The cbc (which is like the BBC but for Canada) goes for the political persecution angle on this (which is a pretty high end source)
The church censored its guest book of all the references to the controversy.
Both blogs carry this counter claim about a horn being blown:
I happen to attend this church. The situation with this lady has been happening for a while. She was approached by church officials a few times about how she conducts herself in service. (One example of an issue that they confronted her about is: She was blowing a horn, the kind you take to a hockey game, in the middle of the song service. It was becoming very distracting and irritating to most people in the congregation. The pastor kindly asked her to not do that anymore, and she made a huge fuss. I clearly recall one service where she was blowing the horn, and a child in front of her was crying because it was so loud, she was oblivious to the fact she was making a young child cry).There isn't much on her. And the facts are muddy. I don't have much to say.
_____
(Follow up) 2 years after this was written Deborah told her side of the story below in the comments.
(Follow up#2 written Feb 2010): After about 500 posts in this thread the evidence finally broke. Deborah Boschman was excommunicated for writing a fairly typical letter to her local paper asking for standard municipal actions, which resulted in her get excluded from her church for embarrassing the pastor. We may never know if this was poor judgement or abuse of office but we do know that had proper procedure been followed Boschman would have remained a member of Bethel. If anything the CBC understated the extent to which Pastor Davis' actions were questionable.
928 comments:
«Oldest ‹Older 401 – 600 of 928 Newer› Newest»As I recall my time at Bethel, the three women that I am thinking of, also spent a great deal of their time talking about, tattling and fighting amongst each other.
Yes, I indeed hope that Ms. Boschman will obtain the services of a good lawyer to prove that you lied to the police and to a lawyer.
Yourself and the other two neighbors should be charged with mischief, lying, harassment, etc.
You plotted, planned and removed Peaches from Ms. Boschman's yard. Then you told her all about how you did this.
Yes, the police should be called, indeed.
I am a friend of the family and I know all about this cowardly scenario with the dog, the School Division, the church, you name it.
This is the result of "rocking the boat" in Conservative everything, Brandon.
Admin.
If you take a look at the most recent anonymous posts. You should see that they are identical to the writing style of Ms. Boschman. The one sentence per line style is a dead giveaway (as it gave her away on our local forum in Brandon 'ebrandon')
On that site as well she came on claiming to be someone else who could verify the truths of Ms. Boschman's stories, in an identical manner as this recent anonymous poster.
Also to cause suspicion is the fact that this anonymous user also believes posters DF and TT to be someone involved in the stories of Boschman; as indicated by lines such as "You plotted, planned and removed Peaches from Ms. Boschman's yard. Then you told her all about how you did this."
If this is the case; which I can say with the up most certainty that it is, it has been a demonstration of repeat and deliberate actions by Ms Boschman to deceive people.
I have no claims as to whether or not the rest of her story happened, but using the logic that I pointed out earlier on (relating to her unclear recollection of the nursery incident...and how it brings into question how well she remembers every other incident). Such actions by Boschman (on her and on ebrandon) do bring into question the complete truth of every statement made.
D.F., I'm just wondering if you still use rags when you run out of toilet paper? I guess Ms. Boschman was good enough to borrow these items from, plus food, plus the use of her telephone.
Didn't she like, drive you around wherever you needed to go, for like 3 years or something?
Just wondering what happened to the other individual that you shared accommodations with?
Didn't something happen here also and then this friend and that friend, etc.? Let's tell the whole story here.
Wow, the latest anonymous and Deborah write their posts in the same way, and have quite the similar sentence structure, eerie.....
As for these women, you can claim it as much as you like Deborah, I've never been to your house, I never spoke with you, was never a friend/former friend of yours. This paranoia is getting annoying, I don't know why you insist on still trying to assume that because we speak out against you that we must be these ladies. It doesn't even make sense.
FYI, its nice that suddenly the nursery incident is true (Awaiting the apology for that one, since you said we made it up) But interesting to note is that They don't have 'girls' working in the nursery, there are adults. (Bethel does plan to protect and they don't allow anyone under 18 or without a criminal record to work in any of their programs, I.e; the Nursery. There would not have been a girl working it.)And the woman you made cry was an adult (and one who wouldn't be mistaken for a young girl, I do believe she's in her thirties) She wasn't crying with the realization of what 'she had done'. She had done nothing, the children never went to the nursery. You sent them (rather then walking them there like the rules stated) and they instead chose to go outside. You proceeded to berate this worker until she cried, you tried placing blame on her, when it was your own lack of responsibility that resulted in these children missing.
(Children that were later removed from your care by CFS. CFS by the way, does not just remove children because of one complaint nor without an investigation. If a complaint was lodged against you then they would have investigated it, and if found unfit they would have removed the children. They don't base their decisions on one report without looking into it.)
Hey, D.F., didn't you lose both of your cats? Talk about the pot calling the kettle black here? Didn't the neighbor's son throw a quarter at you so that you could go and use the telephone? Then you joined forces with them after Deborah decided that was enough; after you asked her for her daughter's puppy also? Let's tell the rest of the story here.
You were mad at Deborah, plain and simple. You sat outside on her neighbor's steps watching her and telling her neighbors anything you could think of. You stalked her yard. You took the puppy out of her yard once before and Deborah had to come over to your place to get it.
How could you do this to her daughter? You talked about hate. What is this, love?
Is this what Christianity looks like at Bethel? I hardly think that this is what you are taught to do there but then again I could be terribly wrong.
TRT --
I would agree the writing style and the interests of the anonymous poster and Ms. Boschman are very similar. Assuming your suspicions are correct, she probably feels a little cornered and is trying to redirect the conversation.
That being said I haven't liked the threats flying back and forth.
Lets be fair and D.W.
What? I don't own any cats, nor have i ever, also like i've mentioned many times I am not associated with Deborah. I really think you have me mixed up with someone else. I have Never borrowed anything from her or even held a conversation with her. I'm assuming you both are Deborah writing under a different name? Especially since its the same accusations she's been tossing around.
I know deborah you assume I'm one of these ladies you were friends with. And you can believe what you want about it, I've told the truth in all my statements on here. Including the ones where i've repeatedly told you that i am NOT a member of Bethel, NOT a former/current friend of yours, and NOT at all associated with you in any form.
This argument is going in circles really, you keep accusing me of this, and it isn't changing the reality of it.
I've never borrowed items from you, never received a ride from you, never spoken to you even. I don't know how many times i've got to say that before you give up these accusations.
"Didn't something happen here also and then this friend and that friend, etc.? Let's tell the whole story here."
huh?
Sorry, I have no clue what you're saying or accusing about there?
as for the rest. Nope, not me, i live in SK, and have plenty of toilet paper, my own phone (plus a cell, so why would i borrow yours?), and have never borrowed food ever. My husband and i work fulltime and bring in an income that provides fully for all our needs. (As well, as pays for my van, that i drive around. I've never taken a ride from you deborah.) (like i said earlier, i'm assuming this also is deborah making these accusations.)
You are confusing me with someone else deborah. I'm not one of these ladies you think i am.
lol oh my, this got pretty interesting pretty quickly lol. Rather than respond to all that previous stuff by deborah (obviously anon, etc.. are all deborah), because really there's too much there to respond to that doesn't make sense I just have a question. Deborah, if you are so trustworthy and people can take you at your word, why are you pretending to be different people on here and on ebrandon? It is obviously deceitful.
As for the nursery incident (not sunday schoold deborah, there is no sunday school) The WOMAN working the nursery is 31 now, and this didn't happen that long ago. So it never was a young girl working the nursery (there never has been younger people working it. The people who work in there are parents and adults. Always have been) And again, I was there. She was not crying because she felt bad, she was crying because she was accused of loosing the children by deborah, who felt that she should put the blame on the nursery worker. I should know, because I was there comforting this person as well was involved in helping with the search for deborah's foster children.
cd host, why is this on monderation again? is there actually any posts you are not approving? they all seem to be making it through.
The moderation isn't specific to this post, this time. I've had to turn on moderation for all posts over 30 days old spam post.
And I guess I spoke too soon there was a post by No integrity that I had to reject.
Now you were supposedly there. Now you comforted this worker.
Well, this is beyond ridiculousness now.
My friend remembers a MUCH DIFFERENT scenario.
How could there be two VERY DIFFERING accounts of the SAME incident?
The other Christian churches DON'T act like this.
They simply DON'T behave like this.
WHY have NONE of these events/occurrences happened there?
Actually I believe TT originally said they were there in the room (since you are saying 'now you say you were there') Just pointing out that their story hasn't changed at all. They (tt) has said throughout this that they were there. (i just double checked, and indeed, tt has claimed throughout it all to have been a witness to the situation)
Anyway Deborah, you've already been outed on here of pretending to be someone else writing in the comments (I think you were all three, the Anonymous poster, 'lets be fair' and D.W.) (At the very least, You've been found out as the Anonymous poster. Both TRT and myself caught on to that). I'm curious, if you're willing to be dishonest in that way on here, how can we trust anything that you've said? What else are you willing to be deceitful about?
It is interesting that you both post within minutes of each other.
One of you is supposedly from Saskatchewan and yet you have just "coincidentally happened" to have been there for critical and crucial events within my life, while attending this church.
How did this happen?
Could you please explain these circumstances?
No, don't bother.
There is no point.
This is like Kindergarten and I don't want to be involved with these Kindergarten activities any longer.
Anyone that knows me and my time at Bethel KNOWS that this did NOT occur as you have stated at all.
Come to my face then and accuse me of this and I will bring my friend with me and she can give her account of this very SAME situation.
Funny, how they are different just like everything else on here.
The people that have left Bethel and that have contacted me will come forth if they need to.
The woman who called me to tell me what she was being told over the telephone when she called into Bethel said that she has a few things that she would like to say.
The woman who approached me at a greenhouse would also like to say a few words.
The other woman who called me up, out of the blue, on the telephone would also like to say a few things, if this is required.
Several other individuals who have also contacted me would like to say a few things if they are called upon.
I want to create a blog so that I can focus on more constructive things such as the genuine concerns of people within this community and how individuals feel that we can work together to make it better.
um ya I've said all along I was there? lol my story never changed, feel free to read back deborah. Of course the versions we've heard from you include: 1. it never happened. 2. It happened but I was really nice to the lady and didn't blame her. 3. I don't rememeber this happening, but if it did I would never talk like that. 4. I took the children upstairs myself and the worker just opened the door and let them out (the nursery is on the main floor and have a policy where children are not just let out). 5. I don't remember this? 6. and now my friend remembers and the worker was at fault and cried because she felt bad.
So no there's not 2 different versions of the same event. I have one version and you have at least 6.
Unless there was only one crucial moment in your life, i never claimed to be there for everything. However i was there for the Nursery incident.
So, lets see what these ladies are saying then, honestly given the posts you've made the last few days pretending to be other people, I'm having my doubts that there are actually ANY ladies. Anyway back to what we said before, if you have proof then show it. You keep claiming you have all these witnesses, all these people who contacted you yet you can't provide any proof at all. I imagine these 'witnesses' are concocted like much of the other stories we've seen on here.
um nope I'm from Brandon, never said I was from Sask. That would be DF, cd host can probably check IP addresses to confirm that. Although if you look at the times on DF and my own posts you'll see that they're hours apart not minutes lol, not sure where you got that from lol.
Still though Deborah you seem to be avoiding the obvious questions and trying to turn the attention to something/some one else again.
Why are you creating multiple usernames and pretending to be someone else on here and on ebrandon? Is that not extreamly dishonest?
Deborah --
If you want to scan in those documents I'll be happy to post to the Church Discipline website and link here in the thread.
"Wow! This time Pastor Mike ADMITS to someone on this site that there is MORE to this story than this one incident."
Actually i just went there and read it, and it doesn't even mention Pastor mike telling anyone anything. Not sure where you got that one from?
(people don't even have to take my word for that one, since Deborah provided the address, you can just check it on your own.)
You come on here and you appear to take "great delight" and sport in tormenting me, trying to corner me, trying to trip me up, mocking me, harassing me, defaming me, etc.
That's EXACTLY what you did to me at Bethel and with my neighbors.
I hope that you are VERY PROUD of ALL of your accomplishments.
What do these actions really say about yourself? What do they say about the current conditions within your church? What do they say about the political party that you so adamantly represent?
These are NOT the actions of any TRUE Christian that I know or have ever known.
YOU are the one who is VERY messed up and YOU are the one who needs help and a LOT of it.
Perhaps this blog is your entertainment or sport or is it YOUR ONLY NECESSARY and required validation?
You have revealed your OWN true character on this blog and I see this as being VERY undisciplined, troubling, out of control, terribly disturbing, you name it.
You are someone that I NEVER want to be or be associated with in ANY way, shape or form.
Is that the REAL problem here?
Is this my payback for breaking off my association with you?
Hopefully, this is not the Pastor of this church but absolutely NOTHING would surprise me any longer. Absolutely nothing!
Just know that you CANNOT, and WILL NOT be allowed to come to ANY ONE of the churches that I now attend and do ANYTHING of the SORT within these churches, that you have done, did and could be currently doing within Bethel.
My new churches are more mature. They would NEVER allow this kind of behavior to go on UNCORRECTED. Not only for yourself but also for the other members within this body whom you have probably also affected in horribly adverse ways.
Look what you did and continue to do to Lisa and SO MANY others?
You just CAN'T seem to shut up. You just CANNOT seem to mind your own business.
EVERYTHING about you and surrounding you involves dysfunction and trouble.
Wouldn't you like to have peace within your life once and for all?
The Bible says that, "they will know us by our fruits."
What will the fruits of your life be?
I have to ask myself the VERY same question also. We all do.
NONE of us will be laughing when we stand there before God all alone.
Then we will give an account for EVERY WORD that we have spoken and EVERY action that we have committed and/or engaged in.
It is VERY and TOO painful for me to come on here and read these HORRIBLE false claims, accusations, character assassinations, etc. about myself.
This is VERY HARD on myself; my family and others are VERY APPALLED and have asked me to simply NOT respond to these horrible posts any longer.
Other individuals are only NOW beginning to realize for THEMSELVES that there might be a FEW PROBLEMS, DISCREPANCIES with what they were initially told about myself and others and what they have actually now witnessed, experienced, encountered and observed for themselves.
I believe that we are somewhat sick as a city.
I also believe that we are immature and that we need to GROW UP as a city and I think that this applies to our churches as well; especially SOME of them.
I want to see us GET BETTER, GROW UP and become MORE MATURE as a city.
Like any functional family, there are problems that need to be worked through and worked out.
How can we get better as a city if we cannot first acknowledge that we have any problems?
Any addictions counselor will tell you that you FIRST have to acknowledge and admit that you have a problem.
This is what I would ideally like to do, here within Brandon, with the intention of making Brandon a better, more open, transparent, engaged, vibrant, dynamic, thriving, pulsating place in which to live, work and do business in.
Is Brandon perfect? No, it is not?
Could it become better? YES, I believe that it could. MUCH better! And so could the attitude, actions and behavior of SOME individuals and possibly the leadership, the board within Bethel.
I believe that my God is an EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER!
Now, go put that in your legalistic and religious pipe and smoke on that for a while.
Deborah, I'm not going to fight with you about being one of these ladies. I've repeatedly told you I am not, I don't live in MB at all. (CD Host, please feel free to trace my IP address and verify it if you like) No matter how you distort it, the realities don't change. No matter how big of an untruth you tell, the truths of the situation stay the same.
Know us by our fruits? So on here I've displayed honesty, what have you displayed? We really haven't worked at tripping you up, you've done that one all on your own. You couldn't keep your stories straight. I agree with your family, you should probably give up on it now before you dig yourself deeper.
(Still haven't seen any of that proof you claim to have....)
and the question lingers unanswered still.
deborah, why are you posting on websites as people other than yourself pretending to be in support of yourself? Lets answer that question and get it out of the way.
My Wife and I want nothing to do with this blog, and i am sure that my Sister-in-Law does not want me commenting openly here as well as she may not like the things i say. So to this point, Deborah, leave us out of it. This is the only warning you are getting on this matter. If you have a problem with this, call KellyJo or myself and we can tell you outright that way as well.
I would ask the host/moderator to please take down the post regarding the phone number for KellyJo please. Thank you.
The post we would like removed wa on dec 15 at 11:51. thank you
Wayne --
I'm unable to successfully identify which post you are referring to. Can you quote a block of text from this post (exactly) so I can just do a search and fine it.
I believe the post mentioned by Wayne includes
"I'd be curious to know IF you would proceed to call my mother a liar also?
Would you like to call her up and ask her?
Her telephone number is"
It was posted today at 9:00am
I apologize to CD-Host as the date of the post was Dec 13th, not Dec 15th at 11:51. Here is a line of the text written.
CD host- How could I post the letter that I received from the desk of Pastor Mike in which he states: "Any further correspondence from you regarding this matter will be deleted and/or ignored."?
I appreciate your help in this matter. Thank you
Hi CD Host - I found the post that contains the phone number, the following is a quote just before the phone number is posted. It was posted on January 15, 2010 at 9:00 AM by Deborah Boschman.
"I'd be curious to know IF you would proceed to call my mother a liar also?
Would you like to call her up and ask her?
Her telephone number is"
TRT -- Thanks
Wayne -- The post TRT is talking about is Jan 15th not Dec 15th.
I'm going to temporarily delete that post. It will be recoverable. Since I am going to assume you are accurately representing this KellyJo's personal wishes. That being said this is a 3rd party request, from people I don't know which if fact is, unlike most of these posts, relevant to the blog.
If the excommunication didn't have the support of the membership in a Pentecostal assembly it would be invalid.
So is this KellyJo is indicating that she:
(1) objected at the time but the pastor overruled her?
(2) objected at the time but the session overruled her?
(3) this is a church where women have no voice in the session?
(4) did not object at the time but has changed her opinion for some reason?
(5) denies flatly Deborah's version of events?
(6) something else?
Deborah --
There was substantial content in there aside from the phone number. Do you need a copy of the post?
Wayne --
Well that's what I get for not reading everything.
I apologize to CD-Host as the date of the post was Dec 13th, not Dec 15th at 11:51.
OK that one is removed.
CD host- How could I post the letter that I received from the desk of Pastor Mike in which he states: "Any further correspondence from you regarding this matter will be deleted and/or ignored."?
If you like email a scanned version to cd.host@gmail.com and I will post it here.
CD-Host, the phone number in question is one of my business numbers, not my wife's personal number. As to this being third party, as my wife, and as you know if you are married or will when you do, i don't say anything in public regarding her or anything she has said without talking to her first. We have discussed this and want nothing to do with the blog at all. Our feelings on Deborah's version of things we don't want to comment on, nor do we want to participate. All we ask is that we be left out of it. I believe Deborah or her mother will be contacting you at some point to have the mother's phone number removed as well, but that is for them to decide. I appreciate your respect in our wishes to keep anonymous to this discussion.
CD host, yes, please DO keep a copy of the post that you mentioned, WITHOUT the telephone number in it.
NOBODY wants their business affected.
THIS is the REALITY of living, working and doing business within Brandon.
Also said poster told me the above personally and so there was NO NEED to post this on here.
When individuals have good jobs and or businesses they don't want either of these to be affected.
THAT unfortunately is the reality of living here.
The effort to KEEP YOU QUIET and SILENT is VERY REAL and TANGIBLE.
People will take their business away from you or your job.
I was asked to leave my church. The Mayor's CAMPAIGN MANAGER and MOST of his campaign team were from this church.
Next, another member of this church HELPED my neighbor take my 9 yr. old daughter's puppy away from us.
Lastly, I lost my job that I held successfully for ten years previously, WITH NO PROBLEMS WHATSOEVER.
THIS is what a person is up against when you EVEN BEGIN to speak the truth in Conservative, closed off Brandon.
The Brandon Sun is FULL these days of people who are saying REPEATEDLY that they've had ENOUGH of this kind of stuff now.
They WANT to be able to speak the truth.
They WANT to be able to have discussions, debates, talk openly and freely but they also know THAT THERE ARE CONSEQUENCES WHEN YOU DO THIS IN VERY CONSERVATIVE AND CONTROLLED Brandon.
Unless above said poster would also not like me to go further, he should also NOT post any further comments on here that he has already previously stated to me, personally.
This is NOT appropriate.
NOBODY wants to rock the boat in this town because of the SERIOUS CONSEQUENCES that incur when you do.
It is NOT my intention to HURT ANYONE'S name, reputation and career here.
They've all hurt mine but that is because I questioned things, spoke up and did NOT keep my opinions quiet.
EVERYONE wants you to play by the rules of the game in this town.
Things NEED TO CHANGE HERE, within Brandon in SO MANY areas.
An individual wrote in a Letter to the Editor that we are so COMPLIANT here within Brandon.
I wrote that we are COMPLACENT.
Another wrote today that we need to WAKE UP.
Yes, we do indeed.
People WANT to be able to speak the truth freely and openly.
I DON'T want to see ANYONE'S career, reputation, future ruined here.
I DIDN'T want mine ruined though either.
The ONLY WAY that we can GET BETTER in ALL areas of this city, however, is to at least ADMIT that we have a problem/s.
I REALLY CARE about the citizens of this city and what is REALLY going on here.
I should have NEVER named any names here.
THAT was a mistake that I DON'T want to repeat.
I DID NOT start this blog in the first place.
I simply responded to an untruth.
CD host, I will have to find SEVERAL of those letters. They are in boxes that are packed away and I'll have to inquire about scanning these and forwarding these to you.
I will send what I can forward to you now.
The rest I have to locate, scan and then forward to you.
I believe that there is a MENTALITY here, a culture of silence, a Conservative STRONGHOLD which needs to be BROKEN OFF of this city and addressed VERY honestly and openly.
MANY, MANY individuals are disgruntled.
They've REALLY had enough now in regards to A LOT of different topics.
They REALLY want to see CHANGE and GROWTH take place here now.
Wayne --
No problem, husband counts as first party in my book. Assuming everyone agrees you are the husband, since you all know each other and I don't any of you, it stays off.
I apologize for any unnecessary stress that was caused to my family member.
Could we remove the word sister entirely here.
That was a faux pas on my part.
I should have not been so specific.
That was an accident.
Yes, please remove my mother's telephone number as well, if you wouldn't mind.
Also, please block, hide, cover up or remove any NAMES from the material that I am forwarding to you, which backs up and supports what I have been saying here.
I am NOT trying to discredit anyone here personally.
That is NOT what I want to see happen here.
We are talking about, what I now perceive to be, the apparent general MENTALITY of a community.
This MENTALITY appears to be entrenched within this community in MANY, many areas.
I see this mentality as one of putting up with ALL manner of crap, keeping perpetually quiet and allowing this kind of stuff to continue and continue and continue.
I did NOT start this blog, remember.
I have just replied and responded to an untruth that was posted here and another one on another blog.
ALL of these events began because someone from this church told a LIE.
This lie or untruth got the whole ball rolling here and have led from ONE event to another to another to another.
I DON'T want to comment anymore about what happened here.
I just want to show you my PROOF of what I am saying here.
Perhaps I should have done that a LONG time ago already.
Several of the letters that I received however, may take QUITE SOME TIME for me to locate.
They are in boxes in my garage and downstairs, from the many moves I have had to make to find employment within my profession elsewhere.
I will let this evidence speak for itself and therefore I don't believe that I need to make any further comment here.
Some may think that I should have NEVER replied to this or given a rebuttal here in the first place.
I don't know if this was the right or the wrong thing to do here.
How would you react IF you saw something about yourself posted on the Internet?
I will allow this evidence to speak for itself and therefore I don't believe that any further comments from myself are required.
I apologize to ANY and EVERY professional person that I may have hurt here, who may have felt discredited, etc.
It is NOT my intention to slander or discredit anyone and/or to make them look bad, etc.
We are ALL connected here.
We live in and are part of this community.
I DON'T want to see this teacher fired. I DON'T want to see this Superintendent or this Pastor fired or ANYONE'S head roll or anyone fired.
THAT is NOT my intention here.
We just need to look at how EACH OF OUR OWN ACTIONS AFFECT ONE ANOTHER.
NOBODY wants to talk about this kind of stuff within this community.
Well, maybe that's part of the problem here.
LET'S talk about these things, discuss them, work through them, sort them out, IMPROVE our communication, etc. and then let's MOVE FORWARD as a community.
THIS is where I am coming from with my rebuttal here and EVERYTHING.
I am FOR Brandon. My heart's desire is to see THINGS RADICALLY CHANGE FOR THE BETTER HERE.
How do we do that? How do we get there?
Well, firstly, I think that we need to get our frustrations, our garbage out of the way here first.
I think that we need to be able to talk about things, discuss them, correct them, IMPROVE upon them.
It is NOT my intention to see ANY vigilante justice, etc. on ANYONE.
I REALLY believe in the Golden Rule: Do unto others as you would have them do unto you.
Again i am sorry CD-Host, i realize that i said i was not going to make any comments, but feel i should clear up WHY my wife and i don't want to be involved in this issue at all. Unlike what Deborah was referring to that my businesses would suffer or be taken away from me, that is so far from the truth i can't believe she said it. The reason we are not involved is because we refuse to see this as a venue to better Brandon and area, as well as a telling of the truth and ideals of people discussing it. I have never been not shall i ever believe that my speaking out in any fashion about politics or religion in this area will ban me or hurt my business practices. As far as i am concerned, as long as you conduct yourself with professionalism and integrity in business, you will always thrive. My businesses are founded on that and customer service. Out of my business contacts in Brandon, some have a completely different view on the political and religous situation in Brandon. Even then all it amounts to is a discussion over a drink to both speak your mind as well as listen to a different perspective on those matters. So please Deborah, don't put words in my mouth. If something needs to be said, i am a big boy and can say them myself.
And as well, Thank you CD-Host. I appreciate you understanding about the phone number. We get enough phone calls telling us how many trips and millions or how much we can save on credit cards, or one of a thousand other things, we just don't need anymore calls in the middle of the night.
Deborah I still haven't recieved an asnwer yet. You pretended to be some one else on ebrandon (and pretended to support yourself as a witness) and on here. Why, if you are such an "honest" person, would you create different ID's online? Do you not see that as dishonest?
I do not know Deborah very well[I have had a few conversations with her}. She is eccentric, she admits to it. But I think she also makes valid points. I am a former christian myself, now a rational freethinker of deistic leanings. I used to attent Bethel and everything she says about Mike Davis and the elites of that church, and about the Mayor and about how this and a couple other churches[and the religious right in general} and the mayor are totally in bed together. It is a religious right neconservative boys club. And some of her dieas, such as a waterslide park and stuff are great ideas. It's interesting because as soon as Dave Burgess became mayor, the influence of the religious right started getting bigger again, especially Behtel and also Calvary temple pentecostal churches. Also, we started seeing more big corporate businesses and more slvae laborers brought in from Mexico and other places to be worked like dogs for these corporations.
Deborah is completely right. There is a church/state marriage taking place here in Brandon, and neconservative ideals are getting a stronger hold. This city, this mayor, and the religious right{especially Bethel and it's current pastors and elite families in the church} are totally corrupt, and few people have the guts or gall to speak out against it all. I myself have done so and faced the censorship and arrogant ignorance and hypocrisy of the mayor, and the hypocrisy of Bethel and of the local religious right.
I cannot verify whether ms Boschman is wrong in some of the things she says or is misrelaying her story a bit. I will say that I stand completely opposed to her faith of christianity in any form and all revealed religions and that I also do think taking a horn{if she so did} into the church and blowing it is a little over the top, but then everything in pentecostal christi8anity is, and frankly...at least she's trying to be real with ehr faith unlike the various powers that go to this and other churches and sheepishly sing and restrain themselves and then after it's done go to Mcdoanls or Burger King or Applebees or Humpt;s and gorge themselves in gluttony and go about their lives the rest of the week as fakes and liars and attend church again the following week; she's right, if it was good enough to be done in the bible, why can't she do it now? Allthough frankly, if christians starty dooing such things and waking me up when I'm sleeping in on a sunday morning I'll fucking go after them for noise violations and disturbung my sleep with their stupid christian bullshit, lol!}
Anyways. This city is fucked. The mayor is a worthless piece of shit liar scumbag. Mike Davis is a worthless piece of shit liar scumbag and his sheeple the hypocrities of Behtel are idiots and the religious right and neconservatives in Brandon need to be reigned in.
For the simple fact of te above truth, I support in principle Deborahs fight against these assholes. I probably won't vote for her, but then I rarely vote anyhow anymore.
That is all.
Bill Baker
cd host, congrats you now got two of the craziest people in brandon to post on one thread. All that aside, I do believe it is within your rules to delete posts that are attacking people which Bill's are doing.
I am well versed in the PAOC constitution, both local and general conference
Deborah,
If you believe the request made to you to leave has anything to do with "Political Gain", you have a strong case against the leadership of the church.
-Bylaw 2.1.6 CHARGES INVOLVING CREDENTIALS: Charges in matters involving the pastor's right to hold credentials with The Pentecostal Assemblies of Canada, their morality, integrity or doctrinal soundness must be made to the district executive in writing, and properly signed by one who is willing to appear in person and give testimony concerning the charges. Charges thus preferred against a credential holder shall be dealt with according to provisions made in the General Constitution and By-Laws of The Pentecostal Assemblies of Canada.
The national constitution, and local church consitution have specific articles in them about such actions from church leadership.
-Bylaw 2.3.5.1 of the local constitution disallows for a church leader (board member) to allow a conflict of interest to happen in decision making.
Both the general conference and the district offices of the PAOC take such accusations seriously. I have heard of and witnessed the procedure for investigations in similar matters.
If through investigation the district office finds the minister in question to be guilty, the credentials of said minister will be removed. Upon losing credentials, the church body will have a major decision put upon them. Either they can fire the minister, or if they opt to keep him, they will lose their affiliation with the PAOC. If the latter is decided, any outstanding debt the church has, such as mortgages, will be collected.
The investigation of an accusation like this would be taken very very very seriously.
Bill Baker,
On a similar note, it is very unlikely for one PAOC church, let alone two churches in one community to get away with such actions which go against the moral conduct guidelines of the PAOC.
You might try to raise some point of how the constitutions of the PAOC are pointless and just there for show. However, I have been closely connected to the behind the scenes going-ons of the denomination for years.
I have witnessed the removal of a Pastor who allowed the sort of situation Deborah is describing.
I have witnessed the discipline of an entire church board by a district office.
Also, the way the church constitution of the PAOC is set up, the pastor does not actually have the final authority on very much
You might argue that, that doesn't stop the pastor from circumventing the authority of the church board, but I have been directly involved in the removing of a Pastor that circumvented the board in the hiring of a staff. A relatively small action compared to the accusations of Deborah.
Regarding PAOC guidelines for excommunication.
as Deborah has admitted she did not hold membership at the church, this situation lies in a bit of a wierd area.
The local constitution only mentions the process for disciplining members in detail. (Which usually involves the removal of membership or suspension of membership)
Now, bylaw 6.3.1 of the local constitution indicates that the church leadership, "which has the authority to approve church membership,
also has the right to withdraw their approval and to dismiss church membership."
The constitutions are consistent that matters of discipline of the congregation are up to the board.
There is no need for the church body to be in favor of such a decision.
However, if the church body or the disciplined member has a problem with the action, the is a very specific appeal process.
There is a bit of a grey area regarding the process of what happened.
If the letter by Pastor Davis was written as a response to a complaint or rumour, as Deborah claims, then the proper procedure was not followed. (Communication regarding complaints or rumours has to be 1. In person, 2. In the presence of the church leadership 3. Has to allow for the member to be heard)
If it was written as a response to the letter, past letters to the editor by Deborah, or past incidents, then no constitution by-law was broken, as it was a public expression made by her.
Again, she did not hold membership in the church.
Anonymous --
I'd agree that Bill is being a bit harsh. But again, this blog post is supposed to be about Deborah's excommunication. Bill, unlike most of the other 400+ posts is addressing the excommunication. He asserting that Deborah's view that there was a conspiracy between the mayor's office and her pastor to induce a church punishment for a political act is correct. That is substantial content.
I've deleted posts that lack any content but have allowed many many attacks that have content. Further, Bill seems to be talking about politicians in terms of their duties. I know you all are Canadian, but the blog is American and this falls under the 1st amendment, "core political speech is interactive communications about political ideas or issues that are not motivated by profit". Personally I'd like something a little more insightful and tasteful than "worthless piece of shit liar scumbag" but... Obviously if Mayor Burgess or Pastor Davis chooses to address these issues, I'll guarantee him a different tone.
So no, Bill can speak his mind. And frankly I think it might be helpful. Bill may be able to help Deborah articulate the things she is objecting to in a less personal and more structural fashion. The issues with Deborah's excommunication, if her theory of the case is correct are structural.
TRT --
The issue of discipline for non members is a tricky one. I did an interview with one of the larger churches that doesn't have a membership structure. Certainly in general it weakens the case in terms of formal structures. In general it turns what should be a trial into a simple administrative choice.
Again though it invalidates, DF's argument. If she is not a member of the church then this is just some institution unhappy with some person.
http://www.thefreedictionary.com/excommunication
"excommunication - the act of banishing a member of a church from the communion of believers and the privileges of the church; cutting a person off from a religious society"
If Deborah wasn't a member then she couldn't have been excommunicated, which invalidates her argument. since you can only excommunicate a Member of the church. If she wasn't a member then she was simply asked to find a new place of worship. (which is what i believe she was told right?)
Aside from that, the PAOC doesn't do excommunication (i think thats more of a catholic thing?) they will dismiss a membership if they are shown to have been in violation of the constitution.
(of which without being on the inside knowledge of absolutely Everything that went on, i can point out two things in the constitution that she would fall under discipline for:
"6.2.2 Any moral or ethical failure other than sexual misconduct or any conduct unbecoming to a local
church member (including, but not limited to deception, fraud, theft and assault).
6.2.3 Any act or action of a local church member, which is the cause of serious discord or dissension,
with or without malicious intent (Romans 16:17, 18; Proverbs 6:19).
Deborah was charged with theft and assault, (i believe that was even mentioned in the local paper at that time, as well as not too long ago) and has caused a large amount of serious discord and dissension.
So then if she wasn't a member, then she wasn't excommunicated, nor had her membership revoked she was simply asked to worship elsewhere.
well a simple google search on Bill baker should tell you everything you need to know about him. I rest my case.
"Again though it invalidates, DF's argument. If she is not a member of the church then this is just some institution unhappy with some person."
Not trying to be cheeky here, what argument is it that this invalidates? I just don't understand...
DF --
You had made an argument that the pastor couldn't respond to Deborah's comments because of her having been a member. An expectation of privacy. I argued that it was the reverse, and then we got into the whole discussion of Canadian law and....
But if she wasn't a member there was no contract and hence no protection. She's just some woman who shows up the church he works at.
Thanks CD-Host.
Generally I don't go into a bunch of ad hominem. But living in this shithole and dealing with this crap for so many years has driven me to not give a shit anymore, lol!
Anyways, I shall try and address the other people who have responded to what I've said later. Or not. Depends on ym mood later, lol!
Bill Baker
tt said...
"well a simple google search on Bill baker should tell you everything you need to know about him. I rest my case."
LoL! Actually if you do a google search on "Iconoclastithon", or "very irreverand bill", you'll fine me all over the net spewing my opinions and having people spew theirs back at me, lol!
But if you're implying that what I'm saying means nothing because I'm not well known by name, well. that's just sad. Allthough I am well known amongst some othe religious right and the mayor as a local freethought contrarian type shit disturber.
meh.
Well I guess I owe Brandon an apology. I got the feeling from this blog you all knew each other from the town. So I looked up Brandon, 43000 which is not so small townish after all. That and the fact that the e brandon website has adds on every other page for a sex shop which throws "home parties" means it is a bit more urban and liberal than I had pictured.
So Brandon I'm sorry. I had figured around 5,000 and mostly churchy kind of folks. Still I don't get the comments on e-brandon castigating the Sun for publishing Deborah's campaign materials.
"DF --
You had made an argument that the pastor couldn't respond to Deborah's comments because of her having been a member. An expectation of privacy. I argued that it was the reverse, and then we got into the whole discussion of Canadian law and....
But if she wasn't a member there was no contract and hence no protection. She's just some woman who shows up the church he works at."
Sorry, but i'll have to disagree with that one, an expectation of confidentiality isn't limited to members only. If she had spoken to him in any private setting, those conversations would be considered confidential, as would other correspondences. It would be quite the situation if they had one set of rules for members and another for handling the people who 'just show up there'.
"means it is a bit more urban and liberal than I had pictured."
Yes, sort of. But just ebcause we have a couple porn stores and are more urban and with a bigger population than you thought does'nt mean it still isn't quite conservative and quite christianized and does'nt have al the problems we've mentioned.
The conservatove party usually holds power here, and they and the religious right are quite friendly with each other.
It may have over 40 thou, but it's stil in some ways small town minded.
DF --
I'm sorry but that seems to cross the line from hard to believe to simply impossible. Under your theory of the law, a pastor engaging in any private conversation with anyone creates an expectation of privacy under the law. How could they function, they could get sued for giving out information about almost anything.
Absolutely there should be, and I suspect are, different standards between people who attend a church and people who are members of a church. That's certainly the case in the US (though the law says the opposite regarding expectation).
While I was doubtful before, this claim makes me much more doubtful. I'd like to see the statute or case law in writing.
If they are having a private conversation with a Pastor, where the Pastor is acting within the role of a minister, You wouldn't expect confidentiality to apply? Just because they have not taken out membership?
There is quite a difference between speaking to a Pastor just as a friend/with casual conversation, and speaking to them within their role as minister.
well you can doubt it all you want, but it doesn't change anything. If something was told to a pastor in confidence in their role of being a pastor (like if some one came to their office or the church to talk to them about something, if its just some one visiting outside of church and just chatting as friends, then its not the same) even if they are not a member what they say still has to be held in confidence.
Besides being against the law, it also unethical to share information given to you in confidence and unprofessional.
Cd host, you're not taking into any consideration that Canadian laws do not mimic American laws, so even if its not that way in the US then it well in the realm of possibility for it to be that way in Canada.
TT --
Both American law and Canadian law are derived from British law. While there are differences between countries, what is being described here is simply unenforceable. How is a court to determine whether a conversation between a minister and an essentially random person occurred within a pastoral relationship?
The basic concept in British, English and American law regarding the formation of a contract is that it must be accepted. You can't form a contract with me without my consenting to be in that contract. What is being described here is a situation where a pastor enters into a contract without him taking any action which constitutes acceptance. "Canada is different" doesn't cut it. It ain't that different.
I have lived in Brandon for a decade now. It is, unquestionably, a somewhat conservative town. There is certainly an "old boys network" as there is in every place I've lived.
However, over the past few years, I've sensed that there are a few of the "tinfoil-lined helmet" crowd here.
I have no doubt that there are some exclusionary practices in some of the sectors of the local society: some for the overall good of the larger society. An animal welfare organization, for example, should look out for the well-being of the pet, as the Child and Family Services looks out for the interests of children. Neither of these has any sort of extraordinary powers....they investigate and deal with situations to ensure the best interests of their charged responsibilities are looked after.
I am an atheist and a member of the NDP (Canada's socialist party) and have no acquaintance with any previous posters other than reading their posts (with amusement). I am employed by one of the numerous organizations that have been slagged on this thread and have not witnessed any of the practices accused to be going on, nor have I been vetted for political or religious beliefs or practices.
Paranoia is not a reasonable approach to effect any change. Brandon could certainly use some changes, but they won't come from any churches, conservatives or Ms Boschman.
well CD host you might have to do more than a 2 minute google search to find it. I'm not uneducated in this as this was a part of my schooling. frankly I just don't care if you don't believe me. So try some "research" and you can find it.
TT --
If it was part of your schooling then grab your books. Give me the names of the case laws or the black letter laws on these issues.
On the topic of "Clergy Confidentiality"
I did a search...and it took me a good hour to really find anything about Canada.
Here's the most informative thing I found
http://csc.lexum.umontreal.ca/en/1991/1991scr3-263/1991scr3-263.html
Here is a court document (along with analysis) describing the appeal of Adele Rosemary Gruenke who claims that the prosecuters evidence in a court case (provided by a Pastor), was not legal because it violated "priest-penitent privilege". She lost her appeal and this is why:
The documents clearly state that penitent priviledge is a case by case situation, and that penitent priviledge is not guarenteed on all communications with a Minister. (Also neither staff of a church, nor non-clergy leaders are bound to any of this)
The documents site "The Wigmore Test", which gives the basic guidlines for whether or not a communication is priveledged. "1) the communications must originate in a confidence that they will not be disclosed; (2) this element of confidentiality must be essential to the full and satisfactory maintenance of the relation between the parties; (3) the relation must be one which in the opinion of the community ought to be sedulously fostered; and (4) the injury that would inure to the relation by the disclosure of the communications must be greater than the benefit thereby gained for the correct disposal of litigation."
The document (which outlines the argument of the lawyers) continues to stress that a communication must ORIGINATE with the understanding that it would be priviledged information.
You can go ahead and read. I know that this is very specific to a murder trial, but the concepts on confidentiallity are very clearly discussed in it.
I saved this qoute from somewhere, but forgot where it was.
"Canadian law descends from British common law, and as such the status of priest-penitent privilege is not well defined in national jurisprudence."
On a side note, accourding to the PAOC "Ministerial Code of Ethics"
4. The minister should never violate the confidence of those who seek help, except where disclosure is mandated by law.
However. Through all my reading, I don't believe that any of this situation falls into a position of required confidentiallity. It is, in my opinion, simply maturity, professionalism, and a smart choice that the Pastor kept his silence on this issue.
My books are packed up in boxes right now and I really don't care to unpack them. As it really doesn't bother me if you don't believe me. If you want to know about it you'll have to research it on your own.
TRT --
Thanks for finding this. The case for Wigmore in Canada I think you are referring to is R v Gruenke. But what is interesting here is that Wigmore is an American who wrote early 20th century US rules of evidence texts. So this example goes the exact opposite of the whole "US and Canada are totally different", argument. Wigmore is quite literally US law.
But looking at the findings of the Gruenke, they seem to indicate the exact opposite of what has been stated here. Basically there is no clerical privilege in Canadian law but there do exist some circumstances where a court might choose to recognize an implicit privilege, circumstances that were not present in Gruenke. The claim here has been that this privilege exists, it is absolute and cannot be waived.
As for the pastor being wise or foolish... I don't think it is his call. Had Borchman been a member she is entitled to due process, the privilege for review rests with her not the pastor. Refusing to submit to review / appeal would invalidate the excommunication. Given that the community has been led to believe she was excommunicated for misconduct unrelated to her political letter writing,
She has obviously made her, defacto excommunication a persistent point of community interest; which waives any kind of confidentiality. I don't think the pastor is being wise in not offering her disclosure but rather quite foolish, and possibly immoral. I'm finding the idea that he is victim of bizarre Canadian laws which prevent him from acting rightfully to have a little foundation.
So I'm standing with:
1) There is no privilege here
2) The only references to privilege in Canadian law are regarding whether a pastor can be compelled to testify by a court, and the answer is yes except in very narrow circumstances.
3) If there was a privilege here it has been clearly waived.
Given the comments by the CBC, and the pastor refusing to allow for his actions to be subject to review the whole thing smells bad. This case is starting to turn out a lot like the Jen Epstein excommunication where the pastor's actions were so poor that it threw the excommunication into doubt even though the underlying sins of the parishioner were both all true and further reinforced by later acts.
This case is murky:
-- she was a defacto member not formally a member
-- it is unclear whether the pastor was acting in a pastoral capacity or an administrative one due to the poor governing structure of his church allowing for that sort of confusion
-- she isn't the most likable defendant
Honestly, I am starting to buy the idea that the pastor abused his authority in her excommunication. The entire defense presented here of the pastor has been that Deborah is a bad person and thus should not be entitled to a full review of the formal charges made against her. It may very well be the case that she could be retried and re-convicted by the session. But I'm not sure she was ever lawfully tried the first time. It would be nice to know for sure, but the pastor seems to me to be falling far short of his duty to the church. It is precisely with unpopular defendants that courts are put to the test.
I found this info while looking for our law, and it looks to me like this might be American not Canadian, but it gives the example i was looking for. Pastors/ministers CAN be sued for breeching confidentiality.
On the other hand, the website ends in ".ca" which makes me think its Canadian, but i didn't delve far enough in there to confirm it.
localgovernment.uwo.ca/.../2009/.../Confidentiality%20and%20Privilege.ppt -
"Richard Hammar, the leading authority on church and clergy law, lists negligent and irresponsible counseling practices as one of every church’s greatest legal risks.
According to Hammar, churches expose themselves to legal liability because of: negligent counselling, sexual misconduct, confidentiality issues, and unauthorized practice of psychology or counselling by unlicensed persons."
"Confidentiality
The church and its counsellors can be sued if they intentionally or inadvertently
disclose confidential information to third parties.
Some states provide exceptions
to this rule in cases of child abuse reporting, or when a counselee threatens to
harm others.
Also, it is important to distinguish between “privilege” and “confidentiality.” The
clergy-penitent privilege provides that clergy cannot be compelled to disclose in
court what was shared with them in confidence. Generally, “confidentiality” refers
to not disclosing to anyone what is shared in confidence."
OH seriously, you are biased to the circumstance (obviously one who'd go as far as to start a blog on church discipline has had issues with church discipline). I have rolled my eyes so many times at your comments. PAOC does not excommunicate, I believe its catholics that do. and how you got all that from trt's post is beyond me. You're looking for a way to blame the pastor because obviously this is a sore spot for you.
Also its nice that you keep not approving comments that disagree with you.
Honestly, I am starting to buy the idea that the pastor abused his authority in her excommunication. The entire defense presented here of the pastor has been that Deborah is a bad person and thus should not be entitled to a full review of the formal charges made against her. It may very well be the case that she could be retried and re-convicted by the session. But I'm not sure she was ever lawfully tried the first time. It would be nice to know for sure, but the pastor seems to me to be falling far short of his duty to the church. It is precisely with unpopular defendants that courts are put to the test.
Guy, there have been tons of reasons given as to why she was Asked to leave, and none of them were 'because she's a bad person'. You're focusing on what you want to see and ignoring the facts.
First, she was never excommunicated, PAOC churches (and i imagine any other church that isn't catholic, fairly certain excommunication is a catholic thing) Do NOT excommunicate. She would have had her membership revoked. (Which she couldn't since she didn't take one out) Instead she was simply asked to worship elsewhere.
Secondly, i do believe i gave two blatant reasons straight from the PAOC constitution as valid reasons for revoking membership. (1. she was charged with theft and assault 2. she caused serious discord) Both are constitutional reasons for removing membership/asking them to leave.
you'll also notice though Deborah doesn't qualify breaking that confidentiality. The pastor was in the right not saying anything.
apparently a two minute google search does work if using the right words.
This link is in power point and it speaks of clergy confidentiality laws as well as privacy laws.
localgovernment.uwo.ca/.../2009/.../Confidentiality%20and%20Privilege.ppt
a search using the words "clergy confidentiality law" and clicking search canadian sites only will show much more on this. So CD host you are wrong.
When I said I felt it's good that he's keeping his mouth shut, I specifically meant to the public/press.
The general public does not have the given right to knowledge of such personal matters.
Ms. Boschman believes that she was wronged, so she is entitled to a full review of this situation. However, from what I have read (and I have taken extensive notes) she did not follow the due process. Letters must be submitted in writting, first to the leadership. If they won't listen then it goes to district. If district won't listen, it goes to National.
So far there is no evidence that Ms. Boschman has been denied a conversation regarding these events. According to Ms. Boschman's post on October 29, 2009 at 7:49 PM, the letter received indicating that all "correspondence relating to this matter" would be ignored, was in response to her attempts to make the church responsible for the house. That was not in regards to her "excommunication"
As for comments by the CBC, are you referring to the line where they say. "Davis declined an interview with CBC News." That is hardly him not allowing his decision to be reviewed. Again, I see no evidence that such a request was properly submitted. And by that, I don't even mean the process of submitting by letter. As far as I have read and noted in this discussion, there has never been an attempt made by Boschman to discuss the excommunication in a way that didn't involve talking about the house, her job, or her dog.
The overall response to this from others has not even been a discussion regarding her excommunication, but rather her claims of systematic harassment.
Oh forgot to mention this.
Deborah's court case with the church was in regards to the house. However, at this point (Spring of 2008) the person who had sold her the house had moved out of town. So there was nothing the church could do regarding this manner.
Claims by Deborah as to why she was asked to leave:
1.former administrators husband was a crook,
-Problem: There's not much evidence either way, so the case of an attempt to silence her regarding this could be entirely plausible. However, it was only years after the fact that she even mentions this, and no solid case was presented, and this argument never appeared again after it's initial mention.
2. The letter would upset Mayor Dave and his campaign staff. (a)Which would lose Pastor his priviledge of praying in city hall (b) Speculations that the Pastor has some sort of perks from Mayor Dave, that could be jeapordized
(c) The pastor does whatever the Mayor says
-Problem: a) The speculation that the Pastor was worried about losing prayer time is silly, the city hall prayer time is not exclusive to one Pastor, nor is it exclusive to Pastors....NOR is it exclusive to Christians (as indicated by Mayor Dave when questioned by the Brandon Sun)
b) Don't see any perks present
c)Could be the case, but the Mayor indicated that he was fine with the letter, and open to criticism.
3) A lady 'whispered' to him the day before she received the letter.
-Problem: Speculation is never considered to be admissible evidence.
4) Pentecostal Men hate strong women
-Problem: While it's true that in many churches struggle with this, from what I've seen of Bethel throughout the years, is that they allow MANY women to be in positions of leadership and influence.
5) Gossiping women
-Problem: This is the only one I have no problem with. I do not doubt that there was gossip about Deborah, as we've seen the evidence on here.
All of these arguments made by Deborah have been relatively ignored. This is mainly because her main focus has been her claims of systematic harassment.
Also its nice that you keep not approving comments that disagree with you.
TT --
Simply not true. I haven't rejected a non spam comment or any comment on this thread for quite a while. And yes protestants excommunicate, I maintain a whole list of rules and procedures regarding protestant excommunications: link.
DF --
1. she was charged with theft and assault 2. she caused serious discord
First off if you know the specific charges then this is a entirely different situation. If the charge was theft that's pretty clear cut. There just needs to be evidence of theft. As for "causing discord" that's not a valid reason in and of itself.
DF & TT --
The link you provided is broken. Try submitting as a direct html link or previewing.
CD host, I was responding to your comment that there was no reason given for her 'excommunication' (PAOC churches Still do not do this, feel free to read through their constitution, maybe other protestant churches do, i don't attend one of those so i'm not well versed in their constitution. However I do know that the PAOC and their churches do not.) "The entire defense presented here of the pastor has been that Deborah is a bad person and thus should not be entitled to a full review of the formal charges made against her."
That just wasn't true, people have repeatedly shown different situations that occurred, many have stated a great deal of different reasons why she would have been removed, and i don't believe anyone stated she couldn't have a review because she's a bad person. She hasn't even asked for one from what i've read. Rather she's jumped online from forum to forum bashing and falsely accusing the church of ridiculous actions.
As for evidence of this, the Brandon sun (local newspaper) reported about the warrant and charges, also i don't think deborah has argued that these are false either. (I do believe it was charges of Both theft and assault)
As for the 'serious discord' it was a direct quote from the PAOC constitution, as grounds for revoking membership. I imagine that even from just reading on here you can see the amount of serious discord and trouble she caused. Its a valid reason, as its within the constitution. The Pastor has followed the constitution regarding this matter.
The broken link is a PDF file, (I imagine that's why it won't open?) you might have to copy and paste it in a search engine to be able to pull it up.
Google "clergy confidentiality laws" and the link will show up. CBC reported Deborah arrest etc.. also an easy find.
DF --
I can't read the doc. But that usage is fully consistent with American usage. Which means in Deborah's case it has been waived. Yes by default when someone speaks to a pastor there is an expectation of confidentiality. I've never said anything different, but the case law is clear that this is like any other confidential conversation and confidentiality can be waived.
Further anyone can be sued for anything. But when it goes to court, the courts have consistently found that minister have far lower burdens in this regard than most other professionals because of church / state interference issues.
PAOC/ Protestants definitely do excommunicate. It isn't done under the title of excommunication in many churches though.
CD Host:
The list you provided however is pretty limited to Reformed, Lutheran, Presbyterian and Methodist. Sooo...for the most part, you listed more liturgical churches. Our pentecostal denomination doesn't have an official "book of discipline". Everything is outlined in the Church constitutions.
The national constitution can be found at http://paoc.org/resources/forms/constitution
The link for the local church constitution doesn't seem to load from there so you can find it at http://paoc.net/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=43&Itemid=95
DF and TT --
I'm not seeing it on google. But now I realize what you are doing. The link in green on google isn't a valid URL, it can't be cut and pasted. That link is meant to be informative to a human reader, not a complete address for a computer. Click on the link and copy the address from your address bar.
TRT --
If she is not appealing her excommunication then what is she doing here? Go back to the original article I wrote. It is short, I didn't have much to say I was just knocking it off in a few seconds but the focus was always on, Bethel Christian Assembly's excommunication for some sort of belief related offense (not theft), "He added that her beliefs do not match those of his church, and suggested she go to another church."
That sounded like a heresy offense, and I love to cover heresy trials. Boschman has in every avenue she understood to be open to her petitioned for a redress regarding the excommunication and in her opinion the conspiracy that followed. I agree she may not have sent a letter to exactly the right address, but given how many letters she has sent her intent is absolutely crystal clear, at least to me. Again this is why defendants being charged in church trials are often provided with an elder to guide them through the process. Particularly in the case of a defendant whose competency to stand trial is in question, the church has an obligation to provide such council.
So no I don't think BCA gets off on, ignoring the clear intent of her actions while arguing that she failed to properly follow procedures she was never trained in nor informed of nor assisted with.
The claim that the church is responsible for the house is stupid. Everyone is unanimous on that issue. The dog issue sounds like a spat with neighbors. But yes she has been appealing her expulsion. And I have yet to hear a consistent theory of the affirmative case.
There are a lot of possibilities (continued)
(continued from previous)
1) She as a non member was removed administratively.
a) That shouldn't be the pastor doing that
b) There were hints of a religious offense. It should have been clear this was administrative not religious. The church has certainly done its best to make everyone think it was an excommunication.
2) She was excommunicated (under different term it sounds like "dismiss membership" is the PAOC term) Which everyone seems to be taking lightly, that's "delivered unto satan for destruction of the flesh"; and there I think her case has lots of merit as I've outlined.
3) He merely requested she find another place to worship and nothing more. In which case again the church should not be going around making this look like any kind of formal act. The pastor acted in an individual capacity here. Again I have some question about this coming from a pastor since it is likely to be confusing to her and others, same as (1) above.
An excommunication is not a private matter it is a public matter. That's the point, the church is institutionally making a public statement about a parishioner's actions an unwillingness to repent being so severe that they expelling them formally from the community of the faithful. They can and should expect other churches to uphold that.
The church's actions have been called into question by both the CBC and the local newspaper. This is evidentially a point of public controversy for years. Whether she was excommunicated or not is a public situation, not private. If she wasn't the church should say so.
There has been a firm insistence that she wasn't excommunicated but rather her case is handled under some other alternate set of rules with a process of appeal and strict secrecy laws....
Were this true. Bethel Christian Assembly performs an excommunication like function, subject to no public review, where obvious attempts for redress are ignored.
So
1) I think Deborah is entitled to an official statement regarding what capacity the church acted. If Davis didn't not excommunicate (or whatever alternate word BCA uses) her he should indicate that.
2) If she was charged with a religious offense, she is entitled to a formal statement of charges. The church doesn't get to just let a swirl of rumors surround her: theft, disruption, heresy, danger to the community, insulted public figures, crazy.... and then declare her guilty.
3) Complete outside of anything having to do with Ms. Boschman, it is pretty clear that PAOC's procedures need some work.
TRT if you want to present an full affirmative case I'd love to hear it. I have yet to hear anything other than that Davis' acts should not be subject to review because of the super secrecy laws of Canada.
Fact is that Mike Davis and Deborah Boschman are the only ones who know exactly why she was asked to leave. With Deborah you don't know if you're getting the truth and what you can believe (as seen on here) and Mike Davis is not and will not talk publically about Deborah Boschman. (which I think is the right thing to do, its honestly no one elses business and completely unethical to do so) So all this speculation is silly, your assumptions are rediculous. As far as excommunications, my understanding of them is that the individual is told to leave and the church is told to shun that individual. Of which did not happen at Bethel and is not practiced there.
No, the pastor would Not have acted individually in this matter. PAOC churches do not run like that. The situation would have been brought before the board and a decision would have been made amongst them. You're assuming the Pastor has much more power then he actually does. A Pastor (within the PAOC at least) answers to the board, and all decisions (unless they are small minor ones) are decided on by the board, not one individual. In deborah's situation, the Pastor acted within the decision of the board. On his own, he just simply doesn't have the power to do anything like that. His letter to her would have been in representation of the decision of the board.
As for the PAOC constitution needing work. I can see that you don't agree with it, however i don't believe that qualifies it as wrong/needing work. The constitution did what it was designed to do, and weeded out someone who was causing Serious problems within the church.
All indicated conversations Ms. Boschman had with the church leaders have been in regards to her house. She has made no actual indications that she ever tried to approach the leadership regarding the letter. I cannot blame her if she does not have any desire for the 'dismissal' to be reverted.
As for what was on the letter written to her, all that we get from the CBC article are the 7 words "embarrassment", "dishonoured the mayor and city councillors." Mentions of the beliefs not lining up are paraphrases, she we do not know how things were truly worded and what else was said on the letter. Like wise, I never read the original article that was supposed to have started this. So, we have no idea what was actually published. We could have Deborah restate what she said, but without the published article, we don't know what her exact statements were.
I have not seen anything indicating that the Pastor is not willing to communicate with Deborah regarding the matter of the request to find a new church. Instead, he indicated that there would be no communications regarding her house.
I have not once indicated that I bought the legal requirements argument for the ministers silence.
However, I have mentioned that the PAOC code of ethics indicate that a minister must act in confidentiality unless required by law. So his silence to the press on this matter is more than likely a result of that. The CBC is not exactly known for being a fair and balanced news source regarding matters of religion. The fact is regarding many issues, experienced PAOC ministers tend to keep their mouth shut to the press.
TRT --
I have no problem believing the PAOC church has strong rules regarding confidentiality, my issue has been with the laws of Canada. If we both agree that the law doesn't say anything of the kind then the problem is with PAOC.
As for the original article, i link to it in the article you can read it here.
DF --
If the pastor is simply relaying the decision of the board after due consideration than there is confidentiality at all. He is merely the spokesperson for a public claim. You are trying to have it both ways it protecting this guy. If it was the board then she formally excommunicated and Davis and PAOC are subject to all the criticisms regarding a formal excommunication.
Which means things like failure to issue a formal statement are valid criticisms. Their trial technique is open to scrutiny. The issue of whether Boshman was tried by a biased jury is unquestionably grounds for appeal. Etc...
TRT --
Boschman has evidentially found a new church home she likes. That's not an issue, and is completely irrelevant to whether Davis/Bethal handled the original excommunication properly and/or the subsequent issue. Rejecting Bethal's discipline is in effect rejecting Bethal so they shouldn't be helping her to find a new church home but rather helping her to either begin or renew her walk with Christ. Remember they have officially declared her to not be a Christian. Why would they be sending her off to go join another church?
As far as the liturgical issue (there is a bunch of issues you mentioned I have responded to), there are plenty of examples from non liturgical churches. In the walk throughs post you'll see lots of materials from the Southern Baptists and other non liturgical churches.
how did bethel officially declare her to not be a Christian? and they told her to find another place of worship. So not seeing your point here?
How on earth has Bethel officially declared her not to be a Christian? You're reading much more into this than there is. She was Not excommunicated (went through that already, so i don't imagine i need to post more on the subject) nor was her membership revoked, (as she did not have one). She was sent a letter letting her know she needs to find a new place of worship. You're assuming you have knowledge of the situation that just isn't there. I don't believe that anyone from Bethel, or their leadership has declared boschman to not be a Christian. If you're at all familiar with the Bible, you should realize that that is not for us to decide, that is between her and God.
As for CBC, like TRT said, they are quite known for not being very friendly/kind to any religious group. (Interesting to note, you can also find an article on both CBC's and McLeans's websites about Deborah's arrest, if you'd rather not take my word for that one.)
My mentioning of needing the original article was in reference to Ms Boschmans letter to the editor.
She was declared not a Christian when they excommunicated her. That's what it means to excommunicate someone.
DF if you are right about the charges that she is unwelcome to attend the church because of disruption and theft, that is an excommunication. And it is a very strong statement. Of course the church is not declaring her to be unelected or unsaved (that would be an anathematization not an excommunication) but they are declaring her to be a non Christian. That's what they did, and that is why Davis is subject to review of this.
There is no notion in Christianity, of we think you are a perfectly good Christian but we don't commune with you. That's an almost the definition of schismatic act. If Davis kicked her out for moral deficiencies then his acts are subject to review as per an excommunication. A full formal review from top to bottom. If he didn't kick her out for moral deficiencies then he should stop pretending to everyone he did. There is no casual kick her out where Davis is automatically in the right.
That may be the definition of excommunication, but Honestly i feel like i'm beating a dead horse here. He did not excommunicate her, its not a play on words, her being asked to leave was not a declaration of her not being a Christian. They in no way declared her to not be a Christian, like I said that would be between her and God. Her being asked to leave was just exactly what it means. She was asked to find a new place of worship.
You're very stuck on this whole "excommunication" issue, and keep trying to place that on the church. You can look through the PAOC constitution, they don't practice excommunication, nor does a revoking of membership mean they are declared to be a non-Christian.
With all due respect, i think you're placing your personal bias on the situation and judging it through that.
What I think is happening here is that this is a sore spot for CD host so rather than see the truth in the situation (that Deborah was not excommunicated, again what happened does not fit in the definition of excommunication) you'd rather want to believe what you want. Which is the worst of the church. I don't need to convince you, really don't have any care if you actually believe what happened or not. You are extreamly removed from the situation, with no knowledge of Deborah or of Mike Davis and the kind of people they are. You're making a huge amount of assumptions about a man you've never met nor even talked to, with very little of the facts about the event.
I'm sure you'll get another 3 comments about this, but Pastor Davis has not opened his mouth to anyone outside of the leadership regarding this issue, as far as I can tell.
I happen to be in close and frequent contact with all the ministers in Brandon, and this has always been an issue the Davis, nor his leadership would speak to the general public about. I have tried on countless occasions to pick his, and his assistant pastor's brain on this issue, and they insist that it is a matter between them, Deborah and God.
So for you to claim he's been "pretending" regarding this matter is an out of left field comment, as he has given no indication as to why this happened.
It's also important to note that this issue has not been, nor does it continue to be of concern to most people in Brandon, it was very short lived. So it is not like he is standing up defiantly against the public, as the public generally doesn't care anymore.
I also noticed that you added a new blurb about the CBC being "a pretty high end source". (I'm pretty sure that, was never there previously, if not ignore this). The CBC likes to quite often side against the religious right in stories like this. (the religious right in Canada, is nowhere near the same as the religious right in America.)
In fact as far as I can recall there is only really one national news source which tends to take any angle from the right (the National Post, correct me if I'm wrong guys).
TRT --
No the comment regarding the CBC has been there for 2 years. Remember this article was written originally for Americans who might not know about the CBC. The current group of people discussing it do know it, and accuse it (in American conservative parlance) of liberal bias. Most media is poor in covering religion but if Davis refused to be interviewed about an official action then that's fine.
As for pretending, he's used orchestrated leaks. Take a look at the facts of the case:
* She was asked to leave. Why does anyone even know that fact?
* This was a religious act not an administrative one? Again who let everyone know?
* It originated from the board? Again who let everyone know?
* The charges were..... here it seems like people are making up whatever they want. Something that is specifically prohibited because it makes return impossible.
Even if Davis is not the point of origin, Deborah is entitled to a formal statement. There is no getting around the privilege rests with her. Davis is not free kick her to the curb and then claim some bogus confidentiality to avoid review.
This doesn't seem much different than a sheriff who takes an activist into the jail cell, beats him up and says that he doesn't want to formally charge him so as not to ruin his life. If nothing formal happened she should be able to walk into Bethal this Sunday. If something formal happened then she is entitled to a full review.
A few things here, first, she was given a statement, do you recall the letter she's gone on about? I do believe the reasons for her being asked to leave were given clearly in the letter.
Everyone knows she was asked to leave because she went to the newspapers and anyone who would listen telling them she was asked to leave. She said on here that Davis asked her to "Find a new place of worship". How would i know the board has involvement in this? (originated from the board) Because i'm Very familiar with the PAOC constitution, and know that Davis on his own would not have that power. The board would Have to be in agreement on this one for it to happen.
He's not once used orchestrated leaks, he does not speak with other's about it. My knowledge of the situation comes from witnessing some of these situations, and from a deep knowledge of the Constitution. Seriously though, you're accusing him now or orchestrating leaks? Why? because you'd like for him to be the guilty party here?
Again, you're assuming a lot in regards to the situation. You don't have any knowledge of what the Davis' have done or not done.
I should mention for lurkers that the PAOC guidelines which keep being mentioned are anything but informal on these issues. While the document, being a constitution and not a BOD focus on the discipline of ministers and not simply members there is not the slightest hint that the PAOC seens discipline as something that should be done casually by a minister without review.
10.6.1 Purpose of discipline is restoration
10.6.1 Discipline should be utilized after Christian counseling has failed.
10.6.2 A specific and complete list of charges. I.e. the the person must be charged with a specific crime from the list. So if for example the charge were theft then Deborah is charged under 10.6.2.2 while if it was disruption it would be under 10.6.2.5
10.6.3 composition of the hearing committee. In particular extensive rights to a fair trial but unbiased parties.
10.6.3.6 rules regarding document retention
10.6.4 Right to have a formal named complaint, not rumors.
10.6.5 Upon conclusion a statement of conduct, i.e. the hearing needs to make a finding of fact
10.6.6.3 The right of the accused to know of all facts under investigation at the time they are being investigated
10.6.6.5 Rules governing the means of delivery of charges.
106.11.6 2/3rds majority of committee needed for a determination of guilt
etc.... I don't see any sign the PAOC allows Davis to casually discipline Boschman anymore than the laws of Brandon allow a police office to use club to discipline a speeder.
I don't see still where you're getting the idea that Davis causally dismissed her/handled this on his own. You just don't have the depth of knowledge about this situation to be able to determine that.
She was asked to leave. Why does anyone even know that fact? Because Deborah went to the papers and told everyone, thats how all know it. so no leaks from Mike Davis, that would all be on Deborah.
* This was a religious act not an administrative one? Again who let everyone know? Because churches rarely operate where a pastor acts alone on a desicion such as this. These things go before a board. Thats just common knowledge.
* It originated from the board? Again who let everyone know? again common sense would know that with in the PAOC these things go before the board
* The charges were..... here it seems like people are making up whatever they want and what charges would those be that are being made up? you can read the stories on the theft and that from multiple news sites, as well as Deborah herself has shown some of them here as well.
Once again you don't know all that happened in her time at Bethel, so you can't say that it was handled wrong. All you have to go on is Deborah's word which has proven to be untrustworthy.
Thank you Bill Baker and others.
I have refrained from going on here because it is SO DIFFICULT to see and hear these untruths and this bashing.
Pastor Mike spoke to a man named Mike Bussey. Pastor Mike indicated to this man that there was more than one incident which I was NOT even aware of. Mr. Bussey then posted this on the internet.
I have a witness who was told some untruths about myself over the telephone.
I only spoke to ONE person on a repeated basis about the corrupt former Administrator's husband.
SHE is the one who caused dissention within Bethel because SHE COULD NOT KEEP HER MOUTH SHUT.
She then spread this to tt and Mrs. G., another female gossip within Bethel.
This woman was running with EVERYTHING I ever said to her to the former Administrator.
I had NO idea.
There was only one other person that I spoke to on the telephone about this and SHE NEVER SAID A WORK TO ANYONE.
It was the gossips at work within Bethel; there were three particular women.
They were WELL KNOWN within Bethel to cause trouble and I was told that at least one of them had received a letter in the past regarding this behavior.
CD host, did you receive some of my proof?
I will be sending you more soon.
I just have to get this stuff scanned.
False witness and false testimony was laid against me AFTER BEING ASKED TO LEAVE BETHEL.
This was because one of these gossiping women HELPED MY NEIGHBOR take my daughter's puppy out of our yard and then told me all about how they did this.
This gossip from Bethel is the one who should have been held to account for her actions and behavior but she's a Conservative and so I guess that they approve of her actions.
This neighbor laid FALSE CHARGES against me.
She STOLE my 9 yr. old daughter's puppy.
I got my daughter's puppy back. Her and this gossip from Bethel would NOT leave us alone.
I SHOULD HAVE called the police. I spoke to an officer. I told him but he did nothing.
This neighbor was SO ANGRY that I got our puppy back that, in anger, she laid these FALSE CHARGES against myself.
There was NEVER an assault on my part. NEVER. I simply went over to her home to retrieve my daughter's puppy which she was refusing to return to us.
My children were there and saw that this neighbor ASSAULTED ME but the police said that they were TOO YOUNG to be used as witnesses.
Pictures from the Brandon Police Station also show that I was the one assaulted.
EVERY TIME I tried to get my daughter's puppy back, this neighbor laid FALSE CHARGES against myself.
These charges were LIES from the pit of hell and will be proven to be such when we are standing before God.
I am going to submit my initial letter to The Brandon Sun and Pastor Mike Davis' letter to me.
My friend who is aware of the situation involving my foster child said that she has had enough now that you will lie about that incident also.
She said that she is contemplating contacting Revenue Canada to have your tax free status revoked.
She said that IF you can continue to harass and lie that she will do this.
Individuals have copied and posted this stuff and sent it ALL OVER Brandon to my new Pastor, to businesses, to the Supt. at the Brandon School Division, etc.
They are trying to cause MAXIMUM TROUBLE for me but I have told the truth and so I have nothing to worry about.
Other Christians within Bethel KNOW about the actions and conduct of the former Administrator's husband and questioned why his behavior was NOT addressed much earlier.
I will ask some of these individuals to come forward also.
Bethel has tried to cover up and deny what these individuals did.
I wanted to hold them ACCOUNTABLE for their actions which is something that Bethel DID NOT want to address or deal with.
They just simply wanted me to forgive these individuals.
Also, they were contributing LARGE AMOUNTS of money to this church and they were GOOD FRIENDS with Pastor Mike Davis.
I did ask God to help me to forgive them but I feel that as Christians that we SHOULD BE HELD TO A HIGHER STANDARD THAN NON-CHRISTIANS.
I simply felt that their actions towards me were UNACCEPTABLE because of the position that the wife held within this church.
Other members of Bethel also KNEW the goings on of this husband as did other Christians within the other Christian churches.
I NEVER took that letter to The Brandon Sun which the Brandon Sun can attest to.
They asked me what my opinion was AFTER they had a copy of this letter.
I couldn't deny this and I was mad. I told them my thoughts which they printed.
The following Sunday Pastor Mike Davis stood up in front of the entire congregation and told them that the discipline of the church was different than the discipline of the world.
Someone who was at this service, told me ALL about this and how everyone thunderously applauded and cheered because poor Pastor Mike had been perceived as being vilified in The Brandon Sun.
I found out that one of these women that was asked to leave her church was FROM BETHEL ALSO.
She is a VERY STRONG CHRISTIAN WOMAN and so now this is two and possibly three.
I simply haven't found out who the third woman is yet.
Being asked to leave Bethel was a POLITICAL THING.
These women should ALL be charged with mischief, harassment, etc.
One of them even asked another woman to use her computer. She told me all about this.
I wrote a Letter to the Editor in which I was critical of the leadership of Brandon and THEN ALL HELL BROKE LOOSE FOR ME in EVERY WAY AND AREA.
The former Administrator's husband was Campaign Mgr. for one of the Conservatives who ran Federally within Brandon and I was told by another Conservative that there was some controversy over money in that incident.
I was asked to leave Bethel IMMEDIATELY after that Letter to the Editor appeared in our Brandon Sun.
Next, was the incident with my daughter's puppy, RIGHT AFTER the Bethel incident.
Then, I also lost my job with The Brandon School Division, that I had successfully held for 10 yrs. previously, with NO PRIOR INCIDENTS.
The President of the Brandon Teacher's Association was from Bethel.
EVERYONE ran to Pastor Mike Davis' defense. Poor him and bad me.
All I did was excercise my DEMOCRATIC RIGHT within a VERY, ULTRA CONSERVATIVE church and city.
I also had NO idea that Bethel was so Conservative and that SHOULD NOT MATTER.
Bethel has some SERIOUS ISSUES within their church that need addressing.
Pastor Mike is a staunch, jealous Conservative, as are the Board Members and the membership of Bethel.
I was NOT AWARE of this and nor should this matter.
Some of us KNOW that Brandon could REALLY TAKE OFF and benefit from new leadership and this is the battle.
It appears that these Christians take their Conservative politics and hold them as close as their Christian beliefs and to MANY of these individuals they are one in the same.
So, if you attack their political party, it is like you are attacking their Christianity.
This feels like the Crusades all over again!
I was a Conservative also but I want the BEST LEADERSHIP OVER BRANDON regardless of the political affiliation.
I asked a member of Bethel to help me have church in the last election and he told me that his supervisory board over him from Bethel told him that I was using church as a political thing.
Really?
Well, I am going to hold church here EVERY WEEKEND very soon.
I want to see GOD'S WILL over Brandon and NOT man's will.
I believe that God wants to KNOCK OUR SOCKS OFF WITH BLESSINGS, ABUNDANCE AND FAVOR, etc. and I believe that this will begin with NEW LEADERSHIP over Brandon.
These are words of battle to these Christian Conservatives.
They will DO ABSOLUTELY ANYTHING to ensure that a Conservative candidate gets in.
Look at what they've done already, just to myself.
I NEVER experienced or understood spiritual warfare until after I wrote that Letter to the Editor, which I have EVERY RIGHT to do.
I REALLY CARE about this city and where we are going or NOT going.
I am NOT interested in covering up for ANY group of people.
Let's be open, transparent and get the truth out there once and for all regarding ALL matters within this city.
ALL of these Christians are praying for revival.
I was listening to Rodney Howard Brown, Myles Munro and the Australian guy who spoke at the 2009 Women's Aglow National convention.
They all speak of a NEW SOUND. Rodney Howard Brown says that there will be a SHIFTING, A CHANGE. He said that revival is MESSY because things JUST SIMPLY DON'T STAY THE SAME.
He said that some will leave the church. He said that this involves shaking and CHANGE.
Jesus OFFENDED PEOPLE wherever He went. He ESPECIALLY OFFENDED the Pharisees.
I have pleaded with God to REVEAL THE TRUTH about ALL of these incidences regarding myself.
I have NEVER EXPERIENCED someone lying about me before, bearing FALSE WITNESS, FALSE TESTIMONY because in their worldly selfishness, they wanted a pet that NEVER belonged to them in the first place.
I have NEVER EXPERIENCED the HORRIBLE SLANDER OF GOSSIP like I did within Bethel.
Oh my goodness! It was just HORRIBLE and I HAD NO IDEA for so long.
I noticed that Pastor Mike Davis spoke at the Ministerial Association's meeting at the Presbyterian Church here in Brandon about Christian unity.
Well, walk the walk. This appears to be a bit of an oxymoron. Start by addressing this situation with myself.
To me, this appears to be phony and insincere when you have asked two women now to leave your church.
You tell one group one thing and yet behind the scenes, you do another.
Let's ALL walk the walk. We've heard the talk. Now, let's SEE THE WALK!
IF the church was REALLY being the church, they would mentor and help out these lost children, gang members and youth that roam our streets at night.
They would do be the hands and feet of Jesus within this city rather than worrying themselves with the politics of Brandon.
Why don't you just pray, Lord, I pray YOUR WILL BE DONE OVER BRANDON IN THIS UPCOMING ELECTION. Your will on earth as it is in Heaven and then just STEP OUT of the picture.
I will also ask ALL of the Mayoral candidates in the last municipal election to share what they ALSO experienced with some of these Conservative individuals.
These Conservatives also tried to get charges laid against Mike Abbey, Mr. Ross went through A HECK OF A LOT, as well as myself and MANY others who ran against this Conservative Mayor of Brandon.
When you are competing for the TOP PRIZE or TOP JOB, these Conservatives are fanatical and have proven THAT THEY WILL GO TO ANY EXTREME IN ORDER TO ACHIEVE THEIR GOALS of having a Conservative as Mayor of our city.
The FALSE CHARGES were laid against myself AFTER I WAS ALREADY asked by Bethel to leave and after I thought well, then I'm going to run against this Mayor.
This FALSE TESTIMONY AND THESE FALSE CHARGES were laid after I chose to run against this Mayor.
This gossip from Bethel is INVOLVED IN THIS RIGHT UP TO HER EARS, AS COURT TESTIMONY HAS ALREADY PREVIOUSLY heard.
She is the one who sought out friendship with this neighbor, as the court was told.
She is a FLAGRANT GOSSIP AND TROUBLE MAKER and she can't seem to control herself.
She is idle and has NOTHING better to do with her time.
THOSE ARE THE VERY WORST KIND.
This woman has caused TROUBLE wherever she has lived and been.
SHE IS ONE OF THE PROBLEMS WITHIN BETHEL AND NOT MYSELF.
If they can't beat you fair and square, then they'll make something up in order to ANNIHILATE their competition.
My name and my reputation are VERY IMPORTANT to me and I hope that these will BOTH be RESTORED to myself after this next election.
These Conservatives are FIERCE and will go to ANY EXTREME.
It's absolutely RIDICULOUS what has been done here in the past to myself and to others.
NONE of these political parties are going to hold ANYTHING back in this crucial election, however.
You are going to be battling ALL of the political parties; who have ALL experienced some of what I have been speaking about here.
You want a battle?
I'm afraid you're going to get a doozy in this upcoming election!
Perhaps Revenue Canada should have ALREADY been contacted just because of the crap that I HAVE HAD TO GO THROUGH because I expressed my private and personal opinion, which had NOTHING to do with this church at all!
One of these gossip's nose got out of joint and so she ran to Pastor Mike with a lie.
That's how this whole thing got started, with these gossips.
I DON'T WANT to see them lose their charitable status but there needs to be a HUGE SHAKEUP AND WAKE UP CALL WITHIN BETHEL and within this city!
Why haven't they dealt SEVERELY WITH THESE TROUBLE MAKING GOSSIPS?
They sure dealt severely and swiftly with me and all I did was write a Letter to the Editor.
Gossip causes WAY MORE TROUBLE for MANY INDIVIDUALS than writing a Letter to the Editor.
Is it because my letter caused some individuals within Bethel to question their Conservative beliefs or their Conservative Mayor?
What was the REAL REASON here for being asked to find another church to worship in, as well as one other woman that I now also know about?
Perhaps we should find out.
The Conservatives have ALWAYS CONTROLLED THINGS within Brandon and they are USED TO THIS kind of behavior.
I think that they see this as a battle between good and evil and God and the rest of the heathen world. Honestly!
MORE AND MORE AND MORE PEOPLE are going to rise up and speak up because MANY INDIVIDUALS have expressed to myself and others their struggles with the leadership of Brandon and the Conservative party that controls Brandon.
There are MANY incidences. They are not isolated. All it will take is one brave soul and then the truth MAY finally get out there to this general population.
Just don't mess with me anymore. I've had enough now.
What I stated is what happened to myself.
I caused NO TROUBLE AT BETHEL whatsoever other than being radical in my faith.
I was only ever approached about the horn incident, that's it. Nothing else.
I felt REALLY EMBARRASSED to hear from this first initial poster that my behavior had been a subject of conversation.
I REALLY was UNAWARE of this and I FELT TERRIBLE when I found out that ANYONE felt this way at all.
I was disgusted with the phoniness of the Administrator's husband and I asked for help in trying to get him to be ACCOUNTABLE for his actions towards myself with the house transaction.
Pastor Mike said that he was accountable unto God for the actions of his members, in his letter to me and that is why I took him up on that.
He didn't want to be held accountable for the actions of this Administrator's husband however, only mine.
I want these GOSSIPING women from Bethel dealt with and made to be ACCOUNTABLE for their actions.
I've really had enough now.
I want my daughter's puppy back and I want my job back with The Brandon School Division.
EACH of these incidents are based upon hysteria, lies, rumors and NOT facts at all.
I want the TRUTH and I want my name to be cleared in EACH situation.
I am VERY TIRED of spineless, jellyfish EVERYTHING.
I have a spine and a backbone and I want these TROUBLE MAKING WOMEN BROUGHT TO ACCOUNT FOR THEIR HORRIBLE ACTIONS.
Is that how you behave IF you are a Christian?
I thought that as Christians, we were suppose to stick together.
You don't go sticking your nose in and get involved in something that is NONE of your business, such as the dog situation with my neighbor.
I DID NONE of these things that I have been accused of and I want to PROVE THIS, if this is possible.
IF you ever had ANY ONE of these incidents happen to yourself, you would understand HOW INCREDIBLY FRUSTRATED AND ANGRY I AM ABOUT THIS.
I want the opportunity to PROVE that what I am saying is indeed the truth.
NOBODY is going to accuse me and CHARGE ME WITH THINGS THAT I NEVER EVER DID IN THE FIRST PLACE, not without a fight anyway.
These women should be thrown right OUT of Brandon; never mind the church.
One of their friends is now being charged with mischief by their neighbor. They should ALL be charged.
Deal with these women ALREADY!
I REALLY LIKE John Hagee and other REAL MEN of action who would NEVER have put up with crap like this in the first place.
That would have been nipped in the bud A LONG time ago with these women.
Dr. Phil McGraw said that, "People will treat us the way that we allow them to."
I'm NOT ALLOWING this stuff any more AT ALL.
If requesting that Bethel start dealing with some of this stuff brands me as a trouble maker within this church, well then, so be it.
Deal with these women already.
MANY members of Bethel have shared with me also their HORRIBLE EXPERIENCES with these women.
DEAL WITH YOUR REAL PROBLEM, already.
Stop blaming me.
You had these problems with these women WAY BEFORE I ever started attending church there.
I tried to help this one gossip for three years. I drove her around all over the place, constantly gave her food and you name it.
That's the thanks I get for that, I guess.
She's also had MUCH TROUBLE with most of the women in the church there.
Would you like me to call them forward? Perhaps I should.
You need to wake up over there and come out of your slumber.
I would need a third party to intervene for myself to deal with this situation with Bethel.
There appears to be TOO MUCH denial to deal with this stuff between them and myself and too many untruths from these gossiping, meddling women.
CD host, I am going to submit to you next week, or the following week, the rest of the proof.
I don't have a cable to scan these yet.
I have in writing from one of these wretched, gossiping, trouble making women, a letter in which she took Peaches to the vet WITHOUT MY OR MY DAUGHTER'S AUTHORIZATION, CONSENT OR PERMISSION and the bill was over $70.00 some dollars which she demanded me to pay. This is indicated in the letter.
She then got my lying neighbor to pay for this again WITHOUT MY AUTHORIZATION OR PERMISSION but she charged me for this anyway.
That is extortion. Court heard ALL of this but the papers were not allowed to be given to the judge.
I have ALL of the papers.
This lying neighbor also had Peaches FIXED WITHOUT MY DAUGHTER'S PERMISSION, CONSENT OR AUTHORIZATION.
These women were EXTREME BULLIES and they just did EVERYTHING to provoke us and to make life HELL for us.
They were absolutely nuts and RELENTLESS. This appeared to be their mandate and their mission.
The police did NOTHING because they believed the lies of this older woman.
Well, we'd better all WAKE UP because we are living in the last days and we'd better expect this kind of NONSENSE to go on NOW.
I was pressing in to their political party and to some of these unstable women, this was warfare for them.
Also, like I said before, these are idle, gossiping women who ran with gossip that they heard and turned it into a RUNAWAY TRAIN of monumental proportions.
THEY ABSOLUTELY WOULD NOT LEAVE US ALONE!
Cameras on my property would have shown what they did.
I do not have those.
This gossip from Bethel sat outside on the steps of my neighbor's home.
They told lies about myself all through the neighborhood.
It was HORRIBLE, absolutely HORRIBLE what we all went through.
This other neighbor kept watching us out of her window.
They just NEVER LEFT US ALONE!
They REALLY HARASSED US HORRIBLY!
Oh my gosh, it was JUST AWFUL and relentless!
They were bound and determined to take Peaches and I SHOULD HAVE CALLED THE POLICE AND ASKED TO SPEAK TO ANOTHER OFFICER, WHICH I DID NOT DO.
It was warfare like I have NEVER experienced before.
These are idle, trouble making women with NOTHING better to do.
ALL of them are retired and my life became their sport.
One is not working; she lives off of her mother's money and makes it her business to mind everyone else's.
She is the one that caused ALL of this trouble at the church and here with this neighbor.
She was the one who invited herself into my home.
She is VERY aggressive but I had NO IDEA that she is as messed up as she is. No idea.
I believed that she was the Christian that she professed herself to be. Nope. Not even close.
I will send these documents to you soon. These should silence anymore arguments.
Perhaps Pastor Mike is NOT at fault for all of this; perhaps it is the Board or a combination of both. Perhaps they have believed the lies of these women. I have NO idea.
All I know is that right now things are VERY BROKEN and they need to be FIXED quickly.
As Christians, you don't turn an ENTIRE CHURCH AGAINST one individual and then spread these lies and untruths to other Pastors and churches.
This is NOT ACCEPTABLE AT ALL and I WON'T TOLERATE THIS any longer.
I am a very decent, kind, sensitive human being and I have NO IDEA why we have had to go through the garbage that we have but I want the opportunity to dispel ALL OF THESE LIES, FALSE WITNESS, FALSE TESTIMONY that have been propagated against myself.
I did NONE of these things that I have been accused of. NONE of them at all.
I am a teacher and a professional.
Like my friend who knows me VERY WELL said, IF the lies don't stop she is calling Revenue Canada and IMMEDIATELY.
NOBODY wants that to happen but if that is what it will take to get the lies to stop and the truth to FINALLY be exposed and come out, then that's what will happen.
these paranoid rants are just repeats of your earlier ones. You still haven't covered the contradictions in your statements (that was pointed out by a few of us at least.) You're just repeating the exact same ridiculous accusations over and over again.
As for contacting revenue Canada, Really go ahead, I'm sure they'll do absolutely nothing. lol. They tend to look a little more into a situation and I imagine they'll be able to see the questionable amount of credibility you have and toss that one out. (If they even look at it. Last i checked, asking deborah to leave a church doesn't automatically revoke a charity status.)
As for them helping the youth and community of Brandon, you must not have been all that involved, since i KNOW that Bethel is quite involved in the community. But that doesn't fit in with your portrayal of them, so i can see why you choose to omit the truth on that one.
As for the rest of the rant, I think we've all addressed this repeatedly. Constantly saying the same thing over and over again, doesn't make it truth.
so its all everybody elses fault but deborahs? Really deborah thats still how you want to portray this? Its beyond me how you place blame, it doesn't make sense? so just to clear things up it was you who said in the most recent posts you've made that you'd contact revenue Canada not a friend lol.
Deborah, it pains me that you keep coming back here.
I truly believe that you are a victim, I really do. But to what, I haven't figured out. You are disliked by many in the city, (not by me personally, I don't know you) and because of that I do believe that some neighbors might harass you. However, I don't buy this belief that the pound, the mayors office, the school board, and a church are all involved in some big plan to hurt you.
You do bring up many good points about what needs to change within Brandon, but you follow it up by saying that you sent a Facebook message to John Mayer to provide evidence that you take action (The John Mayer facebook fan page is run by his management, not him, so he will never read it, and as a result it will get tossed with all the other 13 year old fans sending messages about how they love him) The way you conduct yourself in open forums like this does not help your cause. Actions such as insisting anonymous users are certain people, when you have no evidence are such behaviors. You obviously do not enjoy public ridicule, but unfortunately, as a potential mayoral candidate (based on your statements here, and in other places) you are fair game for public criticism, and ridicule. If you do want to be serious about politics, you need to be prepared for what's to come. It won't be a scheme against you, it'll just be politics.
Now onto the topic of your recent posts. There are a few trouble spots in your post
"Pastor Mike spoke to a man named Mike Bussey. Pastor Mike indicated to this man that there was more than one incident which I was NOT even aware of. Mr. Bussey then posted this on the internet."
No, re read the blog you are referring to. The man did not give a name, his username was Monk-In-Training. Based on information on the link from his name, I would say that his last name is Hall. Kevin Bussey however is the last name of the owner of the blog that comment is on. This is important, because this speaks greatly on how you read something, and unintentionally take it to something that is a half truth. Secondly: This might be minor, but by using the word spoke, you imply that this is an in-person, first-hand encounter he is speaking of. He claims to have emailed PM. Now, based on the fact that the anonymous user who made the initial claims about you, admitted that he assumed things that he had no proof of, it's entirely possible that this user did not really receive an email from the pastor.
"The former Administrator's husband was Campaign Mgr. for one of the Conservatives who ran Federally within Brandon and I was told by another Conservative that there was some controversy over money in that incident."
I have a feeling they weren't talking about the church and money.
"Next, was the incident with my daughter's puppy, RIGHT AFTER the Bethel incident."
Here's another WAIT A MINUTE moment. You have indicated, when asked directly by me, that the incident with the dog happened before you were asked to leave Bethel. You indicated in one post that you spoke with the pastor on the phone about it prior to his letter. You also indicated that you were in church the Sunday before you received the letter, and wished to speak with the pastor regarding the dog. Most people will ask, "well what was it?", but because you answered my question about it previously, we know what it was. It happening BEFORE the letter, was a very important part of the story. I don't doubt that there was some overlap, but it did start before.
"Then, I also lost my job with The Brandon School Division, that I had successfully held for 10 yrs. previously, with NO PRIOR INCIDENTS."
I think this should also be clarified. You have indicated previously that you applied for the job which you previously held, and were denied. You weren't exactly fired, or let go.
"The President of the Brandon Teacher's Association was from Bethel."
The BTA is a union. They have no direct say in the hiring process. Your denial was made by the school division, not the union. Also, you were a substitute teacher, were you not? Subs are not unionized with the BTA, so they really have no say again.
Your tendencies to jump to conclusions and speak solely out of emotion do not do you justice.
They're not paranoid rants, you fool.
It's the truth. There was NEVER an assault on my part. There was nothing.
There was false witness, false charges, you name it.
What happened was and is three women from Bethel who are meddling, gossiping, busybodies got this whole ball rolling with their lies and gossip in the first place.
Bring them forward. Let's deal with them.
There's no paranoid rants here. This is the truth. Why are you having such trouble with the truth?
Are you one of the individuals involved in perpetrating this lie within the church and getting this whole thing rolling in the first place?
I'll just bet that you are.
Let's have a meeting then. Bring all of those parties involved. Let's hear what they said and what was done.
I NEVER submitted the letter to the Brandon Sun. Call them up. Ask them yourself.
They called me up after they already had a copy of the letter and I could not deny that it existed.
They asked me what I thought and I told them. I was as mad as heck also.
Why don't you all meet with me? What are you so afraid of? Are you afraid of your lies being exposed?
You've been doing so well perpetrating these misconceptions.
I believe that you're involved and you are afraid of being exposed for who and what you REALLY are.
This was and is hysteria created after the fact for the purpose of justifying that I was asked to leave this church after writing a Letter to the Editor in which I criticized the Conservative leadership of this city. Pure and simple.
This woman who approached me had her nose all bent out of joint because of my letter. She then approached Pastor Mike and whispered something to him.
The next thing you know I'm getting a letter asking me to find a new church to worship in the following week.
This is TOTALLY UNACCEPTABLE!
EVERYONE has a right to express their personal and private opinion.
My Letter to the Editor did NOT indicate in ANY way my affiliation with ANY church within Brandon.
What did this woman tell Pastor Mike?
These three women have REPEATEDLY caused MUCH GRIEF within this church for MANY individuals over the years.
Why did this woman from my former church then get herself involved with my neighbor and get another ball rolling over there?
I had asked her to help me look after my daughter's puppy so that this neighbor would not take her away from us.
But nope, again, this troubled, meddlesome woman just couldn't control herself, and YET AGAIN she is now friends with my neighbor and helping my neighbor to take my daughter's puppy away from us.
This woman is yet again involved in another situation involving myself.
First the church and then my daughter's puppy. You have also indicated on this post that you sent copies of this to my former Superintendent.
People around town are telling me that you have also sent them ALL MANNER of copies from this post ALL OVER town in the continued hopes that this will cause ALL MANNER of trouble for me.
You should be so VERY PROUD of yourself.
You have done ALL MANNER of HORRIBLE things to MANY individuals within Bethel and within Brandon and that's all okay.
There is something SERIOUSLY WRONG within this church.
Somebody should investigate this which is what I would like to see done.
You are opposed to this and DON'T WANT THIS TO HAPPEN AT ALL because YOU ARE INVOLVED IN THIS UP TO YOUR EYEBALLS. That is my belief.
You just don't want to be exposed for the mischief, troubled, meddling maker that you are.
TRT, I think that I know who D.F. and tt are and they are two of the gossips of Bethel.
tt is the one who ran to Pastor Mike with a lie and D.F. is NOT from Saskatchewan. Neither is she married. She lives here and she is the one that I had asked to help me look after my daughter's puppy so that my neighbor would not take her away from us.
D.F. and tt and VERY GOOD friends.
They are two of the witches that I have continually spoken of.
Within Bethel they believe that if you have two or three witnesses that this is proof.
Now, perhaps unknown to myself, D.F., tt and this other woman confirmed their lies to Pastor Mike, the Board or others.
Perhaps Pastor Mike will feel that he is totally blameless in this because he took their word for things.
He is on tape in 2009 talking about the "witches" within Bethel.
Perhaps he now realizes what these women are all about. Perhaps his hands are tied.
Perhaps I should be going after these three women for ALL of their lies and trouble making.
I told my friend to NOT contact anyone.
I want to get to the bottom of this and get to the truth and this DEFINITELY INVOLVES ALL THREE OF THESE WOMEN whom I have called by name in earlier posts.
You could talk to someone I wish to not name at the moment, from Brandon University about one of these idle women whom he also had problems with.
There is a pattern here.
I got along REALLY WELL with both Pastors and everyone within Bethel.
I was VERY UPSET with the Administrator's husband but I only shared with this one gossip my concerns about this other than Pastor Mike.
If this got out to the church, it's because she blabbed it or because she told her other two friends and they blabbed it.
Once I was speaking on the telephone to someone while D.F. was here. I was having a PRIVATE CONVERSATION with someone that she overheard. She made a VERY INACCURATE comment about this private call to me afterwards.
She probably ran with this also.
I had NO IDEA the problem that these women were within Bethel, NO IDEA.
I also had NO IDEA that everything that I was sharing with D.F. was getting blabbed ALL OVER THE PLACE.
I was unaware that she was two-faced. I was unaware of the EXTENT OF HER MESSED UP, TROUBLED LIFE.
This woman came barging into my home and life, I did NOT seek her out.
I had NO IDEA about this woman or else I would have had NOTHING EVER to do with her at all, EVER.
What I DON'T UNDERSTAND though is WHY the Administration of Bethel even entertained anything that she or her two friends had to say.
Why was I never asked about any accusations that were made against myself?
Why was I never notified of these or involved within this process?
Perhaps D.F. is the one who encouraged my neighbor to lay those false charges against myself when nothing at all ON MY PART ever occurred, ever. Not even once.
My children were there and saw the entire thing but the police told us that they were TOO YOUNG to be called as witnesses.
D.F. did, after all, take my daughter's puppy out of our yard once before and I had to go over to her house to get it.
She is probably the one that gave my neighbors the idea to do this in the first place.
My children told me after the fact, that D.F. was stalking our yard, along with the other neighbor.
Their harassment of us was relentless.
I KNEW something was going to happen because they simply WOULD NOT leave us alone.
My gosh, it was awful.
I would like these women held to account for their lies and their actions that involve myself.
Maybe they had run to Pastor Mike and/or the Board about MANY things regarding myself and the Letter to the Editor was the LAST STRAW for them.
The horn incident was the ONLY incident that was ever brought to my attention and I didn't bring it again. There was NO FUSS, nothing from myself. I never even brought up this incident with anyone.
NO OTHER INCIDENT happened, occurred or exists.
Deborah, I'm not willing to keep fighting with you about who i am. CD host can feel free to trace the ip address and verify that i am in SK. As for not being married, well that'd be news to my husband. lol. I don't get what you think it'll accomplish by continually saying that i'm (your neighbor?) or whatever. I have no problems with the truth, I'm happy to accept truths, what you have ranted about though is not truth at all. It is more of the same 'everyone is against me' consiracy rant that we've been reading on here over and over again.
I really don't know what else to say, part of me thinks i ought to walk away, that these are obviously the writings of someone quite disturbed. But another part of me very much dislikes the things being written on here about the church. (i have no big opinion about the BSD or your puppy, unlike what you think, i'm not involved in either, nor do i much care about either.)
Why is it that anytime someone speaks out against you, its automatically 'this is so and so, she stole my puppy, etc...' kind of accusations? I really don't see what benefit you're getting out of these. I don't imagine anyone here truly believes that I'm this lady you keep ranting about, so it really doesn't serve to try and discredit what i say in that way. So i have no idea why you continue on with those (FALSE) claims.
Any way, I'd still like to see you address the discrepencies in your stories that you keep skipping over. You've contradicted yourself a number of times, which have not only been pointed out by myself. I'd like to hear why your story can't be kept straight. If its the truth, why does it keep changing?
Deborah this is what we're talking about. You think you know who some one is (and no again you're wrong lol I'm not one of these three ladies you keep referring to, I've actually never ever had a conversation with Pastor mike about you.) and then all the sudden it turns to truth in your mind although it is far from the truth at all. Over and over again you fail to address the posts asking you to to answer which is the truth because you've come up with many different "truths" on the same subject. Honestly I don't know how you don't see this as something majorly wrong. I'd like to stop posting, I really would. But i refuse to sit and let lies be spread (very very obvious lies that anyone can see). As for this blog. Its public anyone can read it, BSD, etc... So really common sense would say don't say anything on a public blog that you don't want to be public.
CD host, are my posts not working somehow? This is the third in the past week or so that hasn't been posted. I don't think it would have been denied for rudeness or what not, since there was nothing nasty in it. I didn't say anything about the others since the ones that didn't make it on were basically about the same things tt and trt posted. But my last post i would have liked posted, since i'm being accused of being someone that i'm not. The forced silence on this doesn't allow me to defend these accusations.
(is this a mistake on my end that i'm not posting it right, or are you denying them?)
Df --
Did you remember what you wrote? I've only dropped one post in the last week on this thread, and that was from TT.
DF --
Just checked. There were two of yours caught in a queue since late Jan and then another just now. They are all posted.
Sorry.
" You have also indicated on this post that you sent copies of this to my former Superintendent.
People around town are telling me that you have also sent them ALL MANNER of copies from this post ALL OVER town in the continued hopes that this will cause ALL MANNER of trouble for me."
So now i KNOW for sure you are willing to lie, and if you'll lie about this, then how can we trust anything you are saying?
I've sent One email, with the link to this site (No copies of anything, although like i've mentioned i do have the screen prints saved, but no i haven't sent anything like that to anyone.), to One person, who you mentioned by name on the blog. I figured they had the right to know what was being said about them so they would have the chance to defend themselves if they wanted. (And for the record, no i don't know them, i sent the link via their work email. Which was easy to find since you gave their name.)
No copies of anything all over town, how on earth would i send it to people there anyway? Once again, i don't live there, and know only a few people there. In this situation i know 100% without a doubt that you've made this up. Which really confirms (to myself at least) what i've already known about the other situations you've written about.
Thanks Deborah, you've cleared up any doubt at all i had about any of your stories.
I knew your story about the church was full of falsities, but now i also question the truthfulness of any of your other stories. (Puppy, BSD, etc...)
Thanks CD host for posting those for me! I appreciate you looking into it!
The Pastor of the church I currently attend received a copy of some of this and he received a note that stated, "This is coming from one of your parishoners."
If in doubt, take it up with him. He told me that he had received a copy of this and that he had deleted this from his email.
I will not name the other individuals, who asked not to be identified but they also notified myself of having received some of this post and indicated that copies had been sent to others as well.
I spoke to Pastor Mike about the puppy and asked for prayer regarding same.
Pastor Mike was VERY friendly, cordial and indicated that there was no problem whatsoever. He prayed with myself over the telephone regarding the puppy that had just been stolen.
The very next day, I received the letter from Bethel, in the mail, asking me to find another church to worship in.
There was NEVER an assault on my part, ever. This is an ABSOLUTE LIE created by a very mentally unstable woman.
My children witnessed the entire fiasco.
I went over to pick up our Peaches because this neighbor now REFUSED to give her back to us after she had offered and agreed to train Peaches for us.
I SHOULD HAVE CALLED THE POLICE immediately.
Instead, I went over there and pulled Peaches out of her arms after she stated to me, "Well, I've gotten attached to Peaches and as far as I'm concerned, she's mine now. You'll have to get a lawyer to get her back."
She then ASSAULTED MYSELF. She slapped me across the face, hit me, kicked me, told her other dog to bite me and I DID NOTHING EXCEPT PULL PEACHES OUT OF HER ARMS AND BRING PEACHES HOME TO MY VERY SAD DAUGHTER.
My children saw this entire fiasco and saw that I did NOTHING. They also saw the red mark across my face where this neighbor had slapped me across the face.
After this, I SHOULD HAVE CALLED THE BRANDON POLICE AGAIN TO COMPLAIN TO THEM ABOUT THESE INDIVIDUALS HARASSING US AND STALKING OUR YARD, etc.
I asked the police officer to charge her with assault but he refused to do that.
Again, I should have called the BCP and spoken to another officer.
The gossip from Bethel was in the thick of it as she had been ALL ALONG when I attended Bethel and now with this neighbor.
This woman and her two other friends have NEVER been dealt with at Bethel.
My friend has scanned 27 pages but she has been unable to send these to my email yet.
I am obtaining copies from The Brandon Sun which will be forwarded to you, CD host as soon as possible.
I told my friend who has been through this entire ordeal with me NOT to contact Revenue Canada.
She has HAD IT because she also KNOWS the truth and what we have ALL been through. She is EXTREMELY DISGUSTED.
I have refused to play the GAME and I am NOT kissing anybody's glutous maximus in this town.
If that makes me unliked, so be it.
I am also going after the truth, and there are SOME individuals who ABSOLUTELY DO NOT WANT THIS TRUTH exposed.
The Mayor's campaign Mgr. and most of his campaign team were from this church in the last election.
As for myself contacting John Mayer, well, at least I am trying to do SOMETHING about trying to draw attention to Brandon.
How MANY individuals are on the payroll at City Hall and what has been done within these past 8 years to draw more businesses or industry to Brandon?
How many businesses and industries have been turned away already and have decided to locate elsewhere?
How long have the Fire Hall and the Police Station taken to be built? One is now over budget.
We just heard the Mayor say on the radio that he would like to see the entire east side of 10th Street torn down even though an engineer report clearly indicated that there was nothing structurally wrong with these buildings.
Twice now, this same group with vested financial investments and interests in The Strand Theater on this east side of 10th Street area, have been locked out of City Hall when events were planned and advertised at this venue.
False charges and false witness were laid against myself during the 2006 municipal campaign and charges were attempted to be laid on Mike Abbey, who also ran.
Something incriminating that was posted on the Internet about Mayor Burgess, from someone very close to him, was prevented from being released by a lawyer.
Lies were told about me to a Pastor at Bethel who didn't even bother to check with me for validity of same.
This ALL started after I wrote a Letter to the Editor in which I criticized the leadership of Brandon.
EVERY bit of it. ALL HELL broke loose for me after this.
Someone from another church just told me last week, "Well, I'd think that you're on the RIGHT TRACK then because that is to be expected if you are encroaching on the enemy's turf and territory."
This was from another Christian within Brandon so NOT EVERYONE shares your views of myself.
I believe that asking Pastor Mike for prayer regarding Peaches was after the first time that my awful neighbor refused to give her back to us.
Then I just went over there and took her back. Peaches rightfully belonged to my daughter.
Think about it for a moment. This woman ALREADY had a dog and two cats.
This was the VERY FIRST PET that my 9 yr. old daughter had ever received and it was a GIFT from her father, whom my daughter HARDLY EVER gets to see.
Her father also lived 8 hours away and he bred that puppy for his daughter and then had the mother fixed.
How NUTS do you have to be to want a puppy that belongs to a 9 yr. old little girl who is SO UPSET that she cries herself to sleep, misses school, can't sleep and is SO DISTRAUGHT ABOUT THIS for half a year?
What NORMAL adult could do that to a child? Remember, this older woman ALREADY had a dog and 2 cats of her own.
This is just PURE SELFISHNESS and DURING THIS ENTIRE EVENT, YET AGAIN, this gossip from Bethel is involved and in the THICK OF THINGS yet again.
Like i said deborah i've sent one email to one person (you mentioned her by name on here, making it easy to find her work email. I figured since you were talking down about her that she had a right to see and have the option of defending herself.) with only the link attached. It's rather convenient that there are a bunch of other people that 'supposedly' got emails yet you can't name names. That works well for you. As i said, i 100% know the truth on this one, and i know without a doubt that these people you are claiming do not exist. This is just one more falsity added to your already growing list.
You still are not addressing the discrepancies in your stories (which again, have been pointed out by more than just myself) You're still just continuing on repeating the same paranoid rants. Really I'm curious as to why your stories keep changing and would like for you to explain it.
You can't keep your stories straight, (the contradictions have already been pointed out), you've come on here pretending to be other posters (Show's dishonesty on your part, and others than just myself noticed the similarities in your posts and these "other" posters)
When you're outright caught in lies you start calling foul names and make all sorts of crazy claims. For once i'd really like you to address the questions people have, rather than see you once again go off on a rant repeating the same thing.
We get it, someone took your dog, you wanted her back. I don't really care about that situation, i don't have anything to do with it. And i don't think anyone here is arguing with you about the dog. I do however care about the false things you've been spreading about the church.
You haven't been able to keep the time lines straight, you can't keep the "Facts" of the story straight. Wouldn't that be easy if you were telling the truth? The truth doesn't change, your stories however seem to do that often.
Deborah, the police don't charge some one with assult and break and enter without any cause. If they charged you they had to have had proof. In the end though, no one is talking about the dog with you. No one here is even arguing with you about the dog so why you keep referring back to that and trying to defend it is beyond me. Also beyond me that you find a church at fault for not getting your puppy back. Deborah there is so much "drama" surrounding you that it surprises me that you wouldn't see any reason why you were asked to leave.
Two new files have been added:
BCA and City needs new ideas.
lol uh wow deborah that letter wasn't nearly as bad as you claimed it was lol. you weren't told "go find a new place of worship" you were told "your actions are not consistant with the values of Bethel christian assembly and if you are not going to do anything about them I am asking you to consider attending another church that may hold the same values as you do."
Thats what you got upset over? really? That wasn't even a harsh letter. Obviously your values and beliefs did not match that of Bethel so it probably was a wise decision of Pastor Mike to send that letter. Besides that you were insulting in your letter to the editor about the leadership in brandon. And I'm sure there are times where even the pastors there disagree with the leadership of the city, but you won't find them publicly ridiculing them the way you did. Reading that all again kinda solidifies that Pastor Mike did the right thing and you made a mountain out of a molehill.
Ditto what TT said, plus keep in mind this was One incident in a long long line of behavioural problems and issues brought forth by deborah. I'm glad to have read the note, and still 100% agree with Pastor Mike.
I wouldn't mind too, seeing the one scanned directly from the newspaper, rather than one that she just has on file. (i didn't see that it was scanned from the paper, that looked like an original copy, could be wrong though) I just don't 100% trust that she wouldn't be changing the letter to suit her needs now. As well, this is only one of many letters written into the newspaper by deborah, do we have some sort of guarantee this is the same letter? (I'm still good to go if this was the right letter unedited, I believe Pastor Mike was in the right.)
I hate to appear to be flip flopping,
But I don't buy the "prior problems" argument
You've mentioned things like her assault charges. Unfortunately, one of her consistencies has been that these charges occurred after the letter was received. Verifiable facts indicate that this had happened after she had been asked to leave.
If it was a matter of reoccurring behaviour problems, Bethel would have used those as a reason to ask her to leave. There would be no reason for the letter to indicate that the sole issue is her 'dishonour' of the city leadership.
Likewise Deborah, if they really had all these other reasons (involving the administrators husband, etc), why would they choose such a seemingly weak reason?
Knowing what I know of Bethel, the Pastor's letter to Deborah is consistent with their stand on honouring leadership.
Is this a questionable decision? Definitely. Was it a questionable method? Definitely. Was it consistent with a core moral stance of the church? Definitely
This church really does consistently preach that leadership deserves honour, regardless of the decisions they make. Doesn't mean you can't question or that you have to follow blindly. It just means, through everything give honour.
They really believe in it that strongly.
I've been waiting for others to respond to these documents, but it is the weekend. A few comments here:
1) Davis indicates he did consider himself acting on a member of the congregation. That makes the "Deborah wasn't a member" issue void. Davis charged her as a member not as a visitor.
2) The doctrine that in a democratic society citizens don't have the right to call for opposition candidates to run for office due to policy disagreements strikes me as going well beyond Gothardism. Gothardism itself is a heresy I've discussed elsewhere.
3) Davis claim that this is a private matter is pure BS as this point. The letter is a matter of public record reproduced in a public newspaper. The underlying act is fully public. The claims that Davis supporters have been making for months have been disproven regarding the underlying confidentiality of the situation. Both the act and the excommunication were fully public, to argue for some sort of privacy in the review of Davis' actions is ridiculous.
4) The underlying charge that her letter is dishonoring strikes me as manifestly false. Which is the reason findings of fact are supposed to require more than just one person's opinions. In reading Deborah's letter she calls for:
a) better signage for Brandon on the trans-Canada highway
b) the creation of a tourist attraction
c) that a firehouse not be funded
d) municipally funded horse drawn carriages,
e) funding for a community pool and maintenance for cross country ski paths.
f) a call for affordable housing for transient workers
g) a transition to organic farming (not sure how this is a municipal issue at all but that is more of a jurisdictional sort of thing)
h) a call for fundraising for a political campaign, essentially a request for assistance to organize a PAC.
That sounds like a municipal political platform to me. Heck, in my municipality (about 2000 miles away) last election I essentially voted for for a candidate running on a platform of more community oriented spending and less spending on police / fire.
5) I think Deborah has proven effectively that this was not about some issue of a trumpet or her harassing a day care worker. This was a political excommunication.
The real question is:
Did Davis abuse this office to defend his friend from having his policies subject to the sort of policy oriented critique which citizens of a democratic society are encouraged to engage in
or
Did Davis grossly misjudge the letter focusing instead on the issue of whether their bad decisions were due to lack of prayer rather than the overwhelming content regarding policy proposals.
Deborah's writing style is really really disjointed, repetitive and difficult to read. She does a terrible job presenting her case. This never should have taken as long as it has but this evidence is frankly devastating it proves that Davis is either guilty of shoddy judgement and a process violation in the best case and gross corruption leading to abuse of office in the worst case.
I owe Deborah an apology for my original article and keeping it this way for so long. Deborah I'm sorry.
lol cd host for real? How on earth you saw that as a political move is beyond me. The letter also insulted the leaders in our city. I doubt Davis had any problem what so ever with her ideas, it was her actions of calling them "we need a leader and some councillors who are interested in what is best for "all" of the citizens of Brandon, not just a few "boys with money and toys". So there insult number one for the leadership. lets continue. "When are we going to get a mayor and city councellors who are going to represent the best interestes of all the people of Brandon" There's number 2. "we need new leaders with vision who can see things "outside the box" and leaders who have some passion" And there lies number three. The letter from Davis had nothing to do with her ideas on what she would like to see for the city. It had to do with her approach to doing it. Yes bethel believes very strongly in honouring leadership, had she wrote that letter without insulting the Mayor and councillors she'd probably have not had anything said to her about it. Also fact is that she wasn't told "get out of the church" she wasn't excommunicated at all. She was told that if your values don't match with ours then perhaps you need to find a church that does. It was not done publically at all (deborah made it that way and the whole bit about she didn't submit it to the brandon sun is a load of crap, she didn't submit it but was willing to pose for a picture with it???)
CD host you have some strong biases against churches, thats quite obvious. Its also quite obvious that this bias is clouding everything you're reading and causing you to look for a reason to blame the church. I don't know how you got anything you said there out of the letter Davis wrote. Its actually laughable to anyone who's ever met him to say that he's trying to be controling and keeping the conservatives in Brandon. Really the church doesn't have that kind of power. Yes some members of Bethel helped in the campaign (on their own as citizens was not promoted at the church at all), but gasp there were also members who helped with the NDP campaign and the Liberals!! Do I belive that prior problems also led to this letter? Yes I actually do, the nursery incident and CFS incident happened before this. (of which the church, although deborah was in the wrong and cfs was rightly called, stood with deborah to help her during that time) And who knows what else was all happening. we can see from this blog alone that deborah searches for drama for her life. So basically what I"m trying to say is no, that letter proves nothing of what deborah is saying, it proves that she's taken something thats not there and tried to turn it into a political platform and gain publicity from over exaggerating what actually happened.
I wouldn't have mattered if deborah had published every communication she's ever had from Pastor Mike, it wouldn't excuse His duty of confidentiality. Pastor's are held to a strict moral code, they don't ditch their duty on a whim.
Secondly like TT pointed out, that letter didn't even kick her out at all! He told her if she didn't like the values of the church that she should Consider looking for a church that better suited her beliefs.
TT --
First off Deborah's letter was unquestionably political. The content is important here, she is raising issues of policy tying, in her opinion, Doug Paterson's misplaced priorities to broad structural problems in the city and calling for the formation of a PAC to address them. That is the context which she as speaking, as the leader of a PAC opposed to the party in power. In other words political speech, in a political context by a (soon to be) leader of an opposition PAC focusing on issues related to municipal spending.
Second, my main objection to Davis is that whether these were dishonoring insults out of bounds for a woman who is organizing an opposition political PAC, are the sorts of issues that were supposed to be decided at Deborah's trial. They aren't the sort of things that Davis should be deciding on his own. He has every right to believe they are insults are out of bounds, and charge her but then he doesn't have the right to judge the correctness of her case. Moreover he certainly doesn't have the right to excommunicate without giving her room to respond.
Third Davis himself indicates this was due to her letter (which is a call to form a PAC, a political call to action):
"Your letter dishonored our Mayor and City Council"
He cites 1Tim 2:1 as scriptural justification that her call; tying the idea that one should pray that kings be saved to an idea that one cannot have policy disagreements. This tortured reading of scripture is his explicit justification.
I don't think the church is controlling the city. I don't think Brandon is particularly conservative for a rural community. The questions is whether Davis used his authority as a church leader to attack an PAC organizer against people who was allied with politically. We had a situation in a Florida church where a pastor excommunicated everyone who wouldn't swear they were voting for Bush over Kerry. That doesn't mean that pastor controlled Bush.
I'll address the specific phrases in another post.
So lets look at these phrases. And I'll start by saying Deborah is not the best writer out there, there is room for legitimate disagreement to her meaning:
"we need a leader and some councillors who are interested in what is best for "all" of the citizens of Brandon, not just a few "boys with money and toys".
Now the context is interesting here. Deborah is discussing the issue of signage not including sports fans and the lack of tourist attractions. In other words her statement seems to mean, "the current leadership is holding taxes by not spending benefiting the wealthy and not engaging in programs to create massive numbers of service sector jobs". In other words she is arguing the current city leadership is benefitting from holding the rate of structural unemployment high. Many policies in western democracies induce high structural unemployment combined with low taxes to effectuate wealth transfer. This sounds to me like standard liberal policy analysis of a conservative politician.
"When are we going to get a mayor and city councilors who are going to represent the best interests of all the people of Brandon"
She specifically indicates which group of citizens they are failing to represent, ""Which
part of the firefighters and citizens of
Brandon that do not want that fire hall
on First Street does our present city council not get". She targeting people for the PAC she is forming, naming a group of people that are not being represented by the government.
As for outside the box this is where she argues for bigger change. Again typical of an opposition candidate for office. Incumbents represent current policy, challengers run on a "change" platform.
This is standard political speech.
DF --
I have yet to see any evidence that there is anything like what you have claimed regarding confidentiality. At this point the person on the dock is Pastor Davis not Boschman. That letter is evidence against him not her. He has no obligation of confidentiality regarding his misconduct.
CD host how you still seem to think this is excommunication is beyond me? It doesn't fit with that at all, nor is that what happened. You're basing a lot of things on what you're clouded judgement "thinks" happened. Not on the facts. Also while we're at it. Pastor Davis never told anyone who to vote for in any election. He encouraged people to vote, but never told anyone who to vote for. He has never once told any member of the congregation who they should be voting for. No one in the church has been kicked out for not supporting the same political party as him. The chances are pretty high that in a church of that number of people there were quite a few who would have voted for a variety of the political parties. Honestly it had nothing to do with deborah not voting conservative, it had to do with her dishonouring the people in leadership. Of which she wasn't told "get out" she was told that those were values that Bethel doesn't hold to and perhaps she needed to find a church that matched her values. You're reading a lot into something that never happened.
TT --
Just for clarity I have found churches to be not guilty of misconduct even when I've disagreed with their policies. Xenos in Columbus and Akron link are good examples. Same thing with CREC which is probably well to the right of Bethel.
There were major difference between both of those churches and Bethel:
Those churches had proper policies of appeal. When parishioners, attempted to appeal out of process the process machinery was employed on their behalf. They didn't try an excuse their failure to address the appeal by claiming the parishioner hadn't filled out the paperwork properly. Those churches welcome review, if their abuses going on their leadership wants to know about it. If there are credible complaints (and in these case a major news agency raised this issue years ago) they want to conduct a full investigation into the actions of the pastor and leadership.
Abusive churches, like to keep the focus on the member. In the same way that a legitimate warden hearing about a guard raping a prisoner would want to investigate not blow it off with "well she's in here for murder which is worse than rape... " The That's the sort of thing you hear from abusive prisons.
The PAOC should have been investigated in August 2006 when the CBC raised the issue. The fact that almost 4 years later the entire defense for Davis has collapsed is grounds for an investigation. I think PAOC's failure to offer Boschman a full review is a pretty serious indictment of them. Davis' failure to respond, standing on his "I've been a decorated guard for 20 years, ignore the fact that this lying prisoner has tearing" defense is morally atrocious. This evidence against Davis is pretty serious, even granting all the decorations.
I defend churches that conduct discipline well, and attack pastors that confuse themselves with God. Continuing with my metaphor the Church-Discipline blog plays a role similar to the prison commission. Just as vera looks for abusive prisons, and tries to create a place where prisoner complaints can get heard and evaluated I do/did a similar thing for church abuse cases. And those documents make this a very credible case.
CD host what exactly is she supposed to appeal? she was never excommunicated. You can continue to believe that you're just the avenger for the poor unproperly disaplined church goers, but face it you're bias and you have a grudge against churches in general. That comes out in all your posts. Spouting off a church you defended means nothing. Just that in one case you agree'd with them. It doesn't add credibility to what you're doing or saying here. There was no policital move on the churches behalf, nor was there an excommunication. Was communication eventually cut off? I imagine so, if some one was calling/emailing/sending letters as often as deborah did demanding rediculous outcomes, I'd cut her off too. She has an unrealistic view on what everyone else should be doing for her and when it fails to happen she blame anyone else. In this case the church. Thankfully those of us in Brandon without the clouded judgement you're portraying see this as it is and you'd be very very hard pressed to find anyone in this city who supports deborah or what she's saying.
oh and comparing deborah's claims to a guard raping a prisoner is assinine.
I've just recently started reading this blog, and I have to say, As someone who is a minister's wife within the PAOC and as someone who knows both this church and Pastor, i am appalled with these attacks against Pastor Davis' character. Both my husband and i have had the good fortune to have met and spoke with Pastor Davis on a number of occasions and hold him with the highest respect.
I'm appalled that anyone who calls themselves a Christian would go to such levels to attack someone.
As a Pastor its their duty to serve the entire church, and work to protect their flock so to speak. If Ms. Boschman's behaviour there was anything like it has been on here, then I do imagine Pastor Davis made the right choice, with his congregations well being in mind.
TT --
An excommunication is a formal act of expulsion from a religious body. Davis himself indicates he is acting in a pastoral capacity in the name of the congregation in expelling Boshman because of her refusal to interpret 1Tim 2:1 in line with his thinking on the matter.
Now I happen to think Davis is lying here, but even if he is telling the truth what he is doing is clearly an excommunication. Again Deborah has proven that element of her case.
Tracy --
I don't know the man. He probably does engender respect from most of the people that he engages with. That's part of how church discipline works, in needs widespread community or sub-community support. Humans are social animals, we develop are views of reality based on other's opinions. If the people of Brandon believed that Davis was a vicious nut job then his excommunication wouldn't have had the impact it did.
It is enormously stressful to have our reality questioned, in fact this is a technique used deliberately in brainwashing and torture. The fact that Boschman's community doesn't sees Davis as a moral upstanding citizen and not as the sort of guy who when presented with credible evidence of a pastor who is:
1) Is indifferent to a faithful interpretation of scripture.
2) Completely ignores the bible's focus on justice and due process.
3) Abuses his office to benefit his friends.
thinks that the matter should be treated lightly. If he is a good person who acted wrongly he should admit it and attempt to make restoration. The fact that he has stood behind his acts for 4 years puts whether he is deserving of respect, in question. I have no doubt he is likely more charismatic than Mrs. Boschman, so what?
If you are the wife of a PAOC pastor then get Mrs. Boschman and Davis' case formally reviewed, get everyone on the record and all the evidence dealt with judicially.
again I'll say it, no matter how many times you claim it was excommunication it was not. This story got national recognition. Do you not think that if what Deborah claims was the case really happened that the PAOC would not have done an investigation if they didn't support Pastor Davis? I have full confidence that they would have indeed inquired into what happened with this (as yes it was nationally known they had heard about it) and support Mike Davis in his dicision. again you posts are including all the biases you have shown in your previous posts.
No TT I don't think they did an investigation and found for Davis. If they did one of Boschman's critics would have mentioned it. Probably even leaked it, if PAOC didn't make it public to begin with. And no denominations in general don't care about abusive churches, heck some of them like the SBC even encourage it.
and there shows your bias to churches/religion. which renders any point you have to make moot as you're looking for whatever you can to charge the church with rather than the facts.
The PAOC takes abuse claims very seriously, and you can be assured that they were very well aware of the situation that went down. I can't say for sure whether they did an investigation, but I know had they felt he was in the wrong that it would have been addressed. Without a doubt they were very aware of what happened.
As for having me start the appeal/review process for her, i don't see anything that she can appeal. I read the letter and saw that she was asked to consider finding a new church that supported her values. That isn't an excommunication, neither do i see it as her being removed from the church. (she was asked to consider, not told to not come back)
Charisma has little to do with the situation, Pastor Davis isn't held in respect because he's well liked. He's held in respect because he has proven to be trustworthy and has earned that respect.
I'm not here to bicker and fight, I wanted to voice some support for Pastor Davis and his family after reading some of the things being said against him.
TT and Tracy --
This was a pastor approaching a member about conduct. He is claiming her actions were an offense against the Lord and the council of scripture and as her pastor he bears responsibility for those actions. Davis ain't a polytheist he isn't saying pick a different church with a different God. "Your actions are not consistent with Bethel".
This letter is pure Matthew 18 an official warning from the church that her actions constitute an excommunicatable offense. Davis has never denied that this was exactly what it looks like an excommunication. He could have just told the CBC that Boschman is welcome anytime if she hadn't been excommunicated. Instead he remains silent and spreads rumors that this was about theft or protecting the congregation from her violent outbursts or trumpets in church.
Much better to have Boschman have to defend herself against dozens of vague allegations that are never clearly spelled out then a specific one which frankly was rather silly to begin with.
Boschman insulted Davis friend and Davis abused his office to punish Boschman. Rather than cop to what did and make amends, which is what the bible really does command, he discredits her through a whisper campaign.
There was no investigation from PAOC they don't give a damn about the peons unless it starts to drive people into the arms of another denomination. Maranatha only started worrying about pastoral abuse when their ministers were being thrown off college campuses. The Catholic church only started to take priest abuse seriously when they started losing lawsuits. The Church of Scientology only started to take abuse claims seriously when DA's started considering charging the church with racketeering.
Now it may be that organizing the humiliation and/or harassment of some unpopular woman, is standard operating procedure for this denomination. It maybe that PAOC doesn't know. But no this was not reviewed and there was a solid finding of fact in Davis' favor or this would have been published.
Typical church abuse is an he said / she said. Did the pastor really touch this boy, was the pastor really blackmailing people based on confessions. How pressured were people to go into this pyramid scheme. This one the pastor's acts are in a newspaper, it gets picked up and confirmed by the CBC. That's rare. The dog thing with Deborah is the usual: was killing her kid's dog a threat (a toned down version of nailing someone's dog to their front door), or was it a bureaucratic accident? We'll never know they didn't go after her or one of the kids next so if it was a threat they didn't carry it out.
If there had been a review PAOC would have loved to go public with it if it exonerated Davis. Utilizing the fact that Deborah is a terrible advocate for her own cause is a secondary strategy.
again you make ASSumptions based on very little facts. Pastor Davis did no "whisper campaign" he doesn't talk about her despite what Deborah claims. CD host again you comments prove you dislike for church/religion in general and hold no value in finding out what actually happened. Davis and the mayor are not "friends" yes they pray at city hall (by they I mean the pastor and some congregation members) But they do not push the mayor to make decisions or shove agendas at him. They go there and strictly pray for him and the leaders that are in our city. The same would be done for any leader of political parties that got in. There was no abuse of a pastoral position to punish her for bad mouthing a friend. That you made up. (amazing how you seem to think you know so much about a place you've never been to with people you've never met.) I on the other hand have met both. Had Pastor mike been in the wrong then I would not have supported him. But knowing what I do know of Mrs. Boschman and her strategies of drawing attention/drama to herself and how she so freely will lie about situations and based even on the links she gave you to the letters that were written. Pastor Davis was in the right in this situation. You actually know very little of anything that happened yet seem to think you're overly qualified to judge the events. This shows that you do have a rather large chip on your shoulder and bitterness towards churches, with no purpose rather than trying to force your own personal opinion on religion/churches.
I don't know where you get off saying that pastor Mike is spreading rumours or doing a whisper campaign. Because he refuses to make this into a media circus? Because he doesn't take you up on the offer of replying to these accusations? Any accusations I have levelled have been through My own observations. Of either witnessing the event, or reading different articles regarding boschman from the paper.
And the ridiculous dog incident? I can't believe you would ever seriously take that as having anything to do with pastor Mike or the church. From what i read it was a silly feud between two immature neighbours. It's a church, not the Mafia, I think you have a lot to learn on how a church operates.
As for the PAOC, considering you know Nothing about them, i hardly see how you can say what they are like at all. For one thing, you're from the states, and have No knowledge on who the PAOC are or how they operate. I think it was incredibly naive and arrogant for you to assume that you know to a T how they operate and whether or not the 'give a damn' about the situation.
"They would have loved to have gone public"
And you know this how? I didn't realize you were in such close contact with all the district superintendents that you would know them and their motivations so well.
TT is right, there are some Incredibly obvious biases showing through. There were some i was willing to let slide, they didn't really hit the radar of being that offensive. But for you to arrogantly assume that you have this 'magical' inside knowledge on what went on, and for you to level accusations you know absolutely nothing about at all is exceptionally offensive. (pastor mike spreading rumours or whisper campaigns). I don't think it matters what anyone on any side of this situation says, you've made up your mind to find pastor Mike guilty.
You are levelling accusations that are based Fully on your assumptions and very little on what was fact.
The fact of the matter is you do Not know what fully went on, you don't have the inside knowledge that you assume you do. Just because you want to hear him speak about it doesn't mean that he has an obligation to do so.
I find your statements in this last post, Exceptionally ill-informed and incredibly assumptive. You simply do not have that knowledge so for you to try and claim him to be a part of those things is completely Beyond me.
If you want to be seen as someone who is Intelligently looking to right the wrongs within the churches, you need to take a step back and stop allowing your own biases to colour your judgement. You can't make up accusations and treat them as gospel truth. (again the whisper campaign and p. Mike spreading rumours.)
Honestly, i find your post exceptionally offensive, if you want to argue this, argue the facts. Don't try to throw in these silly accusations you know nothing about.
also should add, that from my understanding the mayor doesn't even attend the prayer meetings, they just meet in a room at city hall to pray for the leadership. The leadership doesn't attend these meetings.
DF --
I don't know where you get off saying that pastor Mike is spreading rumours or doing a whisper campaign. Because he refuses to make this into a media circus?
No because his church is trashing this woman based on this incident.
It's a church, not the Mafia, I think you have a lot to learn on how a church operates.
The mafia just kills you or ignores you. This silly back biting harassment is exactly church's operate. They don't engage in outright crimes, but the goal is humiliation, divorce, ruined families. Oh and churches go further than that: Wollersheim v. Church of Scientology. You want more cites?
And no my opinion of PAOC is not naive. Multiple credible sources have come forward at this point, including the victim asking for a review. The claim 5 minutes ago was it happened and Mike was found not guilty because it was a national case. The Mike minion team needs to get your new story straight now that Deborah has produced the smoking gun.
TT is right, there are some Incredibly obvious biases showing through. There were some i was willing to let slide, they didn't really hit the radar of being that offensive. But for you to arrogantly assume that you have this 'magical' inside knowledge on what went on, and for you to level accusations you know absolutely nothing about at all is exceptionally offensive. (pastor mike spreading rumours or whisper campaigns). I don't think it matters what anyone on any side of this situation says, you've made up your mind to find pastor Mike guilty.
I love the irony here. I don't have insight into things I've been seeing happen in real time for the last 6 months but you know what I was thinking 3 years ago?
For a very long time Deborah has had to be on the defensive while this lying scumbag x-pastor of hers has sat by and watched.
So if Mike wasn't organizing this attack what drove the good people of Bethel Christian assembly to go after her for 4 years? To read a perfectly normative political article calling for adjustments to spending priorities as a document deserving of excommunication? "Even if it is true I agree with Pastor Mike". Sound familiar?
First off, claiming the church of Scientology as an example of how churches operate is an incredibly extreme and far fetched example. The two are nothing alike.
I don't claim to have inside knowledge of you, but i can clearly read what you've written on here. It doesn't matter what facts are shown, you've got a coloured view of judgement. You've claimed that he's spread rumours and started whisper campaigns. Where did you even find any evidence of that?
"The claim 5 minutes ago was it happened and Mike was found not guilty because it was a national case. The Mike minion team needs to get your new story straight now that Deborah has produced the smoking gun."
What are you even talking about here? I've seen people say that the PAOC would of course have known about this, i have seen people write that they were not aware if there was an investigation or not. I think if pastor Mike had been found in the wrong by his superiors he would not still be there with the support of his denomination. Exactly what story are you saying isn't straight?
WHo on earth has been going after her for four years? This blog is the only place i see that people are still talking about it, and from what we can see on here, people just recently within the past few months even noticed it existed.
I don't claim to have always been nice when i'm posting on here, i tend to get offended and angry when i see people attacking a group i care much about. But don't for one minute assume to put my response to this on the feet of pastor Mike. I am responsible for my actions and my words. I really don't get where you get off claiming that he's somehow had a hand in this at all.
This is where i see your bias, this is where i see you deciding him to be guilty without even knowing the case.
I've got to cut my response short for now, but i have much more to say about this, and will be back later to address this more.
one thing to add here, don't take my quotes out of context. I said that "even if it was true" within context to that being the actual letter written. Not that what you or anyone else has said is true. Quote me if you want but keep it in context.
TT --
I suggest you read back over own comments on this thread if you know the situation so well. You
1) argued this wasn't church discipline at all
2) if it was church discipline it was regarding theft and assault and certainly not a political article
3) that PAOC doesn't even have church discipline
sorry if I don't find you all that credible. And lets not forget for how long you all asserted that Deborah had no evidence when in fact she has now produced evidence backing virtually every essentially element of her case:
1) Evidence that the cause of the discipline was a political article regarding policy
2) A very questionable excommunication completely out of process even according to the PAOC guidelines which demand formal processes and don't give a pastor anywhere near that level of discretion.
This of course confirms the CBC's article in its essentials as well.
3) And we've had one of the co-conspirators admitted he fabricated rumors about Boschman to defend Davis.
Deborah has far exceeded any reasonable standard for PAOC to take up this case. They haven't. Heck yeah I think a credible defense needs to come from Pastor Mike's side. His silence at this point speaks volumes.
Boschman's been defending hersefl And the fact that for 4 years people have been trying to intimidate her into dropping it, arguing that she should be denied a voice to air her grievances entirely (and that stuff is on this blog). And here it turns out she was right.
DF --
As for the rumors and whisper campaign that is standard in discipline. In it not specific to Mike it is how church's and operate. Since you seem to object to scientology I can pick Charismatic examples: like Maranatha, but I think for you the best read might be What repentence from a leader looks like.
uh I was well aware of the letter to the editor and the letter she recieved from Pastor Davis, I do happen to read the papers. I never claimed they didn't exist. I do however feel that arguing with you doesn't really matter anymore. Anyone can see your biases who reads this and realize that you're not out to defend the innocent as you claim to be. You come across as some one who's had a bad experience and has turned into one heck of a bitter person over it. My suggestion get over it, not every account of church discipline is wrong. and in this case you are wrong. His silence does indeed speak volumes. It speaks that although he have people come at him and his decisions he has the moral and ethical integrity to not insult deborah and show the same volitile behavoir that she has. Your opinion on this doesn't matter. you really know nothing of the church, the individuals etc.. you have this little world you've created on the internet where you believe what you want despite the facts. The people of brandon (included are those outside of the church too who are not anyway connected to Bethel) who have seen deborah for what she really is and the lies for what they really are. that is why out of over 40,000 people only 75 voted for her. I'd find it hard to believe after all she's done to recently that she'd even get that many this time around. But you seem to think that you have this great insight and the rest of the city is wrong???? lol. Good luck with that.
There are a few things i wanted to address here. First i've read back (as far as i desire too, there are over 500 comments and i don't care to read every one of them, lol) and unless i missed it i didn't see anyone claiming that:
A) the letter didn't exists. I think that was the one part of her story that was not objected to. I think everyone was in agreement that there was a letter. also if you read through the responses, I personally recall bringing up the theft, but take another look at the post. I didn't claim the letter was based on that. I gave it as an example that fit within the constitutional rules of denied membership. I think you need to reread those posts. Which brings me to my second point.
B) No one argued that the church doesn't have church discipline, people pointed out that the church does Not have EXCOMMUNICATION. There is a vast difference between the two. Your point is a twist on words to try and invalidate her posts.
C) She has not produced evidence backing everything she said. Like i mentioned, the letter was the ONE thing no one argued about (as in it not existing.)
D) What process was He to follow, if you've read the letter you can see for yourself that she was NOT excommunicated, nor was she even removed. She was told that she should CONSIDER finding a new church that would hold better to the values she holds to. Absolutely Nowhere did i see him tell her not to come to the church.
E) calling the guys a co-conspirator is a little far fetched isn't it? If we're reading the same post, he misunderstood something someone had told him and came back on here to correct that. He did NOT admit to fabricating the events. That whole point was a little far fetched there.
F) As for the whisper campaign being common practices for churches. It obviously isn't. That is your belief perhaps, but i don't think for a moment anyone buys that its a practice that any church holds to. That is the coloured judgement that I've spoken on. Claims like that are what makes me think that you decided to be judge and jury on this topic no matter what is said.
Df --
i'll use your numbering:
A) The point she has shown is that the discipline was based on a political act, essentiality a call to form a PAC to oppose the spending priorities of the city council.
B) You and TT have been making an incorrect argument regarding the definition of excommunication from the start. The term "excommunication" is used even for non Christian religions when they exclude people, "is a religious censure used to deprive or suspend membership in a religious community". So Jewish Cherem is a form of excommunication, as is Islamic Takfir. The word originally derived from Catholic notions but many words derived from more limited circumstances and spread out. You are just factually incorrect about how narrow you think the definition is.
Regardless, of whether you want to call the argument which was raised in Davis' defense was that Boschman must be lying about being excluded by Davis because PAOC doesn't do that, when it fact it not only does it but Davis himself is doing so on the very letter. The other evidence like long sections of the PAOC constitution directed at this very act were indirect this is direct evidence of a claim of hers which had been denied.
C) I didn't say she produced evidence backing everything she said. I said she produced evidence proving the essentials of her case. I listed those essentials.
D) In a church without a formal trial structure, the 4 stages of matthew 18 are something like (it varies):
1) individual
2) group of 2-3
3) leadership of the church (sometime excommunication lite is practiced here)
4) church body as a whole (excommunication)
Davis is crossing steps (3) and (1) in this letter. He is forming an individual complaint and acting as leadership. In step 1 he has every right to be acting in a pastoral capacity and in notifying her of sin, he does not have the right to bring up anything about leaving the church. In step 3 he has the right to notify about leaving the church but then he has a positive obligation to notify the parishioner of the process that will be followed if they fail to obey. Think about the miranda warning is arrested, "you have the right to remain silent...".
Now in the case of public sins it is not uncommon that earlier steps are skipped over, however in those cases all the rights of all the steps must be preserved. So for example step 1 rights, the right to make amends need to be preserved.
This area where Davis is violating due process, is just like a videotape of a police officer beating a confession out of a suspect. It establishes proof in and of itself of a process violation. And just like a confession obtained under torture is excluded from consideration; that is it is by its very nature this proves the process violation she has argued for. That she was wrongfully excluded from the church.
It proves Davis misconduct the same as the videotape of a police officer beating a confession out of a suspect. Her letter to the paper (not Davis' letter) proves that he is in fact factually wrong about the underlying sin, she is not acting outside the norms of a person attempting to form a PAC. The analogy here would be videotape of a police officer wrongfully believing someone committed a robbery and then beating them as punishment. It would prove utter contempt for the justice system all together. The police officer beating can never be a legal act.
She has alleged misconduct on Davis' and not her part and she proved it.
(continued in part 2)
(part 2)
E) I'll respond in more detail later. We really need to discuss (D) till it makes sense to you. The rest follows form the aftermath. Davis now has to cover up his crime and blame Boschman, sort of a "she was injured while trying to escape" and planting evidence of the robbery. The conspiracy happens as people line up to defend Davis, because they like him and don't like her. This is where the far fetched stories like she was kicked out of church for theft and assault. Because to admit the truth, that she was kicked out of church to cover up Davis original process violation immediately shifts the blame where it belongs.
F) I can give you example after example of people coming forward and confession their involvement in these whisper campaigns the mechanics of church discipline. And I can use you as an example. Davis is not failing to clarify events because he is an asshole but because of some law that no one has been able to find any evidence for that mandates he maintain absolute confidentiality.
From Jehovah's witnesses to Scientology to the OPC & PCA to the pentecostal movements like Every Nation to the Amish how discipline works is well documented. Discrediting the victims is standard operating procedure. I've certainly seen evidence of it here. Yes this is how churches operate. This isn't something that is really even disputed. The standard works on discipline discuss at some length how exclusion creates pressure and a loss of public esteem.
That's why there was such rage originally that I would let Deborah present her case. Not she is a woman who had been wronged by Bethel but rather she is a mentally ill person and I'm exploiting her. Look at TT's allegations, the moment Deborah presented evidence proving the essentials the problem is that I have some sort of deep grievance rather than just that she has proven one of her points.
So for example I'm mentally deficient when I agree with Boschman regarding her excommunication, but not when I rejected her claims regarding Bethel's responsibility for her getting a bad price for her house. Bethal is a fairly typical authoritarian church, doing what these sorts of churches do. And in a broader context, things like bullying are even better understood and documented.
uh deborah didn't prove anything. No one was disputing the letters at all. You figure because you saw it with your biases in place and deemed it evidence that it is. It shows nothing of what deborah was saying. and I do still find you to be exploiting a mentally ill person. Anyone with a shred of common sense would see that she is troubled. You're taking advantage of that. You seem to think that you now have this personal knowledge of what kind of person Pastor Davis is, and you don't. You've deemed something evidence that wasn't disputed by anyone. You claim it was politically movitivated while it wasn't. You claim it was excommunication while it wasn't (and no thats not my narrow view of excommunication, you're applying to broad of a view to it to include things it is not)
For those reading this since it is a very long thread I'd like to quote Deborah's original statements on this blog from July, which were aggressively disputed regarding Davis:
I attended Bethel Christian Assembly Pentecostal church for approx. 5 years. I was NEVER a member of this church. I wrote a Letter to the Editor of our Brandon Sun newspaper which stated that The City Needed New Ideas. In this letter, I spoke about the boys' clubs that I saw over Brandon and I challenged City Council's decision to think that by simply changing the SIGN outside Brandon that they could somehow attract NEW VISITORS to our city. I shared my views of what I thought REALLY needed to be changed in our city. The Brandon Sun published my letter. Immediately after this letter was published, a woman from Bethel Christian Assembly approached me and said, "Well, I'm glad that you didn't mention Bethel when you wrote those comments. Our Mayor is a good Mayor." I then told her that I personally saw and spoke to Mayor Dave Burgess at Superstore and that I personally apologized to him because I wrote about the leadership of this city and the Editors of the paper changed my words to The Mayor. I told her that I HAD MADE IT RIGHT WITH THE MAYOR and I thought that was that. I then saw this particular woman, who I DIDN'T KNOW REALLY WELL, GO OVER AND WHISPER SOMETHING AND SPEAK TO PASTOR MIKE DAVIES. I was going to go over and speak to him also BUT I WAS IN A CHURCH AND I DIDN'T THINK THAT I HAD TO. I ABSOLUTELY HAD NO IDEA AS TO WHAT SHE MIGHT HAVE SAID TO HIM. She MUST HAVE told him a lie because it was IMMEDIATELY AFTER THIS, that I received this letter from Bethel Christian Assembly telling me that my letter was an "embarrassment" to this Pastor and that I should find another church to worship in. I showed another Mayoral candidate this letter. I gave him a copy of this letter and HE took this letter to The Brandon Sun. When they called me, I couldn't deny it, they ALREADY HAD A COPY OF IT. They published that letter ON THE FRONT PAGE OF OUR PAPER! The CBC asked me for an interview on TV and on the radio and people started phoning into this church. I was PRETTY EMBARRASSED about this also because your personal stuff that you are going through is on the front page of your paper! I sent Pastor Mike Davies a letter telling him that I NEVER took this letter to The Brandon Sun and I apologized to him for the embarrassment that this had caused him because I was embarrassed also.
Except for the private conversations she has been proven 100% correct. The evidence is fully consistent with her version of events.
As for the CBC (see original article) their version of events was also disputed and that has been confirmed. TT you can scream bias all you want but in the end when the facts came out they supported Deborah's version of events, the CBC's version of events and proved that the Bethel people who quite often indicated that Deborah and the CBC were lying were the ones with the truthiness problem.
Lets take Tracy (from November), " When you look at the sources that were cited, (cbc, and i can't recall the other one) Both printed basically what Ms. Boschman said, with no views or comments from anyone else. Maybe they don't see the need to fact check in a minor story, but i assumed them to be above printing outright lies. "
And she has spoken here as someone who is the know: her husband's is a pastor, they know Davis personally, he's a member of PAOC..... So that's an in group comment accusing the CBC of reprinting lies.
first off, who said you had mental deficientcies? I said your judgement on this matter is coloured, that hardly means you're crazy. Everyone's judgement is coloured by experinces, and i've said that i feel your judgement in this matter is colourd.
And again, at no point did i sit here and say the letter didn't exist, i don't know why we keep having to fight on this one.
as for me not getting the excommunication point, just because i don't agree with you doesn't mean i don't get it. look at her letter (and her comments in the articles) even she refers (at first) to it being suggested that she find a new church. it wasn't until it proved beneficial for her to claim she was kicked out. You don't even have to take my word on that one, just read the letter.
As for her letter proving all the essentials, which essentials, that she got a letter? I think that was already established by all parties long ago (before the copy on here) that she received a letter.
I have additional proof of ALL that I have stated.
I had Board members IGNORE me, a husband turn the other way when I entered a restaurant.
One of these women told Pastor Mike a LIE; an untruth.
I plan to ask Mayor Burgess to attest to the fact that I had ALREADY apologized to him for this letter prior to attending church that Sunday.
So, what lie did this gossip tell Pastor Mike?
Why isn't SHE in trouble for this LIE that got this WHOLE ball rolling in the first place?
What about this other gossip who was running to Pastor Mike and to others within Bethel REPEATEDLY and I knew NOTHING about this.
I will produce evidence this week that CLEARLY SHOWS that these two gossips, whom I believe to be D.F. and tt are involved in this up to their eyeballs.
There was NEVER an assault. NEVER ONCE did I EVER TOUCH THIS NEIGHBOR! NOT ONCE!
I can produce pictures from the BCP that CLEARLY SHOW that I was the one assaulted and attacked.
How I got into trouble was that I grabbed MY DAUGHTER'S PUPPY and this neighbor pulled back. I ended up in this neighbor's house holding onto my daughter's puppy because I WOULD NOT LET GO!
That is my crime.
I NEVER TOUCHED THIS WOMAN AT ALL, NOT ONCE!
Remember that she SLAPPED ME ACROSS THE FACE, HIT ME, KICKED ME AND TOLD HER OWN DOG TO BITE ME AND I DID NOTHING, NOTHING AT ALL and when we are ALL standing before God, you will also see this to be EXACTLY as I have stated here.
I simply pulled Peaches away from her and left with my 9 yr. old daughter's puppy.
She was SO INFURIATED because her plan DIDN'T WORK OUT that in ANGER, she laid these FALSE CHARGES AGAINST MYSELF.
She told my neighbors ALL manner of lies about myself.
I do NOT know HOW LONG this policeman had been a policeman.
This woman is an elderly woman. God only KNOWS what act she staged for this policeman.
That's ALL this was, was a PERFORMANCE on a GRANDIOSE SCALE.
Again, my children witnessed the entire spectacle. They were right outside watching the ENTIRE episode as my daughter was crying for the return of her Peaches.
Now, this gossip from Bethel was involved in this THE ENTIRE TIME.
What is a supposed Christian doing MEDDLING in my affairs in the FIRST place?
Why did she seek out this neighbor BEHIND MY BACK in the FIRST place as court testimony CLEARLY heard?
Why is a Pastor creating hysteria via an us vs. you scenario by speaking about church discipline the following Sunday and saying to an ENTIRE congregation that the discipline of the church is DIFFERENT from the discipline of the world.
Everyone sat there applauding and cheering their poor horribly done by Pastor.
Someone that I know EXTREMELY WELL was there and many people just stared at this person like, "What are you doing here?"
IF there ever was a meeting with the PAOC, why was I never asked to attend?
I just came back from church and we heard about Stephen and how FALSE CHARGES and ACCUSATIONS were also leveled against him.
Stephen went on to become the first MARTYR of the church.
It's BEYOND ME how three VERY WELL KNOWN AND FLAGRANT GOSSIPS are taken at their word and everything is just taken as fact.
These women SHOULD ALL BE CHARGED WITH MISCHIEF and IF I have my way, they WILL BE, Christian or no Christian.
There was NEVER an assault. There was NO THEFT. That puppy BELONGED TO MY DAUGHTER.
This neighbor simply REFUSED to give her back to my daughter because she said that she got "attached" to her.
Pure SELFISHNESS, COVETOUSNESS!
That right there was the lying and stealing.
This gossip from Bethel KNOWS ALL ABOUT what she was spreading and running to Pastor Mike with.
I KNEW NOTHING of ANY of this other stuff whatsoever or else I would have KICKED THIS WOMAN OUT OF MY HOUSE AND OUT OF MY LIFE LONG BEFORE I DID!
These are FALSE WITNESSES TRYING TO JUSTIFY AND COVER UP for what they started in the first place with their controlling spirits, their lies, their gossip.
What does the Bible say about gossip, slander, false witness?
You MIGHT want to check this out.
THESE ARE THE INDIVIDUALS THAT I WANT THE CHURCH TO DEAL WITH AND SEVERELY.
Let's get down to the REAL TRUTH here.
These idle, gossiping women have NOTHING BETTER TO DO.
For ONCE they had some ATTENTION.
WHY they were allowed to do to me what they were, I will NEVER know!
I heard messages from the pulpit on two different occasions from the assistant Pastor. One was a comment in which what I had only shared with Pastor Mike was directly mentioned.
Unless the gossip, of course, also beat me to that one.
One was in regards to a comment I made that was aired on the Miracle Channel and one was admonishing the comments that are made to The Brandon Sun by certain individuals.
Next thing I know the Pastors BOTH were televised on the Miracle Channel and had a tape that could be purchased.
I WASN'T competing with them.
This ISN'T SUPPOSE to be about a competition.
There was NO competition on MY part.
Why didn't Pastor Mike share with the congregation the fact that I had apologized to him and that I indicated VERY CLEARLY TO HIM that I WAS NOT THE ONE WHO SUBMITTED THIS LETTER TO THE PAPER IN THE FIRST PLACE?
That in itself would have settled and calmed some individuals down.
That's a VERY LARGE CHURCH versus ONE PERSON!
I was VERY OFFENDED after reading this letter from Bethel and I have NEVER spoken in person to Pastor Mike since then.
I emailed both Pastors and Pastor Mike NEVER EVER replied to myself again, ever.
Pastor Len did for a while and even showed up at the courtroom in which this neighbor had decided that she WOULD now give Peaches back IF I paid for her veterinary fees.
She later CHANGED HER MIND on that also after I lost my court case against the City of Brandon.
Now, I guess she felt that she DIDN'T have to give her back to us.
The Animal By-Law officer stated to the courts that it was because of my fence that Peaches got out but IT WAS NOT.
They TOOK Peaches out as this one gossip EVEN TOLD ME TO MY FACE.
They SIMPLY WOULD NOT LEAVE US ALONE!
Omgosh! It was relentless!
I NEVER experienced ANYTHING like this in my ENTIRE LIFE!
This is consistent with the message that EVERYONE receives within this City.
IF you speak up against this STRONGHOLD WITHIN THIS CITY, THERE ARE CONSEQUENCES FOR YOU!
Gee, now a Pastor can claim, "See what happened to so and so when they spoke up against the leadership of this city and against myself?"
Now, aren't I just a glowing example of CONFORMITY, COMPLIANCE AND COMPLACENCY for the church now?
She did that and spoke up against this Pastor and LOOK WHAT HAPPENED TO HER!
The ENTIRE TIME, HOWEVER, THE CHURCH IS INVOLVED IN THIS EVERY STEP OF THE WAY via these gossips, false witnesses, false testimony, etc.
THIS is what you are going to see when we are all standing there before our God.
I asked God to help me to forgive ALL of these individuals but I am EXTREMELY FRUSTRATED with HOW LONG GOD IS TAKING TO EXPOSE THIS TRUTH.
I want these three false witnesses, gossips from Bethel brought before a tribunal of sorts.
I want to hear their lies, their false witness, false testimony against myself.
I want the opportunity to defend myself and to REBUKE THESE WITCHES.
They are witches and I call it like I see it.
I am telling the TRUTH and they are afraid of me because they KNOW that they are LIARS.
The letters that I will be forwarding to you this week, the pictures, etc. should DISPEL ANY FURTHER doubts.
I also wrote a VERY NASTY Letter to the Editor in January or February of 2006 and it was about the Liberal Party of Canada and NO MENTION of attacking the leadership was EVER mentioned to me then.
But then this was a letter regarding an opposing political party.
Its like talking to a brick wall, the Only thing the letter has proven was that there was a letter. Which was already agree'd upon by all parties.
"Why didn't Pastor Mike share with the congregation the fact that I had apologized to him and that I indicated VERY CLEARLY TO HIM that I WAS NOT THE ONE WHO SUBMITTED THIS LETTER TO THE PAPER IN THE FIRST PLACE?"
He did. And people rejoiced and were happy that you did deborah. Then the very next week you were at it again throwing out the same thing you had just appologized for.
CD you only have to read the last three posts she's made to see proof of what I said. You're taking advantaged of a troubled person to further your agenda for hating churches and religion.
Deborah perhaps because the truth you want exposed isn't the truth at all. Its what you've made up and decided as truth.
There was another comment that I made in front of this one gossip that I also ended up hearing on the pulpit one Sunday.
That SHOULD have been a clue for me then.
I DON'T want to see ANY HARM come to Pastor Mike or the assistant Pastor or their families. That is NOT my intention now.
I wanted to prove my point, be heard and listened to and I think that I did.
I am after the trouble making gossips; the WITCHES OF BETHEL who made up these lies in the FIRST PLACE and got this whole ball rolling with the church, the neighbor, etc.
THESE are the women that I am AFTER now.
BRING IT ON NOW ladies.
I think that Bethel owes me a HUGE APOLOGY.
I think that they also need to stay OUT of the Conservative Party politics in this town.
Just pray for GOD's WILL TO BE DONE and then step out of the way.
I hope that Bethel will be as LOYAL to the leadership of Brandon when we get NEW LEADERSHIP IN WITH THIS NEXT ELECTION.
I want the BEST for Brandon and that is what I am fighting for.
I have NOTHING WHATSOEVER AGAINST MAYOR DAVE AS A PERSON and I have phoned and told his Secretary such in the past.
I just want to see THE VERY BEST LEADERSHIP FOR BRANDON and I REALLY think that Mayor Dave's time is up now.
I truly believe that we have OUTGROWN this type of leadership style and it is now time to bring in a new Mayor.
Who is the best fit for the City of Brandon is yet to be seen and determined but I REALLY BELIEVE that the time has come for change in leadership in MANY areas within Brandon now.
That is why myself and others feel that we are at a CROSSROADS with this upcoming election because we have to decide IF we are going to keep going the SAME WAY and get the VERY SAME RESULTS or are we going to change course and move in a NEW AND DIFFERENT DIRECTION now.
I just wanted to expose the truth in this City that involved myself and my being lied about, slandered, false witness, false testimony, etc. that has been spoken against me.
I wanted the opportunity to set the record straight, clear my name and then move on.
I think that MANY of us need to grow up within Brandon, myself included, and I am trying to do that now.
I just wanted to get this TRUTH out there and defend myself and EXPOSE the corruption and crap that I went through at the hands of some unscrupulous individuals within Brandon.
After this week I will have done just that and then perhaps I can finally move on and let this whole thing go and then let God deal with this entire mess to try to straighten it out and get some justice for myself, my family and my daughter.
That is my hope and prayer anyway.
Deborah --
I figure its time to look into the Gothardism. I'm curious to see if Davis is actually a follower of Gothard (though more extreme) or this was just an excuse and he had other motives.
Thinking back to your time at Bethel did Davis talk about "umbrella of covering" or the idea that you were not responsible for sinful acts ordered by a leader. Did he mention a 4 fold test to determine the rightness of various acts? Regulations on makeup and skin tone...? Any of this sound familiar?
I guess I'll throw this out to the Bethel people....
The CBC is the corporation mandated by the legislature to provide a wide range of services. In particular (broadcast act of 1991), "provide a reasonable opportunity for the public to be exposed to the expression of differing views on matters of public concern." How exactly is refusing to answer questions by the CBC honoring to the leadership of his nation given their direct mandate regarding the goals of the CBC?
the cbc is a news station just like any other, and frankly it was no one elses business. He has no responsibility to entertain the rest of the world by responding to the rediculous claims by deborah. Him responding to news stations would bring honour to who?
TT --
Him responding to news stations would bring honour to who?
To start with the governor in council who signed this, Brian Mulroney whose party drafted it.... The state of Canada has empowered the CBC as its official agency to investigate day to day matters of public interest. This agency determined that the Boschman case met this criteria. Davis unilaterally decided that the CBC decided this issue wrongly and refused to cooperate with this state agency.
Failure to comply with a direct request goes far beyond disputing policy. I don't see how that can be seen as honoring leaders while Deborah's actions were dishonoring.
lol wow cd host you're taking this to a whole new level of rediculous. Its not dishonouring some one by keeping a private matter private and not publically speaking about a situation. seriously though? you're really stretching for something lol
TT --
No an excommunication is a public matter. This one is widely known in Brandon and covered several times by the press. The subject of the excommunication, with whom any possible confidentiality rests, has called for a review multiple ties; as has wider community.
Davis does not have a right to not have his decisions reviewed and subject to public scrutiny and oversight. I understand why an abusive minister might not welcome oversight, but that doesn't change the fact that he is acting entirely outside the norms of Christianity in refusing oversight. Ecclesiastical courts have ruled on excommunications for thousands of years because such issues can have profound effects, on the standing of their church.
Even the PAOC agrees that Boschman is entitled to full review. There isn't much to argue about anymore. Davis' arguments that she was not really a member have been disproven with Boschman's release of the letter where he asserted both jurisdiction and responsibility for her. Davis' arguments that she has not requested review are clearly disproven by the articles themselves where she calls for review. Davis' failure to produce any of the necessary documentation much less to have the case heard by a competent authority is exactly like the the police officer beating a suspect; and I suspect in that case as well usually the investigation starts with the local newspaper and moves up to the CBC.
well I'm sure if the PAOC had felt that it needed a review they would have had one. He hasn't denied anyone a review. the person he cut contact with is deborah because she constantly was trying to contact them with something rediculous. She's admitted that herself.
Davis does have oversight, you obviously don't understand how denominations work. He's accountable to his denomination, and the constitution. i understand that you would like to hear all about his side of this. but that doesn't mean he has to post it to you or anyone else. It seems like the problem here is that he isn't taking you up on the offer to post/respond to this. Like its been mentioned before, you're assuming alot of info that you don't have.
DF --
This blog is full of cases where the person responsible hasn't posted here to defend their choices and the case is evaluated based on the evidence at hand. In this particular case Davis is claiming the right to not have the case reviewed essentially because he does not like the person he acted against, to quote the post before your's, " he cut contact with is deborah because she constantly was trying to contact them with something rediculous. She's admitted that herself. "
As if disagreeing with Deborah on dog / house / job issue in some way removes his public obligations with regard to public acts. And you are absolutely right I don't have all the information but what I do have is frankly appalling:
An out of process excommunication based on factually incorrect information, faulty hermeneutics and question principles. Further compounding it, the act which led to the excommunication involves Davis in gross hypocrisy, and thus likely selective enforcement. To cover this up his supports have engaged in a four year defamation campaign.
All of that there is solid evidence for. What evidence is missing is missing because Davis has refused to grant Boschman the due process to which she is entitled. The fact that there is not evidence is because of Davis' second offense against the church, it is not some point of merit.
The case is simple. Davis conducted an invalid excommunication, Davis has refused to submit to review and oversight by any number of appropriate authorities: the broad community, the agency appointed the government of Canada to conduct such investigations into matters of public interest, and now a who specializes in these sorts of reviews. Davis might be objecting to these venues but then the appropriate venue is to redirect the appeal to PAOC not to deny it all together.
The idea that Davis should benefit from further compounding his original crime of an invalid excommunication with his mutiny against the authority of the church universal is frankly morally repugnant. The proper way to view Davis is as a fugitive from justice. I'm not pentecostal and I accept the legitimacy of PAOC conducting a full inquest into these events why doesn't Davis if he is really innocent?
And again since this keeps getting forgotten.
Just like the privilege of confidentiality the privilege of the right to appeal rests with Boschman not Davis. Boschman not Davis gets to determine of an appeal is warranted. Davis does not get a say in determining whether an appeal is warranted.
If after review PAOC decided to strip Davis of his ministerial credentials then the privileges of appeal or confidentiality for restoration would rest with Davis.
You have the same concept in your legal system, section 11f of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms grants the right of trial by jury, i.e. public trial to the accused not the accuser.
"In this particular case Davis is claiming the right to not have the case reviewed essentially because he does not like the person he acted against,"
again, more assumptions on your part, you don't know him so you don't have any knowledge of his motivations at all. Just saying its a fact doesn't make it so.
Secondly, how would you know that the PAOC hasn't done an inquest/overview of this situation? Because they didn't drop off a copy on your webpage, they must not have done it?
Believe it or not, i'm sure hey do many overviews/investigations/inquests into situations going on in a church and don't post them for public review, nor do they need to.
I'm astounded at the amount of assumptions your making and treating as fact. You're claiming knowledge of the situation that you simply do not have.
Finally just a few examples of cases that have been reviewed based on written records:
Rebecca Hancock (where incidentally I find incompetence but not intentional misconduct on the part of the church.
Anne Le Fert no I did not even ask John Calvin to post.
Ed Johnson, where I there does exist good third party documentation and I document the case.
Father Bill Hausen whom I also invited to comment, and he also declined.
The reason you two are objecting to this discussion of Davis is because you like Davis and don't like Boschman. You consider Davis to be a good guy and Boschman to be warped and/or insane. I don't know either one of them, I go where the evidence leads. For months while Boschman spoke about her election, dog, house, ... problems I considered this to be not even remotely related to the purpose of this blog. But the defense to Davis had serious holes, like mysterious laws that appear in minister training books that no one can find any evidence for. But now that Deborah has provided hard evidence of ecclesiastical misconduct 580 posts is enough to draw conclusions.
DF --
No actually the main reason I don't think they've done a review is because Deborah doesn't know about it. Deborah would have needed to be informed. And in general I think Deborah has been pretty open about talking about the various incidents that occurred, she wouldn't have failed to mention having to submit documentation, being interviewed and/or testifying before a committee.....
lol as DF said you're making a ton of assumptions and treating them as fact. The only thing you know is that she got a letter, and that wasn't even disputed lol. What she did do was lie about the letter and what it all said, which we saw when the letter came out. She was never told, you disagree with my political views get out of my church as she claimed she was. She was told the churches stance on honoring those in leadership even if you don't like them and told if those are values that she can't hold to then maybe she should find a church that shares the same values. Now as far as I can see from that letter there was no get out you're not to be coming back. Deborah herself in the article to the editor stated that he suggested that she find a new church and she might take him up on that suggestion. As for cutting contact with her. I'm sure he probably did tell her that he'd be deleting emails etc. to him. Seriously every other week she was running to the paper with another story. Why would he say anything to her when you know she's going to run to the paper imeadiately afterwards? You seem to think that deborah was grossly mistreated, when the truth is that they did everything they could to work with her, till the point that it became unhealthy for both her and the church. We know from this site alone that deborah lies, there's no doubt about that. She also has unrealistic views about what everyone else should be doing for her and when they fail to comply she goes on a rampage. I do know one thing about the police here, they do not charge some one with assult when they didn't assult anyone. there would have had to be sufficient evidence to support it, not a he said she said.
I think it's important to remind everyone that (accourding to Deborah)
Davis stated communications about the house would be ignored.
He never cut off communications.
If we've learned anything from this, it should be that opinion should not be taken as fact. From either side.
Deborah's opinions on something does not mean that it is fact (example. Leader of teachers union attended church, therefore that's why the school division didn't hire me)
Likewise, other posters opinions are not the direct word of Davis.
Everyone seems to be misinterpreting everyone else.
Since this has turned into a somewhat free for all blog I want to again add my own 2 cents.
Hey DF and tt, I have to say that once again, you the both of you have a lot to say and are needlessly keeping this going.
to our host, you have made several valid comments, and I personally love that since the ladies don't agree, they are now arguing with you.
Thanks to all for my evening entertainment. I thought for awhile that everyone was just going to let this blog die the dealth it needs.
Have a wonderful day.
and no ladies, you really don't need to respond.
s.
I argue because i'm not going to idly by and let people say nasty things about the church or Pastor mike without also having someone also show support. You don't have to like it, nor do you really need to read it if it bothers you that much.
My favorite thing ever is people posting to complain about other people posting and then ending their post with "you need not reply" lol. Its pretty easy not to read it if it bothers you. DF and TT have also made very valid points as well that deserved to be heard as much as anyone elses.
PS Anon: dealth isn't a word lol.
I saw one of these witches, from Bethel, at a church service at a Community Center just recently.
I had not seen this woman since the incident at Bethel and I will NOT TOLERATE a gossip, slander, lies, etc.
She looked directly at me and I called her a witch because that is what I believe her to be.
This woman caused me an INCREDIBLE AMOUNT OF STRESS AND TROUBLE by telling Pastor Mike a LIE.
I felt MUCH ANGER towards this woman because of the TROUBLE that her lie caused for myself and MANY others.
Now I was informed by a member of Bethel, that this same woman, Julie V.A. is now telling everyone from Bethel that I called her an itch with a b.
She substituted the w for a b.
YET AGAIN, ANOTHER LIE from this SAME, VERY TROUBLED WOMAN. I had earlier thought her name to be Lena but I just found out that her name is really Julie V.A.
The SAME WOMAN who lied to Pastor Mike in the FIRST PLACE. Surprise, surprise.
This woman from Bethel told me that this Julie has caused MUCH TROUBLE for her also, telling her lies about supposed things her neighbors have said about herself which were proven to be untrue.
This woman said that even the people that this Julie works with have stated that this woman is a "terrible, horrible gossip and a VERY TROUBLED WOMAN."
So, the troubled ones are D.F. and tt.
One of them stated that every effort was made to work with me. NOPE, NOTHING LIKE THAT EVER HAPPENED, which is yet again ANOTHER LIE.
Where are you getting your information from? This is NOT TRUE at all.
Pastor Mike and Mayor Dave are FRIENDS. Oh my goodness, you'd better believe it and was even stated to a family member of mine. Give me a break.
This gossip from Bethel HELPED AND HAD EVERYTHING TO DO WITH ASSISTING MY NEIGHBOR in taking my 9 yr. old daughter's puppy out of our yard and away from us.
She was involved EVERY STEP of the way and even told me ALL about it and was documented in the courts. Omg!
I have EVERY RIGHT to write whatever article I wish in the newspaper. This right is guaranteed under the Charter of Human Rights and Freedoms.
This is all part of the control thing again.
These gossips of Bethel appear to be REALLY GOOD at legalism and being the Pharisees of the church.
My letter must have REALLY hit the nail on the head or else the Conservative boys with money and toys WITHIN THE CHURCH must have ALSO become offended and had their feathers ruffled!
These women like Pastor Mike because he has listened to their lies and garbage and supported them in their mischief and everything else.
They don't like myself because I FIND THESE WOMEN DESPICABLE, APPALLING and I have called these women on their mischief, lies, deception, gossip, slander, etc.
I call a spade a spade and these women are the controlling gossips within Bethel.
These women DON'T LIKE to hear the truth.
These women have been doing this FOREVER within this church and have been ALLOWED to get away with this behavior for years.
I had NO IDEA that these women were SO TROUBLED, mixed up, messed up, etc.
These women do NOT behave like Christians.
REAL Christians simply DON'T BEHAVE this way AT ALL.
Pastor Mike even told a family member of mine that he didn't want their ability to be able to pray at City Hall to be jeopardized.
Yup, you do ALL of these other things just so that you don't JEOPARDIZE your opportunity to pray at City Hall?
Where does it matter where you pray?
Just BE THE CHURCH instead of trying to create an us vs. we mentality; a sort of one-up-manship with the world, as I see it.
Sadly, nothing I have said is a lie.
It's ALL true and I have a GREAT FEAR of lying before God.
D.F. and tt, you can say whatever on this blog but one day you are both going to be standing before God and try saying some of what you are saying then.
I'd be VERY AFRAID of trying this then.
You'll have nowhere to run then with your slander, lies and gossip.
Nowhere.
D.F. and tt have nothing better to do with their time.
They are the gossips of Bethel and they are both idle.
They are as persistent on this blog as they are with spreading gossip, slander and division within this church and as one of them was in helping my neighbor to take my 9 yr. old daughter's puppy away from her.
Of course there is, was and continues to be a whisper campaign.
Julie is doing it right now, AGAIN.
She CONTINUES to REPEATEDLY do this within Bethel WITHOUT consequence and has for SOME time.
Pastor Mike was embarrassed and yes, I was definitely treated like I was excommunicated and it still continues.
I mean I called and asked if I could attend church there in the evening and I was told that they could not refuse anyone.
There was NEVER an attempt at restitution, nothing.
I was NEVER EVER given a reply.
I believe this leadership there to be VERY IMMATURE but I miss some of the REALLY GOOD people that attend there.
I definitely DON'T miss the gossips from there.
Funny, how this MUCH more serious offense of gossip and how this is disrupting and dividing the brethren is considered nothing in the eyes of this church as compared to my writing a Letter to the Editor.
Go figure.
THANK YOU CD HOST FOR ALL OF YOUR HELP AND SUPPORT through all of this!
Thank you for listening, defending and sticking up for myself and for helping me.
I REALLY APPRECIATE ALL OF YOUR EFFORTS ON MY BEHALF!
THANK YOU, THANK YOU, THANK YOU!
I have MUCH more to forward to you.
I am just having trouble scanning this.
The former President of the Brandon Teacher's Association and myself were acquaintances for years previously.
She has chosen to believe the lies that she has been told.
The leadership of Bethel did NOTHING to dispel any of the rumors about myself, to meet with me, to try to resolve this, to make restitution, nothing.
How Christian is that?
I've seen MUCH MORE Christianity from the non-Christian world than I have from this church.
Tracy, I thought that Pastor Mike was a respectable person also until he reacted to me the way he did after I wrote this Letter to the Editor.
NOTHING about what happened after this is acceptable, at all. Nothing!
Things were not handled professionally, fairly, nothing.
This is disgraceful to think that anyone should have to go through ANY of this just because you care about your city and you desperately want to see things improve.
You have to understand that these idle gossips, Gayle whose alias on here is D.F. and Julie, whose alias is tt on here, absolutely THRIVE on this kind of stuff because that is WHO THEY REALLY ARE.
They can't give this up because this FEEDS the REAL DEMONS that appear to live and dwell within each of these women.
I said what I said in my original Letter to the Editor because we are in a BATTLE here within Brandon.
There are MANY STRONGHOLDS over this city. There are locks and chains on the gates over this city.
I want to see God blow the windows, doors, gates, locks and chains RIGHT OFF of this city and I want to see us TAKE OFF as a city.
This is a battle and when you are in a battle you call it like it is.
You go after the strongholds, you call them out, you IDENTIFY them.
I am not a wimp. I have a backbone, a spine and some spunk.
If that vilifies me, well, then so be it.
I had false charges laid against myself, false testimony, false witness, you name it. You were PART of this. You were RIGHT IN THE THICK AND MIDST OF THIS!
Can you imagine a so-called Christian being INVOLVED in ANY of this?
It's all UNFATHOMABLE really.
What happened to DO UNTO OTHERS AS YOU WOULD HAVE THEM DO UNTO YOU?
Never mind the BETRAYAL, DISLOYALTY, the TOTAL DISRESPECT, DISREGARD, you name it.
I asked you to HELP ME and the court was told that YOU APPROACHED THE NEIGHBOR!
I guess that the REAL YOU inside of yourself just couldn't help yourself, right, because of WHO you REALLY are; a PERPETUAL, CONSTANT, IDLE GOSSIP.
You KNEW HOW MUCH that puppy meant to my daughter and to myself after losing EVERYTHING ELSE!
But nope, you go after that also.
That'll teach me, right.
Is that how the legalistic Christians justify what they do?
You told me that you now WANTED PEACHES.
Well, Gayle, or D.F., you revealed to me your REAL CHARACTER when you did what you did.
I had NO IDEA that you were SUCH A MESS AS A PERSON.
I had NO IDEA at all or I would have severed my relationship with you LONG BEFORE I eventually did.
You do ALL OF THAT to a person in the name of Christianity was it?
Or was it in defense of your political party?
You could SO EASILY be sued for mischief, slander, gossip; Julie and Mrs. G. also.
Is that what it would take to get you guys to shut up and STOP doing what you repeatedly do?
These women are the GOSSIP HOUNDS of this church; the peverbial WATCH DOGS.
This is a PATTERN that you have CONSISTENTLY EXHIBITED AND REPEATED EVERYWHERE you have been but I guess as long as your support is behind the RIGHT political party at Bethel, your DEPLORABLE AND UNACCEPTABLE BEHAVIOR will be TOLERATED, I guess.
I don't know but I'm VERY HAPPY to have NO PART of this except again I am repeatedly HOUNDED by you on this blog.
Like somebody from Bethel indicated to me on Friday night, well they MUST be good tithers then.
Does this statement REALLY REFLECT where some of our churches are at now?
This woman also told me that she was told that Mayor Dave was a Christian and that they are CONSTANTLY HEARING THE MESSAGE that they are to honor the leadership of this city.
Well, this is kind of handy when your friend is in power and your ability to pray at City Hall is SO VITALLY IMPORTANT to you.
Is that what this is REALLY all about?
You'll destroy ANYTHING and EVERYTHING by EVERY MEANS POSSIBLE that gets in the way of this coveted prize?
How is THIS BEHAVIOR any DIFFERENT from the world?
I see NO DIFFERENCE at all.
I see this as just the SAME pot but a different kettle of fish.
You also have to understand that these women ARE RESPONSIBLE for the lies that were told to Pastor Mike.
They KNOW EXACTLY what they have said and done and so yes, they have a VERY VESTED interest in this.
Perhaps Pastor Mike and the Board CANNOT do anything with these women because they don't want to lose their jobs also.
You know that saying, "Keep your friends close and your enemies even closer."
Perhaps they KNOW the drama and battle that would ensue if they ever dealt with these women, as I believe they SHOULD HAVE long ago.
I don't know. All I know is that this was a HORRIBLE EXPERIENCE for myself and one that I don't want to soon repeat.
I want the freedom of being able to write whatever manner of Letter to the Editor I so wish and of being able to express myself freely.
My heart is for the VERY BEST INTERESTS of this majority electorate and for ALL of the constituents of this city.
That is what EVERY LETTER that I have ever written has been all about.
I believe that EVERY leadership needs an electorate that DEMANDS and REQUIRES the VERY BEST from them and who will HOLD THEIR FEET TO THE FIRE if they don't deliver on their promises or on the needs within their perspective community.
This is just called making your leadership RESPONSIBLE and ACCOUNTABLE for and to the electorate that put them in power in the first place, to REPRESENT.
I see the leadership of Bethel also not wanting to be held responsible, open, transparent and accountable for their actions.
I believe them also to be involved in this and that is why I believe they are reluctant to be open and transparent.
I believe that they have much to cover up and hide also otherwise this would have been dealt with MUCH better in the first place and LONG AGO.
I believe that they need to grow up also.
The part that hurts the VERY MOST is that we are ALL suppose to be Christians here!
The devil sure KNOWS how to divide and conquer and how did this entire thing begin?
It began with a LIE that Julie told Pastor Mike. That's how this ENTIRE THING began and then it snowballed in speed and velocity from this ONE LIE!
Her getting her "feathers ruffled" over my letter led her to tell Pastor Mike a LIE.
This LIE from Julie and perhaps others led to ALL of this!
Julie MUST BE SO PROUD of herself now. She finally received the RECOGNITION and ATTENTION that she perhaps was SO DESPERATELY craving but VERY UNFORTUNATELY this is for ALL of the VERY WRONG REASONS!
It's quite UNBELIEVABLE really but just goes to show how we are ALL CONNECTED and how ONE PERSON'S INSTABILITY, MENTAL ILLNESS, OFFENCE, gossiping, LIES, controlling spirit OR PERSONAL ISSUES can affect SO MANY OTHER VERY INNOCENT and undeserving individuals!
Perhaps Pastor Mike had heard other things as well from others.
Perhaps he made a mistake. Perhaps he believed this lie that he was told.
IF Bethel SINCERELY met with and/or apologized to me for their part in believing some of these lies, then I would apologize for my part in all of this and then it would OFFICIALLY BE OVER.
I was DEEPLY HURT to hear someone from Bethel tell people OVER THE TELEPHONE further untruths about myself.
Oh my goodness, I was HURT and DEEPLY OFFENDED!
This ONE LIE led to so MANY other infractions and atrocities against myself and became like a GANG mentality gossiping pool that was out to GET me, teach me a lesson and punish me in EVERY WAY possible!
So people from Bethel please note:
1. Your very own Julie V.A. told Pastor Mike a LIE.
2. I had ALREADY made things right with Mayor Dave IMMEDIATELY after I wrote that letter and I told Julie that when she approached me with Mrs. G. after church the following Sunday.
What she told Pastor Mike HAD TO BE SOMETHING DIFFERENT because I was peaceful, serene, calm and had NOTHING to feel ashamed of because I had ALREADY done the RIGHT thing.
3. I was NOT the person who took the letter from Pastor Mike to The Brandon Sun. Call them up and ask them yourself.
It doesn't matter who did, it just wasn't myself.
4. There was NEVER AN ASSAULT on my part, EVER. This woman assaulted me when I went across the street, to her home, to bring back my 9 yr. old daughter's puppy.
This gossip from Bethel had FIRED UP my neighbors and so now they also were on board to vilify me.
5. These gossips FIRED UP Bethel with further lies, gossip, slander, etc. which FURTHER became an ADDITIONAL runaway train.
6. I was SO OFFENDED and DISGUSTED with the IMMATURITY of Pastor Mike to just so BLINDLY believe these lies and NOT check with myself, that I wanted NOTHING further to do with Bethel.
7. Things just escalated from there for both parties, I believe.
There it is in a nutshell. During all of this, there was a teacher who team taught with the President of the Brandon Teachers Association at the time, from Bethel, who also took advantage of a situation by coming over to my home and pressuring me to sign papers that I had NOT read.
She could have taken them to my lawyer in the first place but they saw an OPPORTUNITY and they immediately CAPITALIZED ON IT.
That's what GREED and selfishness does, I'm afraid.
My father was dying of cancer. I wanted as close to $76,000 for the house AS POSSIBLE.
I had JUST lowered the price from $79,000.
My good God Almighty. I paid $76,000 for the house and I had put in brand new air conditioning, a brand new furnace.
The siding and shed were new and I was told by the previous owners that the hot water tank was also new.
I just wanted as close to what I paid for it as possible but NOPE, greed again takes over.
Then I went to the Brandon School Division and AGAIN the lies, untruths, follow me there.
This teacher then LIES to the School Division to cover up her tracks and on and on again this cycle continues.
The Human Resources Director at the time REFUSED to meet with me after the Principal and the union rep. from the BSD representing this teacher had met with them.
This Human Resources Director then told some schools some things I had shared with her, in confidence, over the telephone.
The HR Director is mad at me because I went over her head to get to the truth and so now she WON'T ALLOW me to Substitute teach again because I got her into trouble with the Superintendent.
That's TOTALLY UNPROFESSIONAL also but she has that POWER over myself.
So, that's a hell of a deal. You screw me financially and I LOSE MY JOB!
WOW! That's a GREAT DEAL indeed and what does THAT teach our children?
That it REALLY DOES pay off to lie, cheat and steal.
It says, "Do as I SAY BUT NOT AS I DO" and then DO EVERYTHING WITHIN YOUR POWER TO NOT GET CAUGHT IN YOUR LIE afterwards!
She had a union behind her plus the President of the BTA at the time, who was also from Bethel, and I had NO UNION, nobody.
Heck of a deal!
I am fighting for the TRUTH and I will keep on fighting until EVERY SINGLE THREAD AND/OR DETAIL OF TRUTH IS REVEALED AND EXPOSED IN ITS ENTIRETY.
I WAS a doormat but I'm NOT anymore and I was as MAD as heck after ALL of these things happened CONSECUTIVELY to myself during a period of weakness within my life.
My father was dying of cancer and I was preoccupied with the condition of my father.
Others saw these vulnerabilities and weaknesses within myself and just POUNCED on these in their greed and selfishness.
I want the $3,000 that this teacher cheated me out of.
I have the papers. You made over $51,000.00. I had earlier thought it to be $55,000. Just give me what I had initially paid for the house BEFORE putting in ALL of these other features.
I was ALREADY basically giving the house away to you.
This is what GREED and SELFISHNESS do.
That entire episode would have been OVER a long time ago also if they would have just given me what I had initially requested and was indicated in the paper in the first place.
Now, she may also lose her job over this IF this gets out there to the media.
Will it be worth ALL of this? Plus the scrutiny of your name and ALL of the details surrounding this getting out there in the public domain?
Again, it appears that greed and selfishness cloud our judgement.
You already made over $51,000.00. I'm just asking for the additional $3,000.00 that I had initially been seeking in the first place.
This COULD end up costing you WAY MORE than the $3,000.00 because I'm NOT GIVING UP. I'm after justice and the truth and I want that money.
That's just NOT FAIR to me at all and I'm as mad as heck about it. I want that money.
The devil is SUPPOSE to be our enemy and NOT each other.
Oh for crying out loud deborah, I've repeatedly told you i am NOT even living in Brandon, you can make up these silly accusations and pretend they're fact, but it doesn't change the truth. And I will Happily be standing infront of God one day, and will be very proud to state that I stood for truth in the face of lies.
As for this julie, how does her and you bickering somewhere make me a troubled/disturbed individual? I just don't follow your reasoning. And again, my name isn't gayle, you're accusing the wrong ladies of being on here.
If i was a member of bethel i would have no problem stating that i was, I would be proud to attend there.
I don't get what you think it would help for me to pretend not to be a member? As if that would validate/invalidate my words in any way.
No, you're accusing the wrong ladies there, I don't know either of them, so whether or not these two are liars is beyond me, i've never met them. All three of you though seem to be showing childish behavior especially if the whole witch story is true, and for me thats a mighty big IF. I've seen on here myself that you are willing to be dishonest. Either way it doesn't matter and doesn't involve me. And really, even if its true, it doesn't matter, it doesn't change what we've discussed on here.
anyway, my name isn't julie or gayle, sorry to burst that bubble.
"They can't give this up because this FEEDS the REAL DEMONS that appear to live and dwell within each of these women."
Really? Because i disagree with you suddenly i'm demon filled? That doesn't strike you as a little off there?
CD host, and these are the words of an untroubled individual? really? You don't see anything wrong with all that she just wrote? You want to push your agenda so badly that you'll encourage this?
Deborah, seriously I am not gale or Julie. I do know who they are although we are not friends. Seriously though I don't think either of them can use a computer let alone navigate the internet. I am impressed that you resorted to name calling though and then figured the other woman was in the wrong. Perhaps if you didn't call her a witch in the first place you wouldn't have had any trouble. And as for her saying you said something else. She's an older woman and I imagine she mis heard you then. It was a situation you could have avoided all together.
TT --
My issue from the start is that Deborah is entitled to certain rights. I think her case deserves to be judged on the merits and the facts according to proper procedures. Her deficiencies in being able to articulate her position have hurt her ability to defend herself. She requests an appeal she is entitled to one. Whether she did or didn't attack her neighbor, whether she is or is not a good writer, whether she is correct who she thinks you and DF are or not.
None of those things in any way diminish or change the issue with Mike Davis performing an invalid excommunication and refusing appeal. This blog is about exactly that kind of problem. Also if Davis' supporters killed her child's dog as retribution or intimidation that would certainly be on topic. Killing a pet is often seen as a good way to intimidate or threaten a dissenter or witness, as the penalty is quite low though the effect of the threat is clear.
The motives of Davis might be on topic. As far as I can tell Deborah claims that Davis motives were either:
1) To cover up some city corruption.
2) He was influenced by some gossiping in the church.
I'm not happy about how disjointed this story has been in coming out if that is what you are asking. But the fact is that Deborah has been building her case to the best of her ability and Mike's people have been obscuring their defense. She's been making her case, slowly and awkwardly for sure, while his case has come apart like a bad suit.
Post a Comment