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 in the families £600,000 ($1.2m) home.
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.
—
High profile church leader quits after affair
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
If you found this page useful, consider linking to it. Simply copy and paste the code below into your website/blog. It will look like this: HYPOCRISY IS THE GREATEST LUXURY
Wrote the following comment on April 10th, 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 April 10th, 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 April 10th, 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 April 10th, 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 April 10th, 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 April 10th, 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 April 10th, 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 April 10th, 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 April 10th, 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 April 10th, 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 April 10th, 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 April 11th, 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 April 11th, 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 April 11th, 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 April 11th, 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 April 11th, 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 April 11th, 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 April 11th, 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 April 11th, 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 April 11th, 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 April 11th, 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 April 11th, 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 April 11th, 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 April 11th, 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 April 11th, 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 April 11th, 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 April 11th, 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 April 12th, 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 April 12th, 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.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Xmas
Wrote the following comment on April 12th, 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 April 12th, 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 April 12th, 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 April 13th, 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 April 13th, 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 April 13th, 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 April 13th, 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 April 14th, 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 April 14th, 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 April 14th, 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 April 14th, 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 April 15th, 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 April 15th, 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 April 16th, 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 April 16th, 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 April 16th, 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 April 17th, 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 April 17th, 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 April 18th, 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 April 18th, 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 April 18th, 2008 at 4:37 pm #
Ooops, typo. I meant Peniel church, not Penial church. :-)
Wrote the following comment on April 18th, 2008 at 11:57 pm #
At least you didn’t typo that as “penile” and yet, that somehow seems fitting. :-)
Wrote the following comment on April 19th, 2008 at 11:22 am #
I think we can now talk about Peniel dysfunction!
Wrote the following comment on April 21st, 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 April 21st, 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 April 22nd, 2008 at 12:17 am #
Some people are saying “Good riddance to the Fat Controller”.
Wrote the following comment on April 22nd, 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 April 22nd, 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 April 22nd, 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.
http://www.johlibaptist.blogspot.com/
Wrote the following comment on April 23rd, 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 April 23rd, 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 April 23rd, 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 April 23rd, 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 April 23rd, 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 April 23rd, 2008 at 7:43 pm #
On the fasting issue, see also what I have written here.
Wrote the following comment on April 24th, 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 April 24th, 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 April 24th, 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 April 24th, 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, &#