Apologetics Index
Saturated in Abuse at YWAM Maui

Saturated in Abuse at YWAM Maui

as recounted by Walter Jones [pseudonym]


Important Note: The following account happened during a specific time period.
Discussion of issues brought about a change in Maui's leadership,
and this account should not be construed as having bearing on Maui's current leadership.
However, it continues to have implications about YWAM's international leadership.

I came to my DTS in Maui with high expectations of serving my God. I went through my DTS relatively happy, but had a nagging feeling that something was "off." It was only after my DTS, after I joined as a staff person that I realized the gross extent of manipulation and abuse going on. During my two years at the Maui base I witnessed subtle but potent spiritual abuse - controlling measures were used on all staff members, including myself. I was not the first to notice these problems, but I was the first to start a formal inquiry into the problem, and YWAM eventually investigated my concerns. Some of the problems I saw were examples of public humiliation of people for making mistakes, people who disagreed with leadership were made to feel like rebels. Often people were pressured to confess every dark secret in their lives yet there was no such transperancy with leadership. Some people were reminded of the shortcomings in their Christian walk, and were encouraged that if they stayed in YWAM all their problems would be solved. Elitism was promoted; an emphasis on keeping a good image was considered more important than being honest about one's feelings and performance was a norm Grey areas were not grey and leaders often told people whether it was black or white and favourite staff members of leadership were held up to the rest of the staff as examples. Overtime was regarded as a sign of spiritual maturity, and these are merely a few types of abuse that went on.

I felt it was important to address the issues in a spirit of love, so I put my thoughts to paper. When I first presented my letter of concern in October of 1993,1 it sent shock waves through the YWAM Maui base, and especially with the base leaders, Tom & Cindy Bauer. Virtually everyone agreed with my concerns, including assistant base director Mark Okazaki. Sadly, most of the YWAM leaders above the local level did not, and would later exert their power to cover up the problem. One such leader was YWAM's Pacific Regional director, Sosene Le'au, whom I had sent a copy of my letter to. I asked Sosene to look into my allegations, investigate them and to oversee the situation so that if relationship could be restored between myself and the Bauers, he could help that process as well. As it turned out in the end, he did just the opposite, and counselled the Bauers never to talk to me again.2 Sosene never contacted me during the process until a year later, even though I had made requests for information from him five times. 3 He made me feel like I was the problem, and he ignored me until he felt it was convenient for him to write me. Moreover, in his investigation he only interviewed select people, which did not include any of the general staff.4 Eventually Sosene Le'au wrote to finally answer my repeated requests for information and respond to my concerns. Sosene's fundamental conclusion to my allegations was that they were unfounded, and he wrote, "I have not seen any areas where [Cindy Bauer] was malicious or unbiblical in the issues you mentioned."5 Sosene eventually moved on to a new post and was replaced by Frank Naea.

From the moment I sent my initial letter of concern to Tom Bauer in October of 1993, Tom tried to change the focus of debate off of whether or not the allegations were true, to the method I used to bring correction.6 7 Tom steadfastly asserted that I had not followed the Matt. 18 principle in bringing correction, and Tom used this point to get the focus of investigation off him, and on to myself and others who made the allegations. To him I was the enemy, since I had not followed procedure the way he thought I should have. Others were targets too, including Danny Lehmann, leader of the Hawaii council and the only leader involved who wanted to resolve the situation in a godly manner. The list goes on. Tom tried to divert from the issues and appease me by finally mailing me a response that was unspecific and extremely vague.8 I asked for a more specific response, but due to Tom's deliberate delays, I was to wait a long time. In the interim, by October of 1994, Danny Lehmann and Jim Pitts, YWAM's former Utah director, prepared and sent out copies of a questionnaire9 with the intention of finding out how other people felt and see if there was a pattern. It was sent out to many of Maui's former workers and literally all the results came back saying that people had felt abused by the Bauers' use of power.10 Based largely on these results and my testimony, the Hawaii council decided to place the Bauers under discipline, which included removing them from their positions for one year.11 This was a positive move that was soon to be complimented with another.

In early January of 1995 I received a four-page response from Tom Bauer on behalf of the Maui base in which they agreed to over 80% of the concerns that I had documented in my letter from October of 1993.12 Each of the Maui council members also enclosed personal apologies to me in addition to the corporate apology from YWAM Maui.13 I was greatly encouraged by this response. I knew there was the possibility that I would not be correct in every allegation of abuse I made, but by the Maui council agreeing with over 80% of what I said, I felt that my assessment had been a fair one. I wrote the Maui council back, telling them that I accepted their letter to me as an appropriate response to my concerns, and most important, that I forgave them. I told them that I was very interested in restoring a friendship with them, and that if they were interested, could they let me know.14 Today I have been able to regain my friendships with all the Maui council members except the Bauers - they never contacted me regarding this offer of friendship, so one has to wonder if bitterness has crept into their hearts. Sadly, it appeared that myself and others who had tried to bring "carection" to them lost their friendship, and one of our original goals was to maintain a friendship with them.

Unfortunately, my joy in having this situation resolved was soon shattered by actions taken by Tom Bauer. My discovery of things he said before and after this point made me question the sincerity of his apologies. First, when Tom made confessions, he always disguised his apologies with words that needed interpretation. For example, at two staff meetings regarding the issue of abuse he said , "If I have hurt any of you, please forgive me."15 Phrases like that leave a lot of room for interpretation, and do not denote a true admission of guilt. Further, his wife Cindy had always taught in the DTS schools during her "Repentance and Clear Conscience" week that if a person uses the phrase "if I have hurt you . . . " in their apology, this does not connote true repentance, and is inappropriate for someone to ask for forgiveness this way.16 Once, when someone asked Tom if he is sincere in his "repentance," he replied that he will only confess to what he is "convicted of."17

Another reason to suspect the sincerity of Tom's confession and willingness to change is because immediately after the Hawaii council handed down its ruling, Tom initiated an appeal process to overturn this decision. Just the simple act of Tom resisting his authorities and their decision casts doubt on his sincerity. He may say that he has repented, but if he refuses to follow through on the disciplinary process, it shows an attitude of rebellion and calls his apology into question. Hence, by saying "If I have hurt you . . . " he puts part, if not all of the blame on the offended party for taking offense in the first place, and in the end the confessor looks innocent.18 I have asked Tom's leaders in YWAM why I should believe that his repentance was sincere and Frank Naea, the new Pacific regional director, concluded that Tom's confession was sincere because he spoke the right words.19

By March 1995 Tom Hallas, YWAM's Pacific & Asia Field director and close friend to Tom Bauer,20 got involved in the situation and began a calculated process of cover-up. His first move was to veto21 the decision of the Hawaii council just as they were about to enforce it. He put all decisions on hold until the matter was "investigated" by him, and vetoed a decision supported by many YWAM leaders. This prompted myself and others to write him in early April and ask him to explain why he did this.22 Many of us also wrote Loren Cunningham, founder of YWAM, asking him to get involved in the situation.23 Both these men callously ignored our communication and were vague and evasive in their responses. For example, I faxed Tom Hallas twice and asked him to clarify what he meant in one of his letters but he never ever responded to me.24 Loren never ever wrote me personally, and the most I received was communication from his assistant giving excuses why Loren would not get involved in the situation.25 I was being ignored by YWAM's highest leaders as were other participants in the affair. I was also being frustrated. When I initiated the process, the appeal structure was such that a person could appeal twice and then the decision(s) made were final. Half-way through my appeal they changed the rules of appeal and allowed for multiple appeals,26 causing me to undertake a seemingly endless cycle of appeals to various YWAM leaders. To the best of my recollection, the person in charge was changed nine times during the process, from Sosene to Danny to Randy Thomas (a Hawaii council member) to Tom Hallas, to David Boyd, to Tom Hallas, to Frank Naea, to Danny, and then back to Frank. It felt like a game to frustrate me and deter my efforts, and the "changing-the leader-game" did not stop until it seemed like Tom Bauer had found someone who was willing to cover up his sin.

In the summer of 1995 my wife and I were able to visit Maui for two weeks, and we learned that during the weekend of Aug. 11-13, there was a meeting in Kona Hawaii to discuss the Maui issue and make final decisions. The only people invited were Tom & Cindy Bauer, Danny Lehmann, Frank Naea, and Tom Hallas; not myself or other key people concerned about the abuse issues.27 Moreover Tom Hallas and Frank Naea chose not to consult any of the general staff who were still in Maui28 and did not make a good effort to really hear and receive anything current Maui council members told them.29 They never read the results of the questionnaires, which reflected people's hurt and devastation and Hallas actually called the questionnaire "wicked"30 and "demonic."31. Despite all of the good opportunities they had to get accurate information from people who had worked with the Bauers, Tom and Frank chose to ignore it, and they admitted this.32 A majority decision was reached that weekend which essentially said that although there were many accusations made against the Bauers, they were false slander, and the people bringing the allegations were wrong. Further, they said that in all Tom & Cindy Bauer did, they had never sinned, were never unbiblical, had never violated people and had merely missed a few blind spots in their leadership.33 Things can be blind spots if they happen once or twice, but when they are repeated through the years, and people are confronted on these issues, they are no longer blind spots. If they are repeated, that person is knowingly sinning, and since Tom Bauer had a large file of complaints from over the years, he was aware of the problem.

In a letter of response Iasked Tom Hallas ten specific questions for clarification purposes regarding his decisions and again asked him to reconsider.34 Tom did not answer any of my questions directly and was evasive.35 He recommended to me that I forget the matter and read some good Christian books; the most important thing to him was forgiveness. I agreed with him, but pointed out that until one deals with the issues of abuse, how can the situation truly be dealt with?36 Forgiveness may be granted, but if the problem is still ignored and not dealt with, then that is wrong. The problem needs to be addressed first, and once that is done, true relationship can be restored. Restoring a false relationship is unbiblical. As Jesus says in Luke 17:3 "If your brother sins, rebuke him, and if he repents, forgive him." This passage seems to indicate that the forgiveness process incorporates the initial action of repentance on the part of the sinner. I informed Tom of my deep disappointment in his inability to take leadership and answer direct questions and advised him that he should seek the Lord for help in this area. He never responded, as usual, but that was fine with me since talking to him about issues is unproductive.

The only thing Tom Hallas or Frank Naea tried in order to address the concerns of people who were abused was to invite them to address their complaints to the Bauers once more.37 Since they believed the questionnaire was evil, they invented their own method, I believe, so that they could say they addressed these people's concerns. Further, it had to be done their way. I pointed out to Hallas that this was not a good approach because I personally know many ex-Maui staff members who were spiritually abused and are still too scared to contact the Bauers to this day.38 The respondents appreciated the questionnaire method because it was candid, and yet they could still express their hurts. Hallas did not care about this condsideration and pressed his agenda through despite wide-spread protest.

On a peculiar note, the Bauers eventually did leave the Maui base, but it was not for disciplinary reasons; in fact, Hallas and Naea had exonerated their reputations. The reason they left was that their reputations in Maui were ruined and because they had strained relationships with almost every worker still in Maui.39 Hallas made a personal effort to compensate for their departure however. Since the Bauers had not sinned according to him, Tom Bauer was allowed to keep all positions he had on YWAM councils (except for base leadership, as noted) before allegations were made against him. Further, Hallas invited them to restart their ministry in Australia, where Tom Hallas works out of.40 Tom Hallas further stated in the same letter that he would be making a personal appeal on behalf of the Bauers for financial assistance to resettle and undertake various other projects41 which included transferring King's Kids Hawaii funds to the Bauers and resettling them at another YWAM location. I advised him to quit pursuing this ungodly endeavor,42 but as usual he did not respond.

Hallas went beyond a personal appeal for getting the Bauers money, and ignored the fact that Cindy Bauer had gleaned money from YWAM accounts when she had signing authority over its accounts. The Bauers used this money for various personal items including trips, counselling school and a new vehicle.43 Tom Hallas never responded to my questions on these money "transfers," but after much prompting, Frank Naea finally did and basically defended the decision.44 I pointed out that it is special treatment to allow the Bauers to use YWAM money for personal use when the rest of us are not given the same priveledge. One of YWAM's foundational values is that each worker is not paid by the Mission itself,45 and yet the Bauers received these funds at the same time they were working regular jobs in Seal Beach California while on sabbatical. (For clarification, I am in no way interested in receiving monetary funds from YWAM. I simply pursued this argument to show YWAM how their decisions were unfair. I was never serious about receiving money, and I made this clear to Frank Naea when I first pursued this reasoning with him).46

In January of 199647 I contacted Loren Cunningham again in hope that he would get involved but again he excused himself from the debate and referred me once again to Frank Naea.48 Frank once again indicated that he supported Hallas' decisions. He added that he hoped to meet with me soon, during his upcoming trip to British Columbia. In response to Frank's stance of defiance, I contacted each member of YWAM's Global Leadership team with my appeal, asking them if there was anything that they could do to positively change the problem. I outlined my concerns briefly and presented various pieces of documentation about why the accusations against the Bauers were true, and why they should therefore be under discipline.49 After writing twenty-one Global Leadership members, I received only one response back. This Global Leadership member noted that he was informed that the Bauers were under discipline, which indicated that false information was being told to various leaders. It seemed a new twist on things was developing, which was later confirmed at my private meeting with Frank Naea.

In the middle of June I had the opportunity to meet personally with Frank Naea. As had been his and Tom Hallas' aim for some time, our meeting was to be an opportunity to tie up a loose end for Frank. He presented his perspective on various aspects related to the situation and it seemed like he really wanted me to understand why things happened the way they had. However, he would not change his viewpoint on anything and pressed his point. Things did not sit right with me. One very important idea that I heard for the first time was that Frank felt that the Bauers actually were under discipline. He said that since they were no longer in Maui, they were under discipline. This was discipline to him. I said that it was too convenient for Tom Bauer to "submit" to some the Hawaii council's recommendations after the disciplinary aspect of it is taken away. That way, Tom Bauer appears submissive but in the end he can say that he was never disciplined. I also pointed out that unless it is stated that it is discipline, it is not discipline. Frank could not accept this interpretation, nor any different interpretation of events other than what he and Tom Hallas had already decided. When asked what he thought about other people's opinions about this case, even YWAM leaders' opinions, he said that they are "welcome to [their] opinion."50

Based on Tom Hallas' (and YWAM's) reluctance to be flexible in his decision-making and consider the opinions of those people who had closely worked with the Bauers (all of who were unhappy with Hallas' decisions), I decided to follow the post-Matt. 18 principle of 1 Tim 5:19-20, and rebuke leadership publicly. I contacted over one hundred YWAM centres worldwide appealing for any assistance they could give and indicated that I was very close to going public with my concerns.51 I asked for a meeting of myself, Jim Pitts, Mark Okazaki, and Danny Lehmann with the Global Leadership team to discuss the situation and hopefully convince them to overturn Tom Hallas' decisions. I asked for a response within one week, but actually ended up giving YWAM five weeeks. After sending those Emails, Jim Stier, the President of YWAM contacted with me. In a final attempt to have this issue settled without public fanfare I asked Stier about the possibility of the case going to an independent arbitration board, whose rulings would be final, and no further actions would be taken by the parties in the dispute regardless of what decisions were made.52 I asked this because of my desire to keep this issue from the public, and because it had been noted to me as a possibility in extreme cases where mediation is needed.53 I considered this issue such a case.

Stier later responded and stated that he would have to ask Naea and Hallas if they would be willing to submit their decisions to arbitration.54 I had already asked these men the same question a week earlier.55 After nearly a month of hearing nothing from either Tom Hallas or Frank Naea, I Emailed them56 and asked for a response, one way or another, about their willingness to submit to the arbitration process. I asked for a response within a week, since they had already had a month to make this decision, and added that if I did not receive any answer, I would presume that this meant their answer was "no." That week deadline came and went, so I had to conclude that Tom Hallas was not willing to submit his judgement to any source outside his own being. I saw that YWAM was not willing to consider any changes to the decisions made, and that they preferred to cover up spiritual abuse rather than being open, honest, and dealing with it. I do not feel it is right to blindly smile and endorse an organization that prefers to deal with sin in this fashion, so I followed the 1 Tim. 5: 19,20 principle of rebuking leadership publicly and informed various organizations and individuals, including those of you who read this article.

Specific Sins YWAM has Committed in this Matter

1. Spiritual Abuse. Full-blown abuse occured at the Maui base under the Bauers' leadership, much of which they were confronted on, but they never wanted to deal with the issues, repent, or make restitution.

2. Cover-up. Tom Bauer always tried to cover up the issues, turn the accusations around, and make the accusers appear as the problem. YWAM's international leadership has done this by ignoring my pleas, and by allowing Tom Hallas and Frank Naea to silence their opposition and ignore critical people involved in the situation. Finally, the President, Jim Stier, has done this as well by publishing a response that seeks to label me a spiritual terrorist, thereby getting the public's attention off the concerns I raise. This by itself is as a cover-up manouver.

3. Biased investigation. Tom Hallas and Frank Naea did not talk to key individuals involved in the situation and Naea admitted that to me personally. They chose to ignore important pieces of evidence and testimony before they made their decisions, and were not interested in exploring these options when they were offered. Moreover, Tom Hallas should not have been involved in the situation due to his close friendship with Tom Bauer.

4. Lack of Accountability. YWAM displayed an attitude of contempt for anyone having an opinion different from theirs. They rarely listened to the opinions of these people, and never ever took any of their advice when making decisions. This shows lack of accountability. Moreover, in my final appeal to YWAM when I asked for the case to be reviewed by an arbitration board, YWAM would not submit its wisdom to any source outside of its own organization.

5. Theft. The Bauers clearly took money that did not belong to them when they misused their signing authority on YWAM Maui and King's Kids Hawaii's accounts. They took money given by donors to support ministry projects and used it for their own use. They will never have to replace that money. What is worse, high level YWAM leaders, Naea, Hallas, Stier and Cunningham gave their approval to this theft by ignoring the theft and not making the Bauers replace it. Moreover, they did not discipline the Bauers for this.

6. Special Treatment. James 2:1 says that we should not show partiality in our dealings with one another. Despite this direction in scripture, YWAM did everything they could to protect the Bauers from discipline and actually rewarded them with money, position and prestige in the aftermath of this situation. However, they would not forward the same type of benefits to the abuse victims in this situation. If they pay for the Bauers' counselling needs, they should do the same for others.

As a footnote, now that the Bauers are no longer at YWAM Maui, I believe the credibility of that base is good again. The problem was mainly with the Bauers, and everyone else who I felt was manipulative has sincerely apologized to me and has attempted to make up for their sin. I know most of the leaders who operate the Maui base now, and I give them my endorsement as Christian leaders.

The People Involved

Walter Jones [pseudonym]. I am the author of this article, and thus importance in this matter is plain.

Jim Pitts is the former Utah base director. His importance is that he had a deep friendship with the Bauers for roughly nine years. He helped the Bauers pioneer the Maui base, and served on the Maui council and as the School of Evangelism leader. When he left to pioneer the Utah base, he was sent out with the Bauers' full blessings. Jim drew up the questionnaire, and did everything he could to see a positive change.

Mark Okazaki. Mark is also very important, since he helped pioneer the Maui base with the Bauers, coming over from Honolulu with them. He was the DTS director in Maui and the assistant base director. He also attempted to make positive changes. Currently he is counsellor and team leader of Transitional Living Services of the Syracuse (USA) Rescue Mission.

Danny Lehmann, leader of YWAM's Honolulu base and author of several books. Also leader of the Hawaii council which investigated my and other people's concerns. It was Danny who authorized the questionnaire mail-out. Danny was helpful in the early stages of investigation but, in my opinion, gave up on the matter too early.

Tom & Cindy Bauer, former directors of YWAM Maui. They are the persons who my original concern was about, since they knowingly fostered abuse. Most of my concerns were with Cindy. Before I addressed my concerns they had a file with complaints from people before I came for DTS. Now the focus of my concern is on how YWAM has handled the situation, but I am still concerned about the Bauers personally, and that they get the proper help they need.

Tom Hallas, chair of the Pacific and Asia Field office; one step below the President's position. Tom is significant because he is the one person impeding God's loving discipline toward the Bauers and who has covered up truth. He has let his friendship interfere with his judgement, and points the finger at others for following the supposed "wrong" method and yet cannot admit that about himself. He, Jim Stier, and Loren Cunningham are the only persons in YWAM who could changes things.

Frank Naea, chair of the Pacific Regional office. Frank is also important. Although he came into this situation half-way through, taking over Sosene Le'au's position, he echoed the sentiments of Tom Hallas and would not consider making changes.

Loren Cunningham. As founder of YWAM, Loren is very significant because he is one of the persons who can overturn the decisions made by Tom Hallas. Loren has correspondence from myself and others of like mind (i.e., Okazaki & Pitts), and correspondence from those on the other side of the issue such as Bauer, Naea and Hallas. He has enough information on the issue so that he could make an intelligent decision, instead, he has chosen to remove himself from involvement without comment.

Jim Stier, the President of YWAM. Jim came into this situation late in the events, at a time when I was on the verge of going public. I had the impression he was going to intervene in this dispute, however, when push came to shove, he, Tom Hallas, and Frank Naea would not agree to an arbitration process. Jim is essentially the "highest court" within YWAM, and to this day has not dealt with the situation in a godly manner. Instead, he covered up the issue and has undertaken a campaign to discredit me, including using the Internet, printed material, video, and likely the lecture platform. This man runs YWAM!

Sosene Le'au, former chair of the Pacific Regional office. Sosene was important in the beginning part of this matter, but I soon learned of his close friendship with the Bauers that made his judgement one-sided as well. His investigation into the matter was poor, and he made no effort to comfort me with the trauma of having been abused. His only significance now is that he is a member of the Global leadership team and could shake things up if he wanted, but due to his friendship will not.


1. See letter, Walter Jones [pseudonym] to YWAM Maui. 14 Oct. 1993.

2. Telephone conversation, unrecorded. Cindy Bauer to Jim Pitts; date unknown. Cindy told Jim that Sosene Le'au had advised them (the Bauers) that once they had responded to Calvin, they should not have any more communication with him.

3. First Attempt: See letter, Walter Jones [pseudonym] to Sosene Le'au, 14 Oct. 1993. Second Attempt: See fax, Walter Jones [pseudonym] to Pacific Regional Office, 29 Nov. 1993. Third Attempt: See letter, Walter Jones [pseudonym] to Pacific Council, 9 Dec. 1993. Fourth Attempt: Telephone conversation unrecorded, Walter Jones [pseudonym] to Sosene Le'au, Mid-Dec. 1993. Fifth Attempt: See memo, Walter Jones [pseudonym] to Sosene Le'au, 6 April 1994.

4. See letter, Sosene Le'au to Walter Jones [pseudonym], 31 Oct. 1994. See also letter, Mark Okazaki to Walter Jones [pseudonym], 5 March 1996, p. 2.

5. See letter, Sosene Le'au to Walter Jones [pseudonym], 31 Oct. 1994.

6. See fax What Is An Evil Report?, Tom Bauer to Phil Gazley (my former regional leader), 5 Nov. 1993. See also document Rediscovering A Forgotten Truth, Tom Bauer to Phil Gazley received 23 Nov. 1993.

7. Tom's strategy of trying to take the focus of investigation off himself and placed on his accusers, and making them look like the problem is recognized by even Tom's closest supporters. Tom Hallas admitted "[The Bauers] have at times demonstrated a resistance to receive correction, criticism and complaint; There has been a pattern of defense, justification, and discredidation, which has been perceived to be attacking." See letter, Tom Hallas to Walter Jones [pseudonym], 27 Sept. 1995. Frank Naea has also echoed similar sentiments, see Email, Frank Naea to Walter Jones [pseudonym], 12 April 1996.

8. See letter, [no name given] to Walter Jones [pseudonym], received 9 May 1994.

9. See questionnaire, Evaluation of YWAM Base Leaders and Council Members. The questionnaire's mail-out was authorized by Danny Lehmann leader of the Hawaii council.

10. These responses can be validated by contacting Danny Lehmann of the Hawaii council. The completed questionnaires were returned to Danny and were read and contemplated over by him. However, when Tom Hallas decided that the questionnaire method was "wrong," he asked for the results to be turned over to him. In obedience, Danny mailed him the questionnaire results and did not make photocopies of them before he mailed the originals. Frank Naea tells me that the questionnaire results no longer exist and have not since soon after the time they were turned over to Tom Hallas.

11. This also can be supported by contacting Danny Lehmann. This author does not know if the Hawaii council's decisions were ever written down, but they were certainly voiced, and these were the decisions made.

12. See letter, YWAM Maui to Walter Jones [pseudonym], 30 December 1994.

13. See letters, Tom Bauer to Walter Jones [pseudonym], 27 Dec. 1994; Cindy Bauer to Walter Jones [pseudonym], 29 Dec. 1994; Dave Stone to Walter Jones [pseudonym], no date; Mark Okazaki to Walter Jones [pseudonym], 26 December 1994.

14. See letter, Walter Jones [pseudonym] to the YWAM Maui council, 22 Jan. 1995.

15. See minutes of YWAM Maui staff meetings, 7 March 1995 and 14 April 1995.

16. This can be validated by asking anyone who worked on DTS staff, since they heard this phrase quite often. This is also validated by Maui's former DTS director, see letter Mark Okazaki to Walter Jones [pseudonym], 4 July 1996.

17. See minutes of YWAM Maui staff meeting, 14 April 1995, p. 2.

18. And if one reads the complete notes for the staff meetings mentioned above, one will see that this happened to some staff members (i.e., taking blame on themselves instead of keeping it focused on the accused).

19. See Email, Frank Naea to Walter Jones [pseudonym], 12 April 1996.

20. We learned this in late March 1995 through word of mouth from several people involved in the matter. I asked Tom Hallas if this was true but he refused to answer the question. However, this was later substantiated by Frank Naea. See Email, Frank Naea to Walter Jones [pseudonym], 12 April 1996, p. 2.

21. See letter, Tom Hallas to Walter Jones [pseudonym], 15 May 1995.

22. See letter, Jim Pitts to Tom Hallas, 12 June 1995. See also letter, Walter Jones [pseudonym] to Tom Hallas, 6 April 1995. See also letter, Mark Okazaki to Walter Jones [pseudonym], 5 March 1996, p. 3.

23. I sent three letters to Loren Cunningham before I received a response. See letters, Walter Jones [pseudonym] to Loren Cunningham, 6 April 1995; 6 June 1995; 10 July 1995. See also letter, Jim Pitts to Loren Cunningham, 4 April 1995. Mark Okazaki also wrote Loren Cunningham four times, as quoted in letter, Mark Okazaki to Walter Jones [pseudonym], 5 March 1996. Others wrote Loren as well, but I am unsure exactly who, what they said, and the date of their letters.

24. See Faxes, Walter Jones [pseudonym] to Tom Hallas, 12 June 1995 and 9 July 1995.

25. See letter, Andy Beach, assistant to Loren Cunningham to Walter Jones [pseudonym], 18 July 1995.

26. See document, YWAM Justice/Appeals Process. Working Draft #4: 18 March 1995. Sent with letter, Andy Beach to Walter Jones [pseudonym], 18 July 1995. This new appeals process was made up directly because of the appeals going on in this issue.

27. This fact was established on our visit to the YWAM Maui base by base pastor Tom Hough and Maui council member Tom Osterhaus. Since this time other people have repeated the same understanding of events to us, and I have asked both Tom Hallas and Fred Naea if this is true and they have not denied it - thus, I am presuming it is true. See also letter, Mark Okazaki to Walter Jones [pseudonym], 5 March 1996, p. 3.

28. See Email, Fred Naea to Walter Jones [pseudonym], 12 April 1996, p. 3.

29. For example, current Maui council member Chris Lautsbaugh expressed his disappointment with his personal meeting with Tom Hallas, and Hallas' decisions, see Email Chris Lautsbaugh to Walter Jones [pseudonym], 19 May 1996.

30. This was stated to Danny Lehmann at the meetings in Kona Hawaii sometime during 11-13 Aug. 1995.

31. This was stated at a meeting of several concerned people with Tom Hallas in early June 1996. Tom Hallas actually stated this to John Ganghini, a former YWAM Maui worker who currently lives in Maui but is no longer part of YWAM.

32. See Email, Frank Naea to Walter Jones [pseudonym], 12 April 1996.

33. See letter, Tom Hallas to Walter Jones [pseudonym], 27 Sept. 1995. This form letter listing the decisions made was sent out to all of the people involved in the Maui situation and for the most part did not deviate in content in letters sent to those of us who opposed Tom Hallas' decisions. However, in cases where Tom Hallas suspected the recipient might be sympathetic to the Bauers, Hallas made an appeal for financial assistance to these people. This shows Tom Hallas' bias. See letter on file, Tom Hallas to Ron Fike, 27 Sept. 1995.

34. See fax, Walter Jones [pseudonym] to Tom Hallas, 28 Oct. 1995.

35. See letter, Tom Hallas to Walter Jones [pseudonym], 10 Nov. 1995.

36. See letter, Walter Jones [pseudonym] to Tom Hallas, 27 Nov. 1995.

37. See letter, Tom Hallas to Walter Jones [pseudonym], 27 Sept. 1995, p. 1-2.

38. I pointed this out to Tom in my letter to him, Walter Jones [pseudonym] to Tom Hallas, 27 Nov. 1995, p. 2. I have also been informed that only two people out of the roughly thirty people who received questionnaires decided to personally contact the Bauers. This shows that their pain is still too great to have dialogue with the Bauers and that the method Tom Hallas chose did not work.

39. The notion of reputation being a factor in why the Bauers would not return to Maui was relayed to me during our visit to Maui in Aug. 1995 by Maui council member Tom Osterhaus who heard this information from a Kona council member. Tom Hallas never responded to this assertion, but after asking several times Frank Naea finally did. He denies that this is a reason the Bauers left. He does agree however, that strained relationships is one reason they left Maui. See Email, Frank Naea to Walter Jones [pseudonym], 12 April 1996.

40. See letter, Tom Hallas to Walter Jones [pseudonym], 27 Sept. 1995, p. 2. I know that the Bauers declined an offer to move to YWAM Australia and an offer to move to YWAM's base in Mazatlan Mexico to work for YWAM's "Surfers for Missions" ministry. Apparently they finally decided to work for "Saints Alive," a ministry to Mormons, and are based out of Honolulu Hawaii USA.

41. See letter, Tom Hallas to Ron Fike, 27 Sept. 1995, p. 2.

42. See Email, Walter Jones [pseudonym] to Tom Hallas, 23 Feb. 1996.

43. I was informed about these actions by Tom Osterhaus, a Maui council member at the time, and given a dollar figure of about $30,000.00 US. I asked both Tom Hallas and Frank Naea if this was true. Tom Hallas, as usual, gave me no response, but after much prodding Frank Naea did. Frank did not deny that money had gone toward the purposes stated, and he even confirmed that a van was purchased for the Bauers and that money was released for them to attend a Raffa counselling session. Frank did give clarification on the dollar amount however, and informed me that the dollar amount was too high. I asked Frank for a rough estimate on how much Cindy Bauer was able to take while she had the signing authority on the account, but I received no response. My conclusion is that if Frank does not deny that money was used for the various flights, which was reported to me by a very reliable source, and if he confirms other details that I was told, and if he corrects the parts of information I received which were incorrect (the dollar figure), I conclude that the rest of the information that he did not comment on is true, or else he would have corrected that as well.

44 See Email, Frank Naea to Walter Jones [pseudonym], 12 April 1996.

45. See Foundational Values of Youth With A Mission, value number 19: "YWAM is called to practice a life of dependence upon God and His people for financial provision, both corporately and individually. (Matt. 6:25-33, Phil. 4:6-7, 10-20, 3 Jim 5-8).

46. See Email, Walter Jones [pseudonym] to Frank Naea, 20 April 1996.

47. See Email, Walter Jones [pseudonym] to Loren Cunningham, 20 Feb. 1996.

48. See Email, Loren Cunningham to Walter Jones [pseudonym], 20 Feb. 1996.

49. See letter, Walter Jones [pseudonym] to YWAM's Global Leadership team members (21 people), 7 May 1996.

50. See notes, meeting Kelowna BC: Frank Naea and Walter Jones [pseudonym], 19 June 1996.

51. See letter by Walter Jones [pseudonym]: An Open Letter To Youth With A Mission Leadership Re The Maui Situation. 26 June 1996.

52. See Email, Walter Jones [pseudonym] to Jim Stier, 1 July 1996, p. 2.

53. See handout YWAM Justice/Appeals Process Working Draft #4: March 18 1995, p. 2.

54. See Email, Jim Stier to Walter Jones [pseudonym], 2 July 1996.

55. See Email, Walter Jones [pseudonym] to Frank Naea, 4 July 1996. See also Email, Walter Jones [pseudonym] to Tom Hallas, 7 July 1996.

56. See Emails, Walter Jones [pseudonym] to Frank Naea, and Walter Jones [pseudonym] to Tom Hallas 3 Aug. 1996. I also Emailed Jim Stier a similar message and asked him to ensure that I received an answer by 10 Aug. 1996. Since he was interested in intervening in this dispute, I thought he should also be told about the Aug. 10 deadline so that he could encourage Tom and Frank to respond, see Email Walter Jones [pseudonym] to Jim Stier, 3 Aug. 1996.

Last Update:15 December 1998

Copyright: Walter Jones © All rights reserved.