HYPOCRISY IS THE GREATEST LUXURY
There will be more than a few people rubbing there hands with glee today as details emerge of an eight year adulterous affair involving a Christian fundamentalist ‘Bishop’ who, it would seem, was fundamentally flawed.
Hardline Christian fundamentalist, Michael Reid, 64, has quit his various roles as church, school and moral leader after it emerged that the outspoken ‘Bishop of England’ has been involved in an adulterous affair with the music director of his church based in Brentwood, England.
Apparently the ‘Bishop’ and married mother-of-two Sheila Graziano, 49, have been ‘making sweet music’ together for some eight years, and news of the affair only came to light when Bishop Reid’s wife of 36 years allegedly caught the couple.
The hypocrisy of Michael Reid and Sheila Graziano is obvious. In his role as Bishop of England, and leader of the Christian Congress for Traditional Values (CCTV), Reid has been happy to stir anger with provocative comments such as describing gay people as “filthy perverts,” and more recently a billboard that read “Gay Aim: Abolish the family.”
Graziano, serving as music director at the Peniel Church, has clearly shared those views. Back in 2006 she commented on a Daily Mail story about Pope Benedict’s urging Anglicans to oppose any moves to legalise “weak and deviant” unions (gay marriage).
“I believe that the only rightful sexual relationship is between a man and woman in a monogamous marriage. We need more Church leaders who are not afraid to stand up and be a voice for God’s principles.” Wrote Graziano.
This story positively oozes the kind of sleaze and hypocrisy that the media love to run with. The cliche of the Bishop ‘bonking’ the organist is irresistibly juicy ‘news’, and with Reid making a swift escape (with his wife) to Arizona my suspicions are that more lurid and unpleasant sensations surrounding the Bishop may yet come to light.
MEN OF GOD
This is, of course, nothing new. So called ‘men of God’ have been falling from grace for as long as it’s been possible to do so. But there’s an underlying issue here that I find more troubling than tabloid gossip that ordinarily surrounds a revelation like this, and that is the apparent lack of control and accountability these men are subject to. Apart from God in heaven, who do these men answer to? Who advises them and brings them to book should the need arise?
By all accounts Bishop Reid did not take kindly to any sort of criticism, a trait that seems uncomfortably common among Pentecostal church leaders. A quick Google will reveal some truly awful stories about Michael Reid and the way he has dealt with people who have questioned his leadership over the years. But if the congregation aren’t allowed to question the leadership then doesn’t that make the church a cult, or at least so close to a cult as to be indistinguishable?
When the CCTV, headed by ‘Bishop’ Reid, put out their infamous “Gay aim” billboard earlier this year, I checked their website to see who else was in a position of influence within the organisation. Kensington Temple’s, Pastor Colin Dye, was named as ‘co-founder’ of the group so I decided to email the Revd Dye and ask him if perhaps it would be wise to reign in the Bishop who was clearly prone to unpleasant and unnecessarily confrontational outbursts. (You can read that email in the comments here.)
His first response seemed somewhat defensive. However, in a telephone conversation with me this afternoon, Revd Colin Dye was keen to put as much distance between himself and the ‘Bishop’ as possible.
“I’d not heard or participated in the CCTV for quite some time, knew nothing about this poster, and the point is that he [Michael Reid] wouldn’t necessarily go and involve people in the committee meeting and say this is what we want to do and have you got any ideas. He would just sort of act independently on that.” Claimed Pastor Dye.
“I haven’t had a conversation with him in ages, and I had no idea he was putting posters out in the name of CCTV.” He continued.
Dye went on to tell me that he himself resigned from the CCTV this morning on learning the news of Reid’s affair. Even if his words could be viewed with a degree of skepticism given the obvious desire to not be associated with ‘Bishop’ Reid at this time, Dye’s comments do rather suggest that the church, particularly the Pentecostal church, is open to a lot of abuse from rogue leaders.
ACCOUNTABILITY
I’ve personally come across one such abuse. A relatively high profile Pastor of a local church has for years enjoyed an unchallenged place at the top of a church he created. As part of the Elim Pentecostal group, this particular pastor has often times been embroiled in unpleasant dealings with those who have dared question his authority, methods or practices. Like other rogue leaders he surrounds himself with weaker people who are only likely to ‘toe the line’ or face certain replacement just as those who have questioned him in the past have been.
“We discovered by bitter experience that the Elim organisation has protective mechanisms in place for the leaders (shepherds) but nothing for the sheep. It is assumed that the shepherd must always be right.” One former member told me. They took a complaint about the pastor through Elim channels and were “given the brush-off at this the highest level in Elim.”
With the severity of their accusations about the pastor in mind I asked them why they had chosen to not seek justice through the courts, especially given the apparent presence of a compelling dossier of evidence against him.
“One major problem about bringing the whole unsavory situation into the public arena is that God’s Kingdom would suffer disgrace.” I was told.
While I understand that, I can’t help but feel that such an attitude is merely cowardice disguised as deference to God, and that in choosing to “leave it at the cross” Christians are, in some part at least, responsible for the continued damage that abusive, dishonest and hypocritical leaders will do.
In effect, what I’m saying is that the Christian community as a whole brings itself into disrepute by its willingness to ignore or allow the behavior of rogue leaders to go unchecked and unpunished.
I would suggest that in this recent scandal surrounding ‘Bishop’ Michael Reid, there were no shortage of signs that the man had gone off the rails, or at the very least had stepped outside the bounds of creating a constructive challenge to the public at large.
His hateful tirades set him up for this spectacular fall and while the fingers of blame are pointing squarely in his direction at this time, I feel that the Christian community as a whole should perhaps embark on some self examination of the way in which they let this ‘Bishop’ spin so spectacularly out of control.
—
JULY 08 UPDATE: After resigning from the Church Bishop Reid apparently withdrew his resignation and simply withdrew from his pastoral duties. It would seem this was a strategic move to ensure he was in a strong legal position against his former church whom he is now in dispute with over salary payments, property rights and other financial dealings. Reid himself is actively looking for a senior pastoral role within another church.
—
Family Values campaigner resigns after admitting adultery
Moral and family values ‘Bishop’ resigns over affair
Bad ‘Bishop’ resigns from CCTV
Moral ‘Bishop’ resigns after affair is unearthed
Forum discuss the multitude of sins of the ‘Bishop’
Are you offended?
Michael Reid Miseries
Falwell from grace
[Audio] BBC Radio 4 report the Bishop sex scandal story
Wrote the following comment on Apr 10, 2008 at 1:24 am
You hit a critical issue when you brought up the matter of accountability. The biblical concept of salvation and spirituality is incorporation, which is to say that all who live by faith are made a part of the body of Christ. Faith is not a “rogue” reality, as an inherent part of living in the context of Christ’s body is mutual submission. Paul is explicit about this. Sure, some are leaders, but as leaders they should be exemplars of love, service, and mutual submission.
Going back to the body of Christ: the Church, a picture that I have is God casting his grace amongst his people, investing each one of them with unique gifts that can only be unpacked when we connect with one another, push in on each other’s lives, and mutually submit to one another. It is in this fashion that the open gifts can build us all up toward spiritual maturity, which is most essentially seen in self-sacrificing love.
Wrote the following comment on Apr 10, 2008 at 3:25 am
“While I understand that, I can’t help but feel that such an attitude is merely cowardice disguised as deference to God, and that in choosing to “leave it at the cross” Christians are, in some part at least, responsible for the continued damage that abusive, dishonest and hypocritical leaders will do.”
Yep. That pretty much nails it. Is why I left the institution that is the church. And this article you’re highlighted reminds me of the old adage… “it all comes home to roost.” :-)
Wrote the following comment on Apr 10, 2008 at 5:09 am
“But there’s an underlying issue here that I find more troubling than tabloid gossip that ordinarily surrounds a revelation like this, and that is the apparent lack of control and accountability these men are subject to.”
Looks like his wife held him accountable, unfortunately no one else did in the 8 years prior it would seem.
I know 2 pastors in our church who meet together regularly and ask each other about their marriages etc. I personally have a friend I meet with every week or so who knows areas of life that I’m struggling to do right in and can talk and pray with me about them.
If more of our leaders (and us) had such open, frank, and necessary relationships than we would all be better off. Unfortunately ours is a society that places individualism and privacy above admission that we all are weak and need help. Just ask Ex-Governor Spitzer, Governor Paterson, Mayor Kilpatrick,or ex-Mayor Sharpe James.
Wrote the following comment on Apr 10, 2008 at 9:46 am
I can’t bring myself to feel gleeful about this, because I’m just so angry at the hypocrisy. I don’t know how anyone in good conscience can write comments like “I believe that the only rightful sexual relationship is between a man and woman in a monogamous marriage. We need more Church leaders who are not afraid to stand up and be a voice for God’s principles”, and at the same time be carrying on an adulterous affair with a bishop. Or how the bishop can be condemning gays and slandering them with the accusation of destroying families while committing adultery himself. Makes me sick.
This quote was spot on: “We discovered by bitter experience that the Elim organisation has protective mechanisms in place for the leaders (shepherds) but nothing for the sheep. It is assumed that the shepherd must always be right.” One former member told me. They took a complaint about the pastor through Elim channels and were “given the brush-off at this the highest level in Elim.”
This has been my experience as well. I was in an Elim church with an abusive pastor, and when it all fell apart, all Elim seemed interested in was protecting the senior pastor. I think a lot of abuse has yet to emerge from the woodwork in Elim.
Wrote the following comment on Apr 10, 2008 at 12:45 pm
There are independent churches that set up boards for the express purpose of providing accountability to the leaders of the church – a wise move but not necessarily always effective, even then. Perhaps when a church grows and begins to appear “successful” the people in leadership positions begin to think they are doing something right and God is smiling on them and their ministry and blessing it. It is probably easy to move from that mindset into one that thinks they are more special to God than the everyday person – after all they’re “chosen” or “called” to this special position of leadership and authority. Thus can begin a downward spiral if you are not careful. It appears to be a very slippery slope that many have found themselves on. I suppose the slide down can be a lot of fun but the landing’s a bitch.
Wrote the following comment on Apr 10, 2008 at 2:54 pm
I found this on the web re Narcissistic Personality Disorders. It might shed some light on our disgraced Your Grace
Disordered narcissism
Lack of empathy is a hallmark of narcissistic disorders, and sufferers find it extremely difficult to understand others’ (and their own) emotional states and impact. This poses serious problems in maintaining close or intimate relationships. They may find it difficult to perceive or admit this flaw, or may reinterpret it as a virtue.
It is also worth noting that the individual expressions of grandiosity or arrogance vary with the person’s value system. A person will generally attempt to display superiority as they define it.
• Overreacts to criticism, becoming angry or humiliated
• Uses others to reach goals
• Exaggerates own importance
• Entertains unrealistic fantasies about achievements, power, beauty, intelligence or romance
• Has unreasonable expectations of favourable treatment
• Seeks constant attention and positive reinforcement from others
• Is easily jealous
• Has a sense of entitlement
• Is interpersonally exploitative
• Lacks empathy
• Displays arrogant behaviour
• Displays haughty behaviour
Wrote the following comment on Apr 10, 2008 at 6:56 pm
My recent post about the possible Narcissistic Personally Disorder of Michael Reid seems to be gathering speed after recent postings on http://www.reachouttrust.org‘s forum.
Not only does he refer to himself as Bishop (that’s Bishop of EUROPE mind). Not only does he refer to himself as “Dr” (an honourary doctorate from the ‘mickey mouse’ Oral Roberts University). Not only was the name of the church changed from Penial Pentecostal Church to Michael Reid Ministries (I’ve NEVER heard of anyone in a real church changing the name of it to reflect themselves). But, someone who has attended the church has commented “I never could fathom why the walls were adorned with images of MR”. He has pictures OF HIMSELF put up on the walls of the building.
Are people seriously THAT BLIND that they couldn’t see what was happening? Do the trustees at Peniel (or Michael Reid Ministries, to give it its real name) that the central message of Jesus is “Look at me everybody!”
There needs to be a clean sweep in that church and a degree of transparency unparalleled in any other organisation before trust can be restored.
Wrote the following comment on Apr 10, 2008 at 7:08 pm
You want accountability? Okay, lets start with you then. Why did you name the woman in this? You showed no regard for her children.
She tried on many occasions to end the affair, eventually seeking help assistance from another pastor. She couldn’t live with her guilt and her name appearing in the papers and on blogs like this is heartless and hateful and frankly I think the author of this post should remove it at once!
Wrote the following comment on Apr 10, 2008 at 8:05 pm
Hi Simon, I post on the Reachout Trust forum as John. I have found your comments, particularly about accountability full of insight and wisdom. We so need discernment in the church and the ability to spot and deal firmly with rogue leaders. Keep up your excellent work. I will refer to your points about Elim on the relevant thread under Other Groups on the RT forum.
Wrote the following comment on Apr 10, 2008 at 8:35 pm
Anon really…. do you think what’s going on here is a mystery to everyone this woman knows?
And then on top of it… “She tried on many occassions to end the affair”- are you serious!?! It seemed to have lasted 8 years and I’m curious to know how exactly someone stays in an affair for 8 years against their will.
While its great that this woman is getting her life straightened out, the person who’s done the most damage to the children involved in this are the two people involved in the affair. Wouldnt you agree?
Wrote the following comment on Apr 10, 2008 at 11:52 pm
I’m sorry anon, perhaps she should have thought about her children before making public hateful comments about homosexuals while engaging in an adulterous affair. Why is it that in these situations, women attempt to play the victim card. She was involved in an 8 year affair while spouting self righteous hate. In my experience, those in Christian leadership who have an overtly negative doctrine on sex, tend to be fighting their own sexual temptation and guilt by projecting on to others.
As Rachel said, this affair went on for 8 years, she didn’t try very hard!
To suggest that its somehow those reporting the facts who are at fault is absurd and is typical of fuzzy Christian thinking. She held a public view that was contrary to how she lived, she got caught, and deserves to have her hypocrisy exposed.
Wrote the following comment on Apr 11, 2008 at 11:51 am
To Anon. Thank you stopping by and making your concerns known. I don’t object at all to being held accountable by you on this. Allow me to explain why I saw fir to publish Mrs Graziano’s name.
Unfortunately for Mrs Graziano she chose to carry on a near decade long affair with a man who actively sought and gained public attention. The man she was having the affair with was highly critical of anyone who engaged in sexual activities outside the bounds of marriage. Therefore when the affair was brought to light she simply had to expect that she would be named. She is, after all, equally responsible for the adultery.
I should say that I would have considered omitting her name from my post but for her comments back in October of 2006 when she wrote on the Daily Mail website “I believe that the only rightful sexual relationship is between a man and woman in a monogamous marriage.”
Mrs Graziano clearly shares the hardline views of her lover and therefore should expect to be given an equally rough ride from people who see her life and actions as deeply hypocritical.
If someone carries on an adulterous affair with a public figure then they should expect their name to come out should the affair become public, such as in the case of Ashley Alexandra Dupre who was named as the prostitute who slept with New York State Governor Eliot Spitzer. In fact, I would go so far as to say I would be more inclined to protect the identity of a prostitute than a willing adulterer.
Mrs Graziano is not a victim here. She is a willing partner who shares equal responsibility. My post was about hypocrisy and accountability, therefore naming her was entirely appropriate.
I hope that addresses your concerns Anon.
Wrote the following comment on Apr 11, 2008 at 12:14 pm
I don’t want to defend Reid, certainly not for his immoral actions. I have no direct connection with him or his former church.
But to be fair to him, he is a real bishop, in the International Communion of Charismatic Churches, as the Daily Mail reports. As such he stands in a tradition blessed by Pope Paul VI. So no need for the scare quotes.
This should imply that he is accountable for his actions to that International Communion. If they have failed to call him to account, that is their own internal matter. But perhaps they have been no more successful in calling bishops to account than has another international communion currently in the news.
Wrote the following comment on Apr 11, 2008 at 12:51 pm
Simon. I read your post with interest but seriously, you have absolutely no idea how hard it is to stand against a man like Michael Reid. So while I understand how it might seem like people did nothing, I think you a jumping to conclusions you are not qualified to come to because you have never stood up against someone like Reid. (A phone call to Colin Dye doesn’t qualify. – And why didn’t you just call Michael?)
Wrote the following comment on Apr 11, 2008 at 1:16 pm
Dan, I’m sure Simon can speak for himself, but how do you know he hasn’t faced anyone like Reid?
Simon and I were both members of a church that is run by a man with some quite worrying similarities to Michael Reid, so I can understand how hard it is to stand up to someone like him. In reality, standing up to people like that will get you kicked out and ostracised, however as Christians you are called to speak out against injustice, whatever the personal cost. I was a member of the church in my teenage years and into my early twenties, so standing up to someone like him at that age is very, very hard. As these types of churches encourage you to have little to do with those outside, you become very dependant on the church and as a result people tend to toe the line through fear of being ostracised and rejected.
Wrote the following comment on Apr 11, 2008 at 6:57 pm
No Simon, that does not really address my concern. If you want to address my concern you should do the decent thing and remove this poor womans name at once! There is absolutely no need to drag her name through the mud just for the sake of it. She did wrong, she has admitted that, and she is completely crushed. Imagine how she must be feeling now. You should remove her name right now because it is the right and decent thing to do.
Wrote the following comment on Apr 11, 2008 at 7:32 pm
Peter Kirk should check the facts and not believe everything in the press. As Simon and I now know, Michael Reid is no longer in the ICCC and is not accountable to them. It would be interesting to know if he is accountable to any communion at the moment. Perhaps he is in league in Earl Paulk, who has plenty of experience in sexual misconduct and continuing a ministry of hoodwinking the flock. Paulk was once the presiding bishop of the ICCC.
Wrote the following comment on Apr 11, 2008 at 7:32 pm
I’m not a religious person by any stretch, but I will echo something that Will said earlier, that ‘moral’ leaders who rally against specific things have a bad habit of then being exposed for their own wanton indulgence in those very things.
It reminds me of the case of The Reverend Ted Haggard who was also outspoken about gay people then, surprise surprise, a man he had been paying to have sex with for 2 years tells all.
Anyway Simon, I’m worried that your blog is filling up with religious types. You need to post some porno or something to scare them away before they take the place over! Christians can’t do nakedness. That’s how we used to keep the mormons away from our apartment in college, with what looked like a big stack of porno mags in the window next to the front door. (It was actually just a lot of random mags with a Hustler on the top, but boy did it work a treat!)
Wrote the following comment on Apr 11, 2008 at 9:49 pm
Apparently his main sin, according to a lot of those commenting above, was to dare to resist the sodomisation of the church. Hmmm.
Wrote the following comment on Apr 11, 2008 at 10:11 pm
Simon – When we spoke on the phone I mentioned something about how people seem driven to hypocrisy because often the sins people struggle with are the one’s they feel driven to denounce. I am glad to see others on your blog identifying this dynamic as well.
Sex is an incredible, glorious, awesome, fearful, fantastic reality that like little else, can touch us so deeply. Speaking from the Xian tradition, it is incarnational, because it is the profound wedding of the physical and the spiritual. For this reason, when sex becomes bad, it usually becomes really bad, as in hellish and destructive.
Regarding those caught in obvious hypocrisy, I would guess that subconsciously they are trying to atone, and do some kind of twisted penance by denouncing the thing they are mired in. They are afraid to confess their sin because of both the negative reaction of the public toward such actions along with the feeling that they are trapped and are not sure they can break the activities that would allow them to come out from under public scorn. As a result, they psychologically section themselves off and try to atone for the negative part of themselves through public denunciations of similar activities.
So, when I think of public figures who are caught in such horrible hypocrisy, I often feel both derision for the hypocrisy and compassion for the fear and isolation that likely drove them to this horrible course of action. I say this, however, with some measure of qualification, as I know that there are just out-and-out egoists (often of a religious stripe) who desperately need to be humbled.
Wrote the following comment on Apr 11, 2008 at 10:20 pm
By the way, I think the variety of people who contribute to your blog (religious, somewhat religious, zealots, irreligious, secularists, confused, couldn’t give a shit, ironic, cynical, Pollyanna-ish, was religious but was burned and is now burned out) is absolutely fantastic. So, I wouldn’t feel too threatened by us religious types.
All of this is a sign of your amazing knack (dare I say, almost charismatic gifting) to connect with people from a great diversity of locales, backgrounds and perspectives.
Wrote the following comment on Apr 11, 2008 at 10:21 pm
Simon, I’m going to tip my hat to you for managing to get a response from Colin Dye. Both of the emails you wrote to him were excellent, even after his ranting angry email to you. Well done!
I don’t know if you are a Christian (I’ll admit I went back and read all your ‘faith and religion’ post to try and figure that out), but regardless, I’ll second John’s comments. I think you really strike a chord of truth with your challenge to the church to hold its leaders to accountable.
Doug, a stack of pornographic magazines in the window by the front door. – That made me laugh.
Roger, I have read and re-read the post and comments here and I cannot see anyone suggesting that Michael Reid’s main sin was “to dare to resist the sodomisation of the church.” Would you mind being a little more specific?
Wrote the following comment on Apr 11, 2008 at 10:46 pm
Anthony
Eloquently put. A concise summary of what you said is ‘Freudian projection’. It makes a potent cocktail when mixed with Narcissistic Personality Disorder
Wrote the following comment on Apr 11, 2008 at 11:22 pm
The man is obviously a coward too. He hasn’t even apologised to the congregation, he just resigned and then left, leaving the rest of the leadership to deal with the fallout.
The guy owed it to the congregation to stand up in front of the whole church on a Sunday, and explain exactly why he was leaving and give the members an opportunity to question him.
I also feel that the church’s statement on this matter is woefully inadequate. They need to apologise for all the damage and hurt perpetrated by Michael Reid and publicly distance themselves from him and his views. They need to ask the congregations forgiveness for their inaction during his years in charge. They need to have an independent audit of their accounts.
Unless these things happen, I’m afraid it will just be new faces, same old problems. My fear is, that any man of God could not have sat alongside Michael Reid in a leadership role without having strong objections to his teachings.
Wrote the following comment on Apr 11, 2008 at 11:32 pm
Anthony, If you refer to our Lords name, could you not find your way to giving Him the respect He deserves? It’s Christian, surely that is not too much more effort than Xian?
Wrote the following comment on Apr 11, 2008 at 11:49 pm
Okay, a couple of comments I want to respond to.
To Anon. Could you please tell me what makes removing the “poor woman’s” name, the “decent thing” to do?
To Dan. You know I actually know very well how hard it must be to face up to a tyrant leader. It takes courage and dare I say faith. If you as a christian believe in your God would never “forsake you” then would that not give you at least a little of the courage it would need to at least raise your objections to a tyrant leader?
To Peter Kirk. ‘Bishop’ Reid resigned his position within the International Communion of Charismatic Churches some years ago. Therefore I think the quotes marks are very much in order.
To Roger Pearse, “sodomisation of the church??” Come on Rog, you can’t come on here read my post and the comments then come to the conclusion that anyone was referring to the “sodomisation of the church.” Can you really? I suspect you are one of the poor souls caught up in the Michael Reid church and for that you have my sympathy. But I wonder, if you can tolerate my ignorance for a moment, would you mind explaining to me (and others) what the “sodomisation of the church” actually means or is, because really I have no idea what that term even means.
Wrote the following comment on Apr 11, 2008 at 11:56 pm
Shit! Either Sheila Graziano is flat out blind or the bishop has aged terribly in the last 8 years!
Wrote the following comment on Apr 12, 2008 at 12:44 am
Kristen, I find it interesting that rather than be offended at the damage Michael Reid has done to his congregation, you get offended at Anthony’s use of the word Xian. Its one of things that annoys me about Christians, they are so caught up in the little issues, the title tattle, and yet they often stand by and watch huge injustices without passing comment or getting involved. Its pretty easy to moan about someone not using the correct word on an internet forum, so very much harder to actually have a backbone and make a difference.
Quite frankly, I think what Christians call themselves, is pretty low on his list of priorities.
No wonder that by and large, the church is so pathetic and ineffectual.
Wrote the following comment on Apr 12, 2008 at 3:54 am
Kristen – I am not intending disrespect to Jesus by my use of the X for Christ. Although, if I may be self-disclosing, I am sure that I do show him disrespect, but not in relation to my odd spelling, but rather in how I too often yell at my kids when I grow impatient, or how I often put my interests above my wife, or how I can be so incredibly self indulgent in my materialism and numb toward the homeless I see not too far from neighborhood.
In saying this, I suppose I am affirming what Wilvo said about how often the moral barometer of Christians is a bit out of whack with what is genuinely abhorrent morally. And yet, in affirmation of your concerns, I have to acknowledge that small things can be profoundly significant, such that a seemingly small slight can be expressive of deep seated rebellion or hatred. In my case, however, the use of the X is at worse a product laziness. More often then not, though, I picked up the use of the X in emulation of C.S. Lewis who is a sort of guru for me.
Beyond this, there is a long history of the use of the X for Christ that is in many ways similar to how the cross is a symbol for Christ, the Christian faith, and specifically the atonement. It is a symbolic expression and not an attempt to remove the words “Christ”, or “Jesus” from discourse. Check this decent page at Wikipedia that explains this in more detail.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Xmas
Wrote the following comment on Apr 12, 2008 at 11:02 am
In direct response to Peter Kirk’s comment about Michael Reid’s title of Bishop I’ve been given permission to post this email from the ICCC, the body which made Reid the Bishop of Europe.
I should also point out that I find it perplexing at the reference to “the victim’s family.” What victim? They’re not talking about his behaviour over the past few years (because if they were I am sure they would have requested he cease using the title they awarded him), so who is the victim they refer to?
I suspect that it is the woman, which is of course completely absurd for reasons I have already stated.
Wrote the following comment on Apr 12, 2008 at 1:38 pm
There seems to have been a bit of a knock on effect over at Revelation/Genesis TV. Seems Howard Condor has quit the station. My guess is without the “Bishop” and his dreary programme presumably no longer available Condor has lost the (considerable) income..? God only know whats going to happen next.
All this because of a silly old fool in a bishops mitre knocking off the choir mistress.
Wrote the following comment on Apr 12, 2008 at 6:55 pm
John and Simon, thanks for clarifying matters concerning Reid and ICCC.
Well, for people who believe in the apostolic succession, once a bishop, always a bishop. Thus Archbishop Lefebvre remained an archbishop even after he was excommunicated from the RC church and his consecrations are valid, although schismatic. So I still think the scare quotes were uncalled-for. But Reid would no longer have any right to be called “Bishop of England” or “Bishop of Europe” as ICCC might have appointed him.
This does of course invalidate my remarks about Reid’s accountability to ICCC. Perhaps they tried to call him to account earlier and that is why he left.
Wrote the following comment on Apr 13, 2008 at 5:13 am
I can’t fathom why someone would want to defend a man whose immoral activities are as obvious as the sun. C’mon, you have to have intergrity whenever you’re at the top. Don’t be surprised or act as if you’re surprised when the shat hits the fan.
Wrote the following comment on Apr 13, 2008 at 6:30 am
Please!! Please!! Stop saying how great Simon is!! I beg you!! He will become narcissistic!! LOL I know he is well on his way!
Wrote the following comment on Apr 13, 2008 at 6:31 am
I have spent a lot of time on line today reading many different things said about Mike Reid. I first met him 27 years ago when he would come to our church in Atlanta, Ga. I ended up in his church in the 80’s as part of his so called “Bible College”
I have to say I am not really suprized that he has fallen, although I am greatly sadden by it. I cannot tell you the many times I was witness to his ridcule and public humiliation of someone he felt was not measuring up to his standards. I cannot begin to explain the fear we all felt for him nor the amount of control he exercised over every aspect of our lives. While I know that Shelia is responsible before God for her actions, I am also aware of how difficult it is to escape the brainwashing received at his hands.
I have been gone from Peniel and even from England now for 20 years and am only just now really feeling free of it. Yes, I hold him more accountable than Shelia. But, when you put yourself into a postion where your focus becomes a man instead of God and that man becomes God to you, you are hard pressed to contridict him when he pursues an inappropriate relationship. As a member of the “Atlanta” Peniel church for many years we have already been through this very same thing with our pastor here. It makes me wonder. Did the two churches split from each other because of the issues presented at the time or because they saw in each other the same sin?
Wrote the following comment on Apr 13, 2008 at 6:08 pm
BBC Radio 4 covered this story in a religious affairs program today. This is there report. Click here to hear that report.
Wrote the following comment on Apr 14, 2008 at 5:59 pm
I emailed (via their website which invited questions) Michael Reid Ministries with regard to how they would be proceeding in the light of the recent events.
The following is the email I received in response.
Wrote the following comment on Apr 14, 2008 at 6:41 pm
I think that response is quite telling. The fact that they have not put as much distance from themselves and Mr Reid as possible is very worrying. There initial statement was hardly damning of Mr Reid either.
I was reading some commentary by various past members and one guy said he had seen Mr Reid, rise from the dead on to occasions before, why should this time be any different?
As for the accounts, they are readily available, as long as you can speak Welsh! I thought Christians were supposed to appear whiter than white?
I fear that little will change at the church, Michael will be back before you know it.
The leadership is weak, but why should we expect anything different?
Wrote the following comment on Apr 14, 2008 at 6:55 pm
“I think that response is quite telling. The fact that they have not put as much distance from themselves and Mr Reid as possible is very worrying.”
I don’t think it means much either way. If they did put distance between themselves and Reid, it could just as easily be a way of avoiding responsibility and saving their own skin.
Wrote the following comment on Apr 14, 2008 at 7:23 pm
There has been a great deal of damage to a great many people over the years at that church. The current leadership have been complicit in that abuse. Do they acknowledge the error in leadership? Have they asked the congregation for forgiveness for their failure to protect them? Have they apologised to those damaged by Reid? Reid may have been calling the shots, but no man of good concsience could stay in a leadership role if they disagreed so strongly with that leader. The problems as I see and understand them are greater than the one man at the top.
I feel s though they need a man/woman of great spiritual standing and experience to come in and lead them. The men and women that are there are obviously weak, men like Reid surround themselves with weak leadership, that’s how they get away with things for so long.
Otherwise, I fear it will be business as usual.
Wrote the following comment on Apr 15, 2008 at 4:23 am
Over the last week I have read many different accounts of abuse and wrong doing at the hands of Michael Reid. Despite that I have also seen many people still willing to stand up and make excuses for him. There was even a man in his church who, in the middle of a heart attack called Michael Reid before calling for assistance! Such is the hold he has on his congregation. This is not a rumor, but a fact as I was close to the family in question. Anyone who thinks this man will not try to sneak his way back into a position of leadership is a fool. He will have his way just as he always has. This is not a roadblock on the journey for him, it is just a little speedbump. As for those who still clamour for his return? Well, as we say here in the states……. “You can’t fix stupid”
Wrote the following comment on Apr 15, 2008 at 8:04 am
I would imagine that Reid is heavily intertwined with the church financially and by property etc, therefore the separation of Reid and the church that is named after him will be so utterly complex that I doubt it is realistic to believe it could happen if he didn’t want it to.
The leadership has in the past shown a great weakness against him so I cannot see how anyone could have any real faith in their ability to affect any real change at the top, especially as it is unlikely that many financial decisions can’t be made without executive influence from Reid in a directorial role.
His son and other family members are in roles of influence there too, so I would imagine this will ease his reintroduction to the leading role there.
Those who have been vocally critical in the time since his deception was unearthed will be vilified and likely forced to leave the fold. There will be a great deal of hurt on the road ahead for many people who will be confused by the unfolding events as he returns to the pulpit to shout at everyone.
Claims that the people were in church enjoying a new found freedom are nice, but these people were willing followers (cultists in many ways), and they’ll be easy to re-herd when the barking dog returns.
Wrote the following comment on Apr 16, 2008 at 12:12 pm
I have lived in Brentwood, Essex, England for the past 31 years Michael Reid and his Peniel Pentecostal church have intimidated, bullied, threatened, criticised, judged and sued various people of this town.
Today, with Reid and his wife, Ruth, running away to Arizona there is in this town, at long last, a tangible sense of liberation. The awful oppression created by Reid and his Pentecostal followers, whereby townspeople were fearful to speak the truth about him and Peniel, has now past.
The feeling amongst townspeople here is that Reid had this coming and has got his just desserts, having bullied, threatened, intimidated, bad mouthed and sued so many people.
Moreover, having destroyed so many families and marriages through financial exploitation, Reid has a duty to compensate his victims. Like Zacheus, he should repent and pay these ruined people back with interest. Little chance of that happening. Instead, in cowardly fashion, he has run away.
The word on the streets of Brentwood is, ‘good riddance to bad rubbish.’
Wrote the following comment on Apr 16, 2008 at 3:42 pm
WE ARE IN THE LAST DAYS AS JESUS PREDICTED IN THE BOOK OF MATTHEW 24,IN THIS DAYS MANY THINGS WILL BE HAPPENING BUT THE BIBLE CAUTIONS THAT HE THAT THINKETH THAT HE STAND SHOULD TAKE HEED LESS HE FALL.THIS IS A TRYING PERIODS FOR THE BISHOP,FAMILY AND THE CHURCH.THEY ALL NEED OUR PRAYERS TO GO THROUGH THIS PERIOD.MAY THE LORD SEE THEM THROUGH THIS PERIOD IN JESUS NAME.AMEN
Wrote the following comment on Apr 16, 2008 at 4:36 pm
I think there may be a case for financial mis-selling. It would be good if a number of people who feel they have had things mis-sold went to see a solicitor to start a class action against Reid’s companies. Or, if they don’t want to go to those extremes, they can complain to the Financial Ombudsman.
Wrote the following comment on Apr 17, 2008 at 3:21 am
Samuel. People have been saying the end is nigh for many many many years. I’m sure that in 100 years time people will also be saying we’re in the last days.
(PS. Your comment didn’t appear for a while because it was held back as spam. The software assumed you were a porn peddler BECAUSE YOU ANNOYINGLY USED ALL CAPS.)
Wrote the following comment on Apr 17, 2008 at 3:24 pm
but simon, its the last days. a message of such urgeancy requires all caps.. :-D
Wrote the following comment on Apr 18, 2008 at 3:42 pm
Michael is an absolute fraud. He is an ill-educated oath, indeed a buffon. He has no formal academic qualification nor theological training of any kind. Yet, in spite of this, he adopted the bogus title of bishop and sports a PhD from the third-rate so-called Oral Roberts University.
For years I have been telling others that Reid was a conman, a complete trickster, who sought only to con people out of their money in the name of God.
Reid tricked, cheated, intimidated, slandered and sued many, many people. As a result he became so arrogant that he thought he could do the same to God himself. However, God will not be mocked and the sordid revelations about Reid and Peniel Pentecostal church is testimony to this.
Although, thankfully, Reid is history, nothing has changed at Peniel. The same old rotten, corrupt and bogus people, like Peter Linnecar, continue to run this joke of a church. The best thing that couldhappen is for Peniel to cease to exist in any form. This is not a bona fide church. It has brought the name of the church, Christianity and disrepute. It is a cult and a total disgrace. Any true Christian will know this and shun it.
There is a fundamental, underlying problem with the Pentecostal/Charismatic movement. It ihas fallen into the trap of allowing its leaders to have far too much power over their congregations, Reid is a classic example. This movement needs to move away from this awful North American model. Its leaders must be held to account.
Wrote the following comment on Apr 18, 2008 at 4:34 pm
I am inclined to agree with you there Doc. The happy clappy Christians are the morally acceptable version of beer swilling bar brawling football thugs. They ride the crest of an emotionally charged high with a a devout following that often defies logic and good sense.
However, the Penial church has not seen the back of Reid. I am sure he will return (see my earlier commet [42]). The people involved in that church will be pretty easy to whip back into obidience. They’ve followed him and been fearful of him for years, I’m sorry to say that I very much doubt that anyone there will have the backbone to stand against him when he returns to a leading role at the church.
Wrote the following comment on Apr 21, 2008 at 12:23 pm
In terms of Reid being reminiscient of beer swilling yobs one would meet in their local, Simon, you are absolutely right. However, I do not believe that Reid represents true, authentic, bona fide Evangelical Christianity. His problem was the coarse, vulgar, oafish way in which he made his points. Moreover, he set himself up as judge, jury and executioner; whilst, all the time, being clandestinely immoral and hypocritical himself. Whilst preaching family values, he himself, by financial exploitation and manipulation, was destroying families and marriages. He was also committing adultery.
Reid, like any person in this country, had a right to voice his opinions. His failing in this respect was, as stated, that he chose to do so in an inflammatory and coarse manner. This reflects his paucity of formal education.
He also became too political.
Michael Reid also became self-obsessed, autocratic and meglomaniac. The focus of his ministry was not God but himself. Who has ever heard of a church called, ‘Michael Reid Ministries’ ? Really, those who followed him without question, should really have sent him to see a psychiatrist. Either he went insane or is simply a fraud ?
Reid’s other offence was to make himself (and others) rich in the name of God. This is appalling. If he has truly repented, then he has a duty to compensate all those people he conned. Very unlikely me thinks.
I do not believe Reid will resurface here in Brentwood again. It is possible that he will try to perform his financial scams elsewhere, possibly in America. The real problem is that Peniel Pentecostal Church is still run by the same rootn, corrupt and dogmatic leadership which was complicit with Reid for so long. It would be better for all if this church, which is a cult, ceased to exist.
For all those who are not Christians, please be aware that Reid and Peniel church are bogus. They do not represent true Chritianity.
Does anyone know why Reid was against the Biblical principle of fasting ?
Also, does anyone know exactly where in Arizona Reid’s sister church resides ?
Wrote the following comment on Apr 21, 2008 at 3:36 pm
For years Peniel Church has been known as ‘penal colony.’ Pretty apt me thinks.
There is a certain Carry On quality about Peniel’s various titles etc, i.e. Peniel – penal/penile; Oral Roberts – I’ll leave that one to readers to work out.
It was lovely to see the controversial poster of Reid removed from Wilson’s Corner after
years. There really is a feeling of liberation in Brentwood with the flight of Reid. Many people here believe Peniel is at an end. Let us hope so. Good riddance to this cult.
Wrote the following comment on Apr 22, 2008 at 12:17 am
Some people are saying “Good riddance to the Fat Controller”.
Wrote the following comment on Apr 22, 2008 at 10:04 am
Yes, there is no doubt that Michael Reid was a meglomaniac. He ran Peniel Pentecostal church and its various businesses, including Peniel academy, like a third world dictator.
Reid’s grand plan from the mid-1990s was to much Brentwood his town. At first he took over the Brentwood and Ongar Conservative Association. Then he began to infiltrate local churches. He tried, albeit in vain, to push through a number of planning issues at the local Town Hall.
You know Reid’s ‘crime’ was not his right wing views. We know, for instance, he was anti-gay. What was at fault was the coarse, indeed vulgar and ill-educated manner in which he expressed his views. He was, of course, a total hypocrite; preaching to others about morality when he himself was knocking off his choirmistress.
I, like many, was delighted to see him fall. He has been asking for that for years. He is a bully, a fool and a charlatan. However, we must not make the mistake of saying that Reid is representative of Christians as a whole. Many Christians for years, myself included, warned others about him and his church for years. Not so much because of what he said, but because he misused the name of God to fleece others. Also because of his acute and unwarranted hostility and aggression towards other Christians and churches.
Christianity, sadly, has and will always be plagued by conmen like Reid. That does not therefore mean that Christianity is somehow disqualified. It simply means that a bona fide
religion is sometimes inflitrated and abused by fraudsters.
Indeed, as a result of his odious behaviour and money grabbing, Reid, today, has been consigned to the dustbin of history. I am convinced that as the head of the snake has been cut off (Reid), the rest of the snake’s body (Peniel) will die.
Wrote the following comment on Apr 22, 2008 at 7:17 pm
Dr Raj Patel asks about Reid’s teaching on fasting. I would refer him to the Reachout Trust discussion forum http://www.reachouttrust.org
I have mentioned this matter on the “What is Peniel?” thread under “other groups.” It is also discussed elsewhere on one of the old Peniel threads. The RT forum has a search facility.
As I recall, Reid taught that it was not right to fast because the Lord, the bridegroom, is now with us and we do not need to fast. He even stated at a meeting for pastors that “fasting is heathen.” This is clearly false teaching, especially in view of Acts 13:2-3.
Wrote the following comment on Apr 22, 2008 at 7:24 pm
Correction. There is a comment about fasting on the current Bishop Michael Reid thread at the end of page 18. Try the search facility for more on his views on fasting.
https://www.johlibaptist.blogspot.com/
Wrote the following comment on Apr 23, 2008 at 10:47 am
Interesting, John. You are absolutely right, Reid has totally contradicted Scripture on the issue of fasting. Indeed, some might say say he has blasphemed on this point, as the New Testament tells us that Jesus taught his disciples to ‘pray and fast without ceasing.’ The old time Pentecostals (who appear to have been superseded, regrettably, by Charismania frauds like Reid) fasted on a regular basis. It looks as if the ‘bishop’ thought he was so important and authoritatative that he could contradict the teaching of Christ himself !
So, as well as a meglomaniac, charlatan and slanderer, Reid peddled heretical teaching.
On a separate note, this is not widely known, but back in he eighties Reid openly supported the Apartheid system in South Africa. Then, when this odious system collapsed in 1994, suddenly, Reid when volte face, and ‘fell in love’ with black people (or, at least, their pockets). He also had links with Argentina during the time of notorious fascist dictator, General Galtieri. I wonder, does anyone else have any more information on these dodgy links ?
It would also be very interesting to know where Reid is skulking at this moment in time. Does anyone have any info as to his whereabouts ?
Reid and Peniel were always suing people for telling the truth and labelling Peniel a cult. Let’s see them do this now !
Wrote the following comment on Apr 23, 2008 at 2:02 pm
Dr Patel, where is it that “Jesus taught his disciples to ‘pray and fast without ceasing.’”? I can find no such teaching. There is actually very little in the New Testament commending fasting, and nothing commanding it. The real heresy here is not to devalue fasting, although I would not call it a “heathen” practice, but to command or require it although Jesus never did. (I note that “fasting” in some translations of Matthew 17:21, Mark 9:29 and 1 Corinthians 7:5 is not part of the original gospel text.)
John, I suppose the forum thread you had in mind was this one, but it took a lot of searching to find it. It would help if you could post direct links to specific threads.
Wrote the following comment on Apr 23, 2008 at 4:21 pm
Reid, in fact, use to say that Christians should be feasting and not fasting. In no way can his assertion that “fasting is heathen” be true biblical teaching.
Michael Reid was seen in Tulsa earlier this month (according to the RT forum) but he is now back in the UK trying to rally support.
Some fear that MR will try to make a comeback.
Peter Kirk
You have located the RT thread containing my last post, at the end of page 18, but there are earlier posts that seem to be in the RT archives and among the record of my old posts.
Wrote the following comment on Apr 23, 2008 at 4:38 pm
Reid also used to say that we should not fast and pray, but pray fast. He did not allow prayer meetings and home Bible study groups.
Wrote the following comment on Apr 23, 2008 at 6:32 pm
John, Reid was wrong not to allow prayer meetings and home Bible study groups – as one might expect if he was anxious to avoid any centres for dissent. He was also wrong to say that “fasting is heathen”. There is a place for Christians to fast, as in your Acts 13 example. But he was entirely right to say that as a general principle “Christians should be feasting and not fasting”. After all, the bridegroom, Jesus himself, is with his church, so why should the bride fast? See Mark 2:19.
Wrote the following comment on Apr 23, 2008 at 7:43 pm
On the fasting issue, see also what I have written here.
Wrote the following comment on Apr 24, 2008 at 7:09 am
The more I look into cults and cult leaders and the workings of their minds and modus operandi the more similar each one becomes. They are like fractals.
Some typical examples: They are dubious re their antecedents and educational qualifications and credentials.
They change their names.
They disregard and curse those who disagree with them.
They treat scripture cavarlierly – twisting it hither and thither to prove their ‘special status’.
They write their own additional scriptures since God has been neglectful to give the full story.
They claim special private revelation from God.
They introduce special rites and rituals.
They give themselves titles like, prophet, apostle, bishop and so on.
They claim spiritual fatherhood over their followers.
They teach followers that their lives prior to joining their flock were a waste of time.
They often claim that themselves and their followers will be removed from Earth and taken into heaven by divine action.
Their followers treat their teachings as divinely inspired – and those who cannot ‘see’ the ‘truth’ their leader preaches are damned at worst or dumb/blind at best.
Now since the self proclaimed ‘Apostle’ Paul displayed these attributes it is no wonder that those who derive their ‘authority’ from Paul’s writings display the same traits.
Wrote the following comment on Apr 24, 2008 at 9:40 am
Mr Kirk, I’m unsure as to whether you are a devotee of Reid, however, you are most wrong to devalue the practice of fasting as did, of course, bogus ‘Bishop’ Reid.
Jesus did command his disciples to ‘pray and fast without feasting.’ This was common practice amongst Jews and as such would have been a very familiar concept to his followers.
It is a great pity that some Christians today, mostly Pentecostals/Charismatics, dismiss the important practice of fasting. This is endemic of a movement, sadly, that has moved away from studying and teaching the Bible, to follow heretical teachings peddled by phoneys like Reid. There was a time when evangelicals fasted regularly. Come on, let’s get back to the Scriptures and ditch these awful, false Charismania hedonistic heresies that have contaminated the church like a cancer.
The crass idea of ‘feasting not fasting’ is archetypal bilge peddled by Charismania. It is totally without Biblical precedent. Jesus, the bridegroom, is with us through his Spirit, the Holy Spirit, but not in person having long since ascended to be seated at the right hand of the Father (see Acts 1). Christ himself said that his followers should not fast while his was with them, but that once he had returned to the Father they must fast. Again, let’s get back to reading the Bible, following its teachings and not soaking up heresies promulgated by Charismania and frauds like Reid.
Moreover, Reid probably prevented his cultist followers from fasting because he has an enormous amounts of shares in a supermarket chain.
Many are worried that the bogus ‘bishop’ will make a comeback. That’s understandable after the damage he has done over the last 30 or so years. However, I am convinced that this will not happen as God himself has caused this charlatan to be exposed and toppled. He may well try to return, but, be assured, he won’t be succesful. Likewise, Peniel church will disappear from the scene, mark my words.
Wrote the following comment on Apr 24, 2008 at 11:03 am
Bogus ‘Bishop’ Michael Reid was no doubt opposed to home groups and prayer meetings for the simple fact that these would have allowed members of the Peniel cult to think for themselves. This is the last thing Reid, a control freak and meglomaniac wanted, as his followers might well have realised just what a conman he really was. Moreover, in terms of home groups held at different homes, Reid himself, the ‘fat controller’, would not have been able to be present at all and so control all that was said.
Reid’s followers must have been incredibly naive, gullible and stupid people to follow a man who, clearly, was a charlatan who simply wanted to fleece his flock. I daresay some foolish members of the Peniel cult still revere this ogre.
I bet we won’t see Peniel cultists handing out leaflets in Brentwood High Street any more. They did so for years, with a definite air of arrogance and smugness. On one occasion, one was very rude to my mother as she politely refused a leaflet.
There is a tangible sense of freedom in Brentwood now that Reid has fled. I can understand now how people of occupied Europe felt when liberated from the Nazis and how eastern Europeans felt when communism collapsed.
As I said before, let’s see bully boy Reid and his Peniel cultists sue people now !
Wrote the following comment on Apr 24, 2008 at 11:05 am
Dr Patel, you cannot quote me chapter and verse for Jesus’ alleged commands to “pray and fast without feasting”, and to his disciples that “once he had returned to the Father they must fast”, for the very good reason that he never said either thing. I am obliged to conclude that, to quote your own words back to you, you are the one who “thought he was so important and authoritatative that he could contradict the teaching of Christ himself !” And you dare to talk about “a movement, sadly, that has moved away from studying and teaching the Bible, to follow heretical teachings peddled by phoneys”! It is you who have “moved away from studying and teaching the Bible” by putting in Jesus’ mouth words he never said, which are in fact “heretical teachings peddled by phoneys”.
I am not a “devotee” of Reid and never have been. I have never attended his church or heard or seen him speak. I do know people who have done, and not liked what they saw. Reid is a false teacher, and so are you.
Yes, “let’s get back to reading the Bible, following its teachings and not soaking up heresies promulgated by” YOU!
Wrote the following comment on Apr 24, 2008 at 3:52 pm
you know, going at eachother’s throat for an issue as small as fasting, especially in a public place, really doesnt do any good; and quite frankly it sets a bad example of Christians. If you must call people false teachers or heretics, maybe you could reserve that label for people who break actual core teachings of the church- Basic Christian Doctrine- rather then the peripheral issues; otherwise we’d all be heretics cause every Christian has some small minor difference in interpretation from the next.
On another note, there are people who subscribe to these comments and read these comments who arent Christians. I really hate to think how this is coming across to them- two christians at it again over God knows what. Maybe you could both find some common ground in believing in Jesus Christ as your personal Lord and Savior.
Behaving the way of Reid and his followers is apparently a lot easier to do then we may like to admit. And let me be the first to admit that I sometimes find myself slipping in that direction- thinking my opinion of something is superior to another and judging those who dont agree. May i encourage you both to stay away from this mentality as much as possible. As we see in this very sad mess with this church, it leads nowhere good.
Wrote the following comment on Apr 24, 2008 at 4:17 pm
Mr Kirk, spoken like a true Charismania heretic.
I don’t profess to be a theologian. I do kow, for a fact, that the New Testament (the second half of the Bible that you Charismatic heretics do not read or believe) states, lucidly, that Christians MUST fast and pray. It may have been said by Christ or St Paul (I shall confirm this), however, it is said. So, it is you who, like the bogus ‘Bishop’ is a fraud, charlatan, ill-educated, bogus heretic and phoney. You, openly, deny Biblical teachings.
The problem with you Charismania clowns is that you do not know Scripture, you do not read it, you do not teach it and you do not believe it. Your ‘philosophy’ is simply – if it feels good, do it, regardless of what the Bible says.
It would be a very good thing if Charismatic fools like you, like Reid, disappeared once and for all.
In any event, who made you such a world authority on the teachings of Jesus ? I can’t help feeling you are connected with Reid in some undisclosed way. Like the bogus ‘Bishop’ you are quick to condemn and vilify others for speaking the truth, whilst promulgating false teachings yourself.
In closing, yes I wish you Charismatic types would read the Bible for once.
Wrote the following comment on Apr 24, 2008 at 8:31 pm
Rachel makes some good points. The discussion on fasting has become rather heated. A more irenical touch is needed.
I wrote about “The decline and fall of Michael Reid Ministries” on my blog. You can find it here.
Wrote the following comment on Apr 25, 2008 at 9:44 am
Okay, I was happy to let Dr Raj Patel and Peter Kirk debate to their hearts content if they were willing to play nice, but very quickly they managed to descend into the kind of behavior that repels me, and many others, from wanting to have anything whatsoever to do with religious people.
This is not a Christian theological discussion forum, it’s a personal blog belonging to a guy neither of you know. Watching you two argue like this is as unpleasant as watching a couple of idiots punch the shit out of each other over which football team is better! The pair of you need to get a grip!
I shouldn’t have to tell either of you how to behave yet here I am having to step in to a discussion on my blog and tell two grown men to show each other, and everyone else who is watching this, some respect! I’ll add that I have never EVER felt the need to step in and break up a discussion before. Frankly the pair of you should be ashamed!
In my post I wrote about my disappointment that Christians didn’t do a better job of holding Reid, and those like him, accountable before things got too out of hand. But if this is how you Christian folk choose to challenge one another then it’s easy to see why Reid managed to get as far as he did in damaging the lives and faith of so many of those he came into contact with.
Wrote the following comment on Apr 25, 2008 at 9:49 am
John and Rachel, you make some fair points. I am happy to now draw to a close the debate over fasting and I hope Mr Kirk follows suit.
You are absolutely right, the most important Christian truth is that their is salvation through Jesus Christ alone.
That said, I would like to make one final point on this topic, not least as the present day church has neglected this important practice for some years now. I am, like many Christians, concerned about the influence the Charismatic movement is having over the church, especially with regard to erroneous teachings and practices and the worrying movement away from the Scriptures.
In Matthew 9:15, Jesus said, ‘the time will come when the bridegroom will be taken form them; THEY THEY WILL FAST.’ In his interpretation of this verse, Mr Kirk like bogus ‘Bishop’ Reid is omitting the crucial second half of the verse. Anyone Christian who reads this will know therefore that, in saying believers should fast, I am simply repeating the instruction of Christ. Mr Kirk is therefore in error to say Christians should not fast.
Just a thought, not a dogmatic statement, but I wonder if the terrible state of British society today is not due in some part o the fact that we Christians do not fast (and pray) as vigorously as we once did ? I know from my reseach that, in 18 c England, the monarch would
often call a national day of prayer when we were facing possible invasion by the French. Likewise, during World war II, the king led a national day of prayer when we were facing Nazi invasion. What are the views of other Christians on this matter ?
Wrote the following comment on Apr 25, 2008 at 10:30 am
The above exchange illustrates why I am suspicious of evangelical cultwatching ministries such as Reachout Trust. At the end of the day, the greatest sin is being “unbiblical”, teaching “false doctrine”, or basically having the wrong religious beliefs.
Frankly, this kind of obsession looks to me like just another form of religious control – the same in kind, if not degree, as Reid’s brand of control.
The theological nit-picking and doctrinal arguments just obscure the important issues of abuse and manipulation.
Wrote the following comment on Apr 25, 2008 at 10:38 am
Simon, I understand your frustration, however, Christians are only human. From time to time we discuss, debate and argue over theological issues.
In that respect we are not unique. Sunnil and Shi’ia Moslems have conflict, often violent, Hindus and Buddhists disagree amongst themselves. Indeed, followers of the same political persuasion often fall out, witness the enromous amount of wretched socialist parties in this country alone.
Frankly, if you create a blog on the internet, open to all and sundry, then you can’t really complain if people debate issues important to them. It’s a bit like asking someone for their opinion and then taking offence because it doesn’t mirror yours.
If you don’t like religion then that’s your choice, but please don’t use a debate and disagreement between two Christians to justify your aversion to our religion. After all, this was the case long before we came on the scene.
As you will have noted, both Mr Kirk and
myself are totally opposed to the cultist, Reid.
We have nowt in common with this crook whatsoever.
The vigorous debate between Mr Kirk and myself does not negate in any way from the truth that Jesus Christ ‘…is the way, the truth and the life.’
Wrote the following comment on Apr 25, 2008 at 1:31 pm
Dave, you’re just seking justification for the fact that you don’t want to believe Christianity.
Are you really saying that your decision to not believe Christianity is completely influenced by whatever I (or Mr Kirk) say ?
Come on, be real and admit you don’t believe because you don’t want to believe.
Theology might not be important to you, but it is vital to followers of any religion.
Moreover, I bet you wouldn’t have the courage to openly criticise theological disagreements between Moslems, Hindus etc. Much safer to pick on Evangelical.
Don’t be so crass as to tar all Christians with the same brush. Reid is a fraud, a businessman who used Christianity, to make himself rich. One bad apple amongst an ocean of good, sound Evangelical churches. He and his church have nothing to do with true Evangelical Christianity.
Looking at your final statement, are you one of these awful loony left social(ist) workers ?
You talk about ‘theological nit-picking’, yet you socialists/communists made a dreadful fuss over the abolition of Clause 4 10 or so years ago.
Wrote the following comment on Apr 25, 2008 at 2:53 pm
Mr Rattigan, please don’t use vigorous debates between Christians over important theological issues to ease your conscience over your refusal to believe in God.
I am nothing to do with Reachout Trust. They appear to be a bona fide organisation performing good work.
Don’t tarnish all Christians with the same brush. Reid was a fraud who ostracised himself from other Christians from the outset.
I’ll wager you wouldn’t dare openly criticise Moslems who were debating points pertaining to their religion. Much safer to bash Christians.
If you don’t believe, then you don’t believe. that was the case before you entered this website.
Reid was a charlatan cultist. He got what he deserved. I am very suspicious, however, of leftists, with an anti-Christian agenda, who are exploiting this situation. By all means criticise Reid his abuses, but don’t use this to attack all Christians.
Are you a social(ist) worker ? I say this based on your final statement (not that they ever deal with abuse).
I notice my contributions are being moderated, does this mean the end of free speech on this website because those in charge don’t agree with these ? How democratic – NOT, or is it because I have an Asian name ?, I wonder.
Wrote the following comment on Apr 25, 2008 at 4:02 pm
Raj Patel,
You’re drawing the debate to a close, yet you kept going with your points.
You then excuse your actions to simon by saying that Christians are only human.. and that everyone else is doing it…
Then you assume Dave doesnt believe in Christ, and in an effort to I guess convert him? you throw out yet another excuse for your behavior- its vitality to religion.
You know, I think its time to own up to your mistakes.
If you were just debating the issues, it wouldnt be a problem… but you keep making it personal calling people heretics,charasmania clowns, socialists, communists, etc. You make quite judgemental comments and preach to people you’ve not had much dialogue with at all on what you assume are their personal reasons for not coming to Christianity. Then the icing on this most wretched cake, you suggest that the negative reaction you’re receiving may be because of your asian name! Maybe it has more to do with not approaching the situation as Paul instructs Timothy (2 Timothy 2:22-26) with kindness and gentility.
Seriously i beg you. Take a moment and review your actions cause you’re not making a good name for Christians or Christ right now and though you dodged it earlier, your behavior does present an image to the world of both; and you are responsible for your words and actions towards other people on that count.
IF you continue the way your past entries have gone thus far, name calling, blaming and pre-judgement- dodging the wrongs you are committing against other people- I can assure you no one will give you any more of their time. No one likes to be treated that way.
It takes a lot for someone to humble himself and admit when he’s wrong… but i think you can do it. I’ve been wrong before too… dogmatic in my views and had to humble myself. Its hard I know, but its the right thing to do, and i think the people you’ve insulted would think a lot higher of you if you took this first step towards repentance.
Wrote the following comment on Apr 25, 2008 at 4:11 pm
Eek. I think your bizarre response speaks for itself, Raj, and illustrates what I was trying to say quite perfectly!
Wrote the following comment on Apr 25, 2008 at 7:07 pm
Dr Patel, thank you for implicitly withdrawing your unsubstantiated claim that “the New Testament … states, lucidly, that Christians MUST fast and pray”, and replacing it with the accurate quote “THEY WILL FAST”, in a passage in which there is no mention of prayer and no word “must”.
If we can agree about the facts, we can discuss the interpretation of this passage. But, since Simon doesn’t want this to become a forum for theological discussion, I suggest we move the discussion to the comment thread on this post of mine. Note that in comment 3151 I offered my own interpretation of Mark’s parallel to Matthew 9:15. You are welcome to disagree with this, as long as you avoid abuse and calling other people liars.
National days of prayer are a good thing. It is also good for them to be accompanied by fasting as long as it is realised that this is a voluntary act.
I’m sorry that this discussion became a little heated. I hope the heat has gone out of it now that we have the facts correct.
Wrote the following comment on Apr 25, 2008 at 11:58 pm
The situation at Peniel/Michael Reid Ministries teaches us valuable lessons about the abuse of power and accountability, or rather the lack of it, as Simon’s original post points out.
People were not allowed to question or challenge Michael Reid. He once told me that home fellowship groups were a recipe for church splits. I think that Michael Reid’s belligerence covered his insecurity which manifested itself in a number of control methods and other ways.
Sadly people have suffered through this ministry and were seriously harmed and hurt.
I hope that Peniel will learn these lessons so that they are not repeated in the future.
Wrote the following comment on Apr 26, 2008 at 1:03 am
I suggest that Peter and Raj should make up over a fellowship feast. I would like to join you and we can drink to “abundant life”, and the first round is on me.
How about the Holiday Inn at Brentwood?
Wrote the following comment on Apr 26, 2008 at 12:34 pm
Home fellowship groups are indeed a recipe for church splits when a leader has lost the respect of his or her congregation. The way to avoid these splits is to earn the congregation’s respect, not to attempt to stifle any dissent by banning fellowship.
John, I’d be happy to join you at Brentwood, with or without Raj.
Wrote the following comment on Apr 26, 2008 at 1:05 pm
Dr Patel. You clearly do not understand my frustration because I am not frustrated. I am, however, disappointed to see you behaving so absolutely disrespectfully and making sweeping judgments and insinuations in the same off hand and offensive manner as Reid. (Though I have no doubt whatsoever that you will fail to see how very similar you are.)
Get this straight. I am not complaining about your opinions or about any of the opinions being stated here. I am stating that it is religious bigotry like the type you and Reid display that repels me and many others from wanting anything to do with religious people. You have conducted yourself in a quite unpleasant manner in your last few comments, name calling and being absolutely disrespectful. If people challenge you, you dismiss them and make assumptions about them – something that Reid himself was well known for.
Frankly sir, I have simply grown tired of your increasingly disrespectful babbling and name calling. You’ve lost absolutely ALL credibility in my eyes, and I’m pretty sure the eyes of others who have read your last few comments.
Maybe this discussion has just plugged into a subject in which you feel particularly passionate. I am willing to believe that, and I can even understand that. But you’ve let yourself down here by showing such little respect for those you debate with.
Let me be crystal clear with you so seeing as how you clearly haven’t read the guidelines about commenting here. – This is my personal blog, “those in charge” is me, just one person. Comments sometimes get held back for moderation when the blog software feels the content might be offensive of spam, if this happens be patient, I will allow all genuine comments to be published, regardless of the opinion that person might state! (Note, John and Rachel have also had comments held for moderation in the last 2 days.)
Those people who cannot bring themselves to behave in a respectful manner can expect to be warned about their conduct, and you should consider this to be YOUR warning Raj. Is that clear?
Finally, I don’t appreciate you insinuating that I am a racist, and I think that the fact that you even go there communicates a lot about the kind of person you are. Now, you are welcome to continue respectful discussions with others, though given the subject I don’t think it’s out of place for me to suggest you might want to very carefully consider wether your comments reflect the nature of the man I am sure you, as a Christian, are trying to emulate.
Wrote the following comment on Apr 28, 2008 at 9:37 am
Firstly, if I, inadvertantly, have offended anyone with my comments then I offer my apologies unreservedly.
In the second instance, I wish to stress that I have absolutely no connexion with the odious bogus ‘bishop’ Reid. Neither do I share his views, attitudes nor mannerisms. I find it deeply offensive to be compared to this ogre and would ask that this now cease. I am totally opposed to this man and his cult.
Peter, thank you for your conciliatory position. However, I have not backtracked on any point. A sound interpretation of the New Testament verses on fasting shows that it is as vital as pray. I am happy to continue this debate elsewhere.
I do feel we live in a squeamish age and don’t allow for people to be dogmatic, at least, when it comes to Christian beliefs.
Rachel, I understand your stance, which reflects Paul’s teaching, ‘be at peace with all men. However, those who don’t believe the Gospel did so long before this website. They cannot use me as an excuse (or indeed Reid).
Finally, John and Peter, if you want to name a date and time, I’d be more than happy to meet with you at Brentwood Holiday Inn.
Wrote the following comment on Apr 28, 2008 at 10:48 am
Peter and Raj
We can sort out a mutually convenient date and time. I will put details on Peter’s blog and my blog.
Wrote the following comment on Apr 29, 2008 at 11:18 am
Raj. If you are unable to see how your tone and comments were offensive and flat out ugly then I am not sure if I should pity you or just roll my eyes. I’m pretty sure you knew exactly what you were doing though.
Your behaviour and comments were rude, dismissive, and came over as religiously bigoted… those are qualities shared by Reid. So if you sir I offended by that, then rather than stomp your feet and whine about how offended you are, you’d better spend that time and energy thinking about how you can avoid coming off as such an asshole again.
Wrote the following comment on Apr 29, 2008 at 11:37 am
Simon, I have read the various comments with great interest.
I have to say that I think you in particular have been especially harsh and unfair on Dr Patel.
Dr Patel is a man of conviction and principle, something which the British, to their shame, no longer aspire to.
As Raj Patel rightly said, this country has become very squeamish and wimpish. I cannot believe how weak the British have become.
I find your remarks about Dr Patel typical of a lefty do-gooder, who is holier-tan-thou and sets themselves up on a moral highground; even though they have no principles themselves. I daresay you support homosexual practice, non-christian religions, leniency for nonces and killers, support for Islamist terrorists etc.
In my country, Chile, a certain General Pinochet did away with scum like you. If only the same could happen here.
It is you, Simon, who is an absolute fucking arsehole and a complete leftist cunt.
Wrote the following comment on Apr 30, 2008 at 8:46 am
Well done, Maria – a masterpiece of irony!
Wrote the following comment on Apr 30, 2008 at 9:10 am
For the benefit of those who have been following the comments here, I would like to share the following information.
The IP address used by ‘Dr Raj Patel’ was 80.231.198.77.
The IP address used by the potty mouthed ‘Mrs Maria Hernandez-Rojas’ is… surprise surprise… also 80.231.198.77.
So, the good Doctor and Mrs Potty Mouth are one and the same. :-)
Really Raj, did you not think I would see that straight away. Heck, even without the irrefutable technical evidence, Mrs Potty Mouth was obviously you just from the way the comment was written.
Thanks for the giggle though, you made me and a few other laugh.
Wrote the following comment on Apr 30, 2008 at 3:37 pm
Dr Patel and Mrs Hernandez-Rojas seem to be located in Basildon, according to https://www.ip-adress.com/ipaddresstolocation/
Wrote the following comment on Apr 30, 2008 at 3:50 pm
: The IP address used by ‘Dr Raj Patel’ was 80.231.198.77.
: The IP address used by the potty mouthed ‘Mrs Maria
: Hernandez-Rojas’ is… surprise surprise… also 80.231.198.77.
Saw that coming!
Wrote the following comment on May 1, 2008 at 1:32 am
haha oh my.
Raj seriously… you owe some serious apologies- though i dare say no one holds that last one against you as it was more humorous than anything else.
i think it must be pretty hard to hold beliefs and opinions youre ashamed to put your name too. to save any dignity you have left, you really owe simon and others you’ve insulted some humility.
Wrote the following comment on May 1, 2008 at 7:47 am
Raj (not their real name) was clearly a troll. I doubt he will return, but they wasn’t so bright, so maybe we’ll see another incarnation. But yeah, like you Dave, I saw that coming. :-)
Wrote the following comment on May 1, 2008 at 12:54 pm
I don’t think he’s a troll, which to me would indicate he was just putting on an act and looking for trouble.
On the contrary, I think he’s absolutely serious about his mission. He’s convinced that when it comes to religion, it’s his way (which just happens to be God’s way) or the highway. The world’s going to hell in a handbasket and it’s his job to warn everyone and put the world to rights. I’ve seen it lots of times before, and seen people stoop to the same ridiculous measures to accomplish their mission. It’s kind of frightening and laughable at the same time.
Wrote the following comment on May 2, 2008 at 4:34 pm
Jones, how dare you call my credibility, indeed very name into question. You are an arrogant, pompous, narrow minded and insolent ponce.
Kirk, are you a ‘Walter Mitty’ type character ? I can well imagine you sitting in your damp, squalid council flat, having signed on, scouring the internet as if you were the FBI. You are a sad, pathetic loser.
Rattigan, you’re an idiot and a drama queen. Are you kirk’s boyfriend ?It’s people like you who are both frightening and laughable. Mission ? What mission ? You have an aversion to religion, probably based upon guilt, about which you are in denial. Have the courage to face up to your own impotence, rather than pathetically trying to shift blame onto others. You are a pathetic worm.
Rachel, I have apologised to these fools, however, they refuse to say sorry to me. Rather, they try and pretend they’re important (they are of zero significance) by spreading falsehoods about me. Have nothing to do with these cretans. And no I am not ashamed, indeed proud of my views. It is the liberals who ought to be ashamed of their despicable opinions, which are destroying this country ?
I daresay Jones, Rattigan and his boyfriend, Kirk, are in mourning over the hammering of the Labour party yesterday. It’s the beginning of the end for you socialist scumbags.
Incidentally, I have no connexion with ‘Maria.’ Whilst she had every right to criticise you imbeciles, I do not condone her use of swear words to express this.
Jones, are you making money out of this sordid little website ?
Wrote the following comment on May 3, 2008 at 7:55 am
Raj, you are abusive and you have serious issues with anger and control. I suggest you get help.
And FYI, Peter Kirk has consistently refused all my advances, and politely declined every request for a date. :D
Wrote the following comment on May 3, 2008 at 11:47 am
Raj, that you can’t see you are the same as Reid is so ironic :-)
Reid would be proud of you, a true kindrid spirit.
As with Simon, Christians like you are what led me to leave the church, you are arrogant, pompous, and judgemental. You preach grace but display so little of it.
Wrote the following comment on May 3, 2008 at 6:02 pm
Simon, do we have to put up with this kind of libel? Surely Raj is not exactly following your comments policy:
» Do not post threatening, harassing, defamatory, or libelous material.
» Do not intentionally make false or misleading statements.
Will you ever enforce this policy?
But is Raj in fact Reid, hiding out in Basildon?
Wrote the following comment on May 6, 2008 at 3:16 pm
I will indeed enforce that policy Peter, but right now I don’t think ‘Raj’ has done anything that crosses the line in any way that would be effectively addressed by anything I could do. ‘Raj’ is simply looking to stir a reaction, and so far he’s been effective at creating that whirlwind, however in my experience people like him run out of steam quicker when people simply stop reacting to them.
My best advice is for everyone to ignore ‘Raj’ now. He’s clearly an idiot and surely not worthy of the time of people of good standing.
Wrote the following comment on May 7, 2008 at 3:22 pm
Capt Kirk you are totally out of touch and out of date. It is no longer an offence for someone to be labelled as homosexual. This is not deemed to be libel/slander.
Kirk, don’t be afraid to ‘come out of the closet’. After all, Rattigan has. Kirk, are you still a cross-dresser ?
Kirk, it’s a pity you didn’t stay in the Caucasus. You are one of those people who has a grossly over inflated image of yourself. You actually believe you are important to the world. In truth, you are totally unimportant; a no mark. You can be accurately described as a jumped up ponce, with disillusions of grandeur.
You are a judgemental pratt. I dare say you are one of these pacifist fools, on the one hand claiming to be peacful, yet in reality attacking others and starting trouble. Your claims to be a man of ‘gentle wisdom’ are shown to be a sham by your unwarranted aggression and abuse towards me.Theologically speaking, you are the equivalent to a modern day gnostic heretic. Stick to your pension and bus pass, you old age moron.
Rattigan, I note Kirk is playing hard to get. So, Rattigan, you’re an expert in psychology now ? It is you who needs urgent help you weak-minded, arrogant ponce.
Rattigan, I have nowt to do with Reid.
Wilvo, you left the Church because you are an impotent, weak, spinless coward and a fool. You are yet another jumped up, conceited, eogtistical ponce. Have the courage to face up to your limp-wristed nature, rather than projecting your impotence and personal failure onto those stronger and more capable than you.
Jones, it is you who is running out of steam. You haven’t the stomach to stand and fight. You are an idiot; another example of a jumped up ponce, who is arrogant, over-conceited, has a grotesque perception of self importance, is highly judgemental and critical and is a total hypocrite – saying one thing and doing the complete opposite. ‘Good standing’ – you people are a bunch of freaks; total idiots.
Will any of you cowards have the courage to continue the ‘war of words’ ? I wonder.
My email address is rajpatel59@yahoo.co.uk
Wrote the following comment on May 8, 2008 at 12:01 am
ponces, freaks, idiots, cowards, fools, spineless, pratts, morons.
Spoken with such love, like a true Christian Raj, well done :-)
Wrote the following comment on May 8, 2008 at 1:12 am
I wonder if Michael Reid’s canon outside his former ministry headquarters will be removed now that the Peniel Church is trying to change its image. Apparently the historic canon was aimed in the direction of the local authority offices which denied MR planning permission.
Wrote the following comment on May 8, 2008 at 1:15 am
Apologies for the dreadful spelling and Freudian slip! I meant cannon and like the Bishop is should now be completely removed from Peniel.
Wrote the following comment on May 8, 2008 at 12:11 pm
Wilvo, ‘judge not lest ye be judged’, ‘condemn not lest ye be condemned’, ‘remove the plank from your own eye before you worry about the speck in your brother’s eye’ – remember these teachings ?
Mind you, these are probably news to you if your are a Charismatic/Pentecostal as these movements no longer read the Scriptures but are led by feelings; if it’s good do it, regardless of what the Bible says.
rajpatel59@yahoo.co.uk
Wrote the following comment on May 9, 2008 at 12:55 pm
Raj, I find it laughable that you have just quoted that at me, have you read the bile that you have spewed in your posts. I simply stated that your rant was typical of Christians. Having said that, I have judged you, you’re an idiot. But then I’m not the one who’s professing to follow Christ, you are, so I can judge you all I like :-) By their fruits you shall know them. Remember that one Raj?
For your information, I spent my formative Christian years in a Brethren church, so my biblical knowledge is just fine thanks. That’s why I find your lack of grace so distasteful.
Wrote the following comment on May 9, 2008 at 3:24 pm
Wilvo, where you a member of the cultist, Strict Brethren ? Judging by your harsh, critical, judgemental words, I dare say you were. You sound deeply repressed. As a boy, were you prevented from playing sport, eating sweets, attending the cinema, celebrating your birthdays etc.
Whether or not you judge yourself a Christian, you sound as if you are backslidden in denial, is irrelevant. The Bible, God’s word, applies to all men and women regardless. Your bitter words are characteristic of a Christian who has lost their faith.
If, as you unconvincingly claim, your ‘…Biblical knoweldge is just fine…’ then you will know that Jesus said, ‘if you deny me before men, I will deny you before the Father.’
Rather than lashing out at me like a spoilt child, you might like to ponder those words. Get your relationship with God right before you start hitting out at others.
And, yes, I am a follower of Christ and proud to be so. Neither you, nor anyone in our godless, anarchic, perverse, leftist, lawless society will make me ever think or feel otherwise. There are decent people like me left who are principled and proud of adhering to the truth. We will not be silenced.
rajpatel59@yahoo.co.uk
Wrote the following comment on May 9, 2008 at 4:48 pm
Having read some of the threads on The Reachout Trust’s website, it would appear that Ried has submitted a letter to the trustees outlining his plan to return. He suggests that he preach once a month and then return fully after 12 months.
One can only hope that common sense prevails.
Wrote the following comment on May 9, 2008 at 11:53 pm
It seems that there are now legal, property and financial disputes relating to Michael Reid and the Peniel Church,as it is now known.
It’s sad because this man will fight on despite considerable opposition.
Wrote the following comment on May 10, 2008 at 1:52 pm
Gentlemen, if the news that Reid is attempting to surreptitiously return to Peniel is true, then all bickering over pedantic points must end; we must unite, publicise this disturbing news and do all we can to prevent this fraudster from returning.
It seems to me some have lost their way on this website. my understanding is that it was established to share info about Michael Reid, reflect on the damage done by him and to, ultimately, help stop his return.
Peniel is a massive, multi-million pound business venture. On that basis alone one would expect Reid to try to muscle his way back in. This cannot however be allowed to happen.
May I recommend that those with info pass it onto the local press as they are best positioned to investigate this and publicise it.
Wrote the following comment on May 10, 2008 at 2:12 pm
I predict Reid will return, people will leave in disgust, and things will carry on as normal. Christians by and large are weak and don’t stand against injustice. Reid has nurtured a weak flock and leadership, they are ill equipped to stand up to him.
Wrote the following comment on May 10, 2008 at 2:31 pm
Alan, while I appreciate your comment, I think it’s always safer to actually read the content you’re about to comment on BEFORE you comment on it. Had you taken the time to do that you would have seen that this website is very clearly NOT set up to “share info about Michael Reid, reflect on the damage done by him and to, ultimately, help stop his return.” It is in fact my personal blog, and covers a whole range of subjects with just 2 posts related to the bonking Bishop. ;-)
I also don’t think the local press there in Brentwood will be overly interested in printing allegations that cannot be absolutely proven. It’s a local paper with far more to lose than a national.
The return of Reid is of absolutely no surprise to me. A man such as he will of course try to return, and as I’ve already written in an earlier comment; “Claims that the people were in church enjoying a new found freedom are nice, but these people were willing followers (cultists in many ways), and they’ll be easy to re-herd when the barking dog returns.”
To be frank, I’ll be aghast if Reid doesn’t return to the top of his church in Brentwood. Those who disagree with him will leave, but I would imagine there will be no mutiny to take control of the church from Reid and the (current) leaders who stood idly by and watched him rule his kingdom with an iron first.
There are a lot of people who would seem to be saying that they never want to see Reid darken the door of his Brentwood church again, and while I understand where they’re coming from, is that really a correct Christ like attitude?
I’m in no position to preach to anyone, but it seems to me that all those who are rallying around saying that Reid should be banished are, in effect, showing the man absolutely no forgiveness and are being of no help to him.
Surely it would be the correct Christian thing to do to allow him to return and offer him help to see the error of his ways? Granted though, this assumes that he is returning in humility, which it would seem he is not doing. But still, my question stands, is banishing a sinner really reflective of the Christian ethic?
I don’t know the current leaders of the church, but it would seem to me that that place is in serious need of a huge shake up. In my humble opinion ALL of the leaders should be asked to step down as they were all complicit in Reid’s behavior in their silence all these years.
In the post I wrote (above) I asked about accountability. It remains my firm belief that if people had held Reid accountable for his behavior throughout his years in leadership, this entire situation might well have been avoided. It seems to me that happy clappy Christians are better at shunning “sinners” than actually challenging them.
While Dr Raj is clearly an idiot, I can’t help but agree with him in the fact that men like Reid are able to take advantage of people who are more wrapped up in the experience or their faith than the reality of their religion.
Wrote the following comment on May 11, 2008 at 7:57 am
WIlvo i think that is a bit of a broad statement- CHristians by and large are weak and dont stand against injustice. while your experience with christians may say so, I dont have that experience. I know a lot of christians giving their time and life to help those who’ve been afflicted unjustly. I dont see our response to justice situations being oh so different from the rest of the world. Its not something i want to argue over cause you seem pretty reasonable; i just thought i’d suggest this to you.
Simon, I think there are two concepts key to CHristianity that could bring clarity to why someone would be asked to step down from a church. The first is the difference between a lifestyle of a sin and a one time slip. I’m going to do a blog on it soon i hope, but the bible does differentiate between the two. There are two different words used in the greek even to specify this. THe difference between the two being the premeditation that happened ahead of the sin. In a situation such as adultery, one chooses to maintain that- it doesnt just happen. There is forethought and planning being it. Take something like, lying to protect yourself when being accused- the decision is generally made in the minute and really not much forethought as all. Its the difference between Peter’s betrayal and Judus’.
The second idea is repentance. Repentance is not just an apology for a wrong committed- it is evidence in someone’s life that they have decided to live another way. Its going one direction, then turning around walking the other.
I think the people of the church need to see repentance for awhile before they even consider letting him back into leadership. coming back to the church, wanting to get his life right-cool. COming back and expecting evertyhing to be same old- not cool. he clearly has a lot he needs to get straightened out before allowed back into leadership. he lied to them for 8 years on this front and that’s going to take a lot to get over and work out in his personal life- let alone work.
just a few thoughts on this….
Wrote the following comment on May 11, 2008 at 10:12 am
To be clear I didn’t mean that Reid should return to the church as a leader, I simply meant return. Apologies if this was not clear.
It’s the concept of throwing somebody out of a church for being a “sinner” that I was challenging.
Wrote the following comment on May 12, 2008 at 10:55 am
Wilvo, you are making sweeping generalisations that, whilst they mmay reflect your experience, are not true of Christians per se.
History shows us that Christians have often been at the very forefront of championing justice and freedom. Take Wilberforce who brought about the end of slavery 200 years ago. Likewise, Dr Bernardo, Lord Shaftebsury, Gladys Aylward., Mother Teresa, Oscar Romero, Trevor Huddlestone, Martin Luther king jnr etc. Please don’t allow bitterness distort your view of Christians as a whole. Indeed, I myself am a rep for a Christian Human Rights organisation that is an advocate for Christians and other religious minorities persecuted throughout the globe. The Bible itself often speaks about injustice and promises judgement for those who knowingly exploit others without redress (see the Book of Amos for example).
As for Reid, he may make all his plans for a return, but, amrk my words, he won’t return as bishop for the simple reason that God brought him down and there he will remain. People may scoff, but Reid and Peniel are finished. God will not be mocked.
As for forgiveness, yes it is central to Christianity, however, remember Simon that Jesus instructed his folloers to be, ‘as gentile as doves and as wise as serpents.’ Christians are not meant to be naive fools. This is a mistake inherited from the Victorian era. As such, Reid cannot be allowed to resume his position and influence (which won’t happen anayway for the reasons explained above) for his own good and the common good. He is a ‘bad apple’ that must be discarded. Judgement is also a key tenet of Christianity too. In the case of Reid, that judgement was from above and not of men and women. As such, it is binding.
Wrote the following comment on May 12, 2008 at 2:12 pm
I don’t believe it, the ‘great’ Simon Jones agreeing with me !
Fear not, try as hard as he can ‘Bishop of England’ Reid will not be able to re-establish himself ever again. The ‘bishop’s’ days as the town’s tyrant are well and truly over.
By the way, Simon, I presume you wrongly consider me an ‘idiot’ because you don’t agree with my views ? How many ‘idiots’ as you put it, have a doctorate ? If I am an idiot, then, you are a complete fool.
Wrote the following comment on May 12, 2008 at 3:06 pm
Wilvo, I agree that SOME so-called Christians today are weak, people such as the Archbishop of Canterbury, who, to his shame, wants the UK to be governed according to repressive Shar’ia law.
Many British Christians today are weak and cave in to other religions and the left in a bid to be popular. Christianity isn’t about being popular, it’s simply about speaking the truth – that Jesus Christ alone can save a person’s soul after death. Many people around the world continue to be persecute for believing and sharing this truth, mostly in communist and Moslem countries.
However, Christians can take heart from the fact that there are still some strong Christians in the world today; men such as the Bishop of Rochester. I include myself amongst Christians who are strong in standing up for the Gospel and Jesus Christ.
In truth, real Christianity is only for those who are mentally and emotionally strong. The ‘weak’ are those who quit their Christian faith when the going gets tough.
I bet you wouldn’t dare slag off Moslems in the same way that you do Christians. You’re probably too scared to.
To say all Christians are weak is crass. How can you possibly generalise about one fifth of the world’s entire populace ? Your comment is typical of a liberal – you people, who preach tolerance, are the most intolerant folk I’ve ever had the misfortune to encounter. In my experience, you tolerate everyone and everything save real Christianity, the Jews/Israel and America.
Wrote the following comment on May 13, 2008 at 12:32 am
I never said ALL Christians are weak, of course that would be foolish and incorrect. Modern Evangelical/Charismatic churches are often no more than religious social clubs, were Christians go to enjoy God and each others company. I see little evidence of Biblical Christianity in the West. On the other hand there are those like you Raj, that believe speaking the ‘truth’ is the most important thing. And yet you come across as harsh and judgemental. If I speak in the tongues of angels but have not love, I am like a resounding gong. You come across as having little love and lots of righteous indignation. Perhaps you should spend some time meditating on the parable of the unmerciful servant.
Wrote the following comment on May 13, 2008 at 10:26 am
So as everyone is aware…
‘Dr’ Raj Patel (IP: 80.231.198.77 – Basildon, UK)
Mrs Maria Hernandez-Rojas (IP: 80.231.198.77 – Basildon, UK)
Mike Perry (IP: 80.231.198.77 – Basildon, UK)
Also…
‘Dr’ Raj Patel (IP: 85.12.64.148 – Basildon, UK)
Alan Winterdale (IP: 85.12.64.148 – Basildon, UK)
Wrote the following comment on May 13, 2008 at 9:01 pm
Raj, you may or may not have a doctorate, who knows. If you have, that would make you good at studying. You’re still an idiot, of that I think everyone is in agreement.
Wrote the following comment on Dec 1, 2009 at 4:57 pm
UPDATE : DEC 1, 2009
This blog post seems to be regularly found by those searching the internet for ‘Bishop’ Reid, so with that in mind I thought I would give you a little update.
The Bonking Bishop has took his former church to an employment tribunal where it has emerged that not only was he having it away with his choir mistress, Sheila Graziano, but also another woman too.
I wouldn’t normally ever link to a worthless rag like the Daily Mail, but if you can bring yourself to visit their site you can read more about the tribunal at the story on their website.
Earlier this year ‘Bishop’ Reid was arrested for rape in the small hours of the morning by Essex Police. Details are thin on the ground, as they would be in any similar case, but in a statement given to the press Essex Police confirmed that “A 66-year-old man from Brentwood was arrested on 27 August on suspicion of historical rape. He has been bailed until November.”
It’s not clear what, if anything, has come of this allegation. I expect more details of this will appear in the press in the coming weeks. I may write a new updated post about ‘Bishop’ Reid, though as strange as this may seem I actually don’t want to involve myself in pointless ‘mud slinging’ at the man. While he might well be a thoroughly detestable character I’m not about to rejoice in his downfall.
You can keep up with the latest news about ‘Bishop’ Reid at michaelreidmiseries.org.