Hullo Malcolm,
Suddenly the posts have become silent on this debate.Who is surprised?Not me, for one.
I have remained absolutely silent on this topic, both in the
immediate post-Assembly burst and in the more recent flurry. That was
not because I had no opinion but because the views I hold seemed to be
being expressed quite adequately by others and (I detected fairly
quickly) nobody seemed to be shifting in their position as a result of
the debate anyway.
In your post you cited a great many scholarly and worthy
documents and, having read a number of them, I can understand why you
listed them. But I would not hold my breath, if I were you, that too
many people are going to turn to those documents with enquiring and
seeking minds. Why not?
Sad as it seems to me, nobody much seems to be shifting in this
debate. And the reason for that is that too many of the people (at
least so far as the vocal ones can be judged) are not arguing from
logic or reason or science or even pastoral theology, whatever they
may say in their public statements. Naturally I see this exhibited
most by those with whom I disagree, but I suspect it is true on both
sides. People are arguing from emotion and, as Billy Graham is reputed
to have said once, nobody was ever argued out of a position they were
not first argued into.
I do not claim to be free of homophobia. To do so is to invite
others to point out the plank in my own eye. But my own position (like
Allan Leggett's and I think the bulk of people on this list) is in
favour of the ordination of GLBT people. Whilst I have not involved
myself in the debate on this list, I have engaged in debate by snail
mail with the Reforming Alliance (what a waste of time that was!) and,
like Allan, have spoken out at Presbytery and other meetings. I know
the frustration of which Alan, Greg and you have all spoken.
I have spent a lot of thought on this matter, partly because I
believe the right way forward for the church (and particularly the
Uniting Church) is to approve the ordination of GLBT people; and
partly because, much as a whinge about it, I love the Uniting Church
and am grieved when it tries to tear itself apart. If we are not going
to solve this problem by debate (which clearly is not working) and we
are not going to solve it by theological terrorism (which is how I see
the behaviour of the RA) then we have to find another way.
I am reminded of the frustration my Methodist congregation felt
when, at the time of the initial vote on Church Union around 1974, the
local Presbyterian congregation, with whom we had enjoyed a
co-operative and cordial relationship over many years, voted against
union. Some of our people were inclined to be bitter about it and
mutter nasty names about the Presbyterians. But one wonderful woman in
the congregation simply shrugged her shoulders and said, "Well,
if they're not going to come into the new church when we explain
things to them, then we are just going to have to love them into
it!"
I have to admit that I have not seen a great deal of love on
either side of the debate so far.
-- Tom.
--
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Tom Pardy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Coopernook Web site: <http://www.ozemail.com.au/~pardy>
AUSTRALIA
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
