Posted on 07/01/2005 12:13:05 PM PDT by mbarker12474
The elitist oligarchy at Va Conf UMC headquarters in Richmond refuses to announce or explain the matter, even to laity in churches in Virginia. Local pastors are also silent.
Homosexuality per se is of course at issue, but the primary issue is that of the local pastor's allegedly serious moral transgression of refusing membership to a homosexual. Plus:
-- local control over membership -- local control over their pastor -- bishop power & clergy voting power re character test -- Biblical, Christian stance on homosexuality as a sin (or not) -- what sins (and unrepentance) disqualify persons from acceptance at church? membership in church? -- UMC governing law (the _Discipline_) and what it does or does not say about clergy power over membership, etc.
Mike Barker Lay Member, Trinity UMC King George Va
Reverend Layman?
This is getting ridiculous. Just a few hours ago I was reading that a lesbian couple was suing an inn in VT over a phone discussion of wedding plans in which the innkeepers expressed reluctance, short of refusal.
When does the backlash begin? They are like wild dogs tearing our nation to shreds.
Let him join.
Then make sure every sermon mentions the error of putting out own desires ahead of God's law.
Be specific with examples.
He'll either leave or repent.
But now I guess the adulturers and fornicators know a place where the clergy would be afraid to challenge their behaviors.
Suspended from an un-church? Has Genus (sp) heard of this? A record?
Did someone add them to the Endangered Species Protection Act while I was snoozing? Why are homosexuals so all-fired sacred these days? Somebody tell me.
Creamer? Johnson?
I do declare, I'm gettin the vapors.
....as long as that person isn't a practicing homosexual or a practicing adulterer ..... and is REPENTANT .... then they should be admited as members.
Active homosexuals and active adulterers should not be admitted as members
I'm a Methodist, and I have to agree with the Church on this one.
What if this were an adulterer or fornicator? Would they be refused membership? My church has them in the congregation.
I recall a sermon by one of our pastors; he was stating that someone once scoffed at attending our church because we were all sinners. The pastor's reply was "Sure we are! Our church is filled with sinners and there is always room for one more!"
We are all sinners. I sure am. I have no right to enter heaven for the sins I have committed, and trust, I have committed some bad ones. If I go to heaven, it is only by the grace of God. God calls us to recognize our sin and repent.
I agree with your suggestion. Either this person will recognize their sinful nature and repent, as God calls them to do, or they will not. I think the pastor was wrong for refusing this person's chance to repent of their sin. If we start refusing sinners to attend church, it will be a lonely and empty building.
later pingout.
Clearly, the persecution of those who adhere to Truth is well underway here in this country.
Which will be the more lonely and empty building?
1. A church that refuses sinners?
Or
2. A church that accepts sinners who declare their sin is not a sin and they must be accepted, celebrated and their unions blessed in Holy matrimony?
But they weren't refusing him attendance, were they?
No, they just denied him membership, which implies acceptance.
So, these adulterers who attend your church, do the proudly proclaim themselves as adulterers and inform you that you must change your attitudes about their behavior or it proves that you are not a loving Christian? Do they attend with their mistresses? Are you certain that comparing them to the open (and often in-your-face) homosexual is a valid comparison considering the disparity in their public behaviors?
I mentioned adulterers in my first post because folks always raise that question in defense of the open homosexuals. Actually, the adulterers and the fornicators are counting on the church's silence in regards to the homosexuals. They know if the church loses its ability to stand against that behavior, how can it stand against any other sexual sin?
God and Satan are both watching these developments. I believe that Satan is pleased by these developments and that God is not.
Good question. I don't know.
I'm struggling with that. We must minister to the sinners, but cannot condone their sins. How can we turn away sinners who come to us? I've committed sins since joining my church. Should I be forced out? I'm pretty sure some of the people in church with me have done the same. And it should come as no surprise to anyone that this happens.
Where I would draw the line is if this person stated their open homosexuality, expressed an intent to continue as a practicing homosexual, and denied that it was a sin. Then I would deny membership. I've seen many new members admitted and I have to confess I kind of zone out when the pastor goes through the oath of membership. But I believe one of the lines is "Do you truly repent of your sins..." or something like that. An expressed intent to continue with homosexual practices is a violation of the oath even as it's being given.
I would still encourage attendance for this person. Can't give up on saving someone.
Methodist ping.
The main question in this case isn't whether homosexuals should be allowed membership. The question is whether a local clergy who refuses membership to a homosexual should be removed from his job, on the grounds that this refusal is seriously immoral and unChristian.
Mike B.
Homosexuality is by definition a sinful act.If you identify yourself as a homosexual you are saying you are sinning and have not repented.The Church has an obligation not to fellowship with them but to minister to them.
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.