To get my mind off of the latest national events, I thought I would finally write another post. It’s been a while.
I read recently about the lawsuit involving TV celebrity Danny Masterson and the Church of Scientology. In case you haven’t heard, Danny has been accused by several women of sexual assault. They have brought a civil lawsuit against the Church of Scientology for stalking and intimidation that occurred after they reported their assaults to the police.
The judge in the case ruled for church arbitration, which for Scientologists and former Scientologists means something completely different than the average person. You see, Scientology has a nice catch-22 system built in for a lot of their policies, arbitration being one of them. The problem with the court ruling is that these women must settle their differences with the church through a process that is virtually impossible, according to Scientology policy. Why?
Once a person leaves Scientology, then makes the church mad or talks bad about them, there is a 100% chance they will be labled an SP (Suppressive Person). According to Scientology Policy, a Suppressive Person and a member of the Church of Scientology cannot speak to each other, which makes arbitration unachievable. There has only been ONE successful arbitration between ex-members and the church, and it took TWO YEARS to select the three arbiters who would agree to the arbitration meetings.
I found a great article about that case, which is worth a read. Here are a couple of things that stood out to me:
What Does All Of This Have To Do With Membership Covenants?
My friend Dee who blogs over at the Wartburg Watch started covering the ires of membership covenants LONG before I came along. What she found out, and I did as well, is that just like the Church of Scientology’s contract, when you sign one, it is a legal document.
I wrote a post last year about Watermark Community Church and a lawsuit they were caught up in back in 2006. You can read about it here. The moral of the story was this: when you sign on the dotted line, you had better know what you are signing up for. Here’s why…
ECCLESIASTICAL ABSTENTION DOCTRINE
I’m not a lawyer or have any formal legal training, but it’s not hard to do research to learn how the legal system works. In the case of the Ecclesiastical Abstention Doctrine, or ‘Church Autonomy Doctrine‘, it means that secular courts are not obliged to intervene in issues involving church by-laws and covenants. In layman’s terms, if you have a beef with your church or religious institution and you take them to court, the judge can shove that membership covenant in your face and send you back to them to deal with it.
In the case of the Church of Scientology, they decided arbitration was their method of dealing with people who have issues with them if they get upset or leave. Most evangelical churches defer to ‘submission’. Here is the membership covenant from Watermark Community Church:
I highlighted the section that is of most importance – ‘Following leadership in submitting myself to the care and correction of leadership should need arise.“
Wanna talk about a moving target? This is it folks.
Not living up to the standards and requirements on this membership covenant, along with anything else the leadership believes is ‘sin’ will send a member straight to the principals office to be put under the ‘care & correction’ (i.e.; church discipline) of the church. If a member doesn’t think it’s warranted or too harsh, guess what? Nothing you can do about it. Watermark Church gets to decide what, when, where and how all of this is done and you have ZERO say in any of it. You can’t even leave the church.
If you read the post I referenced earlier, you’ll remember that John Doe was behaving very badly….and by anyone’s standards he was. The problem was, Watermark (and in particular, Todd Wagner) took it upon themselves to harass Mr. Doe, in a way that was quite frightening, just like the Church of Scientology did with Masterson’s victims. Mr. Doe tried to withdraw his membership from Watermark, but the catch-22 in their membership covenant is that you can’t resign from the church if you are currently under church discipline.
It may seem that I’m singling out Watermark Church for their heavy-handed leadership, so to be fair, I’ll reference some more examples of church discipline gone wrong:
1 – The Village Church & Karen Hinkley
2 – The Village Church – Alison’s Story
3 – United Christian Church of Dubai – Todd Wilhelm
4 – Heritage Bible Chapel – Marie’s Story
Living out the 'Church Covenant'
The Village Church has graciously posted their membership covenant online with all of the details, so I’ll use theirs an an example of what warning signs to look for. If you are looking to join a church and hear the words, ‘covenant’ or ‘contract’, this is where you will need to pay attention.
Red flags are flying all over the place in just these few requirements!
If you read the story about Alison’s experience at TVC, she was put under church discipline for having a mental illness, which no staff member or TVC counselor recommended professional psychiatric help for. This is a prime example of church discipline gone wrong. She endured the process and was released from church discipline, only to be put under it AGAIN when she had issues with her community group. Thankfully, with the help of Karen Hinkley (who had her own horror story of church discipline with TVC) was Alison able to withdraw her membership.
Notice there is no list of infractions or prescribed sins that will get you into trouble. This is all at the discretion of fellow members and leadership. It is a common occurrence for fellow members, particularly in community groups, to tattle-tale on each other and report each others ‘sins’ to leadership. In Leah Remini’s series ‘Scientology & the Aftermath‘, this behavior is described as extremely common in Scientology. This type of culture erodes trust and divides loyalty. The only ones who benefit from this kind of system are the leaders.
At TVC, you are not free to leave unless you do so ‘in good standing’ and have found another church to attend that they approve of.
A shocking side note: The Village Church also encourages those who are seeking outside counseling to sign a form that allows the pastors/elders/ministers to have access to their counseling files! Imagine Matt Chandler sitting by the fire, pouring over the notes from your latest therapy session.
Don’t you just love how they give the member a ‘choice’ to see any counselor that they want, but the insinuation is that it is out of the norm. TVC has a whole network to keep tabs on it’s members. Don’t think for a second that a member seeking counseling outside of the TVC-approved method isn’t interrogated, pressured & harassed for that decision.
(Not) Breaking the law
Guess what? Church covenants are completely legal and churches who enforce them are NOT breaking the law. They can take whatever list of kooky rules they have come up with and make you obey them, unless you wake up and remember that you have a brain, your own agency, and live in a free country. Those revelations do not , however, exempt you from what they can do with your information. Unless you sat in an office with a pastor one on one or with a licensed professional counselor, your personal information is NOT protected by law, and the church can use that information in any way they see fit. This is from Watermark Church’s website:
If you happened to have signed one of these covenants/contracts, then fully engaged in the membership of the church, chances are you did a lot of confessing and sharing of personal information. It’s highly encouraged! I’m not saying it’s on par with espionage, but churches gathering all of your deepest heartfelt thoughts, desires and sins committed is some very valuable information – to you that is. They know this. They know that you have put yourself on the hook, so to speak, when you get all connected with your community group, pastors, elders, etc. It feels great, until it doesn’t.
I have spoken to several ex-members of Watermark Church & The Village Church who have said they were never more mistreated by a group of people than they were in these churches. Here’s an example from a former Watermark Church member:
Heartbreaking! Ashley apparently followed all the rules, shared what she was supposed to share, and was subsequently shamed and abused.
The moral of the story is: if you sign a membership covenant, your personal information is NOT confidential, no matter what they tell you. I’ve sat in community/life groups, women’s studies, etc. where they say, “now everything that’s said in this room, stays in this room.” Sorry, but you are going to rely on the honor system to protect your sin confession time? No thanks.
The church or any of it’s leaders/members have ZERO legal obligation to keep any of your information private. They can use your information AT THEIR DISCRETION.
You're Not Welcome Here Anymore
Last summer I was made aware of some YouTube videos by Uche Amuneke. Her channel is called Uche on Purpose. Uche is (was) a covenant member at Watermark Community Church. In 2018 she started having concerns about lack of diversity and racial reconciliation and how it wasn’t being discussed or addressed at the community group level or from leadership, so Uche followed the ‘protocols’ prescribed by the church to bring her concerns to the appropriate person, through the appropriate channels.
In case you aren’t aware, Todd Wagner doesn’t believe races exist:
In this video, Uche describes her first meeting with the Community Group Director at Watermark, and Uche’s account of the director’s response will surprise you.
Uche was told that if she didn’t like the way things were at Watermark, then maybe she should go find another church with more diversity. Oh, and it wasn’t the FIRST time this had been brought up by someone!
Unfortunately it goes from bad to worse…
History Behind the YouTube Videos
During the summer of 2020 (when the protests over the death of George Floyd were happening), Uche posted something to her Instagram story in reference to it. She eventually took it down, but not before several leaders at Watermark saw it. She was contacted by the CG director to find out what was going on. Uche now understands there other motives besides concern, but she agreed to meet with the CG director to tell her the history of why she felt this way (previous meetings with Watermark leadership 2 yrs ago).
It all pretty much went downhill from there. After only 26 days and one meeting with elder Beau Fournet, he informed her that Watermark church was ‘no longer comfortable shepherding her’ and revoked her membership!
I got in contact with Uche and she said that she had continued to attend Watermark (and her community group), even though she was no longer a covenant member,. By November, however, the church was threatening her community group’s membership, so they essentially abandoned her. I recommend watching her other videos:
My Church’s Opinion of Diversity
I Tim 5:19-25 Hi Elders! Maybe Don’t Kick a BLACK GIRL out of Church…And Then “Call for UNITY”
Calling out Racism and Hypocrisy Got me KICKED OUT Of My Church…That’s a HUGE deal.
Good for thee but not for me…
Uche posted this video (A Tale of Two Disciplinary Systems at Watermark) on Dec 1, 2020, which illustrates an excellent point when it comes to membership covenants. Rarely are the same rules enforced upon leadership as they are on the lowly giving units.
Uche points out that Todd Wagner had been under the care & correction of leadership for over 3 months before HE made the decision to step back for the sins of ‘pace and pride’ (whatever those are). Uche was kicked out of the church after only TWENTY SIX DAYS and one meeting with an elder (besides the one where he told her that her membership was being revoked). Clearly church discipline was not being enforced uniformly and I’m thankful to Uche for speaking out against the abusive leadership at Watermark Community Church. I hope she is able to find a more loving and accepting community of believers.
Final Thoughts
Tim Fall, who I follow on Twitter, wrote a great post on membership covenants titled The Problem With Church Membership Covenants. He explains why they aren’t biblical and in most cases, can be harmful, as in this example he referenced,
“The first time I heard of local churches having their members sign these unbiblical covenants was thirty years ago. One of my law school classmates told me she was leaving a church she’d been attending for years. The church elders had been telling her who to room with (several other young women from the church in the home of an older woman in the congregation) and whether she could join the military after graduation (they were not inclined to approve it). She couldn’t take the control any longer and left.
She said they considered her to have broken the covenant she’d signed with them and the leaders decided the only way to preserve the integrity of the covenant was to require church members to shun her. And the membership did, because the leadership told them to.
She lost a lot of friends.”
Unfortunately these days more and more churches are embracing these type of membership covenants, which makes choosing a church even more difficult. Pastors are embracing books like ‘9 Marks of a Healthy Church‘ by Mark Dever, never bothering to follow up with how this method of church membership is hurting many many people.
If this post hasn’t convinced you to NEVER sign a membership covenant, please read my other posts listed here:
From Recovery to Abuse: Part I
From Recovery to Abuse: Part II
The Aftermath: Stories from Former Watermark Church Members
The Aftermath Part II: Stories from Former Watermark Church Members
Family Ties: How Watermark Community Church is Alienating Families
My question is what if you didn’t sign the paper but they held a membership approval meeting without you being present and still made you a member. They’re trying to tell me it doesn’t matter that I didn’t sign because I was voted in and they want me to write a explanation by email or fax as to why I am leaving and where I am going and they’re asking me “nicely” to stay for at least a month. I am not at all interested in that. I was blessed to see things early and while I wasn’t trying to… Read more »
“Elder-Rule” and membership covenants… they both serve to concentrate power within church government. It is an authoritarian tendency that many leaders AND followers actually, genuinely are attracted to. It promises simplicity and safety in a complex and frightening world. IMO, it’s a terrible way to run a church.