Category: United Pentecostal Church | Page 25

Spiritual Abuse & Emasculated Men

A topic that often comes up in our support groups is how women are usually hit harder than men in spiritually abusive churches and groups. It often is mentioned in conjunction with ‘holiness standards‘ and submission. The subject arose once more a couple days ago and in reflecting, I was reminded of some things that married men have shared through the years, a topic that can be difficult for them to discuss. There are men who feel emasculated by the teachings of these churches and how the pastor basically takes their place as the husband. It has been asked, “How many women are having an emotional affair with the pastor and church because their husband can’t quite measure up?”

It seems to happen more often when the man isn’t part of the church or once was but left, or he attends but doesn’t fall in line with all the teachings. However, it also strikes men who are fully immersed in the group. As one shared, “The implied message was that it is more important to be dedicated to the church than it is to your husband. …I didn’t know that the pastor was also married to my wife…strange. Or that he was one of the heads mentioned in the scripture.”

This mindset places tremendous strain and pressure on a marriage and works to emasculate the husband, depriving him of his role and causing him to feel replaced, almost unwanted at times, and less than a man. In situations where there are children, sometimes the wife, and even other family members in the church, will say negative things to the children about their father that can cause relationship problems between them. It can bring untold conflicting feelings, angst and even fear that their dad will burn in hell, a terrifying thought for a child. The women appear to be blinded to the damage they cause as they believe they are following the will of God.

A person asked, “What is it that makes the man (or wife) think he ‘can’t measure up’? …How can a woman put the pastor higher than the man that brings home the bacon, pays the bills and cares for the family? How is it the man that never mowed the lawn, never paid one household bill (probably does not even hold a job) is the man that is superior?” This thought of any pastor being superior to others does not fit in with how the body of Christ is described in 1 Corinthians 12.

One man responded, “This is what the man is reduced to bringing home the bacon, paying the bills, and supplying non-emotional or spiritual needs. Anything else is perceived as an effort to try and convince or change the doctrine/beliefs of the wife, which in turn leads to accusations of the husband trying to break up the family. Unfortunately the woman in many cases makes the statement, ‘when I see you praying, and fasting, (until I see you are worthy) then I will submit to your authority or consider you the priest of our home.’ This obviously is not consistent with scripture.”

In these unhealthy churches, the pastor is usually considered superior to others in the church and this plays into the emasculation of the other men. In fact, some pastors flat out tell people to imitate them in prayer, worship, dress, etc. In addition some claim that one cannot be saved without them. “The only way you’re ever going to get to Christ is to follow a man of God. The only way that you’re ever going to make it in the rapture is to follow a man of God. Amen! You can’t make it without a pastor.” (Quote is from the linked to video.)

So how does the man (pastor) appear superior to the husband? “When he is one who holds dedication, loyalty, and commitment overhead with hell fire and damnation, he certainly can [appear superior]. Conversely, because of the impression he gives of having a pipeline directly to the throne, and with statements and perceptions that no one can or should be more spiritual than the pastor, sure, that husband will never and can never measure up.” Imagine how this makes the man feel and what it does to him and how it insidiously works to destroy the marriage. If that man eventually gives up and walks away, it is entirely blamed on him for not measuring up.

Some seemingly fight a losing battle in attempting to regain their rightful place in the family. As long as the spouse places the pastor and church above her husband, there will be problems in the marriage and sometimes it cannot be overcome. Unfortunately, pastors have told wives to divorce. “Apparently, the pastor told my wife that if I don’t come around, and fall in line with all that he teaches, she shouldn’t stay with me. The same man who married us, suggests that, for the sake of her soul, she should probably leave me.” Such counsel goes against the admonition of the Apostle Paul in 1 Corinthians 7.

A woman shared some observations, “I have seen this kind of stuff going on. Women who think their husbands have no merit in the kingdom of God just because they aren’t like other women’s husbands. They usually have no respect for them and undermine their authority in the home. The children are taught that their father does not know anything. They are pretty confused… The wife runs to the pastor or other spiritual men, counseling with them. She constantly compares her husband with other men….why can’t he be like them?

“…I think if we were not taught erroneously to begin with…that the pastor is like the Pope and only he can hear from God for us…then many of us would have better marriages and better relationships with God. I have never spoken with men to get their viewpoint of what they think of their wives running off to the pastor every time they turn around. I think some of them are conditioned to think it’s OK.”

Another woman told of an event. “Last year at summer camp all the women were invited to lunch with the pastor and were also shown his bedroom with the comment ‘see how clean and tidy he is, not like your slobby husbands.’ Well, for those women with slobby husbands I’m pretty sure they did get mind problems the next time their husband left his clothes on the floor, remembering that nice tidy pastor’s room (which had been cleaned beforehand by a few of the women anyway). We were continually reminded of how our husbands didn’t measure up but if you dared to come out with it yourself you were a Jezebel bitch. So it was a no win situation for everybody.”

This is a very serious problem in unhealthy churches. While there are people who sincerely believe they are doing God’s will by placing church and pastor above their spouse, they fail to realize how their actions are ripping their family apart, harming their children and causing excruciatingly deep hurt to their spouse. Is this not spiritual adultery as one man observed? Take to heart what he shared. “This is so true. Not only putting the pastor in the place of God, but putting the pastor or church above the place of your husband. The hierarchy that God designed and that Paul outlined is pretty much cast into the fire by the UPC, there is no church, or pastor between God, the Man, and his Wife. It is so wrong for the pastor to demand a devotion to him, his doctrine, his perspective, and his general way of doing things. Sometimes I don’t think they do this openly or even purposely but they use various controlling techniques to demand devotion in general.

“It is so funny how most every UPC church has a name, but we don’t refer to them that way, instead we say, ‘I used to belong to Bro. Smith’s church, or I visited Bro. Jones’ church, or my sister belongs to Bro. Johnson’s church.’

“I would covet an opportunity to talk to a pastor’s wife to see how she felt about or even realizes that her husband has the devotion and attention of the women in their church above and stronger than the devotion to their husbands. How many people have the courage to call it religious and maybe spiritual adultery?”

Read Religious Cuckoldry by Dr. Michael Warstler, an essay on this same topic.

********
Shop at our Amazon store! As an Amazon Influencer, this website earns from qualifying purchases.

When Extreme Churches Collide

Many of the blogs shared cover some deep, even painful topics. This one will attempt to share a lighter aspect of the abusive church environment – what happens when two such churches compete on the same turf for new converts.

The church I attended (a UPCI breakaway church) had its main headquarters in Waukegan, Illinois. This was a short drive from the Navy base at Great Lakes, and we even had a serviceman’s center on the North Chicago strip outside one of the main gates. This made it very easy for us to travel to the base and attempt to proselytize the sailors; I was stationed at Great Lakes on several occasions and was very active in the base ministry.

We weren’t the only church competing for members on the base. An IFB megachurch (Independent Fundamental Baptist) from Hammond, Indiana sent men from their Bible college to the base every weekend. Their sales pitch included inviting the sailors for a game of football or basketball depending on the season. Most of the students from the IFB church weren’t in the military, but back then it was fairly easy for civilians to access the base as it was before 9/11.

The fun started whenever we met the IFB guys and typically they would try to invite us to the sporting events. From there, the conversation quickly escalated to a debate over doctrine and whether or not any of us were going to heaven. Sometimes the debate got heated when the subject arose about which one of us was “the true church” and which one was a cult. On some occasions it nearly became a shouting match. This wasn’t really a surprise as the pastors of our respective churches were known to bash one another from the pulpit.

What did I learn from the experiences? Both churches drilled Scriptural knowledge deep in our heads, and admonished us to defend our beliefs no matter what. Both churches also encouraged us to be quick to call out who we thought were false teachers. We were also quick to call someone who disagreed with us a cult. The most significant thing I learned was that despite our doctrinal differences, the manner of indoctrination, abuse, and control was practically identical. Our tactics in outreach were basically the same, only my former church was much closer to the base. Our respective leaders were also steeped in controversy; the IFB pastor at that time had numerous allegations of abuse and control, and our general pastor did as well including prison time.

This is why survivor groups like this are important. Our stories cross denominational and doctrinal lines, and we are often more alike than we wish to think.

********
Shop at our Amazon store! As an Amazon Influencer, this website earns from qualifying purchases.

The Pharisees and Apostolics Part 3

This is a continuation from Part 2. Thoughts are based off the article, Are Apostolics Pharisees? written by Gary R. Trzcinski, which appeared in the September 1996 Pentecostal Herald (now called Pentecostal Life, the official magazine of the United Pentecostal Church) which addressed the issue of whether Apostolics (Oneness Pentecostals) were Pharisees. The author gave 29 points as to why they were not.

Below is an excerpt:

Pharisees never criticized Jesus or His disciples for their physical appearance (hair, modesty, ornamentation). We do not find one verse of Scripture where they ever condemned Jesus and His followers for the way they looked. Many Pharisees were waiting to find one flaw in Jesus so that they could discredit Him and His teachings. If there would have been something wrong, the Pharisees would have found it. But they found nothing. Why? Because there was nothing to find, nothing to criticize.

The Pharisees were somewhat holy looking on the outside but extremely unholy in their hearts. However, Jesus was holy both inside and out. He was the perfect man. “Let us cleanse ourselves from all filthiness of the flesh and spirit, perfecting holiness in the fear of God” (2 Corinthians 7:1).

Why is it that the Pharisees didn’t criticize their appearance? This argument actually works against what the author has stated about being different from ‘the world.’ If Jesus and the disciples looked distinctly different from ‘the world,’ as the UPC teaches we in North America must do today, then would they not have pointed this out? It is somewhat misleading to state they were looking for one flaw as they pointed out several in Jesus and his disciples. They took note that Jesus ate and spent time with sinners, they reprimanded them for eating with unwashed hands and said Jesus was gluttonous and a winebibber…so would they not have made note of any appearance which stood out from those around them? Could it be that Jesus and his followers appeared like ‘the world’? Or are we to believe there was a difference in the definition of ‘the world’ some 2000 years ago?

By mentioning “hair, modesty, ornamentation” the author appears to want readers to link this to standards taught in the UPCI, as if they were being followed by Jesus and his disciples. Yet not once do we read that Jesus taught against jewelry, make-up, cutting hair and so forth. He was silent on such issues that the UPCI feels are extremely important. Similarly, Jesus did not teach or follow the rules which the Pharisees added to the law.

“The Pharisees were somewhat holy looking on the outside but extremely unholy in their hearts.” Actually, they weren’t just somewhat…Jesus said that they made clean the outside of the cup and platter. Anyone can make themselves look good to others in this manner. Consider that the heart of the Pharisee wasn’t really toward God and Jesus pronounced them dead on the inside, yet they were able to present to others the image of a sparkling clean and holy exterior, one they thought would cause people to be envious and look up to them.

Pharisees only cleansed the outward appearance but neglected the sinful human heart. They were righteous on the outside but evil on the inside. They were hypocrites (Matthew 23:25-28); but we abhor hypocrisy. Apostolics seek to clean not only the outward appearance but also the heart, mind, and human spirit. Jesus asserted: “Cleanse first that which is within the cup and platter, that the outside of them may be clean also” (Matthew 23:26). A cleansing of the inside will eventually lead to a cleansing of the outside.

The vast majority of our preaching and efforts center on the redemption of the soul. And yet we would be hypocrites if we willfully neglected those passages of Scripture pertaining to cleansing the outward appearance (1 Corinthians 11:4-16; 1 Timothy 2:9-10; 1 Peter 3:3-4). We follow the admonition of Paul to abstain from all appearance of evil so that we would be sanctified wholly- spirit, soul, and body (1 Thessalonians 5:22-23).

If the inside is clean, then it cannot help but show outwardly–and not simply in our appearance, but more importantly in our actions. This is the work of the Holy Spirit in the believer’s life. This is part of the problem in performance oriented churches- they cause people to believe that they must work to make themselves holy and acceptable to God. Don’t cut your hair or wear jewelry and make-up, be sure dresses and skirts fall below the knees, watch your sleeve length and maybe you will be pleasing to God and accepted. Yet the book of Galatians makes it extremely clear that our righteousness will never come from our own works, but it is by faith in Jesus that we are made righteous in the sight of God. If the law was only to act as a guardian until Jesus came, why would we now need any other set of laws to ‘protect’ us or act as a fence to keep us safe? Think about it. Written laws do not change the person. The Old Testament law did not make the people righteous by obeying it as they were not changed on the inside. No list of rules is going to change us either, no matter how good the intentions.

The author claims that Apostolics “abhor hypocrisy” and yet most of us who have been part of them have seen it in multiple ways. There were the ministers that taught against television and owned one themselves or would otherwise have ways to watch it. They teach women’s hair is to be uncut yet some women hide their trimmed hair by wearing it up. They teach against jewelry but wear similar ornamentation in their hair or on their shoes. In some of their churches men are taught they must be clean shaven but the rule can be temporarily bypassed for those who participate in a Christmas or Easter play. How many times have you heard a minister proclaim how people can shout at a sporting event (some are against attending these) and then compare that to how one is to act in a church service? What about the sermons which state smoking is defiling the temple of the Holy Spirit and yet they ignore where the Bible actually speaks against gluttony? These are just a few of the ways in which hypocrisy has been seen in their midst.

I will close with the thoughts of a friend:

You know, as I think about this, it’s not so much the grace thing, as is the need to have something that can be seen. It’s easier to trust in that which can be seen, it is easier to maintain control over what can be seen. When one is seen doing all that is required, then the pastor can rest assured that he has control over that person. When the standards are broken, then the pastor knows for sure that that person needs reprimanding, and many are quite willing to join in on the flogging! I’ve seen this first hand in my former church, especially with the young people.

It’s harder to let go of the reins and let the spirit have his way. Those in control feel that they must be enforcing something or some kind of rule, etc. I think it comes down to more of a trust issue for many in UPC, afraid to trust in that which can’t be seen, unless there is evidence through obedience.

The Pharisees and Apostolics Part 1

********
Shop at our Amazon store! As an Amazon Influencer, this website earns from qualifying purchases.

Shaky arguments

Someone asked something the other day, and since then I keep thinking about the incident that changed my view of the bible and of certain doctrines of my former church completely.

Before I left my former church, I had joined a discussion board that was supposed to be for people who believed like I did. Through the next months, I’d realized that the people who were kindest were NOT the ones I would ever fellowship in person because, though they exhibited the most fruit of the spirit (love joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, gentleness, and self control) they didn’t dress the way I thought they should, went to places I didn’t think any Christian should, and even did things and said things I didn’t think any Christian would. It blew my mind that they were the ones, these that I would have judged in person as least Christian, could actually be the most Christ-like.

About nine months after I left my former church, a question was raised on that board about baptism. These questions were typical on the board, but this time one woman was very adamant about her position, and she put others down if she felt they disagreed with her on any point. I didn’t get involved at first, but after awhile she said something that made no sense at all, even from our shared viewpoint. I said something about that. She assumed I was disagreeing with her stance on baptism, and for the next several pages of discussion argued with me about something I already believed! She was so convinced in her mind, just as I’d once been, that if a person didn’t agree with me on everything, they must not be a “real” Christian.

And so we went on to have a several page ‘discussion’ that ended with me radically changing my beliefs and my understanding of several passages. So in short, a Oneness Pentecostal argued so ridiculously for what she believed (and was determined I didn’t) that she actually converted me FROM that doctrine, rather than to it. And she did a really good job of it!

I’ve experienced the same multiple times since. The harder someone argues for their views without listening to any others or even stopping to see what the other person DOES believe, the more likely they are to drive me away from their viewpoint, no matter how much I believed in it. It’s crazy now, looking back on that thread, because what she was saying doesn’t even make logical sense. I see where she inserted a bunch of emojis, particularly when she thought she’d made her point… and unfortunately most often where those points had actually fallen shortest. She really thought she was doing something, posting as she was. I notice the many times she would get upset by a question, restate her point, and then go off on an emotional tangent about how her view was directly connected to how great God was and how she had the truth. And I know there have been times in my life when I did, too. Now I realize that all of my arguments for what I believed must have sounded absolutely stupid to anyone who didn’t believe them. Worse, I was certainly proud of them… and I think that pride probably made them even more off-putting.

I want to post part of the conversation, but it is quite lengthy and dizzying in it’s ‘rabbit trails’. What’s incredible to me though is not how convoluted the whole thing got. It’s that she, in all her pride and zeal, actually preached me away from what she thought I had to believe to be saved, even after I told her I believed it. A United Pentecostal actually taught me why the UPC teaching of Jesus name baptism as the only right baptism was wrong.

********
Shop at our Amazon store! As an Amazon Influencer, this website earns from qualifying purchases.

The Pharisees and Apostolics Part 2

This is a continuation from Part 1. Thoughts are based off the article, Are Apostolics Pharisees? written by Gary R. Trzcinski, which appeared in the September 1996 Pentecostal Herald (now called Pentecostal Life, the official magazine of the United Pentecostal Church) which addressed the issue of whether Apostolics (Oneness Pentecostals) were Pharisees. The author gave 29 points as to why they were not.

Below is a quote from the article:

Pharisees placed their own man-made traditions above the commandments of God (Matthew 15:2-9). Some traditions may occasionally serve a good purpose but may also at times interfere with the plan of God (Matthew 15:1-2). Other traditions are evil because they are worldly: “Beware lest any man spoil you through philosophy and vain deceit, after the tradition of men, after the rudiments of the world, and not after Christ.” (Colossians 2:8). Still other traditions are good because they are biblical: “Therefore, brethren, stand fast, and hold the traditions which ye have been taught, whether by word, or our epistle” (2 Thessalonians 2:15).

Apostolics have truly endeavored to teach and practice those traditions found in the Word of God. Critics may disagree with us concerning our understanding of modesty, for example, and call it human tradition, but Apostolics are making a sincere effort to practice modesty in spite of the world’s traditions.

Our critics, on the other hand, often look no different than the world. Maybe they have chosen to ignore the scriptural principles of modest dress. Or maybe their definition of modesty is not much different from the world’s definition. Evidently, they have ignorantly or willingly chosen to follow the worldly traditions of fallen humanity.

It would have been better for him to use the word modest or immodest as compared to worldly or the world. This thinking about ‘the world’ has been carried to extremes. People use many things which are of ‘the world’ such as houses, cars, toothbrushes, banks, electricity, and so forth—so are we to refrain from *everything* worldly? This is what they try to teach concerning dress and a few other things, but they are inconsistent with its application.

With all the varying cultures, it would be pretty impossible to dress in a manner in which everyone would give 100% approval. For instance, while the UPC women may wear long dresses or skirts, they wear various bright colors. To an Amish woman, this would be improper. How the Amish woman dresses would be immodest to a woman in a strict Islamic group.

It is interesting to note that the missionaries of the UPCI are told not to attempt to change the culture of the countries to which they are sent. (In fact, I have heard that the UPC in other countries is different than here in North America in that they don’t have all the same prohibitions.) Yet in North America where the organization is headquartered, they attempt to do the opposite by teaching things contrary to our culture. While pants are culturally acceptable for women to wear, they teach women are not to wear them.

“Apostolics have truly endeavored to teach and practice those traditions found in the Word of God. Critics may disagree with us concerning our understanding of modesty, for example, and call it human tradition, but Apostolics are making a sincere effort to practice modesty in spite of the world’s traditions.” All Christians should be modest. But where the UPC goes wrong is they attempt to define for everyone what is and is not considered modest and then claim these things are biblical. Worse yet, their own ministers and churches cannot agree on what is modest or acceptable.

Visit one of their churches and they teach that sleeves must be to the wrist, while another will teach somewhere else on the arm. While one church will proclaim that a woman cutting her hair could put her in jeopardy of hell, another does not. One church teaches men are to be clean shaven and the next allows facial hair. One church teaches you may wear a wedding ring and the one in the next town forbids it. They try to wiggle around these inconsistencies by claiming each pastor has the authority to set the standards in their church as they see fit. Yet if what they teach is truly “those traditions found in the Word of God,” then why would there be all these differences between their churches? Claiming these outward standards are based on traditions found in the Bible is incorrect. We find no Scriptures giving specifics on sleeve length, no prohibition against jewelry or make-up, or pants on women, etc., yet we are to believe that all they teach is spelled out in the Bible.

“Our critics, on the other hand, often look no different than the world. Maybe they have chosen to ignore the scriptural principles of modest dress.” Note the assumption made by the author. If you don’t see it as they do, then you’ve chosen to ignore what the Bible clearly teaches and of course you must be dressing immodestly. Then those who disagree are linked to ‘the world.’ I will point out again that their men often look no different than men in ‘the world.’ Where in Scripture is it taught that in dress Christians must look different from those around us? I don’t see any mention where Jesus or the disciples dressed any differently from the other people. Nor do we read something like, “And the people of Galatia immediately knew they were Christians because they dressed in a much different manner than the people who did not know Christ.” If there were such a difference in how Jesus dressed, Judas wouldn’t have needed to point him out as he did when he betrayed him, but would have explained how they would recognize him by the difference in his attire.

“Or maybe their definition of modesty is not much different from the world’s definition. Evidently, they have ignorantly or willingly chosen to follow the worldly traditions of fallen humanity.” Here is yet another negative assumption. It is interesting how it must be one or the other and not that some may simply view the issue differently than they do.

The Handbook of Life in Bible Times by J.A. Thompson states, “For all their piety, they placed great burdens of religious obligation on the ordinary people. They had lost the spirit of the law and turned devotion into a system. God became to them almost a machine, bound to bless the person who carried out the right rituals at the right time. Jesus’ concept of God, however, was of a loving Father who cared for people and provided for their needs, and who asked to be loved and obeyed from the heart and not simply to be recognized by outward and often empty ritual.” The name Pharisees implies ‘the separated ones.’ They wanted to be noticed when they prayed and wanted the best seats in the synagogue and at banquets. They made sure to look somewhat different (by broadening their phylacteries and lengthening their tassels) so they would stand out and be noticed. Jesus taught against them and told the people to beware of their teachings. He said they placed heavy burdens upon people. They defined God’s laws, when God did not state those things, such as dictating what constituted work on the Sabbath and what didn’t. Don’t these things sound like what the United Pentecostal Church has done?

The Pharisees and Apostolics Part 3

********
Shop at our Amazon store! As an Amazon Influencer, this website earns from qualifying purchases.