It was with incredible dismay that I read a report received by MAST about how the matter of these letters was handled at the October board meetings in Akron. We heard that the board members were intensely angry that their email addresses had been made available to the letter writers. We heard that they were very tired of this topic and wanted it to go away. We heard that Executive Director Ann Graber Hershberger downplayed the large number of stories by saying that most had happened a long time ago. We heard that some expressed anger about all the money that is being taken away from the good work MCC is doing and being spent on this issue. We heard that the board members were told not to engage with MAST. We heard that a MAST member was prayed for, to be delivered from her trauma. We even heard that the disruption caused by these letters, and by MAST, was referred to as the devil’s work.

What we heard sounds like a huge group temper tantrum.

MCC leaders insist that nondisclosure agreements are used only “a handful of times,” mainly to protect workers in volatile regions. But an analysis of 83 cases documented by MAST tells a very different story. NDAs appear far more frequently, applied mostly in Canada and the US—not war zones—and never as mutual protections. Our data show that NDAs function as tools of silence rather than safety. With dozens of leaders implicated and many stories still hidden, the pattern is unmistakable. MAST’s analysis exposes a systemic practice that demands transparency, accountability, and urgent external review.

I don't rub my hands in glee to discover another aspect of the abuse. Rather, I feel like Jewel the Unicorn in The Last Battle. After being informed that the royal castle, Cair Paravel, has been infiltrated by enemies, he says, “So. Narnia is no more.”

—-

The work of trying to move the process forward – the emails, the conversations, the reviewing of minutes, the scheduling of conversations, the editing of documents – is heavy and exhausting. How can we do this without the witness and support of church leaders and MCC stakeholders who can help us by insisting that there is a broader systemic problem and ensuring that the burden of demonstrating this does not rest primarily on our weary shoulders?

Read Anicka’s personal reflections about three categories of conversation that are part of MAST advocacy, and how each of these affects her differently.