Sunday, 21 December 2014

Safeguarding Handbook for the Protection of Children and Vulnerable Adults

Do the Hales exclusiveists (PBCC) have such a written policy and handbook, furthermore are there trained folk to deal with Pastoral issues as they arise? 


  1. Yes they do.... Absolutely.

    The Holy bible is our Safeguarding Handbook.
    God's book of blessed assurance, guidence. Oh yes...far more appropriate than present day political correctness which is offensive to the truth and Christian conscience.

    His standard is superior


    1. Jim 17:22, If I maybe blunt & direct, your response is quite bizarre & nonsensical

      First of all, you claim “God's book of blessed assurance, guidance” yet you the PBCC Exclusive Brethren don’t follow what Gods book says, in fact you wilfully & deliberately ignore Gods book. You separate from all other Christians when Gods book says the opposite. You refuse to eat or drink with other Christians when Gods book says the opposite. You divide man & wife when Gods book says the opposite. You don’t have appointed & accountable elders, pastors, shepherds, deacons when Gods book says the opposite. You allow babes in arms to take the communion elements when Gods book says the opposite. You refuse to worship, fellowship & sit at the Lords Table with all other Christians when Gods book says the opposite. You show no love to your neighbour when Gods book says the opposite. You call immoral behaviour ‘pure’ when Gods book says the opposite. The list grows & grows & grows

      So Jim, the Holy Bible is not your safeguarding handbook, nor is it your blessed assurance, nor is it your guidance, because you don’t follow what it tells you to do !

      Secondly, the Holy Bible does not detail, explain or give instructions in many safeguarding issues such as -

      Definition of a vulnerable adult
      Safer recruitment
      Positions of trust
      Criminal Records Bureau (CRB) Disclosures
      Supervision, accountability & training
      Risk assessments
      Information sharing, confidentiality & consent
      Complaints & whistle blowing
      Trustees of children’s charities
      Activities specifically with children & young people
      Good practice guide
      Leadership and staffing
      Staffing ratios
      Helpers aged under 18
      Work experience & community service
      Record keeping in children’s activities
      Parental consents
      Consents by children
      Holidays & residential trips
      OFSTED registration
      Affiliated youth groups
      Mixed age activities
      Unaccompanied children
      Special needs
      Drug & alcohol policies
      Electronic communications
      Making & distributing images of children
      Child abuse & neglect
      Reporting concerns about children
      Children in need but not at risk
      Activities with vulnerable adults
      Making & distributing images of vulnerable adults
      Home visits
      Visiting people living in institutions
      Street angels and street pastors
      Lunch clubs
      Handling money for vulnerable adults
      Adult abuse and neglect
      Reporting concerns about vulnerable adults
      Challenging behaviour
      Perpetrators of abuse who are also vulnerable
      Domestic abuse
      Signs and indicators
      Responding to concerns
      Survivors and historic abuse
      Authorized listeners
      Offenders & those who might present a risk to children or vulnerable adults
      Written agreements
      Allegations against church workers

      Jim, it is shocking & frankly horrifying to read that you think the topics shown in the above list from a Safe Guarding document are according to you & the Plymouth Brethren Christian Church Exclusive Brethren just “political correctness which is offensive to the truth and Christian conscience”

      Jim, your flippant, dismissive & nonsensical response is of real concern to readers & those in authority. It shows what a potentially dangerous, harmful & detrimental organisation the PBCC Exclusive Brethren is.

    2. Yes you're right PC 20:43
      The world certainly IS "shocking and frankly horrifying", so don't be so surprised by decent honest people moving away from it.
      As for the PBCC, one has to admit they have got a lot right!

      Drama lesson over chum or you got more to say?
      By the way, have you ever accepted God's authority?
      It's there in the holy bible and far from "nonsensical"

      Nothing wrong with Jim's honest statement.

    3. 20-43 Seems you have a real big chip on your shoulder?
      Such an attitude is not healthy.

    4. Hello Jim

      Any progress on your investigations into my grievances?

      Mark R Elliott

    5. Present-day political correctness, despite some of its sillier aberrations, encompasses several moral principles that are extremely important and can be derived from Biblical teachings. These include racial and sexual equality and respect for a number of basic human rights, including the rights of children. Any church that sweepingly condemns “present-day political correctness” and all that it includes is a danger to its own members, their children and the public. It is also a danger to itself because it would be failing in its legal obligations, and this could lead to loss of charitable status and other administrative sanctions.

    6. Ahhh but you see Ian..What is behind your so called "Equality" It depends on how such an expression is applied and in what context. Such notions or expressions may be intended to snuff out freedoms we still enjoy.

      Christians died at the stake for matters of conscience. We will not give them up.

      We must therefore fear God and not men.
      You are welcome to political correctness if that's the outer limitations of your judgement, but it has no authority with those who love the Lord Jesus.

      There are certain wicked things which are attacking Civil and Christian liberties in the United Kingdom.
      Try even filling in a job application form for NHS these days or a similar institution and see the attack on liberty and freedom of Christian conscience.
      Many great British institutions, including the Welfare state, were founded on Christian principles, but are now being used to attack them.
      See Ian, you might be drawn into this evi, but not be aware.
      lt is part of the apostasy which is against God and will result in the Man of Sin.

      All true and faithful Christians remain completely separate from it.
      Safety and certainty in the assembly is very attractive don't you think?
      Being a real Christian costs something.

      Leonardo J Octavianus

    7. During JT Junior's time as leader the EBs made a great deal of being subject to the authorities except where it went against their conscience.(Romans 13 verse 1)
      Since Child Protection legislation in the UK requires all organisations including churches to have a child protection policy and nominated persons to safeguard children (and indeed adults who may have responsibility for them) I am rather surprised at Jim's flippant comments. Either he is ignorant of such requirements or is a fool.
      Is he seriously suggesting that the Exclusive Brethren ignore the law?
      The Charity Commission will indeed be concerned if that is the case.

    8. Leonardo,

      It is true that some of what you call political correctness, as enshrined for example in the UK Equality Act of 2010 and in prevailing moral standards, does in a sense “snuff out freedoms,” as you put it, because granting a freedom to one person sometimes requires limiting the freedom of someone else. But take a look at the freedoms that are being “snuffed out” and consider whether they are worth preserving. Weigh them against the freedoms that other people now enjoy.

      In employment, education and the provision of goods and services, you no longer have the freedom to discriminate between people on the basis of their race, sex or religion. Is that a problem? Would a respectable person actually want to hold on to that freedom?

      You no longer have the freedom to incite hatred against a particular race or against people who subscribe to a particular religion or lack of it. Again, would a respectable person actually want to hold on to that freedom?

      Can you explain what freedoms you regret losing, to the extent that they can be compared with those that Christians went to the stake to preserve? Could you also enlarge on what it is that concerns you about NHS job applications or the welfare state?

    9. Ian 08:00
      l think you should fear to make charges against people who want to do what is upright.
      You seem to have your mind set against the Truth, so no need to enlarge on something which is obviously right.
      l have made a truthful statement of which you reject at your own loss.

      The world's way of avoiding God's laws, moral issues and responsibility, is to use political correctness. Worse, this can be imposed on Christians or non Christians by a wicked law. Some are calling good evil and evil good, which is a sign of the times we are now in. Apostasy is becoming more evident in many British institutions and we see attempts to oppress and stifle civil liberty to allow people to choose what is good and right.

      Real Christians have the moral courage to challenge such wickedness through the courts and beyond as deemed appropriate.

      Real Christians will also remain separate from this apostasy and do not wish to have such lawlessness and bondage imposed on them.

      Your statement which essentially accuses genuine Christians of "inciting hatred", is an attack on family values, moral choices and on our freedoms hard won by those who had the courage to die for their convictions.

      Your comments thus clearly show you support discrimination, not oppose it.
      Treachery is present on these blogs.

      Take a stand for what is right and God will never leave you without a way through. Paul spoke about a way not entirely shut up.
      However, Stand for what is wicked and you will be judged and thrown into Hell.
      Think Ian before you say sonething even more stupid. God holds us responsible for everything that comes out of our mouths. God is not against you or me, but he hates what is false.
      I think it's not unreasonable to state that Falsehood was on your lips today because of the charge made against people who wish to serve simply God
      and protect traditional family values.

      Leonardo J Octavianus

    10. Leo J O

      You make many unsubstantiated claims & comments in your posts at 22 December 11:07 and at 23 December 16:17, most of which have no evidence, logic, sense, or biblical support

      One of your claims is the following –

      “Try even filling in a job application form for NHS these days or a similar institution and see the attack on liberty and freedom of Christian conscience”

      This comment of yours is made without a shred of evidence to support it. You make no explanation why you say what you say & provide no examples to support your comments.

      This kind of hyperbole & condemnation of something without any actual evidence is typical of how Exclusive Brethren Plymouth Brethren Christian Church have acted since the days of JN Darby. It is not a Christian characteristic.

      For the sake of truthfulness I have copied a link below for a standard NHS job application form. Its in pdf format so most computers can read it.


      I have carefully read every section of this application form and nowhere can I find the type of – “attack on liberty and freedom of Christian conscience” – that you so dramatically describe.

      Please can you explain what you mean by these comments as quoted, otherwise it will be obvious to all readers that your comments are simply hot air with no validity whatsoever ?


    11. Leo

      You been at the scotch already?

    12. Leonardo,

      In your posts of 22 December 2014 at 11:07 and 16:17 you make a lot of extreme statements and accusations, but without citing any examples or any supporting evidence, despite being asked for it. You talk a lot about a rising tide of wickedness in British institutions and churches, and when we ask you to explain your statements you seem to think it is wicked of us even to ask.

      You talk a lot about a rising tide of wickedness in the world, which is one of the central themes of Brethren indoctrination, but most of the evidence points in exactly the opposite direction. In the UK or the USA for example, people are not nearly as wicked now as they were at almost any time in the past. You should look at the massive evidence of this collected by Steven Pinker.

      People who have newly left the Brethren are often surprised to discover how many wonderful people are out there. Many of them have said so. It only takes a few weeks to discover that most of what you were told about the outside world is exactly the opposite of the truth. If you want true friends who are loving and lovable, caring and sharing, friendly, honest and moral, you will find far more of them out than in.

    13. LJO......Just wondering if there might be a link with Demas, do you think?

      Many Christians died at the stake at the hands of other "Christians" who thought only they possessed The Truth. They were contentious and stubborn bigots, you see, who happily piled more faggots on the fire. I find that unattractive, don't you?

      However, I am glad you acknowledge that the Socialists did a good job on the creation of the welfare state; also, the organisation of workers' unions has made a great difference to the conditions of employment for so many. I am sure you will agree it is a pity that PBCC Ltd businesses are so anti union as it might have saved a few accidents, for example, having better health and safety measures in place.

      Regarding your place in the assembly, I seem to recall you saying that you were not an "assembly man". However, I agree it certainly doesn't come cheap as you need to contribute extensively to the Hales Family Trust. I find this personal enrichment in the name of Christianity also unattractive, don't you?


    14. Leonardo

      "Christians died at the stake for matters of conscience. We will not give them up."

      Most martyrs in England were either Catholics killed by Protestants or vice versa. In other words they died because they either accepted the authority of the pope or did not. This is not really matters of conscience in the wider sense; although perhaps your usage is unintentially accurate.

      Happy New Year


  2. This blog is getting duller by the day. What happened to leaked documents and horrible stories?! Bring back Richard Stay!

    1. If you don't like it a) why are you here and b) why don't you set up one yourself along the lines you want. People who talk and don't take action are very dull

  3. Criticism of the term often referred to as PC is often used to justify racism, exploitation, child abuse and all sorts of inequality. Such criticism is the refuge of scoundrels. Jesus Christ had much to say about the protection of children which theEB appears to choose to ignore. They appear, however, to be quite quick to use the law when it suits such as attempting to silence critics or to gain politically correct charitable status.

  4. I’m surprised that the matter of a Safeguarding Policy is still being raised with the PBCC because I know how often I’ve spoken or written about this issue with PBCC members in the past year or so. In ordinary churches it’s considered a priority and many congregations place a reference to their Safeguarding Policy, or the document itself, on display at the entrance of their buildings.

    Jim - it’s not helpful to say that the Bible is your Safeguarding Handbook because such a large part of its content was written in an age which frequently commended violence against the person. I know that the PBCC doesn’t want the babies and children of its detractors to be “dashed against the rock” (Psalm 137:9) and I’m certain that the Brethren don’t stone to death their stubborn and rebellious sons (Deuteronomy 21:18-21).

    If you think about it, much of the Old Testament was written down and edited between the eighth and sixth centuries BC - once the alphabet became available and around the time that scribes were writing Homer’s ‘Iliad’ in Greece. It was an age when writers and law-givers thought it normal to encourage violence in certain circumstances, and they frequently ascribed extreme vengeance to their gods as well. (That’s something, I find, which people often raise with me when I’m talking to them about the Bible.)

    The New Testament records completely different values. There the whole law is summed up in love of neighbour and a proper Safeguarding Policy would reflect that understanding.

    1. The Charity Commission also have some advice on charities.


    2. Joan - Can you at least attempt respond intelligently / in context?
      Jim is most likely referring to specific parts of the Bible.


    3. Dot
      Your posting is illogical. How can anyone respond to a generalisation in context?

    4. Dot 23rd Dec 20:37

      Your thinly veiled personal attack on Joan is pathetic, childish & illogical & a perfect example of how Plymouth Brethren Christian Church Exclusive Brethren members behave when they cant answer simple questions, or when their silly hyperbole is challenged

      Joan, (as ever) responds in a calm sensible intelligent manner using examples from the bible to support her comments in context, with particular reference to the historical aspects, which are important.

      Jim, however, did the opposite and did not mention any specific parts of the bible to support his ridiculous claims. Dot, you may now assert that Jim may have been referring to specific parts of the Bible, but Jim did not do that, nor has he responded in that manner.

      Therefore, those responding to Jim can only respond in general biblical terms because Jim was not specific in his initial silly comments


  5. Despite protestations about their biblical safeguarding, it has not been unknown for the EB to oblige little children to leave their family home or to turn them against one or both parents. I don't believe this behaviour is advocated in either the Bible or most safeguarding policies. Perhaps our EB apologists might care to comment.

  6. Leo
    How many members of the PBCC (Exclusive Brethren) have filled in or even thought about filling in Job Applications for NHS (or any other public sector job) in the past thirty + years. How many Exclusive brethren currently work in the public sector? e.g. NHS; Local Government; Civil Service.
    A friend of mine was thrown out of the EBs in the mid 1970s for refusing to leave the Civil Service because Symington decided the CS pension scheme involved an unequal yoke. I was employed in the Civil Service for over 40 years and I am totally ignorant of what that yoke was.

  7. Leonardo J Octavianus

    In your post at 22 December 11:07 you say – “We must therefore fear God and not men”

    LJO, Why then do PBCC Exclusive Brethren follow the words, rules & edicts of men such as James Taylor & Bruce Hales and not the Word of God ?

    In your post at 22 December 11:07 you say – “All true and faithful Christians remain completely separate from it. Safety and certainty in the assembly is very attractive don't you think?”

    LJO, Do you believe the PBCC Exclusive Brethren to be the only true and faithful Christians ? Do you believe the PBCC Exclusive Brethren to be “The Assembly” ?

    In your post at 23 December 16:17 you say – “Real Christians have the moral courage to challenge such wickedness through the courts and beyond as deemed appropriate”

    LJO, Do you think the PBCC Exclusive Brethren are the only “Real Christians” ? How do you think the ministry of the biblical apostle Paul applies in 1 Corinthians 6 v7 ? Do you think it is right for organisations to suppress access to truth & suppress freedom of speech through the courts ? Do you think those who agree with James Taylor Juniors actions (alcoholism, being with another mans wife, being drunk in a Christian gathering etc) have “moral courage” ?

    In your post at 23 December 16:17 you say – “Real Christians will also remain separate from this apostasy and do not wish to have such lawlessness and bondage imposed on them”

    LJO, Do you think the PBCC Exclusive Brethren are the only “Real Christians” ? Why do you the PBCC EB separate from ALL Christians if the PBCC Exclusive Brethren are not the only “Real Christians” ? The word “apostasy” means to have “left the faith altogether”, do you think ALL other Christians outside of the PBCC Exclusive brethren have “left the faith altogether” ? Please explain what you mean by “lawlessness and bondage”, what is your evidence for this, what has specifically happened to make you draw such a conclusion, where is this supposed “lawlessness and bondage” and what is it specifically ? Do you think other Christians outside of PBCC Exclusive Brethren don’t separate from what you describe ?

    In your post at 23 December 16:17 you say – “Take a stand for what is right and God will never leave you without a way through”

    LJO, Do you mean join the PBCC Exclusive Brethren ? Do you think other genuine Christians who are not part of the PBCC Exclusive Brethren are not taking “a stand for what is right” ?

    In your post at 23 December 16:17 you say – “God holds us responsible for everything that comes out of our mouths. God is not against you or me, but he hates what is false.”

    LJO, If that is the case, Why have the PBCC Exclusive Brethren tried to con & deceive the UK government & those in authority since 2012, by lobbying under false pretences, presenting half truths, spin, misinformation, misrepresentation & falsehoods and why did the UK Charity Commission Jan 2014 report find that the PBCC Exclusive Brethren caused & created matters of detriment & harm ?


    1. Noticed Ian has gone all quiet after being blasted by LJO
      Another PC man shot down in flames...


    2. I think given the time of year, you might find that maybe he has better things to do or maybe he has gone away or maybe he regards LJO like I do - a troll who we will never convince so what is the point of trying. Ian has a life!

    3. I am still waiting for LJO to reply to my last two posts.

  8. Dot, as in dotty I presume?

  9. A safeguarding policy is not just an exercise in political correctness. It is necessary for the protection of children and vulnerable adults, especially in patriarchal and secretive societies, where the risk of abuse tends to be greater than elsewhere, and it is also necessary to comply with the law.

    If the Exclusives have a safeguarding policy, you would expect it to be well known, because it will not be effective unless the members know about it. There are plenty of ex-members who say they were sexually abused as children, so the risk cannot be dismissed as negligible.

  10. One thing we notice here is that EB/PBCc people make silly, unevidenced comments full of clichés and EB-speak then disappear. They never answer a direct question.

  11. Wouldn't it be lovely if we could have truce on Christmas Day just like the troops did in WW1.

    Imagine being able to socialise , converse and dine with our blood brothers and sisters for just one day in the year. That would be better than the continuing 365 day stand-off we endure now, despite the Charity Commission's 2014 directives.

    1. That would indeed be lovely. So I emailed my family in the PBCC (Exclusive Brethren) on Christmas Eve, wishing them a peaceful day and I said our door was always open. Still waiting for a reply...........

  12. If you zoom in, you'll see that most of London is in the 'under consideration' ..... its plans to privatise the Child Protection Services and we're keeping everything child protection jobs uk