I was reading through some of the older threads and I came upon this one and I remember reading something awhile back about the language as to how someone can determine if they are in a spiritually abusive church or not. I myself am in a quandry about my own situation at this point.
http://www.batteredsheep.com/church-speak.html
Here are some examples of what this site dictates as language spoken by an abusive church:
Angry: What a person is deemed to be when they tell the truth about something that has happened. Because you are "angry" and have a "bitter spirit" your legitimate concerns and issues can be written off and ignored. After all, "you are the one with the problem", not the actual offender, especially if the offender is a pastor or elder.
Bad Attitude: (1) "This was usually the first step to "disfellowshipping". If we didn't agree with the minister, we were classified as having a bad attitude. If we didn't repent and agree with the minister we would be likely disfellowshipped. Also see "Critical spirit". (2) People who have left the church or group left because they had a "bad attitude" and were "troublemakers".
A Bitter spirit (variation "Don't be bitter"): (1) The charge made against a person because that person still stands by what they first said. (2) Former members who say anything negative about the church or group are charged with having "a bitter spirit", so what they say is not given any credibility and ignored even though it is factually true. (3) "Don't be bitter." Said by the truly unkind in order to deeply wound, for (spiritually abused) survivors aren't bitter--we just hurt... a lot! Said to shame, usually in a very public venue and/or in front of other kind people or, worst of all, in front of the "Undecideds" who, upon hearing this condemnation, decide that yes, the (spiritually abused) survivors are indeed "bitter", when all we are doing is hurting... a lot!
A Family matter: When the church leadership doesn't want the embarrassment of public disclosure in the community at large regarding a scandal in the church, that scandal becomes a "family matter" and is not to be discussed with people outside of the church or group. That the community at large has a vital and legitimate interest in the matter is ignored, even when the matter involves wrong-doing such as criminal sexual conduct, child or wife abuse, a suspicious death and so on. In such cases the primary reason for something to be "a family matter" is so the leadership or church can "save face". See also "Tell it not in Gath".
What do you all think about this?
Threaded Mode
