From here:
The consecration of homosexual bishops is a matter of justice.
The Episcopal Church in the United States voted last week to overturn a moratorium on the ordination of gay bishops. Dr Rowan Williams, the Archbishop of Canterbury, told the General Synod yesterday that he regretted that decision.Those member Churches, including many in Africa, who conscientiously cannot accept homosexual bishops, should not have appointments forced upon them. But the issue is not one of denominational preference alone. It is also a matter of justice.
The liberal elite who run Western Anglicanism would not admit that they are consciously bent upon the destruction of their denomination – and I don’t believe they are. Subconsciously, it is another matter: to adapt an old proverb: those whom God wishes to destroy he first makes mad.
The reason given for the ordaining of homosexuals is that it is a matter of justice; to exclude homosexuals from holding clergy positions would be unjust. But what do liberals mean by justice in this context?
Of the various shades of meaning of justice – fair, morally right, lawful – the meaning cannot be morally right or lawful, since the bible clearly condemns homosexual activity. That leaves us with fair. But fair to whom? Certainly not fair to the homosexuals who struggle with temptation yet remain celibate, and not fair to orthodox Christians who are committed to following the bible and expect their leaders to do the same. It is also not fair to the run-of-the mill sinner sitting in the pew who, instead of trying to convince the church to bless his sins, is struggling to overcome them.
It is not even fair to practising homosexual clergy, since it confirms as right behaviour that is actually wrong.
In truth, this has nothing to do with justice: it has everything to do with selfishness wanting its own way.
Justice is in the eye of the beholder.
God’s word is eternal. Homosexuality is wrong and a sin and those who promote it are defying God. Period.
Peace,
Jim
bible clearly condemns homosexual activity”
not only does it not, but believers under the new covenant no longer live under regulation as in deut.28, but instead grace. you cannot explain how homosexuqality comes against the 2nd commandment(love your neighbor…..) the summation of all new covenant law, because it doesnt. therefore it is not a sin. pure and simple.
if you have another understanding of romans commentary on the 2nd commandment, id like to hear it.
the first and second are linked together 1john20 if you dont love your brother you cannot love god.
the fact that Paul rather than write the words arseno and koitai apart(1cor and 1tim), as in the greek translation of lev, but instead joins them together creating a new word………indicates he is not refering to the inclusive understanding of lev but rather abusive and defiling behaviors within the realm of being a sexual human, within the realm of sexually acting out……..dragonfly, ladykiller are examples of compound words who have meaning other their specific words.
the victoriian era translators gave no written explanation, to avoid challenge of an absence of reasoning. the fact that the transposition occured in the victorian era, an era known for its sexually repressive attitudes speaks for itself.
paul is not attempting to make a new covenant regulation, but is pointing to specific sexual acts that are about a defiling and abusive spirit, in the realm of human sexuality that is against christ.
bonding among homosexuals is not about abuse or defilement, but mutual love, devotion, affection, respect, and trust for a shared committed life together………the same as with heterosexuals. there is nothing about being homosexual that is abusive and defiling.
So the Bible has parts decrying homosexuality. So guess whats coming next folks. Yup they will ban it in twenty years or less unless it is a hacked version amenable to modern “values”.
According to the Gospel of feetxxxl, God owes the cities of Sodom and Gomorrah an apology. Love, Love, Love that’s all we need.
That explains why homosexuals have so many sexual partners, they are just trying to spread the good news.
Dave,
It gets better than that. The Old Testament doesn’t exist.
Peace,
Jim
“… the victorian era, an era known for its sexually repressive attitudes …”
if the Victorians were sexually repressed, how on earth did they manage to have all those children?