It is very simple, really. What Would Jesus Do? How would he handle the situation, how would he have acted the day of the shooting, and how would he handle those that were affected after the shooting.

First, he would have NOT picked up a gun, we know that. But I do believe WE are the human ones, and the reaction of LB was perfectly HUMAN, which is inherently going to be flawed. He acted irrationally that day as a man, war veteran, Christian, whatever! He also acted IN FEAR and was trained to handle such situations and did what HE thought was right. Under no doctrine or law will you find a manual that explains HOW to react in that situation. I commend LB for his actions as most would not have even put themselves in harms way (which I assume was to help the congregation). Whether he acted for his own glory, or for the safety of the congregation, ONLY GOD KNOWS, and he will have to answer to that someday. But from the limited information I have read, LB did what HE thought was right for the benefit of OTHERS.

Second. The church SHOULD NOT shun UPON ANYONE, UNLESS physical HARM has been evidenced by that person towards any other individuals in the church. The mere fact that he poses a THREAT to the congregation is NOT enough for a CHURCH to disassociate anyone from them. TO ME, that is NOT CHRISTIAN. The purpose of the church is to lead people TO Christ. here is a distressed, potentially emotionally unstable (due to war vet) man, who witnessed several murders. HE SHOULD NOT BE OK. NOONE SHOULD BE after witnessing that. This is THE TIME for the church to step up and not worry about the almighty dollar (how the public will view their congregation, members, etc..) and to open their arms and help people like LB. I have seen it in so many other ways, its sickening!

Third: to quote James above “But ask any therapist/psychologist, and they will tell you, that you can’t lead a horse to water.”……. well, I appreciate all your civil law talk and legal interpretation, but the bottom line is this CHURCH should be focused on helping those that are lost or troubled…….. so when you say, “can’t lead a horse to water”…… well, ACTUALLY, you CAN lead a horse to water….the CHURCH is supposed to lead all its horses to “water”……….. but you can’t make them drink!!!! I don’t think (based on the information above) NLC wanted to help LB…..they merely wanted to help themselves.

NLC may be “trying to protect” its congregation but at the risk of losing one christian…..No chrsitian is “worth” losing over the risk of others. Chrisitanity is not based on that principle (UNLESS YOUR JESUS). If I understand it correctly, HE was the reason we do not have to sacrifice life for the sake of being saved! God/Jesus performed the ULTIMATE sacrifice for us to welcome and LOVE all, regardless of race, nationality, religion, or behaviors……. Unfortunately, most of these churches can’t see the forest through the tree$ ……..

WHAT WOULD JESUS DO!? He would NEVER have abandoned LB. NEVER. Shame on those responsible. Unfortunately some have to suffer for others actions, while FORTUNATELY we all have to answer for our own someday.

How could the kid kill himself with a jammed gun?

He didn’t. He was shot by an armed citizen. The last thing they want you to know even though the security gaurd who shot him said as much. Just like Virginia Tech. They don’t want us protecting ourselves. They would rather we die than have the power to defend ourselves(against them).

Quit your Mega-church today, join a small local church that still adheres to Christian principles. Go small, go local,

And you described very well how unequipped an evangelical structure (New Life Church) is to deal with someone who has been re-traumatized.

Therapy and healing can only take place in a safe and trusted setting.
We’ll have to agree to disagree, Larry B is not safe at New Life Church, leadership went public with their distrust and it wouldn’t matter if they had highly skilled professionals available.
They blew it.
I agree with Brian, they will keep blowing it.

Having seen trauma victims hurt, blamed, discredited, and shunned by fellow evangelicals; knowing in this situation five people are dead, including the shooter (who for all intensive purposes was raised in cultish system) we are going to see a lot more shootings, violence and a hear a lot more stories like Larry B’s.

Evangelical groups (ie: New Life Church) remain ill-equipped, continue to blame the victims, further their trauma, make private property decisions, use law enforcement, self-preservation PR, lawyers and marketers to justify how they deal with mentally and emotionally ill parishoners.

People aren’t buying the New Life spin.
Reconciliation doesn’t happen because a spiritual authority figure ‘demands’ it, reconciliation is a shared process, and a deeply spiritual one, guided by the Holy Spirit over time. 
There is no room for egos and structural agendas.

We can all hope and pray Mr. Bourbonnais is able to receive professional help as far away from New Life Church as possible, and goes on to help others.
He’s needed.
A new generation of war vets are coming home.

He told KRDO television that New Life officials don’t like his criticism of the security guard who wouldn’t confront the gunman.
“They said I denigrated the security staff and made them look bad,” Bourbonnais told KRDO.

Larry’s quote taken from this source:
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/22297690/

So I think New Life’s negative treatment of Larry is retaliation. As a former New Lifer (who left in the ’90s) I can tell you that image is everything to these people.

New Life trying to discredit Larry is the diversionary issue.

When I’ve confronted New Lifers about problems with their teachings and practices I’ve had some of these people respond with untrue character attacks against me. I see what appears to be a disturbingly similar pattern emerging with the church’s response to Larry.

Boyd’s behavior is similar to Haggard’s. Haggard threatened peaceful dissenters with the police and lawsuits.

Some background on Haggard/New Life:
http://www.christianissues.com/newlifechurch.html
(Boyd will never address the issues at the above site.)

Facts 4, 5 and 6 below can all be found on the internet in Larry’s interview with the media. To my knowledge they are also corroborated in police reports.

Fact 1 – Larry is a decorated war veteran: No argument here. This nation owes Larry and every war veteran a huge debt of gratitude. We should thank him for his service to our country.

Fact 2 – Larry’s service in Vietnam is irrelevant when analyzing whether his actions at New Life Church were appropriate: Vietnam was a war zone. New Life Church (and every church), in accordance with US Public Law, is a private organization and it’s property is private property. Vietnam was governed by the rules established by the Geneva Convention and the Uniform Code of Military Justice. New Life Church and it’s congregation is governed by US civil law and the rules established by the church itself.

Fact 3– US civil law had jurisdiction in the incident: Whoever responded to this incident, Larry or security guards, were required to follow US civil law. Wartime tactics and procedures were not appropriate in this situation, no matter how well intended.

Fact 4 – Larry put other people’s lives at risk: By his own admission, Larry attempted to take the gun out of one the church security guards hands responding to the incident. In doing so, he placed the security guards life at risk. By his own admission, Larry attempted to distract the gunmen causing the gunmen to take pot shots at him. This resulted in Larry getting wounded. It also resulted in the gunmen’s bullets going down the main hallway towards other people trying to evacuate and placing their lives at risk.

Fact 5 – Larry broke the law: By his own admission, he violated the crime scene by removing the gun from the dead gunmen’s hands. This is against the law. This is why police put tape around a crime scene to keep people away. This could have seriously hindered the police investigation by clouding the situation as to who shot the gunmen (i.e. custody of the weapon). Larry put his own fingerprints all over the gunmen’s handgun. The church security guards with police experience should have been allowed to handle this situation. The local police gave Larry grace on this matter.

Fact 6 – Larry wanted to further violate the crime scene: By his own admission, Larry told the security guard, who shot the gunmen, to shoot the gunmen in the head after the gunmen shot himself dead. This would have been an additional violation of the crime scene. The security guard declined to follow Larry’s advice.

Fact 7 – Larry is a “Christian-soldier:” Only the Lord God knows Larry’s true standing with the Almighty, but I will take for fact he is a Christian based upon his attendance at New Life Church, and the gentlemen above vouching for him. We have previously established the fact he was/is a soldier.

Fact 8 – New Life Church is required to uphold US civil law and ensure the security of its congregation: Even though New Life Church is a private organization, it and its congregation must abide by US civil law. It cannot allow members on their own volition to do whatever they want, or the church itself will be held legally liable. Additionally, as a private organization, it is has the inherent responsibility to look after the physical security of its congregation and to take actions in that regard.

With those facts established, lets analyze the situation. The board of any private organization would have concerns with Larry’s actions because he placed peoples lives at risk and broke the law. Would you want Larry on your private property participating in your organizational functions again without having the opportunity to discuss with him the need to follow directions, obeying the law, and not placing peoples lives at risk? I don’t think so. That’s the crux of New Life’s argument as best I can tell. There is nothing wrong with that. Any prudent organization would do the same thing, and as a private organization they have the legal right to do so. This is the “reconciliation” that needs to take place (answering the question of the individual above). I don’t know, but I suspect that Larry has refused to have that conversation with the pastoral staff of New Life Church. Because of his refusal to talk, New Life Church probably felt compelled to have its lawyers talk to him and to have him escorted off the campus until he does agree to talk to them. Yes, they are a church, but as mentioned above, they are also a private organization that must ensure compliance with US civil law, and they have a responsibility for the well being of their other 10,000 members.

What does it mean to be a “Christian-soldier?” More specifically, what does it mean to be a “Soldier of Christ” (2 Tim 2:3)? The bible is full of examples of soldiers who were men of God. The best example, which is appropriate here, is the story of the Roman Centurion, called out by Christ as having the greatest faith in all of Israel (Matt 8:5-13). The precepts of the Centurions faith were an understanding of submission to authority and obedience – “For I, too, am a man under authority, with soldiers under me…” This idea of submission to authority is usually very well understood by those who have been in the military. That said, many Christians, to include those who have been in the military, struggle with it because they know about “grace by faith.” However, “grace by faith” does not excuse the requirement of Christians to submit to authority and to be obedient to those who are appointed over them. Roman 13:1-3 specifically speaks to this concept, “Let every person be in subjection to the governing authorities.” In this case, Larry has an obligation as a Christian to meet with the pastoral staff (who biblically have spiritual authority over him), to assure them of his submission to US civil law, and assure them his actions in the future will not put others of the congregation at risk.

New Life Church is a church. No question there. They have an moral and biblical obligation to help Larry through this time. That is without question. I don’t believe anyone should question that. When you look at Larry actions, understand his Vietnam experience as best as one can, you come to the conclusion that he could potentially benefit from counseling and therapy. It would probably make him a better man and a better Christian. But ask any therapist/psychologist, and they will tell you, that you can’t lead a horse to water. The person has to want to be helped. I’m sure that New Life Church is more than willing to provide these services. What church wouldn’t want to help Larry given the situation that occurred and the circumstances? Give New Life some grace here.

My recommendation is the following. The individual above that knows Larry should contact him directly. It would appear that they are friends and are probably a Christian. They should counsel Larry to meet with the New Life pastoral staff and encourage him to agree to counseling.

You are correct, I personally do not know the church.

It is a mega church. If you get to know 10 or 20 people in a cell group you are doing well.

You are saying you know for a fact Larry B did not avail himself of collective counselling offers. I’ll take you at your word. You also say the church offered reconciliation.
We are told that came in the form of church lawyers.

He was critical of how church security dealt with Matthew Murray. He is a traumatized parishoner who didn’t fit into the square pegs being offered, and the size and culture of the church has little or no room for accomadation for his pain.

This played out in the media by the church also.
Leadership words are there for all of us to see.

I too have read other comments on Colorado blogs from people that know Larry and his girlfriend.
(Thank you William)

I can appreciate your anger at any of us who see the culture of this (and many other evangelical) churches of this size comes under scrutiny and comes up sorely wanting.
The media did not make this situation an either/or.
The church did.

I can appreciate your desire and need to cope by defending leadership (as did Jade). What occurred left thousands of people shaken. For some a service will be enough. For others it will not.

I can appeciate if you were there as a member of New Life you are privvy to information those of us discussing this do not have. If you know Larry, say so.

No reporter came forward with any proof Bourbonnais said what he did. Why not?

I agree with you on this point. Larry B’s experience and how he attempted to cope is a threat to leadership.
That is apparent in public statements and behavior; leadership chose to use police, a restraining order and lawyers.
Leaves many of us wondering who else they treated in a heavy handed manner.
Was the one on one offered with strings attached or as required by victims?

Blaming a witness and victim for not fitting into the dictated square holes doesn’t make sense to most of us.
I doubt Larry B was the only person who didn’t avail themselves of the counselling and ‘reconciliation’ the church offered.

What is the reconciliation being attempted James?
What does that mean?
Reconciliation for what?

Reading the press clippings and related blogs this morning in Budapest, Hungary it is clear to me that we want to find out the details of what took place.

Having lived abroad since 1991, my wife and I can provide witness to the poor image of America the mass shootings in American malls, schools, homes, and now even churches provides. What is going on in America today? There seem to be so many people in pain that strike out.

From afar it seems that one of the victims in this senseless shooting tragedy is suffering further. When Larry was in Vietnam, he served in a firebase that was attacked in an attempt to overrun it. Clearly he needs support, not condemnation.