One thing I would add, Mr. Fugate, and I invite the moderator to comment upon this as well if he wishes. Sometimes with these "ministries", it's very difficult to nail down the distinction between what most people define as a cult and what is a "controlling organization" that teeters on the edge of cultdom. I consider CP the latter, a "controlling organization". Perhaps a better term fpr this would be "soft cult". That phrase may or may not be original with me but I find it apt, regardless. Any group that encourages "lifetime commitments" and labels quitters as "persona non grata" is a cult... CP gradually moved away from these practices in an attempt to avoid the cult stigma, I believe.

There is also a fine line between "having nothing to hide" and "flying under the radar". Many "ministries" simply remain at just the right size to "fly under the radar", which allows the question of whether they have anything hide to largely remain a moot point, since they do not get big or powerful enough to draw the attention of those who would have the time and/or money to properly dig into the closet to look for the skeletons.

marjoe2:

Aptly put.

There are many small groups that do "fly under the radar" so to speak.

Sadly, only when there is a tragedy, lawsuit, or some sort of public controversy do they become noticed, typically through media reports.

I have not said that CP is a "cult."

It does seem to have histrically been a personality-driven organization that lacked meaningful checks and balances to provide accountability and financial transparency.

The overwhelming majority of churches and ministries have such safeguards.

CP apparently did not and may not now.

Yes, my understanding is that the group's founder, Charles M. "Chuck" Tanner, passed away about four years ago and that CP is already in serious disarray. The fact that it has only taken four years since the founder's passing for the group to take a downward spiral would seem to support your sense of it being largely personality-driven. Had there been a more appropriate and accountable leadership structure, the group might have survived Tanner's demise for some years to come, but frankly I don't think that is going to prove to be the case.

<< Wow. I started this thread about six years ago. Shocked to see it get picked back up. >>

I just came across it the other week - I actually googled "Covenant Players" to see what kind of web presence they have these days, and this thread popped up. I'm surprised no one from within the ministry ever picked this thread up! Do we know each other by the way?

[Moderator note: Do not post contact information at this message board, which is against the rules. There is a private messaging system.]


<< Mr. Fugate, I know you've answered a lot of questions already, and I do appreciate your willingness to discuss this interesting group and the remarkable man who started it. >>

I probably would have posed the same questions and such for several years after I left, because I did struggle with issues of bitterness and post traumatic stress due to hardships I faced on the road. However, I came to grips with those things and realized that much of my bitterness was due to areas of weakness and avoidance within myself that I wanted to blame on others. While the ministry could have been more accountable to those on the road - and provided more intensive ongoing training in ALL areas - there was really no one to blame other than the user groups (churches and schools) that rejected or burned me, and my own lack of management skills and training in my 20's.

I was an arrogant, inexperienced kid trying to run my own team of professional actors (many who did not see themselves that way) on the road full time in other countries without funding, housing or outside support - and thus, I had difficulties. A lot of my bitterness came from those that questioned my faith due to the very practical difficulties I encountered. However, it did push me, challenge me to my limits, and force me to grow up - for which I am quite grateful.

<< My main question at the moment regards the late Mr. Tanner's pre-CP activities and how they may have shaped his creation and structuring of CP. My understanding is that he sometimes spoke of having worked in military intelligence before forming CP. Do you know anything about this? Specifically, what branch of the military he served with, and whether he worked in any form of Psy Ops (psychological operations). >>

To be honest, I had a hard time separating the CP spread "urban legends" about Chuck from the reality of what he really did. I recall having some good conversations with his wife Dorie about it all, which was less sensationalized and more down to earth, but I can't recall all the details.

My recollection is that he was a film maker that, for his military service, was put to work doing just that. I know that he was in Korea doing anti-communist propaganda for the US government, and that he also did some aerial photography work hanging out of planes (which kept him from ever flying again) - but other than that, I think everything else might have been sensationalized by those around him. He had a lot of respect for the military, and the discipline & stamina they required - and he did incorporate some of that into CP, but not in a Psy Ops sort of way.

There were mind games in CP - and I was guilty of playing them on my units as well - but much of that came about due to putting young people in charge of each other without appropriate training or accountability. Chuck was actually a little distant from all the things that were implemented in his name.

I discovered that the best way to get people to do what I wanted them to do was to proclaim, "Well, Chuck says . . . " This was rarely the case, but it seemed to work within the rather small Universe of CP. I'm sorry to say that some of us in leadership positions resorted to that due to our own insecurity that anyone would take us seriously otherwise.

<< My second question is a real long shot, pure speculation. Did Tanner ever claim to have met L. Ron Hubbard? Much of Tanner's work has a noticeable sci-fi or "Twilight Zone" type influence, and I just wondered if he and Hubbard ever crossed paths in Southern Cal when Hubbard was still primarily a pulp sci-fi author. >>

I don't think so - and I'm pretty sure if Chuck did know him he would have told him off for being a fruitcake. :-) Actually, many of Chuck's ideas were stolen by "Twilight Zone", or so some proclaimed - I'm not sure if I ever heard that from Chuck or not. They either stole his ideas, or he copied theirs within a more Christian context . . . I tend to believe that they were Chuck's ideas first. He found that sci-fi metaphors worked very well to proclaim spiritual truths - which I'm a big proponent of myself as a writer. However, L. Ron and Chuck? No. I can't see that.

<< Also, have you stayed in touch with active CPers over the years, and when you left, were you declared "persona non grata" per Chuck's original policy in the early days? >>

I have stayed in touch . . . but not for the first ten years I was out. I was not persona non grata - I finished the five year commitment I made during my second summer.

Chuck did give me a hard time and tried to get me to stay . . . however, he actually apologized to me about that to my face shortly before he died. I went to his home when I was out in LA and we spent a couple of hours together - and he was very kind, apologetic, forgiving, and even told me he was proud of what I had done outside of CP (which I never thought I would hear).

10 years ago I realized how much I missed everyone - so I started the CP e-group on Yahoo. I made sure that no one was banned - and that it was a safe place to vent, heal, communicate and reconnect. I was surprised to find so many people that felt like I did - and through the community we formed online a lot of people found closure and healing.

I think the reason a lot of people carried bitterness is that there was never any closure for those that left. No matter what your experience in CP, it was dynamic and life changing for better or worse - and then going back to "normal" life without any exit process was very difficult. I know for me - I just needed a bit of closure and debriefing to put it all into context.

The real healing for me came at the 40th anniversary reunion in LA - a lot of us came back for retreat, and were a bit shocked to feel as if we never left. We were warmly embraced, and we all just had a wonderful time together. We even had a "Godspeed" for those going back to their "normal" lives . . . and for some reason, I always needed that.

I also went back to LA for Chuck's memorial service and had a warm time of fellowship once more, and that brought a real sense of finality on that part of my life for me and many others. I'm now in touch with most former and current CPers via facebook.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 07/16/2010 01:07AM by rrmoderator.

CP was a controlling organization - but then, the structure of the ministry was actually far too light on training and accountability and thus compensated for by a strong emphasis on commitment.

How do you get a group of actors to stay focused on the task at hand and work together as a body? I wish I knew - I've been trying to do it my entire life. :-)

We were an artistic bunch of bohemians basically all seeking to follow a call and live out the Gospel - and the only way that Chuck knew to keep that in check was the discipline he had learned in the military. Prior to Viet Nam, military discipline was highly respected and seen as the gold standard. Chuck was very much of that era.

Is the military controlling? Absolutely! Far more controlling than CP . . . but Chuck did look to that standard of discipline and commitment, and applied it within a Christian and artistic context.

In the military, if you walk off - it's a crime. Chuck saw anyone walking away in much the same way - but he couldn't convict you of any crime, so he just banned those that did from having any further association. I never agreed with this - and had many arguments with him about it. His wife never liked it either by the way.

Was CP personality driven? Yes. Chuck had brilliance and charisma - and I have to admit that I used to feel honored whenever I got to spend time in his presence. He taught me a lot, and in the context of theatre training I feel as if I was mentored by one of the greatest theatre practitioners that ever lived . . . it's just that the world doesn't really know who he is because he was not promoted outside of CP.

I do believe that one day his plays will be released, and the world will think of him as one of the greatest playwrights of all time.

One more thing - CP was a ground breaking organization. There was really no template to follow, and very few "ministry standards" in place when Chuck was forming the group. So, he wrote his own rules and developed his own standards. Now, in the context of all those groups and ministries that have come into being since 1963 it does look very unstructured . . . but something I have discovered over the years is that a lot of ministries have put in checks and balances BECAUSE of things that people experienced with other ministries such as CP in the years when these types of ministries were just coming into existence.

So - one thing certainly that CP can be accused of . . . it was different from anything that came before it, and sort of developed in a vacuum with only Chuck's vision to drive it. This vision grew into policy, and it was never really revised with the times.

In the 80's I was saying that the ministry was stuck in the 60's - and I'm sorry to say that they ever grew much beyond that.

I had a vision for CP to branch out in the 80's to specialized creative ministries and training from a permanent base - a Christian conservatory for the arts, or an ongoing retreat center. The idea was that those who joined CP would attend as if it were a college for a year or two before going on the road - and then also serve the various user groups that were coming to facility for creative retreats. However, Chuck felt that idea took away from the focus on the road ministry . . . and that is why I left.

To be honest, 20 years later I'm still pursuing that same vision! I really wish I could have accomplished it in CP because of all the creative committed individuals that would have been there to staff it and make it a world wide destination for Christian resources in all the arts. On my own, I haven't even been able to get others to catch the vision or get it off the ground.

Thanks for the answers, J.S. (As far as I know, we don't know each other, BTW). I find it interesting that Tanner's experience in the military motivated him to emphasize discipline and commitment, yet you also mention that he was guilty of "putting young people in charge of each other without appropriate training or accountability". In the military there is a strong emphasis on rigorous training, accountability to superiors, and a clear chain of command. Of course, it doesn't always work that way, as everyone knows. But it says a lot about Tanner's creation, that he selectively employed some characteristics of military rigor while neglecting others, at the expense of those his organization recruited.

I have a few other questions and I hope you'll indulge me. 1) Do you feel that Chuck and his family made the same level of difficult personal and financial sacrifices, such as living in a hand-to-mouth manner, that he required of touring units? 2) Of the many plays you performed over the years, what percentage of them put an emphasis on abandoning all the comforts of ordinary life, leaving everything behind, and answering the call to some sort of missioner for Christ? (My understanding is that many of the plays had this emphasis, and that it was a tool used by CP to recruit more members) 3) To what extent do you think Chuck's seemingly capricious assignment of the unit members to specific regions of the country (or world, for that matter) was based on a desire to keep them geographically separated as far as possible from home and family? 4) Is it true that any form of recording, photography, or videotaping of CP plays, no matter how innocuous or inconsequential, was expressly forbidden by Chuck, even if it required a unit member to halt a performance in progress and demand that the recording/filming device be put away? 5) While in CP, did you feel that Christians in the USA who are able to both minister and live in comfort, safety, and relative prosperity were not "real" Christians, or were somehow not doing the work of God to the extent that you and your fellow CP'ers were? (In other words, to what extent was an "us versus them" mentality fostered, as you struggled to survive day to day on the road)?

Thanks again for your input and your patience.

"Marjoe"

Hello,
I stumbled on this post while I was looking up Covenant Players. I was quite dismayed and surprised that when you type in Covenant Players to a google search engine that the next "suggested listing" that comes up is is "Covenant Players Cult." I came out of CP in 2008 after finishing my 2 year commitment. It's not a cult by any popular definition and there's certainly nothing sinister lurking under the surface, financially, psychologically or otherwise other than people's natural propensities towards control and annoyance (including my own). It's a smallish internationally diverse community of Christians of most denominations who travel around doing plays.
I know that the rules about leaving and the length of commitment were tougher a few decades ago. These days the initial commitment is 2 years and there are other understandable circumstances where an addition commitment is requested, such as if someone is promoted to unit leader they are expected to remain leader in their assigned area for a year to get to know the terrain.
Members are not allowed to stay at the houses of former members who did not complete their commitment while on mission but I've never known anyone who didn't complete their comittment be snubbed on a social level.
The two year commitment is really to save time and resources for the organisation as a lot of time is invested in training new members and welcoming them into the community.
A lot of the aspects of the ministry which may look from the outside to be cult-like stem from the veteran members passion to keep the organisation going and afloat, morally and financially. The time commitments are made as a promise to God, and are taken that seriously. Around the time I joined several people who joined the ministry quit after just a few weeks on the road. I don't know what happened when they announced they were leaving but they went just the same.
I had some wonderful times with CP and still miss it from time to time. I left because I felt stiffled at times by living so closely with others and because I thought it was time I made some money. I still haven't made any money however!

Bibianaburke:

If you look back on this thread you will see admissions by other ex-members of CP that it was not democratic, somewhat authoritarian and lacked meaningful checks and balances.

There was also no meaningful financial transparency through annually published, audited and distributed budgets, which disclosed in detail all salaries compensation and expenses paid out from ministry funds.

Essentially it was dominated and run by the founder and his family.

CP may not be a "cult," but it lacks the accountability safeguards that govern most Protestant churches and ministries.

How does that invalidate one word I've said about it? The admissions are by one ex-member only in the 1980s when the rules were stricter than they are now, showing that you haven't adiquately reviewed this thread before posting. He freely admits that he doesn't have all the answers and yet you take his not knowing as if it were a negative reply. I've given a true account of my experiences, which on the whole were very positive. Why on earth would they need to disclose financial information to the world and it's mother? They had no shareholders. They weren't raking it in and everyone in the organisation already knew this. I certainly didn't care where the money was going. I knew it was going where it was needed. Why should a missionary organisation be subject to checks not even given to banks until recently? All companies are authoritarian and undemocratic. When I go to work on a morning I expect my boss to tell me what to do and woe betide me if I don't do it! You're also overlooking the vast number of nepotistic capitalist ventures. Why not keep a business / ministry etc. in the family? It makes sense - your kids already know the ropes! Furthermore all company vetting proceedures have been tightened up since the 1980s. It's now standard practice to check out any mental problems before hiring as well as making sure that members are criminal record bureau checked with the police in countries where this proceedure exists. I have recent information while you are basing your reply on information which is 20-30 years out of date and would be aware of this if you'd properly read my post beforehand. I appreciate you have a high volume of posts and probably have to skim read but I just spent a good ten minutes replying to you.

Bibiananburke:

I too was dismayed and surprised to see "Covenant Players Cult" pop up in a search engine, which I why I sought to share my first hand experiences and knowledge - to spotlight what the ministry is really all about.

However, in trying to answer questions it seems that I just ended up looking like a bit of an apologist for CP, although I did think it was important to be completely honest about my experiences - both good and bad. Much of the "bad" was my own fault, or due to my own weaknesses and immaturity - but I believe the good and the miraculous far outweighs the weaknesses mentioned.

Marjoe:

Sorry, I missed your posts - but I shall do my best to answer honestly.

You said, "I find it interesting that Tanner's experience in the military motivated him to emphasize discipline and commitment, yet you also mention that he was guilty of "putting young people in charge of each other without appropriate training or accountability". In the military there is a strong emphasis on rigorous training, accountability to superiors, and a clear chain of command. Of course, it doesn't always work that way, as everyone knows. But it says a lot about Tanner's creation, that he selectively employed some characteristics of military rigor while neglecting others, at the expense of those his organization recruited."

I think what was so unique was the blend of military discipline and Christian grace . . . as well as the blend of providing opportunities for rigorous training, but leaving it up to each individual as to what they were willing to put into it.

There was accountability to superiors and a clear chain of command in CP - but when you send people out on missions in small groups, they tend to become autonomous.

What Chuck was guilty of was relying on the Holy Spirit to motivate, inspire and teach us in ways that he never could . . . and I don't think that's such a bad thing at all. However, people do tend to reject the leading and teaching of the Holy Spirit, and pay lip service to God - and therein lies the problem demanding much greater human intervention and accountability.

You asked "1) Do you feel that Chuck and his family made the same level of difficult personal and financial sacrifices, such as living in a hand-to-mouth manner, that he required of touring units?"

When they were on the road - yes. Suzanne, Bobbi, and Christina (his daughters) all experienced the same aspects of touring life that the rest of us did without any extra or special compensation. I've also shared offices and houses with his daughters, and we were all part of the same community doing the same job.

In Los Angeles, they had the house that Chuck had purchased prior to starting the ministry. Thus, they didn't have to seek host homes. Honestly, I always felt very much a part of Chuck's family, and never felt that they were living differently than the rest of us.

"2) Of the many plays you performed over the years, what percentage of them put an emphasis on abandoning all the comforts of ordinary life, leaving everything behind, and answering the call to some sort of missioner for Christ? (My understanding is that many of the plays had this emphasis, and that it was a tool used by CP to recruit more members)"

There was a very small percentage of plays that were written specifically for Covenant Players to help us realize the call to which we had committed, and to reaffirm our sense of mission and commitment. Most of these were "Pathway Plays" - where a missioner faced hardship and had to make the decision whether to continue or drop out.

These plays were never used for the purposes of recruitment - because we never put on performances for the sole purpose of recruiting anyone at anytime - but we did perform many of them in churches, because they were biblical metaphors for the struggles that everyone goes through with their faith . . . similar to "Pilgrim's Progress"

I disagreed with some of the theology presented in these plays, so I rarely did the one's that seemed to elicit feelings of guilt for being weary. However, not everyone saw them that way. Many were encouraged by the message in these plays, and there was always a lot of positive feedback from user groups.

"3) To what extent do you think Chuck's seemingly capricious assignment of the unit members to specific regions of the country (or world, for that matter) was based on a desire to keep them geographically separated as far as possible from home and family?"

I don't think there was ever any "desire" to keep people separated from their families at all! People were rarely sent to their home area because of the pull to "hang around" that which was familiar rather than focusing on the tasks at hand. I have an example of a young girl that toured with me in her home area. She was constantly wanted to go off and see her friends, stay with friends and family, and had a hard time focusing on the fact that we were on a mission. I allowed her to do whatever she wanted as long as it did not interfere with our work . . . but it did. She went home so often I just told her to stay there, because that was where she wanted to be - but left the door open for her to come back . . . but she didn't. It was a case of immaturity, and had nothing to do with "keeping her away" from home and family.

"4) Is it true that any form of recording, photography, or videotaping of CP plays, no matter how innocuous or inconsequential, was expressly forbidden by Chuck, even if it required a unit member to halt a performance in progress and demand that the recording/filming device be put away?"

That's actually the standard for any play. I have run a couple of theatres where we had the same exact policy - not because of any policy of my own, but due to copyright restrictions which forbid videotaping.

A couple of times I came across churches that HAD videotaped the plays, and they were using them as teaching tools in the church and thus had no need of bringing us back. Thus - it hurt our ministry, and kept us from being able to work.

"5) While in CP, did you feel that Christians in the USA who are able to both minister and live in comfort, safety, and relative prosperity were not "real" Christians, or were somehow not doing the work of God to the extent that you and your fellow CP'ers were? (In other words, to what extent was an "us versus them" mentality fostered, as you struggled to survive day to day on the road)?"

Did I have that feeling, or was that feeling fostered within us? The answer is yes and no -- I did have that feeling from time to time because I was young, immature, and arrogant. Was it fostered? No. In fact, I was chastised for my attitudes by those in authority within the ministry. Anyone that had an "us versus them" mentality was their own doing, arising from their own immaturity.

When I think back on some of the attitudes I had at the time, all I can do is shake my head and realize just how immature and arrogant I actually was - when I thought I was being faithful and selfless . . . all the while thinking I was better than those I was serving.

As I've said previously, much of the problems that I and others faced in CP was due to our own immaturity and arrogance - and I have a hard time finding the ministry itself at fault for many of the things I brought on myself. However, these things helped me to grow, mature, and learn more than any University or theatre experience could ever teach.