A recurring theme among some scripturalists is that the church should not proceed with 'innovations' such as same-sex blessings, women's ordination, and communion without baptism, until the underlying theological questions are 'settled.' At worst, that's merely a delaying tactic; at best, it's an unrealistic approach.
We're not going to see a 'settlement' of such theological questions any time soon. Not only do people (of all persuasions) tend to fall in love with their own opinions; in the Anglican / Protestant tradition, there are few if any penalties for bitter-enders who loudly assert their opinions, even — or especially — as a contrary consensus evolves:
• Such questions can't be resolved by empirical proof one way or another; there's no penalty of peer scorn for those who refuse to face the facts, because there are no facts, at least none that are useful;
• We have no pope who can supposedly resolve the matter by ex cathedra pronouncement; there's little or no danger of excommunication for those who refuse to conform to 'settled' theology;
• In modern Western civilization, there’s no Emperor Constantine (or Grand Inquisitor or Marshal Stalin or Dear Leader) whose minions will jail or execute dissenters from 'correct' views.'
Given these realities, we're not going to see Anglican theologians joyfully proclaiming in unison, “It’s settled — Bishop X has found the right answer!” No; what we'll see instead is the theological counterpart to the aphorism that old economic theories don’t die off until old economists do.

Comments