Conversion therapy

[Carl Emerson]

You seem to have a discomfort with laws designed to regulate harmful practices; I don't. Any "mess" in that situation isn't due to the law, it's due to the problem the law is trying to address.

Yes but the point is this is within the church - such issues should be sorted before God and they havn't been.

 

[Paidiske]

No, it's not just within the church.

And even within the church, it's not going to be sorted as long as some people think God will bless any abuse as long as it's anti-gay. (Because that's the litmus test of Christianity, don't you know? )

 

[Carl Emerson]

From the top down of what, though? Conversion therapy happens in secular organisations, in non-Christian religious organisations, in para-church organisations, and in churches. There's no "top" that can deal with it as a phenomenon, apart from the law.

"and in churches...

There's no lack of top in churches - in fact maybe too much in some cases.

 

[Carl Emerson]

No, it's not just within the church.

And even within the church, it's not going to be sorted as long as some people think God will bless any abuse as long as it's anti-gay. (Because that's the litmus test of Christianity, don't you know? )

Well that is the very thing that needs to be sorted.

There is no place for abuse - that should have been made very clear.

 

[Carl Emerson]

As I have said the church runs the risk of loosing the legal right to operate spiritual ministries that have been a legitimate part of church culture for centuries.

 

[Carl Emerson]

By the way to keep the record straight - I am coming from the angle of seeking to see change from within - not snipe from without.

 

[Paidiske]

There is no place for abuse - that should have been made very clear.

Well, now the law might make it clear.

I look at some of the things mentioned in this report - "corrective rape," imprisonment and "fasting" for weeks, destroying family relationships - and it's clear that this needs to stop.

If churches need to adapt their ministries in order to comply with the law, when this is what happens without that law, I'm fine with that.

 

[Carl Emerson]

The final authority in Church affairs should be the headship of Jesus. If that is not working then there is serious disfunction.

Well, now the law might make it clear.

I look at some of the things mentioned in this report - "corrective rape," imprisonment and "fasting" for weeks, destroying family relationships - and it's clear that this needs to stop.

If churches need to adapt their ministries in order to comply with the law, when this is what happens without that law, I'm fine with that.

Would you be fine with churches loosing the right to operate a deliverance ministry?

That may very well be at stake here...

 

[Paidiske]

Would you be fine with churches loosing the right to operate a deliverance ministry?

I would be fine with the very narrow restriction of churches not being allowed to practice deliverance ministry in an attempt to change someone's sexuality or gender identity.

Deliverance ministry in its entirety is not at all under threat from this; even baptism is a form of deliverance ministry.

 

[Carl Emerson]

Can I illustrate the vast difference between church and civil authority...

Excuse the sedge-way but this true story occurred at a church I attended and I can name the people involved.

There was a hostage situation. A criminal was holding a knife to the throat of a woman known to the church. The police were called but were afraid to burst in for fear the lady could be killed.
An elder of the church walked straight into the house eyeballed the offender and said "sit down in the name of Jesus"
The man was frozen to the spot - and then the police came in and took him away.

Believe me the church has the authority to deal with any issue in church life - to involve the law is a recipe for disaster. To allow issues to develop to the point where police need to be involved is shameful.

 

[Carl Emerson]

I would be fine with the very narrow restriction of churches not being allowed to practice deliverance ministry in an attempt to change someone's sexuality or gender identity.

Does this include addressing the spiritual issues involved at that 'someones' request?

 

[Paidiske]

Can I illustrate the vast difference between church and civil authority...

Excuse the sedge-way but this true story occurred at a church I attended and I can name the people involved.

There was a hostage situation. A criminal was holding a knife to the throat of a woman known to the church. The police were called but were afraid to burst in for fear the lady could be killed.
An elder of the church walked straight into the house eyeballed the offender and said "sit down in the name of Jesus"
The man was frozen to the spot - and then the police came in and took him away.

Believe me the church has the authority to deal with any issue in church life - to involve the law is a recipe for disaster. To allow issues to develop to the point where police need to be involved is shameful.

I don't really think that story is any sound basis for public policy.

Here's how I see it: Conversion therapy is harmful. Conversion therapy continues to this day. The governments recognise that they have a duty to protect the people from that harmful practice. The church should welcome the good in that and cooperate with any such laws passed.

The law is not a recipe for disaster; it's preventing disaster.

Does this include addressing the spiritual issues involved at that 'someones' request?

It would include trying to exorcise someone of their sexuality or gender identity. If you believe there are spiritual issues involved, there are other ways to deal with them.

 

[Carl Emerson]

It would include trying to exorcise someone of their sexuality or gender identity. If you believe there are spiritual issues involved, there are other ways to deal with them.

The persons set aside to function in these areas with the blessing of the bishop are not fools. They would have the gift to identify and deal with spiritual issues if that was what was needed. "other ways" as you suggest in this case would leave the root causes unattended.

 

[Carl Emerson]

Why on earth do we have to work so hard to convince folk that what Jesus, Paul etc. did in dealing with the spiritual realm was needed and an example to follow???

 

[Paidiske]

The persons set aside to function in these areas with the blessing of the bishop are not fools. They would have the gift to identify and deal with spiritual issues if that was what was needed. "other ways" as you suggest in this case would leave the root causes unattended.

No. I am saying that there is more than one way to engage in deliverance ministry. One does not have to make it about sexuality or gender identity in order for it to be effective. In fact I would expect that to be counter-productive.

 

[Paidiske]

Why on earth do we have to work so hard to convince folk that what Jesus, Paul etc. did in dealing with the spiritual realm was needed and an example to follow???

Maybe because plenty of idiots claiming to do what Jesus, Paul, etc. did, have done great harm!

 

[Carl Emerson]

I don't really think that story is any sound basis for public policy.

Sadly you missed the point - authority is given for a domain of responsibility.

The authority to deal with church matters is given to those called and gifted to minister in the authority of Christ.

Civil authorities do not have the spiritual equipment to attend to such matters.

To defer to such authorities in spiritual matters is to abdicate spiritual responsibility and this would surely be symptomatic of a disempowered church.

 

[Carl Emerson]

Maybe because plenty of idiots claiming to do what Jesus, Paul, etc. did, have done great harm!

We are not talking about idiots here, but those called and ordained by the church to operate in deliverance ministries.

 

[Paidiske]

Sadly you missed the point - authority is given for a domain of responsibility.

The authority to deal with church matters is given to those called and gifted to minister in the authority of Christ.

Civil authorities do not have the spiritual equipment to attend to such matters.

To defer to such authorities in spiritual matters is to abdicate spiritual responsibility and this would surely be symptomatic of a disempowered church.

The civil authorities also have a role to play.

For the church to cling to privilege, power and authority rather than humbly seek the safety of the vulnerable is exactly the attitude of which we need to repent.

 

[Paidiske]

We are not talking about idiots here, but those called and ordained by the church to operate in deliverance ministries.

There are plenty of cowboys and idiots who are neither called nor ordained, nor under effective oversight. Again, look at the accounts of what is actually happening!

Or do you think such a law should apply to everyone except the church? Everyone except, perhaps, those churches with adequately robust authority and oversight? And who will get to make that call?

No. The law needs to apply equally to everyone, and there is no reason any church ought to have any issue abiding with this law.