| |
| |
| From: | PJK | Oct-15 2:18 am |
| To: | ALL |
(1 of 26) | | | | 4008.1 | |
Yes, Jack. The victory is won on homosexuality and all the issues you mention. It is time to live it and no longer engage in debates that are not worthy of human beings called to live abundantly and love wastefully. Time to move on.
Peace be with you.
Peter Knight |
| |
|
| |
| From: | annie | Oct-15 8:27 am |
| To: | PJK |
(2 of 26) | | | | 4008.2 in reply to 4008.1 | |
This was a great post as was the Q&A at the end. I see several problems with protestant churches today beyond the homophobia (which has just now hit the ELCA full force).:
1. They are all in a slow moving reactionary mode when everything else is moving at real time warp speed. Its an emergency and they're issuing band-aids.
2. The 'Jesus is God' thing has crept into mainline denominations from the fundamentalist crowd and blown the theology to bits-- I've heard it from pastors and people who say, 'Jesus could've flown down from the cross but instead he hung there and took it like a man.' Gawd!
3. Religions- Mormon, Unification church, Jehovah's witness and many others including plenty of TV preachers, and the far right folks are conning millions of gullible followers and playing to the dumbing down of society. It is these fanatic and well organized types who have the ability to sway opinion and manipulate politics and policies. And no where in the gospel does it say that having a positive attitude will bring you a phone call with a large check from nowhere in desperate times.
Yes, it could all be exposed and we could see a new day- like SBNR. Maybe it will be free of superstition and distortion. Maybe it will be Muslim. Maybe the church remnant will be some hybrid of what's left. I think the likes of 1984, Brave New World, Twlight Zone might have foreshadowed where we are now. A time when the Emperor really has no clothes.
'annie' |
| |
|
| |
| From: | KLATU | Oct-15 2:57 pm |
| To: | ALL |
(3 of 26) | | | | 4008.3 in reply to 4008.2 | |
To All,
I read Bishop Spong's Manifesto this morning and came away with mixed feelings over the stance the good Bishop has arrived at. I understand living as though the debate is over and that it is settled as an issue that Homosexuality is not a choice.
On the one hand I say bravo for that....on the other I feel that it is too early in the fight to lay down ones weapons. There is an active and strong opposition to anything connected to Women's issues or Gay issues or other minority issues. There is so much hatred of Gays still out there.
Until the likes of the John Hagee's and the Family Reasearch Council, the Pat Robertsons and the other endless minions of bigotry and hatred have stopped thier harrangue....thier insideous opposition, ceases it will never be time to end the debate.
Certainly there is value in proceeding from this point on as there is no debate. The whole of the Gay Lesbian Bisexual and Transgender community does this every day. To us there is no need to debate something that we all know to be beyond debate. But we all know the wolf is always at the door.
The Bishops insight on these issues will be greatly missed.
Kelly |
| |
|
| |
| From: | TrogL | Oct-15 6:21 pm |
| To: | ALL |
(4 of 26) | | | | 4008.4 in reply to 4008.1 | |
The victory is not won until all persecution of gay people, either through rampant homophobia or more passive-aggressive methods such as inequality in treatment at hospitals, all justified "because it's in the Bible" has stopped forever.
My eternal thanks to Bishop Spong for taking such a strong and unequivicable position. |
| |
|
| |
| From: | goodguy | Oct-16 4:16 pm |
| To: | PJK unread |
(5 of 26) | | | | 4008.5 in reply to 4008.1 | |
Dear Friends, The Manifesto was a good and strong statement and I found myself cheering -- YES! YES! YES! But sober reflection and a careful perusal of some of it leads me to ponder if this is just about homosexuality. The Bible has LOTS of bigotry in it and "Christianity" (that religion that made Jesus "God" and "The Holy Bible" inerrant "Truth" in 325 AD) is in and of itself intolerant. If we're to be truly tolerant of Muslims, Buddhists, Communists, Daoists, and Hindus, we have to get rid of a lot more than just a few parts of the religion. Equally (maybe even more) divisive and disruptive and intolerant are the words, "Only through me ..." as used every Sunday in most "Christian" places of worship. To believe "we" have the ONLY path to Grace is to be as ignorant as calling homosexuality "deviant". The fight is really about literal and fundamental religion, not about homosexuality. To draw a line in the sand at this one part of the issue is to try and stem the flood of life and save something already dying in Europe and worthy of its demise. Christianity brought about the Middle Ages, where the society insulated itself from change and shunned the learning and scholarship of women and even of lay people in its own membership and shunned all other learning and scholarship. It was the Church that condemned Copernicus and jailed Galileo. And they had been doing these things all along. As early as the Sixth Century, they were stoning non-Christians like Hypatia who were learned and popular. This religion is implicitly against free thought -- all religions are. If we are to be free thinkers, able to arrive at an enlightened view of the world, we must NOT be told what to think or what to believe. We must read the Bible and the Koran and Dante and each other's posts and pick and choose what each of us think is the truth. Love,
Dave |
| |
|
| | | | | 4008.6 in reply to 4008.5 | |
FOR THOSE THAT CAN'T PRINT/COPY IT A Manifesto! The Time Has Come!
I have made a decision. I will no longer debate the issue of homosexuality in the church with anyone. I will no longer engage the biblical ignorance that emanates from so many right-wing Christians about how the Bible condemns homosexuality, as if that point of view still has any credibility. I will no longer discuss with them or listen to them tell me how homosexuality is "an abomination to God," about how homosexuality is a "chosen lifestyle," or about how through prayer and "spiritual counseling" homosexual persons can be "cured." Those arguments are no longer worthy of my time or energy. I will no longer dignify by listening to the thoughts of those who advocate "reparative therapy," as if homosexual persons are somehow broken and need to be repaired. I will no longer talk to those who believe that the unity of the church can or should be achieved by rejecting the presence of, or at least at the expense of, gay and lesbian people. I will no longer take the time to refute the unlearned and undocumentable claims of certain world religious leaders who call homosexuality "deviant." I will no longer listen to that pious sentimentality that certain Christian leaders continue to employ, which suggests some version of that strange and overtly dishonest phrase that "we love the sinner but hate the sin." That statement is, I have concluded, nothing more than a self-serving lie designed to cover the fact that these people hate homosexual persons and fear homosexuality itself, but somehow know that hatred is incompatible with the Christ they claim to profess, so they adopt this face-saving and absolutely false statement. I will no longer temper my understanding of truth in order to pretend that I have even a tiny smidgen of respect for the appalling negativity that continues to emanate from religious circles where the church has for centuries conveniently perfumed its ongoing prejudices against blacks, Jews, women and homosexual persons with what it assumes is "high-sounding, pious rhetoric." The day for that mentality has quite simply come to an end for me. I will personally neither tolerate it nor listen to it any longer. The world has moved on, leaving these elements of the Christian Church that cannot adjust to new knowledge or a new consciousness lost in a sea of their own irrelevance. They no longer talk to anyone but themselves. I will no longer seek to slow down the witness to inclusiveness by pretending that there is some middle ground between prejudice and oppression. There isn't. Justice postponed is justice denied. That can be a resting place no longer for anyone. An old civil rights song proclaimed that the only choice awaiting those who cannot adjust to a new understanding was to "Roll on over or we'll roll on over you!" Time waits for no one. A Manifesto! The Time Has Come!
I have made a decision. I will no longer debate the issue of homosexuality in the church with anyone. I will no longer engage the biblical ignorance that emanates from so many right-wing Christians about how the Bible condemns homosexuality, as if that point of view still has any credibility. I will no longer discuss with them or listen to them tell me how homosexuality is "an abomination to God," about how homosexuality is a "chosen lifestyle," or about how through prayer and "spiritual counseling" homosexual persons can be "cured." Those arguments are no longer worthy of my time or energy. I will no longer dignify by listening to the thoughts of those who advocate "reparative therapy," as if homosexual persons are somehow broken and need to be repaired. I will no longer talk to those who believe that the unity of the church can or should be achieved by rejecting the presence of, or at least at the expense of, gay and lesbian people. I will no longer take the time to refute the unlearned and undocumentable claims of certain world religious leaders who call homosexuality "deviant." I will no longer listen to that pious sentimentality that certain Christian leaders continue to employ, which suggests some version of that strange and overtly dishonest phrase that "we love the sinner but hate the sin." That statement is, I have concluded, nothing more than a self-serving lie designed to cover the fact that these people hate homosexual persons and fear homosexuality itself, but somehow know that hatred is incompatible with the Christ they claim to profess, so they adopt this face-saving and absolutely false statement. I will no longer temper my understanding of truth in order to pretend that I have even a tiny smidgen of respect for the appalling negativity that continues to emanate from religious circles where the church has for centuries conveniently perfumed its ongoing prejudices against blacks, Jews, women and homosexual persons with what it assumes is "high-sounding, pious rhetoric." The day for that mentality has quite simply come to an end for me. I will personally neither tolerate it nor listen to it any longer. The world has moved on, leaving these elements of the Christian Church that cannot adjust to new knowledge or a new consciousness lost in a sea of their own irrelevance. They no longer talk to anyone but themselves. I will no longer seek to slow down the witness to inclusiveness by pretending that there is some middle ground between prejudice and oppression. There isn't. Justice postponed is justice denied. That can be a resting place no longer for anyone. An old civil rights song proclaimed that the only choice awaiting those who cannot adjust to a new understanding was to "Roll on over or we'll roll on over you!" Time waits for no one. I make these statements because it is time to move on. The battle is over. The victory has been won. There is no reasonable doubt as to what the final outcome of this struggle will be. Homosexual people will be accepted as equal, full human beings, who have a legitimate claim on every right that both church and society have to offer any of us. Homosexual marriages will become legal, recognized by the state and pronounced holy by the church. "Don't ask, don't tell" will be dismantled as the policy of our armed forces. We will and we must learn that equality of citizenship is not something that should ever be submitted to a referendum. Equality under and before the law is a solemn promise conveyed to all our citizens in the Constitution itself. Can any of us imagine having a public referendum on whether slavery should continue, whether segregation should be dismantled, whether voting privileges should be offered to women? The time has come for politicians to stop hiding behind unjust laws that they themselves helped to enact, and to abandon that convenient shield of demanding a vote on the rights of full citizenship because they do not understand the difference between a constitutional democracy, which this nation has, and a "mobocracy," which this nation rejected when it adopted its constitution. We do not put the civil rights of a minority to the vote of a plebiscite. I will also no longer act as if I need a majority vote of some ecclesiastical body in order to bless, ordain, recognize a...[Message truncated] |
| View Full Message |
| |
|
| |
| From: | wayseer | Oct-18 3:50 am |
| To: | ALL |
(7 of 26) | | | | 4008.7 in reply to 4008.4 | |
I don't think Spong is suggesting some sort of victory has been achieved. I think he is saying he will no longer debate the obvious. For instance, do any us enter into a debate over whether the Earth is flat? To do so would immediately weaken our own position by conceding that something is needing debate. |
| |
|
| | | | | 4008.8 in reply to 4008.1 | |
| I'm 100% behind the manifesto. It's overdue. The discrimination against gays must stop in the same way that discrimination against women must also end. The Bible thumping literalists ought to learn what the Bible is saying to us and stop bashing others. |
| |
|
| | | | | 4008.9 in reply to 4008.3 | |
Hi there Klatu. Ah yes, the day the earth stood still. I agree with your thoughts. The argument re: homosexuality, women's rights etc., black vs white and so on is not over. I send you best wishes and positive thoughts from the South Pacific.
Regards.
"Sandy" |
| |
|
| |
| From: | KLATU | Oct-31 11:48 am |
| To: | ALL |
(10 of 26) | | | | 4008.10 in reply to 4008.1 | |
Who Needs Such a Religion?
By Harry T. Cook
10/30/09
The odd ecclesiastical intrigue over disaffected Anglicans being welcomed, sort of, into the Roman Catholic Church has driven me to seek mental relief in the novels of Anthony Trollope. In his wickedly funny 19th-century fiction, Trollope let the Church of England speak for itself through such fatuous characters as the indomitable Archdeacon Theophilus Grantly and his archnemesis, the overbearing Mrs. Proudy, wife of the Bishop of Barchester.
Trollope observed that such characters were uncomfortable, save in their "arcana of ecclesiastical snuggeries." The same must be said of the Archbishop of Canterbury who operates out of a pile of stone known as Lambeth Palace, and his considerably more powerful Roman counterpart, Benedict XVI, whose official seat is but 889.34 miles away south by southeast in a city-state known as the Vatican.
As has become apparent, the latter is seeking to swell the ranks of the Roman church with true believers heretofore associated with the former, i.e. rankled Anglicans whose persnickety attachment to the Book of Common Prayer and other anglophilic dainties will not serve to preclude their prostration before the Throne of St. Peter.
In that kingdom they will be spared the scourge of women priests. Neither will they have to deal with gay clergy. Rome officially believes it has none. [It took me several minutes to compose the two immediately previous sentences as I was caught up in a fit of laughter whilst doing so.]
In all the commentary about this recent turn of events, it has gone unmentioned that the first non-Roman Archbishop of Canterbury, Thomas Cranmer, author of the first Anglican prayer book, was incinerated under the sponsorship of Paul IV, Benedict's successor 42 times removed. This kind of thing would surely be grist fit for the mill of Dan Brown.
One can sum up in a few words what's going on: Rome wishes to add members to its diminishing rolls by holding out a half-measure of unity based on common hatred. The Catholic church is supposedly a safe haven for those who believe Jesus is crucified anew every time a priest with a uterus rather than testicles elevates the host and chalice. (It used to be the Jews who were the Christ-killers.) Also, by the way, Rome's priests are expected to employ the male organ exclusively at the urinal, the sole purposes of both considered to be obvious.
Episcopalians in South Carolina got an earful along this line last weekend as their bishop, the Rt. Rev. Mark Lawrence, lectured them about what he called a false teaching: "The Gospel of Indiscriminate Inclusivity [that] has challenged the Authority of Scripture . . ." His Right Reverend Self means, among other things, that inclusivity must not be so undiscriminating that it admits to the club gays and lesbians unwilling to consider abject repentance for who and what they are by nature.
Who needs that kind of religion?
The Book of Common Prayer which, under the new détente, Anglican converts may bring with them to Roman obedience, has at page 305 in the liturgy of baptism a question meant to be answered in the affirmative: "Will you strive for justice and peace among all people, and respect the dignity of every human being?"
That truly is the heart of the matter. It is the Anglican counterpart to Hillel the Elder's answer to the inquirer-in-a-hurry who desired to learn the whole meaning of Torah the while standing on one foot: "What is hateful to you, do not do to your fellow [human being]: This is the whole Torah; the rest is the explanation; go and learn."
Having been retired from parish ministry for going on eight months, I am frequently (and pointedly) asked, "What do you do for church?" meaning, do I look for altars at which to preside or have I found a comfortable pew?
The answers are 1) I do not routinely function liturgically as a priest and 2) I have not sought a comfortable pew, as if any representation of that classic piece of furniture could ever be considered comfortable.
What I have done is to become fully engaged as a volunteer at a nongovernmental social service agency with roots in the Episcopal Church. It's called Crossroads, and there justice and peace are retailed one person at a time. There dignity is assumed and affirmed in each poor or destitute soul who comes to us for help with the basic necessities of life.
That place is my "church" now, and I will no longer, if indeed I ever did, require the sacerdotal ministrations of Canterbury or Rome. I have found an ecumenism and religious unity among my fellow volunteers at Crossroads, some of whom are Catholic, at least one of whom is Jewish -- all mixed in with a couple of us secular humanists. Others may be lesbian fire-worshippers or gay Druids for all I know or care.
| |
|
| ...[Message truncated] |
| View Full Message |
| |
|
|
|
|
