Bishop Michael Reid Resigns over Sex Scandal

Headed “Christian Congress for Traditional Values” 

From Premier:

A well known Pentecostal church leader has resigned after admitting he’s had an affair.

Bishop Michael Reid was the head of Peniel Church and school in Essex.

…In a statement Bishop Reid said:

“It is with great sorrow and regret that I have resigned from the church board and have stepped down from official duties. I confess that I have sinned by committing adultery. I recognize that I have failed in my duties and acted in a way that harmed the Church. I take full responsibility for my actions and so I resigned. I apologize to my wife and family and all of you whose trust I have betrayed and ask for your forgiveness and prayers.”

The websites of Michael Reid Ministries and of his Christian Congress for Traditional Values are both currently down, replaced by a brief contacts page.

Outside Northern Ireland, British evangelicalism tends to be politically centrist and wary of authoritarian leaders. However, Michael Reid and his Peniel Church in Brentwood, Essex, are an exception. Reid – a former policeman – is more like a US “Christian Right” figure, and for the past few years he has campaigned for “traditional morality”, arguing with figures such as gay-rights activist Peter Thatchell and protesting against Jerry Springer: The Opera. One 2000 Guardian report has further details:

…gays are “filthy perverts”; Muslims, Hindus and Buddhists are variously described in videoed sermons as “vile” and “foul heathens”. Christians who do not work, Reid said in one recording, should be allowed to starve. He believes in capital punishment, and he would pull the trigger himself; lethal injection is too good for them, he says in one church video.

Reid has also been controversial for other reasons: ex-members of his church have complained of authoritarianism (although be careful: he’s been known to sue over the “cult” label), and in the 1990s his church tried to derail a critical Channel 4 documentary through a bizarre scheme which involved hiring an actor to approach the documentary-makers with the story that he (the actor) was an intelligence agent and that the programme should not be made for reasons of national security (I blogged on this here). A few years after that, there was further bad publicity when members of the church were accused of joining the local Conservative Party en masse in order to back the local MP, Eric Pickles, against rivals in the party (Pickles is a former Tory centrist “wet” who moved to the right during the 1980s).

Thanks to Google Books, we’re able to see these pictures from Reid’s book Faith: It’s God Given (2002):

Interesting friends, and Reid’s admission is another blow to the International Communion of Charismatic Churches; former presiding Bishop Earl Paulk was last year engulfed in numerous sex scandals, including allegations of sexual abuse. Richard Roberts, meanwhile, was recently forced to resign from the presidency of Oral Roberts University over claims of financial mismanagement. Reid himself has long-standing links with Oral Roberts and ORU.

UPDATE: MediaWatchWatch recalls the work of the CCTV:

The CCTV has been providing us here at MWW with pleasingly whacky Christian fodder since its inception in March 2005. But they really showed their hateful side with their Gay Aim: Abolish the Family campaign which included posters and a video.

UPDATE 2: Ex-members speak out here.

UPDATE 3: Charismatice leader Colin Dye distances himself from Reid.

(Thank you to Michael Reid Miseries for the tip-off, and to MediaWatchWatch for the top picture)

81 Responses

  1. […] It hosts a number of discussion forums, including one devoted to Bishop Michael Reid (see yesterday). There various members and ex-members of his church have been having their say over the past few […]

  2. […] Comments Bishop Michael Reid Resigns over Sex Scandal « Bartholomew’s Notes on Religion on Michael Reid: Peniel Ex-Members Speak OutBishop Michael Reid Resigns over Sex […]

  3. The BBC are covering the Michael Reid story at bbc.co.uk/blogs/ni

  4. he is bishop of a pentecostal church in England. T
    he latest is Mike Reid is back but there is an injunction against him attending any of Peniel grounds and the school pending an investigation. Currently he has been suspended from all duties.

    Its all very well focusing on Michael Reid but we are also forgetting the woman here. Sheila Graziano is a strong minded fiesty scottish girl who knows her own mind. She is no unassuming impressionable school girl. SHe knew exactly what she was doing during the 8 years. All she need have done after the first ‘slip up’ would have been to resign from working as his PA to avoid being around him too much. But no she chose to continue as his PA and be subjected to his desires. Sheila is a fighter, an achiever who knows exactly what she wants out of a situation. While I am happy to forgive her and accept her, my question is what is she doing coming to Peniel Church and attending the school grounds without anything as much as an apology to the Church? Sheila was/is an ordained Pastor. She took pastoral care lessons for our children in the school, she preached at church. The music team and choir all respected her and held in high esteem what she said because of her position. But she like Mike Reid HAS ALSO abused our trust in her as a church. My view and many others I’ve spoken to is she needs to apologise to the church PUBLICLY. If she cannot do that then at least write a statement which is to be read out on her behalf to the whole church. That to me shows remorse. She cannot just swan in and out as though nothing has happened. No, she too is to blame for what happened. Mr Reid did not continously rape her for 8 years otherwise she should have reported to police all those years ago. We need an apology from you Mrs Graziano. Sorry.

  5. I’m confused. He is “bishop”, of what? Is this an Anglican Church, or Roman Catholic or what is it. First I’ve heard of it but I’m an American.

  6. Im totally angry. I was ready to forgive and forget but the fact that this affair has been going for 10 (NOT 8) years. Also, He used scripture to keep this lady in his sexual webb. I am deeply deeply hurt and upset. He can never stand as spiritual leader again, never. The church board needs to resign and start the whole thing over again. I am stopping my tithes until I see a new Trust board. We were told what to think, who to talk to, who to ostracize, our minds were controlled and yet he claimed it was not heavy shepherding – well it jolly well was!!!!

  7. It is very sad to see the harm and the pain that this man’s ministry has caused. There are many testimonies by reliable witnesses to the shameful treatment they suffered as a result of Michael Reid’s malign influence. I have written about the decline and fall of Michael Reid Ministries on my blog http://johlibaptist.blogspot.com/

  8. […] with the American Christian Right, or somewhere like “Bishop” Michael Reid’s Peniel Church. That does not, however, appear to be the case (not that that would justify a campaign of […]

  9. is it not easy to try to destroy a ministry? my question is simple to whom does it benefits?God or the devil? if it benefiting the devil we surely must ask ourselve this simple question…Is it truth? Is it a setting up? it seems to me the mediatic thing of that have been so big that i question the reality of the fact…or facts…
    Maybe we should try to ask God what to do and the answers would be 1)if the story is truth…forgiveness and love, wich is the base of our Christian religion
    2) if it false, is ourself to repent I do thing it is wise to be knowing the real story.
    seven times the just falls and seven times hes rises…and the bible teaches us that the wicked enjoys in the righteous fall.
    Please don t judge me on my writing, I m French…and i know some may say he can write.

    God bless you

    • Is it not easy to try to destroy a ministry?

      In my view it is impossible for any ministry to be destroyed unless God allows it to happen!
      No one has the ability to defeat God or to do anything that goes against God’s plan for our lives. Hence God cannot be defeated, which also infers that the devil cannot benefit from the actions of people!
      Our choices in life may well keep us out of God’s favour but we are the ones hurt by this and God is not taken by surprise by what we do!
      The wicked, who already belong to the devil and are opposed to God, enjoy seeing anything that brings God into disrepute because it supports their opposition to God!
      What I have learnt over the years is that the wicked are just as likely to be found in God’s house as are Christians! Some are on a journey which will lead them to salvation, others are there to abuse and profit from their position in the Church.
      Not that long ago, in the UK at least, there was a tradition for the younger son (of the more well off families) to go into the Christian Church. This was was not exactly the best reason for people to be in ministry, although I would hope that some would have been born again over the years!
      The label of ‘Christian’ is very easy for people to adopt. Our only approach as individuals to these difficulties is to focus on Christ and not to put ourselves in the position of being dependant on any person for our personal walk with God.
      Thus my view is that is impossible to destroy a Christian ministry, simply because God would have to allow it to be destroyed, and since it was His choice to permit the ending of a Christian ministry then it has not been destroyed by anyone!

  10. […] blogged on Reid – the former head of the Christian Congress for Traditional Values – here. His ordination as a Bishop was through the International Communion of Charismatic Churches, […]

  11. Comments speculating about matters currently before the courts cannot be hosted here.

  12. It was posted here that the Bishop refused to accept responsibilty for his actions blaming the other party and this has been mentioned many times I guess in hopes to shine more darkness over the Bishop.

    I have spoken about this many times asking / begging that we might get past this as it has already been dealt with, but it continues, mainly I assume becuase it (would if true) turn people from the Bishop.

    Today the moderator has been cleaning, this prompted me to read some more and I found that in vertually the very first post here this statement.

    =========================================.

    “It is with great sorrow and regret that I have resigned from the church board and have stepped down from official duties. I confess that I have sinned by committing adultery. I recognize that I have failed in my duties and acted in a way that harmed the Church. I take full responsibility for my actions and so I resigned. I apologize to my wife and family and all of you whose trust I have betrayed and ask for your forgiveness and prayers.”

    =========================================

    So if we can try to keep up, and act a little more Christian like it would be …………… nice .

  13. SBS, you are partly right in that your quote was the official comment about the affair.
    Judging by what you posted before the cleaning, it would seem that you were not at the meeting when some of the church were told about the ‘sin’. Michael did not admit to an affair, he said that he had sinned yes, but it was left to a young man in the church to tell people what the sin was. Michael would not tell. Also he has repeatedly told people that the affair was only a few months and not the 8 years as reported.
    Does it really matter how long the affair lasted? The fact that Michael was a “human being succumbing to the affections of a beautiful woman, irrespective of his / her position” shows him to be unfit for the position of Bishop as described in the Bible.
    As for acting “more Christian” maybe you would like to explain what you mean by this?
    Would you consider acting like a Christian would involve having an affair?
    Or maybe it is by telling people lies about other people in the congregation?
    Or maybe it is Christian to accept expensive gifts from people?
    Is it Christian to get the congregation to finance a large church plot and a manor house for a school and then call the church yours?

  14. No one can ‘act more Christian’!! If they were doing this then they would be fooling themselves.
    Being a Christian is a nature, not a behaviour.
    An important indicator of that nature is being truthful.
    Misleading people with selected truths is the same as being untruthful (I am not suggesting that anyone in these posts is being untruthful)

  15. Are we STILL doing this ?????????????

    What a shame that you still want to go on and on about how bad a person and a church leader he was.

    At least you said the affair was “reported to be 8 years” Thank you for that. And NO, a one day / week / month affair is as bad as a lifetime one, the only reason I interjected regarding this was because it was reported to be for 8 and even 10 years to sensationalise it all, The truth is, she was his PA for 8 years.

    So now he accepted gifts and told lies, how terrible (if it is indeed true) lets hang him.

    I was not at the meeting as I said previously, and I know who it was that stood up and explained what had happened.

    PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE read the very first post, and the post above yours where it states that he DID accept………… losing the will to go on for the 100th time…..

    In my opinion the church was (still is) his, he started it in his OWN front room and then bought and built Peniel thus making it HIS church. It was only after it made commercial sense to turn the church into a business that he elected a board as required by law. This board then contrived to surreptitiously remove him, shame on those who he brought into the church to turn on him in this way especially the guy who virtually grew up in the Reid household.

    I did ask if his crime of passion was more or less acceptable than the criminal act listed above, but you evaded this, do you not realize that this has not gone away, people reading this would be wondering why you don’t want to mention it, might I suggest that you are a hypocrite on the grounds that you condemn the Bishop for his weakness and condone what the board has done, and that I would not be wrong to do so?.

    When you asked what I meant by being “more Christian” this is what I meant.

    Do not go on and on about something that happened 2 -5 -10 -20 years ago. If you cannot forget what has happened, at least try to forgive.

    I prefer not to advise on how you shouldn’t carry baggage because if you do it will drag you down, but surely you must realize that hatred and abhorrence lives in the darkness and you have to go there often to remember it. I prefer to live in the light, so I forgave.

    Concerning Michael’s post above.
    I appreciate what you are saying and I may very well be wrong, but I have to say that I think one could act more like a Christian.

    If being a Christian constitutes helping those in need, giving when you can, sacrificing to benefit others, caring for those that you don’t even know and above most, forgiving and accepting an apology then being less like a Christian might mean that you would maliciously harm someone either physically or verbally, take rather than give, sacrifice nothing especially if it inconvenienced yourself and I guess above all, refuse to forgive.

    Maybe I should have said, “ act more LIKE a Christian, accepted.

  16. SBS, I do think that your emphasis on it being ‘his’ church is wrong. There is nothing Christian about a set of buildings and land. Granted a magnificent cathedral can be awe inspiring, but that is simply a human emotion.
    The buildings do not matter, the church is Jesus Christ and only Jesus Christ.
    Fighting over a building is not achieving anything in terms of relationship with God. It is simply human greed desiring money and possessions! There is nothing special about peniel in spiritual terms, there is only land, buildings and money. A lot of money if one includes Brizes!!
    It is God who makes it a church.
    reid has emphasised how he started his ministry in his front room. Thinking in Christian terms, that ministry expanded over the years. How did that growth happen? Did he not learn that God will grow a ministry as He thinks fit, and the opposite, will remove a ministry as He thinks fit?
    Why is reid so bothered about the actions of human beings? Is he not focused on Christ? If he believes that Christ has blessed him with the ministry of peniel over the years then why does he not believe that what God is doing now is what God wants to happen. Where is his faith in Christ?
    To the world this looks like a fight over possessions!

  17. ‘Are we STILL doing this ?????????????’
    Well you see the way leaving comments works is that you can post stuff and so can I. Then when I think you have either posted something good or bad I can come back and comment on your post.
    If you don’t want to keep posting you don’t have to, no one is making you. Well I assume that no one is telling you that you must post a reply?

    ‘In my opinion the church was (still is) his, he started it in his OWN front room and then bought and built Peniel thus making it HIS church. It was only after it made commercial sense to turn the church into a business that he elected a board as required by law. This board then contrived to surreptitiously remove him, shame on those who he brought into the church to turn on him in this way especially the guy who virtually grew up in the Reid household.’
    Interesting reply. You have not acknowledged those of us who gave money to pay for the church/school. Others sold property, remortgaged homes among other things to raise money for the site.
    Also and more importantly you have not acknowledged God’s part in building a church. Or maybe you don’t think that God played any part in this?
    As for you mean by ‘when it made commercial sense’, could you enlighten us?

    ‘I did ask if his crime of passion was more or less acceptable than the criminal act listed above’
    I have not commented on this because the moderator has said not to comment on the court case.

  18. Michael.
    With the upmost respect.

    The term “His church” is the question here and what is understood and meant by “his church” is in contention, so let me try to clarify.

    We all know that a the people are the church, we all know that a building is just a building, we all know that the church is Gods property albeit physical spiritually and / or literally, this is Sunday school stuff, why are we even doing this? I still consider that the church in Coxtie green road is HIS (The Bishops) Church, just the same as one would say “my car” or “my house” when both could easily belong to the bank, an adopted child would use the term “my dad” when in fact he isn’t at all. I understand what you are saying but to me it is and always will be his church and I will call it as such.

    First know that what I write I write from my perspective, I do not speak for the Bishop, I speak for myself, so what I say is what I mean, not what the Bishop has instructed me to write.

    You wrote…………….. Fighting over a building is not achieving anything in terms of relationship with God. It is simply human greed desiring money and possessions!……………………….

    Do you really think that the Bishop is fighting the board for possession of the buildings? He signed 90% of the land / buildings over to the board including Testimony house, I think you will find that it is the board that is not only fighting but scheming to keep hold of the assets, including threatening to have the Reid’s evicted from the home they have lived in for many many years, sending numerous solicitor letters to the effect. The Bishop still outright owns part of the property that is on the plot of land where Peniel stands, yet he has not asked for rent in any form or made demands in any way to prevent the Church from using this part of his land. So tell me, who is fighting over land and possessions ?

    …………………… There is nothing special about peniel in spiritual terms………………………
    How right you are, I agree 100% that now the Bishop has been removed Peniel is just a building full of people. Since it has been ok for others to quote the Bishop, I see no reason why I should not, No miracles No Jesus. And if Jesus isn’t in the church, what do you have? = nothing special about peniel in spiritual terms.

    …………………. It is God who makes it a church…………………………….

    Forgive me, I initially thought that you were another who was against the Bishop, but the more I read of your post I realize that you are in fact for the Bishop, my apologies.

    Yes it is God who decides, and it would appear that he has decided about peniel as evidenced by the dramatic decline in numbers there, whereas on the other hand the Bishop’s ministry is again booming to the degree that a new building was obtained recently to house the church as the house was again too small to accommodate its members.

    I keep reading your post and it appears to be negative towards the Bishop then you write something like this, and it then seems that you are in fact in the Bishops corner.

    Did he not learn that God will grow a ministry as He thinks fit, and the opposite, will remove a ministry as He thinks fit?

    I don’t think we are in a position to question what the Bishop has or has not learnt from God, unless you believe that his last 30 – 40 years have been guess work.

    God’s timing is impeccable, nothing that is done etc, so it would appear that it is God’s plan to make changes concerning Penile, and right now we can only speculate what these changes might be, it looks for all intent and purposes that the Bishop is out of Peniel, but until the results of the tribunal are heard we cannot say this with any degree of certainty. The mistakes that were made at the tribunal may manifest themselves in such a way as to see the Bishop back in his rightful place, or not, but whatever the outcome, you will have to agree that God is NOT blessing Peniel at this time, whereas Jesus is STILL performing miracles through the Bishop and since he is the same yesterday and today, there can be only one conclusion.

    ………………….Why is reid so bothered about the actions of human beings?…………………….
    Is he? Are these your thoughts? Or is there any evidence to support this ? It seems to me that he has ignored what the board thinks and have done, he has not tried to lure the members of Peniel into his new Church, (although many have transferred) in fact, another one of the Bishops sayings is that, “if you don’t like it, go jump in the lake” Does that sound like a man who is “bothered about the actions of humans”? I can tell you all now that his thoughts on “others” is that God will deal with them all, preferring to cast his cares upon him than dealing with it himself, and it looks like he was right to take this stance as it is working . IF he was “bothered about the actions of others” then why isn’t he defending himself? It isn’t because he is lost for words, it is because he doesn’t care what you think, he only cares about what God thinks, and God has forgiven him as he will us all and continuing to support him.

    ……………Is he not focused on Christ? ……………… Where is his faith in Christ?………………….
    Come on……..who are we to question his faith and ask what he is focused on. Objection, argumentative, and ridiculous.

    ………………..To the world this looks like a fight over possessions!…………………..
    Yes it does appear to be the case, however you make it sound as though the Bishop is doing the fighting, if you have any knowledge of what the board are doing and have done then you will know that it is the board that is fighting to keep peniel, rather than the Bishop fighting to get it back.

    ==========================================================================================================

    Posted by JR.
    ……….. ‘Are we STILL doing this ?????????????’
    Well you see the way leaving comments works is that you can post stuff and so can I. Then when I think you have either posted something good or bad I can come back and comment on your post.
    If you don’t want to keep posting you don’t have to, no one is making you. Well I assume that no one is telling you that you must post a reply?…………………..

    I am sorry, I should have been more specific and explained what I meant by this statement.,

    I meant……. Why are we still going on and on and on about the affair and how you say the Bishop refuses to accept his part and apologize for his actions.

    Just to make it perfectly clear to you and anyone else who has trouble understand it. The Bishop stood up in Penile in front of the congregation and said (not verbatim) that he has sinned and he was taking time off from his duties. This was his first acceptance and apology. He then at a later date ( I don’t know when it was) made the statement that is at the very top of this thread /page. Please read it again although I am sure you know what it says. Not only does this statement reiterate what he said in his first statement, but it also outlines the offence and clearly states he has committed adultery.

    Now, please tell me…………. ISNT THAT PLAIN ? isn’t it SO EASY?

    You have not acknowledged those of us who gave money to pay for the church/school. Others sold property, remortgaged homes among other things to raise money for the site.
    Also and more importantly you have not acknowledged God’s part in building a church. Or maybe you don’t think that God played any part in this?
    As for you mean by ‘when it made commercial sense’, could you enlighten us?

    I have heard the stories about how he forced people to give all their money to the church, forcing them to sign up for insurances that they didn’t need and how he demanded etc etc.
    I have known him for almost 20 years and I never once bought any insurances from him, he never once asked me for money although I did help the community in other ways when I could, he never once had a church collection passing the hat throughout the congregation other than the times when he had a collection for a visiting speaker. He always used to say, there is a box outside on the wall, walk right past it if you want.
    I think you will agree that the Bishop did NOT sell any insurances, I believe this was left to a board member, So if you did buy something that you either didn’t need or want, you didn’t buy it from the Bishop, also you are now trying to have your cake and eat it. The Bishop handed over the church to the board and relinquished complete control over the assets and businesses that were part of the corporation, this is not only true, it is not contested and it is evidenced by the fact that the Bishop himself was ousted by the board proving that it was in fact the BOARD who made ALL the decisions collectively, and it was the board who cajoled you into buying these insurances and making donations and remortgaging to raise money, so WHY are you still there? Lets accept that the Bishop was at the helm of the board, where did that money go that you so reluctantly gave? The school, Brizes? The land, and the assets including the long time home of the Reid’s. Tell me, WHO owns all these assets now? The Bishop doesn’t even own the house that he lives in, the board owns it all, so what on earth are you whinging about, you still have all those assets under a new leader. Hahahahahaahah Leader.

    ………………… Also and more importantly you have not acknowledged God’s part in building a church. Or maybe you don’t think that God played any part in this?…………………..
    You are doing it again……making assumption about me and what I may or may not be thinking, are you one of the many doctors from the church membership?
    FYI I acknowledge God in everything that I do. I cannot comment of what other people believe or do not believe. Hopefully God is with you now softening your heart, removing the bitterness, hatred and belligerence, transferring you from the darkness into the kingdom of his dear son, isn’t our God a good God, amen.

    ………………….As for you mean by ‘when it made commercial sense’, could you enlighten us?…………………..
    No, If this is confusing to you then I can’t help you with it, This particular subject is a by product of the main discussion that is about the Bishops actions and how you say he refused to accept his guilt and take responsibility and I have adequately dismissed your claim for what it is.

    ……………….. I did ask if his crime of passion was more or less acceptable than the criminal act listed above’
    I have not commented on this because the moderator has said not to comment on the court case……………………….

    You don’t have to comment if you feel it would compromise your argument, but what I wrote is still live on this thread, so if you don’t want to answer in full, just say (1) or (2). .

    The point I was making by informing you all about what was said at the tribunal was that you don’t hear anyone shouting about how poorly others acted who were also in a highly regarded position of alleged holiness, hence the greenhouse effect.

  19. hi
    you have bypassed my main point. If reid was REALLY trusting God then he would not be bothered WHERE he preached or be bothered about money or possessions at all!
    His focus should be on Jesus Christ. Perhaps his fall from grace at peniel was BECAUSE he focused too much on money and possessions, and God wanted to him to change his focus back to God.
    Very few of the Christian ministers, evangelists etc were wealthy people. God provides what is necessary when it is required.
    How much of this division, infighting and legal activity is really down to possessions and wealth?
    How much difference does it make in this continuing fighting that peniel and brizes own a large amount of land that was green belt but will become prime building land in the next few years, with land values of many hundreds and thousands of pounds per acre?
    Sorry but I am cynical enough about the parties involved in this infighting to believe that is probably what it is all about!! Money, money, money!

  20. SBS – when I answered you before it was on your ways of expressing things that are not so. It is the same now.
    You use a term ‘crime of passion’ – but it is quite inappropriate. You use it psychologically, to minimise and contrast,..
    One of many easily found defiinitions on the web –

    “Crime of passion is a criminal defendant’s excuse for lacking the premeditation element of a crime due to sudden anger or heartbreak. The defense is usually raised in murder or attempted murder cases, when a spouse or lover finds his/her partner sexually involved with another and shoots or stabs one or both of the coupled pair. To successfully raise the defense, the defendant must have acted immediately after the provocation, without time to “cool off”. If the element of premediation is eliminated, the charges may be lessened… ”

    A lessening… – though in a case where there is no premeditation and no ‘cooling off’. hmmmm – Eight years – or 8 months – no cooling… – no premeditation…. – including booking hotel rooms (that is published tribunal info.) Ok.

    Very strangely you ask if this ‘crime of passion’ (which it was not) is ‘more or less acceptable than the criminal act listed above’. The only criminal act listed above is the police charge against MR for indeed a serious charge, at the head of your first current post. I am very surprised you mention it, especially referring to public :”people reading this would be wondering why you don’t want to mention it”. Certainly it is not for any discussion whatsoever. The date of hearing has kept changing but is apparently currently 12 May.

  21. MIcheal.
    I don’t think I bypassed your question at all, however I accept that you might have thought that. Allow me to try to do it again more clearly

    You are suggesting that he was more concerned about money than God, and that either caused or at very least contributed towards his actions that eventually led to his fall “from grace” as you put it.

    When cornered about a situation, it is common for people to shift the enthuses onto a different subject knowing that the original has been lost.

    This whole thread was hatched to discredit the Bishop and knock him off of his perch, well done, you succeeded with his help of course.

    He didn’t have the affair because he was thinking about money money money, if he was thinking clearly he wouldn’t have gotten into a position where he potentially could have lost what he accumulated over the years. How ridiculous to even suggest this.

    Was he a good business man? Yes I think so, does being a good business man constitute a bad thing ? no, so why are you now condemning him from being so? By all means condemn him for being a church leader and at the same time deceiving people, this is a despicable thing to do, this is accepted by you, me the bishop and everyone else, and I would hope that this includes the representative of the church that did the same thing under oath. …Oops.

    You ask, “if he was REALLY trusting in God” Hang on a minute, you can’t do that, you cannot ask me what I think he was or was not trusting in and if so why he did something else.
    You have his details ask him yourself, I am not here to speak for the Bishop I am here to point out to all you that not everything that was written in this thread was in fact the truth.

    I had not considered this part of the outcome before as I have no financial interest in the assets.
    As for the end result, someone has to end up with the funds from the sale of the Church, School and land, so you tell me, who is more deserving?
    The man who started it all off, who spent most of his life building it up to where it is now, or a group who contrived to have him removed so they could end up with the money, money, money ?
    I mentioned this before, when the Bishop was at the helm the church grew (with God’s help and direction) to 800+ members weekly, the school was so full that even those that went to church couldn’t get in and a new school was bought and prepared because the old school had been out grown.
    Since the Bishop was removed the membership has dropped to (and I don’t know if this is correct, but it is what I was told) less than 200, the school is now so badly run that it has opened its doors to any students regardless if they are in the church or not, in fact please tell us because as I said it was only hearsay, is it right that you don’t even have to be a Christian to go to that school now ? Is the school for sale ?
    This was not disputed when I first wrote it, so I assume that it has some merit, that said and accepted…………………

    If God was in Penile and God decided to remove the Bishop then why didn’t God build up the new leader of the church to at very least be able to KEEP the members it already had?
    Same goes for the school, if God has his hand in it, why is it failing? Nothing that God builds can be destroyed, isn’t this right? And if so……………………..
    Doesn’t this suggest that God didn’t build up the Church, for if he did then it would still be strong, and this only leaves one alternative. The Bishop built up the church, but he was removed………. let me give some advice, if you remove the engine from a car IT WILL NOT RUN.

    But of course, I could be wrong 

  22. Still looking.

    Forgive me for using the term “crime of passion” incorrectly, (give me a break)

    You knew fully to what it was I was referring, but you want to play games, carry on.

    The reason why he was removed from the church was because he committed adultery is this the case ?

    Assuming this is accepted.

    Adultery is a Sin, a sin is a crime and this was a crime that had no financial gain, (in fact it jeopardised his whole career) so it was a crime of the heart, does that suit you better ?

    I asked……… since you were condemning the Bishop for his Sin, how did you feel about the actions of the spokesperson for the board?

    The later crime was not only contrived and planned by the whole board is was a crime that if was successful resulted in a huge financial gain.

    So let me ask you again since you brought it up.

    What would you say was the worse of the two crimes, one that was driven by the heart for an emotional gain, or one that was driven by the pocket for a financial gain?

    It is a simply question, and I will accept either answer as your interpretation of the truth.

    As for not wanting to mention the serious charge against the Bishop, I did, so why say I wouldn’t want to talk about it? Firstly there is NO charge, there is an AL-LE-GA-TION.
    However this is not the crime I was referring too as I suspect you knew this but seized the chance to throw in the words “serious charge + MR” into the same sentence.

    I was referring to the statements made by the board representative and the fact that the adjudicator suggested that the representative had lied (his words) I also mentioned the fact that the representative produced legal documents to the adjudicator and these were found and later accepted to have been illegally altered.
    This is the crime that if succeeded would have resulted in a huge financial gain for the board.

    Can you tell us all why it is that the solicitor for the board wavered rights to question ALL of the witnesses for the Bishop accepting each one as being the truth without even hearing them? Effectively saying that ALL of the witnesses for the Bishop was telling the truth.
    If this is the case, and this was at a hearing where two parties go to have their disputes settled, it should follow surely that the witnesses for the Board we not telling the truth either in part or fully.

    Yes, I had already stated above that the next MEETING with the police concerning the un-collaborated allegation was mid May, thank you.

  23. Hi SBS ,
    I didn’t ASK you if reid was trusting in God!
    I made a statement …
    ‘IF reid was REALLY trusting God then he would not be bothered WHERE he preached or be bothered about money or possessions at all!’…
    I cannot understand why ANY minister of God puts their trust in money or possessions or carnal stuff in general.
    As far as I am concerned, the fact that reid is so concerned about property and money shows a complete lack of understanding of the nature of God and devalues his position as a minister in the Christian church!
    After all he is behaving no differently to any worldly person whose focus is on money and wealth and who has no understanding of Jesus Christ.
    The difference between a Christian minister and a worldly person should be obvious to all!

  24. SBS – you are probably having such a hard time to understand what is going on because you have probably only seen one side of Michael Reid – that shown to his friends or those that are advantageous to him. Other writers here and elsewhere have either seen or lived under another, very different side – which you may never have met, never have recognised, and may totally disbelieve. But it is so. That is why they write not wanting Michael Reid to take up the same power role as before. And why you cannot understand it. But they have seen and experienced what you have not.

    From your basis you wrote: “The reason why he was removed from the church was because he committed adultery is this the case ? Assuming this is accepted…”
    No. Not accepted. The adultery exposure was a start. It then acted as a catalyst and exposed the rest of what was wrong. It was the eye-opener to really look at the fruit… and also the methods..! of MR, because now the WORDS which had had such power were in question (because deeds had showed he had not practiced what he preached – and what he had publicly condemned others for, had ostracised people, had created family break-ups…

    Saying it again – it was not the adultery itself – it was what that then exposed — that people bagan to speak up, that blinkers were taken off to look at things as they really were. THAT is why the church would not have him back – too many had suffered too much and for too long.
    This is probably very hard for you if you have never seen it – you probably find it ‘not true’. But – it IS true.Just not YOUR experience – but it IS the experience of others.

    You wrote: “What would you say was the worse of the two crimes, one that was driven by the heart for an emotional gain, or one that was driven by the pocket for a financial gain?”
    I would say Michael Reid’s ‘crime’ was not actually driven by the heart but by another part of his flesh, somewhat lower down. Much more flesh-led. And Michael’s post about ‘money, money, money’ was nothing to do with the adultery, but with the current events and tribunal. MR’s action. That was very clear. So your reply there is… maybe using the technique you wrongly accuse him of?

    Your base again, about this, is that the board are after financial gain. Look again. They have a duty to protect and help as far as possible – ‘the church’ – which is people, of course. If there are buy-offs and settlements etc – where does that come from? People, again – who have already bought the church building, land, Brizes, Testimony House…
    Open your eyes – and your mind. Michael Reid has every appearance of going for money – and of going against scripture to do so. It is really not becoming to a ‘bishop’ to act publicly in this way.

    But then – you seem to look at it all as a business and to think in business terms. To say that you see it as ‘his church’…!! That is a business stance. “Michael Reid Ltd” – oh, sorry – of course ‘Michael Reid Ministeries’… (That was a grave mistake, that renaming to a Michael Reid brand.)

    Not really so different from other ‘great leaders’ – other charismatic folk such as Jim Jones… who built up ‘his church’ – and ruled it with an iron hand. Yes, I do credit MR with much more of following God than did Jim Jones – but I also see a great deal of MR in what MR did and does – colossal egocentricism, supported by a faith in God. Powerful combination… but not all godly power, nor all godly action. Much of MR. Too much MR MR hurt people too much.

    Strangely you finish in a way that is clearly ironic or critical – that you yourself mention that there is a police date about the rape accusation against Michael Reid on May 12. Do please Check your own posts. No mention from you. But then again – you do have a way of not really keeping to the track as I have showed before
    Oh, ‘SBS’ – I found the kingdom a long time ago… and I know do know at least some of where it is! Thank God!

  25. Michael.
    It is YOU who mentioned the money asking “IF”.

    I cannot answer/reply to your IF questions/statements when it comes to the Bishop, or anyone else for that matter.

    ……… As far as I am concerned, the fact that reid is so concerned about property and money shows a complete lack of understanding of the nature of God and devalues his position as a minister in the Christian church!…………….

    He is NOT “so concerned” other than to the degree that any person would be when asking for what is a fair deal, He worked for most of his life in the ministry and when he was removed he was offered an amount that was unacceptable to him especially considering that the amount incorporated the land he owns and his house. From this you ascertain that he is money oriented to the degree that it is a priority for him. You may not like the man but please don’t compromise your integrity.

    ………….After all he is behaving no differently to any worldly person whose focus is on money and wealth and who has no understanding of Jesus Christ……………..

    IF you mean that then you obviously do not know the man, how can you say that he is no different from a person who has NO understanding of Jesus Christ………..

    I accept these are your views on the man and you are entitled to them, but I can’t read your ramblings any more, it is starting to bring me down to your low level and I don’t like it there.

    As far as you are concerned I just dusted the dirt from my feet.

  26. Still seeking, even though you know where it is.

    THANK YOU………………..

    Finally someone said it.

    So, the affair provided the escape route for many/ most of the congregation who was looking /waiting / hoping for a way of distancing themselves from the Bishop.

    WHY DIDNT THEY JUST LEAVE ??????????????????????????????? They all knew where the lake was.

    I accept that everyone has their own views on different people /place/options and ideas, I have never witnessed anything but help and good will from the Bishop, so it really gets to me when people jump on him.

    I will never tire from defending him, but I am tired of going over and over again and again. So I am outta here, I will read it and I will go again if you bring up something new that I may feel is unfair.

    I so no point in continuing when no one will answer or even talk about what happened at the tribunal, I am sure those less bias would see what I see, not that it matters until the decision is made, let’s hope it’s soon to stop all this bickering and demoralising crap.

  27. SBS, I agree with SeekTheKingdom that you have probably never actually experienced life with MR as your pastor. He has another side to him and it is not nice.
    You say about the church getting smaller, well that is hardly surprising. When Michael left people wanted to see massive change. But as time as gone on many have questioned what they accepted as right. Many have left the church saying they no longer know what Christianity is, for others the place just holds so many bad memories.
    You state that MR now has had to get a new building, he is preaching at a sports centre and does not have a building. As for growth, I know people who have been approached by Michael’s followers to go to his new church. The fact is that very few have followed MR to hear him preach.
    Now we get to the comments about who paid for the church in Brentwood. I did not mention Michael selling insurance, you brought that up. The truth is that others paid for the church. I have it on good authority that the house that MR started the church in was bought by someone else. Now if that was a present then it was Michael’s to do what he wished with and that includes selling it and keeping the money if he so wants to. However if that was a loan then he did not put any money into the church. But what about the other people who gave their money for the buildings? Should they not also be part owners, or are you suggesting that they gave the money to Michael and not to the church?
    I can assure you the money I gave was to pay for a church not for Michael to keep.
    Also don’t forget that Michael and Ruth lived rent free in Testimony House. They also had a very generous income from the church. I have not heard of other pastors getting as much as he did. But at the same time MR did not practice charity.
    The office of a Bishop is very clearly described in the bible. Michael did not fulfil this list.
    1 Timothy 3
    1This is a true saying, if a man desire the office of a bishop, he desireth a good work.
    2A bishop then must be blameless, the husband of one wife, vigilant, sober, of good behaviour, given to hospitality, apt to teach;
    3Not given to wine, no striker, not greedy of filthy lucre; but patient, not a brawler, not covetous;
    SBS I think you are seeing what you want to see in Michael. As for bitterness and not forgiving, you could not be more wrong. IT is the accusation that Michael has used about anyone who did not agree with him. In my experience everyone who had left the church who I was told was bitter and unforgiving was quite the opposite.

  28. SBS asked
    IF you mean that then you obviously do not know the man, how can you say that he is no different from a person who has NO understanding of Jesus Christ………

    The answer is pretty obvious to most people. I am surprised that you cannot, at the very least, appreciate how the behaviour of reid allows other people to see him in a bad light!
    ……………………………
    Luke 12
    16And he spake a parable unto them, saying, The ground of a certain rich man brought forth plentifully:
    17And he thought within himself, saying, What shall I do, because I have no room where to bestow my fruits?
    18And he said, This will I do: I will pull down my barns, and build greater; and there will I bestow all my fruits and my goods.
    19And I will say to my soul, Soul, thou hast much goods laid up for many years; take thine ease, eat, drink, and be merry.
    22And he said unto his disciples, Therefore I say unto you, Take no thought for your life, what ye shall eat; neither for the body, what ye shall put on.
    23The life is more than meat, and the body is more than raiment.
    ………………………………..
    SBS, you have to admit that reid ‘s focus on peniel and his determination to get the land and property back is the wrong attitude for a Christian, let alone a minister!
    After all, IF God had wanted him to keep peniel, then why was he forced out from there? Since God allowed this then is reid fighting against God’s will in trying to get back?
    If God wants him back in peniel, then reid should leave it to God to reinstate him.
    reid should be concerned that he is fighting God’s will in this matter.

  29. I said……………….

    Bishop’s ministry is again booming to the degree that a new building was obtained recently to house the church as the house was again too small to accommodate its members.

    I said ……. obtained…….. NOT BOUGHT.

    you pick up on the tiniest detail, and leave the incriminating embarrassing questions that I ask.

    What a waste of time it is to be here.

    I think I have said my part, listening to you makes me so bias against those at Penile, whereas before I was just bias for the Bishop.

    Quoting scriptures don’t get it for me, we all know how to read the bible and I KNOW for a fact that you would NOT get into a scripture ring with the Bishop so get behind me, and stay there.

  30. SBS thanks for the good laugh. By the way you may like to look up how to spell Peniel, or are you being vulgar on purpose?

  31. I would have no problem in a ‘Scripture ring’ with reid.There seem to be so many things that he does not really understand about Christianity.
    It would be interesting to compare Scripture to the way he chooses to behave!

    SBS, you seem to have a lot of faith in reid. Unfortunately that won’t get you too far. You need Jesus and reid has no influence over Him.
    Please make sure that you really are following the right person!

  32. and OFF is spelt with 2 “F”‘s.

    Here is one for you.

    Exod.20

    1. [16] Thou shalt not bear false witness against thy neighbour.

  33. There is a difference, I was picking a relevant Scripture for people who focus on worldly possessions.
    I am not at all surprised that you quote an Old Testament Scripture. It is so much easier to manipulate people with OT Scriptures.
    Most cult like groups control their people through Scriptures from the Old Testament. It is so much easier to condemn people rather than to lift them up and give hope!
    The focus for any Christian is Jesus Christ. When I see people who claim to be Christians but who are focused on worldly things then I know that there is a fair chance that they are not born again (yet).
    I don’t care if you don’t like this because I am not going to pretend.
    I don’t see reid as a Christian simply because of his behaviour over the years and what I have seen of him and what other people, whom I trust, are telling me about him.
    The fact that he knows the Bible well is NOT proof of being a Christian. The devil knows the Scriptures better than all of us!
    Now I see how reid is reacting to the current situation and it confirms everything that I believe about him!

  34. Luke.6

    1. [37] Judge not, and ye shall not be judged: condemn not, and ye shall not be condemned: forgive, and ye shall be forgiven:

  35. Matt.7

    1. [5] Thou hypocrite, first cast out the beam out of thine own eye; and then shalt thou see clearly to cast out the mote out of thy brother’s eye.

  36. SBS you have just shown people what little understanding of the Scriptures you actually have!
    You have taken these Scriptures completely out of context.
    Are you really still living in the Old Testament?
    Are you trying to earn your salvation?
    Do you know what new birth is?

  37. Apt tho eh ?

  38. “Quoting scriptures don’t get it for me, we all know how to read the bible and I KNOW for a fact that you would NOT get into a scripture ring with the Bishop so get behind me, and stay there.”

    I would ‘get into the scripture ring’ with Michael, the man you believe knows his scripture so well. The same man who used as his defence in a employment tribunal hearing that he did not realise a minister could not have more than one wife.

  39. This man was a policeman for many years, and you expect us to believe he said that he didn’t know about marital law?

    You quote from the hearing, but you ignore me when I ask about how the church representative lied, and altered legal papers.

    I assume it is because you can’t say it didn’t happen.

    I have no time for one sided discussions.

    I get complaints for using the old testament, so I give two from the new, I am then accuses of not knowing what I am talking about.

    I chose those specifically because they (a) are probably the most well known, so there is no way you didn’t know that you were doing was wrong, and (b) they tell you exactly NOT to do what you have all done in this thread.

    Whatever I say you will have cause to complain about, it is typical loser behaviour.

    Get on with it, I have made my point and those that have read it now know that what has been written / stated by yourselves is not necessarily the truth.

    Finally……… Therefore now there is only one commandment, is it…………….

    (1) Lie whenever it suits.
    (2) Love one another

    Or is that said out of context too ?

  40. SBS,
    I have heard the accusation that someone altered the papers. If that is true then they should be held to account for it. Legal documents should be true and accurate. I would agree with you that altering legal documents to mislead others is wrong.
    Lying is also wrong whether in a court of law or anywhere.

    That brings up the point that by your own admission Michael lied in church. He told people his family were perfect, yet you said one child was not. If that was true then he should not have claimed a perfect family. I read your comment about how he could hardly say that one child had problems, but why not? Either not say anything about family or admit to problems. Saying they are perfect when you believe that to not be true is a lie.

    The defence that Michael used was that he did not realise that the bible said he should only have one wife. Shows how much he knows. After all he called himself a Bishop and did not keep to the ideal of how a Bishop should behave.

    As for commandments we both know that we are called to love one another. So if Michael told many people how much he hated certain members of his church would that not make him wrong?

    By the way what is your view on the two other women who claimedat the tribunal, to have had affairs with Michael?

    Also I am intrigued by how Michael could say that he had resigned from leadership at the church because of the affair and yet he later instigated an industrial tribunal for unfair dismissal.

  41. Remembering that I have stated many times that what I write is what my views are, I have not been instructed by anyone, I also said that I cannot speak for the Bishop, and A.F.A.I.R. I have not.

    So when I said, How could he say that he had 2 perfect Children, it was an acceptance on my part for understanding why he said it, You sir are a bad man to bring this up.

    What would you have said ? (dont answer that, I suspect I know the asnswe).

    I have no knowledge of “other women” who “claim” to have affairs with the Bishop, would you care to name names and elaborate? Might I suggest these are yet more allegations without substance?

    You say you are “intrigued”, I would say……….obsessed.

  42. … I have no knowledge of “other women” who “claim” to have affairs with the Bishop, would you care to name names and elaborate? Might I suggest these are yet more allegations without substance? ….
    Try the ones who spoke up at the tribunal!!!!!!
    SBS, you seem very ignorant about reid, except of course for all the detailed information you have for his defence!!
    If you do know so little about reid why are you so involved in defending him? After all we we may be right and you may be wrong!
    And if course if you really do NOT know very much about him, then it must be very easy to believe what a wonderful person he really is!
    Have you noticed that it is those who have known him for many years who are the most vociferous AGAINST him! Perhaps we know a lot more than you do!

  43. I have no knowledge of “other women” who “claim” to have affairs with the Bishop, would you care to name names and elaborate? Might I suggest these are yet more allegations without substance? ….

    I meant to add that IF you know reid that well, then just ask him about the other women. He was there at the tribunal!
    I don’t accept that you know very much about reid at all from some of what you are saying!
    (If you do find out just remember that they cannot be named for legal reasons!)

  44. When the people in peniel put a lot of money into buying Brizes Park, I would have thought that every single one of them believed that the property would be owned by the church.
    And the church was, and still is, a charity. Therefore NONE of the money was being given to reid personally.
    Brizes was, as I understand it, set up as a separate charity in order to separate the church from the school. I understand that recently they have been combined as a single charity
    All the money for buying Brizes, nearly one million pounds was donated (I don’t know the exact figure), belongs to the charity and not to any individual person.
    The same applies for EVERY donation given to the church or the school.
    Any donation given to reid on a personal basis obviously belongs to him, but that would always be clear to the person donating.
    I fail to see how anyone could claim that the church or the school (Brizes park) could belong to them!!
    reid has had a good salary and a good house to live in over the years. Is that not enough for him?
    If there is any doubt about the ownership of the school or the church then it might be necessary for the Charities Commission to intervene!

  45. Those of you who don;t accept that reid has done anything wrong, for example, even questioning whether he has had affairs, the following link could be useful
    http://www.courtnewsuk.co.uk/online_archive/?name=reid&place=brentwood&courts=0

  46. […] mega-church run by a man with political views much like those of Hargreaves (this was the since-disgraced Michael Reid, now known to tabloid readers as the “Bonking Bishop of […]

  47. It would seem that michael reid has LOST his employment tribunal claim ‘on all points’ .
    I understand that the story will be carried in our local paper this week.

    Another interesting event is the forthcoming publication of a book by a former member of peniel.

    The book will be available from Amazon. The (proposed) headline seems to give away the content –

    For the Love of My Children: The True Story of One Woman’s Struggle to Escape a Brutal British Cult

  48. “It would seem that michael reid has LOST his employment tribunal claim ‘on all points’ .”

    Really,???????????? “ALL POINTS” ?

    This is interesting, The bishop is in Cameroon so I have not spoken to him recently.

    If this is true then it would appear you were right……….

    I cannot wait to read it.

  49. Hi SBS, No I am not sure which is why I phrased it as ‘it would seem…’. These precise words have come from several sources.
    I too am waiting to read the full judgement, hopefully tomorrow (monday)
    We should all be able to read it in the newspaper on wednesday.
    Good to see you are still around.

  50. And this is what I have been saying all along.

    He said – she said – he siad becomes the honest truth…………

    Still you have a 50% chance of it being right. :-)

  51. no SBS, not quite rumour mongering! I had a reliable source with this story during the week. I waited for confirmation but this was slow to come.
    several people confirmed it to me today but I would still prefer an official source.
    I have to ask you why you don’t believe that ANY of what has gone on over the years is reids fault?
    In your position I would be more concerned with the veracity of what has been said about reid, than the motives of the many people who oppose him!

  52. You just don’t get it do you…………..

    The inconsistencies in your post drive me insane, and I really cannot be Rrrrr’d with your biased further.

    You wrote………

    …………….No I am not sure which is why I phrased it as ‘it would seem………….’.
    I then call it “hearsay” and you jump to the defence..

    …………..no SBS, not quite rumour mongering……………

    WITHOUT PROOF / PHYSICAL EVEDENCE IT IS HEARSAY. Doh.

    Then you ask.

    …………… I have to ask you why you don’t believe that ANY of what has gone on over the years is reids fault?……………

    You even emphasize the word “ANY”

    When I have stated many times that he was at fault regarding the affair.

    What a waste of time it is trying to converse with you.

  53. So that is one thing only then?
    Wasn’t that one long-term affair, that you acknowledge is wrong, enough to show the bankruptcy of reid’s claims to be a Christian minister?
    It was not a one-off event, it was over a long period of time and other women have since come forward also owning up to having affairs with reid.
    It is not that commendable to acknowledge error ONLY when it has become public knowledge. What hypocrisy to campaign loudly in London, and to be on tv and radio with a message of family and Christian standards, when all the time he knew that he was having an affair! He didn’t own up to it UNTIL it was public knowledge.
    What would it take for you to recognise that reid has all by himself destroyed any credibility to be a Christian minister?
    Your focus on reid should be a focus on Christ.

  54. Sorry SBS, your faith in reid takes another staggering blow.
    The Daily Express is running the story of reid losing his tribunal for unfair dismissal. The other newspapers will no doubt follow.

    Quote:
    The shamed preacher of the Peniel Church in Brentwood, Essex, had affairs with three women connected to the church.

    Quote:
    The minister also confessed to a 13-year “sexual relationship” with a Ms X but later denied it, an east London employment tribunal was told. A third anonymous woman revealed further sexual allegations.

    Quote:
    Tribunal chairman Michael Haynes described the bishop as “forceful” and “abrasive” as he refused the claim saying his behaviour was utterly contrary to his church’s teachings.

    SBS, if you really are interested in Christ and Christianity, then it surely is time to give up on reid and find another church!!!
    There has to come a time when you put Christ BEFORE any man (or woman). I hope that it is now!

  55. I am surprised at the comments by SBS who seems to believe that Reid was involved in only 1 affair. According to the papers he had 3 affairs as 3 women have already come forward.

    I wonder how many more there are really.

    I am also surprised that you say Reid was a policeman FOR MANY YEARS – is this true? I have heard from very reliable sources that this is not so and that his police service was very short.

    Still I am sure it will all come out when the next criminal trial is held as I am sure a lot of the information that people have been fed with over the years are just fantasies of Mr Reid

  56. SBS has made accusation on here about how the church lied at the tribunal. The article in the local paper does not agree with this in fact it says “Lawyer John Stamper for the church said after the verdict: “The Bishop’s veracity was clearly doubted by the tribunal.

    “His arguments from day one were just totally unsupportable.”
    I am sure that SBS will say well that was the church’s lawyer, but my experience of Michael does not agree with SBS’s.
    For those who wish to read the article http://www.thisistotalessex.co.uk/gazette/BRENTWOOD-Sinning-Bishop-Reid-lost-unfair-dismissal-case/article-1861365-detail/article.html

    I had wondered why the media was reporting that Michael admitted a 13 year affair with a second woman which he later denied. This article clears that up.

    How can anyone accept this man as a Christian minister when he has admitted two affairs and then later denied one of them?

    So much for the prophecy by Apostle W that Michael would be back in Peniel by Christmas. According to this article Michael and Ruth will be leaving Brentwood very soon.

  57. I have been thinking about why people, such as SBS who has posted on here, so support leaders, such as reid, come rain, snow, tempest etc!!
    At what point do they realise that their ‘christian’ faith is actually in a man(/woman) instead of in Jesus Christ?
    In general terms, how can any Christian put such faith in a person, especially someone like reid who has behaved so badly over the years?
    If someone steals from you, then you will have trouble trusting them again.
    But if someone who calls themselves a Christian minister behaves over the years in ways that are clearly not in the nature of a Christian, then how can anyone trust them again either?
    reid’s behaviour as a Christian, let alone a Christian minister, has been disgraceful.
    Of course we should support fellow Christians who make mistakes, fall into bad ways, or behave badly. But no one can be helped unless they want to be helped!
    reid has shown no sign of repentance that I am aware of, and his aggressive behaviour of suing and taking court action would indicate that he has no intention of repenting!
    reids choice of actions has actually made the situation for himself much worse than if he had admitted his faults and quietly left the scene and concentrated on his relationship with Christ.
    But I would go one step further when referring to those who still support reid as a christian minister, and that is to ask them to think seriously whether they are following Christ or a fallible man?

  58. There has been a lot of speculation about my beliefs and thoughts and even my faith and integrity.
    You wonder why I still follow the Bishop and why I defend him, or rather have done up to date.
    I don’t feel as if I should have to qualify my faith to any man, believe what you will.
    The reason why I have defended the Bishop is because I do not judge, I do not think it is my place to condemn any man irrespective of their faults and reported indiscretions, I have the greatest respect for the Bishop I consider him a friend and I do not turn my back on my friends, and I have to say that I think very little of people who dump their friends when they are in need of a friend.
    All “statements” I have made were from information given to me by the Bishop except for the amount of time he was in the police force, I assumed he was in the force for “many years” as I have known for many years that he was in the force, I apologize for making assumptions regarding that point.
    I had no knowledge of “other women” other than what has been written here and I think it fair to say that I would have been a fool to believe everything that was posted here by biased individuals, so I cannot be blamed for being sceptical on these matters.
    It would appear that I was not fully informed regarding the problems at the church, the arbitration and the affairs. The report in the paper was indeed an awakening and I now unreservedly apologize for doubting / refusing to believe SOME of what you have been saying.
    With this said……….. I still have a great respect for the Bishop regardless of the history, but that’s because I am the person I am. The Bishop is back in the country tomorrow, I will speak to him over the next few days, hopefully I will then obtain a better understanding of what has happened. I have no doubt that the allegations concerning the rape will end in nothing but complete exoneration for the bishop.
    I have no wish to participate in any further discussion concerning the church, the arbitration nor the history. I will of course be anxiously waiting the May date, I am sure we will talk again at that time.

  59. I do not knoww how anyone like SBS can now say that he has his eyes open about the revelations in court about the various affairs that Reid conducted.
    The court made reference to the fact that Reid doe snot tell the truth and that his standards of behaviour fall well below those expected of someone ‘in his position’.
    To say that you are sure that he will be exonerated over the rape allegations are astonishing.
    Obviously by speaking with Mr Reid you will get the same rubbish from him that he has been feeding you up until now and os I am surprised that you think any differently.
    You say you stand by your friends and that is great but Reid never stands by anyone else but himself and will dump anyone else if that is expedient for him
    I’m sorry that even after all that has been said and now proved you cannot see that your support of him should be evry limited

  60. SBS
    Your stated position is untenable in terms of a Christian leader and a follower of that person.
    Of course simply as a friend you are standing by reid.
    You must not forget that many of the people posting here, and whose views you totally disregard, have been in EXACTLY the same position as you are now.
    We have BEEN supporters, we have ALSO treated with contempt those people who opposed reid.
    We have also thought that reid was the ONLY proper Christian leader and that peniel was the ‘place to be’.
    I understand the position you are in because I have been there (although I was luckier than many because I was never a friend to him!!).
    It was simply ignorance on my part about the Christian religion and the relationship between a Christian and Jesus Christ that allowed me to support reid.
    reid made most people in peniel believe that they needed him to be a ‘proper’ Christian!
    It is when one puts Jesus Christ FIRST that the realisation comes that peniel was NOT a proper Christian church. reid controlled people and most of them did not realise it!!
    You will, i hope, come to the point one day where you will KNOW in your heart that reid is wrong. You can still be his friend (if he allows it!!!) but you will not be able to see him as a Christian leader ever again!

  61. SBS, Thank you for the apology, pity that you then qualified it, but at least it shows you are beginning to have some understanding of what is going on.
    So you have a ‘friend’ who has misled you on certain facts, then you have some strangers who have not misled you at all, but who are saying things about your friend. It is admirable that you are loyal to your friends. Lets hope Michael is as loyal if you ever do anything he does not like.
    Not once have we lied to you, we have kept the truth in all our posts. You, thanks to your friend, have had to admit that you got some bits wrong.
    Even in the tribunal they said that Michael lied and not the church as you kept saying.
    I have had many years of experience of Michael Reid and knowing who Michael is I know he has also had many years experience of Michael R. Sadly I cannot vouch for the others here as I do not know who they are, but they are saying the same things I am.
    Michael is telling the truth about Michael R, he hated Michael. He treated the man badly, and then told untrue stories about Michael when he and his family left. I know I was there.
    I have a lot of friends, not one of them would lie to me, or if they did I would be careful. I accept that you do not want to be disloyal, but how loyal is it for a person to tell you lies and let you take the flack for believing and repeating those lies. Is that the behaviour of a friend?
    I think not!

  62. SBS – as one who has corresponded with you before on these pages – first I thank you for writing of your – can we say – tentative new view of things? – that maybe they really are NOT as you have seen them – or heard them — at least, certain key ones are not… I had wondered what further response you might make – and I thank you for being the man to make one with these admissions.

    May I say it gives me no joy that this has to be so – no “I told you so’s” – no crowing. I am just so saddened by this whole long, long story. I wrote before (though I expect you disbelieved at the time) – that I do – I really do – and have done for years now – pray for him as for a brother, and for a REALITY of help and – true meaning of Godly blessing – in his life (he would be astonished, and almost certainly despise both me and my prayers – but that cannot erase them – nor can it erase my hope that they shall nevertheless be answered… if Michael Reid chooses to let this grace touch him).

    For myself, I have learned – had to learn… (- or die inside…) – a lot, a great deal, about what it means, and the costs involved – to forgive those who trespass against you – who sin against you – who do things to destroy your life… and do it intentionally. SBS – you may have totally disbelieved that I forgive – forgave – have forgiven the man – but it is true. He is my brother…
    However, I have not wanted others to be as damaged as I was: as I wrote before, it is almost certainly true you have never been in contact – or under – this side of his character and actions, this side of his tongue, and I recognised why perhaps it was so hard for you to believe there could be reality in what was the testimony of others. But others have, they really, really have, lived under the things they have said — and sadly, at present I think it is nearly impossible that Michael Reid can possibly recognise just what his offences against people really are, nor how many, nor over how many years. If he focuses on the ‘public exposure’ – he has completely missed what this is all about. And certainly, from others, it is NOT all about money!

    It is – just – possible that this setback MAY cause him to think a bit more – I really do pray so – and not just use his (to me, very real) faith to ‘ward off attacks’, and to then himself go on the attack. With all my heart I pray that he may open himself to humbling his heart – even just a bit – and that in those moments the Spirit might have ‘permission’ to work on his heart, on his character, and truth enter him.

    I firmly believe that: – that the grace of God is so big that He ‘limits Himself’ – voluntarily – to not override the free will of a person that He has created – including His own children – to not force us. I believe He gives us opportunities, applies corrections, disciplines, sends His word — and allows us to refuse it all (- normally to our cost and our loss – as in Israel in the desert (OT) or as in Heb 12v5-11 ‘the discipline of the Lord’…) – ‘no discipline for now is joyful but sorrowful, yet AFTERWARDS, to those that HAVE BEEN TRAINED BY IT, it yields the peaceful fruits of righteousness…Michael Reid may view these things as ‘spiritual opposition’, as even demonically inspired, as being the work of spiteful enemies – as things to overcome, reject, push out of the way by the force of his character — I pray however, that they may be used of God for his good.

    SBS – if you are still there – yours was the last post for a long time before an editing of the blog – where you wrote: “Dates to keep your eyes on. December 23rd will see the bishop exonerated from all accusations regarding inappropriate behaviour; this has been confirmed to me personally by he who knows, and January 5th when his will be done.” I mention it only because, as it didn’t happen, I am suggesting you check out what your source was: – I understood you to mean that ‘God has told me’ – if so, then do be (painfully?) aware that something has not been working out on your discernment or hearing regarding MR – so please, do be more careful on these matters as your relationship continues. If MR was your source – well, something was not working out on MR’s hearing from God… so be aware also that what he tells you may not always be quite like that. He can be very strong, full of conviction, overpowering in force of argument – as you well know.

    If you have a record of my previous posting and look back – do please look underneath the surface of the things you found offensive in my posts – see if you can find there what was really my heart/intention. It was for those hurt/wounded/broken; that there should not be more; for a rebuilding of whatever future Peniel has; for the shame of the public exposure of all this ‘dirty linen’, and of the name of Christ by those supposedly speaking for Him — and — yes – for MR himself to come free from what binds within his character – ie. for his real and true good, as I want that for the true good of others, including yourself – and me too.

    May God help and guide you, SBS (each of us needs that!) – and may you be used of Him with and for MR as your friendship continues – indeed, we do each one need friends, and blessed is the man whose friends speak truth to him – and to whom he also speaks and opens his heart! Only let it be – truth and Godly love, not truth and hate, anger, destruction!
    Should you ever want a more personal communication than on this very public place, I would expect it could be sorted through the blogmaster. I am willing. I really do not want axes to grind – and neither heads chopped off. So destructive. God bless.

    SeekTheKingdom

  63. What hypocrites some of you are.

    You wonder why your statements are not believed, it is because you are all so caught up in this witch hunt that you cannot see how biased you are. You never answered my question about how/why the church representative allegedly lied in the tribunal, and how documents were falsified preferring to keep going on about what a bad man he is. You change almost everything I have said to the point where you are telling me what I am really thinking / lacking /meaning when you don’t even know me, I accept that you may possibly have the right and the knowledge to make assumptions concerning the Bishop but how dare you tell me what I “really mean” I know what I have said, I KNOW what I mean when I say something AND I do not lie. What I have done is relay what I have been told, and now after reading snippets from the tribunal I can see that there is a possibility that I may have been misled /kept in the dark on certain matters. I also said I will speak to the Bishop soon and THEN I hope to have a better understanding of the whole affair.
    Just because I have accepted that I may have been misled / kept in the dark it doesn’t mean I am going to dump the Bishop on your biased BS. I have stated that I was not at the tribunal and here I am being accused of lying when I have explained that everything I have posted is either hearsay from the Reid household or personal knowledge.
    To justify the claim that the church board acted inappropriately you quote the adjudicator when he said he didn’t believe everything the Bishop said, however he said that about the representative didn’t he?

    Because he lost the tribunal regarding his removal from the church that I STILL think was underhand and conceived, you have immediately found him guilty of the rape charges.
    I stated that it was confirmed to me by he who knows that the case will end in exoneration for the Bishop. I also said that the Bishop had to go to the police station on XY date. After re-reading this I can see how you may have thought I meant that the date was the same, in fact I was not told WHEN he would be exonerated just that he would be. Referring to LUKE 1:37 God told me that the case will result in NFA. (no further action) Now, if this isn’t correct THEN you can suggest that I don’t know God or that I should seek the kingdom further, but until then get that log out of your own eye.

    You tell me I have NO understanding of the bible and /or Christianity, (when some of you can’t even spell it) who are you to tell someone what they know or do not know when you do not know the person? you are so twisted, warped regarding your “hatred” for the man that it is eating you from the inside out. You have condemned the man for forcing his beliefs on others and here you are trying / failing to do the very same to me, hypocrites most of you. You have a little go at me because I used a well chosen appropriately placed old testament verse and here you are preaching Hebrews. You have openly admitted that you hate the man, The bishop preached that hatred only hinders the person who is doing the hating. The person you hate doesn’t like you so he don’t care that you hate him because he has already brushed your dust from his feet, and the hatred is preventing you from getting closer to God, so you are a great example of how a Christian should live his life.

    Now the Bishop has lost his tribunal you are all coming out of the woodwork like the worms you are, again making assumption and convincing yourselves that he is guilty of EVERTHING from the apple to global warming. I do understand that your victory has given some of you the balls to post and slag him off, but it doesn’t make it right. You continue stating that I should follow the man, WHY do you do this, is it because you THINK you know my mind and what I am thinking? How hypocritical of you all to presume such nonsense.
    I follow the Bishop because I STILL believe that God is with him and working through him, and because I do consider him a friend. The Bishop may not be my first choice of pastor, but he is my current one and it is only a matter of logistics that dictate this. So you know nothing of me, my thoughts, my beliefs and my preferences, and I would thank you to keep your uneducated practicing trick cycling to yourself.

    When I speak to the Bishop I will consider all that he has to say, I will then ponder on this and decide whether I shall continue to follow him or not, I can say that if I do decide not to continue to be friends with the Reid’s I will not be looking at anyone from this forum or the crumbling remains of Peniel for a replacement. IF (big IF) I do decide to remove myself from the Bishops circle of friends it will be of my own choosing, NOTHING you say here will convince me to do this, so stop wasting your time trying to convince me.

    You say you were “luckier than I “ because you were never friends with him. I rest my case.

    Once I read the article, realising that is wasn’t more of the biased crap that you have posted here, I could see that I may have been misled / kept in the dark somewhat, if you had been more honest and less vengeful in your post you may have been able to come across more convincing and less like someone who HATES, and this may have helped your cause, I am sure other here who were sitting on the fence could easily have been pushed rather than pulled because of your belligerences.
    I then publically offer a conditional apology and you STILL have a go at me, not once have I heard anyone on here say they were wrong, is that because you all think you are right in everything you do?, You make ridiculous explanations as to why the church and school are failing, better to make something up than tell it like it is eh? Do you ALL HATE everyone?, or only those that refuse to be led like sheep to your part of the field?

    You have made a statement here about how you have not lied. You then lie in that statement.

    (Not once have we lied to you, we have kept the truth in all our posts. You, thanks to your friend, have had to admit that you got some bits wrong.)

    I didn’t say that at all, THAT WAS A LIE, what I said was that it would appear that I have been misled. Notice I said appear, I assume you know what the word “appear” means, or did your bias refuse to let you recognise that part.
    I don’t want to play games with you anymore, it is dampening me to the point of despondency to have to read all the BS you write.

    (quote)

    SBS – as one who has corresponded with you before on these pages – first I thank you for writing of your – can we say – tentative new view of things? – that maybe they really are NOT as you have seen them – or heard them — at least, certain key ones are not… I had wondered what further response you might make – and I thank you for being the man to make one with these admissions………………………………

    Well at last some honest words with no bias injected, thank you for that refreshing statement.
    In fact your complete post (including OT) was wonderful to read, the post of someone I would consider a Christian with a forgiving heart not darkened with hatred.

    Thank you for the offer, I would rather not meet you and have the discussion marred with the Bishop, under different circumstances I am sure we could both benefit from fellowship.

    Right then………….

    If you stop telling me what I am thinking, and stop assuming what I am trying to say then I am sure I won’t have to post here again until the charges against the Bishop are either expedited or dropped. There is no requirement or reason to continue to try to convince me of what a bad person he is, I think you know by now that your views on him are in my mind tainted with bias and therefore without true value.

  64. Sorry I forgot to add that I felt uncomfortable hiding behind a initial.

    It has bothered me for some time and I would rather stand up and be counted than hide.

  65. hi steve
    when you speak to reid ask him about the churches in Hawaii and Atlanta, ask him about the shunning policy he enforced on peniel, which resulted in
    families and marriages being broken up. Fancy a christian minister breaking up marriages and families because one of the couple had upset reid and been
    thown out of peniel!!

    There are now hundreds of people from peniel, many go to other churches now,who have come to realise what they were caught up in. Truth is sometimes a
    difficult thing for a person to accept because it means that person is wrong. But many did realise which is why reid could not get back into
    peniel. It wasn’t a plot by the other leaders in peniel!

    I am glad that i was never a friend of reid because it meant that i was able to accept the error in peniel and choose to leave. No hypocrisy there, it
    simply meant that i was not trapped as many others were.

    michael

  66. “You never answered my question about how/why the church representative allegedly lied in the tribunal, and how documents were falsified”

    I said it before and I will repeat it for you Steve, if there were documents falsified then those who did it were wrong.
    I have not heard this accusation from anyone who is not closely supporting MR and would suggest that you make sure you have correct information.
    I do not understand why it was not picked up in the tribunal court?
    Have you got proof of this?
    You must remember when a person who left the church took legal action against the board and MR? We were all told about how the church had won but settled out of court because the lady in question was on legal aid and it was cheaper to settle out of court. I later found out that in fact this lady received a substantial amount of money.
    The reason I mention this is that it was Michael who stood at the front of church and told us untrue facts.
    You do not accept that Michael has a record, one that can be proven, of misrepresenting the facts.
    Take care Steve, and make sure you and your family are safe.
    You are in our prayers, as is Michael (we have been praying for him and his family for years).

  67. Steve what a hate filled post but I suppose if you are closely involved with Mr Reid then it is only to be expected.

    We have found for many years that when anything is said against MR then someone will come along and start attacking those of us who simply tell it like it is.

    I agree with Michael and JR in their comments and can only say that I pray for those souls who have been so damaged by the Reid attitude to Christianity.

    There is no forgiveness in MR and he postures as a victim whilst things seem to be going against him but IF and I say IF things turn in his favour he will again spout his vitriol on anyone and everyone.

    Be careful Steve that you are not being hoodwinked intro doing Mr Reid’s durty work for him and that you are jsut being very useful to him at the moment.

    He will drop you and turn against you when iot suits him

    This man is a charlatan and does not behave like a Christian let alone a Pastor.

  68. There you are.

    It was of course far too good to last.

    It was not “hate filled” it was frustration filled, as I do not hate any one or thing.

    You recommend that I should be careful and here you all are burning with hatred and bitterness, the only thing I should be careful off is letting these sour words get into my heart.

  69. PLEASE Dont attempt to give me ANY more advice, I would much rather be where I am than where you all are.

  70. What a shame that you think we are all burning with hatred nothing is further from the trust as the people I know who post on here about MR are relieved that we have the true God in our lives and it is He that gives us our strength and insight.

    I pray that you also find the one true God and follow him and not the man who purports to be God’s chosen one as he certainly is not that

  71. I know Steve said he was not going to come back, but I cannot help but comment on his post.
    Take care and keep safe, how many times do we sign off with comments like that? Now that Steve has identified himself it meant I knew he had a family so I made an innocuous comment.
    This has been out of context. Sadly this is typical of the paranoia that we see around Michael. I know because I used to be part of ‘his church’.
    Michael used to tell us how the ‘world’ was trying to harm us all. Having moved to the area from a long way away I accepted his comments about local people. schools and churches. Of course this was all untrue and I assume an example of Michael R’s fear of the outside world.
    Steve has talked to some of us before and he has been told everything that we have tried to tell him here. Had I realised who SBS was I would have thought twice about spending time posting comments to him. He did not listen before and he has not listened this time.
    However I was once just like Steve. I would not listen, I thought that what the Bishop told me was true and that everyone else was lying to me. Fortunately I was independent and did not abide by all the rules at the church. I kept contact with my family, I met with people from other churches and I did not cut off contact with friends who did not understand that peniel was the place to be.
    Sadly a lot of the people who side with MR are those who are not actually part of his church. They have seen the polished TB programmes and have not seen all the stuff that had to be cut out and could not be broadcast, and I do not mean goofs like we see on It’l be alright on the night.
    As for the dates that kept being mentioned. May 12th seems to be correct at the moment. The date for MR to answer bail has been changed a number of times, and I assume that it could be changed again.
    We were assured that MR would be back at the church, this has not happened.
    We were assured that MR would win the tribunal, that has not happened.
    We are assured that the rape case will be dropped. Let’s wait and see, I am sure those involved have more information about it than we do.

  72. Sorry typo, for TB please read TV!

  73. SBS, are you really serious about those who are trying to help you being ‘hate filled’? Or is it just a defence mechanism to stop you from realising that we are right?
    reid has done this for years at peniel and elsewhere. Anyone who opposes him is ‘hate-filled’ and ‘against God’.
    You are not special to reid in any way!! He treats everyone who supports him like that and drops them the moment they realise what reid is actually like!!!

  74. MORE LIES……..What I said was…………

    If you stop telling me what I am thinking, and stop assuming what I am trying to say then I am sure I won’t have to post here again.

    AND THIS STILL STANDS.

    Now you are telling me that I am paranoid…..don’t you ever listen??? No wonder it ended like it has. Don’t you have your own lives to work out.

    You write like I am besotted, mesmerized by the Bishop, (more of your own failings I imagine) but I am not, I defend him because this forum was a witch hunt, I would also defend anyone who I feel is being picked on by “hide in the dark” keyboard warrior bullies.

    The reason why I didn’t listen before and still are not listening now is because of the bias you all exude, I said it before, if you had been a little less vehement then maybe you would have come across as genuine people trying to give good advice, instead of that you came across as barbarians chomping at the bit to hang the Bishop. ANYONE would have been a fool to listen to you and believe it all to be true, and regardless of the outcome of the tribunal I still don’t believe everything you say.

    You are doing it again, presuming to once be like me. What a waste of words you are.

  75. Quote
    You write like I am besotted, mesmerized by the Bishop, (more of your own failings I imagine) but I am not, I defend him because this forum was a witch hunt, I would also defend anyone who I feel is being picked on by “hide in the dark” keyboard warrior bullies.

    You are besotted! You are not the first like that! Peniel ran for many YEARS with most people EXACTLY like you with your attitude towards reid.
    They were besotted, and you are exactly the same as they were!! Only you do not, at the moment, have eyes to see!

    Don’t make excuses about the forum, all devil worshippers opposed to the only magnificent christian worrier in the world!!!

    Most of these people have been dominated by reid over the years and they now KNOW the difference between being controlled by reid and being true Christians focused on Christ.

    I would guess that most of the preaching you get is from the OT, because that is all about our failings and that we have to EARN salvation. reid’s websites are certainly like that.

    Christianity is the New Testament, we are saved by grace and not works. The OT is all about works and the PROMISE that is yet to come. As Christians we have a relationship with Jesus Christ and no man or woman is part of that relationship.

    I say again, There are many hundreds of people who have followed ried for many, many years who now know the nature of the man, and who now know what reid is actually like.

    But if you do believe the Bible then the affair that reid acknowledges is enough on it’s own to destroy his credibility as a Bishop. If you don’t believe that then you don’t believe the Bible!!

  76. You are amazing……….
    The Bishop preaches LIFE, the resurrected Christ, not death from the OT, if you knew anything you would know that.

    I wished you could be in my shoes for a few minutes just so you would know just how painful it is for me to read your crap. PLEASE do not refer to me again.

  77. Steve, you avoid every single issue that is raised!
    I tell you that there are hundreds of people who know what reid is like. Many had been with him for many years before they came to realise what was happening.
    Do you answer that? No! Do you not think that ONE person against hundreds may mean that the one person is being totally misled!
    On the wgcdfy website there are over 70 daily devotionals based on OT Scripture and SIX based on NT Scripture.
    But I ask again, hundreds have come to realise what reid is like. Are they all liars?
    Please consider why the hundreds who were in peniel now see reid for what he really is?
    The pain that has resulted has been great. Many people had cut themselves off from family and friends for years because they were outside of peniel. There are a number of people who divorced their spouse because they had chosen to leave peniel. Peniel (reid) enforced shunning of those who left because they did not want those in peniel to discover the bad stuff that was going on! There was a lot of harm done to families as a result.
    There is no way that anyone can run a Christian church like that and be a Christian!!

  78. Steve I’m sorry but the preaching I heard from Reid for 12 years was mostly condemnatory and from the OT

    His attitude thnat he is the only one who should pray for people is verfy much OT thinkjing that the priest is the special one

    yOu say he preached LIFE well I knowe he shouts that word a lot but take it from me when the chips are down and is confronted he does not have ‘the goods’

    I was taken in for many years and yes I admit his attitude that he does not fast and pray but prays fast suited me until God met with me on a level I cannot describe ( if you have not experienced it then you will not understand it)

    I then found the power of prayer and the relationship that we build with God through prayer which takes place in the quiet room and on a one to one basis.

    Thsi is what Reid denied me and many others for years because he knows that if a person has that sort of relationship his posturing becomes superfluous and he cannot deal with that.

  79. […] In 2000, there was a concern over alleged entryism by a neo-Pentecostal church in the Conservative Party in Brentwood and Ongar, prompting Martin Bell to stand as an independent against Eric Pickles. Pickles was able to ride out the controversy, and the church concerned has since been diminished by a sex scandal. […]

  80. […] is more important than academic learning), including an honorary Doctorate of Divinity, and a gay sex scandal (his conservative website Christian Congress for Traditional Values went down almost immediately […]

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *