The Questioning Christian

We Don’t Need a “Gay Church”

Written by

D. C. Toedt III

in

In a discussion thread over on the TitusOneNine blog, a (conservative) reader asks what is stopping the so-called liberals from forming a gay church?

Here’s a slightly-edited version of my response:

We don’t need a gay church, any more than we need an alcoholics’ church, or a tall people’s church, or a deaf church, or a well-off educated white folks’ church.

We need instead a church in which everyone can work on putting God first in their lives, and on loving their neighbors as themselves.

We need a church in which all things not directly related to those two items are treated as inessentials, adiaphora. And in which, as to such inessentials, we agree to disagree, praise God, and get back to (his) work, together.

Comments

2 responses to “We Don’t Need a “Gay Church””

  1. Mark Diebel Avatar
    Mark Diebel

    I’m fascinated that no one other than Eugene Siasl had any trouble with the notion of “dispositive”… which is a legal term. When the traditionalists say that the Bible is dispositive with regard to homosexuality, it means that the Bible settles the matter unequivocally. Of course, no traditionalist says that, they say the latter. You’ve given us one word to do the job of four.
    Who knows because of you and discussions like this one (and Br. Michael used the word too) it will some day appear in the OED. I sure hope I don’t hear it though on the floor of convention.

    Reply
  2. Avatar
    Anonymous

    Actually, this argument is proof positive that it’s not “Biblical interpretation” at issue, but simple bigotry.
    If gay is illegal, it’s illegal everywhere and at all times, right? What, then, is the argument for starting such a church? “Love the sinner, hate the sin – but as long as you’re not bothering me, feel free to do whatever.”
    So it’s just the challenge they don’t like, not the “sin.”

    Reply

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

More posts