God no longer 'Father' for United Church of Christ

[CMatt25]

So do me a favor CMatt25, if you truly feel we are in violation of the rules, then report us to the moderators; because I’d rather be banned than post in such a stifled environment. Thanks!

What I and others might truly feel is not necessarily what others might feel. So carry on…

 

[Digitonomy]

Grammar police, reporting for duty…

What … others might truly feel is not necessarily what others might feel.

 

[ringil]

Who cares.

It’'s their religion- just another break off, from a break off, from a break off. . . . . . .

I wish them well. If a few of them feel called to the True Faith, though, that would be fabulous.

 

[CMatt25]

I’ve never said to Catholics that I “know your faith is just not there”. Of course you have your faith as UCC, Methodists, and Unitarians have theirs. I never have asked for forgiveness of Catholics because they “know not what they do”. Or worse ask “what substance they’re smoking or what they’re drinking”. I can imagine the uproar from Catholics if I had. So indeed that’s the wee irony to me. But oh well. I know this is a Catholic forum. Carry on your discussion about the UCC. As I have nothing to add to the thread and shall leave it with these words, may God bless all Catholics, United Church of Christ adherants, and all His children who walk in faith. Peace.

 

[LoyalViews]

Maybe they’re worshipping Mary…

CMatt25, I was only joking, perhaps what I said came across different…

 

[wisdomseeker]

It is the CC that we need to worry about. We need to be concerned with our Faith being watered downed and destroyed throughout the world. This should be the concern of Catholics and not be concern with those who are not commanded by Christ to teach anyway.

Lets look at ourselves and see how much many Catholics who are siding with the enemy of God and allowing and approving for the evils in society yet are going umpunished and even praised for it.

 

[sedonaman]

Triune God forgive them, for they know not what they do.

They DO know what they are doing. They are attempting mind control, for he [or she, in this case] who controls the language controls everything. Besides, one of the feminist goals is to excommunicate men from society, i.e., leave them with no role at all.

Because of their biological makeup, principally their more task-focused and less intuitive intellectual processes, men are unlikely to connect with a feminine-dominated or even gender-neutral symbolic environment, which is what a religion is. Masculine language in reference to God is part of the traditional symbol system of biblical faith, and it has allowed men to find meaning in that faith. Feminizing the language of worship virtually guarantees that men will fall by the wayside, except perhaps those whose sexual identity is confused.

Languages lie at the bedrock of cultures, and are inherently resistant to change. Bible translators know this, and make accommodations in order to translate the biblical idiom into phrases that will have equivalent significance in the target culture. But the current drive for gender-neutral language works in the opposite direction: it attempts to force linguistic change in order to foster cultural change. In this case, the translators are attempting to force a linguistic change on both the originating culture (the Bible and Christian tradition) and the target culture (North American society) at the same time. In reality, the movement for inclusive language is an attempt by an elitist segment to impose its values upon a larger community, and to take control not only of the actions of others but their thoughts as well.

If worship is to be truly inclusive, it cannot impose an elitist linguistic convention on a larger culture. A mandate for gender-neutral language in Christian worship would simply create a small, holier-than-thou cult with its own special lingo, while the rest of us hopeless Neanderthals fall off the edge of their world. And that’s exactly what’s happening to most of the historic North American denominations. Locked into the feminizing agenda, they are fast becoming a tiny minority of Left-wing activists and their captive senior citizens who stick around just because of inertia. Anybody who is really looking for a meaningful set of religious symbols is going someplace else: to those churches which don’t care about inclusive language, but do care whether or not people are included in the covenant with God through Jesus Christ.

Worship and Inclusive Language
Richard C. Leonard
laudemont.org/a-wail.htm

Our parish sings some hymns in Spanish. Why don’t they attack the Spanish language with its gender-based nouns? Now there’s a politically incorrect crime if there ever was one.

 

[Darryl1958]

]If no critical comments whatsoever are allowed concerning any religion, then discussion will be limited to how wonderful every belief is. Boring. :yawn:

 I stand by by comment that "I'm surprised they left Jesus in there" since He is male and being male is evidently now a sin to some people.  I am sincerely surprised they left Him in there.

Not just a male, but a caucasian male.

As to my statement that Unitarians pray "to Whom it may concern :D", I did follow that with a "Big Grin" symbol to show I was NOT serious.

Oh, I missed that. I thought that they really were doing that. It wasn’t all that unbelievable, given what the United church is doing in the OP.

 So do me a favor CMatt25, if you truly feel we are in violation of the rules, then report us to the moderators; because I'd rather be banned than post in such a stifled environment.  Thanks!  :thumbsup:

I think I read already that the Catholic Church will not recognize baptisms without reference to the Father. I wonder if the pope might be banned along with you for his politically incorrect stance.

 

[7_Sorrows]

there is so much political correctness anymore and an efford to modernize the Christian faith. it is like a new reformation.

 

[sedonaman]

…I stand by by comment that “I’m surprised they left Jesus in there” since He is male and being male is evidently now a sin to some people.

If the Church ever ordained women, eventually there would be no men priests, and the women would start complaining that, “You men always con us women into fixing the meals and washing the dishes!”

 

[irishpatrick]

Not to despair. These sorts of things are exactly what will cause many to come back home to the Catholic Church–where all Christians belong (and frankly all people).

 

[OrdinaryMelkite]

Slightly OT here----but Jesus was Caucasian?

That’s the traditional view-----but of course you know Jesus was Jewish----threfore most people agree he had Jewish features.

Not trying to derail the thread-----just wondering if you really meant that.

 

[sedonaman]

Darryl1958;8177114:

Slightly OT here----but Jesus was Caucasian?

That’s the traditional view-----but of course you know Jesus was Jewish----threfore most people agree he had Jewish features.

Not trying to derail the thread-----just wondering if you really meant that.

Depends on what you mean.

The term Caucasian race (also Caucasoid, Europid, or Europoid[1]) has been used to denote the general physical type of some or all of the populations of Europe, North Africa, the Horn of Africa, West Asia, Central Asia and South Asia.[2] Historically, the term has been used to describe the entire population of these regions, without regard necessarily to skin tone.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Caucasian_race

Unquote.
Also see the pictures here en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Europaeid_types.jpg. Note the Bedouin.

P.S. What are “Jewish” features? “Jewish” refers to the religion; Caucasian refers to physical traits.

 

[Scott_Lafrance]

I wonder if they changed the Lord’s Prayer as well?

Our tiune Diety, who are in heaven, hallowed by your name…

Sounds…blasphemously sterile.

 

[LoyalViews]

P.S. What are “Jewish” features? “Jewish” refers to the religion; Caucasian refers to physical traits.

But there’s the Jewish religion, and there’s the Jewish race. Our Blessed Saviour, of the Jewish race, probably never had white-white, European skin, but rather maybe darker, like the Jews we see today in Israel as such, IMHO. I could be and might be wrong, please correct me!

 

[Darryl1958]

Slightly OT here----but Jesus was Caucasian?

That’s the traditional view-----but of course you know Jesus was Jewish----therefore most people agree he had Jewish features.

Not trying to derail the thread-----just wondering if you really meant that.

I didn’t mean much by it really. Just poking at a little fun at political correctness.

He wasn’t white as in White AngloSaxon Protestant(WASP), who are the ones with the power in most PC talk, but Caucasian as in not Negroid or Mongoloid.

Jews, I guess, are grouped in as white or something else depending on who has a bone to pick with them, or who is being politically incorrect toward them.
Most groupings of people by race are artificial anyway, so like I way, I didn’t mean too much by it.
Just poking a little fun.

 

[sedonaman]

But there’s the Jewish religion, and there’s the Jewish race. Our Blessed Saviour, of the Jewish race, probably never had white-white, European skin, but rather maybe darker, like the Jews we see today in Israel as such, IMHO. I could be and might be wrong, please correct me!

What’s the difference between the Jewish religion and Jewish “race”?

My referenced did say “without regard necessarily to skin tone.”

Did you look at the picture of the Bedouin? I think Jesus probably looked a lot like that.

 

[Digitonomy]

Our tiune Diety, who are in heaven, hallowed by your name…
Sounds…blasphemously sterile.

Sterile, perhaps. I don’t see any blasphemy in those words.

 

[Scott_Lafrance]

Sterile, perhaps. I don’t see any blasphemy in those words.

He is our FATHER, that is His appropriate role. Jesus taught us those specific words for a reason. The ould be the same if you called your earthly father your “male parental figure”. Its patently disrespectful of his true role. Any disrespect of God is blasphemous.

 

[Birdpreacher]

eyes, lungs, belly buttons, legs, all of these help us to survive in our environment. If God needs nothing to survive (no need for a digestive tract, cardiovascular system, skin) then are we really made in his image physically? Or perhaps our only likeness with him is our soul