|
|
Post by ronhall on Oct 14, 2010 1:38:59 GMT -5
I am not convinced ts. These guys are wolves in sheeps clothing. They were never helpful and disgraced their positions. They were never gracious enough to step down, they were strongholds that had to be forced out. Those who brought it to light had to risk their necks by shouting it on the housetops. Many were not believed and were excommunicated in the process. Whispering had no effect. Those workers of iniquity never performed any useful service to the kingdom. Get real ts, you and your worker brother-in-law! "We very much appreciate Ira's guidance and help in every way the past 10 years in Texas. He has sought the Lord diligently and faithfully for your care. I have appreciated his help this year in getting me adjusted to the responsibilities here in Texas. The things that we have felt needful to discuss here is in no way to take away from all the good that Ira has done..." - Ray Hoffman CSA does not detract from the spiritual good that a person can do for the kingdom. The workers who are in authority over us are there not by their own choice or devices. If they were wolves in sheep's clothing, the other overseers would have picked up on it. Ray Hoffman would not have said how helpful he has been over the ten years in TX. The other overseers would not have approved of him being an overseer if he were a wolf in sheep's clothing. Ira is a man and men make mistakes. Everyone has made a bigger mess of the whole issue by spreading rumors and gossip. Just goes to show when people with an agenda step in and pretend they are doing God's work better than He can. Ray Hoffman and others over the years have handled the CSA offenders with love and care and compassion. There is a lesson in that for all. "Ronhall, you do not have respect for the authority of the workers." I have the utmost respect for God's true workers, but how could I have any respect whatsoever for these workers of iniquity who show love, care and compassion for each other but only cruelty for children who have been taught to trust them? Any more names to add to the list? |
|
|
|
Post by ts on Oct 14, 2010 2:19:44 GMT -5
"We very much appreciate Ira's guidance and help in every way the past 10 years in Texas. He has sought the Lord diligently and faithfully for your care. I have appreciated his help this year in getting me adjusted to the responsibilities here in Texas. The things that we have felt needful to discuss here is in no way to take away from all the good that Ira has done..." - Ray Hoffman CSA does not detract from the spiritual good that a person can do for the kingdom. The workers who are in authority over us are there not by their own choice or devices. If they were wolves in sheep's clothing, the other overseers would have picked up on it. Ray Hoffman would not have said how helpful he has been over the ten years in TX. The other overseers would not have approved of him being an overseer if he were a wolf in sheep's clothing. Ira is a man and men make mistakes. Everyone has made a bigger mess of the whole issue by spreading rumors and gossip. Just goes to show when people with an agenda step in and pretend they are doing God's work better than He can. Ray Hoffman and others over the years have handled the CSA offenders with love and care and compassion. There is a lesson in that for all. "Ronhall, you do not have respect for the authority of the workers." I have the utmost respect for God's true workers, but how could I have any respect whatsoever for these workers of iniquity who show love, care and compassion for each other but only cruelty for children who have been taught to trust them? Any more names to add to the list? Those mentioned are public figures who are held in high esteem. We are advised by Ray that CSA has not diminished Ira's help and labor for souls. Ray is held in high esteem by all of the other overseers. We cannot but trust his words and feelings. To question Ray's judgment of Ira's helpfulness would be to question all of the other overseers who were met at Seneca. Some victims of CSA might find Ray's words offensive. |
|
|
|
Post by Learning Patience on Oct 14, 2010 6:39:10 GMT -5
ts I realise that your are playing games and that you have an agenda with your recent posts, but he whole thing has gone too far. Your posts are offensive to victims of CSA who may be reading them, so I ask you to "get off the turps" and refrain from this line of posting. Thanks Ts, is annoying me as well with his straight worker speak answers. But his posts are helpful in showing the mindset of the workers and that is invaluable in trying to understand how the workers guilty of sexual misconduct can continue in the work with other workers blessings. When TS was posting true messages about issues in the 2x2 fellowship many of the friends attacked and criticized him as if he were a heretic. Once he switched over to 'worker speak', all of a sudden, none of the friends had anything to criticize him about- and if anyone would actually take the time to read what he is writing and what many workers actually believe, it is pretty ridiculous. The friends and workers are dealing with a conundrum. How are we to treat the workers- as men and women of flesh and blood or as gods? When events like CSA happens, and a worker is exposed in this crime, then we are to forgive them in this, as they are just men. But until a verifiable crime occurs, we are taught, as TS so helpfully points out that the workers have authority over us and we are not to question them on anything, and any that do obviously are weak saints and trouble makers in the kingdom and are in danger of losing out. TS is pointing out beautifully the mindset of the workers. "Obey us because God sent us and we have authority over you. To question us is to question God. If the friends had the right spirit they wouldn't be rejoicing in the downfall of another. God allowed these things to happen to help build faith in the persons involved. Even Joseph had to go to jail. We need to have the spirit of forgiveness. Jesus was falsely persecuted, so we can expect that." OF COURSE it is OFFENSIVE to the victims of CSA, many friends and workers turn against any that represent a threat to the brand name. The workers have been speaking about their authority and their system more at convention recently, they aren't getting the message, but instead are circling the wagons. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 14, 2010 6:48:11 GMT -5
If he is truly a helpful person, then he can be helpful in a capacity which does not give him "authority" over people. He gave up that place long ago through his actions and should never again be in a position of power over children.....or adults for that matter.
Anyone who has molested children should never be allowed to have any kind of capacity of power over them or their parents.....ever. That doesn't mean that person has to be a castaway or that his repentance is invalid. It just means than any responsible person should never give that person an official opportunity to re-offend.
I don't know anything about Ray's judgment in this case. But if Ray thinks this man should be back in the work, Ray's judgment is worthless.
The idea behind this is reprehensible. Workers have only one authority: to build up and edify, not to destroy. Anyone respecting their authority to destroy children should be ashamed.
"For though I should boast somewhat more of our authority, which the Lord hath given us for edification, and not for your destruction, I should not be ashamed"
Anyone who has used their authority to destroy should be ashamed, removed, and never again given the opportunity to destroy.
|
|
|
|
Post by sharonw on Oct 14, 2010 7:07:16 GMT -5
FWIW, I have a number of professing friends in Victoria who tell me that the culture in Victoria is the most repressive and backward of anywhere in Australia. I personally encountered a very backward and dangerous approach to CSA in Victoria. I still can't believe that workers there would place known CSA offender in a fellowship meeting with small children.......unreal. And to the defenders of the system: no this is not rumour, it is not hearsay, this is my first hand experience from all the parents involved and the meeting itself. We have also been made aware recently that we had fellowship in the late 80's with an ex worker who is now a convicted CSA offender. He came to the fellowship after relocating from another State. We can only assume that this was known within the other State prior to him relocating and if so as a duty of care should not all members of this fellowship been advised . We would certainly not have refused fellowship with this person however would have been much more diligent with the care of our young children. I think you're being more then merciful to say you would not have refused fellowship with the offender if you'd known of his perpatrating crimes. I, also, was FORCED to sit in a Sun. a.m. mtg. with a perp who was pretending to be out of the work doctoring....he did not inform the meeting elder in time for the elder to inform anyone else that he was coming to meeting, so it would have been an issue of a "walk-out" should any of us had decided we would not meet with such a person! His pretention of being "ill" made the whole thing a bogus nightmare. And he let a man who is a bit dense call him a worker as in a active worker.....it left the rest of us not knowing how to prepare that man for the awful truth about this man. This man married and is apt to visit that Sun. a.m. mtg. with his bride as they are not that far away and this man has extended family who do go to that particular Sun. a.m. mtg. So the confusion will continue for those who are keeping their heads in the sand about these criminals in the work. Makes me glad I no longer have to put up with it, but makes very sad for those who do. |
|
|
|
Post by sharonw on Oct 14, 2010 7:13:39 GMT -5
No one disagrees with that. The workers have done all within their power and understanding to take care of CSA when they know about it. Yes, there have been mistakes. The workers aren't perfect. All religions have problems with CSA. It is not a spiritual issue. It is a human issue. There is a certain element that is trying to capitalize on CSA and using it to say that the workers who are guilty of CSA have spiritual problems and are incapable of being messengers of the gospel while CSA perps. I think we have seen that these guys have been very helpful to the friends and workers even with CSA in their past. It is because of the smear campaigns against them that removed them from their helpful positions. Some of these men, though unconvicted, have been gracious enough to step down from their positions for the the sake of having peace in the kingdom. Were it not for people causing problems with their "whisper campaigns" these workers could still be in useful service to the kingdom. I am hoping that I have misunderstood this or you are not being serious - are you saying that a known worker with CSA in their past, provided that they are helpful/useful, all is OK for them to continue to preach and be useful. Could God bless such a ministry? Would the same also apply to any other crimes committed by workers as well, provided they are helpful/useful? I am hoping that you can confirm that I have totally misread all of this. I think he is being facetitious! The sad part of it is this, that people professed through these workers' gospel mtgs. Can we not understand how they could feel now when the real truth comes out? My heart weeps for these folks, it is a shock for them! It seems to me it just goes to show us that pretentious people can purely copy what is expected of a minister of truth and actually are wolves in sheep's clothing! It does boggle one's mind to think of 50 years of people coming under the control of such a person! May God keep us all in HIS CARE! |
|
|
|
Post by sharonw on Oct 14, 2010 7:21:29 GMT -5
I do not condone CSA in any way. It is abhorrent and should never exist. Especially in the one and only true ministry on the earth. I am not the first to post that CSA is being used in an agenda to put down the workers and friends. I am only repeating Ray Hoffman's gratitude for Ira's helpfulness. Does that helpfulness come from a godly spirit or a wrong spirit? Can Ira's care come from ungodliness? Why is this, all of the sudden, a taboo subject? Of course a worker remaining in the work after being convicted of CSA is wrong and should not be allowed. So, does Ira's offense take away from any of the good he did? Does Ray's comment take away from his own credibility? Or do we trust the authority of the workers and support them in their words and decisions? The workers are there to care for our souls. They do have authority. Whether they are right or wrong, make mistakes or not, they have to answer to God. Our responsibility is to just obey and submit. The workers used to say, "keep CSA secret" and that is what we trusted was best. Now they don't and we trust that is best. Right now they say, "keep sexual affairs secret" and that is what we will do. If they want to move the promiscuous or flirtatious workers around or make them overseers, that is not anyone's business. Whatever they decide, you can guarantee that there will be someone with a bad spirit who will get angry at them. If they want to tell us how to raise our children, we would do well to submit to that. They would not be in their place of authority without good reason. They would not have such support of so many overseers, workers and friends if there wasn't something to their wisdom. TS, I hope whoever reads your remarks whether they have been those where you've told of your sad family story with a worker OR when they read this thread which is supposedly seeking to help find someone willing to go to Tas/Vic area at least for the interim, they will understand you are speaking from both sides of your mouth. I realize you are trying to post what you know the workers' thoughts and actions have been in the past.....but also as ADMIN points out the victims of CSa and other abuses reading your posts can be more offended and yes, I know there's been some who continue to refuse to believe that CSA is a problem in the workership! So please do not add pain to those poor dear victims! Please?  |
|
jimmy
Junior Member
Posts: 89
|
Post by jimmy on Oct 14, 2010 7:23:48 GMT -5
I realise some of what has been written here is fairly poor taste "humour???" but it raises an interesting question. Does the perpetrators crime negate any good he has done?
Given the long-standing nature of the alleged (and apparently confessed) crimes, it seems impossible to me that God would work through this or any such man. If he was to unreservedly repent i'm sure his soul can be made right with God, but for the period of the crimes he was unrepentant and thus i doubt in contact with God.
Having sat in this man's missions a number of years, this does not surprise me as I found him surprisingly big on history and surprisingly light on bread.
|
|
|
|
Post by sharonw on Oct 14, 2010 7:32:16 GMT -5
I realise some of what has been written here is fairly poor taste "humour???" but it raises an interesting question. Does the perpetrators crime negate any good he has done? Given the long-standing nature of the alleged (and apparently confessed) crimes, it seems impossible to me that God would work through this or any such man. If he was to unreservedly repent i'm sure his soul can be made right with God, but for the period of the crimes he was unrepentant and thus i doubt in contact with God. Having sat in this man's missions a number of years, this does not surprise me as I found him surprisingly big on history and surprisingly light on bread. As well as the one I know very well...he was always big on "form" little on mercy and love.....he was very strict in his expectation of "conforming" of the friends to the "form" of profession in the fellowship.....And as I think of it, as many sermons of his that I've heard, none stay with me like some sermons have! So apparently no bread there either! |
|
|
|
Post by kencoolidge on Oct 14, 2010 7:32:39 GMT -5
Let me just throw this into the mix. For the workers/overseers that are found to be dilly dallying in the work. I feel that if they are honestly repenting and want to remain in the fellowship then the minimum thing that would be required is to give those in authority a list of those they had abused so that they and the ones they had abused could obtain professional help. I suppose that there is still room for dishonesty by not conveniently recalling all the names.
jmt
ken
|
|
|
|
Post by ronhall on Oct 14, 2010 7:51:14 GMT -5
Thanks Clearday for explaining the truth surrounding this situation. It was stated so succinctly in your statement, " Workers have only one authority: to build up and edify, not to destroy."
The picture that is emerging is that there is an "overseer club", operated in sort of a good-ol'-boy manner where each protects the other no matter what the offense. Instead of cloaks of fine purple linen with braided borders, these guys hide and operate behind a cloak of "worker speak".
We just studied 2 Cor 10 last night where the same type had overtaken leadership of the church at Corinth and were ridiculing Paul for his "contemptible" speech.
We also read this together last night: "For though we walk in the flesh, we do not war after the flesh: (For the weapons of our warfare [are] not carnal, but mighty through God to the pulling down of strong holds;)
Casting down imaginations, and every high thing that exalteth itself against the knowledge of God, and bringing into captivity every thought to the obedience of Christ; And having in a readiness to revenge all disobedience, when your obedience is fulfilled."
I am finding myself losing respect for the authority of this corrupt overseer club stronghold and beginning to understand why I am offended by messages delivered in "worker speak".
Of course, I am sad, in a way. But when the truth of the matter is finally understood, there is a release from the old dark thinking to a new awakening.
I suppose you are wondering if I am now planning to exit the fellowship? Nope! The Lord isn't done with me yet! I just have been given a better picture who to believe and who to ignore.
|
|
jimmy
Junior Member
Posts: 89
|
Post by jimmy on Oct 14, 2010 7:52:22 GMT -5
I agree Ken, that part of repentance for a crime like this would have to be a willingness to fully accept the consequences of his actions, and yes, that would take a full confession and genuine remorse. Untill such a thing happens I cannot see how he could be part of the bride of Christ. God can forgive (of that we can be ever thankful), but only when he sees genuine repentance.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 14, 2010 7:57:56 GMT -5
I realise some of what has been written here is fairly poor taste "humour???" but it raises an interesting question. Does the perpetrators crime negate any good he has done? Given the long-standing nature of the alleged (and apparently confessed) crimes, it seems impossible to me that God would work through this or any such man. If he was to unreservedly repent i'm sure his soul can be made right with God, but for the period of the crimes he was unrepentant and thus i doubt in contact with God. Having sat in this man's missions a number of years, this does not surprise me as I found him surprisingly big on history and surprisingly light on bread. Jimmy, your last comment is fascinating. I too sat in several missions of a child molester years ago and his mission was identical: long on history and short on bread. They were great history lessons and I enjoyed them, but there was little for the soul there. |
|
|
|
Post by rational on Oct 14, 2010 8:16:46 GMT -5
I don't believe problems within the fellowship and especially the workership should be allowed to grow unchecked to the point the authorities need be be called in. However, it is apparent that those in control feel otherwise. I respect that, but it does cause me to wonder, more than a little! Hi Ron, my view on CSA is pretty hardline. CSA is not a problem that should have its growth checked. CSA is CRIME, and should be reported to and dealt with by the authorities as soon as it is dertected. Yes there is an element of SIN in CSA, and it is appropriate that the church should deal with SIN, but the church has no commission or authority to deal with CRIME apart from reporting it to the appropriate agency. There is nothing about the CRIME aspect of CSA that the workers should be involved in adjudicating on. There must be NO DOUBT or HESITATION in reporting CSA to and cooperating with the authorities. Anything less than full disclosure is concealment and enabling the offenders to continue offending. I will not resile from this position. Wow. Where have I heard this before? It is the only way to be sure the offenders will be at least investigated and hopefully dealt with. Churches are very protective. The publication suggested by Ram from the Church of England suggested that the offense initially be reported internally. This is not a good solution. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 14, 2010 9:28:17 GMT -5
Hi Ron, my view on CSA is pretty hardline. CSA is not a problem that should have its growth checked. CSA is CRIME, and should be reported to and dealt with by the authorities as soon as it is dertected. Yes there is an element of SIN in CSA, and it is appropriate that the church should deal with SIN, but the church has no commission or authority to deal with CRIME apart from reporting it to the appropriate agency. There is nothing about the CRIME aspect of CSA that the workers should be involved in adjudicating on. There must be NO DOUBT or HESITATION in reporting CSA to and cooperating with the authorities. Anything less than full disclosure is concealment and enabling the offenders to continue offending. I will not resile from this position. Wow. Where have I heard this before? It is the only way to be sure the offenders will be at least investigated and hopefully dealt with. Churches are very protective. The publication suggested by Ram from the Church of England suggested that the offense initially be reported internally. This is not a good solution. And here is a link that shows exactly why the Church of England have that as part of their child protection policies. They are following Government and police advice. Sadly they overlooked yourself in the consultation process. Please note the Metropolitan Police banner of approval on the document! www.ccpas.co.uk/Documents/Safe%20and%20secure.pdf |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 14, 2010 10:07:59 GMT -5
Thanks for that ram. Good brochure.
It doesn't address some of the unique characteristics of the F&W church system so I wrote
CCPAS this morning with the following question:
"I am involved in a church organization in which the missionaries do not maintain a personal place of residence. Rather,they live in homes of church members for varying lengths of time before moving on. The missionaries are treated like
family and are given the same or greater levels of trust as a family member.
Do you have any guidelines/training/recommendations to address kind of situation? Or is it simply more advisable for the
missionaries to avoid living in homes in which there are small children living in close quarters?
Thank you in advance for your response."
I will post the response if and when I get one.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 14, 2010 10:31:02 GMT -5
Clearday, thanks for that. I have been making some behind the scenes enquiries about the whole issue of abuses in churches etc, and have raised the very matter you have mentioned.
Basically from what I gather so far, the F&W's church has some major thinking and decision making to do, at least as far as the UK is concerned. They either recognise they are a church group and accept all the responsiblities and legal requirements (as far as abuses go) that go with it, (the above link gives some idea but is far from complete) or they try to continue as a they are in the belief they are not a religion, a group, an organisation or are not paid or unpaid, voluntary or otherwise. In the battle against CSA and other forms of abuse, the legal noose in the UK is tightening around groups who are in contact with or work with children in the course of their business. The Govt is determined to make all groups accountable and as risk free as possible. The recently formed Independent Safeguarding Authority with its registration and vetting process may well be relevant to the sect. It is possible they could weave and dodge through the registration requirements on technicalities, but would that be wise for the one true church when the spirit of child protection (child first) is the governing principle.
What is required is that some people without personal agendas or axes to grind, biases, favouritism etc, get together and work out proper policies for the sect to follow. All the indications so far show that a combination of education and robust practices and procedures are what is necessary.
There is considerable professional and voluntary help out there. However, it is possible that high costs could be involved. Unfortunately the F&W's sect does not have the infrastructure to cope with what is required.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 14, 2010 11:49:16 GMT -5
You're right that we do not have a mechanism to solve these kinds of problems. It's pie in the sky for people to think "God is in control" but in reality God places matters which can be solved by man into man's hands.
I did note in my reading that in the UK, all organizations seeking tax exempt status are required to do a child protection plan. For now, F&Ws are still flying under the radar.
The strange thing in our group is that money is not a barrier to getting the proper work done to design a child protection program. However, there is no formal infrastructure which can cope with this and appropriate the funds required to involve professional consultants to work with our unique system to design the proper programs and guidelines. The system we have is designed to work well for certain things such as meeting appointments and convention preps and operations. However, getting something like this done is completely outside of anyone's scope.
This is where elders need to be elders. A child protection program should be developed by competent elders with ministerial representatives being involved, working together with professional consultants. There is no shortage of good people who can do this.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 14, 2010 12:08:19 GMT -5
Without a proper child protection policy in force they cannot achieve charitable status. Without a child protection policy they cannot obtain insurance for protection against claims related to csa or other abuses. The first they really have no desire for. The second one is a very risky situation.
As part of a child protection policy all the workers now and in the future would need to register with the ISA (Independent Safeguarding Authority), or its Scottish equivilent.
A long deep breath is needed, followed by a serious biting of the bullet.
|
|
|
|
Post by rational on Oct 14, 2010 12:21:10 GMT -5
And here is a link that shows exactly why the Church of England have that as part of their child protection policies. They are following Government and police advice. Sadly they overlooked yourself in the consultation process. Please note the Metropolitan Police banner of approval on the document! www.ccpas.co.uk/Documents/Safe%20and%20secure.pdfAn excellent link. It is sad indeed because, looking at the flowchart on page 10, it is clear this is a document that does not address dealing with child abuse by church members. The referenced government publication, ' What to do if you're worried a child is being abused', does get it right by sending people to the correct authorities, not church personal. Refer any concerns about child abuse or neglect to Children's Services or the Police.The advice is good for protecting the children at home but not from the church members. It is the same reason for not thinking it should be adopted by the F&W I gave after first reading it - the initial report should be to the police, not some church member to 'evaluate' the validity of the claim. |
|
|
|
Post by rational on Oct 14, 2010 12:26:07 GMT -5
You're right that we do not have a mechanism to solve these kinds of problems. It's pie in the sky for people to think "God is in control" but in reality God places matters which can be solved by man into man's hands. I agree. If you are going to go with the "God is in control." mantra then just walk away because logic dictates that god was also in control during the time the child was being abused. It is clear that god is not the solution. Take care there is not too much bureaucracy involved. |
|
|
|
Post by rational on Oct 14, 2010 12:28:09 GMT -5
Without a proper child protection policy in force they cannot achieve charitable status. Without a child protection policy they cannot obtain insurance for protection against claims related to csa or other abuses. The first they really have no desire for. The second one is a very risky situation. As part of a child protection policy all the workers now and in the future would need to register with the ISA (Independent Safeguarding Authority), or its Scottish equivilent. Not being part of an organization that is looking for a tax exempt/charitable status or an organization that has any insurance why would they have to register? |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 14, 2010 12:38:18 GMT -5
And here is a link that shows exactly why the Church of England have that as part of their child protection policies. They are following Government and police advice. Sadly they overlooked yourself in the consultation process. Please note the Metropolitan Police banner of approval on the document! www.ccpas.co.uk/Documents/Safe%20and%20secure.pdfAn excellent link. It is sad indeed because, looking at the flowchart on page 10, it is clear this is a document that does not address dealing with child abuse by church members. The referenced government publication, ' What to do if you're worried a child is being abused', does get it right by sending people to the correct authorities, not church personal. Refer any concerns about child abuse or neglect to Children's Services or the Police.The advice is good for protecting the children at home but not from the church members. It is the same reason for not thinking it should be adopted by the F&W I gave after first reading it - the initial report should be to the police, not some church member to 'evaluate' the validity of the claim. Rational, thanks for reminding me just why I had decided I had had enough of exchanging views with you. You are quite simply unbelievable! I will remind you of the title of the document, Safe & Secure - Ensuring the well-being of children and young people "WITHIN" the church community!" (emphasis mine!) You quite obviously haven't thought about the document but grasped at what you saw was a chink of light to keep your argument going. The route forward as Clearday says is for the F&W's church to hire professional consultants at whatever cost, to design proper Child Protection policies and procedures, in conjunction with certain elders and workers, taking into account appropriate laws and guidelines. Correct me if I am wrong, but it appears to me you are against such a direction? I certainly favour such a move and have surrendered my previous standing in favour of it. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 14, 2010 12:47:26 GMT -5
Without a proper child protection policy in force they cannot achieve charitable status. Without a child protection policy they cannot obtain insurance for protection against claims related to csa or other abuses. The first they really have no desire for. The second one is a very risky situation. As part of a child protection policy all the workers now and in the future would need to register with the ISA (Independent Safeguarding Authority), or its Scottish equivilent. Not being part of an organization that is looking for a tax exempt/charitable status or an organization that has any insurance why would they have to register? The question is a legal one. Are they a group or an organisation, including voluntary ones, who employ people either paid or unpaid, whose work involves having contact with or working with children or young persons. It is not a simple task to say they do not fit this category. There are various factors which may well direct a court in the UK declare they are indeed such a body and their ministers should register. What is more important, why would they want to avoid the Government's attempts to make all groups paid or voluntary, who work with or have contact with children, register with the ISA, when the principle of doing so is to prevent persons who have a known background of abuse or other risky factors from working with or having contact with children. |
|
|
|
Post by Scott Ross on Oct 14, 2010 13:00:19 GMT -5
And here is a link that shows exactly why the Church of England have that as part of their child protection policies. They are following Government and police advice. Sadly they overlooked yourself in the consultation process. Please note the Metropolitan Police banner of approval on the document! www.ccpas.co.uk/Documents/Safe%20and%20secure.pdfAn excellent link. It is sad indeed because, looking at the flowchart on page 10, it is clear this is a document that does not address dealing with child abuse by church members. The referenced government publication, ' What to do if you're worried a child is being abused', does get it right by sending people to the correct authorities, not church personal. Refer any concerns about child abuse or neglect to Children's Services or the Police.The advice is good for protecting the children at home but not from the church members. It is the same reason for not thinking it should be adopted by the F&W I gave after first reading it - the initial report should be to the police, not some church member to 'evaluate' the validity of the claim. While I DO agree (wholeheartedly!) that the correct procedure is to contact the authorities, unfortunately that just doesn't compute with many members of the truth fellowship. That's just a fact of life. HOWEVER.... Now that it appears that the overseers are starting to take this issue seriously, then a phone call to the overseer should result in the authorities being contacted immediately anyhow. From what I have heard, at least some of the overseers have instructed members of their staff to call the authorities before they call the overseer in cases where there is suspected abuse. The recent quotes from Barry Barkley regarding the arrest of an ex-worker as reported in a newspaper:
"We are more of a fellowship that operates on the basis of a family than on the basis of an organization," he said. "That's why we are left as a group of equals, really. We are a Bible-oriented group. Our attempt is to follow the teachings of the Scripture as individuals."
Scandalis was involved in such work in the '70s, Barkley said, although he was unsure for how long before members told him he had to stop.
"We do recognize that it's in the court system," he said of the more recent allegation. "We will be fully supportive of their efforts at investigation. We'll be fully cooperative because we want any injured persons to be helped quickly."
Several websites, including the one where Carolus posted his story, are dedicated to former members of the fellowship who are concerned about the group's operation, including allegations of sexual abuse.
One site, wingsfortruth.info, is dedicated to allegations of sexual abuse within the fellowship.
Barkley said his ministry does not tolerate child abuse and reports any allegations to authorities. Workers participate in an online training program called MinistrySafe on being alert to and responding to signs of sexual abuse, Barkley said, and are trying to become more proactive.
"It's not what we're about," Barkley said. "If one case comes up, it's a problem. We don't want it. It has been dealt with. It will be dealt with."
Read more: wingsbts.proboards.com/index.cgi?board=csainthenews&action=display&thread=78#ixzz12M6aidWvGoing by the information coming from the overseer of the Eastern US, it is apparent that ALL cases will be reported to the authorities from now on. It will look pretty bad for the fellowship if any overseers didn't follow the training they just received and the public declaration by Barry.... Likewise training workers on CSA issues has been done in parts of Canada as well. I got the following info from one of the professing folks that live in Ontario not long ago: - all the workers in Ontario have now attended a seminar on the subject of CSA
- From this training the workers now understand the '1 on 1' principle and other issues that will now apply to them because of their positions as ministers of the church.
- The head workers have had some professionals that they have consulted with concerning CSA issues and their responsibilities as ministers.
- the training classes were at least in part instigated by some of the US overseers. Based on that information, I would think that no matter whether an individual contacts the authorities or contacts their overseer, it is going to immediately be reported to the authorities. Of course WINGS will be sure to report any instances where this isn't the case......  (Actually, I have no reason to doubt that this is how it will be done, at least in the Eastern US) The willingness of Barry to openly be interviewed concerning this is a good sign for sure. There was no evasiveness on his part, and he readily shared with the reporter that the individual arrested was a former worker who had been charged with an instance of CSA, and then was removed from the work. Such openness is to be commended, and it is nice to see that what is being reported by WINGS is now also being reported by the head worker. (Again, at least in the Eastern US) Scott  |
|
|
|
Post by sharonw on Oct 14, 2010 13:27:43 GMT -5
Thanks Clearday for explaining the truth surrounding this situation. It was stated so succinctly in your statement, " Workers have only one authority: to build up and edify, not to destroy." The picture that is emerging is that there is an "overseer club", operated in sort of a good-ol'-boy manner where each protects the other no matter what the offense. Instead of cloaks of fine purple linen with braided borders, these guys hide and operate behind a cloak of "worker speak". We just studied 2 Cor 10 last night where the same type had overtaken leadership of the church at Corinth and were ridiculing Paul for his "contemptible" speech. We also read this together last night: "For though we walk in the flesh, we do not war after the flesh: (For the weapons of our warfare [are] not carnal, but mighty through God to the pulling down of strong holds;) Casting down imaginations, and every high thing that exalteth itself against the knowledge of God, and bringing into captivity every thought to the obedience of Christ; And having in a readiness to revenge all disobedience, when your obedience is fulfilled." I am finding myself losing respect for the authority of this corrupt overseer club stronghold and beginning to understand why I am offended by messages delivered in "worker speak". Of course, I am sad, in a way. But when the truth of the matter is finally understood, there is a release from the old dark thinking to a new awakening. I suppose you are wondering if I am now planning to exit the fellowship? Nope! The Lord isn't done with me yet! I just have been given a better picture who to believe and who to ignore. Ronhall, I fully understand how you feel presently...been ion those shoes myself. I hung in there feeling a need to be of some kind of help to the friends I met with as they were and are still being shocked right and left themselves and often do not know what their next move should be. As I found a strong and consistent study about Jesus to be most helpful during those times, I think and/or feel that might help you Ronhall....just keeping our eyes on Jesus through these tough times helps me to get through the shock and grief that all of this brings. Just hang in there and keep your faith in Jesus and it will all turn out for you...God will lead you where He sees it is best for you! My prayers are with you and anyone else that is going through these stages. |
|
|
|
Post by sharonw on Oct 14, 2010 13:34:14 GMT -5
You're right that we do not have a mechanism to solve these kinds of problems. It's pie in the sky for people to think "God is in control" but in reality God places matters which can be solved by man into man's hands. I did note in my reading that in the UK, all organizations seeking tax exempt status are required to do a child protection plan. For now, F&Ws are still flying under the radar. The strange thing in our group is that money is not a barrier to getting the proper work done to design a child protection program. However, there is no formal infrastructure which can cope with this and appropriate the funds required to involve professional consultants to work with our unique system to design the proper programs and guidelines. The system we have is designed to work well for certain things such as meeting appointments and convention preps and operations. However, getting something like this done is completely outside of anyone's scope. This is where elders need to be elders. A child protection program should be developed by competent elders with ministerial representatives being involved, working together with professional consultants. There is no shortage of good people who can do this. Yes, elders certainly could and a lot of them would love to be of help like this. That brings up the fact that the Apostles faced issues in which they were not prepared to take care of and they appointed those men who were reliable in the faith and well able to do the service that the Apostles felt like it wasn't theirs to do or they didn't have the time. |
|
|
|
Post by Linford Bledsoe on Oct 14, 2010 14:32:53 GMT -5
The reason the seven elders were appointed was because the people came to the apostles and complained of the problem. The apostles then asked the people to choose out the men. . It says then it pleased the people. The point I am making is the reason this issue of csa is being addressed in a better way is because the people themselves are demanding it. Not some outside of the fellowship group. Little do people here know the behind the scene work that has been done to grapple with this problem. The round the table discussions in our homes. It is not being hid in spite of what anyone says.
|
|
(Actually, I have no reason to doubt that this is how it will be done, at least in the Eastern US)
