Posted on 08/06/2003 7:08:03 AM PDT by Miss Marple
With apologies for posting a vanity, but I wanted to put this theory up for serious discussion.
The gay movement in churches does, indeed force people out (along with other divisive liberal issues). I myself have left my life-long church, the Methodists, because of several doctrinal and political disagreements.
I have noticed that the gays are not lobbying in the Southern Baptists, nor in the Church of Christ, nor in the Assemblies of God. Now, one would on its surface think that it is because those churches are less susceptible to the message of "inclusiveness." That may be true, but there is another underlying reason as well, I think.
The mainline Protestant denominations, as well as the Roman Catholics, own a great deal of real estate and have fairly large bank accounts. The real estate (in Manhattan and Boston and other large cities across this nation) is owned by the denomination, not the individual congregation, and is worth hundreds of millions of dollars. An entire Episcopal congregation who wishes to split from the church and go independent must LEAVE the building, abandoning it to the gay-friendly people. This holds true for the Methodists as well, and I believe for the rest of the mainline denominations and the Roman Catholics.
On the other hand, most Southern Baptist congregations own their property individually. They can withdraw without losing the building, nor would they lose control of their bank accounts.
It seems to me that this is a concerted effort to not only shape public opinion but, more importantly, to control real estate and money. Money is used to sway political beliefs, push certain social issues, and shape public discourse.
If I wanted to control a lot of real estate and church bank accounts, so that the money could go to causes I believed in but were not supported by most of the congregants, I would choose to infiltrate the church with people whose presence would FORCE OUT those who have less radical views, and I would also be forcing them to leave the very expensive real estate, bank accounts, and endowments behind. I could then funnel money to groups like anti-war organizations without any objection.
It seems to me that there is a plan afoot to rob people who have donated their time and treasure (in some families' cases, for generations) to a congregation and church building, and secure the land and money for their own purposes.
In other words, this is about money as much as sex. Otherwise, why wouldn't these people simply start their OWN churches? I have not forgotten how once before we were distracted from the real evil by a story about sex.
They don't want to start their own churches, because they want the land, the buildings, and the money. I think this needs to be looked at with more attention to the financial side.
I also would like to point out that manay mainline churches also control large universities, and this also supports my theory that the issue is financial and political control, not simply sex.
Let us not forget that Satan comes as a thief in the night.
I wish you well as you search for a church in which you can minister and be fed at the same time. I've wondered through that wilderness at times too and know now disconcerting it is.
Not to be picky, but when I see someone say this, it makes me want to comment; that is not at all what is Written, if you were referring to scripture. I have heard interviews with GW where he correctly quotes it, too, surprised you missed him saying it.
not Hebrews but 1Timothy 6:10
1Tim.6
[10] For the love of money is the root of all evil: which while some coveted after, they have erred from the faith, and pierced themselves through with many sorrows.
Tell me what verse in Hebrews you are referring to.
Reading 1 Timothy states that the LOVE of MONEY (over God) which SOME coveted after has caused them error in their faith and lead to sorrow. SOME is not equal to ALL. Job and Abraham are two of the WEALTHIEST men in the Bible and yet they remained true to GOD above and NOT distracted by their wealth. Money in and of itself is NOT evil. It is HOW you use the wealth - serve God or serve yourself. To teach otherwise in NOT Biblically correct.
Well maybe. The most valuable real estate is in urban locations (you mentioned Boston and New York)in which the congegration is least likely to be upset with recent developments. Also, the real estate only has value if it can be sold.
Perhaps. SOME "bad Catholics" which is to say fraudulent "Catholics" are inclined toward Protestant doctrines and may or may not but make very good Protestants. OTHER "bad Catholics" may well be bad people, which is a different category, run-of-the-mill apostates, determined agnostics refusing the truth (as opposed to the sincere kind), atheists (see categories of agnostics), common frauds who seek the benefits of being thought Catholic as politicians with Catholic constituencies, unusual frauds who use the Catholic Church affiliation to lead people not to recognize the extraordinary frauds for what they really are, really extraordinary frauds who use their religious titles and positions to sexually farm innocent youngsters or other men, compounding their gross perversions with the additional sin of giving scandal to others as though their practices were normal or even Godly.
For example, a person might reject the Catholic dogma that Jesus Christ, Body and Blood, Soul and Divinity, are literally present in the Holy Eucharist of the Roman Catholic Church under the appearances of bread and wine. From a Catholic point of view, that person is both wrong and not Catholic. Such a man or woman might be an exemplary member of any one of many Protestant denominations which believe that the Eucharist is merely a commemoration of the Last Supper, an exemplary citizen and an exemplary human being and a true soldier of Christ.
You and I probably differ as to that point of dogma and many others. I do not accept for a nanosecond the idea that human error, as you put it, has overcome the promises of Jesus Christ to the Roman Catholic Church which He personally founded on Simon bar Jonah as He renamed Simon as Peter. We may well disagree on that point too. That does not mean that either you or I, if either or both of us happen to be personally wrong on a point or two hundred out of ten thousand, are not good Christians who seek to love the Lord, our God, with our whole hearts, our whole minds and our whole souls.
Among most genuine Catholics, the word "Why?" is irrelevant to the the consideration. We Catholics firmly believe that we know why and need no further speculation. The Truth is the Truth is the Truth, always has been and always will be. The authority of the Roman Catholic Church and its justification (whatever that may mean for an organization founded and guaranteed by Jesus Christ Himself) are not affected at all by the spiritual peace of actual Catholics who understand that all issues were settled long ago and will not be reopened.
God does indeed see all and, we believe as Catholics, that we and you and everyone else will see all of it at the final judgment. Those alive at the end of this world will, according to the Apocalypse or Revelations see themselves as God sees them and will flee to hide their faces among the rocks which will cry out: No hiding place! No hiding place! This will actually be a final mercy so that those alive may better repent and reconcile with God. Catholics certainly do not claim sinlessness for any but Jesus Christ and Mary,who was specially created in that respect. Quite the contrary. We will leave everyone else to their own self-evaluations while awaiting God's but we Catholics have enough on our plate not to be worried about yours.
In summary, those "Catholics" who reject the Teaching Magisterium of the Church cannot be good Catholics unless they stop that rejection but SOME of them, accepting Protestant beliefs instead may be very good Protestants and fine human beings in great love with their Lord and Savior. As to many others, unrepentant, you probably would not want them either. It is what they believe and how they practice that counts as to their denomination, if any, not where they happened to be baptized so long as their baptisms were valid.
"Catholics" who reject the Teaching Magisterium are not Catholic. It is that simple. The Catholic Church gets to make that call. Such people may be Yankee fans or Red Sox fans, Democrats or Republicans, cat lovers or dog lovers, bankers or welfare moms, bishops or bank robbers, but they are NOT Catholic if they reject Catholic doctrine. I know that this is not an easy concept in the democratic republic in which we live with all of the attendant civil liberties, but it is the truth.
Likewise, it is up to Protestants to decide whether such people are Protestant or up to specific denominations or congregations of what we call Protestants of whatever denomination to decide for their respective denominations whether such people belong among their denominations or congregations. This is not only theologically true but a remaining shred of what was our nation, yours and mine, and our First Amendment.
God bless you and yours!
Psalm 37:12-14
12 The wicked plot against the righteous and gnash their teeth at them;
13 but the Lord laughs at the wicked, for he knows their day is coming.
14 The wicked draw the sword and bend the bow to bring down the poor and needy, to slay those whose ways are upright.
Psalm 37:12-14
12 The wicked plot against the righteous and gnash their teeth at them;
13 but the Lord laughs at the wicked, for he knows their day is coming.
14 The wicked draw the sword and bend the bow to bring down the poor and needy, to slay those whose ways are upright.
Excellent point.
Along those lines, the next push will be to try to get congress to remove tax exempt status from churches that continue their 'bigoted' philosophy
I think good lawyers could make a strong case that the National Church, by changing their precepts, have committed a 'breach of contract' and the local churches owe them nothing.
What we Catholics have a problem with is the preachiness in spreading YOPIOS that abounds here as though YOPIOS had any authority whatsoever compared to actual Scripture. If you don't think that gays have designs on the Baptist churches, you are quite naive.
Furthermore, IF some INDEPENDENT congregation, claiming to be Baptist, publicly denied the divinity of Christ, that Mary was a virgin at the birth of Christ, that God the Father so loved the world that He sent to us Jesus Christ, his only begotten son, that Jesus died on the cross in atonement for our sins, and that he resurrected on the third day according to Scripture, I am going out on a limb and betting that the good men who run the Southern Baptist Convention will find a way to turn such a congregation formally into separated brethren after due investigation and deliberation. No?????
Your comment:
"Among most genuine Catholics, the word "Why?" is irrelevant to the the consideration. We Catholics firmly believe that we know why and need no further speculation. The Truth is the Truth is the Truth, always has been and always will be. The authority of the Roman Catholic Church and its justification (whatever that may mean for an organization founded and guaranteed by Jesus Christ Himself) are not affected at all by the spiritual peace of actual Catholics who understand that all issues were settled long ago and will not be reopened."
is troublesome as that 'blind allegiance" to a man-made, though Christ-Inspired, set of rules is what caused the degeneration of the early Christian Church which led to the first Reformation.
Please remember that ordination does not absolve one of error. There is much in your church teachings that cannot be traced to Christ's Teachings.
Just an observation, not a declaration of war.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.