Skip to comments.F.C. Presbyterian Pastor Hails End of Ban on Openly Gay Clergy
Posted on 06/02/2011 7:02:38 AM PDT by Cronos
Earlier this month, the national Presbyterian Church approved a change in its constitution to allow openly gay church members to serve as ministers and church leaders. It is a change that one local church pastor says has been a long time coming.
"It's been a Presbyterian family quarrel for about 30 years," said Jonathan Smoot, interim pastor at Falls Church Presbyterian Church.
"It's just ridiculous to lift up sexual orientation as a primary criterion for that person's character or suitability for ministry," Smoot said. "I hope this puts an end to it."
"It needs to be read in its historical context and not just used as a bludgeon. It needs to be carefully interpreted as the original writers meant," Smoot said. "I would disagree with my conservative sisters and brothers that the Scripture is making definitive statements about sexuality."
(Excerpt) Read more at fcnp.com ...
Ay-ay-ye -- more yopios, personal interpretation?
If a homosexual pastor has sex, and he isn’t married to his partner, is it “fornication”?
Or are they doing away with that as well?
Why not? After all, if they are in "committed" relationships, thats all that matters, right?
"Committed" doesn't have a time duration -- can be committed for a couple of hours too... or even a few minutes
Woe to those who call evil good and good evil, who put darkness for light and light for darkness, who put bitter for sweet and sweet for bitter.
Oh absolutely. Deviant sexual behavior has nothing to do with "character".. /s
“It’s just ridiculous to lift up sexual orientation as a primary criterion for that person’s character or suitability for ministry,” Smoot said. “I hope this puts an end to it.”
No Rev. Smoot, the Bible has very specific requirements for those who are fit for ministry. It also has descriptions about false teachers of which you clearly demonstrate you are.
Apparently, both the Episcopal and Presbyterian churches continue to fail to comprehend one of the reasons why Sodom and Gomorrah were destroyed by God.....=.=
Or you can just go and start your own.
There IS NO sexual ethic in the new church of perversion. None.
|4||Church of England||1992|
|5||Church of the Nazarene||1908|
|6||Disciples of Christ||1888|
|8||Evangelical Lutheran Church||1970||1991||2006|
|9||First Congregational Church||1853|
|12||National Baptist convention||1895|
|13||Presbyterian Church USA||1930 -elder
1956 - Minister
|14||Salvation Army||1865, 1870|
|15||Unitarian Universalist Association||1863||1973||1980|
|16||United Church of Canada||1936||1990?||1988|
|17||United Church of Christ||2005|
|18||United Presbyterian Church||1955||1973||Against|
|19||United Methodist Church||1956||1973||
|20||Universalist Church of America||1863|
|21||Wesleyan Methodist Church||1856|
Of course not, don't be judgemental /sarc ;-)
Wouldn’t think of it! ;-)
Another church without doctrine.
is this the official ruling body or just another fringe of a church with the name?
The Presbyterians are changing their church constitution to allow individual churches to choose who to ordain and take as a pastor. They may now be a practicing homosexual.
Although to this day [ex-Father John] McNeill, like all gay Christian propagandists, avoids the subject of sexual ethics as if it were some sort of plague, his life makes his real beliefs clear. He believes in unrestricted sexual freedom. He believes that men and women should have the right to couple, with whomever they want, whenever they want, however they want, and as often as they want. He would probably add some sort of meaningless bromide about no one getting hurt and both parties being treated with respect, but anyone familiar with the snake pit of modern sexual culture (both heterosexual and homosexual) will know how seriously to take that. And he knew perfectly well that if he were honest about his real aims, there would be no Dignity, there would be no gay Christian movement, at least not one with a snowball's chance in Hell of succeeding. That would be like getting rid of the books and letting the casual window-shoppers see the porn. And we can't have that now, can we? In other words, the ex-Fr. McNeill is a bad priest and a con man. And given the often lethal consequences of engaging in homosexual sex, a con man with blood on his hands.
Let me be clear. I believe that McNeill's real beliefs, as deduced from his actual behavior, and distinguished from the arguments he puts forward for the benefit of the naïve and gullible, represent the real aims and objectives of the homosexual rights movement. They are the porn that the books are meant to conceal. In other words, if you support what is now described in euphemistic terms as "the blessing of same-sex unions," in practice you are supporting the abolition of the entire Christian sexual ethic, and its substitution with an unrestricted, laissez faire, free sexual market. The reason that the homosexual rights movement has managed to pick up such a large contingent of heterosexual fellow-travelers is simple: Because once that taboo is abrogated, no taboos are left. I once heard a heterosexual Episcopalian put it this way: If I don't want the church poking its nose into my bedroom, how can I condone it when it limits the sexual freedom of homosexuals? That might sound outrageous, but if you still believe that the debate is over the religious status of monogamous same-sex relationships, please be prepared to point out one church somewhere in the U.S. that has opened its doors to active homosexuals without also opening them to every other form of sexual coupling imaginable. I am too old to be taken in by "Father" McNeill and his abstractions anymore. Show me.
If you haven't already, I would recommend that everyone read this very excellent article by Lee, one who has been on the "inside" and knows of that which he speaks. It's long, but well worth the effort.
Thank you for mentioning that there are other Presbyterian churches that still follow biblical teaching. Besides the PCA, there is also the Orthodox Presbyterian Church that left the main Presbyterian denomination when it started down the liberal path back in the 1930s.
Many folks follow their own path, but the Bible’s teaching remains forever. Count me among the members of the OPC (Orthodox Presbyterian Church).
I should add that it is PCUSA pushing the homosexual agenda.
Most of those following their own path believe they are following the Bible's teaching - which is how the various Presbyterian denominations began.
Yes. The resolution allowing gay clery specifically condones fornication. For real.
That is how every church or denomination began. To me, Scripture’s teaching is clear and if anyone can convince me from the Bible that what I believe is contrary to that, I will change. Every person thinks what he believes is correct; else he or she would change. It’s as simple as that. Absolute truth exists. It’s up to us to discern it as much as possible with our finite understanding.
I don’t understand that, how can they push?
I can only chalk it up to they have become more of this world than of Christ. They have forgotten that this is not our home. Heaven is and God is the supreme ruler and lover of our souls. They have invested themselves here on earth and not there.
Thus, the Report continues the conspiracy of silence that has prevailed in the OPC for three decades. It leaves the erroneous impression that the serious doctrinal problems are outside the denomination, not within it. The Report gives false comfort to those who think the OPC is still a bastion of Biblical orthodoxy. On the contrary, the Report, and the 2006 General Assemblys commendation of it, both maintain the OPC as a safe haven for those who teach erroryou can read the details at the link on page 109 why the Former Orthodox Presbyterian Church (OPC) ruling elder Paul M. Elliott says that
Men within the OPC, including at least one member of the Committee itself, teach heresy regarding the Gospel and many other fundamentals of the faith.
I guess if one disagrees with him, he's given his posting and email address in the book. accordingly.
The authors thesis is that the Orthodox Presbyterian Church (OPC) is today exactly where the PCUSA was back then.
This is disturbing
| The Orthodox Presbyterian Church was founded in 1936 by about 135 people who were offended by the lack of discipline in and doctrinal errors of the Presbyterian Church in the USA. .
But early in its history the OPC fell under the influence of an agnostic view of propositional revelation emanating from Westminster Seminary -- a view that said that there is no identity of content between the \"Christian system\" of theology, meaning Reformed confessions of faith, and the \"divine system\" of theology, known only to God.
This agnosticism has now brought the OPC to the point of falling. Like its predecessor, the PCUSA, the OPC has failed to discipline teachers who teach contrary to Scriptures and the Confession of Faith, and it has endorsed un-Biblical teaching about Scripture and the Gospel.
| Despite the painstaking efforts of many fine Christians within the Orthodox Presbyterian Church (OPC), the leaders of the OPC maintain a suicidal course. Despite the departure of congregations and individuals from the OPC, due to the leaders' collective inability to resolve the current justification controversy Biblically, the OPC leaders continue to advance doctrines that contradict Scripture. The OPC is, in the words of its late historian Charles Dennison, "obviously inept, bumbling, [and] confused."1 That confusion now appears to be fatal.
At this point in its history, the confessional affirmations of the OPC have no more credibility than the confessional affirmations of the PCUSA from 1936 to 1967. One of the commissioners to the 2004 OPC General Assembly made this very point: "There was a time when, if the OPC said it, it was accepted. The 2003 deliverance that accompanied the decision to acquit [John Kinnaird] destroyed forever that our words will not be questioned. The PCUSA always said that the [Westminster] Confession was their confession (even as they were denying it)."
As far as I know, the OPC is in the process of kicking out the Fed Vision nuts. Why this takes so long, I have no idea. I will find out more about it.
that’s good. What’s the difference between the OPC and the PCA?
I can understand you having that belief.
That is disturbing. It does look like they’re headed the same way as the PCUSA. More splitting and division to come, I suspect.
Of course, much depends on whether you are asking someone from the OPC or the PCA. ;-) They are the same in official doctrine. They both adhere to the Westminster Confession of Faith. There are some slight differences in the PCA and OPC Book of Church Order, which states how things should be run.
The OPC was formed in the late 1930s when J. Gresham Machen and some other men took a stand against the increasing liberalism of the main Presbyterian body. They lost a great deal personally in leaving and forming a new denomination. The PCA was formed in the 1970s when the northern and southern branches of the main Presbyterian denomination agreed to join. The church was becoming even more liberal, and many people left to form the PCA.
The OPC tends to be more formal and conservative in its worship services (some in the PCA would say stodgy, I suppose). There are more OP churches in the north and more PCA in the south, although both are expanding into new territory.
Just an aside, Pastor Bruce Hunt was an OP pastor who stood up to the Japanese in Korea and was imprisoned for it. The Koreans were so impressed by his courage that the Presbyterian church in Korea flourished. http://www.wts.edu/resources/sarang/brucehunt.html
Hope that helps.
Thanks! I just looked up - it seems that the OPC also does not have women pastors or deaconesses while the PCA is heading to the latter.
I hope the PCA does not take that route. The Bible is quite clear on that issue. And, every church that has ordained women, has gone on to considering ordaining homosexuals.
correct -- and that latter is scarily true. The PCA is heading down that route unfortunately.
I re-read the Trinity website. It seems the guy has seriously pointed out flaws in the OPC and how it’s close to imploding. Ah, well, it’s an about 80 year old denomination
Freepmail wagglebee to subscribe or unsubscribe from the moral absolutes ping list.
Homosexuals and pretend believers destroying another denomination.
With the OPC and the PCA I don't think the problem is with the church denominations getting older but that the churches are getting flooded with growth from those that are fleeing the liberal churches, which more often then not end up polluting the small churches that the people flee too, whether it be a small Presbyterian denomination or some small nondenominational church.
Also I'm not a big fan of congregation rule as I've seen a few PCA churches elect pastors more often based on personality and looks etc then in what they're believes are. A Young good looking fellow always wins over an old fellow no matter what they believe when congregation is full of women. :^)
This is part of a widespread attack on all religions, imho.
It would be interesting if someone could do a survey of atheists and find out how many are really “live and let live” and how many are aggressive. And those pushing the homosexual agenda are particularly driven, whether they’re outright atheists or faux “believers”.
It would be interesting, but it is my impression that their responses might be somewhat deceptive.
Of course, you are right. Lying would be no problem especially if it served their purposes.
Gosh, am I dumb!
But seriously, atheists have no foundation for morality. Why would deception be off-limits?
“What’s true for you is true for you, and what’s true for me is true for me-eee”.
(Sung in a horrid sing-song voice...)
But of course they don’t really believe that, since we’re wrong for believing what we believe!
Our beliefs are founded on 2,000+ years of truth and tradition. :)
There is a lot of non-homosexual pretend believers out there too, in fact I bet you the homosexual ones are a drop in the bucket compared to the non-homosexual ones.
Wrong, the BOCO (Book of Church Order) is very clear about deacons being men. I am an elder in the PCA, so I am very aware of the issue.