During the last few days, this phrase has been uttered within certain political commentaries. It has been in reference to the idea that our governmental leaders are given their power to lead and govern “by the consent of the governed..”. This is a basic premise of our system of government found here in the Declaration of Independence. ( http://www.ushistory.org/declaration/document/ )
This phrase has led me down a trail of ideas and thoughts that reflect on my time at Word of Faith Fellowship (WOFF) in Spindale, NC. This group is led by Jane Whaley. From the beginning, there will be those who would argue that we cannot compare political and social government directly to the organization of a church. And previously, for a time, I would agree. Just why I would agree, I do not know. Does the question focus on the organization of a church or the governing of that group of people or local church?
On the one hand, there are churches that have an autonomous leader. He or she answers to no one in any capacity and totally rules on every level. This is evidently the structure at WOFF. There are other churches which operate within an organizational structure and their leader is afforded very little “decision” power. They may only provide counseling, preaching, teaching and spiritual guidance; while also performing the weddings, funerals and baptisms as needed. Also, I feel sure in America, we have the full spectrum between each of the examples with some church leaders having limited autonomy that would have elders or a board of directors and others having much decision power even within a denominational setting.
Over the years, I have attended churches represented on several different levels of the spectrum. During my childhood, I attended a denominational church where the pastor or minister was interviewed by a church and basically employed by the church under the leadership of a bishop speaking for that denomination. Usually, the minister moved on to another church every four years. As far as I remember, there were business meetings where the members voted on certain issues. If the minister was not accepted for some reason, the church could request that the bishop help assign another one to the church.
Years later, I attended another denominational church. The structure was similar except the local church was more autonomous and had more direct say as to what was said and done- especially when it came to money. After that, I spent time in independent churches where the pastor/leader/founder had ultimate say so over most every aspect of church life and especially- the money issues. This type of church is very popular and many times comes under the heading if a “non-denominational” church. I have been a part of non-denominational churches in the past that were a part of a loose knit organization of churches that may be centered on a certain religious direction, theme or purpose. Otherwise, they may just agree to “fellowship” and come together for social reasons. My church experience has been over many years and in different types of church structure.
Why bring this up or even spend time pondering the differences? First, it seems that our current government has forgotten that they obtain their powers to govern by the consent of the governed. This is the final check and balance in our government. We should all remember this and exercise our voice and vote this coming Tuesday!
Next, I continue to search for answers as to my involvement in WOFF-life. It is worth noting that in America, both previously mentioned types of church structure are accepted and recognized by our government. The structure at WOFF is legal, but, I must ask is it healthy or even New Testament? One could use Old Testament examples of the people following a strong leader and when they rebelled- it did not go good for them. MANY of these examples were taught OVER and OVER at WOFF. Jane could rattle off these examples faster than you could open your Bibles and say “take hold!” Do you want to go the way of Korah, Dathan and Abiram? (Numbers 16) Well, no, who would cross that line and suggest another way or even that Jane had “missed God”? Seriously,…?
Jane and her leaders would also talk about Ananias and Sapphira and what happened to them…(Acts 5) And for New Testament Christians, let’s start there. This couple was held accountable because they had lied to the Holy Spirit. It was acknowledged that they had the opportunity to hear the Holy Spirit. New Testament believers have a different promise than the Old Testament believers. Each New Testament believer has relationship with God individually. This was not so in the Old Testament. Direction from a strong leader seemed needed to keep folks in track in the former years. But now, to not consider insight and direction that God may be speaking to and through others in a group or church seems short sighted or Old Testament. At the minimum, a totally autonomous leader could easily miss the direction of God by only trusting his or her own thoughts. Does this make sense?
While at WOFF, there was a “Board”. Who was on it and what was discussed in their meetings was rarely if EVER discussed. And yes, the members of WOFF may be asked what they wanted to eat on Friday night or if they wanted to play… Yes, Jane did “ask” if the members wanted to sue the DSS. In that meeting, who would have said no? So, in practice, Jane Whaley ran/runs WOFF. This is not illegal, but is it healthy or even New Testament?
It takes a keen person to know BEFORE joining WOFF just how far reaching being involved in WOFF-life will be, after you join. From my experience, most folks have no idea what they are joining and the consequences of being a faithful WOFF member. Some may argue, well can’t they just vote with their feet and leave? If you don’t like WOFF- just leave? At what price? Eternal damnation? Never see family again? Contorted family relationships– if any? Loss of job, housing and maybe access to transportation? Should that really be the price to pay to leave a healthy New Testament church and find another?
There are many more pieces of the question that could be discussed. In my opinion, there is no way for a new member of WOFF to know what life on the inside if WOFF is like before they move in. There is no way to fully understand how many personal freedoms are sacrificed to be a WOFF member until you take that step into Jane’s world. Is membership in a group where the leader does NOT obtain their ability to rule from the consent of the governed– healthy or beneficial? Yes, it is true, without WOFF members Jane would not have a kingdom. In my opinion, if potential members knew the total price to pay in order to be a faithful WOFF member, they would/should make a different choice.
Thank you, for taking time to visit and read this blog. Please, consume the information on this site responsibly. The author is not a licensed mental health professional and encourages those that need professional help to seek it. The intent of the material is to inform and be a resource. Be sure to tell every member that you know at WOFF about this blog. There are readers at WOFF. Comments are invited from all readers, including present or former members. Polls are not scientific and no private information is gathered.
Look on the right side of any post for the option to subscribe by email for notifications or RSS feeds notifying of new postings. It is a great feature. Also, find more posts by selecting “Categories”.
(Please, take time to read the Terms of Use for this personal blog. As mentioned, the information about WOFF is from my memories and recollections as perfect as that may be or not be. ) Scripture references are Amplified Version unless otherwise noted. (Copyright © 1954, 1958, 1962, 1964, 1965, 1987 by The Lockman Foundation ) This is post number 204.