Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 9, 2012 6:13:17 GMT -5
I have heard many many warnings from the worker behind the microphone . Standing on the raised platform, they have warned the Friends about many things. Sometimes the warnings should be headed. At other times, the warnings were pure legalism. Sometimes they were given out of care for the flock and other times they were used as control tactics. In the last few years, there have been reports of CSA among the servants. Workers have misbehaved in their Friends' homes at times. Will there be warnings about this problem in the 2012 conventions?
|
|
shushy
Royal Member
Warning
50%
Posts: 8,009
|
Post by shushy on May 9, 2012 7:20:44 GMT -5
Only if they have the courage to address it.
|
|
|
Post by Greg on May 9, 2012 9:00:49 GMT -5
Any suggestions on what to say? Would addressing the workers be just as good as addressing the whole assembly?
|
|
|
Post by williamirvine7 on May 9, 2012 9:20:13 GMT -5
I think if there is CSA doesn't the law say they need to notify members..perhaps each to there fields,I don't know
|
|
|
Post by ts on May 9, 2012 11:45:21 GMT -5
The workers are not inclined to, from the platform, point out their own errors and their own false doctrine. Though they will warn people of false doctrine in the world and note the errors that come out of false doctrine.
The will warn the Friends away from other preachers but will not warn them about the WORKERS.
It is better to be abused by a worker than to hear truth from a "worldly" preacher. it is better to stay in the Meetings and get abuse than to go to a church where there is love and care.
|
|
|
Post by Greg on May 9, 2012 11:57:33 GMT -5
The workers are not inclined to, from the platform, point out their own errors and their own false doctrine. Though they will warn people of false doctrine in the world and note the errors that come out of false doctrine. The will warn the Friends away from other preachers but will not warn them about the WORKERS. It is better to be abused by a worker than to hear truth from a "worldly" preacher. it is better to stay in the Meetings and get abuse than to go to a church where there is love and care. How would you address the issues at hand about CSA and other similar isssues?
|
|
|
Post by sacerdotal on May 9, 2012 12:11:23 GMT -5
The workers are not inclined to, from the platform, point out their own errors and their own false doctrine. Though they will warn people of false doctrine in the world and note the errors that come out of false doctrine. The will warn the Friends away from other preachers but will not warn them about the WORKERS. It is better to be abused by a worker than to hear truth from a "worldly" preacher. it is better to stay in the Meetings and get abuse than to go to a church where there is love and care. How would you address the issues at hand about CSA and other similar isssues? Regarding similar issues- which I assume to mean other types of sexual misconduct- remove the worker promptly either for a probationary period of time, or, depending on the severity of the crime- such as rape- remove him/her permanently AND report the crime to the authorities. There is too much "he-said she said" types of outs, for especially the overseers, where they have gotten a free pass in the past. One former sister worker told me how she had to talk a lady out of reporting an overseer for sexually harassing her by making unwanted sexual advances toward her. The lady was going to make his advances public to the friends and workers. This former sister worker now regrets that decision, because the man went on to harass/harm other women- and this has been documented. He is still in the work. But, here is the thing. She said that she talked the woman out of reporting him because she didn't want to harm the image of the ministry. The same "logic" that is used time and time again. The perceived harm to the image of the ministry is more important than the real harm to victims. And the other overseers KNOW ALL ABOUT IT the worker's sexual aggression and God only know why they keep giving him the benefit of the doubt over the testimonies of other sister workers and saints. Another lady that I know told me that this worker had an affair with her aunt back in the early 1970s or late 1960s when he was in her part of the state. Thanks to sites like Wings, and the advocacy of folks like Scott Ross, and some workers, who seem to be stepping up to the plate in these matters- these women will have more of an equal voice in the future in matters of "he said- she said."
|
|
|
Post by emy on May 9, 2012 12:16:55 GMT -5
Regarding similar issues- which I assume to mean other types of sexual misconduct- remove the worker promptly either for a probationary period of time, or, depending on the severity of the crime- such as rape- remove him/her permanently AND report the crime to the authorities. There is too much "he-said she said" types of outs, for especially the overseers, where they have gotten a free pass in the past. One former sister worker told me how she had to talk a lady out of reporting an overseer for sexually harassing her by making unwanted sexual advances toward her. The lady was going to make his advances public to the friends and workers. This former sister worker now regrets that decision, because the man went on to harass/harm other women- and this has been documented. He is still in the work. But, here is the thing. She said that she talked the woman out of reporting him because she didn't want to harm the image of the ministry. The same "logic" that is used time and time again. The perceived harm to the image of the ministry is more important than the real harm to victims. And the other overseers KNOW ALL ABOUT IT the worker's sexual aggression and God only know why they keep giving him the benefit of the doubt over the testimonies of other sister workers and saints. Another lady that I know told me that this worker had an affair with her aunt back in the early 1970s or late 1960s when he was in her part of the state. Thanks to sites like Wings, and the advocacy of folks like Scott Ross, and some workers, who seem to be stepping up to the plate in these matters- these women will have more of an equal voice in the future in matters of "he said- she said." Yes, I appreciate WINGS and advocacy of people like Scott. But they act on information given them by victims. Not on gossip passed on. (AFAIK anyway)
|
|
|
Post by quizzer on May 9, 2012 12:32:53 GMT -5
In the last few years, there have been reports of CSA among the servants. Workers have misbehaved in their Friends' homes at times. Will there be warnings about this problem in the 2012 conventions? My understanding is that the warnings are all about what the friends could do wrong - leave the meetings (you'll go to Hell!), have non-professing friends (you're going to get hurt with bad acquaintances!), women dressing normally (you'll get into a bad marriage with a non-professing man!), and watch TV (inviting evil into your homes!). I don't think I've ever heard the warning from the platform: "Beware of the workers - sometimes we don't understand true evil and can really mess up the meetings for you."
|
|
|
Post by sacerdotal on May 9, 2012 12:32:57 GMT -5
Regarding similar issues- which I assume to mean other types of sexual misconduct- remove the worker promptly either for a probationary period of time, or, depending on the severity of the crime- such as rape- remove him/her permanently AND report the crime to the authorities. There is too much "he-said she said" types of outs, for especially the overseers, where they have gotten a free pass in the past. One former sister worker told me how she had to talk a lady out of reporting an overseer for sexually harassing her by making unwanted sexual advances toward her. The lady was going to make his advances public to the friends and workers. This former sister worker now regrets that decision, because the man went on to harass/harm other women- and this has been documented. He is still in the work. But, here is the thing. She said that she talked the woman out of reporting him because she didn't want to harm the image of the ministry. The same "logic" that is used time and time again. The perceived harm to the image of the ministry is more important than the real harm to victims. And the other overseers KNOW ALL ABOUT IT the worker's sexual aggression and God only know why they keep giving him the benefit of the doubt over the testimonies of other sister workers and saints. Another lady that I know told me that this worker had an affair with her aunt back in the early 1970s or late 1960s when he was in her part of the state. Thanks to sites like Wings, and the advocacy of folks like Scott Ross, and some workers, who seem to be stepping up to the plate in these matters- these women will have more of an equal voice in the future in matters of "he said- she said." Yes, I appreciate WINGS and advocacy of people like Scott. But they act on information given them by victims. Not on gossip passed on. (AFAIK anyway) Of course, I didn't imply that they didn't.
|
|
|
Post by Greg on May 9, 2012 12:33:07 GMT -5
How would you address the issues at hand about CSA and other similar isssues? Regarding similar issues- which I assume to mean other types of sexual misconduct- remove the worker promptly either for a probationary period of time, or, depending on the severity of the crime- such as rape- remove him/her permanently AND report the crime to the authorities. There is too much "he-said she said" types of outs, for especially the overseers, where they have gotten a free pass in the past. One former sister worker told me how she had to talk a lady out of reporting an overseer for sexually harassing her by making unwanted sexual advances toward her. The lady was going to make his advances public to the friends and workers. This former sister worker now regrets that decision, because the man went on to harass/harm other women- and this has been documented. He is still in the work. But, here is the thing. She said that she talked the woman out of reporting him because she didn't want to harm the image of the ministry. The same "logic" that is used time and time again. The perceived harm to the image of the ministry is more important than the real harm to victims. And the other overseers KNOW ALL ABOUT IT the worker's sexual aggression and God only know why they keep giving him the benefit of the doubt over the testimonies of other sister workers and saints. Another lady that I know told me that this worker had an affair with her aunt back in the early 1970s or late 1960s when he was in her part of the state. Thanks to sites like Wings, and the advocacy of folks like Scott Ross, and some workers, who seem to be stepping up to the plate in these matters- these women will have more of an equal voice in the future in matters of "he said- she said." I can see probationary removal from ministerial activities. Going to the police should be mandatory and automatic. Is having folks like Scott and some workers who seem to be stepping up to the plate enough? More of course would be better. Yet, should there be sermon and/or non-sermon warnings at convention about these issues?
|
|
|
Post by JO on May 9, 2012 14:57:44 GMT -5
Yet, should there be sermon and/or non-sermon warnings at convention about these issues? What purpose does convention serve if it doesn't address the issues that are turning the fellowship away from God? The NT apostles didn't seem to cover things up to promote a "clean green" image. How should the following scripture be applied in the fellowship today? ------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1 Corinthians 5:9 I wrote to you in my letter not to associate with sexually immoral people— 10 not at all meaning the people of this world who are immoral, or the greedy and swindlers, or idolaters. In that case you would have to leave this world. 11 But now I am writing to you that you must not associate with anyone who claims to be a brother or sister but is sexually immoral or greedy, an idolater or slanderer, a drunkard or swindler. Do not even eat with such people.
|
|
|
Post by emy on May 9, 2012 15:24:58 GMT -5
Yet, should there be sermon and/or non-sermon warnings at convention about these issues? What purpose does convention serve if it doesn't address the issues that are turning the fellowship away from God? The NT apostles didn't seem to cover things up to promote a "clean green" image. How should the following scripture be applied in the fellowship today? ------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1 Corinthians 5:9 I wrote to you in my letter not to associate with sexually immoral people— 10 not at all meaning the people of this world who are immoral, or the greedy and swindlers, or idolaters. In that case you would have to leave this world. 11 But now I am writing to you that you must not associate with anyone who claims to be a brother or sister but is sexually immoral or greedy, an idolater or slanderer, a drunkard or swindler. Do not even eat with such people. That was tried, JO. Many call it the Alberta fiasco.
|
|
|
Post by JO on May 9, 2012 16:02:23 GMT -5
That was tried, JO. Many call it the Alberta fiasco. The friends tried to make immoral people accountable, and it was seen as rebellion. Instead of the immoral people being put out of the church, it was those who resisted immorality who were excommunicated. The Stan Jordan saga is a case in point. From Dale & Marlene Jordan, Calgary, Alberta, Canada as posted on the WINGS site: ------------ --------------------- ---------------------- ------------------------ Re: The undercover investigation by the Calgary Police Department and the resulting charges against Stanley Howard Jordan, of importation, possession, and distribution of child pornography as reported in the September 14, 2001 Calgary Herald, Calgary Sun, Edmonton Journal, etc. This is our truth. As his brother and in response to these charges we state our position for this case. We, as well as Stan and Carol, raised our children in Northwest Calgary. Because Stan and I both worked for Amoco Canada for twenty years and we all worshiped in the same faith, we had much in common. But a life of pretence was being woven and it became increasingly difficult to understand why Stan talked in circles and led a double life. Over the years we kept our distance and our children didn't stay overnight in their home. Multitudes of situations arose which continued to confirm the fact there was sexual perversion causing the lying because he was "living a lie". We never spoke to any of the family about it, in protection of mom and dad and the love we felt for our family. Almost nine years ago a very serious situation arose where Stan had to be confronted because of his dishonesty. We went to Stan and Carol's house, exposed his lying, and pleaded with him to leave us out of his web of lies. After several visits with both of them, and after pleading with them to get help (professional counseling), we became increasingly aware that there was no will to resolve this massive lying/double life problem and they both appeared content with the life of pretense. At one stage, Stan called a meeting with eight present (one being the worker, Susan Corkum), to clear his name on a major lying issue, only to reveal that all that he and Carol had come to tell us at our house the night before was a lie. Susan, along with the others in the Alberta ministry, especially Jim Knipe, supported him in all this and knew clearly about this on-going web. Right after all this was known, Willis Propp (Alberta overseer) then put a Sunday morning meeting (worship service) in Stan's home to heighten his credibility with others in this faith. As the lying and evidence of sexual perversion escalated, we simply wanted free of all connection with him. Four and a half years ago, we visited with two brothers and their wives and expressed our concerns, and one brother told us of several very strange events that they and his in-laws had witnessed. In desperation, we wrote a two-page letter to all the brothers expressing numerous weird/abnormal situations involving Stan and most of these were already known by all of them. We stated our decision to no longer be involved with such corruption, as Stan was professing/pretending to be an elder in this faith. At this time, Stan called a Calgary elder (a close friend of ours and told him a maze of lies about us and about what he pretended to be. He then said that he would buy us a new car in a desperate move to silence us. We were horrified and knew we had to free ourselves of this burden. We spoke to the sister workers (Gwen Fipke and Cheryl Lumley) who upheld Stan but they said that Willis Propp promised to deal with it right away. A few weeks later, in May, 1997, at a meeting at the Carlos Propp home with about 65 people present, we confronted Willis Propp about his unwillingness to call/meet with us (regarding this Stan issue). This Propp meeting was all about Willis and his cover-up regarding the Incorporation Document, his twenty thousand dollar Visa Gold Card, his oil/mineral right dealings, and his financial status at the Canadian Imperial Bank of Commerce. After a three hour meeting where the friends bared their hearts about things that were taking place in this fellowship that were totally contrary to scripture and to what they themselves (the Alberta ministry) were preaching, Willis reassured us that he would finally meet with us regarding this Stan issue. A meeting was called in June, 1997 here in Calgary and those present were Willis Propp, Eldon Kendrew, Gwen Fipke, all members of the Alberta ministry, plus all six Jordan brothers and their wives (Delbert and Madeline, Stan and Carol, Larry and Mary, Ken and Darcy, Ted and Cheryl, and ourselves), and we brought two couples (eiders) as witnesses because they were also aware of massive dishonesty with Stan. We were told that we couldn't bring the other four people to this meeting, but we refused to come unless they were allowed to come and tell their involvement in this mess. The meeting proceeded where numerous lies and solid evidence of sexual perversion were disclosed but all the family chose to accept it as very normal. Willis fully accepted Stan's written lies to the one couple because Stan said that he was "stressed" when he wrote the letter. Stan was asked by Willis to apologize to us for his lying and to state his sexual status, which again revealed the total lack of repentance on Stan's part. Willis then stated that Stan would not prosper spiritually if he had any of these problems. We then found out, after pressuring Gwen Fipke for some answers, that the three workers had gathered all the family together except us for a lengthy meeting before the six of us arrived. The "united family front" that had worked so well in the Propp family cover-up for their brother Coy, had been successfully orchestrated again. The family then concealed the truth to their children about the meeting and we have had no contact with any of them since, but we are so thankful to be free of this dreadful burden of Stan's web, even at any cost. We harbor no ill feelings toward any of the family because they were simply manipulated by Willis Propp. And, of course, this meeting was just before Eldon Kendrew had to leave the work because of his escapades, so he needed to support Willis unconditionally. Following this meeting, we contacted Don Shenton regarding the lies he was telling people about the Jordan family meeting — he was claiming that I (Dale) was asked to apologize to Stan for being jealous of him "because Stan was successful and I wasn't". As is stated in the above paragraph, the reality was that Stan was asked to apologize to ME for his lying, which was just the opposite of what Don was telling. When discussing the situation at length, Don said that all his information came from the Alberta ministry (the three present at the meeting) and so he knew it was true. We told him clearly and fully of all Stan's lying/sexual perversion, so Don was fully aware of all the issues and chose to uphold him in it all. We were ex-communicated by Jim Knipe and Gwen Fipke at Willis Propp's directive in May, 1999 for allowing John and Shirli O'Dell into our home for Sunday a.m. meeting. Stan then moved forward with the reassurance of total support from the Alberta ministry and four out of five of his brothers, as well as most of the members of this faith. This consequent sexual perversion now culminated with the three charges of child pornography. We feel tragically sorry that those who pretended to love his soul and his family, who claim to love him most, did not encourage him to get the help he so desperately needed years ago. We feel that perhaps this despicable situation could have been prevented if real love/care had prevailed. Don Shenton/Alberta ministry are now undermining the seriousness of child pornography to cover for Stan and enable him to be a full partaker in the fellowship meetings. Even young couples with children will undoubtedly dismiss Stan's child porn problem as not being that significant either because they accept whatever the ministry says due to their power and control over the people. There are two very tragic elements in this vile case: this un-Christlike control all being done in Jesus’ name and the abuse of the little children who were victimized.
|
|
|
Post by emy on May 9, 2012 17:27:08 GMT -5
I was mainly referring to what happens when workers make decisions about who can go to meeting and who cannot.
|
|
|
Post by quizzer on May 9, 2012 17:43:44 GMT -5
I was mainly referring to what happens when workers make decisions about who can go to meeting and who cannot. I've seen this in action for a long time. Usually, workers don't like professing people who won't submit to them. Workers love professing people who pay them off, flatter them, and entertain them lavishly. When it's been a choice between moral and immoral, workers tend to side with the immoral. It pays better.
|
|
|
Post by emy on May 9, 2012 21:37:39 GMT -5
I was mainly referring to what happens when workers make decisions about who can go to meeting and who cannot. I've seen this in action for a long time. Usually, workers don't like professing people who won't submit to them. Workers love professing people who pay them off, flatter them, and entertain them lavishly. When it's been a choice between moral and immoral, workers tend to side with the immoral. It pays better. I'm going to "pull a rational" and ask you back this up with examples that can be proven.
|
|
|
Post by JO on May 9, 2012 22:21:57 GMT -5
I've seen this in action for a long time. Usually, workers don't like professing people who won't submit to them. Workers love professing people who pay them off, flatter them, and entertain them lavishly. When it's been a choice between moral and immoral, workers tend to side with the immoral. It pays better. I'm going to "pull a rational" and ask you back this up with examples that can be proven. Emy, would the above account of Dale and Marlene Jordan be good enough proof? (Reply #13)
|
|
|
Post by emy on May 9, 2012 22:29:15 GMT -5
I'm going to "pull a rational" and ask you back this up with examples that can be proven. Emy, would the above account of Dale and Marlene Jordan be good enough proof? (Reply #13) Can you prove a payoff?
|
|
|
Post by rational on May 9, 2012 23:33:56 GMT -5
One former sister worker told me how she had to talk a lady out of reporting an overseer for sexually harassing her by making unwanted sexual advances toward her. The lady was going to make his advances public to the friends and workers. This former sister worker now regrets that decision, because the man went on to harass/harm other women- and this has been documented. He is still in the work. At this point why has it not been reported? Not because of the legal requirements but because it is the ethical thing to do. It is not only workers who can report sexual abuse.
|
|
|
Post by rational on May 9, 2012 23:45:32 GMT -5
The NT apostles didn't seem to cover things up to promote a "clean green" image. How do you know? Maybe they were very good at it. I wonder what Jesus would have thought about this? "...for I am not come to call the righteous, but sinners to repentance."
|
|
|
Post by ts on May 9, 2012 23:52:05 GMT -5
Emy, would the above account of Dale and Marlene Jordan be good enough proof? (Reply #13) Can you prove a payoff? You think that the overseers are above partiality, don't you, emy? You have an account that is detailed where immorality is covered up over doing righteousness. Have you never heard that dishonesty doesn't just affect one area of a person's life. Greed is the root of all evil. Those who are greedy for power(like is illustrated in the above account) will pervert judgment for the sake of power and money. I would hope that the friends and workers would have enough spiritual discernment to figure out what should and should not be happening were there honesty in these accounts of abuse. Sadly, it seems there is a great lack of spiritual discernment in meeting.
|
|
|
Post by rational on May 10, 2012 0:13:11 GMT -5
I'm going to "pull a rational" and ask you back this up with examples that can be proven. Emy, would the above account of Dale and Marlene Jordan be good enough proof? (Reply #13) Assuming the report is true, it is supported by other sources. The unbelievable part is how adults could stand by and see what appears to be CSA and not report it for years.
|
|
|
Post by brissiegirl on May 10, 2012 1:37:18 GMT -5
I've heard platform warnings - by men AND lady workers - about women's hair, women's dress, women wearing denim, women being good Godly creatures.
And now we know the truth, that some perhaps many of those males that gave such stern warnings, were taking the women they chose and using them for their sexual gratification. Some of the women abused in our country are married, others were vulnerable and maybe alone and easy targets, there are young lady workers too, and some were little girls. It makes us cry.
All this while they were grandstanding the virtues of a celibate homeless ministry. Ha! Us women know and we are now in the loop and know what has gone on. I can tell you, no more. That's our warning to them!
How long before someone gets mad as a snake and uses a butchers knife on one of those molesting workers who stand on the platform so smug but ignore the real sickness .
The women workers who support them and don't take a stand against the abuse of women in the truth are just as bad.\
PS i'm not really advocating physical harm, it's just very tempting to think of removing some of those little willies. Especially the ones who have destroyed the lives of young innocent children.
|
|
|
Post by kiwi on May 10, 2012 1:50:48 GMT -5
You think that the overseers are above partiality, don't you, emy? You have an account that is detailed where immorality is covered up over doing righteousness. Have you never heard that dishonesty doesn't just affect one area of a person's life. Greed is the root of all evil. Those who are greedy for power(like is illustrated in the above account) will pervert judgment for the sake of power and money. I would hope that the friends and workers would have enough spiritual discernment to figure out what should and should not be happening were there honesty in these accounts of abuse. Sadly, it seems there is a great lack of spiritual discernment in meeting. She asked for proof not a babble
|
|
|
Post by Done4now on May 10, 2012 1:51:29 GMT -5
I've heard platform warnings - by men AND lady workers - about women's hair, women's dress, women wearing denim, women being good Godly creatures. And now we know the truth, that some perhaps many of those males that gave such stern warnings, were taking the women they chose and using them for their sexual gratification. Some of the women abused in our country are married, others were vulnerable and maybe alone and easy targets, there are young lady workers too, and some were little girls. It makes us cry. All this while they were grandstanding the virtues of a celibate homeless ministry. Ha! Us women know and we are now in the loop and know what has gone on. I can tell you, no more. That's our warning to them! How long before someone gets mad as a snake and uses a butchers knife on one of those molesting workers who stand on the platform so smug but ignore the real sickness . The women workers who support them and don't take a stand against the abuse of women in the truth are just as bad.\ PS i'm not really advocating physical harm, it's just very tempting to think of removing some of those little willies. Especially the ones who have destroyed the lives of young innocent children. There have been some pretty horrible things that have happened to the vulnerable people in the group. But--the great thing is that for some of the victims--they have TRIUMPHED. A close friend of mine is a fairly young sister worker--she is still in her 30s. When she went into the work as a naive young girl of 19--her overseer (in his 70s) forced her into an unwanted sexual relationship with him. She had some very tough years--and is now on a new staff in a different state. She didn't leave the work, she didn't press any kind of harassment charges, but quietly and with dignity, she has warned a lot of the young women about the things that can happen. And now--she is one of the more respected and beloved sisters on the west coast. Most of the young women (and children of either sex) who have problems of this nature--seek her out--and she counsels them and helps them get professional help.
|
|
|
Post by JO on May 10, 2012 4:06:06 GMT -5
The NT apostles didn't seem to cover things up to promote a "clean green" image. How do you know? Maybe they were very good at it. I wonder what Jesus would have thought about this? "...for I am not come to call the righteous, but sinners to repentance." The key word here is repentance.
|
|
|
Post by rational on May 10, 2012 8:35:28 GMT -5
And now we know the truth, that some perhaps many of those males that gave such stern warnings, were taking the women they chose and using them for their sexual gratification. If you know these facts, and what you are describing sounds like sexual assault, why have the criminals not been reported to the authorities? This sounds like some mixed charges. From consensual sexual relations to sexual child abuse. What country are you in? What is the requirement for reporting crimes? It is sad but what is really sad is that no one has brought charges against them. If you know, why not report now? Or is there a statute of limitation problem? Maybe it's just me but I think having the criminal arrested would be a better route. Actually, anyone who knows about abuse and does not report it is on shaky ground ethically. Just contemplating it?
|
|