Lorna, are you familiar with Pope John Paul the Great's Theology of the body and
an earlier papal encyclical Humanae Vitae? Do you think it's possible that this Anglican Bishop can actually be ignorant of some of the significant Theological work that has been done? Finally in your experience do you believe greater communication between protestant and catholic theologians would create a greater understanding of this topic?
My comment and concern is that Mr. Ingham is wholly dismissive of both scripture and Christian tradition, and that from that perspective it is absolutely impossible to develop any theology that could properly be called Christian.
It's scary to watch my old church fall apart. As I wrote earlier, I left my old church for a reason. Anyway most of the rather weak Anglican brain trust was quick to jump on the Ingham bandwagon. (See: Some Anglicans welcome debate on theology of sex) I was encouraged by one Anglican theologian who still has his head screwed on right:
That's the thing about truth; it will always be true no matter how hard some people try to deny it.Dr. Gary Badcock, theology professor at Huron University College, said the
bishop's argument rests on “slender foundations.”“The fact of the matter is that Judaism, prior to Christianity, universally rejected homosexuality. It would be very, very strange for a first-century Jew like Paul to make a case like Ingham is trying to claim,” Dr. Badcock said.
As for the argument that procreation is not truly basic to human sexuality, Dr. Badcock said the procreative aspect can't be ignored.
“Theologically and biologically, one would still need to privilege the procreative aspect of human sexuality since if that were to cease for 40 years, the human race would be extinct. It exists for some purpose,” he said.
No comments:
Post a Comment