PDA

View Full Version : 'Gay' clergy leads to membership drop



FlaGator
09-03-2010, 02:57 PM
And the leaders of these apostate dominations seem to be genuinely surprised by this.




Another mainline denomination, the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America (ELCA), is reporting a decline in membership, joining a growing trend in mainline loses.

The Evangelical Lutheran Church in America -- the largest Lutheran body in the U.S. -- lost almost 91,000 members and 48 congregations last year (see earlier story (http://www.onenewsnow.com/Church/Default.aspx?id=1121356)). Mark Tooley, president of the Institute on Religion & Democracy (http://www.theird.org/), says other mainline denominations, such as the Episcopal Church and the United Methodist Church, have seen continuous decline as well since the mid 1960s.


In response to the loss in membership, which is accompanied by a nearly three-percent dorp in giving, the ELCA Church Council is revising its remaining 2010 budget as well as restructuring the church-wide organization in 2011.


Tooley, whose organization monitors mainline denominations in the U.S., contends there is a direct connection between membership loss and a denomination's position on same-sex "marriage."


"[That amounts to] direct rejection of biblical and historic Christian teachings," he explains. "And so theologically orthodox church members and theologically orthodox congregations have a hard time ignoring that new stance in the same way that they ignored for many decades a whole host of liberal political positions by their church hierarchy."


In 2009 the ELCA voted to allow noncelibate homosexuals to serve as clergy. In a report released recently by the ELCA, the denomination dropped to 4.5 million members in about 10,300 congregations last year.


"A number of these congregations [that have left the ELCA] have come together to form a North American Lutheran Church that they have had several meetings for," he says, "and it seems to involve at least a couple of hundred congregations -- and almost certainly will grow with time."


Tooley says some of those who have left the denomination have also gone to the more conservative Missouri Synod Lutheran Church as well as various other smaller church entities.


The proposed North American Lutheran Church is a topic of discussion at meetings this month called by the group Lutheran CORE (http://www.lutherancore.org/).



The story is here (http://www.onenewsnow.com/Church/Default.aspx?id=1125624)

Apache
09-03-2010, 03:13 PM
Believers are not going to have the wool pulled over their eyes. These "leaders" had better return to the scriptures...

warpig
09-03-2010, 06:17 PM
Believers are not going to have the wool pulled over their eyes. These "leaders" had better return to the scriptures...

Good comment.

PoliCon
09-03-2010, 06:52 PM
What killed me was when the Episcopal church made that homo a bishop they saw nothing wrong with his leaving his wife and kids and shacking up with his gay lover. And then they wonder why the Episcopal church is bleeding membership. Sorry.- there is no way I'd want to be a part of a church that allowed sexualy active homosexuals to serve as clergy. Celibate - that's a different story.

Apache
09-03-2010, 07:06 PM
What killed me was when the Episcopal church made that homo a bishop they saw nothing wrong with his leaving his wife and kids and shacking up with his gay lover. And then they wonder why the Episcopal church is bleeding membership. Sorry.- there is no way I'd want to be a part of a church that allowed sexualy active homosexuals to serve as clergy. Celibate - that's a different story.

Homosexuality is an affront to the Lord. Anybody who says they believe and condones the continued sin is throwing up a smoke-screen for what they truly believe. They will be punished...

Odysseus
09-03-2010, 07:56 PM
What killed me was when the Episcopal church made that homo a bishop they saw nothing wrong with his leaving his wife and kids and shacking up with his gay lover. And then they wonder why the Episcopal church is bleeding membership. Sorry.- there is no way I'd want to be a part of a church that allowed sexualy active homosexuals to serve as clergy. Celibate - that's a different story.

Exactly. Even if they had to have a gay bishop, couldn't they have picked one who hadn't abandoned a family and made a mockery of his marriage vows? Talk about a lack of character. Who would go to this guy for marriage counseling?

PoliCon
09-03-2010, 09:54 PM
Exactly. Even if they had to have a gay bishop, couldn't they have picked one who hadn't abandoned a family and made a mockery of his marriage vows? Talk about a lack of character. Who would go to this guy for marriage counseling?
How on earth they could justify that in their own twisted minds is beyond me.

Apache
09-04-2010, 08:45 AM
How on earth they could justify that in their own twisted minds is beyond me.

Political Correctness

FlaGator
09-04-2010, 09:49 AM
How on earth they could justify that in their own twisted minds is beyond me.

They elected to join the world instead of being an alternative to it.

CueSi
09-04-2010, 01:46 PM
And in other news, water is wet and the sun rises in the East.

~QC

hazlnut
09-04-2010, 09:19 PM
What killed me was when the Episcopal church made that homo a bishop they saw nothing wrong with his leaving his wife and kids and shacking up with his gay lover. And then they wonder why the Episcopal church is bleeding membership. Sorry.- there is no way I'd want to be a part of a church that allowed sexualy active homosexuals to serve as clergy. Celibate - that's a different story.

For someone who always calls out people on intolerance, I would expect better...

How do you see that comment different from the bigotry you always rightly condemn on this board?

PoliCon
09-04-2010, 11:40 PM
They elected to join the world instead of being an alternative to it.

exactly.

PoliCon
09-04-2010, 11:44 PM
For someone who always calls out people on intolerance, I would expect better...

How do you see that comment different from the bigotry you always rightly condemn on this board?

homo is no longer an acceptable abbreviation of the term homosexual? :rolleyes: Truth is - I don't care enough to have bothered to look up the homo's name - and I am certainly not going to type out homosexual every time the term comes up just to make your gay ass feel better. But if that's not enough for you - suck on this: there is a big difference between an accident of appearance and the reality of willful choice. Someone may or may not choose to be teh ghey - they MUST however choose to act on it. Criticism based on choice is very much valid and in the case of the homo in NH that they made bishop - very much warranted.

hazlnut
09-05-2010, 09:39 AM
homo is no longer an acceptable abbreviation of the term homosexual? :rolleyes: Truth is - I don't care enough to have bothered to look up the homo's name - and I am certainly not going to type out homosexual every time the term comes up just to make your gay ass feel better. But if that's not enough for you - suck on this: there is a big difference between an accident of appearance and the reality of willful choice. Someone may or may not choose to be teh ghey - they MUST however choose to act on it. Criticism based on choice is very much valid and in the case of the homo in NH that they made bishop - very much warranted.

Why do you see a difference between skin color and sexual orientation?

Neither are choices.

The only real difference is blacks can't hide their skin color. That's what makes the gay civil rights era different from that of 1960's.

warpig
09-05-2010, 09:42 AM
Neither are choices.

.

There is no concrete proof of that statement.

hazlnut
09-05-2010, 09:55 AM
There is no concrete proof of that statement.

In science and social science we have what's called GENERAL CONSENSUS...

Sexual Orientation is a hard-wired personality trait -- like left-handed. The brain is pre-wired toward one orientation or the other. And there are degrees.

Concrete proof? What you're talking about is the cutting edge of genetics and prenatal research--think of how many different factors contribute to brain development, including nutrition, health, birth order.

But the typical experience of a gay person describes a personality trait and not a choice. People don't just turn gay at 13. They were always that way since birth.

Anti-gay Legislation, bigotry, and homophobia will be phased out of every aspect of American life. But just like small pockets of the KKK still exist, some will cling to their homophobia as a warm blanket (many to hide their own homosexuality--Larry Craig).

Prop 8 is circling the bowl. California will redeem itself (with a little nudge from the Federal Courts).

PoliCon
09-05-2010, 09:59 AM
Why do you see a difference between skin color and sexual orientation?

Neither are choices.

The only real difference is blacks can't hide their skin color. That's what makes the gay civil rights era different from that of 1960's.

You don;'t have a choice about walking around black - but you do have a choice about how you ACT on your sexual attractions. Being gay may or may not be a choice - IMO - that question is irrelevant to the discussion of this issue. What is relevant is that every person on the planet MUST chose how they act on their attractions. The difference is one side you have an accident of appearance on the other side you have a CHOICE. That's the difference.

PoliCon
09-05-2010, 10:02 AM
In science and social science we have what's called GENERAL CONSENSUS...

Sexual Orientation is a hard-wired personality trait -- like left-handed. The brain is pre-wired toward one orientation or the other. And there are degrees. Bullshit. The studies of this issue do not assertion if the hardwiring is a result of continued choices in a given direction creating paths or if the paths lead people to make certian choices. EITHER WAY - it's still a behavior no matter which way your propensities lay and how we behave is ALWAYS a choice.


Anti-gay Legislation, bigotry, and homophobia will be phased out of every aspect of American life. But just like small pockets of the KKK still exist, some will cling to their homophobia as a warm blanket (many to hide their own homosexuality--Larry Craig).

Prop 8 is circling the bowl. California will redeem itself (with a little nudge from the Federal Courts). Anti-gay legislation? prove your claim. Show one example of anti-gay legislation.

Apache
09-05-2010, 11:13 AM
In science and social science we have what's called GENERAL CONSENSUS...



In other words, "Take our word for it". Nope, can't do that. Homosexuality is a choice not a trait.

Zathras
09-05-2010, 11:14 AM
http://chzderp.files.wordpress.com/2010/08/0b389b6a-024a-44e4-a481-9049cd807b87.jpg

Fixed for accuracy.

Odysseus
09-05-2010, 02:53 PM
For someone who always calls out people on intolerance, I would expect better...

How do you see that comment different from the bigotry you always rightly condemn on this board?
Pot, meet kettle. Kettle, pot. Once again, any deviation from your "enlightened" world view is bigotry, subject to insults, catcalls and everything but factual responses.

In science and social science we have what's called GENERAL CONSENSUS...

Sexual Orientation is a hard-wired personality trait -- like left-handed. The brain is pre-wired toward one orientation or the other. And there are degrees.

Concrete proof? What you're talking about is the cutting edge of genetics and prenatal research--think of how many different factors contribute to brain development, including nutrition, health, birth order.
That's not concrete proof, it's a list of factors with no citations. Convincing only if you already agree with your premises, and are willing to ignore any informed discussion to the contrary.


But the typical experience of a gay person describes a personality trait and not a choice. People don't just turn gay at 13. They were always that way since birth.

This is an assertion, masquerading as a fact. According to the latest science, there is no consensus, because there are too many factors which may impact on sexual orientation.

"There are numerous theories about the origins of a person's sexual orientation; most scientists today agree that sexual orientation is most likely the result of a complex interaction of environmental, cognitive and biological factors. In most people, sexual orientation is shaped at an early age. There is also considerable recent evidence to suggest that biology, including genetic or inborn hormonal factors, play a significant role in a person's sexuality. In summary, it is important to recognize that there are probably many reasons for a person's sexual orientation and the reasons may be different for different people."
--American Psychological Association, 2009


For someone who always calls out people on intolerance, I would expect better...

How do you see that comment different from the bigotry you always rightly condemn on this board?
Pot, meet kettle. Kettle, pot.

In science and social science we have what's called GENERAL CONSENSUS...

Sexual Orientation is a hard-wired personality trait -- like left-handed. The brain is pre-wired toward one orientation or the other. And there are degrees.

Concrete proof? What you're talking about is the cutting edge of genetics and prenatal research--think of how many different factors contribute to brain development, including nutrition, health, birth order.
That's not concrete proof, it's a list of factors with no citations. Who has actually done the research that proves that prenatal development leads to homosexuality?


Anti-gay Legislation, bigotry, and homophobia will be phased out of every aspect of American life. But just like small pockets of the KKK still exist, some will cling to their homophobia as a warm blanket (many to hide their own homosexuality--Larry Craig).

Prop 8 is circling the bowl. California will redeem itself (with a little nudge from the Federal Courts).
This is wishful thinking masquerading as fact.
You're going down a dangerous road here. If homosexuality is hard-wired (and despite your claim of consensus, there isn't one, since the research is far from conclusive), then it is a medical condition. Medical conditions have no intrinsic moral value, and may actually inhibit interactions with other parts of the larger community, do not warrant special protection. A person who is "hard-wired" gay is, by the very definition, unable to control the attraction to his or her own sex, and therefore would be prone to disruptive behavior among a group of heterosexuals in close quarters. You've just justified Don't Ask, Don't Tell.