Attempting to SEEM inclusive

[TLFisher]

Originally Posted by Freedom

The LC is anything but inclusive. They can put a spin on it any way they want, but the facts speak otherwise. How could a group that kicks out members for publishing their own materials be considered to be inclusive? How could a group that kicks out members for failing to only use LSM materials be considered to be inclusive?

In all fairness, I feel and believe as many as 99% meeting with the local churches want to be inclusive. It's the 1% who aren't inclusive that happen to be the decision makers (coworkers/elders). In localities, there may be deacons and elders who are part of the 99% don't want to "upset the apple cart" so they go along with the program. Besides after 30-40 years meeting with the local churches, where would they go?

[Freedom]

Originally Posted by Terry

In all fairness, I feel and believe as many as 99% meeting with the local churches want to be inclusive. It's the 1% who aren't inclusive that happen to be the decision makers (coworkers/elders). In localities, there may be deacons and elders who are part of the 99% don't want to "upset the apple cart" so they go along with the program. Besides after 30-40 years meeting with the local churches, where would they go?

I do think that many of the rank and file members want to and strive to be "inclusive", but they are limited both by leaders and their notions about what the LC should be. By its very definition, the LC purports to be something better than it is. They think they express "oneness" and everyone else is in division. That kind of mindset leads to exclusivity whether or not anyone wants to be exclusive.

It's not that LCers sought out to be that way, it's just the principle upon which they are founded is exclusive. The notion of "recovery" implies everyone else is degraded. So naturally, that is how everyone on the outside is viewed.

[TLFisher]

Originally Posted by Freedom

I do think that many of the rank and file members want to and strive to be "inclusive", but they are limited both by leaders and their notions about what the LC should be. By its very definition, the LC purports to be something better than it is. They think they express "oneness" and everyone else is in division. That kind of mindset leads to exclusivity whether or not anyone wants to be exclusive.

Who wants to be the one to tell their elder(s), you're being exclusive in your speaking?
Of course elders may not see their speaking as being exclusive, but being "absolute for the ministry".

[Freedom]

Originally Posted by Terry

Who wants to be the one to tell their elder(s), you're being exclusive in your speaking?
Of course elders may not see their speaking as being exclusive, but being "absolute for the ministry".

I will repost here what I posted on HERn's thread yesterday, because I think it is pertinent. These are descriptions of what I've seen elders/leading brothers do:

Originally Posted by Freedom

Some time back, there was a community church that sent out flyers about an event they were holding for the community. A brother brought this flyer to a meeting and used it to attack what they were doing, saying how in the LC we don't have such "gimmicks". It made me feel sick inside to hear him speak that way. Here was a community church opening their arm to the community to have such an event. In contrast, the LC is so exclusive that they hardly have any contact wit the community. They think they're too good for that. Sad, sad, sad!

I remember being in a meeting where a brother stood up to say how we don't speak the "low gospel" like Billy Graham, Greg Laurie or Rick Warren. When I think about how often I've seen empty seats in LC meeting halls, it disgusts me to think they would criticize others like that. They criticize the so-called low gospel, yet their "gospel" isn't relevant to most people. What hypocrites LCers are!