June 20, 2008--Sodom In Jerusalem

At the very time when gay couples in California are rushing to marry before a federal court issues a stay of the state law that allows homosexuality marriages, Anglican bishops are tearing themselves apart over versions of the same issue.

Many conservative clergy are boycotting the once-a-decade International Anglican Communion because a majority of other bishops allowed the investiture last year of a gay bishop and support same-sex unions. They are holding their own counter communion in Jerusalem, where, ten years ago they passed a resolution which claimed that homosexuality was “incompatible with Scripture.” (See NY Times article linked below.)

In fact, how “incompatible” with Scripture is homosexuality?

I am far from a biblical scholar but even a little research reveals that it may be considerably less incompatible than religious conservatives and fundamentalists contend.

There seem to be just three or four allusions to homosexuality in the Old Testament. Most prominently in the Sodom and Gomorrah passage in Genesis. Sodom, recall, was destroyed by God largely because of rampant sinful behavior that allegedly though not explicitly included homosexuality.

As one example, to save his visitors from what appears to be sexual abuse, often interpreted to mean homosexual rape, Lot offers his two virgin daughters to the angry crowd to assuage them by doing “to them what is good in your eyes.” Later, of course, Lot has sex with and impregnates them; so to most scholars the story and lessons of Sodom and Gomorrah is much more about condoning incest and rape than homosexuality.

In the New Testament there are perhaps a dozen references to homosexuality. I say “perhaps” since virtually all are open to various interpretations because of problems with the translation. Though fundamentalists in the U.S. and England read the Bible literally they obviously read literally the English versions. Not the Greek original. (Putting aside for the moment what we mean by “original.”). And I say “versions” because there are of course many competing English translations.

Be that as it may, take a brief look at Romans 1. It represents perhaps the clearest condemnation of homosexuality in either book of the Bible.

In Epistle to the Romans 1:26-27, in the New International Version translation, Paul writes:

Because of this [idolatry], God gave them over to shameful lusts. Even their women exchanged natural sexual relations for unnatural ones. In the same way the men also abandoned natural relations with women and were inflamed with lust for one another. Men committed shameful acts with other men, and received in themselves the due penalty for their error.

First, this is the only place in the entire Bible where female homosexual behavior is mentioned. Which of course, regardless of one’s views, is not sufficient in itself to discount it. Though it does give one pause to see it brought in as an almost afterthought toward the end of the Old Testament.

But of considerable significance considering the heat and anger and hate and persecution that has been and is directed toward male and female homosexuals by religious fundamentalists, it is worth the time to take a quick look at some of the translation and interpretation issues.

According to one alternate view, even in this one most explicit of passages, Paul is not issuing a blanket condemnation of all forms of homosexuality but rather homosexual acts committed by heterosexuals—acts which for them might be considered to be “unnatural.”

Another interpretation of the Greek text suggests that Paul was condemning other specific types of homosexual behavior—for example, temple prostitution or pederasty.

If either is more correct than the traditional translations and interpretations it may be that the Bible actually accepts rather than condemns the fact that among some humans (as well as among some from virtually all other species in God’s kingdom) homosexuality is “natural.” Homosexuality as opposed to homosexual behavior by nonhomosexuals.

Maybe the good bishops gathered for their competing communions might revisit this and take another look at the Bible that they both say guides them. Perhaps someone there might even know some Greek and could, sorry, straighten, them out.