First openly gay pastor at Episcopal ...

First openly gay pastor at Episcopal Church in Chatham, NJ, moving on

There are 127 comments on the Daily Record story from Sep 5, 2010, titled First openly gay pastor at Episcopal Church in Chatham, NJ, moving on. In it, Daily Record reports that:

CHATHAM - The Episcopal Church of St. Paul's first woman rector and pastor, and the parish's first openly gay spiritual leader, is leaving the parish to figure out "where God might be calling me next," she said ...

Join the discussion below, or Read more at Daily Record.

First Prev
of 7
Next Last

“... truth will out.”

Since: May 08

Stratford, Connecticut.

#1 Sep 5, 2010
from Daily Record:

"In her more than eight years at St. Paul's, the Rev. Dr. Elizabeth Kaeton brought 'challenging' sermons and a new perspective to the Main Street church ...

"Her style of leadership demanded a level of intimacy that could be frightening to people ...

"Kaeton said she tried to keep her advocacy separate from what she preached from her Chatham pulpit. But Rea said her advocacy did come through on the pulpit ..."

Read between the lines.

“The Kingdom of God Begins NOW!”

Since: May 07

The Mountain Empire

#2 Sep 5, 2010
LOL!

You always read between the lines, it's called making shit up to expose your bigotry and misogynistic xenophobia.

No reading between the lines here, I speak clearly.

As a roman, I know you can't fathom that....

“... truth will out.”

Since: May 08

Stratford, Connecticut.

#3 Sep 5, 2010
MiddleWay wrote:
LOL!
You always read between the lines, it's called making shit up ...
No reading between the lines here, I speak clearly ...
Yes, clearly you are lying.
Think Again

Clayton, NC

#4 Sep 5, 2010
I know where God is calling her.....to repentance!
Mary K

Madison, NJ

#5 Sep 6, 2010
Please stop spreading rumors about people. Go home and look in the mirror and examine the heart of the person you see.

Since: Jun 07

Location hidden

#6 Sep 6, 2010
Best wishes in her next assignment.
T McCabe

Fayetteville, TN

#7 Sep 7, 2010
Think Again wrote:
I know where God is calling her.....to repentance!
And when will you hear His voice?'Love one another as I have loved you".
Think Again

Clayton, NC

#8 Sep 7, 2010
T McCabe wrote:
<quoted text>
And when will you hear His voice?'Love one another as I have loved you".
If I didn't love her and you, I would let you continue in your sinful ways. It is not a loving response to encourage, affirm, and celebrate sin.

I know TEC doesn't teach you that and it is not in your baptism covenant so you probably have never heard it but it is scriptural.

Since: Jun 07

Location hidden

#9 Sep 7, 2010
Think Again wrote:
<quoted text>
If I didn't love her and you, I would let you continue in your sinful ways. It is not a loving response to encourage, affirm, and celebrate sin.
I know TEC doesn't teach you that and it is not in your baptism covenant so you probably have never heard it but it is scriptural.
Please STOP pretending to care for me or my ETERNAL wellbeing. You hate my everliving guts. This just gives you a "reason" to respond to me.

I AM NOT A CHILD, NOR AM I YOUR CHILD. YOU DON'T GET TO TELL ME THAT YOU ARE DOING ANYTHING FOR ME OR ON MY BEHALF.
Think Again

Clayton, NC

#10 Sep 7, 2010
Selecia Jones- JAX FL wrote:
<quoted text>Please STOP pretending to care for me or my ETERNAL wellbeing. You hate my everliving guts. This just gives you a "reason" to respond to me.
I AM NOT A CHILD, NOR AM I YOUR CHILD. YOU DON'T GET TO TELL ME THAT YOU ARE DOING ANYTHING FOR ME OR ON MY BEHALF.
First, I didn't respond to you, I responded to McCabe.
Second, If I did hate your guts I would not say anything and let you continue down the path you are on.

Is it more loving to let a child touch a hot stove to show them it is hot or stop them from getting their hands burned in the first place?

Since: Jun 07

Location hidden

#11 Sep 7, 2010
Think Again wrote:
<quoted text>
First, I didn't respond to you, I responded to McCabe.
Second, If I did hate your guts I would not say anything and let you continue down the path you are on.
Is it more loving to let a child touch a hot stove to show them it is hot or stop them from getting their hands burned in the first place?
I AM NOT YOUR CHILD!!! Stop. I AM NOT YOUR CHATTLE PROPERTY. Stop. VEILED HATRED IS DISGUSTING. Stop.
Think Again

Clayton, NC

#12 Sep 7, 2010
Selecia Jones- JAX FL wrote:
<quoted text>I AM NOT YOUR CHILD!!! Stop. I AM NOT YOUR CHATTLE PROPERTY. Stop. VEILED HATRED IS DISGUSTING. Stop.
You are so good at playing the victim.

Since: Aug 09

Location hidden

#13 Sep 7, 2010
Think Again wrote:
<quoted text>
First, I didn't respond to you, I responded to McCabe.
Second, If I did hate your guts I would not say anything and let you continue down the path you are on.
Is it more loving to let a child touch a hot stove to show them it is hot or stop them from getting their hands burned in the first place?
That is a good question, TA.

When my daughter was barely more than a year old, I taught her the meaning of the word "hot" and carefully gave her the experience of feeling and associating by touching her finger momentarily to a hot stove.

She was not allowed to get burned. But, she sure did get an understanding of "hot" and very definitely experienced a level of discomfort - pain - that she conceptually grasped. From that point on, when I told her that something was hot, she was immediately wary of its potential to deliver pain.

I would say that it is actually more loving to let a child touch a hot stove - under the right circumstances. Do you think that such freedom to make choices is a gift of personal responsibiliy that was granted to human beings by God in the Garden of Eden?

But, that is not what we are really talking about here. What we are really talking about is your willingness to attempt to set the limits of behavior of another person. Just what is the basis for your judgment of their behavior? Can you see from their point of view or from their experience? Or is it sufficient for them to be controlled by what you believe is right for them?

KGC
Think Again

Clayton, NC

#14 Sep 8, 2010
RevKen wrote:
<quoted text>

But, that is not what we are really talking about here. What we are really talking about is your willingness to attempt to set the limits of behavior of another person. Just what is the basis for your judgment of their behavior? Can you see from their point of view or from their experience? Or is it sufficient for them to be controlled by what you believe is right for them?
KGC
Ken,

As I have stated many times, I do not and cannot define sin. God has done this for us and He has set limits of behavior. Scripture is very clear on the matter so it does not matter what I believe or you believe, God has spoken.

“The Kingdom of God Begins NOW!”

Since: May 07

The Mountain Empire

#15 Sep 8, 2010
Think Again wrote:
<quoted text>
If I didn't love her and you, I would let you continue in your sinful ways. It is not a loving response to encourage, affirm, and celebrate sin.
I know TEC doesn't teach you that and it is not in your baptism covenant so you probably have never heard it but it is scriptural.
Interesting thoughts, as usual, coming from our heterosexual drama queen.

Is this how you 'love' your wife?

Is this what Jesus meant when He said to "love" your enemies?

Is this what Jesus meant by "For if you love those who love you, what reward do you have? Don't even the tax collectors do the same?"

LOL........

“The Kingdom of God Begins NOW!”

Since: May 07

The Mountain Empire

#16 Sep 8, 2010
Think Again wrote:
<quoted text>
Ken,
As I have stated many times, I do not and cannot define sin. God has done this for us and He has set limits of behavior. Scripture is very clear on the matter so it does not matter what I believe or you believe, God has spoken.
But which 'version" of "god"?

I can't for the life of me understand why someone would rather read a book about someone else when that person is sitting right with them.

If you can't define sin then you might want to look into your own stone heart.....

Since: Aug 09

Location hidden

#17 Sep 8, 2010
Think Again wrote:
<quoted text>
Ken,
As I have stated many times, I do not and cannot define sin. God has done this for us and He has set limits of behavior. Scripture is very clear on the matter so it does not matter what I believe or you believe, God has spoken.
God spoke before, TA.

God speaks now.

God will speak again.

Are you and I listening?

The only clarity that scripture gives on the matter is in the words of Christ Jesus, who said, "You must be born again."

KGC
Think Again

Clayton, NC

#18 Sep 8, 2010
MiddleWay wrote:
<quoted text>
But which 'version" of "god"?
I can't for the life of me understand why someone would rather read a book about someone else when that person is sitting right with them.
If you can't define sin then you might want to look into your own stone heart.....
I said I cannot define sin, not that I didn't know what sin was or that I couldn't identify sin in my own life. God called some things sin and it is ultimately up to Him what is sin and what is not.
Think Again

Clayton, NC

#19 Sep 8, 2010
RevKen wrote:
<quoted text>
God spoke before, TA.
God speaks now.
God will speak again.
Are you and I listening?
The only clarity that scripture gives on the matter is in the words of Christ Jesus, who said, "You must be born again."
KGC
Are you suggesting that God would contradict Himself and declare something OK now that He declared sinful earlier?
T McCabe

Fayetteville, TN

#20 Sep 8, 2010
Think Again wrote:
<quoted text>
Are you suggesting that God would contradict Himself and declare something OK now that He declared sinful earlier?
Here is an example of God contradicting Himself.

Exodus 20:13

13 Thou shalt not kill.

Joshua 8

Ai Destroyed

1 Then the LORD said to Joshua, "Do not be afraid; do not be discouraged. Take the whole army with you, and go up and attack Ai. For I have delivered into your hands the king of Ai, his people, his city and his land.

2 You shall do to Ai and its king as you did to Jericho and its king, except that you may carry off their plunder and livestock for yourselves. Set an ambush behind the city."

3 So Joshua and the whole army moved out to attack Ai. He chose thirty thousand of his best fighting men and sent them out at night

4 with these orders: "Listen carefully. You are to set an ambush behind the city. Don't go very far from it. All of you be on the alert.

5 I and all those with me will advance on the city, and when the men come out against us, as they did before, we will flee from them.

6 They will pursue us until we have lured them away from the city, for they will say,'They are running away from us as they did before.' So when we flee from them,

7 you are to rise up from ambush and take the city. The LORD your God will give it into your hand. 8 When you have taken the city, set it on fire. Do what the LORD has commanded. See to it; you have my orders."

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker
First Prev
of 7
Next Last

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Elizabeth Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News The 25 Most Dangerous Cities in the U.S. Are Mo... (Nov '10) 1 hr why 21,286
News Lt. Gov. candidate Sheila Oliver wants to hear ... Oct 14 Keisha 1
News Should Amazon receive tax breaks from N.J.? Oct 4 smarter 1
rahway erotic massage parlours? (Jul '12) Oct 3 Kurelllaw20 3
Any gay teens in bergen county nj? (May '14) Sep 26 Adam 10
Fifth Ward Council man (May '06) Sep 19 jfm2015 65
News Before start of trial, Menendez says, 'I will b... Sep 18 Anybody Anywhere 11

Elizabeth Jobs

More from around the web

Personal Finance

Elizabeth Mortgages