“一个确定但不令人满意的答案”:福音派对同性恋基督徒的回应

IF 0.3 3区 哲学 Q2 HISTORY
David J. Neumann
{"title":"“一个确定但不令人满意的答案”:福音派对同性恋基督徒的回应","authors":"David J. Neumann","doi":"10.1017/rac.2021.21","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT As an amorphous, nonhierarchical collection of associations, evangelicalism has always lacked a clear source of authority. Since Christianity Today's beginning in 1956, it has aspired to serve as the mouthpiece of authoritative evangelical views, presenting itself as the voice of moderation while espousing conservative views with a combative, culture-war stance. With the emergence of the gay rights movement, evangelicals launched a culture war against “homosexuals” as the implicitly secular, liberal Other and then were forced to wrestle with how to apply this stance toward their gay Christian brothers and sisters. Evangelicals' self-conception led to a contradictory stance that they managed to maintain with little variation for decades. Committed to biblical inerrancy, they were definitive in condemning gay sexual behavior, but as self-identified postfundamentalists, they also desired to be compassionate toward gay people. They encouraged gay Christians to change their sexual orientation and simultaneously admitted that such change was impossible for most. Though evangelicals were slow to welcome the ex-gay movement, they eventually embraced it fully as the only plausible escape from their contradictory ideology. The collapse of the movement thus came as a major blow. Many evangelicals began to question the premise that sexual orientation was a chosen, changeable identity and began to rethink the theology of inerrancy that undergirded evangelical hermeneutics. Since 2010, a number of evangelical leaders have challenged CT's claim to represent the evangelical consensus on the issue. In the coming years, the progressive views of younger evangelicals will undoubtedly increase acceptance of same-sex relationships.","PeriodicalId":42977,"journal":{"name":"RELIGION AND AMERICAN CULTURE-A JOURNAL OF INTERPRETATION","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.3000,"publicationDate":"2022-02-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"“A Definitive but Unsatisfying Answer”: The Evangelical Response to Gay Christians\",\"authors\":\"David J. Neumann\",\"doi\":\"10.1017/rac.2021.21\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"ABSTRACT As an amorphous, nonhierarchical collection of associations, evangelicalism has always lacked a clear source of authority. Since Christianity Today's beginning in 1956, it has aspired to serve as the mouthpiece of authoritative evangelical views, presenting itself as the voice of moderation while espousing conservative views with a combative, culture-war stance. With the emergence of the gay rights movement, evangelicals launched a culture war against “homosexuals” as the implicitly secular, liberal Other and then were forced to wrestle with how to apply this stance toward their gay Christian brothers and sisters. Evangelicals' self-conception led to a contradictory stance that they managed to maintain with little variation for decades. Committed to biblical inerrancy, they were definitive in condemning gay sexual behavior, but as self-identified postfundamentalists, they also desired to be compassionate toward gay people. They encouraged gay Christians to change their sexual orientation and simultaneously admitted that such change was impossible for most. Though evangelicals were slow to welcome the ex-gay movement, they eventually embraced it fully as the only plausible escape from their contradictory ideology. The collapse of the movement thus came as a major blow. Many evangelicals began to question the premise that sexual orientation was a chosen, changeable identity and began to rethink the theology of inerrancy that undergirded evangelical hermeneutics. Since 2010, a number of evangelical leaders have challenged CT's claim to represent the evangelical consensus on the issue. In the coming years, the progressive views of younger evangelicals will undoubtedly increase acceptance of same-sex relationships.\",\"PeriodicalId\":42977,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"RELIGION AND AMERICAN CULTURE-A JOURNAL OF INTERPRETATION\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-02-14\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"RELIGION AND AMERICAN CULTURE-A JOURNAL OF INTERPRETATION\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1017/rac.2021.21\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"哲学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"HISTORY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"RELIGION AND AMERICAN CULTURE-A JOURNAL OF INTERPRETATION","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1017/rac.2021.21","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"HISTORY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

摘要:作为一个无定形、无等级的社团集合,福音派一直缺乏明确的权威来源。自1956年《今日基督教》成立以来,它一直渴望成为权威福音派观点的代言人,以温和的声音自居,同时以好斗的文化战争立场支持保守派观点。随着同性恋权利运动的出现,福音派发起了一场文化战争,反对“同性恋者”作为隐含的世俗、自由的他者,然后被迫纠结于如何将这一立场应用于他们的基督教同性恋兄弟姐妹。福音派的自我概念导致了他们几十年来几乎没有变化的矛盾立场。他们致力于圣经的无误,明确谴责同性恋性行为,但作为自我认同的后原教旨主义者,他们也希望对同性恋者富有同情心。他们鼓励同性恋基督徒改变他们的性取向,同时承认这种改变对大多数人来说是不可能的。尽管福音派对前同性恋运动的欢迎很慢,但他们最终完全接受了这一运动,认为这是摆脱他们矛盾意识形态的唯一可行途径。因此,这场运动的失败是一个重大打击。许多福音派教徒开始质疑性取向是一种被选择的、可改变的身份的前提,并开始重新思考支撑福音派解释学的无误神学。自2010年以来,许多福音派领袖对CT声称代表福音派在这一问题上的共识提出了质疑。在未来几年,年轻福音派的进步观点无疑将增加对同性关系的接受。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
“A Definitive but Unsatisfying Answer”: The Evangelical Response to Gay Christians
ABSTRACT As an amorphous, nonhierarchical collection of associations, evangelicalism has always lacked a clear source of authority. Since Christianity Today's beginning in 1956, it has aspired to serve as the mouthpiece of authoritative evangelical views, presenting itself as the voice of moderation while espousing conservative views with a combative, culture-war stance. With the emergence of the gay rights movement, evangelicals launched a culture war against “homosexuals” as the implicitly secular, liberal Other and then were forced to wrestle with how to apply this stance toward their gay Christian brothers and sisters. Evangelicals' self-conception led to a contradictory stance that they managed to maintain with little variation for decades. Committed to biblical inerrancy, they were definitive in condemning gay sexual behavior, but as self-identified postfundamentalists, they also desired to be compassionate toward gay people. They encouraged gay Christians to change their sexual orientation and simultaneously admitted that such change was impossible for most. Though evangelicals were slow to welcome the ex-gay movement, they eventually embraced it fully as the only plausible escape from their contradictory ideology. The collapse of the movement thus came as a major blow. Many evangelicals began to question the premise that sexual orientation was a chosen, changeable identity and began to rethink the theology of inerrancy that undergirded evangelical hermeneutics. Since 2010, a number of evangelical leaders have challenged CT's claim to represent the evangelical consensus on the issue. In the coming years, the progressive views of younger evangelicals will undoubtedly increase acceptance of same-sex relationships.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
0.40
自引率
25.00%
发文量
7
期刊介绍: Religion and American Culture is devoted to promoting the ongoing scholarly discussion of the nature, terms, and dynamics of religion in America. Embracing a diversity of methodological approaches and theoretical perspectives, this semiannual publication explores the interplay between religion and other spheres of American culture. Although concentrated on specific topics, articles illuminate larger patterns, implications, or contexts of American life. Edited by Philip Goff, Stephen Stein, and Peter Thuesen.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信