Skip to comments.Kirk Commission (Church of Scotland) publishes civil partnership liturgy
Posted on 04/24/2013 1:18:23 PM PDT by NYer
The report sets out liturgy for a civil partnership blessing, along with the traditional view of marriage.
A report for the Church of Scotland on same-sex relationships has suggested an order of service for a civil partnership blessing.
The liturgy contains ideas for scripture readings, including passages about David and Jonathan, and Ruth and Naomi.
The report by the special Theological Commission, which was appointed in 2011, also presents the traditional view of marriage as between a man and a woman.
The Church of Scotland said the report described the breadth of theological opinion that existed and did not represent the views of the Church.
A spokesman said: On the one hand the report offers the Church a way of allowing the ordination of ministers in same-sex relationships who have entered into a civil partnership, while protecting both individuals and congregations who in conscience do not agree with the theological principles which underpin that choice.
“On the other hand the report, while reaffirming its belief that homophobia is sinful, invites the Church to reaffirm its traditional stance that the only appropriate expression of sexual activity should be within marriage between one man and one woman.”
The report does not offer any recommendations.
The Church of Scotlands governing body will vote in May on the future position of the Kirk based on the report.
Revd John Chalmers, the principal clerk to the General Assembly, said: The Report and the options which it provides are offered at this stage without comment from the convener or members of the commission; it will be for the General Assembly alone, based on the substance of the theological arguments to come to a mind on this matter.”
He added: “In the meantime, the report, which is wide ranging and detailed, is commended to the whole Church for prayerful study and consideration.
Another “church” people should stay away from
For most non-Catholic churches, go along to get along always trumps everything else.
Whether it’s reversing themselves to teach contraception is no problem after four hundred years of teaching that it was a sin or reversing themselves and teaching that homosexual acts aren’t sin, they alway seem to adapt to whatever the society they’re in finds appealing.
On the other hand the report, while reaffirming its belief that homophobia is sinful, invites the Church to reaffirm its traditional stance that the only appropriate expression of sexual activity should be within marriage between one man and one woman.
The work of theological quislings who think they have found a way to have their cake and eat it too.
Where can a copy of this liturgical wonder be found ?
“Dae ye, Bruce, tak’ ye, Bruce, tae dae gantin’, unnatural an’ sinful things tae each other afair ye gie fed up an’ bugger some other Bruce?”
(via the English to Scottish translator at whoohoo.co.uk)
I imagine the Book of Ruth was chosen because it indicates that oral sex outside of marriage isn’t wrong. In fact, it is the quickest way to get a husband.
Read it again. Naomi, Ruth’s mother-in-law instructs her to sneak into where Baoz is sleeping and to give him a hummer. Boaz’s orgasm awakens him, and he is delighted. Ruth, being a Moabite (i.e. descendent of the incestuous relationship between Lot and his daughter) must have been greatly skilled. At least, Boaz says so. He offers to marry Ruth if the guy with a better claim to her let’s her go. Then he talks that guy out of marrying her. Thus begins the line that leads to David (and the lord himself).
So I guess all those stories about him and Spock were true after all ...
That is so stupid.
yes, stupid, that is some kind of interpretation!!! Sheesh.
“For most non-Catholic churches, go along to get along always trumps everything else.”
Baloney. What is the point in painting such a broad brush statement? There is a world of a difference between liberal and conservative churches of all types.
The RCC isn’t exactly conservative on border issues and gun issues is it? It’s the opposite isn’t it?
But does John Knox approve this message?
Delude yourself all you like, but laying out the facts about the characteristics of the 70% of non-Catholic "Christians" in this country or anything else isn't "painting with a broad brush". It's correctly characterizing the majority.
The vast majority (that means over seventy-five percent or better for those of you in Rio Linda) of the people who claim to be Christian in this country are in churches that are going along with both the ordination of queers and the marrying of queers to one another and whatever else is popular in their area. They reflect the society they're in, not Jesus Christ.
Since another ten or twelve percent of those who claim to be Christian are not Christian to begin with, the remaining twenty percent or less are whistling past the graveyard of Protestant and Protestant derived "Christianity" in this country to hide from reality.
Have you read the Book of Ruth? Here’s a good exegesis:
Thanks for spelling our your feelings for all to see.
John Knox is rolling in his grave.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.