The Future of Bethel

i believe it should desolve as there are too many bad memories and negative feelings from the whole of the catholic communtiy in perth and past and present members.

If people want a community to be in, there should be a completely new, fresh one started totally removed from bethel and the negative forces that drove it for so many years. The fact that K selected this new board is concerning to say the least. The whole hierarchy / pyramid power system has to stop

Is the centre still in the name of the elders? if so, does this mean they can sell it and pocket the profits??? Who's name is the centre in. This is an important question - does anyone know? Does anyone know if K tithed from his hefty wage? I've always wondered this.

Apart from the abuse one of the other really big issues is that money for lamingtons and raffles was raised under false pretences - it was all for the salaries of the elders, and for going overseas - so how can that be a true Christian outreach?
The defenders that have used this site continue to try to downplay the signficance of the problems and that really is concerning - the " if you dont like it move on " type comments do seem to ignore the vital issues of abuse, pressure, money and deciet. And the fact that things have only "just come to light". If this statement is true it just does not fit with why we all left over the years.

Perhaps, you are right Finally, Bethel as it now is should dissolve.



If a new community does come into exisitence it shoudl be something that only has the good parts of what Bethel was and perhaps what it was meant to be.



The idea of having christians to travel on the journey with you as you bring up your family, to have trustworthy friends, appeals to me.



Perhaps it should be a community where the individual is cherished for being different and where those who feel called to do God's work in other areas are encouraged. There is no one way to follow God in your life. Just as no two people are the same. That is all part of God's plan. He made us unique, he gave us indiviual gifts and talents. We are all part of His body. It just does not work if we are all the same part.



I'd love to hear other's comments.

I dont need to go to Tony - I only mention finance as just one more example of the cult of deceit. As for bethel if people want to stay in it fine - its just that I know how hard ( and I mean really hard) it is to leave. So this blog is about giving people the ability to see through the fakiness and leave if they want to do that.

As far as I can tell, the only way for Bethel to secure a future is to avoid the problems of the past. I will argue that this is unlikely to be achieved because the thing that enabled Bethel to flourish was precisely the organizational structure that brought about the problems that are being discussed and investigated today. Unless radical changes are made to the organization, Bethel cannot have a future in which it does less harm than good.

Most of the problems with Bethel can ultimately be traced to the power hierarchy and the leadership structure of the organization. What needs to be acknowledged is that Horgan was able to do what he did by exploiting the organizational structure of Bethel. For one, the power structure cannot be so sharply peaked with so much power vested in so few. There have been numerous criticisms of hypocrisy towards contributors to this blog that have cited some level people’s free choice to remain in community as a sticking point. What should be made clear is that the power structure of the community effectively stripped people of their freedom to choose. Knowing people’s propensity to obey authority figures (see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Milgram_experiment for the classic empirical investigations of obedience to authority), with so many answering to subservient to so few, it is unsurprising that it took so long for anybody to stand up to the leadership. If Bethel is to continue, the power must be distributed amongst the members of the community. Decisions must be made democratically, and the rules that govern the behavior of those in the community have to be logged and readily available (e.g., something of a Bill of Rights).

One obvious problem with a distributed leadership is that (some would argue) it undermines the purpose of having this sort of religious organization in the first place. If people can’t even agree on (or require a committee to establish) basic rules to live by, what is the group but a mix of people who occasionally meet socially? It seems to me that a guiding ideal of Bethel is a sort of theocracy, whereby the behavior of individuals within the group can be defined in terms of a set of rules (i.e., things one is allowed to do and things one is not allowed to do, all presented in black and white). Although I could hasten to argue on purely logical grounds why this is folly – Wittgenstein’s work has already shown that it is impossible to come up with an all-encompassing definition for the concept of a “game,” how then can we even fathom deriving a set of rules to define the way to live in a way that is acceptable to god? – I instead point to the oppression associated with formal instantiations of theocratic rule in Egypt and Iran. The lesson, I think, is that the best Bethel could hope for is a set of vague governing principles that would be reflected in any moral philosophy. That said, I would guess that the lack of well-defined rules for behavior would prove unappealing to people who voluntarily involved themselves with Bethel in the past.

On a related note, the level of prescription with respect to how people should/should not behave must be reduced for Bethel to have a future. Although I’ve already touched on the potential for a lack of appeal, I think the point can be illustrated by discussing people’s reliance on roles as a template on which to model their own behavior (e.g., within the context of marriage, a wife should behave in a way specified by A, B, and C). Bethel has advocated that people fulfill particular roles in a Christian context (e.g., that of a husband/wife, or a servant of god, or whatever). While this is not inherently problematic, the potential for abuse has been experienced first-hand by several contributors to this blog; namely, the subservience of wives (and more generally, by females of any age). This sort of thing has been the subject of empirical investigation as well. A classic experiment in social psychology is the Stanford Prison Experiment (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stanford_prison_experiment). This study demonstrated that people are all-too-willing to fulfill particular social roles, particularly when under pressure from an authority with which they identify with (I think it is quite obvious that the members of Bethel fit this bill). People were randomly assigned the role of a prisoner or a guard in a mock-up prison at the university. The guards were simply told to keep the peace and the prisoners in line. Within days though, the experiment had to be called off, with guards enacting their roles, and abusing their power. Prisoners were abused (physically and verbally), and became increasingly withdrawn even though everybody knew that they were only participating in a psychology experiment. Thus, I would think it absolutely necessary for Bethel to scale back its teachings about social roles (particularly those that promote obedience as a virtue). It is these very teachings that reinforced the power structure that allowed Horgan to exploit others to his gain.

If Bethel can address these major flaws in its structure (a prospect that I seriously doubt), then it could well have a future. At the very least, it would be a future that is less vulnerable to exploitation. Sadly, I think that these major restructurings can only go so far. What is absolutely necessary for Bethel to have a future that is not characterized by systematic abuse of power and oppression of its members is for membership to be entirely voluntary. Voluntary inclusion must extend to children, and they should under no circumstances be groomed to join; that is, they should be truly free to choose whether they enter the community. As a conservative measure, I would suggest that people should not be permitted to join until they are at least 18. What I think many readers may struggle with is the idea that there is no such thing as a Christian child. There are children of Christian parents, but there is no child who understands the implications of their supposed religious belief (e.g., I daresay that no child could comprehend the concept of transubstantiation) to the extent that they could be considered an actual practitioner of their parents’ faith. There has been much said by former members of the community who voluntarily entered. However, very little has been said on behalf of their children, who were subjected to this lifestyle. For children who simply cannot accept supernatural beliefs, the knowledge that the community will inevitably restrict their contact with their family is truly damaging.

If Bethel can exist in an entirely voluntary manner (i.e., no children, who are incapable of providing informed consent), then perhaps it has a future. However, if this future incarnation of Bethel retains its rigid structure and pointed power structure, then it will merely be a matter of time before another leader exploits the community in the same way Horgan has done. In my mind, the only constructive move Bethel could make at this stage is to dissolve itself and keep what little dignity it still has.

Go sunshine and others - I personally don't really care what Bethel does - its great to be out of it and I think this blog is for us to really feel that we have moved on firstly and secondly to be ready to help anyone who wants to move on or leave.
I don't feel concerned about what some people are saying in supposed defence of all the bad things that happened as when you have seen and experienced them you KNOW they happened - so brainwashing just doesn't work anymore.

The IOC has begun a process of reviewing all aspects of Bethel including corporate structures, approaches to pastoring and counselling, all structured activities, the nature and purpose of our covenant and the actual purpose for being a community group. Bethel will also examine how it can become more transpaent and accountable. It is not the role of the IOC to make these decisions, rather it is their role to facilitate the decision making process that will seek to involve all adult membes of Bethel.

If you want Bethel's initial ideals to survive, do the following:

1) Remove tithing
2) Liquidate all assets and pass them onto to a recognised and renown charity
3) Allow those who wish to remain "in Bethel" meet at any stage, at any time, using their own resources.
4) Recognise that free will is God-given and should never be attempted to be subjugated via any person, organisation or process.

Could Bethel survive purely ad maiorem dei gloriam? I doubt it.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ad_maiorem_Dei_gloriam