It’s Just Chicken Dude…!

The Chick Fil' A Controversy seems to have taken a life of its own and now the chickens have come to roost way too close to home. This week alone I have been asked to eat at the chain, join the boycott, denounce the fast food chain’s anti –equality stance and questioned on my orthodoxy and politics simply because of where I may choose or not to eat! I officially announce I am completely over it!

Dan Cathy, the company’s owner has long been a supporter of traditional definitions of the family. In a recent interview he makes that longstanding position clear by stating on an interview with Baptist press;  

“…We are a family-owned business, a family-led business, and we are married to our first wives. We give God thanks for that...”.

It is also true that his company has donated funds to pro opposite gender marriage causes and to organizations which promote traditional understandings of marriage. That said, the company has made it clear on more than one occasion that they are committed to “treat every person with honor, dignity and respect – regardless of their belief, race, creed, sexual orientation or gender.”

In the last few days it seems like everyone is joining the bandwagon!!! Some ask us to "Eat Less Chickin" because of the insulting remarks of Mr. Cathy against gay marriage, others join the cows and insist we "Eat More"! In reading the above quote, amidst all this controversy, I  have wondered how long before the restaurant chain incurs the ire of the divorced which are sure to react to the “still married to our first wives” pun! And no biblically literate person would miss that their support for Biblical marriage standards means; one man one woman for life! Forget the remarried, the cohabitating or the single parent homes! Wow, talk about foot in mouth; these are surely a much bigger demographic than those intending to marry their same gender partners, even if laws in every state allowed it!

I dare say that if we look carefully there could be more than enough "insult" in his statements to go around! Or just maybe, people in our free society are mature enough to realize there is room in our democracy for differing views! Not everyone wants a little offense or politics with their food, or at the movies or with the places they choose to shop at! I do not choose restaurants or shops based on the political sentiments of their owners! If that were the case, it would be exhausting, with an ever growing list on the left and right. Please do not invite me, nor pretend to use my like or dislike of a fast food chain or business establishment as a litmus test of orthodoxy for the left or right. It is not my cup of tea!

Alexandra Petri in her ComPost blog put it this way:

“…Starbucks supports marriage equality. That’s not why I drink its coffee. I drink its coffee because I have a serious caffeine problem, and they are located on every corner. It is possible, it turns out, to go through the political preferences and leanings of every company that makes anything you want to buy, every athlete whose prowess amazes you, every fashion designer with an eye for color. … It is not a question of being an informed consumer, of trying to buy things that aren’t made in conditions you find appalling. That’s germane. … But this isn’t about the sandwich. It’s about what happens afterward. And that’s a slippery slope...If you’re upset that the Chick-fil-A founder donates to causes you don’t believe in, then donate to causes you do believe in. Fight apples with apples and oranges with oranges…”

                                                                                                         For the record, I do not frequent Chick Fil A because I do not like their sandwiches…they are… too fried…! I could care less if they are open or not on Sundays, nor who their CEO’s are married to! It’s Pollo Tropical for me with a little habanero sauce of the side! This, though I know for a fact its original owners were not Latinos and wonder how got our tasty recipes! 

On a practical note, If I were going to boycott food based on the political sentiments or donations of those who cook, I could hardly eat at all at any church lunches or social affairs. The Episcopal Church I have the good fortune of attending is politically and ethnically very diverse. Frankly, I know for a fact , the very best desserts are made by people whom I completely disagree with! Never mind the times I would have to skip my wife's very delicious "arroz con pollo".

Call me shallow, but when it comes to food, that is all it should be about! It’s just chicken dude!

Blessings

Seraph

Comentarios Calientes....

Ya pasaron los primeros dias desde la decision de la majoria de votantes en nuestra Convencion General de aprobar un rito provisional para la bendicion de parejas del mismo sexo! No dejan de faltar las conversaciones y comentarios acerca de este candente tema . Como es natural no todos los comentarios son igualmente edificantes. Aqui algunos de los comentarios "calientes" mas comunes que ya he escuchado y algunos pensamientos y aclaraciones de mi parte.
            
                                                                                               

"...La Iglesia Episcopal aprobo el matrimonio de homosexuales..."

 Claro esta que la palabras que algunos usan no son tan delicadas pero la idea es la misma! "...Casan a mariquitas y a lesbianas!..." La realidad es otra. El matrimonio en la Iglesia Episcopal es un sacramento que solo puede otorgarse a una pareja de generos opuestos, un hombre y una mujer! Esto asi debido a nuestra interpretacion de la Escritura, la ley canonica de la Iglesia y el Libro de Oracion Comun. El rito aprobado es una respuesta pastoral a una realidad ya vivida en la Iglesia y en el mundo; parejas homosexuales que viven juntos en una union comprometida, monogama y de larga duracion! Precisamente porque la Iglesia no puede ofrecerle el sacramento del matrimonio pero es testigo de la fidelidad, respeto, compromiso y amor mutuo que puede existir, es que aprueba esta liturgia provisional.

"...El Matrimonio en la Biblia es entre un hombre y una mujer..."

Es cierto, en la creacion Dios “les creo hombre y mujer”, y Jesucristo aclaro que “el hombre se une a su mujer para formar una sola carne”. Tambien dijo que; lo que “Dios unio el hombre no separe.” Ahi el cambio sutil de la definicion del matrimonio entre cristianos modernos! El ideal presentado por Dios es; un hombre y una mujer para toda la vida! Jesus mismo no admite el divorcio a no ser por causa de adulterio, y advierte que el que se casa con otra pareja despues de un divorcio, comete adulterio. S. Pablo aclara que si una pareja se separa que se “quede sin casar” o que la "mujer regrese a su marido.” No es esa la realidad que vivimos! Las segundas nupcias despues del divorcios son communes, bendecidas en la Iglesia y apoyadas por una mayoria de los fieles de todas las denominaciones cristianas. Esto a pesar de que la Biblia prohibe terminantemente esas relaciones en la mayoria de los casos. Para aquellos que leemos la Biblia con seriedad, parece incosistente y algo hipocrita extender la bendicion de la Iglesia a una relacion que la Biblia parece prohibir y al mismo tiempo vehementemente negarsela a otra.
                                                                                                                                                                    

"...Esta en contra de la Biblia..."

Estas palabras son serias, pero en los labios de alguien en su segunda o tercera relacion o matrimonio parecen algo ingenuas. Jesus ni menciono al homosexualismo pero hablo claro acerca de algo que los creyentes acceptamos como bien , normal y la voluntad de Dios, el casarse otra vez despues que una relacion fracasa.! Nada hablar de los versiculos acerca del papel de la mujer en la Iglesia, las normas para los esclavos, el velo y el cabello largo y otras que han pasado a la historia. No se puede tomar en serio a este uso de la Biblia para condenar lo que no nos agrada e ignorar lo que no nos molesta.                     

                                                                                                                                                                                            

                                                                                                              

"...Dios puede cambiar a los homosexuales..."

No hay duda!! Sin embargo, esa es la perrogativa de Dios, no la nuestra. Dios puede cambiar a los divorciados a que permanezcan celibes y santos tambien sin volver a casarse, y a los embusteros y a los que juzgan a los demas! Sin embargo eso es algo entre Dios y la persona, no puede imponerse por ley en la Iglesia. Dondequiera que el egoismo sea reemplazado por el amor y el cuidado mutuo, donde la fidelidad y la amistad crecen, alli esta Dios trabajando!!! Demosle lugar y espacio para hacerlo!

                                                                                                                                                           

"...Esto va a acabar con la Iglesia..."

Puede que haya quienes dejen de asistir a la Iglesia Episcopal debido a esto! No sera la primera vez! Cuando se abogaba a favor de la libertad de los esclavos o la igualdad spiritual de la mujer paso igual! Cuando se ordenaron las primeras mujeres como diaconos y sacerdotes hubo los que no pudieron soportar tal afrenta y se marcharon! A veces las personas se alejan aunque las causas sean justas y el mensaje veraz. Al mismo Jesus a quien seguian multitudes se le fueron muchos porque las palabras que decia eran “dificiles de sorportar”. Hasta sus discipulos les pregunto; “se quieren ir ustedes tambien”? Habra algunos que se iran otros se quedaran y no faltaran los que se acercaran segun les dirija el Espiritu de Dios!

"...No quiero que mi familia vea eso, ni que se conviva con homosexuales..."

Bueno, tal cosa no es posible en este planeta!Me he preguntado al oir estas palabras si el que las dice realmente piensa que reflejan el sentir de Dios o el desprecio del mundo! Dios llama a todos a su familia, no en base a los meritos de cada cual ni a la aprobacion de otros! Es el mundo el que excluye!  
 

"....Como me puedo quedar en la Iglesia si no estoy de acuerdo con esa decision?..."

Somos Cristianos en una tradicion acogedora, somos Episcopales! No pretendemos que estemos de acuerdo en todo! Tener la misma opinion no es requisito para vivir la vida Cristiana en nuestra Iglesia! Nuestra union viene de Cristo!!!! Nuestra union la da el Espiritu Santo! Nuestra union se manifiesta en nuestra oracion comun y en la mesa del Senor! No abandonamos a nuestra familias por desacuerdos , ni dejamos el trabajo por ello, no nos mudamos para un pais donde todos esten de acuerdo, eso no existe! No podemos imponer en la Iglesia una conformidad inventada que no aplicamos en ninguna otra faceta de la vida! La unidad de la Iglesia esta en la misericordia , en el amor, en la oracion y en la Eucaristia.

Muchas Bendiciones para todos, no se olviden de orar y de amar!

Serafin

Reflexiones Sabias...

Comparto con ustedes las sabias reflexiones del Padre Ron Pogue. Nos pueden ayudar en estos momentos especiales de la Iglesia. Bendiciones

Queridos hermanos y hermanas: Ayer, la Cámara de Diputados de la Iglesia Episcopal estuvo de acuerdo con la Cámara de Obispos para adoptar una resolución que autoriza el uso provisional del rito "El Testimonio y la Bendición de un Pacto Permanente" a partir del 02 de diciembre, 2012, (el primer domingo de Adviento). El clero necesitará el permiso de sus obispos para ofrecer este rito, por lo que su uso puede variar de diócesis a diócesis. Muchos se molestarán o incluso se enojarán por esta decisión. Muchos otros estarán agradecidos por las nuevas oportunidades para el ministerio que serán posibles gracias a esta decisión. Y otros no tendrán sentimientos fuertes acerca de él de una manera u otra. ¿Quién se puede sorprender por estas reacciones? Después de todo, nuestra Iglesia se compone de ¡personas de "todas clases y condiciones"! Sea cual sea tu respuesta en esta decisión, ofrezco las siguientes perspectivas pastorales.
 

Seamos humildes:

- Condenas arrogantes de quienes están en desacuerdo contigo y gozar con malicia acerca de una decisión en la que tu punto de vista "ha ganado" no honran el evangelio o construyen comunidad entre los seguidores de Cristo. Recuerda que hemos prometido, con la ayuda de Dios, "buscar y servir a Cristo en todas las personas, amando a tu prójimo como a ti mismo," y de "respetar la dignidad de todo ser humano." Piensa en estas cosas y píde a Dios que te de una respuesta humilde.
 

Vamos a ser generosos:

 -Actuar fuera de la suposición de que tu vecino se siente obligado a hacer observaciones sobre esta decisión lo hace por el más puro de los motivos. Incluso pueden pensar que te están haciendo un gran favor al señalar el error de las formas de aquellos con quien tú adoras. Ellos puedes creer sinceramente que esta culpa por asociación podría poner en peligro tu bienestar espiritual. Es posible que quieran ponerte en sobre aviso de que deben evitar contacto contigo con el fin de proteger su propia justicia. Escucha lo que nuestro Señor Jesucristo dice: "Amarás al Señor tu Dios con todo tu corazón, con toda tu alma y con toda tu mente. Este es el primero y grande mandamiento. El segundo es semejante a éste: amarás a tu prójimo como a ti mismo. De estos dos mandamientos dependen toda la Ley y los Profetas. "Dios te ha dado suficiente amor para compartirlo con todos tus vecinos y todavía habrá mucho más cuando lo compartas con ellos en este contexto. ¡Puedes darte el lujo de ser generoso!

No hay que pedir disculpa:
    

- Nuestros vecinos, especialmente los de otras comuniones, pueden decir cosas que nos hacen estar a la defensiva, inseguros, con miedo o vergüenza. Podemos sentir que tienen una ventaja sobre nosotros en su particular comprensión de las verdades bíblicas o doctrinales. Tú puedes elegir sonreír simplemente, no decir nada, cambiar de tema, o marcharte simplemente. O, tú puedes sentir que necesitas debatir con tu vecino. Si sientes la necesidad de debatir el tema, toman tiempo para prepararte. Estudia, consulta fuentes confiables de información, usa tu mente en la mayor medida posible. Por otra parte, prepárate para sentir que has "perdido" el debate al final del mismo. Convicciones muy arraigadas, como sobre la sexualidad humana y la política, a menudo se basan en la emoción con una información superficial. Tus intentos de borrar las emociones con la lógica, probablemente no tendrán éxito. Cualquiera que sea la respuesta que elijas, no tienes que pedir disculpas por la Iglesia Episcopal, que no ha llegado a esta decisión de la noche a la mañana y sin una enorme consideración puesta en oración.

 

Vamos a ser misioneros:

 - En general, los cristianos no somos lo mejor de nosotros cuando nos involucramos en debates bizantinos sobre las diferencias teológicas, morales, o eclesiásticas. Estamos en nuestro mejor momento cuando escuchamos juntos la Palabra de Dios, cuando nos arrodillamos juntos para ser alimentados en la Mesa de Dios, y cuando nos arremangamos las mangas para manifestar la gracia de Dios en el campo de la misión en nuestra propia puerta. Hay personas en ese campo de misión que nos están esperando para ser enviados a hacer el trabajo que Dios nos ha encomendado.

 

Vamos a ser inclusivos:

- Mis puntos de vista sobre el tema de la sexualidad humana, especialmente acerca de la plena inclusión de mis hermanos y hermanas gays, lesbianas, transexuales en la vida de la Iglesia, fueron modelados y han tomado forma a lo largo del tiempo. He buscado en las Escrituras, buscado la sabiduría contenida en las enseñanzas de la Iglesia a través de los siglos, considerado lo que hemos aprendido con la razón a través del tiempo, he pasado un tiempo con aquellos cuyo estilo de vida y la orientación son diferentes de los míos, escuchado a las personas cuyos puntos de vista difieren de los míos, y he orado. En cuarenta y un años de ministerio, me han pedido para bendecir uniones del mismo sexo sólo tres veces. A causa de mi respeto por los cánones de la Iglesia y mi votos de ordenación, nunca he realizado esas peticiones. Yo he obedecido a mis obispos y voy a seguir haciéndolo donde quiera que esté.

 

Vamos a seguir adelante:

– He oído decir por algunas personas que esta decisión marca el final de la Iglesia Episcopal. Yo prefiero creer que es el comienzo de una nueva era de oportunidad misionera de la Iglesia Episcopal. Ahora hemos añadido una nueva forma de abrir las puertas rojas a las personas que hemos marginado. Agregar esta decisión de cómo esta Iglesia en los últimos años se ha expresado al enfrentar la esclavitud, el trabajo infantil, el derecho de la mujer a votar, el racismo, la ordenación de mujeres, y una serie de otros temas para los cuales personas cuyos puntos de vista eran opuestos fueron apoyados por las escrituras y argumentos teológicos para mantener el status quo. Añadir esta decisión también a los cambios que ya hemos hecho con las enseñanzas ortodoxas de la Iglesia sobre la sexualidad humana, específicamente, lo que permite control de la natalidad y la autorización de las segundas nupcias de personas divorciadas.

Unamos nuestras manos:

- Algunos de ustedes que leen esto no estarán de acuerdo conmigo. Entiendo que hay otros en la Comunión Anglicana en otras partes del mundo que tienen problemas con estos puntos de vista. La diversidad de opiniones es normal y natural en la vida en general y en la Iglesia en particular. No hay nada que podamos hacer para cambiar eso. No puedo obligar a nadie a creer o actuar como lo hago yo. Pero podemos luchar con la conciencia tranquila para vivir una vida que encarna el amor de Dios, para que ese amor de Dios pueda hacer posible en nosotros buscar la reconciliación en todos los niveles. Nuestra unidad de esta Iglesia no es ahora ni ha sido sobre la base de que todo el mundo esta de acuerdo en todo. Nuestra unidad proviene de nuestra oración común y la búsqueda común de un mundo donde hay más justicia, paz y amor.Por lo tanto, les digo a mis hermanos y hermanas que están de acuerdo conmigo y los que no lo están, "Si tus intenciones son buenas como las mías, dame tu mano." Los cristianos pueden lograr mucho más para el reino de Dios en la tierra con nuestras manos unidas que con nuestras manos levantadas unos contra otros. Como cristianos católicos, no tenemos que estar de acuerdo en todo con el fin de "andar en el amor como Cristo nos amó."

Vamos a ser lo que decimos que somos:

- Realmente no tenemos nada que temer acerca de esta decisión. Tenemos todas las razones para alegrarnos a medida que aprendemos a vivir en las nuevas oportunidades que se presentan. Podemos mantener la cabeza en alto y con la humildad, la generosidad y sin pedir disculpas, podemos hacer más que nunca para manifestar el amor de Dios. Somos mayordomos de un trabajo importante que transforma la vida que Dios quiere realizar específicamente a través de nuestra Iglesia. ¡Somos episcopales! Y, como alguien ha señalado, no hay ningún asterisco en los letreros que dicen: "La Iglesia Episcopal te da la bienvenida!"

Atentamente,

South Florida Reverend Preaches Tolerance From the Pulpit

Leo Frade, Cuban born bishop of the Diocese of SE Florida makes his stance clear as it relates to the place of gay and lesbian people in the church. In a diocese where there is a great number of socially conservative Latinos, he throws caution to the wind in this humorous but pointed homily! He has already allowed same sex blessings in at least one church in his diocese. Time will tell wether his convictions will strengthen or scatter his flock. Blessings Seraph

The Last Bastion of Prejudice, the Church! Dr. Geoffey John

I have always believed that the only possible Christian model for a same-sex relationship is monogamy. I wrote a booklet about it in 1991 called ‘Permanent Faithful Stable’ which will be republished later this year. At that time I took the view that it didn’t matter whether we call it a marriage or not – what really matters is the nature of the relationship and the commitment on which it rests. In a sense that is still true. But of course the obvious, natural term for monogamy is marriage, and most people instinctively refer to civil partnerships as marriages anyway. So I think ‘marriage’ probably is the best term to use for same-sex as well as well as heterosexual monogamy, and it also has the great advantage of making clear that both should be given equal respect.

Are you willing to chart your theological journey to that point?

I start from the fact that the Church calls marriage a sacrament because the covenant of love between the married couple reflects the covenant of love between Christ and his Church, and so becomes a channel of God’s own love into the world. The secure framework of marriage helps you to keep loving through the bad times, and in the process it teaches you a deeper sort of love – the sort that involves the will and self-sacrifice and not just feelings. Growing in that sort of love means you are growing in the image and likeness of God.That is the traditional understanding of Christian marriage. But the big point is, exactly the same love and commitment are possible between two people of the same sex as between two people of different sexes, and it is not immediately clear why the Church should regard such a relationship as ethically or spiritually inferior to a heterosexual marriage. Of course the procreation of children by two same-sex partners is not possible. But the Church has never seen procreation as a necessity for marriage, and so has always married partners past the age of childbearing. Even in Genesis the first reason given why God created Eve is not childbearing but because ‘God saw that it was not good for man to be alone’. While the Prayer Book states that marriage was ordained first for ‘the procreation of children’ the modern marriage service begins by emphasising the quality of relationship between marriage partners ‘that they shall be united with one another in heart, body and mind.’So same-sex monogamy seems to me to be spiritually indistinguishable from a marriage between two people who are unable to have children together. Admitting same sex couples to marriage would extend the sacrament, not undermine it. Like the Church’s decision to admit women to the sacrament of ordination, it is a lot less revolutionary than it seems at first sight. The ordination of women has not fundamentally changed the priesthood, but has extended and enriched it. The same would be true of extending the sacrament of marriage to people of the same sex. It is not the physical gender of the people involved that matters, but the quality of their commitment and their response to the call of God. It is often assumed that scripture rules out same-sex monogamy, but that is not true unless you read scripture in a selectively literal way. In the few places where homosexuality is mentioned in the New Testament the texts show no awareness that some people are homosexual in orientation. When St Paul condemns people who ‘exchange’ heterosexual intercourse for homosexual, he is assuming that this is a perverse choice on the part of naturally heterosexual people who are simply choosing the alternative out of an excess of lust. What is being criticized in these passages is the kind of homosexual activity that was most visible in the Hellenistic society around him – promiscuity, prostitution and paedophilia. The case of two responsible, adult, homosexual Christians wishing to commit to each other in love for life is simply never envisaged.

It is also important to notice that those who choose to interpret the apparently anti-gay passages in Paul literally are usually much less literal when it comes to what Paul has to say about the place of women, or re-marriage, or slavery.

What is your opinion of the secular, political debate on the issue?

What really pleases me is that the call for same-sex marriage comes from gay people themselves. In the past gay people were often accused of being inherently promiscuous, uninterested in or incapable of permanent relationships. Civil partnerships have shown that to be the lie that it always was. The truth is that the great majority of people, gay or straight, know that their best chance of happiness and fulfilment lies in finding a partner to love and grow together with, someone who will be there at the end of the day and at the end of their life. That is not a heterosexual hope or a homosexual hope, it is just a human hope.

It is illogical to argue that same-sex marriage somehow undermines heterosexual marriage. On the contrary, it confirms the value of marriage and extends its blessings to many more people. From a purely secular viewpoint it is clearly good for the whole of the society when people commit to each other and care for one another without being reliant on the state – and this will become more important as we all live longer.

I was very struck by David Cameron’s statement that he is in favour of same-sex marriage, not in spite of being a conservative but because of being a conservative. I am not a political animal, but I want to say something very similar as a priest. I am in favour of same-sex marriage not because I am a wild liberal but because I am instinctively a traditional Anglo-Catholic. I believe in the sacrament of marriage; I believe we all need a disciplined framework for faith and love; and I believe we all need God’s grace and blessing to live by it. I think most of the 120 or so priests in the London Diocese who recently petitioned for the right to bless civil partnerships would say the same.

What do you think of what George Carey has been saying and his new Coalition 4 Marriage?

They seem to ignore the fact that the ten other countries which have already legalised same sex marriage have not experienced any of the horrors that they keep predicting. Marriage and family life in those countries have not been harmed in any way. The ‘slippery slope’ argument that same-sex marriage will somehow lead to polygamy or incest or increased debauchery is particularly illogical and rather insulting. Nor am I impressed by the argument that we should not use the law to bring about social change. If we had not made changes in the law discrimination against women, ethnic minorities and the disabled would still be firmly in place.

What message do you think the church opposition gives long term about the church and Christianity and does this worry you in any way?

It is enormously worrying. In the sixties the Church of England was in the forefront of the movement to decriminalise homosexuality. The fact that fifty years on the Church is seen as Enemy Number One of gay people is a disaster, both for our own morale and for our mission to the country. The Conservative Party realised ten years ago that the equal treatment of gay people had become a litmus test of basic human decency and changed its view; but it is a test the Church now spectacularly fails. We have become the last refuge of prejudice.

It is worse because the Church’s opposition to gay relationships is so patently unprincipled. In the Church of England we readily bless the second and even third marriages of couples who never darken our doors, yet we reject hundreds of our own faithful clergy and laypeople who long to bring their love and commitment before God and ask his blessing. While we dare to preach justice and equality in Christ’s name to the world, we seek exemptions to equality laws when it comes to our own employment and disciplinary practices. While we threaten to demote or debar American and Canadian Anglicans for appointing openly gay bishops and blessing gay unions, we are trying to appease homophobic Anglican churches in Africa which support extreme social and legal measures against homosexuals.

Not only gay people are repelled by all this. Many more people of goodwill who instinctively expect the Church to uphold justice and truth are scandalised when it so obviously does not. If secularism has gained ground in Britain in recent years, along with the demand that the Church of England must be disestablished and surrender its voice in national life, then it is our mishandling of the gay issue more than anything else that has brought it about.

Food for thought

Blessings

Seraph

New York Says I do To Marriage Equality

FROM: THE NEW YORK TIMES.
Lawmakers voted late Friday to legalize same-sex marriage, making New York the largest state where gay and lesbian couples will be able to wed and giving the national gay-rights movement new momentum from the state where it was born.

The marriage bill, whose fate was uncertain until moments before the vote, was approved 33 to 29 in a packed but hushed Senate chamber. Four members of the Republican majority joined all but one Democrat in the Senate who supported the measure after an intense and emotional campaign aimed at the handful of lawmakers wrestling with a decision that divided their friends, their constituents and sometimes their own homes.

With his position still undeclared, Senator Mark J. Grisanti, a Republican from Buffalo who had sought office promising to oppose same-sex marriage, told his colleagues he had agonized for months before concluding he had been wrong.

“I apologize for those who feel offended,” Mr. Grisanti said, adding, “I cannot deny a person, a human being, a taxpayer, a worker, the people of my district and across this state, the State of New York, and those people who make this the great state that it is the same rights that I have with my wife.

Blessings

Seraph

Demise after DOMA?

Today as the United States Supreme Court hears arguments that challenge the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) I had a chance to read this post from last year with some thoughts on the matter of Civil Marriage equality. I understand the discomfort many Christians have with further redefinitions of marriage which is for us not just a civil contract but also a matter of religious conviction. Here are my two cents on the matter...

"...Though many Christians are going to try to deny "the obvious," evangelical leader Dr. Albert Mohler believes gay marriage is going to become normalized: "I think it's clear that something like same-sex marriage is going to become normalized, legalized and recognized in the culture. It's time for Christians to start thinking about how we're going to deal with that," he said recently on the Focus on the Family radio program.

Mohler, president of The Southern Baptist Theological Seminary, was speaking in response to the Obama administration's decision to stop defending the 1996 Defense of Marriage Act – federal law that defines marriage as between a man and a woman – in the courts...."

Finally from a prominent evangelical,an admission of what has been clear to many of us for a long time. A secular society which was founded upon principles of equality and has developed along the lines of equal protection and treatment under the law for all its citizens should not enshrine discrimination against the relationships of some. Gay and lesbian citizens of our country should have the same rights to establish relationships which are recognized by civil law, as is already the case in a growing number European countries, Canada and several states of our Union.

Despite the cries and lamentations from many Christians as to how the sanctity of marriage, the church’s sacraments and the nature of the family being threatened, I see no imminent demise of marriage or the family as a result of this. Here are a couple of thoughts as to why:

First of all the uniqueness of the male –female bond is biologically based, inseparable from who we are and how we propagate as a species. Governmental recognition of relationships of whatever kind do not fundamentally change a reality for humans; it takes opposite sex partners for a relationship to bring about new life. This reality is attested to in the book of Genesis and quoted by Jesus when he said “male and female he created them”. Unless humans evolve beyond what seems possible to us now or science makes reproduction obsolete, there is no real threat to the male-female design which is essential to the continued existence of humans. That uniqueness, blessed explicitly by God in creation and obvious in daily life in our planet is not amenable to change by any human made laws.

Secondly, it is not gay marriage or its possible equivalents that pose a threat to opposite gender marriage and families. Non gay men and women do quite well in that regards. Serial monogamy, cohabitation, divorce, the hook up culture so prevalent in our day pose greater challenges to marriage and the family than any gay or lesbian couple wanting their union recognized by law. Even among Christians, divorce and cohabitation before marriage are commonplace. Just considering sheer numbers makes the assumption that the demise of marriage falls on the lap on expanding its definition to include same gender couples is laughable.

I think for those interested in the "Defense of Marriage" honesty requires us to identify the real enemies to defend from! We should objectively place the blame for its perceived demise, where it should lie, with us, not those who have not been able to “get married” ever in our society! With that reality clear in our minds then we can address the crisis in our relationships! Maybe our focus should be on enriching and strengthening our marriages and families, not so much in nay saying the relationships of others.

As Episcopalians we are Christians who hold a sacramental worldview. God is made manifest , reveals himself to us in the natural, the commonplace, and the stuff of this world. He certainly needs no help from us in deciding what to bless, where he should manifest himself or what things he should call holy! Sacraments are for us visible signs of an invisible grace which is God’s alone to grant. The church merely recognizes these occasions; we do not dictate them to God, nor can any government or law making body!

It is for Christians to discern where God makes himself present, yet sincere Christians have at times disagreed as to the particulars. The sacrament of marriage, between a man and a woman, as defined by Scripture, understood in Christian tradition, is one of those areas. For some Christians this can only happen once! Divorce, though legal does not invalidate the sacramental reality and remarriage is not a possibility, in fact it is considered sin. For others, despite the desire of God that marriage be permanent, people often fail and God does grant grace after divorce even for remarriage.

No community of faith is forced by law in our society to perform sacramental acts against it convictions and doctrines! The Roman Catholic Church, despite the legality and prevalence of divorce in our society does not remarry divorcees, whereas many other communities of faith do so. This right of Christians in our society to practice faith without government interference is certainly in no danger from the repeal of DOMA.

Perhaps our confusion comes from the uncomfortable mix of cultural, civil and religious principles when it comes to relationships between people. The state is not an arm of the church nor should clergy be agents of the state for civil matters. If marriage is a sacrament blessed by the Church, then certainly people do not get that at their local clerk of the county court, nor from a notary public. The civil and legal aspects of that belong to “Caesar”, or Obama, the courts, legislators, the voters. None of these have any bearing on what belongs to God alone, nor what Christian communities decide to acknowledge and bless!

Furthermore it takes a couple to form a relationship, and in the end, the love and fidelity they choose to pledge to one another can only be seen and blessed by them and God. Here, neither church nor states have any jurisdiction, because they have not been given the keys nor the control over human hearts!

Christians have a message of love and good news to all people. God loves, he saves heals and he includes. That love extends to people who by nature or nurture perceive themselves to be gay or lesbian. We do the gospel no favors by proclaiming God's love with our lips but with words and action attempt to limit the rights of others in our society even as we ignore greater gospel imperatives facing our world.

I agree with Dr. Mohler that it is time for Christians to start thinking ... Episcopalians have been engaged in that for some time ! If recent polls among Christian youth in reference to this topic are to be believed, they may have made up their minds already and left us all behind. How the Supreme Court will make up theirs will be something to watch!

Blessings

Seraph.

Gay Adoption Ban Overturned in Florida

Florida appeals court strikes down gay adoption ban

Licensed foster parent Frank Martin Gill sued for the right to adopt two boys in his care. A Florida appeals court Wednesday struck down a state law barring gay men and lesbians from adoption on the basis of equal protection under law.

The Florida 3rd District Court of Appeal upheld a trial court ruling that Florida's explicit ban was unconstitutional, noting that the state's adoption law required officials to assess potential adoptive parents in "the best interests of the child."

"By the time of the trial below, the application of the statutory ban was contrary to both the professional judgment of the Department and the legislative directive to assure 'the best interest of the child' in 'every' adoption," wrote Judge Cindy S. Lederman in the 42-page ruling...

This is undoubtedly good news for children who are in foster care as well as for gay couples wanting to provide a stable home to them.

Among some Christian circles dissaproval about this ruling comes almost as a reflex and the objections defy reason. I am sure I have not heard it all , but this is the general litany so far...

"It is bad for children" cry some, despite no objective evidence that children of gay couples fare any worse in life;

"Children deserve a mother and father" say others, perhaps oblivious to the fact that a great deal of children are born out of wedlock or whose parents divorce and are raised by a single parent.

"Its just wrong" other exclaim, ignoring perhaps that the Teacher calls remarriage after divorce wrong as well and there seems to be no objection to remarried heterosexual couples adopting.

"It is a bad example"...give me a break,did these kids parents give such a great example to land them in foster care?

If it walks like a duck, quacks like a duck and has web feet it probably aint no dove!!!! Prejudice it what is sounds like! It is not based on love, nor objective evidence, not based on concern for the well being of children stuck in foster care, nor even on the principles we live out our faith by...

Prejudice is not a good foundation for principle!

Blessings

Seraph

Overture To Catholics, From an Episcopal Priest | Religion & Theology | ReligionDispatches

Overture To Catholics, From an Episcopal Priest | Religion & Theology | ReligionDispatches

Funny sort of tongue in cheek turning of the tables on a rather delicate ecumenical misstep....! Though I must admit, warts and all I love the Episcopal Church!

Blessings

seraph

Coming Home

A Gay Christian Speaks to Fundamentalists

Jonathan Odell

Last year I got a call from an administrator at a Midwestern seminary with a reputation for its “take no prisoners” conservative theology. He had permission to conduct a series of seminars on hot-button issues like abortion, stem-cell research, and gay marriage. His plan was to bring in a succession of speakers, one to take the pro side of an issue, followed by a second to present the opposing view.

I took a deep breath. I knew what was coming next. “We want you to take the pro side on homosexuality,” he said.

“Yippee,” I thought. “I get to argue for Satan.” So I asked him, “Why me?” Why me indeed... “The administrator pleaded his case. “I want you to come here not only because you’re gay, but because you’re religious. You’ve obviously held on to your spiritual beliefs.”

I didn’t tell him I’d been able to retain my faith by steering clear of the hateful fundamentalists that universities like his turned out. Instead, I lied and told him I’d think about it. “Well, I can’t blame you if you say ‘no,’” he added. “In fact, I might lose my job over asking you. But I think it’s worth it.”

...I decided I would say no to the request, but I couldn’t tell my contact that I was really declining his invitation because I was terrified of being rejected. After all, I was apparently the only homosexual he had come across who actually believed in God, so I had to keep up the image for what to him must be a very select group of gays. So I did what I usually do when I need to make a purely emotional decision appear rational: I turned to Google. I entered the name of the school and the word “homosexuality” into the search engine. My aim was to find a way to blame these fundamentalist Christians for being so hopeless that I wasn’t going to waste my time on them.

The first hit was an anonymous letter, written by one of the seminary’s own students to a gay support group, pleading for help. He wrote about being a Christian, a closeted gay, and suicidal. “From the outside, I appear much like any other student on campus,” he wrote. “I am a Christian, dedicated to my family, my friends, and my academic career. I am also gay. I came close to committing suicide several times, but God had been looking out for me. He had given me one friend on this campus with whom I could be totally honest. I believe that were it not for him, I would not be here today. One day, I hope that we can be seen for who we truly are, as fellow brothers and sisters in Christ.”

This student’s poignant testimony of desperation and isolation, his love for a church that rejects him, these brought me back to my own youth. As a boy, I too was desperate for some adult to say, “I know just how you feel. I was afraid, too. But look at me. I survived. So will you.”

Now I couldn’t refuse the invitation without rejecting this young man, and by the same token, rejecting that kid inside me who is still waiting for some adult to stand up for him. I guessed this terrified adult was going to have to do the job for both young men...

When I walked to the podium that night and scanned a room of budding fundamentalist preachers, I discovered the place was only partially filled. Most in the audience were faculty and female students. Hanging in the back was a crowd of young guys who eyed me suspiciously, still deciding whether this talk was for them, and what exactly their attendance might say about their own testosterone levels. I nervously blurted out the first thing that came to my mind: “Hello, I’m the gay guy!” It was meant to be humorous, but the silence was so thorough that I could hear them breathing.

“OK,” I told myself, “don’t be clever. Just tell the truth. If they walk out, they walk out.” I began again. “When I got the invitation to come speak today, it was a no-brainer.” I looked directly at the young men massed in the back of the room: “Not in a million years!” I noticed a few smirks, but at least we shared some common ground. We all would rather be somewhere else.

“I’d like to say I’m happy to be here today,” I continued, “but I’d be starting our relationship with a lie. Right now, you are the folks I grew up with. The folks I fled over thirty years ago and have kept running from: my family, my community, my church. You were my first family, and families know how to wound you the deepest. So today I just need to say I’m not here because I want to convert you, or change you, or sway you, or make you like me. I’m here because whether I like it or not, you are in my life and I need to somehow make peace with that part of my life.”...

Very thought provoking essay on a difficult subject for many Christians. It is definitely worth reading! I particularly liked the author's father statement "I guess both will have to be true". Sometimes congtradictory as it may sound it is the best possible answer!

You can read the entire essay by clicking on "Coming home", at the top of this post, or by going to;
http://commonwealmagazine.org/coming-home

Blessings

Seraph

The day I decided to stop being gay - Times Online

A minor incident in a barber’s shop last week has helped me to realise that I may no longer be gay. Not a fully fledged homo, anyway; perhaps not even a part-timer who helps the team out when it’s busy. It appears I may be going straight.

I was in Tenterden, the Kentish village where I was brought up and to which I have lately returned, working at a nearby aerodrome as a helicopter pilot. I was waiting my turn for a chatty Latvian to apply the hot towels and razor. A handsome young dad entered with a small, fair-haired boy at his side. The man took a seat and hoisted the wide-eyed child proudly on to his knee. The first haircut, I speculated inwardly, as an unfamiliar fatherly glow and feeling of mild envy swept over me. I could not tear my attention away from the mirrored reflections.

From time to time, the dad leant forward as they waited and whispered close to his son’s ear, tenderly kissing his fair head. Touching stuff.But then my eyes lowered and I became transfixed by the sight of the boy’s tiny pink fingers gripping his father’s huge, workman-like fist. And I almost wanted to burst into song.

I think my life changed at that moment...

I absolutely loved this post by a gay airline pilot contemplating fatherhood and the impication of such a desire to his lifestyle.

Life is seldom as simple as we would make it and that applies to the author's depiction of his life and hopes, yet it seems honest and refreshing. He tells his story and, though we are seldom objective when doing so, he comes across as sincere.

I can not help but to smile at his words "I may be going straight" in the same breath as he notices the handsomeness of the young father who brings his son for his first haircut.." . Talk about conflicting desires! But hey, life is complicated and people do evolve! He certainly will not be the first!I for one which him the best!

It is fun reading and the host of reader comments is very interesting.

Blessings

Seraph

Lutherans Allow Gays...

Same-sex unions accepted by Evangelical Lutherans
By Christopher Quinn

The Atlanta Journal-Constitution

The nation’s largest Lutheran denomination previously allowed pastors to be gay, but only if celibate. Delegates also approved a resolution which will allow but not require pastors to bless same-sex unions.

The moves were welcomed by advocates of full gay inclusion, but traditionalists were dismayed. Many traditionalists speaking at the Churchwide Assembly predicted it would split the denomination, much as more conservative Episcopal congregations have left that denomination after the installation of a gay bishop.

The Rev. Bradley Schmeling of St. John’s Lutheran in Druid Hills and Bob Gibeling of Atlanta have lobbied for the changes.

Schmeling is gay, has been in a relationship and the denomination removed him from the list of approved pastors in 2007. However, the church kept him as pastor and the denomination took no action against St. John’s.

“This is certainly an important step in the process that I’ve been looking forward to and praying for for a very long time,” he said from Minneapolis.

The wording of the resolution will not require a pastor to perform the blessing, but will allow congregations comfortable doing so to act. The denomination has yet to work out details of how the ceremony must take place.

Gibeling said: “I’ve been a life-long member at Redeemer Lutheran Church, and I was never comfortable asking my church to bless my relationship. This offers great hope to me that when I find a future life-long partner, my own beloved congregation will want to bless that union.”

The Episcopal Church has accepted gay pastors in recent years. Other mainline and evangelical Protestant churches, including conservative Lutherans such as the Lutheran Church – Missouri Synod, do not affirm gay leaders or relationships.

It looks that Lutherans went beyond Episcopalians in their decision today to move toward the full inclusion of gays and lesbians in the church. Time will tell what the fallout from todays's vote will turn out to be. For now prayer seems the best idea of all!

"...Gracious Father, we pray for thy holy Catholic Church. Fill it with all truth, in all truth, with all peace. Where it is corrupt,purify it; where it is in error, direct it; where in any thing it is amiss, reform it. Where it is right, strengthen it; where it is in want, provide for it; where it is divided, reunite it; for the sake of Jesus Christ thy Son our Savior. Amen.


Blessings

Seraph

Gay to Stay...?

There is no firm evidence that sexual orientation can be changed through therapy, so mental health professionals should not tell conflicted gay clients that they can become heterosexual with such treatments, the American Psychological Association declared today.

In adopting a resolution, the APA's governing council said some research suggests such "reparative therapy" could induce depression or suicidal tendencies.

A task force recommended that mental health professionals "avoid misrepresenting the efficacy of sexual orientation change efforts when providing assistance to people distressed about their own or others' sexual orientation," usually as a result of religious doctrine.

Here's what Judith Glassgold, chair of the task force, said in a statement:

"Contrary to claims of sexual orientation change advocates and practitioners, there is insufficient evidence to support the use of psychological interventions to change sexual orientation. Scientifically rigorous older studies in this area found that sexual orientation was unlikely to change due to efforts designed for this purpose. Contrary to the claims of SOCE [sexual orientation change efforts] practitioners and advocates, recent research studies do not provide evidence of sexual orientation change as the research methods are inadequate to determine the effectiveness of these interventions.

"At most, certain studies suggested that some individuals learned how to ignore or not act on their homosexual attractions. Yet, these studies did not indicate for whom this was possible, how long it lasted or its long-term mental health effects. Also, this result was much less likely to be true for people who started out only attracted to people of the same sex."

The APA urged therapists to consider multiple options — celibacy or switching churches, for instance — for helping clients live spiritually rewarding lives in instances where their sexual orientation and religious faith conflict.

No surprises here!

Blessings

Seraph

'Etiquette guide' for Thai monks

A Buddhist preacher in Thailand has announced plans for new guidelines aimed at curbing the flamboyant behaviour of gay and transgender monks.

The "good manners" curriculum - the country's first - is being introduced in the northern province of Chiang Rai. The senior monk told the BBC he was particularly concerned by effeminate activities among novices such as the wearing of make-up and tight robes.

Senior monk Phra Maha Wudhijaya Vajiramedhi told the BBC he would address issues like smoking, drinking alcohol, walking and going to the toilet properly, which are all detailed in the traditional 75 Dharma principles of Buddhism, and the 227 precepts for monks. He was especially concerned, he said, by the flamboyant behaviour of gay and transgender monks, who can often be seen wearing revealingly tight robes, carrying pink purses and having effeminately-shaped eyebrows.

Thailand has a very large and visible population of transgender men, and Phra Vajiramedhi acknowledged that it was difficult to exclude them from the monkhood but he hoped his course could at least persuade them to curb their more extrovert habits. If successful, the "good manners" course, at the Novice Demonstration School, would be replicated at other Buddhist monasteries and seminaries, he said.

Hmmm and I though Episcopalians were having troubles...

Blessings

Seraph

World gets first gay head of state

Independent: ANDY MCSMITH
SYNDICATED COLUMNIST

Iceland is set to appoint the world’s first lesbian prime minister – a former flight attendant who rose through the political ranks to become a cabinet minister.

Johanna Sigurdardottir, the 66-year-old social affairs minister, has been picked by her Social Democratic Alliance party to lead an interim government after the country’s conservative-led government collapsed.

Ms Sigurdardottir’s appointment is expected to be confirmed within days by the new ruling coalition of the Alliance party and the Left-Green movement. She would lead Iceland until general elections, expected in May.

Environment Minister Thorunn Sveinbjarnardottir said: “She is respected and loved by all of Iceland.

That this is news at all shows we have a long way to go as a prejudice free society. Why should people's sexual orientation be newsworthy?

As to claims she is "the first one"! Well, who is to say?...The first one we know about maybe! Or, the fist in a society where its not that important.

Blessings

Seraph

A New Deity?

I do not plan to invoke the name of Jesus at all...pray to the God of our many understandings".

These are words uttered by the Episcopal Bishop of New Hampshire in an interview with NPR just a few days ago. He has been chosen to lead prayer at the opening event of the presidential inauguration this Sunday and wanted to make sure people felt included in his invocation of deity.

Some may applaud his attempt at inclusiveness, for me it was dissapointing! A Christian bishop who specifically excludes the name "Above all Names", the name to which "Every Knee Shall Bow..." and "...every tongue confess ..." ?

What deity is the God of our many understandings? One defined by what we think?

God is in no sense defined by our comprehension nor mental constructs which often distort the divine image! These are mere idols! Religious leaders worth their salt should point us beyond these, to the reality and awesomeness of the Divine person....not allow us to be content with our petty imaginations!


I wonder, given this and other statements in the media by bishop Gene, if he sees his ministry more as that of a bishop or a GLBT advocate? He sure spends a lot of time and is very clear on his message of inclusion but sounds quite dissapointing as an spokesperson for the One who is Lord!

Blessings

Seraph

Ray Boltz...In his Own Words!

“I thought I hid it really well...”

“I didn’t know people could see what I was going through, the darkness and the struggle. After I came out to my family, one of my daughters said she was afraid to walk in my bedroom because she was afraid she’d find me — that I’d done something to myself. And I didn’t even know they’d picked it up.”

“I thought, ‘Well, I can just do what I always do and hide the truth or I can take a risk and be honest.It’s hard to say I came out because I didn’t have all the answers. I just admitted what I was struggling with and what I was feeling. It’s hard to go, ‘This is the point where I accepted my sexuality and who I was,’ but I came out to them and shared with them what I’d been going through.”

“I’d denied it ever since I was a kid. I became a Christian, I thought that was the way to deal with this and I prayed hard and tried for 30-some years and then at the end, I was just going, ‘I’m still gay. I know I am.’ And I just got to the place where I couldn’t take it anymore … when I was going through all this darkness, I thought, ‘Just end this.’”

“You get to be 50-some years old and you go, ‘This isn’t changing.’ I still feel the same way. I am the same way. I just can’t do it anymore. I basically lived an ‘ex-gay’ life — I read every book, I read all the scriptures they use, I did everything to try and change.”

“I was so good at pretending/like an actor on a stage/but in the end nobody knew me/only the roles that I portrayed/and I would rather have you hate me/knowing who I really am/than to try and make you love me/being something that I can’t” (from “God Knows I Tried”).

It is hard to know what to say to words like these other than to offer prayers to God for Ray and his family.

This too is a truth we Christians probably would rather not hear about! It does not seem to fit in with our reading of the Bible or our neat formulas for "a life victorious" , going from "glory to glory" or being "overcomers"! Yet there are those among our loved ones or acquaintances who have felt similarly isolated and afflicted.

May God give us the grace to be attentive to their stories, sensitive to their needs, partners in prayer and quick to offer consolation instead of judgement.

Blesings

Seraph

Doctors Dissed...

California Supreme Court Limits Religious Liberty of Physicians

SAN FRANCISCO, Aug. 18- In a 7-0 decision, the California Supreme Court restricted the religious liberty of physicians' to respect his or her conscience when deciding whether to perform a particular medical procedure.

San Diego physicians Christine Brody, M.D., and Douglas Fenton, M.D., asserted a Constitutional defense, based on their religious liberty, to a lawsuit that was brought by an unmarried female patient over six years ago. The patient, Guadalupe Benitez, claimed the two Ob/GYNs discriminated against her based on her sexual orientation by referring her to another physician for the performance of an IUI (intrauterine insemination) in the course of fertility treatment.

The court's ruling holds that the First Amendment right to free speech and the free exercise of religion cannot be used as a defense to a claim of unlawful discrimination that is based on sexual orientation.

Dr. Brody began treating Ms. Benitez in August 1999 for infertility and informed the patient at the outset that the only procedure during the course of the extended fertility treatment as to which she had a religious issue was an IUI. The defendants contend that Ms. Benitez and her partner understood and agreed in advance to a future referral to another physician, at no expense to Ms. Benitez, should the IUI become necessary. After other fertility protocols were unsuccessful, Ms. Benitez objected to the IUI referral contending that she was being discriminated against because she was a lesbian.

Of course there are several takes on these news from California. Some are touting this as another victory against discrimination based on sexual orientation, others are seeing it as a limitation on religious freedom.

I find this disturbing! Of course physicians may not deny life saving treatment to any patient based on sexual orientation, but that they be forced to act againt their conscience and religious belief when it comes to an elective procedure seems a little much!

This case seems to be akin to that of physicians and pharmacists prescribing medication to induce an abortion. Yes, it is available and legal, but for some doctors and pharmacists to prescribe or dispense would be a violation of their religious belief and conscience. If the desired procedure or medication is available to the patient elsewhere in the community and the physician makes an appropiate referal, that should fall under acceptable medical practice.

I am very much in favor of the equal treament of gays and lesbians in society and the church, but no ammount of positive publicity makes this decision feel right! It seems like the court is limiting the religious freedom and constitutional rights of some to expand the privileges and services available to others.

Blessings

Seraph

Rowan on Gays...!

From Archbishop Rowan, 28 September 2000

Dear Dr. Pitt,

"...This will have to be a relatively brief response to your very substantial question, but I hope it may suggest a few avenues. Until about 1980, I fully shared the traditional ethical understanding of homosexuality as a condition of (at best) some sort of ‘privation’, the practice of which was strictly forbidden to Christians by scripture and tradition.

My mind was unsettled by contact, as a university teacher, with one of two genuinely serious Christians who had concluded after prayer and reflections that the Scriptural prohibitions were addressed to heterosexuals looking for sexual variety in their experience; but that the Bible does not address the matter of appropriate behaviour for those who are, for whatever reason, homosexual by instinct of nature .

...By the end of the 80’s I had definitely come to the conclusion that scripture was not dealing with the predicament of persons whom we should recognise as homosexual by nature. And many of the arguments assumed by theologians in the Middle Ages and later increasingly seemed to beg questions or to rest on contested grounds. I concluded that an active sexual relationship between two people of the same sex might therefore reflect the love of God in a way comparable to marriage, if and only if it had about it the same character of absolute covenanted faithfulness...I was not convinced by the argument that the ethics for homosexual relations should be different from those for heterosexuals ...But it is now a very much politicised question, with many treating it as the sole or primary marker of Christian orthodoxy.

I find myself personally in a difficult situation, between the pressures of the clear majority view in my Church, my own theological convictions on this matter (as someone who has no desire at all to overthrow the authority of scripture here, but wants to ask if it has been rightly read on this matter) and the complex needs of individuals for pastoral counsel and support. I don’t see myself as a campaigner for a new morality; but if I’m asked for my views as a theologian rather than a church leader, I have to be honest and admit that they are as I’ve said.

One last point. The Church has shifted its stance on several matters ¬¬– notably the rightness of lending money at interest (condemned outright in the Old Testament and by all theologians before the seventeenth century) and the moral admissibility of contraception (generally denounced by the Anglican Church up to the middle of the twentieth century) so I am bound to ask if this is another such issue. If I am really seriously wrong on this, I can only pray to be shown the truth. I’d ask simply that Christians might be a little more ready than they seem to accept the good faith of those who have to a different conclusion..."

This certainly is an interesting insight into The Archbishop of Canterbury's thoughts at least in 2000, on this very pertinent issue which the Anglican Communion has been facing.

Blessings

Seraph