In which our hero gets mad about news....again
The Episcopal Church is backpedalling on gay rights.
On one level, I can't blame the bishop, who has been very clear that she believes in the cause, but that it is more important to keep the church whole.
And it's not like it really affects me personally -- I'm not religious.
But it strikes me that SO much of the accepted doctrine of *any* christian church is based on received wisdom -- by which I mean traditional interpretations of an often badly-translated, self-contradicting, and wildly misunderstood Bible -- that it just seems odd to make a stand and issue ultimatums (on either side) over this one issue.
Except...
Except that the Episcopals give a lot of lip service to being inclusive and modern. They're "hip" enough to have a woman bishop. They claim to emphasize the gospel over the prohibitions. "Come to Jesus and be saved, and be welcome here, no matter who you are" is a powerful message, but as with every other organized religion, it seems to get buried under Rules.
Don't get me wrong, rules are necessary. But the really important ones, biblically, are supposed to be the Ten Commandments and the Golden Rule -- and none of them establish rules for clergy or sexuality. Instead, bigots use the archaic rules in Leviticus, and some Pauline letters, and an inaccurate and prurient idea about Sodom and Gomorrah, to justify BREAKING that golden rule. Most do so without realizing the source of their bigotry is simply tradition.
It must be hard to come to terms with change when your life, and your hope of anything better, is tied to an unflinching interpretation of an ancient book.
By clinging to the skirts of the Anglican church (which essentially exists because Henry VIII wanted a divorce -- yes, i know it's more complex than that), which itself owes so much to Rome, which itself is mired in a sexual scandal....well it just seems to me that they're putting the CHURCH before the MESSAGE.
It's the approach of a petty bureaucrat, who will deny common sense and pragmatism in the name of having the right box ticked on a form.
If, as they believe, God wants them to go forth and spread a message of love, tolerance, acceptance, forgiveness....and if humans are so prone to sin that they *need* to hear that message....then how can you justify treating homosexuals differently from how you treat others? Surely no sin is to great in god's eyes that it would make someone with an honest calling unworthy to preach the good news. Isn't the message supposed to be greater than the messenger? Isn't is supposed to uplift and sanctify that person, while she's doing her job?
But no, scared old people who fear change win ...again.
Sigh. I'm glad I make my own relationship with the divine.
On one level, I can't blame the bishop, who has been very clear that she believes in the cause, but that it is more important to keep the church whole.
And it's not like it really affects me personally -- I'm not religious.
But it strikes me that SO much of the accepted doctrine of *any* christian church is based on received wisdom -- by which I mean traditional interpretations of an often badly-translated, self-contradicting, and wildly misunderstood Bible -- that it just seems odd to make a stand and issue ultimatums (on either side) over this one issue.
Except...
Except that the Episcopals give a lot of lip service to being inclusive and modern. They're "hip" enough to have a woman bishop. They claim to emphasize the gospel over the prohibitions. "Come to Jesus and be saved, and be welcome here, no matter who you are" is a powerful message, but as with every other organized religion, it seems to get buried under Rules.
Don't get me wrong, rules are necessary. But the really important ones, biblically, are supposed to be the Ten Commandments and the Golden Rule -- and none of them establish rules for clergy or sexuality. Instead, bigots use the archaic rules in Leviticus, and some Pauline letters, and an inaccurate and prurient idea about Sodom and Gomorrah, to justify BREAKING that golden rule. Most do so without realizing the source of their bigotry is simply tradition.
It must be hard to come to terms with change when your life, and your hope of anything better, is tied to an unflinching interpretation of an ancient book.
By clinging to the skirts of the Anglican church (which essentially exists because Henry VIII wanted a divorce -- yes, i know it's more complex than that), which itself owes so much to Rome, which itself is mired in a sexual scandal....well it just seems to me that they're putting the CHURCH before the MESSAGE.
It's the approach of a petty bureaucrat, who will deny common sense and pragmatism in the name of having the right box ticked on a form.
If, as they believe, God wants them to go forth and spread a message of love, tolerance, acceptance, forgiveness....and if humans are so prone to sin that they *need* to hear that message....then how can you justify treating homosexuals differently from how you treat others? Surely no sin is to great in god's eyes that it would make someone with an honest calling unworthy to preach the good news. Isn't the message supposed to be greater than the messenger? Isn't is supposed to uplift and sanctify that person, while she's doing her job?
But no, scared old people who fear change win ...again.
Sigh. I'm glad I make my own relationship with the divine.