“What Are You…High?” (a potentially offensive Rant)

Hi Ho. I have in the past on my old blogger Blog taken some time to take some Grapeshot over the bow of the greater institution of Anglicanism. Well Today I am going to be making fun of the “leader” of the US Branch of the Family. I am going to be doing so in ways that may offend Christians, Jews, and probably gays. This is your warning… Or your teaser that this is gunna be Hella fun.

Remember folks as I write this I am not a Christian nor am I a Jew. Just a Guy with some little elements of theism. I also share through the traditions of English Masonry a common connection to the Throne of England as the Epsicopal church does. Butas a guy who does “Get Religion” especially because I read the blog of the same name I write this.

Get Religion recently covered her interview with Left wing media type person Bill Moyers. So left leaner speaking to a left leaning person leading what has now become the defacto left leaning christian establishment (you Anglo-Catholics not withstanding)

So cruising there as I was skimming her thoughts till I came to this.

BILL MOYERS: As I read about the conflict in your church, what I find is that both sides treat the Bible as their source, but they come to totally opposite conclusions as to what the Bible says. What do you make of that? As a scientist and a believer.

BISHOP KATHARINE JEFFERTS SCHORI: Our ways of reading Scripture shape the conclusions we come to. And often what we go looking for shapes the conclusions about what we read. I’ll give you a — you know, a loaded example. The story of David and Jonathan.

You know, Canonically, the traditional way of reading that has been about the friendship between two men. It says in the Scripture that David loved Jonathan with a love surpassing women. Many gay and lesbian people in our church today say, “This is a text — that says something constructive about the love between people of the same gender.” Yet our tradition has rarely been able to look at it with those eyes. I think that’s a fertile ground for some serious Biblical scholarship and some encounter from people who come to different conclusions.

Wait… lets pull up that verses

David was a poor boy, but the Prince gave him his best stuff to go out and fight for his father, and for the lord

1 Samuel 18
Jonathan and David
1Now it came about when he had finished speaking to Saul, that (A)the soul of Jonathan was knit to the soul of David, and (B)Jonathan loved him as himself.

2Saul took him that day and (C)did not let him return to his father’s house.

3Then (D)Jonathan made a covenant with David because he loved him as himself.

4(E)Jonathan stripped himself of the robe that was on him and gave it to David, with his armor, including his sword and his bow and his belt.

5So David went out wherever Saul sent him, and prospered; and Saul set him over the men of war. And it was pleasing in the sight of all the people and also in the sight of Saul’s servants

Here is their oath of friendship

1 Samuel 20:15-20 (21st Century King James Version)

15but also thou shalt not cut off thy kindness from my house for ever — no, not when the LORD hath cut off the enemies of David every one from the face of the earth.”

16So Jonathan made a covenant with the house of David, saying, “Let the LORD even require it at the hand of David’s enemies.”

17And Jonathan caused David to swear again, because he loved him; for he loved him as he loved his own soul.

18Then Jonathan said to David, “Tomorrow is the new moon, and thou shalt be missed because thy seat will be empty.

19And when thou hast stayed three days, then thou shalt go down quickly and come to the place where thou didst hide thyself when the business was in hand, and shalt remain by the stone Ezel.

20And I will shoot three arrows on the side thereof, as though I shot at a mark.

The beginning of the End for David and Saul, and the friendship which saves David’s life

1 Samuel 19
Saul Tries to Kill David
1 Saul told his son Jonathan and all the attendants to kill David. But Jonathan was very fond of David 2 and warned him, “My father Saul is looking for a chance to kill you. Be on your guard tomorrow morning; go into hiding and stay there. 3 I will go out and stand with my father in the field where you are. I’ll speak to him about you and will tell you what I find out.”

4 Jonathan spoke well of David to Saul his father and said to him, “Let not the king do wrong to his servant David; he has not wronged you, and what he has done has benefited you greatly. 5 He took his life in his hands when he killed the Philistine. The LORD won a great victory for all Israel, and you saw it and were glad. Why then would you do wrong to an innocent man like David by killing him for no reason?”

6 Saul listened to Jonathan and took this oath: “As surely as the LORD lives, David will not be put to death.”

7 So Jonathan called David and told him the whole conversation. He brought him to Saul, and David was with Saul as before.

8 Once more war broke out, and David went out and fought the Philistines. He struck them with such force that they fled before him.

9 But an evil [a] spirit from the LORD came upon Saul as he was sitting in his house with his spear in his hand. While David was playing the harp, 10 Saul tried to pin him to the wall with his spear, but David eluded him as Saul drove the spear into the wall. That night David made good his escape.

Jonathan tries to reason with his dad

25 He sat in his customary place by the wall, opposite Jonathan, [a] and Abner sat next to Saul, but David’s place was empty. 26 Saul said nothing that day, for he thought, “Something must have happened to David to make him ceremonially unclean—surely he is unclean.” 27 But the next day, the second day of the month, David’s place was empty again. Then Saul said to his son Jonathan, “Why hasn’t the son of Jesse come to the meal, either yesterday or today?”

28 Jonathan answered, “David earnestly asked me for permission to go to Bethlehem. 29 He said, ‘Let me go, because our family is observing a sacrifice in the town and my brother has ordered me to be there. If I have found favor in your eyes, let me get away to see my brothers.’ That is why he has not come to the king’s table.”

30 Saul’s anger flared up at Jonathan and he said to him, “You son of a perverse and rebellious woman! Don’t I know that you have sided with the son of Jesse to your own shame and to the shame of the mother who bore you? 31 As long as the son of Jesse lives on this earth, neither you nor your kingdom will be established. Now send and bring him to me, for he must die!”

32 “Why should he be put to death? What has he done?” Jonathan asked his father. 33 But Saul hurled his spear at him to kill him. Then Jonathan knew that his father intended to kill David.

34 Jonathan got up from the table in fierce anger; on that second day of the month he did not eat, because he was grieved at his father’s shameful treatment of David.

35 In the morning Jonathan went out to the field for his meeting with David. He had a small boy with him, 36 and he said to the boy, “Run and find the arrows I shoot.” As the boy ran, he shot an arrow beyond him. 37 When the boy came to the place where Jonathan’s arrow had fallen, Jonathan called out after him, “Isn’t the arrow beyond you?” 38 Then he shouted, “Hurry! Go quickly! Don’t stop!” The boy picked up the arrow and returned to his master. 39 (The boy knew nothing of all this; only Jonathan and David knew.) 40 Then Jonathan gave his weapons to the boy and said, “Go, carry them back to town.”

41 After the boy had gone, David got up from the south side of the stone and bowed down before Jonathan three times, with his face to the ground. Then they kissed each other and wept together—but David wept the most.

42 Jonathan said to David, “Go in peace, for we have sworn friendship with each other in the name of the LORD, saying, ‘The LORD is witness between you and me, and between your descendants and my descendants forever.’ ” Then David left, and Jonathan went back to the town.

while this sorta sounds a bit gay it does so unless you’ve seen a bunch of slavs or Mediterranean’s greeting with a kiss. And well if the King of my country wanted me dead, and he was the father of my best friend. Most certainly I could see weeping

Near the end of the Civil war with David

1 Samuel 23:16-20 (New International Version)
16 And Saul’s son Jonathan went to David at Horesh and helped him find strength in God. 17 “Don’t be afraid,” he said. “My father Saul will not lay a hand on you. You will be king over Israel, and I will be second to you. Even my father Saul knows this.” 18 The two of them made a covenant before the LORD. Then Jonathan went home, but David remained at Horesh.

19 The Ziphites went up to Saul at Gibeah and said, “Is not David hiding among us in the strongholds at Horesh, on the hill of Hakilah, south of Jeshimon? 20 Now, O king, come down whenever it pleases you to do so, and we will be responsible for handing him over to the king.”

subsuming his birthright (which isn’t well established at the time) to the man with more favor in the eyes of the lord

Here is the Meat of her argument

2 Samuel 1:17-30 (New Living Translation)
David’s Song for Saul and Jonathan
17 Then David composed a funeral song for Saul and Jonathan, 18 and he commanded that it be taught to the people of Judah. It is known as the Song of the Bow, and it is recorded in The Book of Jashar.[a]

19 Your pride and joy, O Israel, lies dead on the hills!
Oh, how the mighty heroes have fallen!
20 Don’t announce the news in Gath,
don’t proclaim it in the streets of Ashkelon,
or the daughters of the Philistines will rejoice
and the pagans will laugh in triumph.

21 O mountains of Gilboa,
let there be no dew or rain upon you,
nor fruitful fields producing offerings of grain.[b]
For there the shield of the mighty heroes was defiled;
the shield of Saul will no longer be anointed with oil.
22 The bow of Jonathan was powerful,
and the sword of Saul did its mighty work.
They shed the blood of their enemies
and pierced the bodies of mighty heroes.

23 How beloved and gracious were Saul and Jonathan!
They were together in life and in death.
They were swifter than eagles,
stronger than lions.
24 O women of Israel, weep for Saul,
for he dressed you in luxurious scarlet clothing,
in garments decorated with gold.

25 Oh, how the mighty heroes have fallen in battle!
Jonathan lies dead on the hills.
26 How I weep for you, my brother Jonathan!
Oh, how much I loved you!
And your love for me was deep,
deeper than the love of women!

27 Oh, how the mighty heroes have fallen!
Stripped of their weapons, they lie dead.

Ok. Lets talk about what Christianity is. It is to be “Little Christs” and to try to nurture that inner sense of love and compassion for men and for women and for all people. When we look at a great example of the kind of love two men could have for each other, the kind of godly love two men could have for each other, she says its gay. Says a man would not enrich a great hero with praise and devotion unless he is riding the meat poll. Says a man would not supply a great warrior with the greatest implements of war unless he is checking out his dip stick. How is that the kind of love that Christ calls us to? the kind of love that happens for no other reason then that it is what one does in a spiritually just sense.

But lets not go just into the ignorance her position shows toward the very theology she is advocating. Because that is not the greatest Ignorance she shows in this interview

“I think that’s a fertile ground for some serious Biblical scholarship and some encounter from people who come to different conclusions.” So lets talk about what REAL scholars would see and not those who have a political animus to their scholarship.

Jonathan and David came from a day when you did not choose your wife. It was chosen for you. Sex was not for pleasure but for procreation, in fact with the nature of human sanitation at the time sex between men and women was quite often rather unpleasant for the woman. Medicine such as it was amongst the lower classes would lead to wives dying after a few births and children themselves were not even in the best of families often long for this earth. Love of family was often marked by death, sex was a duty and not a pleasure, and you had no choice of your wife. In that age for a man to have a deeper love for a man with whom he had fought with in numerous battles makes simple sense. For a man who probably saved his life on the field of battle and vice versa leaves a deep sense of affection and deep sense of connection.

Let me say this I have not earned brothers in blood on the field of battle, but short of My eventual spouse, my eventual children, and my mother I have for these male friends a brotherly love that no woman can ever approach. The kind of love that would have me put my life up for theirs if their was the chance I could save them and the risk to my own life was marginal to slim. And let me tell you I aint takin their man Injection now or ever.

It cheapens us, and it cheapens our Humanity if between men their can’t be a deep friendship and bond without sexuality coming into play. And it cheapens us when our religious leaders do theological twists and turns into the pretzel to justify their political goals.

but at her heart she puts to my mind the Rhetorical nail in herself.

BISHOP KATHARINE JEFFERTS SCHORI: I do believe it’s a moral issue because it’s about how we love our neighbor. It’s about how we live in relationship to God and our neighbors. When I look at other instances in church history, when we’ve been faced with something similar — the history in this country over the — over slavery. The church in the north. Much of it came to a different conclusion than the church in the south — about the morality of slavery.

Slavery as practiced in the United States did harklen biblically to the role Slavery played in the classical period, yet they did not practice slavery as they did in the Classical Period. Is this not suggestive in the comparison of a woman who projects modern sexuality and gender relations onto the classical period.

Some spoke of blacks as inferior by Implications of the Curse of Ham, which was not based on Sound Theology. Is that not suggestive by a woman who tries to see a Gay Elephant hiding in the Books of the Prophet Samuel?

It is this intellectual Laziness which is in much of Christian teaching that I find truely distasteful. But in the leader of the US episcopal church I find it insulting and an attack on our collective humanity. Love does not equate sex, never has and never will.

Teach that is a sign of what Moyers called, a Sexual hang up, of those who take a conservative view of biblical teaching. I think its a view which teaches people to think and to put their feelings into perspective.

If you are gay and your not happy with your church not being agreeable to it. Don’t elect leaders like this who are intellectually flacid. Come up with theologically sound defenses of Homosexuality ( they are possible) advocate for them. Build up the intellectual defense of such a thing.

When you just put up religous leaders to answer your check list of complaints this is what you get.

This entry was posted in Anglican Church, Christianity, DUH, Essay, gay issues, Gender Issues, History, internet rant, Personal, rant, Religous Issues, Spirituality. Bookmark the permalink.

3 Responses to “What Are You…High?” (a potentially offensive Rant)

  1. GW staff says:

    Wow! A man after my own heart
    Love you bro…

  2. GW staff says:

    I think an intellectual argument for homosexuality exists. However, the practise of same is a Bible no no.
    Neither is Fornication or adultery or animal lovin’.
    It swings (sic) both ways.

  3. karasoth says:

    Well 😉 I do disagree but I respect your traditionalist view on Fornication (its a fair argument as opposed to saying David and Jonathan are gay)

    As for animal loving and adultery… thats something the bible is pretty clear on. Bot something I saw on Get Religion was that Gene Robinson (the guy who started a lot of this off) supported gay marriage because he felt gay sex outside of sanctified or official relationship was immoral and sinful.

    Now should churches Sanctify Homosexual unions. I would say for Christian denominations probably not, because it gets into a different kind of social hardware

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s