Really angry pastor in the news

Where Fellowship and Camaraderie lives: that place where the CPS membership values fun and good fellowship as the cement of the community
Post Reply
User avatar
FredS
Patron Saint of Pipe Smoking
Patron Saint of Pipe Smoking
Posts: 25036
Joined: Sat Feb 21, 2009 6:00 pm
Location: NOCO (Northern Colorado)

Re: Really angry parishioners in their home

Post by FredS » Tue Jun 08, 2021 4:23 pm

Jester wrote:
Tue Jun 08, 2021 2:17 pm
FredS wrote:
Tue Jun 08, 2021 1:15 pm
Jester wrote:
Tue Jun 08, 2021 12:33 pm
FredS wrote:
Tue Jun 08, 2021 11:35 am
Jester wrote:
Tue Jun 08, 2021 11:23 am
Some Christians have been using Covid as an excuse to do what they have already been doing.
What, exactly, are you accusing? Are you aiming that accusation at anyone here?
1. Appeasement

2. Anyone convicted?
1. What Christians were wearing masks and limiting gathering sizes to "appease" the government before Covid?

2. By "convicted" I presume you mean by the HS? Surely you're not suggesting individual Christians are at liberty to act on their own convictions when it comes to these temporary restrictions on gatherings.

con·vic·tion
1. a formal declaration that someone is guilty of a criminal offense, made by the verdict of a jury or the decision of a judge in a court of law OR THE HOLY SPIRIT. (HS added and emphasized by me)

2. a firmly held belief or opinion.

EDIT - Actually, I do personally know of a group of Christians in China who had/have to limit the size of their gatherings so as not to raise the suspicion of the neighborhood spies. I suppose one could call that "appeasement". I call it courage. They'd love to be able to record and broadcast their interactions with the cops, but of course they'd never be seen again if they dared do it like the angry pastor does.
Appeasing in China would be not meeting at all, which to MY point, is what the majority of squishy Christians have been doing before Covid began. Covid gave them the cover to do it guiltless. Romans 13, right?

People who neglect assembling together should be convicted by the Holy Spirit. This is not an opinion but a command, a command that a lot of spineless Christians have practiced before the worst virus that ever existed arrived. Practice made perfect, except maybe on Christmas and Easter.

It's hard to blame them. They have been conditioned to submit to their authority. Appeasement after appeasement, American Christians have bowed to culture over the Word of God. When the time came to shut down churches it was easy.

American Christians would not meet in limited gatherings in China. They would be screaming, "Romans 13, you attention seeking, resisting, confrontational, antagonizing, escalators who encounters with law enforcement!"
I see where you're going now. We travel in entirely different circles, you and I. I know plenty of folks (family members even) who go to church on Christmas, Easter, and even Mothers Day if their mothers ask, but they're not Christians. Check that, God knows if they're in or out, but they don't look or act like Christians to me. Squishy or otherwise. Just the same, I don't know any militant Christians ('cept maybe The T Boyz™ and affers) going on like the angry pastor.

I suppose though, that I have seen some confused Christians who point to Romans 13 as a blanket command to submit to the man. The evening news out here liked to find those people and put them on camera last year when they (the news) were trying to paint corporate worshippers in a bad light. But they're more kooky than squishy - that is, they misunderstand scripture, not ignore it.
"If we ever get to heaven boys, it aint because we aint done nothin' wrong" - Kris Kristofferson

"One of the things I love about CPS is the frank and enthusiastic dysfunction here. God help me, I do love it so." – OldWorldSwine

"I'd like to put a hook in that puppet and swing it through a bunch of salmon!" - durangopipe

User avatar
AFRS
Darth Floof-Floof
Darth Floof-Floof
Posts: 11396
Joined: Mon Apr 21, 2008 6:00 pm
Location: University of Mars

Re: Really angry parishioners in their home

Post by AFRS » Tue Jun 08, 2021 5:56 pm

FredS wrote:
Tue Jun 08, 2021 4:23 pm
I see where you're going now. We travel in entirely different circles, you and I. I know plenty of folks (family members even) who go to church on Christmas, Easter, and even Mothers Day if their mothers ask, but they're not Christians. Check that, God knows if they're in or out, but they don't look or act like Christians to me. Squishy or otherwise. Just the same, I don't know any militant Christians ('cept maybe The T Boyz™ and affers) going on like the angry pastor.

I suppose though, that I have seen some confused Christians who point to Romans 13 as a blanket command to submit to the man. The evening news out here liked to find those people and put them on camera last year when they (the news) were trying to paint corporate worshippers in a bad light. But they're more kooky than squishy - that is, they misunderstand scripture, not ignore it.
I'm a militant Christian? Cool! :chili:

User avatar
ReverendThom
Minister of Murses
Minister of Murses
Posts: 4587
Joined: Wed Jul 29, 2015 9:08 am
Location: Winnipeg, MB
Contact:

Re: Really angry pastor in the news

Post by ReverendThom » Tue Jun 08, 2021 6:34 pm

I've preached dozens of times in Canada since this all began. In fact, I'm preaching twice this Sunday in the middle of another huge lockdown. I have not had any problems yet and people are still coming to Jesus. The church we attend has actually grown the last year and a half, and we've barely met in person. Amazing how that works. Maybe Jesus likes them squishy.

Sent from my SM-G970W using Tapatalk

"Pipe smokers used to be among the smartest people walking around. It's not true anymore." - Rusty

User avatar
JMG
You American sniper
You American sniper
Posts: 7356
Joined: Thu Feb 25, 2010 6:00 pm
Location: MS

Re: Really angry parishioners in their home

Post by JMG » Tue Jun 08, 2021 6:42 pm

FredS wrote:
Tue Jun 08, 2021 4:23 pm
Jester wrote:
Tue Jun 08, 2021 2:17 pm
FredS wrote:
Tue Jun 08, 2021 1:15 pm
Jester wrote:
Tue Jun 08, 2021 12:33 pm
FredS wrote:
Tue Jun 08, 2021 11:35 am
Jester wrote:
Tue Jun 08, 2021 11:23 am
Some Christians have been using Covid as an excuse to do what they have already been doing.
What, exactly, are you accusing? Are you aiming that accusation at anyone here?
1. Appeasement

2. Anyone convicted?
1. What Christians were wearing masks and limiting gathering sizes to "appease" the government before Covid?

2. By "convicted" I presume you mean by the HS? Surely you're not suggesting individual Christians are at liberty to act on their own convictions when it comes to these temporary restrictions on gatherings.

con·vic·tion
1. a formal declaration that someone is guilty of a criminal offense, made by the verdict of a jury or the decision of a judge in a court of law OR THE HOLY SPIRIT. (HS added and emphasized by me)

2. a firmly held belief or opinion.

EDIT - Actually, I do personally know of a group of Christians in China who had/have to limit the size of their gatherings so as not to raise the suspicion of the neighborhood spies. I suppose one could call that "appeasement". I call it courage. They'd love to be able to record and broadcast their interactions with the cops, but of course they'd never be seen again if they dared do it like the angry pastor does.
Appeasing in China would be not meeting at all, which to MY point, is what the majority of squishy Christians have been doing before Covid began. Covid gave them the cover to do it guiltless. Romans 13, right?

People who neglect assembling together should be convicted by the Holy Spirit. This is not an opinion but a command, a command that a lot of spineless Christians have practiced before the worst virus that ever existed arrived. Practice made perfect, except maybe on Christmas and Easter.

It's hard to blame them. They have been conditioned to submit to their authority. Appeasement after appeasement, American Christians have bowed to culture over the Word of God. When the time came to shut down churches it was easy.

American Christians would not meet in limited gatherings in China. They would be screaming, "Romans 13, you attention seeking, resisting, confrontational, antagonizing, escalators who encounters with law enforcement!"
I see where you're going now. We travel in entirely different circles, you and I. I know plenty of folks (family members even) who go to church on Christmas, Easter, and even Mothers Day if their mothers ask, but they're not Christians. Check that, God knows if they're in or out, but they don't look or act like Christians to me. Squishy or otherwise. Just the same, I don't know any militant Christians ('cept maybe The T Boyz™ and affers) going on like the angry pastor.

I suppose though, that I have seen some confused Christians who point to Romans 13 as a blanket command to submit to the man. The evening news out here liked to find those people and put them on camera last year when they (the news) were trying to paint corporate worshippers in a bad light. But they're more kooky than squishy - that is, they misunderstand scripture, not ignore it.
Just curious, as to understand your thinking...At what point, or in what sort of circumstance, would you defy government orders to not gather with fellow believers and do it anyway?
"No reserves, no retreats, no regrets."
"When you're dumb, you've got to be tough." - my dad

User avatar
DepartedLight
Archfairy of Carolinia
Archfairy of Carolinia
Posts: 32024
Joined: Thu Nov 19, 2009 6:00 pm
Location: Tobacco Fairy HQ, North Carolina

Re: Really angry parishioners in their home

Post by DepartedLight » Tue Jun 08, 2021 10:07 pm

JMG wrote:
Tue Jun 08, 2021 6:42 pm
FredS wrote:
Tue Jun 08, 2021 4:23 pm
Jester wrote:
Tue Jun 08, 2021 2:17 pm
FredS wrote:
Tue Jun 08, 2021 1:15 pm
Jester wrote:
Tue Jun 08, 2021 12:33 pm
FredS wrote:
Tue Jun 08, 2021 11:35 am
Jester wrote:
Tue Jun 08, 2021 11:23 am
Some Christians have been using Covid as an excuse to do what they have already been doing.
What, exactly, are you accusing? Are you aiming that accusation at anyone here?
1. Appeasement

2. Anyone convicted?
1. What Christians were wearing masks and limiting gathering sizes to "appease" the government before Covid?

2. By "convicted" I presume you mean by the HS? Surely you're not suggesting individual Christians are at liberty to act on their own convictions when it comes to these temporary restrictions on gatherings.

con·vic·tion
1. a formal declaration that someone is guilty of a criminal offense, made by the verdict of a jury or the decision of a judge in a court of law OR THE HOLY SPIRIT. (HS added and emphasized by me)

2. a firmly held belief or opinion.

EDIT - Actually, I do personally know of a group of Christians in China who had/have to limit the size of their gatherings so as not to raise the suspicion of the neighborhood spies. I suppose one could call that "appeasement". I call it courage. They'd love to be able to record and broadcast their interactions with the cops, but of course they'd never be seen again if they dared do it like the angry pastor does.
Appeasing in China would be not meeting at all, which to MY point, is what the majority of squishy Christians have been doing before Covid began. Covid gave them the cover to do it guiltless. Romans 13, right?

People who neglect assembling together should be convicted by the Holy Spirit. This is not an opinion but a command, a command that a lot of spineless Christians have practiced before the worst virus that ever existed arrived. Practice made perfect, except maybe on Christmas and Easter.

It's hard to blame them. They have been conditioned to submit to their authority. Appeasement after appeasement, American Christians have bowed to culture over the Word of God. When the time came to shut down churches it was easy.

American Christians would not meet in limited gatherings in China. They would be screaming, "Romans 13, you attention seeking, resisting, confrontational, antagonizing, escalators who encounters with law enforcement!"
I see where you're going now. We travel in entirely different circles, you and I. I know plenty of folks (family members even) who go to church on Christmas, Easter, and even Mothers Day if their mothers ask, but they're not Christians. Check that, God knows if they're in or out, but they don't look or act like Christians to me. Squishy or otherwise. Just the same, I don't know any militant Christians ('cept maybe The T Boyz™ and affers) going on like the angry pastor.

I suppose though, that I have seen some confused Christians who point to Romans 13 as a blanket command to submit to the man. The evening news out here liked to find those people and put them on camera last year when they (the news) were trying to paint corporate worshippers in a bad light. But they're more kooky than squishy - that is, they misunderstand scripture, not ignore it.
Just curious, as to understand your thinking...At what point, or in what sort of circumstance, would you defy government orders to not gather with fellow believers and do it anyway?
To the catacombs!

Second and Third Century Christians were the original Goth crowd.
DL Jake

You should see if they can recalibrate your internal clock forward a month. - Cleon

User avatar
FredS
Patron Saint of Pipe Smoking
Patron Saint of Pipe Smoking
Posts: 25036
Joined: Sat Feb 21, 2009 6:00 pm
Location: NOCO (Northern Colorado)

Re: Really angry parishioners in their home

Post by FredS » Wed Jun 09, 2021 7:05 am

JMG wrote:
Tue Jun 08, 2021 6:42 pm
FredS wrote:
Tue Jun 08, 2021 4:23 pm
Jester wrote:
Tue Jun 08, 2021 2:17 pm
FredS wrote:
Tue Jun 08, 2021 1:15 pm
Jester wrote:
Tue Jun 08, 2021 12:33 pm
FredS wrote:
Tue Jun 08, 2021 11:35 am
Jester wrote:
Tue Jun 08, 2021 11:23 am
Some Christians have been using Covid as an excuse to do what they have already been doing.
What, exactly, are you accusing? Are you aiming that accusation at anyone here?
1. Appeasement

2. Anyone convicted?
1. What Christians were wearing masks and limiting gathering sizes to "appease" the government before Covid?

2. By "convicted" I presume you mean by the HS? Surely you're not suggesting individual Christians are at liberty to act on their own convictions when it comes to these temporary restrictions on gatherings.

con·vic·tion
1. a formal declaration that someone is guilty of a criminal offense, made by the verdict of a jury or the decision of a judge in a court of law OR THE HOLY SPIRIT. (HS added and emphasized by me)

2. a firmly held belief or opinion.

EDIT - Actually, I do personally know of a group of Christians in China who had/have to limit the size of their gatherings so as not to raise the suspicion of the neighborhood spies. I suppose one could call that "appeasement". I call it courage. They'd love to be able to record and broadcast their interactions with the cops, but of course they'd never be seen again if they dared do it like the angry pastor does.
Appeasing in China would be not meeting at all, which to MY point, is what the majority of squishy Christians have been doing before Covid began. Covid gave them the cover to do it guiltless. Romans 13, right?

People who neglect assembling together should be convicted by the Holy Spirit. This is not an opinion but a command, a command that a lot of spineless Christians have practiced before the worst virus that ever existed arrived. Practice made perfect, except maybe on Christmas and Easter.

It's hard to blame them. They have been conditioned to submit to their authority. Appeasement after appeasement, American Christians have bowed to culture over the Word of God. When the time came to shut down churches it was easy.

American Christians would not meet in limited gatherings in China. They would be screaming, "Romans 13, you attention seeking, resisting, confrontational, antagonizing, escalators who encounters with law enforcement!"
I see where you're going now. We travel in entirely different circles, you and I. I know plenty of folks (family members even) who go to church on Christmas, Easter, and even Mothers Day if their mothers ask, but they're not Christians. Check that, God knows if they're in or out, but they don't look or act like Christians to me. Squishy or otherwise. Just the same, I don't know any militant Christians ('cept maybe The T Boyz™ and affers) going on like the angry pastor.

I suppose though, that I have seen some confused Christians who point to Romans 13 as a blanket command to submit to the man. The evening news out here liked to find those people and put them on camera last year when they (the news) were trying to paint corporate worshippers in a bad light. But they're more kooky than squishy - that is, they misunderstand scripture, not ignore it.
Just curious, as to understand your thinking...At what point, or in what sort of circumstance, would you defy government orders to not gather with fellow believers and do it anyway?
I guess I'd defy those orders any time they were in place and my convictions (or my pastor) thought they were unjust. I've never been in that situation though, so - like killing a robber in my house - I don't really know what I'd do if faced with such orders. This is my whole point - I've never not gathered with fellow believers when I thought it was healthy to do so. We locked down completely for a couple weeks when this deal started last year, then started going to church and the grocery store once we felt it safe to poke our heads out. Many in my local church thought it best for their families to stay home and worship online, but that was their choice.

I wonder though - - - Do you suppose the Kingdom has been harmed or set back by any temporary governmental restrictions or bans on corporate worship around the world over the last year and a half? Is there any way He can use this for good? Has the convenience of online worship drawn in more busy Americans and Canadians as Rev Thom seems to have noticed? And don't poo poo "convenience" - I know a guy who moved to the jungle and set up a local church to make worship convenient for a remote village. Perhaps this is the hook He's using to draw people in before the hard work of being a Christian begins.
"If we ever get to heaven boys, it aint because we aint done nothin' wrong" - Kris Kristofferson

"One of the things I love about CPS is the frank and enthusiastic dysfunction here. God help me, I do love it so." – OldWorldSwine

"I'd like to put a hook in that puppet and swing it through a bunch of salmon!" - durangopipe

User avatar
tuttle
Tomnoddy Attercop
Tomnoddy Attercop
Posts: 16276
Joined: Tue Dec 02, 2008 6:00 pm
Location: Middle-west
Contact:

Re: Really angry pastor in the news

Post by tuttle » Wed Jun 09, 2021 7:49 am

I wonder if some folks are arguing from different positions. I think the bulk of us here mostly agree, at the 10,000 ft level, that there is a line where churches say Enough!, and that the Kingdom of God cannot fail, but down in the trees we disagree where the line is and might misunderstand someone's legitimate complaint as a cry of despair or submission as a sign that they don't think there is a line. Also the intertwining of differing political contexts (American, Chinese, Canadian) adds to the brush and bracken.

I look at conversations like this, and pointed questions like "where do you think the line is" etc, as ways of helping us see each other better, clearing out the brush.

For me, I'd place the appeaser tag, not on the two sunday "Christians" but on the Shepherds who were quick to bow the knee to the State because they were already bowing. I don't think a church that shut down for a few weeks out of concern for a great unknown is in that camp. But an American church that just reopened last month probably is.

The situation in Canada really is disturbing. Pastors are being jailed and churches are being shut down for literally the same thing Americans are not only doing right now, but doing so with vindication by the Supreme Court. When American states said churches cannot meet and some churches met anyway, the 'appeaser' crowd was too ready to mock, deride, and condemn the churches and their defenders. But now, not only are churches being vindicated for meeting (meaning they weren't the lawbreakers) states like California are shelling out millions to pay the churches legal fees. This means, in an American context, anyone who sided with the state against the churches, screaming Romans 13, actually sided with the lawbreakers in violation of Romans 13. They were wrong legally and theologically.
"The Evangelium has not abrogated legends; it has hallowed them" -JRR Tolkien

"Better to die cheerfully with the aid of a little tobacco, than to live disagreeably and remorseful without." -CS Lewis

User avatar
durangopipe
The Goat Fairy
The Goat Fairy
Posts: 9598
Joined: Wed Jan 20, 2016 3:58 pm

Re: Really angry pastor in the news

Post by durangopipe » Wed Jun 09, 2021 10:36 am

tuttle wrote:
Wed Jun 09, 2021 7:49 am
I wonder if some folks are arguing from different positions. I think the bulk of us here mostly agree, at the 10,000 ft level, that there is a line where churches say Enough!, and that the Kingdom of God cannot fail, but down in the trees we disagree where the line is and might misunderstand someone's legitimate complaint as a cry of despair or submission as a sign that they don't think there is a line. Also the intertwining of differing political contexts (American, Chinese, Canadian) adds to the brush and bracken.

I look at conversations like this, and pointed questions like "where do you think the line is" etc, as ways of helping us see each other better, clearing out the brush.

For me, I'd place the appeaser tag, not on the two sunday "Christians" but on the Shepherds who were quick to bow the knee to the State because they were already bowing. I don't think a church that shut down for a few weeks out of concern for a great unknown is in that camp. But an American church that just reopened last month probably is.

The situation in Canada really is disturbing. Pastors are being jailed and churches are being shut down for literally the same thing Americans are not only doing right now, but doing so with vindication by the Supreme Court. When American states said churches cannot meet and some churches met anyway, the 'appeaser' crowd was too ready to mock, deride, and condemn the churches and their defenders. But now, not only are churches being vindicated for meeting (meaning they weren't the lawbreakers) states like California are shelling out millions to pay the churches legal fees. This means, in an American context, anyone who sided with the state against the churches, screaming Romans 13, actually sided with the lawbreakers in violation of Romans 13. They were wrong legally and theologically.
I suspect a factor in how we as individuals respond to this story is the degree to which we believe the government has attempted to restrict the practice of religion.

If you believe the government has the intention of gradually taking away the right of individuals to practice their faith, then it is easy to see the covid restrictions on church gatherings during the pandemic as the opportunistic use of the pandemic to help further that goal. (You might even believe the whole “pandemic” was exaggerated to assist in accomplishing that goal.)

If you do not believe that this is a goal of the government (the gradual stripping away of the right to practice one’s faith) then you likely see the restrictions as an attempt to keep the pandemic under control, practice sound public health policy and protect public health.

My response to the story actually had more to do with the way the angry pastor treated the law enforcement officers than anything else.

I believe we need, always, to be aware of and concerned about government overreach (it’s why each of us keeps informed and votes the way we do), but since I do not believe there is a desire in government to restrict our individual practice of our faith, what I saw was a pastor demonstrating to his flock that disrespect for law officers was okay.


A contributing factor in my response was my personal involvement in the situation. My wife was drafted to aid in the crisis. The same attitudes that allowed disrespect for law enforcement also encouraged similar disrespect for public health officials - people I know who had no motive other than to keep their communities safe. The things that were said about them, the abuse some of them suffered here in our community (demonstrators outside their homes, obscene gestures and shouting as they left their homes) were utterly uncalled for.

I can only think of this behavior as, at the very least, rude, and in the worst cases lawless.
I don’t want to think that we as a nation are degenerating into a people without respect for each other and for the law.
Nothing distinguishes more clearly conditions in a free country from those in a country under arbitrary government than the observance in the former of the great principles known as the Rule of Law.

Friedrich August von Hayek

User avatar
tuttle
Tomnoddy Attercop
Tomnoddy Attercop
Posts: 16276
Joined: Tue Dec 02, 2008 6:00 pm
Location: Middle-west
Contact:

Re: Really angry pastor in the news

Post by tuttle » Wed Jun 09, 2021 11:23 am

durangopipe wrote:
Wed Jun 09, 2021 10:36 am
tuttle wrote:
Wed Jun 09, 2021 7:49 am
I wonder if some folks are arguing from different positions. I think the bulk of us here mostly agree, at the 10,000 ft level, that there is a line where churches say Enough!, and that the Kingdom of God cannot fail, but down in the trees we disagree where the line is and might misunderstand someone's legitimate complaint as a cry of despair or submission as a sign that they don't think there is a line. Also the intertwining of differing political contexts (American, Chinese, Canadian) adds to the brush and bracken.

I look at conversations like this, and pointed questions like "where do you think the line is" etc, as ways of helping us see each other better, clearing out the brush.

For me, I'd place the appeaser tag, not on the two sunday "Christians" but on the Shepherds who were quick to bow the knee to the State because they were already bowing. I don't think a church that shut down for a few weeks out of concern for a great unknown is in that camp. But an American church that just reopened last month probably is.

The situation in Canada really is disturbing. Pastors are being jailed and churches are being shut down for literally the same thing Americans are not only doing right now, but doing so with vindication by the Supreme Court. When American states said churches cannot meet and some churches met anyway, the 'appeaser' crowd was too ready to mock, deride, and condemn the churches and their defenders. But now, not only are churches being vindicated for meeting (meaning they weren't the lawbreakers) states like California are shelling out millions to pay the churches legal fees. This means, in an American context, anyone who sided with the state against the churches, screaming Romans 13, actually sided with the lawbreakers in violation of Romans 13. They were wrong legally and theologically.
I suspect a factor in how we as individuals respond to this story is the degree to which we believe the government has attempted to restrict the practice of religion.

If you believe the government has the intention of gradually taking away the right of individuals to practice their faith, then it is easy to see the covid restrictions on church gatherings during the pandemic as the opportunistic use of the pandemic to help further that goal. (You might even believe the whole “pandemic” was exaggerated to assist in accomplishing that goal.)

If you do not believe that this is a goal of the government (the gradual stripping away of the right to practice one’s faith) then you likely see the restrictions as an attempt to keep the pandemic under control, practice sound public health policy and protect public health.

My response to the story actually had more to do with the way the angry pastor treated the law enforcement officers than anything else.

I believe we need, always, to be aware of and concerned about government overreach (it’s why each of us keeps informed and votes the way we do), but since I do not believe there is a desire in government to restrict our individual practice of our faith, what I saw was a pastor demonstrating to his flock that disrespect for law officers was okay.


A contributing factor in my response was my personal involvement in the situation. My wife was drafted to aid in the crisis. The same attitudes that allowed disrespect for law enforcement also encouraged similar disrespect for public health officials - people I know who had no motive other than to keep their communities safe. The things that were said about them, the abuse some of them suffered here in our community (demonstrators outside their homes, obscene gestures and shouting as they left their homes) were utterly uncalled for.

I can only think of this behavior as, at the very least, rude, and in the worst cases lawless.
I don’t want to think that we as a nation are degenerating into a people without respect for each other and for the law.
For me, it goes beyond the desire and intention of the government and strikes more to the principle of the thing. So my view isn't swayed by whether or not I think the government is really concerned about my health or religion. I don't believe they have the right to tell and enforce the church (in this case) to not meet when the situation does not overwhelmingly demand it. I do believe the government should have emergency powers. But in this case I think they abused their emergency powers which infringed upon constitutional rights, like freedom of assembly and religion. And it seems that the Supreme Court agrees.

For me, the behavior of the Angry Pastor is a secondary issue (one that I actually don't have a problem with, even if he's overly dramatic...but being secondary, I'll let it pass). What we shouldn't do is place the secondary issue of his screaming and/or showboating ahead of the primary issue of an actual injustice being done. It's easy to say "What a jackass. Guy like that deserves that kind of treatment" but that mostly distracts from the unrighteous law. You can say he's not helping his case, but that's just another step in ignoring the primary issue. Something similar happened with Kim Davis, when she was arrested for not issuing gay marriage licenses after Obergefell. People brought up her morally questionable past and her resistance to resign as more problematic than the unrighteous law that precipitated it all.
"The Evangelium has not abrogated legends; it has hallowed them" -JRR Tolkien

"Better to die cheerfully with the aid of a little tobacco, than to live disagreeably and remorseful without." -CS Lewis

User avatar
durangopipe
The Goat Fairy
The Goat Fairy
Posts: 9598
Joined: Wed Jan 20, 2016 3:58 pm

Re: Really angry pastor in the news

Post by durangopipe » Wed Jun 09, 2021 12:33 pm

ReverendThom wrote:
Tue Jun 08, 2021 6:34 pm
I've preached dozens of times in Canada since this all began. In fact, I'm preaching twice this Sunday in the middle of another huge lockdown. I have not had any problems yet and people are still coming to Jesus. The church we attend has actually grown the last year and a half, and we've barely met in person. Amazing how that works. Maybe Jesus likes them squishy.

Sent from my SM-G970W using Tapatalk
:thumbsup:
Nothing distinguishes more clearly conditions in a free country from those in a country under arbitrary government than the observance in the former of the great principles known as the Rule of Law.

Friedrich August von Hayek

User avatar
FredS
Patron Saint of Pipe Smoking
Patron Saint of Pipe Smoking
Posts: 25036
Joined: Sat Feb 21, 2009 6:00 pm
Location: NOCO (Northern Colorado)

Re: Really angry pastor in the news

Post by FredS » Wed Jun 09, 2021 2:05 pm

ReverendThom wrote:
Tue Jun 08, 2021 6:34 pm
The church we attend has actually grown the last year and a half, and we've barely met in person. Amazing how that works. Maybe Jesus likes them squishy.
This reminds me of a discussion among my church friends a few years ago. We were on retreat at a Benedictine Monastery/Seminary and the topic of the resident monks came up. One of our lady's was/is passionate for orphans in Haiti. She raises money and organizes a couple trips down every year. She literally cried out as she wondered what good these effin monks do for the world when they're cloistered away from the world. Surely Gods plan is not to have these guys toiling away focusing only on themselves and their community. Our pastor said "Well, they literally stop what they're doing and pray for orphans in Haiti, and us, many times during their day. They pray for all of us. It's what they do."

It was a reminder that we're all wired differently and we have different roles in the plan.
"If we ever get to heaven boys, it aint because we aint done nothin' wrong" - Kris Kristofferson

"One of the things I love about CPS is the frank and enthusiastic dysfunction here. God help me, I do love it so." – OldWorldSwine

"I'd like to put a hook in that puppet and swing it through a bunch of salmon!" - durangopipe

User avatar
durangopipe
The Goat Fairy
The Goat Fairy
Posts: 9598
Joined: Wed Jan 20, 2016 3:58 pm

Re: Really angry pastor in the news

Post by durangopipe » Wed Jun 09, 2021 2:48 pm

Tuttle wrote:For me, the behavior of the Angry Pastor is a secondary issue (one that I actually don't have a problem with, even if he's overly dramatic...but being secondary, I'll let it pass). What we shouldn't do is place the secondary issue of his screaming and/or showboating ahead of the primary issue of an actual injustice being done. It's easy to say "What a jackass
But many were lifting him up as hero. Unless I missed something, that seemed to be the point of the original post. If you want to let that go for the moment, consider it a distraction from your primary concern, I'm fine with that, we can continue the discussion for a moment apart from that.

For those who consider him a hero - I believe he would have been far more heroic to make his stand on principle by behaving better and setting a better example for his flock. As I said earlier, he might have reasonably objected to the intrusion of the police into his service, allowed the officers to do their job, and continued to express his disagreement with the law in a more appropriate manner. (Others, and likely you have already argued against this understanding. I don't happen to agree with you.)

Tuttle wrote: I don't believe they have the right to tell and enforce the church (in this case) to not meet when the situation does not overwhelmingly demand it. I do believe the government should have emergency powers. But in this case I think they abused their emergency powers
This is your primary point. Point well taken. In principle, I agree with it. However, I do not believe the government abused their emergency powers in this specific case.

In the first place, the vast majority of pastors and their staff worked long hours to find and create ways to continue group worship (either online or in-person with masks and appropriate spacing), and they continued to meet. They continued to worship. The government did not tell any church it could not meet, could not worship (many here have written of such experiences), and in any event the restrictions were temporary. A pain in the butt, yes, but I don't believe those temporary restrictions rose to the level of gross abuse of power by any stretch of the imagination.

The frog in the pot of water on the stove, slippery slope trope is lurking beneath the surface, or right on the surface, in some of the posts about this here. I'm not buying it in this particular case.

Secondly, I do believe there was good reason to consider this pandemic a legitimate emergency. Look at Brazil - look at much of Latin America; look at India. Third world. Not here. Very different situations.

Okay, look at what had happened very early on in industrialized Northern Italy. Later on in Britain. Spain. France. There was no reason to expect that those kinds of first-world medical system collapses and tremendous loss of life (not just by covid but by other causes because the hospitals could not receive emergency patients when they had no more capacity) could not, would not happen here.

In fact, in many places here it did happen. New York. Houston. L.A. In many metropolitan suburbs and many rural health districts. How soon we forget.

Again, others will continue to argue that the measures put in place had no positive benefit, that this was not a public emergency and the government had no legitimate role in trying to mitigate it. I disagree. The facts have been beaten to death.

Your main point is, as I said, well taken.
I do not believe this example meets the criteria of: the situation did not overwhelmingly demand it.



Finally, I maintain and believe it's important to remember, that the strong opposition to public medical services guidelines and government measures to limit disease transmission (when that opposition rose to the level of yelling, spitting, fighting and disobeying the law) divided along established political lines and likely had more to do with the newly vigorous virulently sprouted seed of distrust of anything the government does, and the situation that existed long before covid arrived, and came along with the newly acceptable behaviors of flouting authority, the law, and attacking public servants (sometimes physically) on the extremes of the left and the right.

Society cannot survive this. Neither, I believe, can The Church.
Another issue. Another day.


So if the primary point you wish to make is not to allow government to intrude where it has no business (and I am with you on this - but don't believe it legitimately applies here), mine is that too many of us believe that it is now acceptable to flout the law and to attack those whose sworn duty is to enforce it, to behave poorly - in fact, some wear it as a badge of honor, like an anti-authoritarian tattoo of belonging to the left or right.

There is a long, powerful history regarding the practice and use of civil disobedience, of citizen resistance against unjust laws. Civil disobedience takes fortitude, constancy and courage. And since I won't be the first to pull out a Jesus juke in this thread, it takes love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness and self-control. And it changes things.

This pastor is not practicing civil disobedience, neither is he manifesting the fruits of the spirit.
He is acting like a petulant child who won't eat his vegetables. Again, not your main concern, Tuttle, but I guess it is one of mine.
Nothing distinguishes more clearly conditions in a free country from those in a country under arbitrary government than the observance in the former of the great principles known as the Rule of Law.

Friedrich August von Hayek

User avatar
durangopipe
The Goat Fairy
The Goat Fairy
Posts: 9598
Joined: Wed Jan 20, 2016 3:58 pm

Re: Really angry pastor in the news

Post by durangopipe » Wed Jun 09, 2021 2:48 pm

FredS wrote:
Wed Jun 09, 2021 2:05 pm
ReverendThom wrote:
Tue Jun 08, 2021 6:34 pm
The church we attend has actually grown the last year and a half, and we've barely met in person. Amazing how that works. Maybe Jesus likes them squishy.
This reminds me of a discussion among my church friends a few years ago. We were on retreat at a Benedictine Monastery/Seminary and the topic of the resident monks came up. One of our lady's was/is passionate for orphans in Haiti. She raises money and organizes a couple trips down every year. She literally cried out as she wondered what good these effin monks do for the world when they're cloistered away from the world. Surely Gods plan is not to have these guys toiling away focusing only on themselves and their community. Our pastor said "Well, they literally stop what they're doing and pray for orphans in Haiti, and us, many times during their day. They pray for all of us. It's what they do."

It was a reminder that we're all wired differently and we have different roles in the plan.
Amen.
Nothing distinguishes more clearly conditions in a free country from those in a country under arbitrary government than the observance in the former of the great principles known as the Rule of Law.

Friedrich August von Hayek

User avatar
JMG
You American sniper
You American sniper
Posts: 7356
Joined: Thu Feb 25, 2010 6:00 pm
Location: MS

Re: Really angry parishioners in their home

Post by JMG » Wed Jun 09, 2021 5:54 pm

FredS wrote:
Wed Jun 09, 2021 7:05 am
JMG wrote:
Tue Jun 08, 2021 6:42 pm
FredS wrote:
Tue Jun 08, 2021 4:23 pm
Jester wrote:
Tue Jun 08, 2021 2:17 pm
FredS wrote:
Tue Jun 08, 2021 1:15 pm
Jester wrote:
Tue Jun 08, 2021 12:33 pm
FredS wrote:
Tue Jun 08, 2021 11:35 am
Jester wrote:
Tue Jun 08, 2021 11:23 am
Some Christians have been using Covid as an excuse to do what they have already been doing.
What, exactly, are you accusing? Are you aiming that accusation at anyone here?
1. Appeasement

2. Anyone convicted?
1. What Christians were wearing masks and limiting gathering sizes to "appease" the government before Covid?

2. By "convicted" I presume you mean by the HS? Surely you're not suggesting individual Christians are at liberty to act on their own convictions when it comes to these temporary restrictions on gatherings.

con·vic·tion
1. a formal declaration that someone is guilty of a criminal offense, made by the verdict of a jury or the decision of a judge in a court of law OR THE HOLY SPIRIT. (HS added and emphasized by me)

2. a firmly held belief or opinion.

EDIT - Actually, I do personally know of a group of Christians in China who had/have to limit the size of their gatherings so as not to raise the suspicion of the neighborhood spies. I suppose one could call that "appeasement". I call it courage. They'd love to be able to record and broadcast their interactions with the cops, but of course they'd never be seen again if they dared do it like the angry pastor does.
Appeasing in China would be not meeting at all, which to MY point, is what the majority of squishy Christians have been doing before Covid began. Covid gave them the cover to do it guiltless. Romans 13, right?

People who neglect assembling together should be convicted by the Holy Spirit. This is not an opinion but a command, a command that a lot of spineless Christians have practiced before the worst virus that ever existed arrived. Practice made perfect, except maybe on Christmas and Easter.

It's hard to blame them. They have been conditioned to submit to their authority. Appeasement after appeasement, American Christians have bowed to culture over the Word of God. When the time came to shut down churches it was easy.

American Christians would not meet in limited gatherings in China. They would be screaming, "Romans 13, you attention seeking, resisting, confrontational, antagonizing, escalators who encounters with law enforcement!"
I see where you're going now. We travel in entirely different circles, you and I. I know plenty of folks (family members even) who go to church on Christmas, Easter, and even Mothers Day if their mothers ask, but they're not Christians. Check that, God knows if they're in or out, but they don't look or act like Christians to me. Squishy or otherwise. Just the same, I don't know any militant Christians ('cept maybe The T Boyz™ and affers) going on like the angry pastor.

I suppose though, that I have seen some confused Christians who point to Romans 13 as a blanket command to submit to the man. The evening news out here liked to find those people and put them on camera last year when they (the news) were trying to paint corporate worshippers in a bad light. But they're more kooky than squishy - that is, they misunderstand scripture, not ignore it.
Just curious, as to understand your thinking...At what point, or in what sort of circumstance, would you defy government orders to not gather with fellow believers and do it anyway?
I guess I'd defy those orders any time they were in place and my convictions (or my pastor) thought they were unjust. I've never been in that situation though, so - like killing a robber in my house - I don't really know what I'd do if faced with such orders. This is my whole point - I've never not gathered with fellow believers when I thought it was healthy to do so. We locked down completely for a couple weeks when this deal started last year, then started going to church and the grocery store once we felt it safe to poke our heads out. Many in my local church thought it best for their families to stay home and worship online, but that was their choice.

I wonder though - - - Do you suppose the Kingdom has been harmed or set back by any temporary governmental restrictions or bans on corporate worship around the world over the last year and a half? Is there any way He can use this for good? Has the convenience of online worship drawn in more busy Americans and Canadians as Rev Thom seems to have noticed? And don't poo poo "convenience" - I know a guy who moved to the jungle and set up a local church to make worship convenient for a remote village. Perhaps this is the hook He's using to draw people in before the hard work of being a Christian begins.
Thanks. Just trying to get a base line read on you. I've found it helps me to understand folk's if I flesh out something like this to both sides of the extreme.

"Do you suppose the Kingdom has been harmed or set back by any temporary governmental restrictions or bans on corporate worship around the world over the last year and a half?" Yeah, I can imagine some instances that have been detrimental. Such as, some members who already struggled with regular attendance. This past year or so has made it awfully easy to stay home. If online gatherings are all that's available, then I think that's better than nothing, but it's certainly no replacement for face-to-face mutual encouragement and accountability. The Church certainly will survive all this, but, for certain types of members, I think it was a blow.

"Is there any way He can use this for good?" Of course.

"Has the convenience of online worship drawn in more busy Americans and Canadians as Rev Thom seems to have noticed?" Maybe. I see that as a very real possibility. However, it shouldn't stay there. A year and a half is a long time for bad habits to root deep...but not impossible to break.

"And don't poo poo "convenience" - I know a guy who moved to the jungle and set up a local church to make worship convenient for a remote village." I didn't live with the Hewa so they could have a convenient faith, but to have a faith at all in Christ. Their faith in Jesus, in fact, was most inconvenient for them within their culture.

"Perhaps this is the hook He's using to draw people in before the hard work of being a Christian begins." I sincerely hope so. Wouldn't this be great.

I will close with a word that Tuttle posted that sums up my feelings on this issue, "For me, I'd place the appeaser tag, not on the two sunday "Christians" but on the Shepherds who were quick to bow the knee to the State because they were already bowing. I don't think a church that shut down for a few weeks out of concern for a great unknown is in that camp. But an American church that just reopened last month probably is."
"No reserves, no retreats, no regrets."
"When you're dumb, you've got to be tough." - my dad

User avatar
FredS
Patron Saint of Pipe Smoking
Patron Saint of Pipe Smoking
Posts: 25036
Joined: Sat Feb 21, 2009 6:00 pm
Location: NOCO (Northern Colorado)

Re: Really angry parishioners in their home

Post by FredS » Thu Jun 10, 2021 7:02 am

JMG wrote:
Wed Jun 09, 2021 5:54 pm
"Has the convenience of online worship drawn in more busy Americans and Canadians as Rev Thom seems to have noticed?" Maybe. I see that as a very real possibility. However, it shouldn't stay there. A year and a half is a long time for bad habits to root deep...but not impossible to break.
I agree that it shouldn't stay there any longer than necessary. I think it's inferior in every way to in-person worship services, but I see a number of positives in this alternative method of corporate worship. For you and I, worshiping along with a web-broadcast service will never be the full *experience. But for the elderly or infirm, for those without access to a sound local church, for those in remote areas, for those shyly dipping their toes in the water to see what Christ is about, this new thing might be a benefit. Certainly better than being stuck worshiping with Osteen on Sunday mornings.


*I don't intend to compare worship to a theme park. In fact, it's not really about us at all, but as you wrote earlier, we can get encouragement and instruction to do the hard work of living in this world as Christians when we gather in-person.
"If we ever get to heaven boys, it aint because we aint done nothin' wrong" - Kris Kristofferson

"One of the things I love about CPS is the frank and enthusiastic dysfunction here. God help me, I do love it so." – OldWorldSwine

"I'd like to put a hook in that puppet and swing it through a bunch of salmon!" - durangopipe

User avatar
tuttle
Tomnoddy Attercop
Tomnoddy Attercop
Posts: 16276
Joined: Tue Dec 02, 2008 6:00 pm
Location: Middle-west
Contact:

Re: Really angry pastor in the news

Post by tuttle » Thu Jun 10, 2021 8:12 am

durangopipe wrote:
Wed Jun 09, 2021 2:48 pm
Tuttle wrote:For me, the behavior of the Angry Pastor is a secondary issue (one that I actually don't have a problem with, even if he's overly dramatic...but being secondary, I'll let it pass). What we shouldn't do is place the secondary issue of his screaming and/or showboating ahead of the primary issue of an actual injustice being done. It's easy to say "What a jackass
But many were lifting him up as hero. Unless I missed something, that seemed to be the point of the original post. If you want to let that go for the moment, consider it a distraction from your primary concern, I'm fine with that, we can continue the discussion for a moment apart from that.

For those who consider him a hero - I believe he would have been far more heroic to make his stand on principle by behaving better and setting a better example for his flock. As I said earlier, he might have reasonably objected to the intrusion of the police into his service, allowed the officers to do their job, and continued to express his disagreement with the law in a more appropriate manner. (Others, and likely you have already argued against this understanding. I don't happen to agree with you.)
I'm okay to disagree with people on this. I think he took it a little too far rhetorically, not what I'd have done, but considering his Polish background, learning that police/government intimidation of his church wasn't new, and the cultural boiling point that many folks were at at the time of the video, any over the top-ness to me felt a bit justified.

Take the example of your (albeit hilarious) gambling nun. If she had reacted like this guy, no one who called this guy a hero would think the same of her. Because her crime justified the arrest.

But leave this guy and the nun example aside. There are other pastors and churches in Canada who have been jailed and shuttered who did no such screaming, and these guys have been met with the exact same mockery (not that I've seen here on CPS) as the Angry Pastor. As malcontents and scofflaws, selfish, and deserving of retribution. And so when the reaction to these guys (Jester has a couple of them in his ongoing collage) is virtually the same as the Angry Pastor, then it's hard for me to get riled up about his rhetoric. As FredS might say, we're all wired differently.

durangopipe wrote:
Wed Jun 09, 2021 2:48 pm
Tuttle wrote: I don't believe they have the right to tell and enforce the church (in this case) to not meet when the situation does not overwhelmingly demand it. I do believe the government should have emergency powers. But in this case I think they abused their emergency powers
This is your primary point. Point well taken. In principle, I agree with it. However, I do not believe the government abused their emergency powers in this specific case.

1) In the first place, the vast majority of pastors and their staff worked long hours to find and create ways to continue group worship (either online or in-person with masks and appropriate spacing), and they continued to meet. They continued to worship. The government did not tell any church it could not meet, could not worship (many here have written of such experiences), and in any event the restrictions were temporary. A pain in the butt, yes, but I don't believe those temporary restrictions rose to the level of gross abuse of power by any stretch of the imagination.

The frog in the pot of water on the stove, slippery slope trope is lurking beneath the surface, or right on the surface, in some of the posts about this here. I'm not buying it in this particular case.

2) Secondly, I do believe there was good reason to consider this pandemic a legitimate emergency. Look at Brazil - look at much of Latin America; look at India. Third world. Not here. Very different situations.

Okay, look at what had happened very early on in industrialized Northern Italy. Later on in Britain. Spain. France. There was no reason to expect that those kinds of first-world medical system collapses and tremendous loss of life (not just by covid but by other causes because the hospitals could not receive emergency patients when they had no more capacity) could not, would not happen here.

In fact, in many places here it did happen. New York. Houston. L.A. In many metropolitan suburbs and many rural health districts. How soon we forget.

Again, others will continue to argue that the measures put in place had no positive benefit, that this was not a public emergency and the government had no legitimate role in trying to mitigate it. I disagree. The facts have been beaten to death.

Your main point is, as I said, well taken.
3) I do not believe this example meets the criteria of: the situation did not overwhelmingly demand it.
(I added numbers for clarity)

1) I think we need to remember that there is a contrast between Canada and America here. Whatever stupid restrictions America tried (and yeah, some state governments did tell churches and others to close their doors and/or to restrict attendance, not to sing, take communion, etc) they more or less by now have been found to be unconstitutional (even if some are still playing out in court). But in this case we're talking Canada which obviously doesn't have the same protections as Americans.

2) I also believe there was good reason to consider the pandemic a legitimate emergency. Initially. And initially, my church, like other churches, before governments even intervened, took various preventative measures for ourselves. That's the kind of voluntary thing that happens in an actual emergency. But after a little bit of time goes by, after more data comes out, minimal COVID deaths in areas of the country already hit by COVID, after flip-flops and lies from the Experts, seeing how the most restrictive states faired no better than the less restrictive states, etc. and you get a snowball's worth of evidence that we (or most of us) are not in an actual emergency, despite the fearmongering.

This isn't to downplay where actual emergencies happened, as in the places you pointed out or in elderly communities, even in COVID-lite districts.

3) My point is that the situation, initially, and then in pockets, did demand emergency powers to regulate...until it didn't, and there were many who would not (or who still won't!) let go. Thus, the abuse. Thus my belief that the intimidation tactics, lockdowns, seizures, and arrests of Canadian pastors/churches is an abuse of emergency powers. Far worse than any pastor's rhetoric about it.

durangopipe wrote:
Wed Jun 09, 2021 2:48 pm
Finally, I maintain and believe it's important to remember, that the strong opposition to public medical services guidelines and government measures to limit disease transmission (when that opposition rose to the level of yelling, spitting, fighting and disobeying the law) divided along established political lines and likely had more to do with the newly vigorous virulently sprouted seed of distrust of anything the government does, and the situation that existed long before covid arrived, and came along with the newly acceptable behaviors of flouting authority, the law, and attacking public servants (sometimes physically) on the extremes of the left and the right.

Society cannot survive this. Neither, I believe, can The Church.
Another issue. Another day.
I agree with this assessment, except for the Church not surviving this. It may be a winnowing, but the Church will survive.

durangopipe wrote:
Wed Jun 09, 2021 2:48 pm
So if the primary point you wish to make is not to allow government to intrude where it has no business (and I am with you on this - but don't believe it legitimately applies here), mine is that too many of us believe that it is now acceptable to flout the law and to attack those whose sworn duty is to enforce it, to behave poorly - in fact, some wear it as a badge of honor, like an anti-authoritarian tattoo of belonging to the left or right.

There is a long, powerful history regarding the practice and use of civil disobedience, of citizen resistance against unjust laws. Civil disobedience takes fortitude, constancy and courage. And since I won't be the first to pull out a Jesus juke in this thread, it takes love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness and self-control. And it changes things.

This pastor is not practicing civil disobedience, neither is he manifesting the fruits of the spirit.
He is acting like a petulant child who won't eat his vegetables. Again, not your main concern, Tuttle, but I guess it is one of mine.
I mean, he actually is practicing civil disobedience, just not to your taste.

And I've already gave some reasons I think he was justified in his admittedly excessive rhetoric, and fully admitting that I don't know the fuel that motivated his reaction (be it righteous or petulant), I will say that his name calling is easily justifiable from the Scriptures, and that's part of the sympathy I have for him. When Pharisees are acting like snakes they get called a Brood of Vipers. Canadian health inspectors intimidating a church like Nazi's and Gestapo, recognizably so by the living memory of their pastor, well...
"The Evangelium has not abrogated legends; it has hallowed them" -JRR Tolkien

"Better to die cheerfully with the aid of a little tobacco, than to live disagreeably and remorseful without." -CS Lewis

User avatar
wosbald
Lonergan Fan Club President
Lonergan Fan Club President
Posts: 23637
Joined: Mon Feb 25, 2008 6:00 pm
Location: Cleveland, Ohio
Contact:

Re: Really angry pastor in the news

Post by wosbald » Thu Jun 10, 2021 9:23 am

+JMJ+

Two words:
  • "Appeaser" is the lingo of War.
  • Seems like a short jump from "Appeaser" to "Collaborator".
That is all.

ImageImage

"[T]he emergency of irregular migration has to be met with justice, solidarity and mercy. Forms of collective expulsion, which do not allow for the suitable treatment of individual cases, are unacceptable."
— Pope Francis, Morocco

User avatar
durangopipe
The Goat Fairy
The Goat Fairy
Posts: 9598
Joined: Wed Jan 20, 2016 3:58 pm

Re: Really angry pastor in the news

Post by durangopipe » Thu Jun 10, 2021 9:26 am

“Tuttle” wrote:I agree with this assessment, except for the Church not surviving this. It may be a winnowing, but the Church will survive.
Well, of course the Church will survive. It is God’s church. That does not mean that our personal behavior cannot damage the Church.

If every pastor were to behave like this pastor (and thankfully those who do are rare), the Church would be very seriously threatened, and its witness would be very seriously compromised.

I was not aware that a great many pastors had been arrested in Canada. I thought that, perhaps, there were a very few others and that this pastor was a particularly loud and visible outlier. If the others’ disobedience was more civil (yes, pun intended - but the literal meaning is intended as well), and, still, many churches In Canada have been shut down and their pastors arrested, that is unconscionable.

And yes, Tuttle, you are correct in pointing out that I was conflating the situation here with the situation in Canada. But it seemed to me that others rising to his defense were suggesting that the same response should be engaged in everywhere. I took your words in his defense to be suggesting the same. If that is, in fact, a correct reading of yours and others’ posts, than the conflation is not an error.

I do not agree that local law enforcement being charged with enforcing mask wearing, social distancing and temporary limits on the number of people attending in the same space has biblical justification for using untrue names. The Pharisees were a brood of vipers. The local police are not Gestapo. Any pastor arrested would be quickly released, not held indefinitely and likely tortured (or worse). If a name is called, with biblical justification, it must ring with perfect truth.

“What you are doing is wrong,” might be a justifiable accusation. “This arrest and these laws violate our right to worship!” (although I do not believe they do, there were many options for worship available), would have expressed the pastor’s concerns and communicated them to his flock. To call the police Gestapo (and to carry on the way he did in front of his parishioners) suggests to them that the local government is in all ways evil (as the Nazi government was), that the local police are evil (which they are not), and that their actions in enforcing any laws from speeding tickets to drunk driving have no legitimacy because they are derived from a government that has no moral legitimacy; further, that they would be justified in behaving in the same manner in their interactions with police.

I know that local law enforcement deals with this sort of thing from abusive drunk drivers and others they have to deal with all the time.

Romans 13 does not suggest that the Christian is more subservient to secular law than to God’s law, but it does tell us that secular authority and law carry significant biblical justification and moral weight. I believe this pastor’s behavior undermines that biblical imperative.

We’ll not likely come to agreement on this Tuttle, but I appreciate the thoughtful way you argue your point and I know how deeply you believe that your understanding is based on Biblical principles. Please know that I am coming from that place as well.

One day, we’ll both be beyond the limits of our current position, no more glass darkly - and although I have no idea exactly what that will be like, I rather hope we’ll know each other there.
Nothing distinguishes more clearly conditions in a free country from those in a country under arbitrary government than the observance in the former of the great principles known as the Rule of Law.

Friedrich August von Hayek

User avatar
tuttle
Tomnoddy Attercop
Tomnoddy Attercop
Posts: 16276
Joined: Tue Dec 02, 2008 6:00 pm
Location: Middle-west
Contact:

Re: Really angry pastor in the news

Post by tuttle » Thu Jun 10, 2021 10:48 am

durangopipe wrote:
Thu Jun 10, 2021 9:26 am
“Tuttle” wrote:I agree with this assessment, except for the Church not surviving this. It may be a winnowing, but the Church will survive.
Well, of course the Church will survive. It is God’s church. That does not mean that our personal behavior cannot damage the Church.

If every pastor were to behave like this pastor (and thankfully those who do are rare), the Church would be very seriously threatened, and its witness would be very seriously compromised.

I was not aware that a great many pastors had been arrested in Canada. I thought that, perhaps, there were a very few others and that this pastor was a particularly loud and visible outlier. If the others’ disobedience was more civil (yes, pun intended - but the literal meaning is intended as well), and, still, many churches In Canada have been shut down and their pastors arrested, that is unconscionable.

And yes, Tuttle, you are correct in pointing out that I was conflating the situation here with the situation in Canada. But it seemed to me that others rising to his defense were suggesting that the same response should be engaged in everywhere. I took your words in his defense to be suggesting the same. If that is, in fact, a correct reading of yours and others’ posts, than the conflation is not an error.

I do not agree that local law enforcement being charged with enforcing mask wearing, social distancing and temporary limits on the number of people attending in the same space has biblical justification for using untrue names. The Pharisees were a brood of vipers. The local police are not Gestapo. Any pastor arrested would be quickly released, not held indefinitely and likely tortured (or worse). If a name is called, with biblical justification, it must ring with perfect truth.

“What you are doing is wrong,” might be a justifiable accusation. “This arrest and these laws violate our right to worship!” (although I do not believe they do, there were many options for worship available), would have expressed the pastor’s concerns and communicated them to his flock. To call the police Gestapo (and to carry on the way he did in front of his parishioners) suggests to them that the local government is in all ways evil (as the Nazi government was), that the local police are evil (which they are not), and that their actions in enforcing any laws from speeding tickets to drunk driving have no legitimacy because they are derived from a government that has no moral legitimacy; further, that they would be justified in behaving in the same manner in their interactions with police.

I know that local law enforcement deals with this sort of thing from abusive drunk drivers and others they have to deal with all the time.

Romans 13 does not suggest that the Christian is more subservient to secular law than to God’s law, but it does tell us that secular authority and law carry significant biblical justification and moral weight. I believe this pastor’s behavior undermines that biblical imperative.

We’ll not likely come to agreement on this Tuttle, but I appreciate the thoughtful way you argue your point and I know how deeply you believe that your understanding is based on Biblical principles. Please know that I am coming from that place as well.

One day, we’ll both be beyond the limits of our current position, no more glass darkly - and although I have no idea exactly what that will be like, I rather hope we’ll know each other there.
Yeah, we may not agree here, but I'm with you on that.

As to the survival of the church topic, I didn't necessarily say that as if you didn't believe such a thing, I was more distinguishing it from your comment that Society cannot survive it. I honestly think hostile division that keeps ramping up (they way you described) really can destroy our society as we know it. Like, buh-bye. Gone-zo. I don't think the same kind of destruction will happen for the Church. But I do see what you are getting at above.
"The Evangelium has not abrogated legends; it has hallowed them" -JRR Tolkien

"Better to die cheerfully with the aid of a little tobacco, than to live disagreeably and remorseful without." -CS Lewis

Post Reply