MK forum

So instead of notifying all the sending churches and all individual supporters as recommended---
ntm only notified one sending church?
And in Frank Parker's case, none?
Whoever appeared on his vouchers should be notified.
As well as for all the other abusers.

Does anyone have a voucher to show to Pat and Investigators? They need to see how easy it would be to notify all donors.

Yes, this "sending church" stuff has me really riled up.

The Recommendations Panel would make a suggestion like "a letter will be sent to the member's supporting churches advising them of these allegations and outcomes", and the EB would change it to, "NTM USA is notifying the member's current sending church of the findings related to him".

And in the case of Frank Parker, the recommendation from the panel was, "a letter should be sent to all supporting churches and individual supporters to make them aware of the situation with an apology for the years intervening during which this information was not shared", and the response from NTM was, "NTM USA was asked to inform his sending church of this change of status, however, in earlier years, sending churches were not identified as they are today. The sending church information for Frank Parker is not available".

So in the Parker case, no supporters from any era have been sent any sort of notification at all?? What a lame and shady excuse. All that is saying is, back in our day, no particular single church was specified on a missionary's personnel information with the term "sending church". (Note the dodgy vocabulary: "in earlier years, sending churches were not identified as they are today".) We used the term "home church", and I am quite certain that NTM knew which church was my "home church". (It was the one that sent me the largest monthly donation.)

New Tribes missionaries currently have to raise thousands of dollars per month in support. Without a doubt, most of them will piece that amount together from scores of sources: churches, individuals, all over the country and even abroad. There is a connection between these supporters and the missionaries. Often a very personal one. Missionaries spend time in these churches and these homes, and correspondence goes back and forth, and many prayers are lifted.

To think that only ONE single so-called "sending church" should be notified "of findings" (not even "of allegations and outcomes") is beyond preposterous. If I were supporting a missionary in any way, either through my church, or as an individual, I would be insulted if I was not deemed worthy to be notified if someone I cared that much about had hurt children.

This is insulting, unrealistic, and unacceptable. It seems to me, yet again, just one more desperate attempt to hide the ugly truth from the general public. I simply cannot fathom how NTM leaders can, with any good conscience, think they have done their due diligence when they notify only one church of "the findings" of these investigations into the sexual, physical and emotional abuse of innocent children.

Unacceptable!

Thank you, Raz.
Yes, it IS preposterous.

I agree that the information should be in the hands of any churches/individuals supporting these pedophiles PAST and PRESENT!!! Most (all?) of these people are no longer with NTM, but some are in other ministries currently, and perhaps have retained their contacts/donors.

I agree. But NTM never tried to save its own children.

Were children ever valued and loved? There are very few records that even have the names of MKs listed. Why would they? We were just "with this family" or "his kid."

Who is going to make sure this happens? NTM, we'll make the phone calls for you--have list, will call. If you won't, it's only a citizen's duty, for us to take that up.

Someone has to protect the children.