Cultic Studies Journal, Vol. 5, No. 1 1988 Page 56
taught that ―you can be divisive over truth,‖ that slander may even be ―an innocent question or a
harmless statement.‖ They are told that factious statements are ―dainty morsels,‖ that a factious
dialogue can be .as smooth as butter,‖ and that members can even be ―sinful and wicked with
their questions.‖ Members are instructed that ―it's not the facts that are at issue, but the way
they were shared.‖ They are informed that ―the issue is not theology but the division and
divisiveness that results when people talk.‖ They are warned that ―slander is covered up by
switching over to doctrinal issues.‖ They are even informed that if members are allowed ―to talk
things out, their hearts will be drawn away‖ from the sect.
[Angie] Concerning [the 1976 excommunication], I understand that it was a
disagreement between [the elder] and [the founder] but it was the consensus
apparently of everyone that [the elder] was being factional and divisive and that his
attitude was heretical. But there were no specific points of doctrine that we were
told about in which he had actually aired [sic]. Any inquiries were met with, ―Well,
that's not very edifying to discuss.‖ Edifying speech was the wall that you ran into
any time you wanted any information or any time you wanted to divulge any
information. For instance, when I went to my husband [an elder in the sect] about
it... he regarded it as my being ―overly sensitive and overly emotional,‖ that I was
being unedifying and that I was dwelling on things that the Lord did not want me to
think about -that I was dwelling on the negative. And then he was always
exhorting me to ―just keep focusing on these positive things, sister, because the
devil was really messing with my mind.‖ Everything I thought and saw was
completely invalidated by the elders. And it was always a problem with my attitude
and my perceptions of things... With the [1976 excommunication] there seemed to
be the same attitude that this was so bad what he did that it would really be
unedifying to talk about especially with younger believers, but I was still never told
anything specific because it was all based upon the fact that we didn't need to have
our minds sullied with the sins of others.
Even though these rules seem overly stringent if not impossible to follow consistently, sect
members view these guidelines as necessary to maintain purity within the movement. The
underlying principles that seem to make it all work are that the sect has the ―truth‖ and there is
nowhere else to go, that members me so susceptible to being deceived that they need an
external conscience to define the situation for them, and that the group and the leadership are
basically infallible. The environment within the sect is non-falsifiable. In other words, there does
not appear to be the slightest bit of information that can prove that the group, its leaders, or its
operations are wrong. This non-falsifiable system is tied to the concept of ―sin-potential‖ and
thereby strengthens the system of cognitive and information control.
Members are called upon not only to question their own reality-validation mechanisms, but to
deny reality itself. Members are told that what appeared to them to be an ―innocent conversation‖
was in reality a slanderous and factious encounter with the potential to lure them away from the
truth. Members, then, are pressured to accept falsehoods as truths by denying the validity of
their own means of ascertaining the truth. The nonconforming member who questions or comes
into conflict with the bicameral normative system must grapple with enormous loneliness and
doubt.
[Darcy] Even before I was excommunicated it was incredible -how these people
could say, ―I love you but I can't talk to you.‖ And how they could go from being
interested so much in your life to just ignoring you. I just didn't understand it and
there was a lot of confusion. I felt bad. I felt guilty because I was doing this to
them. I felt guilty because they were having not to talk to me. I didn't understand
where this was coming from. I felt that maybe I did do the wrong thing. That whole
semester I went round and round -―Did I do the right thing?‖ ―Did I pray about it
enough?‖ ―Did I listen to slander?‖ I was always apologizing for my position.
taught that ―you can be divisive over truth,‖ that slander may even be ―an innocent question or a
harmless statement.‖ They are told that factious statements are ―dainty morsels,‖ that a factious
dialogue can be .as smooth as butter,‖ and that members can even be ―sinful and wicked with
their questions.‖ Members are instructed that ―it's not the facts that are at issue, but the way
they were shared.‖ They are informed that ―the issue is not theology but the division and
divisiveness that results when people talk.‖ They are warned that ―slander is covered up by
switching over to doctrinal issues.‖ They are even informed that if members are allowed ―to talk
things out, their hearts will be drawn away‖ from the sect.
[Angie] Concerning [the 1976 excommunication], I understand that it was a
disagreement between [the elder] and [the founder] but it was the consensus
apparently of everyone that [the elder] was being factional and divisive and that his
attitude was heretical. But there were no specific points of doctrine that we were
told about in which he had actually aired [sic]. Any inquiries were met with, ―Well,
that's not very edifying to discuss.‖ Edifying speech was the wall that you ran into
any time you wanted any information or any time you wanted to divulge any
information. For instance, when I went to my husband [an elder in the sect] about
it... he regarded it as my being ―overly sensitive and overly emotional,‖ that I was
being unedifying and that I was dwelling on things that the Lord did not want me to
think about -that I was dwelling on the negative. And then he was always
exhorting me to ―just keep focusing on these positive things, sister, because the
devil was really messing with my mind.‖ Everything I thought and saw was
completely invalidated by the elders. And it was always a problem with my attitude
and my perceptions of things... With the [1976 excommunication] there seemed to
be the same attitude that this was so bad what he did that it would really be
unedifying to talk about especially with younger believers, but I was still never told
anything specific because it was all based upon the fact that we didn't need to have
our minds sullied with the sins of others.
Even though these rules seem overly stringent if not impossible to follow consistently, sect
members view these guidelines as necessary to maintain purity within the movement. The
underlying principles that seem to make it all work are that the sect has the ―truth‖ and there is
nowhere else to go, that members me so susceptible to being deceived that they need an
external conscience to define the situation for them, and that the group and the leadership are
basically infallible. The environment within the sect is non-falsifiable. In other words, there does
not appear to be the slightest bit of information that can prove that the group, its leaders, or its
operations are wrong. This non-falsifiable system is tied to the concept of ―sin-potential‖ and
thereby strengthens the system of cognitive and information control.
Members are called upon not only to question their own reality-validation mechanisms, but to
deny reality itself. Members are told that what appeared to them to be an ―innocent conversation‖
was in reality a slanderous and factious encounter with the potential to lure them away from the
truth. Members, then, are pressured to accept falsehoods as truths by denying the validity of
their own means of ascertaining the truth. The nonconforming member who questions or comes
into conflict with the bicameral normative system must grapple with enormous loneliness and
doubt.
[Darcy] Even before I was excommunicated it was incredible -how these people
could say, ―I love you but I can't talk to you.‖ And how they could go from being
interested so much in your life to just ignoring you. I just didn't understand it and
there was a lot of confusion. I felt bad. I felt guilty because I was doing this to
them. I felt guilty because they were having not to talk to me. I didn't understand
where this was coming from. I felt that maybe I did do the wrong thing. That whole
semester I went round and round -―Did I do the right thing?‖ ―Did I pray about it
enough?‖ ―Did I listen to slander?‖ I was always apologizing for my position.
