Part II, Attachment 8, Page 1 of 2

Why was #8 not

addressed? "That
Thomas Chantry
endeaver to seek
full repentance and
the forgiveness of
each of the four
children and their #8. ???
parents who have
bene the sugject of
physical discipline
by him. It is
recommended that
the Elders who
assume oversight
of Thomas
Chantry assist him
in this process."

"No attempt was made to return to the details of the circumstances at MVBC for the purpose of further investigation...I did
not counsel in regards to an identified sin issue or pattern arising from the particular circumstances that took place during
Tom's time in ministry at MVBC." [Counselor's Letter] Why didn't the counselor address the circumstances which led to
Thomas Chantry's departure from Miller Valley Baptist Church?!

The counselor had full access to all those materials submitted in the complete report, yet he never considered "the
possibility that on some level he [Tom] punished children for his own pleasure?" [Level 1 Report, pg. 4, item 5.]
 Part II, Attachment 8, Page 2 of 2

Tom began
preaching in
September even
though his
counceling didn't
begin until
11/29/2001. Why
was he preaching
at all, let alone
BEFORE he
received any
counseling?!

Why didn't the elders of PRBC address any of the things

that the Level 1 Report advised them to address? Such
as:

"...the Elders who assume the oversight of him should

consider the possibility that on some level he punished
children for his own pleasure."

"It is our recommendation that the priority in dealing

with Tom should not be placed on returning him to
ministry..."

"...we do believe that the seriousness of the allegations

against Tom, the inconsistencies between the accounts
of the spankings and the apparent lack of complete
repentance would certainly prohibit any return to the
ministry until these issues are resolved by Tom and his
Elders."
0ODF
BHBJO
FWFSZUIJOH
JT
SFQPSUFE
UP
BOE
SFDPSEFE
CZ
UIF
"$
Part II, Attachment 9, Page 1 of 1