News Analysis
By David W. Virtue
www.virtueonline.org
8/24/2008
When he was at the Lambeth Conference last month in Canterbury, the newly consecrated first black Bishop of Maryland, Eugene T. Sutton made the following statement; he said that the use of Scripture to reject homosexuality in the Anglican Communion evokes previous eras' biblically based arguments in support of slavery and racism.
He was supported in his views by all eight black Episcopal bishops at the conference who believe rights for homosexuals and their behavior is acceptable based on similar logic.
Another bishop, the black Suffragan Bishop Gayle E. Harris of Massachusetts agreed saying, "As a person who knows what it means to be oppressed, I refuse to allow my brothers and sisters in the faith to be discriminated against."
Not everyone agrees with this linkage.
"As a black Christian, these types of remarks are extremely disturbing, as they in no way reflect the level of scriptural literacy, knowledge of theology, history and methods of biblical interpretation bishops (and other church leaders) should possess," says a fourth generation black Evangelical Episcopal layman, Dr. Michael Howell.
Howell, a former professor of Marine Science, is a member of the Diocese of SW Florida Standing Committee and also serves on the boards of Trinity School for Ministry, (TSM) the American Anglican Council (AAC) and Forward in Faith, North America (FIFNA).
He wrote to VOL saying that one cannot cite erroneous uses of the Bible as justification for slavery as an argument for dismissing scriptural passages that condemn homosexual behavior.
"That's not godly wisdom, but rather, sheer ignorance. Have they forgotten that the witness of the bible was an integral part of William Wilberforce's (British Evangelical politicians') argument for the eradication of the slave trade and (later), slavery?
"Slavery is never glorified in scripture and in the New Testament; it is a situation that should be avoided. There is a clear trajectory from conditional practice and tolerance (e.g., Exod. 21:1-11, Deut. 23:15-16, etc.), towards an end where emancipation is a moral imperative. In Philemon, Paul makes a compelling case for Onesimus (a slave), to be welcomed as a brother in Christ, rather than the continuation of his pre-imprisonment status as Philemon's slave.
The bible is very clear that God has always intended for people of all races, cultures and classes to be fully reconciled with Him. We see this throughout the Old Testament (e.g., Gen. 18:17-19; Ps. 67: 4; Is. 49: 6; Is. 56: 7; Is. 60: 3, 5; Dan. 7: 14; Mal. 1: 11) and certainly in the New Testament (e.g., Mt. 12: 18, Mt. 28: 19; Mk. 13: 10; Lk. 2: 32; etc.). In Acts 15, James justifies the acceptance of the Gentiles by the Church not solely on the testimonies of Peter, Paul and Barnabas, but by appealing to scripture (c.f., Acts 15: 13-21)."
Howell, a Ph.D. who has been a General Convention deputy who recently attended GAFCON and serves on the Common Cause Partnership Council said that by contrast, no scriptural parallel exists for the acceptance of homosexual behavior, despite the fact that biblical writers were certainly familiar with the notions of different sexual "orientations" and other ideas used in antiquity to support acceptance of such behavior (see "The Bible and Homosexual Practice" by Prof, Robert A.J. Gagnon for a through discussion of this topic).
"A biblical justification of slavery can only be made by ignoring and distorting the spirit, letter and trajectory of scripture - clearly unacceptable methods for exegesis and formulating hermeneutics. Those who attempt to discredit the clear and unambiguous witness of the bible towards homosexual behavior, use the same flawed approached to support the notion that homosexual behavior is compatible with Christian belief.
"For the Church, the matter of homosexual behavior can never be a "rights" or a "justice" issue. No one is barring anyone from participating in any aspect of church life or governance simply because they have same-sex attractions, weak or strong. Sex is a blessing that God has reserved for the context of (heterosexual) marriage. Sexual expression is not a "right" and scripture does not support such thinking.
"The bottom line is that Christians who are not married must accept and embrace celibacy, regardless of the intensity or type of their sexual desires. Sexual expression is not a requirement for meaningful interpersonal relationships, and friendships that are based on Godly love are highly desirable and fulfilling.
"Sexual preference or practice is a behavioral issue and therefore, is never comparable to race. As I have said many times, being Black is not a behavior and to quote another inspired source I have never met an ex-Black".
The Rt. Rev. Peter Beckwith, the orthodox Bishop of Springfield agrees, "This is just another revisionist attempt to use anything to undermine the orthodox position of the church and spread the agenda of inclusiveness."
While the eight black Episcopal bishops at the meeting favor gay rights in their church, the vast majority of Africans from the Anglican Communion heatedly disagree. In the Indaba discussion groups that formed the backbone of the conference, some black Episcopal bishops said they have framed their support for gay rights within the context of a long struggle to include blacks and women in the church and in society at large.
Bishop Sitembela Mzamane of South Africa, who says he is also "the victim of oppression," said it's "very inappropriate to equate the struggle of blacks in Africa or in the diaspora" with those of gays. "They are not victims of human rights at all," Mzamane said.
Bishop Bernard Ntahoturi of Burundi also disavowed comparisons between abolition and gay rights. "You cannot compare slavery with homosexuality. Slavery is a sin. Homosexuality is not about rights, it's about how God created you," he said.
A number of white revisionist bishops also believe that homosexuality is the next frontier of discrimination, not unlike racism and sexism, which must be rooted out if the Episcopal Church is to be fully inclusive.
The homogenital Bishop of New Hampshire, Gene Robinson is on record saying, "We've often misinterpreted Scripture. We've used Scripture to justify slavery; the subjugation of women. And now we're realizing that what the Bible initially seems to say about same-sex relationships is not actually what we're talking about today - faithful, monogamous, lifelong-intentioned relationships between people of the same sex."
Such notions of "monogamous lifelong relationships" was notably absent in the recently revealed behavior of leading homosexual Nigerian Anglican and Changing Attitude activist Davis Mac-Iyalla whose predatory homosexual behavior is more the norm than Bishop Robinson's.
The truth is Sutton's odious attack on orthodox Episcopalians who, he says, are looking for black faces to confer "legitimacy" upon, is itself racist to Blacks in North American as well as the Global South. At GAFCON in Jerusalem, (which this reporter both witnessed and reported on), the issue of race was not only not on the agenda it was utterly irrelevant as black and white mingled easily and fraternally. There was not a hint of racism. Worship styles co-mingled. There was no 'black vs. white' theology.
Any notion that one's sexuality is defined by color or creed would have been unthinkable. In a number of places where the Most Rev. Gregory Venables (Southern Cone) has come to the rescue of orthodox parishes and dioceses, a handful of rectors have been black.
In Western Canada, where he officially inaugurated the Anglican Network in Canada (ANiC) an official orthodox Anglican alternative to the Anglican Church in Canada, a large number of the priests were Chinese!
One recalls and recoils from the equally absurd comments of New York Suffragan Bishop Catherine Roskam who said at the Lambeth Conference that men beat women "because they can. We have 700 men here. Do you think any of them beat their wives? Chances are they do. The most devout Christians beat their wives... many of our bishops come from places where it is culturally accepted to beat your wife." The Archbishop of York John Sentamu ripped her as being racist for her stupid comments. "I have never beaten my wife." He warned against the danger of "stereotyping" people because of the culture they come from.
It is clear from Scripture that homosexual acts violate biblical morality. The Bible says nothing about orientation because there is no such thing as sexual orientation, only unwanted homosexual attractions. A predisposition to alcoholism does not make drinking right, much less inevitable or mandatory.
If it did, then homophobes can legitimately claim they were "born that way" and who could contradict them. They are predisposed to having a fear and or hatred of homosexuals and we should let them alone...perhaps even make them bishops!
Bishop Sutton's endorsement of homosexual behavior as being on an equal plane with being black is also not shared by thousands of Black American Baptist pastors who regard any sexual activity, outside of heterosexual marriage, as sinful.
Recently a coalition of conservative African American pastors lobbied Congress to vote against a bill that would extend federal hate-crimes laws to cover gays, saying they fear it would prevent them from preaching against homosexuality.
The handsome, debonair, politically correct Sutton might be the poster boy of Black Episcopalianism, but he does not speak for anyone outside of his dying denomination and certainly not for the vast majority of Black Americans or orthodox lay Episcopalians whose views are more closely represented by Dr. Michael Howell.
After all, if St. Paul saw homosexual activity as an issue that might keep a person from entering the Kingdom of God, it is a wager of Pascalian proportions to risk the destiny of one's eternal soul by indulging in it. Bishop Sutton might want to take note.
END
No comments:
Post a Comment