“Can the Local Church Leadership Say, ‘We Were Wrong’?” (An Open Letter)

[OBW]

Originally Posted by ZNPaaneah

A few corrections. BP was not frequently in Houston during the time frame I was, but he still owned a day care and would come to Houston to take care of it. I spent one afternoon helping him roof the place.

Second, the brothers responsible for the campus work on Rice were not controlled by the elders. RK was on the campus but had virtually no impact on the work. DC was not affiliated with the church leadership and the idea is laughable, JF and PF left the year I came in. So then by implication you are saying that I was and that is false.

Can you elaborate? Your quote of aron was reduced to two words and I cannot find any reference to RK, DC, JF and PF anywhere in any post. Seems to be missing some context and therefore is probably missing some of the meaning you intend.

I did mention BP. But we both agree that he was not in Houston much in your time frame. Just highly influential, even potentially controlling whether it was or was not obvious.

[ZNPaaneah]

Originally Posted by OBW

Can you elaborate?

Sure, and sorry for the RK, I meant KR. The key brothers saved off of Rice that I was familiar with were Clem (who became an elder), James and Pat F who both served in the LSM. Clem was already gone when I came in (I went to his wedding which was a very special meeting). James F stayed an extra year to help me out but was rarely on campus that year. KR is Kerry R. KR was definitely the only brother associated with Rice that was clearly controlled by the elders but he had nothing at all to do with the campus work on Rice. He never preached the gospel, never joined us. He had one failed attempt at trying to run a Bible study using LSM materials that failed after only one meeting.

David C had nothing to do with the elders and neither did I. So the idea that any unseen hand from the elders was controlling the campus work at Rice while I was there is bunk.

Also I cannot see anything sinister in the elders seeking help and fellowship from Benson. BP was highly regarded, even revered in Houston when I came in. I think any elder or pastor could have a mentor and that would be seen as a positive thing spiritually and BP was spoken of as a mentor to RG.

But you cannot use the influence that BP may have had in fellowship with RG as a basis to say another church controlled Houston, that is absurd.

Hindsight is 20/20. Perhaps now we know that the case of Jane A was wrong, but I am not convinced that BP or RG knew it was wrong at the time. Although I did not know anything of that incident, I did know that the feeling at the time was that Max had tried to engineer some kind of rebellion. Of course we realize that the truth is much different now, but I doubt that RG or BP could have guessed the truth at the time. And this impression of mine is based on my reading of Jane's account.

[OBW]

I see your perspective. I never suggested that outsiders had a hand in everything that was going on in Houston.

But there were always things that the scripture taught that did not square with ministry teachings. Or with the practice, which was considered right, was out-of-sync with certain teachings which were also considered right. So how were those made to coexist? There was some kind of contradiction of one that used an overlay, such as "its not about right and wrong, but the spirit" or "deputy authority is always right."

These kinds of things are an insidious control. You become entrenched in a world that is contradictory but are given a reason to accept it. Since outsiders will not go along with the contradictions, you become isolated and at the mercy of those providing the contradictions. And in terms of control, it has begun at a low level. The comments about the leadership really deals with the fact that they, even at dates in the 70s, knew the whole story — or more of it — and had to deal with those who were trying to be more "absolute" for the LRC and might recognize the contradictions. So they were given things to say that would make it better. The things that put the contradiction front and center, but provided a reason to accept it. The less absolute were willing to ignore some of the contradiction, not because they didn't see it, but because they thought something else was more important and a little stupidity could be tolerated.

But if we always looked at the single thing put in front of us "today" and accepted that as a discrete truth, then looked at its contradiction on another day and then accepted it as a discrete truth, we may simply have never realized the contradiction. So if right and wrong are unimportant, only the spirit, then how do we reconcile that the mind set on the Spirit, walking by the Spirit will fulfill the righteousness (the "right") of the law. For many, they just don't think about it that way. For those that do, they end out like AZ, frustrated at the contradictions. Yes, he was probably happy with a few back in the late 70s, but became thoroughly frustrated with them by 89.

But even in the 70s, it began a level of mental control. Then the events in Berkley, Chicago, Houston, Austin, Anaheim, and others at Memorial Day started a move of control. The exertion of authority over the elders started then. Then the following year, when they chased off Max, it was increased. We did not see it. But the elders did.