Quote:
Originally Posted by SpeakersCorner
Nigel's article seems to be taking a different, and more interesting tack than simply name-calling a despised group. It seems to me, in my quick perusal, that he is issuing a call to those of us still in an LC environment but no longer associated with the LSM to separate ourselves further from them, perhaps even to denounce them.
As a person who has borne the shame of the cult label as well as the repudiation of the LSM, this seems like a great idea. "No, no, officer, it's not me ... It's THEM! Get them! They're a CULT! "[Hands in pockets, whistling while he slips off into the night.]
But this seems an admission of weakness to me. I hate that there are some in this world who think I'm in a cult (and some quite close to home), but I refuse to exonerate myself by flinging that vile term upon others.
|
That's a kind of cynical view of it. And you can't be so naive to not understand why the LCM is considered cultic, nor to continue to ascribe those reasons to the "blindness of Christianity."
If you believe the LCM was cultic, then you owe it to your members and message to separate yourself publicly from the cultic root. If that means denouncing LSM them what's the problem? Were you ever squeamish about denouncing Christianity?
At some point you have to admit to yourself that the LCM is and always has been unhealthily cultic. In fact, the case can be made that all the LCM's problems are due to its cultic tendencies (lording it over saints, being different for the sake of being different ("our distinct heritage"), living in a bubble, building walls, making enemies, lacking accountability, etc.) It's not just a matter of denouncing these things and those that will not repent from them. It's a matter of taking steps so that they don't appear in your church.