Forum Home > SCHOLARLY PURSUITS > Intellectual discussions > Philosophy and Theology
Lesbian bishop UMC
franciscosan
WorldHistoria Master
Location: Littleton CO
Quote franciscosan
Quote Reply Topic: Lesbian bishop UMC
Posted: 07 Feb 2018 at 10:45
Turns out the Lesbian bishop that we are all supposed give a chance and be "inclusive" is Berkley radical who last had a church in San Francisco, and is a feminist, an anti-colonialist, etc, who questions scripture, (my words) in a cafeteria style selection. Sigh....
Karen Oliveto, the wikipedia stub does not even mention her books, for a conservative religious commentary on her radical views look up Juicy Ecumenism.
I don't think these people care if there is split. With the split of the Episcopal church, with some churches in America breaking away and going under Africa Anglican bishoprics. I don't care about gays and lesbians in the church, but a crusader as the bishop wanting to fight against 'the patriarchy' and everything else. It is not a matter of merely being "inclusive." Let us not fool ourselves.
Quote Reply Posted: 09 Feb 2018 at 07:27
On line Bishop Oliveto is wearing a sign saying, "we are all Muslims." I wonder what Muslims think about her appropriating their faith.
The Methodist world religions scholar Huston Smith adopted the practice of praying (prostrating) five times a day, but I think he was respectful enough to _not_ assert that _he_ was a Muslim. For an anti-colonialist, she sure seems like she wants to make Others in her own image. Sometimes it is important to not only recognize that someone is different from you, but accept their difference, even if it is sometimes the right to be wrong. My concern with the bishop is whether or rather, how she has an axe to grind, an agenda that, frankly, excludes supposed 'dead white males' such as myself.
The more people I meet, the more I love my dog....:(
toyomotor
Location: Tasmania, AUST.
Quote toyomotor
As I see it, in the US there is a proliferation of different Christian Sects, and one can call themselves Bishop, Priest or whatever without any qualification, or licensing.
As I understand it, the US IRS smiles favourably on religious organisations and that is just one incentive for starting a new neighbourhood church, call it what you like.
Of course the real scam is in the tele-evangelism industry.
Until these so-called priests earn a proper degree in theology, IMHO, they should not be allowed to set up churches of their making, preach gospels or do any of the roles of mainstream priests.
I'm not quite sure what the situation is here, but I think they have to have a valid qualification before being able to call themselves priest, bishop or whatever. Again, I'm not sure about some of these pastors that crop up around the place like bloody mushrooms.
I just know that you'll let me know if I'm wrong, it's become your life calling.
BUT you forgot to mention that she was duly elected by the local synod of the United Methodist Church.
The United Methodist Church is a mainline Protestant denomination and a major part of Methodism. In the 19th century, its main predecessor—the Methodist Episcopal Church—was a leader in Evangelicalism. Wikipedia
Ministers: 83,800
Polity: Connectionalism; (Modified episcopal polity)
Theology: Methodism
Origin: 1968
Members: 12,719,550 (7,064,567 in the U.S.)
Aid organization: United Methodist Committee on Relief
Did you also forget to tell me that she's a part on a mainstream church in the US?
That does seem to change things a little. Lesbian-so what? How many gay RC priests are there roaming around?
Edited by toyomotor - 11 Feb 2018 at 01:02
From where the sun now stands, I will fight no more forever.(Chief Joseph)
Quote Vanuatu
As you were growing up did you ever feel that the trajectory of social justice was such that in our lifetime the entire fly swat of all inequality for all time would SPLAT! Our generation?
vir·tue sig·nal·ing
the action or practice of publicly expressing opinions or sentiments intended to demonstrate one's good character or the moral correctness of one's position on a particular issue.
"it's noticeable how often virtue signaling consists of saying you hate things"
I assumed this was coming. After the Civil War and the disaster/ lack of Reparations we were doomed to a future crisis. I know racism isn't the same as sexual preference but recent political events and communication capability makes this the optimum time for personal protest. People are coming out of the woodwork to flaunt their genitals or to surprise us with their genitals.
It's a bore. Protestantism played a major role in establishing human rights and equality. I don't think it's wise to throw away everything that is dated, it's not all bad.
Still round the corner there may wait, a new road or a secret gate. (J. R. R. Tolkien)
toyomotor, a higher order 'court' in United Methodism said that the election broke the rules, but the 'court' did not have the power to depose the elected bishop. In other words, a radical group forced through her appointment in, frankly, a coup when more conservative elements weren't paying attention, and now the radical elements are consolidating their position. I worry about something happening to United Methodism like what happened to the Episcopalian (Anglican) Church over the appointment of a gay bishop. A split.
Vanuatu, the mirror opposite of virtue signaling for my (local) church, in the local church, we are supposed to be inclusive of the glbtq community. I think that means be uncritically accepting, and not bring up any problems, not "make waves" so to speak. Can we bring up Kevin Spacy's recent behavior? or would that be too gauche? How about anonymous, promiscuous, unprotected, kinky and even under age sex favored by many gay males. For the 3 class sessions at my church on only this issue, are we going to have a free (and probably problematic) discussion? or are we going to get spoonfed the answers the ministers (not "priests," "ministers"), want to hear?
I would not mind having lesbians or gays in my class, and have said so to the minister. My objection is this idea of imposing political correctness from on high to us lowly peons, If 'they' want to join us (my class), then 'they' should first walk a mile in our shoes, come to know us, and then as equals argue for the change they want to see. Are they too much in a hurry to do that? Well, the Church is a very slowly evolving institution, it has been around for 2000 years. And if it is treated right, it will be around for another 2000 years. If.
So why didn't you tell me all of this before, instead of cherry-picking facts (or factoids).
Regardless of internal differences within the UMC, she was elected to the position of Bishop.
If, by some chance, she was improperly elected, so be it, she'll be demoted again I suppose.
franciscosan wrote:
toyomotor,
For the 3 class sessions at my church on only this issue, are we going to have a free (and probably problematic) discussion? or are we going to get spoonfed the answers the ministers (not "priests," "ministers"), want to hear?
Spoonfed, definitely spoonfed
They don't want to join. They want to infiltrate and change everything you have known and you won't recognize your church.
Just remove / from first quote box.
I hadn't thought much about that, but in this world of PC madness, I can see where you're probably right.
In Australia, the government has recently legalised same sex marriages. OK, but now all sorts of fringe groups have joined the band, wanting special concessions.
THAT, I DON'T AGREE WITH!
Marry who you want, melt into the community, keep your bloody mouth shut!
toyomotor wrote:
Isn't more fun to create problems that don't exist?
I didn't get out of bed in time, too depressing. Sunday, first of three talks was about homosexuality in the Bible and how it can all be explained (away) by context. Which in general I agree with (explaining it away by context.) Tribal societies emphasized lots of kids, that is what lead to success. I think that we are all flawed, and so we all have problems. Gays et cetera don't want to hear that. They want to be affirmed in their belief. Fact is, you don't have kids, in the long run you won't have a sect. The evangelicals, and the Catholics and the Muslims seem to understand that. Priorities should be on heterosexual couples in marriage, and families, not on 5% (not 10%) of the population who want to do their own thang. I am not saying that everybody should be married and have kids, I don't but that is my baggage. I am not necessarily a good example in that respect and I know that. There is a place for that, but not at the head of the class.
I don't know what was in the talk by the minister about homosexuality and the Bible, but by chance what I am reading right now (Fohrer on the Israelite religion), explains that in I tribal society, the faster the tribe grows, the better, so when a man is laying with another man, he is wasting his 'seed' and not getting his wife pregnant. Purpose of sex is to be fruitful and multiply, therefore, laying with a man is a waste and forbidden.
The same is not true with women, and female homosexuality is not really condemned like male homosexuality. And you know, with those big harems that David and Solomon had, I would imagine that their is some 'sisterly love.' Attitudes would be more accepting of such relationships, although there would not be anything known as a "lesbian" in the sense of a women who lies with women exclusively, and has her whole identity wrapped up in such a relationship. Even Sappho had a daughter, probably from an anonymous hookup at some festival.
But my point is that ancient attitudes made sense. Feminists go on and on about male patriarchy and oppression, but the thing is, in antiquity men had to worry about getting run through with a spear, and women had to worry about dying in childbirth. If the man failed, the woman had to worry about rape and slavery, if the woman failed, well rape and slavery would probably also happen. Amazons are largely a myth, so is some golden age of matriarchy back before history.
The question is, is that still true? US is still growing, but that largely is because of immigration. Russian frowns on homosexuality and tries to promote family values (yeah, I wonder if that has anything to do with the religious right and the Trump Russian connection), but people don't necessarily want to live there and its population is shrinking.
Are you seriously saying that there's a connection between the Trump/Russian connection(if any) and gay people?
The OP was about an individual, who happened to be gay, and who was elected to a Bishopric of the Methodist Church.
In essence, I'm saying, "So what?". If you want to go that way, how many other gay people are priests, ministers etc in their diverse religeous communities? Do they pose a problem to the community at large? Some definately have-the majority, I can't say.
I don't care if she is a Lesbian, however, I am what is called in the University "a dead white male" and I do care about the political correctness bunk that is leveled against "dead white males," "the patriarchy," "colonials," "the Western canon." She is a politically correct radical from Berkeley and San Francisco, she is unorthodox in her Bible teachings, and it seems the number one qualification for her being a bishop is that she is a lesbian. Oh, it is also hard to find out what she believes because she has taken down stuff on the internet that she herself wrote. That is a little suspicious.
I was required in college to take a "multicultural diversity" class, I made the mistake of taking it in my major, philosophy. I wanted to actually think about the readings, whereas the professor was only concerned about us thinking the way she wanted us to think and regurgitate the answers. I have been burned by multiculturalism, and political correctness, and don't want to have anything to do with it.
You misunderstood, some of the US religious right is anti-gay, Russian law is anti-gay, Russian law is pro-larger families, maybe the US religious right look upon some of cultural politics in Russia as something they would like. They have a dream of making a church state, and Trump humors that dream. Of course, not all oppositions are the same, someone who is against the great multi-cultural "cohort of allies" need not be against 'same' sleeping with 'same.' Those are two different issues, although multiculturalism would like to obscure them.
toyomotor, I read Camille Puglia, who is a lesbian but anti political correctness, I read the fragments of Sappho of Lesbos because she was the greatest Lyric poet of antiquity. I read Michele Foucault who died of AIDS in the '80s. I am not opposed to Bishop Oliveto because she is a lesbian, I am opposed to her because she is a radical, and I have been burned by radicals before!
Many people will smell something that stinks, but can't put their finger on it, they will say "she is a Lesbian" and be shamed from further investigation, being afraid to be called prejudiced. That in itself, is a prejudice, letting someone pass, not because they meet the standards, but because one is shamed into silence. Again, stuff has been taken down by her and her followers (or so I hear) from the internet, perhaps lest people actually become knowledgable about her actual beliefs.
Edited by franciscosan - 19 Feb 2018 at 06:35
Quote Guests
Quote Reply Posted: 30 May 2018 at 08:51
toymotor wrote:
That's largely the way of it. Different states have different regulations regarding who can and cannot perform a marriage (where the issue of credentials most often comes up). In some states, one does not need to be licensed at all; they just take your word for it. Even those states where you are required to obtain a license to perform marriages -- which also doubles as a credential that one can present to perform prison ministry, where the requirements are very stringent and set by the facility -- the process usually consists of a nominal fee paid to the Secretary of State in whichever state one is ministering. Generally the government shies away from defining what does and does not constitute a church except in the most ridiculous cases. That tiny mediation center down the street? It's generally going to be able to become a tax-exempt 501c3 just like the giant Baptist Church. Larger denominations generally seek this status through their umbrella organizations (diocese, metropolis, archdiocese, etc.). And, honestly, even the 501c3 status is more of a pat-on-the-back, as contributions to most organizations defining themselves as a church are automatically tax exempt. The rules really need to be more stringent in the age of the internet. Yet while I agree in principle that one should have to obtain a degree in ministry or theology from an accredited institution, the government generally avoid requiring this to avoid violating the Establishment Clause. If they started demanding academic certification, and getting into the business of what does and does not qualify, it would, in the eyes of most observers, amount to unfairly granting an advantage to established religious organizations that have the ability to provide for the education of their own ministers.
-Akolouthos the Absent
Edited by Akolouthos - 30 May 2018 at 08:55
Hi Akolouthos, good to hear(?) from you after all this time.
Look forward to seeing more posts from you.
I don't know if all Australian preachers have to have some sort of tertiary qualification, I think in some cases their appointment as Pastors is accepted by governments.
Good to talk to you as well, toy. Aye. It has been a while.
It's a cluster you-know-what. This is one of those cases where a pre-information-age society would have been preferable. The bottom line is, when it comes to ministry, my four year degree is equivalent to a piece of paper printed off the internet, as far as many state governments are concerned. And some of them don't even ask for that. Who these governments expect to counsel couples going through marital problems after the honeymoon period ends (or to even know whether or not to refer them to appropriately trained therapists in situations where it is merited) is beyond me, but that's a conversation for another day. There is a great deal more to being a pastor/priest/minister than most people realize. And it is hard for governments to quantify/qualify and evaluate. I don't really see a fix though, short of implementing a system that is even worse than what we have now. Honestly, it's up to the people to determine what constitutes a pastor. I would have more faith if the people were more discerning...
-Akolouthos
Forum Jump -- Select Forum -- Welcome Station and Community News - New Members Guide - Community News - WH Blogs - Legations & Advertising - Warnings - Banned Members - Rescindments The Tavern - The Mead Hall - Sports - Modern Culture - Gaming and IT - Historical Amusement - Members Picture gallery - From Your Own Collections Economic & Social History - General Econ & Social - Economic History - Social History - Women's History - Business History Special Focus - General Special Focus - Archaeology & Anthropology - Natural Sciences through the Ages - Natural History - Modern Arts and Architecture - Alternative History Military History - General Military History - Wars and Battles - Persons - Weapons - Modern Warfare - All Battles Project - Naval History History Travel Guide & Galleries - Historical Maps and Pictures - Historical Art & Architecture - Historical Places and Your Travels Multiple Region - Multi-Region To 1900 AD - Modern Multi-Region East Asia - Ancient EA to 900 AD - Modern EA South Asia - Ancient SA to 1179 AD - Modern SA North & Central Asia - Ancient NCA to 550 AD - Modern NCA West Asia & North Africa - Ancient WANA to 550 BC - Imperial WANA 550 BC - 622 AD - Modern WANA Australia, SE Asia & Pacific - General Australia, SE Asia & Pacific Europe - Ancient Europe to 476 AD - Medieval Europe 476 AD - 1492 AD - Modern Europe Americas - Americas to 1825 - Modern Americas Africa - Africa to 1860 - Modern Africa The Academy - Academy Intellectual discussions - General Intellectual Discussions - Linguistics - Philosophy and Theology - Literary Pursuits - Theories of Society & Economics - WH Geopolitical Institute Q&A Current Affairs - General Current Affairs Ethnicity & Genetics - General Ethnicity & Genetics The Minefield - Cyprus - Kurdish/Turkish Relationships - FYR Macedonia/Kosovo - Armenian/Azeri Massacres - Gujjar-Rajput Relations - Armenian ''genocide'' - Israel/Palestine - US Immigration - General Minefield Discussions Forum Permissions