quote:So don't you folks give me this crap that this stuff was not taught in TWI. It most certainly was. I heard it myself as early as the late 70's and It even seems to go directy back to TWI's research department.
John S.'s paper corroborates that this stuff was certainly discussed and believed. I don't recall it ever being "taught", as in CFS, but I think it matters little now.
I'd also like to again state what I believe is an important distinction, the one between fornication and adultery. I think these are two separate issues. Fornication doesn't necessarily have to be abusive, if you have two consenting adults. It can be in a lockbox private matter that doesn't hurt anyone else if it's handled correctly. Personally I don't have a problem with that. Adultery is another matter entirely.
I see what you are saying, but I think the distinction is irrelevant because it was NOT MADE by those who were into the "secret doctrine." It didn't matter if one was single or not.
Apparently, this wasn't limited to the 6-10th corps. I got the same logic from a 14th corps lady as well. Apparently, she really wanted to "bless me." (Said as he rolls his eyes...)
Was this typical of the corps? Public doctrine versus private behavior?
That's why I think it's important to make a fairly clear distinction between fornication and adultery. You're not suggesting that fornication is nearly as bad as adultery, are you? Let's not forget that "thou shalt not commit adultery" is in the 10 commandments. "thou shalt not covet thy neighbor's wife" is in the 10 commandments. "thou shalt not bear false witness" is in the 10 commandments. I see nothing there about fornication...
I am aware that God's best is for adults to get married before having sex, but it's just not that cut and dry in real life and today's world. Don't you agree?
Oldiesman...I seem to detect a connection between "bearing false witness" and the lock box. If they are consenting adults, why do they need to hide it? What happens if you put it in the lock box and then you are asked point blank by someone? Do you lie? Do you simply say "none of your business"? Isn't the lock box...lying by omission? This whole concept of the lock box was promoted by mr wierwille in order to cover his sexual escapades. There's nothing "Christian" about it.
Saying that fornication is not as bad as adultry may be true but what's your point? Shooting my neighbor in the foot is not as bad as shooting him in the head either. I agree that wierwilles idea of all sins being equal is nonsense but it's nothing more than rationalization to try to justify fornication on those grounds...Of course I'm speaking from a "biblical" point of view.
Thanks for your thoughts. I understand what you're saying. It's unfortunate that when folks speak in generalities, specific facts that are relevant are often lost. I guess there's a tendency to paint everyone with the same broad brush and that's not fair. I know there were fine people with honor and integrity who were not a part of the corruption of which I speak. I apologize to anyone to whom the "shoe does not fit" that I have offended. In fact it's to the credit of anyone who was able to function in a godly manner within the context of that climate.
After re-reading my own post, I would agree that my words are full of bile. That is by design. It does not necessarilty reflect my emotional state of mind but rather a calculated method in which I choose to communicate. It's not so much for me as for the person who reads it. I believe that it's effective in communicating my point of view. There are posters here who are very polite and convey their ideas in an "easy to be entreated" style...I'm not one of them.
quote:Oldiesman...I seem to detect a connection between "bearing false witness" and the lock box. If they are consenting adults, why do they need to hide it?
Maybe they don't. It depends on the situation and the people involved.
quote:What happens if you put it in the lock box and then you are asked point blank by someone?
You can either tell them the truth, lie, or say "it's none of your business".
quote:Do you lie?
No.
quote:Do you simply say "none of your business"?
You can.
quote:Isn't the lock box...lying by omission?
No.
Is not disclosing information, lying?
Is everything, everybody's business?
quote:This whole concept of the lock box was promoted by mr wierwille in order to cover his sexual escapades. There's nothing "Christian" about it.
In the context of adultery, I agree with you.
quote:Saying that fornication is not as bad as adultry may be true but what's your point?
The point is that fornication is not necessarily abuse, as we are talking about abuse by TWI folks.
quote:Shooting my neighbor in the foot is not as bad as shooting him in the head either.
But shooting your neighbor in the foot is much much worse than shooting yourself in the foot. Adultery is much much worse than fornication.
quote:I agree that wierwilles idea of all sins being equal is nonsense but it's nothing more than rationalization to try to justify fornication on those grounds...Of course I'm speaking from a "biblical" point of view.
Let's put it this way, i'd rather justify fornication, then do something worse like mandate a life of bondage by marriage to someone not wanted or loved.
Yes, I know the bible equates fornication with sin. But it's not nearly as bad as adultery and in the context of abuse, fornication doesn't have to be abusive.
You folks who are saying that it was not taught don't know what you are talking about. You are very naive or you are in denial. The fact that you did not hear it in a formal setting is irrelevant.
>>
In the early days of Waydale and later Gspot when people started discussing widespread abusive
behaviors and situations that many endured there were a few harcdcore defenders
of TWI and VPW who would say things like (paraphrased and condensed by me):
"Well I was in TWI for a long time and I never saw that (referring to some destructive
Way practice). Now I'm not saying you made it up but I NEVER saw it. Guess we
all had different experiences. By the way...when did this happen ? what area ? I'm just
curious. Not calling you a LIAR just that I NEVER saw that and would like to know
where it was. Interesting. And none of my friends saw it either.... Buy hey ! Not
suggesting that you are DECEIVING us - just intrigued to know who your LC was ? I've
been around since 70s and was at HQ and I knew most of the people back then
and they had such a heart for God I can't imagine anyone doing that. But hey if you said it happened then I GUESS it did...... but I NEVER saw it...again not calling you a LIAR..".
where is the vomit bag ?
Over time I think that such people got an earful from people who could corroborate
stories of abuse and when faced with confirmation they backed down or at least
quit insulting people by posting condescending drivel like that above. Its well known
that lots of Way teaching was verbal and the more arcane stuff was never written
down (prolly to avoid legal problems). Remember the supposed overthrow attempt
of US government attempt back around 76 ? It too was never written down but it
was passed around. I suppose that because it wasn't written down that it didn't happen ?
In most ways those VPW loyalists and Way apologists were in denial about the darkside
of an organziation that they were serving. IF
they could avoid the reality that TWI had a
twisted side to it then they could go on with
their lives as usual without having to deal with
it. Some people didn't want to admit that they
had been serving an organization that was not
above aboard about all its activities and was
abusing people. But thats cool. I'm sure god
honors the good efforts that many here put forth. Way leaders will have a judgement day..
But on rare occasion you will encounter a
Way apologist who denies any and all badness
in an effort to escape the consequences of their own wrongdoing while in TWI. They figure
that if they can can convince enough people that those things didn't happen then they can rest easier. They fear reprisal for some
There WERE people who were in who never knew this stuff, and never saw this stuff. What you knew and saw depended upon where you were and who your leadership were and how protective they were. Please don't paint everyone with the same brush.
Goey
I think I pretty well knew all the folks on the actual Way International Staff research team back in the early 80's-- BTW there was no "official" research team until then.
The only two people on the research team from Way Corps 6 that I remember in 1982-83 or thereabouts, were, let's see....John Sch*enh*it and Jon N*ssl*-- They were the first and second 6th Corps members on the Research team, and are now in "offshoot" ministries.
--And neither one of them were ordained by The Way International. As a matter of fact, I will confidently say that there was never a 6th Corps member of the actual research team who was *ordained* at the time by TWI. And I cannot for the life of me think of but one other person from the 6th Corps who was ever on the official research team.
Which of these men were the seducer?
Did the writer of the "Adultery is wrong" research paper himself engage in the practice, or are you implying my husband engaged in the activity you described?
Or am I missing a 6th Corps research team staffer since I have a bad case of CRS?
Ch*p St*nsb*ry?
Can't picture that one.
Inquiring minds would like to know.
Also, I will venture to say that adultery being A-OK was NEVER, and I repeat NEVER publicly taught to the 6th Way Corps. You can call me a liar all you want to, but hey, I was there and I attended every frikkin meeting, never absent to a single one. Yes, I DO know what I am talking about.
But as I repeated before, it WAS PRIVATELY endorsed by LCM and others in one to one counsel and conversation. That I know for a fact.
Flame me all you want, but I was in that Corps and I know. I can't vouch for what was said in other Corps meetings, but to MY specific Corps that I was in residence with, adultery was NEVER PUBLICLY ENDORSED. However I'll say it again: I do know now that it was privately supported.
To insinuate that this was a doctrine everyone was aware of at the time is totally ridiculous.
Was I naieve then? Yes. I thought I was in a Christian organization. In denial then? Quite possibly. We were taught that if we ever "saw" a leader make a mistake, WE were the ones wrong, not the leadership It was "the adversary" getting you to think evil. That kind of teaching is denial TRAINING.
Denial NOW? Hell no. Just relating the facts.
Now, fast forward to the Advanced Class Special something or other in the mid 1990's at Rome City. LCM did publicly in that Advanced Class tell the people assembled that teenage premarital sex WAS OK and was pretty obnoxious about it. It was the FIRST time I personally had ever heard anything like that from a public stage at The Way International and was pretty shocked. An elderly couple in the class never came back after that session.
quote:That's why I think it's important to make a fairly clear distinction between fornication and adultery. You're not suggesting that fornication is nearly as bad as adultery, are you?
Oldies, I wonder why you are so adamant about defending fornication as less bad than adultery. Do you need some validation or something on this? Does consent make it all ok with you? Are you looking to get off the hook or something?
I bet quite a few of us did the premarital sex stuff, before during and after TWI. And the vast majority of it was consenting I imagine. But "consenting" does not mean it was or is not harmful. Many times it was.
It was still sinful and in many cases I could argue that it was also abusive regardless of consent.
Anybody who wants to argue the fact that fornication is wrong, is arguing with a whole lot more scripture than that.
"We be not born of fornication.." the religious leaders said of Jesus, insinuating that he was the product of sex between Mary and Joseph before they were legally wed. The common Judaic teaching was that fornication was to be avoided.
Apparently Paul kept the teaching, if you consult Corinthians.
Unless my CRS is as bad as yours, LCM taught in his remake of CFS that premarital sex was not discussed by God. Literally, he had that God "was silent" on the issue.
Having said that, I will see if the silly-bs is still around. Not sure if that quote was in there but it was said in his usually delicate manner. As close as I can remember: "What if that guys still isn't married when he's 28?! What's he gonna [sic] do with that thing between his legs?!"
In a recorded class, of course he would never endorse it, just say God is silent on it. I remember that much from his recorded CFS class.
But in the Advanced Class at Rome City I believe it was in 1995 (?) Martindale took it one step further than God and said that it would actually be cruel (his word, not mine) to expect your young adult (18 and up) child to remain celebate until marriage, what with all the hormones raging, etc.
He "left it up to the parents" because of Ephesians 3:20, but insinuated to the parents that teaching celibacy and expecting your child to remain so until marriage was nothing but "cruel."
But seriously, this inside track on the doctrine that adultery is OK was only made available to people whom VP et al felt could "handle it." If not, they were silent about it unless it became public.
The reason?
They knew if it were PUBLIC knowledge that entire BOATLOADS of people would have walked off. I know I would have and many others as well.
And that is also why it was extremely important when incidents did become public, to shame the hell out of them, defame them publicly and run them out of HQ on a rail. Why?
So no one would talk to the obviously "possessed" people who committed the offense, and learn the REAL reason they were being given the bum's rush.
That's why so many of LCM's personal assistants were regularly run out of town after being defamed as "possessed." He wanted no one to talk to them because they knew his business.
As one astute man put it: "Ever wonder why anyone who ever gets close to the man gets possessed?
During a discussion that I had with the wife of my FC concerning sex before marriage, she informed me that at my age sex was o.k.. I often wondered about her answer and wondered why it would be ok now and not a few years back.
Her answer told me alot about her. In my opinion, sex was very important between men and wowmen and our needs needed to be met with one who was like-minded.
Like-minded or not, doing "it" still didn't make it right.
There were also some sacrificial lambs, those that operated the special doctrine and when push came to shove they got the boot. One quite well loved and famous early corps had a married woman come to him and admit she hated sex. The acting LC said that was because she had never had it with a man that loved gawd!! Ordered her to strip and she would find out how really wonderful sex could be. Instead, she raced out and called HQ, and talked to VP. The official story on the field was the man and his family were given the opportunity to get off salary and build a life, which he was given in front of the WC.. Some of the WC in the state he was in were told the real story and to keep it quiet.
Then there was a time a friend of mine that was apprentice corps told me he was getting worn out by a few women in his city that had *needs*. I asked what the heck he was doing and talking about, that was when I heard that during an after hours hanging out with Joyful Noise some of them shared that sex can be a need, and gawd would rather meet your need than have you walking around out of fellowship because you needed laid! Before I could act the LC (a 6th corps now Dr....) Called and put a stop to this bs!!!!!! That wasn’t really what they shared, what was shared that in the rare, very rare case that lack of sexual activity among singles, it would be better than walking around out of fellowship. My friend and his little harum with needs were strongly reproved and moved around. ( and of course what single wouldn’t all of a sudden be constantly out of fellowship with so many good looking singles around?) Oh, the LC quoted better to wed than to burn. Maybe socks would know if some were playing that tune....
But then when the great migration left in the 80's and all those leaders left........... well the people I knew that followed that one bunch had told married women if their hubby wasn’t doing, go get some. A few married gals came to me and said so and so said, so none of us left and followed the loud-mouthed *comedian*. Perhaps the pot was calling the kettle black, but never heard such a thing from HQ!!!!!
Just as LCM said sex for teens was up to the parents, he was also the one that ranted and spewed over the ROA being an orgy for some teens............................... mixed singnals.
Recommended Posts
Top Posters In This Topic
18
17
23
52
Popular Days
Apr 21
71
Apr 22
69
Apr 13
40
Apr 14
37
Top Posters In This Topic
excathedra 18 posts
Goey 17 posts
Raf 23 posts
oldiesman 52 posts
Popular Days
Apr 21 2004
71 posts
Apr 22 2004
69 posts
Apr 13 2004
40 posts
Apr 14 2004
37 posts
oldiesman
John S.'s paper corroborates that this stuff was certainly discussed and believed. I don't recall it ever being "taught", as in CFS, but I think it matters little now.
I'd also like to again state what I believe is an important distinction, the one between fornication and adultery. I think these are two separate issues. Fornication doesn't necessarily have to be abusive, if you have two consenting adults. It can be in a lockbox private matter that doesn't hurt anyone else if it's handled correctly. Personally I don't have a problem with that. Adultery is another matter entirely.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
ex10
Oldies,
I see what you are saying, but I think the distinction is irrelevant because it was NOT MADE by those who were into the "secret doctrine." It didn't matter if one was single or not.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Tom Strange
OM said:
If it was between "clergy" and "the flock" there's not really any "consenting" there is there?Link to comment
Share on other sites
JustThinking
Apparently, this wasn't limited to the 6-10th corps. I got the same logic from a 14th corps lady as well. Apparently, she really wanted to "bless me." (Said as he rolls his eyes...)
Was this typical of the corps? Public doctrine versus private behavior?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
oldiesman
Of course there is. Here's an example: a good looking, sexy single female reverend is horny and wants to have sex with me. I consent. Voila!
I don't call that abuse, do you?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Tom Strange
no... the word I used was "consenting"...
Link to comment
Share on other sites
outandabout
Boy, was I ever stupid. And to think I thought the whole 15 years I was in TWI that the Word said sex was for married people.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
WordWolf
There's links on the GSC main page
http://www.greasespotcafe.com
that talk about clergy and conduct and stuff.
I won't rehash that here.
I WILL point out the hypocrisy between claiming to be an
authority on the Bible, and a leader according to Biblical
principles, and violating its ordinances against fornication,
adultery, etc. God never approved of it, whether or not
the local government would consider it a crime.
For those of you who don't care what the Bible says, this is
simply hypocrisy. For those of you who DO care, it is sinful.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
oldiesman
Wordwolf,
That's why I think it's important to make a fairly clear distinction between fornication and adultery. You're not suggesting that fornication is nearly as bad as adultery, are you? Let's not forget that "thou shalt not commit adultery" is in the 10 commandments. "thou shalt not covet thy neighbor's wife" is in the 10 commandments. "thou shalt not bear false witness" is in the 10 commandments. I see nothing there about fornication...
I am aware that God's best is for adults to get married before having sex, but it's just not that cut and dry in real life and today's world. Don't you agree?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
GrouchoMarxJr
Oldiesman...I seem to detect a connection between "bearing false witness" and the lock box. If they are consenting adults, why do they need to hide it? What happens if you put it in the lock box and then you are asked point blank by someone? Do you lie? Do you simply say "none of your business"? Isn't the lock box...lying by omission? This whole concept of the lock box was promoted by mr wierwille in order to cover his sexual escapades. There's nothing "Christian" about it.
Saying that fornication is not as bad as adultry may be true but what's your point? Shooting my neighbor in the foot is not as bad as shooting him in the head either. I agree that wierwilles idea of all sins being equal is nonsense but it's nothing more than rationalization to try to justify fornication on those grounds...Of course I'm speaking from a "biblical" point of view.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
ex10
Oldies, newsflash
Fornication is sin according to the bible. If you don't believe me, just look up the uses of the word in the New Testament.
;)-->
Link to comment
Share on other sites
GrouchoMarxJr
Dear Research Geek,
Thanks for your thoughts. I understand what you're saying. It's unfortunate that when folks speak in generalities, specific facts that are relevant are often lost. I guess there's a tendency to paint everyone with the same broad brush and that's not fair. I know there were fine people with honor and integrity who were not a part of the corruption of which I speak. I apologize to anyone to whom the "shoe does not fit" that I have offended. In fact it's to the credit of anyone who was able to function in a godly manner within the context of that climate.
After re-reading my own post, I would agree that my words are full of bile. That is by design. It does not necessarilty reflect my emotional state of mind but rather a calculated method in which I choose to communicate. It's not so much for me as for the person who reads it. I believe that it's effective in communicating my point of view. There are posters here who are very polite and convey their ideas in an "easy to be entreated" style...I'm not one of them.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Raf
You're an interesting character Uncle Hairy.
I know it's a little late to welcome you to the Cafe, but your third cup of coffee is on me.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
oldiesman
Uncle Harry,
Maybe they don't. It depends on the situation and the people involved.
You can either tell them the truth, lie, or say "it's none of your business".
No.
You can.
No.
Is not disclosing information, lying?
Is everything, everybody's business?
In the context of adultery, I agree with you.
The point is that fornication is not necessarily abuse, as we are talking about abuse by TWI folks.
But shooting your neighbor in the foot is much much worse than shooting yourself in the foot. Adultery is much much worse than fornication.
Let's put it this way, i'd rather justify fornication, then do something worse like mandate a life of bondage by marriage to someone not wanted or loved.
Yes, I know the bible equates fornication with sin. But it's not nearly as bad as adultery and in the context of abuse, fornication doesn't have to be abusive.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
diazbro
Goey said:
You folks who are saying that it was not taught don't know what you are talking about. You are very naive or you are in denial. The fact that you did not hear it in a formal setting is irrelevant.
>>
In the early days of Waydale and later Gspot when people started discussing widespread abusive
behaviors and situations that many endured there were a few harcdcore defenders
of TWI and VPW who would say things like (paraphrased and condensed by me):
"Well I was in TWI for a long time and I never saw that (referring to some destructive
Way practice). Now I'm not saying you made it up but I NEVER saw it. Guess we
all had different experiences. By the way...when did this happen ? what area ? I'm just
curious. Not calling you a LIAR just that I NEVER saw that and would like to know
where it was. Interesting. And none of my friends saw it either.... Buy hey ! Not
suggesting that you are DECEIVING us - just intrigued to know who your LC was ? I've
been around since 70s and was at HQ and I knew most of the people back then
and they had such a heart for God I can't imagine anyone doing that. But hey if you said it happened then I GUESS it did...... but I NEVER saw it...again not calling you a LIAR..".
where is the vomit bag ?
Over time I think that such people got an earful from people who could corroborate
stories of abuse and when faced with confirmation they backed down or at least
quit insulting people by posting condescending drivel like that above. Its well known
that lots of Way teaching was verbal and the more arcane stuff was never written
down (prolly to avoid legal problems). Remember the supposed overthrow attempt
of US government attempt back around 76 ? It too was never written down but it
was passed around. I suppose that because it wasn't written down that it didn't happen ?
In most ways those VPW loyalists and Way apologists were in denial about the darkside
of an organziation that they were serving. IF
they could avoid the reality that TWI had a
twisted side to it then they could go on with
their lives as usual without having to deal with
it. Some people didn't want to admit that they
had been serving an organization that was not
above aboard about all its activities and was
abusing people. But thats cool. I'm sure god
honors the good efforts that many here put forth. Way leaders will have a judgement day..
But on rare occasion you will encounter a
Way apologist who denies any and all badness
in an effort to escape the consequences of their own wrongdoing while in TWI. They figure
that if they can can convince enough people that those things didn't happen then they can rest easier. They fear reprisal for some
past act and its likely they can't even remember
all that they've done just that they know that
they've hurt lots of people -so many that they
worry about running into these people.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Catcup
Diazbro--
There WERE people who were in who never knew this stuff, and never saw this stuff. What you knew and saw depended upon where you were and who your leadership were and how protective they were. Please don't paint everyone with the same brush.
Goey
I think I pretty well knew all the folks on the actual Way International Staff research team back in the early 80's-- BTW there was no "official" research team until then.
The only two people on the research team from Way Corps 6 that I remember in 1982-83 or thereabouts, were, let's see....John Sch*enh*it and Jon N*ssl*-- They were the first and second 6th Corps members on the Research team, and are now in "offshoot" ministries.
--And neither one of them were ordained by The Way International. As a matter of fact, I will confidently say that there was never a 6th Corps member of the actual research team who was *ordained* at the time by TWI. And I cannot for the life of me think of but one other person from the 6th Corps who was ever on the official research team.
Which of these men were the seducer?
Did the writer of the "Adultery is wrong" research paper himself engage in the practice, or are you implying my husband engaged in the activity you described?
Or am I missing a 6th Corps research team staffer since I have a bad case of CRS?
Ch*p St*nsb*ry?
Can't picture that one.
Inquiring minds would like to know.
Also, I will venture to say that adultery being A-OK was NEVER, and I repeat NEVER publicly taught to the 6th Way Corps. You can call me a liar all you want to, but hey, I was there and I attended every frikkin meeting, never absent to a single one. Yes, I DO know what I am talking about.
But as I repeated before, it WAS PRIVATELY endorsed by LCM and others in one to one counsel and conversation. That I know for a fact.
Flame me all you want, but I was in that Corps and I know. I can't vouch for what was said in other Corps meetings, but to MY specific Corps that I was in residence with, adultery was NEVER PUBLICLY ENDORSED. However I'll say it again: I do know now that it was privately supported.
To insinuate that this was a doctrine everyone was aware of at the time is totally ridiculous.
Was I naieve then? Yes. I thought I was in a Christian organization. In denial then? Quite possibly. We were taught that if we ever "saw" a leader make a mistake, WE were the ones wrong, not the leadership It was "the adversary" getting you to think evil. That kind of teaching is denial TRAINING.
Denial NOW? Hell no. Just relating the facts.
Now, fast forward to the Advanced Class Special something or other in the mid 1990's at Rome City. LCM did publicly in that Advanced Class tell the people assembled that teenage premarital sex WAS OK and was pretty obnoxious about it. It was the FIRST time I personally had ever heard anything like that from a public stage at The Way International and was pretty shocked. An elderly couple in the class never came back after that session.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Goey
Oldies posted:
Oldies, I wonder why you are so adamant about defending fornication as less bad than adultery. Do you need some validation or something on this? Does consent make it all ok with you? Are you looking to get off the hook or something?
I bet quite a few of us did the premarital sex stuff, before during and after TWI. And the vast majority of it was consenting I imagine. But "consenting" does not mean it was or is not harmful. Many times it was.
It was still sinful and in many cases I could argue that it was also abusive regardless of consent.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Catcup
Um...I Corinthians 6:14 "flee fornication."
Anybody who wants to argue the fact that fornication is wrong, is arguing with a whole lot more scripture than that.
"We be not born of fornication.." the religious leaders said of Jesus, insinuating that he was the product of sex between Mary and Joseph before they were legally wed. The common Judaic teaching was that fornication was to be avoided.
Apparently Paul kept the teaching, if you consult Corinthians.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Grizzy
fleas fornicating????
I am getting a flea collar!!!!!!
Link to comment
Share on other sites
JustThinking
Catcup,
Unless my CRS is as bad as yours, LCM taught in his remake of CFS that premarital sex was not discussed by God. Literally, he had that God "was silent" on the issue.
Having said that, I will see if the silly-bs is still around. Not sure if that quote was in there but it was said in his usually delicate manner. As close as I can remember: "What if that guys still isn't married when he's 28?! What's he gonna [sic] do with that thing between his legs?!"
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Catcup
In a recorded class, of course he would never endorse it, just say God is silent on it. I remember that much from his recorded CFS class.
But in the Advanced Class at Rome City I believe it was in 1995 (?) Martindale took it one step further than God and said that it would actually be cruel (his word, not mine) to expect your young adult (18 and up) child to remain celebate until marriage, what with all the hormones raging, etc.
He "left it up to the parents" because of Ephesians 3:20, but insinuated to the parents that teaching celibacy and expecting your child to remain so until marriage was nothing but "cruel."
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Catcup
But seriously, this inside track on the doctrine that adultery is OK was only made available to people whom VP et al felt could "handle it." If not, they were silent about it unless it became public.
The reason?
They knew if it were PUBLIC knowledge that entire BOATLOADS of people would have walked off. I know I would have and many others as well.
And that is also why it was extremely important when incidents did become public, to shame the hell out of them, defame them publicly and run them out of HQ on a rail. Why?
So no one would talk to the obviously "possessed" people who committed the offense, and learn the REAL reason they were being given the bum's rush.
That's why so many of LCM's personal assistants were regularly run out of town after being defamed as "possessed." He wanted no one to talk to them because they knew his business.
As one astute man put it: "Ever wonder why anyone who ever gets close to the man gets possessed?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
sadie
During a discussion that I had with the wife of my FC concerning sex before marriage, she informed me that at my age sex was o.k.. I often wondered about her answer and wondered why it would be ok now and not a few years back.
Her answer told me alot about her. In my opinion, sex was very important between men and wowmen and our needs needed to be met with one who was like-minded.
Like-minded or not, doing "it" still didn't make it right.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Grizzy
There were also some sacrificial lambs, those that operated the special doctrine and when push came to shove they got the boot. One quite well loved and famous early corps had a married woman come to him and admit she hated sex. The acting LC said that was because she had never had it with a man that loved gawd!! Ordered her to strip and she would find out how really wonderful sex could be. Instead, she raced out and called HQ, and talked to VP. The official story on the field was the man and his family were given the opportunity to get off salary and build a life, which he was given in front of the WC.. Some of the WC in the state he was in were told the real story and to keep it quiet.
Then there was a time a friend of mine that was apprentice corps told me he was getting worn out by a few women in his city that had *needs*. I asked what the heck he was doing and talking about, that was when I heard that during an after hours hanging out with Joyful Noise some of them shared that sex can be a need, and gawd would rather meet your need than have you walking around out of fellowship because you needed laid! Before I could act the LC (a 6th corps now Dr....) Called and put a stop to this bs!!!!!! That wasn’t really what they shared, what was shared that in the rare, very rare case that lack of sexual activity among singles, it would be better than walking around out of fellowship. My friend and his little harum with needs were strongly reproved and moved around. ( and of course what single wouldn’t all of a sudden be constantly out of fellowship with so many good looking singles around?) Oh, the LC quoted better to wed than to burn. Maybe socks would know if some were playing that tune....
But then when the great migration left in the 80's and all those leaders left........... well the people I knew that followed that one bunch had told married women if their hubby wasn’t doing, go get some. A few married gals came to me and said so and so said, so none of us left and followed the loud-mouthed *comedian*. Perhaps the pot was calling the kettle black, but never heard such a thing from HQ!!!!!
Just as LCM said sex for teens was up to the parents, he was also the one that ranted and spewed over the ROA being an orgy for some teens............................... mixed singnals.
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.