If you need urgent support, call 999 or go to your nearest A&E. To contact our Crisis Messenger (open 24/7) text THEMIX to 85258.
Options
Gay people of faith
Former Member
Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
I was meant to post something about this for Fiend and a few others a while ago (sorry, I ran out of time!). The recent flurry of gay-related threads reminded me, as they all seem to refer to religion (specifically to Christianity) somewhere.
As a lot of you will be aware, I'm a Christian and I'm also gay. I don't see that there's a contradiction between the two. As Christians we are called into loving - yes, and sexual - relationships with other people and instinctively I can't understand a view of the gospel that would exclude LGBT people from this calling.
The arguments feel fairly standard and almost stagnant these days but it's very pertinent - and, I think, very important - right now for any faith group to firstly acknowledge the debate and then listen to it. I do get the feeling sometimes that there are Christians who can't even bear to listen (this isn't aimed at anyone here, incidentally). For example, I was intrigued by finding new edition of John Stott's book, Issues Facing Christians Today and had a quick look at it yesterday. At one point, discussing homosexual relationships, he claims that they are harmful because of promiscuity and the risk of AIDS. I'm not quite sure how that applies to loving, committed, monogamous and safe gay relationships or marriages any more than it applies to heterosexual marriage (assuming that Stott doesn't agree that you can have a committed sexual relationship without marriage). It's interesting that despite being a book on the issues, he doesn't seem to acknowledge the debate (if anyone has read the chapter more fully and I'm wrong, please correct me).
This is a bit of a rant, but I didn't want to launch into theology straight off. If anyone wants to, though, I will discuss it.
As a lot of you will be aware, I'm a Christian and I'm also gay. I don't see that there's a contradiction between the two. As Christians we are called into loving - yes, and sexual - relationships with other people and instinctively I can't understand a view of the gospel that would exclude LGBT people from this calling.
The arguments feel fairly standard and almost stagnant these days but it's very pertinent - and, I think, very important - right now for any faith group to firstly acknowledge the debate and then listen to it. I do get the feeling sometimes that there are Christians who can't even bear to listen (this isn't aimed at anyone here, incidentally). For example, I was intrigued by finding new edition of John Stott's book, Issues Facing Christians Today and had a quick look at it yesterday. At one point, discussing homosexual relationships, he claims that they are harmful because of promiscuity and the risk of AIDS. I'm not quite sure how that applies to loving, committed, monogamous and safe gay relationships or marriages any more than it applies to heterosexual marriage (assuming that Stott doesn't agree that you can have a committed sexual relationship without marriage). It's interesting that despite being a book on the issues, he doesn't seem to acknowledge the debate (if anyone has read the chapter more fully and I'm wrong, please correct me).
This is a bit of a rant, but I didn't want to launch into theology straight off. If anyone wants to, though, I will discuss it.
0
Comments
ETA: Yeah I know, I'm neither of the things in the title.
I believe that we are all sinners but being LGBT does not make you any more or any less of a sinner than the next person. Churches and individual 'Christians' who preach against the acceptance of LGBT really upset me because they are doing the exact opposite of what Christianity is all about.
I think that with any religious text, people pick and choose due to their own prejudices, likes and dislikes what to believe. There will always be Christians who hate homosexuals just as there will always be atheists who do. It's still a cause brave people like Piccolo will have to keep on fighting. I am sure that many moons ago there were Christians who were very against women's rights, but as society evolves so does religion.
TBH - the only contradiction is Organised Religion and Sexuality. Also, Organised Religion and thier Holy Books are a complete contradiction 99% of the time. Christianity preaches exactally against a big organisation running things - your faith is your own choice of beleif, and you should be free to express it as you like. And practice as you like, obviously both within reason here. You don't need to go to a church to do so, or give money to the church for fear of burning in hell.
Indeed, organised religion, I feel, was probably warned against in the Bible. But the Catholic Church wouldn't dare let us see what the Bible really says. Between them and the Kings of England the Bible has been ammended and mutilated so much it's a disgrace.
I wonder whta the original Bible really says...
I totally agree with this. Too many people subscribe to that "Believe and do not seek" thing, which is nonsense. You can't support an opinion that you don't fully understand.
And as others have said: Parts of the bible were written specifically for the writers' own time. What we're supposed to get from the book isn't "laws", but a sense of morality.
She told me about a story thats in there, about a village that was destroyed by a fire or something, and only this man and his 2 daughters survived. So they got him drunk and slept with him to get pregnant so that they could re-populate the village. :eek2:
As moonrat said, the bible is outdated and mostly written by men, i don't think it should be taken too seriously at this day and age.
The point being, as far as I’m concerned, is that Christians who have united in their disapproval/discouraging/condemning of homosexuality have simply united in bigotry, nothing more. To use interpretation of the bible as the rationale behind such odious views, is immediately laughable, but then worrying. It means they’ve selectively ignored all the clearly insane and contradictory claims the bible makes, and have instead chosen to try rummage between the lines to find an excuse for their repugnant moral stance.
:thumb: :thumb:
Hallelujah !
I`ll unite with you in that observation.
I do not think the appropriate way to do it is simply by taking in what you like and disregard all that you don't - it's a process that should be done carefully, with a lot of studying and reflexion behind. But in the end, it's your own conscience you should decide by.
There are various parts in the Bible that condemn or look down upon homosexuality, in both the Old and New Testaments - but I believe it is too simplistic to just swallow it without thought. My personal belief about homosexuality is that it is not sinful. And I believe the feedback that people like Piccolo give back to Christianity is very valuable, one that in time, together with other voices will hopefully change the views of the various Christian Churches.
This is what confuses me: Over the past few posts you've described how your views, faith and morals differ greatly to your fellow Catholics, let alone the wider Christian faith. You also said that you understand The Bible is something which should be looked at critically, and is certainly not to be taken literally. What then makes you identify yourself as Christian, and more specifically Catholic? Is it just the label that was give to your belief(s) by your parents, or whomever exposed you to the faith?
I know that last paragraph sounds confrontational, and honestly it's not meant to be. I'm genuinely interested.
What do you mean about 'clans'? Denominations? They were originally part of one church and then broke away because of differing opinions.
I understand that people don’t generally one day decide to be Christian; people are usually indoctrinated by their parents. I also appreciate that religion gives people a sense of identity, and that’s exactly what I’m questioning. As most beliefs are arbitrary, how does one obtain a sense of identity? You just all agree that you’re in the same club, regardless of moralistic and idealistic belief? I’d find that especially difficult when a lot of my fellow believers believe in totally different - and frankly, frequently fundamentally different - things.
We’re not talking about political theory, music tastes or your favourite sports team’s tactics though. A religious person presumably believes in an after-life, probably in the notions of heaven and hell, and that there’s a particular way to worship the Supreme Being. Decisions, convictions and beliefs which are of magnitudes so vastly greater than whether System of a Down rock, or not, that they really can’t be compared.
I am a Christian -a Catholic to be more specific- because I believe in the core teachings of the faith (Jesus Christ came to redeem the world, the Holy Trinity, Eternal life, live life according to the Gospels, etc.). It is these core beliefs that make me identify with Christianity. According to my beliefs I could belong to other Christian Churches, but decided to stay in the Catholic Church (which is the one I was baptised into) mainly because of two reasons:
Firstly, because to some extent it has been my spiritual home, and as such there is a part of me that feels warmly towards it (as you do towards your home), in spite of the fact that there are many many things (mostly moral issues) which I disapprove of (again, like you sometimes feel towards your home: you don't always like everything about it, but it's still your home).
And secondly, derived from the previous, I believe that changing things from within is more powerful than attacking them from the outside, which is why I decided to stay in this particular Church. If there were any core teachings I were downright against then I would not have stayed. But what many people don't realise is that particular moral views, and issues to do with the governing of the Church aren't central issues - they are secondary. These last is where the field of my disagreement mostly stands, and which I constantly fight to change - but from within. At the end of the day I know my sole efforts aren't really going to make a visible difference, but I believe they do sum up towards the growing group of people who are trying to give the same battle as I am, and even if I don't see any success, at least I know I've lived my life coherently with what I believe.
Either they admit that large parts of the Bible are to be safely ignored or they should obey it to the letter.
When it comes to, say, homosexuality, the Catholic Church is basing its bigotry and prejudice on a few selected versicles. If it is just following the doctrine of the Bible, why does it ignore other instructions regarding rich people or those who work on the Sabbath?
It is high time the Church either went full on fundamentalist and campaigned against everyone who commits acts that are banned in the Bible, or admitted large parts of the OT are nonsense,that the overall message of Chrisitanity is one of love and that homosexuals are not to be discriminated against any more than those who like lobster are.
Oh come on. They picked and chose what to include in the bible in the first place, you don't think they can pick and choose from what they actually put in there?
Hey Piccolo,
I read this today and thought of you ... http://www.godmademegay.com/Letter.htm ... I thought you might find it a refreshing change to have this sensitive and considered viewpoint expoused by a heterosexual Baptist minister.
Well, Catholics' position on homosexuality is more a part of their doctrine than a few versus' in the OT. You'd must be thinking about evangelical Christains.
There's lots of Catholic charities. Though the Vatican does have lots of assets.
Christianity doesn't pay nearly as much attention to the OT than Judaism. Catholicism is a mixture of scripture, bible (NT mainly) and dogma/doctrine.
[quoteThere's lots of Catholic charities. Though the Vatican does have lots of assets.[/quote] I was actually referring to the selected memory the Catholic Church has when it comes to sinners. The Bible doesn't like gays or the rich. However you won't hear the Church bashing the latter to any extent near to how the bash the former.
Another instance of people who are condemned by the Bible but the Church chooses to ignore. A little consistency would be nice.
If the Catholic Church doesn't pay that much attention to the OT why does it so obsessed with homosexuality, masturbation or artificial contraception?
As I said, it's part of their dogma/doctrine. You won't hear a Catholic priest standing on the pulpit, quoting texts from the OT about homosexuality. They'll just say it's wrong.