Holy Blasphemy, Batman!

Lately, as per usual, I've been doing some thinking, some reflecting, and some soul-searching. And a few things are coming to a head as a result. Before I get into all of that, I want to do what I promised a couple of weeks ago, and I want to respond to the comments that I received as a result of the last blog post, and I want to elaborate on a few things that I feel have become unclear.

Re: Qwerty Faith
I got a few comments on that post, and I really have taken them in with an open heart and a trust that those of you who commented have done so with the best intentions possible. And I thank you for those comments, concerns, questions, etc. Therefore, I want to address you (and the rest of you dear readers) about the broader issue of LGBT Christianity.

It's a cop-out to post a link, but I really do urge everyone to click here and read what someone more studied and articulate than I has to say. What it boils down to, and what the main take-home is, is that homosexuality in the form of committed relationships between two consenting adults is not forbidden in the Bible. The argument is that the prohibitions on such activities in the Old Testament were based around rape as a form of aggression/dominance over outsiders (Sodom and Gomorrah), and sexual practices related to worship of pagan gods and goddesses in their temples. The prohibitions reiterated by Paul were, then, based upon the premise of being holy and wholly set apart from the idols and their cult practices (temple prostitution, orgies, and the like).

I do encourage you all to read the blog that is linked above, though, because it goes into depth and enters into a broader explanation of how the issue is understood and what it means in this framework.

Among the comments are two points that I want to address specifically, because I think they get to the heart of the debate. One is why gay sin is so much circumvented in order for everyone to basically feel better about himself. The other point is that perhaps the heterosexual relationship is a more perfect way to understand the love of another and the community that God wants for God's children.

The first point, I think, is something that is a deeper than it first seems. Yes, everyone wants to feel like his or her way of life is a good one. No one wants to live in a state of constant dread, guilt, fear, or self-doubt. Obviously. But at the same time, this conflicts with the very real view that many hold which states that homosexuality is something that is wrong in its core. And that view is founded in a much larger system of belief which has its merits and is not something to be taken lightly. If I'm gay, and if the Bible is being face-value literal about the abomination of my lifestyle, then something's got to give. I cannot be happy if my sexuality and my spirituality are constantly at odds.

Something does have to give, but not completely. I don't think of my life as a compromise. I see the ways in which I've changed as an evolution. I've learned that Christian love is about just that, love. Jesus himself boiled down the Law to Love God, Love Others. And while I don't mean to dumb down the intricacies involved in Christian theology, I think that Christ himself had a very good point. Imagine that.

In my movement into a liturgical tradition, one of the core values that strikes me is one of reconciliation. The Episcopal church prays every Sunday for other churches around the world, other churches within our own city. And these churches fall both within and without the Anglican communion. It is very common that during the Prayers of the People (which is a stunning act of solidarity and community) each week, we pray for the XYZ Baptist or Methodist or Catholic or Church of Christ congregation. It is also part of that core value system that the Anglican communion, though multi-faceted, takes the Nicene Creed seriously when we say "We believe in one holy catholic and apostolic church." The Episcopal church is in full communion with the Evangelical Lutheran Church, the Moravian Church, and the Old Catholic Church of the Union of Utrecht. There are continuing talks with the Presbyterian Church (PCUSA), as I understand it, that the communion may be expanded there, as well. The point, here, is that the love of Christ reaches beyond ourselves and beyond our own little stations. Reconciling differences is not doing away with them. They exist for reasons aplenty. But learning from differences and embracing the diversity that they entail is often a powerful way to learn about others and ultimately oneself.

That being said (and I realize it was tangential), I think that the overwhelming issue at stake here is that love overcomes barriers we have thought insurmountable. So, the greater issue is not about feeling better. It's about loving beyond what we personally understand. Most, if not all, gay people have wished, prayed, and begged to be straight. But it isn't something that is chosen. So, with that in mind, loving God and loving others is what comes next for those who are Christian. And finding a place to do that, a framework in which to work, and a community of support for the ministry that may be had is of the utmost importance.

Say what you will about the Episcopal church, but I've found that there is love there. For God, for others, for the naked and the poor and the hungry, for the wealthy and the happy, the searching, the hurting, and even for the LGBTQ among us. If ever we needed a holy communion, it is certain that it must be one that welcomes those who wish to taste the divine.

It's clear I'll have to create a second post for the other main point of this. Another day, dear readers. Another cup of coffee. Another soapbox from which to pontificate and wrestle.

T