[OBW]

Matt,

I was not suggesting that it was necessarily off topic. I had my own thoughts both ways. I have had even more thoughts since then.

Actually, I think that idolatry is probably a very real issue. There might also be other issues. But as part of my further thoughts on the issue, I'm beginning to wonder if throwing the term "idolatry" around might be sort of like my tendency to throw the "C" word around.

I'm not saying that either is not true, but that idolatry is a term that, no matter how we show it to mean more than bowing to a graven image, it has charged meanings that differ among the various people participating and lurking here.

The real issue is in the make-up of the fact that we call idolatry. It is in the expanded definitions. It is about the heart and intent. It is about what comes first (and who's on second).

At some level, the only thing we clearly know is the fruit of the tree. We can point to certain things and think that maybe the issue is the soil, or the water, or a need for fertilizer. But the thing that clearly marks the tree is the fruit.

There are ways to sweep ambition, misguided following, closed-minded dogma, and much more into "idolatry." I'm not sure that it helps the conversation. Instead, it sweeps us into a frenzy.

Now we need the energy of that frenzy at times, but what does collecting a lot of symptoms into a label do? It will alienate those who ride the fence or are still quite “in” the LC but are open to consider.

Rather than talk about idolatry, we can talk about specific instances of LC abuse. For example, Benson has essentially said that he is proud of his actions relating to Jane. He says he did it for the church. When I look at the things he did then, I would have to ask myself, “what kind of church needs this kind of bullying to protect it and would tolerate such a person as one of its primary leaders?” That is clear. We have observed the fruit and can honestly question the source even if we do not know the details about it. Since the examples are coming out of the woodwork, can we let them speak of the fruit of a bad tree? We can separately (different thread?) discuss the fullness of what we believe is the problem with the tree (idolatry, among others).

This is not a complaint about the actual content of the idolatry discussion. It is an opinion about this thread which began as “what role, if any, do you think the LCS played in the development of these behaviors?” We’ve seen Benson’s role in some cases. A couple of them have been heralded strongly. We are now seeing a few others. I expect there to be more. Some will be stronger than others. Some will border on uncertainty about how clearly the LC was responsible. I think if you look at what I wrote to BlessD about myself you can see that the LC played a big part, although not as clearly as it did for her.

Is it necessary that within this thread we figure out what spiritual label to put on these evil doers? Is allowing the evidence of the various ones who were actually affected by the LC without distraction from other things worthwhile? Might a separation of the “why” discussion from the “how it played out” discussion be useful?

Just some honest questions. (BTW. If you are up on Meyers-Briggs personality types, look up INTP. It says volumes about the way I stick myself into these kinds of things. It also tells why I don’t always understand why others complain sometimes. No excuse — just what I’m dealing with.)