Re: Already determined the outcome? -- Mamusz' Restoration Forum

[ Show ]

Support VoyForums

[ Shrink ]

VoyForums Announcement: Programming and providing support for this service has been a labor of love since 1997. We are one of the few services online who values our users' privacy, and have never sold your information. We have even fought hard to defend your privacy in legal cases; however, we've done it with almost no financial support -- paying out of pocket to continue providing the service. Due to the issues imposed on us by advertisers, we also stopped hosting most ads on the forums many years ago. We hope you appreciate our efforts.

Show your support by donating any amount. (Note: We are still technically a for-profit company, so your contribution is not tax-deductible.) PayPal Acct: Feedback:

Donate to VoyForums (PayPal):

[ Login ] [ Main index ] [ Post a new message ] [ Search | Check update time | Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10 ]

[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]

Date Posted: 22:32:42 03/26/11 Sat
Author: George
Subject: Re: Already determined the outcome?
In reply to: Lois 's message, "Re: Already determined the outcome?" on 21:12:20 03/26/11 Sat

> >href="http://www.cofchrist.org/usaconf/journey.asp">htt
>p://www.cofchrist.org/usaconf/journey.asp
>Journeying Toward a USA National Conference
>BY THE USA APOSTOLIC TEAM
>
>Q: Has church leadership already determined the
>outcome on issues of same-gender marriage and
>ordaining people in same-gender relationships?
>
>A: No, church leadership is committed to discernment
>leading to the USA National Conference. This process
>will include spiritual practices, dialogue, scripture
>reflection, and study of credible resources that
>provide multiple perspectives on human sexuality and
>healthy, faithful, and committed relationships.
>--------
>
>I don't believe that. Does anybody reading this
>believe that?
>
>GALA stands for gay and lesbian acceptance.
>--------
>
> >href="http://welcomingcommunitynetwork.org/wcnnews20081
>2.pdf">http://welcomingcommunitynetwork.org/wcnnews2008
>12.pdf
>
>WCNnewsletter December 2008 Volume 2 Issue 12 Page 3
>
>Step by Step
>
>GALA has received permission to use the name of the
>church, Community of Christ, on their letters and
>materials from this point forward; a significant step
>in their faith journey. As many of you know, when GALA
>was beginning in the late 1980�s, use of the church
>name was strictly prohibited.
>---------
>
>Submitted by Lois
>

Well, Lois, it just shows the bias of the CofC. The RLDS elders (back when there were people still in the hierarchy who believed that Joseph Smith, Jr. said something true every once in a while,) GALA was prohibited from using the church name.

However, now all is wonderful, and even though GALA is supposed to NOT be an official, legal subsidiary of the CofC, it has permission to use the CofC name. That's is just marvelous news, following John's announcement of the hatchet men polishing off Devon Park.

Quite a different situation than with the Restorationists. You know, there are probably more Restorationists with their names on the church rolls than there are homosexuals out of the closet. But that is liberalism's rules. Goverment is to be democratic, unless the people don't know what's good for them. Then everything gets railroaded through in the back room. And, of course, it is minority rules.

The CofC's slack hand in disciplining any homosexual group that is not affiliated with the church as opposed to its heavy hand on the Restoration Branches is like the following:

Dad is really proud of his son, who is the captain of the football team and is very fast with the ladies. "That's my boy!" beams Dad.

Dad is also very proud of his daughter. She is two years older than her brother, but she isn't allowed to date. "That's my girl," glowers Dad.

I am beginning to think that Dave Berg, who wrote the above, is a better social scientist than the people who are consulted by the CofC. The latter don't seem to get it.

The CofC's constant din that it is "considering" what to do about homosexuality is like the Nazi's in 1944 stating that they are still having roundtable discussions about what to do about "the Jewish Question." Although the respective solutions were both opposite to the extreme, the lack of honesty about the fact that both plans had already been realized, and that both plans were shockingly radical is a match.

That's the problem with modern reformers. They are usually radicals who have no clear idea of what they want -- kill/ excommunicate all of group X, or kill/excommunicate everybody except group X? Whichever way the reform agency decides to go, it must let everyone know eventually that it has pulled out all the stops, and isn't going to let anybody intimidate it into moderating its stance.

George

[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]