| Welcome to The New Coffee Room. We hope you enjoy your visit. You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free. Join our community! If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features: |
- Pages:
- 1
- 2
| Two Lepers; (sermon 2/15/09) | |
|---|---|
| Tweet Topic Started: Feb 14 2009, 04:45 PM (789 Views) | |
| Dewey | Feb 16 2009, 05:08 AM Post #26 |
![]()
HOLY CARP!!!
|
No handwaving; offering fact. If that's the way you want to use the term, fine. I'll use it my way. Your way implies that a person couldn't use the term "gay" while being critical of a person, and that's simply false.
That's an "if" that we disagree on. I refer you to the biography of Nouwen's life, "Wounded Prophet: A Portrait of Henri J.M. Nouwen" by Michael Ford, in which this subject is discussed at length, even including some discussion about whether Nouwen remained celibate.
The current Presbyterian position is that celibate gay and lesbian individuals may be ordained as Deacons, Elders, and ministers of Word and Sacrament. However, they do not hold straight members to the same standard, permitting them to a standard of "fidelity in marriage, or chastity in singleness." In other words, straight Presbyterians are given an alternative to chastity that they do not permit to the gay or lesbian individuals. They have established a double standard, setting up a category of "second-class" active members of their own church. These people are told that they're welcomed in the front door, and they're welcomed to profess the faith and become active members of the church, and participate in every function, program, and mission of the church - even serving as "co-opted" members of committees established by the governing "Session" which conducts congregational governance - but they may not ever actually be ordained to be a deacon, elder, or minister. It's a terribly hypocrital position, one of refusing to accept the possibility that God would call a person to a specific manner of ministry and service within the Church, simply on the basis of what their sexual preference is. And that's the key point: it is not us who ordains a person to a particular call. God does the ordaining; in our actions, we are only acknowledging and affirming that we see in the person the appropriate skills, talents and gifts for the call. Whether Nouwen, or anyone else, remains celibate is not the relevant point. The fact that he was gay, and was tortured throughout his life over his struggle with his sexuality and need for intimacy versus the position of the church, is. The apostle Paul recommends celibacy to some, but admits that not all have been given the gift of being able to remain celibate. This is true for all people, whether gay or straight. Given that reality, the question becomes one of how the church is to treat all people in the same standard and application of Christ's teachings. I believe that at present, the Presbyterian church - and most others - can do better at that then they're doing now. It is a core Presbyterian belief that God is sovereign, and that as such, God will call whomever God will call to serve him, in whatever way God chooses. If that is the case, then to use your term, who the heck are we to deny someone ordination within the church if an examination of the person's faith, life, talents, and abilities clearly point to God's hand being upon them, and their fitness for service to God, simply because of their sexual orientation? To quote the apostle Peter from the extended passage of Acts 10-11, "If then God gave them the same gift that he gave us when we believed in the Lord Jesus Christ, who was I that I could hinder God?” To do that, my friend, I would, and do, consider sin. A quick google search of Nouwen turns up the following article, which I think is relevant to this conversation: http://www.thesocialedge.com/archives/maurahanrahan/columns-mar2005.htm |
|
"By nature, i prefer brevity." - John Calvin, Institutes of the Christian Religion, p. 685. "Never waste your time trying to explain yourself to people who are committed to misunderstanding you." - Anonymous "Oh sure, every once in a while a turd floated by, but other than that it was just fine." - Joe A., 2011 I'll answer your other comments later, but my primary priority for the rest of the evening is to get drunk." - Klaus, 12/31/14 | |
![]() |
|
| ivorythumper | Feb 16 2009, 10:32 AM Post #27 |
|
I am so adjective that I verb nouns!
|
Yes, Dewey, that and the article you linked is precisely the sort of stuff I included under "Speculation? Rumor? Interpretation of his own psychological self reflections about his need for intimacy?" I have only read reviews of Ford's book. Perhaps you can quote some relevant passages where Nouwen identified himself as gay or homosexual, or some of his lovers recounted their personal experiences with him. In absence of fact or personal acknowledgment, it seems you are speculating based on rumor, and casting aspersions on a man's life for your politics that you have wrapped in the guise of theology. That has no place at the pulpit. |
| The dogma lives loudly within me. | |
![]() |
|
| Dewey | Feb 16 2009, 08:30 PM Post #28 |
![]()
HOLY CARP!!!
|
I disagree, not only with your take on Nouwen, but also with your defintion of a theological versus a political point, as well as what is appropriate sermon content. But thanks for sharing your viewpoint anyway. |
|
"By nature, i prefer brevity." - John Calvin, Institutes of the Christian Religion, p. 685. "Never waste your time trying to explain yourself to people who are committed to misunderstanding you." - Anonymous "Oh sure, every once in a while a turd floated by, but other than that it was just fine." - Joe A., 2011 I'll answer your other comments later, but my primary priority for the rest of the evening is to get drunk." - Klaus, 12/31/14 | |
![]() |
|
| ivorythumper | Feb 17 2009, 11:30 AM Post #29 |
|
I am so adjective that I verb nouns!
|
Good to know that you think speculation and rumor and casting aspersions on a man's life belongs in the pulpit as a long as it is "theological". That to me is a much more interesting view point than mine. |
| The dogma lives loudly within me. | |
![]() |
|
| big al | Feb 17 2009, 01:49 PM Post #30 |
|
Bull-Carp
|
I am confused by the terms of debate here. As far as I can determine, the discussion was instigated by Dewey's statement concerning Henri Nouwen in his sermon that "Yet just before he died several years ago, it came out that for his entire life, he’d hidden the fact that he was gay." Are you debating whether Henri Nouwen was in fact "gay"? Or are you debating whether a celibate homosexual person can properly be called "gay"? Furthermore, does such a characterization as "gay" or "celibate homosexual" constitute "casting aspersions on a man's life", to use IT's words? Perhaps one or both of you can clarify this for me. Perhaps each of you might also comment on whether carnal desires that are not physically fulfilled prevent ordination of clergy in your repective doctrines. I am well aware of Christ's words on the subject of lust and know that few, if any, have not sinned in that regard by thought, but does the nature of that thought and the sex of the object of desire have different consequences depending on the sex of the person harboring that desire? I sat as liturgist last Sunday and, like apple, heard another sermon on the same lectionary readings. It reflects how deep the scriptures truly are when we contemplate how many times their depths may be plumbed and still bring up new understanding. Big Al |
|
Location: Western PA "jesu, der simcha fun der man's farlangen." -bachophile | |
![]() |
|
| ivorythumper | Feb 17 2009, 02:05 PM Post #31 |
|
I am so adjective that I verb nouns!
|
Dewey does not even admit to a difference between calling someone "gay" and calling them a "celibate homosexual", so I am not sure what he will make of that question. But apart from my main objection that it is wrong to use Fr Nouwen as a poster boy for gay ordination based on what seems to be rumor and speculation related to matters of his own private struggles, I guess it depends on the audience, Al. Someone saying that you can really hold your liquor might be a compliment at the Elk's Lodge but not with your board of directors. |
| The dogma lives loudly within me. | |
![]() |
|
| Kincaid | Feb 17 2009, 02:51 PM Post #32 |
|
HOLY CARP!!!
|
Holding your liquor well is a big thing in S.E. Asia, I hear. |
| Kincaid - disgusted Republican Partisan since 2006. | |
![]() |
|
| big al | Feb 17 2009, 04:51 PM Post #33 |
|
Bull-Carp
|
My question was directed to each of you, IT. Do you regard those as different? I can't respond to your second comment until I understand what you mean by "gay" and whether it is (by your definition) inclusive or exclusive of celibate homosexuals. Big Al |
|
Location: Western PA "jesu, der simcha fun der man's farlangen." -bachophile | |
![]() |
|
| Dewey | Feb 17 2009, 06:12 PM Post #34 |
![]()
HOLY CARP!!!
|
Al, at present, in order for a gay or lesbian person to be considered for not only clergy, but also to serve as ordained lay leaders - deacons and elders - within any congregationin the PC(USA), they must maintain a standard of "fidelity in marriage or chastity in singleness." This leads to two points - first, that in the gay or lesbian person not being granted the same option of marriage as an alternative to celibacy (see following) that is offered to a straight candidate for ordination, we are unjustly demanding a higher standard of the gay or lesbian candidate. Paul tells us that celibacy is a gift given to some, but not all, so it is unjust for us to demand adherence to a higher level of sexual restraint than God may indeed have granted to the candidate. Second, many will also make the legitimate distinction between the definitions of "celibacy" - which is not a stated requirement for an unmarried candidate - and that of "chastity." The fact is that in the church's historical documents, "chastity" did not necessarily connote "celibacy," but rather, sexual modesty - as these documents referred to behavioral ideals of "chastity" in marriage, meaning not uncosummated marriage, but rather, simply modest behavior. I think your point regarding the sex of the object of one's desire in lustful thought is extremely valid. In order to be consistent, those who would stipulate that gay or lesbian candidates must remain "celibate" in order to not sin would have to demand that they not even have lusty fantasies of a same-sex partner. The celibacy-demanders are themselves already limiting scriptural attestation of what sexual sin includes. By setting their standard, they've already taken off the table the scripturally defined sin of lusting in one's heart, and in so doing, they have themselves have let loose the very horse they want to keep in the barn - that of having to interpret and understand scripture according to the totality of scripture. An additional thought: the Nouwen reference had some additional local irony. The book that I held up on Sunday had been donated to the library by a former pastor of the congregation - one who held staunch anti-gay beliefs (caused in part, apparently, by his coming home one day to find his first wife in bed with another woman, I was informed after the service), and who had led the congregation to participate in a bit of a revolt against the denomination for what he saw as the apostasy of their moving toward gay ordination. As I held up the book, I mentioned the name of the man who had donated the book, which he obviously thought was worthwile teaching. The reference wasn't lost on the congregation. A final point: I just got back from our Presbytery meeting. The vote to approve the proposed language change referenced in the sermon was 115 yes, 88 no, and 1 abstention; the motion passed 56% - 44%. |
|
"By nature, i prefer brevity." - John Calvin, Institutes of the Christian Religion, p. 685. "Never waste your time trying to explain yourself to people who are committed to misunderstanding you." - Anonymous "Oh sure, every once in a while a turd floated by, but other than that it was just fine." - Joe A., 2011 I'll answer your other comments later, but my primary priority for the rest of the evening is to get drunk." - Klaus, 12/31/14 | |
![]() |
|
| Dewey | Feb 17 2009, 06:16 PM Post #35 |
![]()
HOLY CARP!!!
|
That is correct; I do not.
What you oppose is a Roman Catholic priest who was truly a God-given gift to the entire Christian faith being used as a legitimate example to make a theological point that you simply disagree with. |
|
"By nature, i prefer brevity." - John Calvin, Institutes of the Christian Religion, p. 685. "Never waste your time trying to explain yourself to people who are committed to misunderstanding you." - Anonymous "Oh sure, every once in a while a turd floated by, but other than that it was just fine." - Joe A., 2011 I'll answer your other comments later, but my primary priority for the rest of the evening is to get drunk." - Klaus, 12/31/14 | |
![]() |
|
| Kincaid | Feb 17 2009, 09:49 PM Post #36 |
|
HOLY CARP!!!
|
All celibate homosexuals are gay, but not all gays are celibate homosexuals, n'est pas? |
| Kincaid - disgusted Republican Partisan since 2006. | |
![]() |
|
| Dewey | Feb 18 2009, 04:10 AM Post #37 |
![]()
HOLY CARP!!!
|
Oui. |
|
"By nature, i prefer brevity." - John Calvin, Institutes of the Christian Religion, p. 685. "Never waste your time trying to explain yourself to people who are committed to misunderstanding you." - Anonymous "Oh sure, every once in a while a turd floated by, but other than that it was just fine." - Joe A., 2011 I'll answer your other comments later, but my primary priority for the rest of the evening is to get drunk." - Klaus, 12/31/14 | |
![]() |
|
| ivorythumper | Feb 18 2009, 07:34 AM Post #38 |
|
I am so adjective that I verb nouns!
|
I already alluded to that, Al.
I know a number of chaste homosexuals who don't consider themselves "gay", and would be repelled if their pastor labeled them "gay". |
| The dogma lives loudly within me. | |
![]() |
|
| ivorythumper | Feb 18 2009, 07:38 AM Post #39 |
|
I am so adjective that I verb nouns!
|
Thanks for sharing that story, pastor. You might want to drop that whole "this is theology, not politics" schtick. It strains credulity. |
| The dogma lives loudly within me. | |
![]() |
|
| ivorythumper | Feb 18 2009, 07:44 AM Post #40 |
|
I am so adjective that I verb nouns!
|
No Dewey. It does not matter whether he was a priest or a layman or a Catholic or a fellow Presbyterian. The point is one of justice. You stated things about the man's life that are not matters of public record--that are based on rumor and speculation--to make a political point. It is obvious that it was a political point. If it were "theological" you would not have mentioned the name of the previous pastor who donated the book. |
| The dogma lives loudly within me. | |
![]() |
|
| Klaus | Feb 18 2009, 07:48 AM Post #41 |
![]()
HOLY CARP!!!
|
I haven't read any of the posts in this thread, but I believe that IT is wrong and Dewey is right
|
| Trifonov Fleisher Klaus Sokolov Zimmerman | |
![]() |
|
| ivorythumper | Feb 18 2009, 07:51 AM Post #42 |
|
I am so adjective that I verb nouns!
|
So you agree with him that Germans smell like old beer stained lederhosen? |
| The dogma lives loudly within me. | |
![]() |
|
| Larry | Feb 18 2009, 07:58 AM Post #43 |
![]()
Mmmmmmm, pie!
|
Sigh....... |
|
Of the Pokatwat Tribe | |
![]() |
|
| Klaus | Feb 18 2009, 08:06 AM Post #44 |
![]()
HOLY CARP!!!
|
I think you miss the important difference between the political statement of smelling like old beer stained lederhosen, and the psychological statement of to be sweet with alcoholized chaps. |
| Trifonov Fleisher Klaus Sokolov Zimmerman | |
![]() |
|
| ivorythumper | Feb 18 2009, 08:11 AM Post #45 |
|
I am so adjective that I verb nouns!
|
So all old beer stained lederhosen smell like sweet alcoholized chaps but not all sweet alcoholized chap smell like old beer stained lederhosen? OK, I see your point. |
| The dogma lives loudly within me. | |
![]() |
|
| Dewey | Feb 18 2009, 08:42 AM Post #46 |
![]()
HOLY CARP!!!
|
Only your own, IT. Whether speaking of the man who donated the book, or me, the argument remains a theological one. Based on this thread, your definition of a theological point seems to be "one that agrees with me;" if it doesn't, it's relegated to the political. This whole debate as it plays out within and across the faith hinges on three key, and related, theological issues: A believer's understanding of the nature and locus of authority within the faith; his/her understanding of proper interpretation of scripture; and, by extension, their understanding of the balance among our charge to live out Christ's model of justice, mercy, and love. These are bedrock theological issues that different faith traditions and individual believers have have different opinions on, and it's partly out of different answers to these issues that you and I will never, barring a miracle, agree on this issue, IT. But despite the different viewpoints, the debate is theological, not political. As I sat in that long meeting last night, I was sitting with one of my elders, and our Clerk of Session. Each congregation is assigned a number of representatives who have voice and vote based on active membership. Based on that criterion, I have a voice & vote privileges, as does one elder from the congregation. My clerk was a visitor, but without voice or vote. I was very impressed with the way the meeting proceeded. Presbyterians are big on doing things "decently and in good order," so the debate was organized so that the debate would alternate between people who wanted to speak in favor of the language change, and those who wanted to speak against it. Each speaker had two minutes to speak. The debate had to remain on-point, and specific to why the speaker felt the way he or she did. Arguments against other individuals, or to simply opine on the motivations of the other side, were out of order. Whenever the debate reached the point where the debate couldn't alternate (i.e., there weren't any speakers on one side of the issue, even if there were additional people waiting to speak on the other side), the question would be called and voted upon. The two lines formed side-by-side down the center aisle of the church, not two feet apart from each other, using a single shared microphone. As I sat there, watching the commissioners standing in line to speak, I saw many friends, former instructors, and fellow pastors, people I knew well, lining up in both lines. The people in the lines were mostly friends too, and very often you'd see commisioners reaching over to smile and shake the hand of a friend in the other line, and offer a little chitchat while they waited their turn. Both sides offered good, civil, reasoned, theological arguments for why they were arguing their position. Prayer was offered before deliberation began, before the vote, and again after the vote. Voting was by paper/secret ballot. Neither my voting elder nor I had a pen to use in marking our ballot. Our clerk sitting between us, had one that we could use, so I took it, using it to cast my "yes" vote, and I handed to him, to use as he cast his "no" vote. And then we moved on. |
|
"By nature, i prefer brevity." - John Calvin, Institutes of the Christian Religion, p. 685. "Never waste your time trying to explain yourself to people who are committed to misunderstanding you." - Anonymous "Oh sure, every once in a while a turd floated by, but other than that it was just fine." - Joe A., 2011 I'll answer your other comments later, but my primary priority for the rest of the evening is to get drunk." - Klaus, 12/31/14 | |
![]() |
|
| ivorythumper | Feb 18 2009, 09:49 AM Post #47 |
|
I am so adjective that I verb nouns!
|
That is a truly absurd and desperate argument, Dewey. But at this point it would only be rehashing what was already said to point out the obvious. And so we can move on. |
| The dogma lives loudly within me. | |
![]() |
|
| Renauda | Feb 18 2009, 10:23 AM Post #48 |
![]()
HOLY CARP!!!
|
Strangely enough I think it's the other way around. In any case the two opposing arguments presented here remind me of the contemporary controversy and speculation surrounding the Desiderius Erasmus's alleged homosexuality. He too was an ordained Catholic clergyman who was a respected Humanist and man of letters. In Erasmus' case the argument is neither politcal or theological and really of no historiographical importance- indeed it was not issue even in the 16th Century when he was alive- but has become one of those campy issues people over which people currently love to bicker ad naseum. |
![]() |
|
| ivorythumper | Feb 18 2009, 09:49 PM Post #49 |
|
I am so adjective that I verb nouns!
|
I think you have that backwards, but then I think your whole argument is backwards and I have no idea what that sentence even means. |
| The dogma lives loudly within me. | |
![]() |
|
| Dewey | Feb 18 2009, 10:05 PM Post #50 |
![]()
HOLY CARP!!!
|
OK, time to stop discussing last Sunday's sermon and start concentrating on next Sunday's. |
|
"By nature, i prefer brevity." - John Calvin, Institutes of the Christian Religion, p. 685. "Never waste your time trying to explain yourself to people who are committed to misunderstanding you." - Anonymous "Oh sure, every once in a while a turd floated by, but other than that it was just fine." - Joe A., 2011 I'll answer your other comments later, but my primary priority for the rest of the evening is to get drunk." - Klaus, 12/31/14 | |
![]() |
|
|
|
| « Previous Topic · The New Coffee Room · Next Topic » |
- Pages:
- 1
- 2











4:35 PM Jul 10