Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Learn Jurisdiction and the Power of Christ

Expand Messages
  • humbled.learner
    Bob wrote: What really should stick in the craw of those hearty broccoli eaters though, is the PPSA. It is a compilation of fallacies, erroneous conclusions
    Message 1 of 30 , Mar 11, 2007
    • 0 Attachment
      Bob wrote:

      "What really should stick in the craw of those hearty broccoli eaters
      though, is the PPSA. It is a compilation of fallacies, erroneous
      conclusions and the previously mentioned grand delusions. The non
      sequiturs begin with a congregation alone in an island, Matt. 18, Act
      15 and the Grand Debate. All of which arguments based on these
      examples are fallacies of the undistributed middle term.

      Each example assumes that the officers of the respective courts
      discussed actually meet together in person in one place to constitute
      said court. This as opposed to the RPNA(GM)'s court which does not
      ordinarily, if at all, meet together in person in one place at the
      same time, the parties being separated by thousands of miles and an
      international border. This based on the unprecedented and judicially
      unapproved innovation and argument for essentially the divine right of
      long distance phone government and modern internet technology (p.9)."

      Christ said:

      "But if he will not hear thee, then take with thee one or two more,
      that in the mouth of two or three witnesses every word may be
      established...Verily I say unto you, whatsoever ye shall bind on earth
      shall be bound in heaven: and whatsoever ye shall loose on earth shall
      be loosed in heaven. AGAIN I SAY UNTO YOU, that if two of you shall
      agree on earth as touching anything that they shall ask, it shall be
      done for them of my Father which is in heaven. For where two or three
      are GATHERED TOGETHER in my name there AM I IN THE MIDST OF THEM."
      (Matt.18:16,18-20).

      Now, they are going to spin the Scriptures to say that Christ was not
      talking about "long distance phone government and modern internet
      technology", but in order for Christ to be in the midst of them, they
      must be side-by-side in the same room. They argue that Christ ONLY
      permits two or more authority to make any formal decision IF AND ONLY
      IF THEY ARE SIDE-BY-SIDE IN THE SAME ROOM.

      They want you to limit all Presbyterian Authority to face-to-face
      meetings, and anything done over the phone on decisions by Elders, or
      anything communicated by internet in written judgements, are not
      binding since Christ could not be in the midst of them over telephone
      calls or internet communication. This is their argument, and listen
      to it carefully as they send out their hit man to pound it into you.

      Jesus Christ wrote:

      "And yet if I judge, my judgment is true: for I am not alone, but I
      and the Father that sent me. It is also written in your law, that the
      testimony of two men is true. I am one that bear witness of myself,
      and the Father that sent me beareth witness of me. Then said they
      unto him, WHERE IS THEY FATHER? Jesus answered, Ye neither know me,
      nor my Father: If ye had known me, ye should have known my Father
      also." (Jn.8:16-19).

      Again, The Effort People are going to argue over and over that Christ
      and His Father cannot possibly be in the midst of two or more people
      on the telephone, and all judicial decisions rendered MUST BE DONE
      SIDE-BY-SIDE IN THE FLESH. They will spin you to believe that Christ
      and His Father cannot possibly bind or loose any decisions made using
      the telephone, or internet. They argue all jurisdiction must be LOCAL
      and MUTUAL DUTIES must be performed.

      PEOPLE, THIS IS INDEPENDENCY AT ITS CORE...PLEASE UNDERSTAND THIS.

      We recognize that ORDINARILY IT IS BEST to have a local Session court
      with one Teaching Elder and one or more Ruling Elders. We recognize
      that ORDINARILY IT IS BEST to make decisions locally, and
      Presbyterianism identifies this as the most faithful local court, in a
      more settled state of the church, and it is the ordinary way.

      However, in extraordinary times, in an unsettled state of the church,
      there is NOTHING sinful about deviating from the ordinary way. They
      will argue that the ONLY WAY to perform an extraordinary court is that
      people must visit each other face-to-face, establish the court, and
      then close the court when people go home. They will argue that the
      weekly Session meetings our Elders have over the telephone, and the
      documents they write using electronic means and methods to create them
      are not allowed in historical Presbyterianism, and therefore, the
      Elders must be side-by-side in the same room in order for Jesus Christ
      and His Father to be in the midst and to allow them to bind and loose.

      Now, they are going to spin the arguments, but read Bob's jokes above,
      as he makes fun of these issues. He is a joker and the appointed Blog
      Hit Man to attack. In a heated discussion with Bob I challenged him
      on his methods, but the more I read his Blog I can see his strategy.

      I wrote him on November 3, 2006 for clarification:

      "I know you did say, "At least there hasn't been any so far in all
      this, but a vigorous offense beats a lame defence any day in my book."
      Is that what you are doing Bob? Is that really the strategy that one
      takes against Elders is a vigorous offense? Are they not the one's who
      is given the Authority as ordained men of God in His providence, at
      this time, and are they not the one's who bind and loose? If you
      objective to their opinion, as they get their Authority from God, are
      you not the one to defend your position that you are right and they
      are wrong after their opinion is issued. Where do you get this idea
      from Scripture that you are to attack them using a "vigorous offense"
      when they are the Elders appointed by God and you are a member of a
      society?"

      Obviously, some will say "Who am I to defend the Elders blindly?", but
      I can assure you that I did not defend them blindly back on Nov. 3,
      2006 nor do I defend them blindly today.

      I've read the The Effort People's definitions of jurisdiction and how
      they use the key "mutual duties" argument made by the Independents
      rather than the "mutual consent" argument made by the Presbyterians.

      Of course, they want nothing to do with the Grand Debate document, and
      would likely hope it will just go away forever, as it is non-binding
      in their mind, and only is confusing their positions.

      Well, for me, I don't buy their arguments, and I'm still waiting for
      them (e.g., The Effort People) to put together some Biblical Arguments
      that specifically overturns the PPSA. So far, I listen to only
      bashing of the Elders and see Bob's Blog Bashing Site, and it does not
      convince that The Effort People have any clue what they are preaching
      from the roof tops. It is all smoke and mirrors in my opinion.

      This will be the last message until I return at the end of the month.

      For the sufficiency and truth of Scripture,
      Walt.
    • Tony
      What sayest thou of me, dear brother? I was not involved with the Common Concern paper and I was still excommunicated. I would be interested still in what my
      Message 2 of 30 , Mar 11, 2007
      • 0 Attachment
        What sayest thou of me, dear brother? I was not involved with the Common Concern paper and I was still excommunicated. I would be interested still in what my sin was and who my accuser was as to why I was supposedly "excommunicated." It has come to my attention that there are those still within the RPNA(GM) that know what both of those are eventhough it was told to me by Pastor Price himself that this information wasn't something I needed to know.
         
        If you want to blanket this all underneath the mask of conspiracy you might want to compare dates. The first ten people (including myself) were "excommunicated" prior to any Common Concern paper was released. Btw, I also would point out that I am not aware of Bob being a spokeman for anyone but Bob. I appreciate what this brother adds on various points but he can and will only represent himself, as it should be.
         
        As my story goes, I was most willing to try to continue to work with these three elders to dialogue through concerns but we obviously come to an empasse when I want to know what I am to expect to them as to their office as elders and they want to give argumentation as to why they are a lawful court. I would ask a more pertinent question. How does one evaluate whether they are a faithful court of Christ? They may mean one in the same but one has the connotation of evaluating them based upon their duties done or left undone both in respect to their individual offices and also their collective capacity -- the other doesn't necessarily do as much.
         
        I am not saying that there aren't also other questions that come to bear in regard to this issue but I find this to be the one most simplistic (also most clear) and the one they have been very unwilling to go into. Since times are extraordinary they have not been able to state to me what particular expectations should have been had of me or anyone else for that matter in relation to their particular ministerial charges.
         
        I think it also important to remind you, Walt, that the ministry is to be about the souls of men, i.e. the ministry of mercy. By not following biblical and reformed due process (even if I grant that they could be a court just for the sake of argument), they have not properly proceeded with "excommunications" in a ministerial way. Both Dutch and Scottish (Order of Dordt and 1st Book of Discipline) follow a pattern of three exhortations (aside from various private exhortations as well) that state the sin and the consequences that would follow impenitence. None of this was done. And because proper biblical, presbyterial and legal procedure wasn't performed even if they were something that could be called a session or a court everything that they did in regard to the "excommunication" of myself and my brethren is null and void.
         
        If one really believed that I or my brethren were in such a very dire state why is it still that I have yet to hear nothing from the minister here to help me out of such nor of my RPNA(GM) brethren. It must be perceived that they must lack the love for me to actually endeavor my restoration or they think I am such a hopeless case and under estimate the grace of God (on either account I would desire better from my beloved brethren).
         
        This was in no way to try to argue my case in full and the various things of that nature. Yet rather to put forward to this group and to Walt a perspective that isn't coming from those who were a part of the Common Concern paper. It may ease some consciences to accuse brethren of lying or to cry up conspiracy but in the face of the standards of the reformed church as it regards jurisprudence, due procedure wasn't followed nor the mercy of Christ displayed through His ministers. We can talk much of justice or lack thereof but it is twice as bad of an omission when elders of Christ omit mercy and tender dealing with the sheep of God.
         
        I hope this email finds all of God's people persevering in God's grace and growing in the knowledge and wisdom of Christ. And as this email wasn't meant to provoke further strife on this list, I hope that none of such continues but rather brotherly and charitable behaviour towards one another. In anything, if I have unnecessarily offended in my words, please cover as best as you can with the love of Christ.
         
        In Christ, our Prophet, Priest and King,
         
        Tony 
         
         
        On 3/11/07, humbled.learner <humbled.learner@...> wrote:

        Bob wrote:

        "What really should stick in the craw of those hearty broccoli eaters
        though, is the PPSA. It is a compilation of fallacies, erroneous
        conclusions and the previously mentioned grand delusions. The non
        sequiturs begin with a congregation alone in an island, Matt. 18, Act
        15 and the Grand Debate. All of which arguments based on these
        examples are fallacies of the undistributed middle term.

        Each example assumes that the officers of the respective courts
        discussed actually meet together in person in one place to constitute
        said court. This as opposed to the RPNA(GM)'s court which does not
        ordinarily, if at all, meet together in person in one place at the
        same time, the parties being separated by thousands of miles and an
        international border. This based on the unprecedented and judicially
        unapproved innovation and argument for essentially the divine right of
        long distance phone government and modern internet technology ( p.9)."

        Christ said:

        "But if he will not hear thee, then take with thee one or two more,
        that in the mouth of two or three witnesses every word may be
        established...Verily I say unto you, whatsoever ye shall bind on earth
        shall be bound in heaven: and whatsoever ye shall loose on earth shall
        be loosed in heaven. AGAIN I SAY UNTO YOU, that if two of you shall
        agree on earth as touching anything that they shall ask, it shall be
        done for them of my Father which is in heaven. For where two or three
        are GATHERED TOGETHER in my name there AM I IN THE MIDST OF THEM."
        (Matt.18:16,18-20).

        Now, they are going to spin the Scriptures to say that Christ was not
        talking about "long distance phone government and modern internet
        technology", but in order for Christ to be in the midst of them, they
        must be side-by-side in the same room. They argue that Christ ONLY
        permits two or more authority to make any formal decision IF AND ONLY
        IF THEY ARE SIDE-BY-SIDE IN THE SAME ROOM.

        They want you to limit all Presbyterian Authority to face-to-face
        meetings, and anything done over the phone on decisions by Elders, or
        anything communicated by internet in written judgements, are not
        binding since Christ could not be in the midst of them over telephone
        calls or internet communication. This is their argument, and listen
        to it carefully as they send out their hit man to pound it into you.

        Jesus Christ wrote:

        "And yet if I judge, my judgment is true: for I am not alone, but I
        and the Father that sent me. It is also written in your law, that the
        testimony of two men is true. I am one that bear witness of myself,
        and the Father that sent me beareth witness of me. Then said they
        unto him, WHERE IS THEY FATHER? Jesus answered, Ye neither know me,
        nor my Father: If ye had known me, ye should have known my Father
        also." ( Jn.8:16-19).

        Again, The Effort People are going to argue over and over that Christ
        and His Father cannot possibly be in the midst of two or more people
        on the telephone, and all judicial decisions rendered MUST BE DONE
        SIDE-BY-SIDE IN THE FLESH. They will spin you to believe that Christ
        and His Father cannot possibly bind or loose any decisions made using
        the telephone, or internet. They argue all jurisdiction must be LOCAL
        and MUTUAL DUTIES must be performed.

        PEOPLE, THIS IS INDEPENDENCY AT ITS CORE...PLEASE UNDERSTAND THIS.

        We recognize that ORDINARILY IT IS BEST to have a local Session court
        with one Teaching Elder and one or more Ruling Elders. We recognize
        that ORDINARILY IT IS BEST to make decisions locally, and
        Presbyterianism identifies this as the most faithful local court, in a
        more settled state of the church, and it is the ordinary way.

        However, in extraordinary times, in an unsettled state of the church,
        there is NOTHING sinful about deviating from the ordinary way. They
        will argue that the ONLY WAY to perform an extraordinary court is that
        people must visit each other face-to-face, establish the court, and
        then close the court when people go home. They will argue that the
        weekly Session meetings our Elders have over the telephone, and the
        documents they write using electronic means and methods to create them
        are not allowed in historical Presbyterianism, and therefore, the
        Elders must be side-by-side in the same room in order for Jesus Christ
        and His Father to be in the midst and to allow them to bind and loose.

        Now, they are going to spin the arguments, but read Bob's jokes above,
        as he makes fun of these issues. He is a joker and the appointed Blog
        Hit Man to attack. In a heated discussion with Bob I challenged him
        on his methods, but the more I read his Blog I can see his strategy.

        I wrote him on November 3, 2006 for clarification:

        "I know you did say, "At least there hasn't been any so far in all
        this, but a vigorous offense beats a lame defence any day in my book."
        Is that what you are doing Bob? Is that really the strategy that one
        takes against Elders is a vigorous offense? Are they not the one's who
        is given the Authority as ordained men of God in His providence, at
        this time, and are they not the one's who bind and loose? If you
        objective to their opinion, as they get their Authority from God, are
        you not the one to defend your position that you are right and they
        are wrong after their opinion is issued. Where do you get this idea
        from Scripture that you are to attack them using a "vigorous offense"
        when they are the Elders appointed by God and you are a member of a
        society?"

        Obviously, some will say "Who am I to defend the Elders blindly?", but
        I can assure you that I did not defend them blindly back on Nov. 3,
        2006 nor do I defend them blindly today.

        I've read the The Effort People's definitions of jurisdiction and how
        they use the key "mutual duties" argument made by the Independents
        rather than the "mutual consent" argument made by the Presbyterians.

        Of course, they want nothing to do with the Grand Debate document, and
        would likely hope it will just go away forever, as it is non-binding
        in their mind, and only is confusing their positions.

        Well, for me, I don't buy their arguments, and I'm still waiting for
        them (e.g., The Effort People) to put together some Biblical Arguments
        that specifically overturns the PPSA. So far, I listen to only
        bashing of the Elders and see Bob's Blog Bashing Site, and it does not
        convince that The Effort People have any clue what they are preaching
        from the roof tops. It is all smoke and mirrors in my opinion.

        This will be the last message until I return at the end of the month.

        For the sufficiency and truth of Scripture,
        Walt.


      • bob_suden
        1. The following fails to quote my previous remark re. the Grand Debate which gives the overall context of my remarks. The parties in question are: suffering
        Message 3 of 30 , Mar 11, 2007
        • 0 Attachment
          1. The following fails to quote my previous remark re. the Grand Debate which gives the overall context of my remarks. The parties in question are:

          "suffering under the grand delusion that since they desire to be presbyterian, every jot and tittle they read in the Grand Debate applies straight across the board to the situation they find themselves in, in the RPNA(GM). But wannabe, doesn't necessarily mean actually is. Say so, don't make it so."

          In other words, no one has a quarrel with the Grand Debate per se or even hates it.

          Rather what is vigorously and unapologetically disputed is the blind application and abuse of the GD and its principles to the situation that obtains today in the RPNA(GM). The grand context and backdrop to the  Grand Debate which the PPSA ignores and likewise this post, is that the GD is talking about a genuine greater presbytery. Consequently  it is assumed of that same presbytery:
          One, that presbytery actually meets together in one place in person at the same time in order to make any binding judicial decisions.   If this is not the historical position, exposition and understanding of Matt. 18:20 by the presbyterian and reformed churches, much more the RP historical testimony,  what is? (See again the Minutes for the RPA, Oct 5, 1842 ) To that question, we have yet to receive an answer, much more a judicially approved answer, rather than the bare assertion of the PPSA on p.9.  
          Two, it is also presumed of said presbytery that there is a plurality of teaching elders, much less ruling elders, otherwise it is no presbytery.
          Three, there are representative and resident ruling elders from the respective congregations over which this presbytery serves as a common court. (For that matter, the Second Book of Discipline 7:10 which is appealed to in June `03  and in the PPSA  (p.13) June `06, says elders are to be chosen out of every respective congregation. "Albeit this is meet, that some of the elders be chosen out of every particular congregation, to concur with the rest of their brethren in the common assembly, and to take up the delations of offences within their own kirks, and bring them to the assembly.") And if they are not resident, at least there is a proportionate number to go along with the number of congregations over which the presbytery claims jurisdiction.

          But again, none of these conditions obtain in the RPNA(GM). Hence to consider the GD a silver bullet that answers all objections by the mere repetition of the sounds that make up its name leaves something very much to be desired, but that is the caliber of the debate and the level upon which some wish to conduct the discussion, much more they quarrel with those who object to this debasing of the topic.

          2. One can rant and rail on about the Effort People, but the PPSA itself in its quotes of the London Ministers and Gillespie assumes what has historically been assumed of Matt. 18:20 and a court actually gathering together in one place in person (pp.5,6).

          "Now touching the Matter of our Savior's discourse, it makes this very clear to us: for by gradation he leads from Admonition private and personal, to Admonition before two or three witnesses, and from Admonition before two or three witnesses to the representative body of one church (as the phrase "Tell the Church" must necessarily be interpreted) if there the difference can be settled, the offence removed, or the cause ended; rather than unnecessarily render the offence, and so our brother's shame more public and notorious. And that the Presbytery or Eldership of a particular Congregation - vested with power to hear and determine such cases shall be brought before them-is partly though not only here intended, seems evident in the words following (which are added for the
          strengthening and confirming of what went before in v.17):

          'Verily I say unto you, whatsoever ye shall bind on earth shall be bound in heaven; and whatsoever ye shall loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven. Again I say unto you, that if two of you shall agree in earth, as touching anything that they shall ask, it shall be done for them of my Father which is in heaven. For where two or three are gathered in my name, there am I in the midst of them` (Matt. 18:18-20).

          In which passages these things are to be noted:

          1. That this Church to which the complaint was to be made is invested with power of binding and loosing, and that authoritatively so, [such] that what by this Church shall be bound or loosed on earth shall also be bound or loosed in heaven, according to Christ's promise.

          2. That these Acts of binding and loosing may be the Acts but of two or three; and therefore consequently of the Eldership of a particular congregation. For where such a juridical Act was dispatched by a Classical Presbytery, it is said to be done "of many" (2 Cor. 2:6) because in such greater Presbyteries there are always more than two or three"

          "First, it might be said, the Apostles and other church governors may fall to be very few in this or that church where the offence riseth; shall we, in that case, execute any  church discipline? Yes, saith Christ, if there were but two church officers in a church (where no more could be had) they are to exercise discipline and it shall not be in vain (all emphases added)."

          What more can one say? When the PPSA's  own witnesses and authorities assume the point at issue --   Matt.18:20  refers to a local congregational court, whose officers can and normally do meet together to constitute a lawful session  --   it is a little much to try to blame it on the "Effort people" or call it "Independency." That the PPSA on its part (p.9), can only give its readers one paragraph and that mere assertion without any real argument or proof that the modern technology can erase this requirement, condition or essence of a local court, is deficient in the extreme.  That is because:
          One,  it is contrary to RP historical testimony (i.e. practice) of which there is no mention at all in the PPSA – while lipservice is paid to "maintaining historical continuity with the honorable testimony of those faithful Church Courts of the Reformed Presbytery which preceded us (p.29)," the RPA Minutes for Oct 5, 1842  for one example are conspicuous by their absence. 
          Consequently two, it is a judicially unapproved innovation.
          Three, excommunications will take place for those who the temerity or audacity to disagree with or question it, much more decline its authority and consider it lacking in material fact, exposition of Scripture and valid/logical  arguments.

          3. It is entirely unacceptable to merely quote at large a smattering of texts without giving any kind of exposition or application of them, be they from the GD or no. The reasons for this are two fold. One, if you cannot paraphrase or gloss something, very possibly you do not understand it , if not that at least you are not called to teach it to others because you don't have the necessary gift of speech or utterance. But that is what the teaching ministry in the church is called to do. Two, many times a quote does not refer specifically to the exact same situation or explicitly speak to the point argued for. At that point an exposition of the necessary consequences is necessary so that readers can see your reasoning and judge whether or not  it is valid.

          4. The level of argumentation is so pathetically ridiculous, particularly with Q.4 in the PPSA, that there is almost no way to point it out without descending to absurdity. But the argument of reductio ad absurdum is a  legitimate and valid rebuttal no matter how embarrassing that is for the PPSA and its felonious (sic) arguments and those who apologize for it, even as they brandish it over the heads and abuse the consciences of those who must swear it or be excommunicated from the visible church. (In which case embarrassment is the least of the apologists'  deserts and ought to be the least of their worries. There is one with which they will have to do that has far more to say on the matter. Matt. 10:28)  Hence the charge, the undersigned is a joker with the insinuation that the same is irreverent and disrespectful to the lawful and God given authorities in the church.
          The problems with this are, as has been mentioned before, lex rex, not rex lex. The law is king, not the king is law. Presbyterianism does not recognize unaccountable authority, neither have the elders justified themselves or expounded their case in order that any reasonable Bible believing presbyterian can affirm it wholeheartedly.

          One, they have reneged on their promise to restructure the church. One only has to look at the PPSA to see that it is an apology and justification for the status quo and not a fulfillment of the Jan.1 `06 statement from the elders.
          Two, there was a promise of a forum and a discussion of the issues. (I don't know, but in that again the proxy elders weren't accorded the proper amount of respect and the sheep didn't blindly fall in line with the program, much more the elders didn't step up to the plate and provide any real leadership in the forums they moderated with the two public email scandals, this promise had to get junked.)
          Three, if you are going to appeal to Scripture, much more Act 15 in the PPSA and 16:4 in the excommunication notices, dumping the PPSA on everybody and telling them to get back to the elders with their questions privately has something far less than apostolic authority going for it. The apostles and elders went out and by word of mouth and letter confirmed the decrees for to keep (Act 15:22,23,30-32,36,41, 16:4,5).
          Four, the PPSA fails on the level of natural reason , even before we start talking about the limited and erroneous exposition of Scripture and the even briefer mention of the subordinate standards, never mind the complete absence of RP historical testimony which only contradicts the PPSA's conclusions.

          5. I speak for myself alone and no one else, though I am sure some of the disaffected brethren, i.e. those in the  camp of the saints who have been excommunicated from the RPNA(GM), would agree with some of my comments. But what of it either way? I have never claimed to speak for all, much more many of them I think are heartily disappointed in the way things have gone so that regardless of their agreement with the RP terms of communion, they see no point in maintaining their cause or speaking up on these  issues. I have no quarrel with that and find it understandable. Those who have not been excommunicated of course, probably quarrel with all this and more, but that is no matter to me. The truth will out in the end, again  all the scurrilous screeds and hue and cry about "secret societies", "conspiracies", "public bashing" and "independency" notwithstanding.

          There are none so blind as those who claim they see. Jn 9:41

          Thank you very much,

          cordially in Christ
          Bob S



          --- In covenantedreformationclub@yahoogroups.com, "humbled.learner" <humbled.learner@...> wrote:
          >
          > Bob wrote:
          >
          > "What really should stick in the craw of those hearty broccoli eaters
          > though, is the PPSA. It is a compilation of fallacies, erroneous
          > conclusions and the previously mentioned grand delusions. The non
          > sequiturs begin with a congregation alone in an island, Matt. 18, Act
          > 15 and the Grand Debate. All of which arguments based on these
          > examples are fallacies of the undistributed middle term.
          >
          > Each example assumes that the officers of the respective courts
          > discussed actually meet together in person in one place to constitute
          > said court. This as opposed to the RPNA(GM)'s court which does not
          > ordinarily, if at all, meet together in person in one place at the
          > same time, the parties being separated by thousands of miles and an
          > international border. This based on the unprecedented and judicially
          > unapproved innovation and argument for essentially the divine right of
          > long distance phone government and modern internet technology (p.9)."
          >
          > Christ said:
          >
          > "But if he will not hear thee, then take with thee one or two more,
          > that in the mouth of two or three witnesses every word may be
          > established...Verily I say unto you, whatsoever ye shall bind on earth
          > shall be bound in heaven: and whatsoever ye shall loose on earth shall
          > be loosed in heaven. AGAIN I SAY UNTO YOU, that if two of you shall
          > agree on earth as touching anything that they shall ask, it shall be
          > done for them of my Father which is in heaven. For where two or three
          > are GATHERED TOGETHER in my name there AM I IN THE MIDST OF THEM."
          > (Matt.18:16,18-20).
          >
          > Now, they are going to spin the Scriptures to say that Christ was not
          > talking about "long distance phone government and modern internet
          > technology", but in order for Christ to be in the midst of them, they
          > must be side-by-side in the same room. They argue that Christ ONLY
          > permits two or more authority to make any formal decision IF AND ONLY
          > IF THEY ARE SIDE-BY-SIDE IN THE SAME ROOM.
          >
          > They want you to limit all Presbyterian Authority to face-to-face
          > meetings, and anything done over the phone on decisions by Elders, or
          > anything communicated by internet in written judgements, are not
          > binding since Christ could not be in the midst of them over telephone
          > calls or internet communication. This is their argument, and listen
          > to it carefully as they send out their hit man to pound it into you. . . .
        • Walt Bre
          Tony, I ve not been able to study your writings carefully, but all I can say is that it was my understanding after reading your excommunication document and
          Message 4 of 30 , Mar 12, 2007
          • 0 Attachment
            Tony,

            I've not been able to study your writings carefully,
            but all I can say is that it was my understanding
            after reading your excommunication document and
            hearing second hand that you too believed the summons
            and oath you received was void on its face. You also
            believed that the RPNA (GM) was no court at all, that
            the Elders had no authority over you as a member, and
            that until you learned of the formal complaint against
            you that you would not grant the court jurisdiction to
            hear the case before them.

            Again, this is my own opinion, but unless you admit
            you are a member of the RPNA (GM) and believe they
            have jurisdiction over you and the subject matter to
            hear the case, it is best to stay with your self
            excommunication and never let the complaint against
            you be heard.

            Now, I understand this does not seem fair, but what
            court in the world would hear a case unless both
            parties (or all parties) granted them jurisdiction to
            hear the case. The only court I could imagine that
            would hear a case without any jurisdiction to hear it
            would be a tyrannical court, and if you (like others)
            do not believe you were members of the RPNA (GM), and
            that as a court they have no standing to hear any
            cases, and they are unlawful because they did not
            "perform mutual duties" or were not "within specific
            boundaries of distance" then I think your self
            excommunication is sufficient and makes sense to me.

            In response to your question about why 2 part-time
            Elders and 1 full-time Pastor are not working night
            and day to go out and try to convince everyone to come
            back to the flock is because they are working with the
            rest of us day and night to answer our questions,
            comments and concerns as much as they are able. If
            you only knew the amount of issues they are dealing
            with, on helping those of us who have submitted to
            their authority, then I suspect you would understand.

            I've recently heard from some in Presbyterian churches
            here in Michigan about the size of their
            congregations, and how often they get to speak to the
            Pastor, and those in Albany who were complaining make
            me wonder how they would think at some of these very
            large churches here in Southern Michigan. Wow, stand
            in line!

            Again, I'm sorry I did not answer all your questions,
            and will not be able to for about 3 weeks.

            Walt.

            --- Tony <amenendez78@...> wrote:

            > What sayest thou of me, dear brother? I was not
            > involved with the Common
            > Concern paper and I was still excommunicated. I
            > would be interested still in
            > what my sin was and who my accuser was as to why I
            > was supposedly
            > "excommunicated." It has come to my attention that
            > there are those still
            > within the RPNA(GM) that know what both of those are
            > eventhough it was told
            > to me by Pastor Price himself that this information
            > wasn't something I
            > needed to know.
            >
            > If you want to blanket this all underneath the mask
            > of conspiracy you might
            > want to compare dates. The first ten people
            > (including myself) were
            > "excommunicated" prior to any Common Concern paper
            > was released. Btw, I also
            > would point out that I am not aware of Bob being a
            > spokeman for anyone but
            > Bob. I appreciate what this brother adds on various
            > points but he can and
            > will only represent himself, as it should be.
            >
            > As my story goes, I was most willing to try to
            > continue to work with these
            > three elders to dialogue through concerns but we
            > obviously come to an
            > empasse when I want to know what I am to expect to
            > them as to their office
            > as elders and they want to give argumentation as to
            > why they are a lawful
            > court. I would ask a more pertinent question. How
            > does one evaluate whether
            > they are a faithful court of Christ? They may mean
            > one in the same but one
            > has the connotation of evaluating them based upon
            > their duties done or left
            > undone both in respect to their individual offices
            > and also their collective
            > capacity -- the other doesn't necessarily do as
            > much.
            >
            > I am not saying that there aren't also other
            > questions that come to bear in
            > regard to this issue but I find this to be the one
            > most simplistic (also
            > most clear) and the one they have been very
            > unwilling to go into. Since
            > times are extraordinary they have not been able to
            > state to me what
            > particular expectations should have been had of me
            > or anyone else for that
            > matter in relation to their particular ministerial
            > charges.
            >
            > I think it also important to remind you, Walt, that
            > the ministry is to be
            > about the souls of men, i.e. the ministry of mercy.
            > By not following
            > biblical and reformed due process (even if I grant
            > that they could be a
            > court just for the sake of argument), they have not
            > properly proceeded with
            > "excommunications" in a ministerial way. Both Dutch
            > and Scottish (Order of
            > Dordt and 1st Book of Discipline) follow a pattern
            > of three exhortations
            > (aside from various private exhortations as well)
            > that state the sin and the
            > consequences that would follow impenitence. None of
            > this was done. And
            > because proper biblical, presbyterial and legal
            > procedure wasn't performed
            > even if they were something that could be called a
            > session or a court
            > everything that they did in regard to the
            > "excommunication" of myself and my
            > brethren is null and void.
            >
            > If one really believed that I or my brethren were in
            > such a very dire state
            > why is it still that I have yet to hear nothing from
            > the minister here to
            > help me out of such nor of my RPNA(GM) brethren. It
            > must be perceived that
            > they must lack the love for me to actually endeavor
            > my restoration or they
            > think I am such a hopeless case and under estimate
            > the grace of God (on
            > either account I would desire better from my beloved
            > brethren).
            >
            > This was in no way to try to argue my case in full
            > and the various things of
            > that nature. Yet rather to put forward to this group
            > and to Walt a
            > perspective that isn't coming from those who were a
            > part of the Common
            > Concern paper. It may ease some consciences to
            > accuse brethren of lying or
            > to cry up conspiracy but in the face of the
            > standards of the reformed church
            > as it regards jurisprudence, due procedure wasn't
            > followed nor the mercy of
            > Christ displayed through His ministers. We can talk
            > much of justice or lack
            > thereof but it is twice as bad of an omission when
            > elders of Christ omit
            > mercy and tender dealing with the sheep of God.
            >
            > I hope this email finds all of God's people
            > persevering in God's grace and
            > growing in the knowledge and wisdom of Christ. And
            > as this email wasn't
            > meant to provoke further strife on this list, I hope
            > that none of such
            > continues but rather brotherly and charitable
            > behaviour towards one another.
            > In anything, if I have unnecessarily offended in my
            > words, please cover as
            > best as you can with the love of Christ.
            >
            > In Christ, our Prophet, Priest and King,
            >
            > Tony
            >
            >
            > On 3/11/07, humbled.learner
            > <humbled.learner@...> wrote:
            >
            > > Bob wrote:
            > >
            > > "What really should stick in the craw of those
            > hearty broccoli eaters
            > > though, is the PPSA. It is a compilation of
            > fallacies, erroneous
            > > conclusions and the previously mentioned grand
            > delusions. The non
            > > sequiturs begin with a congregation alone in an
            > island, Matt. 18, Act
            > > 15 and the Grand Debate. All of which arguments
            > based on these
            > > examples are fallacies of the undistributed middle
            > term.
            > >
            > > Each example assumes that the officers of the
            > respective courts
            > > discussed actually meet together in person in one
            > place to constitute
            > > said court. This as opposed to the RPNA(GM)'s
            > court which does not
            > > ordinarily, if at all, meet together in person in
            > one place at the
            > > same time, the parties being separated by
            > thousands of miles and an
            > > international border. This based on the
            > unprecedented and judicially
            > > unapproved innovation and argument for essentially
            > the divine right of
            > > long distance phone government and modern internet
            > technology (p.9)."
            > >
            > > Christ said:
            > >
            > > "But if he will not hear thee, then take with thee
            > one or two more,
            > > that in the mouth of two or three witnesses every
            > word may be
            > > established...Verily I say unto you, whatsoever ye
            > shall bind on earth
            > > shall be bound in heaven: and whatsoever ye shall
            > loose on earth shall
            > > be loosed in heaven. AGAIN I SAY UNTO YOU, that if
            > two of you shall
            > > agree on earth as touching anything that they
            > shall ask, it shall be
            > > done for them of my Father which is in heaven. For
            > where two or three
            > > are GATHERED TOGETHER in my name there AM I IN THE
            > MIDST OF THEM."
            > > (Matt.18:16,18-20).
            > >
            > > Now, they are going to spin the Scriptures to say
            > that Christ was not
            > > talking about "long distance phone government and
            > modern internet
            > > technology", but in order for Christ to be in the
            > midst of them, they
            > > must be side-by-side in the same room. They argue
            > that Christ ONLY
            > > permits two or more authority to make any formal
            > decision IF AND ONLY
            > > IF THEY ARE SIDE-BY-SIDE IN THE SAME ROOM.
            > >
            > > They want you to limit all Presbyterian Authority
            > to face-to-face
            > > meetings, and anything done over the phone on
            > decisions by Elders, or
            >
            === message truncated ===




            ____________________________________________________________________________________
            Don't pick lemons.
            See all the new 2007 cars at Yahoo! Autos.
            http://autos.yahoo.com/new_cars.html
          • Walt Bre
            Tony, May I ask you one question. Can you tell me why you did not participate in the Effort? If it was only a study group, as we are lead to believe by the
            Message 5 of 30 , Mar 12, 2007
            • 0 Attachment
              Tony,

              May I ask you one question. Can you tell me why you
              did not participate in the Effort? If it was only a
              study group, as we are lead to believe by the
              participants, can you tell me if you were invited?

              I understand there were two others that were invited,
              but chose not to participate. It is even possible
              that there were more than two others I do not really
              know. Sometimes allegations need to be made since all
              the facts are not so easily found until detailed
              discovery can be completed.

              However, you said that you were not involved in the
              Common Concerns paper, but does this mean that you
              were not invited to join the Effort? If you were not
              invited, it seems suprising to me as I know you to be
              an excellent student and one who would have greatly
              desired to participate in The Effort.

              If you were invited, like others who will be going
              public shortly, perhaps you could tell us why you
              decided not to join The Effort. May I ask, did you
              ever think in your mind that this was not faithful,
              was not honorable and not loving to work behind the
              Elders like this without their (or even mine and
              others) knowledge?

              The only reason I ask is that I sort of know why I was
              not invited because I would never have tolerated this
              activity, and as someone who has tried and tried, over
              many times, to make a positive difference in our
              church from out here in the wilderness, I simply would
              not have stood for this type of "study group".

              Well, perhaps you did not join because you were too
              busy with work, or other personal reasons, and would
              never have charged these people with being unfaithful,
              but I do look forward to what the others will say when
              the document goes public. I for one, who has also
              been hurt by all this damage to our church, would like
              to understand what this group was, and why did not
              others (like you and I) get invited.

              Only time will tell. I hope when the documents do get
              released my name does not come up as the only idiot,
              blind, weak brethren who should not be included
              because I could not handle the research. Bla, I've
              spent my life in books all over the world. No
              jurisdiction by mutual consent, I can't wait to see
              how these mutual duties and local distance play into
              The Effort.

              May the Lord be with you Tony,
              Walt.






              --- Tony <amenendez78@...> wrote:

              > What sayest thou of me, dear brother? I was not
              > involved with the Common
              > Concern paper and I was still excommunicated. I
              > would be interested still in
              > what my sin was and who my accuser was as to why I
              > was supposedly
              > "excommunicated." It has come to my attention that
              > there are those still
              > within the RPNA(GM) that know what both of those are
              > eventhough it was told
              > to me by Pastor Price himself that this information
              > wasn't something I
              > needed to know.
              >
              > If you want to blanket this all underneath the mask
              > of conspiracy you might
              > want to compare dates. The first ten people
              > (including myself) were
              > "excommunicated" prior to any Common Concern paper
              > was released. Btw, I also
              > would point out that I am not aware of Bob being a
              > spokeman for anyone but
              > Bob. I appreciate what this brother adds on various
              > points but he can and
              > will only represent himself, as it should be.
              >
              > As my story goes, I was most willing to try to
              > continue to work with these
              > three elders to dialogue through concerns but we
              > obviously come to an
              > empasse when I want to know what I am to expect to
              > them as to their office
              > as elders and they want to give argumentation as to
              > why they are a lawful
              > court. I would ask a more pertinent question. How
              > does one evaluate whether
              > they are a faithful court of Christ? They may mean
              > one in the same but one
              > has the connotation of evaluating them based upon
              > their duties done or left
              > undone both in respect to their individual offices
              > and also their collective
              > capacity -- the other doesn't necessarily do as
              > much.
              >
              > I am not saying that there aren't also other
              > questions that come to bear in
              > regard to this issue but I find this to be the one
              > most simplistic (also
              > most clear) and the one they have been very
              > unwilling to go into. Since
              > times are extraordinary they have not been able to
              > state to me what
              > particular expectations should have been had of me
              > or anyone else for that
              > matter in relation to their particular ministerial
              > charges.
              >
              > I think it also important to remind you, Walt, that
              > the ministry is to be
              > about the souls of men, i.e. the ministry of mercy.
              > By not following
              > biblical and reformed due process (even if I grant
              > that they could be a
              > court just for the sake of argument), they have not
              > properly proceeded with
              > "excommunications" in a ministerial way. Both Dutch
              > and Scottish (Order of
              > Dordt and 1st Book of Discipline) follow a pattern
              > of three exhortations
              > (aside from various private exhortations as well)
              > that state the sin and the
              > consequences that would follow impenitence. None of
              > this was done. And
              > because proper biblical, presbyterial and legal
              > procedure wasn't performed
              > even if they were something that could be called a
              > session or a court
              > everything that they did in regard to the
              > "excommunication" of myself and my
              > brethren is null and void.
              >
              > If one really believed that I or my brethren were in
              > such a very dire state
              > why is it still that I have yet to hear nothing from
              > the minister here to
              > help me out of such nor of my RPNA(GM) brethren. It
              > must be perceived that
              > they must lack the love for me to actually endeavor
              > my restoration or they
              > think I am such a hopeless case and under estimate
              > the grace of God (on
              > either account I would desire better from my beloved
              > brethren).
              >
              > This was in no way to try to argue my case in full
              > and the various things of
              > that nature. Yet rather to put forward to this group
              > and to Walt a
              > perspective that isn't coming from those who were a
              > part of the Common
              > Concern paper. It may ease some consciences to
              > accuse brethren of lying or
              > to cry up conspiracy but in the face of the
              > standards of the reformed church
              > as it regards jurisprudence, due procedure wasn't
              > followed nor the mercy of
              > Christ displayed through His ministers. We can talk
              > much of justice or lack
              > thereof but it is twice as bad of an omission when
              > elders of Christ omit
              > mercy and tender dealing with the sheep of God.
              >
              > I hope this email finds all of God's people
              > persevering in God's grace and
              > growing in the knowledge and wisdom of Christ. And
              > as this email wasn't
              > meant to provoke further strife on this list, I hope
              > that none of such
              > continues but rather brotherly and charitable
              > behaviour towards one another.
              > In anything, if I have unnecessarily offended in my
              > words, please cover as
              > best as you can with the love of Christ.
              >
              > In Christ, our Prophet, Priest and King,
              >
              > Tony
              >
              >
              > On 3/11/07, humbled.learner
              > <humbled.learner@...> wrote:
              >
              > > Bob wrote:
              > >
              > > "What really should stick in the craw of those
              > hearty broccoli eaters
              > > though, is the PPSA. It is a compilation of
              > fallacies, erroneous
              > > conclusions and the previously mentioned grand
              > delusions. The non
              > > sequiturs begin with a congregation alone in an
              > island, Matt. 18, Act
              > > 15 and the Grand Debate. All of which arguments
              > based on these
              > > examples are fallacies of the undistributed middle
              > term.
              > >
              > > Each example assumes that the officers of the
              > respective courts
              > > discussed actually meet together in person in one
              > place to constitute
              > > said court. This as opposed to the RPNA(GM)'s
              > court which does not
              > > ordinarily, if at all, meet together in person in
              > one place at the
              > > same time, the parties being separated by
              > thousands of miles and an
              > > international border. This based on the
              > unprecedented and judicially
              > > unapproved innovation and argument for essentially
              > the divine right of
              > > long distance phone government and modern internet
              > technology (p.9)."
              > >
              > > Christ said:
              > >
              > > "But if he will not hear thee, then take with thee
              > one or two more,
              > > that in the mouth of two or three witnesses every
              > word may be
              > > established...Verily I say unto you, whatsoever ye
              > shall bind on earth
              > > shall be bound in heaven: and whatsoever ye shall
              > loose on earth shall
              > > be loosed in heaven. AGAIN I SAY UNTO YOU, that if
              > two of you shall
              > > agree on earth as touching anything that they
              > shall ask, it shall be
              > > done for them of my Father which is in heaven. For
              > where two or three
              > > are GATHERED TOGETHER in my name there AM I IN THE
              > MIDST OF THEM."
              > > (Matt.18:16,18-20).
              > >
              > > Now, they are going to spin the Scriptures to say
              > that Christ was not
              > > talking about "long distance phone government and
              > modern internet
              > > technology", but in order for Christ to be in the
              > midst of them, they
              > > must be side-by-side in the same room. They argue
              > that Christ ONLY
              > > permits two or more authority to make any formal
              > decision IF AND ONLY
              > > IF THEY ARE SIDE-BY-SIDE IN THE SAME ROOM.
              > >
              > > They want you to limit all Presbyterian Authority
              > to face-to-face
              > > meetings, and anything done over the phone on
              > decisions by Elders, or
              >
              === message truncated ===




              ____________________________________________________________________________________
              Expecting? Get great news right away with email Auto-Check.
              Try the Yahoo! Mail Beta.
              http://advision.webevents.yahoo.com/mailbeta/newmail_tools.html
            • nocost2great
              ... Common ... Ah, and neither was I. My sin was to say that I thought the questions (in the CI) were good ones, and I wanted to be included when answers
              Message 6 of 30 , Mar 18, 2007
              • 0 Attachment
                --- In covenantedreformationclub@yahoogroups.com, Tony
                <amenendez78@...> wrote:
                >
                > What sayest thou of me, dear brother? I was not involved with the
                Common
                > Concern paper and I was still excommunicated.

                Ah, and neither was I. My 'sin' was to say that I thought the
                questions (in the CI) were good ones, and I wanted to be included
                when answers were given. According to the elders, this was familiar
                fellowship (though I had not communicated with
                the 'excommunicated'.) I was given less than 24 hours to repent of
                my 'sin' - and was served the oath. (The oath that requires one to
                vow that they have no questions... when I had already publicly
                expressed that I had questions.)I was even verbally told by one of
                the elders that it would not be lying to swear the oath, even though
                I had questions! Actually, I think God used the treatment I received
                to open my eyes even wider so that I might see.


                For His Glory,

                Dee Dee
              • Jerry
                Dee Dee, PLEASE, please, tell me you re kidding. Please? gmw.
                Message 7 of 30 , Mar 18, 2007
                • 0 Attachment
                  Dee Dee,

                  PLEASE, please, tell me you're kidding.  Please?

                  gmw.

                  nocost2great wrote:

                  --- In covenantedreformati onclub@yahoogrou ps.com, Tony
                  <amenendez78@ ...> wrote:
                  >
                  > What sayest thou of me, dear brother? I was not involved with the
                  Common
                  > Concern paper and I was still excommunicated.

                  Ah, and neither was I. My 'sin' was to say that I thought the
                  questions (in the CI) were good ones, and I wanted to be included
                  when answers were given. According to the elders, this was familiar
                  fellowship (though I had not communicated with
                  the 'excommunicated' .) I was given less than 24 hours to repent of
                  my 'sin' - and was served the oath. (The oath that requires one to
                  vow that they have no questions... when I had already publicly
                  expressed that I had questions.)I was even verbally told by one of
                  the elders that it would not be lying to swear the oath, even though
                  I had questions! Actually, I think God used the treatment I received
                  to open my eyes even wider so that I might see.

                  For His Glory,

                  Dee Dee


                • nocost2great
                  ... Jerry, I wish I could. I woke up this morning to find a challenge from Ginny to tell the whole story, so I will format and post the dialogue between Greg
                  Message 8 of 30 , Mar 19, 2007
                  • 0 Attachment
                    --- In covenantedreformationclub@yahoogroups.com, Jerry
                    <ragingcalvinist@...> wrote:
                    >
                    > Dee Dee,
                    >
                    > PLEASE, please, tell me you're kidding. Please?
                    >
                    > gmw.
                    >
                    Jerry,
                    I wish I could. I woke up this morning to find a challenge from Ginny
                    to tell the whole story, so I will format and post the 'dialogue'
                    between Greg Price and me before the public sin of having familar
                    fellowship was committed.
                    I find myself between a rock and a hard spot though. If I bow out, I
                    will give Ginny leave to tell what happened third party, and only
                    based on information she has garnered via emails. If I continue, I
                    will offend my husband even more by publicly testifying. There are
                    times though when the heart can not keep silent, and the ninth
                    commandment compells us to tell the truth. Ginny has threatened to set
                    the record straight if I don't repent publicly by this evening. There
                    is no way for me to dig up and format everything by then, but I would
                    like to put it in an orderly document so that it is easier to follow.
                    Hopefully I can get that done this week, but we are scheduled to go
                    out of town Thursday morning, and preparations have to be made for
                    that.

                    I will confess that I have to just *assume* this was the sin I was
                    charged with, because it was the only sin I was approached about (and
                    it was less than 24 hours.) Since the accuser/accusations remain
                    secret until the oath is sworn, there is really no way to tell for
                    sure.

                    Upholding the Truth,

                    Dee Dee
                  • Chris Coldwell
                    While I have rejected the term in the past, this is sounding more and more like a cult. Sincerely, Chris Coldwell Naphtali Press http://www.naphtali.com The
                    Message 9 of 30 , Mar 19, 2007
                    • 0 Attachment
                      While I have rejected the term in the past, this is sounding more and
                      more like a cult.
                      Sincerely,
                      Chris Coldwell
                      Naphtali Press http://www.naphtali.com
                      The Confessional Presbyterian journal http://www.cpjournal.com
                      Member Lakewood Presbyterian Church (PCA), Dallas, Texas
                      --- In covenantedreformationclub@yahoogroups.com, Jerry
                      <ragingcalvinist@...> wrote:
                      >
                      > Dee Dee,
                      >
                      > PLEASE, please, tell me you're kidding. Please?
                      >
                      > gmw.
                      >
                      > nocost2great wrote:
                      > >
                      > > --- In covenantedreformationclub@yahoogroups.com
                      > > <mailto:covenantedreformationclub%40yahoogroups.com>, Tony
                      > > <amenendez78@> wrote:
                      > > >
                      > > > What sayest thou of me, dear brother? I was not involved with the
                      > > Common
                      > > > Concern paper and I was still excommunicated.
                      > >
                      > > Ah, and neither was I. My 'sin' was to say that I thought the
                      > > questions (in the CI) were good ones, and I wanted to be included
                      > > when answers were given. According to the elders, this was familiar
                      > > fellowship (though I had not communicated with
                      > > the 'excommunicated'.) I was given less than 24 hours to repent of
                      > > my 'sin' - and was served the oath. (The oath that requires one to
                      > > vow that they have no questions... when I had already publicly
                      > > expressed that I had questions.)I was even verbally told by one of
                      > > the elders that it would not be lying to swear the oath, even though
                      > > I had questions! Actually, I think God used the treatment I received
                      > > to open my eyes even wider so that I might see.
                      > >
                      > > For His Glory,
                      > >
                      > > Dee Dee
                      > >
                      > >
                      >
                    • Tim Cunningham
                      Tim writes: comments below. ... Common ... Ah, and neither was I. My sin was to say that I thought the questions (in the CI) were good ones, and I wanted to
                      Message 10 of 30 , Mar 19, 2007
                      • 0 Attachment
                        Tim writes: comments below.

                        --- In covenantedreformationclub@yahoogroups.com, "nocost2great"
                        <manna4free@...> wrote:

                        > What sayest thou of me, dear brother? I was not involved with the
                        Common
                        > Concern paper and I was still excommunicated.

                        Ah, and neither was I. My 'sin' was to say that I thought the
                        questions (in the CI) were good ones, and I wanted to be included
                        when answers were given. According to the elders, this was familiar
                        fellowship (though I had not communicated with
                        the 'excommunicated'.) I was given less than 24 hours to repent of
                        my 'sin' - and was served the oath. (The oath that requires one to
                        vow that they have no questions... when I had already publicly
                        expressed that I had questions.)I was even verbally told by one of
                        the elders that it would not be lying to swear the oath, even though
                        I had questions! Actually, I think God used the treatment I received
                        to open my eyes even wider so that I might see.

                        > --- In covenantedreformationclub@yahoogroups.com, Jerry
                        > <ragingcalvinist@> wrote:
                        > >
                        > > Dee Dee,
                        > > PLEASE, please, tell me you're kidding. Please?
                        > > gmw.

                        Dee Dee writes:

                        > Jerry,
                        > I wish I could. I woke up this morning to find a challenge from
                        Ginny
                        > to tell the whole story, so I will format and post the 'dialogue'
                        > between Greg Price and me before the public sin of having familar
                        > fellowship was committed.
                        > I find myself between a rock and a hard spot though. If I bow out,
                        I
                        > will give Ginny leave to tell what happened third party, and only
                        > based on information she has garnered via emails. If I continue, I
                        > will offend my husband even more by publicly testifying. There are
                        > times though when the heart can not keep silent, and the ninth
                        > commandment compells us to tell the truth. Ginny has threatened to
                        set
                        > the record straight if I don't repent publicly by this evening.
                        There
                        > is no way for me to dig up and format everything by then, but I
                        would
                        > like to put it in an orderly document so that it is easier to
                        follow.
                        > Hopefully I can get that done this week, but we are scheduled to go
                        > out of town Thursday morning, and preparations have to be made for
                        > that.
                        >
                        > I will confess that I have to just *assume* this was the sin I was
                        > charged with, because it was the only sin I was approached about
                        (and
                        > it was less than 24 hours.) Since the accuser/accusations remain
                        > secret until the oath is sworn, there is really no way to tell for
                        > sure.
                        >
                        > Upholding the Truth,
                        >
                        > Dee Dee
                        >
                        Tim writes:

                        Dear Dee Dee

                        I am not a covenanter and thus not directly involved in the
                        controversy you are wrestling with. But I am reformation Christian
                        who has had much to do with church discipline both as a church
                        officer trying to exercise godly discipline and before that as a
                        layman watching a godly church turn into a theological tyranny. And
                        watching as this matter has developed, I can't help being concerned.

                        Observing what has been said so far, if I understand you correctly in
                        the above, you have said that you were excommunicated without the
                        specifics of the charges being made known to you and that those
                        charges would be made known to you only if you signed an oath that
                        committed you to a statement that you had no questions about issues
                        where you had questions; and an elder claimed that your signing the
                        statement under such circumstances would not be a lie.

                        If I have correctly described the situation, this is not a time for
                        you to remain silent. You have made serious charges; you now need to
                        document your claims using the Biblical standards of a charge against
                        elders. You must make sure that what you put forward is either in a
                        public document or email from these elders or supported by at least
                        one additional witness. If I understand you correctly you may be able
                        to support all you have said so far with the possible exception of
                        the point that your signing the oath under your circumstances would
                        not be a lie. And if you ask around among the x'd you may find that
                        statement made to others as well.

                        Since you have been excommunicated from the group, you have no
                        private avenue for Christian redress unless the church you are now
                        attending (if any) is prepared to protest to the group on your
                        behalf. If not, you need to publicly post your material as a
                        testimony against the spritual tyranny going on there.

                        To anybody still involved in this church, session, or meeting, I say:
                        Start asking questions. Now.
                        If what Dee Dee and others are telling us is the true situation then
                        you are in great soul danger: flee for your spiritual lives.
                        There is absolutely no biblical warrant to excommunicate without
                        making the nature of the sin concerned known to the "sinner".
                        There is absolutely no biblical warrant to say that it is not lying
                        to sign an oath that denies that you have questions when you have
                        questions.

                        Grieving and praying for Christ's sheep
                        Tim
                      • Katrina Schumacher
                        Dear List; I think that Dee Dee has nothing to fear from Ginny Dohms posting what ever Ginny wants, here on the list, after all it is the Lord that truly knows
                        Message 11 of 30 , Mar 19, 2007
                        • 0 Attachment
                           
                          Dear List;
                           
                          I think that Dee Dee has nothing to fear from Ginny Dohms posting what ever Ginny wants, here on the list, after all it is the Lord that
                          truly knows all that has occurred and all the heart intents of those involved, and even if, Dee Dee needs to please
                          her husband and not post publicly here, the Lord always raises up someone to defend the good names of
                          His children; so Dee Dee dear; please rest in this.
                           
                          That, Dee Dee, stated that she was  given less than 24 hours is consistent with my last phone conversations with the two Elders from Edmonton
                          in April 2005;
                          I want to add that my email (april 2005) to the three Elders did express some of the  concerns of Elder Dohms as well. Before I sent this email to the
                          three Elders (Price, Barrow, Dohms) I first read it over the phone to Elder Lyndon Dohms
                            and Lyndon stated that he found nothing wrong
                          with it; to go ahead and send it.....my mistake was in CCing it to my family; and this action caused Lyndon to withdraw his support.
                          Lyndon told this to me during the following phone conversation that had both Lyndon and Elder Barrow present;  then while on the phone with
                          these two men; I asked for two weeks, to have any action delayed until after my flight to Albany in order to visit with my children there, attend
                          the wedding of Ed and Hanna (who had so kindly set their wedding date to accommodate my visit) and
                          to be able to witness the baptism of my little grand daughter Emily Price.   I then would have been able to talk to pastor
                          Greg Price in person about my concerns while in Albany New York....and I then in this same phone conversation; told the Elders from Edmonton that my flight plans were to fly from
                          Albany New York to Edmonton Alberta; to be
                           in person at Edmonton to be present for my daughter Doralynne's birth of her first child (Doralynne is also married to Lydon and Ginny Dohms' son Jordan)...and I then could talk face to
                          face with Greg Barrow and Lyndon Dohms.  I was told by Greg Barrow that my children in Albany would not want to see
                          me and that Ed and Hanna would not want me at their wedding.... I was being emotionally pushed to repent for my letter to the Elders that
                          addressed my concerns and also pushed to agree to a gag order to never speak against the Elders again in the future...
                          So on the emotion of the moment, the pain of the handling of these Elders on the phone.... I asked for twenty minutes to pray about my decision,
                          and the Elders(Lyndon and Greg B) phoned back in an hour and I was officially excommunicated just like that....... I canceled my
                          flight to Albany with the return trip through Edmonton; this trip a gift paid for and given to me by a dear friend, just three months prior
                          after the death of Grant my first husband.
                           
                           The two Elders involved in this phone excommunication, probably do not recall much of that conversation, and would no
                          doubt refute that anything was said to me by Greg Barrow  about the wedding or the planned visits to my children; that Lyndon witnessed Greg Barrow's words
                          .....or even of Lyndon telling
                          me to go ahead and send off my email to the three Elders(including himself)..........
                          so just my word....against,.... but heaven did witness this treatment to a new widow.....
                           
                           I need to learn more about what is proper Church Court Behavior, I do not believe my concerns or that of the recent excommunicated
                          were handled properly.
                           
                          To readers of the Covenanted Reformation Club posts; if you have not already gone to Bob Sutton's blog; you
                          can read for yourself a well thought out and prayerful Response of one of the resent Excommunicated,
                          I think Stan has done a good balanced job of putting forth the responsibility of the remaining membership of
                          the former RPNA.
                           
                          "At the voice of thy cry; when He shall hear it, He will answer thee."
                          Isaiah 30:19
                           
                          Sincerely and Prayerfully written;
                          that some good and not more harm would come from my testimony.
                           
                          Katrina Schumacher
                          CRCNA
                           
                           
                           
                           
                           
                           


                          From: covenantedreformationclub@yahoogroups.com [mailto:covenantedreformationclub@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of nocost2great
                          Sent: Monday, March 19, 2007 6:36 AM
                          To: covenantedreformationclub@yahoogroups.com
                          Subject: Re: [Covenanted Reformation] Learn Jurisdiction and the Power of Christ

                          --- In covenantedreformati onclub@yahoogrou ps.com, Jerry
                          <ragingcalvinist@ ...> wrote:

                          >
                          > Dee
                          Dee,
                          >
                          > PLEASE, please, tell me you're kidding. Please?
                          >
                          > gmw.
                          >
                          Jerry,
                          I wish I could. I woke up this morning to find a challenge from Ginny
                          to tell the whole story, so I will format and post the 'dialogue'
                          between Greg Price and me before the public sin of having familar
                          fellowship was committed.
                          I find myself between a rock and a hard spot though. If I bow out, I
                          will give Ginny leave to tell what happened third party, and only
                          based on information she has garnered via emails. If I continue, I
                          will offend my husband even more by publicly testifying. There are
                          times though when the heart can not keep silent, and the ninth
                          commandment compells us to tell the truth. Ginny has threatened to set
                          the record straight if I don't repent publicly by this evening. There
                          is no way for me to dig up and format everything by then, but I would
                          like to put it in an orderly document so that it is easier to follow.
                          Hopefully I can get that done this week, but we are scheduled to go
                          out of town Thursday morning, and preparations have to be made for
                          that.

                          I will confess that I have to just *assume* this was the sin I was
                          charged with, because it was the only sin I was approached about (and
                          it was less than 24 hours.) Since the accuser/accusations remain
                          secret until the oath is sworn, there is really no way to tell for
                          sure.

                          Upholding the Truth,

                          Dee Dee

                        • Jerry
                          ... Again, I may be dense, but what it looks like to me from the excommunication templates (all the letters of excommunication, save a few that are unrelated
                          Message 12 of 30 , Mar 19, 2007
                          • 0 Attachment
                            Tim Cunningham wrote:


                            Observing what has been said so far, if I understand you correctly in
                            the above, you have said that you were excommunicated without the
                            specifics of the charges being made known to you and that those
                            charges would be made known to you only if you signed an oath that
                            committed you to a statement that you had no questions about issues
                            where you had questions; and an elder claimed that your signing the
                            statement under such circumstances would not be a lie.


                            _








                            Again, I may be dense, but what it looks like to me from the "excommunication templates" (all the letters of excommunication, save a few that are unrelated to the current controversy that are being used, are virtually identical, just with different names plugged in) the common pattern is this:

                            1. A charge of sin is made, but what that charge is, and who the witness is, is withheld.

                            2. There is an oath presented requiring the person to swear that the one teaching elder in Albany NY (USA) and the two ruling elders in Edmonton (Canada) constitute a lawful "session" court of Christ.  This must be done before the accuser and the sin being charged is revealed.

                            3.  Refusal to respond positively to the oath within a given time frame results in excommunication of the greater sort -- i.e. being removed from the visible church and being delivered over to Satan.

                            4.  A Scripture passage about Abiram and Dathan is attached, to remind everyone what happens when people pipe up against "the session."

                            http://reformedveritas.blogspot.com/2006/11/communication-of-excommunication-nov-4.html

                            gmw.
                          • nocost2great
                            ... witness ... the one ... Edmonton ... be ... frame ... removed ... remind ... excommunication-nov-4.html ... The oath is also preceeded with a note that one
                            Message 13 of 30 , Mar 20, 2007
                            • 0 Attachment
                              Jerry wrote regarding the oath:
                              >
                              > 1. A charge of sin is made, but what that charge is, and who the
                              witness
                              > is, is withheld.
                              >
                              > 2. There is an oath presented requiring the person to swear that
                              the one
                              > teaching elder in Albany NY (USA) and the two ruling elders in
                              Edmonton
                              > (Canada) constitute a lawful "session" court of Christ. This must
                              be
                              > done before the accuser and the sin being charged is revealed.
                              >
                              > 3. Refusal to respond positively to the oath within a given time
                              frame
                              > results in excommunication of the greater sort -- i.e. being
                              removed
                              > from the visible church and being delivered over to Satan.
                              >
                              > 4. A Scripture passage about Abiram and Dathan is attached, to
                              remind
                              > everyone what happens when people pipe up against "the session."
                              >
                              > http://reformedveritas.blogspot.com/2006/11/communication-of-
                              excommunication-nov-4.html
                              >
                              > gmw.
                              >

                              The oath is also preceeded with a note that one can not have any
                              questions regarding the lawfulness of the court. In the document I
                              sent there is an embedded pdf file with the entirity of the oath
                              letter that includes this, and I quote it in my defense of not
                              signing it.

                              Dee Dee
                            • nocost2great
                              ... And ... concerned. ... in ... issues ... the ... for ... Dee Dee responds: Tim, you are correct in your understanding. However, for Ginny s benefit and
                              Message 14 of 30 , Mar 20, 2007
                              • 0 Attachment
                                --- In covenantedreformationclub@yahoogroups.com, "Tim Cunningham"
                                <timmopussycat@...> wrote:
                                >
                                > Tim writes: > Tim writes:
                                >
                                > Dear Dee Dee
                                >
                                > I am not a covenanter and thus not directly involved in the
                                > controversy you are wrestling with. But I am reformation Christian
                                > who has had much to do with church discipline both as a church
                                > officer trying to exercise godly discipline and before that as a
                                > layman watching a godly church turn into a theological tyranny.
                                And
                                > watching as this matter has developed, I can't help being
                                concerned.
                                >
                                > Observing what has been said so far, if I understand you correctly
                                in
                                > the above, you have said that you were excommunicated without the
                                > specifics of the charges being made known to you and that those
                                > charges would be made known to you only if you signed an oath that
                                > committed you to a statement that you had no questions about
                                issues
                                > where you had questions; and an elder claimed that your signing
                                the
                                > statement under such circumstances would not be a lie.
                                >
                                > If I have correctly described the situation, this is not a time
                                for
                                > you to remain silent.

                                Dee Dee responds:
                                Tim, you are correct in your understanding. However, for Ginny's
                                benefit and others who misunderstood my lack of full explanation, I
                                have emailed to the group, and asked Jerry to post in the files
                                section ALL of my communications (other than the conversation I
                                previously mentioned) with the three elders, primarily Greg Price.
                                They are lengthy because of the many passages that were cut and
                                pasted by pastor Price from their previous sessional responses.
                                For some reason Ginny read your statements and understood that you
                                thought there had been no communication between myself and any of
                                the elders other than being served the oath and the conversation
                                where I was told it was okay to swear the oath even if I had
                                questions. Although, I don't see that in your questions/statements
                                to me, I want to be clear so that one one feels that I have deceived
                                them. The written records are there for any and all to read.

                                For those who don't care to read through them, there were two
                                different incidences where I was given 24 hours to respond. One was
                                after the conversation with Greg on Nov 30th, I was sent
                                a 'brotherly' letter informally warning of the oath to come and
                                basically stating that I must own the oath on Dec. 1st. I was no
                                longer (after a mere 24 hours granted the liberty of just removing
                                my name, I had to own the court and publicly state that and repent.
                                (This was what I was referring to in my original post.) I added my
                                name to the CI on Nov 9th. The first communication I had with anyone
                                regarding it in particular was the above mentioned call which was
                                swiftly followed by the 'brotherly' warning letter.

                                For further clarification (in part 2 of the correspondence), I'll
                                add that it was not a single incident. Another 24 hour time frame
                                occured when I received a letter from Greg stating that he had not
                                yet read my letter of defense for not signing the oath (and that he
                                hoped to reply the next week.) The next day I was excommunicated,
                                and the defense letter was not responded to until 6 days later...
                                basically proving that the excommunication was impending regardless
                                of what biblical responses were received in defense of not signing
                                the oath.

                                I in no way intended to imply by omission that I had not had any
                                communication with Greg Price or the other elders. If anyone got the
                                impression that occurred, please forgive me. I was not trying to be
                                misleading or deceptive as Ginny has implied in her private emails
                                to me. I was simply trying to use as few words as possible to refute
                                Walt's insinuations that all who have been excommunicated were
                                involved with the "Effort".

                                If anyone cares to take the time to read, you'll also find near the
                                end of the third part where questions were sent regarding what I
                                considered to be blatant partiality BEFORE my excommunication
                                announcement. The response from the elders was that since I had been
                                excommunicated, Clay would have to ask the questions. Unless I was
                                ready to seek repentance they would no longer address me directly.

                                Many thanks to Ginny for enabling me to share the whole story. I too
                                felt like it needed to be told but was refraining out of deference
                                to my husband. Without the help of Walt and Ginny, I would not have
                                had the ninth commandment as my defense for speaking up.

                                Standing for the Truth no matter the cost,

                                Dee Dee
                              • nocost2great
                                ... wrote: ... he ... regardless ... Correction: It was late, and I was tired, and not paying close attention. My husband has pointed out that
                                Message 15 of 30 , Mar 21, 2007
                                • 0 Attachment
                                  --- In covenantedreformationclub@yahoogroups.com, "nocost2great"
                                  <manna4free@...> wrote:
                                  Dee Dee wrote:
                                  > For further clarification (in part 2 of the correspondence), I'll
                                  > add that it was not a single incident. Another 24 hour time frame
                                  > occured when I received a letter from Greg stating that he had not
                                  > yet read my letter of defense for not signing the oath (and that
                                  he
                                  > hoped to reply the next week.) The next day I was excommunicated,
                                  > and the defense letter was not responded to until 6 days later...
                                  > basically proving that the excommunication was impending
                                  regardless
                                  > of what biblical responses were received in defense of not signing
                                  > the oath.
                                  >
                                  Correction:

                                  It was late, and I was tired, and not paying close attention. My
                                  husband has pointed out that I confused some details. Actually the
                                  above should state that the second 24 hour time frame occurred after
                                  receiving a letter from Greg stating he hadn't read my defense
                                  regarding *not removing my name from the CI and not publicly
                                  repenting for 'joining hands' with my brethren who penned it.* I was
                                  officially served the *oath* (though the essence of it was contained
                                  in the 'brotherly letter' dated Dec 1st) less than 24 hours later,
                                  *not excommunicated.*
                                  I will also note that I did receive a 'response' to my post "Our
                                  ninth commandment duties" before being excommunicated. No diaolgue
                                  ensued, it was just Greg's response to defend himself publicly,
                                  stating he felt that I had misrepresented him, and to Shawn's
                                  questions of clarification (not mine) which was copied to me on the
                                  same day the excommunications were issued.
                                  Again please forgive me for getting letters confused - oath vs
                                  excommunication. For those of us who had issues with the
                                  discrepancies between practice and biblical and historical testimony
                                  they are actually one and the same; the oath was just the precursor
                                  to the excommuication. But I don't want to be accused of
                                  untruthfulness, even if accidental.

                                  Standing for the truth,

                                  Dee Dee
                                • forisraelssake
                                  Dear Tim I wanted to clarify. The story is more like this: Dee Dee was presented with an affidavit imposed by the session of the RPNA-GM warning her that she
                                  Message 16 of 30 , Mar 24, 2007
                                  • 0 Attachment
                                    Dear Tim

                                    I wanted to clarify. The story is more like this:

                                    Dee Dee was presented with an affidavit imposed by the session of the
                                    RPNA-GM warning her that she was being accused of unknown sin X with
                                    charges that were filed with the session in good order, and
                                    consequently she was required upon lawful authority with lawful
                                    jurisdiction over her to swear the lawful affidavit (as was her
                                    alleged duty) in order for the case over X to go to trial.

                                    Dee Dee was privately counseled by Rev. Greg Price to swear the
                                    affidavit despite her known questions and doubts against the very
                                    things in the affidavit oath that one affirmed one had no doubts or
                                    questions concerning, and that it would not be a lie to swear the
                                    affidavit. Dee Dee didn't/wouldn't/couldn't swear the affidavit, not
                                    being persuaded, creating a new sin A, that of refusing to swear the
                                    affidavit.

                                    She was then immediately excommunicated by the session of the RPNA-GM
                                    for sin A. Sin X was tabled as it had become irrelevant and was
                                    technically never decided on.

                                    Sin X was privately admitted to her and others to be familiar
                                    fellowship with others who had sinned sin A themselves and were
                                    presently excommunicated by the session of the RPNA-GM, with the
                                    accusing party of familiar fellowship against Dee Dee being the
                                    session of the RPNA-GM and the judging party being the same session of
                                    the RPNA-GM.

                                    So the controversies are not quite as you stated below, but
                                    nonetheless very serious obviously

                                    Sincerely,
                                    Chris


                                    'excommunicated'



                                    > Tim writes:
                                    >
                                    > Dear Dee Dee
                                    >

                                    > Observing what has been said so far, if I understand you correctly in
                                    > the above, you have said that you were excommunicated without the
                                    > specifics of the charges being made known to you and that those
                                    > charges would be made known to you only if you signed an oath that
                                    > committed you to a statement that you had no questions about issues
                                    > where you had questions; and an elder claimed that your signing the
                                    > statement under such circumstances would not be a lie.
                                    >
                                  • Ic Neltococayotl
                                    Chris, Hey my brother! I see you signed off as excommunicated . So did they commit you to Satan as well? Did the tyrants disclose what sin you had
                                    Message 17 of 30 , Mar 24, 2007
                                    • 0 Attachment
                                      Chris,

                                      Hey my brother! I see you signed off as 'excommunicated'. So did they
                                      commit you to Satan as well?
                                      Did the tyrants disclose what 'sin' you had committed? Who your
                                      accusers were?

                                      I am sure that there is a few more to be ex'ed real soon.


                                      Chris, take care i'll be in contact with you some more later...have a
                                      blessed Lord's Day.

                                      Edgar


                                      --- In covenantedreformationclub@yahoogroups.com, "forisraelssake"
                                      <c_tylor@...> wrote:
                                      >
                                      > Dear Tim
                                      >
                                      > I wanted to clarify. The story is more like this:
                                      >
                                      > Dee Dee was presented with an affidavit imposed by the session of the
                                      > RPNA-GM warning her that she was being accused of unknown sin X with
                                      > charges that were filed with the session in good order, and
                                      > consequently she was required upon lawful authority with lawful
                                      > jurisdiction over her to swear the lawful affidavit (as was her
                                      > alleged duty) in order for the case over X to go to trial.
                                      >
                                      > Dee Dee was privately counseled by Rev. Greg Price to swear the
                                      > affidavit despite her known questions and doubts against the very
                                      > things in the affidavit oath that one affirmed one had no doubts or
                                      > questions concerning, and that it would not be a lie to swear the
                                      > affidavit. Dee Dee didn't/wouldn't/couldn't swear the affidavit, not
                                      > being persuaded, creating a new sin A, that of refusing to swear the
                                      > affidavit.
                                      >
                                      > She was then immediately excommunicated by the session of the RPNA-GM
                                      > for sin A. Sin X was tabled as it had become irrelevant and was
                                      > technically never decided on.
                                      >
                                      > Sin X was privately admitted to her and others to be familiar
                                      > fellowship with others who had sinned sin A themselves and were
                                      > presently excommunicated by the session of the RPNA-GM, with the
                                      > accusing party of familiar fellowship against Dee Dee being the
                                      > session of the RPNA-GM and the judging party being the same session of
                                      > the RPNA-GM.
                                      >
                                      > So the controversies are not quite as you stated below, but
                                      > nonetheless very serious obviously
                                      >
                                      > Sincerely,
                                      > Chris
                                      >
                                      >
                                      > 'excommunicated'
                                      >
                                      >
                                      >
                                      > > Tim writes:
                                      > >
                                      > > Dear Dee Dee
                                      > >
                                      >
                                      > > Observing what has been said so far, if I understand you correctly
                                      in
                                      > > the above, you have said that you were excommunicated without the
                                      > > specifics of the charges being made known to you and that those
                                      > > charges would be made known to you only if you signed an oath that
                                      > > committed you to a statement that you had no questions about issues
                                      > > where you had questions; and an elder claimed that your signing the
                                      > > statement under such circumstances would not be a lie.
                                      > >
                                      >
                                    • humbled.learner
                                      I m still out of the country, but using the hotel computer for checking the messages. Dee wrote: I in no way intended to imply by omission that I had not had
                                      Message 18 of 30 , Mar 25, 2007
                                      • 0 Attachment
                                        I'm still out of the country, but using the hotel computer for
                                        checking the messages.

                                        Dee wrote:

                                        "I in no way intended to imply by omission that I had not had any
                                        communication with Greg Price or the other elders. If anyone got the
                                        impression that occurred, please forgive me. I was not trying to be
                                        misleading or deceptive as Ginny has implied in her private emails to
                                        me. ***I was simply trying to use as few words as possible to refute
                                        Walt's insinuations that all who have been excommunicated were
                                        involved with the "Effort".***"

                                        This is deception in my opinion as I have not tried to insinuate all
                                        that have been excommunicated were involved in the Effort. I would go
                                        so far as to say that the Effort People did create the underlying
                                        arguments and opinions that lead (in some respects, and really
                                        specifically in Dee Dee case as she wrote that she wanted her name
                                        added to the Effort document) to many to self-excommunicate themselves.

                                        I read Dee Dee comments below that triggered Jerry's reply, and the
                                        flurry of replies in her support, and found it unsupported by the
                                        truth. Jerry has withheld one of my posts from being posted as I was
                                        trying to go through some of the procedure that is normally followed
                                        based upon allegations. Unfortunately, when it is sent, it is not
                                        saved in Yahoo so I don't have a copy, but I understand that selective
                                        posting is understandable if Jerry feels like my posts should not be
                                        posted. I responded in detail to Marc as to the process I feel one
                                        uses to back up an allegation, as we know that all facts are never
                                        known once an allegation is made against someone. It is only after
                                        levels of discovery that we learn of all the documents and facts to
                                        prepare a case.

                                        As I read through these comments below, I can see that people forget
                                        one main point. The charges brought before those people initially
                                        were in order, and to be made available, ONLY if there was given
                                        permission for the court to hear the case as a member (e.g.,
                                        jurisdiction granted via mutual consent) and also acknowledging by the
                                        parties they believed the court to be a lawful court and uphold the
                                        churches subordinate standards. This is how I SIMPLY read the oath.

                                        Clearly, if you read the early responses to the oath, some denied
                                        membership in the church, but only in societies. Some rejected that
                                        the RPNA (GM) was a church, but only group of societies...as one phone
                                        call I had with a brother put me outside the RPNA (GM) as a member of
                                        a church, and they argued I was not even a member of a society because
                                        I was only one person in the wilderness, and could not possibly be a
                                        member of the RPNA (GM). Some rejected the additional subordinate
                                        standards on our web site were not lawful, and could not bind their
                                        consciences since they were never agreed to be a lawful court. Some
                                        argued that a lawful Session court could only be local defined by
                                        jurisdiction boundaries, and acceptable mutual duties, not by mutual
                                        consent and agreement between member and court.

                                        I think if someone goes through the primary documents written by the
                                        Elders in the response to these brethren (whom generally, in majority,
                                        involved in the Effort) you will see a lot of Q&A in your mind. If
                                        like Jerry you simply glance through 25 pages then you might not fully
                                        understand the extent of the communications. The first thing that
                                        comes to mind as Chris has said is "a cult". This is the hot button
                                        I've heard him use before, and the more people that will ignore the
                                        documents, and use the word "cult" the more it will become sexy for
                                        those to go public with sensational comments like what Dee Dee made
                                        below. I'm even surprised at the level of Edgar's summaries, as they
                                        are written with such firm conviction that it sounds like they poor
                                        little sheep were just rolled over by the great tyrannts, and they
                                        were only just studying as innocent students.

                                        Hopefully this message gets through.

                                        Walt.
                                      • humbled.learner
                                        opps, a little late now...already got the fire burning HOT with follow-up words like cult and Dee Dee, PLEASE, please, tell me you re kidding. Please? gmw.
                                        Message 19 of 30 , Mar 25, 2007
                                        • 0 Attachment
                                          opps, a little late now...already got the fire burning HOT with
                                          follow-up words like "cult" and Dee Dee, PLEASE, please, tell me
                                          you're kidding. Please? gmw."

                                          Indeed, the best response after the damage is done, is:

                                          "It was late, and I was tired, and not paying close attention. My
                                          husband has pointed out that I confused some details. Actually the
                                          above should state that the second 24 hour time frame occurred after
                                          receiving a letter from Greg stating he hadn't read my defense
                                          regarding *not removing my name from the CI and not publicly
                                          repenting for 'joining hands' with my brethren who penned it.* I was
                                          officially served the *oath* (though the essence of it was contained
                                          in the 'brotherly letter' dated Dec 1st) less than 24 hours later,
                                          *not excommunicated.*"

                                          I'm really not sure how someone could make such an important
                                          mistake, but whatever the reason, it sure got everyone to look at
                                          the Elders like some extreme Tyrants.

                                          I think this is wrong in my opinion, but let's see if it gets
                                          through.

                                          Walt.


                                          --- In covenantedreformationclub@yahoogroups.com, "nocost2great"
                                          <manna4free@...> wrote:
                                          >
                                          > --- In covenantedreformationclub@yahoogroups.com, "nocost2great"
                                          > <manna4free@> wrote:
                                          > Dee Dee wrote:
                                          > > For further clarification (in part 2 of the correspondence),
                                          I'll
                                          > > add that it was not a single incident. Another 24 hour time
                                          frame
                                          > > occured when I received a letter from Greg stating that he had
                                          not
                                          > > yet read my letter of defense for not signing the oath (and that
                                          > he
                                          > > hoped to reply the next week.) The next day I was
                                          excommunicated,
                                          > > and the defense letter was not responded to until 6 days
                                          later...
                                          > > basically proving that the excommunication was impending
                                          > regardless
                                          > > of what biblical responses were received in defense of not
                                          signing
                                          > > the oath.
                                          > >
                                          > Correction:
                                          >
                                          > It was late, and I was tired, and not paying close attention. My
                                          > husband has pointed out that I confused some details. Actually the
                                          > above should state that the second 24 hour time frame occurred
                                          after
                                          > receiving a letter from Greg stating he hadn't read my defense
                                          > regarding *not removing my name from the CI and not publicly
                                          > repenting for 'joining hands' with my brethren who penned it.* I
                                          was
                                          > officially served the *oath* (though the essence of it was
                                          contained
                                          > in the 'brotherly letter' dated Dec 1st) less than 24 hours later,
                                          > *not excommunicated.*
                                          > I will also note that I did receive a 'response' to my post "Our
                                          > ninth commandment duties" before being excommunicated. No diaolgue
                                          > ensued, it was just Greg's response to defend himself publicly,
                                          > stating he felt that I had misrepresented him, and to Shawn's
                                          > questions of clarification (not mine) which was copied to me on
                                          the
                                          > same day the excommunications were issued.
                                          > Again please forgive me for getting letters confused - oath vs
                                          > excommunication. For those of us who had issues with the
                                          > discrepancies between practice and biblical and historical
                                          testimony
                                          > they are actually one and the same; the oath was just the
                                          precursor
                                          > to the excommuication. But I don't want to be accused of
                                          > untruthfulness, even if accidental.
                                          >
                                          > Standing for the truth,
                                          >
                                          > Dee Dee
                                          >
                                        • Walt Bre
                                          Katrina, Would you post the entire excommunication document to this site so everyone may read the reasons you were excommunicated? I cannot comment on the
                                          Message 20 of 30 , Mar 25, 2007
                                          • 0 Attachment
                                            Katrina,
                                             
                                            Would you post the entire excommunication document to this site so everyone may read the reasons you were excommunicated?  I cannot comment on the discussions below, but think that if you post the entire excommunication on this site it will give everyone the reasons you were excommunicated.
                                             
                                            Walt.

                                            Katrina Schumacher <triple3ranch@...> wrote:
                                             
                                            Dear List;
                                             
                                            I think that Dee Dee has nothing to fear from Ginny Dohms posting what ever Ginny wants, here on the list, after all it is the Lord that
                                            truly knows all that has occurred and all the heart intents of those involved, and even if, Dee Dee needs to please
                                            her husband and not post publicly here, the Lord always raises up someone to defend the good names of
                                            His children; so Dee Dee dear; please rest in this.
                                             
                                            That, Dee Dee, stated that she was  given less than 24 hours is consistent with my last phone conversations with the two Elders from Edmonton
                                            in April 2005;
                                            I want to add that my email (april 2005) to the three Elders did express some of the  concerns of Elder Dohms as well. Before I sent this email to the
                                            three Elders (Price, Barrow, Dohms) I first read it over the phone to Elder Lyndon Dohms
                                              and Lyndon stated that he found nothing wrong
                                            with it; to go ahead and send it.....my mistake was in CCing it to my family; and this action caused Lyndon to withdraw his support.
                                            Lyndon told this to me during the following phone conversation that had both Lyndon and Elder Barrow present;  then while on the phone with
                                            these two men; I asked for two weeks, to have any action delayed until after my flight to Albany in order to visit with my children there, attend
                                            the wedding of Ed and Hanna (who had so kindly set their wedding date to accommodate my visit) and
                                            to be able to witness the baptism of my little grand daughter Emily Price.   I then would have been able to talk to pastor
                                            Greg Price in person about my concerns while in Albany New York....and I then in this same phone conversation; told the Elders from Edmonton that my flight plans were to fly from
                                            Albany New York to Edmonton Alberta; to be
                                             in person at Edmonton to be present for my daughter Doralynne's birth of her first child (Doralynne is also married to Lydon and Ginny Dohms' son Jordan)...and I then could talk face to
                                            face with Greg Barrow and Lyndon Dohms.  I was told by Greg Barrow that my children in Albany would not want to see
                                            me and that Ed and Hanna would not want me at their wedding.... I was being emotionally pushed to repent for my letter to the Elders that
                                            addressed my concerns and also pushed to agree to a gag order to never speak against the Elders again in the future...
                                            So on the emotion of the moment, the pain of the handling of these Elders on the phone.... I asked for twenty minutes to pray about my decision,
                                            and the Elders(Lyndon and Greg B) phoned back in an hour and I was officially excommunicated just like that....... I canceled my
                                            flight to Albany with the return trip through Edmonton; this trip a gift paid for and given to me by a dear friend, just three months prior
                                            after the death of Grant my first husband.
                                             
                                             The two Elders involved in this phone excommunication, probably do not recall much of that conversation, and would no
                                            doubt refute that anything was said to me by Greg Barrow  about the wedding or the planned visits to my children; that Lyndon witnessed Greg Barrow's words
                                            .....or even of Lyndon telling
                                            me to go ahead and send off my email to the three Elders(including himself).... ......
                                            so just my word....against, .... but heaven did witness this treatment to a new widow.....
                                             
                                             I need to learn more about what is proper Church Court Behavior, I do not believe my concerns or that of the recent excommunicated
                                            were handled properly.
                                             
                                            To readers of the Covenanted Reformation Club posts; if you have not already gone to Bob Sutton's blog; you
                                            can read for yourself a well thought out and prayerful Response of one of the resent Excommunicated,
                                            I think Stan has done a good balanced job of putting forth the responsibility of the remaining membership of
                                            the former RPNA.
                                             
                                            "At the voice of thy cry; when He shall hear it, He will answer thee."
                                            Isaiah 30:19
                                             
                                            Sincerely and Prayerfully written;
                                            that some good and not more harm would come from my testimony.
                                             
                                            Katrina Schumacher
                                            CRCNA
                                             
                                             
                                             
                                             
                                             
                                             


                                            From: covenantedreformati onclub@yahoogrou ps.com [mailto:covenantedr eformationclub@ yahoogroups. com] On Behalf Of nocost2great
                                            Sent: Monday, March 19, 2007 6:36 AM
                                            To: covenantedreformati onclub@yahoogrou ps.com
                                            Subject: Re: [Covenanted Reformation] Learn Jurisdiction and the Power of Christ

                                            --- In covenantedreformati onclub@yahoogrou ps.com, Jerry
                                            <ragingcalvinist@ ...> wrote:
                                            >
                                            > Dee Dee,
                                            >
                                            > PLEASE, please, tell me you're kidding. Please?
                                            >
                                            > gmw.
                                            >
                                            Jerry,
                                            I wish I could. I woke up this morning to find a challenge from Ginny
                                            to tell the whole story, so I will format and post the 'dialogue'
                                            between Greg Price and me before the public sin of having familar
                                            fellowship was committed.
                                            I find myself between a rock and a hard spot though. If I bow out, I
                                            will give Ginny leave to tell what happened third party, and only
                                            based on information she has garnered via emails. If I continue, I
                                            will offend my husband even more by publicly testifying. There are
                                            times though when the heart can not keep silent, and the ninth
                                            commandment compells us to tell the truth. Ginny has threatened to set
                                            the record straight if I don't repent publicly by this evening. There
                                            is no way for me to dig up and format everything by then, but I would
                                            like to put it in an orderly document so that it is easier to follow.
                                            Hopefully I can get that done this week, but we are scheduled to go
                                            out of town Thursday morning, and preparations have to be made for
                                            that.

                                            I will confess that I have to just *assume* this was the sin I was
                                            charged with, because it was the only sin I was approached about (and
                                            it was less than 24 hours.) Since the accuser/accusations remain
                                            secret until the oath is sworn, there is really no way to tell for
                                            sure.

                                            Upholding the Truth,

                                            Dee Dee



                                            Expecting? Get great news right away with email Auto-Check.
                                            Try the Yahoo! Mail Beta.


                                            TV dinner still cooling?
                                            Check out "Tonight's Picks" on Yahoo! TV.

                                          • gmw
                                            ... What in the world are you accusing me of, exactly? I don t recall ever withholding any of your posts. The only thing I remember is that time where your
                                            Message 21 of 30 , Mar 25, 2007
                                            • 0 Attachment
                                              --- In covenantedreformationclub@yahoogroups.com, "humbled.learner"
                                              <humbled.learner@...> wrote:
                                              >
                                              > Jerry has withheld one of my posts from being posted as I was
                                              > trying to go through some of the procedure that is normally followed
                                              > based upon allegations. Unfortunately, when it is sent, it is not
                                              > saved in Yahoo so I don't have a copy, but I understand that selective
                                              > posting is understandable if Jerry feels like my posts should not be
                                              > posted.


                                              What in the world are you accusing me of, exactly? I don't recall
                                              ever withholding any of your posts. The only thing I remember is that
                                              time where your posts were delayed (not withheld, but delayed) when my
                                              computer blew up and I had no access to the internet, and you couldn't
                                              understand that my computer blew up and I didn't have access to the
                                              internet.

                                              I certainly don't ever recall speaking to you about not following
                                              proper procedure.

                                              Please explain what you are talking about.

                                              gmw.
                                            • puritan_at_heart
                                              Not that anyone needs me to, but I second that. Which is why I joined Jerry s group and ASK him to moderate my posts, knowing I not always think so well. Cos I
                                              Message 22 of 30 , Mar 25, 2007
                                              • 0 Attachment

                                                Not that anyone needs me to, but I second that. Which is why I joined Jerry's group and ASK him to moderate my posts, knowing I not always think so well. Cos I know he can completely be trusted that way, and is fair. I not ever been in another group who I've asked the group owner the same thing.  Cos they not been so trustworthy IMO, and I been in lots of  Reformed groups at different times.

                                                ~Deejay


                                                --- In covenantedreformationclub@yahoogroups.com, "Susan Wilkinson" <gpyp@...> wrote:
                                                >
                                                > Walt,
                                                >
                                                >
                                                >
                                                > because everyone here knows Jerry to be honest, forthright and fair in his
                                                > moderation. >
                                                >
                                                > >
                                                >
                                                >
                                                > Susan
                                                >
                                                >
                                                >
                                                > _____
                                                >
                                                > From: covenantedreformationclub@yahoogroups.com
                                                > [mailto:covenantedreformationclub@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of
                                                > humbled.learner
                                                > Sent: Sunday, March 25, 2007 7:24 AM
                                                > To: covenantedreformationclub@yahoogroups.com
                                                > Subject: [Covenanted Reformation] Re: Correction
                                                >
                                                >
                                                >
                                                > opps, a little late now...already got the fire burning HOT with
                                                > follow-up words like "cult" and Dee Dee, PLEASE, please, tell me
                                                > you're kidding. Please? gmw."
                                                >
                                                > Indeed, the best response after the damage is done, is:
                                                >
                                                > "It was late, and I was tired, and not paying close attention. My
                                                > husband has pointed out that I confused some details. Actually the
                                                > above should state that the second 24 hour time frame occurred after
                                                > receiving a letter from Greg stating he hadn't read my defense
                                                > regarding *not removing my name from the CI and not publicly
                                                > repenting for 'joining hands' with my brethren who penned it.* I was
                                                > officially served the *oath* (though the essence of it was contained
                                                > in the 'brotherly letter' dated Dec 1st) less than 24 hours later,
                                                > *not excommunicated.*"
                                                >
                                                > I'm really not sure how someone could make such an important
                                                > mistake, but whatever the reason, it sure got everyone to look at
                                                > the Elders like some extreme Tyrants.
                                                >
                                                > I think this is wrong in my opinion, but let's see if it gets
                                                > through.
                                                >
                                                > Walt.
                                                >
                                                > --- In covenantedreformati
                                                > <mailto:covenantedreformationclub%40yahoogroups.com> onclub@yahoogroups.com,
                                                > "nocost2great"
                                                > manna4free@ wrote:
                                                > >
                                                > > --- In covenantedreformati
                                                > <mailto:covenantedreformationclub%40yahoogroups.com> onclub@yahoogroups.com,
                                                > "nocost2great"
                                                > > <manna4free@> wrote:
                                                > > Dee Dee wrote:
                                                > > > For further clarification (in part 2 of the correspondence),
                                                > I'll
                                                > > > add that it was not a single incident. Another 24 hour time
                                                > frame
                                                > > > occured when I received a letter from Greg stating that he had
                                                > not
                                                > > > yet read my letter of defense for not signing the oath (and that
                                                > > he
                                                > > > hoped to reply the next week.) The next day I was
                                                > excommunicated,
                                                > > > and the defense letter was not responded to until 6 days
                                                > later...
                                                > > > basically proving that the excommunication was impending
                                                > > regardless
                                                > > > of what biblical responses were received in defense of not
                                                > signing
                                                > > > the oath.
                                                > > >
                                                > > Correction:
                                                > >
                                                > > It was late, and I was tired, and not paying close attention. My
                                                > > husband has pointed out that I confused some details. Actually the
                                                > > above should state that the second 24 hour time frame occurred
                                                > after
                                                > > receiving a letter from Greg stating he hadn't read my defense
                                                > > regarding *not removing my name from the CI and not publicly
                                                > > repenting for 'joining hands' with my brethren who penned it.* I
                                                > was
                                                > > officially served the *oath* (though the essence of it was
                                                > contained
                                                > > in the 'brotherly letter' dated Dec 1st) less than 24 hours later,
                                                > > *not excommunicated.*
                                                > > I will also note that I did receive a 'response' to my post "Our
                                                > > ninth commandment duties" before being excommunicated. No diaolgue
                                                > > ensued, it was just Greg's response to defend himself publicly,
                                                > > stating he felt that I had misrepresented him, and to Shawn's
                                                > > questions of clarification (not mine) which was copied to me on
                                                > the
                                                > > same day the excommunications were issued.
                                                > > Again please forgive me for getting letters confused - oath vs
                                                > > excommunication. For those of us who had issues with the
                                                > > discrepancies between practice and biblical and historical
                                                > testimony
                                                > > they are actually one and the same; the oath was just the
                                                > precursor
                                                > > to the excommuication. But I don't want to be accused of
                                                > > untruthfulness, even if accidental.
                                                > >
                                                > > Standing for the truth,
                                                > >
                                                > > Dee Dee
                                                > >
                                                >

                                              • humbled.learner
                                                Susan, Thanks for this witness testimony against me as I ve heard it very clear and also apologise to you and others who were offended. It was obviously my
                                                Message 23 of 30 , Mar 25, 2007
                                                • 0 Attachment
                                                  Susan,

                                                  Thanks for this witness testimony against me as I've heard it very
                                                  clear and also apologise to you and others who were offended. It
                                                  was obviously my mistake, and making them so often helps me keep a
                                                  grip on the weaknesses I have in adequately defending my actions.
                                                  This has been another good lesson for me to see and confess my sin.
                                                  I hope you, and others offended, will too forgive me. This will be
                                                  my final post so not to make these type mistakes again on this forum.

                                                  I'm flying to another part of Africa early in the morning and then
                                                  back home to Michigan by Thursday. I will not be able to read your
                                                  or others comments, but will trust in the Lord that He will soften
                                                  your and Jerry's heart toward my mistake, and allow you both to
                                                  forgive me. Lord willing, should I make it back to Michigan as
                                                  planned, I will see your posts in response to my request.

                                                  Your brother in Christ,
                                                  Walt.

                                                  --- In covenantedreformationclub@yahoogroups.com, "Susan Wilkinson"
                                                  <gpyp@...> wrote:
                                                  >
                                                  > Walt,
                                                  >
                                                  >
                                                  >
                                                  > I am weary of both your overt and implied accusations against
                                                  Jerry that
                                                  > your posts aren't going through. You are not helping your cause in
                                                  this
                                                  > because everyone here knows Jerry to be honest, forthright and
                                                  fair in his
                                                  > moderation. Please stop falsely accusing him or else bring proof
                                                  that you
                                                  > have been wronged by him. If it's true that one or more of your
                                                  posts
                                                  > haven't made it through there are a few other logical
                                                  possibilities as to
                                                  > why; you might want to consider that before you make assumptions
                                                  and public
                                                  > accusations.
                                                  >
                                                  >
                                                  >
                                                  > Also as far as I'm concerned you've done a fabulous job of
                                                  demonstrating the
                                                  > veracity of the point of view of those you seek to refute.
                                                  >
                                                  >
                                                  >
                                                  > Susan
                                                  >
                                                  >
                                                • Katrina Schumacher
                                                  Walt; I give to you full leave to have Ginny post my email of April 2005 to the Elders to this forum....if it is posted in it s entirety, the email that I read
                                                  Message 24 of 30 , Mar 25, 2007
                                                  • 0 Attachment
                                                    Walt;
                                                     
                                                    I give to you full leave to have Ginny post my email of April 2005 to the Elders to this forum....if it is posted
                                                    in it's entirety, the email that I read aloud over the phone to Lyndon Dohms first before mailing.....that email voices all of my then concerns...and if folks want to then discuss what is written there, I'm game.
                                                     
                                                    ~Katrina~
                                                     


                                                    From: covenantedreformationclub@yahoogroups.com [mailto:covenantedreformationclub@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Walt Bre
                                                    Sent: Sunday, March 25, 2007 5:51 AM
                                                    To: covenantedreformationclub@yahoogroups.com
                                                    Subject: RE: [Covenanted Reformation] Learn Jurisdiction and the Power of Christ

                                                    Katrina,
                                                     
                                                    Would you post the entire excommunication document to this site so everyone may read the reasons you were excommunicated?  I cannot comment on the discussions below, but think that if you post the entire excommunication on this site it will give everyone the reasons you were excommunicated.
                                                     
                                                    Walt.

                                                    Katrina Schumacher <triple3ranch@ platinum. ca> wrote:
                                                     
                                                    Dear List;
                                                    </ SPAN>
                                                    I think that Dee Dee has nothing to fear from Ginny Dohms posting what ever Ginny wants, here on the list, after all it is the Lord that
                                                    truly knows all that has occurred and all the heart intents of those involved, and even if, Dee Dee needs to please
                                                    her husband and not post publicly here, the Lord always raises up someone to defend the good names of
                                                    His children; so Dee Dee dear; please rest in this.
                                                     
                                                    That, Dee Dee, stated that she was  given less than 24 hours is consistent with my last phone conversations with the two Elders from Edmonton
                                                    in April 2005;
                                                    I want to add that my email (april 2005) to the three Elders did express s ome of the  concerns of Elder Dohms as well. Before I sent this email to the
                                                    three Elders (Price, Barrow, Dohms) I first read it over the phone to Elder Lyndon Dohms
                                                      and Lyndon stated that he found nothing wrong
                                                    with it; to go ahead and send it.....my mistake was in CCing it to my family; and this action caused Lyndon to withdraw his support.
                                                    Lyndon told this to me during the following phone conversation that had both Lyndon and Elder Barrow present;  then while on the phone with
                                                    these two men; I asked for two weeks, to have any action delayed until after my flight to Albany in order to visit with my children there, attend
                                                    the wedding of Ed and Hanna (who had so kindly set their wedding date to accommodate my visit) and
                                                    to be able to witness the baptism of my little grand daughter Emily Price.   I then would have been able to talk to pastor
                                                    Greg Price in person about my concerns while in Albany New York....and I then in this same phone conversation; told the Elders from Edmonton that my flight plans were to fly from
                                                    Albany New York to Edmonton Alberta; to be
                                                     in person at Edmonton to be present for my daughter Doralynne's birth of her first child (Doralynne is also married to Lydon and Ginny Dohms' son Jordan)...and I then could talk face to
                                                    face with Greg Barrow and Lyndon Dohms.  I was told by Greg Barrow that my children in Albany would not want to see
                                                    me and that Ed and Hanna would n ot want me at their wedding.... I was being emotionally pushed to repent for my letter to the Elders that
                                                    addressed my concerns and also pushed to agree to a gag order to never speak against the Elders again in the future...
                                                    So on the emotion of the moment, the pain of the handling of these Elders on the phone.... I asked for twenty minutes to pray about my decision,
                                                    and the Elders(Lyndon and Greg B) phoned back in an hour and I was officially excommunicated just like that....... I canceled my
                                                    flight to Albany with the return trip through Edmonton; this trip a gift paid for and given to me by a dear friend, just three months prior
                                                    after the death of Grant my first husband.
                                                     
                                                     The two Elders involved in this phone excommunication, probably do not recall much of that conversation, and would no
                                                    doubt refute that anything was said to me by Greg Barrow  about the wedding or the planned visits to my children; that Lyndon witnessed Greg Barrow's words
                                                    .....or even of Lyndon telling
                                                    me to go ahead and send off my email to the three Elders(including himself).... ......
                                                    so just my word....against, .... but heaven did witness this treatment to a new widow.....
                                                     
                                                     I need to learn more about what is proper Church Court Behavior, I do not believe my concerns or that of the recent excommunicated
                                                    were handled properly.
                                                     
                                                    To readers of the Covenanted Reformation Club posts; if you have not already gone to Bob Sutton's blog; you
                                                    can read for yourself a well thought out and prayerful Response of one of the resent Excommunicated,
                                                    I think Stan has done a good balanced job of putting forth the responsibility of the remaining membership of
                                                    the former RPNA.
                                                     
                                                    "At the voice of thy cry; when He shall hear it, He will answer thee."
                                                    Isaiah 30:19
                                                    Sincerely and Prayerfully written;
                                                    that some good and not more harm would come from my testimony.
                                                     
                                                    Katrina Schumacher
                                                    CRCNA
                                                     
                                                     
                                                     
                                                     
                                                     
                                                     


                                                    From: covenantedreformati onclub@yahoogrou ps.com [mailto:covenantedr eformationclub@ yahoogroups. com] On Behalf Of nocost2great
                                                    Sent: Monday, March 19, 2007 6:36 AM
                                                    To: covenantedreformati onclub@yahoogrou ps.com< BR>Subject: Re: [Covenanted Reformation] Learn Jurisdiction and the Power of Christ

                                                    --- In covenantedreformati onclub@yahoogrou ps.com, Jerry
                                                    <ragingcalvinist@ ...> wrote:
                                                    >
                                                    > Dee Dee,
                                                    >
                                                    > PLEASE, please, tell me you're kidding. Please?
                                                    >
                                                    > gmw.
                                                    >
                                                    Jerry,
                                                    I wish I could. I woke up this morning to find a challenge from Ginny
                                                    to tell the whole story, so I will format and post the 'dialogue'
                                                    between Greg Price and me before the public sin of having familar
                                                    fellowship was committed.
                                                    I find myself between a rock and a hard spot though. If I bow out, I
                                                    will give Ginny leave to tell what happened third party, and only
                                                    based on information she has garnered via emails. If I continue, I
                                                    will offend my husband even more by publicly testifying. There are times though when the heart can not keep silent, and the ninth
                                                    commandment compells us to tell the truth. Ginny has threatened to set
                                                    the record straight if I don't repent publicly by this evening. There
                                                    is no way for me to dig up and format everything by then, but I would
                                                    like to put it in an orderly document so that it is easier to follow.
                                                    Hopefully I can get that done this week, but we are scheduled to go
                                                    out of town Thursday morning, and preparations have to be made for
                                                    that.

                                                    I will confess that I have to just *assume* this was the sin I was
                                                    charged with, because it was the only sin I was approached about (and
                                                    it was less than 24 hours.) Since the accuser/accusations remain
                                                    secret until the oath is sworn, there is really no way to tell for
                                                    sure.

                                                    Upholding the Truth,

                                                    Dee Dee



                                                    Expecting? Get great news right away with email Auto-Check.
                                                    Try the Yahoo! Mail Beta.


                                                    TV dinner still cooling?
                                                    Check out "Tonight's Picks" on Yahoo! TV.

                                                  • Tim Cunningham
                                                    Hello Katrina You also may post your email to this forum: you don t have to have someone else do it. Tim ... to the ... Lyndon Dohms ... concerns...and if ...
                                                    Message 25 of 30 , Mar 26, 2007
                                                    • 0 Attachment
                                                      Hello Katrina

                                                      You also may post your email to this forum: you don't have to have
                                                      someone else do it.

                                                      Tim

                                                      --- In covenantedreformationclub@yahoogroups.com, "Katrina
                                                      Schumacher" <triple3ranch@...> wrote:
                                                      >
                                                      > Walt;
                                                      >
                                                      > I give to you full leave to have Ginny post my email of April 2005
                                                      to the
                                                      > Elders to this forum....if it is posted
                                                      > in it's entirety, the email that I read aloud over the phone to
                                                      Lyndon Dohms
                                                      > first before mailing.....that email voices all of my then
                                                      concerns...and if
                                                      > folks want to then discuss what is written there, I'm game.
                                                      >
                                                      > ~Katrina~
                                                      >
                                                      >
                                                      > _____
                                                      >
                                                      > From: covenantedreformationclub@yahoogroups.com
                                                      > [mailto:covenantedreformationclub@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of
                                                      Walt Bre
                                                      > Sent: Sunday, March 25, 2007 5:51 AM
                                                      > To: covenantedreformationclub@yahoogroups.com
                                                      > Subject: RE: [Covenanted Reformation] Learn Jurisdiction and the
                                                      Power of
                                                      > Christ
                                                      >
                                                      >
                                                      >
                                                      >
                                                      > Katrina,
                                                      >
                                                      > Would you post the entire excommunication document to this site so
                                                      everyone
                                                      > may read the reasons you were excommunicated? I cannot comment on
                                                      the
                                                      > discussions below, but think that if you post the entire
                                                      excommunication on
                                                      > this site it will give everyone the reasons you were excommunicated.
                                                      >
                                                      > Walt.
                                                      >
                                                      > Katrina Schumacher <triple3ranch@...> wrote:
                                                      >
                                                      >
                                                      > Dear List;
                                                      >
                                                      > I think that Dee Dee has nothing to fear from Ginny Dohms posting
                                                      what ever
                                                      > Ginny wants, here on the list, after all it is the Lord that
                                                      > truly knows all that has occurred and all the heart intents of those
                                                      > involved, and even if, Dee Dee needs to please
                                                      > her husband and not post publicly here, the Lord always raises up
                                                      someone to
                                                      > defend the good names of
                                                      > His children; so Dee Dee dear; please rest in this.
                                                      >
                                                      > That, Dee Dee, stated that she was given less than 24 hours is
                                                      consistent
                                                      > with my last phone conversations with the two Elders from Edmonton
                                                      > in April 2005;
                                                      > I want to add that my email (april 2005) to the three Elders did
                                                      express s
                                                      > ome of the concerns of Elder Dohms as well. Before I sent this
                                                      email to the
                                                      > three Elders (Price, Barrow, Dohms) I first read it over the phone
                                                      to Elder
                                                      > Lyndon Dohms
                                                      > and Lyndon stated that he found nothing wrong
                                                      > with it; to go ahead and send it.....my mistake was in CCing it to
                                                      my
                                                      > family; and this action caused Lyndon to withdraw his support.
                                                      > Lyndon told this to me during the following phone conversation that
                                                      had both
                                                      > Lyndon and Elder Barrow present; then while on the phone with
                                                      > these two men; I asked for two weeks, to have any action delayed
                                                      until after
                                                      > my flight to Albany in order to visit with my children there, attend
                                                      > the wedding of Ed and Hanna (who had so kindly set their wedding
                                                      date to
                                                      > accommodate my visit) and
                                                      > to be able to witness the baptism of my little grand daughter Emily
                                                      Price.
                                                      > I then would have been able to talk to pastor
                                                      > Greg Price in person about my concerns while in Albany New
                                                      York....and I
                                                      > then in this same phone conversation; told the Elders from Edmonton
                                                      that my
                                                      > flight plans were to fly from
                                                      > Albany New York to Edmonton Alberta; to be
                                                      > in person at Edmonton to be present for my daughter Doralynne's
                                                      birth of
                                                      > her first child (Doralynne is also married to Lydon and Ginny
                                                      Dohms' son
                                                      > Jordan)...and I then could talk face to
                                                      > face with Greg Barrow and Lyndon Dohms. I was told by Greg Barrow
                                                      that my
                                                      > children in Albany would not want to see
                                                      > me and that Ed and Hanna would n ot want me at their wedding.... I
                                                      was being
                                                      > emotionally pushed to repent for my letter to the Elders that
                                                      > addressed my concerns and also pushed to agree to a gag order to
                                                      never speak
                                                      > against the Elders again in the future...
                                                      > So on the emotion of the moment, the pain of the handling of these
                                                      Elders on
                                                      > the phone.... I asked for twenty minutes to pray about my decision,
                                                      > and the Elders(Lyndon and Greg B) phoned back in an hour and I was
                                                      > officially excommunicated just like that....... I canceled my
                                                      > flight to Albany with the return trip through Edmonton; this trip a
                                                      gift
                                                      > paid for and given to me by a dear friend, just three months prior
                                                      > after the death of Grant my first husband.
                                                      >
                                                      > The two Elders involved in this phone excommunication, probably do
                                                      not
                                                      > recall much of that conversation, and would no
                                                      > doubt refute that anything was said to me by Greg Barrow about the
                                                      wedding
                                                      > or the planned visits to my children; that Lyndon witnessed Greg
                                                      Barrow's
                                                      > words
                                                      > .....or even of Lyndon telling
                                                      > me to go ahead and send off my email to the three Elders(including
                                                      > himself)..........
                                                      > so just my word....against,.... but heaven did witness this
                                                      treatment to a
                                                      > new widow.....
                                                      >
                                                      > I need to learn more about what is proper Church Court Behavior, I
                                                      do not
                                                      > believe my concerns or that of the recent excommunicated
                                                      > were handled properly.
                                                      >
                                                      > To readers of the Covenanted Reformation Club posts; if you have
                                                      not already
                                                      > gone to Bob Sutton's blog; you
                                                      > can read for yourself a well thought out and prayerful Response of
                                                      one of
                                                      > the resent Excommunicated,
                                                      > Stan B. http://reformedveri
                                                      > <http://reformedveritas.blogspot.com/2007/03/31007-for-your-
                                                      consideration-re
                                                      > sponse.html>
                                                      > tas.blogspot.com/2007/03/31007-for-your-consideration-response.html
                                                      > written on March 10/07
                                                      > I think Stan has done a good balanced job of putting forth the
                                                      > responsibility of the remaining membership of
                                                      > the former RPNA.
                                                      >
                                                      > "At the voice of thy cry; when He shall hear it, He will answer
                                                      thee."
                                                      > Isaiah 30:19
                                                      >
                                                      > Sincerely and Prayerfully written;
                                                      > that some good and not more harm would come from my testimony.
                                                      >
                                                      > Katrina Schumacher
                                                      > CRCNA
                                                      >
                                                      >
                                                      >
                                                      >
                                                      >
                                                      >
                                                      >
                                                      > _____
                                                      >
                                                      > From: covenantedreformationclub@yahoogroups.com
                                                      > [mailto:covenantedreformationclub@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of
                                                      nocost2great
                                                      > Sent: Monday, March 19, 2007 6:36 AM
                                                      > To: covenantedreformationclub@yahoogroups.com< BR>Subject: Re:
                                                      [Covenanted
                                                      > Reformation] Learn Jurisdiction and the Power of Christ
                                                      >
                                                      >
                                                      > --- In covenantedreformati
                                                      > <mailto:covenantedreformationclub%40yahoogroups.com>
                                                      onclub@yahoogroups.com,
                                                      > Jerry
                                                      > <ragingcalvinist@> wrote:
                                                      > >
                                                      > > Dee Dee,
                                                      > >
                                                      > > PLEASE, please, tell me you're kidding. Please?
                                                      > >
                                                      > > gmw.
                                                      > >
                                                      > Jerry,
                                                      > I wish I could. I woke up this morning to find a challenge from
                                                      Ginny
                                                      > to tell the whole story, so I will format and post the 'dialogue'
                                                      > between Greg Price and me before the public sin of having familar
                                                      > fellowship was committed.
                                                      > I find myself between a rock and a hard spot though. If I bow out,
                                                      I
                                                      > will give Ginny leave to tell what happened third party, and only
                                                      > based on information she has garnered via emails. If I continue, I
                                                      > will offend my husband even more by publicly testifying. There are
                                                      times
                                                      > though when the heart can not keep silent, and the ninth
                                                      > commandment compells us to tell the truth. Ginny has threatened to
                                                      set
                                                      > the record straight if I don't repent publicly by this evening.
                                                      There
                                                      > is no way for me to dig up and format everything by then, but I
                                                      would
                                                      > like to put it in an orderly document so that it is easier to
                                                      follow.
                                                      > Hopefully I can get that done this week, but we are scheduled to go
                                                      > out of town Thursday morning, and preparations have to be made for
                                                      > that.
                                                      >
                                                      > I will confess that I have to just *assume* this was the sin I was
                                                      > charged with, because it was the only sin I was approached about
                                                      (and
                                                      > it was less than 24 hours.) Since the accuser/accusations remain
                                                      > secret until the oath is sworn, there is really no way to tell for
                                                      > sure.
                                                      >
                                                      > Upholding the Truth,
                                                      >
                                                      > Dee Dee
                                                      >
                                                      >
                                                      >
                                                      >
                                                      >
                                                      > _____
                                                      >
                                                      > Expecting? Get great news right away with email
                                                      >
                                                      <http://us.rd.yahoo.com/evt=49982/*http://advision.webevents.yahoo.com
                                                      /mailb
                                                      > eta/newmail_tools.html> Auto-Check.
                                                      > Try the Yahoo!
                                                      >
                                                      <http://us.rd.yahoo.com/evt=49982/*http://advision.webevents.yahoo.com
                                                      /mailb
                                                      > eta/newmail_tools.html> Mail Beta.
                                                      >
                                                      >
                                                      > _____
                                                      >
                                                      > TV dinner still cooling?
                                                      > Check out <http://us.rd.yahoo.com/evt=49979/*http://tv.yahoo.com/>
                                                      > "Tonight's Picks" on Yahoo! TV.
                                                      >
                                                    • Katrina Schumacher
                                                      Yes Tim, I realize that I can post at will.....however I d prefer that it was okay with the Dohms household what was posted, in response to Walt. It is my
                                                      Message 26 of 30 , Mar 26, 2007
                                                      • 0 Attachment
                                                        Yes Tim,
                                                         
                                                        I realize that I can post at will.....however I'd prefer that it was okay
                                                        with the Dohms household what was posted, in response to Walt.
                                                         
                                                        It is my personal email to the Elders that expresses concerns on more than one point.
                                                        That email is also very direct in naming what I and Lyndon Dohms thought were personal
                                                        weaknesses of the two Gregs.....so again, if Ginny wants to post it through
                                                        Gerry is one thing, and me being willing to post it without Ginny and Lyndon's
                                                        go ahead is another.
                                                         
                                                        Walt probably only knows about the 'so called official  Cathie Soles Excommunication notice" that
                                                        went out over the internet to former RPNA members. This notice does not address
                                                        my concerns of April 2005; instead that action of excommunicating me, gave the Elders; 
                                                        a neat and tidy way of closing the matter.
                                                         
                                                        Reading over Samantha Elossais documents,  Dee Dee's , Edgar, Bob, Stan B., Chris Tylor,
                                                        the Tarons, I am weary of it all....the problems, the consequences of mishandling
                                                        just become deeper, higher, wider...the fruit of it all so Spoiled
                                                         
                                                        Truly a sad history to weep over.
                                                         
                                                        Isaiah 30:19
                                                        "At the voice of thy cry;
                                                        when  He shall hear it, He will answer thee."
                                                         
                                                        ~Katrina Schumacher~
                                                         
                                                        Communicate member of the CRCNA
                                                        and yes the elders of  the two CRCNA churches that I've worshiped
                                                         with since that excommunication
                                                        were fully told of the details and the concerns of April 2005..
                                                        I was warmly welcomed to their care. 
                                                        I feel that the Lord has not allowed me to be greatly harmed, 
                                                        He has been most merciful in not allowing my health to be harmed,
                                                        He has kept my spirit from falling into great bitterness;
                                                        He has used Shepherds, outside of the former RPNA;
                                                        Shepherds who have made of the Lord's Word a warm healing balm;
                                                        A Healing Balm, that has been applied to my wounds.
                                                        I am loved and cared for.


                                                        From: covenantedreformationclub@yahoogroups.com [mailto:covenantedreformationclub@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Tim Cunningham
                                                        Sent: Monday, March 26, 2007 8:00 AM
                                                        To: covenantedreformationclub@yahoogroups.com
                                                        Subject: Re: [Covenanted Reformation] Learn Jurisdiction and the Power of Christ

                                                        Hello Katrina

                                                        You also may post your email to this forum: you don't have to have
                                                        someone else do it.

                                                        Tim

                                                        --- In covenantedreformati onclub@yahoogrou ps.com, "Katrina
                                                        Schumacher" <triple3ranch@ ...> wrote:

                                                        >
                                                        >
                                                        Walt;
                                                        >
                                                        > I give to you full leave to have Ginny post my email of
                                                        April 2005
                                                        to the
                                                        > Elders to this forum....if it is posted
                                                        > in
                                                        it's entirety, the email that I read aloud over the phone to
                                                        Lyndon Dohms
                                                        > first before mailing..... that email voices all of my then
                                                        concerns...and if
                                                        > folks want to then discuss what is written there,
                                                        I'm game.
                                                        >
                                                        > ~Katrina~
                                                        >
                                                        >
                                                        > _____
                                                        >
                                                        > From:
                                                        href="mailto:covenantedreformationclub%40yahoogroups.com">covenantedreformati onclub@yahoogrou ps.com
                                                        >
                                                        [mailto:covenantedreformati onclub@yahoogrou ps.com] On Behalf Of
                                                        Walt Bre
                                                        > Sent: Sunday, March 25, 2007 5:51 AM
                                                        >
                                                        To: covenantedreformati onclub@yahoogrou ps.com
                                                        >
                                                        Subject: RE: [Covenanted Reformation] Learn Jurisdiction and the
                                                        Power of
                                                        > Christ
                                                        >
                                                        >
                                                        >
                                                        >
                                                        > Katrina,
                                                        >
                                                        > Would you post the entire excommunication document to this site so
                                                        everyone
                                                        > may read the reasons you were excommunicated? I cannot
                                                        comment on
                                                        the
                                                        > discussions below, but think that if you post the
                                                        entire
                                                        excommunication on
                                                        > this site it will give everyone the
                                                        reasons you were excommunicated.
                                                        >
                                                        > Walt.
                                                        >
                                                        > Katrina
                                                        Schumacher <triple3ranch@ ...> wrote:
                                                        >
                                                        >
                                                        > Dear
                                                        List;
                                                        >
                                                        > I think that Dee Dee has nothing to fear from Ginny Dohms
                                                        posting
                                                        what ever
                                                        > Ginny wants, here on the list, after all it is the
                                                        Lord that
                                                        > truly knows all that has occurred and all the heart intents of
                                                        those
                                                        > involved, and even if, Dee Dee needs to please
                                                        > her husband
                                                        and not post publicly here, the Lord always raises up
                                                        someone to
                                                        >
                                                        defend the good names of
                                                        > His children; so Dee Dee dear; please rest in
                                                        this.
                                                        >
                                                        > That, Dee Dee, stated that she was given less than 24
                                                        hours is
                                                        consistent
                                                        > with my last phone conversations with the two
                                                        Elders from Edmonton
                                                        > in April 2005;
                                                        > I want to add that my email
                                                        (april 2005) to the three Elders did
                                                        express s
                                                        > ome of the concerns
                                                        of Elder Dohms as well. Before I sent this
                                                        email to the
                                                        > three Elders
                                                        (Price, Barrow, Dohms) I first read it over the phone
                                                        to Elder
                                                        >
                                                        Lyndon Dohms
                                                        > and Lyndon stated that he found nothing wrong
                                                        > with
                                                        it; to go ahead and send it.....my mistake was in CCing it to
                                                        my
                                                        >
                                                        family; and this action caused Lyndon to withdraw his support.
                                                        > Lyndon
                                                        told this to me during the following phone conversation that
                                                        had both
                                                        > Lyndon and Elder Barrow present; then while on the phone with
                                                        > these two men; I asked for two weeks, to have any action delayed
                                                        until after
                                                        > my flight to Albany in order to visit with my children
                                                        there, attend
                                                        > the wedding of Ed and Hanna (who had so kindly set their
                                                        wedding
                                                        date to
                                                        > accommodate my visit) and
                                                        > to be able to
                                                        witness the baptism of my little grand daughter Emily
                                                        Price.
                                                        > I then
                                                        would have been able to talk to pastor
                                                        > Greg Price in person about my
                                                        concerns while in Albany New
                                                        York....and I
                                                        > then in this same phone
                                                        conversation; told the Elders from Edmonton
                                                        that my
                                                        > flight plans
                                                        were to fly from
                                                        > Albany New York to Edmonton Alberta; to be
                                                        > in
                                                        person at Edmonton to be present for my daughter Doralynne's
                                                        birth of
                                                        > her first child (Doralynne is also married to Lydon and Ginny
                                                        Dohms' son
                                                        > Jordan)...and I then could talk face to
                                                        > face with
                                                        Greg Barrow and Lyndon Dohms. I was told by Greg Barrow
                                                        that my
                                                        >
                                                        children in Albany would not want to see
                                                        > me and that Ed and Hanna would
                                                        n ot want me at their wedding.... I
                                                        was being
                                                        > emotionally pushed to
                                                        repent for my letter to the Elders that
                                                        > addressed my concerns and also
                                                        pushed to agree to a gag order to
                                                        never speak
                                                        > against the Elders
                                                        again in the future...
                                                        > So on the emotion of the moment, the pain of the
                                                        handling of these
                                                        Elders on
                                                        > the phone.... I asked for twenty minutes
                                                        to pray about my decision,
                                                        > and the Elders(Lyndon and Greg B) phoned back
                                                        in an hour and I was
                                                        > officially excommunicated just like that....... I
                                                        canceled my
                                                        > flight to Albany with the return trip through Edmonton; this
                                                        trip a
                                                        gift
                                                        > paid for and given to me by a dear friend, just three
                                                        months prior
                                                        > after the death of Grant my first husband.
                                                        >
                                                        >
                                                        The two Elders involved in this phone excommunication, probably do
                                                        not
                                                        > recall much of that conversation, and would no
                                                        > doubt
                                                        refute that anything was said to me by Greg Barrow about the
                                                        wedding
                                                        >
                                                        or the planned visits to my children; that Lyndon witnessed Greg
                                                        Barrow's
                                                        > words
                                                        > .....or even of Lyndon telling
                                                        > me to
                                                        go ahead and send off my email to the three Elders(including
                                                        >
                                                        himself).... ......
                                                        > so just my word....against, .... but heaven
                                                        did witness this
                                                        treatment to a
                                                        > new widow.....
                                                        >
                                                        > I
                                                        need to learn more about what is proper Church Court Behavior, I
                                                        do not
                                                        > believe my concerns or that of the recent excommunicated
                                                        >
                                                        were handled properly.
                                                        >
                                                        > To readers of the Covenanted Reformation
                                                        Club posts; if you have
                                                        not already
                                                        > gone to Bob Sutton's blog;
                                                        you
                                                        > can read for yourself a well thought out and prayerful Response of
                                                        one of
                                                        > the resent Excommunicated,
                                                        > Stan B.
                                                        href="http://reformedveri">http://reformedveri
                                                        > <
                                                        href="http://reformedveritas.blogspot.com/2007/03/31007-for-your-">http://reformedveri tas.blogspot. com/2007/ 03/31007- for-your-
                                                        consideration- re
                                                        >
                                                        sponse.html>
                                                        >
                                                        tas.blogspot. com/2007/ 03/31007- for-your- consideration- response. html
                                                        >
                                                        written on March 10/07
                                                        > I think Stan has done a good balanced job of
                                                        putting forth the
                                                        > responsibility of the remaining membership of
                                                        >
                                                        the former RPNA.
                                                        >
                                                        > "At the voice of thy cry; when He shall hear
                                                        it, He will answer
                                                        thee."
                                                        > Isaiah 30:19
                                                        >
                                                        > Sincerely
                                                        and Prayerfully written;
                                                        > that some good and not more harm would come
                                                        from my testimony.
                                                        >
                                                        > Katrina Schumacher
                                                        >
                                                        CRCNA

                                                        .
                                                        >

                                                      • nocost2great
                                                        ... wrote: ... after ... was ... contained ... Walt, I won t comment on your insinuation there, but will ask that you note - being served
                                                        Message 27 of 30 , Mar 26, 2007
                                                        • 0 Attachment
                                                          --- In covenantedreformationclub@yahoogroups.com, "humbled.learner"
                                                          <humbled.learner@...> wrote:
                                                          Walt writes:
                                                          > Indeed, the best response after the damage is done, is:
                                                          >
                                                          > "It was late, and I was tired, and not paying close attention. My
                                                          > husband has pointed out that I confused some details. Actually the
                                                          > above should state that the second 24 hour time frame occurred
                                                          after
                                                          > receiving a letter from Greg stating he hadn't read my defense
                                                          > regarding *not removing my name from the CI and not publicly
                                                          > repenting for 'joining hands' with my brethren who penned it.* I
                                                          was
                                                          > officially served the *oath* (though the essence of it was
                                                          contained
                                                          > in the 'brotherly letter' dated Dec 1st) less than 24 hours later,
                                                          > *not excommunicated.*"
                                                          >
                                                          > I'm really not sure how someone could make such an important
                                                          > mistake, but whatever the reason, it sure got everyone to look at
                                                          > the Elders like some extreme Tyrants.
                                                          >
                                                          > I think this is wrong in my opinion, but let's see if it gets
                                                          > through.
                                                          >
                                                          Walt,
                                                          I won't comment on your insinuation there, but will ask that you
                                                          note - being served the oath when the elders know you have questions
                                                          regarding what they are asking you to swear, and in the same letter
                                                          telling you that if you don't swear it you will be excommunicated...
                                                          **and admitting to not even reading your letter of defense**... is
                                                          really no different that going ahead and excommunicating you. Yes, I
                                                          got the documents confused, but the intent to excommunicate was
                                                          clear - crystal clear - when the oath was served. The short span of
                                                          time between oath and excommunication is just a formality. I have
                                                          not painted anyone as a tyrrant, but the actions are indicative of
                                                          tyranny.
                                                          And as for judicial procedure... I have asked many for a historical
                                                          example of ANY court that required an oath granting lawful authority
                                                          of those ruling before a case was tried, much less opened. I can
                                                          imagine that we would all be in jail instead of excommunicated if it
                                                          were our civil courts requiring this. Had the oath been left out, I
                                                          don't think any of us would have failed to appear 'in court' to
                                                          defend our good names, as the ninth commandment requires, even if we
                                                          felt like it wouldn't be a fair trial. We could at least go on
                                                          record with our defense instead of being denied due process.

                                                          Standing for the truth,

                                                          Dee Dee
                                                        • Chris Coldwell
                                                          Dear Katrina, I m very thankful to the Lord for providing you the church home you have, where you have pastors for your soul s good, and that you have been
                                                          Message 28 of 30 , Mar 27, 2007
                                                          • 0 Attachment
                                                            Dear Katrina,
                                                            I'm very thankful to the Lord for providing you the church home you have,
                                                            where you have pastors for your soul's good, and that you have been able to
                                                            "move on" and that this ecclesiastical abuse has not burdened your soul.

                                                            To clarify lest any take offense; my comments regarding the elders personal
                                                            problems has to do with what I am unwilling to bring up in a general
                                                            discussion of the validity of the excommunications as laid out in my
                                                            original comment to Mr. Suden. I was not passing judgment on any who are in
                                                            a position to have to deal with those matters; but it is not germane to that
                                                            general question as far as I am concerned. If I show an abundance of caution
                                                            here, it is simply that I don't want to be anything like those men.


                                                            Sincerely,
                                                            Chris Coldwell
                                                            Naphtali Press http://www.naphtali.com
                                                            The Confessional Presbyterian journal http://www.cpjournal.com
                                                            Member Lakewood PCA, Dallas, Texas

                                                            -----Original Message-----
                                                            From: notify@yahoogroups.com [mailto:notify@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of
                                                            Chris Coldwell
                                                            Sent: Tuesday, March 27, 2007 6:42 AM
                                                            To: naphtali@...
                                                            Subject: Fwd: RE: [Covenanted Reformation] Learn Jurisdiction and the Power
                                                            of Christ

                                                            --- In covenantedreformationclub@yahoogroups.com, "Katrina Schumacher"
                                                            <triple3ranch@...> wrote:

                                                            Yes Tim,

                                                            I realize that I can post at will.....however I'd prefer that it was okay
                                                            with the Dohms household what was posted, in response to Walt.

                                                            It is my personal email to the Elders that expresses concerns on more than
                                                            one point.
                                                            That email is also very direct in naming what I and Lyndon Dohms thought
                                                            were personal
                                                            weaknesses of the two Gregs.....so again, if Ginny wants to post it
                                                            through
                                                            Gerry is one thing, and me being willing to post it without Ginny and
                                                            Lyndon's
                                                            go ahead is another.

                                                            Walt probably only knows about the 'so called official Cathie Soles
                                                            Excommunication notice" that
                                                            went out over the internet to former RPNA members. This notice does not
                                                            address
                                                            my concerns of April 2005; instead that action of excommunicating me, gave
                                                            the Elders;
                                                            a neat and tidy way of closing the matter.

                                                            Reading over Samantha Elossais documents, Dee Dee's , Edgar, Bob,
                                                            Stan B.,
                                                            Chris Tylor,
                                                            the Tarons, I am weary of it all....the problems, the consequences of
                                                            mishandling
                                                            just become deeper, higher, wider...the fruit of it all so Spoiled

                                                            Truly a sad history to weep over.

                                                            Isaiah 30:19
                                                            "At the voice of thy cry;
                                                            when He shall hear it, He will answer thee."

                                                            ~Katrina Schumacher~

                                                            Communicate member of the CRCNA
                                                            and yes the elders of the two CRCNA churches that I've worshiped
                                                            with since that excommunication
                                                            were fully told of the details and the concerns of April 2005..
                                                            I was warmly welcomed to their care.
                                                            I feel that the Lord has not allowed me to be greatly harmed,
                                                            He has been most merciful in not allowing my health to be harmed,
                                                            He has kept my spirit from falling into great bitterness;
                                                            He has used Shepherds, outside of the former RPNA;
                                                            Shepherds who have made of the Lord's Word a warm healing balm;
                                                            A Healing Balm, that has been applied to my wounds.
                                                            I am loved and cared for.

                                                            _____

                                                            From: covenantedreformationclub@yahoogroups.com
                                                            [mailto:covenantedreformationclub@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Tim
                                                            Cunningham
                                                            Sent: Monday, March 26, 2007 8:00 AM
                                                            To: covenantedreformationclub@yahoogroups.com
                                                            Subject: Re: [Covenanted Reformation] Learn Jurisdiction and the Power of
                                                            Christ



                                                            Hello Katrina

                                                            You also may post your email to this forum: you don't have to have
                                                            someone else do it.

                                                            Tim

                                                            --- In covenantedreformati
                                                            <mailto:covenantedreformationclub%40yahoogroups.com>
                                                            onclub@yahoogroups.com,
                                                            "Katrina
                                                            Schumacher" <triple3ranch@> wrote:
                                                            >
                                                            > Walt;
                                                            >
                                                            > I give to you full leave to have Ginny post my email of April 2005
                                                            to the
                                                            > Elders to this forum....if it is posted
                                                            > in it's entirety, the email that I read aloud over the phone to
                                                            Lyndon Dohms
                                                            > first before mailing.....that email voices all of my then
                                                            concerns...and if
                                                            > folks want to then discuss what is written there, I'm game.
                                                            >
                                                            > ~Katrina~
                                                            >
                                                            >
                                                            > _____
                                                            >
                                                            > From: covenantedreformati
                                                            <mailto:covenantedreformationclub%40yahoogroups.com>
                                                            onclub@yahoogroups.com
                                                            > [mailto:covenantedreformati
                                                            <mailto:covenantedreformationclub%40yahoogroups.com>
                                                            onclub@yahoogroups.com]
                                                            On Behalf Of
                                                            Walt Bre
                                                            > Sent: Sunday, March 25, 2007 5:51 AM
                                                            > To: covenantedreformati
                                                            <mailto:covenantedreformationclub%40yahoogroups.com>
                                                            onclub@yahoogroups.com
                                                            > Subject: RE: [Covenanted Reformation] Learn Jurisdiction and the
                                                            Power of
                                                            > Christ
                                                            >
                                                            >
                                                            >
                                                            >
                                                            > Katrina,
                                                            >
                                                            > Would you post the entire excommunication document to this site so
                                                            everyone
                                                            > may read the reasons you were excommunicated? I cannot comment on
                                                            the
                                                            > discussions below, but think that if you post the entire
                                                            excommunication on
                                                            > this site it will give everyone the reasons you were excommunicated.
                                                            >
                                                            > Walt.
                                                            >
                                                            > Katrina Schumacher <triple3ranch@> wrote:
                                                            >
                                                            >
                                                            > Dear List;
                                                            >
                                                            > I think that Dee Dee has nothing to fear from Ginny Dohms posting
                                                            what ever
                                                            > Ginny wants, here on the list, after all it is the Lord that
                                                            > truly knows all that has occurred and all the heart intents of those
                                                            > involved, and even if, Dee Dee needs to please
                                                            > her husband and not post publicly here, the Lord always raises up
                                                            someone to
                                                            > defend the good names of
                                                            > His children; so Dee Dee dear; please rest in this.
                                                            >
                                                            > That, Dee Dee, stated that she was given less than 24 hours is
                                                            consistent
                                                            > with my last phone conversations with the two Elders from Edmonton
                                                            > in April 2005;
                                                            > I want to add that my email (april 2005) to the three Elders did
                                                            express s
                                                            > ome of the concerns of Elder Dohms as well. Before I sent this
                                                            email to the
                                                            > three Elders (Price, Barrow, Dohms) I first read it over the phone
                                                            to Elder
                                                            > Lyndon Dohms
                                                            > and Lyndon stated that he found nothing wrong
                                                            > with it; to go ahead and send it.....my mistake was in CCing it to
                                                            my
                                                            > family; and this action caused Lyndon to withdraw his support.
                                                            > Lyndon told this to me during the following phone conversation that
                                                            had both
                                                            > Lyndon and Elder Barrow present; then while on the phone with
                                                            > these two men; I asked for two weeks, to have any action delayed
                                                            until after
                                                            > my flight to Albany in order to visit with my children there, attend
                                                            > the wedding of Ed and Hanna (who had so kindly set their wedding
                                                            date to
                                                            > accommodate my visit) and
                                                            > to be able to witness the baptism of my little grand daughter Emily
                                                            Price.
                                                            > I then would have been able to talk to pastor
                                                            > Greg Price in person about my concerns while in Albany New
                                                            York....and I
                                                            > then in this same phone conversation; told the Elders from Edmonton
                                                            that my
                                                            > flight plans were to fly from
                                                            > Albany New York to Edmonton Alberta; to be
                                                            > in person at Edmonton to be present for my daughter Doralynne's
                                                            birth of
                                                            > her first child (Doralynne is also married to Lydon and Ginny
                                                            Dohms' son
                                                            > Jordan)...and I then could talk face to
                                                            > face with Greg Barrow and Lyndon Dohms. I was told by Greg Barrow
                                                            that my
                                                            > children in Albany would not want to see
                                                            > me and that Ed and Hanna would n ot want me at their wedding.... I
                                                            was being
                                                            > emotionally pushed to repent for my letter to the Elders that
                                                            > addressed my concerns and also pushed to agree to a gag order to
                                                            never speak
                                                            > against the Elders again in the future...
                                                            > So on the emotion of the moment, the pain of the handling of these
                                                            Elders on
                                                            > the phone.... I asked for twenty minutes to pray about my decision,
                                                            > and the Elders(Lyndon and Greg B) phoned back in an hour and I was
                                                            > officially excommunicated just like that....... I canceled my
                                                            > flight to Albany with the return trip through Edmonton; this trip a
                                                            gift
                                                            > paid for and given to me by a dear friend, just three months prior
                                                            > after the death of Grant my first husband.
                                                            >
                                                            > The two Elders involved in this phone excommunication, probably do
                                                            not
                                                            > recall much of that conversation, and would no
                                                            > doubt refute that anything was said to me by Greg Barrow about the
                                                            wedding
                                                            > or the planned visits to my children; that Lyndon witnessed Greg
                                                            Barrow's
                                                            > words
                                                            > .....or even of Lyndon telling
                                                            > me to go ahead and send off my email to the three Elders(including
                                                            > himself)..........
                                                            > so just my word....against,.... but heaven did witness this
                                                            treatment to a
                                                            > new widow.....
                                                            >
                                                            > I need to learn more about what is proper Church Court Behavior, I
                                                            do not
                                                            > believe my concerns or that of the recent excommunicated
                                                            > were handled properly.
                                                            >
                                                            > To readers of the Covenanted Reformation Club posts; if you have
                                                            not already
                                                            > gone to Bob Sutton's blog; you
                                                            > can read for yourself a well thought out and prayerful Response of
                                                            one of
                                                            > the resent Excommunicated,
                                                            > Stan B. http://reformedveri
                                                            > <http://reformedveri
                                                            <http://reformedveritas.blogspot.com/2007/03/31007-for-your->
                                                            tas.blogspot.com/2007/03/31007-for-your-
                                                            consideration-re
                                                            > sponse.html>
                                                            > tas.blogspot.com/2007/03/31007-for-your-consideration-response.html
                                                            > written on March 10/07
                                                            > I think Stan has done a good balanced job of putting forth the
                                                            > responsibility of the remaining membership of
                                                            > the former RPNA.
                                                            >
                                                            > "At the voice of thy cry; when He shall hear it, He will answer
                                                            thee."
                                                            > Isaiah 30:19
                                                            >
                                                            > Sincerely and Prayerfully written;
                                                            > that some good and not more harm would come from my testimony.
                                                            >
                                                            > Katrina Schumacher
                                                            > CRCNA

                                                            .
                                                            >

                                                            --- End forwarded message ---
                                                          • Whit R
                                                            You are not alone in that assessment, Chris. I am beginning to think the same. Whit Roberts CLC Member, Free Church (Continuing) Visitor ... and ... the ...
                                                            Message 29 of 30 , Mar 31, 2007
                                                            • 0 Attachment
                                                              You are not alone in that assessment, Chris. I am beginning to think
                                                              the same.

                                                              Whit Roberts
                                                              CLC Member, Free Church (Continuing) Visitor

                                                              --- In covenantedreformationclub@yahoogroups.com, "Chris Coldwell"
                                                              <naphtali@...> wrote:
                                                              >
                                                              > While I have rejected the term in the past, this is sounding more
                                                              and
                                                              > more like a cult.
                                                              > Sincerely,
                                                              > Chris Coldwell
                                                              > Naphtali Press http://www.naphtali.com
                                                              > The Confessional Presbyterian journal http://www.cpjournal.com
                                                              > Member Lakewood Presbyterian Church (PCA), Dallas, Texas
                                                              > --- In covenantedreformationclub@yahoogroups.com, Jerry
                                                              > <ragingcalvinist@> wrote:
                                                              > >
                                                              > > Dee Dee,
                                                              > >
                                                              > > PLEASE, please, tell me you're kidding. Please?
                                                              > >
                                                              > > gmw.
                                                              > >
                                                              > > nocost2great wrote:
                                                              > > >
                                                              > > > --- In covenantedreformationclub@yahoogroups.com
                                                              > > > <mailto:covenantedreformationclub%40yahoogroups.com>, Tony
                                                              > > > <amenendez78@> wrote:
                                                              > > > >
                                                              > > > > What sayest thou of me, dear brother? I was not involved with
                                                              the
                                                              > > > Common
                                                              > > > > Concern paper and I was still excommunicated.
                                                              > > >
                                                              > > > Ah, and neither was I. My 'sin' was to say that I thought the
                                                              > > > questions (in the CI) were good ones, and I wanted to be
                                                              included
                                                              > > > when answers were given. According to the elders, this was
                                                              familiar
                                                              > > > fellowship (though I had not communicated with
                                                              > > > the 'excommunicated'.) I was given less than 24 hours to repent
                                                              of
                                                              > > > my 'sin' - and was served the oath. (The oath that requires one
                                                              to
                                                              > > > vow that they have no questions... when I had already publicly
                                                              > > > expressed that I had questions.)I was even verbally told by one
                                                              of
                                                              > > > the elders that it would not be lying to swear the oath, even
                                                              though
                                                              > > > I had questions! Actually, I think God used the treatment I
                                                              received
                                                              > > > to open my eyes even wider so that I might see.
                                                              > > >
                                                              > > > For His Glory,
                                                              > > >
                                                              > > > Dee Dee
                                                              > > >
                                                              > > >
                                                              > >
                                                              >
                                                            • humbled.learner
                                                              Susan, thank you as well for forgiving me. I have learned a good lesson from this situation and will endeavor to keep my words closely guarded in the future.
                                                              Message 30 of 30 , Apr 1 5:17 AM
                                                              • 0 Attachment
                                                                Susan, thank you as well for forgiving me. I have learned a good
                                                                lesson from this situation and will endeavor to keep my words closely
                                                                guarded in the future. It indeed is a learned skill and will come
                                                                from the practice of less talking and more listening. May the Lord be
                                                                with you, Walt.

                                                                --- In covenantedreformationclub@yahoogroups.com, "Susan Wilkinson"
                                                                <gpyp@...> wrote:
                                                                >
                                                                > I forgive you, Walt. Thank you for clearing the air.
                                                                >
                                                                >
                                                                >
                                                                > Susan
                                                                >
                                                                >
                                                                >
                                                                > _____
                                                                >
                                                                > From: covenantedreformationclub@yahoogroups.com
                                                                > [mailto:covenantedreformationclub@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of
                                                                > humbled.learner
                                                                > Sent: Sunday, March 25, 2007 1:51 PM
                                                                > To: covenantedreformationclub@yahoogroups.com
                                                                > Subject: [Covenanted Reformation] Re: Walt
                                                                >
                                                                >
                                                                >
                                                                > Susan,
                                                                >
                                                                > Thanks for this witness testimony against me as I've heard it very
                                                                > clear and also apologise to you and others who were offended. It
                                                                > was obviously my mistake, and making them so often helps me keep a
                                                                > grip on the weaknesses I have in adequately defending my actions.
                                                                > This has been another good lesson for me to see and confess my sin.
                                                                > I hope you, and others offended, will too forgive me. This will be
                                                                > my final post so not to make these type mistakes again on this forum.
                                                                >
                                                                > I'm flying to another part of Africa early in the morning and then
                                                                > back home to Michigan by Thursday. I will not be able to read your
                                                                > or others comments, but will trust in the Lord that He will soften
                                                                > your and Jerry's heart toward my mistake, and allow you both to
                                                                > forgive me. Lord willing, should I make it back to Michigan as
                                                                > planned, I will see your posts in response to my request.
                                                                >
                                                                > Your brother in Christ,
                                                                > Walt.
                                                                >
                                                                > --- In covenantedreformati
                                                                > <mailto:covenantedreformationclub%40yahoogroups.com>
                                                                onclub@yahoogroups.com,
                                                                > "Susan Wilkinson"
                                                                > <gpyp@> wrote:
                                                                > >
                                                                > > Walt,
                                                                > >
                                                                > >
                                                                > >
                                                                > > I am weary of both your overt and implied accusations against
                                                                > Jerry that
                                                                > > your posts aren't going through. You are not helping your cause in
                                                                > this
                                                                > > because everyone here knows Jerry to be honest, forthright and
                                                                > fair in his
                                                                > > moderation. Please stop falsely accusing him or else bring proof
                                                                > that you
                                                                > > have been wronged by him. If it's true that one or more of your
                                                                > posts
                                                                > > haven't made it through there are a few other logical
                                                                > possibilities as to
                                                                > > why; you might want to consider that before you make assumptions
                                                                > and public
                                                                > > accusations.
                                                                > >
                                                                > >
                                                                > >
                                                                > > Also as far as I'm concerned you've done a fabulous job of
                                                                > demonstrating the
                                                                > > veracity of the point of view of those you seek to refute.
                                                                > >
                                                                > >
                                                                > >
                                                                > > Susan
                                                                > >
                                                                > >
                                                                >
                                                              Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.