The Widening Gulf

For the past couple of days I have been pondering this report of a statement made by the Rt. Rev. Isaac Orama, Bishop of Uyo in the Anglican Church of Nigeria. Bishop Orama was quoted as saying

Homosexuality and lesbianism are inhuman. Those who practice them are insane, satanic and are not fit to live because they are rebels to God's purpose for man...

Some bloggers and commenters have questioned the accuracy of UPI's story in light of the total lack of any secondary verification or original source. Others have pointed out that since English is Bishop Orama's second (or third) language, the UPI report of what the bishop may, or may not, have said is a case of errors in syntax and grammar. At this stage of the resulting tempest in the blogosphere, it is not whether or not Bishop Orama actually made the statement but the reactions to it that draw my attention and thoughts.

It was amazing how quickly conservative bloggers fell all over themselves to repudiate what Bishop Orama reportedly said. Yet even in that repudiation, there was a counter argument, which goes something like this: If Bishop Orama should be disciplined by Archbishop Akinola for his hateful remarks, should not Presiding Bishop Jefferts Schori, or bishops of the Episcopal Church, discipline Bishop Spong for his bad--if not dangerous--theology? Some, as Matt Kennedy did, both in comments on Fr. Jake's blog and in his own post on Stand Firm, clearly feel that bad theology is more to be feared than violence against--and even murder of--lbgt people. Here is a piece of one of Matt's comments on Fr. Jake's blog post:

Grace, salvation is found in only one name under heaven. To preach a false Christ is to lead souls to destruction. I do think that heresy is far worse than than we deem it. +Uyo's words are inexcusable. But I do believe from an eternal perspective Spong's do more damage.

PLEASE NOTE: I am not saying that Matt is advocating putting lbgt human beings to death. Nor is he advocating for violence against lbgt people. However, he DOES find that physical violence less reprehensible than Spong's spoken and written words.

Matt's statements about this difference really crystallized something for me. I had always known that the "reasserters'" theology differed from mine and other "reappraisers'." However, what I did not understand was just how much. The posts and comments they have written around this reported statement remind me so much of the Puritans of the 16th and 17th centuries that it is almost scary. There is no "living together" in a church with those whose theology differs from theirs. There is only ONE RIGHT WAY (and I am not referring to any non-Christian spiritual paths here). Everyone else is going straight to hell.

Which puts a whole different light on the "yes but..." discussions that quickly followed. Yes, what Bishop Orama [reportedly] said is reprehensible, but biblical teaching is clear on the issue of homosexuality, so what is the real problem here? Several commenters quoted or listed Leviticus 20:13:

If a man lies with a male as with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination; they shall be put to death; their blood is upon them. (NRSV)

Chapter 20 does prohibit several acts of a sexual nature that most in modern society consider wrong, such as having sex with your father's wife (who might not have been your mother), sex with animals, sisters, daughters, and so on. Yet verse 18 in the same chapter says:

If a man lies with a woman having her sickness and uncovers here nakedness, he has laid bare her flow and she has laid bare her flow of blood; both of them shall be cut off from their people. (NRSV)

Do "reasserter" husbands sleep in separate beds from their menstruating wives?

And later, in verse 25 we are told:

You shall therefore make a distinction between the clean animal and the unclean, and between the unclean bird and the clean; you shall not bring abomination on yourselves by animal or by bird or by anything with which the ground teems. (NRSV)

The last time I checked, the whole "keeping kosher" issue was pretty much much settled with Peter's vision.

Chapter 19 also lists things that are "not holy," yet we often crossbreed animals and plant two kinds of seed in our fields (19:19), for instance. This is true of Leviticus as a whole. So obviously, our understanding of what is "an abomination" has changed over the years. But it often seems that many of the neo-Puritans wish to return to the Holiness Code in its entirety, even though what they really want is to pick and choose the parts that fit their view of Christianity. And the same can be said for us liberals. However, as I said before, the "reasserters" will not tolerate anyone whose "picking and choosing" is different from theirs. It is their way or the hellway, no ifs, ands or buts.

If we cannot relearn how to live together with our differences, then there is no hope for the Anglican Communion as it is currently constituted. In which case, either we find a way to perpetrate an "amicable divorce," or resign ourselves to more border crossings, non-geographic provinces, and lawsuits that will drag on until most of us living now are dead and gone.

Peace,
Jeffri

Update
September 7

According to The Living Church the official spokesman for the Church of Nigeria has said that Bishop Orama did not make the reported statements. The same report also said that the reporter (presumably from the NAN) has apologized and will be issuing a retraction.

The UPI has pulled the story from their web site. However, the note they appended to the bottom of the story earlier today is still there (or at least was at as of 6:40 p.m. Eastern Daylight Time). Here is the text of the note:

UPI distributes certain third party submissions from official government news agencies, such as this article. Since UPI does not control the material included in these submissions, UPI does not guarantee the accuracy, integrity or quality of the material in such submissions, and UPI does not endorse any of the views or opinions expressed therein.

And here is the text of the original article:

Africa Monitoring Cleric condemns homosexuals, lesbiansSept. 2 (UPI) -- Uyo, Sept. 2, 2007 (NAN) The Anglican Bishop of Uyo, Rt. Rev. Isaac Orama, has condemned the activities of homosexuals and lesbians, and described those engaged in them as "insane people''. "It is scaring that any one should be involved in a thing like that and I want to say that they will not escape the wrath of God,'' he said. Orama told the News Agency of Nigeria (NAN) today in Uyo, that the practice, which has worsened over the years, was "unbiblical and against God's purpose for creating man''. Homosexuals - 2 "Homosexuality and lesbianism are inhuman. Those who practice them are insane, satanic and are not fit to live because they are rebels to God's purpose for man,'' the Bishop said. He noted that the Anglican Church in Nigeria had continued to lead the fight against the practice especially in the US where it led the opposition to same sex marriages. "The aim of such fight is to provide a safe place for those who want to remain faithful Anglicans and Biblical Christians,'' he explained.(NAN) NS/IFY/ETS ©

Copyright United Press International. All Rights Reserved. This material may not
be reproduced, redistributed, or manipulated in any form.

(http://www.upi.com/AfricaMonitoring/view.php?StoryID=20070902-831713-6007-r as of September 7, 2007, 2:10 p.m. EDT)