c3 church, c3 church parramatta, dench, ferguson, gary dench, Ian Treacy, kerri ferguson, letter, nutter, paedophile cover-up, paedophile scandal, paedophilia, pedophile cover-up, pedophile scandal, pedophilia, Phil Pringle, Pringle, scandal, sexual abuse, spiritual abuse, Treacy
C3 SCANDALS OVERVIEW
Phil Pringle and his cohorts continue to refuse to deal with issues that occured in the C3 Parramatta scandal 25 years ago. We are talking about two men that covered up pedophilia in the C3 Church movement.
The two pastors put into C3 leadership that showed lack of pastoral care, wisdom and responsibility in the C3 Penrith scandal are STILL in leadership positions today.
These pastors are Gary Dench and Ian Treacy.
Before reading on, we encourage viewers to read what we have covered on the C3 Penrith scandal so far. In this article we wish to publish an open letter that alleges that Pringle was informed of this sexual misconduct and did nothing about it. Nor did he deal with the C3 pastors in relation to the trials.
C3 Parramatta Scandal (Part 1)
C3 Parramatta Scandal (Part 2) – The cover-up scandal that Pringle refused to deal with…
C3 Parramatta Scandal (Part 3) Sex, Money, Power
C3 Parramatta Scandal (Part 4) Pringle regards pastors “gambling” worse than pastors defending a pedophile?
C3 Parramatta Scandal (Part 5) Phil Pringle’s leadership – an unresolved mess
C3 Parramatta Scandal (Part 6) C3 prophetically manipulating the abused into silence
The C3 god abandoning the C3 pastors victims
Part 6 of this series of articles is an important read. It is important to understand the spiritual binding nature of C3 through their prophetic manipulation. It appeared that God wanted Mrs Ferguson to not “over analyse” her situations and just “let loose” so God could bless her.
Just like most loving and undiscerning Christians at C3, she would have done so willingly. However, when you see pastors at C3 preaching that Jesus died to make you rich and watch them live extravagant lifestyles, their is a false hope kindled in it’s members that they can rise above their difficult circumstances.
So when Kerri Ferguson was prophesied over in 1985, you can imagine what she was feeling when she lost her family, lost her home and lost her church through the collateral damage of the cowardly behaviour of C3 “pastors” Gary Dench, Ian Treacy and C3 Founder, Phil Pringle. Just like other victims caught in the C3 Prosperity and Word of Faith cult, Kerri Ferguson would have felt God had completely deserted her. However, unlike other victims, she decided to deal with the issues head on.
Background to the letter
The sexual abuse of Mrs Ferguson’s son had been disclosed one night after a church service to both C3 “Pastors” Gary Dench and Ian Treacy. These two pastors were then primary witnesses to the crime. Not only did the Pastors fail to report the crime to the police but when they were later approached by the Police to give evidence in the case, “Pastor” Gary Dench refused to co-operate and stated that he would not give evidence on behalf of the Prosecution. Dismayed when the Police informed her that Dench refused to cooperate with the investigation, Mrs Kerri Ferguson then decided to approach the leader of the entire church operation, the Head Pastor and founder of C3 (then operating as Christian City Church) in an attempt to have him direct his Pastors to cooperate in the police investigation.
What you are about to read in this below letter was how they first tried to ignore her and then attempt to discredit her. Their pompous and sanctimonious meanderings would have hurt her deeply. Sadly, this is the typical repeated behaviour we continually see at C3 church when members get abused either financially, sexually or emotionally or spiritually by their church leaders.
This letter from Kerri Ferguson was written to Phil Pringle in 1992. You can tell that this woman was writing in such a way to try and convict Pringle’s conscience to get involved in dealing with this unresolved issue. And just like when Pringle was mailed all the evidence exposing Tom Papania as a fraud (a fraud who Pringle allowed to speak at C3 Church anyway), Pringle did not respond to Mrs Ferguson.
You can read the original letter at the bottom of this article.
Dear Mr. Pringle,
As I discussed with you and Simon McIntyre in 1988, it was then and is still, my fervent belief that the “deacons” of the Church should deal with misbehavior on the part of any of the ministers or other leaders in their number. At that time (after an incredible amount of effort to get to talk to you – I am sure Christ himself was more accessible, despite his schedule) I notified you that you were being given an option – “Either deal with the matter yourself or I would have to go outside the Church to have the matter dealt with “. The latter became necessary.
I refer to the matter of [son’s name] a subject subsequently dealt with by “60 Minutes” and showing Gary Dench and C.C.C. in a most unfavourable light. I hasten to assure you that that opinion was passed in thousands of letters received after the show. Those letters were written in the main, by “Christians” and many from Christian church people of all denominations, including several from your own church applauded our stand.
As you did not have the courtesy to get back to me or to [sons’ name] after talking with Gary Dench in 1988 and since it was necessary for me, once again, to “chase” you to get the result of your investigation into the matter, I was not altogether surprised at your ineptitude in dealing with the matter. You told me that you were powerless to control Gary Dench and that he was a “law unto himself”. It would appear Mr. Pringle, that following the “60 Minutes” story that you had a change of heart about just what power you did or did not have! It’s a sorry day when God has to use the secular media to do what his own people are too lacking in courage and principle to take care of.
It may interest you to know that [son’s name] left your office with the comment “he’ll turn out to be just like all the others” to which I urged him “to give you a chance”. [His] cynicism at so called Christian leaders was vindicated. Despite the “college-boy” smiles and the practiced looks of “concern”, the boy never heard from you again. Under the circumstances, don’t you think some show of Christ’s love would have been appropriate?
Despite admissions by Ian Treacy that he and Gary had indeed behaved as we claimed and despite Dench’s subsequent behaviour (which should have been of concern to the country’s psychiatrists, if not to you) to this day neither [son’s name] nor I have EVER received a request by you to forgive any damage caused or any attempt to reconcile what happened.
By the way, whilst Stephen Dent sat in the “accused”s box whilst on trial. Dench sat at the back of the Court reading TRAVEL BROCHURES!!! The praying was left to others!
AS the months went by in 1988 to now I carefully diarised EVERY incident. In my search for more information for a subsequent project I received some startling information. During a phone call from yourself to Gary Dench (after my visit to your office) I was referred to as “A NUTTER”. Well, Mr. Pringle that is not the opinion of doctors, journalists, counselors or MINISTERS of religion with whom I have worked on my project over the last few years.
What a gallant and courteous way for men of the church to speak about “the widows and orphans”!! May I respectfully suggest to you, Mr. Pringle, that Christ himself would have hardly been pleased at such a label being used to one of his children under the circumstances (or, indeed, any circumstances!)
Other revelations have been passed on to me regarding Mr. Dench’s activities which I, and I’m sure even you must find disturbing. To go on, however, expecting any decent stand from you at this point would, as experience has shown, be a lost cause.
I did do the correct thing in going to you first, Mr. Pringle. You left me no choice but to have the media expose that very dangerous man. Sometimes it requires a great deal of courage to stand by the underdog – “THE NUTTER”! You did not show that courage.
Mr McKeon (another of your colleagues) was first approached by me prior to 1988 with my concerns over Dench. I contacted him again much later in my attempt to have you “heroic” men put the pressure on Gary to support [my son] in court. He accused me of being on a “witch hunt” (a most unusual term, I feel for a Christian pastor!) and refused to criticize “God’s ordained”! (Good grief!!)
He was later to say some most ungentlemanly things to me on the phone and hand up (loudly) in my ear. Mind you, when my husband (a committed Christian) phoned him back to ask him to explain such behaviour he was given a hearing. Yet another example, I assume, of the esteem in which your fine C.C.C. Pastors hold women!!
It seems peculiar to me that in my conversations with several C.C.C. pastors they have claimed to have had God speak to them about issues such as real estate purchases, money ventures, parking spots etc. but none seems to have conversed with God about an issue as important as the peace of mind and trust of His children. It has caused me to wonder, Mr. Pringle, whose voice it is they have heard when God “called” them. You would have a difficult time convincing me that the Christ of the Gospels “chats” to his pastors all day about their real estate, other financial undertakings etc and becomes suddenly silent when one of their number steps out of line. No, Mr. Pringle, not the Jesus in my Bible – in fact He publicly castigated his disciples for putting anything in the way of his “little children coming to Him”.
Thankfully, I was most careful about all my dealings with you and your fellow Churchmen, not trusting any conversation (which may be referred to in the future) to their memory. I now feel vindicated in taking the particular steps I did.
It was shameful that a woman and child showed more courage than you and your colleagues. Perhaps, the weakness of some males in leadership positions in Christendom is the cause of many of the Church’s ills.
I am disappointed (yes, and angry) that my approach to you to seek your assistance was treated with such contempt.
Since you have not asked for forgiveness, I assume you do not need mine. May I most humbly suggest, that in the final judgment you and I will have to give account.