So, apparently the Anglicans are rewriting the Bible in order to make it okay to be gay, and to have sex outside of marriage.



No kidding.



Here's the NRSV translation of what Paul said, in 1 Corinthians 7:

"Now concerning the matters about which you wrote: ‘It is well for a man not to touch a woman.’ 2But because of cases of sexual immorality, each man should have his own wife and each woman her own husband. ... 7I wish that all were as I myself am. But each has a particular gift from God, one having one kind and another a different kind. 8To the unmarried and the widows I say that it is well for them to remain unmarried as I am. 9But if they are not practicing self-control, they should marry. For it is better to marry than to be aflame with passion."



And the "Good As New" translation of same, according to the article:

"Some of you think the best way to cope with sex is for men and women to keep right away from each other. That is more likely to lead to sexual offences. My advice is for everyone to have a regular partner. ... There's nothing wrong with remaining single, like me. But if you know you have strong needs, get yourself a partner. Better than being frustrated."



Okay let's take a look at this. The Good As New "translation" would have you believe that Paul is saying celibacy causes sexual immorality, when in fact if you read it, Paul is saying that celibacy is ideal but some people are already sexually immoral. Good as New has Paul advising people to get themselves a partner, when in fact Paul is advising people NOT to. Good as New makes it sound like Paul is saying "Hey guys, I'm single and there's nothing wrong with that. But if you're not lucky enough to be completely asexual like me, then go on out and find someone to sleep with so you won't be frustrated anymore." WHICH IS NOT WHAT PAUL IS SAYING!!!! Grr. Read his words. He's saying "Hey guys, ya know it's better to be celibate like me. I WISH that all of you were celibate like me, so you would know God the way I do. But different people have different gifts, and not everyone has the gift of celibacy. Some of you don't have enough self-control for this lifestyle, and if that's the case you should get married." Also note Paul is talking about "husband and wife", NOT "partner". :P *growl* Stupid stupid stupid stupid...



*sigh* There are those who say the Bible is already corrupt; if this so-called 'translation' becomes accepted how much harder will it be to convince anyone that the old Bible is incorrupt?



And on top of that, I find it sad that we have come to the point where we not only twist the scriptures and teachings, and pull them out of context to make them say whatever we want... but now we must rewrite them. God's teachings change with the times? NO! God's teachings are for all times. Man is just too selfish and arrogant to submit himself to anything anymore. God submits to us now, or so we would believe. Boy are we ever stupid.



And look at the name of the book. "Good As New". I think it's a play on "Good News". Who in their right mind would turn to a book proclaiming to be as 'good as' the Good News... when they can just go right to the Good News itself? I hope this thing gets shot down before it ever takes off. But since the archbishop of Canterbury is backing it, it will probably go somewhere. Next thing you know, people are going to be lobbying for the Catholic Church to buy into it.



On a somewhat related note, the Buffalo News had an article the other day about men leaving the priesthood in order to marry. Ironically, many of those featured in the article are leaving the Church to become Episcopal (Anglican), where they can do both. 'Best of both worlds' I guess.



I think the practice of celibacy in the priesthood is one of those things the Church does which is grossly misunderstood. "Control!" people yell. "The Church is controlling your body! You're not free to do whatever you want!" Not true. If the Church was looking for power and control, they'd abolish the celibacy rule, let the Pope get married, and then pass the Papacy down through a ruling family. No, the Church is not interested in controlling the masses, especially not every bodily function of the masses. The Church is interested in what's BEST for the masses. Saving sex for marriage is not just some silly "we will dominate you" rule, it is a REALLY GOOD IDEA. Self-control, willpower, chastity, these are virtues. Sex is a gift. Those who save that gift for marriage and practice monogamy within marriage are freer to enjoy the gift of sex than those who do whatever whenever with whomever. Freedom doesn't mean doing whatever you want whenever you want to, it means enjoying the gifts you have as they were MEANT to be enjoyed. Or so I would say.



So as far as priests and marriage, again the Church sees something that we don't. Being a priest is a HUGE job and comes with a LOT of responsibility. Priests are everywhere, saying Mass, hearing confession, visiting the sick and dying, and whatever else they do. They are on call ALL THE TIME. Being a priest is not a job, it's a life. They are the spiritual 'parents', if you will, of the hundreds of people that attend their parish, and they must be available to attend to the parishioners' needs. The Church knows all this, and it knows that marriage and family are another huge responsibility. So it asks the priests not to marry, so that they can commit their lives to their vocation, to God and to ministering God's people. The Church is not trying to control them or punish them, it's saying that it is better for all involved -- the priest, his family, and all the parishioners -- if he does not marry, so that he can fully focus on being a good priest. I dunno about you, but it makes perfect sense to me.



But nobody wants to commit their life to anything anymore. Everyone wants to keep their options open, in case something better comes along. This is why so many marriages are ending in divorce, there's a shortage of priests, etc etc. "Till death do us part" doesn't mean anything more than "until someone more interesting than you comes along." And to build on that, people don't want to commit to ONE thing. They want to do it all. Be a priest AND a husband. Work AND raise a family. People want to have everything, do everything, be everything, experience everything... not realizing that what makes them 'happy' at the time probably isn't the best thing for them, or for those around them.



Paul says in Corinthians that "I wish that all were as I myself am." He isn't saying "Hey, there's nothing wrong with being celibate like me." No. He's saying "I WISH THAT EVERYONE WAS CELIBATE LIKE ME." Celibacy allows for complete focus on God and God's work. It removes the distraction of another person who sometimes takes your focus off of God. Paul sees it as the ideal state, but it is not for everyone. God also created marriage, and true sacramental marriage is the ideal for other people. In marriage the spouses see and act on the love of God in each other. They work together on their faith. It's a different kind of calling. Marriage produces children and keeps society going. Celibacy produces leaders. Or it would, in an ideal world. That's how I see it anyway. :P



Anyhow... people gotta understand a couple of things.

1. Religion is not something that "fits your life". Your life has to change to fit your religion, not the other way around. [As a small sidenote here, this sentence pretty much sums up my conversion. You want to know why I became Catholic, read that sentence again and then think about it LONG and HARD.] You don't change the Bible to make it validate whatever you want to do. That's just wrong. :P

2. Life is not about doing everything, having everything, seeing everything. It is not about doing whatever you want to do. It is not about being happy all the time. Those with the most fulfilled and 'happy' lives are the ones who find something to commit themselves to, and stick with it even when it is hard.



One girl's opinion, anyway.