Reposted from MovingOn (Excellent...not one to miss!)

Posted on MovingOn

from cassy - February 11, 2003

I've debated long and hard about whether I speak up. Since leaving I've concentrated on setting up my life and moving on. After spending 27 years in the group, I had no desire to spend another minute wasting my time on it. However, I can't sit by and let another person be "character assassinated" once more.
It's been the Family leadership's pattern to blacken the name of anyone who spoke out; playing down dirty like any other sleazy business whose only interest is in keeping themselves afloat. It's the same tactic used in a courtroom--slander the witness to discredit what he or she says. We've all got dirty laundry cause we're human and nobody is perfect. But just because somebody else is black doesn't make you any whiter. Instead of answering properly the questions and accusations, the leaders opt for making blanket statements and then going on to say how many "souls" they are winning.

Let me ask the question: does the end justify the means? (Sweat shops are fine--look at the nice NIKE shoes they produce for us to wear.) I'm going to get back to that, but for now I'm talking about David (Mama's son). I was in her home and WS for 2 1/2 years, the same time David and Nicole were, and we left WS around the same time. First I'd like to say that I have many good friends in WS, and I love them, like I think we all love our parents or friends still in. I didn't see "Mama" very much, but she was nice and friendly, though somewhat aloof. She kept to herself in her "wing" of the house, had her meals made special for her and, except for the occasional meeting, only the few working directly with her saw her at all.

Those in Mama's home helped me through a very difficult time of sickness where I nearly died (with pregnancy sickness) and for that I am grateful. However, and what I finally realised is that, just because someone is "sweet", doesn't mean I need agree or accept their ideas or the things that I saw that were glaringly wrong. Good doesn't justify the bad in any situation, nor can it excuse it.

I consider David a good friend. I haven't been in contact with him since we left WS, but I know enough to know that what they are saying is not right. They showed the "top secret" video in my home a few days before I left. First it was the "they got to him" line. I'm sorry, but who's the they? No "they" got to him just as much as no "they" got to me or any of us. The "they" is the Family themselves. Our decision and opinions of the Family, right or wrong, is taken directly from a lifetime of experience behind us. Instead of realising your responsibility and the fact that we are the result of your actions, you've opted to blame some third party. Or better yet, DEMONS! Please, spare us. It comes across as a desperate attempt to get out of the hot seat yourself.

Talk about scare tactics, the amount of delving into the dark, gory world of ugly demons swallowing people and eating them from the inside that is going on now with every letter that comes out, is alarming. Dad himself said you weren't supposed to get into all that as a Christian. That's only one of MANY contradictions in the Family's beliefs, picking and choosing. What's wrong one day, is all right the next, just so long as the "prophet" says so. What happened to the Bible saying to think on the good, honest, and positive? Having to sit through an hour a day of reading those visions made me feel ill, and had me questioning the sanity of whoever "saw" it. Pray to God I never see visions like that.

The next one brought up was the whole blackmail issue. Well, like that makes any difference. It reminded me of a recent case where a young man tried blackmailing a priest because he molested him as a child. Then he shot him. Just the other week I read that the jury acquitted him. The priest had been getting away with stuff for years, and though it's no excuse for killing someone, it didn't make what the man went through any less evil. So blackmail may be wrong, but you've got to have something on someone in order to blackmail them, don't you? I don't even know if David has done that. They didn't read his letters on the video, they just said it.

Mama said that his letters were all sweet when she was giving him money but when it dried up, that's when he turned sour. Well, I don't know if I believe that because even when I was with David in WS, he had issues. We all probably have a love/hate relationship with our parents if they are still in. I know I do with my dad. I desperately want to love him and keep up the relationship we had, but I also have anger mounting up within me because I just can't understand how he can be so blinded. I'm sure with David it's just the same. I know that everything he has written is true, because I heard the same stories and witnessed some myself.

So the issue here is not whether what he is saying is right or wrong, they're just upset that he's speaking up and not covering up for them anymore, and they don't want those in the Family to hear it by making the whole thing out to be some big sob story. (David, if you're reading this, prove them wrong, boy!)

After all, they did the same to James Penn, Mene and Deborah and everyone else who's spoken out. Instead of answering their questions, they dug up all the dirt they could on them. So what? I think I would have gone crazy too if my Grandfather wanted to have sex with me. Deborah says the same and Faithy, well, we know. I remember that letter where he was goosing her under the table. If THAT was printed, then I believe a lot more went on, just as Deborah says. Maybe Deborah and her husband did abuse children, but that doesn't take the guilt off Dad. And as I remember, Dad never said what Deb said in her book was wrong. It was all a big, "poor me" how could she do this to her own father? And then publishing loads of evil stories about her.

On the video Mama pulled out that one again about Dad. "Dad was such a wonderful person. He really loved lost souls." Then she ends with "I wish we all had the same fire and love." Of course, everyone sitting in the room sat there nodding their heads. Damn it, they never even met him! I don't care how many tears flowed from his eyes, or how many prayers he prayed, or how many times he said, "Praise the Lord," (we've all seen the Garden of Eden series, and evangelists are known for the dramtic acting ability. That's the world he grew up in), what counts are his ACTIONS. What are his long-term fruit? Okay, let's use the RuleBook the Family says they follow. It says a Bishop of the Church should be blameless and able to rule his own house. You were supposed to judge them according to how you saw them conduct themselves. After all, if what you preach doesn't even work on your own children, why should it work for you?

Well, we know Deborah's story. Aaron died, probably suicide, Hosea, well; his kids have way loads of bitterness against him. I know him personally. Sorry, but not a good impression on my mind. And Faithy, well I don't need to say more. Then there's David. We've heard his side of "Life with Grandpa" and Techi. Well, for those of you who don't know her, when I knew her in WS I was told directly by one of the shepherds that if she hadn't have had a kid, she wouldn't still be in the Family. (In other words, they're secretly glad she got knocked up at sixteen because now she's dependent on them for survival.) She was an exception and they put up with her because they were desperate to keep her. If any of us did or acted the way she behaved we would have been booted out of WS in a second. I believe that she has yet to get up the guts and make her own stand like her brother has. In fact, I was more shocked that David left first as she was definitely "worse" then he was. And top that off, we all know Mene's story. (Hosea marrying an harlot because God told him to is a far cry from a systematic desire for incest. But if that's all right with you, then just come out and say it, please don't hide under the guise of the "law of love")

It beats me who in the Family still wants to read to their children the Life with Grandpa's, when as soon as they grow old enough, they'll realise their "idols" are nothing like what they read about. What was that Dad said in "What is that In Thy Hand?" about our children being the proof of the pudding? Well, here's the pudding, and we are the pudding, and we're telling you the truth. What more will it take for Peter and Mama to not just hear, but listen?

I remember Dad's letter where he used that verse to defend himself, "and he that winneth souls is wise." His argument went that because he started the Family, and the Family was winning so many "souls" then he must be good. Hummmm. All right. Well, first of all, that was totally twisting that scripture. This is King Solomon we're talking about who said it, and in those days there was no "winning souls" as we know it. Jesus hadn't even been born yet. So what did that really mean? Well, in a new translation of the Bible, it has a completely different version. "Righteousness gives life, but violence takes it away."

Nothing about "souls" at all. (Scholars, help me dig up the Hebrew original.)
Sorry, but souls can be won by anyone. What needs to be judged is the fruit. The Family's fruit is first its children. --US! The majority of children born in the Family over 18 years old are NOT in the Family. What does that say? Over two thirds of everyone who has joined has left. In any business or test, if the results were the same, it would not be considered successful. Again, the Family has contradicted itself and twisted scripture to fit the picture it wants to portray. If everyone leaves, then we are a "Gideon's band." But if the Family comes upon some wealth or goes through a growth spurt, "we're in God's blessing." "Dad's prediction of us being a financial power has come true." Win, win situation, is it? Or have you got your back covered?

Let's again use the Bible the Family says they follow. In Deuteronomy it says the judge of a true prophet is if his predictions come true, if not, YOU SHOULD NOT LISTEN TO HIM. Let's not rewrite history here. Those of us who lived through it know that Dad said Jesus was coming in 1993. At that time, his word was THE WORD. We believed it. The 70 years prophecy about when he would die and when Jesus would come did NOT come true. I've heard people say, "it's too early to tell." What? Newsflash! 1993 is past. What about 40 days? What about Davidito and Maria being the two Endtime Witnesses? I recall Davidito being a teenager and Mama a young woman. I went back to read some of Dad's endtime letters before I left. Almost every single one said, "the Crash is here" or "it's gotta happen this year" then a little outburst of tongues and a "Hear ye the words of your father." It was those predictions that had us living from day to day, thinking it all was going to end tomorrow. (Reminds me of the story of wolf, wolf...sooner or later no one's going to listen to you.)

I'm also reminded of the Halley's Comet. I was ten and we were passing out posters saying Halley's comet would herald the coming of the Anti-Christ. Of course, when that didn't happen, Dad got out of it by saying that perhaps the Anti-Christ came secretly, just like the comet wasn't seen. Well, seven years later, it didn't happen, only by that time most everyone probably forgot about that. --Convenient.

What good did it do to buy refuge farms, then sell them, move East, then back West, then South, live in caravans, and then oversized combos, then back down to everyone on their own. He had us all marching to his orders, and there was loads of guilt placed on people when they didn't follow whatever was the craze at the time. The pattern has continued. It's like the Family leadership is experimenting with people's lives like we're toys. Famous Y2K. All the homes stocked up and bought loads of survival and food--only to get rid of it all a year later. Of course, in hindsight, they found one little line of escape in the prophecy. Well, predictions are not worth anything if you leave yourself a loophole out of them. I could do that myself. Need I go on? The verse doesn't say, "if the prophet gets one in ten right, then he's still a true prophet." Correct me if I'm wrong. I found another good verse in Isa.44:25 and 25. I'm going to use the new version NIV, because though it says the same thing in KV, sometimes the flowery language has you miss the point. It says first in the above verse "I am the Lord who..." then in 25. "Who foils the signs of false prophets, and makes fools of diviners, who overthrows the learning of the wise, and turns it into nonsense." Verse 26. "Who carries out the words of his servants, and fulfils the predictions of his messengers." --Pretty clear, isnt it? Not much room for leeway on that one.

Maybe all the stages we went through were "experimental" for the leadership, and in the eyes of the adults (including the sexual play with adults, FFing and teen detention homes), but for us, your children, it was our LIVES. That line "it happened years ago" does not cut the mustard. What you sow, you reap. That pastor's pillow might have only took a second to rip open, but it will take a lifetime to pick up all the feathers again.

What we want is truth, honesty and facing up to reality. We need to talk, and openly. Which gets me on my next subject of honesty.

The main reason I left WS at the time was because I disagreed with the policy of secrecy and hiding. It's an exclusive club within club. The attitude, (and I heard it from Mama herself) was that those in WS were more special, were in the inner circle, it was a step closer to the Lord. There was a definite us and them. No trust of even their own members. (They can deny this high and loud, but I KNOW.) Then leaving to be in the "normal" family, I wondered how anyone would want to follow a group of people they've never met, only maybe on brief visits.

Let's go back to what they are supposed to be basing their beliefs on. What are our shepherds supposed to be like? Well, I don't see anywhere in the Bible Jesus running and hiding, being incognito and forging passports to protect his own ass. Sure he was controversial, but he was out there in the public eye with nothing to hide. He said, I am the good shepherd and I lay my life down for the sheep. He meant it and he did it. Where are our good shepherds leading the way? It's more the other way around. They hide behind, pushing out their sheep, exhorting them to be glad to receive persecution for their sake.

But the hole has been dug and without a complete change, Mama is doomed to live her life just like any other fugitive from justice. I think that says a lot. Perhaps Dad received his just deserts, being buried in an unmarked grave, only to be dug up a few years later. You can't go visit his gravesite because it isn't there anymore. What type of life or death is that? It certainly wasn't for "righteousness sake."

Jesus' whole message was against religion, against following a person. The Holy Spirit was supposed to lead. If Christianity was not even dependent on him being here in the flesh, then why is it so important to "protect" our leaders. If it's of God, then no man can stand against it, right? That brings me to a good example of the British court case. The judge requested that Peter come and represent the Family in court. But no, he didn't come. Guess who they sent as a WS representative? James Penn. Oh, so then when he spills the beans, they turn around and say that he was "always a weak character" and downplayed him as some low down guy. Okay, so that leaves us to conclude you sent your riffraff to defend the Family in court. Someone you could do without perhaps? Thanks a lot!

What bothered me even more was after I left WS, I noticed things that were said that were not completely true, white lies, or exaggerations to slant things the way they wanted to portray something. Like Misty in her jealousy GN saying "my husband had dates with ALL the women in our home." Oh yeah! Well I was there at the time it was written and I did not, nor with any other older man. The "crossing generations" thing just wasn't for me, but I can tell you it took a lot for me to buck the tide and stand up for myself. Was there ever any discussion in the letters on the subject of young women who did not feel comfortable about this new revelation, or that it was fine for those who don't wish to partake, and that maybe some in her home were not so keen on the idea?--I know there were!

I'm sorry, but Mama has surrounded herself with people who are like her or at least suck up to her, and though they may bring up a few opposing opinions, you never really crossed the line, or you would get hammered down. Look at Gabe and Matthew who were made public examples for everyone, along with a long list of others down through the years. Who would want to be the next?

Instead of addressing rumours or issues outrightly, like for example, the one that was going around about two eccentric women in their rooms receiving prophecies all today, instead of answering it, they slapped it down as ridiculous. Well, actually that was probably based on the fact that even though most people in WS do get prophecies for Mama as she requests them, there are two women (at least at the time I was there), Sandy (or Palestina--Genai's mom) and Viv (single older woman) whose full time ministry was just GETTING PROPHECIES. And a lot of the visions also. Well, I couldn't help but think that if I had the pressure of having to come up with stuff day after day after day, I just might go a bit wonkers. And no offence to them personally, but I'm not about to stake my life or the life of my child and service for the Lord on what they receive or anyone else.

Mama's told us that she's the winetaster and that she has some special dispensation to be able to tell if something is of the Lord. I have proof that in Kidland there is a "prophecy" published from some YA in Thailand that was word for word taken from Raise'm Right. The only thing the girl did was change it from the third person to the first person, meaning it was done on purpose (I discovered this only because I happened to read the chapter a few days before the pub came out). I wrote this in at the time (about 2 years ago now--I think it's issue 16), and they sent back a short note saying they'd "look into it". Well, a year and a half later I heard nothing back, nor was anything published about it. Probably something they'd like to brush under the rug if they could. I know from my time in WS that Mama listens to all publications including Kidland before sending out to the Family so what happened then? Where were her special powers of discernment on that one ? I heard the argument, "Well, Mama would never make mistakes on the "important" issues." Well, where do we draw the line on what is important? Doesn't really hold water for me, especially since we can never "prove" that visions of blood dripping demons were actually "seen" and not someone's scary imagination.

I want to know why Mama can call herself a prophetess when she doesn't prophesy herself, and can't discern when others prophesy falsely!

I have more examples stored away on this, but I'll move on for the sake of time and space. I wonder why Mama is so hesitant to give credit to where credit is due? Why is it okay to give credit to dead authors like Charles Dickens for writing a "spirit" story, but not okay to give credit to the flesh and blood person and member of the Family, who took his or her time to put pen to paper and write the story down? Why does WS publish its "tools" under false names, or why does Mama put her name on a product when she didn't even write it?

The Activated calendar is full of nice quotes, one for each day, fine. Each of us in WS contributed 20 or so quotes, I doubt she wrote even one. But right on the front cover it says, " By Maria David". I was under the delusion that I was contributing my work for a good cause and that it didn't matter because the Lord gets the credit for everything, right? Well, why is Mama an exception to that? Not only that, but she can take credit for everyone else as well. Is the leadership really concerned about making sure people give credit to the Lord, or are they just concerned that no one else gets the credit but them?

What about paying taxes? Jesus himself said twice to pay what is due, and Paul is clear on "obeying the powers that be" and "This is why you pay taxes, for the authorities are God's servants, who give their full time to governing,. Give everyone what you owe him." I wonder how many Family members have read Romans 13 recently. There are so many other verses like "provide all things honest in the sight of men," "not handling the word of God deceitfully", "spotless and blameless the sons of God" and the list goes on.

I'm sorry, but that half line of a verse ..."as deceivers, yet true" does not weigh up against a preponderance of scripture on the other side. If the Family leadership really was concerned only about reaching lost souls then they should have heeded Paul's warning, "For meat, destroy not the work of God." It's plain to the see that they themselves have been their own worst enemy.

And what about the "traditions," rules, checklists, the homes are loaded down with. Jesus was quite against those, saying to the religion of his day, "you and your traditions have made the law of God of none effect." And where do you see any Biblical prophets spending most of their time prophesying about how wonderful they are and that everyone should hear ye them? It somehow strikes me as odd that a lot of Dad's letters and prophecies were about himself, and how "even the spittle of David" was like drops of gold. Humility? Peter and Mama have followed suit, publishing loads of prophecies exalting themselves. It really rubbed me the wrong way when a whole FSM was published with stories of the CROs meeting Mama, and at the beginning was a little disclaimer, "we're not exalting man, but....." but what? Hearing the leaders I'm supposed to trust and follow saying that they felt the earth shake and move when they met Mama did not sit well with me. If that isn't cultish behaviour, then I don't know what is. What about the verse, "And I, if I be lifted up, I will draw all men unto Me (as in Jesus)." It seems to me that the Family tries to gain all the praise for itself for everything good that happens, but anything bad, well, that's that naughty individual.

Was it right that the leadership basically made Sarah take the rap for the Dito book during the court case, saying "Oh, those were just her thoughts and opinions", when in actuality at the time the Dito book was THE childcare manual for all to follow. Or in the letter "Professionals" Peter says that FFing was voluntary and the women only did it if they wanted to. I'm sorry, but those of us who were there at the time know the pressure that was placed on people, and my mom happens to be one who did feel like she had to or she was "disobeying" God's prophet. If you didn't do it, you were basically accused of being the "Girl Who Wouldn't." Yes, perhaps some women had a great time, but that doesn't excuse the many women who did not, and that's what Daniel was trying to bring out. The only people who are going to believe the "rewriting" of history are those who have joined in the last eight years and our younger brothers and sisters who don't know any better.

What about tithe? Interestingly, I read about it by chance as I was looking through Deuteronomy (chapter 14: 22-28). Every year 10 percent of the produce was taken and brought to the temple, where they basically had a big picnic. It was the principle of setting it aside so they could enjoy it at a place where they could honour and remember the Lord. Only every 3 years did they give 10 percent to the Levi tribe. What a far difference that is to the Homes giving in some places 16% of their income every month! Often they are struggling to survive, and yet they feel guilty like they won't receive God's blessing unless they give it (not to mention loose their membership). So who has given them that impression? Certainly not the Bible I've read. If WS used a little business sense, they could support themselves no problem, and have enough to give out besides. The Family no more follows the Bible then the Moonies do. At least Peter and Mama should have the guts to say that.

So, so many people I talked to still in the group basically turn a blind eye to the things they don't agree with, just so they can partake of the benefits. They don't want to face reality. For how much longer, I don't know. But the truth is staring them right in the face, if they'll only see it.