During the month of June, I posted a series under the title Why Should Others Not in WOFF Care?.(the link is here… https://religiouscultsinfo.com/?p=2038 .)  I took as my reference text a book titled “The Five Thousand Year Leap” by W. Cleon Skousen (copyright C&J Investments, ISBN 0-9815596-6-2) with a forward by Glenn Beck. One reader, who saw the recent sign posted in the community advertising this blog, took the time to email me and express her concern that I would choose this book as a reference text. She sent her supporting text, from which I will quote,

“Around this same time, Beck began promoting the work of an arcane Mormon conspiracy-peddler named W. Cleon Skousen, whom he described as his political lodestar. Suddenly, Beck had something more to offer than irritable mental gestures…. Skousen’s paranoid politics were an outgrowth of his participation in extreme anti-communist groups during the 1950s. He boasted of a close friendship with then-FBI director J. Edgar Hoover and said he provided him with research on communist plots, claims disputed by FBI historians.”

   This was from a lengthy piece titled “Days of Rage — The Noxious Transformation of the Conservative Movement into a Rabid Fringe” By Max Blumenthal, Nation Books, Posted on August 10, 2010, Printed on August 10, 2010, http://www.alternet.org/story/147784/

   So, in all honesty, I failed to fully research Mr. Skousen’s past and did not research his all of his sources. In fact, I will say that my excitement about the book was more emotional than purely intellectual. Here was one source that listed the “rights” I had seen violated and surrendered during my time at Word of Faith Fellowship (WOFF). For years, I had submitted to the teachings of Jane Whaley and was not aware of the damages it had done. This one book though not purposed or directed to address my question(s), listed “rights” that I had seen thwarted during my time at WOFF.

  

    In order to recognize and appreciate the time the reader took to read my work and then email me her criticism, I will restate the question and reframe the argument for my answer. The question in the title was Why Should Others Not in WOFF Care?… Can we arrive at a suitable answer? 

    From the first post.. “Previously, I would start a post on why others should care and as I wrote it all sounded whiny and selfish. “You should care because I and many others have been affected by Jane and WOFF.”  I would write about the many families who have been torn apart and “it just was not right!”. I decided to leave what to me was obvious and search for a better answer.

    Why Should Others Outside Care About WOFF and Its Members? The question could be asked – why should we care about people in other counties or states who are unemployed or in poverty? Why should we care about people in Louisiana who suffered in Katrina? Why should we care about people in Haiti? Why should we care about the people in Pakistan or China or Nashville, TN? Why should we spend resources to help folks in Iraq or Afghanistan?

    When people are put upon by tragedy of any sorts, there is an element of the human heart and human spirit that wants to help. This country is filled with loving, caring folks who give abundantly in times of need for folks in faraway places or right here in North Carolina. But, John; it is not so obvious- who is hurting at WOFF? Those folks live big, drive big and dress nice! And that could be said in many regards. Let us continue.

Here is the list of rights that were expounded upon during the series of previously mentioned posts:

“The right to beget one’s kind”

“The right to free speech”

“The right to a free press”

“The right to enjoy the fruits of one’s labors”

 “The right to privacy”

 “The right to free association”    

 “The right to contract”

“The right to make personal choices”

 “The right of free conscience”

 “The right to choose a profession”

 “The right to choose a mate”

   This is not the complete list of “rights” that are listed by Skousen. These are just the ones reviewed in the series of posts. We can debate if these are “rights” or if some may be privileges. We can add some or take some away. Which ones do you as a reader not already have in your life – right now? Further, which ones of these “rights” are YOU the reader, willing to surrender in order to be a part of a church? Which ones of these rights do you think is necessary to trade for assurance that you are “right with God”? Which right is okay to give up in order to secure Jane Whaley’s approval? Which right or freedom is acceptable to give away to belong to WOFF? Which one is okay to give up in order to “fulfill the call of God”, or “walk with God” or “be in your place” or whatever WOFF-ism you want to be or have in your life? Is it necessary to surrender this list and others, in order to be a true Christian? In more general terms, when and where is it acceptable for any reason to subject another human being to your unique religious ideals and/or other requirements and cause or induce them to give up these rights in order to be a part of your group?

   Except for the last one, I was married when I went into WOFF; every other right listed was hindered, given up or subjected to Jane Whaley directly or indirectly during my time at WOFF. It was all in order to belong and “stay in my place”. How deceived was I? If you desire, go back and read the series and read the text following the listing of each one of these rights. This is the price for being a member of WOFF. If you want the Freedom in Christ as explained in the New Testament, don’t join WOFF. If you want for a person to direct your life and tell you that you are “walking with God”, and here are the rules to keep going; then consider WOFF and its “cult-ture”. These things are happening everyday at WOFF. (at least, while I was there; have things changed?..)  Does this even make sense that this is happening in the United States of America? Do these things matter?

    Incidentally, the person who wrote me to criticize my choice of reference text did not express disagreement with my argument or conclusions.(maybe she did disagree?)  I am just attempting another answer to the question. Please, reply if you have thoughts to the contrary or a more clear answer than proposed here. By no means do I believe this answer is complete. We may take it up again in a future post.

   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 183.