Homosexuality and Christianity

An article was brought to my attention this week.  It’s here:

Churchtimes: Couple unable to foster children. 

The link above was given, along with a quote from the article here ‘the judgement was an ex­ample of homosexual rights trump­ing free­dom of conscience, and also of con­tinuing intolerance against Chris­tians in the UK’ (Andrea Minichiello Williams, of the Christian Legal Centre (CLC)).

The couple, supported by the CLC, made the claim that they are being discriminated against because they are Christian. 

They said it was because they had a moral code that was ‘based on their faith’.

And I, for the millionth time in the past couple of months, became enraged.

No.  No they were not discriminated against because they were Christian.  They were discriminated against because they were homophobic.  The judges were not saying ‘Christians cannot foster children’; they were saying ‘homophobes cannot foster children’.  It was not because the moral code they had was based on their faith, but because the moral code they had is utterly immoral and moreover it is dangerous particularly when aimed at what are likely to be vulnerable children.

I feel sad for Owen and Eunice Johns, and I am certain that they have been an important, influential and caring force in the lives of the children that they have already fostered.  However, as sorry as I might feel for them, I recognise that the greater care needs to be given to the children.   I really, really hope that none of the children they have previously fostered are gay, and that if they are they are strong enough to stand up and say ‘Foster parents, thank you for caring for me, but your views about me and my sexuality are frankly wrong, and I am no lesser than you because I am gay’.  But these are children.  Children who have already had difficult and confusing backgrounds, and I think it’s an awfully big thing to ask of them.

The reason that I’m glad that this judgement was upheld is because if a ‘looked after child’ should ever go to their foster parents saying “I think I’m gay,” there should be no risk at all that the response should be anything other than “OK, that’s all good.”  They should not hear “But that’s a sin,” or “you will burn in Hell,” or even just “I’ll pray for you.”  A person, particularly a child, should not be made to feel that their sexuality is a sin. 

The thing I’m beginning to get more and more bored with is the statement that people are being denied their Christianity if they are not allowed to condemn homosexuals.  I simply do not understand it.  To be a Christian is to firstly to believe that Jesus was Christ, both God and the son of God, and secondly to follow the teaching of Christ.  A person’s sexuality is irrelevant to the first part of this.  So what about the second?

I happen to have a book here that gives me some insight into what Christ’s teaching was.  Alas, it’s secondary sources only, but we have to work with what we can get, or not bother trying at all.  So what does Christ teach us about homosexuals?  I can’t find a single quote from him condemning anyone for their sexuality.

I did find this though:

“Master, which is the greatest commandment of the Law?”  Jesus said to him, “You must love the Lord your God with all your heart, with all your soul, and with all your mind.  This is the greatest commandment.  The second resembles it: You must love your neighbour as yourself.” Matthew, 22:36-39.

OK, so that seems fairly reasonable.  Assuming you believe in God, you are instructed to love him, and all the people whom he created.  Good.  OK.  I can do that without condemning homosexuals.

Mark has something too:

“Which is the first of all the commandments? Jesus replied, “This is the first: Listen, Israel, the lord our God is the one, only Lord, and you must love the Lord your God with all your heart, with all your soul, with all your mind and with all your strength.  The second is this: You must love your neighbour as yourself.  There is no commandment greater than these.” Mark, 12:29-31.

Huh.  In two gospels?  Must be pretty important then.

Luke?

“Master, what must I do to inherit eternal life?  He said to him, “What is written in the Law?  What is your reading of it?” He replied, ‘You must love the Lord your God with all your heart, with all your soul, with all your strength and with all your mind, and your neighbour as yourself.” Jesus said to him, “You have answered right, do this and life is yours.” Luke 10:25-38.

I think that’s pretty clear is it not?  And it’s important enough to be covered in three gospels.  I’m guessing that it’s something that Jesus stood for.

Now I have trawled through the gospels and squinted and turned them upside-down and I simply cannot find a disclaimer that reads ‘unless your neighbour is someone who you generally disapprove of, in which case it’s fine for you to judge and condemn them.’  In fact all I’ve found were other examples of people you should love.  Apparent; all of them!  Who would have thought it, hey?  All.  Your enemy, the tax-collector, the Samaritan, the Prostitute... basically, if someone is a person and they have been created by God, then you should love them.  All of them.

I’d go so far as to say if you do not do so, you are not behaving as a Christian, which is ultimately to behave as Christ did.

And I’ll add to this.  If you believe that God made you, and if you believe that he made you with free will and your own conscience, then do Him the credit of using that free will and conscience.  Stand up and be counted and say ‘I’ve thought about it, and I don’t like Gay people from my own volition.”  And if you can think of any reasons, state them, but don’t hide behind a God and assume to speak for Him because it’s just crass.  Particularly, because who you’re actually agreeing with are the people who claim to speak for Him.  Not God Himself.

I recently threw my hands up and walked away from the Catholic Church, somewhere that has been my spiritual home for the past thirty-four years.  There have always been major parts of the religion that I have had a somewhat relaxed approach to.  For example, I’ve always preferred to manage my own fertility, than to leave it pretty much to chance.  Well, mostly anyway, but if I haven’t it’s been my own doing because I actually kind of like babies, and not because my Church tells me It’s Wrong.  I can admit to having eaten a variety of meats on Fridays.  I had sex before I was married.  I attended the Civil Partnership of a friend and called it a Wedding, and call it a Marriage and I love the love she has for her wife.  I don’t whine and complain and says that her marriage diminishes my own heterosexual one.

But more and more in recent years I have felt that there is has been a pressure on me to turn to face the church and in doing so, to turn my back on people.  As if it was saying “If you’re for me, you’re against them.”  I can no longer deal with the feeling of being pulled apart by my conscience, which wants me to love, serve and have compassion for all people, and a Church that wants me to turn my back on large swathes of the same people because they don’t measure up to its standards.  I felt, that I had to choose.  I felt I had to point out that when the Pope speaks on behalf of all Catholics, he does not speak on behalf of me.

It may be that one day a Pope will be elected who says “Y’know what, guys?  I think we may have been having a look at the Gospel, and I think we may have been a bit wrong about some stuff...” and I may be able to go back.  But in the meantime, I’d prefer to find a place to pray that doesn’t start off with the principles of hatred or fear.

And yet, for the time being I still count myself as a Christian.  It turns out that you can do it without finding a particular sexuality immoral.