Questions about Newfrontiers

[NickM]

I guess that is CONVINCING evidence of growing maturity on my part

You are too gentle a man to bait mercilessly even though it is clear that it is still very raw for you Ed.

Now had it been West Ham

[Barnabas]

I must admit in finding the New Frontiers I discovered it was different from
http://www.pioneer.org.uk/Groups/10826/Pioneer.aspx
Maybe one day I'll be able to catch on all the groupings.
As to thoughts on New Frontiers I think I'll track http://newfrontiersbloggers.blogspot.com/ 4 a few months and see how I feel then

[Edc]

I guess that is CONVINCING evidence of growing maturity on my part

You are too gentle a man to bait mercilessly even though it is clear that it is still very raw for you Ed.

Now had it been West Ham

Now where is Monty?.

[Invicta]

Thanks Invicta,

Can't say for how long but it is good to see some familiar posters are still around. I trust you and yours are well down in Whitstable

Thanks Nick,

Yes we are fine. My eldest daughter has recently announced that she is getting married and she is only 40. Well she will be later this year.

Recently one of our dearest brothers passed away aged 87. The funeral was last Wednesday. His mother and father and all his siblings were deaf and dumb and a family member intended to translate the service into sign, but had to withdraw at the last minute. This left the family with a problem. They phoned all the local deaf clubs, schools, etc but no one was available. Then a son received a text on Wednesday morning saying that they understood he needed a translator and there was a translation service in Whitstable. They were contacted and sure enough they supplied a young lady translator. She was very good and translated the service and all the hymns. It was good to see the deaf singing the hymns without using words, only their hands. I noticed four of them but I was told there were eight of the family who were deaf and dumb at the service.

The young lady also went to the graveside at Canterbury and translated there as well. It seems she lived in Canterbury and attended the NF church in Ashford. She said she wouldn't go to the one in Canterbury, but wouldn't go into why. She said it was pleasant to go to a real Christian funeral, "You wouldn't believe some we have to go to."

The family were very pleased that they managed to get someone, although I think they were tearing out their hair till the last minute, end even more pleased that she was a believer.

[NickM]

I must admit in finding the New Frontiers I discovered it was different from
http://www.pioneer.org.uk/Groups/10826/Pioneer.aspx
Maybe one day I'll be able to catch on all the groupings.
As to thoughts on New Frontiers I think I'll track http://newfrontiersbloggers.blogspot.com/ 4 a few months and see how I feel then

JT knows more about Pioneer than I do but there are some very real differences- particularly around complementarianism and reformed teaching.

[NickM]

The tender age of 40 Invicta!! Is she the last of your children to marry?

[Invicta]

The tender age of 40 Invicta!! Is she the last of your children to marry?

Yes Nick.

We have two daughters. The younger has 5 children from 14 down to 10 months. She educates them at home. The eldest two are doing their GCSEs which are expensive as they are not done through school. The eldest is also planning to start an Open University course. As he is under 16, he gets it free, it seems.

[NickM]

Wow that's a big ask. I only knew of one other couple who did home education for their children, the irony of which was that whilst the lady stayed and did the home education (she was a midwife by background), he went to work every day...........as a school teacher

[Ian]

Hello Nick.

Welcome back & good night.

[NickM]

Hi Ian....but gone so soon and just when the conversation was getting interesting

[DavidL]

Hello Nick

for New Frontiers in general it is difficult because the structure is either loose, or definitive. This means that some New Frontier Churches may well be "reformed" and interested in the growth and maturity of the church (Apostolic), others may centre on their own growth and have difficulties with ego's.

I have a distinct issue with prophets and prophecies, healers, and other "power" gifts. I still say that people elevating themselves need to be more open to being questioned. New Frontiers (Sweeping generalisation) seem to deal with criticism quite badly. Even when it is genuine.

Still I believe we have the right to test individuals not a church per se.

[NickM]

Good post David!

New Frontiers (Sweeping generalisation) seem to deal with criticism quite badly. Even when it is genuine.

One thing I would say about this is that perhaps in a local setting there are shortfalls but generally you don't see NF leadership going into print, websites or worse to provide rebuttals against protagonists.

[Eutychus]

so despite one or two in this thread suggesting it is all heavy handedness and control, whilst that may have been their experience ( and I always would add the caveat that rarely are these things verifiable because of anonymity and lack of full disclosure) it isn't a direct expression of NF necessarily.

And of course variation within church groups or denominations isn't restricted to NF or others in the charismatic spectrum but is true of anglican communion and evangelical churches such as those within the FIEC.

Hello NickM and welcome back.

Firstly, while of course it is true that there will be local variation within NF, the other organisations you mention do not make the same sort of calls or claims to uniformity that NF does. Somewhere I have or had a tape of a message by Terry on the subject of "being of one mind", and there is no getting round the top-down authority structure in NF.

You have raised the point about anonymity before on this forum and directed it at me and my story, so I'm going to take this opportunity to set out my position again. (The website I set up in the wake of my experience at the hands of NF, well before I joined discussions here, has a whole section on why I have chosen to keep it anonymous, too).

First and foremost, I don't think the Internet is an appropriate medium for settling interpersonal disputes. This is a point you yourself appear to concede when you write:

generally you don't see NF leadership going into print, websites or worse to provide rebuttals against protagonists

.

In the (admittedly unlikely) event of these disputes being resolved, it's better if they are not out of the Pandora's box by not having names named. (I have used Terry's name but that is because he is a public figure in the way none of the others are and immediately identifiable as the head of the movement. Although even then I don't think I've used his surname).

As I have long held here, I think the problems within NewFrontiers are systemic and as such far outstrip issues with specific individuals, which can be distracting. So I keep on posting and drawing attention to what I see as these systemic issues without naming names.

Secondly (and secondarily), I have reasons not to make my identity immediately apparent online which have absolutely nothing to do with NF or the matter in hand. I don't think that position is a rarity in today's world.

(That said, it really isn't too difficult to find out who I am via the Internet and pretty straightforward for anyone within NF if they dare to ask the right questions of the right people, though they do this at their own risk). My aim in the way I told my story was that who was who should be immediately apparent to anyone who knew the situation but that this should not be the case for those not directly concerned by it.

Finally, experience on this board suggests that even if I were to use my real name, it would not change your position that "there are two sides to each story", so what's the point?

In this respect, my position is that what happened to me was utterly unacceptable by any standards and no matter how many sides to the story there are. As far as I can tell, for nine months, fellow-elders who to my face assured me of their support for my position in the church had, behind my back, agreed between them and the apostolic delegate that I was under demonic influence and that this needed dealing with. Unbeknown to me, they continued regular discussions on this topic, culminating in a public announcement before the church to this effect coupled with the threat that if I didn't step down, they would split from the church and form a new one - a position which I found out about at the last possible minute, just a few days before they went public. Even if it is assumed (which I dispute) that everything they said about me was true, I just don't see how such behaviour can be justified - and all the less because NF makes being a movement based on openness, honesty and transparent relationships a defining and distinctive virtue.

I hold that, to use your phrase, this was

a direct expression of NF

for a simple reason: I have it in writing from Terry that he supported the apostolic delegate's position throughout and feels there is nothing further to discuss.

The fact that nobody speaking from a position of authority within NF is capable of recognising the harm done by these actions is one of the most serious hindrances to my christian faith today and one of the most dangerous aspects of the organisation in my respect.

To close this post, I'd like to talk about Toyota. As the Wikipedia article on Newfrontiers mentions, Andrew Walker pointed out similarities between NF and the Japanese car industry back in the 80s. I was reminded of this when reading about the fallout from Toyota's massive recall of its Prius which has been in the news lately. Here's what the Economist had to say about it this week:

A culture that mixes defensiveness towards the outside world with exaggerated deference towards senior management is poorly equipped to identify and then deal with this kind of situation

I think both those aspects are true of NF. I don't know about Toyota, but to my mind the above analysis serves as a good summary of why it is so difficult for NF to acknowledge its inner weaknesses and failures and why it is ripe territory for spiritual abuse.

[NickM]

I don't think the reference regarding Toyota is applicable to Newfrontiers who do not have a particular defensiveness to the world OR an exaggerated deference to the leadership.

[Eutychus]

I don't think the reference regarding Toyota is applicable to Newfrontiers who do not have a particular defensiveness to the world OR an exaggerated deference to the leadership.

NF are defensive with respect to the world inasmuch as they believe their own system of government (divinely anointed leadership) to be superior to any form of government, or governance, the world has to offer, and because of this they don't believe that any criticism from outside the organisation is worth bearing in mind (the problem with Toyota in this instance). Quite simply, at the end of the day they believe they know better than everyone else, in defiance of any evidence to the contrary, and have no mechanism for challenging their views or decisions which can actually get through to the leadership.

As to deference to the leadership, how many times in NF did I hear the refrain "we trust our team"? The leadership are unceasingly referred to as "anointed" and while using David's "touch not the Lord's anointed" may not have been exactly daily discourse word for word, the idea (used to mean that criticism of leadership was basically sinful) was certainly there. "Believe the best" (another frequently repeated phrase) meant believing the best about more senior leaders, who knew better, and not challenging them when, in contradiction of the same phrase, they laid bare one's supposed character flaws and misdemeanours. If you were to even raise the possibility with the senior leadership, Toyota-like, of a serious problem out there in the churches requiring a "recall", I can pretty much guarantee you that your intervention will be perceived as a threat to the organisation and ignored - except that subsequently you will have a black mark against your name which may be used later as evidence of your rebellious attitude.