Last night, I watched a report on FOX News® with John Stossel. He recounted laws, programs and moves made by our elected officials during this past year. The ones he highlighted had “unintended consequences”. Some of the people interviewed agreed and others were very unwilling to admit that the effects of these moves had been negative or even worth addressing. It was a very informative report.

   After watching this report, I wondered if this could be how some folks view Word of Faith Fellowship (WOFF) and Jane Whaley. Could some folks be unwilling to acknowledge the negative fallout for members who are in and/or have been inside that group? Would there be some folks who see the broken relationships, emotional torment and social adjustment issues for those that leave WOFF as “unintended consequences” and therefore give Jane a free pass? Could it be possible that like some politicians that deny the harmful consequences of their policies and programs, Jane and her leadership are in denial that their doctrines, methods and practices are harmful to their members?

  

    After being under the teachings of Jane Whaley from 1992 to 2002 and then moving inside the group from October 2002 until my exit in July 2008; I have some perspective on this question and some answers to offer. While inside the group, denial of the true effects of WOFF-life was essential to being able to stay inside. Does that make sense? While inside, I saw the public rebuke of members and had to come to some form of rationalization for the scenes that played out before me. I saw children being spanked with force and others being told to keep quiet and told not to cry. I saw people being put in discipleship and told to not talk to friends and relatives until “God had dealt with their heart” Later, I could see it really was “god dealing with their heart” – i.e., their bowing to Jane and her control and acquiescing to the behavior modification and WOFF-rules. I saw a young man kept in a room at an industrial complex away from everyone and only allowed to attend church and read his Bible and talk to one person in leadership. Later, I found out that when an ex-member told DSS about it, he suddenly got a furnished room. Wonder why?

    While inside, I saw the control of information and limited to no access to the outside media. This is definitely listed as a method of thought reform in Robert Lifton’s work “Thought Reform and the Psychology of Totalism” subtitle- A Study of Brainwashing in China, copyright 1961 by Robert Jay Lifton, ISBN – 0-8078-4253-2. (see first post in the series on thought reform here… https://religiouscultsinfo.com/?p=3225 ) Who can deny that? How could this be rationalized? Well, certain young folks and even adults can’t handle the severe nature of the information out there…. Or better yet, “God does not want you to be exposed to such sin and negative, it would hurt your walk with Him”… While there is prudence in monitoring your own exposure to the media and its extremes, that responsibility lies with the individual adult or parent of the child, not the person calling themselves the pastor, prophet or apostle or whatever title they claim for that day.

    Could anyone believe that this control of information has/had unintended consequences? I believe the consequences of information control were/are purposeful and calculated. As Steven Hassan writes in “Releasing the Bonds” (copyright ©2000 by Steven Hassan, ISBN: 0-9670688-0-0) “The human mind cannot function properly without information. By controlling both the flow of information and the people’s ability to process it, cults prevent them from making sound judgments about their own lives or the group’s actions.” (page 48 emphasis added)  Could it be that Jane does not want the mind of her members to “function properly”? After all, Jane has said over and over-    “…the mind of the flesh [with its carnal thoughts and purposes] is hostile to God, for it does not submit itself to God’s Law; indeed it cannot.” (from Romans 8:7). So, she tells her member to not trust their mind, with it you cannot understand God or His ways. Could it be that with their fully informed minds they could discern HER ways and see they were not God’s ways? So, she controls their access to information and other opinions about WOFF and her doings; and makes the decision for them. Does she play “God” in this area? Or is it “god”?

    Another question with life at WOFF surrounds the WOFF-speak. Who can deny that members of WOFF have code words and meanings to words that have been added by Jane? Lifton speaks of this as loaded language. “The language if the totalist environment is characterized by the thought-terminating cliché. The most far-reaching and complex of human problems are compressed into brief, highly reductive, definitive-sounding phrases, easily memorized and easily expressed.” (page 429 emphasis added) This subject has been written about many times on this blog. However, today’s question- Is the effect of this code language an “unintended consequence”? Does Jane use the words as an innocent use of terms to help convey meaning or does she know the true consequence is to modify behavior stop “back-talk”. In my opinion, these terms like “take hold”, “help me, Jesus”, “go lock-in”, “expose your heart” and even Scripture references to key WOFF doctrine Scriptures; are all purposeful tools to keep a well planned sedation over their minds as to the true nature of “the group’s actions”. If the code words appear cute and innocent to you, then you have not been a member or known a member who has exited and had to rethink their choice of words in order to UNLOCK from WOFFness and all its consequences.  

        A few former members have brought to my attention the constant push to “fulfill your call” at WOFF. For some, they were told that call was going “To the Nations”. Who can forget that song and the literal HOURS we spent singing it? Others may be told that they had to “hear God” as to what their call was but, that in practice Jane was the one who could confirm, if they were indeed hearing God. Things were always in a state of flux at WOFF. Things were always being defined, redefined, made clearer or hearing God at a higher level and on and on and on… Such euphemistic terms were all used to push the standard of WOFFness further and further away so that NO ONE but Jane ever could rest in their pursuit of holiness and relationship with God. The WOFF standard of “walking with God” as defined by Jane was always unattainable or at a minimum unsustainable. Jane would intimate at times and other times come right out and say she was the only one who could hear God or walked anywhere close to a state of perfection. Her actions told us she was perfect. Why? Because, her attitude and the way she carried/carries herself reflected her belief that she NEVER sinned. Does anyone who honestly reflects on what they have observed of Jane deny that?

    Lifton writes in a section titled “Demand for Purity”, “The philosophical assumption underlying this demand is that absolute purity … is attainable, and that anything done to anyone in the name of this purity is ultimately moral.” (page 423 emphasis added) Lets stop right here and mention that this statement gives understanding as to how such extreme measures as shunning of members and non-members and the break-up of families by Jane and her group is justifiable- in their minds. These measures are done in the hopes that the person being shunned or the family member being ostracized will eventually come back or see how pure WOFF members are and that the actions were necessary for them to “fulfill their call”. These extreme measures against former members are completely justifiable in the “Jane-itized” minds of WOFFers. They must “set god apart” in front of the people and hold the standard that Jane has created. So, consequences are of no concern. Pursuit of the “Call of god” is reason enough to act as they do. How do I know? I acted that way while I was in there. The broken relationships are not unintended consequences but, fully INTENDED consequences and the cost of following Jane; all the while, thinking you are following Jesus and honoring Him. Does this sound twisted?

    Lifton continues; “In actual practice, however, no one… is really expected to achieve such perfection…. for by defining and redefining the criteria for purity, and then by conducting an all out war on impurity, the ideological totalists create a narrow world of guilt and shame. This is perpetuated by the ethos of continuous reform, a demand that one strive permanently and painfully for something which not only does not exist but is in fact alien to the human condition.”(page 424 emphasis added) How does this apply to WOFF? In my opinion, the constant striving for perfection that Jane believes she only has attained, has created a “narrow world of guilt and shame” for the WOFF faithful.  Will Jane admit it? I doubt it. Will Jane change it? I think not. The consequences are a constant ego feed for her to see others striving for what, in her mind, she only has achieved. Is this an unintended consequence? What do you think? Once Jane could see how this gig was going, and how it fed in her the needs of her overwhelming narcissistic idea of herself, others can do what they want. WOFF exists to feed Jane and her own world. Consequences be damned and those who want to point it out can take a hike as far as Jane is concerned. Do others see it differently?  

   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 224.