still do.
Yet those of us who have been blessed with having more knowledge
of the truths of God's word than the Catholics and Protestants,
need to watch our step also, for church groups are out there
among US who ABUSE and "brain-wash" and "want to control" your
every move, and thought. You need to love truth and righte-
ousness; you need to prove all thing; you need to hold fast to
that which is good; you need to keep your nose and eyes in the
Bible; you need to find by prayer and study of God's word HOW a
true minister of the Lord will speak, act, and work. And if you
have ever been a part of an abusive church, you need to admit it!
If you have been by God rescued from an abusive church, then
PRAISE HIM! And ask Him for the wisdom to NEVER be pushed along
and caught up in an abusive church again.
Keith Hunt
|
Churches that Abuse #12Challenge and Changeby Ronald Enroth (1992)
CHALLENGE AND CHANGE
Abusive Churches Will Always Exist
"We repented and were accepted back into fellowship, but
they were afraid to associate with us again. When we came back,
they didn't know what to say. They didn't know what was really
wrong, what we'd done, or what they could say or shouldn't say
that might make them fall from favor. They didn't know how to
relate to us because I had been a 'leading brother' and had
'failed.' But, what really bothered me was, if our repentance was
accepted and we were back, why didn't any other workers or
leading brothers call to see how we were doing or drop by for tea
or anything? They showed very little compassion."
Kyle Larson's story of his eleven-year involvement with
George Geftakys' "Assembly" demonstrates every aspect of the
psychological, emotional, and spiritual abuse that is
characteristic of many fringe fundamentalistic churches. Kyle and
his wife were "workers" responsible under shepherds - in The
Assembly's hierarchy of command. As such, they gave away eleven
years of their lives, including their college careers, to follow
"Brother George's" interpretation of the way to eternal life. Not
once in their married life did they have any privacy, but lived
with and spiritually directed as many as seventeen "brothers or
sisters" at any given time. The Assembly is based in Fullerton,
California, where Brother George Geftakys, 64, a graduate of
Talbot School of Theology and former Baptist minister, provides
the model for his followers across the country. Strongly
influenced by Plymouth Brethren thought and anti-denominational
teaching that condemns organized Christianity, Brother George
began his ministry among the students of the hippie generation of
the early 1970s. Drawing his following from Fullerton Junior
College and California State University at Fullerton--"because
the older people don't want to change and are set in their ways"
- Brother George began by speaking to house meetings of loosely
knit young Christians who had come to Christianity out of the
hippie movement. As Kyle says, "We were willing to have anyone
come speak to us who wanted to address a group of Christians."
None of these young people knew much about the Bible or had
any developed discernment skills. All were "on fire for God," and
desired a life-style of total commitment, including lives as
missionaries if that was God's will. Brother George would speak
to two southern California communes called the House of Christian
Love and the House of the Lord's Grace on a regular basis. Kyle
was impressed. "He could really preach a sermon." On New Year's
weekend of 1971, Brother George invited his new following to a
seminar at Hillcrest Park in Fullerton. This included members of
the two communes as well as a few young families who had been
following him around to the different Bible studies where he
would teach. At that time, Kyle and his contemporaries had been
Christian believers for about six months. "He began opening the
Scriptures to us and showing us what it meant to be involved in a
corporate testimony." By February of that year the thirty-five
persons in attendance began to meet regularly under George's
teaching. The recreation center of Hillcrest Park had been
offered by the city to the fledgling church free of charge on
Sundays in hopes that they would be a positive influence on a bad
neighborhood.
Kyle recalls that within six months a leadership board
composed of "leading brothers" had been chosen by Brother George.
The initial authority exercised by George seemed to be good.
Brothers and sisters were separated into different houses located
in the area, and a strict regimen of activities was begun. This
was all completely opposite to the laid-back life-style to which
the members had been accustomed. The Christian communes of the
earlier period had been very loosely structured. "We didn't have
rules or regulations; we came and went as we pleased. We just
lived together because to us, it was a very normal outgrowth of
the kind of life-style we had had before."
The new "brothers' houses" were very regimented with nightly
meetings, shared expenses, and shared tasks around the house.
(Similar "sisters' houses" came into being a few years later.)
Everyone was expected and required to attend all meetings, and
there were at least six of them each week. All of this was in
addition to being full-time students. Consequently, many never
finished college.
Kyle says that "George has a very domineering personality
and is extremely opinionated and dogmatic. He has a way of
looking at the world that's not quite real, and he's also
extremely intelligent." Although he always refers to himself as a
"brother among brothers," there is no question in anyone's mind
who is in charge of The Assembly. As Kyle states, "It was clear,
without a doubt, who the leader was, who was giving the
direction, the counsel, the teaching. It was George. That
position, from the very beginning, was secured. I don't think
that it was ever relinquished for even a moment." Brother George
asserts that he runs a "prophetic ministry." He teaches a great
deal on how believers are to relate to him as "The Lord's
Servant" who has been anointed by God. While he never refers to
himself as the servant of the Lord, and does not claim to have a
unique anointing himself, he doesn't have to. For his followers
there is an implicit understanding that Brother George is "the
Lord's Servant" in the ministry to whom all are subject and to
whom each is loyal.
The group's name, "The Assembly," came about as a reaction
against the organized church. It was said that the word "church"
had a bad connotation. "Church is a building and it's used
wrongly. We are the Assembly; we are the ecclesia [the 'called
out ones' - the assembly of God's peoplel; we take no name other
than Christ - no name, just 'The Assembly'." Their anti-
denominational stance has gotten them confused with Witness Lee's
"Local Church" at times, and, as Kyle indicates, they have had
some "very big clashes" with members of the "Local Church"
movement. Both groups disdain organized Christianity (reflecting
Plymouth Brethren influences on both), but The Assembly does not
engage in "pray reading" and other practices associated with the
"Local Church" movement.
Kyle and his wife were known as "workers." Workers were the
ones most closely associated with Brother George and constituted
his "inner group." A list of twenty-eight characteristics was
developed to describe the requirements for workers. Set within
these guidelines is the key notion that, in effect, Brother
George is "The Lord's Servant" to whom everyone must be subject
and to whom everyone must be loyal. The inner core of workers
oversees the whole ministry of The Assembly, while each local
Assembly is directed by a leading brothers' council.
Kyle states that during the early years, "Brother George
spoke on Sunday morning, Brother George spoke on Sunday
afternoon, and Brother George spoke on Wednesday night. Brother
George spoke at the prayer meetings, and he spoke on Saturday
morning." He spent those first years indoctrinating the workers
into "all his thoughts, his ideas, everything, until the brothers
were 'developed.'" Thereafter, some of the more "mature" brothers
were allowed to "get a word" and preach. However, no one from the
outside was ever allowed to address The Assembly. Brother
George's followers regarded him like the apostle Paul, his role
being to plant Assemblies, preach, and give the vision.
Kyle now realizes that much of what he and the other members
did was a direct result of what George said they could do - or
had to do. "Although we were getting older and were no longer
kids anymore, we were still treated very much in that same
manner." Those who fell from favor with George, particularly the
older members who persisted in questioning his teaching and
authority, were ostracized and ridiculed. "You don't have a
relationship with George unless George dominates."
Brother George would save his most extreme indoctrination
for the workers' meetings - because workers were supposed to
develop "thick skins." Although he reserved much of the verbal
and psychological abuse for private sessions, he would ridicule
dissenters in these closed workers' meetings, gatherings to which
the general congregation was neither invited nor allowed to
attend.
The average members, according to Kyle, don't see the
underside of the organization. "They see the enthusiasm, the
tremendous amount of outreach that goes on, the impressive amount
of personal involvement, and the companionship as you labor
together with them." But they were not privy to the inner details
of "The Work" - leading, discipling, decision-making, problem
solving, and indoctrinating. The written code of requirements for
workers states that, "The Work is not conducted on the basis of
democracy.... We have the right to demand loyalty in The Work....
We come into The Work ... with a commitment to The Work...."
Supposedly, any Christian is welcome to attend meetings at
The Assembly, and to partake of the Lord's Supper with them. No
one is turned away, and, "God's family and God's purpose are
inclusive of everyone." However, former members say the principle
is not carried out in practice.
Kyle and his wife had a difficult time leaving The Assembly
because to leave was to lose one's "covering." To leave would be
to subject oneself to physical danger from the Adversary, or to
the defilement of one's testimony by Satan. Members are
continually taught that "there is no place else in the world like
this Assembly in Fullerton." Kyle says that the spiritual
intimidation employed can be severe. Members are brought before
the leading brothers' council and "talked to" for violations such
as displaying a desire to hear other Christian preachers, having
a "rebellious spirit," disagreeing with authority, lack of
subjection to the leadership, questioning one of Brother George's
teachings, or desiring to go to another church. "You have one
person on one side of the table, with an array of men on the
other side. A domineering person is telling you you're wrong, why
you're wrong, that you need to repent, and then, one by one, all
the rest of them agree wholeheartedly. The targeted person has a
tremendous psychological onslaught to deal with. More often than
not, he ends up in tears and repents, and is either eventually
restored to favor or leaves the fellowship." Additionally, peer
pressure among the general congregation is an extremely effective
tool used to control the wayward.
......
Wow, are you ex WCG people seeing this? Are bells ringing in your
head? Does it all sound very familiar? Did you not see all this
kind of thing going on in the WCG ? If you did not you
truly had your head in the sand - Keith Hunt.
......
Although members are taught that it is perfectly legitimate
to have differences of opinion between "godly men," in practice
it is not allowed. Brother George himself claims to be
accountable to the leading brothers, and that he doesn't do
anything without their approval. However, "they always agree
with him," because, "Brother George has insight to see things
that we don't see." As a result, Brother George and a few of his
underlings exercise unrestrained control in the lives of Assembly
members. Followers are told what occupations are God-honoring,
whether or not they may practice the professions for which they
have been trained, whom they can marry and when, where they can
live, whom they can date, what they can do with their money, and,
in some instances, what they can and cannot eat.
Members of The Assembly are in a real double bind when it
comes to family and children. Although there is a great emphasis
on homes and the need for family life, activities are so frequent
and so intense that children are neglected. Families are lucky to
have two Saturdays a year to spend together, Kyle observes. From
birth children are expected to attend all meetings and to remain
quiet "in the presence of the Lord." "You would feel guilty if
you went off with your family or just wanted to hang out. If you
took off on a holiday to visit other family members, you just
didn't want what the Lord wanted, and you were just going the way
of the world."
The requirements on workers are the most intense and
burdensome, often entailing voluminous correspondence, outreach
efforts, and meetings. And, of course, Sunday is reserved
entirely as a day for the Lord. Brother George teaches in "broad
strokes" - a whole chapter from the Bible at a time. He may use
three or four hundred Scriptures in a two-hour meeting, and in
the midst of all the Scriptures he is attempting to identify a
general pattern or teaching. He tells his followers that he
believes that the vast majority will "forsake him in the end,"
but that if only one or two remain loyal it will have been worth
his effort. In the end, "tremendous persecution" will inevitably
be his lot. Members are encouraged not to miss out, but to
overcome and receive their "inheritance."
Brother George believes that the greatest part of salvation
is yet to come. According to his theology, only overcomers -
those in The Assembly - will reign with Christ in the millennial
kingdom, which is their inheritance for appropriating God's
grace. At the end of the millennium and after the destruction of
Satan, all believers will gain entrance to the eternal kingdom,
but only those having an inheritance will reign first.
In order to maintain full control over the lives of his
followers, Brother George instituted a reporting system by which
he rewards those who inform him of any questionable activities
among the membership. Although "everyone would deny that flatly,"
it was understood that those who informed on others were "truly
godly," and that the "dedicated ones told all." Consequently,
Kyle, and many others, confided in no one, including even their
spouses at times. Special friendships were said to cloud one's
ability to really discern the Lord. Affections might get in the
way of making an objective spiritual judgment or decision
concerning someone in The Work.
......
More of the same tactics as used in the WCG - Keith Hunt
......
Brother George has developed a teaching that refutes all
criticism. He encourages members to listen to no criticism of or
accusations against that teaching whatsoever, even "the Enemy"
lurking in one's own thoughts. The result of this teaching,
according to Kyle, is the "subtle cutting off of any kind of
critical thinking, any kind of analytical thinking." Members
therefore listen to nothing but the teachings of Brother George.
......
Ahhhh, same thing employed by the WCG - Keith Hunt
......
Kyle and his wife believe that they remained with The
Assembly as long as they did because they were away from
Fullerton and the full impact of George's influence for six of
their eleven years. During that time they ministered to
Assemblies in several states. Kyle says, "When we started
thinking that we were going to be coming back to Fullerton, we
very seriously considered not even leaving the Midwest, just
because we had personally been out from under all the control for
so long. It was a lot easier to deal with a long-distance phone
call than it was to deal with discipline day-by-day,
face-to-face. When we were told to move to another city, we
thought that that was a little bit better. But, what it comes
down to is that there are always ways for control to be
established and perpetuated no matter where you are. The
appropriate thing to say to Brother George was always, 'Brother,
whatever you want me to do, I'll do it.'"
Eventually, Kyle "fell into sin" and was excommunicated. In
actuality, he left the movement for a period of time because he
was "fed up." He had begun to see the subtle indoctrination
process involving heavy scheduling, constant teaching, unending
meetings, and the partisan viewpoint being presented while passed
off as inspiration from God. He saw the "tremendous psychological
chains" that were being put on the people, and he was also aware
that most people who leave The Assembly drift away from the Lord.
They give up, believing that God himself has laid on them
unachievable expectations.
......
And so it was the same with the WCG, most eventually drifted
away, they closed their Bible, decided God was really not there
in their lives, and walked right back into the world - Keith Hunt
......
Unable to reconcile his thoughts and sort out his emotions,
Kyle "repented" and went through a yearlong process of proving
his repentance to the leading brothers. He was passed up for four
months during communion, and the condition of his repentance was
based on how willing he was to do whatever he was told. Even when
his repentance was accepted, he and his wife were still shunned,
because members were afraid of associating with a fallen worker.
After six months of this treatment, Kyle and his wife left to
begin a new life.
Leaders who are abusive usually develop their heavy-handed
style over a period of time. Churches that abuse are the result
of an ever-accelerating emphasis on the kinds of control
mechanisms I have discussed in this book. People who have been in
close contact over a period of years with some of the pastoral
leaders we have discussed have told me that their ministry was
far more benign and subdued at the beginning. Gradually, as the
pastors became aware of the influence they could exert and the
power they could wield, they and their ministries began to
change. Consciously or unconsciously, they took advantage of
vulnerable people, and convinced them that God had given them,
the shepherds, the right to exercise authority over the flock.
People who abuse power are changed progressively as they do so.
In abusing power they give themselves over to evil, untruth,
self-blindness, and hardness without allowing themselves or
anyone else to see what is happening. The longer the process
continues, the harder repentance becomes. Church bosses must be
spotted and rescued early, or they may never be rescued at all.
They have caused inconceivable havoc among churches throughout
history.
......
Yes indeed the WCG did not start out as "authoritarian"
and "ruling people" with a rod of iron - it was a gradual
process. It's like the frog in the water that is slowly heated,
and does not see that change is taking place and he'd better jump
out. The church work started by Jim Jones started out as helping
and serving hundreds - a good charity church. It was over a
period of time that Jones turned his church into a cult of
control and eventually into hundreds of his followers willing to
kill themselves and their children, in the now imfamous story
that you can no doubt look up on the Internet - Keith Hunt
......
Pastoral abuse can be spotted quite easily, at least in its
advanced stages. Abusive religion substitutes human power for
true freedom in Christ. Unquestioning obedience and blind loyalty
are its hallmarks. Leaders who practice spiritual abuse exceed
the bounds of legitimate authority and "lord it over the flock,"
often intruding into the personal lives of members. God's will is
something that they determine for you rather than something you
individually seek to know. Abusive leaders are self-centered and
adversarial rather than reconciling and restorative.
But what about rescuing the leaders and salvaging the
followers? That is a major challenge facing the conventional
evangelical church. Most of the abusive churches I have studied
are independent, autonomous groups. They are not a part of a
denomination or network that could provide checks and balances or
any kind of accountability. As we have seen over and over again
in these pages, their leaders are accountable to no one and
resist any outside scrutiny. How can such independent groups
themselves be disciplined or even investigated for aberrations?
Because we value freedom of religion for all people and because
we are reluctant to get involved in someone else's vineyard, even
if we know it is "off the wall," the problem of abusive churches
is likely to continue.
The key to understanding the whole phenomenon is within the
human psyche - the desire to control others and to exercise power
over people. That has always been a part of the human experience
and it will continue to be. All of us have been exposed to the
temptation of power, whether as parent, spouse, teacher, or
worker. It has been said that human nature is always ready to
abuse its power the moment it can do so with impunity. It should
not be surprising, then, that the will to power sometimes invades
the religious realm, and specifically the church.
The respected Christian writer and physician, Paul Tournier,
writes that "there is in us, especially in those whose intentions
are of the purest, an excessive and destructive will to power
which eludes even the most sincere and honest self-examination."
He makes the point that people in the helping professions -
social workers, physicians, psychologists, and pastors -
especially need to be aware of the temptation of power, the
temptation to manipulate, and to control those who come seeking
help. "To be looked upon as a savior leaves none of us
indifferent."
Although he was not specifically addressing the problem of
contemporary pastoral abuse, Tournier's comments about the
possibility of misusing spiritual authority are a timely warning.
They look upon us as experts, God's mouthpieces, the
interpreters of his will-to begin with for ourselves, but
very soon, before we realize it, for other people too,
especially since they insist on requiring it of us. Very
soon, too, we find ourselves thinking that when they follow
our advice they are obeying God, and that when they resist
us they are really resisting God.
While we probably cannot prevent individual power-seekers
from getting entangled in their own authoritarian excesses, we
must remind all who will hear, including mainstream Christian
leaders, that weakness and dependence on God's strength are the
hallmarks of true greatness. As Harold Bussell writes in Unholy
Devotion:
The antithesis of the misuse of power is gentleness, which
is best seen and understood within the framework of
strength. Gentle leaders, pastors, or teachers do not force
their insights and wisdom on the unlearned, nor flaunt
their gifts before those in need. They are patient. They
take time for those who are slow to understand. They are
compassionate with the weak, and they share with those in
need. Being a gentle pastor, shepherd, leader, or teacher is
never a sign of being weak, but of possessing power clothed
in compassion.
This is in stark contrast to the style of abusive leaders,
who, as we have seen, often lack compassion and a gentle spirit.
Power has a way of blinding the conscience so that those who
spiritually and psychologically abuse others (like abusive
parents) show little sign of remorse and repentance. They deny
any guilt for what they have done to people. And they project
their own weaknesses onto others.
If we are in positions of power over others and we fail to
place controls on ourselves, we subtly and unknowingly start
to control others. Power that elevates a leader beyond
contradiction ... will lead both the leader and the
followers down a road marked by broken relationships,
exploitation, and control. Power that tempers and checks
itself and is wrapped in compassion is the pathway to
gentleness, caring, and maturity. Jesus said, "I am the good
shepherd. The good shepherd lays down his life for the
sheep" (John 10:11). He is our model of service and
leaderships.
One of the pressing needs of the Christian church is to
assist in the development of discernment skills among believers
so that the likelihood of following an aberrant teacher or a
false doctrine is diminished. The need for discernment was
impressed on me by a former member of Hobart Freeman's Faith
Assembly. He told me how the emphasis on the "faith message" or
"faith walk" eventually diverted his focus from the centrality of
Jesus Christ.
"The faith message is a counterfeit, unbiblical faith," he
said. "It takes the place of relationship with Jesus. Christ
became a secondary figure. We were taught that if you produce the
works of faith, God will bless you and you will have definite
proof that you are following Jesus Christ. These people would
say, 'I believe with all my heart that I'm on the right track
because Jesus healed me. Jesus gave me a promotion. Jesus gave me
a new car. He gave me the desires of my heart.' It becomes a
matter of the work of faith, doing some kind of faith formula.
What you do is important proof of your salvation, not what Jesus
did for your salvation."
This young man described the appeal of emphasizing positive
thinking or "positive confession," as it is known in the faith
movement. Many new Christians that he knew in the movement were
not only attracted to Hobart Freeman, but to the prospect of
supernatural, extraordinary experiences. "People look for
teachers who claim special revelations, who promise signs and
wonders. They've got to have something more than just a
relationship with Jesus Christ."
One survivor of an abusive-church situation told me how she
had been exposed to "every movement or fad that has crossed
America in the past decade." Initially influenced by John
Wimber's "signs and wonders" teachings, her church moved from an
emphasis on healing to inner healing, visualization, the healing
of memories, deliverance, positive confession, covenant
relationships, prosperity teaching, discipling/shepherding, and
even community living. She left confused and suffering from
spiritual bum-out. "It's still difficult for me to read my old
Bible, you know, the 'cool' one that's all marked up. I have to
read a different translation. I can't sing the same worship songs
and I have difficulty going to church."
This woman's comments about the progression of spiritual
fads she encountered brings to mind a book that has not received
wide circulation, but which I believe deserves thoughtful
consideration by every Christian interested in the topic of
current evangelical/charismatic movements. It is entitled
"Wonders and the Word," and is a collection of essays that
sensitively and discerningly critique the Vineyard movement
founded and headed by John Wimber. (There are now more than two
hundred Vineyard fellowships throughout North America and
Vineyard-sponsored seminars are held throughout Europe, the
United Kingdom, South Africa, Australia, and New Zealand.)
Although the book focuses on the "signs and wonders"
emphasis within the Vineyard fellowship, I feel its message has
wider implications for understanding any new religious movement.
I receive many inquiries about the Vineyard movement. Based on
extensive conversations with both current and former members of
Wimber's fellowship, I believe that the issues raised in "Wonders
and the Word" are valid concerns and that this rapidly growing
movement has great potential for problems similar to those I have
been discussing in this book. Indeed, there is some evidence of
abusive practices already taking place within Vineyard churches.
Let it be clearly understood that I agree with one of the
contributors to "Wonders and the Word" when he states that:
the Vineyard movement is impacting many people both inside
and outside the church. We cannot deny its existence as a
genuine work of the Spirit, and so should not discredit
it.... At the same time, we need to be aware of some of the
extremes to which such a movement can go.... Most new
movements of the Holy Spirit are embraced by eager
followers, many of whom tend to push the ideas of the
leaders to extremes. However, rather than write off the
movement because of excesses, we should draw alongside to
render guidance and counsel where it is needed and welcomed.
It is precisely this need and desire to provide counsel and
guidance that constitutes the challenge to the larger Christian
community as we reflect on the problem of abusive churches and
the prospect of potentially abusive groups. As I shall point out
shortly, there are some groups that are open to dialogue with
more mainstream churches. Others are extremely defensive and
resist any overtures from traditional churches, considering them
to be apostate and outside the circle of the elect.
Another challenge to the larger Christian world includes the
recognition that at least some of the members of abusive groups
are refugees from more conventional evangelical churches. They
are sincere, earnest seekers after God who, for a variety of
reasons, have become disillusioned with mainstream
evangelicalism. Many are seeking an intimacy and a kind of
fellowship that traditional churches often do not provide. As
Yeakley admits, "In the modern church, people come together as
strangers and leave as strangers and their lives never touch."
Others seek a more informal, charismatic worship style that
many traditional evangelical churches do not offer.
Interestingly, it is this dimension-worship style - that
former members of abusive churches tell me they miss the most, as
they reflect back on their experience. Still others mention the
appeal of a family-like environment. I have in my files a letter
from a man whose comment is not at all unusual: "One of the good
things about the group was that it gave people like me a sense of
'family' and 'belonging' to an extent that I haven't had before
or since."
......
And so it was also in the WCG under HWA - people felt a family
connection, that became so strong it blinded them to what was
taking place in the organization and also in their mind-thinking.
The tie of "belonging" and "family" together with the idea that
"this organization" had a special connection to God - they were
slowly brainwashed into believing "their organization" was the
"apple" of God's eye, and that He had sent them an end-time
apostle to lead them into the Kingdom - Keith Hunt
......
Why are Christians being attracted to nontraditional
groups? In addition to the reasons just cited - greater freedom
in worship, acceptance, fellowship, and a sense of family - there
is the appeal and excitement of experience, the desire for
something new, something more, as illustrated by this observation
concerning the Vineyard: "Dissatisfaction with a lack of
spiritual power, a feeling of unfulfillment in one's relationship
to Christ and a hunger for a new and deeper experience with
God.... The Vineyard's emphasis on power, signs and wonders has a
definite appeal to those who are searching for something more."
I have already noted the role of subjective experience in
the devolution of many abusive churches. It is understandable,
then, that I voice my concern over the current preoccupation in
some Christian circles, including the Vineyard movement, with the
exorcism of demons, the pronouncements of "prophets" like Paul
Cain and Bob Jones, the talk of a "new breed" of people ("Joel's
Army" - a unique end-time army of believers endowed with
supernatural power enabling them to perform "signs and wonders,"
purify the church, and overcome all opposition to the Gospel),
the appearance of the "Manifest Sons of God," the unorthodox
Godman theology of Benny Hinn, and the "revelation teaching" of
assorted "end-time prophets" in charismatic circles. Space does
not permit discussion of these phenomena, but let the reader
beware.
As Dr. Paul G. Hiebert of Trinity Evangelical Divinity
School correctly observes:
Like most movements in the church, the current emphasis on
healing, prophecy and exorcism has both positive and
negative sides to it. It reminds us of the need to take
seriously the work of the Holy Spirit in meeting everyday
human needs. It is in danger, however, of placing primary
emphasis on what is of secondary importance in scripture and
of bending the gospel to fit the spirit of our times. Satan
often tempts us at the point of our greatest strengths. His
method is not to sell us rank heresy, but to take the good
we have and distort it by appealing to our self-interests.
Abusive churches are not, for the most part, promoting rank
heresy. But their human leaders seem ever willing to make
pronouncements in the name of God, thus "mistaking what God is
saying in Scripture for their own particular brand of
interpretation of Scripture." This sets the stage for the
possibility of outright heresy being introduced, as well as the
kind of abusive practices we have discussed.
Is it possible for authoritarian churches to change
direction? There are several fairly recent examples of leaders
who have announced changes and confessed to error. One of the
leaders of the discipleship/shepherding movement officially known
as Christian Growth Ministries, Bob Mumford, made a dramatic
about-face after issuing a public statement of repentance in
November of 1989. Mumford, one of the "Ft.Lauderdale Five" (so
named because of the group of the five founders of Christian
Growth Ministries of Ft.Lauderdale - Don Basham, Ern Baxter, Bob
Mumford, Derek Prince, and Charles Simpson), acknowledged abuses
that had occurred because of his teaching on submission. This
emphasis resulted in "perverse and unbiblical obedience" to
leaders. He publicly repented "with sorrow" and asked for
forgiveness. He also admitted that families had been severely
disrupted and lives turned upside down.
In an interview with "Christianity Today" magazine, Mumford
indicated that the abuse of spiritual authority led to "injury,
hurt, and in some cases, disaster." Leaders, he said, were
operating at a level where biblical limitations on their
authority were not clear. "Part of the motivation behind my
public apology is the realization that this wrong attitude is
still present in hundreds of independent church groups who are
answerable to no one."
Jack Hayford, whose counseling of Mumford was instrumental
in the decision to issue a public apology, said in "Ministries
Today" magazine that he was one of hundreds of pastors who had
spent fifteen years "picking up the pieces of broken lives that
resulted from distortion of truth by extreme teachings and
destructive applications on discipleship, authority, and
shepherding."
In November of 1989, Maranatha Christian Churches, founded
by Bob Weiner, announced that it was disbanding and dissolving
its international federation of churches. The youth and
inexperience of its pastors, along with the controversial
shepherding practices of the group were some of the problems that
led to the demise of the organization (although MCM spokespersons
denied those allegations). Most of the churches themselves did
not close, but instead became even more independent and
autonomous bodies.
One of the most encouraging evidences of change is taking
place within the Great Commission Association of Churches,
formerly named Great Commission International (GCI). Founder Jim
McCotter is no longer associated with the organization. The
current leadership (which includes many of the original leaders)
has been consulting with evangelical pastors, lay persons, former
members, and various well-known Christian organizations in an
effort to chart a new course. I have met with several of the
national leaders on two occasions, and they shared with me their
commitment to a process of restoration and healing, as well as
their desire to chart an organizational change.
The Great Commission leadership has identified a number of
past "errors and weaknesses" that they feel were caused by
incorrect or imbalanced teaching, the youthful immaturity of some
leaders, and a number of other factors. In personal
correspondence with me, one of their national leaders stated, "We
have a desire to forthrightly acknowledge errors and problems
that existed and yet not inaccurately or needlessly dishonor what
the Lord has done in our past...."
Former members of GCI are cautiously optimistic about the
unfolding events and, frankly, they are a bit surprised. Others
are more cynical, fearing that the effort is an insincere gesture
in order to achieve acceptance and legitimation from the
evangelical mainstream without fully acknowledging the depths of
the hurt which has been caused over the years. At this writing,
the effort at reconciliation and restoration is in process. Many
will be watching to see the outcome and the nature of change that
emerges. The Great Commission Association of Churches may well
prove to be a model for other groups to emulate.
Major change is also taking place within a network of
charismatic Catholic communities because of the efforts of former
members to expose the excessive control and abusive practices
alleged to have occurred. The Word of God Community in Ann Arbor,
Michigan, has undergone a split, and cofounders Ralph Martin and
Steve Clark have experienced a parting of the ways. Word of God
leaders, in a March 1991 letter to members, expressed a desire to
repent of "spiritual pride and arrogance, elitism, legalism and
an overbearing exercise of pastoral authority." Several months
later the same leaders told assembled members that people were no
longer to be under anyone's control, in effect renouncing the
shepherding practices of the past. The basic issue that divides
Martin and Clark is the nature of pastoral care and authority in
Christian community.
Martin's faction has opted for a more moderate pastoral
system with less emphasis on submission, while Clark maintains
that covenant community leaders have been entrusted with the
spiritual and material welfare of the members, and therefore must
exercise responsible pastoral authority over those members.
Former members of several other charismatic Catholic
communities told the "National Catholic Reporter" stories of the
extreme submission of women to men, and life-style conformity
that included the wearing of shoes and hairstyles similar to
those of the leaders. One group celebrated the birth of boys but
reportedly only "tolerated" newborn girls. A former member of one
group was "discouraged" from visiting his dying mother. "He was
told to repent for spending a Sunday morning with her."
Roman Catholic Bishop Albert Ottenweller of Steubenville,
Ohio, ordered an investigation of Servants of Christ the King, a
charismatic covenant community affiliated with the Sword of the
Spirit, a network of communities scattered throughout the United
States and abroad. Bishop Ottenweller criticized the Servants of
Christ the King for "an arrogance that is elitist ...." and a
"lack of compassion and love for those in need." He charged that
the lives of members had been controlled through the manipulation
of marriages and life-style patterns. "Great psychological harm
has been done to members."
While not all groups affiliated with the Sword of the Spirit
have recanted their clearly abusive methods, the actions of Word
of God leaders in Ann Arbor appear to be sincere and will have an
uncertain but dramatic impact on that organization's future. In
an interview with Fidelity, a conservative Catholic magazine,
Word of God senior head-coordinator Ralph Martin admitted that
the community had had problems from its earliest days.
I think a small group of people basically took control of
the whole thing early on. And I was part of that group.... I
think [we] took the place 'of the Lord Himself, in a certain
kind of way. Instead of trusting in the Lord and being
docile to the Lord....[we] basically got into protecting our
thing, our work, in a way which led to excessive exercises
of authority, controlling people's lives.
While these examples of repentance and change are welcomed
and praiseworthy, we must not forget those whose lives have been
damaged, some irreparably, during the long years when the
now-repentant leaders were unresponsive to warnings and reluctant
to admit weakness. It is easy for us who have not experienced the
pain and turmoil of their followers to say, "Forgive and forget."
We all struggle on in a fallen world, seeking to test the
voices that call to us, to discern whether they are, indeed, from
God. The ultimate challenge is to fix our eyes on Jesus, the
Great Shepherd, who knows his sheep and who will never abandon
us.
The word of the LORD came to me: "Son of man, prophesy
against the shepherds of Israel .... 'This is what the
Sovereign LORI) says: Woe to the shepherds of Israel who only
take care of themselves! Should not shepherds take care of the
flock? .... You have not strengthened the weak or healed the sick
or bound up the injured. You have not brought back the strays or
searched for the lost. You have ruled them harshly and brutally.
So they were scattered because there was no shepherd ....
Therefore, you shepherds, hear the word of the LORD .... because
my shepherds did not search for my flock but cared for themselves
rather than for my flock .... I am against the shepherds and will
hold them accountable for my flock. I will remove them from
tending the flock .... I myself will search for my sheep and look
after them .... I will bind up the injured and strengthen the
weak .... I will shepherd the flock with justice .... I will save
my flock, and they will no longer be plundered .... You my sheep,
the sheep of my pasture, are people, and I am your God, declares
the Sovereign LORD.'" (Excerpts from Ezekiel 34)
.............................
NOTE:
You should certainly see by now that the Protestant and Roman
Catholic world of Christianity has its "churches that abuse" -
indeed they do, and probably still do.
Yet those of us who have been blessed with having more knowledge
of the truths of God's word than the Catholics and Protestants,
need to watch our step also, for church groups are out there
among US who ABUSE and "brain-wash" and "want to control" your
every move, and thought. You need to love truth and righte-
ousness; you need to prove all thing; you need to hold fast to
that which is good; you need to keep your nose and eyes in the
Bible; you need to find by prayer and study of God's word HOW a
true minister of the Lord will speak, act, and work. And if you
have ever been a part of an abusive church, you need to admit it!
If you have been by God rescued from an abusive church, then
PRAISE HIM! And ask Him for the wisdom to NEVER be pushed along
and caught up in an abusive church again.
Keith Hunt
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
No comments:
Post a Comment