Promoting a gay priest to bishop

Taking liberties with the Bible

Can some very knowledgeable people with easy recall of Biblical verses tell me where I have read about "their women have abused their natural faculties, women doing shameful deeds with women...", etc.
And also analogous or implicated verses in both the Old Testament and in the New Testament?

What about some kind of tabulation of doctrines and precepts of the Bible as can be drawn up with citations of verses where such doctrines and precepts can be deduced, with ranking from 1 to 10, with 10 being the highest.

I really need such a tabulation for my own instruction and guidance; so that if and when I am wondering whether an action is allowed in the Bible, I would know by consulting such a tabulation how strong the prohibition against the action contemplated be, specially compared to possible options.

Or do I have to consult the Jesuit casuist who can tell me how to argue myself to a satisfactory resolution and do the act I do want to do? (No offense to Jesuit casuists, of course.)

I really need some dis-abusing of my understanding of some moral tenets of the Bible in regard to sexual abominations and the opposite, sexual exemplifications: like women with women doing mutual manipulations with their genitals and limbs and fingers for libidinous ends, and implicitly also men, for the first; and chastity and fidelity and not spilling seeds on the ground, for the second?

The more I read about what things are not forbidden in the Bible the more I am now inclined to maintain that for really cognoscenti of the Bible, nothing is forbidden in the Bible.

What do you guys say?

Please give me some updating on my biblical knowledge.


To set things straight (sorry for the pun), Canada as a whole doesn't recognize same-sex mariage. It is recognized in 5 provinces (British Columbia, Manitoba, Ontario, Québec, and Nova Scotia) and in the Yukon territory.

The country's Supreme Court has being asked to look at the issue and should give an answer in 6 months or so...

I have to admit, I find the complexities of the whole debate a little strange. It's almost as a if a "pick and choose" Jesus is introduced according to what any individual's preference to "pick and choose" is. Perhaps the liberal approach to Christianity is that the texts should be questioned and the will of God through Jesus be done - but the fact is that the foundations of Christianity clearly proscribe against homosexuality, amongst other things.

Which makes it all the more amazing that gay people seek to work organised Christianity towards their own worldview. When Christianity is seen to enter other groups in America, it's seen as invasive and an act of aggression. Yet when liberal political ideology enters Christianity, it's not regarded as an act of aggression. In my personal opinion, that's becoming close to being a dangerous double-standard.
Originally posted by Quahom1
The Supreme Court of Texas did away with Sodomy sir, not the Supreme Court of the United States (which I believe never had issue with that act).
I beg to differ. The Supreme Court sat on two different cases, one a few years ago and the other last February [at least, they agreed to sit in decision] I think.) I'll be more than happy to find out if anybody wishes. ;)

Phyllis Sidhe_Uaine
Don't get me wrong.

I really can't see how Christians who claim to follow the Bible can derive biblical support for homosexual sex acts.

But don't get me wrong. Homosexuals as far as I am concerned can do anything they want to do with their sexuality, and also get promoted to the bishopric, if the law is not adverse and they have a majority in their group in favor.

I just want people to know what's in a book and what's not. Of course they can always add to the book or even introduce corrigenda.

And that will be very good for religion, that Christians can introduce corrigenda to their Bible, whether the Catholic or the Protestant version.

As someone said in a post a ways back, one can look at the Bible and focus either on the letter or the spirit. I just finished reading Amos (talk about fire and brimstone!) as part of a bible study and what I came away with is that while the Israelites were obeying the law to the letter with their sacrifices and feasts, they trampled all over what God most cared about: justice and compassion.
Indeed, lunamoth - the trouble is, organised Christianity is founded on the letter of the Bible - or the interpretation of. So to reject specific proscriptions within the Bible begs the question of how much can be acceptably discarded.

Of course, that's a general discussion within Liberalism anyway - but what this case has done is turn the issue from one of individual choosing, to one of institutional proscription. That's what makes this case all the more important.

Anyway, I'm simply trying to push the discussion here. :)
Re: Bishop says Homos are lower than beasts

In response to the Anglican Communion's report on the "Gay bishop" problem and the blessing of same sex unions The Archbishop of Nigeria Peter Akinola, as reported in "The Guardian" (on line) said, "Homosexuals are lower than beasts" . I wonder, what does he mean "lower" . I can't imagine he spoke in the spirit of Jesus. What do other Christians think of this statement.
The Windsor Report was released on Monday. It is a long (100 pg) document with many subtle points that will take a long time to digest. You can find it and the responses from Bishops at Responses to the Windsor Report.

Summary of some of the recommendations from the Windsor Report:
"Recommendations arising from the consecration of the Bishop of New Hampshire (134)

ECUSA is "invited to express its regret" for the pain its actions caused other members of the Communion and its desire to remain part of the Communion, and to effect a moratorium on any candidate to the episcopate who is living in a same gender union "until some new consensus in the Anglican Communion emerges."

Robinson's consecrating bishops are "invited to consider... whether they should withdraw themselves from representative functions in the Anglican Communion."

Recommendation on Rites of Blessing of Same Sex Unions (143-145)

The report asks bishops not to authorize public Rites of Blessing for same sex unions, and recommend that those who have already done so "express regret that the proper constraints of the bonds of affection were breached" by doing so-and until they apologize, "withdraw themselves from representative functions in the Anglican Communion."

The report calls for "continuing study of biblical and theological rationale for and against" same-sex unions-a call that "does not imply approval of such proposals."

From The Most Rev. Griswold's (Presiding Bishop USA Episcopal Church) response:

Given the emphasis of the Report on difficulties presented by our differing understandings of homosexuality, as Presiding Bishop I am obliged to affirm the presence and positive contribution of gay and lesbian persons to every aspect of the life of our church and in all orders of ministry. Other Provinces are also blessed by the lives and ministry of homosexual persons. I regret that there are places within our Communion where it is unsafe for them to speak out of the truth of who they are.

The Report will be received and interpreted within the Provinces of the Communion in different ways, depending on our understanding of the nature and appropriate expression of sexuality. It is important to note here that in the Episcopal Church we are seeking to live the gospel in a society where homosexuality is openly discussed and increasingly acknowledged in all areas of our public life.

For at least the last 30 years our church has been listening to the experience and reflecting upon the witness of homosexual persons in our congregations. There are those among us who perceive the fruit of the Spirit deeply present in the lives of gay and lesbian Christians, both within the church and in their relationships. However, other equally faithful persons among us regard same gender relationships as contrary to scripture. Consequently, we continue to struggle with questions regarding sexuality.

Here I note the Report recommends that practical ways be found for the listening process commended by the Lambeth Conference in 1998 to be taken forward with a view to greater understanding about homosexuality and same gender relationships. It also requests the Episcopal Church to contribute to the ongoing discussion. I welcome this invitation and know that we stand ready to make a contribution to the continuing conversation and discernment of the place and ministry of homosexual persons in the life of the church.

The Report calls our Communion to reconciliation, which does not mean the reduction of differences to a single point of view. In fact, it is my experience that the fundamental reality of the Episcopal Church is the diverse center, in which a common commitment to Jesus Christ and a sense of mission in his name to a broken and hurting world override varying opinions on any number of issues, including homosexuality. The diverse center is characterized by a spirit of mutual respect and affection rather than hostility and suspicion. I would therefore hope that some of the ways in which we have learned to recognize Christ in one another, in spite of strongly held divergent opinions, can be of use in other parts of our Communion.

Archbishop Akinola's statement can also be found at the website above.

I said:
Indeed, lunamoth - the trouble is, organised Christianity is founded on the letter of the Bible - or the interpretation of. So to reject specific proscriptions within the Bible begs the question of how much can be acceptably discarded.

Of course, that's a general discussion within Liberalism anyway - but what this case has done is turn the issue from one of individual choosing, to one of institutional proscription. That's what makes this case all the more important.

Anyway, I'm simply trying to push the discussion here. :)

OK, point taken. But it still makes me want to comb through the New Testament and pull out all the quotes to make the case that we already institutionally proscribe non-literal interpretations of scripture even in the most conservative sects of Christianity. But then, I wouldn't have to comb too deeply. How many Chrisitian churches prohibit divorce? How many do not allow women to speak in church?
Re: I expected more from Anglicanism

Perhaps I expected to much from Anglicanism. Perhaps I have tunnel vision after reading so many of Bishop Spong's books. I was confirmed in the Episcopal Church, but in 1980, at the communion rail (low church) I realized I no longer believed. I salvaged what I could from my religious belief, namely an abiding respect for Jesus and moved on to another path . I expected more from Anglicanism. The very mild rebuke aimed perhaps at Archbishop Akinola by the Windsor Report ... in my opinion is worse than the Archbishop's anti gay rants. The Windsor Report in my opinion shows the spiritual bankrupcy of organized religion.
Well, perhaps I am being overly hopeful, but I don't think that this issue is closed. All commentary I've read so far indicates that the report has much more to it than the easily accessible snipetts such as I posted.

Scripture, tradition, and reason are not always easy bedfellows, so to speak. (no pun intended)

Reality check: In Africa alone, 19,000 children die every day from preventable, poverty-related causes; pollution is poisening the planet; oil is beginning to run out at the same time as governments in India and China are trying to force people off the land and into the cities; GATS trading rules for the world state specifically that money must be given priority over considerations such as social welfare or pollution; we in the west are forcing those in poor countries into virtual slavery so we can have cheap luxuries. All these blasphemies are condemned in ringing tones throughout the law, the prophets and the gospels. Do we hear anything about this from the Southern Baptists and the African churches? Well, not yet. What we hear is a lot of judgementalism based on a questionable interpretation of 6 assorted Bible verses.

I can't help wondering, is this the best way to serve the desperate needs of humanity today? I recommend Jim Wallis's Sojourners web site for more in this vein. BTW my heart goes out to all who have suffered personally. I know it would be a blow to me if my son turned out to be gay, and if he got HIV it would completely break my heart. Lets find a cure for this disease fast.
Good point, Virtual Cliff - there are certainly a lot of prime concerns to tackle. :)

And welcome to CR. :)