I have learned today that the Anglican Church is more insistent that the Doctrine of Original Sin is scripturally based than is the Catholic Church...
Compare and contrast:
CATECHISM OF THE CATHOLIC CHURCH
Original sin - an essential truth of the faith
388 With the progress of Revelation, the reality of sin is also illuminated. Although to some extent the People of God in the Old Testament had tried to understand the pathos of the human condition in the light of the history of the fall narrated in Genesis, they could not grasp this story's ultimate meaning, which is revealed only in the light of the death and Resurrection of Jesus Christ.261 We must know Christ as the source of grace in order to know Adam as the source of sin. The Spirit-Paraclete, sent by the risen Christ, came to "convict the world concerning sin",262 by revealing him who is its Redeemer.
The Catholic Church does not insist that there is a scriptural basis - rather that this is implicit in Revelation
THE THIRTY-NINE ARTICLES OF THE ANGLICAN CHURCH
ARTICLE NINE ... ORIGINAL SIN
Original sin standeth not in the following of Adam, (as the Pelagians do vainly talk;) but it is the fault and corruption of the Nature of every man, that naturally is engendered of the offspring of Adam; whereby man is very far gone from original righteousness, and is of his own nature inclined to evil, so that the flesh lusteth always contrary to the Spirit; and therefore in every person born into this world, it deserveth God's wrath and damnation. And this infection of nature doth remain, yea in them that are regenerated; whereby the lust of the flesh, called in Greek, φρονημα σαρκος, (which some do expound the wisdom, some sensuality, some the affection, some the desire, of the flesh), is not subject to the Law of God. And although there is no condemnation for them that believe and are baptized; yet the Apostle doth confess, that concupiscence and lust hath of itself the nature of sin.
The Anglican Church presents a stronger stance than the Catholic Church on the doctrine being scripturally based. It quotes Saint Paul: And although there is no condemnation for them that believe and are baptized; yet the Apostle doth confess, that concupiscence and lust hath of itself the nature of sin.
And both stances - whether the 1992 Catechism of the Catholic Church, or the Thirty Nine Articles from the 1662 Book of Common Prayer - are equally irrelevant to a Christian life.
ReplyDeleteGene is doing what he always does when he is comprehensively defeated in an argument in which he is completely out of his depth.
He starts a new thread to distract attention from his humiliation.
What a cupid stunt.
And you still haven't answered my question, based on the following chain of immaculate reasoning.
ReplyDeleteIf all of us are made in the image of God, it follows that this applies alike to heterosexuals, homosexuals, bisexuals and asexuals. It follows then that all sexualities are God-given.
In which case how can the expression of a God given sexuality - provided that that expression is [a] legal and [b] consensual, be sinful?
Your claim that you have answered it is nonsensical, in that it is based on the ridiculous claim that the doctrine of original sin is scriptural.
It isn't.
On the other hand, the doctrine that all humans - heterosexual, homosexual, bisexual and asexual - are made in the image of God is scriptural.
It follows then that all sexualities are God-given.
How, then, can the expression of a God given sexuality - provided that that expression is [a] legal and [b] consensual - be sinful?
Over to you, Gene.
How, then, can the expression of a God given sexuality - provided that that expression is [a] legal and [b] consensual - be sinful?
ReplyDeleteYou have been given the answer ad infinitum but you don't want to hear it do you?
Perverted sex (homosexual sex) is not God-given. It comes as a result of the Fall. It is no more God-given than any other propensity to malice and evil that is found in the nature of Man. Read Article 9 of the 39 Articles. Read the Catechism of the Catholic Church on Original Sin. Read up on the heresy of Pelagianism. Read Saint Paul - especially Ephesians. And for that matter read Shakespeare.
No, Gene, you have not answered the question; this is yet another specious evasion based on nothing more than your bigoted value judgement, now tizzied up with superstitious nonsense about original sin, ignorant mouthings about heresy, and the praying in aid of the MANMADE Catholic catechism.
ReplyDeleteWe are all - homosexual, heterosexual, bisexual and asexual - made in the image of God.
Therefore our sexuality is God-given.
Therefore our expression of it - provided that it is consensual - cannot be sinful.
Piffling about homosexual sex being a function of original sin is simply another of your pitifully inept attempts to avoid facing the fact that you are completely unable to answer the question.
Yet another epic fail.
Even you are not fooled by your own bluster. Homosexuality is not God-given, it is a result of the Fall and Original Sin. You just don't want to face this.
DeleteIf Original Sin is superstitious nonsense why does, for example, the Church of England hold to it?
You are a bad loser and you are making yourself ludicrous.
Remember Detterling, Logic and Epistemology: my forte. My time at St John's, Oxford wasn't entirely wasted.
"Homosexuality is not God-given, it is a result of the Fall and Original Sin."
ReplyDeleteWhat utter, ridiculous bollocks. We are all made in the image of God, and this includes people of colours, races, and sexualities.
What logical, epistemic grounds can you offer for suggesting that homosexuals are somehow exempted from this? Give me a source text for this fantastic nonsense - you can't, because there isn't one.
That is the most fatuous piffle you have ever come out with, and you claim that I am blustering.
I have repeated asked you a simple, straightforward question, and all I am getting in return is bogus theology, evasions and waffle about original sin, and, in the latest desperate wrigglings, a completely illogical and foundationless linking of homosexuality with the Old Testament myth of the Fall of Man, and the totally unscriptural doctrine of original sin. Your claims to expertise in logic and epistemology are beyond ludicrous.
As for why the Anglican Church includes Original Sin in its Articles I neither know nor care. I have been an Anglican for fifty years, and I have never even heard it mentioned, any more than is mentioned the fact that the 39 Articles deny free will and affirm predestination.
So, Gene, if you can't answer this question, why not admit it?
How can the expression of a God given sexuality - provided that that expression is [a] legal and [b] consensual - be sinful?
And please, no more bollocks about the Fall of Man - you'll be blaming homosexuality on the Flood next.
Rather than continue this moronic repeating of a question that has been answered ad infinitum concentrate on this:
ReplyDeleteIf homosexuality is God-given (sic) why does your church, the C of E and the Catholic Church condemn homosexual practices? There is your answer staring you in the face. Homosexuality is no more God-given that the murderous propensities of Hitler, Stalin, Mao Zedong or Pol Pot.
Well Detterling, why does the C of E condemn homosexual practices as incompatible with Scripture?
"If homosexuality is God-given (sic) why does your church, the C of E and the Catholic Church condemn homosexual practices?"
ReplyDeleteWhat the Catholic church condemns is a matter of complete indifference to me; many good Catholics in any way ignore their church's teachings on sex anyway. Just as you, along with most British Catholics, ignored your church's teachings on contraception - a fact on which your silence is positively thunderous.
There is a huge difference between the official doctrines of the church and its practice, as is shown by the February General Synod of the Church of England, which voted by 250 votes to 181 to offer blessings in church to couples in same sex marriages. Liturgy for such blessings is in preparation, and the first services of blessing will take place before the end of this year. There is no proviso that such same sex marriage blessings be available only to couples in celibate relationships, which amounts to an acknowledgement [or an endorsement] that homosexual practices are no longer condemned officially by the church. Indeed, by blessing homosexual marriages which are sexually active, the church is in fact acknowledging that sexuality is god given.
As for this:
"Rather than continue this moronic repeating of a question that has been answered ad infinitum...."
I am continuing to ask the question because you have yet to answer it - repeated evasions and the citing of a range of irrelevant theology and superstitious piffle is not an answer.
And in any case, by quoting C of E policy which has been overtaken by events, you have just shot yourself in the foot - AGAIN. SOME Anglicans condemn homosexuals, but a majority do not, you ignorant clown. And the acceptance of same sex marriages, as I demonstrate above, tacitly accepts that
[a] homosexual practices are not sinful and
[b] sexuality is God-given.
Oh, and your equivilation of homosexuality with the genocidal murderousness of Hitler, Stalin, Mao Zedong and Pol Pot is not only a disturbing glimpse of your psychosis, but also dazzlingly fatuous. Homosexuality = Mass murder, does it? Even for you, that is fuckwittery deranged beyond belief.
Homosexuality = Mass murder
DeleteTHERE YOU GO AGAIN YOU CANTING OLD PHONY.