This came in last night from someone whom I regularly quote anonymously on this blog. I edited slightly to preserve anonymity.
In recent years, particularly because I'm an ERCer, I have spoken of theological bankruptcy on General Conference and Regional mountaintops. I have to point out, as I noted in my reply, those days have changed, in Findlay at least.
We are in danger of starting a new chapter of Talk-ism. That deeply concerns me.
My reply is in italics.
--------------------------------------
Bill, You have me nuts! What are you trying to say about same sex marriage. make it very clear so I can’t miss your point.
With the Bruce Jennner thing..., I am not in a very good mood. Maybe you should read the book called “Making gay okay” by Robert R. Reilly, or you should listen to Ravi Zacharias for his take on the matter.
Monday (I talked to) a young man who is about to enter ministry. He spoke so clearly about the conference and his position on same sex marriage.
You who brag about your integrity concerning scripture have me real confused. Right now I’m in no mood for a guy who somehow seems to think he is right and the rest of us are not!
In fact, the catholic stance is looking pretty good to me right now
****
My friend,
I thought I was actually pretty clear and I'm not certain what your confusion is.
So far, all the ERC and CGGC have actually done is to insulate clergy and CGGC real estate from same sex marriage rituals and I think that to do only that is sin. We have done absolutely nothing else.
I like a lot of what Lance said. I believe I made that clear. What is beginning to scare me is that, it seems to me, the next phase in the evolution of CGGC Talk-ism will be to endorse what Lance says and pretend that, by saying we agree with it, we have acted on it.
Let me tell you in advance that Lance has a lot of good things to say.
There is a serious danger in the possibility that leaders will do what Kevin did the other day and endorse Lance's biblical common sense as if agreeing with truth alone is living truth and then, as Kevin audaciously did the other day, add one more piece of institutional ammo to the strategy to insulate clergy and church real estate from the sinners who are right outside of our churches' doors.
Hedonism is taking over the culture and we suppose we are standing for truth simply because we agree with what someone else says about truth so long as we take legal steps to keep sinners from accessing our religious products and services.
That is very wrong.
Can I be more clear?
bill
I thought I was actually pretty clear and I'm not certain what your confusion is.
So far, all the ERC and CGGC have actually done is to insulate clergy and CGGC real estate from same sex marriage rituals and I think that to do only that is sin. We have done absolutely nothing else.
I like a lot of what Lance said. I believe I made that clear. What is beginning to scare me is that, it seems to me, the next phase in the evolution of CGGC Talk-ism will be to endorse what Lance says and pretend that, by saying we agree with it, we have acted on it.
Let me tell you in advance that Lance has a lot of good things to say.
There is a serious danger in the possibility that leaders will do what Kevin did the other day and endorse Lance's biblical common sense as if agreeing with truth alone is living truth and then, as Kevin audaciously did the other day, add one more piece of institutional ammo to the strategy to insulate clergy and church real estate from the sinners who are right outside of our churches' doors.
Hedonism is taking over the culture and we suppose we are standing for truth simply because we agree with what someone else says about truth so long as we take legal steps to keep sinners from accessing our religious products and services.
That is very wrong.
Can I be more clear?
bill
Two more thoughts to clarify:
ReplyDelete1. In case I'm confusing you. I believe that marriage is a covenant between one woman and one man.
2. I don't see any New Testament teaching or example to support what CGGC leadership is doing to address the challenge of same sex marriage. What they are doing clearly, in my mind, assumes the Middle Ages as a launching point. Then, with an unbiblical foundation, they turn to the Bible to justify what they are doing.
This leads to confusion and chaos. But, it is par for the course and has been for a long time in the CGGC.
One further observation:
ReplyDeleteI'm afraid that as long as shepherds lead the CGGC we will do nothing to address the issue of hedonism other than to insulate clergy and real estate from gay people.
To do so would require, among other things, the showing of mercy. True mercy is extreme and irrational.
Shepherds, in my experience, don't do extreme and irrational. They are, above all things, moderate, temperate, cautious, polished, sophisticated, polite, kind, gentle, genteel.
Not one of those are bad traits but they don't fit these times.
These are times to set aside what seems sensical to reserved shepherd minds and to walk boldly in the Spirit, throw caution to the wind and to walk on new paths in mercy and grace.
For all you can affirm about shepherds, these times require devices not found in the toolbox they carry.