This is part 1 of a 2 part series regarding Homosexuality and related issues. The next article deals with the perniciousness of homosexual acts from an LDS point of view.

The Anglican/Episcopalian Church is having problems. There are liberal and a conservative wings of the church. In the past, some highly visible people left the Anglican Church when they began to ordain women in the early 1990’s.

The latest split is over acceptance of openly gay priests and lay members of the Anglican Church.

Deep down, most people who are sinning know that they are sinning. In quiet moments, one on one, you can generally get someone who is living with but not married to someone to admit that they do know that it is wrong but they do it anyway. Most people who are living a homosexual lifestyle are likely in this category.

There are a few people so dedicated to their lifestyle that they will try to justify it to everyone else and even write articles about it. Libby Purves wrote such an article trying to say that homosexuals can be excellent Christians too. (Either that name is a joke or she was unfortunate enough to be named something reminiscent of “Liberal Perverts”). In an article worthy of her last name, she paints Anglican Church leaders as perverts for their focus on sex. The article is titled “Pray lift your eyes above the belt – The Churches’ sexual obsession makes me despair”.

This is an interesting rhetorical tactic. The deviants calling the righteous perverts because of their insistent injunction against unnatural and sinful acts. It makes sense that someone who has turned away from what is good or true or morally right would also decide to twist the meaning or sense of what a religious injunction against sinful sexual acts really mean.

From the article:

it will be the illiberal, genitally-fixated wing of Anglicanism that sidles towards unity with Rome. It will do this because it thinks — accurately, more’s the pity — that Rome is where you find the most intolerant attitudes towards homosexuality.

Not that there’s anything wrong with that. Libby Purves further perverts the truth with this gem:

all I can express for now is frustrated rage at both Churches’ incurable obsession with genital sexuality. It cripples every good intention, impedes every good work.

She wants you to believe that the Churches’ issue is only about what kind of genitals are touching each other and for them to be focused on it is some failing in the Churches’ leadership, or something.

The article goes on to opine with no authority higher than herself about what is really wrong with adultery, pedophilia, rape, promiscuity and prostitution, and it’s not about the sex:

It would be refreshing if the Churches would step back from this stance, and make it clearer that the evil in adultery is not the sexual act but the betrayal of trust, the cruelty, the endangering of children’s happiness. The deep wickedness of rape and paedophilia is not about desire but about misuse of power, invasion, oppression and injury. The sinfulness of promiscuity and prostitution is not about sex but about using another human being for transient pleasure without caring for the physical and emotional damage you do. The Church’s ministry to gays could preach only honesty, gentleness, and commitment, rather than agonising about genital practices. Christianity could just grow up, and stop treating sex as if it were innately toxic or radioactive and yet irresistibly interesting. . . . Being gay can, without doing any violence to the Gospels, be accepted as a potential route to holiness.

“The lady doth protest too much, methinks”.

The problem with inappropriate sex acts is part of the same problem with murder. God is the Creator and shares that power in a limited way by granting us the power of procreation. We should not murder because it is taking away the life that God has granted people. Doing things that are related to the creation or taking away of life are strictly governed by God’s laws. That is why adultery is second place to murder which is only below the shedding of innocent blood or denying the Holy Ghost.

Libby Purves’ philosophical understanding of the sinful nature of some acts is wrong. It is about the sexual acts and every other issue she lists would still be a sin absent the sexual aspect of the sin.

Maybe Libby needs to grow up and let Christian Churches decide what Christianity is really about. Libby did leave the Catholic Church, and now she can’t leave it alone.

Next Posting: Was Homosexuality part of Satan’s covenants with Cain?

Comments Welcome.