quote:When you read only the letter that we have access to, it doesn't really come off as all that bad. But what you miss is the context and the follow-up. What you also miss is the actual text of a letter that uses the words "swear a loyalty oath" or anything like it. While those who had alternate letters sent to them are trustworthy in my book, memory isn't always the most reliabale thing in the world. I'd really like to see one of those letters that used the term "swear a loyalty oath".
Oakspear, you brought some interesting comments. Thanks. I think peoples opinions on the letter is in what spirit you took it in. The way I took it, Craig was asking for folks to stand with him in the continued movement of God's Word. He says it a couple of times. Here's another quote:
quote:If you cannot whole-heartedly stand on God's Word with me as you continue to be full-or part-time with The Way International, then you should resign.
What he was asking for was a show of support to begin anew, asking for support to stand with him in the movement of God's Word. Here's another quote:
quote:I am sorry that things have come to this point, but I need to have men and women working with me who truly want to do so. ...
At that time there were lots of folks who didn't want to work with Craig, but this was an opportunity for them to change their minds and give him another chance. Did he deserve it? Probably not, but that's besides the point. He was looking for support, for a clean break from the past. Now don't get me wrong...he's the one who started this mess by opening his big mouth about POP, after coming back from Gartmore. But I think he was looking to start with a clean slate.
quote:If the leader of the group that you have toiled and sweated for, and given your money to, was being attacked, it would be cowardly to stay neutral by saying "I stand with God, not with any man".
Very good point. It would have been much better for folks to come right out and say they thought Craig wasn't up for the job, he screwed up and I no longer want to stand with him. But instead some said "I stand with God, not with any man". What was hypocritical was the folks saying that, the Geerites, were STANDING WITH MEN. The people that followed them were standing with men. This doesn't apply to everyone but I thought those pointing fingers needed to look in the mirror and see themselves doing the same thing.
Were you by chance very supportive of Craig about the time of the loyaly letters? Say '89 or so? Just curious ...I am wondering if it is possible that your defense of Craig's demand for loyaly is based upon a decision that you made at the time - a decision that maybe you don't want to consider now as possibly not so good.
If I had thought that Craig was the true Mogfodat at the time, and that TWI was truly God's ministry then I would have taken the oath - no problem.
Oldies, what did you think at that time? Did you beleive that Craig was "The Man of God" and deserving of loyalty -- Many folks did. But looking back in hindsight what do you believe now? Was he really?
It seems that many folks exited TWI about the time of the loyalty letters, refusing to take the oath for various reasons. It also stands to reason that quite a few did decide to give give their loyalty to Craig at this time (for whatever reasons).
Those who did not receive letters directly must surely have been affected also, and still had to make a decision. I know that if I had been leadership and had taken a oath to Craig, (willingly or not) that I probably would have demanded or expected the same from those under me.
Goey, Yes I was supportive of Craig at the time. I was a twiggy, not needing to send him a letter of support but would have because I had no problem with me supporting him at that time. I didn't see Craig as "the Man of God of our Day and Time". I saw him as my brother in Christ who was going to try to do his best to lead the ministry. In that spirit, I thought it was good to give him my support.
Goey, the thing is, he never said it was a demand for loyalty; you and others are saying that. That is your interpretation of the letter. I never saw it that way; I saw it as being supportive of a man, standing with him to move the Word. To stop thinking evil of him, if that was the case, or at least giving him a fresh clean slate. Doesn't mean that you need to be loyal to him for evermore. Did he say that? No, but you and others are thinking that and coming off like that.
Again oldies...it was NOT a letter of support that we were asked to send...it was an OATH of LOYALTY!!!
It wasn`t like we got our panties in a wad and decided to leave in a huff....It took much prayerfull consideration of what was being asked.....our letter was very clear as to what was being demanded.....We mourned our decision ...it was not an easy choice to make...
We were very unhappy to have been put in that position....it tore us up to have to refuse a direct request from the head of what we believed to be God`s ministry...
.... we were told NOT to give him the standing with God *CRAP*!! Standing with God was crap...ok???
We did not think standing with God was crap....period....we had already had direct experience with Craigs lack of discernment abilities on several occasions....we KNEW what swearing an oath of loyalty entailed....we knew what we were promising to do....and Mark had the integrity to go against all that we held dear...all that we felt important in this life....and refused.... He knew that his loyalty was to God and no man.
I mourned his decision for us at the time...but in hind sight I can say that I have never been prouder.
I remember reading VF's letter in reply to lcm--not one thing in it about his decision to "stand with" cg. I am not aware of VF ever publicly declaring himself "for" cg. Your understanding of events seems a tad skewed, om. Guess you ended up happy with "choosing" lcm, eh??? I also received the letter rascal did--it came some number of months after the salaried staff and corps received -- perhaps 2, maybe 3. At this point, lcm had received mostly unfavorable replys so he was a bit more "blunt" in the letter to the rest of us "volunteer" kork grads. So perhaps you now know the rest of the story, om.....
I can verify what Alfakat said.
I also read the letter that V.F. sent, as well as the letter his secretary G.M. sent.
I am/was good friends with G.M. She is one of the people who came to visit me when I was stationed in Germany, and I used to visit her about once a month in NY when I came back from Germany.
Rascal, you made excellent points about the letter and what it meant to people.
I had recently left, but I heard about the letter. I had also been under VF and he had definitely gone after CG and took all the corps with him except me and one other person. They were extremely nasty to us because we wouldn't accept CG was the MOG.
Anyway, your points about how we were sold out, had been trained to be sold out and had almost NEVER, rarely ever said no to leadership were excellent. I think people like OM have no idea what the hardship of deciding what to do about the loyalty oath that LCM required did to people. Also, knowing that if you did not stay "loyal" to LCM, there goes your world, which for many of us who had entered the WC as teenaged hippies - and now were in their 30s - this was a huge deal.
Then, to have to go against everything you had been taught about "commitment" to the ministry, and say - No - I cannot stand with a man.
I have said before, I think God used the POP experience to open the door to get us out of TWI, and I think after three years, this demand of LCM's set the rest of the captives free.
Do I know you? I do remember using that phrase about those who stayed being "heroes of the counter-revolution"...
Well, this has stirred me up a bit ot be sure. And I certainly echo so much of what Rascal is saying. I know what I read, and it wasn't a "simple request" to stand with the ministry. He wanted a refutation of all that was Geer, and wanted total loyalty to him. And like Rascal said;
quote: as Mark and I were completely committed to serving in twi for the rest of our lives....we never concieved of a life outside of twi....and continued serving as best we could in SPITE of the lack of decency shown because of our refusal to comply with a demand that wasn`t Craigs to make.
He was not right on....The man in charge of twi our ministry...the one we trusted with our lives.....was not spiritual sound.......we had to face that reality for the first time...we had to for the first time in both our adult lives stand up and say no to our leadership....neither of us had ever contemplated NOT doing what our leaders and ministry deemed necessary for God.....we were completely sold out....for God`s sake oak...I aborted a wanted child oas per *recomendation* from leadership......I was SOLD out!!! Do you honestly think that our refusal was not seriously, carefully considered ...and at last mournfully refused to be bullied into a wrong action?????
I could just replace the name Mark with my wife's name at the top of Rascal's quote. Except for the abortion thing of course.
I was clergy, and this, The Way Ministry was "It" for me. But, when I took that salt covenant, I made an oath to God and not to men, and I was in agony when it appeared that Craig had tipped over like he did, because I knew that there would be no turing back for him. I knew deep within that he would change everything in the Way, rewrite Way history, change the Word, compromise, everything. And obviously, he did, and really lost his marbles. One of the things VPW said via POP was that if Craig didn't change, he would "lash out" at those who didn't agree with him, but I wasn't around for all of that. But I did hear that there was a lot of screaming and shouting from LCM during thos last years he was there. That is true, right? I am so thankful that I did listen to God and leave. Thankful for my wife and my sweet children too. And thankful for my friends who made that same decision too
[This message was edited by Jonny Lingo on March 23, 2004 at 8:57.]
It seems to me that you are ignoring the fact that there was more than just the one "loyalty letter". So far you have not seemed to even have acknowledged that there was more than one letter. Rascal and other have told you that on numerous occasions. Do you think they are lying or making this stuff up? -- I don't.
My "interpretation" of these letters as a "demand" for loyalty, is not based soley upon the one letter that can be seen HERE-- But is also based upon the testimony of others like Rascal who received a letter that required an oath of loyalty. It also considers the fact that those who did not demonstrate their loyalty to Craig by oath were dismissed.
How can you simply ignore these things?
Wouldn't you think that you should consider all of the evidence on this loyalty stuff, instead of just taking that one letter at face value and ignoring what others are telling you really happened and the context in which it happened?
I was in the middle of posting this last night and we had a power outage. Thank goodness I was using Word to type it ….
Okay - I'm going to get beat up about this one….
When that letter came out, I felt that I shouldn't have received it. I wasn't on staff or a paid leader. I felt no urge to answer it. I was never asked to either. I can’t speak for John, but I don’t recall either of us ever being told to write to LCM in response to his letter.
I remember thinking about the letter from a business point of view. If I worked for a company selling a product, and gave the money I made on that product to my most fierce competitor, I would have been immediately fired for doing so. I know that's the way it would happen in corporate America.
Well, my pea-brain figured - TWI is a corporation, and the CEO was actually giving his employees another chance to keep on working for the company. I didn’t think he was all that off base. Maybe a bit too over the top emotionally – with the loyalty and allegiance stuff, but I figured that was Craig – he always got wound up about things more than he needed to.
Frankly, at the time, I was glad to see he was back to his old “rah-rah” self. He’d been wimped out for a few years. I didn’t like Geer at all, never did, and I couldn’t see myself being a part of anything he was running. And I thought POP was a bunch of hogwash as well (still do- pffffffffffffft).
I thought it was wrong that people were "stealing" the PFAL class at the time as well (ah, the morals I had before Napster!). After all, those tapes and videos were owned by TWI and the BC's and LC's who kept them had no right to do so. (Hey, if they wanted them for personal use, they should have made copies of them and returned the originals to HQ’s ;)--> ). But I really felt it was the wrong thing to do. I still think some people who kept the classes felt they were on some kind of mission from God to save PFAL from the evil doers at HQ’s.
Okay – so we stayed in. It was hard. All our good friends left. We felt we had no alternatives – and we’d looked at all the spin-offs that were around at the time (church wasn't even a consideration). We figured things had to get better now that Craig was his old self.
Unfortunately – he wasn’t his old self – he became mean and more stringent and harsh and unloving. His ego exploded. It took a few years to come to a head. At the time of the letter, we figured all would be well again and he was a better choice than Geer.
I think the letter served its purpose. It did push most people over the edge to make a decision, and frankly, the people who were on Waypay shouldn’t have been receiving it if they were supporting Geer. Remember, at the time all the leaders’ housing and cars and clothing and even some furniture was paid for by TWI. I know of a Limb Coor. couple who were living in a 6,000 square foot mansion that TWI was renting for them who were promoting Geer. I even know of one leader here in Tampa whose monthly mortgage payment was being made by TWI.
So that’s where I stood on the letter at the time. I don’t know how I feel about it now. Haven’t read it carefully enough to decide – and the others who have posted here have made some great points. I guess I just wasn’t “spurtchul” enough to get it at the time.
quote:Wouldn't you think that you should consider all of the evidence on this loyalty stuff, instead of just taking that one letter at face value and ignoring what others are telling you really happened and the context in which it happened?
Goey, I will defer to Oakspear's comment before I change my opinion. His quote:
quote:I'd really like to see one of those letters that used the term "swear a loyalty oath".
It seems to me that the situation around the original letter posted here and the additional letters that we may never get a copy of are similar to the debt situation.
Most of the hurt, abuse and fear imposed on the people of twi came verbally, through the "chain of command" and through lunch time sharings, WC meetings, etc. There just isn't much in writing to validate what happened, but it did happen.
People were forced to swear loyalty to a man, a ministry and not God...in both situations. One couple refused to sell their home and the WC overseers told everyone they loved their house more than they loved God. Another couple was told that their child was seriously injured in a car wreck because they were in debt with their house. Every couple was verbally coerced into selling their homes, but there is nothing in writing saying that TWI demands that they sell their house.
If someone were to merely read the one letter posted here, I could see how they would miss the big picture and all the threats, coercion and b.s. that was behind the letter. It doesn't mean it didn't happen. This was the beginning of Craig's ever increasing appetite for power and control.
But it seems to me that you are looking at the letter from a mostly business viewpoint and not from a spiritual/blblical one (you said as much) Both are valid views, but in a different way.
If TWI had promoted itself as a "business" then I could accept your point of view. However it did not. It represeted itself as God's ministry.
You said "the letter served it's purpose", and then spoke of all the money it saved TWI - the "business". Was that the purpose of the letter in your opinion - to save TWI money as a business?
If that is the case, then wouldn't that make all the spiritual/biblical dialog in the letter(s) just rhetoric and a smoke screen for it's real purpose - money in TWI's coffers?
My question then to you is this -- In your opinion did the letter(s) serve any Godly purpose? In other words was it "right on with with the Word" to use TWI's old vernacular.
Good point about Craig's ego. Obviously, it spiralled way out of control in the 90's. His narcissism had to have been lurking around somewhere, even if it wasn't as blatently visible until he totally went over the edge, in the 90's, and became a raving lunatic.
PJ ;)--> God bless her wonderful soul! I have my kids today because of her...
It really was different being in the way corps, than being a twig coordinator or WOW. I think those of us who were in the corpse have a totally different perspective for the reasons that Rascal, Radar, and Johnny mentioned.
quote: I think the letter served its purpose. It did push most people over the edge to make a decision, and frankly, the people who were on Waypay shouldn’t have been receiving it if they were supporting Geer. Remember, at the time all the leaders’ housing and cars and clothing and even some furniture was paid for by TWI. I know of a Limb Coor. couple who were living in a 6,000 square foot mansion that TWI was renting for them who were promoting Geer. I even know of one leader here in Tampa whose monthly mortgage payment was being made by TWI.
Hope, good point. Another way to look at it was, since at the time I was standing with TWI and Craig, I didn't want my ABS going to these folks who at the time complain about how bad TWI and Craig was. "If you don't like it, leave already" was the thought that went through my mind sometimes.
I think you have a point, as long as we all keep it in perspective. Of course it makes sense that people who oppose TWI should leave TWI. Craig was right to expect that.
Based on what's been revealed here and on Waydale, I don't think there was necessarily a right or wrong decision at the time. I think history proves those who left at the time made the right decision. We were spared the "thank God for making Craig Martindale the spiritual head of this ministry" nonsense. We were spared the "homo purges" and the patently unChristian, gutter-language letter LCM sent on that subject, we were spared WAP, we were spared the no-debt policy, the cancellation of ROA, the "genuine spiritual suspicion," and the list goes on.
Those who left were also far less likely to stick to Geer as time went on. Sure, some people did. Some still do. But many more do not. It seems a whole lot of us took that "no carnality" rhetoric to heart. Even if VF did make a carnal decision at the time (I don't know if he did, but you make a decent case), in the long run he did not. I think there's something to be said for that.
I for one am glad LCM sent that letter. And I'm glad I went to ROA for myself, rather than blindly following the New York leadership out the door. The whole episode taught me, in ways that words never could, that leadership and trust SHOULD go hand in hand, but WON'T necessarily do so. If titles impressed me at one point in my life, they no longer do.
During the mid 80s LCM became AWARE that he was the head of a "multi million dollar corporation." TWI was embroiled in the IRS tax case, Ernst and Young had their own office space in the OSC finance department (along with their own telephone ext etc.)
The word "MINISTRY," as in WAY MINISTRY was seldom uttered, it was THE WAY INTERNATIONAL. There is no doubt in my mind that the loyalty issue was strictly a business issue. We had lost 4/5 of the leadership, no one KNEW where several of the top trunk and root locale leadership REALLY stood on the topic of Martindale vs Geer. We used to joke around about one of the region coordinators having been to gartmore so many times that he had been given an apartment over there! And of course, it was the abs of the twi followers that was footing the bill of most if not all of things like that.
The loyalty oath/issue directly led into the MARK AND AVOID phase of twi. Once lcm & rfr had the cold hard facts as to who stood where and with or against whom, they then had to figure out how to circle the wagons, and protect "the household." Make no mistake, rfr and Donna were much more into these decision making processes than people were willing to admit to.
The loyalty oaths, they were just another mechanism to "isolate" and divide families, households and marriages. Those were dark times that lead to even darker times.
It was business, plain and simple.
Radar
I do want to clarify something here. At that point in time there was a SHADOW GOVERNMENT sort of thing going on. There were lots of really great, wonderful, godly, loving people that were trying to do the of the Lord. And we were trying to keep what we thought was the true ministry afloat and going until the dust settled. BUT the decisions that were being made by lcm, rfr and DM were not made in that LIGHT. They were being made as face value business decisions and being sold to the "worker bees" like myself as the will of the lord.
See, the problem here is that if we take ole craggers letter at "face value" as om loves to do with everything he has already made up his mind on, it does "seem reasonable".
WAKE UP, FOLKS! Life is NEVER, EVER, EVER just about "face value". It ALWAYS involves sub-text(listen up, om) and is obviously dependent on who you were listening to, who they were listening to and understanding that there will ALWAYS be more to the story, as so many here have testified in the last 5-6 years. As it turns out, POP told some of the story from a very slanted view. Much of it hit home higher up or lcm, dew and haa would not have become the vegetables they did for 3+ years.
Was it the truth, all the truth and NOTHIN' but the truth??? hardly BUT neither were lcm's rantings against cg or anyone else, such as jal or rd. Turns out that we got just what should have happened; twi was NOT built on THE WAY but on someone's petty ego. What happens to a house built on sand, om??? When the storms came, how did twi hold up?? was lcm "right"?? was vic??
When everything has been said and done, I think the biggest lesson I have taken away from my twi experience is that NOTHING IS EVER WHAT IT SEEMS TO BE.
I think I looked at the letter from a business viewpoint because I didn’t care about the spiritual at the time. I guess I looked at it logically, from a senses point of view.
For me, the choices were either Craig or Chris. Since I didn’t think PoP was valid, since I thought Chris was a horse’s rear-end, there was no spiritual decision for me to make. I didn’t like the way Craig was acting either, but he held the TWI cards, so to speak. At the time, PFAL was still important to me so I stuck with the guy who had legitimate rights to the class. And again, from a senses point of view, it looked like Craig was going to be okay. He certainly had more personality and verve than Chris Geer, who had none!
I never said that I thought the letter was saving TWI money, although indirectly I can see how you would come to that conclusion. I said that I didn’t think the people who were sending ABS meant for TWI to Scotland were ethically right to do so. I also said they shouldn’t have kept the PFAL tapes and materials when they were no longer employed by TWI. And, if TWI was paying for their lifestyle, they were wrong to keep accepting their salaries if they didn’t support the leader of the organization. And many of them not only didn’t support him, they down-right hated him. (one of the letters he received said something like “I am praying that you and the trustees either change or DIE! – C’mon, where is that at?).
I agree the letter may have saved TWI money – but I was thinking about the ethics of the people who were receiving it – not the fact TWI was going to get more when they left. And were they? They’d still have to replace the people who left, which would probably cost them even more if they were paying for their moving expenses and setting up their living accommodations (deposits, insurance, etc.).
Did the letter serve and “godly” purpose? That’s a tough one for me to answer since I guess I didn’t look at it spiritually in the first place.
But it might have. If LCM felt that Geer was so harmful to TWI, if he felt that Geer was possessed (which we found out in the Galatians tapes that he indeed did think Geer was possessed), if he thought Geer was dividing TWI at the time, then to him the purpose of his confrontation was godly in his eyes. Of course, not everyone saw it through his eyes.
Was he right in making people swear allegiance to a person? Probably not. But again, I looked at it as if Craig was a representation of the ministry as a whole. If I went with Geer, that meant I believed that PoP and everything he’d said afterwards was spiritually correct - that LCM and the rest of the Trustees murdered Dr.
Wierwille!!! That the Corps were totally messed up and possessed. And that Geer was the only living MoG left in TWI!
If I went with Craig, I felt that I was sticking with everything I’d learned prior to PoP. Those things that I’d based everything in my adult life on until that point. I wasn’t quite ready to make such a drastic change in my belief system. It was the easier thing to do (or so I thought!) and the one that I felt the best about doing.
I was never quite spiritual enough to look at thing from a purely bible-based point of view.
Again, I will again say that I think Craig went waaaaay overboard. But that was (and probably still is) his nature. I’d been around him long enough to know that and took that into account when I read the letter.
If that kind of confrontation was necessary, would I have handled it differently? Sure. I’m not LCM (thank God). And perhaps it was necessary at the time. Things were really in limbo – no one knew which way to turn, especially the Corps on the field. There was a distinct difference between Craig and Chris – and I was almost glad about the letter because it made me think about what I was going to do regarding my participation in TWI.
I don’t know if that answers your questions.
On another note: I was in Florida. The leader here, the Right Reverend Mr. A*** (Napoleon complex) L***t was the Limb Coor. He was totally loyal to Craig. Very few Corps went the way of Geer here. There were a few other states that way (Ohio, N. Carolina – it all depended on where the Limb Coor. stood). Had I been with Vince in NY or Doug Seed in CA, things might have turned out quite differently. Guess I’m easily influenced!
might I just throw in here, as an aside, that some places had leaders who tryed to influence people very heavily and others did not. I was in CA at the time and while Doug Seed did get fired and was involved to a certain extent with cg, I did not find him to be on a crusade. Others may report a different experience here in CA. I initially thought cg had some insight into how things had gotten so f-ed up; later on I began to be more and more aware that the problems were deeper than lcm, dew or haa could possibly have caused. Before cg even did his class, i began to see signs that others were elevating what he said and taught to the same level previously reserved for vic and then, after 81 or so, as they began to worship lcm's words as well. At that point, bells and sirens went off and I began to distance myself from those who needed a "new apostle" to glom onto...
"what's your point, alfakat??" you are all saying...well, I did not know much in 84 or 85, i knew some by 86,87,88,89---and I know a hella lot more in the last 5 or 6 years. PLUS, look at some of the friends i have re-discovered---I talked to Hope on the phone a couple years ago for an hour or more. We probably hadn't talked so long since we were in 6ckkthppth kork together. And I am still learning....
LCM sent a loyalty letter. That letter demanded people make a choice between LCM and anybody else.
Basically it boiled down to: Are you of Paul (VPW), or Apollos (LCM) or Cephas (Geer)?
And this is somehow OK in the "movement of the word"?
Even "the word" that LCM supposedly wanted to move speaks of this mentality "carnal" if nothing else.
Why would a MOG--even a pretend MOG--ever be justified in putting people in such a position? Why would anyone want to justify the MOG putting people in such an "off the word" position?
You reminded me of something. Do you remember Mark G.'s of the 7th corps' resignation letter? Wasn't he in FL then? Seems like it was circulated around the time of the Schoenheit firings...
But I remember reading that letter, where he compared TWI to the Catholic Church, VP to the Pope, and said that one of the main problems with the "ministry" was the absence of Jesus Christ as Lord, among other things. To me, that letter explained more about what was happening than the POOP ever did. That letter was the final straw for me and hubby. I wonder if there is a copy floating around somewhere?
It would be a great addition to the documents section here at GS. I don't know if I have a copy of it somewhere or not.
quote: twi was NOT built on THE WAY but on someone's petty ego. What happens to a house built on sand, om??? When the storms came, how did twi hold up?? was lcm "right"?? was vic??
Was Paul the Apostles ministry built on sand? Was Paul right? how come that didn't hold up? If what you say is true, its because the ministry at that time was built on sand, and not on the Rock.
I take the 1989 letter at face value, separate from decisions made later. I thought the letter made some very reasonable points; decisions made later were un-reasonable.
I think a problem with your viewpoint Alfakat is, you leave no room for Craig or TWI to be correct or godly in anything. Every decision has to have some sort of an evil motive behind it. I think that's why its so hard from some folks to see that Dr. Wierwille or Craig Martindale or any other BOT, sometimes made godly reasonable decisions.
Recommended Posts
Top Posters In This Topic
28
35
18
63
Popular Days
Mar 23
66
Mar 24
60
Mar 22
45
Apr 8
42
Top Posters In This Topic
alfakat 28 posts
rascal 35 posts
excathedra 18 posts
oldiesman 63 posts
Popular Days
Mar 23 2004
66 posts
Mar 24 2004
60 posts
Mar 22 2004
45 posts
Apr 8 2004
42 posts
oldiesman
Oakspear, you brought some interesting comments. Thanks. I think peoples opinions on the letter is in what spirit you took it in. The way I took it, Craig was asking for folks to stand with him in the continued movement of God's Word. He says it a couple of times. Here's another quote:
What he was asking for was a show of support to begin anew, asking for support to stand with him in the movement of God's Word. Here's another quote:
At that time there were lots of folks who didn't want to work with Craig, but this was an opportunity for them to change their minds and give him another chance. Did he deserve it? Probably not, but that's besides the point. He was looking for support, for a clean break from the past. Now don't get me wrong...he's the one who started this mess by opening his big mouth about POP, after coming back from Gartmore. But I think he was looking to start with a clean slate.
Very good point. It would have been much better for folks to come right out and say they thought Craig wasn't up for the job, he screwed up and I no longer want to stand with him. But instead some said "I stand with God, not with any man". What was hypocritical was the folks saying that, the Geerites, were STANDING WITH MEN. The people that followed them were standing with men. This doesn't apply to everyone but I thought those pointing fingers needed to look in the mirror and see themselves doing the same thing.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
oldiesman
Goey, Yes I was supportive of Craig at the time. I was a twiggy, not needing to send him a letter of support but would have because I had no problem with me supporting him at that time. I didn't see Craig as "the Man of God of our Day and Time". I saw him as my brother in Christ who was going to try to do his best to lead the ministry. In that spirit, I thought it was good to give him my support.
Goey, the thing is, he never said it was a demand for loyalty; you and others are saying that. That is your interpretation of the letter. I never saw it that way; I saw it as being supportive of a man, standing with him to move the Word. To stop thinking evil of him, if that was the case, or at least giving him a fresh clean slate. Doesn't mean that you need to be loyal to him for evermore. Did he say that? No, but you and others are thinking that and coming off like that.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
rascal
Again oldies...it was NOT a letter of support that we were asked to send...it was an OATH of LOYALTY!!!
It wasn`t like we got our panties in a wad and decided to leave in a huff....It took much prayerfull consideration of what was being asked.....our letter was very clear as to what was being demanded.....We mourned our decision ...it was not an easy choice to make...
We were very unhappy to have been put in that position....it tore us up to have to refuse a direct request from the head of what we believed to be God`s ministry...
.... we were told NOT to give him the standing with God *CRAP*!! Standing with God was crap...ok???
We did not think standing with God was crap....period....we had already had direct experience with Craigs lack of discernment abilities on several occasions....we KNEW what swearing an oath of loyalty entailed....we knew what we were promising to do....and Mark had the integrity to go against all that we held dear...all that we felt important in this life....and refused.... He knew that his loyalty was to God and no man.
I mourned his decision for us at the time...but in hind sight I can say that I have never been prouder.
Edited by GuestLink to comment
Share on other sites
Zshot
I can verify what Alfakat said.
I also read the letter that V.F. sent, as well as the letter his secretary G.M. sent.
I am/was good friends with G.M. She is one of the people who came to visit me when I was stationed in Germany, and I used to visit her about once a month in NY when I came back from Germany.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Sunesis
Rascal, you made excellent points about the letter and what it meant to people.
I had recently left, but I heard about the letter. I had also been under VF and he had definitely gone after CG and took all the corps with him except me and one other person. They were extremely nasty to us because we wouldn't accept CG was the MOG.
Anyway, your points about how we were sold out, had been trained to be sold out and had almost NEVER, rarely ever said no to leadership were excellent. I think people like OM have no idea what the hardship of deciding what to do about the loyalty oath that LCM required did to people. Also, knowing that if you did not stay "loyal" to LCM, there goes your world, which for many of us who had entered the WC as teenaged hippies - and now were in their 30s - this was a huge deal.
Then, to have to go against everything you had been taught about "commitment" to the ministry, and say - No - I cannot stand with a man.
I have said before, I think God used the POP experience to open the door to get us out of TWI, and I think after three years, this demand of LCM's set the rest of the captives free.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
J0nny Ling0
Radar O'Reilly
Do I know you? I do remember using that phrase about those who stayed being "heroes of the counter-revolution"...
Well, this has stirred me up a bit ot be sure. And I certainly echo so much of what Rascal is saying. I know what I read, and it wasn't a "simple request" to stand with the ministry. He wanted a refutation of all that was Geer, and wanted total loyalty to him. And like Rascal said;
I could just replace the name Mark with my wife's name at the top of Rascal's quote. Except for the abortion thing of course.
I was clergy, and this, The Way Ministry was "It" for me. But, when I took that salt covenant, I made an oath to God and not to men, and I was in agony when it appeared that Craig had tipped over like he did, because I knew that there would be no turing back for him. I knew deep within that he would change everything in the Way, rewrite Way history, change the Word, compromise, everything. And obviously, he did, and really lost his marbles. One of the things VPW said via POP was that if Craig didn't change, he would "lash out" at those who didn't agree with him, but I wasn't around for all of that. But I did hear that there was a lot of screaming and shouting from LCM during thos last years he was there. That is true, right? I am so thankful that I did listen to God and leave. Thankful for my wife and my sweet children too. And thankful for my friends who made that same decision too
[This message was edited by Jonny Lingo on March 23, 2004 at 8:57.]
Edited by GuestLink to comment
Share on other sites
Goey
Oldies,
It seems to me that you are ignoring the fact that there was more than just the one "loyalty letter". So far you have not seemed to even have acknowledged that there was more than one letter. Rascal and other have told you that on numerous occasions. Do you think they are lying or making this stuff up? -- I don't.
My "interpretation" of these letters as a "demand" for loyalty, is not based soley upon the one letter that can be seen HERE-- But is also based upon the testimony of others like Rascal who received a letter that required an oath of loyalty. It also considers the fact that those who did not demonstrate their loyalty to Craig by oath were dismissed.
How can you simply ignore these things?
Wouldn't you think that you should consider all of the evidence on this loyalty stuff, instead of just taking that one letter at face value and ignoring what others are telling you really happened and the context in which it happened?
Edited by GuestLink to comment
Share on other sites
Hope R.
I was in the middle of posting this last night and we had a power outage. Thank goodness I was using Word to type it ….
Okay - I'm going to get beat up about this one….
When that letter came out, I felt that I shouldn't have received it. I wasn't on staff or a paid leader. I felt no urge to answer it. I was never asked to either. I can’t speak for John, but I don’t recall either of us ever being told to write to LCM in response to his letter.
I remember thinking about the letter from a business point of view. If I worked for a company selling a product, and gave the money I made on that product to my most fierce competitor, I would have been immediately fired for doing so. I know that's the way it would happen in corporate America.
Well, my pea-brain figured - TWI is a corporation, and the CEO was actually giving his employees another chance to keep on working for the company. I didn’t think he was all that off base. Maybe a bit too over the top emotionally – with the loyalty and allegiance stuff, but I figured that was Craig – he always got wound up about things more than he needed to.
Frankly, at the time, I was glad to see he was back to his old “rah-rah” self. He’d been wimped out for a few years. I didn’t like Geer at all, never did, and I couldn’t see myself being a part of anything he was running. And I thought POP was a bunch of hogwash as well (still do- pffffffffffffft).
I thought it was wrong that people were "stealing" the PFAL class at the time as well (ah, the morals I had before Napster!). After all, those tapes and videos were owned by TWI and the BC's and LC's who kept them had no right to do so. (Hey, if they wanted them for personal use, they should have made copies of them and returned the originals to HQ’s
;)--> ). But I really felt it was the wrong thing to do. I still think some people who kept the classes felt they were on some kind of mission from God to save PFAL from the evil doers at HQ’s.
Okay – so we stayed in. It was hard. All our good friends left. We felt we had no alternatives – and we’d looked at all the spin-offs that were around at the time (church wasn't even a consideration). We figured things had to get better now that Craig was his old self.
Unfortunately – he wasn’t his old self – he became mean and more stringent and harsh and unloving. His ego exploded. It took a few years to come to a head. At the time of the letter, we figured all would be well again and he was a better choice than Geer.
I think the letter served its purpose. It did push most people over the edge to make a decision, and frankly, the people who were on Waypay shouldn’t have been receiving it if they were supporting Geer. Remember, at the time all the leaders’ housing and cars and clothing and even some furniture was paid for by TWI. I know of a Limb Coor. couple who were living in a 6,000 square foot mansion that TWI was renting for them who were promoting Geer. I even know of one leader here in Tampa whose monthly mortgage payment was being made by TWI.
So that’s where I stood on the letter at the time. I don’t know how I feel about it now. Haven’t read it carefully enough to decide – and the others who have posted here have made some great points. I guess I just wasn’t “spurtchul” enough to get it at the time.
Edited by GuestLink to comment
Share on other sites
oldiesman
Goey said:
Goey, I will defer to Oakspear's comment before I change my opinion. His quote:
Edited by GuestLink to comment
Share on other sites
WaywardWayfer
It seems to me that the situation around the original letter posted here and the additional letters that we may never get a copy of are similar to the debt situation.
Most of the hurt, abuse and fear imposed on the people of twi came verbally, through the "chain of command" and through lunch time sharings, WC meetings, etc. There just isn't much in writing to validate what happened, but it did happen.
People were forced to swear loyalty to a man, a ministry and not God...in both situations. One couple refused to sell their home and the WC overseers told everyone they loved their house more than they loved God. Another couple was told that their child was seriously injured in a car wreck because they were in debt with their house. Every couple was verbally coerced into selling their homes, but there is nothing in writing saying that TWI demands that they sell their house.
If someone were to merely read the one letter posted here, I could see how they would miss the big picture and all the threats, coercion and b.s. that was behind the letter. It doesn't mean it didn't happen. This was the beginning of Craig's ever increasing appetite for power and control.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Goey
Hope,
I ain't gonna beat you up.
But it seems to me that you are looking at the letter from a mostly business viewpoint and not from a spiritual/blblical one (you said as much) Both are valid views, but in a different way.
If TWI had promoted itself as a "business" then I could accept your point of view. However it did not. It represeted itself as God's ministry.
You said "the letter served it's purpose", and then spoke of all the money it saved TWI - the "business". Was that the purpose of the letter in your opinion - to save TWI money as a business?
If that is the case, then wouldn't that make all the spiritual/biblical dialog in the letter(s) just rhetoric and a smoke screen for it's real purpose - money in TWI's coffers?
My question then to you is this -- In your opinion did the letter(s) serve any Godly purpose? In other words was it "right on with with the Word" to use TWI's old vernacular.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
ex10
Shaz
Good point about Craig's ego. Obviously, it spiralled way out of control in the 90's. His narcissism had to have been lurking around somewhere, even if it wasn't as blatently visible until he totally went over the edge, in the 90's, and became a raving lunatic.
PJ
;)--> God bless her wonderful soul! I have my kids today because of her...
It really was different being in the way corps, than being a twig coordinator or WOW. I think those of us who were in the corpse have a totally different perspective for the reasons that Rascal, Radar, and Johnny mentioned.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
oldiesman
Hope, good point. Another way to look at it was, since at the time I was standing with TWI and Craig, I didn't want my ABS going to these folks who at the time complain about how bad TWI and Craig was. "If you don't like it, leave already" was the thought that went through my mind sometimes.
Edited by GuestLink to comment
Share on other sites
Raf
OM,
I think you have a point, as long as we all keep it in perspective. Of course it makes sense that people who oppose TWI should leave TWI. Craig was right to expect that.
Based on what's been revealed here and on Waydale, I don't think there was necessarily a right or wrong decision at the time. I think history proves those who left at the time made the right decision. We were spared the "thank God for making Craig Martindale the spiritual head of this ministry" nonsense. We were spared the "homo purges" and the patently unChristian, gutter-language letter LCM sent on that subject, we were spared WAP, we were spared the no-debt policy, the cancellation of ROA, the "genuine spiritual suspicion," and the list goes on.
Those who left were also far less likely to stick to Geer as time went on. Sure, some people did. Some still do. But many more do not. It seems a whole lot of us took that "no carnality" rhetoric to heart. Even if VF did make a carnal decision at the time (I don't know if he did, but you make a decent case), in the long run he did not. I think there's something to be said for that.
I for one am glad LCM sent that letter. And I'm glad I went to ROA for myself, rather than blindly following the New York leadership out the door. The whole episode taught me, in ways that words never could, that leadership and trust SHOULD go hand in hand, but WON'T necessarily do so. If titles impressed me at one point in my life, they no longer do.
Edited by GuestLink to comment
Share on other sites
Radar OReilly
Goey,
During the mid 80s LCM became AWARE that he was the head of a "multi million dollar corporation." TWI was embroiled in the IRS tax case, Ernst and Young had their own office space in the OSC finance department (along with their own telephone ext etc.)
The word "MINISTRY," as in WAY MINISTRY was seldom uttered, it was THE WAY INTERNATIONAL. There is no doubt in my mind that the loyalty issue was strictly a business issue. We had lost 4/5 of the leadership, no one KNEW where several of the top trunk and root locale leadership REALLY stood on the topic of Martindale vs Geer. We used to joke around about one of the region coordinators having been to gartmore so many times that he had been given an apartment over there! And of course, it was the abs of the twi followers that was footing the bill of most if not all of things like that.
The loyalty oath/issue directly led into the MARK AND AVOID phase of twi. Once lcm & rfr had the cold hard facts as to who stood where and with or against whom, they then had to figure out how to circle the wagons, and protect "the household." Make no mistake, rfr and Donna were much more into these decision making processes than people were willing to admit to.
The loyalty oaths, they were just another mechanism to "isolate" and divide families, households and marriages. Those were dark times that lead to even darker times.
It was business, plain and simple.
Radar
I do want to clarify something here. At that point in time there was a SHADOW GOVERNMENT sort of thing going on. There were lots of really great, wonderful, godly, loving people that were trying to do the of the Lord. And we were trying to keep what we thought was the true ministry afloat and going until the dust settled. BUT the decisions that were being made by lcm, rfr and DM were not made in that LIGHT. They were being made as face value business decisions and being sold to the "worker bees" like myself as the will of the lord.
Edited by GuestLink to comment
Share on other sites
alfakat
See, the problem here is that if we take ole craggers letter at "face value" as om loves to do with everything he has already made up his mind on, it does "seem reasonable".
WAKE UP, FOLKS! Life is NEVER, EVER, EVER just about "face value". It ALWAYS involves sub-text(listen up, om) and is obviously dependent on who you were listening to, who they were listening to and understanding that there will ALWAYS be more to the story, as so many here have testified in the last 5-6 years. As it turns out, POP told some of the story from a very slanted view. Much of it hit home higher up or lcm, dew and haa would not have become the vegetables they did for 3+ years.
Was it the truth, all the truth and NOTHIN' but the truth??? hardly BUT neither were lcm's rantings against cg or anyone else, such as jal or rd. Turns out that we got just what should have happened; twi was NOT built on THE WAY but on someone's petty ego. What happens to a house built on sand, om??? When the storms came, how did twi hold up?? was lcm "right"?? was vic??
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Radar OReilly
AND THE WINNER IS ALFIE!!!!!!
When everything has been said and done, I think the biggest lesson I have taken away from my twi experience is that NOTHING IS EVER WHAT IT SEEMS TO BE.
Radar
Link to comment
Share on other sites
alfakat
ROR--I have learned things I was not aware of during just the last week here at GSC. I heartily concur with the lesson....
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Hope R.
Goey –
I think I looked at the letter from a business viewpoint because I didn’t care about the spiritual at the time. I guess I looked at it logically, from a senses point of view.
For me, the choices were either Craig or Chris. Since I didn’t think PoP was valid, since I thought Chris was a horse’s rear-end, there was no spiritual decision for me to make. I didn’t like the way Craig was acting either, but he held the TWI cards, so to speak. At the time, PFAL was still important to me so I stuck with the guy who had legitimate rights to the class. And again, from a senses point of view, it looked like Craig was going to be okay. He certainly had more personality and verve than Chris Geer, who had none!
I never said that I thought the letter was saving TWI money, although indirectly I can see how you would come to that conclusion. I said that I didn’t think the people who were sending ABS meant for TWI to Scotland were ethically right to do so. I also said they shouldn’t have kept the PFAL tapes and materials when they were no longer employed by TWI. And, if TWI was paying for their lifestyle, they were wrong to keep accepting their salaries if they didn’t support the leader of the organization. And many of them not only didn’t support him, they down-right hated him. (one of the letters he received said something like “I am praying that you and the trustees either change or DIE! – C’mon, where is that at?).
I agree the letter may have saved TWI money – but I was thinking about the ethics of the people who were receiving it – not the fact TWI was going to get more when they left. And were they? They’d still have to replace the people who left, which would probably cost them even more if they were paying for their moving expenses and setting up their living accommodations (deposits, insurance, etc.).
Did the letter serve and “godly” purpose? That’s a tough one for me to answer since I guess I didn’t look at it spiritually in the first place.
But it might have. If LCM felt that Geer was so harmful to TWI, if he felt that Geer was possessed (which we found out in the Galatians tapes that he indeed did think Geer was possessed), if he thought Geer was dividing TWI at the time, then to him the purpose of his confrontation was godly in his eyes. Of course, not everyone saw it through his eyes.
Was he right in making people swear allegiance to a person? Probably not. But again, I looked at it as if Craig was a representation of the ministry as a whole. If I went with Geer, that meant I believed that PoP and everything he’d said afterwards was spiritually correct - that LCM and the rest of the Trustees murdered Dr.
Wierwille!!! That the Corps were totally messed up and possessed. And that Geer was the only living MoG left in TWI!
If I went with Craig, I felt that I was sticking with everything I’d learned prior to PoP. Those things that I’d based everything in my adult life on until that point. I wasn’t quite ready to make such a drastic change in my belief system. It was the easier thing to do (or so I thought!) and the one that I felt the best about doing.
I was never quite spiritual enough to look at thing from a purely bible-based point of view.
Again, I will again say that I think Craig went waaaaay overboard. But that was (and probably still is) his nature. I’d been around him long enough to know that and took that into account when I read the letter.
If that kind of confrontation was necessary, would I have handled it differently? Sure. I’m not LCM (thank God). And perhaps it was necessary at the time. Things were really in limbo – no one knew which way to turn, especially the Corps on the field. There was a distinct difference between Craig and Chris – and I was almost glad about the letter because it made me think about what I was going to do regarding my participation in TWI.
I don’t know if that answers your questions.
On another note: I was in Florida. The leader here, the Right Reverend Mr. A*** (Napoleon complex) L***t was the Limb Coor. He was totally loyal to Craig. Very few Corps went the way of Geer here. There were a few other states that way (Ohio, N. Carolina – it all depended on where the Limb Coor. stood). Had I been with Vince in NY or Doug Seed in CA, things might have turned out quite differently. Guess I’m easily influenced!
Edited by GuestLink to comment
Share on other sites
alfakat
might I just throw in here, as an aside, that some places had leaders who tryed to influence people very heavily and others did not. I was in CA at the time and while Doug Seed did get fired and was involved to a certain extent with cg, I did not find him to be on a crusade. Others may report a different experience here in CA. I initially thought cg had some insight into how things had gotten so f-ed up; later on I began to be more and more aware that the problems were deeper than lcm, dew or haa could possibly have caused. Before cg even did his class, i began to see signs that others were elevating what he said and taught to the same level previously reserved for vic and then, after 81 or so, as they began to worship lcm's words as well. At that point, bells and sirens went off and I began to distance myself from those who needed a "new apostle" to glom onto...
"what's your point, alfakat??" you are all saying...well, I did not know much in 84 or 85, i knew some by 86,87,88,89---and I know a hella lot more in the last 5 or 6 years. PLUS, look at some of the friends i have re-discovered---I talked to Hope on the phone a couple years ago for an hour or more. We probably hadn't talked so long since we were in 6ckkthppth kork together. And I am still learning....
Edited by GuestLink to comment
Share on other sites
CoolWaters
Let me get this straight...
LCM sent a loyalty letter. That letter demanded people make a choice between LCM and anybody else.
Basically it boiled down to: Are you of Paul (VPW), or Apollos (LCM) or Cephas (Geer)?
And this is somehow OK in the "movement of the word"?
Even "the word" that LCM supposedly wanted to move speaks of this mentality "carnal" if nothing else.
Why would a MOG--even a pretend MOG--ever be justified in putting people in such a position? Why would anyone want to justify the MOG putting people in such an "off the word" position?
Edited by GuestLink to comment
Share on other sites
alfakat
INDEED, cool waters, indeed!! IT was ALL f-ed up, top to bottom, both sides and in the middle, too....
Link to comment
Share on other sites
ex10
Hope
You reminded me of something. Do you remember Mark G.'s of the 7th corps' resignation letter? Wasn't he in FL then? Seems like it was circulated around the time of the Schoenheit firings...
But I remember reading that letter, where he compared TWI to the Catholic Church, VP to the Pope, and said that one of the main problems with the "ministry" was the absence of Jesus Christ as Lord, among other things. To me, that letter explained more about what was happening than the POOP ever did. That letter was the final straw for me and hubby. I wonder if there is a copy floating around somewhere?
It would be a great addition to the documents section here at GS. I don't know if I have a copy of it somewhere or not.
Edited by GuestLink to comment
Share on other sites
oldiesman
Was Paul the Apostles ministry built on sand? Was Paul right? how come that didn't hold up? If what you say is true, its because the ministry at that time was built on sand, and not on the Rock.
I take the 1989 letter at face value, separate from decisions made later. I thought the letter made some very reasonable points; decisions made later were un-reasonable.
I think a problem with your viewpoint Alfakat is, you leave no room for Craig or TWI to be correct or godly in anything. Every decision has to have some sort of an evil motive behind it. I think that's why its so hard from some folks to see that Dr. Wierwille or Craig Martindale or any other BOT, sometimes made godly reasonable decisions.
Edited by GuestLink 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.