Hi Ifellaway, I 100% agree that the most important thing is that individual people learn the truth and can make their own informed decision. I know how much this forum helped me, and, having read your own comments and those of others, there is no doubt that many many people have benefited from knowing they are not the ones at fault. This forum and the Latigo site have now been around for
Forum: Destructive Churches

Thanks Rensil Yes, the arrogant belief that their own spiritual insight is more important than everything else, including scripture, is mind-boggling. Jesus was the one who spoke to people His disciples turned away! In Struthers it is the opposite - most of the congregation would speak to the contributors to this forum (unless ordered not to!) but the leaders would not. That shows just how f
Forum: Destructive Churches

Some interesting thoughts and developments here recently. For example, Quotecbarb Just to let you all know I had some correspondence from the OSCR regarding complaints and they seem to be focusing on investigating concerns around public benefit and the way in which paid positions are handed out. and QuoteChesterk55 So all we can do is hang on happy that, possibly for the first time e
Forum: Destructive Churches

It seems to me that Rensil's point about the information that is given to people is the most important one. Or, as CovLass says, "One of the things I like about the Latigo site is that they often ask the question,Is this what the leadership team at Struthers believe? If so, why not come right out and say it? If the leaders at Struthers believe that it is 'the will of God' to
Forum: Destructive Churches

squareone certainly not annoying - I think the whole point is to get clarity. Yes, as far as I know, the church could have paid for the iPads and the parents could now be paying them back. That doesn't change the fact that the members of the congregation are subsidising the school however. If the parents are not paying back the cost of the iPads, then the equation is: 1) School e
Forum: Destructive Churches

A little more info in case anyone is interested in seeing the actual published accounts. As cbarb says, SMC is obliged to provide a copy to anyone who asks in writing. I am not sure whether they are able to (or will chose to) charge, but you do have to write to them. If you want to obtain a copy without contacting the church, you can download the accounts form the companies house website for
Forum: Destructive Churches

squareone I do not know what parents are charged. For all I know, the cost of the iPads may be added to invoices. What we do know from the church’s own accounts is that the members of the congregation subsidise the school however. The amount of money the congregation gives to the school would be enough to cover the iPads or a number of salaries. I seem to remember the amount in 2009 was £1
Forum: Destructive Churches

By the way, if anyone is interested in reading the "witness statements" from posters here, have a look at the thread on The Refuge in Wendover, Aylesbury, as SeekingSusan created a useful summary of these testimonies there.
Forum: Destructive Churches

I have been thinking about the whole idea of judging others and want to add one other point, which has been made before, and that is that most of the people on this forum are witnesses - they are not the prosecution or the defence. If you read through the posts, you will see that a great many say “this happened to me”, “the impact this had on me was” or “what I saw or heard was”. These are n
Forum: Destructive Churches

QuoteCovLassHi growing123 I was the one who was judged. I was the one accused ... Exactly. That is precisely the problem, and I think you sum it up beautifully in your final paragraph. Supporters of Struthers want us to focus exclusively on our real or imagined faults. Many of us have tried to do that and it doesn't work. The leaders themselves don't do that, they focus
Forum: Destructive Churches

Hi Ifellaway and growing123 and welcome to the forum (oops, and corboy – just seen your post too). It is really great that you felt able to contribute. Ifell way, while my story is different, I do see many parallels and certainly relate to points you make. For example, “my belief system failed me”. Yup, I can definitely relate to that. One of the problems with Struthers is that you are
Forum: Destructive Churches

Hi All, just catching up on the discussions here. First, welcome to MagicCarrot and mikewilson – I don’t think I have posted since you have joined the site. The point about computers vs iPads (vs not using technology) is interesting but, as others have pointed out, it is not really the use of any particular type of technology that is the issue. I personally think iPads are a great idea b
Forum: Destructive Churches

On another matter, I am currently reading an interesting book by Daniel Kahneman, winner of the Nobel Prize for his work on judgement and decision-making. I was particularly struck by the observation on page 84 of his book “Thinking, Fast and Slow”. QuoteDaniel Kahneman, Nobel Prize WinnerTo derive the most useful information form multiple sources of evidence, you should always try to make
Forum: Destructive Churches

I think the debate about what might and might not be effective is interesting but that is not the core issue. What if people have been too critical, or have even reacted in anger? Sure, it is quite legitimate to advise on these things and to try to make contributions as helpful as possible, but I want to make my position quite clear, which is that there is no excuse for the behaviour of the SM
Forum: Destructive Churches

Dear all, I am happy to confirm that I have no reason to suspect people in SMC of any sexual abuse - any reference to abuse is much more general - abuse of power and "spiritual abuse" which I could not define with any great authority, but is something to do with using a position of perceived spiritual power and authority to act in ways that would not be acceptable if that perceived p
Forum: Destructive Churches

Kelvin QuoteKelvin"This is all just nonsense". Okay, that's a pretty clear view. No need to worry about putting together a reasonable response then! ; Well, I am happy to admit I can might carried away, and phrases like the above are conveying some of the frustration I feel rather than a logical argument. Fair point, and I apologise. I am not sure that negates the need for
Forum: Destructive Churches

Lintar123 Well said! thanks for bringing this discussion back to what it is really about – the pain and hurt causes by SMC. We can have all the esoteric arguments about democracy, but the point is people have been hurt, and the leadership of the organization at the centre of all the concerns couldn’t care less. @Kelvin – there are a number of points I would like to comment upon. You say:
Forum: Destructive Churches

Kelvin It is good to have some honest debate! I think there is a world of difference between your earlier statement: QuoteKelvinbecause of personal grudges… which is what is happening here and your more recent, QuoteKelvinsome of the claims on this forum are due to personal grudges (would you prefer "grievances") but, OK , lets take that as a clarification rather than a cha
Forum: Destructive Churches

Kelvin First, it is great that you took the time to reply to these posts. Thanks for dealing with many of the questions directly and, in general, not allowing it to degenerate into personal comments. I do think you are out of line on one point however, and that is your criticism of Chesterk55 when you say - “I strongly object to you attributing those sentiments to me, with no evidence wh
Forum: Destructive Churches

Wow - some interesting arguments here. Quotekelvin@ThePetitor For example, you claim that SMC is accountable to no-one and yet proceed to also claim it will be relieved of its charitable status by OSCR, to whom it is ... accountable. I was not aware I had claimed anything. I thought I had used the word IF, and it was you that had said WHEN, implying you already knew the outcome. We obvi
Forum: Destructive Churches

Kelvin First, welcome to the forum! It is good to have you on board. I don’t know how others would respond, but I for one would be happy that there was no financial impropriety if this was the outcome confirmed by any independent authority. One of the real issues with Struthers is that it is accountable to no-one, denying even basic human rights like the right to a fair trial. A bit of e
Forum: Destructive Churches

Faith is a complex thing. I used to think it was about this sort of unshakable belief that certain things were true – there was a God, Jesus was the Son of God, He died on a cross, Struthers Leaders were infallible – that sort of thing. We will all have or own interpretation, but I guess I look at it a bit differently now. One of the questions I would ask is what do I want to believe in –
Forum: Destructive Churches

Yes, there is a great deal of irony in so many of the behaviors in struthers. On of the ones I find most ironic is the whole coffee shop idea. There is all this stuff about not mixing with the unclean, and being soooo spiritual that you are some sort of Christian mystic. That might have been believable if they did "separate themselves" but they don't, they spend their time making c
Forum: Destructive Churches

I was reading over a few recent posts and was again reminded of the shares fiasco, for example: QuoteCliveQuoteRensil I presume in case new people found out and wanted to leave) as "perhaps the biggest test to come against the church and in that test, some people went down" i.e. they left the church, including someone she valued greatly who assisted her in leadership. So Mrs Bl
Forum: Destructive Churches

Quotesquareone For me we're on safer ground with the fruits of the spirit rather than the gifts.... ie love, joy ,peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness and self control. You can't fake these, not over time anyway Amen to that!
Forum: Destructive Churches

Wow, some amazing posts. Thanks for the additional info Treetop and others. A really relevant quote from scripture there as well squareone. It would be great if those in SMC take it to heart. I suspect the leaders will miss the point and think they are the ones unsoiled by evil (verse 4) but that is not how I would see it. I am sure that there are many who fit verse 4, but they won't b
Forum: Destructive Churches

Quotesquareone ... I can't in my heart of hearts say I think that those who stayed and forgave Mr Black were wrong to do so when they presumably believe that forgiveness is at the heart of Christianity. squareone - I quite agree. I for one am perfectly happy to forgive Mr Black for these actions, or to forgive other leaders for any mistakes or indiscretions. What I am decidedly unhap
Forum: Destructive Churches

Clive I have two thoughts on your comments about the financial scandal. First, you are of course right that it would be a bit unreasonable to expect God to be telling Mr Black which funds to invest in etc. But that is the point, isn’t it? I don’t believe that God is telling the leaders which fund to invest in, which house to buy, which job to take, how to prepare school lunches to get a goo
Forum: Destructive Churches

cbarb - no problem, I guessed that was what had happened. I think the two posts fit quite well together actually - quite different, but complementary. squareone - I think that is a fair question. Others may have a different view, but I would have no great problem if someone from Struthers was teaching a child of mine or of someone I knew. I wouldn't really even have a problem with th
Forum: Destructive Churches

It is interesting to see all the discussions about Cedars School of Excellence and its relationship with the branches of Struthers Memorial Church. To me, discussing this link is absolutely legitimate, as the two things we are talking about are actually both activities of the one organisation with one set of Directors, one constitution, one set of accounts and one AGM. (Yes squareone, they d
Forum: Destructive Churches