Posted on 12/03/2019 5:12:50 PM PST by marshmallow
GRAND RAPIDS, Mich. (WOOD) — A Grand Rapids church is working to change the relationship between churches and the LGBTQ community.
The First United Methodist Church on Fulton Street and Barclay Avenue hosted their fourth ever inclusive Communion service on Sunday night. This comes after Kent County Judge Sara Smolenski says she was denied Communion at her home church for being gay.
Smolenski says she’s been a parishioner at St. Stephen Catholic Church in East Grand Rapids for 62 years and this has never happened to her before.
“Why exclude anyone when they have sincere desire to come to God’s table?” Smolenski asked.
In response, the congregation at FUMC reached out to Smolenski and her wife Linda, inviting them to be a part of an inclusive Communion service.
The church says while they welcome everyone to their church during regular monthly Communion services, their message is more intentional during inclusive services.
“I am so full of gratitude that these ministers, their congregation, has reached out to open this up and do what Jesus would do,” Smolenski said.
(Excerpt) Read more at woodtv.com ...
“Why exclude anyone when they have sincere desire to come to God’s table?” Smolenski asked.
Uhh, read I Cor. 6:9-10, 11:27-32.
On the other hand, Methodists don't bar couples living in remarriage adultery, but RCC does.
Either way, you will never see me taking Methodust or Catholic communion services as being legitimate endeavors according to Bible standards (1 Cor. 11:26-34); nor will you see me participating in them or identifying with Catholic or Methodist religions as truly Christian.
You have to come to God's table on God's terms. Not on your own. Repent of your faggotry.
That's OK … you'll never see me participating in "imardmd1ist" ceremonies ...
Would He, now?
I don't think this "judge" (of what, righteousness?) has the slightest idea of what the mind and Will of Jesus Christ and His Father is. For her involvement in oppositional behavior regarding the Remembrance Supper, she is earning her place in Hades, together with that of the Methodist minister who--even more accountable--invites her AND her . . . wife? (A teachable moment goes to waste, for them and for the whole church.)
Do NOT forget this exchange!
Lol. Good one.
...she was denied Communion at her home church for being gay.
Good thing she was not under oath when she claimed that.
Let's try your whole post:
Either way, you will never see me takingMethodust or Catholic"imardmd1ist" communion services as being legitimate endeavors according to Bible standards (1 Cor. 11:26-34); nor will you see me participating in them or identifying withCatholic or Methodist"imardmd1ist" religions as truly Christian.
You will be judged by the standard with which you judge others.
Ping
OK...so there’s “GAY” churches, and Non-”GAY” churches....pick one. True believers know the difference.
.. . Rev. Dr. Joan VanDessel said. “I’m a part of the (LGBTQ) community too, . . ."
Oh, now I see, even more clearly. Miss(?) Joan is . . . a doctor? of Theology? or Ministries? or what? a lesbian (if not "married," then is she a practicing fornicator?) as an ordained Methodist minister? Probably an Elder, eh?
Oh, I wish I could take this as a true report back to my Dad's congregation, in 1948 when he accepted me and several other members of his Confirmation class, as a full member.
Had he seen then true look at what his Methodist Church was about to become, doubtless he would have left it straitway for a more faithful church and more fruitful ministry. And maybe I would not have progressively ruined my life before truly becoming born again at age 34.
But he did not, and apparently became more and more blind to its errors, the farther it went. At least he retired from active deployment, but only a few years before a woman was made the Bishop of the Conference.
NorthMountain, don't forget that I probably have forgotten more about the Methodist Church and parsonage life than you've ever experienced, and I'm saying that at an altitude of 83 years of observation. And I have the original 1886 and 1900 Methodist Disciplines for benchmarks.
The women have wrecked the Methodist Church, and the weak, effeminacy-tolerating men have let them do it. I clearly is a part of the apostasy declared in 2 Thessalonians 2:3 (AV):
"Let no man deceive you by any means: for that day shall not come, except there come a falling away first, and that man of sin be revealed, the son of perdition; . . ."The watching world is no longer deceived about what entities are engaged in falling away.
So? You chose to sneer at the Catholic Church, which rightly refused Communion to this strange woman in desperate need of repentance. That was a stupid thing to do.
But now, good grief, you are actually judging me and my intents, without evaluating what you are saying against Scripture and against the clear mindset of the founders of Methodism.
Do you believe that John, Charles, and Samuel Wesley would approve of what those called Methodists today are doing? of their practical beliefs? that Frances Asbury or Thomas Coke would heartily commend the bishops of today for their stance? For the standing of the American body in the General Conference?
Before you judge me, pal, you had better honestly judge yourself first and very closely, to see if you be in The Faith (Ps. 26:2, 1 Cor. 11:28, 2 Cor. 13:8). Are you born in the Spirit?
The people, actions, and attitudes I have discussed judge themselves, and it isn't coming out very favorable.
And, choosing the basis for argumentation that you have, it is pretty obvious that your theology is pretty weak, also.
Apparently you cannot face the truth of your denomination, if it is Methodism that you have invested in and defend.
Keep your hands, and your argument, above the table.
Do you believe that John, Charles, and Samuel Wesley would approve of what those called Methodists today are doing?
< shrug > How should I know? I'm not Methodist, and I disagree with much of their theology.
Before you judge me
I continue to refrain from "making it personal". I can't help it if you choose to take things personally ...
No such areas exist.
Do you believe Jesus went to that cruel Cross to redeem your flesh? ... Yes or no will suffice. Measure your response against what He DID go to that cross to redeem, your human spirit. The flesh is the body and soul, the behavior mechanism. There is coming (soon) a moment when ALL THOSE who have been born again by His Spirit into their human spirit, giving them eternal life, will be given new bodies and a new behavior mechanism. Are you in line with that?
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.