Local Church Discussions - View Single Post - Handling Matters In House in the Local Churches

Indiana · 08-30-2008, 10:26 PM

Hello everyone,

I had to “laugh” when an elder told a brother recently that I should have handled matters of our past “in house” and not publicly on the internet. This brother evidently doesn’t understand that there is no such thing as handling matters “in house”. It has been over seven years since I initially presented my burden “in house” about matters of our past and was placed in shackles as a result. The shackles remain to this day.

There was no fellowship then, and there is none now. The brothers were afraid because I put the matters of my concern in print; albeit, I did so seeking first their fellowship over the points made in the book.

I provided six hard copies to elders for their serious contemplation and did the same with six other saints – all for sake of having fellowship “in house”.

My thought was to build a bridge of communication to the many that left the churches. When I found that I was on my own with this idea and the brothers were not going to be supportive, (“jailing” me instead), I sent out copies to others by email. Later, after acquiring much more understanding of the facts of local church history, and asking the brothers for fellowship along the way and being ignored, I placed pertinent information in abundance on the internet that would help leaders and other saints, past and present, understand local church history according to facts, not the myths and fabrications of LSM lore.

(I said earlier I had to “laugh”; more accurately I was mainly incensed about the elder's statement about keeping matters "in house". Leading brothers in the churches don’t get facts straight and never will as long as they remain closed to them and regard their "one accord" even above truth.

The lies and misrepresentations continue in the recovery as blind brothers follow the lead of other blind brothers in avoiding forthright dealings with serious unrighteous matters of our local church history.)

Here is my initial letter to Dan Towle. (I could not have been more naïve, even after being warned about the impenetrable wall I would encounter addressing such brothers. I genuinely thought I could find men with a conscience in the leadership. With regard to my motive, intention, and purity in this cause, I was like a lamb. A very dumb lamb, on his way to the slaughter.)

January 28, 2001

"Dear Dan,

I have written a little book for the sake of fellowship, mainly with leading ones, concerning our past sixteen-year history of the new way. I think this period of time in the Lord’s recovery warrants our careful study of both the benefits and the costs to the church in what was such a highly controversial move among us in those beginning years.

I wanted to come to you because I feel it is safe to do so. If I am inaccurate or unfair in some way, perhaps you are the most qualified one to catch me that I could either make an adjustment or terminate the proposed fellowship.

I hope we can have a good, thorough, and upright fellowship over this booklet called In the Wake of the New Way, while remembering the Lord’s prayer ‘that they all may be one’ and the repeated petitions from our brother Lee, not only to heed the trumpet call for the Lord’s new move, but also to respond to the call for the rendering of care to every member for the building up of the Body in love….

I would welcome your phone call or e-mail message at …………] and sisitt@msn.com. I don’t intend for this booklet to be widespread; rather, I hope that ones who do receive it could do so in the Lord, with a holy regard and respect given to those who left the recovery, and a godly consideration rendered to those who remain, but who are in need of more significant care...."

This was only the first of many attempts to handle matters “in house” with several brothers over a seven-year period. At my three-year point, the hidden matters of our history spilled over to the internet, only after the brothers took issue with Harvest House about a book they felt was defamatory. I then presented our history on the internet as a parallel story and as our own far more serious case of defamation. Since there was NO FELLOWSHIP “in house” and since I was continuing to be held in a disciplinary mode, (in shackles provided by leaders in Bellevue and Seattle), I changed my approach.

I have several documents showing these attempts at fellowship. What a misrepresentation for an elder to say that I should have handled things “in house”. It could not be done! Others have also experienced the impossibility of having genuine fellowship with most leaders in the local churches. Eventually, you must just proclaim. And, this is what I have done. And, all the time with the hope for the cooperation, meaningful dialogue, and genuine mutual fellowship of local church leaders.

08-30-2008, 10:26 PM	#1
Indiana Member Join Date: Aug 2008 Posts: 707	Handling Matters In House in the Local Churches Hello everyone, I had to “laugh” when an elder told a brother recently that I should have handled matters of our past “in house” and not publicly on the internet. This brother evidently doesn’t understand that there is no such thing as handling matters “in house”. It has been over seven years since I initially presented my burden “in house” about matters of our past and was placed in shackles as a result. The shackles remain to this day. There was no fellowship then, and there is none now. The brothers were afraid because I put the matters of my concern in print; albeit, I did so seeking first their fellowship over the points made in the book. I provided six hard copies to elders for their serious contemplation and did the same with six other saints – all for sake of having fellowship “in house”. My thought was to build a bridge of communication to the many that left the churches. When I found that I was on my own with this idea and the brothers were not going to be supportive, (“jailing” me instead), I sent out copies to others by email. Later, after acquiring much more understanding of the facts of local church history, and asking the brothers for fellowship along the way and being ignored, I placed pertinent information in abundance on the internet that would help leaders and other saints, past and present, understand local church history according to facts, not the myths and fabrications of LSM lore. (I said earlier I had to “laugh”; more accurately I was mainly incensed about the elder's statement about keeping matters "in house". Leading brothers in the churches don’t get facts straight and never will as long as they remain closed to them and regard their "one accord" even above truth. The lies and misrepresentations continue in the recovery as blind brothers follow the lead of other blind brothers in avoiding forthright dealings with serious unrighteous matters of our local church history.) Here is my initial letter to Dan Towle. (I could not have been more naïve, even after being warned about the impenetrable wall I would encounter addressing such brothers. I genuinely thought I could find men with a conscience in the leadership. With regard to my motive, intention, and purity in this cause, I was like a lamb. A very dumb lamb, on his way to the slaughter.) January 28, 2001 "Dear Dan, I have written a little book for the sake of fellowship, mainly with leading ones, concerning our past sixteen-year history of the new way. I think this period of time in the Lord’s recovery warrants our careful study of both the benefits and the costs to the church in what was such a highly controversial move among us in those beginning years. I wanted to come to you because I feel it is safe to do so. If I am inaccurate or unfair in some way, perhaps you are the most qualified one to catch me that I could either make an adjustment or terminate the proposed fellowship. I hope we can have a good, thorough, and upright fellowship over this booklet called In the Wake of the New Way, while remembering the Lord’s prayer ‘that they all may be one’ and the repeated petitions from our brother Lee, not only to heed the trumpet call for the Lord’s new move, but also to respond to the call for the rendering of care to every member for the building up of the Body in love…. I would welcome your phone call or e-mail message at …………] and sisitt@msn.com. I don’t intend for this booklet to be widespread; rather, I hope that ones who do receive it could do so in the Lord, with a holy regard and respect given to those who left the recovery, and a godly consideration rendered to those who remain, but who are in need of more significant care...." This was only the first of many attempts to handle matters “in house” with several brothers over a seven-year period. At my three-year point, the hidden matters of our history spilled over to the internet, only after the brothers took issue with Harvest House about a book they felt was defamatory. I then presented our history on the internet as a parallel story and as our own far more serious case of defamation. Since there was NO FELLOWSHIP “in house” and since I was continuing to be held in a disciplinary mode, (in shackles provided by leaders in Bellevue and Seattle), I changed my approach. I have several documents showing these attempts at fellowship. What a misrepresentation for an elder to say that I should have handled things “in house”. It could not be done! Others have also experienced the impossibility of having genuine fellowship with most leaders in the local churches. Eventually, you must just proclaim. And, this is what I have done. And, all the time with the hope for the cooperation, meaningful dialogue, and genuine mutual fellowship of local church leaders. Last edited by Indiana; 08-30-2008 at 10:38 PM.