All Episcopal Churches Must Now Accommodate Gay Weddings


The Episcopal denomination has now decided that even if a local priest does not agree with gay marriage his local church must find a way to accommodate such a request. If the local priest does not want to conduct the marriage ceremony he is to find a colleague who is willing.

No doubt this follows the well worn path of interracial marriage. It's hard to swallow that a large swath of Christianity once thought interracial marriage went against Christian principles. Preachers preached against it and those who disagreed we said to not be true Christians.

Since there is no biblical teaching against gay marriage preachers who oppose it are free-lancing Christians. They may not like homosexuality and are grasping at something in their faith to justify this dislike.

With churches closing, there are plenty of preachers around to take jobs at prosperous churches. I'm wondering if Episcopal priests who oppose gay marriage put that on their resumes when they are shopping for a new parish. I think they would have to limit job searches to rural areas and parts of the South.

There has been a concern expressed that when gay marriage became the law of the land preachers would be forced to perform gay marriages and stop preaching about homosexuality as sin. I've not heard of preachers being forced to do this but in time the market will require enthusiastic participation in gay marriages. Preachers have already adjusted, so I have heard, to the preferences of those in the pews not to preach so heavily about sin, damnation and hell. Sunshine Jesus is now the preferred theology.

With gay marriage now approved by the Episcopal church its place in mainstream Christianity is approaching.

Comments

  1. J. StainsNovember 11, 2018 at 2:15 PM

    This article seems naïve about Christian teaching.

    Historically, the only significant group of Christians who taught against interracial marriage were Anglo-Saxon Protestants in the US, and those more predominantly in the South than elsewhere. The New Testament never spoke against it. Old-world Orthodox and Roman Catholics allowed it, though ethnic-based local churches sometimes preferred their own. Those who preached against it did so more on the grounds of ethnic suspicion, or rumors about differences among races. The New Testament did not give them backing.


    The Bible speaks consistently against adultery, marrying close relatives, same-sex relations and bestiality as immoral. A statement against marriage in such circumstances would be considered triflingly redundant.



    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Jon LindgrenNovember 11, 2018 at 6:04 PM

      Joe, thanks for the comment.
      "The article seems naive about Christian teaching. Historically, the only significant group of Christians who taught against interracial marriage were Anglo Saxon Protestants in the US, and those more predominantly in the South than elsewhere."

      I have to say that is naive. The largest Protestant denomination in the U.S. is the Southern Baptist Convention. Also naive is your statement, "The Bible speaks constantly against...same-sex relations.." Many will argue that the Bible does not condemn same sex relationships--that it is contemporary prejudices which have made this up.

      Delete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Maybe the "Original Sin" Should be Reassigned

Image
We can all agree most Catholic priests are fine people and not guilty of sexual abuse. What Catholics must face, however, it that their church harbors executives who are dishonest . There is an incredible story about the Argentine Bishop Zanchetta. The Pope worked with him in Argentina and they are considered friends. Around 2015 Zanchetta sent nude pictures of himself and they began circulating world wide. He also was too friendly with young seminarians and some left because of him.  Three different officials say they made formal complaints to the Vatican about Zanchetta between 2015 and 2017. Yet, in 2018, the Vatican claimed it was unaware of any complaints about Zanchetta. This might be a good time to repeat the Catholic hierarchy claims to have the sole authority handed down from Jesus to what the faith stands for. It condemns as sinners those who practice birth control, have abortions and gay sexual relationships. Handing the hierarchy this responsibility would make som
Read more

The Religious Capitol Invaders May Yet Win

Image
So much about U.S. society and religion can be learned from the Civil War and what happened afterwards. After its defeat, the South started a myth about the unethical soldiers from the North. The South fought for principles of God and states rights. The North did not. It was the South, this propaganda told the country, that had the high moral ground.  The Capitol invaders, encouraged by Trump, swallowed the myth that Biden's election was stolen. Thus, they think they held and still hold the high moral ground. This was reinforced by the cross and prayers during the invasion. Even with Trump is gone, we will see political opportunists like Senators Ted Cruz and Josh Hawley stroking crowds and feeding the same lies as Trump. Like "the South will rise again" these gullible followers will talk of victory over the unclean. After the Civil War the South rallied around the phrase, Lost Cause. For decades, and maybe to this day, there are ceremonies remembering fallen martyrs, Re
Read more

Father Frank Pavone, the Ultimate Crook

Image
Recently, the Vatican defrocked Frank Pavone. His diehard fans are outraged. This is because he cleverly manipulated his fans and the press all the while living well from donations and, apparently, abusing some women. By making abortion the "sin" of the century, and himself the main opposition to this one sin, he himself could get away with any sin he pleased.  As the link points out, Pavone was the perfect priest for the Trump era. Trump is so self-important laws have no role in his life. He felt accountable to no one. Women were there to be had. Pavone and Trump are interchangeable.  Pavone was very successful raising money. In his mind, abortion was so important in Catholic beliefs and he was so important in anti-abortion the money he raised opposing it was his to do with what he liked. The Catholic Church, the brand name he used to raise this money, thought the money belonged to it. When he gave the Vatican the bird, it gave him walking papers. With polls showing the majo
Read more