Bishop urges change in 'church teaching concerning all sexual relationships'

Bishop urges change in 'church teaching concerning all sexual relationships'

The bishop is absolutely correct that a rethinking is necessary. The question of first princples is not just about sex, but whether all morality is for God or for man. Was the sacrifice of Jesus a blood offering to an angry God or a vision quest by a loving God to feel human brokenness? When Jesus said that his yoke is easy and his burden light, was he telling the truth? If so, how can we believe that every sexual sin is mortal - especially when venial sin's actual meaning is "sins of Venus" - which implies sex?


While a total rethinking of all sexual morality is required, which would include a reexamination of birth control (and how using birth control is no different procreatively than sex after menopause), rethinking whether homosexual sex is licit within the bounds of a monogamous sacramental relationship need not involve such rethinking, as blessing such relationships is affirming and well within the scriptural teaching that when two become one in marriage, they leave their families and cleave to their spouse. This is as true for gays as it is for straights, especially when a gay spouse faces uncooperative family members in trying to assume their God-given role as next of kin in hospital care.