Quote:
Originally Posted by Hope
According to TJ, the sister said the whole affair was a blur. In the sister’s report on the forum, she says “someone” informed her of the meeting. I have to conclude nothing is really clear about that incident and all the inferences and sweeping charges that have put forward should just be dropped. Believe me I am not afraid of digging down deep on this case since I am very certain it is not what it was reported to be. I would rather let the sister go and “move on” as she has said she has.
Don Rutledge
|
As far as I am concerned this won't be dropped. The simple fact that you have requested that it would be dropped has prompted me to believe it should be pursued. You're trying to say the water is muddy. Let's leave it muddy.
Just so you know, this kind of approach activates me to pursue. So here goes. In these situations I don't presume one way or the other. I pursue it to discover the truth. I know one thing for sure. Something happened as this person says and it crossed local boundaries. It violated family boundaries. It was wrong.
I have a question for you: What are you protecting at this time? Please elaborate. Is all of this about protecting against djohnson? If so, there is no need. Almost everyone understands his frame of reference and need no guidance from an ex-leader in knowing how to handle his inputs. Are you protecting something else? If so, what? Many of those here know how to sort through information and see the real situation. The "noise" of the "fray" is not a problem for most here. Almost every single person here is wanting to dig down on elements of truth and have things established for the sake of the Lord. You included.
It is obvious that there is some confusion on the facts. Let's get the facts straight.
To be quite honest, your reaction is very odd to me.
You may be right that some of the lesser facts are wrong, but to request that the whole matter be dropped seems very inappropriate in my mind.
Let me tell you why I see it as so inappropriate. The person this happened to has spoken up. The
abused has spoken up. The Lord is clear. We should defend the case of the widow, the oppressed, etc. This matter should be pursued. And factual errors should be cleared up for the sake of the abused (and the abusers).
The only reason I can come up with in my mind is for your protection or the protection of the perception of Dallas. Between you and the abused party in this situation, you do not need the protection. You can suffer the truth. The abused party always needs more support.
I had written a little more conciliatory post last night, but after reading your post this morning, I just can't be conciliatory.
In closing, let me be quite clear. At this stage, the only reason to determine your presence at a meeting like this one is for your sake. I am assuming based on your words that you were not there and it doesn't make a difference to me. Let me close with a few facts that point to the underlying point of this thread.
1. Elders from outside your locality came to your locality and conducted extra-local church discipline that violated proper family boundaries without your knowledge. (Violation of Local Authority)
Note: Based on your own accounts, this was not the only time this happened. I can think of at least one or two other instances.
Question: Are you trying to say this didn't happen in Dallas? If so, why is it important to you that it didn't happen in Dallas?
2. If there were things like the aforementioned example happening in Dallas, then Dallas was no exclusion to what was going on throughout the greater Texas region. You may not have liked it or may have tried to exclude yourself from some of it. Good. When those extra-local influences were not around Dallas may have been a little better. Good.
3. As this conversation continues, it seems you are positioning yourself as the exception, not the rule, of what happened within the LC. In doing this, you exclude yourself from the point djohnson was/is making and so your reaction to his thread make no sense to me. The general rule was abusiveness towards families due to the way the
system of the LC worked. This abuse came in the major form of
neglect of parental duties and sometimes it was worse. The priorities of the LC system were off. We've all agreed to this fact.
4. It has become apparent that your eldership in Dallas was not respected (especially throughout the rest of the region) and it was ignored when someone with a higher level of authority from some other locality felt it appropriate to take some action. You were treated with kid gloves by others who had more "power" (James, Benson).
The last thing you said, was that you would prefer that this be dropped in part for the sake of this sister. If I assure you that this sister will be cared for in this situation, would you prefer to dig down on this and establish the truth?
Matt
P.S. We've all been beat up on forums like this one when we get "defensive" from time to time. We each have a right to "defend" ourselves and we should. It helps establish truth for the sake of everyone.