The Lawsuit Continues., This is where we are, and what is happening. Options

[Observer]

For the sake of clarity:
Quoting Gailon Joy:
"This is to begin discussions...any thoughts, concerns, additions or just observations are clearly welcome. Linda's team and I have serious concerns regarding your neutrality"

http://www.blacksda.com/forums/index.php?s...st&p=161771

Quoting Gregory Matthews:
"NOTE: I am clearly considered to be one of "Linda's Team." My public position has been and remains: Linda has never given Danny any type of Biblical grounds for him to divorce her."

http://www.blacksda.com/forums/index.php?s...st&p=185453

Quoting ASI:
"Linda [formerly Mrs. Danny Shelton] (afterward referred to as Linda) did not participate personally in discussions to develop an agreed upon process.
Linda identified Gaylon Arthur Joy (afterward referred to as Joy) as her representative. Joy, in turn, introduced Bob Pickle (afterward referred to as Pickle) and Greg Matthews (afterward referred to as Matthews) as his team members.
Linda’s team:
Did not accept that ASI was capable of providing a fair forum to decide the issues
Insisted on including issues involving allegations of mismanagement and corporate misconduct at 3ABN
Would not accept the ground rules for the panel’s procedures
Would not cease harassing e-mail contact with Danny or other 3ABN representatives
Would not cease, when requested to do so, circulating distracting comments about the process under discussion with ASI
We never learned whether Linda approved of the positions asserted by her team. At no time did Linda respond except to say that Joy would be her representative. "

http://www.3abn.org/3abn_asi_update.cfm

Ian:

Yes, I was one of the people involved in discussions with Harold Lance (ASI) that you reference above. I have posted comments on the issues that you list above. So, there is no need to re-state them. In brief, I will say here as I have said before, comments such as the above, in my opinion misrepresent the issues. I consider them to be inaccurate and incomplete.

Unfortunately, the attempt to resolve the issues failed. I believe that they failed in part because Harold Lance did not understand the dynamics that were a part of the discussion process. I also believe that he and ASI pulled out prematurely.

As I have posted a number of times in the past, I happen to believe that there were some aspects of issues in which ASI could have been helpful. I also agree with Mr. Lance that there were other aspects that could not have been resolved by ASI, or any other denominational type of organization. Those aspects, could only have been resolved by the civil authorities. So, I never looked to ASI to resolve those issues. Harold Lance and I were in agreement on a number of aspects of what should be done/accomplished or not done/accomplished.

In the seccular world there people who want to resolve differences my use arbitration or they may use mediation. These are two different processes, quite different in fact. Both of these processes are supported by professonal standards, and have some defination of process.

At the time that our discussions with ASI took place I have little understanding of the differences between mediation and arbitration. I also did not have a comprehensive view of their respective proceses and how they were to be conducted. I have some minimal training in this area now, and therefore a better understanding. Although I do not claim to be an expert in either. With this better understanding, I might make some changes in my approach and relationship to such discussions. But, I acted as best I could at that time. I feel that it would have been helpful if Mr. Lance had spent some time in working with us on the professional standards for each of those two processes.

The process with ASI failed. In my thinking the primary reason that it failed was due to a failure to negotiate in good faith. I do not believe that ASI (Harold Lance) negotiated in any maner with some of the concerns that we had. The appeared to me to be summarly dismissed with no consideration. As anyone who has ever participated in mediation (arbitration has differences) you continue to talk until the respective parties either agree to a resolution, or one pulls out. A mediator does not pull out while there remains a willingness to talk. I can assure you that I, was willing to continue to talk as I believe were Gailon and Bob Pickle.

In arbitration the process is different. In order to be brief, I will simply say that it was prmature, in my mind, for ASI to pull out.

Your post mentions that we did not beleive that ASI could be fair. If that is so, that is a fair issue in an arbitration case. It is clearly a substantial issue. I had not reached an opinion, and I still do not have one, as to whether or not ASI could be fair. Questions were asked. They were valid, and properly a part of any attempt to arbitrate. They were not answered. ASI pulled out befor those questions were answered. As a result, I do not know, or have an opiinon as to whether or not ASI could have been fair. It certainly was within their rights to pull out without responsding to those questions.

In closing: I believe that ASI could have been helpful in a limited way, but that some issues could only have been resolved fairly to both sides by the civil authorities.

[watchbird]

I would not be one bit surprised to see this on 60-minutes one day.

This lawsuit as much as anything illustrates Danny's arrogance or
ignorance.... take your pick.

I fear nothing good will come of it.

The best that could happen at this point would be for a quick, mutual
out of court settlement. I would be in hopes that "the brethren" might
have some influence in making this a reality.

"The best that could happen".... from whose viewpoint? The best way a new carpet could be stretched over the pile of stuff that has already been swept undert he old threadbare one?

Certainly not the "best" from the viewpoint of those who have been injured and swept under the rug... or injured by the things that have been swept under the rug.

NO... nothing less than full disclosure will be the "best that could happen at this point". Even repentance... when it is not accompanied by public confession in the same venues in which the harm was done... and by restitution in all things tangible enough to permit some degree of restitution... AND the complete cleansing of the camp from all who have aided in the wrongs of the past.... will be the "best that could happen at this point".

And a cleansing of the camp does NOT mean the addition of those who are more adept at oiling the machinery of the "spin machine" than those in the past has been. It means what it says... a complete cleansing and a starting over again completely unshackled from anything in its past.

[no_cults]

"The best that could happen".... from whose viewpoint? The best way a new carpet could be stretched over the pile of stuff that has already been swept undert he old threadbare one?

Certainly not the "best" from the viewpoint of those who have been injured and swept under the rug... or injured by the things that have been swept under the rug.

NO... nothing less than full disclosure will be the "best that could happen at this point". Even repentance... when it is not accompanied by public confession in the same venues in which the harm was done... and by restitution in all things tangible enough to permit some degree of restitution... AND the complete cleansing of the camp from all who have aided in the wrongs of the past.... will be the "best that could happen at this point".

And a cleansing of the camp does NOT mean the addition of those who are more adept at oiling the machinery of the "spin machine" than those in the past has been. It means what it says... a complete cleansing and a starting over again completely unshackled from anything in its past.

So, you would welcome the exposure of this "mess" for the entertainment of
the masses?

The longer this suit continues, the greater the likelihood.

There are better ways to "cleanse the camp" than what this lawsuit affords.
DS.... messed up BIG TIME or was just plain snookered by the lawyers.

It is hard to believe that anyone could take pleasure in this sad
episode entering primetime....

[watchbird]

So, you would welcome the exposure of this "mess" for the entertainment of
the masses?

The longer this suit continues, the greater the likelihood.

There are better ways to "cleanse the camp" than what this lawsuit affords.
DS.... messed up BIG TIME or was just plain snookered by the lawyers.

It is hard to believe that anyone could take pleasure in this sad
episode entering primetime....

Where did I say anything about taking "pleasure" in it.

The point is that now is now.

Go back to previous years and cleansing the camp would have been a simpler thing that it is now.

But with every new exposure has come an increasing effort on the Shelton team to cover things over and hide them from view. So with every new moment of time the things it would take to make things right becomes more and more difficult.... and will look worse and worse when it is finally exposed.

That is something we have to live with. But we will not do anyone a favor if we join the call for handling things in secret.... for there is too much that has been done openly.... and too many persons who have been hurt publicly.... so healing and justice can only come when the evils are handled publicly.

[no_cults]

Where did I say anything about taking "pleasure" in it.

The point is that now is now.

Go back to previous years and cleansing the camp would have been a simpler thing that it is now.

But with every new exposure has come an increasing effort on the Shelton team to cover things over and hide them from view. So with every new moment of time the things it would take to make things right becomes more and more difficult.... and will look worse and worse when it is finally exposed.

That is something we have to live with. But we will not do anyone a favor if we join the call for handling things in secret.... for there is too much that has been done openly.... and too many persons who have been hurt publicly.... so healing and justice can only come when the evils are handled publicly.

The issue is the lawsuit and it's possible ramifications.
If this lawsuit continues, the potential for all of it's stinking
mess to be made more public is strong. I would not want
that to occur. My granny used to say, "the more you stir
Shxx, the more it stinks".

At this point, I am willing to give Gilley a chance to prove
that his regime will root out the problem.... meaning those
responsible and those who cooperated in the past wrongs
will be led out the door. If he is smart as I think he is, he
will understand this well. If not, he will have wasted his
time and the "little ole ladies" will still have their money
in their purses.

My desire is not for a pound of flesh, but that this entire
sad episode will not cast a bad light on our church.
NOTE -- I am not implying that what has happened should
be swept under the rug.... or those responsible not held
responsible. Far from it!

Also... I am not overly patient with Gilley ---- Decisive
executive action needs to be taken in a relative short
period of time. People are not going to be easily fooled
by a slick, smooth talking preacher. I am willing to give
Gilley a pass or fail grade in say about six months.

[watchbird]

My desire is not for a pound of flesh, but that this entire
sad episode will not cast a bad light on our church.
NOTE -- I am not implying that what has happened should
be swept under the rug.... or those responsible not held
responsible. Far from it!

I understand the feeling... but the facts are that we can't have it both ways. The whole world is part of 3abn... which means that the whole world has to know....

Yes, it is a sad episode... probably a lot sadder than you and I realize.... but it will not get better by continued concealment. The sooner the tumor is excised, the sooner the body can begin to heal.

[no_cults]

I understand the feeling... but the facts are that we can't have it both ways. The whole world is part of 3abn... which means that the whole world has to know....

Yes, it is a sad episode... probably a lot sadder than you and I realize.... but it will not get better by continued concealment. The sooner the tumor is excised, the sooner the body can begin to heal.

Well, right now - the scalpel is in Gilley's hands.
He has help on the board and surely is smart enough
to discover the problem if he's a mind to.

[Observer]

The issue is the lawsuit and it's possible ramifications.
If this lawsuit continues, the potential for all of it's stinking
mess to be made more public is strong. I would not want
that to occur. My granny used to say, "the more you stir
Shxx, the more it stinks".

At this point, I am willing to give Gilley a chance to prove
that his regime will root out the problem.... meaning those
responsible and those who cooperated in the past wrongs
will be led out the door. If he is smart as I think he is, he
will understand this well. If not, he will have wasted his
time and the "little ole ladies" will still have their money
in their purses.

My desire is not for a pound of flesh, but that this entire
sad episode will not cast a bad light on our church.
NOTE -- I am not implying that what has happened should
be swept under the rug.... or those responsible not held
responsible. Far from it!

Also... I am not overly patient with Gilley ---- Decisive
executive action needs to be taken in a relative short
period of time. People are not going to be easily fooled
by a slick, smooth talking preacher. I am willing to give
Gilley a pass or fail grade in say about six months.

Elder Gilley: I am willing to give him time. I can not expect him to accept the post, and 24 hours later have made all the changes that should be made.

God: I happen to believe that God is still in charge. So far the media has not done much with the stories. They have made some attempts, but people refused to talk to them, and the media did not further persue it.

But, I will suggst that there is an instructive lesson in the history of the SDA church. God sent advice and warnings to our leadership in Battle Creek. The leadership ignored those warnings, and the result was that God burned Battle Creek. The fire that destroyed Battle Creek, came because leadership failed to listen to warnings, and to represent God as God wanted to be represented.

Out of the ashes of Battle Creek, God built an institution that was what God wanted it to be. One of the lessons is that God can build upon ashes. When God builds, even upon ashes, success happens.

John 11: 50 Caiaphas, the High Priest said: "You do not realize that it is better for you that one man die for the people than that the whole nation parish."

The above is an instructive verse. It tells us that religious leaders can come to the point where they are willing to sacrifice an innocent person in order to do what they believe is best. That view does not rightly represent God. The God I worship is not one who in the name of expediency condems an innocent person to achieve a higher good.

There are those who defend Linda who believe that it was an attitude such as the above that sought to sacrifice Linda in the name of the higher good for 3-ABN. The story has been told many times as to how people stated that it really did not matter whether or not Linda was guilty, for the good of 3-ABN, she had to go. So, her name was blackened. Her reputation was flushed down the toilet. The scarlet "A" (or was it SA for spiritual adultery) was branded on her forehead.

Well, God is in charge. No one wants to see 3-ABN destroyed. But, if that happens, it is in the will of God, and God can build upon the ashes.

I do not know what the end result will be. But, the longer humans reject the warnings of God, the more painful the resolution may be.

Whatever happens, God is God. God will accomplish His purpose.

[GRAT]

I understand the feeling... but the facts are that we can't have it both ways. The whole world is part of 3abn... which means that the whole world has to know....

Yes, it is a sad episode... probably a lot sadder than you and I realize.... but it will not get better by continued concealment. The sooner the tumor is excised, the sooner the body can begin to heal.

Amen and Amen!!!

[LaurenceD]

Then there's always the possibility of another lesson learned from Battle Creek...that of Kellogg's wayward son, the pyromaniac. Ever read The Road to Wellville?

[no_cults]

Elder Gilley: I am willing to give him time. I can not expect him to accept the post, and 24 hours later have made all the changes that should be made.

God: I happen to believe that God is still in charge. So far the media has not done much with the stories. They have made some attempts, but people refused to talk to them, and the media did not further persue it.

But, I will suggst that there is an instructive lesson in the history of the SDA church. God sent advice and warnings to our leadership in Battle Creek. The leadership ignored those warnings, and the result was that God burned Battle Creek. The fire that destroyed Battle Creek, came because leadership failed to listen to warnings, and to represent God as God wanted to be represented.

Out of the ashes of Battle Creek, God built an institution that was what God wanted it to be. One of the lessons is that God can build upon ashes. When God builds, even upon ashes, success happens.

John 11: 50 Caiaphas, the High Priest said: "You do not realize that it is better for you that one man die for the people than that the whole nation parish."

The above is an instructive verse. It tells us that religious leaders can come to the point where they are willing to sacrifice an innocent person in order to do what they believe is best. That view does not rightly represent God. The God I worship is not one who in the name of expediency condems an innocent person to achieve a higher good.

There are those who defend Linda who believe that it was an attitude such as the above that sought to sacrifice Linda in the name of the higher good for 3-ABN. The story has been told many times as to how people stated that it really did not matter whether or not Linda was guilty, for the good of 3-ABN, she had to go. So, her name was blackened. Her reputation was flushed down the toilet. The scarlet "A" (or was it SA for spiritual adultery) was branded on her forehead.

Well, God is in charge. No one wants to see 3-ABN destroyed. But, if that happens, it is in the will of God, and God can build upon the ashes.

I do not know what the end result will be. But, the longer humans reject the warnings of God, the more painful the resolution may be.

Whatever happens, God is God. God will accomplish His purpose.

God's work will be completed with or without 3ABN !!
My concern is the potential for some extreme negative
publicity involving our church......

I would be very surprised if there were not dozens
of people willing to talk to the press about this... yea
GLADLY talk to the press !!!!

Pray for Gilley.

[beartrap]

Then there's always the possibility of another lesson learned from Battle Creek...that of Kellogg's wayward son, the pyromaniac. Ever read The Road to Wellville?

LOL! I loved the movie. It caricaturized a number of things that those of us who have experienced utra-conservative Adventism know all too well.

[Observer]

Then there's always the possibility of another lesson learned from Battle Creek...that of Kellogg's wayward son, the pyromaniac. Ever read The Road to Wellville?

I am not concerned with the method. If Kellogg's son, I can still say that God burned Battle Creek.

[Johann]

Another opinion of the lwasuit - sent to Linda:

Linda: . . . I too am not a supporter of 3ABN. I believe you are innocent. Danny will have to answer to God. Who is to say he will last till 2009 with his heart condition. What a foolish, foolish man. God have mercy on him. S. . .

[Panama_Pete]

John 11: 50 Caiaphas, the High Priest said: "You do not realize that it is better for you that one man die for the people than that the whole nation parish."

The above is an instructive verse. It tells us that religious leaders can come to the point where they are willing to sacrifice an innocent person in order to do what they believe is best. That view does not rightly represent God. The God I worship is not one who in the name of expediency condems an innocent person to achieve a higher good.

There are those who defend Linda who believe that it was an attitude such as the above that sought to sacrifice Linda in the name of the higher good for 3-ABN. The story has been told many times as to how people stated that it really did not matter whether or not Linda was guilty, for the good of 3-ABN, she had to go. So, her name was blackened. Her reputation was flushed down the toilet. The scarlet "A" (or was it SA for spiritual adultery) was branded on her forehead...

...Whatever happens, God is God. God will accomplish His purpose.