There’s a post on Facebook by Neil Bennett. He posted this yesterday in response to the New Wine statement:
As a spiritual abuse survivor, as well as someone who was significantly involved in New Wine for many years, I think it was right that New Wine apologised for their initial statement on Mike and Soul Survivor. The original statement was very poor.
Using the word ‘disappointing’ was a bad decision: as anyone who has suffered spiritual abuse knows, it can have a deep and far reaching impact. Often victims have to walk away from jobs, their source of income and their church community and have physical and mental health issues caused by their trauma that can take years to address. ‘Disappointing’ doesn’t come close in reflecting their experience.
Organisations using the recent statements from Soul Survivor as a platform for advertising how good their own safeguarding processes are and how humble and accountable their leadership is, also misses the point. Most spiritual abuse happens in the gap between how organisations are perceived and how they actually behave. One of the reasons that victims find it almost impossible to have their stories heard is because the abuser is held in high regard by others. This is not the time to try and bolster our own reputations. It only adds to victims fear. Rather, it is time for contrition, listening and repentance.
Maybe most concerning was the way the original statement tried to distance New Wine from connections with Mike. Although the two organisations were separate legal entities, in pretty much every other respect they were family. Churches sent their youth groups to Soul Survivor - they would camp for NW and their youth would stay on site for SS. We shared speakers and worship leaders. I led worship at many NW conferences in England and parts of Europe. Mike was a regular speaker. One of New Wine’s previous national leaders, who resigned for well publicised reasons (including - as described by their bishop - for abuse of power), was quickly re-platformed by Mike at one of his events. Another of New Wine’s leadership team from that time went on to partner his church with Mike at Soul Survivor. Worship leaders and staff moved from one organisation to the other. Some young people from New Wine churches were part of their year out program.
Our connections went deep and wide, right up until last year.
This makes me want to ask: what was actually known - at the highest levels of New Wine - about Mike’s behaviour over the years, knowing all these connections?
As someone who led worship at NW events and was responsible for inviting worship leaders, who themselves sometimes shared leadership with Mike at those events, it now makes me feel sick knowing what could have been going on behind the scenes. Did I inadvertently put victims in close proximity to their abuser at New Wine or Trinity Cheltenham? I am so so sorry if that ever happened. (I have tried to connect with many worship leaders in recent months to check in …but I know this feels a little inadequate).
Trying to create distance between Mike and New Wine is the wrong approach. Actually, any organisation should be going back over their previous connections and events, trying to identify people who could have been effected on their watch, and making it as easy and fear-free as possible for them to share their experiences. What we actually need is to be much much closer to it all.
New Wine now say that they want to be a place where victims will be heard without fear, to be cherished with love and respect. As someone who still lives with fear with my own experiences, I want to ask: how does an organisation like New Wine actually make that happen? Because if it doesn’t affect its behaviour, then these are just empty words.
In respect of my own experiences, I have received a small measure of private empathy from those organisations involved, but never any public advocacy. I’m sure that most people have no idea what happened. This has been very painful. I suspect like me, what most spiritual abuse victims want is this: the ability to have their story heard and believed without fear of reprisals; to be able to explain to others their own actions (such as… why they left the organisation, their church, their ministry - often things they loved deeply); some sort of reparation where extreme hardship has ensued; greater transparency and health for organisations to minimise the chance that others will experience what they have experienced; and the knowledge that their abusers and others like them will not continue to be celebrated or quickly reappointed elsewhere.
I no longer feel safe at many of the organisations that I previously gave myself to. They no longer have my heart. Yet, my faith is strong and my family is strong, and my passion for justice is more alive than ever before. Not every abuse survivor has been so fortunate. I offer these thoughts - somewhat fearfully - in the hope of change.