Re: religion on the Sinclair list and web pages

["Kay Garrison" <kgarison@olypen.com>]

John, I agree with you that any religious discussion should be limited to
that which helps explain Sinclair history.  I personally am related to
Sinclairs who are Quaker, Episcopalian, Presbyterian and Roman Catholic. 
Only God knows what other persuasions we have among us.  Shalom!---Kay

----------
> From: John S. Quarterman <jsq@mids.org>
> To: sinclair@jump.net
> Subject: religion on the Sinclair list and web pages
> Date: Thursday, May 27, 1999 8:20 AM
> 
> 
> 
> Folks,
> 
> I was afraid this would happen when I added the religion web pages.
> That's why I included this disclaimer:
>  This set of web pages is a place to put information about religious
events
>  and dogma that affected Sinclair history and genealogy.
>  Religion and politics are notoriously divisive subjects,
>  so let me hasten to say at the outset that opinions from many
>  different people will be represented here, and I do not confirm,
>  deny, attest, or refute any of them, except where I explicitly
>  say so. --jsq
> 
> I suggest we apply a similar disclaimer to religious postings on the
> discussion list.
> 
> Let's back up and think about this a little.
> 
> There have been allusions to the Jesus and Magdalene parentage story
> in the book list in the web pages and in links related to Templars
> for quite some time.  Probably most Sinclairs are aware that that's
> what the Baigent Holy Blood Holy Grail book is about.  So the story
> is nothing new.
> 
> It's also just a story, not to mention one that is generally rejected
> by most scholars who have attempted to check what that books says.
> 
> There are also links to various Muslim pages.  Muslims believe that
> Jesus was just a prophet.
> 
> There are also links to various Jewish pages.  Jews don't even believe
> that Jesus was a prophet.
> 
> There are links to Cathar information.  The Cathars didn't believe Jesus
> was a human.
> 
> There are links to Hindu information.  Some Hindus believe Jesus was
> an avatar of Vishnu.
> 
> Then there are Buddhists, for whom Jesus has no particular significance.
> 
> And that's only a small sample of beliefs that are out there.
> 
> Should I remove all these links, and should no one mention any of these
> things on the list?  I think it's safe to say that some of them are
> considered blasphemous by some people on the list.
> 
> However, please remember that none of you are being asked to believe any
> of them.  At least, I hope not.  Religious proselytizing is probably
> beyond the scope of this list.
> 
> But some or all of the above beliefs are related to topics that are
> relevant to Sinclairs, which is why they are mentioned in the web pages
> and why discussion of them on this list is relevant.  This is a family
> whose motto is Commit Thy Work to God.  Religion (of more than one kind)
> is inextricably intertwined with the history of the Sinclair family.
> 
> I, for one, see no difficulty with anyone describing any of the above
> (or other) beliefs or stories, and also no difficulty with anyone saying
> they don't believe them.  But I would hope that we can all do those
things
> with civility.  And could we all refrain from overgeneralizations such
> as "All Sinclairs believe," as well as from overreactions whenever
somebody
> does slip and post something like that.
> 
> If we can't do that, Niven's idea of a separate list for such matters
> may be what we will need to do.
> 
> Comments?  Opinions?  Suggestions?
> 
> John
> [ This is the Sinclair family discussion list, sinclair@jump.net.
> [ To get off or on the list, see http://www.mids.org/sinclair/list.html
[ This is the Sinclair family discussion list, sinclair@jump.net.
[ To get off or on the list, see http://www.mids.org/sinclair/list.html