Same-sex ‘marriage’ in the Church of Norway

[Thorolfr]

Well only if you’re near the nation of Mexico. But your example is one start, Thorolfr. Thank you for it.

And I guess that Mexicans could have American slaves

 

[SyroMalankara]

Truth is eternal, huh? According to Leviticus 25:44-46:

So if that is eternal truth, would God see nothing wrong if I wanted to have a Mexican slave that I could have as my property and that my children could inherit as property?

Are you a Levite, that this would somehow apply to you? And would he not already be considered a legal citizen, if not he, then definitely his children born on the land? And should said slave take you to court, perhaps he would return the favor, would you be willing to risk that since you believe this to be eternal truth?

 

[Sy_Noe]

And I guess that Mexicans could have American slaves

Only if the Americans can climb a big wall.

 

[Starwarsfan2]

Truth is eternal, huh? According to Leviticus 25:44-46:

So if that is eternal truth, would God see nothing wrong if I wanted to have a Mexican slave that I could have as my property and that my children could inherit as property?

Difference between the eternal moral law , and the ceremonial law , stated by tradition to be seperate , and scripture as well

 

[Thorolfr]

Are you a Levite, that this would somehow apply to you?

The rules in Leviticus don’t only apply to Levites, or so I’ve been told. For example, there’s Leviticus 18:22:

22 You shall not lie with a male as with a woman; it is an abomination.

 

[Thorolfr]

Difference between the eternal moral law , and the ceremonial law , stated by tradition to be seperate , and scripture as well

The distinction between moral and ceremonial laws is a later development and there is not even complete agreement about what belongs in each category.

 

[Randy_Carson]

Well, for now. Charles Porterfield Krauth is instruction in this.

ISTM that the line, “Priests who do not want to celebrate a marriage between a same-sex couple will still have the right to object.”, fits into the second level - ** "The Church shall do nothing which looks like deciding between them; that would be partiality. It is bigotry to assert any superior right for the truth. "**
Soon, we will see, not only in Norway, but in the liberal Lutheran synods here and elsewhere, the third level - "From this point error soon goes on to its natural end, which is to assert supremacy."
IOW, that which was truth, is now error. That which was error, is now truth.

Jon

steadfastlutherans.org/2012/04/charles-porterfield-krauths-three-steps-to-doctrinal-and-ecclesial-nihilism/

Luke 22:32
But I have prayed for you, Simon, that your faith may not fail. And when you have turned back, strengthen your brothers.

 

[Randy_Carson]

pablope;13827885:

I guess I just don’t see the conundrum that you do if a church teaching is that the bishops or priests or pastors have the choice to celebrate a marriage or not.

Ephesians 4
4 There is one body and one Spirit, just as you were called to one hope when you were called; 5 one Lord, one faith, one baptism; 6 one God and Father of all, who is over all and through all and in all.

 

[Sy_Noe]

Sy Noe;13827904:

Ephesians 4
4 There is one body and one Spirit, just as you were called to one hope when you were called; 5 one Lord, one faith

, one baptism; 6 one God and Father of all, who is over all and through all and in all.

Except we don’t truly know which one that is without belief and faith. Obviously Catholics maintain theirs is by their faith.

 

[JonNC]

I guess I just don’t see the conundrum that you do if a church teaching is that the bishops or priests or pastors have the choice to celebrate a marriage or not.

Except that a "same gender marriage " is not a marriage.

Jon

 

[pablope]

pablope;13827885:

I guess I just don’t see the conundrum that you do if a church teaching is that the bishops or priests or pastors have the choice to celebrate a marriage or not.

But this is not a church teaching…the church’s teaching is whether to marry a gay couple or not…so which is it…will it allow it or not…which is God’s will, according to the church of Norway?

It has to make a stand…it seems like it refuses to make a stand if it allows both.

So again…which is it…which will is God’s is the priest following?

a). To marry a gay couple

b). Not to marry a gay couple

A or B?

 

[pablope]

Sure once we get there and truly know it rather than merely believing we know. In the meantime no one is forcing you to be part of a more liberal faith just as no one is forcing me to be part of a conservative one. I’m at peace where I am away from the conservative faiths as I imagine you are being away from the “more liberal Lutheran synods” which you alluded too. We each walk our faith journeys in the meantime. That’s not a problem for me.

So…what you are saying, is you decided for yourself what is comfortable, you did not want your conscience to be bothered or developed by Church teaching you did not agree with.

In essence, you decide what is God’s will is? And for you, that which you agree with is the truth of God’s will?

 

[jlhargus]

Truth is eternal, huh? According to Leviticus 25:44-46:

Quote:
44 As for the male and female slaves whom you may have, it is from the nations around you that you may acquire male and female slaves. 45 You may also acquire them from among the aliens residing with you, and from their families that are with you, who have been born in your land; and they may be your property. 46 You may keep them as a possession for your children after you, for them to inherit as property.

So if that is eternal truth, would God see nothing wrong if I wanted to have a Mexican slave that I could have as my property and that my children could inherit as property?

I would say slavery was not an eternal truth, but a cultural reality as capital punishment. The eternal moral law forbad mistreatment of slaves and prisoners. Those who violate the moral law, must repent or answer to God.

 

[TonyBS]

I would say slavery was not an eternal truth, but a cultural reality as capital punishment. The eternal moral law forbad mistreatment of slaves and prisoners. Those who violate the moral law, must repent or answer to God.

Who was being punished?

Slave, Master or both.

Regards Tony

 

[jlhargus]

We have thousands of years of Scripture, Tradition, the Church, history and most especially prayer. If one sincerely wants to know the truth. Then sincerely ask Christ and be willing to follow where that leads.

[Lk16:30 And he said, Nay, father Abraham: but if one went unto them from the dead, they will repent. 31 And he said unto him, If they hear not Moses and the prophets, neither will they be persuaded, though one rose from the dead.]

[Rms1:18 For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who hold the truth in unrighteousness; 19 Because that which may be known of God is manifest in them; for God hath shewed it unto them. 20 For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse:]

[2Thes2:9 Even him, whose coming is after the working of Satan with all power and signs and lying wonders, 10 And with all deceivableness of unrighteousness in them that perish; because they received not the love of the truth, that they might be saved. 11 And for this cause God shall send them strong delusion, that they should believe a lie: 12 That they all might be damned who believed not the truth, but had pleasure in unrighteousness.]

 

[jlhargus]

Who was being punished? Slave, Master or both. Regards Tony

You tell me.

 

[TonyBS]

You tell me.

Your words, “but a cultural reality as capital punishment”.

Thus please explain.

Regards Tony

 

[Thorolfr]

I would say slavery was not an eternal truth, but a cultural reality as capital punishment. The eternal moral law forbad mistreatment of slaves and prisoners. Those who violate the moral law, must repent or answer to God.

So what did it mean not to mistreat slaves? Did it mean that you could beat them, but just to do it in a loving way?

According to St. Augustine, Enarrationes in Psalmos, in Corpus christianoruam, series Latina (Turnhout, 1953-), 40: 1464-6:

If you see your slave living badly, what other punishment will you curb him with, if not the lash? Use it: do. God allows it. In fact he is angered if you don’t. But do it in a loving rather than a vindictive spirit.

Servumque ipsum tuum, si male viventem videris, non poena aliqua, non verberibus refrenabis? fiat hoc, fiat : admittit deus, imo reprehendit, si no fiat ; sed animo dilectionis fac : non animo ultionis.

 

[JonNC]

Here is the eternal definition of marriage from Christ Himself:

. 6But from the beginning of creation, ‘God made them male and female.’ 7‘Therefore a man shall leave his father and mother and hold fast to his wife,a 8and the two shall become one flesh.’ So they are no longer two but one flesh. 9What therefore God has joined together, let not man separate.”

. Mark 10

Jon

 

[Tomyris]

Those who follow Christian news may have heard that the synod in the Church of Norway have voted on in favour of allowing same-sex ‘marriage’ in the Church.

I am, as a priest in the Church of Norway, part of a group who seek alternative episcopal oversight (as in the Church of England), but I’m not especially optimistic. I was interviewed by three newspapers (because I am a vicar or parish priest who, alongside 200 others, have signed a petition, declaring that marriage is between one man and one woman), and I have said that if nothing happens before the new liturgy has been passed (it doesn’t yet exist), which will probably be in January 2017, I will have to resign my office and no longer remain as a member of the Church. I will probably, in that scenario, stay until the summer of 2017, for the sake of the youth in my confirmation class.

If it happens, I will have to go elsewhere. Where that is, I don’t know. I just know that some small Lutheran free church will not be an option. I’m not part of the Church of Norway specifically because it’s Lutheran but because it’s the historical Church of the Norwegian realm.

Prayers will be appreciated. Monday was a sad day indeed.

I think Wolfhart Pannenberg says it best, and I’ll give him the last word:

Those who urge the church to change the norm of its teaching on this matter must know that they are promoting schism. If a church were to let itself be pushed to the point where it ceased to treat homosexual activity as a departure from the biblical norm, and recognized homosexual unions as a personal partnership of love equivalent to marriage, such a church would stand no longer on biblical ground but against the unequivocal witness of Scripture. A church that took this step would cease to be the one, holy, catholic, and apostolic church.

I’m asking myself, and then, you, why you started this thread. I think as a request for prayer (and to give background for the same) and perhaps as an outlet for frustration. My own denomination split from the major Presbyterian denom here over issues like this, and our particular church split from it and joined the more conservative demon over this kind of issue: Biblical morality or denominational rush to anything goes.

Of course you would expect various sorts to show up and mutter about Petrine authority, as has been done on a million threads here, often by the same people repeatedly. That is what you get on a Catholic Apologetic forum. But I would rather there be a compassionate response for your personal sorrow and sorrow for your Church than for there to be ANOTHER debate on things we have gone over a million times. I am afraid some will cheapen what you are going through to score a few tired apologetic points.

The pain I sense in you is deep and profound. I am deeply and profoundly sorry that you are bearing this cross. May God’s grace and peace go with you and may the Holy Spirit guide you. May we all unite in prayer, may there be unity in the Body of Christ; may HE prevail. We know He will.