This summer, @theeverymom published an article that really concerned me as a mom who was homeschooled K-12. 1/33

https://theeverymom.com/reasons-to-homeschool/


The author of the article, a woman with a master’s degree and a flexible work from home job, prefaces the article with a flurry of caveats. The reasons she cites, however, are deeply problematic. 2/33

As homeschooled alumni know, most articles about homeschooling are written by or about parents who weren't homeschooled themselves. It’s discouraging, especially when parents cite NHERI and alleged child abuser Brian Ray’s work. 3/33

https://rlstollar.com/2023/02/12/my-parents-abused-me-an-interview-with-hallie-ray-ziebert/

I reached out to @TheEverymom and pitched a piece on why I public school as a homeschool alumna, but it was crickets. So here’s my response to that article in thread form. 4/33

I was homeschooled from kindergarten through 12th grade. While my experience in an ultra-conservative Christian family is not the experience of all homeschoolers, it is essential that we listen to the voices of children who were homeschooled. 5/33

Most articles about homeschooling prioritize the parents and do not consider the children’s perspectives, thereby exacerbating the power imbalance in homeschooling narratives. 6/33

There is unfortunately a lack of robust data on homeschooling outcomes; most studies of homeschooling rely on volunteer participants that are not representative of homeschooling as a whole. And even these studies’ findings are frequently misrepresented or misunderstood. 7/33

This makes it all the more important to listen to people who were homeschooled as children. The recent #dayofthehomeschooledchild hashtag on Twitter is a great way for parents who homeschool or are considering homeschooling to learn more from homeschooled alumni. 8/33

While everyone’s experience is unique, here are some reasons that I have chosen to send my son to public school. 9/33

1. Academic Success
I have an MLIS, but I'm not qualified to teach my son about most things, especially as he gets older. I don’t have degrees in child ed. and I don’t do regular professional development. I want my child to learn from people who are trained to teach. 10/33

I am committed to my child’s academic success, but because of the large gaps in my homeschool education, I could easily commit educational neglect out of ignorance. Educational neglect is a serious problem in homeschooling, and results in adults unaware of what they don’t know.

I want my son to have access to sports, music, and other extracurricular group activities. While homeschool coops can offer some opportunities for group activities, they are usually dependent on expertise and volunteer time from parents. 12/33

2. Mental Health
I believe that public schooling can deliver mental health benefits. Why? Because he and I both benefit from not staying home together all day. 13/33

My son gets to establish his own identity away from me and the home, and I get to maintain a professional identity that isn’t solely “Mom.” I want my son to develop relationships with adult role models that are not dependent on me. 14/33

Children experience bullying and other mental health challenges at public school. But homeschooled children can also experience bullying from siblings and neglect from parents; when this occurs, the isolation and lack of any support external to the family can compound harm. 15/33

3. Diverse Community
The first time that I substantially interacted with a non-white person was in my freshman year of college. Growing up in my homeschool community, the only people I saw were other white fundamentalist Christians. 16/33

My parents intentionally limited my exposure to the people I interacted with on a day-to-day basis and that isolation stunted my development. I don’t want my son’s access to other children and adults dictated by my transportation or scheduling limitations. 17/33

I love the fact that my son is one of the only white children in his classroom. I want him to grow up surrounded by diversity. I want his teachers to share different backgrounds and experiences with him. I want him to appreciate a diversity of religious expressions. 18/33


3. Safety
Every time there is a school shooting, homeschool proponents claim that homeschooling is the safer option for children. 19/33

Unfortunately, most states do not provide the kind of structure and accountability necessary to make homeschooling safe. I support laws and other educational policies that protect vulnerable children from abuse and educational neglect. 20/33

https://www.hsinvisiblechildren.org

In 48 states, it is legal for a person convicted of child sexual abuse to homeschool their children. 21/33

https://responsiblehomeschooling.org/research/current-policy/protections-for-at-risk-children/

I may be confident of my ability to keep my child safe at home, but what about the other parents in homeschool coops, where it is rare to find any kind of safeguarding training or policies? 22/33

I know all too well what happens when abuse occurs within a homeschool coop, and no one is required to report it. I prefer to have my son go to school with mandated reporters who are required to pass background checks and other screening measures. 23/33

I was homeschooled in New York State. New York’s homeschool laws are more robust than many in the country. 24/33

https://responsiblehomeschooling.org/state-by-state/new-york/

For example, parents must submit individualized instruction plans and quarterly reports to their local school district—but they still leave space for educational neglect and other serious forms of abuse by homeschooling parents. 25/33

https://www.rimaregas.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/01/Knox-Torture-as-a-Form-of-Child-Abuse-article.pdf


I currently live in Wisconsin, which only requires parents to file a notice with the state and complete 875 hours of instruction per year. 26/33

https://responsiblehomeschooling.org/wisconsin/

There is no way for Wisconsin to ascertain if parents are actually providing those 875 hours of instruction or otherwise providing for their children. All of our children deserve a safe and robust educational environment. And for me, that means a public school. 27/33

4. Preparation for Adult Life

I want my son to develop confidence and independence for his adult life. After graduating from 12 years of homeschooling, I floundered in my first year of college. 28/33

I wasn’t used to the routines and expectations for college and work life. Hard deadlines were foreign to me. My son will learn how school works and be more prepared for college than I was. 29/33

I want my son to see me working outside the home. While some parents are privileged to work from home, many homeschooling families reinforce gender stereotypes by relying on a stay-at-home-mom to teach their children. 30/33

Research shows that children who see their moms working are more likely to exhibit egalitarian beliefs as adults. 31/33

https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/0950017018760167

Children deserve access to diverse ways of thinking, knowing, and believing. While public school is not the only way for children to access these things, my experience as a homeschool alumna leads me to believe it’s the best option for my child. 32/33

If you are homeschooling your children, please check out the @ResponsibleHS to learn how you can promote safe homeschooling in your community. 33/33

You can read the unrolled version of this thread here: https://typefully.com/abbinye/7RVIseo

Concerns with Homeschooling Article

CW for people with religious trauma from Pentecostal/Charismatic traditions.
.
.
.

I was seated between my parents on a stage for hundreds of people to stare at me. I was 17 and I felt sick to my stomach. This was my presbytery experience. #cfctoo

If you're Presbyterian, the word presbytery may conjure up images of church governance.

In my childhood cult, presbytery meant one thing: an annual multi-day event in which traveling prophets would come to town and deliver prophetic words over the favored few.

Presbytery has  been part of CFC's culture since the beginning. This newspaper article from 1982 highlights that presbytery is for "selected members of the congregation."

https://nyshistoricnewspapers.org/lccn/sn83031769/1982-05-11/ed-1/seq-16.pdf

These days it appears that there's an application process, after which you're selected by some unknown criteria--though a life transition generally helps--and then you're asked to attend a prep meeting. In short, plenty of opportunities for leaders to gather data about you.

I didn't do any of that process. It was just assumed that when I was a senior in high school that it would be my turn to go through that rite of passage. Perks of being the kid from an insider family, I guess.

I didn't need a prep class. My preparation came from decades of observation. I watched my parents and their friends laughed hysterically when a prophet would "read someone's mail" = the prophet would reveal something private that only the person and their friends would know.

As a child raised by a father with religious scrupulosity, I was constantly terrified that a prophet would prophesy over me and reveal some terrible secret sin that even I wasn't aware of.

Sitting up on the stage, I felt exposed and claustrophobic at the same time. My parents flanked me and the prophets and pastors would gather around and lay their heavy, sweaty hands on my shoulders and my head.

(Image of my younger brother getting presbytery in 2019)

As it turned out, I didn't have much to worry about. The "prophetic word" was 75% vague platitudes and 25% standard guesses about a young woman raised at CFC.

I was raised to marry young and birth many children. Of course they would mention a husband.

I was the daughter of a trained musician. Of course they would mention a musical instrument.

I was instructed to transcribe the audio from the cassette tape and highlight the different portions of the prophecy, so I dutifully obeyed.

This section always makes me chuckle. At 16 I went on a "missions trip" to Turkey and it was the most underwhelming experience--I basically played babysitter for the family I traveled with.

The dad from that family rushed up to me after the service completely terrified that I had experienced something traumatic during the trip. I had to break it to him that the prophet was completely off-base. I'm not sure if that made him feel better or not.

This section is less amusing. I'm an Enneagram One who was punished for the smallest infractions and here this "prophet" is telling me, "there's no room for a mistake."

"You have to be careful who you bring close."
"Your relationships have to be God-ordained."

This kind of fear-mongering is awfully convenient if you don't want someone straying outside the cult. And it's completely destructive for a teenager who is already terrified of making the slightest misstep.

My experience could have been much worse. I didn't have my presbytery slot canceled because Rick didn't like my behavior.
I didn't have the privilege of attending presbytery held over my head to keep me in line.

https://www.cfctoo.com/stories/wrens-story

You can read the unrolled version of this thread here: https://typefully.com/abbinye/TN3Ijol

Religious Trauma in Pentecostal/Charismatic Traditions

Back in December, a reporter reached out to us about ECAP and asked for our assessment. It took about 2 minutes to find dozens of red flags about this organization.

https://www.christianitytoday.com/ct/2023/april/ecap-church-accreditation-child-safety-standards.html

@ACNAtoo gets questions like this all the time. "Do you recommend this?" "What is a good training resource?" "How can we protect our children?"

These are good questions. Unfortunately, the answers aren't very popular. Churches want to check a box. Churches want a fast solution.

Churches want something like this:

"Accreditation by ECAP will objectively verify that a ministry organization meets the standards set by ECAP for child abuse prevention and response."

https://ecap.net/accreditation/

Here's the problem: child abuse is a systemic issue. Checklists can be helpful, but if you want to actually stop abuse in the church, you need to radically change the way that you do church. On every level.

Obviously people don't want to hear that. We like to be comfortable.

Churches don't want to listen to survivors' painfully-gained expertise. They don't want to groan with the survivors and walk through their trauma with them. They want nice lawyers and consultants to deliver tidy solutions.

That's where organizations like ECAP come in. Basically, you're paying for liability insurance so that if a kid gets hurt you can say that it wasn't your fault.

Other red flags (from Board Member @telioslaw):

"NDAs can help ensure that the reputation of the organization will not be harmed by allegations circulating in the public or by expensive litigation arising from those allegations."

https://ecap.net/gift-or-gag-considerations-for-ndas-in-misconduct-claims/

Counter-point to @TeliosLaw from @R_Denhollander:


https://twitter.com/R_Denhollander/status/1264417399291420673?s=20

Another red flag: this affiliate program. Pay us money and we'll give you access to our members!

https://ecap.net/affiliate/

And one more:  https://ecap.net/standards/

As I've written before, chaperones are NOT a safegaurd:

https://twitter.com/abbinye/status/1599864104398700544?s=20

If you want the satisfaction of checking a box, check the box that says NO THANK YOU.

And then sit down with the survivors you know and humbly ask if they'd be willing to share their painful knowledge.

You can read the unrolled version of this thread here: https://typefully.com/abbinye/lPX6WP8

Assessing Child Safety Standards in Churches

.@LuhmannAudrey points out that @The_ACNA and @MidwestAnglican have amassed a tremendous number of lawyers to deal with the pesky survivors.

https://twitter.com/LuhmannAudrey/status/1615945900538597383?s=20&t=iY_p406vCQ8W5U1L0nk7ew

Many of these lawyers have concerning conflicts of interest. Jeff Garrety, for instance, absolved Keith Hartsell of wrongdoing in his role as one of @the_acna chancellors, even though in his PRT role he was required not to investigate or render judgment.

https://www.acnatoo.org/acna-witnesses/a-deafening-silence

But the one lawyer who stands out to me is Assisting Chancellor Alec Smith, author of the infamous letter to @ArchbishopFoley, in which he slanders @ladyjessicahaze.

https://www.acnatoo.org/january-14-2022-alec-smith-letter-to-foley-beach

Alec's wife, Jill Smith, is the Senior Warden at @ChurchRez and Alec is a worship leader at Rez. Those conflicts of interest are bad enough, but there's more.

Alec Smith admits to @ArchbishopFoley that he has no training in canon law, though apparently, Stewart doesn't care if his @MidwestAnglican chancellors are qualified to do their jobs. (Charlie Philbrick's expertise was real estate.)

Given Alec's defense of Stewart in this letter and his insistence in the November "Family Meeting" that Stewart and his clergy weren't required to report child sexual abuse, I wanted to know more about Alec's credentials.

https://www.linkedin.com/in/alec-j-smith-21989b22/

From this LinkedIn page, it appears that Alec's main qualifications for commenting on child sexual abuse reporting are that he...defended abusers?

Alec says that he defended Marines against charges of rape, drugs, aggravated assault of a child, etc. He boasts that he achieved a "remarkable 40% full acquittal rate" for these Marines.

Perhaps it's common for JAGs to brag about their acquittal rate. I'd welcome input from other lawers on that one.

But I'll just say this: choosing an Assisting Chancellor without general counsel or religious experience but with plenty of experience defending rapists and child abusers says...a lot.

More importantly: If Alec is @midwestanglican Assisting Chancellor, who is he assisting? Did Stewart bring back Charlie Philbrick?

Did the @MidwestAnglican Bishop's Council approve of Alec Smith's defense of Stewart and others' actions and demanding the end of Stewart's leave of absence? Who is governing the UMD? A committee of representatives? Or just Stewart Ruch?


You can read the unrolled version of this thread here: https://typefully.com/abbinye/cTMkQ7D

Tonight, @ChurchRez is holding a RezFast to "pray and lament regarding the tragic effect of abuse in our Diocese, world, and personal lives."

In case any @ChurchRez congregants are reading this, I want to point out how insulting this language is for many abuse survivors from @midwestanglican.

When the Black Lives Matter movement started, people pushed back and said "but all lives matter!" Sure, but that's not the point. We say Black Lives Matter because so many people treat Black lives as if they *don't* matter.

Similarly, the @MidwestAnglican and @ChurchRez communications about Rivera's trial and the abuse in the diocese have focused on "pray for everyone involved" and for "all involved to embrace the Lord’s redemptive power and love."

https://midwestanglican.org/rivera-trial/

When survivors have told you hundreds of times that your response to their abuse has harmed them, it is not the time to issue vague statements about healing for everyone.

God meets us in the *specific* instances of our pain and he calls us to do that as well. Gesturing broadly at "our Diocese, world, and personal lives" is the equivalent of "sorry if you were hurt" instead of specifically naming the offense.

If you're at the @ChurchRez RezFast tonight, here is what you can pray and lament. Specifically.

Lament that your bishop called survivors' calls for justice "a vicious spiritual attack of the enemy."

https://www.acnatoo.org/january-14-2022-bp-ruch-letter-to-abp-beach

Pray that your @MidwestAnglican leaders would find the integrity to confess the violation of their ordinal vows and to step down from leadership.

Lament that your bishop still claims that there were no mandated reporting or pastoral care failures in @MidwestAnglican.

Lament that @ChurchRez has never held any kind of prayer and lament service that acknowledges @MidwestAnglican survivors specifically.

Pray that tongues at @ChurchRez that lie and slander survivors will be silenced.

Lament the profaning of the Lord's Table that occurred when Mark Rivera used the Sacraments to groom his victims at @ChurchRez.

https://www.acnatoo.org/diocese-of-the-upper-midwest/rivers-story

Pray that Mark Rivera is found guilty on all counts at the verdict tomorrow and receives a lengthy sentence at his sentencing hearing.

Lament your part in shunning Cherin's family.

https://www.acnatoo.org/piecing-it-all-together-part02

Pray for concrete ways to financially support survivors instead of @ChurchRez's PR firms and lawyers.

Lament that @ChurchRez has never publicly condemned Mark Rivera and Chis Lapeyre or acknowledged the people that they harmed.

Pray for the strength to model survivor-centric belief to children at @ChurchRez.

Lament the moral injury you have inflicted on survivors in your congregation who have learned that @ChurchRez will not protect them nor will you believe them.

https://www.acnatoo.org/acnatoo-blog/loving-the-abused

Pray for courage to seek the truth, even if it means that you sacrifice your community at @ChurchRez for the sake of survivors.

As the prophet Amos writes:
"I hate, I despise your religious festivals; your assemblies are a stench to me.
Even though you bring me burnt offerings and grain offerings, I will not accept them.
Though you bring choice fellowship offerings, I will have no regard for them."

"Away with the noise of your songs! I will not listen to the music of your harps.
But let justice roll on like a river, righteousness like a never-failing stream!" Amos 5:21-24


You can read the unrolled version of this thread here: https://typefully.com/abbinye/Io7EcQs

How To Write A Terrible Registered Sex Offender Policy: A Case Study

@ChurchRez has shared their "current working policy," possibly a euphemism for "we pulled an all-nighter last week and threw this together."

Full policy here: https://churchrez.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/12/Rez-Restrictive-Access-Sex-Offender-Working-Agreement-.pdf

"We want our church to be a safe place for everyone."

This is a classic "but our intentions are good" excuse. Everyone *wants* their church to be safe, but as long as child sexual abusers are allowed to attend, a church is not safe for *anyone.*


https://twitter.com/hlgriffin/status/1601614175155163136?s=20&t=BjxbooFCR7a_fhJ0I3LMyQ

"The following document serves as a sample agreement."

I would like to see the agreement that @ChurchRez had John Hays sign. Sample agreements are often very different from the actual signed agreement.

"...your participation in Resurrection's worship, activities, ministries, and functions"

Massive red flag: this implies that a registered sex offender can serve in a @ChurchRez ministry.

A lawyer seems to have provided some definitions here, but the misalignment of bullet points indicates a fast copy/paste job.

There's an interesting loophole in this sentence about RezGroups "under the authority and leadership" of @ChurchRez. What about groups of Rez members who gather together regularly but aren't listed as a recognized RezGroup?

Who is the @ChurchRez Supervising Pastor for convicted sex offenders? What qualifications does that pastor have? What is the process for assessing and assigning this pastor? Is this the same pastor for all RSOs or one for each?

So although there's a Supervising Pastor, the escort is doing the work of chaperoning? Is this the escort with "extensive experience in prison ministry" who is "trained to oversee the process of safely involving ex-convicts in the life of the church"?

https://churchrez.org/child-safety-and-rso-questions/

Now we get into the conditions of a registered sex offender's participation at @ChurchRez. Note that almost all of these conditions are unenforceable because the burden is on the offender to report their actions.

Condition 1: Communication channels with the CCO are open, but regularity is not stipulated. @ChurchRez leaders may contact the CCO at any time but it's unclear if they will.

Condition 5. @ChurchRez staff/vestry/leaders/etc: did you get a copy of this signed agreement with John Hays' picture and the rest? Did you get it in 2019? Or only recently?

Condition 7. Who is defined as @ChurchRez senior staff? Does  "sole and absolute discretion" mean scrupulous oversight or just..."discernment"?

This is the second time the policy indicates that registered sex offenders *can* serve in @ChurchRez ministries. Allowing predators to serve in ministries tells unsuspecting parents that John Hays and others are safe.

Condition 11. A visit with a @ChurchRez family is supposed to include notifying the parents of RSO status. Who enforces this? How would the pastors know if John Hays visited a family or is texting a teen if he chooses not to tell them?


Which @ChurchRez pastor is verifying that John Hays is providing a concrete disclosure rather than a vague "I have a sexual addiction" or "sexual brokenness"? (Cf. Chris Lapeyre.)

Condition 12 is very very bad. As @Treebeard55 points out, it makes @ChurchRez parents complicit in potential grooming. In their ignorance, the parents might even require their child to hug or high-five the RSO to "teach their kid respect for elders."

https://twitter.com/Treebeard55/status/1602357763761491968?s=20&t=BjxbooFCR7a_fhJ0I3LMyQ

The @ChurchRez parent who knows nothing about this person’s past does not have the information needed to keep their child safe. They might as well be absent.

Condition 14. "You will only use the bathroom after your supervising pastor or approved escort has entered and found no children in the room. Your supervising pastor or escort will monitor the door while you use the facility."

How exactly does this work, @ChurchRez?

Does someone enter the @ChurchRez bathroom and loudly proclaim: "Are there any children in here?"

Do they peek under the stall doors to look for small feet?

Do they stand at the bathroom door and say "this bathroom is closed" and refuse to explain?

How are any of these conditions enforced? Are there documented meetings? Does the staff get regular updates? Is attendance recorded? Should John Hays leave @ChurchRez or transfer membership, what will Rez do? Will they notify the other church?

The last page is a Consent, Authorization, and Release Form which serves as a get-out-of-jail card for @ChurchRez if anything bad happens.

.@DianeLangberg says: "When the church shows “grace” in response to a few approved words and some tears, we have done added damage to the victim, risked the safety of other sheep and left the abuser with a disease that will rot his/her soul."

https://www.dianelangberg.com/2020/01/how-should-the-church-respond-to-abusers/

The consent & release form highlights that @ChurchRez is showing a cheap grace to John Hays and other sex offenders. They won't do the hard work of bringing church to him, but if something bad happens because of their inadequate policy, they'll use him as the scapegoat.

After reviewing this @ChurchRez policy, I stand by my statement from earlier this month:

https://twitter.com/abbinye/status/1598397455137009664?s=20&t=BjxbooFCR7a_fhJ0I3LMyQ

You can read the unrolled version of this thread here: https://typefully.com/abbinye/tsP7BTI

Following my thread from Dec 5, @ChurchRez sent out another email to Rez parents to reassure them.

(Spoiler: it is not reassuring.)

https://twitter.com/abbinye/status/1599864083502596097?s=20&t=BjxbooFCR7a_fhJ0I3LMyQ

You can find the full @ChurchRez letter here: https://churchrez.org/child-safety-and-rso-questions/

Last week I asked if convicted pedophile John Hays was a @ChurchRez member. Steve's updated language clarifies that point. John is only an attendee.

(It also clarifies that @ChurchRez is really not familiar with common Anglican parlance.)


https://twitter.com/abbinye/status/1599864094294622208

"...it is not our policy to inform the congregation of a parishioner's past criminal actions"

This lumps everything from petty theft to murder into one "criminal" category. CSA is a different type of crime and demands an appropriate response.

(Whoops, "parishioner" is back.)

A reminder from @DianeLangberg: "Do we really think that if we permit an abuser of children into the sanctuary that we can guarantee the safety of the vulnerable?"

https://www.dianelangberg.com/2020/01/how-should-the-church-respond-to-abusers/

"When information was made public and lacked various details..."

That's on you, @ChurchRez. You could have been transparent from the very beginning.

"I am sorry for the moments in which you have felt that my public response does not resolve all your concerns."

1) This is not an actual apology. This puts the blame on people who "have felt" disappointed. This is DARVO.

https://www.acnatoo.org/acnatoo-blog/darvo-in-action

2) This implies that people should not bother with public statements because the truth will be communicated privately to the @ChurchRez Family (TM).

So basically a non-answer on whether additional RSOs can attend @ChurchRez. This conveniently does NOT tell congregants how many RSOs are currently attending.

(I'll tackle the abysmal policy in another thread.)

Who are these "various specialists" who consulted with Rez? I still want names.

"Case by case basis" tells me that @ChurchRez decided that John Hays' case didn't warrant telling parents. If you won't tell parents about Mark Rivera or John Hays, when *will* you tell them?

@ChurchRez, who trains your chaperones? Tell us more.

Experience working with ex-cons does not necessarily mean experience with RSOs. Stop conflating CSA with crimes in general.

(The initial email read: "The two chaperones have extensive experience in prison." LOL)

Despite your protestations, nothing about this communication or policy indicates that children are your top priority, @ChurchRez.

Again, this Child & Youth Protection Policy is a red herring, since it only addresses people who work for/volunteer at Rez.

This email is not reassuring. Instead, @ChurchRez blames parents if they "felt" concerned about Steve's Dec 2 email, refuses to address how parents should protect their children from un-named predators outside church services, and links to a terrible policy.

Grade: D-

@ChurchRez, after attempting the bare minimum:

You can read the unrolled version of this thread here: https://typefully.com/abbinye/CzJFPx5

On Friday, December 2, @ChurchRez Dean Steve Williamson responded to @ACNAtoo's post about convicted pedophile John Hays with an email to Rez congregants entitled: "A note regarding a publicly named parishioner."


https://twitter.com/treebeard55/status/1599546301514801152?s=46&t=hQHSabkyRtYNNthTadI0MA

While @Treebeard55 does an excellent job highlighting Rez's pattern of disclosure timing, I would argue that @ChurchRez isn't even honest when forced to be. Let's look at this email.


Let's start with the subject line. "Publicly named parishioner." Standard usage of "parishioner" in Anglican tradition indicates that John Hays is a member and has gone through membership classes. @ChurchRez, is John Hays a member?

"Yesterday information was released publicly."

@ChurchRez has consistently warned their congregants not to read @ACNAtoo's posts, which means they can't say where the information was released. That must be so galling for them.

"It is not our policy to publicly inform the congregation of a parishioner’s past criminal actions."

What *is* your policy, @ChurchRez? Does "not our policy" mean "we don't have one"? Or is it "we have an internal policy but we won't share it with our congregation"?

"At @ChurchRez we remain fully and deeply committed to two crucial gospel values and practices."

I'm gonna argue that exposing vulnerable children to a sex predator is NOT a crucial gospel value or practice.

"...we are also committed to being a place where sinners, even notorious sinners, can belong and encounter Jesus (with appropriate safeguards in place)."

Chaperones are not appropriate safeguards. See Chris Lapeyre, et. al.

https://twitter.com/LuhmannAudrey/status/1586080814281854976?s=20&t=eh5qOvJmlaYyjCxQAT-8Zw

"At a meeting he requested with our pastors, John disclosed his past and asked our permission to attend."

"Disclosed his past" means nothing here. When the first known victim came forward, John did not disclose other victims. The second known victim came forward on his own.

Hays has a history of lying about the extent of his abuse. How can @ChurchRez leadership claim that Hays has disclosed his past (his whole past?!) and committed to living a restored life when it has already been demonstrated that he lies about his abusive behavior?

"In consultation with churches that have RSO policies, local ex-offender ministry leaders, therapists specializing in sexual addiction, legal experts in this area of law, and John’s personal therapist who specializes in RSO rehabilitation, we created strict guidelines..."

I want names. Clearly these experts didn't include @DianeLangberg because she says this: "When churches have asked what I recommend when dealing with someone whose has sexually abused children my response is – do not allow him/her to attend church."

https://www.dianelangberg.com/2020/01/how-should-the-church-respond-to-abusers/

Are these therapists specializing in sexual addiction qualified to consult on pedophiles? Because pedophilia isn't the same thing as a sex addiction and it's extremely dangerous to treat it as such.

Are these legal experts named Charlie Philbrick? Because I think we've already established that he's probably not the guy who should be offering legal advice about sex offenders.

https://twitter.com/ladyjessicahaze/status/1590779698329460736?s=46&t=TwuFb59-P9MjrbmLquY5Ag

What are these churches with RSO policies? I want to see their policies.

So here are the strict guidelines that @ChurchRez created for Hays. I'd give failing grades to all of them.

Designated chaperone: F
Chaperones actually serve to make an offender look trustworthy in the eyes of folks who don't know his crimes. Why? Because they're always sitting with prominent, respected parishioners.

Restricted to santuary & narthex: F
Are there never children in the santuary & narthex? Abusers thrive on abusing in public.

Not allowed to attend events with children: D+
Children are at church on Sunday. Abusers don't need children-only events.

Pastors & staff are aware of his identity & crimes: C-
Even if staff are aware (wording indicates that only pastors & staff who work with kids know), what is to prevent him from accessing vulnerable children OUTSIDE of church?

(Also, @ChurchRez parents--ask your childcare workers if they knew about John Hays and *when* they found out. Did they just find out last week when @ACNAtoo published that text message?)

"Any breach will result in his [sic] no longer being welcome to attend."

How will you know if John breaches these guidelines? He could be hanging out with children at their houses right now and you'd never know, @ChurchRez.

Also, this is a red herring: "Our church’s most important means of fulfilling that commitment is through the ongoing implementation of our Child & Youth Protection Policy." This policy says *nothing* about sex offenders attending @ChurchRez.

https://churchrez.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/10/Rez-Child-Protection-Policy-2022-FINAL.docx-3.pdf

If John Hays could secretly abuse as a pastor, father of five, and respected community leader, he is not safe for any community with children. There are other ways to bring church to such a person.

The research is clear: sex offenders will almost certainly struggle with the temptation to sexually abuse children for the rest of their lives.

Yes, God can work miracles. But because sexual abuse of children is almost always secret and underreported, there is no way to know with certainty that Hays has not relapsed. Therefore, he must not be near children at all.

You can read the unrolled version of this thread here: https://typefully.com/abbinye/lkvSr7i

When you’re analyzing primary sources, it’s important to ask questions about the creator and audience. What could that look like? Let’s examine some correspondence from @ArchbishopFoley.

When you’re dealing with a high ranking individual, they often don’t write their own communications. These folks have a lot of demands competing for their attention, so you can tell what is important to them by what they write personally vs what they delegate to underlings.


Here’s an example of a letter that may be written by someone other than @ArchbishopFoley. It has a professional tone, selective details, and is clearly written for a public audience. https://anglicanchurch.net/a-letter-from-archbishop-beach-on-the-diocese-of-upper-midwest/


("Request for a leave of absence" is a polite way to put that. @The_ACNA COO Alan Hawkins disclosed to an @ACNAtoo team member that the Province "strongly encouraged" @StewartRuch to go on leave.)

Contrast that public letter to this one, which @ArchbishopFoley sent to the clergy in his diocese following the Dear Gay Anglicans kerfuffle: https://anglican.ink/2021/02/23/archbishop-beach-writes-to-the-diocese-of-the-south-about-the-dear-gay-anglicans-open-letter/

"While it says they are not undermining our Pastoral Statement, they actually are. Replacing “gay Christian” with “gay Anglican” is pretty much in your face."


It's clear that @ArchbishopFoley wrote this himself, both from the much more casual tone and from his comments like "This is serious enough, however, that I am writing this at 1:15 am."

We can confirm his writing style by looking at documents that @archbishopfoley writes for an internal audience, like this one: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Fh--yzGjrNB8HMTr9Ppmlkjw-0X7rBLYwtFnbe5DtQQ/edit?usp=sharing

Why does this matter? Because what a person chooses to focus their time on reveals their priorities. Consider this example: https://anglicanchurch.net/a-pastoral-message-from-archbishop-beach-regarding-gafcon-and-women-in-the-episcopate/


In September 2021, the PRT had just been formed, Bp. Atkinson had just been placed on leave, and @acnatoo had published multiple new survivor stories. Did @ArchbishopFoley choose to address any of that? No. He has been silent about abuse in @the_acna since his letter on 7/10/21.

Instead, @archbishopfoley published this letter about the Anglican Church in Kenya consecrating a female bishop: "I recognize that this decision will come as a deep disappointment to some.  I share in that disappointment."

Whether expressing deep personal "disappointment" over a female bishop or showing anger over clergy in the @adots_acna who signed the Dear Gay Anglicans letter, @ArchbishopFoley's mask drops when it comes to things that upset him.

We start to see the @ArchbishopFoley who visits the Trump White House and consorts with future Jan 6 insurrectionists at The Return: https://web.archive.org/web/20200917072837/https://thereturn.org/live-event/#speakers

In short, examining what @ArchbishopFoley creates and for what audience gives us clues about what he values.

.@ArchbishopFoley, @ACNAtoo wrote you an open letter on July 15, 2021.  You have not responded. It's not too late to humble yourself and care for the wounded in @The_ACNA. Advent is upon us and the voices of the survivors in your churches call for repentance.

#ACNAtoo

You can read the unrolled version of this thread here: https://typefully.com/abbinye/mj8rN3R

🧵 Connections between @greenhousemove and @MidwestAnglican courtesy of your friendly neighborhood archivist.

I recently reviewed the @greenhousemove annual reports (https://opencorporates.com/companies/us_mi/800900018) and noticed that their last available report includes something new: childcare.

In 2021, Cornerstone Oak Park (led by William and Anne Beasley) advertised their Oak Park Building Blocks childcare center.   https://web.archive.org/web/20211224033740/https://www.cornerstoneoakpark.com/

It is curious that @greenhousemove considers their daycare an official part of their mission, since they demonstrate a pattern of carelessness with children's safety.

This section from the @HuschBlackwell report shows how Anne and Nate Beasley did not notify parents at the daycare center about Joel Girard, a sexual predator. The phrase "worked in a daycare center but never in an actual classroom" is naive at best.

We also have the testimony from Beth Thompson, former @greenhousemove administrator. According to Thompson, Beasley committed insurance fraud by saying that he does background checks and creates sexual abuse policies for volunteers and then just...not doing it.

So @greenhousemove--that apparently considers childcare important enough to list on their annual report--did not run background checks, did not implement sexual abuse policies, and thinks it's ok to let a sexual abuser wander around a church-run daycare.

Why is this important? Because Stewart Ruch and @MidwestAnglican are trying to pretend that @greenhousemove isn't their problem and they're not responsible for the hot mess. But they are responsible.

Not only is/was @greenhousemove an official deanery in @MidwestAnglican, but Greenhouse's Alex Cameron (now leading @pittanglicans) ran the UMD Bishop's Council during Stewart's absence. Entirely separate? Not in the least.

https://web.archive.org/web/20211204050847/https://midwestanglican.org/our-leadership/

Let's look at the Bishop's Council minutes from December 2020. First we have Stewart authorizing a model where churches tithe 5% to @MidwestAnglican and 5% to @greenhousemove or other ministries. Entirely separate, huh?

Then, Stewart tells the Bishop's Council that William Beasley gets a copy of his annual review in his role as "our Missioner General of the Mission Society [@Greenhousemove]"  Again, separate doesn't exactly describe this situation.

Finally, here's Stewart telling the Bishop's Council that COLA is "one of our smaller diocesan churches" and he has the authority to make them "suspend services for a season." But sure, Stewart has no role in choosing COLA's leadership.

Stewart Ruch is absolutely responsible for the mess at COLA and at @greenhousemove. That's why @MidwestAnglican and @ChurchRez are listed as respondents in discovery for the lawsuit filed by @cherinmarie2.

You can read the unrolled version of this thread here: https://typefully.com/abbinye/UjJc4yR