For many people coming to terms with their sexuality and being gay or lesbian or bisexual or transgender or queer or same sex attracted two of the key issues that arise are:
2) acceptance by their faith or the religious belief system that has been and still is an important part of their life.
Many, but not all religions, reject homosexuality or same sex attracted people or put restrictions on them such as being allowed to be same sex attracted but not allowed to be sexually active with a member of the same sex. We hope to provide a variety of information on this page that may help you reconcile your religious beliefs and your sexuality. Remember, sexuality is not just about sex, it is about being both physically and EMOTIONALLY attracted to another person. Religions that see being gay or lesbian as simply about having what they would call 'un-natural' sex fail to see our sexualtiy as being far more then just the physical act of sex. They fail to see we are also emotionally and some would say spiritually attracted to members of the same sex.
We do not support any particular religious faith or belief system. We do respect religions that show respect to all people including same sex attracted people. We cannot and do not respect any religion that rejects same sex attracted people on the basis of our sexuality or spread hatred and rejection based upon a persons sexuality.
We hope this page may help you in your journey - if you come across some information that you think may help others about being gay and also having a commitment to their faith please send us an e-mail to: mail@illawarraqinfo.com
Ex-gay ministries use out-of-date and scientifically disproved medical theories to justify trying to "cure" gay, lesbian, bisexual, and transgender (GLBT) peoples' natural sexual orientation or gender identity.
Richard Cohen, one of the main reparative therapists, is permanently excluded from the American Counseling Association (ACA).
"Reparative therapy" is unethical. It does not work and it is dangerous and destructive. The damage that can be done by this practice is real. It can destroy someone's self esteem and faith and may lead to self-destructive and suicidal behavior.
Related Articles
The Churches of Christ View on Homosexuality Gay Marria...
What the Bible Says About... Homosexuality (cont.)
The Pentecostal Movement Views on Homosexuality, Gay Ma...
What the Bible Says About Homosexuality - Christian Tee...
Christian Teens' Denominations Positions on Homosex...
Source: http://gaylife.about.com/od/religion/a/gayreligion.htm
Homosexuality And Religion
By Andrew M Potts
What the Bible really says about homosexuality.
We often hear from churches that homosexuality is a sin, but what is the biblical basis for this and how relevant is it to Christians living in 21st Century Australia?
The passages in the Bible that relate to homosexuality can be separated into those of the Old Testament and the New. The main texts cited as condemning homosexuality in the Old Testament are found in the books of Leviticus and Genesis.
Leviticus is a list of the laws and prohibitions held by the ancient Hebrews at a time when they still performed animal sacrifices to the God of Israel at the great temple of Jerusalem.
Most of its commandments are no longer followed by Jews, let alone by Christians, and many of the practices it condones are now held to be deeply immoral or nonsensical by both religions.
Leviticus 18:22 says, "You shall not lie with a man as with a woman; it is an abomination."
It also says that it is an abomination to eat shellfish, shrimp and a range of other animals considered to be "unclean" in ancient times.
Leviticus 20:13 says, "If a man lies with another man as with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination; they shall be put to death, their blood is upon them."
The book of Leviticus also says that people who have sex outside of marriage, who speak ill of their parents, who curse or blaspheme, who work on the Sabbath, and who get tattoos or trim their hair or beards in certain ways should also be put to death.
Leviticus allows polygamy and the owning of slaves - even selling your own children into slavery.
If the commandments against homosexuality still hold true, why don't all these others hold true also?
The story of Sodom and Gomorrah in Genesis has been one of the hardest stories for Jews and Christians to interpret throughout history and it was not until hundreds of years after the story was written that it was finally decided on as a condemnation of homosexuality.
In this story God decides to destroy the two non-Jewish cities because "their sins are very grave" but sends angels to see if there are any decent men in the city first.
The angels come to the city where they meet Lot who warns them to keep off the street because of the wicked people in the city and they go to his house.
The people of Sodom find out about the strangers and come to Lot's house where they demand "to know" the strangers.
Lot defends the angels and offers his two virgin daughters to the mob for them to
"do as they please" if they will leave the angels alone, but they reject the offer and break down the door at which point the angels strike them blind.
Lot is then told to flee the city with his family and Sodom and Gomorrah are destroyed.
There are a few problems with arguing that this story condemns homosexuality. Firstly, the phrase "to know" in the original Hebrew is sometimes used in the original texts to mean "have sex with" - but most of the time it is not.
Even if it is translated as "have sex with" the crowd intended to rape the angels, so the story can be more easily be interpreted as a condemnation of sexual violence rather than homosexuality.
Thirdly, in Genesis, after Lot's family have escaped Sodom, his daughters get Lot drunk and have sex with him with the intention of getting pregnant so that they can preserve their family line.
After destroying the cities of Sodom and Gomorrah for their immorality, God does nothing to punish Lot's daughters for committing incest and their behaviour goes without comment in the Bible. So can Christians really argue that this story has any relevance today?
The term sodomy, derived from this story, was originally used to describe any kind of sex, heterosexual or homosexual, not intended to produce offspring, right up to the start of the 20th Century. It's only because society has moved on when it comes to issues such as masturbation or oral sex that the term is now used to describe homosexual acts only.
In the New Testament the passages condemning homosexuality are more obscure.
Jesus Christ himself not once refers to homosexuality as a sin, and went out of his way to associate with people considered untouchable at the time - the crippled, prostitutes and tax collectors.
It is only after the living Christ has departed that his followers speak against homosexuality. Almost all these anti-gay statement were made by just one figure - Paul, who never knew Christ as a living man and who's only experience with Christ was a vision on the road to Damascus.
Importantly, Paul spent most of his life in dispute with the other fathers of the early church, including those who had known the living Christ.
Many Biblical experts also dispute the authenticity of some of the letters attributed to Paul as they only appear hundreds of years after his death and are written in a different style to those thought to be genuine.
In I Corinthians 6:9 Paul writes, "Be not deceived: neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor abusers of themselves with men, nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners, shall inherit the kingdom of God. And such were some of you: but you were washed, you were sanctified, you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ, and in the Spirit of our God."
In Romans 1:26-27 Paul writes, "For this cause God gave them up unto vile affections: for even their women did change the natural use into that which is against nature: And likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust one toward another; men with men working that which is unseemly, and receiving in themselves that recompence of their error which was meet."
Similar statements referring to homosexual behaviour are also made in the books of Timothy and Jude. Importantly, these New Testament references do not refer to homosexual acts as being worse than other forms of sinful behaviour.
But why was the Jewish society that Christianity sprang from so opposed to homosexual behaviour? The fact is that most of the world at that time, particularly those civilisations that neighboured Israel and dominated it, actually allowed and incorporated forms of homosexual behaviour into their cultures, particularly the Greek and Roman cultures
in the Near East at the time of Christ and in the period preceding it.
At the time of Christ there simply was no concept of a person being gay or straight, only homosexual and heterosexual behaviour.
In this sense it is incorrect to say that the Bible condemns homosexuals as its writers had no sense of such people existing - especially not the kinds we see in committed, loving relationships today.
Many cultures at this time expected young men to sleep with other young men before they were old enough to get married. In some cultures sex, including same sex behaviour, was part of religious ceremonies. It was also common for men to visit prostitutes, both male and female, in these societies.
Judaism, as the first major ancient religion to have a big problem with sex (both gay and straight), found these customs abhorrent, and this attitude has been passed down to its successors - Christianity and Islam.
It was these attitudes that allowed the people of Israel and the early Christians to differentiate themselves from the dominating cultures they lived amongst. So it's no surprise that Paul and others would write about these issues as the people they were trying to convert were members of these more relaxed cultures.
So, what does this all mean for us today?
What it shows is that there are many things that are acceptable in the Bible that Christians find unacceptable today: slavery, capital punishment for trivial offenses, and the second class status of women. Why then can't some change their attitude to gay men and lesbians?
Maybe these people need to ask themselves, Am I following my religious obligations, or am I simply hiding behind religion to express their own fears and prejudices?
Some groups for gay Christians are-
http://www.freedom2b.org/ (for Pentecostals and Evangelicals)
http://www.mccsydney.org/ (the Metropolitan Community Church)
http://www.nsw.uca.org.au/boe/resources/unitingnetwork.htm(Uniting Church)
http://www.gaycatholic.com.au/ (Gay Catholics)
Christian Denominations
Churches of the
Anglican Communion include the Episcopal Church and the Church of England. The recent consecration of
Reverend V. Gene Robinson, an openly gay man, as a bishop in the United States brought tensions within the worldwide communion into sharp focus.
The Bible is the foundational text of Christianity. Perhaps no other book has been more influential--for better or worse--in determining the construction of gay and lesbian identity in the modern world, as well as social attitudes toward homosexuality.
The core of
Evangelical Christianity is its emphasis on convincing non-Christians to join the Christian faith. Evangelicalism is closely related to fundamentalism and tends to be both socially conservative and hostile to glbtq people and sensibilities.
Spurred by the gay liberation movement of the late 1960s, a number of religious groups--including specifically
Gay and Lesbian Churches and Synagogues--have been formed to address the needs of gay and lesbian believers.
The Christian group known as the
Quakers is officially known as The Society of Friends. The Society of Friends, especially its conservative branch, has been a leader among Christian religious denominations in accepting homosexuality and gay and lesbian identity.
The Roman Catholic Church is the largest Christian denomination in the Western world. It may be the institution most responsible for the suffering of individuals involved in same-sex sexual relationships.
The Salvation Army is an Evangelical Christian sect founded in the nineteenth century, which has recently become an arm of right-wing conservatism. During the late 1990s, the sect campaigned in favor of sodomy laws and against glbtq rights.
The
United Church of Canada has been instrumental in the increased acceptance of glbtq rights, including same-sex marriage, in Canada.
The
Unitarian Universalist church in the United States has been outspoken in support of human rights--including, since 1970, those of the glbtq community. Though many of its members do not describe themselves as Christian, the church has Protestant historical roots.
Church of Scotland votes to appoint gay minister
Sunday, 24th May, 2009
London (AP) - The Church of Scotland has voted in favor of appointing an openly gay minister - the latest case involving sexuality to create a division in the Anglican Communion.
The church's ruling body voted 326 to 267 Saturday to support the appointment of the Rev. Scott Rennie, 37, who was previously married to a woman and is now in a relationship with a man ....... read more.
CONDOMS SPREAD HIV/AIDS
Saturday, 16th May, 2009
The Pope was right about the spread of AIDS, despite criticism in the media and advocacy groups. His fears are backed by good science ..... read more
[ Webmaster note: we do NOT support this theory but publish the article in the public interest ]
Pope Benedict's latest outburst "justifies" homophobic bullying and attacks
December, 23, 2008
The head of the Roman Catholic Church has claimed that the existence of gay people is as great a threat to humanity as the destruction of the rainforest.
Pope Benedict XVI also attacked transgender people and claimed that a "blurring" of genders would lead to the extinction of the human race.
The pontiff made his remarks in an "end of year" address to the Vatican's central administration, the Curia.
The Pope said behaviour beyond traditional heterosexual relations is "a destruction of God's work."
Benedict also said man must be protected "from the destruction of himself" and urged respect for the "nature of the human being as man and woman."
"The tropical forests do deserve our protection. But man, as a creature, does not deserve any less."
The Lesbian and Gay Christian Movement was outraged at this latest Papal outburst.
"It is comments like this that justify homophobic bullying that goes on in schools and it is comments like this that justify gay bashing," said LGCM chief executive Rev Sharon Ferguson.
"There are still so many instances of people being killed around the world, including in western society, purely and simply because of their sexual orientation or their gender identity.
"When you have religious leaders like that making that sort of statement then followers feel they are justified in behaving in an aggressive and violent way because they feel that they are doing God's work in ridding the world of these people."
The UK based gay humanist charity the Pink Triangle Trust has described the Pope's statement as clear evidence of paranoia.
"This must be the most ourtrageous and bizarre claim yet made by the Pope who has already got a well-deserved reputation as one the most viciously homophobic world leaders on a par with Mahmoud Ahmadinejad of Iran and Robert Mugabe of Zimbabwe," said PTT secretary and trustee George Broadhead.
"The Vatican has already reinforced its anti-gay reputation by strongly opposing a UN declaration calling for an end to discrimination against gays, but this latest Papal outburst is clear evidence of an obsession about homosexuality which is tantamount to paranoia."
Last week the Vatican opposed a statement at the United Nations reiterating the universal human rights of gay, lesbian, bisexual or trans people.
According to Roman Catholics, gay people are disordered and called to a life of celibacy.
Source: Pinknews.co.uk
Pope likens "saving" gays to saving the rainforest
Monday, December 22, 2008 - reported by Phil Stewart
VATICAN CITY (Reuters) - Pope Benedict said on Monday that saving humanity from homosexual or transsexual behavior was just as important as saving the rainforest from destruction.
"(The Church) should also protect man from the destruction of himself. A sort of ecology of man is needed," the pontiff said in a holiday address to the Curia, the Vatican's central administration.
"The tropical forests do deserve our protection. But man, as a creature, does not deserve any less."
The Catholic Church teaches that while homosexuality is not sinful, homosexual acts are. It opposes gay marriage and, in October, a leading Vatican official called homosexuality "a deviation, an irregularity, a wound."
The pope said humanity needed to "listen to the language of creation" to understand the intended roles of man and woman. He compared behavior beyond traditional heterosexual relations as "a destruction of God's work."
He also defended the Church's right to "speak of human nature as man and woman, and ask that this order of creation be respected."
Source: Reuters UK
Queer Town: Cardinal Mahony's Double-Speak on Prop. 8
By Patrick Range McDonald December 8, 2008
Cardinal Roger Mahony, head of the (Catholic) archdiocese of Los Angeles, must be fearing some kind of backlash over his quietly active role in the passage of Proposition 8. This weekend, in The Tidings, an archdiocese newsletter, Mahony and the bishops of L.A. try to console "homosexual Catholics" with a kind of wacky double-speak usually doled out by politicians who know they're wrong but refuse to come clean and say it. Here's an excert:
"Your intrinsic value as human beings and as brothers and sisters continues without change," Mahony and the bishops write. "If we had ever thought that the intent of this proposition was to harm you or anyone in the State of California, we would not have supported it. We are personally grateful for the witness and service of so many dedicated and generous homosexual Catholics. We pledge our commitment to safeguard your dignity."
If there was a year-end list for the most cockamamie, intellectually dishonest letter from a Los Angeles public official for 2008, Mahony's contends for the number one slot.
Source: LA WEEKLY
Besen: Can conservative religions reconcile with gays?
By Wayne Besen, 11.26.2008
On Sunday, New York Times Columnist Nicholas Kristof discussed religious and cultural extremism in Pakistan, where a new cabinet member, Israr Ullah Zardari, defended the torture-murder of five women and girls who were buried alive (three girls wanted to choose their own husbands, and two women wanted to protect them.)
The Times had another article on Monday about an all-girl rock band in Saudi Arabia that is forbidden from playing live concerts because of their gender.
At home, former Arkansas governor and pastor, Mike Huckabee, appeared on ABC's "The View" and said that gay and lesbian equality was not the same as civil rights because homosexuals have not had their skulls cracked and were not hosed down by police. Apparently, he is unaware of the latest FBI hate crime statistics that show bias attacks based on sexual orientation making up 15.5 percent of all reported hate crimes.
In Rome, Pope Benedict XVI is being criticized this week for questioning the usefulness of Interfaith dialogue in a letter he wrote to Italian politician Marcello Pera. What the Pope fails to point out is that thanks to intransigent absolutists, like the pontiff, finding common ground is nearly impossible.
How can we expect interfaith dialogue when we can't even have Interstate dialogue between two Mormon universities 45 miles apart because they have literally turned religion into a political football?
When the secular University of Utah played its religious school rival, Brigham Young University (BYU), last weekend, the teams treated the End Zone as if it were the Promised Land.
"It's like a lot of other rivalries, except for those at the extremes," Michael Anastasi, managing editor of the Salt Lake Tribune told the New York Times."For them, it's not only that your school is weak, you're going to Hell too."
Two years ago, the rivalry was further soured after BYU quarterback John Beck threw a touchdown pass to receiver Jonny Harline, who sank to his knees — as if in prayer — to make the winning catch. Describing the "miraculous" play, another B.Y.U. receiver, Austin Collie, concluded it occurred because students at the religious school lived cleaner lives.
"Obviously, if you do what's right on and off the field, I think the Lord steps in and plays a part in it," said Collie. (For the record, the holier-than-thou BYU was crushed 48-24 in this weekend's game. I'm guessing the Lord was upset at Mormon involvement in California's Prop. 8 banning same-sex marriages)
If religious groups become fratricidal based on football allegiance, it seems there is little hope for genuine reconciliation with gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender people. We must still work to enlighten the flock where we can, but fundamentalist leaders will only transform their anti-gay views when popular opinion decidedly turns against them — as it did with race relations in the 1960's and 1970's.
The strategy for the GLBT movement has been to circumvent the ideologues and create change within mainline denominations. I wholeheartedly support such efforts and have contributed to them. Unfortunately, there is scant evidence to suggest that these religious institutions will thrive and form a substantial bulwark against fundamentalism.
In "America Theocracy," author Kevin Phillips documents the steep decline of reasonable religion in favor of the rabble-rousing variety.
"Between 1940 and 1985 mainline Protestantism's share of all U.S. religious adherents was steadily plummeting…Between 1960 and 1997 — the Presbyterian Church, The Episcopal Church, The United Church of Christ and the Methodists lost between 500,000 and 2 million members each. In the meantime, the Southern Baptist Convention added 6 million, the Mormons 3.3 million, the Pentecostal Assemblies of God 2 million and the Church of God (Tennessee) some 600,000."
The implications are that the GLBT movement may be placing its eggs in a basket that is rapidly fraying. It seems that people are either gravitating towards religious extremism or secular humanism, with little appetite for mainline faith. The Internet also offers easy access to eclectic spiritual beliefs that one can follow without organized religion. So, the hope that mainstream religion, as we know it, will supplant anti-gay denominations seems far-fetched.
The trends of urbanization and the discrediting of corporate Republican-style religion will lead, in my view, to more people losing their faith. However, fundamentalist sects will continue to consolidate market share for those who feel estranged or displaced by modernity. In other words, America will look much like Europe in the coming decades — with a secular majority and a small, but still vocal, fundamentalist minority. (Mostly Islamic in Europe)
I can hear objections from those who rightfully point out that America is more religious than Europe. But, Kevin Phillips reminds us that Europe was once was hyper-religious too — but circumstances change over time.
"As the 21st Century began," writes Phillips. "None of the western countries in which Reformation Protestantism bred its radical or anarchic sects nearly five hundred years earlier — England, Scotland, Germany, Switzerland, and the Netherlands — still had congregations of any great magnitude adhering to that theology."
Source: 365gay
Pope's words used in gay-friendly church's defense
Iain Clacher, Wednesday, 8 October 2008
The gay-friendly Catholic parish in South Brisbane that has angered the Vatican over its liberal ways looks set to infuriate church conservatives yet again.
But this time, the Pope's own words have been used in the 'renegade' parish's defence.
A new banner has been unfurled at St Mary's Catholic Church featuring the words: "Everone has a place in the church, every person without exception should be able to feel at home and never rejected".
The quote comes from a speech Pope Benedict XVI made last month in France, gay Catholic activist and St Mary's parishioner Tony Robertson told Queensland Pride.
St Mary's made national headlines again this week after it was revealed a recent video of a baptism at St Mary's had been posted on YouTube.
The video showed resident priest Terry Fitzpatrick using the words, "We baptise you in the name of the creator, sustainer and liberator of life", adding "who is also father, son and spirit".
The parish's "non-sexist" liturgy has been criticised repeatedly by church conservatives as "wrong".
The parish's accepting attitude towards openly gay parishioners has also upset conservatives, who have complained direct to the Vatican.
In May, the Archbishop of Brisbane, John Bathersby, was prompted to issue an ultimatum to the parish over its use of unauthorised liturgy, allowance of women and other lay preachers, and the presence of a small statue some considered to be Buddhist.
Source: SX News
Ray Boltz comes out as gay
September 16, 2008 by hanxter
from Christianitytoday.com:
Ray Boltz, who sold about 4.5 million records before retiring from Christian music a few years ago, came out of the closet Friday to announce that he's gay.
In an interview with the gay magazine The Washington Blade, Boltz said he came out to his family and some close friends in December 2004, but only now decided to go public with the news.
"I'd denied it ever since I was a kid," Boltz, 55, told the magazine. "I became a Christian, I thought that was the way to deal with this and I prayed hard and tried for 30-some years and then at the end, I was just going, 'I'm still gay. I know I am.' And I just got to the place where I couldn't take it anymore … when I was going through all this darkness, I thought, 'Just end this.'"
One reason Boltz decided to come out now might be because he's performing Sunday at Jesus Metropolitan Community Church in Indianapolis, and then next Sunday, Sept. 21, at the Metropolitan Community Church of Washington, D.C. Both congregations are a part of a denomination that embraces the LGBT (Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and Transgender) community. Boltz is perhaps best known for his song "Thank You," about a dream in which a Christian thanks the Sunday school teacher who led him to Jesus. It was the GMA song of the year in 1990. Other Boltz hits include "Watch the Lamb," "The Anchor Holds," and "I Pledge Allegiance to the Lamb."
Boltz also told The Blade that he doesn't want to get into debates about Scripture and has no plans to "go into First Baptist or an Assembly of God church and run in there and say, 'I'm gay and you need to love me anyway.'"
For him, the decision to come out is much more personal.
"This is what it really comes down to," he says. "If this is the way God made me, then this is the way I'm going to live. It's not like God made me this way and he'll send me to hell if I am who he created me to be … I really feel closer to God because I no longer hate myself."
Source: Hanxter.com
Rabbis say 'I do' to marrying gay couple
September 14, 2008 01:22am
A GAY couple will wed in a synagogue in an Australian first which could split the Jewish community.
Traditional Judaism regards homosexuality as "abhorrent", but three progressive rabbis have agreed to conduct the Sydney ceremony for bookshop owner Scott Whitmont, 47, and nurse Christopher Whitmont-Stein, 38.
The couple, together for nine years, said they were excited that their relationship would be recognised by their faith, despite same-sex marriage being illegal in NSW.
"When you're planning a wedding, you don't think about the political side of it. Maybe it will start something," Mr Whitmont-Stein said. "Same sex unions should be recognised ... because we don't have the same legal rights as heterosexual couples."
Mr Whitmont-Stein, who added his partner's name a few years ago, joked that he had assumed the role of bride because he had time off work and was co-ordinating the ceremony and reception for 75 guests.
The couple will wed under the traditional Jewish canopy or chuppah, exchange rings, say blessings over cups of wine and break a glass - another Jewish tradition.
Emanuel Synagogue Rabbi Jeffrey Kamins, said contemporary ethics were at odds with received tradition about homosexuality.
"Contemporary knowledge from biology, psychology and other fields has led to a far deeper understanding of human sexuality," he wrote to congregants.
"Gay or lesbian relationships are not 'deviant', but part of human behaviour."
Orthodox sections of the Jewish community do not condone homosexuality.
Source: NEWS.com.au
Episcopal bishops oppose gay marriage ban
The Associated Press, 10 September, 2008
SAN FRANCISCO—California's six Episcopal bishops issued a statement Wednesday opposing a November ballot initiative that would again outlaw same-sex marriage in the state.
The statement says the bishops do not believe that marriage of heterosexuals is threatened by same-sex marriage and that "Jesus calls us to love rather than hate, to give rather than to receive."
The bishops say that while their denomination and even they themselves remain divided on whether Episcopal clergy should officiate same-sex marriages, they are united in the belief that it would be morally wrong for voters to overturn the California Supreme Court ruling that granted gays the right to wed.
The bishop's stand on Proposition 8 corresponds with positions taken by the Union for Reform Judaism and the state's Unitarian Universalist leadership. Leaders of the Roman Catholic and Mormon faiths have endorsed the measure and are lending organizational and financial support to secure its passage.
Source: MERCURY.News.com
The Gay Bishop at the Center of the Anglican Storm
The Rt. Rev. Gene Robinson on tensions in Anglican Communion and his own controversial ministry
By Jay Tolson, July 30, 2008
As the Lambeth Conference, the once-every-decade meeting of the bishops of the Anglican Communion in Canterbury, England, enters its final days, the great question remains whether the 77 million-member global federation will be able to avoid a schism.
Although he was pointedly not invited to the conference, the Rt. Rev. Gene Robinson has been a figure at the center of the storm ever since the openly gay clergyman was consecrated as the bishop of the Diocese of New Hampshire in 2003. Conservatives point to him as proof that liberal Anglicans and Episcopalians are ignoring scriptural authority—and not only on matters relating to sexuality.
Many observers see the decision of the Most Rev. Rowan Williams, archbishop of Canterbury, to exclude Anderson from Lambeth as an attempt to defuse the anger of conservatives, many of whose congregations have broken away from their governing provinces in North America and elsewhere and reorganized themselves under African or other "Southern Cone" jurisdictions. But close to 250 bishops still decided not to attend the Lambeth gathering.
Robinson, though barred from attending official functions, has been in and around Canterbury during the conference. He spoke to U. S. News about developments at Lambeth and within the Anglican Communion. Excerpts:
You are at the center of a controversy that is threatening to divide the Anglican Communion. What do you think about your role in all of this?
I think it's important to say that there is only one side of this debate that is threatening schism. The folks who are arguing for the greater inclusion of gay and lesbian people in the life of the church are not threatening to leave. We are here to stay, and we don't want anyone else to leave. The sad part is that you can't force someone to stay who is determined to leave, and there seem to be some people who are working for schism rather than reconciliation. So it's a difficult place we find ourselves, but in the end I am hopeful because the real feeling here, among the 650 bishops who are here, is that we all want to find a way to stay together and move forward together.
How did you feel about being excluded from the Lambeth Conference by the archbishop of Canterbury?
Well, you know, the conservatives throughout the communion told the archbishop of Canterbury that they would not participate if I were included, and so he acceded to their demands and excluded me from the conference and then they didn't come anyway. As is often the case with bullying, the bully never gets enough. And so unfortunately the archbishop of Canterbury was not able to purchase their participation by excluding me. It's very sad, and the exclusion has been more painful than I anticipated it would be, but I willingly have accepted the role that I've been given, and I've been on the fringes of the conference doing everything I can to witness to the love of God.
Has your exclusion been a clear signal that the leadership of the Anglican Communion will tolerate no further appointments of openly gay or lesbian clergy?
No, I don't think so, because the archbishop of Canterbury doesn't have the authority to make that decision. This was a personal decision on his part for what he thought was the good of the conference. But the Anglican Communion is made up of the 38 autonomous provinces. Those decisions get made at the local, national church level. So I don't think it [his decision] signals that one way or another. There are clearly people who do not want any other gay or lesbian people made bishop. But I don't think that it is where a number of the churches will wind up—the American church, the Canadian church, the Australians, the New Zealanders, and other provinces as well.
What do you make of the vague assurances of the U.S. bishops that no further provocative clergy appointments will be made?
I think it was a good-faith effort to turn the temperature down for the time being, but I fully suspect that at our next general convention in the summer of 2009 you will see the Episcopal Church saying something like, "You know, we will just have to follow God's will as we can best discern it, and we are now prepared to move forward with the consecration of any bishop that is elected within a diocese who meets qualifications. I don't think the Episcopal Church is going back on the issue [of consecrating gay and lesbian bishops].
Should the American Episcopal Church's continued inclusion in the Anglican Communion be achieved at the price of excluding gay and lesbian clergy, denying church blessings for same-sex unions, or even condemning homosexuality as incompatible with Scripture?
No, and the Episcopal Church is simply not going to go there. We are in the fortunate position of having countless numbers of gay and lesbian Episcopalians sitting in our pews, and we have a huge number of gay and lesbian clergy that are known to be faithfully serving their churches, and the Episcopal Church is not going to turn its back on them.
What do you make of the proposed Pastoral Forum, which will supposedly enforce on the worldwide communion a moratorium on appointments of gay or lesbian clergy, the blessing of same-sex unions, and (as conservatives are now threatening) the creation of new or alternatives provinces within already existing ones?
I think, although it claims to be a way toward reconciliation, there is little about reconciliation in it. It appears to be about nothing but punishing those who color outside the lines, if you will, and I don't believe that many churches in the communion are going to be in favor of participating in such a group or such a way forward because it is unnecessarily punitive.
You wouldn't even want the communion to bring an end to conservatives' efforts to create new jurisdictions or allow conservative jurisdictions (such as the Church of Nigeria) to bring breakaway congregations in other provinces under their authority?
I would certainly like to see those boundary-crossings end, but not at the price of creating a centralized bureaucracy that has never been part of the Anglican tradition. For 500 years, this very loose confederation, under which widely divergent views can exist not only peacefully but productively, frankly I think is not broken, and there is no need to fix it with either a covenant or a Pastoral Forum or anything of the sort. I do think it's going to be messy for a while, and I think that's probably just exactly right. Efforts to tie this up into a neat and tidy package will ultimately be frustrated and are not even the right way forward.
As you understand it, what real authority or power would the Pastoral Forum have? For example, could it expel a province if it violates the moratorium on any of those three points?
It really will have no authority. It's very unclear how any member of the Anglican Communion could be excluded. It would seem that the Anglican Consultative Council would not have the power to propose such a thing. And even so, by its own constitution, it would not be able to do so without a two-thirds vote of all the provinces in the communion, and I think that's highly unlikely.
If the moratoria are "retrospective," as some people are saying they are intended to be, is there any possibility the Episcopal Church will force you to resign?
The Episcopal Church cannot compel me to resign. If I were guilty of some immorality or illegality, then I could be brought up on presentment charges. But shy of that, there is no authority in the Episcopal Church that could compel my resignation. And there is no desire in the Episcopal Church to do so. Even the bishops who voted "no" on my consent I work very well with in our House of Bishops, and our relationship with them is a good and strong one.
Does it appear to you that the initiatives of the conservatives' Global Anglican Future Conference [held a few weeks before the Lambeth Conference] are forcing the Anglican Communion to move toward a more conservative, unyielding stance on the hot-button issues?
Yes. I think they have taken the issue of homosexuality and elevated it to a position above all things that we believe in common, and I think that's a mistake and certainly not in the Anglican tradition. Again, when bullies make demands and say they are going to take their toys and go home if they don't get their way, the only way you can respond to that kind of demand is to stop giving in to them. If they want to affect things in the communion, they need to be here at this table talking with the three quarters of the bishops who are here about how best to move forward.
What have been the reactions of bishops and others to your own informal activities in and around Canterbury?
I must say that my contact has been very limited because I am not allowed on the premises of any of the official gatherings. And the schedule is so full that I've not had much time to connect with my brothers and sisters in my own House of Bishops. But certainly the ones I've talked with are both encouraged with the deepening of relationships here as well as concerned about where this covenant process might be leading us.
Source: USNEWS.COM
Gay bishop defies his Lambeth Conference ban
Gene Robinson wasn't invited - but he's coming anyway. Ian Griggs and Cole Moreton report
Sunday, 13 July 2008
The man whose love life has brought the worldwide Anglican Communion to the brink of self-destruction has not been invited to this week's crucial British gathering of bishops. But he's coming anyway.
Gene Robinson has sex with his male partner and is proud of it. That he is also the Bishop of New Hampshire in the US outrages Anglican traditionalists who believe homosexuality is a sin.
They are threatening to leave Anglicanism in their tens of millions - and their bishops will begin the move away by boycotting the historic Lambeth Conference, which begins on Wednesday.
The Archbishop of Canterbury, Dr Rowan Williams, in whose name the conference is called every 10 years, hoped it would provide the space for the warring bishops to find common ground and save the biggest Protestant church grouping in the world from disintegration. He even sought to offer the traditionalists an olive branch by barring the American from the event.
"I'm the first elected bishop not to be invited to the conference since it began in 1867," the Rt Rev Robinson told the IoS. "I must be a pretty scary guy." Used to inspiring deep feelings, he wore a bullet-proof vest to his consecration in 2003 after receiving "numerous and credible" death threats.
Tomorrow he will appear at the Southbank Centre in London for the premiere of the controversial documentary For the Bible Tells Me So, where the acclaimed actor and gay rights campaigner Sir Ian McKellen - who says "the church has to grow up" - will be at his side.
He will then travel to the University of Kent, where the conference is being held. He may speak at a fringe meeting but won't be an official delegate, although many of his supporters from America and many other countries will be - and this has been enough to make many traditionalists stay away.
Up to a third of the 800 or so bishops invited will not attend. Because of their rarity, Lambeth Conferences are often seen as milestones in the life of the Anglican church - and the boycott means history is likely to judge this one as the beginning of the end of Anglicanism as we know it.
The most senior absentee from this country will be the Bishop of Rochester, Michael Nazir-Ali, who believes it is actually his liberal opponents who should be staying away: "Those who have gone against church teaching should not attend representative Anglican gatherings."
The traditionalists are a powerful lobby in England, where they tend to have the biggest congregations and therefore the most money. Last week, 1,300 clergy threatened to leave the Church of England because they disagreed with a vote allowing women to become bishops. Similar numbers are believed to be opposed to liberalising the stance on gay priests. But this is not just about England.
Half of the 80 million members of the worldwide Anglican Communion come from Africa, where a more literal, evangelical view of the Bible dominates. It is bishops from Nigeria, Kenya and Uganda who are challenging the right of the more liberal churches in England and the US to go on leading the communion. Last month, the dissidents held their own gathering in Jerusalem, apparently as a first step towards forming an alternative network of churches. Their departure would destroy the structures of Anglicanism and cause financial crisis.
Meanwhile, those with a different view of scripture do not see why they should surrender to the conservatives. Many gay clergy still operate in secret, says Gene Robinson: "I'm just the first to be honest about it."
The film he will introduce tomorrow looks at several deeply Christian families in America, including his own, who discover that some of their children are gay and try to reconcile religious teaching with their love for their offspring.
Sir Ian McKellen told the IoS: "The argument [the church] is having now is similar to the argument in the military in which heads of the service predicted its disintegration if gay people were allowed in. That is nonsense. They thought it was a problem particular to the military, but really it was the same old homophobia that exists everywhere."
Source: The Independant UK
Religious beliefs can be tolerated at best
By Sam Leith, Last Updated: 11:01pm BST 11/07/2008
How tolerant should we be of intolerance? This question is at the centre of the tricky case of Lillian Ladele. Miss Ladele is a registrar who - after being threatened with the sack by Islington council for refusing on religious grounds to preside over civil ceremonies for homosexuals - is now in line for a large payout on the grounds of religious discrimination.
It is easy to feel sorry for Miss Ladele. She finds herself in the position of a devout apprentice at a halal butchers which, under new management, starts up a thriving sideline in pork charcuterie. She signed up, in good faith, for a job that involved marrying men to women.
Rather than throw her toys from the pram when her job description changed, she attempted to come to an accommodation. For 15 months, she swapped shifts with colleagues to avoid presiding over civil partnerships for gay couples.
It sounds to me as if Islington council could have been more delicate in its dealings with her, and perhaps have found a compromise. I am well prepared to believe that Miss Ladele's life was not much fun as she was presented with a choice between her faith and her job.
But Islington received formal complaints about her refusals. And regardless of her personal convictions, the job of a registrar does now involve presiding over civil ceremonies for gay couples.
So you can well see why the council, which needs to make the best use of the tax money contributed by residents of all sexual and religious stripes, was exasperated by having a registrar on full pay who refused to do part of her job.
Miss Ladele is not simply in the position of a private citizen who, since 1950, has had a sign in the window of her boarding house saying "No Dogs, No Blacks, No Irish", and then falls foul of liberal legislation. She is, as a registrar, a representative of the British state.
In 1967, that state took the decision that it was no longer any of its business what two adult men or two adult women do with their private parts in the privacy of their own home. In the past couple of years, and not before time, it took the decision that devoted homosexual couples were entitled to the same legal status that married heterosexuals enjoy.
There is a problem there, of course. In some ways, the introduction of civil partnerships for gay couples - since their tax breaks and privileges are extended exclusively to couples in a sexual or at least romantic relationship - can be argued to be retrograde: it makes what we do with our private parts, once again, the business of the state.
But that is no more than a debating point. Nobody sensible wants or expects the institution of marriage to be disestablished - and as long as it exists and is recognised by the town hall, and as long as gay people pay the same taxes as the rest of us, there is no case for making it the exclusive preserve of heterosexuals.
And, it's worth remembering, the change in the law to establish civil partnerships did not presume on the prerogatives of religion. If your faith forbids you to see man and man joined in matrimony, you're under no obligation to marry them in your church.
But, equally, your church has no right to presume on secular rights and privileges extended to those two men by the commonwealth in which you have an equal share. This is a case of rendering unto God what is God's, and unto Islington council what is Islington council's.
That is why I am uneasy about the tribunal's complaint that Islington council "took no notice of the rights of Miss Ladele by virtue of her orthodox Christian beliefs".
The suggestion seems to be that rights in law are conferred on her "by virtue" of her Christianity - that a special protection should be extended to her prejudice because it is superstitious in character.
That's rubbish, and pernicious rubbish. Bigotry is bigotry, whether or not it hides behind the skirts of the Almighty.
If I decide that I won't have black people in my house because I think they smell, that is no more or less admirable - and deserves no more or less protection in civil law - than refusing to register a homosexual union because I think God disapproves.
This nonsense lies behind the cant notion that religious belief should be "respected". It should not. It should be tolerated. You're entitled to believe whatever you damn well like about the disposition of the universe.
But you should not expect a pat on the head because the conclusion you reach is religious in character. This exact understanding of the term "respect" is what gives us the political party of that name - and the respect it extends to illiberal clerics under the flag of anti-imperialism.
So, as much as your sympathy goes out to Miss Ladele, it is worth bearing in mind that there are some much uglier and nastier people - with similar feelings about the relationship between church and state - who will look on the finding of this tribunal with a smile.
Source: Telegraph.co.uk
GAY GROUPS STAND UNITED AGAINST PAPAL VISIT
Author Ani Lamont, Wednesday 9th July, 2008
The first of several planned World Youth Day protests was staged outside Parliament House yesterday afternoon, just 500m from the official WYD tent.
A handful of people chanting 'Pope is wrong, gay is good' and wearing T-shirts emblazoned with the slogans "go homo" and "this T-shirt is annoying" gathered in defiance of the recently introduced anti-protest laws connected to World Youth Day.
No To Pope Coalition leader Rachel Evans told the gathering, which was outnumbered by local and national media, about the increasing rate of HIV in Africa as a result of Catholic teachings on condoms and to challenge the church's views on homosexuality and abortion.
"Homosexuality is not a sin and we want to talk to Catholic youths about this issue peacefully," Evans said.
"It is important that we have discussions about the policies of the Catholic Church. I think it is going to be very hard for the church not to address these questions."
The protesters highlighted the state's attempts to discourage peaceful protest during the Pope's visit. About 630 sites across Sydney have been declared spaces where it will be illegal to "annoy" pilgrims by protesting, wearing an anti-WYD T-shirt or handing out condoms.
Despite the threat of conviction, a rally planned for next Saturday will go ahead, Evans said.
The special WYD laws have prompted criminal lawyer Daniel Hakim to offer his services for free to anyone fined for protesting peacefully.
Hakim told Sydney Star Observer that he was "disgusted" by the implementation of such anti-constitutional laws.
"I will have my mobile on 24/7 over the entire WYD period for anyone to contact me if they have been charged for wearing a T-shirt, holding a placard or taking part in a peaceful protest," he said.
"I will be happy to defend anyone, and cross-examine at length any pilgrim who decides to dob in or have a protest group arrested."
Some rally organisers have already reported receiving phones calls from the NSW Police WYD squad.
Protests already planned during WYD include the Gay Christian Network's July 13 service at Pitt St Uniting Church; gay Catholic group Acceptance's gay youth forum on July 16; a kiss-in at Taylor Square with Vanessa Wagner on July 19 and a rally from Taylor Square to Moore Park on the same day where protesters will defy the law and hand out condoms to pilgrims.
info: Lawyer Daniel Hakim can be reached on 0400 280 977; the Gay Christian Network service starts at 2.30pm; the Acceptance forum is on July 16 from 7pm at UTS and the Taylor Square rally will start at midday, followed by the kiss-in at 3pm.
Source: SSO - Sydney Star Observer
Papal visit protest rules rile Australians
Jul 1, 2008, 10:17 GMT
Sydney - Gay and lesbian Catholics planning protests when Pope Benedict XVI visits Australia later this month said Tuesday they would defy new powers that allow arrests for 'causing annoyance' during the pontiff's stay in Sydney.
Police and even emergency service volunteers will have the authority to detain those causing 'annoyance or inconvenience' to pilgrims during the July 15-21 celebrations of World Youth Day.
NoToPope spokeswoman Rachel Evans said her group would still be out in the streets trying to hand out condoms to the hundreds of thousands of young pilgrims expected to flock an event held every three years.
'We're not anti-religion,' Evans told Australia's AAP news agency. 'We expect the police will allow us to distribute condoms to the young pilgrims and talk with them about human rights issues.'
Lawyer Anna Katzmann, the president of the New South Wales Bar Association, described the new powers as 'unnecessary and repugnant.'
'If I were to wear a T-shirt proclaiming that 'World Youth Day is a waste of public money' and refuse to remove it when an officer of the Rural Fire Service asks me to, I would commit a criminal offence,' Katzmann said.
Deputy Police Commissioner Dave Owens defended the new rules against charges they were anti-democratic and promised his officers would use their discretion in using the powers.
But asked whether someone wearing a T-shirt advocating condom use risked arrest and a hefty fine, Owens would not rule that out. He replied that 'each individual circumstance will have to be dealt with individually.'
Source: M & C - Asia Pacific
Presbyterian Church (USA) Votes to Ordain GLBT Individuals
By C. Boning - Posted on June 30th, 2008
The Presbyterian Church (USA) has voted to remove language from its constitution excluding GLBT people from ordination, according to a recent press release issued by the Human Rights Campaign.
The vote will be passed down to the 173 presbyteries across the country, the majority of which must ratify the decision before it can go into effect, also according to the release.
Anti-GLBT language was originally added to the group's constitution in 1996. Attempts were made at two of the Presbyterian Church (USA)'s national conventions, or General Assemblies, to amend the language, but the presbyteries subsequently rejected it.
The most recent General Assembly, at which the vote took place, ended over the weekend in San Jose, Ca.
Source: The Vital Voice
BUILDING UNITY THROUGH RELIGION
by Ani Lamont, 19th June, 2008
Former Uniting Church minister Dorothy McRae-McMahon knows the fear that comes with outing yourself to your church.
Having gone through it herself she will be one of several ministers and gay people of faith congregating at the Pitt St Uniting Church on 13 July to make a stand against World Youth Day and open the doors to the more inclusive side of religion.
A Jubilee medal and Australian Human Rights medal recipient, McRae-McMahon will stand alongside fellow out and proud people of faith Michael Kelly, Anthony Venn-Brown and David Reeder in an interfaith service designed to challenge the Catholic Church's opposition to gay and lesbian rights.
Talking about the conflict felt by many gay people who have been brought up with religion, McRae-McMahon says, "If you have a faith and if there is an institution that transmits that faith to you, i.e. the church, it has a very, very powerful role to play in relation to your life because if it's presenting to you a God who believes that people of different sexualities are abominations then that is very damning to you if you are of those different sexualities.
"Years ago during the time that I was facing my sexuality, I was being attacked by neo-Nazis for various reasons while I was working at the Pitt St church, and I remember thinking at the time, I am more afraid of the church and what it might do to me than this neo-Nazi group, who were threatening my life and the reason for that was the church was like my family so it's like your family rejecting you," she told the Sydney Star Observer<.
"Luckily for me my church didn't reject me, but at that point in time I felt that fear that others go through. People commit suicide from it.
"I'm a patron of Twenty10 and I've been a part of Suicide Australia and I know. There are people who would commit suicide rather than handle that damning God."
McRae-McMahon and the other spiritual leaders who will be heading the service and open dialogue being held on 13 July are stressing this is not an event that is just for the religious.
"We're inviting young and old alike because we as the elders of the community would like to have a dialogue in the presence of all sorts of people," she said.
"We're hoping that the news will spread to some of the young pilgrims who are going to be here and we would love them to be with us - if they're heterosexual or not.
"We would love to be supported and affirmed by anyone who wants to claim the ground with us. We really want to fill that church so it looks strong and clear.
"Even though we'll be speaking as people of faith I think that all GLBTQI people need to understand that every institution in the world in society must be reformed so that it includes us all, so they can be there affirming that and talking about how we've survived, to gather around us in the church as we try to claim our ground there. We would be most grateful to be supported in that way. The more people we have the better."
The GLBT interfaith service happens on 13 July at the Pitt St Church, 264 Pitt St.
SSO NET
UK bishop orders probe of "marriage" by gay clerics
June 15, 2008
LONDON (Reuters) - A leading Church of England bishop has ordered an investigation into the blessing of two gay clergymen held in a London church in May, the Bishop of London said on Sunday.
Already civil partners, the Reverend Peter Cowell and the Reverend David Lord, who was ordained in New Zealand, exchanged vows in a service at St Bartholomew the Great, one of London's oldest churches, on May 31.
The Sunday Telegraph reported that the priests had exchanged rings and vows.
"Services of public blessings for civil partnerships are not authorized in the Church of England or the Diocese of London," the bishop of London, Richard Chartres, said in a statement.
"I will be asking the Archdeacon of London to investigate what took place at the church of St Bartholomew the Great."
The 77-million-member Anglican Communion, a global federation of national churches, has been in upheaval over the issue over homosexuality and the blessing of gay unions in recent years.
Church of England guidelines require clergy not to bless such partnerships, but the Reverend Martin Dudley, who carried out the service at St Bartholomew the Great, maintains he did not break any rules.
"It wasn't a marriage as you can't marry two men -- it was a celebration of the civil partnership of the two people that were involved," Dudley told Reuters.
"It wasn't intended to be provocative. When two men who have committed themselves to the church ask for a blessing why should we should we turn them away?"
But a Church of England spokesman said the ceremony appeared to contravene those guidelines.
"It is to be hoped that, on reflection, it will be recognized in the wider Anglican Communion that the reported events appear to contravene the terms of the Bishops' 2005 statement, and do not represent any change in Church policy," the spokesman said.
In 2003 the Episcopal Church, the U.S. branch of the worldwide Anglican community, consecrated Gene Robinson, the first bishop known to be in an openly homosexual relationship in more than four centuries of church history.
Earlier this month Robinson entered into a civil union with his longtime partner Mark Andrew at a private ceremony in New Hampshire.
In July the Anglicans are due to gather for their once-a-decade Lambeth Conference in Britain.
(Reporting by John Joseph; Editing by Luke Baker)
Source: REUTERS UK
Anglicans on way to 'accommodate' congregation's differences
May 23, 2008 - 6:43PM
Source: ABC News
The head of the Australian Anglican Church believes its clergy is coming to terms with homosexuals within the church.
Last year the Anglican Church paved the way for women to become Bishops, and the Right Reverend Kay Goldsworthy became the first woman to take up the role last night.
Bishop Goldsworthy says she will not be deterred by opposition from within the church.
"I think it's really important for us to meet people as human beings rather than as ideas or fears of them," she said.
"Each of us is unique and are wonderful human beings and I think we need to take time to get to know each other."
Opponents of the move to allow female bishops have warned it will lead to homosexual priests in the clergy.
Primate of the Anglican Church Phillip Aspinall says there are a range of views that have to be worked through.
"If people are respected and their views taken seriously and ways seriously looked for to accommodate people, those ways usually can be found," he said.
CHURCHES 'CAN'T DISCRIMINATE'
by Harley Dennett, 1st May, 2008
Christian organisations in all states and territories may have lost the right to discriminate against gay people despite religious exemptions in anti-discrimination laws, legal experts claimed this week following a landmark ruling against the Uniting Church's Wesley Mission.
Homosexuality as an intolerable sin was not a doctrine of Christianity, the NSW Administrative Decisions Tribunal ruled last month, because there were many dissenting views on the subject among Christian groups generally, and specifically within the Uniting Church.
As long as gay-friendly congregations like Metropolitan Community Church exist, this ruling means Christian organisations don't have a license to legally discriminate against gays, Brisbane lawyer Stephen Page said.
"Religious exemptions are worded almost identically across all state and territory anti-discrimination laws, so I'd expect other commissions to start citing this case," Page told SSO.
"Christian religious schools in the ACT, NSW, Victoria, SA and WA would not be able to use religion as the reason that gay and lesbian students can be prevented from bringing their partners to the school formal."
The Tribunal rejected the welfare agency's right to refuse a gay couple seeking to become foster parents as the laws only allow-ed exemptions for religions, and there was no "religion of Uniting Church".
The basis for this decision may have come from the Church's own witness, Reverend Paul Swalding, who testified that his religion was Christianity, even though when most people asked what religion they meant which denominational church.
"It is common ground that there is a diversity of views and beliefs within the Christian religion on the issue of homosexuality," the ruling stated.
"The debate within the Uniting Church, about which much evidence was given in these proceedings, is but one of many examples that can be cited to illustrate this point. In our view the respondents have failed to establish that the nominated doctrine [forbidding homosexuality] constitutes a doctrine of the Christian religion."
Other religions would have to pass the same legal test, Page said, and the Catholic stance would be particularly challenging as the Church would have to claim it is a separate religion from Protestant Christianity.
The Tribunal also found refusing gay couples from fostering services "cannot be said to be necessary to avoid injury to the religious susceptibilities of the adherents of the Christian religion," which was a requirement of the exemption provisions.
More of Page's analysis of the implications can be found at lgbtlawblog.blogspot.com
Source: SSO - Sydney Star Observer
Popular Christian show host comes out
published Monday, April 21, 2008
Azariah Southworth, Nashville host and producer of popular Christian youth show The Remix, has come out as gay, Out & About newspaper reported Wednesday.
"I know this will end my career in Christian television, but I must now live my life openly and honestly with everyone," Southworth said in the article. On his weekly half-hour show, Southworth is seen spending time with a Christian musician or band to see what they like, where they go, and how they live. For the past year and a half, it has been in syndication and reaches a total of approximately 200,000 viewers. Southworth has also been featured in various Christian media.
"We all know there are so many other gay people in the Christian industry; they're all just scared," he said. "I was scared, but now I'm no longer afraid." (The Advocate)
Source: GAY.COM
Anti-condom cardinal dies
published Tuesday, April 22, 2008
Cardinal Alfonso López Trujillo, a Colombian prelate who helped lead the Vatican's campaign against abortion and insisted condoms do not prevent HIV transmission, has died, one of his assistants said Sunday. He was 72.
López Trujillo died Saturday night at the Pius XI private clinic in Rome, where he had been admitted for tests on March 17, Monsignor Jorge Raigosa said.
He died after suffering cardiac arrest following medical complications over several weeks that had put the cardinal in intensive care at times, said Raigosa, who declined to elaborate.
Vatican Radio said the cardinal had been hospitalized for ''grave health problems.''
In March 2007, López Trujillo traveled to Mexico to launch the Roman Catholic Church's aggressive campaign against plans in the predominantly Catholic country to legalize abortion. Catholic teaching forbids abortion as a grave sin.
The cardinal inaugurated an international antiabortion conference in Mexico City by celebrating Mass in the Basilica of the Virgin of Guadalupe, the most important Catholic shrine in the Americas.
The next month the Mexico City assembly passed a measure legalizing abortion in the capital during the first 12 weeks of pregnancy. Opponents appealed the law, and Mexico's supreme court is reviewing it.
López Trujillo also made headlines in 2003 for saying that condoms do not prevent HIV transmission. He contended that condoms may even help spread the virus by creating a false sense of security.
The World Health Organization, among others, called the cardinal's message ''totally wrong'' and said condoms are 90 percent effective when used correctly.
Priests for Life, an organization that seeks to end abortion and euthanasia, hailed López Trujillo as ''one of the church's strongest advocates for the dignity of the human person and the family.''
Born in 1935 in Villahermosa, Colombia, López Trujillo moved with his family when he was a young boy to the capital, Bogotà. While a university student, he decided to attend a seminary, and later received a philosophy degree from Rome's prestigious Angelicum University.
López Trujillo was ordained a priest in 1960 and made a bishop in 1971 by Pope Paul VI. He later headed the Latin American bishops' conference, CELAM. He was archbishop of Medellin in 1979 when Pope John Paul II attended a CELAM conference, and in 1983 he was elevated to cardinal's rank by the pontiff.
He headed the Vatican's Pontifical Council for the Family since 1990. With López Trujillo's death, the number of cardinals eligible to elect a pontiff drops to 118, Vatican Radio said. Raigosa said Pope Benedict XVI was expected to celebrate a funeral Mass for the cardinal at the Vatican on Wednesday. (AP)
Source: GAY.COM
By Tony Grew • April 16, 2008 - 10:55
The leader of the Roman Catholic Church has spoken out about the sexual abuse of children by priests.
Benedict XVI gave a rare insight into his views to reporters accompanying him on his first Papal visit to the United States, which began yesterday.
In his comments the pontiff moved to dismiss the suggestion that he links sexual abuse of children with homosexuality.
In 2005 he caused controversy when he appeared to preclude men who may identify as homosexual from training for the priesthood as a response to revelations that thousands of children across the world had been sexually abused by Roman Catholic clergy.
A Vatican report commissioned by the Pope said that the church will ban men who "publicly manifest their homosexuality or show an overwhelming attraction to homosexual culture even if it is only intellectually."
"It is difficult for me to understand how it was possible that priests betrayed in this way," Benedict told reporters yesterday.
"Their mission was to give healing, to give the love of God to these children.
"We are deeply ashamed and we will do what is possible that this cannot happen in the future.
"I would not speak at this moment about homosexuality, but paedophilia which is another thing.
"And we would absolutely exclude pedophiles from the sacred ministry.
"Who is guilty of pedophilia cannot be a priest.
"We'll do all that is possible to have a strong discernment, because it is more important to have good priests than to have many priests."
Pope Benedict XVI is in the US until 20th April and will meet President Bush and address the United Nations.
It is Benedict's first official visit to the US. His predecessor John Paul II visited seven times.
The ABC News poll released yesterday found that 60% of Roman Catholic Americans disagree with the ban on priests getting married, and the same number back women priests.
A group that works for the rights of gay, lesbian, bisexual and trans in the Roman Catholic church is planning a series of protests against Pope Benedict during his visit.
The Rainbow Sash Movement said it is calling on "Catholics of good will" to take the Papal visit as an opportunity to shower the Pope mobile with ashes instead of confetti.
"Ashes are an ancient and appropriate greeting for a sinner who has caused the Church so much division and pain," RSM said in a statement.
The group is calling for reform across a range of issues, from marriage for priests to stronger action against bishops who protected child-abusing clergy.
Source: Pink News
100 REVS THREATENED FOR APOLOGY
by Harley Dennett 26 March, 2008
