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

Secret Society Paper

Expand Messages
  • Walt Bre
    Dear brethren, I know that I promised not to post again on here, and for going back on my promise I m sorry. If you would grant me liberty to post only one
    Message 1 of 16 , Apr 1 5:07 AM
    • 0 Attachment
      Dear brethren,

      I know that I promised not to post again on here, and
      for going back on my promise I'm sorry. If you would
      grant me liberty to post only one document, I wanted
      to attach only part of the "Sins Committed By "The
      Effort" and Steps to Repentance" Issued by the Session
      of the RPNA (GM), March 22, 2007.

      There is also a supporting document called "Effort
      Emails (RPNA--GM)" that I am not including in this
      message to protect the names of those involved. I'm
      sure that people would like to read those supporting
      emails that are the primary reason for the Session
      Paper above, but I would ask you to contact Pastor
      Greg Price at (covpastor@...) if interested in
      the document.

      I saw Whit's comment this morning supporting the ideas
      promoted by Chris and others in the Presbyterian
      movement that not only are we an unfaithful church,
      but that we would border on the edge of the Morman
      Church, the Roman Catholic Ave Maria Worshippers,

      In interesting definition I found will most definitely
      scare away many people from EVER and NEVER consider
      even reading our Terms of Communion, and subsequent
      Session and Presbytery Decisions that our Church has
      issued since around 1996. The definition says:

      "Cults are groups that often exploit members
      psychologically and/or financially, typically by
      making members comply with leadership's demands
      through certain types of psychological manipulation,
      popularly called mind control, and through the
      inculcation of deep-seated anxious dependency on the
      group and its leaders.

      "A cult is a group or movement exhibiting a great or
      excessive devotion or dedication to some person, idea
      or thing and employing unethically manipulative
      techniques of persuasion and control (e.g. isolation
      from former friends and family, debilitation, use of
      special methods to heighten suggestibility and
      subservience, powerful group pressures, information
      management, suspension of individuality or critical
      judgement, promotion of total dependency on the group
      and fear of [consequences of] leaving it, etc)
      designed to advance the goals of the group's leaders
      to the actual or possible detriment of members, their
      families, or the community."

      Based upon the above definition, after our Elders have
      learned about the Secret Society within our own
      Church, I can see how not only those of us who are
      left inside the RPNA (GM), but those especially who
      were members inside the RPNA (GM) as part of this
      Secret Society, will be viewed likewise.

      After I read the documents of this Secret Society, I
      can understand what these guys were trying to do and I
      do not believe they intended to create the problems
      that ultimately led many away from our church (this is
      my own opinion). Surely, some have already admitted
      that they have never felt better since leaving our
      church, but others I'm sure may look back on The
      Effort and the means they used with sorrow.

      As I study these documents, and all the documents that
      make up the basis for nearly 30 excommunications, I am
      firmly convinced now that my brothers and sisters have
      misunderstood the doctrine of true Presbyterian
      jurisdiction and the duties of membership by oath.
      These two primary fundamental roots of the problem
      grew into a massive protest. The protest was:

      1) In the form of a Secret Society led by a few within
      our church who wanted to make a positive impact.

      2) In the form of a Public positive attack (admitted
      by some that a good offence is always better than a
      good defense) against the Elders to damage their
      reputations and destroy all their credibility.

      As I read the comments made by Whit and Chris, and
      others will most likely follow, I can see that as more
      and more people protest against us, for being strict
      Covenanters, the hammer is going to fall on our heads
      in the future. There is no doubt that as more and
      more people see us as a threat to their own
      backslidden Presbyterian churches, and their own
      unfaithful testimony as faithful Covenanters, the
      flame throwers will be forthcoming and likely with a
      vengeance.

      For those who would like to pray for us, please join
      me in the following prayers before the feet of Christ:

      1) That the Lord will enlighten the hearts of those
      who participated in The Effort and reveal to them the
      sin of schism it caused within the RPNA (GM). For
      those who the Session Paper only hardens and causes
      more forthcoming words of vengeance against us and the
      Elders, that the Lord would use those words to be the
      seeds of another Reformation within His Church.

      2) That the Lord would raise up Ministers and Elders
      to study intensely the testimony of the Scottish
      Covenanters and especially the fundamentals of how
      they preached biblical doctrine, discipline, form of
      government and form of worship. That this research
      and study will lead them to compare the Terms of
      Communion preached and practiced by the RPCNA, CLC,
      CRCNA, PCA and all the other Presbyterian
      denominations.

      3) That the Lord will allow the RPNA (GM) to at the
      very least find one more Pastor for Edmonton and one
      more Ruling Elder for Albany so that we may have two
      ordinary locally defined Session courts, and move us
      away from being defined as a cult that has only an
      extraordinary Session court with two Ruling Elders in
      Edmonton and one Pastor in Albany.

      4) That the Lord would reveal to other Ministers and
      Elders the lawfulness and faithfulness, in
      extraordinary and unsettled times, of a phone
      conference to discuss matters of church doctrine,
      discipline, form of worship and form of government.
      That the international phone conference, where two or
      three ordained ministers are gathered, is indeed
      lawful and faithful, and thereby does bring Christ
      into their midst to rule, bind and loose as He has
      promised in His word.

      4) Finally, that the Lord would soon return with His
      vial judgments upon the earth, and that historical
      post millennialism will be taught from the pulpits
      again sending fear of the Lord into each of us
      Covenanters and Presbyterians. The return of his vial
      judgments will indeed bring whole nations to covenant
      together, and cause a major change where those who
      desire to be faithful to His Majesty and Power will be
      loved, rather than labeled cults and openly despised.


      Please forgive my spelling errors and mistakes above,
      but I wanted to close out with my pleas as like anyone
      the more I see the labels coming against those in our
      church I admit it does give me fear. Not so much the
      fear of man, as I know man cannot touch me without the
      approval of God, but more that I will continue to
      stand in the face of fear, and not let my Lord down
      when the whole world begins to follow suit based upon
      the "cult" seeds planted by Rev. C. Matthew McMahon,
      Chris Coldwell and Whit Roberts (he did not say it,
      but implied it). Indeed, these seeds are now firmly
      planted in the minds of many, and likely in the future
      the reporters and media, I suspect it will challenge
      all our members to stay the course.

      As I am now finishing my 36 time reading the bible
      cover-to-cover, I was in the plane flying back from
      Africa and something jumped out at me I've read many
      times before. Nevertheless, it gave me a new meaning.

      "Now the God of patience and consolation grant you to
      be likeminded one toward another according to Christ
      Jesus: That ye may with one mind and one mouth glorify
      God, even the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ.
      Wherefore receive ye one another, as Christ also
      received us to the glory of God." (Rom.15:5-7)

      "For as we have many members in one body, and all
      members have not the same office: So we, being many,
      are one body in Christ, and everyone members one of
      another. Having then gifts differing according to the
      grace that is given to us, whether prophecy, let us
      prophesy according to the proportion of faith; Or
      ministry, let us wait on our ministering: or he that
      teacheth, on teaching; Or he that exhorteth, on
      exhortation: he that giveth, let him do it with
      simplicity; he that ruleth, with diligence; he that
      showeth mercy, with cheerfulness. Let love be without
      dissimulation. Abhor that which is evil; cleave to
      that which is good. Be kindly affectioned one to
      another with brotherly love; in honor preferring one
      another; Not slothful in business; fervent in spirit,
      serving the Lord; Rejoicing in hope; patient in
      tribulation; continuing instant in prayer;
      Distributing to the necessity of saints; given to
      hospitality. Bless them which persecute you: bless,
      and curse not. Rejoice with them that do rejoice, and
      weep with them that weep. Be of the same mind one
      toward another. Mind not high things, but condescend
      to men of low estate. Be not wise in your own
      conceits. Recompense to no man evil for evil.
      Provide things honest in the sight of all men. If it
      be possible, as much as lieth in you, live peaceably
      with all men." (Rom.12:5-18).

      These are some words, as revealed by our Lord to Paul,
      and have given me a special blessing as I prepare for
      the power of words, and the seeds planted in the
      hearts and minds of those who want neither
      reformation, nor want anything to do with God's
      appointed Ministers and Elders in this life.

      May the Lord be with you all,
      Walt.




      ____________________________________________________________________________________
      Need Mail bonding?
      Go to the Yahoo! Mail Q&A for great tips from Yahoo! Answers users.
      http://answers.yahoo.com/dir/?link=list&sid=396546091
    • Julian Gress
      Well said, brother. I have been finishing up the Old Testament recently, and found a great verse, Zephaniah 3:9, For then will I turn to the people a pure
      Message 2 of 16 , Apr 1 11:43 AM
      • 0 Attachment
        Well said, brother.

        I have been finishing up the Old Testament recently, and found a
        great verse, Zephaniah 3:9, "For then will I turn to the people a
        pure language, that they may all call upon the name of the Lord, to
        serve him with one consent." This verse encourages me because in it
        the Lord promises to make his church united in doctrine, worship,
        government, and discipline, such that we may all serve the one Lord
        as one body through one spirit.

        I for one do not understand what some brethren mean they call the
        RPNA (GM) a "cult." I once heard with reference to the "one true
        church syndrome," but this objection has been thoroughly dealt with
        before.

        First, "true" as to the essence of the church, or as to the nature
        or structure of the church, true as being or as to well-being? The
        accusation is entirely out of order unless this detail is included.

        Second, every church under heaven proclaims that it is the one true
        church, by maintaining separation from other churches.

        Third, there is and can only be one true church as to well-being, so
        that there is no absurdity in professing one's own church to be that
        church (for imagine one professing his church not to be the one true
        church, faithful and well-established). Either a church is faithful
        in doctrine, worship, government, discipline, or it is not. If the
        first, then it is obliged to unite with other churches of the same,
        and if it does not do this, it is no longer a faithful church. And
        if the second is true, then it is no true church as to well-being.
        So if there are a number of true churches as to well-being, then
        they will faithfully into one true church. And they will maintain
        separation from ill or diseased churches (I mean unfaithful ones),
        which do not add to the number of healthy churches. Hence there is
        and can be only one true church.

        So if the word "cult," is applied to us as meaning that we profess
        to be the only true church, then the objection has lost its entire
        savor, and is no objection at all, for it points toward no sin in or
        among us.

        Perhaps someone on this forum means something different by it? I
        will gladly hear whatever arguments you have to put forth against us
        being a "cult" and sincerely endeavor to satisfy your questions and
        objections, as I am able.

        On a separate note, I am aware that several faithful members of the
        RPNA (GM) have left this forum because of the condemnation our
        church has received. To avoid all confusion, I merely want to point
        out that I do not see any obligation to leave this forum in order to
        be faithful to the covenanted testimony we as a church hold, and
        this is my reason: in this forum, there is no necessary obligation
        to recognize one opinion or another, because it is granted by the
        nature of this forum that there may be disagreements. Of course, I
        do not intend to have familiar fellowship with any who have been
        excommunicated from the RPNA (GM), or to violate any of my other God-
        given duties. But unless someone points out a reason otherwise,
        something that I have missed, or unless there is a change in
        constitution of this forum that necessitates me to violate my oath
        of membership in the RPNA (GM), I do not see any necessary reason to
        leave.

        Your brother and servant in the Lord,
        Julian R. Gress (RPNA-GM)


        --- In covenantedreformationclub@yahoogroups.com, Walt Bre
        <humbled.learner@...> wrote:
        >
        > Dear brethren,
        >
        > I know that I promised not to post again on here, and
        > for going back on my promise I'm sorry. If you would
        > grant me liberty to post only one document, I wanted
        > to attach only part of the "Sins Committed By "The
        > Effort" and Steps to Repentance" Issued by the Session
        > of the RPNA (GM), March 22, 2007.
        >
        > There is also a supporting document called "Effort
        > Emails (RPNA--GM)" that I am not including in this
        > message to protect the names of those involved. I'm
        > sure that people would like to read those supporting
        > emails that are the primary reason for the Session
        > Paper above, but I would ask you to contact Pastor
        > Greg Price at (covpastor@...) if interested in
        > the document.
        >
        > I saw Whit's comment this morning supporting the ideas
        > promoted by Chris and others in the Presbyterian
        > movement that not only are we an unfaithful church,
        > but that we would border on the edge of the Morman
        > Church, the Roman Catholic Ave Maria Worshippers,
        >
        > In interesting definition I found will most definitely
        > scare away many people from EVER and NEVER consider
        > even reading our Terms of Communion, and subsequent
        > Session and Presbytery Decisions that our Church has
        > issued since around 1996. The definition says:
        >
        > "Cults are groups that often exploit members
        > psychologically and/or financially, typically by
        > making members comply with leadership's demands
        > through certain types of psychological manipulation,
        > popularly called mind control, and through the
        > inculcation of deep-seated anxious dependency on the
        > group and its leaders.
        >
        > "A cult is a group or movement exhibiting a great or
        > excessive devotion or dedication to some person, idea
        > or thing and employing unethically manipulative
        > techniques of persuasion and control (e.g. isolation
        > from former friends and family, debilitation, use of
        > special methods to heighten suggestibility and
        > subservience, powerful group pressures, information
        > management, suspension of individuality or critical
        > judgement, promotion of total dependency on the group
        > and fear of [consequences of] leaving it, etc)
        > designed to advance the goals of the group's leaders
        > to the actual or possible detriment of members, their
        > families, or the community."
        >
        > Based upon the above definition, after our Elders have
        > learned about the Secret Society within our own
        > Church, I can see how not only those of us who are
        > left inside the RPNA (GM), but those especially who
        > were members inside the RPNA (GM) as part of this
        > Secret Society, will be viewed likewise.
        >
        > After I read the documents of this Secret Society, I
        > can understand what these guys were trying to do and I
        > do not believe they intended to create the problems
        > that ultimately led many away from our church (this is
        > my own opinion). Surely, some have already admitted
        > that they have never felt better since leaving our
        > church, but others I'm sure may look back on The
        > Effort and the means they used with sorrow.
        >
        > As I study these documents, and all the documents that
        > make up the basis for nearly 30 excommunications, I am
        > firmly convinced now that my brothers and sisters have
        > misunderstood the doctrine of true Presbyterian
        > jurisdiction and the duties of membership by oath.
        > These two primary fundamental roots of the problem
        > grew into a massive protest. The protest was:
        >
        > 1) In the form of a Secret Society led by a few within
        > our church who wanted to make a positive impact.
        >
        > 2) In the form of a Public positive attack (admitted
        > by some that a good offence is always better than a
        > good defense) against the Elders to damage their
        > reputations and destroy all their credibility.
        >
        > As I read the comments made by Whit and Chris, and
        > others will most likely follow, I can see that as more
        > and more people protest against us, for being strict
        > Covenanters, the hammer is going to fall on our heads
        > in the future. There is no doubt that as more and
        > more people see us as a threat to their own
        > backslidden Presbyterian churches, and their own
        > unfaithful testimony as faithful Covenanters, the
        > flame throwers will be forthcoming and likely with a
        > vengeance.
        >
        > For those who would like to pray for us, please join
        > me in the following prayers before the feet of Christ:
        >
        > 1) That the Lord will enlighten the hearts of those
        > who participated in The Effort and reveal to them the
        > sin of schism it caused within the RPNA (GM). For
        > those who the Session Paper only hardens and causes
        > more forthcoming words of vengeance against us and the
        > Elders, that the Lord would use those words to be the
        > seeds of another Reformation within His Church.
        >
        > 2) That the Lord would raise up Ministers and Elders
        > to study intensely the testimony of the Scottish
        > Covenanters and especially the fundamentals of how
        > they preached biblical doctrine, discipline, form of
        > government and form of worship. That this research
        > and study will lead them to compare the Terms of
        > Communion preached and practiced by the RPCNA, CLC,
        > CRCNA, PCA and all the other Presbyterian
        > denominations.
        >
        > 3) That the Lord will allow the RPNA (GM) to at the
        > very least find one more Pastor for Edmonton and one
        > more Ruling Elder for Albany so that we may have two
        > ordinary locally defined Session courts, and move us
        > away from being defined as a cult that has only an
        > extraordinary Session court with two Ruling Elders in
        > Edmonton and one Pastor in Albany.
        >
        > 4) That the Lord would reveal to other Ministers and
        > Elders the lawfulness and faithfulness, in
        > extraordinary and unsettled times, of a phone
        > conference to discuss matters of church doctrine,
        > discipline, form of worship and form of government.
        > That the international phone conference, where two or
        > three ordained ministers are gathered, is indeed
        > lawful and faithful, and thereby does bring Christ
        > into their midst to rule, bind and loose as He has
        > promised in His word.
        >
        > 4) Finally, that the Lord would soon return with His
        > vial judgments upon the earth, and that historical
        > post millennialism will be taught from the pulpits
        > again sending fear of the Lord into each of us
        > Covenanters and Presbyterians. The return of his vial
        > judgments will indeed bring whole nations to covenant
        > together, and cause a major change where those who
        > desire to be faithful to His Majesty and Power will be
        > loved, rather than labeled cults and openly despised.
        >
        >
        > Please forgive my spelling errors and mistakes above,
        > but I wanted to close out with my pleas as like anyone
        > the more I see the labels coming against those in our
        > church I admit it does give me fear. Not so much the
        > fear of man, as I know man cannot touch me without the
        > approval of God, but more that I will continue to
        > stand in the face of fear, and not let my Lord down
        > when the whole world begins to follow suit based upon
        > the "cult" seeds planted by Rev. C. Matthew McMahon,
        > Chris Coldwell and Whit Roberts (he did not say it,
        > but implied it). Indeed, these seeds are now firmly
        > planted in the minds of many, and likely in the future
        > the reporters and media, I suspect it will challenge
        > all our members to stay the course.
        >
        > As I am now finishing my 36 time reading the bible
        > cover-to-cover, I was in the plane flying back from
        > Africa and something jumped out at me I've read many
        > times before. Nevertheless, it gave me a new meaning.
        >
        > "Now the God of patience and consolation grant you to
        > be likeminded one toward another according to Christ
        > Jesus: That ye may with one mind and one mouth glorify
        > God, even the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ.
        > Wherefore receive ye one another, as Christ also
        > received us to the glory of God." (Rom.15:5-7)
        >
        > "For as we have many members in one body, and all
        > members have not the same office: So we, being many,
        > are one body in Christ, and everyone members one of
        > another. Having then gifts differing according to the
        > grace that is given to us, whether prophecy, let us
        > prophesy according to the proportion of faith; Or
        > ministry, let us wait on our ministering: or he that
        > teacheth, on teaching; Or he that exhorteth, on
        > exhortation: he that giveth, let him do it with
        > simplicity; he that ruleth, with diligence; he that
        > showeth mercy, with cheerfulness. Let love be without
        > dissimulation. Abhor that which is evil; cleave to
        > that which is good. Be kindly affectioned one to
        > another with brotherly love; in honor preferring one
        > another; Not slothful in business; fervent in spirit,
        > serving the Lord; Rejoicing in hope; patient in
        > tribulation; continuing instant in prayer;
        > Distributing to the necessity of saints; given to
        > hospitality. Bless them which persecute you: bless,
        > and curse not. Rejoice with them that do rejoice, and
        > weep with them that weep. Be of the same mind one
        > toward another. Mind not high things, but condescend
        > to men of low estate. Be not wise in your own
        > conceits. Recompense to no man evil for evil.
        > Provide things honest in the sight of all men. If it
        > be possible, as much as lieth in you, live peaceably
        > with all men." (Rom.12:5-18).
        >
        > These are some words, as revealed by our Lord to Paul,
        > and have given me a special blessing as I prepare for
        > the power of words, and the seeds planted in the
        > hearts and minds of those who want neither
        > reformation, nor want anything to do with God's
        > appointed Ministers and Elders in this life.
        >
        > May the Lord be with you all,
        > Walt.
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        _____________________________________________________________________
        _______________
        > Need Mail bonding?
        > Go to the Yahoo! Mail Q&A for great tips from Yahoo! Answers users.
        > http://answers.yahoo.com/dir/?link=list&sid=396546091
        >
      • okidokismokijo
        Thanks for this Walt. It ll be nice to know what steps of repentance the elders now require of us. It is odd that they have neglected to send this document to
        Message 3 of 16 , Apr 1 12:33 PM
        • 0 Attachment
          Thanks for this Walt. It'll be nice to know what steps of repentance
          the elders now require of us. It is odd that they have neglected to
          send this document to those accused in it.

          -Tammy Anderson
          excom'd Albany NY




          --- In covenantedreformationclub@yahoogroups.com, Walt Bre
          <humbled.learner@...> wrote:
          >
          > Dear brethren,
          >
          > I know that I promised not to post again on here, and
          > for going back on my promise I'm sorry. If you would
          > grant me liberty to post only one document, I wanted
          > to attach only part of the "Sins Committed By "The
          > Effort" and Steps to Repentance" Issued by the Session
          > of the RPNA (GM), March 22, 2007.
          >
          > There is also a supporting document called "Effort
          > Emails (RPNA--GM)" that I am not including in this
          > message to protect the names of those involved. I'm
          > sure that people would like to read those supporting
          > emails that are the primary reason for the Session
          > Paper above, but I would ask you to contact Pastor
          > Greg Price at (covpastor@...) if interested in
          > the document.
          >
          > I saw Whit's comment this morning supporting the ideas
          > promoted by Chris and others in the Presbyterian
          > movement that not only are we an unfaithful church,
          > but that we would border on the edge of the Morman
          > Church, the Roman Catholic Ave Maria Worshippers,
          >
          > In interesting definition I found will most definitely
          > scare away many people from EVER and NEVER consider
          > even reading our Terms of Communion, and subsequent
          > Session and Presbytery Decisions that our Church has
          > issued since around 1996. The definition says:
          >
          > "Cults are groups that often exploit members
          > psychologically and/or financially, typically by
          > making members comply with leadership's demands
          > through certain types of psychological manipulation,
          > popularly called mind control, and through the
          > inculcation of deep-seated anxious dependency on the
          > group and its leaders.
          >
          > "A cult is a group or movement exhibiting a great or
          > excessive devotion or dedication to some person, idea
          > or thing and employing unethically manipulative
          > techniques of persuasion and control (e.g. isolation
          > from former friends and family, debilitation, use of
          > special methods to heighten suggestibility and
          > subservience, powerful group pressures, information
          > management, suspension of individuality or critical
          > judgement, promotion of total dependency on the group
          > and fear of [consequences of] leaving it, etc)
          > designed to advance the goals of the group's leaders
          > to the actual or possible detriment of members, their
          > families, or the community."
          >
          > Based upon the above definition, after our Elders have
          > learned about the Secret Society within our own
          > Church, I can see how not only those of us who are
          > left inside the RPNA (GM), but those especially who
          > were members inside the RPNA (GM) as part of this
          > Secret Society, will be viewed likewise.
          >
          > After I read the documents of this Secret Society, I
          > can understand what these guys were trying to do and I
          > do not believe they intended to create the problems
          > that ultimately led many away from our church (this is
          > my own opinion). Surely, some have already admitted
          > that they have never felt better since leaving our
          > church, but others I'm sure may look back on The
          > Effort and the means they used with sorrow.
          >
          > As I study these documents, and all the documents that
          > make up the basis for nearly 30 excommunications, I am
          > firmly convinced now that my brothers and sisters have
          > misunderstood the doctrine of true Presbyterian
          > jurisdiction and the duties of membership by oath.
          > These two primary fundamental roots of the problem
          > grew into a massive protest. The protest was:
          >
          > 1) In the form of a Secret Society led by a few within
          > our church who wanted to make a positive impact.
          >
          > 2) In the form of a Public positive attack (admitted
          > by some that a good offence is always better than a
          > good defense) against the Elders to damage their
          > reputations and destroy all their credibility.
          >
          > As I read the comments made by Whit and Chris, and
          > others will most likely follow, I can see that as more
          > and more people protest against us, for being strict
          > Covenanters, the hammer is going to fall on our heads
          > in the future. There is no doubt that as more and
          > more people see us as a threat to their own
          > backslidden Presbyterian churches, and their own
          > unfaithful testimony as faithful Covenanters, the
          > flame throwers will be forthcoming and likely with a
          > vengeance.
          >
          > For those who would like to pray for us, please join
          > me in the following prayers before the feet of Christ:
          >
          > 1) That the Lord will enlighten the hearts of those
          > who participated in The Effort and reveal to them the
          > sin of schism it caused within the RPNA (GM). For
          > those who the Session Paper only hardens and causes
          > more forthcoming words of vengeance against us and the
          > Elders, that the Lord would use those words to be the
          > seeds of another Reformation within His Church.
          >
          > 2) That the Lord would raise up Ministers and Elders
          > to study intensely the testimony of the Scottish
          > Covenanters and especially the fundamentals of how
          > they preached biblical doctrine, discipline, form of
          > government and form of worship. That this research
          > and study will lead them to compare the Terms of
          > Communion preached and practiced by the RPCNA, CLC,
          > CRCNA, PCA and all the other Presbyterian
          > denominations.
          >
          > 3) That the Lord will allow the RPNA (GM) to at the
          > very least find one more Pastor for Edmonton and one
          > more Ruling Elder for Albany so that we may have two
          > ordinary locally defined Session courts, and move us
          > away from being defined as a cult that has only an
          > extraordinary Session court with two Ruling Elders in
          > Edmonton and one Pastor in Albany.
          >
          > 4) That the Lord would reveal to other Ministers and
          > Elders the lawfulness and faithfulness, in
          > extraordinary and unsettled times, of a phone
          > conference to discuss matters of church doctrine,
          > discipline, form of worship and form of government.
          > That the international phone conference, where two or
          > three ordained ministers are gathered, is indeed
          > lawful and faithful, and thereby does bring Christ
          > into their midst to rule, bind and loose as He has
          > promised in His word.
          >
          > 4) Finally, that the Lord would soon return with His
          > vial judgments upon the earth, and that historical
          > post millennialism will be taught from the pulpits
          > again sending fear of the Lord into each of us
          > Covenanters and Presbyterians. The return of his vial
          > judgments will indeed bring whole nations to covenant
          > together, and cause a major change where those who
          > desire to be faithful to His Majesty and Power will be
          > loved, rather than labeled cults and openly despised.
          >
          >
          > Please forgive my spelling errors and mistakes above,
          > but I wanted to close out with my pleas as like anyone
          > the more I see the labels coming against those in our
          > church I admit it does give me fear. Not so much the
          > fear of man, as I know man cannot touch me without the
          > approval of God, but more that I will continue to
          > stand in the face of fear, and not let my Lord down
          > when the whole world begins to follow suit based upon
          > the "cult" seeds planted by Rev. C. Matthew McMahon,
          > Chris Coldwell and Whit Roberts (he did not say it,
          > but implied it). Indeed, these seeds are now firmly
          > planted in the minds of many, and likely in the future
          > the reporters and media, I suspect it will challenge
          > all our members to stay the course.
          >
          > As I am now finishing my 36 time reading the bible
          > cover-to-cover, I was in the plane flying back from
          > Africa and something jumped out at me I've read many
          > times before. Nevertheless, it gave me a new meaning.
          >
          > "Now the God of patience and consolation grant you to
          > be likeminded one toward another according to Christ
          > Jesus: That ye may with one mind and one mouth glorify
          > God, even the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ.
          > Wherefore receive ye one another, as Christ also
          > received us to the glory of God." (Rom.15:5-7)
          >
          > "For as we have many members in one body, and all
          > members have not the same office: So we, being many,
          > are one body in Christ, and everyone members one of
          > another. Having then gifts differing according to the
          > grace that is given to us, whether prophecy, let us
          > prophesy according to the proportion of faith; Or
          > ministry, let us wait on our ministering: or he that
          > teacheth, on teaching; Or he that exhorteth, on
          > exhortation: he that giveth, let him do it with
          > simplicity; he that ruleth, with diligence; he that
          > showeth mercy, with cheerfulness. Let love be without
          > dissimulation. Abhor that which is evil; cleave to
          > that which is good. Be kindly affectioned one to
          > another with brotherly love; in honor preferring one
          > another; Not slothful in business; fervent in spirit,
          > serving the Lord; Rejoicing in hope; patient in
          > tribulation; continuing instant in prayer;
          > Distributing to the necessity of saints; given to
          > hospitality. Bless them which persecute you: bless,
          > and curse not. Rejoice with them that do rejoice, and
          > weep with them that weep. Be of the same mind one
          > toward another. Mind not high things, but condescend
          > to men of low estate. Be not wise in your own
          > conceits. Recompense to no man evil for evil.
          > Provide things honest in the sight of all men. If it
          > be possible, as much as lieth in you, live peaceably
          > with all men." (Rom.12:5-18).
          >
          > These are some words, as revealed by our Lord to Paul,
          > and have given me a special blessing as I prepare for
          > the power of words, and the seeds planted in the
          > hearts and minds of those who want neither
          > reformation, nor want anything to do with God's
          > appointed Ministers and Elders in this life.
          >
          > May the Lord be with you all,
          > Walt.
          >
          >
          >
          >
          >
          ______________________________________________________________________
          ______________
          > Need Mail bonding?
          > Go to the Yahoo! Mail Q&A for great tips from Yahoo! Answers users.
          > http://answers.yahoo.com/dir/?link=list&sid=396546091
          >
        • bob_suden
          ... Well, at least you are doing better than the elders who broke their promise with the PPSA. And from which same broken promise, all others have flowed. The
          Message 4 of 16 , Apr 1 12:51 PM
          • 0 Attachment
            --- In covenantedreformationclub@yahoogroups.com, Walt Bre <humbled.learner@...> wrote:
            >
            > Dear brethren,
            >
            > I know that I promised not to post again on here, and
            > for going back on my promise I'm sorry.

            Well, at least you are doing better than the elders who broke their promise with the PPSA.
            And from which same broken promise, all others have flowed.
            The buck stops at the top. God holds superiors more accountable than inferiors, particularly when the sins and shortcomings of superiors have provoked or encouraged inferiors to sin or error -  if that is what the Effort was - in answer to the PPSA and its schismatical and erroneous doctrine.

            > I saw Whit's comment this morning supporting the ideas
            > promoted by Chris and others in the Presbyterian
            > movement that not only are we an unfaithful church,
            > but that we would border on the edge of the Morman
            > Church, the Roman Catholic Ave Maria Worshippers,
            >
            > In interesting definition I found will most definitely
            > scare away many people from EVER and NEVER consider
            > even reading our Terms of Communion, and subsequent
            > Session and Presbytery Decisions that our Church has
            > issued since around 1996. 

            While I would agree, that from what I know a cult is a group that denies fundamental Christian truths, such as those in the ecumenical creeds, ie. the Trinity (Mormons) or the deity of Christ (JW's), what will really drive people away from examining the historic RP Terms of Communion, is those who insist that Terms of Membership of the RPNA(GM) are the same thing as those historic terms, if not that the PPSA and the Tattoo paper are also agreeable to the same.

            The definition says:
            >
            > "Cults are groups that often exploit members
            > psychologically and/or financially, typically by
            > making members comply with leadership's demands
            > through certain types of psychological manipulation,
            > popularly called mind control, and through the
            > inculcation of deep-seated anxious dependency on the
            > group and its leaders. . . .
            >
            > Based upon the above definition, after our Elders have
            > learned about the Secret Society within our own
            > Church, I can see how not only those of us who are
            > left inside the RPNA (GM), but those especially who
            > were members inside the RPNA (GM) as part of this
            > Secret Society, will be viewed likewise.

            No, whatever one may say or however they misconstrue things, I don't think that those of us who have been excommunicated will be considered members of a cult because some of us also happened to be a part of the Effort meeting.
            In other words, you are on your own here Walter, as a member in good standing in the RPNA(GM) and trying to share the burden or pass it on won't fly. (Nice try though.)

            >
            > After I read the documents of this Secret Society, I
            > can understand what these guys were trying to do and I
            > do not believe they intended to create the problems
            > that ultimately led many away from our church (this is
            > my own opinion).  Surely, some have already admitted
            > that they have never felt better since leaving our
            > church, but others I'm sure may look back on The
            > Effort and the means they used with sorrow.

            No, we look at the PPSA and the events that led up to and accompanied it with sorrow, much more those like yourself, who still can't see the issues and will be sidetracked by the sins of the Effort –  if they are that  –  all the while the deafening silence regarding the sins of the PPSA which provoked all this and the necessary steps to repentance are ignored.
            Granted, ordinarily something like the Effort meeting is uncalled for, disorderly  and divisive. I would be the first to say so and have, but in the total context of the backsliding, broken promises, obstinacy, unfaithfulness, negligence  and runaround one has gotten from the elders as an individual and as a society, the alternative is what? Submit to anything and everything the "Session" may care to impose upon one's conscience. I respectfully think not. That is popery, not presbyterianism.

            >
            > As I study these documents, and all the documents that
            > make up the basis for nearly 30 excommunications, I am
            > firmly convinced now that my brothers and sisters have
            > misunderstood the doctrine of true Presbyterian
            > jurisdiction and the duties of membership by oath.
            > These two primary fundamental roots of the problem
            > grew into a massive protest.  The protest was:

            No, the protest was and still remains to be against the PPSA, which sins against Scripture, history and reason. NO PPSA - NO study group. It is that simple and always will be.
            >
            > 1) In the form of a Secret Society led by a few within
            > our church who wanted to make a positive impact.
            >
            > 2) In the form of a Public positive attack (admitted
            > by some that a good offence is always better than a
            > good defense) against the Elders to damage their
            > reputations and destroy all their credibility.

            As I was the one that made this comment that you have replied to previously and have taken out of context both times, after the elders have attacked Scripture, history, reason  and my conscience with the PPSA and the tattoo paper, faithfulness to the Lord Jesus Christ does not require abject and supine passivity to their sinful broken promises, official public statements and tyrannical oaths.
            After all, you forget, the Session of the PRCE early on refused to acknowledge the existence or constitution of a presbytery when they dissassociated with First Pres. of Dallas and the rest of the churches and officers in that endeavor and declined the authority of the presbytery. For better or worse and ironically enough, this is nothing more in principle than a replay of that, which makes it that much more odd IMO that the elders object.
            IF the Session is lawfully constituted, IF the PPSA is correct, IF the oaths are lawful, then to refuse one or all three is sinful. But that is precisely what has yet to be determined and the elders have not done a very good job -  if at all  - of establishing and defending their position.  And to fulfill their promise - if that is what it is - to restructure the church by excommunicating approx. 30 out of 90 to bring things down to a more manageable level that the electronically reincarnated Session of the PRCE can handle is not quite kosher. (While maybe not the intention, for all practical purposes that is what happened and what the "Session" is, a reincarnation of the PRCE's session. That is the only way for example, the "Sins of the Effort" paper can say the ''court' has been in existence ten [continuous?] years,' is it not?)

            >
            > As I read the comments made by Whit and Chris, and
            > others will most likely follow, I can see that as more
            > and more people protest against us, for being strict
            > Covenanters, the hammer is going to fall on our heads
            > in the future.  There is no doubt that as more and
            > more people see us as a threat to their own
            > backslidden Presbyterian churches, and their own
            > unfaithful testimony as faithful Covenanters, the
            > flame throwers will be forthcoming and likely with a
            > vengeance.

            But it could never be that the "Session of" or the "RPNA(GM)" itself is backslidden and has an unfaithful testimony as professing Covenanters? Please, we know the Roman Church is infallible and has never and will never sin, but we are inclined to say to the PPSA and all affirmers of it, heal thyself. Then you might have an audience with all the rest of those unfaithful Presbyterian churches or even the disaffected brethren.
            >
            > For those who would like to pray for us, please join
            > me in the following prayers before the feet of Christ:
            >
            > 1) That the Lord will enlighten the hearts of those
            > who participated in The Effort and reveal to them the
            > sin of schism it caused within the RPNA (GM).  For
            > those who the Session Paper only hardens and causes
            > more forthcoming words of vengeance against us and the
            > Elders, that the Lord would use those words to be the
            > seeds of another Reformation within His Church.

            Again, the PPSA is a schismatical departure from Scripture, history and reason. If there was no PPSA, there would have been no extraordinary "schismatical" study group.

            >
            > 4) That the Lord would reveal to other Ministers and
            > Elders the lawfulness and faithfulness, in
            > extraordinary and unsettled times, of a phone
            > conference to discuss matters of church doctrine,
            > discipline, form of worship and form of government.
            > That the international phone conference, where two or
            > three ordained ministers are gathered, is indeed
            > lawful and faithful, and thereby does bring Christ
            > into their midst to rule, bind and loose as He has
            > promised in His word.

            Then maybe he could start first with those responsible for the PPSA who insist not just on a phone conferences, as if anybody objects, but actually constituting an official court of Christ in this fashion, contra the historical understanding of Matt. 18:20 . They also ignore/deny the apostolic practice in Acts 15 to accompany the technology of the day – a written letter – with the personal presence of the apostles and elders in delivering the synodical decree. Or is it that those who nominally claim to be just a session, can lawfully set aside the requirements for synodical decrees even as they usurp those synodical powers? Is this what you mean, when you refer to "t
            he doctrine of true Presbyterian jurisdiction?" Rather, how about substituting tyrannical?


            Ephesians 6:4  And, ye fathers, provoke not your children to wrath: but bring them up in the nurture and admonition of the Lord.

            Luke 12:48  But he that knew not, and did commit things worthy of stripes, shall be beaten with few stripes. For unto whomsoever much is given, of him shall be much required: and to whom men have committed much, of him they will ask the more.

            Isaiah 58:1 Cry aloud, spare not, lift up thy voice like a trumpet, and shew my people their transgression, and the house of Jacob their sins.

            cordially in Christ
            B

          • Gus Gianello
            Mr. Gress, Cult is applied to your church because of its cultish approach to widows, and any who disagree with it. What ever happened to the right of
            Message 5 of 16 , Apr 1 4:38 PM
            • 0 Attachment
              
              Mr. Gress,
               
              Cult is applied to your church because of its "cultish" approach to widows, and any who disagree with it.  What ever happened to the right of private judgement?
               
              And I assert that, the verse you quote, you only quote for your purposes and thereby mangle the true intent of the verse.  Correct me if I am wrong in any of my assertions.
               
              The word used for "consent" is

              shekem.

              Keil & Delitzch have this to say concerning this passage---


              Consequently

              הפך אל must be explained according to 1Sa_10:9
              , since the circumstance that we have הפך ל in this passage does not make any material difference in the meaning. The construction in both passages is a pregnant one. God turns to the nations a pure lip, by purifying their sinful lips, i.e., He converts them, that they may be able to call upon Him with pure lips. Lip does not stand for language, but is mentioned as the organ of speech, by which a man expresses the thoughts of his heart, so that purity of the lips involves or presupposes the purification of the heart. The lips are defiled by the names of the idols whom they have invoked (cf. Hos_2:19
              ; Psa_16:4
              ). The fruit of the purification is this, that henceforth they call upon the name of Jehovah, and serve Him. קרא בשׁם יי, when used of men, always signifies to call solemnly or heartily upon the name of Jehovah. To serve shekhem 'echâd
              , with one shoulder, is to serve together or with unanimity. The metaphor is taken from bearers who carry a burden with even shoulders; cf. Jer_32:39.


              Jeremiah 32: 39 says

              39

              And I will give them one heart and one way, that they may fear Me forever, for their good and for the good of their sons after them.

              As an associated citation so that we may better understand the metaphoric use of the word.

               

              You seem to have mislaid any comments about the voluntary nature of the Church.  The church is a voluntary society of like-believing people, who organize together ostensibly to present Christ to the world.  A "cultish" church tries to compel.  Roman catholicism is a cult of implicit faith in the Pope as infallible (ex cathedra), representative of the magisterium.  MANY ostensibly Protestant churches are cults of implicit faith in either the leaders, in science, etc.  Therefore they feel justified in compelling or coercing association by threats and ostensibly judicial actions.

              ONLY in Scripture can we have implicit faith.  In all the back-and-forth that I have seen nobody has asked the obvious  question:

              What evidence of obduracy deserving being cast into the outer darkness and being declared an apostate is given as reason for excommunicating people?  Were they fornicators?  Were they adulterers?  It is very strange indeed that all this overblown hyperbole and swelling words of  dependence on "Presbyterian polity" NEVER quotes the example of the apostle Paul who in letter after letter after letter, shows that he deals with obstinancy in this extreme manner ONLY after every other recourse has failed and only when there is clear evidence and legitimate proceedure to compel excommunication.  Christian love DICTATES that we be compelled to excommunicate by evidence unsullied, trial unmarred, appeals unheeded, and when circumstance and incidentals deny the possibility for remedy; and always for the salvation of the erring parties and for their ultimate reconciliation.  I see NOTHING in the NT that says "excommunicate the moment somebody disagrees, refuses to take an oath or has a problem with what you are doing."   THAT is worthy of a cult.  And a cult YOU ARE, and a cultist you yourself are, if you can justify these extremes.

              Where is the proof of their heresy?

              Where is the proof of their blasphemy?

              Where is the proof of their scandalous sin, deserving of immediate excommunication, without process?  What they were doing was it equal or surpassing in rebellion to God, that they need to be treated as partners in incest? (1 Cor. 5)

              Why did not your elders do what the wise apostle did when he disagreed with Barnabas? Separate, go their separate ways, without recrimination or censure?  Are you now telling me that "Covenanter" Reformed Presbyterian principles mean that if I become convinced the pastor/elder/session is wrong then I must repent or be excommunicated?  Is that my ONLY choice.  Can we not go our separate ways? THAT is a cult.

              When an acquaintance of mine became a member of an OPC church I thought it a bad idea.  Because he was not convinced of infant baptism. (And it also indicated how orthodox the OPC church was that they would allow such a person to become a member)  When after struggling with it over a year he decided that he COULD NOT be convinced and wanted to leave the church, the pastor told him he would be excommunicated.  See, we dont succor wounded sheep---we slaughter them.  When an elder friend contacted me asking my opinion of this course of action, I told him it was outrageous and worthy of a cult.  That ONLY cults excommunicate people who sincerely cannot agree with them.  Thank God that the elder listened, and allowed him to leave in peace.  I know ALL about cultic excommunication.  When I was a Charismatic and a member of a Faith Movement church, I WAS excommunicated.

              Excommunication as Jay E. Adams warns should be used reluctantly, and any time a "church(?)" rushes to it, as it seems there is evidence that your "church" has done---correct me if I am wrong, that church, those members and those elders are to be viewed with suspicion.  Any one who says "you fool" (Mat 5) quickly and not reluctantly, being not dragged to the situation, and having not constantly and repeatedly appealed, exhorted, admonished, cried over the impenitent, deserves to be called a cultist.  And that church deserves to be called a CULT.

              Respectfully,

              Gus Gianello

              -----Original Message-----
              From: covenantedreformationclub@yahoogroups.com [mailto:covenantedreformationclub@yahoogroups.com]On Behalf Of Julian Gress
              Sent: Sunday, April 01, 2007 2:43 PM
              To: covenantedreformationclub@yahoogroups.com
              Subject: [Covenanted Reformation] Re: Secret Society Paper

              Well said, brother.

              I have been finishing up the Old Testament recently, and found a
              great verse, Zephaniah 3:9, "For then will I turn to the people a
              pure language, that they may all call upon the name of the Lord, to
              serve him with one consent." This verse encourages me because in it
              the Lord promises to make his church united in doctrine, worship,
              government, and discipline, such that we may all serve the one Lord
              as one body through one spirit.

              I for one do not understand what some brethren mean they call the
              RPNA (GM) a "cult." I once heard with reference to the "one true
              church syndrome," but this objection has been thoroughly dealt with
              before.

              First, "true" as to the essence of the church, or as to the nature
              or structure of the church, true as being or as to well-being? The
              accusation is entirely out of order unless this detail is included.

              Second, every church under heaven proclaims that it is the one true
              church, by maintaining separation from other churches.

              Third, there is and can only be one true church as to well-being, so
              that there is no absurdity in professing one's own church to be that
              church (for imagine one professing his church not to be the one true
              church, faithful and well-established) . Either a church is faithful
              in doctrine, worship, government, discipline, or it is not. If the
              first, then it is obliged to unite with other churches of the same,
              and if it does not do this, it is no longer a faithful church. And
              if the second is true, then it is no true church as to well-being.
              So if there are a number of true churches as to well-being, then
              they will faithfully into one true church. And they will maintain
              separation from ill or diseased churches (I mean unfaithful ones),
              which do not add to the number of healthy churches. Hence there is
              and can be only one true church.

              So if the word "cult," is applied to us as meaning that we profess
              to be the only true church, then the objection has lost its entire
              savor, and is no objection at all, for it points toward no sin in or
              among us.

              Perhaps someone on this forum means something different by it? I
              will gladly hear whatever arguments you have to put forth against us
              being a "cult" and sincerely endeavor to satisfy your questions and
              objections, as I am able.

              On a separate note, I am aware that several faithful members of the
              RPNA (GM) have left this forum because of the condemnation our
              church has received. To avoid all confusion, I merely want to point
              out that I do not see any obligation to leave this forum in order to
              be faithful to the covenanted testimony we as a church hold, and
              this is my reason: in this forum, there is no necessary obligation
              to recognize one opinion or another, because it is granted by the
              nature of this forum that there may be disagreements. Of course, I
              do not intend to have familiar fellowship with any who have been
              excommunicated from the RPNA (GM), or to violate any of my other God-
              given duties. But unless someone points out a reason otherwise,
              something that I have missed, or unless there is a change in
              constitution of this forum that necessitates me to violate my oath
              of membership in the RPNA (GM), I do not see any necessary reason to
              leave.

              Your brother and servant in the Lord,
              Julian R. Gress (RPNA-GM)

              --- In covenantedreformati onclub@yahoogrou ps.com, Walt Bre
              <humbled.learner@ ...> wrote:
              >
              > Dear brethren,
              >
              > I know that I promised not to post again on here, and
              > for going back on my promise I'm sorry. If you would
              > grant me liberty to post only one document, I wanted
              > to attach only part of the "Sins Committed By "The
              > Effort" and Steps to Repentance" Issued by the Session
              > of the RPNA (GM), March 22, 2007.
              >
              > There is also a supporting document called "Effort
              > Emails (RPNA--GM)" that I am not including in this
              > message to protect the names of those involved. I'm
              > sure that people would like to read those supporting
              > emails that are the primary reason for the Session
              > Paper above, but I would ask you to contact Pastor
              > Greg Price at (covpastor@. ..) if interested in
              > the document.
              >
              > I saw Whit's comment this morning supporting the ideas
              > promoted by Chris and others in the Presbyterian
              > movement that not only are we an unfaithful church,
              > but that we would border on the edge of the Morman
              > Church, the Roman Catholic Ave Maria Worshippers,
              >
              > In interesting definition I found will most definitely
              > scare away many people from EVER and NEVER consider
              > even reading our Terms of Communion, and subsequent
              > Session and Presbytery Decisions that our Church has
              > issued since around 1996. The definition says:
              >
              > "Cults are groups that often exploit members
              > psychologically and/or financially, typically by
              > making members comply with leadership's demands
              > through certain types of psychological manipulation,
              > popularly called mind control, and through the
              > inculcation of deep-seated anxious dependency on the
              > group and its leaders.
              >
              > "A cult is a group or movement exhibiting a great or
              > excessive devotion or dedication to some person, idea
              > or thing and employing unethically manipulative
              > techniques of persuasion and control (e.g. isolation
              > from former friends and family, debilitation, use of
              > special methods to heighten suggestibility and
              > subservience, powerful group pressures, information
              > management, suspension of individuality or critical
              > judgement, promotion of total dependency on the group
              > and fear of [consequences of] leaving it, etc)
              > designed to advance the goals of the group's leaders
              > to the actual or possible detriment of members, their
              > families, or the community."
              >
              > Based upon the above definition, after our Elders have
              > learned about the Secret Society within our own
              > Church, I can see how not only those of us who are
              > left inside the RPNA (GM), but those especially who
              > were members inside the RPNA (GM) as part of this
              > Secret Society, will be viewed likewise.
              >
              > After I read the documents of this Secret Society, I
              > can understand what these guys were trying to do and I
              > do not believe they intended to create the problems
              > that ultimately led many away from our church (this is
              > my own opinion). Surely, some have already admitted
              > that they have never felt better since leaving our
              > church, but others I'm sure may look back on The
              > Effort and the means they used with sorrow.
              >
              > As I study these documents, and all the documents that
              > make up the basis for nearly 30 excommunications, I am
              > firmly convinced now that my brothers and sisters have
              > misunderstood the doctrine of true Presbyterian
              > jurisdiction and the duties of membership by oath.
              > These two primary fundamental roots of the problem
              > grew into a massive protest. The protest was:
              >
              > 1) In the form of a Secret Society led by a few within
              > our church who wanted to make a positive impact.
              >
              > 2) In the form of a Public positive attack (admitted
              > by some that a good offence is always better than a
              > good defense) against the Elders to damage their
              > reputations and destroy all their credibility.
              >
              > As I read the comments made by Whit and Chris, and
              > others will most likely follow, I can see that as more
              > and more people protest against us, for being strict
              > Covenanters, the hammer is going to fall on our heads
              > in the future. There is no doubt that as more and
              > more people see us as a threat to their own
              > backslidden Presbyterian churches, and their own
              > unfaithful testimony as faithful Covenanters, the
              > flame throwers will be forthcoming and likely with a
              > vengeance.
              >
              > For those who would like to pray for us, please join
              > me in the following prayers before the feet of Christ:
              >
              > 1) That the Lord will enlighten the hearts of those
              > who participated in The Effort and reveal to them the
              > sin of schism it caused within the RPNA (GM). For
              > those who the Session Paper only hardens and causes
              > more forthcoming words of vengeance against us and the
              > Elders, that the Lord would use those words to be the
              > seeds of another Reformation within His Church.
              >
              > 2) That the Lord would raise up Ministers and Elders
              > to study intensely the testimony of the Scottish
              > Covenanters and especially the fundamentals of how
              > they preached biblical doctrine, discipline, form of
              > government and form of worship. That this research
              > and study will lead them to compare the Terms of
              > Communion preached and practiced by the RPCNA, CLC,
              > CRCNA, PCA and all the other Presbyterian
              > denominations.
              >
              > 3) That the Lord will allow the RPNA (GM) to at the
              > very least find one more Pastor for Edmonton and one
              > more Ruling Elder for Albany so that we may have two
              > ordinary locally defined Session courts, and move us
              > away from being defined as a cult that has only an
              > extraordinary Session court with two Ruling Elders in
              > Edmonton and one Pastor in Albany.
              >
              > 4) That the Lord would reveal to other Ministers and
              > Elders the lawfulness and faithfulness, in
              > extraordinary and unsettled times, of a phone
              > conference to discuss matters of church doctrine,
              > discipline, form of worship and form of government.
              > That the international phone conference, where two or
              > three ordained ministers are gathered, is indeed
              > lawful and faithful, and thereby does bring Christ
              > into their midst to rule, bind and loose as He has
              > promised in His word.
              >
              > 4) Finally, that the Lord would soon return with His
              > vial judgments upon the earth, and that historical
              > post millennialism will be taught from the pulpits
              > again sending fear of the Lord into each of us
              > Covenanters and Presbyterians. The return of his vial
              > judgments will indeed bring whole nations to covenant
              > together, and cause a major change where those who
              > desire to be faithful to His Majesty and Power will be
              > loved, rather than labeled cults and openly despised.
              >
              >
              > Please forgive my spelling errors and mistakes above,
              > but I wanted to close out with my pleas as like anyone
              > the more I see the labels coming against those in our
              > church I admit it does give me fear. Not so much the
              > fear of man, as I know man cannot touch me without the
              > approval of God, but more that I will continue to
              > stand in the face of fear, and not let my Lord down
              > when the whole world begins to follow suit based upon
              > the "cult" seeds planted by Rev. C. Matthew McMahon,
              > Chris Coldwell and Whit Roberts (he did not say it,
              > but implied it). Indeed, these seeds are now firmly
              > planted in the minds of many, and likely in the future
              > the reporters and media, I suspect it will challenge
              > all our members to stay the course.
              >
              > As I am now finishing my 36 time reading the bible
              > cover-to-cover, I was in the plane flying back from
              > Africa and something jumped out at me I've read many
              > times before. Nevertheless, it gave me a new meaning.
              >
              > "Now the God of patience and consolation grant you to
              > be likeminded one toward another according to Christ
              > Jesus: That ye may with one mind and one mouth glorify
              > God, even the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ.
              > Wherefore receive ye one another, as Christ also
              > received us to the glory of God." (Rom.15:5-7)
              >
              > "For as we have many members in one body, and all
              > members have not the same office: So we, being many,
              > are one body in Christ, and everyone members one of
              > another. Having then gifts differing according to the
              > grace that is given to us, whether prophecy, let us
              > prophesy according to the proportion of faith; Or
              > ministry, let us wait on our ministering: or he that
              > teacheth, on teaching; Or he that exhorteth, on
              > exhortation: he that giveth, let him do it with
              > simplicity; he that ruleth, with diligence; he that
              > showeth mercy, with cheerfulness. Let love be without
              > dissimulation. Abhor that which is evil; cleave to
              > that which is good. Be kindly affectioned one to
              > another with brotherly love; in honor preferring one
              > another; Not slothful in business; fervent in spirit,
              > serving the Lord; Rejoicing in hope; patient in
              > tribulation; continuing instant in prayer;
              > Distributing to the necessity of saints; given to
              > hospitality. Bless them which persecute you: bless,
              > and curse not. Rejoice with them that do rejoice, and
              > weep with them that weep. Be of the same mind one
              > toward another. Mind not high things, but condescend
              > to men of low estate. Be not wise in your own
              > conceits. Recompense to no man evil for evil.
              > Provide things honest in the sight of all men. If it
              > be possible, as much as lieth in you, live peaceably
              > with all men." (Rom.12:5-18) .
              >
              > These are some words, as revealed by our Lord to Paul,
              > and have given me a special blessing as I prepare for
              > the power of words, and the seeds planted in the
              > hearts and minds of those who want neither
              > reformation, nor want anything to do with God's
              > appointed Ministers and Elders in this life.
              >
              > May the Lord be with you all,
              > Walt.
              >
              >
              >
              >
              >
              ____________ _________ _________ _________ _________ _________ _
              ____________ ___
              > Need Mail bonding?
              > Go to the Yahoo! Mail Q&A for great tips from Yahoo! Answers users.
              > http://answers. yahoo.com/ dir/?link= list&sid= 396546091
              >

            • Jerry
              Are you now telling me that Covenanter Reformed Presbyterian principles mean that if I become convinced the pastor/elder/session is wrong then I must repent
              Message 6 of 16 , Apr 1 5:20 PM
              • 0 Attachment

                "Are you now telling me that "Covenanter" Reformed Presbyterian principles mean that if I become convinced the pastor/elder/ session is wrong then I must repent or be excommunicated?"

                Let it be known that not everyone who holds to Covenanter/Reformed Presbyterian principles agrees with what these particular Reformed Presbyterians are doing, and there are some of us who find the implicit faith the RPNA (GM) [which is neither a presbytery nor a general meeting] require [??? at the very least, they allow and accept implicit faith, if not require it] to be unacceptable.

                I also find the structure of my sentence above to be unacceptable, but you get the point.  LOL!

                gmw.

                Gus Gianello wrote:

                

                Mr. Gress,
                 
                Cult is applied to your church because of its "cultish" approach to widows, and any who disagree with it.  What ever happened to the right of private judgement?
                 
                And I assert that, the verse you quote, you only quote for your purposes and thereby mangle the true intent of the verse.  Correct me if I am wrong in any of my assertions.
                 
                The word used for "consent" is

                shekem.

                Keil & Delitzch have this to say concerning this passage---


                Consequently הפך אל must be explained according to 1Sa_10:9, since the circumstance that we have הפך ל in this passage does not make any material difference in the meaning. The construction in both passages is a pregnant one. God turns to the nations a pure lip, by purifying their sinful lips, i.e., He converts them, that they may be able to call upon Him with pure lips. Lip does not stand for language, but is mentioned as the organ of speech, by which a man expresses the thoughts of his heart, so that purity of the lips involves or presupposes the purification of the heart. The lips are defiled by the names of the idols whom they have invoked (cf. Hos_2:19; Psa_16:4). The fruit of the purification is this, that henceforth they call upon the name of Jehovah, and serve Him. קרא בשׁם יי, when used of men, always signifies to call solemnly or heartily upon the name of Jehovah. To serve shekhem 'echâd, with one shoulder, is to serve together or with unanimity. The metaphor is taken from bearers who carry a burden with even shoulders; cf. Jer_32:39.


                Jeremiah 32: 39 says

                39 And I will give them one heart and one way, that they may fear Me forever, for their good and for the good of their sons after them.

                As an associated citation so that we may better understand the metaphoric use of the word.

                 

                You seem to have mislaid any comments about the voluntary nature of the Church.  The church is a voluntary society of like-believing people, who organize together ostensibly to present Christ to the world.  A "cultish" church tries to compel.  Roman catholicism is a cult of implicit faith in the Pope as infallible (ex cathedra), representative of the magisterium.  MANY ostensibly Protestant churches are cults of implicit faith in either the leaders, in science, etc.  Therefore they feel justified in compelling or coercing association by threats and ostensibly judicial actions.

                ONLY in Scripture can we have implicit faith.  In all the back-and-forth that I have seen nobody has asked the obvious  question:

                What evidence of obduracy deserving being cast into the outer darkness and being declared an apostate is given as reason for excommunicating people?  Were they fornicators?  Were they adulterers?  It is very strange indeed that all this overblown hyperbole and swelling words of  dependence on "Presbyterian polity" NEVER quotes the example of the apostle Paul who in letter after letter after letter, shows that he deals with obstinancy in this extreme manner ONLY after every other recourse has failed and only when there is clear evidence and legitimate proceedure to compel excommunication.  Christian love DICTATES that we be compelled to excommunicate by evidence unsullied, trial unmarred, appeals unheeded, and when circumstance and incidentals deny the possibility for remedy; and always for the salvation of the erring parties and for their ultimate reconciliation.  I see NOTHING in the NT that says "excommunicate the moment somebody disagrees, refuses to take an oath or has a problem with what you are doing."   THAT is worthy of a cult.  And a cult YOU ARE, and a cultist you yourself are, if you can justify these extremes.

                Where is the proof of their heresy?

                Where is the proof of their blasphemy?

                Where is the proof of their scandalous sin, deserving of immediate excommunication, without process?  What they were doing was it equal or surpassing in rebellion to God, that they need to be treated as partners in incest? (1 Cor. 5)

                Why did not your elders do what the wise apostle did when he disagreed with Barnabas? Separate, go their separate ways, without recrimination or censure?  Are you now telling me that "Covenanter" Reformed Presbyterian principles mean that if I become convinced the pastor/elder/ session is wrong then I must repent or be excommunicated?  Is that my ONLY choice.  Can we not go our separate ways? THAT is a cult.

                When an acquaintance of mine became a member of an OPC church I thought it a bad idea.  Because he was not convinced of infant baptism. (And it also indicated how orthodox the OPC church was that they would allow such a person to become a member)  When after struggling with it over a year he decided that he COULD NOT be convinced and wanted to leave the church, the pastor told him he would be excommunicated.  See, we dont succor wounded sheep---we slaughter them.  When an elder friend contacted me asking my opinion of this course of action, I told him it was outrageous and worthy of a cult.  That ONLY cults excommunicate people who sincerely cannot agree with them.  Thank God that the elder listened, and allowed him to leave in peace.  I know ALL about cultic excommunication.  When I was a Charismatic and a member of a Faith Movement church, I WAS excommunicated.

                Excommunication as Jay E. Adams warns should be used reluctantly, and any time a "church(?)" rushes to it, as it seems there is evidence that your "church" has done---correct me if I am wrong, that church, those members and those elders are to be viewed with suspicion.  Any one who says "you fool" (Mat 5) quickly and not reluctantly, being not dragged to the situation, and having not constantly and repeatedly appealed, exhorted, admonished, cried over the impenitent, deserves to be called a cultist.  And that church deserves to be called a CULT.

                Respectfully,

                Gus Gianello

                -----Original Message-----
                From: covenantedreformati onclub@yahoogrou ps.com [mailto:covenantedr eformationclub@ yahoogroups. com]On Behalf Of Julian Gress
                Sent: Sunday, April 01, 2007 2:43 PM
                To: covenantedreformati onclub@yahoogrou ps.com
                Subject: [Covenanted Reformation] Re: Secret Society Paper

                Well said, brother.

                I have been finishing up the Old Testament recently, and found a
                great verse, Zephaniah 3:9, "For then will I turn to the people a
                pure language, that they may all call upon the name of the Lord, to
                serve him with one consent." This verse encourages me because in it
                the Lord promises to make his church united in doctrine, worship,
                government, and discipline, such that we may all serve the one Lord
                as one body through one spirit.

                I for one do not understand what some brethren mean they call the
                RPNA (GM) a "cult." I once heard with reference to the "one true
                church syndrome," but this objection has been thoroughly dealt with
                before.

                First, "true" as to the essence of the church, or as to the nature
                or structure of the church, true as being or as to well-being? The
                accusation is entirely out of order unless this detail is included.

                Second, every church under heaven proclaims that it is the one true
                church, by maintaining separation from other churches.

                Third, there is and can only be one true church as to well-being, so
                that there is no absurdity in professing one's own church to be that
                church (for imagine one professing his church not to be the one true
                church, faithful and well-established) . Either a church is faithful
                in doctrine, worship, government, discipline, or it is not. If the
                first, then it is obliged to unite with other churches of the same,
                and if it does not do this, it is no longer a faithful church. And
                if the second is true, then it is no true church as to well-being.
                So if there are a number of true churches as to well-being, then
                they will faithfully into one true church. And they will maintain
                separation from ill or diseased churches (I mean unfaithful ones),
                which do not add to the number of healthy churches. Hence there is
                and can be only one true church.

                So if the word "cult," is applied to us as meaning that we profess
                to be the only true church, then the objection has lost its entire
                savor, and is no objection at all, for it points toward no sin in or
                among us.

                Perhaps someone on this forum means something different by it? I
                will gladly hear whatever arguments you have to put forth against us
                being a "cult" and sincerely endeavor to satisfy your questions and
                objections, as I am able.

                On a separate note, I am aware that several faithful members of the
                RPNA (GM) have left this forum because of the condemnation our
                church has received. To avoid all confusion, I merely want to point
                out that I do not see any obligation to leave this forum in order to
                be faithful to the covenanted testimony we as a church hold, and
                this is my reason: in this forum, there is no necessary obligation
                to recognize one opinion or another, because it is granted by the
                nature of this forum that there may be disagreements. Of course, I
                do not intend to have familiar fellowship with any who have been
                excommunicated from the RPNA (GM), or to violate any of my other God-
                given duties. But unless someone points out a reason otherwise,
                something that I have missed, or unless there is a change in
                constitution of this forum that necessitates me to violate my oath
                of membership in the RPNA (GM), I do not see any necessary reason to
                leave.

                Your brother and servant in the Lord,
                Julian R. Gress (RPNA-GM)

                --- In covenantedreformati onclub@yahoogrou ps.com, Walt Bre
                <humbled.learner@ ...> wrote:
                >
                > Dear brethren,
                >
                > I know that I promised not to post again on here, and
                > for going back on my promise I'm sorry. If you would
                > grant me liberty to post only one document, I wanted
                > to attach only part of the "Sins Committed By "The
                > Effort" and Steps to Repentance" Issued by the Session
                > of the RPNA (GM), March 22, 2007.
                >
                > There is also a supporting document called "Effort
                > Emails (RPNA--GM)" that I am not including in this
                > message to protect the names of those involved. I'm
                > sure that people would like to read those supporting
                > emails that are the primary reason for the Session
                > Paper above, but I would ask you to contact Pastor
                > Greg Price at (covpastor@. ..) if interested in
                > the document.
                >
                > I saw Whit's comment this morning supporting the ideas
                > promoted by Chris and others in the Presbyterian
                > movement that not only are we an unfaithful church,
                > but that we would border on the edge of the Morman
                > Church, the Roman Catholic Ave Maria Worshippers,
                >
                > In interesting definition I found will most definitely
                > scare away many people from EVER and NEVER consider
                > even reading our Terms of Communion, and subsequent
                > Session and Presbytery Decisions that our Church has
                > issued since around 1996. The definition says:
                >
                > "Cults are groups that often exploit members
                > psychologically and/or financially, typically by
                > making members comply with leadership's demands
                > through certain types of psychological manipulation,
                > popularly called mind control, and through the
                > inculcation of deep-seated anxious dependency on the
                > group and its leaders.
                >
                > "A cult is a group or movement exhibiting a great or
                > excessive devotion or dedication to some person, idea
                > or thing and employing unethically manipulative
                > techniques of persuasion and control (e.g. isolation
                > from former friends and family, debilitation, use of
                > special methods to heighten suggestibility and
                > subservience, powerful group pressures, information
                > management, suspension of individuality or critical
                > judgement, promotion of total dependency on the group
                > and fear of [consequences of] leaving it, etc)
                > designed to advance the goals of the group's leaders
                > to the actual or possible detriment of members, their
                > families, or the community."
                >
                > Based upon the above definition, after our Elders have
                > learned about the Secret Society within our own
                > Church, I can see how not only those of us who are
                > left inside the RPNA (GM), but those especially who
                > were members inside the RPNA (GM) as part of this
                > Secret Society, will be viewed likewise.
                >
                > After I read the documents of this Secret Society, I
                > can understand what these guys were trying to do and I
                > do not believe they intended to create the problems
                > that ultimately led many away from our church (this is
                > my own opinion). Surely, some have already admitted
                > that they have never felt better since leaving our
                > church, but others I'm sure may look back on The
                > Effort and the means they used with sorrow.
                >
                > As I study these documents, and all the documents that
                > make up the basis for nearly 30 excommunications, I am
                > firmly convinced now that my brothers and sisters have
                > misunderstood the doctrine of true Presbyterian
                > jurisdiction and the duties of membership by oath.
                > These two primary fundamental roots of the problem
                > grew into a massive protest. The protest was:
                >
                > 1) In the form of a Secret Society led by a few within
                > our church who wanted to make a positive impact.
                >
                > 2) In the form of a Public positive attack (admitted
                > by some that a good offence is always better than a
                > good defense) against the Elders to damage their
                > reputations and destroy all their credibility.
                >
                > As I read the comments made by Whit and Chris, and
                > others will most likely follow, I can see that as more
                > and more people protest against us, for being strict
                > Covenanters, the hammer is going to fall on our heads
                > in the future. There is no doubt that as more and
                > more people see us as a threat to their own
                > backslidden Presbyterian churches, and their own
                > unfaithful testimony as faithful Covenanters, the
                > flame throwers will be forthcoming and likely with a
                > vengeance.
                >
                > For those who would like to pray for us, please join
                > me in the following prayers before the feet of Christ:
                >
                > 1) That the Lord will enlighten the hearts of those
                > who participated in The Effort and reveal to them the
                > sin of schism it caused within the RPNA (GM). For
                > those who the Session Paper only hardens and causes
                > more forthcoming words of vengeance against us and the
                > Elders, that the Lord would use those words to be the
                > seeds of another Reformation within His Church.
                >
                > 2) That the Lord would raise up Ministers and Elders
                > to study intensely the testimony of the Scottish
                > Covenanters and especially the fundamentals of how
                > they preached biblical doctrine, discipline, form of
                > government and form of worship. That this research
                > and study will lead them to compare the Terms of
                > Communion preached and practiced by the RPCNA, CLC,
                > CRCNA, PCA and all the other Presbyterian
                > denominations.
                >
                > 3) That the Lord will allow the RPNA (GM) to at the
                > very least find one more Pastor for Edmonton and one
                > more Ruling Elder for Albany so that we may have two
                > ordinary locally defined Session courts, and move us
                > away from being defined as a cult that has only an
                > extraordinary Session court with two Ruling Elders in
                > Edmonton and one Pastor in Albany.
                >
                > 4) That the Lord would reveal to other Ministers and
                > Elders the lawfulness and faithfulness, in
                > extraordinary and unsettled times, of a phone
                > conference to discuss matters of church doctrine,
                > discipline, form of worship and form of government.
                > That the international phone conference, where two or
                > three ordained ministers are gathered, is indeed
                > lawful and faithful, and thereby does bring Christ
                > into their midst to rule, bind and loose as He has
                > promised in His word.
                >
                > 4) Finally, that the Lord would soon return with His
                > vial judgments upon the earth, and that historical
                > post millennialism will be taught from the pulpits
                > again sending fear of the Lord into each of us
                > Covenanters and Presbyterians. The return of his vial
                > judgments will indeed bring whole nations to covenant
                > together, and cause a major change where those who
                > desire to be faithful to His Majesty and Power will be
                > loved, rather than labeled cults and openly despised.
                >
                >
                > Please forgive my spelling errors and mistakes above,
                > but I wanted to close out with my pleas as like anyone
                > the more I see the labels coming against those in our
                > church I admit it does give me fear. Not so much the
                > fear of man, as I know man cannot touch me without the
                > approval of God, but more that I will continue to
                > stand in the face of fear, and not let my Lord down
                > when the whole world begins to follow suit based upon
                > the "cult" seeds planted by Rev. C. Matthew McMahon,
                > Chris Coldwell and Whit Roberts (he did not say it,
                > but implied it). Indeed, these seeds are now firmly
                > planted in the minds of many, and likely in the future
                > the reporters and media, I suspect it will challenge
                > all our members to stay the course.
                >
                > As I am now finishing my 36 time reading the bible
                > cover-to-cover, I was in the plane flying back from
                > Africa and something jumped out at me I've read many
                > times before. Nevertheless, it gave me a new meaning.
                >
                > "Now the God of patience and consolation grant you to
                > be likeminded one toward another according to Christ
                > Jesus: That ye may with one mind and one mouth glorify
                > God, even the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ.
                > Wherefore receive ye one another, as Christ also
                > received us to the glory of God." (Rom.15:5-7)
                >
                > "For as we have many members in one body, and all
                > members have not the same office: So we, being many,
                > are one body in Christ, and everyone members one of
                > another. Having then gifts differing according to the
                > grace that is given to us, whether prophecy, let us
                > prophesy according to the proportion of faith; Or
                > ministry, let us wait on our ministering: or he that
                > teacheth, on teaching; Or he that exhorteth, on
                > exhortation: he that giveth, let him do it with
                > simplicity; he that ruleth, with diligence; he that
                > showeth mercy, with cheerfulness. Let love be without
                > dissimulation. Abhor that which is evil; cleave to
                > that which is good. Be kindly affectioned one to
                > another with brotherly love; in honor preferring one
                > another; Not slothful in business; fervent in spirit,
                > serving the Lord; Rejoicing in hope; patient in
                > tribulation; continuing instant in prayer;
                > Distributing to the necessity of saints; given to
                > hospitality. Bless them which persecute you: bless,
                > and curse not. Rejoice with them that do rejoice, and
                > weep with them that weep. Be of the same mind one
                > toward another. Mind not high things, but condescend
                > to men of low estate. Be not wise in your own
                > conceits. Recompense to no man evil for evil.
                > Provide things honest in the sight of all men. If it
                > be possible, as much as lieth in you, live peaceably
                > with all men." (Rom.12:5-18) .
                >
                > These are some words, as revealed by our Lord to Paul,
                > and have given me a special blessing as I prepare for
                > the power of words, and the seeds planted in the
                > hearts and minds of those who want neither
                > reformation, nor want anything to do with God's
                > appointed Ministers and Elders in this life.
                >
                > May the Lord be with you all,
                > Walt.
                >
                >
                >
                >
                >
                ____________ _________ _________ _________ _________ _________ _
                ____________ ___
                > Need Mail bonding?
                > Go to the Yahoo! Mail Q&A for great tips from Yahoo! Answers users.
                > http://answers. yahoo.com/ dir/?link= list&sid= 396546091
                >


              • Tom
                We re with Jerry on this one! Tom & Susan (a.k.a.) Bander1643 & SusanandCrew
                Message 7 of 16 , Apr 1 5:38 PM
                • 0 Attachment
                  We're with Jerry on this one!

                  Tom & Susan (a.k.a.) Bander1643 & SusanandCrew

                  > Let it be known that not everyone who holds to Covenanter/Reformed
                  > Presbyterian principles agrees with what these particular Reformed
                  > Presbyterians are doing,
                • puritan_at_heart
                  I think its pertinent to point out, that John Knox, of which Scotland is still called The Land of Knox and who was so involved with the early presbyterian
                  Message 8 of 16 , Apr 1 7:14 PM
                  • 0 Attachment

                    I think its pertinent to point out, that John Knox,   of which Scotland is still called "The Land of Knox"  and who was so involved with the early presbyterian church in Scotland, taught one thing consistently  throughout  his ministry.  That Presbyterianism and tryanny cannot co-exist. When the two meet, one of them leaves the field.

                    ~Deejay


                    --- In covenantedreformationclub@yahoogroups.com, Jerry <ragingcalvinist@...> wrote:
                    >
                    >
                    >
                    > Let it be known that not everyone who holds to Covenanter/Reformed
                    > Presbyterian principles agrees with what these particular Reformed
                    > Presbyterians are doing, and there are some of us who find the implicit
                    > faith the RPNA (GM) [which is neither a presbytery nor a general
                    > meeting] require [??? at the very least, they allow and accept implicit
                    > faith, if not require it] to be unacceptable.
                    >
                    > I also find the structure of my sentence above to be unacceptable, but
                    > you get the point. LOL!
                    >
                    > gmw.
                    >
                    >

                  • Julian Gress
                    Dear Gus Gianello, As I read your post a number of questions came to mind, things on which I need further clarification before I can proceed to satisfy the
                    Message 9 of 16 , Apr 1 8:26 PM
                    • 0 Attachment
                      Dear Gus Gianello,

                      As I read your post a number of questions came to mind, things on
                      which I need further clarification before I can proceed to satisfy
                      the questions and objections you raise.

                      First, I am afraid I simply do not understand what you meant when
                      you said, "Cult is applied to your church because of its 'cultish'
                      approach to widows, and any who disagree with it. Whatever happened
                      to the right of private judgment?" With respect to this statement,
                      I desire to know these things:

                      First, "cult is applied to your church because of…" By whom is it
                      applied to my church for this reason? Does everyone who calls my
                      church a "cult" call it so for this reason? Who are you talking
                      about? Are you talking about only yourself, or others as well?

                      Second, What exactly is our "cultish" approach to widows and those
                      who disagree with us?

                      Third, What do you mean by the term "widows"? I do not understand
                      if you mean actual widows, or some other sense of the term. When I
                      read in Scripture that we are to protect the widow and the orphan, I
                      understand these to be specific instances of a general rule, to
                      protect those who are especially vulnerable to oppression. For
                      instance, no one should rob the rich or the poor, but to rob from
                      the poor is far worse, since they are especially vulnerable to it.
                      What exactly do you mean by using this word, and what are you saying?

                      Fourth, After this you add, "And any who disagree with it." The
                      natural sense of this seems to me, anyone who maintains that we are
                      not a faithful church, as to our well-being, and, on those grounds,
                      anyone who will not unite with us. But I cannot be certain, so I
                      ask who exactly are you referring to?

                      Fifth, when you say, "What ever happened to the right of private
                      judgment?" What do you take that to be, "the right of private
                      judgment"? And furthermore, how does it relate to your previous
                      assertion concerning our "cultish" approach to widows and any who
                      disagree with us?

                      Sixth, I cannot tell in these words (taken as a whole) whether you
                      are referring to members of the RPNA (GM), former-members of the
                      RPNA (GM), people who are not members and never have been, or any
                      two or all three of these categories. Who exactly do you mean to
                      include here?

                      Second, in your next statement you say, "And I assert that, the
                      verse you quote, you only quote for your purposes and thereby mangle
                      the true intent of the verse. Correct me if I am wrong in any of my
                      assertions." Again, I must express my confusion in the following
                      things:

                      First, you say that I only quote it for "[my] purposes," and I
                      desire to know what exactly my purposes are when I quote this
                      verse. As far as I am aware I cited it in the same way as Walt did
                      Romans 15:5-7, as it being a source of personal comfort and
                      encouragement to me.

                      Second, "and thereby mangle the true intent of the verse." Part of
                      my confusion arises in that I do not understand what goes before
                      it. For you say that because I use it for "[my] purposes,"
                      I, "thereby mangle the true intent of the verse." You say, then,
                      that because I used it for my own causes, I therefore mangled its
                      true intent. And if that is the cause of my error, then I ask not
                      only how I have used it for "[my] purposes," but how, by doing so, I
                      have mangled its true intent.

                      Third, but there arises another confusion in these words,
                      particularly in the phrase, "the true intent" (of the verse). The
                      word intent, I understand to mean a purpose or a goal, or the reason
                      by which a choice is made, but afterwards you offer a very clear
                      interpretation of its meaning, but not of its use or application
                      (which, I take it would be the reason that God has included it in
                      his word). So, I ask, do you mean to say, "The true meaning" of the
                      verse, or its "true intent"?

                      Fourth, after making all these assertions, you say, "Correct me if I
                      am wrong in any of my assertions." I am of course, most willing to
                      correct you in any of your wrong assertions, once I know what those
                      assertions are.

                      Fifth, but when you say this, I wonder why you have chosen to make
                      these "assertions," and then ask for my correction. Are you making
                      assertions, or are you asking questions? I humbly think that you
                      can not do both, for a question implies ignorance, and a statement
                      implies knowledge. And I take it that this imperative is no less a
                      question, as if it were in the form of a question, for it still
                      implies ignorance, as if you sensed that you needed or might need
                      correction. Unless you mean it rhetorically, as if to say, "This is
                      the way it is, and no other way is it, besides this. However, I am
                      willing to submit to your superior knowledge if it is not this way
                      (but it is)." In which case, I do not know if you actually expect
                      me to correct your assertions, or simply to consider for my own
                      sake, whether I can find anything wrong about them.

                      Sixth, do accuse me of sin in these words?

                      Third, I have some questions concerning the paragraph that
                      begins, "You seem to have mislaid any comments…"

                      First, when you said, "You seem to have mislaid any comments…" do
                      you mean that I have mislaid these comments in the sense that the
                      comments themselves are mislaid, or in other words, the statements
                      themselves are false, or, however true they are or may be, I have
                      used them in the wrong way, or applied them inaccurately, and
                      hence "mislaid" them.

                      Second, what exactly do you mean by the word "voluntary," both with
                      respect to my comments about the "voluntary" nature of the church,
                      and with respect to you calling the church a "voluntary" society?
                      Third, what exactly are the things in which "like-believing people"
                      must be "like-believing" in order to organize as a church?

                      Fourth, what do you mean by the word "ostensibly"? How is the
                      church made of those who meet together "ostensibly"? And how do you
                      mean this word in the other places you use it in this paragraph?

                      Fifth, with general regard to your statements about the nature of
                      the church, do you hold to and believe The Form of Presbyterial
                      Church Government?

                      Sixth, when you say that a "cultish" church does this or that, do
                      you mean that it is essential to the cultishness of a church that it
                      does this or that, or that it is a common characteristic of cults,
                      but not a necessary one, that they do this or that?

                      Seventh, when you say that a "cultish" church tries to compel, what
                      do you mean by "compel"? Is it compelling in general, or is it a
                      form of compelling that is unjust in itself, or is it unjust insofar
                      as the compelling is done in certain circumstances, or in such a
                      manner, or does it altogether depend on what they are being
                      compelled to do or believe, or how they are being compelled to do or
                      believe it?

                      Eighth, for when you mention "implicit faith," I do not know if you
                      intend this as a general example of cults trying to "compel," or as
                      the specific instance where they wrongfully "compel" others.

                      Ninth, what do you understand, "implicit faith," to mean? I am
                      unable from the context in which you use it to understand how you
                      use it.

                      Tenth, does it matter at all who they try to compel, members or non-
                      members, or former-members?

                      Eleventh, what do you mean by "compelling or coercing association by
                      threats or ostensibly judicial actions," a sentence so vague that I
                      cannot understand the meaning of it.

                      Fourthly, with regard to all that you have said concerning
                      excommunication, I ask the following questions:

                      First, what are the conditions that must be met in order for
                      excommunication to be lawful and just?

                      Second, when you say, "I see NOTHING in the NT that
                      says, `Excommunicate…'" why do you say that you see nothing in the
                      New Testament? Do you deny that both the Old and New Testaments are
                      the Word of God, the only rule of faith and practice?

                      Third, you say that my "church" has rushed to excommunication. What
                      do you mean when you put our church in quotation brackets? Are you
                      implying that we are no church at all? And how do your previous
                      comments, such as when you said that the term "cult" is applied to
                      my church at the beginning of your post, how do these comments
                      square with what you say about my "so-called" church?

                      Fourth, again, you say, "Correct me if I am wrong," and the same
                      question still applies as before, are you uncertain of what you
                      say? And having heard this same thing twice, I ask generally, how
                      certain are you of the facts of the case?

                      As you acknowledge in your final paragraph, we are not to be rash in
                      matters of great weight, therefore before I respond to your
                      questions and objections, I would like to make sure that I fully
                      understand them, so that I do not reply like a babbling fool, and
                      you say, "No, that's not what I meant." As the Scripture says, "The
                      heart of the righteous studieth to answer: but the mouth of the
                      wicked poureth out evil things," and, "He that answereth a matter
                      before he heareth it, it is folly and shame unto him" (Proverbs
                      15:28, 18:13).

                      Your servant in the Lord,
                      Julian R. Gress




                      --- In covenantedreformationclub@yahoogroups.com, "Gus Gianello"
                      <dr.gus.gianello@...> wrote:
                      >
                      > Mr. Gress,
                      >
                      > Cult is applied to your church because of its "cultish" approach
                      to widows, and any who disagree with it. What ever happened to the
                      right of private judgement?
                      >
                      > And I assert that, the verse you quote, you only quote for your
                      purposes and thereby mangle the true intent of the verse. Correct
                      me if I am wrong in any of my assertions.
                      >
                      > The word used for "consent" is
                      > shekem.
                      >
                      > Keil & Delitzch have this to say concerning this passage---
                      >
                      >
                      > -------------------------------------------------------------------
                      -------------
                      >
                      >
                      > Consequently ×"פך אל must be explained according to 1Sa_10:9,
                      since the circumstance that we have ×"פך ל in this passage does
                      not make any material difference in the meaning. The construction in
                      both passages is a pregnant one. God turns to the nations a pure
                      lip, by purifying their sinful lips, i.e., He converts them, that
                      they may be able to call upon Him with pure lips. Lip does not stand
                      for language, but is mentioned as the organ of speech, by which a
                      man expresses the thoughts of his heart, so that purity of the lips
                      involves or presupposes the purification of the heart. The lips are
                      defiled by the names of the idols whom they have invoked (cf.
                      Hos_2:19; Psa_16:4). The fruit of the purification is this, that
                      henceforth they call upon the name of Jehovah, and serve Him. קרא
                      ×`שׁם יי, when used of men, always signifies to call solemnly
                      or heartily upon the name of Jehovah. To serve shekhem 'echâd,
                      with one shoulder, is to serve together or with unanimity. The
                      metaphor is taken from bearers who carry a burden with even
                      shoulders; cf. Jer_32:39.
                      >
                      >
                      > -------------------------------------------------------------------
                      -------------
                      >
                      >
                      > Jeremiah 32: 39 says
                      >
                      > 39 And I will give them one heart and one way, that they may fear
                      Me forever, for their good and for the good of their sons after
                      them.
                      >
                      > As an associated citation so that we may better understand the
                      metaphoric use of the word.
                      >
                      >
                      >
                      > You seem to have mislaid any comments about the voluntary nature
                      of the Church. The church is a voluntary society of like-believing
                      people, who organize together ostensibly to present Christ to the
                      world. A "cultish" church tries to compel. Roman catholicism is a
                      cult of implicit faith in the Pope as infallible (ex cathedra),
                      representative of the magisterium. MANY ostensibly Protestant
                      churches are cults of implicit faith in either the leaders, in
                      science, etc. Therefore they feel justified in compelling or
                      coercing association by threats and ostensibly judicial actions.
                      >
                      > ONLY in Scripture can we have implicit faith. In all the back-and-
                      forth that I have seen nobody has asked the obvious question:
                      >
                      > What evidence of obduracy deserving being cast into the outer
                      darkness and being declared an apostate is given as reason for
                      excommunicating people? Were they fornicators? Were they
                      adulterers? It is very strange indeed that all this overblown
                      hyperbole and swelling words of dependence on "Presbyterian polity"
                      NEVER quotes the example of the apostle Paul who in letter after
                      letter after letter, shows that he deals with obstinancy in this
                      extreme manner ONLY after every other recourse has failed and only
                      when there is clear evidence and legitimate proceedure to compel
                      excommunication. Christian love DICTATES that we be compelled to
                      excommunicate by evidence unsullied, trial unmarred, appeals
                      unheeded, and when circumstance and incidentals deny the possibility
                      for remedy; and always for the salvation of the erring parties and
                      for their ultimate reconciliation. I see NOTHING in the NT that
                      says "excommunicate the moment somebody disagrees, refuses to take
                      an oath or has a problem with what you are doing." THAT is worthy
                      of a cult. And a cult YOU ARE, and a cultist you yourself are, if
                      you can justify these extremes.
                      >
                      > Where is the proof of their heresy?
                      >
                      > Where is the proof of their blasphemy?
                      >
                      > Where is the proof of their scandalous sin, deserving of immediate
                      excommunication, without process? What they were doing was it equal
                      or surpassing in rebellion to God, that they need to be treated as
                      partners in incest? (1 Cor. 5)
                      >
                      > Why did not your elders do what the wise apostle did when he
                      disagreed with Barnabas? Separate, go their separate ways, without
                      recrimination or censure? Are you now telling me that "Covenanter"
                      Reformed Presbyterian principles mean that if I become convinced the
                      pastor/elder/session is wrong then I must repent or be
                      excommunicated? Is that my ONLY choice. Can we not go our separate
                      ways? THAT is a cult.
                      >
                      > When an acquaintance of mine became a member of an OPC church I
                      thought it a bad idea. Because he was not convinced of infant
                      baptism. (And it also indicated how orthodox the OPC church was that
                      they would allow such a person to become a member) When after
                      struggling with it over a year he decided that he COULD NOT be
                      convinced and wanted to leave the church, the pastor told him he
                      would be excommunicated. See, we dont succor wounded sheep---we
                      slaughter them. When an elder friend contacted me asking my opinion
                      of this course of action, I told him it was outrageous and worthy of
                      a cult. That ONLY cults excommunicate people who sincerely cannot
                      agree with them. Thank God that the elder listened, and allowed him
                      to leave in peace. I know ALL about cultic excommunication. When I
                      was a Charismatic and a member of a Faith Movement church, I WAS
                      excommunicated.
                      >
                      > Excommunication as Jay E. Adams warns should be used reluctantly,
                      and any time a "church(?)" rushes to it, as it seems there is
                      evidence that your "church" has done---correct me if I am wrong,
                      that church, those members and those elders are to be viewed with
                      suspicion. Any one who says "you fool" (Mat 5) quickly and not
                      reluctantly, being not dragged to the situation, and having not
                      constantly and repeatedly appealed, exhorted, admonished, cried over
                      the impenitent, deserves to be called a cultist. And that church
                      deserves to be called a CULT.
                      >
                      > Respectfully,
                      >
                      > Gus Gianello
                      >
                      > -----Original Message-----
                      > From: covenantedreformationclub@yahoogroups.com
                      [mailto:covenantedreformationclub@yahoogroups.com]On Behalf Of
                      Julian Gress
                      > Sent: Sunday, April 01, 2007 2:43 PM
                      > To: covenantedreformationclub@yahoogroups.com
                      > Subject: [Covenanted Reformation] Re: Secret Society Paper
                      >
                      >
                      > Well said, brother.
                      >
                      > I have been finishing up the Old Testament recently, and found a
                      > great verse, Zephaniah 3:9, "For then will I turn to the people
                      a
                      > pure language, that they may all call upon the name of the Lord,
                      to
                      > serve him with one consent." This verse encourages me because in
                      it
                      > the Lord promises to make his church united in doctrine,
                      worship,
                      > government, and discipline, such that we may all serve the one
                      Lord
                      > as one body through one spirit.
                      >
                      > I for one do not understand what some brethren mean they call
                      the
                      > RPNA (GM) a "cult." I once heard with reference to the "one true
                      > church syndrome," but this objection has been thoroughly dealt
                      with
                      > before.
                      >
                      > First, "true" as to the essence of the church, or as to the
                      nature
                      > or structure of the church, true as being or as to well-being?
                      The
                      > accusation is entirely out of order unless this detail is
                      included.
                      >
                      > Second, every church under heaven proclaims that it is the one
                      true
                      > church, by maintaining separation from other churches.
                      >
                      > Third, there is and can only be one true church as to well-
                      being, so
                      > that there is no absurdity in professing one's own church to be
                      that
                      > church (for imagine one professing his church not to be the one
                      true
                      > church, faithful and well-established). Either a church is
                      faithful
                      > in doctrine, worship, government, discipline, or it is not. If
                      the
                      > first, then it is obliged to unite with other churches of the
                      same,
                      > and if it does not do this, it is no longer a faithful church.
                      And
                      > if the second is true, then it is no true church as to well-
                      being.
                      > So if there are a number of true churches as to well-being, then
                      > they will faithfully into one true church. And they will
                      maintain
                      > separation from ill or diseased churches (I mean unfaithful
                      ones),
                      > which do not add to the number of healthy churches. Hence there
                      is
                      > and can be only one true church.
                      >
                      > So if the word "cult," is applied to us as meaning that we
                      profess
                      > to be the only true church, then the objection has lost its
                      entire
                      > savor, and is no objection at all, for it points toward no sin
                      in or
                      > among us.
                      >
                      > Perhaps someone on this forum means something different by it? I
                      > will gladly hear whatever arguments you have to put forth
                      against us
                      > being a "cult" and sincerely endeavor to satisfy your questions
                      and
                      > objections, as I am able.
                      >
                      > On a separate note, I am aware that several faithful members of
                      the
                      > RPNA (GM) have left this forum because of the condemnation our
                      > church has received. To avoid all confusion, I merely want to
                      point
                      > out that I do not see any obligation to leave this forum in
                      order to
                      > be faithful to the covenanted testimony we as a church hold, and
                      > this is my reason: in this forum, there is no necessary
                      obligation
                      > to recognize one opinion or another, because it is granted by
                      the
                      > nature of this forum that there may be disagreements. Of course,
                      I
                      > do not intend to have familiar fellowship with any who have been
                      > excommunicated from the RPNA (GM), or to violate any of my other
                      God-
                      > given duties. But unless someone points out a reason otherwise,
                      > something that I have missed, or unless there is a change in
                      > constitution of this forum that necessitates me to violate my
                      oath
                      > of membership in the RPNA (GM), I do not see any necessary
                      reason to
                      > leave.
                      >
                      > Your brother and servant in the Lord,
                      > Julian R. Gress (RPNA-GM)
                      >
                      > --- In covenantedreformationclub@yahoogroups.com, Walt Bre
                      > <humbled.learner@> wrote:
                      > >
                      > > Dear brethren,
                      > >
                      > > I know that I promised not to post again on here, and
                      > > for going back on my promise I'm sorry. If you would
                      > > grant me liberty to post only one document, I wanted
                      > > to attach only part of the "Sins Committed By "The
                      > > Effort" and Steps to Repentance" Issued by the Session
                      > > of the RPNA (GM), March 22, 2007.
                      > >
                      > > There is also a supporting document called "Effort
                      > > Emails (RPNA--GM)" that I am not including in this
                      > > message to protect the names of those involved. I'm
                      > > sure that people would like to read those supporting
                      > > emails that are the primary reason for the Session
                      > > Paper above, but I would ask you to contact Pastor
                      > > Greg Price at (covpastor@) if interested in
                      > > the document.
                      > >
                      > > I saw Whit's comment this morning supporting the ideas
                      > > promoted by Chris and others in the Presbyterian
                      > > movement that not only are we an unfaithful church,
                      > > but that we would border on the edge of the Morman
                      > > Church, the Roman Catholic Ave Maria Worshippers,
                      > >
                      > > In interesting definition I found will most definitely
                      > > scare away many people from EVER and NEVER consider
                      > > even reading our Terms of Communion, and subsequent
                      > > Session and Presbytery Decisions that our Church has
                      > > issued since around 1996. The definition says:
                      > >
                      > > "Cults are groups that often exploit members
                      > > psychologically and/or financially, typically by
                      > > making members comply with leadership's demands
                      > > through certain types of psychological manipulation,
                      > > popularly called mind control, and through the
                      > > inculcation of deep-seated anxious dependency on the
                      > > group and its leaders.
                      > >
                      > > "A cult is a group or movement exhibiting a great or
                      > > excessive devotion or dedication to some person, idea
                      > > or thing and employing unethically manipulative
                      > > techniques of persuasion and control (e.g. isolation
                      > > from former friends and family, debilitation, use of
                      > > special methods to heighten suggestibility and
                      > > subservience, powerful group pressures, information
                      > > management, suspension of individuality or critical
                      > > judgement, promotion of total dependency on the group
                      > > and fear of [consequences of] leaving it, etc)
                      > > designed to advance the goals of the group's leaders
                      > > to the actual or possible detriment of members, their
                      > > families, or the community."
                      > >
                      > > Based upon the above definition, after our Elders have
                      > > learned about the Secret Society within our own
                      > > Church, I can see how not only those of us who are
                      > > left inside the RPNA (GM), but those especially who
                      > > were members inside the RPNA (GM) as part of this
                      > > Secret Society, will be viewed likewise.
                      > >
                      > > After I read the documents of this Secret Society, I
                      > > can understand what these guys were trying to do and I
                      > > do not believe they intended to create the problems
                      > > that ultimately led many away from our church (this is
                      > > my own opinion). Surely, some have already admitted
                      > > that they have never felt better since leaving our
                      > > church, but others I'm sure may look back on The
                      > > Effort and the means they used with sorrow.
                      > >
                      > > As I study these documents, and all the documents that
                      > > make up the basis for nearly 30 excommunications, I am
                      > > firmly convinced now that my brothers and sisters have
                      > > misunderstood the doctrine of true Presbyterian
                      > > jurisdiction and the duties of membership by oath.
                      > > These two primary fundamental roots of the problem
                      > > grew into a massive protest. The protest was:
                      > >
                      > > 1) In the form of a Secret Society led by a few within
                      > > our church who wanted to make a positive impact.
                      > >
                      > > 2) In the form of a Public positive attack (admitted
                      > > by some that a good offence is always better than a
                      > > good defense) against the Elders to damage their
                      > > reputations and destroy all their credibility.
                      > >
                      > > As I read the comments made by Whit and Chris, and
                      > > others will most likely follow, I can see that as more
                      > > and more people protest against us, for being strict
                      > > Covenanters, the hammer is going to fall on our heads
                      > > in the future. There is no doubt that as more and
                      > > more people see us as a threat to their own
                      > > backslidden Presbyterian churches, and their own
                      > > unfaithful testimony as faithful Covenanters, the
                      > > flame throwers will be forthcoming and likely with a
                      > > vengeance.
                      > >
                      > > For those who would like to pray for us, please join
                      > > me in the following prayers before the feet of Christ:
                      > >
                      > > 1) That the Lord will enlighten the hearts of those
                      > > who participated in The Effort and reveal to them the
                      > > sin of schism it caused within the RPNA (GM). For
                      > > those who the Session Paper only hardens and causes
                      > > more forthcoming words of vengeance against us and the
                      > > Elders, that the Lord would use those words to be the
                      > > seeds of another Reformation within His Church.
                      > >
                      > > 2) That the Lord would raise up Ministers and Elders
                      > > to study intensely the testimony of the Scottish
                      > > Covenanters and especially the fundamentals of how
                      > > they preached biblical doctrine, discipline, form of
                      > > government and form of worship. That this research
                      > > and study will lead them to compare the Terms of
                      > > Communion preached and practiced by the RPCNA, CLC,
                      > > CRCNA, PCA and all the other Presbyterian
                      > > denominations.
                      > >
                      > > 3) That the Lord will allow the RPNA (GM) to at the
                      > > very least find one more Pastor for Edmonton and one
                      > > more Ruling Elder for Albany so that we may have two
                      > > ordinary locally defined Session courts, and move us
                      > > away from being defined as a cult that has only an
                      > > extraordinary Session court with two Ruling Elders in
                      > > Edmonton and one Pastor in Albany.
                      > >
                      > > 4) That the Lord would reveal to other Ministers and
                      > > Elders the lawfulness and faithfulness, in
                      > > extraordinary and unsettled times, of a phone
                      > > conference to discuss matters of church doctrine,
                      > > discipline, form of worship and form of government.
                      > > That the international phone conference, where two or
                      > > three ordained ministers are gathered, is indeed
                      > > lawful and faithful, and thereby does bring Christ
                      > > into their midst to rule, bind and loose as He has
                      > > promised in His word.
                      > >
                      > > 4) Finally, that the Lord would soon return with His
                      > > vial judgments upon the earth, and that historical
                      > > post millennialism will be taught from the pulpits
                      > > again sending fear of the Lord into each of us
                      > > Covenanters and Presbyterians. The return of his vial
                      > > judgments will indeed bring whole nations to covenant
                      > > together, and cause a major change where those who
                      > > desire to be faithful to His Majesty and Power will be
                      > > loved, rather than labeled cults and openly despised.
                      > >
                      > >
                      > > Please forgive my spelling errors and mistakes above,
                      > > but I wanted to close out with my pleas as like anyone
                      > > the more I see the labels coming against those in our
                      > > church I admit it does give me fear. Not so much the
                      > > fear of man, as I know man cannot touch me without the
                      > > approval of God, but more that I will continue to
                      > > stand in the face of fear, and not let my Lord down
                      > > when the whole world begins to follow suit based upon
                      > > the "cult" seeds planted by Rev. C. Matthew McMahon,
                      > > Chris Coldwell and Whit Roberts (he did not say it,
                      > > but implied it). Indeed, these seeds are now firmly
                      > > planted in the minds of many, and likely in the future
                      > > the reporters and media, I suspect it will challenge
                      > > all our members to stay the course.
                      > >
                      > > As I am now finishing my 36 time reading the bible
                      > > cover-to-cover, I was in the plane flying back from
                      > > Africa and something jumped out at me I've read many
                      > > times before. Nevertheless, it gave me a new meaning.
                      > >
                      > > "Now the God of patience and consolation grant you to
                      > > be likeminded one toward another according to Christ
                      > > Jesus: That ye may with one mind and one mouth glorify
                      > > God, even the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ.
                      > > Wherefore receive ye one another, as Christ also
                      > > received us to the glory of God." (Rom.15:5-7)
                      > >
                      > > "For as we have many members in one body, and all
                      > > members have not the same office: So we, being many,
                      > > are one body in Christ, and everyone members one of
                      > > another. Having then gifts differing according to the
                      > > grace that is given to us, whether prophecy, let us
                      > > prophesy according to the proportion of faith; Or
                      > > ministry, let us wait on our ministering: or he that
                      > > teacheth, on teaching; Or he that exhorteth, on
                      > > exhortation: he that giveth, let him do it with
                      > > simplicity; he that ruleth, with diligence; he that
                      > > showeth mercy, with cheerfulness. Let love be without
                      > > dissimulation. Abhor that which is evil; cleave to
                      > > that which is good. Be kindly affectioned one to
                      > > another with brotherly love; in honor preferring one
                      > > another; Not slothful in business; fervent in spirit,
                      > > serving the Lord; Rejoicing in hope; patient in
                      > > tribulation; continuing instant in prayer;
                      > > Distributing to the necessity of saints; given to
                      > > hospitality. Bless them which persecute you: bless,
                      > > and curse not. Rejoice with them that do rejoice, and
                      > > weep with them that weep. Be of the same mind one
                      > > toward another. Mind not high things, but condescend
                      > > to men of low estate. Be not wise in your own
                      > > conceits. Recompense to no man evil for evil.
                      > > Provide things honest in the sight of all men. If it
                      > > be possible, as much as lieth in you, live peaceably
                      > > with all men." (Rom.12:5-18).
                      > >
                      > > These are some words, as revealed by our Lord to Paul,
                      > > and have given me a special blessing as I prepare for
                      > > the power of words, and the seeds planted in the
                      > > hearts and minds of those who want neither
                      > > reformation, nor want anything to do with God's
                      > > appointed Ministers and Elders in this life.
                      > >
                      > > May the Lord be with you all,
                      > > Walt.
                      > >
                      > >
                      > >
                      > >
                      > >
                      > __________________________________________________________
                      > _______________
                      > > Need Mail bonding?
                      > > Go to the Yahoo! Mail Q&A for great tips from Yahoo! Answers
                      users.
                      > > http://answers.yahoo.com/dir/?link=list&sid=396546091
                      > >
                      >
                    • Salaam Alaykoum
                      Walt Bre wrote: For those who would like to pray for us, please join me in the following prayers
                      Message 10 of 16 , Apr 2 9:37 AM
                      • 0 Attachment
                        Walt Bre <humbled.learner@...> wrote:
                        "For those who would like to pray for us, please join
                        me in the following prayers before the feet of Christ:
                        ...
                        4) That the Lord would reveal to other Ministers and
                        Elders the lawfulness and faithfulness, in
                        extraordinary and unsettled times, of a phone
                        conference to discuss matters of church doctrine,
                        discipline, form of worship and form of government.
                        That the international phone conference, where two or
                        three ordained ministers are gathered, is indeed
                        lawful and faithful, and thereby does bring Christ
                        into their midst to rule, bind and loose as He has
                        promised in His word."

                        Dear Brethren,
                        A brother who has been recently "excommunicated" by the "Session of the RPNA(GM)" has written some excellent "articles" (if I may call them such) regarding the use of technology and some considerations that cannot be ignored.  You can find both articles on Mr. Suden's blog, using the links below.

                        Article 1:
                        http://reformedveritas.blogspot.com/2007/04/32007-q1-excommunication-by-email.html

                        Article 2:
                        http://reformedveritas.blogspot.com/2007/04/33007-for-your-consideration-q2-limits.html

                        Your sister in Christ,
                        Samantha


                        Now you can have a huge leap forward in email: get the new Yahoo! Mail.
                      • Gus Gianello
                        Dear Brother, Of that I am certain---that is, that the structure of your sentence is unacceptable, and that it is an insult to other Covenanters to call the
                        Message 11 of 16 , Apr 2 11:19 AM
                        • 0 Attachment
                          
                          Dear Brother,
                          Of that I am certain---that is, that the structure of your sentence is unacceptable, and that it is an insult to other Covenanters to call the RPNA (GM) Covenanters.  I therefore suggest a modification, that we call the RPNA (GM) the
                           
                          Reformed Presbyterian North America We Are the Only Ones Right and Can Excommunicate Any One We Prefer to (General Assembly of a Few)
                           
                          or the RPNAWAOORCEAOWP (GAF).  This is how ridiculous it gets.
                           
                          Gus Gianello
                          -----Original Message-----
                          From: covenantedreformationclub@yahoogroups.com [mailto:covenantedreformationclub@yahoogroups.com]On Behalf Of Jerry
                          Sent: Sunday, April 01, 2007 8:21 PM
                          To: covenantedreformationclub@yahoogroups.com
                          Subject: Re: [Covenanted Reformation] Re: Secret Society Paper Response


                          "Are you now telling me that "Covenanter" Reformed Presbyterian principles mean that if I become convinced the pastor/elder/ session is wrong then I must repent or be excommunicated? "

                          Let it be known that not everyone who holds to Covenanter/Reformed Presbyterian principles agrees with what these particular Reformed Presbyterians are doing, and there are some of us who find the implicit faith the RPNA (GM) [which is neither a presbytery nor a general meeting] require [??? at the very least, they allow and accept implicit faith, if not require it] to be unacceptable.

                          I also find the structure of my sentence above to be unacceptable, but you get the point.  LOL!

                          gmw.

                          Gus Gianello wrote:

                          

                          Mr. Gress,
                           
                          Cult is applied to your church because of its "cultish" approach to widows, and any who disagree with it.  What ever happened to the right of private judgement?
                           
                          And I assert that, the verse you quote, you only quote for your purposes and thereby mangle the true intent of the verse.  Correct me if I am wrong in any of my assertions.
                           
                          The word used for "consent" is

                          shekem.

                          Keil & Delitzch have this to say concerning this passage---


                          Consequently הפך אל must be explained according to 1Sa_10:9, since the circumstance that we have הפך ל in this passage does not make any material difference in the meaning. The construction in both passages is a pregnant one. God turns to the nations a pure lip, by purifying their sinful lips, i.e., He converts them, that they may be able to call upon Him with pure lips. Lip does not stand for language, but is mentioned as the organ of speech, by which a man expresses the thoughts of his heart, so that purity of the lips involves or presupposes the purification of the heart. The lips are defiled by the names of the idols whom they have invoked (cf. Hos_2:19; Psa_16:4). The fruit of the purification is this, that henceforth they call upon the name of Jehovah, and serve Him. קרא בשׁם יי, when used of men, always signifies to call solemnly or heartily upon the name of Jehovah. To serve shekhem 'echâd, with one shoulder, is to serve together or with unanimity. The metaphor is taken from bearers who carry a burden with even shoulders; cf. Jer_32:39.


                          Jeremiah 32: 39 says

                          39 And I will give them one heart and one way, that they may fear Me forever, for their good and for the good of their sons after them.

                          As an associated citation so that we may better understand the metaphoric use of the word.

                           

                          You seem to have mislaid any comments about the voluntary nature of the Church.  The church is a voluntary society of like-believing people, who organize together ostensibly to present Christ to the world.  A "cultish" church tries to compel.  Roman catholicism is a cult of implicit faith in the Pope as infallible (ex cathedra), representative of the magisterium.  MANY ostensibly Protestant churches are cults of implicit faith in either the leaders, in science, etc.  Therefore they feel justified in compelling or coercing association by threats and ostensibly judicial actions.

                          ONLY in Scripture can we have implicit faith.  In all the back-and-forth that I have seen nobody has asked the obvious  question:

                          What evidence of obduracy deserving being cast into the outer darkness and being declared an apostate is given as reason for excommunicating people?  Were they fornicators?  Were they adulterers?  It is very strange indeed that all this overblown hyperbole and swelling words of  dependence on "Presbyterian polity" NEVER quotes the example of the apostle Paul who in letter after letter after letter, shows that he deals with obstinancy in this extreme manner ONLY after every other recourse has failed and only when there is clear evidence and legitimate proceedure to compel excommunication.  Christian love DICTATES that we be compelled to excommunicate by evidence unsullied, trial unmarred, appeals unheeded, and when circumstance and incidentals deny the possibility for remedy; and always for the salvation of the erring parties and for their ultimate reconciliation.  I see NOTHING in the NT that says "excommunicate the moment somebody disagrees, refuses to take an oath or has a problem with what you are doing."   THAT is worthy of a cult.  And a cult YOU ARE, and a cultist you yourself are, if you can justify these extremes.

                          Where is the proof of their heresy?

                          Where is the proof of their blasphemy?

                          Where is the proof of their scandalous sin, deserving of immediate excommunication, without process?  What they were doing was it equal or surpassing in rebellion to God, that they need to be treated as partners in incest? (1 Cor. 5)

                          Why did not your elders do what the wise apostle did when he disagreed with Barnabas? Separate, go their separate ways, without recrimination or censure?  Are you now telling me that "Covenanter" Reformed Presbyterian principles mean that if I become convinced the pastor/elder/ session is wrong then I must repent or be excommunicated?  Is that my ONLY choice.  Can we not go our separate ways? THAT is a cult.

                          When an acquaintance of mine became a member of an OPC church I thought it a bad idea.  Because he was not convinced of infant baptism. (And it also indicated how orthodox the OPC church was that they would allow such a person to become a member)  When after struggling with it over a year he decided that he COULD NOT be convinced and wanted to leave the church, the pastor told him he would be excommunicated.  See, we dont succor wounded sheep---we slaughter them.  When an elder friend contacted me asking my opinion of this course of action, I told him it was outrageous and worthy of a cult.  That ONLY cults excommunicate people who sincerely cannot agree with them.  Thank God that the elder listened, and allowed him to leave in peace.  I know ALL about cultic excommunication.  When I was a Charismatic and a member of a Faith Movement church, I WAS excommunicated.

                          Excommunication as Jay E. Adams warns should be used reluctantly, and any time a "church(?)" rushes to it, as it seems there is evidence that your "church" has done---correct me if I am wrong, that church, those members and those elders are to be viewed with suspicion.  Any one who says "you fool" (Mat 5) quickly and not reluctantly, being not dragged to the situation, and having not constantly and repeatedly appealed, exhorted, admonished, cried over the impenitent, deserves to be called a cultist.  And that church deserves to be called a CULT.

                          Respectfully,

                          Gus Gianello

                          -----Original Message-----
                          From: covenantedreformati onclub@yahoogrou ps.com [mailto:covenantedr eformationclub@ yahoogroups. com]On Behalf Of Julian Gress
                          Sent: Sunday, April 01, 2007 2:43 PM
                          To: covenantedreformati onclub@yahoogrou ps.com
                          Subject: [Covenanted Reformation] Re: Secret Society Paper

                          Well said, brother.

                          I have been finishing up the Old Testament recently, and found a
                          great verse, Zephaniah 3:9, "For then will I turn to the people a
                          pure language, that they may all call upon the name of the Lord, to
                          serve him with one consent." This verse encourages me because in it
                          the Lord promises to make his church united in doctrine, worship,
                          government, and discipline, such that we may all serve the one Lord
                          as one body through one spirit.

                          I for one do not understand what some brethren mean they call the
                          RPNA (GM) a "cult." I once heard with reference to the "one true
                          church syndrome," but this objection has been thoroughly dealt with
                          before.

                          First, "true" as to the essence of the church, or as to the nature
                          or structure of the church, true as being or as to well-being? The
                          accusation is entirely out of order unless this detail is included.

                          Second, every church under heaven proclaims that it is the one true
                          church, by maintaining separation from other churches.

                          Third, there is and can only be one true church as to well-being, so
                          that there is no absurdity in professing one's own church to be that
                          church (for imagine one professing his church not to be the one true
                          church, faithful and well-established) . Either a church is faithful
                          in doctrine, worship, government, discipline, or it is not. If the
                          first, then it is obliged to unite with other churches of the same,
                          and if it does not do this, it is no longer a faithful church. And
                          if the second is true, then it is no true church as to well-being.
                          So if there are a number of true churches as to well-being, then
                          they will faithfully into one true church. And they will maintain
                          separation from ill or diseased churches (I mean unfaithful ones),
                          which do not add to the number of healthy churches. Hence there is
                          and can be only one true church.

                          So if the word "cult," is applied to us as meaning that we profess
                          to be the only true church, then the objection has lost its entire
                          savor, and is no objection at all, for it points toward no sin in or
                          among us.

                          Perhaps someone on this forum means something different by it? I
                          will gladly hear whatever arguments you have to put forth against us
                          being a "cult" and sincerely endeavor to satisfy your questions and
                          objections, as I am able.

                          On a separate note, I am aware that several faithful members of the
                          RPNA (GM) have left this forum because of the condemnation our
                          church has received. To avoid all confusion, I merely want to point
                          out that I do not see any obligation to leave this forum in order to
                          be faithful to the covenanted testimony we as a church hold, and
                          this is my reason: in this forum, there is no necessary obligation
                          to recognize one opinion or another, because it is granted by the
                          nature of this forum that there may be disagreements. Of course, I
                          do not intend to have familiar fellowship with any who have been
                          excommunicated from the RPNA (GM), or to violate any of my other God-
                          given duties. But unless someone points out a reason otherwise,
                          something that I have missed, or unless there is a change in
                          constitution of this forum that necessitates me to violate my oath
                          of membership in the RPNA (GM), I do not see any necessary reason to
                          leave.

                          Your brother and servant in the Lord,
                          Julian R. Gress (RPNA-GM)

                          --- In covenantedreformati onclub@yahoogrou ps.com, Walt Bre
                          <humbled.learner@ ...> wrote:
                          >
                          > Dear brethren,
                          >
                          > I know that I promised not to post again on here, and
                          > for going back on my promise I'm sorry. If you would
                          > grant me liberty to post only one document, I wanted
                          > to attach only part of the "Sins Committed By "The
                          > Effort" and Steps to Repentance" Issued by the Session
                          > of the RPNA (GM), March 22, 2007.
                          >
                          > There is also a supporting document called "Effort
                          > Emails (RPNA--GM)" that I am not including in this
                          > message to protect the names of those involved. I'm
                          > sure that people would like to read those supporting
                          > emails that are the primary reason for the Session
                          > Paper above, but I would ask you to contact Pastor
                          > Greg Price at (covpastor@. ..) if interested in
                          > the document.
                          >
                          > I saw Whit's comment this morning supporting the ideas
                          > promoted by Chris and others in the Presbyterian
                          > movement that not only are we an unfaithful church,
                          > but that we would border on the edge of the Morman
                          > Church, the Roman Catholic Ave Maria Worshippers,
                          >
                          > In interesting definition I found will most definitely
                          > scare away many people from EVER and NEVER consider
                          > even reading our Terms of Communion, and subsequent
                          > Session and Presbytery Decisions that our Church has
                          > issued since around 1996. The definition says:
                          >
                          > "Cults are groups that often exploit members
                          > psychologically and/or financially, typically by
                          > making members comply with leadership's demands
                          > through certain types of psychological manipulation,
                          > popularly called mind control, and through the
                          > inculcation of deep-seated anxious dependency on the
                          > group and its leaders.
                          >
                          > "A cult is a group or movement exhibiting a great or
                          > excessive devotion or dedication to some person, idea
                          > or thing and employing unethically manipulative
                          > techniques of persuasion and control (e.g. isolation
                          > from former friends and family, debilitation, use of
                          > special methods to heighten suggestibility and
                          > subservience, powerful group pressures, information
                          > management, suspension of individuality or critical
                          > judgement, promotion of total dependency on the group
                          > and fear of [consequences of] leaving it, etc)
                          > designed to advance the goals of the group's leaders
                          > to the actual or possible detriment of members, their
                          > families, or the community."
                          >
                          > Based upon the above definition, after our Elders have
                          > learned about the Secret Society within our own
                          > Church, I can see how not only those of us who are
                          > left inside the RPNA (GM), but those especially who
                          > were members inside the RPNA (GM) as part of this
                          > Secret Society, will be viewed likewise.
                          >
                          > After I read the documents of this Secret Society, I
                          > can understand what these guys were trying to do and I
                          > do not believe they intended to create the problems
                          > that ultimately led many away from our church (this is
                          > my own opinion). Surely, some have already admitted
                          > that they have never felt better since leaving our
                          > church, but others I'm sure may look back on The
                          > Effort and the means they used with sorrow.
                          >
                          > As I study these documents, and all the documents that
                          > make up the basis for nearly 30 excommunications, I am
                          > firmly convinced now that my brothers and sisters have
                          > misunderstood the doctrine of true Presbyterian
                          > jurisdiction and the duties of membership by oath.
                          > These two primary fundamental roots of the problem
                          > grew into a massive protest. The protest was:
                          >
                          > 1) In the form of a Secret Society led by a few within
                          > our church who wanted to make a positive impact.
                          >
                          > 2) In the form of a Public positive attack (admitted
                          > by some that a good offence is always better than a
                          > good defense) against the Elders to damage their
                          > reputations and destroy all their credibility.
                          >
                          > As I read the comments made by Whit and Chris, and
                          > others will most likely follow, I can see that as more
                          > and more people protest against us, for being strict
                          > Covenanters, the hammer is going to fall on our heads
                          > in the future. There is no doubt that as more and
                          > more people see us as a threat to their own
                          > backslidden Presbyterian churches, and their own
                          > unfaithful testimony as faithful Covenanters, the
                          > flame throwers will be forthcoming and likely with a
                          > vengeance.
                          >
                          > For those who would like to pray for us, please join
                          > me in the following prayers before the feet of Christ:
                          >
                          > 1) That the Lord will enlighten the hearts of those
                          > who participated in The Effort and reveal to them the
                          > sin of schism it caused within the RPNA (GM). For
                          > those who the Session Paper only hardens and causes
                          > more forthcoming words of vengeance against us and the
                          > Elders, that the Lord would use those words to be the
                          > seeds of another Reformation within His Church.
                          >
                          > 2) That the Lord would raise up Ministers and Elders
                          > to study intensely the testimony of the Scottish
                          > Covenanters and especially the fundamentals of how
                          > they preached biblical doctrine, discipline, form of
                          > government and form of worship. That this research
                          > and study will lead them to compare the Terms of
                          > Communion preached and practiced by the RPCNA, CLC,
                          > CRCNA, PCA and all the other Presbyterian
                          > denominations.
                          >
                          > 3) That the Lord will allow the RPNA (GM) to at the
                          > very least find one more Pastor for Edmonton and one
                          > more Ruling Elder for Albany so that we may have two
                          > ordinary locally defined Session courts, and move us
                          > away from being defined as a cult that has only an
                          > extraordinary Session court with two Ruling Elders in
                          > Edmonton and one Pastor in Albany.
                          >
                          > 4) That the Lord would reveal to other Ministers and
                          > Elders the lawfulness and faithfulness, in
                          > extraordinary and unsettled times, of a phone
                          > conference to discuss matters of church doctrine,
                          > discipline, form of worship and form of government.
                          > That the international phone conference, where two or
                          > three ordained ministers are gathered, is indeed
                          > lawful and faithful, and thereby does bring Christ
                          > into their midst to rule, bind and loose as He has
                          > promised in His word.
                          >
                          > 4) Finally, that the Lord would soon return with His
                          > vial judgments upon the earth, and that historical
                          > post millennialism will be taught from the pulpits
                          > again sending fear of the Lord into each of us
                          > Covenanters and Presbyterians. The return of his vial
                          > judgments will indeed bring whole nations to covenant
                          > together, and cause a major change where those who
                          > desire to be faithful to His Majesty and Power will be
                          > loved, rather than labeled cults and openly despised.
                          >
                          >
                          > Please forgive my spelling errors and mistakes above,
                          > but I wanted to close out with my pleas as like anyone
                          > the more I see the labels coming against those in our
                          > church I admit it does give me fear. Not so much the
                          > fear of man, as I know man cannot touch me without the
                          > approval of God, but more that I will continue to
                          > stand in the face of fear, and not let my Lord down
                          > when the whole world begins to follow suit based upon
                          > the "cult" seeds planted by Rev. C. Matthew McMahon,
                          > Chris Coldwell and Whit Roberts (he did not say it,
                          > but implied it). Indeed, these seeds are now firmly
                          > planted in the minds of many, and likely in the future
                          > the reporters and media, I suspect it will challenge
                          > all our members to stay the course.
                          >
                          > As I am now finishing my 36 time reading the bible
                          > cover-to-cover, I was in the plane flying back from
                          > Africa and something jumped out at me I've read many
                          > times before. Nevertheless, it gave me a new meaning.
                          >
                          > "Now the God of patience and consolation grant you to
                          > be likeminded one toward another according to Christ
                          > Jesus: That ye may with one mind and one mouth glorify
                          > God, even the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ.
                          > Wherefore receive ye one another, as Christ also
                          > received us to the glory of God." (Rom.15:5-7)
                          >
                          > "For as we have many members in one body, and all
                          > members have not the same office: So we, being many,
                          > are one body in Christ, and everyone members one of
                          > another. Having then gifts differing according to the
                          > grace that is given to us, whether prophecy, let us
                          > prophesy according to the proportion of faith; Or
                          > ministry, let us wait on our ministering: or he that
                          > teacheth, on teaching; Or he that exhorteth, on
                          > exhortation: he that giveth, let him do it with
                          > simplicity; he that ruleth, with diligence; he that
                          > showeth mercy, with cheerfulness. Let love be without
                          > dissimulation. Abhor that which is evil; cleave to
                          > that which is good. Be kindly affectioned one to
                          > another with brotherly love; in honor preferring one
                          > another; Not slothful in business; fervent in spirit,
                          > serving the Lord; Rejoicing in hope; patient in
                          > tribulation; continuing instant in prayer;
                          > Distributing to the necessity of saints; given to
                          > hospitality. Bless them which persecute you: bless,
                          > and curse not. Rejoice with them that do rejoice, and
                          > weep with them that weep. Be of the same mind one
                          > toward another. Mind not high things, but condescend
                          > to men of low estate. Be not wise in your own
                          > conceits. Recompense to no man evil for evil.
                          > Provide things honest in the sight of all men. If it
                          > be possible, as much as lieth in you, live peaceably
                          > with all men." (Rom.12:5-18) .
                          >
                          > These are some words, as revealed by our Lord to Paul,
                          > and have given me a special blessing as I prepare for
                          > the power of words, and the seeds planted in the
                          > hearts and minds of those who want neither
                          > reformation, nor want anything to do with God's
                          > appointed Ministers and Elders in this life.
                          >
                          > May the Lord be with you all,
                          > Walt.
                          >
                          >
                          >
                          >
                          >
                          ____________ _________ _________ _________ _________ _________ _
                          ____________ ___
                          > Need Mail bonding?
                          > Go to the Yahoo! Mail Q&A for great tips from Yahoo! Answers users.
                          > http://answers. yahoo.com/ dir/?link= list&sid= 396546091
                          >


                        • Ic Neltococayotl
                          Gus et al, (Hi Gus!) I wonder what that means for other micro-Presbyterian churches that are 5-12 congregations big, with a small number of Presbyteries that
                          Message 12 of 16 , Apr 2 4:52 PM
                          • 0 Attachment
                            Gus et al,

                            (Hi Gus!)

                            I wonder what that means for other micro-Presbyterian churches that are
                            5-12 congregations big, with a small number of Presbyteries that are not
                            regional and claim to have a General Assembly.

                            To be fair there are other micro-Presbyterian that are one congregation
                            big and yet claim to be a denomination. Or others that are very small
                            but yet claim to hold a General Assembly. Their reasons in being
                            separated from others principally are not Biblical and also tend to add
                            division to Christ's body (with so many micro-Presbies around all
                            claiming to hold the original Standards why can't they unite??).
                            Sometimes these micro-Presbyterian churches smite the "RPNA(GM)" for
                            reasons that they also hold to to some extent.

                            I will not name any names...those who know the Presbyterian scene
                            probably can figure it out.

                            I also am NOT stating that all micro-Presbyterian denominations do this,
                            but there are a select few that do.

                            I only point this out so that people realize that there does exist other
                            groups that do a similiar thing.

                            Edgar

                            Reformed Presbyterian


                            --- In covenantedreformationclub@yahoogroups.com, "Gus Gianello"
                            <dr.gus.gianello@...> wrote:
                            >
                            > Dear Brother,
                            > Of that I am certain---that is, that the structure of your sentence is
                            unacceptable, and that it is an insult to other Covenanters to call the
                            RPNA (GM) Covenanters. I therefore suggest a modification, that we call
                            the RPNA (GM) the
                            >
                            > Reformed Presbyterian North America We Are the Only Ones Right and Can
                            Excommunicate Any One We Prefer to (General Assembly of a Few)
                            >
                            > or the RPNAWAOORCEAOWP (GAF). This is how ridiculous it gets.
                            >
                            > Gus Gianello
                            > -----Original Message-----
                            > From: covenantedreformationclub@yahoogroups.com
                            [mailto:covenantedreformationclub@yahoogroups.com]On Behalf Of Jerry
                            > Sent: Sunday, April 01, 2007 8:21 PM
                            > To: covenantedreformationclub@yahoogroups.com
                            > Subject: Re: [Covenanted Reformation] Re: Secret Society Paper
                            Response
                            >
                            >
                          • Gus Gianello
                            Dear Edgar, having been excommunicated by charismatics, and excommunicated --(in absentia, without trial, without notice or process) [StiLL do not know WHY I
                            Message 13 of 16 , Apr 2 7:01 PM
                            • 0 Attachment
                              Dear Edgar,
                              having been excommunicated by charismatics, and excommunicated --(in absentia, without trial, without notice or process) [StiLL do not know WHY I was excommunicated]-- by the RPCGA, another micro denomination, I have learned the following by being in the wilderness for 10 years.
                               
                              1.  Be suspicious of ANYONE who claims to have all the answers and cant work with ANYONE who doesn't agree with everything.
                              2.  Be suspicious of ANY church/session/presbytery/synod/general assembly that is dominated by one or two men.  No matter how competent or how strong our  personalities the temptation is very great to just take over.
                              3. Be suspicious of ANYmicro-denomination that can not practice even loosest form of Reformed ecumenism.
                              4. Be suspicious of ANY micro-denomination built around a unique "insight" on the Westminster Standards.  Whether its "all presbyterian churches are unconstitutional but ours---so leave them", or whether its "refusal to incorporate is the 4th mark of the church" avoid them like the plague.
                              5.  Have NOTHING to do with a denomination that mouths the Standards but whose leaderships' behaviour is BLATANTLY contrary to it.  For instance: minister watching pornography during a GA; ministers standing up in the middle of an official meeting and rebuking everyone for some insignificant slight committed by a few; ministers who can not conduct  GAs or Presbyteries with any semblance of decency or order, Sessions that are willing to conduct potentially embarrassing meetings while not in direct session, or secret session/presbytery meetings.
                               
                               
                              Though there are legitimate differences among Reformed Presbyterian groups (for instance the American Pres. Church which denies the right of Christians to drink alcohol), these difference are NOT over substantive issues.  It is serious when a Reformed Presbyterian denomination (micro or otherwise) denies the covenant of works or that there is such a thing as ruling elders, or the legitimacy of any other denomination than their own, or that affirms that any denomination that is incorporated is substantially in error.
                               
                              When the American revision of the Confession took place, denying the original doctrine of the Assembly that there is a place for the magistrate to call a Synod, or that there is an obligation to use civil power to suppress heresy and blasphemy, ALL of the Presbyterian church in America agreed to the changes.  DOES THAT mean they were correct?  Not necessarily, but it points out that "in a multitude of counselors there is safety".  No one should depart from the Standards casually or quickly.
                               
                              Now I did not say reject micro-denominations who have these characteristics, I said BEWARE.  DO NOT take out membership or transfer membership until all your questions are answered. And you should have LOTS of questions. (Anything that is not of faith is sin) Be like the noble Bereans who checked to see if the APOSTLE Paul spoke according to the Scriptures.  Please NOTE they were not excommunicated for being suspicious of an APOSTLE, they were PRAISED.
                               
                              Hope this helps you and others.
                               
                              Gus
                               
                               
                              -----Original Message-----
                              From: covenantedreformationclub@yahoogroups.com [mailto:covenantedreformationclub@yahoogroups.com]On Behalf Of Ic Neltococayotl
                              Sent: Monday, April 02, 2007 7:53 PM
                              To: covenantedreformationclub@yahoogroups.com
                              Subject: [Covenanted Reformation] Re: Secret Society Paper Response


                              Gus et al,

                              (Hi Gus!)

                              I wonder what that means for other micro-Presbyterian churches that are
                              5-12 congregations big, with a small number of Presbyteries that are not
                              regional and claim to have a General Assembly.

                              To be fair there are other micro-Presbyterian that are one congregation
                              big and yet claim to be a denomination. Or others that are very small
                              but yet claim to hold a General Assembly. Their reasons in being
                              separated from others principally are not Biblical and also tend to add
                              division to Christ's body (with so many micro-Presbies around all
                              claiming to hold the original Standards why can't they unite??).
                              Sometimes these micro-Presbyterian churches smite the "RPNA(GM)" for
                              reasons that they also hold to to some extent.

                              I will not name any names...those who know the Presbyterian scene
                              probably can figure it out.

                              I also am NOT stating that all micro-Presbyterian denominations do this,
                              but there are a select few that do.

                              I only point this out so that people realize that there does exist other
                              groups that do a similiar thing.

                              Edgar

                              Reformed Presbyterian

                              --- In covenantedreformati onclub@yahoogrou ps.com, "Gus Gianello"
                              <dr.gus.gianello@ ...> wrote:
                              >
                              > Dear Brother,
                              > Of that I am certain---that is, that the structure of your sentence is
                              unacceptable, and that it is an insult to other Covenanters to call the
                              RPNA (GM) Covenanters. I therefore suggest a modification, that we call
                              the RPNA (GM) the
                              >
                              > Reformed Presbyterian North America We Are the Only Ones Right and Can
                              Excommunicate Any One We Prefer to (General Assembly of a Few)
                              >
                              > or the RPNAWAOORCEAOWP (GAF). This is how ridiculous it gets.
                              >
                              > Gus Gianello
                              > -----Original Message-----
                              > From: covenantedreformati onclub@yahoogrou ps.com
                              [mailto:covenantedreformati onclub@yahoogrou ps.com]On Behalf Of Jerry
                              > Sent: Sunday, April 01, 2007 8:21 PM
                              > To: covenantedreformati onclub@yahoogrou ps.com
                              > Subject: Re: [Covenanted Reformation] Re: Secret Society Paper
                              Response
                              >
                              >

                            • Gus Gianello
                              If you are interested in what I hope is an informative blog, from a consistently Protestant, that is reformed and Presbyterian perspective please see:
                              Message 14 of 16 , Apr 3 9:29 PM
                              • 0 Attachment
                                If you are interested in what I hope is an informative blog, from a consistently Protestant, that is reformed and Presbyterian perspective please see:
                                 
                                 
                                I would also encourage every list member to visit:
                                 
                                Regards,
                                 
                                Gus Gianello
                              • Julian Gress
                                Dear Gus Gianello, Just to let you know, in case you missed, I did respond to your earlier post. If you are unable to respond (due to time constraints, or
                                Message 15 of 16 , Apr 7 6:35 PM
                                • 0 Attachment
                                  Dear Gus Gianello,

                                  Just to let you know, in case you missed, I did respond to your
                                  earlier post. If you are unable to respond (due to time
                                  constraints, or other factors), I understand completely, but please
                                  reply briefly to let me know.

                                  Your servant in the Lord,
                                  Julian R. Gress

                                  --- In covenantedreformationclub@yahoogroups.com, "Julian Gress"
                                  <multiplose@...> wrote:
                                  >
                                  > Dear Gus Gianello,
                                  >
                                  > As I read your post a number of questions came to mind, things on
                                  > which I need further clarification before I can proceed to satisfy
                                  > the questions and objections you raise.
                                  >
                                  > First, I am afraid I simply do not understand what you meant when
                                  > you said, "Cult is applied to your church because of its 'cultish'
                                  > approach to widows, and any who disagree with it. Whatever
                                  happened
                                  > to the right of private judgment?" With respect to this
                                  statement,
                                  > I desire to know these things:
                                  >
                                  > First, "cult is applied to your church because of…" By whom is it
                                  > applied to my church for this reason? Does everyone who calls my
                                  > church a "cult" call it so for this reason? Who are you talking
                                  > about? Are you talking about only yourself, or others as well?
                                  >
                                  > Second, What exactly is our "cultish" approach to widows and those
                                  > who disagree with us?
                                  >
                                  > Third, What do you mean by the term "widows"? I do not understand
                                  > if you mean actual widows, or some other sense of the term. When
                                  I
                                  > read in Scripture that we are to protect the widow and the orphan,
                                  I
                                  > understand these to be specific instances of a general rule, to
                                  > protect those who are especially vulnerable to oppression. For
                                  > instance, no one should rob the rich or the poor, but to rob from
                                  > the poor is far worse, since they are especially vulnerable to
                                  it.
                                  > What exactly do you mean by using this word, and what are you
                                  saying?
                                  >
                                  > Fourth, After this you add, "And any who disagree with it." The
                                  > natural sense of this seems to me, anyone who maintains that we
                                  are
                                  > not a faithful church, as to our well-being, and, on those
                                  grounds,
                                  > anyone who will not unite with us. But I cannot be certain, so I
                                  > ask who exactly are you referring to?
                                  >
                                  > Fifth, when you say, "What ever happened to the right of private
                                  > judgment?" What do you take that to be, "the right of private
                                  > judgment"? And furthermore, how does it relate to your previous
                                  > assertion concerning our "cultish" approach to widows and any who
                                  > disagree with us?
                                  >
                                  > Sixth, I cannot tell in these words (taken as a whole) whether you
                                  > are referring to members of the RPNA (GM), former-members of the
                                  > RPNA (GM), people who are not members and never have been, or any
                                  > two or all three of these categories. Who exactly do you mean to
                                  > include here?
                                  >
                                  > Second, in your next statement you say, "And I assert that, the
                                  > verse you quote, you only quote for your purposes and thereby
                                  mangle
                                  > the true intent of the verse. Correct me if I am wrong in any of
                                  my
                                  > assertions." Again, I must express my confusion in the following
                                  > things:
                                  >
                                  > First, you say that I only quote it for "[my] purposes," and I
                                  > desire to know what exactly my purposes are when I quote this
                                  > verse. As far as I am aware I cited it in the same way as Walt
                                  did
                                  > Romans 15:5-7, as it being a source of personal comfort and
                                  > encouragement to me.
                                  >
                                  > Second, "and thereby mangle the true intent of the verse." Part
                                  of
                                  > my confusion arises in that I do not understand what goes before
                                  > it. For you say that because I use it for "[my] purposes,"
                                  > I, "thereby mangle the true intent of the verse." You say, then,
                                  > that because I used it for my own causes, I therefore mangled its
                                  > true intent. And if that is the cause of my error, then I ask not
                                  > only how I have used it for "[my] purposes," but how, by doing so,
                                  I
                                  > have mangled its true intent.
                                  >
                                  > Third, but there arises another confusion in these words,
                                  > particularly in the phrase, "the true intent" (of the verse). The
                                  > word intent, I understand to mean a purpose or a goal, or the
                                  reason
                                  > by which a choice is made, but afterwards you offer a very clear
                                  > interpretation of its meaning, but not of its use or application
                                  > (which, I take it would be the reason that God has included it in
                                  > his word). So, I ask, do you mean to say, "The true meaning" of
                                  the
                                  > verse, or its "true intent"?
                                  >
                                  > Fourth, after making all these assertions, you say, "Correct me if
                                  I
                                  > am wrong in any of my assertions." I am of course, most willing
                                  to
                                  > correct you in any of your wrong assertions, once I know what
                                  those
                                  > assertions are.
                                  >
                                  > Fifth, but when you say this, I wonder why you have chosen to make
                                  > these "assertions," and then ask for my correction. Are you
                                  making
                                  > assertions, or are you asking questions? I humbly think that you
                                  > can not do both, for a question implies ignorance, and a statement
                                  > implies knowledge. And I take it that this imperative is no less
                                  a
                                  > question, as if it were in the form of a question, for it still
                                  > implies ignorance, as if you sensed that you needed or might need
                                  > correction. Unless you mean it rhetorically, as if to say, "This
                                  is
                                  > the way it is, and no other way is it, besides this. However, I
                                  am
                                  > willing to submit to your superior knowledge if it is not this way
                                  > (but it is)." In which case, I do not know if you actually expect
                                  > me to correct your assertions, or simply to consider for my own
                                  > sake, whether I can find anything wrong about them.
                                  >
                                  > Sixth, do accuse me of sin in these words?
                                  >
                                  > Third, I have some questions concerning the paragraph that
                                  > begins, "You seem to have mislaid any comments…"
                                  >
                                  > First, when you said, "You seem to have mislaid any comments…" do
                                  > you mean that I have mislaid these comments in the sense that the
                                  > comments themselves are mislaid, or in other words, the statements
                                  > themselves are false, or, however true they are or may be, I have
                                  > used them in the wrong way, or applied them inaccurately, and
                                  > hence "mislaid" them.
                                  >
                                  > Second, what exactly do you mean by the word "voluntary," both
                                  with
                                  > respect to my comments about the "voluntary" nature of the church,
                                  > and with respect to you calling the church a "voluntary" society?
                                  > Third, what exactly are the things in which "like-believing
                                  people"
                                  > must be "like-believing" in order to organize as a church?
                                  >
                                  > Fourth, what do you mean by the word "ostensibly"? How is the
                                  > church made of those who meet together "ostensibly"? And how do
                                  you
                                  > mean this word in the other places you use it in this paragraph?
                                  >
                                  > Fifth, with general regard to your statements about the nature of
                                  > the church, do you hold to and believe The Form of Presbyterial
                                  > Church Government?
                                  >
                                  > Sixth, when you say that a "cultish" church does this or that, do
                                  > you mean that it is essential to the cultishness of a church that
                                  it
                                  > does this or that, or that it is a common characteristic of cults,
                                  > but not a necessary one, that they do this or that?
                                  >
                                  > Seventh, when you say that a "cultish" church tries to compel,
                                  what
                                  > do you mean by "compel"? Is it compelling in general, or is it a
                                  > form of compelling that is unjust in itself, or is it unjust
                                  insofar
                                  > as the compelling is done in certain circumstances, or in such a
                                  > manner, or does it altogether depend on what they are being
                                  > compelled to do or believe, or how they are being compelled to do
                                  or
                                  > believe it?
                                  >
                                  > Eighth, for when you mention "implicit faith," I do not know if
                                  you
                                  > intend this as a general example of cults trying to "compel," or
                                  as
                                  > the specific instance where they wrongfully "compel" others.
                                  >
                                  > Ninth, what do you understand, "implicit faith," to mean? I am
                                  > unable from the context in which you use it to understand how you
                                  > use it.
                                  >
                                  > Tenth, does it matter at all who they try to compel, members or
                                  non-
                                  > members, or former-members?
                                  >
                                  > Eleventh, what do you mean by "compelling or coercing association
                                  by
                                  > threats or ostensibly judicial actions," a sentence so vague that
                                  I
                                  > cannot understand the meaning of it.
                                  >
                                  > Fourthly, with regard to all that you have said concerning
                                  > excommunication, I ask the following questions:
                                  >
                                  > First, what are the conditions that must be met in order for
                                  > excommunication to be lawful and just?
                                  >
                                  > Second, when you say, "I see NOTHING in the NT that
                                  > says, `Excommunicate…'" why do you say that you see nothing in the
                                  > New Testament? Do you deny that both the Old and New Testaments
                                  are
                                  > the Word of God, the only rule of faith and practice?
                                  >
                                  > Third, you say that my "church" has rushed to excommunication.
                                  What
                                  > do you mean when you put our church in quotation brackets? Are
                                  you
                                  > implying that we are no church at all? And how do your previous
                                  > comments, such as when you said that the term "cult" is applied to
                                  > my church at the beginning of your post, how do these comments
                                  > square with what you say about my "so-called" church?
                                  >
                                  > Fourth, again, you say, "Correct me if I am wrong," and the same
                                  > question still applies as before, are you uncertain of what you
                                  > say? And having heard this same thing twice, I ask generally, how
                                  > certain are you of the facts of the case?
                                  >
                                  > As you acknowledge in your final paragraph, we are not to be rash
                                  in
                                  > matters of great weight, therefore before I respond to your
                                  > questions and objections, I would like to make sure that I fully
                                  > understand them, so that I do not reply like a babbling fool, and
                                  > you say, "No, that's not what I meant." As the Scripture
                                  says, "The
                                  > heart of the righteous studieth to answer: but the mouth of the
                                  > wicked poureth out evil things," and, "He that answereth a matter
                                  > before he heareth it, it is folly and shame unto him" (Proverbs
                                  > 15:28, 18:13).
                                  >
                                  > Your servant in the Lord,
                                  > Julian R. Gress
                                  >
                                  >
                                  >
                                  >
                                  > --- In covenantedreformationclub@yahoogroups.com, "Gus Gianello"
                                  > <dr.gus.gianello@> wrote:
                                  > >
                                  > > Mr. Gress,
                                  > >
                                  > > Cult is applied to your church because of its "cultish" approach
                                  > to widows, and any who disagree with it. What ever happened to
                                  the
                                  > right of private judgement?
                                  > >
                                  > > And I assert that, the verse you quote, you only quote for your
                                  > purposes and thereby mangle the true intent of the verse. Correct
                                  > me if I am wrong in any of my assertions.
                                  > >
                                  > > The word used for "consent" is
                                  > > shekem.
                                  > >
                                  > > Keil & Delitzch have this to say concerning this passage---
                                  > >
                                  > >
                                  > > -----------------------------------------------------------------
                                  --
                                  > -------------
                                  > >
                                  > >
                                  > > Consequently ×"פך אל must be explained according to
                                  1Sa_10:9,
                                  > since the circumstance that we have ×"פך ל in this passage does
                                  > not make any material difference in the meaning. The construction
                                  in
                                  > both passages is a pregnant one. God turns to the nations a pure
                                  > lip, by purifying their sinful lips, i.e., He converts them, that
                                  > they may be able to call upon Him with pure lips. Lip does not
                                  stand
                                  > for language, but is mentioned as the organ of speech, by which a
                                  > man expresses the thoughts of his heart, so that purity of the
                                  lips
                                  > involves or presupposes the purification of the heart. The lips
                                  are
                                  > defiled by the names of the idols whom they have invoked (cf.
                                  > Hos_2:19; Psa_16:4). The fruit of the purification is this, that
                                  > henceforth they call upon the name of Jehovah, and serve Him.
                                  קרא
                                  > ×`שׁם יי, when used of men, always signifies to call solemnly
                                  > or heartily upon the name of Jehovah. To serve shekhem 'echâd,
                                  > with one shoulder, is to serve together or with unanimity. The
                                  > metaphor is taken from bearers who carry a burden with even
                                  > shoulders; cf. Jer_32:39.
                                  > >
                                  > >
                                  > > -----------------------------------------------------------------
                                  --
                                  > -------------
                                  > >
                                  > >
                                  > > Jeremiah 32: 39 says
                                  > >
                                  > > 39 And I will give them one heart and one way, that they may
                                  fear
                                  > Me forever, for their good and for the good of their sons after
                                  > them.
                                  > >
                                  > > As an associated citation so that we may better understand the
                                  > metaphoric use of the word.
                                  > >
                                  > >
                                  > >
                                  > > You seem to have mislaid any comments about the voluntary nature
                                  > of the Church. The church is a voluntary society of like-
                                  believing
                                  > people, who organize together ostensibly to present Christ to the
                                  > world. A "cultish" church tries to compel. Roman catholicism is
                                  a
                                  > cult of implicit faith in the Pope as infallible (ex cathedra),
                                  > representative of the magisterium. MANY ostensibly Protestant
                                  > churches are cults of implicit faith in either the leaders, in
                                  > science, etc. Therefore they feel justified in compelling or
                                  > coercing association by threats and ostensibly judicial actions.
                                  > >
                                  > > ONLY in Scripture can we have implicit faith. In all the back-
                                  and-
                                  > forth that I have seen nobody has asked the obvious question:
                                  > >
                                  > > What evidence of obduracy deserving being cast into the outer
                                  > darkness and being declared an apostate is given as reason for
                                  > excommunicating people? Were they fornicators? Were they
                                  > adulterers? It is very strange indeed that all this overblown
                                  > hyperbole and swelling words of dependence on "Presbyterian
                                  polity"
                                  > NEVER quotes the example of the apostle Paul who in letter after
                                  > letter after letter, shows that he deals with obstinancy in this
                                  > extreme manner ONLY after every other recourse has failed and only
                                  > when there is clear evidence and legitimate proceedure to compel
                                  > excommunication. Christian love DICTATES that we be compelled to
                                  > excommunicate by evidence unsullied, trial unmarred, appeals
                                  > unheeded, and when circumstance and incidentals deny the
                                  possibility
                                  > for remedy; and always for the salvation of the erring parties and
                                  > for their ultimate reconciliation. I see NOTHING in the NT that
                                  > says "excommunicate the moment somebody disagrees, refuses to take
                                  > an oath or has a problem with what you are doing." THAT is
                                  worthy
                                  > of a cult. And a cult YOU ARE, and a cultist you yourself are, if
                                  > you can justify these extremes.
                                  > >
                                  > > Where is the proof of their heresy?
                                  > >
                                  > > Where is the proof of their blasphemy?
                                  > >
                                  > > Where is the proof of their scandalous sin, deserving of
                                  immediate
                                  > excommunication, without process? What they were doing was it
                                  equal
                                  > or surpassing in rebellion to God, that they need to be treated as
                                  > partners in incest? (1 Cor. 5)
                                  > >
                                  > > Why did not your elders do what the wise apostle did when he
                                  > disagreed with Barnabas? Separate, go their separate ways, without
                                  > recrimination or censure? Are you now telling me
                                  that "Covenanter"
                                  > Reformed Presbyterian principles mean that if I become convinced
                                  the
                                  > pastor/elder/session is wrong then I must repent or be
                                  > excommunicated? Is that my ONLY choice. Can we not go our
                                  separate
                                  > ways? THAT is a cult.
                                  > >
                                  > > When an acquaintance of mine became a member of an OPC church I
                                  > thought it a bad idea. Because he was not convinced of infant
                                  > baptism. (And it also indicated how orthodox the OPC church was
                                  that
                                  > they would allow such a person to become a member) When after
                                  > struggling with it over a year he decided that he COULD NOT be
                                  > convinced and wanted to leave the church, the pastor told him he
                                  > would be excommunicated. See, we dont succor wounded sheep---we
                                  > slaughter them. When an elder friend contacted me asking my
                                  opinion
                                  > of this course of action, I told him it was outrageous and worthy
                                  of
                                  > a cult. That ONLY cults excommunicate people who sincerely cannot
                                  > agree with them. Thank God that the elder listened, and allowed
                                  him
                                  > to leave in peace. I know ALL about cultic excommunication. When
                                  I
                                  > was a Charismatic and a member of a Faith Movement church, I WAS
                                  > excommunicated.
                                  > >
                                  > > Excommunication as Jay E. Adams warns should be used
                                  reluctantly,
                                  > and any time a "church(?)" rushes to it, as it seems there is
                                  > evidence that your "church" has done---correct me if I am wrong,
                                  > that church, those members and those elders are to be viewed with
                                  > suspicion. Any one who says "you fool" (Mat 5) quickly and not
                                  > reluctantly, being not dragged to the situation, and having not
                                  > constantly and repeatedly appealed, exhorted, admonished, cried
                                  over
                                  > the impenitent, deserves to be called a cultist. And that church
                                  > deserves to be called a CULT.
                                  > >
                                  > > Respectfully,
                                  > >
                                  > > Gus Gianello
                                  > >
                                  > > -----Original Message-----
                                  > > From: covenantedreformationclub@yahoogroups.com
                                  > [mailto:covenantedreformationclub@yahoogroups.com]On Behalf Of
                                  > Julian Gress
                                  > > Sent: Sunday, April 01, 2007 2:43 PM
                                  > > To: covenantedreformationclub@yahoogroups.com
                                  > > Subject: [Covenanted Reformation] Re: Secret Society Paper
                                  > >
                                  > >
                                  > > Well said, brother.
                                  > >
                                  > > I have been finishing up the Old Testament recently, and found
                                  a
                                  > > great verse, Zephaniah 3:9, "For then will I turn to the
                                  people
                                  > a
                                  > > pure language, that they may all call upon the name of the
                                  Lord,
                                  > to
                                  > > serve him with one consent." This verse encourages me because
                                  in
                                  > it
                                  > > the Lord promises to make his church united in doctrine,
                                  > worship,
                                  > > government, and discipline, such that we may all serve the one
                                  > Lord
                                  > > as one body through one spirit.
                                  > >
                                  > > I for one do not understand what some brethren mean they call
                                  > the
                                  > > RPNA (GM) a "cult." I once heard with reference to the "one
                                  true
                                  > > church syndrome," but this objection has been thoroughly dealt
                                  > with
                                  > > before.
                                  > >
                                  > > First, "true" as to the essence of the church, or as to the
                                  > nature
                                  > > or structure of the church, true as being or as to well-being?
                                  > The
                                  > > accusation is entirely out of order unless this detail is
                                  > included.
                                  > >
                                  > > Second, every church under heaven proclaims that it is the one
                                  > true
                                  > > church, by maintaining separation from other churches.
                                  > >
                                  > > Third, there is and can only be one true church as to well-
                                  > being, so
                                  > > that there is no absurdity in professing one's own church to
                                  be
                                  > that
                                  > > church (for imagine one professing his church not to be the
                                  one
                                  > true
                                  > > church, faithful and well-established). Either a church is
                                  > faithful
                                  > > in doctrine, worship, government, discipline, or it is not. If
                                  > the
                                  > > first, then it is obliged to unite with other churches of the
                                  > same,
                                  > > and if it does not do this, it is no longer a faithful church.
                                  > And
                                  > > if the second is true, then it is no true church as to well-
                                  > being.
                                  > > So if there are a number of true churches as to well-being,
                                  then
                                  > > they will faithfully into one true church. And they will
                                  > maintain
                                  > > separation from ill or diseased churches (I mean unfaithful
                                  > ones),
                                  > > which do not add to the number of healthy churches. Hence
                                  there
                                  > is
                                  > > and can be only one true church.
                                  > >
                                  > > So if the word "cult," is applied to us as meaning that we
                                  > profess
                                  > > to be the only true church, then the objection has lost its
                                  > entire
                                  > > savor, and is no objection at all, for it points toward no sin
                                  > in or
                                  > > among us.
                                  > >
                                  > > Perhaps someone on this forum means something different by it?
                                  I
                                  > > will gladly hear whatever arguments you have to put forth
                                  > against us
                                  > > being a "cult" and sincerely endeavor to satisfy your
                                  questions
                                  > and
                                  > > objections, as I am able.
                                  > >
                                  > > On a separate note, I am aware that several faithful members
                                  of
                                  > the
                                  > > RPNA (GM) have left this forum because of the condemnation our
                                  > > church has received. To avoid all confusion, I merely want to
                                  > point
                                  > > out that I do not see any obligation to leave this forum in
                                  > order to
                                  > > be faithful to the covenanted testimony we as a church hold,
                                  and
                                  > > this is my reason: in this forum, there is no necessary
                                  > obligation
                                  > > to recognize one opinion or another, because it is granted by
                                  > the
                                  > > nature of this forum that there may be disagreements. Of
                                  course,
                                  > I
                                  > > do not intend to have familiar fellowship with any who have
                                  been
                                  > > excommunicated from the RPNA (GM), or to violate any of my
                                  other
                                  > God-
                                  > > given duties. But unless someone points out a reason
                                  otherwise,
                                  > > something that I have missed, or unless there is a change in
                                  > > constitution of this forum that necessitates me to violate my
                                  > oath
                                  > > of membership in the RPNA (GM), I do not see any necessary
                                  > reason to
                                  > > leave.
                                  > >
                                  > > Your brother and servant in the Lord,
                                  > > Julian R. Gress (RPNA-GM)
                                  > >
                                  > > --- In covenantedreformationclub@yahoogroups.com, Walt Bre
                                  > > <humbled.learner@> wrote:
                                  > > >
                                  > > > Dear brethren,
                                  > > >
                                  > > > I know that I promised not to post again on here, and
                                  > > > for going back on my promise I'm sorry. If you would
                                  > > > grant me liberty to post only one document, I wanted
                                  > > > to attach only part of the "Sins Committed By "The
                                  > > > Effort" and Steps to Repentance" Issued by the Session
                                  > > > of the RPNA (GM), March 22, 2007.
                                  > > >
                                  > > > There is also a supporting document called "Effort
                                  > > > Emails (RPNA--GM)" that I am not including in this
                                  > > > message to protect the names of those involved. I'm
                                  > > > sure that people would like to read those supporting
                                  > > > emails that are the primary reason for the Session
                                  > > > Paper above, but I would ask you to contact Pastor
                                  > > > Greg Price at (covpastor@) if interested in
                                  > > > the document.
                                  > > >
                                  > > > I saw Whit's comment this morning supporting the ideas
                                  > > > promoted by Chris and others in the Presbyterian
                                  > > > movement that not only are we an unfaithful church,
                                  > > > but that we would border on the edge of the Morman
                                  > > > Church, the Roman Catholic Ave Maria Worshippers,
                                  > > >
                                  > > > In interesting definition I found will most definitely
                                  > > > scare away many people from EVER and NEVER consider
                                  > > > even reading our Terms of Communion, and subsequent
                                  > > > Session and Presbytery Decisions that our Church has
                                  > > > issued since around 1996. The definition says:
                                  > > >
                                  > > > "Cults are groups that often exploit members
                                  > > > psychologically and/or financially, typically by
                                  > > > making members comply with leadership's demands
                                  > > > through certain types of psychological manipulation,
                                  > > > popularly called mind control, and through the
                                  > > > inculcation of deep-seated anxious dependency on the
                                  > > > group and its leaders.
                                  > > >
                                  > > > "A cult is a group or movement exhibiting a great or
                                  > > > excessive devotion or dedication to some person, idea
                                  > > > or thing and employing unethically manipulative
                                  > > > techniques of persuasion and control (e.g. isolation
                                  > > > from former friends and family, debilitation, use of
                                  > > > special methods to heighten suggestibility and
                                  > > > subservience, powerful group pressures, information
                                  > > > management, suspension of individuality or critical
                                  > > > judgement, promotion of total dependency on the group
                                  > > > and fear of [consequences of] leaving it, etc)
                                  > > > designed to advance the goals of the group's leaders
                                  > > > to the actual or possible detriment of members, their
                                  > > > families, or the community."
                                  > > >
                                  > > > Based upon the above definition, after our Elders have
                                  > > > learned about the Secret Society within our own
                                  > > > Church, I can see how not only those of us who are
                                  > > > left inside the RPNA (GM), but those especially who
                                  > > > were members inside the RPNA (GM) as part of this
                                  > > > Secret Society, will be viewed likewise.
                                  > > >
                                  > > > After I read the documents of this Secret Society, I
                                  > > > can understand what these guys were trying to do and I
                                  > > > do not believe they intended to create the problems
                                  > > > that ultimately led many away from our church (this is
                                  > > > my own opinion). Surely, some have already admitted
                                  > > > that they have never felt better since leaving our
                                  > > > church, but others I'm sure may look back on The
                                  > > > Effort and the means they used with sorrow.
                                  > > >
                                  > > > As I study these documents, and all the documents that
                                  > > > make up the basis for nearly 30 excommunications, I am
                                  > > > firmly convinced now that my brothers and sisters have
                                  > > > misunderstood the doctrine of true Presbyterian
                                  > > > jurisdiction and the duties of membership by oath.
                                  > > > These two primary fundamental roots of the problem
                                  > > > grew into a massive protest. The protest was:
                                  > > >
                                  > > > 1) In the form of a Secret Society led by a few within
                                  > > > our church who wanted to make a positive impact.
                                  > > >
                                  > > > 2) In the form of a Public positive attack (admitted
                                  > > > by some that a good offence is always better than a
                                  > > > good defense) against the Elders to damage their
                                  > > > reputations and destroy all their credibility.
                                  > > >
                                  > > > As I read the comments made by Whit and Chris, and
                                  > > > others will most likely follow, I can see that as more
                                  > > > and more people protest against us, for being strict
                                  > > > Covenanters, the hammer is going to fall on our heads
                                  > > > in the future. There is no doubt that as more and
                                  > > > more people see us as a threat to their own
                                  > > > backslidden Presbyterian churches, and their own
                                  > > > unfaithful testimony as faithful Covenanters, the
                                  > > > flame throwers will be forthcoming and likely with a
                                  > > > vengeance.
                                  > > >
                                  > > > For those who would like to pray for us, please join
                                  > > > me in the following prayers before the feet of Christ:
                                  > > >
                                  > > > 1) That the Lord will enlighten the hearts of those
                                  > > > who participated in The Effort and reveal to them the
                                  > > > sin of schism it caused within the RPNA (GM). For
                                  > > > those who the Session Paper only hardens and causes
                                  > > > more forthcoming words of vengeance against us and the
                                  > > > Elders, that the Lord would use those words to be the
                                  > > > seeds of another Reformation within His Church.
                                  > > >
                                  > > > 2) That the Lord would raise up Ministers and Elders
                                  > > > to study intensely the testimony of the Scottish
                                  > > > Covenanters and especially the fundamentals of how
                                  > > > they preached biblical doctrine, discipline, form of
                                  > > > government and form of worship. That this research
                                  > > > and study will lead them to compare the Terms of
                                  > > > Communion preached and practiced by the RPCNA, CLC,
                                  > > > CRCNA, PCA and all the other Presbyterian
                                  > > > denominations.
                                  > > >
                                  > > > 3) That the Lord will allow the RPNA (GM) to at the
                                  > > > very least find one more Pastor for Edmonton and one
                                  > > > more Ruling Elder for Albany so that we may have two
                                  > > > ordinary locally defined Session courts, and move us
                                  > > > away from being defined as a cult that has only an
                                  > > > extraordinary Session court with two Ruling Elders in
                                  > > > Edmonton and one Pastor in Albany.
                                  > > >
                                  > > > 4) That the Lord would reveal to other Ministers and
                                  > > > Elders the lawfulness and faithfulness, in
                                  > > > extraordinary and unsettled times, of a phone
                                  > > > conference to discuss matters of church doctrine,
                                  > > > discipline, form of worship and form of government.
                                  > > > That the international phone conference, where two or
                                  > > > three ordained ministers are gathered, is indeed
                                  > > > lawful and faithful, and thereby does bring Christ
                                  > > > into their midst to rule, bind and loose as He has
                                  > > > promised in His word.
                                  > > >
                                  > > > 4) Finally, that the Lord would soon return with His
                                  > > > vial judgments upon the earth, and that historical
                                  > > > post millennialism will be taught from the pulpits
                                  > > > again sending fear of the Lord into each of us
                                  > > > Covenanters and Presbyterians. The return of his vial
                                  > > > judgments will indeed bring whole nations to covenant
                                  > > > together, and cause a major change where those who
                                  > > > desire to be faithful to His Majesty and Power will be
                                  > > > loved, rather than labeled cults and openly despised.
                                  > > >
                                  > > >
                                  > > > Please forgive my spelling errors and mistakes above,
                                  > > > but I wanted to close out with my pleas as like anyone
                                  > > > the more I see the labels coming against those in our
                                  > > > church I admit it does give me fear. Not so much the
                                  > > > fear of man, as I know man cannot touch me without the
                                  > > > approval of God, but more that I will continue to
                                  > > > stand in the face of fear, and not let my Lord down
                                  > > > when the whole world begins to follow suit based upon
                                  > > > the "cult" seeds planted by Rev. C. Matthew McMahon,
                                  > > > Chris Coldwell and Whit Roberts (he did not say it,
                                  > > > but implied it). Indeed, these seeds are now firmly
                                  > > > planted in the minds of many, and likely in the future
                                  > > > the reporters and media, I suspect it will challenge
                                  > > > all our members to stay the course.
                                  > > >
                                  > > > As I am now finishing my 36 time reading the bible
                                  > > > cover-to-cover, I was in the plane flying back from
                                  > > > Africa and something jumped out at me I've read many
                                  > > > times before. Nevertheless, it gave me a new meaning.
                                  > > >
                                  > > > "Now the God of patience and consolation grant you to
                                  > > > be likeminded one toward another according to Christ
                                  > > > Jesus: That ye may with one mind and one mouth glorify
                                  > > > God, even the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ.
                                  > > > Wherefore receive ye one another, as Christ also
                                  > > > received us to the glory of God." (Rom.15:5-7)
                                  > > >
                                  > > > "For as we have many members in one body, and all
                                  > > > members have not the same office: So we, being many,
                                  > > > are one body in Christ, and everyone members one of
                                  > > > another. Having then gifts differing according to the
                                  > > > grace that is given to us, whether prophecy, let us
                                  > > > prophesy according to the proportion of faith; Or
                                  > > > ministry, let us wait on our ministering: or he that
                                  > > > teacheth, on teaching; Or he that exhorteth, on
                                  > > > exhortation: he that giveth, let him do it with
                                  > > > simplicity; he that ruleth, with diligence; he that
                                  > > > showeth mercy, with cheerfulness. Let love be without
                                  > > > dissimulation. Abhor that which is evil; cleave to
                                  > > > that which is good. Be kindly affectioned one to
                                  > > > another with brotherly love; in honor preferring one
                                  > > > another; Not slothful in business; fervent in spirit,
                                  > > > serving the Lord; Rejoicing in hope; patient in
                                  > > > tribulation; continuing instant in prayer;
                                  > > > Distributing to the necessity of saints; given to
                                  > > > hospitality. Bless them which persecute you: bless,
                                  > > > and curse not. Rejoice with them that do rejoice, and
                                  > > > weep with them that weep. Be of the same mind one
                                  > > > toward another. Mind not high things, but condescend
                                  > > > to men of low estate. Be not wise in your own
                                  > > > conceits. Recompense to no man evil for evil.
                                  > > > Provide things honest in the sight of all men. If it
                                  > > > be possible, as much as lieth in you, live peaceably
                                  > > > with all men." (Rom.12:5-18).
                                  > > >
                                  > > > These are some words, as revealed by our Lord to Paul,
                                  > > > and have given me a special blessing as I prepare for
                                  > > > the power of words, and the seeds planted in the
                                  > > > hearts and minds of those who want neither
                                  > > > reformation, nor want anything to do with God's
                                  > > > appointed Ministers and Elders in this life.
                                  > > >
                                  > > > May the Lord be with you all,
                                  > > > Walt.
                                  > > >
                                  > > >
                                  > > >
                                  > > >
                                  > > >
                                  > > __________________________________________________________
                                  > > _______________
                                  > > > Need Mail bonding?
                                  > > > Go to the Yahoo! Mail Q&A for great tips from Yahoo! Answers
                                  > users.
                                  > > > http://answers.yahoo.com/dir/?link=list&sid=396546091
                                  > > >
                                  > >
                                  >
                                • Gus Gianello
                                  Mr. Gress, I missed it, since there are a flurry of posts, and I do not have the time to keep up. Please repost them. Cordially, Gus Gianello ... From:
                                  Message 16 of 16 , Apr 9 2:23 AM
                                  • 0 Attachment
                                    Message
                                    Mr. Gress,
                                    I missed it, since there are a flurry of posts, and I do not have the time to keep up. Please repost them.
                                     
                                    Cordially,
                                    Gus Gianello
                                    -----Original Message-----
                                    From: covenantedreformationclub@yahoogroups.com [mailto:covenantedreformationclub@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Julian Gress
                                    Sent: Saturday, April 07, 2007 9:35 PM
                                    To: covenantedreformationclub@yahoogroups.com
                                    Subject: [Covenanted Reformation] Re: Secret Society Paper Response

                                    Dear Gus Gianello,

                                    Just to let you know, in case you missed, I did respond to your
                                    earlier post. If you are unable to respond (due to time
                                    constraints, or other factors), I understand completely, but please
                                    reply briefly to let me know.

                                    Your servant in the Lord,
                                    Julian R. Gress

                                    --- In covenantedreformati onclub@yahoogrou ps.com, "Julian Gress"
                                    <multiplose@ ...> wrote:
                                    >
                                    > Dear Gus Gianello,
                                    >
                                    > As I read your post a number of questions came to mind, things on
                                    > which I need further clarification before I can proceed to satisfy
                                    > the questions and objections you raise.
                                    >
                                    > First, I am afraid I simply do not understand what you meant when
                                    > you said, "Cult is applied to your church because of its 'cultish'
                                    > approach to widows, and any who disagree with it. Whatever
                                    happened
                                    > to the right of private judgment?" With respect to this
                                    statement,
                                    > I desire to know these things:
                                    >
                                    > First, "cult is applied to your church because of…" By whom is it
                                    > applied to my church for this reason? Does everyone who calls my
                                    > church a "cult" call it so for this reason? Who are you talking
                                    > about? Are you talking about only yourself, or others as well?
                                    >
                                    > Second, What exactly is our "cultish" approach to widows and those
                                    > who disagree with us?
                                    >
                                    > Third, What do you mean by the term "widows"? I do not understand
                                    > if you mean actual widows, or some other sense of the term. When
                                    I
                                    > read in Scripture that we are to protect the widow and the orphan,
                                    I
                                    > understand these to be specific instances of a general rule, to
                                    > protect those who are especially vulnerable to oppression. For
                                    > instance, no one should rob the rich or the poor, but to rob from
                                    > the poor is far worse, since they are especially vulnerable to
                                    it.
                                    > What exactly do you mean by using this word, and what are you
                                    saying?
                                    >
                                    > Fourth, After this you add, "And any who disagree with it." The
                                    > natural sense of this seems to me, anyone who maintains that we
                                    are
                                    > not a faithful church, as to our well-being, and, on those
                                    grounds,
                                    > anyone who will not unite with us. But I cannot be certain, so I
                                    > ask who exactly are you referring to?
                                    >
                                    > Fifth, when you say, "What ever happened to the right of private
                                    > judgment?" What do you take that to be, "the right of private
                                    > judgment"? And furthermore, how does it relate to your previous
                                    > assertion concerning our "cultish" approach to widows and any who
                                    > disagree with us?
                                    >
                                    > Sixth, I cannot tell in these words (taken as a whole) whether you
                                    > are referring to members of the RPNA (GM), former-members of the
                                    > RPNA (GM), people who are not members and never have been, or any
                                    > two or all three of these categories. Who exactly do you mean to
                                    > include here?
                                    >
                                    > Second, in your next statement you say, "And I assert that, the
                                    > verse you quote, you only quote for your purposes and thereby
                                    mangle
                                    > the true intent of the verse. Correct me if I am wrong in any of
                                    my
                                    > assertions." Again, I must express my confusion in the following
                                    > things:
                                    >
                                    > First, you say that I only quote it for "[my] purposes," and I
                                    > desire to know what exactly my purposes are when I quote this
                                    > verse. As far as I am aware I cited it in the same way as Walt
                                    did
                                    > Romans 15:5-7, as it being a source of personal comfort and
                                    > encouragement to me.
                                    >
                                    > Second, "and thereby mangle the true intent of the verse." Part
                                    of
                                    > my confusion arises in that I do not understand what goes before
                                    > it. For you say that because I use it for "[my] purposes,"
                                    > I, "thereby mangle the true intent of the verse." You say, then,
                                    > that because I used it for my own causes, I therefore mangled its
                                    > true intent. And if that is the cause of my error, then I ask not
                                    > only how I have used it for "[my] purposes," but how, by doing so,
                                    I
                                    > have mangled its true intent.
                                    >
                                    > Third, but there arises another confusion in these words,
                                    > particularly in the phrase, "the true intent" (of the verse). The
                                    > word intent, I understand to mean a purpose or a goal, or the
                                    reason
                                    > by which a choice is made, but afterwards you offer a very clear
                                    > interpretation of its meaning, but not of its use or application
                                    > (which, I take it would be the reason that God has included it in
                                    > his word). So, I ask, do you mean to say, "The true meaning" of
                                    the
                                    > verse, or its "true intent"?
                                    >
                                    > Fourth, after making all these assertions, you say, "Correct me if
                                    I
                                    > am wrong in any of my assertions." I am of course, most willing
                                    to
                                    > correct you in any of your wrong assertions, once I know what
                                    those
                                    > assertions are.
                                    >
                                    > Fifth, but when you say this, I wonder why you have chosen to make
                                    > these "assertions, " and then ask for my correction. Are you
                                    making
                                    > assertions, or are you asking questions? I humbly think that you
                                    > can not do both, for a question implies ignorance, and a statement
                                    > implies knowledge. And I take it that this imperative is no less
                                    a
                                    > question, as if it were in the form of a question, for it still
                                    > implies ignorance, as if you sensed that you needed or might need
                                    > correction. Unless you mean it rhetorically, as if to say, "This
                                    is
                                    > the way it is, and no other way is it, besides this. However, I
                                    am
                                    > willing to submit to your superior knowledge if it is not this way
                                    > (but it is)." In which case, I do not know if you actually expect
                                    > me to correct your assertions, or simply to consider for my own
                                    > sake, whether I can find anything wrong about them.
                                    >
                                    > Sixth, do accuse me of sin in these words?
                                    >
                                    > Third, I have some questions concerning the paragraph that
                                    > begins, "You seem to have mislaid any comments…"
                                    >
                                    > First, when you said, "You seem to have mislaid any comments…" do
                                    > you mean that I have mislaid these comments in the sense that the
                                    > comments themselves are mislaid, or in other words, the statements
                                    > themselves are false, or, however true they are or may be, I have
                                    > used them in the wrong way, or applied them inaccurately, and
                                    > hence "mislaid" them.
                                    >
                                    > Second, what exactly do you mean by the word "voluntary," both
                                    with
                                    > respect to my comments about the "voluntary" nature of the church,
                                    > and with respect to you calling the church a "voluntary" society?
                                    > Third, what exactly are the things in which "like-believing
                                    people"
                                    > must be "like-believing" in order to organize as a church?
                                    >
                                    > Fourth, what do you mean by the word "ostensibly" ? How is the
                                    > church made of those who meet together "ostensibly" ? And how do
                                    you
                                    > mean this word in the other places you use it in this paragraph?
                                    >
                                    > Fifth, with general regard to your statements about the nature of
                                    > the church, do you hold to and believe The Form of Presbyterial
                                    > Church Government?
                                    >
                                    > Sixth, when you say that a "cultish" church does this or that, do
                                    > you mean that it is essential to the cultishness of a church that
                                    it
                                    > does this or that, or that it is a common characteristic of cults,
                                    > but not a necessary one, that they do this or that?
                                    >
                                    > Seventh, when you say that a "cultish" church tries to compel,
                                    what
                                    > do you mean by "compel"? Is it compelling in general, or is it a
                                    > form of compelling that is unjust in itself, or is it unjust
                                    insofar
                                    > as the compelling is done in certain circumstances, or in such a
                                    > manner, or does it altogether depend on what they are being
                                    > compelled to do or believe, or how they are being compelled to do
                                    or
                                    > believe it?
                                    >
                                    > Eighth, for when you mention "implicit faith," I do not know if
                                    you
                                    > intend this as a general example of cults trying to "compel," or
                                    as
                                    > the specific instance where they wrongfully "compel" others.
                                    >
                                    > Ninth, what do you understand, "implicit faith," to mean? I am
                                    > unable from the context in which you use it to understand how you
                                    > use it.
                                    >
                                    > Tenth, does it matter at all who they try to compel, members or
                                    non-
                                    > members, or former-members?
                                    >
                                    > Eleventh, what do you mean by "compelling or coercing association
                                    by
                                    > threats or ostensibly judicial actions," a sentence so vague that
                                    I
                                    > cannot understand the meaning of it.
                                    >
                                    > Fourthly, with regard to all that you have said concerning
                                    > excommunication, I ask the following questions:
                                    >
                                    > First, what are the conditions that must be met in order for
                                    > excommunication to be lawful and just?
                                    >
                                    > Second, when you say, "I see NOTHING in the NT that
                                    > says, `Excommunicate… '" why do you say that you see nothing in the
                                    > New Testament? Do you deny that both the Old and New Testaments
                                    are
                                    > the Word of God, the only rule of faith and practice?
                                    >
                                    > Third, you say that my "church" has rushed to excommunication.
                                    What
                                    > do you mean when you put our church in quotation brackets? Are
                                    you
                                    > implying that we are no church at all? And how do your previous
                                    > comments, such as when you said that the term "cult" is applied to
                                    > my church at the beginning of your post, how do these comments
                                    > square with what you say about my "so-called" church?
                                    >
                                    > Fourth, again, you say, "Correct me if I am wrong," and the same
                                    > question still applies as before, are you uncertain of what you
                                    > say? And having heard this same thing twice, I ask generally, how
                                    > certain are you of the facts of the case?
                                    >
                                    > As you acknowledge in your final paragraph, we are not to be rash
                                    in
                                    > matters of great weight, therefore before I respond to your
                                    > questions and objections, I would like to make sure that I fully
                                    > understand them, so that I do not reply like a babbling fool, and
                                    > you say, "No, that's not what I meant." As the Scripture
                                    says, "The
                                    > heart of the righteous studieth to answer: but the mouth of the
                                    > wicked poureth out evil things," and, "He that answereth a matter
                                    > before he heareth it, it is folly and shame unto him" (Proverbs
                                    > 15:28, 18:13).
                                    >
                                    > Your servant in the Lord,
                                    > Julian R. Gress
                                    >
                                    >
                                    >
                                    >
                                    > --- In covenantedreformati onclub@yahoogrou ps.com, "Gus Gianello"
                                    > <dr.gus.gianello@ > wrote:
                                    > >
                                    > > Mr. Gress,
                                    > >
                                    > > Cult is applied to your church because of its "cultish" approach
                                    > to widows, and any who disagree with it. What ever happened to
                                    the
                                    > right of private judgement?
                                    > >
                                    > > And I assert that, the verse you quote, you only quote for your
                                    > purposes and thereby mangle the true intent of the verse. Correct
                                    > me if I am wrong in any of my assertions.
                                    > >
                                    > > The word used for "consent" is
                                    > > shekem.
                                    > >
                                    > > Keil & Delitzch have this to say concerning this passage---
                                    > >
                                    > >
                                    > > ------------ --------- --------- --------- --------- --------- -
                                    --
                                    > ------------ -
                                    > >
                                    > >
                                    > > Consequently ×"פך אל must be explained according to
                                    1Sa_10:9,
                                    > since the circumstance that we have ×"פך ל in this passage does
                                    > not make any material difference in the meaning. The construction
                                    in
                                    > both passages is a pregnant one. God turns to the nations a pure
                                    > lip, by purifying their sinful lips, i.e., He converts them, that
                                    > they may be able to call upon Him with pure lips. Lip does not
                                    stand
                                    > for language, but is mentioned as the organ of speech, by which a
                                    > man expresses the thoughts of his heart, so that purity of the
                                    lips
                                    > involves or presupposes the purification of the heart. The lips
                                    are
                                    > defiled by the names of the idols whom they have invoked (cf.
                                    > Hos_2:19; Psa_16:4). The fruit of the purification is this, that
                                    > henceforth they call upon the name of Jehovah, and serve Him.
                                    קרא
                                    > ×`שׁם ×™×™, when used of men, always signifies to call solemnly
                                    > or heartily upon the name of Jehovah. To serve shekhem 'echâd,
                                    > with one shoulder, is to serve together or with unanimity. The
                                    > metaphor is taken from bearers who carry a burden with even
                                    > shoulders; cf. Jer_32:39.
                                    > >
                                    > >
                                    > > ------------ --------- --------- --------- --------- --------- -
                                    --
                                    > ------------ -
                                    > >
                                    > >
                                    > > Jeremiah 32: 39 says
                                    > >
                                    > > 39 And I will give them one heart and one way, that they may
                                    fear
                                    > Me forever, for their good and for the good of their sons after
                                    > them.
                                    > >
                                    > > As an associated citation so that we may better understand the
                                    > metaphoric use of the word.
                                    > >
                                    > >
                                    > >
                                    > > You seem to have mislaid any comments about the voluntary nature
                                    > of the Church. The church is a voluntary society of like-
                                    believing
                                    > people, who organize together ostensibly to present Christ to the
                                    > world. A "cultish" church tries to compel. Roman catholicism is
                                    a
                                    > cult of implicit faith in the Pope as infallible (ex cathedra),
                                    > representative of the magisterium. MANY ostensibly Protestant
                                    > churches are cults of implicit faith in either the leaders, in
                                    > science, etc. Therefore they feel justified in compelling or
                                    > coercing association by threats and ostensibly judicial actions.
                                    > >
                                    > > ONLY in Scripture can we have implicit faith. In all the back-
                                    and-
                                    > forth that I have seen nobody has asked the obvious question:
                                    > >
                                    > > What evidence of obduracy deserving being cast into the outer
                                    > darkness and being declared an apostate is given as reason for
                                    > excommunicating people? Were they fornicators? Were they
                                    > adulterers? It is very strange indeed that all this overblown
                                    > hyperbole and swelling words of dependence on "Presbyterian
                                    polity"
                                    > NEVER quotes the example of the apostle Paul who in letter after
                                    > letter after letter, shows that he deals with obstinancy in this
                                    > extreme manner ONLY after every other recourse has failed and only
                                    > when there is clear evidence and legitimate proceedure to compel
                                    > excommunication. Christian love DICTATES that we be compelled to
                                    > excommunicate by evidence unsullied, trial unmarred, appeals
                                    > unheeded, and when circumstance and incidentals deny the
                                    possibility
                                    > for remedy; and always for the salvation of the erring parties and
                                    > for their ultimate reconciliation. I see NOTHING in the NT that
                                    > says "excommunicate the moment somebody disagrees, refuses to take
                                    > an oath or has a problem with what you are doing." THAT is
                                    worthy
                                    > of a cult. And a cult YOU ARE, and a cultist you yourself are, if
                                    > you can justify these extremes.
                                    > >
                                    > > Where is the proof of their heresy?
                                    > >
                                    > > Where is the proof of their blasphemy?
                                    > >
                                    > > Where is the proof of their scandalous sin, deserving of
                                    immediate
                                    > excommunication, without process? What they were doing was it
                                    equal
                                    > or surpassing in rebellion to God, that they need to be treated as
                                    > partners in incest? (1 Cor. 5)
                                    > >
                                    > > Why did not your elders do what the wise apostle did when he
                                    > disagreed with Barnabas? Separate, go their separate ways, without
                                    > recrimination or censure? Are you now telling me
                                    that "Covenanter"
                                    > Reformed Presbyterian principles mean that if I become convinced
                                    the
                                    > pastor/elder/ session is wrong then I must repent or be
                                    > excommunicated? Is that my ONLY choice. Can we not go our
                                    separate
                                    > ways? THAT is a cult.
                                    > >
                                    > > When an acquaintance of mine became a member of an OPC church I
                                    > thought it a bad idea. Because he was not convinced of infant
                                    > baptism. (And it also indicated how orthodox the OPC church was
                                    that
                                    > they would allow such a person to become a member) When after
                                    > struggling with it over a year he decided that he COULD NOT be
                                    > convinced and wanted to leave the church, the pastor told him he
                                    > would be excommunicated. See, we dont succor wounded sheep---we
                                    > slaughter them. When an elder friend contacted me asking my
                                    opinion
                                    > of this course of action, I told him it was outrageous and worthy
                                    of
                                    > a cult. That ONLY cults excommunicate people who sincerely cannot
                                    > agree with them. Thank God that the elder listened, and allowed
                                    him
                                    > to leave in peace. I know ALL about cultic excommunication. When
                                    I
                                    > was a Charismatic and a member of a Faith Movement church, I WAS
                                    > excommunicated.
                                    > >
                                    > > Excommunication as Jay E. Adams warns should be used
                                    reluctantly,
                                    > and any time a "church(?)" rushes to it, as it seems there is
                                    > evidence that your "church" has done---correct me if I am wrong,
                                    > that church, those members and those elders are to be viewed with
                                    > suspicion. Any one who says "you fool" (Mat 5) quickly and not
                                    > reluctantly, being not dragged to the situation, and having not
                                    > constantly and repeatedly appealed, exhorted, admonished, cried
                                    over
                                    > the impenitent, deserves to be called a cultist. And that church
                                    > deserves to be called a CULT.
                                    > >
                                    > > Respectfully,
                                    > >
                                    > > Gus Gianello
                                    > >
                                    > > -----Original Message-----
                                    > > From: covenantedreformati onclub@yahoogrou ps.com
                                    > [mailto:covenantedreformati onclub@yahoogrou ps.com]On Behalf Of
                                    > Julian Gress
                                    > > Sent: Sunday, April 01, 2007 2:43 PM
                                    > > To: covenantedreformati onclub@yahoogrou ps.com
                                    > > Subject: [Covenanted Reformation] Re: Secret Society Paper
                                    > >
                                    > >
                                    > > Well said, brother.
                                    > >
                                    > > I have been finishing up the Old Testament recently, and found
                                    a
                                    > > great verse, Zephaniah 3:9, "For then will I turn to the
                                    people
                                    > a
                                    > > pure language, that they may all call upon the name of the
                                    Lord,
                                    > to
                                    > > serve him with one consent." This verse encourages me because
                                    in
                                    > it
                                    > > the Lord promises to make his church united in doctrine,
                                    > worship,
                                    > > government, and discipline, such that we may all serve the one
                                    > Lord
                                    > > as one body through one spirit.
                                    > >
                                    > > I for one do not understand what some brethren mean they call
                                    > the
                                    > > RPNA (GM) a "cult." I once heard with reference to the "one
                                    true
                                    > > church syndrome," but this objection has been thoroughly dealt
                                    > with
                                    > > before.
                                    > >
                                    > > First, "true" as to the essence of the church, or as to the
                                    > nature
                                    > > or structure of the church, true as being or as to well-being?
                                    > The
                                    > > accusation is entirely out of order unless this detail is
                                    > included.
                                    > >
                                    > > Second, every church under heaven proclaims that it is the one
                                    > true
                                    > > church, by maintaining separation from other churches.
                                    > >
                                    > > Third, there is and can only be one true church as to well-
                                    > being, so
                                    > > that there is no absurdity in professing one's own church to
                                    be
                                    > that
                                    > > church (for imagine one professing his church not to be the
                                    one
                                    > true
                                    > > church, faithful and well-established) . Either a church is
                                    > faithful
                                    > > in doctrine, worship, government, discipline, or it is not. If
                                    > the
                                    > > first, then it is obliged to unite with other churches of the
                                    > same,
                                    > > and if it does not do this, it is no longer a faithful church.
                                    > And
                                    > > if the second is true, then it is no true church as to well-
                                    > being.
                                    > > So if there are a number of true churches as to well-being,
                                    then
                                    > > they will faithfully into one true church. And they will
                                    > maintain
                                    > > separation from ill or diseased churches (I mean unfaithful
                                    > ones),
                                    > > which do not add to the number of healthy churches. Hence
                                    there
                                    > is
                                    > > and can be only one true church.
                                    > >
                                    > > So if the word "cult," is applied to us as meaning that we
                                    > profess
                                    > > to be the only true church, then the objection has lost its
                                    > entire
                                    > > savor, and is no objection at all, for it points toward no sin
                                    > in or
                                    > > among us.
                                    > >
                                    > > Perhaps someone on this forum means something different by it?
                                    I
                                    > > will gladly hear whatever arguments you have to put forth
                                    > against us
                                    > > being a "cult" and sincerely endeavor to satisfy your
                                    questions
                                    > and
                                    > > objections, as I am able.
                                    > >
                                    > > On a separate note, I am aware that several faithful members
                                    of
                                    > the
                                    > > RPNA (GM) have left this forum because of the condemnation our
                                    > > church has received. To avoid all confusion, I merely want to
                                    > point
                                    > > out that I do not see any obligation to leave this forum in
                                    > order to
                                    > > be faithful to the covenanted testimony we as a church hold,
                                    and
                                    > > this is my reason: in this forum, there is no necessary
                                    > obligation
                                    > > to recognize one opinion or another, because it is granted by
                                    > the
                                    > > nature of this forum that there may be disagreements. Of
                                    course,
                                    > I
                                    > > do not intend to have familiar fellowship with any who have
                                    been
                                    > > excommunicated from the RPNA (GM), or to violate any of my
                                    other
                                    > God-
                                    > > given duties. But unless someone points out a reason
                                    otherwise,
                                    > > something that I have missed, or unless there is a change in
                                    > > constitution of this forum that necessitates me to violate my
                                    > oath
                                    > > of membership in the RPNA (GM), I do not see any necessary
                                    > reason to
                                    > > leave.
                                    > >
                                    > > Your brother and servant in the Lord,
                                    > > Julian R. Gress (RPNA-GM)
                                    > >
                                    > > --- In covenantedreformati onclub@yahoogrou ps.com, Walt Bre
                                    > > <humbled.learner@ > wrote:
                                    > > >
                                    > > > Dear brethren,
                                    > > >
                                    > > > I know that I promised not to post again on here, and
                                    > > > for going back on my promise I'm sorry. If you would
                                    > > > grant me liberty to post only one document, I wanted
                                    > > > to attach only part of the "Sins Committed By "The
                                    > > > Effort" and Steps to Repentance" Issued by the Session
                                    > > > of the RPNA (GM), March 22, 2007.
                                    > > >
                                    > > > There is also a supporting document called "Effort
                                    > > > Emails (RPNA--GM)" that I am not including in this
                                    > > > message to protect the names of those involved. I'm
                                    > > > sure that people would like to read those supporting
                                    > > > emails that are the primary reason for the Session
                                    > > > Paper above, but I would ask you to contact Pastor
                                    > > > Greg Price at (covpastor@) if interested in
                                    > > > the document.
                                    > > >
                                    > > > I saw Whit's comment this morning supporting the ideas
                                    > > > promoted by Chris and others in the Presbyterian
                                    > > > movement that not only are we an unfaithful church,
                                    > > > but that we would border on the edge of the Morman
                                    > > > Church, the Roman Catholic Ave Maria Worshippers,
                                    > > >
                                    > > > In interesting definition I found will most definitely
                                    > > > scare away many people from EVER and NEVER consider
                                    > > > even reading our Terms of Communion, and subsequent
                                    > > > Session and Presbytery Decisions that our Church has
                                    > > > issued since around 1996. The definition says:
                                    > > >
                                    > > > "Cults are groups that often exploit members
                                    > > > psychologically and/or financially, typically by
                                    > > > making members comply with leadership's demands
                                    > > > through certain types of psychological manipulation,
                                    > > > popularly called mind control, and through the
                                    > > > inculcation of deep-seated anxious dependency on the
                                    > > > group and its leaders.
                                    > > >
                                    > > > "A cult is a group or movement exhibiting a great or
                                    > > > excessive devotion or dedication to some person, idea
                                    > > > or thing and employing unethically manipulative
                                    > > > techniques of persuasion and control (e.g. isolation
                                    > > > from former friends and family, debilitation, use of
                                    > > > special methods to heighten suggestibility and
                                    > > > subservience, powerful group pressures, information
                                    > > > management, suspension of individuality or critical
                                    > > > judgement, promotion of total dependency on the group
                                    > > > and fear of [consequences of] leaving it, etc)
                                    > > > designed to advance the goals of the group's leaders
                                    > > > to the actual or possible detriment of members, their
                                    > > > families, or the community."
                                    > > >
                                    > > > Based upon the above definition, after our Elders have
                                    > > > learned about the Secret Society within our own
                                    > > > Church, I can see how not only those of us who are
                                    > > > left inside the RPNA (GM), but those especially who
                                    > > > were members inside the RPNA (GM) as part of this
                                    > > > Secret Society, will be viewed likewise.
                                    > > >
                                    > > > After I read the documents of this Secret Society, I
                                    > > > can understand what these guys were trying to do and I
                                    > > > do not believe they intended to create the problems
                                    > > > that ultimately led many away from our church (this is
                                    > > > my own opinion). Surely, some have already admitted
                                    > > > that they have never felt better since leaving our
                                    > > > church, but others I'm sure may look back on The
                                    > > > Effort and the means they used with sorrow.
                                    > > >
                                    > > > As I study these documents, and all the documents that
                                    > > > make up the basis for nearly 30 excommunications, I am
                                    > > > firmly convinced now that my brothers and sisters have
                                    > > > misunderstood the doctrine of true Presbyterian
                                    > > > jurisdiction and the duties of membership by oath.
                                    > > > These two primary fundamental roots of the problem
                                    > > > grew into a massive protest. The protest was:
                                    > > >
                                    > > > 1) In the form of a Secret Society led by a few within
                                    > > > our church who wanted to make a positive impact.
                                    > > >
                                    > > > 2) In the form of a Public positive attack (admitted
                                    > > > by some that a good offence is always better than a
                                    > > > good defense) against the Elders to damage their
                                    > > > reputations and destroy all their credibility.
                                    > > >
                                    > > > As I read the comments made by Whit and Chris, and
                                    > > > others will most likely follow, I can see that as more
                                    > > > and more people protest against us, for being strict
                                    > > > Covenanters, the hammer is going to fall on our heads
                                    > > > in the future. There is no doubt that as more and
                                    > > > more people see us as a threat to their own
                                    > > > backslidden Presbyterian churches, and their own
                                    > > > unfaithful testimony as faithful Covenanters, the
                                    > > > flame throwers will be forthcoming and likely with a
                                    > > > vengeance.
                                    > > >
                                    > > > For those who would like to pray for us, please join
                                    > > > me in the following prayers before the feet of Christ:
                                    > > >
                                    > > > 1) That the Lord will enlighten the hearts of those
                                    > > > who participated in The Effort and reveal to them the
                                    > > > sin of schism it caused within the RPNA (GM). For
                                    > > > those who the Session Paper only hardens and causes
                                    > > > more forthcoming words of vengeance against us and the
                                    > > > Elders, that the Lord would use those words to be the
                                    > > > seeds of another Reformation within His Church.
                                    > > >
                                    > > > 2) That the Lord would raise up Ministers and Elders
                                    > > > to study intensely the testimony of the Scottish
                                    > > > Covenanters and especially the fundamentals of how
                                    > > > they preached biblical doctrine, discipline, form of
                                    > > > government and form of worship. That this research
                                    > > > and study will lead them to compare the Terms of
                                    > > > Communion preached and practiced by the RPCNA, CLC,
                                    > > > CRCNA, PCA and all the other Presbyterian
                                    > > > denominations.
                                    > > >
                                    > > > 3) That the Lord will allow the RPNA (GM) to at the
                                    > > > very least find one more Pastor for Edmonton and one
                                    > > > more Ruling Elder for Albany so that we may have two
                                    > > > ordinary locally defined Session courts, and move us
                                    > > > away from being defined as a cult that has only an
                                    > > > extraordinary Session court with two Ruling Elders in
                                    > > > Edmonton and one Pastor in Albany.
                                    > > >
                                    > > > 4) That the Lord would reveal to other Ministers and
                                    > > > Elders the lawfulness and faithfulness, in
                                    > > > extraordinary and unsettled times, of a phone
                                    > > > conference to discuss matters of church doctrine,
                                    > > > discipline, form of worship and form of government.
                                    > > > That the international phone conference, where two or
                                    > > > three ordained ministers are gathered, is indeed
                                    > > > lawful and faithful, and thereby does bring Christ
                                    > > > into their midst to rule, bind and loose as He has
                                    > > > promised in His word.
                                    > > >
                                    > > > 4) Finally, that the Lord would soon return with His
                                    > > > vial judgments upon the earth, and that historical
                                    > > > post millennialism will be taught from the pulpits
                                    > > > again sending fear of the Lord into each of us
                                    > > > Covenanters and Presbyterians. The return of his vial
                                    > > > judgments will indeed bring whole nations to covenant
                                    > > > together, and cause a major change where those who
                                    > > > desire to be faithful to His Majesty and Power will be
                                    > > > loved, rather than labeled cults and openly despised.
                                    > > >
                                    > > >
                                    > > > Please forgive my spelling errors and mistakes above,
                                    > > > but I wanted to close out with my pleas as like anyone
                                    > > > the more I see the labels coming against those in our
                                    > > > church I admit it does give me fear. Not so much the
                                    > > > fear of man, as I know man cannot touch me without the
                                    > > > approval of God, but more that I will continue to
                                    > > > stand in the face of fear, and not let my Lord down
                                    > > > when the whole world begins to follow suit based upon
                                    > > > the "cult" seeds planted by Rev. C. Matthew McMahon,
                                    > > > Chris Coldwell and Whit Roberts (he did not say it,
                                    > > > but implied it). Indeed, these seeds are now firmly
                                    > > > planted in the minds of many, and likely in the future
                                    > > > the reporters and media, I suspect it will challenge
                                    > > > all our members to stay the course.
                                    > > >
                                    > > > As I am now finishing my 36 time reading the bible
                                    > > > cover-to-cover, I was in the plane flying back from
                                    > > > Africa and something jumped out at me I've read many
                                    > > > times before. Nevertheless, it gave me a new meaning.
                                    > > >
                                    > > > "Now the God of patience and consolation grant you to
                                    > > > be likeminded one toward another according to Christ
                                    > > > Jesus: That ye may with one mind and one mouth glorify
                                    > > > God, even the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ.
                                    > > > Wherefore receive ye one another, as Christ also
                                    > > > received us to the glory of God." (Rom.15:5-7)
                                    > > >
                                    > > > "For as we have many members in one body, and all
                                    > > > members have not the same office: So we, being many,
                                    > > > are one body in Christ, and everyone members one of
                                    > > > another. Having then gifts differing according to the
                                    > > > grace that is given to us, whether prophecy, let us
                                    > > > prophesy according to the proportion of faith; Or
                                    > > > ministry, let us wait on our ministering: or he that
                                    > > > teacheth, on teaching; Or he that exhorteth, on
                                    > > > exhortation: he that giveth, let him do it with
                                    > > > simplicity; he that ruleth, with diligence; he that
                                    > > > showeth mercy, with cheerfulness. Let love be without
                                    > > > dissimulation. Abhor that which is evil; cleave to
                                    > > > that which is good. Be kindly affectioned one to
                                    > > > another with brotherly love; in honor preferring one
                                    > > > another; Not slothful in business; fervent in spirit,
                                    > > > serving the Lord; Rejoicing in hope; patient in
                                    > > > tribulation; continuing instant in prayer;
                                    > > > Distributing to the necessity of saints; given to
                                    > > > hospitality. Bless them which persecute you: bless,
                                    > > > and curse not. Rejoice with them that do rejoice, and
                                    > > > weep with them that weep. Be of the same mind one
                                    > > > toward another. Mind not high things, but condescend
                                    > > > to men of low estate. Be not wise in your own
                                    > > > conceits. Recompense to no man evil for evil.
                                    > > > Provide things honest in the sight of all men. If it
                                    > > > be possible, as much as lieth in you, live peaceably
                                    > > > with all men." (Rom.12:5-18) .
                                    > > >
                                    > > > These are some words, as revealed by our Lord to Paul,
                                    > > > and have given me a special blessing as I prepare for
                                    > > > the power of words, and the seeds planted in the
                                    > > > hearts and minds of those who want neither
                                    > > > reformation, nor want anything to do with God's
                                    > > > appointed Ministers and Elders in this life.
                                    > > >
                                    > > > May the Lord be with you all,
                                    > > > Walt.
                                    > > >
                                    > > >
                                    > > >
                                    > > >
                                    > > >
                                    > > ____________ _________ _________ _________ _________ _________ _
                                    > > ____________ ___
                                    > > > Need Mail bonding?
                                    > > > Go to the Yahoo! Mail Q&A for great tips from Yahoo! Answers
                                    > users.
                                    > > > http://answers. yahoo.com/ dir/?link= list&sid= 396546091
                                    > > >
                                    > >
                                    >

                                  Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.