Texas church refuses memorial for Navy vet

[Baron Max]

"Homosexual Lutheran clergy who are in sexual relationships will be able to serve as pastors, the largest U.S. Lutheran body said on Saturday."

Interesting. I read in today's paper that, while they made that statement, they also kept the rule in place that gay pastors aren't permitted to indulge in homosexual relationships. Thus, all they're saying is that they'll turn a blind eye as long as they want to .....yet when they decide against it, the law/rule remains in place.

The contrast, as I see it, is simple. The Church doesn't have to say gay sex is right.

If they allow it to continue, they're effectively saying that it's okay. Yet their laws remain to indicate that gay sex is NOT okay. Seems to me that it's perfectly hypocritical of them .....which is probably why you like it, Tiassa!

Baron Max

 

[John99]

*************
M*W: Why as many as three? There was no equality when there was only two.

probably more likely with two even if it is male and female. beyond that it is unlikely enough to say impossible, i guess competition would be the main factor.

 

[superstring01]

It's impossible to discriminate against the guy, because he's dead. A church memorial is a meaningless ceremony. They have a right to perform or cancel their meaningless ceremony for any reason or no reason.

I have to agree with this assessment.

~String

 

[Michael]

I'm with Baron on this one. I think they are closed minded arrogant fools, but they have a right to believe what they believe. Same as me. I don't like them, they don't like gays.
At least they aren't hypocritcal about it.

I'm going to have to agree too. They have a right to be bigoted hypocrites. Anyway, it depends on which God they worship, OT or NT, Evil or Love - they chose OT-Evil-God so its only natural of them to be Evil-minded SOBs

Good to see they were outed though

 

[Tiassa]

If they allow it to continue, they're effectively saying that it's okay. Yet their laws remain to indicate that gay sex is NOT okay.

Actually, Baron, they're not saying it's okay. They're simply putting judgment in God's hands, which, according to the Bible, is where it belongs.

Really, Baron ... I know I'm hard on Christians, but you maybe you could explain how the hell are they being hypocritical for trusting in God according to scripture?

Are you saying that any sinner shouldn't be a pastor? By definition, there will be none left.

 

[Baron Max]

Actually, Baron, they're not saying it's okay.

If they permit him to be a pastor, they're effectively approving of his lifestyle ...effectively saying that they think it's okay to engage in homosexual relations.

Are you saying that any sinner shouldn't be a pastor? By definition, there will be none left.

You obviously don't know the difference between a sinner and a repentant or remorseful sinner.

Baron Max

 

[Tiassa]

If they permit him to be a pastor, they're effectively approving of his lifestyle ...effectively saying that they think it's okay to engage in homosexual relations.

There is a difference between approving of something and leaving it between the sinner and God.

You obviously don't know the difference between a sinner and a repentant or remorseful sinner.

God chose to bless the homosexual with birth and life. The homosexual will reckon with God at Judgment.

I know that showing mercy is a horrible thing in your perspective, but as people learn more and more about God's role in the world, so, too, will their mercy grow.

 

[KennyJC]

Being gay is not a sin. It's not even in the pointless 10 commandments for fuck sake. In most cases, homosexuality is the uncontrollable attraction to the opposite sex. What then should a person in this situation do? Be selobate and alone until death? In any case, they will still be gay when they die.

I can't believe they said it wasn't because of hatred or prejudice, because many christians who have lived other 'sins' would have had their sins forgiven and had the ceremony go ahead... so long as they are not gay.

 

[Adstar]

Officials at the High Point Church in Arlington, Texas, have decided, despite the words of their Lord and Savior, to reserve judgment for themselves:

A megachurch canceled a memorial service for a Navy veteran 24 hours before it was to start because the deceased was gay.

Officials at the nondenominational High Point Church knew that Cecil Howard Sinclair was gay when they offered to host his service, said his sister, Kathleen Wright. But after his obituary listed his life partner as one of his survivors, she said, it was called off ....

.... The church's pastor, the Rev. Gary Simons, said no one knew Sinclair, who was not a church member, was gay until the day before the Thursday service, when staff members putting together his video tribute saw pictures of men "engaging in clear affection, kissing and embracing."

Simons said the church believes homosexuality is a sin, and it would have appeared to endorse that lifestyle if the service had been held there.

"We did decline to host the service — not based on hatred, not based on discrimination, but based on principle," Simons told The Associated Press. "Had we known it on the day they first spoke about it — yes, we would have declined then. It's not that we didn't love the family" ....

.... "Even though we could not condone that lifestyle, we went above and beyond for the family through many acts of love and kindness," Simons said. (Yahoo! News)​

For the church, this is all about image, and has nothing to do with faith. Whether we choose to indict just this church, or "megachurches" in general, or even, as some certainly will, the whole of Christianity in the United States, we should bear in mind that at the center of this is the choice to judge. Do they not believe that they, in turn, will be judged? Do they think that God does not know what is in their hearts? I mean, they admitted that this is about appearances. According to the article: "Simons said the church believes homosexuality is a sin, and it would have appeared to endorse that lifestyle if the service had been held there."

The last thing, apparently, that the High Point Church wants is to appear to endorse compassion, mercy, and the comfort of Jesus Christ.

Cecil Howard Sinclair served the U.S. Navy in the first Gulf War, and died of an infection related to surgery to prepare him for a heart transplant. He was 46.

The website for High Point Church is: http://www.churchunusual.com

Your whole argument is faulty. The explanation of the church is clear enough.

"Simons said the church believes homosexuality is a sin, and it would have appeared to endorse that lifestyle if the service had been held there"

Their intent was not to be seen to be endorsing the homosexual lifestyle. That is a good intent for a Christian to do. I would never want to give the impression that i endorsed the homosexual lifestyle either.

God has already judged that the homosexual act is an abomination. What these people are doing is making sure they do not give anyone the impression that the homosexual act is ok with God.



All Praise The Ancient Of Days

 

[MacGyver1968]

I wonder...instead of being gay...if the guy had been a known cheater on his wife....would they still have canceled the service?

 

[Baron Max]

I wonder...instead of being gay...if the guy had been a known cheater on his wife....would they still have canceled the service?

If he was repentant or remorseful, then no, they wouldn't have cancelled the service.

See the difference? The church, no church, nor the Bible advocates forgiveness and acceptance of someone who continues to sin. Forgiveness is ONLY for those who have sinned, but are trying to repent.

Baron Max

 

[Ripley]

It's interesting how—as clearly exemplified—bigots will hide behind Jesus' robes; how accommodating the Bible must be... But I wonder, if they were not already bigots, wouldn't homosexuality, while not necessarily being condoned, at least be tolerated in the same sense as a Catholic would tolerate a Jew, or a Buddhist, or a Lutheran, or a Protestant, or a Krishna, or a Republican, etc?

 

[Bells]

If he was repentant or remorseful, then no, they wouldn't have cancelled the service.

See the difference? The church, no church, nor the Bible advocates forgiveness and acceptance of someone who continues to sin. Forgiveness is ONLY for those who have sinned, but are trying to repent.

Baron Max

You fail to see the point.

The man is dead. He can no longer sin or be remorseful. So how can he, a dead man, continue to sin?

The memorial service is for his family. By refusing to allow it in their church, they are not punishing the "sinner", but his family. As I said before, the man is no longer living, so in effect, he can no longer sin.

Who is the church, to give forgiveness? Is it not God's purpose to do so?

Yes, the church has a right to refuse to have the memorial in their place of worship. The issue that should be discussed is whether they are right to do so.

 

[Baron Max]

You fail to see the point. The man is dead. He can no longer sin or be remorseful. So how can he, a dead man, continue to sin?

Ahh, I can see that you didn't read up on this issue. The church would have been perfectly okay with the service until they discovered that it was turning into a gay rights issue ....with hundreds of gay and lesbians attending and singing gay songs, and talking about the wonders and beauties of gay sex, gay life, etc. That's what the church did not want in their church! And I don't blame them a damned bit.

The memorial service is for his family.

No, it wasn't. It was becoming a gay rights, free speech agenda.

Yes, the church has a right to refuse to have the memorial in their place of worship. The issue that should be discussed is whether they are right to do so.

They are right to do so ....it's their fuckin' church! Why do you think you have the right to tell them how they should act or worship? Or who they should allow into their congregation? Do you think a church is like some public government office ....where you can demand that it follow some stupid fuckin' laws?

Baron Max

 

[Bells]

Ahh, I can see that you didn't read up on this issue. The church would have been perfectly okay with the service until they discovered that it was turning into a gay rights issue ....with hundreds of gay and lesbians attending and singing gay songs, and talking about the wonders and beauties of gay sex, gay life, etc. That's what the church did not want in their church! And I don't blame them a damned bit.

Where did it say that in the article Baron? Or are you making things up again?

And what exactly is a "gay song"? You are taking a story and running with it, as you tend to do. Your imagination knows no bounds.

When they had originally agreed to hold the service, it was not a gay rights issue. It became a gay rights issue when they cancelled it. Before they cancelled it, it was a memorial service organised by his family, who happen to be members of the church.

No, it wasn't. It was becoming a gay rights, free speech agenda.

Again, where does it say that in the article?

They are right to do so ....it's their fuckin' church! Why do you think you have the right to tell them how they should act or worship? Or who they should allow into their congregation? Do you think a church is like some public government office ....where you can demand that it follow some stupid fuckin' laws?

Oh shove it Baron.

In case you failed to read what I wrote properly, I agree they have a right to refuse. However are they right to have done so? The man is dead. He can no longer sin. So who exactly are they punishing? Him or his family? My guess would be the family since they are the one's who organised the memorial service in the first place as it is their church. The church claims that it loves the family. Great way of showing that love and support.

You are quite correct. The church is not a government office. What it is however, is a group supposedly following Christ's teachings. And seeing that Christ was such a great advocate of forgiveness and kindness, their actions tend to point in the opposite direction.

 

[Atom]

Doesn't surprise me... backward lot over there...

 

[§outh§tar]

Tiassa, I believe the irony lies in the fact that the church refuses to "endorse" a dead homosexual's lifestyle.

 

[Baron Max]

Where did it say that in the article Baron? Or are you making things up again?

And what exactly is a "gay song"? You are taking a story and running with it, as you tend to do. Your imagination knows no bounds.

When they had originally agreed to hold the service, it was not a gay rights issue. It became a gay rights issue when they cancelled it. Before they cancelled it, it was a memorial service organised by his family, who happen to be members of the church.

Again, where does it say that in the article?

All of that that I mentioned was in the Dallas Morning News ...I just read it this morning, so I thought I'd pass it along.

Oh shove it Baron.

Are you permitted to say that according to the rules of the site? And you're a moderator, right???

[In case you failed to read what I wrote properly, I agree they have a right to refuse. However are they right to have done so?

If they wanted to refuse it, then, yes, they were right to do so.

The man is dead. He can no longer sin. So who exactly are they punishing? Him or his family?

Why should the church or you or anyone else care? It's the church's place to make that decision, you even admitted it yourself. Now you're turning it into a "Who's right?" issue. It was and is the church's place to decide ....and they did.

You are quite correct. The church is not a government office. What it is however, is a group supposedly following Christ's teachings.

Well, it's their right to decide what to follow, what to believe, and how to act, ain't it? If you don't like it, then you're welcome to say, "I don't like that." But that's all you should say ...it's not your place to tell others how to act, what to believe, or who to have funeral services for.

Baron Max

 

[Bells]

All of that that I mentioned was in the Dallas Morning News ...I just read it this morning, so I thought I'd pass it along.

Link? Because at the moment all I have to go on is what you tell me, and for all I know, you are simply making it all up.

Are you permitted to say that according to the rules of the site? And you're a moderator, right???

Lets see now. "Shove" and "it" are not swear words. And I am a member, just like you, in this particular forum. The "you're a moderator" argument is weak, even from you. If you are that offended, the report function is there for a reason.

If they wanted to refuse it, then, yes, they were right to do so.

And they did. But did their doing so go against their Christian beliefs? After all, Christians are meant to follow the forgiveness and do not judge rules, are they not? Is it not God that is meant to be the one to pass judgement on sinners?

Why should the church or you or anyone else care? It's the church's place to make that decision, you even admitted it yourself. Now you're turning it into a "Who's right?" issue. It was and is the church's place to decide ....and they did.

The family care enough. After all, they are the one's who have been denied the right to have the memorial service at their own church, 24 hours before the service was meant to start.

Well, it's their right to decide what to follow, what to believe, and how to act, ain't it? If you don't like it, then you're welcome to say, "I don't like that." But that's all you should say ...it's not your place to tell others how to act, what to believe, or who to have funeral services for.

Well lets see now. As Christians, they supposedly follow Christ's teachings and the bible, do they not? Where does it say in the Bible that a Church should refuse to have a memorial service for a homosexual? If we were to look closely at what Christ taught, this particular church has gone directly against it. Which tends to reek a bit, don't you think? The refusal to have this man's funeral was not because he was supposedly a "sinner". It is based on bigotry, something Christ was completely against.

Just like it is not my place to tell them who to have funeral services for, it is not your place to tell me what to agree on.

 

[scorpius]

Officials at the High Point Church in Arlington, Texas, have decided, despite the words of their Lord and Savior, to reserve judgment for themselves:

A megachurch canceled a memorial service for a Navy veteran 24 hours before it was to start because the deceased was gay.

Officials at the nondenominational High Point Church knew that Cecil Howard Sinclair was gay when they offered to host his service, said his sister, Kathleen Wright. But after his obituary listed his life partner as one of his survivors, she said, it was called off ....

.... The church's pastor, the Rev. Gary Simons, said no one knew Sinclair, who was not a church member, was gay until the day before the Thursday service, when staff members putting together his video tribute saw pictures of men "engaging in clear affection, kissing and embracing."

Simons said the church believes homosexuality is a sin, and it would have appeared to endorse that lifestyle if the service had been held there.

"We did decline to host the service — not based on hatred, not based on discrimination, but based on principle," Simons told The Associated Press. "Had we known it on the day they first spoke about it — yes, we would have declined then. It's not that we didn't love the family" ....

.... "Even though we could not condone that lifestyle, we went above and beyond for the family through many acts of love and kindness," Simons said. (Yahoo! News)​

For the church, this is all about image, and has nothing to do with faith. Whether we choose to indict just this church, or "megachurches" in general, or even, as some certainly will, the whole of Christianity in the United States, we should bear in mind that at the center of this is the choice to judge. Do they not believe that they, in turn, will be judged? Do they think that God does not know what is in their hearts? I mean, they admitted that this is about appearances. According to the article: "Simons said the church believes homosexuality is a sin, and it would have appeared to endorse that lifestyle if the service had been held there."

The last thing, apparently, that the High Point Church wants is to appear to endorse compassion, mercy, and the comfort of Jesus Christ.

Cecil Howard Sinclair served the U.S. Navy in the first Gulf War, and died of an infection related to surgery to prepare him for a heart transplant. He was 46.

The website for High Point Church is: http://www.churchunusual.com

Id say FUCK YOU all,and take the dude to some other church.
fucking preachers are the biggest COCKSUCKERS anyways so why the fuck do they have to pretend to be oh so fng righteous,MOTHERFUCKERS!!