<?xml version="1.0" encoding="ISO-8859-1" ?>




































































  <rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
    <channel>
      <title>Comments On: Two faces of orthodoxy
    
      by Harold Henderson</title>
      <link>http://www.chicagoreader.com/TheBlog/archives/2006/09/02/two-faces-orthodoxy</link>
      <atom:link href="http://www.chicagoreader.com/chicago/Rss.xml?oid=942177&amp;id=comments" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />      <description>Comments On: Two faces of orthodoxy
    
      by Harold Henderson</description>
      <language>en-us</language>
      <copyright>Copyright 2009 Chicago Reader. All rights reserved. This RSS file is offered to individuals, Chicago Reader readers, and non-commercial organizations only. Any commercial websites wishing to use this RSS file, please contact Chicago Reader.</copyright>
      <webMaster>wil@desert.net (Chicago Reader Webmaster)</webMaster>
      <pubDate>Sun, 22 Nov 2009 00:00:01 -0600</pubDate>
      <lastBuildDate>Sun, 22 Nov 2009 03:30:00 -0600</lastBuildDate>
      <generator>Foundation</generator>
      <docs>http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/tech/rss</docs>
      
        
          <item>
    
    <title><![CDATA[Re: Two faces of orthodoxy]]></title>
    
    
    <link><![CDATA[http://www.chicagoreader.com/TheBlog/archives/2006/09/02/two-faces-orthodoxy/#954721]]></link>
    
    <guid isPermaLink="true"><![CDATA[http://www.chicagoreader.com/TheBlog/archives/2006/09/02/two-faces-orthodoxy/#954721]]></guid>
    <author><![CDATA[Jade Eby]]></author>
    <description>
      
      <![CDATA[Who is this Dorhauer guy and what evidence does he have that IRD is sending out infiltrators? Does IRD hold a boot camp on infiltration? Does it advertise for infiltrators? Where would it get people so devoted that they would change churches just to lie fallow for a while and then seek to "dismantle" a church? Which church? Where? How--by asking questions?
    
    Have you ever run across a ready pool of people like this? People willing to be "trained by others in the art of dissent," who "are clever manipulators of thought and action who know the things that make for unrest." People who are "sent from another place with a particular mission" that is nasty to the core?
    
    Come now! The whole thing sounds preposterous to me. I wonder what Dorhauer is thinking? You know, a guy can CLAIM anything. Why should I believe Dorhauer? Looking at his vast conspiracy theory, I sure would be dubious.
        
        <br />
        
          Posted by Jade Eby]]>
    </description>
    <pubDate>Wed, 28 Mar 2007 01:01:29 -0500</pubDate> 
    <source url="http://www.chicagoreader.com">Chicago Reader</source>
  </item>
        
          <item>
    
    <title><![CDATA[Re: Two faces of orthodoxy]]></title>
    
    
    <link><![CDATA[http://www.chicagoreader.com/TheBlog/archives/2006/09/02/two-faces-orthodoxy/#950858]]></link>
    
    <guid isPermaLink="true"><![CDATA[http://www.chicagoreader.com/TheBlog/archives/2006/09/02/two-faces-orthodoxy/#950858]]></guid>
    <author><![CDATA[Harold]]></author>
    <description>
      
      <![CDATA[Now that's a thought-provoking statement.  If I can borrow some time somewhere, I'd like to promote it out of comments for more discussion.
        
        <br />
        
          Posted by Harold]]>
    </description>
    <pubDate>Fri, 08 Sep 2006 21:30:06 -0500</pubDate> 
    <source url="http://www.chicagoreader.com">Chicago Reader</source>
  </item>
        
          <item>
    
    <title><![CDATA[Re: Two faces of orthodoxy]]></title>
    
    
    <link><![CDATA[http://www.chicagoreader.com/TheBlog/archives/2006/09/02/two-faces-orthodoxy/#965184]]></link>
    
    <guid isPermaLink="true"><![CDATA[http://www.chicagoreader.com/TheBlog/archives/2006/09/02/two-faces-orthodoxy/#965184]]></guid>
    <author><![CDATA[John Powers]]></author>
    <description>
      
      <![CDATA[The thought that someone would only spend two years in a specific congregation before daring to suggest a change in Sunday School is certainly revolutionary.
    
    I do not see any false pretenses in the IRD action, nor do I see anything "liberal" about squashing discussion in the name of authoritarianism.
    
    It certainly reads to me that the heterodox authoritarians in the churches hierarchies are threatened by dissent, and would like to squash it.  
    
    Myself, I would rather have a truly liberal church, with a strong central orthodoxy, and freedom to use good judgement for individual circumstances.  
    
    JBP
        
        <br />
        
          Posted by John Powers]]>
    </description>
    <pubDate>Wed, 06 Sep 2006 18:42:32 -0500</pubDate> 
    <source url="http://www.chicagoreader.com">Chicago Reader</source>
  </item>
        
          <item>
    
    <title><![CDATA[Re: Two faces of orthodoxy]]></title>
    
    
    <link><![CDATA[http://www.chicagoreader.com/TheBlog/archives/2006/09/02/two-faces-orthodoxy/#950022]]></link>
    
    <guid isPermaLink="true"><![CDATA[http://www.chicagoreader.com/TheBlog/archives/2006/09/02/two-faces-orthodoxy/#950022]]></guid>
    <author><![CDATA[Harold]]></author>
    <description>
      
      <![CDATA[John -- Did you read the original item carefully?  If IRD wants to *discuss* orthodoxy, and identify its members as such when they join the church, then I don't think there'd be any problem.  If they're infiltrating under false pretenses, and then trying to *impose* orthodoxy, as TTA says they are, then they're the ones who are being Stalinist.  Although neither experience would be pleasant, I'd rather be a conservative in a liberal church than a liberal in an orthodox one.
        
        <br />
        
          Posted by Harold]]>
    </description>
    <pubDate>Wed, 06 Sep 2006 14:19:26 -0500</pubDate> 
    <source url="http://www.chicagoreader.com">Chicago Reader</source>
  </item>
        
          <item>
    
    <title><![CDATA[Re: Two faces of orthodoxy]]></title>
    
    
    <link><![CDATA[http://www.chicagoreader.com/TheBlog/archives/2006/09/02/two-faces-orthodoxy/#955736]]></link>
    
    <guid isPermaLink="true"><![CDATA[http://www.chicagoreader.com/TheBlog/archives/2006/09/02/two-faces-orthodoxy/#955736]]></guid>
    <author><![CDATA[John Powers]]></author>
    <description>
      
      <![CDATA[Harold,
    
    Perhaps the Talk To Action people can use the internet to find out more information about the IRD.
    
    I am sensing that the Talk To Action people are against any discussion of orthodoxy, hence are claiming that there is something unethical about having the discussion, showing all the charm and grace of Joe Stalin.
    
    JBP
        
        <br />
        
          Posted by John Powers]]>
    </description>
    <pubDate>Wed, 06 Sep 2006 06:48:43 -0500</pubDate> 
    <source url="http://www.chicagoreader.com">Chicago Reader</source>
  </item>
        
          <item>
    
    <title><![CDATA[Re: Two faces of orthodoxy]]></title>
    
    
    <link><![CDATA[http://www.chicagoreader.com/TheBlog/archives/2006/09/02/two-faces-orthodoxy/#967528]]></link>
    
    <guid isPermaLink="true"><![CDATA[http://www.chicagoreader.com/TheBlog/archives/2006/09/02/two-faces-orthodoxy/#967528]]></guid>
    <author><![CDATA[Harold]]></author>
    <description>
      
      <![CDATA[John -- IRD's web site doesn't hide anything that I know of.  And if its adherents acknowledge their commitment to orthodoxy (as IRD defines it) when they come to join a mainstream church, then it is indeed a "good bit of intramurals."  Talk To Action is claiming they sometimes join and gain power under false (or undisclosed) pretenses, hence the metaphor.
        
        <br />
        
          Posted by Harold]]>
    </description>
    <pubDate>Tue, 05 Sep 2006 19:10:30 -0500</pubDate> 
    <source url="http://www.chicagoreader.com">Chicago Reader</source>
  </item>
        
          <item>
    
    <title><![CDATA[Re: Two faces of orthodoxy]]></title>
    
    
    <link><![CDATA[http://www.chicagoreader.com/TheBlog/archives/2006/09/02/two-faces-orthodoxy/#965588]]></link>
    
    <guid isPermaLink="true"><![CDATA[http://www.chicagoreader.com/TheBlog/archives/2006/09/02/two-faces-orthodoxy/#965588]]></guid>
    <author><![CDATA[John Powers]]></author>
    <description>
      
      <![CDATA[Harold,
    
    You have lost me here.  If the IRD truly believes in their version of orthodoxy, and the churches they are ministering to do not, isn't this just a good bit of intramurals?  
    
    As the IRD is claiming to be orthodox, and working for orthodoxy, I would say they are advertising themselves quite properly rather than as a "wolf in sheeps clothing".
    
    Am I missing something here?
        
        <br />
        
          Posted by John Powers]]>
    </description>
    <pubDate>Tue, 05 Sep 2006 15:30:44 -0500</pubDate> 
    <source url="http://www.chicagoreader.com">Chicago Reader</source>
  </item>
        
      
    </channel>
  </rss>




