I have now seen yet another site about abuse in The Move. Indeed, an internet search will suggest that sexual abuse was the nature of Sam Fife’s Move. I was not aware of it when I was in; I have had some reports. Here is my position. In short, I separate investigation of sonship doctrine today from Move history of any abuse.
I was in the Move as a teenager, for a few years, in Houston and at Headwaters. I left with Ross Bracewell. So, I have never been to Alaska and there was necessarily much I didn’t know. My interest today is more the sonship doctrine than anything to do with the Move. I continue to have friends among those who stayed, stayed at that time, and who left then.
In about 2006, I became aware of accusation of sexual abuse. I was never involved in any of that. However, I made an online rant against it. I said sexual abuse was unacceptable. Any kind of abuse is unacceptable, must be repented from. Such a policy must be stated and advertised. It was not appreciated. So, I can say that I saw how the eldership refused to make a public policy or public statement. It was often said that this position was rooted in a generational perspective. The leadership was very old, the WWII generation.
They had sent away nearly all the competent boomers, thus insuring that there would be few leaders, and none that caused any distribution. Even in 2006-2018, boomers were called “the young people!” Perhaps this sending away was incompetence, or pride, but also rooted in the financial situation. As the Move membership shrunk, so did the pie of money for leadership. So, more leadership was not wanted. Control, that was not acknowledged, was wanted, for sure.
I discussed the situation of abuse briefly with Ross Bracewell, and he focused on the fact that pastoral counseling must of course be confidential. Further, the abuse that he knew about at Headwaters had been be conducted by a male who was then a teenager.
I wonder if a quick, and unplanned pulling together of disparate people to live together, could happen without some problems. What disturbs me is the lack of corrective response.
Strict child discipline of course may be construed as abuse or as properly strict discipline. I saw very strict discipline, but I did not see beating, beyond hand slaps – back in the early 1970s. In 2006, I did see concerning behavior between and among the children. I saw parents concerned, but more gossiping than working to thwart. Again, leadership was tone deaf when approached. And some parents were even lax beyond my nonfarm expectations. Again, very little standardization.
Bro. Joe told me in 2006 that back in the early days, when he became aware of the over strictness at Ware, he told Bro. Sam that if this is what the Move was going to be like, he would leave. Most egregious in Joe’s mind was that the people at Ware were told they would be punished if they complained to the “father ministry.” Watertown was very different from Ware. It is my understanding that Sam spoke to the Ware elders and things improved. Also, it was disbanded early.
I know there were hard feelings about the selling of some farms, but have no specifics. I was in Texas, long gone from the Move when things were being sold. I noticed again, lack of discussion.
I know of nothing to suggest the Move taught blood sacrifice.
Today, I see no commitment to natural food or any natural living; and no commitment to alternative health practices. I am dismayed. Apparently, Sam himself did not agree with health food, although he did eschew doctoring. However, no question that I learned natural health practices in the “back to the land” word which Sam preached at the Farmers’ Branch, TX convention.
I had such an adventure. On the other hand, I and my family were damaged immensely financially — mostly through giving up college and wrong marriage. There would be complete denial on this point. I see the serious damage even in my grandchildren. And salt is rubbed in the wounds when I talk to those who were then elders who boast of their college and that of their children – which we were explicitly denied.
Some of the best people I know, I met in the Move. No surprise. Who else would give up literally everything to follow Jesus, to go “all the way with God.” You will only hear about the ones who want to complain and have an angle that others will listen to. Similarly, I notice that people are easily led astray by people who make them feel good. “Buddy was always nice to me.” Yes, Buddy spoke comfortably to the sheep. However it was Buddy, and not Sam, that kicked Ross out. It was Buddy who would not permit the discussion of grace, such that at least 1/3 of the leadership left. Perhaps Sam made us feel powerful? Elders that wanted to push people down — either are gone or have no members. Who I see staying in, are either huddled at a few of less sick places — or are hanging on for power’s sake. I still see some wild personal behaviors attempting to advertise one into a position. But I also read memoirs that humble me and encourage my faith.
So many people I loved. So many wonderful things I loved. For now, I hope to continue what relationships I can maintain. And, especially after a vision of model-sized cabin turned to ashes, falling down since only ashes held it together, it is my choice to move forward with what sonship doctrine I can hear and teach. Healthy community would be very welcome.
