Thank God, there are no Wayfers around here that might remind me of what anyone at that place said or did. I agree with you about it sounding a bit sinister. And juvenile, as though those saying it still haven't begun to grow up and think for themselves.
But it's a common enough expression... "It's like..." So, where do you start unpicking it?
You could startle people by saying, "It's like - that means it isn't..."
As in: "It's like Dr W said...." " Ah, it's only like - it's not what he said/did, which was..."
"It's like HA said...." " Ah, it's only like - but this is the real deal."
Or, "It's not like anything he did, but it is like what my Mom/my teacher/the preacher at church did..."
Or, "It's like Dr W did." "Oh, you mean, lied, stole, deceived, coveted money, attacked women, died..." (choose your event)
Or simply, "So what?" - or "So what? even HA said sensible things once in a while. Even a stopped clock tells the right time twice a day; you just don't know when."
Followers use these "fathers in The Word" to back their own sloppy thinking. It's laziness. It's selfishness. It's their ego identifying with those men. They want to relieve uncomfortable thoughts of responsibility.
It ties right into "leadership made me do it . . my hands are clean!"
If YOU join/follow a cult, YOU are responsible for YOUR actions, words, decisions, and emotions.
I remember this a lot growing up in the way, and it amazes me how much I still hear it among family. "It's like, Dr. Wierwille used to say..." or "It's like Howard Allen, said..." or "It's like we were taught in the Way Corps..." I hear these kind of phrases all the time and I have come to view them as sinister.
Every time it is said, to me, it just reinforces the influence of these characters. It also says, "see, they weren't all bad." Of course they weren't *all* bad, but they deserve no further authority or influence in my life. I don't owe that to them. Neither do you.
So to the extreme on some of these phrases, there was this one chick we knew in the ministry, and she would always be talking "when Doctor did this, when Doctor did that" - that was the only phrase she would ever refer to him by. Not VPW, not Vic, etc. Only doctor. She did have known significant private access to him. Looking back on it, me thinks the doctor dicter.
So to the extreme on some of these phrases, there was this one chick we knew in the ministry, and she would always be talking "when Doctor did this, when Doctor did that" - that was the only phrase she would ever refer to him by. Not VPW, not Vic, etc. Only doctor. She did have known significant private access to him. Looking back on it, me thinks the doctor dicter.
If you join/follow a cult, knowing or ignoring its true nature, you are responsible for your words, actions , decisions and emotions.
If your involvement is the result of deception, the deceivers must share in the responsibility.
I'm thinking now there's a relationship between faith and deception, there's certainly one between freedom and responsibility. (Likely off-topic, but interesting).
Deferring to a leadership's phrases to make a point, well, at least it's not plagiarism. You're at least citing the source of your mindless drivel.
Yeah, I hear ya, Oakspear. I thought it was creepy too. Especially since he was DEAD by the time I'd got involved.
I also thought his self-appointed title The Teacher was creepy if not to say megalo. But I rationalised that to think that he meant a research or communications dept. I wonder if anybody actually did "write The Teacher..." and got any sensible sort of answer?
I know a good many respectable clergymen nowadays and they are ALL referred to by their first names. Occasionally the might be referred to as (say) Bishop Peter, because Peter as a name is not uncommon and to add his designation of bishop simply clarifies who's meant. And other than in highly ritualistic situations, none of the church higher-ups expects anything other than the hospitality that would naturally be extended to a visitor or guest.
Yeah, I hear ya, Oakspear. I thought it was creepy too. Especially since he was DEAD by the time I'd got involved.
I also thought his self-appointed title The Teacher was creepy if not to say megalo. But I rationalised that to think that he meant a research or communications dept. I wonder if anybody actually did "write The Teacher..." and got any sensible sort of answer?
I know a good many respectable clergymen nowadays and they are ALL referred to by their first names. Occasionally the might be referred to as (say) Bishop Peter, because Peter as a name is not uncommon and to add his designation of bishop simply clarifies who's meant. And other than in highly ritualistic situations, none of the church higher-ups expects anything other than the hospitality that would naturally be extended to a visitor or guest.
I don't know if it is proper, but I'm always like "what's up, BISH?"
So to the extreme on some of these phrases, there was this one chick we knew in the ministry, and she would always be talking "when Doctor did this, when Doctor did that" - that was the only phrase she would ever refer to him by. Not VPW, not Vic, etc. Only doctor. She did have known significant private access to him. Looking back on it, me thinks the doctor dicter.
I wonder if anybody actually did "write The Teacher..." and got any sensible sort of answer?
I wrote to VP, once, to point out that "Uncle Harry Day" smacked of Roman Catholicism (from whence I had come). I don't remember if I addressed it to "The Teacher" or "Doctor Wierwille." I did get a pleasant, if somewhat evasive, response, essentially, "It's not the same. Trust me." I kept that letter for years. I think I threw it away, finally.
Recommended Posts
waysider
We had a similar conversation HERE.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Twinky
Thank God, there are no Wayfers around here that might remind me of what anyone at that place said or did. I agree with you about it sounding a bit sinister. And juvenile, as though those saying it still haven't begun to grow up and think for themselves.
But it's a common enough expression... "It's like..." So, where do you start unpicking it?
You could startle people by saying, "It's like - that means it isn't..."
As in: "It's like Dr W said...." " Ah, it's only like - it's not what he said/did, which was..."
"It's like HA said...." " Ah, it's only like - but this is the real deal."
Or, "It's not like anything he did, but it is like what my Mom/my teacher/the preacher at church did..."
Or, "It's like Dr W did." "Oh, you mean, lied, stole, deceived, coveted money, attacked women, died..." (choose your event)
Or simply, "So what?" - or "So what? even HA said sensible things once in a while. Even a stopped clock tells the right time twice a day; you just don't know when."
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Bolshevik
Followers use these "fathers in The Word" to back their own sloppy thinking. It's laziness. It's selfishness. It's their ego identifying with those men. They want to relieve uncomfortable thoughts of responsibility.
It ties right into "leadership made me do it . . my hands are clean!"
If YOU join/follow a cult, YOU are responsible for YOUR actions, words, decisions, and emotions.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
waysider
If I may, I'd like to tweak this just a bit.
If you join/follow a cult, knowing or ignoring its true nature, you are responsible for your words, actions , decisions and emotions.
If your involvement is the result of deception, the deceivers must share in the responsibility.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
chockfull
So to the extreme on some of these phrases, there was this one chick we knew in the ministry, and she would always be talking "when Doctor did this, when Doctor did that" - that was the only phrase she would ever refer to him by. Not VPW, not Vic, etc. Only doctor. She did have known significant private access to him. Looking back on it, me thinks the doctor dicter.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Rocky
It's certainly not out of the question.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Bolshevik
I'm thinking now there's a relationship between faith and deception, there's certainly one between freedom and responsibility. (Likely off-topic, but interesting).
Deferring to a leadership's phrases to make a point, well, at least it's not plagiarism. You're at least citing the source of your mindless drivel.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Oakspear
Calling him just "doctor" was just annoying back when I was in, hearing people do it now is just plain creepy
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Twinky
Yeah, I hear ya, Oakspear. I thought it was creepy too. Especially since he was DEAD by the time I'd got involved.
I also thought his self-appointed title The Teacher was creepy if not to say megalo. But I rationalised that to think that he meant a research or communications dept. I wonder if anybody actually did "write The Teacher..." and got any sensible sort of answer?
I know a good many respectable clergymen nowadays and they are ALL referred to by their first names. Occasionally the might be referred to as (say) Bishop Peter, because Peter as a name is not uncommon and to add his designation of bishop simply clarifies who's meant. And other than in highly ritualistic situations, none of the church higher-ups expects anything other than the hospitality that would naturally be extended to a visitor or guest.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
WordWolf
I think Cardinals get their titles included. In practice, "Monsignor" can be appended for
a lot of people, but I've only heard it used for the truly venerable
(that is, he was really, really old.)
I read here that letters to "the Teacher" went to the Research Department. I don't know
if that was only after several years, or if all the letters went there as soon as he
set up the department. But they occasionally DID get answers.
Back when I thought he'd been issued a doctorate from a respected institution of learning,
I referred to him as "DOC." I bought into his "humble, aw-shucks" public facade and
thought he would find it needlessly high-faluting to use a formal title. My lack of
actually knowing his character (who he was when the microphones were off) led me to
fall for his carefully-crafted public image. Plus, since I was trustworthy, I saw no
reason for him to be otherwise, and expected he was equally trustworthy.
(The logical errors are very obvious in hindsight.)
Link to comment
Share on other sites
shortfuse
I don't know if it is proper, but I'm always like "what's up, BISH?"
Link to comment
Share on other sites
GeorgeStGeorge
He was just PLAYING doctor. :lol:
George
Link to comment
Share on other sites
GeorgeStGeorge
I wrote to VP, once, to point out that "Uncle Harry Day" smacked of Roman Catholicism (from whence I had come). I don't remember if I addressed it to "The Teacher" or "Doctor Wierwille." I did get a pleasant, if somewhat evasive, response, essentially, "It's not the same. Trust me." I kept that letter for years. I think I threw it away, finally.
George
Link to comment
Share on other sites
waysider
BREAKING NEWS
He wasn't really a Dr.
(It will just be our little secret.)
Link to comment
Share on other sites
chockfull
No. You don't say.
Just because the correspondence school he got his doctorate degree from was a house close to downtown Manitou Springs Colorado?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
waysider
Shhhhh! You're not supposed to know that.
OOPS!
Edited by waysiderLink to comment
Share on other sites
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.