Stolen checks and a fingerprint have linked a local teen to fires set in a Manomet church parish house this week.
The suspect, a recent arrival to Plymouth from Ohio, attended an Alcoholics Anonymous meeting at St. Bonaventure Church parish center just hours before three fires broke out in the parish offices early Tuesday.
The same teen later allegedly cashed a check stolen from the church office at a supermarket in Wareham. Police later found a laptop computer from the church at the teen’s South Plymouth home.
Late Wednesday, police charged Henry Mahon, 19, of 923 Long Pond Road, with uttering a false document, receiving stolen property worth more than $250 and receiving stolen property worth $250 or less.
Shortly after his arraignment and release Thursday, police arrested Mahon again on charges of arson and breaking and entering at night for a felony.
Capt. John Rogers said newly confirmed forensics evidence led to the added charges.
Rogers would not comment further, but a prosecutor said in court that police discovered one of Mahon’s fingerprints in the parish office.
Authorities offered no motive for the fires, but Friday a judge that Mahon undergo a 20-day competency examination at Bridgewater State Hospital. Mahon is also being held without bail, pending a dangerousness hearing.
An attorney who represented Mahon in court Wednesday said the teen only recently moved to Plymouth from Ohio and is staying with his grandfather on Long Pond Road.
Attorney Marshall Johnson said Mahon had a drug charge against him continued without a finding in Cincinnati before moving east. Mahon’s record was otherwise clean, Johnson said.
Mahon appeared agitated Friday at his second court hearing into two days, pacing back and forth and shaking his head as attorneys discussed his case with Judge Rosemary Minehan.
Police reports indicate Mahon attended an AA meeting at the church that ended between 9 and 9:30 p.m. Monday.
At 3 a.m. Tuesday, firefighters responding to smoke alarms found two fires burning inside the parish center. One fire was located on a desk. Another fire was located inside a filing cabinet. Investigators determined a melted puddle of yellow plastic was the burned remains of a computer keyboard and monitor and a plastic bin of paper.
Investigators found a note on an office desk that read: “GOD DID IT’ and had a symbol of an inverted cross.
Church officials later determined that someone had stolen a laptop computer, a digital camera, an iPod and some checks. Efforts to break into the office safe were not successful.
Mahon became a suspect after he allegedly cashed a St. Bonaventure Church check made out to him at the Stop and Shop supermarket in Wareham. He allegedly tried unsuccessfully to cash another check at Walmart.
Police later found a church checkbook and the church computer at Mahon’s home. He told police a friend had given them to him.
At his arraignment Wednesday, Johnson said Mahon adamantly denies having any role in the fire, saying his connections to the church were purely coincidental.
He was originally released on personal recognizance, with orders to stay away from the church and stay alcohol and drug free. Police arrested him again less than two hours later on the arson and breaking and entering charges after confirming the discovery of his fingerprint in the church office.
The case was continued to Oct. 4 for dangerousness and competency hearings.
Why in the world do Christian Churches allow AA meetings in their Churches?
AA is religious, but AA is not a Christian religion. AA does not follow the values of Christianity, it is a made up hokey cult religion by Bill W and others. It reminds me of Scientology. Do Churches allow the Scientology Cult to rent space from them? Does your church rent to AA? Does your pastor realize the reality of AA’s teachings and the sexual predators being mandated as well?
Churches and Alcoholics Anonymous
Learn What AA Members Really Think About Church
Vincent Van Noir
I cannot understand why churches rent space to Alcoholics Anonymous? Are churches really that desperate for money that they need to allow a group that cuts against the grain of their own beliefs, within their walls? Especially with regard to Christian based churches; AA should be an affront to Christians everywhere.
One would think that the AA concept of God would be enough to have most Christians kicking AA to the curb. The AA view of God is that of self design. In accordance with AA literature, one can choose a God of his or her own understanding, such as nature, the universe, or even a doorknob (Wilson, 2009). This is a far cry from the Christian concept of God. I might be a little rusty on my theology but I am pretty sure that the God spoken of in most religions is a God of creation. This means that the idea of choosing a God is in direct violation of the tenets of most religions. God created man, man did not create God, is the idea.
Beyond just being in violation of most Christian concepts of god, AA also violates most of the morality that is taught through Christianity. If you can pick your own God, than you can certainly pick your own moral principles. AA states that it is a moral program, but there are no criteria for its moral standing. Essentially what is right and wrong is left up to the individual to decide. Christians follow commandments and rules as set forth by the church, God, and the Bible. AA morality is guided by individual conception. So according to AA a person can choose their own God and their own morality. For example, if a person decided to make their god Satan and they felt that the teachings of Satan should guide their life this is perfectly acceptable.
But there are worse issues regarding AA than just theological conflicts. Another major issue for a church should be the fact that many AA members are very hostile towards churches. They have sayings that mock organized religions:
“Who needs church; I get everything I need in AA.”
“Church is for people looking for god, AA is for people who have found him.”
“Church is for people who fear hell; AA is for people who have already been there.”
As though this kind of mentality was not insulting enough, the depth of arrogance runs deeper still. Dr. Sam Shoemaker was one of the founders and spiritual leaders of AA. In his article, “What the Church has to Learn from Alcoholics Anonymous” he criticizes church members for hypocrisy and relates to them how they could become better Christians by learning from AA members. Here are the four lessons the Dr. Shoemaker outlines for church members:
1. Recognition of Need-Essentially Dr. Shoemaker expresses that Christians lack the strength of spirit that AA members maintain because they do not have the necessity to be convicted in the same manner.
2. Redeemed in Life-Changing Fellowship-This lesson centers on the idea that the church needs to become life altering in the way that AA is for alcoholics. This is achieved through recruitment.
3. Definite Personal Dealing with People-This lesson for the church states that the church needs to be more like AA in the way that AA takes personal interest in its members
4. Necessity for a Real Change of Heart-Christians could learn to promote Christianity the way that AA promotes itself. By showing true transformation (Shoemaker, 1936-1956).
If I belonged to a church I would be insulted by these statements. Lessons such as this highlight the fact that AA members think AA is superior to church. Not just superior, but condescending to the churches members. Somehow AA members manage to espouse views in this manner but at the same time fly under the radar of objection. Here is a quote from an early member of AA,
“The relief of being accepted can never be known by one who never thought himself unaccepted. I hear of ‘good Christian men and women’ belonging to ‘fine old church families.’ There were no good Christians in the first church, only sinners. Peter never let himself or his hearers forget his betrayal in the hour the cock crew. James, stung by the memory of his years of stubborn resistance, warned the church members: ‘Confess your faults to one another.’ That was before there were fine old church families. Today, the last place where one can be candid about one’s faults is in church. In a bar, yes; in a church, no. I know; I’ve tried both places. (Ellison, 1955)”
I love how AA members speak in black and white viewpoints, such as “the relief of being accepted can never be known by one who never thought himself unaccepted.” This is typical AA thinking that nobody can understand the plight of an alcoholic except another alcoholic. As well, this statement implies that the church was rejecting alcoholics or thinking of them in some lowly aspect.
This thinking is complete nonsense. Churches have been the largest supporters of AA, offering them space for meetings at low cost sometimes free. Sadly, the support is a one way street. Insults such as this statement show the depth of hostility that AA members hold towards congregations, “…the last place where one can be candid about one’s faults is in church. In a bar, yes; in a church, no.” What a terrible thing to say about a church. To imply that one can be more honest in a bar than in church denigrates the clergy and the members.
The reality of the relationship between AA and religious organizations is that AA reaps the benefits of churches providing space for meetings. Churches receive rent but the amount of money that is collected is typically very low. The space provided is really charity.
Sadly, Churches are really unaware of AA’s stance on religion. They are unaware that AA members are often attacking or insulting the church during their meetings. AA members will talk about how church never did anything for them but how AA saved them. As if these things were not enough, AA blatantly will show its disrespect for churches by standing around outside smoking, cursing, and acting disrespectfully. At meetings were teenagers attend, kids are left unattended by parents were they hang around people three times their age. These kids have no idea who these adults are or what type of person they may be dealing with since AA is an anonymous program.
As I said in the beginning of this article, I cannot understand why churches continue to deal with AA. Whether it is out of ignorance or financial need, the relationship is really not worth the effort. If I was clergy or member of a church that rented space to AA; I would be worried. I would certainly question the conviction of my church to its theology for dealing with a group so contradictory and hostile in nature.
http://voices.yahoo.com/churches-alcoholics-anonymous-4756102.html?cat=34
Also Check Out http://www.theaachurch.com
This AA member who set the church on fire after attending the AA meeting, should send a message to churches and others. Many rent to these court mandates where many do not even want to be there in the first place. Many are only there to get their court cards signed so they wont get thrown back in jail. When they do screw up and fail to go, the typical punishment by the courts is actually attending MORE AA and NA meetings!
The fact is that there is a extremely high concentration of mentally and emotionally disturbed, violent repeat offenders and sex offenders etc. that are sent straight from jail over and over again from the drug courts to meetings.
Alcoholics Anonymous and Narcotics Anonymous, with full knowledge of this, still refuse to implement any safety guidelines!
They invite trouble by refusing to have security personnel or procedures at meetings. They choose to ignore the value of modern medicine and the mental health profession.They instead assign any available ex-addict to counsel other members, even though they are totally unequipped to effectively and properly advise or handle people with real mental and emotional issues. This often ends up causing more harm than good!
It’s no wonder that more insurance companies are choosing not to insure churches and other facilities who allow these high-risk anonymous gatherings to take place on their property!