|
To set the scene, the position of the Lutheran Church here is that
to be a homosexual is not a sin but the practicing of one's
homosexuality is.
On the official front we have an equivalent of marriage for gays and
lesbians called 'partnership' which needless to say is not
recognized
by the church. In fact the only religious society which has been
willing to bless these partnerships has been the Society of Friends.
Recently, one of our bishops who is gay-friendly (there are only 3 -
the remainder are negative to gay rights )
appointed a priest who is a lesbian openly living in a partnership.
The Church's learned men are now debating the issue but as before
they cannot agree and have postponed judgement.
The main problem is that they tackling the problem from the
standpoint of Biblical interpretation and again, as for many times
before, they beg to differ. They don't seem to get past the usual
utterance that Paul was quite clear in his condemnation of men
having sex with men and they are not impressed by the argument that
homosexuality as we know it (the word was only invented last
century) is not mentioned anywhere in the Bible.
Of course a case could be made for them to change their minds about
forbidding the sin on the grounds that it is an anachronism. As
some one has pointed out this was the case with 'usury' which was
implicitly condemned in the Old Testament in 'Psalms' and in the New
Testament by Jesus in Luke. In fact the whole of the economic
system of Europe for many centuries was based on 'usury' i.e. the
loan of money without the demand of interest. By that yardstick we
would all of us that today put money in a bank and subsequently
recoup the interest be mortal sinners destined for the confines of
'a very hot place'. The reasons for the Church's rescission of its
condemnation of usury was based on the changing nature of money.
Whereas money was previously nothing more than dead, nonproductive,
inert metal we know today that this evaluation of money's function
was far too simplistic and that its role in modern society is far
more complex. It is to be hoped that the learned men of the Church
could come to homosexuality in this light, that is, to see that
homosexuality is far more than people of the same gender having sex, although
that looks very much doubtful.
If all the arguments fail what remains? The problem has to be
solved one way or another. What are the Church's options? First,
it must be admitted that the ordaining of one openly homosexual
priest is not the real issue. It seems likely that there are
several homosexual priests in the Church already. No one, as yet,
has asked them to account for their sexual orientation and since they
are not in established partnerships and are still in the closet.
The first option for the bishops is to declare that homosexuality is
wrong and refuse to ordain them. But then what does one do with the
homosexual priests who are already ordained ? What does one do with
heterosexual priests who subsequently discover that they are really
homosexual 30 or 40 years after they began to minister ? Does it
seem try to find out who these closeted priests are ? I think not.
The second option would appear to be to continue as before. That is
while professing that homosexuality is wrong one continues to
ordain closeted homosexuals whilst rejecting those that have gone
into openly homosexual partnerships. This would not appear to be a
very positive stand point if honesty is considered. Homosexuals
would be tempted to lie to be ordained and priests discovering
their real orientation in late age would be tempted to deny it.
What effect would this have on their pastoral mission? After all
this was the main reason for denying ordination to homosexuals in
the first place.
Another variation of this option is to turn the blind eye to the
fact that there are, in Norway, gay/lesbian (friendly) priests from
all denominations who do in fact preach the Gospel to predominately
gay/lesbian congregations -a sort of sexual apartheid - for want of a
better name.
The final option which seems somewhat remote at the moment would be
to accept homosexuals into the Church on the same footing as
heterosexuals, and priests as well as laity. In the long run it is
difficult to see that there is any other solution than this. Norway
has a population of about 4.5 million. It is doubtful as to
whether the Church would be able to survive the kind of
fragmentation that has occurred on the other side of the Atlantic.
The population here is so small population and over 80% are members
of the Lutheran State Church.
A ruling, putting forth the Church's attitude in these matters is
expected in May. Unanimous agreement seems unlikely as this would
more than likely split the Church.
|
by John J. McNeill
by William Leckie, Barry Stopfel
Also In This Issue:
Forget Love! What About God's Wrath?
|