The Shunning of Francine McIntosh by The Word of God Covenant Community

The Shunning
of
Francine
McIntosh*
by
The Word of God
Covenant
Community
June 28, 1971
*Not her real name.
The following transcript was made from a tape from private archives on The Word of
God in Ann Arbor's Bentley Historical Library collection. The tape was made during a
public meeting of the group on June 28, 1971. Only the name of the banned woman has
been changed to conceal her identity. The ban is still in effect as of November, 1989.
The speakers, Steve Clark, Jim Cavnar, Ralph Martin, are the founders of The Word of God,
along with Gerry Rauch.
[Steven B Clark: ejecting people from the Community is very important to the Lord.]
What we want to do tonight, is to lay before you as a community a case which we've had to
deal with recently, the case of Francine McIntosh, and what we've done in regard to her. The
reason why we wanna lay it before you is because it's a kind of an action that we haven't
had to take ever before in the life of our community. And we believe it's a serious enough
thing, and it's a new enough thing, that it's the kind of thing that needs to be presented to
the community as a whole, so that we can all understand together the situation. And I
believe in particular, that the Lord wants us to come to an understanding in this matter, that
it's something that is very important for Him. I say this partly because I know that another
community that we're related to has had to take the same sort of a... a consideration. And
that in some way that it even became an issue at the national conference this last week. And
I believe it's part of what the Lord wants, that if we're going to become a people, if we're
going to take the responsibility that He's giving to us, we need to be able to deal with
situations like this, the way He's indicated for us to do.
[St Paul... who is not the Lord... was pretty big on getting rid of people who were not an
asset to the early Christian Community.]
After I've talked, Jim and Ralph are going to explain the situation itself. But, what I wanted
to do, was to begin by laying before you some con... some considerations from scriptures
about Christian communities, and the principles under which people can be excluded from
being part of Christian communities. There's a number of passages in the scripture, and I'd
like to read a couple of 'em to ya, and then read one in particular, and explain it. In the
sixteenth chapter of Romans, Paul says, "I appeal to you brethren, to take note of those who
create dissensions and difficulties, in opposition to the doctrine which you have been
taught. Avoid them, for such persons do not serve the Lord Jesus, but their own appetites,
and by fair and flattering words, they deceive the hearts of the simple minded."
Maybe one point is that each one of these passages, or most of these passages deal with
slightly different types of cases. They're not all dealing with the same kind of an issue. The
third chapter of Titus, Paul says, "...but avoid stupid controversies about genealogies,
dissensions, and quarrels over the law, for they are unprofitable and futile. As for a man
who is factious, after admonishing him once or twice, have nothing more to do with him."
[Paul says to make brethren ashamed and warn them as a brother, but not as an
enemy.]
Or at the end of Paul's second letter to the Thessalonians, after talking about... well, I'll just
read the passage before, it says, "We hear that some of you are living in idleness, mere
busybodies not doing any work. Now such persons we command and exhort in the Lord
Jesus Christ to do their work in quietness and to earn their own living. Brethren, do not be
weary in well-doing. If any one refuses to obey what we say in this letter, note that man, and
have nothing to do with him, that he may be ashamed. Do not look on him as an enemy, but
warn him as a brother."
[Early Christians assemble with the spirit of St Paul among them (and the power of
that other guy, Jesus Christ). Paul's judgment? “Deliver that man over to Satan for the
destrucion of his flesh, that his spirit may be saved!” … And we wonder where the
Inquisition originated...]
There are more passages like this. I think the main reason why I wanna read those
passages, is because what I wanted to indicate was that exclusion from a Christian
community, is part of the scriptural teaching. And that part of that is the need for the
members of the community to avoid certain people. There's a variety of different cases
here. Each case is slightly different. And the way Paul indicates the community should
handle each case, is slightly different, depending on the... the different kinds of issues. But
the point is, that part of the scriptural teaching, is that it is necessary at times, to say to
people, that they cannot be part of the life of a particular Christian community.
The passage I want to read and comment upon, is 1st Corinthians 5. Now I want to read that
passage for two reasons: one is because it's fuller, it gives a fuller treatment than all the
others, the other is because it treats the kind of case that we're dealing with.
Paul says, "It is actually reported that there is immorality among you, of a kind that is not
found even among pagans, for a man is living with his father's wife, and you are arrogant
about it. Ought you not rather to mourn. Let him who has done this, be removed from
among you. For though absent in body, I am present in spirit, and as if present, I have
already pronounced judgement, in the name of the Lord Jesus, on the man who has done
such a thing. When you are assembled, and my spirit is present, with the power of our Lord
Jesus, you are to deliver this man to satan, for the destruction of the flesh, that his spirit
may be saved in the name of the Lord Jesus."
[The Steven B Clark Show continues.]
The phrase, "deliver a man to satan", seems to have meant, "put them out of the
community," seems to have been a phrase that was used among the early Christians to
describe it. He goes on to say, "Your boasting is not good. Do you not know that a little
leaven leavens the whole lump. Cleanse out the old leaven, that you may be a new lump, as
you really are unleavened. For Christ our pascal lamb has been sacrificed. Let us therefore
celebrate the festival, not with the old leaven, the leaven of malice and evil, but with the
unleavened bread of sincerity and truth. I wrote you in my letter not to associate with
immoral men, not at all meaning the immoral of this world, or the greedy, and robbers, or
idolaters, since then you would need to go out of the world. But rather I wrote to you not to
associate with anyone who bears the name of brother, if he is guilty of immorality, or greed,
or is an idolater or reviler, drunkard or robber, not even to eat with such a one. What have I
to do with judging outsiders. Is it not those inside the church whom you are to judge. God
judges those outside. Drive out the wicked person from among you."
[More considerations blah blah blah Clark drones on and on...]
A number of considerations on that passage, I think are important to us. The first
consideration is, why does Paul say it's a good thing in some circumstances to exclude
people like this... why is it a good thing to exclude people like this. And he says... he gives
two reasons. One reason he gives is that it's important for the life of the community. That
it's not possible to allow certain types of behavior to go on and to still have somebody be
part of the life of the community. He saying that that's not good for the life of the
community. The thing(s) he picks out are very serious matters. You know, it's not light
things that he picks out, but he's picking out things that are extremely grave wrongdoing.
Those are the things that he's saying that we can't allow to have among us.
The second reason, he gives an also important reason, and that is, he says it needs to be
done for the good of the person. In some way, he understands putting people out of the
community, as a remedy for the person. What he's saying is, that they need to be put in a
situation, that they can see, that what they're doing is incompatible with the Christian life.
And if you leave them as a member of the community in good standing, then in effect what
you do, is you convey to them, that they can do that, and still be a Christian, because it
makes no difference to the way they relate as being part of the community. Another way of
saying that, is that for Paul, to put somebody out of the community is not an act of
vengeance, but it's an act of love. It's an act by which you're trying to remedy a situation in
the person's life.
[Don't take our rejection of you personally. We really love you. And we want you back.|
I think there's a number of things that are important before that can be really the case. One
of the things that's important is that when we do it, we need to convey to the person, that
it's not them personally that we're rejecting. We love them personally. But, what we're
saying is, that the particular thing that they're doing, is incompatible with the life of our
community. And part of that I think needs to be, we need to specify to them what they can
do in order to come back and be part of the life of the community. The purpose of excluding
somebody is in no way to say that we don't want them. We want them, and we want them
back. But what we need to do is to specify to them the terms under which it's possible for
them to be fully a part of the life of the community again.
[The way we are handling this is not the right way to handle it.]
Another question which I think is maybe not quite so clear in the scripture but that we need
to consider, is how ought something like this to be handled in the life of a Christian
community. I think in general, to have a meeting of the whole community when this comes
up, is not the right way to handle it, generally. The reason why we're presenting it to you
now, is because it's something new that everyone needs to understand. But it isn't a matter
of policy or a matter of direction of the life of the community. We're not trying to
understand in the question of ordinarily, how the Lord wants the life of the community to
be lived. But ordinarily what it is, it's a matter of the judgment of a particular situation. I
think this is something that'll become clear as we talk about this particular situation.
In order for it to be possible to exclude somebody from the life of the community ya have to
make a judgement on a particular case. Ya have to say, "yes, this does fulfill the
requirements of what Paul was talking about when he said you should do such a thing." And
sometimes that can be a difficult judgement to make. I think in this case it's not so difficult a
judgement to make. There may be some tricky questions in it but I think in general it's a
fairly straightforward thing. And since it is a matter of a particular judgement in a
particular case, it's not the kind of thing that ordinarily should be brought forward to the
whole community to be decided.
But it should be decided by somebody within the community who's competent to make
judgement about the particular cases within in the community. And it can... in traditional...
in the tradition of the Christian communities, the people who have done this, have been the
elders of the community. Or in our case, the corresponding group would be the
coordinators of the community, particularly the ones who have responsibility in this
particular case.
In other words, what I'm saying is, that it's a matter of pastoral judgement. It's not a matter
of deciding the direction of the community. And it's the kind of thing where in general it
would be better if we didn't have to present to everybody all the particulars of the case and
to sort things out. It's something that's best done by a couple of people who are responsible
in the community to do that.
[We are shunning this person and it's never been done before so we want everyone to
watch so they understand it.]
And I think that one of the things that that means is that the purpose of our gathering
together here is not to pass (judgement) on the particular case, particularly. But the
purpose of our gathering together here is as a community, to come to an understanding
about something that's new in the life of our community.
Read one other thing about the scriptural teaching that's very important and that is, in the
passage I read, and in the other passages, that I read before that, Paul enjoins on the
community, the need to avoid the people who are being dealt with. In 1st Corinthians 5 he
says "... I wrote you not to associate with anyone who bears the name of brother, if he is
guilty of immorality, or greed, or is an idolater or reviler, drunkard or robber, not even to
eat with such a one."
And there's a reason for this, if what we're concerned to do is to convey to the particular
person in question, that the behavior which they have is incompatible with being part of the
life of our community, and being... and incompatible with the Christian life, then we can't
treat them as if it made no difference. What we're saying to them in effect is, that has to be
straightened out before we could enjoy again, brotherly relationships. And the reason why I
am insistent upon this is because I believe the Lord is... is very serious about this.
[God corrects Steven B Clark.]
At the conference at Notre Dame, we... a... the group of people who were responsible for the
conference, told somebody who is a public slanderer... the way it would have been
translated in the Revised Standard Version is a public reviler, the same word in Greek...
somebody who is a public slanderer who injured many people, we told that person, that
they were not allowed to come to the conference. Afterwards that person did come, and
that person was allowed to stay. In particular that person went to my workshop, and I
allowed the person to stay at the workshop. And afterwards, I felt the Lord convicted me,
and telling me that I had done something that was seriously wrong. He convicted me two
ways.
One way was that He brought to my attention, in a way that I had never read it before, the
particular passage from 1st Corinthians 5. And he did it in a meeting in which we were
discussing the issue. I felt it was a word from the Lord saying, ya did something wrong
(and) it was serious.
He also did it through another person afterwards who explained something to me. He said
that one of the reasons why we had never been able to deal with that person effectively
within the community, is because some of the people would say, "what you did was wrong,
and something that we can't accept," and that, other people would then invite her to dinner,
try to be nice to her, and in every way try to say that she was perfectly acceptable to them.
And he said it was no wonder that she couldn't understand what the Christian people were
saying to her.
[No wait, I guess we are handling this correctly?]
And I believe the Lord takes that seriously, and that's one of the reasons why we need to lay
this before you, because it's not simply a matter of the responsibilities of the coordinators
of the community. If someone is excluded from the community because of immorality of a
grave sort, it's the responsibility of everybody in the community to deal with that in the
right kind of a way. And it's part of what the scripture teaches in this particular area.
Now what I'm gonna do is ask Jim to explain the background situation, and then I'm gonna
ask Ralph to explain how and why we took the particular action which we did. And then
afterward I'm gonna introduce it... the discussion for us.
[Jim Cavnar explains the bad things Francine McIntosh did to get rejected by the Word
of God Covenant Community.]
I'd like to explain to you as clearly and succinctly as I can the sequence of events that led up
to the action that we took in regard to Francine McIntosh. I think Steve has made clear the
reason why we feel we have to make known to the whole community publicly the details of
what went on and why. That the reason is in order that everyone might understand the
action that was taken, and particularly, as I think we'll be seeing as I explain this, so that
everyone will know how to deal with this situation, and will be acquainted with the truth of
what has happened.
Francine McIntosh came to our community in October, 1970. At that time she was in very
desperate need of ministry. At least daily she would have severe asthma attacks, and violent
muscle spasms, would go into thrashing around, would have to be physically restrained,
and ministered to frequently by casting out spirits, and... and by several people dealing with
her. Physically she was is very bad condition, and so she asked us if we would take her in
and minister to her, and take care for a period of time, until these problems could be taken
care of. At that time I met with her over the course of about a week and a half to two weeks.
At the same time being in... in dialogue with... with the... some of the lead... ah.. coordinators
in the community who were responsible for coordinating our ministry to people with
severe problems like this.
[Francine must submit any important matter in her life to Jim Cavnar in exchange for
ministry and healing. She must join the Word of God as well, even if she would prefer
not to.]
At that time I made clear to her that her coming into the community for ministry and for
help with these problems would involve some very definite relationships and commitment
on her part to us and to the community. Specifically, one thing was that she would have to
be willing to submit her life to someone else's discernment, and to someone else's care. And
since she had requested that she be allowed to live on our household to be ministered to by
us, the person in the community who would do that would be me. That she would be willing
to submit her decisions, all of her guidance, and any important matter in her life, to me, as
the one who was caring for her for discernment and for right judgement.
Secondly, part of the condition of our caring for her, was that she be willing to become a
part of the community, and be willing to submit herself to the life of the community, and to
take part in that life, since at the time, she didn't want to become part of The Word of God,
and preferred instead to remain individual and isolated from it. We made clear that we'd
minister to her only as a community, and only with the resources of the whole body of
Christ.
[Francine's prophecies were not from God. And she had sex with the community
woman sent to minister to her.]
After some hesitation on her part she agreed to these conditions, and was allowed to move
into our household with that explicit, verbalized--and in fact I wrote down parts of that--
that understanding, of submitting her life, decisions, and guidance, to another person. That
was in October. In December, unbeknownst to me and the members of my household, she
became involved in two very serious overt sins. One of these was that she was... began to
practice something that can only be called false prophecy, allowing herself consciously to go
into what seemed to be a trance-like state, in which it became very clear later she was used
by satan, and pretending that these things were from the Lord, and using these utterances,
with another member of the community who was involved with her at the time.
Secondly, she became involved, partially as a result of this, in overt homosexuality, with the
other member of the community that she involved in this. Overt, homosexual sin, meaning
not just tendencies or desires but actually overt relationship and action that was
homosexual. This went on from December until the first part of February, at which time, the
other person came to me to tell me what was going on. And I remarked that this was
happening during a period of time when I was meeting with Francine three times a week
for an hour, every Monday, Wednesday, and Friday for an hour, to talk with her about her
life, and at which meetings, she had promised to submit all the aspects of her life to me for
guidance and discernment.
[For two months Satan pulled the wool over my eyes!]
And for a space of over two months, this activity of false prophecy, and overt homosexuality,
was going on in my household, and concealed from me. In early February, when the other
person came, I knew immediately, as soon as she described what had happened, that this
was obviously not the Lord, that (it) was a very, very serious sin, and I told her that, and she
saw that, and agreed to it. And she also gave to me tapes of these false prophecies, since
Francine was in the habit of tape recording things, and I've listened to these, and others
have, and there's no question at all but that they're clearly not from the Lord, and very evil,
and that her participation in them, and consciously allowing herself to be used in that way,
was a very serious harm to herself and to this other person.
When I confronted Francine with my knowledge that these things had happened, for the
space of three days she denied any responsibility for it or any knowledge of the
homosexuality. She denied that she knew at all what had been going on, she denied that she
was guilty of it, and when finally confronted with it.. the fact that it was objectively... that we
knew about it, she denied any culpability for what had happened, and in fact, blamed the
other person as responsible for allowing it.
[Somebody called a priest! And a fancy Catholic one at that!]
The Lord gave us the discernment to realize that this wasn't true, that she wasn't leveling
with us, and three days after we first spoke to her about this, thanks to Father Francis
Martin, from Madonna House, who came through and who happened to come to our
household and talk with her, he somehow managed to speak to her and to bring her to an
honest confession of what she had done. In this confession, she admitted to us, in the
presence of a couple of witnesses, Father Francis, Betsy, myself, and another member of my
household, that she had lied to us about not being conscious of what had been going on. She
also confessed to us that she had deliberately concealed it from us, because she had felt that
it was probably wrong, and she didn't want us to know about it. She further confessed that
she was a homosexual, and that she had indeed been guilty of homosexual sin.
[Francine confesses her sins... and we write them down so she can't get tricky with us.
Again.]
Father Francis Martin asked her to write this down and so she put all of these things in
writing, and gave them to me for me to read, and to judge if they were true and honest,
which I did, and at that time, these were the principle elements of her confession: that she
had lied in den... in denying responsibility or knowledge of it; that she had deliberately
concealed it for a space of over two months; and that she had...was guilty of homosexual sin,
and was a homosexual.
As this was going on I went to Ralph as one of the overall coordinators of the community
and kept him informed of what we were doing. And in each of our...my dealings with
Francine, I consulted with Ralph in advance, and we made the decisions together, and we
considered them to be the decisions of the community, and to be important and serious
decisions.
As a result of her coming to what seemed to be a sincere and an honest repentance, and
confession of her sin, we worked out with her, also put in writing, a tentative basis for her
continuing in the community. We had made clear to her, that someone guilty of such
serious, overt sin could no longer be allowed to be a part of the community, unless they
were willing to repent. When she, after three days of denying it, did come to a s... some kind
of a sincere rep... acknowledgement and repentance, she asked if she would be allowed to
remain in the community, and we said that she would, if she were... if she remained in that
repentance.
[Looking for the fruits of repentance in two specific areas.]
And because for three days she had been telling us things like "well I'm sorry for anything I
did if I was responsible I... I'm sorry for it," and yet, simultaneously had been deliberately, as
she later confessed, lying and deceiving us, about her true knowledge and responsibility, it
became obvious that her words, saying that "I have repented," could mean nothing, but
rather that what would have to be the deciding factor would be that her life bear the fruits
of repentance. Not that she just say it but that she begin to live it.
And we explained this to her, and there were two things in particular, that we said to her
would be part of the fruits of repentance expected in her life for her to be sincerely
repenting from that sin, and be allowed to remain in the community. And we made clear
that she would be allowed to remain tentatively, if her life did indeed bear the fruits of
repentance, and specifically in these two areas. The first area was that she be willing to
submit her life to the community, and specifically to me as the one who was directly caring
for on behalf of the community. And this was the same kind of condition that we had
originally placed on her coming to the community, and which she had violated.
[God told her to change her name to Frances but Coordinators say you much change
back to Francine.]
The specific elements where we asked her to submit were on the i... were in the question of
her name, of her guidance, of her service in the community. The reason that we asked her to
submit on the question of her name is that we told her that she should change her name
from Frances, to Francine. Her name originally was Francine. Two years ago, under what
she thought was guidance from the Lord, she changed her name to Frances. We went over
with her at the time the grounds on which she'd changed her name to Francine and pointed
out to her that her interpretation of this so-called "guidance" was clearly explainable as
giving in to desires of the flesh, giving in to the desires that she admitted she had, to be
masculine in character and to deny her feminine qualities and her feminine nature. At that
time she admitted to us that her guidance was wrong. That indeed what she thought was
from the Lord, very likely was indeed from the flesh, and from her own fleshly desires, and
therefore was not a reliable basis on which to make that decision.
And so she accepted the change in name. Further we asked her to change that name
because it had born consistently bad fruits in her life. For one thing it reinforced her
masculine assertiveness and character, and prevented and was one of the obstacles to her
growing as a woman. Secondly she used the name in a bad spirit, often condemning people
and criticizing people and rebuking people in a very un-Christian way, if they happened to
call her by her old name. She admitted this and confessed to it.
[“I need a feminine name to help me in my growth in the Lord”.]
And so as a result of this, she accepted that she would indeed change her name back to her
original name of Francine, which was her baptismal name. And further she agreed that she
would correct others, in a loving spirit, who called her by her old name, and that she would
say to them, and I quote, "We have decided that I need a woman's name, because I need a
feminine name, to help me in my growth in the Lord. Therefore I ask you now to please
continue to call me Francine in the future." And this she did for the space of about a month.
So the first condition of her staying with us (was that) she be willing to submit to the
community on the issue of the name and on her guidance since clearly it (had) been shown
that her guidance was... was not reliable, that she had been brought into serious sin and to
false prophecy, by what she had called guidance from God, and thirdly, that she submit on
the issue of her service in the community.
[...she consistently began to wear women's clothes. Good things happened in Francine's
life after this.]
The second general condition, part of the fruits of repentance in her life, was that she begin
to become a woman, in name, dress, and manner. Many of you may have noticed that after
February, that for the first time in our... since she'd come into our community, she
consistently began to wear women's clothes. Good things happened in Francine's life after
this. More significant changes took place in her life than I had seen in the previous two and
a half months that she had lived in our house... or four months, rather, that she had lived in
our house. Many of her physical problems cleared up very rapidly. Her leg, which had been
operated on, began to heal much more quickly. Her own attitude and spirit became much
more docile, and loving, and gentle. Her own character as a woman began to emerge much
more clearly. And she herself said that it was the best thing that ever happened, as she
recognized the Lord's hand in it.
During... after about a month, again in consultation with leaders of the community,
especially Ralph and... and Gerry Rauch who was working especially in our ministry to
those who have serious problems, we decided that in order to continue our care for her,
that we would like to send her to Houston to live in their community and to receive
ministry there from other women who had already been cured of similar problems. I called
Houston, and talked to the pastor, explained the situation, and he agreed that she could
come, and we worked out the conditions on which she could come. Then I presented it to
Francine, and she agreed, that, though she was somewhat a little bit frightened about it, this
was a good thing and was from the Lord, and that she should do that, and agree that we...
that she would indeed do that in June, move down there and she accepted that.
[“And I, not understanding what that could mean, said yes.”].
Then in the middle of May, something began to happen: she began to withdraw from that
path of repentance, began to rebel against the ministry and guidance that we had been
given. Two overt things began to happen very noticeably. One was that she began to
compromise on the use of her name. She came to me and said "many people have still can't
get out of the habit of calling me Frances and I keep correcting them and they can't
remember: is it OK if I just let it go?" And I, not understanding what that could mean, said
yes.
The next thing I discovered she was telling people "I prefer the name of Frances, and I
would really like it if that's what you called me, but if you'd like to call me Francine, you
can." And of course you can see that... , what was happening. As soon as I understood that,
and saw what she was beginning to do, I corrected her, and told that no we had not changed
that, that she was indeed to go by the name of Francine, and that she needed that name for
the same reasons,.
The second thing that began to happen was that she began to pull out of her decision to
follow our guidance and to go to Houston for ministry. She... she began to say that she had
many problems that needed doctors' care here and she had to stay. She complained about
not being able to hear well. She went down to University Hospital where she faked a
hearing test to prove that she couldn't hear. The doctor who took the test talked to a
member of our community showing her the graphs and the details and showing that the
test had been deliberately faked to prove that she could not hear, when they could es... they
could establish that her hearing was normal.
[Francine/Frances runs away! And refuses to come back!]
Things like this began to happen, and finally when I corrected her on the use of her name,
she left our house and ran away. For three days she concealed where she was... was, and we
didn't know, and finally at the end of three days I managed to be able to talk to her--maybe
it was after the first day--in any case it was on the phone before we had found out where
she had gone. And I presented to her the reasons why she should come back, and why she
should accept, and continue in the path of repentance and change of life that she had been
in, and she rejected those and refused to come back, refusing to enter into that kind of
relationship of submitting her life and guidance to other people. She returned to her
original position of minim... minimizing her responsibility and culpability for the
homosexuality, and the false prophecy, placing the blame on the other person, and
beginning clearly to go back on that repentance.
And so I began... we... I went to the coordinators of the community, in one of our
coordinators' meeting(s) where we spent several hours talking about the situation, and
Ralph is going to explain what we decided and how we came to that decision.
[Ralph Martin; a little bit louder, please.]
Uh, at this point Jim asked that uh... we could take ten minutes of the coordinators meeting
that night to talk about the situation so that he could share what was developing...
(member of audience)
A little bit louder.
[… the Lord was presenting us with new situation that we had never dealt with
before...]
Yeah... At this point Jim asked if we could take ten minutes at the weekly coordinators'
meeting to talk about what was happening in the situation concerning Francine, and we not
only took ten minutes but we took several hours that night and at future meetings. Now we
realize what was... wha... what the Lord was presenting us here was a new situation that we
had never dealt with before, and something that we very much needed His wisdom on and
very much needed His guidance on.
And one of the things we really set ourselves to do was try and discern in the Lord what
was going on here and what he wanted to do. Our first reaction was, "well, this is probably a
private matter, happening in Jim's household and uh... well we're glad that Jim is handling it
as well as he is." (scattered laughter from audience) We very soon came to see it as
something that really affected the life of the whole community.
[Psychological problems? 'Not so fast,” said the Lord...]

I think a second response was "well, this is probably just a matter of a psychological
problem, and it ought to be dealt with just in those terms." But as we prayed and as we
talked, we felt like what the Lord was showing us was that this really was a matter of going
back on repentance: that the name over which Francine left Jim's house was simply one
item in a whole reorientation of life that was to manifest a desire to live a new life.
[...serious... serious...serious!]
On the particular matter of homosexuality I talked to Father Flannery who is a moral

theologian and who has had extensive experience in pastoral counseling in this area. And
the distinction he made, which we felt was sound and from the Lord was that many people
suffer from problems of sexual orientation at, you know, in some... some kind of disorder,
many... many people suffer from some kind of homosexual desires, and this is something
that the Lord can take care of in periods of time and work out in different peoples' lives in
different ways. But suffering from a sexual disorientation is another matter from actually
engaging in overt behavior that involves other people in homosexual actions. And, uh,
Father Flannery was careful to point out, and we feel was careful to point out that the thing
that Francine is repenting of is not homosexual desires, but a whole complex of things that
involves and involved them in this particular situation.
So after several hours of discussion and prayer and consultation we felt like the Lord was
telling us that what we were involved in was a situation as described in 1st Corinthians 5. A
case of serious immorality that really had to be repented of, and if the person refused to
repent and show the fruits of repentance as Jim outlined, which involved the name, among
other things, that it really was a situation that demanded that the person be excluded from
the community. That the situation was at the point where the only thing that could be done,
that could communicate to Francine the seriousness of what was going on, the seriousness
of the path on which she was turning, the seriousness of what she was turning away from.
[...those that she would be in contact with in the community would be in real danger...]
I personally believe that the Lord was offering to Francine, and still is, a remarkable healing,
and that it lay, in her being in submission to Jim and his household, and in the plan for her
going down to Houston. That turning away in that situation, was a serious turning of her life
away from what the Lord had for her and for her healing. And that turning away from that,
and turning away from what the Lord had for her, made it very likely that what the Lord had
for her was being frustrated. And also that those that she would be in contact with in the
community would be in real danger, not just in the matter of the homosexuality but in the
matter the confused guidance, the false prophecy, and just the general, unreliable way in
which... in which Francine operates on her own.
So we felt like the situation was a situation like 1st Corinthians 5 and we needed to do a
number of things. Ah, as an overall coordinator of the community, myself and Jim went to
visit Francine and we explained to her what we thought had to be done, and we explained
three things. The first thing is that we... we just... we shared with her that as a body of
coordinators, the nine coordinators and Steve and myself, were in unity in the Lord in
discerning the situation to be a matter of turning back from repentance of serious
immorality. And that, that's how we saw the situation and that's how the Lord was showing
us the... the situation.
[Come back or you probably won't be able to go to the student chapel at St Marys...]
That secondly, we were requesting her not to have any thing to do with the community any
more, and not to attend community functions or talk to people in the community. (tape
skip) ... those who would be affected by Francine in light of the disor... disordered situation,
and two for the sake of Francine herself. That Francine had to realize the seriousness of the
direction in which she was turning and recognize what she was turning from, and that it
had to made real to her, by her really being physically separated from the Christian
community. Ah, we mentioned that this would mean for her probably that she shouldn't
come to St. Mary's (student chapel). We weren't speaking on behalf of the pastor of that she
was not to come to St. Mary's, but it was a likely possibility, a probable possibility, that if she
came to St. Mary's at the 5 o'clock liturgies, if she had contact with people in the
community, and that this would be a very difficult situation for her.
[...having it a private matter, is really going halfway...]
(The) third thing we said which we feel like we're only going halfway on was that we
wanted to preserve her reputation as much as we could and we wanted this to remain a
private matter between the leaders of the community and Francine herself, and that if she
did separate herself from the community, and if she didn't have contact with people in the
community, and really, uh, follow what we're suggesting that we would keep it a private
matter.
Ah, as Steve said when he was speaking, if future situations ever develop like this again, and
God forbid that they do, we won't need to talk about all the details of the situation. But what
we will need to do, I am convinced, is to make it public that this person is being separated
from the community. Because, having it a private matter, is really going halfway. In order for
the separation from the community to function the way it is in scripture, it's important for
the whole community to understand what's going on, in order to be able to take their part
in the discipline that the Lord is giving for the return of the person who has turned away
from repentance.
[...there is a need for the whole Christian community to be in agreement, to be in unity,

on dealing with a particular person in this particular way...]
But we told Francine that we would keep it a private matter if she just did separate herself
from the community. Since then, ah, at least 6 instances of people that she's spoken to
starting the day after she left Jim's house, where she tried to divide some people from the
community, and, uh, caused confusion, have been brought to our attention, and I sure
there's a number of more. This in itself is a violation of the agreement we made with her,
but even more it shows the... the incompleteness of going halfway. In situations like this,
there is a need for the whole Christian community to be in agreement, to be in unity, on
dealing with a particular person in this particular way.
We don't mean by this action that we're excommunicating her from the Christian church.
We're separating a person from this Christian community. Excommunication from the
Christian church is something that's the responsibility of the bishops and the authorities in
the church. What we're doing tonight, what we've been doing all along is something that
we've done in communication with Father Flannery as the immediate person responsible in
the church structure for this particular community.
The thing we'd like to suggest tonight is that the community as a whole support the actions
of the coordinators, and not have any contact with Francine, for her sake, that she may see
the seriousness of what's going on and the direction she's taking, and for the sake of the
community.
[Other people believe her version of events without talking to the Coordinators first.]
One of the things also we've had to consider was concerning Mark and Debbie Holbrook,
the two people in Ann Arbor who took Francine into their home. There's a number of
distressing things about this particular circumstance. Mark and Debbie had been friends of
the community, although they haven't committed themselves to being members of it. One of
the distressing things was that they took Francine into their home, accepted her version of
what was going on, and decided to take her part without talking to people whom she
respected in the community, like Jim.
One of the things we've been praying about and trying to decide is what the Lord would
have us do concerning our relationship to, to Mark and Debbie. At the moment, what... all
we feel like He's asking us at the moment is that we request them to not come to
community functions. If they're in that serious disagreement with the discernment of the
leaders of the community and the life of this community, we'd ask them to not come to
community functions. If other things develop, we'll have to go back and pray about it again,
but at the moment what we've requested is that, simply, Mark and Debbie not attend
community functions.
[Thanks Ralph Martin. Now back to you, Steve Clark and the different meanings of
homosexuality.]
Maybe just a couple of comments on what was said. One is just to underline something
Ralph said about homosexuality. In our si... in our situation, the term is used in a variety of
different ways. It's used when people have sexual desires for somebody of the same sex, it's
used for emotional problems, for a particular kind of emotional problem, that certain
people have, and it's used for actually having sexual relationships with somebody of the
same sex.
And one of the things that I think is very important for us to understand, is that, the only
place where it's a question of wrongdoing, is when it's a question of having relationships
with somebody of the same sex. Wrong... it's not wrongdoing to have sexual desires for
somebody of the same sex. How ya handle that, is what could lead to wrongdoing.
[The Lord can heal homosexuality. But we got false prophecy and deception too... very
serious matters.]
Now many people who are happily married, have been... have had sexual desires for people
of the same sex. There's a variety of different ways that particular problem can be taken
care of. The Lord can heal people of it, free people of it in various different sorts of ways.
So when we're talking about homosexuality, what we're talking about is a specific form of
wrongdoing, which is having sexual relationships with somebody of the same sex. I think
also to underline something else that Ralph said, or that Jim said, rather, is that that's not
simply the only thing. We're also dealing with a question of false prophecy. We're also
dealing with a question of deception. And deception in very serious matters.
I think this particular issue, for us as a community, is significant for a number of reasons.
One of them is, that we have to make the decision, as to whether we're going to follow the
scriptures in an area that isn't popular in the world today, or whether we're not going to. In
our society, it's not considered an acceptable thing to exclude somebody from a community
for wrongdoing, but it does seem to be clearly a scriptural principle, and it's another
instance of us having to make a decision, whether we're going to go with the scriptures, or
whether we're going to go with the society around us. I think it's a serious step from that
point of view, one that we need to understand.
[Even people with emotional and psychological problems are not off the hook for their
behavior, because God can fix them.]
I think another thing that's part of it, as Ralph pointed out, is that we're agreeing, or that
we're deciding this on the basis of an agreement, that because a person has emotional
problems or psychological problems, that doesn't allow them to behave within the
community, any way they want. That that's not an excuse in itself, but that the Lord can heal
that, so that a person doesn't have to act that way. I think there's a... a certain kind of an
active faith involved in that, that is again something that's not acceptable within our society.
That's not the normal way, that people in our society would approach that problem, but I
think that that's the situation, that that's the... one of the bases of the decision that we've
made.
[Everyone is on notice now: we will deal with these things.]
And finally I think something else, uh, that's part of it in some kind of way that is very, very
important. And that is, that we're deciding that a situation like this can't be passed over, but
that we need to take responsibility for it, and that we all need to take responsibility for it,
and that we need to deal with situations according to the way that the Lord's taught us to
do it.
[... what I feel we're here for is to come to an agreement about how it's right as a
community to handle situations like this...]
I think what... what maybe just one other, one kind of thing just for the sake of our
discussion, and that is what we're here for is not to try to judge this particular case. If you
feel there's some reason to raise a question about the particular case, uh, we can consider
whether that might be a good thing to talk about. But what I feel we're here for is to come to
an agreement about how it's right as a community to handle situations like this, and that
that's what we need to understand. I don't know that we need a lot of discussion, maybe we
do, uh that's up, that's sort of how you feel about it. Uh, but, what we'd like do is provide
you the opportunity right now (to) ask any questions you want or to make any kinds of
comments that you'd like.
[ A fantastically Drastic Action.]
(Nick (?))
(male member of audience)

Uhm, I have serious reservations of the wisdom of bringing this kind of a case as publicly as
the coordinators have done before the community, but especially when we're being
presented with generalities and not the specifics, I wonder about the responsibilities of
each of us, to all of us, to individuals within the community, for real sharing, for real love, for
real power, for real (dynamism (?)), before we take this kind of a fantastically drastic action.
(Clark)
Pardon me? What is it that you're suggesting, (Nick (?)) Do you have a specific suggestion?
(member of audience)
I wonder about... a specific suggestion would be... the things I suggest... would be to come to
the community and say that there is a problem with this person, the facts of the person
notwithstanding, you know, those members the community who have real questions
about ... (?) a public display of this kind of thing is extremely dangerous to our Christian
lives.
[We're just getting our side of the story out there...Steve Clark]
I think the reason... I think that's a... is a... I think there's a real question there. Uhm. I don't
feel like the question is in the area of what the right thing to do is, but, uh, there was a
serious question about whether this should... this particular thing should be done. Uhm, we
decided to do it for two reasons. Uh, we decided to do it for the reason that what was being
done was something that was really new in the life of the community, and that we felt that
in this particular case something had to be said about the particular issue.
We decided to do it for a second reason, and that was because both Francine, and Mark and
Debbie, have told people a lot of things about it, uh, that are simply wrong, and that involve
a number of the details of the situation. Uh, the story comes out in different kinds of ways,
sometimes it comes out ways like, uh, "the reason why they're excluding me is because I
won't change my name." There's different sorts of things like that that happened. And it
didn't seem to be possible, it... that... I guess that... I guess I'd just say it this way, that the
basis, one of the bases, under which, uh, we decided to do that was, uh, for that reason.
[You have a point, we may have been wrong, but it's done now, so...?]
I don't think it's right, or would be right, to do this as a normal course. I think there's just no
question about that. That, in the future, it's something that shouldn't be handled that way.
Uh, I think there's a real question whether it should have been done this way this time. With
the particular decision, uh, I guess one of the things you have to say at this point is we did it,
and in a way it can't be taken back, but I think I would... I would really agree with you to the
point that I think it's a real... it's a serious question. I wouldn't feel in any sense, that what I
wanna say to you is I feel certain this was the right thing to do. I think I would definitely
want to agree it's a real serious question whether we should have done it or not. Uh, it's a
particular judgement we made, uh, if it was wrong I don't know what we can do about it
now. Uh, I think it was better to do it, but I do really agree with you, and say that I would not
want to claim that I was sure that it was the right thing to do.
[Shouldn't tell people outside the community about this.]
(female member of audience)

Uh, during this whole thing I was just thinking, uhm, while it was being presented, what a
(critical (?)) responsibility we have now that we do, uh, have a full knowledge of the truth
as a body to, uh, keep it within the con... confines of the body and... and just, you know, not
to be gossipy ourselves... (that) we just realize that, with the seriousness of the thing that
we've been told, that it's necessary for us not to tell anybody else out... outside of the body
because it is something that just concerns us.

... (?) of such an incident ... (?) with the details, because I've found (I was having (?)) serious
doubts about whether, well, about being able to trust such a thing to just a few people. I
means it's... it's a very, very serious thing to ostracize someone. And I by hearing the details
of this (incident (?)) it gives an example of the sort of thing that they think is serous enough
to take (exception (?)). So I myself feel that... that I can trust them to do (things (?)) and in
making such a decision without necessarily telling us everything, because they've given...
there is this example, and, uh, I feel that it is very serious ... (?). So I think ... (?).
(Steve Clark)
... (?)

My opinion is following. We have to make big distinction on the person himself, or herself ...
(?) we never (call on the name (?)) or dare to judge anyone of our fellow sister or brother.
The judgement is God's. (But the other duty is of...ours (?)) If something is wrong, you are
the member of Word of God, you have told them, "don't do that brother," "don't do that
sister. Repent." And it doesn't go, to go to the, uh, coordinators.
And I'm asking the grace of God, that they would get much more time, to spend some time
for me too because I've been suffering so much. I wanted to share many, many things but
didn't get the choice... uh... the... uh... chance, with the exception--Jerry--Jerry--God bless,
and the other one, always with love. I got two mothers who came to me, say me many many
thanks, I helped with the grace of God to grow up their sons as a ripe, uh, young man. And I,
as a young student, uh, brought back a fellow man from a fornication and he blessed God's
grace given to me as a tool. I helped him to be an honest man. And I am telling something to
you brothers and sisters, I am ... (?). If I have something it is out of grace of God, and uh, just
let me give a... a occasion to talk with me and to find out if this is from God then will be for
everybody a blessing. If not from God, then we will find who is the guilty and we what... we
know what to do. ... (?) this case, I was in the ... (?) case, should be handled somehow as a
case, not a person, but a case because here is (widely spreaded (?)). I know about a young
teacher, I have seen--not yet (Doug (?))--who later committed suicide here. Is a terrible
subject, and we have to be strict, but with love, and never judging the person.

... (?) we could really show our love for Frances if this is such a serious thing we're doing, is
to meet one extra evening a week and have a prayer meeting especially for her, because...
because the case is so serious so... her situation maybe we should have an... another prayer
meeting and pray for her.
(Steve Clark)
Someone up there. Ann.

I think in view of the way our society thinks about things like this, that it might be good to
point out again what I think Steve and Ralph already pointed out, that it's not simply for one
sin of a sexual nature that the community has decided to take this action. Because of a
particular kind scandal, or something which our society attaches to this kind of sin, and
there's also a tendency, in the world, to say, well, if someone steals you say they've stolen,
you don't say they are a thief, but if someone com... commits a sexual sin like this you say,
they are a homosexual, you don't say they committed a sin. And I think it's good to
remember that Francine has been excluded from the community for a whole complex of
things in contradiction of the order of the community, and of the community brothers, and
not for one specific thing. And also that this thing is an act that she committed like any
other act, and can be repented of, it's not part of her whole nature.
(Steve Clark)
Tim.

I trust you, that... it doesn't bother me to (trust you (?)) should something like this happen
again, that just the coordinators take care of it. But our Lord said, in Matthew 18, if
someone does something wrong, one goes to him; if he doesn't repent, two or three go to
him; if he doesn't repent, you bring the matter before the community; the whole
community asks him to repent; and then if he doesn't repent, then you exclude him. I don't
understand how you can... it seems (to me) the Lord is saying that you should bring the
matter before the community before you take this matter ... (?), and I'd like to know (what
you have to say about that?)
(Steve Clark)
Uhm, I think in that particular passage, uh, that the n... the normal interpretation of it is, it's
a... it's a case of an individual person who has something against another brother, that is,
(if) a brother wrongs you. And, what the recommendation is that first you get a couple of
witnesses to go talk with them, and then if that doesn't work, then you take it to the whole
church. But taking it to the whole church, I don't think necessarily means the assembly of
the people all at once together. But it means taking it to the people constituted within the
church to make the decision. I think that's the normal interpretation of that passage and I
think when you... uh... in the context of the whole passage that makes sense. (OK (?))
And, I think the... also that Christian tradition would back up that interpretation of the
passage because it's... it's an unheard of thing for it to be a normal procedure for a whole
assembly to do something like that. But the normal way is to... is to take it to one of the
elders in the community. That has been the normal way. It's also part of... that also is the
traditional Jewish way in which it was done.

One thing that, uhm, I (have been meaning to ask you (?))--I'm kind of anxious, I think it is
quite obvious--I wanted to know, if nothing is mentioned, whether or not the community
(having met, had been spared if she wasn't... (?)).
(Steve Clark)
Yes she was.

Uhm, I... I kind of feel that there's two other callings--I talking about turning away from a
sincere repentance, and so forth--(and we should have (?)) two other callings that are
talking place right now in the community. One is a call for us to keep our covenanted
agreements with each other about trusting each other, and our acceptance of the leaders
the Lord has raised up among us. And in our... our turning over, uhm, our community
decisions to a counsel of... of men whom the Lord has raised up and given a special
leadership (role), a special grace. The other is a call to the leaders to remember their
vows ... (?)) and I trust in them to remember those vows, to act faithfully in prayer and in
love.

... and one the attitudes Jesus Christ had, was the attitude, the desire to heal. And He
expresses this in the fifth chapter of Luke. "Those who are well have no need of a physician,
but those who are sick; I have not come to call the righteous, but sinners to repentance." I
think there's an attitude there that... that should be among the members of The Word of
God, and I think I can appreciate this attitude myself because I am going to be a physician,
and I am going to be involved in the healing of the sick. And that ministry is going to be
going out to the sick, and accepting the sick when the sick come to me. I think that's the
attitude we should have.
The second thing I want to say, is that it should be made specifically clear whether or not
we are giving to the coordinators ... (?) of The Word of God the right to do this exclusion, to
(exorcise the man (?)), however you want to phase it, there's a number of ways to phrase it.
Are we going to give the community coordinators this right, and I think that it's a right that
the whole community should be given, and not the prerogative of the coordinators (this
soon (?)).

... the community as a whole... (several members of audience say "I can't hear you) ... I
underst... my understanding ... (?) (is that... (?)) when the leaders took the... the vows to be
installed, we as a body gave the right... gave the leaders, (the servants (?)), the choice to
make these decisions. And I feel that... that... that they have done this and it's not the
responsibility of the community, but rather the responsibility of the leaders, the
coordinators, to make this... to make these decisions ... (?).
(Steve Clark)
(Bob ... (?))

Since there are many of us from other communities here, I appreciate your thoughts on our
involvement in this kind of thing, when somebody like Francine, or the person that, or
persons that, who actually comforts them should come into our own community. If--a
double thought coming, you know--one, to go along with the discernment of this
community, and not accept the precedent as the other possibility ... (?) in a different
situation, and I would appreciate whatever thoughts you or Ralph would give about that
one.
(Steve Clark)
Maybe I could just say something to what (Bill Noble (?)) said. As I would understand the
situation, uh, it would be a normal thing for those who were... who were responsible for the
community as a whole to have also the responsibility about ex... excluding anyone who was
not in order within the community. Uh, as I understand it that's a normal situation within
any kind of community.
Uhm. I think also that insofar as we as a community felt that what we wanted to do was to
model the leadership of the community on the New Testament and the early church
pattern, that that would have been part of what we opted for at that time. And I suppose
one of the reasons for bringing this whole thing before you, was that if the community as a
whole felt that this wasn't right, (that) they felt it was wrong for us to take this action, or
that this authority didn't belong to us, that this is the place for people to bring that up, and
(this is) where we can discuss it.
So, I guess that the way I would look to the situation would be, that as I understand it would
be normal for me, or for us as a body, to understand that we have that respons... that
authority, and on the other hand we are open, if the community as a whole feels that that
isn't right, uh, to state that, to discuss that, and to resolve that. But, my... the way I would
personally look at it is that is part of the normal... part of what our what our responsibility
is.

(... but seems to me, uh, that we could be more lenient ... (?)) I think she should be allowed
to come to the meetings (... guilty (?)). Now my question is, does anybody, just to support
the leaders, necessarily have to close their doors to a friend.
(Steve Clark)
Yeah, uhm. I think there's two... two different questions. Uh, the second one about uh, to
support... if the... whether anyone, to support the leaders, has to close their doors to a
friend. Uhm, I think part of what Paul is teaching us, I think that's a question for us within
the community--Mark and Debbie aren't members of the community, uh, they've never
made a public commitment, they've indicated they didn't want to make a public
commitment, so they're people who aren't part of our community, so that's a separate
question--I think the question for those who are members of the community, you know, that
the instructions that Paul gave was "... I wrote to you not to associate with anyone who
bears the name of brother, if he is guilty of immorality, or greed, or is an idolater or reviler,
drunkard or robber, not even to eat with such a one." And I don't... personally I don't feel
like it's a question of leniency.
Uh... my personal feeling is that, if this kind of an action is to be a real remedy, that it is
really important for the community as a whole to express that, and that, uh, it's not so
much--I don't think the right way of looking at it so much--is it's supporting the leaders, as
it is a question of the community expressing to Francine in a clear way that this is
incompatible with being part of the community, with brotherly relationships, and with
living, uh, a Christian life.
The question for Mark and Frances I think is a complicated one... excuse me... Mark and
Debbie is complicated one because they aren't members of the community. I think one right
way of looking at it is to look at it as a violation of our hospitality as a community. And we
have allowed them to come previously to community gatherings even though they said that
they didn't want to be part of the community. And this is a case, I think, of intervening
within the affairs of the life of the community. And there's a variety of kinds of different
situations connected with it.
Uh, I think one of the things that we came to the agreement was, was that one of the
reasons why what they did was serious, was because we felt, that it did endanger precisely
Francine's being cured. That they gave her a different situation and a support for a wrong
course of action, and that they took on a serious responsibility that wasn't theirs.
Uh, I think also, uh, we could go into a... to a variety of different considerations that I think
would indicate that possibly even we should be more strict with them. Uh, it's hard to say, I
mean it's not a clear-cut case like it is with Francine. Uh, I think we'd prefer not to go into it,
basically for the ra... reasons being raised, as to why we're recommending this particular
course of action with them. But I feel that if anything we're being lenient with them, rather
than being strict with them, uh, and I'm not sure that that's right yet, and I feel like what we
need to do is we need to consider that more, and that includes talking to them about it. But
I think that... my personal feeling is that if anything we're being lenient with them.
John.

Uhm. Well. Assuming that... that uh... assuming that the way we've looked at what St. Paul
said about this whole situation is right, which I do feel is right...
(other member of audience)

Louder?
Uhm... giving that... that what we said about the way St. Paul looked at this situation,
applying it to our situation is right, which I do feel... seems to be as the coordinators have
said, is right, uh, looking down the road a little farther, and giving the coordinators
responsibility, without the whole body... without the whole body deciding on a particular
situation, I just can't see how... how let's say we... we do later on have another case, we have
another case, and we exclude a person, and we see... let's say I see that person on the street,
you know. How can all of us, you know, in true conscience turn our face from that person,
you know. I mean if we're going to make a decision I just really feel like we all need to do it...
that... you know, it just has to be all of us because we... we can't... we can't deny our own
consciences in loving other people, and we can't deny that... the ethical feelings we have
about... about a... a past brother or sister, someone who (was among us (?)).
(Steve Clark)
I think, John, that the right kind of procedure actually would be the one that (Dane (?))
suggested, namely, if that you had a problem with the particular decision and you were in
some kind of relationship with the person, then it would be possible for you to bring that to
the coordinator, and to talk it over with the coordinator and to understand why the decision
was made the way it was, and that we wouldn't necessarily have to take somebody from
across the campus who might not know the person, or be in contact with them, and explain
to them the whole situation to them too.
In other words, to say that it is something that ought to be decided by the coordinators
doesn't necessarily mean that other people can't be informed according to how they need to
be informed in order to act correctly in the situation. So I don't feel like it excludes what
you're asking for.
Uh, before we go on, uh, it is getting kind of late, and I sort of feel that we've come though
the whole thing, and people have said all kinds of different things, and I sort of feel that
community as a whole has a peace about it. So what I'd like to do, is I'd like to just ask you,
that if you want to ask a question right now, that you weigh it very seriously, and consider
that it's really something that ought to be asked, and I'd also like to ask you that if you're
not, uh, a member of the community now, uh, again considering the lateness of the hour--
oh, I forgot Father (Harold's (?)) question, I'll answer his question--but, if you're not a
member of the community now, uh, considering the lateness of the hour, uh, that you not
ask questions. In other words, that... if you're not a publicly committed member. Uh, so, if
any of you do feel definitely that the Lord wants you to ask a question, uh, we... we still can
have you ask questions but I'd like you just to seriously consider it.
(Steve (?))

Yeah. I... I'd like to talk (about) the exception to the point that you mentioned when you
were talking about (brothers we should receive (?)). That there are times in the life of a
Christian community when we do need to place someone beyond the bounds of that
community, and I don't think that anyone would argue with that. The second point isn't
nearly so clear, the point that the heads of that community are the ones who normally make
those decisions. And my feeling is that that may not in fact be true. I think there's some
alternative methods.
One of the alternatives that I'd like to suggest to the community is that we rely upon the
coordinating team to function, to weigh, to consider these questions, but then to come back
to the community to present the questions, not in nearly the kind of form we've had tonight,
but in a very abbreviated form, asking the community to prayer, asking the community to
come to a consensus on this, in their own mind and in their own prayer, you know, with
perhaps a week in between for the people who feel that they have a real need to understand
that more deeply to seek out the coordinators. But then make a community decision. And,
uh, I think that this really speaks to the question of, what about the personal ties.
You know, I also think that it speaks to the question of accountability. I don't think that, in
honesty, and in charity, we can delegate to a few men, the responsibilities, that we're talking
about. I think we have to squarely accept that we as brother Christians accept the
responsibility of setting a person outside of the community. That we assent to that. That we
believe in that. That we do that in charity.
(Steve Clark)
I'm not sure I understand quite how you could expect people to make a decision of that sort
without presenting them with all of the facts. Why don't you answer that?
(same member of audience)

I think that you can't usually expect that. I think that you can expect that God will move in
our hearts in such a way as to say "yes," you know, "I'm with the coordinators one this one."
You know, to go to the Lord and say, you know, "where, where's it at," you know, the... "he's
there presenting me with this question, I need wisdom on it, I need guidance and counsel." I
think that we'll find that the Lord will work in crises in the community even without all of
the grisly details of every situation in the community.

I have a question to add. Uhm, I'm a very good friend of Debbie and Mark's, my husband
and I are. And we arrived home from vacation, you know, when all... when all this had
occurred. On Sunday evening I received a phone call from Debbie, explaining the situation
from her viewpoint. I left the community to that vacation and some just... as I spoke to
Bruce, you know, some just real... (I've) been having a lot of hassles just about some things
that I had been seeing going on within the community.
And as a result of seeing my family and seeing old friends, people who were not baptized in
the Spirit, or had not committed their lived to Christ, I began to see that... that Christ was...
my... my conviction (that) Christ was truly working in this community was being (made)
stronger. And when I came home and talked to them, you know, I was just really hit with
what I see now as a spirit of confusion.
And then I talked to Jim two nights later, and there was just a strong sense of the Spirit
mending, at least this is my discernment of the whole thing, of the spirit of truth. And when
I spoke to Jim I really felt that there was truthfulness to what he was saying. And there was
something, there was no confusion when I spoke to him.
I again spoke to Debbie a few days later, and became all confused. I really don't think that in
this case a decision could be made by knowing some, you know, few of the facts. I really feel
that after tonight, you know, I now feel again a peace with the decision, and I feel it too, that,
uhm, it isn't so much of a question of exact rightness or exact wrongness. But the Lord has
given the gift of discernment to the body of Christ, and He's manifested it through certain
members, who are stronger than others. And I feel that it's now a time when we seriously
weigh the commitment that we have made, or will make, to the fact that... to the question of
these gifts, the spiritual (gifts), particularly that of discernment which is so... so evidently
needed in this case.
And I really would like to also exhort everyone to not let satan divide you against the
community. I think he's been trying to do that many times this year, not only in myself but
in other members, and I really think those are questions to bring to the Lord now and (ask
Him to explain (?)) And to really ask the Lord to show us where the spirit of truth is, and I
really think that after a while, consid... aft... considering this in prayer, you won't have any
question where the spirit of truth is.
(Steve Clark)
OK. Some people back here. Yeah.
(Unintelligible male member of audience)

... Uh, Paul says in, uh, 1 Corinthians 5, "... let him who has done this be removed from you."
And as I see, uh, Matthew 18, Christ is really outlining the way it should be done. And he
says in the last step if he refuses to listen to them, tell it to the church, and if he refuses to
listen even to the church, let him be to you as a gentile and as a tax collector.
And I say this not to question the authority of the coordinators, which I respect... respect
very much, but, uh, mainly I think there's a function, Christ says this for a functional reason
which many overlook. Just as a physical body has an infection ... (?) we try to cure this
infection, then it can't be cured. The fever always comes before the gangrene. Not that I'm
relying specifically on that analogy, but I think, with the knowledge that perhaps, given a
week, or two weeks, and then with the prayers and the love, of not only a few individuals,
good and very strong and powerful gifts of God and with the love and prayer of the entire
community, perhaps this part of the body can be really healed in a fashion that it couldn't
be, uh, healed without this. And then be restored to the body in that sense.
And, and, mechanically perhaps, uh, I don't think we have really that much reason to be
afraid of the details of the specific situation. We're all here as one in Christ, and if that's
what's needed for the clarity of communications, then I say so be it. If we love other people
and bear one another's burdens, we can explain it, then let the community, really, in love,
work with this person, pray with this person, and then perhaps meet a week later, and see if
the fruits are satisfactorily manifest, and if not, then I think, uh, there's a much greater
possibility that the community would be together as one, uh, and perhaps ask this person
to remove themselves from the community. It would also minimize the possibility of any
confusion, regarding the area, for it... about giving notice to the community first. Mainly
with prayers and the loving function I think Christ wants it brought to the entire body first,
and let the entire body be brought itself, to the healing function.
(Steve Clark)
That particular passage was the same one that I talked about to Tim and I think the
interpretation of the passage is not that you bring it to the whole community assembled,
but that it, that it's the people responsible within the community for it.
Peter.
(same member of audience interrupting)

(Uh... .could I--I'm talking still--I don't want to be... bringing in (?)) a long theological
disputation but, uh, you mentioned traditions, and traditions are something that really, I
really had rather be directed to the Word. And uh, I... I think by following traditions you
really might be overlooking the function, uh, you know, I... I just throw this up for thought,
but, uh, really I think (that love requires you to bring all the people together (?)), it is not
something we quickly, you know, (dismiss (?)).
(Steve Clark, interrupting)

Yeah, I wouldn't wanna quickly cast it aside. I'm just trying to say what I think is the normal
interpretation of the passage, the correct interpretation.
(Peter Williamson)
Uh, sort of along the lines of something from the scripture. At the beginning of this meeting
I, uh, when a couple passages were being read I... I prayed for a passage and I got, uhm, I
looked down on the page (and what) I got was a farewell to the elders of Ephesus, and it's
from Miletus, he sent for the elders of the church of Ephesus, that is, Paul. "When they had
arrived, he addressed these words to them," and then kind of gives his farewell, and says
that he won't be coming back to Ephesus, and he gives the elders a charge, and part of the
charge that he gives them is, "be on your guard for yourselves and for all the flock of which
the Holy Spirit has made you the overseers, to feed the church of God, which He bought
with his own blood. I know quite well that when I am gone fierce wolves will invade you
and will have no mercy on the flock. Even from your own ranks there will be men coming
forward, with the travesty of the truth on their lips, to induce the disciples to follow them,
so be on your guard, remembering how night and day for three years, I never failed to keep
you right, shedding tears over each one of you."
Uhm, and it seemed to me that, what Paul was doing was presenting this charge to, uh,
guard over the flock of God against... against the wolves, and against those, uhm, who... who
would try and... and lead away people of the community. That Paul was putting the
responsibility for this on... on the elders of the church of Ephesus, he was telling them in a
special way to be on guard. Uhm, this is part of his last words, and his... his last message to
them.
(Steve Clark)
I wonder if, uh, just two things. Uh. One a procedural matter again and that is I really would
like to ask those of you who haven't yet made a public commitment, not to raise your hands
and make contributions. The reason why is 'cause I think we are really getting late, and
that, uh, I want to give everybody who has a direct responsibility for this matter a chance to
speak if they really feel the Lord wants them to. But those of you who don't yet have a direct
responsibility for it, at this point I'd like to ask you not to make contributions.
I'd also like to make a suggestion, and that is, I see there's two things being said. Uhm, one
is something that I s... have said and that other people have said is, I think the feeling that a
judicial function, that is to say, a pastoral judgement on a particular case, should probably
be done by a small group of people, and that there should be people responsibil...
responsible for it.
There's also the suggestion that, if the community has a part in this, they ought to have
some kind of a... of a chance to... to be part of making the decision. And both of those things
seem to me to be reasonable. And I wonder if, perhaps what we want, is some kind of
procedure in which both can be done.
And that perhaps what we need to do is to do something similar to what we've done before
in the choosing of coordinators and so on, namely, that if the proper procedure would be for
the coordinators, or at least a couple of the coordinators--I don't think this is something
that ought to be done by the whole group of coordinators, uh, I don't think that's a
necessary thing--but if the coordin... the coordinators responsible could make the
judgement, that we could then present that to the community one week, and that we could
give anyone in the community who had something to say about, or some questions about it,
a chance to discuss it with those people, and then, if there hasn't been any, uh, widespread
disagreement, or any definite disagreement that needs to be worked through, that then the
next week we could take it as, uh, a final decision.
In other words, I guess what I'm suggesting is, I wonder if we can't have a procedure that
can do both of those things, uh, without forcing us to ha... every time a case like this comes
up, to have to bring the whole case, and the person's whole life, before the whole
community. Uh, there were some more... Jim.

I think, uh, one issue is clear: what the leaders of our community have done, is to set
guidelines that (tells Frances (?)), and for Mark and Debbie, for their continuance in the
community. Now these people chose not to continue, not to live up to these guidelines, and
thereby excluded themselves from the community. Not so much a decision of the leaders as
a decision of these people themselves. I think we should abide by their own decisions, and
pray that they change them and return to the community. The question of whether the
leaders have the right to do this or not, is one we should pray over, and consult at a later
time.
(Steve Clark)
Jim.

The policy that you were just talking about, Steve, I think was somewhat followed even in
this particular case. I think (it was (?)) six or eight weeks ago that Jim stood up and said,
"there's some confusion about Francine's condition, and anyone that has questions, we'd
like to talk with them." And at that time people could have gone to him if they were
confused and perhaps something along that line would be (of some significance (?)).
(Steve Clark)
Jill.

My question is, uh, how can we, if... if there is an exclusion from the community--which
seems to be really necessary at this point--well how does one act, uh, in excluding them. I
think that, I think that's a... uhm... I have a feeling that there are going to be many various
ways of... of excluding and perhaps some of them would turn out to be very unloving ways
of exclusion. Mistakes have been made because... I think that people could look, uh, back in...
in family, just things that have happened in various family situations where, uh, say a
daughter goes to a convent, or a daughter gets married and she's totally, you know, her
father, uhm, says, "OK, the heck with you." And uh, you know, uh "I won't talk to you again"
type of thing.
Uhm, I think it's very important about, you know, just the attitude of this whole body, in this
thing. I just think it's... it('s) of extreme importance and I think it's something that should be
made very clear, uh, because, if you see the person on the street and you just walk by them
as if you don't know them, I mean, that's a... to me that's kind of ... a very extreme thing to
do. And, it seems that, uhm, we just have to, uh, I feel I need a clarity and some direction to
this thing.
(Steve Clark)
Can you answer the question, Barbara?

Uhm, I'd like to... to cons... talk a little bit to Bruce, but first I'm gonna say a few things. Uhm,
in my mind, and I... I... I think in the mind of most of the community, uhm, there's no
question now, especially after having this laid before us, of the rightness of the leaders to
have this kind of authority. Uhm, I think we have clear cut example here tonight of the kind
of love that Francine was approached with.
This is no way to say anything about the condition of Francine McIntosh right now. I haven't
talked to her in quite a while. But one thing I see as necessary, as far as setting precedents
in the future, that I have a general feeling now that there may be times when this is
necessary again. There may be times when the break can made... be made in a cleaner way.
But I would like to just present to you a personal experience, uhm, Kelly shared a little bit
about it. Uhm, after the decision was made and Francine was approached with how she was
(was to be handling (?)) the problem there, uhm, I think she presented more of a problem
to the community by telling different things to different people that added to confusion in
our community. And in a certain sense, perhaps without her knowledge of being used, I feel
satan was really working to divide our community in certain ways, and that a real
clarification as to the real facts in what happened needed to be stated.
Uh, Jim stated a while ago that we could go to him personally. And, uhm, I did talk to Jim,
and after talking with him, I felt much better about the decision of the coordinators. But I
feel, just because we're a new community and we're growing, that a lot of people didn't take
the time or the opportunity, or didn't feel that they had the right to ask, and that seeds that
were planted by stories you may have heard were causing confusion in different peoples
lives.
Therefore I feel that, I feel bad that it had to happen this way, I feel... I feel as a Christian
community we can love Francine, and we don't have to be scandalized by what was said
here tonight, but we can accept it in love. But I also think we have to be realistic in knowing
we're being attacked from the outside, and that's what I feel is happening. I feel that satan is
really at work to divide us.
Uhm, I feel, in a certain sense, when we question the authority of our leaders to make this
kind of decision, I feel like we walk back to September, and all the questions we had at that
time when we decided that... that the Lord was calling a certain community order.
As far as the... the problem of how you go about excluding a person, uhm, I... I just wanted to
re... share with you an incident with Francine, and I do have a great amount of love for
Francine, I don't know her very well, but I do know she has problems, and I... I feel a
particular kind of love for someone in that situation.
It's not as if somebody walked up to you on the street and you avoided them like they have
the bubonic plague. But Francine approached me and began to tell me all these things. And
there's a spirit, an attitude, that I think Phil was talking about, that you can give to her that
will either help her--maybe not in that situation, she won't feel helped--or you can give
sympathy to her and reinforce all the problems that she has, simply because you don't have
the courage to face the untruth she's telling you.
And that is the distinct feeling I had as she stood face to face to me, talking to me. It was
almost like I knew that was an untruth, the thing she was saying. You know, the spirit of
love, that I felt at that time, was to... to look her in the eye and say "Francine I don't believe
that, I don't believe that's what really happened," instead of, kind of hem-hawing around
and saying, oh, you know, you... you can lend a certain kind of attitude to that person, which
is not excluding them, and not loving them, (but) just surrendering to their, you know, to
their pride.
And that's... that's just what I wanted to share and that (the) precedent doesn't necessarily
have to be that we always have to lay bare the problem, but I think the problem was taken a
step further, after the coordinators did everything they could, but the problem was caused
from Francine, and not... not from a... you know, it came from the outside.
(Steve Clark)
I just want to say one other thing to what Gail said. Uhm, I suspect to some degree this
going to have to be like a lot of things in the life of our community. We know some things in
scripture, we're supposed to avoid people who are excluded from the community, and yet, it
takes a certain amount of experience for us, and wisdom to figure out what the right ways
of doing that are. And I suspect, like everything, this is something we're going to have to
learn from experience.
And I would like to share just one thing that I did, uh, with Mark and Debbie, uh, because I
had been fairly close to them. And when the incident happened and the decision was made,
what I did was that I wrote them a note, uh, explaining how I looked at the situation, and
how I felt that I was going to have to relate to them in the future. And what I tried to do was
to make it clear that I loved them as much as I ever did, but that this was the way I was
going to have to relate to them because of something... because of the way in which they...
uh... the things that they had done. Uh, that's just one... one person's attempt.
We have some other....
Greg.
Uhm, I think,I... I had a kind of feeling that, uh, what we're trying to do here is decide
whether the coordinators, in the future, will have, you know, whether the body of The Word
of God, the full ... (?) or the coordinators will have the right to exercise this function of... of
making a decision on who will be excluded.
And I kind of feel that it also implies that if we agree with this decision, that we agree that,
uh, that... that (the reason (?)) that was used, you know, is the best possible solution worked
out in this particular situation. And I don't, you know, I... I'm (unclear (?)) that there is... I
feel completely that there is ... (?) ... there is something about, uhm, like you said earlier,
that... the possibility to have to decide whether to discuss (some of the details (?)) of this
case or not. And I think that (sort of the coordinators decided (?)) the general rule. I don't...
I don't know whether you want to discuss that here, now, or if I should bring that to the
coordinators ... (?).
(Steve Clark)
Uh, I'm sorry, I missed the qu... last question. The question was whether we need to discuss
that now.
(same member of audience)

No, but whether I could take that up personally with you or Jim ... (?).
(Steve Clark)
Uhm, (OK. I feel (?)) before we... before we go on, uh, maybe I could state to ya, how I look at
the situation now, where we're at with Francine, and maybe make some decisions together.
Uh, personally I feel, Greg, that it would be better to discuss the particular case, uh, say with
Jim or myself afterwards. Uh, if we could avoid discussing it here as a group and working
through it I think that would be good.
Uh, I feel that the decision, uh, I hadn't looked at what we were doing was as a community
deliberation as to whether the coordinators had the responsibility to do that or not. Uh, the
way I... I understand the situation is that, that was part of what we were entrusted the
responsibility to do last September. Uh, I also said that I felt like I was open... we a... we
needed... that if there were real questions, uh, that we could discuss it.
And I think some people have raised some questions, uh, but my personal feeling has been
that, with the proviso that we have a good procedure for it, uh, maybe indicating some of
the things that I said, uh, maybe we could come up with some other things in the course of
our experience, that the general consensus has been that it is the responsibility of the
coordinators, or at least some of the coordinators.
And, I guess what I wanna do now, is to find out whether that is a consensus, or that I'm
laboring under a delusion about the situation. Uh, if that isn't the consensus, we maybe
need to work out a way of discussing it. Uh, so maybe what... what I'd like to do now is just
ask you, uh, whether your general consensus is that this was something that was entrusted
to the coordinators in September. You know, again, not a... we're not raising the question of
this particular case, but whether this responsibility was entrusted to the coordinators in
(December (?)). Uh, if you agree that that is, would you say yes.
(audience)
Yes.
(Steve Clark)
Uh, are there some people who don't. (pause)
Uh, I feel like that's the consensus of the community ... (?)
(male member of audience, interrupting)

(Steve. What I've been wondering about whether... (tape skip)... henceforth (tape skip)
about exclusion or about ... (?) and I wanna know a major development in the community ...
(?) in possibly becoming a non-profit corporation, or ... (?) to all these things entrusted to
them ... (?) alright? (right (?)) Instead does God want each (one of these Christians to go out
(?)) so that the whole body can pray about it... about it, and (seek the Lord (?)) about
(whether) this is indeed that (... it is one of the responsibilities of the coordinators or of the
whole body (?)) ... This is something that's been passing me now for about the last, ... (?)
ten months.
(Steve Clark)
I think that's a good question. Uh, I wouldn't look at as being a blank check. Uh, personally I
feel the commitment, the same commitment that we had in the past... last September, that
whenever there's a major change, uh, or a new step, that's something that ought to be
presented to the whole community, and that's why we had this particular meeting.
(same member of audience responding)

But, you did act beforehand, in relationship with Francine, and it seems like, in the way that
was presented, that this would not (have) been presented... this conversation ... (?) with Dr.
(Bell (?)), if Francine, had not been out on her own, and talked with six other people, at
least. So as it seems like you have made a step, which was necessary at he time, and then
well ya... ya have not really tried to get the ratification of the community, it's something that
you ... (?)
(Steve Clark, interrupting)

Right... right... and I think Ralph also said, and I'd like to reiterate, that we feel like that was
a mistake, that we did that particular thing out of a desire to save Francine's reputation, and
that we consider that was a mistake.
Uh, my personal feeling is that whenever there's something that we judge to be a significant
change of direction, uh, or new step of some sort, that that's something that the community
as a whole should agree to if that's appropriate. I think, personally in this particular case,
again, just to state the way I have been looking at it, personally I feel like that was the
authority that was given to the coordinators. Uh, it wasn't made explicit at the time. That's
the reason for this particular meeting, or one of the reasons for this particular meeting.
Another reason for the particul... this particular meeting, perhaps a even more important
reason for this meeting, was because that community as a whole was being asked to do
something new. But, the way I would judge the situation was that that authority has been
given, and that what we're just doing now is explicating that, or agreeing on it.
(tape skip)
There were some people who didn't agree with that, uh, and what I'd like to do is, before
everybody to offer ya the chance to come and talk to me or Ralph about it and see if we can
resolve the question, and if we can agree that there is something that needs to be raised, uh,
that can't be worked out that way, then sometime in the future we'll raise it. But I feel like
the... the overwhelming consensus of the community is that way, so I'd like not to keep us
any longer in view of that fact. I'd like not to keep us any longer at night, or... and make us
come together and have another whole meeting on it. I ... (?) feel like the consensus was,
you know, great.
Now, (tape skip) ... some of ya had your hands up, and I'd like to appeal to ya again, uh,
and ... (laughter, then tape skips to worship period)
("prophecy" from member of audience)

... follow me. Then shall I make my ways known to you. Yes my people, when you have given
me all. When you have turned your entire thoughts to me. Then shall my ways be made
know to you. And your ways will become my ways. Yes I tell you, turn to me, that I may
purify your hearts, that I may purify your thoughts and your intentions. And that I may live
with you. Truly I am creating within my people a oneness of heart, a oneness of mind. I am
coming to you, my people, and I am drawing you to myself. I am binding you up and calling
you my very own people. Turn your hearts to me. Listen to what I would say to you. In all
things turn your hearts to me. And in everything rejoice in my name. For truly I have told
you, nothing can harm you, nothing can divide you any more. You are my people, I am your
God, turn your hearts to me.
June 30, 2019
It has been 48 years since these actions were taken by a very young Covenant Community.
The two major leaders (Steven Clark and Ralph Martin) are 20 years away from their
schism in 1991. Much has yet to happen.
I publish this particular piece of history because I think it had effects beyond it's own stated
purpose. Expelling a person from the Christian body was a brand new thing to the Word of
God in 1971. The leaders: Clark, Martin, Cavnar and the other six Coordinators were flexing
their muscles. Not only were they utilizing authority only vaguely granted to them the
previous year (there had been no discussion at that time over the act of 'shunning' and if
they had the authority to do so on behalf of the Word of God members) but they wanted
everyone in the community to see them do this act, approve it and approve them for
carrying it out.
What they may or may not realize they were doing at the time is sending the body of The
Word of God a new message: “Here is what we can do to you if you fail to follow the life we
set up for you.”
Maybe some people understood this at the time... maybe for some it was a subliminal
message that lingered at the corners of their conscience, causing them to re-consider any
doubts or grievances they might have held about the Covenant Community's leaders or
direction. But needless to say, the shunning of Frances McIntosh served notice that
leadership had the power to eject you from the Covenant Community.
One thing that did happen in 1991 was Ralph Martins' public repentance for the act of
shunning Francine... or as she preferred to be called, Frances. Martin also repented of
shunning other members of the Word of God over the 20 years that followed. He seemed to
realize that the community had gone horribly off track. He separated himself from Steven
Clark's creation The Sword of the Spirit and has never gone back. Neither has the Word of
God Covenant Community.
It is unknown if Steven Clark's new community (Word of Life) still shuns members.
John Flaherty, Grand Island, NE 6/30/19
More documents available here: https://www.scribd.com/doc/118237557/Index-Of-All-Docs-

RE-The-Sword-of-the-Spirit-Related-Topics-by-John-Flaherty-Scribd-com

The Shunning of Francine McIntosh by The Word of God Covenant Community

Încărcat de

Informații document

Titlu original

Drepturi de autor

Formate disponibile

Partajați acest document

Partajați sau inserați document

Opțiuni de partajare

Vi se pare util acest document?

Este necorespunzător acest conținut?

Drepturi de autor:

Formate disponibile

The Shunning of Francine McIntosh by The Word of God Covenant Community

Încărcat de

Drepturi de autor:

Formate disponibile

The Shunning

[The Steven B Clark Show continues.]

[More considerations blah blah blah Clark drones on and on...]

[God corrects Steven B Clark.]

[No wait, I guess we are handling this correctly?]

[For two months Satan pulled the wool over my eyes!]

[Somebody called a priest! And a fancy Catholic one at that!]

[Looking for the fruits of repentance in two specific areas.]

[“I need a feminine name to help me in my growth in the Lord”.]

[“And I, not understanding what that could mean, said yes.”].

[Ralph Martin; a little bit louder, please.]

[Psychological problems? 'Not so fast,” said the Lord...]

On the particular matter of homosexuality I talked to Father Flannery who is a moral

[...having it a private matter, is really going halfway...]

[...there is a need for the whole Christian community to be in agreement, to be in unity,

[Everyone is on notice now: we will deal with these things.]

[ A fantastically Drastic Action.]

(male member of audience)

[Shouldn't tell people outside the community about this.]

(female member of audience)

(female member of audience)

(male member of audience)

(female member of audience)

(female member of audience)

(male member of audience)

(male member of audience)

(male member of audience)

(male member of audience)

(male member of audience)

(male member of audience)

(female member of audience)

(male member of audience)

(other member of audience)

(male member of audience)

(same member of audience)

(female member of audience)

(Unintelligible male member of audience)

(same member of audience interrupting)

(Steve Clark, interrupting)

(male member of audience)

(male member of audience)

(female member of audience)

(female member of audience)

We have some other....

(same member of audience)

(male member of audience, interrupting)

(same member of audience responding)

(Steve Clark, interrupting)

("prophecy" from member of audience)

June 30, 2019

John Flaherty, Grand Island, NE 6/30/19

More documents available here: https://www.scribd.com/doc/118237557/Index-Of-All-Docs-

S-ar putea să vă placă și