Monday, August 28, 2006

The "M" word or Marriage lessons from the Episcopal Church?

Click on the link to shorter sermon on Paul's letter to the Ephesians.

Let me begin with Paul, Eph 4:28 "Let no corrupt communication proceed out of your mouth, but that which is good to the use of edifying, that it may minister grace unto the hearers."
I hope my communication today will be edifying and not corrupting.

The thing I love about the "M" word is that no matter what you say about it, you are going to get in trouble. This certainly holds true for Paul, Charlie, and me. The lesson was from Paul's letter (including Eph 5:22-....). You know, the part about wives obeying their husbands. The sermon took 23 minutes to explain away Paul. Is it because the Episcopal Church does not have a legitimate voice on the subject of marriage that we cannot be more concise? Also, Charlie is tired of attempts to legislate marriage! Let us then do away with all laws that refer to marriage. Of course in doing so we would leave widowed spouses devoid of social security checks, inheritance would be thrown to the whims of the courts, and "free love" would govern our relationships. Therefore, polygamy, incest, bestiality, transdimensional beings having intercourse with us, and who knows what else could be okay. Paul himself was trying to set down some rules for husbands and wives (traditional marriage). Let us throw him out the window as well because he was writing 2000 years ago, and is therefore irrelevant. And where did Charlie get the notion that nobody in Rock Hill was upset about the Episcopal Church having the current female Presiding Bishop Elect? Has he not been reading Cato's comments?


  1. I know there is a problem with the title link. I will try to fix it.

  2. TravellingMercies11:30 PM

    Oh good, Pewster, your comment on the sermon is back up; I wanted to add a few thoughts. Poor Paul has been slapped around a lot over that "Wives obey your husbands" verse; as a woman, I have to say I never found it to be a problem. First, Paul WAS trying to establish guidelines for a Christian marriage; second, he writes only ONE verse about wives obeying their husbands, then follows that with MANY more about the importance of husbands reverencing their wives. The implication (at least to me) is that this is a mutual agreement that is binding on both parties. To read the "obedience" as some kind of permission for women to let themselves be abused is simply ridiculous. It's one of those darn things when a verse is taken out of context--you just can't do that in the Bible much and get the proper meaning of it.

    Also, I am not particularly impressed by our Bishop-Elect myself, NOT because she is a woman but because as I read the backgrounds of all the candidates , she seemed to be the least experienced.

  3. I, too, have not opposed the PB-elect just because she is female. That debate was lost 30 years ago. However, her lack of honest qualifications is terribly upsetting. Her claim (in writing, no less) to have been Dean of the Corvallis School of Theology when, in fact, she was Associate Rector and DRE, absolutely stinks. Her defense is "well, that's what the Rector called it" simply doesn't wash. And she readily admits that she chose the priesthood because she needed a job when the government cut off funding for her research on the mating habits of squid and she didn't get promoted from assistant professor. A failed academic and a wishy-washy vocation does not inspire confidence.

  4. FEMINIST PLEDGE AT SEWANEE UNIVERSITY. "I am a feminist. I pledge to use the power of my education to actualize my feminist ideals. I will live my life aware of the restrictions traditionally placed on male and female behavior and work to reduce their power over myself and others. I will respect women as decision-makers. I will make my political and consumer choices with awareness of their implications for women around the world. I will recognize that oppressions intersect, that the interplay of race, class, gender, sexual orientation and nationality create multiple vulnerabilities for women."

    Apparently no pledge to submit to the Lordship of Jesus, his authority, even over their feminism.

    As one alumnus wrote: Here's what happens to sweet Southern girls when their parents pay $36,000/yr to send them to "the Episcopal University:"

  5. Let's send them my version

    Revised FEMINIST PLEDGE AT SEWANEE UNIVERSITY. "I am a feminist. I pledge to use the power of my education to understand my womanhood. I will live my life aware of the traditional and
    biological differences between men and women. I will respect men and women as decision-makers by being aware of their different decision making thought processes. I will
    not discriminate in my political or consumer choices as I believe that all homo sapiens should be treated equally. I am woman, I am strong, I will follow Christ, and therefore I will be invulnerable.

  6. I'm afraid that might be a very hard sell---but it's worth a shot.