Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rutgers!aramis.rutgers.edu!athos.rutgers.edu!christian From: lvron@saturn.lerc.nasa.gov (Ronald E. Graham) Newsgroups: soc.religion.christian Subject: Re: Consultation sought: training & skills dedicated to God's service Message-ID: Date: 13 Dec 90 09:09:17 GMT Sender: hedrick@athos.rutgers.edu Organization: NASA Lewis Research Center Lines: 58 Approved: christian@aramis.rutgers.edu In article , I wrote... [Description of InterVarsity Christian Fellowship deleted...] >>The three of us working on this conference session have determined that a >>difficulty with IVCF, at least in this region, has been that it has not >>prepared students sufficiently for contributing to the life of the Church >>after graduation. [...] Anyway, the Moderator responds... >You might also consider trying to involve your members in local >churches while they are in school. Hold on, Mr. Moderator. This assumption does not hold here. I did not say, "IVCF fails to encourage church involvement." I said, "IVCF has not adequately prepared its members for contribution to the life of the Church." IVCF does, in fact, have local church involvement as one of its bases of faith. The problem (which may not have been clearly stated, I'll admit) is, student work does not always adequately translate into church service. >It's always bothered me slightly >to see local churches, chaplaincy programs of various denominations, >and "parachurch" groups such as Intervarsity functioning with little >contact. Contact with...each other? >It's hard to know exactly what to suggest, as it depends a >lot upon your local situation. When I was a grad student at CMU, a >lot of the Intervarsity members were active in a local Presbyterian >church (one that had a rather evangelical orientation). But our >Intervarsity group had a somewhat broader scope than I believe the >national staff were quite comfortable with. I don't see, based on what you have written, any reason for IVCF staff to be uncomfortable with activity in this particular church. But, like you said, this is a function of the local situation. >(Technically I shouldn't >have been allowed as a member, as I don't believe in inerrancy.) Yeah, but that's a separate thread, and doesn't belong in this one. With all due respect. Since this conversation was just between you and me, feel free to respond via e-mail and not to post. And a suggestion: if you have a question about a particular posting, why not ask before allowing it to be posted? Naw, better not ask a dumb question like that, given the volume of stuff you have to deal with. But it bothers me that you can get "the last word" on things you don't like, without making certain you understand what's being written. Not that I'd do things any differently, I guess. RG "...wine maketh merry, but money answereth all things." (Eccles. 10:19)