tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1692793350977058371.post9018525866038353441..comments2023-04-09T05:18:06.643-05:00Comments on Into the Expectation: Getting Off the Fence – ObstaclesMatt Gunterhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11230570081324464033noreply@blogger.comBlogger8125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1692793350977058371.post-86144329996237603362012-10-19T19:22:28.776-05:002012-10-19T19:22:28.776-05:00Thanks, bls.
I appreciate you dropping by and co...Thanks, bls. <br /><br />I appreciate you dropping by and commenting. You anticipate some of what I will be saying in upcoming posts in this ' apologia. Rowan Williams and James Alison are two of my favorites. Because I trust their theological judgment generally, and the sanctity I perceive in their writing, I have been willing to engage them on this issue. <br /><br />In my more charitable moments, I get the point of 'bad theology' resulting from attempting to express what was more 'felt'. But, it is not just this issue, unlike Williams and Alison and a few others, most who have tried to make the case have done so in the context of a ‘liberal’ theology for which I have little respect. And I am not convinced that we could not have done it better tactically with much less collateral damage. In any event, my bitterness and resentment about that is one of things I need to get over - and to hold out because of that seems uncharitable.<br /><br />I'll be interested to see what you make of the rest of what I have to say as I get it out.<br /><br />Under the Mercy,<br /><br />matt<br />Matt Gunterhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11230570081324464033noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1692793350977058371.post-20608132453430814252012-10-19T18:18:03.116-05:002012-10-19T18:18:03.116-05:00I came of age during the 70s and 80s, and believe ...I came of age during the 70s and 80s, and believe me: depression, alcoholism, drug addiction, and suicide were the reality for a huge percentage of gay people in those days. Go back a little further, and it was shame, loss of employment (still a possibility, BTW), electroshock therapy, blackmail, and prison. I mean, the whole thing was all still a big secret for most people until about 20 years ago.<br /><br />So I'm actually quite impressed and proud of TEC for what it did; it looked at all that and said, "Well, <i>that</i> can't be right...." - and then it acted upon that assumption. Episcopalians were one of the few groups of people that actually saw the real human beings at the core of this - and the toll that all that had taken. And Episcopalians (after a few false starts) ultimately didn't fold in their convictions, either. That's pretty impressive, in my view - and to be honest, I don't think it could have happened any other way.<br /><br />Probably all the "bad theology" out there has been due to people casting about for justification for a gut feeling (that turned out to be correct!). It's also due to the fact that that there really aren't many inspired theologians around today. You might want to check out <a href="http://www.jamesalison.co.uk/texts/eng17.html" rel="nofollow">James Alison's argument</a>, though, if you're interested; <i>he's</i> got the chops. It's of course coming from a Catholic point of view. Rowan Williams wrote about this many years ago, in "<a href="http://www.igreens.org.uk/bodys_grace.htm" rel="nofollow">The Body's Grace</a>." And then there's "<a href="http://archive.episcopalchurch.org/documents/ToSetOurHope_eng.pdf" rel="nofollow">To Set Our Hope on Christ</a>," which kind of argues what I talked about above: "<i>that</i> can't be right." It also argues that our understanding of homosexuality is "new data" - an argument I'm seeing elsewhere as well. We also now have 40 years' worth of almost completely negative data on "reparative therapy" - and people have known for millennia that most people aren't called to celibacy. <br /><br />So what's left? Blessing faithful unions, I'd say. This is the <i>via negativa</i> approach, if you like: nothing else really makes sense. The only other option is to ignore the very people who have the most at stake in this - which is exactly what most of the church does. (I would also point out here that we have other kinds of confirmation that we're headed in the right direction; early data from states in which same-sex marriage is legal shows that gay men in those states make far fewer visits to their doctors for ill health. Also I believe it's true that rates of depression, addiction, and suicide have gone way down - but of course, that's only what you'd expect when a formerly widely despised minority is no longer widely despised.<br /><br />Myself, I don't think a Christian argument for same-sex unions is any different than the one for heterosexual marriage: "This mystery [marriage] is profound, and I am saying that it refers to Christ and the church." That's in Ephesians 5 - and while it's speaking of heterosexual marriage (and you might, I suppose, have problems with the "one flesh" thing, if you had a mind to) - but what's so different? I don't see it, honestly. Christian marriage is a "type" of the relationship between Christ and the Church - or between God and the soul; therefore <i>faithfulness</i> is at the center of it. <i>Faithfulness</i> is what the entire Bible is about, as far as I can see - and practicing it in marriage is a natural extension of that spiritual faithfulness. Obviously, same-sex unions are not primarily about reproduction - although of course same-sex couples do have children, and do adopt - but then, neither are those between elderly couples, and nobody would dream of saying a negative word about them.blshttp://topmostapple.blogspot.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1692793350977058371.post-58075730876311453362012-10-17T13:33:33.678-05:002012-10-17T13:33:33.678-05:00I certainly agree that the 'liberal' side ...I certainly agree that the 'liberal' side of the homosexuality debate (I don't care for the label but for the sake of convenience...) has not offered any type of a sexual ethic of its own, besides what sometimes looks like a tacit endorsement of the "if it feels good do it" mantra of the sexual revolution. No matter how one contorts Jesus you just can't get <i>that</i> out of him.<br /><br />That said, I still think Wink's approach offers a helpful starting point, in that it notes Scripture does not offer a consistent self-evident sexual ethic one can just appeal to on its face (hence simply quoting texts that appear to condemn homosexuality is not, as far as I'm concerned dispositive). Discerning a consistent sexual ethic is up to the Church and the exegetical tools she uses. I also do think there is merit to the position Wink & others enunciate that the Church's position on certain other moral matters-has indeed 'evolved' over time (again, perhaps not the best word but there it is). <br /><br />All of this is just a starting point for me though. Too often the 'liberal side' has offered what I've found to be very facile arguments when it pushes for change, that I find to be no more self-evident than their opponents (again they often boil down to "it feels good, do it"-not to say experience shouldn't be <i>a</i> factor somewhere in the process, but like you I feel a lot more is needed).<br /><br />I'll stop rambling for now...again, looking forward to seeing where you go with this.<br /><br />Best,<br /><br />-LLoganhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01240062898789541472noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1692793350977058371.post-9287145263973662002012-10-17T10:17:04.353-05:002012-10-17T10:17:04.353-05:00Thanks, Logan.
I appreciate your reading and com...Thanks, Logan. <br /><br />I appreciate your reading and commenting on the post. <br /><br />I am less enamored with Wink's approach. I do not think the teaching of the church based on the NT and informed by the OT has been as incoherent as he suggests.<br /><br />Certainly, the Bible as a whole has a grab-bag of things to say about sexual behaviors. As it does about money, violence, justice, etc. <br /><br />If one just pulls random things about any of those from the 'grab-bag', then one can conclude the Bible has nothing clear to say about anything. Or we can configure them to suit our own prejudices. But that has not been the Church's approach.<br /><br />Wink sounds too much like points 7 & 8 above for my taste.<br /><br />That said, I do think Jesus' two-fold summary of the Law is a fundamental hermeneutical key. Matt Gunterhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11230570081324464033noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1692793350977058371.post-42951117969704086812012-10-16T18:43:30.237-05:002012-10-16T18:43:30.237-05:00Very impressive and I'm looking forward to see...Very impressive and I'm looking forward to seeing the following posts.<br /><br />FWIW I tend to agree with Walter Wink's excellent summary on the subject-I simply don't think the Scriptures contemplated this issue, and as a result citing chapter-and-verse isn't the best method to find a resolution. Not that I'm minimizing the importance of Scripture, but I think a new exegesis-relying on the standby Anglican interpretive device we call 'Reason'-is in order.<br /><br />On that note its long been intriguing to me that the Roman Catholic Church bases its objection to homosexuality more deeply in natural law than it does Scripture. I'd contend that revisiting the natural law argument today free of scholastic bias would dispose of that argument fairly quickly, but that's another can of worms!<br /><br />I attended a schismatic Catholic for a long time that I felt offered a weak rationale for its embrace of LGBT unions, and I'm mindful of the issue as I move towards Anglicanism. In any case, I enjoy your blog and look forward to the next post!Loganhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01240062898789541472noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1692793350977058371.post-338411750725420892012-10-16T17:10:09.516-05:002012-10-16T17:10:09.516-05:00Thanks, Andrew.
You might be right about boomers...Thanks, Andrew. <br /><br />You might be right about boomers. Like everybody, we've got our blind spots. As does, no doubt, your generation. It just may take some time for anyone to identify what they are (if you could see 'em they wouldn't be blind spots).<br /><br />On the other hand every generation has its gifts and makes its contributions. Perhaps yours will find the synthesis you speak of.<br /><br />I look forward to hearing what you think of waht follows in this little series.<br /><br />Under the mercy,<br /><br />MattMatt Gunterhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11230570081324464033noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1692793350977058371.post-67831446669186995772012-10-16T16:23:46.974-05:002012-10-16T16:23:46.974-05:00Looking forward to reading more!Looking forward to reading more!Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1692793350977058371.post-70643680479035904612012-10-16T16:22:54.042-05:002012-10-16T16:22:54.042-05:00Thanks for sharing your thoughts. I am in favor of...Thanks for sharing your thoughts. I am in favor of SSU (for obvious reasons), but I have great trepidation about the way we've gone about doing it, too. As you rightly pointed out, the arguments for it are usually based on sanctifying white-bourgeois concerns (eg. the Democratic Party platform) and not on theological grounds. And, as you point out, talking at each other somehow passes for "conversation". I, too, am greatly frustrated by the lack of any sexual ethic outside of "do whatever you want -- God loves you!"<br /><br />But, I'm convinced that there is a way to be gay and be Christian that doesn't have to include mass-enforced lifelong celibacy. Imperfect, awkward, nontheological and unspiritual as TEC's approach has been, I can't help but wonder if it will open the door for a deeper understanding to take place in the next generations. Personally, I'd like to see the traditional understanding retained (most sexual acts within the bonds of a blessed, committed relationship), but opened to LGBT persons. Not to be ageist, but I wonder if Boomers are capable of making that step towards a new ethic. I think most people my age who are thinking about this are ready to make that jump.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com