Cultic Studies Journal, Vol. 15, No. 2, 1998, page 12
married‖ to another woman in the group who was legally married to someone else. This
woman was nearly 30 years his junior. Needless to say, this issue caused a split in the
group. I decided to continue with the leader, and I dragged my protesting new spouse to
follow my lead.
Damaging Doctrines
Looking back, I see there were two significant issues. One issue was the group‘s beliefs. At
the theological core of these beliefs were two non-negotiable, highly damaging doctrines.
There was a false belief concerning the nature of spiritual authority. There was also a very
unorthodox view of spirituality. As with Dave‘s [David Clark] experience, the use of
Watchmen Nee material was extensive and influential. The group used a particular book by
Watchman Nee, Spiritual Authority. This book proposed an extremely hierarchical,
oppressive, and controlling form of leadership. The group‘s view of spirituality was highly
anti-intellectual and esoteric, allowing for nearly unlimited ―direction by the Holy Spirit,‖
contingent only upon the will of the leader. This view is characterized clearly in a book that
was promoted heavily in the group, Rees Howells: Intercessor, by Norman Grubb. An
allegorical hermeneutic was standard fare, and frequently resulted in convoluted
interpretations of the Bible.
The second significant issue revolved around the very dysfunctional behavior that was
encouraged. Looking back, I realize that we were frequently encouraged to follow what is
sometimes known as the five rules of a dysfunctional family: don‘t think, don‘t talk, don‘t
feel, don‘t trust, and don‘t do anything but pretend that those in authority are always
correct. Within the group, pretending became an art form.
In terms of my own behavior, my hero role in my family of origin helped to draw me in to
the group, because at this time I perceived the leader to be very much the underdog. I
wanted to come in as the knight in shining armor to help in the turbulent times and to
contribute my perceived great wisdom to this now ailing group. The leader served as the
strong father figure I didn‘t have growing up, and he and I went for many long walks. We
spent sometimes two or three hours just walking around the neighborhood, talking about
relationships and talking about many questions I had about life in general. These times I
spent with the leader met some very real needs for me. Looking back though, despite the
help I received, I had essentially traded my dysfunctional family system (from my family of
origin) for another dysfunctional system that had religious verbiage.
Increasing Aberrance
During the next 11 years following its internal split, the group became much more aberrant.
We had many heavy, all-night ―counseling‖ sessions. We viewed people outside the group
with a lot of we/they isolationism. We were forbidden to have any contact with our parents,
other relatives, or previously close friends who were not a part of the group. Our family
lived here locally, but we were encouraged to hang up on them when they called, to return
the letters they sent unopened, and to return presents they sent for the kids. While a few in
the group were allowed some limited contact with parents, mostly for financial reasons, we
were allowed none.
Over time, expectations for compliance from group members and financial contributions to
the abusive and controlling leader increased. The leader encouraged us to remain as
dependent little children, waiting upon him. He often used a wheel analogy: He was the hub
and we, as the spokes, were rightfully dependent upon him. He repeatedly told us that
without him we would fall apart, spiritually and emotionally and, according to him, that was
God‘s design. He said he didn‘t particularly like this role, but that was simply the way God
had structured it.
married‖ to another woman in the group who was legally married to someone else. This
woman was nearly 30 years his junior. Needless to say, this issue caused a split in the
group. I decided to continue with the leader, and I dragged my protesting new spouse to
follow my lead.
Damaging Doctrines
Looking back, I see there were two significant issues. One issue was the group‘s beliefs. At
the theological core of these beliefs were two non-negotiable, highly damaging doctrines.
There was a false belief concerning the nature of spiritual authority. There was also a very
unorthodox view of spirituality. As with Dave‘s [David Clark] experience, the use of
Watchmen Nee material was extensive and influential. The group used a particular book by
Watchman Nee, Spiritual Authority. This book proposed an extremely hierarchical,
oppressive, and controlling form of leadership. The group‘s view of spirituality was highly
anti-intellectual and esoteric, allowing for nearly unlimited ―direction by the Holy Spirit,‖
contingent only upon the will of the leader. This view is characterized clearly in a book that
was promoted heavily in the group, Rees Howells: Intercessor, by Norman Grubb. An
allegorical hermeneutic was standard fare, and frequently resulted in convoluted
interpretations of the Bible.
The second significant issue revolved around the very dysfunctional behavior that was
encouraged. Looking back, I realize that we were frequently encouraged to follow what is
sometimes known as the five rules of a dysfunctional family: don‘t think, don‘t talk, don‘t
feel, don‘t trust, and don‘t do anything but pretend that those in authority are always
correct. Within the group, pretending became an art form.
In terms of my own behavior, my hero role in my family of origin helped to draw me in to
the group, because at this time I perceived the leader to be very much the underdog. I
wanted to come in as the knight in shining armor to help in the turbulent times and to
contribute my perceived great wisdom to this now ailing group. The leader served as the
strong father figure I didn‘t have growing up, and he and I went for many long walks. We
spent sometimes two or three hours just walking around the neighborhood, talking about
relationships and talking about many questions I had about life in general. These times I
spent with the leader met some very real needs for me. Looking back though, despite the
help I received, I had essentially traded my dysfunctional family system (from my family of
origin) for another dysfunctional system that had religious verbiage.
Increasing Aberrance
During the next 11 years following its internal split, the group became much more aberrant.
We had many heavy, all-night ―counseling‖ sessions. We viewed people outside the group
with a lot of we/they isolationism. We were forbidden to have any contact with our parents,
other relatives, or previously close friends who were not a part of the group. Our family
lived here locally, but we were encouraged to hang up on them when they called, to return
the letters they sent unopened, and to return presents they sent for the kids. While a few in
the group were allowed some limited contact with parents, mostly for financial reasons, we
were allowed none.
Over time, expectations for compliance from group members and financial contributions to
the abusive and controlling leader increased. The leader encouraged us to remain as
dependent little children, waiting upon him. He often used a wheel analogy: He was the hub
and we, as the spokes, were rightfully dependent upon him. He repeatedly told us that
without him we would fall apart, spiritually and emotionally and, according to him, that was
God‘s design. He said he didn‘t particularly like this role, but that was simply the way God
had structured it.
