Spiritual Adultery And Remarriage Revisited, What are the facts? Options

[Noahswife]

Personally, I wonder what Sigmund Freud would say about Kay's concept of the Spiritual Hole? Freud would have a field day with that one!

Or two or three days or maybe an entire book.

However, I suspect if Aletheia or the others address this thread or this post they will point out Freud's flaws and errors rather than discuss the author Mr. Sanford and his interesting viewpoints or why Ms Kuzma would even be aware of and recommending his book. Do you think they can stay on topic and address this interesting post?

No wonder Danny said in the email discussed elsewhere that Linda needed new friends.

If WWJD, Lee and cronies buy into this no wonder they don't understand why the rest of us don't see what they see in the emails that have been posted. They need to get off the compound.

Thanks for sharing this back story and doing the research for us Panama_Pete.

nw
C"i"

This post has been edited by Noahswife: Mar 6 2007, 09:34 AM

[PeacefulBe]

PP,

Yikes! Shades of the Burmuda Triangle! I agree with NW, thank you so much for doing this research.

As each of the puzzle pieces slip inexorably into place, the picture is becoming so clear!

[PrincessDrRe]

[fallible humanbe...]

. . .

Then I read this:

http://jmm.aaa.net.au/articles/8207.htm

John Sandford says in his quite brilliant book 'Why Some Christians Commit Adultery' (Tulsa, OK: Victory House, 1989), 'the first and greatest cause of _sexual_ adultery, among well-meaning Christians, is _spiritual_ adultery [which happens when] married persons share with someone else what ought to have been shared first or only with their own spouses' (p.7).

The classical wisdom here:

1. Spiritual adultery is always (at first) unintentional.

2. When persisted in, it leads inevitably to full physical adultery.

PP,

Have been reading your research and doing some of my own on the subject and its origins. I thought it was interesting that you left out the #3 from the classical wisdom list. I find it interesting because it holds a lot of wisdom in regards to husband/wife relationships even outside the discussion of spiritual adultery.

(Emphasis is mine)

3. So: don't become isolated, particularly from your spouse; be careful when you keenly anticipate an appointment with someone or invent even 'innocent' excuses to spend inappropriate amounts of private time with that person; listen to the warnings of others; confess to a spiritual director or supervisor; join a small group where you can be accountable; be willing not to see the person in question in private - ever again; and ask for someone with spiritual discernment to pray for a 'separation' or 'loosing' of spirits - particularly if it led to sexual adultery (see 1 Cor. 6:15-20). Finally: deal with the roots of your own dysfunction.

Now that seems like wise counsel - especially within this discussion. Why did you leave it out?

- FHB

[awesumtenor]

PP,

Have been reading your research and doing some of my own on the subject and its origins. I thought it was interesting that you left out the #3 from the classical wisdom list. I find it interesting because it holds a lot of wisdom in regards to husband/wife relationships even outside the discussion of spiritual adultery.

(Emphasis is mine)

3. So: don't become isolated, particularly from your spouse; be careful when you keenly anticipate an appointment with someone or invent even 'innocent' excuses to spend inappropriate amounts of private time with that person; listen to the warnings of others; confess to a spiritual director or supervisor; join a small group where you can be accountable; be willing not to see the person in question in private - ever again; and ask for someone with spiritual discernment to pray for a 'separation' or 'loosing' of spirits - particularly if it led to sexual adultery (see 1 Cor. 6:15-20). Finally: deal with the roots of your own dysfunction.

Now that seems like wise counsel - especially within this discussion. Why did you leave it out?

- FHB

If you are trying to insinuate he was being disingenuous, you are equally guilty of disingenuity... the entirety of the reads thusly:

In my work as a counselor-of-clergy, one of the most baffling questions is: why do so many clergy and people-helpers commit adultery?

I'm writing a major paper on this issue, which will be posted in due course: together with another article on 'Sex and Singles'...

Where do we start? Here's one place: the need of every human being for intimacy (Genesis 2:18), which people-helpers/clergy are involved in every working day. God has created us with a deep need to be loved when we are 'known'. Spiritual and emotional wholeness happens when the dynamic of confession/forgiveness occurs. God's unconditional love is incarnated when another human being accepts us when they know the worst about us...

But in our world children and adults are not loved unconditionally. Parents, teachers/authority figures and peers 'loved' us to the degree that we are 'good' or clever or conform or satisfy other criteria for acceptance. And because most men were not properly initiated into manhood by their fathers (mothers can't do that: ask for my article on that) and most women were not nurtured adequately by their fathers (I have something on that too), we have in our 'bent world' an increasing number of adults living with a mild-to-severe love-deficit.

If I marry a wife to find a nurturing mother, or a husband to find a nurturing father, all sorts of codependent behaviours develop. I'm supposed to marry a _mate_, not someone whose main function is to carry the baggage of unmet emotional needs I've brought from my childhood.

Now people-helpers/clergy are very vulnerable at this point. A client/parishioner may project their unmet 'love-deficit' needs into the counseling relationship. 'No one has ever understood me like you do' is a common come-on. The counselor is burnt out, tired, emotionally drained, frustrated in their marriage or whatever, and gets hooked. They share with the client feelings which don't belong in this context and find comfort and refreshment in this relationship. One thing leads to another, and as John Sandford says in his quite brilliant book 'Why Some Christians Commit Adultery' (Tulsa, OK: Victory House, 1989), 'the first and greatest cause of _sexual_ adultery, among well-meaning Christians, is _spiritual_ adultery [which happens when] married persons share with someone else what ought to have been shared first or only with their own spouses' (p.7).

The classical wisdom here:

1. Spiritual adultery is always (at first) unintentional.

2. When persisted in, it leads inevitably to full physical adultery.

3. So: don't become isolated, particularly from your spouse; be careful when you keenly anticipate an appointment with someone or invent even 'innocent' excuses to spend inappropriate amounts of private time with that person; listen to the warnings of others; confess to a spiritual director or supervisor; join a small group where you can be accountable; be willing not to see the person in question in private - ever again; and ask for someone with spiritual discernment to pray for a 'separation' or 'loosing' of spirits - particularly if it led to sexual adultery (see 1 Cor. 6:15-20). Finally: deal with the roots of your own dysfunction.

The context of the quote is speaking of clergy that fall...and is attempting to look back with hindsight after physical adultery has occurred so it's applicability is somewhat spurious in the first place... secondly, The claims of physical adultery originally implied have been retracted in lieu of this fraudulent 'spiritual adultery' definition that no one but this writer and Danny's camp accepts as valid. No clergy, counselors, attorneys or social workers accept the term as Sandford defines it. Thirdly, you have given no evidence that there was any infatuation or other romantic involvement; both LS and Dr. Arildson have denied such and attempts to place them in a compromising position remain unsubstantiated. You and others continue to say you have proof; Linda has said fine; show it... and you keep coming up empty. This article, while well meaning, is putting forth a bad hermaneutic but it was convenient at the time for Danny... he erred when he assumed that no one would question it... but you continue to dance around the crux of the issue...

If you have incontrovertible proof of adultery, put it out there. If you don't admit it... but this " I have proof but I can't show it to you" game is not working...all you need is the "for reasons of National Security" and I'd swear you were Scooter Libby... and you see how well toeing the party line worked out for him today...

Danny's minions and lackeys should take heed...

In His service,
Mr. J

[Bystander]

If you are trying to insinuate he was being disingenuous, you are equally guilty of disingenuity... the entirety of the reads thusly:
The context of the quote is speaking of clergy that fall...
In His service,
Mr. J

Then you should take it up with PP, He is the one that brought it in.

[PeacefulBe]

Then you should take it up with PP, He is the one that brought it in.

Bystander,

PP brought it in in the context of that was where this whole "spiritual adultry" theme came from. He cited Kay Kuzma's invoking Sandford as the source and also posted the quotations that applied so that others here could see Sandford's take on the subject.

That FHB seems to have brought PP's motives into question by wondering why he excluded #3 misses the point of PP's post, IMO.

Mr. J attempted to expand the offering by noting that Sandford's "paper" was directed at clergy who are at risk of developing more than professional relationships with those they are attempting to help. Perhaps it would have been more prudent for Kay Kuzma, Danny Shelton and the BoD to apply Sandford's logic to one Mr. Tommy Shelton long before 2004. Perhaps some of his alleged victimizations could have been prevented. Unfortunately, it seems that somewhere along the way TS's behavior was adeptly hidden from the powers that be.

No amount of attempts to cloud the issue PP brought up will work. The information clearly speaks for itself.

PB

[ex3ABNemployee]

Bystander,

PP brought it in in the context of that was where this whole "spiritual adultry" theme came from. He cited Kay Kuzma's invoking Sandford as the source and also posted the quotations that applied so that others here could see Sandford's take on the subject.

That FHB seems to have brought PP's motives into question by wondering why he excluded #3 misses the point of PP's post, IMO.

Mr. J attempted to expand the offering by noting that Sandford's "paper" was directed at clergy who are at risk of developing more than professional relationships with those they are attempting to help. Perhaps it would have been more prudent for Kay Kuzma, Danny Shelton and the BoD to apply Sandford's logic to one Mr. Tommy Shelton long before 2004. Perhaps some of his alleged victimizations could have been prevented. Unfortunately, it seems that somewhere along the way TS's behavior was adeptly hidden from the powers that be.

No amount of attempts to cloud the issue PP brought up will work. The information clearly speaks for itself.

PB

Off the subject, but for his sake, I hope the nickname "PP" doesn't stick outside the forums.

[PeacefulBe]

Off the subject, but for his sake, I hope the nickname "PP" doesn't stick outside the forums.

I know what you mean! I'm just glad my children and grandkids don't read here. They would also be

[Panama_Pete]

PP,

Have been reading your research and doing some of my own on the subject and its origins. I thought it was interesting that you left out the #3 from the classical wisdom list. I find it interesting because it holds a lot of wisdom in regards to husband/wife relationships even outside the discussion of spiritual adultery.

(Emphasis is mine)

3. So: don't become isolated, particularly from your spouse; be careful when you keenly anticipate an appointment with someone or invent even 'innocent' excuses to spend inappropriate amounts of private time with that person; listen to the warnings of others; confess to a spiritual director or supervisor; join a small group where you can be accountable; be willing not to see the person in question in private - ever again; and ask for someone with spiritual discernment to pray for a 'separation' or 'loosing' of spirits - particularly if it led to sexual adultery (see 1 Cor. 6:15-20). Finally: deal with the roots of your own dysfunction.

Now that seems like wise counsel - especially within this discussion. Why did you leave it out?

- FHB

Nothing was overlooked or left out.

I clearly left a link to the source so that you could infuse the discussion with retroductive equivocation at its finest.

Pete

[Johann]

Then you should take it up with PP, He is the one that brought it in.

From Pilate to Herod and back to Pilate. No responsibility.

[PeacefulBe]

Nothing was overlooked or left out.

I clearly left a link to the source so that you could infuse the discussion with retroductive equivocation at its finest.

Pete

Pete,

Yep, it's clearly there!

FHB,

What will you say to try to obfuscate this? An honest man would apologize to Panama_Pete for casting aspersions when none were deserved, IMO.

PB

[Johann]

In every one of these discussions Bystander, wwjd, Lee, or one of the others do all in their might to divert the discussion .

Reality is as follows as far as I have experienced it:

1. Shortly after Linda and Brenda came back from their short trip to Norway, Danny and Brenda spent a lot of time together, at the end of which Linda was accused of planning to commit adultery by going to Florida to meet Dr. Arild Abrahamsen there. Danny was so certain of this that he wrote the letter that is displayed elsewhere here on BSDA as a proof that their marriage was finished and that she could not return to him.

2. When Danny discovered that Dr. Abrahamsen never left Norway, so it was really impossible to accuse them of adultery, then he had to save face, and that was done by someone finding that book on which he could speak of spiritual adultery. This was based on phone calls.

3. When discussions on BSDA revealed that spiritual adultery was not a valid reason for a divorce, then he had to invent a third excuse for the divorce, and now it was really getting difficult. So Garwin McNeilus came to his aid by paying for Private Investigators to spy on us on our trip to Illinois. You would not expect that Danny would spill his secret, but that is exactly what he did. He kept calling to let us know that he knew exactly where we were and what we were doing. So we knew right from the beginning that we were being tracked. Somehow Danny thought we were so stupid that we would let those PI catch us even if we knew they were on our heels. Wouldn't any normal person realize then that even if there was some kind of love relationship going on, then we would see to it that the PI would never catch us? We even talked about this several times when we heard of the PI surrounding us.

Somehow I am having a difficult time accusing the Danny gang of exercising the gift of normal thinking. In stead they still imagine that with their distractions they can get normal thinking people to think in completely unrealistic terms just to make it possible to justify how Linda was treated.

4. When nothing else worked they keep hammering on the thought that they are still looking for a new reason to justify Danny Shelton. Somewhere a reason must be found.

This reminds me of the boy who was about to get caught who fell on his knees and prayed, Jesus make it so that it never happened! - except here they seem to pray, Lord, make Linda guilty of what never happened, or do a miracle to make it have happened that Linda is guilty!

Danny is still telling people on 3ABN that the Lord shows him things. Now he claims that the Lord has shown him that Satan is the god of details, because details disturb him. What is he trying to make out of this new doctrine?

This post has been edited by Johann: Mar 7 2007, 11:52 PM

[wwjd]

Post this again if you want to, without the shouting.

Calvin

This post has been edited by calvin: Mar 7 2007, 07:26 PM

[Richard Sherwin]

Sorry but I can't read your post when you are yelling so loudly that your voice fills the whole page. Besides I can't stand being around screeching people. Gives me a migraine headache. Of course if you would cool down and edit your words.....