Danny Shelton/3abn Board Are Innocent?, Well, then, there must be some proof, so bring it on! Options

[summertime]

[
I "

Danny was quoted....

"Anyway, he told me how he had invited Brandy to 3ABN to live and work as she was going through a very hard time and she needed a change and a fresh start. He told me he had personally given her Bible studies when she came to 3ABN."

[summertime]

[
I "

Danny was quoted....

"Anyway, he told me how he had invited Brandy to 3ABN to live and work as she was going through a very hard time and she needed a change and a fresh start. He told me he had personally given her Bible studies when she came to 3ABN."

I have 3 SDA pastors who are members of my family and they all tell me that it is inappropriate for a married minister (or any minister) to have Bible Studies with a lone female unless he takes another lady (preferably his wife if he has one). There have been too many examples where relationships can be formed or even misunderstood by others. A more appropriate form of study could have been handled either on the phone, e-mail or with a group Bible Study. Temptation when the 2 are alone in small proximity is always dangerous or could be misunderstood by others who see it happening. That is one reason why there are always 2 male workers who travel and work together in the Church of Latter Day Saints If they can be so indicriminate, maybe our television evangelists could do the same. It may keep a lot of workers marriages from failing.

[Observer]

I have 3 SDA pastors who are members of my family and they all tell me that it is inappropriate for a married minister (or any minister) to have Bible Studies with a lone female unless he takes another lady (preferably his wife if he has one). There have been too many examples where relationships can be formed or even misunderstood by others. A more appropriate form of study could have been handled either on the phone, e-mail or with a group Bible Study. Temptation when the 2 are alone in small proximity is always dangerous or could be misunderstood by others who see it happening. That is one reason why there are always 2 male workers who travel and work together in the Church of Latter Day Saints If they can be so indicriminate, maybe our television evangelists could do the same. It may keep a lot of workers marriages from failing.

I understand the points that you make, which do have some validity.

However, I strongly disagree with your conclusion:

1) Yes there are well-known examples where male pastors have gotten into trouble in working alone with a female.

2) But, there are also well-known cases where male clargy have gotten into trouble in doing the above with another female.

3) In regard to male clergy taking their wives, that assumes that the males are married, that their wives do not have responsibilities that will prevent them from accompaning their husbands, and that the wives are appropriate for being so involved.

The reality of the matter is that some SDA clergy are due to death, divorce, or simply never married, unable to take their wives. Due to family or other responsibilites, some women cannot devote large amounts of time to accompaning their husbands. Some people (both male and female) are not welll suited to doing such pastoral work.

4) Under typical law, the legal dynamic is changed when an ordained clergyperson is accompanied by another who is not so ordained. That aspect is well supported by case law, depending upon the specific State in whch the clergyperson is living.

NOTE: Under specific conditions, as an ordained (Commissioned in the SDA Chruch may meet this criteria.) clergyperson, I cannot be compelled to testify in court in regard to information that I have learned from another person. However, if that information was given to me in thre presence of another person who does not have the same credentials and recognition that I have (Again, Commissioning by the SDA Chruch may meet this standard.) that person may be compelled to testify. This issue is well established.

To illlustrate with a true story: The Conference President who hired me once hired a young pastor, and his wife who were committed to jointly working together in a common effort. As they developed the plan, the two of them worked together in ministry two days per week. They also worked together two days per week on issues related to the home, and so-called women's work (I use that term in an attempt to be clear as to my meaning.). They took one day off. They spent the Sabbath together in church. The one day that was left was devoted to whatever needed most to be done--that might be pastoral, and it might be home-related.

As the above became known the couple were promptly informed that if they expected to remain in ministerial employment, they were going to need to effect a change. The malel pastor was not hired to spend time in ministry 2 or 2.5 days a week.

NOTE: The reason that male clergy get into trouble is due to their common inability to deal with issues of transference and counter-transference. It is not because they are spending time with a female. While the so-called helping professions are typically trained to recognize and properly deal with transference and counter-transference, SDA clergy, as I experienced and understand the training, are not so trained. My training and understanding of this comes from my background in psychology.


This post has been edited by Observer: Sep 14 2007, 06:21 AM

[lurker]

Daryl, Why could they not meet for Bible Study in a semi public place such as an office building at 3ABN with the door open so that the conversation is private but the people involved can be observed? This would protect their reputations as well as remove temptation. No matter how well trained a person is he/she may be caught in a weak moment.

[justice4jesus]

I used to love to hear the Talleys and Kirk sing together. Then Kirk announced that he was gay---it was very widely known and it came from his own mouth--not gossip. He really tore the Talley family apart. Now I understand that Kirk is in treatment hoping to straighten this part of his life out.----we should all hope and pray that he can, because he was one of the best Gospel singers and writers that I have ever heard. Does anyone know if he has anything new out---I would buy it if he does. 'summertime'

I apologize for being here, but I wanted to respond to summertime's concern regarding Kirk Talley.

The story of Kirk's struggle with homosexuality is indeed true, as he himself admitted to the world through his website. Reports are that, for a while, Kirk took the "it's no one's business but mine" attitude, and would become furious if anyone brought it up. Fortunately, some time ago, Kirk realized that he was heading in the wrong direction, and came forward with his struggle, seeking prayer and support from the Christian community as he undertook the recovery process.

Every one of us stumbles from time to time. It's part of being human. Kirk Talley is a Christian brother, and for whatever reason, homosexuality is the web in which he became entangled. While we should never be tolerant of homosexuality to any degree, we should love, encourage, and pray for those who are entrapped by it. I do not know Kirk's current status, but I do know that, as with all such situations, the scars left behind will be there forever. Let us all pray for Kirk Talley as he continues to seek the Lord and to put this painful chapter of his life behind him.

Thank you, summertime, for your concern for this very talented individual, and for reminding us to continue to pray for him.

[Observer]

Daryl, Why could they not meet for Bible Study in a semi public place such as an office building at 3ABN with the door open so that the conversation is private but the people involved can be observed? This would protect their reputations as well as remove temptation. No matter how well trained a person is he/she may be caught in a weak moment.

Perhaps you meant me, rather than Dayrl?

My response was general in nature in regard to the typical SDA pastor. It was not directed toward Danny and Brandy.

In an institutional setting, such as where I work the situation may be different.

However, personal privacy concerns may dictate that doors be closed. In a situation where the door is open, privacy is not maintained. People walking by my open office door will be able to hear anything that is said in my office.

In regard to:

No matter how well trained a person is he/she may be caught in a weak moment.

I strongly disagree with you, in part. Yes, a person can fall, so to speak. But, I do not agree that such, under the circumstances of which we are talking is a simple "being caught in a weak moment." In the context of which we (I) are speaking, any sexual assult is planned over a period of time, and is acted upon following that planning. It does not happen in a weak moment.

In my experience, I have seen a few exceptions. I will acknowledge this. But, those exceptions have never been of the type where a person was engaged in a course of Bible Study, or Pastoral Counseling. In every case involving Bible Study and/or Pastoral Counseling, of which I am aware, planning preceeded action, and desire proceeded planning.

Yes, I am aware of a few cases in which a pastor accepted the services of a prostitute in which I could say that such a person simply fell into a weak moment.

People in the helping professions are generally expected to have been trained well in issues of transference and counter-transference. They have often engaged in considerable instropection to the point where they are comfortable with their own sexuality, and can acknowledge (recognize) what is going on in their owh psyche. As such thay have been trained to act responsibility.

Unfortunately, SDA clergy (and some other clergy) often to not have that training. If they are unable to instropect and to acknowledge thier own sexuality, and what it going on withing themselves, they, in my opinon, are likely to get into trouble. For a male to keep out of sexual trouble with a female, the first step is for that male to recagnize/acknowledge that he is sexually attracted to that woman. To refuse to acknowledge such, and to deny his own sexual feelings, is, in my opinion, the first active step to trouble. I have seen to many people where their trouble began when they denied to themselves that they were sexually attracted to one to whom they were not married.

By the way, in my personal opinion, for a person in a helping profession to become sexually involved with one whom he is helping should be treated as satuatory rape. Unfortunately, in my opinion, in most places, the law does not agree with me.

NOTE: My comment above is of a general nature. Do not construe it to apply to any specific person or situation. I do not know enough about any specific situation to make such a statement about that situation.

[YogusBearus]

I understand the points that you make, which do have some validity.

However, I strongly disagree with your conclusion:

1) Yes there are well-known examples where male pastors have gotten into trouble in working alone with a female.

2) But, there are also well-known cases where male clargy have gotten into trouble in doing the above with another female.

3) In regard to male clergy taking their wives, that assumes that the males are married, that their wives do not have responsibilities that will prevent them from accompaning their husbands, and that the wives are appropriate for being so involved.

The reality of the matter is that some SDA clergy are due to death, divorce, or simply never married, unable to take their wives. Due to family or other responsibilites, some women cannot devote large amounts of time to accompaning their husbands. Some people (both male and female) are not welll suited to doing such pastoral work.

4) Under typical law, the legal dynamic is changed when an ordained clergyperson is accompanied by another who is not so ordained. That aspect is well supported by case law, depending upon the specific State in whch the clergyperson is living.

NOTE: Under specific conditions, as an ordained (Commissioned in the SDA Chruch may meet this criteria.) clergyperson, I cannot be compelled to testify in court in regard to information that I have learned from another person. However, if that information was given to me in thre presence of another person who does not have the same credentials and recognition that I have (Again, Commissioning by the SDA Chruch may meet this standard.) that person may be compelled to testify. This issue is well established.

To illlustrate with a true story: The Conference President who hired me once hired a young pastor, and his wife who were committed to jointly working together in a common effort. As they developed the plan, the two of them worked together in ministry two days per week. They also worked together two days per week on issues related to the home, and so-called women's work (I use that term in an attempt to be clear as to my meaning.). They took one day off. They spent the Sabbath together in church. The one day that was left was devoted to whatever needed most to be done--that might be pastoral, and it might be home-related.

As the above became known the couple were promptly informed that if they expected to remain in ministerial employment, they were going to need to effect a change. The malel pastor was not hired to spend time in ministry 2 or 2.5 days a week.

NOTE: The reason that male clergy get into trouble is due to their common inability to deal with issues of transference and counter-transference. It is not because they are spending time with a female. While the so-called helping professions are typically trained to recognize and properly deal with transference and counter-transference, SDA clergy, as I experienced and understand the training, are not so trained. My training and understanding of this comes from my background in psychology.

Gregory, while your background and training greatly exceed mine in this area, I do have a couple of reservations. One of the things I admire most about Billy Graham is his common sense approach to avoiding scandal of any type. My recollection is that he will never allow himself to be alone with a woman other than his wife for any purpose and he is totally uninvolved with any of the financial aspects of his ministry. These simple guidelines have appeared to serve him well in a high profile ministry spanning decades.

I believe your point regarding SDA clergy generally not being equipped to provide professional level counseling is a good one. Does the church have any limits on what type of counseling it's pastors can be involved in?

Lastly, folks might be interested in the Odenthal story that is a tragic example of everything that can go wrong in these situations. Bonnie Odenthal has been an outspoken advocate against clerical abuse in counseling and I believe she is a member at Maritime. Here is a link to the Odenthal case: http://library.findlaw.com/2003/Feb/7/132534.html


-bear

[lurker]

Yes, I meant you rather than Daryl. Sorry.

This post has been edited by lurker: Sep 14 2007, 09:57 AM

[PeacefulBe]

Gregory,

Twice your posts have spoken about the training in transference and cross transference that many counselors receive and it demostrates to me that our denomination needs to train our pastors and leaders in the same way so that they have the necessary tools to counsel wisely.

[Observer]

Gregory, while your background and training greatly exceed mine in this area, I do have a couple of reservations. One of the things I admire most about Billy Graham is his common sense approach to avoiding scandal of any type. My recollection is that he will never allow himself to be alone with a woman other than his wife for any purpose and he is totally uninvolved with any of the financial aspects of his ministry. These simple guidelines have appeared to serve him well in a high profile ministry spanning decades.

I believe your point regarding SDA clergy generally not being equipped to provide professional level counseling is a good one. Does the church have any limits on what type of counseling it's pastors can be involved in?

Lastly, folks might be interested in the Odenthal story that is a tragic example of everything that can go wrong in these situations. Bonnie Odenthal has been an outspoken advocate against clerical abuse in counseling and I believe she is a member at Maritime. Here is a link to the Odenthal case: http://library.findlaw.com/2003/Feb/7/132534.html


-bear

As you probably know, I am well aquainted with the Odenthal case. That one is not an isolated case. There are many others like it. I have posted much in other forums in regard to that case and the issues that are faced.

I fully understand that point that is taken by Billy Graham, and others who take that position. Allow me to make a couple of points:

1) As a young pastor, working toward ordination, in a remote area of the Conference, without many of the trappings of civilized society, I could not have performed the expectations of the Conference if I had followed that rule. I would not be a SDA minister today. In fact, I would likely not be employed by the denomination at all. NOTE: I am currently employed by the Federal Government, and not the denomination. I am endorsed and credentialed by the General Conference.

2) SDA clergy marry women with whom they have developed a personal relationship that has in the normal course of life developed to the point of marriage. We, I hope, learned long ago that we can not expect our clergy to marry women [NOTE: I am aware of our female clergy. I am simply using the male references in this post.] who fit some pre-determined denominational role. Some ministeral wives would not fit a role that would require them to accompany their husbands as is suggested. In addition, as a denomination we have leaarned that clerical happy marriages to do occure when women are forced to give up their chosen roles to fit that of their husbands.

NOTE: I am personally aquainted with a ministerial couple where the male is a very successful pastor, and the female is a physician. She has agreed to practice medicine in a manner that will allow her husband to be a successful pastor, and in addition to be moved between Conference churches. It is in part because she has agreed to limit her practice of medicine that her husband has been a successful pastor. Should we now expect her to give up her practice of medicine so that she can sit with her husband every time he visits a female?

3) I will say again there are serious legal implications, dependent upon the individual State, that change the pastoral dynamics any time that a clergyperson allows another person who is not clergy to participate in his pastoral role.

4) What are you going to do about those who work in an instutional role, as I do? I see women alone in my office, in the building where I work. I would not be allowed to have my wife with me in much of what I do. To do so would violate a Federal role known as HIPPA. In this setting, to leave my door open would violate the privacy and confidentiality that my patients expect.

In regard to institutional chaplaincies, consider those SDA clergy person who work in prisons, and as military chaplains. In those situations no outside persons would be allowed to participate with the chaplain in their ministry.

Think beyond this to military issues. Men and women serve together in combat. I am a veteran of combat. I have experienced combat. I am well aware of the issues that come up in relation to men and women in combat together. Folks, combat is not an ideal situation. It is not possible for one to structure an Ideal situation like Billly Graham would suggest.

5) At the bottom line it comes down to the values that the individual has, their introspective reflection on what is going on internally within them, and the decisions that they make in regard to how to act on what is gong on inside them.

If I am walking down the street and I notice a woman walking down the street toward me dressed only in shoes and her birthday suit, it becomes my responsibility at to how I relate to her. It is my responsibility to relate to her in such a manner that I do not "jump" on her and lay her down on the sidewalk.

I am very serious in all that I am saying. I have lived in a country where men and women shared bathroom facililties, where men and women openly bathed in public streams and engaged in other personal activities. I have walked streets in the United States where I have seen women on the street who were not dressed as we would think for them being out in public, or dressed less than that.

The fundamental issue of the Christian living in society today is not to flee from that society, but to be aware of how that culture is impacting on him/her self, and to make responsisble choices.

I simply cannot function in a pastoral role that allows me to intereact with society and do ministry as God would want me to do, and in fulfilling that role function as Billy Graham has suggested. He may have been able to have done so. But, I am not called to be a Billy Graham.

With the expectations that the SDA denomination has for its pastors, many can not do so either. Some can.

Re: Limits as to counseling: Some Conferences do, in part to the Odenthal case. But, even those limits do not have the protection that is needed for the individual pastor. Rather they serve to protect the Conference.

[Observer]

As you probably know, I am well aquainted with the Odenthal case. That one is not an isolated case. There are many others like it. I have posted much in other forums in regard to that case and the issues that are faced.

I fully understand that point that is taken by Billy Graham, and others who take that position. Allow me to make a couple of points:

1) As a young pastor, working toward ordination, in a remote area of the Conference, without many of the trappings of civilized society, I could not have performed the expectations of the Conference if I had followed that rule. I would not be a SDA minister today. In fact, I would likely not be employed by the denomination at all. NOTE: I am currently employed by the Federal Government, and not the denomination. I am endorsed and credentialed by the General Conference.

2) SDA clergy marry women with whom they have developed a personal relationship that has in the normal course of life developed to the point of marriage. We, I hope, learned long ago that we can not expect our clergy to marry women [NOTE: I am aware of our female clergy. I am simply using the male references in this post.] who fit some pre-determined denominational role. Some ministeral wives would not fit a role that would require them to accompany their husbands as is suggested. In addition, as a denomination we have leaarned that clerical happy marriages to do occure when women are forced to give up their chosen roles to fit that of their husbands.

NOTE: I am personally aquainted with a ministerial couple where the male is a very successful pastor, and the female is a physician. She has agreed to practice medicine in a manner that will allow her husband to be a successful pastor, and in addition to be moved between Conference churches. It is in part because she has agreed to limit her practice of medicine that her husband has been a successful pastor. Should we now expect her to give up her practice of medicine so that she can sit with her husband every time he visits a female?

3) I will say again there are serious legal implications, dependent upon the individual State, that change the pastoral dynamics any time that a clergyperson allows another person who is not clergy to participate in his pastoral role.

4) What are you going to do about those who work in an instutional role, as I do? I see women alone in my office, in the building where I work. I would not be allowed to have my wife with me in much of what I do. To do so would violate a Federal role known as HIPPA. In this setting, to leave my door open would violate the privacy and confidentiality that my patients expect.

In regard to institutional chaplaincies, consider those SDA clergy person who work in prisons, and as military chaplains. In those situations no outside persons would be allowed to participate with the chaplain in their ministry.

Think beyond this to military issues. Men and women serve together in combat. I am a veteran of combat. I have experienced combat. I am well aware of the issues that come up in relation to men and women in combat together. Folks, combat is not an ideal situation. It is not possible for one to structure an Ideal situation like Billly Graham would suggest.

5) At the bottom line it comes down to the values that the individual has, their introspective reflection on what is going on internally within them, and the decisions that they make in regard to how to act on what is gong on inside them.

If I am walking down the street and I notice a woman walking down the street toward me dressed only in shoes and her birthday suit, it becomes my responsibility at to how I relate to her. It is my responsibility to relate to her in such a manner that I do not "jump" on her and lay her down on the sidewalk.

I am very serious in all that I am saying. I have lived in a country where men and women shared bathroom facililties, where men and women openly bathed in public streams and engaged in other personal activities. I have walked streets in the United States where I have seen women on the street who were not dressed as we would think for them being out in public, or dressed less than that.

The fundamental issue of the Christian living in society today is not to flee from that society, but to be aware of how that culture is impacting on him/her self, and to make responsisble choices.

I simply cannot function in a pastoral role that allows me to intereact with society and do ministry as God would want me to do, and in fulfilling that role function as Billy Graham has suggested. He may have been able to have done so. But, I am not called to be a Billy Graham.

With the expectations that the SDA denomination has for its pastors, many can not do so either. Some can.

Re: Limits as to counseling: Some Conferences do, in part to the Odenthal case. But, even those limits do not have the protection that is needed for the individual pastor. Rather they serve to protect the Conference.

Let me tell you an interestign story, which is true:

I participated in the U.S. invasion of Grenada. [Do I have comments to make about that.] At that time, I was assigned high enough in the command that I lived in a house in the capital of the nation. It was a small home built for the tourist trade. It had two small bedrooms each with a bathroom, and a common living area and kitchen between the two small bedrooms.

During the time I was in Grenada, there were always from 7 to 10 pesons living in that home. Some were female and some were male. I was senior in rank. As a Commissioned Officer, the second senior in rank, also a Commissioned officer, automaticly got one bedroom. The two senior enllisted people, automaticly got the second bedroom. It just happened that the other Commissioned officer was a male, and the two senior enlilsted people were female. So the other male officer and I shared one bedroom. Due to that, the bathroom off of our bedroom became the bathroom for the males living in the house. Also, it just happened that the two senor enlisted peopel were females, so they got the second bedroom. That bathroom became the bahroom for the females.

But, the bedrooms would have been given as stated even if it had resulted in males and females sharing a bedroom.

Once the bedrooms had been given out, that left us with anywhere from 3 to 6 males and females sleeping on the floor, side by side, together.

My enlisted assistant was not comfortable with that. So, he attempted to sleep out on the porch away from any females. Well, Grenada is a tropical island. It rained on him the first night. The second he slept under a table. It rained on him again.

I called a meeting the next morning, and I surfaced the issue of the sexuality involved with males and females sleeping together on the floor, side by side, next to each other, as wa required due to furniture, etc. We openly discussed the issues. Everyone got their feelings, thoughts and fears out into the open. We dwelt with them. Then we reached a common understanding as to how everyone would behave and how all of us would relate to each other. My enlisted assistant moved back into the home, and comfortable slept on the floor next to one of the women. Everyone behaved in an approprite manner.

I will say again, we live in the world, the culture, and in society. God has called us to represent Him in our cultures, and in our societies. We are not called to flee society and sin as dis Simon Stylitis in monastic times. That mode was clearly unsuccessfull. Regardless of our culture and our society, God expects us to rightfully represent Him.

In regard to our sexuality, that can be done. Clergy do not typically fall into sexual sin. (Yes, there are rare exceptions.) When they sin sexually, it is much more complicated than mere falling into sin.

[LaurenceD]

Well! Although one doesn't need to have grown up in a nudist camp to keep one's mind clear (although it may help), there are simple ways to avoid potentially inapproprate one-on-one bible studies, or any studies for that matter, at either conservative religious compounds or institutions of higher learning.

Of course the professor or minister can always go off campus--I understand--but even the students could have shown the wayward adults how to avoid circumstances like the academy teacher who had an affair with his secretary after school (this actually happened), or the minister who had an affair with a woman he was counseling (this also really happened-and at church), or the college professor who got involved with one of his students after school (also really happened). or the female teacher who tudored her student one summer at his apartment (also really happened).

This is what we're talking about (practical judgement, or campus rules), not some technical code higher up in gov't.

[Observer]

Well! Although one doesn't need to have grown up in a nudist camp to keep one's mind clear (although it may help), there are simple ways to avoid potentially inapproprate one-on-one bible studies, or any studies for that matter, at either conservative religious compounds or institutions of higher learning.

Of course the professor or minister can always go off campus--I understand--but even the students could have shown the wayward adults how to avoid circumstances like the academy teacher who had an affair with his secretary after school (this actually happened), or the minister who had an affair with a woman he was counseling (this also really happened-and at church), or the college professor who got involved with one of his students after school (also really happened). or the female teacher who tudored her student one summer at his apartment (also really happened).

This is what we're talking about (practical judgement, or campus rules), not some technical code higher up in gov't.

Yes, and it begins with the ability of an individual to look at a situation, realize what is inappropritate, and make proper decisions in regard to behavior.

[YogusBearus]

As you probably know, I am well aquainted with the Odenthal case. That one is not an isolated case. There are many others like it. I have posted much in other forums in regard to that case and the issues that are faced.

I fully understand that point that is taken by Billy Graham, and others who take that position. Allow me to make a couple of points:

1) As a young pastor, working toward ordination, in a remote area of the Conference, without many of the trappings of civilized society, I could not have performed the expectations of the Conference if I had followed that rule. I would not be a SDA minister today. In fact, I would likely not be employed by the denomination at all. NOTE: I am currently employed by the Federal Government, and not the denomination. I am endorsed and credentialed by the General Conference.

2) SDA clergy marry women with whom they have developed a personal relationship that has in the normal course of life developed to the point of marriage. We, I hope, learned long ago that we can not expect our clergy to marry women [NOTE: I am aware of our female clergy. I am simply using the male references in this post.] who fit some pre-determined denominational role. Some ministeral wives would not fit a role that would require them to accompany their husbands as is suggested. In addition, as a denomination we have leaarned that clerical happy marriages to do occure when women are forced to give up their chosen roles to fit that of their husbands.

NOTE: I am personally aquainted with a ministerial couple where the male is a very successful pastor, and the female is a physician. She has agreed to practice medicine in a manner that will allow her husband to be a successful pastor, and in addition to be moved between Conference churches. It is in part because she has agreed to limit her practice of medicine that her husband has been a successful pastor. Should we now expect her to give up her practice of medicine so that she can sit with her husband every time he visits a female?

3) I will say again there are serious legal implications, dependent upon the individual State, that change the pastoral dynamics any time that a clergyperson allows another person who is not clergy to participate in his pastoral role.

4) What are you going to do about those who work in an instutional role, as I do? I see women alone in my office, in the building where I work. I would not be allowed to have my wife with me in much of what I do. To do so would violate a Federal role known as HIPPA. In this setting, to leave my door open would violate the privacy and confidentiality that my patients expect.

In regard to institutional chaplaincies, consider those SDA clergy person who work in prisons, and as military chaplains. In those situations no outside persons would be allowed to participate with the chaplain in their ministry.

Think beyond this to military issues. Men and women serve together in combat. I am a veteran of combat. I have experienced combat. I am well aware of the issues that come up in relation to men and women in combat together. Folks, combat is not an ideal situation. It is not possible for one to structure an Ideal situation like Billly Graham would suggest.

5) At the bottom line it comes down to the values that the individual has, their introspective reflection on what is going on internally within them, and the decisions that they make in regard to how to act on what is gong on inside them.

If I am walking down the street and I notice a woman walking down the street toward me dressed only in shoes and her birthday suit, it becomes my responsibility at to how I relate to her. It is my responsibility to relate to her in such a manner that I do not "jump" on her and lay her down on the sidewalk.

I am very serious in all that I am saying. I have lived in a country where men and women shared bathroom facililties, where men and women openly bathed in public streams and engaged in other personal activities. I have walked streets in the United States where I have seen women on the street who were not dressed as we would think for them being out in public, or dressed less than that.

The fundamental issue of the Christian living in society today is not to flee from that society, but to be aware of how that culture is impacting on him/her self, and to make responsisble choices.

I simply cannot function in a pastoral role that allows me to intereact with society and do ministry as God would want me to do, and in fulfilling that role function as Billy Graham has suggested. He may have been able to have done so. But, I am not called to be a Billy Graham.

With the expectations that the SDA denomination has for its pastors, many can not do so either. Some can.

Re: Limits as to counseling: Some Conferences do, in part to the Odenthal case. But, even those limits do not have the protection that is needed for the individual pastor. Rather they serve to protect the Conference.

I think I should have clarified that I believe the approach that Billy Graham is taking is really for his own protection. He undoubtedly knows how quickly the knives can come out when "Christians" sense something potentially sensational is in the wind. My personal observation is that SDA's are known for the high quality of their cutlery.


-bear

This post has been edited by YogusBearus: Sep 14 2007, 03:57 PM

[princessdi]

ITA, YB!

I think I should have clarifyified that I believe the approach that Billy Graham is taking is really for his own protection. He undoubtedly knows how quickly the knives can come out when "Christians" sense something potentially sensational is in the wind. My personal observation is that SDA's are known for the high quality of their cutlery.
-bear