Well, to each his/her own.
Would it matter if Jesus was Gay or Straight? He turned European for the Western world and it didn't do much good in so far as spreading Love and Peace and Respect for all of God's creation. So let's make Him Gay for a while. But a warning to Gays and Lesbians. If you think you've been persecuted before, look out!
Jesus was a Jew, and see what that's done for Jews? His mother was a Virgin and we really get off raping and violating virgins. His adopted father was a carpenter and we bust up their unions any chance we get and call them Blue Collar Labor.
So why stop at Jesus being Gay. Let's take a good look at all of the disciples, sitting around together eating and getting soused on new wine. Did we ever hear of any of their wives? Or their many children? No!
But then the whole Human Race began on an incestual basis. God made Adam and took from him a rib from which He created Eve. This made Eve part of Adam just as sure as if she were his sister. And they had two sons, Cain and Able, who had to travel to the Land of Nod to seek wives. Now since God had only created Adam and Eve, we can only surmise that Cain and Able met and had sex with Apes. This is nothing against apes, but it would go a long way toward explaining today's people. Naturally we're all messed up.
Maybe it's time we invented a new God and wrote a book that makes sense.
Carl Jarvis
----- Original Message -----From: Claude EverettSent: Sunday, April 22, 2012 3:48 PM
Excerpt: "After much reflection and with certainly no wish to shock, I
felt I was left with no option but to suggest, for the first time in half a
century of my Anglican priesthood, that Jesus may well have been
homosexual."
A Good Friday procession along the Via Dolorosa in Jerusalem's old city this
year. (photo: Jack Guez/AFP/Getty Images)
Was Jesus Gay? Probably By Paul Oestreicher, Guardian UK
*******
Excerpt: "After much reflection and with certainly no wish to shock, I
felt I was left with no option but to suggest, for the first time in half a
century of my Anglican priesthood, that Jesus may well have been
homosexual."
A Good Friday procession along the Via Dolorosa in Jerusalem's old city this
year. (photo: Jack Guez/AFP/Getty Images)
Was Jesus Gay? Probably By Paul Oestreicher, Guardian UK
22 April 12
I preached on Good Friday that Jesus's intimacy with John suggested he was
gay as I felt deeply it had to be addressed.
reaching on Good Friday on the last words of Jesus as he was being executed
makes great spiritual demands on the preacher. The Jesuits began this
tradition. Many Anglican churches adopted it. Faced with this privilege in
New Zealand's capital city, Wellington, my second home, I was painfully
aware of the context, a church deeply divided worldwide over issues of
gender and sexuality. Suffering was my theme. I felt I could not escape the
suffering of gay and lesbian people at the hands of the church, over many
centuries.
Was that divisive issue a subject for Good Friday? For the first time in my
ministry I felt it had to be. Those last words of Jesus would not let me
escape. "When Jesus saw his mother and the disciple whom he loved standing
near, he said to his mother, 'Woman behold your son!' Then he said to the
disciple. 'Behold your mother!' And from that hour the disciple took her to
his own home."
That disciple was John whom Jesus, the gospels affirm, loved in a special
way. All the other disciples had fled in fear. Three women but only one man
had the courage to go with Jesus to his execution. That man clearly had a
unique place in the affection of Jesus. In all classic depictions of the
Last Supper, a favourite subject of Christian art, John is next to Jesus,
very often his head resting on Jesus's breast. Dying, Jesus asks John to
look after his mother and asks his mother to accept John as her son. John
takes Mary home. John becomes unmistakably part of Jesus's family.
Jesus was a Hebrew rabbi. Unusually, he was unmarried. The idea that he had
a romantic relationship with Mary Magdalene is the stuff of fiction, based
on no biblical evidence. The evidence, on the other hand, that he may have
been what we today call gay is very strong. But even gay rights campaigners
in the church have been reluctant to suggest it. A significant exception was
Hugh Montefiore, bishop of Birmingham and a convert from a prominent Jewish
family. He dared to suggest that possibility and was met with disdain, as
though he were simply out to shock.
After much reflection and with certainly no wish to shock, I felt I was left
with no option but to suggest, for the first time in half a century of my
Anglican priesthood, that Jesus may well have been homosexual. Had he been
devoid of sexuality, he would not have been truly human. To believe that
would be heretical.
Heterosexual, bisexual, homosexual: Jesus could have been any of these.
There can be no certainty which. The homosexual option simply seems the most
likely. The intimate relationship with the beloved disciple points in that
direction. It would be so interpreted in any person today. Although there is
no rabbinic tradition of celibacy, Jesus could well have chosen to refrain
from sexual activity, whether he was gay or not. Many Christians will wish
to assume it, but I see no theological need to. The physical expression of
faithful love is godly. To suggest otherwise is to buy into a kind of
puritanism that has long tainted the churches.
All that, I felt deeply, had to be addressed on Good Friday. I saw it as an
act of penitence for the suffering and persecution of homosexual people that
still persists in many parts of the church. Few readers of this column are
likely to be outraged any more than the liberal congregation to whom I was
preaching, yet I am only too aware how hurtful these reflections will be to
most theologically conservative or simply traditional Christians. The
essential question for me is: what does love demand? For my critics it is
more often: what does scripture say? In this case, both point in the same
direction.
Whether Jesus was gay or straight in no way affects who he was and what he
means for the world today. Spiritually it is immaterial. What matters in
this context is that there are many gay and lesbian followers of Jesus -
ordained and lay - who, despite the church, remarkably and humbly remain its
faithful members. Would the Christian churches in their many guises more
openly accept, embrace and love them, there would be many more disciples.
Regards,
Claude Everett
"Labor is prior to and independent of
capital. Capital is only the fruit of labor, and could never have existed if
labor had not first existed. Labor is the superior of capital, and deserves
much the higher consideration."
Abraham Lincoln,
Congressional address 1861
_______________________________________________
Blind-Democracy mailing list
Blind-Democracy@octothorp.org
http://www.octothorp.org/mailman/listinfo/blind-democracy
felt I was left with no option but to suggest, for the first time in half a
century of my Anglican priesthood, that Jesus may well have been
homosexual."
A Good Friday procession along the Via Dolorosa in Jerusalem's old city this
year. (photo: Jack Guez/AFP/Getty Images)
Was Jesus Gay? Probably By Paul Oestreicher, Guardian UK
22 April 12
I preached on Good Friday that Jesus's intimacy with John suggested he was
gay as I felt deeply it had to be addressed.
reaching on Good Friday on the last words of Jesus as he was being executed
makes great spiritual demands on the preacher. The Jesuits began this
tradition. Many Anglican churches adopted it. Faced with this privilege in
New Zealand's capital city, Wellington, my second home, I was painfully
aware of the context, a church deeply divided worldwide over issues of
gender and sexuality. Suffering was my theme. I felt I could not escape the
suffering of gay and lesbian people at the hands of the church, over many
centuries.
Was that divisive issue a subject for Good Friday? For the first time in my
ministry I felt it had to be. Those last words of Jesus would not let me
escape. "When Jesus saw his mother and the disciple whom he loved standing
near, he said to his mother, 'Woman behold your son!' Then he said to the
disciple. 'Behold your mother!' And from that hour the disciple took her to
his own home."
That disciple was John whom Jesus, the gospels affirm, loved in a special
way. All the other disciples had fled in fear. Three women but only one man
had the courage to go with Jesus to his execution. That man clearly had a
unique place in the affection of Jesus. In all classic depictions of the
Last Supper, a favourite subject of Christian art, John is next to Jesus,
very often his head resting on Jesus's breast. Dying, Jesus asks John to
look after his mother and asks his mother to accept John as her son. John
takes Mary home. John becomes unmistakably part of Jesus's family.
Jesus was a Hebrew rabbi. Unusually, he was unmarried. The idea that he had
a romantic relationship with Mary Magdalene is the stuff of fiction, based
on no biblical evidence. The evidence, on the other hand, that he may have
been what we today call gay is very strong. But even gay rights campaigners
in the church have been reluctant to suggest it. A significant exception was
Hugh Montefiore, bishop of Birmingham and a convert from a prominent Jewish
family. He dared to suggest that possibility and was met with disdain, as
though he were simply out to shock.
After much reflection and with certainly no wish to shock, I felt I was left
with no option but to suggest, for the first time in half a century of my
Anglican priesthood, that Jesus may well have been homosexual. Had he been
devoid of sexuality, he would not have been truly human. To believe that
would be heretical.
Heterosexual, bisexual, homosexual: Jesus could have been any of these.
There can be no certainty which. The homosexual option simply seems the most
likely. The intimate relationship with the beloved disciple points in that
direction. It would be so interpreted in any person today. Although there is
no rabbinic tradition of celibacy, Jesus could well have chosen to refrain
from sexual activity, whether he was gay or not. Many Christians will wish
to assume it, but I see no theological need to. The physical expression of
faithful love is godly. To suggest otherwise is to buy into a kind of
puritanism that has long tainted the churches.
All that, I felt deeply, had to be addressed on Good Friday. I saw it as an
act of penitence for the suffering and persecution of homosexual people that
still persists in many parts of the church. Few readers of this column are
likely to be outraged any more than the liberal congregation to whom I was
preaching, yet I am only too aware how hurtful these reflections will be to
most theologically conservative or simply traditional Christians. The
essential question for me is: what does love demand? For my critics it is
more often: what does scripture say? In this case, both point in the same
direction.
Whether Jesus was gay or straight in no way affects who he was and what he
means for the world today. Spiritually it is immaterial. What matters in
this context is that there are many gay and lesbian followers of Jesus -
ordained and lay - who, despite the church, remarkably and humbly remain its
faithful members. Would the Christian churches in their many guises more
openly accept, embrace and love them, there would be many more disciples.
Regards,
Claude Everett
"Labor is prior to and independent of
capital. Capital is only the fruit of labor, and could never have existed if
labor had not first existed. Labor is the superior of capital, and deserves
much the higher consideration."
Abraham Lincoln,
Congressional address 1861
_______________________________________________
Blind-Democracy mailing list
Blind-Democracy@octothorp.org
http://www.octothorp.org/mailman/listinfo/blind-democracy
No comments:
Post a Comment