Shunning maintaining connectedness

Terrific little YouTube video by a woman who left the Jehova's Witnesses explaining calmly and rationally how shunning (a ban on social intercourse) creates an ongoing connectedness. "The Jehovah's witnesses have essentially kidnapped my family". Many of the people who argue for discipline would assert this is the point. Discipline is supposed to prevent people from not being confronted. But of course by creating this life long negative relationship churches are going to come for criticism. They prevent people from moving on in their lives. This is a short video but I think this woman is extremely articulate and authentic in presenting her case for why she is involved in the anti Jehovah's Witnesses movement. And while she sees her problems as specific to the church it would really apply to any church with community that was closed, has a strong tradition of discipline and enforced the ban on casual social intercourse between members and the excommunicated.

What repentence from a cult leader looks like

I'm taking this text from A Former Leader's Journey which is a blog written by someone who has left an shepherding type church and is now being shunned. The entire blog explores her feelings and the hurt caused by shunning and is worth reading and moreover worth passing on to answer the "why don't you just join another church" issues.

However, she does offer a sincere repentance for her former acts which furthered the cult and that is simply too valuable to too many people in too many different denomination and organizations not to republish in a way that it will be read in our much broader context. So for those of you who will never hear this from the people who abused you:

Because of all this, I need to repent and ask your forgiveness. I was wrong. I thought wrong things. I believed wrong things. I modeled wrong things. I taught wrong things. I was wrong. I have sinned against you and the others and against my grace loving, mercy giving, all powerful, all loving God.

- I repent for teaching and modeling that the “covering” of our church, my leadership, and our network would keep you from going into rebellion or deception.

- I took your private confidences and passed them on to the other leaders regardless of my telling you that I wouldn’t. I told myself that this was an accepted practice to gain wisdom in dealing with your situation. Now I see it was probably mostly to garner, in some twisted way, the favor of my leaders, to show my loyalty and to gain a better placement of myself in their leadership system.

- I taught, modeled and practiced tithing. I taught you that if you didn’t tithe, bad things would happen to you and/or your finances. Now I understand the fallacy of this. It is a fear tactic – and it is not of God.

- I did not stand up and speak up when I heard and saw something wrong being taught, lived, or modeled. In this way, you, as people who respected me had neither voice nor protection. There were many times I should have spoken up gently/humbly to correct other leaders around me. I wrongly felt that it was up to God to correct and deal with them. That it was not my “place” to correct “God’s Anointed.”

- I wanted to be seen by leaders as loyal and mostly I wanted to be in what I perceived as one of the “inner circles of friendship.” I bought their friendship with flattering words, serving them unconditionally, not making waves, not challenging them and being disloyal to what I sometimes knew was wrong. I was a religious whore.

- I taught you that with leaders, you did not have the right to expect friendship or any sort of loyalty back. I told you that you should become what I had become, completely a servant. They owed you and me nothing. I have learned to watch out for “friendships” where I am the servant only. I have learned my “servanthood” was nothing more than trying to manipulate myself into prominence.

- I taught that the church was an Army and that we therefore needed Generals and Sergeants to lead us. (I of course saw myself as the sergeant – not the head but certainly one of the right arms of the head.) Again, I did not read my Bible.

- I taught you to despise other churches in our city. I taught you that they were not as enlightened as us, did not have as much of the Holy Spirit as us, could not worship as we did, did not recognize the leadership in our church and come under their apostolic leadership, and so many other things. I hinted at their pastors “weaknesses.” I judged their programs, people, leaders and lives as unfit for the true expression of the Kingdom of God and taught you to do the same. It is true that I did see many legitimate problems, and I still do but I had pulled back and decided I was done with the all but the select body of Christ in our area and encouraged you to also “not waste your time.”

- I practiced and taught you “shunning.” This is the practice of not associating with those who have left our body. I taught you to look the other way in the grocery store. To ignore their emails and be succinct and distant when they called you. I taught you that you could be contaminated by a perceived friendship with them, and instilled in you the fear that was in me, that I would be seen as disloyal.

- I taught you that when people left our body, they left their destiny. I thought that the only way they were to fulfill what God had for them was through our particular church.

- I encouraged you in total obedience to our leaders and total submission of ministry to their vision. I often referred to the church as being in the leaders’ “boat.” We were to totally get in this “boat” and leave it up to God and the leaders where and how to navigate this life. We were not to question this boat leader’s vision or direction as they were “hearing from God”. If you wanted to minister it had to be under their direct “umbrella.”

My pride, arrogance, manipulation and disregard for the scripture are detestable to me. In that I was your leader, role model, and teacher makes it doubly serious. I know of nothing else than to remove myself.

I am not beating myself up as to the point where I imagine that I did nothing right. There were many of you that I loved unconditionally. We showed hospitality, we modeled a good marriage, an open and honest life and when I needed to, I have asked your forgiveness. But the scope and magnitude which I see my own heart today is detestable to me.

So today, I ask your forgiveness. I know many of you were not directly under my leadership. So why do I ask your forgiveness? This is why. - Maybe in reading my “confession” you will come to realize that those in leadership above you who have inflicted so many hurts will someday come to realize what they have done. Maybe your prayers for them will result in them walking out of their own deception. Maybe the grace that you show to them will be a signpost for them to follow. Maybe in not hating them you will be able to love and pray for their blinders to fall off.From my heart to you, I am so sorry, please forgive me. And please forgive those who also have been your leaders.

A Person Formerly Known As Your Leader

Andrew Yoder, shunning overturned by court

In 1947 an interesting case came to trial regarding an Andrew Yoder sued the Bishop and 3 other church leaders of Helmuth District Old Order Amish congregation. Most of the facts of this case are undisputed and a complete story has emerged.

Andrew Yoder's daughter is born very ill and needs regular medical attention. Andrew Yoder is a farmer and lives 15 miles from the clinic. Being Amish Yoder is entitled to rent a car or take a taxi but not to own one. However he decides to put his daughter above his church quits the church and joins a more liberal Mennonite church. He did not however complete a valid transfer.

Church elders confront Yoder and he refuses to provide a full explanation. He is excommunicated and subjected to shunning. As a result of the shunning Yoder suffers severe financial and emotional distress. He goes to court and sues the church to have the ban lifted. The argument is that since he had quit the church he could not be subject to church discipline.

The court has serious questions about its jurisdiction to take the case. However since Yoder lives in an Amish community the ban organized by the church leadership, in the court's opinion, constitutes a conspiracy to defame. That is they found that the shunning was illegal because a conspiracy to boycott the plaintiff actually amounted to a violation of the plaintiff's civil rights of liberty to switch churches at will and without intimidation and coercion. That is while the court can't order any of Yoder's neighbors to talk to him they do believe they can hold the leadership responsible for what amount to attempt to coerce Yoder to remain with a particular church.

The church is found guilty and the leadership is ordered to pay $5000. The bishop refuses to pay his share and his farming equipment is sold at auction by the sheriff, an elder then steps in and pays the balance of the judgment to say his own farm. Yoder's daughter dies, one of the elders dies from the stress and Yoder commits suicide.

Now that the facts are out of the way lets move on to some analysis. In general most people who have studied the Yoder case agree it is highly atypical. You do have a judge essentially arguing that a religious punishment is incorrect. Guinn vs. Church of Christ of Collinsville (where the Judge found that shunning constitutes a religious act) would likely have been the outcome had the defendants defended themselves properly.
However, what is generally agreed drove this case was community disgust at the effects of shunning. That is shunning was for these farmers seen as too effectual. Given the level of effect the community felt that their notions of justice (that is justice as seen by the broader society) were being violated. Interestingly enough they also objected to the sale of the farm equipment for the same reason. What this points to is an issue with that church discipline is likely to face if it capable of having "real bite". It needs broad community support to function or the church not the individual is the one who gets publicly shamed.


Some additional documents

• U Manitoba discussion
• Link to a book on the case
• School paper from Gruter Institute for Law and Behavioral Research (opens in word)

Follow up on Jen's Gems, FPC position and illegality

This article is a follow up to Original article on Jen Epstein. I thought it would be a good choice for independence day since today we celebrate breaking away from invalid kangaroo courts.

While following up on Jen's Gems I ran into a very interesting post regarding her excommunication Church Elders Criticize Epsteins But Offer No Viable Solutions. What's interesting about this case is an abuse of the notion of fraternal relations. As far as I understand it among American Presbyterian churches there can be 3 types of relationships:

1) They are in the same hierarchy. That is if you go far enough "up" you'll find a body which has actual authority over both of them.

2) They have fraternal relations. That means they agree that each other's discipline processes are valid. In the particular case of PCA churches (including FPC) the NAPARC agreement governs this structure

3) They have no formal relationship and there is no obligation to recognize one another's disciplinary processes.

For examples of case 3, a PCA church is not required to have a Mormon who attends their church attempt reconciliation with an LDS excommunication. Technically FPC (the church that is discussed in the above post) and BCA (the excommunicating church) have a relationship of type 3. BCA is not a party to the NAPARC agreement. It does not have an appeals structure and the leadership of the PCA has correctly and wisely ruled that organizations without an appeals structure should not have their excommunications treated with anywhere near the level of deference appropriate for a Presbyterian church. Quite simply, FPC most certainly is empowered to simply ignore what Doug Phillips did. They have the right to overturn it. They have the right to assert jurisdiction. The post above is simply incorrect in its assertion of the seriousness of BCA's actions.

However if FPC wished to recognize the excommunication as valid then the logically the NAPARC agreement would be the governing structure. The NAPARC agreement defines a "Transfer with Irregularities"

a. That upon request for transfer of membership by a person under discipline, the sending session/consistory or presbytery/classis inform the receiving body of the nature an extent of the disciplinary procedure before implementing the requested transfer, thus enabling informal consultation between the pastors and elders of both churches.

b. That such a person not be received officially until the judicatory/assembly of the receiving church has taken into serious account the discipline of and the information supplied by the sending church.

c. That such a person not be received officially until the judicatory/assembly of the receiving church is satisfied that proper restitution has been made and/or reconciliation has been seriously attempted.

d. That a "fugitive from discipline" who no longer is a member of a church or who is no longer on the roll of a presbytery shall not be received until the former judicatory/assembly has been contacted to determine if proper restitution has been made and/or reconciliation has been attempted.

Note the key point. FPC is required to
1) Receive a specific report
2) Take into consideration the contents of that report
3) Verify that restitution has been made and/or reconciliation has been seriously attempted

However FPC did not choose to do that. What they did do was:
1) Faith PCA verbally and in writing affirmed the legitimacy of the excommunication process of BCA
2) Faith PCA affirmed the exclusive jurisdiction of BCA, both to give and to remove the censure of excommunication from the Epsteins, "Knowing that Boerne Christian Assembly is an orthodox evangelical Christian church, we recognize your excommunication of Mark and Jennifer as a valid ecclesiastical act with continuing effect.”

The PCA does not recognize any notion of exclusive jurisdiction. FPC's act here was a blatant violation of presbyterian legal structures.

Breaking away, case study from Xenos

Xenos Christian Fellowship is a mega-church in Columbus Ohio which makes heavy use of strong "home churches" to create a large group / small group feel. The church is very well known and influential. Strange Things at Xenos gives one a feel for their outlook and their distinctives. It also, publishes on its website heavily on the issue of church discipline.

• basics
• leadership and authority

There was an extended discussion of Xenos on Byron Harvey's website and the following is
post 14

I was in the college Ministry.

Now, I would not classify Xenos as a cult per se, but in the college group at least, I saw quite a few cultlike elements in the social structure that the church structure fed. Let me take you on a journey. I will probably tip my identity in sharing this, but I am not too concerned with that.

I moved to Columbus Ohio in the fall of 1996. I was lonely, immature, and depressed, although at the time I would not have said it as such. It was not long till an acquaintance of mine told me about this meeting in one of the dorm study rooms where a bunch of Christians were having a discussion group. At first, I was against it, but he enticed me with the prospect of attractive young females. Being a young man of 18, I went of course.

Over the next few weeks, I became a regular attendee, debating points of the Christian faith, and giving the arguments that were presented to me more creedance than they were worth, for at the time I was not trained to spot logical fallacies. To an impressionable mind, they made extraordinary claims, claims of God’s perfect love, perfect justice and whatnot. Growing up in a blue collar catholic family, I ate this stuff up.

Meanwhile, my class attendance started slipping. I had a lot of evening classes, but was encouraged to attend first CT, and then a homechurch, both while skipping out on classes. My grades plummeted.

Now I do realize I had a choice here, I could have stuck to my studies, and surely my life would have been easier for it, but I was confused, empty, a lost soul, and one of the promises Xenos made to me about God is that with the spirit, you are no longer empty.

I accepted Christ on easter of 1997. A week later I was kicked out of school for failing to meet the conditions of my academic probation.

Now, I am grateful for what came next. Xenos took me in, provided a couch to sleep on till I got a job and an apartment, and when my sublet was up, moved me into a ministry house. By this time, I was attending a homechurch, CT, a cell group, along with myriad prayer meetings.

I was on a spiritual high at the time. I was learning all I could about God, about Christianity, and looking back was starting to be groomed for leadership. My house and homechurch leaders started referring to “when I would be a leader”.

Meanwhile, I was still as depressed and as empty as ever. When I talked about this with other xenoids, I was told to keep to the path, God would sort it out.

I also started seeing things that sat very uneasily with me. All other Christian sects were bashed to one form or another, but particularly Catholics, Jehova Witnesses, and to a lesser extant, Mormons. I won’t even go into the venom reserved for non-Christian religions.

I started missing meetings due to work, or just being too depressed to leave the house. One hear or there did not merit comment, but if you missed more than three in a month, leaders started coming to you to voice thier concerns for your spiritual walk.

Finally, a few weeks before Christmas of 1998, things came to a head. I had been neglecting some of my house chores for a few weeks (as had other members of the house, but I was singled out it seems) and was put on probabtion. No missed chores for a month or I was outs. Three days before the month was up, I had been out late with friends seeing a movie, and forgot to do some cleaning. I did it first thing in the morning, but the house leaders decided to make me leave. At first, they wanted me out immediately. I managed to get a whole week out of them.

Needless to say, a week later I was homeless. I was crushed. Everything I had built my adult life around was suddenly gone. I had no friends outside of the church, as outside friends were not forbidden, but they were not encouraged unless they were outreach. My only support network was two hours away, so I went home to my parents.

The next year and a half were hard. I was removed from any support network, and was slowly slipping into darkness. Only a handful of people kept up with me, I would thank them, but all but one have left that group.

I moved back to Columbus in mid 2000, a mental wreck. Like an abused spouse, I went back to the only thing I knew, Xenos. I puttered on for about 7 or 8 months, never regaining the acceptance I had enjoyed previously. I was a fringe member, and outsider. Being on the edge I saw the truly bad aspects of that group. The cliquishness, the social control wielded over members, the selective enforcement of morality and the unhealthy focus on “Sexual Sin”.

My end with the group came with a woman. We started dating, and she was not Christian. I tried to bring her around at first, but she was offended at the groups attitudes towards other religions. We ended up having sex. Knowing I was violating Xonos’ rules, I removed myself from the group. However, that was not enough. Even though I had left of my own accord, they still instituted their church discipline against me, and the few friends I still had in the group were forbidden from speaking to me “For my own good”.

It was the best thing that ever happened to me.

Since then, I broke away from the false promises of my faith, and found my own way. I conquered my depression, have built true, lasting friendships, and have finally gotten my life back on track, all the things Xenos tells you are not possible without God, with the undertone that to be right with God you must be right with Xenos. Looking back, I see the broken people they pulled into their group, and some have gon on to lead rich, fulfilling lives, I can honestly say as of my last check, there were not that many in the college group that were.

I have overcome any resentment I had towards that group, a process that took many years. Through it I have become a better person, and in a way, am glad they treated me the way they did. I would not be the person I am today without Xenos.

I just hope for all those that go to them listening to false promises of fulfillment and meaning in their life, that they find what they are looking for.

I invite any and all comments to this on my own blog at gothic_oreo.livejournal.com. I will make a public post with anonymous comments aloud specifically for that purpous.

What's interesting about the story is that the person has clearly seperated from evangelical Christianity and is quite happy about the effects of the shunning.

If there are any Xenos people out there:

1. Why discipline on a non member?
2. Why shunning?

_________

Addendum: There is an interview with the lead pastor for Xenos on discipline at a later post Interview with Xenos on membership and discipline policies

Excommunication and shunning

Churches and books have a wide range of doctrines about what to do with the excommunicated.

• The catholic church separates between anathema (which implies some shunning) and simple excommunication
• PCG declares excommunicated family members (except spouses) should be shunned.
• Liberal Baptist on why baptists can't excommunicate or withhold sacraments at all.

• Jonathan Edwards (important American theologian of the 18th century) establishes that excommunicates are to be treated substantially worse than heathens (impolite, and entitled only to minimal human rights) in the Nature and Purpose...