Wednesday, 15 January 2014

An interesting comment on a recent Third Sector article

I was kicked out when a brother read a verse from the Mosaic law inferring that I had an "old leprosy". My wife was made to leave me and all my efforts to seek readmission stumbled on the rocks of one or two brothers who wanted me kept out. When faced by a similar event in the future will they consult the new PDT document (a commitment to mitigate the harmful effects that many people claim to have suffered as a result of the Brethren's harsh disciplinary practices, including the "shutting up" and "excommunication" of members) and say we should be governed by this now? Will they take a vote on it? Had anyone expressed disagreement over my case they too would have had the chop. It appears they are ready to sign anything that ensures the continuation of their tax favours, but will they act on them in the future? And if they do, will they look back at the times their actions have broken up families and say "We were wrong, what can we do to make reparation for our inhumanity and cruelty, and the suffering we have put you through?" Will the CC look at how they treat those of us who have suffered in the past and not just new cases of discipline before they give the PBCC the all-clear? The system is not governance by elders, it is run by mini-dictators (in every meeting) and one big dictator - the one they call the Man of God.


  1. Quite correct. I have often thought the recent use of the expression "elders" to be misleading, as it tends to signify authority balance by wisdom and governance. However, as the above comment suggests, localities are usually run by someone of Hitlerian leanings, often with one or two with not dissimilar to Himmler or Goebbels (Glowballs?)


    1. Elders, local leaders, city leaders, and senior members. The trouble is they are not trained, not qualified, not elected, and not vetted. So if one fancies a bit of power, or is looking for a vent for one's bullying urges, then they just need to say the right things, creep forward row by row, jostle and posture their way around, accuse a few people of some sins, and they could soon find themselves considered a priest. It is no wonder that with no checks and balances that the resulting leadership is like it is.

  2. Does it mean by signing this document they will keep to their commitment? No, I don’t think so. It all comes down to money, in this case saving money, they have simply signed this to save paying tax.
    Don’t forget the Brethren are always right, it is the regulations/law that is wrong. So although they have been ‘forced’ to sign this document it won’t stop them from being ‘right’ and carrying on just as before.
    We might see some sham cases of course to try to show to the CC that they’ve changed, but it will all be a show.