Why Stoned Stephen Society?

"Looks like there is another disgruntled member taking to blogging." That will be the snarling remark in HQ board meetings as they play Titus 1:10-11 in their minds over and over.

"For there are many unruly and vain talkers and deceivers...whose mouths MUST BE STOPPED, who subvert whole houses, teaching things which they ought not, [always ignoring the rest of the statement] for filthy lucre's sake."

Spending decades of my adult life in the churches of God, I have seen many friends come and go. More often than not, they had a negative personal experience with another member or their minister or both, that served as the catalyst for becoming critical and exiting stage right. These types of incidences always made it easy to side with the church and not so much with the disgruntled. To make their case worse, these angry exiters often would get wrapped up in irrelevant picky points of doctrine, making themselves more pharisaical than the ministry they attack. 

So when I first started sharing some of my disagreements about church teachings to close friends, the first thing I could see them do was try to determine who I had a beef with and why. Makes sense. I do the same thing. I could tell some of them were frightened by the prospect that I was actually making objective and logical sense. Once they could see I was not motivated by anger or a personal slight or offense, and that my objections were sound, the obvious question they would then ask was, "So what are you going to do about it?"

The question baffled me for 3 years. I had no idea what to do. My temporary solution was to do nothing. As I pointed out in David V. Barrett's book in my previous post, he stressed how in the churches of God's top-down hierarchy, all the power and control rests at the top and the laity has no power, no influence and no voice. But there are two things that have changed that.

Barrett points out that the most important leader in a "New Religious Movement" is not the founder but the second leader. The movement will make or break upon the 2nd leader's ability to legitimize the movement or destroy it. Unlike the Seventh Day Adventists, the Mormons and the Jehovah's Witnesses, the Worldwide Church of God failed to legitimize after the death of its founder. What followed was a corporate rejection of the Armstrong movement and the formation of competing factions led by middling managers with no charisma or credibility. 

This diffusion of power and control has given brethren options. This is quite powerful because one of the most controlling aspect of WCG was it's "one true church" teaching in which it was expected that everyone understood that meant the corporate entity known as WCG. With no charismatic leaders to follow, people just landed where their ministers did and if there was any disagreement with a teaching or a personal falling out occurred with brother or minister, another church of God was probably just a few more minutes closer or further away.

The other game-changer is the internet. Before Google, the only thing people had as a resource concerning the cultic abuses of WCG was Ambassador Report that went largely unknown until it was made available on the internet. The churches of God no longer have the means to control the flow of information. Barrett concludes the churches of God movement will continue to wither on the vine because the internet kicks open closets and drags skeletons into the light of day for everyone to see. Couple that with elitist leaders who think they can ignore and defy reality, and there should be no wonder why there is no influx of new members.

Heterodox or nonconforming (I had to look it up too) religious movements create alternative realities for their believers. This actually serves to isolate members, blinds them from reality and causes them to adhere to a culture where you never question the groupthink. If and when this "spell" is ever broken, that is where emotional trauma, anger and bitterness  enter. I certainly went through my share of it that first year. I was mostly angry at myself and embarrassed that a free-thinking and intelligent person such as myself would be deceived. But I couldn't let the emotional and personal aspect of the moment dictate my actions. I forced myself to step back and pray and wait and meditate and study. I had to let time ensure reason and objectivity was at the forefront of my thinking.

So people ask, "Why do you stay involved? Why do you attend services?" At the end of the day, I had to determine if the people in my life in the last 2 plus decades are really my brethren. And do I love those brethren? I realized I really did have an invested interest in these people. And I also came to realize after studying how the WCG also traumatized the ministry, that the ministers were victimized as well. I am not excusing their sins as the abusers. It's just a matter of recognizing that in a cult setting of concentrated power and control, even the abusers are victims. 

Many have thrown their hands up in the air and walked away, erasing the existence of their time and experience completely from their lives. That is ok. I understand that. But there is a spectrum of response. I see it every day on Banned by HWA and I appreciate everyone's perspective. It is theirs. 

This is mine. If these people are my brethren and I love them, then I am staying. But I will not shut up. This blog is for people like me who love the people, want to stay and encourage positive change but don't know what to do or how to do it. The most important thing I think we can do is be informative without the vitriol. How information is presented can be more important than the information itself.

This blog is for those that understand that no one has the market cornered on all truth. This is for those that have the patience to dissect ideas and beliefs and recognize there are decent, dare I say, Biblical ones, even in the churches of God. Even if the baby is ugly, I still don't want to toss it with the bathwater.

My ultimate goal is to give a greater voice to brethren in hopes we reach a point where the leaders are forced into one of three directions. I am ok with any one of them or a combination of all three:

1. Dissolve.
2.  Reform.
3. Merge.

The key is to no longer allow business as usual. It is time to stir the pot and effect change. The churches of God must shed their cult skins and revert to congregational governance. They must strip their statements of belief to a small core and encourage people to really study their Bibles and develop their own understanding. Spreading information, making connections, building bridges anonymously through the power of the internet, and withholding financial support is the best way I can see to empower both laity and ministers afraid to speak out. I refuse to leave the next generation to wallow in an institution that has not changed or grown in over 60 years.  The organizations may not be salvageable but the people certainly are.

Another 10 years and the guiltiest among the organizations will be dead or out of  power. I am hopeful the next generation of ministers (some of which are my friends) coming into power will begin a reformation. If they don't, then we will simply witness the churches of God continue on toward the dust bin of history and the brethren find new places to go or, better yet, create new congregational entities patterned after the parent church, Church of God (Seventh Day).


V