The Most Frequently Asked Questions About “A New Chapter”

 

 

In Volume 21, No. 8 of The Stelle Group Letter, we reported Richard’s resigna­tion from both The Stelle Group and The Adelphi Organ­ization. In an article enti­tled “A New Chapter,” it was announced that Richard’s resignation came “at the end of five months of in-depth dis­cussion about several con­cerns which the Boards of both organizations have with a number of actions taken by Richard. Both Boards sought psychological and legal counseling to help develop al­ternative approaches and so­lutions. We discussed the choices with Richard and all of us agreed that a resigna­tion was appropriate under the circumstances.”

 

Since that article ap­peared, people have contacted The Stelle Group with various questions related to Richard’s resignation. We would like to share some of the most fre­quently asked questions and their answers with readers of The Stelle Group Letter.

 

Q.  Was Richard expelled or forced to resign?

 

No, Richard was not ex­pelled or forced to resign. Throughout the process lead­ing to his resignation, the boards of both The Stelle Group and The Adelphi Organ­ization were specifically working toward a friendly compromise that everyone in­volved would accept; they were careful not to force any particular decision upon Richard. Problems were iden­tified and possible solutions developed for discussion. Outside professionals were brought in to facilitate the process. The membership was eventually involved. The goal was to solve the problem with one all important cri­terion—that the solution of choice was Richard’s decision.

 

Q.  Was it his free-will decision?

 

Yes, we believe it was. Richard first offered to re­sign at a meeting of The Stelle Group board held on August 5th. It was the only solution he offered in re­sponse to both boards’ re­peated requests for his help. The board did not accept Richard’s resignation at that time because resigning did not necessarily address the issues and the board did not want ~1ichard’s resignation to set the stage for additional conflict.

 

On August 19th he re­signed from The Adelphi Or­ganization, and a few days later he indicated his deci­sion to resign from The Stelle Group provided the board granted him an annual pension. When the board indicated that it was uncom­fortable with the idea of making a pension contingent upon his resignation because this did not address the real issues, he left the meeting. He later withdrew the pension proposal and said he wanted to resign anyway.

 

The general membership was then notified that Richard was thinking of resigning from The Stelle Group but it was not definite and that discussions were still under­way. The members present wanted to discuss the situa­tion, so several meetings were held during the next month-and-a-half. The meet­ings provided a forum for the sharing of information and feelings. Richard attended most of them.

 

In early October Richard attended a meeting with The Stelle Group and The Adelphi Organizations’ attorney to review the various legal and organizational issues facing both organizations which were a result of Richard’s actions. Counsel recommended that Richard consider following through on the offer to re­sign so that The Stelle Group could focus its attention on its mission and on rectifying the legal issues facing the group. Similar recommenda­tions were made for The Adel­phi Organization. Richard said he wanted to think about it.

 

Shortly thereafter Richard called the attorney and said he had thought it over and decided it would be best to resign. A meeting was ar­ranged for October 6th, at which time Richard reviewed a draft agreement prepared by the attorney. After addi­tional negotiations and changes to the agreement which Richard requested, he signed it. The resignation was accepted in good faith.

 

Q.  What did Richard do?

 

First, Richard’s behavior was perceived as being fre­quently dishonest and manipu­lative, which was inconsis­tent with Richard’s own teachings. This behavior occurred in both his business dealings and interpersonal relationships. Various mem­bers objected including more than half a dozen ladies who experienced Richard as being deceitful in his relationship with them.

 

Secondly, Richard seemed unwilling or unable to accept any responsibility for the effect of his actions. When confronted with members’ le­gitimate issues, rather than dealing directly with the logic and merits of the con­cerns raised, his response was to find scapegoats, accuse people of being under attack from Black Mentalists, char­acterize the situation as some kind of political power play or say that the member was out to destroy him and the Great Plan. The result was a gradual erosion of trust in people’s relation­ship with Richard. This be­havior also ran counter to his own teachings.

 

In addition, some of Richard’s actions were creat­ing legal problems for the organizations. Together, the issues related to honesty, manipulation, and credibility were combining with the legal concerns to create a whirl­wind of controversy and con­flict around Richard. As a result, the organizations were unable to focus on their missions, thereby short-changing our members, friends, and the people who participate in our various programs. His method of relating and dealing with people has driven away hundreds of participants over the years, thereby obstruct­ing the organizations’ pro­gress. It was time to face the problem.

 

Had any other member acted as Richard had, expul­sion proceedings would have been initiated, In the past, Richard has sought the termi­nation of membership of par­ticipants who have done less.

 

When the first of sever­al situations was brought to the boards’ attention last spring, they found themselves in a difficult spot. The prob­lem could not be ignored, but to hold the founder accountable for his actions could easily become a tumultuous un­dertaking. Experience has now proven that to be the case!

 

Because expulsion pro­ceedings were not brought against Richard, there are no formal charges to report. The boards’ goal was to nego­tiate a healthier relation­ship with Richard and to support him in finding a way to change this destructive behavior pattern.

 

Q.  Can you give me some examples of this behavior pattern?

 

A typical case in point involves the Philadelphia Fund, which was created in 1982 for the exclusive pur­pose of buying the island for Philadelphia. On page 279 of The Ultimate Frontier while Richard talks about the air­lift at the turn of the cen­tury, he states that: “This will be for the participants of The Stelle Group, and of the new city of Philadelphia to be built on the island presently  in  the  Pacific Ocean that was shown on a map to Richard by Dr. White.” (emphasis added.)

 

When the boards’ of both organizations established their Philadelphia Funds, it was done with the written understanding that Philadel­phia was to be built on an island in the Pacific. An article announcing the fund in the newsletter read:

 

“The Stelle Group has established a fund exclusive­ly for the purchase of the island in the Pacific upon which the first city of the Nation of God, Philadelphia, will be built.” (emphasis added.)

 

Over the last four years both The Stelle Group and The Adelphi Organization received many tens of thousands of dollars for the purchase of the “island presently in the Pacific Ocean that was shown on a map to Richard by Dr. White.”

 

This summer Richard re­vealed to the boards and membership that what was written in The Ultimate Fron­tier was actually a “smoke­screen” (his word) and that the island in the Pacific actually was the Dallas area. This did not add to the sense of trust in the group nor did it enhance Richard’s already deteriorating credibility.

 

The board consulted an attorney to determine the proper way to deal with Ri­chard’s disclosure on the actual location of Philadel­phia, since money had been solicited to buy an island. Richard signed an agreement that the Philadelphia Fund should be terminated. He further agreed that he would personally pay the legal fees associated with dissolving the fund.

 

After the board decided to terminate the fund to set matters right and also had a signed agreement stating that Richard would pay for the resulting legal fees, Richard then changed his story again. According to Richard, Phila­delphia is now a “complex multiphased prophecy” which will become clear as the century progresses.

 

So, first there’s an island. Then it’s only a smokescreen. The board tries to right the matter, Richard agrees to reimburse the or­ganization for the legal ex­penses, and the next thing we know we’ve got a complex multiphased prophecy.

 

This situation typifies much of The Stelle Group’s relationship with Richard. It is difficult at best to make sense out of such word-play. It is even more diffi­cult to accomplish anything when you can’t be certain what is an important organ­izational goal and what is a smokescreen.

 

This is but one small example of Richard’s pattern of behavior. It hurts morale, undermines trust, and results in the organization spending much of its time and energy on dealing with the eccentri­cities of its founder and not on its mission. It seemed that there was too much at stake, so we asked Richard to help us to improve this situation.

 

Q.  “A New Chapter” article says that Philadelphia is to be located in the area around Adelphi instead of on an island in the Pacific. How is this going to affect the Philadelphia Fund?

 

It is the opinion of our attorneys that the fund ought to be terminated because, based upon Richard’s state­ments, it was evident that the funds would not be used for the purpose for which they were solicited. As part of the termination, we are having an independent public accounting firm audit the fund. All contributors will be contacted and the amount of their total contribution verified. All contributors will have the choice of ei­ther receiving a refund or transferring their contribu­tion to The Stelle Group general operating account.

 

Q.  Why didn’t the board and membership try to work out their differences with Richard in such a way that he could remain a part of The Stelle Group?

 

The board and membership did try to work out their differences with Richard at many long meetings over a

five-month period. Many alternatives were offered along with criteria Richard could use to develop his own solutions. Toward the end of the five-month period, seven­ty percent of the partici­pants in the Dallas area signed a petition asking Richard to take a leave of absence to work on his per­sonal issues, as had been recommended by his therapists. This petition was a last attempt to have Richard re­tain his membership in The Stelle Group while removing his damaging behaviors. It was hoped that while Richard was on the leave of absence, two things would happen: he would come to understand his need for such behaviors and then learn to replace them with healthier, more con­structive ways of relating; and the members would more fully accept the need to think for themselves, to as­sess information or behavior on its merits rather than its source. Such growth on every­one’s part offered the possi­bility that in a few years Richard could resume active involvement in The Stelle Group and work within it more harmoniously. As far as we know, Richard did not respond to the petition.

 

The perception of the board and many of the members is that Richard is not taking any personal responsibility for his own problems. A basic principle of the Bro­therhoods’ philosophy is that until a problem is acknow­ledged and responsibility accepted, change is impossi­ble. On page 151 of The Ultimate Frontier, Dr. White reminds Richard that “You, and you alone are responsible for everything you enjoy and suffer in this life.” An understanding of this point is the first step toward healing.

 

Q.  What were some of the alternatives that were con­sidered?

 

The alternative that received the most considera­tion, as mentioned above, was given to Richard by the therapists. They suggested that Richard take a leave of absence from both organiza­tions so that he could focus on his personal issues free from the outworkings of his inner conflict. At first it appeared that Richard was going to act on this, but he later changed his mind.

 

Other alternatives con­sidered included working out a detailed agreement with Richard addressing the prob­lem areas, or having the board resign en masse, or having a public discussion with the membership to get their recommendations.

 

Q.  How are the members of The Stelle Group handling all of this?

 

The members of both The Stelle Group and The Adelphi Organization are strongly supportive of the way the problems with Richard are being handled. The situation provides an opportunity for individual character growth and the assumption of greater personal responsibility for the mission of The Stelle Group. However, there is a very small minority of people—about ten or so—who are having a difficult time because they feel Richard should be a part of both The Stelle Group and The Adelphi Organization regardless of his behavior. These members express the feeling that whatever harm Richard has caused is a small price to pay for having a direct link to the Brotherhoods and that even the Brotherhoods are deceptive when it serves Their purposes.

 

Most members disagree with this perspective and instead reflect the value originally put forth by Richard on page 286 of The Ultimate Frontier: “Inasmuch as the practice of strict honesty and sensible morality is so heavily penalized by the present order of things, The Stelle Group is available for those who seek to live in an orderly and sound fashion again. The serenity and sim­plicity of living life in a straight forward manner will permit the return to Christ’s ideal of thinking and acting without guile.” This approach to life makes much more sense to the vast majority of members.

 

However, there were three members of The Stelle Group who shared Richard’s perception that he was “forced out.” One of these members came into our office when nobody was around and secretly copied our mailing list and other confidential donor information. They formed a self-styled “commit­tee for truth” and used this information to send false and defamatory letters to many of The Stelle Group’s financial supporters. These letters make it sound like Richard was forced out, that the trustees and members are engaged in some kind of cover-up, and that the reader can get the real “truth” from Richard at an address they provide. These letters have raised quite a few questions among our contributors and it has hurt The Stelle Group’s ability to fund its programs.

 

When asked, Richard de­nied being involved in the three member’s efforts but said that he had agreed to answer letters generated by their efforts. We found it confusing that on one hand Richard would deny that he was involved, but on the other hand was allowing them to use his name to generate inquiries which he agreed to answer. Then in his reply to these inquiries he tells the reader that he was forced by the trustees to resign—something that is not true.

 

Several written requests were made asking the indi­viduals involved including Richard to refrain from using the confidential list and return it to The Stelle Group. None of these requests were answered and after it became clear that they planned to continue regard­less of our requests, we initiated the necessary legal action to get the list back and prevent further damage.

 

It is extremely discon­certing for The Stelle Group to have to resort to these measures although they do have the support of the gen­eral membership in Stelle and Dallas. This entire situa­tion serves as another exam­ple of the vortex of conflict and confusion that Richard’s actions have been precipi­tating in and around The Stelle Group which detract from the organization’s abil­ity to perform its work. The vast majority of members are ready to set this conflict aside, allow for wounds to heal, and turn their atten­tion to the group’s mission.

 

Q.  Is this situation with Richard similar to the one that is written about in chapter 17 of The Ultimate Frontier that occurred be­tween the trustees and Richard in 1974-75?

 

In 1975, after a hearing before a panel of his peers, Richard was expelled by a 6-1 vote, In the present case,

Richard was not charged, there was no hearing, and he was not expelled. His resig­nation is the result of a long process of much careful soul-searching by all parties concerned.

 

As a historical digres­sion, it is interesting to note that there are consider­able differences between the view presented by Richard in chapter 17 and the actual experiences of the people who were in Stelle in 1975.

 

Q.  The article called “A New Chapter” tint appeared in the newsletter a few issues ago says that psychiatric coun­seling was sought. Is Richard all right?

 

Psychiatric counsel was sought to help Richard iden­tify the internal source of the conflict and controversy associated with his behavior and find ways to successfully deal with it. His mental wellness was not the issue. As mentioned earlier, the board had received numerous complaints from people who felt that Richard was not keeping his agreements, not being honest with them, and being generally manipulative. Regardless of Richard’s in­tentions, his actions were perceived as having a nega­tive impact upon The Stelle Group. It was hoped that, by confronting Richard with the results of his behavior and by involving professional help, the situation would improve for everyone. The board felt that it was im­portant to address the situa­tion. Not to do so would have resulted in a double-standard—one for members and another one for Richard.

 

Q.  Is The Stelle Group going to continue to publish The Ultimate Frontier? Will there be any changes to the basic text?

 

We will continue to pub­lish Richard’s writings be­cause there is a great deal of value in them. Every day we receive letters from peo­ple who have experienced a sense of upliftment from hav­ing read The Ultimate Fron­tier. We do not expect to change the basic text although we will need to inform readers of the existing situ­ation. One suggestion being considered is a publisher’s introduction.

 

Q.  How can The Stelle Group continue to publish Richard’s writings when he is not ac­tive in the organization or when his credibility is in quest ion?

 

This is not the first time Richard has been outside of The Stelle Group. There was a period from 1975 until

1982 when he was not a mem­ber. Our feeling is that, if Richard’s works contained truth and had value while he was in The Stelle Group, his writings should still have the same value and truth in them now that he is not in the group.

 

Complete belief in The Ultimate Frontier has never been a requirement for parti­cipation in The Stelle Group; although, it is expected that an individual be in general sympathy with the information and philosophy contained in it. Member’s have been test­ing and applying the philoso­phy over many years and have demonstrated many of the Great Truths in The Ultimate Frontier. We do not see Richard’s writings as being infallible. We do see them as being of great value and we will continue to publish them so others may also find them not infallible but very valuable.

 

Q.  Where does The Stelle Group go from here?

 

We want to get back to forwarding our mission. That means helping to make more people aware of The Stelle Group and The Ultimate Fron­tier; providing and develop­ing programs for spiritual and psychological growth; helping Stelle expand as a community dedicated to human development; moving forward with the education of the children in Dallas and Stelle; and continuing with the research and development of technologies that foster self—reliance. In short, we’re going forward!

 

Stelle Letter, December 1986

 

 

 

Return