The CRCNA should Pivot in its Human Sexuality Conversation from discussing Prohibitions to Ideals
If you can't agree on ideals, you'll never agree on prohibitions or accommodations
Today's video is on the @CRCNA crisis surrounding the Human Sexuality Report (HSR) and confessionality.
Much of the debate has centered around prohibitions. What is permitted. What the Bible says we should or shouldn't do. That debate for me is played out. Sides are hardened. People aren't listening to each other.
I think coming at the question from the perspective of IDEALS would be more fruitful. As a culture we seem to have forgotten what ideals are, what they are for, and how they bless, shape, inform and facilitate communities.
In my 3+ video on "marriage equality" I arrive at the idea that one man, one woman 4 life is the ideal for marriage. I think that case can be made both from the Bible and beyond it.
The difficulty with the progressive wing of the @CRCNA is that they probably can't arrive at an "ideal" for marriage given the current discourse on "gender justice".
That's because the ideal beneath the general liberationist movement is self-realization usually pursuing some secret-sacred self. This pursuit doesn't necessarily afford community, even a life-long stable community of 2.
If the @CRCNA really wants to work towards "unity" a "local option" can't get you there. That's simply more diversity. We'll need to talk more about ideals first.
After you have agreement on ideals you can deal with the inevitable accommodations necessary you need to make to actually afford community, because by definition we never achieve ideals, we only pursue them, hopefully together.
I agree with Paul and think that we have lost sight of the "ideal" in many different sets of circumstances including this same sex marriage debate within Christianity. My church in the UK, Church of England, allows gay clergy to live together but they have to vow to abstain from any kind of sexual behaviour. I feel this has already crossed the line and goes directly against the teachings of the Bible and whilst I'd never condone hatred of anyone I would refuse to attend services led by a gay vicar, the hypocrisy alone would stop me attending.
It's not my place to Judge, that's Gods job, but I can criticise and I can disagree and I can voice my opinion and have done so at several Parochial meetings in the last few years. Our church is divided on the issue though and is becoming increasingly "woke" and I see their acquiescence on this one subject being more of a political move and one that smacks of desperation.
Hi Paul, I wonder what it would be like having you in conversation with Andrew Klavan. I know in his role as political polemicist you would find him objectionable but on marriage and sexuality I think you would find common ground and good will. As an adult Christian convert he appears affirming of all the orthodox/traditional propositions but it's also clear he loves his adult son Spencer, who is in a same sex marriage. I have heard him say in his show (I paraphrase) that the biological child with biological male/female parents is the human ideal but that we fallen humans can find a place to put other relationships that is not simply rejection. Seems like you could accept that frame. .... Keep doing what you are doing, sir. I appreciate your living example.