Dr Schori and Pelagianism

 

I wrote in a comment over at Stand Firm in Faith of taking only statements by Dr Schori made since the feign of her election to be PB of ECUSA and see if a case for heresy could be made. In the article I was commenting upon, Father Kennedy found evidence of Pelagianism, Marcionism, Pluralism, Universalism, and Gnosticism. The limit to use only thing said or written since her election has proven to be a challenge.

 

 

As an Anglo-Catholic I do not think of the woman elected as Presiding Bishop to be either Priest or Bishop. However, she does have an earned doctorate so I will use the title of Doctor. Please note that the degree is not in a theological field, but rather in the natural sciences.

Motives of Those Who Call Homosexual Acts Sin

People who have quit smoking are some of the most anti-smoking people. Could this be because social pressure has harmed them at some time in the past? I think it reasonable that people who were hurt by social pressure to engage in harmful behavior would be strong voices to change that social pressure. Rather than being something sinister, this is the voice of experience, bad experience talking.

Without getting into the whole discussion of homosexual by nature, I know of several men who had previously engaged in homosexual acts who had exited the lifestyle. In these cases the entry into the homosexual lifestyle, was from social pressure. This is where the witness of the Church is most important. Had these men been grounded at the time in the teaching of the Church, my guess is they would have never entered the homosexual lifestyle in the first place.

Doctor Schori and Marcion

So as to not mask my position, to me the opening chapters of Holy Scripture are best described as lore. (Accumulated facts, traditions, or beliefs about a particular subject). I like that term albeit misunderstood by many. I posted much of this post as a comment over at Stand Firm to a post by Matt Kennedy, Do They Really “Take the Bible Seriously Not Literally”?. I am writing here in order to provide to revise and extend my remarks.

The parables of Christ are stories. Did the parable of the good Samaritans happen exactly as it got recorded in Holy Scripture and does it matter? I would contend that it matters nothing at all if the story of the good Samaritan happened exactly as recorded in Holy Scripture or not. Christ’s purpose was not to relate history.

Wakeuptec said write, so I did

I could not sleep early this morning and I came across http://titusonenine.classicalanglican.net/?p=14820 and the link thereon. I took some of the advise on the link and wrote the following.

Date: Thu, 24 Aug 2006 06:02:07 -0700
To: KJeffets@aol.com
Madam;

I write this in response to a website request concerning your meeting to be held in New York at the request of the Archbishop of Canterbury. This meeting could well be the indicator of the commitments of the Episcopal Church in the USA. Is the Episcopal Church loyal to God as revealed in Holy Scripture, or to certain groups who want the sins for which they have proclivities to no longer be considered sin?

I think it fair to paraphrase Jesus as saying, come as you are and be changed. I think that the Episcopal Church is saying come as you are and we will change the gospel so you need not change. Many are saying that the only sin left in the Episcopal Church is to accept the biblical understanding of sin and sinning. This may be a bit over the top, but given the apparent path being taken, it soon may not be over the top.

This may be a blunt way of stating a position, but action like those of certain Bishops in California against another Bishop of the same state, strongly suggest the time for token pleasantries be long past. If you seriously want to be viewed as having concern for justice over the political position, you need to disavow the action in California.

Yours in Christ
Scott+
Arizona

( http://www.wakeuptec.org/action.shtml is the website in question. I thank them for the address but not the suggested content of my letter.)

Homosexuality and Reason

In the whole sexuality discussion, focusing on Scripture is not to concede reason to the other side. Reason in Anglican tradition, is to be used within the framework of Scripture. The idea that reason is equal to scripture is not valid. Reason is used to understand Scripture and Tradition it does not stand alone.  I have generally taken the tact that if Scripture is clear, not to engage in the discussion using reason. For the most part, I have only engaged in the discussion about reason when charges of being unreasonable have been put forth.

Nevertheless, there are good and shall I say secular reasons that homosexuality is a social problem. I here present a short summary of my thinking on how homosexuality defeats comradeship. I with this suggest that comradeship be a very necessary social function.  This is one reason the homosexuality is not good for the social structure, there are others.

There are sometimes when the sexes are to be separated. To me this is proper when comradeship is a required element. I know of nothing that can hurt a unit’s view of its common purpose than sexual attraction. The most clear examples are things like combat units in the armed forces.

As I am using the term, comradeship is a close personal attachment without sexual desires. This can be with an individual or a group.  While I am not saying that comradeship with a person of the opposite sex cannot occur, I am saying that sexual attraction destroys comradeship. Large group comradeship of mixed sexes is very difficult if not impossible.

Homosexual attraction also destroys comradeship. If I am part of a group of all men, I feel more open to comradeship, and I think that this is true of most men. This is where a even homosexual proclivity becomes a problem I need to be sure that my comradeship is not viewed as sexual attraction or a sexual advance. When I go on a men’s retreat, I do so in large part for comradeship. Homosexual attraction being part of the group destroys comradeship. This idea can be generalized and should be.

If I am part of a larger group of comrades, I want to think that the decisions of all in the group are made devoid of sexual attraction. It is not my original idea, but I contend that in any group of people where leaders or members of the group are required to make decision which effect the group in less than two seconds, need comradeship and must not have sexual attraction. This is why mixed sexes and homosexuals should not be in things like combat units.

I close with the reminder that homosexual acts are sin.  Holy Scripture tells us this, so the above is additive.   Even if the reader feels the logic of this posting is wrong, it does not change the sinful nature of homosexual acts.

I write this post because the topic has come up on the email group I am a member as well as posting by Brad Drell on his blog.

Mount Soledad Cross

It was until recent times that the United States could have been called a Christian country. It was not that Christianity was the only religion, but rather it was the force which created the morals by which people interact. Every government has morals which underpin the laws of the country. Sometimes these morals are fear, as in Iraq before the invasion. The laws of the United States are based upon the morality of the Jewish and Christian religions.

The idea that the government could not establish a Church is not saying that religion has no place in government. It is a job for religion to maintain moral order, and in that respect it overlaps with the role of government. Let us all be honest, government is all about morals. Morals are what make laws acceptable to people. There is no such thing as a government that does not have morals. They may be what I would call bad morals, but they have their moral none the less.