You may also like...

26 Responses

  1. Caryn LeMur says:

    ROFL!!!! Too true!!!

    A church may often believe that they have the Bible, therefore, they have the answer. However, given they all have the same mindset, they will reach the consensus of a single view rather quickly.

    Our mind’s filter accepts or rejects.

    That is why we need the homeless with us during our discussion of ‘how can the church help you’?

    That is why we need the divorced and remarried with us during our discussion ‘how can we help you?’

    That is why we need the LGBT believers with us during our discussion of ‘how can the church help you?’


    Just for fun… a reader may have wondered about those three (3) categories above, and flinched at one or the other. ‘After all’, the mindset says, ‘they are not equal concerns’.

    Try this version:

    That is why we need the homeless with us during our discussion of ‘how can the church help you’?
    No we do not – they are damaged, some are ex-felons, many have chosen to be homeless.
    Yes we do – they are human beings that need to know their input is valued by us.

    That is why we need the divorced and remarried with us during our discussion ‘how can we help you?’
    No we do not – they live in adultery by remarriage according to the very words of Christ. How can sinners that depraved even contribute to our godly conversations?
    Yes we do – they are believers and can use a community of believers that help them with the grieving and rebuilding process – they need the confirmation of our acceptance of their second marriage.

    That is why we need the LGBT believers with us during our discussion of ‘how can the church help you?’
    No we do not – they live in sin according to the very words of Paul – who wrote by the same Holy Spirit that inspired the words of Christ. How can sinners that depraved even contribute to our godly conversations? Love is the priority and that means helping to change others.

    Yes we do – they are believers and can use a community of believers to give them the confirmation of our acceptance of their second marriage. Love is the priority; not changing others.


    Such is life. Our need for an anchor, our need for a certain number of absolutes, our fear of risk, our need for controlling others, our love of power and being worshipped….. all these color our mindset.

    And then, we find verses in the Bible to support us.

  2. Brigitte says:

    Caryn, can I just ask you a question: do you believe in fidelity? Should a person find one partner and stick with them based on a promise? Is that what we are aiming for, excepting things like abuse and such? The statistics for male homosexuals are for extremely low fidelity and very high promiscuity, for example. I don’t know about females, but even there I have heard that it is about fun, appearance and money more than fidelity, statistically speaking. — It’s just if we can’t agree on the concept of life-long union, seeing that we are struggling people, we often fail, but is this what we are after. Did Jesus say: stick with your spouse, love your spouse? Yes he did. If it fails, there needs to be repentance. If however, promiscuity is ok, then we are no where near what the church is about in serving the human family, and you are trying to mix oil and water.

  3. Brigitte says:

    In googling this, we find that some make distinction between “fidelity of the heart” and “monogamy”. Thus some “couples” have some rules for their “extra-marital” hook-ups. In googling this further, we find that the break-up rate for couples is just as high or higher for lesbian relationships as compared to gay relationships. This is being caused by the “relationship-intensity” of two females which relationships often can’t bear, somewhat surprisingly. So, what really is the story? What do people want with the church?

  4. Caryn LeMur says:

    Brigitte: great question on fidelity in marriage relationships.

    Quick background: there are two major views of ‘What is Biblical Christianity?’. On the left side, the Bible is interpreted as Doctrine. On the right side, the Bible is interpreted as Priorities.

    I strongly lean towards the right side. The first priority to encounter Christ and believe in him. The second is to help the wounded: that is especially the hungry, the thirsty, the sick, the prisoner, the homeless, and those needing clothing. Other doctrines run a very distant third place.

    Thus, I encourage those that are poly or living together to know Christ. To worship him. To then help others. To join in with others that reach to the hungry, the thirsty, the sick the prisoner, the homeless, and those needing clothing. To avoid attending church for the sake of attending church. If the Spirit speaks to changes, then to follow those changes.

    Within my view, then, ‘marital fidelity’ is a minor doctrinal issue to the church; but can be a major issue to the couple. The couple may be wise in seeking LGBT accepting Christian counsel, and/or poly-accepting Christian counsel.

    Marriages often have difficulty that is swept under the rug… and a third-party counselor can be very helpful to explore those difficulties, differences, and to ‘hear’ each other.

    I do not lean towards the left hand view, that Biblical Christianity is primarily Doctrine, and when needed, should have doctrinal enforcement.

    I believe that you lean towards the left hand view?

    Hope this helps.

  5. Brigitte says:

    I don’t need a lot of left hand view and right hand view categorizing and have myself labeled in some other way again that some people have recently devised. Left and right distinction in faith is usually reserved for things to do with the church vs. things to do with the state or nation. Anyways, the question is simple and also historic. Judeo-Christianity has always had a moral attached to it that served the family, and thus especially also women, saved children from fire and abandonment, and as even Solomon (of all people) always says to love the wife of your youth. What I hear you say is that this kind of morality does not matter to you.

  6. Brigitte says:

    You know Caryn, this whole thing is deceiving. And it is also deceiving to those young people who are getting into relationships thinking that these are “love” matches, that will last, married or cohabitating. They are sorely disappointed when they find it is all about changing partners. They are burnt and hurt and angry. They may have acquired an STD or a drug addiction and a great confusion about what to do next and where to go. If they regret their choices, they may now have burned a lot of bridges and acquired a reputation, and they can only change their lifestyle with great difficulty. Some of them leave their stories on Youtube. Quite a few of them, actually, if you start paying attention to them.

  7. Caryn LeMur says:

    Yes, Brigitte. Your view of historic Christianity would of course always have “a moral attached to it that served the family”.

    And thus, your view would most likely preach ‘repent’ first and foremost. Then, you would describe all the emotional horrors of continuing ‘in sin’ and get that bad behavior changed. That makes sense to you, because of your mindset.

    My view preaches Christ first and foremost, and then what matters to Christ at Judgment (the hungry, the thirsty, etc.). Over time, the Spirit will speak to hearts, and change what matters to Him. This view makes sense to me, because of my mindset.

    Our mindset comes first; then we ‘see’ that the Bible supports us.

    And yet, I am not against your Orthodox Lutheran belief system. For those people that need tight community, and enforcement of external behaviors, it sounds good. I also recommend the Catholic system for those that need a very tight book of Doctrine (Catechism). If the liturgical stuff bothers them, there are some very uptight Baptist and Methodist church movements that have solid fences and walls.

    Some people need a tight leash – they seem to thrive under it.

    And, I was a champion of your view for several years in my early Christian experience. However, I have no desire for it now.

    My view is much closer to the Episcopal view, if you need a box for me.

  8. Brigitte says:

    There are only Ten Commandments in the Ten Commandments, and one of them is “do not commit adultery”, and for this who don’t get that pretty plain slap around the head, Jesus added “and don’t lust either”. — so, all your words about systems, and tight leashes, and so on, just don’t wash. People don’t want to live that way, they should not pretend that they are rejected from joining a group that tries to live that way, and that that is injust and they are left in the cold. It’s like saying, it’s not just that say Hillary Clinton is not allowed to join the Republican Party, if she just so wished, as if it were not mutually exclusive. Unless of course, renounced the Democratic Party. Thus also, when you become a Christian and are baptized you also renounce “the devil and all his works.” — This whole throwing mud at people because they toe the line at sexual sin, seems pretty devilish, and the deception that you do all this wonderful work for the poor while others do nothing, or at least the bragging of it ( which you also see is not happening with those whom Christ commends “when did we do this?”) seems manipulative and hypocritical, and the pretense of committed, homosexual marriages, when in fact most of the scene is a swapping kind of situation, also is a deception. Those who have come out of it do not hesitate to call it deception and satanic, and full of lies. Everything was nothing like it was made out to be.– so you keep heaping characterization upon me, and it is obviously because there is no good defense. — individual people, of course, we always be worthy of care and concern, but part if that concern is that the truth be spoken.

  9. I have no idea why ultra-conservatives are attracted to my very liberal “un-Christian” blog.

  10. Caryn LeMur says:

    Again, Brigitte, you answered as predicted.

    I would have said that there are only 2 commandments that matter, Love God, and Love your Neighbor…. but… that is right-sided reasoning. Yet, my statement that only 2 commandments matter are the words of Jesus, as well.

    You see, Brigitte, your mindset wants and needs the tighter constraints of the 10 commandments. So, you immediately went from 2 to 10, and then renouncing “the devil and all his works”.

    And it is ok. Your form of Christianity of course rejects other forms of Christianity… just as my old beliefs would have done the same.

    Please remember that other orthodox groups consider that the Lutheran Orthodox are not believers, and are going to hell… and their reasoning is again based on the Bible.

    I have observed that the left-side arguments (the Bible is a book of Doctrine, and my doctrine is the truth), sadly yield death, division, hatred, anger, absolutism, elitism, priest/laity layers… yet work for those that are highly disciplined, have an accountant or goal mindset, or are in need of controlling others. Community enforcement of standards is required. And… these groups do great things.

    I have observed that the right-side arguments (the Bible is a book of Priorities) has yielded life, community, honesty, and exceptional diversity of worship and life-styles… and this works among the normally disciplined, those that have an artistic mindset, and among those that trust God to change others. Unless you are damaging another human being, these people do not ‘set you straight’. These groups also do great things.

    Indeed, much of what I have written here is little more than a repeat of the principles within the Book of Galatians. In essence:

    1. There are those that need a form of the Mentor of the Law; and

    2. There are those that need a form of the Law of Christ – which is to bear one another’s over-burdens.

    The Jesus of Galatians is the Jesus that I will continue to preach.

  11. Caryn LeMur says:

    David: I think we are all attracted because your cartoons ‘kick the ball in a certain direction’.

    And then, those of us that expected soccer say, “kick!… wait… why is the ball colored? – the rules demand white!”

    Those of us that expected American football say, “Yes for the kick!…. What the hell? there is a net on the ground by the goal?”

    Those of us that expected Basketball say, “Kicked ball! Give it to the ref!” and add in “There is always a net on the ‘goal’, and it is called a ‘hoop’!… idiots… check the rule book….”

    Meanwhile, you continue to move into the water on the beach… despite bumping that beach ball on the sand, that was near the fishing nets.


  12. thanks caryn. interesting explanation.

  13. Brigitte says:

    Caryn you are repeating yourself and the dogma that suits you best, avoiding any objections and labelling me. It is good to be a preacher of the Gospel, but first there have to actually be sins before there is forgiveness. So what you say makes no sense, at all.

    I don’t know, David, why you have to draw cartoons that hurt Christians, why you call yourself pastor, and why you publish them on-line, in an era when Christians are persecuted work-wide and among the poorest of the poor.

  14. Brigitte says:

    David, I am just wondering: do you believe in fidelity, as in monogamy. Do you think Jesus wants us to avoid adulertery?

  15. Brigette: If you would look over my cartoons again with a more discerning eye, you might notice that I don’t attack christians and churches, but only those that are abusive, etc. There is a huge difference. The only Christians that get hurt are those who believe in shame, control, power, and abuse, or those who think these methods of community gathering are legit.

  16. Brigitte says:

    If the church people believe in fidelity (you may fall down on that end and repent, being weak human beings),– but the people on the outside, don’t wish to affirm fidelity, why are the people around the outside standing there? What do they want from the people who don’t agree with their attitude?

  17. Brigitte says:

    Do did not answer my question, and heap more scorn on people.

  18. Brigitte says:

    Sorry about the misspelling, there.

  19. Brigitte says:

    Actually you attack all Christian churches and you have said that there isn’t one good one. But if you could answer regarding fidelity?

  20. Brigitte says:

    No answer. The picture is actually not one of people left out in the cold but people engaged in a siege.

  21. I’m not sure what you’re getting at Brigette. No, I’ve never said there are no good churches. I have said there are no perfect churches.

    About fidelity… of course I believe in it. But I also know people who are in “open relationships” and I don’t judge them for that because it’s mutual.

    Consent. That is key.

  22. Jordan says:

    I’ve learned that people like Brigette have this thought process attached to their theology that is all-or-nothing. Either you respect ALL parts of her take on Christianity or you are attacking the whole of her beliefs. It’s rather typical of ultracons.

    It’s interesting though that homophobes like her always go for sex and fidelity with regards to non-heterosexual/non-cisgender anything.

  23. Brigitte says:

    David, you are pretty fluid about what you say about churches, the Bible or Jesus. By now I hav read you say many different things that don’t hang together. About fidelity you are saying, for yourself you believe in it, but other people can do as they please. Jordan is in his usual mode.

    The answer is pretty specific and pretty basic and it has to do with human sexuality, as that is how LGTQ, or current label differ from long-held teaching and tradition, and also what nature would seem to indicate. We have here a picture of some people frozen out of the evil, patriarchal, institutional, also perhaps now “ultra- conservative” church of dogmatic , unloving, neanderthal-brained men. (It seems there are only men in suits here.)

    It looks like the rain-blow flagged would like to get in. I am just asking:”why do they want to get in? They don’t agree on the convention of human sexuality that is upheld in this group, which is that one man marries one woman and that they honor and care for each other to the end of their lives, as they promise before the altar.

    I have been to several outdoor weddings this summer where such promises were not made. They just said how much the other one made them complete. There was not really a vow as such. And the justice of the pease only asked them for “commitment.” Which is a bit vaguer than faithfulness than death do us part.

    Nevertheless, those who go to altar or some minister do it in a hope of giving permanence to the union, as well as exclusivity.

    If now some young man falls in love with another young man and hopes for a permanent bond, but the culture is really understood as a swinger type situation, he has been duped, betrayed, deceived.

    You don’ have to pile labels on me for pointing out the obvious, but perhaps this is one of the things that lately have become unmentionable.

    To equate love with licentiousness to indulge your whims and inclinations is also false. To say God made me do it, and this is how my life is in his design, is to fashion an idol in your own image. This is also a deception.

    I once was involved in caring for a young and exceptionally beautiful indigenous woman. She had several children from more than one man, was on welfare and going to church. She was very hospitable and had us all over to her house. She was very lovely. One day, she decided to move and take a job in a regional centre. I went to visit her there. She was now pregnant with her next child. Her first pay check took her to the bar. The Lord helped her find this guy who would love her, she says, she drank and sleep with him and got pregnant that night. She tells the story like this is God’s will for her life. Meanwhile, I am sure that the children are all in foster-care. — This is just to illustrate, that what you feel like doing next is not necessarily what God would have you do. The end result is that we have a whole set of siblings living without their dads and much of the time without their mom, and we won’t even mention the cost to the state… This is not OK. And no, it is different from Christian commitment.

  24. I misunderstood you Brigette. By fidelity I mean faithfulness… and that can go for polyamorous relationships as well. You mean life-time monogamous.

  25. Caryn LeMur says:

    Brigitte: concerning David’s cartoon, you wrote, “It looks like the rain-blow flagged would like to get in. I am just asking: ”why do they want to get in? They don’t agree on the convention of human sexuality that is upheld in this group, …”

    I agree with you in many ways.

    It is best they not join churches that will not let them into the conversations. They should really avoid these churches. These churches will focus on their ‘sin’, and often ask those in second marriages to divorce and remain celibate, or the lesbian couple to separate, or the controlling wife to submit to her husband, and so forth.

    [The first based on the words of Jesus; the second based on the words of Paul; and the third based on the words of the author of Ephesians.]

    It is best the LGBT that are married meet in churches that will honor their life-time monogamous commitment, or their fidelity. These churches, and para-ministries, will focus on the things that are the highest priority to Christ – believing in Christ for eternal life, and helping the hungry, thirsty, prisoner, sick, homeless, and unclothed.

    I believe the lesbian couple that I know, both work with the Food Kitchen run by the Catholic orthodox group down the road. This type of para-ministry may be great for the LGBT. The couple have no desire to become Catholic, as I recall.

    Why would they want in? In order to help the poor, of course, and thus fulfill the Law of Christ.