"Way College Compared with Dangerous Cults"

***************************************
In November, 2008, I was perusing some of my files, the kind of files one keeps in metal file drawers....the tangible on paper stuff. :-)

I came across a few various newspaper articles. I was unable to find them in the newspaper archives on the web. So....I'm thinking of transcribing and blogging them.

Following is one of the articles. I've endeavored not to make typos. My apologies if I have.

After a google search I discovered that the author, Douglas McGaw, was apparently a professor of sociology/anthropology at Emporia State in Kansas.

I would like to hear McGaw's opinions now, though he may be deceased. With further investigations and studies into cultic manipulation, some of his observations/ideas might have changed. I would think his final four paragraphs would remain the same.

Note: The article below, written in 1979, corresponds with Kristen Skedgell's first manipulative sexual encounters from VPW....not to mention others' encounters prior, during that time, and afterwards via TWI leadership. Point being, activities behind the scenes at that time were very much behind the scene and part of the "internal workings." It is the hidden (and even open) internal workings that help produce manipulation and toxic transcendent belief systems.

*********************************

The Gazette, Emporia, Kansas
Tuesday, November 27, 1979
by Douglas McGaw

Way College Compared with Dangerous Cults

Recently I attended a national convention on society and religion. Participants included sociologists, psychologists, religious researchers and leaders, and other interested people. Among the topics was some discussion on the lessons of Jonestown and its relevance to other modern religious groups.

The keynote speech by James Richardson bears paraphrasing in light of a number of comments I have heard in recent months here in Emporia in regard to comparisons between Jonestown and the Way College. Mr. Richardson, a sociology professor at the University of Nevada in Reno, and one of the foremost experts nationally on new religious movements, cautions against making such blithe comparisons, and my own studies in the same field lead me to similar conclusions.

Richardson points out that, in spite of a few superficial similarities between the People's Temple (Jones's group) and many of the new religious movements such as the Unification Church (Moonies) and the Way International, there are nevertheless some important differences that critics of these "cults" tend to overlook in their zeal to condemn all equally. Allow me to use his points in drawing some comparisons between the People's Temple and the Way, since the Way is of such concern locally.

First, the new movements are products of the social ferment of the 60's. Most of them arose as part of the new scene rather than in reaction against it. Although the Way officially began in the 40's, it did not become a significant movement until it began drawing from contemporary youth. The People's Temple, however, dates back to the 50's and was specifically oriented to combat a prevalent reality of the day -- racism. It was never "part of the scene."

Second, the characteristics of the members are different. Where the new movements (including the Way) draw primarily from white, single, middle-class youths who are relatively well-educated, the People's Temple drew mainly from the ranks of the lower-class blacks, many of whom were married and brought their families with them into the group. In this, the People's Temple more closely resembles the Father Divine group than the Way.

Third, the organizational structures are noticeably different. Although both are hierarchical, the People's Temple was much more rigorously controlled than the other movements. A simple, uncomplicated authoritarian structure, going from Jones through a a few "angels" and a fairly small "planning commission" to the unranked mass of followers, allowed for direct and personal control by the leader. The Way (and other new movements), being larger and more diffuse, cannot and do not operate in such a controlled way.

Fourth, contact with the outside world is different. Although all these groups are somewhat isolated from the world, the People's Temple carried its isolation to extremes, relocating itself in a remote jungle and then committing corporate suicide when the world threatened to "invade" its domain. Far from removing itself from the community, the Way is in contact with many segments of it, sometimes to the point of being defined as obnoxious about it.

Fifth, the resocialization procedures are different. "Brainwashing" is the common but inaccurate word for what goes on in virtually all religious (and political) groups; resocialization is the appropriate term. An important concern is the amount of physical coercion used in this resocialization. The People's Temple members lived a rigorous, deprived -- even grim -- life in which the family ties were openly challenged by their leader. Deprivation of food and shelter were not uncommon as tools to elicit conformity. Although the Way does engage in a certain amount of thought reform it is based on different principles and does not even approach the severity of Jone's tactics. To draw people in through what the Moonies call "love-bombing" is far different from holding them through deprivation and terror.

Sixth, the ideologies are quite distinct. The Way, like most groups in the Christian tradition, focuses on the individual as the object of concern. Salvation is individually obtained through the person's relationship with God. Membership in the group is important, but only insofar as it reinforces the individual's commitment to faith. The People's Temple was more communally oriented, openly espousing communistic ideals before the tragedy at Jonestown. Membership in the group and subordination of the individual to the group was central. The mass suicide was treated as dying for a collective cause -- a form of altruistic rather than egoistic suicide, such as one might find among soldiers who gave their lives for their comrades in arms. An individually focused philosophy such as the Way''s is unlikely to lead to the excesses of self-sacrifice shown by Jonestown.

Seventh, the general orientations differ as well. With the focus on the importance of the individual, the Way tends to emphasize self-development and introspection more than the People's Temple. There is less concern with political matters in favor of individual seeking. Social change is essentially the sum of individual efforts to "do right." The People's Temple has a more structural orientation in its focus on dealing with social (rather than individual) problems. Its early emphasis on the problems of racism led it into instituting soup kitchens, legal aid, and political support on behalf of poor blacks and other minorities. Jones saw social change as most effective when accomplished through collective political rather than individual channels. This of course contributes to their collectivist orientation.

Finally, the rituals differ. The ritual activities of the Way are important but less central than they were in Jonestown. Those most obvious to outsiders are the unique form of togetherness they have at their noontime meal and their regular jogging exercise around the streets of town. But these and the other rituals are not as structured or demanding as sessions in Jonestown where the members would be required to drink "poison" to show their loyalty to the group and to Jones. This "practice suicide" drill occurred a few times before the real thing occurred a year ago and was doubtless instrumental in preparing the people to commit suicide with as little resistance as the did. In this instance and many like it, the ritual superceded any meaning that was attached to the action. Congressman Ryan's visit provided the spark or catalyst to set in motion the mass suicide for which the Jonestowners had been "practicing" for a long time.

Those comments are not intended to defend any particular religious position. I am no "fan" of the Way, nor is anyone at the Way College aware of these comments before they go to press. (Hence, any misstatement of their beliefs is my responsibility and not theirs.) I do, however, feel that any assumptions about what goes on in that group should be grounded in reality rather than ethnocentric (or religiocentric) bias. It especially bothers me to hear hysterical cries from Way opponents that the Way represents another potential Jonestown, what with all the "brainwashing" and "secretiveness" that goes on there. This shows ignorance, disregard, or unconcern with the facts.

In the final analysis, the Way is disliked by many because the religious views -- being non-Trintarian -- are at odds with the traditional Christian conception of the Trinity. In short, they don't "think like we do." Therefore, they are heretic (which is true, according to traditional Catholic dogma) and should be eliminated. Or at least run out of town on a rail.

The problem is that in our religiously plural society we aren't supposed to persecute religious devinats solely on the basis of their beliefs. That would be gauche. But if we can somehow pin on them all sorts of negative lables (such as "evil brainwashing" practices), then they become more vulnerable.

(Incidentally, I would like to ask how their "brainwashing" is substantially different from that found in half a dozen other conservative and more traditional Christian groups in town.)

In any case, comparison of the Way to Jonestown is a dangerous and misleading practice. It provides simplistic and incorrect analyses of extremely complex issues. It is perhaps unfortunate for many of us that our traditional beliefs are being challenged by these "heretics" but it would be more unfortunate if our social system did no allow new ideas to be aired. I submit that further criticisms of the Way stick to the facts and avoid making unwarranted assumptions about its internal workings. He who faults others' beliefs opens himself to similar attack on their own faith.

************************************