Meeting of AFF Members

[rrford]

Originally Posted by rgcraig

I tend to agree with you!

I didn't think twice about meeting you for breakfast or meeting Stephen - - - guess it's a matter of the mind/heart!

So now a person wanting to be careful and use ethics has a bad mind or heart? Sorry. THat is a horrible mischaracterization. And with ILG turning to back to a UPC mistrust thing I gotta say I am not surprised.

In all honesty there was a day that a married person meeting somene of the opposite sex was unheard of in society at large.

[rrford]

Originally Posted by Margies3

I know I am going to take alot of flak for saying this, but it sure seems obvious to me that in general the everyday people (not clergy) are much more relaxed about meeting with people of the opposite sex than people in the clergy tend to be.

I would have absolutely NO problem at all meeting with MOW without a chaperone. You know why? Because it so very, very obvious how much he is in love with his own wife. And if I know that, I also have to believe that anyone who knows him also knows that. MOW could tell me that he met with any woman from here and I would never begin to question that it was inappropriate because I am so convinced of his commitment to his wife.

If someone is concerned that people would wonder about their actions if they met with someone of the opposite sex, then perhaps they need to portray to the world they live in their love for their spouse in a better way.

At the same time, I would not be uncomfortable meeting with any man from here alone. Because I know my commitment to Walt. I know I would never ever consider violating that.

So maybe some of it is just in knowing your own heart also.

RRFord, I see what you are saying. And I am not finding fault with you. I think that in your own way, you are protecting your wife's integrity by handling things this way. But I also think that it is just as acceptable to do it MOW's way

Consider this:

A man pastors in a fairly large city. He is seen in public having lunch with a woman. The folksin the restaurant have no way of knowing whether they are married or not. They don't even know that he pastors in that city. THen they visit his church on Sunday morning. They then find out the woman he was meeting with was not his wife. Are you seriously gooing to tell me that some sinner folks are not going to raise a few eyebrows at that?

For me it all goes back to not letting my good be evil spoken of. And yes, it is because I love my wife that I would not meet as some here would. People in the public that don't know me would have no idea wherther I love my wife or not. This discussion really has me scratching my head.

[rrford]

Originally Posted by Emma Bontrager

I'm sure RRFord had it drilled into him. For some, it is a cultural practice and has nothing to do with commitment. But some people are taught that it is wrong and then it actually CAUSES rumors if people don't abide by the teaching. (So, the teaching causes the distrust and rumors IMO.)

Ooooppss!! (ILG hijacked the computer and wrote this!!)

Yes. I had it drilled into me. Long before I ever got in the church or became a prt of the UPCI. It was drilled into me by my parents. Thanks for a rather asinine assumption though.

[rrford]

Very kindly, some of you folks have left the planet.

[Rhoni]

I will have to say that RRFord is correct. An affair starts with a look, an e-mail, and a meeting. I don't think ethics are for clergy only. I think we all need to be careful of appearances and on business lunches they are only appropriate in a group - not a woman and a man alone.

[mizpeh]

Originally Posted by rrford

So now a person wanting to be careful and use ethics has a bad mind or heart? Sorry. THat is a horrible mischaracterization. And with ILG turning to back to a UPC mistrust thing I gotta say I am not surprised.

In all honesty there was a day that a married person meeting somene of the opposite sex was unheard of in society at large.

It's really about not giving any appearance of evil and bringing a reproach on the name of Christ.

[scotty]

Originally Posted by Rhoni

I will have to say that RRFord is correct. An affair starts with a look, an e-mail, and a meeting. I don't think ethics are for clergy only. I think we all need to be careful of appearances and on business lunches they are only appropriate in a group - not a woman and a man alone.

And not to forget about spousal stress.

So nothing happened other than some people talking (gossip). Even though a wife or husband knows nothing happened there will still be that lingering thought in the back of ones mind. You can't stop it , its part of the flesh.

I had a boss tell me when he refused a lunch date with an associate, " My wife knows I am faithful, but because others will talk, I refuse to put her in a situation where she has deal with it in any way shape or form"

I would refuse just out of love for my spouse and my desire to not cause her undue worry .

[ILG]

Originally Posted by Rhoni

I will have to say that RRFord is correct. An affair starts with a look, an e-mail, and a meeting. I don't think ethics are for clergy only. I think we all need to be careful of appearances and on business lunches they are only appropriate in a group - not a woman and a man alone.

I think this is true to a degree, but I think there is also a point where it becomes ridiculous. For example, with Renda....her adult son was with her. That is not meeting alone. I think the main thing is to respect your spouse. If you do that, you've got it covered. That means, your spouse chooses how you respect them...not you choose and then say "I respected you, so get over it!"

[rrford]

Originally Posted by Rhoni

I will have to say that RRFord is correct. An affair starts with a look, an e-mail, and a meeting. I don't think ethics are for clergy only. I think we all need to be careful of appearances and on business lunches they are only appropriate in a group - not a woman and a man alone.

Thanks....


See? We can agree occassionally!

[Truthseeker]

Sounds fishy to me. No reason to meet someone of the opposite sex without your spouse. Why would you?