theology

Last night's Theology Discussion focused on the issue of same-sex marriage initiatives. As California has an initiative on this November's ballot, we thought it proper that the CrossLeft community speak out in the whole matter.

Those present (Rich Warden, Bill Peltz and Steve Rockwell) developed a sense that due to the wide variety of opinions/positions on homosexuality we should make a statement presenting a range of perceptions, not a formal position endorsing or opposing the initiative.

From our on-line discussion on homosexuality we have the sense that some of us favor gay marriage, others feel it is a civil matter; such separation of church and state - that no one religious tradition should tell another what to do or that the state should not deny homosexuals the right to marry, civil unions being one solution. Some feel it is a spiritual matter, that civil unions do not go far enough, that marriage is a matter of two consenting adults brought together by Our Creator, living in a committed relationship built upon love. We desired to affirm gay/lesbian people in a manner consistent with our beliefs and our feelings.

Nowhere in the New Testament do I find any reference to Jesus and homosexuality. Why I ask? I suspect it has to do with he being concieved, by divine plan, in the lowliest of stations in ancient Jewish culture that he was accepting of all persons, without exception.

As Our Creator accepts all of divine creation without exceptions, Jesus was conceived in this lowliest of states as Our Creator's living example of unconditional love for all, no matter their station in life. Moreover I believe Jesus could see into the hearts of all who came before him, and saw the love in their hearts. He understood that sexual orientation is a condition of birth, not a choice and thus accepted everyone where they were. Hence he did not, and could not, condemn anyone for being who they were by the nature of their birth.

As the current leading political issue is, rightfully, the economy, I would like to assemble a team of writers, editors and reviewers to author a white paper on the topic of progressive Christain economic policy. With Kety's inside connections to the Obama campaign I would like us to develop a paper that places economic issues in a progressive Christian context.

Rev. Roger has graciously provided us with several good biblical references. With Bill Peltz' well established experience as a stock broker I invite others like these two to step forth and offer your thoughts and experiences.

I would base it in the premise that we, as divinely created creatures, have free will to choose and are bound by the consequences of our actions to provide mutual service one to another. The Golden Rule, AKA, the Ethic of Reciprocity, would be our guide. We would pursue policies that provide a level playing field for all persons.

So if we are a Christian nation, then what would a Progressive Christian Economic Policy encompass, how would it be implemented, what kind of legislation would be needed to put it into action?

In his recent May 28, 2008 piece entitled "Evolution and Homosexuality: The Twin Terrors of the Christian Church", Bishop John Shelby Spong wrote of "a new, human, celebratory theology struggling to be born. In this new theology the call of the Christ figure is not to rescue the sinner so that the sinner can become the abuser of others; it is rather to empower us to become so fully human that we do not need a victim to victimize, but can become a new humanity, people who are not struggling to survive, but who are capable of giving our life and love away. A fully human Jesus, a new way, besides sacrifice, to view the cross and a new meaning to be found in early
Christian creed that in Jesus God has been engaged, will be the hallmarks of this new theology. It is time for the Christian Church to make this shift in a conscious way."

This is the second in an ongoing series on the early church fathers and their relevance in today's world.

On the Equity of God.

After Pelagius left the scene Julian of Eclanum contiuned to engage Augustine in a long debate that ended only after the latter died in 419. On the nature of God Julian took a distinctly Jewish approach. Like Pelagius he believed in the doctrine of free will, that our law was like God; rational, sensible and divine in origin. To the Pelagian an unjust God was simply just not possible.

Augustine, in direct contrast, thought man was simply not capable of knowing what justice God administers. His belief that Adam's fall was transmuted to all humans at birth, that some people are predestined by God to be saved and others condemned to eternal torment in the afterlife, that only by the Grace of God are humans saved, all flew in the face of the Pelagians belief in the basic goodness of God.

Of what relevance is all this today?

The purpose of this and succeeding posts is to introduce some of our early church fathers and, with some their lost contributions to the development of modern day Christianity, to recover their wisdom and show how the church might have looked had not their wisdom been "lost."
Simply because their wisdom does not appear in the present day Bible does not negate their value. Their contributions were negated by church politics more than anything. We are, IMO, all the lesser for the loss.

Having now come to the surface after a deep dive into a vast area of research, at the risk of oversimplification, I'll try to be as brief as I can.

I'll begin with Origen, a Greek philosopher (ca. 185-ca. 254), considered by many to have been one of two of the most important early Christian theologians, the other being Augustine. His great work, the Hexapla, is a synopsis of six versions of the Old Testament. He is said to have authored 6,000 manuscripts. It is important, for this discussion, to note that Ancient Greek belief systems of his time commonly accepted preexistence of the soul.

We've had an enthusiastic response to the call for theologians, seminarians and lay people, 10 to date. The call has been answered by a fascinating mix of folks from traditionalists to metaphysicians.

As I see it the purpose would be to provide sound progressive Christian theological interpretations and information for any papers authored by The IPC, to provide a stimulating interchange of ideas on the CL site and to suggest books, tapes and CD's of interest, to the benefit of all members of this community. Any other purposes?

A partial list of topics that have been discussed in the past include:
.Abortion, when does life begin?
.Bonhoffer and living for others
.Reincarnation, Preexistence of the Soul and Metempsychosis
.Origen: An early church father
.Race, slavery and social justice

Potential topics might include:
.The Jesus Seminars - Robert Funk and Westar
.Bishop John Shelby Spong; his books and theology
.Pelagius and Augustine
.Science and, not vs, theology

Suggested Books have been:
What does a Progressive Christian Believe? Delwin Brown

Suggested books might include:
.The Gospel According to Jesus: A translation and guide to his essential teachings for belivers and non-believers. Stephen Mitchell

.Jesus for the Non-Believers. John Shelby Spong

I was glancing through my library today and rediscovered an excellent book. James Newton Poling is the Professor of Pastoral Theology and Counseling at Colgate Rochester Divinity School/Bexley Hall/Crozer Theological Seminary. His Deliver Us From Evil: Resisting Racial and Gender Oppression addresses the nature of evil and emphasizes the need for communities of resistance. It has been years since I've read this.  It's time to read it again with a fresh set of eyes.

Here's an excerpt:

You can visit my personal blot at http://matthewlkelley.blogspot.com

Is there a way I can connect the RSS feed to this site? Somebody let me know.

How much are we (as a Christian political group) influenced by principals of Liberation Theology? Would more study of Liberation theologists be time well spent for us? Is this a school of thought and action we want to be identified with? If so, how can we avoid the Marxist label (if indeed we want to avoid it)? Is this a path we want to follow?

(next post coming with more basic info about this school of theology, it may take me a bit to write so if your first response is "I'm clueless" (almost always MY first response to about anything) then relax because I am currently writing a simple primer post about this)