From Mr Michael Neville
Sir, — I have just read with astonishment, and even anger, Felicity Crow’s letter (18 July). The strength of her vituperation is almost surreal, and totally absurd.
The Bible is an old book, compiled and written by lawyers, psalm-writers, historians, prophets, and Evangelists. Like all ancient literature, it has to be interpreted. The Law of Leviticus, to which Felicity Crow has turned to support her intense dislike of homosexuality, was written for an ancient Hebrew tribe, and has no relevance for Gentiles of any time. Some Christians who, like Ms Crow, have strong views against homosexuality should bear this in mind when they are looking at the verses in the Epistle to the Romans, in which St Paul, a Jewish rabbi, is only reinforcing the Levitican law, not giving any new teaching.
Ms Crow states that Jesus came “to remove not one jot or tittle of the Law”. This is a piece of nonsense without scriptural foundation. Jesus certainly upheld the Ten Commandments, especially the first two, and they have been regarded since the beginning of Christianity as very important. If we were still living our lives according to Jewish Levitican Law, we in the Gentile world would be bound by all sorts of dietary rules, which we are not.
Ms Crow is confused by the word “Law”. The verses picked out by her from Leviticus are not for all time, nor for all societies. Presumably she would have gay people executed for carrying out actions that are an abomination (Leviticus 10.13,14).
And finally, her language! What does she mean by saying that Jesus is “totally terrifying” to those who pollute his teaching? This sentence is meaningless: pure rant. Moreover, Jesus never mentioned homosexuality. Both Ms Crow’s third and fourth paragraphs are hyperbolic nonsense, and full of irrelevant puritan-style matter like her last sentence. Indeed, the language is anachronistic: almost 17th-century.
There is no room for hyperbolic stuff like this in present-day psychological thinking. It is a tragedy that it still lingers on in certain areas of Christianity; the African bishops and those supporting GAFCON or FOCA should grow up and get over their immature hang-ups. This includes the vituperative Ms Crow.
MICHAEL NEVILLE
Address supplied
From Mr Patrick Daunt
Sir, — Andrew Brown is apparently quite pleased that “some liberal commentators are beginning to see New Hampshire’s actions as a provocation” (Press, 18 July).
But what happened there was formally and legally determined by the Episcopal Church in the United States. Whether one regards it as a provocation or an affirmation, the responsibility for it lies with the Episcopal Church. To attribute it merely to one diocese is tendentious.
PATRICK DAUNT
4 Bourn Bridge Road, Little Abington
Cambridge CB21 6BJ
From Professor Michael Sanderson and Dr Carolyn Sanderson
Sir, — As heterosexual, committed Anglicans, we had the privilege of being present at the Queen Elizabeth Hall on Monday of last week at the Bishop Gene Robinson and Sir Ian McKellen meeting, at the end of which Sir Ian said: “You have practically converted me to Christianity.”
At this meeting, the Anglican Church met and stood alongside the secular gay, lesbian, bisexual, transgender and transsexual community, who have been damaged and hurt by the Church, in a way that Lambeth hasn’t the remotest possibility of doing.
It is ironic that a bishop who was excluded from Lambeth was doing exactly what Lambeth should be doing in bridging the gap and healing hurts not only in the Church, but in society as a whole.
MICHAEL SANDERSON
CAROLYN SANDERSON
85 Linceslade Grove, Loughton
Milton Keynes MK5 8AD
|
back to Letters
previous story
|
next story 
back to top
%231%23.gif "Wordl Vision Sponsor a child Nov to Dec campaign © site")