Christian Discussion Thread XII: Soter? I hardly know her!

[HISPIDA]

[url=https://www.lgbtqnation.com/2021/07/u-k-methodist-church-allows-sex-marriages-historic-vote/]UK Methodist church votes to allow same-sex marriage (254-46)

It's not uncommon for Protestant churches to integrate Left-wing politics.

til basic human decency is "left-wing politics"

[Tarsonis]

It's not uncommon for Protestant churches to integrate Left-wing politics.

til basic human decency is "left-wing politics"

his comment might not be fair but I don't think yours is either.

[Kowani]

UK Methodist church votes to allow same-sex marriage (254-46)

The Methodist Church in the U.K. will allow same-sex marriages for the first time, after delegates voted overwhelmingly to change its definition of matrimony. Methodists are expected to start conducting same sex marriages later this year.

For British Methodists, the previous definition of marriage was the union of a man and a woman, which left out most LGBTQ worshippers. On Wednesday, delegates to the Methodist Conference voted 254 to 46 to endorse a definition that says marriage is “a lifelong union in body, mind and spirit of two people who freely enter into it.” At the same time, the delegates sought to appease members and clergy who believe that marriage is the union of one man and one woman, by affirming that definition as well. In effect, the Methodist Church now has dual definitions of marriage – the previous definition and the new broader one.

According to a resolution adopted this week about marriage: “Within the Methodist Church this is understood in two ways: that marriage can only be between a man and a woman; that marriage can be between any two people. The Methodist Church affirms both understandings and makes provision in its Standing Orders for them.”

Under a “Freedom of Conscience” clause, no minister or congregant will be required to conduct or otherwise participate in a marriage service for a same-sex couple “should it be contrary to the dictates of his or her conscience to do so.”

Even though I support the outcome, I dislike the method here. Truth is Truth. Doctrine shouldn't be up to majority vote like this, and it definitely shouldn't embrace post-modernist ideas of relative truth.

i may be misremembering, but wasn't the council of nicea technically also a vote?
like sure there was definitely a lot more advanced theological deliberation and quibbling but the end process seems-not a proper democracy, but democratic

[Tarsonis]

Even though I support the outcome, I dislike the method here. Truth is Truth. Doctrine shouldn't be up to majority vote like this, and it definitely shouldn't embrace post-modernist ideas of relative truth.

i may be misremembering, but wasn't the council of nicea technically also a vote?
like sure there was definitely a lot more advanced theological deliberation and quibbling but the end process seems-not a proper democracy, but democratic

.
There's an element to be sure, but the Councils are extensive theological deliberations that declare infallible doctrines. This, this is not that.

[The Archregimancy]

i may be misremembering, but wasn't the council of nicea technically also a vote?

Of bishops.

As indeed was the case with all seven Ecumenical Councils.

Anyway, with Constantine threatening (and carrying through on the threat) to exile and excommunicate anyone who didn't adhere to the decisions of the Council - notably the creed - I'm not sure the comparison is entirely valid. What were the Methodists going to do with anyone who failed to support the ruling? Give them one less scone at the next parish tea?

[North Washington Republic]

i may be misremembering, but wasn't the council of nicea technically also a vote?
like sure there was definitely a lot more advanced theological deliberation and quibbling but the end process seems-not a proper democracy, but democratic

.
There's an element to be sure, but the Councils are extensive theological deliberations that declare infallible doctrines. This, this is not that.

Well, church governance is much more Democratic in mainline Protestant Churches when compared to the Catholic Church.

Since you claim you support the outcome, what method would you have preferred?

[Tarsonis]

.
There's an element to be sure, but the Councils are extensive theological deliberations that declare infallible doctrines. This, this is not that.

Well, church governance is much more Democratic in mainline Protestant Churches when compared to the Catholic Church.

Since you claim you support the outcome, what method would you have preferred?

An actual theological deliberation and declaration, rather than a change in definitions.

[North Washington Republic]

Well, church governance is much more Democratic in mainline Protestant Churches when compared to the Catholic Church.

Since you claim you support the outcome, what method would you have preferred?

An actual theological deliberation and declaration, rather than a change in definitions.

I think that through the U.K Methodist Church, the vote that took place included deliberation and the result was the declaration. We are talking about a mainline protestant church it does not have Bishops. Not every church has a Episcopal polity, but I’m sure you already knew that.

[Tarsonis]

An actual theological deliberation and declaration, rather than a change in definitions.

I think that through the U.K Methodist Church, the vote that took place included deliberation and the result was the declaration. We are talking about a mainline protestant church it does not have Bishops. Not every church has a Episcopal polity, but I’m sure you already knew that.

The declaration boils down to "believe what you want." As Arch pointed out, we don't do that here on the Apostolic side of things

[Kowani]

i may be misremembering, but wasn't the council of nicea technically also a vote?
like sure there was definitely a lot more advanced theological deliberation and quibbling but the end process seems-not a proper democracy, but democratic

.
There's an element to be sure, but the Councils are extensive theological deliberations that declare infallible doctrines. This, this is not that.

fair enough

i may be misremembering, but wasn't the council of nicea technically also a vote?

Of bishops.

As indeed was the case with all seven Ecumenical Councils.

Anyway, with Constantine threatening (and carrying through on the threat) to exile and excommunicate anyone who didn't adhere to the decisions of the Council - notably the creed - I'm not sure the comparison is entirely valid. What were the Methodists going to do with anyone who failed to support the ruling? Give them one less scone at the next parish tea?

they gave those people outs within the ruling
so....
probably not

[North Washington Republic]

I think that through the U.K Methodist Church, the vote that took place included deliberation and the result was the declaration. We are talking about a mainline protestant church it does not have Bishops. Not every church has a Episcopal polity, but I’m sure you already knew that.

The declaration boils down to "believe what you want." As Arch pointed out, we don't do that here on the Apostolic side of things

Methodists don’t believe in “Apostolic succession”. The “believe what you want” is a bit of a strawman. According to their polity, the issue was deliberated and then voted on. Thus, it is a valid teaching according to their polity.

[Sundiata]

The declaration boils down to "believe what you want." As Arch pointed out, we don't do that here on the Apostolic side of things

Methodists don’t believe in “Apostolic succession”. The “believe what you want” is a bit of a strawman. According to their polity, the issue was deliberated and then voted on. Thus, it is a valid teaching according to their polity.

Their church is a democracy?

[North Washington Republic]

Methodists don’t believe in “Apostolic succession”. The “believe what you want” is a bit of a strawman. According to their polity, the issue was deliberated and then voted on. Thus, it is a valid teaching according to their polity.

Their church is a democracy?

It’s called Connexionalism.

[Tarsonis]

The declaration boils down to "believe what you want." As Arch pointed out, we don't do that here on the Apostolic side of things

Methodists don’t believe in “Apostolic succession”. The “believe what you want” is a bit of a strawman. According to their polity, the issue was deliberated and then voted on. Thus, it is a valid teaching according to their polity.

I'm aware of all of this. I said what I said.

[Lower Nubia]

The declaration boils down to "believe what you want." As Arch pointed out, we don't do that here on the Apostolic side of things

Methodists don’t believe in “Apostolic succession”. The “believe what you want” is a bit of a strawman. According to their polity, the issue was deliberated and then voted on. Thus, it is a valid teaching according to their polity.

Technically they do. The Anglican Methodist Communion agreement (I believe it’s pending) stipulates Methodist ministers be ordained, or undergo the laying on of hands by Bishops to confer Holy Orders as part of being in communion with eachother. When you are behest at an Anglican request you better dress your best and put on your priestly vest... ments.

I believe this document was the start of those talks.

[Sundiata]

Their church is a democracy?

It’s called Connexionalism.

Does it work? I don't understand how that can really.

[Sundiata]

I was a Roman Catholic until I was 11.

I was an Atheist until I fell in love.

[Salus Maior]

I was a Roman Catholic until I was 11.

Ok?

[Salus Maior]

The declaration boils down to "believe what you want." As Arch pointed out, we don't do that here on the Apostolic side of things

Methodists don’t believe in “Apostolic succession”. The “believe what you want” is a bit of a strawman. According to their polity, the issue was deliberated and then voted on. Thus, it is a valid teaching according to their polity.

Well, teachings. Two that aren't compatible with each other.

[Sundiata]

I was an Atheist until I fell in love.

What does that mean?

My pursuit of one beauty led me to another, and that beauty was the church.

I loved someone who was quite faithful and devoted to our Lord. She is a nun now.

[The Archregimancy]

The declaration boils down to "believe what you want." As Arch pointed out, we don't do that here on the Apostolic side of things

Methodists don’t believe in “Apostolic succession”. The “believe what you want” is a bit of a strawman. According to their polity, the issue was deliberated and then voted on. Thus, it is a valid teaching according to their polity.

Well yes, of course. That's why I noted earlier in the thread that there wasn't much point in the thread's Orthodox and Catholic posters lecturing the Methodist Church of Great Britain over the means by which they reached this decision; according to their rules and theology, the decision was wholly valid. They don't need our approval, and I very much doubt that the Methodist Church of Great Britain is that bothered by the potential disapproval of a small number of anonymous people posting on an internet forum.

But there's nonetheless grounds for comparative discussion of how different denominations decide doctrine. The Orthodox concept of the formulation of doctrine is, for example, more collegial than the Catholic concept, and has no scope for granting a specific hierarch doctrinal infallibility when pronouncing ex cathedra on issues of doctrine. At the same time, the Orthodox concept of collegiality is limited to bishops, so is certainly not democratic - and is also arguably more conservative than Catholicism in some aspects in that we don't recognise any ecumenical councils since Second Nicaea in AD 787.

And both of these approaches to doctrine clearly differ from the Methodist approach, where bishops have no role at all for the simple reason that they have none. They're also more relaxed about doctrinal standards than Orthodoxy and Catholicism (though it would be wrong to claim that they have none). In the same sex marriage decision that prompted this discussion, for example, they've made it clear that no Methodist minister will be forced to perform such a marriage if he or she feels unable to offer the ceremony.


Summed up, a comparison of differences between denominations need not be inherently pejorative, even where it's clear that we don't agree with a specific denomination's approach; it can also simply be observational.

[Lower Nubia]

I was a Roman Catholic until I was 11.

I was 10, until I was 11.

[Tarsonis]

I was a Roman Catholic until I was 11.

I was 10, until I was 11.

I'm still 10, even at 32

[Luminesa]

I was a Roman Catholic until I was 11.

Okay. What happened that made you leave? If you don’t mind sharing. If not, don’t mind me. You’re still welcome regardless.

[Sundiata]

I was 10, until I was 11.

I'm still 10, even at 32

You haven't even outlived our Messiah yet.