A Voice for Integrity in the Public Forum

Thursday November 16, 2006

This is a strong and somewhat provokative statement. I would call it ‘forthright.’ In the light of current statements emanating from Washington from both the Capitol and from the Hyatt Regency, Bishop Spong’s words might even be prophetic.

October 25, 2006

Sexual Hypocrisy in Church and State
by John Shelby Spong

It has long been observed in religious circles that the most outspoken critics of homosexuality frequently turn out to be themselves closeted homosexual people. Now we discover that among those in the political arena who have done most to politicize the homosexual issue in an effort to curry votes among conservative voters in recent elections are themselves also deeply compromised on this issue. At stake is the issue of integrity, a quality sorely missing, I fear, in both the life of the Christian Church and in the present Bush administration. In both arenas the duplicity of sexual politics needs to be exposed.

Let me begin with the Church. Benedict XVI, the current pope, has made the purging of homosexual candidates for the priesthood one of his top priorities. This is nothing less than pandering to cultural prejudice solely for public relations. The tip off is clear when he states that no attempt will be made to remove from their positions those homosexuals who are now priests, bishops or cardinals. That would decimate the ranks of the ordained! He only plans to put up a fire wall at the entry-point. A thoroughly gay church wants to pretend that it is the enemy of homosexual clergy. What a pathetic response to abusive clergy behavior.

This Church failed to be honest, suppressing its history of dealing with abusive clergy by transferring them to other states, and minimizing criminal behavior. Needing to make a stand somewhere, they decided to denounce all homosexuality, implying inaccurately in the process that homosexuality is the cause of this abusive behavior.

Nothing revealed the dishonesty of this planned diversion more than the transfer of one of the chief architects of priestly abuse, Cardinal Bernard Law of Boston, to a prestigious Vatican assignment when by every standard he should have been tried, convicted and sentenced to jail for willfully covering up evidence of criminal behavior. Here is a church whose ordained ranks are filled with gay males leading the chorus against homosexuality. That is, quite frankly, “queer behavior.”

My own church is no better. Internationally the Anglican Communion was recently headed by a deeply homophobic Archbishop of Canterbury named George Carey. He, along with the majority of England’s Anglican Bishops, constantly passed resolutions and quoted the Bible to condemn homosexuality.

In response, a group of Anglican clergy, who knew more about where homosexuals were in the hierarchy than the Church thought they did, began a public campaign to out those gay bishops who were busily condemning homosexuals. The carnage in the Church of England was palpable. The number three ranked Anglican bishop was forced to call a press conference to announce that he was “sexually ambivalent.” He was later elevated to the number two position! England’s fourth ranking prelate had to face the newly revealed fact that in his twenties he had been arrested for soliciting homosexual favors in a public wash room. Church leaders called these charges a “youthful indiscretion” and he served until his retirement.

Still another ‘outed’ bishop resigned his post and entered a monastic community, where he could live in an all male community with impunity and anonymity. When George Carey retired he was replaced at the head of the Church of England by Rowan Williams a man well known, prior to being named Archbishop of Canterbury, for his liberal attitude toward homosexual persons.

He peeked into the closet of Anglican clergy and, frightened at the vision, began to backpedal rapidly on both truth and character. He actually concurred in the appointment of a known gay man to be an area bishop in a major Diocese until forced by the cries of homophobic evangelicals into acting in such a way that he left himself with neither integrity nor any other redeeming feature, forcing his own appointee to withdraw.

At the same time, however, underneath the radar screen of public attention at least four gay men were being appointed Deans of English cathedrals. They were in fact men of enormous talent that I have admired for years. While these Deans were worthy of respect, the secretive church that appointed them was not.

In the American Episcopal Church we have time after time discovered that violent homophobia was pouring forth from sources that turned out to be deeply closeted gay men. A western bishop, from whose mouth streamed vitriolic condemnations of homosexual people, was discovered with his gay lover shortly before his retirement.

The issue was hushed up. A convenient eye disease was offered as the excuse for the fact that his retirement was moved up. Both he and the Church’s integrity disappeared from public view. A Midwestern bishop died of AIDS, but that too was covered over and never faced. With his death, however, one of the most homophobic voices of our church was silenced, and those of us who knew the facts, railed at this ecclesiastical duplicity.

At the same time one of the great bishops of our church was elected vice-president of the House of Bishops. He served with great distinction, but when he retired and came out of the closet, no one was surprised. In 1990 my Church’s House of Bishops was debating a resolution to “disassociate” itself from me and my diocese for ordaining an openly gay man who lived in a publicly acknowledged partnership.

That resolution passed by a 78-74 vote majority with two abstentions. I was one of the two since I did not know how to vote on whether or not I wanted to associate with me! Following the vote, two bishops came out of the closet to me separately and privately. Both were married. One had voted for me, the other against me. The one who voted against me apologized and told me that he dealt with his fear of being exposed by condemning homosexuality in every public forum.

No one, not even his wife, even suspected him. I promised him that I would never reveal his identity and I haven’t, but I also told him that his position was contemptible. The next day another bishop, who had led the attack on me came to me, again privately, to ask if I would be able to take a homosexual priest who needed to move. He had no place in his Diocese, to move him. It was one more illustration of a two-faced church structure for which I have no respect or patience.

I thought of these church episodes recently as I watched the leadership of the Republican Party squirm under the revelations of Florida’s Representative Mark Foley. This party is filled with the same kind of duplicity. Under the leadership of Karl Rove, whose openly gay, adoptive father died in 2004, the Republicans have regularly run political campaigns designed to capitalize on uninformed fear about gay people.

The first Rove ‘smear campaign’ was directed against Texas Governor, Ann Richards, implying that she was a lesbian. That dark campaign propelled George W. Bush into the governorship of Texas. Homophobia has been a theme in every Bush campaign since. Now with destructive homosexual behavior revealed in the midst of the GOP, they have engaged in a cover-up. Dennis Hastert has emerged as the political counterpart to Cardinal Law.

One cartoonist actually portrayed Hastert in the ecclesiastical robes of a Catholic bishop. He had been told about Congressman Foley’s inappropriate e-mails to congressional pages at least three years ago, but disregarded those reports. Even with these suspicions abroad, Hastert and other ranking Republican leaders went to Congressman Foley in 2005 seeking to get him to run for Florida’s Republican Senate nomination to oppose incumbent Democrat Bill Nelson.

They wanted to use Foley’s popularity to stop what they saw as the doomed candidacy of Katherine Harris. Control of Congress was so important that these Republicans played sexual politics until the whistle was blown. Then they “could not recall” being warned about Congressman Foley’s proclivities, that were, it now appears, widely known.

Meanwhile on Tuesday, October 11, 2006 an openly homosexual man named Dr. Mark Dybul was sworn into office at the State Department with his partner holding the Bible. Dr. Dybul was flanked by First Lady Laura Bush and Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice. In her remarks Ms. Rice referred to the mother of Dr. Dybul’s partner as his “mother in law.” While I welcome this enlightened attitude, I remember that this is the administration that has urged an amendment to the constitution banning gay marriage as our only protection against “liberal, activist judges.”

This is the administration in which Vice President Cheney’s lesbian daughter has been made invisible. This behavior reveals that homosexual people are today’s political victims, the new “Willie Horton!” Bob Woodward’s book “The State of Denial” refers to Steve Herbits, the openly gay, top consultant to Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld, as the one advisor who “foresaw the disaster in Iraq.”

We also now know that aides to President Bush and assistants to such homophobic senators as James Imhofe of Oklahoma, Mel Martinez of Florida, and Rick Santorum of Pennsylvania are known to be open homosexuals. I am not upset by that fact. I am upset that people will bash homosexuals publicly, while depending on them privately.

The final revelation of this administration’s crass behavior came on Sunday, October 15, 2006 in an interview on CBS’s Sixty Minutes with David Kuo, a former top official in the Bush “Faith-based Initiatives” program. In his book, “Tempting Faith,” Kuo reported that Bush administration spokespersons who were willing to blast gay people in public, were in private referring to “these f——-g faith based programs” and calling its homophobic Evangelical base a bunch of ‘nuts.’

Both the hierarchy of the Church and Republican politicians will clearly resort to lies and cover-up to preserve power. No lie can, however, be sustained indefinitely. Even Republicans are today beginning to tire of this tactic.

Two contenders for that party’s 2008 nomination are John McCain and Rudy Giuliani, consistent supporters of gay civil rights. Perhaps it is not the Republican Party, but this particular administration that is the culprit. Maybe they even learned their behavior patterns from the Christian Church.

John Shelby Spong

And here’s a bit of wisdom from a ‘fan’ triggered off by comments aired by Dr Laura. Enjoy!

This article was published in The People News,
Cleveland, TN January 2006 issue, Things You Didn’t Know column.

Dr. Laura Schlesinger is a radio personality who dispenses advice to people who call in to her radio show. Recently, she said that, as an observant Orthodox Jew, homosexuality is an abomination according to Leviticus 18:22 and cannot be condoned under any circumstance. The following is an open letter to Dr. Laura allegedly penned by an east coast resident, which was posted on the Internet.

Dear Dr. Laura:

Thank you for doing so much to educate people regarding God’s Law. I have learned a great deal from your show, and try to share that knowledge with as many people as I can. When someone tries to defend the homosexual lifestyle, for example, I simply remind them that Leviticus 18:22 clearly states it to be an abomination. End of debate. I do need some advice from you however, regarding some of the other specific laws and how to follow them:

When I burn a bull on the altar as a sacrifice, I know it creates a pleasing odor for the Lord – Lev.1:9, The problem is my neighbors. They claim the odor is not pleasing to them. Should I smite them?

I would like to sell my daughter into slavery, as sanctioned in Exodus 21:7. In this day and age, what do you think would be a fair price for her?

I know that I am allowed no contact with a woman while she is in her period of menstrual uncleanliness – Lev.15:19-24, the problem is, How do I tell? I have tried asking, but most women take offense.

Lev.25:44 sates that I may indeed possess slaves, both male and female, provided they are purchased from neighboring nations. A friend of mine claims that this applies to Mexicans, but not Canadians. Can you clarify? Why can’t I own Canadians?

I have a neighbor who insists on working on the Sabbath. Exodus 35:2 clearly states he should be put to death. Am I morally obligated to kill him myself?

A friend of mine feels that even though eating shellfish is an abomination – Lev. 11:10, it is a
lesser abomination than homosexuality. I don’t agree. Can you settle this?

Lev. 21:20 states that I may not approach the altar of God if I have a defect in my sight. I have to admit that I wear reading glasses. Does my vision have to be 20/20, or is there some wiggle room here?

Most of my male friends get their hair trimmed, including the hair around their temples, even though this is expressly forbidden by Lev. 19:27. How should they die?

I know from Lev. 11:6-8 that touching the skin of a dead pig makes me unclean, but may I still play football if I wear gloves?

My uncle has a farm. He violates Lev.19:19 by planting two different crops in the same field, as does his wife by wearing garments made of two different kinds of thread (cotton/polyester blend). He also tends to curse and blaspheme a lot. Is it really necessary that we go to all the trouble of getting the whole town together to stone them? – Lev. 24:10-16. Couldn’t we just burn them to death at a private family affair like we do with people who sleep with their in-laws? (Lev. 20:14)

I know you have studied these things extensively, so I am confident you can help. Thank you again for reminding us that God’s word is eternal and unchanging. Your devoted fan, Jim

Recent Articles

Seventh Sunday of Easter 'B'

Living the Mystery at the town square As I walked recently to the Green in the center of Morristown after my…continue reading...

Sixth Sunday of Easter 'C'

In all things, charity It continues to astound me how the Scriptures come to life over and over again under different…continue reading...

Sixth Sunday of Easter 'C'

In all things, charity It continues to astound me how the Scriptures come to life over and over again under different…continue reading...

Fifth Sunday of Easter 'B'

Let’s stay connected. It’s not unusual to hear family members or close friends at the departure gates of life say to…continue reading...

Fourth Sunday of Easter 'B'

Watch out for the leopards! When my sister and I were kids, my father would whistle for us when it was…continue reading...