Jump to content

Gay 'Sacred Unions' Test Uniting Church Resolve


Graeme

Recommended Posts

Gay 'Sacred Unions' test Uniting Church resolve

For the record, I'm a member of the Uniting Church in Australia, and I've actually met the Rev. Dr. Max Champion. A sincere man, even if I disagree strongly with his views. The Assembly of Confessing Congregations (ACC) that he heads (essentially a lobby group within the Uniting Church) says they are not anti-gay, and that they accept gays, just not as ministers of religion, but they had a statement on sexuality (I can't find it on their website now) that essentially said they believed gays should be celibate to be acceptable....

Happily, they are still a minority within the Uniting Church, with others, such as the Brunswick Uniting Church here in Melbourne, or the Blackwood Uniting Church in Adelaide showing the opposite viewpoint, and the Uniting Network being a lobby group, like the ACC, that presents the opposing view.

And, from my research from a few years ago, the closing statement of the article is absolutely correct:

Reverend Jenski says she knows of 25 Uniting Church ministers who are gay or lesbian. Many unofficially live with their partners. The church has no problem if the minister's congregation doesn't.

The church leaves it up to the congregations as to whether they'll accept a gay or lesbian minister. The wider church has been unable to set a national policy on the subject, so they leave it to the relevant parishes/congregations to decide on a case-by-case basis.

Link to comment

I'm not sure that a case by case situation is okay. As people move around it might suddenly become 'not acceptable' when it was only weeks before. That just doesn't seem right to me, although I suppose it is better than an outright ban. I just can't get around the sheer ignorance of the discrimination in the first place. Interpreting part of the Bible in a way that other parts are not is just so stupid, and obviously NOT the word of God but the word of humans with foibles of their own.

Link to comment
I'm not sure that a case by case situation is okay. As people move around it might suddenly become 'not acceptable' when it was only weeks before. That just doesn't seem right to me, although I suppose it is better than an outright ban. I just can't get around the sheer ignorance of the discrimination in the first place. Interpreting part of the Bible in a way that other parts are not is just so stupid, and obviously NOT the word of God but the word of humans with foibles of their own.

Since a minister will stay in a parish for something like five years, that means that this is only something that the ministers have to face when they are changing the parish where they are preaching.

we're not anti-gay, they're just not welcome here.

sounds a lot like:

we're not racists, they're just not welcome here.

I'm not anti-str8, I've just heard this BS before. :devlish:

:lol: Pretty much my reaction, too.

Link to comment

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...