When is a gay-wedding not a gay-wedding? It depends who you ask. Here is an excerpt from The Presbyterian Layman, a conservative voice in the mainline Presbyterian church (PC-USA).
Court says Spahr Didn't Violate Constitution
Because Ceremonies Weren't Weddings
By John H. Adams The Layman Online Tuesday, April 29, 2008
In her own words, to stoke the fire of her crusade for lesbians and homosexuals, Jane Spahr testified at three levels of church court that she had conducted "marriage" ceremonies for two lesbian couples. But the highest court in the Presbyterian Church (USA) ruled that Spahr had done no such thing.
In a decision posted this afternoon, the General Assembly's Permanent Judicial Commission said Spahr did not violate church law because a union of two people of the same gender is not a marriage – no matter what you call it.
The article goes on to explain the decision of the PC-USA's highest court that the minister in question, Jane Spahr, has been cleared of all wrong-doing in this matter.
As anyone can see this decision is based on technicalities of language and parsing things to the nth degree (ie. President Bill Clinton, "It depends on your definiton of the word 'is.'"). Furthermore it demonstrates the casuistry of those who will say and do anything to promote a 'progressive and tolerant' agenda. Ironically, it also highlights their intolerance of anyone who holds a differing view.
For conservatives in this church the hand-writing has been on the wall for quite some time. The Hebrew word, "Ichabod" comes to mind. It means, "the glory of the LORD has departed from Israel" (I Samuel 4:21).
You can read the rest of the article here: The Layman Online
You should also see my earlier post, "What Does a Dying Church Look Like?"
http://joshuajudgesruth.blogspot.com/2008/03/what-does-dying-church-look-like.html
No comments:
Post a Comment