Pacific Union and WO

[Gerr]

Gerry,

Is it OK that some of the same Divisions who are against WO are OK with summarily disfellowshipping women who divorce due to spousal abuse? Is it OK for the denomination to prance around major issues like abortion and child molestation while they dig in their heels on WO? Is that legitimately done in the name of unity?

I don't know the particulars of the issue you are bringing up. Let me ask you this, is divorce the ONLY option for an abused spouse? And is there a world church policy or anything in the church manual that they are disregarding by doing so?

[JoeMo]

Gerry,

You ask if divorce is the only option for an abused spouse. My answer (and just my opinion) - YES, in a life threatening situation.

Is divorce the only option in the case of marital infidelity? Yes; it is approved in the Bible; but is it the only option?

[olger]

Gerry,

Is it OK that some of the same Divisions who are against WO are OK with summarily disfellowshipping women who divorce due to spousal abuse? Is it OK for the denomination to prance around major issues like abortion and child molestation while they dig in their heels on WO? Is that legitimately done in the name of unity?

As a counselor, I am interested in your rhetorical question.

1) Are you able to cite specific situations where this occurred?

2) You rightly object to violence. I do too. Why then do you suggest something that causes violence (divorce, Malachi 2:16) as a solution to violence !!!

3) Divorce is not a good solution to the unresolved issues that both partners bring into the relationship. I never recommend divorce. I recommend separation only where a couple is about to kill each other. Then, counseling to help identify and resolve the issues.

rejoice always,

G

[CyberGuy]

Originally Posted By: CyberGuy

At the pacific Union session they made it clear that any confernece who did not want to ordain women would NOT be forced to ordain. So for those that think that conferences will be forced to ordain that is not the case. Free will is the bases of this decision. You can if you want and do not have to if you do not want to ordain.

Suppose the African Unions voted to have polygamy and "made it clear" that those against it are not being forced to accept it?

Free will?

When I was in africa we would convert men who had many wives. In africa if a wife is put away she and her children is disgraced and they have no way of living or supporting themselves. The man was allowed to keep one wife and supported the rest of the wives and children officially. However all those wives and children would still live under the same roof.

Now tell me this. Do you think that their was never any more sexual relations between the man and his former wives.

Sexual relations in africa has always been very loose even in the church unfortunately.

Some young people said they wanted to get several wifes before they became SDA's so they could still have their women after.

Polygamy may not be accepted officially in africa but it is winked at.

[Woody]

As I have stated before. Our doctrine #14 is very clear that all people are equal. Races men and women are all to share in spreading the word of God Equally. So technically this policy of no women allowed to be ordained is against our Doctrine.

So the question is do we obey our doctrine or policy. That policy of no womens ordination is in direct violation of our doctrine of our church of no descrimination.

[Woody]

Bottom Line Peoples:

Both scriptures and our Fundamental Beliefs support WO -

WE should go forth and do likewise.

As a Seventh-day Adventist Christian - I can do no other.

[JoeMo]

G,

Oh, I totally agree that divorce is not good; and it should only be a last resort - especially where children are involved! No argument there. As a counselor, I'm sure you have had some people divorce anyways in spite of your counsel to do otherwise. In the case of violence as a reason for divorce, it may be necessary if lives are in danger. I am not a violent person; so I don't understand people beating on those they love.

As far as women being disfellowshipped when they divorce their husbands for the reason of spousal abuse, I can give no personal experiences - only what I've read on some of the posts here on CA and second-hand from others.

Reminder to self - don't believe everything you hear from others or read in the internet. :)

[CyberGuy]

G,

Oh, I totally agree that divorce is not good; and it should only be a last resort - especially where children are involved! No argument there. As a counselor, I'm sure you have had some people divorce anyways in spite of your counsel to do otherwise. In the case of violence as a reason for divorce, it may be necessary if lives are in danger. I am not a violent person; so I don't understand people beating on those they love.

As far as women being disfellowshipped when they divorce their husbands for the reason of spousal abuse, I can give no personal experiences - only what I've read on some of the posts here on CA and second-hand from others.

Reminder to self - don't believe everything you hear from others or read in the internet.

I have been told that some pastors from africa report that if they do not beat their wives their wives think they are not loved.

That kind of feelings are totally alien to the western culture. How can we ever agree on WO when there is such a different way of looking at human relations.

[teresaq]

At the pacific Union session they made it clear that any confernece who did not want to ordain women would NOT be forced to ordain. So for those that think that conferences will be forced to ordain that is not the case. Free will is the bases of this decision. You can if you want and do not have to if you do not want to ordain.

[Woody]

Quote:

Its a bit hard for me to take such people and their anti-WO agenda very seriously.

[teresaq]

Why then do you suggest something that causes violence (divorce, Malachi 2:16) ....

Malachi doesn't state that divorce causes violence. God says He hates divorce but that He hates it even more when husbands declared their wive were unfaithful and then had them stoned to get rid of them. Which is why Jesus said:

Matthew 19:8

He saith unto them , Moses because of the hardness of your hearts suffered you to put away your wives: but from the beginning it was not so.

[teresaq]

I don't know the particulars of the issue you are bringing up. Let me ask you this, is divorce the ONLY option for an abused spouse? And is there a world church policy or anything in the church manual that they are disregarding by doing so?

Wow Gerry, is this indicative of the general knowledge of the SDA church regarding abusive spouses (parents?, incest? and all else?)?

Do you know how many women are killed or mangled in the U.S. by boyfriends/husbands, not to mention others but that isn't the subject? That doesn't count emotional/verbal/spiritual abuse (and yes, that can and does go both ways) Do you know how much of this is most assuredly in the SDA church at large and most assuredly in your church?

No wonder they are starting to have special seasons of enlightenment, or attempted enlightenment in the church!

[teresaq]

I can never be equal to a woman. For one thing, I can't have babies! That's just for starters.

[CyberGuy]

Ted Wilson should read this.

There is danger of doing too much to cure difficulties.--The sincere believers of truth are made sad, and their trials and sorrows greatly increased, by the elements among them which annoy, dishearten, and discourage them in their efforts. But the Lord would teach His servants a lesson of great carefulness in all their moves. "Let both grow together." Do not forcibly pull up the tares, lest in rooting them up the precious blades will become loosened. Both ministers and church members should be very cautious, lest they get a zeal not according to knowledge. There is danger of doing too much to cure difficulties in the church, which, if let alone, will frequently work their own cure. It is bad policy to take hold of matters in any church prematurely. We shall have to exercise the greatest care, patience, and self-control to bear these things and not go to work in our own spirit to set them in order.--3T 113. {PaM 212.1}

[Naomi]

you got that right ... just sayin ...

[Gerr]

Wow Gerry, is this indicative of the general knowledge of the SDA church regarding abusive spouses (parents?, incest? and all else?)?

Teresa, I was referring to the specific case I was responding to. And nowhere in my post did I even hint that an abused woman stay with her husband. Is not separation an alternative?

Me thinks divorce has far too often been made the first option so that now, all the parties have to declare is "irreconcilable differences".

[Gerr]

Ted Wilson should read this.

There is danger of doing too much to cure difficulties.--The sincere believers of truth are made sad, and their trials and sorrows greatly increased, by the elements among them which annoy, dishearten, and discourage them in their efforts. But the Lord would teach His servants a lesson of great carefulness in all their moves. "Let both grow together." Do not forcibly pull up the tares, lest in rooting them up the precious blades will become loosened. Both ministers and church members should be very cautious, lest they get a zeal not according to knowledge. There is danger of doing too much to cure difficulties in the church, which, if let alone, will frequently work their own cure. It is bad policy to take hold of matters in any church prematurely. We shall have to exercise the greatest care, patience, and self-control to bear these things and not go to work in our own spirit to set them in order.--3T 113. {PaM 212.1}

And to whom does this apply to? Just Pres. Wilson and all the anti-WO?

[Gerr]

[quote name="teresaq(sda)

That's what happens when one carries the theory of equality into a territory without clear/unequivocal direction from Scripture.

[/quote"]What happens?

Confusion. Division.

[Felix Florimon]

Ted Wilson should read this.

There is danger of doing too much to cure difficulties in the church, which, if let alone, will frequently work their own cure. It is bad policy to take hold of matters in any church prematurely. We shall have to exercise the greatest care, patience, and self-control to bear these things and not go to work in our own spirit to set them in order.--3T 113. {PaM 212.1}

The problem is that Elder Ted Wilson is not just a regular member or a regular church officer of the SDA Church. He happens to be the GC President. Now, if a union within the SDA Church breaks away from a policy adopted in a session by the GC, he has a moral and a spiritual obligation to express in words such disagreement. Organizations don't put people in leadership in order to keep quite and hide their disagreement with lower level officials who openly disobey and disregard policies agreed by the majority within the church organization.

For you and me, regular folks within the SDA organization, in order to keep the church healthy and growing, it is our duty just to focus our attention on the spiritual and membership growth of the church. However, it is the duty of GC President to spend time and energy letting other people know where he stands regarding things bringing controversy within the church. Now, our love for the church will generate a need to pray to God so this controversy don't take our focus off our duty of spreading the gospel of Jesus Christ to the entire world.

FF

[Woody]

Trouble is - it is TED who is promoting division and suggesting a policy that is contrary to our Fundamentals voted on by a majority of those in attendance in a General Conference Session.

[doug yowell]

On another board a quite young man recently shared that his daddy impregnated another woman in the church a few years ago. Apparently there is no church discipline over such and they seem to believe that participating in all the soul-winning ministries with such loose morals tis not a problem...at least not as that young man saw it evidently.

Its a bit hard for me to take such people and their anti-WO agenda very seriously.

If it is open sin that goes unpunished/disciplined by church authorities then which side stands guiltless? It is no secret that some of the most strident supporters of WO here in So. Cal. and in the Sligo area are also openly advocate the acceptence of practicing homosexuals and same sex marriage. Our particular SECC conference president, one of the main speakers for WO, and his officers refused to remove a local pastor for fleecing old ladies in nursing homes of their assets. One of the greatest sins in the church is it's failure to discipline itself. It allows people like you to legitimately charge inconsistency. But if the church breaks the norm on the issue of the open rebellion of two of it's unions why is that not a possible step in the right direction? One of the first "non-ordained" woman head pastors here in SECC ran off with the founder of Celebration Center who had been one of the biggest supporters of WO.My wife, a big opponent of WO, was the first to leave our local church when the WO supporting pastor refused to discipline the Junior leaders (plural, the woman was married with children)for doing the same exact thing that you cited above.Inconsistencies of discipline are one thing. Ignoring open attempts to undermine the church structure is a whole different ballgame.

[Woody]

Originally Posted By: teresaq(sda)

On another board a quite young man recently shared that his daddy impregnated another woman in the church a few years ago. Apparently there is no church discipline over such and they seem to believe that participating in all the soul-winning ministries with such loose morals tis not a problem...at least not as that young man saw it evidently.

Its a bit hard for me to take such people and their anti-WO agenda very seriously.

If it is open sin that goes unpunished/disciplined by church authorities then which side stands guiltless? It is no secret that some of the most strident supporters of WO here in So. Cal. and in the Sligo area are also openly advocate the acceptence of practicing homosexuals and same sex marriage. Our particular SECC conference president, one of the main speakers for WO, and his officers refused to remove a local pastor for fleecing old ladies in nursing homes of their assets. One of the greatest sins in the church is it's failure to discipline itself. It allows people like you to legitimately charge inconsistency. But if the church breaks the norm on the issue of the open rebellion of two of it's unions why is that not a possible step in the right direction? One of the first "non-ordained" woman head pastors here in SECC ran off with the founder of Celebration Center who had been one of the biggest supporters of WO.My wife, a big opponent of WO, was the first to leave our local church when the WO supporting pastor refused to discipline the Junior leaders (plural, the woman was married with children)for doing the same exact thing that you cited above.Inconsistencies of discipline are one thing. Ignoring open attempts to undermine the church structure is a whole different ballgame.

sick. Is this post really necessary? How low have we come.

[doug yowell]

sick. Is this post really necessary? How low have we come.

Necessary enough for you to repost it in your reply.

[CyberGuy]

yes. The more Ted Wilson tightens his grip on the NAD unions the more unions will slip through his fingers and ordain women. Best to just leave it alone. Remember what Sauls aka Paul mentor said to Saul

If it be of man it will die off but if it be of God then nothing will stop it and you are fighting against God.

If it be of man Then wo will die off on its own. If it be of God nothing Ted Wilson or anyone else can fight it.

[Felix Florimon]

Trouble is - it is TED who is promoting division and suggesting a policy that is contrary to our Fundamentals voted on by a majority of those in attendance in a General Conference Session.

Please be more specific in explaining how the Pacific Union, on the WO issue, is just following the church's Fundamentals derived from the Bible while the majority of the SDA Church including its highest elected official is against those Fundamentals.

FF