Don Lindblad

This walk-through focuses on Don Lindblad and his involvement with ARBCA and Tom Chantry.  He is pastor of Trinity Reformed Baptist Church in Kirkland, WA and likely remains a Trustee at IRBS Theological Seminary (IRBSTS removed the Trustee page from their website).

#1 Don Lindblad & Timeline of Events

This document is an abbreviated version of the ARBCA & Timeline of Events timeline specific to Don Lindblad regarding what we can ascertain from the currently available documentation.

#2 Informal Council’s Level 2 Report (12/16/2000) & Confidential Minutes (1/4/2001)

This document contains the Informal Council’s Level 2 Report and the documents that record that the 2000 AC was to receive a copy of it and actively concealed the fact that there were multiple levels of reports (picture of men on the 2000 AC, Confidential Minutes dated 1/4/2001, Telephonic Interview with Pastor Don Lindblad dated 3/21/2018 page 52 lines 17-20, Letter from Jamie Howell with Testimony of Bob Selph, and AC Report Part 2 page 13).

Level 2 Report

“That during his ministry at Miller Valley Baptist Church, Thomas Chantry did volunteer to tutor four children from three separate church families.  Each child was subjected to inappropriate physical discipline in the course of their instruction.” [Page 1, last paragraph]

“That there still remain serious factual differences between Thomas Chantry and the four children he disciplined during his ministry at Miller Valley.  These factual differences include the purpose, frequency and severity of the physical punishment.  It is recommended that the Elders who assume the oversight of Thomas Chantry [Tom Lyon and Mark McCormick] address these differences because it is the opinion of this informal council that his repentance may not be complete.” [Page 3, item 7]

“That Thomas Chantry endeavor to seek full repentance from each of the four children and their parents who have been the subject of physical discipline by him.  It is recommended that the Elders who assume the oversight of Tom Chantry [Tom Lyon and Mark McCormick] assist him with this process.” [Page 3, item 8]

Confidential Minutes

The AC received a report concerning the Council sent to Prescott, AZ, concerning the difficulties between former pastor Tom Chantry and the church. Three reports will be distributed: a general report to be sent to all the churches, a middle level report sent to all the AC members (to remain confidential), and a much fuller report to be given only to nine individuals involved.

Mr. McKnight is to e-mail the public statement to be inserted. Distinction of 3 levels of reports is to remain confidential!! Only the public statement is to be sent to the churches or noted in the public minutes.” [Page 9, item 2]

Don Lindblad Telephonic Interview

LINDBLAD: The other one was more public and it wasn’t distributed, it wasn’t mailed to everybody, uh, uhm, but it was the Administrative Council and – and, uh, and so forth had access to that, I had access to it. [Page 52, lines 17-20]

Testimony of Bob Selph

“The Council also wrote a signed report to the Administrative Council of ARBCA.  As they had been directed in Dykstra’s letter, they sought to ‘Summarize [their] findings and recommendations in a written document [they] all can sign.’  The Council’s specific recommendations concerning Tom Chantry were contained in this report to the Administrative Council of ARBCA.” [Page 3, item 2]

2000/2001 AC: Bob Selph, Larry Vincent, Earl Blackburn, Steve Martin, Don Lindblad, John Giarrizzo, David Dykstra, Dale Smith, Mike McKnight, Bruce Kronheim, Tom Green, Jamie Howell, and Tom Lutz.  [Photograph]

#3 Informal Council’s Level 3 Report (12/16/2000) & Confidential Minutes (1/4/2001)

This is the report that the 2000/2001 AC sent to the ARBCA member churches in early 2001 and the Confidential Minutes that identify it.  There is no mention of the children or the violence they suffered at the hands of Thomas Chantry.

#4 Tom Lyon’s Report (1/1/2002) and Confidential AC Minutes (1/22/2002)

This document contains the “report of compliance” submitted by Tom Lyon and Mark McCormick and the Confidential page from the AC Minutes dated January 22, 2002.

Tom Lyon’s Report

“Thomas Chantry has undergone and completed the recommended “Biblical Counseling” as advised by the council.  This counseling was pursued under the oversight of the elders of PRBC [Tom Lyon and Mark McCormick] and was completed in December 2001.  A report of which has been submitted and is in the possession of those elders, who are satisfied with both its progress and conclusions.” [Page 1, item 3]

“…beginning in September [Tom Chantry] has preached regularly.” [Page 2, paragraph 3]

“This report is being sent to:

Tom Chantry

Walt Chantry

Earl Blackburn (chairman of the ARBCA Administrative Council)

Don Lindblad (witness to the informal council’s proceedings at Tom Chantry’s request)

The counselor mentioned in this report.

 We authorize Earl Blackburn to further publish this report to the elder(s) of Miller Valley Baptist Church and grant him permission to abstract this report to the ARBCA Administrative Council.” [Page 2, paragraph 5]

“Respectfully submitted:

Tom Lyon

Mark McCormick” [signature]

Confidential AC Minutes

“Pastor Tom Lyon sent a letter to Mr. Blackburn concerning Tom Chantry, which Mr. Blackburn read to the AC, commending Mr. Chantry’s progress in spiritual restoration, and suggesting that there is no impediment to a future wider usefulness in the church of Jesus Christ, having completed a course of biblical counseling recommended by the ARBCA ‘informal council.’  This letter is to be archived with the prior findings of the council concerning Mr. Chantry.” Page 4, item 2]

2001/2002 AC Members: Bob Selph, Tedd Tripp, Earl Blackburn, Steve Martin, Don Lindblad, John Giarrizzo, David Dykstra, Dale Smith, Mike McKnight, Bruce Kronheim, Tom Green, Jamie Howell, and Tom Lutz. [Photograph]

Why didn’t any of the men who were also on the 2000/2001 AC question why item #8 on the Level 2 report was not addressed, why the “serious factual differences” between what the children and Tom Chantry said, or why Tom Chantry was preaching “regularly” for 2 months before he had any counseling?

Men on both the 2000/2001 AC and 2001/2002 AC: Bob Selph, Earl Blackburn, Steve Martin, Don Lindblad, John Giarrizzo, David Dykstra, Dale Smith, Mike McKnight, Bruce Kronheim, Tom Green, Jamie Howell, and Tom Lutz. 

#5 Report Written by Don Lindblad for Earl Blackburn (4/15/2002)

This document contains a report Don Lindblad wrote for Earl Blackburn regarding the Informal Council and the page from AC Report Part 2 that quotes it, identifying it as “Private Document 16.”  

“When I raised the issue again of Tom not being permitted to speak, which was the fourth time I had raised the question in three days, all three assented to the following: they could not allow Tom to speak because if they did he would have incriminated himself.  Once that happened they would not have been able to give him back his life in the way that they had.  They would be forced to deal with him differently.” [page 4, paragraph 4]

“Instead of pressing for some form of church discipline or civil charges, they told us they wanted to give Tom back his life.  They believed he had not been forthcoming, that he was far guiltier than what he was willing to admit, but they also believed he was a gifted young man and should return to the ministry someday.” [page 3, paragraph 3]

“Mike wanted to hear what Tom had to say about the various incidents, but that he should be cautious in responding because the investigators believed entirely what the children had told them.” [page 2, paragraph 1]

#6 Letter from Earl Blackburn to Rich Jensen, Mike McKnight, and Tedd Tripp (4/18/2002)

This document is a letter written by Earl Blackburn to the members of the Informal Council (Rich Jensen, Mike McKnight, and Tedd Tripp).  It was cc’d to Don Lindblad, Walter J. Chantry, and Dale Smith.  It discusses Earl Blackburn’s belief that Tom Chantry had been wronged by the IC and cites the “Report Written by Don Lindblad for Earl Blackburn dated 4/15/2002” multiple times.

“I asked him [Don Lindblad] then, and later followed up that request with a phone call to write a report of the meeting and send it to me.  I have enclosed for each of you a copy of that report.” [Page 1, 3rd paragraph]

“What you told me and what he [Don Lindblad] wrote do not match up…In other words, brothers, I believe his written report.”  [Page 1, 3rd paragraph]

“During the informal Council, Don phoned me two or three times seeking advice and counsel.  He told me to different times that you were not allowing Tom Chantry to voice his concerns.  I told Don that he must get you mediators to allow Tom to address all his concerns or there would be serious and unsettling ramifications.” [Page 2, 1st paragraph]

#7 Letter from Tedd Tripp to Earl Blackburn (8/26/2002)

This document is a letter written by Tedd Tripp to Earl Blackburn in response to the “Letter from Earl Blackburn to Rich Jensen, Mike McKnight, and Tedd Tripp dated 4/18/2002.”  It was also distributed to “the other members of the Informal Council” (Rich Jensen and Mike McKnight). 

“The claim, that we were unfair to Tom Chantry is an essential part of his ‘smoke and mirrors’ strategy to avoid acceptance responsibility for his actions.  Sadly, you, Don and Walt have fallen for it and thus fallen into Tom Chantry’s clever attempt to make himself the aggrieved party.” [Page 1, 2nd paragraph]

“The informal council acted in good faith, accepting Tom Chantry’s signing of the document and Don Lindblad’s counsel to Tom Chantry to sign it as meaning that we had an agreement.” [Page 1, 4th paragraph]

#8 Letter from Rich Jensen to Earl Blackburn (1/21/2003)

This document is a letter written by Rich Jensen to Earl Blackburn in response to the “Letter from Earl Blackburn to Rich Jensen, Mike McKnight, and Tedd Tripp dated 4/18/2002.” 

“It was very clear that Tom Chantry wanted to steer the investigation of the Informal Council away from his culpability for possible crimes and shift it to the deteriorating relations with the Elders.  I want to say this in the strongest possible language.  The council was well aware of what Tom was trying to do and would not allow it.  It is unfortunate that Don Lindblad did not see what Tom was doing, and therefore he viewed the actions of the Informal council in a negative light.” [Page 2, 1st paragraph]

“Yet I believe that Don’s perception of what occurred was seriously flawed.  It was very obvious to me from the very beginning that Don was quite upset with the events in Miller Valley, including the actions of Tom Chantry.  It was also clear that Don has a great deal of affection and love for Tom.  But it also became evident to me that Don did not understand what the council was trying to do.  Due to those factors, Don’s view of the events of that weekend were very biased.” [Page 2, 2nd paragraph]

“Early in our investigation, it became obvious that Don was acting as a ‘defense attorney’ for Tom and not an impartial friend.  Several times before Tom would reply to a question, he asked for time to speak with Don alone.  I do not believe that Don Lindblad had any improper motives, but I believe that he was blinded by his love for Tom Chantry…Don may be a gifted preacher, but he severely misjudged the actions and motivations of the Informal Council.”

“Tom was pleased with the outcome of the investigation but was not pleased that he was unable to pull the wool over our eyes.  And he has used Don, his father, and you to do harm to the body of Christ in general and to our association in particular.” [Page 3, 3rd paragraph]

“You state that Don called you during the investigation to insist on certain things.  You told him to phone Tedd and plead with him.  You also warned him of your concerns of ‘serious and unsettling ramifications.’  I find this behavior highly irregular and questionable.” [Page 3, 2nd paragraph]

“I do not believe that Tom has complied with either the letter or the spirit of the document he signed.  Instead he has sown seeds of discord among the churches.  And Don, though I do not believe he acted maliciously, has done the same.” [Page 5, 2nd paragraph]

#9 Letter from Don Lindblad to Steve Marquedant (6/17/2015)

“There is a young man living in the Boston area [Mark Jones] who called Tom several times and asked for further resolution.” [Second paragraph under item 2]

“The following documents are in the ARBCA archives:…” [Item 3]

“As suggested, it seems wise to talk with John G. to make sure he is aware of all this and also to discover what, if anything, MVBC decides to do by way of protest.” [Item 4]

#10 Email from Steve Marquedant to Don Lindblad titled “Confidential from Steve M” (9/1/2015)

“The case presented by MVBC is not strong enough to prevent us from processing it [CRBC’s application] – but it should be understood that there will be controversy for Tom C.” [Ninth paragraph]

#11 Email from Don Lindblad to Steve Marquedant titled “A Possible Approach to MVBC” dated 9/4/2015

“There was an unsigned report that went out from the ARBCA office early in 2001 [Level 3 Report]…It was generic and sanitized,” [First paragraph]

“The other two documents [Level 1 and Level 2 Reports], which were signed, are not public…Those documents are to be opened only if Tom messes up again.  He has not.” [First paragraph]

“The AC already approved Tom’s ‘rehabilitation,’ and an email was sent to the churches to that effect.  ARBCA has already weighted in officially on the matter.  All objections were dealt with in letters by Earl and myself before the AC unanimously decided to approve Tom Lyon’s report.” [Second paragraph]

“Tom fulfilled the requirements of what he signed TO THE SATISFACTION OF ALL EXCEPT MVBC. (Rich Jensen did object, but Earl and I responded and nothing more was said.)” [Third paragraph]

“Personally, I do not think ARBCA is in a position to do more.  Again, it would be unrighteous to open this up again.” [Fifth paragraph]

#12 Email from Don Lindblad to Steve Marquedant and cc’d to John Giarrizzo, Douglas VanderMeulen, and Tom Lyon titled “TC” (9/9/2015)

“Thanks for the update on the CRBC application.  Hopefully, you (along with John G. and Doug V.) received my email of last Friday.  It was the one where I forwarded to you men a reference to the January 4, 2001 AC Minutes.  Those minutes include a formal report from the Informal Council held in December 2000 with regard to MVBC and Tom Chantry.” [First paragraph]

“The bookend minuted reports, the one referenced above and the one in 2002 following the report Tom Lyon sent, are the only significant ones the AC and the member churches can address.” [Second paragraph]

“Once again, while they [MVBC] may be dissatisfied with Tom’s compliance, they gave up the right to pursue him once he left…Even if he had not complied, MVBC was not given the authority to pursue him.” [Fifth paragraph]

“MVBC needs to let this go, at least officially in the context of ARBCA.” [Sixth paragraph]

#13 ARBCA Announcement (4/2017)

This is the statement ARBCA released at the 2017 General Assembly.  It has been said that the men who wrote this statement simply didn’t know that what they wrote was untrue.  However, many of the men on the Administrative Council responsible for writing this statement had access to information that contradicts this statement. 

Don Lindblad was present when Tom Chantry was interviewed by the Informal Council.  He made a report of it for Earl Blackburn.  He admitted in court to knowing the brutality of the “spankings” described by the children, including that Tom hit the children with objects, that two of the children claimed that he spanked them bare bottomed and that Tom rubbed their bare bottoms.

#14 James Renihan Introduced Don Lindblad as Longtime IRBS Trustee (12/2018)

I included this section because it shows Don Lindblad’s long history with IRBS.  He likely remains a Trustee with IRBS Seminary, but it is impossible to know because IRBS Seminary removed their Trustees page and doesn’t list their Trustees anywhere else.  For more information see section #2 on the IRBS Seminary, ARBCA, and Tom Chantry Page.

In December 2017 at the IRBS Update, James Renihan introduced Don Lindblad as a longtime IRBS Trustee.  The video can be found here:

“Pastor Don Lindblad from Trinity Reformed Baptist Church in Kirkland, Washington who is one of the original Trustees of IRBS all the way when we began back in 1998 and has been with us a long time.”

Here is the video clip of the quote:

Here is the full video file (quote begins at about 11:12):

This is a picture of the Trustees page that was on IRBS Seminary’s website.  It was removed in Summer 2019 and remains missing. It can be found here:

Why did IRBS remove it, and does Don Lindblad remain on the IRBS Seminary Board of Trustees?

#15 Transcript of Don Lindblad’s Telephone Interview (3/21/2018)

This is the transcript of the telephone interview of Don Lindblad by the prosecutor Susan Eazer.  Don Lindblad described how he and the rest of the AC had access to the Level 2 Report and said that the “sealed report” was to remain sealed unless Tom repeated what he had done (which he did in 2004 when a police report resulted from his spanking a child).  Quotes of interest (words in brackets added for clarity):

LINDBLAD: But I did not have the sealed document [“Confidential Report and Recommendations” aka “fuller report”], it was sealed and it was not to be, uhm, revealed, uhm, because of its sensitivity unless Mr. Chantry repeated what he had done in Prescott…[page 32, lines 7-12]

LINDBLAD: …There were, there were three reports, there was the sealed report [“Confidential Report and Recommendations” aka “fuller report”] and if you look at that report it gives counsel and advice to the parents…The other one [“Report, Conclusions and Recommendations” aka “middle level report”] was more public and it wasn’t distributed, and it wasn’t mailed to everybody, uh, uhm, but it was the Administrative Council and – and, uh, and so forth had access to that, I had access to it.  And then there’s the – the report that went out to the churches [“Report of the Informal Council” aka “general report”] in the, uhm, uh, in our, uhm, uhm, uh, in our, uh, regular reporting which was done by email…[page 52, lines 9-12 and 17-23]

#16 Transcript of Don Lindblad’s Testimony During Tom Chantry’s Trial (8/9/2018 & 8/10/2018)

This is a transcript of testimony by Don Lindblad during Tom Chantry’s trial (8/9/2018 and 8/10/2018).  Quotes of interest (words in brackets added for clarity; names of the victims redacted or changed to pseudonyms):

Q (EAZER): To include that Mark Jones was saying that the defendant made him pull down his pants or take down his pants, bend over, grab his ankles while he spanked him with a handmade paddle he made for just that occasion and said he wanted to see his butt turn red; correct?


Q (EAZER): So you would agree that this wasn’t just about perhaps improper discipline during tutoring; correct, sir?  The allegations were a bit more serious than that?

A (LINDBLAD): Yes. [page 105, lines 2-16]

Q (EAZER): So to be clear you now have said yes, bruises on Daniel came up [in 2000 at the Informal Council], spanking bare bottomed of Mark and rubbing of the bottom came up; correct?

A (LINDBLAD): Correct.

Q (EAZER): I’m not misstating anything; correct?

A (LINDBLAD): Correct.

Q (EAZER): And I think then I asked you and the same thing came up with Wayne Walsh, spanking of objects, spanking with bare bottom and rubbing of bottom; correct? I’m not asking you what the approach was. I’m asking you if these things came up in 2000.

A (LINDBLAD): Correct. [page 63, lines 6-19]

Q (EAZER): All right, and would you agree, sir, that [in 2000 at the Informal Council] the topic of – with Mark Jones was bare bottomed spankings with objects and Tom rubbing Mark’s bottom after these spankings, yes or no, sir?

A (LINDBLAD): That came up. [page 62, lines 14-18]

#17 First Baptist Church of Clinton, LA Resignation (9/27/2019)

This document is the resignation that First Baptist Church of Clinton, LA posted on their website (  It contains their list of charges and Timeline of Actions Taken by FBC to Address ARBCA’s Mishandling of the Tom Chantry Matter. 

“1. In 2000 and beyond, ARBCA’s officials failed to protect the children abused by Tom Chantry and failed to aid them in obtaining the justice due to them (Ps 103:6). In 2019, ARBCA’s GA failed to reach out to those abused by Tom Chantry, to acknowledge the wrongdoing of the ARBCA council, to ask forgiveness from the victims, and to seek to make amends in any way possible (2 Sam 21:3; Lk 19:8).”

“2. Recently discovered documents in July of 2019 prove that ARBCA’s 2000 Informal Council knew of Tom Chantry’s child abuse and failed to report it to law enforcement (Rom 13:1). This failure to report to the authorities had the effect of exposing more children to danger and denying justice to Chantry’s victims (Ps 82:3-4; Is 1:17).”

“3. ARBCA’s 2000 Informal Council failed to recommend that Miller Valley Baptist Church discipline Tom Chantry, which is what the Scriptures require (Matt 18:15-20), and instead resorted to a biased and unbiblical program of restoration so that Chantry’s ministry could be preserved (1 Tim 5:20-21).”

“4. The formation of the 2000 ARBCA Informal Council by Walt Chantry, Bob Selph, and ARBCA’s 2000 Administrative Council was both unbiblical and contrary to ARBCA’s confession of faith, which does not permit “informal councils” (Acts 15:2, 4, 6, 22-25; 2LCF 26.15).”

“5. The allowance of “sealed reports” facilitated the cover-up of a crime. Sealed reports from an ARBCA council are a violation of Scripture and ARBCA’s confession of faith, which requires that all advice given by church councils “be reported to all the churches” (Acts 15:2, 4, 6, 22-25; 2LCF 26.15).”

2000/2001 AC Members: Bob Selph, Larry Vincent, Earl Blackburn, Steve Martin, Don Lindblad, John Giarrizzo, David Dykstra, Dale Smith, Mike McKnight, Bruce Kronheim, Tom Green, Jamie Howell, and Tom Lutz. [Photograph]

2001/2002 AC Members: Bob Selph, Tedd Tripp, Earl Blackburn, Steve Martin, Don Lindblad, John Giarrizzo, David Dykstra, Dale Smith, Mike McKnight, Bruce Kronheim, Tom Green, Jamie Howell, and Tom Lutz. [Photograph]

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s