Living Church of God Is Still Making Sure Its Members Know That They Can Be Disfellowshipped And Marked

One of the favorite weapons the Church has used over the decades to keep members in line is the threat of disfellowshipment and even worse, being marked from the pulpit.  That fear of being kicked out and ultimately losing one's chance in going to Petra and ultimately salvation was a serious mind tool of the church.  How can any of us forget the numerous disfellowshipments announced from the pulpits by ministers during church services?  You could hear a pin drop in the room as fear quickly spread.

The new and improved Living Church of God, who at one time actually had a chance of being a real Christian organization by doing what was right, quickly resorted back to kicking people out and publicly humiliating them. In fact, every single splinter group that apostatized in the 1990s had a chance to do what was right and actually be real Christians and yet, 25 some years later they are more abusive and filled with more liars and false prophets than we could have ever imagined. And, almost every single one of them still uses disfellowshipment as a weapon to keep their fledgling flocks in line.

Today, many of these splinter personality cults take it a step further and claim to have the ability to "mark" individuals that are NOT part of their groups. Talk about control!

Dexter Wakefield writes:

In the Church, we may occasionally hear that someone has been “disfellowshipped” or “marked,” as the King James Version (KJV) puts it. Thankfully, these are rare events. But, perhaps because of this rarity, these practices are not always well understood. Can a person who is not a member, attendee, or adherent of the Living Church of God be disfellowshipped? No. Can a person who is not affiliated with the Living Church of God be “marked”? Yes. 

The good thing about all of this is that God does not honor their disfellowshipment and markings.  S ultimately, it is not an issue and most certainly NOT a salvation issue.  Many now take it as a badge of honor to have one of the splinter cult leaders publicly rebuke them. They know first hand how puny and insignificant these men are and their public proclamations are useless.

Wakefield then uses a mean neighborhood dog as an example of "marking".  Since it is a public menace, it can be marked in order to warn loyal devotees to steer clear.

We might describe it this way: Let’s say that in my neighborhood there lived a big dog that would walk up to people on the street, looking at them expectantly. When someone put out a hand to pet the dog, it would suddenly snap at them savagely. Ever know a dog like that? Imagine you and I were walking down the sidewalk and this dog approached us expectantly. When you reached out to pet it, the dog gave you a vicious bite. Then, as you tried to stop the bleeding, I remarked, “Actually, I knew that dog would bite you. It does that to everyone who tries to pet it.” You would probably be very upset with me, and you might say, “You should have warned me to mark, to note, to keep my eye on, to watch out for that dog, and avoid it!” And you would be right.

Paul was saying that the Church has a similar responsibility. This is why the ministry, after careful consideration, will sometimes announce to a congregation or to the Church as a whole that someone may potentially do harm and needs to be “noted” or “marked.” It’s rare, but it happens, and the individual may or may not be a member. This is done when you need to be warned, and the person taken note of can be anyone who poses a threat of some kind, spiritual or otherwise.

Wakefield then explains that church members can be disfellowshipped and that devotees should steer clear of them for extended periods of time.  

Sadly, it is sometimes necessary for someone to be suspended or even dismissed from the fellowship of the Church—that is, to be disfellowshipped. Disfellowshipping is quite different from the marking or noting described above, in that it always involves someone who is a part of our fellowship, and the local members may or may not be told about the action. Also, a person may be temporarily suspended for some problem without their congregation being told (often called a “suspension”), and then return weeks or months later. Or members may be asked, depending on the circumstances, to avoid social contact with the person for a period, pending repentance. Usually, this restriction does not include business contact. Determining how to handle business contact is the responsibility of the individual member, but seeking counsel from the ministry can help you decide what is most helpful in each individual case.

The sad part in all of this is that some church members believe that the minister has the capability to discern if a member has repented or not and is worthy to be let back in the fold.  None of them have that ability and actually end up abusing members.  None of them have adequate training in counseling or therapy work.  None of them should ever be expected to make the right decision.  Tragically, the trail of dead bodies littering the ground down the rough the decades in the church proves that.

Wakefield then goes on with this:

How, then, should we feel toward those who have been marked or disfellowshipped? It is very important to remember that the membership should not bear any ill will against the person. These practices have a constructive and protective purpose, and should never be construed to encourage feelings of animosity.

If people could read the horror stories posted on closed Facebook groups by people who have been disfellowshipped and how the church and members treated them is appaling.  Church members believing they are doing what is right many times ended up be disgustingly abusive towards friends and family members. Some of the stories are sickening to read.

Wakefield then summarizes his article with the following:

Disfellowshipping

• involves only someone in our fellowship.

• may involve a temporary suspension, or it may be permanent.

• generally involves cases of promoting doctrinal error, causing division, personal sin, or some other issue—pending repentance. Its purpose is to help the person spiritually and to protect the Church spiritually from sin or division.

The congregation may not be informed of a disfellowshipping, particularly in the case of a suspension. This is a judgment call made by the minister, who carefully considers what is in the best interests of the individual and of the Church.

Marking

• means “taking note of” or “watching out for.”

• can involve someone who is in our fellowship or not in our fellowship.

This practice may be used to protect the Church congregation when people make adversaries of themselves. The “marked” or “noted” people may cause harm, and the brethren are being told: Beware.

Disfellowshipping and marking are two different practices, but both are used for the health and protection of the Church. Neither practice should ever result in animosity against the individual involved.