CAM Molestation Issue

[TruthSeeker]

The third member of this collusion team, Darwin Hostettler:

1) Is part of a church group that evolved from Charity
2) Served in Haiti as a fellow missionary of Harold Herr
3) Was commissioned by CAM to serve as part of the original Truth Council investigating the Harold Herr sexual abuse allegations--the panel Daniel Herr, Harold's son making the allegations, did not deem eligible or legitimate to do a credible, impartial investigation.

[Josh]

Perhaps Bruxy Cavy, Greg Boyd, and a few others should have a meeting about “what to do about Mose Stoltzfus”.

[Judas Maccabeus]

The third member of this collusion team, Darwin Hostettler:

1) Is part of a church group that evolved from Charity
2) Served in Haiti as a fellow missionary of Harold Herr
3) Was commissioned by CAM to serve as part of the original Truth Council investigating the Harold Herr sexual abuse allegations--the panel Daniel Herr, Harold's son making the allegations, did not deem eligible or legitimate to do a credible, impartial investigation.

Is it just me, or is Charity popping up in this more often than i would expect if it was random conservative Anabaptists?

J.M.

[Josh]

Charity is over-represented in CAM, and now Charity is over-represented in molestation scandals.

From the looks of things, Charity seems to be a thoroughly corrupt institution.

[Dan Z]

Pushing back just a bit - this discussion about the "What to do about Trudy" meeting sounds gossipy to me (a concern I've shared before) - and the responses even more-so. We're going after not only the alleged perpetrator here, but now those associated with him as well - including his pastors. To be honest, it feels like there is a mob mentality brewing here in the background, fueled I'm sure by a visceral response to some very disturbing information. I understand why it is happening - this has been disturbing and gut-wrenching to me as well.

But how do we know it wasn't a "How do we respond to Trudy" meeting - the two phrases are remarkably similar, but the meaning is totally different. Was what was reported to Trudy about a private meeting reported correctly and in the right tone? I doubt that any of the three men in the meeting reported it to her, so this juicy information was likely reported by a third party with their own assumptions about what took place. Could the meeting have been misunderstood or perceived in light of some of the emotions we're seeing in this thread? Couldn't it be that this is a pastoral meeting with a broken man in response to Trudy's exposure of the situation, maybe even one that represents the beginning of confession, repentance and healing? I pray that it is heading in a healing direction - I don't know one way or the other - but it feels like we have prejudged what is going on here. Time will bring it to light.

Especially those of us who are committed to nonresistance, and love for enemy, I suggest we take a deep breath when we hear things like this, and keep our emotions and anger in check. These are painful and weighty matters indeed, and love and light must prevail. So let's guard out hearts, and let's work toward the things that can begin to heal and redeem tragic situations like this - honoring and caring for victims, making changes that protect against future victims, bringing wrong to light, and most importantly praying for repentance, forgiveness, restoration for all involved.

[TruthSeeker]

Pushing back just a bit - this discussion about the "What to do about Trudy" meeting sounds gossipy to me (a concern I've shared before) - and the responses even more-so. We're going after not only the alleged perpetrator here, but now those associated with him as well - including his pastors. To be honest, it feels like there is a mob mentality brewing here in the background, fueled I'm sure by a visceral response to some very disturbing information. I understand why it is happening - this has been disturbing and gut-wrenching to me as well.

How do we know it wasn't a "How do we respond to Trudy" meeting - the two phrases are remarkably similar, but the meaning is totally different. Was what was reported to Trudy about a private meeting reported correctly and in the right tone? I doubt that any of the three men in the meeting reported it to her, so this juicy information was likely reported by a third party with their own assumptions about what took place. Could the meeting have been misunderstood or perceived in light of some of the emotions we're seeing in this thread. Couldn't it be that this is a pastoral meeting with a broken man in response to Trudy's exposure of the situation, maybe even one that represents the beginning of confession, repentance and healing. I pray that it is heading in a healing direction - I don't know one way or the other - but it feels like we have prejudged what is going on here. Time will bring it to light.

Especially those of us who are committed to nonresistance, and love for enemy, I suggest we take a deep breath when we hear things like this, and keep our emotions and anger in check. These are painful and weighty matters indeed, and love and light must prevail. So let's guard out hearts, and let's work toward the things that can begin to heal and redeem tragic situations like this - honoring and caring for victims, making changes that protect against future victims, bringing wrong to light, and most importantly praying for repentance, forgiveness, restoration for all involved.

Dan Z, as always, I appreciate your impartial and balanced holding of tensions and perspectives.
Regrettably, I know that Harold continues to fully repudiate all sexual abuse charges and "repentance" did not precipitate the collusion in question.

[ABC 123]

Pushing back just a bit - this discussion about the "What to do about Trudy" meeting sounds gossipy to me (a concern I've shared before) - and the responses even more-so. We're going after not only the alleged perpetrator here, but now those associated with him as well - including his pastors. To be honest, it feels like there is a mob mentality brewing here in the background, fueled I'm sure by a visceral response to some very disturbing information. I understand why it is happening - this has been disturbing and gut-wrenching to me as well.

Point taken.

In defense of the visceral reaction, some of us sat under some pretty heavy duty Charity teaching that heaped up generous portions of guilt and shame. It is an astonishing reveal 20+ years later to be plugging these things into our mental timelines, knowing it was happening while we were self loathing over external performance issues.

[Josh]

Pushing back just a bit - this discussion about the "What to do about Trudy" meeting sounds gossipy to me (a concern I've shared before) - and the responses even more-so. We're going after not only the alleged perpetrator here, but now those associated with him as well - including his pastors. To be honest, it feels like there is a mob mentality brewing here in the background, fueled I'm sure by a visceral response to some very disturbing information. I understand why it is happening - this has been disturbing and gut-wrenching to me as well.

Point taken.

In defense of the visceral reaction, some of us sat under some pretty heavy duty Charity teaching that heaped up generous portions of guilt and shame. It is an astonishing reveal 20+ years later to be plugging these things into our mental timelines, knowing it was happening while we were self loathing over external performance issues.

Yep.

Denny Kenaston repented, but it’s shocking to see Mose Stoltzfus apparently aligned on the pro-abuse side. At this point, the burden of proof is on him to prove he’s not providing cover for rampant sexual abuse.

I think the time is coming near for a mass excommunication and avoidance of this false religion by genuine followers of Christ and churches of God.

[mike]

Pushing back just a bit - this discussion about the "What to do about Trudy" meeting sounds gossipy to me (a concern I've shared before) - and the responses even more-so. We're going after not only the alleged perpetrator here, but now those associated with him as well - including his pastors. To be honest, it feels like there is a mob mentality brewing here in the background, fueled I'm sure by a visceral response to some very disturbing information. I understand why it is happening - this has been disturbing and gut-wrenching to me as well.

But how do we know it wasn't a "How do we respond to Trudy" meeting - the two phrases are remarkably similar, but the meaning is totally different. Was what was reported to Trudy about a private meeting reported correctly and in the right tone? I doubt that any of the three men in the meeting reported it to her, so this juicy information was likely reported by a third party with their own assumptions about what took place. Could the meeting have been misunderstood or perceived in light of some of the emotions we're seeing in this thread? Couldn't it be that this is a pastoral meeting with a broken man in response to Trudy's exposure of the situation, maybe even one that represents the beginning of confession, repentance and healing? I pray that it is heading in a healing direction - I don't know one way or the other - but it feels like we have prejudged what is going on here. Time will bring it to light.

Especially those of us who are committed to nonresistance, and love for enemy, I suggest we take a deep breath when we hear things like this, and keep our emotions and anger in check. These are painful and weighty matters indeed, and love and light must prevail. So let's guard out hearts, and let's work toward the things that can begin to heal and redeem tragic situations like this - honoring and caring for victims, making changes that protect against future victims, bringing wrong to light, and most importantly praying for repentance, forgiveness, restoration for all involved.

I agree very much, Dan. I'm good with information coming forward to shed light on things that may have been wrongly covered up. I'm good with the facts coming out. I'm good with waiting till they do to make up my mind. But I am thoroughly turned off by the unverified third-hand gossip (I want to use some stronger terms here) that is so mixed in with the actual truth as to almost be indistinguishable. I'm starting to tune it all out.

[appleman2006]

What Mike says here is very true and I think also where a whole bunch of people are at. I too want the truth to come out. And I am all right with directly pressuring those in the know to get at that truth and release it as soon as possible. But my biggest fear is that third party assumptions and the spreading or even hinting at half truths will actually hinder the unveiling of truth and will even be used as justification for not taking appropriate action in regards to things that have happened.
I heard one young man who I respect very much throw up his hands recently and say he is so sick of the whole FB debacle he simply is not listening and reading it anymore. That should be cause for all of us to stop and think before we just type away. And BTW he was not talking about Trudy in anyway. In fact he expressed appreciation for what she has done.