List Of Concerns & Suggestions
The following list of concerns and suggestions
was compiled from various contributions to the KIT
newsletters and from concerns and personal experiences
expressed and discussed at various conference
workshops. It does not pretend to be an exhaustive
compilation but just to serve as a starting point for
further discussion and dialogue.
Concern A) Visiting privileges: Although
guaranteed verbally and IN WRITING by Johann
Christoph Arnold, visitation rights have been denied to
almost all those who read -- or who write letters to -- the
KIT Newsletter. When this is pointed out to the Bruderhof
leadership, their rationale is that "these are family
matters that each family decides individually." However
that is an evasion. All that Johann Christoph has to do is
put a 'spin' on a remark such as "I'll leave it in your
hands as a family to decide what to do about these
relatives of yours that are connected to this horrible
newsletter..."Also, we definitely know that there is no
difference between what an individual or an individual
family decides to do and what Christoph decides --and
the brotherhood 'rubber stamps.' The system is coercive
and monolithic.
Suggestion A) Guarantee and put into practice
open contact for family members and friends, in and out
of the community regardless of religious or political
opinions.
Concern B) So-called "clearances" in the children's
community: In the past, as recently as the 1980s,
children were isolated and interrogated for lengthy
periods of time either over some so-called "impurity"
(such as commenting on two mating animals) or so-called
"sin." Frequently the children did not know why they
were being interrogated or could not even understand
the implied sexual references. A six-year-old girl once
whispered to her friend, "Just tell them that we looked at
each others' bottoms." Children have been removed from
their families and/or their age group for long periods of
time, sometimes for more than a year. Many who grew
up in the Bruderhof suffer from the trauma of these
incidents, even after many years have passed.
In the past, the Bruderhof practiced canings,
thrashings, boxing of ears and switching of girls' bare legs
with willow or mulberry switches. For the most part
these physical abuses were stopped in the 1950s when
the Bruderhof started communities in the USA, but
certain individuals continued aspects of these practices. A
particularly extreme example was the Servant of the
Word at the Deer Spring community in Norfolk,
Connecticut, during the 1970s. He was responsible for the
departure of up to fifteen boys from the communities
because of his tendency to pull them around his office by
the hair and hit them. In one case he actually inflicted
permanent damage. The Bruderhof's emphasis on
"purity" in the children has led to many abuses, both
psychological, sexual, emotional as well as physical. Their
addiction to what has been labeled "worm theology" (the
theory that Man is hopelessly sinful and must die to
his/her own sense of self) has led to many psychological
breakdowns and depressions, especially among the
younger women. The same cluster of symptoms has been
treated so often by the psychiatrists and therapists in the
surrounding towns that it was given the name "The
Society Syndrome."
Suggestion B) Regardless of whether the children
are growing up in a direction that will lead them towards
or away from the life in the community, they should be
treated with respect and consideration, and their
educational opportunities arranged to their own
advantage. No more forced separation of children from
their parents, or isolation or prolonged interrogations.
The psychological abuse of children and young people
must stop.
Concern C) We are concerned about the paranoia
running rampant among the leadership that has infected
the membership as a whole. The Bruderhof seems to be
withdrawing more and more from society-at-large and
from the Christian fellowship in general (including the
Anabaptist groups such as the Society of Friends, the
Mennonites, etc.)An indication of this is that their Elder
Christoph Arnold has armed himself with two handguns,
and owns a permit to carry a concealed weapon. This
gives the lie to the Bruderhof's witness as a pacifist
organization.
Suggestion C) The cult of personality that has
allowed Johann Christoph Arnold to assert total control
over the finances, the minds and the emotions of the
community, and impose the myth of the infallibility of
the Elder, must be exposed and stopped.
Concern D) Children are given college educations
or specialized trainings on a selective basis that include a
caste and class value system. Wealthy relatives on the
outside tend to improve a child's chances to go to college.
For children who leave the community after college,
Bruderhof leaders dun them for repayment of tuition
moneys, threatening them either with a lawsuit or with
loss of visiting privileges to their family until the money
is paid.
Suggestion D) Inasmuch as the Bruderhof is a
wealthy organization judged by any per capita standard,
all the children should be allowed a college education AT
THE EXPENSE OF THE COMMUNITY regardless of whether
they are staying or moving away to live outside
permanently, and regardless of how wealthy their
outside family members are. Because their parents sign
over all their worldly possessions to the Bruderhof, the
Bruderhof stands in loco parentis to their young people.
It is customary in the USA, for parents who are able, to
bear the expense of a child's education.
Concern E) The possibility exists of medication
being used to control the moods of individuals within the
Bruderhof. According to one source, there seems to have
been an increase in the amount of anti-depressants
ordered. In one recent case in Pennsylvania, a member
was brought to a local hospital so overdosed on
prescription drugs that the staff reprimanded the
attending member. There have been other reported cases
of young women seriously overmedicated by the
Bruderhof medical staff.
Suggestion E) Individuals' medical records and
the medical work of in-house specialists should be
reviewed by the outside medical community. For
example, the cancer rate seems very high within the
communities. In one case (Xavie Sender Rhodes), she died
from melanoma ten days after diagnosis. The oncologist
said, "I have never seen a case like hers, even in the
literature!" In times past, the Bruderhof attitude toward
sickness was overly Spartan, and the tendency was to
ignore early symptoms. Even such things as brains
tumors were frequently ignored or misdiagnosed as
"demonic possession."
Concern F) Families who are kicked out or who
re-settle outside do so with minimum assistance from the
community. They have no health insurance. Frequent
cases are reported of individuals being driven to the
Greyhound depot and given $50, or families with eight
children told to apply for Welfare and food stamps.
Suggestion F)People should be financially vested
in the Bruderhof and able to liquidate their stake upon
departure. Their health insurance should be continued
until they have established themselves outside.
Concern G) Upon a person becoming a Novice, all
his or her worldly possessions are taken by the
Bruderhof. If the person decides that the life is not to
their taste, they leave all their possessions behind except
for perhaps a suitcase of clothes and whatever personal
objects they keep in their room. In certain cases, people
were kept just long enough to sign over their property
and then, a few days later, told to leave.
Suggestion G) Novice members' worldly goods
should not be absorbed by the Bruderhof. Instead the
items should be itemized, warehoused, and the cash put
into escrow with the understanding that everything will
be returned to them WITH NO HARD FEELINGS, if for
some reason the Novice decides to withdraw. This is the
practice within many religious orders.
Concern H) In some instances the Bruderhof
grabbed for inheritances against the express wishes of
the deceased. They have harassed family members on the
outside over legacies and trust funds.
Suggestion H) Money-grabbing from individuals
cheapens the Bruderhof, at least in the eyes of those
involved in the distribution of the deceased's possessions.
This habit perhaps is left over from the early, poverty-
stricken period in Paraguay and Germany, but is no
longer necessary.
Concern I) A tendency exists both in the
Bruderhof, the Hutterites and other 'withdrawn' sects to
view property and goods in the "outside world" as tainted
by the devil. With that attitude held firmly in mind,
anything that can be 'liberated' for the Church (and by
implication, for oneself) becomes a minor victory. In the
Bruderhof this attitude carries over to milking the
government bureaucracies for whatever the communities
can get away with: Social Security, Food Stamps,
Medicare, School Lunch Programs, 'cooking' the account
books, etc. etc.)
Suggestion I) HONESTY! All property and all
ethical obligations, both in and out of the communities,
should be fully respected.
Concern J) The German Reparations moneys paid
to individuals in the Bruderhof in the early 1960s to
compensate them for their lack of education, etc. should
be paid to those named on the checks. The German
victims never saw one pfennig of those moneys that
were due to them. Also, it seems that the family who now
owns the original Rhoen Bruderhof in Germany is having
to buy it over again by paying the Bruderhof for the
value of the property (the German government's
somewhat strange way of settling reparations on
property) even though they themselves bought it from
the family who originally bought it from the Nazis as
confiscated property. Does this seem fair to these poor
people? It is not, after all, as if the Bruderhof is a poor
organization. They should let the current owners off the
hook.
Suggestion J) The reparations just should be paid
to whomever they are due. A few names come to mind:
Miriam Arnold Holmes, Elizabeth Bohlken-Zumpe, but
there are many others. If not forthcoming, perhaps the
German government should be asked to investigate?
There is also the specific question of Teika Schonbroodt's
hotel in the North Sea that was appropriated during her
Novitiate and then sold. When she left the Bruderhof, she
and her children were forced to live on the generosity of
friends and public assistance. Since the German
Government paid reparations to the Bruderhof, the
Bruderhof should pay reparations to Teika and her
children.
Concern K) There are many people, women
especially, living very marginal lives outside due to the
emotional damage they suffered in the Bruderhof. These
people should have financial support from the
communities, and enough money to seek out counseling
or psychotherapy. Also there are elderly people who
spent a major portion of their lives in the Bruderhof and
are now having to eke out their final years on tiny
pensions and marginal Social Security checks.
Suggestion K) Requests for financial aid for
special needs such as psychotherapy should be respected.
A fund similar to the XRoads Fund should be established
because there are ex-members living in poverty who
would rather DIE than ask a penny from the Bruderhof.
The fund would allow them to apply for aid and keep
their self-respect.
Concern L) Speaking of Social Security, why does
the Bruderhof place all their elderly folks on SSI? By
some strange technicality, it seems that everyone there
over the age of 65 can receive a monthly check from the
Federal government even though, to our knowledge, the
communities do not pay into Social Security and also have
a per capita income high above the poverty level!
Suggestion L) The fictional accounting methods
by which the elderly people are shown as impoverished
should be exposed and rectified. After all, if they have
spent their entire lives in the community, they should be
financially vested in the community. Also the Bruderhof
should pay Social Security, and thus guarantee that if
someone retires outside the community, there will be
something for them after 65.
Concern M) The Bruderhof keeps extensive
records on any and all ex-members and members. These
include letters of confession that can be used -- and are
used -- to smear or control the individual, sometimes
even brought up many years later. In the outside world
this would be called "blackmail. " Their manipulation and
misuse of confidential data stands in direct contradiction
to the Bruderhof's own insistence that once something is
forgiven someone, it is forever forgotten. One outstanding
example of misuse of the archives was the publication of
ex-Servant of the Word Gwynn Evans' letter of contrition
and confession in "Torches Rekindled" without including
his second letter that withdrew his statements. Also the
recent publication and dissemination of the personal
confessions of members of a Hutterite colony was judged
in extremely poor taste and 'beyond the pale' by many
other Hutterite colonies. It served to confirm them in
their stand against the Bruderhof's attempts to interject
their values and life style into the Old Order Hutterite
colonies.
Suggestion M) Freedom of Access to Information!
The Bruderhof archives should be opened to the
following: members and ex- members who request any or
all records relating to their time in the Bruderhof under
conditions similar to those of the Freedom of Information
Act of the U. S. government; outside physicians who
request access in order to review any or all medical
records.
Concern O) Rumors abound of financial
mismanagement and possible skullduggery, including
money-skimming, private bank accounts, credit cards for
the senior servants, and odd money trails that disappear
over the horizon. Are the books being 'cooked? '
Suggestion O) An accredited and independent
auditing firm should be hired to make an unbiased, full
accounting of the financial status of the communities.
considering Johann Christoph Arnold's involvement in
Jacob Kleinsasser's money manipulations (that resulted in
the loss of 47 million dollars of the Hutterite colonies'
money). This matter is currently under investigation by
Canadian Revenue and the RCMP. Can the IRS and the FBI
be far behind? Anyway, the Bruderhof books should be
open and available for public scrutiny. As a religious
organization, there is no need for secrecy in connection
with any of their financial affairs.
Concern P) The Bruderhof does not allow its
members free access to outside information. Mail is
scanned and carefully watched. In the past it was even
censored by the Servant and in certain cases not
delivered at all.
Suggestion P) Tampering with the mail is a
federal offense, with each case considered a separate
crime.
Concern Q) The Bruderhof system stifles dissent
and does not offer a real opportunity for its members or
their children to make informed decisions. Over the
members' heads hangs the very real threat of expulsion
with nothing to show for many years of faithful service
except a very large family and no credit or work
references. The "No Gossip" rule, known as "The First Law
In Sannerz," protects the leader from any small group
getting together to discuss the leader's failings before
confronting him as a group. Thus each individual must
approach the Servant with his or her own private
accusation and thereby exposing him or herself to the
very real danger of immediate expulsion.
Suggestion Q) Freedom of Expression is basic to a
free society! The "No Gossip" rule must be changed to
allow discussion in small groups of any topic of their own
choosing without endangering their membership. The
inability of the individual to challenge an order of a
superior, in the words of a Canadian appeals court justice,
"turns Hutterites into zombies who can be expelled from
the Church for daring to question the conduct and orders
of the elders. "
Concern R) The 'no personal property' rule
disenfranchises the members just as thoroughly as if they
were in a perpetual state of servitude.
Suggestion R) As mentioned earlier, each
individual must be allotted a vested interest in the
property of the Bruderhof that is negotiable or can be
liquidated upon their decision to leave the community.
Concern S) Women are treated as second-class
citizens. The Bruderhof still remains an orthodox
patriarchy, with the woman's place seen as in the home,
in the kitchen and as the bearer of many children. She is
expected to express herself in meetings through her
husband's voice, keep her head covered in public and not
talk too loudly or laugh too much.
Suggestion S) Orthodox patriarchies, upon closer
inspection, may camouflage a strong matriarchal
hierarchy, but there are no workers for women's rights
who would approve of the manner in which women are
treated in the Bruderhof. Freedom! Equal treatment!
NOW!
Summing Up: The Bruderhof system has trapped
both the rank- and-file members and the leadership in a
stagnant puddle of fear and rigidified power. Power that
is not shared becomes a dictatorship. Power that is not
based on love becomes authoritarian and judgmental.
This is not what Christ taught his friends and followers,
and the hope for the future is that the Bruderhof can find
their way back to their First Love, drop their fears, peek
out from behind the demons of their own making and
discover that the world out here wants them, begs them,
to become their own best dream, the followers of the
Universal Christ (for others the coming Messiah, or the
Avatar Kalki, or the Maitreya Buddha) whose coming
world democracy of cosmic love will embrace everyone
everywhere! PEACE!
Click here to get
back to The
Peregrine Archives Page.