For Immediate Release:

[John]

For immediate release:

For over two years before the "voluntary association know as Peaceful Assembly Church" was formed - and for well over two years since the organization was formed - I consistently, repeatedly, and quite publically stated that I am "morally, philosophically, and spiritually opposed" to personally using the government to protect Peaceful Assembly Church from the government.

I have publicly, repeatedly, and consistently, said that, "I am relying on God - not men."

For those who would need (or prefer) things stated in their NH government's constitutional language; it is a matter on "conscience."
As in:
"[Art.] 4. [Rights of Conscience Unalienable.] Among the natural rights, some are, in their very nature unalienable, because no equivalent can be given or received for them. Of this kind are the Rights of Conscience."
and
"[Art.] 5. [Religious Freedom Recognized.] Every individual has a natural and unalienable right to worship God according to the dictates of his own conscience, and reason; and no subject shall be hurt, molested, or restrained, in his person, liberty, or estate, for worshipping God in the manner and season most agreeable to the dictates of his own conscience; or for his religious profession, sentiments, or persuasion; provided he doth not disturb the public peace or disturb others in their religious worship."

----------

For over two years before the "voluntary association known as Peaceful Assembly Church"" was ever formed, I had repeatedly, consistently, and publicly, stated that I was "prepared to loose everything - including my life" rather that get into fighting with the government.

Again, I publicly, repeatedly, and consistently, said that, "I am relying on God - not men."

In addition to matters of conscience:
It is clear that if I would be getting involved in fighting with the government I would - quite unacceptably - become hugely distracted from my mission: "To foster Peace as prescribed by God."

----------

While, it was well known - and accepted by me - that at the organization would be using the government much more than I would, I was not going to get involved.

As I have (subsequently) had to restate - ad nauseam - to the board: "I don't know how many more ways I can say it:"

----------

From about the time of their first board meetings, the board of directors began trying to convince me to file paperwork with the state government claiming rights with regard to back taxes.

After much talk - again - about my positions, which the board seemed mostly uninterested in and ignoring and/or dismissing - I, instead, signed paperwork relinquishing those rights to the organization.

Without getting into excruciating detail here - which would serve to further distract me - I'll just say that this very early interaction with the board was just their little warm-up for their further interaction with me - and it was a very early sign of many bad things to come.

-----------

In the two-and-a-quarter years since the board was formed there has been an enormous mission-drift by the board.

I'll give just a glimpse of that enormous drift here:

Early on, the board became angry that I was sticking to what I have said - and I was not joining in their fight.
Their anger got incrementally worse.

I believe that about one year ago, some on the board were floating - and advancing - the idea that I could be FORCED - via government subpoena - to talk to the lawyers.

Eventually a sheriff was sent here to try to serve a subpoena, which I avoided.

Tom Ploszaj -chairman. said he told the board that avoiding a subpoena is what normal people often do. He said that he told the board that this is why sheriffs are the ones who deliver subpoenas.

The board eventually began pestering me with their repeated demands that I cooperate in their fight with the government.
The "friendly" visits by the board's relentless "salesmen" could be its own separate story, which I'll avoid here.

Eventually, a sheriff was making more attempts to serve a subpoena.

----------

The more I had expressed displeasure with being put on the spot by surprise, the more the board was doing exactly that.

They even began having occasional unannounced board meetings here.

It seems that communication this poor could only be by intention - and by design.

The board's behavior was beginning to appear rather sneaky - and, quite frankly - creepy.

And then things got much worse.

----------

At one of their board meetings (held outside after one of the Regular Sunday Worship Meetings) board members began arriving and - with ZERO prior information shared with me - I repeat, ZERO information about this shared with me - they had on their agenda that John Redman was going to introduce himself to the board.

Quite coincidently, I had a long series of questions for the board members at the beginning of their meeting.

The questions all related to my UNCHANGED positions from 5 years ago, through those positions remaining unchanged while forming the organization, their individual knowledge of my positions along that time-line including when they accepted positions on the board, through my positions not having changed to this day; and their knowledge that I am one guy who is actually doing what he said he'd do.
Each question ended with:
"Did you not hear me? Did you not understand me? Or, did you not believe me?"

I needed to quite briefly (perhaps 5 to 10 minutes) leave their surprise meeting, so I, quietly, let the chairman (Tom Ploszaj) know that I would be right back - and that I wanted to be here for the item down the list, of Redman introducing himself.
The chairman quietly acknowledged.

I was back to the meeting in that 5 to 10 minutes, but the board was already finishing up with that item. Redman was saying that he was wanting "nothing more than assistant pastor."
After a tiny bit of discussion by the board, focused on the board's legal strategy and calling Redman (in relation to their legal strategy) "co-pastor.)
The board voted unanimously to "hire" Redman as "co-pastor" on the spot.

The board's relationship with Redman appears to have been so haphazard to have received ZERO - yes zero - DUE DILIGENCE,

----------

In their frustration with me in regards to their court case, in resent months, the board has made some very poor (though mostly all reversible) choices.
In their frustration, the board is currently acting quite contrary to the mission of Peaceful Assembly Church.

In my frustration with them, I have been very tempted to talk publicly about things which I've previously withheld.
If I do, they will surely blame me for loosing their court case.

----------

They have an agreement with me regarding my being the pastor and the sexton here - for life.

They may choose to deny it, because it is not in writing. I will not.

I am relying on God - not men.

The agreement (and understanding) has always been that if the organization ever became intolerably unhappy with me - either personally or professionally - that the organization would withdraw its support, give the property back, or give me enough money to make me happy to leave. In my position as the pastor, I am entitled to my private space and the semiprivate office, and that even if I was to take an extended sabbatical, I would never loose my rights to those spaces.
In addition to that agreement, I've stated, since the first members' meeting (where Tom Ploszaj began promoting the idea that "members can do whatever the membership says") that if the membership ever takes this in a direction in contradiction to the foundational mission, that I could withdraw my support.

----------

I do not want to make John Boanerges Redman out to be the biggest current problem for the mission of Peaceful Assembly Church.
He is not.

In various places, I (reluctantly) have previously (and recently) posted plenty (though certainly not all) information about Redman's behaviors.

Redman's presence here at Peaceful Assembly Church has been, and continues to be, a HUGE problem
Redman's behavior here (and elsewhere) is antithetical to the mission of Peaceful Assembly Church, but he is just a symptom of much bigger problems,

The bigger problems include pretending that ends justify the means - rather than admitting that the means we choose are often the ends.

----------

The board of directors brought John Boanerges Redman into the organization known as Peaceful Assembly Church for purposes that seem rather twisted.

I call on the board of directors to dismiss John Boanerges Redman - posthaste!

----------

JOHN BOANERGES REDMAN HAS A PROVEN - - - AND SELF-COnFESSED - - - PROPENCTY TOWARD VIOLENCE!!!!!

Let it be known that John Boanerges Redman is not welcome on this property.

John Boanerges Redman is the first - and only- person in Peaceful Assembly Church history to EARN this distinction.

-----------

NOW THE GOOD NEWS:

Despite these very very poor choices by the board, and by Mr, Redman, which distracted me for far too long, and pushed me to the precipice of walking away from Grafton Center, I Forgive them.

I also pray to God Almighty for His Forgiveness for any, even momentary, ill-will I have felt toward any of them. I hope that they can Forgive me as well.

After much prayer an meditation on these issues, as a matter of conscience, and in keeping with my calling from Almighty God, I WILL BE STAYING ON AS THE PASTOR AND THE SEXTON.

----------

More info later, but on this early Wednesday morning, on the 18th of November, 2015, before the sun comes over the eastern hill, behind Peaceful Assembly Church, here in Grafton Center, I can assure you that A REVIVAL IS AT HAND.

----------

For those unable to keep the commitment to the mission "To Foster Peace as prescribed by God" I have one but two words: PLEASE, DEPART.

For those who would want to create any more distractions here, PLEASE DEPART - POSTHASTE! Things will NOT go as you are planning.
In Peace and Revival,
@John Joseph Isaac Connell