Info on 2011 Holy Land Pilgrimage

The Old Archives

« on the Episcopal Church Mission Statement, or "why democracy does not equal God" | Main | updated notes on 2008 pilgrimage »

August 07, 2007

Comments

Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

CPM

A fairly typical misapplication of the graciousness of the gospel of Jesus Christ. Including the standard mudslinging against all who might disagree with his revised gospel. Can you imagine the uproar if any conservative used language as offensive as bigot or homophobe? The concluding paragraph below.

"And it seems to me that if we can draw a circle of the love of Jesus as widely as that, we might even bring in the bigots and the homophobes and one day the Christian community will be as wide as God’s love, as big as the biggest heart in the world."

joseph

I've read the piece and am still processing a response.

in the meantime, CPM, you could always have a look at MIchael Hawkins on The Stewardship of the Sacraments

Speaking of radicals & ne'er do wells, I hear that "Anglican Planet" thing is updated.

ps - I think one might need to address the whole of the argument put forward - does this exegesis bear up? If not, why not?

The Sheepcat

Well, for starters, there's that thang about the closure of public revelation when the last apostle died, or thenabouts.

I've seen it argued (see Gagnon, The Bible and Homosexual Practice, pp. 443-452) that slavery in its 19th-century incarnation was pretty distinct from the ancient institution tolerated--never endorsed--in the New Testament. So that example of Holloway's is a red herring.

As for women behind the altar, I'm sure his audience takes the revisionist position on that issue for granted, but that doesn't make it correct.

Holloway's key point seems to be this:
"And what Jesus wants us to do, therefore, is to understand the function, the purpose of these codes, to hold them firmly enough for them to guide us but not so tightly that we can’t discard them when the need arises."

But what is the pressing need that would justify chucking two millennia of constant Christian teaching on sexual behaviour? When Holloway says about his friend with the fridge door, "the church, as it were, described him as unclean" (emphasis added), ten quid says he's imposing his own construction upon what the church actually said. And I wonder what pastoral solution Holloway would propose for that other group so sorely oppressed by the church: men who sleep with their stepmothers (1 Cor 5). Oy vey.

In short, to extrapolate from the superceding of the purity code as if the moral law is likewise abolished just doesn't work.

joseph

Sheepcat, that last sentence of yours is a good summary of the exegetical problem, and the crux of the issue.

The Sheepcat

Thanks very much, Joseph. Now if I could just remember to look up the spelling of "supersede" next time, I'd be all set!
Alan

Alex

Sheepcat,

Don't worry. Us Canadians have been mis-spelling the word for so long that the official check (dictionary.com) says that both spellings are cromulent.

Alex

The comments to this entry are closed.

September 2011

Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
        1 2 3
4 5 6 7 8 9 10
11 12 13 14 15 16 17
18 19 20 21 22 23 24
25 26 27 28 29 30  

blank stare...



  • Copyright Rev. Joseph Walker, St Timothy's Anglican Church

Subscribe in NewsGator Online

Your email address:


Powered by FeedBlitz

Add to My AOL

feeds