@RareDenver wrote:
“Surely though if they changed their minds about homosexuality, and remember the bible is quite clear on that, then are they not just treating their religion like a pick and mix stall at the cinema. Taking the bits they like (chunky fudge) and leaving the bits they don’t like (fizzy cola bottles).”
“Is that really the way the Church can or should behave?”
I’ll make no judgment on how “the Church” should behave. Or maybe I will. Frankly, that’s exactly how the Church should behave. Of course, they’ll try not to be seen to be behaving that way. It’s amazing what you can do with rhetoric.
I think I’m not stating very clearly what my approach is to this topic. I am speaking purely as a scholar of institutions. I am looking at what makes institutions last. Sure, symbols have something to do with it, but that is a very small part, I think. What makes institutions last is a very effective bureacracy.
The bureacracy is effective whether or not there is some argument about doctrine. Doctrine is symbolic and a source for policy, but neither symbol, nor policy are what keep institutions going.
The US government has been going for several centuries and it’s policies and doctrine have changed back and forth many times. The Church, too, has changed doctrine and policy many times. The issue of homosexuality is merely a blip on the radar screen, compared to all the activities and history of the Church.
I think people often mistake rhetoric for reality. Especially when it is rhetoric about moral ideology. Frankly, I think it makes more sense to see arguments over interpretations of scripture as entertainment, than as something serious. Sure, people take it very seriously, but that doesn’t mean it’s serious.
I don’t know what makes the Church so strong and able to resist efforts to supplant it. I’m pretty sure it has little to do with interpretations of the Bible. They will change their interpretation if it becomes necessary to do so. They will find a way to make it appear as if they were saying the same thing all along. If it turns out that most of the clergy are gay (and from what I’ve heard, that could well be true), then eventually, those self-haters will come to love themselves, and doctrine and policy will change, dragging some portion of the laity along, kicking and screaming, and making another portion of the laity sigh with relief, wondering what took them so long.