tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3915617830446943975.post1121458761564924714..comments2024-03-30T00:33:32.285+13:00Comments on Anglican Down Under: Bonhoeffer on MarriagePeter Carrellhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09535218286799156659noreply@blogger.comBlogger29125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3915617830446943975.post-86337576050133721812012-08-26T20:35:50.839+12:002012-08-26T20:35:50.839+12:00"So this story is NOT an affirmation of sexua..."So this story is NOT an affirmation of sexual sin, nor does it portray Jesus as less strict than the Pharisees, quite the opposite in fact."<br /><br />You are correct, Shawn; it is a tiresome caricature from the 1960s that Jesus was some kind of morally relaxed hippy preaching peace and love. Anyone who reads the Gospels (cf. Matt 5.17-20)carefully will see that Jesus both *intensified and *interiorized the demands of the Law. 'Unless your righteousness exceeds that of the sctribes and Pharisees ....' Tertullian at least got this right, although he lapsed into legalism, not understanding the sacraments and the gospel of grace. Jesus taught both astonishing grace and forgiveness, along with the urgent call to holiness. Very many Chrisitans since have been unable to hold the two together.<br />MartinAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3915617830446943975.post-15641193344770036092012-08-26T13:59:36.296+12:002012-08-26T13:59:36.296+12:00In fact Jesus did affirm that she was a sinner whe...In fact Jesus did affirm that she was a sinner when He told her to go and sin no more.<br /><br />The reason why he did not condemn her to death was because the Law stated clearly that both parties involved in the adultery has to be punished. Yet only the woman is present. (see Leviticus 20:10)<br /><br />Thus Jesus was in fact strictly upholding the Law, not being lenient. <br /><br />Moreover no witnesses are brought forth to confirm the accusation, another requirement of the Law.<br /><br />The Pharisees were trying to trick Jesus and Jesus will have none of it. He recognizes that they are violating God,s Law, and refuses to play their game.<br /><br />So this story is NOT an affirmation of sexual sin, nor does it portray Jesus as less strict than the Pharisees, quite the opposite in fact.<br /><br />Jesus was certainly opposed to heartless legalism, but He was no liberal either, and to use the woman caught in adultery as a basis for accepting homosexuality is both facile in the extreme and the very same kind of self-serving abuse of Scripture Jesus critiqued the Pharisees for. Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3915617830446943975.post-84917514835999346522012-08-26T12:15:23.544+12:002012-08-26T12:15:23.544+12:00Those who claim Jesus is a liberal need to show wh...Those who claim Jesus is a liberal need to show where in Scripture he advocates easy divorce, abortion, unlimited sexual freedom or homosexual marriage.<br /><br />No, it is that claim which is facile, as is the claim that the conflict between Jesus and the Pharisees was between a liberal and conservatives. As Peter points out Jesus was in fact a conservative evangelical.<br /><br />A better analogy for the conflict would be the Reformation, with the Pharisees as the moral corruption of the Renaissance Church, with it's man made traditions (Ron's "new" revelations) and works righteousness, and Jesus as the defender and promoter of moral reform and the five Sola's: Scripture alone, grace alone, faith alone, Christ alone, and all for the glory of God alone.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3915617830446943975.post-68796754913591584882012-08-26T09:25:34.813+12:002012-08-26T09:25:34.813+12:00" the highest of standards on sexual morality..." the highest of standards on sexual morality," (Of Jesus)<br /> - Dr. Peter Carrell - <br /><br />Ah. But would the Keepers of the Law, the Scribes and Pharisees have thought that - in the incident of the woman 'taken in adultery? They would have her stoned. Jesus was much less rigorous! In fact, Jesus did not condemn her - but rather, those who would have stoned her.<br /><br />Jesus was tougher on self-righteous hypocrisy than on sexual sins.Father Ron Smithhttp://kiwianglo.wordpress.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3915617830446943975.post-20219466091838545352012-08-26T05:59:15.682+12:002012-08-26T05:59:15.682+12:00Hi Ron,
By any measure Jesus was an evangelical (b...Hi Ron,<br />By any measure Jesus was an evangelical (believing in the authority of Scripture, substitutionary atonement for the forgiveness of sins, need for a personal relationship with himself), and a conservative one at that (supporting as he did the purification of the Temple, the Law of Moses, the highest of standards on sexual morality, and the paying of legitimate taxes).<br /><br />His liberality was no more or less than the gracious and kind behaviour one would expect of a conservative evangelical towards sinners. (He was not a sinner, so I have omitted the word "fellow" from the expected phrase for the rest of us, "fellow sinners.")Peter Carrellhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09535218286799156659noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3915617830446943975.post-54721472599567349542012-08-25T22:33:41.456+12:002012-08-25T22:33:41.456+12:00"One might point out that liberalism has not ..."One might point out that liberalism has not actually done a lot for the health and strength of the church in the West." - Dr.Peter Carrell -<br /><br />A little bit facile here, Peter! Could not this have been said about the liberality of Jesus by His opponents, the Scribes & Pharisees?Father Ron Smithhttp://kiwianglo.wordpress.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3915617830446943975.post-71259246898674923102012-08-25T13:11:43.394+12:002012-08-25T13:11:43.394+12:00Hi Shawn,
I like it when you say, "Whenever ...Hi Shawn,<br /><br />I like it when you say, "Whenever a liberal says "don't worry" it is time to panic."<br /><br />One might point out that liberalism has not actually done a lot for the health and strength of the church in the West.Peter Carrellhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09535218286799156659noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3915617830446943975.post-84557172453694387462012-08-25T12:57:23.649+12:002012-08-25T12:57:23.649+12:00Yes Ron, you have to believe in the God who calls ...Yes Ron, you have to believe in the God who calls homosexuality an abomination, who defines marriage as one man with one women, who promises to bring to nought civilizations that consistently rebel against Him, and who has the power to redeem homosexuals from their sinful lifestyle.<br /><br />Quoting hymns at us does not hide the fact that your siding against Christ's Church in favor of the secular liberal State, and promoting Godless immorality.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3915617830446943975.post-41953726001188385772012-08-25T12:48:10.045+12:002012-08-25T12:48:10.045+12:00With every radical change promoted by liberalism w...With every radical change promoted by liberalism we have been told not to worry, Western civilization won't end, nothing bad will happen.<br /><br />And yet as others point out, the West IS dying, largely because of the changes liberals have wrought.<br /><br />In fact every single change brought about by the childish insanity of liberalism has been a disaster. Marriage is in decline, the traditional family under attack and increasingly under the control of the liberal State, millions of innocent children incinerated for the crime of being inconvenient, and increasingly even the most basic freedoms of religious practice and free speech are being revoked to satisfy the liberal fascism of gay rights activists.<br /><br />Ron's claim therefore that we have nothing to worry about is laughable. <br /><br />Whenever a liberal says "don't worry" it is time to panic.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3915617830446943975.post-30907379142168565662012-08-25T12:06:05.394+12:002012-08-25T12:06:05.394+12:00For those on this thread who are fearful for the f...For those on this thread who are fearful for the future, here is a rather encouraging charismatic chorus we used to sing:<br /><br />"Fear not, rejoice and be glad;<br /> The Lord has done a great thing;<br /> Has poured out His Spirit on all<br /> humankind - on all who believe<br /> in Him!"<br /><br />Of course, to sing that chorus with any credibility you really have to 'believe in Him' and His power to redeem!Father Ron Smithhttp://kiwianglo.wordpress.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3915617830446943975.post-8517384154755250242012-08-25T10:47:47.239+12:002012-08-25T10:47:47.239+12:00I fear Andrei's points are indeed true, for mu...I fear Andrei's points are indeed true, for much of the western world. Mounting debt, an aging population and falling fertility are combining to create pressures that no politicians want to face. Demographic change is coming via immigration, and that is altering the character of nations. Along with this, the prospects that today's rising generation will be poorer than their parents.<br />MartinAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3915617830446943975.post-49108571982083033782012-08-25T09:13:13.886+12:002012-08-25T09:13:13.886+12:00Civilisation won't be going to hell in a hand-...<i>Civilisation won't be going to hell in a hand-cart - just because Gay people have a chance of settling <br /><br />down to a life-time monogamous relationship, for goodness sake!</i><br /><br />Fr Ron; <br /> While you chortle away in semi mockery of my concerns the <br /><br />entire Western world is facing a crisis. A crisis which had its genesis in the 1960s with the sexual <br /><br />revolution. The children of which are just now reaching retirement age.<br /><br />In the past decade in this country alone we have aborted enough children to populate a city the size of <br /><br />Hamilton! Can you grasp the long term econmomic implications of that? <br /><br />The population is aging, because we have not been raising enough children, not only because we abort <br /><br />them but because we have contracepted them into non existence in the first place. And as the population <br /><br />ages the percentage of working age people in relation to the elderly declines and the resources that are <br /><br />transfered from former to the later increases - not rocket science.<br /><br />The real crunch hasn't occurred yet though it is starting to bite. According to Treasury estimates in a <br /><br />mere thirteen years there will be 2½ working age adults for every superannuant to pay for super <br /><br />annuation and health costs for the later group.<br /><br />Our political class, the most shallow and vapid of all time and whose vision extends to one electoral <br /><br />cycle instead of dealing with this as it has been developing have kicked it into touch by <b>borrowing <br /><br />money we will not be able to repay</b>. This is true across the Western world.<br /><br />Our cultural malaise arises from the fact that we prefer iPads and holidays in Bali to children - and <br /><br />indeed <a href="http://media.nzherald.co.nz/webcontent/image/jpg/200951/161209splPOSTER_460x230.jpg" rel="nofollow">de<br /><br />nigrate the very concept of Motherhood as a noble calling</a>. Super orgasms being a worthwhile thing <br /><br />to strive for it seems.Andreihttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04536593172412406428noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3915617830446943975.post-59998666108898914642012-08-24T21:29:58.655+12:002012-08-24T21:29:58.655+12:00"It is not something I fear for myself, you u..."It is not something I fear for myself, you understand because I will most likely be gone before the real damage to our society and culture fully kicks in. But for my children, who will bear the consequences."<br /><br />And what sort of consequences would they be, Andrei? Would they be forced to marry a same-sex person against their will? I think not!<br /><br />Civilisation won't be going to hell in a hand-cart - just because Gay people have a chance of settling down to a life-time monogamous relationship, for goodness sake!<br /><br />There's far too much abject fear in the Church on this issue. There is much more to worry about in this world than the fear of 'frightening the horses' on Same-Sex Marriage.Father Ron Smithhttp://kiwianglo.wordpress.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3915617830446943975.post-24038503690963936542012-08-24T20:54:32.996+12:002012-08-24T20:54:32.996+12:00Andrei,
Christ is the truth to Christians, he embo...Andrei,<br />Christ is the truth to Christians, he embodies the truth because he is God. But God cannot be defined, pinned down or fully comprehended - and nor can truth. God is ineffable and we can only grasp a tiny part of God and imperfectly. I sometimes think one of the reasons there are so many views of God is that he is too big for any single human to comprehend. And so, yes, we need many "truths" to contribute to our knowledge of God.<br /><br />But at the same time, I can't see that having a faith gives me the right to expect that my truths about God/ marriage/ whatever will hold weight with a secular person or society. I can try to share them but I can't see that we can say that a theological understanding of marriage (and anyhow Christians differ on their theology) should be the basis for marriage in a secular society. <br />Suemhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03128736092253293640noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3915617830446943975.post-54040441901580587042012-08-24T15:16:39.257+12:002012-08-24T15:16:39.257+12:00Suem John 14:6Suem John 14:6Andreihttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04536593172412406428noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3915617830446943975.post-36693484133304292772012-08-24T15:13:23.761+12:002012-08-24T15:13:23.761+12:00Dear Fr Ron;
If it is, as we are endl...Dear Fr Ron; <br /> If it is, as we are endlessly told, that we approve of this innovation then why isn't this radical proposition put to a referendum?<br /><br />The answer is of course, it would loose, and substantially. As it has every time it has been put to the voters.<br /><br />And our masters cannot allow that, we are mere serfs you understand, not enlightened beings such as they.<br /><br />So we will get "gay marriage" whether we like it or not.<br /><br />It is not something I fear for myself, you understand because I will most likely be gone before the real damage to our society and culture fully kicks in.<br /><br />But for my children, who will bear the consequences.<br /><br />Anyone who is half aware can see the great damage done by that earlier travesty "no fault divorce" to our society and culture.<br /><br />And this is just the next step. The real goal isn't "gay marriage" it is the elimination of the concept family and of strong family bonds which stand in resistance to the brave new secular world our masters are trying to bring into being.<br /><br />Read Karl Marx, or Antonio Gramsci if you doubt thisAndreihttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04536593172412406428noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3915617830446943975.post-33382358454856106172012-08-24T12:11:15.763+12:002012-08-24T12:11:15.763+12:00"Surely (Ron) you are not saying that any mem..."Surely (Ron) you are not saying that any member of parliament who puts up a proposed new law/change to current law is exempt from alternative views being put forward?" - Peter - <br /><br />Not at all, Peter. What I AM saying, though, is that there are other views than yours/mine that deserve to be considered, along with others.<br />___________________________________<br /><br />"Aren't we having gay "marriage" imposed upon us?" - Andrei -<br /><br />How is it being 'imposed' on you, Andrei? You are not being forced to marry a same-sex person - unless you feel you have to marry one - because of a change in the law that would allow that to happen.<br /><br />What a law change in this direction would mean is that two same-sex persons who want to be legally recognised as a monogamous couple - on the same basis as any other non-procreative couple who want to 'tie the knot' - may do so, under the law of the land.<br />Father Ron Smithhttp://kiwianglo.wordpress.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3915617830446943975.post-54909304587533815652012-08-24T10:25:16.692+12:002012-08-24T10:25:16.692+12:00I don't think you have special and unassailabl...I don't think you have special and unassailable access to some definitive truth any more than I do, Peter. I am thoroughly post modern and think we all have truths to offer each other if we are prepared to listen and consider.<br /><br />Andrei's comment offers an interesting "truth"/ perception which I think has a lot of validity. There IS a danger that society/ secularism can itself become a religion or God - if by that you mean a tyrannical power (which I certainly think religion or State can be.) <br /><br />But how angry those would wield that sort of tyrannical religious power become when they find that their power no longer holds sway. Then, oh-so- ironically, they begin to inveigh against the tyranny of secularism.Suemhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03128736092253293640noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3915617830446943975.post-3697694651871758142012-08-24T10:13:15.564+12:002012-08-24T10:13:15.564+12:00"What is true, just and beautiful is not dete..."What is true, just and beautiful is not determined by popular vote. The masses everywhere are ignorant, short-sighted, motivated by envy, and easy to fool. Democratic politicians must appeal to these masses in order to be elected. Whoever is the best demagogue will win. Almost by necessity then democracy will lead to the perversion of truth, justice and beauty." --- Hans-Herman Hoppe in 'Democracy: The God that Failed.'Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3915617830446943975.post-52881835060289573832012-08-24T10:00:57.520+12:002012-08-24T10:00:57.520+12:00Truth comes from God, not the majority vote in a d...Truth comes from God, not the majority vote in a democracy. <br /><br />That does not mean "imposing" anything. Though I note that progressive liberals are happy to use democracy as an excuse to impose Liberal dogma on others, and happy to use the blunt force of the State to force others to conform via "human rights" legislation, hate speech laws and restrictions on the right to voluntary association.<br /><br />The Liberal Taliban is alive and well and in control of the State.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3915617830446943975.post-74551830140587925842012-08-24T09:55:32.996+12:002012-08-24T09:55:32.996+12:00You simply can't impose your view of what is t...<i>You simply can't impose your view of what is true on the rest of society and insist it is true because the church says so or because you say it is the will of God</i><br /><br />Aren't we having gay "marriage" imposed upon us? It would seem that way to me. Mankind has continued without gay "marriage" from the beginning up until the present day and indeed marriage as we have always understood it has been the very basis of our continuation. It has provided the safe nursery for the raising of the young by their bonded biological parents and their blood relatives to a lesser extent in many cases.<br /><br />I have come to the conclusion we have a new state religion - its called secularism and the non god of secularism is a jealous god and brooks no dissent. And while secularism makes lofty statements about religious freedom what this means in reality you are free to go to your church of choice, sing your hymns and pray your prayers to your deity of choice, but when it comes down to a conflict between your heart felt convictions and the commandments of the non god of secularism it is to the non god of secularism you must offer your pinch of incense or else pay the penalty as written in the book of secular lawAndreihttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04536593172412406428noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3915617830446943975.post-90060140293265995602012-08-24T07:58:59.507+12:002012-08-24T07:58:59.507+12:00To be frank, Suem, I do not understand your commen...To be frank, Suem, I do not understand your comment!<br /><br />I am not attempting to "impose" anything, not least because I know I cannot (neither as a democrat nor as someone who has not got a gun!).<br /><br />I am attempting to argue for the truth. I am even implying that truth is truth and, in the end, it is in the nature of truth itself that it imposes on us (and does not need ourselves to try to impose it).<br /><br />But perhaps you do not ascribe to the possibility that there might be truth. Just a range of views endlessly jostling for adherence by the majority?Peter Carrellhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09535218286799156659noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3915617830446943975.post-3184123972355833992012-08-24T07:51:15.435+12:002012-08-24T07:51:15.435+12:00But that's not good enough, Peter! You simply ...But that's not good enough, Peter! You simply can't impose your view of what is true on the rest of society and insist it is true because the church says so or because you say it is the will of God - end of story! Not unless you are the Taliban or live in a fundamentalist theocracy.<br />Suemhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03128736092253293640noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3915617830446943975.post-37151531845544817082012-08-24T07:41:56.569+12:002012-08-24T07:41:56.569+12:00I once read a fascinating RC document totally reve...I once read a fascinating RC document totally reversing Christ’s “drink this all of you” to have it argue that only the priest drink. If Bonhoeffer’s text were the start of a rethink of our church’s position and practice on divorce, that might make some sense – that the anonymous Underground Pewster can see how it can be directly applied to committed same-sex couples is less surprising. <br /><br />Blessings<br /><br />Boscoliturgyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11822769747947139669noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3915617830446943975.post-64914991789454935822012-08-24T06:58:46.687+12:002012-08-24T06:58:46.687+12:00Hi Ron and Suem,
In a democracy the church is ent...Hi Ron and Suem,<br /><br />In a democracy the church is entitled to put forward its views, as are individual Christians. Surely (Ron) you are not saying that any member of parliament who puts up a proposed new law/change to current law is exempt from alternative views being put forward?<br /><br />Bonhoeffer's views are not important per se; but they are important if and when they offer true insight into the divine origin of marriage. At that point we are not simply talking about 'interesting' views on marriage, but what we understand the will of God to be for humanity. A government with secular character is entitled to ignore the will of God, but Christians/the church is entitled to speak out for God's will.<br /><br />The weight of theology here for secular society is simply that if something is true it is true. A society which ignores, avoids or contradicts truth is likely to face consequences down the track which it did not foresee.Peter Carrellhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09535218286799156659noreply@blogger.com