Letters Between Linda And The Thompsonville Church, J.L. re: counseling, censure & attempts at reconciliation Options

[Johann]

Of course, that explains a lot.

However, it does not excuse him calling himself a counselor and not having the ethical sense to see that even if he were a counselor, he had a conflict of interest in the Danny/Linda conflict. He is not "evil," as Aletheia likes to to say we are suggesting.lems However, he does not have the sensibilities of a good pastor -- and not even the basic ethical standards of the world. (A Christian pastor should have higher standards, not lower ones.

What he wrote to Linda re church discipline (using discipline to direct her to a church where she could find healing) is just plain nonsense and inexcusable coming from anyone sitting on a church board, let alone a pastor. He really should go back to school. But would training give him the sensibility of a good pastor?

Please note, Aletheia, that we are not basing our u wilof JL's involvement on anything Linda said, but on what he wrote and you shared.

About 50 years ago C. Witchebie (sp?) tried to initiate some education in pastoral counseling as a part of our ministerial training. While attending some of his classes in pastoral counseling I asked him how I should deal with a certain lady who was having serious problems, where I thought I could be of help with my Christian experience and help her with the words of Jesus Christ.

At first CW's words chocked me, but I have often reflected on them since.

- Stay away from her. With the limited amount of knowledge you have in counseling you will do her more harm than if you try to remove her appendix without being a medical doctor.

And here I thought I could do the job because I had learned so much from his wisdom.

In my dealings with John Lomacang I have wished he had a better knowledge of Scripture and how to apply the words of Jesus Christ to your Christian experience. That may give him some better insight into how counseling works.

We must not forget how Ellen White stresses the importance of studying how the mind works to give us a background of how to deal with people. Just like Aletheia I have also worked in a psychiatric ward and dealt with all kinds of patients. Some of the patients were physicians and lawyers, and they revealed quite a bit to me. It always pays to have your ears and eyes open so the words of our Lord can have a grater impact in our lives. Let us pray for understanding.

This post has been edited by Johann: Apr 12 2007, 02:17 AM

[Observer]

http://www.pacificpressprofiles.com/bio.php?id=35

"John received an Associates Degree in Electronics before continuing his education at Oakwood College and Valencia College in Orlando, Florida. Though he is an ordained minister, he has received no formal training in that area."

Thank you for posting information regarding Elder L's educational and training background. I was aware of that. But, I did not want to post on it as I could not document what I knew. You have supplied the documentation.

I will make two comments:

1) John L. appears to have neither formal educational training nor experience in counseling and marital counseling.

Cllinical training programs in counseling focus on ethics. In my formal training I was requred to take course work in ethics. In addition, my supervised clinical training focused on ethical eissues. Did I recognize them? Did I apply then to my counseling experience?

Elder L's published comments picture him as a person who simply does not under the ethical issues related to counseling.

2) I will comment on the standard educational and experiencal route for entry in the SDA ministry in North America, and what John L. has missed by his entry by an alternative route.

Let me be clear. The SDA denomination has recognized Elder L. as an ordained SDA clergyperson. As such, whatever respect you might give to a person who holds that office is due Elder L. However, that respect for the office does not prevent one from questioning the one who holds that office, and how that person practices ministry in the SDA Church. John L. is fully qualified to perform the duties of a SDA minister. As an ordained SDA minister, he has the responsibilities to practice ministry according to accepted standards.

The typical standard for entry into SDA ministry in Norrth America requires that a person have a degree from a SDA college in one of the fields of Relligion/Theology. The purpose of this is to be certain that the individual understands SDA beliefs, has accepted them, and can defend them. In addition, some minimal experience is given in some aspects of pastoral ministry, and also preparation is given for some course work that must be taken at a later time.

John appears to have a background in electronics, rather than the above background. This should not be considered as disqualifying one for SDA ministry. I am going to assume that John L. understands, and has accepted SDA beliefs. It is not unusual for peple to come into SDA ministry without the above background. Some have been very successful. The above background may be helpful, but its lack is not a killer.

Following graduation as above, the standard expectation is that one will obtain a Master of Divinity degree (MDiv) from Andrews. Yes, I know that there are exceptions. But, that is the standard expectation.

In the MDiv. program the focus is as follows:

a) There is a further in-depth study of SDA history and doctrine. But, this is done from a perspective of its application in the congregational life.

There is something to be said for experience and maturation. In my Seminary class, one student confessed that he would have a struggle in baptizing a male who wore a beard. With that, another student confessed that he would struggle with baptizing a chiropractor. Then there was discussions regarding women who wore wigs. Well, both of the above Seminary students are ordained SDA clergy. They have matured, and been successful.

'b) Part of this development comes from the interaction with other students, and their struggles and attempts to do ministry in an Adventist congregation. NOTE: In the MDiv. program many of the students will have worked in a pastoral setting providing ministry to a congregation. After I left Andrews, and pastored a congregation, some of my experiences were used in teaching pastoral students at Andrews.

c) The MDiv. program typically provides ongoing supervised pastoral experience. Someone in a post mentioned the Amazing Facts College of Evangelism. I do not know if that training experience if formally connected with Andrews. But, that is the type of experience that students in the MDiv. program would recieve.

There is of considerable value to place pastoral students in supervised pastoral experience programs where they can gain and grow.

It is unfortunate that Elder L. lacks the above background whch would have enriched his prepartaion for and his practice of pastoral minsitry.

But, there is one last comment that I need to add:

John L's failure to have the above background severely limits his ability to practice ministry:

a) We are graduating more students from ministerial courses than the denomination can employ. This means that some of our graduates, in order for find ministerial employment must be employed in ministry by organizations that may not be SDA. These may be military, hospital and prison chaplaincies. NOTE: While these people may work for non-SDA organizations, they represent the SDA Chruch, are endorsed/credentialed by the SDA Chruch, and practice ministry according to SDA standards that are applied to them.

The standard for employment in these fields requires a MDiv. degree, and pastoral experience; and in some cases there are additional requirements.

Because John L. lacks this background, he will not be eligible to be employed as I have listed above. You might say that he will never need to be so employed. That may not be true. Local SDA Conferences are sometimes requried to reduce its nubmer of ministers due to financial restraints, and those clergy are out looking for employemnt. They may need to consider some of the options I have listed above.

'b) In addition, some SDA Conferences have come to the point where they are unable to hire people who do not have the MDiv. background that I have listed above, and do not employ pastors who have entered the SDA ministry from an alternative background.

Tha apparent reality is that John L may have entered the SDA milnsitry from an alternative background to pastor the congregation associated most closely with 3-ABN. If the time comes that it is believed that there should be a pastoral change, John L. may be limited in his options? Yes, it may be that the IL Conferene would at that time be able to transfer him to another congregation? But, it still just may be that John is limited in the pastoral opportunities that he has outside of the congregation that is associated with 3-ABN? On the other hand, his musical abilities, as long as they may last, may help to make up for this?


This post has been edited by Observer: Apr 12 2007, 07:27 AM

[LaurenceD]

Whether they know or don't know isn't really the point. I think we can be well assured that they are saying exactly what the DS Defender Unit WANTS them to say. There is a consistency and coherency among the various yarns spun by the Dannyspinners that makes their sources all traceable. If 3abn is "embarrassed" they have only themselves to blame. The reporters are doubtless only repeating what they have been told.....

"Bare with me" (lol, as someone here misspoke the other day).

There's a real expectation on a Chrisitan forum like this, that when one enters into a dialogue with another member, one is actually having a dialoge with that person...not someoneone else. No one wants to have a conversation with a member who has to send the comments to someone else and wait for an official response. Perhaps that's why the silence is so deafening with certain questions of the DS defender unit. Neither of them knows how to respond.

[Aletheia]

watchbird , Apr 11 2007, 09:56 AM:
Whether they know or don't know isn't really the point. I think we can be well assured that they are saying exactly what the DS Defender Unit WANTS them to say. There is a consistency and coherency among the various yarns spun by the Dannyspinners that makes their sources all traceable. If 3abn is "embarrassed" they have only themselves to blame. The reporters are doubtless only repeating what they have been told.....
------------

"Bare with me" (lol, as someone here misspoke the other day).

There's a real expectation on a Chrisitan forum like this, that when one enters into a dialogue with another member, one is actually having a dialoge with that person...not someoneone else. No one wants to have a conversation with a member who has to send the comments to someone else and wait for an official response. Perhaps that's why the silence is so deafening with certain questions of the DS defender unit. Neither of them knows how to respond.

You guys are free to speculate, postulate or surmise all you like, but it doesn't mean you have a clue about who or what you are talking about.

As one who has been labelled such, allow me to say, you don't. That is false.

What a bunch of garbage.

This post has been edited by Aletheia: Apr 12 2007, 08:42 AM

[Clay]

You guys are free to speculate, postulate or surmise all you like, but it doesn't mean you have a clue about who or what you are talking about.

As one who has been labelled such, allow me to say, you don't. That is false.

What a bunch of garbage.

and neither do you Cindy as you have stated you are not a witness to anything.... so it seems you are in the same garbage you have accused others of being in...

[awesumtenor]

You guys are free to speculate, postulate or surmise all you like, but it doesn't mean you have a clue about who or what you are talking about.

As one who has been labelled such, allow me to say, you don't. That is false.

What a bunch of garbage.

We do know that you, by your own admission are "not a witness". We do know that you, by your own admission, have never spoken to or met Linda or Danny. We know that your postings continue to be "full of sound and fury, signifying nothing"

So you would be best served to take your own advice and recognize that while you are free to speculate, postulate, pontificate ( had to throw that one in because you do it so often... along with obfuscate, denigrate and playa hate ) or surmise all you like, but it doesn't mean you have a clue about who or what you are talking about.

In His service,
Mr. J

[Lee]

We do know that you, by your own admission are "not a witness". We do know that you, by your own admission, have never spoken to or met Linda or Danny. We know that your postings continue to be "full of sound and fury, signifying nothing"

So you would be best served to take your own advice and recognize that while you are free to speculate, postulate, pontificate ( had to throw that one in because you do it so often... along with obfuscate, denigrate and playa hate ) or surmise all you like, but it doesn't mean you have a clue about who or what you are talking about.

In His service,
Mr. J

Mr. J. what is your problem? You are a grandfather but you act like a 2 year old. You are being an internet stalker. You are using harassment against Aletheia behind every one of her posts. Much of what Aletheia is saying is true. You don't have to accept it. But you do need to stop your stalking her.

[Clay]

Mr. J. what is your problem? You are a grandfather but you act like a 2 year old. You are being an internet stalker. You are using harassment against Aletheia behind every one of her posts. Much of what Aletheia is saying is true. You don't have to accept it. But you do need to stop your stalking her.

it cant be true because she by her own admission is NOT a witness to anything.... Now, since you dipped your spoon in this kool aid, are you stepping forward to say you witnessed something? If so what? Where is your evidence or proof? If you are not a witness then you are doing what Cindy is doing... and likewise are playing in the same garbage....

As for the other accusation stalking is a strong term, and it is not taken lightly... as a member here Mr. J can respond to any post anywhere on this forum... if you think that responding to posts is stalking behavior then we are all guilty.....

You might want to chill....

[Hersheys99]

Mr. J. what is your problem? You are a grandfather but you act like a 2 year old. You are being an internet stalker. You are using harassment against Aletheia behind every one of her posts. Much of what Aletheia is saying is true. You don't have to accept it. But you do need to stop your stalking her.

Main Entry: stalk·ing
Function: noun
: the act or crime of willfully and repeatedly following or harassing another person in circumstances that would cause a reasonable person to fear injury or death esp. because of express or implied threats; broadly : a crime of engaging in a course of conduct directed at a person that serves no legitimate purpose and seriously alarms, annoys, or intimidates that person

Well for starters this is a public forum & per the definition of stalking he is far from stalking her. For him to stalk her he would have to follow her from web site to web site. Just because people call her into accountability for the stuff she posts don't make them stalkers.

[awesumtenor]

Mr. J. what is your problem? You are a grandfather but you act like a 2 year old. You are being an internet stalker. You are using harassment against Aletheia behind every one of her posts. Much of what Aletheia is saying is true. You don't have to accept it. But you do need to stop your stalking her.

Get a grip, Lee. Cindy has come to where I am; I haven't come to her. I was here long before you and she knew this forum existed. As for stalking her... in your and her dreams perhaps. She is getting nothing more than she is giving to gailon and pickle and others... in fact a good deal less. You say *much* of what Cindy says is true... which means that some of it is not true. Why dont you go through her posts and mark out the parts which are true and the parts which are lies... since you obviously know.

stalking cindy...

We're gonna have to put you in a Harlequin novel 12 step program... because they are coloring your reality

In His service,
Mr. J

[Johann]

Mr. J. what is your problem? You are a grandfather but you act like a 2 year old. You are being an internet stalker. You are using harassment against Aletheia behind every one of her posts. Much of what Aletheia is saying is true. You don't have to accept it. But you do need to stop your stalking her.

It would be an important revelation if you'd spell out which parts of her posts are true. That would make it much easier to deal with her. Since you know that only much of what she says is true, you must be having some misgivings.

[Noahswife]

Main Entry: stalk·ing
Function: noun
: the act or crime of willfully and repeatedly following or harassing another person in circumstances that would cause a reasonable person to fear injury or death esp. because of express or implied threats; broadly : a crime of engaging in a course of conduct directed at a person that serves no legitimate purpose and seriously alarms, annoys, or intimidates that person

Well for starters this is a public forum & per the definition of stalking he is far from stalking her. For him to stalk her he would have to follow her from web site to web site. Just because people call her into accountability for the stuff she posts don't make them stalkers.

Hi Hersheys99

Mr. J has already responded to Lee but her post has made me wonder about something.
I wonder if Linda has been subjected to any behavior by some in real life that others might consider stalking or worse.

It often seems to me these types of posts contain a good degree of projection. Has anyone else noticed that?

nw
C"i"

This post has been edited by Noahswife: Apr 12 2007, 10:22 AM

[Johann]

Main Entry: stalk·ing
Function: noun
: the act or crime of willfully and repeatedly following or harassing another person in circumstances that would cause a reasonable person to fear injury or death esp. because of express or implied threats; broadly : a crime of engaging in a course of conduct directed at a person that serves no legitimate purpose and seriously alarms, annoys, or intimidates that person

Well for starters this is a public forum & per the definition of stalking he is far from stalking her. For him to stalk her he would have to follow her from web site to web site. Just because people call her into accountability for the stuff she posts don't make them stalkers.

Some live by the motto, "Live life dangerously!" Lee might be using such expressions because she loves to look down her nose at the face of a judge?

[Noahswife]

O. K. Aletheia:

For the purpose of this discussion, let us accept at face value your claim that Elder John L. is a counselor, and as evidenced by his 16+ years of counseling experience does do counseling.

Do your understand the legal liability that you have potentially placed the IL Conference in, or rather the legal liability that Elder L. has potentially placed the IL Conference in?

Do you understand the ramifications of the Odenthal case which comes from MN?

Of course, I understand that a case heard by the MN Supreme Court does not set a precedent in IL. However, as one who has studied psychiatric nursing, and understands counseling, I am certain that you understand the Tarasoff case. You likely know that the Terasoff case became a model that was adapted by probably all of the 50 states of the United States.

Based upon your knowledge of the history of the Tarasoff case, it is unlikely that you would seriously attempt to tell us that the Odenthal case has no revelance for someone in IL.

NOTE: I am very briefly making a statement about a very complex case that went back and forth between the District and Appealate courts until the MN Supreme Court rendered a decison that resulted in the parties reaching a settlement without a trial by the District Court.

In brief the MN Supreme court ruled that the MN Conference of SDA could be sued, and held liable for a failure to supervise the counseling activities of a SDA pastor whom the Court had determined held himself out to be a counselor, and did represent himself as giving marital counseling to the Odenthals. In that ruling the Court ruled that the MN Conference did not have the protection of the First Ammendment to the Constitution due to the fact that the pastor involved represented himself as providing the Odenthals with marital counseling.
If what I expect happens actually takes place, Aletheia and others will commant adversely on me and/ or my post. If they finally respond to my question, they will begin to back track in their claims in regard to Elder L. being either a counselor, or in providing counseling for 16+ years.

Let us seewhat they do.

Citation: Tarasoff v. Regents of the University of California (1976)

See: http://www.atoday.com/220.0.html for a longer discussion of the Odenthal case which I wrote for ADVENTIST TODAY.

I don't want Observer's post to get lost on this thread and his questions to Aletheia ignored (although I am sure he would not object if Lee or FHB respond for her since that is a common trait on this and other forums). The highlighting is mine so the questions are not lost.

Aletheia, Lee, etc how about a response? As Observer has stated. Let's see what you do. Will you respond?

nw
C"i"

This post has been edited by Noahswife: Apr 12 2007, 10:52 AM

[watchbird]

Hi Hersheys99

Mr. J has already responded to Lee but her post has made me wonder about something.
I wonder if Linda has been subjected to any behavior by some in real life that others might consider stalking or worse.

It often seems to me these types of posts contain a good degree of projection. Has anyone else noticed that?

nw
C"i"

Several first hand witnesses have affirmed that they witnessed such behaviour as you describe.

It has also been affirmed by a number who have had first hand experience with DS that they frequently noticed that the very things they had witnessed DS do were the things that he most frequently accused others of doing.

So yes to both questions.