Welcome to De-Commissioned, a place for former members of the Great Commission movement (aka GCM, GCC, GCAC, GCI, the Blitz) to discuss problems they've experienced in the association's practices and theology.

You may read and post, but some features are restricted to registered members. Please consider registering to gain full access! Registration is free and only takes a few moments to complete.
De-Commissioned Forum
March 28, 2024, 05:57:39 am *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
 
  Home   Forum   Help Search Login Register  
Pages: [1]   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: Jean's Story: Why she joined GCI, how she was deprogrammed  (Read 12999 times)
puff of purple smoke
Administrator
Household Name (300+ Posts)
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 604



« on: October 21, 2007, 12:46:54 pm »

Here is a multi-part newspaper article on the movement, from The Montgomery County Sentinel, February 6th, 1986. The first link is a scan from the front page of the paper, and the second link includes scans from the inside pages. For those of you who have not seen the newspaper articles on the movement from this time, this will give you a good idea of just how controversial this movement was during the 70's/80's/90's. Also, those of you that are recent former members might notice eerie similarities between Jean's experience and your own recent experiences with the movement.

Here it is:

Jean's Story: Why she joined GCI, how she was deprogrammed
Logged
Linda
Household Name (300+ Posts)
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2520



« Reply #1 on: October 22, 2007, 07:04:32 am »

That story made me sad. Really, really sad.

Does anybody know how Jean is doing now?

The big question that comes to mind is why wouldn't GCx want to distance themselves from a past like this? I've seen the 1978 Des Moines Register article as well so know this wasn't just a situation limited to one church or state.

People involved now need to know that while they did issue the statement of apology, and changed their name to make the break from their past, they never changed their core beliefs that are "off" (in the areas of commitment and leadership).

An apology without change is no apology at all. GCx is good at that kind of apology.

As a former member, I really feel for Jean. As a parent, I really feel for Jean's parents. Can you imagine the emotional and financial toll that it took to help her get away from this obviously bad situation?

Hebrews 13:17, (taken out of context from what Hebrews says and what the whole New Testament says) was the verse that was always pulled out of the back pocket to justify the obedience to leadership in everything doctrine. Oddly, lately, that verse has been very comforting, especially this line:

Quote
"for they are keeping watch over your souls, as those who will have to give an account"


One day, there will be an accounting for all of this.
Logged

Thanks be unto God for his unspeakable gift.
namaste
Veteran (100-299 Posts)
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 201



« Reply #2 on: October 22, 2007, 07:35:10 am »

Quote
People involved now need to know that while they did issue the statement of apology, and changed their name to make the break from their past, they never changed their core beliefs that are "off" (in the areas of commitment and leadership).


Do you have documentation that they intentionally changed the name of the organization in order to distance themselves from their checkered past?

I had dinner with a friend a few weeks ago who is still (heavily involved) with the local GCx affiliate.  I knew she attended the Faithwalkers stuff, so I asked what she thought about Rick Whitney's talks.  I gave her some specific examples of things that concerned me, like claiming that husbands should train their wives to suffer, and intimating in his church loyalty talk (available on his website) that desiring sound teaching in a church was a "nice to have," but it was completely reasonable to leave a church that ordains women.

Her response was that Rick Whitney seems to stick his foot in his mouth an awful lot, and that it's become something of a joke to lots of people.

One wonders if he ever manages to get his foot out of his mouth (or his head out of his ass, based on that 1986 newspaper article).

I heard through the grapevine that Mr. Whitney is supposed to be making a trip to this area sometime over the fall.  If he does, I fully intend to be in the audience.  :twisted:
Logged

Om, shanti.
Linda
Household Name (300+ Posts)
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2520



« Reply #3 on: October 22, 2007, 08:37:24 am »

Somebody remind me about the name change.

I thought that when accusations were made about these old newspaper articles and the line of people in and out of Wellspring in the 80's, and the books mentioning GCI by name (Churches that Abuse and How to Cult Proof Your Kids) in the 90's that one of the points of defense was that GCI no longer exists and that GCM was not GCI. Or something like that.

The sense I had was that the name was changed to make a break from their past. I doubt if there is any documentation saying they did it for that purpose.

Anyway, I'm still waiting for an apology that means something and praying for eyes of leaders and attenders to be opened, and, in the meantime, for no more people and families to be hurt.
Logged

Thanks be unto God for his unspeakable gift.
puff of purple smoke
Administrator
Household Name (300+ Posts)
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 604



« Reply #4 on: October 27, 2007, 09:17:19 am »

The topic of GC's name changes has come up several times on de-comm. Here is a quote from namaste:

Quote
For all I know, GC has never considered the reality that changing names ALL THE TIME makes it exceedingly difficult to track down information (attempting to gather further verification for this statement) on the organization. But if they're so insistant that they not be labeled a cult (or "shady" organization), then they ought to consider that name changes are a common cult obfuscation tactic before they change names.


I believe there was something about it in one of my posts as well. To recount, there was a point at time when I was at GC that I began to seriously suspect that I was in a cult. A cult! I had gone to several Christian churches in my life and never before had I ever seriously considered that possibility. But, there I was truly wondering about my church. So, I went to the largest source of information I knew of, the Internet, and searched for search terms "GCM cult" and ""Great Commission Ministries" cult" and so on. I found absolutely nothing to indicate that it was, and so naively I thought, "Hey, if it was bad enough there'd be stuff online about it at least." Turns out, if I had known to search for "GCI cult" I would have found plenty of information. In that instance, it was GC's name change that concealed the past from me, and after I found out that is what had kept me from the information I felt very and purposefully betrayed by the movement.

I believe GC would deny it all the way to the bank, but current members have attempted to talk to me about GCI and the modern GC as if they were completely different organizations ("That was GCI! Not GCAC!"), when in reality many of the big leaders from back then (Whitney, Dennis Clark, Herschel) are still around at the top of the leadership chain today, and many of the teachings are just the same (or in some cases, when they resurrect old materials, exactly the same). I believe GC is in the middle of another name shift today, veering away from GCM and GCAC and towards the new GCC (as of a couple years ago) acronym. Once again, finding information on this group requires a lot of knowledge about their name history, and gets harder the more times they change their name. Again, why change the name all the time, and kick people out who are bringing up the truth of the past, unless you're trying to hide it.

And to quote Rick Whitney on the subject:

Quote
I recently heard a brother comment on our church association’s recent history. He used the phrase, “Our organizational wilderness . . . ” He was reflecting on some of the changes that we have been wrestling with as a church movement.

I understand what he means. We have gone through changes and it seems like there is no end to the number of Great Commission, “GC acronyms”, that we can come up with. I understand his humor and maybe his partial frustration.

But honestly, nothing has changed. We are still the same group of men and our bond remains strong. We have lost a few and yes, it hurts and yes, there have been challenges. All movements of God have lost men. Even our Lord lost a few.

But nothing has really changed.
Logged
namaste
Veteran (100-299 Posts)
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 201



« Reply #5 on: October 27, 2007, 03:01:02 pm »

Geez, they're an organization of MEN, apparently exclusive of women.
Logged

Om, shanti.
Left
Regular (15-99 Posts)
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 21



« Reply #6 on: November 03, 2007, 08:27:02 pm »

Although the organization of the name changed, the church stayed on UMD's campus through the entire thing and exists today.  Does anyone know the details of the transition of leadership and current status?
How does an organization go through that kind of public defamation and manage to stay operating on campus without much public information on how GC* handled the leadership change and accountability?
Does anyone have leads?
Logged
Angry
Veteran (100-299 Posts)
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 103



« Reply #7 on: November 05, 2007, 09:47:18 am »

Left -

In this day and age of political correctness, you have to remember that a University's hands are tied when it comes to describing a religious organization's shortcomings.

The ACLU would be all over the Students Activities Office if they were to defame a group being it Muslim or Budhist or Hindi or Scientologist.

When we tried to garner some information into GC's activities, we were at least urged to "do a little research on them - we're well aware of the group..." by the SAO where we are.  The expression in the director's voice spoke volumes about GC*'s reputation.  Same with the campus police and the local city's police dep't.  They all recognized the fine line they were walking in divulging any unsavory information - they all did the best they could knowing that they'd get in trouble to tell the truth.

Welcome to PC world - 2007!

Angry
Logged
Left
Regular (15-99 Posts)
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 21



Wow
« Reply #8 on: November 05, 2007, 12:05:48 pm »

I had no idea that Student Organizations couldn't do anything about not supporting sketchy campus groups.

I suppose I was thinking more along the lines of GC's apology.  If they were really sincere about trying to make things right, wouldn't they try to install some sort of internal accountability between the churches to make sure leaders aren't preaching the wrong things or being overbearing on their members and micromanaging things?
Logged
namaste
Veteran (100-299 Posts)
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 201



« Reply #9 on: November 05, 2007, 06:36:51 pm »

Quote from: "Left"
I had no idea that Student Organizations couldn't do anything about not supporting sketchy campus groups.

I suppose I was thinking more along the lines of GC's apology.  If they were really sincere about trying to make things right, wouldn't they try to install some sort of internal accountability between the churches to make sure leaders aren't preaching the wrong things or being overbearing on their members and micromanaging things?


I think they thought that might be a good idea when they wrote the statement.

But GCx is heavily predicated on the idea of autonomy of the individual churches.  That means that on spiritual matters, they're going to be pretty firmly against anything that gives one church authority over another, or gives the national organization the authority to control the churches on a local level (beyond a very basic statement of faith).

As you've experienced, some people will wield autonomy for nefarious purposes.
Logged

Om, shanti.
G_Prince
Household Name (300+ Posts)
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 417



« Reply #10 on: November 05, 2007, 06:45:01 pm »

Wow!!!

I felt she was telling my story, and describing exactly how I used to see myself. "Just kill me inside." That kind of damage takes a long while to heal from; it almost ruined me.

It's funny that I had a similar experience in a different part of the country nearly 20 years later...so much for change.  :cry:
Logged

Here's an easy way to find out if you're in a cult. If you find yourself asking the question, "am I in a cult?" the answer is yes. -Stephen Colbert
puff of purple smoke
Administrator
Household Name (300+ Posts)
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 604



« Reply #11 on: November 05, 2007, 08:44:51 pm »

Quote
But GCx is heavily predicated on the idea of autonomy of the individual churches. That means that on spiritual matters, they're going to be pretty firmly against anything that gives one church authority over another, or gives the national organization the authority to control the churches on a local level (beyond a very basic statement of faith).

As you've experienced, some people will wield autonomy for nefarious purposes.


The "autonomy" word is used by GC to avoid blame for the past (and present) mistakes of those in its organization, and as an excuse to not do anything about the 'bad churches'. For an autonomous church though, the one I attended was strongly influenced by GC leaders thousands of miles away, such as Mark Darling and Bill Young (guy with the "swerver" sermon.) Teachings that have been around since the McCotter days, such as on loyalty and dating, often crept into our church via teaching tapes these people had made, rarely coming in directly from the weekly sermons by our pastors. Conferences also were a great way for the problematic beliefs to be spread into our church. (think Faithwalkers and LT) Small group leaders often attended these and then brought what they learned into small group lessons and their discipleship relationships. So even if the church pastors aren't directly responsible for it at some churches, GC culture finds its way in through the back door.
Logged
Pages: [1]   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  


Powered by SMF 1.1.11 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines LLC
SimplePortal 2.1.1