Can we discuss women priests and same sex marriage here?-Anglican/Old Catholic Only

[karen freeinchristman]

Couldn't same sex marriage be somekind of test for our love of everyone regardless of what their preferences are?...
We as Christians need to learn to love EVERYONE.I think that is something that is missing from every church....
God loves everyone and expects the same of us.

Love does not mean sex.
When God reveals to us that he wants us to love everyone, he certainly does not mean that we are to have sex with everyone.
I don't think God is 'testing us' by giving us the issue of same sex marriage. But I do think he is very interested in what we decide to do, as the Church, regarding whether we accept homosexuality or not. And in a way, I am not sure whether it's the final decision that he is interested in most, but rather it's the way we go about deliberating the decision and implementing it.
I think God is mostly interested in the condition of our hearts when we are thinking about these issues and making decisions as the Church.

 

[Little Brother]

Of course I didn't mean that He wanted us to have sex with everyone and I didn't mean to imply that we should.Thats stupid.What I meant was we should love everyone without trivial questions of sexuality and we should be allowed to let people honor the love between two people.Christians all seem to be against homosexuals and I don't know why.Everyone has their part to play in His plan, and who are we to question.Every church is missing the simple practice of acceptance.

 

[karen freeinchristman]

Of course I didn't mean that He wanted us to have sex with everyone and I didn't mean to imply that we should.Thats stupid.What I meant was we should love everyone without trivial questions of sexuality and we should be allowed to let people honor the love between two people.Christians all seem to be against homosexuals and I don't know why.Everyone has their part to play in His plan, and who are we to question.Every church is missing the simple practice of acceptance.

I can understand what you are saying.
One thing I would point out is that many people do not believe that questions of sexuality are 'trivial'. Additionally, I can see a problem if Christians practice acceptance without any boundaries. But anyway.

I am trying to consider this whole issue quite seriously, because I have been advised that I should have a definite view on the matter if I want to pursue the ordained ministry vocation. I find it really, really difficult to come up with a definite view. On the one hand, I can see definite places in scripture where homosexuality appears to be condemned. Is this actually God's view, then? But on the other hand, I know quite a few gay people, some of whom are in monogamous relationships, and I don't think it is very good to condemn them. I don't know what to think.

I wouldn't mind hearing from both sides of the argument, but I must say, Snake, that this is a congregation-specific thread, so I'm not sure of whether the 'rules' allow you to post here. But I don't mind, personally.

 

[Little Brother]

​

I may be posting in an area where I'm not allowed and for that I'm sorry (in the way I say it but don't actually mean it.)This quote strikes me as funny, in a hypocritical way, because you seem to think in a very conservative, preservationist way (I'm not trying to step on any toes), not in a progressive way.Maybe that's what God wants, I dunno.But I think the more we can accept people the way they were created, than the happier it makes God.I just believe that if you think in a certain way, than you should defend that way of thinking without question.Unless it results in a loss of life.But you can't be "progressive" with a preservationist viewpoint.Its just not possible.

 

[Little Brother]

PS- Happy Birthday!

 

[bumblebee62331]

Both involve the change of the gender of a person involved in the sacrament.

The change of gender? I'm sorry, but all the female priests I know are still female. There's no condition that they change their gender to take on their new roles.

I am for female priests.

I am neither for nor against same sex marriages. Civil marriage. Or whatever it's called. I don't think same sex marriages should be blessed in a church (are they?) but I see nothing wrong with two people of the same sex who love each other, getting married in a civil ceremony.

I don't believe the two are similar at all. Two lesbians who marry do not automatically turn into a man and a woman, either physically or mentally. That's the whole point of a same sex marriage. There is no gender change. I know lesbians who are proud to be a woman and don't have 'butchness'.

I don't think there is any basis for an argument such as the above quoted one. Of course, if someone disagrees, post your thoughts.

 

[karen freeinchristman]

you can't be "progressive" with a preservationist viewpoint.Its just not possible.​

I'm not sure I can agree with this statement!
I think there are certain truths in the Bible that remain the same in every culture and age, and this is what I feel is to be preserved. But some things which are in the Bible were really only applicable to the specific culture and time/place. That is what progressives look at differently, I would say.
There is probably a scale of progressives running from conservative progressive through to radical progressive.​

 

[karen freeinchristman]

I am for female priests.

Me, too.

I am neither for nor against same sex marriages. Civil marriage. Or whatever it's called. I don't think same sex marriages should be blessed in a church (are they?) but I see nothing wrong with two people of the same sex who love each other, getting married in a civil ceremony.

I feel pretty much the same, but my question is should the church accept these civil-marriages and affirm these couples as if they were hetero couples, in the church family? If we are not going to bless the marriage in the church in a ceremony, isn't that saying we don't fully accept this type of marriage as being equal to a hetero marriage?

Also, I have trouble with the question of whether the Church should allow practising homosexuals in the priesthood. Abstaining or celebate homosexuals are not a question, because if they are not doing the behaviour which seems to be spoken against in the bible, then that is fine. But if they are openly practising (or even practising without being open about it) should they be accepted as priests? I don't know.

I don't believe the two are similar at all.

I agree.

 

[bumblebee62331]

I feel pretty much the same, but my question is should the church accept these civil-marriages and affirm these couples as if they were hetero couples, in the church family? If we are not going to bless the marriage in the church in a ceremony, isn't that saying we don't fully accept this type of marriage as being equal to a hetero marriage?

Also, I have trouble with the question of whether the Church should allow practising homosexuals in the priesthood. Abstaining or celebate homosexuals are not a question, because if they are not doing the behaviour which seems to be spoken against in the bible, then that is fine. But if they are openly practising (or even practising without being open about it) should they be accepted as priests? I don't know.

Hmm these two points have made me think. I'm not sure how I feel about those situations as I haven't found myself in either of them. I think the church should accept homosexual couples as members of the congregation, just as the church accepts prositutes, drug addicts, alcoholics, people who have sex before marriage etc. I think.

As for whether I agree with a homosexual being a priest? I'm not sure. "Homosexual priest" is an oxymoron to me, I think. I don't know. Now you've got me all confused, but at least it's made me think deeper about this issue.

 

[karen freeinchristman]

Hmm these two points have made me think. I'm not sure how I feel about those situations as I haven't found myself in either of them. I think the church should accept homosexual couples as members of the congregation, just as the church accepts prositutes, drug addicts, alcoholics, people who have sex before marriage etc. I think.

As for whether I agree with a homosexual being a priest? I'm not sure. "Homosexual priest" is an oxymoron to me, I think. I don't know. Now you've got me all confused, but at least it's made me think deeper about this issue.

I'm relieved to know I'm not the only one confused by this issue!

But even in the case of the church accepting prostitutes, drug addicts, alcoholics, etc., etc.; doesn't the church try to help/heal these people? So in a way, accepting them in doesn't mean we accept that they don't try to allow Christ to change them. In which case, is it the same for homosexual couples? It wouldn't make sense to accept them in the church and then proceed to assume they will be trying to change.

I know there isn't a really satisfying answer. That's the problem.
I'm not really expecting anyone to come up with the perfect solution. I guess I'm just trying to process my thoughts about it through this thread.

 

[bumblebee62331]

But even in the case of the church accepting prostitutes, drug addicts, alcoholics, etc., etc.; doesn't the church try to help/heal these people? So in a way, accepting them in doesn't mean we accept that they don't try to allow Christ to change them. In which case, is it the same for homosexual couples? It wouldn't make sense to accept them in the church and then proceed to assume they will be trying to change.

Hmm yes....I don't think they would want to change. But they have to fit in with the Bible, dont they? Although God didn't really say anything about that, did He? So confused...

 

[Colabomb]

Apples and oranges.

One deals with gender, the other sexuality.

While I disagree with Paladin's stance on both of these issues, I agree with him here.

These are different issues, treated differently in Scripture.

It is simple for me, Scripture says both are wrong, and I simply go by what it says.

Granted, if it were up to me, I wouldn't care. If I made the rules, I wouldn't care if there was a lesbian behind the pulpit. But this isn't about me.

I try my best to obey the Wise God of the Universe and Trust that He knows what He is doing.

 

[Colabomb]

And if we're getting into issues of gender, how do you define gender? Genitalia? Chromosomes? If one over the other, which one and why? Because they don't necessarily match in all cases. There are people who appear to be female but who have XXY genes.

What about transgendered persons? Does a woman who undergoes a sex-change operation to become a man not qualify for ordination because of his gender?

My opinion here... not claiming divine revelation.

I don't believe that God would intend for a sex change to happen in the first Place. I believe you are created as you are Created and you should be happy with it.

To monkey with Gender is playing God and I, in my uptight conservativeness..... don't like that.