Biblical Mennonite Alliance and credential removal of past abusers

[GelassenheitBnksi]

I may be off in left field here but I have a question that will not go away. It’s been three weeks since Trudy references 100 pages of evidence and conversations with multiple BMA leaders. She also referenced the Mexico orphanage situation, yet only silence.

Did someone in BMA cut a deal with Trudy and buy her silence?

[Soloist]

I may be off in left field here but I have a question that will not go away. It’s been three weeks since Trudy references 100 pages of evidence and conversations with multiple BMA leaders. She also referenced the Mexico orphanage situation, yet only silence.

Did someone in BMA cut a deal with Trudy and buy her silence?

I might not personally like her but I really doubt it. Either she has nothing to say or she can’t for legal reasons.

[JohnH]

I may be off in left field here but I have a question that will not go away. It’s been three weeks since Trudy references 100 pages of evidence and conversations with multiple BMA leaders. She also referenced the Mexico orphanage situation, yet only silence.

She doesn't release information unless she has good evidence and is ready to back up her claims.

For reference, she has a great deal more information than she lets on, and she doesn't release it all at once. She also has a great deal of information that is perhaps not 100% backed up by evidence, and she will not release allegations, etc. based on this at all.

Did someone in BMA cut a deal with Trudy and buy her silence?

Trudy is the last person who would ever do this; however, it does appear she is working closely with her contacts inside the BMA organisation and she is happy with the results happening so far. That may mean even more things come to light, and also that those people will effect real change within BMA and its affiliates.

I predict we will see some organisations and congregations suddenly realising they are independent of BMA.

[anndet92]

Update from Trudy:
Link

This really leaves BMA in a very bad light, how is it possible that a person convicted twice of child sexual abuse is made a board member of an orphanage?

And for OAK Hill they are really very far from good Christian practice, how is someone with that type of criminal record going to have a position of leadership and power?

Really, as a conservative Anabaptist, this leaves me very sad. In some cases, a person is criticized or even shunned because they want to wear a different hairstyle or wear a long skirt instead of a dress, but we leave a person convicted of crimes against children in a position of power and if you criticize that decision, you are the bad guy.

I appreciate that you see this horrendous hypocrisy for what it is. I’ve seen this kind of thing happen over and over in conservative Anabaptist church communities, and it breaks my heart every time.

[R7ehr]

I may be off in left field here but I have a question that will not go away. It’s been three weeks since Trudy references 100 pages of evidence and conversations with multiple BMA leaders. She also referenced the Mexico orphanage situation, yet only silence.

Did someone in BMA cut a deal with Trudy and buy her silence?

The idea that a deal would be cut with Trudy is beyond absurd.

[Neto]

I may be off in left field here but I have a question that will not go away. It’s been three weeks since Trudy references 100 pages of evidence and conversations with multiple BMA leaders. She also referenced the Mexico orphanage situation, yet only silence.

Did someone in BMA cut a deal with Trudy and buy her silence?

I sincerely doubt she could possibly be "bought off". That's an explanation I would never consider.

[GelassenheitBnksi]

I may be off in left field here but I have a question that will not go away. It’s been three weeks since Trudy references 100 pages of evidence and conversations with multiple BMA leaders. She also referenced the Mexico orphanage situation, yet only silence.

Did someone in BMA cut a deal with Trudy and buy her silence?

The idea that a deal would be cut with Trudy is beyond absurd.

I have a friend who has first-hand access to a very large report, close to 100 pages long. It's directly related to the orphanage in Mexico, including victim testimonies, statements.

She's talking to BMA leaders. Nothing on Mexico. Meanwhile, the accolades pour in for BMA on her page and she says nothing. Something doesn't add up.

Currency goes far beyond $$$.

[JohnH]

I have a friend who has first-hand access to a very large report, close to 100 pages long. It's directly related to the orphanage in Mexico, including victim testimonies, statements.

Which doesn't mean it's necessarily credible or otherwise ready for release.

She's talking to BMA leaders. Nothing on Mexico. Meanwhile, the accolades pour in for BMA on her page and she says nothing. Something doesn't add up.

Currency goes far beyond $$$.

Attacking Trudy's credibility on this is certainly a new front, but I suppose eventually a faction will develop that complaints Trudy doesn't go after things hard enough. Truly amazing to behold, though.

[anndet92]

I may be off in left field here but I have a question that will not go away. It’s been three weeks since Trudy references 100 pages of evidence and conversations with multiple BMA leaders. She also referenced the Mexico orphanage situation, yet only silence.

Did someone in BMA cut a deal with Trudy and buy her silence?

The idea that a deal would be cut with Trudy is beyond absurd.

I have a friend who has first-hand access to a very large report, close to 100 pages long. It's directly related to the orphanage in Mexico, including victim testimonies, statements.

She's talking to BMA leaders. Nothing on Mexico. Meanwhile, the accolades pour in for BMA on her page and she says nothing. Something doesn't add up.

Currency goes far beyond $$$.

Trudy crosses her “I’s” and dots her “T’s” before she publicly releases info to the public. She’s thorough and makes sure there are “receipts” for what she publicly exposes. Because she is meticulous in that way, she doesn’t always make everything public.

This is something I appreciate about her.

She is also quick to own mistakes.

Do you have evidence for the claims you are making? Because if there is evidence of mishandling victims stories, that’s a big deal and should be taken seriously.

I’ve not seen any evidence of her taking money or mishandling victims stories.

[GelassenheitBnksi]

I have a friend who has first-hand access to a very large report, close to 100 pages long. It's directly related to the orphanage in Mexico, including victim testimonies, statements.

Which doesn't mean it's necessarily credible or otherwise ready for release.

She's talking to BMA leaders. Nothing on Mexico. Meanwhile, the accolades pour in for BMA on her page and she says nothing. Something doesn't add up.

Currency goes far beyond $$$.

Attacking Trudy's credibility on this is certainly a new front, but I suppose eventually a faction will develop that complaints Trudy doesn't go after things hard enough. Truly amazing to behold, though.

Only speculating that BMA leadership leveraged a relationship to keep it silent this long. I would further speculate that both parties are not above it...