Reply
Mon 27 Jun, 2005 11:53 am
TFI apologies
I’m somewhat tired of the “we apologizedâ€
I've been frustrated by these arguments as well.
Any such contribution would be welcomed, but IMO, though editorialization or rebuttles of apologies may be useful and informative, it might be more appropriate for the forum here than within an article on the main site. What may be more appropriate for the wiki is quotations from Family publications which directly contradict statements made within the various public apologies. Perhaps others will disagree with me though, or have additional/alternate suggestions (as is the nature of a public discussion
).
Also be aware that articles on the wiki can and will be edited by other contributors when deemed appropriate.
Whatever serves to declare the truth is , and should be, OK by all!
evanman wrote:Whatever serves to declare the truth is , and should be, OK by all!
There are facts (or truth), and then there are more subjective issues.
xFamily.org is intended as a reference resource, not a pulpit. For this reason we try to editorialize others' writings (i.e. by The Family, former members, academics, the press, etc.) as little as possible. Sometimes it's necessary or significantly beneficial to do so, and in these cases we strive to present all sides.
However, the fact that Jered noted his shunning of the "yes they apologized but they weren't sincere" argument shows that we might already be on the same page.
For the record, I agree with many former members that The Family's public apologies have left a lot to be desired.
Good idea for an article
I'd like to see a compilation of official Family apologies. I think these apologies will pretty much speak for themselves in the context of everything else that has been documented ont his website. BTW, Zerby is reputed to have apologized to Rick in a letter. I've read a few of her letters to Rick, and I've not seen anything that looked like an apology. This letter with apology is mentioned by James Chancellor in his interview with the Tuscon news immediately following the murder/suicide.
The apologies I have seen have been worded in a fashion that sounds like that if something accidentally happened to you in The Family, then they are sorry. I've not seen one that admits that The Family did something that caused harm.
There are different kinds of apologies.
One is where if I hear that you got hit in the head with a hammer, I say, "I'm sorry you got hit in the head with a hammer".
Another kind is where I admit that I hit you in the head with a hammer by accident, and I apologize for accidentally hitting you on the head with a hammer.
Then there is yet another apology where I admit that I picked up a hammer and hit you with it on purpose. I don't recall ever reading an apology of this nature from The Family. In my personal opinion, this is the kind of apology that people are waiting for.
Indian Joe wrote:I've not seen one that admits that The Family did something that caused harm.
Well, they've admitted that David Berg caused harm, though it was only done because Lord Justice Ward made it one of the conditions for granting custody in the court case he presided over. The acceptance of Berg's responsibilty, as well as the later reversal of this by Karen Zerby, can be found here:
http://www.xfamily.org/index.php/Judgment_of_Lord_Justice_Ward
Untill the "Family" renounce and reject Berg as God's Prophet, renounce and reject Zerby's ramblings and complience in everything done then The "Family's" "Apologies" are not worth the paper they are vomitted on!
Organizing the apology article
Joe made an excellent point about types of apologies. The article could simply organize the pusblished statements of apology into categories. There are passive voice--"mistakes were made"--(fails to mention WHO made the mistakes) Also, accidental harm apologies--"we regret if anyone was hurt "---(fails to establish cause of harm); no intent to harm apolgoies--"we are sorry if the misguided actions"--(identifies movtivation as "misguided actions" ); and so on...
If editors & researchers at xfam were to post a list of the apologies, we could do a categorization based on analysis of content. It would be an interesting exercise.
I like these ideas, folie a deux. This would not only be an interesting article, it could prove useful in public opinion over the matter.
Another point is that the last official 'apologies' were made years ago, and made to a small group of FGA exmembers who left years and years ago. It's easy to make apologies to that group of members because it's not an admittance of guilt, or crime, it's an admittance of mistake and errors, perhaps being overbearing or harsh, too controlling...
But what about the apology to our generation for loss of education, for the bad treatment so many received when they made the choice to leave the group, for the violent ways some were dealt with when they had ordinary teenage problems, for the blame and guilt some felt when they were being preyed on by molestors, for the abuse, both physical and mental, that our generation suffered?
I have yet to see an apology along those lines, and I highly doubt it will come. The Family has re-written their own past, and seems to have forgotten some of the things that has happened within the group to a large number of children. It's no wonder they can't make an apology for these things because to do so would be to admit guilt in a more serious manner than it was 10 years ago.
Following are some excerpts from None of These Things Move Me (
http://www.exfamily.org/pubs/ml/b2/3307.shtml ) from July 2000, written in response to the first James Penn letter. It also includes references to all previous apologies. I've not looked over the document in depth and selected the following excerpts quickly and somewhat haphazardly, but nevertheless it does bring some interesting things to light.
Karen Zerby wrote:
26. (Mama:) When you keep your face--your crystal--facing the light, then you’re pulled in closer and you see things as the Lord sees them. You’re able to receive the Lord’s Words, His truth, and you’re fed and grow thereby. But if you begin to listen to the Enemy, whether outright or when he cleverly packages his message in the deceptive covering of a friend telling you about some of his bad experiences, sharing his reasoning with you, or complaining about his gripes, and tearing down the Word or Family leadership, then your face begins to turn toward the darkness. And as Dad brought out, when a crystal turns even a bit toward the darkness, then the darkness has some power over it, and you can be pulled further and further into the darkness.
27.If you’ve wondered why some seemingly very strong people have left the Family after hearing such accounts from former members, that’s one reason why. They allowed themselves to turn their faces away from the light, and consequently the darkness had more power over them. Every time a person turns away, they lose strength and power, until finally they lose the glow from the light and don’t shine with its beauty anymore.
28. Sad to say, this is what has happened to many people who were once part of us, who once pulsated with the light and were very much in unity and agreement with the Lord’s Words and the way He led us, but now see things very differently. Why? Because they’ve removed their face from the light and have changed their position. So they don’t see the glow, the beauty, and the blessings and power of the light as they used to before.
29. When rebutting former members’ comments about their doubts, grievances, bitterness, stories about failed or false prophecy, accounts of bad things that Family leadership has done, etc., I’m not saying that every single thing that a former member tells you is a complete lie. In some cases former members had negative things happen to them, and we are sorry for these things and have apologized in print numerous times. However, in many other cases, when the person telling the story is trying to make the Family sound bad, they will tell you the story in a way that brings out as much negative as possible without telling you the full truth of the situation. If they told you the full story, most likely you would get a very different, more positive or balanced picture. However, they don’t want that, as they’re trying to convince you that they were treated so badly, or that the Family is so terrible.
65.(Mama:) It is sad that issues that have been resolved for years are once again brought up, but because they have been, I will address them once again. Before doing so, I want to point out that the claim that Peter and I are not sorry for any hurt that happened to individuals in the Family is absolutely false. We are very sorry that anyone was hurt, and have publicly apologized and have asked for forgiveness in various ÂLetters or other publications. (See the 1992 Statement on Child Abuse; “Our Beliefs Concerning the Lord’s Law of Love,â€
I don't have time to go through reading the above statement right now, but I find it very interesting, and if I get a chance want to comb through it with some observations. One very obvious one concerning Mene is that the Last State led us to believe Mene was the core of her own problems, she had 'given in' to the Devil, was possessed, insane... when in reality she was being sexually abused by her grandfather, and then being beaten on top of it. The whole truth was not revealed to the members, and the Mene series is what the Victor Programs were based on.
Maria's wiriting in the above article does not work for me. It is not above board and honest. The Family has so extensively re-written their past 'mistakes' and 'apologies' that they themselves don't even know where the truth lies. It needs someone to comb through the writings and compare what's being said today with what actually happened. In '86 there may have been a rule made about sexual conduct with minors, but to my memories it was NOT a well-known or public rule, or mandate. It was more according to the situation and leadership and home as to how to enforce it. And what exactly is 'sexual contact'? It's too easy for the person or the shepherd to define it as it happens.
I know for a fact that sexual encounters to the point of severe molesting and rape happened after 86 and the individuals involved did NOT get excommed for it. At most they got slapped with babe's status, and neither were such behaviours made public to parents or teachers or others in the Home, so that all would be aware of what had happened. It was 'a dirty little secret' that noone discussed, thus leaving the people who could have protected children in the dark about perverts, and the children at risk for more abuse.
It seems like Maria thinks we are too stupid or were too young to really put things together. Some of us have pretty clear memories of that time period and what did or did not happen. I lived at the HCS and later at Margie's in Tokyo, and I will claim for a fact that whatever rules were put in place about sexual contact with minors were not made a public rule, not even discussed in the Homes at length, not even acknowledged that yes, we have a problem. Things were handled very backwards, and perhaps a notice came out or two, but these were not put up for all to see, children were not informed of it, kids were not educated as to their rights, including the right to protection.
And so I find Maria's writings basically a big huge cover-up for the past, and a trying to convince her own members, and perhaps herself, that they are righteous in the face of the truth according to the ex-members.
As Martin O, or Ricky, or one of those former sheps. used to say 'It's time to come clean.'
This topic
Ricky's claim regarding his mother's incest sets the date at 1987-88; this suggests that top leadership were not following a 1986 prohibition against child/adult sex. I've never seen "Liberty or Stumbling Block" as anything more than a general policy statement that indicated a shift in leadership thinking about the "harmlessness" of adult/child sex. Actual guidelines & rules of prohibition? No, I don't think so.
I would agree that there is a lot of problems that The Children of God need to work out. Untill they start actuilly admiting that polices in there group contributed to abuse i wont belive anything by theam.
About the Apologies Article...
I think the best way to begin organizing this information on apologies would be to include the context in which the statement of apology was made. Context includes date, who is doing the apologizing & who and what issue is addressed in the apology.
I'll work on this sometime next week.
TFI Apologies
I wrote to Maria, 3 or 4 times and I wrote to Peter Amsterdam before I left TF. I shared my heart and also questions about the Ricky -Angela unfortunate
tragedy. Why was Gabe and Amy contacting Ricky in teh first place? How did Angela all of a sudden "hear" that Ricky was favorable and wanted to see her? It all sounded fishy to me. I questioned that. The reply , through their secretary implied that I was confused after reading material on Ex member sites. I said that is not what confused me, it helped open my eyes. What confused me was the way they were side stepping the whole issue , and trying to give The Family members this sob story, and blaming Angela for going to meet Ricky alone. I questioned these words and mind set they were trying to establish in the hearts and minds of the Family members and I just did not buy it. I could not. You can read my letters to them on my blog
here, I hope the link is right. There are also some interesting things from Judy, Merry's mom about the early days, Aaron's suicide note, and what Merry is going through now.
http://www.angelfire.com/music6/coolfire/A_truth/index.blog?topic_id=1013897
stop apologizing
evanman wrote:Untill the "Family" renounce and reject Berg as God's Prophet, renounce and reject Zerby's ramblings and complience in everything done then The "Family's" "Apologies" are not worth the paper they are vomitted on!
That's absolutely right. I know I am more than willing to forgive someone if they are TRUELY sorry.
The problem is they are not sorry
I would highly recomend that the "Family" lets thoes abusers that are"sorry" write personal letters or post personal letters adressed to every victim by name. I know they (the guilty) remember our names and I know many of the guilty still remain in the FI..Quit hiding behind the rest of the "family"! You know who you are. All I have to say to the FI is this...
your so called "apologies" are not even going to work for us but rather adds insult to injury. And just remember you can't bolshit a bolshitter .
Re: stop apologizing
Jason, the problem is also that they keep chanting "we apologized seven times" or whatever, referring to their generalized and obfuscating double-speak which neber meets the recognize requirements for a basic apology, but when a specific person speaks out with specific allegations, they call us liars, crazy, delinquent, whores.
JASONLANIK wrote:evanman wrote:Untill the "Family" renounce and reject Berg as God's Prophet, renounce and reject Zerby's ramblings and complience in everything done then The "Family's" "Apologies" are not worth the paper they are vomitted on!
That's absolutely right. I know I am more than willing to forgive someone if they are TRUELY sorry.
The problem is they are not sorry
I would highly recomend that the "Family" lets thoes abusers that are"sorry" write personal letters or post personal letters adressed to every victim by name. I know they (the guilty) remember our names and I know many of the guilty still remain in the FI..Quit hiding behind the rest of the "family"! You know who you are. All I have to say to the FI is this...
your so called "apologies" are not even going to work for us but rather adds insult to injury. And just remember you can't bolshit a bolshitter .
Stumble It!
Tweet This
Bookmark on Delicious
Share on Facebook
Share on MySpace