When You're Just a Member and Not an
Employee
Spiritually abusive systems operate
through authoritarianism in a way that deprives the member of
reasonable personal rights. In Shepherding/Discipleship,
many openly teach that Christians have absolutely no rights and must
submit to every and any situation that comes their way that does not
require them to sin in an obvious way. (Suffering works good
character into the abused and supposedly carries an inherent,
effective power which is said to convict then convert abusive
sinners.)
Some aberrant Calvinists distort the Doctrines of Grace (TULIP) in a similar way, interpreting those concepts to define a Christian as a hapless and powerless creature who can only get the meager crumbs that fall from God's table. It just so happens that, under hierarchy, the abusive leader's table represents God's table, and the rank and file members of the group are whelps who have not yet shown sufficient outward signs of humility and have thus not yet earned their seat. Devotion to the group leader and system qualifies a person as God's better child, granting them choice bread, but the member without power may only glean from the crumbs on the floor, along with the dogs (Matthew 15:21-28). The system appears to exist and likely reports to exist to help individuals, but in reality, the balance of power and primary gain rests with the leadership at the expense of the member.
Some aberrant Calvinists distort the Doctrines of Grace (TULIP) in a similar way, interpreting those concepts to define a Christian as a hapless and powerless creature who can only get the meager crumbs that fall from God's table. It just so happens that, under hierarchy, the abusive leader's table represents God's table, and the rank and file members of the group are whelps who have not yet shown sufficient outward signs of humility and have thus not yet earned their seat. Devotion to the group leader and system qualifies a person as God's better child, granting them choice bread, but the member without power may only glean from the crumbs on the floor, along with the dogs (Matthew 15:21-28). The system appears to exist and likely reports to exist to help individuals, but in reality, the balance of power and primary gain rests with the leadership at the expense of the member.
In the early discussion of thought
reform, one of the first publications describing a set system of
manipulation and exploitation that manifests in cultic groups that
foster an ideological connection with a group or leader described the
process as “Deception,
Dependency, and Dread” which became known as “DDD Syndrome”
(Farber, Harlow and West). The lowly members who glean from the
crumbs with the dogs in such groups are initially deceived about
group dynamics and rules when they join, they become dependent on the
system for guidance and discernment, and they are threatened with the
woe of harm and loss (which may be eternal) when they leave or are
dismissed from the group.
The Ambiguity of Informed Consent
for Employees of Spiritually Abusive Groups
When you take a job with an employer in
the United States, you're contracting with them to provide a service
to them and they agree to provide you with a specific type of
compensation about which you're informed in advance. You generally
have some kind of written job description, but even if you don't,
you've got a legally binding set of obligations which you owe to the
employer and the employer owes to you. You're given a good idea of
what will be required of you and what will not be, some of which is
also determined and protected by civil labor laws to prevent the
employer from exploiting the worker. Even if you need the job and
have no other options, you're given informed consent about the job
and have the freedom to accept it or decline it, based on the
details. You might think that this extra information and the laws
governing employment would offer a church member some additional
protection at a meeting of confrontation. Guess again.
Unfortunately, there's the dreaded
clause of “other duties as assigned” that can be used to
broadly define a great deal of permissible abuse under
the freedom of religious interpretation. Unquestioned compliance and
submission easily falls under such a category for the person who is employed by a religious organization. Mixed with freedom
of religion in terms of the law, submission as one of those "other duties" becomes license for a
spiritually abusive employer to place their presumed right to demand unreasonable compliance well above the rights of an
employee in the workplace. In other words, labor law and religious
freedom compete with one another and are pitted against one another.
Insubordination, viewed through the lenses of authoritarianism, takes
on a whole new meaning when a person works for a church that
manipulates its members and capitalizes on shame. Labor law goes
right out the window.
Worse, Not Better
When a church member walks into a star
chamber meeting with pastors and elders, under religious freedoms
that we enjoy in this country, the church member has only the
integrity of the ministers, the structure
of the religious system, and the manner in which
leadership interprets Scripture as a source of
protection. For the church employee, very little protects him
from this “higher law.” They're pressured if not required to
presume a motive of virtue and self-sacrifice on the part of those
leaders, just like a church member must. All of those standards in
such a meeting tend to be fluid, especially under a type of
leadership that uses their desired end to justify not so virtuous
means. Rather than a workplace chain of command system and labor
practices serving as a type of protection for the employee which
might curb abusive behavior, the fact that the employee and church
member fits into a formal chain of command actually gives
leadership more liberty to be spiritually and psychologically
abusive. Theirs is seen as a more intimate relationship that extends
beyond a regular employment situation, so they feel greater liberty
to do and say whatever they want. God's law and their position as
God's anointed mouthpiece gives them the power of the highest
authority. It becomes the abusive leader's means of avoiding accountability.
In a normal workplace setting, an
employer would also never use tactics like deception, dependency and
dread in the way that they're used within spiritually abusive groups
to control members. Because of the ambiguity of open interpretation
of religious ideas, an employer within a closed, high demand group
will use deception, dependency, and dread to manipulate, almost with
a sense of impunity.
I have a friend who works in a medical
doctor's office that employs several techniques that qualify as
Complementary and Alternative Medicine/Health Care (CAM). She
actually encountered the dynamics of spiritual abuse within that
setting while working for them. Managers used fear of ridicule and
harassment from those in traditional medicine who oppose CAM to
threaten employees into submission, requiring them to keep quiet
about some of the more questionable behaviors that took place within
the office.
At times, practitioners there were directed to deceive clients, and they were not willing to do so, failing to see why it was necessary and also realizing that it put their own professional licensure at risk. Very much like the tactics that I've seen used in churches to get rid of their “problems” (pay cuts, lack of access to facilities, scheduling conflicts, etc.), this office used the same to manipulate ethical, non-compliant people into leaving their employment there. And much like many churches, the questionable behavior detracted from the very good work and legitimate resources offered at the facility. Was it needful? Did they really need to mislead clients, cut corners, and threaten their staff with fear? Apparently, they felt that they did, and it cheapened all of the truly good work that the clinic accomplished. It makes sense that greed motivated the actions of the medical office. It's not so palatable and easy to comprehend when the same behavior comes from a church.
At times, practitioners there were directed to deceive clients, and they were not willing to do so, failing to see why it was necessary and also realizing that it put their own professional licensure at risk. Very much like the tactics that I've seen used in churches to get rid of their “problems” (pay cuts, lack of access to facilities, scheduling conflicts, etc.), this office used the same to manipulate ethical, non-compliant people into leaving their employment there. And much like many churches, the questionable behavior detracted from the very good work and legitimate resources offered at the facility. Was it needful? Did they really need to mislead clients, cut corners, and threaten their staff with fear? Apparently, they felt that they did, and it cheapened all of the truly good work that the clinic accomplished. It makes sense that greed motivated the actions of the medical office. It's not so palatable and easy to comprehend when the same behavior comes from a church.
Question # 6: Both
secular and religious employers have used all of these tactics with
me. I tend to think that, although the patterns were definitely
there, my employers did not deliberately intend to utilize systematic
mind-control tactics. Perhaps they were acting in patterns that were
familiar to them based on prior experiences, or based their own
trial-and-error learning of what works, but I seriously doubt they
were schooled in such techniques or consciously realized they were
using well-established manipulations techniques. Not that I put it
past anyone to do so, nor do I think these particular individuals are
too virtuous to be capable of intentional manipulation; it's just
that I know them well enough to doubt they had ever been explicitly
trained in such techniques. What are your thoughts on this?
Sometimes, People are Just Immature
Jerks, or They're Having a Bad Day
Coming full circle on the idea that
effective tactics of manipulation look the same no matter where or
how they're used and that there are a fairly set number of tactics
because human nature tends to be somewhat predictable, you can spot
the same individual manipulation tactics used in a spiritually
abusive group in any setting where you find human beings interacting
with one another.
A good boss could take the low road on a particular day,
using personal matters, shame, or unfair comparison as a means of
gaining your compliance as opposed to earning your trust and
cooperation. I myself have taken jobs that promised one set of
conditions and delivered entirely different ones, all because the
employer was willfully dishonest. And I've worked with and for some
true manipulators. I've also had good managers who worked along with
me for employers that were less than ideal, but I found the overall
experience to be good because of the virtue of those working there
with me.
People can choose to use the same
individual manipulation tactics that can also be found at play in
spiritual abuse, and they may use many of them, interpersonally or
even in the way that they manage people within the workplace.
Sometimes that just amounts to poor character and immaturity in only
one person, or it might be what an executive requires of a middle
manager. I spoke to an old supervisor of mine several years ago
concerning an impossible workplace, and she said that she quit
because the system was just so abusive. The hospital wasn't running
a thought reform program, but they did need us to comply in order to
do a job well with too few resources which put a burden on the staff.
But they didn't meet the demands of thought reform or spiritual
abuse, or more simply, they didn't operate by way of personal
deception, dependency, and dread.
That's always the test: Does this
group meet the criteria? They might, and they might not. Review
the different lists of criteria that are used to define spiritually
abusive groups and the dynamics of manipulation. This site lists only
a few of them. Then, trust your judgment about whether the dynamics
continue to manifest within your group. Decide for yourself.
That's actually part of getting free –
exercising your own discernment and critical thought. It may be your
first step out of a group, or it might just mean that your working
for a jerk! Everyone has a bad day once in awhile, too. Or they
might be good guys under other circumstances and just haven't learned
good skills to use during the uncomfortable process of confrontation.