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.
But my local Episcopal church in Red Bank is openly decrying the decision!
Most of the property is held, now, at the Diocesan level, so he who controls the hierarchy, controls the money. That's what the homosexuals want: control of the institution. They want control of the institution for two reasons. The first , of course is the money (and concomintant power) as you recognize.
I think equally important however, they want control on the ecclesiastical side to legitimise their pratices by saying "see, the Church says it's ok, why we even have gay Bishops and priestesses".
That's a powerful recruiting tool to use on confused teenagers (remember your own awkward stage?) Surveys suggest as many as 25% of teens are unsure of their sexual orientation at some point. Of course that could be anything from the tortured psyche of the 'born' homosexual to the normal kid's wondering 'well, if I don't like baseball (because I'm lousy at it), maybe I am queer like the other kids are teasing me. Virtually every kid get's teased at some point and called 'queer' (in our day) or 'gay'. What's important is how they react and what happens next.
The truth is that whatever the amount of normal or even abnormal teen angst over sexuality, most people end up straight. If 3% of the population is gay (a high estimate), and 25% of teens question their sexual orientation, that means of those who do question their sexualilty, about 88% of those who question their sexuality end up straight, and only 12% of those who question their sexuality end up queer! Grrrr.
The homosexuals want to use the Church to make it seem more OK to be queer. They fantasize about 10-15% of the population being queer, and would use the Church to up the number who end up queer for 10+% of the kids who are unsure to 50% of the kids who end up unsure. Very bad.
I've never heard of a conservative Episcopal parish in that region, so I have no advice on that front.
I think you may be right, but I *DOUBT* very much that the *people* involved have this as a conscious motivation. However I do think that it comes into play for the forces behind the corruption of the church at large. I am speaking with regard to spiritual warfare. That would be a valuable asset for the unseen adversary to control.
I believe you are correct when you speak of the homo (I refuse the terms Gay or other such terms...call it waht it is) movement. It is clearly their intention to get their way, just as it is for NOW to force abortions down our throat. Any way for homosexuals to wiggle their way in (ugh ...the pun!) is their goal. Just look at the TV airwaves today. Network tv is full of Homosexual stories...Homo High in New York, this bishop thing, the homo network itself...Bravo and Hollywood, with its adulation and open promotion of the homosexual lifestyle. For one thing... and I know I will be flamed for this, I believe the majority of jewsih people think nothing of homosexuality (abortion either for that matter). They seem to be heavily involved in Hollywood and promote their beliefs freely and without any challenge.
So Miss Marple, in reality, I believe the real promoters are the unwitting executives in the news networks and Hollywood, who really carry they torch for NAMBLA and other awful organizations with serious homosexual agendas.
I love the theory.....signed ...a former, temporary Hoosier....
People have been indoctrinated, especially in this country with the thinking that we cannot offend people, so we must tolerate their behavior....Given this inch, they take the mile by saying we must accept their behavior in all aspects of what we do in organizations and change our traditions accordingly or perish (Boy Scouts and Marriage are a good example of this).
I don't really think its as much an organized push as it is a common way of thinking amongst homosexuals.
The Baptists are way behind the "tolerance curve", so an event like this is not possible at the moment. Because of traditions and the power structure of the Catholic Church, it remains unadvertised to an extent, though there have been cases and seem to be more all the time where people want the traditions of the church changed. I think the Church of Christ and Assembly factions don't have these issues because many of those members have run TO those groups, not started out there, due to the changing of the older factions.
I think if you study the history of the Episcopal Church, you would see it is a slow chipping away of the standards day by day, year by year. Not over the last 10 years, but probably more over the last 100.
It is obvious to me that this new Bishop is not working in colusion with "The Homosexuals", but is instead thinking of himself in this situation. It's all about him. Look at his life, and you will see that he has adjusted his life by his rules, not God's. He was married, with a child, left his wife for a man. He has convinced them that, depspite the promises he made in the past in regards to fidelity/trust/etc, his action to leave his family is ok. (and has used them as pawns in this latest event). He has kept his religious standing instead of understanding its ways were not for him, and has pushed people to be "tolerant" of him so that he can maintain and increase his power within the organization. Now its at the point where to obtain more power for himself, he must fracture his Church. He certainly does not seem to have a problem with this.
I do think that traditional Jewish law implies that the baby isn't equal to a full human life until a certain time laterin the pregnancy, but I'm not sure on that. But they certainly have no traditional legal 'excuse' if what you say about their attitudes toward homosexuality is true.
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.