This is what happens, when a church sets up it’s own version of a ‘corporate board room’. (Find THAT in either ‘Timothy’, if you can.) Also, has this church a current ‘503c’?
It is always amazing to see what happens, when a pastor’s wife opens her mouth, and begins to give her views. A lot of folks don’t accept a pastor’s wife, as a separate, thinking, human being of value, which unknown to them, IS an American value. It seems that “the right to free speech”, ends at the pastor’s domicile, and shall not be seen or heard of, in the outside world. The cry of “Pastor, bridle thy wife!”, must be raging throughout Kentucky, and beyond.
I give her a lot of credit, for stating what she feels needed to be said! The Pentecostal addage, “Wives, submit to your husbands.” has never sat well with me, (and I was married twice), because it -IS- an encroachment on the American right of free speech, bought with blood, (some of mine, too).
Pepeat, fire THEIR sorry butts. These ministerial jobs are hard to come by. They can be replaced in a flash.
I do not give her credit. Anybody can open their mouth and garbage comes out. There should be a little common sense. A woman should support her husband’s beliefs when it is their paycheck, and in his position for goodness sake! The southern Baptist’s support the Word of God and what it says - and I say.....thank goodness.
This isn’t a “free speech” issue at all. Nobody is saying this woman (and her associate Pastor husband who said he agreed with her) had no right to say what they said. But the congregation and other Church leaders also have rights to speech and if they believe these people do not properly represent their Church then they have every right to fire them. If it was my Church I would make it quite clear that either they go or I go and I would have no problem shaking their dust off my feet and leaving if that’s what it came down to - the Bible commands me to flee from Babylon.
“Pentecostal adage?”
It’s not mere adage, it’s part of God’s inerrant, infallible, and fully sufficient Scripture. And that passage puts as much or more obligation on the husband. Sadly, too many don’t understand it within the church, so I certainly don’t expect those outside the church to get it.
The wives in my church are treated with honor and respect. And they are a credit to their husbands, they are real ladies who would never embarrass their husbands by being in open rebellion against God’s moral order in the local newspaper.
Ephesians 5:22-33
King James Version (KJV)
22 Wives, submit yourselves unto your own husbands, as unto the Lord.
23 For the husband is the head of the wife, even as Christ is the head of the church: and he is the saviour of the body.
24 Therefore as the church is subject unto Christ, so let the wives be to their own husbands in every thing.
25 Husbands, love your wives, even as Christ also loved the church, and gave himself for it;
26 That he might sanctify and cleanse it with the washing of water by the word,
27 That he might present it to himself a glorious church, not having spot, or wrinkle, or any such thing; but that it should be holy and without blemish.
28 So ought men to love their wives as their own bodies. He that loveth his wife loveth himself.
29 For no man ever yet hated his own flesh; but nourisheth and cherisheth it, even as the Lord the church:
30 For we are members of his body, of his flesh, and of his bones.
31 For this cause shall a man leave his father and mother, and shall be joined unto his wife, and they two shall be one flesh.
32 This is a great mystery: but I speak concerning Christ and the church.
33 Nevertheless let every one of you in particular so love his wife even as himself; and the wife see that she reverence her husband.
You probably don’t like what the Bible has to say about remarrying if your first spouse is still alive. I hope you follow the rules a bit closer on envy, theft, murder, gossip and egotism.
As an Eagle Scout, former Scoutmaster and District Committee member, I know the Scout Oath and its passage about being MORALLY STRAIGHT, and any Scout having sex outside of marriage is breaking that oath. “Openly Homosexual” means practicing homosexual and is against the Scout Oath.
Boys may join the Scouts at age 11 or the fifth grade and continue until age 18, or 21 in the Explorers. Everything is fun and fine until an “openly gay” 17 year old decides he is attracted to a fifth grader......
Furthermore, Baptists in the SBC do not generally consider themselves Pentecostal.
The issue at hand here seems to be wanting to LIBERALIZE the Southern Baptist denomination and using their church leadership position to do so which is wrong and conduct that should be questioned by the church. Deacons would be wise in asking them both to move on. That should be well within a churches right to set their own doctorine and standards of conduct for membership in same. Oh and I would say the same for any member of the church doing this.
Why should her and her husband be so special? Sure both of them can have an opinion and even attack their church. If it is public then their church has the right to ask them to leave. It's not that complicated really.
Both are opposed to the very clear teaching of the Bible. This did NOT happen because "the local church set[s] up it's (sic) own version of the corporate board room". The issue was brought up at the Southern Baptist Convention voted on and approved.
You seem concerned as to whether or not "this church has a current '503c' ". I assume that you mean the 501(c)(3). "Organizations described in section 501(c)(3) are commonly referred to as charitable organizations."
"IRS-Exempt Charitable Organizations"
Do you advocate that a tax exempt status be revoked due to opposition to the homosexual targeting of young boys? California is trying to rule that teenaged boys can use the girls restrooms & showers. Would a church's opposition to co-ed camping trips by teenagers also displease you?
The American right of free speech is in regard to governmental restraints, not private. It also happens to be enumerated in a phrase which is PRECEDED by the prohibition "impeding the free exercise of religion", which was also "bought with blood, (some of mine, too)".
Churches routinely & rightly prohibit freedom of speech (e.g., vulgar jokes & music), freedom of the press (Playboy & Hustler in the hymnal racks on the back of the pews) and they would most likely "interfere with the right to peaceably assemble" ("No, you cannot hold your weekly poker game with whiskey & cigars in the back of the sanctuary during Sunday morning services!")
The US government is trying very hard to Establish a religion (The 1st Church of Sodomy) and the very first phrase in the First Amendment clearly prohibits this.
Finally, I suggest that you re-read the Bill of Rights and, since you mentioned them, the New Testament books of First and Second Timothy. In particular, 1Timothy 1:6-10
"Some have departed from these and have turned to meaningless talk. They want to be teachers of the law, but they do not know what they are talking about or what they so confidently affirm.
We know that the law is good if one uses it properly. We also know that the law is made not for the righteous but for lawbreakers and rebels, the ungodly and sinful, the unholy and irreligious, for those who kill their fathers or mothers, for murderers, for the sexually immoral, for those practicing homosexuality, for slave traders and liars and perjurers—and for whatever else is contrary to the sound doctrine"
I'm mildly curious about two things:
1) Do you claim to be a Christian?
2) Do you know the origin of that "Pentecostal addage (sic)"?
The wife's character and behavior is taken into account when hiring a pastor. God has made them one flesh, she is as important as he is to the health of the church.
There was no outcry that she voiced her views. That is both expected and needed in the church. The outcry is that her views are anti-biblical.
I give her a lot of credit, for stating what she feels needed to be said!
What she said was "I do not believe in the bible as the inspired word of God. I believe the bible is wrong and that homosexuality is a perfectly acceptable lifestyle. I believe that homosexuals should be allowed to prey upon our younger boys in boy scouts."
This is not an acceptable belief for a pastor to have. And if his wife has it, but he does not (Although he publicly agreed with her so we know he also holds it), then he is failing to rule his own house (as required by scripture) and allowing his wife to not only believe heresy but to preach it. He has failed both her and the church.
The Pentecostal addage, “Wives, submit to your husbands.” has never sat well with me, (and I was married twice),
Ever think that maybe the reason you had to be married twice is that you did not accept what the bible said about it? (Although please interpret it correctly in the full light of scipture. The verses quoted above by another poster do not make the wife a slave to her husband).
because it -IS- an encroachment on the American right of free speech, bought with blood, (some of mine, too).
She has every right to free speech. No one said she didn't. But the church also has every right to fire her and her equally non-believing husband because they are promoting homosexuality (and thus enabling the homosexuals to go to hell, rather then dragging them back from the edge and getting them saved). They should never, ever get another job in ministry as they obviously don't believe God. They are not Christians.
"CONGRESS. SHALL. MAKE. NO. LAW."
"Free exercise" of speech, of the press, of religion, means this in practice: a whole lot of people deploying their speech, press, and religion as they see fit, with no government interference.
It means Ms Ministerial Wife has the right to print her divisive, hyperbolic and insulting views about the Southern Baptist Convention (SBC) in the newspaper, and it means the Baptist Church has a right to hire and fire at their discretion.
The "right to free speech" means speech without government censorship, not without real-world consequences.
This woman wanted her words to be "impactful," as they say, and lo and behold, they had their impact. She should be marveling that people read her and took her seriously.
She sure can't blame the Church for saying "You don't want to be associated with 'raging Shiite Baptists'? Fine. You're outta here."
Only government is required to respect freedom of speech. Churches, businesses, and other public and private institutions do not have to put up with speech that is derogatory or destructive to their objectives. Her attitude reflects back toward the church, and the church is free to ask her and her husband to leave.
The Pentecostal addage, “Wives, submit to your husbands.”
I believe your disagreement is with the Bible, not the Pentecostals.
Ephesians 5
22
Wives, submit yourselves unto your own husbands, as unto the Lord.
25
Husbands, love your wives, even as Christ also loved the church, and gave himself for it;
These are pretty plain words, not much chance of twisting them around as some scriptures are twisted around.
1 Cor 7
4
The wife hath not power of her own body, but the husband: and likewise also the husband hath not power of his own body, but the wife.
It works both ways but because people do not read enough to understand what it is talking about they let this stupid little pride thing get the best of them, or rather that is the excuse people use when they want to go to greener pasture.
Reason #1
Because many of the pentecostal women were so beautiful and appealing that i could not keep my mind on the sermon.
Reason #2
Because there were too many Women ( including preachers wives ) who were also preaching and making a shambles out of the word of God.
Don,t get me wrong as i loved those people but i needed the word of God in the worst way, not romance nor a woman,s fairy tale of the Gospel.
she has free speech and the church is free to get a new pastor too