Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Johann]

"Morality is doing what is right, regardless of what you are told."
"Religion is doing what you are told, regardless of what is right."

Author unknown.

Whom does this describe?

[Bob Pickle]

"Morality is doing what is right, regardless of what you are told."
"Religion is doing what you are told, regardless of what is right."

Author unknown.

Whom does this describe?

Neither, the way it is worded.

The anti-move-forward-now crowd, whether pro-WO or anti-WO, are doing what is right, regardless of what the pro-rebellion crowd are telling them.

[Daryl Fawcett]

Did any of you receive the following by email?

A special constituency meeting was held Sunday afternoon, August 19, 2012, in Southern California. On the agenda were two votes: 1) to change the bylaws of the Pacific Union, allowing the union to be out of sync with General Conference regulations; 2) to approve ordination to the pastoral ministry without regard to gender.

The bylaws vote needed a two-thirds margin to pass. This vote failed by one percent, consequently making an ordination vote irrelevant.

The executive committee continued the meeting to "discuss and vote on the ordination issue." Though without teeth, the union voted 79 percent to 21 percent to recommend women's ordination. This ordination vote did pass its 51 percent margin, yet the union still cannot ordain women due to the failed bylaw vote. To do so would put the union out of compliance with its own bylaws which still state:

"All the policies, purposes and procedures of this Union shall be in harmony with the working policies and procedures of the North American Division and the General Conference of Seventh-day Adventists."

In conclusion, the union president Ricardo Graham stated, "I do not think this is a 'win'... but we have expressed our opinion through our vote."

Here is the web site link that contains this and other links:

http://campaign.r20.constantcontact.com/render?llr=7ufpwmkab&v=001QCSeYgsyMVqFKSRN4q_YGcCuYHIjjURYfRhoLxzXES222CcvcbcYQNdYjmfC5eh20fr7gykj7FAZ7zoqTUI4NOb_49yH0KVduSr8hGuwJrJGbbpjynIZ5x_Yl9hTiZYi_EUP4DQW27VtS4dp6jijpA%3D%3D

Don't know if that long long link will work.   I had to hit refresh to actually see this.

[Daryl Fawcett]

The link in my previous post worked OK this time.

[Dedication]

The Church is not supposed to be run like a heirarchy -- from top down.
When EGW said "God has ordained that the representatives of His church from all parts of the earth, when assembled in a General Conference, shall have authority.  The error that some are in danger of committing, is in giving to the mind and judgment of one man, or of a small group of men, the full measure of authority and influence that God has vested in His church,"  she showed that the authority was with the PEOPLE, not with the heirarchy.

What's happening isn't "private opinion"  like it or not -- it is the voices of the churches wanting to be heard.

Probably to solve the issue according to the voice of the church, they should allow every union to have a constituency meeting like the Columbia Union and the Pacific Union had, and ENCOURAGE people to vote on the issue.  This would show the true "mind and judgement" of the church, it would also show whether or not there is a cultural/ethnical bias .

[Bob Pickle]

The Church is not supposed to be run like a heirarchy -- from top down.

I don't see anything resembling a heirarchy involved in what is going on presently, except perhaps when a conference executive committee votes in favor of WO without first calling a constituency meeting.

When EGW said "God has ordained that the representatives of His church from all parts of the earth, when assembled in a General Conference, shall have authority.  The error that some are in danger of committing, is in giving to the mind and judgment of one man, or of a small group of men, the full measure of authority and influence that God has vested in His church,"  she showed that the authority was with the PEOPLE, not with the heirarchy.

The PEOPLE as represented at a GC Session.

What's happening isn't "private opinion"  like it or not -- it is the voices of the churches wanting to be heard.

Which specific churches have called for WO? Churches per se aren't directly represented at union session meetings.

Probably to solve the issue according to the voice of the church, they should allow every union to have a constituency meeting like the Columbia Union and the Pacific Union had, and ENCOURAGE people to vote on the issue.  This would show the true "mind and judgement" of the church, it would also show whether or not there is a cultural/ethnical bias .

But that is essentially what already happened at the 1990 and 1995 GC Sessions, since to some extent or a large extent the unions comprise the constituency of the GC Sessions, correct? So what we have is certain unions and conferences being upset that the vote didn't go their way, or so they are bound and determined that they are going to do it anyway, thus violating the principle of Acts 15.