The Same Old Story?

I attended a discussion the other night entitled "Are Christianity and Homosexuality Incompatible?" There was a large contingent of students from a gay-straight alliance on campus, many from an evangelical Christian group, and a few from the more progressive Christian group that actually sponsored the event. I slipped into the role of moderator, since it was obvious that we needed one. The discussion was civil, but the old underlying tension caused by the slogan, "Love the sinner, hate the sin" was alive and well. It was clear within a very short time that there was a wall that would not be breached: there are those who interpret scripture literally, and those who do not. When that reality interjects itself, forward progress almost always ceases. I often feel embarrassed when GLBT people attend a discussion where Christianity's views are debated. If Christians are supported, others will say that they do not respect the authority of scripture. If other Christians condemn homosexual activity based on their understanding of scripture, they are perceived as bigoted. Is there a way out of this morass? I wish I knew. There are progressive Christians, and by that, I mean Christians who see their faith as a way forward to heal a broken world. Undoubtedly, many conservative Christians see their faith in a similar way. However, the brand of evangelical Christianity that is most familiar in America as reported through the media, is a type of faith that insists that the world conform to a standard based upon a literal understanding of scripture. I read recently an article that asserted that literal interpretation of scripture is really only about three hundred years old, and that, before that, Christians used scripture in its richest form.  They looked to scripture for inspiration and guidance, not as a step-by-step book of rules and prohibitions. During our campus discussion, it was evident that some of the students who insisted on a literal interpretation of scripture had no other basis for their faith, should that lone pillar be removed. Other, more moderate Christians tried to make the argument that scripture is really not relevant to the discussion. In that case, the baby went out with the bath water! I left the meeting discouraged, because I realized that I have seen no forward movement, at least on this issue, among the conservative group of students who was there, during the entire time that I have been at this institution. And I am very frustrated with students whose views are more inclusive and welcoming, but who will not take the time and exert the effort to be a part of the discussions. I realize that this dynamic reflects the larger society as a whole. Our more progressive mainline churches will continue to falter and disappear, because they cannot capture, and hold, the attention of the populace with a message that Christ messes with the "common theology" of twenty-first century America. Unless one embraces a restrictive view of Christianity, that promises a payoff for few, after this life, what is the upside? Who wants to practice a faith that espouses acceptance of people different from oneself and a throwing open of the doors to all who will come, as they are. Yes, there ARE standards for Christian living, and they are not for everyone. But to insist that one change an in-born or acquired sexual orientation just for admission to the flock is to demand that one sell one's soul not to God, but to those who have set themselves up as God's gatekeepers. No one wins.