Fr. Dwight Longenecker: Sneaky, snaky, modernism

[JimG]

“Let me tell you what happened in the Church of England over women’s ordination. The change came about by stealth and persistence.”

Sneaky Snaky Modernism | Fr. Dwight Longenecker

Let me tell you what happened in the Church of England over women's ordination. The change came about by stealth and persistence. First they said it was just about the idea of women's ordination. It was a question that should be debated. No one dreamed that it would happen of course, but...

dwightlongenecker.com

 

[Vonsalza]

“Let me tell you what happened in the Church of England over women’s ordination. The change came about by stealth and persistence.”

Sneaky Snaky Modernism | Fr. Dwight Longenecker

Ah, the age old battle;

“How much must we change in order to survive, but how can we limit that change in order to retain our identity”.

The fight is everlasting.

Today’s trad is yesterday’s modernist.

 

[PickyPicky]

Fr Longenecker, having found the Church of England not to his liking, seems now to feeling uncomfortable in the Church of Rome.

 

[Spyridon]

I personally have no problem with communion for remarried people in certain cases and use of contraception in limited cases.

This is the Eastern Orthodox position and I’m open to implementing it in the Catholic Church.

I absolutely oppose women priests however, and I think women deacons is a very bad idea right now because it would simply be a stepping stone to women priests.

 

[Vonsalza]

I personally have no problem with communion for remarried people in certain cases and use of contraception in limited cases.

This is the Eastern Orthodox position and I’m open to implementing it in the Catholic Church.

I absolutely oppose women priests however, and I think women deacons is a very bad idea right now because it would simply be a stepping stone to women priests.

I can dance to that.

 

[Spyridon]

Whatever happens, I have full confidence the Holy Spirit is guiding the Church.

People who lose sleep over this stuff make me question their level of trust in Providence and the promises of Christ.

Women priests will simply never happen.

Contraception and reception of communion is an issue between the individial couples and communicants and their bishops and God, not the general laity.

The gates of hell shall not prevail against the Church.

 

[Maximilian75]

What justifies the use of conteraception in the EOC?

 

[Spyridon]

It’s a complex issue, but:

Concerning contraceptives and other forms of birth control, differing opinions exist within the Eastern Orthodox Churches. In the past birth control was in general strongly condemned, but today a less strict view is coming to prevail, not only in the west but in traditional Eastern Orthodox countries. Many Eastern Orthodox theologians and spiritual fathers consider that the responsible use of contraception within marriage is not in itself sinful. In their view, the question of how many children a couple should have, and at what intervals, is best decided by the partners themselves, according to the guidance of their own consciences.”1

There are also Orthodox who say it should never be used at all.

Personally, I am at peace with the current Catholic discipline of never using contraception.

But all I’m saying is I would still be at peace if certain forms of contraception were allowed in some circumstances.

http://www.orthodoxevangelical.com/2014/02/04/eastern-orthodoxy-and-contraception/

 

[Maximilian75]

Okay… For a second, I thought you were speaking of RU 486 and the like… preventative conteraceptives, as opposed to abortafacients

 

[Spyridon]

No abortificants should never be used.

The main contraceptive I have in mind is condoms.

I don’t see a whole lot of difference between NFP and condoms in the context of marriage.

 

[JimG]

In the past birth control was in general strongly condemned, but today a less strict view is coming to prevail

Indeed, in the past, contraception was strongly condeemned by all of Christianity, Catholic and Protestant. The doctrne was unchanged through 2,000 years of Catholicism and 400 years of Protestant Reformation history. It was the Church of England in 1930 which first toppled the doctrine and began a domino effect. I guess that’s one reason Fr. Longenecker is suspicious.

 

[Melodeonist]

This last sentence proves it’s a slippery slope we don’t want to go down…

God never changes. We would be teaching error if we tried to “change” His doctrines.

 

[stupidisasstupiddoes]

God never changes

Evidently you’ve never read the bible!

 

[Tis_Bearself]

Whatever happens, I have full confidence the Holy Spirit is guiding the Church.

I’ll hold you to that someday when the Church does something really radical.

Actually I won’t hold you to it because my guess is this will not happen before I myself am in the grave.
Vatican II was too much change already. But I bet if we see the Church in 100 years we might be surprised.

Unless of course the world ends before that.

 

[JimG]

Well, in 100 years, despite Fr. Longenecker’s worries, I don’t think we will have women priests (or bishops), and doctrine will not change.

 

[Vonsalza]

Spyridon:

In the past birth control was in general strongly condemned, but today a less strict view is coming to prevail

…The doctrne was unchanged through 2,000 years of Catholicism and 400 years of Protestant Reformation history…

Sure. Abortifacients were the prime method of BC before the 20th century. For that huge interval of time, the technology of BC hadn’t changed.

And then it did.

 

[Vonsalza]

This last sentence proves it’s a slippery slope we don’t want to go down…

God never changes. We would be teaching error if we tried to “change” His doctrines.

Do you enjoy shrimp? Lobster? Once upon a time they were verboten to the children of God.

 

[JimG]

So then all of Christianity except Catholicism changed its mind on birth control. And a few years later, abortion was legalized.

 

[SuperLuigi]

People who lose sleep over this stuff make me question their level of trust in Providence and the promises of Christ.

In my experience, people who don’t worry enough about these things are the ones who message, respond and call me to tell me: “I’m surprised” “didn’t think it could happen” “how did this happen” ect ect.

Contraception and reception of communion is an issue between the individial couples and communicants and their bishops and God, not the general laity.

The Church has very clear stances on this.

Otherwise, would this be acceptable:

“Slave ownership and not helping the poor and reception of communion is an issue between the individuals and communicants and their bishops and God, not the general laity.”

 

[Vonsalza]

So then all of Christianity except Catholicism changed its mind on birth control.

No they hadn’t. Abortifacients were and still are vilified in most forms of Christianity.

The question arose when we had these new methods of BC pop-up that work differently.

And a few years later, abortion was legalized.

It was already legal in a lot of places. It just became illegal to make it illegal, if that makes sense (if you’re talking about Roe).