Life Choices
Mission Statement
Life Choices of Memphis exists to provide a non-judgemental and Christ-like environment to educate and empower women to make life-affirming decisions.
In response to the recent donation of $25,000 to the First United Methodist Church of Memphis, Life Choices issued this statement.
Mission Statement
Life Choices of Memphis exists to provide a non-judgemental and Christ-like environment to educate and empower women to make life-affirming decisions.
In response to the recent donation of $25,000 to the First United Methodist Church of Memphis, Life Choices issued this statement.
Bellevue Baptist Church, at the suggestion of pastor Steve Gaines, recently made a donation of $25,000 to the First United Methodist Church of Memphis following a devastating and highly publicized fire in October which destroyed most of the fully insured, historic, 113-year-old church building in downtown Memphis. The donation was approved by the finance committee but never brought to the congregation for approval. The gift was not earmarked for any of the mission projects the church operates but was presented to the pastor of the church, Rev. Martha Wagley, to be used as she and her congregation see fit.
Certainly not all Methodists or Methodist churches share her views, but Rev. Wagley is a known supporter of pro-choice (i.e. abortion on demand) and pro-homosexual (i.e. ordained clergy, gay marriage, etc.) causes. Should Bellevue Baptist Church be contributing to an organization whose leader holds these views and actively promotes these causes?
When asked about the donation, the Communications Committee's response was, "We didn't realize they had a female pastor." Rev. Wagley was featured on news broadcasts and in the newspaper for several days in the aftermath of the fire. Is it possible that neither our pastor nor anyone on the finance committee could have not known this?
Would that have been the deciding issue? What about Rev. Wagley's stances on abortion and homosexual rights? Were those things not issues? What if she were staunchly pro-life and anti-gay-rights? Would this have made a difference?
Certainly not all Methodists or Methodist churches share her views, but Rev. Wagley is a known supporter of pro-choice (i.e. abortion on demand) and pro-homosexual (i.e. ordained clergy, gay marriage, etc.) causes. Should Bellevue Baptist Church be contributing to an organization whose leader holds these views and actively promotes these causes?
When asked about the donation, the Communications Committee's response was, "We didn't realize they had a female pastor." Rev. Wagley was featured on news broadcasts and in the newspaper for several days in the aftermath of the fire. Is it possible that neither our pastor nor anyone on the finance committee could have not known this?
Would that have been the deciding issue? What about Rev. Wagley's stances on abortion and homosexual rights? Were those things not issues? What if she were staunchly pro-life and anti-gay-rights? Would this have made a difference?
ATTENTION EVERYONE:
I'm about to introduce a new "rule" for posting comments. From now on, everyone must make his or her profile viewable by others. Before you panic at the thought of revealing your personal information, if you'll look at most profiles, all you'll see is the number of profile views. There is no need to reveal any personal information. All that will show is your username and the number of times your profile has been viewed. No e-mail address or other information will show (unless you choose to do so). This is an attempt to keep up with the "imposter" problem we've had the last couple of days. Your cooperation will be appreciated. Comments by posters who continue to hide their profiles will be deleted.
428 comments:
«Oldest ‹Older 401 – 428 of 428Ignorance is not an option for men who teach thousands upon thousands to be GOOD STEWARTS of their time and money and then take the flocks donations and litterally throw it
before swins.
I agree ignorance it is not an excuse for their actions. My point was that if they were not ignorant of FUMC teachings then it is an even more serious mistake. It will mean they knowingly and willfully gave funds to a heretical church despite the fact they had better options available to them. That is a much bigger problem in my estimation.
You are right that there is no excuse for this gift to have ever been made. However men will make mistakes, it is in our nature. The issue now is whether they will admit it as a mistake and implement corrective action, or stiffen their necks and deny there was anything improprer done. Any real corrective will require a decrease in their power and control of the BBC purse. We will soon find out how attached they are to their power and control.
Does the time off for the Holy Land trip count as vacation time?
Is SG paid for that time off??
How much vacation time does SG get each year?
Who keeps up with his vacation time and logs it in?
If you dont like me asking these questions, ask yourself, what is wrong with these type of questions
Ask the CC these questions and let's see if they have answers.
November 25, 2006
JudgeLarry said...
Let me throw this in from the outside. If the CC allowed Terry and Ted to review certain documents, and will not allow any other members upon request not to review the same. This may be viewed as discrimination. The CC need to be very careful and at this point, be very open.
Everyone at the meeting Sunday need to ask to review "ALL" credit cards for all staff member along with expense reports for the last 18 months.
Also all direct billings to the church, for the last 18 months.
The check register, bank statements, accounts payables and accounts receiveable files, all for the last 18 months.
2:20 PM, November
Heroes Across Pacific Magazine
ADRIAN ROGERS
SOUTHERN BAPTIST LEADER, PASSES AWAY AT 74
By Michael Ireland
Tuesday, November 15, 2005
MEMPHIS, TENNESSEE (ANS) -- Tributes from Christian leaders are pouring in after the Rev. Adrian Rogers, a three-time president of the Southern Baptist Convention and leader of a CONSERVATIVE TAKEOVER of the faith, passed away early Tuesday, Nov. 15 in Memphis. He was 74.
Rogers was elected president in 1979 as part of the conservative takeover of the convention. His election turned out to a be a watershed moment for the denomination, and the 16-million-member group shifted dramatically to the right politically and theologically.
In the years that followed, conservative leaders pushed hard against abortion rights, homosexuality and women pastors.
AND WE ARE FACING THE SAME BATTLE THAT PASTOR ROGERS FOUGHT-
sw&w,
I did write the post. I did not realize that I had not completed it until much later. I posted the completed version over on the PDL thread.
It should seem sort of familar because of the structure. I borrowed it from a prior pastor that I had. He taught me to love the Word of God. Study the Word of God. Compare everything even his words to the Word of God. Accept nothing that did not stand up to the Word of God.
We need more pastors like that. I can not remember a single solitary time in over 20 years and hundreds of sermons that I could dispute a single sentence that was preached.
After being out of the muck for a few days, having to strap on my hip waders and slog around in the anti-Bellevue slop is, well, unpleasant.
"Pope Gaines"? "Goosestepping"? And ancillary attacks against Mid-America and my friend Mike Spradlin?
It's bad enough that the only answers that pop up about the donation to First United and disagree with it are answers that are exclusionary and condemning--the things you folks supposedly decry in Pastor Gaines.
Thanksgiving weekend's been a nice break for me, and thankfully it's not quite over. If it's not quite over for you, please take some time for prayerful reflection, particularly if you're one of the ones objectifying people with whom you don't agree, and damning Bellevue for showing love and mercy to others in the body of Christ with whom none of us might completely agree.
--Mike
mike bratton wrote:
"After being out of the muck for a few days, having to strap on my hip waders and slog around in the anti-Bellevue slop is, well, unpleasant."
You know, you're right! I certainly have to roll up my pants legs every time I check out The Bratton Report -- which reminds me I haven't done that in a few days. By the way, that wasn't a personal attack. I was just characterizing the behavior and mindset I've observed there.
NASS
SW&W,
It is his turn on rotation. HisServant-1 rotates out, MB rotates in.
I'm not sure which one we are worse off with.
I went to MB's blog ,and I see that he vigorously defends the $25k gift to a pro- abortion church.I guess he his pro-abortion since he thinks was such a great idea.
And Mike you can live that label and long as you take that stand.....
popegaines,
E-mail me, please.
Thanks,
NBBCOF
DaughterofJudah said...
Everytime I see the offering plate being passed at Bellevue, I will see a dead baby lying in it.
10:42 AM, November 25, 2006
Sad that Bellevue Baptist Church used our offerings for this.How do our leaders look at themselves in the mirror?
Maybe we should redirect our thithes from Bellevue to Life Choices and hopefully save a few of these little lives
By the way everytime the offering plate is passed I will not only see a dead baby,I'll also see SG and his yes men who sacrificed the life of a child for psudeo benelvelence.
New BBC Open Forum said...
mike bratton wrote:
"After being out of the muck for a few days, having to strap on my hip waders and slog around in the anti-Bellevue slop is, well, unpleasant."
You know, you're right! I certainly have to roll up my pants legs every time I check out The Bratton Report -- which reminds me I haven't done that in a few days. By the way, that wasn't a personal attack. I was just characterizing the behavior and mindset I've observed there.
NASS
Bravo! And so original, too!
So tell me, Nass--how does "goosestepping," another Nazi/Fascist analogy, not end up in your trash can? Do you not consider it trash?
I mean, it doesn't even seem to have received even a mild rebuke, much less the condemnation it deserves.
dontbeatthesheep said...
I went to MB's blog ,and I see that he vigorously defends the $25k gift to a pro- abortion church.I guess he his pro-abortion since he thinks was such a great idea.
And Mike you can live that label and long as you take that stand.....
Sounds like you were the anonymous individual who made the one millionth slur! Too bad I don't have a way to contact you--there was going to be a big prize package for the one millionth slur slung by an member of the anti-Bellevue coalition. However, I do have an article written with you in mind. Stop by and read it, when you have a chance.
popegaines said...
DaughterofJudah said...
Everytime I see the offering plate being passed at Bellevue, I will see a dead baby lying in it.
10:42 AM, November 25, 2006
Sad that Bellevue Baptist Church used our offerings for this.How do our leaders look at themselves in the mirror?
Maybe we should redirect our thithes from Bellevue to Life Choices and hopefully save a few of these little lives
By the way everytime the offering plate is passed I will not only see a dead baby,I'll also see SG and his yes men who sacrificed the life of a child for psudeo benelvelence.
As noted elsewhere, it seems many people affiliated with the anti-Bellevue nonsense have left "disagree without being disagreeable" in the rear view mirror a long time ago, and that's indeed a shame.
--Mike
mike bratton wrote:
"So tell me, Nass--how does "goosestepping," another Nazi/Fascist analogy, not end up in your trash can? Do you not consider it trash?"
Frankly, Mike, I didn't see that, but if you'll tell me when and in what thread that was posted, I'll certainly look at it. With several hundred comments a day this past week or so, it's been difficult to keep up, and either I missed it, or the author already deleted it. I don't have time to sit here and moderate every post. It certainly sounds like it would have been inappropriate, but tell me, why do you think it's your job to come here and tell me what I should rebuke, condemn, or delete? I don't tell you how to moderate your blog. Could you not extend me the same courtesy?
NBBCOF
Here you go, Nass. It's on this thread, even:
dontbeatthesheep said...
Tim, gogainesgo
I find it interesting that the blind goose stepping followers of pope gaines 1 defend him by diverting attention away from the pope by attacking others,even a loved and respected pastor like Dr. Rogers.Pope Gaines and his minions have reached a new low.Tells me everything about their lack of charactor.
...
11:52 PM, November 23, 2006
And I didn't "tell you how to moderate" anything, actually--just asking a question.
Did the smelling salts do the trick?
--Mike
Mike,
The fact of the matter is that God has some pretty strong words to say about this. It is not that you have problems with my words or any one elses on this issue. You are standing opposed to God and I stand opposed to you. Sorry this just isn't an issue that God chose to address in an agreeable manner and neither do I.
Tim said...
Mike,
The fact of the matter is that God has some pretty strong words to say about this. It is not that you have problems with my words or any one elses on this issue. You are standing opposed to God and I stand opposed to you. Sorry this just isn't an issue that God chose to address in an agreeable manner and neither do I.
I completely agree that God has some strong words on the subject, Tim, the "subject" being that of compassion:
Luke 10
36 Which now of these three, thinkest thou, was neighbour unto him that fell among the thieves? 37 And he said, He that shewed mercy on him. Then said Jesus unto him, Go, and do thou likewise.
Your viewpoint motivates you and yours to, verbally and anonymously, assualt people with whom you disagree, while engaging in the partisan rhetoric that prompted the "anti-Bellevue" label in the first place.
And some questions have still gone unanswered. I quote them thusly, and like so:
1) Do you believe in everything I believe in?
2) And not just the "non-negotiables," such as how to be saved--do you share all my doctrines?
3) If I find out later that you don't completely agree with me on everything, would you mind terribly if I pull the rug out from under you?
Keep in mind, these questions have to extend to everything from financial assistance to changing a tire to giving directions.
When we see people in legitimate need--particularly brothers and sisters in Christ--our job is to help, not to run a background check. When Jesus told the story of the Good Samaritan, it's worth noting in His story that the Samaritan didn't share all the wounded man's beliefs; he just did what was right.
"You are standing opposed to God and I stand opposed to you"? Tim, you and I both know you wouldn't speak that way in person, so the posturing doesn't really do much for your faction--except to emphasize the polarizing nature of your collective behavior and statements.
I understand that you and yours have moved from desiring dialogue to laboring for others' careers on platters, but keep this in mind: It's cognitively dissonant for one member of the body of Christ to "stand opposed" to another member of the body of Christ. And from what I'm told, that cognitive dissonance can sneak up on your brain just like eating ice cream too fast on a summer's day does.
--Mike
Mike,
I believe that this scripture was referring to individuals not organizations. If that is what you are hanging your hat on, then you need to go back to the drawing board.
Sounds like your hanging on the pegs outside of the ark to me.
Tim said...
Mike,
I believe that this scripture was referring to individuals not organizations. If that is what you are hanging your hat on, then you need to go back to the drawing board.
Sounds like your hanging on the pegs outside of the ark to me.
That's what I find so amusing.
Really.
Never mind that you won't answer simple questions--that's not at all surprising, and at least a little bit understandable. The really, really funny part is that you took something I shared to minster to someone who's obviously hurting and tried to turn it into a weapon against me.
It was just so funny it brought tears to my eyes.
--Mike
Mike,
Sorry, it seemed to me that as with most of your questions that they were rhetorical, which is exactly what you condemn others on the blog for doing.
Excuse me, but I believe that thou doest protest to much.
Tim said...
Mike,
Sorry, it seemed to me that as with most of your questions that they were rhetorical, which is exactly what you condemn others on the blog for doing.
Excuse me, but I believe that thou doest protest to much.
You know, as a matter of fact I probably don't protest enough.
And none of you have yet to answer the questions I've asked.
--Mike
Mike Bratton said...
1) Do you believe in everything I believe in?
2) And not just the "non-negotiables," such as how to be saved--do you share all my doctrines?
3) If I find out later that you don't completely agree with me on everything, would you mind terribly if I pull the rug out from under you?
Let's see such obscure questions.
1. I don't know what you believe in, but I am pretty sure that Santa Claus and the Easter Bunny are involved.
2. see #1.
3. Turn the question back on yourself. Isn't this what you are debating everyone on the blog about, that they don't agree with you. You have done an excellent job of proving my point. Thank you.
Tim said...
Mike Bratton said...
1) Do you believe in everything I believe in?
2) And not just the "non-negotiables," such as how to be saved--do you share all my doctrines?
3) If I find out later that you don't completely agree with me on everything, would you mind terribly if I pull the rug out from under you?
Let's see such obscure questions.
1. I don't know what you believe in, but I am pretty sure that Santa Claus and the Easter Bunny are involved.
2. see #1.
Again, I'm going to give the benefit of the doubt and presume you're going for a joke there--and missing horribly.
Whether or not you were attempting to be humorous, you still haven't answered any of the questions.
3. Turn the question back on yourself. Isn't this what you are debating everyone on the blog about, that they don't agree with you. You have done an excellent job of proving my point. Thank you.
See what I mean?
As is typical of most everyone gathering around the anti-Bellevue bonfire, your response gave off a lot of heat, but not so much light.
If one restricts one's assistance to only those people and groups whose beliefs line up one-for-one with one's own (Did you catch it? A little play on words there, just to lighten things up!), one will find oneself helping not so many people.
And one will have to admit that the Samaritan in Jesus' story is more generous than one's own self.
--Mike
Mike,
Exactly which organization was it the Samaritan contributed to. Search scriptures and see if you can find a New Testament Chruch extending benevolance to an apostate church and get back to me.
Jesus also said,
Matthew 7:21-23
21 Not every one that saith unto me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven; but he that doeth the will of my Father which is in heaven.
22 Many will say to me in that day, Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in thy name? and in thy name have cast out devils? and in thy name done many wonderful works?
23 And then will I profess unto them, I never knew you: depart from me, ye that work iniquity.
We always have to be careful in boasting of our good works, they are only good when they are in the will of the Father.
Tim said...
Mike,
Exactly which organization was it the Samaritan contributed to. Search scriptures and see if you can find a New Testament Chruch extending benevolance to an apostate church and get back to me.
You do understand, do you not, that the Samaritan and the wounded man--who was presumably Jewish--represented polar-opposite "organizations"?
And you still haven't answered the original questions.
Jesus also said,
Matthew 7:21-23
21 Not every one that saith unto me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven; but he that doeth the will of my Father which is in heaven.
22 Many will say to me in that day, Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in thy name? and in thy name have cast out devils? and in thy name done many wonderful works?
23 And then will I profess unto them, I never knew you: depart from me, ye that work iniquity.
We always have to be careful in boasting of our good works, they are only good when they are in the will of the Father.
Yes, that's God's responsibility to judge and sort--and no one else's.
Tell me, Tim, have you seen a lot of "boasting" about the donation to First United?
--Mike
Mike,
That's a pretty good stretch there to say that the Samaritian and the Jewish man that he helped represented opposing "organizations". I would take that you do not believe along the lines of literal translation of scripture. I would have really thought that you would have found a reference by now that a church had given their children to support the church of Bael and that God was real happy about it.
Yes, it is up to God to decide, but He did choose to include that passage in scripture wouldn't you agree. I believe also that you would agree that the scripture is profitable.
As far as boasting about the donation. Are you saying that you aren't very proud of the fact that it was done? I thought that you had previously posted how proud you were of the donation that had been made for such a worthy cause. I must have completely misunderstood what you were saying.
As for your questions. I believe that you need to expound a bit on what it is exactly that you believe, until that point I couldn't tell you that we were in agreement or not.
Tim said...
Mike,
That's a pretty good stretch there to say that the Samaritian and the Jewish man that he helped represented opposing "organizations".
You think? Merely your opinion that it's a "stretch" doesn't skip over the obvious fact that Samaritans and Jews, while both insisting they focused on the same God, had fundamentally irreconcilable differences in belief.
And you do understand, do you not, that that's the reason Jesus focused on the good Samaritan, rather than on the good Other Jewish Guy?
I would take that you do not believe along the lines of literal translation of scripture.
Nice try.
I would have really thought that you would have found a reference by now that a church had given their children to support the church of Bael and that God was real happy about it.
It's "Baal," actually--the literalist in me, but of course you knew that already.
Since none of you has yet to address the issues regarding the story of the Good Samaritan, it really wouldn't make much sense to delve into anything else, now would it?
Yes, it is up to God to decide, but He did choose to include that passage in scripture wouldn't you agree. I believe also that you would agree that the scripture is profitable.
And that it shouldn't be used as you and yours have repeatedly used it--as a club.
As far as boasting about the donation. Are you saying that you aren't very proud of the fact that it was done? I thought that you had previously posted how proud you were of the donation that had been made for such a worthy cause. I must have completely misunderstood what you were saying.
Not surprising, though I would be more inclined to believe there's a partisan motivation for your responses. Find the word "proud," "boast," or anything along those lines in anything I've written on the topic, and we'll discuss it.
As for your questions. I believe that you need to expound a bit on what it is exactly that you believe, until that point I couldn't tell you that we were in agreement or not.
That's a hedge.
Do you, or do you not, develop a complete theological and doctrinal dossier on everyone you've ever given help to before you've given it to them?
And have you ever withdrawn help after finding out someone to whom you've given help didn't completely match up line-for-line with your doctrine and theology? You know--snatched a half-consumed glass of cold water from someone's hand, something like that?
--Mike
Mike,
If you have a point or opinion just make it. I have already made mine and given relevant scripture. I believe comparing the compassion that we are to have to individuals to an apostate church is complete unfounded. I also see your question as therefore irrelevant.
Post a Comment