" let us not forget Anglicanism’s other notable contribution to the destruction of the family, the approval of birth control in the 1930 Lambeth Conference"
the above statement to me is so bizarre that I have no reply
That’s not really a very strong response. It’s a rhetorical attempt to cover for the fact that you don’t have a good answer.
Rowan Williams, in his lecture “
The Body’s Grace,” essentially agrees with the link between contraception and homosexuality, although of course he differs on the value to be put on both:
In fact, of course, in a church which accepts the legitimacy of contraception, the absolute condemnation of same-sex relations of intimacy must rely either on an abstract fundamentalist deployment of a number of very ambiguous texts, or on a problematic and non-scriptural theory about natural complementarity, applied narrowly and crudely to physical differentiation without regard to psychological structures.
I don’t think the fact that most people fail to obey this difficult teaching is a good witness against it. Have most Christians, historically, loved their enemies? Do most even now?
to the poster of the quote above-sorry if we do not desire to have 10 children -or like many good roman catholics live in poverty in Latin America with our family of 12
sorry for the sarcasm but the above comment really set me off-
I note that Episcopalians are easily set off about birth control. It is in my opinion one of the least lovable habits of Episcopalians. There was simply no need for the response you gave. It was bad-tempered and didn’t really address the point. It supported the stereotype that the Episcopal Church is a church of elites and has contempt for the unwashed masses.
For a Christian, living in poverty is not supposed to be the One Great Evil to be avoided.
the 3 legged stool of scripture-the Tradition of the Church and reason is our bedrock
And are you suggesting that this hermeneutic supports birth control?
Of course, it can be made to support nearly anything.
Edwin
