Advent Talk

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  

News:

If you feel a post was made in violation in one or more of the Forum Rules of Advent Talk, then please click on the link provided and give a reason for reporting the post.  The Admin Team will then review the reported post and the reason given, and will respond accordingly.

Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 ... 9   Go Down

Author Topic: Unauthorized History of 3ABN Continues  (Read 157377 times)

0 Members and 7 Guests are viewing this topic.

Johann

  • Guest
Re: Unauthorized History of 3ABN Continues
« Reply #45 on: February 09, 2008, 10:18:17 AM »

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.
Logged

Sister

  • Veteran Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 689
Re: Unauthorized History of 3ABN Continues
« Reply #46 on: February 09, 2008, 10:56:01 AM »

Quote
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
Logged

Artiste

  • Global Moderator
  • Veteran Member
  • *******
  • Offline Offline
  • Gender: Female
  • Posts: 3036
Re: Unauthorized History of 3ABN Continues
« Reply #47 on: February 09, 2008, 11:08:06 AM »

Good move, Sister!
Logged
"Si me olvido de ti, oh Jerusalén, pierda mi diestra su destreza."

Sister

  • Veteran Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 689
Re: Unauthorized History of 3ABN Continues
« Reply #48 on: February 09, 2008, 01:31:30 PM »

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...
Logged

Bob Pickle

  • Defendants
  • Veteran Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 4061
    • Pickle Publishing
Re: Unauthorized History of 3ABN Continues
« Reply #49 on: February 09, 2008, 01:57:08 PM »

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?
Logged

Chrissie

  • Global Moderator
  • Veteran Member
  • *******
  • Offline Offline
  • Gender: Female
  • Posts: 878
Re: Unauthorized History of 3ABN Continues
« Reply #50 on: February 09, 2008, 03:22:04 PM »

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.
Logged

Chrissie

  • Global Moderator
  • Veteran Member
  • *******
  • Offline Offline
  • Gender: Female
  • Posts: 878
Re: Unauthorized History of 3ABN Continues
« Reply #51 on: February 09, 2008, 03:24:53 PM »

Quote
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.
Logged

Sister

  • Veteran Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 689
Re: Unauthorized History of 3ABN Continues
« Reply #52 on: February 09, 2008, 05:16:46 PM »

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
Logged

inga

  • Senior Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Gender: Female
  • Posts: 209
    • The Sabbath School Network
Re: Unauthorized History of 3ABN Continues
« Reply #53 on: February 09, 2008, 09:42:44 PM »

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.
Logged
Visit http://ssnet.org The Sabbath School Network to see our new look and much more content. And leave us a message. :)

Ozzie

  • Senior Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Gender: Female
  • Posts: 470
Re: Unauthorized History of 3ABN Continues
« Reply #54 on: February 10, 2008, 12:10:45 AM »

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.
Logged
Ozzie
****************************************************

"Why not go out on a limb? Isn't that where the fruit is?"
~ Frank Sculley.

Bob Pickle

  • Defendants
  • Veteran Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 4061
    • Pickle Publishing
Re: Unauthorized History of 3ABN Continues
« Reply #55 on: February 10, 2008, 06:37:11 AM »

What year did all this take place? What year was Jean Fiscalini fired?
Logged

Daryl Fawcett

  • Global Moderator
  • Veteran Member
  • *******
  • Offline Offline
  • Gender: Male
  • Posts: 2933
  • Daryl & Beth
    • Maritime SDA OnLine
Re: Unauthorized History of 3ABN Continues
« Reply #56 on: February 10, 2008, 07:53:06 AM »

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.

Johann

  • Guest
Re: Unauthorized History of 3ABN Continues
« Reply #57 on: February 10, 2008, 08:54:59 AM »

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!!!

Logged

Chrissie

  • Global Moderator
  • Veteran Member
  • *******
  • Offline Offline
  • Gender: Female
  • Posts: 878
Re: Unauthorized History of 3ABN Continues
« Reply #58 on: February 10, 2008, 12:35:19 PM »

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.
Logged

Artiste

  • Global Moderator
  • Veteran Member
  • *******
  • Offline Offline
  • Gender: Female
  • Posts: 3036
Re: Unauthorized History of 3ABN Continues
« Reply #59 on: February 10, 2008, 12:36:12 PM »

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...
Logged
"Si me olvido de ti, oh Jerusalén, pierda mi diestra su destreza."
Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 ... 9   Go Up