JAL has a right to his opinion with respect to some former twi participants engaging in internet defamation and disparaging comments about the past.
He has a right to his opinion, and if there's factual errors in what he says, we have rights to point that
out and discuss them. (Or, if he was correct, rights to agree.)
The error we were addressing this moment was the "false dilemma" of his categorizations.
EVERYONE you can get information on twi about-
except him and his organization-
are either
-the media (which he pronounces "much of that false")
-other Christians (which he pronounces "much of that false")
-and DISGRUNTLED former followers (which he pronounces "much of that true, some of it false").
So, he's declaring right out that the only place to get non-false information is HIM and his organization.
Further, if former followers speak up at all, he's CATEGORICALLY labelled them "disgruntled".
That's why Raf replied:
"Nice. Nice. Those are the only three categories listed.
The Media
Other [presumably non-Way] Christians
Disgruntled former followers
How about this for a category, JAL: Former followers. Not disgruntled. Shun the judgmental adjective. You have NO RIGHT to refer to me or anyone else as disgruntled, a word you use to dismiss the valid complaints being made by those who have every right to stand up to treachery of VPW."
Don't you realize what his categorization has done?
You've spoken about twi.
According to JAL, since you're not a member of the Media, and not a non-twi Christian, you're "DISGRUNTLED". So's Mike.
Now, Mike has objected to being called "disgruntled." Don't YOU?
Stop and listen to Mike for a moment!
Mike said:
"A person should be considered gruntled until proven disgruntled."
You may disagree all you want, but I think using the word "disgruntled" is a harmless way to say it.
We think it is not.
What do you think disgruntled means? It's another way to say someone is unhappy, unsatisfied about their twi involvement. Well, I think that describes some folks' actions perfectly. (Not everyone at GS Cafe, but SOME.) If one plays in the arena, one ought to be prepared to take some criticism of one's behavior, don't you think that's fair?
"Some criticism"? Yes-depending on the form of criticism. If he came here and said "I consider you 'disgruntled',
I'd discuss whether or not it applied. But we objected the BLANKET LABEL, the CATEGORIZATION, that to be
ex-twi and to speak on it is to be "disgruntled". For that matter, I'd object to ANY blanket label or categorization,
and I think the others would as well.
As to "the arena", I'll take my criticism "in the arena" from those there, thank you.
Let's have open dialogue.
Now, if JAL were to come on the forums here and say it here, I think he might be in violation of the rules because we are asked not to make it personal with other posters here on the forums.
HAHAHAHAHA!
Ever consider doing a lounge act? Mitch Hedberg's dead, so there's the vacancy for a good observational comic out there...
If JAL were to DISCUSS here, he'd be granted every benefit of polite discourse here.
He'd even be allowed to NOT reveal who he is, to wear an alias, an internet handle, and speak,
and let the strength of his words, and his logic, carry weight- or FAIL to carry weight, as the case may be.
If JAL were to come here and just announce "everyone who posts here is disgruntled", he'd receive the recompense
of his blanket accusation, which is deserved. That's because HE would have arrived and MADE IT PERSONAL.
"I've just arrived. The rest of you are illogical, angry, emotional and hurtful."
In case you missed it, he ALREADY made it personal in his letter-but he didn't mention us by name.
Feel free to think that if your name isn't mentioned, you're not being referred to- but, you know, you've concluded
the opposite to that before, and objected to labels nobody said they DEFINITELY meant for you, you've read
the descriptions and context- as we did here- and drew what you thought was the logical conclusion...
Here's a novel idea- how about JAL NOT make it personal ANYWHERE- at least outside any place that made him a
leader- and just deal with us as siblings under God?
But John didn't come here, someone brought John's letter to us.
JAL's letter was posted on the internet, at the ces/stfi website.
JAL HAD to have given his approval for that. JAL's been giving his approval for a few of his public statements
down the years- and his responses, GENERALLY (not counting the very beginning of CES, when there was an
active messageboard with civil discussions) he's insisted on controlling the microphone.
It's as honest as the politician who takes questions from the audience-
but to get IN the audience, you had to be a supporter of his to begin with....
JAL's taken shots at us before, safe behind his "I don't go on messageboards" podium.
It was wrong then, it's wrong now.
If you read that letter carefully, OM - you'll see that JAL counted on it finding its way to the Cafe.
He may have a right to his opinion. But he's still being arrogant.
And we have a right to CALL him on it when he's being arrogant.
JAL has a right to his opinion with respect to some former twi participants engaging in internet defamation and disparaging comments about the past. You may disagree all you want, but I think using the word "disgruntled" is a harmless way to say it. What do you think disgruntled means? It's another way to say someone is unhappy, unsatisfied about their twi involvement. Well, I think that describes some folks' actions perfectly. (Not everyone at GS Cafe, but SOME.) If one plays in the arena, one ought to be prepared to take some criticism of one's behavior, don't you think that's fair?
Now, if JAL were to come on the forums here and say it here, I think he might be in violation of the rules because we are asked not to make it personal with other posters here on the forums. But John didn't come here, someone brought John's letter to us.
I posted JAL's letter and have every right to do so; HE put it in the public domain.
Therefore, the GSC community has the right to read JAL's letter in which he states his opinion
regarding those things which he has identified as issues, and everyone here has the right to rebut his opinion,
state their own opinion, and offer critical analysis of any issue in said letter.
Disgruntled?...Hmmm, in other words, even though Vic deceived people, abused people, took their money, sexually abused women, led some to suicide...AND taught wrong doctrine...it's YOUR fault because you're "disgruntled"...why be disgruntled when you can once again leap through the magic portal, back into "wayworld"...where the snow falls plentifully on the gas pumps and "men of gawd" once again walk the earth...and of course, gawd's servant...JALVIS will humbly lead the way!
JAL never left TWI of his own volition - he was fired, and no one should ever forget that. He got disgruntled enough after being fired that he wrote at great length about what was wrong with what LCM and CG were doing, but I can assure you that he never felt that way about VPW and TWI. I believe his goal with CES was a new and improved TWI modeled after all that was good and true within TWI. I believe that because that's what he's said to me and I believe the letter makes the same point. He has never strayed far from that belief as witnessed in one of his early letters which said, "Rest assured that there is life after The Way. Although many of us have been victims of wrong doctrines and practices to varying degrees, I view my involvement as a steppingstone to greater scriptural truth. I can no longer grow spiritually within The Way’s tightening confines."
For those who wonder why he hasn't been going after fresh meat - he has. It's just not been successful. The internet is a terrible thing in terms of moving the word. Just how many of you would have bitten if you had the resources available then that you have now?
I am honored to be among what he refers to as the disgruntled.
For those who wonder why he hasn't been going after fresh meat - he has. It's just not been successful. The internet is a terrible thing in terms of moving the word. Just how many of you would have bitten if you had the resources available then that you have now?
Yes.......the internet is a terrible thing in terms of recruiting others to way doctrine.
JAL never left TWI of his own volition - he was fired, and no one should ever forget that. He got disgruntled enough after being fired that he wrote at great length about what was wrong with what LCM and CG were doing, but I can assure you that he never felt that way about VPW and TWI.
thank you for that !!!!! I actually forgot what the heck he was going on and on about in the late 80s or whenever that was. JAL, shame on you.
Speaking of John's 1988 letter, he wrote this in it regarding VPW's "doctrine" on adult sexual relations:
This esoteric doctrine has permeated the leadership structure of The Way to the end that believers all over the country know about it.
Only some, John. Only some.
Even after all these years I still haven't ever heard a full rendering of how one entered the Spiritual Mile High Club.What did one have to do from a "leadership" standpoint to hold the appropriate position. VPW and women I understand. VPW wasn't gay, his interests in that category were for women so women were the logical partners. But the men, the males.
I'd still like to know more about what qualified someone, specifically the man, to be among the Chosen Few of the "leadership structure". That might shed some light on the whistle being blown. So to speak. John was one who was in high enough and deep enough, but I've never heard that full side of the story. Or for that matter why it didn't seem repulsive to him, being married and with a daughter of his own. I think it's an honest question, no gruntles involved at all.
This might actually be one of the last, lingering questions I have. For the most part everything that happened all those years ago was a loooong time ago. Life has gone on and life by God's grace and a little effort is moving along at a swell pace.
But there's a little part of my brain that hasn't gotten that part squared up. Maybe it never will. But a simple, straightforward answer would go a long way towards that. No condemnation forthcoming, trust me. Just curious.
JAL never left TWI of his own volition - he was fired, and no one should ever forget that. He got disgruntled enough after being fired that he wrote at great length about what was wrong with what LCM and CG were doing, but I can assure you that he never felt that way about VPW and TWI.
thank you for that !!!!! I actually forgot what the heck he was going on and on about in the late 80s or whenever that was. JAL, shame on you.
.
Tzaia makes a good point. I'd forgotten that myself. JAL was fired, he never quit.
It was April 1st (forget the exact year now --- 1986?), and How@rd @llen was the one who did it.
JAL admitted to his own indiscretions, sins, whatever, publically and went on to rebuild twi ---
renamed CES with a few changes (though not many).
There's not a lot of difference between the two org's, although there is some.
JAL admitted to his own indiscretions, sins, whatever, publically and went on to rebuild twi ---
another thought. He allegedly betrayed his position of power in one organization.. what in the world makes him think he should be trusted in ANOTHER organization?
Maybe jl wasn't as depraved as loy in the old organization, but making him the one MOSTLY in charge of a "church", makes as much sense as spanking loy, and putting him in charge of research..
I'd still like to know more about what qualified someone, specifically the man, to be among the Chosen Few of the "leadership structure". That might shed some light on the whistle being blown. So to speak. John was one who was in high enough and deep enough, but I've never heard that full side of the story. Or for that matter why it didn't seem repulsive to him, being married and with a daughter of his own. I think it's an honest question, no gruntles involved at all.
I too would like to know how the progression of the deception grew from free spirited old man hippie sex among singles, to the distortion of - it is required of men of god to be able to love people, it is required among women in order to be healed, to the cynical climax of - lets just get as much sex as possible, make it a secret sect and do whatever it takes to silence any dissenters even to the destruction of souls, ladderclimb up the organization and forget about this bible stuff unless we need to use it to better our position or as a club to rule over people.
Socks, I would think you would have known about it because of your job description, and your access to the high ranking leaders, backroom people, etc. Â I know you didn't, but I would have thought all Joyful Noiser's would have been aware? Â It must have been a known quanity of who didn't fit the profile for such letchery.
They say sexual predators have a sixth sense for smelling out a new victim or one whose been previously victimized, maybe it also works for them smelling out who is just like them and who'd make a good predator and philanderer.
Maybe DontWorry can weigh in on this one too since he was there, rubbed shoulders with these guys too, and I can imagine, friends with some of them too.
A little late to rejoin this part of the conversation, but indulge me:
The problem I have with the word "disgruntled" is that it's dismissive. The word implies lack of justification for any such feeling. It doesn't say or mean the same thing as "awakened." It doesn't mean "fed up." It doesn't mean "recognizing, after all these years, that you've been HAD by a predator."
I am not a "disgruntled former follower" of The Way. I am perfectly content. When I look back on that time in my life, I am grateful that I came away unscathed. And when I see what others went through, my emotions are similar to many of theirs.
Disgruntled? No, thank you. I prefer "morally outraged!"
Speaking of John's 1988 letter, he wrote this in it regarding VPW's "doctrine" on adult sexual relations:
This esoteric doctrine has permeated the leadership structure of The Way to the end that believers all over the country know about it.
Only some, John. Only some.
Even after all these years I still haven't ever heard a full rendering of how one entered the Spiritual Mile High Club.What did one have to do from a "leadership" standpoint to hold the appropriate position. VPW and women I understand. VPW wasn't gay, his interests in that category were for women so women were the logical partners. But the men, the males.
I'd still like to know more about what qualified someone, specifically the man, to be among the Chosen Few of the "leadership structure". That might shed some light on the whistle being blown. So to speak. John was one who was in high enough and deep enough, but I've never heard that full side of the story. Or for that matter why it didn't seem repulsive to him, being married and with a daughter of his own. I think it's an honest question, no gruntles involved at all.
This might actually be one of the last, lingering questions I have. For the most part everything that happened all those years ago was a loooong time ago. Life has gone on and life by God's grace and a little effort is moving along at a swell pace.
But there's a little part of my brain that hasn't gotten that part squared up. Maybe it never will. But a simple, straightforward answer would go a long way towards that. No condemnation forthcoming, trust me. Just curious.
Socks,
I was never able to get a straight answer from JAL about this, and I did ask. I also asked PL and how she could involve her kid in all of this (much of which came out through Momentus) and she couldn't tell me exactly how she wrapped her mind around it, but I knew she felt awful about what her child experienced.
I found that the good-looking single corp guys seemed to be groomed to help bring ladies to the class by whatever means deemed necessary. I had one girl who served on the one team I was a part of tell me that she was in what she thought was a relationship only to have the guy break off the relationship once she took the class. She felt used, but struggled with why she felt used. The guy told her that now that she was a sister in Christ that it was inappropriate for them to have that kind of relationship, and she was kinda buying it, until I told her it was just wrong. I confronted him about it and I was told that anything was acceptable to "bring people to Christ" including sex. I asked for a chapter and verse on that one and was told that obviously I was not spiritual enough to understand. He was trying to play some of that mind-sh1t on me and I told him I wasn't buying it. I also told him that it was really a sad thing that he was unable to bring a woman to Christ without being dishonest, and how that reflected poorly on him and TWI. He got pretty sh!tty with me, and I dished it right back, which he was absolutely not used to. He reminded me that he was in the corp and I told him I didn't care; he was wrong to do what he did. I told him that as his sister in Christ that I was obligated to reprove, correct, and instruct and I didn't give a crap whether he was corp or not. It got ugly.
I came home and told my husband who had been WOW and taken about every class available, including the advanced class. He knew nothing about the ok to use sex to bring people to Christ thing, so for a long time we assumed that it was not a normal thing - even though VPW once gave me the once-over that only a lecher can do. Once things broke open, it appeared to be something that was a part of the corp experience if you were deemed "spiritual" enough. I see it as how someone feels people out for whether they do drugs, are into swinging, or open to adultery. Someone who is up for those activities responds to the "hints" one gives. I knew that VPW was throwing out hints, but my husband didn't believe me until other people came forward with stories of his behavior. How did I know? Because I've done the same thing. As I told my husband, it takes one to know one. VPW was very good at being subtle in finding targets and he had a whole group of people who were dedicated to seeing that the MOGOTW got what he needed. He built it into the curriculum.
A little late to rejoin this part of the conversation, but indulge me:
The problem I have with the word "disgruntled" is that it's dismissive. The word implies lack of justification for any such feeling. It doesn't say or mean the same thing as "awakened." It doesn't mean "fed up." It doesn't mean "recognizing, after all these years, that you've been HAD by a predator."
I am not a "disgruntled former follower" of The Way. I am perfectly content. When I look back on that time in my life, I am grateful that I came away unscathed. And when I see what others went through, my emotions are similar to many of theirs.
Disgruntled? No, thank you. I prefer "morally outraged!"
I think JAL's response amounts to wondering why people don't simply let it go, which is easy to say if you are in his position. I think that many responsible people continuing to dance around this issue is what contributes to keeping the fires burning.
Why are any of these predators being protected? I have never understood that mentality.
Ok Ex, I'm going to get graphic here. What were these women thinking? VPW was stinky and gross. I mean at least LCM was somewhat easy on the eyes, if you go for the flaky blond types, but VP was just gross. Don't people have any standards, for cryin' out loud?
Ok Ex, I'm going to get graphic here. What were these women thinking? VPW was stinky and gross. I mean at least LCM was somewhat easy on the eyes, if you go for the flaky blond types, but VP was just gross. Don't people have any standards, for cryin' out loud?
It's really not about that. It's about these men using the penis as a weapon. These women didn't necessarily find either of them attractive or within their standards of the kind of man to go for.
Ok Ex, I'm going to get graphic here. What were these women thinking? VPW was stinky and gross. I mean at least LCM was somewhat easy on the eyes, if you go for the flaky blond types, but VP was just gross. Don't people have any standards, for cryin' out loud?
It's really not about that. It's about these men using the penis as a weapon. These women didn't necessarily find either of them attractive or within their standards of the kind of man to go for.
And don't forget... they were brainwashed into thinking that they were serving God by meeting the Man'O'God's needs.
Thanks for the response Tzaia. I don't know the answer and I think - just my guess - it's avoidance. It's something he doesn't want to talk about and if pressed won't respond directly to. It might have to do with not wanting to drag PXX through it all, then and now. Which is understandable but - that's exactly what he did to others by pointing out these errors and wrongs in others publicly. Others were pantsed in public, but I think it's obvious he deflected direct confrontation to himself. So be it, but I would say the playing field wasn't level.
In fact, there's an element of distraction to it - a "look at this! look here!", directing traffic away from himself...? As posted, he got fired, directly, by H. Allen. That burned a lot of people when it happened to them - I think he figured, hey. This is me. Me, John Lynn. They have to listen to me. A lot of people thought that. They forgot - "no friends when it comes to the Word/protecting our interests" trumps "you're always welcome at the Way"...every time, no matter who you are. Even I knew that - it's why I didn't bother with a final hurrah on the way out. I didn't need their permission, recognition or lies. And they did tell some whoppers about people at that time as soon as they got the chance.
now I see - my own story is one of contrasts. Because I was in love with a wonderful person at the time I first met all of these folks I wasn't interested in being a playah. I was soon married and by the time we went into the Way Corp program we were well into developing our lives together. So I'm sure neither of us seemed we'd be approachable on this whole topic.
I never heard anything direct on it taught, never saw or heard it in any meetings, and I was in a lot of meetings where a lot of things were discussed and dealt with. No one every told me about the wonderful benefits of "sexual healing" ministering capabilites. And frankly I feel kind of left out. I know it's not a joking matter but there is an odd kind of humor to the whole thing. Secret. Because some of you may not be able to handle it.
Which is fine by me since everyone who got mixed up in the whole deal pretty much shot their relationships full of holes, with few exceptions. But I had little ability to help and looking back I'm not sure what I would have done. Hopefully the right thing.
In contrast to what I was trying to do with building a solid relationship (now 38 years in the making) with a wife, I came out of some very hmmm...not so good personal years before that. I was deeply, deeply esconced in illegal drug use, large both in quantity and breadth. Many of my associations were with people of questionable character. My interests and friends were extremely esoteric, to say the least. In some ways I was in another world much of the time. Reasonably safe most of the time but looking back there were many more "lost" weeks than I care to remember, which I do with some difficulty. :)
So, in a very odd way, much of what I encountered in the earliest Way years was a breath of fresh air and very normal and "grounded" compared to where I'd been visiting before that. I gave up drug use over time and then finally, cold. Since that final day I've never used any of those things again. So I quickly became a "square". I tried drinking, the party mentality, while in the Way. It didn't last long, I found then as now that I really, really enjoy having a clear head and mind. Trust me, I'm very glad to have left that all behind.
So - I probably seemed a little dazed during those years, and I probably was. But not fertile ground for this stuff. I was trying to get my mind back, get it right, not mess it up.
Recommended Posts
Top Posters In This Topic
19
20
16
25
Popular Days
Jul 3
36
Jul 2
32
Jul 1
23
Aug 8
21
Top Posters In This Topic
Tzaia 19 posts
Ham 20 posts
rhino 16 posts
doojable 25 posts
Popular Days
Jul 3 2008
36 posts
Jul 2 2008
32 posts
Jul 1 2008
23 posts
Aug 8 2008
21 posts
Popular Posts
geisha779
The letter of Assumptions--by St. John the divine of Indiana This is what happens when people isolate themselves from the Christian community at large. No accountibility. John, get out there and mee
geisha779
Word Wolf--That. . . was. . . an. . . AWESOME read!! Thank-you for that effort. Astute very astute!
WordWolf
Here we go again....
He has a right to his opinion, and if there's factual errors in what he says, we have rights to point that
out and discuss them. (Or, if he was correct, rights to agree.)
The error we were addressing this moment was the "false dilemma" of his categorizations.
EVERYONE you can get information on twi about-
except him and his organization-
are either
-the media (which he pronounces "much of that false")
-other Christians (which he pronounces "much of that false")
-and DISGRUNTLED former followers (which he pronounces "much of that true, some of it false").
So, he's declaring right out that the only place to get non-false information is HIM and his organization.
Further, if former followers speak up at all, he's CATEGORICALLY labelled them "disgruntled".
That's why Raf replied:
"Nice. Nice. Those are the only three categories listed.
The Media
Other [presumably non-Way] Christians
Disgruntled former followers
How about this for a category, JAL: Former followers. Not disgruntled. Shun the judgmental adjective. You have NO RIGHT to refer to me or anyone else as disgruntled, a word you use to dismiss the valid complaints being made by those who have every right to stand up to treachery of VPW."
Don't you realize what his categorization has done?
You've spoken about twi.
According to JAL, since you're not a member of the Media, and not a non-twi Christian, you're "DISGRUNTLED". So's Mike.
Now, Mike has objected to being called "disgruntled." Don't YOU?
Stop and listen to Mike for a moment!
Mike said:
"A person should be considered gruntled until proven disgruntled."
We think it is not."Some criticism"? Yes-depending on the form of criticism. If he came here and said "I consider you 'disgruntled',
I'd discuss whether or not it applied. But we objected the BLANKET LABEL, the CATEGORIZATION, that to be
ex-twi and to speak on it is to be "disgruntled". For that matter, I'd object to ANY blanket label or categorization,
and I think the others would as well.
As to "the arena", I'll take my criticism "in the arena" from those there, thank you.
Let's have open dialogue.
HAHAHAHAHA!Ever consider doing a lounge act? Mitch Hedberg's dead, so there's the vacancy for a good observational comic out there...
If JAL were to DISCUSS here, he'd be granted every benefit of polite discourse here.
He'd even be allowed to NOT reveal who he is, to wear an alias, an internet handle, and speak,
and let the strength of his words, and his logic, carry weight- or FAIL to carry weight, as the case may be.
If JAL were to come here and just announce "everyone who posts here is disgruntled", he'd receive the recompense
of his blanket accusation, which is deserved. That's because HE would have arrived and MADE IT PERSONAL.
"I've just arrived. The rest of you are illogical, angry, emotional and hurtful."
In case you missed it, he ALREADY made it personal in his letter-but he didn't mention us by name.
Feel free to think that if your name isn't mentioned, you're not being referred to- but, you know, you've concluded
the opposite to that before, and objected to labels nobody said they DEFINITELY meant for you, you've read
the descriptions and context- as we did here- and drew what you thought was the logical conclusion...
Here's a novel idea- how about JAL NOT make it personal ANYWHERE- at least outside any place that made him a
leader- and just deal with us as siblings under God?
JAL's letter was posted on the internet, at the ces/stfi website.
JAL HAD to have given his approval for that. JAL's been giving his approval for a few of his public statements
down the years- and his responses, GENERALLY (not counting the very beginning of CES, when there was an
active messageboard with civil discussions) he's insisted on controlling the microphone.
It's as honest as the politician who takes questions from the audience-
but to get IN the audience, you had to be a supporter of his to begin with....
JAL's taken shots at us before, safe behind his "I don't go on messageboards" podium.
It was wrong then, it's wrong now.
And we have a right to CALL him on it when he's being arrogant.
Edited by WordWolfLink to comment
Share on other sites
bfh
I posted JAL's letter and have every right to do so; HE put it in the public domain.
Therefore, the GSC community has the right to read JAL's letter in which he states his opinion
regarding those things which he has identified as issues, and everyone here has the right to rebut his opinion,
state their own opinion, and offer critical analysis of any issue in said letter.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Tzaia
JAL never left TWI of his own volition - he was fired, and no one should ever forget that. He got disgruntled enough after being fired that he wrote at great length about what was wrong with what LCM and CG were doing, but I can assure you that he never felt that way about VPW and TWI. I believe his goal with CES was a new and improved TWI modeled after all that was good and true within TWI. I believe that because that's what he's said to me and I believe the letter makes the same point. He has never strayed far from that belief as witnessed in one of his early letters which said, "Rest assured that there is life after The Way. Although many of us have been victims of wrong doctrines and practices to varying degrees, I view my involvement as a steppingstone to greater scriptural truth. I can no longer grow spiritually within The Way’s tightening confines."
For those who wonder why he hasn't been going after fresh meat - he has. It's just not been successful. The internet is a terrible thing in terms of moving the word. Just how many of you would have bitten if you had the resources available then that you have now?
I am honored to be among what he refers to as the disgruntled.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
rascal
Amen Tzaia..it is a disgrace NOT to be a disgruntled former follower :)
Link to comment
Share on other sites
skyrider
Yes.......the internet is a terrible thing in terms of recruiting others to way doctrine.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
excathedra
Link to comment
Share on other sites
socks
Speaking of John's 1988 letter, he wrote this in it regarding VPW's "doctrine" on adult sexual relations:
This esoteric doctrine has permeated the leadership structure of The Way to the end that believers all over the country know about it.
Only some, John. Only some.
Even after all these years I still haven't ever heard a full rendering of how one entered the Spiritual Mile High Club.What did one have to do from a "leadership" standpoint to hold the appropriate position. VPW and women I understand. VPW wasn't gay, his interests in that category were for women so women were the logical partners. But the men, the males.
I'd still like to know more about what qualified someone, specifically the man, to be among the Chosen Few of the "leadership structure". That might shed some light on the whistle being blown. So to speak. John was one who was in high enough and deep enough, but I've never heard that full side of the story. Or for that matter why it didn't seem repulsive to him, being married and with a daughter of his own. I think it's an honest question, no gruntles involved at all.
This might actually be one of the last, lingering questions I have. For the most part everything that happened all those years ago was a loooong time ago. Life has gone on and life by God's grace and a little effort is moving along at a swell pace.
But there's a little part of my brain that hasn't gotten that part squared up. Maybe it never will. But a simple, straightforward answer would go a long way towards that. No condemnation forthcoming, trust me. Just curious.
Edited by socksLink to comment
Share on other sites
dmiller
Tzaia makes a good point. I'd forgotten that myself. JAL was fired, he never quit.
It was April 1st (forget the exact year now --- 1986?), and How@rd @llen was the one who did it.
JAL admitted to his own indiscretions, sins, whatever, publically and went on to rebuild twi ---
renamed CES with a few changes (though not many).
There's not a lot of difference between the two org's, although there is some.
Edited by dmillerLink to comment
Share on other sites
Ham
another thought. He allegedly betrayed his position of power in one organization.. what in the world makes him think he should be trusted in ANOTHER organization?
Maybe jl wasn't as depraved as loy in the old organization, but making him the one MOSTLY in charge of a "church", makes as much sense as spanking loy, and putting him in charge of research..
Link to comment
Share on other sites
now I see
I too would like to know how the progression of the deception grew from free spirited old man hippie sex among singles, to the distortion of - it is required of men of god to be able to love people, it is required among women in order to be healed, to the cynical climax of - lets just get as much sex as possible, make it a secret sect and do whatever it takes to silence any dissenters even to the destruction of souls, ladderclimb up the organization and forget about this bible stuff unless we need to use it to better our position or as a club to rule over people.
Socks, I would think you would have known about it because of your job description, and your access to the high ranking leaders, backroom people, etc. Â I know you didn't, but I would have thought all Joyful Noiser's would have been aware? Â It must have been a known quanity of who didn't fit the profile for such letchery.
They say sexual predators have a sixth sense for smelling out a new victim or one whose been previously victimized, maybe it also works for them smelling out who is just like them and who'd make a good predator and philanderer.
Maybe DontWorry can weigh in on this one too since he was there, rubbed shoulders with these guys too, and I can imagine, friends with some of them too.
Edited by now I seeLink to comment
Share on other sites
Raf
A little late to rejoin this part of the conversation, but indulge me:
The problem I have with the word "disgruntled" is that it's dismissive. The word implies lack of justification for any such feeling. It doesn't say or mean the same thing as "awakened." It doesn't mean "fed up." It doesn't mean "recognizing, after all these years, that you've been HAD by a predator."
I am not a "disgruntled former follower" of The Way. I am perfectly content. When I look back on that time in my life, I am grateful that I came away unscathed. And when I see what others went through, my emotions are similar to many of theirs.
Disgruntled? No, thank you. I prefer "morally outraged!"
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Tzaia
Socks,
I was never able to get a straight answer from JAL about this, and I did ask. I also asked PL and how she could involve her kid in all of this (much of which came out through Momentus) and she couldn't tell me exactly how she wrapped her mind around it, but I knew she felt awful about what her child experienced.
I found that the good-looking single corp guys seemed to be groomed to help bring ladies to the class by whatever means deemed necessary. I had one girl who served on the one team I was a part of tell me that she was in what she thought was a relationship only to have the guy break off the relationship once she took the class. She felt used, but struggled with why she felt used. The guy told her that now that she was a sister in Christ that it was inappropriate for them to have that kind of relationship, and she was kinda buying it, until I told her it was just wrong. I confronted him about it and I was told that anything was acceptable to "bring people to Christ" including sex. I asked for a chapter and verse on that one and was told that obviously I was not spiritual enough to understand. He was trying to play some of that mind-sh1t on me and I told him I wasn't buying it. I also told him that it was really a sad thing that he was unable to bring a woman to Christ without being dishonest, and how that reflected poorly on him and TWI. He got pretty sh!tty with me, and I dished it right back, which he was absolutely not used to. He reminded me that he was in the corp and I told him I didn't care; he was wrong to do what he did. I told him that as his sister in Christ that I was obligated to reprove, correct, and instruct and I didn't give a crap whether he was corp or not. It got ugly.
I came home and told my husband who had been WOW and taken about every class available, including the advanced class. He knew nothing about the ok to use sex to bring people to Christ thing, so for a long time we assumed that it was not a normal thing - even though VPW once gave me the once-over that only a lecher can do. Once things broke open, it appeared to be something that was a part of the corp experience if you were deemed "spiritual" enough. I see it as how someone feels people out for whether they do drugs, are into swinging, or open to adultery. Someone who is up for those activities responds to the "hints" one gives. I knew that VPW was throwing out hints, but my husband didn't believe me until other people came forward with stories of his behavior. How did I know? Because I've done the same thing. As I told my husband, it takes one to know one. VPW was very good at being subtle in finding targets and he had a whole group of people who were dedicated to seeing that the MOGOTW got what he needed. He built it into the curriculum.
Edited by TzaiaLink to comment
Share on other sites
Tzaia
I think JAL's response amounts to wondering why people don't simply let it go, which is easy to say if you are in his position. I think that many responsible people continuing to dance around this issue is what contributes to keeping the fires burning.
Why are any of these predators being protected? I have never understood that mentality.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
excathedra
I liked that, Raf, "morally outraged" vs. "disgruntled"
Tz
ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha
It's really not funny in any way, shape or form, but it just hit me the right way.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Tzaia
Ex,
It was meant to be funny. The thought of VPW naked makes me want to puke.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
excathedra
oh good thanks !!!! tell me about it lol lol lol
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Tzaia
Ok Ex, I'm going to get graphic here. What were these women thinking? VPW was stinky and gross. I mean at least LCM was somewhat easy on the eyes, if you go for the flaky blond types, but VP was just gross. Don't people have any standards, for cryin' out loud?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
excathedra
there's only one standard and that's the word !!!!!!!!!!!! ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha haha
--
but in all seriousness, when you don't have your right mind, or you've been abused as a child by a gross man.... etc. etc.
power / abuse / whatever is a very strange thing
it's very far from an "affair" or attractiveness, etc.
lucky for him
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Shellon
It's really not about that. It's about these men using the penis as a weapon. These women didn't necessarily find either of them attractive or within their standards of the kind of man to go for.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
excathedra
too true
the psychological stuff is what it's about
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mark Clarke
And don't forget... they were brainwashed into thinking that they were serving God by meeting the Man'O'God's needs.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
excathedra
And THAT, Mark, is what is so heartbreaking.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
socks
Thanks for the response Tzaia. I don't know the answer and I think - just my guess - it's avoidance. It's something he doesn't want to talk about and if pressed won't respond directly to. It might have to do with not wanting to drag PXX through it all, then and now. Which is understandable but - that's exactly what he did to others by pointing out these errors and wrongs in others publicly. Others were pantsed in public, but I think it's obvious he deflected direct confrontation to himself. So be it, but I would say the playing field wasn't level.
In fact, there's an element of distraction to it - a "look at this! look here!", directing traffic away from himself...? As posted, he got fired, directly, by H. Allen. That burned a lot of people when it happened to them - I think he figured, hey. This is me. Me, John Lynn. They have to listen to me. A lot of people thought that. They forgot - "no friends when it comes to the Word/protecting our interests" trumps "you're always welcome at the Way"...every time, no matter who you are. Even I knew that - it's why I didn't bother with a final hurrah on the way out. I didn't need their permission, recognition or lies. And they did tell some whoppers about people at that time as soon as they got the chance.
now I see - my own story is one of contrasts. Because I was in love with a wonderful person at the time I first met all of these folks I wasn't interested in being a playah. I was soon married and by the time we went into the Way Corp program we were well into developing our lives together. So I'm sure neither of us seemed we'd be approachable on this whole topic.
I never heard anything direct on it taught, never saw or heard it in any meetings, and I was in a lot of meetings where a lot of things were discussed and dealt with. No one every told me about the wonderful benefits of "sexual healing" ministering capabilites. And frankly I feel kind of left out.
I know it's not a joking matter but there is an odd kind of humor to the whole thing. Secret. Because some of you may not be able to handle it.
Which is fine by me since everyone who got mixed up in the whole deal pretty much shot their relationships full of holes, with few exceptions. But I had little ability to help and looking back I'm not sure what I would have done. Hopefully the right thing.
In contrast to what I was trying to do with building a solid relationship (now 38 years in the making) with a wife, I came out of some very hmmm...not so good personal years before that. I was deeply, deeply esconced in illegal drug use, large both in quantity and breadth. Many of my associations were with people of questionable character. My interests and friends were extremely esoteric, to say the least. In some ways I was in another world much of the time. Reasonably safe most of the time but looking back there were many more "lost" weeks than I care to remember, which I do with some difficulty. :)
So, in a very odd way, much of what I encountered in the earliest Way years was a breath of fresh air and very normal and "grounded" compared to where I'd been visiting before that. I gave up drug use over time and then finally, cold. Since that final day I've never used any of those things again. So I quickly became a "square". I tried drinking, the party mentality, while in the Way. It didn't last long, I found then as now that I really, really enjoy having a clear head and mind. Trust me, I'm very glad to have left that all behind.
So - I probably seemed a little dazed during those years, and I probably was. But not fertile ground for this stuff. I was trying to get my mind back, get it right, not mess it up.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
excathedra
socks, i love you, and appreciate your post
I do want to ask you, though, didn't you see or sense some things, especially with veepee / motorcoach etc.?
If not, that' fine. I'm certainly not trying to accuse you of anything AT ALL ever ever ever.
Same thing with Don'tWorry.
But young gals on and off the bus, and just the way he was, traveling etc.
Did you or your wonderful wives ever say to each other, or think, what the ????
--
ps. oh never mind the ps.
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.