What's Really Behind the Episcopal Controversy (Vanity)

August 6, 2003 | Miss Marple

[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.

[Huck]

I am not equating homosexuality and womanhood. I just don't want a female priest.

[Terriergal]

I have to say that I disagree with people who equate women priests with this homosexual thing. There is nothing immoral, per se, about being a woman.

I think Huck is saying that they are both changes made that are not supported in Scripture, made just to make people 'happy.' -- That's where the parallel would be. If the criteria is "to make people happy" then any kind of horrible/immoral change is possible.

[boilerfan]

I would like to proffer another idea to the liberalization of many main line denominations.

Since many of these denominations long ago deviated from original teaching of a literal Bible it opened the door for deviants to slowly change church doctrine. I belong to one of the most conservative protestant denominations (LCMS) and the only thing that is keeping the Missouri Synod away from liberalistic teaching is the adherance to a literal translation of the Bible.

True, church property is a motivator, but I believe that Satan is using liberalism to destroy the church to deceive the faithfull as is profecied in the Bible.

The Episcopal church has reached a turning point where it is openly condoning and welcoming unrepentant sinners as teachers and pastors of their congregations. This is totally contradictory to the scriptures.

We are all sinners, but only those who recognize their sin and repent are washed clean. Unfortunately all others have a warmer destination ahead of them.

[Huck]

What is a less high church church?

[Jalapeno]

Unfortunately all others have a warmer destination ahead of them.

You mean Cancun?

[Huck]

I think Huck is saying that they are both changes made that are not supported in Scripture, made just to make people 'happy.

To tell you the truth, I don't know why they made their decision to have female priests. I suppose I think of a male priest as more traditional, female priests as more modern. I have a somewhat old fashioned attitude about women. Anyway, I want a church with a male preacher. That will make me happy. I am a male chauvanist.

[esopman]

This entire episode is precisely as sc2_ct states. It is all about the demonic Nietzschean will-to-power of those deceived by the enemy.

As much as I love MM's posts, and as much as the enemy loves to gain material wealth, the real issue is the soul of the body of Christ.

For those so deceived, there is a visceral loathing of all that is Godly on their part. It is manifest in the social, political, ecclesiastical and other realms. The deceived do not really understand why they hate. All of their rationales and argumentation is a surface layer, obscuring the poisoned spirit contaminated by the dark realm.

Even the language/terminology I have used in this brief rant is alienating and incomprehensible to those deceived. For those of us sinners-saved-by-grace, we must press on in love: Love the sinner, pray for the sinner...but reject the sin.

Thank you for the post, MM.

[Terriergal]

True, church property is a motivator, but I believe that Satan is using liberalism to destroy the church to deceive the faithfull as is profecied in the Bible.

Kind of what I said - I don't know that any of these people have the real estate in mind when they challenge teachings on homosexuality or whatever, but Satan I am SURE does, so he uses them as his pawns to corrupt the most visible witnesses for God in society.

I send my kids to an LCMS school. If I didn't already belong to the local E. Covenant church I would go to an LCMS church. There are some unscriptural teachings in the Covenant church, e.g. women pastors, creeping in to the higher levels that are disturbing, but so far our local congregation is aware and opposed to them. I had to laugh at some of the articles that come in the denomination Magazine - about gun control (pro gun control) and lamenting the fact that 'women pastors' in the Covenant denomination are finding it hard to get called to a church! Boo hoo.

[altura]

Okay, I respect that totally.

A lot of people do make that equation, though.

I have to admit, I didn't care for the idea, but, after dealing with several "Good" ones and having one in our own church, I've changed my mind.

[Terriergal]

Even the language/terminology I have used in this brief rant is alienating and incomprehensible to those deceived.

Oh whew, glad I understood it then. :-)

[Woahhs]

Bump!

[Terriergal]

What is a less high church church?

something that doesn't use a lot of formal liturgy-- e.g. a 'smaller town' kind of church.

[altura]

I love male chauvinists. Promise not to let them do one of those gay makeovers on your !!!!

[irish guard]

>>>>>>>But they certainly have no traditional legal 'excuse' if what you say about their attitudes toward homosexuality is true.<<<<<<<

I confess knowing nothing of thier traditions or legal issues. Instead, I try to follow the maxim that I often tell my children....watch what they do.....Clearly, Hollywood today is very interested in promoting the homosexual lifestyle. Hollywood is dominated by very liberal jewish influences...hence my theory.

As for abortion, I am thoroughly confused. I would think the intire holocaust thing would have created an abhorent hatred for it, but I am not even close on that matter. Jews seem as interested in promoting it as NOW does....... sorry for the digression on Jews...this was meant to be a homosexual thread/comment.

[Terriergal]

Unfortunately all others have a warmer destination ahead of them.

You mean Cancun?

ROFL!

[twigs]

A well-read man in my church has been telling me that he thinks that one reason our society is in the shape it's in today, allowing in such influences as post-modernism, for example, is because the church didn't do its job and speak out against the heresies that came to displace Christianianity as the bedrock of our thought and society in the second half of the 19th century. One reason our society is coming to be so fractured today is that the church, at least the Bible-believing church, IS doing so. As a result, belief in theories like evolution are being challenged by beliefs like intelligent design. The church is taking back some ground, but because we lost so much of it last century and the beginning of this one, we're coming up square against the enemy and he's fighting us tooth and nail, ready to take down our entire culture. I think there's truth in this. I think your observations are spot on, too, and this money issue is another tool the enemy is using to fight for the territory he's been winning awhile.

[Tijeras_Slim]

New way of viewing things, although I would be more prone to believe that it is power and money that they are after, although they may be fooling themselves as to the purity of their motives (the liberal capacity for self deception is bottomless, and they do have a obsession with wealth - I give Bubba and the witch as a prime example).

This is just the latest, predictable, act of the liberalization of the mainline (an particularly protestant) churches. In the 80's it was such things as solidarity with Salvadorans in the midst of the cold war. As the threat of Soviet-style communism is presently gone (or sleeping), they unerringly seek to find the longest lever to move their institutions left, and following the wonderous 90's, "non-judgementalism" on sexuality seems to be that lever.

[Huck]

Promise not to let them do one of those gay makeovers on your

Not to worry :-)

[Terriergal]

I want a church with a male preacher too. I guess that makes me...?

;-)

I think Scripture makes it pretty clear women are not supposed to lead a congregation.

[Huck]

Yeah, there's a local baptist church I have been meaning to try. I sorta want a church that covers old and new testament, which is why I checked out the Episcopal church. The weird part is the vibe, for lack of a better word. Everyone was nice and welcoming, and I don't mean ill will towards anyone. It's tough to be the new guy. But I just didn't feel comfortable.