It's Starting, We were told it Would

Yeah, I can't find any information on this other than from the one Washington Times article. That article omits any specific spokesperson and there's nothing on the church's Facebook page or twitter about the removal.

There's no mention of it on any of the local news organizations.

I'm calling this fake news until Washington Times can provide a name and face or the church says it on social media.

a reply to: DJW001

No they would not have. Neither did in their lifetimes. Both men were, by the strict definition of the term, traitors. If that's not controversial, I struggle to see what would be...

Many churches would cheerfully claim George, and Bobby Lee, as parishioners.

Too controversial...

Too stupid. No wonder parishioners are leaving.

a reply to: Gryphon66

How long has that sign/plaque been hanging on that wall? Long ass time would be my guess. Now it's a problem? Why now, after all these years, and other social upheavals?

OP's opinions are their own, and last I heard, we're allowed to disagree. Were I a parishioner of that church, I would be most displeased, nor would I be shy about expressing said displeasure--possibly to the point of joining George and Robert in being removed. I'd be in good company.

originally posted by: hounddoghowlie

i wonder how many more?

Haven't you read god's instructions ?

Thou shalt not make unto thee any graven image, or any likeness of any thing that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth: -- KJV, Exodus 20:4

Thou shalt not bow down thyself to them, nor serve them: for I the LORD thy God am a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children unto the third and fourth generation of them that hate me; -- KJV, Exodus 20:5



Ye shall make you no idols nor graven image, neither rear you up a standing image, neither shall ye set up any image of stone in your land, to bow down unto it: for I am the LORD your God. -- KJV, Leviticus 26:1

So, to answer your question: "Until, they are all gone!"

God is in charge. He wills it. We just watch it happen and marvel.

duplicate

a reply to: projectvxn

That's the point.

a reply to: avgguy

For some of the more, shall we say, enthusiastic among this crowd...the books should be next.

Burn 'em... Ban 'em... No one needs to read those books, they're bad. Trust us, we know best. Isn't that what's said at those times?

Statues. Books. Books about statues. The internet. All for our betterment, of course.

a reply to: seagull

I don't have a problem with what's on the wall in the church or anywhere else seagull.

I didn't say I had a problem with it. What I said was there are those, apparently like OP, that want to be able to dictate to others, like say, the members of that church, what they can do with their property.

Stating opinions is fine. We all do it every day. Pointing out that OP's position is authoritarian and controlling, for example, is my opinion. Further, the expression of these opinions on the part of several members here are not consistent with their previously stated opinions about local determination and autonomy.

Were it a situation with some vanguard of liberal vigilantes going around the country terrorizing the neighbors and doing away with these emblems ... that would be a different matter. It is not.

If you were a member of that church, you should speak your mind. Why would you assume that they didn't come to some kind of consensus?

originally posted by: seagull
a reply to: avgguy

For some of the more, shall we say, enthusiastic among this crowd...the books should be next.

Well, we do burn all the books too. We're not there, yet, though. That's quite a way off from today.

See, the problem with the Library of Alexandra was that too many people were spending their time reading the old books, containing stories of the past, and they weren't living in the present. Like Trump, they were stuck in the past, glorifying the old days when "things were great" etc..and longing for the times to return, when things would be like they were long ago. Nobody was moving forward, creating new things, generating new experiences, they were stuck with an old mind set.
So, the books had to be burnt, the library destroyed, so that people could start living once again, discovering new things, and exploring the world around them, rather than being stuck in the library stacks reading some book.

Oh good, the statue haters have arrived. This church can do any damn thing it wants to do. But those of us who aren't afraid of history do get to offer an opinion on it. You know, freedom of speech and all. Kowtowing to the idiots isn't the way to move forward, it will only make you end up just like the idiots. (IMHO)

a reply to: Gryphon66

Stating opinions is fine. We all do it every day. Pointing out that OP's position is authoritarian and controlling, for example, is my opinion. Further, the expression of these opinions on the part of several members here are not consistent with their previously stated opinions about local determination and autonomy.

hold on there a second little miss, i no where in any of my post said anything about controlling people or dictating what they can and can't do.

what i'm basically saying is people caving in to the political correct mindset that permeates liberal dogma to remove historical monuments because someones wittle feelings got hurt is stupid.

if you read anything else into anything that i wrote that's on you, don't presume and speak for me.

Christ Church Blog

After reviewing what we heard in the listening sessions and what we read in your thoughtful emails, the Vestry decided last night to spend a month in thought, prayer, and reflection before voting on the presence of the plaques in our historic church on October 24. The Vestry understands the gravity of this decision and its impact on our beloved church. We take this process very seriously.

The meeting to decide was scheduled for Oct. 24th. They don't seem to publish anything about the results of it anywhere. Perhaps wary of causing protests since they meet in a historic building, in a church they advertise as open to anyone.

If they did decide to remove the plaques and it looks like they did, I think it was a bad, politically driven decision. When religion becomes driven by politics, it leaves the realm of religion and becomes an arm of a political ideology.

People don't need an authoritarian government in order for them to lose freedoms.

They (the people) can willingly give up freedoms, vote to burn their own books.

a reply to: Blaine91555

I found it! Not fake news after-all, just very poorly cited. PDF of the letter to members with added emphasis:

The Vestry believes that the memorial plaques to George Washington and Robert E. Lee should be considered together. The plaques were erected at the same time. They visually balance each other, maintaining the symmetry of our sanctuary. The men they memorialize are giants in our nation’s history and were members of this parish. Robert E. Lee has taken on outsized symbolism in the national conversation about race and inclusion.

The Vestry has unanimously decided that the plaques create a distraction in our worship space and may create an obstacle to our identity as a welcoming church, and an impediment to our growth and to full community with our neighbors. Accordingly, the plaques will be relocated no later than the summer of 2018.

It is important to understand that the plaques will not be moved to a storage area. Rather, they will remain in the church until they can be relocated to a place of respectful prominence where they will be fully visible to parishioners and tourists alike. And ultimately, they will be incorporated into a more complete presentation of our long and many-faceted history.

The Vestry will create a committee of parishioners tasked with working with parish members to identify ways we can highlight not only the plaques, but many other materials and objects from our past. This will allow visitors and researchers to more fully understand the role Christ Church has played in our community and our nation since 1773.

The discussion about the appropriateness of the plaques in our worship space caused friction in our parish family. We understand that the discernment process has felt confusing and exclusive. We hope all parishioners will be more fully involved as we move forward.

The plaques will remain on display but will, ultimately, leave the area where the sermons are held.

a reply to: AMPTAH

You don't know anything about the Great Library at Alexandria, do you?

It was not just a repository of information of many sorts, but there was research done there by some of the greatest minds humanity has ever, and unfortunately, probably will ever, see. Research was done on the secrets of the Universe, some of it has only been replicated within the past couple of generations.

It was, most certainly, not burned because it was making people lazy. It was burned, or at least partially burned, four times-- Julius Caesar's fire during his civil war in 48 BC; the attack of Aurelian in AD 270–275; the decree of Coptic Christian pope Theophilus of Alexandria in AD 391; and the Muslim conquest of Egypt in AD 642--because it represented a threat to the status quo--especially in the case of Theophilus, and the Muslims.

New knowledge is gained on the shoulders of older knowledge.

We are not, possibly, quite yet at the point of burning libraries--but libraries are certainly removing, or being pressured to do so, books from shelves. Amazon is deciding, as is their legal, if not ethical, right, what we will, more accurately won't, read.

So, again, try to tell me why I shouldn't be concerned?

a reply to: links234

What a shame. The plaques were to denote the pew where he sat in a building that's on the national historical registry.

I'm going to have to agree that a move is on to whitewash history that offends some. It's a dangerous path to go down and for a church to cave to political pressure does not bode well for the future of religion.

They have the right to do as they wish, but mixing politics with religion is not good and I'll never buy this was to unite, it was to placate the irrational few who have extremist views.

ETA: What do they say to those who disagree and if they leave the church over it?

originally posted by: seagull
So, again, try to tell me why I shouldn't be concerned?

Our knowledge and history is not being removed, it's being re-emphasized.

Statues of confederate generals, leaders and slaveholders should not be held in prominence as though they were honored. They should be on display as reminders of the horrors of slavery and racism in our nation.

For far, far too long the white establishment in the South has held aloft their forebears as ideals and individuals to be looked up to, to aspire to be. They're lauded with monuments to their deeds rather than as reminders of their misdeeds. We have so-called patriots coming to the forefront waving the Rebel flag as if it were their national emblem telling us not to erase history while whitewashing their own.

As recently as the 1970's we've had systematically oppressive operations against minorities in the penal system. Even today, more minorities are sentenced to longer, harsher sentences than their white counterparts. Moreover their vote is still bein g suppressed.

Do you honestly believe that all of this has happened in a vacuum? That young whites are aware of the history of racism and discrimination but still, somehow, grow up to believe that this just doesn't happen in modern America?

a reply to: Blaine91555

As I understood it they're the plaques at the front of the room where the sermon's are held:
Washington

Lee

Interior view of the church

They're not the plaques on the pews. So...you could remove one (the Lee memorial) but that, as the letter stated, would leave the room aesthetically unbalanced.

a reply to: links234

OK, I also ran into pictures of the one on the pew.

Either way, it's caving to political pressure. If it were not so, it would have been an issue long ago.

History is history, whether good or bad. Politics and religion do not mix, nor should they ever mix.

I suspect just as many will be offended by it's removal as will be placated by its removal. They picked a side, which will tell the members which are welcome and which are not. I'm not buying its to make people more welcome, it's to tell members which ones are welcome or preferred.

It’s the church’s business; no one else’s.

Period.