Posted by
Playful Walrus on Monday, August 03, 2009 1:40:37 PM
The Los Angeles Times, that great theological journal, continues to cover the homosexuality advocacy within the Episcopal Church. As if there was any doubt, their editorial board makes it clear that they are very happy.
But its recent pronouncements indicating support for openly gay bishops and church blessings for same-sex couples will have reverberations beyond that church, beyond Christianity and even beyond religion.
Most likely it will mean fewer members for the liberal churches and more fighting within the Anglican denominations.
For all the theological issues it raises, acceptance of gays and lesbians at the altar reflects -- and affects -- the campaign for equality in the larger society.
There is a slight of hand being used here. My church accepts homosexual people. It does not condone, let alone celebrate, homosexual behavior. There is a difference.
One resolution calls for a "renewed pastoral response from this church, and for an open process for the consideration of theological and liturgical resources for the blessing of same-gender relationships."
Yes, but based on what? Certainly not anything in the Bible or in church tradition.
The other affirms that God has called gays and lesbians to "any ordained ministry in the Episcopal Church."
Again, based on what? Warm and fuzzy feelings from the members voting on the matter?
Actually, Episcopalians already have seen an acrimonious parting of the ways between the national church and bishops and faithful who have aligned themselves with churches in Africa and South America that have more conservative (and in some cases crude) views about human sexuality.
It is crude to believe that sex is for marriage?
One could dismiss the fissure in the Anglican Communion as a purely internal matter that turns on theological issues of little import to non-Anglicans or non-Christians, such as whether the church's policy toward homosexuality should be guided by Jesus' seeming lack of interest in the subject or the condemnations of homosexuality in the Old Testament and the writings of St. Paul.
This argument from silence on the part of Jesus is ridiculous. The assumption of Jesus' day among religious authorities and the faithful was that sex was for marriage, marriage united the sexes, and any sexual activity with someone other than your spouse was a sin. If Jesus challenged such notions, then it is far more likely that would have been noted in writings more than some of the other things actually recorded. After all, Jesus did challenge some notions of those in authority and common notions, and it was recorded. However, what is recorded is that Jesus affirmed what we call the Old Testament as the Word of God.
They go on to equate this homosexuality advocacy push in the denomination with ordaining women, before finishing with...
Supporters of Proposition 8 weren't the only ones to cloak prejudice with piety.
Who is prejudging? It takes a bride and a groom to make marriage. If we want our state marriage licensing to reflect that, we are not prejudging. The church is not to affirm and celebrate sinful behavior. That is not prejudging.
Duke Helfand has more than one version of his story on the latest actions within the church posted online. This is the shorter (earlier) version. And here's the blog entry.
Episcopal Church leaders in Los Angeles today nominated an openly gay priest and an openly lesbian priest as bishops, becoming one of the first dioceses in the national church to test a controversial new policy that lifted a de facto ban on gays and lesbians in the ordained hierarchy.
The nominations of the Rev. John L. Kirkley of San Francisco and the Rev. Canon Mary Douglas Glasspool of a Baltimore-based diocese are likely to further inflame theological conservatives in the U.S. church and their global partners in the Anglican Communion, who have repeatedly warned about the repercussions of such action.
The two are among six nominees who will face election for two assistant bishop posts at the diocese's annual December convention in Riverside.
I want to know when "open" atheists will get a fair shake in being put into positions of power and leadership in the church.
In addition to Kirkley and Glasspool, the other nominees are: the Rev. Canon Diane M. Jardine Bruce of St. Clement's by-the-Sea Episcopal Church in San Clemente; the Rev. Zelda M. Kennedy of All Saints Episcopal Church in Pasadena; the Rev. Irineo Martir Vasquez of St. George's Episcopal Church in Hawthorne; and the Rev. Silvestre E. Romero of St. Philip's Episcopal Church in San Jose.
The action in Los Angeles followed a similar decision Saturday by leaders in the Diocese of Minnesota, who nominated a partnered lesbian as bishop. The Rev. Bonnie Perry is rector of All Saints Episcopal Church in Chicago and an adjunct professor at Seabury-Western Theological Seminary in Evanston, Ill. Her longtime partner is a priest in the church.
On the one hand, I think it is kind of silly the paper keeps giving this so much attention. On the other hand, I like how it helps warn those who are looking for a church.
One of the main purposes of a Christian church is to make disciples who will grow in their walk with Jesus. Part of this involves repenting of sin - which means that although you may still struggle with it, you no longer call it right. These people appear to be treating the church like a social club that also happens to be a charity. The Bible clearly teaches that sex is for marriage (believe me, I've looked for a way around that) and that marriage is something that unites the sexes. Any sexual behavior with someone other than your spouse is sinful.
Some people have a rather lame retort to these truths, citing other teachings in the Old Testament that they don't like or seem strange today, forgetting that some things are given in the Bible to a specific person or people for a certain time and with certain conditions. Other things are given to all and reaffirmed as lasting. One of the lasting things that applies to all is that sex is for marriage and that marriage unites the sexes. No church that uses the Bible as Scripture should be affirming, let along celebrating, homosexual behavior, or fornication, or adultery. It doesn't matter how depraved the surround culture gets. If anything, the church should be doing more to defend and promote morality the more the culture deviates from it.
As for the editorial writers and other homosexuality advocates - they don't really believe the Bible has any authority, though they may cite passages here and there that they like. The worldview being used appears to be one that is not Christocentric, but rather focused on their own personal feelings and tastes.
Church membership in our country is strictly voluntary. It is too bad that the homosexuality advocates couldn't stick with churches that seem to have been expressly created for unrepentant homosexuality participants ("metropolitan"). Perhaps more Episcopalians need to think about finding another church, or realigning their congregation with Bible-affirming Anglican organizations. If the church is willing to abandon the Bible on this matter, what will be next?