NEITHER should be excused for their actions, and I am almost of the opinion that it doesn't matter what we think, since all will answer at the Bema, including VPW, & LCM.
I have read other threads where if I recall, you have seen other cultures and you think that adultery is accepted in other cultures. and it may have been you who thought maybe VP just had a different way of looking at things - as if he believed in another culture's beliefs on sex and adultery being okay.
This was not adultery. It was far greater than that and the comment:
"Un-like the Catholics priests he did not claim to be celebite while he was boinking the congregation. Un-like the Baptists minister he did not use the tithe to pay for prostitutes. Un-like the Methodists minister he did not use the tithe to pay for weapons for the Nicaragian-Contras."
Seems a little weird and I think that has stirred people up including myself. Just because you pointed out other churches that have their own creeps does not dilute the crimes VPW did to his congregation. So, I am not sure why you would use that as a defense of VPW.
Galen, I appreciate your kind post to me.
But I sometimes think because you are accepting of other cultures engaging in "free sex" or the like -- that you think what VPW did was not so bad.
What he did was criminal. IT is beyond adultery and culture.
Do you recall the hurricane in Florida? The people were thirsty and hungry and they sat on heaps that used to be their lives hoping someone would come by and help them fix things.
The first group that came to these desperate people tried to sell them 99 cent water for $50.00 a gallon. So, you recognize that as wrong? It is gouging the people. When they are at their lowest. When they cannot deal with one more "bad" thing.... They reach out for a drink of clean water and people used their crippled state to get rich off them.
That is what VP did. He came along to girls sitting on heaps that should have been a well-structured life at 17, 18, and 19. They were dying for a drink. Thirsty for answers. In need of healing. And he offered them a drink with a high price to pay for it.
(and if they refused... He had been known to give them drinks... questionable drinks... to force them)
I will tell you about Jesus if you....
That is why your example just seems odd to me...
[This message was edited by Dot Matrix on December 29, 2003 at 21:56.]
I am going to post this again and again and again... until people take off their rose-colored glasses and see things clearly...
Why It's Not an Affair
Rev. Patricia L. Liberty
Rev. Liberty is the Executive Director of Associates in Education and Prevention in Pastoral Practice, PO Box 63, 44 Main Street, North Kingstown, RI 02852 Tel # 401-295-0698
The issue of sexual contact between clergy and congregants is complex. Whenever a minister is exposed for such behavior the aftermath is traumatic for everyone involved. Churches feel betrayed, victims/survivors are marginalized and misunderstood and the families of all involved suffer greatly. This article is intended as an informational and educational forum to increase understanding about sexual contact between clergy and congregants.
Oftentimes sexual contact between clergy and congregants is dismissed as an "affair" between "consenting adults". This is a misnomer for several reasons. First, the relationship between a clergy person and his/her congregants is professional in nature. That means that clergy have a responsibility to use the special knowledge, skills and gifts of their call for the benefit of those they serve namely their congregants. It also means that clergy have a responsibility to establish healthy professional relationships. Because clergy carry moral and spiritual authority, as well as professional power it is ALWAYS their responsibility to maintain an appropriate professional boundary.
In practical terms this translates into clergy not pursuing or initiating sexual relationships with congregants (regardless of marital status of either party) and not responding to the sexual advances of congregants who may be interested in a relationship with their pastor. It also means that clergy will not engage in sexualized behavior with congregants. Sexualized behavior includes jokes, inappropriate touching, pornography, flirting, inappropriate gift giving, etc.
Since the ministerial relationship is professional in nature, it is inappropriate to call a sexual encounter an affair. Affair is a term used to describe a sexual liaison between peers, or equals. In addition, the term affair focuses attention on the sexual nature of the behavior rather than the professional violation. It also places equal responsibility for the behavior on the congregant. Since clergy have a responsibility to set and maintain appropriate boundaries, those who are violated by clergy's inappropriate sexual behavior are not to be blamed even if they initiated the contact.
This is a difficult concept for many people to grasp. We want to blame the congregant (usually but not always a woman) for the sexually inappropriate behavior of the minister (usually but not always a man). As tempting as this may be, it is wrong because it is always the responsibility of the minister to maintain the integrity of the ministerial relationship. The temptation to blame the congregant is also a reflection of the difficulty people have believing that a person who carries moral and spiritual authority, who is respected and trusted, can also be guilty of misusing the power and authority of the office. That denial and confusion causes tremendous damage to victims who need understanding and support as well as to churches that need clear, ethical, theological and faith based intervention to understand their betrayal. Blaming the congregant also means a failure to call the abusing pastor to genuine accountability. The focus needs to remain on the violation of the ministerial relationship.
The term "consenting adults" also reflects a misunderstanding of sexual behavior between clergy and congregants. It is assumed that because two people are adults that there is consent. In reality, consent is far more complex. In order for two people to give authentic consent to sexual activity there must be equal power. Clergy have more power because of the moral and spiritual authority of the office of pastor. In addition, education, community respect and public image add to the imbalance of power between a clergy person and a congregant. Finally clergy may have the additional power of psychological resources, especially when a congregant seeks pastoral care in the midst of personal or spiritual crisis, life change, illness or death of a loved one. This precludes the possibility of meaningful consent between a congregant and their pastor.
In our work with survivors of clergy abuse we often ask the question, "Would this have happened if he/she was your neighbor and not your pastor." Overwhelmingly the answer is "no". The witness of survivors underscores the truth that the clergy role carries with it a power and authority that make meaningful consent impossible.
When speaking of sexual contact between clergy and congregants, the term professional misconduct or sexual exploitation is more accurate. It keeps the emphasis on the professional relationship and the exploitative nature of sexual behavior rather than placing blame on the victim/survivor. "An affair between consenting adults" is never an appropriate term to use when describing sexual contact between a minister and congregant. Accurate naming of the behavior is an important step to reshaping our thinking about this troubling reality in the church, how we name it reveals our belief about it. Holding clergy accountable with compassion and purpose and providing healing resources to churches and survivors is dependent on an accurate starting point. Only when we name the behavior accurately can we hope to have a healing outcome for all involved.
GREASE SPOT CAFE has a main site where much of this information, links to other articles, old Waydale documents and various editorials are posted. (click here for the Grease Spot Cafe Main Page)
Don't forget it's there! And you "newbies" - if you haven't checked it out - spend a few hours perusing the site. It will blow your mind and open your eyes (though not necessarily in that order!).
We now return to our regularly scheduled thread... pardon the interruption!
xoxoxox
Hope R. color>size>face>
What a long, strange trip it's been!size>face>color>
:(--> Excathedra Dot & Others I am sorry your hearts are once again hurt and your wounds are again opened. As we approach a new year I pray that this is the last time such hurt and pain is again reintroduced into your lives. As awful as I feel right now I know that I can not even come close to how these women are feeling. I hope that posters will consider the effects of their words on these women in the future. We have all of this information archived in the greasespot I just don't see why we need to continually reintroduce it into their lives each month they deal with it everyday I'm sure as it is.
Without Coffee
I Would Have No Personality At All
[This message was edited by WhiteDove on December 30, 2003 at 0:15.]
Excellent post. For the defenders of VPW to still (mis)use and manipulate Bible verses and so-called 'biblical logic' to whitewash, at *any* cost, their 'Father in the Word's reputation basically tells us that they put the value on that dead man's reputation and image far above the well-being of those who were abused, even if they don't fully realize that that is what they are doing. And all in the wrapping of 'God and His Word'.
-->
My own secret sign-off ====v,
Rational logic cannot have blind faith as one of its foundations.
I am fine in sharing with others if I think it can help them awake. But I love the way you stepped in with loads of consideration.
I feel like it needs to be said like America's Most wanted keeps showing crime clips until the criminal is stopped. So, until TWI stops the sex practices (and other evils) and admits they were WRONG or they close down, I can handle it (I think)
Ex is another story. Talk about the sweetest mushy hearted person around! And what she endured kills me.
"Saying it" can be liberating. It is when people challange it... as if it was consenual or something -- that is when my cage rattles.
Fortuately, there are folks like you, Long Gone, Zixar, Raf, Steve, Pirate, Plots, Socks, Shaz, Alphacat, QQ, Diazbro, Hope, Vickles, Dataway, Larry, Garth and others to step in.
This is what I said on Mike's thread and I am sorry to say it bears repeating, once again, here....
..."so all you folks that say, oh, sin is sin... raped any one lately ???
how about your daughter??? want her molested at age 14,15,16, 17 by a Christian minister, maybe the Man Of God for the 20th century?? is that all cool under the "sin is sin, he taught ME the WORD!!!!!" slavish devotion of some apparently still-cannot-see-the-signal-for-all-the-noise types out there....
sure a g-d lot of smoke and opinion and very little concern for God's opinion of those who do such things knowingly...
give up your idols, folks...."
I guess I am getting old-- I AM repeating myself... --> :(-->
Could we please get rid of these silly trees? I can't see stuff . . .
Can I say that I'm "....ed"??? When are we all going to take some responsibility???
We are taken advantage of when we LET ourselves be taken advantage of.
I was hurt, too -- extremely hurt. But guess what. . . I still had a mind of my own and KNEW BETTER but I LIKED being with the MOG.
Personally, I think Wierwille is to blame for the whole damn thing -- what a jerk. Craig loved Wierwille like we loved Craig. It goes from generation to generation just like in a regular old family.
Thank you for taking the time to reply to me in such a detailed manner! I'm touched.
You're right about so much. There was a LOT of premeditation. I think it went on for years until the actual act happened. It wasn't just one person, there were many involved.
I think that by the time the MOG had (allegedley) "perfected" it, he could do things "spriritually" like on a Sunday night teaching tape reach people like me who lived miles away! Just on a tape! I remember the first time I was stimulated just by listening to a Sunday teaching tape while out WOW -- it spooked me, but I was a gal who was prone to that anyway.
What I mean by "knowing better" is that I did! I always asked myself "how can this by okay?" I thought, "But it must be, he (the MOG) would never do anything against God. He loves God! and if he says it's okay, it must be." But there was always this voice in the back of my mind saying "no, no, no. . . . this is wrong." I just didn't want to listen.
I totally believe he loved God and probably still does! I think he was decieved by Wierwille and some of us, in turn, were deceived by him.
That is what makes me angry, is that my love for God was taken advantage of. But honestly, I WANTED to be with him. He never forced me to do anything. My goof was to "love" him emotionally. Couldn't get past that part. And really, I think I still do and probably always will.
I take full responsibility for my part in all of it. No time to blame anyone but me.
It was extremely powerful. Beyond words. But I still knew better.
What hurts the most is that God was used. If it was a "self help" business, I think it would have been easier to handle. But not God. That was the biggest goof, in my humble of humblest opinions.
quote:Each time VPW saw her he tried to ?get? her and she confronted him time and time again. She became a conquest. Still refusing his advances, VPW invited her on the coach and gave her a "questionable" drink, hazy and unable to fight back, he assaulted her.
There's a question I've wanted to ask for a while, and since this was brought up, I might as well ask. Are there any other women besides Marsha and Excathedra who claim having first-hand experience of being drugged by Dr. Wierwille? (By being drugged I don't mean just alcohol, but something was put in the drink that prohibited these women from acting responsibly, saying no, etc.)
quote:... those who are violated by clergy's inappropriate sexual behavior are not to be blamed even if they initiated the contact.
Does Ms. Liberty use the bible as her source of authority and truth? Because as far as I know, the bible doesn't give a pass to those who are complicit and initiate adultery and fornication. If I'm wrong, please supply biblical passages to argue the point.
And we need this info why ? I for one hope that those are the only two- it would be two too many. Maybe we can give them a break here, Hey lets ask them to describe exactly how it felt also in detail while we are at it!
Ask John Lynn, he is the one who apparently knew of other druggings if you read the letter on the site.
But your questions and Mike's are the ones I fear the most. Because whether you mean to or not, by asking it, it implies that "these are only two people and they could be lying."
EVEN if there were no other druggings, these two woman -- probably three if you read Marsha's WOW sister lay crying in a bed as well-- were. You always come across like "Well, I do not believe you - who else can validate this accusation." But then more people validate things and you seem to ask for more.
You may not be thinking that way at all, but when someone tells the most gut wrenching story of their life, in an effort to help others, you need to be careful what you ask and how you ask.
When, in the past someone said it was not consenual, your response was something like, "were they over 18?" You can be 84 years old and when you say "NO" that is what it means.
It just always seems you look for loop holes to let VPW off the hook. So, your apparent lack of compassion and your responses that seem to have an "I do not believe you" edge to them, can absolutely send a victim backwards in their healing.
The thing is OM, even if you do not believe either of us. If you had some what of a soft heart for people, wouldn't you feel the pain of another human being and NOT post, rather than risk their fragile state for the sake of "one more jab" from you.
People think of you as ignorant or without a clue. I see you as an intelligent human being who somehow would rather risk the state of a victim then have to read something negative about VPW. Now, it could be you do not understand how "accusing" you present yourself, but I think you are acutely aware of it. And the effects on people mean nothing to you.
I think the way you post is careless and mean in the context of what happened here.
If this becomes about "prove it" or "I do not believe you." We will pull our stories.
You do not have to believe anything, I am asking you not to challange anything in her post here. Just go away not believing it, please. Don't you recognize when another person is bleeding?
[This message was edited by Dot Matrix on December 30, 2003 at 22:04.]
quote:We are taken advantage of when we LET ourselves be taken advantage of.
I hope you did not write this as a response to my posts. If you did, then may I remind you there are people who did not willingly remove their pants. There are people who knew what was happening was not "love."
If you were responding to the thread topic, then your second response just shows me how you were also used and I am very sorry you were injured in the process.
Recommended Posts
Top Posters In This Topic
68
96
22
28
Popular Days
Dec 31
88
Jan 1
83
Dec 29
58
Dec 30
48
Top Posters In This Topic
excathedra 68 posts
Dot Matrix 96 posts
Oakspear 22 posts
early2it 28 posts
Popular Days
Dec 31 2003
88 posts
Jan 1 2004
83 posts
Dec 29 2003
58 posts
Dec 30 2003
48 posts
dmiller
VPW guilty as charged
LCM guilty as charged
NEITHER should be excused for their actions, and I am almost of the opinion that it doesn't matter what we think, since all will answer at the Bema, including VPW, & LCM.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
excathedra
i'm sorry my buttons were pushed
?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Dot Matrix
Edited out at the request of Excathedera
(Was her heartbreaking story)
[This message was edited by Dot Matrix on December 31, 2003 at 6:31.]
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Dot Matrix
Galen
I have read other threads where if I recall, you have seen other cultures and you think that adultery is accepted in other cultures. and it may have been you who thought maybe VP just had a different way of looking at things - as if he believed in another culture's beliefs on sex and adultery being okay.
This was not adultery. It was far greater than that and the comment:
"Un-like the Catholics priests he did not claim to be celebite while he was boinking the congregation. Un-like the Baptists minister he did not use the tithe to pay for prostitutes. Un-like the Methodists minister he did not use the tithe to pay for weapons for the Nicaragian-Contras."
Seems a little weird and I think that has stirred people up including myself. Just because you pointed out other churches that have their own creeps does not dilute the crimes VPW did to his congregation. So, I am not sure why you would use that as a defense of VPW.
Galen, I appreciate your kind post to me.
But I sometimes think because you are accepting of other cultures engaging in "free sex" or the like -- that you think what VPW did was not so bad.
What he did was criminal. IT is beyond adultery and culture.
Do you recall the hurricane in Florida? The people were thirsty and hungry and they sat on heaps that used to be their lives hoping someone would come by and help them fix things.
The first group that came to these desperate people tried to sell them 99 cent water for $50.00 a gallon. So, you recognize that as wrong? It is gouging the people. When they are at their lowest. When they cannot deal with one more "bad" thing.... They reach out for a drink of clean water and people used their crippled state to get rich off them.
That is what VP did. He came along to girls sitting on heaps that should have been a well-structured life at 17, 18, and 19. They were dying for a drink. Thirsty for answers. In need of healing. And he offered them a drink with a high price to pay for it.
(and if they refused... He had been known to give them drinks... questionable drinks... to force them)
I will tell you about Jesus if you....
That is why your example just seems odd to me...
[This message was edited by Dot Matrix on December 29, 2003 at 21:56.]
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Dot Matrix
edited out at request of excathedera
[This message was edited by Dot Matrix on December 31, 2003 at 6:32.]
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Hope R.
I am going to post this again and again and again... until people take off their rose-colored glasses and see things clearly...
Why It's Not an Affair
Rev. Patricia L. Liberty
Rev. Liberty is the Executive Director of Associates in Education and Prevention in Pastoral Practice, PO Box 63, 44 Main Street, North Kingstown, RI 02852 Tel # 401-295-0698
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The issue of sexual contact between clergy and congregants is complex. Whenever a minister is exposed for such behavior the aftermath is traumatic for everyone involved. Churches feel betrayed, victims/survivors are marginalized and misunderstood and the families of all involved suffer greatly. This article is intended as an informational and educational forum to increase understanding about sexual contact between clergy and congregants.
Oftentimes sexual contact between clergy and congregants is dismissed as an "affair" between "consenting adults". This is a misnomer for several reasons. First, the relationship between a clergy person and his/her congregants is professional in nature. That means that clergy have a responsibility to use the special knowledge, skills and gifts of their call for the benefit of those they serve namely their congregants. It also means that clergy have a responsibility to establish healthy professional relationships. Because clergy carry moral and spiritual authority, as well as professional power it is ALWAYS their responsibility to maintain an appropriate professional boundary.
In practical terms this translates into clergy not pursuing or initiating sexual relationships with congregants (regardless of marital status of either party) and not responding to the sexual advances of congregants who may be interested in a relationship with their pastor. It also means that clergy will not engage in sexualized behavior with congregants. Sexualized behavior includes jokes, inappropriate touching, pornography, flirting, inappropriate gift giving, etc.
Since the ministerial relationship is professional in nature, it is inappropriate to call a sexual encounter an affair. Affair is a term used to describe a sexual liaison between peers, or equals. In addition, the term affair focuses attention on the sexual nature of the behavior rather than the professional violation. It also places equal responsibility for the behavior on the congregant. Since clergy have a responsibility to set and maintain appropriate boundaries, those who are violated by clergy's inappropriate sexual behavior are not to be blamed even if they initiated the contact.
This is a difficult concept for many people to grasp. We want to blame the congregant (usually but not always a woman) for the sexually inappropriate behavior of the minister (usually but not always a man). As tempting as this may be, it is wrong because it is always the responsibility of the minister to maintain the integrity of the ministerial relationship. The temptation to blame the congregant is also a reflection of the difficulty people have believing that a person who carries moral and spiritual authority, who is respected and trusted, can also be guilty of misusing the power and authority of the office. That denial and confusion causes tremendous damage to victims who need understanding and support as well as to churches that need clear, ethical, theological and faith based intervention to understand their betrayal. Blaming the congregant also means a failure to call the abusing pastor to genuine accountability. The focus needs to remain on the violation of the ministerial relationship.
The term "consenting adults" also reflects a misunderstanding of sexual behavior between clergy and congregants. It is assumed that because two people are adults that there is consent. In reality, consent is far more complex. In order for two people to give authentic consent to sexual activity there must be equal power. Clergy have more power because of the moral and spiritual authority of the office of pastor. In addition, education, community respect and public image add to the imbalance of power between a clergy person and a congregant. Finally clergy may have the additional power of psychological resources, especially when a congregant seeks pastoral care in the midst of personal or spiritual crisis, life change, illness or death of a loved one. This precludes the possibility of meaningful consent between a congregant and their pastor.
In our work with survivors of clergy abuse we often ask the question, "Would this have happened if he/she was your neighbor and not your pastor." Overwhelmingly the answer is "no". The witness of survivors underscores the truth that the clergy role carries with it a power and authority that make meaningful consent impossible.
When speaking of sexual contact between clergy and congregants, the term professional misconduct or sexual exploitation is more accurate. It keeps the emphasis on the professional relationship and the exploitative nature of sexual behavior rather than placing blame on the victim/survivor. "An affair between consenting adults" is never an appropriate term to use when describing sexual contact between a minister and congregant. Accurate naming of the behavior is an important step to reshaping our thinking about this troubling reality in the church, how we name it reveals our belief about it. Holding clergy accountable with compassion and purpose and providing healing resources to churches and survivors is dependent on an accurate starting point. Only when we name the behavior accurately can we hope to have a healing outcome for all involved.
Copyright © 2000 Patricia Liberty.
here's the link on the Main Page of GS "Why It's NOT an Affair"
Hope R. color>size>face>
P.S. I added the bold stuff - the whole article should be that way... and in capitol letters... in red... UNDERLINEDcolor>size>
What a long, strange trip it's been!size>face>color>
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Dot Matrix
Hope
GREAT post! GREAT article!
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Hope R.
This is a commercial interruption...
GREASE SPOT CAFE has a main site where much of this information, links to other articles, old Waydale documents and various editorials are posted. (click here for the Grease Spot Cafe Main Page)
Don't forget it's there! And you "newbies" - if you haven't checked it out - spend a few hours perusing the site. It will blow your mind and open your eyes (though not necessarily in that order!).
We now return to our regularly scheduled thread... pardon the interruption!
xoxoxox
Hope R. color>size>face>
What a long, strange trip it's been!size>face>color>
Link to comment
Share on other sites
WhiteDove
Without Coffee
I Would Have No Personality At All
[This message was edited by WhiteDove on December 30, 2003 at 0:15.]
Link to comment
Share on other sites
GarthP2000
Whitedove,
Excellent post. For the defenders of VPW to still (mis)use and manipulate Bible verses and so-called 'biblical logic' to whitewash, at *any* cost, their 'Father in the Word's reputation basically tells us that they put the value on that dead man's reputation and image far above the well-being of those who were abused, even if they don't fully realize that that is what they are doing. And all in the wrapping of 'God and His Word'.
My own secret sign-off ====v,
Rational logic cannot have blind faith as one of its foundations.
Prophet Emeritus of THE,
and Wandering CyberUU Hippie,
Garth P.
www.gapstudioweb.com
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Dot Matrix
White Dove
Love and hugs to you and your kind heart!
I am fine in sharing with others if I think it can help them awake. But I love the way you stepped in with loads of consideration.
I feel like it needs to be said like America's Most wanted keeps showing crime clips until the criminal is stopped. So, until TWI stops the sex practices (and other evils) and admits they were WRONG or they close down, I can handle it (I think)
Ex is another story. Talk about the sweetest mushy hearted person around! And what she endured kills me.
"Saying it" can be liberating. It is when people challange it... as if it was consenual or something -- that is when my cage rattles.
Fortuately, there are folks like you, Long Gone, Zixar, Raf, Steve, Pirate, Plots, Socks, Shaz, Alphacat, QQ, Diazbro, Hope, Vickles, Dataway, Larry, Garth and others to step in.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Dot Matrix
Garth
We posted at the same time. Thanks for your heart as well.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
alfakat
This is what I said on Mike's thread and I am sorry to say it bears repeating, once again, here....
..."so all you folks that say, oh, sin is sin... raped any one lately ???
how about your daughter??? want her molested at age 14,15,16, 17 by a Christian minister, maybe the Man Of God for the 20th century?? is that all cool under the "sin is sin, he taught ME the WORD!!!!!" slavish devotion of some apparently still-cannot-see-the-signal-for-all-the-noise types out there....
sure a g-d lot of smoke and opinion and very little concern for God's opinion of those who do such things knowingly...
give up your idols, folks...."
I guess I am getting old-- I AM repeating myself...
--> 
:(--> 
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Sunny1
Dear Year 2027,
. . . who ARE you???
(rolling my eyes)
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Sunny1
Could we please get rid of these silly trees? I can't see stuff . . .
Can I say that I'm "....ed"??? When are we all going to take some responsibility???
We are taken advantage of when we LET ourselves be taken advantage of.
I was hurt, too -- extremely hurt. But guess what. . . I still had a mind of my own and KNEW BETTER but I LIKED being with the MOG.
Personally, I think Wierwille is to blame for the whole damn thing -- what a jerk. Craig loved Wierwille like we loved Craig. It goes from generation to generation just like in a regular old family.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Rocky
Sunny,
What are "....ed" about? Things in general?
And please remember that it's better to be ....ed off than ....ed on.
:D-->
Link to comment
Share on other sites
WordWolf
Sunny1,
Internet scams con people into giving up money and personal
information.
Yes, the victim should have been more paranoid, but does this
excuse the con artist?
A smooth enough scam can fool almost anyone.
Why do I bring this up?
It's been brought up here that the Way Corps candidates were required
to write papers before they entered the corps, and this included
autobiographies. Some of them included information that indicated
some of the women had been sexually victimized or exploited in
childhood or adolescence. As you may know, people who have been
traumatized in that way by certain vile people are more vulnerable
to later exploitation by later vile people.
Those women whose "confidential" autobiographies included backgrounds
of sexual abuse and molestation were- surprise, surprise!
Singled out and targeted for "affairs"/molestation/rape/abuse by
the "upper echelon". Quite a concidence, wouldn't you say?
One might almost think that the papers had been read and targeted for
victims....if one were very mistrustful, one might think that the
entire purpose of the autobiographies was to get dirt for later
exploitation. When some people left twi or were kicked out, info
from the "confidential" papers was often cited as "proof" the person
was now delving into evil in leaving twi.
Hmmm... almost sounds like quite a bit of "premeditation" happened.
Strange how vpw had a HOUSE, yet he also had a trailer on grounds
where these young women were brought. It takes work to set up a
trailer like that. Is it remotely possible that the entire purpose
for the trailer (when he had a HOUSE RIGHT THERE) was to arrange in
advance a separate, secluded place where young women could be
molested without interruption? Seems almost beyond belief, no?
What else was it for?
(He had a HOUSE RIGHT THERE.)
I'm mentioning "premeditation" because it makes a big difference when
discussing crimes.
"Premeditation" means a crime was planned out before executed.
It's the difference between a "crime of passion" and a callous act.
It's the difference between first-degree murder and manslaughter.
Look-
if Rafael and I meet in the street, argue, fight, and one of us kills
the other, that would be viewed as manslaughter. It happened in the
"heat of the moment."
If Rafael and I meet in the street, and 5 burly friends of one of us
mysteriously appear on cue and knife the other guy, and the survivor's
Day Planner list this block of time as "time to murder", then this
shows he PLANNED it-thus, premeditation is shown. This makes it a
WORSE crime, since it was planned out coldly.
========================
Let's say Rottiegrrl and I met for cocktails New Years Eve.
It's possible both of us could "click" and get "intimate" and start
a relationship (or get intimate and not start a relationship.)
If one of us had regrets the next day, well, we're adults and we
should have known better.......
but what if one of us had slipped the other "rohypnol" in their
drink?
If I did that, and she had regrets the next day, not knowing I had
drugged her to take advantage of her, would you say she should just
"get over it"?
If she drugged me, and I ended up cheating on my imaginary wife as a
result, would you say I was equally responsible, and should just get
on with my life?
Some things you "just get over".
When someone makes a deliberate plan, and orchestrates it, setting
steps into motion to eventually make a victim out of you for their
own gain, you don't just chalk it up to experience.
You warn others that this person lacks integrity, and warn them to
keep a safe distance, lest bad things happen to them.
They are NOT to trust them.
==========================================================
"All the women in the kingdom belong to the king."
That's a direct quote from pfal AND the collaterals.
The context: King David's seduction of a married woman in his kingdom,
and the subsequent arranged murder of her husband to cover David's
tracks. vpw said that "technically" David could have gotten away
with this because "all the women in the kingdom belong to the king."
NO!
This defies the written Laws in effect, the letter AND intent of the
Mosaic Law concerning marriage, and was an abuse of the power he
wielded as king.
Everybody knows that.
The concept of the "droit de seigneur" was NEVER in effect in the
Bible.
Strange it was part of vpw's teaching, though.
Why would he maintain that the person in top authority was within his
rights to have sex freely with the women under his authority?
Might this be a concept that was on his mind?
It certainly was not outlined from Scripture.....
Might this be a hint, a clue, to deliberate intent?
It certainly would help establish a pattern of state-of-mind.
It's not without irony that I compare King David's coverup with vpw's
coverups in my mind. Some of you may see the same thing I do.
(Some of you may not.)
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Sunny1
My Dear Wordwolf,
Thank you for taking the time to reply to me in such a detailed manner! I'm touched.
You're right about so much. There was a LOT of premeditation. I think it went on for years until the actual act happened. It wasn't just one person, there were many involved.
I think that by the time the MOG had (allegedley) "perfected" it, he could do things "spriritually" like on a Sunday night teaching tape reach people like me who lived miles away! Just on a tape! I remember the first time I was stimulated just by listening to a Sunday teaching tape while out WOW -- it spooked me, but I was a gal who was prone to that anyway.
What I mean by "knowing better" is that I did! I always asked myself "how can this by okay?" I thought, "But it must be, he (the MOG) would never do anything against God. He loves God! and if he says it's okay, it must be." But there was always this voice in the back of my mind saying "no, no, no. . . . this is wrong." I just didn't want to listen.
I totally believe he loved God and probably still does! I think he was decieved by Wierwille and some of us, in turn, were deceived by him.
That is what makes me angry, is that my love for God was taken advantage of. But honestly, I WANTED to be with him. He never forced me to do anything. My goof was to "love" him emotionally. Couldn't get past that part. And really, I think I still do and probably always will.
I take full responsibility for my part in all of it. No time to blame anyone but me.
It was extremely powerful. Beyond words. But I still knew better.
What hurts the most is that God was used. If it was a "self help" business, I think it would have been easier to handle. But not God. That was the biggest goof, in my humble of humblest opinions.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Sunny1
And to you, dear Rocky.
I agree better to be ....ed off than ....ed on!
That's a great saying. Mind if I use that?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
oldiesman
There's a question I've wanted to ask for a while, and since this was brought up, I might as well ask. Are there any other women besides Marsha and Excathedra who claim having first-hand experience of being drugged by Dr. Wierwille? (By being drugged I don't mean just alcohol, but something was put in the drink that prohibited these women from acting responsibly, saying no, etc.)
Link to comment
Share on other sites
oldiesman
In regards to Rev. Liberty's article:
Does Ms. Liberty use the bible as her source of authority and truth? Because as far as I know, the bible doesn't give a pass to those who are complicit and initiate adultery and fornication. If I'm wrong, please supply biblical passages to argue the point.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
WhiteDove
And we need this info why ? I for one hope that those are the only two- it would be two too many. Maybe we can give them a break here, Hey lets ask them to describe exactly how it felt also in detail while we are at it!
Without Coffee
I Would Have No Personality At All
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Dot Matrix
OM
Ask John Lynn, he is the one who apparently knew of other druggings if you read the letter on the site.
But your questions and Mike's are the ones I fear the most. Because whether you mean to or not, by asking it, it implies that "these are only two people and they could be lying."
EVEN if there were no other druggings, these two woman -- probably three if you read Marsha's WOW sister lay crying in a bed as well-- were. You always come across like "Well, I do not believe you - who else can validate this accusation." But then more people validate things and you seem to ask for more.
You may not be thinking that way at all, but when someone tells the most gut wrenching story of their life, in an effort to help others, you need to be careful what you ask and how you ask.
When, in the past someone said it was not consenual, your response was something like, "were they over 18?" You can be 84 years old and when you say "NO" that is what it means.
It just always seems you look for loop holes to let VPW off the hook. So, your apparent lack of compassion and your responses that seem to have an "I do not believe you" edge to them, can absolutely send a victim backwards in their healing.
The thing is OM, even if you do not believe either of us. If you had some what of a soft heart for people, wouldn't you feel the pain of another human being and NOT post, rather than risk their fragile state for the sake of "one more jab" from you.
People think of you as ignorant or without a clue. I see you as an intelligent human being who somehow would rather risk the state of a victim then have to read something negative about VPW. Now, it could be you do not understand how "accusing" you present yourself, but I think you are acutely aware of it. And the effects on people mean nothing to you.
I think the way you post is careless and mean in the context of what happened here.
If this becomes about "prove it" or "I do not believe you." We will pull our stories.
You do not have to believe anything, I am asking you not to challange anything in her post here. Just go away not believing it, please. Don't you recognize when another person is bleeding?
[This message was edited by Dot Matrix on December 30, 2003 at 22:04.]
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Dot Matrix
Sunny you said:
I hope you did not write this as a response to my posts. If you did, then may I remind you there are people who did not willingly remove their pants. There are people who knew what was happening was not "love."
If you were responding to the thread topic, then your second response just shows me how you were also used and I am very sorry you were injured in the process.
Great post WW! Thanks White dove!
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.