Moving On - Children of the Children of God

Hi Jules,

This material was sent to me by some anonymous young people in the Family. They gave permission to distribute the file as is. The material may be of interest to your readers, so please post it on www.movingon.org if you wish. Readers may download the file and circulate it, as long as they respect the authors' wishes that all three letters remain together and unedited. The James Penn material mentioned in the file can be downloaded at www.geocities.com/magicgreenshirt

*****

Below is a letter some of us Family young people wrote to Mama. Thought you might be intrested in her reply which is also included below. Permission granted to post and/or forward if desired (as long as all 3 letters remain together and unedited).
____________________________________________

Dear Mama and Peter,

My name is C. I love you both and admire you and Peter for the people that you are and the monumental task that you have to do. I was very relieved to hear that your eyes, Mama, have been feeling better. I admire you for having persevered so long despite your "thorn in the flesh". I continue to pray that your eyes will heal completely and your dizzy spells will subside.

To begin with, I would like to apologize for the anonymity of this letter, but I hope that after I explain, you will understand my reasons for this.

I am writing you, Mama and Peter, on behalf of a group of Family SGA's and YA's of various nationalities. We all know each other in some way -- either in person or over the Internet. Although we all have some things in common (i.e. serving the Lord in the Family all our lives) we all have different backgrounds and were raised on different fields. Some of us live in the same Homes; others have been in communication via email with each other. Some of us are married, others not. Some of us have children, others do not.

Most of us are very thankful for the way we were raised, and realize that if it wasn't for the Family we would not be the people we are today, nor would we have some of the high moral standards we have today.

What is written below is a compilation, if you will, of thoughts, battles, questions, and yes, perhaps even some things that could be labeled as 'doubts', that my friends and I have had. There are many instances throughout the text where references to "I", "myself" or "me", do not refer to me personally, because the portion was inserted as is. Some of the inserted portions are more impassioned or emotionally charged than others, but I've included them in order to give somewhat of a balanced portrayal of how we feel. Although I have changed a few words here or there for the sake of clarity and readability I haven't given these comments and questions a slant of my own or altered their intended meaning in any way.

As for our reasons for writing anonymously:

I would have to say that the first and foremost reason for this is that we do not want to have whoever reads this see us as some sort of "spokespersons for Family youth", "resistance movement" and other such tripe. We do not want to be looked on as a gang for people to join or to add their murmurs or bitterness on to, we are just a group of random friends who have similar questions. Nothing more, nothing less.

Second: Unfortunately, it seems (and some of us have witnessed this, too) that there is a lot of stigma attached to a person voicing such questions, even if they are presented in a sincere undoubting manner. He or she is labeled as a "doubter", "sower of disunity" or "tool of the enemy" and the like.

Third: We prefer to assume anonymity for our own protection from people who would misunderstand our motives in writing what we have.

We apologize for any inconvenience this causes you and pray that you will understand what we have to say regardless of the nameless/faceless source.

I'd like to add here that I have read parts of the latest 'Conviction versus Compromise' series and I realize your not going to be very happy to get a letter like this right now. Maybe I'd even be excommunicated if you knew who I was. But please understand that at least I -- I can't speak for anyone else -- am sincerely seeking answers to these questions. Maybe I just missed something somewhere, but I don't recall these issues being addressed elsewhere in specific terms.

One of the first reactions you might have upon reading the comments and questions below is that there is an underground revolt and rebellion going on; that a few young people and YA's have banded together and have a hidden agenda to overthrow the Family and undermine its members' faith in leadership. You might think me some sort of ringleader or a spokesperson for my companions. Please believe me when I say that none of these are the case. I am simply compiling a lot of thoughts, questions and concerns that my friends and I have.

I do not believe that we are 'the voice' for all young people in the Family. Who knows, perhaps we are voicing some of their unspoken questions, but we do not delude ourselves with the idea that what is written here speaks for all Family members our age. These are question that each of us (my friends and I) has battled with -- some for several years, others more recently.

As for myself, writing this is not an easy task, much less a pleasant one. I actually don't know why I, out of all of us, have ended up writing this. I am by far not the most outspoken person and conveying my own or other people's thoughts through writing has never been my forte. Actually, it has taken me several months to compile the letter since I first started. However, I'll try my best and I'm sure the Lord will help me present this clearly.

I just had a panic that another thought that may cross your mind is that maybe I am not a Family member at all, but rather some antagonistic outsider trying to pose as a Family SGA and so there's no point in answering. I completely understand this concern, given the circumstances. I guess you'll have to have faith that I and those on whose behalf I am compiling this, are who we say we are - just as we are expected to have faith in you and your Staff, Mama, although we've never met you personally or seen photos of you.

Without any further ado, below are some of the comments, notes and excerpts of letters written by my friends and I, which I have added as a sort of introduction to the questions below. I have compiled these from personal emails, conversations, online chats and even some unfinished letters to you, Mama, and have tried to organize them in such a way that, I hope, will help paint the picture more clearly.

--*--

(From C., SGA)
During our lives in the Family, many of us have heard about situations and incidents in the Family, Family leadership, WS, and even in your Home, Mama and Peter, that we have had to battle with ever since. In many cases we have witnessed, or experienced these situations in our own Homes or fields. Some of us have been battling with these questions for many years, wrapping them, as you've taught us so often, in a bundle of faith, laying them on the shelf and trusting God to take care of it for us. The truth is, for many of us those bundles are still on the shelves and for some, the shelves are not capable of holding any more bundles.

More recently, there have been the Web postings from James Penn, Ed Priebe and others that have discussed the going-ons in areas of the Family, in most of these cases the WS Family, which the average CM member has never even heard about, much less known existed.

The reasons for why and how we got hold of these materials varies and, frankly, is neither here nor there. The fact is, things were said about you and Peter that have put you in a very bad light. Although we do not agree with everything James Penn and others have written -- and many of us feel that much of what was said is subjective no matter how well presented -- many questions and accusations which were made against you, Peter, and your staff still remain unanswered.

--*--

(From T., SGA)
In his second posting, "All of These Things Moved Me", James Penn writes:

"Why don't some Family Members just ask them outright. The whole issue could be resolved in five minutes if someone would just do it. Do what normal people would do; ask the obvious question and demand a straight answer."

As a Family member, I take offense in that statement because he insinuates that we are not "normal". But that's not the point here. The point is: Questions were asked, accusations were made, stories were told.. and there was silence. And James makes a valid point on this -- "Silence like a cancer grows".

Sure, general answers and explanations were given, but the main accusations to which answers were challenged of them (Mama, Peter and WS) remained largely unanswered, and still do. James asked a number of very specific questions and they went unanswered or the answer that was published didn't hit the nail on the head.

To me, this is like a lawyer of the accusing side asking a suspect on the witness stand a direct question and the suspect instead begins debating the definition of a word used in the question, vilifies the lawyer and then lets people attest to how good a person he (the man on trial) is and how sweet, kind and loving he is, etc. After all the suspect's verbiage is over with, the simple fact remains: The question wasn't answered. In a normal court of law, the suspect would be held in contempt of court if he refused to answer a direct question (unless, of course, he pleaded the 5th amendment).

--*--

(From S., SGA)
I was expecting a "wham bang, sock it to the Enemy with the truth and prove him a liar" type of answer, so, in all honesty, what was published left me very disappointed. I had faith in you, Mama and King Peter. Faith that these things were not so. Faith that my loving shepherds could not be capable of such things. Faith that, for the sake of the sheep and putting the record straight, you would answer the allegations against you with clear, direct answers. Faith that you would stand up and proclaim the truth boldly and call the Enemy's bluff.

Sometimes I wonder. If I feel this way about your response to these allegations, what about some of my peers in the CM Family. I certainly know other people my age who believe that the way you handled answering James Penn's allegations was the best way it could have been handled. But I also know of others, both CM young people and adults, who don't know what to make of the whole situation and are confused by it.

As for me, I want to fight by your side and defend you. But how can I do that if I don't know where you stand?

I love you both very much, and want to serve the Lord in the Family until He returns. I want to know that what James, Hart and the others are saying about Dad, you both, and your staff is all a fabrication; a figment of their imagination. And, if it isn't, I would like to know that my loving shepherds have the guts to admit they were wrong, apologize, and we all go on serving the Lord together. Whichever it may be, I just want to know that I can stand behind what you, Mama and Peter, are saying and doing with 100% conviction that I am doing the right thing.

I've found in my life that it's easier for me to accept a correction or advice from someone and apologize to them if I know that, would the roles be reversed, they would apologize to me, too. It just helps to put that human face on them, to realize that we all make mistakes and to see the Lord in each other. I may not necessarily get along with that person so well, but knowing that certainly gives me more respect for them.

--*--

(From T., SGA)
I know that Mama and Peter said in both "Stay on the Wall" and "None of These Things Moved Me" that they don't have the time, neither has the Lord shown them to answer these accusations one by one. But I think that's, in effect, avoiding a direct challenge. To me, it made them look like the cat got their tongue and they couldn't face up to what really happened. Explaining it away with "The Lord told us not to get into this" just didn't cut it for me. If this is new policy for Family members to say "I heard from the Lord on this and he said I shouldn't discuss it with you", then, hey, I could wiggle my way out of ever having to confess or deny anything.

Mama and Peter are being challenged. James made direct attacks at both of them. He challenged them in his letter with his "Say it ain't so, Joe." When you're challenged like that you either say in a husky male baritone voice "It ain't so", or you say "It IS so! I'm sorry. I was wrong.", but you don't just keep quiet when you're challenged like that. It makes them look like they got caught red-handed. And what's worse is when they try to change the subject and avoid the simple yes-or-no answer to a direct, yes-or-no question.

--*--

(From J., 20)
I feel so helpless when guys like James Penn write stuff and throw accusations at the Family or at our shepherds and I don't know where we stand on this. I would LOVE to be able to say with full conviction, "Get lost, buster, You're full of shit!!". That would be so cool!! But then, when there's little or no feedback or counterattack, you're kind of left wondering, like "What's going on here? I thought none of this was true. Why don't they say something in answer to the real questions?"

I know it may not be my place to defend the Family or WS on this stuff, but I just keep thinking about that verse, "Be ready always to give an answer to every man that asketh you" (1 Peter 3:15 - my dad drilled us on those references. :) )

I thought that maybe the whole "Our Side" series would take care of that and there'd be testimonies from all sorts of people who where there when it happened and could say, "No, that's not how it was at all!! Here's some specifics of how it actually happened." But it was all general stuff, like "Mama and Peter are good people", or with Mene's case, "It was all done in love." So I'm like, "OK .. but that's what my OC teacher told me when he spanked me with headphone wires for something I didn't do." (Not like I'm still holding a grudge against my OC teacher about that, by the way. :) ) But it still doesn't answer the real questions. It just sort of put a band-aid on the huge open wound.

--*--

(From S., SGA)
I really had no interest in reading any of the James Penn letters even though friends and relatives had repeatedly offered them to me. I figured that I really wasn't interested in being hit with more doubts than I already had and there was no reason to inflict that on myself. But then the "Our Side" series came out, and to be honest, it offended me so much to read page after page after page of "glorify Mama and Peter" that it probably had quite the opposite affect that was intended. I had no idea what accusations James had thrown out about them, but after reading so many pages exemplifying how wonderful our shepherds are, I thought for sure he must have said the most vile, evil and unconceivable things imaginable. So I went and read his letter to find out what in the world could have been said to cause such an extremely vitriolic and defensive reaction.

That's when I was truly shocked. Not shocked by what he said, because I've heard it all before -- and worse stuff from going through court case material, and it never affected my dedication. However, I was sincerely shocked -- almost horrified at the reaction to what he'd said. No serious accusations were answered and the whole series seemed like nothing but a subterfuge -- a distraction from the true issues being presented -- A vilification of the accuser and a living canonization of the accused. It's also clearly evident that most of the people who stood up for Mama and Peter either hadn't a clue what was actually in James' letter (not having read it for themselves) or that they'd just quickly skimmed over it. There were so many misstatements and generalizations in referring to James' letter that it almost made him look like a persecuted hero the way he was "torn to shreds" by people who had no idea what they were talking about.

It's all great and fine and dandy that Mama and Peter are wonderful people. Sometimes wonderful people do bad things, too. Nobody is perfect and I don't think anyone expects Mama and Peter to be perfect either. But I do think that people expect honesty -- especially from Mama who has preached honesty from the rooftops. The silence on the issues that were raised just kills me. It has cemented into my subconscious the idea that these things really did happen exactly as stated in the accusatory letters. But that's not even the worst of it. I've always believed that some of the accusations thrown out had an element of truth to them, otherwise the testifiers would've been thrown out of court for perjury. But yet, I still believed in Mama and Peter because like I said, nobody is perfect. But it's hard to have faith in someone (even the imperfect) if they're not willing to 'fess up to their mistakes - or even just clarify the inaccuracies. And basically this whole silence issue says, "Guilty as charged, but I'd like to cover it all up, publish a ton of material telling you how good I am to distract you from the issues, and then hope that you'll forget about it just like you always have so that we can go on with life like nothing ever happened."

--*--

(From R., SGA)
I'm always hesitant to write them (Mama and Peter) with direct questions because I always feel like I'm gonna get pages of prophecy telling me that I'm too low on the totem pole to be concerned with such matters -- in a nice way, of course. Either that or I feel that the answer will just be a general "GBY, we're praying for you during this difficult time your going through." Or that they won't reply and I'll be left hanging.

Or, like what happened before. I wrote Mama with some specific questions I had about the prophecies in the latest GNs and all I got was, "File received safely. GBY!", or something like that. That was 2 years ago and I still haven't heard back from them.

So I just feel that if I ever wrote them something direct like that, all I'd get back is a non-committal answer like "We've answered all this stuff before." or, "Here are a few pages of prophecies from Dad on why you should have a change of attitude and shouldn't be reading material like this, Honey." or , "We plead the 5th." Or maybe I wouldn't get any answer back like the last time.

Or like happened in the case of that sister who wrote in and said, "I feel like all the latest GNs have been about the Law of Love". They almost picked that sentence to shreds when they replied, in effect, "Well, actually it hasn't been ALL of the GNs, only a few, and here are statistics to prove it." I think that all this sister was trying to say was that, to her, it felt like all of this stuff was harping on the same subject because she was going through these trials at the time. All she needed was probably just for someone to say, "Look, I know how you feel, but you're doing the best you can. Don't worry about it. It'll be clearer in retrospect." It just doesn't do any good to pick apart the letter and find fault with how things were worded

I think I'm old enough that I don't need a lecture or prophecy on doubts and their evil fruits. I know about that already. It would be so nice to just get some simple black and white, 'Yes' or 'No' answers with very little explanation or justification, and then let the chips fall where they may. I think that as a member of the Family, a group for which I've given all of my life thus far, I have a right to know the answers to these questions.

--*--

(From C., SGA)
We understand that you and Peter are very busy people, Mama, but we are expecting to hear something back. We expect that you will answer these questions, especially if, as so many people have said about you, you are wonderful people with nothing to hide. On the other hand, we also feel that we as members of The Family who are expected to follow you, your leadership and your connection with the Lord unquestioningly and loyally have a right to know these things. So, as much as this sounds like a threat -- and it really isn't, but there's no other way to word it without it sounding like one -- if we get vague, incomplete, general answers to these specific questions, we will, as you have diligently taught us, "ask again". If we fail to receive a reply or continue to be given the run-around we will post this letter and it's reply (or lack of it) on the Internet untouched and will send it to everyone we know. Because as we said, as Family members whose loyalty is pre-requisite to staying in the Family, we have a right to know whether these things be so, and if they are not, we'd like to know that, too.

Trust me, the answers, whether affirmative or negative will not shake my faith. What I found most disturbing about the accusations leveled in James Penn's, Ed Priebe's and other people's letters were that the accusations were not answered or confronted leaving me with the feeling that yes, they did happen but you are hoping to just sweep the issues under the carpet and hope they go away. True leadership takes responsibility for its actions -- whether true or allegations. To side step the issues would irresponsible, hypocritical and would put you in the same category as Bill Clinton.

--*--

(From R., SGA)
It's like Dad always said, "Why explain? Your enemies won't believe you and your friends don't need an explanation anyway." But I think there are times when your friends do need an explanation.

QUESTIONS:

1) Was Dad, or any member of WS involved in trying to influence the coup in the Philippines and attempting to destabilize the Philippine government?

2) While at Dad's house, was Mene ever beaten until she was black and blue, or until she vomited or fainted?
3) During her time of living in Dad's house, was Mene ever tied to her bed during the night?
4) Did Maria ever jokingly comment that she would like to throw Mene off the high wall of the Hilltop compound and then bury her?
5) Did Peter ever give Mene a spanking in front of a group of WS staff members and/or visitors?
6) Did Dad ever accuse a Family member of being demon-possessed, when in fact it was later discovered that they needed serious medical attention?

7) Did Dad ever perform oral sex on Mene?
8) Did Dad ever have contact with Mene that involved the touching of her genitals in any form?
9) Did Dad ever have sexual contact (involving genitals) with his daughters, Deborah and/or Faithy?
10) Did Dad ever have regular or irregular sexual contact (involving genitals) with minor girls (in this case, we'll say under the age of 18) in his house?

11) Was Dad on cortisone for the last few years of his life?
12) Was Dad's character or personality affected in any negative way by the medication (if any) he was taking in his later years?

13) Was a "dead men talking" prophecy received in your Home or in WS from Art Linkleter while he was still alive?
14) Have there been other cases where a prophecy given for or by celebrities contained obvious inaccuracies.
15) Has a prophecy ever been withheld from being printed because it was tainted or a false prophecy?

16) Is it true that a member of WS tried to obtain false passports for members of Dad and Mama's Home or WS, and the result for this person was time spent in prison?

17) Why weren't these questions/accusations answered before?

--*--

We look forward to hearing from you. Please don't let us down.

Much love and prayers,

C.
_____________________________________________

Below is Mama's reply to the above letter, followed by one more from a Family young person.
_____________________________________________

Letter to Anonymous YAs and SGAs from Mama and Peter-24/10/01.

Dear anonymous kids, wherever you are,

God bless you! We love you. Thanks for sending us the compilation of your comments and thoughts. It's good to know what you're thinking, and we've been praying for you. We're sorry to hear that the James Penn and Ed Priebe material has been such a burden for you. As much as you won't like it, with this letter you won't receive the answers you have asked for. That will be a disappointment to you, but we'll try to explain why we will not answer, not even if you keep asking, and there are very legitimate reasons why. If you choose to post your letter and our response on the Internet, that's perfectly fine; in fact, maybe we'll post it ourselves, for all those who have similar questions.

To begin with, we're sorry you feel that none of the accusations from James Penn were answered. Others feel differently. We answered the ones we felt we could answer, and the most obvious accusations that we didn't address specifically were any dealing with Mene. We didn't address what James Penn said about Mene in his first letter, we will not address what he said about her in his second letter, and if he writes again, we will continue to ignore that point. There are two reasons for that, and if you can't understand them, then you're not the smart kids that we think you are:
1) As we said in "None of these Things Move Me," Mene has moved on. She's a grown woman, living in the United States, and she has her own life to live. Maybe you think she doesn't mind James Penn and people like you opening up her past for the whole world to see and examine and criticize, but we believe it's counterproductive. It's unnecessary and it will only open old wounds. We have officially apologized to Mene. We have said the book is closed, and that's it. We believe she, too, wants it left closed.
It's a funny thing. Young people are notoriously private. Even the young people that live in our Home whom we have a very sweet and close relationship with, would probably die of embarrassment and be extremely offended if any tiny bit of information about their personal sex lives or past were broadcast to even those in our Home, whom they know, trust, and love. To breach their confidentiality is a big deal, a real bad thing in their eyes. I think this is a pretty common quality in most young people. But then again, maybe not, as you young people don't seem to feel there's much wrong with delving into alleged very private experiences of a woman that's out of the Family--mind you, things that happened, let's see, almost 15 years ago--but which seem to be very much public domain and free to be discussed and explored at will amongst young people who are complete strangers to her. So I might be misreading this confidentiality question with young people. Maybe you're not so concerned about keeping your private lives private, considering what you're willing to broach publicly about someone else.
2) For obvious reasons, to get into any of the questions James Penn asks would be a legal nightmare. That's not to say those things are necessarily true, but just to address such dicey subjects in print, in today's climate, would be extremely delicate, and could put the whole Family at risk. Any time past actions have been addressed, apologies given, changes in policy made, it has required extensive consultation with lawyers and a tremendous amount of prayer. We do this, not because we have anything to hide, as you say, but because we as the shepherds of the Family are responsible for the security and safety of the Family.
It would be extremely negligent for us to, out of pride or because we feel sorry for people who can't put these accusations behind us, get into answering all these accusations at the risk of giving our enemies, the anti-cult movement, irresponsible media reporters, etc., more material to twist, pervert, distort, and thereby cause a lot of legal problems.
You probably aren't thinking about this, since you might not have been directly involved in it, but we have endured very long-lasting court cases where we were falsely charged. These caused a tremendous amount of pain for parents, children, and many Family members. It was terrible! It was time-consuming, nerve-wracking, and expensive! And whether you like it or not, we want to avoid that happening again if at all possible.
And you know what? Even if we were to answer these questions, and there were nothing at all illegal in our answers, and they were carefully scrutinized by lawyers--which they'd have to be--that still doesn't mean we would be safe from possible persecution because of answering your questions, because those who fight us are always looking for something new, something more that they can use to whip up some anti-cult sentiment and create a frenzy and cause us trouble. And even if it never amounts to anything in the end, still, it wastes a lot of time and money and can hurt a lot of people in the Family.
Did you know that as soon as the first James Penn letter was written, it was immediately scooped up by our enemies as they tried to introduce it into one of the ongoing cases against a Family couple? It's like, "Oh, hooray, here's something juicy. Sounds good, looks bad, let's go!" It amounted to nothing, but it still took our time and attention. Frankly, we have better things to do.
By the way, have you considered that James Penn knows we will not address the Mene issue? We made that clear in "None of these Things Move Me." Therefore, he then ventured to write another letter with more accusations. I suppose he felt he could say anything he wanted, knowing full well there would be no rebuttal.
Speaking of security issues, there are a few people who could write a few things about James Penn that I'm quite sure he would refuse to answer too. But we'll let that ride for now.
Okay, so that's that on the subject of Mene.

There are other subjects you ask about. You're not going to be happy about this, but we're not going to answer those either. The reason being is that some of the questions are fairly straightforward, some are very complex, some are doctrinal, and some could be security risks. Again, it's like the Mene questions. It's not that saying something is a security risk means we are guilty of illegal activities, but as many people know--at least those who have been personally involved in any actual court case--once something is in writing, every minute detail is important, the wording is crucial, and even innocent actions can be misconstrued. So to answer those questions would be extremely time-consuming, and like I said, we'd need to consult lawyers etc.
Well, maybe these questions are deal-breakers for you. Maybe they're the most important things happening in your lives. Maybe in spite of the huge challenges before the Family right now, where we're fighting for our future and working hard to get back to the level of dedication as outlined in the Bible and Letters, you still want to focus on these things of the distant past. That's okay if that's what you want. But Peter and I cannot. Even if we wanted to, we cannot, because we are swamped with timely work. We're busy trying to win the world for Jesus.
Now, that probably sounds like a miserable excuse to you, but for Peter and me, it's legitimate. Everyone has to make choices as to how they spend their time. We could probably spend a huge majority of our time answering apostates' accusations if we wanted to. In fact, the "Conviction vs. Compromise" series landed on Barney's web site within days of posting it on the MO site, and there is a whole flurry of complaints against us from former members. If we were really interested in defending our position at every opportunity, we could spend days, weeks, or months answering people's complaints, gripes, accusations, etc. But we're not going to do it, and we won't be intimidated by apostates. They won't be telling us how to spend our time, nor will we take more of our valuable time going back in time. It's ridiculous.
Right now there's a lot happening, today and in the future. There's the revitalization of the Family through the "Conviction vs. Compromise" series, which took months of prayer and seeking the Lord to prepare to publish. There's the launching of the boards, which took years of prayer and planning and seeking the Lord! There's the upcoming board workshops, which Peter needs to prepare hours of explanatory videos for. There's the upcoming Family Feast 2002, which we're praying about now. And those are just the majors. That's just the tip of the iceberg.

Now that you've received this letter--all you anonymous young people and any who feel the same--need to take this into consideration and make your choice. If getting those questions from James Penn answered is really that important to you, considering what I've told you, then I guess this isn't the place for you. I'm not threatening. I'm just being realistic. We won't be answering these questions, so now it's between you and the Lord. I'm not upset that you asked, and everyone has their right to their priorities and opinions. But I'm just trying to help you count the cost. And if the "Our Side" FSMs, which people other than Peter and myself were responsible for creating, bothered you that much, then that's another thing for you to seriously consider.
Everyone is making decisions now. Everyone is re-evaluating their place and what they want to do for the Lord. Each of you will need to do that too, so it's good you wrote when you did and that we could write you back, so you can take this answer of "no answers" into the equation, and if it's a deal-breaker, and you can't continue in the Family as a result, that's okay. We pray for you and hope for the best. If you can accept this answer, that's fine too. Really, we're not all shook up about this. It's a pretty straightforward situation. You made your position known; we have made ours known. Now you decide.
As you know, every man must give account of himself before the Lord. Each of us will have to stand before the Lord and give account of our own deeds, not another's. Bear in mind, however, that it's not going to be much of an excuse if you were to say to the Lord on that day, "Sorry, Jesus, I didn't serve You because Dad did so-and-so," or "Sorry, Jesus, I left off from being a missionary because Mama wouldn't tell us if Dad did so-and-so." The Lord will judge you according to how you live your life, not according to how Dad lived his!
We love you no matter what you decide.

Much love in Jesus and David,

Mama and Peter.
______________________________________________

Response to Mama's letter from Family young person:
______________________________________________

To Mama and Peter From C. - December 10, 2001

In response to Letter to Anonymous YAs and SGAs from Mama and Peter-24/10/01, received November 17th, 2001.

Dear Mama and Peter,

(Unlike the first letter, which was a compilation, this is from me and only me.)

Thank you for taking the time to answer our letter. I know you are busy people, so I appreciate it a lot. I think most of the others do, too.

Your response was not disappointing for me. In fact, I was almost expecting something along those lines. Hey, once you've received a few hundred letters from someone, you have a pretty good idea of what their thought pattern is like. Your reasons for not answering our questions are entirely your prerogative and I (we) respect that. Although, being the 'smart kids that you know we are' (your words, not mine), we know it doesn't take a lot of intelligence to understand that there are few to no legal ramifications in denying a false accusation. The trouble only comes up when there is some element of truth involved and you have to explain your side of the coin. So even though our questions weren't directly answered, indirectly, they were, and I thank you for that.

There is one point of your letter that I'd like to comment on, and that is where, speaking of confidentiality & the questions about Mene, you said, "To breach their [young people in your Home's] confidentiality is a big deal, a real bad thing in their eyes. I think this is a pretty common quality in most young people. But then again, maybe not, as you young people don't seem to feel there's much wrong with delving into alleged very private experiences of a woman that's out of the Family--mind you, things that happened, let's see, almost 15 years ago--but which seem to be very much public domain and free to be discussed and explored at will amongst young people who are complete strangers to her."

I personally find this comment rather amusing considering that it was you, Mama, who those 15 years ago was responsible for publishing the very intimate and private details of Mene's thoughts, feelings and personal battles for the whole Family to wade through & it has been your words put in print that "demonised" or "stigmatised" her in the Family for the years that followed. Even after all this time, just the name "Mene" has very negative connotations to it for Family members. Also, I doubt that knowing as much about a person as the average Family member has come to learn about Mene from the Letters makes them a "complete stranger". -- But, that's just semantics and not worth getting into.

It's also quite obvious from our questions, at least it seemed so to me, that we are not "delving into alleged very private experiences" of Mene, but rather calling into question alleged actions forced upon her. There IS a difference.

But as far as delving into Mene's past goes, our questions didn't bring any new issues to surface that haven't already been made very public by either Mene or Sara D. (you and/or Dad being responsible for the publishing of Sara's writings). James Penn didn't "shed new light" on the whole can of worms, he only claimed to be an eyewitness confirming that the things Mene had been saying were mostly, if not completely true. Your reply to Mene's allegations in the past has been, "Who are you going to believe, a crazy girl or God's Prophet". (I'd like to be able to quote you verse and chapter on that, but the Letter has long since been edited out of public existence). I took you literally and figured that of course all of Mene's accusations were lies & that she was a nut case. Now as I look back as far as my young memory can recall, God's Prophet never had a reply to Mene's accusations either (or Deborah's for that matter) & there are people (James Penn and others) claiming to verify that at least some of what she was saying was the truth -- hence, the questions.

I'm happy enough that the book has been closed as far as Mene is concerned, and hey, if it spares her any more humiliation, that's great that you refuse to answer questions. I'm glad that the policy on public humiliation has changed.

As far as all of the other questions go, well, like I said above, although not addressed, they were answered to some degree. However, I can think of quite a few reasons why getting specific answers would be very important to some people - particularly those of us who have been born and raised in the Family, fed "Life with/of Grandpa" from the time we were learning to read and who have had our entire belief system established by the ideals of one man. (When I say belief system I'm not just talking about our 'unique' faith or Family doctrines, I'm talking about the way we see and relate to EVERYTHING - from the world around us to the World above us).

For some people it does make a difference and it's not a trivial difference. It's easy to throw out one-liners and say that someone left the Family (I won't say "stopped serving the Lord" as the two are not synonymous) because "Dad did so& so" or because, "Mama wouldn't tell us if Dad did so & so". It's true, as you say, the Lord will judge me by how I lived my life and not by how Dad lived his. But let's face it. Dad has influenced us all in a very large way. We learned everything from him; from how to wipe our butt to how to hear from the Lord. His life became our world. We saw the 'outside world' through his eyes. We trusted without question that the tiniest word he uttered was from the Lord. So regardless of whether we wanted to or not, how we have lived our lives has been completely influenced by how Dad lived his. Get it?

For some people, such as myself and my friends who are trying to understand or come to grips with what they believe, why they believe it and what it is based on, these things do matter and it's a "mattering" that goes very, very deep.

Sincerely,

C.

End of e-mail

Reader's comments on this article
Add a new comment on this article
from SeanSwede
Wednesday, November 07, 2007 - 08:14
(Agree/Disagree?)

CRYSIS IS UPON US

Let Thy light and blessed influence

be shed upon this affliceted land.

Pity the evils which we suffer under

the power and tyrrany of war.

Help us to see that suffering delivers justice.

Harken to our prayers and provide a remedy for our clamities.

-2007 Electronic Arts Inc. -
(reply to this comment)

From Fish
Wednesday, November 07, 2007, 09:42
(Agree/Disagree?)
No.(reply to this comment)
from Corpus Outreach
Wednesday, November 07, 2007 - 07:29
(Agree/Disagree?)
Some feel the 'sons of God going in to the daughters of men' is simply speaking of the sons of those who 'were righteous' [from the lineage of those who were not rebelious, at least until they went in unto the girls!] There is doubt to the commonly espoused idea that Angels could in any way have sex with humans, how in the world can a spirit [angel] cohabitate with a human?
(reply to this comment)

From Corpus Outreach
Wednesday, November 07, 2007, 07:34
(Agree/Disagree?)
It's me! The comment on 'sons of God' was for the cool pack atricle a few comments down. I am having trouble getting my comments in the right spot!(reply to this comment)
from sim44
Thursday, July 26, 2007 - 07:49
(Agree/Disagree?)

I don't regularly visit this site, but my son is on a warpath gathering info on the family. When I read this I was happy to hear family young people expressing themselves. I had to write a comment when I saw the article about Art Linkletter and the false prophecy which I really don't remember or have a clue about. I met Art Linkletter in Snowmass, CO a couple of weeks ago. A healthy 95 year old who spoke to a crowd of 2500 on the side of the mountain. He is involved in the environment and is on the board of the largest solar panel manufacturer in the USA. He has just written a book called, "Make the rest of your life, the best of your life" which although geared towards baby boomers, certainly would be a good motto for all who are able to make a new life for themselves outside the family.

I personally have been out for 6 years now (16 if you count the last 10 when I was on the inside wishing to be out). At 53, life has never been better. I started a successful company on the internet and I help people with their health, through natural and holistic ways of treating their bodies. Mainly I believe that Americans do not get enough Omega-3s and supplementation is vital. I just moved into my dream home on the water. I own 7 houses and all this was from having to borrow $1000 from my parents to be able exit the family. I wish everyone who reads this, the best that life has to offer, and hope that more kids can make real choices and follow their dreams and aspirations.
(reply to this comment)
from Harikari Voodoo Vandari
Saturday, January 29, 2005 - 05:46
(Agree/Disagree?)

My comments on Karen Zerby,

(Thanks to master Slim Shady,)

"When I just a little baby boy,
Mama used to tell me these crazy things
She used to tell me I was an evil boy,
she used to tell me god hated me
But then I got a little bit older
and I realized, she was the crazy one
But there was nothin I could do or say to try to change it
cause that's just the way she was,

(AHHH!) Slut, you think I won't choke no whore
til the lying cords don't work in your throat no more?!
(AHHH!) Put your hands down bitch, Ricky didn't shoot you
He pulled your victim to his blade when she was just duped by you
(AHHH!) Shut up slut, you're causin too much chaos
Just bend over and take it slut, okay Ma?

Bitch I'ma kill you! You don't wanna fuck with me
Bitch leave - you ain't nuttin but a slut to me
Bitch I'ma kill you! You ain't got the balls to beef
We ain't gon' never stop beefin I don't squash the beef
I better kill you! you'd be another liar dead
for poppin off at the mouth with shit you shouldn'ta said
.. I said you don't, wanna fuck with SG's (cause why?)
Cause SG's, will fuckin kill you (ah-haha)
I said you don't, wanna fuck with SG's (why?)
Cause SG's, will fuckin kill you..

Bitch I'ma kill you! Like a murder weapon, I'ma conceal you
in a closet with mildew, used rubber, your porn pubs and film you
Buck with me, I been through hell, shut the hell up!

Your's truly,

(And I give you D- for you're bullshitting skills.
(reply to this comment)
from cool8pack
Saturday, January 29, 2005 - 05:36
(Agree/Disagree?)

Another scriptual backdoor that Berg always promoted was how the sons of god took a fancy to the daughter of men, *&^%^'d them and had giants running around in the land.....check out the below:

Berg wrote:
In paragraph 19, he gave what he believed was a Scriptural precedent: “If the sons of God, or the angels or spirits of God, could have intercourse with the dreamy daughters of men and thereby have children who became giants and mighty men of old, why cannot the sons of men have intercourse with these beautiful spiritual daughters of God, these Goddesses of His spiritual Heavens, the symbolic spirits or Heavenly Queens of each nation? (Gen.6:1-4)”

The daughters were daughters of heathern tribes. They spawned modern day devil worship and the Hebrew for giants is fallen ones. Giants, the Nephilim (http://www.houseofnephilim.com/) --- doesn't sound too kosher to me...

Jamieson, Fausett & Brown
The First Book of Moses,
Called Genesis Commentary by ROBERT JAMIESON

CHAPTER 6

Gen 6:1-22 . WICKEDNESS OF THE WORLD.
4. giants--The term in Hebrew implies not so much the idea of great stature as of reckless ferocity, impious and daring characters, who spread devastation and carnage far and wide.
(reply to this comment)
from xbytejp
Saturday, January 29, 2005 - 03:42
(Agree/Disagree?)
How do we know this is genuine?
(reply to this comment)

From ErikMagnusLehnsher
Saturday, January 29, 2005, 06:59
(Agree/Disagree?)
You could probably ask Maria and I imagine she would confirm it. Keep in mind, the fact that you read it here might put you in the "doghouse" if you are still in the TF.(reply to this comment)
from Shaka
Sunday, February 01, 2004 - 22:09
(Agree/Disagree?)

Hey "Mama"!

If it wouldn't be too much trouble, could you please take your mouth off of Peter's cock and ANSWER THE FUCKING QUESTIONS!!!!!!!!!!!

Taking the 5th ain't gonna cut it anymore. You can't hide all your life. You've always said that what you do will come back to you, and you know what? That includes you, bitch!

Don't think that your excuses will keep us from finding the truth. You can run but you can't hide. Your pathetic little "Endtime Army" will collapse on itself, burying all of you. So go ahead, enjoy your moments of power. Dictate people's lives. But no matter what, YOU WILL NOT WIN THIS FIGHT!!!! The rage that is growing against you is much larger than you.
(reply to this comment)
from Virginia
Friday, February 07, 2003 - 02:24
(Agree/Disagree?)
Wow! I'm nearly lost for words. Although Kerby's reply to thy YAs and SGAs letter didn't surprise me, it brought out a lot of anger and only confirmed the contraditctions that were the source of my "doubts" and one of the main reasons I decided to leave TF. Like C. says, Mene's private life was hardly sacred to Kerby, as we saw in the publishing of the "Mene series" and is, I believe, just the sort of thing these young people are wanting her to confirm or deny, only in this case it's evident. Another thing that got me boiling was were Kerby says that they can't be bothered to answer these "accusations" since they have much more important things to do like, "fighting for (their) future and working hard to get back to the level of dedication as outlined in the Bible and Letters". I think they missed something there. The whole idea and reason a lot of these people want these questions answered is so that they can know that their dedication is in the right place. You can't expect people to be dedicated (especially to the extent that is expected in TF) to someone who won't answer to accusations, and who expects you to "have faith" and believe that it's all lies, or, if it's true, it's not relevant. Yes, we all make mistakes and if Kerby gave an official appology to Mene, then there were things that happened and that called for an apology. It would be putting the whole Family at risk to address these things, but maybe they really are "deal-breakers" for a lot of people. Maybe they are "the most important things happening in (their)lives" and if that is the case, if these kids life and dedication to TF is balancing on whether or not DB really did do all these atrocious things, shouldn't they then be addressed? Don't these people have a right to know what really went on?
(reply to this comment)

From Virginia
Friday, February 07, 2003, 05:06
(Agree/Disagree?)
That would be Zerby, now wouldn't it!?! ;-)(reply to this comment)
from bobo
Friday, December 27, 2002 - 01:59
(Agree/Disagree?)
I can answer the questions, (some)...

QUESTIONS:3) During her time of living in Dad's house, was Mene ever tied to her bed during the night?

Yes, he orders family members to do that in the 'Mene' letters.

6) Did Dad ever accuse a Family member of being demon-possessed, when in fact it was later discovered that they needed serious medical attention?

Yes, Mene.

7) Did Dad ever perform oral sex on Mene?
8) Did Dad ever have contact with Mene that involved the touching of her genitals in any form?

In the letters published the two mentioned in James Penn's letter He says, "We shared our bed with you!"

9) Did Dad ever have sexual contact (involving genitals) with his daughters, Deborah and/or Faithy?

Yes. I've read from him and Faith in print on this. Just do a search on Faithy in the Home Arc. He says he slept with her and another girl at age 12 in the camper. See "little girl dream" where he tells the world of his dream of fucking a 10 yeart old!!!! Faith also admits this in an FSM when she says she remembers as a little girl having her father put her to sleep by "rubbing her front".

10) Did Dad ever have regular or irregular sexual contact (involving genitals) with minor girls (in this case, we'll say under the age of 18) in his house?

I'd say yes. He says in Heaven's girl, "Why didn't she have sex with us when she was a teen?"

13) Was a "dead men talking" prophecy received in your Home or in WS from Art Linkleter while he was still alive?
14) Have there been other cases where a prophecy given for or by celebrities contained obvious inaccuracies.

One was recieved from Priscilla Presley who said she was sharing with someone else in heaven, not Elvis, or Elvis was sharing with someone, not her. It was pointed out that Priscilla was still alive and when Maria was asked she said, "Sorry, we didn't catch that!!"

The whole Abrahim, Cathars thing is historically inacurate. Just do websearches on these topics and you'll see!

17) Why weren't these questions/accusations answered before?

They know that it would incriminate them. Can't say "NO!", though that would be lying. Child-sex is condoned, see "Devil hates sex,"Revolutionary Sex" "My childhood sex", "Teen Brides" "Marrytime", "Davidito Book", "My little Fish", etc, etc, etc...but not lying.
(reply to this comment)

From Baxter
Thursday, March 11, 2004, 08:59
(Agree/Disagree?)
The Cathars as a religious movement stood for everything that Berg was against;to them, Christ was never made flesh because the physical world is corrupted and God would have nothing to do with it. They preached sexual abstinence, not sexual freedom, and as for going for gold-they believed childhood was a sin because as far as they were concerned, propagation of human life was propagation of evil. They even practised anal sex to avoid pregnancy (for those who could not abstain)- the term 'bugger' comes from Bulgar, where most of the Cathars hailed from.

Of course, this is not an isolated instance of historical deviance for the purpose of propaganda. Most of his opinions on history- i.e. T.E Lawrence, Cromwell, etc. were based on films that impressed him in some way. Academically, accepting a historical surmisal from this man was like recognising the History of the World by Britney Spears as scholarly.

(reply to this comment)

From Joe H
Thursday, March 11, 2004, 14:15
(Agree/Disagree?)

Baxter, you're right that Berg was wrong about the Cathars. Unfortunately, you're wrong about them too. I looked up bugger in the dictionary and, sure enough, it comes from Bulgar, but the etymology doesn't really support your butt-fucking Cathars hypothesis:

bugger

\Bug"ger\, n. [F. bougre, fr. LL. Bulgarus, a Bulgarian, and also a heretic; because the inhabitants of Bulgaria were infected with heresy. Those guilty of the crime of buggery were called heretics, because in the eyes of their adversaries there was nothing more heinous than heresy, and it was therefore thought that the origin of such a vice could only be owing to heretics.] 1. One guilty of buggery or unnatural vice; a sodomite.

Also, the same dictionary gives the following tidbits for Cathar:

Cath·ar n. pl. Cath·a·ri (--r) or Cath·ars

A member of a Christian sect flourishing in western Europe in the 12th and 13th centuries that professed a dualistic belief emphasizing ascetic renunciation of the world and was condemned by the Church as heretical.

Notice the words "Western Europe"? I think most of us would agree that Bulgaria is in Eastern Europe. Furthermore, I wouldn't expect to find abstinence and anal sex being practised in the same religious group. Don't you have to be pretty liberal and open minded to be into anal sex? Seeing as how your idea that the Cathars were Bulgars has turned out to be untrue, perhaps you'd be so kind as to back up the rest of your "facts" on the Cathari movement?(reply to this comment)

From Cathars
Thursday, March 11, 2004, 17:10
(Agree/Disagree?)
Joe, from what I've read about the Cathars, the anal sex thing is correct. Actually, they believed in any kind of sex that did not procreate, so homosexuality was what they promoted most. I guess if people couldn't get into the same gender thing, anal sex was their option. The absitinence part is news to me.(reply to this comment)

From Kirschy
Friday, March 12, 2004, 07:03
(Agree/Disagree?)
Some historians claim that the word bugger came from the Gnostic group Bogomils who did in fact originate in Bulgaria, but are named for their leader, Bogomil (obviously) and not for their nationality. While the cathars are believed to have originated in Germany and moved west, the Bogomils begin in the east and spread to Russia as well as towards the west and served as a connection between the sects in the east and west.
As you mentioned, many Gnostic scholars have said that, in fact, it was not sex that the Bogomils considered sinful, it was instead the act of bringing more sinners into the world, for all men are wicked. Therefore they would have no qualms about their followers performing anal sex, so long as there was no chance of reproduction(reply to this comment)

From Wolf
Thursday, March 11, 2004, 22:30
(Agree/Disagree?)
How do you know this isn't Catholic BS? Not that I care what the Cathars were like.(reply to this comment)

From Cathars
Friday, March 12, 2004, 00:01
(Agree/Disagree?)

Considering that the Catholic church was responsible for writing most of the history about the Cathars, it's impossible to know what is BS and what is not. By the same standards it's impossible to know if the books contained in the New Testament are Catholic BS or not.

The Council of Laodicea purposefully rejected numerous books for the Cannon. Mainly those that contradicted the notion that Jesus was divine and were Gnostic in form. Historians generally conclude that Christianity originated from Gnostic sects within Palestine.

The Catholic church: Fodder for the world's greatest conspiracy theory.

(reply to this comment)

From Fox
Wednesday, January 22, 2003, 19:19
(Agree/Disagree?)
As far as not knowing where you stand, that is an understatement. You don't know where you stand, who it is you stand for, or even what you are. Poor abused little children. How many time would you like Moses David to give it to you in the ass? I'm sure he'd be happy to give it to you if he wasn't bent over a fire pit in hell. He has no time for you anymore. He's been promoted to satan's muse.
Anyways, read the bible for yourself, then tell me where God or Jesus promote adultry or excuse fornication, you sick, twisted fucks. Wake up to real life. There's so much more out there than grampa's penis, as far as the ontological arguement goes Moses David failed in his attempts of reasoning. He is a fallacy and his reasoning is deluted with demonic intervention. I reccomend any C.O.G. member, if they can break away from their confusion for a moment, try reading books written by true Theologians, Astrophysicists; I could recommend a few authors. Any books by Grant Jeffry or Hugh Ross PH.D. are a couple of my favorites; hell, there's more truth in The X-Files than anything I've ever read from Moses David, the dead pedophilia with drunken dillusions of grandiose, "sometimes life is stranger than fiction," as the band, Bad Relilion, put it. I just wish I was the last thing Moses David saw before he died. For all you, stay truelly free, be an original, be an individual, God made you to be so. Smoke out and have fun, life is short and long.(reply to this comment)
from tommyknocker
Sunday, October 06, 2002 - 13:47
(Agree/Disagree?)
True or not? Does it matter? Is it what we want to hear?
(reply to this comment)
from Still sheep
Saturday, October 05, 2002 - 08:48
(Agree/Disagree?)
I would think that being in the Family has taught all you one thing: question the source. Obviously I was mistaken. You blindly accept this anonymous letter as the truth just as most of you blindly accepted the letters. You don’t even know who wrote this or who responded to it. You have no way of verifying that information yet all feel free to comment on the merits or lack thereof of this letter. You're out of the family. So what? You still haven't learned to question what is shown to you. Has anything changed? Grow a brain people. Just because it is anti-family doesn't necessarily mean it true.
(reply to this comment)

From thepersoniamnow
Wednesday, November 20, 2002, 21:22
(Agree/Disagree?)
I actually know the people personally who wrote the letter and was there when they received the response from Mama.
This letter is quite famous within the Family and although it wasn`t altered and published (as was the one I alledgedly wrote) you probably would find alot of familymembers who have seen it as its been widely distributed.
As for what the fams taught me...well one things for sure, I spend less on toilet paper than anyone in the building due to my training as a kid.
Thanks Berg!

(reply to this comment)

From IMC
Thursday, November 21, 2002, 01:47
(Agree/Disagree?)
"I actually know the people personally who wrote the letter."

Do you now, Daniel?(reply to this comment)

From IMC
Saturday, October 26, 2002, 19:19
(Agree/Disagree?)
There's no need to question the source. The proof of the veracity of this letter and the reply by Maria is the fact that it was mentioned in the Grapevine. It's not anti-Family. It just asks questions. In my opinion, the only people who would call this "anti-Family" or who think that questions are bad, are those who are still in.

If you have any more questions on this letter, feel free to ask me. I compiled it and sent it to Maria.(reply to this comment)

From Granite
Wednesday, January 22, 2003, 00:17
(Agree/Disagree?)
How long did it take you to come up with Maria and Peter's reply?
You burn your last thread of legitimacy with stuff like that.
Come on, if you're gonna fight at least fight fair.
Or, if you're gonna keep making things up, then you're gonna have to make it sound a little bit more authentic and not so much like yourself talking.
Really, the things that "Zerby" replied in "her" letter sounded a lot more like your mockings then anything I've ever heard her or Peter say.
Come on stop being so obvious.

(reply to this comment)

From loch
Friday, March 12, 2004, 00:27
(Agree/Disagree?)
Yeah, i'm sorry, but having just left two years ago, I still have maria's preaching style ringing in my ears, and that sounded an awful lot like her.(reply to this comment)

From Hydra
Wednesday, January 22, 2003, 15:39
(Agree/Disagree?)
Granite, it's blatantly obvious from your posts on this site that you have not been reading the Letters like all good Family members should. If you had, you would realize that Maria's reply is authentic (as confirmed by her in the Grapevine) and that the GN postings quoted on this site (those that contain letter numbers and paragraph numbers) are, indeed, verbatim from the printed GNs (more likely copy and paste).

I have no problem with someone not reading the Letters -- in fact I highly recommend the act. But I do have a problem with someone ignorantly claiming to have read them and calling the God honest Family-fucked-up writings forgeries. Do you have such a high regard for the Family's writings that you cannot recognize what they really are when it smacks you in the face?

If you doubt the veracity so much, why not take the trouble to look up the facts for yourself in Family publications before spouting off your ignorance and making yourself look like a fool?

(reply to this comment)

From Granite
Wednesday, January 22, 2003, 23:41
(Agree/Disagree?)
So, Mama's response as quoted in this article was printed in full in a Grapevine? Could you please give me the number? I'd like to look it up.(reply to this comment)

From thepersoniamnow/Dan
Thursday, January 23, 2003, 00:32

From Jules
Thursday, January 23, 2003, 00:01
(Agree/Disagree?)
She did not reprint her response, but Karen Zerby commented on this email and her response in Grapevine #127.
What she said was posted here: http://www.movingon.org/article.asp?sID=1&Cat=9&ID=227#1157
Please do look it up and let us know, but I received this GV personally firsthand, so I can guarantee it's legitimate.(reply to this comment)

From -
Thursday, January 23, 2003, 00:29
(Agree/Disagree?)
You can always count on Jules to have a full "lit" library. Shit, must be scary when you know their own teachings better than they do...(reply to this comment)

From SmellsARat
Wednesday, January 22, 2003, 01:35
(Agree/Disagree?)
Granite, are you still a Family member? You sound like you've been hiding under a rock.(reply to this comment)

From clare
Wednesday, November 20, 2002, 20:15
(Agree/Disagree?)
let's hope that you are still not in that cult(reply to this comment)

From porceleindoll
Tuesday, October 22, 2002, 08:02
(Agree/Disagree?)
I wouldn't mind verification for this letter, but the question is, who do we get the verification from? Since we obviously don't know the names of the anonymous young people, the only person mentioned in here that we could actually verify it with is Maria Zerby, and do you think she would do that for us?

I do believe she or her leadership or some representative has been invited here, why don't they take up the task of finding out since we obviously don't have a link with the prophetess, being the backsliders that we are. Since it is obvious the Family leadership is monitoring this site, I wonder why they haven't mentioned anything about this being a false 'response'...

If it is proven to be false, then I will denounce it as well, until then, I believe it stands as a true report.(reply to this comment)
from Hanna_Black
Friday, September 06, 2002 - 08:57
(Agree/Disagree?)
...and all they said was "blah, blah blah".
I can't believe that Mama answered that!! It's incredible! Finally someone has the guts to ask some real-life questions and expect a real-life answer and they evade it!!! I don't get what in the world she means when she says that "answering the questions would waste time and money and hurt people in the family!" ??? It might hurt people to find out that those things were true, at least partly if not completely.
Plus, if they spend all that money on their stupid Summits and whatnots, why not spend some money on clearing their name? That is, if they have a name they can clear...I doubt it!
(reply to this comment)

From clare
Wednesday, November 20, 2002, 20:20
(Agree/Disagree?)
exactly HB. She's a fucking evasive, totally guilty worthless blind cunt(reply to this comment)

From Jerseygirl
Friday, September 06, 2002, 10:23
(Agree/Disagree?)
My feelings exactly HB! If you get some answers let me know.(reply to this comment)
from hope
Thursday, August 22, 2002 - 13:29
(Agree/Disagree?)
Is this for real?

The above missive from Maria & Peter is such a bold-faced insult to Family members. They have dodged these important questions like a bad politician or a sleazy lawyer, and thereafter threaten judgment from God if members leave.

If there is a God, he/she is certainly not judgmental because these sleaze-bags would have been dealt with a long, long time ago.

Moreover, these repugnant excuses for humans continue to lead (by direction and by example)their followers into lives of continued immoral and criminal behavior.

Anyone who has accepted the above letter as a valid response to these young people's concerns (my parents probably included) are out of touch with reality and/or just too scared to face the facts before them.

Finally, one who lives under the tyranny of Maria & Peter as a mindless zombie is a FOOL not a MISSIONARY!

(reply to this comment)
from C
Sunday, August 18, 2002 - 19:24
(Agree/Disagree?)
I'm not sure if James Penn monitors this site, but if so, I would like him to know how much I appreciate the things he has written. He has lended credibility to our stories of abuse. He has confirmed what he saw Merry Berg endure. That was much needed after the smear campaign the COG attempted against her, when she was still a child, no less. He has exposed the COG from a position in their own inner circle, which he once occupied. He has put forth letters and information in a logical and reasonable manner. He has posted the COG's own publications on the internet which expose them for the child molestors they are. Thank you James Penn! Thank you for speaking up concerning the abuses of a whole generation of children when the COG has repeatedly tried to deny them. What you have written, James Penn, has been very helpful to people you have not even met. Please, do not let the COG dissuade you from doing what you know is right.
(reply to this comment)
from mind
Friday, August 02, 2002 - 09:02
(Agree/Disagree?)
Meet Karen Zerby, the ultimate "girl who wouldn't."
(reply to this comment)
from Lauren
Sunday, March 10, 2002 - 08:24
(Agree/Disagree?)
On the subject of the "Silence that Screams", maybe it’s about time Ms. Zerby started practicing what she preaches.

Here’s a quote from her most recent “purge” series “Conviction vs. Compromise” that so ironically fits her and her refusal to discuss the issues:

“But how can lying, covering up, being deceptive and actually leading people astray through half-truths, omissions, and lies be looked at as “going everywhere doing good”? You’ll be very sorry, but the damage will be impossible to undo. Once you’ve hurt people’s faith in you by lying and deceiving them, even if not by what you say but by what you don’t say, it’s impossible to regain it. They’ll always, forever after, be thinking in the back of their minds, “Hmm… I wonder if they are telling me the truth.”” (Taken from GN960 par. 141).

Don’t we all just wish that people still in the Family could apply that instruction where it really SHOULD be applied.
(reply to this comment)

From Mat
Wednesday, January 22, 2003, 04:44
(Agree/Disagree?)
Is this Lauren married to German David? If so, Hi I lost your e-mail when my computer crashed almost a year ago. Please reply if it is you so we can write.
Mat (reply to this comment)

From Lauren
Wednesday, January 22, 2003, 15:58
(Agree/Disagree?)
My husband is German. My profile is in the web site user directory and his under "JohnnieWalker". If you recognize me you can contact me through there. I'm not sure I know a "Mat" but perhaps I knew you under a different name.(reply to this comment)

From EyesWideShut
Sunday, March 10, 2002, 18:18
(Agree/Disagree?)
We should find out what her contact e-mail is and hundreds of us e-mail her this--her own quote--over and over again! What do you think? Anybody know her e-mail? It's supposed to be common knowledge in the Family.

“But how can lying, covering up, being deceptive and actually leading people astray through half-truths, omissions, and lies be looked at as “going everywhere doing good”? You’ll be very sorry, but the damage will be impossible to undo. Once you’ve hurt people’s faith in you by lying and deceiving them, even if not by what you say but by what you don’t say, it’s impossible to regain it. They’ll always, forever after, be thinking in the back of their minds, “Hmm… I wonder if they are telling me the truth.”” (Taken from GN960 par. 141).(reply to this comment)

From JohnnieWalker
Monday, March 11, 2002, 03:41
(Agree/Disagree?)
Her address is mama@wspubs.commailto:mama@wspubs.com">mama@wspubs.com>, but I highly doubt that this is a direct e-mail address. All incoming mail most likely gets picked up by someone else, filtered, and sent via a second email account to another address where, for all we know, the messages are filtered again, and then passed on to KZ. All very "Selah".(reply to this comment)

From gringomia
Saturday, January 29, 2005, 05:35
(Agree/Disagree?)
Selah = TF code for "we are guilty and have stuff to hide.(reply to this comment)

From EyesWideShut
Monday, March 11, 2002, 09:49
(Agree/Disagree?)
Thanks. Good point, but we have to start somewhere.(reply to this comment)
from Soulman
Tuesday, February 26, 2002 - 13:36
(Agree/Disagree?)
Dear Disgusted,
I wouldn't exactly call your comments a warm welcome to this website, which I was visiting for the first time. I've been out of the Family for several years and have never read all these things about Dad that you refer to. I'm NOT saying they couldn't be true--I just never heard them. However, the other side would be, for fairness sake, that a lot of the sixty generation were saved from drugs and turned Christian. Your assumption that I still cram Dad and Mama stuff into my kids ears is as false as can be. I had my own experiences that drove me out of the Family. To those anonymous young people who are still there I would suggest that instead of trying to change something that can't be changed into something better....take the proper consequence and move on, like I did! And "Disgusted", to you I'd suggest that you forget all you learned in the Family about rebuking people and learn to be a little more kind and tolerant, otherwise there won't be many people visiting your website! Greetings from Soulman
(reply to this comment)

From Disgusted
Wednesday, February 27, 2002, 21:23
(Agree/Disagree?)
Soulman,

In all fairness, the part about waving the Black Book at your 10 year old was going too far. I got carried away. It was an undo assult on your character and you have my sincere apologies. You sound like a decent person--just going about your life with issues of your own to deal with--and I have nothing against you personally. The fact that you fianlly left speaks volumes for your sanity. Ha!

However, factually speaking, this site is focused on the 2nd Gen X-members, and 99% of us have major issues in regards to those times which you look back on with warm and fuzzy fondness. As someone said, it's no consolation that your peers "quit drugs and became Christians". Since leaving, I've taken a close look at the "church people" and find that many of them practise the kind of Christianity that was probably inteneded. In contrast to that, we (SGA's)grew up in a religion that was a strange mixture of contradictions that changed with every whim of a perverted, drunk, borderline communist, pissed off, sex mongering, paranoid-schitzophrenic. But that's just what I think.

If you would like to read what I'm talking about regarding Berg's not so secret life, you can find the articles at magicgreenshirt. I'm not sure of the exact URL. It's on here somewhere as a link.

Berg's own step-son confirms the veracity of everything in those articles.

Yet, the ideal is to believe what you want to believe. That is the essence of the error in the Group, if nothing else. So if you have reason to love the man you call "Dad", please, go right ahead. Just expect us to "agree to disagree".

Kind regards,

Sunny James(reply to this comment)

From Ian
Wednesday, February 27, 2002, 12:58
(Agree/Disagree?)
"Saved from drugs and turned to Christian" - Is that supposed to be an accomplishment. The only Christians I know are people that couldn't hack life any other way and really need to feel like they are special. Every accomplished pro I know(artists, doctors, lawyers, musicians, scientists, businessmen, programmers) gets "high" every now and then.
Just because you freaked out in the 60's and dropped bad acid 20 times in a row because you were to stupid to fugure it out doesn't mean that everyone needs to be saved from drugs.
Do the math on this issue, on one side you've got hundreds of abused kids and on the other you've got some former junkie that feels better about himself while passing out leaflets and begging for donations. From that perspective perhaps it wouldn't have been so bad if you would have never got on that bus. Nothing personal, just don't justify fucking up my life to save yours. Next time "Just say no", besides drugs aren't that bad anyway, I certainly like them.

"Do not taunt happy fun ian"

(reply to this comment)

From Lance
Wednesday, February 27, 2002, 13:37
(Agree/Disagree?)
Word Ian,..word ::takes hit from the bong::(reply to this comment)

From Jules
Tuesday, February 26, 2002, 15:38
(Agree/Disagree?)
Don't take it personally Soulman, but you are not welcome on this website. This is for people who were born in the Family, not those who chose to join. Don't despair though, there is a happy home for people like you on the internet: www.newdaynews.comhttp://www.newdaynews.com">www.newdaynews.com> I suggest you go and interact there. They also have links to other exmember sites where you will be welcome.
Thanks,
Jules(reply to this comment)

From cool8pack
Friday, December 19, 2003, 14:02
(Agree/Disagree?)
Cut the guy some slack...that is just his experience in life...he's been there...done it...got the tee-shirt...and moved on...like this webiste man...move on - or just stay there! chill out man - wanna share my bong?(reply to this comment)

From mat
Wednesday, January 22, 2003, 04:58
(Agree/Disagree?)
You must have been really hurt by your experiences in the F or maybe you were having a bad day of something when you write your reply but emotional, hateful get lost mail does not lend credability to what should be a factual and free to express ones opinions site. If the creators and managers of the site do not want any postings other than second gen ex members then it should be officially stated on the home page. Bye the way, this is just my opinion but if this is only for 2nd gen ex's then you risk placing yourself in an exclusive deminishing world where you are not open or tolerant to others experiences or opinions and your perspectives will become very narrow. Sound familiar?(reply to this comment)

From PompousJohn
Wednesday, January 22, 2003, 10:10
(Agree/Disagree?)
Hey Mr. Manners, here's a repost from the homepage:

"Welcome to Moving On -- The website created by and for young adults with parents who joined the religious organization The Family / Children of God."

Are you a young adult? Did your parents join the group?

Do you also have a habit of walking into women's restrooms and then complaining that you're not welcome there?

Maybe you're a draft-dodger who likes to whine about not receiving veteran's benifits?

Jules set up this site in her free time, runs it in her free time, (no small task) and hosts it at her own expense.

Most of the rest of the internet is for idiots like you, run along and bore someone else with your opinions.(reply to this comment)

From Matt
Wednesday, January 29, 2003, 12:27
(Agree/Disagree?)
Sorry, did not read the home page. Don't see the point in getting personal though??(reply to this comment)
from Jules
Monday, February 11, 2002 - 06:51
(Agree/Disagree?)
From Karen Zerby to members of the Family regarding this compilation:

Dear Family,

Peter and I love you so much. We pray the board workshops and first board meetings are going very well. This is a monumental time in our history, and we know the Lord is going to work wonders. We are supporting you all in prayer and calling on the keys of the kingdom for your inspiration, health, safety, fruitfulness, supply and protection.

As you know, the Lord said in the Convictions Versus Compromise series that there would be more apostates, more "stories" about us or WS that would test your faith, so it shouldn't be a surprise that there is an e-mail circulating that has raised some questions from various people. This e-mail consists of a letter from a group of anonymous SGAs who wrote to me demanding that I answer various allegations, many of which they gleaned from James Penn's second letter. I wrote a short response to these young people, which was sent back to them personally, to the anonymous e-mail address that they provided.

One of them has now taken it upon himself to send an e-mail to various Family members in different parts of the world that consists of the anonymous young people's letter to me, my response, and this young person's commentary on my response. We have received numerous complaints from Family members about this intrusion of their privacy, as many of them don't know this person who is sending the e-mail, and they wonder how he got their address.

There has been some speculation as to whether this letter is “legitimate” and why it is being sent the way it is. The answer is that yes, I wrote the short reply. One of the young people who wrote in is sending this around, not your area officers or Peter and me. This is by no means an official WS mailing.

This e-mail file is quite draining, as you have to wade through quite a bit of material from apostates' accusations, which is never inspiring. My letter doesn't really offer much new information; it's mostly saying the same thing that has been written in "None of These Things Move Me" GNs. Of course, Peter and I are not forbidding you to read the e-mail compilation if you receive it; you can if you want to. But when we prayed about it, the Lord said that He would prefer that you not deliberately waste your time or allow yourself, out of curiosity, to be dragged through all that negativity and those doubts again that have already been addressed by Peter and me.

God bless and keep you feeding deeply of the Word, so you can put on the Lord's mind and focus on the power! There is so much to do to win the world, let's get busy doing that and keep our eyes looking straight ahead, on the goal! We love you and are praying for you!

Much love in our Miracle-working Husband,

Mama
(reply to this comment)

From patijo
Friday, August 29, 2003, 22:30
(Agree/Disagree?)

What a fucking joke. An insult to the intelligence of the guys who sent her that letter. Does she think they are going to take that NON answer and continue to blindly believe in her. She basically said it is ALL true. "You are not going to like this, I am not going to answer blah blah" Shut the fuck up. I hope all those guys who wrote the letter, (by the way, BRAVO,) are long gone. What a load of bull shit.

Does anyone have a way to e-mail her, I have a thing or two to tell her??(reply to this comment)

From john
Wednesday, November 20, 2002, 20:24
(Agree/Disagree?)
"miracle working husband" suck my ass. What fucking freaks. (reply to this comment)

From anonymus
Tuesday, October 22, 2002, 00:12
(Agree/Disagree?)
how typical... I dont mind at all, but we asked the Lord, and he said "...-insert main thought-..." now I might not like it my self but the lord said it....(reply to this comment)

From Soulman
Monday, February 25, 2002, 20:14
(Agree/Disagree?)
Well...don't know how I got into this but somehow this website was furnished by my son. In reading Mamas' comments it is nothing new: Do away the critis by ridiculing them as apostates. Don't know how Dad would look at this: Didn't he say that it's important to take criticism? The Family is weakening by the hour now and rapidly so...it started when Dad departed and none has been able to take his crown. And thos ewho were supposed to failed and are not able to admit taht they lost control..still desperately tryin to hold the power. I still love Dad, but it's been sad to see the tearing down of the Family that's been done by the ones who took over the Family after Dad. There would be a ton more to say, but this was just a short reaction to what I just read from "Mama".(reply to this comment)

From patijo
Friday, August 29, 2003, 23:49
(Agree/Disagree?)
"STILL LOVE DAD"? What dad? The worst example of a Dad I think I will ever know. Get off this Site!! He did everything short of murder. Whould you like him going down on your 10 year old daughter? I would fucking kill him--FUCKER. I have 2 great kids and The best thing I ever did was decide to raise them out of that cesspool. He is burning in hell. And hope his hell is extra hot. (reply to this comment)

From Heather
Wednesday, January 22, 2003, 13:51
(Agree/Disagree?)
Reaction?? Hello!!! This isn't the COG!! No one has to write "reactions" anymore! LOL! Get a life! And you may have "a ton more to say" but no one wants to hear it! (reply to this comment)

From cyber_span
Wednesday, November 20, 2002, 20:26
(Agree/Disagree?)
Soulman, you "still love dad." Get a fucking life. I bet your one of those creeps who actually joined, rather than was born into that cult. Loser.(reply to this comment)

From Disgusted
Tuesday, February 26, 2002, 04:22
(Agree/Disagree?)
I don't believe that any of us young movingon.org members accept or agree with anybody that "still loves Dad". "Dad" was the seed and sap of a very sick tree, and those he so carefully trained are just following in his footsteps--the blind leading the blind. "Dad" abused young girls, "Dad" became sexually aroused by spanking young girls. "Dad" had some serious mental issues--seeing and fucking spirits, being oppressed by the same spirits, thinking the AC hated his saggy ass more than anybody elses! Whoever you are, friend, the list of that man's weirdnesses and offences is endless. Let me just say, you won't get no love here if you love "Dad". I know your type. You think Mama is the one that took the Family off course and you're still reading the "MoLetters" wishing thing were like the old days, quoting the Black Book at your 10 year old. Your type got us into this mess in the first place! Go home!(reply to this comment)

From Lance
Monday, February 25, 2002, 23:48
(Agree/Disagree?)
I think that you need to reevaluate just the way you look at this person you call "dad." What "dad" said was important varied often. "dad" was a lunatic and an autocrat, so it makes sense that his other half is a complete nut job. She was already deranged when she joined, "dad" only complemented her eccentricities. (reply to this comment)

From Lauren
Wednesday, February 20, 2002, 15:43
(Agree/Disagree?)
So when KZ said in her letter to C., “If you choose to post your letter and our response on the Internet, that's perfectly fine; in fact, maybe we'll post it ourselves, for all those who have similar questions.” – what was that? Bluffing? Now that someone actually took Zerby literally and apparently delivered it to the Family in some kind of a mass email mailing, she writes to all Family members suggesting that they don’t read it. Talk about a double flip!

Unfortunately, I don’t think Zerby is “running scared” as previously suggested. She has a devout following and is trying to whittle it down to a smaller and thus more devout following. That’s why she can tell people who do care about the allegations to take a hike. She owes an explanation or at the least a denunciation of the guilty. But the fact that we get neither is self-explanatory. It’s a sad case of culpable leadership withholding information from their trusting flock, remaining mute on the issue and then allowing their flock to defend them on issues that the flock is completely clueless about.

The one thing I find offensive in Zerby’s letter to the Family is when she calls the authors of the “C letter” “apostates”. From what the letter says, C., was in the Family at the time of writing it & for all we know, is still in the Family. God only knows where all those other contributors are – quite possibly still in the Family.

Is this a befitting description of brothers in Christ? Apostasy: Abandonment of one's religious faith, a political party, one's principles, or a cause.

Somebody has gotten rather haughty and arrogant in her singling out of the inquisitive.
(reply to this comment)

From MG
Saturday, February 16, 2002, 20:00
(Agree/Disagree?)
Zerby says that this is a "short reply"...no way it's short...she's running scared.(reply to this comment)

From Kyla
Monday, February 11, 2002, 08:52
(Agree/Disagree?)
Oh, for God's sake, of course she doesn't want Family members reading it! This is what winds me up - I cannot understand how she can deny information, even if it is of an opposing view, from the people who trust her as "God's anointed"! How dare she distrust their sense of judgment and loyalty, when they have lived their entire lives trying to "uphold the standard" and follow the twisted mind of MAN!

She says "we are not forbidding you to read it - you can if you want to", then goes on to say "BUT, the LORD SAID that HE WOULD PREFER that you do not deliberately waste your time", directly insinuating that if you do, you are disobeying the Lord! And she HAS NOT addressed "all these doubts"! She has NEVER even tried to give an intelligent, straightforward answer to the accusations leveled against her and others. Instead she cowards behind "what the Lord told her to do".

Why, oh why does she not trust the members of the Family? Why does she not represent truth? Why is so much smothered in lies, cover-ups, and half-truths? If "honesty is the best policy", why is it not upheld?

Trust is synonymous with love. You cannot love someone if you do not trust them. Likewise, you cannot claim to love them if you do not trust them!

Like so many others before, another half-truth is pushed out to the (largely) wonderful people that make up Family membership, and because they truly want to "serve the Lord", they swallow it whole-heartedly. How sad.

"But whoso shall offend (or LEAD ASTRAY) one of these little ones which believe in Me, it were better for him that a millstone were hanged about his (or her) neck, and that he were drowned in the depths of the sea." (Matthew 18:6)

Watch out, Zerby! (reply to this comment)

From geo
Friday, April 05, 2002, 00:46
(Agree/Disagree?)
"BUT, the LORD SAID that HE WOULD PREFER"
kind of like the time god told moses that he prefered they dont worship idols or "waste time" having sex with animals.
did he tell zerby if he preffered blondes to brunettes, or tea to coffee...
while she had this oh so casual conversation with god(reply to this comment)

From C
Wednesday, May 29, 2002, 22:03
(Agree/Disagree?)
Bravo Geo! Such sheer and utter logic! Your sharp mind cuts right to the chase!(reply to this comment)

From Prett
Saturday, April 06, 2002, 22:27
(Agree/Disagree?)
Exactly, Geo. A long, long time ago, the Family got away from the Bible and into it's own "Word". Like the Bahai temple prophecy, they are leading themselves further and further away from what they passionatly claim they are founded on, the Bible, to making gods out of Berg, Zerby and now her new husband. It's so great that God is speaking to them on a moment-by-moment basis. It's just a wonder that He has so much to say about tiny Family policies and so little to say about The Middle East crisis, for instance. Nice to see Zerby's God has His priorities straight.(reply to this comment)

From VWBabe
Wednesday, April 10, 2002, 11:47
(Agree/Disagree?)
Exactly! This "God" of Zerby's really need to get his priorities in order. We were always told that yes, there were wars and famines and people were murdered and killed, but no, "don't blame God, it's not him, it's those people he gave free choice to". I find it so difficult to believe that this "God" can turn his back on children and innocent people who are desperatly crying out to him for help to save their lives, but has the time to tell the Zerb which way "he likes it". It's disgusting!(reply to this comment)
from Xeena
Friday, January 11, 2002 - 01:01
(Agree/Disagree?)
I agree with you Sara, that's the reason that i finally left. I couldn't raise my son in that sort of invironment. Half truths, no real medical , etc.

(reply to this comment)
from EyesWideShut
Tuesday, January 08, 2002 - 19:25
(Agree/Disagree?)
From C.'s writing I got the feeling that she was using her place and knowledge of Family double speak to mean business in Maria's eyes, so that she could assure a reply. I certainly gathered that C.'s on her way to bigger and brighter things, especially after a non-responce like the one she received from The Zerb. Sounds like some sort of alien race. Ha! Like I said, she was a clever little thing, writing like that. Makes me want to meet her. I hope she "comes out" once she makes the cut. I can't imagine that she would see any reason to follow Maria's lead once she witnessed the indirect confirmation of her "doubts".
(reply to this comment)
from EyesWideShut
Tuesday, January 08, 2002 - 03:28
(Agree/Disagree?)
Terrific! Astounding! Wish I had done that while I was still in the Family. Love the way C. worded her thoughts. Verrry clever indeed. Imagine if the whole Family started asking questions--what a wonderful world this would be!
(reply to this comment)
from Sara
Monday, January 07, 2002 - 14:21
(Agree/Disagree?)
BRAVO!!!! It was refreshing to read a straight forward letter written to Maria (refering to the second letter written). I've been a believer for some time now that nothing can be said or done to get truthful responses out of Maria or any of them, but reading this sure did confirm that. Good job in asking those questions the way you did. If you hadn't written the first letter the way you did, you probably wouldn't even have gotten a response at all.
(reply to this comment)
from Lance
Sunday, January 06, 2002 - 23:00
(Agree/Disagree?)
That article was awesome and very well compiled! I have no doubt at all that this was writen by an FGA currently living in the family, as the word and grammer structure is perfectly fitting.
I very much agree with the point that the author was trying to bring out, -or at least the way that I interpreted it, in that it is imparitive that current members of the family be properly informed about contraversial issues from the past. How then can one truely "serve the lord" with a cloud of mystery hovering over the very doctrine, structure and origins of what their supposed to believe in.
Mad props to the Author and those involved in this article! Keep up the good work and never be afraid to ask questions!

(reply to this comment)

From Lance
Thursday, January 10, 2002, 12:47
(Agree/Disagree?)
-Sorry! I meant SGA. it was simply a slip of the "keyboard", so to speak.(reply to this comment)

From IMC
Tuesday, January 08, 2002, 12:58
(Agree/Disagree?)
Being C., I can assure you that I am not an FGA. I am an SGA -- but these days, that acronym refers to a pretty large age range.(reply to this comment)

From JoeH
Tuesday, October 22, 2002, 02:40
(Agree/Disagree?)
c, you're brilliant and a great writer! Top-notch!(reply to this comment)

From Sara
Tuesday, January 08, 2002, 14:36
(Agree/Disagree?)
C., have you changed your mind about the Family now, or are do you still think that it is the best place to "serve the Lord" (if that's what you are into). Just curious, because I got the impression from your writings that you are a fairly intelligent person. And another question... I've been out since '96 so could you clue me in as to what FGA and SGA stand for. (Apparently I've really lost touch because I can't understand Family lingo anymore):-)(reply to this comment)

From IMC
Wednesday, January 09, 2002, 14:06
(Agree/Disagree?)
Good question!

Besides having been taught, like all Family members, to believe that the Family is the best place to serve the Lord, I’ve also been given a certain mindset of what ‘serving the Lord’ is all about. If I were going to continue to serve the Lord in that particular manner, then yes, I’d have to say that the Family is the best place to ‘serve the Lord’ because it’s an environment that is conducive to that particular kind of service. But from contact I’ve had with other Christians and missionaries I’ve come to realize that the picture of what service for the Lord is all about is a lot fuller.

Did my letter and Mama’s response change the way I see them &/or the Family? Not really. As I mentioned in the letter, I was already expecting something along those lines, but I had to prove it for myself. One doesn’t get around to writing a letter like that if one hasn’t been doing some serious thinking for quite a while.

However, as I make the decision to stay or leave, the issue won’t be about serving the Lord. I’ve given that question enough thought and I believe I have a clear understanding of what that entails. My decision will be weighed against the doctrines, the hitherto demonstrated lack of forthrightness, and the lack of accountability of those at the top versus what I want out of my life and what I want for my children.(reply to this comment)

From john
Wednesday, November 20, 2002, 20:32
(Agree/Disagree?)
IMC as long as your in a cult, I don't think anything you say is relevant. Get a life and get out.(reply to this comment)

From Sara
Thursday, January 10, 2002, 15:09
(Agree/Disagree?)
If the issue isn't about serving the Lord than don't you think that the only decision you really have to make is what is best for your children? I'm not suggesting that you don't make your decisions with your children's best interest at heart, but I don't see how "doctrine" and "what I want for my children" can be weighed against the other. I don't have children so I probably have no right to say any of this, but IF I did I know this is how I would feel. I also feel very strongly that the Family is NOT a good place to raise children. Children deserve the chance to become whoever and whatever they want, and that chance is not given to children raised in the Family. That, of course, is my personal opinion.

(reply to this comment)

From IMC
Friday, January 11, 2002, 15:51
(Agree/Disagree?)
Up until about two months ago, I would’ve had to disagree with you on that. You mentioned leaving in ’96, which is right around the time when most people were realizing what the Charter actually meant in practical terms. Since then, life in the Family has pretty much been a “what you make of it” type situation, meaning one’s version of events would largely depend on where they were, who they were living with and what they were doing over those years.

My premise for my children has been to give them the tools they need to fill their full potential. If brain surgery or rocket science was their thing in life, then I want to provide them the means to get there – if it means a higher education and setting up a college fund now, so be it. On the flip side, if I leave the Family, I’d like to think I would be levelheaded enough to support them if their thing in life was to join an NRM (even though my preferences would be otherwise). My point being: besides wanting to provide the means for them to fulfil their full potential, I also want to let them live their own lives and not have them be cookie-cutter productions like we were.

My first child was born a few years after ’96 so I do feel that I had control of how my child was raised and taught. If someone had come along and taught my child something I wasn’t fully in agreement with (and this includes Family publications) or began abusing my child in any way, shape or form, I had a Charter-given right to interfere and put a stop to it. I am proud of the way my children have turned out so far, and I honestly think it wouldn’t have been as easy to raise them, if I wasn’t in the Family. It provided a wholesome, violence-free, educational environment with good Christian morals being taught.

Just like most of us from the second generation, I’ve got plenty of pre-Charter horror stories to tell. Fortunately, since then, I’ve had the opportunity to experience things that most people can only dream about, and that includes most people in the Family. These are experiences that I wouldn’t trade for the world, and yet it’s very safe for me to say that were it not for the Family structure and way of life, they probably never would’ve happened. I’ve also been blessed with a full-time companion who thinks, feels and sees things pretty much the way I do. We’ve had the ability to chart our own destiny over these years and, kooky doctrines aside (which are not mandatory and thus not a complete issue in themselves) up until now my personal goals and those for my children have been perfectly attainable in the Family -- maybe even more so than out of the Family. I realise that this is not the case for everyone.

Unfortunately, paradise never lasts forever. Two months ago the ‘Conviction vs. Compromise’ series was published. In it parents are “strongly recommended” (we all know what that means), to take their children out of “outside” schools. Higher education, whether “in” or “out”, is now also frowned upon, “system jobs” are pretty much considered out of “God’s highest will” (with very few exceptions), buying or investing in property is also out of “God’s highest will” and the list goes on. These all in effect, will kill any chance my children will have of pursuing any personal goals they may have in life which are not narrowly limited to the options now sanctioned by the Family.

So this is why, for me, it all boils down to doctrines (and maybe I should have added policy) along with the other issues I mentioned earlier vs. what I want out of life for myself and for my children.

Given the circumstances, I probably will end up leaving. But I won’t make a rush decision. I’m sure no one does when they’re at this kind of fork in the road.
(reply to this comment)

From john
Wednesday, November 20, 2002, 20:34
(Agree/Disagree?)
No offense IMC, but seriously the sooner you leave the sooner you can get on with your life. Please, for your own, and your children's future.(reply to this comment)

From ntshy
Sunday, January 20, 2002, 21:24
(Agree/Disagree?)
I think you decision not to rush it is very wise. But don't take too long, as you have to start at the beginning line once you do and the sooner you start down that path the better. I myself took my time in making the decision. I have 2 children and really had to take time before leaving, I also had a husband who at the time was soon to be an ex-husband that was reluctant to leave. When I made the decision to leave with one of my children he was only one month behind me. Both of us are very successful in our own lives and work but really only have 1 regret, which is we didn't leave sooner. I think we can both say we learned a lot from our time in the group, but enough was enough. Not that I can speak for my X but we are both very happy about our decision. Not that it has been easy, especially at the beginning it was very tough - I think it was harder for him as he was getting over the divorce and all. Looking back though we are both very glad for the children's sake and ours as well.
All that to say it is wise to take your time and make sure you have everything lined up as best as you can before taking the plunge. Up till now I have not met one SGA (second-generation adult) that has regretted the decision of leaving. Just from the stand point of being a mother it is the best choice you can make for your children.
(reply to this comment)

From Amanda
Wednesday, January 23, 2002, 11:34
(Agree/Disagree?)
Your right about that, I'm also an SGA (or whatever they are calling it now)mother and I myself have never regretted the decision. The only thing I've regretter is not having left sooner. Unlike you I did not take my time in making the desicion and get things lined up, I just knew it was something I had to do for my family and I had no time to spare. I think if you wait and try and get things lined up and think about it too long you may get stuck never making the move at all. (reply to this comment)

From bintoro
Saturday, January 12, 2002, 06:56
(Agree/Disagree?)
I can definitely relate to where you are at and what you are going through at the moment. From the tone of your letter you were in leadership for quite sometime as you have seen the good on both sides of the coin. You probably have had to listen to a lot of young peoples "battles" over the years, and let's face it-it's a difficult decision to "move on" to something new when you are faced with letting go of all that you believe. I’ve been at that crossroads many times, and that’s why I started frequenting this sight-to see what other people go through. It may sound like I am a glutton for punishment and enjoy pain, but I do like being a help whenever and wherever possible, and I hope I can be a help to you. Did you ever feel that a lot of the times that you helped young people when they were going through it that the way you helped them was mainly just letting them know that somebody understands what they are going through? I was up all night with somebody once and I was the first person that she told of her plans to leave. God, I wish it didn’t have to be that way. She was so torn between two worlds, and I’m going to make some enemies here right now but I’ve got to say that there is a lot of good in the Family and some really good people. If anyone reading this doesn’t know any, then you must have stopped looking. I agree with you that things have changed a lot and I can feel that a lot of adults are more open-minded than before, and far from being mindless robots. Whether or not they will stand up and be counted is another issue, but I think it’s coming. So many of their kids have left there must be conflict going on in their minds and hearts. The education thing is an awesome “revelation” shall we call it. As well as the “system job” issue. Do you think everyone is just going to give up all of their jobs or they are going to be booted out? Is it a charter rule now that if you choose higher education that you can no longer be in the Family? Or do you think that the end result is going to be like the other revelations such as “Praise Time” (sorry for those of you that left years ago-we were asked to do a 5 minute time with the lord 3 times a day-big push that fizzled out in most places as far as know) “Loving Jesus”, the “Law of Love” etc, that all will just float to their level of faith? You know like a church revival or going to see a good concert or movie. You are really full of the event for a time, but then you kind of level off and fit all the new excitement into more of your normal routine. You are changed for a while and try it, but the only part that lasts is the part that you personally really identify with. I do pray for you that you make the right decision. Do you stay in a little longer and try to change it by really speaking your mind or do you leave before it’s too late? It's amazing how honest you can be when you have no fear of retribution or reciprocation, and that's the way it's supposed to be. Don't let the leadership intimidate you. You were one. You were one of the best young leaders. maybe God is calling you to get really honest and speak up for the weak mindless ones. Are the little doctrines worth leaving over or staying for? Will you continue to seek out a life for the Lord? Is there a better church somewhere else? Is this the endtime? Look what Noah had to go through, Moses gave up everything to suffer with the children of God. However, is God requiring us to be like Noah? Those are just a few of the millions of questions that there are. What it is going to come down to is, is this the final squeeze that is going to cause you to leave? I wished I could simply say, “go girl” like someone else did, but I know that there is a lot more to it than that. There sure is for me. You tell yourself that what you really need to do right now is pray, and that is the answer I would suggest. My prayers are with you too as you make your decision, though I think you probably already have. God bless.(reply to this comment)

From Chuutoro
Monday, January 31, 2005, 03:49
(Agree/Disagree?)
Yominikuiyo, chitto wa space irena. Thx(reply to this comment)

From IMC
Monday, January 14, 2002, 13:33
(Agree/Disagree?)
Actually, I was never in leadership. If I had been, they probably would've gotten rid of me for being too analytical.

As far as this new "move" in the Family: It would seem to me that they mean business & are hoping that anybody who is not 100% in, gets out. They won’t be sending out any new mailings for the next two months so that everyone can have time to read, re-read and re-re-read the series and get the most out of it. We’re also recommended to get personal follow-up lists in prophecy.

But how seriously people are taking it also seems to depend on things like where they are geographically, how they are doing financially, and if they can comprehend the fact that it’s not the worst thing in the world to leave the Family. If you’ve spent some 20 odd years following a certain mindset, it’s damn hard to shake it. Especially when you’ve got 10 kids and no job experience.

That’s the perfect irony of the Family: Ban system jobs and higher education, discourage family planning, take all of your time and money away & then chase you out with nothing when your belief wears thin and you’re just in the Family because you have nowhere else to go.

The whole thrust of the series is that although there are different levels of discipleship (CM, FM, Live-out, Active Member, etc.) -- those levels being determined by how exactly you want to put “The Word” into practice -- there should be no difference in their level of belief in leadership, their anointing, and what’s published.(reply to this comment)

From JohnnieWalker
Wednesday, February 20, 2002, 15:41
(Agree/Disagree?)
C., I get the feeling the 2 months of ‘no mailings’ that you mentioned is just so they can move locations or something. They must have gotten edgy about their security (again!) since so many people know they are (were??) in Albuquerque, NM.(reply to this comment)

From Amanda
Wednesday, January 23, 2002, 11:26
(Agree/Disagree?)
C; I have to say that your letter was great!!! I was glad to see someone finally ask those question straight out and by the answers she gave to me it just confirmed their guilt. They were just yes or no answers and in not being able to answer "no"......well, i guess we know the truth. I was in leadership in the family for many years and although I will never disclose my true identity on this site, I have to say that leaving the family was the best thing I ever did for my children, myslef and my husband. I hope you make the right chice.
(reply to this comment)

From JP
Monday, January 14, 2002, 20:20
(Agree/Disagree?)
The approach Maria and Peter take towards people who are not "on board" is known as "shoot the wounded." Also known as tossing the bodies off the back of the wagon -- Berg's expression -- or chewing you up and spitting you out. Common characteristics of a kindler, gentler cult.
You sure "get it," ICM.I hope everything works out well for you. It is hard leaving and starting over, but at least you are free. (reply to this comment)

From EyesWideShut
Thursday, January 10, 2002, 08:13
(Agree/Disagree?)
You go, girl!(reply to this comment)

From Peter
Tuesday, January 08, 2002, 18:40
(Agree/Disagree?)
First Generation Adult
Second Generation Adult(reply to this comment)