|
Source: (consider it)
|
Thread: Homophobia in churches
|
Johnny S
Shipmate
# 12581
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by The Man With No Name:
I can't see any other way to interpret that than that they consider homosexuality to be "wronger" than what Jesus considered to be adultery. Which does seem to me to be an unreasonable prejudice.
I think you've got a fair point about inconsistency but I also think you are failing to take into account real politik.
Is not the real reason for the lack of letters that this wing of the church feels that it lost the battle on divorce but this is the battle it is fighting now?
Surely there is a limit to the number of letters that even Reform can write?
Posts: 6834 | From: London | Registered: Apr 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
Hiro's Leap
Shipmate
# 12470
|
Posted
Another explanation is that most churchgoers have numerous divorced friends (or they themselves are divorced) and so can relate to the situation. Gay people are in a minority, often isolated from a church, and so it's harder to have empathy with their concerns.
I hear it used to be difficult to get courts to sentence driving offenses strongly. The problem was that judges and juries could easily imagine themselves being in the same position, and so tended to be very forgiving: there but for the grace of God go I.
Posts: 3418 | From: UK, OK | Registered: Mar 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
ken
Ship's Roundhead
# 2460
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by The Man With No Name:
... someone forming a sexual relationship following a divorce (which Jesus explicitly described as adultery)
Not in the New Testment he doesn't. He ways that a man who divorces a woman for a reason other than sexual immorality causes her to commit adultery. That's not quite the same thing.
It is clear that the sin is on the head of the divorcer, not the remarrier. And that divorce is allowed for "porneia" (whatever that is)
--------------------
Ken
L’amor che move il sole e l’altre stelle.
Posts: 39579 | From: London | Registered: Mar 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Johnny S
Shipmate
# 12581
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Hiro's Leap:
Another explanation is that most churchgoers have numerous divorced friends (or they themselves are divorced) and so can relate to the situation. Gay people are in a minority, often isolated from a church, and so it's harder to have empathy with their concerns.
I'm sure that enters people's heads but I honestly doubt it is a significant factor.
quote:
Originally posted by Ken:
And that divorce is allowed for "porneia" (whatever that is)
Ken's right. There are biblical grounds for divorce and so how on earth is a Reform type person going to know whether a forth-coming marriage at St. Egbert's in the Swamp is between two people who (in their eyes) have been legitimately or illegitimately divorced previously? Is this kind of detail mentioned in the banns? Or should they literally write to every single wedding taking place in any Anglican church anywhere just to double-check?
I don't think I'm really sticking my neck out when I say that civil partnerships are a lot easier to spot.
Posts: 6834 | From: London | Registered: Apr 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
leo
Shipmate
# 1458
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by ken:
quote:
Originally posted by The Man With No Name:
... someone forming a sexual relationship following a divorce (which Jesus explicitly described as adultery)
Not in the New Testment he doesn't. He ways that a man who divorces a woman for a reason other than sexual immorality causes her to commit adultery. That's not quite the same thing.
It is clear that the sin is on the head of the divorcer, not the remarrier. And that divorce is allowed for "porneia" (whatever that is)
Yes - probably because divorced women had no means of financial support. It's more about the morality of money and gender than of sex.
--------------------
My Jewish-positive lectionary blog is at http://recognisingjewishrootsinthelectionary.wordpress.com/
My reviews at http://layreadersbookreviews.wordpress.com
Posts: 23198 | From: Bristol | Registered: Oct 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
JoannaP
Shipmate
# 4493
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by leo:
quote:
Originally posted by ken:
Not in the New Testment he doesn't. He ways that a man who divorces a woman for a reason other than sexual immorality causes her to commit adultery. That's not quite the same thing.
It is clear that the sin is on the head of the divorcer, not the remarrier. And that divorce is allowed for "porneia" (whatever that is)
Yes - probably because divorced women had no means of financial support. It's more about the morality of money and gender than of sex.
But what if the divorcer is the remarrier?
My mother divorced her first husband after he had a child with another woman but my parents were not allowed to marry in church (and it still annoys me).
--------------------
"Freedom for the pike is death for the minnow." R. H. Tawney (quoted by Isaiah Berlin)
"Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety." Benjamin Franklin
Posts: 1877 | From: England | Registered: May 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Matt Black
Shipmate
# 2210
|
Posted
If one wishes to look at the spirit rather than the letter then I suppose the 'divorcer' is the one who de facto ends the marriage. Where that gets difficult IRL of course is that more often than not there's fault on both sides...
[ETA - I've been round the houses on this one personally: technically I was the petitioner in the divorce suit which ended my first marriage so legally I was the 'divorcer'. But the petition was on the grounds of my wife's admitted and ongoing adultery, so morally she was the 'divorcer'. But I had been far from the perfect husband to her, so that places at least some moral responsibility on me for the break-up. My present (2nd) wife's parents who are conservative Brethren refused to give their permission for me to marry her until I could demonstrate that I had Scriptural grounds for so doing, and I pleaded Matt 19 (plus some commentary on it by an ECF whose name escapes me which effectively said that as her adultery was ongoing then it was my duty to divorce her otherwise I would be approving of her sin) in my 'defence', which they eventually accepted. So, contrary to what some may think here, there are conservative Christians who treat divorce and remarriage issues seriously.]
[ 28. September 2009, 11:06: Message edited by: Matt Black ]
--------------------
"Protestant and Reformed, according to the Tradition of the ancient Catholic Church" - + John Cosin (1594-1672)
Posts: 14304 | From: Hampshire, UK | Registered: Jan 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Erroneous Monk
Shipmate
# 10858
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by ken:
quote:
Originally posted by The Man With No Name:
... someone forming a sexual relationship following a divorce (which Jesus explicitly described as adultery)
Not in the New Testment he doesn't. He ways that a man who divorces a woman for a reason other than sexual immorality causes her to commit adultery. That's not quite the same thing.
It is clear that the sin is on the head of the divorcer, not the remarrier. And that divorce is allowed for "porneia" (whatever that is)
Yes, you're right, and I'm very lazy and should have used more words to avoid implying that I'm an RC hardliner on this subject, when nothing could be further from the truth.
As an aside, we have a new parish priest this morning, and his first sermon was the hard line on divorce and remarriage. Can't decide if I think that was brave or foolhardy (or both).
However, to return to the subject, I have the perception that there is more outspoken condemnation of homosexual immorality than heterosexual immorality. I probably can't support that with any evidence, but if it is the case, it leads one to the view that there is institutionalied homophobia in the church.
--------------------
And I shot a man in Tesco, just to watch him die.
Posts: 2950 | From: I cannot tell you, for you are not a friar | Registered: Jan 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Lietuvos Sv. Kazimieras
Shipmate
# 11274
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Hiro's Leap:
Another explanation is that most churchgoers have numerous divorced friends (or they themselves are divorced) and so can relate to the situation. Gay people are in a minority, often isolated from a church, and so it's harder to have empathy with their concerns.
[/i].
Or they're in the closet (still). It's a sad situation for those folks because the only possible way of changing attitudes is to come out, come out wherever you are.
Posts: 7328 | From: Delaware | Registered: Apr 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
iGeek
Number of the Feast
# 777
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Ticachick:
I think my original intent was not to discuss the rights and wrongs of homosexuality, but assuming that even in conservative churches, when asked people will say "love the sinner, hate the sin" but when push comes to shove, there is a prejudice against homosexuals, in that jokes against this community are deemed okay (where jokes against other minority groups would not be).
Ironic, given the prevalence of faith identity in the LGBT community (at least, in the US).
Money quote:
quote:
George Barna, whose company conducted the research, pointed out that some popular stereotypes about the spiritual life of gays and lesbians are simply wrong.
“People who portray gay adults as godless, hedonistic, Christian bashers are not working with the facts,” declared the best-selling author of numerous books about faith and culture. “A substantial majority of gays cite their faith as a central facet of their life, consider themselves to be Christian, and claim to have some type of meaningful personal commitment to Jesus Christ active in their life today.
Posts: 2150 | From: West End, Gulfopolis | Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
Printer-friendly view
