"All previous synodical actions on the matter are explicitly and tellingly characterized as "pastoral advice.""
Exactly the problem, then?
My hope is that somebody (from the study committee who already has their sources?) will rise to meet your challenge and find the evidence that you seek to show that a previous synod has claimed decisively that 1. marriage is between one man and one woman, and that 2. homosexual behavior is sinful.
Although it seems to me that it's clear that both of those statements have been made by the CRC already (even though they've clearly been made by the Bible already)... but just not up to an "official standard" of what makes something confessional?
Just trying to understand.
I appreciate and thank you for having this conversation now, though, so that we all know what official motions need to be made or don't need to be made at Synod 2021.
"If Synod 2021 passes the recommendation that the church's teaching on sexuality already has confessional status - that statement in itself recognizes this teaching not in the pastoral advice category, but in the confessional category."
I both strongly denounce racism, allow for racism in "systems" and only critique a single yet crucial aspect of CRT.
The only explanation Staci gave me was to point to this article. I fail to see how this would be oppressive to people of color. It's a central tenet of all Christian Theology.
I both strongly denounce racism, allow for racism in "systems" and only critique a single yet crucial aspect of CRT.
The only explanation Staci gave me was to point to this article. I fail to see how this would be oppressive to people of color. It's a central tenet of all Christian Theology.
"Posts to the Network that deny that whites have privileges in our society that people of color do not enjoy, denying that whites sit atop a racial hierarchy that our society has established, denying that people of color face challenges and outright danger that we whites do even have to think about"
Who is doing this? Sure not any of the men commenting to this original post. All here recognize the evils of racism!
I don't deny white privilege in certain areas. And I don't deny other types of privilege that have nothing to do with skin color. But it's all context-specific, and not inherently sinful, though at times through willful action it can absolutely lead to sin in individual people. To say it is inherently sinful has massive theological implications. Read my article linked above that was banned from being posted here on the Network (which Kristen will explain why hopefully at some point in these comments...) "Jesus the Sinner".
You're unnecessarily censoring conservative comments because of fictional boogeymen that you imagine. No one is denying that black people have painful felt-experiences! We should mourn with those who mourn.
But we do not ignore or suppress Biblical truth, no matter what. Mark, Kristen, Staci, and any others... please stop suppressing Biblical truth.
Christian Arabs don't feel pain when we declare that Islam leads to damnation. Christian people of color won't complain when we isolate and condemn any part of Critical Theory that is counter to Biblical truth!
Also, Mark, you did not reply to Dan's specific question: "Your new policy seems to be saying that anyone who wishes to join in any discussions must first acknowledge and agree with certain aspects of Critical Theory, as a sort of admission fee to the conversation. Would you also censor the viewpoints of people of color who refuse to make those initial acknowledgements?"
Praying fervently that the CRCNA not only continues to follow scripture by upholding the traditional one-man/one-woman stance on marriage as shown in this document, but that they do so for the last time and make it confessional!
Benjamin already answered, but no, they don't release individual votes. In the Acts of Synod, you can find the names of those who registered official No votes. But that's not all the no votes. And it doesn't list yes votes either.
It's probably for the best that they don't, if you ask me!
I, myself, proudly cast my Yes vote in support of the HSR and the Bible's understanding of "unchastity".
Posted in: Status Confessionis
Indeed. I had actually wanted to use the word "elder", but didn't want to cause confusion with the church office.
Posted in: Status Confessionis
"All previous synodical actions on the matter are explicitly and tellingly characterized as "pastoral advice.""
Exactly the problem, then?
My hope is that somebody (from the study committee who already has their sources?) will rise to meet your challenge and find the evidence that you seek to show that a previous synod has claimed decisively that 1. marriage is between one man and one woman, and that 2. homosexual behavior is sinful.
Although it seems to me that it's clear that both of those statements have been made by the CRC already (even though they've clearly been made by the Bible already)... but just not up to an "official standard" of what makes something confessional?
Just trying to understand.
I appreciate and thank you for having this conversation now, though, so that we all know what official motions need to be made or don't need to be made at Synod 2021.
Posted in: Status Confessionis
"If Synod 2021 passes the recommendation that the church's teaching on sexuality already has confessional status - that statement in itself recognizes this teaching not in the pastoral advice category, but in the confessional category."
Beautiful.
Posted in: "Censorship" on The Network
Would you mind explaining why this piece, which I originally tried to post to the Network, was not permitted to be posted?
https://reformedeveryday.com/featured-article/f/jesus-the-sinner
I both strongly denounce racism, allow for racism in "systems" and only critique a single yet crucial aspect of CRT.
The only explanation Staci gave me was to point to this article. I fail to see how this would be oppressive to people of color. It's a central tenet of all Christian Theology.
Posted in: "Censorship" on The Network
Whoa whoa.
Both Mark and Tim Keller are white, and thus ineligible to speak on this topic by the new standards implied in the original article here!
Please AT LEAST show consistency by deleting Mark's comment here.
(Or even better, Kristen, admit your obvious mistake and allow the posts and voices of all CRCNA people to be heard...)
Posted in: "Censorship" on The Network
Kristen, please respond how my post differed from Mark's comment.
Would you mind explaining why this piece, which I originally tried to post to the Network, was not permitted to be posted?
https://reformedeveryday.com/featured-article/f/jesus-the-sinner
I both strongly denounce racism, allow for racism in "systems" and only critique a single yet crucial aspect of CRT.
The only explanation Staci gave me was to point to this article. I fail to see how this would be oppressive to people of color. It's a central tenet of all Christian Theology.
Posted in: "Censorship" on The Network
"Posts to the Network that deny that whites have privileges in our society that people of color do not enjoy, denying that whites sit atop a racial hierarchy that our society has established, denying that people of color face challenges and outright danger that we whites do even have to think about"
Who is doing this? Sure not any of the men commenting to this original post. All here recognize the evils of racism!
I don't deny white privilege in certain areas. And I don't deny other types of privilege that have nothing to do with skin color. But it's all context-specific, and not inherently sinful, though at times through willful action it can absolutely lead to sin in individual people. To say it is inherently sinful has massive theological implications. Read my article linked above that was banned from being posted here on the Network (which Kristen will explain why hopefully at some point in these comments...) "Jesus the Sinner".
You're unnecessarily censoring conservative comments because of fictional boogeymen that you imagine. No one is denying that black people have painful felt-experiences! We should mourn with those who mourn.
But we do not ignore or suppress Biblical truth, no matter what. Mark, Kristen, Staci, and any others... please stop suppressing Biblical truth.
Christian Arabs don't feel pain when we declare that Islam leads to damnation.
Christian people of color won't complain when we isolate and condemn any part of Critical Theory that is counter to Biblical truth!
Posted in: "Censorship" on The Network
Also, Mark, you did not reply to Dan's specific question:
"Your new policy seems to be saying that anyone who wishes to join in any discussions must first acknowledge and agree with certain aspects of Critical Theory, as a sort of admission fee to the conversation. Would you also censor the viewpoints of people of color who refuse to make those initial acknowledgements?"
Posted in: Same-Sex Marriage Resources and Church Order History for CRCNA
Well done. Thank you for this!
Praying fervently that the CRCNA not only continues to follow scripture by upholding the traditional one-man/one-woman stance on marriage as shown in this document, but that they do so for the last time and make it confessional!
Thanks, again!
Posted in: Debunking 5 Myths About The Network
I chuckle at points 1 and 5 being "myths" as my submitted post sits in limbo for the past 13 days...
I'd love for you guys to either approve my post or give me the reason why not.
Thanks.
Posted in: Debunking 5 Myths About The Network
Thanks, Staci!
Thanks for reaching out.
Still waiting on the reasoning why my post was rejected though. Would love to know which Community Standard I disobeyed.
I thought it was a good, thoughtful post.
Posted in: Synod 2022 Sexuality Vote?
Benjamin already answered, but no, they don't release individual votes.
In the Acts of Synod, you can find the names of those who registered official No votes. But that's not all the no votes. And it doesn't list yes votes either.
It's probably for the best that they don't, if you ask me!
I, myself, proudly cast my Yes vote in support of the HSR and the Bible's understanding of "unchastity".