[This question was edited because a) it has already been addressed in a previous thread, b) has no concrete proof, and c) is malicious.

If you suspect someone of being gay, this is NOT the place to discuss it. You do this at the appropriate conference when the question is asked about someone's fitness for church service. You take this to the disciplinary boards outlined in the Discipine. In any case, you better have proof. If you name names here, and have no proof, the victim can sue you. I keep records of what you post. We now return you to the rest of the post]

... So tell me what you think?

[moderator's note: I think I will call the Bishop for this district and see if there really is a "Rev. Roger Wilmer", and whether or not they have posted this maliciously.]

-- Anonymous, August 12, 2003

Answers

What is the "official" definition of "Openly Gay"? Does that mean that one brings his/her partner to church and introduces him/her as such, and asks the church to recognize the union? Or does it mean two same sex individuals are sharing a residence and the rumors say they are a gay couple? Economics can dictate that a residence be shared even to the point of purchasing a house together. Without a clear definition innocent persons could be damaged. I daresay that if I had to share my residence due to economics, I would perfer to do so with another man rather than a woman because it would be less complicated. (That will raise some ires!) I trust and hope that when our Episcopal Fathers draft the letter to be read to the churches, they define the term "Openly Gay" without ambiguity. Really we should use the term Homosexual rather than gay in order to reduce the ambiguity.

BE Blessed

BE

-- Anonymous, August 12, 2003

Rev. Wilmer:

Are you a minister in the First District or Philadelphia Conference? I am very suspect of your entry and believe it to be very malicious.

-- Anonymous, August 13, 2003

I agree.......and so your post is edited

-- Anonymous, August 13, 2003

I received this communique from the REAL preacherman:

Rev. Harper,

I recieved an e-mail from you in reference to the election of bishop. I did not post anything on the site and therefore I want to apologize for the misunderstanding. I am not sure who it is that has decided to use my email and my name, but it certianly was not me.

Rev. D.L. Montgomery Sr.

Malicious acts like this are causing me to rethink the way in which this forum runs. We need to have tighter controls over what is posted. In normal situations, Rev. Montgomery would have been "flamed" by the community, rendering his e-mail useless. Thank God we are more civilized than that.

The software that powers this forum does not have the ability to request verification of the poster's identity. To do that would require setting up another website, and installing a new software package.

If you think that we need to do this, let me know...

-- Anonymous, August 13, 2003