This is the third post discussing some aspects in light of a British program I saw on the techniques of persuasion and manipulation (and drawing on my background of being in the International Churches of Christ for over a decade). I wrote a second postregarding my experiences in the whole circle of “Bible Talk Leadership”, which was like the “middle management” of the ICOC. This final post is regarding certain elements of what I’ve experienced regarding the deliberate playing of the system. The extent of artful deceit and psychological manipulation one hopes is rare but possible in the type of controlling organisation employing one-on-one disciplingor shepherding.
By the way, I’m not referring to Kip Mckean. I’ll only make certain judgments about particular individuals, because firstly, I never new Mckean personally (only once at a World Sector leadership meeting in Sydney where I stood behind him whilst watching a rugby match, trying to elicit utterances of conviction etc…. It was a time in the ICOC when world sector leaders were like celebrities and idols within the ICOC culture). I suppose his leadership style and discipling system made it’s mark in ICOC congregations all around the world but I don’t think the issues center around him. I do do my best to actively discourage anyone joining his churches at the moment because of the one-on-one discipling system.
No, in this post I’m not about naming names, but rather giving a warning of the nature of what can go on in an organisation like the ICOC. My point is there are a lot of questions with no easy answers. But for this post the issue isn’t about trying to define slander or laying blame on people but a kind of side-note warning of underhand techniques that hopefully don’t apply to a present ICOC style church but it’s possible they might -for these techniques or methods may spread, just as yeast spreads throughout the whole dough.
Twists and Double Meanings
The following is in the context of biblical doctrine and concern for the gospel. It’s my belief that a good leader does his best out of faith (in God) and concern for his group (congregation, fellowship, sheep etc…) Personal integrity is essential and he faces the truth even when it hurts. This is the whole point of biblical leadership: being a servant.
One the other hand a corrupt leader can take something that seems good, and twist it slightly for his (or her) advantage. In this way there’s no need to create their own propaganda or legends or stories about the group (althought the ICOC did do this to a degree: “30 ‘would- be’ disciples in the Gempel’s living room etc…” -they can use the bible and exploit it to suit their own agenda.
This is basically the underlying principle used through all propaganda and techniques of manipulation and control.
Making examples of rank and file: good and bad.
Great biblical leaders lead by example and then praised others who followed in good deeds and personal sacrifice, but for a corrupt leader one way to boost one’s own “moral authority” is by the use of underlings to do the good “dirty” work, then congragulate and uphold them publically in the fellowship.
The converse is to shame those who don’t support the group. A good leader will rebuke sin because it is sin: the lazy and idle for example, the gossips and devisive, the immoral, argumentative etc.. He will follow the biblical steps from personal discussion to rebuking in front of witnesses. The twist on this is when a bad leader uses reproaching, rebuking and shaming to eliminate his enemies. If there are those opposed to him on matters of conscience (e.g. high accountability, forced tithing, questionable practices) he can label those who share their view as “devisive”, “grumbling”, “critical”, “ungrateful”.
There are several variants of this, for surely the eliminating of potential threats is the goal of a bad leader in a high-powered religious organisation. The threats can exist in the form of an upcoming leader who may seek to take his place, or by the public discussion of issues that may cause the leader to lose face or the whole organisation to lose moral authority and fold in on itself because of questionable practices (Henry Kriete’s “Honest to God” leading to public discussion is an example of this).
So, while a good leader seeks to stop someone from sinning, a bad leader may seek to cause someone to sin: an obvious way is by provocations. In a position of leadership it’s easy to attack and find fault in a provocative manner where the leader seems to be “right” and for the person to refute this to seem “proud”, “defensive” and “argumentative”. That person won’t want to stay long in the group.
But that brings us on to “character assissination”, because if the undesirable individual that the bad leader was provoking holds any clout, he may persuade some of the congregation to leave. The public labels of “critical”, “bitter” and any handy sins the leader may know of from those discipling him can be used in the propoganda machine to warn the group to have no interaction.
But it should be noted: the good leader also may mark individuals who are devisive, or contrary to biblical doctrine and the gospel out of a conscience before God and genuine concern for his congregation.
Emotional Manipulation.
Again, this concept of a right way and twisting the right way to one’s own advantage applies. We all have emotions, and there are appropriate times to feel these emotions. Basically speaking, we know we should feel joy in Christ, but guilty when we’ve done wrong, we should feel indignant at injustice but control our anger and be self-controlled in other situations. We should fear God and be courageous for what’s right and true. And a good leader will induce or inspire these emotions at the appropriate time.
A devious leader learns how to use these emotions to solidify support for his own power and position and mould his group into conformity for his system. One obvious example is known since the time of the pharisees and teachers of the law in Jesus’s day, when they had power over who’s “in” and “out” of the synagogue. It’s the power of fear of rejection from the group, and it’s probably the greatest leverage in faulty, bullying religious groups.
Fear
An important distinction I believe should be made here. As Christians we believe we’ll be judged by God, not by men. We’re condemned or saved based on our reaction to and accepting of the gospel of Christ, and how we live our lives in faith as Christians. A potent leveage can be gained however if we believe that to stay in faith and in grace, we must remain in a particular group. If our salvation is tied to a particular group, then there is the fear that if we leave the group, we’re leaving God.
So the devious leader can use this too his advantage: everytime someone leaves in shame and disgrace, they lose face, they lose friends, they may lose girlfriend/boyfriend and they may still take the belief with them that they’re losing their relationship with God because they’re leaving the group alone and rejected. The propaganda machine can come into play here as well, as leaders refer to them about how they’ve “left God” or sinned with the implied message: “go against the group and this could happen to you, too”.
The devious leader will repeatedly instill a fear of leaving the group because this will provide leverage to stay. If the people suddenly believed it was liberating to leave, that they don’t need the group to get to heaven, then there may be no reason for them to stay. If they leave together, (break in a faction) they won’t have the feeling of isolation or rejection.
So actually manipulation of fear and guilt are factors here, because if one’s spent enough time in a group it’s hard to shake off the guilt of leaving as well.
Joy, fake joy and euphoria.
As a Christian I believe it’s good to take joy from the gospel, one’s relationship with God and the fact we’re freed from guilt and a good leader will encourage his group to do the same. But a devious leader can play with the concept of joy. He may encourage all to be joyful in the group with the implied meaning to take joy from the group: from being accepted. If you conform well, say the right things, you’ll be “blessed”. Be grateful for the group and the leaders.
A continuation of this tactic is the euphoria from grandoise mega-services and conferences and the like. I suppose this is a touchy one with today’s mega-services, often seen as a sign of a church of healthy growth and a way to glorify God. I guess that’s up to the reader’s discretion on what to believe. But an unscrupulous leader can and most definitely will use these tactics, because it is a great way to create mass euphoria and though it’s meant to be glorifying God, the leader places himself as an indispensable part of that glorification.
(A side point to make: the greater a church is in numbers, the greater the temptation for a leader to let it get to his head. There’s more at stake: more influence, more people, more money, more glory -as well as the potential for negative press etc. In a church of humble size, perhaps there’s less temptation for a leader, but this is another debate.)
And what of “fake joy”? Well, that’s just fear, really. In an effort to be part of the group, to conform members may fake the joy to continually affirm they are part of the group. If a devious leader has been basing the foundation of belief on the group rather than the gospel, then there’s a sense of all-round fakeness anyway.
Hope
And this brings us on to Hope. I’ll be honest, I’m not sure if hope constitutes an emotion, but it’s a tool for the bad leader all the same. A good leader inspires hope in God under all circumstances as hope is one of the big three in Christian aspects: faith, hope and love. A corrupt leader, however, teaches hope in the group, because all rank-and-file members must have hope to keep toiling for the group. Hope is the basis of all motivation: hope to succeed, hope to be blessed, hope to be promoted and be like the leader (to be successful, prominent etc), hope to get married etc… If the bad leader effectively controls all the means to these blessings, then he further solidifies his power.
To give some examples, if the bad leader has power over a member’s hope to date someone, then that’s leverage over that individual. If he’s loyal to the leader and conforms, he’ll be blessed. If he constitutes any threat at all, then his hopes can be dashed -which will probably cause him to leave the group. Promotion is another obvious example. Of course, bad leaders cover their reasons for denying any member these blessings with convincing religious language along the lines of “not spiritual enough, yet”.
In or out of the ICOC, God may test you on where your hope actually lies: in Him or in an institution. David’s hope was in God, not Israel or Saul’s kingdom.
Indignation
As Christians we should be indignant about the bad things that go on in the world: war, pollution, violence, immorality etc… But there’s a technique used in a devious leader’s propaganda machine: take news pieces that are shocking and put them in a sermon: allow me to explain. Preacher reads out section of newspaper about some shocking act of violence, then goes on to say how lucky everyone is in the group. Simple enough, but the implied meaning is “we’re special in the group because we don’t do those things like poeple outside the group”. And that’s why I say “indignation and comfort” -it encourages people to feel comfort in the group.
You can probably bet your babies that after any particular piece of shocking news, every fundamentalist group, sect, puritanical church and wacky religious group etc… is pulling it out in a sermon to use this very tactic: does that make them all right because something someone does in society is wrong and it gets in the papers? It’s a way the leaders and followers can take the high moral ground.
Realm of psychology
The above examples are fairly basic. A corrupt leader, however, can study human nature and psychology to best strengthen his hold over them and make the most advantage. Playing the system can become an art with its own subtleties: using each sermon and public gathering to mould conformity. The day-in-day-out routine, keeping the members busy rather than thinking and getting in the member’s heads to pressure them to eliminate doubts -because those doubts are the cracks in the cult culture that can lead to the damn bursting.
Real faith and independent enquiry can help someone read the bible critically and take to heart the principle of freedom: it’s freedom to serve Christ rather than indulge the sinful nature, but it’s also freedom to determine who’s genuine and who’s a counterfeit Christian and act accordingly, just as Paul instructed his followers. The corrupt leader’s intention is to make his followers believe he is fully justified in exploiting them and slapping them in the face. I believe Paul, in complete contrast, was abhorred by such self-effacing weaknesses. That’s not Christianity -the ” Ned Flanders” syndrome.
After writing this post I realise I’ve barely scratched the surface. I, like others, have experienced some of these things, and I think the ICOC wouldn’t have the problems it has today if some of these techniques didn’t go on. There’s more to discuss on pyschological leverage, double and twisted meanings, isolating and eliminating individuals from the group, casting slurs and character assassination, backdoor (or shadow) disipling, psychological intelligence (finding peoples weaknesses, sins and “emotional” pressure points), making uses of connections and credibility (politically manouvering) and the list goes on. I haven’t used many scriptures, because I’m not discussing a healthy Christian church, I’m warning about the techniques that may go on in a bad religious organisation, which go by a whole different set of rules and principles.
