Exposing the underbelly of Armstrongism in all of its wacky glory! Nothing you read here is made up. What you read here is the up to date face of Herbert W Armstrong's legacy. It's the gritty and dirty behind the scenes look at Armstrongism as you have never seen it before!
With all the new crazy self-appointed Chief Overseers, Apostles, Prophets, Pharisees, legalists, and outright liars leading various Churches of God today, it is important to hold these agents of deception accountable.
Herbert Armstrong's Tangled Web of Corrupt Leaders
I was an ordained WCG minister. As an Ambassador student I was never given any training on how to counsel members or potential members. The Bible classes taught what HWA said and believed. Many of the HQ ministers had never pastored a local church. A potential member was asked if he/she had read the booklets WCG published. Did they keep the sabbath? Did they believe what WCG taught. If so they were invited to church.
Counseling a member was mostly listening to what they had to say. Repeating what we published was standard fare. My training was being sent out as a ministerial trainee. I was supposed to listen to what the local minter said. He of course was not trained in counseling either.
How to counsel someone with a mental problem was never addressed. How to deal with addiction was never covered. No training in how to deal with financial problems we’re covered except to make sure they were tithing. If they were tithing they should not have financial problems.
Serious health problems, just be anointed. Later during the 80’s some people would go to doctors but in the early years, doctors were practicing sorcery. I had a relative die of appendicitis because the parents didn’t believe in doctors.
I did counsel people to seek professional help. I did recommend people with alcohol problems to attend AA meetings. I didn’t think mental problems were demons. But I was in the minority. I look back on my pastoral counseling as being sorely limited. Sad!
WCG had no actually trained in all things Bible and theology pastors or teachers, much less counseling. Bible reading, cobbling, scripture mining and cherry picking was the rule of the day. Come up with truth that is "Plain" rather than correct and throw in a radio audience with emphasis on "Bible Prophecy" for the times anyone happens to live in and you got yourself a hook and church.
It is common with a One Man Show Ministry/Church with adherents agreeing to whatever the leaders come up with. We see that in Pack, Flurry, Thiel, Weinland and other slivers of the "True Church" to this day. No way to learn anything. Good way to waste your time and life resources.
At least Flurry, Weinland, and Pack have retained the old WCG habit of introducing "new revelation" from time to time, so members feel like they're growing as part of something special. Unfortunately, they may be growing in the way People's Temple and Heaven's Gate were able to grow under the sway of a single powerful leader.
By contrast, being a member of COGWA, UCG, LCG, and most of the other "hold fast to HWA" splits is like being trapped in a history museum, with the job of chasing out anything newer than 1986. "Growth" means growing away from HWA, so no real growth is allowed. That's a recipe for decay.
Bitter Bwana Bob is in a weird middle position. In CCOG, members are allowed to dream new dreams... but the dreams must be about the wonderfulness of Bob as HWA's successor.
Members of the ministry learned all they knew about counselling by osmosis. The kids being sent into the field sat in on sessions while being mentored by the ministers to whom they were assigned. The type of counselling learned was based on so many of the principles which made the church cultic. Had they used outside training from a secular organization, the church doctrines would have led participants to reject much of the very important information being taught. The counselling normally given by HWA's lackeys was based on little experience, was very authoritarian, and rarely reflected any special wisdom or insights. To be seen as having the proper attitude, those counselled would pretend that it did. It was all about control.
The pastoral ministry in an autocratic church government is very different from that same ministry in a more open-minded church government. The former is minister oriented. The minister is a great oracle who speaks only the truth and cannot be doubted. The counselee has no role except to listen and obey. If the counselee does not see the wisdom of some statement of advice, then he "will not take correction."
At the open-minded end of the spectrum, the approach is problem oriented. The counselor and counselee team up to work on a problem together based on a mutual understanding of scripture. You can get a flavor where a church stands in the spectrum by asking how the ministry interprets the "loosing and binding" principle. The counselor may believe that he cannot make a mistake. The interpretation of this principle is a good litmus test and is a predictor of the quality of counseling you are going to get.
Moreover, pastoral counseling is a dynamic interaction and is subject to many factors. One negative factor that I have seen at work in the past is a belief on the part of the counselee that the counselor is divinely omniscient or speaks with inspiration - whatever the counselor says goes as if his statements were the word of God and there is no need for the counselee to take any responsibility. Counselees who adopt that attitude can expect trouble. They are not looking or counsel, they are looking for a decree from on high. They have exalted the counselor to the role of Great Shaman. Caveat emptor. When Solomon wrote that in a multitude of counselors there is wisdom, he was serious. Be polite and then ask around. Maybe talk to someone with training.
Most of the minister/counselors I interacted with in an Armstrongist context in the distant past did not have pastoral qualities. They were more like canon lawyers in the Catholic Church - they knew and applied the legal system, sometimes without compassion. This means that if you are counseling with them on an issue of Armstrongist law, they are pretty good. Outside that - it depends on their personal life experience. Early on in my lengthy tenure as a WCG member, I quit routinely counseling with Armstrongist ministers.
Counseling is a complex discipline and requires specific advanced training. It is not a fly-by-the-seat-of-your-pants practice that you automatically get as a stamp on your diploma in theology. Ministers who believe they can pull pastoralism out of their hip pocket will be bulls in a china closet. I have no pastoral leanings personally. It helps me to recognize others who also do not have pastoral leanings. I would never presume to counsel anyone. I can offer an opinion. I can croak out a warning.
When I was in Worldwide church I got some TERRIBLE advice from one of those well trained counseling ministers, but luckily I got a second opinion by someone not even associated with that church.
Most of the "counseling" that has happened in the COGs has been of the nature of the minister being either a monitoring sheriff, or being used as some kind of "arbiter umpire". In both cases it was simply a matter of blindly obeying the authority , ie "stop smoking" and everything will be fine.
Going to a licensed professional, is expensive, somewhere in the neighborhood of $200 an hour. Thus people try to use ministers as the "poor mans" psychologist alternative, and frankly, virtually 99% of the are out of their league.
With the advent of the internet, virtually every problem is addressed for free by either a book, or online presentations. Simply type your problem into the google search bar! The important thing in life is to be willing to "ask the right questions of it". Usually, you already know the answer , such as how to lose weight = eat less and exercise more!
Although the answers are out there for nearly everything, the big stumbling block for us all, is that we want to negotiate the price that has to be paid , or the pain to be embraced, or somehow hoping there is a quick fix and easier way.
Like NeoTherm , several decades ago , I realized that counseling with Pastors was a total waste of time. My mantra is to never listen to anyone who is not where I want to be or go. Most ministers have severe problems that need counseling in itself , and many are neurotic, mal adjusted, and just plain screwed up!
Look for the answers from within, ask God for help to "pull back the curtains of your denial" , and dare to ask the right questions! Follow this and it will spare your pocketbook , from either counselors or ministers, both of which exist by sucking off your dependence and dysfunction.
I can't imagine running to the minister and asking for counseling on anything. When I was in the church I can recall not ever getting baptized because for some bizarre reason I was supposed to have a baptismal counseling session with the minister, but I changed my mind because I didn't feel comfortable having him at my home or even telling him things that were essentially none of his business.
Don't forget their 'expertise' in 'Love-Busting'. Happened to me, but not to worry, they set up my girl with a favored local. How'd that work out? Hmm, not so well..
This is all a tiny minority rewriting the past. Since when did WCG members get ' counselling from the ministry. Counselling was for AC students and the elite.
130 noted: "The Apostle Paul, given the opportunity, would have broken up more marriages than Gerald Flurry." ===============
Not to mention advising against marriage and to "like me". Paul was the Gerald Waterhouse of the NT.
Counseling for AC students by the elite was lame. Best just to have kept things to oneself and keep moving without ministerial/elite input. Like most Going to the ministry and avoiding the professionals was not invented by WCG. Many a church is like that, at least in the South in my experience
4.50 PM I've read half a dozen books on abusive Christian churches, so it can't be true that only ACOGs members ask the ministers for counseling. HWA copied the COG-7 and similar, business model. Watch the tele evangelists and observe what they say and what they leave out. They are all cut from the same cloth. They all mentally shrink their members, and enslave to their group with mental chains. HWA just copied these folks.
Do these strategies work? Well, Esau got his bowl of stew, so short term, yes. Dave Packs Disney-like compound is one example of this. I assume their business strategy is to replace the members who wise up and leave, with new victims. So churning members is their means of survival. If they can't churn, they create a commie-like iron curtain for their members. Not exactly Godly.
Even in the hands of professionals, counseling is a challenging exercise that is NOT guaranteed to produce a positive outcome and is always subject to real risks and dangers for both the counselor and the person being counseled. (See https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/the-village-effect/201001/when-counseling-is-dangerous-0 and https://www.cphins.com/the-risks-of-counselingtherapy/) Even medical doctors must frequently confront the truism that humans are not generally subject to one size fits all kinds of treatments/solutions. Different people react to and process things differently from each other. The truth is that reliving and/or talking about traumatic experiences/events is NOT always helpful.
Professional training is certainly an important way to improve the chances that a counseling session will be successful, but we must be willing to acknowledge that there are a host of factors that will influence the outcome of any session. I'm thinking about things like the age and experience of the counselor (and a younger counselor may be a better fit in some circumstances), the degree of trust between the counselor and his/her subject, the quality of empathy, the ability to listen and how much each side is willing to invest in the venture.
Hence, I can see Paul being an excellent counselor in some circumstances and not very helpful in others. Like all of us, each of the apostles had strengths and weaknesses peculiar to him. Like all of us, they were subject to prejudice, fatigue, anger, impatience, boredom and distractions of various kinds. Paul's understanding of the importance of the concept of love might have made him an excellent marriage counselor for some circumstances, but his obvious sexual hang-ups would have rendered him useless for marital problems arising from issues related to sex. Likewise, Peter's enthusiasm and boldness may have made him an excellent counselor for those dealing with depression, but that same quality may have rendered him useless for those dealing with anger management issues. In short, as with most things, simplistic answers or observations about counseling are often devoid of insight or offering us much help in evaluating its potential for good or bad. I like that line from Proverbs about the efficaciousness of a multitude of counselors.
Dennis, I did keep to myself as much as possible, making my own decisions and avoiding the faculty and ministry at AC. But, I found that they had a complex, saying to themselves, "Well, here's another one who somehow we can never get to know!" Turns out that while they overtly made the counselling voluntary, the reality was that it was not. The assumption was that if you really wanted to go somewhere in "the work", you would enthusiastically seek their counsel. That was considered to be the ticket, and the right attitude. The "voluntary" counselling was part of the screening process.
Years later, as I watched the classic movie "Animal House", the Neidermeyer character reminded me of what all the student body leaders at AC were like. There was an unmistakable likeness. In the bizarre reverse world of Ambassador College, my friends and I were like the fun loving frat boys of Delta Tau Chi, but in our case, we were overrun by the Neidermeyer type typical AC students. It really didn't matter, because even at such a young age, I realized that AC was a horrible mess of crap. It was somewhat fulfilling over the years as many of the Neidermeyer types had continuing experiences which eventually awakened them, and some of them expressed to me that they wished they had realized the things which I had clearly seen back in the day. I really didn't see myself as having been particularly prescient as a student, it was just all about living life and having fun in spite of the surrounding aura of arbitrary authority. My response to these former Neidermeyer types was a simple "Hey, welcome aboard. Great to have you around!"
Dennis, I did keep to myself as much as possible, making my own decisions and avoiding the faculty and ministry at AC. But, I found that they had a complex, saying to themselves, "Well, here's another one who somehow we can never get to know!" Turns out that while they overtly made the counselling voluntary, the reality was that it was not. The assumption was that if you really wanted to go somewhere in "the work", you would enthusiastically seek their counsel. That was considered to be the ticket, and the right attitude. The "voluntary" counselling was part of the screening process.
Years later, as I watched the classic movie "Animal House", the Neidermeyer character reminded me of what all the student body leaders at AC were like. There was an unmistakable likeness. In the bizarre reverse world of Ambassador College, my friends and I were like the fun loving frat boys of Delta Tau Chi, but in our case, we were overrun by the Neidermeyer type typical AC students. It really didn't matter, because even at such a young age, I realized that AC was a horrible mess of crap. It was somewhat fulfilling over the years as many of the Neidermeyer types had continuing experiences which eventually awakened them, and some of them expressed to me that they wished they had realized the things which I had clearly seen back in the day. I really didn't see myself as having been particularly prescient as a student, it was just all about living life and having fun in spite of the surrounding aura of arbitrary authority. My response to these former Neidermeyer types was a simple "Hey, welcome aboard. Great to have you around!"
Dennis wrote, "Not to mention advising against marriage and to "like me". Paul was the Gerald Waterhouse of the NT."
Paul thought, like everyone else, that the 70 AD events were going to happen smack up against the follow-on Parousia. Paul thought he lived in the very last part of the Eschaton. It didn't happen that way. (If Paul made a mistake, why do the current crop of Great and Incessant Predictors believe they will do any better?) Because of this, Paul was skeptical about marriage and thought thrones, principalities were rapidly fading away. Other Christians thought they should start a commune. Even though Peter had already said that the Parousia was conditional.
Paul was nothing like Waterhouse in theology. But Paul and Waterhouse both believed that they lived at the end of days and, therefore, evinced similarities in viewpoint on a few topics. Your statement seems a little hyperbolic. I believe that the expectation of the Parousia happening soon is why there is so little in the NT about family relations. Early Christians thought that most issues would be overtaken by events. Just as well. Family relations are heavily influenced by cultural context. And I agree with Miller Jones on Paul's likely strengths and weaknesses.
When speaking of counselors I think an important point is being overlooked and it’s even brought up in scripture. When people go through trials, they learn as they go through them, and when they come out on the other side of the trial they have a depth of learning, understanding and empathy that no trained counselor will ever have. I’ve read that WWCG ministers, unmarried young men, counseled couples with children. I find that unlikely to be successful in the majority of cases, unless there’s a young man with a certain gift, perhaps from a large family dynamic when growing up. However, a member who has gone through life, experiences and trials successfully, will have a wealth of information and help to pass along. As an example in a life situation, a young mother enters a hospital to give birth and decides to breastfeed her baby. In the room visiting is the new mother’s own mother who had breastfed this new mother for years and knew all the ins and outs of successful breastfeeding. In comes the professional lactation consultant. The question arises in one’s mind, “have you ever lived this experience or is this just learned on paper for you?” I know who I would rather hear from in many instances. Many churches, not just the COGs, have been ill equipped to handle abusive marriages. Too many times a wife has probably been told to submit and make her husband happy, all the while she has been suffering under the hand of a hopeless and horrible situation. Quite a few pastors, even mainstream, are waking up to the mistakes they’ve made.
Paul, unlike Gerald Waterhouse, didn't go to gay bars.
Jesus was scorned by the Pharisees and other self-righteous fools, and one of the reasons he was scorned is that he went to his century's equivalent of gay bars.
The difference, of course, is that Jesus went to minister to sinners. Waterhouse wanted intimate contact that his Armstrongist association forbade him from having.
Disney-like? I suppose Disney and Dave have Fantasyland in common. Other than that, I would choose Disney's Tomorrowland over Dave's in a heartbeat. Though Dave has an entire Council of Dwarfs, not just seven.
NEO HWA did not base church culture on Matthew 4:4 "..live by every word that proceeds out of the mouth of God." Despite his and his minion ministers endless bible quoting, much of Armstrongism is non biblical, and copied from churches such as the COG-7 and other denominations. Consider the following examples: 1. Church tyranny. It's condemned in the bible yet is treated as Christian by ACOG ministers. This is the norm in many other tele evangelical denominations. 2. Tearing members down in order to gain power over them. This takes the form of mentally "shrinking" members by treating them as children, evil, incapable, etc. Hence members in HWAs church get a constant diet of "we have met the enemy and it is us" or "there is non righteous, no not one". These are also pavlovian code words. Again, this is cold blooded murder 4. HWA learnt from these denominations the technique of mentally "fusing" wholesome concepts he disagreed with, with some sinful behaviors. Hence rational self interest is fused with selfishness and greed. Btw, this is also murder, which is why HWA will not be in the kingdom. 5. Hiding that relationships are two way. The words "one another" as in "forgive one another" appears over 50 times in the NT. HWA rejected this, as do the tele evangelicals. Btw, the word I often heard at church services "S-E-R-V-E" ie, said loud and stretched out, is used by these other denominations. It hides that serving is two way rather than the implied one way. Likewise the word "sacrifice" is used as one way, but it's also two way. This amounts to the game of the unjust steward.
There are dozens of other ploys, but they amount to schoolyard bully morality rather than biblical morality. Bully morality "works" in the short term, so HWA and his splinters, including other denominations use them as their business model of success.
I wholeheartedly agree with what you've written anon 10:46. They use church tyranny to tear down and attempt to keep down members as God is a stranger to them. If they knew God and Jesus Christ, as much as they say, then they wouldn't do what they do.
And what they do is evil. They practice evil because their hearts devise evil. They love to deceive. They think deception is something to giggle at. The evil of bully morality, lying, double lives, fake social media accounts... the list is endless... It is a soulless evil way to dwell amongst the children of God. It never ended well for Garner Ted it won't end well for them. For they forget about God. God will catch up with them. He does protect those that are his.
4:00, your post is revisionist to say the least. As a pioneering televangelist, actually perhaps a "radevangelist", HWA was one of the people who wrote the book and constructed the mold in many ways for the people you see today with huge audiences on Christian TV. HWA was also a contrarian who deliberately eschewed all of his competitors of his era in the mainstream. He attempted to distinguish himself from other religious teachers and deliberately put hard burdens upon his followers, like three tithes, separatism from preconversion friends and family, and observance of a collection of little known holy days which were at best annoying to those raised in mainstream traditions.
Another of his constructs has just reached mainstream politicians, the presentation of his truths as "the" truth, advocating rejection of all other sources as being "fake" and not to be read or trusted. Only HWA's fabrications were to believed, even in cases where his contentions were easily and readily disproven. Taken as a body, these infected and contaminated any counsel which was available from his established ministry. It provoked immediate and hostile reactions from the mainstream to all of HWA's followers on virtually every front, that is unless the members were very secretive and concealed their "real" selves from all other humans. Honestly, our stupid and irrational behaviors were about as subtle as a poopy diaper, the whole program designed to make us into pariahs, who could delight themselves in being persecuted, although our behavior and attitudes towards all outsiders were anything but Christian. This is similar in principle to deliberately doing bizarre and aberrant things in order to fake superior intelligence. That's a thing, amongst some, too.
8.48 AM It sounds as if you haven't read up on abusive cults since Herbs ploys such as separating his members from outsiders, and his teachings being the only "true" truth is straight out of Cults for Dummies. Herb most certainly was a trail blazer in much of his marketing of "the truth."
Apparently the minister we had in WCG was just some dumbass they pulled off the street. If he had been "well trained" we sure couldn't tell it.
ReplyDeleteThe well trained COG minister.
ReplyDeleteI was an ordained WCG minister. As an Ambassador student I was never given any training on how to counsel members or potential members. The Bible classes taught what HWA said and believed. Many of the HQ ministers had never pastored a local church. A potential member was asked if he/she had read the booklets WCG published. Did they keep the sabbath? Did they believe what WCG taught. If so they were invited to church.
Counseling a member was mostly listening to what they had to say. Repeating what we published was standard fare. My training was being sent out as a ministerial trainee. I was supposed to listen to what the local minter said. He of course was not trained in counseling either.
How to counsel someone with a mental problem was never addressed. How to deal with addiction was never covered. No training in how to deal with financial problems we’re covered except to make sure they were tithing. If they were tithing they should not have financial problems.
Serious health problems, just be anointed. Later during the 80’s some people would go to doctors but in the early years, doctors were practicing sorcery. I had a relative die of appendicitis because the parents didn’t believe in doctors.
I did counsel people to seek professional help. I did recommend people with alcohol problems to attend AA meetings. I didn’t think mental problems were demons. But I was in the minority. I look back on my pastoral counseling as being sorely limited. Sad!
Jim-AZ
Don't believe you. You need training on how to spell never mind anything else.
DeleteWCG had no actually trained in all things Bible and theology pastors or teachers, much less counseling. Bible reading, cobbling, scripture mining and cherry picking was the rule of the day. Come up with truth that is "Plain" rather than correct and throw in a radio audience with emphasis on "Bible Prophecy" for the times anyone happens to live in and you got yourself a hook and church.
ReplyDeleteIt is common with a One Man Show Ministry/Church with adherents agreeing to whatever the leaders come up with. We see that in Pack, Flurry, Thiel, Weinland and other slivers of the "True Church" to this day. No way to learn anything. Good way to waste your time and life resources.
Oh, the hindsight of it all... Live and burn :)
At least Flurry, Weinland, and Pack have retained the old WCG habit of introducing "new revelation" from time to time, so members feel like they're growing as part of something special. Unfortunately, they may be growing in the way People's Temple and Heaven's Gate were able to grow under the sway of a single powerful leader.
ReplyDeleteBy contrast, being a member of COGWA, UCG, LCG, and most of the other "hold fast to HWA" splits is like being trapped in a history museum, with the job of chasing out anything newer than 1986. "Growth" means growing away from HWA, so no real growth is allowed. That's a recipe for decay.
Bitter Bwana Bob is in a weird middle position. In CCOG, members are allowed to dream new dreams... but the dreams must be about the wonderfulness of Bob as HWA's successor.
"Bible Prophecy"
ReplyDeleteA recent Dilbert strip seems appropriate:
Dogbert: I get the most attention when I predict doom.
But I have to keep pushing the envelop to be scarier than the competition.
Members of the ministry learned all they knew about counselling by osmosis. The kids being sent into the field sat in on sessions while being mentored by the ministers to whom they were assigned. The type of counselling learned was based on so many of the principles which made the church cultic. Had they used outside training from a secular organization, the church doctrines would have led participants to reject much of the very important information being taught. The counselling normally given by HWA's lackeys was based on little experience, was very authoritarian, and rarely reflected any special wisdom or insights. To be seen as having the proper attitude, those counselled would pretend that it did. It was all about control.
ReplyDeleteThe pastoral ministry in an autocratic church government is very different from that same ministry in a more open-minded church government. The former is minister oriented. The minister is a great oracle who speaks only the truth and cannot be doubted. The counselee has no role except to listen and obey. If the counselee does not see the wisdom of some statement of advice, then he "will not take correction."
ReplyDeleteAt the open-minded end of the spectrum, the approach is problem oriented. The counselor and counselee team up to work on a problem together based on a mutual understanding of scripture. You can get a flavor where a church stands in the spectrum by asking how the ministry interprets the "loosing and binding" principle. The counselor may believe that he cannot make a mistake. The interpretation of this principle is a good litmus test and is a predictor of the quality of counseling you are going to get.
Moreover, pastoral counseling is a dynamic interaction and is subject to many factors. One negative factor that I have seen at work in the past is a belief on the part of the counselee that the counselor is divinely omniscient or speaks with inspiration - whatever the counselor says goes as if his statements were the word of God and there is no need for the counselee to take any responsibility. Counselees who adopt that attitude can expect trouble. They are not looking or counsel, they are looking for a decree from on high. They have exalted the counselor to the role of Great Shaman. Caveat emptor. When Solomon wrote that in a multitude of counselors there is wisdom, he was serious. Be polite and then ask around. Maybe talk to someone with training.
Most of the minister/counselors I interacted with in an Armstrongist context in the distant past did not have pastoral qualities. They were more like canon lawyers in the Catholic Church - they knew and applied the legal system, sometimes without compassion. This means that if you are counseling with them on an issue of Armstrongist law, they are pretty good.
Outside that - it depends on their personal life experience. Early on in my lengthy tenure as a WCG member, I quit routinely counseling with Armstrongist ministers.
Counseling is a complex discipline and requires specific advanced training. It is not a fly-by-the-seat-of-your-pants practice that you automatically get as a stamp on your diploma in theology. Ministers who believe they can pull pastoralism out of their hip pocket will be bulls in a china closet. I have no pastoral leanings personally. It helps me to recognize others who also do not have pastoral leanings. I would never presume to counsel anyone. I can offer an opinion. I can croak out a warning.
******** Click on my icon for Disclaimer
When I was in Worldwide church I got some TERRIBLE advice from one of those well trained counseling ministers, but luckily I got a second opinion by someone not even associated with that church.
ReplyDeleteJim, I often referred the classic marital, addiction and mental health issues to professionals in the field, including an ER or two along the way.
ReplyDeleteMost of the "counseling" that has happened in the COGs has been of the nature of the minister being either a monitoring sheriff, or being used as some kind of "arbiter umpire". In both cases it was simply a matter of blindly obeying the authority , ie "stop smoking" and everything will be fine.
ReplyDeleteGoing to a licensed professional, is expensive, somewhere in the neighborhood of $200 an hour. Thus people try to use ministers as the "poor mans" psychologist alternative, and frankly, virtually 99% of the are out of their league.
With the advent of the internet, virtually every problem is addressed for free by either a book, or online presentations. Simply type your problem into the google search bar! The important thing in life is to be willing to "ask the right questions of it". Usually, you already know the answer , such as how to lose weight = eat less and exercise more!
Although the answers are out there for nearly everything, the big stumbling block for us all, is that we want to negotiate the price that has to be paid , or the pain to be embraced, or somehow hoping there is a quick fix and easier way.
Like NeoTherm , several decades ago , I realized that counseling with Pastors was a total waste of time. My mantra is to never listen to anyone who is not where I want to be or go. Most ministers have severe problems that need counseling in itself , and many are neurotic, mal adjusted, and just plain screwed up!
Look for the answers from within, ask God for help to "pull back the curtains of your denial" , and dare to ask the right questions! Follow this and it will spare your pocketbook , from either counselors or ministers, both of which exist by sucking off your dependence and dysfunction.
Dennis you were one of the few ministers that used his brain. There are many cases where professionals are absolutely needed.
ReplyDeleteJim-AZ
I can't imagine running to the minister and asking for counseling on anything. When I was in the church I can recall not ever getting baptized because for some bizarre reason I was supposed to have a baptismal counseling session with the minister, but I changed my mind because I didn't feel comfortable having him at my home or even telling him things that were essentially none of his business.
ReplyDeleteBut it would also be true that the great heroes of faith, prophets, disciples and apostles would not have been good at counseling either😁
ReplyDeleteit would also be true that the great heroes of faith, prophets, disciples and apostles would not have been good at counseling either
ReplyDeleteThe Apostle Paul, given the opportunity, would have broken up more marriages than Gerald Flurry.
Don't forget their 'expertise' in 'Love-Busting'. Happened to me, but not to worry, they set up my girl with a favored local. How'd that work out? Hmm, not so well..
ReplyDeleteThis is all a tiny minority rewriting the past. Since when did WCG members get ' counselling from the ministry. Counselling was for AC students and the elite.
ReplyDelete130 noted: "The Apostle Paul, given the opportunity, would have broken up more marriages than Gerald Flurry."
ReplyDelete===============
Not to mention advising against marriage and to "like me". Paul was the Gerald Waterhouse of the NT.
Counseling for AC students by the elite was lame. Best just to have kept things to oneself and keep moving without ministerial/elite input. Like most Going to the ministry and avoiding the professionals was not invented by WCG. Many a church is like that, at least in the South in my experience
4:06, As I'm in the south and I know for a fact that nobody in any church asks their local preacher counseling advice. That only happens in the ACOGs.
Delete4.50 PM
DeleteI've read half a dozen books on abusive Christian churches, so it can't be true that only ACOGs members ask the ministers for counseling. HWA copied the COG-7 and similar, business model. Watch the tele evangelists and observe what they say and what they leave out. They are all cut from the same cloth.
They all mentally shrink their members, and enslave to their group with mental chains. HWA just copied these folks.
Do these strategies work? Well, Esau got his bowl of stew, so short term, yes. Dave Packs Disney-like compound is one example of this. I assume their business strategy is to replace the members who wise up and leave, with new victims. So churning members is their means of survival. If they can't churn, they create a commie-like iron curtain for their members. Not exactly Godly.
Even in the hands of professionals, counseling is a challenging exercise that is NOT guaranteed to produce a positive outcome and is always subject to real risks and dangers for both the counselor and the person being counseled.
ReplyDelete(See https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/the-village-effect/201001/when-counseling-is-dangerous-0 and https://www.cphins.com/the-risks-of-counselingtherapy/) Even medical doctors must frequently confront the truism that humans are not generally subject to one size fits all kinds of treatments/solutions. Different people react to and process things differently from each other. The truth is that reliving and/or talking about traumatic experiences/events is NOT always helpful.
Professional training is certainly an important way to improve the chances that a counseling session will be successful, but we must be willing to acknowledge that there are a host of factors that will influence the outcome of any session. I'm thinking about things like the age and experience of the counselor (and a younger counselor may be a better fit in some circumstances), the degree of trust between the counselor and his/her subject, the quality of empathy, the ability to listen and how much each side is willing to invest in the venture.
Hence, I can see Paul being an excellent counselor in some circumstances and not very helpful in others. Like all of us, each of the apostles had strengths and weaknesses peculiar to him. Like all of us, they were subject to prejudice, fatigue, anger, impatience, boredom and distractions of various kinds. Paul's understanding of the importance of the concept of love might have made him an excellent marriage counselor for some circumstances, but his obvious sexual hang-ups would have rendered him useless for marital problems arising from issues related to sex. Likewise, Peter's enthusiasm and boldness may have made him an excellent counselor for those dealing with depression, but that same quality may have rendered him useless for those dealing with anger management issues. In short, as with most things, simplistic answers or observations about counseling are often devoid of insight or offering us much help in evaluating its potential for good or bad. I like that line from Proverbs about the efficaciousness of a multitude of counselors.
Dennis, I did keep to myself as much as possible, making my own decisions and avoiding the faculty and ministry at AC. But, I found that they had a complex, saying to themselves, "Well, here's another one who somehow we can never get to know!" Turns out that while they overtly made the counselling voluntary, the reality was that it was not. The assumption was that if you really wanted to go somewhere in "the work", you would enthusiastically seek their counsel. That was considered to be the ticket, and the right attitude. The "voluntary" counselling was part of the screening process.
ReplyDeleteYears later, as I watched the classic movie "Animal House", the Neidermeyer character reminded me of what all the student body leaders at AC were like. There was an unmistakable likeness. In the bizarre reverse world of Ambassador College, my friends and I were like the fun loving frat boys of Delta Tau Chi, but in our case, we were overrun by the Neidermeyer type typical AC students. It really didn't matter, because even at such a young age, I realized that AC was a horrible mess of crap. It was somewhat fulfilling over the years as many of the Neidermeyer types had continuing experiences which eventually awakened them, and some of them expressed to me that they wished they had realized the things which I had clearly seen back in the day. I really didn't see myself as having been particularly prescient as a student, it was just all about living life and having fun in spite of the surrounding aura of arbitrary authority. My response to these former Neidermeyer types was a simple "Hey, welcome aboard. Great to have you around!"
Dennis, I did keep to myself as much as possible, making my own decisions and avoiding the faculty and ministry at AC. But, I found that they had a complex, saying to themselves, "Well, here's another one who somehow we can never get to know!" Turns out that while they overtly made the counselling voluntary, the reality was that it was not. The assumption was that if you really wanted to go somewhere in "the work", you would enthusiastically seek their counsel. That was considered to be the ticket, and the right attitude. The "voluntary" counselling was part of the screening process.
ReplyDeleteYears later, as I watched the classic movie "Animal House", the Neidermeyer character reminded me of what all the student body leaders at AC were like. There was an unmistakable likeness. In the bizarre reverse world of Ambassador College, my friends and I were like the fun loving frat boys of Delta Tau Chi, but in our case, we were overrun by the Neidermeyer type typical AC students. It really didn't matter, because even at such a young age, I realized that AC was a horrible mess of crap. It was somewhat fulfilling over the years as many of the Neidermeyer types had continuing experiences which eventually awakened them, and some of them expressed to me that they wished they had realized the things which I had clearly seen back in the day. I really didn't see myself as having been particularly prescient as a student, it was just all about living life and having fun in spite of the surrounding aura of arbitrary authority. My response to these former Neidermeyer types was a simple "Hey, welcome aboard. Great to have you around!"
Dennis wrote, "Not to mention advising against marriage and to "like me". Paul was the Gerald Waterhouse of the NT."
ReplyDeletePaul thought, like everyone else, that the 70 AD events were going to happen smack up against the follow-on Parousia. Paul thought he lived in the very last part of the Eschaton. It didn't happen that way. (If Paul made a mistake, why do the current crop of Great and Incessant Predictors believe they will do any better?) Because of this, Paul was skeptical about marriage and thought thrones, principalities were rapidly fading away. Other Christians thought they should start a commune. Even though Peter had already said that the Parousia was conditional.
Paul was nothing like Waterhouse in theology. But Paul and Waterhouse both believed that they lived at the end of days and, therefore, evinced similarities in viewpoint on a few topics. Your statement seems a little hyperbolic. I believe that the expectation of the Parousia happening soon is why there is so little in the NT about family relations. Early Christians thought that most issues would be overtaken by events. Just as well. Family relations are heavily influenced by cultural context. And I agree with Miller Jones on Paul's likely strengths and weaknesses.
******** Click on my icon for Disclaimer
Paul, unlike Gerald Waterhouse, didn't go to gay bars.
DeleteWhen speaking of counselors I think an important point is being overlooked and it’s even brought up in scripture. When people go through trials, they learn as they go through them, and when they come out on the other side of the trial they have a depth of learning, understanding and empathy that no trained counselor will ever have. I’ve read that WWCG ministers, unmarried young men, counseled couples with children. I find that unlikely to be successful in the majority of cases, unless there’s a young man with a certain gift, perhaps from a large family dynamic when growing up. However, a member who has gone through life, experiences and trials successfully, will have a wealth of information and help to pass along. As an example in a life situation, a young mother enters a hospital to give birth and decides to breastfeed her baby. In the room visiting is the new mother’s own mother who had breastfed this new mother for years and knew all the ins and outs of successful breastfeeding. In comes the professional lactation consultant. The question arises in one’s mind, “have you ever lived this experience or is this just learned on paper for you?” I know who I would rather hear from in many instances. Many churches, not just the COGs, have been ill equipped to handle abusive marriages. Too many times a wife has probably been told to submit and make her husband happy, all the while she has been suffering under the hand of a hopeless and horrible situation. Quite a few pastors, even mainstream, are waking up to the mistakes they’ve made.
ReplyDeletePaul, unlike Gerald Waterhouse, didn't go to gay bars.
ReplyDeleteJesus was scorned by the Pharisees and other self-righteous fools, and one of the reasons he was scorned is that he went to his century's equivalent of gay bars.
The difference, of course, is that Jesus went to minister to sinners. Waterhouse wanted intimate contact that his Armstrongist association forbade him from having.
Dave Packs Disney-like compound
ReplyDeleteDisney-like? I suppose Disney and Dave have Fantasyland in common. Other than that, I would choose Disney's Tomorrowland over Dave's in a heartbeat. Though Dave has an entire Council of Dwarfs, not just seven.
Anonymous 4:00
ReplyDelete"HWA copied the COG-7 and similar, business model." I am intrigued by what you mean by this. Can you elaborate?
NEO
DeleteHWA did not base church culture on Matthew 4:4 "..live by every word that proceeds out of the mouth of God." Despite his and his minion ministers endless bible quoting, much of Armstrongism is non biblical, and copied from churches such as the COG-7 and other denominations. Consider the following examples:
1. Church tyranny. It's condemned in the bible yet is treated as Christian by ACOG ministers. This is the norm in many other tele evangelical denominations.
2. Tearing members down in order to gain power over them. This takes the form of mentally "shrinking" members by treating them as children, evil, incapable, etc. Hence members in HWAs church get a constant diet of "we have met the enemy and it is us" or "there is non righteous, no not one". These are also pavlovian code words. Again, this is cold blooded murder
4. HWA learnt from these denominations the technique of mentally "fusing" wholesome concepts he disagreed with, with some sinful behaviors. Hence rational self interest is fused with selfishness and greed. Btw, this is also murder, which is why HWA will not be in the kingdom.
5. Hiding that relationships are two way. The words "one another" as in "forgive one another" appears over 50 times in the NT. HWA rejected this, as do the tele evangelicals. Btw, the word I often heard at church services "S-E-R-V-E" ie, said loud and stretched out, is used by these other denominations. It hides that serving is two way rather than the implied one way. Likewise the word "sacrifice" is used as one way, but it's also two way.
This amounts to the game of the unjust steward.
There are dozens of other ploys, but they amount to schoolyard bully morality rather than biblical morality. Bully morality "works" in the short term, so HWA and his splinters, including other denominations use them as their business model of success.
I wholeheartedly agree with what you've written anon 10:46.
DeleteThey use church tyranny to tear down and attempt to keep down members as God is a stranger to them. If they knew God and Jesus Christ, as much as they say, then they wouldn't do what they do.
And what they do is evil. They practice evil because their hearts devise evil. They love to deceive. They think deception is something to giggle at. The evil of bully morality, lying, double lives, fake social media accounts... the list is endless... It is a soulless evil way to dwell amongst the children of God. It never ended well for Garner Ted it won't end well for them.
For they forget about God. God will catch up with them. He does protect those that are his.
4:00, your post is revisionist to say the least. As a pioneering televangelist, actually perhaps a "radevangelist", HWA was one of the people who wrote the book and constructed the mold in many ways for the people you see today with huge audiences on Christian TV. HWA was also a contrarian who deliberately eschewed all of his competitors of his era in the mainstream. He attempted to distinguish himself from other religious teachers and deliberately put hard burdens upon his followers, like three tithes, separatism from preconversion friends and family, and observance of a collection of little known holy days which were at best annoying to those raised in mainstream traditions.
ReplyDeleteAnother of his constructs has just reached mainstream politicians, the presentation of his truths as "the" truth, advocating rejection of all other sources as being "fake" and not to be read or trusted. Only HWA's fabrications were to believed, even in cases where his contentions were easily and readily disproven. Taken as a body, these infected and contaminated any counsel which was available from his established ministry. It provoked immediate and hostile reactions from the mainstream to all of HWA's followers on virtually every front, that is unless the members were very secretive and concealed their "real" selves from all other humans. Honestly, our stupid and irrational behaviors were about as subtle as a poopy diaper, the whole program designed to make us into pariahs, who could delight themselves in being persecuted, although our behavior and attitudes towards all outsiders were anything but Christian. This is similar in principle to deliberately doing bizarre and aberrant things in order to fake superior intelligence. That's a thing, amongst some, too.
8.48 AM
DeleteIt sounds as if you haven't read up on abusive cults since Herbs ploys such as separating his members from outsiders, and his teachings being the only "true" truth is straight out of Cults for Dummies.
Herb most certainly was a trail blazer in much of his marketing of "the truth."
Did Ambassador college ever have a course on compassion 101?
ReplyDelete