Believers in Exile

by The Rev. Dr. Rodney R. Romney
February 12, 2006

This title is not original with me. It could be misinterpreted by some, who might think it implies that we believe those people whose beliefs are different from our own should be exiled. Such is not my intent. Rather I mean that we, you and I, are often believers in exile when we discover that we don't fit into mainstream religious thought.

"Believers in exile" is a phrase that comes from the writings of Bishop John Shelby Spong, who has been a strong voice for American liberal Christianity for the past twenty years or more. In his book, "Why Christianity Must Change or Die," he writes about what it has meant for him to live in a state of exile, because he cannot accept many of the presuppositions of his own religious past. As he points out, exile is never a voluntary experience. It is something forced upon us by people or circumstances over which we have no control.

Exile, as an enforced dislocation, has been a particularly familiar experience for Jewish people. Jewish history is marked by numerous exiles, beginning in the year 598 B.C. in their historic struggles as recorded in Hebrew scripture, including their captivity by the Babylonians. The exile of Jews was carried into our own century with the rise of Nazism, which sought to exterminate all Jews in Germany and Eastern Europe through the horrors of the holocaust.

Exile was also forced upon Africans who were captured in their own countries and brought to this land to be sold as slaves. Eventually a war was fought to free them, but freedom did not instantly happen. After the Civil War, African-Americans continued to live in exile from the full benefits and advantages that were enjoyed by their white captors, an exile that still continues, though to a lesser degree.

Historically women have lived in exile. Only in comparatively recent times have women been granted greater equality. However, in many religions women are still considered inferior and are not granted equal status with men, particularly when it comes to leadership roles. Will we ever see a female Catholic pope? Not likely, since women are still denied the role of priests or bishops. Betty Friedan, recently deceased and often referred to as the founder of the feminist movement in this country was against a culture that slapped down those who didn't conform, and thus she pulled a trigger in history (Alvin Toffler's words) against exiling women.

People whose sexual persuasion is other than heterosexual have lived in exile for generations. As gay, lesbian, and transgender people have become more outspoken and honest and have come out of the closets into which they have exiled, society and some churches opened their doors to them, but many churches did not.

In my denomination (American Baptist), a group was formed in the 1980s called the Association of Welcoming and Affirming Baptists (AWAB), which meant everyone was welcome in an AWAB church, regardless of sexual identity. This is a comparatively small group of fifty or more churches across the country, which included the two churches I served in Oakland and Seattle.

Currently there has been a move by some of the more conservative churches to banish all AWAB churches. There are already more than thirty different Baptist groups, so separation is nothing new for Baptists, ranging all the way from Southern Baptists, the largest, to a tiny group called the Two-Seed-in-One-Spirit Baptists (whatever that means). The autonomy of the local church, which Baptists have always protected, means a church is independent from any higher authority and responsible to no one but its own people. However, that doesn't mean a church might not be exiled if it strays too far from the dictates of the larger body.

Because I believe in and have consistently preached a gospel of unconditional love and the inclusion of all people, regardless of race, gender, or sexual orientation, the two churches I served attracted racial and sexual minorities. Their individual stories often reflected stories of heartbreak and alienation from families, from society and from churches who would not accept them. Thanks to the counsel I received from a therapist, who worked closely with that population and who attended my church, I was able to confirm something I intuitively felt was true: sexuality, like race, is genetic and not something that one arbitrarily chooses. The refusal of many churches to accept this fact has resulted in their launching a vitriolic attack against the churches and ministers with whom they differed.

Not only churches, but society at large has kept sexual minorities in exile. The late Coretta Scott King said in 2004, "Gay and lesbian people have families, and their families should have the same legal protection, whether by marriage or civil union. A constitutional amendment banning same-sex marriages is a form of gay-bashing, and it would do nothing to protect traditional marriages. Constitutional amendments should be used to expand freedom, not restrict it."

As we look back at human history, we realize that there have always been groups who believed in exiling those with whom they disagreed or did not understand. The primary mission of Jesus was to deliver everyone from exile. He said, "I am here to preach the good news to the poor, to heal the broken-hearted, to deliver the captives, to bring sight to the blind, and to set at liberty all those who are oppressed." (Luke 4:18)

The one thing that Jesus makes clear to his followers is that their greatest task is to love and accept others. We are not here to change people into our image of who we think they should be, we are here to love people for who they really and truly are. We are here to help remove them from exile, to bring sight to the blind and to set at liberty all those who are oppressed.

Paul Tillich, a theologian whose writings have strongly influenced my thinking, was himself a refugee from Nazi Germany. The God to whom Tillich pointed was not a person, but a mystical presence in which all personhood could flourish. This God, said Tillich, is not a being but rather a power that calls forth being in all creatures, not an external, personal force that can be invoked but rather an internal reality that opens to us the meaning of life itself. This God is not a God of exclusion, but a God who includes everyone and loves all persons and all life equally.

What then will we of the liberal faith do with Jesus? I say we need to reclaim Jesus from the fundamentalists, where he has never really belonged. His primary mission was to reform his own religion, which was Jewish. Because he preached that the main task of religion is to love one another, and because he practiced what he preached and welcomed and affirmed all people (including women, prostitutes, Gentiles, and sinners), he was exiled and finally put to death. Jesus did not intend to establish a new religion. He tried to reform the religion into which he had been born and to return it to its original and true purpose. It is impossible to quote Jesus accurately today, because all we have are translations of translations which were culled and chosen by select groups, but we can gain insight into his message and mission if we study the texts carefully. You might want to read "Misquoting Jesus" by Bart Ehrman, (Harper, 2005), a study of how human mistakes and changes shaped the Bible we read today.

As I see it, the primary purpose of the Christian church today is threefold: (1) to discover anew the God who is the infinite center of all life, not a person but a mystical presence in which all persons may grow and flourish; (2) to discover anew the Jesus of the New Testament, whose teachings can still guide us today, and (3) to love all persons exactly as they are. Jesus was not a magician or a wonder-worker, but he can be a mystical and loving presence in all life. This does not mean that Jesus is the only way to God. He is one way. But all faiths eventually lead to the same place and dissolve into the eternal (as stated on our bulletin cover today).

Many of us today are believers who are in exile. For various reasons, old religious forms and suppositions no longer work for us. The question before us is how do we exist when we are placed in exile because of our beliefs? Let me suggest some ways by which I believe we can move into the future as a vibrant disciples of a relevant faith.

1. In our churches we need to maintain worship services that are vital, inspiring and relevant. The sermon, the music, the children's programs, and the ministries of a church must give evidence of spiritual renewal, enthusiasm, acceptance of all people, and ultimate meaning for the times in which we live. The sermon or spoken message of any church is crucial and must be relevant, energizing and inspiring.

2. The spirit of friendship must be warm, sincere, and inclusive. It is up to every individual to make sure that all visitors are made to feel welcome and included.

3. Ministries of outreach and social justice are vital. We need to give evidence that we stand for more than just ourselves, that we are also part of the world in which we live, giving our support to those ministries and programs in our world and community which represent our own core values and our basic beliefs in equality and social justice.

4. An all-inclusive love for our world, all its peoples and all its many life forms, must be the primary doctrine of this place. We must be socially and environmentally committed as we consciously manifest a concern for the planet on which we live and all the creatures with whom we share this place.

5. Our churches must continue to be places where all religious traditions are honored and revered, and where we especially welcome those individuals who have been placed in exile, because they can no longer accept all the doctrines and suppositions of a particular religious system. All religions are human-made systems which are taking different routes to get to the same place. We may have disagreements as to religion, but when it comes to matters of the spirit, we must be in harmony, for this is where we meet God.

Persons are always more important than religious systems. May churches and temples ever be a place where the sacredness of each individual is upheld and central to our life together.

Two young men, who were regular attendees at Seattle First Baptist Church, where I was then senior minister, came to see me one day and asked me to perform a commitment service in the sanctuary for them. They knew they wanted to be together for life, and they wanted to acknowledge this in a spiritual and public way, even though legal recognition was not possible.

It was not the first time I had done this kind of service, but this one proved to be different. For one thing, a father of one of the young men was vehemently against their doing such a thing. He deplored that his son insisted on being gay, and he particularly despised a church or a minister that would conduct such a public ceremony. Thereby he announced vocally and viciously to me and to them that he would not be in attendance at their so-called wedding.

Another unusual circumstance about the event was that the young men wanted their beloved dog, Luna, a black Labrador, to be the ring bearer. I was a bit concerned about that, not wanting to turn the service into a comic routine, but the men assured me the dog was well-trained and would not be a problem.

The ceremony came off beautifully. When I asked at the end what tokens they planned to give to each other as a symbol of their love, they replied, "These rings," whereby they whistled for Luna, who was being held on a leash in the back of the sanctuary. The leash was loosened and she bounded down the center aisle of the church toward her owners, a small box ring box attached to her collar. When the box had been removed, she laid down obediently at our feet and listened intently to the rest of the service. When the postlude began, she turned and led everyone down the aisle in a stately march. Her performance was stellar and would have won her an Oscar, if one had been granted that day to dogs.

One of the young men was a steward for Alaska airlines, and several years later he invited his partner to share a flight with him to California and back. As the plane was returning to Seattle, it developed engine trouble and went down in the Pacific Ocean. Both men, along with many passengers and crew members, lost their lives.

Friends arranged for a memorial service to be held in the same church where these men had made their public commitment to each other. To my surprise, the father, who had refused to attend their commitment ceremony, was there, and asked me if he could say a few words. I was hesitant and apprehensive, but decided I had no right to deny that to him. He stood up and gave an eloquent tribute to his son, confessing his own ignorance and lack of acceptance as a father, admitting that he had been wrong not to attend their wedding service, and how his son and partner had verified for him a love for one another that was genuine and real. With tears in his eyes, he ended with these words, "I was wrong, and I want you to know it. These boys were fully loved and accepted by God, and I can only hope that they now know they are fully loved and accepted by me as well." Nearly everyone was in tears when his talk ended.

At that very moment, Luna, the black Lab, who was sitting in a front pew with some friends of her owners, raised her head and uttered a mournful howl. She too was mourning the loss of her beloved companions.

I know this story would be scorned by some religious bigots, who would cheerfully place me and that family in exile, if they could. But for me it was an affirmation of a kind benevolent Force in creation who loves everyone and everything, and who yearns to bring us out of exile into complete acceptance and unconditional love.

May God help all of us to grow to be who we came here to be. Believers in exile we may be today and perhaps always. But we are headed toward a place of unconditional love and complete acceptance. Don't give up, and don't turn back. We are on our way.

The Very Rev. Robert Taylor is possible second openly gay Episcopalian bishop

by Ken Lambert, Seattle Times

The Very Rev. Robert Taylor, dean of St. Mark's Episcopal Cathedral, is among five finalists for the position of bishop of the Diocese of California.

One of the Seattle area's most prominent clerics, the Very Rev. Robert Taylor, dean of St. Mark's Episcopal Cathedral, is among five finalists for the position of bishop of the Diocese of California.

If elected, Taylor would become the second openly gay bishop in the Episcopal Church and the worldwide Anglican Communion to which it belongs.

The denomination has been sharply divided on the issue of homosexuality, especially since the 2003 election of the church's first openly gay bishop, in New Hampshire. "I feel just honored and humbled by the trust and faith of the diocese in including me on their list of nominees," said Taylor. He also said he hoped the church would focus on issues other than gay clergy, such as poverty, health care and ministering to the larger society.

"I would say that the major global issue for the Anglican Communion is not the discussion of human sexuality," he said. "That's a side show. It's about the ministry we should be engaged in in ending global poverty."

The announcement of the finalists was made Monday morning at Grace Cathedral in San Francisco, home of the Diocese of California, which has about 27,000 members in the Bay Area.

Taylor, 47, has led St. Mark's Cathedral on Capitol Hill since 1999. During his tenure, membership has risen from 1,900 to 2,400, and in 2002 the cathedral bought a nearby building and land for $11.5 million to accommodate the growth.

At his previous position, as rector at St. Peter Church in Peekskill, N.Y., the congregation grew from about 50 to 550 during his 11 years there.

Taylor is known for his graciousness and his work on social justice, community outreach and interfaith efforts. He helped fight against apartheid in his native South Africa, which he left in 1980 with help from Nobel laureate and Anglican Archbishop Desmond Tutu.

At St. Mark's, Taylor has made the cathedral a focal point for social-justice activities. He and Rabbi Daniel Weiner of Temple De Hirsch Sinai are co-founders of Faith Forward, a social-action group for people of faith.

He served as chairman of King County's Committee to End Homelessness and is founding president of the Desmond Tutu Peace Foundation, which raises money for Tutu's peace center in Cape Town, South Africa.

"I will miss him terribly" if he is elected bishop, said St. Mark's parishioner Peggy Cleary, 50, of Seattle. "He's brought a lot of clarity to our purpose. before Robert came, a lot of what we did was all over the map. He's really gotten people more focused."

In addition to Taylor, the finalists include the Rt. Rev. Mark Handley Andrus, an assistant bishop of the Diocese of Alabama; the Rev. Jane Gould, rector of St. Stephen's Church in Lynn, Mass.; the Rev. Bonnie Perry, rector of All Saints' Church in Chicago; and the Rev. Canon Eugene Taylor Sutton, canon pastor at Washington National Cathedral in the nation's capital.

The candidates will meet collectively with members of the California diocese April 24 to 29, with the election May 6. The bishop-elect is to be confirmed at the denomination's national gathering June 13 to 22.

In 2003, the national gathering was a battleground over the confirmation of the openly gay Rt. Rev. V. Gene Robinson. While some within the church saw the move as a significant victory for gay rights and biblical teachings on inclusion, others, including some bishops in Africa, Asia and Latin America, saw it as another in a series of steps away from biblical authority.

Some of those bishops talked of a schism. In the United States, a number of conservative churches formed the Anglican Communion Network, and some local parishes left their dioceses. Two local parishes — St. Charles in Poulsbo and St. Stephen in Oak Harbor — aligned with a traditionalist bishop in Brazil.

Among the five finalists to succeed the California Diocese's Bishop William Swing, who is retiring, Taylor and Perry are openly gay.

That's not meant to be a political statement, said the Rev. Jack Eastwood, an adviser to Bishop Swing. "We're trying to find the best person to lead this diocese," which is diverse in its ethnicity, sexuality and income levels.

"I think the elected leadership really has to respect the fact that we do have differences throughout the church worldwide."

For Taylor, the attractions of the position include the diocese's desire to grow, to better serve the multiethnic population there, and its commitment to social justice.

Becoming embroiled in his denomination's battle over gay clergy "is not a role that I've certainly sought in any way," he said. "It is my hope that if I were to be elected, we would be putting energy — and I want to put energy — into much more vital, pressing, interesting conversations."

[ For more information, contact Janet I. Tu by phone at 206-464-2272 or by email at jtu@seattletimes.com.]

Copyright © 2006 The Seattle Times Company

Homosexuality and the Bible: The Last Prejudice

by The Rev. Timothy Ahrens
The First Congregational Church, Columbus Ohio
Sunday, February 12, 2006

[Part V of VI in the sermon series: "We Believe: God in American Life"
Genesis 19:1-9; Acts 10:34-43, Luke 10:29-37]

The last prejudice in this nation and in Christian faith is against homosexuals. Across the nation and faith, there are huge pockets of prejudice in which it is acceptable or encouraged to scorn, condemn and judge persons who are Gay, Lesbian, Bisexual and Transgendered (or GLBT). GLBT persons are ridiculed, mocked, beaten, judged, jailed, and even murdered because they have a sexual orientation - or they are judged to have a sexual orientation - other than straight or heterosexual. Let it be known to ALL who hear this or read this, The First Congregational Church, UCC, Columbus, Ohio is a safe place for you or your loved ones, if you or they are gay, lesbian, bisexual or transgendered. We are an island of sanity in a sea of prejudice. But, we are not the only island. If our community of faith is not what you need, I promise you, with everything that is in me, I will help you find a spiritual home.

Today I begin to end this six-part sermon series, "We Believe: God in American Life." Today's sermon,"Homosexuality and the Bible: The Last Prejudice," is drawn from many years of study, preaching, and writing. Next week, I conclude with "Homosexuality and the Church: A Way Forward." In a few minutes, I will focus on "What the Bible says about homosexuality." First, allow me to share a small part of my journey with you and what I have learned.

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Let us pray: May the words of my mouth and the meditations of each one of our hearts be acceptable in your sight, O Lord, our rock and our salvation. Amen.

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

For the last 14 of my 48 years I have walked a journey of acceptance and love for persons who are gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgendered. As a heterosexual Christian and a pastor, this has often been eye-opening experience. It has always been an adventure. I have been converted from a Liberal Christian Homophobe (that is "one who proclaims he is an accepting Christian but inwardly is scared of homosexuality and persons who are GLBT") to an open and affirming man and pastor. My trek has taken a rather rambling route. But, on this path I have met Jews and Christians, agnostics and atheists of all ages and races who have shared their stories with me and opened my eyes by so doing. I have witnessed depression, despair and death as well as renewed hope, revival and resurrection.

I have walked the final hours with men dying of AIDS who have been cast out of the church because they were gay. As they died beside me, they found peace in feeling they were indeed "reconciled to their Savior." Lesbians have told me their stories of rejection and alienation from "Christian" parents and family members who looked them in the eye and spoke to them as though they were dead. Bisexuals have told me of their faithful struggles to live and love one partner, even while feeling attracted to people of both genders. Persons who are transgendered and transsexual have told me of their struggles to become alive to the person they always knew they were.

Many times I have not understood the fullness of what I have heard. Any number of times, the only connection I have felt with the person in front of me was our common humanity and often our common baptism in Christ. And that was truly enough. Even more so, God's grace was always sufficient. By the end of each encounter, I realized we had much more in common than different. Through most of this journey, I have not felt worthy to be graced by the immensity of love and the integrity of faith I have witnessed in these stories of pain, suffering and loneliness. Through it all, God has humbled me with countless opportunities to listen and learn. I have learned a lot.

I have learned that in our sanctuary today and every week, there are many people with a variety of expressions of sexual orientation. I have learned to acknowledge and celebrate the variety. Just as there are hues and colors of race, beautiful mixtures of ethnicity and a vast range of multi-cultural backgrounds at First Church, so too are there varieties of sexual orientations. We should not be afraid. We need never be prejudice. Every person here must commitment himself or herself to overcome and outlive the statement: "We are `they' to `them' and `they' are `them' to us."

I've learned that the word "homosexual" was the creation of a 19th Century German psychologist who labeled homosexuality a disease. Trying to prove the pathological nature of homosexuality, science spent more than 100 years of research and come up empty. In 1973, (now 33 years ago) even while facing extreme protest from the Religious Right, the American Psychiatric Association removed homosexuality from its list of mental disorders, declaring that it is not "in itself a psychiatric disorder." For the past 30 years, geneticists have been unraveling DNA that shows some people are simply born gay. Like so many questions of nature and nurture, all the evidence isn't in on how one becomes gay or lesbian. The complexities of environment and biology work together as they do in anyone's life. Many of you have heard me quote Dr. Johnson of Masters and Johnson, who when asked why and how someone becomes homosexual responded, "I don't understand how someone becomes heterosexual and I have been studying that all my life. How do you expect me to explain how someone becomes homosexual?"

I've learned that "homosexuality" is an orientation not a lifestyle or a choice. There are a number of persons who have homosexual feelings, but do not act on their feelings. In their classic Sexual Preference, researchers Alfred Bell, Martin Weinberg and Kiefer Hammersmith of Indian University's Alfred Kinsey Institute for Sex Research repeatedly underscored one main point: "Homosexual feelings appear to play a more important role than do homosexual behaviors in the development of sexual orientation" (Sexual Preference, p. 188). Preference precedes behavior.

Often people will quote testimonies of "ex-gay" ministries when speaking to me of people "converted" from their homosexual orientation. Yet, in anonymous interviews, the founders and leaders of ex-gay ministries (persons who publicly claim to be "cured" of their homosexuality) have most often been truthful in admitting their feelings or orientation has not disappeared. Rather, they have sublimated their desires to act on their feelings. In reality these supposed, "ex-gays" are really "celibate gays" who are choosing to serve God in this way. I have honored and embraced persons when they have chosen this path while acknowledging the reality of their true feelings, just as I have honored and celebrated people who have come out and made the painfully difficult decision to be honest and open about their sexual orientation.

Through all of this growth, the one thing I have heard consistently is: "The Bible says homosexuality is a sin and I can't go against the Bible." I wish to address those who have retreated into the Alamo of their prejudice by declaring, "The Bible says homosexuality is a sin and I can't go against the Bible."

So what does the Bible say about the Last Prejudice of Against Homosexuals? This may surprise many of you, but the Bible doesn't have much to say about homosexuality. It appears the Bible really isn't very interested in the topic. In the original texts of Hebrew, Greek, Syrian, and Aramaic "homosexuality" is NEVER used. The word doesn't even appear in the Bible until 1946 in the Revised Standard Version of the Bible. Depending on your Bible of choice (and many conservative Christians pick the New King James Version BECAUSE "homosexuality" appears there), you may not see the word and its cognates. There are seven primary passages of scripture - four in the Jewish scriptures (Genesis 19, Leviticus 18:22 and 20:13, and Dt. 23:17-18) and three in Christian scriptures (Romans 1:18-32, I Corinthians 6:1-8, and I Timothy 1:9-10) which are most often rolled out in arguments against homosexuality. These texts speak against same sex acts in very negative ways. Each is related to adultery, promiscuity, violence, and idolatrous worship.

Before studying these more closely, I need to add that these seven passages could easily fit onto one page out of 1100 pages of the Bible - thus making up less than 1/10th of 1% of the holy scripture God has given us. Do you know what the first and second most written about topics in the Bible are: #1 is how we care for the poor and #2 is how we are stewards of our resources and of the earth given to our care! Poverty, Stewardship, and Care for the Earth. If these compassionate concerns are good enough for God to spend hundreds of passages addressing don't you think the church needs to put its energy here as well? Anyway, here we go . . .

Genesis 19:1-9 - the story of Sodom and Gomorrah. In Genesis 18:16-33, God sends two angels to the city of Sodom to find ten righteous people so that God might spare the city from utter destruction. When the angels arrive, Abraham's brother, Lot befriends them and brings them to his home. Later that night, Lot's house is surrounded by all the men of Sodom, old and young, who demand that Lot bring the visitors out so that they "might know them." Lot pleads with the crowd on behalf of the angels and then offers them his two virgin daughters, suggesting that the crowd would do with his daughters what they please. This is a strange passage to say the least. Without actually studying the passage, a large number of Christians assume that the sin of Sodom (for which the city is later wiped out) is homosexuality. This assumption is based completely on the belief that "to know" is a euphemism for "Sexual intercourse." Although "to know" does refer to sexual intercourse in ten other Biblical passages, in an additional 933 passages "to know" has no sexual connotation whatsoever. Evidence here suggests that it means "knowledge" or "acquaintance," not sexual abuse or homosexual rape. If this is so, then "the sin of Sodom" is not male to male intercourse but Inhospitality.

Pay attention now, because the Old Testament prophets, Jesus our Savior, and Peter and Jude agree with me - not with Rod Parsley, Jerry Falwell or Pat Robertson - that Sodom's sin is not homosexual rape. Isaiah 1:10, 3:9, Jeremiah 23:14 and Ezekiel 16:49 all say God was angry at Sodom because the people were proud and prosperous and they refused to aid the poor and needy. Whether you like it or not, God had decided to wipe out Sodom long before the city's men showed up at Lot's house. In the New Testament, Peter and Jude mention Sodom - but in general reference to what happens when people live un-Godly lives. Paul never refers to Sodom in any of his 13 letters. In Matthew 10:15, Jesus says that if a town refuses the disciples hospitality, they should shake off the dust and move on. The story of Sodom is really about wickedness, greed, and self-centered people who refuse to aid the poor and care for the strangers in their gates. God was angry because people behaved badly not because they were gay. Is it any wonder? Nevertheless, to this day, we still refer to our civil laws as "sodomy laws" and certain acts as Sodomizing, even though these laws have nothing to do with hospitality. We continue to misuse the word and create more prejudice as a result.

In the three laws of Leviticus and Deuteronomy homogenitality is condemned. But, it is crucial to note that the real concern for Jewish law was about impurity and wasting the seed of life and stood in direct reaction to pagan and Canaanite practices. We cannot make a mistake in reading these texts however. The laws exact a punishment of offenders and in Leviticus 20 such condemned to death.

I have two questions related to this: First, if we follow these laws and put people to death for homogenital acts, will we also follow stone children for disobedience, call for husbands and wives to abstain from sex except during fertile periods, and even the harvest at the edge of the field for the poor? The 613 Levitical and Deuteronomic laws make no distinction between Moral Laws and Ceremonial Laws. How then, would we choose to enforce one law over another? Second, didn't Jesus say he had come, not to destroy the law, but to fulfill the law? Did not Jesus' fulfillment of the law focus on two laws: "To love the Lord your God with all your heart, mind, soul, and strength and to love your neighbor as yourself?" How then, does any Christian have an ounce of integrity focusing on Jewish laws against homogenitality when Jesus has clarified this question?

Speaking of Jesus, let's look at the New Testament . . . Jesus said absolutely nothing about same sex relations. Nada. Nichts. Zero. While he addresses stewardship, poverty, care for the poor, living right in relationship to neighbors any number of times, he never breathes a mumbling word about same sex relations. Why is he silent? Well, either same sex issues were not an issue for Jesus or he simply chose not to "go there" or both.

Our beloved Apostle Paul was not silent. While he didn't mention Sodom (which actually confirms my hospitality theory), he did talk about male to male sex. In his landmark book in 1983, The New Testament and Homosexuality, Union Seminary New Testament Professor, Robin Scroggs offers the position that Paul was speaking, not against male to male sex per see, but against Pederasty -which literally means -men having sex with boys or young teens. Pederasty was an open and common practice in many Hellenistic cities in Paul's time. This was a form of abuse and rape, not mutual love. I would hope all of us would join Paul in opposing such abusive use of power and sex. Scroggs writes: "What the New Testament was against was the image of homosexuality as pederasty and primarily here in its more sordid and dehumanizing dimensions" (Scroggs, p. 127).

Peter J. Gomes adds in The Good Book, "Paul is not writing about homosexuality in Romans . . . He is writing about the fallen nature of humankind" (Gomes, p. 155). Paul is concerned that passions are emotions out of control. Dishonorable passions disorder God's purpose. The shameful acts that Paul brings into focus involve lust, avarice, exploitation, power and abuse. These are evil qualities in the human condition, not qualities to be associated only with homosexual persons. I hope and pray that when you consider loving relationships - whatever the orientation of your relationships may be - you always do so with a heart of love, gentleness and mutuality. With any other heart, you will find yourself condemned by Paul, and ultimately God. While I have not fully addressed Paul's writings, I hope I have opened a door to new understanding in our greatest apostle's writings.

I like what Scroggs says in conclusion to his book 23 years ago: "Biblical judgments against homosexuality, are not relevant for today's debate. They can no longer can used in denominational discussions about homosexuality, and should in no way be a weapon to justify refusal of ordination, not because the Bible is not authoritative, but simply because it does not address the issues involved (Scroggs, p. 127). That powerful conclusion was reached ten years ago by conservative theologian John Stott in an article in Christianity Today. Stott told readers to stop using biblical texts to prop up their arguments against persons who were homosexual. The case cannot be made, Stott said! (Quoted in a lecture by Virginia Ramey Mollencott, 3/4/95). William Sloan Coffin put it this way, " The problem is not how to reconcile homosexuality with scriptural passages that appear to condemn it, but rather how to reconcile the rejection and punishment of homosexuals with the love of Jesus Christ! I do not think it can be done."

I have taken much time today to reach this point. I thank you for your patience in listening. Next week, I conclude with a look at the church through the ages and our response to homosexuality. I will humbly propose a way through the madness. I hope it helps. Before I close allow me share one final reflection . . .

In today's Gospel lesson, Jesus answers the question,"Who is my neighbor?" by telling the story of a Samaritan's compassion for wounded traveler. I am sure many people were offended when Jesus chose the Samaritan as his model for loving behavior. Taught to despise and fear their neighbors in Samaria, Jesus' Jewish audience must have found it hard to swallow "good" and "Samaritan" in the same story. John 4:9, tells us that Samaritans were people with whom one should not associate. In Luke 9:54, Samaritans were those whom the fire of heaven was justifiably called down upon. Didn't Jesus know this? What was he thinking? Why didn't he give his people a positive role model from within their own Jewish faith? All too many people treat gay, lesbian, bisexual, and transgendered persons like the Jews in Jesus' crowd treated the Samaritans. Yet, like the Samaritan, I have seen sons and daughters kneel in compassion and love beside the sickbeds and deathbeds of parents who have rejected them. I have seen gay Christians offer themselves in love to co-workers, family members, and fellow Christians who have shunned them, and spoken hate and disdain for them. I have witnessed GLBT Christians love unconditionally those who have hated them with homophobic hearts, minds, and words. I have felt such unconditional love from those I had abandoned and forsaken years and years ago. I stand here today, like the man saved from death by the Samaritan so many years ago, to tell you the time has come to welcome the Samaritans home. They are good. They are our neighbors. They are our brothers, our sisters, perhaps our parents or our friends. They should no longer be treated like lepers. They need not be quarantined. They have no disease. In the words of passionate love spoken by God to God's people in Solomon's song proclaims: "Set me as a seal upon your heart, as a seal upon your arm: for love is strong as death." Amen.

Copyright 2006, The First Congregational Church