Clare McIvor Clare McIvor

Why its Time the Church Retired the Term “Forgiveness”

Hello all. I know its a rare thing for me to sit down and write these days but here I am - answering a particularly poignant question that has popped up in my inbox a bit of late. It’s the question of forgiveness. Now I’ll state up front that I am no theologian. I am a geek who has been in church for all but two years of her life. I’ve been in good churches and toxic ones. I’m sure I’ve likely been in good churches that were only good on the surface. I’ve experienced and witnessed things that would make Jesus’ roll in his grave (a metaphor I’m sure I’m not allowed to use!) and I hope I’ve been part of a small amount of healing for people who have walked some pretty terrible roads. It’s taken me a long time to stop fearing judgement and damnation enough to back myself enough to make the big calls. So I’m here making one today: Church needs to stop weaponising the word forgiveness. If it can’t do that, it needs to retire the term altogether.

I said what I said. Now let me explain. (CW: sexual assualt and other religious abuse)

I’m a communications professional. That’s my wheelhouse. Thus, I am acutely aware of the evolving nature of language, and that words are just sounds we make. We imbue them with meaning that is then shared by other people and then Huzzah - we have something that we can use to express our thoughts and their meanings to other people. One example is the word I just used: Huzzah has no real meaning other than that its an exclamation of something like joy or applause. Pretty vague, but pair it with the body language of the person yelling it and you’ll have a pretty clear understanding of what they’re talking about.

The meanings of words evolve. I’ve heard it said that there is currently no word in the English language that means “literally.” Why? How many times have you heard someone say “I literally died.” or something like that. Well they didn’t die. They’re talking to you right now, and more likely about a funny or awkward situation - not about a medical emergency. No one died. Not even close. The word “literally” is evolving to mean something more like “experiencing a strong feeling or placing a strong emphasis on something.” It doesn’t really mean “literally” anymore.

So then, is it possible there's a gap between what forgiveness should mean and the meaning it has taken on? I defer here to the writings of Maria Mayo, who holds a Master of Divinity and a PhD. She makes some seriously interesting points on this same topic (in fact, go read the article. Its great. It’s here.) The word ‘forgive’ comes from “aphiemi” which, as per usual with Greek terms, translates to a wide variety of things poorly captured by our watered-down English translations. Words associated with aphiemi include “to remit (a debt), to leave (something or someone) alone, to allow (an action), to leave, to send away, to desert or abandon, and even to divorce.” So there’s a wide variety of things it was supposed to mean. But these days, it seems to mean “forget something happened. Don’t do anything about it. Get on with your life.” As if victims of life altering trauma have the option to do that. As if it’s even okay to place such a demand on someone who has sustained such damage.

Interestingly, the prevailing idea of forgiveness as a mental or emotional condition is much more modern. It “traces to 18th-century moral philosophy, not first-century Christian writings, ”says Mayo.

When you read through Jesus’ statements on forgiveness, you’ll find that he speaks mostly about humans forgiving each other. But there’s another element in there: repentance. If we repent, turn away from our sin in action and intent, forgiveness is available to us. Fine. Good. Perfect.

So what’s the problem?

The Weaponising of the Word

We have witnessed the floodgates open in terms of abuse allegations against churches and church leaders in recent times. I won’t rehash it again as I’ve blogged on it very recently and dropped names. Plus, lets be honest, most of you reading this would have a harrowing story or two pop to mind without my assistance. Sadly, there is a common story that runs right alongside allegations of abuse within religious circles and faith communities (not all of them, blah blah blah).

The modern day church too often weaponises the term ‘forgiveness’ against victims of abuse or mistreatment for whom there is no repentant transgressor. The term ‘forgiveness’ is then taken to mean ‘lose your chance at justice’, ‘sweep this under the rug’ or worse, ‘allow your abuser to keep abusing.’

Classic example: Josh Duggar of 19 Kids and Counting was busted for sexually abusing some of his sisters. He was sent to a church based rehab thing (which I seriously doubt the therapeutic credentials of) and then a big show was made of his sisters forgiving him. Justice was not done. It was swept under the rug. Years later, he is up on child pornography charges that make my stomach churn. The burden of forgiveness was placed on his sisters, the victims, while the burden of repentance with an active “turning from evil ways” was not adequately placed on Josh.

I wonder how his sisters feel. I don’t wonder what they say. I know what it’s like to be a good Christian girl and say the right things. But often this comes with a searing sense of betraying ones own soul. This never brings true healing. In my observation, it re-traumatises the victim because, when what they needed was a police report, a supportive community and a therapist, they were given trite scriptures justifying leaderships desire that they shut up about it. The meaning with which the word ‘forgiveness’ was imbued was made very, very clear.

That is traumatising. That is hitting out at vulnerable people who need the support of the church community. If Jesus was in the room, he wouldn’t be telling the victim to shut up. He’d more likely be throwing a table at those who demanded such silence and who got in the way of justice. I’m also quite sure that, should the perpetrator have a genuinely repentant heart, Jesus would forgive. But that doesn’t mean justice wouldn’t be done.

Remember: render unto Caesar what is Caesar’s. If sin is lawlessness, then there is a penalty for that even if you said you’re sorry.

While yes, the New Testament talks about forgiveness a lot, there is a condition. Maria Mayo writes, "The author of the Gospel of Luke repeats the same story, but adds a condition to forgiveness, stating that church members must forgive boundlessly "if there is repentance" (17:3).

So here is my hot take: The burden of forgiveness should not be pressed upon the victim of crime or abuse. The burden of repentance needs to be placed on the perpetrator. And that perp needs to “bear fruits worthy of repentance.” I.e. Hand yourself into the police if you have committed a crime. Even if your pastor says you don’t have to. Your pastor is not above the law of the land. Not ever.

Side note: Like many survivors of the more toxic aspects of church, I’ve heard the whole “turn the other cheek” line quite a bit, along with the old line about the Bible never contradicting itself. Here’s a fun one for you then - the Bible also says “an eye for an eye.” So while we can shrug off the little things and move on with our day, there is certainly no Biblical precedent for letting major abuse or mistreatment fall under the category “turn the other cheek.”

Just like there is no Biblical precedent for forgiving where there is no repentance. Even Jesus on the cross didn’t forgive, he prayed that God would. Modern translations of the Bible don’t tell us which version of Aphiemi was used in that moment. All we know is that Jesus died bearing no ill will towards the ones who taunted him, as unrepentant as they may be.

Which brings me to the next big point: what then do we do with our hurt?

Therapeutically speaking…

While undoubtedly, I’ve been known to write with a pen of fire (I think I can thank my grandmother, the original Kit, for this gift), those who know me see me as a soft-hearted and compassionate person. I can be both things - fiery and soft-hearted - because of two things: therapy and boundaries.

Not once has my therapist used the word “forgiveness” to me. She knows, as any good counsellor would, that such a word would shut down my processing of all the things I’ve gone through. It would stunt my progress towards peace and happiness. To be pushed in any way towards a certain end would be tantamount to therapeutic sabotage.

Under skilled, qualified care, I’m doing amazingly well.

While I am sure pastors and Christian teachers have good intentions for people when they speak about healing and forgiveness in the same breath, the two are not necessarily connected. Survivors of abuse and mistreatment do not need to forgive their unrepentant transgressors in order to gain mental and emotional health. They need to be empowered over and above the degree to which they were disempowered, they need supportive community that doesn’t play down or try to erase their abuse, and they need to be given adequate support to process and work through the trauma. This includes qualified medical and psychological help in many cases.

When we say “Just forgive” we shut down this vital pyscho-emotional processing, disempower the victim again, and stunt the growth towards healing. As well-intentioned as this might be, it is damaging. I’d argue that the road of true healing, psychoemotional processing of trauma and then empowered choices regarding justice or clemency is the hard road. the right road, but the hard road. “Just forgive” is easy in a way. You don’t have to face the damage. You don’t have to sit in the wreckage and look at it. You don’t have to decide anything.

But what we know from research regarding PTSD and trauma is that the body remembers. Trauma will find its way out of the shadows and up to the surface, no matter how many times you said the words I forgive.

One thing that makes me laugh these days is the contents of my shame shelf. Yes, you heard it. I had a shame shelf. Over the years, following my disclosure of abuse, I was given by various people quite a collection of books. I’d say most of them were gifted by well intended but poorly informed people. They were books on forgiveness, on how women need to be less bitter and then they’d feel better or how reading a prayer out loud would fix everything (*eye-roll). Would it surprise you that while this was the best advice available to me, I was at my worst?

They went on the shame shelf, right next to fiction novels I wouldn't dream of admitting I own. When I learned to laugh at the lot of those books, I threw them out (But okay. I kept the Twilight series. *Gasp). With them went my shame over having faced abuse in religious settings or communities. I realised the shame doesn’t belong on my shoulders. It belongs on the shoulders of those who did me wrong. I don’t hold it against the people who gave me those books. Frankly, I’ve only got a finite emotional budget to spend each day and it would get spent real quick if I dwelt on the actions of good people who were ill-informed. So I choose to laugh at the shame shelf and educate myself so I never make the same mistake, no matter how well-intentioned I am.

If there is no repentance, there is no capacity for real forgiveness if for no other reason than the victim then spends the rest of their life wondering if the perp is at it again. I can tell you this though. Forgiveness, where there is remorse, is amazing. I had the incredible experience of having one transgressor ask for my forgiveness. It was beautiful. It came at a time where I had benefited from enough therapy to have the skills to extend compassion and forgiveness while also maintaining boundaries. It goes down as a red letter day for me, because I felt empowered and in no way bitter at all. That was genuine repentance and forgiveness.

There are others from whom I will never get such a question. My pursuit of therapy has allowed me to have the skills to process that, set boundaries that maintain my emotional and mental safety (and that of my children) and move on. It does not mean never getting justice. It does not mean sweeping anything under the rug. It does not mean denying any of the things that happened. It does not mean remaining in a place where I am at risk of any sort of damage, even emotionally. And if I choose one day to seek justice, it doesn’t mean I am wrong in doing so.

Its rare for me to use my personal situation in such an example. I know this. But when so many people have suffered deeply personal abuse in situations similar to mine, its unfair to not use it as an example.

I have a mixed relationship with spirituality these days. I call myself post-Christian, because I’m so good with Jesus but I’m so not okay (for the most part) with church. But this is what I know: Jesus would not want the church to be a place of abuse and mistreatment, where the vulnerable are further disempowered and their need for justice and healing disregarded or even sabotaged. Jesus wouldn’t weaponise the word forgiveness. Neither should we. And if we can’t do away with even the slightest tendency to put pressure on victims to forgive unrepentant perpetrators, then we shouldn’t use the word at all. When Jesus offers us forgiveness if we repent, then its bad logic to think the same conditions don’t apply when we are called upon to decide.

Just some thoughts on a contentious topic.

You may now hit me with your hate mail. I’ll either forgive you if you ask nicely, or make fun of you at driveway drinks with my friends. It’s completely up to me.

As for the rest of you, I hope you get some context, relief and validation from this.

Peace

Kit K.

P.S. If you happen to go to a church that supports vulnerable people, has clear lines of accountability, transparency around protocols for reporting grievances and keeping people safe, and stands up for marginalised or traumatised people - I like that church. Just saying.

Read More
Clare McIvor Clare McIvor

Losing the Jezebel Brand

Last week I posted an article I thought would be a stand-alone. It was a rather academic piece on Jezebel – what she/it is and isn’t, and how it is wrongly used to subjugate and control women. I packed as much as I could into it in the vain hope that I’d never have to write on it again (read that here, if you haven’t already). 

But I already knew that I had to, didn’t I? You see I’ve learned something about you readers: you like the academic stuff, but you love the personal stuff. I’ve also learned something about me: I write what interests me, but any writer worth their salt draws from the deeper parts of themselves. For a long time I didn’t feel as if I owned my story. But I freaking do. So here I am, with my big girl pants on, telling you what its been like for me to gain and lose the Jezebel brand. 

I’m a big sister. I’m a mum. I’m a loyal friend. So perhaps it would come as no surprise that I’m the sort of person who can take a fair bit on the chin, feel the hurt, shrug it off and then get on with life. But when people around me are in pain or somehow negatively affected by something, then ohhhh mother. It takes all my strength to say “not my circus, not my monkeys” and stay out of it sometimes.

It wasn’t whether or not had been called a Jezebel that motivated me. It was other women’s stories – other women’s pain. It was other women trying to find their way in Christianity, or just in life, wearing this shame that comes with the inference that you are under the influence of an evil spirit; that you are responsible for the lack of spiritual progress in your church, for division, for ill health, for bad things that have happened in relationships or families. It takes a bit to recover from that and find your personality and voice again. I think, I hope, I’ve learned some things along the way. They say sharing is caring so here we are.

First a bit about “Jezebel” and me.

I have to say up front that it was never said to my face. No one ever said to me “you are a Jezebel. It was said to my husband though. It was said to my face in other words. “You shouldn’t be so strong. You need to surrender your opinion. You’re becoming too much. Surrender. Back down. Don’t ask questions. Your intellect is a problem to God. If you ever hope to get married, then you need to learn not to be such a handful.” Or the big one, “I’m not saying you are a Jezebel, but you ought to be careful not to act under the influence.”

I knew what that meant, because I’d heard or been part of conversations where other women had been talked about in the same terms. They were called Jezebels. Thus, by characterisation, I was at risk of being one of them. I knew when I was out of favour, and I knew when I was in. I knew, by virtue of the gossip I’d been part of, that certain things would be said about me. The J word, if not pronounced explicitly, would be present in every insinuation.

But you see, I wasn’t a Jezebel, and I knew it. If Jezebel was associated with sexual immorality, then how could I, a virgin on her wedding day and a faithful wife, be one? Even if I wasn’t a virgin on my wedding day, it still would have been a long, long way from Baal, the fertility cults of Canaan which Jezebel partook in and their alleged temple orgies. Gosh! If Jezebel was associated with idolatry, how could I, a monotheistic Christian constantly on guard against putting other things before God, be idolatrous? If Jezebel was associated with unsubmissiveness, then how could I, the woman who wanted to vow to “love honour and obey” on her wedding day (but took the vow out because my husband wasn’t comfortable with it) be one of them? But as comfortable as I was in my knowledge of this, I was not immune to the feelings that come with the brand.

  • You start to ask God why He made you smart/inquisitive/bubbly/passionate, if that made you a problem. You feel ashamed of these aspects of your personality, so you try to mute it.

  • You start to feel guilty when male attention comes your way, and feel ashamed of your sexuality or your looks (both of which are God-given parts of who you are).

  • You begin to hate your desire to use your talents (for God, or for fun or vocation in my case), because you know this could come across as attention seeking and that would add fuel to the fire.

  • You begin to second guess your discernment. If something feels or looks wrong, you silence your misgivings – partially because you doubt yourself, partially because you know that if you raised it you’d be “being a handful” or “dishonouring leadership.” I.e. You’d be acting under the influence of Jezebel.

All in all, this Jezebel brand can have the effect of eroding a persons confidence and discernment, muting their talent, intellect and sexuality, causing their self-esteem to plummet and their personal appearance to be the cause of great shame. Gosh, you should try dodging the ‘seductive/attention seeking/Jezebel’ brand while possessing boobs and being expected to dance at every worship service. Good golly. If that isn’t a double bind!

Can you see why I feel so strongly that this label is harmful, and that bad theology is dangerous? Too many women have had it worse than me. Too many women still struggle to find their voices, or to fully express their strength, femininity, talent, intelligence or charisma. Too many women are not living the lives God intended for them – all because of bad theology that is too often used against them.

I don’t care whether you are egalitarian or complementarian. I don’t care whether you believe women should have the right to preach/pastor or not. This type of inequality does not belong in the church. Not when all of us are fearfully and wonderfully made, and marvellous are the works of the one who made us. (Psalm 139:14)

Shaking off the big J brand

Every healing journey begins with the realisation that you have something to heal from. We see the world through rose coloured glasses sometimes, because its easier to smile and say, “Oh no thats totally fine,” than to look at your wound and say “Yeah that hurt.” Because that statement has another statement attached to it. “That hurt, and you hurt me.” It might be a person, it might be a system. Either way, the realisation that you have something to heal from often comes with the realisation that something else ain’t right. Once that bubble has popped, it’s popped. You can’t unpop it. The only thing you can do is sit with that realisation, and then eventually figure out what you will do with it.

Read lots. I know, I am a nerd. This is how I handle life. But reading *helped* me. I read the Bible. I read commentaries on the Bible. I took notes about what I agreed with  and what I didn’t agree with and why. I talked with people wiser than me and let my inner nerd loose like a kid in a lolly shop. I discovered a lot of theological clashes that had made their way into my belief system. But I also discovered that the colloquial term “Jezebel” that is used to control and subjugate women bears little resemblance to the Biblical character and the warnings that accompany her.

Find people who will tell you the truth. I’ve always valued people who tune me, who don’t blindly agree. When someone confronts bad ideas and tunes you on them, that’s a valuable thing. When those same people tell you “Nope! That’s wrong. You aren’t this thing you’ve been called. Don’t accept that,” then you’ve got to listen. It was these people who helped me regain my faith in God and in myself, and who reminded me again and again that it is okay to be strong, and to be a woman of substance.

Remember you are fearfully and wonderfully made, and marvellous are your creators works. If I am a work of art, then how awful of me to hate myself and whine to my creator about what a rubbish job He did. If I was to honour God, then I needed to honour what He made me: smart, bubbly, loving, passionate, generous, talkative, curious, discerning, musical, a nonconformist who can’t stand injustice and needs to uncover bad theology, a compassionate person who can’t look upon the plight of wounded people and feel nothing. None of these things are bad. All of these things are God-given, and thus He would not look upon them or me with shame.

Take back your story. Take back your voice. You don’t have to do this in spite. You don’t have to do it on anyone else’s timeline. You can be kind, strong, restrained and do things in your time and on your terms. Eventually I had to stop being ashamed of my story. I haven’t told it yet. I may only ever tell snippets (because there are too many other people whose stories intersect with mine, and even though some of these people have hurt me, they are still people).

Tangent! But! I was saying – It is my story though. No one else owns it. I decide what to do with it. For now, I’m sitting comfortable in my ownership, and only sharing what I think is relevant and helpful to other people. But there is a whole lot of freedom that comes with knowing the simple fact that no one else owns your story, and no one else gets to tell you what to do with your voice.

I’ll be the first to admit, it has taken/is taking me a while to take back my voice. I’ve been a writer since I was a kid. I’ve ghostwritten books. I’ve authored novels. But to write non-fiction, and to examine doctrine was what I always wanted to do. It took me until last year to do it. I was scared people in my past would think it was a veiled dig at them, even if it had nothing to do with them. I grew the courage to blog about things that fascinated me, but didn’t have the courage to share it. I was still scared of other peoples judgements of me. But there came a tipping point where I had to think “Okay, how long am I going to let other people run my life? How long am I going to ignore God’s promptings and defer to the judgement of people who don’t love me like He does?”

Things went boom on this blog. Every time I think about quitting, I get another thank you email from someone it has helped. So I owe it to myself and others to keep on. I never write something out of spite. I never write when I am hot headed. But I owe myself, others, and my creator, better honour than to let fear dictate my limits.

I am a woman. I am loved by God. I am worthy of equality. The patriarchal systems within some churches may not agree. Some men may not agree. But I do not attend those churches and I am not married to those men. This is my space, and I intend to fully inhabit it.

Look in the mirror and try to see what God does. If you can do it, look at your kids and ask “What do I want for them?” I looked at my daughter, and I asked it about her. My husband and I want the same things for her. We want her to be free to be herself in the fullest possible way. She’s only one, but she’s smart, loving, wacky, affectionate, musical, inquisitive and just so beautiful. We will teach her to own these things and never to listen to someone who tells her they aren’t pure and wonderful. If you can’t see yourself the way God sees you, if you can’t see His heart for you when you look in the mirror, then look at your kids and ask yourself “how much more does my creator love me?”

I asked that question. I couldn’t argue with the response. So this fierce and worthy woman is shaking off the shame of a brand that once tried to attach itself to me. It is not mine. I won’t have it. You can say what you like about me. That simply doesn’t make it true.

Before I sign off – a shout out to my branded sisters, wherever you might read this from: You owe it to yourself, your partner, your kids and your creator to rise up above the voices that tried to control and minimise you. What you are is beautiful. No one else gets to dictate how much of your true self you can let shine through. Don’t become less just because someone doesn’t think you have the right to shine. You do.

You do. And I do.

Go in peace, girlfriend

Kit K. 

Read More
Clare McIvor Clare McIvor

What to Do if You or Someone You Love is in a Cult

Hey there world, This series has been somewhat of a surprise to me – not in terms of content, but in terms of readership. Ordinarily, I would have gone off into other topics again by now, but due to the fact that this has been picked up by another blog, I need to finish it where I said I would.

I’m doing it via video…eeeeek! Sometimes you need to see whether the person on the other end of the article is a friendly face. I hope you see mine as friendly! Click the link to check the vid! The video is the whole blog post so like - go on. Click it. If you are in a safe place to listen to this stuff without someone asking questions. Here for you. xo


https://youtu.be/8B6acd_S66I

I forgot to raise one thing in the video (because – nerves! I like to be behind the camera not in front of it!) And that is that institutional religion can offer the benefit of solid policies, grievance procedures, and that these can/should exist to protect the people inside it. I meant to say that…but completely forgot. Anyway! Go watch the video, and don’t forget this isn’t a tell all – you’ll need to read the rest of the series if you missed it. Thanks for tuning in. I really hope this helps, or at least raises awareness and compassion for what some people may be going through. Cults/high demand groups/toxic groups still happen. They didn’t go out of fashion in the 70’s.Okay! Go watch if you haven’t already. And if you  need more info, don’t be afraid to consult an expert.

Be safe. Be happy. Be free.
Kit K.

Read More
Clare McIvor Clare McIvor

Thinking Errors and Thought Stoppers in Cults

Welcome to part 6 of the “Cults and Unhealthy Groups” series. I thought I’d be done by now, but as it turns out there are a few more things that popped up on my radar that made me go “Hmmm. Now that needs a little more awareness.” So we need to talk about cognitive distortions and thought-stopping clichés. A couple of slightly tidier terms for these are “thought-stoppers” and “thinking errors.”

I’m going to try and keep this light, but if you are exiting or have recently exited a cult/unhealthy group, you may find some examples triggering. If you do, make sure you contact one of the helplines listed at the bottom of the article. Look after yourself, friend. You are worth it.

When it comes to cognitive distortions (thinking errors) – anyone can have them. To me, that seems pretty much human. We can be healthy in some areas of our thinking and others can be thoroughly unhelpful. But there are counsellors, journals or wise friends to help us recognise these and get through them. Whether you are in a cult or not, you can have a couple of these going on. No biggie. But there’s a big difference between say, the cognitive distortions of a teenager with an eating disorder and the cognitive distortions of a cult leader and the effect that could have on their followers.

If you are going to pick up a book on this topic, then “Captive Minds: Captive Hearts” by Lalich and Tobias is about as good as it gets. The topic of cognitive distortions in cults is not a newie and all of these terms have come from experts (i.e. not me!) But! When it comes to cults/unhealthy groups, the thing I find interesting is the way that thinking errors can feed into the power and control structures of the group. I’m not an expert and this is a step outside my comfort zone. I’d rather just lay out the research. But I feel like examples will help make this more relatable. So its research writer meets fiction writer today. I hope it helps.

We need to know what these things are before we can be empowered to recognise them. We can’t always help others see their own thinking errors, especially in cults. But we can free our own minds from their negative effects.

Cognitive Distortions/Thinking Errors

There’s a list of 15 at Psych Central, and another list of 50 at Psychology Today but I thought I’d pick out the ones that may be most applicable to cults.  Psychologist Linda Tilgner (and co-writers) flagged the first five of these when they were writing on the topic of institutional abuse.  The last two are added by yours truly based on other reading. If you’ve read the first few pieces in this series, you’ll know by now that cult leaders can wield a whole lot of control over their followers – in every area of life, potentially. What I’m going to jump right into is what these thinking errors are and how they might be used to further entrench the ideas and control structures of the group.

1 – Mental filtering. This occurs when you filter out some of the details of a story or situation and fixate (usually) on the negatives. A person may ignore all the positives in a situation and focus only on the down-sides, thus allowing their thinking to spiral toward a dark or doomy conclusion.

How might a cult leader do this? They may ignore or filter out the good progress society is making in many areas and use a single crime to paint a picture of the world becoming a more depraved or dangerous place. The rumination on this single event could then be linked with unrelated events to create a dark picture of the future. This may then cause followers to fear/distance the outside world more, and further devote themselves to the teachings and lifestyle of the group – which they may believe will be the thing that ‘saves’ them. Their commitment to their group, and the leaders control over them, becomes more entrenched.

2 – Polarised thinking. This one is also called “Black and white” thinking, and basically it removes all grey areas or middle ground. You are either a complete success or an utter failure. People are either for you (team/pseudo-family/covenant) or against you (enemies/people who cannot be trusted).   There is no middle ground like a neutral acquaintance or just steady progress in life with a minor setback here and there.

In a cult/unhealthy group setting, the most obvious way this might play out is the ‘us vs them’ mindset where people are either allies or enemies and nothing in between. This has the potential to create deep divisions between family/friends and the cult member, or even fuel a persecution complex.

But on a more personal level, the demand for purity (that Robert Lifton talks about in his work) means that this polarised thinking could result in the “complete success or utter failure” version of polarised thinking – If I mess up even once, it’s a disaster. I’m a complete failure. (This links with another thinking error called “catastrophisation” but time doesn’t permit me to go there.) Given the control structures within the cult, and the impact of failure on a persons standing in the group, the pressure to conform could be loaded with consequences here.

3 – Overgeneralisation. This is when we come to a general conclusion based on a single incident or a single piece of evidence. In a cult setting, the leader may use this tendency towards overgeneralisation to make sweeping statements based on single events, further entrenching their teachings, labels or view of the world, whilst also filtering out the details that don’t suit their narrative and using polarised thinking to further separate followers from “the rest of the world.” The world is getting darker. This group is a problem. This person has an agenda. This person or thing is a threat. That sort of thing.

4 – Emotional reasoning. Emotional reasoning is when you feel something so therefore you believe it is true. Lalich and Tobias, in “Captive Minds, Captive Hearts” (cited here) explain it this way: “In groups that place emphasis on feeling over thinking, members learn to make choices and judge reality solely based on what they feel.  This is true of all New Age groups and many transformational and psychology cults.  Interpreting reality through feelings is a form of wishful thinking. If it really worked, we would all be wealthy and the world would be a safe and happy place.  When this type of thinking turns negative, it can be a shortcut to depression and withdrawal:  “I feel bad, worthless, and so on, therefore I am bad, worthless, and so on.”

Side note: One of the reasons cult leaders have such power over their people is that their followers believe they have special enlightenment, or a special ability to hear God or be God. So they’re not going to call emotional reasoning what it is. It would take someone pretty darn ballsy (or unconcerned with their reputation or standing in the group) to say “I don’t think that’s based on fact. I think its emotional reasoning.”

What might emotional reasoning look like in a cult or high demand group? Imagine an extended meditation session guided by a guru, or perhaps an extended praying in tongues session, or intense music that leads you into an altered state of consciousness, one where you are emotionally heightened, open-minded and impressionable. Things said at the peak of such an experience may resonate very strongly because of the emotional state you are in. It can be very easy to take them as truth during this time even if the evidence in your life is contradictory. “I must change.” “God will only love me if I change.” “I must become better.” “I must work harder.” Or “A particular thing in my life is about to change. I just know it. I’m going to make life decisions based on this feeling.”

Experiences during such heightened states may not be recognised as emotional reasoning, but this is what it can indeed be.

5 – Labelling. This happens when we take one occurrence or characteristic and apply a label to someone. Its unhealthy when we do it to ourselves or other people, but when a group dynamic is added, and a single person has the power to label someone and have a whole group agree without questioning – that’s powerful. In Scientology, dissenters are branded “Suppressive persons”. In other groups, there are other words. “Jezebel” is one I’ve heard thrown around a bit. Labels can damage a persons self-esteem, but also their relationships and standing within the group.  A person could be labelled anything by a cult leader, and because followers lack the ability to question him/her, it can be difficult or impossible to shift.

The “us vs them” mindset is also an example of labelling in the cult/unhealthy group context. This has the power to make followers disregard the care and input of entire groups of people because they’ve been labelled as an enemy.

6 – Mind reading.I just knew what they were thinking.” If a guru/central person in a cult tells us this, we may whole-heartedly believe they actually knew what someone was thinking. We may even react pre-emptively based on this assumption. Guess what: We can’t read minds. No one can. So if you are told “they were thinking this,” and it didn’t come straight from the mouth of the person who was thinking it, it’s a cognitive distortion. No one can read minds. Not even your guru/pastor. This links with another cognitive distortion called “fortune telling” where people claim to know what happens next. “They’re thinking this…they’ll do this next.” That sort of thing. No one can know. They can only guess.

How might this look in a cult/unhealthy group setting? “She’s thinking this. She’ll do this next” is said by the guru/central person and the group goes into damage control mode. All over something that may not have been thought, and hasn’t been done.

7 – Cognitive Conformity (also known as) Group Think. Psychology Today explains cognitive conformity (or group-think) as “Seeing things the way people around you view them. Research has shown that this often happens at an unconscious level.”

A cult or unhealthy/high demand group may exhibit this group-think by unquestioning agreement with the central person in the group. This culture of “Don’t question the leader” may result in unconscious agreement with everything he/she says, even if it means suppressing ones own misgivings.

If you are to look in a normal group of say, 20 people, there are likely to be clusters of opinions on a particular issue and not all of them will be in agreement. But if a leader gives a statement and then says “Do you agree?” to a group of 20, and everyone agrees or adds more so-called evidence (which may be based on emotional reasoning or mind-reading) to the leaders statement, you may have yourself a thinking error in action.  This should be especially concerning (in my opinion) if you feel fear about voicing a differing opinion. My belief is that this potentially links with another thinking error, the in-group bias where we tend to trust people in our circle, from our background or from our own experience more than others. If you can only trust people in your group, if you can only listen to opinions from an echo chamber, you may have a problem.

How do these cognitive distortions work together in a cult or unhealthy group setting?

Individually, they look a little different. They may make it difficult for a person to be happy or at peace in life. They may screw with personal relationships. But they don’t have the same controlling or coercive power they have in a cult/unhealthy group. As I mentioned further up, its the interplay that I find interesting. I’m not an expert. But here’s how it could play out.

You’ve been trained not to question the leader. You believe he possesses a level enlightenment you’ve not seen equalled. You’ve gone through the programs and have learned to see things his way, to look through his eyes. So you haven’t even noticed that you are subject to group-think or an in-group bias. You start to filter out uncomfortable details – details that mess with your groups way of seeing the world. People who disagree with you are distanced, disregarded or cut off from your life. If they aren’t for you, they’re against you. You are seeing things through the polarised thinking that is part of the group. No one picks you up on this, because everyone thinks the same way. 

You go to one of those meditation sessions. After hours of pushing yourself to the limits and stilling your mind so you can receive enlightenment, the guru speaks. Its truth. You know it. You feel it. You don’t pick up on the fact that he used overgeneralisation and mental filtering to lead you to the point of unquestioning belief. You start to think about implementing this new truth in to your life. You don’t realise its emotional reasoning, because you don’t check it against anything. What you do know is that you must succeed at it. This is vital. This leader has a unique level of enlightenment. You won’t question it because you don’t want to miss out. Group think, meets emotional reasoning, meets polarised thinking, influenced by overgeneralisation and mental filtering. If anyone challenges you, you know to shut them down. You have something precious, even if it doesn’t make sense to anyone else. Even if you can’t explain it. If there was ever a conflict, you know you would agree with the guru. He has the keys for you life. You feel it. Therefore it is true.

Now for a little more on Thought-Stoppers

I know the “thought-stopping” cliché was mentioned in part two of this series, but I felt it warranted a little more of an example, hence its mention here. Thought-stopping cliches are used in cults and unhealthy groups to kill dialogue or healthy, investigative thought. Nathan Dial (of Medium) wrote, ” It is an essential tool of totalitarians and would-be brainwashers. Be aware of it, and guard against it. A very large amount of both everyday and politically-oriented (and at times, religious oriented as well) rhetoric consists of these.”

Robert Lifton also talks about it in his discussion of “Loading the Language” which you can read here.

Some everyday examples include:

  • It is what it is

  • S@*t happens

  • God works in mysterious ways

  • Its all good

  • Just choose joy (actually I wrote a whole blog post on that here).

All of these could cause someone to silence their misgivings or questions in order to just accept something and move on without thinking about it. But there are other examples. “Its apples and oranges” may cause someone in a cult/unhealthy group to stop comparing their own groups thoughts/doctrines with others, when in fact they can be compared. Another one is “Damned if you do, damned if you don’t” which can reduce tricky situations to a double binds which can’t be solved.

I just wanted to illustrate how thought-stoppers can affect someone in a group. I agonised over what kind of an example to use here. I decided to use one regarding women, because its a story I’ve heard a lot: (Trigger warning: deals with disclosures of abuse)

  • Person A discloses abuse to Person B. The story goes around the group and a few people now know about it. The guru/central person needs to shut it down. Guru says to Person B “She’s just not seeing things straight. Her perception is altered. You know, she’s been through so much.”

  • Person B doesn’t investigate further. “She’s not seeing straight. She’s been through so much” was enough to make them nod, agree, and not look any further. Person B now assumes Person A is mentally affected, and unable to see things straight. The thought process has been stopped.  This may be repeated through-out the group to discredit the person who disclosed the abuse. (Abhorrent behaviour, in my opinion! All victims should be given the benefit of our compassion and belief. Anyway..!)

Let’s think this through. Follow-on questions could probe beyond the thought-stopper and arrive at the conclusion that the victim is actually seeing things straight and should be believed.

What has she been through, then?” (Ahhh, so she has faced abuse? So she is seeing things straight).

And who did that to her?” (And there’s the whole ballgame. Don’t get me wrong, abusive people will dodge, weave, gaslight and lie to avoid getting caught. But eventually the truth comes out, because the more lies that are required to cover the tracks, the more likely it is that one will end up in a “Gotchya” moment.)

Asking questions beyond the thought-stopper is powerful. Whether we are allowed to do it out loud (without putting ourselves at risk) or whether we do it in the silence of our own thoughts until we can get to a place of freedom, it can be liberating. It’s important.

Too often, we stop at “They’ve been through so much” as a means of discrediting someone. Too often, victims end up defending themselves because they have a right and need to be heard but they’re in an establishment that’s not listening. Next time someone tries this on you, ask what they’ve been through. Ask who did it. Don’t fall for the thought stoppers.

If any of these rang a bell for you, and if you feel you need support right now, please call either Lifeline on 13 11 14  (for mental health support) or the Cult Information and Family Support Service. You aren’t alone. You can get through this. There are people here who get it, and are here to help.

BIBLIOGRAPHY:

Grohol J , Psych Central “15 Common Cognitive Distortions,” https://psychcentral.com/lib/15-common-cognitive-distortions/

Boyes A, Psychology Today, “50 Common Cognitive Distortions,” https://www.psychologytoday.com/au/blog/in-practice/201301/50-common-cognitive-distortions

Tilgner L, Dowie T, and Denning N, Integrative Psychology, “Recovery from church, institutional and cult abuse: A review of theory and treatment perspectives,” https://integrativepsychology.net.au/wp-content/uploads/2017/11/institutional-abuse.pdf

Tobias M and Lalich J (excerpt cited on International Cultic Studies Association), “The Role of Cognitive Distortion” http://www.icsahome.com/articles/the-role-of-cognitive-distortion-tobias

Dial, M, Medium, “Beware the Thought Stopping Cliche,” https://medium.com/@nathandial/thinking-friends-please-be-informed-about-the-thought-stopping-cliché-ea6b0d9510d8

And the rest of the articles in this series if you missed them

How do I know if I’m in a cult – https://kitkennedy.com/2018/09/06/how-do-i-know-if-im-in-a-cult/

8 Key Characteristics of cults – https://kitkennedy.com/2018/09/06/8-key-characteristics-of-cults/

What cults have in common – https://kitkennedy.com/2018/09/08/cult-commonalities/

What is gaslighting in cults and high demand groups? – https://kitkennedy.com/2018/09/12/what-is-gaslighting/

Whats the difference between a cult and a healthy church: the Kit Kennedy Opinion -https://kitkennedy.com/2018/09/16/difference-between-cult-and-church/

Read More
Clare McIvor Clare McIvor

What is the Difference Between a Cult and a Healthy Church?

After an interesting week, to say the least, and more than 2000 hits on a blog series I haven’t advertised at all, I’m taking a short break from the juicy cult stuff to write about an important topic – what to look for in a healthy church. After this, I’ll be writing about cognitive distortions (unhelpful thinking patterns) common in cults, and theological cat-fishing. Can’t wait to bring you those, but in the meantime, lets talk about something positive!

First of all, I have to acknowledge an irony here: my husband and I skipped church today. We just couldn’t bring ourselves to go. We’d had a big week. Our phones have been pinging constantly for two weeks following a couple of Facebook posts which mentioned that we were no longer members of my family’s church (the one they run), a disclosure that lead my Dad (the senior pastor) to comment in the local newspaper about it. Not going to lie: that stung. But the public response to that fiasco lead to yet more support for us, and sadly, more disclosures of peoples own sad stories. I’m seeing that there are a lot of people wounded by church. I mean, I knew there would be a lot of hurt people out there because there are a lot of unhealthy churches out there. But it really hit home this week. It motivates me to write more. Because knowledge is power, and because to me, faith should be empowering not crushing.

I understand that if you’ve been wounded by a church or cult experience, it can be seriously difficult to approach church or faith again. But there is a difference between cults and true christianity, just like there’s a difference between healthy and unhealthy churches. I can’t possibly cover the whole gamete here, but I can give you a few gems on what I believe you should to look for in a healthy (vs. unhealthy) church.

Here’s my list of considerations:

1. The Hebrews 10 test: In Hebrews 10:23-25 it says “Let us hold fast the confession of our hope without wavering, for He who promised is faithful. And let us consider one another in order to stir up love and good works, not forsaking the assembling of ourselves together, as is the manner of some, but exhorting one another, and so much the more as you see the Day approaching.” Some translations say “for the uplifting and edification” of the saints.” But whatever the translation, this is about stirring up hope, love, good works, and leaving us feeling encouraged and edified or empowered. Sure, exhortation can also involve delivering the tough-love truth in order to bring us further along in our walk with God, but it should always leave us feeling more empowered. 

This scripture doesn’t encourage us to hand over control of our walk with God.  It’s about stirring up love and good works. “Assembling together” and “exhorting one another” sound very egalitarian to me – eluding that we are peers, we are together, there is not one whose place is over us to make demands or control us. A healthy church, to me, has a pastor as a leader among peers, not ever on a pedestal to be the one through whom we filter our faith or our relationship with God. There is a mountain of scripture I could go through here, but lets save that for another blog post.

Another quick caveat here – Ephesians 2:8-9 says that “Salvation is by grace through faith and not of works, lest anyone should boast.” So there’s a line. Exhorting each-other towards good works is one thing, demanding it so it qualifies you for salvation is quite another.

What to look for: a church that lifts you up, empowers you, doesn’t avoid preaching truth, but always binds it in love, hope, and exhortation towards good works. A church should make a positive contribution to the families and community that it touches.

2. The Romans 14 test: In Romans 14: 17 it says “for the kingdom of God is not eating and drinking, but righteousness and peace and joy in the Holy Spirit.” So look at that last bit.  Righteousness is right standing with God. That is something that can only be attained through Christ. If we think good works is the key here, and if there is no peace or joy, we have legalism – a problem (in my opinion). If we do not have peace, then there’s a problem. If there is no joy, then there is another potential red flag. If this is the metaphorical three legged stool, then we need to look for evidence of all three. Otherwise we have ourselves in a wonky establishment, something we can’t rest our metaphorical tooshes on without risk of a fall. The Bible exhorts us to judge a tree by its fruit. So have a look around and see how this is sitting.

How do you test it? Follow your heart, honestly, as that’s the best barometer of whether or not you’ve found your spiritual home. But be aware. “In their slick advertising, cults present smiling faces and happy families (Aron, Cults, too Good to be True).” So if the smiles are too wide and constant, you might be looking at something with a shiny facade that can’t be trusted.

The other point up for consideration is mental health. In mental health terms, the antithesis of peace is anxiety and the antithesis of joy is depression. Does this mean that depression and anxiety shouldn’t exist in the church? I’m not saying that. One in four people in the modern world will have mental health struggles at some point, that’s ok. That’s life. A healthy church will support them as they find treatment and restoration. But church should build us up. It should support us. If you are looking around and seeing a lot of people diagnosed with mental health issues after becoming involved in a group, you might have to think about why.

What to look for: three legs to the stool – righteousness, peace and joy. But make sure its genuine, not a front. 

3. The Doctrinal Question Test: What happens when a doctrine is questioned? Does the pastor react poorly? Or do they say “Make yourself a cuppa. Let’s kick this around”? Are you allowed to arrive at an “agree to disagree” point after discussion? Cults and high demand groups usually don’t allow questions, even from the inner circle (More on that here). In a healthy church, questions and genuine respectful debate are allowed or even encouraged. The truth is that the Bible is a complicated book. Theologically, there are many different lenses you can apply to it. Choosing one over the other shouldn’t leave you feeling excluded, mocked, shamed or at worst, excommunicated. The other part to the “doctrine” test is this: does your church know what it believes and is this consistent through each layer of the church? If you don’t know what your church believes when it comes to basic doctrines, you could have a problem.

What to look for: a church that encourages healthy discourse when it comes to matters of faith, doctrine, or even the how the church itself runs, and is clear on what it’s key doctrines are.

4. The Friends, Family and Community Test: Does your church encourage healthy engagement with friends, family and community, strengthening them and building them up? Or does it drive a wedge between you and them? Does it encourage legitimate, altruistic engagement with your community, or is there another agenda behind it? A healthy church will never divide you from your family or friends, and it won’t foster and “us and them” mentality. Dividing someone from friends and family is something that is flagged as a concern in domestic-abuse type relationships. If a church exhibits this characteristic, it is no less concerning (read more on that here). I’ll also have to flag here that I’m strongly anti-dominionist in my theology. My belief (based on Philippians 2:5-11 among others) is that Jesus came to serve not to conquer and we should emulate that. Not everyone will agree with that, but I’m strongly skeptical of churches that exhibit dominionist theology and want to take over a community rather than serve it.

What to look for: A church that doesn’t divide families or do harm to communities. It should serve and uplift both.

5. The Discipleship Test: Discipleship programs are common in churches, just as thought-reform programs are common in cults. I like to ask this question: does the discipleship program build up the person so they are more empowered, more discerning, more informed, more able to make their own life choices in accordance with where they believe God is guiding them? Or are they less able to engage in independent thought, becoming more and more dependant on the group? If the latter, watch out. (Because I’m dropping in a reference or scripture in every section here, I’ve linked this article on abusive forms of discipleship, but only read it if you’re in for something heavy!)

What to look for:  Programs that make people more personally empowered and capable of independent thought, rather than more dependant on the group and less capable to think independently.

6. The Clear Structure Test: If you were to have a grievance in your church, would it be clear to you who and how this would be rectified? Or would you feel fear and potential isolation? I’m a little wary of independent churches, especially if there is no board the pastor legitimately answers to. Most cults are ‘self-sealing systems‘ – they are their own power structures which can make grievances difficult to air or resolve. The central person becomes “the voice of God” who can’t be questioned. If your pastor has no one they are accountable to, or if you don’t know who you could take a grievance to, then this risk is wide open.

What to look for: Somewhere where there are clear lines of communication and accountability, clear policies and procedures, and consistency through-out the whole organisation. 

7. The Truth Test: I didn’t know what to call this one, but I guess the thing I’m questioning here is this – does your group have a single guru-type that it gleans all its truth from, or does it recognise truth can and does come from multiple sources? Does it always come back and check “truth” with the Bible and consider the interpretation of it against the nature of God? If your church is only allowed to ‘draw from one well’ so to speak, then you could have a problem. Clean water is clean water wherever you drink it from. Truth is truth, wherever you glean it from. My other little flag here, and it is a personal flag, is this: does your church talk about different types of truth, or suggest that facts and truth may differ. They don’t. Truth is truth. If the facts don’t line up, then there’s an issue.

What to look for: a church that genuinely seeks to grow in its understanding of truth and doctrine, that looks for confirmation from multiple sources and checks back with the Big Guy and His Book (meaning God and the Bible).

8. The “I’ve missed a Sunday” test: I missed this Sunday. I missed it because we had a huge week, one that was incredibly raw emotionally. There was no demand on me to justify why I missed it. I just did. This, to me, is good. Because it means my church trusts me to make my own decisions, and doesn’t treat me as its property. If your church puts unreasonable attendance demands on you, even for midweek meetings or for “volunteering” opportunities (which may be voluntary in name only), then you might consider the possibility that this could be a high demand group. (Read more here)

What to look for: genuine freedom, known by its fruit and not just by its narrative. 

9. The Robert Lifton Test: I’m not going to spell this all out again, but check out my blog post on 8 Key Characteristics of Cults. They’re taken from a well-respected psychiatrist who researched mind-control techniques. Read that and make sure your group doesn’t check too many boxes!

If you want another opinion on this whole issue of finding a healthy church, check out this article here.

As mentioned above, this past week or so has seen us inundated with contact from people with various stories. Some of you will find it impossible to even think about walking back into a church again. I completely get that. So I have three encouragements for you: 1. Allow yourself to heal. That takes time. 2. Feel free to use this post as a checklist if you find yourself able to consider church again. 3. If you can’t ever walk into a church again, know that doesn’t mean you can’t ever approach God again. I’d encourage you to find a friend, even one, that you can share your life and faith with. Even if thats just over a coffee or a beer every now and then, because guess what “Wherever two or more are gathered in My [God’s] name, there I AM in the midst.”

Take the pressure off, friend. Recover. Then revisit this stuff always remembering that your gut instinct is something to be listened to. Once again, I’ve hyperlinked the heck out of this article. Don’t feel like you have to follow every link. Its just so you know I didn’t make up all these opinions myself. There are a mountain of considerations you could make. These are just my top 9.

Cheers and good luck.
Kit K

Read More
Clare McIvor Clare McIvor

What is Gaslighting in Cults and Toxic Groups?

What do we do when something upsets our status quo? When it confronts our deepest held ideals, threatens to dethrone our idols, and tarnish our heroes? What do we do when someone comes forward and says “I was a victim of abuse. This person [who you all held in such high regard] took something from me, damaged me profoundly.” And out pours their awful story. 

In my time in evangelicalism, I’ve observed the lengths people will go to in order to protect the way they see the world. Sadly, sometimes, even often times, this does not deal kindly with those who deserve our utmost compassion and care, and whose deep craving to be heard and believed is too often met with scorn and cover-ups.

Long before the abuse victim finds the courage to speak up (if they find it at all), there exists a psychological phenomenon that has a unique ability to keep them silent and make them doubt their own story. This can be true for cults and toxic groups. It can also be very true for domestic violence situations – very often, in fact.

Guys. We need to talk about gaslighting.

“Gaslighting is a form of psychological manipulation that seeks to sow seeds of doubt in a targeted individual or in members of a targeted group, making them question their own memory, perception, and sanity. Using persistent denial, misdirection, contradiction and lying, it attempts to destabilize the victim and delegitimize the victim’s belief. Instances may range from the denial by an abuser that previous abusive incidents ever occurred up to the staging of bizarre events by the abuser with the intention of disorienting the victim [1].” 

The term has its origins in a pretty messed up movie called “Gaslight” from the 1940’s. In it, an overbearing, abusive husband paints his wife as the crazy one, and makes her believe she is seeing and hearing things, by messing with the gaslights and denying it. That is the super quick version, but the full movie was pretty twisted by 1940’s standards. In recent years, the term has been used in clinical and research literature quite extensively.

It’s just a shame more people don’t know what it looks like, because this little trick is one that can be used by abusive individuals or toxic/unhealthy groups to hold people captive, and make them believe they are crazy or incompetent.

It’s horrible. Insidious. It can heap more damage on people who are nothing like the narrative set up around them, and put the monster inside their own head as the words of the abuser continue to do damage even when they are not around. Let me show you how it can look, but before I do – a hefty trigger warning! The Lifeline phone number will be at the end of this post. Call it if you need it.

Now. Gaslighting is often a term used in domestic violence relationships. But I think it’s fair to say that in cults or toxic groups, it is often individuals in positions of power who abuse other individuals. So the gaslighting example I’m about to give you could be one between guru/pastor/leader and follower:

A victim, lets call her Karen, attempts to confront her abuser over something he said that she didn’t believe to be true. She’s tried before one on one, but he yells at her until she stops and just listens. No one is there to witness it. So this time she asks him about it in front of someone. “I just wanted to clarify something you said to me on Tuesday,” she says, fearful.

“I didn’t speak to you on Tuesday,” he responds, glibly.

“Yes you did. I was at your office. I arrived at five past ten. I texted you because I was going to be late,” Karen says. She starts to feel anxious.
“No you didn’t,” he says. “I wasn’t there Tuesday.”

She knows he was. She goes to check her phone/diary. “See, here’s my appointment. I was there. SO were you.”

He grabs his phone and opens up their text message history, fumbling for a second. “Here. No text message. You weren’t there Tuesday. Your memory is playing tricks on you.”

She panics, but presses on with rising anxiety. “Anyway! We had a discussion where you said (insert damaging statement here).”

He leans across the table, face exuding empathy and care, “Karen, that conversation never happened. You imagined it. Your mind is not reliable.” He then turns to the person sitting next to them. “She clearly needs our support. She’s just not stable.” Karen feels shame, embarrassment and confusion. She is still hurt by the original thing he said, the one she tried to confront him over, but now her mental stability has been called into question in front of a witness, perhaps even a friend who now looks down on her.

The thing is, she was there on Tuesday. She did send the text message. He just deleted it so the evidence was gone, and denied the conversation that would have outed him as having damaged her psychologically. Ask any abuser if they are an abuser. The vast majority will say no. They’ll say no up until a criminal conviction and then sometimes after that. Jails are full of people still claiming innocence. That’s why its important to know gaslighting when you see it – so you know you aren’t the guilty one.

Karen’s guru/pastor/leader may have set himself up as an authority figure or a person with power and control over her life. To anyone else, including the person beside him in the example above, he may seem eloquent, caring, and utterly incapable of abuse.

Karen isn’t crazy. The first time gaslighting happened to her, she may not even have noticed it or second guessed her own mind. But as the behaviour progresses, she may doubt herself more and more. She may experience abuse, be it psychological or otherwise, and yet he may erase evidence and pretend it never happened only to point again to her ‘faulty brain’ and ask her why she is imagining such awful things.

Its insidious. It can be big moments like this, or like in the movie – causing the lights to dim and then denying that they have dimmed – or it can be subtle.

–          An “I forgive you” from the abuser when the victim has done nothing wrong.

–          An “I love you” from someone who causes you physical harm. If you want to know what love looks like, check out 1 Corinthians 13: 1-13. It’s a pretty good checklist on what love is and isn’t.

In an article on Psychology Today, Robyn Stern (PhD) suggests there are three stages to gaslighting. The first is “disbelief.”

“When the first sign of gaslighting occurs,” writes Stern. “You think of the gaslighting interaction as a strange behavior or an anomalous moment. During this first stage, things happen between you and your partner, or your boss, friend, family member, that seem odd to you.”

The second is defense, where you try to defend yourself against the gaslighting type of manipulation. I wasn’t going to lift a big quote from Sterns article, but gee, its good. She explains it this way:

“Think about it—you tell your boss, for example, you are unhappy with the assignments you have been getting; you feel you are being wrongly passed over for the best assignments. You ask him why this is happening. Instead of addressing the issue, he tells you that you are way too sensitive and way too stressed….. well, maybe you are sensitive and stressed, but, that doesn’t answer the question of why you are being passed over for these better assignments. But, rather than leave it at that, or redirect the conversation, you start defending yourself, telling your boss you are not that sensitive or stressed, or, that the stress doesn’t interfere with your ability to work. But, during this stage, you are driven crazy by the conversation…. going over and over, like an endless tape, in your mind.”

The third stage cited by Stern is depression:

“By the time you get to this stage you are experiencing a noticeable lack of joy  and, you hardly recognize yourself anymore. Some of your behavior feels truly alien. You feel more cut off from friends—in fact, you don’t talk to people about your relationship very much—none of them like your guy. People may express concern about how you are and you are feeling—they treat you like you really do have a problem.”

Side note: she is the author of a book called The Gaslight Effect: How to Spot and Survive the Hidden Manipulations Other People Use to Control Your Life.” If you need it, get it.

What are the warning signs?

I’m no psychologist. I’m no expert on gaslighting even though I’ve experienced it. But I can tell you that, no matter how long you’ve faced it for, you can get back to a place where you can spot it and deal with it. It might take therapy. It might take time. But it can be done.

I think we could probably say that the first warning sign is that those three stages listed above rang some bells with you. Gaslighting isn’t always obvious. In fact, it uses subtlety and confusion as weapons. It isn’t always “on purpose” as the abuser may operate this way almost habitually. It is always damaging, I would argue. But again, I’m not an expert.

Who is? Dr. Stephanie Sarkis PhD. She posted these 11 warning signs in an article on Psychology Today. Read it for further detail. Its good. But here’s the scoop. (Thanks Psych Today/Dr Sarkis):

  1. They tell blatant lies

  2. They deny they ever said something, even though you have proof

  3. They use what is near and dear to you as ammunition

  4. They wear you down over time

  5. Their actions do not match their words

  6. They throw in positive reinforcement to confuse you

  7. They know confusion weakens people

  8. They project [ie. accuse you of the thing they are guilty of]

  9. They try to align people against you

  10. They tell you or others that you are crazy

  11. They tell you everyone else is a liar

Seriously, if you’ve got the time to do it, go read the article. The examples might help you understand what is happening to you or someone close to you. I’m not going to try and write some pithy, cutesy article with all the answers here. But I am going to tell you this: you can recover. I’m a huge advocate of therapy here. It might start by calling a domestic violence service. They can help you through it and point you to where you can get some good counselling and reclaim that beautiful brain of yours.

I have experienced this phenomenon. I remember, at the height of my gaslighting (in one scenario), I believed I was dumb, defective and utterly hopeless. I can’t tell you how dark that time was. Imagine my utter horror when I was chosen in a human resources class to do an IQ test (we were studying psychometrics). My result came back, well, okay I’ll say it – high.

So high I had to sit back and think “Well. I’m not dumb then, am I? If I’m not dumb, then maybe there are some other things I am being lied to about here.” That was my trigger for a journey out.  It has taken time, but I’ve reclaimed my brain. It’s a good one. I like it.

I’m telling you that because encouragement helps. But like I said, I’m not going to offer you five steps out of the situation you may be in. I’d strongly suggest:

–          Contacting a domestic violence service. Google one in your local area (Click here if you need to clear your browser history afterwards)

–          Contacting the Cult Information and Family Support Service (or a cult support service in your local area if you have one). www.cifs.org.au

–          Access counselling services through your local GP

–          Calling the police if your immediate safety is at risk

–          Calling Lifeline on 13 11 14 if you are feeling depressed and at risk.

Gaslighting is wrong. It is abusive. It might feel too hard to overcome. I get that. But you can do it. Just don’t feel like you have to do it alone. There is so much help out there. Don’t quit. Please access help. Life can be beautiful again.

Read More
Clare McIvor Clare McIvor

8 Characteristics of Cults

Hello again! This is the second in a series on what is and isn’t a cult. Its a hot topic, a hurtful topic for some and one that I’ve only written because of the overwhelming amount of questions I’ve, well, avoided. Look after yourself as you read. Remember this isn’t about me branding a group as a cult. Its about education and understanding. I won’t brand a particular group a cult in this series (except those named in the article that have already been publically scrutinised a lot. Scientology for example). That is not my job, my right, nor my intent. But I hope it helps you understand what you may be concerned about, to form your own thoughts, and know where to go for help if you need it.

Okay people. On with the show. Here are 8 key characteristics of cults

Dr Robert Lifton was a psychologist with a special interest in mind control. His work, “Thought Reform and the Psychology of Totalism: A Study of Brainwashing in China” outlined eight criteria for so-called thought reform. This has been quoted in many a cult-related document, but many of them are quite academic (targeted, for example, at counsellors who help exiting or post-exit cult members). They are profound points though, and when you go and watch or read up on cults (such as Scientology, Rajneesh Purim, The Family, The Children of God, Heaven’s Gate, Jonestown etc) you will see many or all of these points in action. Your particular experience may not be as hardcore as some of the cults I just mentioned, but that doesn’t mean they aren’t profoundly damaging and difficult to leave. I’m going to try and paraphrase it so it’s a bit easier to digest, but it all comes from Lifton’s. I’ll pop the deets in the bibliography at the end.

Point 1 from Robert Lifton: Milieu Control

This is a fancy term for control of communication and information within the group. It may involve control of information and communication within the environment and ultimately to the individual. It can result in a significant degree of isolation from society.

What do you look for? On one end of the spectrum, it may involve certain publications being frowned upon. They may be mocked rather than expressly forbidden. On the other end of the spectrum, you may only be allowed to read or watch certain things and others may be explicitly forbidden. Information about people may be another thing that can be strictly controlled or contrived. If you feel isolated from society because of your involvement with a group, then this is a big red flag. If your information isn’t kept confidential, or if it gets twisted, then this may be another sign.

Point 2: Mystical Manipulation.

This is a tricky one. It involves “the manipulation of experiences that appears spontaneous but is, in fact, planned and orchestrated by the group or its leaders in order to demonstrate divine authority, spiritual advancement or insight that sets the leader and/or group apart from humanity, and that allows reinterpretation of historical events, scripture and other experiences. Coincidences and happenstance oddities are interpreted as omens or prophecies.”

I say its tricky because, although its incredibly common, it can also be genuine. I don’t know what Lifton says about it, but my thoughts (and they are just my thoughts) on what to watch for include:

–          Extra Biblical revelation, or self-proclaimed apostles or prophets. Who gave them their credentials? Does what they say reinterpret the Bible or line up with it?

–          The belief that your group has a superior truth to other groups or the rest of humanity.

–          Do you feel peaceful about it? Or do you feel controlled by it. The Bible says that “you will know the truth and the truth will set you free.” If the so-called “Truth” being presented to you causes you to be further within someone else’s control, then it isn’t the kind of truth the Bible was talking about. God’s truth brings freedom, liberty and peace.

Point 3: Demand for Purity

A cult believes that its ideology is superior to that of the rest of the world. You have to stay pure and loyal to that ideology or you are at odds with the group. There’s a certain irony in the fact that every cult believes it is unique and holds a superior truth. When does it become problematic? Ask yourself the following questions:

Does your group take a black and white view of the world? Are your members constantly exhorted to conform to the ideology of the group and strive for perfection? Are guilt and shame used to control members? These are your warning signs here.

Its important to note that no one in a cult is going to outright say “I’m using guilt and shame to control you.” This is subliminal. You may believe the cult leader is superior and you are inferior, that you must strive to reach their approval. You may feel shame and guilt when you fail and then ride a constant merry go round of failure, shame/hiding and then re-engagement.

Point 4: Confession 

In Scientology, “audits” are used to extract peoples secrets. In other cults, programs of reform are used to extract confessions and replace old mindsets with new ones. The information given/extracted in these sessions can later be used to control members. Other groups may use confession to various degrees to control. “Sins, as defined by the group, are to be confessed either to a personal monitor or publicly to the group. There is no confidentiality; members’ “sins”, ”attitudes,” and “faults” are discussed and exploited by the leaders.

Your brain might go straight to Catholic confession. I don’t believe Lifton was referring to that. I think that for two reasons: Sins were defined by the Bible, and not by individual priests and confidentiality is an enshrined rule and value – a highly political topic right now.

Your brain might also go to Romans 12:1-2 – “Be transformed by the renewing of your mind that you might prove the good and acceptable and perfect will of God.” This scripture may be used in a good, kind, uplifting way. It shouldn’t be used in a controlling, coercive, shaming or threatening way. Listen to your heart here.

What do you look for? Stringent accountability structures, information being exchanged without confidentiality, information being used against people, whole groups of people knowing and discussing personal sins, sins being defined by the group.

Decent groups respect people and their confidentiality. They recognise humans are imperfect. If your group doesn’t, then warning, warning.

Point 5: Sacred Science 

This one has been hinted at in previous points. Perhaps that was Robert Lifton. Perhaps that was me seeing the interplay. Either way, sacred science is the belief that the groups doctrine or ideology is the ultimate truth. It is beyond question or dispute. Truth doesn’t exist outside the group. “The leader, as the spokesperson for God or for all humanity, is likewise above criticism.”

What to look for? Does your group seem so special, so unique that it cannot be found anywhere else in the world? Are you allowed to question or disagree with something? What happens if you do? Would you be punished, shamed or shunned? These are your warning signals.

Now, the office of the prophet can be a dicey one here. It is my belief that prophets do exist and are bona-fide gifts to the body of Christ. But. This comes with caveats. If a prophet demands, even tacitly, unquestioning obedience to their word, then you have a possible problem. If they are self-proclaimed, you may have a problem. If they are unchecked, you may have a problem.

How do you check a prophet? Look at what they’ve said and ask if it has come true. Try to avoid coincidence. If they’ve seen someone playing a musical instrument and prophesied a music ministry, then that’s pretty obvious. That’s not necessarily prophecy. That’s an educated guess about what someone might want to hear.

Point 6: Loading the Language

Are there words or phrases that mean something different to your group than to the rest of the world? Is your groups jargon such that the rest of the world wouldn’t understand what you mean unless you explain it? According to Lifton, “This jargon consists of thought-terminating clichés which serve to alter members’ thought processes to conform to the groups way of thinking.”

That might sound tricky. So I’ll break it down. Is there a word you use to describe a person who should be avoided perhaps? Scientologists call them “Suppressive persons.” Other pseudo-Christian cults may brand a person a “jezebel” for example. This is quite a common one actually. Again, not a statement about a particular group. Jezebel was a problematic Biblical character and churches may use this term legitimately. It’s only a problem, in my opinion, if it causes a person to go “oh ok, avoid them. They can’t be trusted” and further thought is terminated.

Are there words you use to describe aspects of your doctrine that a ‘normal’ person or a person outside of your movement wouldn’t understand? When you hear these words used, do you actually think about them, or just think “Yes, I agree/I know what that means” and  move on?

Point 7: Doctrine over person. 

“Members personal experiences are subordinated to the sacred science and any contrary experiences must be denied or reinterpreted to fit the ideology of the group.” Okay this one is loaded! Does your group cover up abuse? Does it talk about bad or abusive experiences as being the will of God, or somehow a qualifying factor for promotion? Do you have to look back on abuse or misfortune and feel thankful for it or apologise for it? Do you have to look back on experiences you may otherwise have enjoyed and feel guilty over it? Does the doctrine come before you or other people in terms of value? Does leadership gloss over abuse/poor treatment of people because the “end justifies the means”?

If it does, warning, warning.

Point 8: Dispensing of existence 

Okay this one is one that is scary, but be brave as you read. With Lifton’s final point, he talks about the group deciding who has the right to exist and who doesn’t. “This is usually not literal, but means that those in the outside world are not saved, unenlightened, unconscious and they must be converted to the groups ideology.” If they don’t they ought to be shunned, excommunicated or rejected by members.

This “convert or reject” mentality can isolate cult members  from their families. It can also make people very scared to leave because they will lose friendships.

This is going to come across harsh: but if your ‘faith’ or ideology isolates you from family or friends, or brings distance between you causing you to distrust them, warning, warning. If you can’t leave a group you are uncomfortable with because you will lose friendships, warning, warning. This is a cult characteristic and those friendships aren’t genuine.

There’s a lot to think about. If you’ve Googled this because you’re in crisis, check out the help resources below. I’ve got another post coming soon on things cults have in common with each-other. In the meantime, know this: unless your personal safety is immediately at risk (in which case get in contact with the police, a cult service or a domestic violence service now to ensure your safety), you have time. You don’t have to change your life today.

If you are in a cult though, your information will be used to control you and your thought processes. This might hurt to hear, but it really isn’t wise to confide in members of the cult. This information will likely filter through to leadership and be used to keep you in the group or excommunicate you before you are ready.

Do your thinking in private. Take your time. Consider your options. Make your plan, then take action. I know the crisis is now. I know it hurts like heck. But a successful plan takes time. I’m not the expert on exiting cults but I have done a little research (ahead of writing this piece) on where you can find help if you need it. I didn’t want anyone to read this post and feel alone and scared. There is help available.

Now! If you are in a cult, and people may be keeping an eye on your communication, here’s how to clear your browser history. https://www.computerhope.com/issues/ch000510.htm

Good luck. Below is a list of resources that might help, including a couple of experts you can contact if you need to. Give this blog a follow so you don’t miss any of the good stuff, but the next instalment in this series is HERE.

BIBLIOGRAPHY:

WHERE TO GO FOR HELP

Read More
Clare McIvor Clare McIvor

How Do I Know if I’m in a Cult?

Hey there friend. I hope its morbid curiosity that helped you find this blog piece. I hope its not that you, a friend or family member is questioning whether a group you are involved in is a cult. Because that is hard stuff. If it’s the latter, you have my sympathy. This piece is not written to brand a particular group or church a cult, and it’s really not for me to be labelling individual groups anyway. Often people’s own research can just come up with personal, subjective and heartbreaking stories that don’t offer much in terms of solid, objective thought. But after the veritable inundation of questions I’ve received, I thought it time to put pen to paper (fingers to keyboard?) and answer a few questions about what a cult is and isn’t. It comes from reading, and research. It is not an expose of personal experiences and I’m not an expert.  Read that sentence again. Good? Now…I hope this helps you think through the challenges.

“Cult” is a term I hear thrown around a lot these days. Many, many churches get branded this. As a Christian, and a participating member of a wonderful, healthy church, this saddens me because I see the beautiful reward of participating in healthy spirituality and community. But I also see the damage unhealthy churches and groups do. It can be significant, to say the least.

There are a lot of things that a cult isn’t. But if you Google it, you might find a whole lot of personal stories that don’t bring any real structure to what you are thinking, feeling or fearing. I hope this series can help. I say series, because its not a one-post wonder. It’s a complicated topic and you need space to ponder and possibly plan. The topics will be spaced out a bit, because friend, Mamma’s gotta write this stuff! They’ll be as follows:

  1. Risk Factors for Cultism

  2. Key characteristics of cults (You’ll get this one today too. Bonus!)

  3. Cult Commonalities

  4. So I’m in a cult. What next?

  5. What to look for in a healthy church – the Kit Kennedy Opinion

At the end of each article, there will be a link showing you how to clear your web browser history as one aspect of cult life may include control of information and access to it. I’ve got your back. Now for topic number one:

Risk Factors for Cultism

We live in an era where non-denominational churches, or independent churches are on the rise. You don’t need a reference for that. It’s obvious. We also live in an era where some pastors are promoted without solid theological credentials. In my opinion, this gives us a few areas wide open for toxic or unhealthy churches to develop. We used to know what a church believed based on its name. Catholic/Anglican/Salvation Army/Baptist/Lutheran/Methodist etc. Now we have churches with increasingly vague names. We don’t know what they believe, although their marketing can be pretty slick. Sadly, in some cases, their own members aren’t clear on the doctrines they do or don’t believe. These things concern me deeply because:

  • Many cults exist as independent groups, or groups outside of denominational organisational structures. There is little or no accountability or grievance structure, or they are able to hide their illegitimate activities from the chain of command. Then there are groups like Scientology but that shit’s just next level. (Watch Going Clear if you need more on that sad case)

  • Where people do not have strong theological training, credentials or dedication to learning, pseudo-Biblical or extra-Biblical “theologies” can develop. This has the potential to twist the truth of the Bible into something more sinister or damaging – even if it sounds enticing on the surface. My personal fear is that, in an age where we can all have Bibles on our shelves or on our phones, Biblical literacy and solid knowledge of doctrine isn’t necessarily any better than it ever was. “Convenient” does not always equal “informed.”

  • Names can be used to camouflage the true nature of groups. Where true allegiances aren’t obvious, members can be left grasping for what the truth actually is.

  • Its important to note that not all cults are harmful. Some centre on self-improvement and can help boost someone’s self-esteem or connection. It’s the job of loving family and friends to keep a watchful, caring eye over whether the person is falling more and more under coercive or unhealthy control. Love them. Keep in contact.

(If you want a book that spells this all out, check out “Cults, too good to be true” by Raphael Aron.” Link below.)

It’s important to note, before we get into the guts of this, what doesn’t constitute a cult.

  • If you have been to a church and had a negative experience, that doesn’t necessarily mean they are a cult. You have my sympathies, as a negative experience in a church can be a profoundly damaging experience. I’m sorry to say it doesn’t always mean they’re a cult though.

  • If their belief system doesn’t sit well with you, or if you’ve had a clash with leadership, that doesn’t mean they’re a cult. Different strokes and all that.

  • A church may have toxic or unhealthy aspects, but may not be a cult. There are very specific set of characteristics that makes up a cult. I’d encourage you to read through the  list in the blog post that follows this one (linked below), and have a good think about it. If you are in a toxic/unhealthy church, or a church that isn’t a good fit for you, then I encourage you to move on and find a healthy one that is a good fit for you. We all need to find our spiritual home.

The term “cult” has now been largely superseded in modern literature with the term “high-demand group.” I have issues with this, as it seems altogether too simplistic, but I concede that the term needed to change because of one key issue: not all cults are religious. Self-help groups, multi-level marketing businesses, and even normal businesses can also be cults. If you are looking for good information, you may need to include the term “high demand group” in your search. I’m going to focus on the churchy kind of stuff in this series, because otherwise it all gets too broad.

I’ve heard  it said that Christian groups can’t be cults. This is absolutely untrue. Pseudo-Christian cults exist (Again, I’ll point you to Raphael Aron’s book). Again, it’s a matter of looking at the eight characteristics I’m about to show you (as a starting point!)

These eight points are from an authoritative work by a well-respected psychiatrist, but it is not the exhaustive list on cults. It is the best, most structured list I’ve come across though.

I listened to a Ted Talk recently where the speaker, a cult survivor, offered up a point all pre-exiting cult members should note: a cult will never say it’s a cult. If you think you are in one, then asking a member of leadership if your group is a cult will result in the answer “No.”

Do think carefully before you ask this question of anyone inside your group. This could put you at risk of shunning or of further control measures. If you are questioning, I’d advise against doing it out loud just yet.

Okay! That’s the necessary starting point. Now onto the second topic. Get yourself a cuppa. Breathe and click here to access the next post with the meaty stuff…

(And here’s how to clear your browser history if you need to https://www.computerhope.com/issues/ch000510.htm )

BIBLIOGRAPHY:

WHERE TO GO FOR HELP

Read More