It must be spring....
April 23, 2009
In the spring a young man's fancy lightly turns to thoughts of love. But Miserable Middle Aged Gits, such as myself, turn their curmudgeonly, uncharitable thoughts to the Church of Scotland and her evangelical wing.....
I appreciate Iain's post on the Queen's Cross church. I lived for a while within sight of the rather beautiful, Sleeping Beauty-like spires of the church, and used to pass it every Sunday as I walked to the Free Church of Scotland. A fine example of Aberdonian granite.
What puzzles me is the concern among C of S evangelicals about the appointment of an openly gay man as a minister. In my time at Aberdeen, the minister of this church, as I remember, did not make any secret of his dislike of traditional Christianity. Indeed, I think he was a self-identified liberal. So the question is: why is a general denial of the authority of the word of God and of basic Christian orthodoxy acceptable in the Church of Scotland, but living in a homosexual partnership not so? If evangelicals are prepared to live with the former, then for them to oppose the latter is then both inconsistent and, arguably, homophobic. Evangelicals who have not fought denials of the resurrection among office bearers -- and some of whom stood by in silence as fellow evangelicals were beaten up by the church courts over refusals to ordain women -- should not fight homosexuality. Indeed, they have absolutely no grounds upon which so to do; and it just looks like bigotry to the onlooking world. Too little, too late.
I appreciate Iain's post on the Queen's Cross church. I lived for a while within sight of the rather beautiful, Sleeping Beauty-like spires of the church, and used to pass it every Sunday as I walked to the Free Church of Scotland. A fine example of Aberdonian granite.
What puzzles me is the concern among C of S evangelicals about the appointment of an openly gay man as a minister. In my time at Aberdeen, the minister of this church, as I remember, did not make any secret of his dislike of traditional Christianity. Indeed, I think he was a self-identified liberal. So the question is: why is a general denial of the authority of the word of God and of basic Christian orthodoxy acceptable in the Church of Scotland, but living in a homosexual partnership not so? If evangelicals are prepared to live with the former, then for them to oppose the latter is then both inconsistent and, arguably, homophobic. Evangelicals who have not fought denials of the resurrection among office bearers -- and some of whom stood by in silence as fellow evangelicals were beaten up by the church courts over refusals to ordain women -- should not fight homosexuality. Indeed, they have absolutely no grounds upon which so to do; and it just looks like bigotry to the onlooking world. Too little, too late.
