United Methodist Court Upholds Traditional Plan, Allows Liberals a 'Gracious Exit'

On Friday, the Judicial Council of the United Methodist Church (UMC) — the denomination's highest court — upheld the key provisions of the Traditional Plan, the conservative policy upholding traditional Christian teaching on sexuality, and upheld the "Gracious Exit" policy, enabling dissenting liberal churches to leave while still holding on to their property.

These decisions finalize an unprecedented move in increasingly liberal mainline Protestant denominations. The Episcopal Church and the Presbyterian Church (USA) have rejected the traditional Christian teaching that marriage is between one man and one woman and that homosexual activity is sinful. Liberals in the UMC wanted that denomination to move in that direction, as well.

Yet in February, in a special meeting of the UMC General Conference, the denomination passed the conservative alternative. White liberals accused black Africans of using bribery to uphold the traditional Christian teachings, but no evidence of any such activity came to light. No, the conservative position prevailed, fair and square.

In recent decades, as mainline Protestant denominations started rejecting the clear teachings of scripture, many congregations decided to leave. My church, the Falls Church Anglican, left the Episcopal Church in December 2006, following Nigerian bishops who remained devoted to the Bible. The Episcopal Church had ordained openly homosexual clergy, but it also had firmly rejected the Bible's teaching that Jesus is the only way to reconciliation with God and eternal life.

While the congregation — not the Episcopal Church — owned the church building (with a history tracing back to George Washington), the denomination claimed the building. In 2012, the Supreme Court awarded the historic property to the Episcopal Church. My congregation lost the building, worshipped in school auditoriums, and only recently raised enough money to construct a new church building, which is still under construction.

The UMC move to allow dissenting congregations to keep their property is extremely generous, given this recent history. While liberal denominations fight tooth and nail to take property away from local congregations who wish to uphold the Bible's teaching, the conservatives in the UMC not only upheld biblical teaching on sexuality but also approved a plan to let dissenting congregations leave the denomination with their property intact.

Many have attacked the UMC policy as "anti-LGBT," but the policy explicitly holds to the principle of "inclusivity" in addition to Bible teaching on sexuality.

"The United Methodist Church acknowledges that all persons are of sacred worth," the policy states. "All persons without regard to race, color, national origin, status, or economic condition, shall be eligible to attend its worship services, participate in its programs, receive the sacraments, upon baptism be admitted as baptized members, and upon taking vows declaring the Christian faith, become professing members in any local church in the connection."

Yet the UMC does not cave on the Bible's clear condemnation of homosexual activity.

"The practice of homosexuality is incompatible with Christian teaching. Therefore self-avowed practicing homosexuals are not to be certified as candidates, ordained as ministers, or appointed to serve in The United Methodist Church," the policy states. "Ceremonies that celebrate homosexual unions shall not be conducted by our ministers and shall not be conducted in our churches."

In defending the Traditional Plan, the UMC's Judicial Council struck down seven of the 17 petitions, leaving the most influential policies intact. Clergy who engage in homosexual activity or identify themselves as actively homosexual will be disciplined when the plan comes into effect next year.

The Traditional Plan defines a "self-avowed practicing homosexual" as a person who is "living in a same-sex marriage, domestic partnership or civil union or is a person who publicly states she or he is a practicing homosexual." Such persons are not eligible for leadership in the United Methodist Church.

Despite the passage fo the Traditional Plan in February and this recent decision upholding the plan last Friday, liberal members of the UMC are not yet leaving the denomination. The UMC General Conference will meet again next year, and liberals have decided they will attempt to fight back at this conference. If the Traditional Plan again prevails — as is likely — a mass exodus will begin.

When these liberal congregations decide to leave, at least they will hold on to their property — and they will not even have to wage a long legal battle like my church did.

It is tragic that Christian denominations like the UMC face such divisions. However, Christians must follow Jesus, no matter how counter-cultural His teachings are. Those who reject traditional Christian doctrine are distancing themselves from the gospel, especially if they reject the historic bodily Resurrection of Jesus or the unique saving power of the gospel.

The church should always be a welcoming place for struggling people — those with homosexual attractions and gender confusion emphatically included. However, that does not mean that churches must embrace LGBT identities and practices. Christians must preach the message of love and repentance — love and inclusion for those who struggle, but repentance from what the Bible clearly defines as sin.

Christians must constantly examine our hearts. We must offer love and grace, but without abandoning the scripture, the very basis for that grace and love. Jesus calls us to uphold traditional teaching while genuinely caring for those who struggle with same-sex attraction and gender confusion. Liberals cannot afford to reject truth, and conservatives cannot afford to reject love. Yet liberals must not pretend that holding to biblical teaching is somehow a rejection of love.

The UMC shows how conservatives can win with grace and love. Allowing liberal congregations to leave with their property is a gracious act, one befitting followers of the man who told His disciples to pray for their enemies.

SOURCE  






Toxic Masculinity Deterred Synagogue Shooter

One thing you aren't hearing too much about in the news stories about the synagogue shooting is that a good guy with a gun stopped a bad guy with a gun.

The man who fired a semi-automatic weapon inside the Chabad of Poway synagogue in San Diego on Saturday froze, dropped his gun and sprinted to his car when he saw Oscar Stewart come barreling toward him, yelling so loud the priest at a neighboring church could hear.

“Get down!” Stewart yelled, according to his wife and others who were at the scene. “You motherfucker! I’m going to kill you!”

“I heard gunshots,” Stewart said. “And everybody got up and started trying to get out the back door, so I — for whatever reason — I didn’t do that. I ran the other way. I ran towards the gunshots.” TOXIC MASCULINITY, ladies and gentlemen.

“When I came around the corner into the lobby area, I saw the individual with a gun, and he fired two rounds. And I yelled at him and I must have yelled very loud, and he looked at me, and I must have had a really mean look on my face or something, because he immediately dropped his weapon and turned and ran. And then I gave chase.”

Amen, brother, amen.

The shooter was using an "AR-style" weapon, which may or may not be true since reporters think every black rifle is an AR.

SOURCE  






Border Patrol Official: Central Americans Entering U.S. With Contagious Health Conditions

"Well, we're seeing an unprecedented number of people crossing the border illegally as family units," Aaron Hull, the chief for the El Paso Border Patrol sector, told "Sunday Morning Futures" with Maria Bartiromo.

Hull said there's been a 600 percent increase in arrivals, most of them family units, in the current fiscal year to date, compared with the same period in the prior fiscal year.

And many of those people are sick, he said, a situation that forces Border Patrol agents to divert from their main mission.

Hull called it a "huge resource drain."

"Agents join the Patrol to secure the border, to enforce the law, but increasingly they're being tasked with things that they never thought they would be doing -- heating up baby bottles, literally changing diapers, caring for more and more sick people, because a lot of these aliens coming in are carrying contagious health conditions, things like chicken pox, scabies, tuberculosis, lice."

Hull said the Border Patrol has its own emergency medical technicians and paramedics, who treat the people they're able to help, and they have contract medical support for more serious cases, but it costs a lot of money to take people to the hospital.

"We have had to deal with pregnancies and all types of medical conditions that occur when you have family unit aliens."

Hull said 90 percent of the illegal aliens walking into the El Paso sector are from Guatemala, Honduras, and El Salvador. And he repeated what so many Americans have heard over and over again:

"Those people realize that as long as they're being apprehended by us, they are still likely to be released on their own recognizance. That's because the country, the U.S. government as a whole, does not have the detention and removal capability to hold them in custody until their immigration hearing.

"When they know that they are going to be released, even though they're caught, it serves as a huge draw to enter this country illegally."

"So they want to get apprehended," Bartiromo said. She was reporting from the El Paso border sector and watched several family unit cross into the U.S.

"Yeah, they're not trying to get away," Hull said. "They know that we're basically -- a period of time, they are going to be held in custody and then they're going to be released and continue on to all parts of the United States."

Bartiromo said one of the illegal aliens she spoke with told her she wasn't fleeing from danger:

"You know, yesterday when we were talking with some of the migrants, I asked one woman, I said, why are you here? She said 'asylum, asylum.' She spoke Spanish, and I said 'Oh, well what's happening there? Did they try to hurt you?' She said, well actually, I just want to get opportunity for my daughter. So they are seeing America as just an opportunity for their families. It's not necessarily that they're fleeing.

"That's exactly right," Hull said. "A lot of people refer to all of these family units as asylum seekers but that's really not the case. Matter of fact, most of those that we encounter when they're caught at this step in the process, they don't indicate fear of return. They indicate they want better opportunity."

SOURCE  






Hand over your phones or see attackers walk free, British rape victims told

There have been many false rape accusations in Britain and this is an attempt to short circuit them

Rape victims will be forced to hand over their mobile phones to police or risk their attacker walking free under a controversial new policy being introduced by prosecutors.

The National Police Chiefs' Council (NPCC) and the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) have revealed plans which aim to stop sexual offence cases collapsing because crucial evidence emerges at the last moment.

But the new policy has already attracted criticism, with privacy and women’s campaign groups saying it treats victims like suspects, subjecting them to a “digital strip search” and deterring them from coming forward.

Two rape complainants are already planning a legal challenge to the policy and the Information Commissioner’s Office (ICO) is currently carrying out an investigation.

One woman taking part in the legal challenge, named only as Olivia, said: "The data on my phone stretches back seven years and the police want to download it and keep it on file for a century.

"My phone documents many of the most personal moments in my life and the thought of strangers combing through it, to try to use it against me, makes me feel like I'm being violated once again."

The consent forms allowing officers to access messages, photographs, emails and social media accounts are being rolled out across the country in a bid to make it easier to identify and handle crucial evidence.

If the victims refuse to hand over their private data they will be warned that the case may not be pursued.

The move is in response to disclosure issues which have seen men held on bail for long periods, in some cases for up to two years, before walking free when messages emerge from their accusers that cleared their name.

Police chiefs claim the introduction of written consent forms is a “step forward in the right direction” and will reduce the current confusion in the system.

Max Hill, the Director of Public Prosecutions, said digital devices will only be looked at when it forms a "reasonable line of enquiry" and only "relevant" material will go before a court if it meets "hard and fast" rules. He said he hoped ultimately it would lead to more successful prosecutions for sexual offences.

Under the current legal framework the police have no legal power to seize phones or digital devices from a complainant.

Giving details of the new system, Assistant Commissioner, Nicholas Ephgrave, the NPCC Lead for Criminal Justice, explained that accusers "have the opportunity if they are uncomfortable with that for whatever reason to say 'I don't want that to happen' and record the reasons why.

“But we also make clear on the form that if that is the position they adopt for whatever reason it may not be possible for a prosecution to proceed.”

Once written permission is given allowing officers to examine and download anything relevant the data, no matter how private or personal, could then be shared with their attacker’s legal team under disclosure rules.

The new forms will not deal with the resourcing issues that senior officers have complained leave police struggling to sift through thousands of messages. 

The Centre for Women’s Justice is launching the legal challenge alongside the two alleged victims arguing the consent form discriminates based on sex, breaches the Data Protection Act and the right to privacy.

Harriet Wistrich, founder of the CWJ, said that whilst complainants understand the need for relevant material to be examined it is “disproportionate” for their entire lives to be downloaded.

"We seem to be going back to the bad old days when victims of rape are being treated as suspects,” she said.

Her concerns were backed by Claire Waxman, Victims’ Commissioner for London, and Vera Baird QC, the lead on victims for the Association of Police and Crime Commissioners, who have complained to the ICO about the policy.

Ms Baird said there was a “public safety issue” that could see serial rapists walk free if victims do not come forward because they don’t want every element of their private life examined.

“This is not consent,” she warned. “This is an authority figure asking you to sign a form as soon as you have finished an interview reliving what is one of the most horrific experiences of your life.”

She said the forms were  just part of the problem as police and prosecutors look to harvest third party material, such as school records and medical notes.

Ms Waxman said she was also “hugely concerned” by the requirement for complainants to “sign away their rights to privacy” in order for the case to proceed.

“We already know that victims who decline to grant access are having their cases dropped at alarming rates, while new Home Office figures show the proportion of rape cases being prosecuted nationally has drop to a low of just 1.7 per cent,” she said.

Adina Claire, Acting Co-Chief Executive at Women’s Aid, said: “We know from our work with domestic abuse survivors that many victims of rape and sexual abuse feel that they, not the suspect, are the ones being put ‘on trial’.

“The extent of personal data of victims of rape and sexual offences that is being routinely collected by the police and CPS is highly concerning. This can mean that a victim’s background, and even sexual history, is scrutinised in court.

This often deters women from trying to access justice; already one third of domestic abuse-related cases do not proceed due to the victim withdrawing her support from the prosecution.

"With the dramatic decline in prosecutions and convictions for rape and serious sexual offences in recent years, the police and CPS must take urgent steps to ensure that victims feel safe and supported, and not as if they are being put on trial themselves."

However, justice campaigners warn that if the accused cannot see all of the evidence pertaining to the case then there is a risk that innocent people will be convicted.

Nigel Evans MP said the importance of disclosure was highlighted by a number of cases including that of Liam Allen, a student who had the charges against him dropped after messages from his accuser were revealed during his 2017 trial.

“I understand that there may be discomfort into handing this information over,” Mr Evans said. “But that is nothing compared to the pain and torture that those who are wrongfully accused face.”

A spokesman for the ICO said they were looking at “concerns raised around the collection, secure handling and the use of serious sexual crime victims' personal information” and how that information travels through the system

“These are ongoing investigations and we will be reporting on the outcomes in due course,” she added.

A spokesman for the CPS said:  “Mobile telephones should not be examined as a matter of course and we have made that very clear in our guidance to police and to prosecutors.

"However, in circumstances when it is necessary – both for gathering evidence and meeting our disclosure obligations – we hope the clearer information we have provided will help complainants give free, specific and informed consent.”

Sign up for your essential, twice-daily briefing from The Telegraph with our free Front Page newsletter.

SOURCE  

*************************

Political correctness is most pervasive in universities and colleges but I rarely report the  incidents concerned here as I have a separate blog for educational matters.

American "liberals" often deny being Leftists and say that they are very different from the Communist rulers of  other countries.  The only real difference, however, is how much power they have.  In America, their power is limited by democracy.  To see what they WOULD be like with more power, look at where they ARE already  very powerful: in America's educational system -- particularly in the universities and colleges.  They show there the same respect for free-speech and political diversity that Stalin did:  None.  So look to the colleges to see  what the whole country would be like if "liberals" had their way.  It would be a dictatorship.

For more postings from me, see TONGUE-TIED, GREENIE WATCH,   EDUCATION WATCH INTERNATIONAL, AUSTRALIAN POLITICS and  DISSECTING LEFTISM.   My Home Pages are here or   here or   here.  Email me (John Ray) here.  Email me (John Ray) here. 

***************************