![]() |
| The Christadelphian Office |
Source: Click here
Most people employed within Christadelphian organisations are employed to give practical services to the members and most of these are for their Care Homes. These activities are not ones that are directly involved in preaching and therefore it is not inconsistent with the primary stance of the community.
Many of the other organisations are involved with preaching such as the Bible Mission. Generally they will help with expenses, but they do not directly pay those who preach or do work. It is expected that this should be done voluntarily and without pay.
The anomaly is the Christadelphian Magazine and Publishing Association which has nine staff. It’s an anomaly too because the community now has a number of magazines all of which run without paid staff.
It is interesting that this is where a major Christadelphian fraud did take place and it is also interesting to consider what difference monetising a Christadelphian database has actually made. After all this has been the criticism of having a paid priesthood.
There are potential benefits to the community just as there are with a paid ministry. A paid magazine can identify and work on larger projects than an unpaid one can. It can employ talent volunteers may lack, particularly in technical areas. This isn’t demonstrable however with the CMPA. Its readership in the UK is largely due to the fact that it was the first major magazine to exist and has historically compiled information of baptisms, deaths and other events. Although it often had a co-ordinating and leadership role this has never been official and to a large degree no longer exists today. In practice therefore it is now simply a publishing house.
The main Christadelphian magazine has changed. In presentation terms it now looks like a modern magazine and it has sought to simplify its appeal. Its writers are less accomplished than early Christadelphians and largely rehash accepted positions. In its original days it was more adversarial. It could not be separated from its fierce debates with other churches for instance. It therefore has moved to a more institutionalised position. This may also be why its appeal has diminished. It is no longer moving the community forward or actively countering contemporary threats or spearheading preaching. Its focus is existing, long term Christadelphians and a flashy cover won’t change that.
If it is to move forward then it really has to regain some of its early character and credibly answer the contemporary objections that are found for instance on websites like this one. With huge amounts of new information and perspectives now being widely shared this is a faster moving environment and it would need to address these also on the online mediums as well. It was formed in the nineteenth century when journals and magazines were the principle way to communicate over distances and that has now changed.
More folk today look online and the young folk and potential new recruits will want answers to questions and issues raised online as well as how living is practically affected by the modern world.
It seems that making money to support existing staff and maintain revenues is what the emphasis has turned towards. With a declining readership that is understandable, but that represents a lack of vision and a diminishing of earlier ideals.
For instance it has no links to other sites which would provide free resources to those who are looking for answers. It simply focuses on that which can be sold. A few years ago it provided Elpis Israel in the new edition for free, now it sells it online as an ebook. It provides mainstream Christian materials which can be purchased cheaper online from Amazon. It still sells books from its former disgraced editor including one titled, “The Beauty of Holiness.” If it is to retain a useful purpose to the community the continued employment of staff has to play a secondary role to its earlier principles that the gospel having been freely given should be freely transmitted.
That is acknowledgedly hard for existing staff, but in a large community where the intention is to “love each other as themselves” and they are “members one of another” surely there are ways to help each other through that.
Here is a segment from their statement to the Charity Commission:
Risk management:
The trustees recognise their duty to identify and review risks to which the charity is exposed and to ensure appropriate controls are in place to provide reasonable assurance against fraud and error.
The identified risks in recent years have been
(a) a reducing readership within the Christadelphian community of magazines and books.
(b) extended production times for new publications due to other company activities; and
(c) the holding of large stocks of books and pamphlets which may take many years to sell.
Recognition of these risks has encouraged the trustees
(a) to continue to review the format and contents of the magazines with a view to increasing their appeal;
(b) to examine carefully the publication of new books and re-prints which are most likely to appeal to Christadelphian readers;
(c) to establish and fulfil firm publication dates for new material;
(d) to use appropriate printing methods to limit, without extra unit cost, the number of copies printed in order to provide stocks equivalent to no more than 5 years projected sales;
(e) to diversify into the production and distribution of electronic media, including making available valuable archival material;
(f) to seek ways of increasing the efficiency of production, sales and distribution;
(g) to improve the marketing and ordering facility by means of an effective website that provides a facility for online purchasing and payment by credit card.These are conservative objectives and the Christadelphian community was not formed on the idea of “risk management.” It was about proclaiming the true gospel at personal risk and personal cost. Sure risk from a charity commission perspective means using donated funds wisely, but in a Christadelphian context that means a commitment to truth, principles and veracity of preaching have to come first.

What's happened to Tim Woodall's website christadelphian research in no longer appears on the internet
ReplyDeleteWho are The Christadelphians in the country called "Bangladesh"?
ReplyDeleteScammed for all property in New York, claimed "wife- another Man 's wife!
Christadelphians in Bangladesh are the same as any other country, I would think - people who call themselves Christadelphians, hold the same beliefs, and have fellowship with other Christadelphians around the world. No idea what this has to do with New York.
DeleteAnon, you will have help us with a few more clues as to what you are on about, however if Christadelphians have been involved in property scams/dishonesty and marital infidelity, then where they are from is not relevant, such actions affect both Christadelphians (and everybody else), regardless of their location. Although moral decline now affects Christadelphians so badly, they barely even bother to pretend it doesn't anymore. Some of what they accept as OK amongst themselves even shocks me nowadays, just as an outside observer.
DeleteI thought about responding to that part of the comment, Joseph, and ended up being too lazy to bother. I've probably said it before, but I don't think this is the right forum for specific accusations, particularly against specifically named people. There's no way for me - or any other reader here - to verify those accusations, and similarly nothing we can do about them even if we could verify them.
DeleteBut the reason I answered as I did is that I don't know you can define Christadelphianism as anything other than a package of shared beliefs (and possibly shared practices driven by their beliefs). And as far as I know, just about any kind of fraud or sharp practice would be against official Christadelphian beliefs.
So back when I was a believer I would have responded to individual cases of bad behaviour with "It's the official beliefs that matter, and if people aren't following those beliefs, how can you blame the beliefs or other Christadelphians?" Now I'd probably agree that if most Christadelphians aren't following the beliefs, that could show a problem - but it wasn't my experience. I can't tell you whether that's because I was in a more upright corner of the Christadelphian world or because I was younger and more naive. I haven't had much to do with Christadelphians other than family members in the last decade.
I quit because I find Christadelphian doctrines and beliefs problematic. I certainly hear more stories about individual corruption, abuse, etc. than I did when I was a believer, but I didn't (and I think don't) find its members or organisational structures inherently corrupt.
Jon, I tend yo agree with what you have written in your last paragraph above, that members and organisational structures being not inherently corrupt. I am still in touch with three friends I`ve known for over seventy years. Two are Christadelphians and the third an ex-Christadelphian who joined the Baptists. The two CDs, from separate CD communities, do keep in touch and I get to know what is happening in their respective Cd communities, and the ex-Christadelphian has many Cd friends with whom he keeps in close touch, and he, too, keeps me informed about any "problems", of which these are of the minor and inconsequential type, and nothing which falls into anything which is corrupt. I realise this is far from a representative survey of what might be happening in the wider community but it gives a snapshot of what might be the case overall. No doubt evidence of corruption raises its head from time to time, but is probably not widespread.
Deletehttps://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2025/10/20/asylum-seekers-baptised-in-migrant-hotel-bathtubs
ReplyDeleteI wondered if this would show up here. I think I speak for most Christadelphians when I say they don't associate themselves with Duncan Heaster. Clearly what he is doing here goes against the principles of baptism, at least those taught by the Christadelphians.
DeleteDave, so what do you see as being the main difference between what carelinks are doing, and what (for the want of a better term) "mainstream" Christadelphians are doing?
DeleteTo be honest, 'mainstream' Christadelphians has such a wide spectrum these days, that's difficult to answer. Clearly there are the more liberal side who will baptise quickly and without asking many questions, and the less liberal side who will only baptise following the same kind of 'instruction' a young person might receive prior to baptism. Even then, it's an abused system. Many have been willing to go through this more rigorous process and still disappear once they have right to remain and bring their family over.
DeleteI remember Duncan Heaster and Carelinks being viewed with suspicion when I was in and that was a decade ago. I never knew the full details, but thought one of the concerns was that group being too quick to baptise people who weren't proper believers. As to what represents a Christadelphian "mainstream", I'd have thought having a fairly thorough baptismal interview was a minimum standard, but really don't know for sure.
DeleteFunnily enough, though, the "we need to get baptised in the bath-tub here" reminds me of Philip and the Ethiopian eunuch "See, here is water - what is to prevent me being baptised?" I remember that example being tiptoed round. It was scriptural, so no-one could deny it, but in my experience most people didn't want to accept that quick baptisms were a good thing.
I was baptised over sixty years ago. Despite being third generation in my family to be brought up/indoctrinated by Cd parents, came through Sunday School from five years old right up to what was known as The Preparation class, I still had to have intensive instruction, an examination of some depth, before I was accepted for baptism -- and that was in a fairly liberal-minded Ecclesia.
DeleteDave, Jon didn't publish my previous comment, perhaps it was too inflammatory, or combatively worded. I am OK with that. However it did state more or less what you have stated.
DeleteDuncan Heaster's book, "Bible Basics" was provided to me as part of MY baptismal journey in 1997, and although it has long since gone to recycling, I do recall it being rather compelling, and certainly well thought of in the religion at that time. Did Duncan change, or did the religion change?
Mancott. This is why I think that standards have slipped. I went through the same, despite (or because of) not being born into the belief. It beggars belief that the subjects of the mass baptisms of recent years have been as thoroughly examined as we were, and as such, the suspicion as to why has crept into my thinking. I should say that I don't think about it much though, far less than I think about what I might like for my breakfast, for example.
DeleteJoseph, I remember reading your comment when it came in and would have sworn I published it. Don't know what happened there.
DeleteIt does not make much sense, if neither Duncan nor his associates appear at tribunals, as he claims, then the asylum seeker's case will be very weak. I was baptised honest, with no supporting evidence.
ReplyDeleteBob, very little of the Christadelphian's antics make sense, either those involving illegal migrants or not, genuine Bible students and Christians can wrap them up in knots in minutes, which is why they avoid any contact with such people. Few people believe that Iranians who have paid criminals thousands of dollars to sneak across Europe into the UK, then suddenly find, by chance, that their conversion was false, and that they need to re-convert with the help of Christadelphians, who stalk them in their tax payer funded accomodation, to a "true" Christianity, discovered by a seasick doctor in the 19th century. Most people realise, but don't say out loud, that this is just a price to pay for a fast track to a passport and a family resettlement (funded by the tax payer)scheme. The Christadelphians go along with it because (a) it looks like the right thing to do (b) they are scared of the brethren promoting it and too soft in the head to complain (c) None of the costs associated with it will ever fall upon them to pay.
ReplyDeleteWe are all still waiting to hear of the success stories of these people, successfully integrating into British society, becoming (English)speaking brethren wearing suits on a Sunday, raising Sunday school scholars with their English wives, enjoying good careers and housing in the south, provided by the Christadelphians, at no burden to the state.
Meanwhile we all know the truth. Which is very different to the "Truth".
Amen to that. I remember visiting a function at a CD ecclesia in England, and watching the faces of the newly arrived Third World "converts." Their expressions of boredom, disinterest, annoyance, and contempt were revealing. If the alternative to importing these people is that some ecclesias dwindle and die, then that is the more honorable thing to have happen. To go whoring for these unlikely recruits is undignified and shameful -- and ultimately NOT good for the host countries stuck with them.
ReplyDeleteI noticed the mentions of Carelinks here. Having done some small amount of research, it is my impression Carelinks appears to be a support organization for Christadelphian defectors, but it is, in reality, I believe, a Christadelphian entity attempting, ultimately, to direct defectors back into the fold. The deception is poorly concealed, and defectors hoping to make a final departure from the Christadelphian sect would be well advised to avoid this organization.
ReplyDeleteI don't think so. From their website:
Delete"We're a network of Christian believers world-wide who through careful study of the Bible have come to conclusions that separate us from mainstream Christianity. We believe in salvation by grace; eternal life on earth in the Kingdom of God, to be established by the Lord Jesus Christ at His return; in the Lord Jesus as God's Son, but not "God the Son" or a pre-existent Jesus as taught in the common doctrine of the Trinity, which we reject; in taking full responsibility for our sins, and not blaming any personal Satan figure, whom we find nothing of in the Bible; the Bible being the inspired word of God we find no evidence there nor elsewhere for the existence of an immortal soul, 'hell' as a place of fire and torment etc (rather does 'hell' refer simply to the grave); and we urge people to do as the Bible says and be baptized by full immersion in water. You can read more about us in the "About us" section.
We seek to spread Bible knowledge world-wide, and seek to assist all who wish to be baptized into the saving name of the Lord Jesus. God blesses our work - we baptize a few hundred people each year, seeking to encourage them in turn to develop into independent churches or ecclesias. We also seek to care for our brothers and sisters, both practically and spiritually. This has involved us in producing and distributing literature in over 55 languages; holding online breaking of bread meetings; seeking to care for those who are the victims of Islamic and other persecution because of their Christian faith; counselling alcoholics; and generally sharing God's grace and truth, both practically and doctrinally, to all the world. He is offering eternal life - and we wish to share that with everyone, and to follow through on the joys and responsibilities which come from having this wonderful hope."
That reads much as I remembered hearing about it as a believer - a largely Christadelphian group with Christadelphian teachings though not using the name "Christadelphian" (and, as I mentioned, they were viewed with suspicion by many Christadelphians). Proud of their baptism count, and like I said that led to the concern that they were baptising people who weren't ready for it.
Jon, I don't wish to contradict, but 28 years ago, Duncan Heaster was not considered to be "outside" of Christadelphianism, rather he and his writings were very much part of it and promotional of it, hence the reason that I had a copy of his book, "Bible Basics", although I am 99% sure that at the time it was called "Bible basics for believers", I have been unable to confirm that this is the case though, and destroyed my copy at least 15 years ago.
DeleteBeing proud of baptismal count is not confined to Carelinks, if you go and look at the annual reports at the charity commission in the UK, you will see that most, if not all, of those Ecclesias with sufficient turnover, numerically report such data, specifically relating to asylum seekers (look up just Watford and Cambridge if you are short of time or inclination).They are not legally required to, but are PROUD to do so. Having Iranians who paid people smugglers thousands of dollars on the books now seems to be a bit of a badge of honor for UK Eccelesias.
Joseph
Delete"Bible Basics for Believers" and "Bible Basics a Study Manual", both by Duncan Heaster, are currently available on Ebay.
Joseph, I'm sure you're right 28 years ago. I was talking about my impressions from 10 - 15 years ago. Bible Basics was still being used in some of the mission areas, but my understanding was that the author was viewed less favourably. I can't tell you what the situation is now, and my impressions may have been wrong even then, but Dave's comment seems to match it.
DeleteLeaving that aside, the main point to me is that Carelinks seems to all intents and purposes to be a Christadelphian organisation (in both official beliefs and in conversion activity), whether or not they use the word, and whether or not other Christadelphian organisations and ecclesias are happy with it. Maybe they're a bit more hasty with baptisms, maybe they're not - that's what I've heard, but I don't know.
As for making a big deal of numbers, I'm sure it's not just Carelinks. When I was involved with mission work it was a big deal there too - how can you encourage people to donate to support the work if you can't point to measurable results? Baptisms made good measurable results and potentially heart-warming stories for the Bible Missionary magazine.
That said, I would say when I was involved in mission work converts went through both pre-baptismal instruction and a fairly standard baptismal interview before they were baptised. Their ecclesias weren't the same as, say, Australian ecclesias, and that was by design (I'm sure I've quoted before that the ACBM fieldworker guide said something like "It is not your job to make their ecclesias into an outpost of Australia - in some things they may work quite differently").
I don't have any inside information on the Christadelphian Iranian refugee situation. It isn't like anything I experienced as a Christadelphian. But I don't think expecting them to turn into traditional UK Christadelphian mini-mes is a realistic or sensible expectation no matter how genuine their belief may be.
BTW, I found what Samantha might be referring to: https://carelinks.net/doc/exca If so, I would say the target audience is people who leave / are thrown out of the central Christadelphian community but still hold the beliefs. That doesn't include me, and I'm not sure it includes many ex-Christadelphians I know, but maybe it would be helpful to those. Don't know.
DeleteIt does indeed appear that "Carelinks" is intended to shepherd Christadelphians who are out of fellowship, but have retained Christadelphian beliefs. The ultimate goal, however, somewhat transparently, appears to be to nurture defectors until they shuffle back into the flock. Carelinks assumes the appearance of offering defectors assistance, when drawing defectors back into the cult is actually no assistance at all. In this regard, the organization is also achieving "dissent management," minimizing the extent to which CDism's dirty laundry gets into public view.
Delete