When Archbishop Mark Shirilau founded the Ecumenical Catholic Church in 1987, he did so to provide a religious home for gays and lesbians.
Now, with the Episcopal Church ordaining gay priests and the United Church of Christ performing same-sex weddings, the Riverside-based denomination is losing members.
As more mainstream churches reach out toward gays and lesbians, many gays are leaving churches like Shirilau’s. The largest gay Catholic group, Dignity, lost nearly half its active members in the past decade.
Numbers in churches that are ‘gay’ affirming are also falling, while churches that tell the truth of Christ’s power to heal and deliver emotionally and sexually broken (hetero and homo) people to freedom and victory are growing.
(http://www.standfirminfaith.com/index.php/site/article/18694/)
Hebrews 7:25, I Corinthians 6:9-11, II Peter 1:3,4
Reposting a couple of SFIF comments interpreting the decline of attendance over several decades in TEC in order to put the consequences of becoming ‘gay’ affirming upon mainline denominations like The Episcopal Church (TEC):
“Base number: attendees left the church at the rate of 721 people per week, or 103 per day. That’s not a decline, that’s a hemmorhage.â€
“Based on the 2000 – 2007 ASA numbers, we are losing an average of 16,000 people a year. That is two average dioceses per year for 8 years. THAT DOES NOT COUNT the four dioceses that have left since Dec 2007.†(emphasis mine)
It’s all about pushing an agenda. When that agenda is reached or in sight, they leave the devastation they caused and move on to the next battlefield.
It’s been done over and over and over, whether GLBT or Feminist or Ecological or whatever. That’s the game plan.
What is that old saying about those who don’t know history?
Peace
Jim Elliott
Florida
I think that the article makes the point that gay-mostly churches are shrinking as gay folk find places in mainline churches. What is shrinking are those niche gatherings of gay people who meet in homes or speciality groups. But it is still all about an agenda. The need for drama and egocentrism seems to be higher among homosexuals, thus ANY gathering where gay folk meet will inevitably be forced to deal with personal liberty strained into lifestyle endorsement.
“The largest gay Catholic group, Dignity, lost nearly half its active members in the past decade.” Is this because members are leaving RC for denominations that accept their agenda, or are these persons just leaving RC period, or are these persons staying in the RC but resigning membership in Dignity? To make a flat out statement that membership is down is ok, but what you read into the statement can be confusing.
I’m not fooled. Perhaps because one of those interviewed lives and works here in my hometown, I’m getting what’s unspoken. The only way they want to become irrelevant is by forcing unbridled and enthusiastic acceptance of their issues/demands on all people of faith.
While I didn’t realize that Cindi Love is the executive director of the entire MCC, I know what she and her fellow activists do here. Last year on Palm Sunday, they rented the historic theater downtown and put together an extravaganza for the community, beginning with a worship service, continuing with a panel discussion about GLBT issues and then a film festival featuring “The Bible Tells Me So” starring VGR and other movies. Earlier this year, there was a feature story in our newspaper about Ms. Love and her partner hightailing it to California to marry, even though they were already “married” in Canada long ago. The comments section in the online edition of our newspaper was abuzz and a few of us asked why they were doing this when they were already “married,” and a ceremony in Calif. still wouldn’t be recognized in Texas. No response.
It seems to me that the last thing these folks want is for homosexuals to join mainstream churches, adhere to the traditional tenets of the faith as best they can (just like ALL of us strive to do!) and nuture their spiritual lives. I know I’m skeptical, hope I’m not cynical, but I think the assertion that they’re finding mainstream churches to be more “welcoming” is a code for their excitement that the gay activists have successfully beaten down mainstream churches into accepting, if not embracing, their agenda. THEN, their work will be done.
That said, I don’t mean this as a criticism of homosexuals who have embraced the teachings and disciplines of our Church and who are joining us in the walk of faith. My heart goes out to these folks as they are often bullied and called “self-haters” by the activists.
Choir Stall writes: “The need for drama and egocentrism seems to be higher among homosexuals,”
Please state your evidence for this statement, or did you just pull it out of somewhere?
For Kevin,
Experience. Experience. Experience. Egocentrism and a flair for drama are not exlcusive to gay folk, but be in a gay get-together (as I have and do occasionally) and…need I say more?
Kevin, my experience is the same. In fact, some of my favorite gay friends regally admit and claim to be drama queens, and it is often fun to watch them. And, of course, they are always the center of attention. And I have other gay friends that are quiet and reserved.
Choir Stall: so true, so stereotypically true …
Azusa,
Like the new old saying:
When you can’t argue with someone’s facts or experience, play the race/bigotry/stereotype card and shut down the conversation that way.
Or did I misread?
Peace to you
Jim Elliott <>< Florida
The notion that gay people are usually pushing an agenda is ridiculous. Many would simply like to be in a place where homosexuality simply isn’t an issue.
However, being anti-gay has been a money maker. It’s all about making people afraid of the gay “agenda.” Then your coffers will fill.
RE: “Many would simply like to be in a place where homosexuality simply isn’t an issue.”
Sure — many would. But the progressive gay activists make that impossible since they are pushing actions that others don’t want.
Unless, of course, John Wilkins’ thought is that those who don’t want what progressive gay activists want are supposed to sit down quietly and not resist . . . which wouldn’t surprise me at all.
Sarah,
Well, I’m from Mississippi, and I can tell you they didn’t want integration down there, said it was being shoved down their throats by a bunch of “outside agitators.” Thank God for agitators, both outside and inside.
Except, of course, that race and disordered sexuality are not the same sorts of things.
Those who push the “get to know gays and you will like them”, are selling dangerous wares. Those of us who actually know a number of gays are quite aware that the stereotypes are quite valid.
#14 — You know, you should really be ashamed of yourself. When gays are forced to sit in the back of the bus, sent to separate and unequal schools, are lynched with regularity, face SEVERE housing and job discrimination, then you will have a point. Until then, the “drama” of equating their experience with that of African-Americans is revolting and wrong.
Ah, but wasn’t there a bunch of gay activists ASKING for a separate school for GLBTs in NY? I believe I recall that. They want to play the tune and then whine when some of us refuse to dance to it.
As to the exhibitionistic streak so common in homosexuals: Go to a parade of homosexuals. What do you see? Any parade, any city.
The evidence is right there, partly undressed, right in front of you.
Narcissism flaunts itself, because itself is what it loves most. Last fall Los Angleles was treated to a sort- of parade of homosexuals and lesbians who had painted themselves mostly blue, and who rode in public stark naked. (There is something more than strange about a naked man or woman, riding a bike, wearing a flashy crash helmet.
Overdressed, no?) The image of the exhibitionist is no mere stereotype (if stereotype means, as it does now, a false image generated by malice or ignorance.) Larry
Choir Stall, you wrote, ‘The need for drama and egocentrism seems to be higher among homosexuals’. If we are dealing in stereotypes I think that is a pretty good description of many of the posters on this blog and reasserters in general. Pot calling the kettle black?
libraryjim: I was agreeing with Choir Stall. By ‘stereotype’ I do NOT mean “a false image generated by malice or ignorance” (thanks for this modern (mis-)definition, Larry) but what the Greek actually denotes: a ‘strong impression’ created by common experience (e.g that Swedes are blond or Italians somewhat excitable).
alaninlondon is talking the kind of ad hominem nonsense he writes in Ruth Gledhill’s blog.
Azusa (re.#19) – Actually, strictly speaking ‘stereo-type’ is a Greek -French compound denoting a ‘strong impression’ created by a ‘solid’ plate of type (the word was first used in the 19th century). You clearly do not find that some human beings, created by God in all their wonderful diversity, are a little more complex than such a mechanical re-presentation – that as you say is your ‘common experience’. I would suggest to you , however, that it is represents a very poor theology of creation. God didn’t create ‘replicas’ or ‘representations’ but ‘individuals’. The sooner that is rememberred the better for this whole debate.
alaninlondon: I was alluding to the Greek words ‘stereos’ and ‘tupos’ that form the compound coinage. What is ‘clear’ to you about me isn’t ‘clear’ to me, as I am well aware of the individuality of, er, individuals. I am also aware (though I usually need outsiders to tell me this) that in quite a few respects I conform to the traits of my ethnic and social origins; how could I (or anyone else) be otherwise? This is not to say I have never met a blond Italian or a quiet American or a German with a sense of humor.
How do you think stereotypes arise? From some vast rightwing conspiracy? Stereotypes describe general group tendencies, not universal truths. These things cut both ways. Male homosexual *tend to be brighter and more sensitive than the population at large. They also *tend to have higher rates of anxiety, alcohol dependance and over-dramatizing personalities. This is not my ‘very poor theology of creation’, just the observations of sociologists and psychologists. You can see it on your own British TV, where half the variety show presenters seem to be ‘hyper’ gays.
I don’t see much drama and egocentrism in this blog. We’re a pretty staid bunch.
Azusa – Thank you for taking the time to reply. Of course ‘stereotypes’ do not arise because of a right-wing conspiracy. The point however is that they can be used to dehumanise ‘individuals’ and seek to take away their ‘individuality’ and ‘diversity’. (Look at how ‘stereotypes’ can be used for evil – as in Nazi Germany, dehumanising Jews and to demarcating ‘them’ as a group in distinction to the ‘us’ of pure aryan Germans). Hence, I was suggesting that within a Christian debate, in which God values each and every person precious in his sight – even when they are on a gay-pride marches – it is not helpful to resort to stereotyping and can lead us to some very bad theology and worse. We need to be careful how we use language and witness by our use of it how God love for us is revealed in Jesus. That’s all I’m saying.
#15: “Those of us who actually know a number of gays are quite aware that the stereotypes are quite valid.”
Tsk, tsk. Is this that old “Some of my best friends are [insert group]”? Or do you know what “they” are like because you see them from a distance or, rather, see what you want to see? If it’s the former, you really need a refresher on what friendship is.
#21: “I don’t see much drama and egocentrism in this blog. We’re a pretty staid bunch.”
ROFLMAO! Wow, you are totally clueless. I bet you don’t see the venom either. Of course, the venom doesn’t effect the snake that produces it.
Thanks, Kevin. I haven’t been called a clueless venomous snake since, oh, last Tuesday. & there’s me thinking serpents were cunning varmints. Darn – got that one wrong too. Must be a stereotype. A Merry Christmas to you too.