« Compassion | Main | Sailing toward a new Downgrade Controversy »

January 16, 2013

Comments

Tony Clay

I worry when the Church becomes too focussed on political issues. Gay marraige is not a question of faith it is a legal/political matter. Gay couples are looking to find a legal base/foundation for the relationships that they are already practising. Obviously should it ever be made law that the clergy could not refuse to conduct homosexual/same sex marraige ceremonies that is another matter. However, the 'Church Wedding' is often abused by 'ordinary' couples who stand before and make vows to a God they don't actually believe in and yet the clergy seemingly has no qualms about allowing this. Should the act be passed then the next question that will concern the church is should married Gay couples be allowed to go to church ...the answer will hopefully be Yes and what happens afterwards is in Gods hands.
I don't feel the church has many legs left to stand on when our own house need so much TLC ...there are Gay ministers and that seems to be acceptable (though why women can't be Bishops too is beyond understanding and logic ) and there are Bishops who don't believe in God. The rest of the world are not waiting for the Church to decide on this matter ... the French turned out against Gay marraige recently in Paris it was the largest demonstration since 1968 (and the French are predominately anti cleric but pro family) There are 52 hushed up cases of child abuse by priests being exposed in Italy right now. The church it would appear has plenty of jobs to do on it's own house. To an unbeliever our discourse on these matters may seem somewhat hypocritical and presumptious.

Jonathan Thiessen

Thanks Malcolm,

I appreciated your thoughtful and detailed approach and felt you did justice to the big questions involved. Some of the other responses I've read have been tripping over themselves to apologise for disagreeing with Steve, and consequently haven't said too much. I thought your rebuttal was a very good balance of grace and truth.

Chick Yuill

At this time I don't want to add any comments to those above. Other than two say 2 things:

Firstly, for me this is a time to pray, to search scripture, and to seek the mind of Christ on this one.

Secondly, it is so good to see the debate being conducted in a manner which demonstrates grace, courtesy and serious thinking through the issues. Thanks, Malcolm for the way in which you have set the tone for this.

casquette ralph lauren


Hi! Me encantó su lectura a sus blogs. Gran energía! Acabo de empezar a bloguear mí y te ha añadido a mi lista. Espero que usted echa un vistazo a mi blog cuando tú! Puede Sigan con el buen trabajo!

Quentin Hobbes

Thank you Malcolm for this thoughtful and generous analysis. You make a strong case that the tide of scripture is against same-sex relationships. Do you think there are also non-scriptural reasons that make same-sex relationships wrong?

James Pate

Malcolm
Lots of thoughts about your generously worded post, but let me mention this one.
I'm struggling with your idea of a 'trajectory' and the importance you attach to whether there is a trajectory in the Bible concerning homoerotic behaviour.
Isn't it possible that the Bible may point to trajectories that it does not explicitly launch?
To give an example that sounds a bit silly: is there any trajectory about wearing clothes made from more than one fabric? And does there need to be before I can think that the shirt I am wearing is ok?
Yours thoughtfully
James

Gillian

I applaud you Malcolm for writing sensitively but also truthfully on this subject. A man and woman in marriage is the closest thing we have on earth to the 'type' of Christ and his bride. That in itself is enough to tell us what marriage should mean in God's eyes. What is apparent is that Steve Chalke and others like him, are letting society define the bible, when it should be the other way around. Giving into the tide of opinion within society is not a way to curry favour with the Lord. To interpret scripture regarding extra-marital sex, hetero or homo as being to do with what went on in idol worship or in the temples but that it doesn't apply to what went on outside of the temples, is a cop-out. It is making scripture say what you want it to say. Romans 1 states that 'they exchanged the truth of God for a lie' and to me, the application of scripture in the aforementioned context is doing just that. Marriage in accordance with the bible is clearly between a male and female, otherwise another noun would have been used in reference to Christ and his 'bride'. Bless you Malcolm and know that many are standing with you.

Matthew

Hi, an excellent, gracious and brave response, in what must seem very painful circumstances, given that you are a friend of Steve Chalke. I am one of many christians who agree with your conclusions on the issue. I think you hit the nail on the head when you comment "My greatest fear is that Steve is speaking into a culture with which he has become so enmeshed that he is unable to see the distinction between our society's definition of truth, goodness and inclusion and that of scripture." Absolutely, I have been making similiar points on the discussion on Steve's church website.

Newfred

On the last sentence, "Gay, straight, black, white, man, woman, rich or poor – we must all kneel at the cross if we are to be followers of the Cross-Bearer," I note that it is only the first item which you claim is morally problematic. How telling.

Arviso Steed

I am amazed on the image presented here. It sends me a lot of unexplainable ideas, emotions, etc. I was glad to read its meanings below. I am very much pleased reading everything. At least I am enriched today.

Continue enriching other people's lives!

Demeo Catalano

I can't see any problem on it, Newfred. Open your mind.

Tomoko

http://ifx.web.id

Verify your Comment

Previewing your Comment

This is only a preview. Your comment has not yet been posted.

Working...
Your comment could not be posted. Error type:
Your comment has been posted. Post another comment

The letters and numbers you entered did not match the image. Please try again.

As a final step before posting your comment, enter the letters and numbers you see in the image below. This prevents automated programs from posting comments.

Having trouble reading this image? View an alternate.

Working...

Post a comment

Your Information

(Name and email address are required. Email address will not be displayed with the comment.)

My Photo

Photo Albums

February 2017

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        

Other Areas to Explore

TypePad Profile

Get updates on my activity. Follow me on my Profile.
http:///www.churchandcommunity.org.uk