Pseudocults

Pulpit-led Backlash on Gay Marriage

2011-12-05T11:21:00.038+08:00

Today The Australian newspaper headlines read "Labor faces pulpit-led backlash on gay marriage".

For those overseas readers who don't know, Labor or ALP stands for the Australian Labor Party who currently hold power as the federal government Down Under. To Americans the ALP may be seen as more akin the Democratic Party with more progressive social views and policies than their conservative rivals, the Liberal Party (while called the Liberal Party, they are certainly not 'liberal' in the American political use of the term).

A synopsis of what was reported in The Australian stated, "Protestant, Catholic and Muslim leaders have predicted an election loss for the Australian Government due to its new stance on same-sex marriage. The national congress of the Australian Labor Party has approved a proposal by Prime Minister Julia Gillard to give MPs a conscience vote on the issue, which is being seen by the churches as a breach of the election promise not to introduce changes to the Marriage Act. Labor is especially vulnerable as resistance to gay unions is likely in seats with large ethnic minorties that have traditionally been its strongholds. The Opposition also says the Government has alienated working class voters ...... "

Now there's an interesting scenario, the churches once again pitting the pulpit against homosexuals while at the same time saying little about more weighty matters that beset our society, including the burgeoning divorce rate among heterosexuals. So much for our hypocritical comments about the legitimacy of homosexual unions! The tragic historical issue of sexual abuse of children (both male and female) by priests is also worthy of a mention in the context of hypocrisy.

For time immemorial broader society has kept homophobia alive and well and persecuted those who have been born with a sexual orientation different to the majority. Like I have said in earlier blogs, with the current level of prejudice that is still prevalent in so many societies, who would want to choose a same sex lifestyle? Thank goodness that the scientific evidence of more recent years is telling us what gays have been trying to so for donkey's years, that is, 'it ain't a choice' as some simply happen to be born with a same-sex orientation (albeit with the usual interaction between genes and environment).

I put the question to readers, "What is the primary cause of the underlying anti-homosexual views in our society?" Let me suggest fundamentalist religion.

My work over some years in forensic mental health brought me across more than one case of how dangerous such religious influence can be for the gay community. Let me give you just two examples. One was the case of a very physically fit young man in his early 20s who had a history of violent assault, especially perpetrating unprovoked assaults on homosexuals. There were three explosive ingredients in this fellow's history, an evangelical background where he was educated to consider homosexuality a sin, the unfortunate fact that his younger brother had been sexually interfered with by a male when a child, and a psychotic disorder with paranoid delusions that added fuel to the fire. I pitied the gentle young men who he had a reputation of bashing and maiming.

Another case was a man in his thirties who believed he had a mission from god to rid homosexuals from the prison system where he himself had been sent for assaultive behaviour in the community. He had a pentecostal background, well trained to view homosexuality as the primary sin of Sodom and Gomorrah, a sin allegedly abhorred by Lot's god. A sad, but informative aside is that the men who knocked on Lot's door did not ask for his son, but rather his daughter. So much for the misused and misunderstood term, 'sodomy'. Now back to the pentecostal prisoner in his 30s; he was also psychotic with clear paranoid delusions about his mission from god. In this case I suggested to the psychiatrist in charge of his case that we continue his treatment in the forensic hospital with antipsychotic medication until his pathological hatred of homosexuals had remitted and then perhaps I might be able to ameliorate his views with some focused psychological therapy. However, my primary motivation was to spare homosexuals in prison added persecution and pain.

Now you might blame the mental disorders of these two men for their extreme aggressive attitudes to homosexuals and I willingly concede that it certainly inflamed the situation. However, the thinking of these forensic mental health patients is unfortunately not far from the thinking of a dangerous minority in the general community, who while perhaps now far from their church backgrounds, nonetheless still carry the prejudice taught to them by under-educated fundamentalist clergy.

In the same vein, not long ago I met a retired Pentecostal preacher who clearly stated his abhorrence of all homosexual. I noted that his political views were also particularly conservative in that he lambasted climate change theory with little desire to discuss the issue in a rational manner. In my opinion such individuals provoke much food for thought about the type of individuals and personalities that may be more prone to homophobia and other equally close-minded attitudes.

I applaud the guts of the Australian Labor Party for choosing to support the gay community by recognising their equal ability to form loving and supportive long term relationships. Yes, it may be electorally risky for them, but such momentous decisions always require putting yourself at risk of a backlash.

Perhaps the church also needs to reconsider its position in light of the findings of recent genetic research that largely debunks the idea that gays somehow choose same sex attraction. Furthermore, those in the pulpits should seriously evaluate the possibility that they may be creating human time bombs in the case of less balanced parishioners by teaching strident views about a whole number of issues that fall aptly under the descriptive terms, 'narrow-minded and bigoted'. God help us all to find the grace and love to be more broad-minded and able to embrace difference.

(My readers might like to look at one or two of my older posts that address gay issues and religion. These posts are titled: "Why Try to Fix Something that is Not Broken?" - 19 February 2008; and "Homosexuality and the Continuing Ignorance of Religious Fundamentalists." - 8 February 2008. Additionally, may I suggest that you take a look at Google postings about recent comments by the Reverand Margaret Court on Gay issues and Gay marriage. She is a former Grand Slam tennis champ. Of course, you will see that her views are juxtaposed to mine and to my thinking it is a pity she didn't progress on to coaching tennis, rather than don the robes of the cleric! Check critiques of her views too as some of them have great merit)

More recent articles are added below for readers of my blog who are interested in the ongoing debate on gay isssues:

Same-sex marriage is not the political province of socialist parties

by: Cassandra Wilkinson
From:The Australian
December 17, 201112:00AM

"Following the ALP conference decision to allow a conscience vote on gay marriage Paul Sheehan wrote in The Age, "The week began with another shift to Greens policy." He wasn't alone in equating the campaign for gay marriage with a rise in the influence of the green Left, but gays and greens are only the most recent of acquaintances and the cause of gay marriage is the antithesis of the march of socialism.

The green socialist movement in Australia may be led by a gay man but socialist and communist governments have never been friends of liberty, least of all in love.

In Russia there was no specific law against homosexuality until the communists introduced one in 1933 carrying a prison term of five years. The law was not repealed until the brief flourishing of Russian parliamentary democracy under Boris Yeltsin. After World War II the East German communists retained article 175 of the Nazi penal code ensuring homosexuality was not welcome in the German Democratic Republic. Likewise, Chinese communists outlawed homosexuality from the beginning of the revolution until 1997, and removed it from the official lists of mental illness only in 2002.

Fair-minded British lefties were horrified at the recent alliance between fundamentalist Muslims and the British Socialist Workers Party under cover of the No War movement. The discomfort of socialists explaining their new friendships with bearded men who revile lesbian mothers would have been pretty funny except that it really, really wasn't.

As for Green parties being pro-gay, the Ecologist Green Party of Mexico has three members in the Senate, all of whom abstain on gay issues and one of whom has been forced to publicly apologise for vilifying a gay opponent.

In post-revolutionary Cuba the first National Congress on Education and Culture resolved that "all manifestations of homosexual deviations are to be firmly rejected and prevented from spreading". Gay people were rounded up and imprisoned by their comrades, put into "rehabilitation" camps during the 1960s and many then expelled from their own country in 1983, cast out to America on boats with violent criminals, the insane and other "undesirables".

Cuban gays found themselves in Ronald Reagan's America where, notwithstanding his close relationship with the Christian Right, the Republican president had a track record of not just looking the other way in his Hollywood years but in 1978, in the lead-up to his run for president, had vigorously opposed a California ballot initiative to ban homosexuals from teaching in public schools. While he later drew legitimate criticism for under-reacting to the AIDS crisis, Reagan is credited by many gay rights activists with turning public opinion on the California measure on the basis of his belief in personal freedom.

Reagan's good friend Margaret Thatcher has been criticised, with good reason, for passing a law to prevent the "promotion" of homosexuality, but few remember that one of her first acts as a parliamentarian was to vote in support of Leo Abse's bill to decriminalise homosexuality. She also voted in favour of Liberal Party leader David Steel's bill to legalise abortion. Her reasons for both votes are contained in Frederick Hayek's essay Why I Am Not a Conservative; as a lifelong liberal she sensibly saw the matter as private and no business of government.

Liberals grappled with the question of equality for homosexuals long before the Greens. Jeremy Bentham's essay Offences Against the Self, written in 1785, is believed to be the first known argument for decriminalisation of sodomy, which was then punishable by hanging. He covers exactly the arguments still made today, noting it weakens neither the man nor society. He tellingly criticises the homophobia of socialist philosopher Voltaire, who took time out between head-lopping to worry that homosexuality was "a vice which would destroy mankind if it were general; an infamous outrage against nature".

The rights of individuals to love as they please have only ever been respected as a consequence of liberal efforts to reduce the intrusion of government into private life and create the generalised prosperity that allows for individualism. Which is why gays and lesbians have only ever been free from violence, discrimination and fear in liberal democratic capitalist societies.

This is why it is so disappointing to hear gay rights being characterised as a left-wing or green issue when in fact it is a liberal issue. The freedom to love sits politically with the freedom to vote, to own private property, to express private opinion and the freedom to act as we please so long as it causes no clear harm to others.

Gay rights sit within the liberal tradition, not the socialist tradition. Should the Prime Minister relent and recognise that marriage between adults is a private affair she would in fact be abandoning the socialist tradition of subjugating private relationships to the perceived interests of the state.

The Australian Greens party, by contrast, appears driven to subjugate as many private interests as possible to the will of the state, from how we build our homes and educate our children to attacking the free press as requiring more regulation to ensure adequate green-ness. It has demonstrated no respect for private enterprise, private speech or private life. Its failed candidate Clive Hamilton notoriously commented that even democracy itself should be subordinate to the needs of the environment.

Gay and lesbian people have been unfairly associated with a drift to the Left in Australian politics. It is true that taxation, industrial relations, planning and education all reflect this trend to restrict personal freedom. A victory for gay marriage would be a welcome turn of the tide."

Anti-gay Message Inflicts Pain

By Julie Hosking
Talkingpoint, The West Australian, January 17, 2012, 12:00 pm

It must be so comforting up there in the land of certainty. Where everything is black and white.

No room for those murky shades of grey.

I say "up there" because the inhabitants of this particular plane claim the guidance of a higher power. They do not choose to think, speak or behave in a certain way - their God has told them to do so. It is with this certainty they feel entitled to judge the rest of us.

It must be wonderful to have faith, to be so certain that there is life after death, one that is so much better than our earthly existence - an afterlife full of love, forgiveness and happily ever after. Why, then, do so many who profess to believe in something so beautiful insist on using their faith in such an ugly way - to make others who do not measure up to their beliefs feel so abnormal, unloved and unwanted?

Down here in the real world, life is a little more perplexing and far more colourful. After listening to yet another series of missives from the certain ones, I am reminded yet again why I choose to live in the here and now, as if there were no second chances.

Margaret Court was a great tennis player, without a doubt. She won an incredible 62 grand slam titles and brought pleasure to lovers of the game the world over. But as a pastor of Victory Life, the evangelical church she founded, she is inflicting real pain on an already vulnerable section of our community.

Mrs Court waded into the debate about gay marriage with all the certainty and inflammatory language of a zealot. "Politically correct education has masterfully escorted homosexuality out from behind closed doors, into the community openly and now is aggressively demanding marriage rights that are not theirs to take," she told The West Australian.

"To dismantle this sole definition of marriage and try to legitimise what God calls abominable sexual practices that include sodomy, reveals our ignorance as to the ills that come when society is forced to accept law that violates their very own God-given nature of what is right and what is wrong."

The push for the right for gays to marry has nothing to do with political correctness and everything to do with love. And, honestly, what is she so afraid of? There was a little quiz doing the rounds on Facebook a while back. Among the multiple choice answers to the question "what will happen if gay people get married", there were the usual fire and brimstone predictions of disasters and Armageddon. The simple answer is, of course, "gay people will get married".

Worse was Mrs Court's frankly medieval assertion that homosexuality is about choice. "The fact that the homosexual cry is, 'we can't help it as we were born this way', as the cause behind their own personal choice is cause for concern. Every action begins with a thought.

There is a choice made." In preaching the abhorrent notion that homosexuality can be "overcome" with prayer and spiritual guidance as some kind of God-given truth, the venerated sportswoman is not only propagating intolerance, but putting vulnerable people at risk. Young people, in particular, who are still coming to terms with the fact their sexuality is not seen as "the norm", who feel alienated and frightened of telling their own loved ones, let alone the wider world.

Far from being "masterfully escorted" out from behind closed doors, homosexuals have had to endure centuries of mockery, bigotry and much, much worse. They have been beaten, burnt and publicly executed for their "choice". Indeed, in many countries people still "choose" to love someone of the same sex in the face of imprisonment or death.

You would think, wouldn't you, that if it was all about choice that any of the above would have been enough to make these confused individuals abandon their deviant behaviour long ago? If the threat of cancer is enough to make many give up smoking, surely the threat of death would be enough to make one choose to abandon their sexual leanings.

Bemused that the people she describes as an abomination would dare to crash this week's Australian Open and festoon the arena named after her in rainbow colours, Mrs Court professes to lack the very thing she argues homosexuals can use to bring them back into the fold of the righteous: choice.

"My views are biblical views, they're not Margaret Court's views and that's what I believe and that's what I stand for to protect family, to protect marriage between a man and a woman," she argued in her defence.

What is it about zealots that they feel they can pick and choose from an ancient text - written by mere mortals by the way - as befits their purpose? As other correspondents to this paper have pointed out, there are many tracts of the Bible that Mrs Court would never dream of employing as a defence.

The scriptures that support slavery or demand we stone adulterers, or the one that argues no woman should be preaching to men.

Mrs Court is clearly hurt by the backlash from other high-profile tennis players, including Martina Navratilova and Billie Jean King, as well as Tennis Australia's statement to the effect it does not share her views. She also seems more than a little miffed that homosexuals and their supporters will be allowed to unfurl their rainbow colours in "her" arena, as if such an open - no pun intended - display of solidarity is more offensive than her diatribe.

That's what you get in a democracy. She made the choice to speak out. Every action begins with a thought, remember? You can't fire a rocket into the heart of real people's lives from a lofty pulpit and expect them to sit idly by while you make them feel less than human.

This pastor may not hate gay people but her comments do nothing to dispel hatred.

Of that I am certain.

(The following article describes a television interview with one of Australia's premier comedy personalities)

Magda thought of suicide, struggled with sexuality

Adam Cooper
The Age
February 15, 2012 - 11:28AM

Magda Szubanski has admitted to having suicidal thoughts while struggling with her homosexuality as a teen and has rejected claims by tennis great Margaret Court that sexual preference was a choice for people.

The day after the comic actor announced publicly she was gay, Szubanski called for greater respect to be shown to homosexuals, although she said Australia was overwhelmingly a tolerant society on the issue.

Court, a former world No.1 tennis player and now a pastor with the Perth-based evangelical Victory Life Centre, last month claimed people chose to be gay. She later claimed homosexuality was often the result of sexual abuse.

Szubanski today said while she respected Court's sporting achievements, she did not hold the same view on Court's opinions on homosexuality.

"All this notion of choice, the notion you can terrorise or frighten - they used to give people electric shock therapy," she told radio station 3AW.

"I think all you can do is respect what people are and [show] the most compassion and empathy that you can bring to the situation, trying to foster in people who they really are and help them be their best self."

Szubanski said she was relieved at coming out publicly, although she had previously done so "thousands of times" to family, friends and colleagues.

She said she had struggled with her feelings when she first realised she was gay, and while she wouldn't elaborate, admitted she had felt suicidal.

"Oh yes, yeah, absolutely ... people will say 'Why did I take a while to do this [come out]?' I needed to be as solid as I could be so I could do this in the strongest possible way and be really clear about myself," she said.

"I didn't want to come out and botch coming out as it were, I wanted to be effective and useful for other people and to get on really solid ground yourself can really take a while. It can really take a while - it can be a journey - so that's why I think it's really important to respect people's journey, whatever that is."

Szubanski said gay people often struggled to come to terms with who they were or be accepted by their families, and pointed to high rates of substance abuse, depression and youth suicide as associated factors.

She said she was lucky she had a supportive family, but still endured her emotional struggles as a teen.

"Oh my god. I know how those kids feel. Believe me, I know how those kids feel," she said.

"I was in my teens when I started to kind of realise and we're talking the 1970s, and we're talking living in Croydon in the Sharpie era [of suburban youth gangs].

"I have a Scottish-Irish mother and a Polish father and there is a certain wisdom in keeping your head down sometimes. Those cultural influences also have an impact, no doubt about it."

Szubanski said she had been "absolutely overwhelmed and so moved by the beautiful response" by the Australian public since she came out publicly and discussed her sexuality on Channel Ten's The Project last night.

Read more:
http://www.theage.com.au/entertainment/tv-and-radio/magda-thought-of-suicide-struggled-with-sexuality-20120215-1t54g.html#ixzz1mPWBXo7x

http://blogs.theaustralian.news.com.au/meganomics/index.php/theaustralian/comments/on_marriage/

YWAM's 50th, Same Old, Same Old

2010-01-26T11:20:00.019+08:00

What astounds me is that the once very simple (dare I use the word, simplistic) Youth With A Mission vision of waves of young people washing across all nations has now turned into a rather convoluted version of sameness.

I was invited to attend a YWAM 50th celebration recently in recognition of my role as one of the original merry band from the nether regions of the South Pacific. I graciously accepted the invitation even though it was an invitation to attend a traditional ‘happy-clappy’ YWAM sing-along, followed by a presentation by the founding director of the Mission, Loren Cunningham. There was no popping of champagne corks or canapés unfortunately. Anyway, I skipped the ‘happy-clappy’ part of the show and turned up just after Loren commenced his presentation. It was another multimedia blitzkrieg that reminded me of the first multi-screen, multimedia YWAM show back in the 70s that was driven by an army of slide projectors, rather than the wonder of a single digital computer as was the case last night. The history of the organisation was again explained to the waiting youthful audience who hung on every word of the master. Loren was quick to expose his fundamentalist leanings by stating that in spite of the growth of Islam worldwide, “Jesus was still winning” in the numbers stakes. He also added the coup de gras of Christian fundamentalism by stating that, “God only has one book”. I thought we might have learned something since 9/11, but it appears not, the good ol’ American ethnocentrism and narrow-mindedness shone through just the same as it did when I was a bright-eyed and undereducated disciple of the master back in the 60s and 70s.

Now to my point about how the simple gospel message seems to have been reborn in more complex wording that refects an attempt to turn the ‘Old Time Story’ into modern corporate-speak. Nonetheless the essence of his presentation was the same old, same old, except that it was told in more convoluted language. Loren spoke not only of the vision of the world ‘Spheres’ that he pointed out was given to the Mission by God in 1975, but he went on to add something new to my naïve ears, the additional concept of ‘Omega Zones’, that he partially explained as references to all the little areas within various ‘Spheres’ that must now be targeted individually with Christian fundamentalism. To hell with the local religious and philosophical beliefs that form the very foundation of these unique and wonderful subcultures, just go in there with ‘God’s only book’ and rack up some stats for Jesus. To be fair to Loren though, he caught himself talking about world evangelisation in terms of statistics and reminded the youthful audience that it was actually people who should be the Mission’s main concern, not statistics. Well, well, there’s a new concept.

It’s probably obvious to readers of this blog that I am endeavouring to provoke some thinking outside the old evangelical square. To my thinking one of the hallmarks of fundamentalism is the belief that its message is the truth to the exclusion of other points of view. I freely concede that it is not just YWAM or their retired director who holds such a point of view and I don’t want to be seen to be exclusively picking on them. I can well remember non-YWAM evangelical missionaries encouraging the destruction the 'Spirit Houses' on the north coast of Papua New Guinea in the late 1960s and early 1970s, with the loss of thousands of artefacts of great antiquity. There was a hullabaloo in the Port Moresby newspaper about it at the time and I personally disagreed with such wanton destruction of relics of history and signposts of cultures different from our own. What gives us the right to do this? Some may suggest the Bible (Christian one that is), but I see such a view as an excuse to replicate our own culture all over the world at the expense of a more diverse range of interesting and fascinating cultures. Remember, insisting that our beliefs are transcendent and encouraging subcultures to change in the name of our religion will just lead to a world of sameness - in my mind a very boring place to live. After all, why do we all like to travel overseas anyway?

I can remember how exciting and exhilarating it was to walk into a village on a pristine Melanesian island and wonder at the cultural diversity that had its foundation in beliefs so different, and so much older that those of my Salvation Army mother and Anglican father. To insist that these individuals change their beliefs would have ripped the heart out of the culture and caused it to collapse into the melting pot of sameness. Yes, to recognise my own cultural prejudices and change my thinking and behaviour was a challenge, but nonetheless it was a course I had to embark on once I was willing to cease my well-honed defensiveness and consider ideas that I had hithertofore been too fearful to contemplate. Sure, international industrialisation, multinational mining companies and the inevitable drift to secularism will have their negative impact on these subcultures anyway, but why hurry the destructive process along by suggesting that people burn their ‘wicked and evil’ artefacts and come along nicely clothed to a good Christian church (maybe even a Megachurch with cappuccino on tap). I am sure that the people of these non-Western societies, ‘Spheres’, and ‘Omega Zones’ may experience some level of culture shock if they were able to view some of the horrendous effects of our religious and cultural beliefs; after all we are knee deep in plastic bags and atomic weapons, as well as becoming fatter than the pigs we raise, even though we might go about the world trumpeting the wonders of the Christian ethos!

You might think I am being awfully sarcastic in respect to my comments about Loren Cunningham’s latest foray in explaining the YWAM vision and mission around the world, but remember we should always endeavour to view these things though the eyes of other cultures and religions. To fail to do so will ensure that Americanised Christianity is treated with growing contempt and resistance around the world, and in the Muslim world, it will no doubt help promote the insanity of equally fundamentalist suicide bombers who are just sick to death of the rampant domination of God’s ‘chosen’ people from the blessed, non-Muslim West. But then again, Sarah Palinism is alive and well in the hearts and minds of American Evangelicals and Pentecostals, so I suspect that my admonition will fall mainly on deaf ears.

By the way, in talking about the 'Same Old, Same Old', are Afican Americans still conspicuously missing in YWAM as was the case when I was an active participant in the '70s? I would hope that this situation may have changed since President Obama came onto the scene.

Pentecostalism: An Education in Threat and Fear

2009-05-07T15:00:00.008+08:00

There are many things that go bump in the night that we are sensitised to fear from our earliest years; often made more so by superstitious parents or older siblings who seem to enjoy scaring their younger brothers and sisters. Indeed, I can remember living in a little ol’ house in the suburbs as a boy with one of those old outside ‘johns’, or ‘loos’. Being the second youngest of six left me somewhat prone to the scheming of my four older siblings who took delight in waiting in the darkened backyard for me until I left the ‘john’ and then jumping out and making some blood curdling noise that would have frightened even the dead. No wonder I have been left with a well-developed startle response!

However, the frights in the darkened backyard and stories of witches and mythical beings that I was subjected too by my brothers and sisters pales into insignificance when compared to the thorough socialisation in fear that the church gifted me. No, it wasn’t the Episcopalian, Lutheran or Presbyterian churches, it was the good ol’ rocking and rolling pentecostal church; otherwise known as the ‘full-gospel’ church. The ‘smile to strangers’, ‘slap on the back’ and ‘shout hallelujah’ type of church. My God, what an education in fear and superstition they gave me!

From my earliest days in Sunday School through to my emotion-charged introduction to ‘Holy Spirit baptism’ as an adolescent, I was taught all about the lurking demons, who with bated breath waited for me to stray from God’s protective grace. I can even recall those drawings of skulking devils in the picture bible that my mother must have bought for us ‘lucky’ kids. Now, as an adult, I am reminded of it whenever I see the renowned art in the churches of Italy with its devils, demons, and saints; along with Jesus, his mother, Mary and the so-called guardian angels. Strangely though, we Westerners are often bemused by the so-called ‘primitive’ spiritual beliefs of other cultures, forgetting that all the paraphernalia of our own religion must look awfully weird to them as well. It just goes to highlight the arrogance and ignorance of our own culture when we fail to recognise that we are no different to others when it comes to religious superstition. I can remember my time in Papua New Guinea as a young man when I considered the spiritual beliefs of the indigenous population with some mirth, and yet not being able to objectively reflect on the strangeness of my own spiritual beliefs that were fraught with irreconcilable errors and bizarre concepts. It was some years later before a little humility and open-mindedness allowed my own beliefs to be challenged; it was only then that I began to break free of the shackles of fundamentalist evangelicalism and Pentecostalism that were installed into my psyche as an impressionable child.

I can well remember being taught all the usual pentecostal and evangelical poppycock, like if you stray from the fold, the wolf may come and devour you. This allegory no doubt had its origins in reality when earlier societies may well have reminded their children to stick around the village or they may go missing like some of the local shepherd’s flock. Of course in my case it was all about not committing sins for fear of straying from the protection of God’s grace and my guardian angel; or worse still, face the prospect of eternal damnation in the fires of hell.

The movie, “Jesus Camp” graphically depicts the inhumane nature of the powerful indoctrination process that is inflicted upon so many evangelical and pentecostal children. The woman who was the main character in this story, and who can be seen using the ‘threat and fear’ tactics mentioned above, would do well to be sued by some of these children once they become adults. To my thinking such action would be deserved and might help to put a stop to what I viewed as the exposure of innocent children to potential post-traumatic stress disorder outcomes. Take a look at the movie for yourself and consider the anguish in the eyes and faces of these beautiful young ones who through no fault of their own were born to parents with fundamentalist beliefs and sent off to this camp to learn to be better disciples. The movie also demonstrates the obvious lack of formal education in critical thinking and a capacity for scientific analysis among these ignorant parents; who in turn allowed their children to be subjected to what I considered blatant emotional abuse and manipulation at the ‘Jesus Camp’.

My thoughts on the above and this particular blog were in fact prompted after reading recent comments to one of my earlier blogs that critiqued Dean Sherman’s spiritual warfare book: The blog can be found at: (http://psuedocults.blogspot.com/2007/12/dean-shermans-battle-with-irrational.html). The anonymous reader and commenter made two consecutive comments about Dean Sherman’s thesis. In the first he mentions that Mr Sherman’s comments may border on being blasphemous, but then recants in the second as if out of fear. He effectively apologises for using the term, blasphemous. Now, whether Mr Sherman’s views are blasphemous is not the point; what concerned me was that this fellow appeared to be shackled by the bonds of threat and fear and was too afraid to speak his mind and stand by what he had originally stated. To me it was a good example of the powerful hold that fear has over truth and objectivity. I hope this man is able to break free and speak his mind in the future without being beset by fear of divine retribution for being open and honest in his opinion. This poor fellow must have felt much unease, probably brought about by having been taught that accusing someone of blasphemy may unleash some type of payback, not in the legal sense I am sure, but more so in respect to retribution from God, or Satan. Funny thing isn’t it how the loving and benevolent God of our childhood is also capable of meting out vengeance just because we wrongly or rightly accuse someone of blasphemy. Maybe this god has a ‘Passive Aggressive Personality Disorder’, or is psychopathic, or the like? I would have thought that a good and loving god (or parent) would simply kindly remind us to be careful about what we say about our fellow human beings, without implying the likelihood of impending punishment.

From my own experience and after viewing the contents of the movie “Jesus Camp”, it is patently clear that when we are subjected to the teachings of fundamentalist religion, whatever its label, fear and threat are an essential part of the indoctrination process. In a sense we are ‘damned if we do and damned if we don’t’. We are told we are destined to commit both sins of commission and sins of omission and will face the music for doing either unless we bow, or grovel in repentance. It is not unlike the demands and threats of any other totalitarian and undemocratic regime, like the Stalin era in Soviet Russia where you were told to give a disproportionate part of your crop to the State and remain in good favour with the ruling elite, or otherwise face either execution or a long period in the Gulags to make restitution. It is all about paying your dues or facing payback. No concept of positive reinforcement here, it is the threat of punishment that drives the devotees onward. Come to think of it, the Catholic Church’s concept of Purgatory is somewhat ‘Gulagish’ in that we are told that we can expiate our sins by doing a little time in Purgatory en route to heaven. Talk about the fables of more ‘primitive’ societies, I think we who were raised in modern fundamentalist Christianity, Judaism and Islam ‘take first prize’ for ignorance.

Abortion Laws and the Australian Bushfires - A Platform for Religious Extremists

2009-02-17T11:43:00.006+09:00

I found the following news article on the Australian Broadcasting Commission website. I quote it verbatim as follows:

Abortion Laws to Blame for Bush Fires?
Feb 10, 2009

This is surely the most unusual statement made in the wake of Victoria's bushfires. A press release from Catch the Fire Ministries reads (in part):

Catch the Fire Ministries (CTFM) leader Pastor Danny Nalliah said he would spearhead an effort to provide every assistance to devastated communities, although he was not surprised by the bush fires due to a dream he had last October relating to consequences of the abortion laws passed in Victoria.

He said these bushfires have come as a result of the incendiary abortion laws which decimate life in the womb.

Yesterday (Monday 9th February 2009), the front page of the Herald Sun newspaper reported "The Darkest hour for Victoria".

A few months ago the news media should have reported "The darkest hour for the unborn" but unfortunately the "Decriminalization of Abortion bill" went through parliament and was passed, thus making many people call Victoria "the baby killing state of Australia", Mr Nalliah said.
He said on November 7th last year we had sent out an email to our national network and a posting on our website carried an urgent post titled, ‘STOP PRESS. URGENT PRAYER NEEDED REGARDING AUSTRALIA, ESPECIALLY THE STATE OF VICTORIA’ following a dream he had on the 21st of October 2008, which he shared with his team on 22nd October.

Following is an excerpt from the dream which was published in the article:

"In my dream I saw fire everywhere with flames burning very high and uncontrollably. With this I woke up from my dream with the interpretation as the following words came to me in a flash from the Spirit of God. That His conditional protection has been removed from the nation of Australia, in particular Victoria, for approving the slaughter of innocent children in the womb.”
End quote

What struck me when I read this news article was the absurd and insensitive nature of Pastor Nalliah’s statement; although I assure you, that as a son of Pentecostal excess, this type of thinking was part of everyday life during my childhood. Sometimes I wonder how I survived and remain relatively sane!

This matter also brought to mind a time when I was working with Youth With a Mission in the United States during the late 1970’s, a time when bushfires also raged out of control across the southeastern area of Australia. I well remember a striking statement made by a senior leader in YWAM at the time.

He stated, in all seriousness how it appeared that God’s judgement was upon Australia in the form of the bushfires. Even though I was still caught up in the fundamentalist web in those days, and a bit overawed by my 'spiritual senior', I was nevertheless taken back by what was said and remember thinking how this fellow was entirely ignorant about the nature of the tinder dry Australian bushland that is primarily made up of Eucalypt tree, that are in turn full of Eucalyptus oil, and therefore burn like no other forest in the world. He also appeared entirely uninformed about the fact that these fires rage every summer somewhere in the Australian bush in the face of temperatures well over 100 degrees, albeit with less ferocity. However, to attribute a major flare-up of these annual bushfires to an act of God was in my mind as ludicrous as Pastor Nalliah’s ranting about how these must be linked to abortion legislation of all things.

It is no wonder that the better educated community of 2009 is becoming increasingly intolerant of idiotic statements from the likes Pastor Nalliah and his fundamentalist colleagues; especially when they might have lost their loved ones to the fires. Let me tell you, from what I have read of the responses to Pastor Nalliah’s statements in Downunder news media, religion is the loser as people are sick to death of the fundamentalist claptrap that is behind such inane, insensitive and irrational comment.

"Shock and Awe" vvs Throwing Your Shoes

2008-12-16T11:05:00.011+09:00

Symbolism is considered important to many things, including nations, religions, as well as educational and business organisations. We are well aware of what is represented when we see a swastika, an American eagle, a cross, a hammer and sickle, or a dove. However, some symbols are products of more modern day representationalism, often chosen to elicit high levels of emotional responses to associated technological advancements of our present day world. These symbols are usually carefully chosen with much forethought and planning; they generally do not arise spontaneously or as accidents of nature.

In respect to modern-day symbolism, the example of the United States of America’s symbol for their war on the Iraqi people stands out. The symbolism was termed “Shock and Awe” and while it may have elicited a sense of excitement, fear, power or a sense of revenge in some, it brought a sense of disgust to many others. The symbol "Shock and Awe" was spectacularly demonstrated in reality by the graphic television coverage of American firepower destroying various facilities in downtown Bagdad. I can remember how the Fox News channel confronted us all with this symbol along with its destructive reality 24/7, for months on end, ad nauseam. Even if we had believed that it was a just war, I don’t think it did any favours to the standing of America in the world community to have glorified the destruction of the enemy by the use of such blunt and inhumane symbolism with its carefully orchestrated media coverage. To me it reflected the narcissistic and grandiose views of a Republican president who had gone well beyond his “war on terror” and his stated allegiance to Christian values; values that include a command to love one another, not to facilitate the rape and pillage of one another. I ask you, what example have we set the Iraqi people and their Arab neighbours by our unnecessary invasion of Iraqi? It certainly is not one of restraint, moderation and diplomacy, let alone 'agape'.

"War on the Iraqi people? No, no, that is a misconception”, you might say. But the reality is that it was not just an attack on Saddam Hussein or an absent Al Qaeda, or equally absent weapons of mass destruction, but also a war on the innocent that triggered the death of over 100,000 Iraqi civilians (albeit mostly at the hands of fellow Moslems). The citizens of Iraqi society now know all too well the meaning of “shock and awe”. As a result, Saddam’s crimes against the Kurds and other ethnic groups now seem almost trivial compared to the greater destruction triggered by the destabilising influence of a self-righteous and rampant America who chose to clearly ignore the cautionary views of the world community at the United Nations. “No, we’ll go it alone if you don't like our plan” trumpeted the US president, thumbing his nose arrogantly at other international leaders.

Even if we had chosen an approach to Iraqi that advocated least destruction, but the necessary death of the despot Saddam Hussein, surely with America’s stated technological advantage Saddam could have been taken out with a “magic bullet”. Thereby saving the lives of countless civilians and avoiding the death of over 4200 young Americans, and the maiming of over 30,000 more. An even more humane and Christian approach could have involved the strategic capture of Saddam Hussein and his trial before the International Criminal Court. Again, with the help of sophisticated intelligence agencies and key elite military units, his capture should have been possible with little loss of life or collateral damage. Even the US-based Sojourners organisation proposed something similar to both the US and UK governments, but as a result of the intransigence of the warmongers in the US and UK Cabinets, the Sojourners' rational and achievable plan was ignored. We were told we just had to go to war, that there was no alternative! Thus, while Americans may continue to pipe, “God Bless America”, there are many millions more who are now likely to be asking, “How can a country that espouses Christian ideals have ignored less destructive options and decreed a ‘shock and awe’ approach to dealing with the internal problems of Iraqi?”

Twice I marched with younger contemporaries in my home country to protest the plan for war and the start of the war. I told my children that to attack Iraqi was madness, that it would not allay the march of terrorism; rather it would promote a new wave of religious fanaticism, hate and terror. I also suggested that it was akin to opening a ‘Pandora’s Box’ of further death and destruction. Regrettably, my views have proven all too true in the case of the death and destruction experienced by the ordinary citizens of Iraqi and the promotion of frenetic recruitment of misguided fanatics to terrorist organisations around the world. Furthermore, when I questioned the validity of the evidence put to the UN that claimed weapons of mass destruction were indeed present in Iraqi, I was summarily ridiculed by a conservative work colleague. Maybe, I should take the opportunity to remind him of his response now that the facts of the matter are clearly established, but alas the type of mindset that reacts in this way is generally impervious to reproof, so why waste my time?

What disturbs me most though is the fact that so many supporters of the war came from the ranks of the religious right of America, a significant group of Bible-believing individuals who appear unable to critically examine the facts or learn from the errors of the past, like my work colleague; the same individuals who are also likely to support other equally destructive ventures in the future. It makes it understandable as to why an Iraqi journalist might want to throw his shoes at the President of the United States of America. While his act of defiance might have sprung from a sense of what psychologists term ‘learned helplessness’, nonetheless it was an act rich in symbolism and one that demonstrated far more restraint than the wanton destructive acts of a president who has waged an unnecessary war for so long in this man’s homeland. Bring on Obama, the rest of the world is waiting for someone for whom they might be able to afford some respect.

Is the Republican Party Really God's Party?

2008-11-06T14:02:00.021+09:00

I hope readers noted that I made no mention of the US Presidential election prior to the close of polling. I guess I just wanted to be different from all those ‘Religious Right’, pentecostal and evangelical fundamentalists who just had to get involved in assigning each candidate to the ‘For God's Will’ and ‘Against God’s Will’ sides.

This brings to mind a conversation I had many years ago with a young American pentecostal man who I met during my world travels. He was convinced that God even took sides in sporting events, let alone weightier matters such as politics, and believed it was all a matter of God seeing beyond what we could see and assigning the right to win to the most moral and ethical group of 'jocks'. Funny how that oftentimes the members of the winning football team often end up in the headlines because of controversial and infamous off-field behaviour. It is as though fundamentalists can make their God fit just about any scenario and have no problem finding a justification if things don’t quite work out quite the way they predicted. In this vein, I wonder how that young American fundamentalist would explain the ‘come from behind’ 4-3 win by the Australian 12 metre yachting crew in 1983 when they took the America’s Cup from the New York Yacht Club (after they had held the Cup for about 150 years). To make matters even more theologically complicated, the New York Yacht Club never won the Cup back. In fact, except for a brief stint at the San Diego Yacht Club after Dennis Conner regained the Cup for America in 1987, it has effectively resided outside the United States ever since. Now what does that say about America from a religious fundamentalist’s point of view? Has America displeased God in the intervening years and therefore doesn’t deserve to have the Cup back? Or, is it because God really doesn’t really care about the Cup and is too busy concentrating on resolving other more important international problems, such as mass genocides and the predicament of starving millions somewhere else in the world? Search me!

Anyway, back to the US elections. I was most pleased some weeks ago when my son contacted me with the news that he was leaving Beijing to travel to the United States to take up work as an Obama Campaign intern. He said he dearly wanted to be part of such a historic campaign. He ended up working 18 hour days to help coordinate that wonderful Indiana win for Obama where for the first time in 24 years the state of Indiana went ‘Blue’. My God, if you want to talk about miracles, consider the odds. This was a 60-39 Republican State in 2004 and last night it finished 50-49 in favour of Obama. Now, I could be sitting here on the other side of the world thinking, “God was obviously on the side of Obama in view of this statistically improbable win.” However, I’ll spare you all the religious 'claptrap' as I see the win as a product of American people finally getting wise about things and supporting a candidate who will probably save them from further unnecessary pain. Oh, before I forget, I also recognise that the work of Obama's staff and volunteers in Indiana, including my son were essential to getting him over the line. When all is considered, somehow God doesn't appear to have been the primary force in this obvious political 'miracle'.

So why do Americans get their knickers in such a religious twist when it comes to elections? I believe you guys even had a plethora of conspiracy theories about Obama’s sinister motives. In this way he was not only ‘up against it’ because he was an African American, but he also had the religious fanatics spinning unfounded and malicious gossip about him. Pity the same people didn’t have a few well-founded conspiracy theories about George Bush in that he was certainly intent on getting your county involved in the needless Iraq war where many young Americans have died and countless more have been severely maimed; not to mention the 100,000 plus Iraqis who have died also, many more than at the hands of their former despot leader. And the pity is, before the war began Al Qaeda wasn’t even present there, let alone those elusive weapons of mass destruction. Interestingly, back in 2002 when I last visited the USA for a skiing holiday in Colorado, I met a wonderful young man, a senior from West Point who ended up serving not one, but two tours of duty in Iraq as a captain in the Marine Corps. Not surprisingly, after his first tour he came home very disillusioned with the purpose and process of the war and voted for Kerry in the 2004 Presidential election in the hope that a new, more rational President might put an end to such an unnecessary and destructive conflict. He remained in contact with me when serving in Iraq and sent me some memorable digital photos of the lighter side of his work, like sitting on the 'throne' in one of Saddam Hussein's ostentatious marble bathrooms at a Bagdad palace.

(Note: 1811 now reads 4201)

Thanks to 'The Australian' newspaper and cartoonist Bill Leak

You know, I sometimes wonder if there may be a significant difference in intellectual ability between American fundamentalist Christians and normal everyday rational Americans such as Barack Obama. Personally, I don’t think the fundamentalists are less intelligent, just a product of their education in Christian narrow-mindedness; a bit like the one I had as a youngster. Even so, I believe that my own compulsory stint in pentecostalism has enabled me to even sympathise with Sarah Palin's inability to see outside of her fundamentalist square because of her present state of personal and professional underdevelopment. In this context, I recently disagreed with a female journalist from a conservative Australian newspaper who suggested that she was "as thick as a brick". Not so I argued, as I believe she is an intelligent woman who simply does not have the broad education and wisdom that is necessary to lead a nation such as the USA. Give her time to travel and to read more broadly, and perhaps even study at a good secular university in order to appreciate the value of 'critical thinking', and in time she might be ready. (Yes, I am aware that she graduated from the University of Idaho and at least she didn't attend Liberty!). Meeting a gay or two might help also! However, during the recent Presidential race, I believed she would have presented a potential risk to both the USA and the rest of the world had she been thrust into national office. Most experienced Western observers from outside of the USA believed the same.

In conclusion and on a positive note, now that Barack Obama has been elected and due for inauguration in early 2009, I hope that American evangelicals, pentecostals and members of the 'Religious Right' will get behind this wonderful new leader and give him every chance to help bring the positive change that he envisages for the ordinary people of your great land.

Religion, Money and Greed

2008-10-09T13:39:00.006+08:00

It is said, “The root of all evil is not money, but that the love of money is the root of all evil.”

So when do Churches cross the line from collecting, earning, owning and investing money to loving it at the expense of generally accepted moral and ethical principles?

After a background in the old evangelical and pentecostal tradition and with later exposure to the more ‘neo-pentecostalist’ and ‘neo-evangelical’ movements, I have found a great diversity of views and behaviours when it came to money and the church. I can remember genuinely humble men and women of the cloth who lived in circumstances of relative self-denial, sharing much the same lifestyle as their parishioners that included such public displays of servitude such as carrying out their own maintenance of their motor vehicles; and vehicles that were within the same price range as those owned by the average parishioner. I even recall the story of an AOG pastor in a rural parish who was unfortunately killed while working under his old car when the house bricks he was using as wheel stands collapsed and he was summarily crushed under the vehicle. No picture of the modern head of the mega-rich charismatic church here who now drives a BMW or Mercedes Benz, or the like and wouldn’t think of even checking their own oil or cooling fluid levels, let alone having a crack at changing the brake pads. Too important and too busy I guess?

Allow me to digress a little and discuss a point made by Steve Bidolph in his book, “Manhood” where he suggests that in the old days male bonding was often facilitated by things such as buddies getting together to help one another work on their old motor vehicles in their home garages. Can you imagine having a ‘down-to-earth’ theological discussion these days with your pastor while sharing the greasy joys of motor maintenance? Highly unlikely!

Yes, in the ‘grand old days’ you might well have found a pentecostal or evangelical pastor working by day as a bricklayer or a carpenter, and by night and on weekends as a ‘Man of the Cloth’. Maybe they had to be a bit manic to keep up the pace, and I don’t mean that unkindly! See my earlier article on “Sex, Personality and the Hallelujah Chorus” that proposes a link between a hypomanic disposition and the behaviour of charismatic clergy.

No, I don’t advocate a return to what may well have been “not so grand old days” where we probably expected too much of men and women of God who pursued a career as a pastor or evangelist. It is no doubt a good thing that these people can now concentrate on a sole profession and invest more time in doing what they really want to do. The only regret I have is that it also often distances clerics from some of the realities faced by ‘Joe and Jill Average’ who sit in the pews on Sunday. The same problem often arises with politicians, who after a couple of terms in government appear to forget what it is like to have to get up early every working day to go to a job that may not be perfect or highly paid, but nonetheless necessary to meet the household bills and keep the kids clothed and well-fed.

Sometimes an anecdotal story better describes reality than a thorough theoretical argument and in this respect I want to relate a real life experience that gets to the heart of some of the problems of the mega-sized and mega-rich charismatic churches. The story is about a friend who I met when he worked with me as young man running hostels for homeless adolescents. This was during the ‘Jesus Revolution’ days of the rockin’ 70’s where these hostels provided not only good food and accommodation, but also what we believed was a wholesome Christian family-like environment.

I kept in contact with this good fellow over the years when he took up cab driving as a profession. He seemed to love his work, even though it required long hours on the road, because it gave him the chance to talk to individuals from many walks of life and to share his faith from time to time. In fact, in his latter years he won the Cab Driver of the Year Award for the category of ‘assisting the disabled’. He was a Christian in the true sense of the word and would spend time assisting the elderly and disabled rather than focusing on chasing the almighty dollar. His prize, apart from the award, was a bottle of wine and a voucher for dinner for two at one of the city’s trendy pubs. I am humbled by the fact that he took me to dinner rather than a good-looking lady; he even shared the bottle of wine with me as we ate and reminisced.

Sitting with him in his single room one evening during the last year of his life he related how that every week he deposited 10% of his pre-tax earnings in an envelope and gave it to the church that he attended every Sunday. This church happened to be the largest charismatic church in the city and emphasised the issue of tithing out of before-tax income. Regrettably the church appeared to major in the subject of ‘giving’, to the church that is. He discretely told me the story of his giving in the context of his struggle to pay for the maintenance of his taxi and the other essentials of his relatively meagre lifestyle. He was obviously worried about being able to pay his bills, but no doubt believed God would prevail. Frankly, I was tempted to tell him to pocket the tithes and not to feel guilty for a moment because I was well aware of the ostentatious wealth of the church he attended. However, he loved his church and was committed to it despite its glaring flaws. Thus I kept my opinion to myself, but at the same time wondered why he didn’t raise questions about his church’s stated thesis that ‘God will bless you financially if you give, give, give’. He was certainly not rich, even in the most modest sense of the term and his life appears to be a good contrast to the unbiblical poppycock that infers that God wishes us all to be materially blessed! Can you imagine making such a suggestion to all those saints who suffered material and physical deprivation over the centuries before the era of excess dawned on us, who through accident of birth live in the Western World?

When my friend unexpectedly and sadly passed away I telephoned one of the team of pastors at his church and told them of his secret charity and how this man gave so much it hurt him. Interestingly, the church was so big that they didn’t even know that he was dead; despite the fact that he wasn’t an invisible member of the congregation being involved in a number of supportive roles! I also dutifully informed them that he would have loved his church to conduct his funeral had he been able to communicate his wishes before his departure from this world. Regrettably, a wrangle ensued between churches for reasons that are beyond me and when I attended his funeral it was officiated by a minister from an entirely different church who didn’t even take the time to investigate the deceased’s humble achievements and dedication to the downtrodden of this world. It was as if a disciple of ‘Francis of Assisi’ was buried without due recognition by his peers. Needless to say, I was less than impressed, but I guess my good friend would not have made a fuss about it, so I didn’t either.

Nevertheless there is a lesson to be learned from such experiences. In my opinion the striving for recognition and acceptance in this world, on the part of modern super-sized charismatic churches, appears to detract from the original example of discipleship and service that was ably demonstrated by Jesus of Nazarus and his roving band of disciples. The very size and focus on money and other ‘things’ of these modern churches often lead to a loss of individual identity and raison d’tere of Christ’s church in this world. Their attention to material ‘success’, glamour, business ventures, slick seminars and getting involved in party politics have created a whole new image of the church in the 21st century, an image at times that I view as becoming so fragile that it is destined to come crashing down when individuals realise how similar it is to their everyday world.

(I recommend Tanya Levin’s book, “People in Glass Houses” for a more comprehensive critique of mega-sized and mega-rich charismatic churches and their role in modern Christendom. I have never met the author, but enjoyed her honest portrayal of herself and her experiences at her former church that had the largest congregation and budget in her country)

Please post a comment.

Can Religion be Dangerous?

2008-07-29T12:00:00.012+08:00

I have previously blogged on the topic of demons, ghost and goblins in respect to some of the poppycock that is presented by ‘respected’ leadership in international missionary organisations such as Youth With a Mission. I do not have a personal axe to grind in my criticism of what I view as irrational thinking and misleading theology, but I believe I have at least a moral obligation to present an alternative point of view to young Christians who through no fault of their own are raised in a background of religious narrow-mindedness, similar to that in which I was socialised. That is, young people from fundamentalist religious communities who continue to be misled by those they have been raised to look to as unchallengeable authorities in their lives. In turn, when one of their peers cries out for help, they end up providing little rational assistance.

Let me give you an example that is hot off the press, one that I stumbled across quite by accident when Googling the topic of ‘spiritual warfare’ as part of my ongoing research. Readers may wish to check the particular website for themselves to ensure that I am not presenting them with a ‘furphy’ (slang in my part of the world for a rumour, or an erroneous or improbable story).

http://au.answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20070517022411AAqJgah&show=7

You will note that an individual (who is likely to be an adolescent or young adult) wrote to ‘Yahoo Answers’ with the following query:

Is it possible to be attacked at night by a demonic force?
“Late at night, i feel like there is a demonic force that surrounds me and when i am in bed it attacks me. Once i have been attacked, i can't talk, scream, or move. Please tell me i am not the only one with this problem. This isnt the only reason as to why i believe it is a demonic force, i can hear it/them laughing, and when they do take over me i have reeaaly bad nightmares and wake up all sweaty. Also, when i went to the bathroom and closed the door, it felt as if someone on the other side was pullig back giving me resistance... i feel as if I am being haunted and my faith is poor right now. i feel as if i can do nothing but hope tonight is not the night i get attacked.”

Depending on our worldview, we might ignore the potential serious implications of this question and the impact of our replies to this desperate young person. In this case it was the variety and content of answers that both intrigued and disturbed me. I will provide a sample of the responses below that includes harmless simplistic answers, informed educated answers, through to the downright unhelpful, uneducated and potentially destructive answers from our home-grown religious fundamentalists.

Sample of answers to above question:

“It's sleep paralysis.... no demons... sheesh!”

“it is and you must rebuke it in the name of Jesus”

“A night terror, also known as pavor nocturnus, is a parasomnia sleep disorder characterized by extreme terror and a temporary inability to regain full consciousness. The subject wakes abruptly from slow-wave sleep, with waking usually accompanied by gasping, moaning, or screaming. It is often impossible to fully awaken the person, and after the episode the subject normally settles back to sleep without waking. A night terror can occasionally be recalled by the subject. They typically occur during non-REM sleep.”

“You're not; it's called "sleep paralysis." Discuss it with your doctor or shrink. There may be meds that can help.”

“That is scary, dude. You need to envoke the name of Jesus before you go to sleep and ask Him to protect you. You need to do some serious spiritual warfare. Talk directly to Satan in the Name of Jesus and rebuke that demon and command it to leave your home. I do believe in demonic force. How long has this been going on?”

“No, it's not. But there are perfectly reasonable medical explanations for the phenomenon you experience.”

“Yes it is possible. The people talking about spiritual warfare have the right idea. Dean Sherman wrote an excellent book about spiritual warfare, the exact title escapes me just now (I'm gonna feel really dumb if the title is "Spiritual Warfare"), but you can probably just google his name and find it.”

As you can well see from the selection of answers many worldviews are represented. As I pointed out above, some views can only be described as simplistic, through to the ridiculous and uninformed. Fortunately there are some answers demonstrating that some individuals are willing to look outside the religious square for a more scientific explanation. Certainly this individual’s problem was most likely a sleep disorder in the parasomnia spectrum, commonly known as 'Sleep Paralysis', as ably highlighted by some of the more enlightened abovementioned replies. Of interest is that scientists have suggested that such a disorder probably accounts for many of the centuries-old accounts of nocturnal encounters with devils and demons, and in more modern times encounters with aliens, including abduction by aliens.

While it may well have been the case that the young person in question may have eventually found a solution to his problem regardless of the quality of advice provided to him via the web, I put the question to my readers, “What if this young person was enquiring about the early symptoms of a psychotic disorder, rather than a more straightforward and curable sleep disorder?” Imagine the potential replies to a scenario where an individual reports something like:

“I often hear demon voices that either say horrible things about me or make suggestions that I should kill myself because I am so worthless. Also, I often hear the commentators on the TV talking personally to me and suggesting that I am preordained to die at the hands of the police. I just can’t shake this belief and wonder what I should do about it so that I fulfil my destiny? Should I go out and attack the police so that they shoot me? Another thing, I also have a strong sense that my thoughts can be seen or heard by other people, this really disturbs me as I wonder what secrets they will find out about me?”

Some may wonder if I am being a bit too melodramatic, but the essence of this hypothetical scenario and cry for help (usually from someone in their late adolescence or early adulthood) is akin to those that are well documented in psychiatry and my own experience after working in acute care psychiatry for many years.

Now can you imagine the additional trauma that such a person would be exposed to if they followed advice similar to that provided to the person with the sleep disorder and googled ‘Dean Sherman and spiritual warfare’? My concern here is based on the likelihood that an impressionable adolescent or young adult, when encouraged to view the world as inhabited by the 'Principalities and Powers' described by Mr Sherman, will interpret their psychotic symptoms as spiritually-based, rather than as biologically-based. In turn, such a misinterpretation of symptomatology may lead to negative outcomes, including an unwillingness to accept a valid psychiatric diagnosis of mental illness and refusal to comply with prescribed medication. I presume that this may not be Mr Sherman's purpose in what he teaches, but nonetheless he needs to see that it is often an inevitable outcome of what he and other religious fundamentalists teach about the so-called 'Devil' and his 'demon' assistants.

Undiagnosed and untreated chronic psychotic illnesses can have potentially disastrous effects that range from suicide (to escape aversive symptoms) to even murder if an individual is also afflicted by psychotic paranoid delusions. I encourage new readers to go to my 14 February 2008 blog titled, “Burning the Witches, Religious Fundamentalism, Ignorance, Mental Illness and the Unknown” that further addresses the topic of mental illness. This earlier blog is also a call for a balanced education in critical thinking rather than an education that is limited to simplistic fundamentalist bible-based learning.

Believe me, my work in the area of mental health that includes a number of years in forensic mental health, has made me all too aware of the dangers of ignorance. Even of late I have come across another case of fundamentalist religious parents who have visited their young adult son in a forensic mental health unit and opened their bible and harangued this poor, poor man with reasons why he should feel so very guilty about what he did when he was chronically psychotic. Sadly, they have even managed to convince this fellow that his psychotic experiences were no more than “an attack of the Devil”, and that his recovery is the result of prayer and not the antipsychotic medications. God help us!

The Stage Hypnotist and the Charismatic Preacher: Strange Bedfellows

2008-06-20T16:33:00.016+08:00

Stage hypnosis is a worldwide phenomenon that often draws a lot of interest from a broad audience in our community. It is the type of topic that is often discussed around the coffee room at work by adults, or in the schoolyard among younger people, especially after a stage hypnotist’s show has been seen the night before on prime-time television. People appear fascinated by what other individuals have been coaxed to do with a little suggestion from an expert entertainer and no doubt strangely intrigued by thoughts about what they may have been capable of doing if they were put in the same situation.

“On the count of three, you will imagine that you are walking on the deck of boat as it rocks to and fro on the ocean”. Carefully selected, or self-selected people from the audience who have ventured onto the stage begin to smile and giggle at the very suggestion of being on a rocking boat out at sea. The show has begun and all in the audience are transfixed by the skill of the entertainer and bizarre behaviours that begin to be manifested before them by seemingly ordinary people.

But this is a stage hypnotist show, not a religious meeting, you might remind me. But wait, just imagine a change of audience, a change of leader, a change of language and music, a change of suggestions, and before you know it you could be talking about a charismatic religious rally.

So on with the show! That is, the stage hypnotist's come charismatic preacher's show.

Let’s take a look at some of the classic signs and wonders stuff of Pentecostalism that I was forced to observe and participate in as a child and adolescent, and I hasten to add, frowned upon if I ever questioned the veracity of such vaudeville. This by the way is not directed at YWAM, but at the broader community of ignorance that can be found in fundamentalist religious communities and associated cults, whether Christian or not. Some direct sales organisations are not exempt either when you analyse the hype they get up to in their recruitment and training meetings.

“Slain in the Spirit” or "falling under the Spirit's power", "falling before the Lord" or "resting in the Spirit" as it is sometimes called, is a typical example of one of these so-called signs and wonders. I just stand in amazement these days when I see the herd mentality of many charismatic Christians as they ‘go to the altar to experience the power of god’ and as the preacher lays hands on them, or motions, down they go. Wow, what a show! And let me tell you it is a show, and no more!

I liken it to the phenomenon of stage hypnotism where the often highly skilled hypnotist prepares his self-selected audience for hypnotic induction. I say this with some degree of authority as I have been professionally trained in clinical hypnosis and have practiced it to assist individuals with their psychological difficulties for some years now. Furthermore, I am forbidden by my professional association to practice potentially harmful stage hypnosis (not that I would want to anyway). Let me assure you, the phenomena you witness in these pentecostalist meetings is one of two things, role playing on the part of those who are ‘slain in the spirit’, or otherwise a hypnotic trance-like state that is induced by a preacher who over the years has happened upon the techniques of the professional hypnotist. Of course they may or may not be fully aware of the systematic nature of the techniques they employ, but nonetheless it works just the same. Let me explain.

The hypnotist, or if you like, the preacher:
"Due to the stage hypnotist's showmanship and their perpetuating the illusion of possessing mysterious abilities, hypnosis is often seen as caused by the hypnotist's power. The real power of hypnosis comes from the trust the hypnotist can instill in his subjects. They have to willingly grant him the ability to take over their critical thinking and direct their bodies. Some people are very trusting, or even looking for an excuse to abdicate their responsibilities and are able to be hypnotized within seconds, while others take more time to counter their fears." (1)

Subject or audience preparation is essential to the stage hypnotist's carefully planned show. Similarly, just think about the type of statements made in charismatic, pentecostal and evangelistic meetings. I can remember some straightforward classics, “God is with us today, can’t you feel his presence?”, “He is here to do wonders, to make the lame walk again, to heal the broken-hearted”, “Expect a miracle” and the like. The music and worship preparation is also important in building up a state of expectancy in the audience. All this type of preparation is akin to similar techniques used by the stage hypnotist, except different wording is used and the religious themes are substituted by more audience-appropriate preparation techniques.

The subject, or if you like, the congregation:
"In a stage hypnosis situation the hypnotist chooses his participants carefully. First he gives the entire audience a few exercises to perform and plants ideas in their minds, such as, only intelligent people can be hypnotized and only those wanting to have fun will play along. These suggestions are designed to overcome the natural fear of trusting a stranger with the greater fear of being seen as unintelligent, unsociable, and joyless by the rest of the audience. Out of the crowd he will spot people who appear trusting, extroverted and willing to put on a show. Often these people are looking for an excuse to do something they otherwise would not do sober.

The hypnotist starts them off by having them imagine ordinary situations that they have likely encountered, like being cold or hot, hungry or thirsty then gradually builds to giving them a suggestion that is totally out of character, such as sing like Elvis. The desire to be the center of attention, having an excuse to violate their own inner fear suppressors and the pressure to please, plus the expectation of the audience wanting them to provide some entertainment is usually enough to persuade an extrovert to do almost anything. In other words the participants are persuaded to 'play along'. This gives the impression that the hypnotist has total control over them." (2)

Suggestibility is an important factor in participant selection. If you have an audience that is largely made up of suggestible and compliant individuals you are way ahead and will be assured of a ‘good show’. Think of how advantaged the preacher is in this respect. He has a congregation that is largely made up of individuals who have attended because they wish to experience something of the Divine. They are therefore ‘ripe for the picking’ in the sense of preparedness for hypnotic induction and suggestion. For example, if you told an audience of atheists that god was present and desirous to manifest his divine glory, they would scoff. However, an audience of believers (who are generally more the extroverted type found in pentecostalist and charismatic circles), when told the same thing they will hoot and holler, “Praise God, Hallelujah”; and hey presto, are ready for hypnotic-like induction and suggestion that is manifested in behaviour such as being ‘slain in the spirit’, or perhaps bursting forth in tongues, or interpretation of tongues.

Yes, it is a show, one that is based on tried and proven hypnotic technique, that is, audience preparation, induction, deepening and suggestion. It is a show that I would like to demonstrate to you all for the sake of liberating the masses of Pentecostals from their misconceptions (if you like, their bondage), but a demonstration that may not be received by them even if I were able to do it. In the end people believe what they want to believe, despite rational alternatives being available that may explain their world, and experiences therein.

Hypnotic trance is generally viewed by Pentecostals as dangerous, a way of ‘opening yourself up to the Devil’ is the most common terminology used. I presume that what people are suggesting is that you may open yourself to be possessed by a demon if you participate to hypnosis. However, let me assure readers that this is poppycock and in the 18 years or so that I have practiced clinical hypnosis, it has only benefited the participants. I have no record of even one individual being harmed by this well researched therapeutic process. I can only put the negative comments of Pentecostalism (in which I was raised) down to a lack of knowledge and/or the fear of the unknown. Human beings have a history of rejecting what they fail to understand, don’t they? It is a bit like racism or xenophobia, oftentimes generated from a lack of knowledge and understanding of other races and their unique socialisation experiences.

When you take a long hard look at the facts, what people are potentially harmed by are the ‘stage hypnotist’ antics of the Pentecostal preacher who practices none of the safeguards that are required by the professionally trained practitioner of clinical hypnosis. In effect they mislead their congregations by giving them the fallacious idea that they are experiencing the Divine when being ‘slain in the spirit’ or the like. They promise healing of not only the body, but also of emotions and mind. In so doing they deny their flocks effective therapeutic interventions that are available through professionally trained clinicians of all types, such as medical doctors, psychiatrists, psychologists and other allied health personnel. What a sham! Like the song goes, “When will they ever learn, when will they er…er…ev...er learn”.

(1) (2) Thanks to Wikipedia for providing some prepared 'nuts and bolts' stuff on hypnosis.

Beware: Sex Leads to Dancing

2008-03-29T11:17:00.014+09:00

A young man approached me some years ago in a remote city Downunder. He knew I was a representative of Youth With A Mission and wanted to quiz me about something he had heard after attending youth rally presentations by Dean Sherman and Winkey Pratney who are well-known associates of YWAM. He related Winkey’s strong advice to those in the audience that they should avoid 'parking' with their boyfriends or girlfriends as if there was a Tarantula spider in the car. As anyone who has heard Winkey present publicly will attest, he is a natural communicator and I am sure he made the statement with typical humour that drew much laughter from the audience. However, all jokes aside, this fine young man was obviously wondering why such legalistic mumbo-jumbo was being foisted on decent Australian young people by overseas religious fundamentalists, and wanted me to provide an answer. I am sorry my answer has taken so long, but we all live and learn, don't we? Well at least some of us do, but sadly not all; probably because they are bound by the fear of comtemplating an alternative view of the world and the meaning of life.

We all might think this statement by Winkey is a hoot, especially when put to us in the context of humour; but in reality it expresses a plainly naïve and dysfunctional view of human sexuality, as well as an unsympathetic understanding of adolescent development. Winkey should himself be challenged to consider what motivates him to make such statements as I have also witnessed him making similar statements about sexual abstinence to single Christians in a joking, but nonetheless serious manner. I noted with interest that he usually had a good-looking blond by his side (his wife) who no doubt satisfied his own sexual desires, but at the same time he demonstrated little tolerance for the sexual needs of other young Christians who may not have been fortunate enough to have found a permanent partner, or may never find one.

Winkey’s statement is just one example of the misconceptions and hang-ups about sexuality that are prevalent among religious fundamentalists, whether they are Christian, Moslem or Jewish. I can well remember my own experience as a young adult evangelist who occasionally enjoyed the company of Christian women, who were in turn a natural part of the social milieu of the Church. What struck me was the number of times that ‘concerned’ pastors asked me why I hadn’t married. It was as if they were dreadfully concerned about my moral welfare, or otherwise the moral status of the young women who I occasionally dated. When you think about it, my own experience is a good example of how Christian young people are so often coerced to marry too early, so that they avoid fornication, I presume. How many times dare I ask, has this led to mismatches in relationships and accompanying heartache? Of course, as I grew older and more knowledgeable about human behaviour, it was patently obvious that the attitudes and statements of these pastors was a reflection of their own heightened interest in sex, an interest that may not be a problem in itself, but was made a problem by the displacement of their own anxieties about the subject onto members of their flocks, and anyone else who happened to be silly enough to listen to them.

This brings us to the foundational issue of how and why all these taboos arose and why are they still practised in today’s modern world? Of course sexual taboos are only one of a myriad of taboos that have been part of societies around the world for hundreds of thousands of years. For example, if we look at traditional Aboriginal Society in Australia, a common taboo across tribal groups throughout this wide-ranging country was that the son-in-law was dissuaded from communicating directly with his mother-in-law and strongly dissuaded from making eye contact. In essence the relationship is one of respect, but avoidance. The two still communicate, but through the daughter/ wife who acts as the primary conduit for communication in this relationship. A brother and sister relationship taboo also exists. This usually takes place after initiation, as beforehand brothers and sisters can play together freely. Both these avoidance relationships have their grounding in the Australian Aboriginal kinship and language system and are recognised as ways of avoiding incest in small bands of closely related people. Furthermore, Aboriginal Dreamtime mythology often overlays these taboos, thereby reinforcing their importance within the culture.

We may think such taboos are strange and idiosyncratic, but nonetheless they perform an essential role in maintaining social order. However, it is also fair to ask the question, “Would these Aboriginal societies have survived over tens of thousands of years without such specific taboos?” I think the rational answer is “Yes”, but obviously some other form of social order would have taken their place so that harmony and cooperation was maintained within these small bands of hunters and gatherers. Whether the taboos protected against incest in the final analysis is open to conjecture, but you can no doubt appreciate the destructive nature of random sexual liaisons in a small group situation.

In the same manner, taboos within fundamentalist Christian religion perform similar roles in respect to maintaining order, or if you like, the status quo of the dominant culture. For example, if we critically analyse the role of taboos that have governed traditional Pentecostalism, we will discover that they act to perpetuate the accepted order of the dominant Pentecostal culture. An example arises out of the acceptance of the New Testament that includes the writings of St Paul, as the inspired literal word of God. Therefore, if St Paul stated that we should avoid fornication, then it follows that many taboos would have naturally evolved to ensure the perpetuity of this edict. Even some of the laughable old taboos that my poor sisters had to abide by, such as not wearing lipstick, was rooted in not making oneself too attractive to males; in the belief that it helps avoid the inevitable consequence of such attraction, that is, fornication. Pentecostalists however, afraid of mentioning sex, justified such adornment taboos in terms of avoiding becoming too 'worldly'. The only positive comment I can make about this matter is that at least most pentecostalists appear to have now broken free from such ridiculous adornment taboos.

The largely outdated taboo about attending dances is another good example from the sad history of Christian fundamentalism. I can distinctly remember my mother forbidding me to attend a school dance with my adolescent girlfriend who lived up the street. My mother simply explained her actions in terms of dancing being a 'worldly' pursuit and therefore to be avoided. There was no mention of the fact that pentecostalists somehow linked dancing with close body contact and resultant temptation. Naturally, my girlfriend was mystified why I couldn’t accompany her and I think I was too embarrassed to tell her the truth. Needless to say, she went to the dance with someone else and that was the end of the relationship!

So does dancing really lead to sex? Personally I see this as a redundant question because all these man-made taboos have little affect in inhibiting the inevitable sexual attraction between men and women. All they seem to accomplish at times is to cause fundamentalist Christians to miss out on some of the joys of living, as well as driving many from the fold once they start to think for themselves.

Of note is the fact that we now live in 2008 and most of us have been educated in ‘critical thinking’, or at least should have been if we didn’t have our education restricted by fundamentalist ‘home schooling’, or the likes of both private Christian schooling and a followup fundamentalist Christian university education; an education in 'narrow-mindedness' in my opinion. So shouldn’t healthy critical thinking motivate us all to analyse the taboos that have been thrust upon us by under-educated parents and pastors who have themselves been over socialised within fundamentalist religious cultures? "Are such taboos rational or irrational?" "Where and how did they arise?" "What function do they play in our present-day society?" "Can they be safely discarded with little or no ill effect?" These are the probing questions that we should be asking, rather than naively following narcissitic individuals like small-brained sheep. After all, we are no longer children!

So why do 'Winkey Pratneys', 'Joy Dawsons', 'Dean Shermans', ‘Loren Cunninghams’ and other religious fundamentalists of their type continue to bombard us with the taboos of our largely ignorant forebears? Obviously because they are themselves bound by such taboos and are afraid to question them in an objective manner. They may also be struggling with their own inner conflicts about the subject; but I can’t see inside their heads, so will have to leave that question for them to answer.

I can tell you one thing; sex can lead to dancing, rather than dancing leading to sex. Why? ... because it is a naturally enjoyable and highly reinforcing human behaviour. The joy of sex, and other equally pleasurable non-sexual activities, will make us all dance if we open our minds to the truth. Such pleasures can also be enjoyed within a relationship that is founded on mutual human respect without the need for any of the ancient and restrictive taboos that are foisted on us by the ignorant, and/or those who would desire to control us.

On the Right Track

2008-03-26T15:29:00.010+09:00

By the gods! It has been some weeks since I wrote my last blog. Then again, sometimes work and pleasure seem to take over our lives, don’t they?

Speaking of pleasure, I just enjoyed the most fabulous Easter holiday in the countryside where my lovely partner and I attended the local race meeting (horse racing for those from the USA). What a stupendous occasion it was with all the townsfolk turning out in their best attire for one of those few special occasions among the hills and dales of the countryside. And unlike us ‘pseudo-sophisticates’ from the city, those country folk sure know how to have a good time. They even hosted the ‘girl’s footrace’ down the track in between the horse races; upon which the young lady who was accompanying me threw off her lovely white hat and newly acquired shoes and promptly jumped the fence and darn near beat those younger fillies to the winning post. I nearly choked on my glass of claret to see such a beauty in full flight!

She was dreadfully apologetic after her jaunt down the turf though, obviously thinking that her sheer enthusiasm might be mistaken for chardonnay excess. However, I assured her that I was absolutely enthralled by her lovely form on the day and hoped that it may continue later in the evening.

Now back to the reality of this present world, and perhaps the next, if we factor in Dean Sherman’s ravings about spiritual warfare and those demons that are supposedly lurking in the shadows for us, breath bated, hoping that we may drop our spiritual guard and stumble into their well-laid traps.

As you will understand, if you have read my blog of late December that was titled, “Dean Sherman’s Spiritual Warfare: The Irrational World of Demons, Ghosts and Goblins”, I wonder about the sanity of such hypothetical claptrap. Let’s face it, after my weekend of excess that has just drawn to a sad close, the demons should have already devoured me; after all, I remained somewhat oblivious to the spiritual and concentrated my efforts, quite effortlessly I must say, on having a jolly good time. While I say that I was not mindful of the spiritual, I was nonetheless prone to admire the beauty of god’s creation that inspired me from all angles. Even that lovely filly sprinting down the track, in my mind at least, was a timely reminder of the wonders of creation and dare I say, the resurrection. After all, she was forty-nine, going on fifty. Ah! the image of that yellow chiffon dress wafting in the breeze is indelibly burned into my hippocampal neurones.

Why then do the fundamentalist churches, and in this case YWAM, produce individuals who seem to have a lot of fun themselves, but try hard to ensure that their charges do not indulge in the 'excesses of the flesh’? Sometimes I wonder if they are just mean-spirited and act like dogs in the manger when it comes to these matters. On the other hand, maybe it is the fact that they have a deep-seated fear of their own taste for the delish and reel back in convulsions whenever they see their own hidden desires being acted out in front of them. “My god, we can’t allow this sort of behaviour can we dear, we must save their souls by telling these wayward children that they have to rein in their desire for fun and frolic.” And talking about reining in our desire for enjoyment, let me tell you, that young forty-nine year old needed a rein or two on her last Saturday, but on the other hand given her head, she sure looked good barefoot and leggy as she cantered gracefully down the track.

Yes, Mr Sherman assures us that these devils, demons, principalities and spiritual powers never sleep; they are always at work looking out for their next victim among the wayward of the flock, such as me, I assume. It may be considered irreverent of me I confess, but I often wonder why these beings never get stuck into a bit of pleasure seeking themselves instead of working non-stop, day and night; after all, they must know more than we about the delights that await in the big wide world. So why does Mr Sherman suggest that they are always at work looking to catch us out, unimportant individuals that we are, when they too could be at the races, having a nice glass of claret or chardonnay, getting a little bit tipsy and admiring the lady in chiffon yellow as she sprints down the paddock, dress flying high and showing a little bit of fetlock, not to mention a revealing amount of thigh?

Well, it is probably a good job that I am back at work and away from all that temptation; after all, we all know the old saying, “The devil finds work for idle hands.” I wonder what Mr Sherman is doing with his at this very moment. Maybe we could telephone him and ask. Better still, may I be impertinent and suggest that we call Joy Dawson instead; after all she was always the one who was most concerned about what young people do with theirs (see Nov 2007 blog).

Sex, Personality, and the Hallelujah Chorus

2008-02-29T16:07:00.018+09:00

Not long ago I provided a comment to a reader’s question that asked (I think rhetorically) why so many ministers and priests fail in ministry because of sexual sin? Good question, and one that has a number of answers; including I suggest, the apostle Paul’s seemingly overvalued interest in this aspect of human behaviour, and the likelihood that his views have encouraged too many Christians to get hung up on this mono-issue. However, an additional hypothesis that I have toyed with as a result of my experience as a mental health clinician, and ex-pentecostal, is that individuals tend to largely self-select to different denominational affiliations, and as such, individual differences related to personality and disposition play a large part in the normative behaviours that mark the respective denominations. In the case of Pentecostal groups, many join because they are attracted to the more extroverted form of worship and challenging service opportunities (no boring ‘high’ Anglican/ Episcopalian stuff in Pentecostalism, that’s for sure!). I always thought it would be interesting to conduct an interdenominational study of personality that quantified the hypothesised different personality structures of members of the various denominations, but that will have to wait until the next life.

So who are these individuals likely to be, or should I say what type of personality traits and behaviours are these individuals likely to display? Of course, the more extraverted, outgoing and gregarious traits and behaviours from my experience. In a dispositional sense, they may be over-representative of individuals who experience some degree of hypomania, but not mania per se. One of my psychiatrist colleagues described it as “constitutional hypomania”, and as such was suggesting that it doesn’t necessarily need to be classified as a psychological disorder, but may be viewed in a more dispositional context. Nonetheless, one of the characteristics of such individuals is a heightened drive to engage in pleasurable activities that includes sex, among other things. You may like to read up on hypomania by googling ‘hypomania’. However Wikipedia’s definition appears sound and includes the following (modified) description:

People with hypomania are generally perceived as being energetic, euphoric, overflowing with new ideas, and sometimes highly confident and charismatic, and unlike full-blown mania, they are sufficiently capable of coherent thought and action to participate in everyday activities. A person in the state of hypomania might be immune to fear and doubt and have little social inhibition. They may talk to strangers easily, offer solutions to problems, and find pleasure in many types of activities. Hypomania can also include:

lower need for sleep
pressure of speech
racing thoughts
obsessive behavior, whether mild or severe
poor judgment relative to a particular situation's judgment call
uncontrolled, or only partially controlled, impulsivity
excessive sexual activity
Plus other out-of-character behaviors that the person may regret following the conclusion of the mood episode; like buying a BMW instead of a Ford!

While it is not the purpose of this blog to discuss the technicalities of mania and hypomania it is probably important to point out that in clinical cases hypomania can signal the beginning of a more severe manic episode, if the hypomanic episode remains untreated. A hypomanic or manic episode can also directly precede a depressive episode; hence the term Bipolar Affective Disorder (formerly Manic Depression).The question is, do you see a higher proportion of such cases in the Pentecostal and charismatic churches than in the more established denominations? If so, do such dispositions contribute to the oft-cited sexual excesses among Pentecostal clergy? I will leave that question for readers to answer.

One of the more concerning aspect to my hypothesis is not so much the overstimulated sexual appetite that is often triggered by a hypomanic disposition, but the fact that mania is often accompanied by delusional thinking. Now this is something that Pentecostals draw back from, but let me say from experience that I have witnessed delusional thinking and related delusional statements from the pulpit of full-gospel clergy on more than one occasion. Grandiosity if a classic sign, as are magical claims that God has told an individual something that has absolutely no grounding in reality; nor in fact may ever appear in reality. And I am not just referring to the everyday ‘word of knowledge’ or run-of-the-mill ‘prophetic message’ that is characteristic of Pentecostal worship services; rather I am talking about the ‘great’ visions that are claimed to be inspired by ‘god’. If you care to analyse such claims, they tend to only bear fruit in reality through the sheer hard work and hard earned money of the saints, not because of the delusional thinking of some Pentecostal pastor.

I recall a well-known pastor of a large church in a mainstream Pentecostal denomination who used to ask us if we had exercised creative thinking en route to church, inferring that we must be bone-lazy if we had simply been lazily enjoying the view of the forest or some other equally benign and pleasurable human activity. He made it clear that he engaged his mind in creative thinking at all times; although I don't think it was his choice; rather it was driven by his hypomanic disposition. He was also prone to theatrics on stage that well and truly titillated the generally extraverted congregation. The church just grew and grew and was known as a place where ‘god was at work’ in that city. Regrettably though, and predictably, this fellow ended up experiencing what everyone diplomatically termed, ‘a nervous breakdown’ or ‘a stress breakdown”. In reality he suffered from an undiagnosed Bipolar Affective Disorder that he was obviously in denial about. His behaviour could clearly be seen as often hypomanic, and at times, definitely manic. It is also likely that he had periods of depression, and if so, he kept them well hidden from his congregation. In his case, hypersexuality did not appear to be a problem (at least on the surface), just pressure of speech, racing thoughts and other classic symptoms of an untreated mental illness.

There are many more examples, one of which is about a now defrocked Pentecostal pastor who pioneered one of the largest Pentecostal churches Downunder. I can remember hearing him as a visiting overseas speaker as a young teenager. As you can imagine you tend not to forget startling references to sex at that age and he provided one of those unforgettable statements from the pulpit that stunned even a veteran child of Pentecostalist excess like me (and no doubt the adults more so, who were probably wondering what us teenagers thought about it all). As it emerged after the years went by, he was accused of sexual indiscretions with the under-aged; or paedophilia when the niceties are put aside. However, he managed to avoid exposure with the alleged assistance of his Christian brothers from the church hierarchy in his home country. The cover-up apparently continued until his own son, who also pioneered a mega-sized charismatic church, precipitated his expulsion from the ministry. What I remember about this character, even though I only saw and heard him that one time, was his noticeably elevated manner that pointed to yet another untreated mood disorder. Tanya Levin, in her book, “People in Glass Houses” suggests that psychotic symptoms (delusions??) were also evident in this former pastor’s background, but this point remains conjecture. His son, during an interview with a major broadcasting organisation, spoke about how his father was very impulsive at times. Of course, no criticism is implied of those with a mental illness; rather the point is that people should seek diagnosis and treatment of such disorders to minimise collateral damage, as well as potential disasters that occur in some less fortunate cases. Also, it should be noted that paedophilia is an independent sexual disorder that is not generally associated with a mood disorder. However, in this case of this former pastor, he was likely to be more vulnerable to his sexual disorder because of untreated hypomania.

In discussing this topic within a religious context, it is important to remember that individuals who display hypomanic behaviour are not evil or sinful; far be it from the truth! Rather they are just expressing their natural ‘god-given’ disposition to be a whole lot more interested in pleasure than the average introvert, or even the average ambivert. Throw this hypothesis into the equation and I think we may better understand why Pentecostal ministers in particular have a reportedly higher probability of getting chucked out because they like sex too much and end up engaging in what their peers view as immoral expressions of sexuality. No, I am not suggesting that all Pentecostals, or indeed all Pentecostal clergy experience hypomania or have a greater than normal penchant for pleasure; or sexual pleasure for that matter. I am putting forward the notion that compared to the whole community of churchgoers, Pentecostals seem to demonstrate personality traits and behaviours that mark them out as a rather gay group; gay in the sense of cheerful and lively I mean! After all, this is the same group of people who are known for their happy-clappy, foot stomping, hooting and hollering behaviour. After all I should know, I was born into the ‘hallelujah chorus’ and stayed in the fold until my mid 30’s. What an education in human excess that proved to be! Glad to be out though.

The other aspect of Pentecostalism that stands out in my mind, after some years fellowshipping in other denominations, is the overemphasis by their clergy on the subjects of petting, concupiscence, lasciviousness, immorality, homosexuality, adultery, fornication etc. Isn’t it amazing how many terms Christian society has invented to be able to describe their preoccupation, titillation and guilt in respect to the subject of SEX! Of course, you don't have to be Freud to understand why they are so preoccupied and regularly lash their youth with verbal admonitions about the evils of such behaviour.

Getting back to the subject of hypomania and the clergy, some health professionals might suggest that in light of some of the more catastrophic falls from grace of some well-known full-gospel clergymen, that a little medication might have helped avert major disaster. It is amazing what a little mood stabiliser can do, and it is far better than whacking yourself out on a regular basis with alcohol, even though alcohol has its longer-term use in controlling hypomania, as a CNS depressant. The trouble with alcohol is that it is a two-edged sword because its short-term effect is to loosen social inhibition that guards us humans from involvement in potentially unacceptable or objectionable behaviour; and people with a hypomanic disposition can ill afford any more loosening of social inhibitions, that's for sure!

I guess if I had my choice between remaining at the top of my profession as a somewhat hypomanic tele-evangelist, charismatic preacher, Pentecostal evangelist, and the like, or ending up broke with no wife in sight, and reputation in tatters, then I might take a little medication myself. On the other hand, I could try to adjust to my outgoing human disposition early in life and mould my lifestyle around it so I didn’t get into too much trouble. That would probably rule out a religious vocation though, especially when you factor in the 'anally retentive' ramblings of dear ol' Paul the apostle on the subject of sexuality. Even so, St Paul's views pale into insignificance when we look at what the Levites decreed in respect to sexual indiscretion; we would all be stoned, and not in the modern, more pleasurable meaning of the term!

Footnote:
While I have put forward a dispositional hypothesis, other authors have alternative credible, well-researched explanations about Pentecostalists' reputation for sexual indiscretion. For, example, Grant Wacker wrote, “Are Pentecostals Sex-Crazed?” (Christianity Today Vol 45, 2001). His conclusion about this question read:

“Viewed from afar, then, the most reasonable explanation for the licentiousness stereotype was self-interest. Insiders' claims that other insiders had strayed into gross immorality helped establish the accusers' own doctrinal and moral purity. Likewise outsiders' claims helped establish the doctrinal and moral integrity of the outsiders—or lined their pockets with ready cash. Moreover pentecostals brought much of the problem on themselves in a way not yet noted. From the beginning they proved eager to flaunt their rectitude. When conversion, sanctification, and Holy Spirit baptism did not turn them into saints, but left them ordinary Christians subject to the same failings that bedeviled everyone else, the rest of the world noticed.”

(Grant Wacker is Associate Professor of the History of Religion in America at Duke University and the above-mentioned article is an extract from his book, Heaven Below: Early Pentecostals and American Culture. Cambridge, Mass: Harvard University Press, 2001.)

Comments welcome!

Why Try to Fix Something that is Not Broken? Homosexuality, Adjustment and Religious Meddling

2008-02-19T17:27:00.009+09:00

It is plain to see that religious fundamentalists are plainly ‘hung-up’ about homosexuality. It is amazing what effort they invest in their quest to convince homosexual individuals to either change their orientation or to control their same-sex attraction. Consider the range of organisations they have created for this purpose: Exodus International, Parents and Friends of Ex-Gays, Love in Action, True Freedom Trust, Focus on the Family's Love, Won Out, National Association for the Research and Therapy of Homosexuality, Courage UK, and Courage International, to name just a few. But then again, I guess that if the Levites decreed, on God’s behalf, that we should stone them all, then changing them or helping them to resist temptation, doesn’t appear to be too bad an option! As a writer from the Monty Python series might suggest, “Change or abstinence is a whole lot better than having a bloody great rock bounce off your head!” Seriously though, why do religious fundamentalists single out these people, when homosexual individuals have enough discrimination trust on them even in the secular world as it is? Oh, I forgot, it is all done in the name of righteousness and love.

An article titled “Sex, Drugs and Rock & Roll” by Wynn Cameron Thompson (http://www.stonewallrevisited.com/pages/wynn_t.html) demonstrates the inherent bias of religious fundamentalists in their dealing with adolescents with a homosexual orientation (see extract below). Thompson is a reformed homosexual or perhaps a non-practicing homosexual; or maybe a gay who has been transformed into a heterosexual, or whatever. You work it out! Unfortunately though, Thompson obviously remains trapped by his ongoing commitment to religious fundamentalism in that he sees himself as continuing to abstain from ‘unwanted homosexuality’. From my point of view, his stance is a very good example of the heterosexually married homosexual man who struggles on a daily basis with the tension generated between their public sexual orientation and their private (natural) sexual orientation. Thompson mentions his marriage at age 29, but I am not sure of his current status in this regard. Maybe his wife did the right thing and moved on to enjoy a genuine heterosexual relationship; I am not being unkind, just realistic. After all, if it was my daughter, I would want her to enjoy the fullness of a heterosexual relationship if she were so oriented, not spend her life with a man who is homosexually oriented with all the attendant needs and desires. At the same time I would hope that the homosexual man would realise that he should spend his life with someone who will also fulfil his needs, or if he so chooses, remain single.

In his article Thompson points out how he has been involved in training and ministry with YWAM. He has a degree in counselling from YWAM’s University of the Nations and is obviously influenced by the anti-gay orientation of both YWAM and other fundamentalist religious organisations. Thompson now conducts his own ministry called “Restoring Wholeness” that specialises in sexual counselling and reformation. When I use the term ‘anti-gay’ I am not inferring that gays as individuals are not treated with some level of ‘respect’ by religious fundamentalists; rather I am referring to the fact that religious fundamentalists, including those in YWAM, consider the homosexual lifestyle a sin and therefore to be rejected by all Christians. These juxtaposed positions about ‘acceptance’ and ‘rejection’ somehow confuse the notion of ‘respect’ don’t you think? Moving on though, Thompson states in his well-publicised web-based article:

“…. My parents were very confused about my behaviour. They went to our pastor and asked her for help. The pastor suggested that my parents bring me to a prayer meeting in which they would “cast the demon of homosexuality” out of me. I was 14 years old. I remember being terribly frightened. My body shook with fear as they prayed. I felt condemned and rejected. Afterwards I was in a terrible state. I was hurt and more confused than ever. However, one thing remained...I was still hungry for masculine love, affirmation and touch…”

Thompson continues by inferring that his “hunger for masculine love, affirmation and touch” was the result of his unfortunate earlier experiences of sexual abuse and dysfunctional relationship with his father. There is no discussion of more recent genetic research that highlights about a 55% phenotype penetrance rate in twin studies concerning homosexuality. Genes and other physiological factors that may contribute to sexual orientation just don’t get a mention. However, you can read the full transcript for yourself at the above-mentioned site and make up your own mind about the course of his life and struggle with his sexual orientation. Nonetheless, I think we can all say, “What sad and tragic experiences this fellow went through”, regardless of our own particular philosophical stance on the matter of homosexuality. It is fortunate indeed that Thompson did not take the route of suicide as so many other young homosexual adolescents so often do when confronted by carers and clergy who regrettably lack knowledge and wisdom, and as a result subject those who they profess to love, to unnecessary suffering. The antiquated use of aversion therapy to ‘cure’ homosexuality also springs to my mind when raising the issue of lack of knowledge and understanding about being gay. That is another controversial topic in itself and one that still haunts the hallways of behaviour therapy, psychology and psychiatry. Thankfully though, the vast majority of secular health professionals have now stepped out of the ‘dark ages’ and ceased pathologising homosexuality. They’ve left that to inadequately educated and intransigent religious fundamentalists.

Unfortunately for Thompson, even though he is intimately familiar with homosexuality, he appears to make the age-old mistake of confusing his story of adjustment to sexual orientation with his unfortunate childhood and adolescent experiences with paedophiles (he mentions being abused independently by a woman and a man), as well as a difficult relationship with his father. Certainly, it is tragic to read about what Thompson experienced at the hands of sexual deviants, but this should not cloud the issue of what a wholesome homosexual orientation is all about. Now, I’ll bet my use of the adjective, ‘wholesome’ in this respect is a challenge to readers of fundamentalist persuasion, but I assure you, I use the term based on my clinical experience with homosexual individuals and my reading of the professional literature. When you examine the facts, there are numerous homosexual individuals who maintain stable and fulfilling intimate relationships with members of the same sex. Proportionally I am sure they compare well in this respect to those in heterosexual relationships, and would do even better if we didn’t persecute them so.

What concerns me about a fellow like Thompson is that his present ministry to assist individuals abstain from homosexuality is largely based on a personal understanding of the world that is marked by his self-confessed background where he was exposed to early religious fundamentalist ignorance on the part of his parents, as well as exposure (as a victim) to paedophiles. Most other homosexual individuals do not have the same dysfunctional background as a child and generally approach their adult lives and sexuality based on a more balanced and secularist viewpoint. Moreover, homosexuals do not report a greater incidence of dysfunctional parental relationships; albeit it is recognised that there is often a struggle for heterosexually oriented fathers to engage meaningfully with their homosexual sons, but this is not a cause of homosexuality, rather it is a result of fathers struggling to adjust to a son who is different. Nor is a greater incidence of childhood sexual abuse reported. My opinion is that homosexual individuals will find better adjustment when their sexual orientation is more readily accommodated by both the broader community, as well as the church. Why try to change something that is now considered by the scientific community to be a largely genetically driven orientation? I fear that ministries such as the one that Thompson is involved in will just add anxiety and guilt to the lives of those who are swimming upstream as it is when you consider the prejudice to which they are still subjected, even in our more tolerant and educated Western society.

If readers remain confused and ponderous about this topic let me refer them to a seminal book on the topic of homosexuality written by a psychiatrist who himself was forced by society’s prejudice to spend many years in a heterosexual marriage. He later ‘came out’ and found much peace and fulfilment and now serves as a New York psychotherapist with particular expertise in ‘ministering’ to the homosexual community. I refer you to his book: “Becoming Gay: The Journey to Self-Acceptance” Richard A. Isay, M.D. Pantheon Books: New York, 1996. His chapter titled, “The Dilemma of Heterosexually Married Homosexual Men” is of particular relevance when considering the detrimental consequences of societal pressure to conform to a heterosexual model. I found this book to be of great value in helping me, a heterosexual, to better understand the realities of homosexuality. I highly recommend it as I do other works by the same author. It may provide an antidote to the damaging effects of religious fundamentalism for those who are willing to open their minds and look outside the square of their own narrow upbringing.

Additional up-to-date information about key psychosocial factors that impact on homosexuals, and that are often the point of misconceived ideas in the general community, is readily available at the American Psychological Association website at http://www.apa.org/ When you load the APA website, look under “Psychology Topics”, then choose “Sexuality”.

(The following website is also recommended for up-to-date information about the genetics of homosexuality: http://www.religioustolerance.org/hom_caus4.htm)

What do you think? Comments welcome.

Burning the Witches: Religious Fundamentalism, Ignorance, Mental Illness and the Unknown

2008-02-14T16:15:00.008+09:00

The vagaries of fundamentalist religious cultures never cease to amaze me, and frighten me at times as well.

Mental illness is one of the great burdens in life that many individuals have to bear through no choice of their own. I overheard someone ask an experienced medical partitioner who specialised in psychiatry what she thought might be worse, to have paraplegia, or to have schizophrenia? She suggested that she would choose paraplegia, but added that she might balk at quadriplegia. A crude question you might suggest, but nonetheless one that plainly demonstrates the suffering that individuals with chronic schizophrenia have to endure.

For a number of years I worked in a locked ward at a state mental hospital and had first-hand exposure to the pain and suffering of those with a variety of mental illnesses. Let me assure you, the intensity and frightening nature of some psychotic delusions have to be witnessed in order to appreciate their destructive impact on the lives of ordinary human beings. Of course, full appreciation can only come through experiencing them! I can well remember one young man who reeled back in fear every time I entered the ward through a locked door, crying out, “Stay away from me, Satan.” He also had vivid delusions that aliens were coming to earth to wreak pain and destruction on him. His auditory hallucinations (voices) and other psychotic phenomena just added to his mental torment. This went on for many months until a new atypical antipsychotic medication took effect so that this tortured fellow was finally able to smile and greet me as one of the staff, rather than as Satan. I can remember later meeting this same individual out in the hospital grounds when he had fully recovered and pondered the wonders of modern medicine in being able to provide such effective relief from chronic paranoid schizophrenia. And this is only one of the hundreds of graphic portrayals of true ‘madness’ that I personally witnessed in my clinical work.

One might think that you could not find a more profound example of irrational thinking than witnessed in the context of florid psychosis, but not so. What I found to be an even greater example of irrationality was the views of many fundamentalist Christians who have such an antiquated and ignorant view of mental illness. I can remember being taken back when one of them, a member of a 'charismatic' church, suggested to me that I must come across so many cases of demon possession in my work! I would have liked to put this comment down to the idiosyncrasies of the individual in question, but not so; I have found it to be a surprisingly common view among so many of those in the Pentecostalist and so-called 'Charismatic' churches.

In this context I can remember also meeting a young man who had command auditory hallucinations telling him to kill people; he even put shivers up my spine during my first interview with him in an isolated interview room on the hospital ward. What astounded and angered me however, was that he related belonging to a well-known 'charismatic' religious organisation where he was told that he was demon possessed. That is, they took his psychotic symptoms as evidence of demon possession. Angered me, you say? Yes, righteous indignation if you like, about the fact that not only was this young man struggling to come to terms with the fact that he had a life-time debilitating mental illness, but he was also somehow demon possessed as well! I wondered if these ignorant church members, including the clergy, had any idea of the high suicide rate among young people during the early stages of their illness when they are struggling to come to terms with their disability. The other more tragic outcome from the uninformed meddling of these people may have been that this man ended up murdering someone because the voices were not silenced by referral for sound psychiatric treatment. With a justified touch of sarcasm and satire I might suggest, that by treating this man with medication, the 'demons' miraculously disappeared!!! However, getting back to reality and in plain and rational language, his psychotic disorder was brought under control by correcting the neurotransmitter dysfunction in his brain, not by the casting out of some imaginary demon!!!

This brings me to the central theme of this blog; that is why do so many religious fundamentalists still hold such uninformed and uneducated views about a well-researched area such as mental illness? Why do they still carry the core beliefs in 2008 that resulted in so many psychotic individuals, usually women, to be burned at the stake as witches over so many centuries during the Dark Ages, and not so dark ages? To be straightforward, you must put it down to a general lack of education in critical thinking among such people, or perhaps a very narrow education within the restrictive environment of fundamentalist religious education systems. Defensiveness, driven by insecurity about one’s own view about the meaning of life is another fair bet. Nevertheless, I find such ignorant views appalling and disturbing when each one of us can access easily understandable information about these matters.

And what about the views of so many so-called missionaries who have labelled the practices of indigenous cultures as demon-related. I can well remember the absolute ignorance of my fellow Ywammers when working in Third World countries who supported the destruction of artefacts of indigenous culture because of its supposed link to evil spirits. I ask you, how many Spirit Houses and ceremonial masks were burned in the Sepik area of Papua New Guinea by the native peoples because they were assured by the pentecostalist and evangelical missionaries that they had to be removed in order to free the local population from the bondage of satanic spiritual powers. Shades of Dean Sherman’s Spiritual Warfare don’t you think? A very specific example of such ignorance and plain ‘sillyness’ was how Ywammers at the Port Moresby base (during the early 70s) used to turn the spirit masks from the Sepik area that adorned the walls at Koki House (a public meeting hall) so that the symbols of ‘demonism’ would not be facing them and not be able to exert any influence on the Christian worship service. However, I guess we can be thankful that these Ywammers did not have ownership of these ancient artefacts as I am sure they would have made a bonfire out of the lot had they had their way!

A more educated viewpoint in respect to the above might include anthropological evidence and research that clearly demonstrates that Spirit Houses, ceremonial masks and the like simply reflect normal human endeavour to explain the unknown within the bounds of available knowledge. That is, human beings have always tried to make sense of the world around them, explain their inner experiences, and justify their societal structures though elaborate means that includes religion systems of all types. In other words, on what grounds should we derive fear from these things? However, to think in anthropological terms is no doubt too much of a challenge to the more fundamentalist subgroups of the Christian, Moslem and Jewish faiths. That is, it necessitates critical thinking in respect to the reasons behind the development of their own religious systems!

And to think that we chide our children for continuing to believe in the “Boogeyman” when they reach school age; and wonder why some people fly jumbo jets into skyscrapers. No wonder Christopher Hitchens was moved to write his recent book, “God is Not Great: How Religion Spoils Everything” (New York: Twelve. 2007).

I suggest we all grow up or get half educated, or something!

What do you think? Feel free to comment.

Homosexuality and the Continuing Ignorance of Religious Fundamentalists

2008-02-08T10:15:00.002+09:00

I am not usually one to be swayed by hearsay evidence, but I couldn't help but note a comment posted by Kt1 on FACTNet (11/19/07) about some of her experiences in YWAM (www.factnet.org/discus/messages/3/4570.html - 578k). Yes, the comment is hearsay, but nonetheless it raises some important issues about the perception of intolerance in organisations like YWAM. An unedited extract from Kt1's comment read,

“…. one time there were two girls (in a relationship), and they were made to feel like the lowest of lifeform. They had to wash the leaders feet and confess to the whole base how evil they were because they had been in a lesbian relationship with each other!!!That is NOT a caring christian attitude. Im sorry, but if you are made that way, then you are made that way and should be loved and accepted no matter what. We had it drummed into us it was an unatural act..........unatural to who??? straight people of course, well hello male to female is unatural to a gay couple, it makes me so mad to remember how humiliated those girls were to be.”

Before further commenting about the topic of this blog, it is my opinion that if Kt1’s comment has any possibility of describing an actual event at a YWAM base I would like to see the YWAM Executive ask Kt1 to name names, then investigate such behaviour and if there is indeed any truth to this allegation, deal swiftly with the perpetrators of such blatantly abusive behaviour. In the meantime I will post a comment on FACTNet encouraging Kt1 to lodge a formal grievance with the YWAM Executive and then to let us all know what action was taken in response to her grievance. (I would have already done this but found a posting fault at FACTNet).

Now I concede that homosexual behaviour is considered to be unacceptable and a sin to those who believe the Old Testament and New Testament writings to be the literal word of God. After all, homosexuals were to be stoned under Levitical Law. However Kt1's allegation just serves to reinforce comments in my earlier blogs about how religious fundamentalism and organisations like YWAM struggle with sexuality issues, and in this case, the alleged alienation and abuse of homosexuals. The following is a copy of my original reply to Kt1's comment at FACTNet:

"On this topic I can vouch for the fact that I sat over 30 years ago listening to the Director of YWAM and witnessed him stating something about homosexuals that even took me back at the time (despite our shared Pentecostalist roots). He stated that he had never come across a case in his ministry in which a homosexual was 'freed' from his homosexuality, where deliverance form evil spirits was not required. I was probably taken back in view of the fact that I had spent my late adolescence and early adulthood in a beachside suburb with a high population of gays, many who I befriended, as I was likely to do with any other human being who came across my pathway in life. As he spoke I guess I thought about some of the gentle, intelligent and gay young men who I had sat and had coffee or dinner with on various occasions; and me a committed heterosexual and fundamentalist Christian to boot. One such young man was one of the city's top hairdressers and judge at the state hairdressing championships. I remember how he cooked me gourmet meals and shared his best red wine with me, poured into the finest crystal glasses. Sure he struggled emotionally with the relationship 'ghosts' that seemed to haunt homosexuals more so in those less tolerant days, but who could blame the fellow for that? Let's face facts, society as a whole is to blame for much of their grief, because of both direct and indirect discrimination. I also hasten to say that I have met even more heterosexuals who came across as equally dysfunctional in respect to finding lasting relationships and yet they were allowed to liaise with partners quite openly without fear of being bashed or sanctioned in some other cruel and ignorant manner! Sadly I also returned to visit this good fellow after a jaunt overseas with YWAM and found that he was black and blue after being the victim of what is derogatively called 'poofter bashing' in my part of the world (or ‘fag bashing’ in the good ol' US of A). But to add to their plight by having the leader of an international Christian organisation, who espoused the eternal and boundless love of God, suggest that you were not only a member of a deviant group, but you were also demon-possessed (or oppressed, or whatever), well that is the end! Yes, make no mistake, I was not hard at hearing and did not misunderstand what was said, the leader of the Mission clearly related that he believed that homosexuals were in some manner bound by Satan. I ask you, what else can we think up to persecute these innocent individuals who have genetically inherited a different sexual orientation, NOT a different sexual preference (that infers a choice)? Maybe some may think that we should send them all off to the gas chambers as Adolf Hitler did with the German gays - God forbid! But maybe telling them that we love them, but hate their sin, and then not really loving them, as we should, is like sending them off to the gas chambers anyway. My god, Kt1, I can't imagine how those poor lesbian women felt who you describe above; I am deeply saddened that anyone could treat them so; and in the name of Christ."

After posting my reply, I wondered if our dear Kt1 might have been one of these women who were subjected to disrespect and abuse by so-called base leaders? “Base”, in the end may be a pertinent word in that it no doubt provides an apt description of the behaviour of this type of leadership.

Interestingly, or should I say disturbingly, I have come across a number of cases in the forensic area where the church’s views on homosexuality has indirectly contributed to cases of brutal assaults on homosexuals. When you combine a fundamentalist upbringing where individuals are taught that homosexuality is a sin, societal ignorance that wrongly links paedophilia to sexual orientation, a penchant for aggression and psychological dysfunction, you end up with a potentially explosive mixture that can result in great danger to members of our homosexual community. These matters remain largely hidden to the average person, but loom large to those who have to deal with either the offenders or the victims in respect to unjustified and cruel assaults on homosexuals. It is my opinion that if children and adolescents were NOT taught that homosexuality is to abhorred, but rather accepted as a natural difference in sexual orientation, then much of this targeted violence would be averted. Yes, the church does have a responsibility in this respect and needs to be made aware of how they have contributed for hundreds of years to narrow-minded and prejudicial thinking in our society.

I also encourage the readership to take their own look at the latest genetic twin studies research in respect to homosexual behaviour (they have found about a 55% penetrance rate for this genetic type - and no demons were discovered to boot!!!). It clearly supports the notion that such behaviour is not primarily driven by choice, but rather it is clearly an ‘orientation’ that is predetermined by the interaction of a genetic predisposition, as well as yet to be determined additional factors that may well include potential exposure to testosterone in utero. To think that fundamentalist evangelicals can continue to bumble along in total ignorance about the true facts of this matter is an indictment of their claim to be seekers of the truth. I suggest some may like to start with an article that gives a good balanced overview of this subject at: http://www.religioustolerance.org/hom_caus4.htm

However, if individuals are worried that this website, or any other site, may have an inherent bias, then go straight to the professional journals on genetics. There you will find unfettered professional opinions that will challenge age-old views that homosexuality is somehow a choice.

Gun Ownership, Church Security and Mental Illness

2008-01-23T11:42:00.001+09:00

While the following blog, about guns, church security and mental illness, is not strictly related to cult-like beliefs and activities, it nonetheless addresses issues that require a rational response from the modern Christian community.

After reading various ‘Christian’ blogs following the tragic shooting at YWAM Arvada in Colorado and related carnage at the New Life Church in Colorado Springs, I find it hard to believe that many have suggested that it is justifiable, and indeed necessary, for church security guards to carry guns. Some even suggested that members of congregation should themselves go to church armed. This is the type of mentality that makes educated Christians in other parts of the world wonder about the socialisation process that goes on in American evangelicalism and pentecostalism. For example, one blog concluded the following in a four-point summary in respect to the action of the security guard and death of the shooter at the New Life Church:

· it is good the church's security team is armed,
· it is good the arms were helpful in stopping the violence,
· it is not ideal that the shooter was killed,
· but it was justified in my understanding of the Kingdom of God.
(from: Umblog, "Shooter not Killed by Church Security Guard". December 10 2008)

I believe this blogger’s logic is flawed by first of all excluding some of the more macro issues that need to be analysed in respect to gun ownership and licensing procedures, and why it should be considered acceptable for churches to hire armed security guards. It is also flawed from my point of view in that a potentially mentally ill individual may have well been killed by a bullet from a church security guard's gun had he not turned his own gun on himself, as has been alleged. I thought ‘Tasers’ were the new weapon of choice for stopping out-of-control and armed mentally ill individuals, to ensure that they are not unjustly killed? I think most of us would agree that the shooter in this case was not a career criminal, but rather a seriously deranged individual who was in urgent need of psychiatric treatment.

I note that someone who responded to an article in Christianity Today about the Colorado Springs shooting asked (in a satirical manner), "What kind of gun would Jesus carry?” All jokes aside however, in respect to the event in question, no one of Christian ilk seems to have raised the serious matter of US gun laws and how they may have contributed to this tragedy. The National Rifle Association’s philosophy espousing the so-called right of an individual to own and carry a gun has not been brought into question, especially by Christians who are supposed to be the 'salt of the earth' and agents for positive change. I ask, "Why on earth does anyone need to carry an automatic, or indeed semiautomatic handgun or rifle?" In fact my own personal view is, “Why carry any type of gun as a civilian?” I think Christians and the general populace in the United States need to seriously rethink their views on gun ownership and take the lead of some other Western democracies (like Australia) that have chosen to limit the type of gun that people can carry, introduced stringent character screening of applicants for gun ownership licences, as well as requiring strict locked storage of weapons in special steel cabinets in the gun owner’s home. Do people not realise that the majority of firearm deaths that occur with weapons owned by private citizens end up killing a member of the gun owner’s family, either by suicide, murder or accidental shooting? A review of the independent literature on this subject will validate this point. Yes, there will be unfortunate occasions when a police officer will have no choice but to use a lethal weapon, rather than a ‘Taser’, even when the victim may be mentally deranged. However, let it be a police officer and not any Tom, Dick or Harriet of a security guard who generally does not have the same sophisticated weapons training a police officer. More so, if Joe Citizen gets involved with his arsenal of weapons that are so easily procured in the Land of the Free, then God help the mentally ill whose brain just happens to be malfunctioning, most often through no fault of their own.

I can remember visiting Colorado from overseas with my family to ski at Snowmass some years ago. We happened to be sitting in a restaurant with Americans who staunchly defended their right to own and carry a gun. My two teenage sons respectfully questioned their point of view as I have always encouraged them to use their brains, think analytically and critically, and not be afraid to ask questions. Of note was the fact, that after dinner, one of the American teenagers just happened to receive a telephone call from friends in PA who informed her that a school friend had just suicided using the family handgun. Uncanny, but a tragic, true story. Furthermore, professionals who work in the field of forensic mental health will attest to the fact that there is even greater potential for devastation when gun laws are lax and when a floridly psychotic and paranoid individual has access to weapons, particularly automatic weapons.

What do you think? Add a comment.

Relationship Counselling, YWAM Style?

2008-01-17T16:16:00.004+09:00

For those readers not familiar with YWAM history, Loren Cunningham is the founder of Youth With A Mission. Therefore, because of his central founding and guiding role and significant influence on the thinking and beliefs of a multitude of YWAM participants, I reviewed his book, “Is That Really You, God? Hearing the Voice of God” (written in conjunction with Janice Rogers, YWAM Publishing 2001). I will not attempt a formal book review in this blog as that is a rather lengthy undertaking. Rather, I would like to comment on the chapter titled, “Kalafi Comes Home” where Loren tells the story of Kalafi and his estranged wife Tapu.

“Kalafi had fallen into the worst troubles imaginable” Loren states, referring to Kalafi’s separation from his wife, that he says resulted from infatuation with another woman. In my review of this chapter I was taken by what seems to be Loren’s catastrophizing tone about a very common, but unfortunate human experience. If I were not already familiar with this story, after reading the words, “worst trouble imaginable” I would have been left thinking if a reference was being made to something of a more dire nature, other than relationship breakdown. To my thinking it is no wonder that Christians have such great difficulty adjusting to relationship problems when they are ‘primed up’ by such emotive language! And then he continues, “But Tapu had been deeply wounded. She couldn’t forget the betrayal.” Again, the terms, “wounded” and “betrayal” appear to reflect Loren’s traditional and conservative view of a troubled marital relationship. It makes you wonder if these words were actually those used by Tapu (a Tongan) or were they Loren’s own very Western descriptive terms that he uses to describe his own personal evaluation of Tapu’s thoughts and emotions. Perhaps if given the opportunity, Tapu may have described her feelings in quite different terms, notwithstanding the likelihood that people experience deep emotion at such times whatever their cultural background. Perhaps she may have used terms that were more appropriate to Tongan culture, but then the Western Methodist missionaries converted the poor 'heathens' there too, didn’t they? And taught them our lingo and cultural values to boot! I belabour this point as I have personally witnessed Christian pastors almost priming individuals to catastrophize about issues well beyond what may be considered a reasonable, rational response. Psychologists sometimes use the term "awfulizing" to describe dysfunctional thinking that leads an individual to view a situation as far worse that it may well be. Whatever we may call it, it 'ain't helpful'. It can also encourage unforgiveness and grudges and impede an individual's ability to move on in life.

Later comes an account of what may well be seen an unnecessary meddling in a relationship that was already doomed to failure. In fact from what is said, it appears that Loren and Dar (Loren’s term for his wife, Darlene) might have well prolonged the agony of these already separated individuals by indirectly (or perhaps directly) encouraging a reconciliation that was obviously doomed to failure. We could well ask the question, “Would both Kalafi and Tapu have been better off had they not been pursued by their concerned fundamentalist friends, Loren and Dar?” I say fundamentalist because later in this chapter Loren alludes to the great struggle that he and other conservative Christians experience in respect to divorce. He states, “It seemed clear to me that although divorce was not in God’s perfect plan, it was not the unpardonable sin, either.” This smacks of a conflicted view of separation and divorce, one that in my opinion has caused such unnecessary pain to separating Christians all around the world. Fundamentalist evangelical/ Pentecostalist thinking about this subject has only served to add tremendous guilt and turmoil to the lives of so many that are already struggling with the reality of a failed relationship.

This type of guilt and turmoil may well have been generated by Loren and Dar from their account of independent meetings with Kalafi and Tapu who they believed god had prompted them to seek out in Los Angeles. After describing how they ‘miraculously’ found Tapu in Los Angeles without knowing her address, they tell how they entered Tapu’s apartment and confront her about god’s perfect plan for her life. “Tapu opened the door, clutching her bathrobe. Her eyes widened, and she backed into her living room.” She asks, “How did you ever find me? Come in, but I can’t talk! I have to go!” “We pleaded with Tapu, but it was useless. After a five-minute visit, standing awkwardly in her living room, we said good-bye and left.” Certainly not a ‘Dr Phil’ encounter from what I can gather from this pithy description! Poor Loren and Dar, they felt so awkward, but I wonder who felt most awkward in this situation. I am sure it was the young woman Tapu as she was confronted in her bathrobe by these two pleading fundamentalists who assumed they were on a divine rescue mission. I wonder if she should have been greeted with, “Tapu, sorry to intrude, but we were just on a mission from God to rescue you from a fate worse than death!” Only joking, but don’t you think a greeting that included something like, “Tapu, sorry to catch you at such an inopportune time, but maybe you would like to catch up with us, or Dar, over a meal or coffee and cake sometime. We would love to remain friends whatever your new direction in life.” (But no subtleties here, straight to the jugular of moral virtue it appears.) Tapu may well have still wanted to guard her privacy, but at least there would have been none of this guilt- engendering ‘pleading’ that Loren refers to in his book.

I am still amazed at the stories of how much trauma and misery is caused by the fundamentalist view of human relationships. We all understand that separation and divorce are hard enough as it is without the additional burden of guilt, recrimination and fear caused by visions of a god who is displeased with a less than perfect plan for our lives. Even Loren’s account of a girl’s words that Kalafi met in his favourite bar clearly demonstrates the reality of this type of senseless guilt. This young woman who Loren states “had once gone forward at a Billy Graham meeting” is alleged to have exclaimed, “Kalafi, I’m so afraid. I know I am going to die and go to hell!” No wonder someone like Tapu was keen to get away from the repressive and oppressive atmosphere of religious fundamentalism as exemplared by YWAM; may be she was strong enough and analytical enough and just grew out of it. I know I personally found great peace when I came to the realisation that such extreme stories of sin and hellfire damnation were very much the product of man’s mind, not indisputable revelation from some so-called loving, but vengeful god. What do you think?

Dean Sherman's Spiritual Warfare: The Irrational World of Demons, Ghosts & Goblins

2007-12-28T15:20:00.004+09:00

I took the liberty of reading Dean Sherman's book, Spiritual Warfare for Every Christian: How to Live in Victory and Retake the Land (YWAM Publishing 1995). Apparently, over 300,000 copies have been sold. Apart from the impact of this book on the broader readership of fundamentalist Christians, Mr Sherman's book and related seminars have also had a significant impact on the philosophy of religion that is taught to the tens of thousands of young people who have attended Youth With A Mission schools, and as such is worthy of review. Mr Sherman is advertised as the dean of the College of Christian Ministries at YWAM's University of the Nations and lectures on the topic of spiritual warfare in many of YWAM's Discipleship Training Schools (if not in person, then via his videotaped lectures). Concern about the impact of this topic on the formative thinking of Christian youth was my reason for reading the book, as it is not a book that I would read out of interest in the subject or for personal development. In fact, I consider it a good example of some of the irrational ideas that are presented by YWAM leadership under the guise of sound theology.

Chapter One of Mr Sherman's book, "A Life and Death Struggle" appears to set the theme for the rest of the book that hypothesises about the activities of principalities and powers of an unseen world. In this chapter he discusses events that took place in Papua New Guinea in 1970 and relates the story of David Wallis from New Zealand who almost died of cerebral malaria (CM) while on a mission with YWAM. Mr Sherman extrapolates from this story some very interesting assumptions about spiritual powers and so-called spiritual warfare. He infers that both Mr Wallis's illness and his eventual recovery were somehow related to an attack by satanic forces, and a later victory over the same forces brought about by the prayers of the YWAM team. He also presents the notion that these powers had hitherforeto never been challenged and had ruled the Papua New Guinea area for many centuries. No mention was made of any breach of duty of care by the YWAM leaders at the Port Moresby base in respect to not recommending prior medication or other methods of protecting the young Ywammers from the clear danger of malarial infection in this malaria-ridden country. Mr Sherman happened to be one of those leaders, along with Kalafi Moala and Tom Hallas (who are often mentioned in YWAM literature). Sure Mr Sherman alludes to some potential breach of duty of care as he says the leaders were afraid that Mr Wallis' parents might sue, but he fails to state the obvious; that is, YWAM appears to have had a very slip-shod approach to the management of risk and apparently failed to make an adequate effort to protect their staff from known danger. Was it a case of simply `trusting God' and hope for the best as is often the case in more fundamentalist circles?

However, this is not the main point that I wish to highlight in this review. What I query is the irrational assumptions that Mr Sherman draws from this sentinel event. Assumptions that introduce his thesis of `spiritual warfare' and shape his argument in the rest of the book. To my thinking, Mr Wallis predictably contracted malaria as a result of working out in one of the swampy villages during our outreach. The statistical risk of him contracting malaria would have been well understood by health professionals at the time, but obviously not by YWAM leadership. He returned to Port Moresby and was admitted to Port Moresby Hospital as Mr Sherman points out. There he was apparently diagnosed with CM and at the time Mr Sherman reported to the team that the treating doctor had stated that Mr Wallis was in a coma and might die or suffer brain damage as a result of the parasitic infection. However, Mr Wallis was treated by competent medical practitioners and subsequently recovered without apparently acquiring brain damage, although subtle cognitive impairment may have been evident if he had the luxury of neuropsychological assessment after his recovery.

The YWAM team were encouraged to participate in around-the-clock intercession for Mr Wallis that focused on 'binding' the spiritual powers that were allegedly behind this calamity. They no doubt took this approach as their view of the world and medicine would have been fairly simplistic if based on the teaching of fundamentalist Pentecostalism; remembering that Mr Sherman is a graduate of the Assemblies of God Bible College, Springfield MO. However, for Mr Sherman to infer that the malarial infection was the result of an attack by unchallenged spiritual powers that ruled PNG at the time is entirely without foundation and fanciful to say the least. To also claim that Mr Wallis's recovery was a result of these powers being challenged and defeated through our prayers is also entirely conjecture. It is purely Mr Sherman's assumption and not based on scientific reality or sound theology. It is well documented that many individuals with cerebral bacterial infections of various types respond to prompt treatment. Even though there is a risk of permanent brain damage, many of the afflicted recover most, if not all of their brain function, albeit sometimes many months after their illnesses remit. To witness a full recovery is not unheard of in the case of CM, nor is it rare, as long a treatment is dispensed with haste.

What concerns me is that Mr Sherman's philosophy about spiritual powers that "never take a day off" is taught as implicit fact to Ywammers in their various training courses. Regrettably, it no doubt instils some level of anxiety in otherwise healthy young people who may have gone about their lives living and loving without getting hung-up on a hypothesised eternal spiritual battle that rages even when they are asleep (or trying to sleep!). It also instils an erroneous view of cause and effect relationships of both personal and international events. Is it that people like Dean Sherman have little or no insight into the potential long-term detrimental effect that their theses have on the thinking, emotions and behaviour of impressionable young people? Or, is it the case that they just do not care? A more rational and balanced scientific and theological approach is certainly preferable; one that at the same time promotes the mental health of young YWAM participants, as well as providing them with training in objective critical analysis? Wouldn't it be so refreshing to see someone recant and admit that what they have been preaching all their life is basically poppycock? However, I have seen little of this in my lifetime and believe that the inability to change is intrinsically linked to either ego protection or otherwise deep-seated insecurity about letting go of childish fables.

It is my view that the David Wallis event in PNG in 1970 was more attributable to the lack of training and unprofessional behaviour of YWAM leadership, the hostile environment that was inevitably encountered in such a tropical location, as well as the wonders of modern medicine that provided treatment with chemotherapy (quinine in this case) to kill the parasitic infection, along with adjunctive pharmacology. Yes, Mr Wallis was very lucky to survive, as death was likely to have occurred if he had not received immediate treatment. However, I suggest that thanks for his survival can be given to the education and human intelligence of hospitals and their staff; and thanks be to god (if you so wish) for exercising longsuffering with human failing that left team members totally unprotected in the first place! But please, please leave out the fanatical leap into the irrational world of spiritual powers as proposed by Mr Sherman in this book, a proposal that is well beyond the pale of what is taught by most rational thinking theologians. It is unnecessary and entirely spurious in my opinion.

(click on 'Home' to read more blogs by Robere if this is the only blog displayed)

YWAM: Manipulation of Young People?

2007-11-06T10:50:00.006+09:00

This is an introductory blog about my personal exposure to what I term a "psuedocult". I hope it will set the theme for many other more structured articles that discuss the psychopathology of the Christian fundamentalist and Pentecostalist organisations.

I was an early recruit to YWAM and stayed on for a number of years. I left the organisation many years ago after attending their various schools and 'mission' groups to many of their now famous outreaches, such as the Munich and Montreal Olympic Games. I left in good favour of my own free will. Therefore, I believe my comments can be viewed as not being tainted by a falling out with the organisation. Rather my comments are influenced by my post-YWAM personal growth, further education and hopefully deep respect for my fellow human beings.

Life after YWAM saw me go on to study anthropology, psychology and education at both undergraduate and graduate level at a various secular universities outside of the United States. I am appreciative of my university education as it taught me much about critical analysis of human motives and behaviour.

YWAM is an example of a fundamentalist Christian organisation with close links to the Pentecostalist tradition. We should remember that the founder, Loren Cunningham was raised in the Assemblies of God church in the USA.

As part of their fundamentalist evangelical beliefs, the 'Great Commission' (“Go ye into all the world and preach the gospel…”) is primary to YWAM's purpose and raison de l'existence. Therefore, it shouldn't surprise anyone that young people who join the organisation are thoroughly schooled in YWAM training facilities in the art of 'sharing their faith'.

Overall, I found that most of the attendees at YWAM schools and outreaches were a healthy bunch of mainly young people who chose YWAM service as a logical extension of their evangelical/ Pentecostalist backgrounds. Yes, there were some from other backgrounds, but these were by far in the minority. Blacks were conspicuously missing as a matter of interest, even though we all appreciate how black Americans are well represented in evangelicalism.

The evangelical/ Pentecostalist and fundamentalist backgrounds of YWAM adherents is of course the punch line. This well-meaning, but largely misguided group of young people also bring with them into YWAM their ingrained narrow-mindedness and prejudices that they have been systematically exposed to for most of their lives in largely fundamentalist church backgrounds (as was the case with me!). I say young people, but I presume that now the organisation has a heavy weighting of Generation X among their core leadership.

They bring the belief that they are sinful and in need of salvation and cleansing with them; they bring the belief that adherents of non-Christian religions and philosophies are doomed to everlasting damnation and hellfire if they don't repent and embrace the Christian way; their restrictive views about the role of women; their unnecessary guilt about human sexuality; their prejudiced views about homosexuals; they even bring their American historical ethnocentricity and hardline capitalist economic views with them (one could write a lengthy blog on this last point alone!).

In short, YWAM does not create the problem, it just gives 'brainwashed' individuals the opportunity to pool their pride and prejudice and learn how to better impose it on an unsuspecting world. Yet, to be fair and balanced, most of them do this in blissful ignorance, with I believe, a genuine desire to serve humanity.

I could give you numerous examples of what ridiculous things naïve and not so naive Ywammers have got up to, but the following example probably encapsulates the spirit of the organisation in respect to narrow-mindedness, prejudice, ignorance and control over innocent youth.

I can remember sitting as a member of YWAM leadership in one of the training meetings for the Montreal Olympic Games outreach listening to the unforgettable Joy Dawson. She had a mainly youthful and impressionable international audience who obviously looked to her as a messenger of god. She got toward the end of her typical legalistic and judgemental treatise about ‘holiness’ and finished with the coup de grace of intellectual finesse, masturbation; a subject she had highlighted in previous sermons that I had been unfortunate enough to witness. Joy directly challenged those lovely young people and asked if they had indulged in the sin of masturbation! What a stroke of utter genius in topic selection to ensure that the altar was filled with weeping, repentant young Christian 'sinners'.

“Poor devils!” I thought as I walked out shaking my head in disbelief that such waffle should again be foisted on well-meaning youth. I remember returning home to the YWAM base to dutifully continue with the practical tasks that I was responsible for at the Montreal Olympic Outreach. However, I continued to struggle intellectually, ethically and emotionally with the surreal scene and irrational behaviour that I had just witnessed. I felt truly saddened that these decent young Christians had been so blatantly manipulated as if they had been in the audience of a stage hypnotist, or the like.

I guess you could say, "What an irresponsible and base organisation to allow such a mindless presentation to their unsuspecting audience. Surely such an international audience, who were paying for the privilege, could have expected better?" My exit from YWAM was sealed that day and I left soon after.

By the way, as a result of my experience with life and clinical work in the years that have followed my exit from YWAM, it has become absolutely clear that someone who repeatedly raises the subject of the evils of sexuality is highly likely to have personal conflict with this issue themselves; even if the conflict amounts to no more than normal human sexual desire and behaviour that regrettably cannot find expression without accompanying guilt. How sad! Perhaps the psychological term 'scrupulosity' is of relevance here and may be informative for blog readers who want to further investigate potential motivational factors behind this type of behaviour.

While this last point may be obvious to readers, it will hopefully encourage us all to conduct a more thorough analysis into the behaviour and motives of the leadership in all fundamentalist religious organisations, especially when they harp on about sex. I will discuss the issue of fundamentalist Christianity's over-emphasis on sexuality in a future blog, although the matter is well demonstrated in the literature, including a recent book by Tanya Levin titled, "People in Glass Houses".

I was one of the lucky ones; I left YWAM before the real damage was done. Regrettably though, many don’t move on, or move on after their experiences have left them damaged. From my post-YWAM contact with many who did break free, this damage included long term emotional disturbance, broken relationships (usually related to alienation from family and friends who do not share the ‘vision’), or a belief that they had been financially deceived after gifting large sums of money as a result of emotion-charged calls for financial assistance from the organisation's leadership. I personally remember one sad incident during my first YWAM outreach where the relationship between one of our indigenous disciples and his father, a Methodist Pastor, was deeply conflicted by the father's disagreement with YWAM's militant approach to 'spreading the gospel' and the resultant alienation of his son from family and friends, along with his withdrawal from university studies. In retrospect, I would now deem this man well balanced and educated and we in YWAM at the time, a bunch of uneducated fools. Strong words, but I include myself in this criticism.

The damage list could go no, but we should move on instead, by involvement in a more positive and productive future where care and consideration for our fellow human beings is our guiding principle. However, the errors of the past should not be forgotten or hidden and we need to be open to intelligent and vigorous discussion, especially if the same dysfunctional attitudes and behaviours continue as a central theme within an organisation like YWAM, or its fundamentalist look-alikes.

Robere