|
Hi,
I
think it's a little unfair to challenge Mary and Nick this way. Arguing for
consistency is going to end up with debates about the hypocrisy of all
participants. God knows there is plenty of evidence for all of us to stand
accused.
The
important argument about the formation of the "Rebel Alliance" (whoops I
meant _Reforming_ Alliance) is not about the theological congruency, or lack
thereof, of its leadership. Rather of its constitutional legitimacy to determine
the polity and character of the UCA.
It
claims to represent most members of the UCA yet appears to ignore the processes
of the UCA which, those of us who made the promise of membership, are bound to
support and accept as authoritative.
This
is a conflict over power and authority. It needs to be addressed as
such.
Geoff
My wife was a minister 7 years before I became
one. Is this an answer? All I ask is that we all be consistent.
David
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Thursday, September 25, 2003 7:31
PM
Subject: RE: post emu summit
He does point up the "selective literalism" of the
antihomosexual
position. It's a fair question to ask. With
some people I know the
answer is "She is covered by the mantle of her
husband's authority." :-(
Andrew
-----Original
Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, 25 September 2003 4:10
PM
To: David and Olivia Neilson; insights
Subject: Re: post emu
summit
David,
I'll bite - are you being sarcastic, pulling
fun at EMU, or serious?
Blessings,
themolk.
>--
Original Message --
>Reply-To: "David and Olivia Neilson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>From:
"David and Olivia Neilson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>To:
"insights" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Subject:
Re: post emu summit
>Date: Thu, 25 Sep 2003 14:03:52
+1000
>
>
>It just worries me that the EMU have a woman as
their leader and
spokesman.
>
>Paul quite clearly tells us in
1 Cor 14
>
>As in all the churches of the saints, 34 women
should be silent in the
churches.
>For they are not permitted to
speak, but should be subordinate, as the
law
>also says. 35 If
there is anything they desire to know, let them ask
their
>husbands
at home. For it is shameful for a woman to speak in
church.
>
>and again in 1 Timothy 2:
>
>11 Let a
woman learn in silence with full submission. 12 I permit
no
woman
>to teach or to have authority over a man;she is to keep
silent. 13 For
Adam
>was formed first, then Eve; 14 and Adam was
not deceived, but the woman
was
>deceived and became a
transgressor. 15 Yet she will be saved
through
childbearing,
>provided they continue in faith and love and
holiness, with modesty.
>
>Paul says this twice, that they are
not to have a say in church
government.
>This biblical attitude is
reinforced by 1900 years of tradition.
Following
>Paul, men are the
leaders and women the followers. I would want to know
what
>her
husband thinks before I encourage my people to consider
this
proposal.
>David
------------------------------------------------------
-
You are subscribed to the mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED]
-
To unsubscribe, email [EMAIL PROTECTED] and put in
the message
body 'unsubscribe insights-l' (ell, not one (1))
See: http://nsw.uca.org.au/insights-l-information.htm
------------------------------------------------------
|
