I actually think that the impression we have of "orthodoxy" is very simplistic -- the Church has encompassed all sorts of things throughout it's history, and what's orthodox in some contexts is sin in others. Slavery is the most basic example, but there are myriad others -- women in leadership being a very relevant to the Uniting Church, since that's one of the fundamental distinctive marks that separate us from Orthodox and Catholic traditions (and others, including the continuing Presbyterians in Australia). They claim we're being un-Orthodox, we claim we're being faithful to the leading of the Holy Spirit (and are probably recovering historical practices from early New Testament times, actually).
So the "conservative" claim to return to orthodoxy is a pretty tenuous one, if we begin to recognise the diversity of what orthodoxy has included thoughout our history. Regards, Rohan Rohan Pryor Manager, Information Technology Services Synod of Victoria and Tasmania Uniting Church in Australia Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Ph: (03) 9251 5243 Fax: (03) 9654 4110 Website: http://vic.uca.org.au -----Original Message----- From: Clare Pascoe Henderson [SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, July 30, 2004 4:18 PM To: insights Subject: Re: theage.com.au ~ GAY ministers still up for debate Terry wrote: > As a Christian, I also feel uncomfortable with terminology such as > Orthodox, Fundamentalist, Liberal, Conservative etc, when applied > particularly to believers of Christ. It implies and somewhat helps to > perpetuate the gaps that divide us, not only within but throughout other > denominations as well. While I think there's some validity in that argument, I think there are as many arguments *for* more labelling as there are against. For example, the very people who most object to being labelled *within* Christianity (fundamentalists) themselves create a very stark "us and them" divide by delineating what (or who) is and isn't a christian. Labelling people as fundamentalist or liberal crosses faith boundaries and thus provides an alternative divide. That isn't to say it's any better, but I believe it's certainly no worse, and that adding alternative divides to those already assumed is one step towards reaching beyond the divides. > There seems to be a modern day tendency for some believers, to interpret > or re-interpret Scripture to their belief system. For example you would > find that many Social Workers, Shelter Workers, those working with > Homeless or those wanting social change, tend to be in the Liberal > category (box). This is not saying they are more right or wrong than any > of us but it will colour their perceptions and interpretations of the > Message. Whilst we want and need social change, does that therefore lead > to necessarily wanting the Message or Church also to change > accordingly. Surely the great and wondrous thing about Scripture, is > that it as relevant today as when it was written and we don't have to > reinterpret it to apply it. That's a dangerous argument, IMO, because it presupposes that there's only one way to interpret scripture, which certainly isn't true. Interpreting scripture from within a particular framework doesn't necessarily alter it, anyway. It simply offers a way of understanding the overall message for a particular set of circumstances. > Is this why the Sexuality debate keeps on going, because we want to fit > the Message to it rather than the other way round? I would say the sexuality debate keeps on going because there's a conflict between those who see the message as black and white and incapable of being interpreted in any other way, and those who believe that the "orthodox" interpretation of the message falls short of meeting people where they're at. > To paraphrase Geza Vermes, we should take more notice of what Jesus said > than what is said about Him. But we don't know what Jesus said. And therein lies my biggest problem with seeing scripture as absolute, or insisting that any one interpretation is the only right way to understand it. Clare *************************************************** Clare Pascoe Henderson http://www.clergyabuseaustralia.org Clergy Sexual Abuse in Australia Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] *************************************************** ------------------------------------------------------ - You are subscribed to the mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] - To unsubscribe, email [EMAIL PROTECTED] and put in the message body 'unsubscribe insights-l' (ell, not one (1)) See: http://nsw.uca.org.au/insights-l-information.htm ------------------------------------------------------ ------------------------------------------------------ - You are subscribed to the mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] - To unsubscribe, email [EMAIL PROTECTED] and put in the message body 'unsubscribe insights-l' (ell, not one (1)) See: http://nsw.uca.org.au/insights-l-information.htm ------------------------------------------------------
