Paul's Passing Thoughts

A Second Open Letter to Lou Priolo

Posted in Uncategorized by Paul M. Dohse Sr. on January 8, 2012

Dear Lou Priolo,

I see that you are still the featured speaker at Clearcreek Chapel’s annual “Family Enrichment Conference” taking place on January 27-28, 2012. Still convinced that you are a man who would never use the position that God has placed him in to give undue credibility to men who are unrepentant regarding evil deeds, I will now make an attempt to spell things out more clearly for you:

Because the Clearcreek elders are drunk with visions of grandeur, they sought to neutralize me as a member because I basically figured out what they were spoon-feeding the congregation. I became a threat to their role as the great new Reformers saving the church from the Dark Age of Synergistic Sanctification.

I left quietly with my family after they used every cult tactic in the book to dissuade my concerns. A letter was issued to all elders and my departure was upon receipt of that letter. The parishioners were not aware of the contention between the elders and me.  Less than a week later, two elders, Dr. Devon Berry, an associate professor of psychiatry at UC, and Mark Schindler, arrived at my house and announced that I was “under church discipline.” And this is key: Devon Berry said that it was the “first step of church discipline.” They were obviously concerned that I was no longer under their authority and parishioners would want to know why we left.  We had been members there for at least eighteen years and I was a former elder. Russ Kennedy, the pastor/teacher at Clearcreek, may have been concerned that he would be sent packing like he was in Illinois for being less than forthright about his theology.

Though I was dazed and confused about the visit, I did one thing right; I asked that the reasons for the church discipline be put in writing and that I would be given time to pray about it. In the meantime, I was counseled by two pastors to return and “play the game until I could leave in peace,” and was also counseled by my son-in-law (a missionary in Puerto Rico) to NOT  submit to the discipline. But here is my first point: regardless of the fact that my life was supposedly full of sin, they waited till I submitted a letter of departure to the elders to put me under church discipline. Why?

After my son-in-law called them on it—it set off a string of blunders and additional lies to cover up other lies. Instead of telling an intelligent lie that I gave them a letter after being confronted about sin I wouldn’t deal with, they instead stated in a letter to me that they did not interpret my letter as intent to leave membership because I didn’t specifically say, “please remove me from membership.” But here is what my letter stated:

After much consideration and prayer, and with a heavy heart, I tell you that there is no possible way I can remain at Clearcreek Chapel with my family. Furthermore, I am not willing to discuss the matter any further. Shirley may remain long enough to wrap-up outstanding ministry while I search for another church home.

Here is their response to me in regard to the charge:

We have attached your letter received by us on December 9, 2007 [actually, they did not attach the letter. This was a ploy to see if I retained a copy for myself because my wife couldn’t find one in my computer files where I normally kept such records]. You have represented this letter as your demand to have your membership removed from the Chapel. No such request or demand is in the letter. You say that you are going to be seeking another church and then state your disagreements with the Chapel. You did not ask to remove your membership. We did not receive this as a request to be removed as a member.

Hence, they unwittingly made the letter the issue and not sin issues, plainly verifying the fact that there were no sin issues being discussed before I submitted the letter. Instead of their response stating, “Paul, the letter is neither here or nor there and is not valid because we were in the second step of church discipline,” they made the interpretation of the letter the issue in order to justify a first step of discipline. But even a child would laugh at the ridiculous notion that my letter was not an intent to separate myself from Chapel membership. Furthermore, the fact that the letter initiated this unjust action speaks for itself. They knew they couldn’t say the letter came after the first step of discipline was initiated, so they had to say the letter wasn’t an intent to depart.

Secondly, the Clearcreek elders realized they had a second problem in the situation. After taking the advice of the two other elders (as opposed to the counsel of my son-in-law) and allowing Clearcreek to hold me hostage there for almost four months, I submitted a second letter to inform the Clearcreek elders that I had been counseled by other pastors to leave there with my family at all cost. Devin Berry and Mark Schindler then returned to my home to verify that my letter was an intent to leave membership. Why did they not ask for such verification in the first visit? But the bigger question that they anticipated from people was the following: “Why wouldn’t his attempt to leave be the second step of church discipline?” Well, they attempted to cover their tracks on that in the same letter:

On January 8, you received a visit from two elders who informed you that you were at the second stage of corrective discipline. You were given a letter outlining the category of sins, some specific examples of those sins and what true, godly repentance would entail. You did not then respond that you were not a member and not subject to discipline. You said you would prayerfully consider what we had to say and how you would respond.

I responded in a letter to their fellowship of churches:

Furthermore, in another lame attempt to cover their behavior, they claim (in the same letter) that I was presented with a second letter by two elders that initiated a second step of church discipline. I received no  such  letter;  nor  did  I  meet  with  two  elders  in  regard to  a  second step of  church  discipline.  In anticipation of these letters sent by me, I made the following request to the Clearcreek elders:

“In your written response to the website: http://www.eldersresolution.org, you claim that I was presented with a letter by two elders on January 8, 2008, that specifically stated that I was in the second step of church discipline. I respectfully request that a copy of this letter be sent to me, along with the names of the two elders that presented this letter to me at that time.”

The request was ignored. Why? Because no such letter was ever drafted and no such meeting ever took place; that’s why. In addition, such a letter could only produce additional contradictions, even if it was produced.

Apparently forced into a position to reply, they sent me the following email:

In our response to the website, we did not say that the letter given you “specifically stated” that you were in the second step of church discipline. In our response to the website, we wrote the following:

“On January 8, you received a visit from two elders who informed you that you were at the second stage of corrective discipline. You were given a letter outlining the category of sins, some specific examples of those sins and what true, godly repentance would entail. You did not then respond that you were not a member and not subject to discipline. You said you would prayerfully consider what we had to say and how you would respond.”

Also, we misread our records. On January 8, 2008 there was an Elder’s Meeting in which the elders who visited with you in December gave their report.

After leaving the church discipline and Clearcreek for the second time,  and entering into counseling with pastor Rick Wilson, a certified NANC counselor, the Clearcreek elders excommunicated me on a Sunday morning without stating specific reasons and deliberately leaving the parishioners to their own imaginations. It is the most despicable form of slander I have ever witnessed in my life. Furthermore, a parishioner sent me the following email shortly thereafter:

But more questions arose, especially concerning church discipline. More and more it seemed they selected the people for discipline, while others were left alone. I am a prime example. I realize they don’t have the resources to follow everyone around, but I was even living with my [boyfriend/girlfriend] at one point and [elder’s name withheld] just eventually quit talking to me- though my membership remains and I was never brought up on any “charges”. I’d been in counseling for much of the entire time I attended. There are more strange happenings, but I won’t get into all of it.

I later met with this parishioner face to face and confirmed the fact that the Clearcreek elders had full knowledge that this Chapel member was cohabitating outside of marriage while putting me under a completely bogus church discipline. Moreover, they submitted a six page resolution commanding my wife to return to the Chapel, stating that I had been declared an unbeliever by them and had no authority in her life. They also offered to supply her with housing, a job, and attorneys fees if she decided to divorce me. After accusing me of not sufficiently supplying for my family in a three-year period prior to 2007, their very own attorney supplied tax records in a domestic court hearing showing that I made over 100,000 dollars in 2005 in an attempt to elicit more child support that was being paid in the temporary order.

Dr. Priolo, these are wicked men. Not only do they teach blatant false doctrine, their vile character precedes them. If you go there, you are a partaker in their evil. And I will not go the way of those who have fled to other states to avoid their persecution, I will stand against them and their filthy false doctrine till my dying day, so help me God.

Paul M. Dohse

10 Responses

Subscribe to comments with RSS.

  1. lydiasellerofpurple's avatar lydiasellerofpurple said, on January 9, 2012 at 12:55 AM

    For crying out loud, Paul. Who do these men think they are? We are not in Geneva in the 1500’s! This whole church discipline thing has become the Nicolatians drunk with power.

    Like

    • Paul M. Dohse Sr.'s avatar paulspassingthoughts said, on January 9, 2012 at 7:15 AM

      Lydia,
      I answer that question in the beginning of the post. Like all New Calvinists, they think they are the children of the Reformers. After leaving the Chapel for doctrinal reasons, and by letter, in essence, they threatened to ruin my name if I didn’t come back under their authority. They also knew I had aspirations of being an elder again, so they figured I would play along. That’s why they promised not to “tell anyone” in the congregation. I was held hostage there for almost 4 months. I would goad them continually and dare them to tell the congregation why I was under discipline and how it was being conducted. Under Ohio state kidnapping laws, controlling anybody by threat of financial loss or loss of reputation is considered kidnapping in the state of Ohio. Basically, they are criminals. Not only that, they would not stop the process when I agreed to take their concerns seriously: 1. Be a better husband 2. Replace the two jobs I had with something Shirley was more comfortable with 3. Stop questioning their doctrine. They refused to put two other charges in writing regardless of my insistence. After walking away the second time because it became obvious that there was not going to be any end to the process, I was told that I needed to come back, and that is what I would do….and I quote, “If you want your wife back.”

      This is indicative of the kind of behavior that this doctrine is fostering nationwide. That’s the point. That’s what folks don’t seem to get. I have read testimonies from people who were involved in the Hyles affair and more recently, the ABWE scandal. The “move on with your life and let the Lord deal with it” approach is now worn-out and found wanting. Anybody who thinks I am going away before the Lord wants me to is just smoking crack.

      Like

  2. lydiasellerofpurple's avatar lydiasellerofpurple said, on January 9, 2012 at 12:05 PM

    Paul, In my many years consulting in mega’s, I can tell you I have seen every lawsuit under the sun thrown at churches by members and staff. Most of them warranted because the leadership were acting like thugs.

    And the church almost always wins. Churches can pretty much do what they want to people within reason. They are not under mosts labor laws, either.

    It is just that churches do not like the publicity of lawsuits. In one former mega I happen to know that they are managing about 5 lawsuits at a time for the last 10 years. That is how often they are sued. They have a counsel on staff who just handles the paperwork.

    In fact, when Paige Patterson removed Dr. Sheri Klouda from her position as a female teaching Hebrew to young men at SBTS. She sued but Patterson’s attorney claimed the seminary was a “church” so the case was thrown out. There is NO protection in a church at all when it comes to legalities. I advise people all the time to never go to work for a church. EVER.

    Welcome to the Body of Christ? I think not.

    Like

    • Paul M. Dohse Sr.'s avatar paulspassingthoughts said, on January 9, 2012 at 1:17 PM

      Lydia,
      Uh, ya, it ain’t pretty. I keep my sanity by remembering the fact that the apostles said this is the way it would be. I also know that I have to stay true to the word, and gag, submit to the authority of a local church body! After what I have been through, yes, even I! I know really solid guys who have vowed to never join another church. They are faithful to a local congregation, but they won’t intrust themselves to the leadership. I know I can’t allow myself to become that pessimistic. However, having a wife like Susan is extremely helpful. Her reply to a pastor and his wife who wanted to meet with her even while we were dating; in essence, “That’s not going to happen without Paul being there.”

      To your point: I contend that organizations like Peacekeepers International and G.R.A.C.E are damage control organizations that serve local church leadership. Church leaders take the tithes from parishioners and support such organizations for their own protection! It would be hilarious if not so sad! And I don’t know about Hebrew teachers, but I know what was said by a top SBC official to a victim of a confirmed sexual encounter by a SB pastor: “What do you want me to do, shoot him?” What about getting on a plane and rebuking him in front of his congregation? Biblical, no? But of course, we are talking about mere sexual abuse, no big deal anymore. “Hey, be a big Christian, forgive and move on with your life.” Doesn’t work. Listen, I don’t want much. I just want ONE story of leaders who stood up. Anybody have one?

      “I advise people all the time to never go to work for a church. EVER.” Ouch. I hear an echo from my Susan who worked as a Christian school teacher for 25+ years. She has nothing to show for it. It was always “ministry.” She switched to public schools at some point, so now, if she works till she is 70, she will have some retirement.

      Like

  3. lydiasellerofpurple's avatar lydiasellerofpurple said, on January 9, 2012 at 6:01 PM

    Paul, Are you referring to Hebrews 13:17 when you say you must submit to your church leaders?

    Like

    • Paul M. Dohse Sr.'s avatar paulspassingthoughts said, on January 9, 2012 at 9:02 PM

      Lydia,
      No. Let me clarify: I don’t believe we “must submit” to church leaders. We follow there leadership as long as it aligns with Scripture. Originally, in the Clearcreek situation, I was counseled by a few pastors that the fact that they were not doing things by the “literal wooden interpretation” of the word was neither here nor there–I was still under their authority. The Clearcreek elders, like many New Calvinists, believe that the “higher law of love” trumps literal interpretation. It didn’t matter that their actions were in blatant contradiction to Scripture, “their intentions were according to love.” As Francis Chan has said, “It’s impossible to sin while we are loving.” I believe Christians benefit immensely from being identified with a local assembly and it is assumed throughout the Bible. What constitutes actual membership is a whole other discussion. Elders also have authority over us when it is authority according to truth. When not, our first obligation is to the Chief Shepard. Elder’s have no authority to tell us to do things that are contrary to Scripture or Christian liberty. Also, they have no authority in our homes. The authority structure in the Christian home is detailed in Eph. 5 and elders are conspicuously missing. Too bad I had to learn all of this the hard way.

      Like

  4. lydiasellerofpurple's avatar lydiasellerofpurple said, on January 11, 2012 at 7:21 PM

    “Elders also have authority over us when it is authority according to truth”

    Which means we must know the truth. I view elders as those who do not want “authority: over us but those who want us to be spiritually mature even surpassing themselves. They are servants and we will recognize real elders if we are truly seeking Holiness. In our institutions, it might not even be someone who has the title. It might be the janitor who is spiriutally mature, humble and loves truth and LOVES believers.

    Like

  5. abey's avatar abey said, on July 19, 2014 at 1:19 PM

    The problem with Mark Shindler is that he deems what is the truth, instead of the truth.

    Like

    • Paul M. Dohse Sr.'s avatar paulspassingthoughts said, on July 19, 2014 at 4:41 PM

      Abey,

      Schindler broke up my first marriage over the false gospel of progressive justification. If you see him, tell him I said good luck with that when he stands before Christ. Oh, and though he thinks he is genius, tell him I said, “Chad Bresson told me to do it” won’t be an adequate excuse.

      Like

  6. abey's avatar abey said, on July 20, 2014 at 9:59 AM

    One who tries to make a name for himself(even at the cost of others as it seems) is one who goes by the Interpretations of the mind instead of by the revelations of the Spirit.

    Like


Leave a reply to abey Cancel reply