An Open Letter From Carol Shelton, Tommy's Wife Options

[PrincessDrRe]

It is amazing to me that Bystander not only knows what everyone thinks at 3ABN, but now he claims to know that the congregation in Virginia was "very sad when he left and would have loved for him to stay on" , and that there were "no rumors".

Bystander, how do you know how the people in Virginia felt or thought?

How do you know there were no rumors?

Who told you everyone was so happy with Tommy as a pastor?

[erik]

He wasn't disciplined by a second church. As posted sometime ago, there were no allegations of any kind in the Dunloring church. The congregation was very sad when he left and would have loved for him to stay on. There were no rumors, allegations, or anything in question at all until Glenn Dryden became the pastor there. Odd isn't it?

Bystander if the 2nd church is not doing anything then why the open letters or the letter from the lawyer?

Erik

[PeacefulBe]

Bystander if the 2nd church is not doing anything then why the open letters or the letter from the lawyer?

Erik

Great and insightful question, Erik!

[princessdi]

You act as if this makes anything better. It never ceases to amaze me how far you all will go to defend TS's actions. Even by your own accounts(maintaining the young men were of the age of consent, and never, ever trying to maintain his innocence), he was at the very least having homosexual affairs with young men. He is/was a married pastor. There is no excuse you can give to make this any better. He is wrong, and they should not have let him work at 3ABN with these allegations hanging over him. They should have sidelined him, until they were setttled. It is as simple as that.

He wasn't disciplined by a second church. As posted sometime ago, there were no allegations of any kind in the Dunloring church. The congregation was very sad when he left and would have loved for him to stay on. There were no rumors, allegations, or anything in question at all until Glenn Dryden became the pastor there. Odd isn't it?

[Bystander]

You act as if this makes anything better. It never ceases to amaze me how far you all will go to defend TS's actions. Even by your own accounts(maintaining the young men were of the age of consent, and never, ever trying to maintain his innocence), he was at the very least having homosexual affairs with young men. He is/was a married pastor. There is no excuse you can give to make this any better. He is wrong, and they should not have let him work at 3ABN with these allegations hanging over him. They should have sidelined him, until they were setttled. It is as simple as that.

Please purchase some new glasses. My post had nothing whatsoever to do with TS guilt or innocence. I was answering a question that was ask of me.

[Aletheia]

Bystander if the 2nd church is not doing anything then why the open letters or the letter from the lawyer?

Erik

Glenn Dryden....

[erik]

Please purchase some new glasses. My post had nothing whatsoever to do with TS guilt or innocence. I was answering a question that was ask of me.

But if tommy is guilty then the charges agianst Glenn Dryden true and his information needs to look at in that light.

If tommy is not guilty then Glenn Dryden is the jerk and false shepard that he is accused of being.


SO bystander tommy guilty or lack of guilty is everything.

ERik

Glenn Dryden....

Aletheia, let ask you a simple question with a yes or no question.

DID Glenn Dryden make up stuff about tommy?

Follow up question,

Did Glenn Dryden force anyone to lie about Tommy?


"YEs or no to the best of your knowledge at this time.

ERik

[PrincessDrRe]

You act as if this makes anything better. It never ceases to amaze me how far you all will go to defend TS's actions. Even by your own accounts(maintaining the young men were of the age of consent, and never, ever trying to maintain his innocence), he was at the very least having homosexual affairs with young men. He is/was a married pastor. There is no excuse you can give to make this any better. He is wrong, and they should not have let him work at 3ABN with these allegations hanging over him. They should have sidelined him, until they were setttled. It is as simple as that.

Please purchase some new glasses. My post had nothing whatsoever to do with TS guilt or innocence. I was answering a question that was ask of me.

Bystander - Di's quote is directed at you due to comments you have made within this thread. ...or are you stating that no post that you have made in this thread had anything to do with TS's guilt or innocence? If this is what you are stating - then it's you who needs new glasses 'cause the one's you're lookin' through are rather rosy.... and dirty....and missing a lens.
*(insertion of the name "Tommy" for clarification by PDR)*

He (Tommy) wasn't disciplined by a second church. As posted sometime ago, there were no allegations of any kind in the Dunloring church (against Tommy). The congregation was very sad when he (Tommy) left and would have loved for him (Tommy) to stay on. There were no rumors, allegations, or anything in question at all until Glenn Dryden became the pastor there. Odd isn't it?

*(Which would all "infer" that the man was not actually "guilty" per se [per your statement] of any wrong doing since you state that they "would have loved for him to stay on" [per your statement]. Assuming that no one [person with human DNA/Church] would want a known pedophile to stay on at their church; unless of course they were devoid of children. This statement by you therein states by omission that Tommy Shelton [not named; but who you were "inferring" to] is innocent.)*


This post has been edited by PrincessDrRe: Feb 20 2007, 09:30 PM

[Seraphim7]

Bystander - Di's quote is directed at you due to comments you have made within this thread. ...or are you stating that no post that you have made in this thread had anything to do with TS's guilt or innocence? If this is what you are stating - then it's you who needs new glasses 'cause the one's you're lookin' through are rather rosy.... and dirty....and missing a lens.
*(insertion of the name "Tommy" for clarification by PDR)*

*(Which would all "infer" that the man was not actually "guilty" per se [per your statement] of any wrong doing since you state that they "would have loved for him to stay on" [per your statement]. Assuming that no one [person with human DNA/Church] would want a known pedophile to stay on at their church; unless of course they were devoid of children. This statement by you therein states by omission that Tommy Shelton [not named; but who you were "inferring" to] is innocent.)*

All right DrRe, you broke it d o w n.

[inga]

WWJD said it all when he said the assumptions that you have made about Carol, from reading that letter, couldn't be farther from the truth.

Now, how could you possibly know that the assumptions we have made "could not be farther from the truth.

Btw. Bystander, you do seem to exhibit multiple personalities, complete with differing verbal skills and attitudes. Most interesting.

As for Carol: I find her letter so sad!!

The letter is full of self-justification in the form of justifying Tommy. (In a case like this, self-justification and spouse-justification amounts to much the same thing.) It is utterly self-focused. So very sad! There is no healing for anyone who feels no need of it, as she clearly says she doesn't.

No even a passing thought of the victims.

This post has been edited by inga: Feb 22 2007, 01:23 AM

[wwjd]

I will say it again. You have no idea what she feels. You DO NOT know her. I do. When you say she has no compassion blah blah, you are judging her. The word says to judge by their fruits. You don't know any of her fruits since she is a stranger to you. You judge on 1 letter written that should never have appeared here in the first place. She was addressing a certain discussion, certain individuals, in a certain situation. It is wrong in the eyes of God for you or anyone else here to judge someone's feelings, motives and character whom you have never even met.

[Ralph]

.

Do get some sleep wwjd. The morning comes early.

[Whtz Happenin]

... blah blah...

Congratulations to wwJd (What Wouldn't Jesus Do)!

You have just earned the coveted "CLANGING CYMBAL" award .

I am proud of the boys that are now standing up to show what Men do in order to protect others.

[Observer]

I will say it again. You have no idea what she feels. You DO NOT know her. I do. When you say she has no compassion blah blah, you are judging her. The word says to judge by their fruits. You don't know any of her fruits since she is a stranger to you. You judge on 1 letter written that should never have appeared here in the first place. She was addressing a certain discussion, certain individuals, in a certain situation. It is wrong in the eyes of God for you or anyone else here to judge someone's feelings, motives and character whom you have never even met.

In counselling, one of the things that a counselor does is to confront people with how they present themselves, or to put it another way, with how they come across to others.

I may say to X: You come across to me as very angry. You may not be angry, but that is how you appear to me. I wonder of others might see you as angry, and relate to you as if you were angry. Do you want to present your self as an angry person?

Folks, many of the comments made here about people are essentially stating how someone has come across to them. It is likely that some of these people have only intended to give feedback, or to tell others how someone presented themself. It is not a judgement of a person to share how that person came across to them

It is also probable that some have intended to state that X was actually Y. So? Doing so is not necessarily sinful, and may not be a statement that X is sinful. If I were to say that X is an angry person, would I be accusing him of sn? I do not think so. Anger is an emotion. God created us with an emotional component to our very being. If I am angry, that is not sin, in my understanding of life. Now, I may act on my anger in a manner that is sinful. But, it is that act that is sinful. It is not the anger itself. God has given me the power, under the Holy Spirit, to chose not to act on my anger in a manner that is sinful.

I have refrained up to now from commenting on Carol's letter, if that is what it is. My comment now will be brief:

As I read it, I felt a lot of sorrow.

One element of my sorrow was for her, as a person, and the issues that she has had to face.

Another element of my sorrow was in how she appears, if that is her letter, to be facing those issues.

I feel compasion for her in several ways. One aspect of that is that she is a victim.

In another aspect, I would not criticize her for issues of what she knew, and when. In the impersonality of the Internet, and with no face to face interaction, I do not feel that such speculation is either productive or helpful.

In my thinking, those questions may be valid, but are better raised in a different venue than this Internet forum.

Our focus on primary individuals does not, in my thinking, require that we, at this time, attempt to cast the net in a manner to cover an area broad enough to entangle every fish that may have been entangled with a lessor degree of culpability.

To be specific, as I see things:

Focus on Danny, if you wish, but Brandy is not the major issue.

Focus on Tommy, if you wish, but his wife is not the major issue.

I will suggest that there is another aspect of this, so I will surface it:

Some have felt that the attempt of some people to focus on Linda is a result of a bias against women. Pass the buck from the responsible male to the female. In society today, this is sometimes expressed by: She seduced me. Etc.

If the above is true in regard to issues that involve Linda, let us not do the same in regard to Carol and Brandy.

Well, enough of my thoughts. That is all they are. I assume that others will disagree with some of what I have said, and respond accordingly. That is fine withe me.

[awesumtenor]

I will say it again. You have no idea what she feels. You DO NOT know her. I do. When you say she has no compassion blah blah, you are judging her.

There are plenty of people here that you do not know... and yet that has not stopped you from judging them on far less than 9 pages of what they've said; if you are going to be angry about what seems to you to be judgements made of someone based on "limited information"... you need to to deal with the judgements you have made of others *first*

The word says to judge by their fruits. You don't know any of her fruits since she is a stranger to you. You judge on 1 letter written that should never have appeared here in the first place.

Umm... in case you missed it... the latter two statements above are mutually exclusive

She was addressing a certain discussion, certain individuals, in a certain situation. It is wrong in the eyes of God for you or anyone else here to judge someone's feelings, motives and character whom you have never even met.

You have never met me... or Clay... or the majority of the people in this forum. You wouldn't know us if you ran into us on the street. Neither has Aletheia, Lee, Bystander, or the rest of your camp... Yet, all of you have done nothing but judge the motives, feelings of character of everyone who disagrees with you... often based on twisting things said if not by outright fabrications...so spare us the indignation... and speaking of which... have you made those plane reservations yet? You were talking about beating me the other day and I just want to make sure you have every opportunity to express yourself more fully in that regard. Maybe Danny will let you used the jet; then after you get scraped you wont have to endure the shame of having to fly commercial all busted up....

In His service,
Mr. J