Soul Survivor thread 2

[BadSkiingMum]

This is a thread for anyone following the events at Soul Survivor or wishing to discuss their own experiences or the experiences of their loved ones within evangelical, charismatic and pentecostal religious spaces.

Again, I used to have this argument on threads years ago, people disputing my first hand knowledge. If it wasn’t outing myself I would post the London street names on here. I am specifically talking about the HTB stable that I am linked with.
It’s quite frustrating to have this denied. It’s true, I can tell you of several vicarage’s that would be worth £3-4m in London.

These clergy also have their children in private schools, using the clergy bursary access fund.

https://whoownsengland.org/2019/11/04/gods-acres-the-land-owned-by-the-church-commissioners/

https://www.yorkshirepost.co.uk/heritage-and-retro/heritage/church-of-england-spends-ps530000-on-a-six-bedroom-house-for-the-vicar-of-yorkshire-dales-parish-3052675

An example

I'm not at all disputing your account of expensive London vicarages connected to HTB @Befonce I'm just saying that many ( maybe the majority?) are not in this situation.

As Arti says, London is different in lots of ways.

I am in East Mids an area where deprivation and luxury are cheek by jowl , like London in that respect, I guess.

I was looking forward to visiting my neighbouring very posh village’s vicarage, as there were amazing gates at the end of the drive. In I went, only for the vicarage sign to point to a small drive off to the side to a very ordinary 70’s house.
Badly insulated, I hear.

They do seem to have reasonably good gardens though. Not necessarily massive, but not tiny either.

One vicar in my area made a point of planting a couple of fruit trees every garden he had, knowing he wouldn’t see the benefit. Several friends have fruit trees due to his foresight.

Somewhere dense like London, it’s probably harder to build a sensible modest vicarage in a suitable place, so they are stuck with what they have.

Poor show though.

We live in a big vicarage (4 beds) with a decent sized garden. Both the kitchen and garden get used by the church a lot though and we have a damp problem so it's not all roses. We pay rent, although it's a lot lower than the market rate and full council tax because we aren't C of E. We are one of the poorest families in our church though. I've seen normal sized vicarages and massive ones but I think that a very rich vicar in an area where many of the congregation are poor isn't really appropriate and it would be a struggle for the vicar to relate to his/her congregation. And no vicar, rich or otherwise should be pressuring anyone to give money, that's between the person giving, or not giving, and God.

I don't think I k ow of any vicarage smaller than a 4 bed and without 2 reception rooms.

I'm sure they exist but even on my local housing estate they have a "good" modern 4 bed with 2 bathrooms etc. Which is more than average.

Balloons for CofE they are supposed to have two reception rooms or a big study because of church meetings happening there.
The idea being to be able to keep family separate when there’s a meeting.

Yep exactly - so much nicer houses than usual! Hence the point.

I've also been in churches where they dont ever use the vicarage (which is fair enough) for meetings as its a family home/use the church tbf so not really needed.

It certainly means you don't just look at the salary but salary plus reduced bills plus nice house. (and possibly inform grants/school grants and even benefits in some cases if they just go by the salary coming in and not benefits in kind) And yes I know of a couple of London ones (not htb esque) that must be worth an absolute fortune and no regular professional could hope to buy.

But we are digressing.

Sorry, I think I was a tad triggered this morning. Years of suppressed fury at the poor play acting with, as lotsofballoons says, incredible benefits. Also using wealthy parishioners holiday homes. I do know this is not representative of all clergy and I think it must be very tough outside of the wealthy circles.

I was specifically thinking of the glam squad. I am itching to say more but mustn’t. Not sure I like this side of myself either but it’s good to have this thread.

I don't think discussions about vicarages are on topic here tbh.

Why is that?

Because we're talking about Mike Pilavachi and soul survivor? The c of E have many issues and we can't cover them all!

Let's talk about the fact that teenagers heard this Chocolate cake analogy for premarital sex for 30 years and whether this helped an entire generation have weird hangups about sex, all while Mike Pilavachi had his hand up the inside thigh of young men he was mentoring and had the adoration of.

Oh sorry, I didn’t realise you were thread gatekeeping . It’s entirely relevant as it’s HTB which is fed by MP graduates. I have been on these threads for years and don’t really appreciate being told what I can and can’t post.

Another one was girls told they had a box of treasure and shouldn’t give coins away as they’d be less valuable.

Personally I’m interested in a productive conversation whatever topics are covered.

What do you think of this?

https://www.psephizo.com/life-ministry/what-is-the-place-of-charismatic-theology-after-mike-pilavachi

I think that charismatic Christian movements are abusive and coercive by their very nature and therefore particularly dangerous. I'm not convinced at all by this writer's attempt to defend them.

Would that make you what he calls a cessationist? Or would you say God acts charismatically but we shouldn’t be seeking it out/creating a movement around it?
There’s an interesting spat in the comments.

Wasn't sure if you were directing that comment at me.

I no longer believe in God, and I think charismatic manifestations are basically a form of group hysteria, egged along by leaders and preachers being deliberately manipulative.

Ah ok.
Yes, was interested in your comment.
Safeguarding is everyone’s business and responsibility.
Those of us in the church need a damn good understanding of how to move forward without repeating abusive situations.

I have had conversations with people that I think have lost that line- their belief justifies imo abusive scenarios. For me if it’s not good it’s not of God. So easy.

I'd agree with this. One of the things I've noticed in some of the articles and also the video by the Reedmans are comments along the lines of: MP might have done some bad stuff, but he was also responsible for lots of really good things too. What are these good things? Do they just mean getting lots of young people to join the church? Because that makes the church sound like one enormous pyramid scheme. Or are there other good things that he did too, in which case what are they?

Personally, I find it impossible to reconcile the idea of a loving God giving MP the gifts to successfully evangelise to huge numbers of young people who he then goes on to abuse. He (God) would actually be enabling MP to abuse. It just makes no sense. I don't think that makes me a 'Donatist' as one of the above articles suggests - I'm not saying that evangelists need to be perfect. I just don't understand how anyone can believe in a God who would essentially deliver victims into MP's (and others') clutches. If that's who God is then I'm not interested in "a relationship" with him.

Apologies for the rant.

@Bornagainunbeliever Exactly, by saying that much of MP's ministry was good, we're saying that the victims are somehow acceptable collateral damage. That's not good, is it? And yes, a lot of it is about bums on seats, and no-one seems to care about what happens to them as long as they don't leave, or draw attention to the negative stuff that goes on.

Rants are fine. It’s a perspective that would make anyone angry. It isn’t how it looks to me, but my experiences have been different.

I think bad teaching, dogmatic teaching, leaves people really vulnerable to things going wrong. It primes people to expect wonderful things if they just ‘obey/believe/pray/etc’ hard enough.

That’s not life, I don’t read the bible as meaning that. The bible reflects all
the mad chaos of human existence with bits of divine poking through.

If that’s what SS and MP were teaching then I have no time for it.

The good from Soul Survivor- you’d have to ask people who experienced it. I’d expect it to be things that you don’t value, like ‘developing a relationship with Jesus’. Many, many people do value that and feel it adds to their lives and helps them live richer (not materially) and better lives as a result.

I hope that doesn’t read as dismissive- it isn’t intended to. I fully appreciate the validity of your experience and perspective, and I’m not claiming to be right- no one can or should.

Is that true? I absolutely don’t think victims are acceptable collateral damage.

Where people gather, some of them will treat others badly. In any situation, no matter how unlikely, we seem to be able to screw it up.

medicine should Be full of people who want to help others
schools should be peopled by those who want to facilitate children and help them develop life skills.

Do we stop all group events and places, no matter how well intentioned, because of the nature of people? Families can be crap too.

I don’t know how to resolve that. It shouldn’t happen. Be have safeguarding so that it doesn’t happen but when it does we stop it quickly. The issue is the safeguarding failure, not the gathering.