On Monday, there will be oral arguments in front of the Supreme Court on a case involving Obamacare. Regardless of your position, these arguments and the ruling expected sometime in June should be of interest to all US citizens. Included in the debate is the requirement under the new law for religious institutions to provide contraception services to their employees. On Friday, there were rallies held across America protesting the mandate under this “new” law. In an article titled:
Contraception law sparks rally, debate Insurance groups required to offer antifertility drugs
Here is a quote from that article telling about a rally held in Green Bay: “The event in downtown Green Bay at the Brown County Courthouse was held in solidarity with similar rallies on Friday in more than 200 cities across the nation, said organizer Cate Zeuske of Suamico. “This event is not about contraception. This event is about religious freedom,” she said.” (source link- http://www.greenbaypressgazette.com/article/20120324/GPG0101/203240624/Contraception-law-sparks-rally-debate?odyssey=nav%7Chead )
This nation again faces the questions surrounding “religious freedom”. Just what is “religious freedom”? Where does come from? What does it include? Complete answers to all of these questions cannot be provided in this post. However, I do want to share my perspective on “religious freedom” and how my life has been affected by such “freedoms” in years past. Many already know that from 1992 until 2008- I was under the influence and was an active part of Word of Faith Fellowship (WOFF). During my years there we were told that our right to our beliefs and practices were our “religious freedoms”. It all sounded good and of course at the time fit nicely into the mindset needed to stay a part of the group. In court cases where the beliefs and practices of WOFF would come under question or scrutiny, the standard defense was that to hinder or even question any such beliefs or practices would be a violation of our “religious freedoms”. It all sounded right and legal and I believe many in the community had accepted the idea that WOFF members may act different- but, leave them alone. They are just exercising their “rights”.
While inside the group, any member would have to come to grips with certain conflictions or conundrums. After all, if we were exercising our religious freedoms – why were other freedoms and rights required to be sacrificed and surrendered in order to stay a part of the group? Why were rights given to any U.S. Citizen such as freedom of press, free access to the press, freedom of speech, freedom of assembly, freedom of association, freedom to choose employment, freedom to choose a place of residence and others- surrendered in order to be a part of the group or win the approval of Jane? WOFF members were not allowed to openly question Jane Whaley and her revelations or edicts. To do so was an invitation to be put in church discipline or shunned. We were told we were exercising our religious freedoms as long as we believed Jane was speaking for God and without her we were lost and could “miss our call” and “not make it”. To not obey WOFF rules meant your were full of devils.
Only a light reading of material or references on what is means to have or exercise religious freedom raises serious questions about the validity of the WOFF defense of their practices. Included in the idea of religious freedom is the right to convert to a new religion or seek reaffiliation within the same religion. (source link- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Religious_conversion ) Neither of these acts was accepted within WOFF, who has repeatedly defended their beliefs and practices as being a part of their religious freedoms. So, could it be said that you are free to choose your religious affiliation as long as once you choose WOFF – you NEVER changed? To change will cost you your soul or worse – according to WOFF.
“The freedom to leave or discontinue membership in a religion or religious group —in religious terms called “apostasy” —is also a fundamental part of religious freedom, covered by Article 18 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights..[2] “ (source link- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freedom_of_religion )
The actual reading from this Declaration is as follows: Article 18
“Everyone has the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion; this right includes freedom to change his religion or belief, and freedom, either alone or in community with others and in public or private, to manifest his religion or belief in teaching, practice , worship and observance.”
( source link- http://www.un.org/en/documents/udhr/ ) We may post more from this document in the future.
Would it be an accurate statement to say that WOFF defends its practices as religious freedoms and robs the religious freedoms and human rights of its members daily and especially when/if they ever decide to leave – whether that is apostasy or simple reaffiliation? I think that is entirely accurate and to which I say you can’t have it both ways. If Jane Whaley and her WOFF leaders argue that their practices of blasting, loud prayer, shunning, public humiliation, corporal punishment- to include striking the physical bodies of their members with “rods of correction” to the point of bruising, and/or with open hands and/or closed fists not only on the hinder quarters but, on other areas are protected as “religious freedoms”; then when a member decides to leave this drama filled environment- allow them to freely exercise their individual religious freedom without any demeaning or threatening speech. Do not use the WOFF religion as an excuse to abuse in any form or fashion. In my opinion, this has been done repeatedly to those who make the decision to leave WOFF. Is that the understatement of the day? Members who are even accused of thinking about leaving can have their freedom of religion destroyed and basic human rights stolen! How can you reason that the practices of the group are protected as religious freedoms yet violate the individual rights and religious freedoms of your members? That cannot and should not be allowed. Does this sound like a safe place to live?
During my reading about religious freedom, I learned about a holiday that was new to me. The holiday is Religious Freedom Day! Here is a quote from the website set-up for that holiday:
“Religious Freedom Day
Each year, the President declares January 16th to be Religious Freedom Day, and calls upon Americans to “observe this day through appropriate events and activities in homes, schools, and places of worship.” The day is the anniversary of the passage, in 1786, of the Virginia Statute of Religious Freedom. We encourage schools to recognize Religious Freedom Day during the school week leading up to January 16.” (source- http://www.religiousfreedomday.com/ )
Did you know about that holiday? Needless to say, as far as I remember, I never heard about this holiday while in WOFF. Are you surprised? With all the posturing to toot the WOFF horn to ward off any actual scrutiny in regards to WOFF practices- you would think this could be one holiday Jane would allow! But, alas another one is added to the list of holidays that WOFF ignores.
On the website, there is a “Religious Freedom Day Guidebook” for download. In this guidebook, this holiday is one proclaimed by the President and explained as “first and foremost a time to acknowledge one of our most important civil liberties.”
A few statements from the “Paraphrase of the Virginia Statute” – the original written by Thomas Jefferson:
God created us to be free in our thinking. He is all-powerful, but he chose not to force us to obey Him. Throughout history, there have been people who have tried to force others to believe a certain way about God. Often times this has led to people being forced to believe what the ruler believed even if it wasn’t really true. We don’t want that. … Each person should be free to support his religion in the way he thinks best… The rights we have, as citizens, should not depend on the religion we follow. … Instead, everyone should be free to follow and talk about their religion. … We know that in the future some group of Virginia’s leaders may decide to change this law. But, if they did that, we want to say right now, that would be wrong, because God created us to be free. (emphasis added)
Yes, I am aware that one of the purposes of the statute was to limit the government from controlling and/or requiring a certain religious choice or forcing financial support of a State sanctioned religion. How does that relate to the culture inside WOFF? Here is my answer. Once you are inside WOFF, approval from Jane and her leadership depends on your financial support and your confession of agreement by words and actions –“even if it wasn’t really true”. The supposed free exercise of your rights- “depend(s) on the religion we (you) follow…” Yes, it could be argued that adults can leave… Well, at what cost? There is no simple apostasy or reafilliation allowed in WOFF-land. To do so is labeled as “going to hell” or worse. How “free” are you to exercise your “freedom”? And what about those who have grown up in WOFF and have known no other “government” or “ruler” other than Jane Whaley? What hope do they have for a simple drama-free exercise of their religious freedom to choose another path of religious belief or even non-belief? What hope do they have to exercise the religious freedom that is being used to justify their captivity? Is it religious freedom or abuse?
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”.
Guest posts reflect the opinions of the writers. Their opinions do not necessarily reflect the opinions of John Huddle or any other persons affiliated with this blog.
Please, take time to read the Terms of Use for this personal blog. As mentioned, for posts written by John Huddle, any information about WOFF is from his 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 393.