Theopolitan

I'm finding that there could be an ethics violation. I have the address of the organization of which he serves as a dean. I will write to them.

Knowing what I do about the situation, I would have to say the neutral counselor didn't uncritically accept the daughters' narratives, and it was only three sessions into the process. But though I think I could win you folks over to the parents by divulging certain info, my question isn't about who is right and wrong. My question is, did the pastor, as a professional counselor himself, violate ethics by interfering with the efforts of another? There's no question his actions lack integrity, but I'm wondering if there is a professional counselor here who could tell me if there is a code of ethics that he violated.

I don't know. I'm told family counseling was his suggestion, and everyone agreed on the counselor. He was biased to start with, and it seems the pastor had been entertaining talk about the sessions and ventured his opinions about their effectiveness.

I know a couple who was in family counseling with two of their grown daughters. They and their daughters attend separate churches. It had become evident that the daughters' pastor was interfering with the work of the counselor, and through his interference was instrumental in the girls' decision to abandon counseling after only three sessions. This has left the couple devastated. Both the pastor and the counselor are professional counselors. Is there an ethics violation on the part of the pastor, and is there any recourse for the parents?

All I can say is . . . you chose 'im. Whining about it now won't help.

Great thread. I'm bumping this to the top!

Nope. It's not a marriage. It's adultery. If they couple in their hearts truly repent of their sin, then, yes.

Ditto!

I would apologize for disturbing the peace and turn it down.

I'm looking for sheet music for this old Shaker hymn. http://www.amazon.com/Shaker-Songs-Want-Sh...55&sr=102-1 (I've already been all over the Web.) Anyone have an old Shaker hymnal with this in it?

My quick reply would be, "How do you know?"

This is excellent advice, and in line with Rom 13:14, But put ye on the Lord Jesus Christ, and make not provision for the flesh, to fulfil the lusts thereof. I would venture further and advise you to turn off the TV and radio, and put the CD's and MP3 players away. Spend at least a month without all the sensual stimualtion and open the Bible. Read stories of great Christians. Get a job that requires you to work with your hands, or volunteer manual labor for the Christian missions in your region. Find another outlet for all this energy you have. Those who are advising you that this is "just natural," are forgetting that it is the fallen nature, and not at all the way your Father in Heaven desires you to see women. Bless you for your candor.

Some people just aren't letter writers. Keep sending him cards and letters. I'm sure he appreciates them.

This is a national promise and not an individual promise, but it's still a good promise.

I agree mostly with what the others have posted. I interpret it more strictly. "Congress shall make no law . . . This by design left it open for the states to have state-established churches, and a majority of the 13 original colonies had government churches when they ratified the Bill of Rights. The First Amendment was imposed upon the states in 1947 through an application of the 14th Amendment in Everson vs New Jersey (A misapplication in my opinion). The schools periodically dismissed for religious education and were bussed to the churches and back to school. This case was the first time the "separation of church and state" was argued as an interpretation of the First Amendment. Of course, I think we'd be better off doing things as they were originally framed: State senators were elected by the state legislatures. Property ownership was a prerequisite for voting privileges. No income taxes. Just to name a few.