Homosexual practice has been affirmed nowhere in the history of Christianity. An overview of texts [examined in the book] reveals unequivocally that the Fathers, Reformers, Evangelicals, Pentecostals, Roman Catholics, and Orthodox churches are unanimous in their condemnation of homoerotic behavior among those who profess Christ as Lord.Read more >>
Rainbow_flag_breezeIn contrast, in the West a handful of denominations in recent decades have capitulated to the gay Christian movement, and they are currently losing members en masse. They are losing members because the ordination of gay clergy and the blessing of gay marriages are wholesale departures from what Scripture and Christian tradition have always taught. The homosexual crisis in the church has become a dividing line between orthodox Christianity and those who no longer confess the faith of the church across the centuries.
The historic witness of the church on the topic of homosexual practice could not be more transparent. The church’s constant verdict on homosexuality is completely reasonable given the unambiguous testimony of Scripture. The historic texts explored in this volume are filled with biblical references because the Bible has always been the final authority behind Christian condemnation of homosexual practice. The historical evidence for a consistently negative assessment of homosexual practice is indisputable. In fact, as evidenced in the texts cited, there are no dissenting voices at all. In light of the unanimous historic witness, it is not surprising that 90 percent of the Christian churches in America find the gay Christian arguments unconvincing. In order to jettison traditional Christian teaching about homosexuality, one would need to identify overwhelming exegetical evidence in Scripture. The lack of dissenting voices in church history confirms that there is no such exegetical evidence.
[Hat tip to E. Echeverria]
"The historic witness of the church on the topic of homosexual practice could not be more transparent."
ReplyDeleteEncouraging. But given the loophole that we now call "Development of Doctrine," I also reflexively think, "And?..." Hell has been sidestepped. Inerrancy has been sidestepped. Divorce is being sidestepped. Living together might as well have been embraced. By none other than the Pope and Cardinal Chris, one of the primary architects of the CCC who is now the laity's most empathetic supporter. Sexual morality is HARD, you guys! I think the gay question is too defined for the Church to make a reversal, but I also think the signs are quite clear it will obfusicate in makers we have yet to even imagine, and that the Church's teaching right now is anything BUT transparent. I challenge anyone to visit Fr. James Martin's FB page and doubt that. The editor of AMERICA, the preferred spokesman of North American Catholicism, and a Jesuit just like the Pope (!) too... Our "historic" witness might be encouraging. Our contemporary witness, given that and the problem of gay priests, not so much. But then who am I to judge? Sorry to be cyncial. Also, note that this is published by a Baptist press. I will salute Robert Royal for his "Making Gay OK," but notice how much attention that little book has received....
Remember, People of God, DIGNITY, that is the most important thing, forever and always. Then search for the word "dignity" in the New Testament or preconciliar literature....
Furthermore, this is the sort of article that cuts against current pastoral malpractice and that Catholic websites could use some of, versus the Pope Francis "affirmation" doctrine...
ReplyDeletehttps://www.thegospelcoalition.org/article/book-reviews-sprinkle-homosexuality
We really ought to depart from the use of this term 'homosexual', a pseudoscientific designation with no basis in the common human understanding of aberrant sexual practices. It also has the habit of pathologizing an action and thus hampering the condemnation of the action itself. If we are to destroy the acceptance of this practice, then it is the 'gay identity' which needs to be thoroughly deconstructed as a political phenomena.
ReplyDeleteMark Citadel,
ReplyDeleteI agree. Former Editor of New Oxford Review tried to resurrect the term 'Fag', but didn't meet with a very enthusiastic reaction.
'Pervert' packs the sort of opprobrious punch one might wish for; but in the meantime, I think the most serviceable appellation is one suggested to me by one of my sons: "Sodomite." It's thoroughly BIBLICAL to boot.
What are your thoughts?
Cheers,
PP