You make a very important but too often overlooked point.
Joel Send a noteboard - 14/05/2011 01:54:40 AM
Which I guess makes it no surprise it's overlooked here.
That's the core of it, yet alarmingly easy to miss. It cuts both ways of course; some very strict denominations practically deny the possibility of repentance when church members sin, so people only have to screw up once to be permanently ostracized whatever they do subsequently. Yet on the other end of the spectrum are churches that seem to feel something as trivial as unrepentant sin shouldn't be a barrier to fellowship with God (which is totally the churchs call, right? ) My experience has been that both phenomena are most prevalent with BAC churches, where the Sinners Prayer, an alter call, dunking or whatever rite of passage they endorse somehow makes people immune to sin, and any subsequent sins are either treated as proof the young Christian was insincere or unclean, or dismissed because they can't have sinned; they're CHRISTIANS. Of course, this overlooks another scriptural point on which Paul is explicit in multiple places; had he the luxury of putting his life on autopilot once he accepted Christ he wouldn't have spoken of "finishing the race" or "perfection in Christ" as a process rather than an instantaneous event.
*returns from tangent*
The point is, if someone objects to a basic and enduring Church statement that a given act is sinful, but nonetheless commits it and means to continue, the solution is not conforming the Church to their wishes, but a religion (if any) that condones them. Just because a Christian desires something that the Church condemns doesn't mean the Holy Spirit is conveniently telling them the Church is wrong and their desire right; as you correctly note, that's the nature of a Christians struggle against sin, one the Church teaches is impossible for anyone to win apart from Christ. I realize there's a popular view that Christianity is "slavery to Christ", but within the Church I thought it well established that slavery to sin is NOT Christianity. It's one thing to err, repent, be forgiven in Grace and try to be righteous henceforth, and quite another to revel in error while calling it Gods will.
So what? You seem to have a very poor understanding of the nature of faith and salvation if that's your attitude. The forgiveness of sins by Christ is founded on the penitence of the sinner. Jesus said to the adulteress, "Go, and sin no more", not "Go, and keep doing what you've been doing". While every human is a sinner in Christian doctrine, there is a difference between sinning and asking for forgiveness, and trying not to sin again, and being comfortable with sin and professing it to not be a sin. That is pretty much the standard definition of an unrepentant sinner no matter what denomination you belong to. If the priest is a homosexual who tries to refrain from acting on his urges, then he's no different than the priest who struggles with any other sin. It's when he claims that what he's doing is okay that he has crossed a line, and a very clear one at that.
That's the core of it, yet alarmingly easy to miss. It cuts both ways of course; some very strict denominations practically deny the possibility of repentance when church members sin, so people only have to screw up once to be permanently ostracized whatever they do subsequently. Yet on the other end of the spectrum are churches that seem to feel something as trivial as unrepentant sin shouldn't be a barrier to fellowship with God (which is totally the churchs call, right? ) My experience has been that both phenomena are most prevalent with BAC churches, where the Sinners Prayer, an alter call, dunking or whatever rite of passage they endorse somehow makes people immune to sin, and any subsequent sins are either treated as proof the young Christian was insincere or unclean, or dismissed because they can't have sinned; they're CHRISTIANS. Of course, this overlooks another scriptural point on which Paul is explicit in multiple places; had he the luxury of putting his life on autopilot once he accepted Christ he wouldn't have spoken of "finishing the race" or "perfection in Christ" as a process rather than an instantaneous event.
*returns from tangent*
The point is, if someone objects to a basic and enduring Church statement that a given act is sinful, but nonetheless commits it and means to continue, the solution is not conforming the Church to their wishes, but a religion (if any) that condones them. Just because a Christian desires something that the Church condemns doesn't mean the Holy Spirit is conveniently telling them the Church is wrong and their desire right; as you correctly note, that's the nature of a Christians struggle against sin, one the Church teaches is impossible for anyone to win apart from Christ. I realize there's a popular view that Christianity is "slavery to Christ", but within the Church I thought it well established that slavery to sin is NOT Christianity. It's one thing to err, repent, be forgiven in Grace and try to be righteous henceforth, and quite another to revel in error while calling it Gods will.
Honorbound and honored to be Bonded to Mahtaliel Sedai
Last First in wotmania Chat
Slightly better than chocolate.
Love still can't be coerced.
Please Don't Eat the Newbies!
LoL. Be well, RAFOlk.
Last First in wotmania Chat
Slightly better than chocolate.
Love still can't be coerced.
Please Don't Eat the Newbies!
LoL. Be well, RAFOlk.
Presbyterian Church (USA) passes Amendment 10-A.
11/05/2011 05:39:29 PM
- 1335 Views
What's the language? Did they at least TRY to give a doctrinal justification?
12/05/2011 02:10:46 AM
- 835 Views
Thank you for that rousing argument against married priests.
12/05/2011 03:36:51 AM
- 823 Views
Why ARE you letting women into the priesthood?
12/05/2011 04:16:50 AM
- 771 Views
Because Episcopalians don't listen to the Bible much.
12/05/2011 05:47:03 AM
- 713 Views
That's just fine as far as I'm concerned
12/05/2011 02:23:44 PM
- 711 Views
Yes, I suppose a church could go that route.
14/05/2011 07:38:02 AM
- 681 Views
I'm not attempting to impose a dichotomy on the Bible.
14/05/2011 03:25:30 PM
- 739 Views
I don't even know what following the Bible in its entirety means.
14/05/2011 09:09:10 PM
- 914 Views
As an exercise, I tried to think of how I would justify allowing homosexuals as clergy.
14/05/2011 04:19:43 PM
- 718 Views
Thanks (I'm actually OK with women priests though).
12/05/2011 07:09:11 AM
- 792 Views
There's ample precedent for female religious leaders, even within the bible.
12/05/2011 06:51:05 AM
- 822 Views
Since when is Moses' society the be-all end all?
12/05/2011 07:12:41 PM
- 702 Views
Since never, which is why I referenced five other eras you completely ignored.
14/05/2011 01:11:30 AM
- 803 Views
They did so, via negativa.
12/05/2011 04:22:17 PM
- 862 Views
Sorry for the delay, particularly since it looks like I'll be spending a fair amount of time here.
14/05/2011 12:31:33 AM
- 659 Views
Your church has a constitution?!
12/05/2011 03:36:41 AM
- 723 Views
My Church has a congress! *NM*
12/05/2011 03:37:52 AM
- 365 Views
Haha no way! *NM*
12/05/2011 03:46:32 AM
- 319 Views
Well, we have one group of laity and one of bishops, so it is only mildy utter chaos. *NM*
12/05/2011 05:51:09 AM
- 344 Views
I'm happy to hear this, personally. I also wonder how you reconcile this with the Bible.
12/05/2011 04:11:31 AM
- 907 Views
Every direct reference to homosexuality in the Bible is a reference to rape.
12/05/2011 04:12:43 PM
- 738 Views
Every single word that you wrote in your response is complete bullshit.
12/05/2011 05:50:07 PM
- 850 Views
Knock off your eisegesis, try some exegesis
12/05/2011 07:02:45 PM
- 790 Views
I'm trying to figure out just what your "gifts" are, because I don't see any.
12/05/2011 07:30:39 PM
- 761 Views
There are cases in which hypocrisy is far better than the alternatives.
12/05/2011 10:04:32 PM
- 834 Views
Hypocrisy is better than, say, setting gays on fire, yes.
12/05/2011 10:10:40 PM
- 795 Views
My statement is that, from a pragmatic point of view, hypocrisy shouldn't be discouraged too much.
13/05/2011 10:05:39 PM
- 801 Views
Oh, is that how we're playing this, then?
13/05/2011 06:29:31 PM
- 757 Views
I'm not playing. I'm pointing out some glaring errors on your part.
13/05/2011 07:25:08 PM
- 678 Views
The Bible says what it says. The problem... people like to tell us just what else it's saying.
13/05/2011 05:31:29 PM
- 700 Views
You make a very important but too often overlooked point.
14/05/2011 01:54:40 AM
- 820 Views
You don't reconcile... you pick the parts you like and adjust the rest to suit you.
13/05/2011 09:33:54 PM
- 661 Views
Another example...
12/05/2011 09:19:52 AM
- 655 Views
If you claim to follow the entire Bible, then you are completely correct.
12/05/2011 06:04:38 PM
- 631 Views
On the contrary, this move will take some butts out of the seats.
12/05/2011 07:16:22 PM
- 692 Views
We both know that isn't the case
12/05/2011 07:55:41 PM
- 799 Views
Cool cool. I have a question on a semi-related note, about Protestant Gospels
12/05/2011 05:33:49 PM
- 761 Views
No Protestant denomination has added so much as a word to the Bible
12/05/2011 05:58:16 PM
- 638 Views
So, everyone hates Judith, then?
12/05/2011 06:40:11 PM
- 700 Views
The Catholics and Eastern Orthodox Churches accept Judith as part of Scripture.
12/05/2011 07:51:27 PM
- 675 Views
Does the Eastern Orthodox Church also segregate deuterocanonical works like Roman Catholicism does?
14/05/2011 02:19:03 AM
- 981 Views
The Eastern Church bases everything on the Septuagint.
14/05/2011 02:34:41 AM
- 726 Views
That sounds appealing, and makes sense.
14/05/2011 02:44:56 AM
- 748 Views
Oh, I just enjoy calling Protestants "heretics" to remind them not everyone agrees with them.
14/05/2011 03:25:42 AM
- 685 Views
Re: Cool cool. I have a question on a semi-related note, about Protestant Gospels
12/05/2011 08:52:48 PM
- 709 Views
The NIV is terrible. The NASB has the best translation I have found (of the NT, at least).
12/05/2011 10:43:58 PM
- 846 Views
I find this really weird, to be honest
13/05/2011 05:48:28 AM
- 718 Views
Well, it wasn't just Athanasius. But yes, we are lucky in that respect. *NM*
13/05/2011 06:32:48 AM
- 301 Views
Athanasius's list reflected the victory of Pauline Christianity
13/05/2011 02:52:53 PM
- 676 Views
There's a school of thought that says that's a strong vindication of Athanasius.
14/05/2011 02:37:49 AM
- 617 Views