Dear Paul Rimmer,
I was devastated to read the letter that you posted on Facebook this morning. Every week we welcome thousands of people to services in King’s Chapel and we do our best to meet all their various needs and expectations. Sometimes we fail and I realise that we especially failed you and Tristan on Sunday afternoon. I apologise for that most sincerely.
Since hearing of your experience I have looked into what happened and now more fully appreciate that that there is more that we can do to support and help the staff who are responsible for the welcome that we give those who come to share our services with us. This is one of the reasons that I have written to you asking if you might be prepared to meet with me. I’m sure that your insights and connections could help us do better in the future. I should perhaps say for the record that I did not, in fact, give any instruction to the effect that your son should be asked to leave the Chapel on Sunday. Nonetheless as Dean I do take responsibility for the whole life of the Chapel and in that regard I express my unreserved apology and intention that we will do better in the future.
Yours sincerely,
Stephen Cherry
[…] Cherry issued an apology on his blog the same day Rimmer shared the letter. The chapel dean said he “failed [Rimmer] and Tristan” at the service but denied that he personally called for the family’s removal. […]
LikeLike
[…] Cherry issued an apology on his blog the same day Rimmer shared the letter. The chapel dean said he “failed [Rimmer] and Tristan” at the service but denied that he personally called for the family’s removal. […]
LikeLike
[…] Cherry issued an apology on his blog the same day Rimmer shared the letter. The chapel dean said he “failed [Rimmer] and Tristan” at the service but denied that he personally called for the family’s removal. […]
LikeLike
[…] Cherry issued an apology on his blog the same day Rimmer shared the letter. The chapel dean said he “failed [Rimmer] and Tristan” at the service but denied that he personally called for the family’s removal. […]
LikeLike
[…] Cherry issued an apology on his blog the same day Rimmer shared the letter. The chapel dean said he “failed [Rimmer] and Tristan” at the service but denied that he personally called for the family’s removal. […]
LikeLike
[…] Monday, Dr. Cherry apologized to Mr. Rimmer on Facebook and on his personal blog. He denied that he had given any instructions to expel the family and said he had been […]
LikeLike
[…] Monday, Dr. Cherry apologized to Mr. Rimmer on Facebook and on his personal blog. He denied that he had given any instructions to expel the family and said he had been […]
LikeLike
I think your handling of this situation has been exemplary! Any of us in congregational ministry know what it’s like to have a volunteer say or do the wrong thing. But this situation illustrates the dangers of social media shaming. Here in Canada, within 24 hours I’d seen the original complaint 6 times from 6 different sources. I saw your reply only once. The complaint went viral; your excellent reply did not. Hopefully people can learn a lesson from this about dealing with their complaints in person before taking them to social media. Grace to you.
LikeLiked by 2 people
[…] Monday, Dr. Cherry apologized to Mr. Rimmer on Facebook and on his personal blog. He denied that he had given any instructions to expel the family and said he had been […]
LikeLike
[…] Monday, Dr. Cherry apologized to Mr. Rimmer on Facebook and on his personal blog. He denied that he had given any instructions to expel the family and said he had been […]
LikeLike
[…] Monday, Dr. Cherry apologized to Mr. Rimmer on Facebook and on his personal blog. He denied that he had given any instructions to expel the family and said he had been […]
LikeLike
[…] Monday, Dr. Cherry apologized to Mr. Rimmer on Facebook and on his personal blog. He denied that he had given any instructions to expel the family and said he had been […]
LikeLike
[…] Monday, Dr. Cherry apologized to Mr. Rimmer on Facebook and on his personal blog. He denied that he had given any instructions to expel the family and said he had been […]
LikeLike
[…] måndag ber om ursäkt till Dr. Rimmer på Facebook och på sin personliga blogg. Han förnekade att han hade givit några instruktioner för att utvisa familjen och sa att han […]
LikeLike
[…] Monday, Dr. Cherry apologized to Mr. Rimmer on Facebook and on his personal blog. He denied that he had given any instructions to expel the family and said he had been […]
LikeLike
[…] Monday, Dr. Cherry apologized to Mr. Rimmer on Facebook and on his personal blog. He denied that he had given any instructions to expel the family and said he had been […]
LikeLike
[…] a présenté ses excuses à M. Rimmer sur Facebook tard lundi soir. sur son blog personnel. Il a nié avoir donné des instructions pour expulser la famille et a déclaré qu'il avait […]
LikeLike
[…] Monday, Dr. Cherry apologized to Mr. Rimmer on Facebook and on his personal blog. He denied that he had given any instructions to expel the family and said he had been […]
LikeLike
[…] Monday, Dr. Cherry apologized to Mr. Rimmer on Facebook and on his personal blog. He denied that he had given any instructions to expel the family and said he had been […]
LikeLike
[…] Monday, Dr. Cherry apologized to Mr. Rimmer on Facebook and on his personal blog. He denied that he had given any instructions to expel the family and said he had been […]
LikeLike
[…] Monday, Dr. Cherry apologized to Mr. Rimmer on Facebook and on his personal blog. He denied that he had given any instructions to expel the family and said he had been […]
LikeLike
[…] Monday, Dr. Cherry apologized to Mr. Rimmer on Facebook and on his personal blog. He denied that he had given any instructions to expel the family and said he had been […]
LikeLike
[…] Monday, Dr. Cherry apologized to Mr. Rimmer on Facebook and on his personal blog. He denied that he had given any instructions to expel the family and said he had been […]
LikeLike
[…] Monday, Dr. Cherry apologized to Mr. Rimmer on Facebook and on his personal blog. He denied that he had given any instructions to expel the family and said he had been […]
LikeLike
I’ve responded a couple of times to Mr Stackhouse and I think I’ve clearly got a very different opinion to him of this issue. I am a father to an autistic child (also 9, but we are fortunate that our child is verbal). I am not religious, but have the fullest of respect for those who are.
My view is that the response from Stephen to this issue shows that the church is aware of it’s obligations under the equality act to make reasonable adjustments. I will clarify that for the avoidance of doubt here that disability does not just include physical disabilities. The Church of England has some guidance on the issue of accessibility here: https://www.churchofengland.org/more/church-resources/churchcare/advice-and-guidance-church-buildings/accessibility which includes a link to an access guide. In this case, I think the church is taking a sensible approach in considering the issues and discussing them with Paul to see whether reasonable adjustments can be made to ensure that Tristan can attend services.
In this case I don’t know Tristan’s level of need (all autistic children are different and I wouldn’t like to ‘label’ him in any way), but there are very clearly options to ensure that he can enjoy a service – e.g. attending a ‘relaxed’ service, or perhaps being able to move to a quiet area/room if he’s struggling.
I don’t think that anybody is suggesting that a parent is devoid of responsibility whenever they are out in public with their children (disabled or otherwise). If my child is having a meltdown in a similar space, I would look to leave quickly until my child has calmed down. If I am at a wedding with my child I will generally sit close to the door for this purpose. I don’t believe that this is relevant here based on either the original letter from Paul, or from the response from Stephen.
Another question seems to be whether the original letter should have been shared publicly; whilst this is clearly embarrassing for the church, they now have an opportunity to consider how they can improve the accessibility of the church to worshippers with disabilities, and to make this a ‘good news story’. As for Paul – I would imagine he was rightly angry at treatment which appears discriminatory and he has every right to share this experience, but hopefully a meeting with Stephen will reassure him that Tristan is indeed welcome at the church.
I will leave it at that, but wish all involved all the best in coming up with a sensible solution which allows Tristan to attend services.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Miiike,
If Tristan can only attend if a ‘solution’ is found, you seem to be suggesting that Tristan isn’t actually welcome, and his attendance was a problem.
Therefore, you disagree with his father that Tristan’s excitement (not a ‘meltdown’) would please God. So this is just a concert, not worship and Tristan isn’t as worthy as other people.
You’re wrong, and this is why the letter definitely needed to be public. I’m very glad that Tristan has Paul as his father to stick up for him and raise awareness of unfair treatment of people with autism.
It’s great you want to welcome them, but you seem to be missing the point here. It doesn’t seem very Christian.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Hi Emily,
I apologise if that’s how it came across – I absolutely feel that reasonable adjustments can be made to ensure that Tristan can attend services at this church. I certainly didn’t suggest that Tristan was having a meltdown, and the paragraph on me making a choice to remove my child from a public place if he was struggling was really to clarify (in response to another poster accusing Paul of selfishness and/or poor parenting) that parents of autistic children are generally entirely aware of the disruption a meltdown (or indeed other noises) can cause, and generally go out of their way to avoid disruption to others. The last sentence in that paragraph stated that this was clearly not relevant in Tristan’s case.
As stated – I’m not religious, so was not commenting from that perspective. I have no idea what would/would not please God and claim no expertise in that area! However, my general view of the church in general is that it’s entirely welcoming of any excitable noises children make. The church I occasionally attended as a youth certainly did.
I agree that the letter should have been made public (I don’t think I argued against that) – it’s reasonable because it raises awareness and should push the church to change their direction on this issue. Apologies if I was unclear on that as well.
LikeLiked by 1 person
(also to clarify – that’s assuming reasonable adjustments are needed. It may just require more understanding from the church ‘staff’ in general.)
LikeLiked by 1 person
Hi Mike,
I can’t work out how to reply directly, sorry.
Thanks for your reply, and for standing up to Mr Stackhouse. I’ve been reading down the comments & I found his views pretty repulsive.
I think we agree on the main points and I think your final suggestion is worth consideration by the church. I do think (as an atheist!) that they need to be more accepting of Tristan here rather than him having to face limitations.
Thanks for the discussion!
LikeLike
Miike?
I sense you are fairly ignorant when it comes to disabilities.
Why are you fortunate that you son is verbal?
Tristan will make noises and use his face to show emotions, and as you should know autistic people often show emotions differently to neuro typicals.
He was enjoying himself, just like everyone else did except the many bigots who work in the Church, could you have told a parent of an autistic boy to get out because he wasn’t welcome due to being disabled?
Why should he have to be segregated from the rest and made to sit near the door? or sent to a room? Did he ask to be treated differently?
Tristan is not welcome, that is quite clear, and I am sure it has affected his self-confidence, this was 100%discrimination.
I am surprised that a parent of an autistic child could think like you clearly do.
This is Britain 2019, you need to attend an autism awareness course, but I doubt you could be helped anyway.
I feel sorry for you.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Hi David
We are fortunate that our child was able to learn to speak. I firmly believe it will make the world easier for him as he grows older. This wasn’t a dig at Tristan in any way, merely pointing out that whilst I have experience of an autistic child, our circumstances are different.
I haven’t suggested he should have any of those things, in fact I was quite clear that I don’t know what would work for Tristan/Paul to make it easier for Tristan to attend church.
For the avoidance of doubt – I firmly believe that the actions of the church in this instance were discriminatory. However, I also believe that actions after the event are important and if the church learns from this mistake this may end well. Meeting with Paul and Tristan would be a first step here.
LikeLiked by 2 people
Mr Cherry,
The usher states you told him to remove the boy from the service. I believe the usher’s story. You appear to have lied and seem to despise disabled people, in my opinion you should be sacked for apparent dishonesty and possible discrimination towards an autistic person.
This is why I lost faith in the Church as a young person, your supposed actions reflect the true picture of religion.
Shame on you.
LikeLiked by 1 person
>”I believe the usher’s story. ” — On what basis? And why the rush to judgment, in claiming that Rimmer lied? Could he not simply be mistaken, not having ALL of the facts (which you don’t have either)?
LikeLike
[…] shared in an update on Facebook that Cherry had replied to his letter, saying that he had not asked for the family to leave, but took responsibility for […]
LikeLike
You seem confused, where did I state that Mr Rimmer lied?
Why would the usher lie? I am sure he followed orders from Mr Cherry.
LikeLike
>”where did I state that Mr Rimmer lied?” — Your: “You appear to have lied” — My mirtake was in thinking you said that in reply to Rimmer (got my peeps mixed up!); you were replying to Mr. Cherry.
>Why would the usher lie? I am sure he followed orders from Mr Cherry.
You are guessing. You have no concrete, verifiable evidence.
LikeLike
[…] response, the dean of King’s College, Revd Dr Stephen Cherry apologised on his blog, saying he was “devastated” by the […]
LikeLiked by 1 person
Hello Rev. Cherry,
My name is Zahra Khozema and I work for Broadview Magazine, formally known as the United Church Observer in Toronto, Canada. I’d love to speak to you for a couple of mins over the phone today for a story we are writing. Please let me know if this is possible and we can arrange a call.
Best,
Zahra Khozema
LikeLike
[…] Dr Cherry’s reply to Dr Rimmer was also posted on Facebook: […]
LikeLike
Thank you Stephen. Your letter to the family has helped me to recover a little from the shock and anger I was feeling after reading the account of the visit.
LikeLike
You are easily fooled.
LikeLike
On a point of fact, the UK legislation is not limited to making physical accommodation but includes making reasonable adjustments for mental disabilities also. It’s a difficult one, but an evensong service is an act of worship and it seems wholly unchristian to me, an atheist, to shut out a child from it. The point is well made that it’s not a concert with an audience, and as the father in the letter says, this isn’t the first time his son, who cannot help his behaviour, has been kicked out of a church service. Some commentators have criticised the public nature of the criticism. The father doesn’t say, but presumably quiet words have had no effect on the previous times his son was shut out. I hope that this time there is some sort of positive change that results.
LikeLiked by 2 people
You were right to ask the disruptive people to leave. The unctuous guilt-tripping of the father’s letter shouldn’t confuse the issue here. There was a particular event scheduled to occur and a particular kind of behaviour necessary–not just desirable, but necessary–on the part of audience members in order for that event to occur.
Allowing persons to respond with loud cries, however sincere, would change the nature of the event. It’s no one’s fault: It is what it is. And requiring everyone to play a certain part–that everyone jolly well knows is expected–is not heavy-handed or unwelcoming, but merely sensible.
Again, don’t let the sanctimonious sarcasm get to you. Welcoming people to church doesn’t mean letting anyone do just anything anywhere at any time. The church welcomes people in terrible pain but doesn’t welcome them to set up a bed in the front of the sanctuary and writhe while the service continues. The church welcomes people who are thrilled by good news but doesn’t encourage them to chuckle loudly through a funeral.
We owe each other consideration in shared spaces and times. This father evidently thinks everyone owes him and his family accommodation–I’m confident he’d write a similar letter to an orchestra conductor who had him removed: “We paid for our tickets! Our taxes support this orchestra!” etc.
No, this is a time for instruction in mutual forbearance, and in this case the parents (as we did when our children were small and couldn’t be expected to enjoy evensong appropriately) must do the right thing: something other than disrupt other people’s worship.
LikeLiked by 1 person
With all due respect, people at a church service are not “audience members.” They are worshiping members of the body of Christ. Making a joyful noise unto the Lord is pretty much called for.
LikeLiked by 4 people
I freely grant the terminological point about “audience,” but the egregious misuse of Scripture…not so much. “Making a joyful noise” is fine in a community procession (per Psalm 100)–but actually the exact opposite of a choral service.
The narcissistic tunnel vision of the father in this situation is key: He is thinking of himself and his son. Period. Now, let’s invite all such fathers and sons from a wide area, so that instead of one charming autistic boy occasionally shouting out his appreciation toward which we are all supposed to nod with an accommodating smile, we have dozens of autistic people, dozens of infants, dozens of small children, dozens of mentally impaired people all sounding off. Lots of “joyful noise,” sure, but no longer evensong…in anything like the intended form.
Again, this isn’t anyone’s fault: It is the nature of the situation. A certain kind of worship requires certain kinds of participation. If you want to accommodate people who participate in different ways, great! But you can’t have a cricket match with a bridge tournament, or a kindergarten, going on on the same field. And it is just preposterous to suggest that the cricketers are mean-spirited because they politely ask the card players and children to retire to the clubhouse so that everyone people can enjoy legitimate, but incommensurable, experiences.
There’s no big deal here about human rights and marginalization and all the rest of it. It’s about common sense and courtesy.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Under the Equality Act 2010 the chapel has a duty to make reasonable adjustments to accommodate people with disabilities. Considering the number of visitors the chapel receives each year one would assume they have had many disabled guests and should already have considered how to make these adjustments to allow disabled children in to worship. Clearly in this case it did not work because this child was ejected.
Your comments about a theoretical position of many autistic children coming into worship are irrelevant because this has not happened – and if it were to become an issue the chapel could of course consider a relaxed service to cater more for the needs of their congregation.
LikeLiked by 4 people
Okay, let’s get that point clear. “Accommodating people with disabilities” has to do with physical accommodation. It doesn’t have to do with mental difficulties.
Your second paragraph makes my point: accommodation of people acting as this boy did would require…a different service, a different thing. So long as one wants what is currently offered in evensong, one cannot have frequent loud disruptions.
Again, common sense and courtesy.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Miike, you are ignorant when it comes to all thing autism. I truly feel sorry for people like you, you can’t help putting your foot in your mouths, Boris Johnson is similar. You are not fortunate that your son is verbal, you are fortunate to have a child and so is Mr Rimmer fortunate to have his son, try thinking before you type.
LikeLike
Hello again David
I’m happy to give some thought to what you’ve said. I agree that I am very fortunate to have a son, and he would have been loved however his autism affected him. I find it difficult to understand the offence you take at my belief that he will find life easier because he can talk, but we may have to disagree on that.
What I do take offence at is any comparison to Boris Johnson.
I absolutely agree that the church acted extremely poorly, but to my knowledge this is an isolated incident at this particular church (indeed, another commenter had a different experience). If I recall, the letter from Dr Brimmer described similar experiences elsewhere. I would suggest waiting and seeing how the church learn from this.
LikeLike
I don’t appear to be able to reply directly to your response. Either you’re trolling, or you have a very basic misunderstanding of disability. I assume the former based on your profile as an academic.
Either way, anyone who wants to check it out can of course look at the Act online, I’m fairly sure the church is aware of their obligations and am confident from the letter that they will meet them in the future. If they find there’s a need for a relaxed service I would imagine they will put something in place. However, the majority of worshippers would welcome someone with additional needs without them having to attend a separate service.
LikeLiked by 5 people
Okay, one last time. It’s too easy to dismiss what I’m saying as “trolling,” Miiike, especially, as it turns out, my wife has a certified physical disability and one of our sons a learning disability. But my own situation shouldn’t have anything to do with the logic of the situation, should it?
My central point is that the whole situation is wrongly framed by the original complaint. This situation is not about the rights of the disabled and the obligations of the chapel. And it certainly is not about Christian charity, churches welcoming all people, and the like, despite the father’s preposterous letter. It is about common sense and courtesy.
The chapel is not under an obligation to accommodate someone with that boy’s disability because it is impossible to do so. Someone who cannot manage his public responses in a way appropriate to an evensong service at King’s College Chapel, Cambridge, should not attend such a service. This is a hard concept only to someone who willfully expects the world to conform to his preferences when the world simply cannot.
The child himself, of course, is only nine years old, so the fault is hardly his! No, it lies with his father, who wants to make this whole thing about him and his son, but it’s really about (a) the nature of the thing itself, a service of this particular kind in this particular place (and not, let it be clear, about whether the Christian Church in general, or this chapel in particular, welcomes people with disabilities) and (b) one’s obligations to one’s neighbours who attend such a service.
The situation is, in fact, absurd. To “welcome” all such people to an evensong service is as literally counter-productive as to welcome anyone with Tourette’s Syndrome to a wedding–and provide an open mic.
So the more helpful response from the chapel, I respectfully suggest, is to challenge the father’s premises. The chapel is not obliged to list on its door anyone who isn’t welcome. (Good grief.) All it should have to do is list “Service of Evensong” and expect responsible adults to make sensible choices as to whether to participate in it in a way that is courteous to everyone involved–choristers and fellow congregants included–rather than just oneself and one’s kin.
I can’t make this more plain, so I’ll leave it there. But please be assured that I am not suggesting any disrespect to those who suffer disabilities. Indeed, this whole stupid incident makes it harder, in fact, to make the legitimate case for the reasonable accommodation of disabilities.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Just to point out there is no such thing as a ‘certified disability’ in this country. Would love to know who ‘certified’ your wife’s disability as far as I’m aware there is no such think. If you mean that your wife has a disability that is recognised by the Department of Health and the DWP as worthy of being recognised for receipt of certain help or benefit then put that and not ‘certified’.
LikeLiked by 3 people
How very ‘Christian’ of you sir!
Does the bible teach us nothing of acceptance.
I wonder what Jesus would have done if his teachings were interrupted by an individual who had no control over his or her actions. Ask them to leave? I think not. What on God’s Earth has happened to Christianity or any religious gatherings that allow us to pick, choose and judge others that come. This is why I choose not to be part of the church. It is full of hypocrites.
LikeLiked by 4 people
>”This is why I choose not to be part of the church. It is full of hypocrites.” — The joke on that is that without you, there’s one less. We are all flawed in some shape, manner, or form.
LikeLike
>”There was a particular event scheduled to occur and a particular kind of behaviour necessary–not just desirable, but necessary–on the part of audience members in order for that event to occur.”
In that case, if I were there I would ask you to leave because of your bad attitude.
LikeLike
People were bringing little children to Jesus for him to place his hands on them, but the disciples rebuked them. When Jesus saw this, he was indignant. He said to them, “Let the little children come to me, and do not hinder them, for the kingdom of God belongs to such as these. Truly I tell you, anyone who will not receive the kingdom of God like a little child will never enter it.” And he took the children in his arms, placed his hands on them and blessed them.
— Mark 10:13-16
LikeLiked by 2 people
>”my wife has a certified physical disability and one of our sons a learning disability.” — Did the child who “disrupted your service have either of those? If not, then it was irrelevant to mention them., BTW, you have also made a claim with no support offered–for all we know, you may have neither a wife or a son. We have no basis to assume that you would.
LikeLike
>”The narcissistic tunnel vision of the father in this situation is key” — And you are a licensed psychiatrist, or psychologist? And you spent how long with the father as a patient? Or, is it more likely that you are describing yourself, eh?
LikeLike
>”“Making a joyful noise” is fine in a community procession (per Psalm 100)–but actually the exact opposite of a choral service.”
1) There is NOTHING in Psalm 100 that says that this ONLY applies to a “community procession.”
2) A choral service belongs to the community–ALL of them, not just the sanctimonious windbags.
>”something other than disrupt other people’s worship.”
Or, maybe they learn to adjust when it means to worship; Jesus (do you know Him?) said: Matthew 7:21-23 (NKJV) “Not everyone who says to Me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ shall enter the kingdom of heaven, but he who does the will of My Father in heaven. 22 “Many will say to Me in that day, ‘Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in Your name, cast out demons in Your name, and done many wonders in Your name?’ 23 “And then I will declare to them, ‘I never knew you; depart from Me, you who practice lawlessness!’
LikeLike
Mr Stackhouse,
If Canadian people are like you, then no thanks! What is someone like you doing teaching religious studies??
I am shaking my head in disbelief at your ignorance and intolerance, and I am sure you are one of those cretins who believe disabled people were criminals in a previous life.
In your own words, you claim an autistic child was disruptive, I feel sorry for your family to have you in their lives.
I shall pass on your comments to your employers, let’s hope they see sense and remove you from office!!
Shame on you.
LikeLiked by 1 person
You make me sick! It is not the father’s fault that his son has autism, nor is it the child’s! They both deserve to go to church if they would like to! How would you like it if you were kicked out of a church for being white, which is as much your choice as it is Tristan’s for having autism?
LikeLiked by 3 people
Praying for all involved in this meeting & that it would have a good & healing outcome. My daughter with additional needs was invited through her special school to attend a service of 9 Lessons & Carols at Kings a few years ago . She & her peers were made very welcome & it was a major highlight of her school career. Thank you to all involved
LikeLiked by 4 people
I’m not sure why the Rimmer’s felt they had to go public with this versus a simple conversation directly with you. Your response was very respectful and loving and I know that would be your tone in a personal conversation. Prayers that your meeting will be a healing experience for everyone.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I expect it is simply human nature. Contempt breeds anger. If someone showed contempt and disregard for one of your family members, wouldn’t you also be angry? It is human nature to respond to something humiliating, frustrating and quite frankly unchristian.
LikeLiked by 2 people
The removal itself was very public!
I’m grateful for people who do make a stand and make these things public.
It will be hardwork for Paul but he is fighting for all people who face this kind of discrimination, as well as his son.
There seems to be a lot of empathy missing from some of the comments.
If there had only been a ‘quiet chat’, then this letter would not have been here, not would I have read about it on Twitter.
This raises awareness, and hopefully some people will be more understanding in the future.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I recommend that King’s College Chapel invest in a government-sanctioned cage for children – used for housing children from all over the world who seek sanctuary in the United States – and have it modified to be sound-proofed. Send inquiries to President Trump.
LikeLiked by 1 person
So who did ask them to leave and why did they blame you? What repercussions have happened?
LikeLike
wow always expecting the people affected to put in the emotional labour… GOOGLE IS FREE. Start your search with “understanding ableism”
LikeLiked by 1 person
Basic logic: whoever makes a claim, has the burden of proof–no one else.
LikeLike
You have two issues: 1) the thoughtless way that you kicked a little special needs kid out of the church. and 2) you have an even bigger PR problem. Your note on your blog seems sincere. You need to put this on social media. Your silence on your Twitter feed is deafening. Get ahead of this.
LikeLike
Followup: I see you have put this out in social. Bravo. It was the right thing to do and say. I’m sure you didn’t have ill intent with the action.
LikeLike
Just a note that it wasn’t the Pastor who asked the family to leave- but instead someone in the Church. That’s an important distinction. And the action certainly is not something the Pastor can be blamed for.
LikeLiked by 1 person