Homosexual Clergy question

[LuxPerpetua]

Does anyone know the official reasons churches are citing for ordaining homosexual clergy?

I know that the United Church of Christ (I think), the Episcopal church, and now, it seems, the Methodist church are approving of openly homosexual clergy, but are there any other denoms at the moment jumping on this "bandwagon" ( )?

 

[countrymousenc]

There are other denoms examining the question. I think the ELCA is one of them, seem to remember reading that at their official website. There doesn't actually seem to be an official statement as to why from any of them. Proponents for allowing non-celibate homosexual clergy have decided that it is unloving and discriminatory to bar anyone from the vocation of ministry because of the person's sexual orientation, and that, if a homosexual couple is monogamous, their relationship is no different from that of a faithfully married heterosexual couple in God's eyes.

This implies that Christendom has misinterpreted the Scriptures regarding homosexual behavior prior to this, meaning that the Church cannot authoritatively and infallibly interpret what the Bible says. The question is not whether a pope or bishop is infallible, the question is the Church herself. If they are right, the Church has erred for nearly two thousand years in calling all homosexual behavior sinful. Therefore, the Church has proven not to be trustworthy in deciding what is sinful (if these people are to be believed.) If the Church does not know what is sinful, then the Church does not know from what we need to be saved.

 

[Bulldog]

The Presbyterian Church in America is currently going through a gig conflick about gay clergy. The way its looking, they probably will eventualy ordain gay clergy.

 

[Lotar]

I think all the denoms that ordain women will eventually ordain homosexuals.

 

[nadroj1985]

If the Church does not know what is sinful, then the Church does not know from what we need to be saved.

I'm not sure this necessarily follows. The Church has been wrong before, but it's still considered to be right by most Christians in its view of salvation.

 

[countrymousenc]

I think all the denoms that ordain women will eventually ordain homosexuals.

I think you're right. In ordaining women to the priesthood, those churches have already broken with Tradition, and denied the Church's ability to rightly interpret the Bible. We shouldn't be surprised at anything else they do.

 

[seebs]

The question is not whether a pope or bishop is infallible, the question is the Church herself. If they are right, the Church has erred for nearly two thousand years in calling all homosexual behavior sinful.

Yes. This is one of the heavy burdens Protestants must bear; we have accepted that it is possible that "the Church", as a whole, may yet have errors to be led out of. We have had this debate before, on many issues. Modern churches teach that historical positions on slavery were wrong. Protestant churches teach that historical positions on many issues were wrong. Different churches teach differently on many issues.

We will not know, for some time, whether we are being led astray or led into all truth as promised. Many of the things we have come to doubt about historical teachings have worked out well; some, perhaps, not so well.

It would be a lot easier for us to seek the truth in this matter if we were more consistent in seeking understanding of differing positions. The people who are wrong on this issue - whoever they are - nonetheless appear to be sincere in their desire to seek God's will in this and other issues.

It is humbling reading documents from other debates within our history. Debates over the ordination of women continue to this day. Debates on the nature of war, and how far to take the injunction not to resist the evil man, continue.

 

[Plan 9]

Has anyone else noticed that there are already three threads on this subject just on the first page? Wouldn't it be more productive to stick to one? For instance, some of the answers Lux is seeking are in the Methodist thread.

 

[countrymousenc]

Lux isn't only asking about Methodists.

 

[Lotar]

People are outraged about this now but five years from now it won't even hardly be mentioned, just like the ordaination of women. So many sects have now adopted the historical critical method of interpretation of scripture. They hold nothing as absolute and bind themselves only to the "spirit" of their confessions, or the "message" of the gospel; and even then what that message is is open to interpretation. This has opened them up to heredoxy and apostacy.

 

[Plan 9]

Lux isn't only asking about Methodists.

Since Lux wants to know the "official reasons", as she put it, that thread would make a fine starting place, especially since she specifically mentions the Methodist church in her OP.

 

[countrymousenc]

Perhaps we should leave that up to Lux, don't you think?

 

[BBAS 64]

Good Day, Lux


This is very troubling with the churches of today seems people have forgotten some simple things:

"I beg of you, my dear brother, to live among these books [scripture], to meditate upon them, to know nothing else, to seek nothing else." - Jerome (Letter 53:10)

Joh 8:30 As he spake these words, many believed on him.

Joh 8:31 Then said Jesus to those Jews which believed on him, If ye continue in my word, then are ye my disciples indeed;

Joh 8:32 And ye shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free.

Peace to u, Even though I feel troubled inside

BBAS

 

[SpiritPsalmist]

I think all the denoms that ordain women will eventually ordain homosexuals.

I find this a very odd statement. . .I strongly disagree. I know many scriptures that backup woman being used to preach the gospel. There are none that back up laying hands on one living in sin and sending them forth to preach the Word.

 

[Plan 9]

Perhaps we should leave that up to Lux, don't you think?

Of course.
In the meantime, it might be nice if someone besides Bulldog attempted to address the OP? Were the OP being addressed, this would be a helpful thread indeed and I would be the first to support its continued existence.

Bulldog, where should I go on that site to find the relevant material, please? I can't find it.

Lux, if you were to PM Origen (United Methodist) and Polycarp1 (Episcopalian), both of them seem quite knowledgeable about their respective denominations, and I feel sure they would be happy to explain.

 

[Lotar]

It is not odd at all.

Why do certian sects ordain women? Because they re-inturpret scripture and say "Well, Paul probably never meant for that inturpretation," and so on.

Those who accept homosexuality do it on the same basis. "Sodomite was probably refering to permiscuos behavior or prostitutes" etc.

They are both rejections of the historical interpretations.

 

[SpiritPsalmist]

It is not odd at all.

Why do certian sects ordain women? Because they re-inturpret scripture and say "Well, Paul probably never meant for that inturpretation," and so on.

Those who accept homosexuality do it on the same basis. "Sodomite was probably refering to permiscuos behavior or prostitutes" etc.

They are both rejections of the historical interpretations.

Again, I strongly dissagree. Jesus allowed woman to preach the gospel.

That's a blanket statement about many groups you know nothing about. I belong to a church that ordains woman. I know we will not ordain homsexuals or any other person who is living in sexual sin.

 

[SpiritPsalmist]

Also *speaking as a MOD*

LET'S NOT BITE AND DEVOUR ONE ANOTHER.

Thank you.

 

[Lotar]

Time will tell.

Lux asked for who and why, and I gave my answer, like it or not.

All of the sects who ordain or are considering ordaining homosexuals also ordain women, and they all do it on the same grounds, which, unless I am mistaken, are the same grounds your denom uses. They do it because they don't consider it a sin.

 

[Bulldog]

.

Bulldog, where should I go on that site to find the relevant material, please? I can't find it.

That's my fault, actually. I was just intending to give the church website, so that people would know what the church was. Here are some links to things about the PCUSA and homosexuals:

http://www.layman.org/layman/news/news-from-pcusa/ga99-oldenburg-opposes-standard.htm

http://www.thelutheran.org/9908/page52.html

http://www.findarticles.com/cf_dls/m1058/18_120/107760348/p1/article.jhtml

http://www.sdadefend.com/Presbyterian.htm

Note: Some of these may be biased.