From: psyrobtw@ubvmsb.cc.buffalo.edu (Robert Weiss)
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.christia
Subject: Sponged [was Re:      Re: homosexuality]
Date: 2 Sep 92 02:45:00 GMT
Organization: University at Buffalo
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.41

In article <BtwL5z.4FB@news.larc.nasa.gov>, carlson@ab24.larc.nasa.gov (Ann Carlson) writes...
>Maks,
> 
>Your whole answer to Carol and your whole statement about same sex
>love hinges on your statement that the Bible clearly calls it sin.
>This is simply not so.  I have recently published references and 
>several people have published to this group brief explanations of 
>why we do not believe this.  This is *not* a case of intentionaly
>twisting scripture, and it is *not* a case of ignoring certain parts
>of scripture.  Read Boswell, read Mollenkot, read Spong and the
>others; talk to Integrity (Episcopal), Dignity (Roman Catholic),
>More Light (Presbyterian), Affirmation (Methodist?) and other 
>Christian groups who believe that the Bible does not condemn gays
>and lesbians or their relationships.  Find out why they believe as
>they do, they have good reasons.

[...]

	I would be hesitant to refer someone to Spong's work to see 
what his "interpretation" of Scripture is. Spong doesn't so much 
have a different interpretation of Scripture as much as he *dismisses*
Scripture.

	I have read some of Boswell, but I am not fresh enough to 
comment on him. Spong was recently discussed in Christia, and I 
found the following in the Christia database:


>>> Item number 7291, dated 92/03/08 22:29:00 -- ALL
Date:         Sun, 8 Mar 1992 22:29:00 EST

[...]

     For those that are not aware, in _Living in Sin?_ (Harper, 1988),
     Spong argues that homosexual acts should not be considered as sin.

     Spong is also the author of _Rescuing the Bible from Fundamentalism_
     (Harper, 1991). In this work, Spong posits that the miraculous works of
     Jesus are myth (pp 129-33, pp 143-44), that the Gospel of John doesn't
     contain a single word that was spoken by Jesus (p 191), he teaches that
     the Bible presents a nationalistic, sadistic God that Spong "cannot
     respect, much less worship" (p.24; cf. p.17, p20), that the Gospels
     present a Jesus who is sometimes "narrow-minded, vindictive, and even
     hypocritical" (p.21), that the "list of objectionable passages could be
     expanded almost endlessly" (p.20), and unbelievable things "are
     discoverable and present in almost every part of the Bible" (p.150).

     I realize that Louie pointed readers to _Living in Sin?_ and not to
     _Rescuing the Bible from Fundamentalism_. However, I think that
     pointing to what Spong teaches will help one to discern whether he is a
     teacher of truth or an apostate teacher.

[and in:]

>>> Item number 4671, dated 92/01/04 15:35:00 -- ALL
Date:         Sat, 4 Jan 1992 15:35:00 EST

Quoting from Colson's  _Against the Night_ chapter 10:

     The Georgetown case shows the relentless external pressures facing
religious institutions and the church It is also true, however, that the
church has been crippled from within by an invasion of barbarian values
and habits.

     Nowhere is this more evident than in the electronic church, where
lavish ministries compete for audience share and viewer dollars as surely
as network programs vie for ratings and advertising dollars. There are
notable exceptions, of course. Billy Graham, respected religious
statesman, has used television for years to faithfully preach the gospel.
But much of the electronic church has given in to the prevailing moods of
the culture it purportedly exists to confront.

     The very nature of television as a medium invites this. Television
is immediate, visual, and dependent on its ability to entertain to
perpetuate itself. Low ratings spell death for programming. Thus the need
for constant emphasis on emotion, drama, and financial success --- the
same elements that make  "Wheel of Fortune" America's most popular game
show.

     William Fore points out in his book _Television and Religion_  that
one  reason  the  electronic  church  has proven so popular is that it
gives religious sanction to the American tradition of self-interest. The
electronic church, says Fore, corrupts "the biblical tradition so that
religion itself becomes the key to maximizing self-interest, and there is
no effective to virtue, charity, or community." [6]

     Isolated in front of their television sets, the utilitarian
individualists find in much Christian programming what they seek most ---
the promise of material gain --- now sanctified in the name of God.
Meanwhile sofa-loads of expressive individualists recline in their living
rooms nibbling chocolates and reveling in TV-induced tears, testimony,
and titillation.

     Conformity to the culture's prevailing mood is not peculiar  to  the
electronic  branch  of  the  Christian church. In my extensive travels
over the past twelve years I've met with pastors, talked with church
members, and spoken in hundreds of churches. And from my observations I
must conclude that the church, broadly speaking, has succumbed to many of
the culture's enticements.

     I don't want to generalize unjustly or be overly harsh, but it's
fair to say that much of the church is caught up in the success mania of
American society.  Often more concerned with budgets and building
programs than with the body of Christ, the church places more emphasis on
growth than on repentance.  Suffering sacrifice, and service have been
preempted by success and self-fulfillment.

     One pastor confided to me, "I try not to talk about subjects that
make people uncomfortable. My job is to make sure they come back here
week after week."

     Many churches are more concerned about what happens inside their
doors than outside. Members will help the poor and needy as long as they
don't have to dirty their own hands to do it. Admittedly, it's easier to
organize fellowship suppers and church picnics than it  is  to reach  out
to the  sick  and  suffering  in the community. Caring after all, takes
time and personal involvement.

     And then there is the other extreme: the churches who care more
about what happens outside than inside. These trendy souls have made a
head-long dash to embrace every cultural attitude and cause and drag them
into the sanctuary. Consider just one example --- a proposed Episcopal
rite to bless homosexual marriage: "In the name of God, I, George, take
you, Stan, to be my companion; and I solemnly promise here before God and
these witnesses that I will stand beside you and with you always, in
times of celebration and of sadness, in times of pleasure and of anger,
in times of sickness and of health; I will care for you and love you so
long as we both shall live." [7]

     Though this proposed rite may sound "strange and shocking to many,"
writes the Episcopal bishop of Newark, John Shelby Spong, in his book
_Living in Sin: A Bishop Rethinks Human Sexuality_, "all words that
announce new life sound foreign to the ear, at least until experience
illumines understanding."

     "The  time  has  surely  come  for  the  churches  of America  not
just  to  tolerate,  but  to  celebrate  and welcome, the presence among
us of our gay and lesbian fellow human beings," continues Bishop Spong.
"One way to do that is for the church to admit publicly its own
complicity in their oppression, based on its vast ignorance and
prejudice... [by stating] its willingness and eager desire to bless and
affirm the love that binds two persons  of the same gender into a
life-giving relationship of mutual commitment."

     Bishop Spong goes on to suggest church blessings and rites for the
rocky footpaths of modern romantic relationships, both hetero and homo,
which affirm the "goodness of sexuality," free from the guilt the church
has generated over the years. He suggests, for example, a liturgical
service to  mark  the end of a marriage, describing one such "painful,
traumatic, but intensely real" service held to "offer this all too human
reality called divorce to God."

     Certainly God brings healing, forgiveness, and renewal to all who
confess their human failings to him with a repentant heart. But we need
not offer "the reality" of broken commitments to God as if they were
sacrifices of obedience.

     Spong asserts: "There will always be individuals who will  test  the
boundaries  of  any  rule,  but  in  our generation the rules have become
so out of touch with reality that they are simply disregarded. The tide
of change always begins with the trickle of a few non-conformists and
then it grows into a veritable flood as increasing numbers of people
abandon the convictions of the past."

     Like other tolerant intolerants of our day, the bishop loads his
language, focusing on such positive notions as "celebration,"
"life-giving," and commitment" in the face of dark "prejudice" and
"obsessive concern" of the church. By implication, anyone who disagrees
with his ideas is "out of touch with reality."


[7] All of the John Shelby Spong quotes are from "Sex and Sin," _Washington
    Post_ (Sunday, July 31, 1988): C4

=============================
Robert Weiss
psyrobtw@ubvms.cc.buffalo.edu
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU