Political Correctness VS. Theological Reflection

This post is inspired by a fantastic blog post I read on the blog catholicity and covenant.  The title is called "The Anglicans George Weigel doesn't know."

In it, the blog poster responds to sharp attacks on Anglicanism, by Roman Catholic commentator George Weigel, regarding the selling out of Christian orthodoxy to political correctness and whatever society decides is good. 

George Weigel says that women's ordination and same-sex blessings are sell outs to modern society that started with the supposed acceptance of contraception in the 1930s.

Here is what the poster says in response to contraception:

"As for the two issues raised by Weigel - contraception and women priests - Anglicanism's developing doctrine on these two issues may be presented in terms of conformity to modernity, but they need not be. The 1930 Lambeth resolution on contraception was no acceptance of an understanding of sexuality defined by a contraception mentality:

The Conference records its strong condemnation of the use of any methods of conception control from motives of selfishness, luxury, or mere convenience."

This certainly doesn't sound like approval and the Episcopal Church leaves these issues to the believer's conscience.  Perhaps Weigel would be better served by worrying about the 98% of Roman Catholic women who have used contraceptives?

Moving on to women's ordination, the poster says:

"Regarding the ordination of women as priests, in 2009 +Rowan reminded us that the Anglican decision to ordain women to the ministerial priesthood, while it can be dismissed as conforming to modernity, is rooted in explicitly theological reflection:

"The claim of certain Anglican provinces is that the ordination of women explicitly looks to an agreed historic theology of ordained ministry as set out in the ARCIC report and other sources ... But for many Anglicans, not ordaining women has a possible unwelcome implication about the difference between baptised men and baptised women, which in their view threatens to undermine the coherence of the ecclesiology in question."

In some cases, are such arguments framed in political correctness terms?  Of course, but for the those who are centered on the "Trinity" and a "Christological center", the arguments are rooted in theological reflection, not conforming to society. 

The blogger finishes up by saying:

"The same can be said for the on-going debate surrounding human sexuality. Thus, for example, +Rowan's 'The Body's Grace' and Sam Wells' more recent 'Wholly Holy', quite clearly do not argue for a conformity to modernity but, rather, seek to reflect on the phenomenon of committed same-sex relationships in light of the Trinitarian and Christological centre.

It's difficult not to come to the conclusion that Weigel doesn't really know and doesn't 'get' Anglicanism. Admittedly his experience may be defined by encounters with those in TEC still shaped and defined by the liberal protestant agenda of the 60s and 70s. Many of us, however, who are catholic, evangelical, charismatic or liberal Anglicans simply will not recognise ourselves in Weigel's descriptions."

Arguments can be made supporting same-sex blessings by deeply rooted theological arguments.  The blogger points out that the liberal protestant agenda of the 60s is largely gone from the episcopacy of the Church of England.  Theological arguments regarding these issues can be made, but they must be rooted in a Christological and Trinitarian understanding and the not the political/theological understandings of 1960s liberal protestantism, which has little use for deep theological reflection.  Parishes that are conservative, evangelical, catholic, liberal, and Charismatic that have this focus on the Trinity and a Christological center will not match the descriptions of Anglicanism given by George Weigel.  That is the claim of the blogger and I am inclined to agree.

As far as TEC goes, where is the Trinitarian focus and the Christological center when presenting arguments for same-sex blessings?  Can we claim, like the Church of England, that our episcopacy has largely moved on from the liberal protestantism of the 60s?  Unfortunately, I don't think so and that gives guys like Weigel all the ammunition they need to fire away at TEC.  When are we going to get serious about rooting our arguments in deep theological reflection and not in the political agenda of the 60s?  If we want people to bother with church on Sunday, then we need to be able to feed them good theology, theology that is rooted in the Trinity, that is rooted in the physical Resurrection, that is rooted in a Christological center.  Are Episcopalian leaders going to continue to throw the baby out with the water and sell Christian orthodoxy down the river or are they going to finally get serious about rooting their arguments in theological reflection and a Trinitarian understanding?  Doing theology the "Spong" way is an embarrasement to those who take Anglicanism seriously.

Thoughts?