Answering a Homosexual Episcopalian

Homosexual Episcopalian

Answering a Homosexual Episcopalian

Richard Hollerman

I notice recently that there has been a response to a letter that I had sent to a liberal Episcopal paper. It might be helpful to comment on it at this point so as to address some of the concerns that this woman has about homosexuality.

I might say before I begin a critique that Scripture has this to say about a woman homosexual: “God gave them over to degrading passions; for their women exchanged the natural function for that which is unnatural” (Romans 1:26; the next verse [verse 27] then speaks of the male homosexual). Thus, this woman isn’t thinking rightly. She is unnatural and irrational as well as being unscriptural about this subject. Nevertheless, we address her concerns here.

First, in order to give the backdrop of my original letter, let me include the announcement found on the Episcopal website:

In 1976 the Episcopal Church promised “full and equal claim with all other persons upon the love, acceptance and pastoral concern and care of the Church” to its gay and lesbian members. In the intervening years, we have seen many milestones along the way in the journey toward making that resolution a reality. But we are not there yet.

Full and equal claim means full and equal claim – – and it is time to end the exclusion of a percentage of the baptized from a percentage of the sacraments by adopting the canonical and liturgical changes necessary to end discrimination against the marriages of same- sex couples in the Episcopal Church.

At its 77th General Convention the Episcopal Church spoke unequivocally on civil marriage equality by adopting GC2012- D018: “End Discrimination Against Same-Sex Marriages.” It is time to “Let our yes be yes” [M atthew 5:37] and call the 78th General Convention to do the same for sacramental marriage.

You will want to keep in mind that although the Episcopal Church is part of the Anglican Church fellowship, it is by far the most liberal. It denies great amounts of Scripture and accepts many sins of society. In short, it hardly deserves to be called “Christian” in any measure.

Probably many of our readers will hardly be able to believe how far this liberal American denomination has drifted since the days of George Washington and others in the past. But it is leading the way into moral compromise and gross unbelief.

The above statement shows that this denomination is willing to openly embrace clear and obvious sexual immorality and celebrates their willingness to do so. In other words, not only does the Episcopal Church accept gross sexual perversion but it knowingly does so. It is aware of what God says about this yet it blatantly disregards this and rebels against His will while they go after their own will.

Now, here is the original letter that I sent in reference to the official Episcopal endorsement of sexual perversion:

This is a very, very sad situation. Anyone who respects God and His Word knows how grieved He is that anyone would reject and pervert His marriage arrangement. This has been in place since creation itself (Genesis 2:18-24) and Jesus our Lord endorsed the truthfulness of this original account (Matthew 19:3-12). There is no excuse for acquiescing to what has become a popular stance of fallen and sinful society, and rejecting the divine relationship that God requires–one man with one woman, for life (Mark 10:2-12). This is His eternal will (1 Peter 1:23-25; Matthew 24:35; 2 Timothy 3:15-17; Hebrews 4:12-13) that cannot be broken, and to whom all are accountable. Those who reject His Word concerning marriage will be rejected by the Lord (John 12:48). And it is all for our good and not just to impose His restrictions.

Hopefully you will see that I was trying to be concise and yet clearly communicate what God says in His infallible Word about the perversion of His plan in creating man and woman and instituting marriage (see Genesis 2:18, 24 and Ephesians 5:22-33). There were responses to my letter and the longest letter of response came from a homosexual Episcopal woman (Cynthia):

My marriage is holy, Richard. God has blessed us mightily. That alone refutes your view. How rude of you to impose your judgement on my life and my LGBT sisters and brothers. You really can’t speak to each of relationships with God our Creator. Jesus said “don’t judge” and he said “love your neighbor;” the Good Samaritan parable shows that Jesus meant ALL of our neighbors.

I’m on the cusp of the next generation that sees these views as the same ilk as racism, slavery, anti-Semitism, and witch burning, all supported with “scripture.” Fundamentalism of any stripe is really not helpful in spreading the Good News. Pretending that Scripture depicts Ozzie and Harriet style marriage is just silly, as pointed out.

Deepest thanks to all of the people who’ve worked on inclusive marriage in the church. It needs to be available to all Episcopalians, not just the ones living in liberal cities and “blue states.”

As I mentioned earlier, it would be helpful for me to point out several of Cynthia’s irrational and unscriptural statements so show the fallacy in her thinking and her deep unbelief of God’s Word.

First, Cynthia says that her homosexual “marriage” is holy. Those who know the Scriptures know that this is false. A homosexual union is not a “marriage” at all but a substitute for marriage. Further, this immoral relationship can’t be “holy” for God says that sin is unholiness. Sodomy of all kinds is unholiness.

Second, she says that God “as blessed” her and her partner “mightily.” Like the Charismatic who is willing to accept his or her feelings above God’s Word, Cynthia is willing to think and claim that God has blessed them greatly. In reality, God will not bless sin since this is an abomination to Him. He hates sin of all kinds! And He refuses to “bless” the sodomite or homosexual regardless of what their heart says. Remember that God’s Word says: “There is a way which seems right to a man, but its end is the way of death” (Proverbs 14:12).

Episcopal homosexual bishop and partner

Third, she says that her feeling that God has blessed her sin is an indication that this has “refuted” what God has said in His Word. How can we use any subjective experience to reject what our Holy God has said? This shows the danger of accepting our feelings above and instead of what God has already revealed. It is putting our personal will above God’s will.

Fourth, she says that it is “rude” to “impose [our] judgment on [her] life and on [her] LGBT sisters and brothers.” You will notice that Cynthia not only denies what God has said about His will regarding marriage, but she reacts in such a way as to claim that it is wrongful “judgment”  to say that she is living in sin and all other sexual perverts are living in sin. In reality, the Lord Jesus tells us to judge rightly: “Do not judge according to appearance, but judge with righteous judgment” (John 7:24). Christ does not condemn us in doing what He has instructed us to do.

Fifth, she makes allusion to Matthew 7:1-5 when she says, “Jesus said ‘don’t judge’.” Yes, He said this but she is taking this out of context. The Lord said, “Do not judge so that you will not be judged” (v. 1). He goes on to say that we should not judge for we will be judged by the same standard with which we have judged others (v. 2). In other words, if we are living in sexual immorality, it would be hypocritical to condemn someone else who is living in immorality. It has no bearing at all on whether we should point out the wrongfulness of sin if we are living a holy life.

Then Jesus says that we should judge others and we must do so only after we have taken the “log” out of our eye (vv. 3-5). He commands us to judge others: “You will see clearly to take the speck out of your brother’s eye” (v. 5). In other words, don’t judge hypocritically in condemning others for what we are guilty of but go ahead and judge others and help your brother (v. 5). What is said here regarding a “brother” would be true of others (non-brothers and non-sisters) as well (see Romans 2:1).

Sixth, this homosexual woman says that if we “love” our neighbor we will not point out their sin, especially sexual perversion. God doesn’t want us to overlook sin and call this love. Instead, He says that we are to speak truth with love (Ephesians 4:15). If we love the homosexual (and the other sexual perverts that she mentioned), we will want to call on them to repent (Luke 13:3, 5) and forsake their sin (Proverbs 28:13) so that they will not be condemned for their unrepentant sin (1 Corinthians 6:9-10; Galatians 5:19-21; Revelation 21:8).

Cynthia goes on to say that the “next generation” refuses to be bound by God’s will regarding rightful and holy sex, and considers that those who restrict sexual sin to be similar to those who formerly practiced various cultural sins such as “racism, slavery, anti-Semitism, and witch burning.”

But consider: racism is sinful (actually there is only one race—the human race—but she must mean the idea that one ethnic group is intrinsically better than another). Slavery—As practiced in the United States, it was wrong (even though in New Testament times, which was different, it could be acceptable—Ephesians 6:5-9). Anti-Semitism (it is not only wrong to reject one class of people such as Jews, but any other class of people). Witch burning (we would agree that this is not to be done by Christians).

Seventh, regardless of what “the next generation” believes or does, what bearing does this have on whether we obey God or not? God’s will is not bound by a certain generation. Even if a whole generation chooses to reject God and His will, we must be willing to obey it! We know that even when virtually the whole world rejected God’s holy standards, this had no bearing of whether one was to obey or disobey Him. When the Lord “saw that the wickedness of man was great on the earth, and that every intent of the thoughts of his hard was only evil continually” (Genesis 6:5), He was able to find one family who was willing to submit to Him (Genesis 6-9). Noah and his family knew that they needed to believe and obey God in they were to be saved from the great worldwide flood. Thus, even if a “whole generation” departed from the Lord this would have no bearing on whether we should reject Him and His will regarding marriage.

Eighth, this woman homosexual says that it is “silly” for us to understand the Scriptures to be in opposition to sexual perversion. The one who accepts God’s Word as the inspired and inerrant Word of the living God will not be intimidated by such blatant rejection of God’s will. Let others call us “silly” if they wish; we will still submit to God our Creator.

Ninth, she “thanks” all of those fellow Episcopalians who have endorsed and  promoted the ungodly practice of “inclusive marriage” in the Episcopal Church. We are reminded of what Paul the apostle wrote regarding such a practice: “Although they know the ordinance of God, that those who practice such things are worthy of death, they not only do the same, but also give hearty approval to those who practice them” (Romans 1:32). In other words, some people not only openly sin (whether this is homosexuality of either males or females, bisexuality, transexuality, etc.), but they are willing to “give hearty approval” to those who sin in this way. In other words, the guilt is multiplied.

Tenth, Cynthia says that immoral unions (“marriages”) should be available to “all Episcopalians” including those living throughout the United States and elsewhere. She commends all who have worked to this end—promoting and practicing sexual immorality and perversion in every place. We are reminded of Romans, verses 24-27, in which Paul shows the degradation that not only sexual immorality brings, but the sexual perversion that such sins bring.

Hopefully, this little critique will be helpful to all who are trying to work their way through the widespread twisting of Scripture that accompanies an acceptance of sexual immorality. We might also point out that it is not only the Episcopal Church but other liberal denominations that must be warned about how heinous such sins are—especially when the perpetrators knowingly rebel against a Holy God for their sake of their selfish pursuits.

We should also observe that the Episcopal Church has largely departed from anything Christian in nature. There is a small reactionary group (with headquarters here in Fort Worth, led by a “Bishop Iker) that is unwilling to go along with the main Episcopal Church because of such sins as an acceptance of homosexuality as well as feminism in general. I would encourage them to “go all the way” and reject all of the unscriptural elements within both Episcopalianism and Anglicanism (the “parent” religious fellowship, headquartered in England)—and not just sins as sexual immorality and perversion and feminism. We are to teach and practice the “whole” purpose of God (Acts 20:27). Let the Episcopalian denomination do likewise!

We encourage all members of the Episcopal Church to renounce all unscriptural or unbiblical elements and choose to follow Jesus Christ! Be willing to renounce homosexuality, transgenderism, bisexuality, and all other sexual perversions and follow the holy and righteous ways of God!

Comments are closed.