Who said this?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Castor Muscular
  • Start date Start date
C

Castor Muscular

Guest
Any guesses (without googling it)?


So, for example, the Church loves, welcomes, and respects the alcoholic . . . but would not condone his binge;

The Church loves, welcomes, and respects a prominent business leader…but would not condone his or her failure to pay a just wage to a migrant worker;

The Church loves, welcomes, and respects a young couple in love . . . but would challenge their decision to “live together” before marriage;

The Church loves, welcomes, and respects a woman who has had an abortion, and the man who fathered the child and encouraged the abortion . . . but would be united with them in mourning and regretting that deadly choice;

The Church loves, welcomes, and respects a woman or man with a same-sex attraction . . .  while reminding him or her of our clear teaching that, while the condition of homosexuality is no sin at all, still, God’s teaching is clear that sexual acts are reserved for a man and woman united in the lifelong, life-giving, faithful, loving bond of marriage.

The Church loves, welcomes, and respects wealthy people, while prophetically teaching the at-times-uncomfortable virtue of justice and charity towards the poor.

We are part of a Church where, yes, all are welcome, but, no, not a Church of anything goes.
 
Castor Muscular said:
Any guesses (without googling it)?


So, for example, the Church loves, welcomes, and respects the alcoholic . . . but would not condone his binge;

The Church loves, welcomes, and respects a prominent business leader…but would not condone his or her failure to pay a just wage to a migrant worker;

The Church loves, welcomes, and respects a young couple in love . . . but would challenge their decision to “live together” before marriage;

The Church loves, welcomes, and respects a woman who has had an abortion, and the man who fathered the child and encouraged the abortion . . . but would be united with them in mourning and regretting that deadly choice;

The Church loves, welcomes, and respects a woman or man with a same-sex attraction . . .  while reminding him or her of our clear teaching that, while the condition of homosexuality is no sin at all, still, God’s teaching is clear that sexual acts are reserved for a man and woman united in the lifelong, life-giving, faithful, loving bond of marriage.

The Church loves, welcomes, and respects wealthy people, while prophetically teaching the at-times-uncomfortable virtue of justice and charity towards the poor.

We are part of a Church where, yes, all are welcome, but, no, not a Church of anything goes.

ALAYMAN?
 
The guy I guessed was on the same team, but I picked the wrong player. :)
 
Castor Muscular said:
Any guesses (without googling it)?

So, for example, the Church loves, welcomes, and respects the alcoholic . . . but would not condone his binge;

The Church loves, welcomes, and respects a prominent business leader…but would not condone his or her failure to pay a just wage to a migrant worker;

The Church loves, welcomes, and respects a young couple in love . . . but would challenge their decision to “live together” before marriage;

The Church loves, welcomes, and respects a woman who has had an abortion, and the man who fathered the child and encouraged the abortion . . . but would be united with them in mourning and regretting that deadly choice;

The Church loves, welcomes, and respects a woman or man with a same-sex attraction . . .  while reminding him or her of our clear teaching that, while the condition of homosexuality is no sin at all, still, God’s teaching is clear that sexual acts are reserved for a man and woman united in the lifelong, life-giving, faithful, loving bond of marriage.

The Church loves, welcomes, and respects wealthy people, while prophetically teaching the at-times-uncomfortable virtue of justice and charity towards the poor.

We are part of a Church where, yes, all are welcome, but, no, not a Church of anything goes.

It's obviously a contemporary so could it be Francis Chan? I don't know these quotes so this is nothing more than a guess.

Ok I just googled it and I was way off. There is no way I'd guess it was someone I'd never heard of. My second guess was Pope Francis but Popes have a tendency not to say much. It sounds like something he would write though.
 
Billy Graham?

Jack Hyles?

Rick Warren?

It is the word charity that is throwing me. Hyles would use it because it is in the AV1611, and Robert Schuller would because he is old, but Schuller would not because he would not believe that homosexuality is a sin.

These statements are from someone with a heart and a head. From someone with a big view of the world and yet a big view of the Bible.

Hyles had those at the beginning, but he became an egomaniac later.

"Same sex attraction" is another term Schuller would not use, it is too modern.  Maybe

Tullian Tchividjian

or

his predecessor, the pastor of Coral Ridge ministries, D. James Kennedy?

last chance, ok. I say that  my final cue is the term "while the condition of homosexuality is no sin at all," where he or she uses "condition" when referring to homosexuality. 

Joyce Meyers?

Now I google and find.....


You sneaky dude, Castor.  Good one.

That was a really fun game.  I like those.  Let's play again. 


Ok, who said this: in their first pastorate?

"The music question was simply settled, not by telling us that it was not right to have unconverted persons singing praises for us to the glory of God, whom they rejected, but by arousing within our hearts the desire to worship God in a way pleasing to him."


 
I googled it. I wouldn't have guessed, since I wasn't even thinking of the right team.

Should this come as a surprise?
 
subllibrm said:
Is he right or is he wrong?

He's absolutely right when talking about what the Church should be. Not always right on what the Church actually does.
 
Back
Top