Info on 2011 Holy Land Pilgrimage

it is written...

The Old Archives

« Canadian Anglican General Synod won't consider same sex marriage in 2010 | Main | Mt Sinai, mid morning »

May 12, 2009

Comments

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

Peter

Hmm, the problem is that you're coming from a worldview that prizes a level table, and trying to engage another worldview which sees nothing wrong with a tipped table, indeed values the gradient.

Or to put it another way, exegesis meets eisegesis!

CPM

Good on you for taking it seriously. I read through it and very cynically dismissed it.

joseph

Peter - I think at least part of this project by FWM was tipped from the beginnig of the mandate. It would be interesting to see (and I think it is needed at some point) a theological rationale for opposite gender marriage. I mean, shouldn't the church give equal time?...

CPM - I suggest that the way forward is to engage, and since I am a member of General Synod and this group derives from it; I will perhaps hold them to a bit of a higher standard with regards to the things they circulate for the church's consumption.

It is always good practice, and good manners, to take people's views seriously. :^)

anthony

Boswell isnt even a theologian, and i am not sure how good of a historian he is. In fact the three they qoute here are pretty poor as historians of the church and critics of theology.

Malcolm+

In fairness, the case against same sex marriage has been fairly well articulated for more than a few years. Hence the request was only to rationalize the case for. It was not intended to be a complete analysis of the entire question.

joseph

Malcolm - I noted that they were given a particular task, and grant that the were charged with providing a raionale for one side only; yet I still believe the rationale to be inadequate. I also think they should come up with a rationale for opposite gender marriage, rather than simply pull out arguments against SSM whenever the need arises. I see a large difference between making a case against SSM as opposed to articulating an Anglican understanding of opposite gender marriage as normative.

As Rowan Williams once said, it is up to those who are seeking innovative understandings to prove their case, and that case must be proven against the normative position of traditional opposite gender marrige. I see this rationale as falling short in the task of addressing the normative understanding of the wider church, and as it fails to address the traditional understanding of marriage, it fails to make its case.

anthony - I tend to agree

Mario

As a theologically untrained layperson that believes same-sex blessings are contrary to God's will, I was keen to read a compelling theological case for same-sex blessings. Instead, I am very alarmed to see the Rothesay Report (1) dismiss portions of the Bible as being “historically and culturally conditioned” (see para 25) and (2) read grand themes of the Bible (ie., loving God and others) as being in OPPOSITION to sections of the Bible prohibiting same-sex intimacy (see para 26).

Unless I mistaken, this is 100% contrary to Article XX of the Thirty-Nine Articles: “The Church hath power to decree rites or ceremonies and authority in controversies of faith; and yet it is not lawful for the Church to ordain anything contrary to God's word written, neither may it so expound one place of Scripture, that it be repugnant to another”.[emphasis added]. As you know, the Articles have been declared in our Solemn Declaration of 1893 as being transmitted “unimpaired to our posterity”.

This type of biblical hermeneutic is also contrary to universal, historic Christianity. Applying ALL of Scriptures as a CONSISTENT whole has been foundational to Christianity since the ecumenical creeds were developed (in a way, that was the entire purpose of the creeds, as corrective, interpretive lenses of Scripture). I understand that Jehovan Witnesses started out as a well-meaning Bible study group that that soon misread Scriptures to deny the "same substance" of the Father and the Son.

Would the authors of the Rothesay Report have the courage to admit this is a seismic split from the universal Church?

joseph

Mario - thanks for your comments. The fuller round of papers from the PTC is now out, and I hope we all might have a look through these, with some more thoughts to follow.

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