Disappointed in 'Christians' Who Profess Religion but Promote Decadence

By Geraldine Hawkins
June 21, 2003

"I certainly am disappointed in some Christians," my publisher said as together we lamented the increasing decadence in our state. What reactions other than disappointment and indignation could be elicited from anyone who honors Scripture, tradition, and common sense to the way in which many professional Christians allow law and culture to be altered by fashionable and powerful secular groups?

Consider the letter sent by the Episcopal Bishop of Massachusetts to his parishioners last week opposing legislation pending in the Massachusetts State House that would restrict the legal definition of marriage to the union of one man and one woman.

"We believe that there is no single model for healthy families," writes Bishop M. Thomas Shaw, on behalf of himself and his colleagues, fellow Bishops Roy "Bud" Cederholm and Gayle Harris. "We know that there are families headed by single men and women, adoptive and foster relationships, blended families, and families comprised of gay or lesbian couples. All of these families are present in our church and all are welcome.

"The proposed amendment makes second-class citizens of gays and lesbians, denying any legal recognition of families formed by same-sex partners. . We believe that God recognizes and blesses committed, loving, and life-giving relationships. In our years of ministry, we have not found that such committed relationships between gays and lesbians undermine marriage or the family."

MassNews sent an e-mail to Kenneth Arnold, Director of Communications for the Diocese of Massachusetts, who is invariably deputized to speak for the Bishops. Upon learning that Arnold is "on a peace mission to Israel," MassNews sent e-mails directly to Bishops Cederholm and Harris, which have met with no response.

In addition to the Episcopal Bishops, Rev. William Sinkford, President of the Unitarian Universalist Association (based in Boston), and Rev. Dr. Nancy Taylor, President of the Massachusetts Conference, United Church of Christ, as well as over 20 clergy of various denominations, have gone on record promoting same-sex marriage. (See http://www.uua.org/news/2003/030605.html)

We believe our readers may be interested in the questions the Bishops are so studiously ignoring, in the hope that they may ponder them and perhaps be led to request some answers from their own religious hierarchies.

1. While it is certainly true that God blesses "committed, loving, and life-giving relationships," in light of passages such as Romans 1, Leviticus 18:22, Leviticus 20:13, and 1 Corinthians 6:9-10, would homosexual relationships fall into this category? While we realize none of the three Bishops are fundamentalists, would they point to any passage in Scripture that could be interpreted to mean that sexual intimacy is healthy in any context other than within the marriage covenant? ("Marriage" meaning the union of a man and a woman.)
2. How can it plausibly be said that "such committed relationships between gays and lesbians do not undermine marriage or the family" when it is reported in nearly every newspaper that Rev. Canon V. Gene Robinson, who has just been elected Bishop of New Hampshire, left his wife and children to live the gay lifestyle?
3. Is it loving or thoughtful to say that homosexual relationships are "life-giving" when it actual fact they often lead to AIDS?
4. Isn't it a slippery slope to give our blessing to behavior that is forbidden in Scripture, albeit for reasons that not everyone may understand? Why not remove the stigma from pedophilia, or bestiality, or adultery? These could all be construed as "personal preferences" or "lifestyle choices."
5. Jesus was never married, and we may safely assume that He never had sex. Should not unmarried Christians at least make an attempt to take up their cross and follow Him?

More and more questions come to mind, such as: Why do the Bishops behave as though Christian outreaches to homosexuals, such as Exodus, L.I.F.E. Ministries and Stephen Bennett Ministries do not exist? Do they feel that it would be "homophobic" for them to acknowledge these ministries? As someone who loves the English language, this writer feels the need to ask, why do people tolerate the term "homophobia," a made-up word that would mean something like "fear of sameness," certainly not "fear of homosexuals"?

The Episcopal Bishops' letter would seem to be directed at the beleaguered Roman Catholic Archdiocese of Boston, which has its own (misunderstood) problems (see "Boston Globe Gives One-Sided View of Priest Scandal," MassNews, March 14, 2003), but which issued its own remarkably un-hateful letter, which reads in part:

"The Roman Catholic Church believes that marriage is a faithful, exclusive, and lifelong union between one man and one woman, joined as husband and wife in an intimate partnership of life and love. This union was established by God with its own proper laws. By reason of its very nature, therefore, marriage exists for the mutual love and support of the spouses and for the procreation and education of children. These two purposes, the unitive and procreative, are equal and inseparable. The institution of marriage has a very important relationship to the continuation of the human race, to the total development of the human person, and to the dignity, stability, peace, and prosperity of the family and of society.

"Furthermore, we believe the natural institution of marriage has been blessed and elevated by Christ to the dignity of a sacrament. This means that Christian marriage is more than a contract. Because they are married in the Lord, the spouses acquire a special relationship to each other and to society. Their love becomes a living image of the manner in which the Lord personally loves his people and is united with them. Living a Christian sacramental marriage becomes their fundamental way of attaining salvation.

"Because the marital relationship offers benefits, unlike any other, to persons, to society, and to the church, we wish to make it clear that the institution of marriage, as the union of one man and one woman, must be preserved, protected, and promoted in both private and public realms. At a time when family life is under significant stress, the principled defense of marriage is an urgent necessity for the well-being of children and families, and for the common good of society.

"Thus, we oppose the attempt to grant the legal status of marriage to a relationship between persons of the same sex. No same-sex union can realize the unique and full potential which the marital relationship expresses. For this reason, our opposition to 'same-sex marriage' is nor an instance of unjust discrimination or animosity toward homosexual persons. In fact, the Catholic Church teaches emphatically that individuals and society must respect the basic human dignity of all persons, including those with a homosexual orientation. Homosexual persons have a right to and deserve our respect, compassion, understanding, and defense against prejudice, attacks, and abuse.

"We therefore urge Catholics and all our fellow citizens to commit themselves both to upholding the human dignity of every person and to upholding the distinct and irreplaceable community of marriage.

"If legal marriage is redefined in Massachusetts so that any two people regardless of gender can be married, then the state will no longer be able to promote the union of a man and a woman as uniquely beneficial to society. The Catholic Church and other private institutions with moral objections will be forced to change their employment and other policies to recognize other relationships as marriage, or face discrimination lawsuits."

And for this, homosexuals stood with their backs to the altar during services at the Cathedral of the Holy Cross while the letter was read from the pulpit?

And the Episcopal Bishop of Massachusetts ends his letter to his flock with a recommendation that they visit the website of Gay and Lesbian Advocates and Defenders (GLAD)?

Can it be that most homosexuals, because they are talented and tend to have good jobs and a great deal of disposable income, are being pandered to by the Episcopal hierarchy because the Diocese needs their money to maintain the venerable (and sparsely attended) Episcopal churches in Boston?

And can it also still be true that God is not mocked?

We are indeed disappointed in some "Christians."