Our own reader ”High Church” sent me the link to a great article over at a site called Wittenburg Gate (not to be confused with the publication, Wittenburg Door, which is put out by the (now-we-discover) somewhat questionable Trinity Foundation). You can read the full article here, but below are some very interesting excerpts:
*************
Excerpt #1: The best defense against being manipulated may be to recognize it as it happens and to have an idea ahead of time about what you will do. In this post I will write about some of the techniques that are used in manipulative and cult-like groups (including churches with orthodox Christian doctrine) and some suggestions you might try to resist them.
*************
Excerpt #2: This leads to another manipulation tool, pressuring you to hold loyalties to your church or your pastor above your loyalties to your spouse or your immediate or extended family. You have probably heard how cults will turn young people against their parents. Cult-like Christian groups sometimes do the same thing, though the pressure is often more subtle than a call for complete separation. Perhaps you will be encouraged to consider your family as unbelievers because they belong to another Christian denomination. You may be discouraged from visiting family when doing so prevents you from attending services or keeps you from another church activity. Pressure to participate in a lot of mid-week activities may seriously cut into your family time. Wives may be encouraged to pressure their husbands to a particular point of view, or to believe that their husbands are not leading the family adequately.
**************
Excerpt #3: It should also be noted that the controlling leader will confuse loyalty to himself or his ministry as faithfulness to God, though he will not likely state it explicitly. He will not, for example, suggest to a wife that her faithfulness to him should supersede her loyalty to her husband. He will instead equate attending this church with loyalty to God, and imply that any other choice would be man-pleasing. The leader may also be spoken of in subtly messianic terms. Perhaps faithfulness to the church will be spoken of as “following” this leader, or his “voice” will be equated with the voice of God, or his office one of special anointing. Some use of such terms may actually be appropriate, but they should never imply that a man is anything more than a fallible man, nor should they be used to imply that any man is untouchable or that his ministry should be followed without question.
*************
Excerpt #4:
Isolation
Manipulators want to minimize all contrary influences, and so will seek to isolate you from others. You will be taught to mistrust certain authors, find fault in other churches, seek counsel from no one but your pastor, and to limit friendships with troublesome people (even if those troublesome people are a part of your church). If you are feeling rebellious because you read a certain author, visit another church, or ask someone other than your pastor for advice, consider whether or not you are responding to pressure to isolate yourself and limit outside influences.
Elitism
Spiritually abusive church leaders also encourage their members to believe that this particular church is better than others, and perhaps the only acceptable church within hundreds of miles. This plays into the isolation mentioned above, because members are discouraged from worshiping with or learning from other congregations, even within the same denomination. Christians need to guard our hearts from pride in this regard, and resist thoughts that would lead us to exalt ourselves above other Christians.
This elitism is also used to control dissent. Any actions that threaten your good standing in the only good church around may also be perceived as threatening your good standing with God. After all, if you can’t cut it in the only acceptable church, what does that make you? If you must leave, where can you possibly go?
Black and White Pronouncements
Narcissistic personalities often cannot think other than in terms of black and white, and other kinds of controlling people may choose not to. Manipulators will often present you with a false dichotomy: either you believe or do as I say or you deny God. An example of this might be in evaluating a work of literature. Rather than see the negative and redeeming aspects of the work and recognizing that some sincere Christians may wish to read it or allow their children to read it and others may not, a declaration is made, and anyone who disagrees is simply either wrong or wicked.
Does disagreeing with your leader make you feel disloyal or rebellious? Do you check with the group when deciding how you should think about something or what choices you should make? Do you conceal things about yourself, such as a movie you watched or hobby you pursue, until you figure out whether or not it is okay? If so, you may be attempting to navigate the broad gray ship of Christian liberty in a narrow black and white sea.
Is It Unity or Is It Uniformity?
Black and white thinking will manifest itself with a uniformity among members who are submitting to the black and white mandates of the leader. This uniformity is often presented as unity, but it is a false unity, a unity of image only. Genuine unity among Christians should be Christ-centered and Gospel-centered. Unity based on works–even good works–is nothing more than worldly uniformity. The group uniformity will produce a silent group pressure for conformity. The manipulator will leverage this group pressure when someone begins to get out of line. Perhaps he will point out that all other members of the group do things in a certain way. Those who differ from group norms may find their roles in the church diminished, and those who conform will be rewarded with prominence and favorable treatment.
Confusion
Controlling groups often have a group lingo, or special vocabulary that sounds foreign to outsiders. The words are often not well-defined, but just as no one was willing to say the emperor had no clothes, no one is willing to admit that they do not understand the meaning of these words. The result is a quiet confusion that is unsettling and causes you to see yourself as a follower in this group rather than a leader or even an equal contributor. No person of average intelligence ought to feel he or she isn’t smart enough to contribute to discussion or understand the teaching in his or her church.
Some people in manipulative groups will also take on the role of guards, who protect the leader from dissenters by jumping in and defending the leader or the accepted doctrines whenever someone questions them. These guards are most often not being consciously manipulative, but are responding out of their own anxiety about having the groupthink subjected to scrutiny. (See Catez’s excellent post on Cognitive Dissonance at Allthings2all.) Others in the group remain silent and their silence is interpreted as agreement. This kind of group dynamic has been much studied by psychologists, and is known to squash dissonant thoughts and encourage conformity to the group.
Confusion also arises when a manipulator suggests that you said or did something or agreed to do something in the past. ”Didn’t you say you would be writing a letter of support for this project?” “Wasn’t this meeting your idea?” He may also deny that he said or did something in the past. Since we all know our own memories are not always completely reliable, we don’t feel we can say for sure that we did not do or say what is being claimed, even when we doubt it.
I think it is also important to note that the confusion and groupthink mentality can extend to a church council or session. In that case, a controlling elder can manipulate the other elders, and it will appear that they are all working together equally. In this way, the real authority of the church council can be manipulated to do the controller’s bidding. (See an insightful article from the Chalcedon Foundation on the groupthink phenomenon in the church leadership.)
Shame on You!
Most healthy people are willing to admit their own imperfections, and when told they are in the wrong, they thoughtfully consider the criticism. Manipulators take advantage of this, by causing you to be ashamed of your criticism of him or of your lack of cooperation with his dictates. You may be told your “heart is not right” on this or that your intentions are bad. Are you feeling guilty for things you shouldn’t? Are you feeling vaguely guilty, but unable to say exactly what it is you are doing wrong?
I think it is important, when faced with inappropriate feelings of shame, to remember the difference between guilt and shame. Guilt is an actual judgment for something that is objectively sinful. I can be guilty of theft or bearing false witness. Shame, however, is a feeling of being condemned by God or by others. If you find yourself feeling shame, ask yourself if there is a sin you need to confess and repent of. If so, do so, and know that Christ forgives repentant sinners and put away your shame and put on his grace. If however, you are feeling shame for something that is not sinful, ask yourself if someone is manipulating you into feeling that way. Again, turn to Christ and put away the bondage of men and put on the freedom that is bond service to Christ.
Beware especially when you find yourself feeling guilty for something simply because your leader would not like it. If you feel guilty for maintaining your friendship with Suzy and look around the restaurant where you are meeting for lunch, hoping that the wrong people don’t see you, then perhaps you are being manipulated by shaming. Likewise if you tuck away that book you’ve been reading or can’t let anyone know what curriculum you have chosen for you homeschooling.
Manipulators will also bring up your past sins to keep you in a place of shame, unwilling to assert yourself as an equal or consider yourself worthy of criticizing your manipulator or refusing his demands. Again, if proper repentance has been made before God and men, Christ has removed that sin from you. Christ’s forgiveness separates us from our sins like the east is separated from the west. It does not remind us again and again of our unworthiness. A Christian man who leads with the authority of Christ ought to be like Christ and forgive in this way. (Read more on forgiveness here and here.)
It’s Not My Fault!
The manipulator will blame you or others for his bad behaviors. Perhaps you drove him to it by your bad behavior. Each person is responsible for his or her own actions, whether others are sinning or not.
Like shaming, this blame-shifting may cause you to begin to focus on your own real or alleged weaknesses and be diverted from expressing your concerns about the church or your leader. Probably the best response to this kind of diversion is to agree to discuss that after you discuss what it is you came to talk about. You can even start a list of these these diversions as they come up, and promise to discuss them later.
I Don’t Love You Anymore
A narcissistic person is convinced that his attention, approval and love are things to be coveted by all. Sometimes he manages to convince others of this, too. Once a person becomes dependent upon the approval and love of the manipulator (which is generally accomplished through flattery and elitism), it can be selectively withdrawn in order to encourage compliance. As Christians, we must remember that it is our Father in heaven whom we should desire to please, and be willing, when necessary, to bear the disapproval of men.
In group form, this technique takes the form of shunning. It may be understood that people leaving the church, even those who are not the subject of any discipline, are at fault and in sin, and must not be contacted or socialized with any longer. In one church parents were pressured not to even allow their children to play with their friends from families that had left the church or families that were still in the church, but out of the favor of the controlling person.
Oh, Yeah? Well Your Mother’s Ugly!
Another tool of the manipulator is when being confronted or questioned, he will turn the tables or divert the conversation away from your concerns. Very often the diversion will be in the form of an accusation against you. Sometimes he will divert you with a pity play. As in the case of blame-shifting, probably the most effective defense against this is to say, “Okay, we can get back to that in a minute, but I came here to talk to you about this subject.”
Don’t Listen to Him, He’s a Such-and-such!
Labeling is another technique used by a controlling person to shut down debate. It can be surprisingly effective. Perhaps you are quoting a book or the opinion of a well-known person who differs from the manipulator. “He’s a dispensationalist (theonomist/evidentialist/Arminian/six-day creationist), you know.”
With one label the discussion is shut down. Sometimes a person’s position on another issue does impact his views on another, but let it be explained why the given label is relevant to the discussion at hand. Surely a such-and-such can have some good thoughts, can he not? Rather than accept a label, insist that the labeler respond to the ideas.
The person expressing concerns may also be labeled as a means of deflecting those concerns. Again, rather than focus on the label, focus on the ideas being expressed.
Of Course, That Doesn’t Apply in My Case!
Manipulators apply a different standard to others than what they apply to themselves. You must submit to church authorities, but he will not because the authorities over him are corrupt. You may not share bad information about him, because to do so violates Matthew 18; however, he must share bad information about others because he is “defending himself” or “holding people accountable”. You share gossip; he shares “prayer concerns”.
A controlling personality will justify every action by twisting Scriptures, often absurd rationalizations, and by explaining why his circumstances are so different than any other. Often the convolutions of his logic will be impossible to follow. Perhaps the best response is to attempt to restate his case. ”So you are saying that because James allegedly told Peter that you lied about him, you are now required by the Scriptures to defend your reputation by telling me bad reports about James’ past? Do I have that right?”
Everybody’s Talking About It!
A manipulator may suggest that several unnamed people agree with them. Perhaps they join him in his criticism of you, or perhaps they agree that a certain course of action should be taken. Sometimes these alleged supporters are respected or well-known people with whom the controlling person claims to have consulted. If names are given, let your controller know you will check with that person to hear his point of view first hand. If the people are unnamed, tell him you cannot regard any secondhand statements of what other people’s opinions are. In my own experience, I found that every time I attempted to verify this kind of claim, the person quoted had no recollection of any such conversation and refused to identify themselves with the opinion expressed. You must either totally disregard any such claims or check them out to clear up the doubts they create. Otherwise, this sort of claim can distance you from people who have really done nothing to offend you.
Join My Crusade!
One of the ugliest and most destructive aspects of an abusive or controlling church situation are when these manipulative techniques all come together in covertly-aggressive and well-orchestrated attacks on people who are perceived as a threat to the abuser. First, the manipulator uses gossip to invite people to take up his personal offenses and turn people against his target(s). He uses flattery and pity plays to build a team and to keep his followers loyal. He encourages his loyal followers to pressure, rebuke, and speak out against the targets. He may claim that the aggression is actually being perpetrated against him by his targets. Well away from the eyes of his loyal followers, he uses threats and intimidation, accusations and shaming to bully his target into compliance or silence. He sets traps for the target that he then publicly walks into, and in the eyes of those who have listened to the gossip, his behavior seems to confirm the truth of it. The target is eventually put out of the group and shunned. I lampooned this sort of attack in my post, The Church Demolition Game, but it is not at all funny. The targets of such aggression suffer from the trauma it causes. The situation may result in depression, symptoms of extreme anxiety, or even suicidal thoughts or actions.
July 5th, 2008 at 10:35 pm
Just as a reminder – when you read statements in the above article like, “I lampooned this sort of attack in my post…” the “I” and the “my” are the article’s original author referring to herself. That is NOT I, Kris, talking.
If that made any sense at all…
??:
July 5th, 2008 at 11:20 pm
Thanks for posting this article/weblink–there’s so much to digest here that I may have to print it out so I can wrestle with it more effectively since I see myself on both ends of manipulation. I saw myself, my estranged husband, my estranged church family, and my boss who is a Queen of Narcissistic Control . I have so wanted to be the kind of person who just laughs or shrugs or points out the manipulation, not the kind who cries (a form of manipulation evidently) or lashes out or internalizes it (so that it becomes truly toxic in my body with pain).
My temptation, however, is to wrestle with this on my own and then give up because it’s just too hard or to just to go straight to giving up because there’s too much to think about and weigh and consider.
I want to be Peter, stepping out of the boat and walking on the water, as long as he keeps his eyes on the LORD. I want to be Mary who sits at Jesus’ feet and ignores Martha’s manipulation. I want to boldly break open my bottle of alabaster and pour it on Jesus, ignoring the whispers around me.
July 5th, 2008 at 11:31 pm
acme,
This brought tears to my eyes:
You know, in my Christian life, I have done a lot of thinking about prayer. I think the Bible clearly teaches in many places that if we pray in God’s will, our prayers will be answered. I take great comfort in this, because we can know SO MUCH of God’s will. It is always God’s will for us to be able to demonstrate more of Christ’s love to others, for instance. So if I pray that God will increase my love for others, I can rest assured that this is a prayer He will answer.
I think your prayer is just like that. Is it God’s will for you to do all those things you’ve just written? I believe that Scripture clearly indicates that it is. Therefore, you will be like Peter…you will be like Mary…you will boldly break open your bottle of alabaster and pour it on Jesus, ignoring the whispers around you.
July 6th, 2008 at 10:16 am
Excellent thoughts, and worthy of note. I’m thankful to say that I have not experienced these signs of manipulation in my own church, either personally or in public meetings. I think I myself have been guilty of the “Of course, that doesn’t apply in my case!” category many times though. Thanks for posting this.
July 6th, 2008 at 1:20 pm
Wow. Every time I read about manipulation, I get angry, and think “I was such a fool!” How could I have missed the manipulative techniques my former pastors employed against me?
My former care group leader got really dirty in his manipulation – it was move overt than the Sr Pastor, not sure wich is more deadly…but both are manipulators. I keep thinking back and the Lord shows me examples again and again. It makes my blood boil – I trusted these men, and they manipulated me! ARGH! Ok..enough of that. MOving on the freedom road, never to look back again…
thanks for posting this. I think, if you are IN THE MIDST of manipulation this list will hurt. Because it is true. And then maybe you will have the courage (even in anger) to break free. It’s been three months since I left my SGM church and each week has new challenges but I never think of going back, and i keep reading things like the list above to remind myself it wasn’t all my imagination, it was real, it was painful, and I can’t avoid or deny the fact that I was spiritually abused.
Speaking of that, I wonder if avoiding and denying spiritual abuse is like other forms of abuse? It is so painful to admit that we can’t – so we don’t So many who were abused as children either sexually or physcially struggle for years just coming to terms with the reality of it. Kind of like spiritual abuse, yet of course the struggle itself is entirely unique.
July 6th, 2008 at 1:28 pm
by the way, another form of manipulation from SGM comes through the teaching itself and what it focuses on. For example, take a look at what the “Modesty Series” of Sovereign Grace focuses on and ask yourself what are they telling us? (this is from their website directly) My comments are in parentheses…
Modesty Series Index
Modesty: God, My Heart, and Clothes (pt. 1) (this is about women’s clothes)
Modesty: The Attitude of the Modest Woman (pt. 2)
Modesty: The Appearance of the Modest Woman (pt. 3)
Modesty: A Pastor’s Concern (pt. 4)
Modesty: A Word to Fathers (pt. 5) (who have daughters)
Modesty: The Right Adornment (pt. 6) (taken from how women should adorn themselves)
Modesty: The Modest Woman’s Allegiance (pt. 7)
It really angers me. The message is: it’s YOUR FAULT WOMEN!!! No focus on men. Except to tell fathers to beware to not have a daughter who dresses immodestly or a son who is tempted by a woman who dresses immodestly. Avoid these women, they are evil! They never come out and SAY point blank, “Women, the blame is on you alone” but how can a woman not come to that conclusion??
July 6th, 2008 at 9:19 pm
I think the men are addressed concerning lust in SGM. I sure addressed a lot of them. Every man’s battle was recommended,and I think Josh’s lust book was directed towards men. (I never read it).
Here’s what I find missing-SGM seems to think that lust is only a man’s issue.
I never saw a man addressed regarding his clothes. When I told my ex sr p that I considered one guys attire immodest (a cgl), he made some stupid jokes.
Lust is clearly an issue for both genders, and it’s hypocritical to address women’s clothing without addressing men in the same way.
July 7th, 2008 at 3:01 am
Yes-but I heard CJ’s sermon on this topic on Christian radio-and the problem I had was it did leave the impression that the women were almost at fault for men’s lust. I’m all for modesty-but I’ve been to CLC-and I can’t think of one time that I saw any woman dressed immodestly. But by CJ’s intensity of voice-you’d think that their were a bunch of scantily clad women who were intentionally causing the men to fall into lust.
And I think that’s just pure manipulation to keep the women doubting themselves. And I agree-where’s the intense passion to implore men to do the same?
July 7th, 2008 at 7:20 am
Even Muslims have dress standards for both genders.
While I agree with basic comcepts of modesty and I have noticed that both boys and girls develop a sense of modesty, blaming the woman is so wrong.
And could be predicted, why are they so predictable.
July 7th, 2008 at 8:04 am
Well, the women are lectured about modesty, and the men are lectured about lust, which is already a problematic imbalance. But the way it’s described, it always seems like “immodesty” is a sin that women commit voluntarily out of their pride, whereas “lust” is something men are subject to because of “indwelling sin” or something. They are never described in the same terms.
For example, I’ve heard talks on modesty that encouraged women to stop and think before they put on an outfit: what’s my real motivation here? Who am I trying to impress? Am I causing my brothers to stumble for the sake of my vanity? (I’m paraphrasing, but very much along these lines.)
But I have never heard them give a message on lust that encouraged men to stop and think: am I taking responsibility for my own sin? Is that dress really immodest, or am I being overly judgmental because of my own weakness?
They are very free in acknowledging their own weakness to lust (a little too much, I think, since like I said it often sounds like it’s practically involuntary, and the only redress is to control your environment completely). But the possibility of a man mistakenly thinking a woman is dressed immodestly is not something they talk about very much.
July 7th, 2008 at 9:16 am
…but a REAL man can’t help it, donchaknow? It’s not HIS fault that he’s more masculine than these wusses that can control themselves….
July 7th, 2008 at 9:36 am
Hello Beady Sue and welcome to the site. Your comments are “dead on”! It’s good to have you with us!
LOL…you’re right, EVERYONE’S “stories” do sound the same! It’s almost comical to look back at the Wikipedia Wars when we were told this site did not have enough people who had actually experienced or witnessed the abuse, or enough churches within SGM guilty of the abusing to qualify as a “legitimate” site. In God’s timing, He brings all things to light. :smile:
With reference to the modesty “going both ways”, I’ve commented on this several times. I stated that women are just as visual as men, and the men are NEVER addressed for making us stumble. My example was how the guys were allowed to wear swimsuits and go shirtless on the beach while the girls were made to wear shorts and tank tops while on a singles’ beach trip. Trust me, those young girls were “struggling” watching bronzed, built young men playing volleyball shirtless! The bad thing was the young men KNEW exactly what they were doing! The dives, spikes, and “subtle flexing” were incredible! There would not have been near the effort put into that game had those young girls not been watching. Guys may accuse girls of knowing “exactly” what they’re doing when they dress immodestly, but guys know “exactly” what they’re doing, as well!
The fathers at my former SG church really push their sons to “work out”. I actually overheard 2 fathers boasting about their sons’ built and how they “turned the girls’ heads” every time they walked by. They were also bragging about their sons’ abilities to play the guitar and how that, too, was a “chick magnet”. And guess what…THEY’RE RIGHT!
So yeah, it goes both ways and the men are just as guilty. As a matter of fact, MORESO! A well-endowed female can’t hide that fact no matter how “frumpy” she dresses. To work out to build pecs and abs like the guy on the bowflex commercials goes beyond just wanted to stay “fit”. And the amount of hours it takes each week to maintain such a body is sinful in my opinion. These young men are out of balance because dad’s putting so much emphasis on the physical element of what “manhood” should look like!
July 7th, 2008 at 10:11 am
Eric Simmons might want to check those CLC members’ basements for overzealous single young men “pumping iron” and flexing in front of mirrors in their underwear!
And sorry Beady Sea, I called you Beady “Sue”.
July 7th, 2008 at 10:26 am
This might sound a little crazy, but I think “modesty” for men would almost have to be more all-encompassing than it is for women.
Kindred, I agree that it’s silly to think that girls aren’t at all visual. They are. But especially in a culture like SGM’s, one that places a huge emphasis on a woman’s role as wife and mother (stay-at-home mother in particular), I think it’s easy for single gals to fall prey to a particular kind of “lust” if guys don’t watch how they behave and what sort of image they cultivate.
What I’m trying to get at is, guys can probably more easily provoke gals to “lust” by making themselves appear to be “good catches.” If a guy looks like good husband material – if he seems financially solvent, someone who is good with kids, someone who would ultimately want the sort of lifestyle that the gal wants – it is much easier for a young woman to commit the sin of idolatry over him. And then, if he works a particular kind of magic, of seeming to show personal interest in the girl, then her fate is practically sealed. She will waste untold hours fantasizing about how to get him to notice her.
There are guys who are particularly skilled at showing girls this sort of interest, all the while not really being interested in them at all. I’ve seen it again and again, back in my single days, and then again when I used to work with teens and young singles. There will always be at least one sort of “Christian player,” the guy that a lot of the more average gals will have in their sights, the guy that seems like “such good husband material,” and “maybe he might like me! He did remember, after all, to ask me how Aunt Millie is feeling, and it was at least a week since I brought up that prayer request!”
Does anyone else know what I mean?
And then, if you add insult to injury, and these same guys are preening themselves and parading around shirtless, it’s almost hopeless for the poor girls who like them.
So I think a “modesty” checklist for guys would have to include things like how they are portraying themselves. Do they carefully evaluate the sorts of cars they drive, for instance, so as not to give off too strong an impression of financial stability? Are they sensitive to how simple demonstrations of personal interest can send the less attractive girls to the moon with fantasies about them?
I know this almost sounds like a spoof, and it sounds a little crazy, but it’s not. If we’re going to talk about “modesty,” guys need to consider a lot more than whether or not their purse straps are pulled too tightly across their chests. :-)
(And if guys read this and go, “I can’t help it if ugly girls have problems with their marriage fantasies,” I would say to them, “In the same way, I can’t help it if YOU have problems with your LUSTFUL fantasies!”)
July 7th, 2008 at 11:25 am
“(And if guys read this and go, “I can’t help it if ugly girls have problems with their marriage fantasies,” I would say to them, “In the same way, I can’t help it if YOU have problems with your LUSTFUL fantasies!”)”
Haha…AMEN SISTER!
Yeah, I know EXACTLY what you’re saying. I saw (and still see) the “Christian players” all the time. They definitely know how to work the “good husband” image and “I’m a GREAT catch”! Afterall, Al Mohler provided SGM with a phamplet of an itemized list of what these young men SHOULD “look” like! And gosh, there’s countless articles written on SGM websites informing the young girls what to look for in a young man. All the guys have to do is “read and act”!
Of course I’m being sarcastic here. But once again, when taken to legalistic extremes, such articles and “lists” breed this behavior.
But you are ABSOLUTELY “dead on” with the guys’ part in all this, and how it affects the girls!
If it’s GENUINE, great!!! But so many times it’s “OBVIOUS” they’re just “working” the girls! I taught my girls to be “very observant” and what to look for that indicated “genuine sincereness”. They can spot a “Christian player” a mile away!
July 7th, 2008 at 11:33 am
Best current SGM example…Brett & Alex Harris!
Sorry folks, but it’s true. Just read the article Ellie posted on them!
I personally witnessed their brother (Joshua Harris) come on the scene doing the same thing. “I Kissed Dating Goodbye” had every homeschool girl across the country “swooning” at his very presence at homeschool conferences!
July 7th, 2008 at 11:58 am
I am the first to say, by the way, that there is a legitimate place to discuss modesty.
(On a side note: Does anyone else get the willies from the fact that at SGM, it seems like it’s most always the MEN doing these teachings??? When I was growing up in my conservative Baptist/Evangelical world, we would get these talks in youth group from time to time. But they always came from WOMEN, either a pastor’s wife, or someone’s mom, or one of the female youth leaders. And they would NEVER be done in “mixed company.”
I just think there’s something borderline Uncle Pervy about hearing a GUY teaching about things like too-tight tops. Yucky! The men I respect would NEVER be comfortable addressing women on these subjects!)
Anyway…
This whole “blame game” for the sin of lust is, in the end, quite ridiculous. For every example guys can point to about seatbelts and purse straps (and even legitimate issues, like when a gal wears a strapless dress and from the back looks, when she’s sitting down, as though she’s wearing nothing at all!), girls can point to guys’ behavior (and looks) that cause THEM to stumble.
I’m not quite sure how SGM has managed to garner such credibility in the “modesty” arena when…
1) Their talks are almost ALWAYS given by MEN. As I said – yucky!!!
2) They focus way more than 50% on the women’s responsibility, instead of spreading it around evenly and laying the lion’s share in front of the individual’s control of his/her own thoughts.
July 7th, 2008 at 12:18 pm
Again-what better way to keep people doubting their own judgment?
What women can be sure she’s not being vain or causing a brother to stumble (especially as defined by CJ)?
What man can honestly he didn’t notice an attractive woman (which by SG’s standards-to even acknowledge a woman’s attractiveness is lust) ? Ironically- (speaking for the men)-this ultra focus on not lusting actually makes the problem worse.
It’s like telling your younger brother to go stand on the corner and not think about ice cream. And then every 5 minutes or so-you come out and ask him if he’s thought about ice cream? Even if hadn’t for the full five minutes-he will now because you reminded him again that he shouldn’t be thinking about it. This type of circular practice actually leads to more struggle. I’ve been in men’s meetings that essentially start by the leader saying ” Let’s all go around and confess our lust-ok John you go first..”.and so it goes.
July 7th, 2008 at 12:49 pm
MM,
soooooooo, what do they do when they are all done confessing their lust?
July 7th, 2008 at 12:54 pm
Everytime we discuss this I think of “Frollo” in Disney’s 1996 animated version of “The Hunchback of Notre Dame”!
July 7th, 2008 at 1:07 pm
Well it usually became a search and destroy mission for any men who were hesitant to confess or only had some benign confession like “I only showered twice this week and need to be more accountable in my cleanliness”-these folks would usually be put on the hot seat and questioned at length about why they were unwilling to confess some “real” sin. In other words-we really didn’t believe that sin such as lust could be overcome or believe that maybe someone really hadn’t struggled with it that week.
I remember one new comer to our group, who didn’t confess anything about lust one week-but then came back next week and said he had really struggled because of how detailed everyone’s confession the week before had been. He had been caught in the “don’t think about ice cream scenario…” -our leader simply dismissed his anger and assumed he had really been dishonest the week before. Now that he was being “real”-they really honed in on him and his sin and put him thru another round of sin sniffing questions.
July 7th, 2008 at 2:01 pm
Kris! “I just think there’s something borderline Uncle Pervy”….
That is TOO funny!!!
Can I steal it from you? :cool:
July 7th, 2008 at 2:34 pm
Ellie: Thank you for making me laugh out loud in an otherwise somewhat depressing thread :razz:
July 7th, 2008 at 3:32 pm
Carole,
Feel free to pilfer all you wish.
Like you and Jim have said, the more ways we have to get the word out, the better it is.
July 7th, 2008 at 10:08 pm
Thanks Kris!
I just couldn’t pass the “Uncle Pervy” reference up!! :-)
And yep! We are all on the “same side”… getting the word out about SGM! I can’t think of anyone better than you and Guy to be in “partnership” with! :smile:
July 8th, 2008 at 12:54 pm
Perhaps stopping short of Uncle Pervy, I have noticed a tendency for those men who are very strict and very legalistic tend to be the ones harboring secret, ahem, behaviors that seem to contradict their strict teaching.
The politicians and preachers that have the anti gay agenda soliciting men in the bathroom. The most lustful condeming women into baggy dresses and modest colotte style swim suits.
Perhaps some people tend to dwell on people’s sinfulness because their own inner thoughts are more, um, colorful than usual.
July 8th, 2008 at 3:54 pm
DB,
I do believe your observations are most accurate.
:smile:
July 8th, 2008 at 4:03 pm
July 10th, 2008 at 8:00 am
DB, your “observations” are DEAD ON!!!
I’ve ALWAYS been an “observer” of people. Not nosey, mind you, just fascinated by the human race.
I’ve watched some of these men “look up and down” young girls. It’s OBVIOUS the “modesty issues” they claim they’re trying to address out of concern really stem from their own “personal struggle with lust”. Some of the girls will openly share that they think “so and so” is a “Perv”. IT’S THAT OBVIOUS…and girls know!
July 10th, 2008 at 4:50 pm
Daddies have no business conducting modesty checks on their daughters–that’s what moms (and Church Ladies, if necessary) are for–otherwise, daddies are looking at their daughters in ways that are frankly not appropriate–and creepy.
July 11th, 2008 at 11:34 am
Re: Acme #30
Yes, absolutely. I get seriously creeped out when I hear the daughters of SGM leaders (like the Mahaney women) talk about how they run/ran their clothing purchases by their dads for modesty checks.
Btw. Acme, I was wondering if we could touch base offline? If that’s ok with you, you can email me at wip1219 at gmail dot com.
July 11th, 2008 at 11:36 am
Another (not specifically SG) thing that creeps me out is the chastity ball.
Daddy and nubile daughter and mom (likely worn and haggared by the demands of housework and childbearing,) is nowhere to be found.
Mom does all the heavy lifting and daddy has all the fun.