Category: News

I write this only to put it on the record. I’m posting under my own name only to more legitimize this as it happened so long ago. I feel like we need to put all perpetrators on the record whether they are still alive or not. The more we know about each and all cases helps us grasp the extent of the problem(s) that still exist, and how far back these problems have gone. 

This has to do with one of the quite early Workers, Herbert Vitzthum, who was head over the Spanish Speaking in the United States from mid 1930s until 1969. He was a good friend of our family as my grandparents, uncles, aunts, and parents were Spanish speaking. He stayed at all of our homes often. That was until my oldest sister finally complained to my parents that Herbert had cornered her in her bedroom, forced himself on top of her and (in her words) “wet all over himself”. I’m guessing that she was around 9 years old at the time.

He later tried to force himself on my twin sister, but she was able to push him away and run outside. She stayed outside and she remembers hiding under our lemon tree until our parents got home. Of course, none of this ever got reported as he was a very respected Elder Worker.

Before this happened, my grandmother attempted to report an incident that she witnessed. When staying at their home, she walked in on him in their living room. He had a neighbour kid on his lap and was fondling the kid’s genitals. When she brought this to the other workers, everyone thought my grandmother was crazy. Herbert vehemently denied it, and reprimanded her and said, “do you realize you are talking about a man of God?!” No one believed my grandmother until the later incidents happened. 

I have an Aunt who was also molested by him, but she has only talked about it to certain, very few people. 

I can guarantee that Herbert Vitzhum has left a large trail of more incidents with others that we don’t know about. This guy was a predator, and waited until he had children alone to do his thing.

---

WINGS Note: Andrew Otero requested that this be posted by WINGS so it is on record. His oldest sister (mentioned above) died in an auto accident a few years ago.

Herbert Vitzthum was a pioneering worker in Argentina in1919.

Front Row: Jack Jackson (Ireland and US), Glenn Smith (Nebraska US),
Back Row Herbert Vitzthum (Minnesota US), Maurice Hawkins (Maryland US)

My husband and I would like to share our story and the struggles we have faced. Our main goal in sharing this story with you is to provide encouragement to the families of victims and survivors alike letting them know that they are not alone. We firmly believe that God sees everything and we are grateful that we can see him working to purify His kingdom and prepare His chosen bride.

Both my husband and I are from Iowa, and it was through a high school friend that my husband was introduced to meetings.

My husband and I made the decision to move from Iowa to Pontotoc, Mississippi with the hope of building a new life for ourselves and our children. We purchased an acreage and built a new house, eager to establish our own roots. However, our journey took a devastating turn when we discovered that George Garner [deceased], a perpetrator, had been abusing our oldest daughter from the age of 9 until she was 13. It was a shocking betrayal, as we had trusted these individuals and welcomed them into our home as fellow believers.

It took two years for George Garner to be convicted and sentenced to a state prison in Mississippi. During this time, the overseer of Mississippi, asked us to show mercy, forgiveness, and compassion, requesting that George Garner receive only a two-year sentence for his crimes of child sexual abuse (CSA). The impact of the abuse on our daughter was profound, and the acts committed against her were deeply unsettling. Nonetheless, we managed to support our daughter to the best of our abilities through this difficult period.

Unfortunately, the challenges did not end there. George’s wife expressed a desire to return to meetings, our meetings, which caused great distress for us. We brought this issue to the overseer once again, expressing our concerns, but were met with a request to be considerate and compassionate. George’s wife would frequently request hymns to be sung on behalf of George, the man who had abused our daughter. This was infuriating and highly inappropriate, to say the least.

Upon his release from prison, George Garner expressed a desire to return to meetings as well. Our meeting. We once again confronted the overseer about the legality and ethics of this decision. To our dismay, he advised us that as foreigners in the area, it would be best for us to leave our meeting and move away. Furthermore, when we arrived at our convention that year we were asked to leave because George Garner’s family felt “uncomfortable” with us there. Being asked to leave our meeting and home convention to accommodate a convicted child molester attending these events was deeply troubling and unacceptable.

The overseer’s lack of sound judgment and respect towards us was disheartening. Additionally, during this same timeframe, it came to light that he himself was engaged in an affair with one of the friends’ wives in the area. This further eroded our trust and confidence in his leadership. It is not in line with the teachings of the Bible, which call for a good report and condemn such immoral behavior.

Simply moving individuals around that have committed immoral acts or condoned unthinkable assaults cannot be the solution. It is important we change our culture and address these issues with integrity and accountability. We have kept this story to ourselves for 25 years, but now feel compelled to share our experience with others. We ask for your prayers and support, not just for us, but for all those who have faced similar struggles. Thank you for taking the time to listen to our story.

---

WINGS Note: George Garner’s conviction was reported Feb, 11, 2013 in https://wingsfortruth.info/breaking-the-silence-2/convicted-csa-ca-offenders/george-garner/

Scott Porter’s letter:

Dear all,

Most of you probably don’t know that in 2021 I was made aware of and involved in a child sexual abuse case. There are some who are calling for me to step down from the work because of my involvement in it. For the sake of transparency, honesty, and vulnerability I will share with you what happened according to the notes I took at that time and from the best of my ability to remember. I would like to do what is best for all involved, and if for any reason it seems I should actually step down, I am willing to do so.

My coworker and I were staying in a jungle/countryside community. These are very small communities where most people are, in some way, related to each other. They are isolated, everyone is connected to each other, there are no secrets amongst them, there are no local police, etc. These places need to be experienced to be understood. Life is raw in these places.

I got up early one morning in a certain home, in a certain one of these countryside places and was heading to the kitchen to get some coffee and met the lady of the home on the way. She was very distraught and told me in one big rush that she had discovered through one of her daughters that some of her granddaughters had been “disrespected by her husband.” She didn’t tell me names but told me that first, many years ago, some of her daughters had been abused by him, and she had just found out that some of her granddaughters had suffered the same. Some were still underage, but from what she could understand, the abuse had taken place 8 or more years in the past (I don’t share this as an excuse, it’s just a part of the story).

I can’t remember if I got my coffee or not, but I immediately spoke to my coworker and we decided that we needed to travel right away with our friend to the city where her daughters and their families live, a 3-4 hour multi-bus commute. Thus began my involvement and attempts to guide what happened.

I was the spokesperson, but I did not make any decision alone. Rather, I tried to guide and support the adult victims in this group process. I never had any contact with the victims who were still minors, but they were in communication with their mothers. It would be impossible to convey in words the emotions, tears, distress, and spirit of our time together. It remains one of the most impactful events of my life. We met for lunch with the mothers, some whom were themselves victims and, in this visit, I discovered that their husbands didn’t know anything about any of it. I strongly encouraged everyone that the next step would be to visit all together with their husbands and tell them what had happened and what was happening. They were very nervous about doing this but decided to do so.

So that evening at dinner we visited with them. I was so impressed with the courage of these victims and also by their husbands’ response, support, and help. During these visits I felt it would be good to have a sister worker join us and they chose a sister worker that they knew well and trusted who then traveled all night to join us. Together, we decided that the next step would be to all travel together and confront the abuser.

I had asked them if we needed to alert the authorities and they repeatedly said no, and asked us not to. (A side note: The people of this country do not trust the authorities of the country. All are easily bribed. Even judges are known to wait to see who will give the largest bribe before making their decision. Again, I don’t say this as an excuse, it is simply a fact of life in this particular country).

We spent a total of four nights in the city and on the fifth day we traveled back into the countryside where we confronted the abuser. There were tears and emotions indescribable, group visits and individual visits, and a lot of prayer and thinking. I never once asked the victims to forgive him. That was not the purpose. I will never ask them to forgive, and if they come to the place of doing so, that is their personal journey.

The abuser was calm and quiet, and appeared humble, yet I never felt he truly repented. It was during this time that I agonizingly tried to figure out how to guide us as a group. They did not want to get any authorities involved and so I seriously considered asking the abuser to leave his community. I think he would have. Just go, leave, and don’t come back. Then it dawned on me that he would go to a different city where more of his family live although he hadn’t been there for many years. He has a large handful of great nieces living there who are just at the age that all of these women and girls were at the time of their abuse. I quickly abandoned that thought and although I had mentioned it to my coworker, I didn’t mention it to anyone else.

Our number one goal in all of this was the present safety of those directly involved. I had no experience that allowed me to even consider the affect that our decision could and would have on other uninvolved victims. This abuser was the elder and we made it clear that he could no longer be the elder.

Most of those in the meeting had no means of transportation to travel to a meeting at a different location, so we asked another man who lives a good distance away (but does have a vehicle) to come to this man’s house and lead the meeting. In this community there was no other place for the meeting. I seriously considered asking this man to no longer attend the meeting. However, from a safety standpoint and considering the unique elements of this particular situation I didn’t feel like this would actually make anything safer. He was not in meeting with any of his victims. However, there were other children, in differing degrees related to him, who did attend the meeting. Their parents were very aware of the situation. I felt that there was far more interaction and potential opportunities for harm outside the meeting than in the meeting itself.

Due to the nature of how these communities work, everyone knew that he had abused, everyone was on alert, and I didn’t believe that taking him out of the meeting would cause the situation to be less dangerous. We spoke incredibly directly and strongly to the abuser both as a group and in individual visits. We told him that we would never trust him again and that he should be in jail, and that we absolutely condemned what he did.

He did still partake in testimony and emblems, which I was uncomfortable with. It seemed like the general consensus was to not remove him from involvement in the meetings, and as I didn’t see how it would affect the safety of the situation, I didn’t insist on that outcome.

Since that time, I have learned that many victims feel revictimized upon hearing that perpetrators have not been removed altogether from the meetings. I finally understand that reaction, and for that reason I am very sorry to not have removed him completely. I sincerely wish I would have tried to lead the group to make that decision.

After four nights we all returned to the city and remained there for another four days. Then, my coworker and I returned to the countryside and visited with all the friends in this community and a nearby one, reiterating to those who knew, and telling those who didn’t, that this man was a predator. We did not reveal the names of any victims.

Throughout this whole experience, the presence, comfort, advice, and help of the sister worker involved was immense. I would never want to go through such a situation without a sister worker(s) involved.

I have maintained a good relationship with the victims and their families to this day. I continue to support them. At the time, I offered to help find professional counseling and I let them know that somehow, we would arrange the finances for it. I’ve recently (entirely unrelated to this) found some good resources and would like to re-suggest and reoffer professional help. They also know I would support them if they ever wanted to press charges.

Sometime later, a person who was not originally involved in the situation became involved. That is another long and ongoing story, in and of itself. Due to their involvement, the abuser was excluded from all fellowship. I am glad, for that needed to happen, and like I said, I am sorry for any hurt and further harm that has come from leaving him in fellowship. I do not doubt this persons’ motives in becoming involved, unfortunately in an eagerness to help, this person widely shared the victims’ names and I am also very sorry for that.

I don’t know what more to say. I’m willing to step down if it would help reestablish trust and be an action of apology to all victims worldwide. I value my place in the ministry, but it cannot come at the cost of suffering, abused and silenced people within or without our fellowship. I am sorry for the mistakes I have made. I would also encourage all workers worldwide to share their stories honestly and vulnerably, and be willing for anything that would help us all heal and mend. For that is the purpose of it all.

Sincerely,

Scott Porter

---

Richard Harbur’s communication in regards to Ecuador:

To those who have read Charlie and Judy Habner’s letters about CSA in Ecuador…

Charlie made it clear that he had asked Lealand 8 years ago to have Leroy Lerwick removed because Leroy was preaching false doctrine. The doctrine that Charlie is referring to is divorce and remarriage. Ecuador is the only country in South America that allows people that have been divorced and remarried to have full fellowship.

Because of this, Charlie and Judy have been against the ministry in Ecuador long before they knew of this specific case of CSA. I would hope that everyone would understand that Ecuador is a different country than the USA with different laws. Charlie makes a big deal that Leroy and Max didn’t take the case to the authorities 20 years ago when they came to know of what had happened 10 years before.

Ecuador didn’t have laws concerning CSA until 2018. Just to give you an idea of the government there – in 2021 the government put it up for a popular vote as to whether there would be any penalties (fines or prison time) for CSA and abuse against women. Fortunately there are penalties. But as you can see there was no one for Leroy and Max to take the matter to authorities to deal with it. The laws of a country don’t decide what is right and wrong in the eyes of God, but they do limit one’s options.

Obviously we are much more aware today than in that day, that people like (T) are likely to continue offending. Also there are differences in the laws – in Ecuador if an allegation is brought to the authorities the first thing they do is go to the victims and the first question is: We have an allegation that you were abused, do you want us to investigate? If the answer is no, that is the end of the case as far as the government is concerned. That includes a minor victim.

So as Scott wrote in his account the victims and their families didn’t want anyone to take it to the authorities from the beginning when we first found out about it.

When Judy found out about it, she kept pushing until one of the workers did go to the authorities. The authorities then went to the victims and their families. Of course victims continued to say no, so the case is closed as far as the authorities are concerned.

Some might be wondering why (B) wrote a letter about the abuse so that Judy could read it to the church.. (B) says, “That Judy manipulated me.” She realized as soon as Judy left with the letter that it was a mistake and communicated with Judy, pleading that she wouldn’t read the letter, but that she would destroy it. Judy tried to convince her that it had to be done and don’t be afraid, but B insisted that the letter be destroyed and not read. So Judy agreed that she wouldn’t read the letter. That communication was by Whatsapp and there is a copy. (Several lawyers have said that the family could sue Judy for reading that letter and sharing it publicly. They say the only place that letter should have ever been read is by the authorities. The family has no desire to sue, they just want to be left in peace).

So one can understand why the family feels betrayed when Judy went ahead and read the letter and has continued to share it. It was at that time that the victims were exposed to the church. Although Judy told us Saturday that she had the workers’ approval to disband the meeting entirely, we had been given no indication from anyone that she actually had that approval. The same Saturday Scott had pleaded with her to wait a couple of days until we could get to the area to work together concerning the situation. The next day Judy read the letter in the Sunday morning meeting and exposed the victims (who were not in attendance) to those who already knew (T) was a perpetrator.

Scott and I arrived a couple of days later and the following Saturday Judy demanded that we tell the 2 churches in the area that she had acted with the authority of the workers. We didn’t feel that we could say that she was acting on our behalf. So after the Sunday morning meetings we met with her and another couple involved and I stated our reasons why we could not in good conscience tell everyone that the way she read the letter and disbanded the meeting had any part of our approval. As I was talking she continually tried to interrupt me and I raised my voice. I never screamed at her. She immediately stood up and confronted me, saying I couldn’t “raise my voice” at her, I apologized and she accepted it. The visit continued for some time.

The next day she told the couple that she was going to put a restraining order against me. Which she did that day. At the first hearing I was as surprised as Judy to see several of the friends there. My lawyer wanted (J) and (D) there as witnesses because it took place at their house and they were part of the conversation. They were the only ones that I expected. Afterwards I found out that several were quite concerned about what the judge might do with me, a foreigner, because of the corruption there. Interestingly enough, it was supposed to be an open hearing but he wouldn’t let them come in and he didn’t want to hear from the couple that were witnesses to the conversation.

At the second hearing my lawyer said that (J) and (D) should be there and also a character witness. I made sure that no one else came. I went into the hearing not knowing if Judy was going to drop the restraining order or not…. Because she was emailing me (of course I could not reply because of the restraining order). The last email I had she demanded that unless I tell (L) to stop lying about what happened in the first hearing to (E) she wouldn’t drop the restraining order. I had no idea what it was about, but called (E) and he said I haven’t talked to (L) since before the first hearing. (L) told me the same. So I didn’t know what Judy had in mind??? She did drop the restraining order at that hearing.

It was during that time that the elder (JP) asked her not to come to his meeting in Guayaquil. My lawyer made it clear to me that if I was involved in any such thing I could go to jail, so I had nothing to do with it. It also had nothing to do with (T). But it was because the victims and their families felt betrayed, used, abused, hurt and afraid of Judy that he felt it was necessary to give them space from her, as several meet in his home. They still feel that way and don’t want anything to do with her and Charlie. Judy got so upset with (JP) that she started looking for any skeletons in his extended family and going after them. So (JP)’s father who is the elder of the other meeting in Guayaquil said she wasn’t welcome there either.

It wasn’t until what has happened here in the USA this spring and summer that I became aware of how offensive it is to some victims that the perpetrators would be in meetings. The victims and their families very much want (T) to repent and be saved, so they weren’t opposed to him being in meetings 3 hours away from them. But I see now that we should have handled that differently because of other victims.

There is almost no phone signal where he lives so on-line listening isn’t an option for (T). From the beginning our concern has been for the victims and how to support them as Scott mentioned in his account. It was never about trying to cover up for (T).

It has become clear that Judy wasn’t listening, but projecting her feelings and desires on the victims and their families. It has caused lots of harm, suffering and hurt to the victims and their families. Like we have been hearing a lot the last while, each victim is unique and their journey to healing and being whole is unique. I need to listen.

Richard Harbur

WNGS Note: This post shares correspondence from a group of concerned friends to overseers and workers. It is directly supported by 175 people (names at the bottom).

The original draft letter, which was opened for signatures, was shared at Concerned Friends Proposed Letter to Australia / New Zealand Overseers

---

28^th August, 2023.

Dear Friends in Australia and New Zealand,

We are writing to you today to share a response that we have provided to our overseers signed by a collective group of concerned friends. This is in regard to the overseers letter of the 18^th August, 2023, to inform us of the new advisory group. We are forwarding a copy for your viewing to open dialogue with the ministry and the advisory group. This will help inform the process and we encourage you to communicate any concerns and feedback you may have to our overseers. Being made aware of the questions asked will help you know what has already been raised, to avoid inundating the advisory group with duplications. We would also like to inform you of multiple online resources relating to the current crisis within our fellowship of child sexual abuse and sexual abuse. These platforms are invaluable resources that help us to keep informed and connected.

_______________________

Concerned and Connected Friends – Australia/New Zealand Chat

(https://connected~and-concerned-friends.mn.co/spaces/11570094/chat )

This is an online platform that has been set up for concerned and connected friends all over the world. Within this platform, there is an Australian/New Zealand chat group that we can all use to connect on issues of concern for us. Within this group, we are beginning to develop further ways we can connect through zoom meetings and sharing of resources. We are also looking at ways to provide more education and information. Please join us there if you would like more support during these extremely difficult times.

The Brave Truth Australia – Webpage and Hotline

https://thebravetruthaustralia.com/

For more information on the Australian context of child sexual abuse and sexual abuse within our fellowship, this is a helpful resource. On this page, you will find a confidential hotline number where you can report. This does not take the place of formal police reporting but is focussed on accountability and exposure of perpetrators. There is also a private Facebook page available for online connection. Important note on this website is: If you have information which involves current sexual abuse of a minor you will need to immediately report this information to the relevant authorities in your State or call CrimeStoppers -1800 333 000.

Wings for Truth – Webpage

https://wingsfortruth.info/

WINGS has been advocating for victims/survivors within our fellowship for 15 years and they continue to provide information, support and guidance as we address this grave concern. There is updated and historical information from around the world that will help you to understand the enormity of what we are currently facing.

Advocates for the Truth – Webpage and Hotline

https://www.advocatesforthetruth.com/

Since the news was first communicated in regard to allegations of sexual misconduct against late senior worker (overseer) Dean Bruer and the subsequent exposure of child sexual abuse within our fellowship, Cynthia, Sheri and Lauren have been working hard to advocate and give voice and protection to victim/survivors within our fellowship. They also have a hotline you can contact for International and Australian/New Zealand cases of child sexual abuse as well as information on current open and active cases. You can donate on their page to help provide support for investigative and legal expenses, as well as victim therapy.

________________________

We are grateful for the effort people are putting in to provide so much support, care and compassion for victims/survivors and our fellowship. There are two concerns that unite us all and that is healing from the past and the safety of our children for the future. Please use these resources available to you as we work prayerfully together towards positive change. Also, we repeat the information provided by the overseers letter regarding support available in Australia and New Zealand.

Australia: https://www.childsafety.gov.au/ or 24/7 support on 1800 737 732.

New Zealand: https://www.kidshealth.org.nz/listing-information-support-resources-child-abuse or 24/7 support on 0508 26 459.

Please look after yourselves and we look forward to seeing you within the chat group of the Concerned and Connected Friends where we can join together in edification and support. Reach out to the communities you feel comfortable in that can support you as you process your individual experiences.

Yours in gratitude,

Concerned and Connected Friends of Australia and New Zealand

Enc. Letter sent to overseers for attention of the advisory group, with signatures

---

28^th August, 2023

Dear Malcolm, Graeme, Wayne, Trevor, Alan Mitchell and Alan Richardson,

We would like to acknowledge your letter of the 18^th August, 2023, communicating with the friends and workers in Australia and New Zealand, the work you are undertaking in response to the church’s concerns of prevention of child sexual abuse within our fellowship. In the interest of transparency, working openly and your invitation for all of us to support each other throughout this process, we write this letter in reply. We have drafted a letter to the friends and workers of Australia and New Zealand and will be attaching a copy of this letter for their viewing. We also welcome you to share this information widely. This will open up dialogue to ensure that the measures being put in place have input from all stakeholders and in accordance with standard two and three of the Child Safe Standards of the Royal Commission undertaken in Australia {Commonwealth of Australia, 2017).

“Standard 2 – Children participate in decisions affecting them and are taken seriously.

a} Children are able to express their views and are provided opportunities to participate in decisions that affect their lives.

b) The importance of friendships is recognised and support from peers is encouraged, helping children feel safe and be less isolated.

c) Children can access sexual abuse prevention programs and information.

d) Staff and volunteers are attuned to signs of harm and facilitate child-friendly ways for children to communicate and raise their concerns.

Standard 3 – Families and communities are informed and involved.

a) Families have the primary responsibility for the upbringing and development of their child and participate in decisions affecting their child.

b) The institution engages in open, two-way communication with families and communities about its child safety approach and relevant information is accessible.

c) Families and communities have a say in the institution’s policies and practices.

d) Families and communities are informed about the institution’s operations and governance.”

At a recent meeting of concerned friends, a discussion was held regarding your letter of the 18^th August, 2023, and we would like to present you with some feedback to help inform the advisory group. We hope they will be able to address some of our concerns and that our questions will help them in future decisions. In the absence of a direct contact on the advisory board, we are communicating in this way in the hope that everyone is informed. For future communication, we request a direct email to the advisory group. It has been noted that some survivors do not feel comfortable to go to workers due to past traumatic experiences and would not feel comfortable with information being filtered through senior workers.

While your focus is the protection of children and victim-survivors, it seems that we cannot ignore other members in our fellowship that will take on a significant amount of risk due to the roles they have. Risk assessments for these contexts need to be worked on transparently, as a matter of urgency. For example, our convention owners and families who have fellowship meetings in their home. How can we assure them that they are protected from risk? How will they be involved in this process? Are there contingencies in place such as appropriate insurance cover? Will visiting workers from overseas hold the relevant child safety checks that are equivalent to our Working With Children Checks (WWCC)? There is a duty to consider this aspect of our fellowship. It raises the question if conventions and fellowship meetings should continue in the immediate future until appropriate safeguards have been put in place.

Further concerns and questions have been raised and we would like to summarise them for you:

1. Your letter expresses a desire to be open and transparent and highlights that the members of the advisory committee wish to remain anonymous. While we understand the need for victim- survivors to be respected in this process, these two points appear to contradict each other. Also, you mention that the group will need support of each one of us as they progress. How can we offer this support throughout the process if there is no direct line of communication?
2. In relation to your point of ‘consultation and engagement will be needed from time to time’ – there is a view that this consultation should occur right from the start. How does the advisory group confidently report on the effect of CSA in the fellowship if they do not ask for survivor stories from the beginning? How can they quantify the effect without substantial knowledge?
3. Further to quantifying ‘effect’, how is that measured? Are they measuring the mental trauma or the financial cost of after care? Are they counting families or individuals? Are they counting historical cases where the predator/perpetrator has died?
4. What is their scope when completing risk assessments? Given the complexity, it would be advisable that these risk assessments be conducted by a third party to avoid any conflict of interest or legal ramifications.
5. Who formed this group, when was it formed and who decided who should be part of this advisory group? Was there a transparent, democratic process in its development?
6. If the advisory group members do not offer the facility to engage with the wider community, how can stakeholders have input in the process if they are only communicated with when the advisory group deems it necessary? You may view it as avoiding external pressures or distraction but from our perspective, it is in contradiction with the Child Safe Standards – ‘families and communities have a say in the institution’s policies and practices.’ What process will be provided for collaboration?
7. Thank you for providing us with the breakdown of the group. We would also like clarification of demographics of the group. For example, how many are from New Zealand and each state of Australia? Are all contexts being taken into consideration? It would be advantageous to have a separate advisory group for New Zealand that is in communication with the Australian advisory group, considering there would be a possible difference in laws. It also establishes local support for victims and accountability of the ministry in this region.
8. Will there be accommodation within future planning to ensure these groups are victim centred and will there be opportunity for listening groups/collaboration with the wider community?
9. You highlight that all members of the advisory group have relevant clearances and training. However, these clearances do not assure other victim-survivors that the current members have not covered up abuse within the fellowship in the past. With this lack of transparency, it is difficult to develop trust in the process.
10. How long a term are members of the advisory group volunteering for? Will there be a rotation of people on the group to share the load long term? An advisory group will be needed indefinitely considering the scope of abuse and there is a need for it to include elements of advocacy. It would seem that it is not a ‘one and done’ scenario.
11. The advisory board is to advise the ministry and has expressed a desire to act impartially. How can this process be impartial if there are workers on an advisory group that are advising the workers? This appears to be a conflict of interest. Also, as overseers, you have knowledge of who these members are but the community you serve does not. You have an advantage of being able to communicate with them that we do not have. This does not promote impartiality.
12. Further to the topic of impartiality, there is a concern that an advisory group, while coming from a range of professions and experiences, cannot remain unbiased due to their connection with the fellowship.
13. We were made aware that the advisory group is going to use publicly accessible material to inform their risk assessments and guidelines. Will an independent lawyer be engaged to ensure that they are sound and rigorous enough to align with current Australian and New Zealand legal standards? Once again, the engagement of a third-party is needed.
14. How is ‘zero tolerance’ of harming of children defined by your ministry? We are aware of a number of people still in our fellowship meetings that have allegations and convictions. When will your ‘zero tolerance’ be followed through?
15. How will our fellowship be made aware of the advice given by the advisory group? What accountability procedures will be put in place? How will we know that the advice being given has been informed by the law and stakeholders and implemented to fidelity by the ministry?
16. You have acknowledged in your letter that the scope of work to be completed is large and there has been a prioritisation of tasks to be undertaken. Can we please be provided with an indication of areas deemed the highest risk that will be addressed first?
17. In relation to accountability of the appointed overseers, what provisions will be in place there? Would there be a procedure where grievances could be communicated and acted upon?

Important concerns raised that require an urgent response are repeated below:

• Due to the imminent preparations and conventions in Australia and New Zealand, further clarification is sought on the progress of risk assessments and safety procedures for these gatherings. This needs to be done in a timely and collaborative manner to ensure all measures can be in place.
• Provision of an email address to communicate directly with the advisory group to ensure a transparent, collaborative approach throughout the process.

Once again, thank you for being proactive in beginning the process for change. We hope that this feedback will help you as this important work continues. As mentioned, we will share this letter with the friends and workers of Australia and New Zealand as an attachment to their letter so that they are aware of the concerns raised, avoiding a duplication of questions inundating the advisory group. We look forward to a formal published and shared response to these concerns being addressed, in the interests of transparency.

Yours in gratitude,

Concerned and Connected Friends of Australia and New Zealand

---

Thank you for taking the time to read our response. We have shared this letter through the limited distribution channels available to us to provide an opportunity for as many people as possible to view and sign. The signatures primarily consist of concerned friends of Australia and New Zealand who concurred with the feedback contained within this communication. Some additional signatures have been received from connections to friends of Australia and New Zealand that also have an interest in ensuring our fellowship continues to prioritise the safety of our children. We are grateful for your careful and prayerful consideration in these matters and look forward to working together in a collaborative way.

David & Wendy McNab, NSW

Roz Buckman

Janean Gay

Robyn Miller

Andrew & Sharlene Mahaffey, WA

Josiah Higgs

Belinda Young, QLD

Annette Jackson

Nikki Olds

Sharon Craig

Joyce Jarrell

Karol Lawry

Rhonda Gordon

Deborah Kent

Jenny Appel

F Hoffman

Phil Hoffman

Lorelle & Don Hall

Clarissa Briggs

Beth & Stan Roberts

Julie Speight

Rachel Taylor

Joy Bell

Darren Bell

Greg Hancock

Wendy Alcorn

C. Crowden

Karlene Munday

Samantha Bonfield (Briggs)

Jan King

Ruth

Jillian Hishon

S Clarke

Barbara Kemp

Ellen Pearce

Campbell Mattson

Lydia Horton

Tenae Earnshaw

Charlie Blundell

YB

Rochelle Tidman

Des Thompson

Angela Major

Don Major

Keri Sullivan

Lorinda Billing

J Hobbs

Lyndal Davis

Dellsa Earl

W. Harding

Dee Watkins

Peter and Patti

Jen Barndon

Vianne Hills

Judy and John Collins

Col Watkins

Ross Bowden

Tim and Olivia Eldridge

Rosie Rasmussen

Marlon Lobegeier

Lynette Speight

Denise Bennett

Neville & Leonie Oliver

Roselyn Tubman

Lyndall Hamling

Graham and Carol Young, OLD

Trish Robertson

TJ Brown

Shona Brennan

David and Carol Chenery

Tess Lawry

Dan and Jen Collins

Ruth Mackay

Rell Oliver-Braddock

Clare Oliver

Jason Walker

L Wilson

Glenls Blackley

Jane McKinnon

JH

Meredith McIntyre

John Bowman

Max Burrows

Kay Burrows

Max and Colleen Hamblin

Mac Baartz

Stewart and Heather Garlick

Daniel Hoffman

Graham & Cheryl Hart

Shelley Nicholls

Mark Burrell

Gareth Easton

Doreen Leven

R K Sloman

Laura McConnell

Hannah J

Linda Young

Darren Johnson

Coral Coleman

Rod Coleman

David Fairey

Ian Leven

Doreen Leven

Brett Wilson

A & R Oxenbridge

Cherie Kropp

Chester Ehrig

Merilyn Chisholm

Julie King

Monique Lucas

Jo Giltrap

Felicity Quirk

Mervyn Long

Carolyn Brown -West Australia

Trevor & Evol Thompson

Kelvin Horton

Alaina Morrison

Suzie Alcorn

Philip Alcorn

Rebecca Kitto

Alan Syverson

M. Morrell

Kelvin Wolff

Russell Gibbs

Rod Coleman

RDP

Elaine Williams

Kaye Ohlsen

Alana Robson

Bronwyn Bird

CCH

E. Martin

Lauren Bird

Danita Clark

Leah Bell

M Eriksen

Leann Kaizer

Kathy Flippo

Conne Jean Paulson

Betty Weigman

Eileen Medina

Jon O’Reilly

M. Campbell

Craig McNab

M Nixon

Col Watkins

Sandra Lomas

Alison Dixon

Anndella Bond

We would also like to acknowledge an additional 18 people that communicated their support to the contents of this letter but did not provide us with their names.