Spiritual Abuse

[mcmstaff78]

The following is from an essay by David Henke and is available online here (http://www.watchman.org/profile/abusepro.htm).

Spiritual abuse is the misuse of a position of power, leadership, or influence to further the selfish interests of someone other than the individual who needs help. Sometimes abuse arises out of a doctrinal position. At other times it occurs because of legitimate personal needs of a leader that are being met by illegitimate means. Spiritually abusive religious systems are sometimes described as legalistic, mind controlling, religiously addictive, and authoritarian.

COMMON CHARACTERISTICS

#1) Authoritarian

The most distinctive characteristic of a spiritually abusive religious system, or leader, is the over-emphasis on authority. Because a group claims to have been established by God Himself the leaders in this system claim the right to command their followers.

This authority supposedly comes from the position they occupy. In Matthew 23:1-2 Jesus said the Scribes and Pharisees "sit in Moses' seat," a position of spiritual authority. Many names are used but in the abusive system this is a position of power, not moral authority. The assumption is that God operates among His people through a hierarchy, or "chain of command." In this abusive system unconditional submission is often called a "covering," or "umbrella of protection" which will provide some spiritual blessing to those who fully submit. Followers may be told that God will bless their submission even if the leadship is wrong. It is not their place to judge or correct the leadership - God will see to that.

#2) Image Conscious

The abusive religious system is scrupulous to maintain an image of righteousness. The organization's history is often misrepresented in the effort to demonstrate the organization's special relationship to God. The mistaken judgements and character flaws of its leaders are denied or covered up in order to validate their authority. Impossibly high legalistic standards of thought and behavior may be imposed on the members. Their failure to live up to these standards is a constant reminder of the follower's inferiority to his leaders, and the necessity of submission to them. Abusive religion is, at heart, legalism.

Abusive religion is also paranoid. Because the truth about the abusive religious system would be quickly rejected if recognized, outsiders are shown only a positive image of the group. This is rationalized by assuming that the religion would not be understood by "worldly" people; therefore they have no right to know. This attitude leads to members being secretive about some doctrines and the inner policies and proceedures of the group. Leaders, especially, will keep secrets from their members. This secrecy is rooted in a basic distrust of others because the belief system is false and can not stand scrutiny.

Continued in next post...

[mcmstaff78]

...continued from previous post.

#3) Suppresses Criticism

Because the religious system is not based on the truth it cannot allow questions, dissent, or open discussions about issues. The person who dissents becomes the problem rather than the issue he raised. The truth about any issue is settled and handed down from the top of the hierarchy. Questioning anything is considered a challenge to authority. Thinking for oneself is suppressed by pointing out that it leads to doubts. This is portrayed as unbelief in God and His anointed leaders. Thus the follower controls his own thoughts by fear of doubting God.

#4) Perfectionistic

A most natural assumption is that a person does not get something for nothing. Apart from the express declarations of salvation by grace through faith God has given in the scriptures, it would be natural to think that one must earn salvation, or at least work to keep it. Thus, in abusive religions all blessings come through performance of spiritual requirements. Failure is strongly condemned so there is only one alternative, perfection. So long as he thinks he is succeeding in his observation of the rules, the follower typically exhibits pride, elitism, and arrogance. However, when reality and failure eventually set in, the result is the person experiences spiritual burnout, or even shipwreck of his faith. Those who fail in their efforts are labeled as apostates, weak, or some other such term so that they can be discarded by the system.

#5) Unbalanced

Abusive religions must distinguish themselves from all other religions so they can claim to be distinctive and therefore special to God. This is usually done by majoring on minor issues such as prophecy, carrying biblical law to extremes, or using strange methods of biblical interpretation. The imbalanced spiritual hobby-horse thus produced represents unique knowledge or practices which seem to validate the group's claim to special status with God.

*********************

Okay, does that sound familiar to anyone?

[jonmoseley]

Okay, does that sound familiar to anyone?

MOSELEY: NO. Not from my experience. Unless you count 99% of churches as being this way.

[matt_hatter]

Dear friends, be careful with our morose poster. He will suck the LIFE out of you, I felt it yesterday. He will NOT go away, given the attention he is getting. Suggestion: Go read the scripture dust posted on the ponder thread from Phillipians. Ask yourself if he is worth thinking on. MY ANSWER IS NO! I don't need a shill for EN blabbering away.

[mcmstaff78]

<blockquote><hr size=0><!-quote-!><font size=1>quote:</font>

Moseley: NO. Not from my experience. Unless you count 99% of churches as being this way.<!-/quote-!><hr size=0></blockquote> Jon, since from what I've read you have little or no experience with any "churches" other than MCM and EN, and certainly not with "99%" of Churches, your comment is inane, non-responsive, irrelevant, immaterial and without basis in fact. However, I will take as corroboration that this is, in fact, what you've experienced in both MCM and EN and so, inadvertently and, I'm sure, unintentionally, you help corroborate that MCM and EN were/are spiritually abusive organizations.

Good to hear from you!

(Message edited by mcmstaff78 on October 26, 2006)

[jonmoseley]

For example, are baptists "unbalanced" under #5 in contrast to Anglicans? THey over-emphasized (at one time in the past at least) baptism to distinguish themselves from other churches.

Do Assemblies of God over-emhpasize charismatic gifts in comparison with Baptists?

What church doesn't are about its image?

I don't dispute the discussion as a valid criticism of cults. But I do see wild potential for subjective interpretation and unfair accusations.

FOR EXAMPLE: Evidence conclusively proves that the bank robber had 2 arms and 2 legs and 2 eyes, and a head. HORRORS: Rice Broocks ALSO has 2 arms and 2 legs and 2 eyes, and a head. SHOCKING SCANDAL.

That king of logic appears again and again.

[jonmoseley]

As it is easy to do here, MCMstaff78 apparently missed my personal story that I spent from 1993 to 2003 looking for another church, and discovered that ALL of them had the same problems that you identify here about EN. I attended a wide variety of churches, and was not a member of EN, from 1993 to 2003.

[mcmstaff78]

You are confusing "distinctives" with "unbalanced", (though I have little sympathy for either group you've mentioned, they are not, generally speaking, abusive). Moreover, you seem not be inable to distinguish between acceptable and extreme behavior. "Caring" about one's image is not the same as prohibiting any discussion with "outsiders" and being totally secretive about theology, finances and personnel issues.

Again, your last analogy is totally inane and demonstrates the extent to which you've been brainwashed to believe that all religious institutions engage in the abusive behavior you've been reared in. Come to the light, Jon, it will do you good.

[upcase20]

I visited many churches after I left Maranatha and no they did not ALL have the same problems, perhaps I could suggest some to you: for starters try Alfred Street Baptist Church in Alexandria Va.
There are many more mainline christian churches that don't display the type of legalism in EN that were handed down from Maranatha. Let me know if you need a list, I'll be glad to help you.

[mcmstaff78]

<blockquote><hr size=0><!-quote-!><font size=1>quote:</font>

Moseley: As it is easy to do here, MCMstaff78 apparently missed my personal story that I spent from 1993 to 2003 looking for another church, and discovered that ALL of them had the same problems that you identify here about EN. I attended a wide variety of churches, and was not a member of EN, from 1993 to 2003.<!-/quote-!><hr size=0></blockquote> Man, have you ever had bad luck, or you simply keep gravitating to the wrong churches (or maybe the churches that perpetuate the same theological and abusive errors that EN did). Well, they say people who grow up abused wind up in abusive relationships more times than not.

I can say that only one of the churches I've been in in the 27 years since I left MCM exhibited the same abusive characteristics. It started to dawn on me that bad theology perpetuated by self-appointed men in schismatic groups tend to go bad (abusive) fairly quickly.

(Message edited by mcmstaff78 on October 26, 2006)

[upcase20]

I can say NONE of the churches I visited after I left MCM showed what I saw there.

[mcmstaff78]

<blockquote><hr size=0><!-quote-!><font size=1>quote:</font>

upcase20: I can say NONE of the churches I visited after I left MCM showed what I saw there.<!-/quote-!><hr size=0></blockquote>Ah, but you were smarter than I!

[robert_unknown]

i was raised in the Roman Catholic church until i got saved in 1988. I have NEVER wittnessed ANY abuse in the churches that I have been at this time. My mother wsa involved in certain areas of church life and ministry and has NEVER seen any abuse happening.

But she does not go to people who have experienced abuse, perhaps as children, and tell them that they are wrong, because she has not experienced it.

The RCC - at least where i am living - is VERY concerned about abuse and works strongly against it. they also have apologized publicly for certain issues.

what i awant to say is this:
- not every individual will be a victim of abuse
- not in every local church abuse is happening

the distracting thing with EN is, that i hear the SAME stories from all over the world. They are happening in Africa, Australia, New-Zealand, Latin-Amerika, the US.

The churches under Steve Murrel in Asia have a good reputation though. Perhaps the best in EN. Also the british EN churches seem to have a very good reputation.

Despite this it seems that the roots of EN (which are going back to MCM) are corrupted. Somehow a theology or at least a mindset of authoritarian leadership, false discipleship concepts, wrong understanding on covering are the root of this problems.

To all this comes the fact, that some of the main leaders are arrogant, selfish and loveless. some of them are more concerned on themselves than of the church.

I know that EN is busy working on restructuring and reforming its structure.

I fear that - even despite the fact, that they try hard to reform EN - it will not happen. i fear that the changes will be more of cosmetical nature than real and deep changes.