A Religious Leader Who Isn't An Idiot
 

I about fell over. Common sense in a church.

How long before they burn HER at the stake ?


WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Newly elected leader of the U.S. Episcopal Church Bishop Katharine Jefferts Schori said on Monday she believed homosexuality was no sin and homosexuals were created by God to love people of the same gender.

Jefferts Schori, bishop of the Diocese of Nevada, was elected on Sunday as the first woman leader of the 2.3 million-member Episcopal Church. the U.S. branch of the worldwide Anglican Communion. She will formally take office later this year.

Interviewed on CNN, Jefferts Schori was asked if it was a sin to be homosexual.

"I don't believe so. I believe that God creates us with different gifts. Each one of us comes into this world with a different collection of things that challenge us and things that give us joy and allow us to bless the world around us," she said.


"Some people come into this world with affections ordered toward other people of the same gender and some people come into this world with affections directed at people of the other gender."

Jefferts Schori's election seemed certain to exacerbate splits within a Episcopal Church that is already deeply divided over homosexuality with several dioceses and parishes threatening to break away.

It could also widen divisions with other Anglican communities, including the Church of England, which do not allow women bishops.

In the worldwide Anglican church women are bishops only in Canada, the United States and New Zealand. The Robinson issue has been particularly criticized in Africa where the church has a growing membership and where homosexuality is often taboo.

Jefferts Schori, who was raised a Roman Catholic and graduated in marine biology with a doctorate specialization in squids and oysters, supported the consecration of Gene Robinson of New Hampshire, the first openly gay bishop in more than 450 years of Anglican history.

The 52-year-old bishop is married to Richard Schori, a retired theoretical mathematician. They have one daughter, Katharine Johanna, 24, a second lieutenant in the U.S. Air Force and a pilot like her mother.

Asked how she reconciled her position on homosexuality with specific passages in the Bible declaring sexual relations between men an abomination, Jefferts Schori said the Bible was written in a very different historical context by people asking different questions.

"The Bible has a great deal to teach us about how to live as human beings. The Bible does not have so much to teach us about what sorts of food to eat, what sorts of clothes to wear -- there are rules in the Bible about those that we don't observe today," she said.

"The Bible tells us about how to treat other human beings, and that's certainly the great message of Jesus -- to include the unincluded."

Huh? What's this?:laugh:

:thumbsup: I love it when people just seem to get it right!

SEEE not all religious people are mean and evil. This lady and Jane Fonda really seem to have the right idea!

**I threw Jane Fonda in there because I recently read her book and really liked what she had to say about her Christianity.***

Yeah but if that was the case, how would there be excuses for all these wars and what the Terrorists have to say?:(

Very true - the bible says it is a sin to eat rare meat, and it is a sin to wear garments of mixed fabrics...

But of course.:distress:

This woman is a rather bright light. I mean she became a priest a realtively very short time ago and is now one of the haeds of the whole thing and is widely liked. That is such a good thing!

That's so awesome! Now if only us Catholics can have a leader like this... *sigh*

don't hold your breath. :-(

-Lis

She beat out that guy from Alabama who vociferously opposed homosexuality...as well as 6 other candidates :angel:

It's usually just the leaders. Pity, people so often listen to them.

If only we could clone her. She has balls, that's for sure.

I hope Im wrong but Im afraid the backlash (OH! the moral indignation!) will cost her her job. :distress:

Well Christ, isn't this refreshing??:nod:

I love you for that one.:laugh:

Mwah!!:xoxo: :laugh:

If she's coming out with this sort of stuff that directly contradicts what her church says, then maybe she's not doing much of a good job at it to begin with. :shrug:
I thought the purpose of religious leaders was to uphold the beliefs of their church, not to just pick and choose what they want to believe and preach.
When we start picking and choosing what to believe from the Bible and from God's teachings we're making up our own little version of God, and how can we be sure of truth in that?

Just my two cents' worth. :shrug:


PS: To call religious leaders and those who believe homosexuality is sinful "idiots" is a bit much.

Sahara, please clear out your message box. I was trying to send you something.

Right - But don't you see that the homosexuality debate is something that has been PICKED AND CHOSEN - it's one little passage that has been horribly misinterpreted because of POLITICS NOT RELIGION!

So those who believe homosexuality is a sin? Well they're VERY guilty of picking and choosing from the Bible. And that is the truth.

Edit: Here's a little Internet thing I always laugh at - it makes an excellent point:

Dear Dr. Laura:

Thank you for doing so much to educate people regarding God's Law.

I have learned a great deal from your show, and try to share that
knowledge with as many people as I can. When someone tries to
defend the homosexual lifestyle, for example, I simply remind them that Leviticus 18:22 clearly states it to be an abomination. ... End of debate.

I do need some advice from you, however, regarding some other
elements of God's Law and how to follow them.

1. When I burn a bull on the altar as a sacrifice, I know it
creates a pleasing odor for the Lord - Lev.1:9. The problem is my
neighbors. They claim the odor is not pleasing to them. Should I
smite them?

2. I would like to sell my daughter into slavery, as sanctioned
in Exodus 21:7. In this day and age, what do you think would be a fair price for her?

3. I know that I am allowed no contact with a woman while she is
in her period of menstrual uncleanness - Lev.15:19-24. The problem is how do I tell? I have tried asking, but most women take offense.

4. Lev. 25:44 states that I may indeed possess slaves, both male
and female, provided they are purchased from neighboring nations. A friend of mine claims that this applies to Mexicans, but not Canadians. Can you clarify? Why can't I own Canadians?

5. I have a neighbor who insists on working on the Sabbath.
Exodus 35:2. The passage clearly states he should be put to death. Am I morally obligated to kill him myself?

6. A friend of mine feels that even though eating shellfish is an
abomination - Lev. 11:10, it is a lesser abomination than
homosexuality. I don't agree. Can you settle this? Are there 'degrees' of abomination?

7. Lev. 21:20 states that I may not approach the altar of God if
I have a defect in my sight. I have to admit that I wear reading
glasses. Does my vision have to be 20/20, or is there some wiggle room here?

8. Most of my male friends get their hair trimmed, including the
hair around their temples, even though this is expressly forbidden by Lev.19:27. How should they die?

9. I know from Lev. 11:6-8 that touching the skin of a dead pig
makes me unclean, but may I still play football if I wear gloves?

10. My uncle has a farm. He violates Lev. 19:19 by planting two
different crops in the same field, as does his wife by wearing
garments made of two different kinds of thread (cotton/polyester
blend). He also tends to curse and blaspheme a lot. Is it really
necessary that we go to all the trouble of getting the whole town
together to stone them? - Lev.24:10-16. Couldn't we just burn them to death at a private family affair like we do with people who sleep with their in-laws? (Lev. 20:14)

I know you have studied these things extensively and thus enjoy
considerable expertise in such matters, so I am confident you can
help.

Thank you again for reminding us that God's word is eternal and
unchanging.

BINGO !
What shocked me most about this woman was she is the first religious leader I have ever heard talk about this selective belief in print. The mixed fibers ! :lol: Straight from Macy's to Hell !
And she actually mentioned the evidently unmentionable historical context issue. I am so impressed by her. I think they will hang her over educated ass from the highest tree, but I am impressed. She might actually get a few people to think before they lynch her.

I hope so too - I mean I hope she sticks first and foremost - but my faith in that is low :distress:

Why oh why out of everything to focus on are people so damn intent on demonizing homosexuals? It really makes NO sense to me at ALL.

AND Worse...what kind of a religious leader would advocate hatred and dissent based on their religion and Bible...but that seems to be the majority :(

I was taught by religious leaders in my community growing up that the Bible is NOT a weapon, is NOT a tool of derision...it's a guide.

And as for my own religiousity - well I hope that the few people like that woman and myself and others that will affect change..maybe not tomorrow - but someday :D

Enemy. People need an enemy. Not even Muslims are a big enough target for the seething and seemingly endless rage and fear. They will always want a target at home too. I wish I knew why. Human nature ? All I can say is that most of the people who spout this stuff are led there.

Lowest common denominator, I suppose. It's all about good and evil, black and white. Like I said, people love a target. They want to fight something. And they want to see it as they take it down.

You were lucky. Fight the good fight. Spread the word. To badly paraphrase Bon Jovi, "You give religion a good name !"

If only I believed in miracles... :o

well we've made some progress..women no longer HAVE to wear doilies on their heads for mass ;)

lol -- you're right...change is coming...just verrrry slowly.

I'm just waiting until they elect Stevie as Pope

Pope Stevie of Shangri-La :angel:

:laugh: You're gonna be waiting a loooong time ;)

Sadly a woman can't even make it to priest - that's one thing I'd like to see changed, that and the celibate thing...erm on second though perhaps I should just veer on over to Episcopal land (which actually is something I've considered).

I don't understand what you mean, sorry. It's there in black and white plenty of times, how has it been misinterpreted?
How so?

Religious leaders who say that homosexuality is sinful don't advocate hatred and dissent. Sure, some do, some individuals do, but that's not the way of God. Any religious leader doing the work of God doesn't advocate hatred of anyone.
Similarly, those who think homosexuality is sinful aren't intent on demonizing them. Again, it's a small minority. They need an enemy, someone to victimize? No. It's the act we disagree with, not the person.

To say we've at least made progress is kind of worrying to me. God's word is forever. Society changes but God doesn't change, and even when society accepts certain things it doesn't mean that the Church must conform to them.

Actually it's only in black and white a couple of times compared to the hundres of references condeming sex acts etc between heterosexuals.

The people who use Leviticus as the anti-gay thing have taken it competely out of historical context.

AND they've chosen to heed only that passage. How is that NOT picking and choosing? The letter I posted above clearly illustrates how yes, in fact, people ARE picking and chosing which parts of God's word to obey. :shrug:

EDIT:


I'm NOT discussing this further. Those who think homosexuality is a sin won't change their minds based on what I have to say and I'm generally not a fan of talking at brick walls.

I believe what I believe, and I happen to think it's sinful for people to pass judgement on other based solely on who and how they love.

Well it seems to me it's all about interpretation. There was a guest opinion in my local paper this Saturday from a pastor who essentially said that they embrace homosexual couples because they perceive the Bible to be about love and family and that protecting the children should come first. Interestingly enough, she also went on to say that, because of that position, a ban on gay marriage (in the civil arena) could possibly be seen as the state infringing on their religious beliefs.

Are they wrong? Who knows...until God him/herself comes down and starts explaining things, it will always be about interpretation.

Frankly I don't care about what any church says. I mean, I see this as a step toward tolerance and certainly seems to be more in line with the spirit of the Bible, but churches have a right to construct their own belief system.

It's when religion is used as the sole justification for any civil law that bugs me.

True enough, but it is there.

Leviticus isn't the only place where we're told about homosexuality ~ far from it, you say yourself, it's there a couple of times. It's there in the New Testament too.

No, sorry, but that to me seems completely backwards. The letter you posted is taking Leviticus out of historical context. When God handed down his laws to Moses they were intended to draw his people together ~ and to be honest, many of them were based on common sense. When Jesus came to us he didn't throw the book out the window but he did oppose the way that those laws had been used. Everything had become about ritual and people had lost sight of the most important things ~ love and God.
So Jesus gave us a new commandment -- to love God, and to love one another. Homosexuality directly contradicts love for God, and if anyone wants me to explain why, I will.

As I've said, it's the act we disagree with, not the person. Whether someone is homosexual or not to a large extent doesn't matter. Being homosexual is not wrong ~ it's the decision (THEIR decision) to act on it and engage in homosexual acts that is wrong.

Ummm....until the bible gets rewritten and re-edited by the king and whoever else happens to feel like it.

:laugh:

'What The Bible Really Says About Homosexuality,' by Daniel A. Helminiak

God creates right? So when has it ever been that a creative being has not grown and changed? Ask any creative person. You are imposing your idea upon God with a statement like that. Basically the Bible is a collection of works by man about God. I don't know anybody who has studied the Bible who says anything otherwise, including every Pope I would imagine. Dr. Laura is typical of the kinds of lazy minded no-nothings who call themselves Christian as the open letter to her beautifully demonstates. So often I have nitwits at the door with their full color pamphlets and I could swear their Bible and mine have nothing in common if they ever even bother to read theirs. Essentially I'm a Gideon by the way. You would hope that we really could have at least gotten more educated, and the amazing success of the Da Vinci Code also proves how little the average person really knows about the holy book and it's creation and evolution.

People speaking for God are nothing new, nor is the percentage who produce fruits of negativity by which ye shall know them! The hell and brimstone some seek to command will be theirs but not to command, they will have it when the sword comes around full circle to the double edged side we are told.

Love you neighbor, love your enemy, only that way is change possible. People's mere existance being a sin is not something I can agree with at all, it says God made mistakes in creating. Only the Gnostics (and maybe the Buddhist Jainists) believe in simple existence being a sin.

P.S.

I expect God also sees hidden things like a person's motivation, so the innocent person who parrots the talking points brought up by a self righteous public prayer type will be known, but we can't always know and should love them anyway. Even those who do believe in homosexuality being a sin are told to let he who is without sin cast the first stone and see the timber in your own eye first.

If it is wrong or a sin for you speak for yourself. I can't eat crab meat as I'm allergic to it, but that does not mean crabs or people who eat them are evil or sinning, nor does it mean that nobody should eat it because it is wrong for me to. God created an amazing variety and in variety there is strength. This is the God I meet every day through His creations, the God I read about in the divenly inspired writings of many people. Let those who have ears listen Jesus says.

I think the point is that people pick and choose what they want to believe in in the Bible. If you believe that homosexual people are sinning because the act on their feelings - then you must believe that people who wear clothes of mixed fabrics, eat rare meat etc. are sinning as well :shrug:

Interesting. I read a few of the reviews. It was telling that there are references to Boswell. That book was a dry, heavy brick of a read. This looks like it might be easier to digest. While I felt at times Boswell was stretching a bit, I think I might pick this up for the heck of it when I have a lapse in the book heap. Good suggestion.

Did anyone else catch this?

Okay, since that flies in the face of everything I perceive as logical, I'll ask you to explain. I can't resist.
Unless the explanation is something like: "Because god doesn't like homosexuals, so if you are homosexual, you could not possibly love god, or else you would do what god wants."

Or if it's something like "God wants us to procreate, and homosexuals don't have children, so if you are homosexual you aren't having children, therefore don't love god."

If the explanation is anything but those two things, I'm very interested.

You know, it's a head against a brick wall, but one of the things that has always bothered me about some religious people is their insistence on dwelling on the negative behaviors of everyone. I don't see a lot of LOVE in the actions of most. I don't see a lot charity in the actions of most. Having read the bible more than once and having thought about it quite a lot, I find I am most interested in the current movement known as the What Would Jesus Do group. It makes me think.

If Jesus were walking about the earth right now, what do I think he would do ?

Hm.

Possibilites :

1. He'd be in Iraq, trying to administer to men and woman who have had their guts torn out of their bodies by artillery and are dying in the sand.

2. Trying to talk sense into people in the middle east who like to cut the heads of other human beings off and film it.

3. Tending to the battered women and children.

4. Feeding the starving.

5. Helping the countless crystal meth addicts desperately crawling about our cities. And soothing the open sores on their bodies.

6. Trying to find and speak to the one shread of humantiy left in the heart of a serial killer on death row.

7. Washing the feet of an elderly person who has been abandoned by their family and has no money, no food, and no ONE.

What I doubt Jesus would be doing...

1. Lobbying congress to deny people the right to marry.

2. Picketing funerals.

3. Blowing up abortion clinics.

4. Arguing with people about who they love.

5. Legislating anything.

6. Threatening anyone.

7. Posting on a message board telling people what a sin is and isn't.

Last I heard, the main message is God Is Love.

Why do most Christians get a bad rap ?

They forgot this message so long ago, they couldn't define it or live it to save their lives. Not to mention their souls.

Yikes.:distress:

What kind of nonsense is this? That's like saying having the ability to breathe is not wrong, its the decision to breathe and acting upon it that's wrong.

I guess I'm just surprised that people in the day and age still choose to believe that homosexuality is nothing more than a controllable urge, like a craving for butterscoth pudding.

This place is to express opinions, for debate, right? That's what we're doing.
EDIT: Besides, I would have thought that'd be exactly what He'd be doing. Telling about the Word of His Father? :shrug:

OK, here goes:
Basically this is what it comes down to: life is a gift from God. Life is sacred, the purpose of sex is to create life, therefore sex is sacred also. A sacred bond between man and woman, as God intended it to be. Sex is for procreation, not recreation. The purpose of sex is to create life and therefore anything which gets in the way of that gift of life (eg contraception -- no, I'm not getting into a debate on that -- or homosexuality) is defying the will of God.
You use the phrase "if you are homosexual" -- again, being homosexual isn't the problem, it's the sexual act that is.
It's perfectly possible to be homosexual and love God, but homosexuality (I believe) is a trial -- can we love God enough to do what he wants us to do?
Hope that answers your question.

That analogy makes zero sense, sex is not essential for survival, breathing is. Again, you're missing my point -- being homosexual isn't the problem, it's the sexual act, which is controllable. It's about self-restraint, doing what God wants and not merely what the flesh tells us to.

EXACTLY!!!! Jane Fonda addresses this in her book as well - she says something to the effect of the men in power today who lean so heavily on their religion and faith would be the first to call Jesus "soft" and persecute him if he were alive today because he so does not personify anything that the people in power display.

So you made an excellent point above!!!