Background information to this story

I have had  close personal relationship/fellowship  with the victims in this cruel story for a good while now, and although it has been painful in many ways, I have appreciated the privelage of sharing with them in their struggle to do the right thing before God,  in the face of massive slander and the uttmost of cruelty, bitterness and hate.

  - Unfortunately this has led to an assumption on my part that much of the background information has been understood by those who may read these pages. I understand now that concern for this  tragedy has grown beyond the scope of our  family and friends, and now is shared by many who do not have the background as firmly entrenched in their minds as we do.

In this description I am assuming that most readers are familiar with the many 'home made' cultural aspects of  the'  fellowhip of friends and workers' Example 'bun in the hair  -  outlawed slacks for females - workers always claiming  the front place in conventions, special meetings etc.etc.etc - special eating arrangements and coffee arrangements for the elite (workers) at conventions - the utter ban on questioning anything that workers may say or do - ban on TV on the grounds of access to evil, at the same time as most workers have personal access to the Internet - dishonest denial of organizational financing  dispite the abundance of  very open evidence of enormous finansial resourses.  Dishonest denial of any central organization inspite of public knowledge of regional leaders, country leaders, continental or semi-continental councils etc. etc. Ban on all other books but the bible - at the same time as an enormous publishing of convention notes, workers sermons, detailed travel documents etc. etc. - the accepted and taught principle that a person is expected to act differntly when workers are present than if they aren't (especially true in younger families)

It is important to have an understanding of these strange aspects of the fellowship, to understand the story unfolding arround Astrid Grant and Astrids little boy Bragd Andreas.     

This is an effort to describe the background as I have understood it.

Astrid Katle  grew up in western Norway in a large proffessing family. There aren't that many friends in Norway so their home was an important one as far as the fellowship of friends and workers was concerned. This of course was added reason for the children growing up to 'conform' with the different and varied ideas that different workers would come up with. Most of her familly were proffessing - and one of her sisters went out into the work, It was a close family which as most would know means that the pressures of 'conforming'  were considerable. In the interests of peace in the family Astrid tried to fit into these things even tho at times, she felt that common sense would be more in line with the will of God.  All these thoughts plagued her, during her school years. Then she studied to be a dentist - and then specialized to become an orthadontist. She has  her own practice -

When she (out of wedlock) became pregnant this was interpreted as a major scandel in the family (and the fellowship). The childs father wanted to her to have an abortion - and when she refused wanted as little as possibleto do with  the child - (until she married Grant!!)  An interesting fact has turned up in connection with this, and this is that the seniour workers  (Lars Lund) actually also supported the idea of abortion - feeling that this would lessen the shame for the fellowship!! and the influence on other young girls!!! When the boy was born (with considerable health problems) Astrid felt very much alone - although at that time some of her family were helpful in her struggle to care for him - and at the same time look after her business and establish a home. She was asked not to take part in meetings at this time.

When she feel in love with Grant Barnato this turned into the straw that broke the camels back as far as the 2x2 fellowship was concerned. Grant had been completely banished from the fellowship  - and was highly warned against by the workers  throughout the world - even those who never had met him  (including Lars Lund). Grants crime was that he was concerned about some inconsistencies in what was said and done amongst workers - amongst other things some very sizable bank accounts that senior  workers handled - at the same time as they proffessed poverty.  Workers obviously felt that the best damage control they could do would be to discredit Grant so that no one would believe him. (And rather believe the lies that they wanted to hear!!)

 The ensuing fights about her love for and  loyalty to Grant, put a major strain on everyones nerves - and after tears and stress she spent a short time in the hospital as stress therapy. When she decided to leave the hospital her family was so upset that they, through connections in the police arranged for her to be committed to a mental institution by force. The temporary legal papper for this also temporarily took away the custody of her son.

She appealed this legal ruling and in quite short order was released - on the grounds that there was nothing to prove she was mentally ill. However those caring for her son refused to accept this judgemnt and refused to give her back her son. This is what the court system is in the process of dealing with now - and although it is a slow process we feel that she has every possibility of regaining full custody.

Edgar