Exclusively foolish cult

On the TV programme, 'The Big Questions' today the vacuous character of the campaign of the Exclusive Brethren cult was embarrassingly obvious. Here is a direct link: http://www.bbc.co.uk/i/b01r1v3c/?t=21m31s

They had two standard bearers. The hapless Peter Bone MP had to confess that he had not heard the facts of the family disruption dictated by the cult. Peter does not have a reputation as a Commons intellectual giant. He once told EB 'your word is my command'. His oceanic gullibility has not been sullied by the truth on EB.

The other apologist for EB was Julian Smith of Farrer's, a lawyer who was presumably paid for his futile contribution. He said nothing - expect 'be careful what you say'. Was this a veiled threat? If the EB have a case why did they put up two ill-informed advocates to represent them?

Councillor Richard Stay got his points across well. He is a former member of EB who has been 'shut up'. The three seconds of silence that followed Richard's comment about his mother was the most persuasive part of the programme. Bone dropped his head. The other critics of EB were well informed and persuasive. Shame that Bone's interruptions hampered the Third Sector man from fully explaining his expert view that Bone's Bill will do harm. The journalist understands Charity Law and deserved to have had a fair hearing. Bone's Bill is going nowhere. When he learns more about the cult that he has held to his bosom he will start retreating cartwheels to distance himself from the cult's excesses.

EB have done themselves great harm and spent up to £2 million on this foolish campaign. Today's discussion was the best that has been broadcast. It put Radio Four's coverage to shame. The propaganda of EB was answered with convincing testimony. I hope there will be follow-up items in the media.

One unexpected consequence of EB's £1million campaign is grave and could cause them serious problems. A peer was so horrified with the personal accounts of the threat to children in the cult. She has collected personal testimonies. Baroness O'Loan says she is not yet sure what she will do with the information collected about the Brethren. Another consequence is the closure of the Wilton EB school. Very serious allegations were made in a national paper. EB has whistled up the wind. They may now suffer severe consequences.

 

I

 

Comments

[Ad]

John Handel: "Hell and Heaven exist and we are all destined to one or the other."

Very true. Most people in my experience think that being a decent well meaning person is enough to avoid hell but that is not what the Bible says.

I know this is not a political subject but lets at least be clear and aknowledge what all christian churches believe. I.e. heaven and hell.

[John Handel]

Paul Flynn

I was very pleased to hear such clear Christian voices during the Big Question show.
You cannot change the truth, Hell and Heaven exist, and we are all destined to one or the other.
It clearly showed the power of Gods own word, witnessed to by clearly spoken clean living people, of whom there are many in this world.
It was a shame there were no PBCC members there but it showed the voice of other churches sings the same clear tone of Christianity, the saving message for all men alike.

[Ivor]

Paul, David Ainsworth did publish his conclusions:

http://www.thirdsector.co.uk/Governance/article/1172289/peter-bone-meet-nick-hurd-discuss-bill-amend-charities-act-2011/

Conservative MP's bill seeks to reinstate the presumption of public benefit for religious organisations

An MP who has proposed a bill to reinstate the presumption of public benefit for religious organisations will today meet with the charities minister, Nick Hurd, to discuss it.

Peter Bone, Conservative MP for Wellingborough, presented a Ten Minute Rule Motion in the House of Commons on 19 December seeking leave to bring a bill to amend the Charities Act 2011 to "treat all religious institutions as charities".

Bone said yesterday on BBC’s The Big Questions programme that the bill will contain three tests that an organisation must pass before it can be a charity: it must either provide prayer, do social work and education or provide money to other charities.

He said that sham charities and those that have harmful doctrines would also not be permitted.

The motion passed its first reading in December by a majority of 166 to seven. A second reading of the bill, which is formally titled the Charities Act 2011 (Amendment) Bill, has been scheduled to take place on 22 March, although parliament is not due to be sitting on that day.

It is rare that bills introduced under the 10-minute rule become law because they are usually opposed by the government in the later stages. The majority pass their first reading without any opposition.

Bone’s bill was introduced in response to a recent decision by the Charity Commission to refuse charitable status to the Preston Down Trust, a congregation of the Plymouth Brethren Christian Church, a religious group which practices a "doctrine of separation" which limits their contact with the outside world.

The Brethren have since appealed to the charity tribunal.

A Charity Commission spokeswoman said: "Judging from his comments during the BBC programme, Mr Bone’s test appears different in nature as well as content to the commission’s understanding of the public benefit requirement for religious charities in charity law.

"The public benefit of a religion derives from the positive impact the organisation’s doctrines and practices have on the wider community: activities carried out by a religious organisation have to be seen in that context.

"Demonstrating public benefit is not an onerous task for religious organisations – the commission registers hundreds of religious charities each year."

There's already a foolish comment from B Temple who seems to be an Exclusive Brethren lobbyist from his comments in various places.

[SuzieQutzie]

Of course children take things literally, this is even proven both medically and psychologically. It is especially important to note the Bible never tells us to hate the world once, (not even the Darby version that only this cult uses); but the Bible does tell us many times that God loved the world so much He gave His only Son do die for it, and also that Jesus loved the world so much, He laid down His life for it and us. The only time hate and the world are mentioned in the same sentence, is that you are not to be surprised if the world hates you... and that is a vast difference to what they teach!!

I think the fact that this cult puts the word of man (their leader) above the Word of God, while they claim to follow God and to be Christian, yet they do not even do the most basic of Jesus' directions, which to put it simply, is to go and make disciples of all the nations and baptize them in the name of the Trinity, shows one of the reasons why they are referred to as a cult by many organizations who know how cults operate. They are trying to claim a mainstream umbrella but do not follow the teachings observed by others in this category, and more importantly, this one mans word is Law and when one person has that much power over others, really bad stuff happens...

What I find more alarming personally, considering the fuss being made by this cult about their Charitable Status, is their cults teachings on giving to Charity... which is basically that their money only belongs to themselves, and other Churches should look after their own, and the unChurched miss out (paraphrased)... and interestingly, the fact is that this was still the case right up until they made an appeal to have the decision overturned after the Charity Commission ruled against them. It is only recently they have been making a big public fuss about giving to Charity, which calls to mind another directive from Jesus, which was when you give to others, do not blow your trumpet, but give in secret...

Even more scary and bizarre are their leaders many categorical statements only a few years ago, that computers were evil and were not allowed to be used (but now they are all of a sudden somehow ok - but really it is just so they can get free public funding for their schools). This shows just how low they are prepared to go to get money for nothing... it truly seems all their hard and fast rules that they punish people for breaking, are so easily bent and broken as soon as it comes to them losing money for keeping them. The saddest part about this, is all the rulings and punishments made against many cult members, who were chucked out and kept away from their families for breaking the rules and using computers previously, as these people are still being punished by the cult for their actions, directed by the leader, even though the rules have now changed and he says computers are suddenly ok... this is nothing more than horrific abuse and control of other humans by one man. Actually, maybe we could send in the American Armed Forces, they like to free people from dictators!

All we can hope is that this cult chooses to stop their serious Human Rights abuses and practices of preventing families having normal relations with each other, (including forcibly separating children from families and husbands from wives), because they really want to keep all their "Charity" money, as if they did this alone, that would be of more public benefit than anything they have ever done for anyone so far... especially considering all those that have been driven to suicide, murder and into mental illness, by having their whole lives and families taken off them by this cult, and the cost that this puts on the public as tax payers. Failing them doing this, I believe that those of us who obviously care about others, need to all be doing everything we can to ensure this disgusting control of other humans by this cult leader is stopped, and by law if necessary.

[Gwen Whitbourn]

I have been out of the Exclusive Brethren since my parents were withdrawn from in 1974, at the age of 6. I feel very strongly that the Exclusive Brethen, which was once a sect but has become more and more cult like as the years pass, should not be granted charitable status for the Preston Down Trust and should have their charitable status removed entirely. They do nothing to further religion, quite the opposite. Their world view is completely incompatible with that of the wider public.

In a period of austerity when the most vulnerable in society are having their benefits and essential assistance in order to survive removed, the taxpayer should be asking serious questions about why we are supporting this group of extremely rich individuals through the tax system, enabling them to fund their schools which will inevitably preach more hatred of the world and yet more separation.

Thank you Mr Flynn for finding out the facts before you speak. The biggest problem for ex Exclusive Brethren is that the punishments meted out by the EB to those who transgress appear too extreme for non-EB to grasp. Thus, it is very easy for the likes of Peter Bone to dismiss us as a few individuals with a chip on our shoulder.

Keep up the good work and let us hope that a light will finally be shone into the dark depths of this anti social cult.

Gwen

[Paul Flynn]

Thanks Jill. I hope to see Peter Bone soon and challenge him on his bill. Perhaps that chap from the Third Sector magazine will write his conclusion on the Bone Bill.
I have used that Hales quote and it good to see that these points were made. I hope that there will be a spin-off to the programme.
best wishes

[Jill Mytton]

Hello Paul. I agree - very good programme though getting three questions in one hour means that none of them were fully argued in any depth in my opinion. That silence was stunning - well done to the presenter for not breaking it.

One thing I felt was missed is that the 'hate quote' is actually directed at the young people. Hales says:

“What we're trying to bring is the young people through now to see that the world is, the whole principles of the world have to be scorned and disdained and just hated, really, hated.

We have to get a hatred, an utter hatred of the world. Unless you've come to a hatred of the world you're likely to be sucked in by it, and seduced by it . You must hate the world, every feature of the world, at every point you hate it”

Now the lawyer and the EB both argue that this is taken out of context but even if we accept that - imagine you are a child sitting in the meeting hearing that. A child does not know about context, or metaphor, or theoretical concepts. A child thinks in very concrete terms. It hears someone with perceived authority telling it to hate the world. A child can only understand that in concrete terms.

I was annoyed with Bone's interruptions of the Third Sector person (names escaping me this evening!) - so much so that I was heard to shout at the TV something I do not normally do. But I found that very rude.

Jill