More inclusion from the Anglican Church of Canada: Rev. Dwayne Bos and Imam Suleyman Demiray officiated at a wedding between a Christian and a Muslim. Apparently, the precedent for this was set some time ago when the Church married a Christian to a Wiccan. The Anglican Church of Canada is easing its way into Chrislam via Wicca, a belief system which already strongly resembles that of the ACoC.
The imam recited a passage from the Al-Fatiha in the Quran, not to be confused with the Quran 8:12 passage which invites Mohammed’s followers to behead the infidel – a bit of a downer just before the honeymoon.
Read all about it here:
History was made this summer at Canadian Forces Base Borden, Ont., with a unique interfaith wedding, the officiating clerics say.
On August 29, Capt. Georgette Mink, a physiotherapist in the Canadian military, was married to Ahmad Osman, a soldier in the Lebanese army. Although technically a Christian marriage, it was attended by representatives from both the Christian and Muslim religions, and was followed by a Muslim blessing of the couple.
Capt. the Rev. Dwayne Bos, the Anglican padre who officiated, said he believes other weddings may have been done in the Canadian military involving Christians and non-Christians—he has heard of some involving one Wiccan partner, for example. But the fact that clerics from both faith traditions co-performed the liturgy made this one unique, he said.
“From what we understand and know, this would be the first one of this type that’s ever been done in the Canadian Forces,” he said.
I wonder when someone will break it to Georgette that Ahmad is allowed four wives?
It seems to me it says somewhere “Do not be unequally yoked with unbelievers.” Christian are not to marry non-Christians. But then Muslims are not to marry non-Muslims as well, “and do not marry to idolaters until they believe…”
I just pray that neither ‘head’ was severed. In light of the celebratory mood that I am sure both participants were in…………….
It is the ACoC that has lost its head.
What are these two people supposed to do then? If they love one another? Do any of you smug sideline sneerers have any reasonable, adult solution?
The AcoC might like to consider getting out of the ‘marriage business’. Any self respecting organization………….of which there are some………..would have a long time ago. This catering to people must stop. I do not consider myself to be smug or self righteous. I do however not suffer fools gladly. The ‘church without gravity’ has slid into irrelevancy with the blessing from those at ‘the top’. Not one to throw rocks………..take a look at what is left of the United Church of Canada for example. Merciful Lord, save me.
Get married in a Unitarian church but the bible clearly states that Christian are only to marry Christians ,if your not a Christian then that’s not really a problem and if that man is a devote Muslim it won’t be long till he gets her to become a Muslim ,one way or the other.
I can’t decide if you guys live in a very simple or a very complicated world. 😀
Yes…….to Vincent.
It is actually quite simple but hard to do.. ,you either follow what the bible teaches or you don’t “If you love me you will keep my commandments.”
Hence… they should not get married? I want a religion that doesn’t make me utterly miserable in this life. What’s the bloody point if all it does is separate people?
If you’re born to Christian parents, the statistics are overwhelming that if you decide to pursue a religious life it’ll be as a Christian. And it’s the same for Muslims.
When the deck is that stacked against you from the start, the kind of simplistic rhetoric I’m hearing here simply fails to address in any kind of serious way the questions I’m raising.
Yes, if everyone around you looks just like you and you’re lucky enough to fall in love with someone in your immediate cultural circle, bravo, your life will considerably simplified. Good job.
That has not been my experience and I rather doubt that there have been reliable statistics compiled on such a connection.
Nevertheless, if we suppose that what you suggest is the case, it does not affect the truth or otherwise of any particular religion. If one becomes a Christian because one’s parents were Christian and Christianity is true, then it remains true. If one becomes a Muslim because one’s parents were Muslim and Islam is false, then it remains false.
If a Christian marries a Muslim, the fact that both religions cannot be true, will, at some point, create a significant problem in their marriage – no matter how much they are in love. If they both take their different faiths seriously, I would contend that it is going to be an insurmountable problem – unless one of them converts to the other’s faith.
That is not “simplistic rhetoric “, it’s logic.
http://publicdata.norc.org:41000/gss/DOCUMENTS/REPORTS/Social_Change_Reports/SC26.pdf
This study finds that about two thirds of people who were raised in a specific religion remained with this religion as adults. The other third switched religion or went with no religion at all. I rarely invoke common sense, because it’s so often stupid, but if people didn’t tend to stay with their parent’s religions, Christian churches would be much more full of cultural Muslims and Jews than they are now, and most synagogues would have a much higher number of converts in their congregations, and so on.
The problem with the way you apply the concept of “truth” is that it can be applied internally to a single religion anyway — the Bible is full of contradictions, that’s what makes it interesting. You can either work very hard at convincing yourself the contradictions aren’t there — in which case I fail to see why you can’t reconcile two different religious outlooks — or you can, you know, stop getting upset online all the time.
To all you good people, I am bold to ask………….were any animals hurt in the creation of this thread?
“The Bible is full of contradictions , that’s what makes it interesting.” If the bible is full of contradictions that would make it unreliable for any proclamation of truth and just another book with no authority One would have no way of discern truth form a lie for only one side of a contradiction can be true unless both are false. There may be paradox but paradox is not contradiction.
If she is truly a Christian then you are right they should not marry but if she is just a christian in name only then knock yourself out ,she has nothing to loose.If you follow Christ you play by his rules, not for brownie points but because you love him . In this life you are free to follow any path you want but all paths do not lead to God.
Vincent,
Which table in that report are you looking at?
In your last paragraph, I fear we are back to the issue of objective truth, a concept whose meaning appears to elude you.
Oh absolutely. Religion needs to make emotional sense first and foremost, I think.
There are two types of reality or truth. One is that of buses bearing down on you in the street, or the chair you’re sitting on. That’s probably — I guess, I’m not absolutely sure — what you mean by objective truth. The other is whatever structures give the world meaning to you. I happily claim that this reality may very well be completely made up, and I don’t care. You could prove to me that “Christianity” is not the “truth” — that Jesus didn’t rise from the dead — and I’d remain a Christian. I’m much too old to care about being right. Which is why I don’t have a blog decrying points of dissent within my denomination, and why I so readily concede that the meaning of objective truth does, indeed, elude me.
Mind you, now I think about it, my last paragraph is precisely _not_ about objective truth, and I don’t understand why you says it is. That’s at least twice you’ve come back to me with this one, and it’s never actually made any sense.
Table 28. That 35,7 figure.
Thanks for the table.
Perhaps I should have said “would lead to the issue of objective truth”, as, indeed, it did in your second paragraph.
Have you considered that if you regarded your every day reality in the same way as you do your religion you would almost certainly have been run over by one of those buses since they “may very well be completely made up.”
But I don’t, and so I wouldn’t have. That’s the crux.
People get run over by buses everyday, and I can put my hand in their wounds if I like.
The objective truth of any religion being self-evident would make faith redundant.
Also: who cares? It seems to me that what this mindset really leads to, on the actual ground, is people being unkind at best, and murderous at worst. I don’t see the percentage in it.
So what you are saying is that faith can only happen with subjective truth not objective truth. A couple questions, Do you believe in gravity?, was the apostles faith redundant? ,their belief in Jesus was objective not subjective . It seems your problem lies with your evaluation of the concept of faith. the subjective part of faith is ,do believe that God is a “man” of his word
Vincent,
Something can be objectively true without it being self-evident. It’s self-evident that 1+1=2, whereas the truth of Fermat’s last theorem is far from self-evident; both are objectively true, though.
You seem to have a tendency to mix up objective truth, something that, whether verifiable or not remains true, with a Vincent branded Logical Empiricism – if you can’t see it, it isn’t there. At other times you appear to teeter on the brink of solipsism where all reality is determined by how you feel about it.
Still, I’m sure you are happy enough the way you are.
Let me rephrase — though I suspect we still won’t be quite on the same page: the objective truth of any religion being convincingly, formally proved would make faith redundant.
Also, every time I speak to an actual mathematician, they take pains to explain that the “fact” that 1+1=2 is actually based on a series of axioms.
If by objective truth you simply mean a category, regardless of what’s in it, we’re probably speaking at cross-purposes.
Not really. If Jesus didn’t rise from the dead Christianity would be an illusion, it would not be objectively real – there I go again – it would not exist. In which case you could not be a Christian.
If you insist. I’d be happy to be a pretend Christian.
This summary article is actually incorrect and a redaction of the actual article. There is no reference to this Chrislam referred to. The Anglican Church of Canada has approved a rite for people of mixed faiths, in the RC Tradition it’s called disparity of cult. With marriage being a largely civil matter, a couple will get married regardless; this was an opportunity to journey and prepare this couple in education about each other’s faiths and to properly prepare them for the challenges ahead. The unevenly yoked is a misinterpretation in meaning; and is not a command for marriage nor a marriage instruction manual. In the context, it was historical in building a nation, “Israel”. Today, it can be interpreted that there are challenges to people being of different faiths, but unevenly yoked could also mean money, social status, power etc… all applies. It is not a command directive and heck, the Prophet Hosea married a prostitute. Love excels beyond human understand, who are made in God’s image btw. People’s judgement is unnecessary and entirely irrelevant. God is the judge of all things, and his grace far exceed anyone’s understanding. Good luck to all, and perhaps with more understanding and less biblical legal bull we can all leave in peace and harmony with each other.