Every cult-like institution, without exception, has its own 'call to purity'. A member's loyalty is measured by his or her adherence to the standards and expectations of the group, however bizarre. The institution prizes conformity over individuality and lavish praise is given to those who excel in meeting the leader's expectation.
In totalitarian states, for example, there might be an expectation for all men to wear the same hairstyle or clothing. To do otherwise may be punishable as an expression of disloyalty to the leader.
In legalistic churches, the requirements can be equally stringent: Perhaps women may not wear trousers. Jewellery or make-up may be considered 'worldly', modern technology may be forbidden, including not only the internet, but also television, Sat-nav, mobile phones and so on.
Charismatic 'free' churches, on account of their historic rejection of legalism, liturgy and religious, 'external' codes of conduct and regulations, tend towards a more subtle, apparently spiritual legalism in their slide towards the cult-like.
Traditionally, charismatic churches are strong on the theology of Grace - that God not only freely forgives, but also lavishes on his children every blessing He can give. - and that these blessings can be enjoyed through simple trust, rather than as a reward for service. We did nothing to deserve them.
But that message becomes warped over time in a church 'on the slide' into a shaming message which demands ever increasing work or 'spirituality' and ever continued begging of God for forgiveness for obscure shortcomings which even God does not consider sin. It is often successfully presented as drive for 'holiness', twisting and manipulating Scriptures to justify its ever-increasing demand for effort and uniformity. A congregation tends not to object. After all holiness is a good thing, isn't it? To object demonstrates that one does not want to be holy!
The message of God's forgiveness and His free gift of the Holy Spirit is turned on its head: If God has been so good to us, giving us everything He has, how much worse sinners we are if we fail to take advantage of it. If God has empowered us to live like Him, through faith in His strength, how much more worthy of condemnation are we when we simply behave as 'normal' human beings?
Such a message is often tied to the lack of evidence of 'revival', which God has, according to the teaching, promised to those who will pay the price for it.
So a congregation is shamed for not praying enough. It is told that its worship is half-hearted. Its members are told that if they miss meetings they are 'spacing out on God' as well each other. Members may be taught that there is virtue in rising punishingly early in the morning to 'meet with God'. They may be berated for not singing in tongues loudly enough, or shouting praises to God extravagantly enough, or confessing their sins frequently enough. Members who do not conform may be berated in the preaching, even if their names are not mentioned. That word 'enough' is a sure sign of legalism! Those in the congregation would be forgiven for thinking that the Christian life is just too hard.
The consequences of such 'spiritual' legalism include a condescending, although often unspoken, attitude from those who consider themselves to be doing better, but are nevertheless weighed down with intolerable, unnecessary guilt and shame as to their own failure.
Those who buy into it live with the cognitive dissonance of living one kind of life but believing in another, since this particular brand of 'Christianity' simpy cannot be maintained moment by moment.
Worse than that, it provides a foundation for the leader to destroy whomever he likes, if they cross him in any way, especially those who raise concerns about the slide away from the message of Grace.
It becomes an easy matter for the leader to select any apparent lapse in meeting the unrealistic expectations and use it to accuse. Such accusation may be done through preaching, in which the Pastor attempts to manipulate obedience, conformity or 'recanting' for raising legitimate concerns. He may coerce through public humiliation and shaming, whether names are mentioned or not.
The fear that such tactics engenders can be intense, especially applied in conjunction with rules which shut down communication between members in the name of stifling gossip. These leave the victim isolated, compounding his or her fear.
And that is how abuse so often works - isolating and intimidating the victim.
Membership of a cult, if one falls out of favour with the leader for legitimate 'whistleblowing', can lead to severe spiritual, emotional and mental abuse.
And that abuse is often conducted secretly - in plain sight.
No comments:
Post a Comment