I think he would disagree that he was the betrayer. I would ask for you to enlighten me and the others exactly HOW he betrayed the others. He hasn't come on here posing as someone else dropping information about others.
Do you agree with this Tzaia?This would have to mean that the posters that brought the evil deeds done behind closed doors and hidden from the vast majority of CES/STFI followers are the evil doers and the board and MG are the innocent victims of back-biting and tale-bearers. I am sure that is the story the board will stick to and the ever so worshiped research guy will be held high for getting the ministry through all the evil attacks of the adversary.
Let's get a little "lock-box" going here also and make sure to teach the silence of the lambs to the flock, just shut-up and bleat in unison as we lead you to slaughter. Seems the bible with the back-biting and tale-bearer topics also talks about men loving to be in darkness and hate their deeds made manifest to to light of day. I would say anyone that considers the evil deed being brought forth to be manifest being the more evil deed calls evil good and good evil.
So they're giving MG the boot, but I'd like to know what they're going to do about this pp business. Are they going to backtrack and say they were wrong about it?
I had someone give me a pp once. It was so strange that neither one of us knew what to make of it nor did we understand it. About six months later it came true I benefited from it greatly.
So I can see that there could be something to pp.
I'd also like to know what they're going to do with Karen Anne. Even if pp could be possible she obviously used it for evil.
So they're giving MG the boot, but I'd like to know what they're going to do about this pp business. Are they going to backtrack and say they were wrong about it?
Doesn't look like they are. JS said they were examining the doctrine, but doesn't sound like they're getting rid of it.
They should go back to the way we did it in twi, what was wrong with that way? :o :P
Hey, Uptown1, you can get your personal prophecy right here at the cafe for free!!
Step Right Up! The Right Reverend G. Gordy Godfrey was "bang on" with mine! Couldn't have been more accurate, if you ask me.
They'll "review" their teachings on personal prophecy like TWI "reviewed" their teachings on debt. They will never admit to being wrong about anything. You'll never hear, "I'm sorry. I screwed up." from any of them.
What's the lawsuit for? To keep from admitting he did anything wrong.
Something's wrong with an organization when, at the very root, are measures that prevent change.
Dare I ask??..........WHO'S going to re-examine the doctrine??
Wait a minute...They claim to follow the Lord and to have a personal relationship with Him...afterall, he is the head of the body...right?
If they are on talking terms with Him (revelation), why should their belief system be reduced to an academic excercise?...I believe this is where the rubber meets the road.
Is PP done only by permission of a person asking for it?
As I have seen it done and heard people in CES use the term, Personal Prophesy is requested. If you ask for prayer someone may prophesy, also. I have never heard one be negative, although, if you had an axe to grind, you could. Just as in a meeting, if you were to give a Word of Prophesy, you could say, "The Lord your God is damning you all to Hell!" After which you would be suspect.
But the dreams given to Elizabeth were not Personal Prophesy, they were supposedly, "prophetic." These were not requested but delivered by a "prophet," such as Nathan to David. A prophet is supposed to say what God has told them to say. But since the New Birth, He speaks to us first. Elizabeth was well aware they were false. But the others in the inner circle were blind.
But the dreams given to Elizabeth were not Personal Prophesy, they were supposedly, "prophetic." These were not requested but delivered by a "prophet," such as Nathan to David. A prophet is supposed to say what God has told them to say. But since the New Birth, He speaks to us first. Elizabeth was well aware they were false. But the others in the inner circle were blind.
Hope this helps.
CC
Which makes me wonder why ANY SUPPORTER OF CES/STFI WOULD WANT ANYBODY FROM THAT "INNER CIRCLE" RUNNING THINGS...
Do you agree with this Tzaia?This would have to mean that the posters that brought the evil deeds done behind closed doors and hidden from the vast majority of CES/STFI followers are the evil doers and the board and MG are the innocent victims of back-biting and tale-bearers. I am sure that is the story the board will stick to and the ever so worshiped research guy will be held high for getting the ministry through all the evil attacks of the adversary.
Let's get a little "lock-box" going here also and make sure to teach the silence of the lambs to the flock, just shut-up and bleat in unison as we lead you to slaughter. Seems the bible with the back-biting and tale-bearer topics also talks about men loving to be in darkness and hate their deeds made manifest to to light of day. I would say anyone that considers the evil deed being brought forth to be manifest being the more evil deed calls evil good and good evil.
I am talking about the people from CES/STF who have come on here masquerading as others dumping little crumbs of information taken out of context and spun to get you guys all up in a fervor. If you support Mark and he's gone - there goes the money. Better to make Mark the villain so financial support doesn't suffer.
FWIW, I know all these people personally. ALL of them. I live in Indy. I supported the ministry in a very tangible way through taking care of the computer systems as a friend, supporter, volunteer, and as a paid vendor. As an on-the-outside insider I knew about more than any of you could ever imagine.
These are things I will not dispute.
I will not dispute anyone's sincerity. No one set out to do anything (ministry wise) other than learn and teach what they believe to be God's Word.
I will not dispute that every last one of them thinks they are right.
I will not dispute that each of them lacks critical thinking skills in key areas.
I will not dispute that each one of them is capable of going off on a tangent and unfortunately a lot of people follow.
This is what I know as true:
JAL should have NEVER married Elizabeth, or Liz as she was known in her former town. He didn't know her well enough and her baggage proved to be a greater obstacle than he ever imagined. Marrying her ripped his family apart and continues to do so to this day. She is an incredible, articulate woman who also has some real issues. He was warned. I warned him. I wasn't getting a good vibe about it at all. I don't dislike her. I have no issues with her. But the situation is not all as she would like you to think.
I personally believe the personal prophecy thing was a poor way to handle the situation with EL. First of all, it kept people from dealing directly with her behavior and acting on that. The prophecies became the center of attention and the lack of credibility in using personal prophecy as some sort of a valid means for determining truth or intent has caused a lot of problems. It kept her from receiving much needed help. She's been able to use this as fodder when the best course of action would be to receive professional help from trained individuals who know how to deal with her types of issues. They (the prophecy council) were all in over their heads and they should have acknowledged that and stepped away.
JAL is an energetic, charismatic man who isn't above using his considerable influence. He can get ticked off if you don't fall into line with his thinking, but he can also be reasoned with - after a while. He needs someone to get in his face from time to time. I've done it. I did it over Momentus. But John is also easily influenced by smooth talkers and people who's intellect he respects. This has not always serve him well.
John S is a very intelligent man who is also incredibly naive in some areas of life. I marveled that a man who could see things with great clarity in some areas, like bible research, could be so totally clueless in other areas. That focus allows him to pursue the Word with passion, but that kind of focus also means that he really misses signals from people that are obvious to others. He really needs someone to interpret some of the nuances of what goes on in the office for him because he is oblivious and has no idea. He doesn't 'get' office politics. He will be a president in name only, which is probably what Dan and certainly Jeff want.
Mark is also very intelligent. He is reflective and quiet. He hates confrontation and will buckle until it becomes unbearable and then seem totally out of line when he does take a stand. That's probably what you are seeing with the defamation of character suit. I can tell you that if he feels inclined to do this - it's for a very good reason. This is so uncharacteristic of Mark that whatever provoked him to do this was more than he could bear. My experience is that Mark was more reasonable, more approachable, less judgmental, more patient, more humble, and kinder than anyone else in there. The others are not bad people, but Mark is pastoral. I'm really not getting where people think that Mark is punitive or unreasonable.
When Mark 'fired' Dan (Dan was not being paid) and asked Jeff for his resignation, it was because the situation had become unmanageable from his perspective. This was not a sudden thing, Jeff's relationships with other office staff had been a problem for a number of years and Dan was brought in to help manage that problem and bring a business perspective to the administrative side of the ministry that everyone could respect. Dan wanted to do that and bring Jeff along to manage the day-to-day office. In Mark's mind, Jeff was Dan's responsibility and Dan was letting Jeff run amok. If you didn't do what Jeff wanted, when he wanted it, and how he wanted it; Jeff became verbally abusive and the tone of the office had become very fearful under Jeff's management. Prior to Dan, Mark personally stepped in. I know he did it on my behalf many times. Many who stood up to Jeff were bullied out the door, or they were let go - as in my case. It was an ongoing issue that was tolerated because Jeff could get things done and Mark was pretty sure that Jeff's heart was in the right place. I know that because Mark and I discussed the situation on more than one occasion.
I don't know a whole heck of a lot about Dan. He seems to be sincere. He also, to me, appears ethically challenged in areas. To me he has a warped sense of what is important in some areas of his life and a quick reply or reason when questioned. I think there's been enough duplicity in his life that has worked for him that he's comfortable with moving the ethical bars as need be. I don't think Mark, John, and John knew nearly as much about him as they thought they did. I think that the two Johns think they know Dan. I don't think they do. I think they accepted way too much on face value. I found him very charming, but I also found him a bit creepy.
Jeff and I had a very interesting relationship. I like Jeff. He is willing to dig in and do whatever needs to be done. He can be very verbally destructive and cruel. It was obvious that he loves the ministry and he was thrilled with what we were able to do with the Biblical Unitarian web site and the TorT site. He was very excited about the outreach created by those sites. On the other hand, I will never trust the man again. He has done things to me that cannot be overlooked. He is not a victim in this situation. He is very much an instigator.
I warned Mark of the possibility of this whole effort to bring Jeff along eventually blowing up in his face. It was clear to me that Jeff's methods would cause more harm than good in the long run if allowed to continue. Mark was just as convinced that Dan could keep it under control and that with Dan's help, Jeff would develop some people skills and flourish. Apparently everything was OK for a while, but the whole thing broke down last summer, which resulted in Dan being asked to leave. In the early fall, Jeff had what appeared to be an epiphany and everything was fine - for about a week. It was after the relapse that happened after the epiphany that Jeff was asked to resign. Some in the office would argue that Mark just wasn't patient enough. Mark didn't feel that he needed to be patient any longer. He's all for longsuffering, but I think he'd gotten to the point where he thought everyone had suffered long enough.
Mark called me late Sunday afternoon to apologize. I didn't recognize the number and didn't take the call. He left a detailed message indicating that he was sorry for not heeding my warning back in early 2005. I returned Mark's call and we had a very nice talk. Mark didn't go into a lot of details with me beyond the basic time line that I've shared here. He didn't have to. I had been a personal witness to and personal receiver of what Jeff was capable of doing. Then I came out here and saw the rest of this crap and many of you having a field day about this. Over the last few days I've picked up the phone and have spoken to several others directly involved on both sides because I have relationships with all of them that didn't go away when I was let go.
My take on it is that Mark's firing Dan and asking Jeff to resign is so uncharacteristic of Mark that neither one of them can believe that he came to that conclusion on his own or that their behavior merited his response because Mark has shown incredible restraint and compassion towards Jeff and unwavering trust in Dan's ability to deal with Jeff even as things started escalating. So, in Dan and Jeff's mind, it MUST be Karen Anne's influence. Mark on his own simply could not have gotten fed up, because Mark just doesn't get fed up.
The reality is that John Lynn rarely involved himself in employee disputes nearly always deferring to Mark and his decisions; John Schoenheit is largely unaware of office dynamics and is usually in Bloomington; Gary and Karen Theisen live in Michigan and do not deal with day-to-day issues, which is appropriate; and Tom Resner, who is a business owner who understands employee dynamics - probably the only one who gets it, knows it's not his place as a board member to involve himself in the situation. Tom rightly supported Mark's right to solve this problem any way way he saw fit within legal boundaries - Indiana being an 'at will' employer state. JohnL had no say in the matter, and Dan's and JohnS's involvement clearly demonstrates why board members should not be paid employees or non-payed CEO's.
Now I have NO idea how Elizabeth and John's situation, personal prophecy, and whatever else has been tied up into this has become part of this issue beyond a shift in the relationship between Mark and Karen that OFTEN occurs once the kids are out of the house - a shift in relationship that they have been open about with their peers - who in turn have used it against them. Personally, I think blaming Karen Anne and dragging her into this is a means of deflecting blame. I will tell you that Jeff is the KING of not taking responsibility for his actions. He blames everyone but himself. I have absolutely no problem with the notion that he projected all his issues as really being Karen Anne's fault or personal prophecy, but he and Dan were right there in the thick of it when the prophetic council put together their 'findings' about Elizabeth. Dan even conducted 'deliverance' sessions. Don't tell me that Karen Anne was 'out there' all by herself. They ALL were 'out there', and quite willingly. I'm here to tell you Jeff wasn't all that sympathetic towards Elizabeth in 2003 or when she worked in the office except perhaps in the context of miserable comforter. I was there. I saw what was going on. I know what Jeff does when he is privy to other people's weaknesses. I've confronted him about his behavior only to be told I'm possessed. Try working with someone who screams devil spirit every time you say something he doesn't agree with. It makes for a very odd work environment.
Yes, this seems very over the top, but let's remember that this is a ministry - one that deals with broken and wounded people who mostly emerged from a controlling cult. To me, high needs and tremendous personal issues seemed to be a requirement to work there. Some of the younger kids were not so damaged, but everyone else was in need of 'services' to deal with their stuff. The ministry tried to fill that function, but sometimes that got in the way of actually getting work done.
I am definitely not surprised by all of this. I am sad, but I also feel vindicated. I have told these guys for years that a strong dose of 'normal' would do them all a lot of good. I personally could not live and breath what they were doing on a daily basis. The intensity was just overwhelming for me. And from what I can see, that's not uncommon in church organizations where people burn out due to the emotional demands.
Personally I don't know if the ministry will survive this latest blow. If it does,it's God's will. Mark needed to deal with this back in 2003-2004 when Jeff was really becoming unreasonable. As valuable as Jeff was, he was not indispensable, and should not have been treated as such and allowed to behave so badly. After my bad experience, I walked away and forgave them all even though I had made a significant personal and financial sacrifice for over 10 years for the sake of the ministry.
I don't know what all of your personal stakes are in all of this. What I do know is that starting over in your 50's and almost 60's is not an easy thing. Mark and I talked about that briefly on Tuesday. He is sure the Lord will provide.
It's been two years since I've stepped in the office or had any involvement in the ministry. I can honestly say I haven't missed it. Jeff made serving the ministry very difficult.
And that's pretty much all I have to say about it.
Thank you for your perspective Tzaia... I haven't 'known' any of the folks for years (or some at all), but as I've been trying to view this situation with (what I feel is) an unprejudiced eye, your post above is pretty much about how I envisioned things were... except that I don't feel that it's the result of an employee retaliating for being dismissed which I kind of picked up from your post (was I wrong?) ...
Did I also pick up that you're pretty much minimalizing KA's influence in all of this? From what I've heard, her involvement has not been 'minimal'... of course, we've only 'heard' one side of the story but it does speak volumes... but we have heard a few tales from that side.
Regardless, and I'm not meaning to focus on just one small part of your post, you come to the same conclusion that a lot of us have:
"They ALL were 'out there', and quite willingly."
Which is why I still maintain these folks, the board, should ALL resign their positions.
Yes, I dooooooooo know what it's like to start over in my 50s/60s.
Wouldn't you imagine that a lot of us here KNOWS what it feels like after our twi involvement?
Probably more here in that boat than we realize.
Tanzia, thanks for sharing your story here and adding light on the subject.
Hind sight is 20/20, but I do think, as a rule of thumb, that it's better to say "I failed" than to give God credit for our failures (through pp or prophecy or the like).
Tzaia says, "It's been two years since I've stepped in the office or had any involvement in the ministry."
Remember several people have posted of changes, both in office administration and people, in the 2006 year.
Sure they have. BUT it all goes back several years. 2006 was the first year Mark and Karen had no children at home and Mark and Karen's relationship changed. Rather than blame the 'problem' on the events that caused some of the changes - it's easier to blame it on Karen Anne. I can also guarantee that Jeff wasn't real happy with Nate or Anita working there, but they're good kids and they brought a great deal to the table for people of their age.
Jeff doesn't deal well with strong women in times of disagreement. He's clashed with every woman that's worked in the office. It is a great 'guy' environment.
Someone else mentioned everyone resigning. That has to be the most ridiculous thing I hear when things like this happen. Boards are about policy and procedure. The board stepped out of it's legal realm when it tried to manage daily functions.
I wish they would learn how a(n) NPO is supposed to function.
Someone else mentioned everyone resigning. That has to be the most ridiculous thing I hear when things like this happen. Boards are about policy and procedure. The board stepped out of it's legal realm when it tried to manage daily functions.
I wish they would learn how a(n) NPO is supposed to function.
How is it "ridiculous"? From reading your post I sure didn't come away with a warm and fuzzy feeling that any of them were near qualified...
...and as you stated "They ALL were 'out there', and quite willingly" as all of this weird krap was being put into practice... they're turn should be over... but that's JMO.
If folks continue to support a CES/STFI run by any of them I don't see how they can have any room to complain when this kind of stuff happens again...
... except that I don't feel that it's the result of an employee retaliating for being dismissed which I kind of picked up from your post (was I wrong?) ...
I think it is to a certain extent. It's not just Jeff's forced resignation, it was taking Dan out of the loop. I can guarantee you that he wasn't happy about that.
Did I also pick up that you're pretty much minimalizing KA's influence in all of this? From what I've heard, her involvement has not been 'minimal'... of course, we've only 'heard' one side of the story but it does speak volumes... but we have heard a few tales from that side.
I don't think she was any more involved than she's ever been, except as she felt her family was under attack. She has been a person of influence in the ministry - and a strong woman. That is a problem with many of them, which would put her under scrutiny. I really don't think she was any more 'out there' than she's ever been.
Which is why I still maintain these folks, the board, should ALL resign their positions.
Being on a volunteer board for a(n) NPO is always a thankless job. I simply don't do it anymore.
How is it "ridiculous"? From reading your post I sure didn't come away with a warm and fuzzy feeling that any of them were near qualified...
...and as you stated "They ALL were 'out there', and quite willingly" as all of this weird krap was being put into practice... they're turn should be over... but that's JMO.
If folks continue to support a CES/STFI run by any of them I don't see how they can have any room to complain when this kind of stuff happens again...
Because it takes a number of years to get up to speed if you've had no experience being on a board. The other issue is they put people on the board they felt they could work with and now those relationships are shattered. It's very sad. Unless things heal, Mark and Tom can be nothing more than irritants.
I agree with you on both of those points... it's quite the dilemma...
...and this isn't just your plain, everyday NPO... it's a ministry that has the word "truth" in their name and purports to have the truth to guide people's lives...
Recommended Posts
Top Posters In This Topic
13
9
9
9
Popular Days
Jan 16
66
Jan 17
32
Jan 19
18
Jan 18
17
Top Posters In This Topic
excathedra 13 posts
skyrider 9 posts
Tzaia 9 posts
Tom Strange 9 posts
Popular Days
Jan 16 2007
66 posts
Jan 17 2007
32 posts
Jan 19 2007
18 posts
Jan 18 2007
17 posts
Ductape
Tzaia says:
Do you agree with this Tzaia?This would have to mean that the posters that brought the evil deeds done behind closed doors and hidden from the vast majority of CES/STFI followers are the evil doers and the board and MG are the innocent victims of back-biting and tale-bearers. I am sure that is the story the board will stick to and the ever so worshiped research guy will be held high for getting the ministry through all the evil attacks of the adversary.
Let's get a little "lock-box" going here also and make sure to teach the silence of the lambs to the flock, just shut-up and bleat in unison as we lead you to slaughter. Seems the bible with the back-biting and tale-bearer topics also talks about men loving to be in darkness and hate their deeds made manifest to to light of day. I would say anyone that considers the evil deed being brought forth to be manifest being the more evil deed calls evil good and good evil.
Edited by DuctapeLink to comment
Share on other sites
skyrider
Research.............oooooooh, there's that high and mighty revered word again.
Just a quick sampling to get the brain cells working:
....1) Proverbs is loaded with practical admonitions........do this, don't do that.
....2) Jesus warned his disciples to examine the fruit .....by their fruits YE SHALL KNOW THEM.
....3) Ephesians is balanced with doctrine and practice..............the balanced walk.
....4) Vain worship..............honor with their lips, but their heart (actions) is far from God.
....5) Division, divorce, destruction..........are NOT qualities from the One True God.
....6) Many CES followers have confronted the CES Board thru the years.....no changes.
....7) Is this "research" objective?......or fitted to an already-concluded agenda?
....8) Is this "research" leading those away from the simplicity of Christ?
Knowledge puffeth up....and UP.....and UP.
Edited by skyriderLink to comment
Share on other sites
uptown1
So they're giving MG the boot, but I'd like to know what they're going to do about this pp business. Are they going to backtrack and say they were wrong about it?
I had someone give me a pp once. It was so strange that neither one of us knew what to make of it nor did we understand it. About six months later it came true I benefited from it greatly.
So I can see that there could be something to pp.
I'd also like to know what they're going to do with Karen Anne. Even if pp could be possible she obviously used it for evil.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
notinKansasanymore
Inkernet, welcome! I don't know the answer to your questions (are these people in the DC area? How widespread are they?), but someone will.
It's interesting that this thread has attracted some relatively new posters. Welcome to you all.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
oldiesman
Doesn't look like they are. JS said they were examining the doctrine, but doesn't sound like they're getting rid of it.
They should go back to the way we did it in twi, what was wrong with that way? :o :P
Link to comment
Share on other sites
skyrider
Dare I ask??..........WHO'S going to re-examine the doctrine??
First of all......this BUYS them time and sounds eerily familiar to twi's responses.
Secondly.......the CES followers should demand a WIDER CIRCLE of input/dialogue.
Thirdly..........HOW LONG will this process take? Any accountability or deadlines?
Lastly............SOUNDS LIKE "they" are not going to put out the fire, but silence the alarms.
Same ole politics, same ole bs.
<_<
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Belle
Hey, Uptown1, you can get your personal prophecy right here at the cafe for free!!
Step Right Up! The Right Reverend G. Gordy Godfrey was "bang on" with mine! Couldn't have been more accurate, if you ask me.
They'll "review" their teachings on personal prophecy like TWI "reviewed" their teachings on debt. They will never admit to being wrong about anything. You'll never hear, "I'm sorry. I screwed up." from any of them.
What's the lawsuit for? To keep from admitting he did anything wrong.
Something's wrong with an organization when, at the very root, are measures that prevent change.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
oldiesman
I would imagine (I am speculating) that JS and others are going to see if they can do it in a "kinder and gentler" fashion.
**********************
Have a question,
Is PP done only by permission of a person asking for it?
For example, in twi, if one asked to be ministered to, someone would do it for you.
Is PP like that? One has to ask for it first?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
skyrider
Exactly!!
Link to comment
Share on other sites
GrouchoMarxJr
Wait a minute...They claim to follow the Lord and to have a personal relationship with Him...afterall, he is the head of the body...right?
If they are on talking terms with Him (revelation), why should their belief system be reduced to an academic excercise?...I believe this is where the rubber meets the road.
Edited by GrouchoMarxJrLink to comment
Share on other sites
Captain Crunch
As I have seen it done and heard people in CES use the term, Personal Prophesy is requested. If you ask for prayer someone may prophesy, also. I have never heard one be negative, although, if you had an axe to grind, you could. Just as in a meeting, if you were to give a Word of Prophesy, you could say, "The Lord your God is damning you all to Hell!" After which you would be suspect.
But the dreams given to Elizabeth were not Personal Prophesy, they were supposedly, "prophetic." These were not requested but delivered by a "prophet," such as Nathan to David. A prophet is supposed to say what God has told them to say. But since the New Birth, He speaks to us first. Elizabeth was well aware they were false. But the others in the inner circle were blind.
Hope this helps.
CC
Edited by Captain CrunchLink to comment
Share on other sites
Tom Strange
Which makes me wonder why ANY SUPPORTER OF CES/STFI WOULD WANT ANYBODY FROM THAT "INNER CIRCLE" RUNNING THINGS...
Link to comment
Share on other sites
sprawled out
c'mon, everyone, sing it with me! (you remember the tune, doncha?)
On the CES board, Mark can't be removed.
On the CES board, Mark can't be removed.
Just like tu-mor, too close to your brain stem
Mark can't be removed.
p.s. please stop saying "pp." it's making me pp in my ppants.
Edited by sprawled outLink to comment
Share on other sites
Tzaia
I am talking about the people from CES/STF who have come on here masquerading as others dumping little crumbs of information taken out of context and spun to get you guys all up in a fervor. If you support Mark and he's gone - there goes the money. Better to make Mark the villain so financial support doesn't suffer.
FWIW, I know all these people personally. ALL of them. I live in Indy. I supported the ministry in a very tangible way through taking care of the computer systems as a friend, supporter, volunteer, and as a paid vendor. As an on-the-outside insider I knew about more than any of you could ever imagine.
These are things I will not dispute.
I will not dispute anyone's sincerity. No one set out to do anything (ministry wise) other than learn and teach what they believe to be God's Word.
I will not dispute that every last one of them thinks they are right.
I will not dispute that each of them lacks critical thinking skills in key areas.
I will not dispute that each one of them is capable of going off on a tangent and unfortunately a lot of people follow.
This is what I know as true:
JAL should have NEVER married Elizabeth, or Liz as she was known in her former town. He didn't know her well enough and her baggage proved to be a greater obstacle than he ever imagined. Marrying her ripped his family apart and continues to do so to this day. She is an incredible, articulate woman who also has some real issues. He was warned. I warned him. I wasn't getting a good vibe about it at all. I don't dislike her. I have no issues with her. But the situation is not all as she would like you to think.
I personally believe the personal prophecy thing was a poor way to handle the situation with EL. First of all, it kept people from dealing directly with her behavior and acting on that. The prophecies became the center of attention and the lack of credibility in using personal prophecy as some sort of a valid means for determining truth or intent has caused a lot of problems. It kept her from receiving much needed help. She's been able to use this as fodder when the best course of action would be to receive professional help from trained individuals who know how to deal with her types of issues. They (the prophecy council) were all in over their heads and they should have acknowledged that and stepped away.
JAL is an energetic, charismatic man who isn't above using his considerable influence. He can get ticked off if you don't fall into line with his thinking, but he can also be reasoned with - after a while. He needs someone to get in his face from time to time. I've done it. I did it over Momentus. But John is also easily influenced by smooth talkers and people who's intellect he respects. This has not always serve him well.
John S is a very intelligent man who is also incredibly naive in some areas of life. I marveled that a man who could see things with great clarity in some areas, like bible research, could be so totally clueless in other areas. That focus allows him to pursue the Word with passion, but that kind of focus also means that he really misses signals from people that are obvious to others. He really needs someone to interpret some of the nuances of what goes on in the office for him because he is oblivious and has no idea. He doesn't 'get' office politics. He will be a president in name only, which is probably what Dan and certainly Jeff want.
Mark is also very intelligent. He is reflective and quiet. He hates confrontation and will buckle until it becomes unbearable and then seem totally out of line when he does take a stand. That's probably what you are seeing with the defamation of character suit. I can tell you that if he feels inclined to do this - it's for a very good reason. This is so uncharacteristic of Mark that whatever provoked him to do this was more than he could bear. My experience is that Mark was more reasonable, more approachable, less judgmental, more patient, more humble, and kinder than anyone else in there. The others are not bad people, but Mark is pastoral. I'm really not getting where people think that Mark is punitive or unreasonable.
When Mark 'fired' Dan (Dan was not being paid) and asked Jeff for his resignation, it was because the situation had become unmanageable from his perspective. This was not a sudden thing, Jeff's relationships with other office staff had been a problem for a number of years and Dan was brought in to help manage that problem and bring a business perspective to the administrative side of the ministry that everyone could respect. Dan wanted to do that and bring Jeff along to manage the day-to-day office. In Mark's mind, Jeff was Dan's responsibility and Dan was letting Jeff run amok. If you didn't do what Jeff wanted, when he wanted it, and how he wanted it; Jeff became verbally abusive and the tone of the office had become very fearful under Jeff's management. Prior to Dan, Mark personally stepped in. I know he did it on my behalf many times. Many who stood up to Jeff were bullied out the door, or they were let go - as in my case. It was an ongoing issue that was tolerated because Jeff could get things done and Mark was pretty sure that Jeff's heart was in the right place. I know that because Mark and I discussed the situation on more than one occasion.
I don't know a whole heck of a lot about Dan. He seems to be sincere. He also, to me, appears ethically challenged in areas. To me he has a warped sense of what is important in some areas of his life and a quick reply or reason when questioned. I think there's been enough duplicity in his life that has worked for him that he's comfortable with moving the ethical bars as need be. I don't think Mark, John, and John knew nearly as much about him as they thought they did. I think that the two Johns think they know Dan. I don't think they do. I think they accepted way too much on face value. I found him very charming, but I also found him a bit creepy.
Jeff and I had a very interesting relationship. I like Jeff. He is willing to dig in and do whatever needs to be done. He can be very verbally destructive and cruel. It was obvious that he loves the ministry and he was thrilled with what we were able to do with the Biblical Unitarian web site and the TorT site. He was very excited about the outreach created by those sites. On the other hand, I will never trust the man again. He has done things to me that cannot be overlooked. He is not a victim in this situation. He is very much an instigator.
I warned Mark of the possibility of this whole effort to bring Jeff along eventually blowing up in his face. It was clear to me that Jeff's methods would cause more harm than good in the long run if allowed to continue. Mark was just as convinced that Dan could keep it under control and that with Dan's help, Jeff would develop some people skills and flourish. Apparently everything was OK for a while, but the whole thing broke down last summer, which resulted in Dan being asked to leave. In the early fall, Jeff had what appeared to be an epiphany and everything was fine - for about a week. It was after the relapse that happened after the epiphany that Jeff was asked to resign. Some in the office would argue that Mark just wasn't patient enough. Mark didn't feel that he needed to be patient any longer. He's all for longsuffering, but I think he'd gotten to the point where he thought everyone had suffered long enough.
Mark called me late Sunday afternoon to apologize. I didn't recognize the number and didn't take the call. He left a detailed message indicating that he was sorry for not heeding my warning back in early 2005. I returned Mark's call and we had a very nice talk. Mark didn't go into a lot of details with me beyond the basic time line that I've shared here. He didn't have to. I had been a personal witness to and personal receiver of what Jeff was capable of doing. Then I came out here and saw the rest of this crap and many of you having a field day about this. Over the last few days I've picked up the phone and have spoken to several others directly involved on both sides because I have relationships with all of them that didn't go away when I was let go.
My take on it is that Mark's firing Dan and asking Jeff to resign is so uncharacteristic of Mark that neither one of them can believe that he came to that conclusion on his own or that their behavior merited his response because Mark has shown incredible restraint and compassion towards Jeff and unwavering trust in Dan's ability to deal with Jeff even as things started escalating. So, in Dan and Jeff's mind, it MUST be Karen Anne's influence. Mark on his own simply could not have gotten fed up, because Mark just doesn't get fed up.
The reality is that John Lynn rarely involved himself in employee disputes nearly always deferring to Mark and his decisions; John Schoenheit is largely unaware of office dynamics and is usually in Bloomington; Gary and Karen Theisen live in Michigan and do not deal with day-to-day issues, which is appropriate; and Tom Resner, who is a business owner who understands employee dynamics - probably the only one who gets it, knows it's not his place as a board member to involve himself in the situation. Tom rightly supported Mark's right to solve this problem any way way he saw fit within legal boundaries - Indiana being an 'at will' employer state. JohnL had no say in the matter, and Dan's and JohnS's involvement clearly demonstrates why board members should not be paid employees or non-payed CEO's.
Now I have NO idea how Elizabeth and John's situation, personal prophecy, and whatever else has been tied up into this has become part of this issue beyond a shift in the relationship between Mark and Karen that OFTEN occurs once the kids are out of the house - a shift in relationship that they have been open about with their peers - who in turn have used it against them. Personally, I think blaming Karen Anne and dragging her into this is a means of deflecting blame. I will tell you that Jeff is the KING of not taking responsibility for his actions. He blames everyone but himself. I have absolutely no problem with the notion that he projected all his issues as really being Karen Anne's fault or personal prophecy, but he and Dan were right there in the thick of it when the prophetic council put together their 'findings' about Elizabeth. Dan even conducted 'deliverance' sessions. Don't tell me that Karen Anne was 'out there' all by herself. They ALL were 'out there', and quite willingly. I'm here to tell you Jeff wasn't all that sympathetic towards Elizabeth in 2003 or when she worked in the office except perhaps in the context of miserable comforter. I was there. I saw what was going on. I know what Jeff does when he is privy to other people's weaknesses. I've confronted him about his behavior only to be told I'm possessed. Try working with someone who screams devil spirit every time you say something he doesn't agree with. It makes for a very odd work environment.
Yes, this seems very over the top, but let's remember that this is a ministry - one that deals with broken and wounded people who mostly emerged from a controlling cult. To me, high needs and tremendous personal issues seemed to be a requirement to work there. Some of the younger kids were not so damaged, but everyone else was in need of 'services' to deal with their stuff. The ministry tried to fill that function, but sometimes that got in the way of actually getting work done.
I am definitely not surprised by all of this. I am sad, but I also feel vindicated. I have told these guys for years that a strong dose of 'normal' would do them all a lot of good. I personally could not live and breath what they were doing on a daily basis. The intensity was just overwhelming for me. And from what I can see, that's not uncommon in church organizations where people burn out due to the emotional demands.
Personally I don't know if the ministry will survive this latest blow. If it does,it's God's will. Mark needed to deal with this back in 2003-2004 when Jeff was really becoming unreasonable. As valuable as Jeff was, he was not indispensable, and should not have been treated as such and allowed to behave so badly. After my bad experience, I walked away and forgave them all even though I had made a significant personal and financial sacrifice for over 10 years for the sake of the ministry.
I don't know what all of your personal stakes are in all of this. What I do know is that starting over in your 50's and almost 60's is not an easy thing. Mark and I talked about that briefly on Tuesday. He is sure the Lord will provide.
It's been two years since I've stepped in the office or had any involvement in the ministry. I can honestly say I haven't missed it. Jeff made serving the ministry very difficult.
And that's pretty much all I have to say about it.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Tom Strange
Thank you for your perspective Tzaia... I haven't 'known' any of the folks for years (or some at all), but as I've been trying to view this situation with (what I feel is) an unprejudiced eye, your post above is pretty much about how I envisioned things were... except that I don't feel that it's the result of an employee retaliating for being dismissed which I kind of picked up from your post (was I wrong?) ...
Did I also pick up that you're pretty much minimalizing KA's influence in all of this? From what I've heard, her involvement has not been 'minimal'... of course, we've only 'heard' one side of the story but it does speak volumes... but we have heard a few tales from that side.
Regardless, and I'm not meaning to focus on just one small part of your post, you come to the same conclusion that a lot of us have:
"They ALL were 'out there', and quite willingly."
Which is why I still maintain these folks, the board, should ALL resign their positions.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
WOG
Yes, I dooooooooo know what it's like to start over in my 50s/60s.
Wouldn't you imagine that a lot of us here KNOWS what it feels like after our twi involvement?
Probably more here in that boat than we realize.
Tanzia, thanks for sharing your story here and adding light on the subject.
Hind sight is 20/20, but I do think, as a rule of thumb, that it's better to say "I failed" than to give God credit for our failures (through pp or prophecy or the like).
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Whatsgoingon
Tzaia says, "It's been two years since I've stepped in the office or had any involvement in the ministry."
Remember several people have posted of changes, both in office administration and people, in the 2006 year.
Edited by WhatsgoingonLink to comment
Share on other sites
Tzaia
Sure they have. BUT it all goes back several years. 2006 was the first year Mark and Karen had no children at home and Mark and Karen's relationship changed. Rather than blame the 'problem' on the events that caused some of the changes - it's easier to blame it on Karen Anne. I can also guarantee that Jeff wasn't real happy with Nate or Anita working there, but they're good kids and they brought a great deal to the table for people of their age.
Jeff doesn't deal well with strong women in times of disagreement. He's clashed with every woman that's worked in the office. It is a great 'guy' environment.
Someone else mentioned everyone resigning. That has to be the most ridiculous thing I hear when things like this happen. Boards are about policy and procedure. The board stepped out of it's legal realm when it tried to manage daily functions.
I wish they would learn how a(n) NPO is supposed to function.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Tom Strange
How is it "ridiculous"? From reading your post I sure didn't come away with a warm and fuzzy feeling that any of them were near qualified...
...and as you stated "They ALL were 'out there', and quite willingly" as all of this weird krap was being put into practice... they're turn should be over... but that's JMO.
If folks continue to support a CES/STFI run by any of them I don't see how they can have any room to complain when this kind of stuff happens again...
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Tzaia
I think it is to a certain extent. It's not just Jeff's forced resignation, it was taking Dan out of the loop. I can guarantee you that he wasn't happy about that.
I don't think she was any more involved than she's ever been, except as she felt her family was under attack. She has been a person of influence in the ministry - and a strong woman. That is a problem with many of them, which would put her under scrutiny. I really don't think she was any more 'out there' than she's ever been.Being on a volunteer board for a(n) NPO is always a thankless job. I simply don't do it anymore.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Tzaia
Because it takes a number of years to get up to speed if you've had no experience being on a board. The other issue is they put people on the board they felt they could work with and now those relationships are shattered. It's very sad. Unless things heal, Mark and Tom can be nothing more than irritants.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Tom Strange
I agree with you on both of those points... it's quite the dilemma...
...and this isn't just your plain, everyday NPO... it's a ministry that has the word "truth" in their name and purports to have the truth to guide people's lives...
Edited by Tom StrangeLink to comment
Share on other sites
therebutforgrace
Wow.
I'm a bit late learning of this thread, so I just read it from the beginning....
THANKS TO ALL OF YOU for great laughter tonight!
Really...I just love you GreaseSpots!
I'll be back,
Grace
Link to comment
Share on other sites
excathedra
Tzaia
were you a wayfer ?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.