|
|
Letter to CMI supportersfrom Philip Bell, formerly speaker/deputy CEO of AiG (UK/Europe). 15 November, 2006 Dear friends/colleagues, You may recall my name as a speaker for Answers in Genesis (UK/Europe). However, you may not all be aware that I left AiG last June. Since that time I have been engaged in school teaching and some pastoral work in my own church and have been praying about the long-term future for myself and my family. Due to the circumstances that resulted in my resignation from AiG, I had more or less determined not to be involved full-time with another creationist ministry for the foreseeable future. I was concerned about the confusion that this might otherwise cause if people perceived that I had ‘jumped ship’ to join a ‘rival’ organisation—not least because AiG’s total silence about my departure inevitably meant that some people might still think I was working for AiG. Only today, I was asked by somebody who is a friend of the AiG ministry whether or not I had left AiG! I have also consciously avoided contacting many friends that I have made through the course of five years of AiG ministry around the country because I did not relish the inevitable questions that would be asked about why I had left a job that I had always declared to people to be a joy and a privilege. The accompanying response by CMI, to a letter by Dr Monty White of AiG-UK, explains a little of the background to my departure but I have decided that it is time for me to speak out. Ironically perhaps, it was reading Monty’s letter to some of AiG’s supporters and the latest Answers Update from AiG that provoked me to break my silence. As someone who has been ‘on the inside’, I feel that I can no longer sit by and tolerate the misleading statements and gross injustice that I have observed. I take no pleasure in what I am about to write and have prayed for many weeks about the pros and cons of such a course of action. I can only hope and pray that, even if you disagree with the wisdom of my decision, you will respect that my heart in this is simply to vouch for the reputation and good name of people in CMI for whom I have the utmost respect and am privileged to count among my friends. My heart in this is to defend the reputation of a Christian ministry that has been used by God to equip Christians to better uphold and defend their faith over nearly three decades, not least through Creation magazine. Late in 2005, it became clear to senior staff in AiG–UK that there were major disagreements between AiGs in USA and Australia. Let me hasten to add that these had nothing whatever to do with doctrine. At first, I felt like a spectator and prayed that differences would be resolved. However, I became increasingly concerned by certain things I was hearing. It became clear that the rift in relations between the two organisations was proving irreconcilable and I started to hear about an alternative magazine to Creation. I was certainly not opposed to this in principle in any way. However, in late November 2005, I was very surprised (as were many of my colleagues in AiG–UK at the time) to hear of the intended launch of a new magazine called Creation Answers by AiG–US. This was in a presentation by a senior member of AiG–USA and the date being aimed for was clearly stated to be June 2006. As you will now know, this magazine was indeed produced, although under the title Answers magazine. And more than 30,000 subscribers to Creation and TJ (Journal of Creation) in the US were cut off without being told that these periodicals still existed, or where to get them (CMI did not keep a copy of the mailing list for the US). I began to ask questions of my colleagues in leadership in AiG–USA and AiG–UK. There were other things which deeply concerned me around that time too, but I was particularly upset by the fact that Carl Wieland and the Australian organisation were always being cast in a negative light (putting it mildly); there was no convincing justification for this. Following a growing unease and dismay with what I saw happening, and not receiving open, satisfactory answers to my queries, I resigned from leadership towards the end of February. Very shortly afterwards, I was present at a meeting at which Monty White stated that AiG–UK speakers would now encourage people to take up the Answers magazine (even though the launch date was at least three months away) rather than Creation, subscriptions to which he indicated would wither. This was around the time that CMI became officially known (see accompanying letter) and launched its new website, <www.creationontheweb.com/>. Later I began to ask questions of staff in CMI in relation to these matters. We corresponded regularly on office-related matters but I had not entered into dialogue on these things. Immediately, certain things became clear but I was dismayed to discover that I had been kept in the dark about many other things. For instance, I discovered that the American ministry had been applying to trademark Creation magazine (the name of the Australian ministry’s magazine, without telling them) in the USA since April 2005, about which I later questioned Ken Ham (AiG–USA’s application was actually initially rejected by the trademark examiner, but a few months ago, they continued their application, even though CMI had discovered it and wanted them to cease. They overcame those objections successfully, in part by attaching two copies of Creation magazine as if it was ‘theirs’. After CMI lodged a formal objection in the USA, which would have made AiG–US’s application clearly unwinnable (given that it was now clear that they were applying to trademark someone else’s product), AiG has only just moved to drop this application. It also became clear that the rights to use (and to change in any way) the intellectual property of all CMI’s Creation and TJ articles had been cynically seized by AiG–USA (along with other assets of the Australian ministry) by a ‘legal’ document (signed by four volunteer directors appointed years ago by Ken Ham, who subsequently resigned en masse in return for legal indemnity from CMI management for their astounding actions) so that AiG–USA could continue to use the Australian ministry’s articles on their website. I questioned my AiG–USA colleagues who took these decisions but was entirely dissatisfied with their justification for this. This inappropriately named ‘Memorandum of Agreement’ and the associated deed had not been seen by a single one of the management staff of the Australian ministry, including the founder of the magazine (Carl Wieland). Furthermore, it contained the astounding claim that written permissions of all the magazine authors to hand over their moral and intellectual rights to AiG–USA had been obtained—entirely false. All my attempts to get satisfactory answers to my questions on these disturbing issues (by speaking to senior colleagues in AiG–USA) failed. I did not personally fall out with any of these men, whom I had always liked and felt privileged to count as friends but eventually handed in my full resignation in early May. I had informed Monty White that I was prepared to work until the end of October in order to fulfil most of the speaking engagements that were booked; however, he felt it might be better all round if I left earlier so the end of August was agreed (though he later ‘speeded up the process’—see the refutation of the Monty White letter). Unfortunately, as if these sort of things were not enough, I observed, first-hand, attempts to blacken the character of fellow Christians in CMI. Many of my colleagues in AiG–UK found this, as I did, to be the most upsetting aspect of the whole sad breakdown in fellowship between the leadership of the two organisations. The deliberate character assassination that I and others observed (together with other problems, some of which I have indicated above) strongly fed into our resignations which happened during late June and early July. Neither of my colleagues, Tim Matthews or Rachel Revell nor myself had jobs to go to but we resigned on the basis of conscience issues. Subsequently, all three of us have found work for which we are very grateful to the Lord. It needs to be said that CMI/Carl Wieland, despite slurs to the contrary, did not induce or seek our resignations—in fact, I did not once make contact with Australia until I had resigned from AiG–UK leadership. After that time, I opened up dialogue with the leaders of both the American and the Australian ministries. At no time did CMI put pressure on any of us to work for them. My decisions on all these things were entirely my own and were respected at all times.1 In all of this, we observed time and again how Carl Wieland (as the Managing Director of CMI) exercised restraint (i.e. not going public about these issues even though CMI had the UK mailing list—as it had done for some 16 years) so as not to damage the work of AiG. This in spite of the serious financial losses incurred by the ministry of CMI and the incredibly painful personal attacks. For reasons known only to him, Monty White has not shown such restraint in the various letters that he has been sending out recently. This is why I find myself writing these things, almost five months after leaving AiG. I have not ceased praying for both ministries and for their leaders—daily asking God to deal mercifully with all concerned and that repentance and even reconciliation may result. I know that I speak for both my former colleagues, Tim Matthews and Rachel Revell, when I say that we still hope that directors and other senior folk associated with AiG will come to talk through these serious issues with their former colleagues in CMI. It seems clear to us that there has been a strong reluctance from AiG to come to the table in this way, in complete openness with all relevant parties present. And we are genuinely perplexed at the apparent ‘amnesia’ that seems to exist over these serious issues—except that the ministry here seems in thrall to the leadership of the much larger sister organisation in USA. This makes sad reading but, to the best of my knowledge and before the Lord—to whom I shall one day give account—I vouch for its truth. In these days of increasing animosity towards the Christian faith, there is a crying need to present a united front—I particularly have creation ministries in mind. However, we believe in unity that consists in truth and the trumpet must not give an uncertain sound or its clarion call will be ignored. Believing that you, as supporters, would wish the organisation that you support to be one of integrity, I believe that this was a time to speak out. The enemies of the Gospel will continue to attack the Lord’s people and His work—witness the recent publication of The God Delusion by the infamous Prof. Richard Dawkins for example. Consequently, the battle lines are clearly drawn, and we all, as God’s people, must be prepared to face up to and deal with inconsistency and sin that will mar our Christian testimony. I find the words of the Apostle Peter particularly sobering as I consider my own walk before the Lord but also these weighty matters that I have shared: ‘Therefore brethren, be even more diligent to make your call and election sure, for if you do these things you will never stumble’ (2 Peter 1:10). I would strongly urge you to commit these matters to prayer. Yours sincerely, Philip Bell
|