Comments for PC(USA) sexual standards must be required, Gagnon tells New Wineskins at http://pres-outlook.net , comment 1 to 8 out of 8 comments http://pres-outlook.net Fri, 19 Mar 2010 04:06:04 +0100 FeedCreator 1.7.3 http://pres-outlook.net/news-and-analysis/1-news-a-analysis/2446.html#comment-2584 So, it's OK if I am unrepentant about one sexual experience, but not OK if I am unrepentant about...how many? When does serial start? Is serial in the concordance of the translation the reader prefers? If not, does that indicate a flaw in bibilical scholarship on the part of the translators? Does the word serial occur in the confessions? Is the 'serial' standard biblical, in accordance with the book of confessions, or simply trying to make what is absurd seem reasonable? If I feel exultant about past illicit sexual experiences, it is OK as long as I am exuberant about less than (please fill in the number) sexual episodes. That seems to be Mr. Gagnon's well thought out (and reportedly well received) theology. - Carl Van Valkenburg Mon, 21 Aug 2006 12:00:00 +0100 http://pres-outlook.net/news-and-analysis/1-news-a-analysis/2446.html#comment-2581 I am so disappointed that New Wineskins gave Robert Gagnon a forum and The Outlook covered it (August 14, 2006). I hesitated to write because then I, too, am giving Gagnon the attention he so obviously craves, and I risk becoming like him. But his unchristian spirit cannot be allowed to remain unanswered at this crucial moment in the life of our church. To his main point: G-6.0106b has been challenged repeatedly because it is a duplicitous blunt instrument to scapegoat gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender Presbyterians. Surely "love one another" is an essential of Reformed faith and polity so the effort will continue to be made until G-6.0106b is removed. Gagnon's twisting of this opposition to prove the sexual standard to be essential is a good example of his manipulative tactics. And please, there is no one on the left of the church who speaks with the same judgmental, insulting vindictiveness toward those who disagree with him as Gagnon does. Thank God. Gagnon may say and think what he pleases. I pray for the day when Presbyterians stop listening to him because the day is coming swiftly when Gagnon's ideas will be an historical embarrassment to our church. - Janet Edwards Sat, 19 Aug 2006 12:00:00 +0100 http://pres-outlook.net/news-and-analysis/1-news-a-analysis/2446.html#comment-2571 Mr. Gagnon speaks very effectively for thousands if not hundreds of thousands of PCUSA members who feel betrayed by leadership. The PUP is a cyanical end run around the constitution after failing twice at amending-the proper course of action. Regarding Mr. Martin's comments,Ihave no interest in the actions of others as long as I am not associated in a common organization. The scruple concept may prove useful-I plan to ask my church to scruple the property clause. - v c scott Thu, 17 Aug 2006 12:00:00 +0100 http://pres-outlook.net/news-and-analysis/1-news-a-analysis/2446.html#comment-2561 Doesn't a scruple still have to be constitutional? I think it prudent that Mr. Gagnon suggests we be hurt before we cry but I'd be interested to know on what does he base his conviction that the GAPJC will hurt us? - Cameron Mott Mon, 14 Aug 2006 12:00:00 +0100 http://pres-outlook.net/news-and-analysis/1-news-a-analysis/2446.html#comment-2558 How is it that 'now' a candidate can declare a sruple, where he or she could not before? How are ordaining bodies constrained, or freed, in their decision-making by adopting the authoritative interpretation? I can discern nothing that they can do now that they couldn't do in May. Also, funny how the Winskins claim to be all about local control, but they are freaking out about what rogue presbyteries and churches might do. - Hal Martin Mon, 14 Aug 2006 12:00:00 +0100 http://pres-outlook.net/news-and-analysis/1-news-a-analysis/2446.html#comment-2510 what do they mean by 'leave the donomination'? - BOBBIE COXE Sun, 23 Jul 2006 12:00:00 +0100 http://pres-outlook.net/news-and-analysis/1-news-a-analysis/2446.html#comment-2509 When I first became aware of Robert Gagnon several years ago, I thought I was encountering a respectable scholar. Sadly, time has proved me wrong. I am reading and hearing in Gagnon's word choice and style a skilled propagandist who is coming closer to a shrieking and shrill rant. IT appears he has a parallel in Dr. Patterson of the Southern Baptist Convention crisis from 25 years ago. Perhaps Gagnon will play a similar role in the founding of the new Pesbyterian denomination-to-be. - Sydney Smith Sat, 22 Jul 2006 12:00:00 +0100 http://pres-outlook.net/news-and-analysis/1-news-a-analysis/2446.html#comment-2502 It is in Jesus Christ that we hold together, not in Louisville, not in the opinion of the ACC or the GAPJC. We must find our connectionalism in a shared theology, a shared view of the Word of God (Incarnate and Written), a shared mission, not in property, not in polity alone. Until that happens there will always be conflict and division, as it should be for 'What agreement has Christ with Belial?...What agreement has a temple of God with idols?' 2 Cor 6:15-16 God Bless Rob Gagnon and his willingness to stand for the truth. - Jeffrey Ogden Thu, 20 Jul 2006 12:00:00 +0100