Evangelicals treading toward gay marriage?

[dronald]

My idea is this: there are still a lot of Catholics in America that view their Catholicity as being part of their ethnic heritage, rather than as their faith & creed. Catholics didn’t really come to this country in mass until the late 19th century and 20th century. You have a lot of babyboomer Catholics whose Irish/Italian/Polish grandparents were from Europe. So you may have, for example, a middle aged women from Massachusetts who has swallowed down secular liberal values hook, line, and sinker, but she still retains a pseudo-love towards her Catholicity because its part of her background and heritage. Top this off with the fact that she may have been poorly catechized from the beginning and she might even attend Mass now and again, vainly believing that her deplorable views are in some way reconcilable with Christ.

I know a girl originally from London that is in exactly this position. She believes everything that secular liberalism says, but if you ask her if she is Catholic, she will ardently respond “Yes”, and then she’ll tell sentimental stories about her Irish grandpa.

It’s not so different from the situation some Jews are in. They’re conflicted because they want to adopt new age values but they still retain a pseudo-love towards their Jewish faith (though in their case, they have no Magisterium)

American protestants don’t have that sense of heritage; not hardly, because American protestantism has always been a chain of revivals and reforms and revivals.

This is one possible theory, which I think can make sense of at least some secularized Catholics.

Good theory. I think a chart like this would be better if there was some kind of correlation given between Church attendance vs views on homosexual marriage.

If we were to take a poll on Evangelicals and Catholics that attend Church/Mass every Sunday and their views on gay marriage, perhaps the numbers would come out to be extremely close?

If there’s anything Evangelicals and Catholics don’t argue much on it’s abortion and gay marriage, which caused this topic to surprise me. Although, what surprised me even more is the stats favor Evangelicals with regards to traditional beliefs on gay marriage and yet the poster still posted it as an example of dying Evangelical Church’s. :S

 

[Iron_Donkey]

I think you’re right, and I think both sides are guilty. Why do you think it’s so hard for Catholics to believe what Catholics are supposed to? What is it about Catholicism and the way the laity are taught that makes people reject its tenants?

My own experience is that my parish’s CCD was treated as socialization time with added warm and fuzziness, but little to no actual instruction. While our volunteers worked hard, and while there were pizza parties and basket ball games and bible story skits, we simply weren’t really taught much, beyond a passing familiarity with the more well known bible stories and that Jesus loves us. Little intellectual content, a few stories, lots of touchy feely. Which isn’t to say that I think I know how to do it better - getting a bunch of kids who already go to school most of most days to sit through an actual class in an evening has got to be difficult.

I really do wonder why this is. Why would Catholics feel compelled to call themselves Catholic and yet reject its tenants while Evangelicals would abandon the label? It’s almost as if they would feel shame calling themselves Evangelical because of the stigma it has of rejecting abortion and gay marriage sternly. Although Catholics also reject such, why don’t they feel that same shame of being called Catholic?

I wish I knew. I mean, I can see several things that would attract people to the Church whether they at that time agree with it entirely or not, but the idea of professing a blatant contradiction and being ok with that is baffling to me.

 

[Jacob94]

My own experience is that my parish’s CCD was treated as socialization time with added warm and fuzziness, but little to no actual instruction. While our volunteers worked hard, and while there were pizza parties and basket ball games and bible story skits, we simply weren’t really taught much, beyond a passing familiarity with the more well known bible stories and that Jesus loves us. Little intellectual content, a few stories, lots of touchy feely. Which isn’t to say that I think I know how to do it better - getting a bunch of kids who already go to school most of most days to sit through an actual class in an evening has got to be difficult.

I wish I knew. I mean, I can see several things that would attract people to the Church whether they at that time agree with it entirely or not, but the idea of professing a blatant contradiction and being ok with that is baffling to me.

your CCD sounds like a Catholic Joel Osteen Meeting.

 

[ArchAngeles]

I remember many Methodists saying the same thing, but when push can to shove, the minister retained his position.

Yep. This type of thing from the UMC is one of the reasons I left the denomination.

 

[ArchAngeles]

your CCD sounds like a Catholic Joel Osteen Meeting.

 

[steido01]

Are you sure LCMS can never bless same sex marriage? There are plenty of Anglicans just today who probably never thought they’d allow ordination of women based on Holy Scripture. They initially rejected it by a vote, yet it just happened today.

Oh, I’m quite sure. For many reasons. We are right in line with our Roman Catholic siblings on this issue. Here’s the short version: Confessional Lutheranism is not Anglicanism. The latter is… well, motley in its beliefs, while the former are bound to their Confessions. They cannot be realistically compared. But don’t take my word for it: Official LCMS Resource Page, Official LCMS Document, Official LCMS Document. More can be easily found with a Google search.

Perhaps the difference between the Roman Catholic priest who is removed, is that he is removed by one Authority, therefore there really is only One Communion, There are no denominations of Catholicism, “of us” in the RC Church is of the One, not the many . That’s the main difference. The One is also of a universal scope in the RC Communion as with the One authority that assures is remains One and unified.

This is silly. There is only one Communion for the LCMS. We don’t appeal to any other denominations to rule us any more than your communion would. We aren’t part of some mythical “Protestant Church;” we are the Lutheran Church-Missouri Synod. There are no denominations of Missouri Synod Lutherans. If a pastor is defrocked and removed by the Syond, that’s it. If he goes on to start his own denomination or join a different denomination (including yours), then he’s no longer our problem, just as a wayward laicized priest would no longer be your problem (Well, sort of.). Understand what I mean here? No difference. Just because our communion doesn’t place all of the authority in one bishop doesn’t mean it doesn’t have authority to rule itself.

 

[SyroMalankara]

Good theory. I think a chart like this would be better if there was some kind of correlation given between Church attendance vs views on homosexual marriage.

If we were to take a poll on Evangelicals and Catholics that attend Church/Mass every Sunday and their views on gay marriage, perhaps the numbers would come out to be extremely close?

If there’s anything Evangelicals and Catholics don’t argue much on it’s abortion and gay marriage, which caused this topic to surprise me. Although, what surprised me even more is the stats favor Evangelicals with regards to traditional beliefs on gay marriage and yet the poster still posted it as an example of dying Evangelical Church’s. :S

Dying? I am the OP, I didn’t say Evangelical Church’s were dying, only that they were treading toward liberal. Catholics are already majority liberal, but the Church is not.

 

[PRmerger]

I go to an Evangelical Church; one that’s basically what you would imagine. Discussions on the streets with people, going into bad neighborhoods at night to feed the homeless and preach the gospel, anti-abortion, anti gay marriage, rock music, bible study groups, enthusiastic Pastor, no sex before marriage, etc.

It ought to be unnecessary to add all of that in bolded. One simply ought to be able to profess, “I belong to an Evangelical church, thus you know what my church professes”.

However, sadly, you have to add all of that in bolded, because not all Evangelical churches do believe in that.

And the “etc” is a curious addition. It elucidates nothing.

Thus, we have no idea what your pastor teaches on these issues:

Baptism
Rapture
Tongues
Divorce/remarriage
When to celebrate the Lord’s Day
Once saved, always saved
Women pastors
Hell
Sola scriptura/private interpretation
Ordination
Death/Soul Sleep
Church leadership, or no leadership
Head coverings or no head coverings
Health and wealth gospel
Drinking allowed, drinking not allowed
Attend weekly services, don’t have to go to Church
Judge others, don’t judge others
What’s a sin, what is not a sin
Predestination
Is it permissible for women to teach Scripture?

With Catholicism, whether the individual Catholic accedes to her teachings or not, we are all aware of what the CC professes.

 

[PRmerger]

So, when Catholics are pro-homosexuality they are just misguided Catholics trying to live out the love of Christ. When evangelicals are pro-homosexuality, it’s obviously because their heresy of Sola Scriptura has led them into deception.

Yes. Because they are merely being good Protest-ors and following in the paradigm of the First Reformers.

 

[PRmerger]

And when the ELCA finally approves same-gender marriage, it will be done in a democratic way.

Jon

 

[SyroMalankara]

Oh, I’m quite sure. For many reasons. We are right in line with our Roman Catholic siblings on this issue. Here’s the short version: Confessional Lutheranism is not Anglicanism. The latter is… well, motley in its beliefs, while the former are bound to their Confessions. They cannot be realistically compared. But don’t take my word for it: Official LCMS Resource Page, Official LCMS Document, Official LCMS Document. More can be easily found with a Google search.

Wouldn’t the better comparison be between “confessional” Anglicans and “confessional” Lutherans? Although, each sub group within that term would claim to be “really” the confessional ones.

This is silly. There is only one Communion for the LCMS. We don’t appeal to any other denominations to rule us any more than your communion would. We aren’t part of some mythical “Protestant Church;” we are the Lutheran Church-Missouri Synod. There are no denominations of Missouri Synod Lutherans. If a pastor is defrocked and removed by the Syond, that’s it. If he goes on to start his own denomination or join a different denomination (including yours), then he’s no longer our problem, just as a wayward laicized priest would no longer be your problem (Well, sort of.). Understand what I mean here? No difference. Just because our communion doesn’t place all of the authority in one bishop doesn’t mean it doesn’t have authority to rule itself.

If a LCMS becomes Roman or Orthodox, what is the LCMS position about their priesthood?

 

[steido01]

Wouldn’t the better comparison be between “confessional” Anglicans and “confessional” Lutherans?

Yes, I think that’d be a better comparison. Note that neither group favors gay “marriage,” and cannot. That’s also why Confessional Lutherans and Continuing Anglicans generally enjoy a growing affinity toward each other.

Although, each sub group within that term would claim to be “really” the confessional ones.

Aye, we have some level of exclusion just as the Orthodox do (excommunication, even of entire synods, is a pastoral exercise, after all). But LCMS, WELS, ELS, ELDoNA, etc. – all understand each other to be orthodox, Confessional Lutherans, even if we have church-dividing differences (Confessional Lutherans typically have little-to-no difficulty transferring to another Synod when theirs is not available). And none would seek to assert authority over the other’s communion, which is the point I’m making. That whole “See! You all can’t even agree among yourselves!” argument falls flat when “you all” is an arbitrary grouping of separate communions (e.g. “Protestantism”).

If a LCMS becomes Roman or Orthodox, what is the LCMS position about their priesthood?

Interesting question! We recognize both Rome and Constantinople to have valid Sacraments and ministerial orders, so in our view the “validity” (though we do not typically speak in terms of “valid,” “licit,” etc.) of the pastor’s ordination would not necessarily be questioned simply on account of his Orthodoxy or Roman Catholicism. Yet we hold both groups to be in error, and for a pastor to take up a position in an heterodox body would mean that he has abandoned his call to his congregation, his oath to uphold the teachings of the Evangelical-Lutheran Church and made himself no longer fit for ministry or communion within our church. Synod and District response in these rare situations is swift.

 

[steido01]

Yes, I think that’d be a better comparison. Note that neither group favors gay “marriage,” and cannot. That’s also why Confessional Lutherans and Continuing Anglicans generally enjoy a growing affinity toward each other.

Aye, we have some level of exclusion just as the Orthodox do (excommunication, even of entire synods, is a pastoral exercise, after all). But LCMS, WELS, ELS, ELDoNA, etc. – all understand each other to be orthodox, Confessional Lutherans, even if we have church-dividing differences (curiously, Confessional Lutherans typically have little-to-no difficulty transferring to another Synod when theirs is not available). And none would seek to assert authority over the other’s communion, which is the point I’m making. That whole “See! You all can’t even agree among yourselves!” argument falls flat when “you all” is an arbitrary grouping of separate communions (e.g. “Protestantism”).

Interesting question! We recognize both Rome and Constantinople to have valid Sacraments and ministerial orders, so in our view the “validity” (though we do not typically speak in terms of “valid,” “licit,” etc.) of the pastor’s ordination would not necessarily be questioned simply on account of his Orthodoxy or Roman Catholicism. Yet we hold both groups to be in error, and for a pastor to take up a position in an heterodox body would mean that he has abandoned his call to his congregation, his oath to uphold the teachings of the Evangelical-Lutheran Church and made himself no longer fit for ministry or communion within our church. Synod and District response in these rare situations is swift.

 

[SyroMalankara]

Interesting question! We recognize both Rome and Constantinople to have valid Sacraments and ministerial orders, so in our view the “validity” (though we do not typically speak in terms of “valid,” “licit,” etc.) of the pastor’s ordination would not necessarily be questioned simply on account of his Orthodoxy or Roman Catholicism. Yet we hold both groups to be in error, and for a pastor to take up a position in an heterodox body would mean that he has abandoned his call to his congregation, his oath to uphold the teachings of the Evangelical-Lutheran Church and made himself no longer fit for ministry or communion within our church. Synod and District response in these rare situations is swift.

what about if a pastor goes to another “confessional Lutheran” body, or a “confessional Anglican” body?

 

[dronald]

Dying? I am the OP, I didn’t say Evangelical Church’s were dying, only that they were treading toward liberal. Catholics are already majority liberal, but the Church is not.

. Only the Catholic and Orthodox Churches will remain in the next 10-15 yrs.

Should I have said “not remain” instead of dying?

 

[dronald]

It ought to be unnecessary to add all of that in bolded. One simply ought to be able to profess, “I belong to an Evangelical church, thus you know what my church professes”.

However, sadly, you have to add all of that in bolded, because not all Evangelical churches do believe in that.

And the “etc” is a curious addition. It elucidates nothing.

Thus, we have no idea what your pastor teaches on these issues:

Baptism
Rapture
Tongues
Divorce/remarriage
When to celebrate the Lord’s Day
Once saved, always saved
Women pastors
Hell
Sola scriptura/private interpretation
Ordination
Death/Soul Sleep
Church leadership, or no leadership
Head coverings or no head coverings
Health and wealth gospel
Drinking allowed, drinking not allowed
Attend weekly services, don’t have to go to Church
Judge others, don’t judge others
What’s a sin, what is not a sin
Predestination
Is it permissible for women to teach Scripture?

With Catholicism, whether the individual Catholic accedes to her teachings or not, we are all aware of what the CC professes.

So when I make a list it should be implied but when I say “etc” it doesn’t do enough? Oi vey.

 

[Per_Crucem]

what about if a pastor goes to another “confessional Lutheran” body, or a “confessional Anglican” body?

If the Synod is in fellowship with the other confessional body, then there is no problem. An example would be the LCMS and the AALC, or the WELS and ELS. Since they share altar and pulpit fellowship, pastors may move freely between them. In most cases (especially with the smaller Synods), they will share seminaries.

If they are not in fellowship with the other body, they are effectively excommunicated.

Not sure how the Anglicans handle those cases.

 

[PRmerger]

So when I make a list it should be implied but when I say “etc” it doesn’t do enough? Oi vey.

Huh?

 

[Novocastrian]

Yes. Because they are merely being good Protest-ors and following in the paradigm of the First Reformers.

*protesters.

But, once again, I shall remind you that the First Reformers didn’t believe in a doctrinal free-for-all.

 

[ltwin]

Yes. Because they are merely being good Protest-ors and following in the paradigm of the First Reformers.

Well then, the Catholic Church must have swallowed the Protestant Reformation, feathers and all.

(Extra credit for anyone who gets the Reformation humor!)

Why must we ascribe “good motives” to the Catholics who bless what God has forbade and ascribe “negative motives” to Protestants who do the same? Both groups are in open rebellion of God’s law and the truth contained in what both agree is divine revelation. Trying to exonerate Catholics while taking shots at Protestants is really ridiculous.