“Defendant is a member of Word of Faith Fellowship, a church that for nearly two decades has been the subject of extraordinary persecution, hatred, bigotry, and discrimination in this county, spurred by the Inside Edition tabloid news, local, national, and international new media coverage, as well as continued social media postings”…

Garland’s motion says – “Given that public perception is key to this motion, the State respectfully shows that defense counsel’s own allegations support the State’s position in bringing the motion to disqualify counsel.”

Garland’s memo also includes several other reasons for the disqualification. Time does not permit me to go through every point; however, I will list a few of the focal points in the motion. As a further explanation, we will add understanding of the background nuances which Garland may or may not be aware of in this case. These nuances may or may not come out on Monday.

The motion is extensive and well prepared. The citations are detailed and for this post we expect the reader to read the motion and we will omit the extensive notations.

The motion outlines circumstances in which an attorney could not represent multiple clients (23. a,b)“A case where the representation of one client will be directly adverse to another client; or where the representation of one of more clients may be materially limited by the lawyer’s representation to another client, a former client, or a third person, or by a personal interest of the lawyer.”

Let’s stop right here. The nuances of the pyramidal structure inside the close knit social environment where four defendants live makes the representation of more than one client prohibitive. Brooke is near the top of the authority structure (closer to Jane). She is in authority over Robert Lewis Walker, Jr. He is a “regular member” with very limited to NO control over the direction of his life. On the fateful night in question, he would do as he was told or shown by example what to do. Sarah and Justin live in the same house as Brooke and naturally would incur more favor from her and Jane than Robert. None of the four of Farmer’s clients are equal within the ONLY social structure they know. Now, Adam Bartley has NO standing inside the WOFF structure and his best interests cannot be guarded by the same attorneys who guard the interests either individually or corporately of Jane, Sam, WOFF, Inc (as a corporate entity) and the other four defendants who are still members.

PLUS- Josh and Mark are in leadership authority over Robert within WOFF. This fact pollutes the accepted beneficial, attorney client privileged relationship through the antagonistic prevailing nuances of WOFF. The conflicts are HUGE. How can Robert Lewis Walker expect his personal wishes to be carried out by counsel if they should go contrary to the leader’s WORD for him, when he knows anything he says is subject to the internal control dynamics of WOFF? His desires are secondary to the leader who is also in authority over EVERY ATTORNEY IN THE FIRM OF TOMBLIN, FARMER and MORRIS. This leader is also their lead client WOFF, Inc- ie. Jane and Sam Whaley. The dynamics are strange but they serve her in many ways and she leads all of them in absolute power. (right , Josh?) Robert must do as he is told or he faces severe social, emotional and maybe physical consequences. To deny such is to completely ignore why we are all having this discussion. We are here because Matthew Fenner alleges he suffered the physical and emotional abuse that Robert Lewis Walker is subject to if he decides to deviate from the desires of Jane Whaley expressed through her attorney- Josh Farmer or Mark Morris. Where is there safety for him? What a conundrum.

Yes, Adam Bartley is out of WOFF and has been offered a plea. Cut to the chase- how can Josh and Mark safely advise Bartley if that counsel directly endangers the main interest of WOFF/Jane Whaley? By their standing as her attorney and attempting to represent the defendants, Morris and Farmer are in effect extending to their client, WOFF, Inc harm and injury. Jane and Sam stand to lose a lot of members and money and reputation because Josh and Mark are required at this time to defend the interests of an adversarial person – Adam Bartley. We do not know the course this trial may take and which other defendant will transition into the role of adversary to the main client- WOFF, Inc. Will Robert Lewis Walker see the light and decide to take a plea or at least seek different counsel knowing his interests are not being protected inside or outside the structure of WOFF? Does he even know how the results of being tucked away as a regular member under the authority structure of WOFF could land him in JAIL?

Mark Morris is cited in the Motion as saying each client signed a “waiver of any and all potential conflicts.” Who counseled them to do that? Were the future potential conflicts outlined to them? In the structure of WOFF, the defendants had no standing to object or question the signing of such a waiver! You do as you are told inside that group or you are out. Right, Adam? Several years ago, WOFF required members to sign a waiver saying that each member was not under mind control. That was a raw deal then and this sounds like a similar raw deal. (see my post here -Waiver post.)

24. c In this citation it outlines the circumstances where a lawyer may represent more than one client in the same proceeding if it “does not involve an assertion of a claim by one client against another.” Before this trial is over, one or more of the WOFF defendants could assert a claim against another, someone besides Bartley.

27. “The potential for conflicts of interest in representing multiple defendants in a criminal case is so grave that ordinarily a lawyer decline to represent more than one co-defendant.”

That is one of the main sticking points; the effective leader of the law firm, Jane Whaley does not consider herself bound by anything “ordinary.” She showed this by her ineffective, self-absorbed testimony on May29th in the Jerry Cooper case. Her interests as number one client and supreme spiritual leader overrule and go beyond “ordinary.”

Garland points out the severe difference in what Bartley faces if convicted on any of the charges versus what the other four may receive as a sentence. This is important to note as another differentiation between the four versus Bartley. He has more incentive to cooperate. (11.) He faces 41 to 62 months if convicted of aggregated kidnapping. (12) The other four “have no prior criminal record and possibly could be given probation in the discretion of the court.” Though a quick check of this website lets us know the sentence for a Class E Felony can be 15-63 months. Garland is putting forth the best possible outcome for the four defendants with no prior record. Who knows right now?

In summary, Garland Byers has a lot of evidence to present for his case of disqualification of the Tomblin, Farmer and Morris law firm. Josh Farmer and Mark Morris will be under extreme pressure to win the rights to represent at least four of the remaining WOFF member defendants. Why? Because to her own hurt, Jane says so. The subculture of WOFF is so engulfing and all inclusive. For those that doubt, we will see on Monday just how extensive her control over the attorneys has been and will be in the future. Monday will be no ordinary proceeding as it will involve people who are members of no ordinary church. Nothing ordinary should be expected. I do expect to report on this extra-ordinary affair after it is over, Please, return on Monday.

Follow this blog on Twitter- @religiouscults

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. Jane told me and Josh confirmed it.

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 526.

Google plus® night…. at WOFF

If you think the Google plus® night was about dealing with sin… You are one hundred percent wrong. It will take several posts to fully explain what happened that night. However, there are couple things I would like to highlight, including the mind control techniques Jane applies on the WOFF members. This is psychology 101, by the way.

On the 4th of February of 2014, a Tuesday; a text message went out church wide calling all members for a solemn assembly. Puzzled, I began to wonder the reason for such. The worst scenario was someone may have died, but I was pretty sure by that time, I would have heard about it. I had no idea what was going on. I made some phone calls to some of my buddies to find out if anyone knew what was happening. After exhausting all my avenues, I grew even more puzzled. No one in my cult knew of the upcoming event. This was really unusual since gossip runs like wild fire in that place.

I went to church that night not having the first clue. Upon arrival all members were instructed to go to the sanctuary. No one was allowed in the overflow rooms. The sanctuary was overcrowded, lots of people standing up including children. Shortly after, Jane marches into the room, holding her Bible and a stack of papers… She was late for the meeting, as usual. She always said she was late because she was dealing with sin. If eating, gossiping, or playing with dogs was dealing with sin, then no wonder things there were falling thru her fingers.

Evidently, by the look on her face, she was not having a good day. She was angry, even though she says the devil of anger left her many years ago (LOL).

With rage in her eyes, she began reading the Bible, telling everyone — the church was full of sin and she already knew what everyone’s sins were.

Paraphrasing as close as I can; she said- This church is full of sin, and I have all the evidence of all your sins (banging the stack of papers on the pulpit). You need to come clean because we already know what you do on your phones, and on your computers…going on.

Ok, I’ve been here long enough to know she knows jack about anything that goes on. What she does know is how to control and manipulate people to say what she wants them to say. As the saying goes- knowledge is power. If you think in fact she knows what you do behind your closed door, on your computer or phone, she then has power over you. She has you like a puppet. When you confess something she will say, “We all knew the sin you were giving to.” Then you will worship her like many there still do.

Whenever Jane or one of her minions comes to you demanding you open up your heart to tell all of your sins, because God has already told them you are in sin; you should answer them accordingly, “If God told you that I’m in sin, He also ought to tell you what sin I’m giving to”. (Use that phrase with caution, because it will make them super upset).They will look at you not knowing what to say or they will say something broad and general like “the unclean.” When they do say this, do not fall for it. Ask them more questions and you will see they don’t know much about your life at all.

Back to the hell night which lasted four hours. It was extremely insane. I will give you a nutshell of the night. It was basically someone, who reads and writes Jane’s personal emails, noticing some church members had pictures attached to their emails because they had a Google plus® account. These pictures on their accounts also showed up on Jane’s email. This “grieved” her so much since some of these pictures were of themselves and/or their children. It was nothing but her making a huge deal out of something innocent. Every time I think about that day, I get goose bumps. However, on the bright side of things, once again, my eyes were being opened to what was really happening there. I realized the church did not stand for helping people, but at the end of the day, it was all about controlling people and money.

I know some of you who are reading this were there that night. Please, take a minute and think about what happened and how Jane tries to impose her Brockianity and Whaleyanity faith. The Brockianity is a whole other topic. It could take an entire website to explain that subject.

Time does not permit me to describe all the events which took place on that night, but I hope I was able to describe a few of the mind control schemes that went on.
Anonymous
_______________________________________________________________________
Follow this blog on Twitter- @religiouscults

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. Jane told me and Josh confirmed it.

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 523.

Through the years since 2008, I learned my struggles were new to me, but not unexpected for one leaving a religious cult or a high-demand group. The feelings and emotions of those days were predictable. There was no one close to me who had traveled the same road and could guide me. In a quest to learn more, I turned to resources- books and online sources. Many a night, I traded sleep for the time to read survivor stories or other resources and/or the freedom to write. Both reading and writing helped sort out the jumbled mess of my life from the years within WOFF.

One of the most valuable resources I found is the International Cultic Studies Association (ICSA). Their online resources are many. July of 2014, I attended their conference in Washington, DC. The people I met and the sessions I attended, deepened my understanding of the dangers and results of high-demand groups. One of the benefits of membership is receiving the publication, ICSA Today.

ICSA Today Magazine volume 5 number 3 2014 – contains an article titled “Thought Reform and the Psychology of Breaking Away from Totalism”, written by Ron Burks, PhD. This is my resource for this post. I will quote from it in order to explain my struggles and those of others leaving WOFF during these days.

Burks admits upfront this article is based on the work of Dr. Paul R. Martin. Burks worked with Martin for years at Wellspring Retreat. He credits his views as “colored and textured by the more than four hundred stories, including (his) own, about being drawn into a cultic group—all resulting in captivity and varying only in degree, not kind.” These real life stories speak to his credibility and experience needed to write this piece.

Indoctrination and the Loss of Freedom
“Cults take away freedom and then attack those who work to help their victims get it back.”

Well, yes, I agree. I and many others have experienced the WOFF attack as we help victims get their freedoms back. It goes with the territory. I am called a “big attacker” for helping others take back their life. It is a matter of perspective. Burks includes a quote from Abraham Lincoln:

“The shepherd drives the wolf from the sheep’s throat, for which the sheep thanks the shepherd as his liberator, while the wolf denounces him for the same act, as the destroyer of liberty. Plainly the sheep and the wolf are not agreed upon a definition of the word liberty; and precisely the same difference prevails today among human creatures, (Roe, 1907, p220)”

Yes, Jane Whaley and I differ on the definition of liberty. More accurately, we differ on the harmful practices inside her group which rob her members of their liberty. To her members, I am cast as the wolf (or worse). I know several who advocate for survivors of WOFF, who think differently from Jane as to who the real wolf is in this drama. Will the real WOFF-WOLF come forward? Back to the article.

Burks explains thought reform in a way which made it easy for me to understand. When I first left WOFF, I had no idea of the level of thought reform or mind control I had lived under. This series of posts will explain the characteristics of thought reform using Burks’ article and the accompanying struggle with the new freedoms of survivors.

“Thought reform is the process of making an intelligent, thinking person into a virtual slave without the person knowing what has happened. The context of all thought reform is a differential in power or worth between the indoctrinator and the inductee. There are many ways this differential is established in cults; but power differential, either conscious or unconscious, is the foundation of thought reform.”

This explanation of a power differential as the foundation of thought reform was vital to my understanding of the whole picture. Who honestly can deny the existence of a power differential between Jane Whaley and ANYONE else in WOFF? She is supreme leader and power grid energizer. Any decision is subject to her review. Any rule or dictate goes through her. Any spending of church funds is subject to her approval. Any relationship, career, house buying decision, house decorating decision and the like is subject to Jane’s review and choice. Does this indicate a power differential inside WOFF?

If you are still in doubt about the idea of thought reform inside WOFF, can we at least agree here that Jane thrives off the power differential between her and every other member? She feeds on being the only one who can hear God at the highest level. She believes she lives closer to the holy throne of God than any other human alive. Doubt me? Watch the way she lives her life. Observe with no WOFF-glasses on.

I admit, at first, the idea of spending years being drawn into and living under thought reform was not pleasant. It was hard to swallow. Admitting it I thought cast a shadow of doubt on me. Then, I realized the shadow came from my towering pride. I thought I was too smart to be led into such a controlling system as exists in the bowels of WOFF. Let’s be clear. The victim of thought reform is just that – a victim. I was a victim who fell among thieves and robbers. The leaders I followed spouted the WOFF beliefs in total agreement and submission to the head WOFF-wolf. Now, I advocate for those still in the grip of these same thought control systems. I help those who have left and may need a hand-up. Anyone can be a victim of thought reform given the right circumstances.

Burks continues to explain the thought reform model to include the eight processes given by Robert Lifton “that, together, have the effect of controlling three aspects of human experience that are central to the notion of freedom: thinking, feeling, and conscience.” We look at the first two of the eight in this post as seen inside WOFF and the others in subsequent posts.

Controlling Thinking
“Once a power differential has been established, two of Lifton’s criteria, Sacred Science and Loading the Language, work together to undermine the inductee’s ability to think critically, or outside the box created by the group.
The teachings and views of the group and its leader have a sense of sacredness not to be challenged by mere mortals.”

We stop here to apply this statement to what is known about WOFF. The teachings and views of WOFF are portrayed as based on the sacred scriptures found in the Amplified Bible. (Just look at the tons of scripture references on their website.) Challenging Jane’s interpretation of these sacred writings was an invitation to public rebuke, mockery and chiding as Jane defended her authority based on her “walk with God.” (perfection) This was for members. Please, let no mere mortal from outside WOFF pretend to know more than Jane about holy righteous living. Members set aside their critical thinking skills in order to live their lives reflecting Jane as the HIGHEST source of truth.

“The means by which logic may, or may not, be applied to certain group beliefs are controlled by the leader. The sacred science enables the group to inactivate in inductees (members) the ability to distinguish association from causation. If the group prescribes a certain ritual that is supposed to affect some other events or persons, there are three scenarios, and all serve the needs of the leader.”

Okay, this will be a long read. But please, don’t miss this next part. This explanation will expose the details and power of the tentacles of deception which control members on the inside and many survivors outside. This will tear back the curtain and show you the steps used by Jane to look wise and prophetic. This will explain her fear-factory techniques used as she predicts outcomes based on her unique prayer, her “hearing God” or other control practices.

“If the expected outcome occurs, the sacred science of the group is proved. Association and causation.”

As an example, if Jane prays and leads her members in prayer for money and it comes in through the offering or the sale of a property or some other means, then her “sacred science” of unique prayer has been validated and proven “of God.” She rests on her throne of (self) RIGHTeousness and looks down on the (poorer) mere mortals. Oh, if we just knew God as Jane does…

“If the outcome doesn’t occur, it was because the followers did the ritual incorrectly, or with an improper inner attitude, again proving the sacred science is true by associating the “incorrect” practice as the cause of the improper outcome.”

Staying with the same example, if Jane tells her members to pray for money, then leaving to attend to other matters and the money does not come; then the people were not in faith! They were distracted not taking hold of their minds. “Come on people, we know if we blast the heavens turning back the strongholds of the devil, good things will happen, right?”

“If the leader is performing the ritual and a negative outcome occurs, it is due to a “hole in the pipeline” somewhere, proving that the followers were not in a frame of mind to prevent such a travesty, and once again proving sacred science is true. The followers caused the negative outcome because of their shortcomings.”

I can still hear Jane when things did not go right, “the sin in the hearts of the people held back the blessings of God.” With the dynamic already in place for members to always accept their hidden sin as the cause of negative outcomes, Jane pounces on them as “not in tune with the Spirit and thus her prayers were hindered,” NOT because the sacred science of her unique prayer was ineffective. It was the member’s fault. Jane still rests on her throne, since she knows her prayers are always “of God.”

The same scenario applies in other matters. When Jane predicts something bad will happen to a wayward member or an attacker, if it happens; then she is validated. If it does not happen, then she is validated for some other reason which she concocts. For those under her spell, the application of critical thinking to reason why an event happened or did not happen is suspended waiting totally on Jane to supply the answer. This is enhanced by the previously mentioned power differential.

So, does this help? With a negative scenario, it was never Jane’s fault or the fault of her prayer being ineffective. Some thing, someone, some other reason was the cause of her plans going array. When an outcome she predicted happens (a “positive” scenario), then she easily takes credit and adds another sitting cushion to her throne. Within her group, she is the original spin doctor.

Do not “attack” her unique practices built on her unique doctrines. The “sacred science” of her unique prayer and practices was in effect the avenue which brought her personal worship. When you don’t perform or receive the prayer- you are not worshiping her with the adulation she deserves. Thus, you cannot be “blessed” and are “attacked.” The sacred science requirement for thought reform is met here.

“The group system or its leader also directs questions and thoughts into a prefabricated box by controlling or Loading the Language used in the group. Unfamiliar terms and familiar terms used in esoteric ways are often employed more for emotional effect than for logical content. Terms that are not familiar to the inductees are used to enhance the appearance of authority and uniqueness of the group.”

Anyone attending the recent court session in May could hear this WOFF special language as Jane testified. At one point, she said to Paul Ditz, “I don’t know where you are coming from.” I started to gag at the WOFF-speak. When Jane addressed a member with that statement, it was a condescending put down. In effect, you are not in my realm. (I live with God, you are of the devil.) Paul Ditz did not catch the meaning and why should he? Yes, it is English –with another level of WOFF meaning. She has spoken her unique WOFF-speak for so many years- she struggles as a bilingual.

Take-hold. Open your heart. Are you locked-in? Are you giving over? Have you submitted your heart to Truth? Just put your name on the apostasy list! Get on your face and cry out to God! Repent and submit to Jesus. What sin are you giving to? Better to bruise than to burn. You are an attacker! You are out of the church. You are in discipleship! The sleep devil is taking you over! You are a Jezebel harlot! The Babylonian system is taking you over.

The previous paragraph is just a small example the loaded language of WOFF. The Loaded Language requirement for thought reform is met in the WOFF culture.

So, for present and former members, is it possible you lived under a thought reform system while inside WOFF? Does it still affect your life?

For certain, when members leave WOFF- they will go through a “spring thaw” to rediscover who they are. For those who were raised inside WOFF, yours is not a thaw but a springing forth, as you discover who you are now after never being able to make your own choices until leaving. In future posts, we will continue to explain thought reform and the process survivors go through when leaving these groups into their new liberty and freedom.

Follow this blog on Twitter- @religiouscults
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. Jane told me and Josh confirmed it.

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 520.

There were no decorations, but we placed information and candy in the seats for the guests. We had waters for the taking on a table to the side. There were three tables up front for the panel and the large screen television. The attendees filed in and in that group were two WOFF members, Greg and Rita Burgeson. Several other WOFF members were spotted circling through the parking area, some waving and blowing their horns. We were prepared for more WOFF members, but they only sent two inside.

We began the forum a little late after experiencing technical difficulties with the PowerPoint® we were given from another advocacy group. This was just “warfare”, right? We had a back-up plan and were able to use printouts of the presentation. Mr. Rape began the session in prayer encouraging all that it was possible to be deceived and we would learn how that could happen through the material revealed tonight. He delivered an encouraging prayer as well.

Then it was my turn to present an introduction. I stated that with two members of WOFF announcing or seeking public office in previous months, one for a judgeship and one for Clerk of Court; this made them public figures and there was reason to examine the influences of WOFF in their life. Next, I mentioned the response there has been when sharing about the forum which gave us the understanding that a viable thirst existed for this information. No one should be shocked that I also mentioned that any faithful member of WOFF was “greatly influenced daily by their beliefs and practices.” I closed this part by mentioning Josh Farmer statement last year when being interviewed by WLOS about allegations of another WOFF survivor, “We absolutely have nothing to hide… that’s absurd…” We have taken the admission by Mr. Farmer in the public record as a welcome sign that survivor stories need no longer be hidden. After all, according to Josh, there is “nothing to hide.”

Next, I then provided the quotes below to help frame the content.

“Nobody joins a cult. Nobody joins something they think is going to hurt them. You join a religious organization, you join apolitical movement and you join with people you really like.” Deborah Layton, survivor of Peoples Temple. (PBD Home Video JONESTOWN- The Life and Death of Peoples Temple, Copyright ©2007 WGBH Educational Foundation and Firelight Media)

Steven Hassan: “Occasionally, I am asked whether there is some kind of typical “problem family” from which cult members tend to come. The answer to that question is no. Anyone, regardless of family background, can be recruited into a cult. The major variable is not the person’s family but the cult recruiter’s level of skill.” (page 77)

“When I lecture at colleges, I usually challenge my audience with the question, ‘How would you know if you were under mind control?’

After some reflection, most people will realize that if one was under mind control, it would be impossible to determine it without some help from others. In addition, one would need to understand what mind control is.

When I was under mind control, I didn’t really understand what it was all about. I assumed that mind control would involve being tortured in a dank basement somewhere, with a light bulb shining in my face. Of course, that never happened to me while I was in the Moonies. Whenever people yelled at me and called me a “brainwashed robot,” I just took it as persecution. It made me feel more committed to the group.” (page 53)

Steven Hassan from Combatting Cult Mind Control, (Copyright © 1988, 1990 Steven Hassan, Park Street Press, Rochester, VT)

Honestly, my mouth went dry and I asked Matthew Fenner to open my water for me. I stumbled over words and felt very “rusty” when it came to public presentations. During my transitions, I could feel the deafening silence. Anyone else been there? Though I was convinced before we started that this material helped lay a foundation, I will reconsider such a tactic when or if we ever present one of these sessions in the future.

Moving on, I admitted that some in the country don’t believe in mind control. Those would include scholars who saw no proof of such behaviors and of course, those who were under mind control at this time and did not know it.

Next, I quoted some leading experts who did believe that such control over folks was possible and used some of the following to give that side of the issue.

Dr. Philip G. Zimbardo:

“Mind control is the process by which individual or collective freedom of choice and action is compromised by agents or agencies that modify or distort perception, motivation, affect, cognition, and/or behavioral outcomes. It is neither magical nor mystical, but a process that involves a set of basic social psychological principles.” (Source link- http://www.icsahome.com/articles/mind-control-zimbardo  , Mind Control: Psychological Reality or Mindless Rhetoric, retrieved May 17, 2014 )

Dr. Margaret T. Singer (1921-2003):

“Thought reform is not mysterious. It is the systematic application of psychological and social influence techniques in an organized programmatic way within a constructed and managed environment (6,7,8,9,10). The goal is to produce specific attitudinal and behavioral changes. The changes occur incrementally without its being patently visible to those undergoing the process that their attitudes and behavior are being changed a step at a time according to the plan of those directing the program….

Thought reform is accomplished through the use of psychological and environmental control processes that do not depend on physical coercion. Today’s thought reform programs are sophisticated, subtle, and insidious, creating a psychological bond that in many ways is far more powerful than gun-at-the-head methods of influence….” (Source link: http://www.icsahome.com/articles/thought-reform-exists-singer – “Thought Reform Exists: Organized, Programmatic Influence, The Cult Observer Vol. 11 No. 6 1994, retrieved May 17, 2014)

Dr. Robert J. Lifton:

“…Certain psychological themes which recur in these various historical contexts also arise in the study of cults. Cults can be identified by three characteristics: 1) a charismatic leader who increasingly becomes an object of worship as the general principles that may have originally sustained the group lose their power; 2) a process I call coercive persuasion or thought reform; 3) economic, sexual, and other exploitation of group members by the leader and the ruling coterie.”

“Milieu Control

The first method characteristically used by ideological totalism is milieu control: the control of all communication within a given environment.

Creating a Pawn

A second characteristic of totalistic environments is mystical manipulation or planned spontaneity. This is a systematic process through which the leadership can create in cult members what I call the psychology of the pawn. The process is managed so that it appears to arise spontaneously; to its objects it rarely feels like manipulation….

Purity and Confession

Two other features of totalism are a demand for purity and a cult of confession. The demand for purity is a call for radical separation of good and evil within the environment and within oneself. Purification is a continuing process, often institutionalized in the cult of confession, which enforces conformity through guilt and shame evoked by mutual criticism and self-criticism in small groups.

Confessions contain varying mixtures of revelation and concealment. As Albert Camus observed, “Authors of confessions write especially to avoid confession, to tell nothing of what they know.” Young cult members confessing the sins of their pre-cultic lives may leave out ideas and feelings that they are not aware of or reluctant to discuss, including a continuing identification with their prior existence.

…The term “loading the language” refers to literalism and a tendency to deify words or images. A simplified, cliche-ridden language can exert enormous psychological force, reducing every issue in a complicated life to a single set of slogans that are said to embody the truth as a totality.”

(These are only a few excerpts from this article that explains the characteristics of totalism or controlling groups.- please, read the entire article – here- http://www.icsahome.com/articles/cult-formation-lifton -Cult Formation- Robert J. Lifton, M.D.- John Jay College- Abstract, This article is an electronic version of an article originally published in Cultic Studies Journal, 1991, Volume 8, Number 1, pages 1-6. )

After these excerpts, we reviewed the handout of the presentation given to us by the Families Against Cult Teachings advocacy group out of Florida. Their website found here. The presentation was titled “What’s the Difference Between a Church and a Cult?” The traits of a “Safe Group, Church or Leader” were listed. A few included; Will not vilify or ex-communicate former members, Will not have a negative paper trail (court cases, news articles), Will recognize reasonable boundaries and limitations and Will admit mistakes and accept constructive criticism.

The second part of the presentation included 15 attributes to use as an analytical tool to determine if a group, church or leader was UNsafe. I found the source link for the information here. All 15 points to consider are listed at the source which is on the International Cultic Studies Association (ICSA) website. A few of note:

— Questioning, doubt, and dissent are discouraged or even punished.

—The leadership dictates, sometimes in great detail, how members should think, act, and feel (for example, members must get permission to date, change jobs, marry—or leaders prescribe what types of clothes to wear, where to live, whether or not to have children, how to discipline children, and so forth).

—The group has a polarized us-versus-them mentality, which may cause conflict with the wider society.

—The leader is not accountable to any authorities (unlike, for example, teachers, military commanders or ministers, priests, monks, and rabbis of mainstream religious denominations).

—The leadership induces feelings of shame and/or guilt in order to influence and/or control members. Often, this is done through peer pressure and subtle forms of persuasion.

—Subservience to the leader or group requires members to cut ties with family and friends, and radically alter the personal goals and activities they had before joining the group.

—Members are expected to devote inordinate amounts of time to the group and group-related activities.

—Members are encouraged or required to live and/or socialize only with other group members.

—The most loyal members (the “true believers”) feel there can be no life outside the context of the group. They believe there is no other way to be, and often fear reprisals to themselves or others if they leave (or even consider leaving) the group.

Let me say that if I get an event out or order, it is not intentional or meant to harm. The first survivor to speak was Christina Bryant. She began by reminding the group that she had spoken at the meeting in April. Included in her testimony was the view she had early on that she wanted the things WOFF had to offer. As a common thread, I believe each survivor included the same observation, except me. (Early on, I did want the things I thought WOFF-life had to offer.) Christina went into a little more detail and expounded on her brother’s plight and treatment inside WOFF and his escape running away at night time into the woods. Her brother is serving in the armed forces and could not attend. It was a moving account as I was familiar with more details than she told in the forum.

Jeanna Powell spoke next. She also mentioned that at a young age, she believed that only WOFF members would be in heaven. Her testimony included great detail of the controls Jane Whaley uses on her members. She expressed her frustration with the constant review of her walking, talking or appearance. She recounted step by step her frustration with how her brother was treated inside the group including a meeting in which he was pulled from a service by his tie by Jane because it was too long. I was in that service. Jeanna went back down the above list and confirmed which attributes of WOFF qualified as unsafe according to the list in the presentation. I thought she was very accurate and thorough and displayed excellent recall of life inside WOFF. She also confirmed Jane’s attempt to demonstrate how young boys and men were to properly use the bathroom. Before the night was over, we would also hear about WOFF attorney’s attempting get her fired from her job. It was a blatant display of an elitist mentality. The attorneys for her employer were shocked at the attempt.

Teresa Dodrill went next as she and I switched places to allow her to sit closer to the microphone. Nancy Burnette called me into a back room to ask me about Greg Burgeson. She pointed out that he was nodding frequently and seemed to be agreeing with the material presented. This shocked her. Did he want out of WOFF?

I calmed her down and pointed out it was a conditioned response for WOFF members to nod at a speaker. I told her he may not even be aware he was giving her the wrong signals. Later, we would see how accurate I had assessed Greg. He did get a turn to speak later in the meeting. Maybe one other explanation could have been he was just bored, tired and fighting sleep?

Teresa laid out an emotional, but logical explanation of her time inside of WOFF and the confusion that lead her to leave. I had never heard her story. She conveyed the emotion and yet the reasons in a very understandable way. Her exit began over chewing gum. She had missed a service where Jane had laid down another edict that chewing gum in public was a sin and “not God’s way.” The next day, she was among WOFFers and outsiders at her job. A non-WOFFer offered gum to those gathered around and she was the only WOFFer who accepted and that done out of ignorance as no one had informed her of the new rule.

Later, in the car after the shift, she was confronted and asked why God had not convicted her heart that chewing gum in public was a sin? She pleaded for an explanation. At that time, she was told by her sister-in-law to spit out the gum into sister-in-law’s hand and find a place of repentance. Friends, even I was taken aback by the abruptness of the condemnation of chewing gum! But, knowing her sister-in-law and the attitude she carries helped me understand. I was not in the original service, but I remember the rule being passed on and touted as the new “don’t” until the next one came along.

Teresa had worked as a nurse for some time. She worked third shift and one Sunday she decided to skip the humiliation of being singled out in service as falling asleep. If one was caught nodding or sleeping during a WOFF service, they had to stand –up and pray or shout or stand up in the back holding their Bible and not fall over. One Sunday, Teresa decided get the sleep she knew she needed and attend in the evening. Before the evening service, she was contacted and told that since she did not consider coming in the morning important, she could stay home in the evening. And so, she did. She did not go back. (If I remember right…) About a month later, Jane called or met with her to go over her grievances. When Teresa began to lay out the list, she was told she was an “attacker” and from then on labeled such to her family still in the church. She was also accused of improper behavior with another man outside the church. All of this led her to not return to WOFF.

After her separation from WOFF, she did attempt to reach her parents and let them know that regardless of what they had been told, she loved them. There was no response. She reiterated that to this day, family members inside the church have no contact with her.

About this time, I took a couple of questions. The first fellow in the back of the group asked where Jane lived. He wanted to go “talk” to her. Immediately, I did not want to be a party to divulging her address and Matthew and I answered real quick- call or go by the church. For legal reasons, we would not give up her address. To which he replied, “I can go to that church?” We then warned him that visitors were greeted by the security team and he may not be allowed in.

The next person I took a question from made it a statement. She wanted to mention WOFF lawyers attempt to intimidate and cause Jeanna trouble enough for her to be fired from her job. This lady refrained from mentioning Jeanna by name, but later it came out. She expressed her deep shock and disgust that WOFF attorneys would attempt such a feat. At this time, Greg Burgeson was silently and persistently striving to get my attention. Later, I gave him his chance to speak, but not at first.

My turn had come and I fumbled my way into some sort of beginning. I recounted by first contact with WOFF in 1992 and explained the Greenville migration and went into my exit in 2008. I began telling that my experiences were on my blog and gave the address. Several nodded their heads and later I learned these were some regular readers. My testimony included my starting the blog for my own therapy and the ability to process the experiences and the emotion. However, I added that I now get emails from all over the world from former members or family members of present members. The consensus is this blog helps them understand how their WOFF relatives think about matters and events.

I felt no need to repeat a lot of what was on this blog. I did include a few statements about the destruction of my family as following the typical WOFF path. Also, I included details about my involvement with the Faith Freedom Fund and how that allows me to help other survivors. After those statements, I attempted to read the letter I posted to my daughter, Sarah. I began the letter and could not finish it for the emotions that washed over me. Turning to Teresa, I asked her to finish it. I choked up and came close to balling like a baby. Why had I melted like that? Afterwards, I remembered another event from a public meeting this past Wednesday. A child of a co-worker had called me a “Grandpa” because I had some gray hair and looked old to her. I relished the thought of one day being given that privilege of playing with my grandchildren. Right now, that time looks as far away as the moon. The incident Wednesday had an effect on me while reading the letter to my daughter.

Before Matthew Fenner took the microphone, I may have recognized Greg, I don’t remember the order, but I do recall doubting if I should have given him access. To his credit, he was polite and asked if he could speak, he stood up and began to roll on about how no one had mentioned Jesus or talked about being saved…?

I said this was no place for a dissertation and asked what his question might have? At some point, another person turned and reminded him this was not a church service.

He then said, “None of this stuff you are talking about goes on inside of Word of Faith.” No one threw anything, but he received a couple of comments. One was about his daughter who has left WOFF. He said she made her choices. He then blurted out to me, “I know how you treated your son.”

To which at least one other survivor said, “You know what you were told!” The inference was you are done, sit down and he did. See, I was right. He was nodding earlier out of a reflex born of his WOFF days, not that he was agreeing. He had done his bit and could go back to Jane and be cleared of any doubt that he had “taken hold” during the forum.

Greg’s outburst unleashed an impromptu rebuttal from Nancy Burnette. Nancy went on to explain her initial involvement with WOFF through her role as a guardian ad litem for two boys who were being considered for adoption by a WOFF family. She told her story of being let go from that position by Jane’s admission of her negative opinion of Nancy. She went on the explain Matthew’s attempt to warn the Department of Social Services in Rutherford and Cleveland County. No one listened and stepped up to complete any complaint forms. Included in this explanation was more understanding of the Federal Injunction and how it has affected the officials in Rutherford and now Cleveland counties. It was compelling to say the least.

Matthew Fenner began next and explained his first contacts with WOFF. He admitted that much of what he said in the video posted recently by a WOFF source was true. He did enter the group at a low point in his life and enjoyed being there – for a while. He was treated to the best living arrangements and had what many may think were enviable surroundings. He expressed his passion for the truth and his relationship with God as being alive and well. Matthew cited his recent acceptance into the University of North Carolina on a full ride as evidence of direction from God. Then he began to tell events where the attractive and supportive environment of WOFF began to unravel.

He announced he would demonstrate how he was treated during a prayer session near the end of his time at WOFF. One lady on the second row exclaimed, “This is what I want to see!”

Greg Burgeson whipped out his phone to record and Matthew told him to put it away. Greg said it was “bashing”. Matthew corrected him and said no- this is truth. Greg put down his phone. (Previously, the group had agreed if children were in attendance there would be no prayer demonstration because of the fear it would unleash.)

Nancy sat in the chair and Christina Bryant and Tim Cornelius walked around the table to help Matthew. Christina warned people that this would be loud and they might cover their ears and that there would not be the normal words included here out of respect for those in attendance. I saw several apprehensively put their hands to their ears. Matthew demonstrated on Nancy a muted version of the physical aggression shown to him. Then the three of them began to “pray” loud. This only lasted maybe thirty seconds. The effect was enough to shock many in the room. I told them I wore ear plugs during my time there and that this “prayer” could last as long as two hours. Clearly, the desired effect had been achieved.

Matthew came back to finish his exit story and Nancy added some more reference points including information about the Federal Injunction and the hazards it has created for the children inside of WOFF. When Matthew left with another survivor, Patrick Covington (who was in attendance, but decided not to speak), it was in the middle of the night. A couple days later, Jane Whaley pronounced that the cancer Matthew had at four years old would come back and kill him. Does that sound like the words of a “Safe Church” leader?

There were videos set to play, but the hour was so late we were not able to give them the proper attention. The session ended as many stayed to talk and make comments of appreciation. Two more events to note, Nancy’s husband, Chad, was talking to the city worker who was in attendance to unlock the building for us. He first grabbed Chad and told him that a van full of folks was slowly driving by taking video of the license tags of everyone in the lot. Chad assured him it was WOFFers and the worker was not happy. With this event, he launched into stories about his time at the local prison and seeing WOFF effects on the inmates- not all good. As they were talking downstairs, the short prayer demo was heard and the city worker jumped! He was shocked and concerned, but Chad assured him it was okay. This served to pique his interest in our meeting only more and later he came to request a set of the handouts.

This has been a long read and I know I left out some of the testimonies, my apologies to anyone who may not be happy with that. Tim Cornelius, also a survivor was present. By the end of the meeting, he felt like he did not have anything to add to what had been said. Afterwards, he did demonstrate for me the physical force used against one WOFF member during prayer. I was shocked.

Overall, there was a general sense that those in attendance (except for two) were pleased at the content delivered and left believing they knew more about mind control and its effects on victims. Thank you, WOFF for circling the parking lot and filming the tags, this showed us you were more concerned than you let on and upset the city worker. There was a lot more that could have been shared by the survivors, but time constraints prevented that.

Please, use the comments section below for your reactions and questions.

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. Jane told me and Josh confirmed it.

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 480.

The video is less than twenty-five minutes long. He recently spoke at the Society for  Ethical Culture in NY and apparently he has many friends there.

Mr. Hassan gives a brief synopsis of his background, telling of his involvement and exit from the Moonies, He was there for two and one half years and had risen to a level of leadership within the group. His family performed an intervention and he subsequently left the group. After speaking to Robert Lifton; he began his journey to learn more about what had happened to him and thus how to help others. Thirty-six years later he has been on many media sources and has helped many group members in their quest to learn to think for themselves. His books outline the “Strategic Interactive Approach” for helping group members.

In his opening, Hassan shares his thoughts on the deception used in cults during recruiting. Mind control groups to do not give full disclosure and allow for prospects to make informed decisions about joining their group. This lack of informed consent is paramount to the determination of a group’s validity and motives. Prospects are not told what the group believes or what will happen to them once they accept the gifts or invitation to a meeting and proceed to join. Were you told what would happen to you before you joined WOFF? I had no idea of the level of intense commitment of members who lived inside the group. It was a shock to see the day to day requirement to “lock-in with Jane” when we first moved in October of 2002, thus followed the surrender of any privacy in the family and marriage. It was a slippery slope for sure. Back to the video…

Next, he reviews his B.I.T.E. model and its application to understanding mind control. This model is used as a test to examine a group in order to determine if they are using mind control. We have reviewed this model before, but, with many new readers we will give a brief overview. Hassan is not concerned with a group’s beliefs but their acts or practices. The B.I.T.E. model stands for B-behavior control, I-information control, T- thought control, E- Emotional control. Does the group in question practice any of these areas of control? We determined in previous posts that Word of Faith Fellowship (WOFF) scored a 100% on this test! Please, watch the video and read Hassan’s books to learn more.

As Hassan continues, he puts forth several nuggets of wisdom garnered over the many years of his experience in helping cult members. He cautions that in this country we over emphasize or protect the freedom of religion to include the inordinate freedom to act. Yes, there is freedom of religion but, that is not a license to take advantage of others. He warns against being “convinced by the member’s passion” that they are happy and in complete control of their thinking and their life. This is simply not the measure needed to determine one’s actual condition.

Later in the video he recognizes that phobias are real and “You can install phobias in someone’s mind.”  He lists several phobias he has dealt with over the years in his clients – fears include losing your salvation if you leave or do not follow the group’s directives. He explains the continuum of ethical influence and unethical influence. Instilling fears would be an unethical influence technique. Does WOFF instill fears? The fence of fear surrounds the group and keeps many of them inside Jane Whaley’s influence and control for years! She is very effective in undue influence.

Hassan explains that Abrahamic religions have been based on choice. The followers choose to follow their God. God did not does not make us robots and force us to follow him. Hassan explains how cults pervert the “choice” process all under the guise of freedom of religion. At about 13 minutes into the video, he says that these groups actually violate the freedom of religion by the use of deceptive recruiting and mind control techniques. We touched on that recently in a post asking Frank Webster questions about his attorney’s oath and involvement in WOFF. In my opinion, the practices of WOFF violate a person’s freedom of religion for the very same reasons Hassan shares.

Even with undue influence, Hassan says the mind control is not 100% captivating. Everyone, including those born into a cult, still has the desire to be free and to be loved and have rewarding relationships. Given that mind control groups do not allow these desires to exist outside of the group’s methods and practices, he says this is the reason people walk away after 20 or 30 years of cult involvement. He says that in practice, cult members “have to be obedient rather than be in touch with their conscience.” (We will expand more on this in a future post!) He cites the Internet being a resource for those wanting to know more about a group and this access has helped many.

Hassan tells the story of a friend who had been in Scientology for 30 years. They left because someone was nice to them and helped them start thinking about the conflicts and doubts they had while in their group. He said while telling this story, “It is never too late to wake up and leave and reclaim your life!” (19 minutes into video) Hassan continues with this truism, “When you are in a cult, you don’t think you are in a cult, when you have been brainwashed, you don’t think you have been brainwashed. But you think other groups are cults and other groups have been brainwashed…”  This key can help you speak to your loved ones to start them thinking about other groups and lovingly help them consider their group. He suggested having members watch the exit interviews of Heaven’s Gate member to show the results of brainwashing. Then consider the B.I.T.E. model when applied to their group. His main key was that if any group is legitimate, they will stand up to the (B.I.T.E.) test!

In his close, he says, “Love is stronger than mind control.” That, my friends, is the thought of the day. Please, learn more about his work and contact me with any questions. I will help in any way I am able to help.

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 429.

   Mind Control Versus Brainwashing

   As we introduce the subject, allow me a few comments on the subject at hand. For some readers, the difference between brainwashing and mind control may be one strictly of semantics. Trust me; it is much more than that. Brainwashing has occurred in years past, and I have no doubt there are places in this country and around the world where individuals are being brainwashed. “Brainwashing is typically coercive. The person knows from the outset that he is in the hands of the enemy. It begins with a clear demarcation of the respective roles—who is the prisoner and who is the jailer—and the prisoner experiences the absolute minimum of choice…” (page 55). This is just not the case at WOFF. The roles are not clearly marked. Faithful WOFF members do not see themselves as prisoners- until it is time to leave!  And over time, within certain strata of the group, the roles can change and one who once was lower in the pyramid structure can be elevated higher than those who once where over them. For regular WOFF members, Jane and those in leadership are not cast as “jailers” until it is time to leave!

    Don’t get me wrong; when a person is being pressured inside WOFF to change and give up individual freedoms and choices, it can get ugly. There have been, and from what I have learned, still are abusive measures employed in order to help someone “serve God with all their heart”… Overall, and in comparison to brainwashing, the process of mind control used at WOFF is much more subtle. Hassan writes, “Mind control, also called “thought reform,” is much more subtle and sophisticated. Its perpetrators are regarded as friends or peers, so the person (being influenced) is much less defensive… Mind control has little to no overt physical abuse… The individual is deceived and manipulated – not directly threatened – into making prescribed choices. On the whole, he responds positively to what is done to him.” (page 56) Jane, Sam and the leadership certainly do not show themselves as “enemies” of those regular members who are “submitting to them” or “opening their heart” to them. Therein is a large part of the deception within WOFF-life. As we move on, we will compare in more detail what Hassan describes as mind control to what I experienced at WOFF.

    In my opinion, the major source of confusion for those who live in the surrounding community and for relatives of those still inside WOFF, lies in witnessing the extreme changes that occur when one becomes a faithful WOFF member. A new member takes on the dress, the language, the mannerisms and the legalistic lifestyle very quickly upon entering WOFF. For those unfamiliar with or who have not lived through the indoctrination process of a mind control group, these radical changes could only occur when someone has been forced at near gunpoint! I can understand the confusion and I am not ignoring the severity of the control measures used. But, for sure, the new WOFF member RARELY ever is aware of how many changes are occurring and how quickly they are changing.  The new WOFF member does not realize how those on the outside would view the obvious effects of WOFFness. Why? From one who has lived through the process, when mind control techniques are being used, the new convert feels as if they are an active part of the change process. The reality is that many folks are rendered helpless to make critical thinking choices as the sea of fears washes over them and the ground they stand on turns to quick sand. On one hand Jane is helping supply them with clothes, a job, a place to live, instant “friends”, structure and a “purpose to their life”. For every need supplied, valuable personal freedoms worth much more are being eroded and will eventually be thrown as far as the East is from the West.  

   Additionally, another point made to support the accusation of WOFF-brainwashing for outsiders is the total uniformity of the members of WOFF. It is not just the new converts, but, it is the obvious fact the individuality is outright destroyed for WOFF members. Set aside how and why; who can ignore that Jane obviously dislikes and does not allow freedom of choice. For those on the outside looking in, this is glaringly ABNORMAL. Before we end this series on mind control, I hope show why I believe this uniformity could not happen as easily with brainwashing, but, it could with mind control. The subtle processes of mind control include the use of peer pressures to assure acceptance of a group identity. Mind control used at WOFF is more seductive and harder to detect. After that lengthy introduction, we move on…

   Steven Hassan begins Chapter 4, “When I lecture in colleges, I usually challenge my audience with the question, “How would you know if you were under mind control?” After some reflection, most people will realize that if one were under mind control, it would be impossible to determine it without some help from others. In addition, one would need to understand very clearly what mind control is.” (page 53)

   This is a vital first point to make on the subject. WOFF members do not believe for one second that they are under either brainwashing or mind control! I know since I did not have any idea that the “gift” that Jane operated in was full of mind control techniques. Why, how could that be? When I was inside, I admitted to someone near the end of my tour that I knew there were things that were things not right with life at WOFF, but I stayed for the preaching. Can you see what I was really saying? For MANY YEARS, I was never willing to admit that anything was ever WRONG with WOFF-life. I defended WOFFness to my relatives and to my few acquaintances outside the group. Over time and somewhere in my thoughts, I came to admit some things did not measure up, but, I was willing to overlook those things- for what? Preaching from a woman who could at times rage with anger and excuse it as the anger of God? Was I duped? Was I under some type of influence? What do you think?  No, WOFF members have no idea the control measures being used against them are not “the way God’s people live”. God’s children should not be spiritually raped in order to benefit the person leading the group. That is not God’s will no matter how spiritual Jane makes it look to obey what she hears as “the word of the Lord.”

    But, to realize how far under mind control I actually had been was so far from my thinking that I still doubted it for months after leaving! For me to admit to having been under the mind control techniques of a person or persons I had at one time trusted to bring me the “word of the Lord”; that was a tough place to come to. It hurt on the inside. It prompted so many questions! Because WOFF was/is a religious cult and uses Scripture to justify the measures used against its members; there was/is the temptation to blame God for allowing “His ministers” to use you and fool you. Who wants to be caught blaming God? So, those who stay and many who leave, it is much easier to ignore the facts and scoff at the truth.

   Yes, I realize that not everyone goes through the same level of WOFF drama/trauma and everyone handled the stresses of WOFF-life differently. Not everyone has their family destroyed. Does that make it safe to say that WOFF-life must be okay since not everyone ends up vowing to never walk in a church for as long as they live? Though I must close for now, before we finish this series on mind control, I hope to make it very clear why after helping several former members, Paul Martin of Wellspring Retreat  assessed WOFF as “one of the top five emotionally destructive cults in America”.  

  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 348.

   The front of Hassan’s book has several endorsements from which I will quote two in hopes of bringing some perspective of how well respected and admired Steven Hassan’s work has become.

   “A valuable, well written book on a topic of genuine importance. Steve Hassan explains precisely how cults operate to control minds and, in the process, he provides sharp insights into how the influence process works in everyday situations as well.”       Robert B. Cialdini, Ph.D –Author of “Influence”

   “Anyone who has witnessed a loved one rapidly slips into the emotionally insulated and distant world of a cult knows the extent and swiftness of its catastrophic effects. Few people understand the mechanisms by which these devastating seductions are systematically engineered by cult leaders. Steve Hassan knows from experience. Through his examples and analyses, we finally witness how cults work and learn how we can protect ourselves and our loved ones from them.”  Stephen Josephs, Ed.D. Psychologist- Founder of the Massachusetts Institute of Neuro-Linguistic Programming

   Again, these questions are from the section titled, ““Asking Questions: The Key to Protecting Yourself From Destructive Cults”. (pages 106-110) Hassan introduces the subject noting a very important characteristic of those in cults, “Although most groups use deception, it is important to realize that most cult members don’t realize they are lying in the process of recruitment. For that reason, by asking these direct questions one after another, you can usually discover that either you are not being told a straight story, or the cult member does not have the straight story to begin with.” (page 106)

    During my time, either directly or indirectly under the teachings of Jane Whaley, I did not realize I was not getting the full truth about the drama scenes being played out within the group or outside the group concerning former members. It was not until I left and started hearing other former members and those who live in the community tell what they saw and heard did I realize that I had been kept in the dark. So, has that changed? Is it likely or unlikely?  If Jane Whaley told the WHOLE truth about every situation or drama scene that occurred/occurs within her group or because of her group- would her ability to control others be affected? I think so. If her aura lessened in strength what would that affect in the long run? Among other things, the adulation of her members give her would lessen as well as their fervor to give into HER coffers.

  We have shared about the difference in WOFF between facts and “truth”. Jane and her leadership held back facts thinking they were telling “truth”. After all, in WOFF what do the facts matter when Jane is the source of all “truth”.  

  Hassan continues, “Because members have been trained to avoid thinking negatively about the group, you will often receive less than direct responses. Among the more common responses of cult members are vague generalities, evasive remarks, and attempts to change the subject…. Evasive remarks such as “I understand you are feeling skeptical; I was too, before I came to understand… ” (page 106-107). Who could honestly deny that during WOFF days, we were “trained to avoid thinking negatively about the group”? That training was subtle, yet VERY effective! Why? It was effective because it was pounded in to us with the FEAR of Jane’s wrath. The wrath that came if we were caught expressing something negative or even less than positive about WOFF, WOFF –life, Jane’s leadership decisions or even her every utterance. That wrath was euphemistically labeled as the love of God. Does this make sense? WOFF members have a high motivation to cast everything about WOFF in a positive light. I know I was under this fear for years.

   Let’s begin with the questions. We will state the question, give a remark or two by Hassan and then follow with comments about WOFF-life.

–          How long have you (the recruiter) been involved? Are you trying to recruit me into any type of organization?  

“A person who has been involved in a destructive cult for less than one year is usually very inexperienced. He is less likely to lie, and his lies are not as convincing as those of a more experienced recruiter.”(page 107) Well, this was true at WOFF. Jane realized that when a serious matter came up and some in the community needed “truth”, she would openly select certain ones who had been in WOFF longer and were more versed in WOFF-truth. She would instruct the rest of us to keep quiet or avoid situations where we could be asked about WOFF-life. When the newspaper printed the names of Faith Freedom Fund contributors, those names were read openly in the service and Jane instructed who could “go give them truth”. After there was an encounter, you were to report back and give an account as to how it was received.

–          Can you tell me the names of all other organizations that are affiliated with this group?

   “What you are trying to uncover here are the names of front groups.” (page 108) For the most part, Hassan is dealing with much larger groups than WOFF. But, knowing the affiliation WOFF has with Christians United for Israel (CUFI) is important as well as which politicians have been allowed to come speak at WOFF. I get asked all the time which businesses in the community are owned by WOFF members.  That list changes often, but, it is vital to know. Why? It is because wherever a WOFF member works- the fellow employees and customers are subject to being invited to WOFF events and drawn into WOFFness. When I used to work for Two Mile Properties, I invited residents of the apartments to church functions with the owner’s blessings. I know of what I speak.

–          Who is the leader? What are his (her) background and qualifications?  Does he (she) have a criminal record? 

  “You may or may not get a straight answer to these questions… He may not know anything about the leader’s background or criminal record… Remember, a destructive cult tries to get a person’s commitment first, before disclosing important information. A legitimate group will always give information first, and ask for commitment only when the person feels ready.” (page 108) Well, what can be said? I was committed to the Greenville church and did not realize that in turn committed me to WOFF. By giving trust to GS and LS, that trust was in turn transferred to Jane and Sam Whaley. That was not prudent on my part. I did not perform any research on the Greenville church or WOFF. Did any others commit the same mistake when considering joining WOFF? 

–          What does your group believe? Does it believe that the ends justify the means? Is deception allowed under certain circumstances?

   “Most cult recruiters will not explain what they believe right there on the spot…If a person is not willing to summarize the key points of the group’s beliefs right there and then, you can be sure they are hiding something… Any legitimate group will be able to summarize its central beliefs. Destructive cults will not want to do so…No legitimate organization needs to lie to people in order to help them..(page 108-109)

    One thing I would add to Hassan’s question would be to ask about the group’s practices and not just their beliefs. While at WOFF, we could explain our beliefs in a pretty conventional or traditional manner. It was the practices of WOFF that would turn heads and cause eyebrows to be raised. Who among former members did not feel queasy when explaining the blasting, loud prayer and deliverance? How did you feel when your visitor began to see how Jane exercised authority over every area of a member’s life? Don’t get me wrong, there were pat answers to give and you could always refer them to someone in leadership or even Jane. And when a visitor learned how many folks lived in communal housing- how did that go? If they needed a place to stay; it may go well, if not, then explain away! A constant question when explaining communal living- “Do you share the kitchen? And –How many bathrooms are there in the house?”  No, I am not sure how I stayed in a group that long and always felt the need to tell others about “blasting” and deliverance and communal living and all the WOFF-rules- just when they were “ready”. That is one reason I find this blog so therapeutic. If it happened at WOFF- I can tell it. Yea!  

–          What are the members expected to do once they join? Do I have to quit school or work, donate my money and property, or cut myself off from family members and friends who might oppose my membership?

  “If you are being approached by a destructive cult, the person you meet may tell you that you will be expected to do little or nothing once you join. However, this question will make most cult members very uncomfortable and defensive. Watch the recruiter’s non-verbal reaction carefully when you ask this question. Ask the person what he did when he first met the group and what he is doing now.” (page 109)

   Honestly, I must admit, if Jonathan Guy had asked this question when I first invited him to WOFF, I am not sure I could have answered. “What are the members expected to do once they join?” Simple- work, work, go to church, go to church, obey Jane, give your time and your money- right?  “Do I have to quit school or work, donate my money and property, or cut myself off from family members and friends who might oppose my membership?” Well, what shall we say then? How did that turn out for you after you had been in WOFF a few years? We should also include here – Are you required to delete your Facebook® page when you join the group?  Was anybody told to quit their job and go to work for a company owned by church members? Does WOFF expect you to tithe, give offerings and most of all, become submerged into WOFF- 24/7/365? Did anyone else cut off family members or friends who opposed or just asked questions about WOFF?  Are these great questions? My three favorites are yet to come!

–          Is your group considered to be controversial by anyone? If people are critical of the group, what are their main objections?

“This is a nice open ended question, something to probe just how much the person knows or is willing to discuss. If you ask this question politely and with a smile, you will be surprised at how many times you will hear, “Oh, some people think that we are a cult and that we are all brainwashed! Isn’t that silly? Do I look brainwashed?” To that question I will usually respond, “Oh, how are people supposed to look if they are brainwashed?” (page 109)

   This question would have knocked me for a loop when I was in WOFF! First of all, I did not have the COMPLETE list of organizations that considered WOFF controversial. It would have been hard to comprehend even one – since we were trained to deny or avoid all negative thoughts about WOFF! Okay, we were told about the Faith Freedom Fund, but, who else? To admit even one could have sent cold chills down my spine since that could subject me to a verbal love bath from Jane or GS or someone else in leadership. After all, KR got up in front of us all in WOFF and scoffed that brainwashing could even be true!  Most of us joined in the chorus of laughter- brainwashed at WOFF- how silly! The fact was denying it made it no less true. I suspect those under “mind-control” or “brainwashing” have no real discernment about the process and the results. I know I did not. That is until someone helped me see the effects of it in my their life.  In a future post, I will review the difference between brainwashing and mind-control.

   What are the main objections to WOFF? The next two questions will help answer that one. We have shared these questions before, but they are worth reviewing.

–          How do you feel about former members of your group? Have you ever sat down to speak with a former member to find out why he left the group? If not, why not? Does your group impose restrictions on communicating with former members?

“This is one of the most revealing sets of questions you can ask any cult member. Any legitimate organization would never discourage contact with former members…Destructive cults on the other hand, do not accept any reasons for a person’s departure no matter what they are. Likewise, cult groups make sure to instill fear in members, insuring that they stay away from critics and former members.” (page 109)

   When will we know that WOFF is truly changing? It will change when fear stops being used as a fence to keep members in and a hammer against former members from telling their experiences. When Jane quits using her bazooka of fear and stops verbally abusing those who express doubts or questions about her “spiritual gifts” or doctrines or WOFF-practices, then maybe changes have come. Until now, fear of Jane and her wrath has kept the fences up and the gates closed to prevent or hinder a free exit from WOFF.

–          What are three things you like least about the group and the leader? 

     This question would have short-circuited my WOFF thinking during WOFF days. Of course, on the outside, I would have said “There is nothing I don’t like.” This was an acceptable WOFF-lie. Remember, in faithful WOFF members thinking, there is no room for critical thoughts or even doubts. At least, that is what they want you to think. The front or façade is their defense against analyzing the conundrums and quandaries of WOFF-life. Pushing to the front the acceptable words and actions of a faithful WOFF member leaves a giant emptiness inside –behind the wall. For me, and I suspect for many others, the emptiness rang the loudest at night time before going to bed. WOFF-life was/is full-throttle most days, and then you read your Bible and fell asleep, most nights. But, for those few nights when sleep would not come and questions persist, sleep was short and a restless adventure at best. Several nights during, and many nights towards the end, I would push sleep away and ponder the realities of what was going on. Why was my wife treating me this way? Why was she keeping the children from me? When I was around the children for brief moments, why were they quiet or on guard? Why had all the family dinners stopped? Why did my wife send the children to other families and not tell me where they were going? I think I am awake, but, it all seems like one long unending nightmare. Who is this woman beside me in the bed? She looks like the woman I married over twenty years ago, but, she has acted like I am the enemy and not her husband. When the answers to these questions started coming, the reality was sad to say the least. 

    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 346.

    The WOFF-dramas that tear apart families are not hashed out in the view of public – well, except those child custody cases seen in the courts. Those follow a script and for the most part end up in the parent that leaves getting very little actual visitation with children still in WOFF. A few WOFF-children have chosen the non-WOFF parent and have left. But, they did so facing the cost of losing WOFF friends, WOFF School, and regular contact with the WOFF-parent that stayed inside the supposed “Christian” church known as WOFF.

   The scenario I am more familiar with both from being inside and now being outside for three years, includes the family members who stay, refusing any contact with those who have left WOFF. This part of the WOFF-drama is hard to explain even to one who has seen it from both sides. Why? I believe that many that see the glitter and glamour of WOFF-life do not actually see the trauma and drama for those inside and those that make their way out.  So, for those in the community, appearances can be deceiving. The price to pay to stay and play is high for sure. I saw it in other lives before it came to be a part of mine. I saw other families being torn apart but, not one day before it began to happen to me, did I think I would be a victim of Jane-love. 

   For sure, I don’t know all of the family dramas played out because of this radicalized passion for Jane Whaley. And certainly, I don’t know each circumstances- but, safe to say the scenes all follow the same or similar script- insiders shunning outsiders in order to keep receiving their fix of Jane-love and showing their Jane-love, all the while in their minds thinking they are honoring God and fulfilling their call and standing for righteousness and keeping the faith and keeping their children from being attacked and so on and so forth.

    Jane-love lived out does not appear as God’s love when you get right down to it- but, WOFF members need it, have to show it and must reflect it in their lives- or they are OUT. This is the supreme test for regular members. They will from time to time be required to sacrifice for the cause– which is supporting Jane with Jane-love. Do you doubt this?  

   As I have considered the direction of this post for days, it originally carried the title: “I love you; I love you, Oh, NOW I can’t talk to you!!!!” I began considering this as after certain events unfolded. A former member was ending their conversation on the phone with me one day and said – “I love you… well, not as we said in WOFF…. That was not real love.” You could tell this person was feeling awkward and did not know how to express what they were feeling. Truthfully, I remembered the same feeling after I had left WOFF. It was normal to end the conversations or visits at WOFF with “love you…” or some derivative. It was reflex, but, very acceptable. When you leave WOFF, you have to decide how much of this was true and how much was show. When a person leaves the group; any contact with WOFF members at all is not concluded with the same words… or was it for you? Former members, do WOFF members keep espousing their deep love and affection for you—since you have left?  So, what this former member was coming to grips with was the fact that what they had heard was a show and was all part of the sham. They were expressing their regret for being deceived. They had believed what they had heard, that those at WOFF had actually loved them, when in reality- that love was based on WOFF allegiance and more specifically — the love of and for Jane Whaley. Thus, the term “Jane-love” was coined.  

    While inside WOFF, a member does not see the love being expressed as “Jane-love”. It is covered over and euphemistically called the Love of God or God’s love. But, Jane-love has several dynamics which I will attempt to explain. First, there is the love of members for Jane. This is characterized by undying faith and unquestioned belief in all that Jane says or does. Those members who express Jane-love must show no doubt that Jane hears God perfectly and that anything she does is holy, righteous and beyond question. Another former member told me quite emphatically, she believed WOFF members would kill for Jane. Next, there is the “love” that Jane shows towards her members. Huh? Yes, Jane shows her members “love” by telling them the Word of the Lord, by “correcting, rebuking and blasting them” either with words or the shrill cry she makes when she is “hitting the heavens” on their behalf. Why? So, “the devil will leave them”. Shall we forget that Jane also gives either directly or indirectly many members jobs, houses, clothes, money, direction, counsel on who to marry and other such things. She creates for many a dependency that is labeled as “love”. Another way Jane shows her “love” toward her members was/is feeding them the ideas that only through her will they fulfill their call, become holy and righteous and make it to heaven. Does that sound like “love” or something else? All of it creates in WOFF members an emotionally charged, intense dependency. This dependency is deceptive, for as much as it gives, it takes away much more… There is a high price to pay to stay and play….in WOFF.  

   Another dynamic of this “Jane-love” is that it becomes the means for members to relate to and judge others in the group. Jane-love replaces the healthy, normal bonds of familial love and affection. What does that look like? When a member expresses doubts or some other great “sin”, they are put in “discipleship”. This includes being cut-off from contact with many, if not all family members and friends. This is supposed to help that person “get their heart right”. Where is the breach? Some where they have failed to express Jane-love. Because of that, regular members can have no contact with them unless “Jane has ahold of it…” Now for those inside, this is all spun to that person’s detriment. The person in discipleship has not “walked in the love of God” or is in sin in some area… Therefore, simple expressions of support and kindness toward that person have been suspended. Many times Jane will not talk to them until they repent and express the proper amount of contrition. This is labeled as repenting to God, when in essence it is repenting to Jane.      

    If Jane-love was a great model to follow and truly the “Love of God”, shouldn’t other churches exhibit this among their members and towards their leader? What other church in Rutherford county has such requirements? Do any other Pastors in the county receive such “love” from their members?  What other churches in the state have such “love” present including the same results as the destruction of family bonds as WOFF? The question is rhetorical, as I know there are others. The others that have such results are ALSO religious cults! The results of Jane-love are no different than the emotional destruction found in Strong City, FLDS, Exclusive Brethren or the other thousands of religious cults across the world. Strong City in New Mexico had the “Michael-love”… FLDS continues to show undying “Warren-love”…

   The characteristic of “Jane-love” is not special only to WOFF. This type of allegiance, loyalty and perversion of the true love of God makes it clear what type of group WOFF really has become. We can use this as one measure to define WOFF as a religious cult. Steven Hassan is a nationally known cult expert. He was in the Moonies for over two years and after he got out, studied to become a leading expert in the mind control used by cults of all types all over the world. In his book, “Releasing the Bonds” (Copyright© by Steven Hassan 2000, A Freedom of Mind Press Book, ISBN: 0-9670688-0-0) Hassan is answering the question, “What is a Destructive Cult?” Under the heading “Authoritative Leadership” he writes, “In essence, a destructive cult is an authoritarian group that is headed by a person or group of people that has near-complete control. Charismatic cult leaders often make extreme claims of divine or “otherworldly” power to exercise influence over their members….Being a powerful leader is not inherently wrong, though it carries a high potential for abuse. A group becomes destructive when its leader actively uses such power to deceive members and to rob them of their individuality and free will…” (page 4, emphasis added)

    Later in the book, “Although most cult leaders claim to be of the “spiritual realm”, we can see their true colors when we examine how much emphasis leaders place on the material world—their luxurious lifestyles, millions of dollars in real estate, extensive business enterprises, and so on.” (page 6, emphasis added) In my opinion, Jane-love is the electricity that carries Jane’s power to her and from her… It results in the controlled lives of WOFF members and when examined- sheds light on the true nature of WOFF-life…

  We will close with this. In Steven Hassan’s first book, “Combatting Mind Control” (Copyright©1988, 1990 by Steven Hassan, Park Street Press, ISBN: 0-89281-311-3) he had a section titled, “Asking Questions: The Key to Protecting Yourself From Destructive Cults”. “…These questions work best if you ask them in a very direct yet friendly manner and demand very specific answers.” (page 106) In this section, Hassan has many great questions, too many to list in this post. One group of questions did catch my eye and it applies to one of the subjects of this post.

   He recommends asking these questions of a recruiter for a group. So, the next time a WOFF member tries to defend WOFF-life, consider asking the following. “How do you feel about former members of your group? Have you ever sat down to speak with a former member to find out why he left the group? If not, why not? Does your group impose restrictions on communicating with former members?” (page 109, emphasis added)

    While inside WOFF, I would not have been able to answer these questions with confidence, especially the last one. Does WOFF place restrictions on communicating with former members? Has any present regular member ever sat down with a former member and asked them why they left the group- without other WOFF members present?

   And who can ignore this last question in Hassan’s list? “What are three things you like least about the group (WOFF) and the leader?… If you get an opportunity to catch a cult member off guard and ask that question, I suggest you watch their face very carefully. The pupils in his (or her) eyes will dilate and he will act momentarily stunned. When he (or she) does answer he will very likely say there is nothing he can think of that he doesn’t like. Cult members will generally give some variation on that reply because they are simply not permitted to talk critically… (of their group or of their leader) (page 110) Why? It is because of “Jane-love”. Asking questions is the best way to come out from under the spell of “Jane-love”.

    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 341.