Biblical Mennonite Alliance and credential removal of past abusers

[Judas Maccabeus]

I suspect that all of these new accounts may not all be unique individuals.

[flyingnorm]

Yes that was a part of the story at LOH and John Eicher and Lenn Miller and BMA. Its one story.

[JohnH]

So who are the main influences in conservative Anabaptist culture who promote exorcism? Are there deliverance ministries or influencers who promote exorcism as the solution for physical and mental health issues including trauma symptoms?

Steve Stutzman/Straight Paths
Lapp Brothers

Perhaps I'm engaging in "no true Scotsman", but I haven't thought of those organisations as "conservative Anabaptis".

I have tended to think of them as fringe Pentecostal. I would put Oasis Tabernacle in the same category.

In any case promoting exorcism for such things, I think, is deeply harmful. There is a time and a place for an exorcism, but not as a "cure all" for such things.

[ken_sylvania]

So who are the main influences in conservative Anabaptist culture who promote exorcism? Are there deliverance ministries or influencers who promote exorcism as the solution for physical and mental health issues including trauma symptoms?

Steve Stutzman/Straight Paths
Lapp Brothers

Perhaps I'm engaging in "no true Scotsman", but I haven't thought of those organisations as "conservative Anabaptis".

I have tended to think of them as fringe Pentecostal. I would put Oasis Tabernacle in the same category.

In any case promoting exorcism for such things, I think, is deeply harmful. There is a time and a place for an exorcism, but not as a "cure all" for such things.

They aren't conservative Anabaptist, but sometimes I get the feeling that they are influencing some segments of the conservative Anabaptist world.

[JohnH]

They aren't conservative Anabaptist, but sometimes I get the feeling that they are influencing some segments of the conservative Anabaptist world.

I strongly agree, but so are Mormons, Jehovah's Witnesses, Oneness Pentecostals, and many others. It is indeed a "strange fire".

[flyingnorm]

It appears to me the rather than applying a “not a true conservative Anabaptist” filter to these groups we look at the lack of filters that would conservative Anabaptists generally operate under.

Here is an orphanage being operated under the BMA identity and legal structure with no filter to keep these kinds of fringe practices out.

[JohnH]

It appears to me the rather than applying a “not a true conservative Anabaptist” filter to these groups we look at the lack of filters that would conservative Anabaptists generally operate under.

Here is an orphanage being operated under the BMA identity and legal structure with no filter to keep these kinds of fringe practices out.

I would agree that since BMA is not a heirarchy or a high-control organisation, the orphanage should have been operated with its own, independent branding. (Not that BMA would have much control over this - what are they supposed to do, file a trademark infringement lawsuit in Mexico?)

[ken_sylvania]

I would agree that since BMA is not a heirarchy or a high-control organisation, the orphanage should have been operated with its own, independent branding. (Not that BMA would have much control over this - what are they supposed to do, file a trademark infringement lawsuit in Mexico?)

Nah, they don't need to file a trademark infringement. They can start with the easy things. For instance, if BMA's website design person was unwilling to remove the orphanage information from the official BMA website, the board could have terminated that person and hired someone willing to follow BMA's wishes.

BMA listed the orphanage on their website in such a way as to give the impression that it was an officially sanctioned project of BMA. Now, perhaps they did indeed have no authority or control over what was happening on the ground, and maybe they simply trusted the orphanage board to a level that they should not have, but it seems kind of duplicitous to me to want to take credit for the good things the orphanage is doing when it seems like everything is going well, but then when the bad and ugly comes out to back away and say "we had no actual responsibility for what was happening." I'm not accusing BMA of doing that - I don't really know how much accountability they are taking for what (if anything) happened.

[JohnH]

I would agree that since BMA is not a heirarchy or a high-control organisation, the orphanage should have been operated with its own, independent branding. (Not that BMA would have much control over this - what are they supposed to do, file a trademark infringement lawsuit in Mexico?)

Nah, they don't need to file a trademark infringement. They can start with the easy things. For instance, if BMA's website design person was unwilling to remove the orphanage information from the official BMA website, the board could have terminated that person and hired someone willing to follow BMA's wishes.

BMA listed the orphanage on their website in such a way as to give the impression that it was an officially sanctioned project of BMA. Now, perhaps they did indeed have no authority or control over what was happening on the ground, and maybe they simply trusted the orphanage board to a level that they should not have, but it seems kind of duplicitous to me to want to take credit for the good things the orphanage is doing when it seems like everything is going well, but then when the bad and ugly comes out to back away and say "we had no actual responsibility for what was happening." I'm not accusing BMA of doing that - I don't really know how much accountability they are taking for what (if anything) happened.

I wonder who operates the website, but yes, it would be better to clarify what is merely affiliated versus what is an official BMA ministry, organ, or agency.

My own church doesn’t officially operate very many agencies (for example the publishing house is technically independent). And the national association doesn’t really have much authority other than to organise a conference and send out letters begging for money for affiliated organisations.

[flyingnorm]

In the BMA, all the institutions are the same legal entity. LOH, EBI, DNI, VMB, MTC, and maybe others are programs entirely owned and corporately controlled by BMA. Websites are not the same thing in fact as a corporate entities.