Wayman O. and his fellowship have spent, according to my source, about three times as much in legal fees as the property is worth trying to take the propertyMessage 1 of 1 , Jul 21, 2007View Source
Wayman O. and his fellowship have spent, according to my source, about three times as much in legal fees as the property is worth trying to take the property from the Lautoka, Fiji church which was pioneered, at great personal sacrifice, by Larry and Linda Gregory. The question would arise as to why Lord Wayman would be willing to spend more than the property is worth to take it away? The answer is that there is something larger at stake. The Little Big Man has to ensure a reign of terror in order to hold his fellowship together. He must demonstrate on no uncertain terms that he will do things like this to any pastor and church that tries to leave his fellowship.
Legally speaking, fellowship churches are independent. Most of them are independently incorporated, and as such, Wayman O. has no legal right to them. However, Boob Man Mitch has set up a social structure that is very real. Within that social structure there is a very real threat concerning those who leave. We all know the shunning doctrine concerning ex members, or at least most of us do. People who leave the local churches are punished with loss of all friendship and realationship, and are even used as sermon examples. On the pastoral level it is even more severe. The full power of the fellowship will come against any pastor who tries to exercise their legal right to be a truly independent church. Mitch and the boys will do all they can to split that church and destroy that pastor. This is well known in the fellowship, and Waymanchrist wants it well known.
Just a side note. Just because someone gives a donation to a church does not mean that they own that church. Certainly a member of a church who gives to their church would be entitled to a true accounting of the money. Yet, the church member who donates to the church does not own it. This is also true of organizations that make donations to churches. In other words, just because the fellowship gives money to start a church does not mean that they own that church. Unless His Unholiness in Prescott is willing to start a denomination, like Foursquare, and have bylaws that state that all properties are owned by the denomination, he has no right to claim any ownship of "physical and human resources." Any document that he makes pastors sign under threats would be worthless, and that is exactly what he does.
And that brings us to the issue of threats. Wayman O. is suing the Lautoka, Fiji church, to renew his threat to pastors that this is what he will do to pastors and churches that try and leave the domination of Lord Wayman the First. He wants it well known that those who pull out will be destroyed, hurt, and that it will ultimately not be worth it. One leader who left in 1990 told me that if he knew the suffering that he and his family would go through upon leaving the fellowship, that he would never have left. In the end he was glad he was out, but made that comment nonetheless. This is exactly what Lord Wayman wants to convey to those who would try to get out from his bondage.
Now put this in the context that the Waymanchrist fellowship is "the greatest move of God in the earth today." Put this in the context of statements like, "We are a privilidged people tonight, folks." Put it in the context of, "We are the Book of Acts revival for today." So why do you need threats? I mean, this is the greatest thing since Jesus walked the earth, right? There's nothing else that even comes close, right? So why is the fellowship held together by threats? The simple answer is that it is because the fellowship of Lord Wayman is not the greatest move of God in the earth today, or something that you are privilidged to be part of, or the Book of Acts revival for today. It is a religious cult that holds people and churches in it by threats.
If the fellowship is so great then why does Wayman have to maintain a reign of terror? Why would this petty little man have to sue a church in Lautoka, Fiji to make his point? Wouldn't churches that leave suddenly realize they had made a terrible mistake and beg to be let back in this marvelous fellowship? Has any church that left ever begged to be let back in?
I have to laugh. At one point, a couple of years after the 1990 exodus of leaders and pastors, the remaining leaders and the Mighty Mitch discussed what would be their reaction if the departed leaders repented and asked to be let back in the fellowship. According to the then leader who told me about this, they decided that they would forgive them, but never let them back in the fellowship. Well, guess what? No one ever even asked. Not only that, but almost all the leaders who decided this have now also left the fellowship.
If the fellowship of the Most High Mitch is so great, then why is this the case? It isn't great. That is why threats and punishments must be maintained. They will never be able to keep people based on inspiration. Threats work much better. And if you examine their core teachings, they are all pretty based on threats.
I sit back and I marvel at the whole thing. I have been out for 13 years. What a trip to look at it now!