Posted on 10/01/2007 1:00:06 PM PDT by SmithL
On Sunday - the deadline set by church leaders for the Episcopal Church to roll back support for same-sex unions - the U.S. church's presiding bishop said unequivocally at San Francisco's Grace Cathedral that there would be no retreat.
"All people - including gay and lesbian Christians and non-Christians - are deserving of the fullest regard of the church," the Most Rev. Katherine Jefferts Schori declared during an hourlong discussion before services. "We're not going backward."
Jefferts Schori said these are the views of the church's bishops as well as its lay members - who have increasingly affirmed rights for same-sex couples. As such, Jefferts Schori's comments served as the punctuation to a historic day.
What will happen next is unknown. But a number of U.S. bishops on Friday declared that they are unifying the scores of breakaway churches that view homosexuality as sinful. They are seeking alternative oversight from conservative leaders based abroad.
"A schism of sorts seems inevitable," said the Very Rev. Alan Jones, dean of Grace Cathedral, who moderated the Sunday discussion with Jefferts Schori.
Anglican Communion leaders issued a communique in February for the U.S. Episcopal Church's bishops to state by Sept. 30 that the church would not authorize rites for same-sex unions or approve gay clergy as bishops. Conservatives viewed it as an ultimatum. Some have suggested that the Episcopal Church's price for noncompliance might be lesser status within the 77 million-member Anglican Communion, the body of churches whose roots are in the Church of England.
(Excerpt) Read more at sfgate.com ...
Or do you not know that the saints will judge the world? And if the world is to be judged by you, are you incompetent to try trivial cases? Do you not know that we are to judge angels? How much more, then, matters pertaining to this life!
“...you are probably a troll. I’ll wait and see.”
Oh, what the heck. Call in the Krusader Kitties.
Perhaps the idol is unity. I believe you can find a few references in the Bible to not associating with those who call themselves believers and choose to persist in a pattern of sinful behavior.
That's fine, so far as it goes.
But it is not up to us to decide who is, or is not, a Christian -- to do so, is to judge something that is in neither of our job descriptions. You did that, though .... which is a bit close to what Paul warns us against.
I noticed you provided a counterpoint to every one of DaveBuck’s examples, except for slavery. I’m admittedly not religious, so just out of curiosity, how do you reconcile the fact that the Bible seems to condone such a clearly immoral institution?
I’m just curious because you said, “I am quite historically certain that we believe the same thing now as we believed in 33 A.D.” How can you make that statement given that slavery was pretty much universally recognized as a morally acceptable institution for hundreds of years?
And perhaps there is a total lack of clarity concerning the prioritization(s) of ecumenical efforts by the ELCA.
First should be intra-Lutheran unity with the LC-MS. Extremists on both sides have made that a total non-possibility; the ready embrace and disproportionate influence of the AELC/Seminex schismatics will be neither forgotten nor forgiven by St. Louis.
Second should be serving as a bridge church between the Eastern Patriarch and the Bishop of Rome; but the extremist embrace of abortion, gay rights, etc, have rendered that also a non-possibility.
So the only remaining course is to become part of generic American liberal Protestantism. Never mind that it was tried and failed by Samuel Simon Schmucker et. al. in the mid 19th Century.
"Those who do not learn from history...."
Proof texting is an ugly thing. For example, that quote from 2 Corinthians has the misfortune of seeming to contradict Jesus' own words in, say, Matt. 7:1-3. The secret to untangling that mess is to understand the context.
God alone knows our relationship with Him -- it is not for us to judge that.
The answer is a simple "No." One cannot say that certain ways of behavior which were considered an unspeakable perverse abomination until about 30 years ago--based on the Bible first, then Reason, and Tradition, are now suddenly a new blessing of the Holy Spirit. Such an attitude is perilously close to blasphemy of the Holy Spirit which is, as we know, the unforgivable sin--something everyone should shudder about.
Starting in 2000 BC with Abraham, consistantly in scripture, through the Old Testament and New Testament times too, homosexual practice has been absolutely condemned. Any ancient near east scholar worth his salt, even the pro-homosexual ones--will admit as such. These were not naive sheltered people either--the surrounding nations to ancient Israel were among the most sexually deviant in history--and of course the New Testament was written at the start of the decline of the Greco-Roman culture--a decline marked by increased sexual depravity. Paul and the apostles were observant Jews, agreeing whole heartedly, with Jesus Himself on traditional Old Testament sexual mores.
The whole issue is nothing more than rebellious Baby Boomer types who came of age during the "sexual revolution" (call it the deviancy started in the '60s) who never grew out of it...and can't bear to think God would dare ask people not to do some things if they feel good.....The Episcopal Bishops could care less about the Holy Scriptures--or the opinions of the Church united through the centuries or in the world today--as they are so much more enlightened and smarter than all that.
I pray that if repentance is not coming, God will harden them to the point of laughable ridiculousness, that our nation and the world will know the utter folly of sin and it's resultant blindness.
If you let anything go because you don't want to 'judge', you will eventually end up where the ECUSA, PCUSA, UCC, and other mainline groups have found themselves.
Why are you trying to steer this thread off-topic? That’s called trolling, and considered bad form.
Isn’t it true that if you examined christian practices and beliefs every century for the last 1000s years that it would be different at each one? Stoning OK. Stoning bad.
Stoning was a practice of the theocracy of ancient Israel...which more or less ceased as an entity before the time of Christ. It was never practiced by Christians--as Christianity has not been political entity or kingdom. In AD 50, the original Apostles decided that Kosher law (dietary) regulations were not required of gentile Christians, along with other essentially pre-Christ Jewish religious practices.
Woman are subservant, woman are equal. Slavery is OK. Slavery is not OK. Black and whites shouldn’t interbreed. Blacks and whites can be married.
All these are cultural practices by nations which adopted Christianity--change for the better didn't occur all at once. Do you really think 2000 years of progress is arbitrary?
Divorce is a horrible sin. Divorce should be avoided. Divorce is sometimes necessary.
Ancient Judaism and Jesus Christ Himself took the latter two positions--medieval Roman Catholicism made up a stricter standard--not well defensible from the Bible.
Women must not talk in church. Women can talk but can’t preach. Women can sorta preach. Women can preach on sista!
This has been an issue in virtually all churches for less than 100 years--5% in the time Christianity has existed.
Give away your belongings and follow jesus. Keep your belongings, gain wealth and still follow jesus.
The church has never required full communalism--but has at times been infected by a health and wealth "gospel" unfortunately. Private property though has always been assumed--along with care for the poor.
Jonah was in a big fish. Story of Jonah is a parable.
Only since the Enlightenment a priori denial of the supernatural (200 years) has Jonah been called a parable. Naturalism and Englightenment thought is just an excuse for people not to reconcile themselves to the claims of Christ.
Crusades a good idea. Crusades a bad idea.
Again, a product of medieval thinking--a full thousand years ago. Besides, given our troubles with Islam today, don't you find the Crusades all the more understandable???
Earth is center of universe. Earth not in center. Jews won’t get to heaven. Jews do get to go to heaven.
Other than those who don't really believe in Jesus and the scriptures no Christian will say those who reject Jesus go to heaven, period.
I mean, come on. Look how different your christian beliefs are from those in the dark ages or even in the 1600s, 1700, 1800s or even early 1900s.
If you will really study the 1600s to today, you'd find many Christians, with a few minor details excepted, believe the same things Luther or Calvin believed then (in the 1500s) with development in some cultural areas (a rejection of forced servititude for example). My essential beliefs are not all that different than say, of St. Augustine of approx AD 400. Most conservative Christians, if they knew what Augustine taught, would say the same thing....
One thing that hasn't changed at all, and is common to all traditional Christians, from Egypt to Greece to Rome to Wittenberg, or Geneva, no matter what issues of theology they differed on, are sexual morals. Yes Roman Catholics don't permit divorce (though anullment comes pretty close...) but sex outside of marriage is, and always has been, considered wrong, and, relevant to this debate, homosexual practice, like incest or bestiality, has always been known as very wrong.
Only since the 1960s, or really the '70s for most, has there been confusion on issues of sexuality--and then, only among those who long before abandoned the bible as their highest authority.
She is every bit as nutty and evil as she looks.
She is not the reason I am no longer an Episcopalian, but she is one of the fruits of the misconduct that caused me to flee from the wrath to come.
St. Paul also placed a direct command on Philemon to free a slave, Onesimus, in Philemon 1:15-17.
And those are just a couple of examples. Despite the fact that slavery was just part of the landscape everywhere in the ancient world, the Bible still speaks against it (and was the first authority to do so.)
And you realize, of course, (1) that slavery is still rife throughout most of the world, and (2) that it was the Christians who freed the slaves in England and in America, and spread this concept through the world?
Let’s say you enter a room full of people that you have known for some time. You are feeling particularly evangelistic. You decide to share the Gospel with one of them. Which one will you approach?
No argument there. My complaint, rather, is the readiness with which some folks call others non-Christian -- which is not their job.
I suppose I'm taking it a little personally -- I've had a bellyful of that sort of crap in recent months, dished out by folks who are not particularly pure in their own lives and actions.
Agreed. But there are a lot of those things to which we give our own, tacit approval. None of us is immune.
Yet with these slimy false teachers cheering them on, telling them their sin is A-OK, hip, cool, acceptable...how will they ever have a chance to know God's truth?
Again, I agree. That's the problem I have with the Episcopal Church right now. Then again, I find that those on the conservative side are often so caught up in the politics of this stuff that they forget to show any sort of humility or Christian love -- they offer no solace to a seeker who doesn't care about the politics.
So on the one side you have a group of folks who are dismantling the Christian foundations.
And on the other side you have a bunch of folks whose cold, unpleasant, sometimes hypocritical, and sometimes even wild-eyed behavior gives Christianity a bad name. Televangelists are an obvious example, but I'm thinking also of folks like David Virtue, who pretty much makes his living by promoting controversy and tension.
It's very easy to blame the liberals -- and they do merit a hefty portion of blame. But we conservatives are the ones who really have something to answer for: we're the ones who let it get to this point, and we'll do it again and again, because (IMO) we're too prone to getting lazy and smug -- and we behave very badly when finally we realize that (once again) we've given away the store.
Oh, I don't know. I figure if everything goes as it should, that God would lead me to the proper person(s). I doubt I could do it on my own.
There's not really enough information in your scenario for me to give a better answer.
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.