03/11/10

A Homily on Homosexuality

In America’s capital, gay marriage is now legal, highlighting the role of religion in the struggle for homosexual rights.

AUR’s official stance is that the push for gay marriage is well-intentioned but misguided: although we do believe in equal rights and dignity for gays and straights before the law, we also believe that the government should not discriminate based on relationship status and should not be involved in anything that is — in the overwhelming majority of cases — a religious institution.

The truly progressive position is that the institution of marriage belongs to churches and cultural organizations, and therefore has no place in legislatures and courtrooms.  Still, the legalization of gay marriage reaches toward social justice, even if it falls short of achieving it.

The larger issue of homosexuality in society remains in play, and forces opposed to gay rights will certainly fight to have gay marriage in DC (and elsewhere) repealed, renamed, or outright banned.  The governor of Virginia has recently declared anti-gay discrimination in state government acceptable, and the ability of homosexuals to serve openly in the American military continues to be obstructed by the infamous “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” policy.

Although there are many arguments against homosexuality, the anti-gay movement draws key inspiration from religion, specifically Christian scripture.  It is this inspiration that is the subject of this Thursday’s homily.

Continue reading

01/14/08

Homosexuality and What Paul’s Letter to the Romans Really Says

There are numerous scriptural arguments against homosexuality, but none as commonly used as Paul’s Letter to the Romans, which describes the apostle’s vision of the Gospel for the mixed Jew/Gentile church in Rome. Paul wrote it in the 1st Century, long before the idea of “sexuality,” when people spoke merely of various sexual acts. Even so, we’ll take a look at this proof text to see what it says about God’s attitude toward what we call homosexuality today. Continue reading

12/26/07

Bibliolatry – Why Scriptural Sufficiency and Literalism are Wrong

Do you believe that Jesus was a baby sheep or a cat with a tawny mane?  Do you think that a ten-headed dragon is going to crawl onto the beach at the end of time?

If you answer No, then you do not believe in a literal interpretation of Scripture.  Each of those are symbols used by the Bible: the Lamb of God, the Lion of Judah, and the Dragon of the Apocalypse.  Dedication to a truly literalist interpretation would force you to answer Yes to the questions above.

Even so, many leaders of the Christian community who would certainly answer No to the above questions still insist that their interpretation of the Bible is “literal.”  Clearly their claims are either dishonest or deluded.  Even worse, the fact that Jesus taught with fictional parables clearly shows that stories do not need to be literally true in order to be spiritually valuable, which means that the attitude of some church leaders that religion requires the Bible to be historically and materially factual implies that Jesus was a fraud.

So why do so many insist on scriptural literalism and bibliolatry?  Continue reading