I googled the clergy again, an exercise that unfailingly raises my hackles. The article I came upon, having entered the name of a classmate (Steve Paulson) whom I know to be a professor of systematic theology at a Lutheran seminary, is entitled "Against the Holy Blasphemers." For those disinclined to click on the link, trust me: the pugnacious title is characteristic of the whole. Who are "the holy blasphemers"? Those whose view of homosexuals is more, shall we say, moderate than those of the author, Dr Steven Paulson. Of course his view is the Lutheran, biblical one sporting the imprimatur of St Paul, that fount of wisdom on all matters sexual.
Dr Paulson gives the impression of a man who, standing at the lectern before thirty mild and admiring theological students, is not accustomed to being contradicted, and has as a result lost any inclination to self-edit. "Blasphemers!" "Fanatics!" To me, it seems over the top, but then you can imagine how annoying it is to be outvoted by a bunch of know-nothing laypeople.
It's a wonder that the article is so long, since the author has nothing more than the familiar bible-says argument, but on a second reading the mystery lifts. It's not that the reasoning is subtle, it's that the wind is strong. Who really is the fanatic? "They know," writes Dr Paulson (his emphasis), "even though they have no word from God to stand on." As opposed to: "I know, and I have the word from God to stand on." Here is the last sentence of "the word from God" that he chooses to cite:
Though they know God's decree that those who do such things deserve to die, they not only do them but approve those who practice them (Romans 1:32).
You can see why he's against ordaining homosexuals. They don't even deserve to live. Disagree? Fanatic! Blasphemer!
