Pilgrim Holiness Chirch (1962-1966)
Premarital challenges--Civil Rights, a Dubious Investment and Wedding Rings
So, what do YOU think?
keith drury
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
This blog is here to notify readers of a new post--though the discussion of the Tuesday Column is on Facebook (simply friend me there to participate) To subscribe to the feed paste this: http://keithdrury.blogspot.com/feeds/posts/default
Tuesday Column Followers
My other blogs
Labels
- abortion (1)
- alcohol (3)
- boomers (2)
- camp meeting (1)
- christmas (3)
- Denominations (4)
- developmental (1)
- doctrine (1)
- economics (3)
- education (3)
- emerging church (6)
- ethics (2)
- evangelicals (1)
- evangelism; discipleship (1)
- family (2)
- future (1)
- gamblling (1)
- General topics (1)
- generations (2)
- holiness movement (5)
- holy spirit (1)
- homosexuality (2)
- humor (4)
- indiana (1)
- Internet (2)
- IWU (1)
- Leadership (5)
- Marion (1)
- Marriage (1)
- Membership (5)
- Movie Reviews (1)
- music (1)
- Nazarene (1)
- Ordination (2)
- Outdoor (3)
- pastor's wife (1)
- Pastors (11)
- Pilgrim Holiness Church (11)
- Politics (9)
- seminary (1)
- sermon notes (1)
- Sex (3)
- sin (2)
- small church (1)
- State-of-church (1)
- Students (14)
- summers (1)
- sunday school (1)
- taxes (1)
- Theology (10)
- Trends (4)
- Wesleyan (6)
- Women (4)
9 comments:
Thanks for a great job!
Thanks Greg--coming from you that means a lot.
Simply want to echo what Greg said. We all should be paying for these history lessons, but as a recent "joinee" to the N.Y. Pilgrim Holiness denomination, I find your insight helpful and informative.
Thanks for the work!
Keep up the good work,Professor! Even if it is only restricted to the interest of the minority, your sincerity is appreciated. That's what counts!
Below is the information of a book I had read. Very enriching good stuff relating to tradition of Holiness. Good for seminary student at least from a practical level.
A thorough digestive understanding at the theological level really requires transparent understanding of Genesis 1 and 2.
Book is entitled:
They knew their God. Book 2
Hsrvey/Hey
M.O.V.E. Press. 247 Newcastle Street. Burslem
Stoke-on-Trent. Staffs ST6 3QW
Thanks for the series; it was tremendously meaningful to me.
My comment pertains to the Church's Immigration Statement, which I will preface by saying that I have been an immigration enforcement officer since 1994.
I am also the 29-year husband of an immigrant for whom I went to exceptional lengths to procure proper documents as a young servicemember.
I interact daily with scores of people facing imminent deportation. Almost universally they consider US immigration law which I am sworn to enforce, as unjust, harsh, and inhumane. Most come from countries where the rule of law is capricious, and police protection is for sale. They are drawn to the US precisely because it is a land of laws, yet have revealed themselves to retain at some level, the right to choose which laws they will obey.
I am also a member and lay leader in my local Wesleyan church, and volunteer in a ministry to many (I suppose) undocumented aliens.
I consider my workplace to be a mission field of sorts. Rarely a day passes that I am not able to speak words life and hope in His Name to seriously hurting people. I do not disparage the professed-Christianity of those who believe they deserve to stay in the US despite the law. I rejoice when provision in the law is found for anyone to be able to stay, however that is often not the case.
So, should a Wesleyan Christian be exempted by conscience (or by church membership) from my line of work? Would it be better for only non-Christians to work in immigration law enforcement? I have not come to those conclusions, although I admit struggling with decisions I have had to make.
I am a US natural born citizen who served as a Wesleyan missionary in Latin America and now attend a Wesleyan Hispanic church in the Indianapolis area. I would like to respond to Eugene’s comments in TX with a several observations.
First, I thank God that one of our Wesleyan members, Eugene, is an immigration enforcement officer! On one hand, I agree with his comments about the attitudes of many immigrants regarding the immigration laws. On the other hand, our country’s faulty immigration policies for over twenty years have created a complex mess involving thousands of families and innocent children. Many of the laws are confusing and the enforcement has been arbitrary and irregular in many places.
Second, my understanding is that the Immigration Statement of The Wesleyan Church urges us to take into account the whole counsel of the Scriptures regarding the immigration problem in North America. Obeying the laws of the land is one important principle, to be upheld as much as possible while also balancing the other Biblical principles in the statement. At the same time, given the complexities of the current situation and the millions of people that are affected, the National Association of Evangelicals (NAE), of which The Wesleyan Church is a member, recently adopted a statement calling for comprehensive immigration reform. In my view, this statement by the NAE honors the spirit of The Wesleyan Church’s Immigration Statement.
Third, personally I believe that those caught crossing the border illegally ought to be returned to their home country. For the millions of others living here without documents, most if not all of the more recent arrivals should also be returned, depending on each one’s situation. Meanwhile, others that came on work permits that were not renewed have been allowed to live and work here for years. Many of them have families and are buying homes. Others without documents were born here of parents who came to our country to provide a better life and future for their children. Given these complexities, sending 12 million people “back home” is not a viable or compassionate option. For this reason, there is growing support for comprehensive immigration reform. I believe it should involve background checks, confirmation that all taxes have been paid, fines as appropriate, waiting periods, and other requirements as specified by the immigration authority.
In conclusion, Eugene, I do not think that our church’s Immigration Statement necessarily places you in a situation where you are forced to choose between your duty in immigration law enforcement and your responsibilities as a member of our church and the body of Christ. Sure, it would be nice if there were easy answers to the immigration problem, but unfortunately, that is not the case. For that reason, my brother, you are in my prayers today! May God grant His wisdom and guidance every day as you endeavor to follow Him with your whole heart, soul, mind and spirit; serve our country with integrity; and treat each person with compassion and dignity.
Please remember that all white people now living on our land were illegal immigrants ever since May 14, 1607.
Interesting posts on immigration.
I have two comments:
1) I find it fascinating that Eugene can feel the pressure of the ethical dilemma of choosing between an apparently respectable line of work and his church's position on an issue of the day. I sense some similarities in this and how a determination of an "unjust" war would impact the ability to voluntarily serve in the military.
2) With all due respect to Norman Wilson, the real problem is that current immigration law is immoral, not just that it has been inconsistently applied etc. Our current law has far more to do with greed and economic protectionism than any public safety or security function. I can see how this could create ethical tension for an officer charged with enforcing immigration law. Obadiah seemed to be able to balance similar kinds of tension in Ahab's court, so I am not sure a Christian would be precluded from border patrol work.
I appreciate "Outside-the-Beltway Drury's" sensitivity and no doubt share the same perspectives. Only with special help and wisdom from above could someone in Eugene's place be faithful both to God and country given the current situation.
Post a Comment