Print

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

[SDAminister]

Well, why not? He's to blame for all the ills in the church, right?

I mean, in Folkenburg and Paulsen, two pro-WO presidents, you heard nary a word against them because WO didn't happen under their watch. Or did Dr Running or others send open letters to them too? I think we know the answer to that.

But now, Wilson is catching flak from the pro-WO crowd because he is ..... wait for it..... doing just what they wanted!! The poor guy can't win.

The pro-WO crowd begged and pushed for this worldwide study on ordination 3 years ago. Now, Wilson is administering the study according to plan and yet he is pilloried for doing so!

We're not sure just how disingenuous the pro-WO side can be. But it appears a much larger scale than currently exists will be needed to measure it in the days and years ahead.

SDAminister

[Dedication]

Well, why not? He's to blame for all the ills in the church, right?
I mean, in Folkenburg and Paulsen, two pro-WO presidents, you heard nary a word against them because WO didn't happen under their watch. Or did Dr Running or others send open letters to them too? I think we know the answer to that.
But now, Wilson is catching flak from the pro-WO crowd because he is ..... wait for it..... doing just what they wanted!! The poor guy can't win.
The pro-WO crowd begged and pushed for this worldwide study on ordination 3 years ago. Now, Wilson is administering the study according to plan and yet he is pilloried for doing so!
We're not sure just how disingenuous the pro-WO side can be. But it appears a much larger scale than currently exists will be needed to measure it in the days and years ahead.
SDAminister

 
Folkenburg and Paulsen never a word against them? 
Where have you been?

An Open Letter   

October 30, 2001                                                                                 
Dr. Jan Paulsen, President
 Dear Dr. Paulsen:..................   
David D. Dennis

OPEN LETTER TO PRESIDENT JAN PAULSEN -- The
Ultimate Goal of Ecumenism?
Date: Fri, 29 Sep 2006
Dear President Paulsen and GC .....
Phil Moore


Well that's just two -- there were more.

[Gailon Arthur Joy]

Frankly, my problem with Mr Wilson begins with his history. He has been in Washington for over two decades in various positions and never was noted for calling for "Revival and Reformation" until he faced election to the GC under the guiding hand of McNeilus and the ASI Mission Board. Excellent theme to attract conservative support but it simply has clearly not caught on in Washington, let alone the North American SDA Church.

In fact his most noteworthy achievement was the toppling of the Falkenburg Administration after Bob and brother were caught in collusion with the Vatican after he was in default and being sued in California and SR Wilson got wind. Yes, in the political world, what goes around will eventually come around and bite you!!! Bob topples Neil, Neil gets Jr to topple Bob!!!
Draw your own conclusions or talk to "Harold" and he will gladly share his!!!

I continue to insist this is an apple that did not fall far from the tree, a chip off the old block and more a political leader than a spiritual leader. WE NEED A SPIRITUAL LEADER. NEIL "TED" WILSON IS NOT A SPIRITUAL LEADER.

I site as proof the selection of 3ABN as the forum to discuss his position on Women's Ordination, the equivalent of going to the base and leaving the opposition party (yes, that would be LLBN) and the independent moderates (HOPE Channel) unchallenged.

Ironically, the administration at 3ABN is rife with open and notorious adultery, cover-ups and litigation, past and present, with more sure to come. 3ABN can best be described as a "false front". Why associate with the "false front"? The ASI base, managed by the ASI Mission Board, is definitely more conservative and supports the 3ABN message, despite it's hypocrisy. SIMPLE AS THAT.

And why not reach out to LLBN and HOPE? Well, ask Neil Jr, he is the President, after all.

Now, is there anyone on this Forum that does not wonder, given the history of 3ABN, why "this" President of the GC has abrogated his predecessors arm's length relationship and cuddled right on up there with Jim, DLS, et al??? I submit a political agenda can outweigh
"revival and reformation" in some circles.

Now, let's discuss his efforts to thwart WO...do I not recall him clearly stating he would stay out of this? Why? ... Answer: Politics... So much for honesty and leadership!!! He should take Governor Chritie's advice and stop following the polls and lead!!! He missed a very critical opportunity to "lead" and we now have two NAD Unions preparing to ordain Women contrary to the General Conference in session.

Where was the "emergency session" of the ENTIRE General Conference Executive Committee to deal with the issue "in the counsel of many"? Should we really have left the issue for the FALL COUNSEL, still a month and a half away??? And what will they do now that the horses are out of the barn???

People, understand when you have been duped by the very political "shrugged shoulder play" to the base:
"Look, I took a stand but could not get the constituency to change their mind and now there is not much we can do until the next General Conference session in "2015"!!!" (and how many other unions do we lose in the interim???)

I will REGRETFULLY side with Dr Taylor on this LIMITED issue and note that "THIS" GC President does not have the "POLITICAL WILL"l to deal with this open rebellion!!!

I would be the first in line to support a RECALL...and let us find a MOSES/DAVID to lead us!!! IT IS TIME TO RETIRE THE OLD ORDER and prepare a peculiar people for the LOUD CRY MESSAGE!!!

Gailon Arthur Joy
AUReporter





 

[Daryl Fawcett]

Many people see Elder Ted Wilson as the GC President for these times.

Can you think of anybody else who would do better?

[Gregory]

As I have posted elsewhere:  In restrospect, President Wilson may be seen as doing more to promote the ordination of females than any other person could have accomplished.

Prior to his accension to the office of President, the issue was simply sputtering along.  Not much was ahappening.  Two years has passed since he became President.  In that time three Unions have decided to ordain without respect to gender. This is a greater advance of women's issues than has occured under any other leader.  He may have started a train rolling down the track that can not be stopped.

[Daryl Fawcett]

I don't think that train rolling had anything to do with him.   I think it would have happened no matter who the GC President was.   Perhaps this is why he is our GC President right now.

[Gailon Arthur Joy]

Good observation: "Perhaps this is why he is our GC President right now."

Yes, that is exactly what they told us about "Mr Hope and Change"!!! Well, we are out of HOPE and we have way too little change!!!

This president will oversee the uneasy co-existence of Orthodoxy and Progressives, but it must sooner than later collapse upon itself and separate into two very different churches.
In three years he will have to explain to a world church the rebellion was not met head on.
I predict, if he survives as president that long, HE WILL BE A ONE TERM PRESIDENT.

Ironically, he will be hard pressed to get support from the orthodoxy or the left coast progressives. And the world church will see him for the week politico he is!!! HE WILL BE HISTORY.

If "some say" he is the man for this time...consider where we are after just two years of his administration...we have your ex-president, now NAD President, who cannot manage the progressives without getting sued. "Ted" has managed to loose control of the NAD and has three unions in rebellion and preparing to ordain women. And while Rome burns, Ted is doing an evangelistic series in Peurto Rico...couldn't even find an evangelist he could trust with this task (guess Finley was too busy) so he could deal with rebellion...or, do we see this man for our time simply ignoring the crisis...while he shrugs his shoulders!!!

I see no leadership from the top on this issue and no leadership from NAD and congregationalism is alive and well in the "TED WILSON" administration. He will reap what little he has sown.

Gailon Arthur Joy
AUReporter

[Gregory]

Gailon has stated some of the reasons why I believe in retrospect President Wilson may be seen as doing more to bring about the ordination of females than any other person  could have done.

I do not want my statment to be understood as agreeing with everything that Gailon said.  But, I Believe that those who favor female ordination sense that there will never be a better time and now is the time to act.  Gailon, in my opinion, has listed some valid reasons why I believe that there is a sense that this is the time to act in regard to female ordination.

[Bob Pickle]

Gailon,

You may be right, but I wonder if it was Dan Jackson who said he wasn't going to get involved rather than Ted Wilson. My understanding is that Dan Jackson did say he wouldn't encourage or discourage what was going on. I don't know of any similar quote from Ted Wilson.

This is a greater advance of women's issues than has occured under any other leader.

Gregory,

Your sentence above appears biased. There are women who feel strongly that God in the Bible reserving certain functions for men and certain functions for women in the home and in the church intended to protect women. If that be true, then what is going on right now would not be an advance of women's issues, not a retrograde.

It seems to me that the only way that what is going on can really be considered an advance is if we view God's instructions in the Bible about the roles of men and women as being discriminatory, unfair, and oppressive. But if we go down that road, we are siding with the Archrebel, agreeing with his positions in the great controversy about God's laws and instructions, and defying God Himself.

[Dedication]

I think by "advance" he meant the issue of ordaining women, has made it's greatest advance.

In my listening to Ted Wilson's speech  I didn't hear anything that would indicate he was against women's ordination.  I didn't listen to every speech so may have missed something.  But in the ones I did listen to he said that was " another issue" and he wasn't going to get into it.   
His whole "plea" was not to go against the policy or "vote" of the General Conference, he made a strong case that their motion was "out of order" as far as policy was concerned,  that more studies were being conducted, and that the Unions should "give time for the process to do its work".

So what is the "process".   Were the unions just trying to "help" the process along, give it some energy by letting their vote speak.   At the end of the Pacific Union meeting, it was stated "this wasn't really a 'win',"   are they just trying to speed up the "process"?

[Gregory]

Bob said:

Your sentence above appears biased. There are women who feel strongly that God in the Bible reserving certain functions for men and certain functions for women in the home and in the church intended to protect women. If that be true, then what is going on right now would not be an advance of women's issues, not a retrograde

I have never claimed to lack bias.

I think that most people would understand my comment as a statement that I believe that President Wilson will be seen as bringing about the ordination of females sooner than it whould have happened if he had not been elected President.  That is what I was saying.  YOu may disagre with that.  But, that is my opinion and I have posted my reasons for saying such as this was not the first time that I have posted such.

[Gregory]

Bob said:

Your sentence above appears biased. There are women who feel strongly that God in the Bible reserving certain functions for men and certain functions for women in the home and in the church intended to protect women. If that be true, then what is going on right now would not be an advance of women's issues, not a retrograde

I have never claimed to lack bias.

I think that most people would understand my comment as a statement that I believe that President Wilson will be seen as bringing about the ordination of females sooner than it whould have happened if he had not been elected President.  That is what I was saying.  You may disagre with that.  But, that is my opinion and I have posted my reasons for saying such as this was not the first time that I have posted such.

[Gregory]

Dedication is correct.  In the present circumstances, President Wilson has never stated that he is against the ordination of women.  He has not stated that he favors it.  He has simply asked that a process to decide be put in place.

However, he has a past history that is well known and is commonly understood as being against women in the role of SDA Clergy.

But, his past history is mixed and the issue is not as simple as some would think.  It was while President Wilson served as co-chair of the ACM Committee that the SDA denomination first placed SDA, female clergy into the U.S. military chaplaincy, where they still serve today.

[Bob Pickle]

Bob said:

Your sentence above appears biased. There are women who feel strongly that God in the Bible reserving certain functions for men and certain functions for women in the home and in the church intended to protect women. If that be true, then what is going on right now would not be an advance of women's issues, not a retrograde

I have never claimed to lack bias.

I think that most people would understand my comment as a statement that I believe that President Wilson will be seen as bringing about the ordination of females sooner than it whould have happened if he had not been elected President.

But you did use the word "advance," and I would like you to address whether or not that word was the right word to use.

So what you did was label the cause of women's ordination the "advance" of women's issues, even though a lot of women consider it something other than that. So since women aren't presently permitted to fill a certain narrow role, and since there is a movement afoot to force change before the study commission process is even completed, you referred to that as the "advance" of women's issues.

"And coveting the honor which the infinite Father had bestowed upon His Son, this prince of angels aspired to power which it was the prerogative of Christ alone to wield. ...

"In all the councils of God, Christ was a participant, while Lucifer was not permitted thus to enter into the divine purposes. 'Why,' questioned this mighty angel, 'should Christ have the supremacy? Why is He thus honored above Lucifer?' ...

"Working with mysterious secrecy, and for a time concealing his real purpose under an appearance of reverence for God, he endeavored to excite dissatisfaction concerning the laws that governed heavenly beings, intimating that they imposed an unnecessary restraint. Since their natures were holy, he urged that the angels should obey the dictates of their own will. ... He claimed that in aspiring to greater power and honor he was not aiming at self-exaltation, but was seeking to secure liberty for all the inhabitants of heaven, that by this means they might attain to a higher state of existence" (GC 494-495).

Would you say that it is fair to say that Lucifer was working for the "advance" of angel issues in heaven, since there was a particular role that God had not allowed him to fill, and that God was thus "discriminating" against him? Or would you designate the use of such words as being inappropriate?

[Gregory]

Bob, the standard dictionary  of the English language which I am using lists the first meaning of the word "advance" as:  "to accelerate the growth or progress of."

That is how I  used the word.  President Wilson, in my opinoin, may be seen in the future as accelerating the time when in the SDA Church, females are ordained to a clergy position.

I am not going to play word games with you.  I took your comment as an honest one.  I attempted to clairfy my meaning.  If you want to play word games, find someone else to play with.

Yes, the word that I used was the right one to use which, according to a standard dictionary, meant exactly what I intended it to mean.