|
|
Post by fixit on Jan 20, 2013 16:47:59 GMT -5
6 On hearing this, Pilate asked if the man was a Galilean. 7 When he learned that Jesus was under Herod’s jurisdiction, he sent him to Herod, who was also in Jerusalem at that time.Playing out nicely. Is poor worker Steve about to be crucified  Have some of our workers deviated so greatly, they fail to understand that the first requirement of Christian ministry is to be upholding the standard of Christ morally and ethically, to the best of our ability? Simply having method (going out 2 by 2) does not then give them licence to behave as they are. Yes, this saga made me think of the Pilate/Herod thing as well. Graham Thompson and Steve Shultz have it right, to uphold principles no matter how politically uncomfortable it might be. Sadly men upholding righteousness like Graham Thompson and Steve Shultz are pushed out, while the political types like Alan Kitto and David Leitch run the show. |
|
|
|
Post by fixit on Jan 20, 2013 17:02:03 GMT -5
Pilate was not bound by SA law, Alan Kitto was, and as overseer should be aware of that. Does mandatory reporting include historical cases, or is it only for reporting currently abusive situations? Jerome Frandle in Michigan was able to argue with some success that overseers are not clergy and therefore not responsible for reporting child sexual abusers on their staffs. Would that argument work in Australia? |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 20, 2013 18:32:16 GMT -5
Pilate was not bound by SA law, Alan Kitto was, and as overseer should be aware of that. Does mandatory reporting include historical cases, or is it only for reporting currently abusive situations? Jerome Frandle in Michigan was able to argue with some success that overseers are not clergy and therefore not responsible for reporting child sexual abusers on their staffs. Would that argument work in Australia? I think the Michigan case established clergy status for the workers there although Jerome's lawyer took a good run at denying it. Jerome's case was successful for him because a witness backed out. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 20, 2013 18:37:06 GMT -5
fixit, if you go to the Wings site, and you read the terms of reference for the upcoming Royal Commission re CSA, it seems clear that Workers are persons who should report. We know that the 2x2 system will try to get around it, they only answer to God. I dare say with a good Lawyer and some money they might beat the system. No doubt they will try. Where there is a will, there is a way. This method has already been used in Victoria to keep a convicted ex Worker out of gaol.
|
|
|
|
Post by Greg on Jan 20, 2013 18:42:34 GMT -5
Jerome's case was successful for him because a witness backed out. Do you know what did the witness knew? That Jerome knew of the abuse? |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 20, 2013 19:18:35 GMT -5
Jerome's case was successful for him because a witness backed out. Do you know what did the witness knew? That Jerome knew of the abuse? The case collapsed when the witness withdrew. It was the prosecution who pulled out so the testimony was considered by them as essential to establish their case. The testimony was not tested in court so the veracity was never established. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 20, 2013 19:32:55 GMT -5
fixit, if you go to the Wings site, and you read the terms of reference for the upcoming Royal Commission re CSA, it seems clear that Workers are persons who should report. We know that the 2x2 system will try to get around it, they only answer to God. I dare say with a good Lawyer and some money they might beat the system. No doubt they will try. Where there is a will, there is a way. This method has already been used in Victoria to keep a convicted ex Worker out of gaol. Fixit and redback, here is a Summary Table of Mandatory Reporting in the various states of Australia. SA specifically requires a "minister of religion" to report, but Victoria's laws do not.....yet. www.aifs.gov.au/cfca/pubs/factsheets/a141787/index.html#table-1 |
|
|
|
Post by someguy on Jan 20, 2013 20:26:53 GMT -5
The only reason I remain anonymous is to retain my privacy from Internet searches on Google. Anyone on this board is welcome to PM me and I will provide full disclosure on personal details. That was also the case when I was worshipping with the friends. I do recommend that, in general, people not use their real name on any Internet board. For example, do you want your boss, who is an NRA nut, finding out that you think Obama's daughters should have Secret Service protection? Probably not. I stopped posting with my full name for the same reason. Although, when one does a google search on my full name one pulls up a famous actor, a famous dancer, and a famous baseball player, each with hundreds if not thousands of hits. 3 guesses which one of them is me  I guess the famous dancer... |
|
|
|
Post by sharonw on Jan 20, 2013 20:38:47 GMT -5
Is poor worker Steve about to be crucified Have some of our workers deviated so greatly, they fail to understand that the first requirement of Christian ministry is to be upholding the standard of Christ morally and ethically, to the best of our ability? Simply having method (going out 2 by 2) does not then give them licence to behave as they are. Yes, this saga made me think of the Pilate/Herod thing as well. Graham Thompson and Steve Shultz have it right, to uphold principles no matter how politically uncomfortable it might be. Sadly men upholding righteousness like Graham Thompson and Steve Shultz are pushed out, while the political types like Alan Kitto and David Leitch run the show. How's Graham's health these days? |
|
|
|
Post by fixit on Jan 20, 2013 21:12:51 GMT -5
...it seems clear that Workers are persons who should report. We know that the 2x2 system will try to get around it, they only answer to God. If the overseers answered to God they wouldn't support child sexual abusers in their midst. I think God would want sex offenders off of the platform and out of children's homes. |
|
|
|
Post by quizzer on Jan 21, 2013 2:25:39 GMT -5
fixit, if you go to the Wings site, and you read the terms of reference for the upcoming Royal Commission re CSA, it seems clear that Workers are persons who should report. We know that the 2x2 system will try to get around it, they only answer to God. I dare say with a good Lawyer and some money they might beat the system. No doubt they will try. Where there is a will, there is a way. This method has already been used in Victoria to keep a convicted ex Worker out of gaol. Fixit and redback, here is a Summary Table of Mandatory Reporting in the various states of Australia. SA specifically requires a "minister of religion" to report, but Victoria's laws do not.....yet. www.aifs.gov.au/cfca/pubs/factsheets/a141787/index.html#table-1Don't the workers tap-dance around the official "minister of religion" title by claiming that all the friends are "minister of religion" as well? |
|
|
|
Post by aussiesteve on Jan 21, 2013 3:27:10 GMT -5
Well said SharonW. I agree totally. This was my experience 40 years ago when I was exed from the 2X2's. I was upset at the time but looking back it was one of the greatest blessings in my life. I hope Steve Schultz makes a total break like I did and continues his love for God and morality. Ausiesteve, do you know Steve Schultz? If so or have a way to speak to him and just give him support there in the downunder, would you do that? I hope it would at least let him know that he is walking the same pathy that many have already walked before him...maybe not for the same reason, but it was for the same sentencing. Thanks, AS! Sharon...just read your post. I will do all I can. I have family living in the field in Northern Tasmania where David Leitch and Bernard Manning are serving. I will try and find out from family (still professing) as much as I can about this...but I am sure they will close ranks behind DL as they are in fear of what might happen if they don't...you know how it works I am sure! I will try though as I really feel for SS if he has done the right thing as suggested on here - and then been humiliated for his righteous actions. I live in South Australia but don't know any 2X2's well enough here to ask discrete questions. |
|
|
|
Post by jondough on Jan 21, 2013 9:43:55 GMT -5
This was asked on another thread...
Does anyone know if Steve Shultz is a relative of Dale Shultz?
|
|
|
|
Post by ScholarGal on Jan 21, 2013 10:08:44 GMT -5
This was asked on another thread... Does anyone know if Steve Shultz is a relative of Dale Shultz? Probably not, since their surnames are spelled differently. From workers' lists: Stephen Schulz Dale Shulz |
|
|
|
Post by jondough on Jan 21, 2013 11:22:19 GMT -5
This was asked on another thread... Does anyone know if Steve Shultz is a relative of Dale Shultz? Probably not, since their surnames are spelled differently. From workers' lists: Stephen Schulz Dale Shulz Thanks SG - good catch |
|
|
|
Post by sharonw on Jan 21, 2013 13:04:56 GMT -5
Pilate was not bound by SA law, Alan Kitto was, and as overseer should be aware of that. Does mandatory reporting include historical cases, or is it only for reporting currently abusive situations? Jerome Frandle in Michigan was able to argue with some success that overseers are not clergy and therefore not responsible for reporting child sexual abusers on their staffs. Would that argument work in Australia? There are no statue of limitations of CSA crimes down under, so therefore mandatory reporting is viable throughout time......whether allegations are old or current. Whereas in the states, each state has their own statue of limitations for various things....I did hear that since CSA has been such a sticky thing in the schools and churches as well in homes, etc that the federal government may consider a bill to pass a law that CSA allegations may be made at any time....that would put the states in the same place on CSA as down under.... I think this law should be passed, simply because the victims are afraid to tell when so young, but after reaching adulthood often will and still need to make the allegations against their abuser....I suppose the only thing to stop the allegations would be the abuser's death. |
|
|
|
Post by sharonw on Jan 21, 2013 13:08:29 GMT -5
...it seems clear that Workers are persons who should report. We know that the 2x2 system will try to get around it, they only answer to God. If the overseers answered to God they wouldn't support child sexual abusers in their midst. I think God would want sex offenders off of the platform and out of children's homes. I feel I don't have to think about God's wanting in regards to offenders of the little ones... Mat 18:6 ¶ But whoso shall offend one of these little ones which believe in me, it were better for him that a millstone were hanged about his neck, and [that] he were drowned in the depth of the sea. |
|
|
|
Post by sharonw on Jan 21, 2013 13:28:58 GMT -5
David L. cooperated with the law last year on Chris C. case, so he knows about co-operating with the police.... I wonder why David L. sent Steve Schultz worker home for bringing up a CSA worker to him? .... Does anyone know the whole story? The factual version would likely have to come from Steve S. I'm sure if asked DL would either say it's none of your business or he would justify his firing of a much needed worker! I mean here it is that there are many places Steve would be useful...so IF DL and the other overseer do not want Steve in their groups anymore send him to another country, don't kick a worker out just because he is coming to the overseers instead of the authorities himself. I'm hoping that the alleged victims and Steve both have gone to the authorities as of this date! |
|
|
|
Post by sharonw on Jan 21, 2013 21:10:50 GMT -5
The factual version would likely have to come from Steve S. I'm sure if asked DL would either say it's none of your business or he would justify his firing of a much needed worker! I mean here it is that there are many places Steve would be useful...so IF DL and the other overseer do not want Steve in their groups anymore send him to another country, don't kick a worker out just because he is coming to the overseers instead of the authorities himself. I'm hoping that the alleged victims and Steve both have gone to the authorities as of this date! Nathan, I don't think the overseers will ever see it the right thing to do and that is for any of the friends or underling workers to go straight to the authorities as that will be taking the "control" that the overseers are fighting to keep at present. If the overseers don't know who has been reported to the authorities on an allegation then he feels plumb left out in left field without glove OR ball! The worker overseers do NOT want nor do they willingly give up complete control of what happens within the fellowship and workership! |
|
jimmy
Junior Member
Posts: 89
|
Post by jimmy on Jan 24, 2013 7:41:09 GMT -5
I know this may not be the most popular post to make, but I am concerned that there is a one-sided nature to theseposts and I would be almost certain that there could be 2 (and probably more) very different accounts to this series of events. It is very evident, and has been for some time, that there is a small group out for David's scalp.
Firstly tho I want to make it perfectly clear I believe any CSA offender should be reported to authorities and dealt with according to the law.
However, in any of my dealings with David I have found him to be reasonable, compassionate and fair. I have found him to have integrity and intellect. I haven't always agreed entirely but to me the story that is being spread here is not consistent with the man I know.
Without being privy to the meeting with Steve, I would wonder if there is not much more to this story. I wonder if there are those who have been using Steve (quite probably without him being aware) to try and push their agendas. I believe that David has taken any allegations of CSA or worker improperity seriously so I could imagine there being a problem if he was accused of a cover-up.
I see David being put in a difficult situation if a worker is accused of CSA - and this accusation has not been founded on a direct report from a victim but rather an extended communication chain - and the worker denys the accusations and noone is willing to press charges. The worker, as is any other person, is entitled to the presumption of innocence. As heart-wrenching as it is, for this reason it is crucial for any victims to make a report to authorities to save others from a life-time of harm.
My thoughts are with Steve, who comes across as a genuine but influencable individual, because I have a suspicion that he has been manipulated by some with an agenda, and has now been badly hurt as a consequence despite his intentions being good.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 24, 2013 8:47:38 GMT -5
I know this may not be the most popular post to make, but I am concerned that there is a one-sided nature to theseposts and I would be almost certain that there could be 2 (and probably more) very different accounts to this series of events. It is very evident, and has been for some time, that there is a small group out for David's scalp. Firstly tho I want to make it perfectly clear I believe any CSA offender should be reported to authorities and dealt with according to the law. However, in any of my dealings with David I have found him to be reasonable, compassionate and fair. I have found him to have integrity and intellect. I haven't always agreed entirely but to me the story that is being spread here is not consistent with the man I know. Without being privy to the meeting with Steve, I would wonder if there is not much more to this story. I wonder if there are those who have been using Steve (quite probably without him being aware) to try and push their agendas. I believe that David has taken any allegations of CSA or worker improperity seriously so I could imagine there being a problem if he was accused of a cover-up. I see David being put in a difficult situation if a worker is accused of CSA - and this accusation has not been founded on a direct report from a victim but rather an extended communication chain - and the worker denys the accusations and noone is willing to press charges. The worker, as is any other person, is entitled to the presumption of innocence. As heart-wrenching as it is, for this reason it is crucial for any victims to make a report to authorities to save others from a life-time of harm. My thoughts are with Steve, who comes across as a genuine but influencable individual, because I have a suspicion that he has been manipulated by some with an agenda, and has now been badly hurt as a consequence despite his intentions being good. Let's put aside for a moment your conspiracy theory that someone is out for David's "scalp". Also, let's put aside your conspiracy theory that someone is manipulating the alleged "influencable" (weak minded) Steve in some scheme to get David. Where you and David Leitch are completely off the track, is that you think David is in the position to make a legal investigation into an allegation, then make a legal pronouncement that the alleged offender is guilty or innocent. This couldn't be more wrong. Let me explain this as simply as possible. As soon as David Leitch hears an allegation that seems credible enough to cause him to want to go ask the alleged offender about it, then he has an allegation that should go to the authorities for investigation. The fact that he spoke to the alleged offender about it is proof that David believed the allegations were credible. As soon as he goes to the alleged offender and stops there, he has broken the law in many jurisdictions in the world (but not Victoria at this time). To embark on your own criminal investigation as David Leitch has done is wrong and immoral. Does this make any sense to you at all? I think it will only make sense to you if you can successfully suspend your conspiracy theories long enough to realize that all allegations of CSA must be reported to authorities. All advice to avoid the authorities is legally wrong and evil. Dismissing a worker over raising allegations is also wrong. If you lack any sense of right and wrong about it, dismiss both the offender and the accuser, then you know will will only be 50% wrong at worst instead of the possibility of being 100% wrong. This is not about David Leitch whatsoever. This is about doing the right thing. |
|
|
|
Post by philsmiley on Jan 24, 2013 9:21:48 GMT -5
I know this may not be the most popular post to make, but I am concerned that there is a one-sided nature to theseposts and I would be almost certain that there could be 2 (and probably more) very different accounts to this series of events. It is very evident, and has been for some time, that there is a small group out for David's scalp. Firstly tho I want to make it perfectly clear I believe any CSA offender should be reported to authorities and dealt with according to the law. However, in any of my dealings with David I have found him to be reasonable, compassionate and fair. I have found him to have integrity and intellect. I haven't always agreed entirely but to me the story that is being spread here is not consistent with the man I know. Without being privy to the meeting with Steve, I would wonder if there is not much more to this story. I wonder if there are those who have been using Steve (quite probably without him being aware) to try and push their agendas. I believe that David has taken any allegations of CSA or worker improperity seriously so I could imagine there being a problem if he was accused of a cover-up. I see David being put in a difficult situation if a worker is accused of CSA - and this accusation has not been founded on a direct report from a victim but rather an extended communication chain - and the worker denys the accusations and noone is willing to press charges. The worker, as is any other person, is entitled to the presumption of innocence. As heart-wrenching as it is, for this reason it is crucial for any victims to make a report to authorities to save others from a life-time of harm. My thoughts are with Steve, who comes across as a genuine but influencable individual, because I have a suspicion that he has been manipulated by some with an agenda, and has now been badly hurt as a consequence despite his intentions being good. Jimmy with due respect and taking the 'politics' out of this, sending a worker home who is wanting to report a suspected incident of child abuse - is not what a victim needs. Victims are often afraid to come forward, many times victims are pitied and feel like they are to blame for something that is entirely NOT their fault. IF a report of abuse comes to an overseer he should: 1. Inform (let the accused know that an allegation has been made), remove the accusted from the work immediately and immediately report it to the legal authorities. 2. The friends should be informed of the ALLIGATIONS (stop the rumors) 3. Let the authorities deal with it as they will be the most objective. ALSOIf the friends have experienced abuse from a worker, friends, non-professing person - there first stop is the authorities and then report it to the overseer and the worker removed. This approach makes the victim confident that they can report with limited judgement (it will still be a really BIG task for a victim). It will also remove the overseer from the situation (we wouldn't be having this conversation as its now with the authorities). It also helps put the friends mind at ease that should abuse occur, that it will be dealt with in a standard legal way - without decisions being made by overseers, to protect their own interests. Am I the only one who thinks its actually quite simple to know what is the right thing to do? PS: if I was an overseer I woud be wanting people to come forward and rid the church of this evil - not cover it up with politics. |
|
|
|
Post by Scott Ross on Jan 24, 2013 9:40:06 GMT -5
I know this may not be the most popular post to make, but I am concerned that there is a one-sided nature to theseposts and I would be almost certain that there could be 2 (and probably more) very different accounts to this series of events. It is very evident, and has been for some time, that there is a small group out for David's scalp. Pretty sure that the account of what took place is correct. However, you are right that the posts are basically one-sided. David is welcome to register here and give his version of what transpired. Overseer Lyle Schober registered and responded to some posts directed at him in the past, so it wouldn't be the first time an overseer did so. Great! Do you feel that David and the other overseers are doing this? That if someone comes to them with information about abuse he will immediately report it to the authorities for investigation rather than investigate himself? I am asking because I haven't heard of him ever reporting to the authorities. You might ask David about how the Ernie Barry case was handled in regard to whether he encouraged victims to report to the authorities, or whether he encouraged them NOT to go to the authorities. That makes sense. I have heard the same from others in regard to how he is in dealing with regular church matters. It is the criminal matters that we are discussing here. I don't think anyone is using Steve. He reported allegations and got kicked out of the work for doing so. The Royal Commission is looking at how institutions handle such matters. It will be a good opportunity for David to explain how reports of abuse are appropriately dealt with, and then everyone will know whether his handling of reported abuse is correct or not If a worker is accused of CSA, then why would David even know that the worker is denying it? It isn't a difficult situation actually. If the accusation is made and a victim named, then David simply reports the allegation to the authorities, gives the name of the one making the allegations, the name of the victim and the name of the alleged offender and the authorities investigate. That way the victim is interviewed, the one that told David (if other than a victim) is interviewed, the worker is interviewed and the issue is taken care of. Or do you feel that David should investigate the matter before reporting to the authorities? I feel bad for Steve as well. Getting booted out of the work and told that after a year then David will consider allowing him back into the work. All for going to the one person who should be considered the most likely person in the church to take action on such matters. Well..... I guess he did take action though didn't he..... and now there is one less worker...... and some others who will be leaving the church...... and his leadership abilities questioned again...... There isn't any agenda against David. Any agenda is against how the church handles such issues. David just happens to be in the position of overseer, and as such he is the only one that can initiate change within the church in the area he oversees. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 24, 2013 11:59:48 GMT -5
I feel bad for Steve as well. Getting booted out of the work and told that after a year then David will consider allowing him back into the work. All for going to the one person who should be considered the most likely person in the church to take action on such matters. Well..... I guess he did take action though didn't he..... and now there is one less worker...... and some others who will be leaving the church...... and his leadership abilities questioned again...... Although I don't personally know any of the folks involved here .. I can't help but compare somewhat with our exit from 2x2ism. I can feel for this Steves pain --- but in reality I don't feel bad for his as you worded it. --- I think that like it was for us, this is possibly one of the greatest blessings in his experience. A chance to leave 2x2ism in the past understanding that his expulsion was in the interests of a righteous cause. I doubt if I could have left 2x2ism without the rejection that gave us no other choice -- and am satisfied to today that the whole painful issue was God in his mercy leading us away from something evil into the far, far better life and privelages that we have today. I feel sorry for this Steves pain -- but I hope it turns out to be the blessing for him that it has for us, Edgar Isn't it amazing the wide range of issues that give folks the courage to stand tall, and find something better!!! |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 24, 2013 12:19:06 GMT -5
I feel bad for Steve as well. Getting booted out of the work and told that after a year then David will consider allowing him back into the work. All for going to the one person who should be considered the most likely person in the church to take action on such matters. Well..... I guess he did take action though didn't he..... and now there is one less worker...... and some others who will be leaving the church...... and his leadership abilities questioned again...... Although I don't personally know any of the folks involved here .. I can't help but compare somewhat with our exit from 2x2ism. I can feel for this Steves pain --- but in reality I don't feel bad for his as you worded it. --- I think that like it was for us, this is possibly one of the greatest blessings in his experience. A chance to leave 2x2ism in the past understanding that his expulsion was in the interests of a righteous cause. I doubt if I could have left 2x2ism without the rejection that gave us no other choice -- and am satisfied to today that the whole painful issue was God in his mercy leading us away from something evil into the far, far better life and privelages that we have today. I feel sorry for this Steves pain -- but I hope it turns out to be the blessing for him that it has for us, Edgar Isn't it amazing the wide range of issues that give folks the courage to stand tall, and find something better!!! There are indications that Steve accepts the cover up and hopes to get his place back in the work by fitting in. So, not much pain there I would think. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 24, 2013 12:44:26 GMT -5
Then I feel 'bad' for him!!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 24, 2013 12:48:11 GMT -5
Then I feel 'bad' for him!! Me too, Edgar, and "sad" for him. |
|
|
|
Post by happytroll on Jan 24, 2013 15:20:31 GMT -5
Here are the honorable things that Jimmy thinks: Firstly tho I want to make it perfectly clear I believe any CSA offender should be reported to authorities and dealt with according to the law. I see David being put in a difficult situation if a worker is accused of CSA - and this accusation has not been founded on a direct report from a victim but rather an extended communication chain - and the worker denys the accusations and noone is willing to press charges. The worker, as is any other person, is entitled to the presumption of innocence. As heart-wrenching as it is, for this reason it is crucial for any victims to make a report to authorities to save others from a life-time of harm.Here he is being quite insulting and offensive to worker Steve, a person with a brain who has stood in support of many victims now. A worker with a shepherd's heart who stands by and supports the downtrodden and those without a voice: Without being privy to the meeting with Steve, I would wonder if there is not much more to this story. I wonder if there are those who have been using Steve (quite probably without him being aware) to try and push their agendas. My thoughts are with Steve, who comes across as a genuine but influencable individual, That's right, dismiss a caring shepherd worker as a nice but influencable bumbleton who has stumbled into a trap because he doesn't have the brains of someone like his powerful and politically savvy overseer. BUT THERE"S WORSE. In dismissing worker Steve and his advocacy for the downtrodden, you are badly insulting and demeaning of all the victims who Steve is supporting and who he has provided with a voice and some hope. SHAME! Here Jimmy shows his agenda: in any of my dealings with David I have found him to be reasonable, compassionate and fair. I have found him to have integrity and intellect. The victims who Steve supports and David continues to mistreat know another side to this man altogether. Perhaps there are 2 Davids? The family will tell you if that is possible. |
|
