Hi TheGreek, and good to hear your insightful thoughts.

Yes, one of the features of the controlling setup in Struthers is that they can say one thing to the congregation and a quite different thing to those outside.

If you are outside the organisation you can see this contradiction, as you can hear stories and comments from the folk inside and can also see comments from those outside, for example on this forum.

If you are however inside, you are told not to read the forum or speak to these terrible people that are outside of the church, so it does not matter what is said to those outside, you will never hear it and you will not be able to see that there are different messages.

This is part of the problem with how they handle complaints. Even if they tell the complainant privately that the complaint is upheld (and say the same to organisations like 31:8) they can simply stand up in the pulpit and say, “all these complaints were a load of rubbish that come from terrible people trying to destroy our reputation.” That is of course a total contradiction and lacks any moral integrity, but that does not seem to bother them, all they care about is keeping the congregation trapped. They know they can say this from the pulpit and no-one in the organisation can complain: if they do, they just get a row for reading the forum or listening to outsiders.

That is most likely what will happen over the next few weeks. People who have been brave enough to come forward and make a complaint and in some cases to tell their story openly here on the forum, will get a private letter saying ”mistakes were made”. At the same time, as TheGreek describes, the Struthers propaganda machine will go into overdrive to discredit anyone who has complained and blame it on those who have complained, those they associate with or other issues like mental health or bad motives.

This also reminds me of a story in the news this very evening. Rowena Pailing resigned from her ministry role in the Church of England because of how they dealt with the issues around Canon Hindley, saying:, “I couldn’t work for an organisation which puts its own reputation and the protection of alleged abusers above the protection of and care and listening to victims and survivors.”

Note the two things which she says are prioritised:

[*] The church’s reputation, and
[*] The protection of alleged abusers

And the three things she would expect to have higher priority:

[*] The protection of victims and survivors.
[*] The care of victims and survivors.
[*] Listening to victims and survivors.

I suspect some of the same will be said about Struthers in a few weeks. I hope that, if that is the case then some honest people will, like Rowena Pailing, have the guts to stand up and talk openly about the priorities Struthers are demonstrating.

I have recently seen evidence of this in a related context. A message (not to Struthers) raising some serious concerns and questioning priorities was answered with a reply defending the organisation’s reputation but saying nothing about the issues raised. Just the way of the world I guess, but churches and Christian organisations should be better than this.

Trying to deliver a different internal and external message is a bit harder when it comes to practical matters though. As noted by Blackwatch, the church is now closing the school. As I said on October 22 (see p157)

Quote
ThePetitor
Hudson Taylor (often quoted by Mr Black): “God's work, done in God's way, will never lack God's supply.”

Chris Jewell: “Largely due to Covid and the present cost of living crisis, together with major increases in food costs, the directors of the charity have very reluctantly agreed to close the shop.”

Compare also with what was said by a parent (whom I am led to believe also attends Struthers) last week (see article about Cedars School in The Herald) “A lot of schools in trouble now are the faith schools.”

Hmmm. God’s work, done in God’s way, will never lack God’s supply. So that must mean… er…

Another thing Mr Black was fond of saying was: “The mills of God grind slowly, but they grind exceeding small” which is actually part of an older saying translated by Wordsworth as:

Quote
Wordsworth
Though the mills of God grind slowly; Yet they grind exceeding small;
Though with patience He stands waiting, With exactness grinds He all.

I think that is what is happening here. What Struthers is experiencing is what happens in the Bible all the time – God tells people to turn back to Him but they do not, so He sends judgement upon them to wake them up and make them notice. If they still do not respond, there is further judgement. This increasing judgement appears in a condensed form in the story of Pharoh refusing to let God’s people go, but also happens on many other occasions.

As Amazing Grace says, they problem is however that the leaders in Struthers have absolutely no Biblical or theological training. If they did, they would see that this is what is happening and that the Bible makes it clear that they (the leaders, not the congregation!) are the ones who are responsible. How can they however even see this when they are not prepared to sit under proper training under sound expositional ministry?

Their (unbiblical) answer is of course that God speaks to them directly but that simply does not accord with the evidence.

For example, some of the things that seems to be happening this year are:

[*] A number of formal complaints have been submitted.
[*] The school has collapsed and is about to close
[*] The BBC are gathering info for a documentary

So, what was the New Year Word for this year – did it predict this? Did it perhaps say this would be a year of trial and difficulty? That the smooth paths would become lumpy and that the waters would be rough? I will leave you to check that for yourselves, then to consider:

Quote
Deuteronomy 18v21,22
You may say to yourselves, “How can we know when a message has not been spoken by the Lord?” If what a prophet proclaims in the name of the Lord does not take place or come true, that is a message the Lord has not spoken.

Hi ThePetitor,

I would be interested to know more about this BBC documentary. Is it towards the church or the school or a combination of both? And do you know if it’s possible to contact them to provide information?

curiositykillsthecat Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Hi ThePetitor,
>
> I would be interested to know more about this BBC
> documentary. Is it towards the church or the
> school or a combination of both? And do you know
> if it’s possible to contact them to provide
> information

Hi the contact details for anyone wishing to speak to the BBC is jax.sinclair@bbc.co.uk what I am led to believe It's anything to do with Struthers. I think, myself, they would love to hear anything about either.

I think it's about time others spoke up and tell their story. You are not alone, we all are here to support you.I know its took me a long time to speak of what I went through but I am glad I have now.

Every day I am hearing and reading memories of folk's time in Struthers, and it's shocking me more and more, I know I am minding more and more lately,

I am just sorry that It took me 40 years to speak out and tell my story.And put the complaint in and ask them some questions what I am still waiting to be answered , Seems Like Diana has not been in the ofice for over a month. As her last email said she would replay to my email after she returned to the office

Well - re what curiositykillsthecat was asking - there won’t be anything left of a school for the BBC to take an interest in.

And also interesting was a quote about the school closure from the Greenock Telegraph link - thank you Blackwatch.

It indicated - as do the new set of charity accounts out yesterday - that 2 new Trustees were recently appointed to the Struthers Executive to bring in their expertise to market the school and raise the intake.

Seems they didn't have much time to do that before the closure was decided.

But the problem was not marketing. It was always, and remains, a failure of Risk Management. How do you market places in a school run by a church with an open running sore for over 10 years as they utterly fail to address and resolve the public testimonies about their conduct expressed on this forum? How do prospective parents ignore that it is the only church in Scotland with an industrial scale online controversy relating to its shocking treatment of people?

An intelligent person might conclude that this fully deserved exposure now shared by around 100 agreeing witnesses has contributed to the closure of the coffee shops and now the school and the loss of jobs to every salaried employee. Yet not once since 2011 was this Risk ever identified and acknowledged in the Annual Report and Accounts. Never once (astonishingly) was it even considered worth mentioning that once the subsidised church kids declined and the collection plate was maxed out; bringing in non church kids might be difficult given the uniquely appalling reputation Struthers has among Scottish Churches and online. No plan to deal with that issue was ever proposed.

Yet the point of risk management is to identify issues which could have a negative impact on the charity AND address them intelligently and adequately before they come back and slap you in the face. Despite some people on this forum desperately pleading with the leaders to help them and help resolve their decades of pain not one thing has been done and not one finger has been lifted to help.

Imagine if the leadership had engaged earlier and people coming into this forum saw an online dialogue with Struthers people constructively engaging with those complaining and then attempting to mend fences and heal hurts – no matter how humbling that might have been for them. Imagine if they had been seeking to learn from complaints and resolve things via respectful dialogue – as their Complaints Policy claims (really – it does!). People coming across that and wanting a cheap private school for their kids might have seen that as signifying a sufficiently safe environment.

The failure to identify that risk and resolve it fully and quickly is a massive institutional failure and a massive Christian failure which now the charity can no longer hide. Their approach was to pretend, like foolish delusional children, that all was lies and the devil. Then in a staggering irony to allow people to preach that terrible consequences would befall online critics, while Struthers would grow and prosper because of its special holiness and it “had leaders only moving on the instruction of the Lord God of Hosts” (according to the idiotic, unbiblical rantings of Spiers in 2011) How is that approach working out for Struthers Memorial Church?

We warned them to sort this out. Multiple people in multiple posts warned them for over a decade. Reality has now caught up with them. The Struthers Empire is in tatters. The churches are declining in number and attendance. Everyone is gazing over the dust and ruins of their leadership.

Men might even think that God has visited on them the apocalyptic judgements and consequences they claimed He would inflict on others.
Matthew 7:1-3: For in the same way you judge others, you will be judged, and with the measure you use, it will be measured to you.”


And there is no reason to believe that SMC will listen now but they should. The day isn’t over yet. If they believe that this is as bad as things can get they should wise up and understand things for Struthers Memorial Church can still get much, much worse. They already know some of what is coming towards them. They do not yet know the impact of the school closures and redundancies on church attendance and income. They do not know what consequences will result from their response to complaints currently being handled for them by 31:8.

So to the SMC leadership I suggest once again - deal with the running sore on your church. There is no guarantee that will solve all the problems Struthers is facing but it is without doubt the most serious issue. This situation makes them look childish, uncaring and deeply unwise. No normal person can understand their suicidal reluctance to resolve all this. Yet they go on pretending it is nothing but lies and they have more important things to do with their time. Look where a decade of that thinking has got them.

It is time for the leaders of Struthers to roll up their sleeves and get their hands dirty. It is time to contact people here by signing onto the forum and asking individuals if they want to talk. If necessary offer a safe environment regulated by a trusted 3rd party. It is time for them to ask questions, listen, empathise and work hard to convince hurting people that they can be trusted. It is time for them to sit and listen while people get the chance to finally feel heard by those who pretended to be their spiritual parent, ripped their hearts out, then cut them off for decades. Only after they have convinced us they are genuine this time - then the past can be dealt with. Then the hurts can be shared and apologies made and an understanding of a way ahead worked out. Then based on the good reports coming out others may have courage to talk as well and the issues on the forum can be addressed by those doing the work of servant leaders. This will take time, patience and most of all humility on the part of those seeking to be the peacemakers.

Or are the important leaders, the ones who have done the damage, too busy repeating 40 year old sermons and pointing out sinful members in public meetings to do this? Will they hunker down and continue to run their charity and churches irresponsibly and further into oblivion. The next generation of leaders will no doubt thank them for that when they inherit the appalling mess.


There is no way back up for SMC except the one described above. If the present leaders don’t fix this the next generation will have to.

And all of us, inside and outside Struthers, are now asking in considerable unity:
given that everything it has tried to do for the last 30 years has now spectacularly failed
and in that time branches have closed and membership declined
and hundreds are grieving publicly that they were ever involved
- what on earth is this church for?

As a trade unionist my heart goes out to those losing their jobs as a result of the school closure due to what looks like poor financial foresight, but as someone who has been a victim of Struthers I'm glad to see their impact in the local communities continue to reduce. It certainly feels like we're watching the steady decline of the Church as their reputation spreads and people speak out on the harm they have suffered.

A Bible believing church might remember three key verses in times like this:

"you reap whatever you sow"

"A good tree cannot bear bad fruit, nor can a bad tree bear good fruit. Every tree that does not bear good fruit is cut down and thrown into the fire. Therefore by their fruits you will know them."

“Whoever sows injustice reaps calamity, and the rod they wield in fury will be broken.”

The Greek, thanks for these comments and for confirming last year’s accounts are now available from companies house.

I have had a quick look and note that one line in their accounts says, “During the year we have continued to see... restored families and general wellbeing.” I suspect that sometime in the next year or so, they will (unless they take your advice) have to answer questions about how they can reconcile that statement with all those whose wellbeing has suffered. One hundred people on this forum from what you say, and there are I am sure as many others who have not posted yet who have suffered as much.

As for your comment about risk, I note that accounts state that, “the charity’s management of risk is informed by professional volunteer specialist advice and support”. I sure hope that is not someone currently working in the Risk Management industry as it looks like their professional reputation will just have taken a serious dive.

The main risks in the report are listed as Safeguarding, Financial and Reputational, which seems a reasonable choice of key areas.

Yet, when you look at the detail, they are just using these words, there is no recognition of the very real risks they face in these areas. (Although, in some cases, things they should have identified are no longer “risks” which may or may not happen. In risk management terms, things that have already happened become “issues” rather than “risks”. They should still have been on the risk register though, along with mitigations. )

Safeguarding – which is clearly not being managed or they would be seeking out those on the forum who have concerns in that area, and would not be getting formal complaints.

Financial – which has gone totally wrong in terms of the bookshops and now the school. The financial risks have been publicly posted on this forum and could have been managed much earlier but, in spite of the figures (taken from their own accounts) being published here ten years ago, the issues are not even identified as risks in the accounts.

Reputational- what can I say? The BBC are sufficiently concerned about the reputation of this church that they are investigating it. Yet there is nothing to worry about in terms of reputational risk? The one hundred unhappy people on this forum do not even get a mention under reputational risk? That is the most extreme example I have ever come across in my life of being deliberately blind to a risk.

Who is this advisor, and are they licenced in any way? How can they approve this total disregard for the risks in ALL THREE areas they have identified as key?

As you say, this is just the beginning of the pain – that is one person whose professional reputation is probably now ruined. When questions about the organisation’s approach to risk are asked publicly, they may never be able to work in the industry again. I know I would not employ any sort of risk manager who failed to identify such significant risks. I do not wish that on anyone, but it is not me (nor will it be the BBC or others) who identified - or failed to identify the risks, so do not shoot the messenger!

There are also other school employees who will presumably now be seeking other jobs. Like anonymous for now, I feel sorry for these individuals. If this had been properly managed, they could have been given notice at a suitable time of the year and had time to find other employment. That will no doubt have some reputational impact in terms of those making that decision. Since many of the Directors are fairly new, that means they are being dragged down by something that is not really of their making.

How many others may be dragged down with the organisation? As you have said TheGreek, people are now putting their professional reputations on the line. If they stand up to the plate, admit some things have gone wrong and launch a genuine investigation designed to do what their policy says – “learn from any mistakes and set things right” their reputations will probably escape relatively unscathed.

If they instead toe the normal Struthers party line that the church is perfect so it must be those who complain are wrong (in spite of all the clear evidence that you point out) they will quite simply lose all professional standing, and individuals may even end up being reported to professional bodies for not upholding standards. That is something that happens, as standards are not just restricted to paid employment, so we are talking about potentially serious consequences. Every documentary I have seen ends by saying “we have forwarded the evidence to the appropriate bodies” so come on folks, read your Bibles and do what is says, talk to your creditors and seek to settle matters on the way to the court, even if it is in this case the (very powerful) court of public opinion.

As you say TheGreek, they have no idea how bad things could get. What if the risk management guy is unable to work and sues SMC for coercing him or her into providing a misleading report? What if some of the parents sue because of damage to their children’s education that could easily have been avoided? What if a building has not been maintained properly and someone is hurt? That is a very real risk when decisions are not made based on professional input but on the basis that the leaders know everything.

Only one thing I think I disagree with from your post, which is that “if the present leaders don’t fix this, the next generation will have to.” If the present leaders do not fix this, I doubt there will be a next generation. I think this is the hand of God “grinding exceeding small”. Their only option is to repent of their cold stone hearts and pray for hearts of flesh so that they can have care and compassion for others driving all they do. There is no viable alternative. They will discover that one way or the other, either now while it is still relatively painless or ten years down the road when it is all horribly painful.

Oh, and Anonymousfornow – that may be the best post on this entire forum!

Hi Petitor
It is a reasonable point to make that professionals (and people with jobs) who are enabling what Struthers are doing and the results they are producing may end up reputationally...compromised.

Yet I think you may be dancing around a wee bit much on the head of someone who may prove to be one of the few people left with the capability (should there be a time for change) to actually make things better. The story is he was someone who had a key role in finally standing up to Mother Speirs bullying ways which ultimately resulted in the schism and her departure.

That he can help fix the mess may or may not prove true and it is also possible that by posting mildly in his defence I have just done him a worse favour than you did! Strange days.

TheGreek,

Well, it is good to hear there may yet be some people in the organisation who are capable of "speaking truth to power".

I still think the Risk Manager's professional standing my have been compromised by this however. Hopefully they will have emails that show they have identified the risks and asked for these to be added to the Risk Register, so that will give then a bit of professional cover, but most professionals would part company with an organisation that consistently refused to take their advice. How could a risk manager who kept pointing our serious risks and seeing these ignored year after year continue to advise the company?

Do those involved have any idea how difficult these questions will be to answer publicly?

I think the problem here is, once again, the whole power thing. "The leaders" are in charge. They have a hot line to God and know everything. It does not matter if you are a Risk Manager or a Safeguarding expert - or even an amateur who posts financial information on this forum to say that the school finances are not viable - you are not one of "the anointed ones" so your opinion does not count. That is not a Biblical model - look at Nathan standing up to David, Paul to Peter, and even Balaam's Ass speaking to Balaam! The Biblical model is that truth matters, not who is saying it.

The same replacement of knowledge with power is likely to happen with current issues. Even if there is professional advice from HR specialists, safeguarding experts or outside agencies like 31:8, "the leaders" will know best and have ultimate authority. Even the church website says, "While officially the Executive Council has been replaced by the Board of Directors, in reality the task of overseeing the work of the Fellowship continues as it did previously, with Mrs Diana Rutherford now carrying the overall responsibility for the work, supported by the other directors and the members of the whole Fellowship. "

So the democracy things is just a sham, the Directors are only there to support Diana.

The problem is of course that is not their responsibility in law. No matter what the website says or how decisions are made internally, the Directors are responsible in law. The Directors will not be able to say, "I do not know about that, please ask Diana", they are "jointly and severally" responsible. If you are a Director of SMC and do not know what that means, I suggest you look it up right now. Do not leave it to tomorrow!

I have been asked to share this podcast .
You can all guess with me posting it here what the church is she is referring to.
And yes you have also guessed right. This girl has a hudge story to tell and share with what she went through and witness at her time in Struthers.
We have alot in common and my daughter watched this today and said "you both have so much in common mum and act the same you both put a great show on" but that church. Has alot to Answer for why you still have self doubts that your never feel that good enough no matter what you do . They didnt protect and norish you both . This is so true .Yes its not all about Struthers but its where her mental health problems started

Its up to her to tell you all her story its not my place but those who you who are struggling with things ex members amd members i think this could help some relise there not alone.And theres help out there

[youtu.be]

Hi everyone
Hope you’ve all had a good summer .. even though it’s been rain and more rain!
Also, those we haven’t heard from e.g. Rainbow hope your doing well and if your still liaising with BBC (and anyone else) I hope it’s going in a positive direction too.
Has anyone looked at the new Company’s House report (December 31st 23)for the church?
I’m not an accountant so can only look at them as a non-expert.
Only looking at the schools finances:
Wages and salaries £649,033
Support Costs £201,265
Total £850,298 outgoings

School fees brought in £552,908

So a shortfall of £297,390

I know the school is closing this year but my question is how did the school support itself in previous years?
Did the congregation collections mainly pay for the school? Did all of the congregation know this and were happy with it?
I remember the Latigo site posting the finances and asking similar questions.
So when Alison Speirs was the headteacher (for most of the schools existence) did she just transfer money from each of the churches without asking the person in charge of finances for that church? Did Chris Jewel who was the paid central treasurer ever question the shortfalls and give advice on how to get the church school into a self-financing position. Did the leaders of the Church ever question Alison decision making re the school. For example, her daughter had a class size of about 3 pupils and if she was paid the normal full time teachers wages (£33,729 to 42,336)was that good ‘housekeeping’. Surely Alison could have merged more classes to give a more realistic teacher to pupil ratio and therefore trim teachers salaries to help towards self-financing.
Did the supposed vision from God for the school take over common sense?
Was this an abuse of power? Did Alison Speirs just say I want this amount and simply get it without question?
Surely this is also an issue along with spiritual abuse?
The money that members of struthers gave, which I do believe that they saw it as giving from the heart into a work for God in promoting the Gospel of Christ, did it mainly end up being siphoned towards the school!
Also, what about individual church maintenance… was that neglected in favour of the school? I’m simply talking about everyday common sense needs of running a Church.
Alison Speirs was in charge of the Glasgow Church.. did she ensure that the Church building was properly looked after or did she neglect it (along with most of her parishioners) in favour of the school? Did members of the Glasgow Church have a say about where the money went? They certainly didn’t have a say in spiritual matters.
The Greek stated
‘story is he was someone who had a key role in finally standing up to Mother Speirs bullying ways which ultimately resulted in the schism and her departure.’

Did this ‘he’ then identify some of the above and finally address it. Be interested to know who the ‘he’ is? When Alison left had heard through the grapevine it was because of difference in opinion in a school matter between her and the directors.
I wonder how the 2023 school deficit will be covered. Maybe when selling the school. Also, the teachers will also have to get some financial package… how much will that cost the church members? Or will this also be covered by selling the school.
The leaders should have taken action a long time ago to address the funding of the school. They should also have been more transparent with church members that Church funding was going towards the school throughout the years. I’m sure they would say that the finances were transparent by looking at the yearly reports but I really don’t believe that the average church member will 1. Look at these reports or 2. Will go through them with a fine tooth comb. Although they might now!
Maybe with Alison Speirs gone the new leadership and directors will be more financially resilient and also involve church members more …. after all without the church members there is no church!
The finances may make perfect sense and add up to someone who knows more about accounting. Be good to hear from you.
AG