Jump to content
GreaseSpot Cafe


  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


socks last won the day on March 18

socks had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

99 Excellent

About socks

  • Rank
    This space for rent!
  • Birthday 09/15/1950

Profile Information

  • Gender
  1. socks

    Revival and Restoration

    Yep. I would go with saying most churches today are a form of "religious business", and especially so for small, localized groups like The Way Nash, ie anything that calls itself a "ministry" or a fellowship and that then declares itself tax exempt. The Way was supposedly all about "the church in the home". There's no part of that which requires legal protections or definition. People meeting to do as they believe is correct, within the laws of the land - what's to declare to the government about? "God bless America" indeed. The Way Nash received "donations" from all over the country, from people meeting in their homes who basically felt they wished to give and support the work of a ministry they were being taught by. Big deal - right? Well, yes, since The Way had declared itself tax exempt it needed to answer to the government for those donations so as not to pay taxes on them as income. So being a tax exempt "church" actually required them to be as tied to governmental controls as if they were just licensed as a business, maybe even more so. Without being cynical or judgmental, I think it's just obvious and logical to recognize that when a Wafer group splits off from the main mother-ship and forms their own group and gets recognized as a "tax exempt church" the primary reason is so that money can be received to support the church operations and not get taxed. That's business. Non profit, charitable action can happen without forming a legal entity to do so. Jesus told His followers to give Caesar what he's got coming, and do the same with God. I might actually debate Him on the former, while accepting the latter, but that was His position and in many ways it makes sense. And arguably if Caesar had given a pass for traveling Rabbi's maybe He would have put in for it, being the Messiah and all though, I kind of doubt it. We do know what He said though and that He paid temple taxes. He also accepted financial support and had a close follower manage "the bag" accounts. (Who tragically but interestingly turned out to betray Him and got paid for doing so. ) In short, Jesus actually appeared to steer clear of "Imperial Entanglements" unless they came to Him for help, as did the soldier seeking help for his servant.
  2. socks

    The Way of the Wiki

    Hello BlueCord! Wikipedia may well be correct in their interpretation of their policy and guidelines. I've been through this ad nauseam in other unrelated areas of Wikipedia. I'm not sure I agree how they're describing their position but - well, take a look at a couple other entries for organizations that are very publicly labelled "cults" by many people including former members - Scientology's page opens with this line: Scientology is a body of religious beliefs and practices launched in May 1952 by American author L. Ron Hubbard (1911–86). LDS/Mormons open with this: The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (LDS Church), often informally known as the Mormon Church, is a nontrinitarian, Christian restorationist church that is considered by its members to be the restoration of the original church founded by Jesus Christ. Yet if we look up "Cult" on Wikipedia we read a very broad discussion of the topic that starts with this: And so on and so forth.... To your intent and point however, it could be appropriate to say something to the affect of the Way being considered a cult by many (for the following reasons)....etc. etc. Whether anyone believes that to be true or not, it has been a fairly consistent accusation historically since it's growth in the 70's and as such would simply be a statement of a significant fact reflecting a concern of society in regards to new religious "movements". So the logic is kind of like saying "John Lennon once said that he felt The Beatles were more popular then Jesus, given the reactions of their fans around the world to their music".....as opposed to saying "John Lennon said The Beatles were more popular than Jesus"......both statements are "true" but arguably the first statement gives more information. The Wikipedia page covers a great deal of information on The Way and in my opinion does a decent enough job - but you'll notice that while there's mention of Martindale's "sexual misconduct" and other issues, nothing's mentioned of that being an accusation made against his predecessor. VPW gets a pass on that - and that's buggy to me from a historical standpoint but - I get why that's probably the case, ashis accusations don't have any legal or formal record and Martindale's does....so a writer would be on safe ground to note LCM's history as it's a matter of court record, but VPW's problems with it such as they may have been - are not. Still and all it has become a very public part of the Way's history, of that there's no question. And while reading it I think there's a very telling few lines about the Way West and East, and the era of Jim Doop and Steve Heefner.....it's this part under the paragraph "The Way": "Some of the groups he met later incorporated as The Way East (based in Rye, New York) and The Way West (based in Mill Valley, California), groups that utilized Wierwille's PFAL class in their ministries.[10] Wierwille also recruited a number of new members on his trip, marking a period of large growth for his ministry. Wierwille later merged The Way East and The Way West into The Way Inc., now the Way International.[21][22]" That very succinctly describes what happened, and the results of what they're calling a "merge" indicates the intent of VPW to grow his ministry's assets into a larger organization. But calling it a merger is like calling a shi t storm a reason to buy more toilet paper. Clearly the writers of the Wiki page are giving VPW a pass and making the earlier history of the Way dust free, while lightly covering the later problems that more people alive now are likely to know about. Anyhoo - don't sweat it. Peace!!
  3. socks

    Wikipedia Scrubbed?

    This one?
  4. socks

    Revival and Restoration

    Hmmm. no. I'm not kidding. Was I not clear enough? Let me try again, more seriously. "So is that correct - did LCM's legacy amount to "0" for EVERYone, whether they continue to maintain some, all or any part of what they were taught by The Way....?" I'm going to put your answer as a "Yes", my question/statement is true. So far everyone appears to agree. Thank you for your response, it's appreciated. If anyone reading disagrees or has other thoughts or perspectives please feel free to respond! Thanks!
  5. socks

    Revival and Restoration

    Speaking of Refesteration and Revilery, here's a question fer y'all...lemme see if I can make this make sense...I was thinking about it after reading that one of the principles of the STFI/Truth of Tradition ministry had left and was teaching something radically different than what the group teaches. It made me wonder - would those who leave that group refer back to their roots and the points at which they left the herd by name and by date, for instance using the name of John Schoenheit or John Lynn or whomever....since they're branching off from a group that built their doctrinal platform by the hands of a few people, it would make sense if they did. It might also make sense for them to reach even further back or for that matter, to skip people altogether and just start from "scratch" so to speak, from "The Word" and not what their previous founders and bible-pounders taught. Or from some other point of reference that they consider important. Likewise, today there are groups, ministries, fellowships and otherswho are carrying forth the teachings of Dr. Wiewille, by name, both in part and whole. Refaced PFAL classes, reworked teachings and books, in whatever form, some people openly favor all or some part of "what they were taught" and are willing and ready to keep the candle burning for "What Doctor Taught".... But - I never hear of anyone referencing or building their platform from what Craig Martindale taught - and he redid the Way's "Foundational" series class....yet there seems to be a vast void of anyone who references him directly as "What Rev. Martindale Taught" or as a way of calling the fold together around something he taught in the past....it seems no one sees a point of his involvement as a milestone date or event in a positive way. And I could see why - I personally can't think of anything he did or said that's worth remembering, other than some personal communications I might have had with him, but nothing on a deeper scale. I was only involved for a short few years after he took over but others were on board with him for many years.... So is that correct - did LCM's legacy amount to "0" for EVERYone, whether they continue to maintain some, all or any part of what they were taught by The Way....? Your responses are welcome.
  6. socks

    Revival and Restoration

    That's a good recap, DWBH, thank you. So much of what I've seen as well as heard from others says that the Moneyhands are a very damaged couple who are not interested in helping much less "restoring" anyone unless it serves their own purposes. Taxiperson, you're on the right track. Remember, in the "old" days everyone used to say that The Way was....Jesus Christ, and that we were followers of the Way, of Jesus Christ, not people. That has a practical application and requires you and I actually do it, and understand that Jesus Christ was and IS the Living Logos, and it is through that Word that we understand and have a perspective of God. God magnified "His Word" above His own name, which puts the Living Word as the thing that we must live to see and follow. Men and women will always want you to follow THEM, as an aid, a means to better do that....their "ministries", so called, if given by God are in SERVICE to God's people and will always magnify Jesus Christ, making His Way clearer. Faith comes by hearing and hearing by the Word, indeed....and it's that "faith of Jesus Christ" which is complete and full and all that we need to rely on and identify with. Yes, thank God we have a written record to read and learn from - but we must always remember that the Way of Christ is straight, simple and easily intreated, not burdensome though we may choose to bear the burdens of others as Christ has our own - it's loving, forgiving and only requires that we subject ourselves to God's forgiveness, knowing that we need it - we need the broken ends of our lives brought that together and "restored" - so we can live for God. The Way was so subtle replacing the simplicity in Christ with the complexities of it's own religion, born out of The Way Corps program which ultimately drilled down into every fellowship The Way held for many years. Ultimately in order to be true to God, each person that came out of the Corps program had to divest it'self from the authority of The Way in order to make any use of what they'd learned. I for one did learn a great deal and I do not understate the value of the experiences I had, including of course the mistakes I myself made and those of others that affected me. It's far outweighed by what I gained. This in no way values bad over good, error over truth or ungodliness over true faith. However everything I am today is the sum total of what I have been and done up to this point, and it will never be the perfection that God promises through eternal life wholness, in Christ. Still I persist! There's really nothing else to do but that. PEACE!!
  7. socks

    Revival and Restoration

    I fielded a couple questions recently on this group and their communications. I only know what I've seen online but note that it's Moynihan who says - 'nothing happens without leadership, and when we have great leadership things happen greatly'.... Given the last few decades and what they've being doing, I'd have to agree - it appears obvious that In the absence of anything close to "great" leadership in the Way ... nothing great has happened for many many years, unless you count leaving being great. In which case, now that they've left, perhaps...."great leadership"....might develop? I won't develop that idea further but this is why you can't trust what so many people say. They just don't really think about what they're saying but sometimes the truth comes out anyway... Also the woman who emphasizes that the 'self governing, self propagating' aspect of the home fellowship has been "slowly taken away" is showing how blind they really are and have been. It was not slow, and for practical purposes once the 'Way Tree' was installed as a functional organizational tool that's been gone, going back to the early 70's. I would say that since Dr. Wierwille really hit the road looking to promote his newly filmed PFAL class, the organizational model of close corporate level control over everything has been in place. Certainly since the late 70's it's been impossible for any smaller ministry units like "twigs" to be truly self governing unless it's in strict "cooperation with the next higher level" of leadership. It wasn't slow by these peoples' timeline, some of them didn't even know about the Way until the 80's......edits were made to the pamphlet "First Century Church in the Twentieth" when it it went into the New Dynamic Church "The Green Book" that left out key parts of the early Acts model of growth. All classes related to the "Way Tree" and ministry outreach hammered the point of maintaining accountability to what the New Knoxville "leadership" said and did at "The Root". Allegiance to the "man of God" was promoted and the idea that you HAD to stand with him and the Way to be a "true believer" became essential long before Craig got a hold of it. (that's why Craig was able to step so easily into being a self serving Hitleresque President, the frame work already existed to keep all control within the BOT's, he just exercised it to a greater degree across all parts of the Way. ) Likewise for years and years there was a growing development of process and procedure for local fellowships to support the Way Nash by giving TO them and supporting them in all ways but little to no development of process and procedure for the Way Nash Trunk/Root level organizations BACK to support local fellowships - except in products and merchandise. The products of the ministry were books, classes, tapes and visits and assignment of Way leaders and teachers to live in areas where the ministry had work. But there was no real tangible connection to allow for the local expanding churches/twigs in a state to have autonomy amongst themselves. Everyone followed the same ministry calendar of events, parallel classes and concurrent meetings, plus attendance at all larger state and multi state meetings, reviews f the Way Magazine being done week after week, the SNS teachings being reviewed in twigs week after week - the only way or reason a local fellowship coordinator could be assured of exercising self governance was to just not tell his "next higher" level of leadership, to hide it. Which oddly was something even Dr. Wierwille advised regarding certain things....! Slowly taken away, indeed...............ah, kids, lotta things, but you gotta see it in the original to really appreciate it. It was hardly "slow" - it was actually rather quick, starting in about 1971 and moving forward from there.
  8. socks

    Athletes of the Spirit Video (from the '80's)

    Yes, that's it! A very bizarre flick, and at 11 years old, seemed kinda kinky. Wacky! AOS - We drove up with another couple for the premiere weekend showing. Stayed a night, and were back home Monday. We all discussed it for a long time on the way home - and remember we were broadly pro-the-ministry, and weren't looking to trash it. I had friends involved, and really really wanted to like it, to learn something from it, to be encouraged the Ministry was moving in a healthy direction that we could all grow with. Plus this was seeing our new Pres Craig in action and saw it to be something of a harbinger of his future. Buuuuuuuuuuut...outside of the dancers trying to do their best I thought it was a terrible production. It had no natural rhythm or flow that carried the viewer, no real story being told, no narrative quality, texture. Considering I was very well schooled in what they were trying to communicate I felt I knew less about the topic after seeing the production - seriously, the imagery was, to put it into a word, "corny" and took away from the realities being referred to. It removed all sense of horror from the reality of a rebellious adversary working contrary to God the Creator's will. It made it seem like an academic exercise - given Craig's failure and that he was about to have his defeated "Adversary" tying a plastic bag around his head while being drug into quicksand, he was being cavalier at an almost Shakespearean level. In the Way we were taught to see God as the sum of the things He does for us. We lost the magnitude of His glory, the breadth of His will as Creator by reducing it to words and definitions we could parse. We knew the greek nuances of the words that told us that God was beyond our highest perceptions but ignored what that meant and how it might affect our actions and attitudes. AOS was a perfect example of Craig's "flat earth" view of spirituality. Lacking grandeur and scope, but struggling with every wiggling drop of sweat to communicate. Anyway, I'd never show that to anyone. We never watched it back home in our fellowship. It eventually was shown locally buuuuuuuuut I barely remembered it. There was an incident on the road trip home from Ohio that has lived on our memories as one of the more hilarious travel stories we accumulated but that's another story. Anyway. Yeah.
  9. socks

    Athletes of the Spirit Video (from the '80's)

    To add: I'm sure there was but it doesn't ring any bells. It likely ran around 2 am, right after the "Shepherds Chapel" and the Bahai Events Calendar for that month.
  10. socks

    Athletes of the Spirit Video (from the '80's)

    When I was a kid going to Cat'lic school, we used to get summer Movie passes to a local theater, and it included weekly cheep matinee showings. Sold a lot of popcorn and soda, I'm sure. They would show all kinds of fringe stuff in the matinees with an emphasis on cheesy horror and sci-fi flicks. (back when there were 2 movies plus cartoons and news reels) There was a movie I saw then that I would bet you've heard of - "The Mask". It wasn't the Jim Carey movie but the plot was somewhat similar - there was this African witch doctor kind of mask that would give the person wearing it wild hallucinations, visions of alternate dimensions which of course had a scattering of weird looking women in tights and tattered colored clothing, dancing around being menacing - I don't remember all the details but I've never seen it shown anywhere since then. It was so odd - it could have been an early reference to the coming DMT and LSD movements. It was in 1961 or so I saw it, and it's now available through some streaming services. Anyway - I wonder if anyone else has ever seen it? AOS and all the undulating dancing "spirits" reminded me of that movie's look and feel when it goes into the hallucination sequences when the person wears the mask. So few have ever seen that movie it barely qualifies for cult classic status but it's really a fringe-gem. Anyway, figured you might like to know, if you haven't seen it, might be worth a shot.
  11. socks

    Anybody got the words?

    Speaking of that tune.....I re read Craig's July 1994 letter to the Corps covering the current status of his "Homo Purge". In it he added a PS that is really a commentary on his entire future as Pres' of the Way. I wasn't involved in the Way at that time, wasn't getting corps-espondence or Happy Ho Ho' Holiday cards, so I only saw this later as it was shared by others. It went out that year a month before the August Corps Week and ROA, I'm not even entirely sure if there was even one that year but it sounds like he was gearing up for a real rip roaring time in the tents that year if there was. Anyway - he notes early in that letter about VPW's "older standard" he had taught of dismissing anyone who was "caught in the act" of - well, I guess "being homo". Craig says they can no longer "wait" for that kind of thing. (I picture him pacing and fidgeting day after day at his desk, "did you get 'em?? did you see 'em?? No??!! Keep at it, we have to catch them IN THE ACT!! and GET PICTURES!) ....He ramps it down to "genuine spiritual suspicion" guiding the noses of those in "leadership"... ( I really struggle even writing that word in regards to the hose-pumps that ran the Way at that time, so I get where he's going with his sense of disgust). So the ethical rubber met the road in VPW's time only if you got caught breaking a fundamental rule of his organization. Craig is clarifying that back in the day he understood that whatever you could get away with was okay by VPW. Just keep it down, manage your stuff, take care o' business and have a nice day. He might not like it, it might not even be "off the Word" but hey. So Craig wanted everyone to get out their genuine suspect-acles and eyeball everyone for homo-nistic influences. I shudder at that thought - no unnecessary offense is intended to anyone including myself but the Way had a lot of people in the Corps who couldn't tie their shoes if they didn't have someone to tell them why and then had practiced doing it a lot...I'm not trying to be mean but it's the truth...plus a growing percentage of the "leadership" at the Way by that time were those who were too corrupt to pass up the emerging opportunities it's failure was offering...Yikes!! Knowing now that Craig was looking down the lane at a sh it storm of biblical proportion his PS to close that letter is telling - it read: "Howard Allen said quite a thing to me by way of a note the other days, when he said that he never saw Dr. Wierwille work as hard as I do to keep the household clean...." and he closed it by saying "so either get on or get scared to death and get out." Of course he didn't - why do you think that was, genius! Craig was so busy busting other people from his elevated perch of judgment that he couldn't see the irony of a man who enjoyed the privacy of his own sexual activities looking under every rock to smoke out the activities of others. Kinda bad form as that kind of thing goes, you'd think. "No honor amongst those thieves" to be sure.
  12. Hi WW. I think we can say that no, VPW did not cite his sources in a consistent, professional or scholarly way that would allow a reader of most of his work to track it. I used those three words deliberately - there are some references here and there but there is a notable absence of him foot noting sections of what he published under his name that were clearly and closely identical to other work of other writers and doing it consistently or in such a way that it would be on record. Nor did he observe professional and legal best practices in that area, nor educational standards. He did talk about them, at times. He referenced Bullinger, Leonard, etc. etc. but never in a way that credited them, nearly always making note that they had all somehow stepped into error at some point or stopped "believing" God at His Word. I think one of the likeliest reasons he did that was to support his claim that God would teach him like no other since etc. if he would teach that to others. If he referenced huge chunks of his ideas and language used to express them to others having it first it would erode that claim. The best thing he could have done was invite all critics including those he quoted, to question and negate his work if they so desired and then let the pieces fly as they might. That would have suited his two-fisted mans-man motorcycle riding personae he promoted. Instead he talked about it in ways that allowed him to "credit" them while making sure the listener understood they were not fit to judge his ultimate use of their words. Matthew 5 – "Again you have heard that it was said to those of old, 'You shall not swear falsely, but shall perform your oaths to the Lord.' But I say to you, do not swear at all; neither by heaven, for it is God's throne nor by the earth, for it is His footstool; nor by Jerusalem, for it is the city of the great King. Nor shall you swear by your head, because you cannot make one hair white or black. But let your 'Yes' be 'Yes' and your 'No,' 'No.' For whatever is more than these is from the evil one." "Honesty" is a moving target for a lot of people. In the Way it's reserved for "the truth of God's Word". Everything else to them is a "fact", unreliable and invalid. Facts are ignored and replaced by "what's the Word say?"....and of course the Word says to be honest and truthful in regards to our "facts". Jesus taught His followers to pursue honesty through clarity and performance. Say what you mean, mean it and do your best to do it. We're not going to perform a 100 per cent of that all the time, we know that, but any effort to redefine that blurs the reality Jesus led us to.
  13. I'd taken PFAL in 1969 (or late '68, sometime around that time frame) I didn't vote in the survey. I can't say how well I "know" the book. I doubt I could pass a test on any but the most obvious references. I knew Elena W and thought she was a sweet person, kind and thoughtful. I just don't remember much about the book other than it was about the Way, and covered a relatively short period of time. It's been so many years I honestly don't remember any details. I know it meant a lot to a lot of people at the time but I never really felt like it represented "me" or my thoughts and impressions, wholly and to the point I'd say here, read this, it tells our story. I don't mean that as a criticism or as praise, it's just how It seems to sit on that shelf of my memory.
  14. socks

    The Way of Hillsong

    Old news story, see below for an old news clarification. https://www.christianpost.com/news/brian-houston-hillsong-youth-pastor-naked-cowboy-nyc-church-164824/
  15. socks

    It's the words

    Interesting topic, mrap. Not new but I'll give you my 'pinion. For the sake of this discussion I'm only including 2nd generation Off shoots, started by those directly taught by Dr. Wierwille. I'm not familiar with 3rd and further out although I'd say that for better or worse they seem to digress so far from his direct influence that it's no longer a viable comparison. There's a lot of that in the earlier generations too though, like John Lynn, who has deviated so far from the basics of PFAL that he's not a reasonable comparison (despite the fact he assures his followers that Dr. Wierwille would be "pleased" by his work, nothing would be further from the truth I'm sure)...so in reality he's a perfect example of the need to be cautious since he's a textbook example of someone directly taught by Dr. Wierwille who's reinvented both history and teaching to equal a new thing. I might say he's either a pathological liar or extremely mentally damaged. Perhaps he's just a well meaning do-gooder. Whatever the case a person would be advised to evaluate him as a person and by his actions when considering if what he says is true or not and even more importantly to know how to accept him as a member of the Church - I for one would give him all the love and forgiveness accorded me by God through Christ, but would never put him in the position of being a Teacher. It would be unfair to his well being and potentially others. But this isn't about him specifically although he comes to mind because he's currently recovering from illness and had had so many ups and downs and a range of experiences in his lifetime. To a great degree you have to consider the character and conduct of an individual when you evaluate their work. Some Christians over emphasize that, others under. I'd contend that behaviors and conduct and the resulting characterization of the individual drawn by their actions is important and should be factored in at this front end when considering whatever it is a person does or says. Mathew 7: 15-20 - Watch out for false prophets. They come to you in sheep’s clothing, but inwardly they are ferocious wolves. By their fruit you will recognize them. Do people pick grapes from thornbushes, or figs from thistles? Likewise, every good tree bears good fruit, but a bad tree bears bad fruit. A good tree cannot bear bad fruit, and a bad tree cannot bear good fruit. Every tree that does not bear good fruit is cut down and thrown into the fire. Thus, by their fruit you will recognize them. Deut. 18:22 - When a prophet speaketh in the name of the LORD, if the thing follow not, nor come to pass, that is the thing which the LORD hath not spoken, but the prophet hath spoken it presumptuously: thou shalt not be afraid of him. Matthew infers intent - outwardly they act like sheep but their intentions are those of ferocious wolves. How do I find that out? By their actions. If we are comparing a fruit bearing tree then Jesus is saying that a bad tree won't yield good fruit. Ultimately they'll be cut down and removed. So he wants us to look at the tree, the person, and see what fruit it bears, what are the products of what it does, what it brings forth? Then judge by that - which you can do because the judgment is really already made and you only have to recognized it. Today Christian thinking accepts our lives of growth as manifestations of God's grace and mercy, without which we'd be condemned. So we see each other do good things, bad things, and we are compelled to forgive as we have been forgiven, and deal with grace and forgiveness with others. How much? Jesus said - a lot. 70 X 7. As many times as it takes. Does that then mean that when a person, a brother or sister in Christ teaches in God's name in error or in pride or for self serving reasons, that I am to forgive and accept them? The New Testament covers that too - all can be forgiven but not all are to be given freedom and access within the Church to speak for and on behalf of God. Deuteronomy speaks to that, the prophet who does not speak for God. The NT says to speak directly to each other, confront, include others, don't accept second hand information or rumors, don't promote gossip, require witnesses, multiple witnesses and proofs - why? To waste time? Be nice? No. To be sure you're right and that both they and those affected have the best opportunity to understand what's going on and how to correct it. Paul encouraged Timothy to watch out for Alexander the coppersmith because he did Paul "much harm". Paul also warned about those who would try to sneak in and defraud the church. Why, so they could defraud them? No, so they could collectively avoid being harmed. Paul also instructed Timothy what to look for in church leaders, the elders, deacons, over seers, "servants" of the Lord of God's people....he said look for honest people, men who are spoken well of, who have good reputations, who care for their families, work care for the needs of the church, who have some maturity in the faith. Basically he wants honest, reasonable people who are faithful to the church and who don't lie, cheat, steal or have ongoing problems with things like that. It's impossible to evaluate the teaching without evaluating the teachers. A person may be teaching something completely correct, biblically accurate, but not be living by the biblical teachings themselves. Worse yet, they can be lying about it, creating chaos in the church over it, hurting others without concern if they disagree with them and worse yet stuck, expecting to have their words honored over their actions - which is counter-Christianity. That's anti-Christian, it's the opposite of what Christ did or taught or what anyone who suggests their mature enough to teach "God's Word" on His behalf should be exemplifying. In order to do what the Bible teaches us to do there has to be discussion and communication between people. Will it all be right, good, even useful? Of course not. But if no one tries, no one talks, no one will know. When the news is good, we speak it. When it's not - do we ignore it? Reinvent it, translate it into something that sounds better? The Church isn't someone's personal organization that they run and manage as they see fit - its a newly minted reality where all are brought together in unity through Christ, and God fills us all through Christ. Notice how evil tries to segment and silence the individual, prevents inquiry, refuses to accept criticism, denies responsibility, blames others, prefers a vacuum. That's not the Body of Christ, the "Mystery" in living action, where each individual has God working and willing in them to both have the will and the desire to do as God wishes. Trash talk gets old and endless rounds of gossip damaging and hurtful. But if the Church doesn't make some effort to protect and warn itself and others - Who will?