“I was there for some of those Classis of the Asses and they were little more than a gathering of effeminate social justice warriors speaking of all those things important to what could have well passed for a socially relevant meeting of the Democratic Club. And when I say effeminate that is reserved for the men. The women had more testosterone.”
Alan Chamberlain — Psuedonymn
Former Elder Who Attended Several Classis Meetings With Me
I’ve already mentioned a few of the incidents that occurred in the District meetings, but since Alan mentioned the effeminate social justice warrior aspect of it all I thought I would go with more examples.
You will remember from the past entry the chap I spoke of who, while undergoing an Ordination Exam froze up and literally could not answer one question put to him from the floor. From that point forward in my life that chap became the living embodiment of the maxim, “Like a deer in the headlights of an oncoming car.” Certainly, you have been part of something where what you were witnessing was so bad you could barely endure being embarrassed for the person who was being embarrassed. This was that. However, the humor in this situation was found in the fact that while the ordination candidate was unsure of anything theological he sang like a bird when it came to how terrible “racism” was. He didn’t know Jack Shinola when it came to anything theological but he damn sure knew that racism was bad. I was confident that those who trained him were proud and indeed the whole District closed ranks around him and voted for him to pass his ordination exam with the provision that said candidate would continue to do theological training with two other Ministers in the District — two other Ministers who in the past had shown themselvesd in previous meetings to be just as jejune in theology as the candidate had revealed himself to be. It was the only time that one of the synodical delegates later privately pulled me aside and thanked me for drawing a line in the sand and standing. That delegate asked me to “keep the faith.” I told him that I had long ago had lost “the faith” when it came to this district and at this point, I was just going down with the ship.
Another time with another candidate in another ordination exam I asked from the floor if the Seminary graduate who was up for ordination could name the three great Imputations held by the Reformed faith. Now, I understand for the average reader such a question sounds rather abstruse but for a Reformed minister candidate, this is theology 101. You simply cannot get through Seminary without knowing the three great imputations.
1.) Adam’s Sin to his posterity
2.) The sins of the Elect to Christ
3.) The righteousness of Christ to His People
The very second the question had finally fallen from my lips Dr. Rev. Rusty Lugnut — my long-time foil and Simon Bar-Sinister — rose to object at the question and was in high dudgeon. The reader has to understand that the ordination candidate was going to go from ordination to work in Dr. Lugnut’s Church as some kind of assistant. Dr. Rev. Lugnut was instantly in a lather and tried to turn things on me. Dr. Rev. Lugnut shouted at me asking if I realized that “75% of the ministers in the building could not answer my question,” thus insinuating that I was being overly exacting. I calmly but with gusto replied that “I find that completely believable given the track record of the years of ordination exams I have witnessed.” Dr. Rev. Lugnut was not amused, though this day I consider that to have been one of my more witty comebacks at just the right moment. Dr. Rev. Lugnut was decidedly not amused and my answer only sent him further into orbit. He began a diatribe that had something to do with me and my ancestors but he was mercifully cut off by another minister with the demand to vote on the candidate. To this day I am glad for the interjection of this other minister at that point because if he had not stepped in there was fixing to be blood on the floor between myself and Dr. Rev. Lugnut. Of course, the candidate passed with flying colors. I was a pebble in the shoe of the District chieftains but I had absolutely zero influence.
In yet another exam of yet another ordinate candidate in the area of “knowing one’s Bible,” the candidate was asked a series of questions of where in the Bible fairly well-known passages were located. Over 25 years in my time in the Denomination I met one fellow Minister who shared my convictions and it was this minister who was responsible for examining the candidate with this portion of their exam. For 20-30 minutes he peppered the Candidate with different passages asking for the candidate to provide the book of the Bible they were found in and if possible what chapter. The Candidate got something like 20% correct. A dismal performance by any standard. But you guessed it … he was ordained by a nearly unanimous count. (They always counted on me voting “no.” Indeed, I don’t think in all the time I was loosely connected with these meetings I ever voted for a candidate to be ordained.)
In another famous case, the candidate was asked “Was it possible for Jesus to have sinned.” Now, to be honest I was a bit shocked by this question because it was way out of the norm for the ministers of this District. Usually what one got from these ministers was questions like, “What is your favorite recipe,” or “If you were a piece of clothing, what piece of clothing would you be.” (OK… so I’m exaggerating, but only by a little bit.) The candidate answered the question about Jesus and his possible ability to sin with an “affirmative.” Now, I wanted to jump out of my seat but by this point, I was finally learning there was no upside to being the turd in the punchbowl and kept my place as I enjoyed the amusement by the subsequent discussion that these theological titans entered into on the question “Could Jesus have sinned.” Oh… and he passed almost unanimously.
In another case, the District decided that they were going to have a “listening session” on the issue of sodomy. There were those who were pushing to mainstream the acceptance of sodomy in the Denomination and near my end in the Denomination the wizards of smart decided that they were going to have breakout sessions and discussions on this issue. The wizards of smart found a large auditorium and placed us in groups of 6-8 in order to discuss the issue. At this particular meeting, I had a Deacon with me and he was more adamantly opposed to sodomy than even I am. Poor Bob. By the time these discussions were finished, he was apoplectic. I thought the poor guy was going to stroke out on me.
Before the discussions even began I lodged a protest saying that the mere “conversation” on the matter by itself was part of the process of mainstreaming the vile idea of the Church accepting sodomy as a matter of course. The moderator couldn’t believe his ears. How could anyone object to “a conversation.” However, I knew and know that when these conversations begin it is with the purpose of desensitizing people to the awfulness of what is going to be discussed. The best way to mainstream any perversion is to first start having conversations about it as if there is any possibility said perversion could ever be mainstreamed. The first step of perversion coming out of the closet are conversations about perversions possibly coming out of the closet. They weren’t fooling me with this “conversation” nonsense.
Bob (the deacon from the Church I serve who attended) and I were at different tables. Later I learned that one of the chaps who was part of my discussion table stood in the background and waited to see where I was going to sit so that he could sit at that table. I had crossed swords before with this pro-sodomite chap on the issue and he was bound and determined to be part of any discussion group I was part of so as to cut my influence. And so the two of us – he, the pro acceptance of sodomy in the Church and me, a generation younger than him, defending the quaint notion that the Scripture says that sodomy is a sin. Hammer and tong the two of us went at it while the rest at the table faded into the background. I was quoting Scripture and he was pleading for the experience of those who had been so ostracized and so “hurt” by the Church. He was making an appeal to emotion and I was making an appeal to the authority of God’s Word. Beads of perspiration formed on his forehead and I was fearful that he was going to start slapping me any second. Meanwhile, I could hear Bob’s voice rising in the background as he was heating up his table in the discussion. It was surreal.
The discussion roundtables ended and the main group as a whole gathered together and once again Bob and I heated up the place in the main discussion. I have only occasionally been as proud of one of my Church officers as I was proud of Bob in this discussion. He raised the black flag and asked for no quarter while giving no quarter.
Our final instance for this entry was how I witnessed a conservative minister destroyed by a Cultural Marxist Church and Disctrict. I still can’t go into all the details of this episode but I can say that I witnessed the district try to bury exculpatory evidence that would have gone a long way towards restoring this minister to his post.
To this day I don’t know the full details of the charges. I do know the charges were not of a nature that required the minister to lose his job. However, as I said, he was a conservative man in a liberal denomination and in an important liberal church and he was succeeding in moving the Church in a conservative direction having only been serving there a few short years. (He took over for Dr. Rev. Dusty Lugnut when he retired.) He was dealing with a revolt from his staff as his postmodern female campus minister was insisting that the minister under question was being far too declamatory from the pulpit. I heard this same woman in minister gatherings try to run this minister down in the presence of other ministers in the district clearly seeking to ruin his reputation. As I said, I did not know and have never learned the details of what amounted to the crime of “jaywalking” which was visited with the punishment of the electric chair by the Church and denomination.
At the District meeting where the minister was finally thrown under the bus and removed from his position, I had in my possession something that nobody else knew I had. I had the exculpatory evidence that stated that the minister was ready to take up again his office. The denomination had required that my minister friend go see a counselor of their choosing. This he did, thus showing the virtue of submission to the denominational “authorities.” The professional and degreed Counselor had given the minister a clean bill of health and had recommended that he be allowed to return to his responsibilities as minister of the Church he was put on leave from. Clearly, this Counselor — a Counselor assigned by the denomination itself — believed that this chap should not be tossed. Yet, in the District denominational meeting dealing with this issue, the wizards of smart decided to bury this report. They had intended not to make known this piece of information which had bearing on the decision making of whether this Pastor should be essentially be removed from his job. They intended to bury this evidence. Except, as I said, I had this evidence.
Up to this point, I had made a stirring defense of this minister but was told in no uncertain terms that I should not be calling into question the work of the Church and district in this matter as they had been very punctilious in their going over the evidence. That is when I snapped and started waving around the document that I had that demonstrated that the very Counselor that they had required the minister in question to go see had signed off a document saying he was fit and ready to go back to work. I started pointedly asking why this document had been conveniently not mentioned. At this point, the red-faced embarrassment was in full glow. They had been caught in their guilt of trying to bury exculpatory evidence. They had been caught red-handed in seeking to put their thumbs on the scale of justice. I was in a full-throated rage and everybody in the building knew it. How could they dare seek to destroy a man’s career by withholding exculpatory evidence? They sought to make flimsy excuses but they knew they were busted.
Despite being caught redhanded in what can only be called a Kangaroo court stunt all that the dirty denominational chieftains wanted to have stamped with approval was stamped with approval and the minister in question effectively had his career ended.
Later one of the delegates pulled me aside and said, “If I’m ever in a tight place, I want someone like you as a friend defending me.” I responded by saying it did precious little good today. And so the most qualified minister I ever met in the Clown Reformed Chruch (CRC) was cashiered but I still have the privilege of calling him a friend yet today.
And do keep in mind these are only the most excessive of things I witnessed.
Great….. please continue on with Part 3 ….