<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<!-- generator="FeedCreator 1.7.3" -->
<rss version="2.0">
	<channel>
		<title>New Wineskins Association of Churches organized; further decisions in February</title>
		<description>Comments for New Wineskins Association of Churches organized; further decisions in February at http://pres-outlook.net , comment 1 to 4 out of 4 comments</description>
		<link>http://pres-outlook.net</link>
		<lastBuildDate>Sat, 04 Jul 2009 15:54:06 +0100</lastBuildDate>
        <generator>FeedCreator 1.7.3</generator>
		<item>
			<title>...</title>
			<link>http://pres-outlook.net/news-and-analysis/1-news-a-analysis/2476.html#comment-2587</link>
			<description>The Wineskin momement has a familiar ring.  An elder said at a recent meeting, 'We should just go ahead and make changes despite the fact that some people are going to get mad.'  Only thing is we were trying to make a decision....one that made him mad.

We've been trying to cancel the early service and have only one Sunday worship service. There are voices who insist that if we do this they will leave. Sometimes we have to risk hard decisions even in the midst of threats and fear.

I'll hold out for some hard decisions and not panic in a sea of anxiety about all those who are yelling, 'Leave the denomination!'
 - blake  spencer</description>
			<pubDate>Wed, 23 Aug 2006 12:00:00 +0100</pubDate>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>...</title>
			<link>http://pres-outlook.net/news-and-analysis/1-news-a-analysis/2476.html#comment-2570</link>
			<description>I am disturbed by people who are always (professionally) disturbed, and try to gain power and control by disturbing others who would not otherwise be disturbed.

I am also amused by the Wineskins' emphasis on local control, free from the oppressive PC(USA) but then get all bent out of shape about something that they think gives too much discretion to local ordaining bodies.  Guess they only like local control when it favors their views, and not otherwise. - Hal Martin</description>
			<pubDate>Wed, 16 Aug 2006 12:00:00 +0100</pubDate>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>...</title>
			<link>http://pres-outlook.net/news-and-analysis/1-news-a-analysis/2476.html#comment-2559</link>
			<description>I'm all in favor of fidelity/chastity.  It should be required of gays as well as heteros.  But gays should be able to commit to a faithful relationship. - Hal Martin</description>
			<pubDate>Mon, 14 Aug 2006 12:00:00 +0100</pubDate>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Henry Memorial Presbyterian Church</title>
			<link>http://pres-outlook.net/news-and-analysis/1-news-a-analysis/2476.html#comment-2555</link>
			<description>John Westerhoff once said something along these lines: 'If you are comfortable, the Bible should disturb you. If you are disturbed, the Bible should comfort you.' The quote on the front of the August 14/21, 2006 'Outlook' caught my eye. 'No matter how uncomfortable it makes you feel, God's Word is true.' (Jim Logan) It suddenly came to me that a big problem we have in Christianity today, including us Presbyterians, is we are not all disturbed by the same thing. Some are disturbed by alleged deviations from the ethical mandates made in the scriptures for the Christian life. Others are disturbed by the the mandate of Jesus Christ to love God and one another. Which ever of those disturb you the most will dictate your position on about any issue that comes along. Both are in the Bible. Which leads to this one person's opinion: I welcome 'New Wineskins.' I have never affiliated with a para church group and probably will not. At the same time it is good for any denomination to reflect the diversity of the gifts of God shared amongst its people. At any given time we all need to be comforted and disturbed. Some where in the midst of that perhaps all of us will feel loved and appreciated and will do the same for others.
 - Proctor Chambless</description>
			<pubDate>Sun, 13 Aug 2006 12:00:00 +0100</pubDate>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
