Free Presbyterian Rumblings
The rebranding of Ian Paisley continues. Now named at Westminster, he's looking like quite the statesman in the eyes of many these days. Even Martin McGuinness refers to him as "our First Minister". But when the Presbytery of Ulster meets in September to elect its Moderator, will Dr Paisley be re-elected unopposed, as has been the case since the founding of the church? It's unlikely, I think, that any significant challenge will be mounted, but there is a slim (ok, very slim) possibility that the First Minister will decide to stand down as Moderator and allo the church. A significant minority of Free Presbyterian ministers and elders are struggling to understand how their Moderator appears to have pulled off a theological and political U-turn on the question of power-sharing with Sinn FĂ©in.
Dr Paisley's willingness to share power with Sinn Fein has alienated a section of the Free Presbyterian Church, not least his old friend and colleague the Other previous critics of power-sharing within the church, including the Rev David McIlveen, have made a theological journey with their Moderator and regard the new Northern Ireland executive as a "moral government". But the rumblings continue, often voiced in private conversations (perhaps in coded comments) and sometimes fleetingly on internet sites (such as ). A sign of the sensitivities involved here is the unwillingness of Free Presbyterian ministers and elders to talk in public about their unhappiness with their Moderator's new political stance. In private, some are quietly fuming. In public, they are the soul of discretion and keen to distinguish between Dr Paisley's political and ecclesiastical roles.
[Picture: Previously arch enemies are seen enjoying a laugh together at the commencement of power-sharing between Sinn FĂ©in and the DUP, and Ian Paisely protests during the 1974 Ulster Workers' Council Strike, which was organised in opposition to the Sunningdale Agreement which would have given the government of the Republic of Ireland a direct say in the running of the region. The strike succeeded in bringing down the power-sharing Northern Ireland Executive.)
Comments
It's an amazing story. I'm nervous about giving Paisley too many plaudits for finnally discovering that talking and inclusion are the key to NI's political future.
Paisley has sold out his principles to get into government. Ambition over ideals. He destroyed Trimble for doing less. I am glad we have a government that includes nationalists and republicans. I supported the Good Friday Agreement. Paisley didn't. Now he's on board, I am glad, but if he had discovered statesmanship 30 years ago we would have saved a lot of lives in NI. I make the same criticism of Sinn Fein - what was the fighting about?
So I have a mixed reaction.
I am absolutely clear in my mind that a church leader should resign if he becomes Prime Minister or First Minister. Conflict of interests. Double-jobbing.
This ties in with the article in yesterday's Newletter quoting the Free Presbyterian Church elder Raymonf Linton who said that Paisley and William McCrea should leave their positions of pastors in the church due to their decision to share power with Sinn Fein. According to Linton there are "big divisions" in the Free Presbyterian Church at the moment. William McCrea seems to have brainwashed himself into justifying the DUP's decision by claiming that the IRA had been defeated. This is the second time this week that I have read a stupid comment like this. Were the IRA defeated? Did they hand over weapons? No they were not. The Republican movement simply became more shrewd and realistic in realising that more could be achieved with the ballot box rather than the armalite.
Ian Paisley has spent 40 years standing in the way of progress in Northern Ireland. From Brookeborough to Trimble every Unionist leader had to go, whilst only he was the man who could save 'Ulster' from the trachery of Dublin and London. Let it never be forgotten that the generally accepted beginning of 'the troubles' was the Divis Street riots, which were as a result of Paisley. Whilst he has never once been personally responsible for the death of anyone it is beyond doubt that his words and actions contributed to many hundreds of people dying on both sides of the 'conflict'.
So whilst Paisley is being lauded as some sort of Ulster version of Nelson Mandela never forget the harm and trouble that he has caused to this province. Never forget the hatred that he stoked and the mistrust that he helped stir. Three months of nice words can not destroy 40 years of memories. If Paisley really spent the last 40 years seeking to save Ulster then he is indeed a modern day Lundy.
Great pic from the 74 strike. Those two pics say it all. From isolated protestor to head of government.
Yes...but who is (cough)"Dr" Paisley?
Dylan,
Paisley has an Hon. DD degree from Bob Jones University. That uni is now accredited by the US govt. Why shouldn't he be allowed to use the title they gave him. Bishops and moderators are often given honourary dgrees and use the title.
Dr John Dunlop? Honorary.
Dr Ken Newell? Honorary.
Well how he chooses to wear his several hats is of no concern to anyone but the organisations themselves.
Presby says that if Paisley had discovered statesmanship 30 years ago we would have saved a lot of lives. I'm going to politely disagree. Paisley represents an electorate who, 30 years ago, were dealing with full-scale troubles of the kind the Belfast Agreement has (knock on wood) superseded. If it wasn't Paisley standing up for unionist values it would have been another leader to inherit his position today. According to Paisley, it's not him who's changed but Sinn Fein. Paisley waited until his conditions were met and then (and only then) took diplomatic steps to share power: many unionists are very happy that he didn't cooperate with Sinn Fein 30 years ago!
Biblebelivingchristian
Mr Paisley has 2 honorary "doctorates" both from places described as "degree mills" by the US dept of education.
Bob Jones "uni"(which is an insult to genuine uni's)was unaccredited at the time(and is still a matter of dispute). The reason why it was uncredited was because it was a racist/segregationist dump. The racist opinions of the founder Bob Jones was well-known and infamous and does not say much for Mr Paisley's integrity that he accepted a "doctorate" from such a racist dump.
"Why shouldn't he be allowed to use the title they gave him."
Well...if I have explain it! 10's of 1000's of honorary doctorates have been handed out by genuine uni's throughout the world. I have yet to hear of an instance when someone who received such an award calls themselves Dr("Dr" Alan Hansen etc etc anyone?). They don't because doing so would be the height of crassness and be recognised as an insult to millions of genuine students who have studied at genuine universities. It is a great shame that Paisley and other Bible-believers(since it is mostly Bible-believers who are afflicted by the awful disease of dodgy doctoritis)do not have the ounce of integrity that other people have.
Indeed I would say that Paisley's decision(along with Jerry falwell, Pat Roberstson etc etc) says a lot about their character or to be more exact lack of...
Yes Newell and Dunlop do this and I disagree with that however at least they did study at genuine uni's in contrast to Mr Paisley who did not go to uni yet still lists a "BA", "MA" and "Phd" after his name(all honorary and all from degree mills).
I am all for the sharing of power in N Ireland and long may it continue....but the time has come for Mr. Paisley to make up his mind is he First Minister or head of the FPC? I do not believe he can be both you have to be impartial to be First Minister and you have to serve all the people surely this clashes with a lot of the teaching especially about SF coming from the Pulpit of Free Pres Churches of which he is the founder and head.
There seem to be grumbling coming from certain FP Ministers the Rev Ivan Foster being one they are very good at shouting out ( but not to loud ) in their own little church but will one of them take Mr. Paisley on? If they are so unhappy why don't they run against him?
You never know we could have a Free/Free Presbyterian Church
(Many will say Never! Never! Never! )
Found this from a link on the main Blog (it is very long but you can skip through it)
Ian & Martin or is it the Chuckle brothers Paul & Barry in disguise! The laughing stock of Northern Ireland and the world. What a double act, the Grand Opera House awaits for them to grace their stage this Christmas "May McFettridge" has lost out to Ian & Martin, who are now open for bookings for panto this Christmas!!!!!!!
“Other previous critics of power-sharing within the church, including the Rev David McIlveen, have made a theological journey with their Moderator and regard the new Northern Ireland executive as a "moral government".”
Has McIlveen or any other Free P said WHY they have reached the conclusion that this is a moral gov?
I suggest you put the following to any Free Presbyterian minister:
1.In 1998 every Free Presbyterian minister in the British Isles signed a statement which said it was “unscriptural, unethical and immoral” for “those who have supported and advocated violence” to be in gov. I can provide you with a copy of this statement complete with the names of those who signed it if you send me your email address. If you want to know who the statement was referring to when it talked about “those who have supported and advocated violence” I suggest you google Gerry Kelly and Martin McGuinness – both of whom now work in Dr P’s office. Notice the tense used in the statement – “those who HAVE” i.e. the position of the Free Church as outlined in the 1998 statement is that the past deeds of SF/IRA rendered them unfit to hold office. IF that position changes (and I stress IF) the Free Church owes the Ulster Unionists, the SDLP, the Alliance Party, the UDP, the PUP and the Women’s Coalition an apology for branding the conduct of those parties “unscriptural, unethical and immoral” because the grounds upon which the Free Church attack their political conduct now applies to the moderator.
2. Today is the 12th July. Last year Dr P spoke at an Orange service and told the crowd that Sinn Fein/IRA would only be in government “over our dead bodies”. There is an article about this speech on the ±«Óătv website. I can give you the link if you want. Of course SF/IRA did enter gov over a lot of dead bodies – just not those of DUP members.
Dr P said that the IRA had to hand back their “ill-gotten gains” (i.e. monies obtained through smuggling, bank robbery, etc.) before they could be considered for gov. SF/IRA are in gov and NO money has been returned.
3. The OFDF which is jointly headed by Dr Paisley and Martin-I-am-very-very-proud-to-have-been-in-the-IRA McGuinness is responsible for the funding of sodomite groups in N.I. (see link above). I believe that you will have difficulty defending that from the Scriptures.
I would suggest to you Hanson to obtain a copy of the “Revivalist May 2007” (maybe you have cancelled your subscription) there you will find the theological and moral reasons given by Ian Paisley backed up by some moral support from Mammy. But I don’t think the God appointed and God anointed explanation given will be music to your ears.
CH,
I have read that. I so read the Nov 1997 editon which said “when my consituants voted for me they voted for a covenant that we would never sit down with SF. I am not a liar. I am an honest man”.
I was wondering of Dr P, McIlveen, et al have Biblical support for what they are doing. I don’t accept papal bulls from any pope.
I have been informed by a source from within that the election of the Moderator maybe put of for a month to October to allow for a full attendance at Presbytery.
CH,
I think you are mistaken.
I don’t think that I’m mistaken Hanson, I personally don’t know, I was only conveying some information that was communicated to me by a congregational office bearer from within the FPC, it is he that is wrong and he also favours another Paisley to take over as moderator.......... I wait in anticipation Hanson.
The question for the ±«Óătv, the Newsletter, the Belfast Telegraph is this - why are you so shoddy in your journalism? All of you predicted that Paisley was in the majority in his church when you were warned that he was not. All of you took at face value these unnamed "senior sources' within the FPC when it was clear that they were lickspittle for Big Ian.
I am not rejoicing but I am glad that the FPC Presbytery was true to the principles it was founded on.
Paisley, Cairns, Douglas, Cooke , McIlveen are finished and it is time for a new generation of leaders to take the FPC forward from the failure of the past.