My life there and afterwards


Forgiveness is not sentimentality. Forgiveness demands justice. In order to forgive, both parties need to acknowledge the wrong that has been done, and the offending party must show some repentance, some desire to right the wrongs, to address the harm that has been done and to make amends.

When someone has been hurt, violated, abused, they are exercising the willingness to forgive when they make the attempts to re-enter relationships. If a woman has been raped, for example, she is exercising a form of forgiveness, within her own psyche, to men in general, when she is ready and willing to open herself up to a new relationship. If a person has experienced spiritual abuse by a group or person, s/he is exercising a degree of forgiveness to those who betrayed her trust when she is willing to enter a new relationship with another group or person on a spritual or ethical basis.

However, full forgiveness towards the abuser cannot happen until the evil that was done has been acknowledged and dealt with. Forgivenes does not mean ignoring the past or moving prematurely to attempted reconciliation with the abusers. Only when those on the other side of the equation, the ones who did the wrong, are ready to admit their wrong-doing and to make amends does the possibility of full forgiveness enter the arena.

In the absence of repentacne on the part of the perpetrator, forgiveness is morally objectionable because it involves an abandonment of justice.

Forgiveness also does not mean that you necessarily re-enter a relationship with the perpetrator, even if they do repent of their wrong-doing. It will free both parties into new relationsips, but does not require re-committment to the old one.


Deep within myself

Freud seemed to think that the sexual, pleasure drive was underlining everything that we do.
The version of Christianity that I learned at CJ taught that sin was the underlining motive of everything I did.
Jung on the other hand talks about the very depth of us being where we connect with god (however you define that concept).

Within our depths are things we are afraid of, thoughts and desires that we have been taught to label as “bad”. We are a mixture, but in that same “darkness” live the angels, the wisdom, the truth of our capabilities. Denying your shadow self allows you to unknowingly do very selfish and evil things–and even call it virtue (John 16:2-3). This is what I think went wrong at CJ. The leaders, and to some degree all of us, bought into denying our true selves. “Deny your self” was a constant invocation. But in constant denial there is no accountability, first and foremost to yourself.

If I want to be accountable to myself, it means accepting myself, not labelling myself as “bad”, and learning to sort out what is healthy for me and what is not. God, life, growth and happiness are wrapped up in acceptance of myself and others, not in condemnation and constant denials.

Here is a quote from Richard Rohr’s Meditations:

“Jung believes we can do damage, therefore, by “petrifying” our spiritual experience when we try to name it, to express God as an abstract idea. Before you explain your encounter with the Divine as an idea or a name that then must be defended, proven, or believed, simply stay with the naked experience itself–the numinous, transcendent experience of allurement, longing, and intimacy within you… This is both a transcendent God and also my deepest me at the same time. To discover one is to discover the other. This is why good theology and good psychology work together so well. You have touched upon the soul, the unshakable reality of my True Self, where “I and the Father are one” (John 10:30).”

The place of the wound becomes the place of the greatest gift. It is in our sorrow and pain that we are transformed, if we will not turn away from being aware. ‘Wounded Healer’ is an icon for me. It speaks of not only my own healing, but of the return of meaning, of purpose in my life, of reaching out to be connected with others, which is healing for both of us. Jesus was wounded and killed, and he is the icon of healing and love. (Don’t think Christianity here, just think Jesus) If we are meant to see his life as an example, then surely those of us who have also been wounded can take hope from his life. Our life is grounded in our common vulnerability, not in the power structures that try to tell us how to live and what to believe..

As I pause at the beginning of a New Year to reflect on my life, I see the multitude of friends who have been a help in my journey. I am grateful for you all. Thank you for:
– listening to my story
– believing me
– advice and encouragement
– monetary gifts and loans
– temporary living space
– rides to appointments and to buy my first car
– invitations to weekends and celebrations
– sticking with me over time
– thoughtfulness and gifts
– most of all for being my friends and being there for me.

I love you all!!

Although at times I may feel very alone, it is heart-warming and encouraging to remember that I am connected to a wide network of loving and caring people. I do not at this time have a daily companion, but when I remember to reflect on our connections, I no longer feel alone. In this remembrance I find solace and joy.

My mom always said that in order to have friends, you have to be a friend. I hope you know that I am here for you also, and will do all I can to be your friend.

Blessings on us all in this New Year!!!

Public Writing

There is no real protection. In America anyone can sue anyone for anything. They may not win their case, but they can open one against you, and guess what, you have to pay your lawyer.

Whatever you write is public. All your emails are public. Even after you delete them, they are on a Google server somewhere. Google is a private company. The law can subpoena them to provide your emails. It’s up to Google, not you, how they respond to that. Your texts are public and can end up in court. Your written letters are public and can be subpoened.

A phone call didn’t use to be recorded. You can be called upon to try to remember, and to give the gist of your phone conversatons, but everyone knows memory is not infallible, and you can only do your best with it.

If you send off a draft of an article, or whatever, to a journalist, or a book company, or anywhere, even to a friend, it is in the public domain and can end up in court. Did you think it was only a draft, and it was meant to be edited before it got published? No protection there. The unedited draft can be used against you if you were not careful and named names or said anything that can’t be proven.

We do still have freedom of speech, but think before you write.

Oh yes, what I receive in written form is also in the public domain. Did a friend write me in confidence and ask me to not publish it? I have regretfully found out that the fact that you emailed it to me makes it already public. I will certainly keep it in confidence as far as my actions are concerned, but again, Google still has it.

Anonymity certainly helps. I’ve been told by reporters that people can tell their stories anonymously, but I do not know what the law says about their right to not reveal their sources. We know from popular media that sources are sacrosanct and not to be shared, but I don’t know how the real world works.

One thought in our favor is that organizations, groups, leadership, usually do not want the spotlight and probably will take no action publicly as an entity. However there is always the possibility that an individual within a group may take action in the hopes of shutting us up.

I’ve been doing a little reading about freedom of speech. More is allowed than I had realized. Public figures are expected to be in the public scrutiny, so even caustic remarks are allowed. Private citizens are more protected from harm to their reputations. Intent is important. A charge of Defamation has to prove that the statements were made with the intent to harm.

“Defamation law tries to balance competing interests: On the one hand, people should not ruin others’ lives by telling lies about them; but on the other hand, people should be able to speak freely without fear of litigation over every insult, disagreement, or mistake… A defamatory statement must be false…People who aren’t elected but who are still public figures because they are influential or famous — like movie stars — also have to prove that defamatory statements were made with actual malice, in most cases. ”

What to do about Cults?

How does one grapple with the phenomenon of cults, and the harm that they do?

We are all human, and if we are going to try to live in a larger sphere than our own self-seeking, there seems to be a call on our lives to care about others, and this is indeed the case. Everywhere you see people helping people. Many professionals give most of their lives to the service of others, and bless and are blessed in doing so. I am in no way saying that nothing is being done. However, I do wonder how we are to grapple with the situation we find ourselves in, in regard to cults.

I want to start this discussion by focusing primarily on religious cults, and even to narrow the field further, Christian cults. Those who know me find that as no surprise, for it was a Christian cult that I lived in and have been affected by. What responsibilities do the individual players in this scene have? What is my responsibility as an ex-member. What responsibility does the cult carry, whether they wish to acknowledge it or not? And to cast the net further out, does the rest of the Christian world carry any responsibility? Do other churches have any responsibility for harm done by a group that calls itself Christian? And if so, what form would that responsibility take?

When I talk about responsibility, many images come to mind. It probably is not realistic to think that mainstream Christian groups are going to set up a task force to monitor and “watch-dog” other fringe groups that call themselves Christian. Not only do thay have their own lives to live, but what moral standing would they have to do that? And yet, without that kind of responsibility for our “neighbors”, where does that leave the victims?

One answer, and a very good one, is that the victims have recourse to a lot of very good help for recovery. I have been the recipient of such help. And yet, I long for a world where we could go a step further. I would like to see two things happen. Prevention, and Accountability.

Prevention: ICSA and other groups are very visible, and do fantastic work. But how visible are they? To themselves and those who know of them, visible. To an ex-member fresh out of a cult? I did not know about them. I did not know recovery groups existed. As far as I knew, I was on my own. I finally did hear about a support group, but I long to make this a well-known issue that everyone knows about. I think every college campus needs a cult awareness course. Every town hall should have a flyer up.

Accountability: I realize the court system is not set up to judge cases of emotional or psychological abuse. However, the abuse is real, and in some cases is worse than physical abuse. If the country’s law system cannot deal with this kind of abuse, can other Christians raise their voice publicly, and bring public opinion to bear? Can people, and perhaps the media, become those who seek for accountability?

Responsibility: I feel a responsibility to speak out. If I remain silent, I am saying in essence that what goes on in the daily lives at the Community of Jesus doesn’t matter, that what happened to me and my family, and many friends, and continues to affect those who live there, doesn’t matter. If I remain silent, I am turning my back on harm being done, and ignoring it. I cannot do that. It would be no different than walking past a rape or robbery and not at least calling the police. I may not have much power, but I have a voice.

Legal Navigation

Any ex-cult member who has to deal with a legal situation may find themselves at sea like I did. I have compiled as much as I can remember of what I learned through the process in the hopes that it might be of some use to others.

I received a subpoena to a deposition. I was a witness, not named in the case, therefore it was no real threat to me, but since some of the others involved in the case were members of the group I am a former member of, it was an emotional issue for me. I also had never been involved in any kind of legal action before, did not know the rules of the game, or have a clue as to what to expect the procedure or atmosphere to be like.

This goes without saying, but just to put it onto the record, if you receive a subpoena to a deposition, and it lists documents to bring, do not trash, hide or otherwise do anything to those documents. It is what it is, and at this point you want to cooperate. If you try to hide anything, that could bring you more trouble later. I will talk in another blog about how to think ahead and protect yourself as much as possible from unnecessary legal troubles.

Like most of us who leave a high-control group, my finances were pretty low. I’m not in poverty, but I also don’t have the cushion that many people my age have been able to save. So besides the emotional issue of having to deal with people from my former group, I also had fear about not being able to afford a lawyer, and whether this would put me into debt.

I started researching for free legal advice on the Internet and found good resources. The three free sessions I had with three different lawyers were invaluable with their knowledge and advice, but it took many hours of research and networking to get those three references. was an excellent resource. I was able to “chat” with legal librarians who looked up the answers to my questions.
A site in Connecticut is which I have not used, but I would think could certainly point you in the right direction. I also assume each state will have something similar. Even if the site does not seem to list your particular need, get in touch with them anyway. I did not know if anyone could help me, but I asked anyway. You never know what good references you might get.

The librarians at gave me answers to these questions:
– I didn’t know if I could have a lawyer at a deposition and found out I could. They also sent me literature on the rules of a deposition, which helped me know what to expect.
– I found out that court-appointed lawyers, at least in MA, are only for criminal cases, not for civil cases. What this means is that any fees were going to be solely my responsibility. I wasn’t going to get any financial help from any state agency. This in itself can put a person off, because who can afford a lawyer? I was quoted $350/hour by one lawyer and $275/hour by another. That can really add up. But don’t quit yet. At least keep asking questions to learn what the process is all about.
– I asked next if they could refer me to any lawyers. They gave me this resource:
– I found out that I could call the lawyers who had sent me the deposition and say I needed more time in order to find a lawyer, and get the deposition re-scheduled. I had the right to do this.
– The deposition did not spell out what the case was about. I learned that I could call the courthouse and ask them for that information. They told me to ask for the civil clerk’s office.

When I called the courthouse, they said I had to come in person to read the court file, but that it was public record, and I could make copies of it. The copies cost $.25 per page, so take plenty of quarters with you. In my case, this was a 2 hour drive one way, but I considered the effort worth the knowledge that would make me feel more confident and in control of the situation.

When I checked out the website I filled out a form, and ended up in a phone call with someone from the Mass Bar Referral service. I had to decide how much to tell him, and decided to go for broke and just tell it as it was. I told him the bare facts of the subpoena, and why I was worried – i.e. that these were members of a group I had left, not on amicable terms, and I thought the extent of the documents they were asking for was overboard, etc. I also was upfront with the legal librarians and MassBar that I needed a lawyer that would pro-rate to my income. They gave me the name of a lawyer to contact, which I did. Of course, during all this, I was scared, but pushing forward anyway.

I called the lawyer and set up a preliminary meeting with him. He said the first half hour would be free, to my great relief. This meeting was very informative. I felt I could not afford him, but he helped me to understand the process more and gave me options on what I could do.
– He could negotiate what documents I needed to provide, and change the date of the deposition. That would be minimal involvement and cost.
– If he continued with me and went to the deposition with me, that would increase the time and money.
– I could start my own action, without him, by going to the courthouse and filing for a protective order. This is a request by me for the court to limit what documents they ask for, saying that not all of them are pertinent to the case. I had never heard of this before, so was glad to know this was an option.

When I read through the court documents related to this case, my name was not mentioned anywhere. It made me wonder why I was involved, so I had a second “chat” with the legal librarians and learned:
– The subpoena came directly from the lawyers, not through the court. This is legal and legitimate because lawyers are considered “officers of the court”. This is why a copy of the subpoena was not in the court file at the courthouse.
– For the first time I learned about the option of filing a motion to “quash the subpoena.” This is different than a protective order. It would require the judge to assess the reasonableness of the documents asked for in the attorney’s subpoena.
– The notarization on the subpoena does not have to be that raised stamp that we often see. It can also be an ink stamp.
– They gave me another reference. The Mass Bar Association has a free legal advice service. 617-338-0610 or 877-686-0711

I also talked with a couple of friends about looking for a lawyer and got other referrals that way. They gave me free phone calls, and one said I could call the lawyers and ask them why they needed all of these documents from me. I had not known whether it was considered “OK” or not to talk with the lawyers. He also told me more about the motion to “quash the subpoena”. He sent me the official form to do this. It’s important to get a lawyer’s help in these steps. The official form makes things go more smoothly. Once I had the form I had to again drive it the 2 hours to the courthouse, but it was accepted and a date was set for the hearing. When I went to this hearing I did not understand the importance of being prepared to defend my motion. If you take this step, be sure to practice explaining your reasons ahead of time. Being under the stress of actually appearing in court to argue against the people/situation that trigger your emotions can make it difficult to concentrate and remember what you want to say. At this point I still did not have a lawyer, so was “pro se” that is, representing myself. Also be prepared that the other lawyers will bring their “opposition to the motion to quash the deposition.” In other words, they will bring their reasons why they want you in, and you will have to read those on the spot and be able to articulate your reasons against their reasons. I was not prepared for this.

Once I retained a lawyer, I felt tremendously at ease. He was there to protect me, and he knew the legal landscape and how to navigate it. I no longer had to learn how to invent the wheel. He laid out a plan of action, simple but effective. He gave me papers to read about how depositions work, and how to conduct yourself in one. This is very important information. He made sure I was prepared and knew what it was going to be like. The unknown is stressful and fearful, but knowledge is power and security.

Lawyers are allowed a great deal of latitude in depositions as they are a “discovery process.” They can ask a wide variety of questions, even if the information eventually is not allowed into the courtroom testimony. But what you say is as if you are in a courtroom, so above all, telling the truth is the most important rule to follow, and I would add the second guideline is to answer the questions but don’t volunteer information.

At times I had wondered if it was going to be worth the cost, but once I talked with my lawyer I knew it was worth any cost. He knew how to handle not having to bring in the documents that did not relate to this case. Your lawyer is not allowed to say hardly anything in a deposition, but he gives the opening explanations and just his being there helped me to keep my confidence and clarity. You can also take as many breaks as you want, and can talk with your lawyer out in the hall.

The actual deposition was not a bad experience and I am glad for what I now know. I have a desire to make this information more accessible to all ex-cult members. I also would love to see a fund started to help pay lawyer expenses. Most everyone who leaves a cult has a huge job ahead of them just reintegrating into society, finding a job, supporting themselves, not to mention the emotional rebuilding that is taking place. Being hit with a lawyer bill of $1,000+ (or more) is a huge burden. I have a vision for a fund that can help with these expenses. I do not know how it will come about, but I believe it can happen.

The next blog will be what I have learned so far about writing publicly and what can or cannot be done to protect your interests.