±«Óãtv

Okay. I'm going to make two statements of my own for consideration, in light of the above questions.

(1) I'd be very surprised if anybody invested their money in the PMS because they thought it was the same thing legally as the Presbyterian Church in Ireland.

(2) If anybody DID invest their money in the PMS because they thought it was the PCI then they made an imbecilic decision regardless of the way it turned out that was in no way the fault of the PCI!

I don't think that in the light of the above facts you can say that no one could think that...it was for sure so wrapped up in PCI that those who are a part of it thought that it was an entity belonging to the Presbyterian Church in Ireland..otherwise why oh why would there be all the ties mentioned above...for goodness sake how could it not be ''Presbyterian'' for presbyterians and branded accross all PCI...there is NO getting away from that...

I found it embarrasing, but not entirely surprising, to listen to Donald Watts ducking and diving the issue yesterday morning. This seems to be the Presbyterian policy for dealing with problems. From personal experience having faced serious problems as a member of the Presbyterian Church I was actually told by Presbytery that the interests of the Church would come first. Needless to say I am no longer a member of the Presbyterian Church, although at least that meant that, thankfully, I withdrew my savings from PMS as its only open to Presbyterian members.

I know there are many great Presbyterian ministers, but there are also a number at its core in positions of authority who see it as their role to protect the legal institution of the Presbyterian Church at all costs, including those of compassion, justice and integrity. Whilst their actions may, for now, succeed in legally protecting the institution they are causing untold harm to the unity of the church and leaving many hurt and struggling people in their wake and this situation is just another example.

Listening to Donald Watts was like listening to a politician as he protected his position by not answering the questions very reasonably put to him by William Crawley. He became very defensive and displayed a total disregard for the reality of the financial difficulties now faced by many PMS savers. PCI needs to wake up to what is happening at its core. They stated in black and white in the Annual Report of the General Assembly that they resolved to encourage members of the Church to avail of PMS services, in doing so they agreed to promote financial services which, as far as I'm aware, they are not qualified or licensed to do. Its therefore hard to see how they can now sidestep any responsibility by hiding behind the separate legal entity copout.

The minister is due to make a statement on this this evening.

southernR-

I think you missed my point: my point isn't that nobody thought that the PCI and the PMS were the same organisation, but that nobody invested for that reason. (And if they did, they're stupid, because that's a ridiculous reason to invest.)

John it doesn't help to call some of these people idiots, imbeciles and ridiculous. The fact is that SOME people DID invest in PMS because they thought they were investing in their own church. They clearly made a mistake when they thought that PMS was part of the Presbyterian Church, but that was a mistake that was quite understandable. Some invested in PMS thinking they were helping out other presbyterians and their church. Until recently, the PMS offices were inside Presbyterian Church House headquarters, right next to the church's Financial offices. All the other connections listed above added to this fact would certainly have misled an elderly person who had a little money and also wanted to help out their church a bit. That's understandable, I think. The Mutual Society is not simply a financial services organisation, it is a way in which presbyterians have been able to assist one another particularly, so it's not ridiculous to invest some money in this body as a sign of commitment to ones church.

Augustine-


"Some invested in PMS thinking they were helping out other presbyterians and their church."

They were. But that doesn't exempt the organisation from the risks that are associated with any investments.


"All the other connections listed above added to this fact would certainly have misled an elderly person who had a little money and also wanted to help out their church a bit. That's understandable, I think."

Don't they read? I don't want to sound harsh, here, but of course they're helping their churches - they were right about that - the PMS lends to congregations with that money. I wasn't right to use the word 'stupid'; certainly some people could just have had their guard down because they don't associate 'church' with 'risk'.

I guess hindsight is 20/20.

Will thanks for the update on Donald Watts' comments. Watts is rowing back very fast, but nothing he says can change the fact that the Presbyterian Assembly, under his direction as Clerk of the Assembly, passed a resolution in June 'encouraging' members of the church to 'avail of the services' of the Presbyterian Mutual Society. He may think this falls short of advising people how to invest their money, but in making that argument he sounds like Humpty Dumpty speaking to Alice in Through the Looking Glass: "When I use a word," Humpty Dumpty said in a rather a scornful tone, "it means just what I choose it to mean – neither more nor less."

On the previous thread on this matter I suggested that the action of those investors who protected their own interests by withdrawing their savings without regard to the fate of the deposits of those coming behind them was sinful.

No one has taken up this point which interests me greatly. There are no end of Presbyterians willing to condemn the recreational use of drugs and alcohol, sexual licence, even certain types of music and dance. Where are they now? Why are their voices not raised in condemnation? I would like to be able to assume their reticence is not because of the constituency they would be addressing: is there something wrong with telling nice, respectable, middle-class, church-going Presbyterians that their greed and self-interest are deeply, deeply sinful?

Clearly many Presbyterians are confused concerning the link or otherwise between PResbyterian Church in Ireland and Presbyterian Mutual society. They are of course two completely seperate entities,however the 9,000 investors with PMS I would suggest make up a substancial number of committed people who year on year give sacrificially to support the work of the church at home and overseas. It is very disappointing that the clerk of PCI sought to put "Clear blue water" between the mutual society. As a society PMS has assisted and continues to assist in the building and maintainance of many church building projects (400) at present. PMS has a charitable fund which has assisted many projects over the years. A previous comment made by a former Presbyterian suggests that it may be sinnful for members to withdraw money at the expense of others. He speaks the truth, mutuallity is about sharing. Some by their actions in withdrawing their investments have left the burden or otherwise to be shared by others. Under God this organisation has been a great help to God's work through PCI, it is my solemn prayer it will continue to do so.

I was astounded to hear Dr Watts admit that he wasn't aware that the PMS shared PCI's website. Surely a man as senior as he in the church should be more than aware of what is on his own denomination's website? (Although given the mess which is the PCI website, that's not entirely surprising. For how long have they been promising an updated site now?)

Likewise with the email address. If Dr Watts reads the Herald (or is it ReachOut? can't remember...), surely he must have seen the large glossy ads for the PMS every month?

Tony - agree with your comments - I fear, however, I am not and never have been a Presbyterian...

I simply felt emboldened to contribute to this debate by the many informed and thoughtful comments made by members of other denominations when the Lambeth conference was the focus of the blog's attention...

Has the time now come that individual Presbyterians and Congregations get together and help those who may be suffering financial hardship because Presbyterian Mutual society is in administration? If all members show patience and confidence these matters will be resolved. In the meantime a call to God's people in PCI. Help those in need. Come together and offer pastoral care and back that care up with solid cash.
PCI members are faced with a real crisis, make no mistake about that, but in the midst of that crisis actions will speak much louder than words. Many members do not need their investment paid back today, however there are those in financial difficuties, let Presbyterians show what the love of Jesus reallly means to them and support their brothers and sisters in need.

Tonyhately

That is exactly what should happen, and if this means congregations putting on hold planned expenditure in order to act as the community we should be then so be it. The message should go out loudly and clearly that people are more important than property or programmes. Maybe then this could be followed up by a further years suspension of spending on property while a corresponding amount of money is raised and put to charitable use.

These actions may go some way to answering portwyne's call for repentance.

In an attempt to seek clarity and some transparency, i would urgently request the PMS through the Administators to convene an extraordinary general meeting to facilitate the Members of the Society.

Yes, I agree with pmsnew. I think that there is an utter feeling of helplessness for anyone involved. I have been thinking about what the best way of getting everyone together is.
I think that everyone should hold their nerve and yes, it will be difficult. I can identify with this as we are a family who need money for our builder.
There are certainly emergency situations and there really should be some sort of fund that will pay out something to help these people.
I have calmed down considerably over the last few days and know that there is really nothing we can do until the administrater gives his assessment which could take up to 8 weeks.
I only hope that the church does not have to deal with any tragedies because of this situation. I am finding it difficult to come to terms with the church's attitude and don't know if I will ever quite regain my sincere devotion to the presbyterian church.
Although I know that it is important to remember that it is 'In God we trust' not man. Let us pray for divine wisdom in the undertaking of this administration task and that the situation will be resolved to everyone's approval and satisfaction.

I am finding it difficult to come to terms with the church's attitude and don't know if I will ever quite regain my sincere devotion to the presbyterian church."

See, this is the sort of statement encouraged by blaming the PCI/PMS. Do you realise how many mutual funds and financial organisations and individuals are in this same position? This is not the fault of the PMS. You have no legitimate rage against them. William's post above - as I understand it - is about ensuring that people (primarily older people) understand exactly what they're investing in, not about justifying blame for the PMS in this financial crisis.

There is one thing for sure no matter the outcome, the PCI will be hit very very hard.

The way the church has totally left the members of the PMS out in the cold is shocking.

Only recently the church had something to say to the media regarding the 11+ etc, yet it has nothing to say on this issue except distance itself from it.

There have already been groups set up that will not be paying another penny to PCI.

And how ministers who are maybe on 40k a year can really pastor a pensioner who has thier life savings in teh PMS and depend on it for their food and heat is beyond me.

The recent debacle that was caused by the worldwide credit crunch, within the Presbyterian Church, when confusion and disarray was caused to members of the Presbyterian Mutual Society who are all members of the Presbyterian Church in Ireland, poses serious questions to the ordinary members and the hierarchy of the PCI.

What is the mission of the Presbyterian Church, is it to provide for the financial needs of its members or is it to cater for the spiritual needs of its members, is it to look after the lusts of the flesh in the polluted world of banking or is it to feed their sheep with the milk and the meat of God’s Holy Word.

Causing the life of the believer to be polluted and defiled by becoming caught up with the cares of this world does not lead to a life in the Spirit because the sorrows of this world lead to death, as believers and followers of Christ we are commanded that even though we are in this world we are instructed not to be part of it. Those that follow a path of greed in this world drain life from their bodies and cast trouble upon their house.

Trouble has been brought upon the houses of those PMS members who have been caught unaware that their savings and investments would be frozen draining life from their bodies with anxiety and worry about the future of their money, the Lord Jesus Christ tells us, For where your treasure is, there your heart will be also, today where are the hearts of those PMS members who are perplexed by the future of their savings.

The dogs have a mighty appetite; they never have enough. But they are shepherds who have no understanding; they have all turned to their own way, each to his own gain, one and all.

groovyjon
How can I get in touch with one of those groups?
Do you know of any groundswell of opinion of PMS members. I am west of the Bann, and am hearing nothing at all.
I would like to join an email group if there is one going, just to get information, because there is nothing coming from the PMS.
Thanks

The wider membership of Presbyterian Church in Ireland and members of PMS should be aware that there are those people within PCI, Ministers Elders Committee mebers, many from professional backgrounds in Law, Finance and accountancy working hard to keep PMS. The society has been very successful in the past and can be in the future. members should know that many people have offered substancial sums of money to ease individual crisis situations.
God's people are working hard outwith the PMS and official structures of PCI to put emergency funding in place. PMS is solvent, but not if members force a sell off of very valuable assetts. There are very generous people who genuinely want to help and will help if asked. One draw back is that PMS cannot accept deposits, despite the fact that people have been seeking to make lodgements

groovyjon. Sorry to hear that groups are forming to withold money from the Lord's work (Many ministers work on minimum stipend of Approx £21k). Please understand one fundamental fact, the PMS was built by Presbyterians, by their actions in withdrawing money at such an alarming Presbyterians and Presbyterians alone cause this problem. Yes PM's £50,000 deposit guarantee paid a very big part but ultimately every member who withdrew there money did it for themselves, not for PMS, Not for PCI not for God's Glory, for themselves. This run should never have happened PMS was healthy and solvent, there was no need for a run or panic. If the directors had said in mid september like Corporal Jones "Don't panic" then everyone would have paniced.

With hindsight, it is a pity that there was no communication at all from PMS in the lead up to the run.
Yet they must have been aware of the members building anxiety because of the global financial situation.
I phoned about 2 months ago to ask about the safety of my savings and was assured by the secretary that everything was ok.
He also told me that he was getting a lot of phone calls from members.
That being so, it would have been sensible to send out a letter to all members answering all those questions, and also to have set in place an emergency fund in the event of a run.
Also the 21 day rule should have been invoked from the start.

To goodbyepci. You have a very valid point. My daugther invested a substancial five figure sum in August. There was no hint of any trouble then. RBS HBOS and others were in same situation. It is my understanding that action was taken within two days of the run becoming an issue.
We need to keep focused though on a few very important points.
PMS is not bankrupt, is not in insolvency, has assetts worth in access of £300m, does not owe money to any individual or institution.
We are all wise after the event, no one in the country could have foreseen the financial turmoil of past six weeks. While this is little comfort to us as investors in PMS, unlike large institutions there are no nasty bad debts to be uncovered , no large bonuses (All directors of PMS are voluntary) and above all our investments are sound

Tony Hately-

Don't you know? It's all PCI's fault! They forced people to invest through deception! They pulled people in so they could trap their funds in some conspiracy! They are complicit in some evil deeds indeed, like helping their congregations by starting a mutual fund!

In fact, if you look closely enough Tony, the Presbyterian Church in Ireland is responsible for the entire global financial crisis. Do your homework and you'll see for yourself!

Goodbye, PCI!!!!

Tonyhately
As long as the assets of PMS exceed the liabilities we will be fine, and I realise that a "fire sale" would be a disaster for the situation.

Mr. Micawber, in Charles Dickens' David Copperfield, summed it up by saying:

"Annual income twenty pounds, annual expenditure nineteen nineteen six, result happiness. Annual income twenty pounds, annual expenditure twenty pounds ought and six, result misery"

But the PCI and PMS really do need to improve their communication.
Searching the internet and media interviews are not the ideal method.
Donald Patton said he wrote to all Pres ministers regarding the situation, but nothing was read out on Sunday in our church.
There has been no official word from the PCI and 2 letters from PMS.
Not a great comfort or source of information to people who are anxious about their savings.
Spotlight tonight should be interesting, but again it is trial by media.