Cultic Studies Review, Vol. 5, No. 1, 2006, Page 26
gradually came to realize that the leaders seemed to be using sex as a tool to gain powerful
friends and contacts...‖ (p. 113). Her description of her time FFing in the French Riviera is
particularly significant because in it she reveals both the enjoyable and the difficult
experiences she and other members had there.
Abuses of power and the authoritative nature of leadership are part of Williams‘s story,
although she fails to contextualize them within the structural conditions of the group.
Absent from her narrative is a discussion of the Reorganization and Nationalization
Revolution (RNR) and other organizational changes in the movement. She does discuss,
however, the differential nature of power within different COG/Family homes, depending on
their geographic location and the status of members who lived there. Thus, she describes
the often substantial differences that existed among the various homes, and she discloses
her own shock upon reaching South America, where, confronted with squalor, she realised
that she had led a relatively privileged way of life, having lived mostly in band homes that
were more liberal and better funded than those she encountered there.8
Eventually Williams rejected the group because of the abuses taking place but by her own
admission, she and her husband chose to ignore some of the explicit indicators that Berg
was advocating adult sexual contact with children (pp. 220–221). That she and others
remained part of an organization that engaged in the sexualisation of young children (while
personally finding such behaviours abhorrent) leads Williams to grapple with her own
demons. After returning to the United States, she sought to confront her own family‘s
problems, including the child abuse that she suffered as a child.
Interestingly, Chancellor (2002) described Williams‘ book as ―feminist‖ (p. 194) in a way
that suggests (to me) that he is slightly scornful, or at least suspicious, of it. Williams‘
account is less a feminist analysis and more one woman‘s autobiography of her experiences.
Indeed, she seems quite loathe to place responsibility for some of the more problematic
experiences that she endured solely on leadership, and when she does allocate culpability,
she does so as part of her narrative rather than from a theoretical-feminist perspective.9
This said, Williams does engage in more of a critical analysis toward the end of the book. A
more rigorous critical feminist reading, however, would include thorough deconstructions of
the power hierarchy, the patriarchal nature of the group, the bestowal of a misleading sense
of female sexual empowerment (through FFing), the sexualisation of children at an early
age, and the harsh discipline that Berg and others meted out to both children and adults.
Williams‘ book, although not an academic account, does stand as a good illustration of
conversion and commitment (during both happy and difficult times) to a new religious
movement. Hence, her work is a worthy addition to the broad body of research on the
group.
The Endtime Family: Children of God (2002) by William Sims Bainbridge
In The Endtime Family: Children of God (2002), William Sims Bainbridge presents the
outcome of his statistical survey in which he compares the results of 1,000 completed
questionnaires (from The Family) to responses compiled by the General Social Survey
(GSS).10 Bainbridge‘s goal was to examine to what extent life in the group is different from
or similar to life in general American society. As well, his aim was to apply a survey
technique to an area to which scholars do not typically employ it—namely, new religious
movements (p. xi). Bainbridge‘s focus is the current, full-time members of the movement.
Despite his claim that the book is for a ―diverse audience‖ (p. 25), for those unfamiliar with
COG/The Family, this book does not contextualize its subject matter.11 He makes few
references to the larger history of COG/The Family, and the survey information tells us only
about current beliefs and activities. The strength of this narrow temporal focus is that it
provides a wealth of contemporary statistical information that might act as a catalyst for
gradually came to realize that the leaders seemed to be using sex as a tool to gain powerful
friends and contacts...‖ (p. 113). Her description of her time FFing in the French Riviera is
particularly significant because in it she reveals both the enjoyable and the difficult
experiences she and other members had there.
Abuses of power and the authoritative nature of leadership are part of Williams‘s story,
although she fails to contextualize them within the structural conditions of the group.
Absent from her narrative is a discussion of the Reorganization and Nationalization
Revolution (RNR) and other organizational changes in the movement. She does discuss,
however, the differential nature of power within different COG/Family homes, depending on
their geographic location and the status of members who lived there. Thus, she describes
the often substantial differences that existed among the various homes, and she discloses
her own shock upon reaching South America, where, confronted with squalor, she realised
that she had led a relatively privileged way of life, having lived mostly in band homes that
were more liberal and better funded than those she encountered there.8
Eventually Williams rejected the group because of the abuses taking place but by her own
admission, she and her husband chose to ignore some of the explicit indicators that Berg
was advocating adult sexual contact with children (pp. 220–221). That she and others
remained part of an organization that engaged in the sexualisation of young children (while
personally finding such behaviours abhorrent) leads Williams to grapple with her own
demons. After returning to the United States, she sought to confront her own family‘s
problems, including the child abuse that she suffered as a child.
Interestingly, Chancellor (2002) described Williams‘ book as ―feminist‖ (p. 194) in a way
that suggests (to me) that he is slightly scornful, or at least suspicious, of it. Williams‘
account is less a feminist analysis and more one woman‘s autobiography of her experiences.
Indeed, she seems quite loathe to place responsibility for some of the more problematic
experiences that she endured solely on leadership, and when she does allocate culpability,
she does so as part of her narrative rather than from a theoretical-feminist perspective.9
This said, Williams does engage in more of a critical analysis toward the end of the book. A
more rigorous critical feminist reading, however, would include thorough deconstructions of
the power hierarchy, the patriarchal nature of the group, the bestowal of a misleading sense
of female sexual empowerment (through FFing), the sexualisation of children at an early
age, and the harsh discipline that Berg and others meted out to both children and adults.
Williams‘ book, although not an academic account, does stand as a good illustration of
conversion and commitment (during both happy and difficult times) to a new religious
movement. Hence, her work is a worthy addition to the broad body of research on the
group.
The Endtime Family: Children of God (2002) by William Sims Bainbridge
In The Endtime Family: Children of God (2002), William Sims Bainbridge presents the
outcome of his statistical survey in which he compares the results of 1,000 completed
questionnaires (from The Family) to responses compiled by the General Social Survey
(GSS).10 Bainbridge‘s goal was to examine to what extent life in the group is different from
or similar to life in general American society. As well, his aim was to apply a survey
technique to an area to which scholars do not typically employ it—namely, new religious
movements (p. xi). Bainbridge‘s focus is the current, full-time members of the movement.
Despite his claim that the book is for a ―diverse audience‖ (p. 25), for those unfamiliar with
COG/The Family, this book does not contextualize its subject matter.11 He makes few
references to the larger history of COG/The Family, and the survey information tells us only
about current beliefs and activities. The strength of this narrow temporal focus is that it
provides a wealth of contemporary statistical information that might act as a catalyst for
