Advent Talk
Issues & Concerns Category => 3ABN => Topic started by: Daryl Fawcett on January 22, 2008, 07:56:44 AM
-
I am posting the following with permission:
The following is a composite of Pastor Jean and Kristina Fiscalini. They have read this, agreed to it’s publication and the truth of the depicted incidents.
For those of you unfamiliar with foreign names, Pastor Fiscalini’s first name is the French version of the English name “John”, his last name is of Italian origin, he is a native of the German speaking area of Switzerland and his wife is American.
Nobody owns the Church... Part 1
Sitting quietly, facing Danny Shelton, Kristina’s mind races back to the conversation she had with her husband the previous evening:
“Honey, you realize if you stand up against Danny Shelton that could be the end of your career at 3ABN,” she said. Snuggling closer to her husband she looked into his eyes, wondering what effect this would have upon his decision. Smiling back at her, he softly strokes her hair and answers, “The Lord has always provided for us and that will not change. This is a church issue and in good conscience, as a SDA pastor and one of the Thompsonville elders, I have to go to the nominating committee and object to Danny being re-elected as an elder. I am sure they will act correctly, otherwise I will be forced to bring it up publically when the vote is taken in church.”
As a sense of foreboding came upon her, she realized her Swiss pastor husband had more confidence in the correct functioning of their local church than she. Knowing Danny’s reputation of only attending church board meetings when he wanted to guarantee a specific outcome in an item on the agenda and having heard how it functioned, gave her little faith in the leadership of the local church: Prior to Danny’s appearance there could be majority agreement among the board concerning a certain topic, after his arrival and a statement of his “suggestion” the board would flip in the opposite direction and if necessary call for another vote on the same agenda item in order to comply with Danny’s wishes. Having obtained his desired results, Danny would exit the meeting, leaving the remaining Board members to handle the rest of the agenda without his personal supervision.
The previous night’s conversation with her husband and her understanding of how the Thompsonville church board functioned, is what brought her to where she was today, sitting on the sofa in Danny Shelton’s office, as he smiled at her from the other side of his desk. To understand why Kristina felt it was necessary to ask Danny Shelton the following question is understood in light of the fact that the majority of church board members were either employed by 3ABN or the spouses of 3ABN employees. “Danny, I have a question. Does what happens in the Thompsonville church effect a person’s job at 3ABN or are the two separate?” For a brief instant a puzzled look crossed upon Danny’s face, quickly regaining his composure, he answered, “No. They are separate.” While repeating his answer to confirm a correct understanding, a look of relief passed over her face as she continued to discuss a few other topics in regard to other matters. Getting up to leave she hoped that Danny would remain true to his word.
After the first reading of the nominating committee report, the 3ABN European Liaison, who also worked in the pastoral department, felt very uncomfortable with one of the selections for church elder— Danny Shelton. During the last cycle of church offices, he and Danny Shelton had both been elders in the Thompsonville SDA church.
Pastor Fiscalini had served both as a department head in the German Swiss Conference of SDA and as a district pastor before working for 3ABN. He and Danny Shelton were about the same age, but their understanding of the responsibilities involved in serving the local church were diametrically opposed. While Pastor Fiscalini took his duties very seriously, Danny was not of the same mind in regard to his responsibilities and the obligations of a church elder.
Was it important 3ABN business that kept Danny from fulfilling his obligations as an elder and a member of the church board? No. For example, instead of attending Board meetings he was in the gym playing basketball. Additionally, Danny never attended the church elders’ meetings or functioned as an elder in any way during the time he and Jean Fiscalini were both members of the Thompsonville church.
Driving home one evening after a church board meeting—where Danny was present for just a few topics and left about 30 minutes into the meeting—Jean saw the lights on in the church school gym and a number of vehicles parked outside, including Danny Shelton’s big red truck. Looking inside he was surprised to see Danny and a group of his friends in the midst of playing basketball. Judging by their physical condition and their sweat soaked t-shirts, it was obvious that they had been playing for quite a while. Was this the reason that Danny had walked out of the church board meeting, shirking his responsibilities? Jean Fiscalini could hardly believe what he saw. Could it be possible that a church elder would walk out on a board meeting just to indulge his own pleasure?
Later, Jean Fiscalini would approach Danny Shelton privately, under similar circumstances—Danny continued to leave church board meetings, without a word of explanation and spent the rest of the evening playing basketball in the Church School gym. It was becoming obvious that Danny placed a higher value on his weekly basketball games than his responsibility as a member of the church board.
When Pastor Fiscalini approached Danny Shelton with his concerns regarding the performance of the duties of an elder—including being present at church board meetings for their entirety, rather than scheduling his basketball play at the same time; not arriving at church until Sabbath school was over and not being involved in any other functions of an elder—he reminded Danny how their roles as church elders obliged them to a higher standard of conduct. Danny’s response was to laugh, but it was not with amusement. There was a coldness in his eyes and a sharpness to his laugh. The expression on his face changed to indicate he found no humor in Pastor Fiscalini questioning his conduct. As chairman of the church board, a fellow local elder and a Seventh-day Adventist minister, Jean Fiscalini had begun the Biblical process described in Mathew 18 by bringing his concerns directly to Danny Shelton.
To be continued in the next post...
-
Nobody owns the Church... Part 2
In Part 1 Jean Fiscalini had approached Danny Shelton concerning his neglect of duties associated with fulfilling the office of an Elder in the Seventh-day Adventist Church. Having received no assurance from Danny that he intended to change his behavior, the next step was to approach the nominating committee and request that Danny Shelton’s name be removed from the list as an Elder in the Thompsonville SDA Church.
Peering individually into the astonished faces of the Nominating Committee members of the Thompsonville SDA Church, Jean Fiscalini repeated his last few sentences again, “There are no honorary positions in the Biblical Church. Every member is called to fulfill the duties of an office when he agrees to serve in that position. When Danny Shelton agreed to fulfill the office of an Elder in the Thompsonville Church, it was not offered as an honorary position, but as a position of service. To re-elect Danny as a church Elder without the assurance of his intent of faithfully fulfilling that position is an affront to God and to those church Elders who willingly sacrifice their time and put aside personal pleasure to serve the church.”
A deafening silence filled the room, as the Nominating Committee pondered what they had just heard. Pausing for a moment to allow the gravity of his words to be absorbed by those in attendance, Pastor Fiscalini then continued, “If Danny Shelton’s name is not removed from the list of Elders, by conscience I will have to publically oppose the acceptance of the list as presented at the second reading next Sabbath.”
No discussion followed Pastor Fiscalini’s statement nor were any questions asked by the members of the Nominating Committee. Looking into their faces he realized the burden of truth expressed in his explanation placed them in a position of moral dilemma. The majority of them worked for 3ABN. Danny Shelton was their boss. And in their experience the Thompsonville Church and 3ABN functioned as one unit:
• Their pastor’s salary was partially paid by both the Conference and 3ABN. Where was the line drawn in the separation of his duties as local church pastor and an employee of Danny Shelton? How could he faithfully serve two masters? What would be the result when loyalty to one came into conflict with obligation to the other?
• It was Danny, not the Illinois Conference, who selected the Pastor of the Thompsonville Church. Of course the Conference always approved Danny’s choice for his church and agreed with any suggest he made regarding it’s operation. Why did this situation exist?
• If they were to follow Biblical counsel and remove Danny Shelton’s name as a candidate for the office of Elder, how would that effect their future at 3ABN?
A myriad of possibilities flashed before their eyes. Looking into the face of the Swiss pastor, whom they had come to know and respect for his honesty and integrity, they realized that by entertaining his request they were being driven into unchartered waters in their experience as members of the 3ABN church. Danny’s right of authority within the local church, based solely upon his position as President of 3ABN, irregardless of ability or acceptability, had never been challenged.
In less than one week the second reading of the Nominating Committee would be given and offered for approval in the Thompsonville SDA church. What would be the outcome of Pastor Fiscalini’s heartfelt appeal to the members of the Committee? Jean realized this would be the end of the game and the beginning of reality concerning the actual relationship of the Thompsonville SDA Church and Danny Shelton. Despite warnings that he was cutting his own throat, he took his stand on the side of conscience.
Slowly standing up Pastor Fiscalini thanked the members of the Nominating Committee for listening to his concerns and considering his request. His heart was lightened as he turned and left the room, passing other church members waiting to address the Committee as he exited the building. He knew the position he had taken would not be to pleasing to Danny Shelton, but he had the responsibility to uphold Biblical standards while remaining faithful to the calling God had given him as a minister of the Gospel.
To be continued...
-
This was originally posted by Sister over in BSDA before the 3ABN forum there was turned into a read only forum.
-
Thank you Daryl. I was disappointed that BSDA suspended posting to that Forum.
-
Sadly, Ozzie, the contentiousness and meanspiritedness on the 3abn forum, from both sides, led to the more-than-gracious owner locking the thread for a time. If everyone would have used the venue to discuss the evidence and opinions in a mature manner it would still be open.
-
Sadly, Ozzie, the contentiousness and meanspiritedness on the 3abn forum, from both sides, led to the more-than-gracious owner locking the thread for a time. If everyone would have used the venue to discuss the evidence and opinions in a mature manner it would still be open.
Yes. I understand the reason for doing so GrandmaNettie. As this Forum starts out, I hope that people respect the opportunity for open discussion, without them acting like cannibals (ready to devour each other)!
-
As I read through the installments about the Fiscalini's experience, I couldn't help but wonder why this would be considered an issue of character. I can imagine that something like this personality and opinion clash is happening in many SDA board meetings. Human beings [censored] heads, even the Christian ones.
Then, to read on a web site:
The following is copied from AdventTalk.com, and recounts some of the events leading up to the alleged wrongful termination of Pastor Jean Fiscalini. It is particularly important since it illustrates why the Thompsonville Seventh-day Adventist Church has had so much difficulty disciplining Danny Shelton for his unbiblical divorce, lies, and financial irregularities. (I supplied bolding)
Why? Because the Thompsonville SDA Church felt okay about having Danny Shelton serve as more of an Honorary Elder rather than a hands on one?
Eight years ago I faced an employer and told him I disagreed with his unreasonable behavior and I got fired. I expected I would and was glad not to be working for such a mean guy. Is that an illustration of anything other than my boss had the right to fire someone who didn't care for his behavior?
Kind of a stretch if you ask me...
-
Sadly, Ozzie, the contentiousness and meanspiritedness on the 3abn forum, from both sides, led to the more-than-gracious owner locking the thread for a time. If everyone would have used the venue to discuss the evidence and opinions in a mature manner it would still be open.
Yes. I understand the reason for doing so GrandmaNettie. As this Forum starts out, I hope that people respect the opportunity for open discussion, without them acting like cannibals (ready to devour each other)!
;D Ozzie, I hope so too! Calm discussion is so much more productive.
-
Ah, pardon my inquisition, Grandma Nettie,
But shouldn't one actually be asking what lead Pastor Fiscalinni to come to the decision to challenge a church leadership position held by the "annointed one"?
Was it, in fact, based upon a clear violation of the SDA Church Manual that lead to the challenge?
And where is the rest of sister's story? Was it cut short by the closure of BSDA 3ABN forum? Wouldn't you like to read the rest of the story? You will be able to do that here!!!
And is employer retaliation the modus operandi for dealing with the discipline of the SDA church that rubs the "annointed one" the wrong way?
In fact, is employer retaliation an acceptable way for church organizations and christian leadership to eliminate whistle blowers? Only a very narrow theology would accept such a standard for Christian leadership, and I pray never within the SDA Church.
Counsel is repeatedly clear on the power of leadership: "Sometimes a man who has been placed in responsibility as a leader, gains the idea that he is in a position of supreme authority, and that all of his brethren, before making advance moves, must first come to him for permission to do that which they feel should be done. Such a man is in a dangerous position. He has lost sight of the work of a true leader among God's people. No one is to lay down man-made rules and regulations to govern arbitrarily his fellow laborers who have a living experience in the truth."--Testimonies to Ministers, p. 491.
May Christian Integrity and the Truth Prevail.
Yours in the Blessed Hope,
Gailon Arthur Joy
-
Amen, Gailon, well said!
-
As I read through the installments about the Fiscalini's experience, I couldn't help but wonder why this would be considered an issue of character. I can imagine that something like this personality and opinion clash is happening in many SDA board meetings. Human beings [censored] heads, even the Christian ones.
Why? Because the Thompsonville SDA Church felt okay about having Danny Shelton serve as more of an Honorary Elder rather than a hands on one?
I just can't go along with that being OK GrandmaNettie. I do have an issue with anyone being appointed as an "Honorary Elder" or an 'honorary anything'. In the Church, we should not be seeing more of "jobs for the boys". Either people are there to do a job or else they're not 'holding a position'. I am reminded of a friend's definition of MERIT a few years ago:
M = Mates
E = Elevated
R = Regardless of
I = Intelect or
T = Talent.
If 3abn is to be seen as taking the message of the last days to all the world, there is no room for people to be promoting themselves and putting themselves to the forfront, rather than God holding that place. I don't believe that the Spirit of God can be in a place, where someone is given the bullet for standing up for what is right!
-
As Sister has registered here, I expect we will soon be receiving part 3 of the Unauthorized History of 3ABN continues.
Sister is the one who posted parts 1 and 2 over at BSDA prior to the 3ABN forum over there being changed to a read only forum.
-
I will soon be posting "Nobody owns the Church... Part 3" both here and at BSDA.
Sister
-
Yes, I noticed that BSDA is allowing posting again at their 3ABN forum.
Looking forward to the next instalment, which I will also be posting over at Maritime SDA OnLine.
-
Still waiting for the conclusion of this story...but it seems that a basic principle is coming to light, or I should say the ignoring of a principle.
If Danny Shelton has had control of the SDA church located on 3ABN premises to the extent that a pastor he disagreed with could be fired by him...I don't know... maybe it reminds me of something like blurring the famous separation between church and state of our country.
-
Still waiting for the conclusion of this story...but it seems that a basic principle is coming to light, or I should say the ignoring of a principle.
If Danny Shelton has had control of the SDA church located on 3ABN premises to the extent that a pastor he disagreed with could be fired by him...I don't know... maybe it reminds me of something like blurring the famous separation between church and state of our country.
Artiste, could you please clarify what you are saying in the paragraph of your post that I have bolded. I have read it over several times and you seem to be inferring that Danny Shelton was able to fire a pastor of the SDA Church located on the 3abn premises. It is my understanding that Pastor Fiscalini was an employee of 3abn in both the pastoral department and as European Liason. His only position, other than member, was as an elder of the SDA Church there on 3abn grounds. He was fired from his position at 3abn, so how does that blur the line of separation between church and state?
Furthermore, if he felt wrongfully terminated, did he bring a wrongful termination suit against Danny Shelton/3abn?
Ozzie, how things should be done and how things are done is different in many individual churches in our denomination. Many churches have in-fighting over issues. Whole churches are divided over some.
Also, we don't know the whole story of either Pastor or Mrs. Fiscalini. We don't know if they were malcontents or wonderful, upright Christian folks. We don't know if they had personal agendas in mind or even control issues. Some may see choosing to make an issue over the position as elder a worthy battle, no matter the consequences. Jean Fiscalini obviously was willing to take the risk. Now, it seems, he was not content with the outcome. Others might feel there are better battles to pick when standing up for truth.
-
Jean Fiscalini obviously was willing to take the risk. Now, it seems, he was not content with the outcome.
Grandma, on what evidence do you declare that Jean Fiscalini "was not content with the outcome?" And just how do you mean that?
Should Christians only stand up for something if they are assured that the outcome will be comfortable for them?
Do you suppose it possible for a pastor to be so committed to doing the right thing in such an important issue as electing officers to lead the church in a manner that honors God that they are willing to risk their employment?
As an analogy, do you really expect someone who risks his employment in order to keep the Sabbath holy to be "content with the outcome" in the usual manner if he loses his job?
It is one thing to be "content to trust God with the outcome" -- which it seems Jean Fiscaline did -- and it's quite another to be happy with the outcome. I would guess that Pastor Fiscalini would have been much more "content" and happy if Danny and the church had chosen to submit themselves to God. After all, a pastor's goal should be to lead those within his sphere of influence to submit themselves to God.
Should a pastor be content with the outcome of individuals refusing to submit themselves to God and continuing on in their self-serving ways?
Is that the kind of pastor you personally prefer?
Personally, I am gratified when I see pastors who will not be bought or sold and who will stand for the right though the heavens fall. I can trust them to follow God's leading wherever that may be.
So what kind of pastor do you prefer?
-
some of the events leading up to the alleged wrongful termination of Pastor Jean Fiscalini. It is particularly important since it illustrates why the Thompsonville Seventh-day Adventist Church has had so much difficulty disciplining Danny Shelton for his unbiblical divorce, lies, and financial irregularities.
Why? Because the Thompsonville SDA Church felt okay about having Danny Shelton serve as more of an Honorary Elder rather than a hands on one?
The focus is on why Pastor Fiscalini got fired, and the writer's opinion appears to be that his opposition of Danny's nomination as elder was part of the reason.
This is consistent with other stories of people being fired for crossing Danny. (And, by the way, Sister has a lot of credibility in my book.
Whether or not Pastor Fiscalini's opposition to Danny as elder was justified is another question. (By the evidence presented, I tend to think it was.) The way the story is told, at least Pastor Fiscalini felt compelled to oppose the nomination as a matter of conscience.
It wouldn't surprise me one bit to have 3ABN reps come on here to "prove" that Pastor Fiscaline was justly fired -- just like Linda.
Eight years ago I faced an employer and told him I disagreed with his unreasonable behavior and I got fired. I expected I would and was glad not to be working for such a mean guy. Is that an illustration of anything other than my boss had the right to fire someone who didn't care for his behavior?
The situation is hardly analagous. 3ABN professes to be a ministry. As such it is incumbent upon the administrators to conduct the affairs of the ministry in a manner that puts God's agendo foremost, not their own likes and dislikes.
It seems to me that Sister's story is illustrative of much of what's wrong at 3ABN -- that Dan Shelton's personal agenda is a much higher priority than the service of God or the welfare of God's children.
If the situation you describe is parallel, then 3ABN is merely another business, and they should stop pretending to be doing God's work and asking for donor dollars.
-
Also, we don't know the whole story of either Pastor or Mrs. Fiscalini. We don't know if they were malcontents or wonderful, upright Christian folks. We don't know if they had personal agendas in mind or even control issues. Some may see choosing to make an issue over the position as elder a worthy battle, no matter the consequences. Jean Fiscalini obviously was willing to take the risk. Now, it seems, he was not content with the outcome. Others might feel there are better battles to pick when standing up for truth.
GrandmaNettie, you have brought up a valid point. Let me clarify the situation, although I have already made reference to the general opinion concerning the character of Pastor Fiscalini. During the time they were at 3ABN Pastor Fiscalini through both his work at 3ABN and his involvement as an active elder in the Thompsonville church was known as a man of integrity. Neither he nor his wife had reputations of being either malcontents, having a personal agenda or control issues. Pastor Fiscalini won the trust and respect of his fellow employees and church members through consistant Christian behavior.
Personally, I find that it is not always we who choose the battles within which we engage, but the circumstances of our lives places us in situations where we are given the opportunity to stand steadfast upon Biblical principle. Christians who "walk the talk, not just talk the talk" realize their only option is to act on the side of conscience, to do otherwise be sin against our Lord. Being present at the time the Fiscalini's were at 3ABN and being acquainted with them, I would have no doubt that Pastor Fiscalini acted upon conscience in regard to Danny Shelton. Perhaps as the situation continues to unfold in upcoming segments of "Nobody Owns the Church", more questions will be answered.
Those who have followed "An Unauthorized History of 3ABN", through it's installments at BSDA, realized that each section directly pertains to the issue of character. The character of Danny Shelton is revealed through his interactions with family members, church members, employees of 3ABN and the surrounding community. Through life experience and how each of us choose to react to the situations we encounter, character is molded. Like gold refined though fire the Lord gives us many opportunities to face the impurities in our characters and to reshape it through the choices we make. Depending upon those choices we prepare ourselves either for eternity with the Lord or the extinguishing fire of the Second death. GrandmaNettie, in the stands we make for conscience and principle every battle is a worthy battle, because it is the battle for souls...
Sister
-
author=GrandmaNettie link=topic=14.msg120#msg120 date=1201121056]
GrandmaNettie, you have brought up a valid point. Let me clarify the situation, although I have already made reference to the general opinion concerning the character of Pastor Fiscalini. During the time they were at 3ABN Pastor Fiscalini through both his work at 3ABN and his involvement as an active elder in the Thompsonville church was known as a man of integrity. Neither he nor his wife had reputations of being either malcontents, having a personal agenda or control issues. Pastor Fiscalini won the trust and respect of his fellow employees and church members through consistant Christian behavior.
Personally, I find that it is not always we who choose the battles within which we engage, but the circumstances of our lives places us in situations where we are given the opportunity to stand steadfast upon Biblical principle. Christians who "walk the talk, not just talk the talk" realize their only option is to act on the side of conscience, to do otherwise be sin against our Lord. Being present at the time the Fiscalini's were at 3ABN and being acquainted with them, I would have no doubt that Pastor Fiscalini acted upon conscience in regard to Danny Shelton. Perhaps as the situation continues to unfold in upcoming segments of "Nobody Owns the Church", more questions will be answered.
Those who have followed "An Unauthorized History of 3ABN", through it's installments at BSDA, realized that each section directly pertains to the issue of character. The character of Danny Shelton is revealed through his interactions with family members, church members, employees of 3ABN and the surrounding community. Through life experience and how each of us choose to react to the situations we encounter, character is molded. Like gold refined though fire the Lord gives us many opportunities to face the impurities in our characters and to reshape it through the choices we make. Depending upon those choices we prepare ourselves either for eternity with the Lord or the extinguishing fire of the Second death. GrandmaNettie, in the stands we make for conscience and principle every battle is a worthy battle, because it is the battle for souls...
Sister
I am reminded of a quote from Colporteur Ministry (1953) / Section 11. Chapter 7 - Wholly Surrendered to God.
The World's Greatest Need.-- The greatest want of the world is the want of men, -- men who will not be bought or sold; men who in their inmost souls are true and honest; men who do not fear to call sin by it's right name; men whose conscience is as true to duty as the needle to the pole; men who will stand for the right though the heavens fall.-- Education, p. 57. (1903) CM 54.4
-
It seems difficult, at least in the congregations that I have been exposed to, for pastors or local church leaders to take a stand in opposition to the more egregarious problems present in their church.
-
It seems difficult, at least in the congregations that I have been exposed to, for pastors or local church leaders to take a stand in opposition to the more egregarious problems present in their church.
It may be difficult. No one said that life is meant to be easy, but if it needs to be done, someone needs to stand up and be counted.
-
Nobody owns the Church... Part 3
In Part 2 Jean Fiscalini addressed the Thompsonville SDA Church Nominating Committee with his concerns regarding the re-election of Danny Shelton as a church elder. In neither his previous term as local elder, nor in respect to the election in question, was the title of elder bestowed upon Danny Shelton as an honorary position. At that time all church officers in the Thompsonville Church held functioning positions which they agreed to fulfill upon accepting the nomination for a particular office.
The pastor held up a paper in his right hand and referred the congregation to the copy they had received in the church bulletin, “Each of you has the Nominating Committee Report in front of you. If there is no discussion, we will now vote to accept the report as written.” As his eyes scanned through the pews they came to rest upon Jean Fiscalini. Dumbfounded, he realized that Jean had raised his hand and stood waiting to be recognized. The pastor acknowledged Jean and invited him to speak. “For reasons that I have already expressed to the Nominating Committee, I would like to recommend a change be made before the vote is taken.”
As Jean sat down his wife moved closer to him, placing her hand in his, she whispered into his ear, “You realize that you are committing career suicide.” Squeezing her hand, he said, “I have to follow my conscience.” “I know”, she replied, “I just wanted to make sure you realize where the consequences of you actions are leading us.” “Honey, I know what I have to do...” Looking into his wife’s eyes he understood that she was not questioning the necessity of his actions, but merely voicing her skepticism of Danny’s assurance that “...whatever happens in the Thompsonville church does not effect someone’s job at 3ABN. Even if Jean and I were to disagree about something at church, it would not effect his job.”
Assuming the congregation was unaware of the nature of the objection being raised, the pastor asked the Nominating committee to immediately adjourn, accompanied by Jean Fiscalini, to another room for private discussion. Passing Danny Shelton, Jean leaned over to him and requested that he join them since the discussion was in regard to him, “Danny, can you join us, it is about you and I want you to hear the information first hand.”
For fifteen minutes, like the buzz of a swarming hive of bees, whispered voices fulled the sanctuary of the Thompsonville Church. Sitting silently, Kristina Fiscalini was aware of different individuals attempting to catch her eye. She looked down at her open Bible and tried to imagine what was happening behind the closed door where her husband was now facing Danny Shelton and the Nominating Committee. For her it was as if time stood still. She became aware of the soft sound of a woman’s dressing sliding along the pew toward her. “Kristina, what is going on in there?” She looked up into the eyes of her trusted friend, but her only answer was to shake her head and return her eyes to the same passages she had read repeatedly for what seemed like eternity, as everyone waited...
Without warning a rush of silence engulfed the Sanctuary as Jean Fiscalini and Danny Shelton walked in together, followed by the Nominating Committee. His back turned to the Congregation and speaking in a hushed voice, what Danny had to say was intended for Jean alone, “That was ridiculous”, he hissed. An expression of controlled rage welled up upon his face he continued, “All you did was waste fifteen minutes of everybody’s time! You kept everybody waiting fifteen minutes for a-b-s-o-l-u-t-e-l-y nothing!” As Jean turned toward the front of the church to rejoin his wife, Danny took his accustomed seat in the pew that was situated against the back wall of the Sanctuary.
Looking up into her husband’s face as he sat down beside her, Kristina moved closer and squeezed his hand. A sad smile greeted her questioning glance as the pastor moved up to the microphone to address the congregation... “We will now continue the vote to accept the report of the Nominating Committee as written.”
From his position in the rear of the sanctuary, Danny surveyed his realm—everyone entering or leaving had to pass before him. This vantage point gave him the opportunity to observe the raised hand of Jean Fiscalini as he voted according to his conscience based upon Biblical principle, an action which Danny Shelton would interpret as Jean placing himself in direct opposition to his authority.
Raising her hand to vote in unity with her husband, Kristina looked over her shoulder and saw the look of disgust and contempt on Danny’s face. Later, as her husband recounted what had taken place with Danny and the Committee, the image of Danny countenance as the vote was taken would surface in her mind. She realized her husband had made a very dangerous enemy that day, although he appeared unaware of the ramifications his simple act of conscience would cause him.
To be continued...
-
Sister, you have a true gift for writing.
Thank you!!!
-
I wonder at what point he gives the 3ABN Board the same look?
Gailon Arthur Joy
-
Does anybody know what Jean and Kristina Fiscalini are doing now?
-
Does anybody know what Jean and Kristina Fiscalini are doing now?
They have returned to Switzerland. Jean Fiscalini is the senior Pastor for the district of Bern. Included in Pastor Fiscalini's church district is the headquarters of the Euro-African Division of Seventh-day Adventists.
-
Does anybody know what Jean and Kristina Fiscalini are doing now?
They have returned to Switzerland. Jean Fiscalini is the senior Pastor for the district of Bern. Included in Pastor Fiscalini's church district is the headquarters of the Euro-African Division of Seventh-day Adventists.
God rewards those who risk their jobs and stand up for truth.
-
Amen to that Fran! :)
-
They have returned to Switzerland. Jean Fiscalini is the senior Pastor for the district of Bern. Included in Pastor Fiscalini's church district is the headquarters of the Euro-African Division of Seventh-day Adventists.
So what does Division leadership there think about the various 3ABN issues? Do you know?
-
Posted on: Today at 07:21:26 PM Posted by: Bob Pickle
So what does Division leadership there think about the various 3ABN issues? Do you know?
Good question, Bob! That's the Euro-African Division, right?
-
We would like to hear the next installment of this story, Sister!
-
They have returned to Switzerland. Jean Fiscalini is the senior Pastor for the district of Bern. Included in Pastor Fiscalini's church district is the headquarters of the Euro-African Division of Seventh-day Adventists.
So what does Division leadership there think about the various 3ABN issues? Do you know?
It was my job trying to get the administration of that division to accept the presence of 3ABN in their area. They were very friendly towards me, but they did have some misgivings based on bad experiences in dealing with 3ABN.
I discovered the general problem that faced the European Divisions was that they had not been able to trust the president of 3ABN. There had been too many problems and clashes in the past. I tried my best to proclaim the entrance of a new era, as Linda gave me hope that Mr. Danny Shelton could be trusted in the future. You noticed they often held hands, and Linda squeezed his when she knew he was venturing out on thin ice.
Danny must not have liked that, so he decided to try out a younger model.
-
I was told that there was a similar occurance of mistrust of Danny Shelton in the Southeastern California conference after he renaged on a deal with them.
-
You noticed they often held hands, and Linda squeezed his when she knew he was venturing out on thin ice.
Danny must not have liked that, so he decided to try out a younger model.
Definitely a midlife crisis. One might feel sorry for him, except that he's caused so much pain to so many other people as well. If only he would acknowledge his wrongs, put right those things he can and withdraw the lawsuits as well - with restitution to Pickle and Joy to compensate them for the harm done to them. :praying:
-
You noticed they often held hands, and Linda squeezed his when she knew he was venturing out on thin ice.
Danny must not have liked that, so he decided to try out a younger model.
Definitely a midlife crisis. One might feel sorry for him, except that he's caused so much pain to so many other people as well. If only he would acknowledge his wrongs, put right those things he can and withdraw the lawsuits as well - with restitution to Pickle and Joy to compensate them for the harm done to them. :praying:
Amen!
-
We would like to hear the next installment of this story, Sister!
Sister, are you able to post the next installment yet please?
-
We would like to hear the next installment of this story, Sister!
Sister, are you able to post the next installment yet please?
Chrissie, you ask so kindly, it is difficult to disappoint both you and Artiste. As Artiste knows, although the last installment was received peacefully here, on BSDA it started a battle. Danny’s supporters started slinging false accusations against the Fiscalini’s. Unfortunately, the brunt of the lies were targeted at Mrs. Fiscalini. In an attempt to disqualify the testimony, they even went so far as referring to her as “needing treatment for a mental illness”. This completely untrue statement, coupled with the barrage of additional false accusations against them caused discomfort to both Pastor and Mrs. Fiscalini. As one of our members here, Ozzie, commented on BSDA:
“The suggestion of someone having a mental illness is one that is used by people who have run out of legitmate concerns, and then imply such a condition, in order to justify their attempts to make that person be seen as unreliable or of no account. you know, the gossip-mongers who have little to do, but want to make their story sound good?
It is a ploy to be-little people, but really strikes below the belt and is a tactic that I consider to be lower than a snake's belly.”
Because of the hateful responses attacking the Fiscalini’s I have chosen to let the dust settle before continuing their testimony.
Sister
-
Sister,
Many of us can relate to the "battles at BSDA". While I would dearly love to see the next installment as well, I surely do understand your decision to withhold it for now. I am just sorry it had to come to that. The good news is that it sounds as though the Fiscalini's have moved on and not let a power hungry televangelist stop their ministry! Praise the Lord for that! It would be an honor to get to meet them one day.
Just know that we love you, as does Jesus!! You are certainly in my prayers.
Hugs!
Snoopy
-
And the readers on the 16 or so sprouted mushroom sites will probably appreciate part 4 when it's available.
-
Chrissie, you ask so kindly, it is difficult to disappoint both you and Artiste. As Artiste knows, although the last installment was received peacefully here, on BSDA it started a battle. Danny’s supporters started slinging false accusations against the Fiscalini’s. Unfortunately, the brunt of the lies were targeted at Mrs. Fiscalini. In an attempt to disqualify the testimony, they even went so far as referring to her as “needing treatment for a mental illness”. This completely untrue statement, coupled with the barrage of additional false accusations against them caused discomfort to both Pastor and Mrs. Fiscalini. As one of our members here, Ozzie, commented on BSDA:
“The suggestion of someone having a mental illness is one that is used by people who have run out of legitmate concerns, and then imply such a condition, in order to justify their attempts to make that person be seen as unreliable or of no account. you know, the gossip-mongers who have little to do, but want to make their story sound good?
It is a ploy to be-little people, but really strikes below the belt and is a tactic that I consider to be lower than a snake's belly.”
Because of the hateful responses attacking the Fiscalini’s I have chosen to let the dust settle before continuing their testimony.
Sister
Thank you for your reply Sister. I understand now why you need to 'let the dust settle' before you post further.
Those allegations would indeed hurt and is so totally unfair. It shows up the character of those posting such allegations though, doesn't it? If all else fails, 'character assassination' seems to be the modis operandi at the centre of all this pain and dirt. I am so sorry that Mrs Fiscalini has been made the [censored] of such sick and unfounded allegations.
Please assure the Fiscalini's that they are loved and are in our prayers. It certainly sounds like they needed to be away from 3abn; with such cruelty being metered out.
-
It is folly to assume the dust will ever settle when the truth is published.
Delay acheives virtually nothing other than deferring the next dust-storm.
Gailon Arthur Joy
-
We would like to hear the next installment of this story, Sister!
Sister, are you able to post the next installment yet please?
Chrissie, you ask so kindly, it is difficult to disappoint both you and Artiste. As Artiste knows, although the last installment was received peacefully here, on BSDA it started a battle. Danny’s supporters started slinging false accusations against the Fiscalini’s. Unfortunately, the brunt of the lies were targeted at Mrs. Fiscalini. In an attempt to disqualify the testimony, they even went so far as referring to her as “needing treatment for a mental illness”. This completely untrue statement, coupled with the barrage of additional false accusations against them caused discomfort to both Pastor and Mrs. Fiscalini. As one of our members here, Ozzie, commented on BSDA:
“The suggestion of someone having a mental illness is one that is used by people who have run out of legitmate concerns, and then imply such a condition, in order to justify their attempts to make that person be seen as unreliable or of no account. you know, the gossip-mongers who have little to do, but want to make their story sound good?
It is a ploy to be-little people, but really strikes below the belt and is a tactic that I consider to be lower than a snake's belly.”
Because of the hateful responses attacking the Fiscalini’s I have chosen to let the dust settle before continuing their testimony.
Sister
I feel it is shameful to have to admit that individuals who have followed so much of the 3ABN saga and should have some understanding of the issues can descend to the point that they would make statements and accusations such as those that went on over at BSDA toward the Fiscalinis.
I understand competely your decision to wait a while. It is difficult to see friends in discomfort and to feel that you may have contributed by telling their story...even though it is a story that needs to be told.
-
We would like to hear the next installment of this story, Sister!
Sister, are you able to post the next installment yet please?
Because of the hateful responses attacking the Fiscalini’s I have chosen to let the dust settle before continuing their testimony.
Sister
I feel it is shameful to have to admit that individuals who have followed so much of the 3ABN saga and should have some understanding of the issues can descend to the point that they would make statements and accusations such as those that went on over at BSDA toward the Fiscalinis.
I understand competely your decision to wait a while. It is difficult to see friends in discomfort and to feel that you may have contributed by telling their story...even though it is a story that needs to be told.
It is my understanding that the Fiscalini's are sturdy stock with solid faith, a moral compass and
clear direction. One thing they have certainly discovered is that the truth will always be met with vicious personal attacks and every level of evil to deter its dissemination. The other fact is that we have also learned that silence is Golden for the perpetrators of such evil...you stay silent and they keep the Gold!!! The truth must be told and the sooner the better or evil will have indeed deterred the truth and won the silence...and kept the Gold!!!
Time is of the essence. While you still have the stage, I would encourage the Fiscalinis to stand for the truth and allow the release of the story.
Gailon Arthur Joy.
AUReporter
-
It is my understanding that the Fiscalini's are sturdy stock with solid faith, a moral compass and
clear direction. One thing they have certainly discovered is that the truth will always be met with vicious personal attacks and every level of evil to deter its dissemination. The other fact is that we have also learned that silence is Golden for the perpetrators of such evil...you stay silent and they keep the Gold!!! The truth must be told and the sooner the better or evil will have indeed deterred the truth and won the silence...and kept the Gold!!!
Time is of the essence. While you still have the stage, I would encourage the Fiscalinis to stand for the truth and allow the release of the story.
Gailon Arthur Joy.
AUReporter
Sister, are you able to put this question to the Fiscalinis please?
-
Nehemiah 2:18
Then I told them of the hand of my God which was good upon me; as also the king's words that he had spoken unto me. And they said, Let us rise up and build. So they strengthened their hands for this good work.
-
It is my understanding that the Fiscalini's are sturdy stock with solid faith, a moral compass and
clear direction. One thing they have certainly discovered is that the truth will always be met with vicious personal attacks and every level of evil to deter its dissemination. The other fact is that we have also learned that silence is Golden for the perpetrators of such evil...you stay silent and they keep the Gold!!! The truth must be told and the sooner the better or evil will have indeed deterred the truth and won the silence...and kept the Gold!!!
Time is of the essence. While you still have the stage, I would encourage the Fiscalinis to stand for the truth and allow the release of the story.
Gailon Arthur Joy.
AUReporter
Sister, are you able to put this question to the Fiscalinis please?
The Fiscalini’s have no problem with the continued release of their experiences at 3ABN. It is I, Sister, who has chosen when to release the next part of their story. It will be released soon and exclusively on Advent Talk. I will notify the readers at BSDA that it can be found here. It will not be posted on BSDA at the same time, as it was in the past.
Sister
-
Good move, Sister!
-
Nobody owns the Church... Part 4
In Part 3 Jean Fiscalini, Danny Shelton, Pastor Samuel Thomas and the Nominating Committee retired to a private room to discuss Jean’s objections to Danny Shelton being re-elected as an Elder in the Thompsonville SDA Church. After returning to the Sanctuary, the vote was taken to accept the Nominating Committee Report as written. At that time the congregation was still unaware of what had transpired, what objections were raised, upon what grounds or upon what individual Pastor Fiscalini had objected. In Part 4 we will open the veil and see what transpired behind closed doors...
Entering one of the children’s Sabbath school rooms all those present seated themselves around a table as the Chairman of the Nominating Committee turned to Pastor Fiscalini and formally asked, “What is your objection to the Report?” Jean had already informed the committee he would publically object if Danny Shelton’s name was still listed as an Elder at the time of the second reading.
For the second time Jean explained to the Committee that twice he had approached Danny Shelton personally, as a fellow elder and chairman of the Church Board, in regard to his neglect of fulfilling his duties. It was not the conflict of Danny being away for ministry business which concerned Jean, but Danny’s choosing to walk out of Board meetings early or neglecting to attend at all because he had invited his cronies to play basketball with him. If Danny were unable to fulfill the duties of an Elder because of time conflicts with ministry business, was unwilling to schedule his private activities at times other than previously scheduled church board meetings, never attended Elder’s meetings or functioned in any aspect as a local Elder in the Thompsonville Church, he should not be re-elected to hold that position. It would be better both for Danny and for the Thompsonville church to elect another individual that was both able and willing to perform the duties required of an Elder. The office of Elder was not offered to Danny Shelton as an Honorary position, but as an opportunity to serve the local church.
Danny started immediately defending himself, “That is ridiculous!” He continued to ridicule Pastor’s Fiscalini’s objections, claiming that none of them were even worth considering and would not be legitimate grounds to hinder him from being an elder. As Danny continued his discourse it was obvious he would not accept being removed as an Elder of the Thompsonville Church and that no one had the authority to question his right to the title of Elder.
As first Jean Fiscalini, than Danny Shelton spoke, both were met with silence from the Committee. No comments were made, no questions were asked. Those present were aware that what Jean had said was true, Danny had not opposed the facts as Jean had presented them. Instead Danny’s attitude and arguments made it apparent that facts were irrelevant and should have no influence upon his continued role as an Elder in the Thompsonville SDA Church.
Barely a minute or two passed, after Jean Fiscalini and Danny Shelton left the Nominating Committee, when the Committee members returned to the Sanctuary. It became obvious that the members of the Nominating Committee were unwilling to oppose Danny Shelton’s re-election, although Danny did not dispute the truth of the allegations that he did not function as an Elder.
If the Nominating Committee finds the objection has merit then they have an obligation to remove that person from consideration for election. Given the nature of the situation at the Thompsonville Church, it would not have mattered what the objection was or it’s validity. The one unvoiced fact the members of the Nominating Committee could be certain of is they were being requested to make a decision that would be in direct opposition to the person upon whom they depended for their livelihood. There was little or no deliberation within the Nominating Committee that day. The potential rumblings of empty stomachs drowned out the sound of compromised consciences.
The inception of compromise does not lie at the feet of the Nominating Committee, but at the hands of the Illinois Conference that made themselves beholden to Danny Shelton by allowing him to pay half the pastor’s salary and by allowing the congregation to use a 3ABN building, rather than the Conference owning the church outright, which is the norm in the Adventist church. By allowing these things to happen, the Illinois Conference made Danny Shelton the de facto ruler of the Thompsonville Church.
To be continued...
-
Why was Danny in the nominating committee meeting with Pastor Fiscalini if he was not a member of that committee, and if he wasn't also objecting to the committee report? Was his presence irregular?
-
Why was Danny in the nominating committee meeting with Pastor Fiscalini if he was not a member of that committee, and if he wasn't also objecting to the committee report? Was his presence irregular?
It is my understanding of procedural matters, that this would be highly irregular. When a matter is 'referred back', it should be that the person referring the name back, meets with the Nominating Committee. The person whose name is being 'referred back', should not be part of that meeting.
It appears that the integrity of the Nominating Committee was compromised, due to the actions of the Conference, which allowed Danny/3abn part-ownership of that particular Church.
-
It is my understanding that the Fiscalini's are sturdy stock with solid faith, a moral compass and
clear direction. One thing they have certainly discovered is that the truth will always be met with vicious personal attacks and every level of evil to deter its dissemination. The other fact is that we have also learned that silence is Golden for the perpetrators of such evil...you stay silent and they keep the Gold!!! The truth must be told and the sooner the better or evil will have indeed deterred the truth and won the silence...and kept the Gold!!!
Time is of the essence. While you still have the stage, I would encourage the Fiscalinis to stand for the truth and allow the release of the story.
Gailon Arthur Joy.
AUReporter
Sister, are you able to put this question to the Fiscalinis please?
The Fiscalini’s have no problem with the continued release of their experiences at 3ABN. It is I, Sister, who has chosen when to release the next part of their story. It will be released soon and exclusively on Advent Talk. I will notify the readers at BSDA that it can be found here. It will not be posted on BSDA at the same time, as it was in the past.
Sister
Thanks you Sister for continuing to post this information. Good move, publishing it here, where the information is appreciated.
-
My intent was to only post a link at BSDA to my post here at Advent Talk. I was very surprised to check back at BSDA and find that the entire text of “Nobody Owns the Church, Part 4" had been added to my post, but not by me. I went into the edit format intending to erase the text, but decided since it had already been seen to let it remain there.
Sister
-
Why was Danny in the nominating committee meeting with Pastor Fiscalini if he was not a member of that committee, and if he wasn't also objecting to the committee report? Was his presence irregular?
It is my understanding of procedural matters, that this would be highly irregular. When a matter is 'referred back', it should be that the person referring the name back, meets with the Nominating Committee. The person whose name is being 'referred back', should not be part of that meeting.
Yes, indeed! The individuals whose nominations are questioned normally should not know who brought up the questions.
On the other hand, no nominating committee should make a decision without asccertaining the truth of objections made. This might include interviewing the nominee. But the nominee still does not need to know who made the objections. Along with keeping the nominating process confidential, this should insure that members of the congregation and the board can still work together after the nomination process is complete.
-
Why was Danny in the nominating committee meeting with Pastor Fiscalini if he was not a member of that committee, and if he wasn't also objecting to the committee report? Was his presence irregular?
It is my understanding of procedural matters, that this would be highly irregular. When a matter is 'referred back', it should be that the person referring the name back, meets with the Nominating Committee. The person whose name is being 'referred back', should not be part of that meeting.
Yes, indeed! The individuals whose nominations are questioned normally should not know who brought up the questions.
On the other hand, no nominating committee should make a decision without asccertaining the truth of objections made. This might include interviewing the nominee. But the nominee still does not need to know who made the objections. Along with keeping the nominating process confidential, this should insure that members of the congregation and the board can still work together after the nomination process is complete.
I don't believe that the nominee should ever know who has referred the matter back. I know that in practice, this doesn't always happen, but I believe that anyone who reveals this confidential information is contributing to division within their local Church. Sad that people don't recognise the integrity and confidentiality of the Nominating Committee.
-
What year did all this take place? What year was Jean Fiscalini fired?
-
I also have a question.
As this was a disruption of gathering for worship on the Sabbath, why did the NC meet right then and there?
Why didn't they simply move on and organize a meeting of the NC at a later date with the idea of bringing this forward the following Sabbath?
It seems to me that two normal processes were broken on that Sabbath day.
-
My intent was to only post a link at BSDA to my post here at Advent Talk. I was very surprised to check back at BSDA and find that the entire text of “Nobody Owns the Church, Part 4" had been added to my post, but not by me. I went into the edit format intending to erase the text, but decided since it had already been seen to let it remain there.
Sister
You did not post it? It was posted as if you had done it!!!
-
I also have a question.
As this was a disruption of gathering for worship on the Sabbath, why did the NC meet right then and there?
Why didn't they simply move on and organize a meeting of the NC at a later date with the idea of bringing this forward the following Sabbath?
It seems to me that two normal processes were broken on that Sabbath day.
I also thought that rather strange. I would expect that the matter be adjourned for a later discussion with the Nominating Committee (on both occasions), rather than continuing as it did. It all sounds highly unusual. Seems like that Church is a law unto itself.
-
My intent was to only post a link at BSDA to my post here at Advent Talk. I was very surprised to check back at BSDA and find that the entire text of “Nobody Owns the Church, Part 4" had been added to my post, but not by me. I went into the edit format intending to erase the text, but decided since it had already been seen to let it remain there.
Sister
You did not post it? It was posted as if you had done it!!!
I also was surprised to see it posted as if Sister had done it herself!
I noticed that Calvin later admitted to adding the post himself after he saw the link, and Clay then defended Calvin's posting of it.
The interesting thing was that immediately after adding the post himself, Calvin then began questioning the story.
Quote from Calvin:
"Why is this four year old story even important to tell at this point in the saga? Sister haven’t you exposed enough of Danny’s character in your previous stories?"
In that case, just wondering why Calvin bothered to bring the story over to BSDA...
-
My intent was to only post a link at BSDA to my post here at Advent Talk. I was very surprised to check back at BSDA and find that the entire text of “Nobody Owns the Church, Part 4" had been added to my post, but not by me. I went into the edit format intending to erase the text, but decided since it had already been seen to let it remain there.
Sister
You did not post it? It was posted as if you had done it!!!
I checked over there and it 'appears' that Sister posted it. How is this so?
-
I also was surprised to see it posted as if Sister had done it herself!
I noticed that Calvin later admitted to adding the post himself after he saw the link, and Clay then defended Calvin's posting of it.
The interesting thing was that immediately after adding the post himself, Calvin then began questioning the story.
Quote from Calvin:
"Why is this four year old story even important to tell at this point in the saga? Sister haven’t you exposed enough of Danny’s character in your previous stories?"
In that case, just wondering why Calvin bothered to bring the story over to BSDA...
I am confused. ??? Why did Calvin snag and copy it and then commence denigrating Sister's account of the happenings? If he didn't like the information, what was his purpose? :scratch:
-
I posted the link, Calvin later added the content of the link to my original post. As the administrater no edit was apparent. Later I edited the content Calvin had posted adding italic, etc, so it would be identical with my post here.
Sister
-
I posted the link, Calvin later added the content of the link to my original post. As the administrater no edit was apparent. Later I edited the content Calvin had posted adding italic, etc, so it would be identical with my post here.
Sister
It doesn't appear quite kosher to me, the way he did this.
-
I noticed that Calvin later admitted to adding the post himself after he saw the link.....
Although I have no doubt he did, I am having a difficult time finding where Calvin "admitted" to adding the post himself, could you provide that link?
In that case, just wondering why Calvin bothered to bring the story over to BSDA...
Do you think the non-speculative thing to do would be to just ask him since you post there and can contact him via PM?
-
I posted the link, Calvin later added the content of the link to my original post. As the administrater no edit was apparent. Later I edited the content Calvin had posted adding italic, etc, so it would be identical with my post here.
Sister
It doesn't appear quite kosher to me, the way he did this.
Greetings once again, Adventtalk members!
I have been following this particular "incident" since I noticed chatter about it last night.
My question is, how is what Calvin decided to do on his site any less kosher than Daryl deciding to clean up members' misspellings on the Stan Jensen thread as well as delete posts he deemed off-topic? Tis their prerogative as site owners, right?
-
We work as a team here as much as possible, therefore, except for dire circumstances, we normally do things here by consensus.
-
We work as a team here as much as possible, therefore, except for dire circumstances, we normally do things here by consensus.
That is possibly the big difference between AdventTalk and other Forums? It may take some people awhile to adjust to that way of thinking?
-
Well, I actually also try to do things by consensus over at Maritime SDA OnLine. :)
-
Well, I actually also try to do things by consensus over at Maritime SDA OnLine. :)
OK Daryl! OK. I just can't be everywhere at once! ;D I'll get over there too, as soon as I get a few minutes to spare. ;)
-
I noticed that Calvin later admitted to adding the post himself after he saw the link.....
Although I have no doubt he did, I am having a difficult time finding where Calvin "admitted" to adding the post himself, could you provide that link?
In that case, just wondering why Calvin bothered to bring the story over to BSDA...
Do you think the non-speculative thing to do would be to just ask him since you post there and can contact him via PM?
Here is the PM I sent Sister soon after I edited her post.
From: calvin
To: sister
Send Time: 09.02.2008 - 20:40
Read Time: 09.02.2008 - 21:26
Subject: I should not have edited your post
Sorry Sister for editing your post. I should have posted your story under my id. I felt is was important that since you started the story here that it was a disservice for our members to have to go elsewhere to continue following it. I see you have already made a few edit so I will leave it alone, however if you want to delete what I have posted that would be fine.
-
Just want to welcome you, Calvin, as a new member of AdventTalk. I appreciate your honesty. Even if I may disagree with you on certain issues, I have always sensed that you are an honest person.
-
I noticed that Calvin later admitted to adding the post himself after he saw the link.....
Although I have no doubt he did, I am having a difficult time finding where Calvin "admitted" to adding the post himself, could you provide that link?
In that case, just wondering why Calvin bothered to bring the story over to BSDA...
Do you think the non-speculative thing to do would be to just ask him since you post there and can contact him via PM?
Here is the PM I sent Sister soon after I edited her post.
From: calvin
To: sister
Send Time: 09.02.2008 - 20:40
Read Time: 09.02.2008 - 21:26
Subject: I should not have edited your post
Sorry Sister for editing your post. I should have posted your story under my id. I felt is was important that since you started the story here that it was a disservice for our members to have to go elsewhere to continue following it. I see you have already made a few edit so I will leave it alone, however if you want to delete what I have posted that would be fine.
Good to see you over here Calvin. More and more 'family' turning up here. That's great. :)
-
Greetings once again, Adventtalk members!
I have been following this particular "incident" since I noticed chatter about it last night.
My question is, how is what Calvin decided to do on his site any less kosher than Daryl deciding to clean up members' misspellings on the Stan Jensen thread as well as delete posts he deemed off-topic? Tis their prerogative as site owners, right?
We work as a team here as much as possible, therefore, except for dire circumstances, we normally do things here by consensus.
Hello,
Speaking of which; I can't find last week's post by Inga to Gailon about the contempt of court and sanctions entered against him and the court documents posted on BSDA .
I was interested in that discussion.
Do you have a link to it? or was it deleted by a consensus, or due to dire circumstances?
from Doodle
-
To my knowledge nothing like that has been deleted, therefore, it must still be here somewhere.
Did you try using the Search Feature to locate it?
-
Glad to see you over here, Calvin, defending your actions over there. :)
-
To my knowledge nothing like that has been deleted, therefore, it must still be here somewhere.
Did you try using the Search Feature to locate it?
Why yes I did. Several times, especially as I knew right where it was and the post # too. I searched again this morning at 7:20, immediatly after you posted this, and it was still gone.
As the post is now back... and a search of the word "trustee" does show it, it seems someone is playing games here or being decietful, and maybe you should check on that.
It's a good thing I saved the HTMl code for the search page, or you might be tempted to think me either looney or a liar. I will do the same with this post as well in case you are having forum or moderator problems...
Most won't be able to read the part in the quotebox below, but if you copy and paste all that's in the quote box below into the box of any html code tester, you can see the page duplicated, and see the post in question was indeed gone before now.
As a courtesy, here is a html tester that any member or reader here can use.
http://www.draac.com/htmltester.html
BTW, I am not the only one unhappy here:
******** Unacceptable link removed. - Daryl Fawcett, Administrator ******** :-[
From Doodle
-
Well, Doodle, it's fine with me if J. R. takes his diatribes elsewhere, especially since he presently is making false accusations regarding who is posting here.
-
Calvin, thanks for clearing that up. :) I can certainly see how that happened.
Inga
Here is the PM I sent Sister soon after I edited her post.
From: calvin
To: sister
Send Time: 09.02.2008 - 20:40
Read Time: 09.02.2008 - 21:26
Subject: I should not have edited your post
Sorry Sister for editing your post. I should have posted your story under my id. I felt is was important that since you started the story here that it was a disservice for our members to have to go elsewhere to continue following it. I see you have already made a few edit so I will leave it alone, however if you want to delete what I have posted that would be fine.
-
I need to know what year Jean Fiscalini was fired. Anyone know?
-
Calvin on BSDA said that the story was four years old, but I don't know where that information came from.
-
Jean was at 3ABN in 2001. Someone is guessing he got fired the next year.
-
Doodle,
I also did a search word using the word trustee and only came up with your post here, therefore, I still don't know what missing and now found post you are referring to.
-
Jean was at 3ABN in 2001. Someone is guessing he got fired the next year.
I was asked to take part of his job towards fall of 2002. I was under the impression it was some time since he had been there.
-
Did tithe paying have anything to do with Jean Fiscalini's concerns?
My understanding is that Danny has testified under oath that he pays tithes to 3ABN. There are definitely pastors out there who would consider such conduct grounds for exclusion from the office of elder.
-
If that is true, then that would also show/prove that 3ABN accepts tithe.
-
Did tithe paying have anything to do with Jean Fiscalini's concerns?
My understanding is that Danny has testified under oath that he pays tithes to 3ABN. There are definitely pastors out there who would consider such conduct grounds for exclusion from the office of elder.
Where or how Danny Shelton paid tithe was information that Jean Fiscalini did not have access to as an Elder in the Thompsonville Church. If Danny has testified under oath that he pays tithes to 3ABN, it is by his own admission that informantion is made available.
Does that disqualify Danny for holding the office of Elder? Since Danny does not pay tithe to the Seventh-day Adventist Church that gives the impression that he personally does not support the SDA church. A leader leads by example. If the example Danny Shelton gives is paying tithe to his own private ministry/business instead of the organized Church, what example is he sending out to others as a local church leader?
Sister
-
If that is true, then that would also show/prove that 3ABN accepts tithe.
It was no concern to 3ABN where the money comes from, a member of the pastoral staff was told not to discourage callers who wanted to send their tithe money to 3ABN. Molly Steenson had said, “We don’t ask where money is coming from, that is the responsibility of the one sending it.” Even if the money is marked as tithe, it is accepted by 3ABN and not passed on to the Illinois Conference. If Danny, himself, by his own testimony, believes it is acceptable to give his personal tithe to 3ABN; why would he be unwilling to knowingly accept tithe as donations to 3ABN?
-
Hi Calvin!!! Welcome to AdventTalk! It is great to see you here!!
Blessings,
Snoopy
Here is the PM I sent Sister soon after I edited her post.
From: calvin
To: sister
Send Time: 09.02.2008 - 20:40
Read Time: 09.02.2008 - 21:26
Subject: I should not have edited your post
Sorry Sister for editing your post. I should have posted your story under my id. I felt is was important that since you started the story here that it was a disservice for our members to have to go elsewhere to continue following it. I see you have already made a few edit so I will leave it alone, however if you want to delete what I have posted that would be fine.
-
The conclusion of "Nobody Owns the Church" will be posted both here and on BSDA today.
-
Nobody owns the Church... Conclusion
In Part 4 we observed evidence that suggests Danny Shelton’s control of the Thompsonville SDA Church was becoming more overt. When an individual chooses to follow a path that runs contrary to the will of God, in His mercy, the Lord provides him with many opportunities to be brought to the realization that change is needed. Had Danny Shelton heeded the counsel that he needed to take his responsibilities as an Elder more seriously, perhaps it might have been the first small step in a path that would have lead him to repentance and restitution and the discussions of the last four years would have never taken place. Steeped in his pride, Danny was unable to hear that call, so our story continues...
Two woman sit together in the executive wing of 3ABN and quietly discuss the events of the last half year. It is the third week of November 2001, less than one week since Jean Fiscalini’s position as European Liaison has been terminated. Linda Shelton, wife of Danny Shelton, vice President of 3ABN and Kristina Fiscalini, wife of Jean Fiscalini sit facing each other in Linda’s office. It is late at night, a time usually reserved for clandestine meetings, but this unscheduled encounter is an attempt to arrive at the truth, not a planning meeting for further subterfuge...
* * * * *
The previous Friday twenty minutes before noon— at 3ABN the work week ended at noon on Friday, except for the pastoral staff —Jean Fiscalini was called into the office of Danny Shelton. He was told that due to budget cuts the position of European Liaison was immediately terminated, Jean was to clean out his desk and leave the premises. He would be given one month’s severance pay and was to vacate the 3ABN apartment where he and his wife resided by the end of the month. Jean said it would be impossible to make plans to leave in two weeks, so the deadline for moving was extended until the end of December. In a state of shock Jean arrived home and told his wife what had happened. One day earlier they had made a deposit on an apartment in West Frankfort where they planned to move in January. Suddenly without a job, everything had changed. Earnestly they sought the Lord in prayer.
During the next few weeks the Fiscalini’s were quietly visited in their apartment by a number of employees who expressed their shock at what had happened and had come to say good-bye. Nancy O’Brien, the Thompsonville SDA School principal exclaimed, “If this could happen to Jean, it could happen to any of us!” Everyone was aware of the conflict that had taken place between Jean and Danny over Danny’s nomination as Elder. Even then Jean had been warned by two of the other Elders that to publically oppose Danny in the Thompsonville Church would be the end of his career at 3ABN.
In addition to being the European Liaison, Jean also worked as a member of the Pastoral staff. His duties included answering prayer calls and previewing programs for Biblical inaccuracies. If programs had information of a questionable nature notes were made and Danny had the final say whether they would be aired. Since Rick Odle had left 3ABN, Jean was the only member of the pastoral staff who had pastoral training and was an ordained minister of the SDA Church. Two weeks prior to Jean’s position as European Liaison being terminated, a retired SDA pastor was added to the Pastoral Department. Later when he visited Jean in his home he asked, “Why did they hire me, when Danny could have kept you here as a member of the Pastoral staff?”At the time the position of European Liaison was terminated, Jean Fiscalini was working ninety-five per cent of his time in the Pastoral Department.
A week after the second reading of the Nominating Committee of the Thompsonville Church, Jean was called into Mollie Steenson’s office and informed that he could not proceed on any plans for the European Department without first receiving personal approval from Danny Shelton. At that time Jean requested a meeting with Danny regarding the current plans to promote 3ABN in Europe. Mollie replied, “I will contact you when Danny has time for an appointment with you.”
One week passed, no appointment. Jean again approached Mollie and received the same reply, “I will contact you when Danny has time for an appointment with you.” Meanwhile Jean observed others in the pastoral department making and receiving appointments with Danny, while he continued to wait. Each week Jean would return to Molly with the same request and receive the same answer. Unable to proceed without the direct approval of Danny, Jean spent more and more time working in the Pastoral department.
When Jean was hired he was told by Danny he would also be attached to the Pastoral department and any time he had that was not needed for his others duties should be spent there. It was for this reason that he had shared an office with Rick Odel. After Rick left, the next Pastoral department head, John Dinzey moved into the office with Jean. After thirteen weeks Jean finally received an appointment with Danny Shelton, Danny disapproved all plans for the European promotion of 3ABN and Jean returned to the Pastoral department. During this time, he expressed his frustration to John Dinzey. John told him he must be mistaken, in fact Danny had told him, “You can find no fault in Jean’s work.” There was no legitimate reason to fire Jean for his work in either the European or Pastoral departments.
* * * * *
After talking for over an hour, Kristina realized that Linda appeared both open and honest in their conversation. Previously the two women had little contact with each other except as members of the Thompsonville Church. This was to be their first and last conversation before the Fiscalini’s left 3ABN. Kristina now asked the question that brought her uninvited to Linda’s office that evening, “Danny had told me that even if he and Jean disagreed on an issue at the church, it would have no impact upon Jean’s job at 3ABN, what is the real reason that he was fired?” Linda looked at the woman seated across from her with both compassion and the knowledge that the “official” and the actual reason for ending Jean Fiscalini’s employment with 3ABN were not the same. The decision to terminate Jean Fiscalini’s employment was not based upon a financial need to close the European department of 3ABN or that Jean’s services as a SDA pastor were not an asset in the Pastoral Department, but something entirely different. Breaking the silence that hung heavily between them, Linda replied, “Jean was fired from 3ABN because we believed if he could not respect Danny as a church Elder, how could he respect Danny as called from God to be the President of 3ABN.”
* * * * *
A short two and one half years later Linda Shelton would find herself in a similar situation. She would be removed from her position as Vice President of 3ABN for reason’s other than officially stated at the hands of her husband, Danny Shelton. Later Linda was told, “All we knew was the President no longer wanted his Vice President.” Whether or not Linda had actually committed adultery was not the issue. When Danny was in the process of preparing to divorce Linda, without Biblical grounds, did she receive any support from the Thompsonville Church or John Lomacang, her pastor? No... Was it ever even suggested that Danny Shelton should be put under church discipline for divorce and re-marriage without Biblical grounds. Not to my knowledge, if it had, the information would have spread just as quickly as the false accusations about Linda committing adultery had been processed through the rumor mill. Does Danny Shelton own the Thompsonville church and control the current pastor. Ask Linda Shelton...or Johann. By the time that Johann was fired...that is another story and one better told by Johann himself. It appears that the position of European Liaison is a dangerous one at 3ABN for those unwilling to stroke the ego of Danny Shelton or at least one with a very limited future.
-
Hi Doodle!
I am sorry that you are not happy here. I'm curious - who forces you to be here if you don't like it?
I have found AdventTalk to be a warm, friendly place for folks to respectfully discuss the issues on their minds. None of those adjectives describes what one finds if they follow the link you provided. If I were an admin here I would have deleted it.
I feel badly for you, and hope that you may find peace.
Sincerely,
Snoopy
BTW, I am not the only one unhappy here:
********** Unaccepable link removed from original post and, therefore, also removed from quote here. - Daryl Fawcett, Administrator ********** :-[
From Doodle
-
Thank you, Daryl!!! 8)
-
Hi Doodle!
I am sorry that you are not happy here. I'm curious - who forces you to be here if you don't like it?
I have found AdventTalk to be a warm, friendly place for folks to respectfully discuss the issues on their minds. None of those adjectives describes what one finds if they follow the link you provided. If I were an admin here I would have deleted it.
I feel badly for you, and hope that you may find peace.
Sincerely,
Snoopy
???
I was talking about a situation, not the forum, and... the link was merely in addition to that.
I appreciate your sincerity and well wishes. I have already found peace though, although not as this world offers.
May "The LORD bless thee, and keep thee: The LORD make his face shine upon thee, and be gracious unto thee:
The LORD lift up his countenance upon thee, and give thee peace." also. (Numbers chap 6 vs 24-26)
BTW, I am not the only one unhappy here:
********** Unaccepable link removed from original post and, therefore, also removed from quote here. - Daryl Fawcett, Administrator ********** :-[
From Doodle
I am not surprized you objected to the link and found it unacceptable, but I do wonder why you also deleted the material and evidence I posted in my quote box which wasn't related to that, along with Chrissy's reply to that? :scratch:
but, oh well, it's your forum, but those acts by consensus or due to dire circumstances you referred to seem to be adding up.
-
That very large and long post and quote of all that stuff wasn't necessary here in this topic, however, if it is ever needed, it is in our archives, and can be brought out of the archives again.
Chrissy's response was one reason why it was eventually removed.
-
I am entirely in accord with all that confusing html material being removed--thank you Daryl!
I was also floored when I followed the link that has been deleted and was confronted with such distasteful and unpleasant comments. I couldn't imagine that being on a forum supposed to be Christian in content...or did I make a mistake in thinking that's what it was?
-
Sister, thank you for the final installment of this amazing story!
Even after reading many narrations from the Danny Shelton era of 3ABN, I was still furthur enlightened and surprised over the oppressive and dictator-like atmosphere under him, and the amount of control he exerted, obviously helped along by people like Mollie Steenson.
-
Thanks for clearing that up, Doodle. I'm sorry I misunderstood you. I am glad you are here!! :welcome:
Snoopy
???
I was talking about a situation, not the forum, and... the link was merely in addition to that.
I appreciate your sincerity and well wishes. I have already found peace though, although not as this world offers.
May "The LORD bless thee, and keep thee: The LORD make his face shine upon thee, and be gracious unto thee:
The LORD lift up his countenance upon thee, and give thee peace." also. (Numbers chap 6 vs 24-26)
-
In the ending of the Fiscalini's story, it appears that Linda Shelton was agreeing to the firing of Pastor Fiscalini as well as defending the reasoning behind it which had to do with Danny Shelton's divine appointment to 3ABN.
From time to time people have blamed Linda for what went on at 3ABN, either for her actions or just by being there, knowing what was going on, and acquiescing to it.
It does seem more like she trusted DS and truly believed that God was working through him.
-
In the ending of the Fiscalini's story, it appears that Linda Shelton was agreeing to the firing of Pastor Fiscalini as well as defending the reasoning behind it which had to do with Danny Shelton's divine appointment to 3ABN.
From time to time people have blamed Linda for what went on at 3ABN, either for her actions or just by being there, knowing what was going on, and acquiescing to it.
It does seem more like she trusted DS and truly believed that God was working through him.
Maybe, Linda was as blinded to the 'true' Danny, as many still are. Unfortunately, she has learned the hard way, just what he is like. :( However, I have not heard and seen nastiness and lies written by Linda about her former husband. :-X She appears to be a very gracious lady to me.
-
In the ending of the Fiscalini's story, it appears that Linda Shelton was agreeing to the firing of Pastor Fiscalini as well as defending the reasoning behind it which had to do with Danny Shelton's divine appointment to 3ABN.
From time to time people have blamed Linda for what went on at 3ABN, either for her actions or just by being there, knowing what was going on, and acquiescing to it.
It does seem more like she trusted DS and truly believed that God was working through him.
At the point in time where the Fiscalini story took place, in my opinion, Linda still trusted Danny and believed that he would never do anything that would harm the ministry. Although I am not in a position to speak for Linda, all indications were that she truly believed that God had inspired Danny to build a television station and that God was working through everyone involved in building up the ministry.
From contact with Mrs. Fiscalini in regard to the conversation that took place between she and Linda, it appeared that Linda was confirming that although Pastor Fiscalini was "officially" let go as a result of budget cuts, in fact the truth was that Danny's intent was to fire him, but no legitimate grounds could be found to justify it. When Linda said "we" was she in agreement with Danny or officially speaking as Vice President of 3ABN? The decision to hire or fire Jean Fiscalini was made by Danny, not Linda.
What was not included in the story is that a number of years later, after Danny had divorced Linda and removed all evidence of her from the ministry, the Fiscalini's had the opportunity to speak with her. At that time Linda expressed her sorrow over what had happened to Jean Fiscalini at 3ABN.
Sister
-
Linda has gone through some very hard times. She has learned some tough lessons. She is not the same person whom she once was. She had done some things in the past, in her role as 3-ABN Vice-President, that she would not repeat again if same situation were to arise again.
-
At least Linda is recognizing what Danny fails to recognize.
-
At least Linda is recognizing what Danny fails to recognize.
What a sad way for a wife to learn of her husband's infidelity to herself, to God and the supporters of 3abn.
-
At least Linda is recognizing what Danny fails to recognize.
Psychopaths are very convincing people Daryl, and very unsafe to be around. They will stop at nothing to gain their own ends and they don't care who or what they destroy, to gain their own ends.
-
What do you do when they also have access to unlimited financial power? How will justice prevail? Has the Lord promised that justice will prevail in this evil world?
-
"We must Trust and Obey, that is the only way."
Let me say that we have a very fair judge and we will be drawing a jury in the Commonwealth of Massachusetts. I believe that given the intellectual level of the juries in Massachusetts, particulary in Federal Court, that the results will largely become dependant upon the presentation and documentation.
I sincerely believe the jurists on the 3ABN side will overplay the drama and the truth will easilly be seen by the jury...yes they will see throught the vail of linguistics, objections, rules of evidence and will see the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth.
I am certain this Judge will make certain that the jury will get that chance, even through the maze 3ABN will build based upon the Federal of Rules of evidence will make the task lengthy and arduous. Having been through several jury trials from the taking of the complaint to the jury verdict, I am convinced we can clarify the story and vivify the truth, by the Power of the Spirit...it is in His hands!!! 3ABN will be using surrogates to represent their effort, we will be their ourselves to represent the truth. May the Lord's Will prevail!!!
Gailon Arthur Joy
-
I do have an issue with anyone being appointed as an "Honorary Elder" or an 'honorary anything'. In the Church, we should not be seeing more of "jobs for the boys". Either people are there to do a job or else they're not 'holding a position'.
There are a couple of issues present here:
1) Should the church/denomination grant "honorary" status to someone who is not required to "perform all of the duties?"
2) Does denominational policy allow for the issuance of such honorary status to people?
3) Should a specific individual be granted such status?
My response is as follows:
3) Should Danny have been granted such status: The answer to that question will depend upon the positions that people have taken on other issues. In any case, the local congregation has the right to place in office those people whom it wishes to place in office. Both liberals and conservatives agree to this in principle.
2) Does denominational policy allow for granting honorary status to people: Take a look at any edition of the YEARBOOK. The General Conference and the Union Conferences issue the following honorary credentials:
a) Honorary Minesterial Credential
b) Honorary Commissioned Minister Credential
c) Honorary Commissioned Ministry of Teaching Credential
Folks, there is a very long denominational history of granting "honorary" status to people.
Just as the General Conference and the Union Conferences grant such credentials it is within the power of the local congregation to grant people honorary status.
1) Should the local congregation grant honorary status to people who are not required to perform all of the duties:
Folks, in larger congregations people elected to positions such as Elder and Deacon are often not asked to perform all of the various duties of an Elder or a Deacon. Rather the duties of that posision are divied up between the various people. Some perform some functions and others perform other functions. Typicallly in this situation at the time of election the person is informed as to what the required duties will be.
To be specific, under some situations a Elder is supposed to preach the Sabbath sermon. Yet, in larger congregations a person may be elected to the position of Elder who knows that they will never be asked to preach a sermon. Others may be asked. But, their duties will be some that are not performed by others.
In acutal application there is not actual requirement that every person elected to a position be required to perform all of the duites of that office. The duties of that office may be divided between those who hold that office.
-
In the case of Danny Shelton, was he actually elected to be an "Honorary Elder" or an "Elder"?
-
In the case of Danny Shelton, was he actually elected to be an "Honorary Elder" or an "Elder"?
Danny Shelton was not elected to be an "Honorary Elder". There were no honorary positions in the Thompsonville SDA church, so the arguments of Gregory are moot.
-
Sister:
You will note from the citation that began my post, I spoke in general terms. I made no claim as to whether there were honorary positions in the Thompsonvie chruch or not. So, as a generality, I will suggest that my post was not moot.
Howeve, I call your attention to the following:
Why? Because the Thompsonville SDA Church felt okay about having Danny Shelton serve as more of an Honorary Elder rather than a hands on one?
Regardless of whether or not there were honorary positions in the Thompsonville congregation, there was discussion of the Danny that was related to being an honorary Elder. In view of that my post was much more on point.
-
Gregory,
First, let me say that I agree that your well-reasoned post was definitely unmoot and was presented in a most respectful and dignified manner, very representative of the personality and character you have exhibited from the beginning of the public discussion of this saga. Thanks for your continued gentle and principled input.
In the case of Danny Shelton, was he actually elected to be an "Honorary Elder" or an "Elder"?
Daryl,
I have avoided much comment on your forum because I have not felt it was a good fit for my personal opinions and perspective. I am happy to say that I can freely answer your query without the need to add personal comment or opinion on the matter because, in this particular story, not only do we have the observations of Sister, who says she was a witness we also have the observations of appletree, who also says he was a witness! You might find enlightenment by weighing the input from both sides. Up just a bit here, sister claimed
Danny Shelton was not elected to be an "Honorary Elder". There were no honorary positions in the Thompsonville SDA church...
Not so very long ago, appletree made the following statement on BlackSDA.com: (http://www.blacksda.com/forums/index.php?s=&showtopic=19216&view=findpost&p=234879)
...A. DS said he couldn't be an active Elder and would rather not hold that office.
B. You say that he left WF church because he couldn't control it....If he wanted to control the church why would he offer to turn down the role of Elder? Why would he say upfront, that he wouldn't be able to come to most board meetings. (The lack of presence at board meetings was one of your main points in your little story) So, which is it? You can't have it both ways. You can't control something if you aren't there.
C. Since DS didn't want the Elder role I fail to find what controversy that you have painted. DS agreed with Mr. F. that he shouldn't have that office. But, nowhere in your story is that mentioned. Did Mr. F not mention it to you or did you accidentally on purpose leave it out as you usually do?
Again, I say, Where's the fight. DS agreed with Mr. F and caused no trouble about F's suggestion that he not be made an Elder. The pastor, Elders and the church ultimately disagreed. So...we are faulting Danny on this...how?
Here's appletree offers an idea to add to the "honorary elder" mix: (http://www.blacksda.com/forums/index.php?s=&showtopic=19216&view=findpost&p=232759)
...Also amusing was the statement that Danny didn't come until after SS. The truth is Danny was rarely present at the T'vill church because of his extensive travel schedule on the weekends. On the rare weekends he was home, I certainly wouldn't blame him a bit if he did wait until the worship hour to come. He was wore out. Danny was responsible for building that church so maybe the board felt like he should be an honorary elder or something to that affect because, they knew, with his schedule he could not be an active elder. That would have been an impossibility.
-
Well, Doodle, it's fine with me if J. R. takes his diatribes elsewhere, especially since he presently is making false accusations regarding who is posting here.
Uh? Bob what's this all about, my "diatribes?" I don't see anything resembling anything about my "diatribes" here....much less any remarks I've made. FWIW, I approve and have reposted many of your post on "Atomorrow.com". Indeed on "Atomorrow.com" I've linked your home page and have encouraged others to view your postings! So what gives? What have I done to you to generete such hostility?
The sadness is that some in the Adventist Church are still supporting Danny Sheldon (a failed "Carpenter" who couldn't even build a wall square!) with their Tithes and Offerings contrary to both the church manual and EGW thoughts on the Tithe.
Anyway......I have no problem with you or your postings.....I just wonder as to why you seemingly wish to attack me personally on this thread? When I totally agree with everything your saying and are trying to do, to reform 3ABN, and make it into a true ministry of God, and NOT a financial boondoggle for Danny Sheldon's personal bank account. Shrug…..so why are you attacking me?
-
Someone ought to read the following to Danny Sheldon....and to the McNallasis who appear to continue to support him and 3ABN unconditionally!
BC- 1888
-TI- The Ellen G. White 1888 Materials
-CN- 162
-CT- The Danger of Self-Sufficiency in God's Work
-PR- 02
-PG- 1358 & 1359
-TEXT-
How does the spirit of self-exaltation and grasping for arbitrary
authority compare with the spirit and example of Christ? Our
people, who talk of religious liberty, have lessons to learn as to
what liberty in Christ really is. The Lord has marked the oppression
that has been practiced. To the men that are working in lines that are
not in accordance with Bible principles he declares that he will not accept
the means gained in this way.
Those who know the truth are to be worked by the Holy Spirit, and not
themselves to try to work the Spirit. If the cords are drawn much tighter, if
the rules are made much finer, if men continue to bind their fellow-laborers
closer and closer to the commandments of men, many will be stirred by the
Spirit of God to break every shackle, and assert their liberty in Christ
Jesus."
-
Well, Doodle, it's fine with me if J. R. takes his diatribes elsewhere, especially since he presently is making false accusations regarding who is posting here.
Uh? Bob what's this all about, my "diatribes?" I don't see anything resembling anything about my "diatribes" here....much less any remarks I've made. FWIW, I approve and have reposted many of your post on "Atomorrow.com". Indeed on "Atomorrow.com" I've linked your home page and have encouraged others to view your postings! So what gives? What have I done to you to generete such hostility?
...
Anyway......I have no problem with you or your postings.....I just wonder as to why you seemingly wish to attack me personally on this thread? When I totally agree with everything your saying and are trying to do, to reform 3ABN, and make it into a true ministry of God, and NOT a financial boondoggle for Danny Sheldon's personal bank account. Shrug…..so why are you attacking me?
I'm afraid you are at a small disadvantage in this matter. A conversaton between you and John Alfke on atomorrow was posted here on this forum for a time. It was quite offensive to some here as there were some references to past behavior on the part of some who hold positions of leadership here, so there was a consensus by administrators to remove most of the posts relating to to that discussion, as well as the link.
You should know that the same administrators will go through and correct spelling errors as well. I haven't noticed administrative corrections in grammar as yet, but the site is still young.
-
You should know that the same administrators will go through and correct spelling errors as well. I haven't noticed administrative corrections in grammar as yet, but the site is still young.
GrandmaNettie,
Hopefully it is your intent to let everyone know your opinion of the administration here because it is VERY obvious!!! I am not certain why you have developed such a dislike for AdventTalk and the way things are handled here, but I personally find it very refreshing from the administrator tirades over at BSDA. Each to his own, I guess. Just wanted to let you know that you are coming through loud and clear!!!
-
You should know that the same administrators will go through and correct spelling errors as well. I haven't noticed administrative corrections in grammar as yet, but the site is still young.
GrandmaNettie,
Hopefully it is your intent to let everyone know your opinion of the administration here because it is VERY obvious!!! I am not certain why you have developed such a dislike for AdventTalk and the way things are handled here, but I personally find it very refreshing from the administrator tirades over at BSDA. Each to his own, I guess. Just wanted to let you know that you are coming through loud and clear!!!
It is a matter of taste and opinion, I suppose. I would actually feel rather violated if an admin decided to correct my spelling errors without even asking my permission. I can certainly understand administrative action when forum policy has been broken by a member. But to change the spelling on a member's posts? I read the rules here when I joined and that was not listed.
The deleted post that I was referring to when filling J.R. in on the background to the confusing comments in Bob's post was a case of going overboard with the adminstrative delete button as well, IMO. I'm not speaking of the link to atomorrow, per se, but much of the rest of the lengthy post that the member took the time to share. The length of the post was annoyingly long and it made a mess when others quoted it in its entirety, but how did it break the Adventtalk rules?
BTW, I am not the only one unhappy here:
********** Unaccepable link removed from original post and, therefore, also removed from quote here. - Daryl Fawcett, Administrator ********** :-[
From Doodle
I am not surprized you objected to the link and found it unacceptable, but I do wonder why you also deleted the material and evidence I posted in my quote box which wasn't related to that, along with Chrissy's reply to that? :scratch:
but, oh well, it's your forum, but those acts by consensus or due to dire circumstances you referred to seem to be adding up.
If most of you are comfortable with the level of post altering that has been demonstrated then I suppose the few that are not comfortable with such are in the minority and, therefore, not a part of the consensus. I would hope that the forum rules will be updated so that new members will be aware of the potential for adjustments to their posts.
-
It is a matter of taste and opinion, I suppose. I would actually feel rather violated if an admin decided to correct my spelling errors without even asking my permission. I can certainly understand administrative action when forum policy has been broken by a member. But to change the spelling on a member's posts? I read the rules here when I joined and that was not listed.
The deleted post that I was referring to when filling J.R. in on the background to the confusing comments in Bob's post was a case of going overboard with the adminstrative delete button as well, IMO. I'm not speaking of the link to atomorrow, per se, but much of the rest of the lengthy post that the member took the time to share. The length of the post was annoyingly long and it made a mess when others quoted it in its entirety, but how did it break the Adventtalk rules?
If most of you are comfortable with the level of post altering that has been demonstrated then I suppose the few that are not comfortable with such are in the minority and, therefore, not a part of the consensus. I would hope that the forum rules will be updated so that new members will be aware of the potential for adjustments to their posts.
I know exactly what you are referring to, and I am glad it is gone.
As for feeling violated, how can one feel any more violated than when a BSDA admin comes along and makes a poster feel stupid or trivial for sharing their opinions?? I would much rather have someone come along and quietly fix my spelling errors than to experience someone like Clay who either beats someone down if he doesn't agree or simply closes the thread. Talk about violated...
I personally am thankful that there is a friendly forum where I can openly but respectfully discuss what is on my mind. As a matter of fact, I much prefer to share my thoughts here than at BSDA. If you don't like the environment here...then why....????????....never mind.
-
Uh? Bob what's this all about, my "diatribes?"
My apologies, J.R. I was reacting to your claim that Chrissie was Claudia, and maybe the way that post wherever it was came across. In this ongoing saga it is difficult to know who is who and what side this one is on or that one is on. My apologies.
Would you like me to edit that?
-
Re: "[The deleted post that I was referring to when filling J.R. in on the background to the confusing comments in Bob's post was a case of going overboard with the administrative delete button as well, IMO. ..............I personally am thankful that there is a friendly forum where I can openly but respectfully discuss what is on my mind."
Uh? FWIW....the worst form of Forum Management, is the unjustified use of the "Delete" button......it demonstrates the "small man" syndrome of anyone in control of a discussion format. In the case of "Atomorrow.com" the ONLY time that the "delete" button is used, is when someone becomes or post something vulgar (including my friend, John Alfke! ;D)....such as is so common of the vulgarity seen on "Club Adventist!" And we only delete the offensive portion of the post, so there is a RECORD of the post....even though it is made clear, that "editing" has occurred! Indeed the whole reason for starting "Atomorrow.com" was because of the invasive and "Controlling" nature of other so called "Adventist" forums.
FWIW....John Alfke was one of my sisters graduating classmates at South Lancaster Academy....and his sister was my classmate at SLA. when I attended there 1964-1965 He is also my friend....so we josh around once in awhile!
But back to the discussion about 3ABN......it took me personally awhile to come to a conclusion at to the matter of Danny vs. Linda. As I personally like the idea of independent ministries......and don't particularly appreciate the churches vested interested in CONTROLLING all aspects of ministry (remember I’m a PK!). But I've come to realize and acknowledge that it appears that Danny Sheldon is an out of control "Control Freak." And certainly not worshiping the God of Heaven....but the god of his own self interest!
-
Uh? Bob what's this all about, my "diatribes?"
My apologies, J.R. I was reacting to your claim that Chrissie was Claudia, and maybe the way that post wherever it was came across. In this ongoing saga it is difficult to know who is who and what side this one is on or that one is on. My apologies.
Would you like me to edit that?
You've just justified my requirement as to why every member of a forum should be required at the least, to provide bonafieds as to their identity! On Atomorrow.com.......if you fake your name, or don't identify yourself....your HISTORY!
I'd much rather reply to Bob Pickle....then to some guy who says his name is "Jake!" Bob Pickle is an identity I can focus on....whom I can know his situation and positions on various internet sites. he might take....Likewise, you can immediately identify "J.R. Layman" anywhere on the net
-
Gregory,
First, let me say that I agree that your well-reasoned post was definitely unmoot and was presented in a most respectful and dignified manner, very representative of the personality and character you have exhibited from the beginning of the public discussion of this saga. Thanks for your continued gentle and principled input.
In the case of Danny Shelton, was he actually elected to be an "Honorary Elder" or an "Elder"?
Daryl,
I have avoided much comment on your forum because I have not felt it was a good fit for my personal opinions and perspective. I am happy to say that I can freely answer your query without the need to add personal comment or opinion on the matter because, in this particular story, not only do we have the observations of Sister, who says she was a witness we also have the observations of appletree, who also says he was a witness! You might find enlightenment by weighing the input from both sides. Up just a bit here, sister claimed
Danny Shelton was not elected to be an "Honorary Elder". There were no honorary positions in the Thompsonville SDA church...
Not so very long ago, appletree made the following statement on BlackSDA.com: (http://www.blacksda.com/forums/index.php?s=&showtopic=19216&view=findpost&p=234879)
...A. DS said he couldn't be an active Elder and would rather not hold that office.
B. You say that he left WF church because he couldn't control it....If he wanted to control the church why would he offer to turn down the role of Elder? Why would he say upfront, that he wouldn't be able to come to most board meetings. (The lack of presence at board meetings was one of your main points in your little story) So, which is it? You can't have it both ways. You can't control something if you aren't there.
C. Since DS didn't want the Elder role I fail to find what controversy that you have painted. DS agreed with Mr. F. that he shouldn't have that office. But, nowhere in your story is that mentioned. Did Mr. F not mention it to you or did you accidentally on purpose leave it out as you usually do?
Again, I say, Where's the fight. DS agreed with Mr. F and caused no trouble about F's suggestion that he not be made an Elder. The pastor, Elders and the church ultimately disagreed. So...we are faulting Danny on this...how?
Here's appletree offers an idea to add to the "honorary elder" mix: (http://www.blacksda.com/forums/index.php?s=&showtopic=19216&view=findpost&p=232759)
...Also amusing was the statement that Danny didn't come until after SS. The truth is Danny was rarely present at the T'vill church because of his extensive travel schedule on the weekends. On the rare weekends he was home, I certainly wouldn't blame him a bit if he did wait until the worship hour to come. He was wore out. Danny was responsible for building that church so maybe the board felt like he should be an honorary elder or something to that affect because, they knew, with his schedule he could not be an active elder. That would have been an impossibility.
GrandmaNettie,
I stand by what I said about there being no “honorary elders” voted in at the Thompsonville church at the time in question. I know, I was there, I voted on the issue at the time, because I was a member of the Thompsonville church. No where in Appletree’s “yarns” does he ever make the statement that he was a member of the Thompsonville church or present at the time these events took place.
Item C., is an outright lie. I checked again with Pastor Fiscalini and he confirmed that Danny never told him that he did not want the role of an Elder. If that were the case, why was Danny so angry at Fiscalini for opposing his election?
Jeanette, we both know where your sympathies lie in this situation. First at BSDA and now here at Advent Talk. You are attempting to nullify the verity of my testimony regarding the actual character of Danny Shelton, as portrayed through vignettes that give insight into how Danny operates behind the scenes at 3ABN. It is understandable why both Appletree and you, in your supporting role of him, have fought so vehemently in an attempt to discredit the facts of this episode of “An Unauthorized History of 3ABN”. The larger question here is not one of “Honorary Elders” in the SDA church, but the question of an individual having so much control of a local church that it becomes impossible for the Pastor, church board and the congregation in question to discipline said member when his actions run contrary to the word of God. This is the essence of “Nobody Owns the Church”.
At the time these events took place the situation was as follows: the pastor was chosen by Danny Shelton and hired by the Illinois Conference in accordance with Danny wishes, half the pastor’s salary was paid by 3ABN, the pastor and his family lived in 3ABN housing rent free, the pastor and his wife both appeared on 3ABN programming (she had her own program), in addition to his work at the Thompsonville church and 3ABN, the pastor had his own “independent” ministry which was headquartered in 3ABN facilities. At the very least there is a definite appearance of conflict of interest here. Has the situation changed with the later hiring of another Pastor? Apparently, not. Similar conflicts exist with John Lomacang. Why was Danny not disciplined for an unbiblical divorce and remarriage by the Thompsonville SDA church? Who was willing to stand up and oppose Danny Shelton? Not the pastor, elders or church board. Obviously, no one. Why?
Sister
-
The only editing I have basically done in anybody's posts was to correct the formatting error in the quoted sections of posts where it is hard to identify the quote from the person's new post.
I do NOT normally go around correcting anybody's spelling errors.
As far as the public discussing Admin/Mod actions goes, there will be a new forum rule added against that.
If you have a complaint against any Admin/Mod actions, use the PM feature.
-
Gregory,
First, let me say that I agree that your well-reasoned post was definitely unmoot and was presented in a most respectful and dignified manner, very representative of the personality and character you have exhibited from the beginning of the public discussion of this saga. Thanks for your continued gentle and principled input.
In the case of Danny Shelton, was he actually elected to be an "Honorary Elder" or an "Elder"?
Daryl,
I have avoided much comment on your forum because I have not felt it was a good fit for my personal opinions and perspective. I am happy to say that I can freely answer your query without the need to add personal comment or opinion on the matter because, in this particular story, not only do we have the observations of Sister, who says she was a witness we also have the observations of appletree, who also says he was a witness! You might find enlightenment by weighing the input from both sides. Up just a bit here, sister claimed
Danny Shelton was not elected to be an "Honorary Elder". There were no honorary positions in the Thompsonville SDA church...
Not so very long ago, appletree made the following statement on BlackSDA.com: (http://www.blacksda.com/forums/index.php?s=&showtopic=19216&view=findpost&p=234879)
...A. DS said he couldn't be an active Elder and would rather not hold that office.
B. You say that he left WF church because he couldn't control it....If he wanted to control the church why would he offer to turn down the role of Elder? Why would he say upfront, that he wouldn't be able to come to most board meetings. (The lack of presence at board meetings was one of your main points in your little story) So, which is it? You can't have it both ways. You can't control something if you aren't there.
C. Since DS didn't want the Elder role I fail to find what controversy that you have painted. DS agreed with Mr. F. that he shouldn't have that office. But, nowhere in your story is that mentioned. Did Mr. F not mention it to you or did you accidentally on purpose leave it out as you usually do?
Again, I say, Where's the fight. DS agreed with Mr. F and caused no trouble about F's suggestion that he not be made an Elder. The pastor, Elders and the church ultimately disagreed. So...we are faulting Danny on this...how?
Here's appletree offers an idea to add to the "honorary elder" mix: (http://www.blacksda.com/forums/index.php?s=&showtopic=19216&view=findpost&p=232759)
...Also amusing was the statement that Danny didn't come until after SS. The truth is Danny was rarely present at the T'vill church because of his extensive travel schedule on the weekends. On the rare weekends he was home, I certainly wouldn't blame him a bit if he did wait until the worship hour to come. He was wore out. Danny was responsible for building that church so maybe the board felt like he should be an honorary elder or something to that affect because, they knew, with his schedule he could not be an active elder. That would have been an impossibility.
GrandmaNettie,
I stand by what I said about there being no “honorary elders” voted in at the Thompsonville church at the time in question. I know, I was there, I voted on the issue at the time, because I was a member of the Thompsonville church. No where in Appletree’s “yarns” does he ever make the statement that he was a member of the Thompsonville church or present at the time these events took place.
There may not have been a position on the list of offices available that was titled Honorary Elder, but, considering the input here and elsewhere, the statements by you and a variety of others, the majority of the Thompsonville church voted Danny in, in spite of apparently knowing that he was not fulfilling the job of an elder. Doesn't that make him rather an "honorary elder" by default?
Item C., is an outright lie. I checked again with Pastor Fiscalini and he confirmed that Danny never told him that he did not want the role of an Elder. If that were the case, why was Danny so angry at Fiscalini for opposing his election?
If Pastor Fiscalini says Danny never told him he did not want the role of Elder, I would have to take him at his word, as it is his experience.
Jeanette, we both know where your sympathies lie in this situation. First at BSDA and now here at Advent Talk. You are attempting to nullify the verity of my testimony regarding the actual character of Danny Shelton, as portrayed through vignettes that give insight into how Danny operates behind the scenes at 3ABN. It is understandable why both Appletree and you, in your supporting role of him, have fought so vehemently in an attempt to discredit the facts of this episode of “An Unauthorized History of 3ABN”. The larger question here is not one of “Honorary Elders” in the SDA church, but the question of an individual having so much control of a local church that it becomes impossible for the Pastor, church board and the congregation in question to discipline said member when his actions run contrary to the word of God. This is the essence of “Nobody Owns the Church”.
I know exactly where my sympathies lie and they aren't with Danny Shelton. They also aren't with appletree. They are with the truth, wherever it can be found, with a woman who has suffered a huge blow to her life and, IMO, is now possibly being exploited by some with personal agendas, and with an ex-son-in-law whose life was also ripped apart by this ugly saga. You may surmise that you know where my sympathies lie but, from what you have concluded here and on BSDA, it is clear to me that you have erred in your conclusions.
The details in your story are told from your perspective and from the Fiscalini's perspectives. The details that appletree and others have brought forward are told from their perspectives. That leaves the reader to weigh all of the supporting evidence to attempt to determine what actually happened. I merely provided details from both perspectives to Daryl so he could weigh them and, perhaps, find an answer to his question.
At the time these events took place the situation was as follows: the pastor was chosen by Danny Shelton and hired by the Illinois Conference in accordance with Danny wishes, half the pastor’s salary was paid by 3ABN, the pastor and his family lived in 3ABN housing rent free, the pastor and his wife both appeared on 3ABN programming (she had her own program), in addition to his work at the Thompsonville church and 3ABN, the pastor had his own “independent” ministry which was headquartered in 3ABN facilities. At the very least there is a definite appearance of conflict of interest here. Has the situation changed with the later hiring of another Pastor? Apparently, not. Similar conflicts exist with John Lomacang. Why was Danny not disciplined for an unbiblical divorce and remarriage by the Thompsonville SDA church? Who was willing to stand up and oppose Danny Shelton? Not the pastor, elders or church board. Obviously, no one. Why?
Sister
When you first began sharing this latest story, I spent days attempting to reach and speak with Pastor Odle so I could get his version of the story. I never was able to find and speak with him so I have had to rely on what you and others have brought forward, just like everyone else who was not present for those events. Without a doubt the one thing I can feel secure in believng for sure is that the majority of the congregation voted Danny in as an Elder, whether it was a real or an "honorary" position.
You challenged Gregory that his arguments regarding "honorary elders" are moot, you characterize appletree's input as "yarns", you challenged what I presented from you and appletree and made judgements about my sympathies and claim that I am attempting to "nullify the verity" of your "testimony regarding the actual character of Danny Shelton" all because you believe we are calling your story into question.
What has me scratching my head is why you would speak out so strongly to protect against perceived attacks on your story that is attempting to show the actual character of Danny Shelton, and yet didn't challenge Gailon when he called Linda's character into question by publically condemning her for her lack of support of the cause.
Is it ethical right to spend millions of dollars in an attempt of defaming those who question such things? Why not rather spend those funds improving and making open the current system?
Because systems are about self preservation, not common sense, integrity and ethics. However, when whistleblowers stand up, frequently they find many others will stand with them and you develop the Enron affect: the "system" is brought to justice in time.
Someone just has to take that very first step...and you certainly know what that is all about, don't you, Johann...Linda has much to thank you for or we would not be where we are today without your efforts...too bad Linda doesn't recognize that and do us the justice of supporting the effort!!!
Gailon Arthur Joy
-
Why did you attempt to contact Pastor Rick Odle? He was not the Pastor of the Thompsonville Church at the time this incident took place. Samuel Thomas was the church pastor.
There may not have been a position on the list of offices available that was titled Honorary Elder, but, considering the input here and elsewhere, the statements by you and a variety of others, the majority of the Thompsonville church voted Danny in, in spite of apparently knowing that he was not fulfilling the job of an elder. Doesn't that make him rather an "honorary elder" by default?
No, it does not make Danny an "honorary elder" by default. If he was not elected as an "honorary elder" than it does not mean that by default he is an "honorary elder". I do not understand how you could logically come to that conclusion. Danny's inability to fulfill his duties as a local elder was not brought up to the church at large before the vote was taken, only to the Nominating Committee.
-
I'm afraid you are at a small disadvantage in this matter. A conversaton between you and John Alfke on atomorrow was posted here on this forum for a time. It was quite offensive to some here as there were some references to past behavior on the part of some who hold positions of leadership here, so there was a consensus by administrators to remove most of the posts relating to to that discussion, as well as the link.
Whether or not that was factual is open to question. It could be considered slander, and for that reason, I support the deletion of the posts in question.
You should know that the same administrators will go through and correct spelling errors as well. I haven't noticed administrative corrections in grammar as yet, but the site is still young.
I agree that editing of posts by administrators is unjustified. Posters have the ability to edit their own posts.
-
What has me scratching my head is why you would speak out so strongly to protect against perceived attacks on your story that is attempting to show the actual character of Danny Shelton, and yet didn't challenge Gailon when he called Linda's character into question by publically condemning her for her lack of support of the cause.
A little technicality: Just because someone states that someone isn't being supportive does not necessarily mean that the unsupportive one's character is being called into question.
-
I'm afraid you are at a small disadvantage in this matter. A conversaton between you and John Alfke on atomorrow was posted here on this forum for a time. It was quite offensive to some here as there were some references to past behavior on the part of some who hold positions of leadership here, so there was a consensus by administrators to remove most of the posts relating to to that discussion, as well as the link.
Whether or not that was factual is open to question. It could be considered slander, and for that reason, I support the deletion of the posts in question. You should know that the same administrators will go through and correct spelling errors as well. I haven't noticed administrative corrections in grammar as yet, but the site is still young.
I agree that editing of posts by administrators is unjustified. Posters have the ability to edit their own posts.
Inga,
The quote that the link in question led to was certainly filled with many allegations and I'm not suggesting it was inappropriate to delete it. To take so much of the rest of Doodle's post that had no connection to the link was going a bit far, IMO. That was my point. However, new policy says that we are not to discuss admin/mod actions so will not say more about that.
I have gone back to take a second look at the posts that I clearly remember contained notification by the owner of this site that he had corrected misspellings(was such a shock that it made my jaw drop). The notices are no longer in the posts. Perhaps the members who were edited remember the messages; perhaps I was imagining the spate of misspelled words editing for I am getting pretty old. If the latter is the case, I humbly apologize for the unfounded allegations. I don't even want to consider the ramifications if my memory is correct.
Jeanette
-
A conversaton between you and John Alfke on atomorrow was posted here on this forum for a time. .
I agree that editing of posts by administrators is unjustified. Posters have the ability to edit their own posts.
Dern....I'd sure like to know what conversation that was, since Alfke and I talk all the time! :-[ FWIW he went to Collanges (sic) France, got his degree in French from AUC and taught at Loma Linda for awhile. OTOH, he doesn't exactly get along with Gailon even though they live in the same town in MASS. FWIW when I "edit" a post on Atomorrow.com. I make sure that what I've edited is clearly marked as a "bleep" and I give the reason for such! (Usually some vulgarity....which is not allowed) Indeed John Alfke is the one I most commonly have to "bleep" ;D even though he's my friend and a classmate of one of my sisters. ROFL
=====
Edited to correct quote formatting probem only. - Daryl :)
-
[quote author=J.R. Layman link=topic=14.msg1429#msg1429
FWIW when I "edit" a post on Atomorrow.com. I make sure that what I've edited is clearly marked as a "bleep" and I give the reason for such! (Usually some vulgarity....which is not allowed) Indeed John Alfke is the one I most commonly have to "bleep" ;D even though he's my friend and a classmate of one of my sisters. ROFL
=====
Edited to correct quote formatting probem only. - Daryl :)
[/quote]
Just noticed that this site has had but one post since 2008.