And Jesus-Free Blessings To You Too
Yesterday I referred you to an article describing a gay wedding, an article that required either a good sense of humor or a strong stomach (prefereably both) to get through. I apologize in advance for doing this to you, but I'd like to go back, because the whole thing neatly summarizes what's going on in the Episcopal Church right now.
The supporters of gay marriage and actively gay clergy in the Episcopal Church will tell you that the entire debate is about homosexuality, but to the orthodox there's something else going on: sometimes it's a detailed theological argument, sometimes it's a gut feeling, and sometimes it's anecdotes like Michael and Randy's Special Day, but at some point the orthodox will tell you there's more going on than a debate about sexual ethics -- that their opponents are bent on drastically changing the nature of the church itself.
Here's the really telling part:
I had never taken communion, out of respect and also out of a vague fear that, as a Jew, I would be struck with thunderbolts if I did. But the minister and Michael and Randy said this communion was for everyone, that it could mean whatever we wanted it to, and after all it was challah. So I stood in line, dunked my bread in the cider, and was generously showered with a Jesus-free blessing by a minister friend.
The thing is, Eucharist (or communion for you Evangelical types) doesn't just mean whatever we want it to mean. Christians have argued long and hard about the significance of the ritual, but at a minimum it's supposed to be a meditation on Christ's sacrifice: "Do this in remembrance of me." To take Christ out of communion is to drain the ritual of all meaning. And because Eucharist is so critical to both the Roman Catholic and Episcopal churches, taking Christ out of Eucharist arguably represents the negation of all Christian tradition and teaching.
Elizabeth Kaeton is an Episcopal priest in New Jersey, and considered a spokeswoman for the pro-gay faction of the church. She was not the original author of any of this, but she saw fit to repeat it, approvingly, in her blog.
Leave aside the question of gay marriage, and all the other wierdness of this particular wedding ceremony. That a leader in the church is not disturbed by the notion of a "Jesus-free" eucharist -- holding this up as an example of how weddings should be celebrated -- suggests that she is willing to purge Christ from Christianity.
And that, folks, is what all the fuss is about.
The supporters of gay marriage and actively gay clergy in the Episcopal Church will tell you that the entire debate is about homosexuality, but to the orthodox there's something else going on: sometimes it's a detailed theological argument, sometimes it's a gut feeling, and sometimes it's anecdotes like Michael and Randy's Special Day, but at some point the orthodox will tell you there's more going on than a debate about sexual ethics -- that their opponents are bent on drastically changing the nature of the church itself.
Here's the really telling part:
I had never taken communion, out of respect and also out of a vague fear that, as a Jew, I would be struck with thunderbolts if I did. But the minister and Michael and Randy said this communion was for everyone, that it could mean whatever we wanted it to, and after all it was challah. So I stood in line, dunked my bread in the cider, and was generously showered with a Jesus-free blessing by a minister friend.
The thing is, Eucharist (or communion for you Evangelical types) doesn't just mean whatever we want it to mean. Christians have argued long and hard about the significance of the ritual, but at a minimum it's supposed to be a meditation on Christ's sacrifice: "Do this in remembrance of me." To take Christ out of communion is to drain the ritual of all meaning. And because Eucharist is so critical to both the Roman Catholic and Episcopal churches, taking Christ out of Eucharist arguably represents the negation of all Christian tradition and teaching.
Elizabeth Kaeton is an Episcopal priest in New Jersey, and considered a spokeswoman for the pro-gay faction of the church. She was not the original author of any of this, but she saw fit to repeat it, approvingly, in her blog.
Leave aside the question of gay marriage, and all the other wierdness of this particular wedding ceremony. That a leader in the church is not disturbed by the notion of a "Jesus-free" eucharist -- holding this up as an example of how weddings should be celebrated -- suggests that she is willing to purge Christ from Christianity.
And that, folks, is what all the fuss is about.
posted by A. at 4:24 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home