tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32613460.post695403646859084926..comments2023-05-24T13:59:06.959+01:00Comments on Barnaby Perkins: Colossians 1.15–20Barnaby Perkinshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11319261226357587158noreply@blogger.comBlogger2125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32613460.post-82831385216125922402012-02-21T16:46:53.057+00:002012-02-21T16:46:53.057+00:00Thank you for your comment Ian. Yes, my thoughts h...Thank you for your comment Ian. Yes, my thoughts hang on Paul. And I would NEVER want to amputate Paul from the canon, I happen to love Paul greatly! Neither would I wouldn't want to attempt to decouple Paul's theology from the context in which he wrote. Nevertheless, I do think it is important to remember that Paul wrote to specific churches with specific problems. Even when his letters were first circulated, there surely would have been some things which he wrote which were less applicable to certain congregations than to others? I can't imagine that every congregation had quite the same problems as the church in Corinth, for instance. The question, therefore, is not whether one rejects Paul holus bolus, but whether one allows some parts of Paul to read differently in different contexts. We don't therefore utterly relativise 1Timothy 2 for instance, but we certainly must acknowledge that there are certain specific problems which Paul is dealing with in a text like that which may not be precisely replicated elsewhere. So to make a decision as to whether or not women can be ordained on the basis of these texts alone seems unsound to me. This is particularly the case when you read these texts in the light of some of the other things the NT has to say about the place and ministry of women in the church. Consider Junia, who was an excellent apostle (Romans 16.3). I am not sure that Paul meant to prohibit her from teaching or exercising authority.<br />Again, many thanks for an interesting comment.Barnaby Perkinshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11319261226357587158noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32613460.post-4424897843342326052012-02-21T11:49:00.478+00:002012-02-21T11:49:00.478+00:00Yes, excellent. Thoughtful and with a beginning, m...Yes, excellent. Thoughtful and with a beginning, middle, end and message. <br />Though I sometimes wonder how texts that read well come over as the spoken word. I must turn up some Wesley, since he kept the crowds in thrall for hours.<br />Meanwhile, your thoughts hang largely on Paul. Which comes back to the fashionable rejection of Paul's instruction on not having women in charge. <br />If Paul was wrong about that, then why do we hang onto the rest of Paul. Is it simply because it is part of 'tradition'. <br />And so, what would a Paul-free Gospel look like? 'Bishops' sort-of come from Paul, not Christ, who was not very keen on 'rulers', male or female. But that's a specific, local, issue. It goes far wider. Re-write your homily as Paul-free, and much of the message stands, but the argument has to be re-shaped.Ian Mnoreply@blogger.com