Quote:
Originally Posted by spence
Did you read what the parish actually said?
|
Yes. The congregation worried that their "worship space" was threatening to some. They wanted all, with no exception, to feel welcome to their worship space. They also wanted, somehow to preserve their "larger history" and look to their future.
Like so much of what the rest of their letter says, this sounds more like the current wave of "social justice" nonsense such as "safe spaces" on college campuses.
They were concerned about where God was calling their church.
Apparently God was telling them to remove the plaques. Even God doesn't like those plaques.
They recognized that the church was present at the center of two of the most important events in our nation’s history.
Shifting away from God's call, they recognize their church as being in the center of our nation's history.
They understood that Washington was "unique in our nation’s history: the leader of the Revolution, the visionary who not only refused to be king but also gave up power after eight years, and a symbol of our democracy. He regularly worshiped in our pews and helped shape our city’s character."
But a plaque recognizing him as a parishioner is threatening to some. Maybe the pew he sat in should also be moved. That could really be scary. Might still be some biological traces in the wood--he sat there for 20 years of Sundays, or more.
They understood that both Washington and Lee were children of God and lived in a different time than ours.
Apparently, God no longer wants their presence in His worship space.
They said that "Today our country is trying once again to come to grips with the history of slavery and the subsequent disenfranchisement of people of color."
More shifting away from God and concern with our country's grips. Slavery and blocking votes of "people of color." More politically correct diction. Let's see--negro, black, African-American, now people of color. How about the God's calling thingy--children of God.
They quoted Hebrews 13:2 which says, “Do not neglect to show hospitality to strangers, for thereby some have entertained angels unawares.”
Apparently, the strangers have no responsibility to respect your house. Did the Hebrews re-arrange their temples every time strangers entered?
They said "The plaques in our sanctuary make some in our presence feel unsafe or unwelcome. Some visitors and guests who worship with us choose not to return because they receive an unintended message from the prominent presence of the plaques."
Now, why would they receive an unintended message? Wasn't the presence of Washington once a positive message? What has changed to make a reference to Washington a cause for fear? In the paragraphs above, Washington is given great honor.
They said their sanctuary is a worship place not a museum.
So what is truly being worshipped in their sanctuary? Is it God, or is it political correctness? Washington worshipped in their sanctuary for twenty years. If he is as great as depicted above in the letter, how does it detract from worship if it is noted that perhaps the greatest founder of this country and of their church worshipped there and is symbolically present there?
They said "The Vestry believes that the memorial plaques to George Washington and Robert E. Lee should be considered together. The plaques were erected at the same time. They visually balance each other, maintaining the symmetry of our sanctuary. The men they memorialize are giants in our nation’s history and were members of this parish. Robert E. Lee has taken on outsized symbolism in the national conversation about race and inclusion."
So Washington's plaque distracts from worship but "the national conversation" doesn't? How does the national conversation fit into the worship. Again, what is being worshipped in their church?
And the symmetry of their sanctuary is part of their worship? I guess it's not a museum, but sort of a house of fung shway.
They said "that the plaques create a distraction in our worship space and may create an obstacle to our identity as a welcoming church, and an impediment to our growth and to full community with our neighbors."
Sorry, but this quote sounds exactly like the politically correct, social justice community gibberish that is hectoring us on campuses, the media, politics, and even in the market place and football fields, rather than a house of Christian worship. It sounds as if at heart the church is more inclined to be a community center than what used to be a Christian church which revered God, Christ, the Apostles, the founders of the church and all its saints and even gave a nod to the other great men who were part of its history.
And that the plaques would " be relocated no later than the summer of 2018."
Ah . . . the relocation of Washington's presence will make the sanctuary safe for strangers. Do we see a pattern here? Do we see a widening of the influence of SJW mentality that has been spurring protests around the country? Do we see a further expansion of the Progressive rejection of the American past, seeing it as an unjust oppression that must be devalued in order to make way for Progressive governance?
They made three bullet points explaining why and how their moving the plaques to a sort of the church's history museum will allow the church to "take ownership of our history." And how that will explain their relationship to the plaques and other things in their history.
Then they ended with a call and prayer to bring all the parishioners together.
That all sounds nice. But it also sounds like their church is accommodating current Progressive social thought rather than God's "calling" to which they referred. The idea that a plaque honoring Washington would be more frightening or unwelcoming to average strangers than the actual demands Christianity puts on those who believe and worship is ludicrous.
"But small is the gate and narrow the road that leads to life, and only a few find it." Luke 13:24. "Make every effort to enter through the narrow door, because many, I tell you, will try to enter and will not be able to." Apparently, Alexandria's Christ Church has a different view than the Bible it professes to preach. It wants to make their sanctuary a welcoming place, without exception, and doesn't want any strangers to feel "unsafe" or "unwelcome." Washington's plaque will scare people away, but the gospel message won't? A gospel, BTW, which doesn't change its appearance to accommodate strangers. Rather, the strangers must accommodate themselves to the gospel.
Reading their letter gives me the impression that the church is caving in to the Progressive message above the Christian one. It sounds like a go along to get along move rather than a standing on principle. And their idea of moving the plaques to another place where they can explain their relation to it and explain their history can appear to be a sort of split personality disorder (I know you will fear the plaque in the church to which you are welcome, but you won't fear it in our museum to which you are also welcome) as well as a misunderstanding of how those who are prone to the Progressive view would react to visiting the proposed museum. To those who feel unwelcome or unsafe in a church that honors Washington and Lee (as stupid as that is), visiting the museum where they will be honored will still reflect on the Church's connection to those men. And for those who believe that our unjust past was created by Washington's and Lee's, there is no explanation that can justify honoring those men whether in a church or a museum.
And yes, I believe, wittingly or unwittingly, the church's action is just a part of the ongoing effort to dismiss and devaluate the past. At best, to put it in a museum.