This is the fourth post in a series which will highlight several insights found in the book by Dr. Len Oakes while comparing his observations and conclusions to my personal experience inside Word of Faith Fellowship (WOFF). This work by Len Oakes titled, “Prophetic Charisma” – The Psychology of Revolutionary Religious Personalities (copyright ©1997 by Syracuse University Press, Syracuse, NY, ISBN 0-8156-2700-9) has captured my attention. We closed the last post in this series by noting that instead of a vision to spread the WOFF gospel “To The Nations” as the lyrics of a WOFF-song of several years ago proclaimed; I suggested that Jane Whaley has become her own vision. From the previous post, “Has her vision turned inward in order to make her comfortable and let her have the good life? Is this a predictable course when “prophets” age and come to the fall or winter of their ministry? When considering all that is WOFF- could there any other strong or noticeable message besides –Jane?” As I reflect on that line of thought, has Jane retired  thereby limiting her vision or outreach and concentrating on her lifestyle here in Rutherford County? She never advocated allowing her members to “retire”, but, we have to assess her actions and not just here words or restrictions on others. Could the many fine clothes and jewelry be what she feels she deserves after all these years of “ministry”? Is that why she passes the offering plates until she gets what she needs?

    Oakes writes that about David “Moses” Berg as an example of other leaders of the type he studied. “Because of his vision, his followers have suffered greatly, yet he retains their loyalty through his inspirational rhetoric” (page 14) He noted that the followers of Berg suffered because of the vision. I suggest that regular WOFF members endure a suffering because of Jane’s vision however that is defined. Their suffering includes lost years, lost relationships with family and friends as well as not knowing a true one on one Christian relationship with God. In the WOFF design for relationships, Jane is between her members and their personal walk with God. In her zeal and dysfunctional control of them, she keeps them from exactly what she claims the Christian walk is- a walk of “holy righteous living in Jesus”.  

 

      In reference to the “inspirational rhetoric” Oakes writes, “The rhetorical skill of charismatic prophets can be phenomenal… Of course rhetoric can be used for good or evil purposes, but when it is used by a prophet, certain themes tend to recur. These include the use of moral absolutes to amplify a crisis in which the sinfulness of the world is described in absolute terms, while relative terms are used to describe the leader’s work…” (page 14)  It is here I must admit that for years, I was totally mesmerized by some of the things Jane Whaley would say. Closer to my exit date, I began confiding in a person in leadership about some of the things that I did not agree with at WOFF. I said something to the effect that the only thing that kept me at WOFF was/were some of the revelations that Jane had shared. Jane Whaley was not the most polished speaker; she incorrectly pronounced certain words and over the years has flip-flopped on certain doctrinal positions or issues. All that taken into consideration, I must admit I was under the “inspirational rhetoric” of Jane Whaley. To say otherwise would be a lie. What does that make me? I was a “follower” for years that is obvious. I did not see the dangers of defining the world and thus my world in absolute terms. In many ways, to do so is a crutch and the path of least resistance. It is much easier to claim things in black and white terms and dogmatically declare them to be so. The natural outcome of such a position or process is to declare yourself on the right side of every issue- always. Does that seem likely or possible to always be right?

    Oakes continues, “And every prophet’s message has two parts. The first or “negative revelation” is an account of all that is bad in the world and of (on) the road to hell. “Positive revelation” describes the path to salvation and the prophet’s special role as guide. Deep human wants for unconditional love and life after death are implied to lie within the grasp of the faithful.” (page 14) It is here that I must remind myself that Oakes did not interview Jane Whaley, as far as I know and I NEVER saw him in the services of WOFF. He is outlining the message of WOFF when he writes his observations of other “prophets”. Since Jane’s message follows the outline of the other “prophets” Oakes studied, what does that make her message? How many times WOFF members were/are warned that to leave Jane/WOFF was to become prey of the devil and be taken over by the world! Things in the WORLD were always bad or evil – until Jane saw a need for them and could rationalize a way to allow them in the church without that thing “taking everyone over”. Face it; some things will NEVER be a part of WOFF-life. Why? That is because to bring in certain things to WOFF would definitely lure members away from considering Jane as the center of their lives. If members do not consider Jane “worth the knowing” then she would lose her hold and control on her members and WOFF could/would implode. (the money would stop flowing) Oakes hits the nail on the head by suggesting that “prophets” like Jane have a revelation of their “special role as guide” to salvation and beyond. She claims to love everyone and everyone loves her. If you don’t love her, you are listening to devils. She often tells her members whether or not a person who has passed away made it to heaven or “did not fulfill their call”. Faithful WOFF members are supposed to have the inside track on “life after death” in heaven. If you doubt me, just ask them and watch them.

    Of the prophet’s message, Oakes writes, “Such a heady brew may the rhetoric become, that the prophet may fall under its spell, believing his own propaganda and alienating his friends and family with a compulsive fanaticism. Such leaders appear to be “on stage” the entire time, seeming to derive sustenance form endlessly repeating their own rhetoric which has become from them a “beautiful lie you can live in” (Rapp 1972)”. (pages 14-15, emphasis added) What can anyone say to those statements in reference to Jane Whaley? Is she “on stage” the entire time? Is there ANY doubt of that? Does she repeat herself over and over with her story and her stories? Believe me, after 16 years; I can only answer- yes. Has she fallen under the spell of her story and is caught in a “beautiful lie you can live in”? How do we answer that one? In my opinion, it is an outward sign of the extreme, inordinate self-love and narcissism that IS Jane Whaley. Is she the only “minister” I have know to repeat their story over and over? No, but the others I have known did not have the specific traits expounded upon by Oakes and discussed in these posts. It is not uncommon for a preacher to repeat himself.  But, when he/she becomes caught up in their story and in some cases seems to lose touch with its value and validity and loses count of how MANY times they have told the same story to the same people for the same reasons — there is a problem of some type. Do you agree? After so many years, I felt as if I could tell the stories as well as she could in many cases.   

    When prophets are repeating their message, Oakes writes, “At such moments they may seem grotesque, but they are saved from total loss of credibility by their extreme manipulativeness.” (page 15 emphasis added) As I read this I thought, well, no kidding! Is Jane Whaley manipulative? You are joking, right? Then I remembered at WOFF, there is no joking or foolishness. After I stopped laughing, I began to consider how this fit in the overall scheme of the WOFF plan. She does not lose credibility by being manipulative? Then it began to fit together as I remembered certain events and read on.

    “The prophet’s manipulative skills are acquired over many years of practice and are highly refined. At a personal level he can be charming and warm, speaking frankly but supportively… Prophets are natural actors… The leader appears sensitive and concerned, usually remembering the names of people he has met… Yet the leader astutely registers the needs and vulnerabilities of the people he meets, subtly implying that he can fulfill these needs. The cult is set up (at least in part) to satisfy the wants and exploit the vulnerabilities of the followers, who find, that once they have joined, that it is hard to challenge the leader because of the large number of needy members who depend  for their well-being on him.” (page 15 emphasis added) So we ask, has Jane had time to develop these skills of manipulation? I would say so, but, she may refer to it as “being able to hear God better on how to help His people”. Who could deny that Jane is charming and warm and very supportive to many folks, especially the ones she meets for the first time? Or better still, someone she wants to work her manipulation on for some purpose, which would be “God’s purpose”. After all, everything Jane does is God’s will, right?

    Yes, I would consider Jane an actress. Would others agree? It is not beyond me to think she is always looking for someone to bless or help in some way? Does that seem plausible? After all, isn’t that what “ministers” are supposed to do—help folks? Yes, a lot of folks depend on her to meet their needs. If you doubt it, consider all the houses and doublewide mobile homes the church owns or controls? Do you think Jane has any influence over companies owned by church members? I do. Once a member lives on a house controlled by Jane, works for a company controlled indirectly by Jane and has to get a ride everywhere with church folks or has to “check it out” before they go anywhere in their car; are the dependent on Jane? What do you really think?

   Oakes continues, “The prophet communicates very early that there are topics that are taboo for discussion. These include his need to control others and the dependency and hero worship that are encouraged. Yes-men (or, more frequently, yes-women) are installed in key positions in the group; they will be demoted if their affections lapse.” (page 15, emphasis added) Wow, Oakes is describing Jane and her leadership structure at WOFF. Can you see it? What was taboo to discuss at WOFF? For one, Scriptures that mentioned a woman not being in authority over a man were not to be discussed except where Jane could give you truth!!! If you had doubts about Jane and her decisions, you were to only discuss with Jane. Hero worship was not something Jane talked about. After all, at WOFF, they did not teach that having “heroes” was biblical. So, it did not matter that members worshipped Jane, she was not a hero; she was a minister. The respect you showed her you were showing for God. That is what I was taught. As in other groups, you did not voice doubt about Jane or “God’s work through Jane”, doing that was a ticket out. WOFF members were told that Jane did not control others; after all she reasoned with a chuckle, how could one person control over 400 members? Did/does Jane put “yes-women” in key positions? Do I need to mention names or would you just care to go to the WOFF website and see their faces and names in one place? Remember, Dr. Oakes had not been to WOFF as far as I know. So, if other groups he studied have the same characteristics that are at WOFF, what does that say about Jane Whaley and the way she runs her group? Are Jane and her group unique in some ways and very common in others? I would say so, wouldn’t you? In many ways, Jane Whaley and WOFF exhibit many identifiable common cult traits. But, then again, who is surprised at that?  

    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 287.