November 18, 2002 Brent T. writes to Danny Edwards about Their Confidential Meeting

Hi Danny,

When you visited me in my office a few weeks ago, I was quite hopeful of the possibility of reconciliation.  However, what has transpired since has been a great disappointment.  Please help me with the following:

  • You made a point of telling me that your visit was "confidential," yet you went over to Kirk's immediately after leaving my office and told him you visited me.  Lynda and Suzie went to a meeting at EV Free that night, and the first thing Lynda said was, "I hear Brent had a visitor today."  What am I supposed to make of this?  I am to keep it confidential, but you aren't?  Why? For what purpose?

  • You asked me to forgive you for not following up on discussing my concerns, as outlined in some of my essays.  Danny, I do forgive you, and I am ready to get together at any time, yet again, you haven't followed through. If you ask me to forgive you, aren't you admitting you were at fault?  If so, do you intend to rectify your mistake, or do you have a different idea of what forgiveness and repentance means?  I have forgiven you, for much more than not meeting with me, but our Lord's goal is restoration, which cannot occur until you perform the act you neglected the first time, which is what you asked forgiveness for in the first place.  I am ready, and you are welcome to approach me at any time.

  • You admitted that you were wrong in the way you excommunicated me.  I agree, it was and is wrong.  However, I am somewhat confused (I loathe the idea of being sure about why you said this, because it does not indicate goodwill at all) on this point as well.  If you went about it the wrong way, after publicly instructing people to shun me, shouldn't you publicly apologize to me and the saints?  Were you saying to me that you shouldn't have excommunicated me at all, or just that your protocol had a few minor faux pas.  If it is the latter, please don't think that I am comforted in the least by your apology.  If it is the former, than why has so much time passed and still you have not done anything besides saying you're sorry?

  • Why, in God's name do you refuse to allow two or three to approach you with our offenses?  Can the eye say to the hand, "I have no need of you?"  This is exactly what you said to Kirk, "We don't need you to tell us what our sin is." Danny, you most certainly do need people like us, and many others to tell you, because it is quite evident that you are either blind or corrupt, or both.  I am very concerned with your actions and inactions in this matter, as are many others.

  • Perhaps more than anything else, I am alarmed at the way you let Jeff Lehmkuhl tell people that there are no witnesses to David's abuse.  He himself is a witness. He was there when the hearing for the restraining order took place.  He saw the bruises on two occasions. He knows of Rachel's testimony.  He agreed with Kirk, Roberto and Ray that David had sinned. Why do you allow him to lie about this?  Why was David disciplined if he never did anything wrong. (And mild discipline at that!) How can you now deny the abuse ever happened? 

This will all come out in the light. You had an opportunity to fix things when you arrived here in June of 2001.  You heard witnesses then, but you have chosen to ignore us, and the many people we spoke for.  I think I know the reason for this, but it grieves me greatly to consider it.  You see, in spite of all this, I can't help but like you. I know that in many ways you are an exemplary individual, and someone I could benefit from in Christian fellowship. Yet, you are totally blind, and are applying the most wicked double standard to this affair.  I know you want success and blessing in your work, but it will be impossible under the current situation because the Holy Spirit is grieved.

More people will be wounded, and the cost will be greater, and needless pain will occur. Please be a man of God; come to your senses and stop this now. Even now it is not too late, although it will not be nearly as easy as it could have been when you first arrived.

As ever, I am ready to remove any and all of my things off the Internet, and will quickly publish an update, praising and supporting repentance, the moment this occurs.  The only catch is that it must occur.  Saying sorry, in a "confidential" meeting is not enough.  There must be visible fruits of repentance.

I pray that we could get together soon, with regard to your following up on my essays. However, I do not wish to meet with you one-on-one with regard to the treatment of David, the slander of my reputation and my false excommunication. In this matter, you have greatly overstepped your authority and any meeting must involve the Body of Christ.  You have had ample opportunity to meet with me alone in the past, which you have neglected. No, we must pick up at the place where Kirk came to you a few weeks ago. If we meet, it will be with myself, Kirk, Aaron Cantrell, and one or more of the following: Rick Eastman (Pastor of church of Nazarene), Bryan Stupar (Calvary SLO) and Scott Peterson (Grace).  I would have liked to have had Chris Lawson there, but he will have moved to Scotland by December 14th.  God has opened a door, and Chris and his family are planting a church there. 

Please understand that people are praying for you.  Don't harden you heart.

Your brother and friend,

BrentMenu     Back to top