I would tend to agree. Just as it was the belief that the gender of the recipient was adiaphora, with respect to the valid confection of the sacrament of orders. and as was the belief that their opinion on the issue(s) were as valid, and likely more moral, than the traditional views that they were seeking to undermine in the TEC.Regardless, although more and more Christian denominations are accepting gay rights, its hardly risk free for them to do so. I think its obvious that they are taking this position based on their genuine considered beliefs. To suggest that they are merely bending to popular sentiment is not only offensive to their beliefs, it ducks any real dialogue on the issue.
And maybe the contemporary secular zeitgeist and the theological developments are heading in the same direction because that is the correct direction.I would tend to agree. Just as it was the belief that the gender of the recipient was adiaphora, with respect to the valid confection of the sacrament of orders. and as was the belief that their opinion on the issue(s) were as valid, and likely more moral, than the traditional views that they were seeking to undermine in the TEC.
That the contemporary secular zeitgeist was moving in the same direction merely made it easier to bring the revolution.
No doubt some think so. But whether it be so, or no, they are certainly equally yoked, and marching toward those goals, in their respective spheres.And maybe the contemporary secular zeitgeist and the theological developments are heading in the same direction because that is the correct direction.
These are my thoughts too, TMC. TEC is tiny compared to the Southern Baptists and the Catholics. Among mainstream self-professed Christians, we are the minority in numbers and in some ‘small’ beliefs.Regardless, although more and more Christian denominations are accepting gay rights, its hardly risk free for them to do so. I think its obvious that they are taking this position based on their genuine considered beliefs. To suggest that they are merely bending to popular sentiment is not only offensive to their beliefs, it ducks any real dialogue on the issue.
The “capitulate to the Media/Culture” soundbite is easy and well worn, of course. But those who know TEC know that there’s no Truth in it.Incorrect… Absolutely incorrect.
It’s not capitulate to the culture. It’s cooperate and converge with the culture.The “capitulate to the Media/Culture” soundbite is easy and well worn, of course. But those who know TEC know that there’s no Truth in it.
Fair enough. The sound similar in my ears!It’s not capitulate to the culture. It’s cooperate and converge with the culture.
There’s a distinction, if not a relevant difference…Fair enough. The sound similar in my ears!
They are not equally yoked. They are following the lead of that portion of the culture committed to secularism and relativism. As relativists, they accept no absolute dogma of what is true or right, but follow the establishment.No doubt some think so. But whether it be so, or no, they are certainly equally yoked, and marching toward those goals, in their respective spheres.
They are equally yoked to each other. Two expressions of a common mindset, one secular, one couched in more… hmmm …spiritual terms. They are not capitulating to each other, they are working in common. I do not think we are in basic disagreement.They are not equally yoked. They are following the lead of that portion of the culture committed to secularism and relativism. As relativists, they accept no absolute dogma of what is true or right, but follow the establishment.
They aren’t exactly yoked to all of American culture, they are yoked to following the powers that be, mainly the media/higher education - in other words, TEC is yoked to a subculture, not America as a whole. The problem with relativism is that you really don’t know where the dominant subculture will go in a decade. With no fixed truths, relativists can twist the Bible to support or oppose anything they want, even what they themselves taught a decade earlier. When you’re yoked, you’re yoked.
Read Orthodoxy, by G. K. Chesterton. Even if you totally reject my opinions, attitude, occasional cramped thinking, and knee-jerk kicks, Chesterton as Anglican saw this all coming.
SheeshYou can read what the Episcopal Church has to say on this issue in the document “Same-Sex Relationships in the Life of the Church.” It includes both the traditional and the liberal positions and their responses to each other.
collegeforbishops.org/assets/1145/ss_document_final.pdf
Desire covers everything from pedophilia and bestiality. Those are desires as well. Are they seriously trying to claim that when follows ones whatever one sexually desires , that brings them to Christ?What is a sexual orientation? It is an orientation of desire. Since Christ “satisfies the desire of every living thing” (Ps 145:16), a sexual orientation, theologically speaking, must be this: a more or less settled tendency by which Christ orients desire toward himself, through the desire for another human being. Alternatively, stated another way–Christ, as God, is nearer to every creature than the creature is to itself. A sexual orientation is a way, a tropos, which the creature follows Christ to come as near to another person as a creature can. The orientation of desire to Christ means that sexual orientation is a moral matter.
Brendan, I hear you and respect your argument. This line of reasoning (pedophilia and bestiality) will never take purchase. And I believe that you know why.Sheesh
From the ‘liberal’ PoV
Desire covers everything from pedophilia and bestiality. Those are desires as well. Are they seriously trying to claim that when follows ones whatever one sexually desires , that brings them to Christ?
It would take purchase if we follow the theology presented to its conclusion.Brendan, I hear you and respect your argument. This line of reasoning (pedophilia and bestiality) will never take purchase. And I believe that you know why.
Then I will run straight to the Orthodox.How can it possibly matter? I understand that the Catholic Church deeply believes that it does matter. But do Catholics in the pews believe that? I wonder? There seems to be considerable dissent. I imagine, that as the younger generation replaces the older generation, that dissent will blossom even more fully.
Exactly. I find no merit whatsoever in saying TEC and the other denominations are merely playing to whatever direction the wind is blowing and with no risk. Just look at the heat they take here as one example.Regardless, although more and more Christian denominations are accepting gay rights, its hardly risk free for them to do so. I think its obvious that they are taking this position based on their genuine considered beliefs. To suggest that they are merely bending to popular sentiment is not only offensive to their beliefs, it ducks any real dialogue on the issue.
Yes Thorolfr, thank you. No doubt a much better source to go directly to TEC than what I provided.Thank you for posting this, Thorolfr. This document lays it out quite well.
yes.Desire covers everything from pedophilia and bestiality. Those are desires as well. Are they seriously trying to claim that when follows ones whatever one sexually desires , that brings them to Christ?
GKC of course has read* Orthodoxy*. But I am guessing the other people on the Thread perhaps have not.They are equally yoked to each other. Two expressions of a common mindset, one secular, one couched in more… hmmm …spiritual terms. They are not capitulating to each other, they are working in common. I do not think we are in basic disagreement.
Your reading suggestion is well taken. But, you did note my board name, I’ll hope.
But have I forgotten to mention that I have collected the works of, and works about Chesterton for over 50 years? Own very nearly everything he wrote, as published under his name, in book or pamphlet form. Love the man. And yes, ORTHODOXY was written while he was an Anglican (a slovenly autobiography, as he said), roughly 13 years before his formal conversion, but at approximately the point when he had come to the conclusion to convert.