UnderGround Forums
 

HolyGround >> First Openly Gay Episcopal Bishop Says St. Paul Wa


2/9/10 5:34 AM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
Juijitsuboxer
55 The total sum of your votes up and votes down Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 1/1/01
Posts: 7720
 
http://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/60952

First Openly Gay Episcopal Bishop Says St. Paul Was Condemning Homosexual Acts by Heterosexuals
Thursday, February 04, 2010
By Karen Schuberg


Rt. Rev. V. Gene Robinson, the first openly gay bishop in the Episcopal church. (Wikipedia Commons)
(CNSNews.com) – In a section of his New Testament letter to the Romans (1:22-27) dealing with God’s admonitions against same-sex relations, St. Paul was actually writing about heterosexuals who engage in same-sex acts and not homosexuals, said the Rt. Rev. V. Gene Robinson, the first openly gay bishop in the Episcopal church.

“We have to understand that the notion of a homosexual sexual orientation is a notion that’s only about 125 years old," Bishop Robinson told CNSNews.com. "That is to say, St. Paul was talking about people that he understood to be heterosexual engaging in same-sex acts. It never occurred to anyone in ancient times that a certain minority of us would be born being affectionally oriented to people of the same sex.”

At the National Press Club on Tuesday, CNSNews.com asked Bp. Robinson: “St. Paul wrote in the Book of Romans, ‘Therefore God gave them over in the sinful desires of their hearts to sexual impurity for the degrading of their bodies with one another. … Even their women exchanged natural relations for unnatural ones. … Men committed indecent acts with other men and received in themselves the due penalty for their perversion.’ So my question is, was St. Paul right in—about engaging in homosexual acts as being against nature?”



Bishop Robinson answered: “The question you ask takes about two days to answer, but I’ll try to give you the Cliffs Notes version which is: One of the things we have to understand is that any piece of scripture needs to be understood in its own context. We have to understand that the notion of a homosexual sexual orientation is a notion that’s only about 125 years old.

“That is to say, St. Paul was talking about people that he understood to be heterosexual engaging in same-sex acts," said Bishop Robinson. "It never occurred to anyone in ancient times that a certain minority of us would be born being affectionally oriented to people of the same sex. So it did seem like against their nature to be doing so.”

“The other thing about St. Paul,” Robinson said, “is that he was also speaking out against a practice known to him and both the Roman and the Greek world, and would have been known in the Palestinian culture there of an older man taking a younger boy under his wing, using him sexually, and so on. No one’s—that’s child abuse. No one is arguing for that today. We would all be against that. We would all agree with St. Paul on that.”

“So the real question when you look at scripture is, ‘What did it mean to the person who wrote it?’” said Bishop Robinson. “’What did it mean for the audience to whom it was written?’ And only then can we ask, ‘Is it eternally binding?’ And in this case, I would say, the things that St. Paul was against, I’m against, too.”

Robinson added, “The question is, are there any answers there for what we’re asking today, which is the rightfulness of faithful, monogamous, lifelong-intentioned relationships between people of the same sex, and the Bible simply does not address that.”

CNSNews.com asked the follow-up question, “So you would say then that St. Paul is incorrect in this passage?”

Bishop Robinson said, “No. I think St. Paul was absolutely correct in his own context given what he knew, and given the behavior which he was describing. The questions we’re asking today are about a completely different set of circumstances.”

Bishop Robinson was asked by President Barack Obama to deliver the invocation at the opening presidential inaugural ceremonies at the Lincoln Memorial on Jan. 18, 2009.

Bishop Robinson spoke with CNSNews.com following a press conference to announce the “American Prayer Hour,” a new, multi-city event designed to “affirm inclusive values and call on all nations, including Uganda, to decriminalize the lives of gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender people.”

Other panelists at the press conference included Harry Knox, member of Obama’s Advisory Council on Faith-based and Neighborhood Partnerships and director of the religion and faith program at Human Rights Campaign; Bishop Carleton Pearson, senior minister at Christ Universal Temple in Chicago; Frank Schaeffer, author and journalist; Rev. Elder Darlene Garner, pastor at Metropolitan Community Church; Rev. Barry W. Lynn, director of Americans United for Separation of Church and State; and Moses, a Ugandan citizen seeking asylum in the United States to escape abuse in his own country based on his sexual orientation.

A transcript of CNSNews.com’s exchange with Bp. Robinson follows below:

CNSNews.com: “St. Paul wrote in the Book of Romans, ‘Therefore God gave them over in the sinful desires of their hearts to sexual impurity for the degrading of their bodies with one another. … Even their women exchanged natural relations for unnatural ones. … Men committed indecent acts with other men and received in themselves the due penalty for their perversion.’ So my question is, was St. Paul right in—about engaging in homosexual acts as being against nature?”

Bishop Robinson: “The question you ask takes about two days to answer, but I’ll try to give you the Cliff’s Notes version which is—one of the things we have to understand is that any piece of scripture needs to be understood in its own context. We have to understand that the notion of a homosexual sexual orientation is a notion that’s only about 125 years old.”

Bishop Robinson: “That is to say, St. Paul was talking about people that he understood to be heterosexual engaging in same-sex acts. It never occurred to anyone in ancient times that a certain minority of us would be born being affectionally oriented to people of the same sex. So it did seem like against their nature to be doing so.”

Bishop Robinson: “The other thing about St. Paul is that he was also speaking out against a practice known to him and both the Roman and the Greek world and would have been known in the Palestinian culture there of an older man taking a younger boy under his wing, using him sexually, and so on. No one’s -- that’s child abuse. No one is arguing for that today. We would all be against that. We would all agree with St. Paul on that.”

Bishop Robinson: “So the real question when you look at scripture is, ‘What did it mean to the person who wrote it? What did it mean for the audience to whom it was written?’ And only then can we ask, ‘Is it eternally binding?’ And in this case, I would say, the things that St. Paul was against, I’m against, too.”

Bishop Robinson: “The question is, are there any answers there for what we’re asking today, which is the rightfulness of faithful monogamous lifelong-intentioned relationships between people of the same se
2/9/10 5:44 AM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
Ridgeback
3 The total sum of your votes up and votes down Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 7/3/07
Posts: 15676
 He is right that homosexuality didn't exist as a defining feature of identity in the time of St. Paul.  The fact is the focus was not on the "causes" of any of a number of sex acts or behaviors.  They were all seen as equally part of a fallen humanity and a slavery to the "carnal" man.   He is wrong that it wouldn't have been obvious that some people in the ancient world would have preferred sexual partners exclusively of the same sex.  

 The rule has always been simple in Christianity.  If you are married you can do it.  If you are not you can't.  Marriage is between a man and a woman who could theoretically produce offspring if they were healthy.  Robinson would be a much more honest man if he dismissed the religion and took off his collar.  

The notion that it is proper for some people to engage in homosexual acts because it is "natural" to their make-up is just silly.  Most heterosexual men are promiscosexuals by nature and would love to be able to have sex with multiple female partners.  They aren't getting any slack from St. Paul on that count either.
2/9/10 2:39 PM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
Joe Ray
Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 8/24/00
Posts: 54626
Church should accept equal rights for gays, says David Cameron

David Cameron has criticised the Church of England over its attitudes to homosexuality, calling for it to accept equal rights for gays.

In an interview with the gay magazine Attitude, Mr Cameron said that “our Lord Jesus” would back equality and gay rights if he were alive. He said that he did not want to get into a row with the Archbishop of Canterbury, Dr Rowan Williams, but the Church should recognise that equal rights for gays was “essential”.

Mr Cameron apologised last summer on behalf of his party for the Section 28 legislation banning promotion of homosexuality in schools.

The Tory leader said that it was “worth looking” at changing civil partnerships to marriage but at the moment he favoured staying in the current situation. where we are.

.....

“Actually I could find you quite a lot of relatively religious conservatives who totally agree that we must never go back. My Parliamentary Private Secretary Des Swayne is a good example, someone of deep religious faith, but who argues very passionately with people like him that they have just got it wrong. That if our Lord Jesus was around today he would very much be backing a strong agenda on equality and equal rights, and not judging people on their sexuality. I’m being as honest as can, that all conservative parties will often find this journey a bit harder than others.”

.....

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/comment/faith/article7017147.ece


....That bloke is going to be the next UK Prime Minister
2/9/10 6:57 PM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
Grakman
Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 6/21/08
Posts: 2427
 Welcome back, Ridge.
2/10/10 12:52 AM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
Ridgeback
3 The total sum of your votes up and votes down Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 7/3/07
Posts: 15685
Joe Ray - Church should accept equal rights for gays, says David Cameron

David Cameron has criticised the Church of England over its attitudes to homosexuality, calling for it to accept equal rights for gays.

In an interview with the gay magazine Attitude, Mr Cameron said that “our Lord Jesus” would back equality and gay rights if he were alive. He said that he did not want to get into a row with the Archbishop of Canterbury, Dr Rowan Williams, but the Church should recognise that equal rights for gays was “essential”.

Mr Cameron apologised last summer on behalf of his party for the Section 28 legislation banning promotion of homosexuality in schools.

The Tory leader said that it was “worth looking” at changing civil partnerships to marriage but at the moment he favoured staying in the current situation. where we are.

.....

“Actually I could find you quite a lot of relatively religious conservatives who totally agree that we must never go back. My Parliamentary Private Secretary Des Swayne is a good example, someone of deep religious faith, but who argues very passionately with people like him that they have just got it wrong. That if our Lord Jesus was around today he would very much be backing a strong agenda on equality and equal rights, and not judging people on their sexuality. I’m being as honest as can, that all conservative parties will often find this journey a bit harder than others.”

.....

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/comment/faith/article7017147.ece


....That bloke is going to be the next UK Prime Minister

That's fine.  The Anglican church is on its death bed anyway.  People who try to make their church match their culture soon find that their church disappears with their culture.
2/10/10 1:53 AM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
PembrokePinesVillain
Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 10/31/08
Posts: 5041
 what about where it says do not lay with a man as you would lay with a woman? thats pretty cut and dry to me, this guy better change his ways or its gonna get real hot in his future
2/10/10 1:58 AM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
PembrokePinesVillain
Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 10/31/08
Posts: 5042
Ridgeback -   

 The rule has always been simple in Christianity.  If you are married you can do it.  If you are not you can't.  Marriage is between a man and a woman who could theoretically produce offspring if they were healthy.  Robinson would be a much more honest man if he dismissed the religion and took off his collar.  
 this is exactly right, he knows it, we know it, but this guy is trying to convince himself that what he is doing is ok, even though he knows in his heart that it isnt. He believes in god, wants to go to heaven, but wont give up his sin, he keeps telling himself that its ok and that god will forgive him, he probably believes 100% that he will go to heaven, but he also knows what he is doing is wrong and wont let go of it, he cant say no

this is the same as christians that have sex before marriage, live with their girlfriends, drink every single day, do drugs, etc etc they all know its wrong but they are not willing to give it up, so they convince themselves that being a believer is enough, they believe 99% of what the bible says and throw out the part that condemns their particular sin.
2/10/10 3:27 PM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
Joe Ray
Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 8/24/00
Posts: 54641
"That if our Lord Jesus was around today he would very much be backing a strong agenda on equality and equal rights, and not judging people on their sexuality"

I was more interested in what you thought of this part.
2/11/10 3:58 AM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
Ridgeback
3 The total sum of your votes up and votes down Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 7/3/07
Posts: 15697
Joe Ray - "That if our Lord Jesus was around today he would very much be backing a strong agenda on equality and equal rights, and not judging people on their sexuality"

I was more interested in what you thought of this part.

A great deal of self-justification takes the form of the imagined approval for one's actions by Jesus.  
2/11/10 10:02 AM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
Joe Ray
Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 8/24/00
Posts: 54642
I see. Thanks.
2/12/10 1:01 AM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
PembrokePinesVillain
Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 10/31/08
Posts: 5048
 actual jesus would and had full athority to judge this man, and he would condemn him, also christians are supposed to help, give critiscism aka judge fellow brothers and sisters, we are not supposed to judge those outside the church, so as a christian i am technically allowed to judge this guy, and i feel that what he is saying and doing is wrong.

im sorry i cant site the exact verse that talks about this but its in 1st corenthians somewhere i think
2/15/10 10:17 PM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
Philanderer
13 The total sum of your votes up and votes down Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Edited: 02/15/10 10:18 PM
Member Since: 1/1/01
Posts: 1907
double post
2/15/10 10:18 PM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
Philanderer
13 The total sum of your votes up and votes down Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 1/1/01
Posts: 1908
Ridgeback - - That's fine.  The Anglican church is on its death bed anyway.  People who try to make their church match their culture soon find that their church disappears with their culture


Insightful as hell. Or what's that saying by conservative christians- "The church is supposed to lead the world, not be lead by it."
2/16/10 9:35 AM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
Grakman
Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 6/21/08
Posts: 2485
Ridgeback - 
Joe Ray - "That if our Lord Jesus was around today he would very much be backing a strong agenda on equality and equal rights, and not judging people on their sexuality"

I was more interested in what you thought of this part.

A great deal of self-justification takes the form of the imagined approval for one's actions by Jesus.  
I imagine it would be something like the scene with the woman caught in adultery.  Jesus may forgive on the spot, but he would add 'Go, and sin no more.'
 
3/4/10 11:24 AM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
CJJScout
52 The total sum of your votes up and votes down Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 4/20/04
Posts: 5523
^^^True dat.
3/4/10 12:45 PM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
toelocku
Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 11/5/03
Posts: 3086
CJJScout - ^^^True dat.

5/10/10 10:12 AM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
RamK
57 The total sum of your votes up and votes down Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Member Since: 8/29/03
Posts: 3614
Kind of makes sense to me.

Reply Post

You must log in to post a reply. Click here to login.