More Schisms Are Just Fine.
September 5, 2006
Rabbis who are part of Conservative Judaism, which falls midway between Orthodox literalism and the more liberal (in the good sense) Reform movement, foresee a possible schism coming over ordaining gay rabbis and performing same-sex marriages, notes this article in the Jewish Daily Forward.
I view schism within Conservative Judaism the same as I view schism among Anglicans/Episcopalians or within other denominations. Let 'er rip. Just as Northern protestants broke with their Southern denominational counterparts over slavery, so let those who choose to mask the dark path of intolerance and bigotry in religious rhetoric go their own way, and good riddance!
Comments to "More Schisms Are Just Fine.":
Greg Capaldini | September 6, 2006, 10:20am | #
It's understandable that people take pleasure in the potential disarray of hostile religious or other groups. But I'm happy with my sect, Episcopalianism, because it has so far avoided the go-off-in-a-huff reaction that would scratch certain people's itches. Rather, it has largely accepted diversity in the best way possible - "hey, what you do isn't my bag, but we're all believers, and we agree on the important stuff." I'm buoyed by occasional mentions in the GLBT-directed media of those religions and other associations that could have ruptured over such issues but haven't, and I'd enjoy seeing more such coverage.
Br. Katana of Reasoned Discussion | September 6, 2006, 11:47am | #
"Liberal" religion is an approach to religion...not a political stance...whose opposite is "literal" religion. If they cannot agree on a major point of the doctrine(acceptance of GLBT people in the life of the congregation) it's just going to be a matter of time.
Maybe we'll end up with a bunch of storefront synagogues like we have churches?
Richard J. Rosendall | September 6, 2006, 12:59pm | #
Greg wrote: "Episcopalianism ... has so far avoided the go-off-in-a-huff reaction...."
You could have fooled me.
Northeast Libertarians | September 6, 2006, 6:08pm | #
From a cultural view, religion has some influence (albeit diminishing over time). From a direct-relevance-to-one's-life view, the reality is that most religious practitioners tend to pick the interpretation of whatever creed they follow which endorses their way of life. Many also choose to use that interpretation to condemn people they otherwise wouldn't like.
parker | September 6, 2006, 8:01pm | #
"Episcopalianism ... has so far avoided the go-off-in-a-huff reaction...." Excuse me, then just what do you call the behavior of the 7 conservative dioceses who have appealed for "alternative primatial oversight" since the election of +Katharine? Seems like a huff to me and I speak as an Episcopalian (NOT an Anglican).
Greg Capaldini | September 7, 2006, 10:57am | #
Commenters above are correct that individual Dioceses have withdrawn from the American province, the PECUSA (Protestant Episcopal Church of the USA). I should have said said that at the moment the worldwide Anglican Communion has avoided a rupture involving entire national provinces, which was an expected result. To further clarify, a request for supervision by a bishop outside of the USA may or may not meet certain individuals' definition of schism. ("You're the one schism-ing, I'm not.") My point remains that clergy on various levels have been exercising moderation and restraint on these questions, and I feel I'm being fair in saying that the fractious elements have been getting the lion's share of media attention.
Randy R. | September 6, 2006, 9:44am | #
I agree that they should shism, but not before making every effort to remain whole. If that fails, then let 'er rip.
Let THEM do the shismising (is that a word?)