The Ordination of Practicing Homosexuals

[brightmorningstar]

To JasonV

God asked us to reason together.

Which god, it was the teaching of Jesus Christ I referred you to. and indeed asked you why you dont acknowlegde His teaching.

 

[JasonV]

To JasonV
Which god, it was the teaching of Jesus Christ I referred you to. and indeed asked you why you dont acknowlegde His teaching.

As long as you keep coming to the table with your presupposition of the Bible, we cannot have a discussion.

 

[catolico]

While, in general, I'd lean against the ordination of "practicing homosexuals", this would be primarily because the Church does not recognise same-sex marriage, at least in Canada, for the moment.

In general, I feel that churches which have ordained sexually active gays and lesbians to have done this in the wrong order. It would make more sense to approve same sex marriage (or declare all pre-marital sex okay) and then ordain married gays, than to do it in the reverse order, unless they also want to ordain unmarried, sexually active heterosexuals.

But as long as same-sex marriage is not ecclesiastically recognised, ordaining "practising homosexuals" doesn't make a great deal of sense to me.

With all due respect shouldn't it make more sense to do the right thing as opposed to acquiese to the current popular trend?

After all I don't remember where God granted us the authority to change His original plan because of peer pressure or supposed "new" revelations/discoveries.

 

[JasonV]

It's quite simple, if God really said homosexuality was wrong, then God wrong and we are more loving and moral than God. So in this case, the "right thing" is to ignore the Bible entirely with regards to this matter.

I believe that's what Jesus would do.

 

[mark46]

We understand your position. Given a choice of accepting that homosexual ordination is acceptable or that the bible is acceptable, you choose homosexual ordinatination.

Of course ordination itself makes no sense at all independent of the bible and Tradition of the Church.

It's quite simple, if God really said homosexuality was wrong, then God wrong and we are more loving and moral than God. So in this case, the "right thing" is to ignore the Bible entirely with regards to this matter.

I believe that's what Jesus would do.

 

[JasonV]

We understand your position. Given a choice of accepting that homosexual ordination is acceptable or that the bible is acceptable, you choose homosexual ordinatination.

I choose love and what is morally right.

Yes I pick and choose from the Bible, just like everyone else. Why you seem to think I can't do that when you do is beyond me.

Of course ordination itself makes no sense at all independent of the bible and Tradition of the Church.

Which is why I work within both just like you do.

 

[mark46]

I think that I understand your view of scripture. You use it as support for what you choose to believe. And yes, unfortunately many others do the same. This diminishes scripture so that it is no longer God's Word any more than any other book we might read for inspiration.

Personally, I find this position unacceptable and offputting. As a Christian, my interpretations of scripture are through the prism of God's Love, through the prism of the creeds of the Church and the Traditions of the Church. Otherwise it makes no sense to me to affirm the labels of Christian and Anglican.
=========================================
With regard to the issue of this thread, I find your position regarding scripture a diversion and totally unnecessary. If one considers only scripture in the context of who wrote it for whom and in what language and culture, the scriptural message regarding homosexuality is quite unclear. If our cultural biases were different, I suspect that our translations would be a bit different, and our conclusions might be different.

Those who point to the clear words of the 3 or 4 verses that speak on this subject need to be clear about the meaning of the original language in the original cultural context. A literal reading is not acceptable, unless we wish to forbid our women from haveing braids, wearing gold and wearing pearls, all of which are specifically prohibit. And certainly men better not have long hair! And of course, all pastors and priests would be married as required in 1st Timothy.

For those for whom tradition is important, the much more serious issue is how Christains have interpreted the few verses over the past 2000 years. It seems that we can choose to reject 2000 years of Tradition or be very, very careful about re-interpreting scripture and changing the Tradition. All the apostolic churches are very, very careful about such changes is interpretation. They are also understandably intolerant of those who would ignore Tradition before coming to a new communal understanding.
For me, the Tradition of the CHurch is clear. From the very beginning, sex outside marriage has been forbidden, marriage has been between a man and a women, and pastor (and bishops) have been men (until the last 100 years or so).

=====================================
WHERE IN THE TRADITION OF THE CHURCH
1) is sex outside of marriage supported?
2) is marriage between other than between a man a woman supported?
3) is there support for the ordination of non-celibate homosexuals?
=====================================

I choose love and what is morally right.

Yes I pick and choose from the Bible, just like everyone else. Why you seem to think I can't do that when you do is beyond me.



Which is why I work within both just like you do.

 

[catolico]

It's quite simple, if God really said homosexuality was wrong, then God wrong and we are more loving and moral than God. So in this case, the "right thing" is to ignore the Bible entirely with regards to this matter.

I believe that's what Jesus would do.

One, God and Jesus are one and the same so how could they disagree?

Two, I figured as much from previous posts that you doubt God's pefect will.

We are alike in that we are both sinners but differ by the fact that if I in my journey to try to understand God's will realize that something He desires is in opposition to what I want I do my very best to acquiese to His will. Often times I fail miserably but I will never justify myself, rather I beg for mercy and pray for the ability to live according to His plan.

 

[catolico]

I choose love and what is morally right.

With all due respect Jason this statement says a lot about you. You apparently decide to determine what is morally right and everyone else be damned, including God.

It is apparent you haven't submitted to yourself to God as best as you are able.

When you are able to finally let go of your own will and enable His to come into your life you can't possibly imagine the joy, relief and good it will bring. Everything before that will pale in comparision.

 

[JasonV]

Catolico, only God will judge me. He doesn't need your help. If you want to talk with me you can go back and start answering the questions you so conveniently ignored.

Mark1, I appreciate what you are saying, but I cannot fathom going back to a worldview like that. Nor would I ever want to. My world is so much happier there is no reason to subject myself to evil anymore. I believe the god of the old testament was a devil. A jealous, tyrannical, war-mongering devil. When Jesus talked about his Father, it most certainly was not Yahweh. When he quoted the old testament, it was only to shut people up, not to sustain them as divinely inspired. Jesus was not the old testament messiah. He was much bigger than that and could have been born anywhere in the world for that matter.

You can believe whatever you want. I have moved on and found a better Christianity.

 

[BenjaminW]

With all due respect shouldn't it make more sense to do the right thing as opposed to acquiese to the current popular trend?

After all I don't remember where God granted us the authority to change His original plan because of peer pressure or supposed "new" revelations/discoveries.

What I meant there was, if the Church is to approve of homosexuality and all that, they seem to be going about it in the wrong logical order. I wasn't taking a side on the matter (my sympathies lie with the conservative side, but I have no intention of getting into a scripture quoting war.)

Basically, disregarding the actual validity of homosexuality, if the Church was to decide that homosexuality was suddenly completely valid and morally good, the logical way to go about doing that, I feel, would be to first approve of same-sex marriage, and then to ordain married (or unmarried celibate) gays and lesbians, rather than first ordaining unmarried sexually active gays and lesbians without approving of marriage first. Unless, of course, they have also decided that (all) sex outside of marriage is now perfectly acceptable, which is the message, I feel, that ordaining sexually active unmarried gays and lesbians sends.

 

[catolico]

Catolico, only God will judge me. He doesn't need your help. If you want to talk with me you can go back and start answering the questions you so conveniently ignored.

Mark1, I appreciate what you are saying, but I cannot fathom going back to a worldview like that. Nor would I ever want to. My world is so much happier there is no reason to subject myself to evil anymore. I believe the god of the old testament was a devil. A jealous, tyrannical, war-mongering devil. When Jesus talked about his Father, it most certainly was not Yahweh. When he quoted the old testament, it was only to shut people up, not to sustain them as divinely inspired. Jesus was not the old testament messiah. He was much bigger than that and could have been born anywhere in the world for that matter.

You can believe whatever you want. I have moved on and found a better Christianity.

Certainly only God can judge you, I've already pointed out I don't amount to much.

As far as continuing to have a serious conversation about certain aspects of the Christian faith as it has been handed down to us, ie not the new "improved" version, I really don't see how I can take anything you say with anything other that a grain of salt based on your statement that God is the devil in the Old Testament. I mean seriously just your false assertaions above are so unfounded as to reveal an almost complete ignorance of the Bible.

 

[mark46]

How do you define "Christianity". Clearly it is in a different way than anyone else on this board.
=====================
You talk about worldview. That is a good place to start
Weltanschauung [ˈvɛlt.ʔanˌʃaʊ.ʊŋ] a concept which refers to a wide world perception. Additionally, it refers to the framework of ideas and beliefs through which an individual interprets the world and interacts with it.
======================================
In what sense do you have a Christian world view?
Q1) Are you a follower of Yeshua, the Nazerene? If so, who do you say he is/was (his question to his followers)?
Q2) Do you follower the teachings of Jesus? If so, what are your sources
of such teachings? not likely the Gospel of John.
Q3) Do you believe the there are both material and spritual events in this dimension we call life? Do you beleive that there are physical and spiritual rules and laws? Do you beleive that your existence ends at you physical death: if not, what comes next?

======================================

I do not mean to offend or challenge. The reality is that I have tremendous respect for those who follow Jesus in the traditional way of his time, by doing as he did and as he said. I do believe with Isaiah that if one acted as a true follower of Yeshua, there would be no poverty, no war, no children dying of poor health, no prisoners.

You reject God as he was revealed to the Jews 5000 years ago. He revealed what could be understood. It is not God that has changed. It is humanity's ability to understand.

Catolico, only God will judge me. He doesn't need your help. If you want to talk with me you can go back and start answering the questions you so conveniently ignored.

Mark1, I appreciate what you are saying, but I cannot fathom going back to a worldview like that. Nor would I ever want to. My world is so much happier there is no reason to subject myself to evil anymore. I believe the god of the old testament was a devil. A jealous, tyrannical, war-mongering devil. When Jesus talked about his Father, it most certainly was not Yahweh. When he quoted the old testament, it was only to shut people up, not to sustain them as divinely inspired. Jesus was not the old testament messiah. He was much bigger than that and could have been born anywhere in the world for that matter.

You can believe whatever you want. I have moved on and found a better Christianity.

 

[JasonV]

... I really don't see how I can take anything you say with anything other that a grain of salt based on your statement that God is the devil in the Old Testament.

That's not what I said. I said: "I believe the god of the old testament was a devil." That's not the same thing at all. I am not saying God is the devil, I am saying that Yahweh was not God, but was a devil.

That is a very big difference you need to understand.

I mean seriously just your false assertaions above are so unfounded as to reveal an almost complete ignorance of the Bible.

God didn't ask people to kill other people for a scrap of worthless real estate. God doesn't kill babies and old women for "purity".

If your god does that, then you have my pity.

 

[catolico]

That's not what I said. I said: "I believe the god of the old testament was a devil." That's not the same thing at all. I am not saying God is the devil, I am saying that Yahweh was not God, but was a devil.

That is a very big difference you need to understand.



God didn't ask people to kill other people for a scrap of worthless real estate. God doesn't kill babies and old women for "purity".

If your god does that, then you have my pity.

You express yourself to be learned in things of the Bible but that couldn't be farther from the truth.

The truth isn't what you think it should be but what He designed it to be.

God is all loving and cannot do wrong, yet His judgement is without reproach and no doubt unappealing to many. That is simply because people are afraid of judgement due to their own sins. Fact is we humans are capable of the most abominable things.

 

[JasonV]

You express yourself to be learned in things of the Bible but that couldn't be farther from the truth.

You are welcome to your opinion.

God is all loving and cannot do wrong, yet His judgement is without reproach and no doubt unappealing to many. That is simply because people are afraid of judgement due to their own sins. Fact is we humans are capable of the most abominable things.

With an example like Yahwah, it's no wonder we do such terrible things and justify them.

 

[mark46]

As do the others, I do believe that you have a serious misinterpretation of the Old Testament. However, you are certainly correct in that the misinterpretation fo the Old Testament by others probably has done more harm than good in this world. Unfortunately, this misinterpretation of Jesus is extended to the interpretation of Paul in the New Testament.

Christians (and all the world's people) would be well served to follow Jesus, his example, his two commands and the Beatitudes. We would be better off as "red-letter Christians", following the words of Jesus. If we would all follow Jesus, his prayer in the garden would be answered; we would be one. Curiously, we would also be accepted by Muslims, Hindu, Sikh and Buddhist alike. Jesus has a fine reputation in this world. it is Christians that are hated. Unfortunately, we Christains do NOT understand that this dislike and hate is not because we follow the example of Jesus; we are hated because we do not follow his example.
===================

BTW, let me make a further comment on the subject of this thread. IMHO. it is does not help the body of the Anglican Communion to ordain those who are engaging in sexual activity outside of the bonds of matrimony.

You are welcome to your opinion.



With an example like Yahwah, it's no wonder we do such terrible things and justify them.

 

[LiturgyInDMinor]

We forbid it in the CCC.
We hate the sin, not the sinner for sure though.

 

[catolico]

Mark

I agree with a lot you say, however I have a couple of points:

However, you are certainly correct in that the misinterpretation fo the Old Testament by others probably has done more harm than good in this world.

This would be misleading to say the least. Without God the default of the human condition is to deceive, etc and has been this way since the beginning. Those of the Judeo Christian faiths certainly aren't the main protaganist nor less the creator of this phenomenom.

Curiously, we would also be accepted by Muslims, Hindu, Sikh and Buddhist alike. Jesus has a fine reputation in this world. it is Christians that are hated. Unfortunately, we Christains do NOT understand that this dislike and hate is not because we follow the example of Jesus; we are hated because we do not follow his example.

This is a unfortunaltely inaccurate interpretation and in direct conflict with the scriptures. Jesus was hated in His time and was murdered because of it. We should not expect all to love us and in fact should expect many to hate us as JESUS clearly states in the New Testament.

BTW, let me make a further comment on the subject of this thread. IMHO. it is does not help the body of the Anglican Communion to ordain those who are engaging in sexual activity outside of the bonds of matrimony.

This is omitting the root of the problem and in fact will give hope to those who wish homosexual unions be recognized. Fact is plain and simple God hates homosexual relations. He made the sexual organs of a man compatible with that of a women, not with the organ whose only function is to dicharge human waste. To continue to propagate anything else is an affront His masterful creation.

 

[JasonV]

Fact is plain and simple God hates homosexual relations.

Had him over for coffee one afternoon did you?

He made the sexual organs of a man compatible with that of a women, not with the organ whose only function is to dicharge human waste.

I take it you have never played with your anus? For your information, the anus is a wonder of sensitive nerves serving much more than as a waste outlet. And anal sex is found in both hetrosexual and homosexual relationships, and enjoyed by all I might add!

To continue to propagate anything else is an affront His masterful creation.

Hardly.