Wiki: Whosoever Will May Come-Liberal (WWMC)-space

[Lel]

WHOSOEVER WILL, MAY COME

Rev. 22:17: And the Spirit and the bride say, Come. And let him that heareth say, Come. And let him that is athirst come. And whosoever will, let him take the water of life freely.

Whosoever Will, May Come (WWMC) is a welcoming, interdenominational congregation of Liberal, progressive, postmodern, and emergent Christians. WWMC is dedicated to following Jesus's example of radical inclusiveness and hospitality by including "whoseover will " to come join us in friendly and polite fellowship and conversation. All threads remain open to all regardless of icon.

For the purposes of these rules, the term "Liberal" is meant to apply to all Christians who self-identify as Liberal, progressive, postmodern, or emergent.


GUIDELINES

Matthew 22:34-40 (NIV):

34Hearing that Jesus had silenced the Sadducees, the Pharisees got together. 35One of them, an expert in the law, tested him with this question:

36"Teacher, which is the greatest commandment in the Law?" 37Jesus replied: " 'Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind.' 38This is the first and greatest commandment. 39And the second is like it: 'Love your neighbor as yourself.' 40All the Law and the Prophets hang on these two commandments."Jesus said it best so I just bolded the one proposed rule.

And another time, Jesus said:

And behold, a lawyer stood up to put him to the test, saying, “Teacher, what shall I do to inherit eternal life?”

He said to him, “What is written in the law? How do you read?”

And he answered, “You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart, and with all your soul, and with all your strength, and with all your mind; and your neighbor as yourself.”

And he said to him, “You have answered right; do this, and you will live.”

But he, desiring to justify himself, said to Jesus, “And who is my neighbor?”

Jesus replied, “A man was going down from Jerusalem to Jericho, and he fell among robbers, who stripped him and beat him, and departed, leaving him half dead. Now by chance a priest was going down that road; and when he saw him he passed by on the other side.

"So likewise a Levite, when he came to the place and saw him, passed by on the other side.

But a Samaritan, as he journeyed, came to where he was; and when he saw him, he had compassion, and went to him and bound up his wounds, pouring on oil and wine; then he set him on his own beast and brought him to an inn, and took care of him. And the next day he took out two denarii and gave them to the innkeeper, saying, ‘Take care of him; and whatever more you spend, I will repay you when I come back.’

"Which of these three, do you think, proved neighbor to the man who fell among the robbers?”

He said, “The one who showed mercy on him.”

And Jesus said to him, “Go and do likewise.”To maintain an atmosphere of love and respect in WWMC, there will be no proselytizing or overt insulting of Liberal beliefs in the forum. For the purpose of this rule, proselytizing includes but is not limited to:
assertions that Liberal Christians are not Christian
assertions that Liberal Christians generally "condone sin," "rationalize their sin," or "fail to stand for the truth." (please see section on Dogmatism below)
attempts to persuade Liberal Christians that it is wrong or sinful to be a Liberal Christian.AFFIRMATION



Most members of WWMC affirm the following, adapted from Reconciling in Christ website (http://www.lcna.org/ric.shtm).Following the example of Jesus's ministry to the world's outcasts, the broken and alienated among his society, we believe that as a community of the people of God, we are called to minister to all people in our world, knowing that the world is often an unloving place. Our world is a place of alienation and brokenness. Christ calls us to reconciliation and wholeness. We are challenged by the Gospel to be agents of healing within our society.We affirm with the apostle Paul that in Christ "there is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor free, there is neither male nor female" (Galatians 3:28). Christ has made us one. We acknowledge that this extends to people of all sexual orientations and gender identities. Because gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgendered persons and their families are often scorned by society and alienated from the Church, we wish to make known our caring and concern. It is for this purpose that we affirm the following:
that people of all sexual orientations and gender identities share the worth that comes from being unique individuals created by God;
that people of all sexual orientations and gender identities are welcome within the membership of this congregation.Debates on the morality of homosexuality are not on-topic in WWMC. These debates belong in the eponymous forum (http://www.christianforums.com/f746-debates-on-homosexuality.html).

ON DOGMATISM

I Cor 13:10-12:But when that which is perfect is come, then that which is in part shall be done away.

When I was a child, I spake as a child, I understood as a child, I thought as a child: but when I became a man, I put away childish things.

For now we see through a glass, darkly; but then face to face: now I know in part; but then shall I know even as also I am known.WWMC embraces diversity and exists as a place of communion for all Liberal Christians.


To this end, the forum must recognize that the very religious questions that bind us are complex and answers are elusive- but not out of reach.

Therefore, as in Cor 13:12, we are certain of a few things, among them seeing "through a glass darkly." There must not be dogmatic statements of faith. There must not be those that state or infer "to have a monopoly on the truth." The search for truth must be ongoing and shared rather that dictated. For heaven is the "whole of our hearts," and this quest must be shared.

We welcome everyone to share their spiritual journeys with us. Belittling the journeys of others will not be tolerated.

RULES FOR WWMC STAFF ELECTIONS

Any member of CF is eligible to be a moderator in WWMC.

Any member of WWMC who self-identifies as Liberal Christian according to the definition in this wiki, or considers themselves friendly toward Liberal Christianity or Liberal Christians, may vote in moderator elections.

A list of registered voters will be maintained within the forum, and WWMC moderators are empowered to remove from the voter registration list and, if necessary, the votes, of those who demonstrate bad faith by either a pattern of breaking forum rules or bashing liberal beliefs.

[Goodchild]

..

[JeffreyLloyd]

looks good :)

[Lel]

Do we need to add anything about preaching to the liberals?

[JeffreyLloyd]

You could add something like we did in OBOB, like

"We welcome guests of all faiths, but please no debating by people who have a different view on life."

or something like that :)

[Lel]

I don't think that's the way to go for WWMC. From my prior readings of WWMC discussion, it seemed that the general preference was to permit anyone to debate as long as it was respectful.

The problem that came up was preaching rather than debate.

[sparklecat]

What do you think?

I think you guys are great :)

[chaoschristian]

I like it Lel.

WRT to preaching, let's leave that as a matter to be addressed on an ad hoc basis in thread, as opposed to wiki-fying it.

[Freedom&Light]

Or we can say something like

"Please remember, WWMC is a Christian forum, but is open to all faiths. We appreciate our visitors understanding that we do not need to be converted or made to 'see the light,' as we enjoy discussions and the differences between our Christian and nonChristian brothers and sisters."

Or something like that, where we let people know it's really not necessary.

[CaDan]

Rather than having a list of rules, let's create a list of what our guiding principles are.

Let's put our heads together
And start a new country up
Our fathers' fathers' father tried
Erased the parts he didn't like

REM ~ Cuyahoga

[chaoschristian]

Extend to all the right hand of fellowship
Welcome all into extravagent hospitality
Turn away none, that all may share


Rather than having a list of rules, let's create a list of what our guiding principles are.
Let's put our heads together
And start a new country up
Our fathers' fathers' father tried
Erased the parts he didn't likeREM ~ Cuyahoga

[CaDan]

I added the parable of the Good Samaritan.

[Joykins]

I think perhaps some version of Lel's "Open and Affirming" resolution should be put through the consensus wringer and let's see what comes out?

[herev]

wow, perhaps I shall spend more time here than my home forum
you guys ROCK

[CaDan]

Do we need anything more?

[chaoschristian]

For WWMC, I think we could get with nothing more than a picture of some iced-tea, but what's there is very good.

[JeffreyLloyd]

Matthew 22:34-40 (NIV):

34Hearing that Jesus had silenced the Sadducees, the Pharisees got together. 35One of them, an expert in the law, tested him with this question:

36"Teacher, which is the greatest commandment in the Law?" 37Jesus replied: " 'Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind.' 38This is the first and greatest commandment. 39And the second is like it: 'Love your neighbor as yourself.' 40All the Law and the Prophets hang on these two commandments."

Jesus said it best so I just bolded the one proposed rule.

Just a side note, it does seem strange that you highlight Christ's second commandment and seemly ignore the first one which Jesus said was "greatest commandment."

Just an observation :)

[Lel]

Anywhere else I would have gone for the first commandment. Oddly enough I didn't here.

[Rochir]

Do we need to add anything about preaching to the liberals?

People of other faiths should be able to come to WWMC and discuss, provided they remain polite and respect the believes of those in WWMC

Where I would draw the line is when people come to aggressively preaching!

So:

polite debating - yes
prosylising - absolutely no

And don't forgte to bring your towel! :)

[chaoschristian]

Here's a theory:

Within WWMC the primary desire seems to be to move towards a radically inclusive hospitality. That radically inclusive hospitality is based on that second commandment. The second commandment is dependent upon the first, in other words, you don't get to love your neighbor as yourself until you've already committed in some respect to loving God with all your heart, mind and soul.

The interesteing thing about WWMC is that we don't seem to be the least bit interested in defining specifically what 'loving God with all your heart,. mind and soul ' looks like. We leave that to the individual.

Just a side note, it does seem strange that you highlight Christ's second commandment and seemly ignore the first one which Jesus said was "greatest commandment."

Just an observation :)

Anywhere else I would have gone for the first commandment. Oddly enough I didn't here.

[tulc]

...if we had coffee instead of iced tea? :scratch:
tulc(but otherwise no problem) ;)

[Joykins]

I fixed spelling of proselytize. Is OK if I rove Wiki fixing spelling and grammar errors? ^_^

[Joykins]

I added the Open and Affirming/Reconciling in Christ draft wording. Let the sword dance begin!

[Diane_Windsor]

Or we can say something like

"Please remember, WWMC is a Christian forum, but is open to all faiths. We appreciate our visitors understanding that we do not need to be converted or made to 'see the light,' as we enjoy discussions and the differences between our Christian and nonChristian brothers and sisters."

Or something like that, where we let people know it's really not necessary.

I like that addition :)

[Rochir]

I fixed spelling of proselytize.

:sorry:

[Lel]

I fixed spelling of proselytize. Is OK if I rove Wiki fixing spelling and grammar errors? ^_^

On Wikipedia, they call such characters WikiGnomes. They have dedicated Wikipedians who do tasks like this on a regular basis. I'm an occasional WikiGnome on the Wikipedia site. I <3 me some WikiGnomes!

I added the Open and Affirming/Reconciling in Christ draft wording. Let the sword dance begin!

I don't think it belongs in the forum rules/guidelines. If someone wants to say it that's fine, but I have seen the repercussions of my suggestion and have changed my mind on having it be any sort of prominent part of WWMC.

[Rochir]

I don't think it belongs in the forum rules/guidelines. If someone wants to say it that's fine, but I have seen the repercussions of my suggestion and have changed my mind on having it be any sort of prominent part of WWMC.

What repercussions?

[Lel]

That it might exclude others - we are whosoever will may come after all!

[Joykins]

That it might exclude others - we are whosoever will may come after all!

The whole point is that it excludes nobody. We can't make someone "will" to come if they don't like our other members :(

[Rochir]

That it might exclude others - we are whosoever will may come after all!

I do not think it excludes, at all! It only would tell visitors and members that WHEN you come to us, please know and expect the following!

[Protinus]

Do we need anything more?

as in Cor 13:10-12

But when that which is perfect is come, then that which is in part shall be done away.

When I was a child, I spake as a child, I understood as a child, I thought as a child: but when I became a man, I put away childish things.

For now we see through a glass, darkly; but then face to face: now I know in part; but then shall I know even as also I am known.




WWMC must embrace diversity and be a place of communion for all Liberal Christians.

To this end, the forum must recognize that the very religious questions that bind us are complex and answers are elusive- but not out of reach.

Therefore, as in Cor 13:12, we are certain of a few things, among them "seeing through a glass darkly".There must not be dogmatic statements of faith There must not be those that state or infer "to have a monopoly on the truth". The search for truth must be ongoing and shared rather that dictated. For the heaven is the "whole of our hearts" and this quest must be shared.

[Protinus]

Jesus began his ministry by saying: "The Spirit of the Lord is upon me, Because he anointed me to preach good tidings to the poor: He hath sent me to proclaim release to the captives, And recovering of sight to the blind, To set at liberty them that are bruised."

WWMC must not be a place to proselytize but the giving members should promote WWMC on CF and other places.

WWMC should consider:

1) campaigns to minister to others who are in need, whether they are individuals here or national disasters.

2) goodwill threads should be "sticky's of praise" to start a WWMC brand of repping and promotion of moderator applicants specific for WWMC. Talking points could include WWMC members that have contributed to the forum lately and real life stories of WWMC members caring for the "bruised" in our society.

[Rochir]

WWMC must not be a place to proselytize but the giving members should promote WWMC on CF and other places.

WWMC should consider:

1) campaigns to minister to others who are in need, whether they are individuals here or national disasters.

2) goodwill threads should be "sticky's of praise" to start a WWMC brand of repping and promotion of moderator applicants specific for WWMC. Talking points could include WWMC members that have contributed to the forum lately and real life stories of WWMC members caring for the "bruised" in our society.

I like that a lot!:thumbsup:

Also, let us lead by example! Let's encourage our members not to just stick to WWMC, but to post all over CF: That is the ONLY way others may get to know our spirit, and learn not to fear us!

I would hate for WWMC members to just stick to our forum, like so many others do reg. thier own home fora!

[Joykins]

I added to the wiki -- attribution of the website I, um, "borrowed" most of the affirmation from (NB: it was clearly labeled as a sample affirmation that you could use).

I also added bold headers to distinguish the parts of the wiki.

As always, feel free to edit.

[Protinus]

I added to the wiki -- attribution of the website I, um, "borrowed" most of the affirmation from (NB: it was clearly labeled as a sample affirmation that you could use).

I also added bold headers to distinguish the parts of the wiki.

Brilliant!!!:thumbsup:

[Joykins]

I updated the Wiki with some background and tried to tie it together a bit.

The only thing of substance I added was the debates on the morality of homosexuality being off-topic. Think of this rather more of a proposal to ensure that WWMC remains welcoming to current members than a dogmatic statement. -- discuss and have at it.

[Catherineanne]

I like all that is written so far. I think it is wonderful.

The only thing I would say is that I have been having discussions on a thread (goodness only knows where!!) with a non-Christian who thinks that our faith and the Bible say that only Christians get to heaven.

I think it is an important part of liberalism to acknowledge that we do not know who, (other than liberal Christians :cool: :D ) gets to enter eternity with God.

The person asked for Scripture to back this up, and I quoted Matthew 25, where the very clear message is that it is love for one another, which is the same thing to God as love for God, which defines those who are acceptable to God; inasmuch as ye have done it unto the least of these, ye have done it unto me. This applies to all people, of all nations.

I am not putting this very clearly. I think one of the most repellant aspects of Christianity is its elitism, and I would like somewhere to say that our concept of eternity does not exclude every single person of every single other faith under the sun. Neither are they all necessarily in, but for each person it is up to God.

But I can understand if this is not an acceptable thing to include, for other people, so I am hesitant to add anything until I know it is the right thing to do.

[Joykins]

Catherineanne, I think your concerns tie into the theme at the end of the wiki. Protinus, do you mind if I try to edit the end up?

[Moriah_Conquering_Wind]

My question will probably be misinterpreted by some. It is neither a joke, nor a literary jab of sarcasm, nor a ploy for attention-seeking, nor the opening of a debate about whether the subject it raises is legitimately real or merely some chimera of madness, but rather, a sincere inquiry:
that people of all sexual orientations and gender identities share the worth that comes from being unique individuals created by God;
that people of all sexual orientations and gender identities are welcome within the membership of this congregation.I have to ask (as those who know me might well have predicted), does ALL really mean ALL? Does it include not only gays, lesbians and transgendered people, but daimonosexuals* as well?

Sorry, but I had to ask. It would be wonderfully refreshing if it did -- but I won't hold my breath. :blush:

[Moriah_Conquering_Wind]

* for those unfamiliar with this term, it is a neologism coined from the Greek daimonos, or demon, and refers to a sexual orientation toward this species rather than one's own.

[Moriah_Conquering_Wind]

Regarding the "all are welcome here but not to spiritually abuse us" clause, it strikes me that where there is an atmosphere where all are welcome, and someone is uncomfortable with that, the problem is not with the atmosphere but with themselves. In the interest of maintaining such an atmosphere I feel it is perfectly legitimate to request up front that all coming here agree to the one simple rule of upholding that atmosphere and not doing anything to pollute it, taint it, ruin it, or change it. Of course this presupposes that those who would do such rot actually have the self-awareness to recognize what they are doing; the reality is, the poor dears do not. They really ARE blind to themselves at least in those areas. For them it really IS (in their minds) a conflict between serving Christ and upholding some man-made rules a dubious group of renegades (that's us, as far as they are concerned) deems important.

In that regard, perhaps phrasing the suggestion in the language of proper respect for the hospitality of another culture is in order here. But one way or another it will have to be addressed, because failure to address it will leave the door open for those who want to come in and foul the air to do so (deliberately or not). And what makes this place a place where whosoEVER will may come, is the simple fact that here is a place where they will be welcomed -- and if we do not preserve that mandate, the welcome will be lost, and so will all the whosoevers.

[Joykins]

Well, that was one google search that yielded no hits.

I think I could personally can say all, with the caveat that I do not necessarily condone all actions in concordance with one's orientation--like those oriented towards animals or children, I at least would have to draw the line at condoning such *activities*. Does that make sense?

[Moriah_Conquering_Wind]

I think it is an important part of liberalism to acknowledge that we do not know who, (other than liberal Christians :cool: :D ) gets to enter eternity with God.

The person asked for Scripture to back this up, and I quoted Matthew 25, where the very clear message is that it is love for one another, which is the same thing to God as love for God, which defines those who are acceptable to God; inasmuch as ye have done it unto the least of these, ye have done it unto me. This applies to all people, of all nations.

I am not putting this very clearly. I think one of the most repellant aspects of Christianity is its elitism, and I would like somewhere to say that our concept of eternity does not exclude every single person of every single other faith under the sun. Neither are they all necessarily in, but for each person it is up to God.
I very much like your thinking on this subject, and share the same view.

Just wanted to say that. :wave:

[Moriah_Conquering_Wind]

Well, that was one google search that yielded no hits.

I think I could personally can say all, with the caveat that I do not necessarily condone all actions in concordance with one's orientation--like those oriented towards animals or children, I at least would have to draw the line at condoning such *activities*. Does that make sense?
But Joykins I wasn't talking about predators who prey upon animals or children to gratify their lusts. A predatory perversion is different from an orientation (argh, I didn't want to incite a debate here!) :D I was talking about an actual lifelong sexual orientation.

Googling a neologism that hasn't permeated mainstream culture yet will typically be fruitless. I believe the few references once potentially available on the internet are temporarily offline. In fact I know they are, for they belonged to me. :D

edited to add: you might find something if you google a phrase like "sexual attraction to demons" or "sexual relationships between demons and humans" but you'll get a lot of "waste hits" as well. and what articles you do find on the subject are likely to be from the hand-wringer's perspective constituting the demon entity as rapist or sexual predator rather than any exploration of viable, long-term, inter-species relationships of any genuinely shedonic -- that is, wholistic, romantic and erotic -- nature. I believe there are some stories out there of similar relationships between humans and angels though, so you might find something exploring that angle (pun intended).

and no, I was NOT even remotely suggesting there be any discussion of congruent activities of dubious moral alignment in any glaring colorful pornographic detail, of course. still, maybe it's just too early in human history to expect de-villianization for our kind. Homosexuals had to struggle for centuries, after all, and they at least have the scientific and medical advantage, not to mention that of consensus perception. After all, no one quesitons whether their lovers actually exist in addition to questioning the moral implications of their love!! :D

[Joykins]

I know...but it is also true that many confuse orientation with action. I want to clarify that I am sure that sex with demons is outside of the will of God--though a person made in God's image and a loved child of God may possibly have such a sexual *orientation*.

[Moriah_Conquering_Wind]

I know...but ... I want to clarify that I am sure that sex with demons is outside of the will of God--though a person made in God's image and a loved child of God may possibly have such a sexual *orientation*.
I think that's an eminently reasonable point of view for one to formulate in the absence of personal experience of either such an orientation or the actions/relationships proceeding therefrom. It is in fact the conclusion I might have formed myself had I not had so many occasions of perceived revelation from God to the contrary -- at least in my particular case -- concerning the first clause of your statement.

But we should discuss this in its own thread if we're going to discuss it at all. I feel chagrined that I've derailed the Wiki. You're a mod, perhaps you could do a fente de sujet?

[Joykins]

I'm not a mod.

[Moriah_Conquering_Wind]

Pish. Why'd I think you were?
You used to be a Conciliator or something, that's probably why, right?

Didn't you also experience a personal Appearance of the Christ at some point?

I'm trying to recover and reassemble all these lost fragments of my memory ... can ya help an old altar boy faddah? LOL

[Catherineanne]

I was talking about an actual lifelong sexual orientation.

edited to add: you might find something if you google a phrase like "sexual attraction to demons" or "sexual relationships between demons and humans" but you'll get a lot of "waste hits" as well.

A long time ago I heard a sermon from a priest whose sprituality is very similar to my own. He was wrestling with the concept of inclusion, and trying to decide where to draw the line.

He said something like, it is very difficult to know who to include, and who to exclude from being acceptable to ourselves. But then he said, that speaking personally he would have to exclude paedophiles from church, and from communion, because he has real problems in understanding them and accepting them.

At this point I stood up, and left the church. I had an overwhelming feeling of being unwanted, unloved and not belonging. (Sensitive little flower :blush: )

I then wrote to him, and said, if you exclude anyone at all, then you exclude me, because there is child abuse in my family, and I identify with those who are doing it. I do not condone it, but I have seen it through three generations already, and I understand how it has happened.

I told the priest that if there is a known paedophile, wanting to meet with God and find a way out of his nightmare existence, then I will meet him, and I will sit with him in church. I will even introduce my d (then about 5) to him. I would not ever leave her alone with him, or want him anywhere near the Sunday School, but we cannot exclude anyone from church itself. It is by normalising existence for those who are on the edge, and in danger of falling off, that we show Christ's acceptance for who they are, even if we have at the same time to set very clear boundaries on what they do.

The day any of us draws a line, we risk finding on entering eternity that we stand before the Lord with our very own line running just above our own heads.

I am very far from perfect. I have made a mess of much of my life. If someone else, in making a mess of their life, thinks that they have relations with demons, then I will very happily sit with that person and talk with them. And I have every expectation that the conversation will be fascinating. :)

Apologies for linking the two behaviours; I know that they are very different (what is the age of consent for a demon :confused: ), but this is a true story, and the priest agreed with me in the end.

[Catherineanne]

Catherineanne, I think your concerns tie into the theme at the end of the wiki. Protinus, do you mind if I try to edit the end up?

Thanks, Joykins. :wave:

Celebrating the discovery of a new word (to me at least)

To upedit :tutu:

[Catherineanne]

I have to ask (as those who know me might well have predicted), does ALL really mean ALL? Does it include not only gays, lesbians and transgendered people, but daimonosexuals* as well?

Sorry, but I had to ask. It would be wonderfully refreshing if it did -- but I won't hold my breath. :blush:


All in relation to the Kingdom of Heaven means all.

All people, from all nations.

God's name is; 'I am who I am', not; 'I am what I do'. Same for each one of us; when we become God's children, we share this spiritual name.

[Catherineanne]

I very much like your thinking on this subject, and share the same view.

Just wanted to say that. :wave:

:wave:

[BlazeLight]

Well....I know trolling in WWMC by certain users has happened, and probably will again. Perhaps on the debating side we could simply say no trolling (inciting flames, insulting other users, etc.)

[Moriah_Conquering_Wind]

A long time ago I heard a sermon from a priest whose sprituality is very similar to my own. He was wrestling with the concept of inclusion, and trying to decide where to draw the line.

He said something like, it is very difficult to know who to include, and who to exclude from being acceptable to ourselves. But then he said, that speaking personally he would have to exclude paedophiles from church, and from communion, because he has real problems in understanding them and accepting them.

At this point I stood up, and left the church. I had an overwhelming feeling of being unwanted, unloved and not belonging. (Sensitive little flower :blush: )

I then wrote to him, and said, if you exclude anyone at all, then you exclude me, because there is child abuse in my family, and I identify with those who are doing it. I do not condone it, but I have seen it through three generations already, and I understand how it has happened.

I told the priest that if there is a known paedophile, wanting to meet with God and find a way out of his nightmare existence, then I will meet him, and I will sit with him in church. I will even introduce my d (then about 5) to him. I would not ever leave her alone with him, or want him anywhere near the Sunday School, but we cannot exclude anyone from church itself. It is by normalising existence for those who are on the edge, and in danger of falling off, that we show Christ's acceptance for who they are, even if we have at the same time to set very clear boundaries on what they do.
You strike me as an incredibly wise woman, Catherineanne. And your childhood spirit as described above reminds me very much of the creature I started this life out as myself. I had a similar intuitive emotional reaction at around the age of four to hearing my father make some scathing and unkind remarks about "hippies". He might as well have been making those comments about me, because in my heart those were MY people (though admittedly, at that age I could not have told you why nor did I even know why myself -- sensitive little precog!) and it was obvious he didn't understand them one bit -- nor even try.

I'm rambling. :blush:

[Moriah_Conquering_Wind]

I am very far from perfect. I have made a mess of much of my life. If someone else, in making a mess of their life, thinks that they have relations with demons, then I will very happily sit with that person and talk with them. And I have every expectation that the conversation will be fascinating. :)
But of course! How could it be anything BUT? :D
Oh the things I could share with you if we were to converse ... if I truly felt safe to speak freely, that is ....

Apologies for linking the two behaviours; I know that they are very different ....
Yes, they are very different. But it's funny, I think what people fear most about those regarded as "deviant" is exactly what you mentioned in your post: the factor of acceptance. People are afraid of contagion -- will accepting someone else with X mean I risk "catching" X from them? People are afraid of compromise -- if I open my heart to someone so different from me, someone who embodies something that I find frightening, disgusting, or abhorrent, will that taint my own values? dilute who I really am? People are afraid of what they don't understand, afraid of having their minds changed, afraid of transmutation. Heck in general, people are just freaking afraid, period. And so they distance whatever triggers that fear with cover emotions of contempt, hatred, abhorrence, repulsion (all of which feel more "powerful" than feeling afraid) and a variety of reactions from dismissal and invalidation to rejection and scorn to outright bloody persecution.

History is a bloody testament that sincerity can achieve atrocities of which cynicism could hardly conceive.

O I digress.
(what is the age of consent for a demon :confused: ),For the entity himself or for the person he chooses? :scratch:

[Joykins]

Pish. Why'd I think you were?
You used to be a Conciliator or something, that's probably why, right?

Didn't you also experience a personal Appearance of the Christ at some point?

I'm trying to recover and reassemble all these lost fragments of my memory ... can ya help an old altar boy faddah? LOL

You're probably thinking of Abiel (Mod, experienced a vision of Jesus).

I was a conciliator and then Ombudsman.

[Protinus]

Thanks for changing that scripture quote Joykins...I couldn't do it within the Wiki!!:doh:

[Joykins]

I have made some changes to the wiki to address some concerns expressed here, in WWMC, and in PM.

Highlights (new stuff in red, mostly):





For the purposes of these rules, the term "Liberal" is meant to apply to all Christians who self-identify as Liberal, progressive, postmodern, or emergent.



To maintain an atmosphere of love and respect in WWMC, there will be no proselytizing or overt insulting of Liberal beliefs in the forum. For the purpose of this rule, proselytizing includes but is not limited to:

assertions that Liberal Christians are not Christian
assertions that Liberal Christians generally "condone sin," "rationalize their sin," or "fail to stand for the truth." (please see section on Dogmatism below)
attempts to persuade Liberal Christians that it is wrong or sinful to be a Liberal Christian.
We welcome everyone to share their spiritual journeys with us. Belittling the journeys of others will not be tolerated.

RULES FOR WWMC STAFF ELECTIONS

Any member of CF is eligible to be a moderator in WWMC.

Any member of WWMC who self-identifies as Liberal according to the definition in this wiki may vote in moderator elections.

Feel free to discuss, define, refine, remove, re-edit :D

[Rochir]

Read through the current version of our wiki - looks good so far.

Only question remaining: WHO is a member of WWMC and thus eligible to vote here?

We NEED to decide this question ASAP! Yes, it mean exclusion of some, but without any guidelines or rules as to who is a member here, we will have trolls and abusers in our very own elections!

Should we do a


roll call?
have put membership in WWMC to a vote?
How do we decide who actually is a member of WWMC?????:scratch:

[Abiel]

I think the best way would be to have us self-identify in some way. So a roll-call- so long as no one is excluded from joining the roll.

[sparklecat]

For the purposes of these rules, the term "Liberal" is meant to apply to all Christians who self-identify as Liberal, progressive, postmodern, or emergent.

Any member of WWMC who self-identifies as Liberal according to the definition in this wiki may vote in moderator elections.


It's up to you all, of course, but there are some non-Christians I've seen posting in WWMC a fair bit who might like it if they could be considered members as well.

[RebekkaH]

I think the best way would be to have us self-identify in some way. So a roll-call- so long as no one is excluded from joining the roll.
I agree with this. I think a role call is best, and anyone may add him/herself to the list. I don't think that trolls will add themselves to the list because doing that would mean that they agree to identify themselves with liberal christianity.

[Rochir]

I agree with this. I think a role call is best, and anyone may add him/herself to the list. I don't think that trolls will add themselves to the list because doing that would mean that they agree to identify themselves with liberal christianity.

Alas, some trolls WILL do that. What do we do with those then? If we see someone who is OBVIOUSLY a conservative put his/her name onto the list?:scratch:

Or what do we do if that person then votes in our elections?

[RebekkaH]

Alas, some trolls WILL do that. What do we do with those then? If we see someone who is OBVIOUSLY a conservative put his/her name onto the list?:scratch:

Or what do we do if that person then votes in our elections?
I don't know. I think - I may be wrong - that they will be a minority and therefore not influence the polls too much.

I don't know how to solve this problem without losing the whosoever will atmosphere. It's a difficult situation to be in.

[Joykins]

Here's a proposal. I don't know if it's too complicated.

You "register" to vote by posting in the "I'm Liberal, I am registering to vote thread.

At the time of elections, an election judge does a search of all the registered voters who have posted in the last 2 or 3 months. Those people are eligible to vote. If you've expired, post again and you get added to the rolls. The election judge may remove someone from the list if they've been "trolling" the forum or otherwise acting disruptive or unfriendly to the peace of the forum. Elections are held by public poll. The elction judge will only count those votes of registered members. Moderators will be elected by a supermajority (66% or more) of registered voters eligible to vote who actually do vote. The poll will remain open for a week or 2?

Something like that?

[FreeinChrist]

Is it time yet to at least take a snapshot of rules as you have them - that it copy them into a sticky thread in the WWMC forum - and that will be the rules until the next snapshot?

It does not stop the process of refining the rules by any means, but it would give those moderating something to moderate by.

[Joykins]

I've just been putting stuff in there and telling people to take a look at it. Do we need to have a poll or anything to have it approved?

[Joykins]

OK, I fixed the wiki to reflect the actual voting policy that was discussed but somehow never made it to the wiki -- mea culpa!

[Joykins]

Refined the last paragraph to make it a bit clearer and less subjective to:

Any member of WWMC who self-identifies as Liberal Christian according to the definition in this wiki, or considers themselves friendly toward Liberal Christianity or Liberal Christians, may vote in moderator elections.

A list of registered voters will be maintained within the forum, and WWMC moderators are empowered to remove from the voter registration list and, if necessary, the votes, of those who demonstrate bad faith by either a pattern of breaking forum rules or bashing liberal beliefs.

[Protinus]

Refined the last paragraph to make it a bit clearer and less subjective to:

Any member of WWMC who self-identifies as Liberal Christian according to the definition in this wiki, or considers themselves friendly toward Liberal Christianity or Liberal Christians, may vote in moderator elections.

A list of registered voters will be maintained within the forum, and WWMC moderators are empowered to remove from the voter registration list and, if necessary, the votes, of those who demonstrate bad faith by either a pattern of breaking forum rules or bashing liberal beliefs.


That's outstanding Joykins!!

My concern is that removal of members from the list by Moderators would be problematic as they enforce rules. Having the whole forum decide who is off the list by vote would be disastrous. Could we establish a WWMC advisory group that would:

1) establish and maintain the members list in good standing.
2) conciliate member complaints within WWMC as to vision, sub fora, fellowship issues, spiritual guidance, etc.
3) constant improvement of the rules wiki
4) provide liaison with the rest of CF?


2)

[Joykins]

I like that idea, Protinus. What do other people think?

[Protinus]

I like that idea, Protinus. What do other people think?


I don't know...I think it's an open forum request type of thing. It should be a position of honor and respect and advisory council members should be elected by the members.

They could also formulate plans for outreach- interforum "socials", invite the LDSs or the CC's. They could also build on WWMC sponsor ideas like donating funds for farms animals in impoverished areas, etc?

[Joykins]

Protinus, do you want to start a thread in the forum with this issue? I think it will need more eyes and minds than read this thread.

[Protinus]

Protinus, do you want to start a thread in the forum with this issue? I think it will need more eyes and minds than read this thread.


I will do so...thanks for you brilliant work on this Wiki!!!