Customer Reviews

Liberation of the Worldwide Church of God, The

5 star:		(8)
4 star:		(4)
3 star:		(5)
2 star:		(1)
1 star:		(10)

 

 

The very first thing I would like to say about this book is that I will not fault Mr. Feazell his opinion. On the other hand, it's just that -- an opinion. At certain points in the book, his opinion is much closer to reality than at other points.

To give two opposing examples, Mr. Feazell states on page 98, "I will go so far as to say that Sabbatarianism prevents anyone who believes in it from coming fully to the freedom of the gospel." His reasoning for this is that, based on his experience, everyone who keeps the seventh-day Sabbath believes that Sabbath-keeping is a salvation issue. Fortunately, there ARE Sabbatarians who do not believe that way. One of the largest of such groups is called "Messianic Judaism," which believes that God has called Israelites and Gentiles to different roles. (See Acts 21:17-25, Rom. 3:1-2, 1 Cor. 7:18 and Col. 2:16-17 in particular.) It's true that most if not all of the membership of the WCG felt that way however, and in that, I agree with Mr. Feazell.

On the other hand, Feazell states that Armstrong's understanding of biblical healing came from an experience he had in his early years. He then proceeded to base his entire doctrine on healing on that one experience. Just from my own reading of the bible, there were three examples of Jesus healing blindness in the bible, and He did it in three DIFFERENT ways. If each of the people who had been healed by Jesus had gone and started their own denominations based on their one experience, we might have seen something similar to what happened with Herbert Armstrong and the WCG. Yes, the understanding of biblical healing was a legitimate problem that the WCG had.

Mr. Feazell was unfortunately not smart enough to understand what the WCG was all about. I do not mean to criticize him -- I'm simply stating it as a fact. Most people, whether within our outside the WCG, never understood it. I'll give one simple example to illustrate my point. There was a great amount of criticism, by both members and non-members, of the "opulent lifestyle" of Mr. Armstrong. Unfortunately, what they didn't grasp is that he believed the Kingdom of God to be an earthly kingdom that would be established at some point in the future, in which all of the riches of this world could not compare. If one could not learn to appreciate physical blessings and learn to be responsible with wealth here and now, it would be all the more difficult in the Kingdom. Whether Armstrong was correct in his understanding of the Kingdom or not (and I happen to agree with him), HARDLY ANYONE UNDERSTOOD THIS PREMISE. Although the finances of WCG weren't "squeaky clean" and the wealth WAS abused by some in the ministry, the accumulation of wealth by the WCG wasn't entirely wrong. In the exact same way, if one goes to some of the towns of western Europe where the houses are plain and simple, the town church is often highly extravagant and ornate. The townspeople contributed, over generations, to creating a beautiful place to worship which they felt glorified God.

The final problem with Mr. Feazell's analysis -- and, frankly, most of Christianity -- is that they have a great deal of trouble grasping the principle that there can be more than one right way to interpret the bible. To give a simple example, the Worldwide Church of God was well-known for preaching that we are NOT "born again now," but that this spiritual birth takes place when Jesus Christ returns and our bodies are changed from flesh to spirit. A proper reading of John 3:8 supports this interpretation. However, 1 Peter 1:3 and other, similar verses make it clear that being "born again" is something that happens during this lifetime. BOTH INTERPRETATIONS ARE CORRECT. (By the way, the doctrine that the Kingdom of God exists now and the doctrine that it is yet in the future is another example of two correct interpretations.) If Christianity -- including the WCG splits that still believe and practice a majority of the old WCG doctrines -- would realize that a lot of their doctrinal differences are the result of having different but equally correct interpretations, there would be a lot more peace and unity within the body of Christ.

In the final analysis, the WCG's migration from cult to "mainstream" status could have been handled much more effectively than it was. On pages 115-117, Mr. Feazell explains the reasoning as to why the church leadership tried its best to hide the process of change from the laity, citing the cult mentality of the laity as THE barrier to effective change. To that, I say two things: first, no lie is of the Truth -- and they LIED to the laity in telling them that nothing was being changed -- and secondly, if the cult mentality is the problem, then change the cult mentality BEFORE changing any doctrines!

In my opinion, the changes that took place in the WCG constitute the biggest religious disaster in years. There are still hundreds of splits from the WCG that hold nearly the same doctrines as before the changes. They have not been healed or bound up, so to speak (quoting Isaiah 61:1-2). Everyone seems to be focusing instead on the "miracle" of the mainstreaming of the "stump" of the eviscerated tree.

The leadership of the WCG did not have the tools to make effective change, either. Because the entire organization was infected with an attitude of negativity and judgmentalism, THAT needed to be cured first, and the leadership just didn't know how to do that. Trust should have been won first, rather than changing doctrines. Secondly, the same goes for the WCG leadership as what I said concerning Mr. Feazell. They just weren't smart enough to discern between what WAS true and correct -- even though it was almost unique to the WCG -- what teachings had to be modified, and what had to go. Again, I'm not criticizing them, I'm just stating the facts.

There are lessons to be learned from what happened with the WCG -- both in what went right and what went wrong. This is where I feel that this book has its greatest strength, although the reader must beware that the author himself makes mistakes in determining what went right or wrong. If one were to approach another "cult" organization with a similar agenda, then one had better beware of making the same mistakes and ultimately leaving the walking wounded in the wake of the "miracle" of doctrinal healing.

Unlike his friend and co-worker, Joseph Tkach (Jr), Mike Feazell provides a relatively in-depth examination of WCG doctrinal changes during the early 1990s. The book seems poorly organized and rather disjointed, even contradictory at times - Feazell jumps from topic to topic with little of a detectable outline (perhaps he produced a majority of the book by combining previous articles he had written), and often adopts an irritatingly defensive tone, but it does provide ample "food for thought" on many points, as opposed to Tkach's rather glossy, plastic narrative. There's less here for an outside observer, though; the book seems to be more directed at current and former WCG members.

The title of this book is very misleading! The Worldwide Church of God did not need to be liberated from anything. Those who were its members at the time of the death of Herbert Armstrong were content with its basic doctrines. It was a growing and thriving church, with its mission of preaching the gospel of Jesus Christ to the whole world as a witness. It was not a cult; it did not twist anyone's arm to join it. In fact, it was content to remain relatively small in overall numbers. Members were free to come and go as they pleased, and if they did not agree with its doctrines that differed from "mainstream Christianity," (such as keeping the 7th day Sabbath, and observing "Jewish" Holy days such as Passover, the Day of Atomement, etc. instead of Easter, Christmas, etc.) then the WCG would recommend that they not attend its services!

But with the death of Armstrong in 1986, the leadership of the WCG fell into the hands of Joseph Tkach, his son, and others like Mike Feazell. At first they deceived the membership by pretending to remain loyal to the original doctrines of the Church. Then, near the end of his life, Joseph Tkach began to make wholesale changes. These changes escalated under the pastorship of his son, Joe Tkach, Jr., who succeeded him. The Destruction, not the Liberation of the WCG was now in full gear. The membership of the WCG saw the sad mismanagement of Tkach and Feazell, and began to leave in droves. The WCG owned two beautiful and first rate college campuses, one in east Texas, and the other in Pasadena, CA. These campuses, along with many other assets the WCG owned, have now been sold off and the proceeds pocketed by the elite group (ie Tkach and Feazell, et al) who now control the remanant of the WCG. Herbert Armstrong was a man of vision who was instrumental in building a worldwide Work. The current church leadership is merely a bunch of little, greedy men who have built nothing! They did not liberate the WCG, but hijacked it and plundered its wealth for their own personal gain. I wonder Who will liberate it from them!!!

I grew up in the WCG, and like most former members, have quite a few scars and just as many questions.

This book has helped so much with understand not just the error of our old ways but why we believed them, what Herbert Armstrong's vision originally was, and the complete timeline of the doctrinal changes and split of the church after he passed.

It's written by someone who was right in the midst of the caos and who has a complete understanding of the hurt and confusion that was caused. Let's be honest, only those who were a part of the WCG can fully understand what kind of damage and confusion was left behind.

I've already recommended this book to other previous members of the WCG in hopes it can bring as much clarity and comfort as it has brought me.

I came in contact with Herbert W. Armstrong and what was then called the "Radio Church of God" in another time, in 1956. Then, in 1958 I came to "God's own college" - the church's Ambassador College - answering Armstrong's call to young people to share in the telling of a Christian message that he claimed had not been preached for 1900 years.

I have worked most of my adult life for the Worldwide Church of God, and many of those years were lived under the shadow of this charismatic leader. Then came the turbulent years of doctrinal changes, which drastically altered my life and turned it right side up.

When I heard that Mike Feazell's "inside story" of the Worldwide Church of God was being published, I was quite anxious to read his personal experiences. We had lived through a miraculous liberation of the Worldwide Church of God from false religious teaching. I wanted to hear the full story from someone who was "in at the creation," so to speak.

I found the book so compelling that I essentially read it at "one sitting" over a recent weekend. I believe most people will be astounded at the story as well. If you want to understand - both intellectually and emotionally - what it was like to be a member of and actually live and work at the pulsating hub of what Ruth Tucker has called "an unorthodox fringe church," then you will find this book a fascinating, instructive and sobering read. Most exciting and exhilarating is Feazell's recounting of the period when the actual spiritual liberation of the church occurred during the last dozen or so years. Reading his book immersed me into those years once again -- the time when we were confronted with the real truth about belief after belief that we had once accepted as "gospel truth."

We all know what it's like to live through revolutionary times, as our age has been one of change upon change. To be immersed in the world of religious change - and to experience it even vicariously - is a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity. Mike Feazell's book provides all of us - whether we were a part of the old Worldwide Church of God or had never heard of it - with the chance to understand what it means to face the truth and finally to be able to let go of beliefs on which we had once staked our lives, but had come to find out were simply wrong and unbiblical.

After reading Mr. Feazell's book, I can understand why the church blew up the way it did. Having been a member since birth, I can say there were times I empathized with Mike. Not being able to play sports in high school because of the Sabbath issue, etc... Having said that, Mike seemed a bit too bitter, a bit to angry etc... I give him kudos for writing the book as it is the view of someone who lived through the break-up, however he doesn't seem to effectively refute any of Mr. Armstrongs teachings other than resorting to name calling and innuendo. Some of the teachings of Mr. Armstrong certainly are flawed, and by no stretch of any human imagination could he be called a prophet, however, my point is that Mike does not satisfactorily address any changes in a scholarly light to validate in any way how things changed. I believe this to be at best a personal memoir, and not a valid defense of any changes that occurred. My recomendation would be to read it in that light, and find scholarly advice on the Bible elsewhere. As I said, kudos to Mike for writing this, but ultimately I think it misses the very point he may have been trying to make.

A sound theological base is vital to the spiritual health of any church organization. In this book, J. Michael Feazell lays out the errant theological history of the old Worldwide Church of God and engages the reader in a fascinating personal and corporate journey ending in that church's embracing of Christian orthodoxy. In this accurate and painfully honest account from an insider's perspective, Feazell is unflinching in his examination of Herbert Armstrong's church under the lens of the gospel of Jesus Christ. He wisely chooses not to vilify or judge Armstrong, however, revealing him for what he was in reality, simply a fallible human. He describes how easy it is to fall into error when a charismatic leader offers believable solutions to Christian nominalism and the sense of "unravelling" that occurs when people are confronted by a world they believe to be on a downward moral and behavioral spiral. Feazell shows how appealing religious legalism and transactionalism can be to those inclined to "law and order" and how readily some with a need to be "right" can accept an "only true church" mentality. The good news he presents is that it doesn't have to be this way. Through an honest appeciation for sound biblical scholarship and a willingness to "listen" to the word, he shows where peace and healing are available and that one really can be free to rest solely in Christ.

Besides being an interesting and informative read, I found this book important in two other ways. First, it can help people in the new Worldwide Church of God who struggle with a lingering false identity rooted in tradition and who continue to carry various forms of residual baggage. Feazell's clear annunciation of the New Testament message, especially in the areas of the New Covenant and our freedom in Christ, would serve to help those whose cultural identities remain partially obscured from the effects of years in legalism, to complete trust in Christ alone. Secondly, for those outside the church's fellowship, the book sends a powerful message warning against the dangers inherent in lack of education and disdain for Christian theology, history and doctrine. Any church or movement can benefit from Mr. Feazell's analysis and prevent or correct the evils that flow from exclusivist teaching and legalism. While exposing the heartache resulting from the bad fruits of an aberrant theology, this book is really one of hope and encouragement. It offers liberation through the power of the gospel to any individual or church that find themselves boxed in through fear and guilt, a negative worldview or the need to feel important. Mr. Feazell's book, like the title of the first chapter, may well prove to be a "crack in the dam" against the psychological and religious forces that seek to keep people in bondage. It deserves a wide reading.

While fresh analysis of the theological legacy of Herbert
Armstrong, founder of the controversial "Worldwide Church of
God" sect, would be welcome, little is to be found here.

Former members, such as myself, will remember Armstrong for his
cold hearted aloofness, cruelty, and selfish lust for wordly
wealth and status - not to mention his rank dishonesty (claiming
divine inspiration for his patently eclectic theological system).
With regard to pursuit of wealth, Armstrong was secretly paying
himself the equivalent of $1 million per year in the 1970's!

Mr Feazell fails to point out how the new leadership - which he
is a part of - is any improvement. Top salaries for the new
church boss, Joseph Tkach, and his management team - which
includes Michael Feazell are still top secret but rumored to be
well into the six-figure range. And so far this year, this
"church" (business?) has spent over $4 million more than it has
taken in meaning, to me, that the leaders are maintaining their
huge salaries and grand lifestyles despite falling revenues.
They claim this money is coming from "reserves" but skeptics
suspect that it is coming from borrowing in anticipation of
pending real estate liquidations. Given this church's past
history of dishonesty, I wouldn't doubt it. In fact for over
65 years, the "Worldwide Church of God" sect has never leveled
with its members on how much its leaders are paying themselves -
even when the sect was raking in over $200 million per year !

The one star rating is for the lack of freshness in analysis
and the hypocrisy & secrecy of the present money-hungry
administration of which Mr. Feazell is a part.

Many of us were pleased with the initial changes in style and doctrines that occurred under Joseph Tkach from 1986-1989. We agreed with Herbert Armstrong's core theology, but thought that he was not as good as Paul was in being "all things to all men." He was authoritarian, and, as Mr. Feazell correctly notes (p.92), Armstrong did have a "characteristic style of hyperbolic overstatement"(the ALL CAPS and exclamation points, the exaggerated claims, the going out of our way to differentiate ourselves from other people, etc). The changes that had taken place by early 1989 "regarding the use of the medical profession, women's use of cosmetics, and celebration of birthdays"(p.26) were either welcomed by or did not greatly bother most members. And contrary to what many would have thought, the church seemed to "take off" after Armstrong died. One can read about all the telecast response records set in 1986 in Herbert Armstrong's Autobiography Vol 2, pp. 656-659. Instead of a church we had tried to hide from people, the Worldwide Church was becoming one that you wanted to share with others. Most of us were fond of Joe Tkach, even if we knew he would not leave a legacy of writing like Herbert Armstrong did. But when Tkach and his men changed Armstrong's correct teachings on the Law and the commandments, those of us who just wanted a refinement of "Armstrongism" bolted.
Mr. Feazell is quite correct that there is nothing biblically wrong with using the medical profession. To say that taking medicine is a lack of faith that God can heal, but binding wounds and setting bones is not, is inconsistent. Cannot God bind wounds, set bones? However, this is now a moot point, because Feazell admits that "by the time Armstrong died in January 1986, the stigma (of using the medical profession) had lifted somewhat"(p.52). I would say more than somewhat, since I started attending church in 1984 and never heard anything said against using medicine, and it was known that Armstrong had been using doctors since at least 1977. And of course, setting dates is always wrong, but this was another problem that had been largely eliminated by 1986.
Mr. Feazell's whole argument against the theology of Herbert Armstrong and his followers is to claim that they did/do not love Jesus as much as he does now. Indeed, his book is at times nasty and insulting (unlike Joseph Tkach Jr's book Transformed by Truth). For instance, he says(p.27) the WCG "robbed" his life, "lied to me all these years," and "emotionally raped" him. He implies that those who did not agree with the changes are stupid(p.30-31). Those who believe that commandment keeping is still necessary (as Jesus says in Matt5:17-19 and 19:16-19, Paul says in Rom3:31 and 1Corin7:19, and Revelation says in 12:17 and 14:12) are referred to as "Christians who believe in God's existence but do not know God in personal experience"(p.41), and "the result for most members was what Paul called 'having a form of godliness, but denying its power'(2Tim3:5)"(p.68). I take offense at Mr. Feazell judging my (as well as tens of thousands of others) faith in Jesus as my Lord and Savior, and it is especially hypocritical since he spends time in the book attacking Herbert Armstrong for judging others. My worship is not only "obedience to the law," as Mr. Feazell claims(p.82). It is insulting to refer to those of us who believe that obedience is what we owe to God as those who "thought we loved Jesus...arrogant, self-serving, smug, or self-righteous," possessing "an unregenerate heart of stone"(p.70). How is Mr. Feazell showing Christian love by referring to those of us who do not agree with his ignoring of our Lord's clear teaching in Matthew 5:17-19 as "an army of obedient robots" who were "waiting eagerly for the day" when God would "destroy all the rotten sinners"(p.111)? Did Mr. Feazell really used to feel that way about others? Would he claim that the 8 million Seventh-Day Adventists in the world (who are some of the most loving people I have ever had the pleasure to fellowship with) do not have true love for Jesus? The implication here is that he would. Indeed, if our Lord was going to do away with Sabbath-keeping, he would have told the Pharisees who accused him of breaking the Sabbath, "You know what? You are right," instead of condemning their unnecessarily rigid Sabbath restrictions.
Mr. Feazell writes(p.99) that "The Sabbath, along with the rest of the law, was given to Moses, for Israel, on Mount Sinai. It was a sign of the covenant between God and Israel. It was not given to the whole world." How, then, does he explain Zech 14:16-19, which shows that in the future Egypt and "all the nations" will be punished if they do not observe the Feast of Tabernacles?
Thinking about Matt5:17-19, Rom3:31, and Heb8:8-10 reminds me of what Mr. Feazell wrote on page 61-"As Dr. Watson used to say to Sherlock Holmes, 'How absurdly simple.'" Simple indeed.

Excellent. I grew up in the Worldwide Church of God, but had left it by the time all of the changes happened (went to college). I always felt that I could never get a straight or satisfying answer to what was going on and what the doctrinal changes were. This book made it so clear to me. I read it slowly to digest everything. It brought back tons of memories.

One concern of mine though is that the church was referred to as a cult and having lived my life in that church for 13 plus years, I still to this day don't think my experience was that way. I have very fond memeories of the church and when I left there was no negative consequences,etc.for doing so. I learned so much being a part of that church that I feel has made me a better person in life.