Letters

Dear Christis,

I was both angry and dismayed to read the letter by Wulf Forrester-Barker in your issue 7, condemning homosexuality and apparently supporting this condemnation with the use of Biblical passages.

Wulf exhibits in his condemnation the same bigotry and prejudice held in the minds of the original writers, bigotry which I believe has justified the oppression of gay men and lesbians since Biblical times and originated from the attempts of the religious (male) elite to maintain their power.

I would like to consider here the Bible passages Wulf uses and examine the links between the condemnaton of sexual practices and the oppresion of two groups in society — homosexuals and women.

Firstly, any attempt to compare adultery with homosexuality is short-sighted and ignorant. I find it very difficult indeed to comprehend Wulf’s line of reasoning here, but I suspect he is succumbing to the stereotyped view that gay men and women have multiple sexual partners, and sex (however that is defined) is the only basis for a relationship. This is utter nonsense, most gay men and lesbians are committed to their relationships, and are just as monogamous (if not more so) as “heterosexual” (however that is defined) people. In choosing this passage about an adulterous woman to condemn homosexuality, however, Wulf does draw attention to the links between the oppression of homosexuals in the Bible and the oppression of women. Adultery in biblical times was an act men were usually not condemned for, only women could be stoned to death. I think the main point of this story is that Christ completely overturned the attitudes of the patriarcal Pharisees and Elders.

Interestingly, although Wulf points out that Jesus told the woman to “Go now and leave your life of sin” (v.11) he chooses to ignore the first part of that verse, “I do not condemn you either.” How easy it is to condemn those we know little about.

The criticism of homosexuality in Leviticus 18:22 must also be placed in a similar comtext. Verse 19 in this passage states “Do not have intercourse with a woman during her monthly period, because she is ritually unclean.” How many people would agree with this today!!! Most people would argue that this verse indicates the beliefs of a patriarchal society where menstruating women were viewed as evil, unclean, damaging to crops; views ridiculed today and overturned by Christ when in Luke 8:43–48, a woman who had been bleeding for 12 years touched Christ (thus making him ritually unclean) but instead of rebuking her said, “My daughter, your faith has made you well. Go in peace.”.

If verse 19 in Leviticus can be rejected, we must also surely reject verse 22 as yet again indicating the prejudice and fear felt by men who did not understand homosexuality in the same way they did not understand menstruation. Backing up their views with words such as “God hates that”, obviously served as a way to justify their condemnations.

Moving on to the New Testament, it is interesting that homosexuality isn’t even mentioned in the four Gospels, hardly an indicament of its importance! Christ himself didn’t even mention it, but rather concentrated on God’s undying love for all. Saint Paul saw homosexuality as a punishment upon idolators from God because of their unfaithfulness (again surely an attempt to justify his fear and ignorance of homosexuality by using God to condemn it).

Interestingly, in this letter to the Romans, Paul makes the only reference to lesbianism in the entire Bible, again, its criticism was hardly a crucial issue. Many feminist theologians have criticised St. Paul as the mysogynist he was at times. Clearly, two groups in society were particularly seen as being necessary to control in society, women and homosexuals. fear and ignorance were expressed towards these groups, they were seen as a threat to the power of a male-dominated patriachal society; the idea that God condemned their behaviour served to justify their oppression and exclusion from power. Christ was to completely overturn these views, his whole doctrine was to “Love your neighbour as yourself”, do those people who subscribe to Wulf’s view really love gay men and lesbian women as themselves? I dislike the phrase “Hate the sin but love the sinner”, I do not accept that homosexuality is a sin, but many people have far from loved lesbians and gay men. The large-scale persecution of them began in 12th century Christian Europe, at the same time as the Inquisition and attacks on all kinds of religious non-conformity took place. Thousands were burned at the stake. Thousands more died in Hitler’s concentration camps. Millions suffer constant abuse, violence and condemnation every day. The Bible has been used to justify this behaviour. Christians who have interpreted the Bible as a condemnation of homosexuality must take their place in this persecution. I believe the use of the Bible in this way is one of the gravest sins ever committed. Action is derived from words and the words of Wulf and others who agree with him are dangerous.

I pray that one day we all will learn to love our neighbours as ourselves, whatever their sex, race, colour or sexual orientation. Only then will the love of Christ be freely available to all.

Amanda Mole