<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=Content-Type content="text/html; charset=windows-1252">
<META content="MSHTML 6.00.2900.2802" name=GENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY>
<DIV><FONT size=4>J Ford provides us with well thought out comments on the lack
of Christ Church Cultmaster Douglas Wilson lack of a professional certificate,
in this case ordination, even he claims he is 'Presbyterian.'</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=4></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=4>Her comments include the following extremely revealing
information:</FONT></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=#0000ff>"Doug Wilson, Evan Wilson, and several other men were
commissioned to the <BR>work of Faith Fellowship, later to become Christ Church,
by the elders of <BR>the Evangelical Free Church of Pullman at a meeting held in
the One-Way <BR>Bookstore of Pullman, WA in the mid-1970s. The elders of
EFC-Pullman at the <BR>time included Jim Wilson and Doug Busby."
(poohsthink.com)<BR><BR>"The four stages or order of ordination were not
followed; they were simply <BR>overlooked or ignored. The group met in a
coffee/bookstore, basically had a <BR>business meeting and decided "Viola! you
are now a "minister." Or did they?</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=#0000ff> <BR>"Were they simply "appointing" Doug as a
deacon of the newly formed <BR>ministry and he took it to be an ordination or
anointing as a minister, and <BR>ran with it? It has been seen that the
EFC have condemned Doug over the <BR>years for actions "unfitting" of the
position he holds himself in, i.e. <BR>minister."</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=4></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=4>Various members of the EFC have made numerous comments about
Cultmaster Wilson, all supported by documents and other testimony, alleging
the lack of honesty, humility, selflessness, compassion/agape, etc on his
part. They have in effect alleged that by character and action, Wilson is
unfit to be called a minister of Christ.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=4></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=4>However, there are many that do not believe that the EFC are
sincere in their charges.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=4></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=4>Well, here is a chance for the EFC to clearly demonstrate
where they stand. They can simply revoke the so-called "ordination" they
once bestowed upon Wilson and then publicize widely and clearly the good
news of such revocation. </FONT><FONT size=4>With such a revocation, the
Cultmaster will have no claim to call himself an ordained minister, barring an
attempt by the CCC elders (read "whores") to lay an obviously invalid ordination
upon him.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=4></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=4>Watching Wilson trying to extricate himself from all the
entanglements he manages to entrap himself in is like watching Bozo the Clown --
one cannot help but admire and be amused by his clever showperson antics, but at
the same time know that he, like the Bozo character, is only a spiritually
vacuous persona.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=4><BR>Art Deco (Wayne A. Fox)<BR><A
href="mailto:deco@moscow.com">deco@moscow.com</A><BR></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=4> </DIV>
<DIV><BR></DIV></FONT>
<DIV><FONT size=4>----- Original Message ----- </FONT>
<DIV><FONT size=4>From: "J Ford" <</FONT><A
href="mailto:privatejf32@hotmail.com"><FONT
size=4>privatejf32@hotmail.com</FONT></A><FONT size=4>></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=4>To: <</FONT><A href="mailto:vision2020@moscow.com"><FONT
size=4>vision2020@moscow.com</FONT></A><FONT size=4>></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=4>Sent: Wednesday, February 15, 2006 3:07 PM</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=4>Subject: [Vision2020] Does Doug Wilson fit the Presbyterian
mold of anordained minister?</FONT></DIV></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=4><BR></FONT></DIV><FONT size=4>> Ok, I realize this is a bit
long, but......<BR>> <BR>> What Presbyterians Believe about
ordination<BR>> <BR>> What does it mean to be ordained?<BR>> <BR>>
Presbyterian beliefs about ordination have changed significantly over the
<BR>> years<BR>> <BR>> What Presbyterians believe about ordination has
changed--sometimes rather <BR>> significantly--over time. For example, the
ordination of women as ministers, <BR>> elders and deacons--something
considered unthinkable earlier in our <BR>> history--has become not only
acceptable but expected.<BR>> <BR>> Three unchanging beliefs Presbyterians
have remained open to change <BR>> regarding our understanding of ordination
because of three unchanging <BR>> beliefs:<BR>> <BR>> 1.) We believe
that God is the source and summit of all ministry in the <BR>> church. For
Presbyterians ordination is not synonymous with ministry. We <BR>> believe
all Christians are called by God and equipped by the Spirit for <BR>> service
in the world when they are joined to the ministry of Jesus Christ at <BR>>
their baptism. On the other hand, not every member is called or equipped by
<BR>> God for the exercise of particular offices of ministry within the
church.<BR>> 2.) Presbyterians hold the conviction, voiced in chapter 1 of
the Book of <BR>> Order, that "truth is in order to goodness." Truth includes
our shared <BR>> convictions about who should be ordained, to what offices,
for what <BR>> purposes, and with what preparation and standards of
accountability. The <BR>> measure of this truth, however, does not depend
upon logical coherence or <BR>> philosophical argument, but from the
character of the fruit it bears.<BR>> 3.) Presbyterians believe that ordained
ministry should be collegial (shared <BR>> with others), non-hierarchical
(shared by clergy and laity), and communal <BR>> (representing the whole
church and not merely a congregation). We also <BR>> believe those called to
ordained offices in the church should be subjected <BR>> to a process in
which their calls are tested and confirmed by the church.<BR>> Men and women
together?<BR>> <BR>> In 1789, when the first General Assembly of the
Presbyterian Church in the <BR>> United States of America met in
Philadelphia, all church officers-- deacons, <BR>> elders and
ministers--were, by both custom and church law, male. The very <BR>> notion
of women holding office was considered preposterous. Indeed, some <BR>> early
19th-century church "worthies" became quite worked up over the <BR>>
possibility that women might lead prayer in "promiscuous assemblies" <BR>>
(gatherings where men would be present).<BR>> Women were prohibited from
serving as elders or deacons until the 1930s--or <BR>> the 1960s in the
Presbyterian Church in the U.S. (PCUS). Ordaining women to <BR>> the gospel
ministry took an additional 20-30 years.<BR>> <BR>> Today, however, the
proportion of women and men serving in ordained offices <BR>> is nearly 50
percent each, a development that is mirrored in the enrollment <BR>> figures
of the 10 Presbyterian theological institutions.<BR>> <BR>> Whose
hands?<BR>> <BR>> Until the 1830s no one seriously challenged the notion
that only pastors <BR>> (also called bishops until 1957) were permitted to
join in the laying on of <BR>> hands in the ordination of new pastors, elders
and deacons. Professor <BR>> Charles Hodge of Princeton Theological Seminary,
who opposed letting elders <BR>> take part in the process, was fond of
quoting an old Latin proverb: Nemo det <BR>> quod non habet (no one may give
what he does not have). Hodge's argument was <BR>> cast aside by the PCUS in
the 1860s, but Presbyterians in the "Northern" <BR>> stream steadfastly clung
to it until the 1950s.<BR>> Today ordination is explicitly defined as an act
done by a governing body <BR>> made up of ministers and elders who jointly
exercise the power of <BR>> jurisdiction, rather than as an act done by
persons who possess a power of <BR>> order only they can transmit.<BR>>
<BR>> Service for life<BR>> <BR>> For the first century of American
Presbyterianism, congregations were unable <BR>> to change entrenched
leadership on the session or board of deacons. Elders <BR>> and deacons
served on their boards until they died (or were convicted of an <BR>> offense
that stripped them of their ordination). Finally, in the middle of <BR>> the
19th century, churches were given permission to opt out of the lifetime <BR>>
service model in favor of a rotating limited-term service (the PCUS would
<BR>> take nearly a century to provide the same option to its
congregations).<BR>> <BR>> Today, limited-term service is now mandatory,
and congregations that wish to <BR>> be exempted from this requirement must
make their request to the presbytery.<BR>> <BR>> Radical roles for
elders<BR>> <BR>> During the same general era a then-radical notion began
to take root: that <BR>> elders should be able to be moderators of governing
bodies above the level <BR>> of the session. Although the idea eventually
carried the day, a debate <BR>> opened up almost immediately: How, it was
asked, could a lay person serve as <BR>> moderator since the retiring
moderator each year was required to preach? <BR>> Because elders had not been
given the power of order needed to preach, any <BR>> retiring elder-moderator
was expected to deputize a minister member or <BR>> commissioner to preach
the retiring moderator's sermon!<BR>> Today elders are not only regularly
elected to serve as moderators of higher <BR>> governing bodies but often
serve as commissioned lay pastors, preaching the <BR>> Word and presiding at
sacramental celebrations for congregations without <BR>> pastors. Moreover,
elders are as likely as ministers to be elected to <BR>> service as
presbytery, synod and General Assembly executives.<BR>> <BR>> More
ministry options<BR>> <BR>> When American Presbyterians adopted their
first Book of Order in 1789, only <BR>> two options existed for those who had
prepared themselves for ordination to <BR>> the gospel ministry. Those with a
call from an existing congregation would <BR>> be ordained by the presbytery
as pastors (or bishops). Those without a call <BR>> would be ordained as
evangelists, charged with gathering and organizing a <BR>> new
congregation.<BR>> Today those preparing to serve as ministers of the Word
and Sacrament are <BR>> faced with an array of specialized forms of ministry,
many of which have no <BR>> formal ties or links to local congregations or
agencies of higher governing <BR>> bodies.<BR>> <BR>> Testing what we
believe<BR>> <BR>> Picture a child's top. When the top is not spinning,
all sorts of clever <BR>> lines and designs can be seen, but once it is set
to spinning, we see <BR>> something altogether different. When we look only
at what our confessional <BR>> and governance documents say about ordination,
we can see all kinds of <BR>> logical connections and easy-to-understand
categories. When all of these are <BR>> put in motion by virtue of applying
them to particular persons, with <BR>> particular gifts, called by particular
communities of God's people to lead <BR>> them at a particular time in
history, the lines and the categories begin to <BR>> blur. The strengths and
weaknesses of these provisions come to light in ways <BR>> that matter to
people.<BR>> Some in our church feel strongly that Christian educators ought
to be <BR>> ordained. The church also is deeply divided over the question of
whether <BR>> openly gay and lesbian persons may be ordained to offices of
ministry. We <BR>> may wish these debates would just go away, but they are
the way we <BR>> Presbyterians go about testing what we believe to be the
truth. If and when <BR>> the debates finally come to an end, it will come
from putting everything <BR>> that matters to us into play and then testing
the fruits born of each side's <BR>> understanding and practice of ministry.
(By J. Frederick Holper)<BR>> <BR>> J. Frederick Holper is professor of
preaching and worship at McCormick <BR>> Theological Seminary, Chicago,
Ill.<BR>> <BR>> What is ordination<BR>> <BR>> The act by which the
church sets apart leaders to serve in particular <BR>> offices. The word
ordination is derived from order. In ordination the church <BR>> orders
itself for ministry.<BR>> <BR>> Q. For what offices is ordination
required?<BR>> A. Minister of the Word and Sacrament, elder, deacon.<BR>>
<BR>> Q. Who does the ordaining?<BR>> A. The presbytery ordains ministers.
The church session ordains deacons and <BR>> elders.<BR>> <BR>> Q. How
does the process of ordination work?<BR>> <BR>> A. Those called to an
ordained office in the church are subjected to a <BR>> four-stage process of
admission to that office. Presbyterian ordination <BR>> rites have always
included each aspect of this fourfold process:<BR>> • Articulation of a clear
inner sense that God is calling the person to an <BR>> office of ministry
requiring ordination.<BR>> • Testing of that inner call by the church itself.
In practice, this has <BR>> included an examination not only of the person's
knowledge and gifts, but <BR>> also of his or her way of life.<BR>> •
Election to office by a particular community of God's people, ordinarily a
<BR>> congregation.<BR>> • Admission to the office (ordination) in the
context of public worship, <BR>> through prayer, with the laying on of
hands.<BR>> <BR>> Q. What kind of leadership does the church need?<BR>>
A. The two key words here are gifts and service.<BR>> <BR>> "Leaders in
the church are identified and called to office in terms of their <BR>> gifts.
It is expected that these gifts, coming from God, are to be exercised <BR>>
in the particular tasks and office. It is also to be expected that the gifts
<BR>> of the leader will be cultivated and developed in obedience to the
guidance <BR>> of the Spirit and in the service of the church. Leaders are
also called on <BR>> to empower and enhance the exercise and development of
the gifts of all of <BR>> the members of the community."--A Proposal for
Considering the Theology and <BR>> Practice of Ordination in the Presbyterian
Church (U.S.A.), commended for <BR>> churchwide study by the 1992 General
Assembly<BR>> <BR>> "The purpose and pattern of leadership in the church
in all its forms of <BR>> ministry shall be understood not in terms of power
but of service, after the <BR>> manner of the servant ministry of Jesus
Christ."--Book of Order, G-14.0103<BR>> <BR>> <BR>> According to the
Encyclopedia Americana, ordination is:<BR>> <BR>> "The CEREMONY by which
priests, deacons, subdeacons, candidates for the <BR>> minor orders and
ministers of any denomination are admitted to their <BR>> specific office in
the church."<BR>> <BR>> While Jesus himself was not ordained by the clergy
and religious system of <BR>> His day John the Baptist baptized Jesus. Christ
dedicated Himself to God; so <BR>> why did Jesus insist that John baptize
him? Because Jesus wanted to <BR>> symbolize in a PUBLIC CONFESSION that He
had dedicated Himself to God. The <BR>> Bible tells us of Jesus' baptism that
"immediately on coming up out of the <BR>> water He saw the heavens being
parted, and, like a dove, the spirit coming <BR>> down upon Him; and a voice
came out of the heavens: 'You are my Son, the <BR>> beloved; I have approved
you."<BR>> <BR>> After His ordination immediately following His baptism in
the River Jordan <BR>> Jesus PUBLICLY stated the authority of His ordination
by reading from Isaiah <BR>> 61:1, 2: "1 The Spirit of the Sovereign LORD is
on me, because the LORD has <BR>> anointed me to preach good news to the
poor. He has sent me to bind up the <BR>> brokenhearted, to proclaim
freedom for the captives and release from <BR>> darkness for the prisoners, 2
to proclaim the year of the LORD's favor and <BR>> the day of vengeance of
our God, to comfort all who mourn."<BR>> <BR>> In today's world, declaring
someone ordained through ceremony is a <BR>> recognizable way for the ENTIRE
community into which the "minister" belongs, <BR>> to agree with the choosing
of him and to greet the newly ordained. <BR>> Basically, it is a
"vote", if you will, of confidence and acceptance of the <BR>> new
minister/leader of their church. Jesus' baptism/ordination "ceremony"
<BR>> is a model for a church to follow His steps closely; it marks the
person as <BR>> a person that is dedicating his ENTIRE life/world to God and
God's people <BR>> for the benefit of those people and Glory of God. It
is a "token" of the <BR>> person's willingness to follow God's Word and
Jesus' work.<BR>> <BR>> <BR>> Comment<BR>> <BR>> Given all this,
the following sheds light on the fact that Doug Wilson is <BR>> NOT an
ordained minister in any given "ministry":<BR>> <BR>> To answer your
question:<BR>> <BR>> Doug Wilson, Evan Wilson, and several other men were
commissioned to the <BR>> work of Faith Fellowship, later to become Christ
Church, by the elders of <BR>> the Evangelical Free Church of Pullman at a
meeting held in the One-Way <BR>> Bookstore of Pullman, WA in the mid-1970s.
The elders of EFC-Pullman at the <BR>> time included Jim Wilson and Doug
Busby." (poohsthink.com)<BR>> <BR>> The four stages or order of ordination
were not followed; they were simply <BR>> overlooked or ignored. The
group met in a coffee/bookstore, basically had a <BR>> business meeting and
decided "Viola! you are now a "minister." Or did they? <BR>> Were
they simply "appointing" Doug as a deacon of the newly formed <BR>> ministry
and he took it to be an ordination or anointing as a minister, and <BR>> ran
with it? It has been seen that the EFC have condemned Doug over the
<BR>> years for actions "unfitting" of the position he holds himself in, i.e.
<BR>> minister.<BR>> <BR>> Where, before this and certainly since, does
Doug show any kind of gift(s) <BR>> that would make people say "Hmm, this guy
looks like he'd be a good <BR>> candidate for ordination?" or "Doug
Wilson has a gift for making people <BR>> understand and follow God's word?"
- especially given his penchant for <BR>> ignoring God's laws and ways (for
instance, following the laws of the land <BR>> he finds himself in?)<BR>>
<BR>> It is my belief that ordination should be required for all men that
want to <BR>> be Ministers to go to a college or Seminary. Otherwise you get
these people <BR>> who become Pastors simply because they "like to preach"
and know nothing <BR>> about correct doctrine or how to even look for the
correct doctrine. I <BR>> think a church, when thinking of putting a
pastor in office should question <BR>> his doctrine, and if he knows what he
is talking about, then and only then <BR>> should a PUBLIC ordination be
committed.<BR>> <BR>> Because, there are skills and things learned from an
experienced and well <BR>> educated Seminarian that a "pastor" should have;
those things simply can not <BR>> be learned at the local bookstore or as an
apprentice. Granted, a person <BR>> would be able to learn "about" or
"of" them, but you simply can't get a full <BR>> education like what you get
at a college. Seminaries have experienced <BR>> professors that have
had their own parishes/churches. The reason why there <BR>> are so many
churches full of false doctrine today is because of pastors who <BR>> have
never gone to college and preach their own thing. They have no <BR>>
counseling skills, no communication skills, and no interpersonal skills. It
<BR>> leads to a mess!<BR>> <BR>> Also, Pastors need to know how to
properly interpret, much less educate, the <BR>> people of the Word. You
don't learn how to do this by simply reading a book <BR>> all the time or
even writing them. Most of the Pastors I know have a good <BR>> handle on
Greek and Hebrew and actually go into the original text to get <BR>> sermons
from. Sermons are a lot more difficult then just finding a problem <BR>> and
getting 1 to 2 points out of it to verify their true point. There is <BR>>
much more involved if done properly. I would say that one should be an
<BR>> "ordained" minister to be the senior pastor of a church, but one must
more <BR>> importantly focus on what it means to be ordained. I do
realize and accept <BR>> the prerequisites will vary from place to
place.<BR>> <BR>> I believe that one should have a strong theological
background in order to <BR>> be ordained. In almost all cases, this should
require the approval of an <BR>> acceptable degree-granting university or
seminary. In some wild and <BR>> generally hypothetical cases (like Peter and
the apostles), one might make <BR>> an exception. I realize that Doug
is stating (lately) that he is in fact an <BR>> apostle; but can one just
appoint oneself to that position? Can anyone just <BR>> say "I am a
(*), therefore I am a (*)"? In other words, is Doug a <BR>>
pastor/minister/apostle simply because he says so?<BR>> <BR>>
Accountability needs to be another concern and requirement of an ordaining
<BR>> body. If someone is not ordained per the steps outlined above,
who does the <BR>> pastor/minister(apostle) answer to? Especially if
they are, in reality, <BR>> self-appointed?<BR>> <BR>> Aithníonn cíaróg
cíaróg eile. -- One beetle recognizes another beetle (and <BR>> can
accommodate for the lacking of their fellow beetle.)<BR>> <BR>> Given the
actions of Doug and his fellow "deacons" (especially after Dale's <BR>>
repugnant posting this morning), I believe the Christ Church fellowship <BR>>
needs to seriously look at Doug's continued role as "minister". They need
<BR>> to seriously consider if he is the type of "minister of God's Word" and
<BR>> God's work that they want to represent them in the community.<BR>>
<BR>> <BR>> J :]<BR>> <BR>> <BR>> <BR>> <BR>> J
:]<BR>> <BR>>
_________________________________________________________________<BR>>
Express yourself instantly with MSN Messenger! Download today - it's FREE!
<BR>> </FONT><A
href="http://messenger.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200471ave/direct/01/"><FONT
size=4>http://messenger.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200471ave/direct/01/</FONT></A><BR><FONT
size=4>> <BR>>
_____________________________________________________<BR>> List services
made available by First Step Internet, <BR>> serving the communities of
the Palouse since 1994.
<BR>>
</FONT><A href="http://www.fsr.net"><FONT
size=4>http://www.fsr.net</FONT></A><FONT
size=4>
<BR>> </FONT><A
href="mailto:Vision2020@moscow.com"><FONT
size=4>mailto:Vision2020@moscow.com</FONT></A><BR><FONT size=4>>
¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯<BR>>
<BR>></FONT></BODY></HTML>