<html xmlns:v="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:vml" xmlns:o="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" xmlns:w="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" xmlns:st1="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags" xmlns="http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40">
<head>
<meta http-equiv=Content-Type content="text/html; charset=us-ascii">
<meta name=Generator content="Microsoft Word 11 (filtered medium)">
<o:SmartTagType namespaceuri="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags"
name="place"/>
<o:SmartTagType namespaceuri="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags"
name="City"/>
<!--[if !mso]>
<style>
st1\:*{behavior:url(#default#ieooui) }
</style>
<![endif]-->
<style>
<!--
/* Style Definitions */
p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal
{margin:0in;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman";}
a:link, span.MsoHyperlink
{color:blue;
text-decoration:underline;}
a:visited, span.MsoHyperlinkFollowed
{color:purple;
text-decoration:underline;}
span.EmailStyle17
{mso-style-type:personal-compose;
font-family:Arial;
color:windowtext;}
@page Section1
{size:8.5in 11.0in;
margin:1.0in 1.25in 1.0in 1.25in;}
div.Section1
{page:Section1;}
-->
</style>
<!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapedefaults v:ext="edit" spidmax="1027" />
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapelayout v:ext="edit">
<o:idmap v:ext="edit" data="1" />
</o:shapelayout></xml><![endif]-->
</head>
<body lang=EN-US link=blue vlink=purple>
<div class=Section1>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=3 face="Times New Roman"><span style='font-size:
12.0pt'>Joe Writes:<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal style='text-autospace:none'><font size=3
face="Times New Roman"><span style='font-size:12.0pt'>FYI I do not think that
CC is a 'cult.' The members of CC, in my opinion, do not exhibit cultish
behavior. Just an observation.<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=3 face="Times New Roman"><span style='font-size:
12.0pt'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=3 face="Times New Roman"><span style='font-size:
12.0pt'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=3 face="Times New Roman"><span style='font-size:
12.0pt'>Me:<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=3 face="Times New Roman"><span style='font-size:
12.0pt'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=3 face="Times New Roman"><span style='font-size:
12.0pt'>This is a difficult and vexed issue, but I suspect it is primarily a
semantic problem after debating this with folks who think CC is a cult and
those who think it is not—I actually get a hard time from some X-Kirders
when I say “cultish” instead of “outright cult.” I have
not seen what anticipated this post from you, but I wanted to take a quick jab
at it: Most of those who claim that CC is a cult are those who have had first
hand experience with <st1:City w:st="on"><st1:place w:st="on">Wilson</st1:place></st1:City>,
particularly after they became critical of him. The “cult”
focus is on the nature of the leader’s behavior, not on the behavior of
the congregation. Even if we do focus on the congregation however, those
who believe CC is a cult, see it as a cult “in the making.”
With respect to the general story line, or trajectory, I would have to agree
with this analysis at this time. This could always change direction,
particularly with the kind of publicity CC is receiving. CC is fairly new and
it is not monolithic; but there is also a clear “inner/outer”
reality within. There are those who sort of know that they are part of
the “next reformation” and who implicitly pledge more loyalty to
the leaders and attempt to see themselves as those who “get it,”
and there are those who simply attend regularly without much knowledge of what
it is they are attaching themselves to (this is a rough distinction of course).
As for <st1:City w:st="on"><st1:place w:st="on">Wilson</st1:place></st1:City>’s
behavior, I think his eccentricities line up way to well with what I am finding
in the “literature” on this. I’m fairly well convinced
that if left to his own devices and without accountability, CC would be a clear
sociological cult within time. This causes me and my wife more shame than
anything else, since we were long term inner loyalists. We also feel a
bit damaged, and we believe that many people have been very hurt over the last
15 years because of run of the mill “spiritual abuse.” But this is
where the semantic problem arises. Abuse of power or authority is
everywhere. Spiritual abuse runs rampant in conservative, fundamentalist
circles. And most of this parallels with typical patterns in the business
world or in the home. We live in a world filled with oppression.
There are many dragons to be slain out there, but I think it is most important
to slay those dragons who present themselves as the bastion of freedom and
accountability. My wife is reading another book on spiritual abuse right
now, and it locates just this as the fiercest sort of sociological sub-group:
those who present themselves as sufficiently accountable and free when they are
really not. <o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=3 face="Times New Roman"><span style='font-size:
12.0pt'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=3 face="Times New Roman"><span style='font-size:
12.0pt'>With that said, I would like to commend you in being judicial and
careful on this, willing to defend CC where you see fit. I would be
curious as to what you take to be cultish behavior from the typical layman
however. I had friends of 10 years plus turn on me immediately without
private concern was expressed at all towards me or my family as soon as I was
identified as a mild critic of Doug Wilson (back in the old days when I was still
mildly amenable to the fact that Wilson was just a bit skewed and not simply a
typical, power hungry man, willing to exploit those around him—like most
men would be apt to do if given such an unaccountable position of authority and
the right sort of temperament).<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=3 face="Times New Roman"><span style='font-size:
12.0pt'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=3 face="Times New Roman"><span style='font-size:
12.0pt'>I should also note that CC is never able to present a persuasive,
positive defence on this issue; in fact, I have argued a couple times at <a
href="http://www.poohsthink.com/">www.poohsthink.com</a> that the nature CC’s
response to this criticism seems to always evidence a cultish existence. The
response is irrelevant and smug, or simply changes the subject, or else CC
offers a fully self-referential defense, disconnected from society’s
general perceptions about this issue.<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=3 face="Times New Roman"><span style='font-size:
12.0pt'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=3 face="Times New Roman"><span style='font-size:
12.0pt'>But I’d love to hear more of your thoughts on this issue. I’m
sure we all could use a bit more balance and insight from others right now.<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=3 face="Times New Roman"><span style='font-size:
12.0pt'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=3 face="Times New Roman"><span style='font-size:
12.0pt'>Thanks<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=3 face="Times New Roman"><span style='font-size:
12.0pt'>Michael Metzler <o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
</div>
</body>
</html>