From the Winnipeg Sun:
But the delegates meeting in Winnipeg this weekend would do well to close their ears to those outside voices of dissent. Archbishop Andrew Hutchison, the primate of the ACC, said as much in his opening address earlier this week, when he urged delegates to obey their consciences on the divisive issue.
“The first principle of moral theology is obedience to conscience, and I ask each one of you to embrace that principle, and with it the ethic of respect for the conscience of those who disagree with your own,” Hutchison said.
If the delegates, listening to their consciences, vote to sanction same-sex unions tomorrow, they might not encounter that same “ethic of respect” among their fellow Anglicans in Uganda, Nigeria or other parts of the globe. But they must not let that deter them.
Canadian Anglicans have been at the forefront of social change within the worldwide church, taking the lead in ordaining women priests and bishops over the past 30 years. If they vote to create a group of second-class citizens within their church, they’ll be turning their back on that tradition.
Perhaps the choice isn’t that tough, after all.
Where does this first principle come from? A slippery slope, I think, that could take so many directions based solely on the conviction of “my point of view.” Who is creating the second class citizen? Loving neighbor calls for discipline not capitulation to feelings. Feelings aren’t truth.
But conscience isn’t just ‘feelings’.
Excuse me, but the FIRST PRINCIPLE of CHRISTIAN MORAL THEOLOGY is obedience to GOD through the example of JESUS CHRIST. Our own pitiful consciences are flaccid by comparison.
What hooey! (and yes, that’s a technical term!)
KTF….mrb
Somehow, I don’t get warm fuzzies about the consciences of revisionists. Said consciences appear to be informed primarily by the far-left zeitgeist. Let’s look at what the conscience of one famous revisionist urged him to do: Invite a seething psychotic to speak at the National Cathedral:
“In Islamic Iran, the revolutionary fatwa issued by Imam Khomeini remains valid and cannot be modified,” leading Iranian cleric Hojatoleslam Ahmad Khatami said during his Friday prayers sermon in Tehran.
“The old and decrepit government of Great Britain should know that the era of their empire is over and today they are a valet in the service of the United States,” Khatami added.
Tom Wolfe, where are you?
“The first principle of moral theology is obedience to conscience, and I ask each one of you to embrace that principle, and with it the ethic of respect for the conscience of those who disagree with your own,” Hutchison said.
The Canadian Primate makes an all too common error in regards to this matter.
From the Catholic Catechism :
While all of us have the right and duty to follow our consciences, it is likewise true that our consciences must be correctly formed, and that is truly a lifelong task.
In the formation of conscience, the Word of God is the light for our path (cf. Ps. 119:105); we must assimilate it in faith and prayer and put it into practice (cf. Catechism, no. 1785). Further, in forming our consciences, we must be “guided by the authoritative teaching of the Church†(ibid.; cf. Dignitatis Humanae [DH] 14).
…Conscience is like God’s herald and messenger; it does not command things on its own authority, but commands them as coming from God’s authority, like a herald when he proclaims the edict of the king. This is why conscience has binding force.[1]
…Yet it does not follow that every judgment of conscience is correct. “Faced with a moral choice, conscience can make either a right judgment in accordance with reason and the divine law or, on the contrary, an erroneous judgment that departs from themâ€
A right formed conscience is very different from doing whatever I think or feel is right. The one is grounded in submission to God and His revelation in Scripture. The other on my desires and my will. One will keep us on the path of salvation the other leads straight to hell.
Canadian Anglicans have been at the forefront of social change within the worldwide church, taking the lead in ordaining women priests and bishops over the past 30 years. If they vote to create a group of second-class citizens within their church, they’ll be turning their back on that tradition.
The choice is a)turn your back on a 30 year old tradition, a tradition of a small number of western, mostly white folks from two or three generations, or b)turn your back on a 2000 year tradition embraced by billions of people from all generations (past and present), races, classes, and locales. I choose the latter, even if means not condoning same-sex acts. This has nothing to do with making gays and lesbian “second class citizens”; I commit sins everyday the Church doesn’t approve of, after all “all have sinned…” Heck, on the golf course today I was impatient and used language that wasn’t appropriate. Am I going to petition the Church to change her views on impatience and unbecoming talk? No; instead I will repent and try to become holier.
If people were refused ordination over addictions to alcohol or gambling or because of adultery or theft, would that be making them second class citizens?
How did homosexuality go from a category of sin as presented in vice lists in the Bible to a category of status encompassed in gender in the Bible?
It seems as if this reclassification was asserted, but not proven.
#7 Dejavu You nailed it right on the head!