Pacific Union Officials Decline Inclusion in SDA Yearbook; Stand in Solidarity with President Sandra Roberts


(Sam Geli) #25

It is worth noting that the GC Yearbook (never a best seller) officially states:
“The Yearbook does not define church structure or describe legal relationships among church entities or any of the listed organizations, most of which are separate legal entities. The Yearbook is intended primarily to identify the many and varied organizations, other than local churches/congregations, through which the Church advances its mission. "

  1. Kudos to the Pacific Union President’s Council for this meaningful gesture. It sends a clear message of understanding and support for gender equality. This Yearbook is not a best seller anywhere, I’ve been told that it is heavily subsidized so as to be able to publish it.
  2. Plan ahead for Step #2, the next demonstration of solidarity with gender equality issue.
  3. Respond carefully, don’t just react when there is an official action or response to this action.
  4. Inform PUC constituency (as statement states), and other interested impacted parties why the SDA Yearbook is “thinner” this year.
    Besides being a useful paperweight in my library office, the SDA Yearbook is NOT the Book Of Life!

(Joselito Coo) #27

If they were really serious about this solidarity thing, have they also turned in their ordained minister credentials in exchange for commissioned minister credential?


(George Tichy) #28

FINALLY!!! Whoever had this idea must be a genius!!!

Is this the first serious step to confront the abusive behavior on the part of the GC toward the Unions? I hope so, because this is getting out of control. This GC appears to have a malignant agenda determined to do whatever is necessary to perpetuate discrimination of women in our Church. They should experience the “grave consequences” of their abuse and be banished asap.

I also suggest that a policy be created that when “the green stuff” aka money is sent out to the black suited people upstairs the check must contain the signature of the Conference Presidents. Since according to TW the SECC has no President (just look in the YB…), then there is no way to send that check to the party upstairs… This could change the game very quickly!

I hope many more Unions will follow suit. It’s time to end this crusade in favor of discrimination of women perpetrated by this GC! Yes, perpetrated is the word to define their Machiavellic modus operandi!!!

There is only ONE name that needs to actually be removed not only from the YB but from the GC - its President. There is no room in a Church for leaders who promote discrimination of any nature.

@elmer_cupino @harrpa @vandieman @andreas

EDIT:
Let it be known that in solidarity to SECC President SANDRA ROBERTS, I am also declining the inclusion of my name in the SDA Yearbook.
Sorry… :wink:


#29

Their stand is respected; it’ll be interesting though to see whether they’d be willing to go that far, or even surrender their credentials altogether.


(DENNIS HOFER) #30

Yea ! Unity through liberty of conscience. What a simple concept.

Perhaps GC headquarters should move to the West Coast.
Is it the air ? Or . . .what ?

I am one of a ‘people’, my male eyes are open, and you might rethink what you are implying as a woman:
That women can ‘live’ on nothing, but men can’t.
That women have loads of free time, and no families, but men don’t. . . .

So, perhaps the solution to this WO thing is that we need to train our male SDA leaders to ‘minister’ for free, also, to be ‘self-supporting’ . . .
then mostly the wealthiest self-made men will have a voice in the SDA church, (perhaps like SDA / ASI media stars who receive ‘free’ donations to fund their lives) . . .
which is sort of what we have right now, anyway, come to think of it.

The ‘status quo’ (‘over 42 years’) – the existing state of affairs – is not necessarily the most righteous
state of existence.
‘Repentance and reformation’ is very often needed,
just as our SDA leader --Ted Wilson – has long pointed out to the SDA people.

Then, as our leader, God, please, may it begin with him, just as it began with You, the Owner of Your church !:

“And he sat down, and called the twelve, and saith unto them, If any man desire to be first, the same shall be last of all, and servant of all.” Mark 9:35

"Ye call me Master and Lord: and ye say well; for so I am.
If I then, your Lord and Master, have washed your feet; ye also ought to wash one another’s feet."
John 13:13-14

The least that the (male) apprentice-leaders of God’s church can do, is to set a place at the table
for another SDA apprentice-leader, Sandra Roberts.

And, from a more recent movie, Hidden Figures:
“Here at NASA, we all pee the same color!”

We SDAs are aiming toward a place far beyond the mere moon.


(LINDA F TAYLOR) #31

I have always said that this whole WO issue is about money! Not on the part of the GC, but on the part of women wanting to be paid for speaking. I have been in the church over 42 years, have attended many SDA churches, and I have never, ever witnessed any discrimination against women getting up and preaching. The only difference is that they do not get paid for it. Open your eyes people, it is all about the money!!! Women have an abundance of jobs in the church that they can do, but, do they do them. NO! This equality attitude is absolutely nonsense. A line I heard in a movie years ago still resonates in my head to this day. SHOW ME THE MONEY!!!


(E Chinnock) #32

On page 235 (2016 Yearbook) under “Property/Trust” she is listed. Makes the exclusion, on the SECC officers, even more strange!


(Lynden Williams) #33

If only I had the money of Bill Gates my tithe, alone, would give me the power to make this corrupt church of mine do anything I wanted it to do. Unfortunately, God is allowing us to wallow in our own self-righteousness, while wasting the resources of finishing the work.


(Cfowler) #34

Is this a joke? Tongue in cheek? Maybe I’m missing the nuance of this comment, but it sounds like a horrible idea.


#35

Wow!. The competition is tough!

What do I need to post to get 50 “likes”

Let’s see…

  1. Let all SDA pastors be ordained women.
  2. Recall Ted Wilson
  3. Let all LGBT SDA serve in any church position
    .4. Stop teaching 6 day creation
  4. Stop teaching IJ
  5. Make Sabbath observance optional
  6. Prohibit use of all EG White books in the denomination
  7. Allow bacon, spare ribs and pork chops at potlucks
  8. Let electric guitars and drums be used for worship services.
  9. Allow church carpet color be ANY color
  10. Let anyone who wants to be SDA to join even if they are a Jesuit, haven’t been baptized or haven’t heard any of the 28 fundamental beliefs.
  11. De-fellowship all LGT SDA (last generation theology)
  12. On the 13th day of Christmas, my true love gave to me…

By the way…does any SDA know what the gospel is?

Here it is Tuesday morning and only 4 “likes” Well, to all of the other posters…I don’t like you either…so there!

Reminds me of what an evangelist said to an audience in an SDA church…
“It’s not right for the upright to be up tight.”


#39

Ye also, as lively stones, are built up a spiritual house, an holy priesthood, to offer up spiritual sacrifices, acceptable to God by Jesus Christ.
1 Peter 2:5 KJV

How do people establish a male and female priesthood from one text .
Was it established male and writen as male ?


#40

"The GC refuses to recognize both her ordination and her presidency because she is female."
I chose this denomination in the 80’s because it was very Bible-based and relevant. The GC is behind the times and while ultra-conservative brothers and sisters will argue this based on some cultural texts, it’s going to be the downfall of the denomination as society throws the denomination aside due to ultra-conservative practices that chase away our younger members. You old conservative traditionalists need to realize that you’re not preaching to society and growing our church, you’re placing a choke hold on its growth.


(Mrs Joy Elliott) #41

Very funny Simon, but sadly, this whole issue is not a matter for joking. While our wonderful church leaders are arguing over W.O. they are neglecting the reason why the SDA church was raised up in the first place - to spread the good news about Jesus’s second coming! So much time and money is being wasted on this issue, and I’m sad to say I believe it could split the church and play right into Satan’s hands.


(Frank Peacham) #43

Perhaps we can solve this whole issue by accepting God’s instruction to Moses, about who has the right to approach the Divine as a priest on the Sabbath.

  1. They cannot touch a dead body, unless it is a close relative.
  2. They cannot shave their heads.
  3. They cannot cut or trim their beards
  4. Cannot marry a women who was a prostitute.
  5. Cannot marry a divorced woman, only marry a virgin. (If he is an older man whose wife has died–he is forced to marry a very young teen girl.)
  6. “If a priest’s daughter defiles herself by becoming a prostitute, she also defiles her father’s holiness, and she must be burned to death.” (Of course, men go free)
  7. “No one who has a defect qualifies, whether he is blind, lame, disfigured, deformed, or has a broken foot or arm, or is hunchbacked or dwarfed, or has a defective eye, or skin sores or scabs, or damaged testicles…can approach the alter.”

Moses (not God) was not at all concerned about political correctness nor was he worried about equal rights for women to minister as priest. So why should we today worry about it? Perhaps the problem was women were subject to monthly times of uncleanness and longer periods of from child births. For a female 66 days of uncleanness and for a male 33 days. During this time a woman was cut off from all physical contact from her husband, even a hug. And also all public worship. I think most men were glad they were not born a woman.

Lev 21


(JSKMD ) #45

PUC leadership is basically saying, “Ted Wilson is not our president and the worldwide SDA Church is not our church.” The PUC has not just rejected God’s servant, Elder Wilson, but has rejected God by rejecting His voice in the decision of the General Conference in session.

Each one of the PUC leadership should read the parable of the minas in Luke 19:12-27 and repent lest the Lord remove His protection from them.

“A certain nobleman went into a far country to receive for himself a kingdom and to return. So he called ten of his servants, delivered to them ten minas, and said to them, ‘Do business till I come.’ But his citizens hated him, and sent a delegation after him, saying, ‘We will not have this man to reign over us.’

“And so it was that when he returned, having received the kingdom, he then commanded these servants, to whom he had given the money, to be called to him, that he might know how much every man had gained by trading. Then came the first, saying, ‘Master, your mina has earned ten minas.’ And he said to him, ‘Well done, good servant; because you were faithful in a very little, have authority over ten cities.’ And the second came, saying, ‘Master, your mina has earned five minas.’ Likewise he said to him, ‘You also be over five cities.’

“Then another came, saying, ‘Master, here is your mina, which I have kept put away in a handkerchief. For I feared you, because you are an austere man. You collect what you did not deposit, and reap what you did not sow.’ And he said to him, ‘Out of your own mouth I will judge you, you wicked servant. You knew that I was an austere man, collecting what I did not deposit and reaping what I did not sow. Why then did you not put my money in the bank, that at my coming I might have collected it with interest?’

“And he said to those who stood by, ‘Take the mina from him, and give it to him who has ten minas.’ (But they said to him, ‘Master, he has ten minas.’) ‘For I say to you, that to everyone who has will be given; and from him who does not have, even what he has will be taken away from him. But bring here those enemies of mine, who did not want me to reign over them, and slay them before me.’”


(Tim Teichman) #46

Nonsense. They did not claim that Ted is not their president. Or that the church is not their church. Rejecting Ted’s many shenanigans is not rejecting God. Rejecting the GC in session is not rejecting God.

Where do you get these ideas?


(Johnny Carson) #53

What if it does split the church? Is that such a horrendous thing? How does it impact your salvation. While I’d rather it not split the church, honestly, I do not understand this fear. As a lifelong Adventist it seems wholly irrational to me. My walk with God is not dependent on the SDA denomination as a whole or in pieces.


(Michael Wortman) #54

I like your use of the word “shenanigans” here, Tim. It is kinder than sinful or dishonest and accuses Ted Wilson in a way that seems to be somewhat understanding of his human frailties, but at the same time brooks no nonsense. And to have used it so close to Halloween, a holiday celebrating shenanigans, tickled my funny bone. :slight_smile:


(Wijngaarde) #56

In the real world Sandra Roberts (and the likes) would have been sacked and all these PUC officers too.
But it shows once more that clergy don’t live in the real world and that under a distorted understanding “grace” anything seems to go in a church. Every form of grace is bound by laws (policy). Even God’s. God’s kingdom is not a chaotic, disorderly bunch of ego’s. One may not like the law, but must abide by it if one wants to be part of the system. Because, what gives these few men the authority to strike out rules not to their liking? Isn’t that what the RCC pontiff did –strike out laws and times?

Many here on Spectrum and AToday find it courageous, but what these officers did is petty, and bigotry, and cultic.
The only proper way would be to campaign for the changing of the policy, by trotting the king’s highway - through our accepted decision making process. It’s the Union president’s level and higher that have decided to the policy - complaints must be dropped at their doors - in our policy making meetings – GC Sessions. Educate your delegates and keep on trying, for there is never courage in rebellion.

For isn’t it strange …
Wanting to be in leadership positions, appointed, called, etc. by the Policy you have conjointly agreed on;
wanting to be respected by the people in the pews when you lay your policies on the tables of the local churches;
But blatantly rejecting the paragraphs that are not to your liking. This is Schizophrenic. Even Satan’s house is not divided.
But there seems to be spiritual characters in the Church who are only campaigning for sentimentality and emotionalism. And those who are accustomed to be spoon fed are swallowing the dross.

With this “vote” the little group of PUC conference presidents have decided to loose themselves even more from the world church, and they do not seem to have any concern whatsoever the people that are bringing up the money to pay their bills. When it suits them right, they scream – ‘the church is the people’; when it suits them right they neglect the will of the people.

I wonder, since they have abrogated and overruling WP paragraphs, did they take this vote with a two third majority? I don’t think so…. As in Belgium they have decided not to ordain anymore with a meager 52 to 48. What a laugh!

To me the rebellious leaders in our church, at any level, have proven themselves unfit for office – or have they abrogated the disciplining paragraphs in the WP and CM too, making themselves untouchable? What will those leaders do if the people in the pews start to do the same? Will they disfellowship those? Is it so obscured to their minds that what they are doing is a scenario for disaster, for tearing down the Church. Who would be the spirit behind all of this?

It’s a sad sight seeing people who profess to be rational, led by the Holy Spirit, and duly educated behaving so dumb.

I hope this comment is posted, because more than once I have noticed that free speech is not a strong asset of Spectrum or AToday. The trumpet gives only one sound here.


(Pierre-Paul Legault) #64

Sacked by whom? In the real world, Ms Roberts works for the SECC, and is responsible to the SECC constituency. The SECC constituency has had ample opportunity to sack her, and on the contrary they have chosen to re-elect her.

Many SdAs, including not a few GC administrators, pine for a papal system where the union president is the “boss” of the conference presidents; and where the GC president is the “boss” of the union presidents. Many of these authoritarians and proto-papists wish that TW had the authority to “fire” bishops (i.e. conference presidents). But he doesn’t and he can’t.