MERGED (yet again): All Gay Marriage Discussion Here Please

The friendliest place on the web for anyone that follows U2.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
See posts with no answers
Status
Not open for further replies.
http://www.pcusa.org/pcnews/oldnews/2004/04074.htm

The presbytery?s PJC had ruled in April that Van Kuiken was guilty of having ?married? homosexual couples, in violation of the PC(USA) constitution. The ruling concluded, addressing Van Kuiken: ?The Presbytery of Cincinnati, in the name and authority of the Presbyterian Church (USA), expresses its condemnation of this offense, and rebukes you.?

Of course it doesn't say discriminate.
 
Interesting. I knew a girl in high school who went to a Presby church that welcomed homosexual couples. I'm not sure if they could be married there, but it sounded like the church wouldn't be against it. But unfortunately I've had no experience with the Presby church (unless you count that one incident at the PCUSA building in Louisville....um, nevermind.) even though I know a lot of Presbyterians. I'm going to ask my theology Prof what he thinks of this issue b/s I'm pretty sure he's Presby....
 
nbcrusader said:
I am unaware of a Presbyterian church that bars homosexuals from attending or becoming a member.
Click to expand...

That wasn't what the article alleged though. It alleged that the Presbyterian church refused to allow gay people to marry. Is that incorrect?
 
Ministers ordained in the Presbyterian Church are not permitted to marry same-sex couples. The Constitution of the church does not extend beyond its doors.
 
nbcrusader said:
Ministers ordained in the Presbyterian Church are not permitted to marry same-sex couples. The Constitution of the church does not extend beyond its doors.
Click to expand...

So the church's Constitution does say that it's ministers can't marry gay people? And it did charge this minister with violating that provision?
 
FizzingWhizzbees said:
So the church's Constitution does say that it's ministers can't marry gay people? And it did charge this minister with violating that provision?
Click to expand...

Yes. That is what Van Kuiken agreed to when he was ordained in the Presbyterian Church.
 
nbcrusader said:


Yes. That is what Van Kuiken agreed to when he was ordained in the Presbyterian Church.
Click to expand...

Two questions then...

Firstly, what exactly were you objecting to about the article? I had thought you were saying it was inaccurate, but obviously I was wrong. So is it just the fact that the article describes the church's position as discrimination which you object to?

Secondly, do you think his actions were justifiable or not?
 
FizzingWhizzbees said:
Firstly, what exactly were you objecting to about the article? I had thought you were saying it was inaccurate, but obviously I was wrong. So is it just the fact that the article describes the church's position as discrimination which you object to?
Click to expand...

Correct. The article was more commentary than reporting. Slapping the word "discriminatory" on the story ignores the deeper issues of biblical interpretation and church polity.

FizzingWhizzbees said:
Secondly, do you think his actions were justifiable or not?
Click to expand...

There is a clear difference in how Scripture is applied in this area. The Presbyterian Church has maintained a clear position that same-sex marriage should not be performed by the church. This point has been made many times before the General Assembly. Presbyterian ministers are given a large degree of freedom in the pulpit, but must follow the Constitution and laws of the church. Van Kuiken took an oath to follow these laws as part of his ordination. I would hope his word means a little more than it has. Matthew 5:37
 
nbcrusader said:
Correct. The article was more commentary than reporting. Slapping the word "discriminatory" on the story ignores the deeper issues of biblical interpretation and church polity.
Click to expand...

So you don't think that it's discriminatory to refuse to allow gay people to marry while allowing straight people to marry?

There is a clear difference in how Scripture is applied in this area. The Presbyterian Church has maintained a clear position that same-sex marriage should not be performed by the church. This point has been made many times before the General Assembly. Presbyterian ministers are given a large degree of freedom in the pulpit, but must follow the Constitution and laws of the church. Van Kuiken took an oath to follow these laws as part of his ordination. I would hope his word means a little more than it has. Matthew 5:37
Click to expand...

Do you personally think they're right?

I suppose this all raises the question of under what circumstances it's okay to disobey what you perceive as an unjust law.
 
But as he's said the PC Constitution once banned race equality, upheld slavery ect. I'm sure someone within the clergy helped to change things, as well as society at large.
 
nbcrusader said:


Correct. The article was more commentary than reporting. Slapping the word "discriminatory" on the story ignores the deeper issues of biblical interpretation and church polity.



There is a clear difference in how Scripture is applied in this area. The Presbyterian Church has maintained a clear position that same-sex marriage should not be performed by the church. This point has been made many times before the General Assembly. Presbyterian ministers are given a large degree of freedom in the pulpit, but must follow the Constitution and laws of the church. Van Kuiken took an oath to follow these laws as part of his ordination. I would hope his word means a little more than it has. Matthew 5:37
Click to expand...

But what if part of that oath included the idealology that slavery was acceptable to Presbyterians? Many used scripture for years to justify slavery. At some point someone's interpretation had to conflict with that of those who justified slavery. I believe that's what Van Kuiken is doing here and he's putting his faith in front of some oath.

There are times when the Church has to be challenged, just take a look at history, take a look at Christ's life.
 
I've heard it said that many used Scripture to justify slavery - it was Scripture that led to the abolishment of slavery. We should remember that slavery was a secular institution.

The Presbyterian Constitution was not changed after Van Kuiken was ordained. He made his representation regarding what he would follow. His actions show otherwise.

The Presbyterian Constitution and Book of Order has changed over the years. The change is done slowly and thoughtfully. To many, Van Kuiken is simply putting his beliefs/agenda ahead of Scripture.

We can reopen discussion on the Scriptural viewpoints, but I believe both sides have been fairly clearly stated in numerous threads.
 
nbcrusader said:
I've heard it said that many used Scripture to justify slavery - it was Scripture that led to the abolishment of slavery. We should remember that slavery was a secular institution.
Click to expand...

A secular institution used by many of the church at the time who did in fact use scripture to justify it. Just like scripture can be used by both sides here.
nbcrusader said:

The Presbyterian Constitution was not changed after Van Kuiken was ordained. He made his representation regarding what he would follow. His actions show otherwise.
Click to expand...
Who else to make change than from someone from inside?
nbcrusader said:

The Presbyterian Constitution and Book of Order has changed over the years. The change is done slowly and thoughtfully. To many, Van Kuiken is simply putting his beliefs/agenda ahead of Scripture.
Click to expand...
No, he's putting his views above the churches written views. The Presbyterian church does not hold the absolute interpretation of the Scripture, if it had, it would never have had to change.
 
nbcrusader said:

The Presbyterian Constitution and Book of Order has changed over the years. The change is done slowly and thoughtfully. To many, Van Kuiken is simply putting his beliefs/agenda ahead of Scripture.
Click to expand...

No, he's putting his beliefs ahead of church doctrine, which is how slow and thoughtful change can begin.
 
If Martin Luther had maintained the status quo, the entire Protestant Reformation would never have existed.

Melon
 
Good news from our friends at Reuters:

CAMBRIDGE, Mass. (Reuters) - Same-sex couples will legally exchange vows on Monday when Massachusetts becomes the first U.S. state to allow gay marriage, an election-year milestone likely to fuel legal and political battles nationwide.
Click to expand...

May 17 is a historic day: It's the day that marks a new chapter of equality for gay and lesbian families," said gay rights activist Marty Rouse. "For the first time in U.S. history, we can receive the critical legal rights and protections that come only through marriage."
Click to expand...

:applaud:
 
http://www.cnn.com/2004/LAW/05/17/samesex.marriage.ap/index.html

Same-sex couples begin marrying in Massachusetts
Monday, May 17, 2004
CAMBRIDGE, Massachusetts (AP)

The first couple to receive marriage paperwork was Marcia Hams, 56, and her partner, Susan Shepherd, 52, of Cambridge. After 27 years together, they sat at a table across from a city official shortly after midnight, filling out forms as their adult son looked on.

"I feel really overwhelmed," Hams said. "I could collapse at this point."

:applaud:
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

LuckyNumber7
Desert Island Mini - LP Island - Rules & Sign Up Thread
2 3 4
Replies
96
Views
4K
Axver
Axver
LemonMelon
Desert Island XI - QUARANTINE ISLAND - Master List and Discussion Thread
4 5 6
Replies
175
Views
5K
Axver
Axver
LemonMelon
Desert Island XI - QUARANTINE ISLAND - Group 1 Listening Thread
7 8 9
Replies
244
Views
7K
LemonMelon
LemonMelon
N
Best Live Track Survivor - Intro, Rules & Discussion
Replies
1
Views
674
Hewson
Hewson
N
Barack Obama Appreciation & Farewell Thread
Replies
1
Views
585
the iron horse
the iron horse

Latest posts

Back
Top Bottom