This week's "Speaking of Faith" will feature a discussion (debate?) on the topic of gay marriage.
I have high hopes for this show, as the two people discussing this issue are people I like, as is the host, Krista Tippett, who is a brilliant interviewer (and a really sweet person based on our one meeting). Unfortunately, the "con" side is headed up by my seminary's president, Richard Mouw. *sigh* He's a great thinker. I hope he comes around someday.
Anyway, it's nationally syndicated or you can listen to it here (lots of great background material here too - what a responsible show to actually go through the broadcast and provide all these resources based on things brought up by the interviewees):
Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)
I'll admit I'm a little surprised that Richard Mouw would head up the 'con' side of this argument. The same guy who offered a 'modest defense of polygamy' on beliefnet?!?
Can you shed light on whether Mouw's opposition is political (this seems unlikely based on my understanding of Mouw's positions) or theological--as in the context of the Christian community (a little more likely.)
OR...is Mouw just playing the devil's advocate because he's smart enough to do so convincingly.
Oh, goodness, Mouw is WAY against gay marriage. My understanding is that he's said Fuller's stance on this will NEVER change. At least not when he's in charge.
I mean, I'm assuming he's the con, but it's a pretty safe assumption. He's still evangelical.
We'll have to listen to find out for sure...but I know his theology cannot allow for gay Christians. So why gay marriage?
Plus the other person on the show has just written a book entitled, "Omnigender" which won an award from Lambda. I'm guessing she's the pro.
This show is actually a re-run, I heard it about a year ago. I can't remember much in the way of specifics, but I seem to remember Mouw was infuriating on the subject.
On the other hand the late, great Louis Smedes was a stalward defender of same-sex marriage -- and given his wisdom and sweet disposition, I've found his reference to him and his wife having to adopt children because they could not have their own (a "best alternative in light of the circumstances" for them) and the comparison he drew with people predisposed towards homosexuality choosing committed relationships with a member of the same sex to be a pretty successful argument with evangelicals who've dialogued with me on the subject.
Princeton Seminary put out a great reader on the subject, covering a wide variety of different positions a few years ago. It's worth a read, and I'd certainly be open to lending it :)
Hmmmmm....Personally, I note with interest that the Christ had no teaching on marriage EXCEPT that it was to be honored and not allowed to be dissolved. It was to be viewed as a lifelong, if not possibly eternal union. Gay marriage? Fine. Polygamy- certianly fine in the Old Testament and for the first 1100 years of Christian history (kind of killing the one man one woman idea...)PolyAndry? Seems like Jesus had no objection. Now economic oppression as practiced by most Evangelical Corporatists, that annoyed the Christ no end.
yeah... you're not really theologically conservative. I think you could drop that title from your heading.
OK, gay is not a theological issue, and also, theologically conservative in the big Church means you believe literally in the statements of the Nicene Creed which I do. To a majority of world Christians, I am conservative, albeit not to Evangelicals, but that's not how I make my measurements.
Post a Comment