Lititz Springs Park

[steve-in-kville]

It is fascinating what all a person can find on here, but I think you have to squint real hard to read state-sponsored religion into RZehr's post that you quoted. I think a more logical interpretation is that he thinks Christianity ought to overcome the devil's haunts through the power of preaching, salvation and changed lives.

This place can go from zero to 60 in no time. This thread is an example: what started about a gay pride event is now about catholic monasteries... all in nine pages!

[Soloist]

This place can go from zero to 60 in no time. This thread is an example: what started about a gay pride event is now about catholic monasteries... all in nine pages!

Well Catholic monasteries are more interesting anyway. We have a Catholic here, we don’t have any open trans or gay people here although we had someone a while back.

[Jazman]

When you say "it's something Christians should [not] tolerate" , what does that mean in my local context (especially if I lived in Lititz proper? (I live in another town close by) What should I (by extension anyone else like-minded) do in response to this event? This year?

In the local context of the members of that Moravian church who don't want drag shows being conducted on their property, yes, it's something that Christians should not tolerate: cross-dressing men performing highly sexual "shows" on church property.

Is this something you think is good or that we should tolerate?

We may be talking past each other....
First, I'm still not sure from what I've read so far, that I can frame the situation quite as starkly as you are: (unified church board vs, at-war-with unified park board...) Do you live near Lititz? (I do). Have you been to this church (I have, numerous times. And my son's cello teacher attends). From what I can tell the church leans mainline (woman pastor, African American man associate pastor... Loved his Christmas homily btw, but a few minutes talk does not mean we agree on things) But, given the general community I could see the church board/trustees possibly having a more conservative member(s). I could see the park board having 1 activist and other more conservative members or vice versa... In the news pieces it's not real clear where the lines might be - but it feels like you're framing it in simple black & white lines... But you might be right; if we both were much closer to the situation, your framing might be absolutely correct. I'm not that close to it, so I can't frame it that way.

Secondly to your last question: Of course I don't think it's good or something I or my church would participate in, promote or facilitate. My wish for any church is that they wouldn't promote or facilitate something like this. But churches are as varied as individuals. God gives them and individuals the right to choose all kinds of good or bad or worse... As I read Scripture I don't see much besides prayer, loving/polite invitation or persuasion or walking away, peacefully shaking the dust... towards someone or some church in their choices... (I would see the few protesters last year possibily straying from this Biblical ideal...) So, in a sense I do 'tolerate' (as does God) the choices of others. I know it's splitting hairs. I know it's complicated. I know it's nuanced. It might appear to be compromise. It is not.

We're not God. As Christians we don't get to judge or smite or forcibly compel anyone... And as Anabaptists we go even further and shun most/or all coercive force against sinners... So in a sense you're as 'tolerant' as I am (including everyone else here) of the grossest sins imaginable. In large part because we ALSO are sinners, living by the grace of God who 'tolerates' our failings on a daily, minute by minute basis.

And the history of Anabaptism is filled with these kinds of tensions and complexities. The founders were actually quite revolutionary, for their time! - in their parsing/nuancing something like this out. The culture around them was stuck in a very black & white paradigm. 'Everybody must do infant baptism = white, Any adult baptism = black > anathema > smiting > death..etc' It was the Anabaptists who said, "wait... can we have some nuance here? You all can do your infant baptism... we'll let God decide what to do with you all...and btw Scripture says the same to you... so if we extend that freedom to you, why not do the same for us and allow us to do baptism, and other things, a different way?"

And that's a Biblical principle that happens to, in a sense, be written in our Constitution. It's religious freedom. A variety of interpretations can arise from that, but in general, as I see it, the Lititz Moravian church board or the park's board should be allowed to NOT host the Pride org... But it should also be allowed TO Host the Pride org if they want to...(as God may also allow them to make that choice)

So in a complicated, nuanced, parsing way, yes, I have to 'tolerate' that church / park and their decision, whatever it is.

[RZehr]

Didn't imagine I'd find endorsement of state-sponsored religion in a forum full of CAs. Fascinating.

It is fascinating what all a person can find on here, but I think you have to squint real hard to read state-sponsored religion into RZehr's post that you quoted. I think a more logical interpretation is that he thinks Christianity ought to overcome the devil's haunts through the power of preaching, salvation and changed lives.

He was quoting a post explaining the Roman Empire's adoption of Christianity. Not much squinting needed.

First, as a person of Asian descent and heritage myself, I encourage non-Asians to not squint to hard at my posts. At best cultural appropriation, worse racist. Might even become permanent. Even though yes, it does usually enhance one’s vision. Wide screen vision.

I can agree though that my post was written sloppily. There are two sections to the post I was quoting. And I was truly intending my reply towards only the second, while ignoring the first:
1st part: “ The opposite is true. As Christianity became the dominant religion of the Roman Empire,”
2nd part: “a number of early churches were built on the foundations of pagan temples.”

What I’d like to see, is true Christianity to grow, and need more churches built, and I’d like to see every other religion go extinct. Am not a fan of state sponsored religion whatsoever.

[RZehr]

It is fascinating what all a person can find on here, but I think you have to squint real hard to read state-sponsored religion into RZehr's post that you quoted. I think a more logical interpretation is that he thinks Christianity ought to overcome the devil's haunts through the power of preaching, salvation and changed lives.

This place can go from zero to 60 in no time. This thread is an example: what started about a gay pride event is now about catholic monasteries... all in nine pages!

Aaaaand now off to racism we go!

[steve-in-kville]

It is fascinating what all a person can find on here, but I think you have to squint real hard to read state-sponsored religion into RZehr's post that you quoted. I think a more logical interpretation is that he thinks Christianity ought to overcome the devil's haunts through the power of preaching, salvation and changed lives.

This place can go from zero to 60 in no time. This thread is an example: what started about a gay pride event is now about catholic monasteries... all in nine pages!

Aaaaand now off to racism we go!

I'm not racist. I hate everyone equally.

[barnhart]

MaxPC, I guess you and I can agree to disagree. If I remember correctly this is what you have said about me so far:
1. I made a "claim" against the monastery
2. I commit trespass on helpless nuns
3. I have a heart of dark anger
4. I harbor angry anti Catholic bias
5. I "derogate" and "persecute" women
6. I am persisting in lying about the glass shards and razor wire
7. I am hypocritical to promote nonresistance

I don't know what to think about you. As far as I know all the above are not true, except I did claim the walls are studded with glass and razor wire, which is true. I don't wish to antagonize you, but I don't know how to approach that much untruth.

[Josh]

Jazman,

There is no need to speculate here. The Moravian church board has already publicly stated to the press they don’t want to host gay pride events on their property. The park board (which is subordinate the church board) is simply openly defying them. Replacing a rebellious board often takes time and can’t be done quickly.

[Jazman]

Jazman,

There is no need to speculate here. The Moravian church board has already publicly stated to the press they don’t want to host gay pride events on their property. The park board (which is subordinate the church board) is simply openly defying them. Replacing a rebellious board often takes time and can’t be done quickly.

Could you post the quote here? And if whole board said that or a person on the board?

[Josh]

Jazman,

There is no need to speculate here. The Moravian church board has already publicly stated to the press they don’t want to host gay pride events on their property. The park board (which is subordinate the church board) is simply openly defying them. Replacing a rebellious board often takes time and can’t be done quickly.

Could you post the quote here? And if whole board said that or a person on the board?

You can go re-read the news article on it, or simply click on page 1 or this thread:

The park board had already approved renting the park to the organization last year, but on Friday, the Lititz Moravian Congregation Board of Trustees directed the park board to deny Lititz Chooses Love “full use” of the park, citing “political activism,” “vulgarity and dress issues of presenters” at last year’s event, as well as safety concerns.