Comments 3

  1. I’m only a casual reader of this site and know little of the larger subject matter, but I find Rodriguez’ comments potentially troubling.

    While he insists that “we cannot say that gender complementarity, in and of itself, grounded in common sense biology, is the heart of the church’s historic (“mere”) teaching on sexuality”, I do not see him reference scriptural or historic church teachings showing that complementarity is not assumed to be the heart of sexuality. Like gravity, it is assumed by authors and left unstated.

    When Rodriguez’ asks “can we ground our theology of sex not in a historically contingent understanding of gender, but in this beautiful, glorious, doxological drama of the Trinity?” it sounds orthodox. But how could we ever proceed with any action or understanding if every syllable of scripture and every atom of creation were subject to debate over its correct theological understanding in the doxological drama of the Trinity?

    Rodriguez seems to propose full employment for ivory tower theologians – and a life on uncertain inaction from every other believer.

    1. What other unstated assumptions of (which?) biblical authors should we assume today are “biblical” and therefore valid in a scientific, empirical sense? The biblical authors did not assume gravity or heliocentrism or germs — the list goes on. I can’t make any sense of Rodrguez’s trinitarian idea either, but even more direct attempts to mine ancient texts for insights superior to modern science are no better, unless they restrict themselves to the moral domain. Wilson is creating a pariah, like lepers, imperial tax collectors, eunuchs, slaves, and prostitutes when he says people who don’t fit into “commonsense” sex and gender binaries (in the right combinations) are anomalies that can be ignored. It’s quite clear what Jesus’ attitude toward pariahs and pariah creators was.

      1. Hey there, sounds like you two really did not like my essay. That’s too bad. Is there a clarifying question you can ask? I would be happy to try to be more clear.

        Thanks,

        Steven

What are your thoughts about this topic?
We welcome your ideas and questions about the topics considered here. If you would like to receive others' comments and respond by email, please check the box below the comment form when you submit your own comments.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.