I consider this discussion at an end. It was unnecessary and meanspirited in the first place, which is what was intended. I uphold you in your beliefs, though they are not mine of course. May you extend blessings to those whom you don’t agree with, and remember that they too may have good in them and may do good things. Knee jerk condemnation is beneath us as humans.
On the contrary SpiritMeadow, this discussion is necessary and ongoing. This post was originally about the state of the Anglican communion and in particular the Episcopal Church. I referenced Bishop Robinson’s comments as reflective of the state of the Episcopal Church. It, clearly, is having problems in the US and Bishop Robinson captured this moment in history well with his comments about his prayer. To me, as a practicing Roman Catholic, Robinson well represents the disintegration of parts of the Episcopal Church into postmodern, post-Christian culture (something us Roman Catholics are not unfamiliar with). This discussion does not need to be about attacking Robinson per se but about what his cultural position reflects.
I urge you in your argument to find Biblical or extra-biblical sources that support your position that a) homosexual acts are moral and b) that the Judeo-Christian tradition has allowed or affirmed them historically.
There simply isn’t opinion on this matter. There is either right or wrong, regardless of your feelings. One of us is right. I accept, as a matter of faith, that I could be wrong. If I couldn’t, there would be no need for faith. Homosexual acts are either right or wrong, period. God either willed for sex to be between a man or a woman in marriage, or he didn’t and we can use our ability to experience sexual pleasure anyway that floats are boat. The Christian tradition has always affirmed that all the baptized are called to chastity and that the only moral use of the sexual dimension of the person is toward the conjugal act, which is procreative and unitive. I would be happy to provide you with Biblical and extra-biblical sources that inspire and reflect this Christian tradition.
I urge you to take a consistent moral position and not fall into a moral relativism, in which morality depends upon a person’s perspective. No decent philosopher, religious or not, would affirm the position that you seem to be arguing for that morality is relative. If that is true, it would not be possible to even say that murder is wrong, because morality would just be a matter of opinion.
If you can do the two things I mentioned above then we can carry on a rational, non-emotional argument, again: 1) demonstrate that homosexual acts are moral- using criteria from Scripture and tradition and 2) Demonstrate that there is some ambiguity about this in Christian scripture and tradition
This is a difficult path to take, particularly in light of the reality of two sexes, man and woman, and the nature of the conjugal act. Of course I can use my sexuality in many ways, but is it right? I have many different urges, is it okay to act out all of them?
I apologize if my personal discussion ever seemed mean-spirited. It is my intent to post with a disinterested charity. Love is not always comfortable nor politically correct (if any questions about this read the Prophets). Moral arguments are not only appropriate, but can be prophetic. They are always necessary for the protection of the dignity of the human person and the complete reconciliation of people to the divine will of the Triune God.
