January 29, 2007
No Time To Post

...but I had to pop in to tell you about the funniest thing that happened in class today.

My panel group has decided to discuss the ethical question, "Should members of the GLBT community be granted full access to the sacramental life of the church?," i.e., Should homosexuals be allowed to be baptized, married, ordained in the church?

My group placed me in charge of the pro-gay position from the "cultural" perspective. I'm not really sure what that means since what the culture thinks has little bearing on what the church does, but whatev.

I explained to one of the guys in my group that I wasn't exactly certain what they were hoping to get from my portion of the presentation and, I shit you not, this is what he said:

"Well, like, you know, in ancient Greece, they believed that only the person on the, you know, receiving end of the, you know, was gay, but that the other person wasn't."

Whu? He can't possibly really expect me to get up in front of a seminary class and say anything even related to that, right? I'm not crazy here, am I? We're Nazarene, after all!

Also, what the hell would that have to do with anything?!?

No book review this week. I'll have to catch up after this class is over Friday!

Posted by Bethiclaus at January 29, 2007 05:37 PM
Comments

So the catcher is gay and the pitcher is not?? Interesting.

Posted by: Mitch McDad at January 29, 2007 09:48 PM

wow, the faces on the other people in your class would have been priceless. depending on how you feel about them, it might have been worth it. ;)

Posted by: lara at January 30, 2007 01:21 AM

Ummmm, cultural perspective???? I have no clue what that is? Whose culture? Is there "a" cultural perspective out there I didn't know about?

Also if I may....The romans are not a good example for GLBT issues. Romans were not necessarily gay in the way we think of the practice today. Instead they simply worshipped the male form and attributes to such an extreme that no other union seemed natural. Men had to be socialized to be with women and even then sex was about procreation and little else. Gay is a much more modern term with lots of cultural connotations that did not exist for the Romans.

Posted by: sarah at January 30, 2007 04:42 PM

JULY 21st!!! you may nott be as excited as me. But I thought I would pass on the information.

On GLBT. Maybe an approach is to dispell common myths the "church community" is being fed to alienate GLBT(s). Like the spreading of diseases, where everyone knows that hetero- sex spreads more diseases than homo-sexual sex. That a hetero- family does not equate a functional family . . . Or how a trans gender operation logically is not much different than plastic surgery. Why can Sally get a boob job and not me? Okay I Confess I really want Boobies for my birthday.

And I dont know if I'm completely off base, but that the goal of sin is to seperate us from a life with God (church included). Before, church communities made issues about race and economics (obiviously still an issue), and now sexuality seems to be the focus (even politically). It's sin of the church community that divides. I just think that no matter what our predisposition (sexuality) or circumstances (economics) that the church has a responsibility to create a place for us all if thats what we want. And not have seperate tables like the story of Peter and Paul but that we can commune together in community.

San Diego is German for a whale's vagina. . . . . . . . agree to disagree.

hope school is going well. Say Hi to the hubby and the baby and tell the baby "NOSE!"

Posted by: Josue at February 1, 2007 10:35 AM

That sounds like it could be an interesting discussion, strange comments from classmates aside. I don't think I would have been able to not make a face at the comment your classmate said. I might (might) be able to not laugh until I was alone though.

Posted by: Jessie at February 1, 2007 10:38 AM

Sounds like you've got some interesting classmates...

Posted by: Liz at February 1, 2007 11:30 AM

Amazing!

Posted by: Jenny at February 1, 2007 07:14 PM

You definitely have a few gems in that class, although as a classics minor in college, he is only partly right. They never considered gay vs straight. It was a power thing. The 'giver' was always the older, more senior, respected powerful man and the 'recipient' was usually the younger student in the relationship. The only time the Greeks thought of homosexuality was when it was female/female.

Posted by: Jennifer at February 1, 2007 09:20 PM