And knowing I have potential backup in this community is huge.
I try and manage things so I never have to make such a call - I put some Webworm aside into the legal fund: Even advice throughout my Arise reporting adds up. But so far that is all under control thanks to subscribers like you.
It's not just hot air when I say "I could not do this without you."
Amazing... truly amazing mahi. Those guys are *unbelievable.* I realise this is edge of the seat stuff for me as a reader/following, but for those hurt and still hurting..... my heart goes out to them.
1) The press release this afternoon from Arise is the first step in minimising the voices of the 545 people who contributed. They do not like Pathfinding's report and they do not intend to implement the recommendations. The report will be characterised as an outlier.
2) The comment by Arise that " it was not an investigative process, with no testing or verification of what was heard. Because this approach does not result in substantiated findings, the Board sought further advice from experts in the field of HR, governance, and finance." could be paraphrased as "we are not sure we believe you".
3) A mature organisation would have responded to the report by saying that it contained some sobering comments that Arise needed to reflect on and there was mandate for substantive change.
Fair point. However the clear narrative in the report is that the writers heard a consistent story from hundreds of people that the governance of the church failed and that grave harm was caused on the board’s watch. The report represents a call for dramatic change. The weight of numbers and the report writer’s response would indicate that the evidence is there if an investigation was required. I don’t think the writers of the report want an investigation. They want change and don’t believe the current board can facilitate that change. The board needs to hear that message and humbly consider who or what they are protecting.
I concur with many of your comments. - particularly your point 3 above. I think the Pathfinding Process was always going to be fraught given it was run by counsellors and they wanted to create safety (understandably so) but therefore it limits the effectiveness (possibly) for employment matters due to the lack of specificity and natural justice in individual allegations but it certainly doesn't remove the imperative to a call for action for the wider organisation.
I'm not so sure about Point 1. I suspect we have a case or an organisation caught in the headlights and Board members out of their depth. To be fair - who would take this beats on even as Pathfinding suggests? I think they would struggle to dismiss such a report particularly given that they (and the Cameron's ) commissioned it - and the credibility of the three report writers. I know nothing of Charlotte Cummings (except that she bravely took this work on amidst much criticism including David's own quesitons) but I rate Rev Frank Ritchie and Chris Clarke (and we know David rates the Rev)
It's going to be a very interesting way and see. Along with the Employment Case.
In my opinion the Pathfinding Process report was a good idea. Stage one gave those who had suffered harm an opportunity to speak. Stage two was the report writers' response to what they heard together with their recommendations. Stage three should have been an acknowledgement and a commitment to respond in 30 days with a meaningful report on what recommendations will be adopted and which recommendations would not be adopted and the reasons why.
I don't think the report makes any comments on particular employment issues. Given that John and Gillian Cameron are the Applicants in the ERA proceedings it would seem likely that their grievance will relate to the Church's conduct after the allegations first became public. The report writers exclusively deal with the period before that. My reading of the report is that it focused primarily on the lack of board leadership rather than pastoral leadership.
I don't think the employment issue between the Church and the Camerons is material to anyone other than the parties. Having said that, if the Church was to re-employ them then the Church would need to explain the rationale for that decision.
An general acceptance of the recommendations with a commitment to respond in 30 days would not, in my opinion, have had any bearing on the employment issues. It would simply indicate that there was an intention to be better. Based on what I read many of the 545 contributors want the Church to continue in a better form.
I think you are right that the board was ill equipped to run the Church. Having the humility to realise that someone can do this better than you is the hallmark of a great leader. The report writers signaled this to the board.
Yeah - the fact this got dragged into the ERA is kinda a distraction. This was never about employment - it was about clear guidelines to the church on how to stop fucking things up, and fucking people up.
And going on their response - as you noted in your first point - all they are gonna do is gaslight and minimise.
Making it sound like the victims can't be believed - and that this report was just a tiny part of it all.
A bunch of horseshit, all of it. This is a horseshit church, in summary.
Sorry - it's just so annoying the way they're treating this.
Very interesting thanks Michael. I think the Pathfinder report neatly pre-emoted some of the likely Board excuses, as obviously their recommendations (especially in relation to them) were never going to be palatable. I was also interested in the ‘other reports’ commissioned with less participants (and who would do this more than once) . I asked myself why the Board would do this and with exception of the Duncan Cotterill one ( which presumably is about extent of liability) the only reason I could come up with is that they wanted a ‘less comprehensive’ review to release. No chance now. Batten down the hatches- it’s going to be interesting.
I would love to be a fly on the wall in any of the prayer meetings that had taken place. So curious how I am described. And knowing how they treat those they've harmed - I don't think I would fair very well.
In fact, I just pictured JC (not Jesus, the other one!) face bulging, fiery red shouting things at the top of his lungs and just up above him, perched on the wall looking down is David, the fly on the wall… but think ‘The Fly’ 🪰 as in legendary Jeff Goldblum. Glorious.
Seriously though, I can only imagine the horrid and manipulative vibe 🤮
Someone made the observation that an episode of Undercover Boss with Jesus turning up to Arise would be amazing. My take is he's not white, so would probably not get the VIP section.
You've done such great work here, David. I know it can't undo the harm experienced by so many in the past, but it really can put a stop to it continuing. I'm so happy to see great investigative journalism alive and well and making a real difference.
They will of course respond in the most inhumane way possible because they are self serving and cruel. So I eagerly await the inevitable fuckery that’s about to happen
I am with you Carolyn, not Caroline. My daughter is also Carolyn too.
I eagerly await David's next move, and I personally am thankful for such a champion David is in doing his utter best to expose the corruption going on in Corporate NZ churches and schools. Shame on Arise and all those other professionals that block the TRUTH.
When I read the report I wondered why (what we now can be sure was the Cameron's) sought to prevent it's publication - given the fact that it itself says it's not a investigative process. This is reflected in the Arise statement. So - unless individuals who comments are prepared to have their comments used for another purpose I would imagine very little of it is useful in any employment matters - The Duncan Coterill Report will be another matter!!
I'm also pretty sure that John Cameron was still on the Board when the Pathfinding Report was commissioned - so why would you not want a report you commissioned to be published? (Well - we know - but wouldn't that be an interesting conversation!)
So there are flaws but I don't think it should stop the church making some progress. I truly hope they do.
Wow! That seems like a swift move from ERA. Great result.
I like to imagine someone at ERA has been diligently but unhappily following the law, saw your release, rubbed their hands and said 'lol, see ya later sucker' or maybe 'let there be light' to the non publication order
So the voice of the 545 are not to be believed as the report was "not an investigative process" and there was "no testing and verification of what was heard". While it was not an "investigation", It was a a thorough comprehensive piece of truth telling. And from reading the report I concluded that there was a high level of consistency in the stories. So to minimise the voice of these brave souls who came forward with their horror stories of abuse and malfeasance is gas lighting on an industrial scale. Furthermore there were 92, I repeat 92 recommendations for serious, systematic change.
Also I find their statement about being "frustrated by the delay" as credible as a child caught with their hand in the cookie jar crying their innocence. There approach has been one of delay, delay, delay, deny, deny, deny. Rather than acknowledging fault they cry foul over the the report being "illegally obtained" which to me is a thinly veiled threat. Stay strong for truth is they only weapon to defeat this evil.
David, just reminding you that the community here will help with any legal costs in ways other than our subscriptions if they come up.
Thanks Mothy - that really does mean a lot.
And knowing I have potential backup in this community is huge.
I try and manage things so I never have to make such a call - I put some Webworm aside into the legal fund: Even advice throughout my Arise reporting adds up. But so far that is all under control thanks to subscribers like you.
It's not just hot air when I say "I could not do this without you."
I really couldn't.
Can confirm I have seen some legal bills related to this investigation and that lawyers still cost quite a bit of money
Absolutely.
Thanks Camille.
Amazing... truly amazing mahi. Those guys are *unbelievable.* I realise this is edge of the seat stuff for me as a reader/following, but for those hurt and still hurting..... my heart goes out to them.
Unbelievable about sums it up.
I think they've sunk low, then they just go lower.
Gaslighting victims - including over 300 of their own members - a "unique" move from them.
Three comments.
1) The press release this afternoon from Arise is the first step in minimising the voices of the 545 people who contributed. They do not like Pathfinding's report and they do not intend to implement the recommendations. The report will be characterised as an outlier.
2) The comment by Arise that " it was not an investigative process, with no testing or verification of what was heard. Because this approach does not result in substantiated findings, the Board sought further advice from experts in the field of HR, governance, and finance." could be paraphrased as "we are not sure we believe you".
3) A mature organisation would have responded to the report by saying that it contained some sobering comments that Arise needed to reflect on and there was mandate for substantive change.
Michael - The Pathfinding report itself says it's not investigative.
Fair point. However the clear narrative in the report is that the writers heard a consistent story from hundreds of people that the governance of the church failed and that grave harm was caused on the board’s watch. The report represents a call for dramatic change. The weight of numbers and the report writer’s response would indicate that the evidence is there if an investigation was required. I don’t think the writers of the report want an investigation. They want change and don’t believe the current board can facilitate that change. The board needs to hear that message and humbly consider who or what they are protecting.
I concur with many of your comments. - particularly your point 3 above. I think the Pathfinding Process was always going to be fraught given it was run by counsellors and they wanted to create safety (understandably so) but therefore it limits the effectiveness (possibly) for employment matters due to the lack of specificity and natural justice in individual allegations but it certainly doesn't remove the imperative to a call for action for the wider organisation.
I'm not so sure about Point 1. I suspect we have a case or an organisation caught in the headlights and Board members out of their depth. To be fair - who would take this beats on even as Pathfinding suggests? I think they would struggle to dismiss such a report particularly given that they (and the Cameron's ) commissioned it - and the credibility of the three report writers. I know nothing of Charlotte Cummings (except that she bravely took this work on amidst much criticism including David's own quesitons) but I rate Rev Frank Ritchie and Chris Clarke (and we know David rates the Rev)
It's going to be a very interesting way and see. Along with the Employment Case.
Again, you make good points.
In my opinion the Pathfinding Process report was a good idea. Stage one gave those who had suffered harm an opportunity to speak. Stage two was the report writers' response to what they heard together with their recommendations. Stage three should have been an acknowledgement and a commitment to respond in 30 days with a meaningful report on what recommendations will be adopted and which recommendations would not be adopted and the reasons why.
I don't think the report makes any comments on particular employment issues. Given that John and Gillian Cameron are the Applicants in the ERA proceedings it would seem likely that their grievance will relate to the Church's conduct after the allegations first became public. The report writers exclusively deal with the period before that. My reading of the report is that it focused primarily on the lack of board leadership rather than pastoral leadership.
I don't think the employment issue between the Church and the Camerons is material to anyone other than the parties. Having said that, if the Church was to re-employ them then the Church would need to explain the rationale for that decision.
An general acceptance of the recommendations with a commitment to respond in 30 days would not, in my opinion, have had any bearing on the employment issues. It would simply indicate that there was an intention to be better. Based on what I read many of the 545 contributors want the Church to continue in a better form.
I think you are right that the board was ill equipped to run the Church. Having the humility to realise that someone can do this better than you is the hallmark of a great leader. The report writers signaled this to the board.
Yeah - the fact this got dragged into the ERA is kinda a distraction. This was never about employment - it was about clear guidelines to the church on how to stop fucking things up, and fucking people up.
And going on their response - as you noted in your first point - all they are gonna do is gaslight and minimise.
Making it sound like the victims can't be believed - and that this report was just a tiny part of it all.
A bunch of horseshit, all of it. This is a horseshit church, in summary.
Sorry - it's just so annoying the way they're treating this.
Men.
Very interesting thanks Michael. I think the Pathfinder report neatly pre-emoted some of the likely Board excuses, as obviously their recommendations (especially in relation to them) were never going to be palatable. I was also interested in the ‘other reports’ commissioned with less participants (and who would do this more than once) . I asked myself why the Board would do this and with exception of the Duncan Cotterill one ( which presumably is about extent of liability) the only reason I could come up with is that they wanted a ‘less comprehensive’ review to release. No chance now. Batten down the hatches- it’s going to be interesting.
I agree. The release of the report (thanks David) means they no longer control the narrative.
This. Is. GOLD!!
In our Webworm ‘prayer meetings’ we’ve all been yelling ‘The power of David Farrier compels you!!’ 😂 😂
Legendary!!
I am so happy to be a webworm supporter and David Farrier fanboy 😍
I would love to be a fly on the wall in any of the prayer meetings that had taken place. So curious how I am described. And knowing how they treat those they've harmed - I don't think I would fair very well.
Oh imagine!!
In fact, I just pictured JC (not Jesus, the other one!) face bulging, fiery red shouting things at the top of his lungs and just up above him, perched on the wall looking down is David, the fly on the wall… but think ‘The Fly’ 🪰 as in legendary Jeff Goldblum. Glorious.
Seriously though, I can only imagine the horrid and manipulative vibe 🤮
Someone made the observation that an episode of Undercover Boss with Jesus turning up to Arise would be amazing. My take is he's not white, so would probably not get the VIP section.
Ha! Yes!!!
Me too
You've done such great work here, David. I know it can't undo the harm experienced by so many in the past, but it really can put a stop to it continuing. I'm so happy to see great investigative journalism alive and well and making a real difference.
👍 thank you for your continued care and attention David.
I can't stop this one. It's too much.
Take care 💙 as we watch and wait for how this lands
S a m e.
So far the board has entirely stopped replying to me.
Who am I kidding - they stopped ages ago.
They give zero fucks - it's all just cover now.
Lots of your fans have your back!
They will of course respond in the most inhumane way possible because they are self serving and cruel. So I eagerly await the inevitable fuckery that’s about to happen
Cruel is correct.
I am with you Carolyn, not Caroline. My daughter is also Carolyn too.
I eagerly await David's next move, and I personally am thankful for such a champion David is in doing his utter best to expose the corruption going on in Corporate NZ churches and schools. Shame on Arise and all those other professionals that block the TRUTH.
Good work - it seems your bravery has forced a change by the ERA. Journalism in action.
When I read the report I wondered why (what we now can be sure was the Cameron's) sought to prevent it's publication - given the fact that it itself says it's not a investigative process. This is reflected in the Arise statement. So - unless individuals who comments are prepared to have their comments used for another purpose I would imagine very little of it is useful in any employment matters - The Duncan Coterill Report will be another matter!!
I'm also pretty sure that John Cameron was still on the Board when the Pathfinding Report was commissioned - so why would you not want a report you commissioned to be published? (Well - we know - but wouldn't that be an interesting conversation!)
So there are flaws but I don't think it should stop the church making some progress. I truly hope they do.
Great work David!
More good news: https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/129610943/charity-services-opens-inquiry-after-damning-arise-church-allegations
Oooh, let's see how they do when their charity status gets withdrawn. That's a lot of tax!! ,😋🎉🌈🤣
Something comes to mind about horses and stable doors...
Wow! That seems like a swift move from ERA. Great result.
I like to imagine someone at ERA has been diligently but unhappily following the law, saw your release, rubbed their hands and said 'lol, see ya later sucker' or maybe 'let there be light' to the non publication order
Great work, David. Be proud of yourself.
I am taking a moment on this one. Thank you.
I went to bed happy and calm.
Lovelly!!
So the voice of the 545 are not to be believed as the report was "not an investigative process" and there was "no testing and verification of what was heard". While it was not an "investigation", It was a a thorough comprehensive piece of truth telling. And from reading the report I concluded that there was a high level of consistency in the stories. So to minimise the voice of these brave souls who came forward with their horror stories of abuse and malfeasance is gas lighting on an industrial scale. Furthermore there were 92, I repeat 92 recommendations for serious, systematic change.
Also I find their statement about being "frustrated by the delay" as credible as a child caught with their hand in the cookie jar crying their innocence. There approach has been one of delay, delay, delay, deny, deny, deny. Rather than acknowledging fault they cry foul over the the report being "illegally obtained" which to me is a thinly veiled threat. Stay strong for truth is they only weapon to defeat this evil.
Yeah, let's see how that "frustrated by the delay" holds up now, eh?
Fucking excellent!!!