MK forum

"OK, point well taken. Now, let's get back to the work."

That is the response I got from one friend when I told them about the Fanda Eagles website. I got the impression that they felt it was enough that these failings were acknowledged: "I see that hand. Glad that is over. Let's get back to planting churches."

I wonder if that is how "Unbelievable," an NTM missionary, feels? I am not a victim of sexual abuse by NTM missionaries. And, although I was spiritually abused as an adult, I would not deign to speak for the victims (or their parents, siblings, relatives and other loved ones). However, having read pages and pages of this forum, I am fairly confident in asserting that "the point" has not been sufficiently made. In fact, "the point" has been so regularly missed that I wonder if this is being done on purpose. Privately, I am almost certain of it. But, it would be impolitic to say so publicly.

I address the following tirade, I mean, remarks, to Unbelievable, not because I expect him/ her to reply (though they would be welcome to!), but as a convenient way to direct attention to some "points" that NTM executives and their missionaries seem unable and unwilling to address. They may never address them here, but we can be hopeful that they will be able to do so in court.

Unbelievable, you have so gently expressed your understanding of how a severe beating and sexual abuse at the hands of missionaries could have "tainted" a victim's image of God, buttressing your comment with examples from your own experiences at the hand of a spiritually abusive father. I hope "Another MK" was touched by your sincere efforts to identify, commiserate and encourage.

I was ashamed.

Please don't misunderstand me. I was not ashamed of what you said, but of the fact that I could have – and would have – said the very same things at one time. In fact, although it is immodest to think so, much less say so, I believe I could have done an even better job of saying those things. After all, I am older and have had more experience, even if I have less talent.

Like you, I would have spent a lot of energy addressing points about which there is little if any dispute or question. And, like you, I would have failed to address the points of contention. I am certain that I would not have done this with any conscious malice or with any desire to deflect the discussion onto a path that would make NTM look better, and me feel better. But, that is still what I would have done. And, it is what you have done. For what it's worth, I can identify with you, perhaps more closely than you can identify with "Another MK."

For example: You told "Another MK" this: "I am so truly sorry that happened to you." I am sure that you are. I know that I am. In fact, I wonder who isn't sorry?

NTM is sorry. The Orlando (Florida) Sentinel quotes Nita Zelenak: "We're [NTM is] very sad about it, and we're [NTM is] sorry for the damage that was done by those people that chose to abuse."

Les Emory, former-NTM employee and serial rapist is sorry; he said so publicly on TV.

I think we can surmise that the victims are also sorry these things happened to them, and they are probably not pleased with the damage that was done.

So, is being sorry "the point" that needs to be made?

Not that it's objectionable to be sorry. It is always, always, always good and proper to express feelings of remorse and sympathy, and I applaud your doing so. However, having done that, you may have made more progress in resolving things had you, in the same spirit of gentleness, spent a little time explaining how you deal with some of "the points" that are in dispute.

How, for instance, has your view of NTM leadership been "tainted" by the revelations that have come forth? How much of this were you really "told about"?

You were not surprised when the Fanda Eagles story broke, because you had already been told that these sorts of things happened "a LOT." How did you feel when you found out that the victims themselves were unaware of the frequency of this abuse? Best friends often did not know what had happened to each other; siblings did not know siblings had been molested. Does it taint your image of your godly leadership to know that they, be it on purpose or by sheer inconsideration, kept the victims and their families isolated and ignorant? Had they told you that in the training?

Unbelievable, do you believe that the possibility of legal action is one reason, perhaps the primary reason, that victims and their families were thus isolated? Do you think that NTM's leadership (affectionately known as "employees" when NTM is faced with legal action) was trying to avoid responsibility for what had happened? If not, please reread Dean Van Vliet's notes regarding correspondence from the Fanda Fondler. And, please note that Mr. Van Vliet did not manage to offer any musings about protecting the feelings and confidentiality of the abused. Does this "taint" anything for you? I'm going to bet that this was not told to anyone during the training.

In case anyone missed it, Unbelievable's sadly believable post was made on the Fanda Eagles home page, here: http://fandaeagles.com/

I admit that it left me breathless. Stunned. And ashamed, as I said above....

How did it affect your image of NTM leadership when you found out that evidence had been destroyed, not by some sex crazed pedophile in a dorm, but by and with the knowledge and acquiescence of NTM's Executive Committee? Were you told this before, or was this news?

It seems to me like it should have tainted your image of NTM leadership to know that the very men who are leading your mission now needed to be told to fire people who were involved in the lies and cover-ups of sexual abuse around the world.

These are just a few of "the points" that NTM has not addressed. Why would that be, Unbelievable?

Unbelievable, I do not flatter myself in thinking that anything I can post on this forum is going to change your mind. If you have read the stories of the victims and still "feel comfortable" being in NTM, nothing I can say is going to change your mind. I am saying these things for the record, because I find it so horrifyingly insulting that "the points" that matter are ignored while points about which no one disagrees are offered as comfort to the wounded.

Did it taint your image of NTM leadership when you read the comments by the Executive Board member, blandly telling victims of sexual abuse that "most" of the abusers were no longer in the mission and no one could figure out what else to do? Have you ever been told who this Executive Board member is?

Were you outraged and did you demand his immediate dismissal? Or were you, like the Senegal Field Committee member, consoled by the fact that "at least there had been no penetration"?

NTM did not hide the fact that sexual abuse occurred, you say. So, does it taint your view of NTM leadership to know that NTM ran an obituary in Family News for Mrs. Emory who, with her husband, "served in the Philippines"? Either the person responsible for writing that obituary did not know the circumstances under which the Emorys resigned, or they knew and ran it anyway. If they didn't know, it would be pretty good evidence that the identity of this pervert and the fact of his crimes was kept quiet. If they knew, it looks a lot like they were party to covering up both the crime and Les Emory's identity. Does this taint your image of NTM's openness?

I was in NTM for 25 years. Some of the victims of Les Emory were relatives of missionaries on the field where I served. I heard whispers about what had happened. But, I never heard the name Les Emory and would never have guessed from the obituary that anything had been questionable about his "service" in the Philippines. Any taint going on there, Unbelievable?