SUNY (State University of New York) Students Hear Other Sheep Presentation

At an Other Sheep presentation on LGBT Christians in Kenya and Uganda, SUNY (Statue University of New York) students of Geneseo hear an activist lawyer comment on how “human rights” is not grasped in developing countries where the Bible is believed to be the final authority in all things

by Rev. Stephen Parelli

Executive Director, Other Sheep

Bronx, NY

March 4, 2013

Rev. Parelli speaks on why "religion" is so important to the work of human rights for LGBT people in countries like Uganda
 

Rev. Stephen Parelli,  Executive Director of Other Sheep, speaking on the topic of religion and homosexuality in Uganda, told a group of thirty plus students attending the Pride Alliance February 28 meeting at State University of New York (SUNY) at Geneseo in western New York, that the rational for Other Sheep could be found in a quote taken from Religion, Conflict and Democracy in Modern Africa (2012):  “. . . what you fellows don’t understand is that you must get at a man through his religion and not yours” (emphasis is Parelli’s from his PowerPoint presentation).

Parelli, quoting from Gerrie ter Haar’s How God Became African (2009), said “The extreme attention to the Bible as the authoritative and infallible word of God is another notable point of distinction between African Christians and most of their Western counterparts.”   Parelli was quick to note, however, that according to Mark Noll, The New Shape of World Christianity, a “key mark of evangelicalism,” whether in the United States or Africa, is “the Bible as ultimate religious authority.”  Parelli remarked that the book The Children Are Free, the book that Other Sheep distributes which is on what the Bible does and does not say about homosexuality, addresses the topic of homosexuality from the evangelical perspective, that is, that the Bible is the final authority in all that it addresses, and therefore speaks to the African through his religion.

Following Parelli’s presentation, a local activist lawyer from Rochester, who presented briefly about a film he is making on a developing country and homophobia, commented that “human rights” is not a principle that developing countries recognize when talking about equality for gays.  Instead, he said, you must talk to them about what God is or is not saying, referencing the Bible.  What God may or may not say about homosexuality trumps any idea of human rights, according the lawyer.  The activist lawyer went on to say that the ministry of Other Sheep, in countries like Uganda, is exactly what is needed.

David Kato (left) with Steve Parelli, Uganda, 2007.

Parelli commented that “liberty of conscience” addresses the idea of human rights in the specific context of religion, that is, that each person is at liberty to follow the dictates of his or her own heart in the matter of what the Bible does or does not say about homosexuality without the interference of the state or church.  Parelli commented that David Kato, when learning about “liberty of conscience” for the first time in a discussion with Parelli, asked Parelli, “Where can I get more information about liberty of conscience.”

Parelli’s presentation focused on Other Sheep’s work in Uganda and Kenya since 2007.  Other Sheep, which began in 1992 in Latin America, is an ecumenical Christian organization that empowers LGBT people of faith worldwide.  Parelli became Executive Director of Other Sheep in 2005 and since then, with his husband Jose Ortiz, has visited countries in Africa, Asia, and Latin America.

Jill McPherson and Sam Colbert of SUNY Geneseo Pride Alliance invited Parelli to speak to the SUNY students in conjunction with his being on campus as the honored guest of the March 2nd benefit concert for Other Sheep.

 

Ostracism in Nepal – The Long Arm of Evangelical Spiritual Persecution Reaches Kathmandu

By Rev. Steve Parelli

Thamel, Kathamandu, Nepal

2:35 am, August 24, 2011

A religious inquisition can have more than one form. In Goa, India, where I was vacationing just two weeks ago, I saw, in the state museum of Goa, the “inquisition table” used by the Roman Catholic Church in Old Goa where a tribunal of some sort sat and handed down its brutal physical torments upon its victims during its reign of religious terror a few centuries ago. The long arm of the dreadful religious Inquisition in Europe had reached all the way to India. I stood somewhat in shock and horror as I looked upon the table and chairs that represented the church’s official right of persecution, just to realize that even here, in India, the Inquisition took hold of its subjects.

I’ve just now witnessed something of the same this evening in Kathmandu, Nepal: The long arm of evangelical spiritual abuse reaching all the way to Kathmandu. The persecution was not physical, but emotional. The victim, a church-going Nepali Christian actively seeking to understand the plight of the sexually marginalized in Nepal, and showing his support in having open dialogue between gay Christians and church leaders, received a phone call from a clergyman who identified himself as the pastor of the largest church in Kathmandu. From his undefined “table and chairs” he handed down his official decree without trial or recourse for the individual on trial: If the victim would not cease to show his support of free dialogue between gay Christians and church leaders in a public setting, the pastor would speak to the victim’s pastor in such a way that the victim felt excommunication was intended.

The victim was distressed, anxious and was notably shaken. Church life is the center of this individual’s life. In fact, the pastor who made the threat had inquired from the beginning, prior to his speaking with the victim, to learn if the person in question was an active Christian who was regularly involved with the life of his church. Once the accusing pastor had determined that the victim would indeed suffer if removed from the family life of his church, he handed down his apparent decision: complete ostracism.

The victim called it a threat. The pastor denied that he was making a threat and argued, instead, that it is his calling and commission to save the flock from wolves. Sociologists tell us that ostracism is one of the most effective ways of emotionally distressing an individual, and when carried out to its fullest has harmful results leading to depression, inactivity, and even suicide. When a society or a community ostracizes an individual from its circle, the harm can be extensive.

In America, where evangelicals have been dealing with this “issue” of homosexuality since the late 1960’s, there has been, more recently, increments of talking-and-listening among evangelicals themselves as well as evangelicals dialoging with gay Christians. It hasn’t always been that way, and the in-roads to open discussions within American evangelicalism is not that extensive. But, yes, evangelicals outside of Kathmandu are, to a small degree, talking in settings that this leading pastor of the Kathmandu Valley deems inappropriate enough to covertly speak with the victim one-on-one over the phone and to seriously raise the question of church discipline, even to the point of complete ostracism, so the victim felt.

I ask, is this Christianity, to judge another Christian as disqualified from fellowship with his or her church on the basis of his or her support of understanding and knowing gay Christians through open, public dialogue. In America, as a gay Christian, I have been personally involved with Soulforce in its active, public dialogues with evangelicals. While I cannot speak to the culture of Nepal for I am not qualified, I can, to a certain degree, speak to the experience of evangelicals worldwide. And so I ask, can an evangelical Christian be a good Christian even though he or she may be in total, complete support of gay Christians? We have those kind of evangelicals in America, who are evangelical and who have concluded that it is ok to be gay and Christian. Straight evangelicals in support of gay evangelicals do exist. Maybe this is one area where evangelicals will have to agree to disagree for the time being and treat each other civilly while doing so. And, at the very least, let’s set aside the “table and chairs” of the Goa Inquisition, the long arm of the West bearing down again on the East with its religious intolerance.

While I’ve obviously taken issue with the pastor in question who spoke the way he did to the Nepali Christian, I do, at the same time, respect his right to lead his flock and to influence fellow clergypersons as he deems he must do. Church discipline, as defined by any denomination, is the prerogative of that institution. At the same time, the outside world has every right, and perhaps every responsibility, to say at times, that whatever the institution – government, religious or private, that that institution has perhaps acted in a way that is abusive towards one’s fellow being. When it comes to religion, it is hard to blow the whistle because religion has, by its very nature, an almost right-of-way to say and do whatever it deems is the will of God (and in doing so often offends the Creator as much as the creature). In this case, I feel the Golden Rule needed to come into play more than the pastor’s views on homosexuality when speaking to the victim. The victim claims he was threatened instead of pastored, counseled, and shepherded. Religion can be heavy-handed, especially when it comes from the top down.

And just now (by speaking of heavy-handedness and top-to-down authority), I ’ve been carried back, from Nepal, to the “chairs and table” of the Goa Inquisition. And that’s not where I wish to be.

A republican and evangelical Christian, former Iowa state Senator Jeff Angelo supports marriage equality

Rev. Steve Parelli
Albany, NY
June 20, 2011
Photo by Kelly Mapes

Posted by Rev. Stephen Parelli

Bronx, NY

June 24, 2011

Another leading republican and evangelical for Marriage Equality

According to an article by Loren A. Olson (M.D. - Psychiatrist) in yesterday's The Huffington Post (dated June 23, 2011), entitled Iowa Republicans for Marriage Equality,

"former Iowa state Senator Jeff Angelo launched Iowa Republicans for Freedom whose mission is to change the hearts and minds of Iowa's social conservatives who currently oppose marriage equality.

"Angelo was a three-term state Senator who did not seek reelection in 2008. He has not always been on the side of same-sex marriage. Five years ago, Angelo, an evangelical Christian, co-sponsored a bill to amend the state's constitution to prohibit marriage between same-sex couples. Now he says that his views have evolved because of his relationships with Iowans who have families with same-sex couples. Angelo has said that he believes his new position is consistent with basic GOP values: individual freedom, limited government, and the pursuit of happiness."

Editor's Personal Note: I grew up evangelical and up-state NY republican.  So then -- I'm so excited when I see the religious political conservative person shift in his/her thinking. It has been, in large part, my mission to focus on "people like me" in telling my story. Putting a face on homosexuality within the community in which I grew up. (Jose, my spouse, also grew up evangelical.) - Steve Parelli

On Rev Kong Hee of Singapore mega church: Like so many evangelicals, his "pro" homosexual stance is a sham

by Rev Dr Yap Kim Hao, the retired Bishop of the Methodist Church in Singapore
Source:  Yawning Bread, September 16, 2009

A personal note: Jose Ortiz and I had the privilege of meeting Rev Dr Yap Kim Hao, author of this article, when we visited the Free Community Church, Singapore, Sunday, August 2, 2009. I preached in the morning service (audio recording of sermon at this web page). - Rev. Steve Parelli

Original Title: Church welcome hides rejection by Rev Dr Yap Kim Hao
--------------------------------
Excerpts:

Kong Hee has cleverly crafted his response that can mislead readers that he is sympathetic to LGBTQ people unless one is aware of his background and the purpose of his writing in the manner that he did.

Kong Hee focuses in a general way on salvation and dismisses sexual orientation. The assumption is that once a person is saved according to his terms of reference the work of truth and sanctification will take over. He posits the simple equation that once a gay person is saved, the sexual orientation will turn from homosexuality to heterosexuality. If not, LGBTQ will be given grace to suppress same-sex feelings and become celibate. Salvation leads to eradication of the practice of same-sex acts. Unless you are saved you will remain a homosexual.
--------------------------------

The article in full:

The founder and senior pastor of [the Singapore mega church] City Harvest Church, Kong Hee, an evangelical pentecostal, has posted in his blog his response to Singapore Prime Minister Lee’s National Day Rally Speech 2009 on Racial and Religious Harmony.

The following is what the prime minister said on the issue of Homosexuality:

PM: [Concerning the recent AWARE controversy:] On homosexuality policy or sexuality education in schools, there can be strong differences in view; but government’s position on these issues is clear.

Kong Hee wrote:

KONG HEE: My position on this hot button issue is this: gay or straight, heterosexual, bisexual or homosexual, we want to introduce everyone to the love of Jesus Christ. But how are they going to encounter that if gays and lesbians perceive the Church as hostile toward their community? As the shepherd over my flock, I don’t want my members exposed to any unwelcome, predatory sexual advances made by anyone —- be that person straight or gay. But if he or she doesn’t pose a direct, negative influence over the congregation, we should indeed adopt a “live and let live” attitude. We are all sinners saved by grace. I want City Harvest Church to focus on the issue of salvation, not sexual orientation. Once someone is saved, I trust the Word of God and the Holy Spirit to lead them into all truth and sanctification.

Kong Hee has cleverly crafted his response that can mislead readers that he is sympathetic to LGBTQ people unless one is aware of his background and the purpose of his writing in the manner that he did.

He has dissociated from Derek Hong of the Church of the Savior who openly and vigorously opposes LGBTQ persons and in his “Choices” programme attempts reparative therapy. However, Derek Hong too claims that he welcomes them to his Church and that his congregation should [not] be hostile to them. LGBTQ will be enlisted to “Choices” and undergo a therapy which is regarded widely as being damaging. Success stories are few and far in between.

Kong Hee has lumped the homosexuality issue to that of sexuality issue in general to avoid giving attention specifically to homosexuality. His response hides the fact that the teaching of his church is against homosexuality which is regarded as a sin or fallen nature. His welcome is for the LGBTQ people to come to his Church, stay in the larger closet and offer themselves to be saved. That is his conditional welcome for the purpose of changing their sexual orientation or forcing them to refrain from same-sex acts.

I know that when a member of the musical team in his church was known to be gay, he was summarily removed from serving in the team. I presume that gays and lesbians cannot assume leadership positions when they come out as gay. They are to hide their sexual orientation from the rest of the congregation.

Despite his statement that he does not want his members exposed to any unwelcome, predatory sexual advances made by anyone—be that person straight or gay, he is directing the message more to gays who are often stereotyped as predatory. LGBTQ are providing a greater negative influence. The so-called “live and let alive” attitude is leaning more towards the straight then the gay.

Quite intentionally but subtly there is the affirmation of the straights even though he is not saved but condemnation for the gays who practice homosexuality.

Salvation is for all and we are all saved by grace. Kong Hee focuses in a general way on salvation and dismisses sexual orientation. The assumption is that once a person is saved according to his terms of reference the work of truth and sanctification will take over. He posits the simple equation that once a gay person is saved, the sexual orientation will turn from homosexuality to heterosexuality. If not, LGBTQ will be given grace to suppress same-sex feelings and become celibate. Salvation leads to eradication of the practice of same-sex acts. Unless you are saved you will remain a homosexual. There is no way literally for a homosexual to be saved until he becomes heterosexual. Heaven therefore has no room for the gays and even for those who dare to support them but only for people like him and those who align themselves with his teaching.

Society of Biblical Literature member charges religious publisher with anti-gay hate speech

Blatant hate speech against homosexuals in Zondervan's Africa Bible Commentary cited at Society of Biblical Literature 2009 Annual Meeting

Panel respondant reports churches in South Africa "are hungry" to know what the Bible realy says about homosexuality
NEW ORLEANS, LOUISANNA - November 23, 2009

by Rev. Steve Parelli, Other Sheep Executive Director

The African Biblical Hermeneutics Section of the Society of Biblical Literature (SBL) featured a paper today at the SBL annual meeting centered around the "Lot and Abraham Story" from the Africa Bible Commentary (Zondervan, 2006). The respondent to the paper, Gerald O. West of Kwa-Zulu Natal University, in his remarks, made a brief reference to the Africa Bible Commentary's featured article entitled "Homosexuality," found in the Romans section of the single volume commentary, to illustrate how the "Lot and Abraham Story" of the Africa Bible Commentary is predisposed to the evangelical anti-homosexual position.

During the open discussion that followed the papers, Rev. Steve Parelli, Executive Director of Other Sheep, said the publisher, Zondervan, was guilty of "hate speech" against homosexuals. Parelli said the Zondervan Africa Bible Commentary article quotes uncritically a so-called common-enough view held in Africa that "homosexuals are worse than beasts." The Africa Bible Commentary article further states, said Parelli, that "the Anglican Church in Africa has rejected Bishop Tutu's call for tolerance and acceptance of homosexuals." Parelli said, because the Africa Bible Commentary article links, uncritically, the two statements that "homosexuals are worse than beasts" and that "the Anglican Church rejected Tutu's call for tolerance" that the article is hate speech against homosexuals, that the evangelical Nigerian author of the article, because he is uncritical of the quotes he uses, owns the quotes as his own viewpoint.

Parelli said Rick Warren of the United States, John Stott of England, and Douglas Carew of Nairobi, Kenya, have all endorsed the Africa Bible Commentary.

Parelli, citing Uganda as an evangelical country, tied the evangelical view of homosexuality to the current criminal Anti-Homosexuality Bill of Uganda that calls for the death sentence and life imprisonment of homosexuals who meet certain conditions.

Another attendant of the SBL session, sitting at the rear of the room, who did not identify himself when he spoke and who left early, thanked the audience for their comments on the Africa Bible Commentary and said that the "insensitivities" of the Africa Bible Commentary as noted in this meeting would be taken into consideration. Apparently, from his remarks, the gentleman is somehow associated with Zondervan, but that notion was not confirmed.

West, in his final reply to the audience as the respondent, thanked Parelli for his comments on the Africa Bible Commentary and related his own disappointments with the volumn. In addition, West gave an account of how religious groups within South Africa are forming meetings around the study of the issue of homosexuality and the church in Africa in order to discuss seriously the Biblical texts traditionally associated with homosexuality. West said South Africans "are hungry" to really know, and not assume, what the Bible does and does not say about homosexuality especially in light of the very really present situation that their

South African constitution provides for the right of same-sex marriage.

Robert Wafula, Drew University, and Robert Wafawanaka, Virginia Union University, each gave a paper and West responded to each paper separately. Elelwani Farisani, University of South Africa, presided. In 2008, Parelli and his same-sex spouse, Jose Ortiz, conducted Other Sheep seminars on the Bible and homosexuality in Kenya, Rwanda and Uganda.

Correspondance with a Nairobi evangelical Bible teacher on issues that spring from the Ugandan Anti-Homosexuality Bill of 2009

A letter in which it is shown that evangelicals in America and Africa, denying basic human rights, are courting the state in order to make laws and amend constitutions in order to limit same-sex relationships according to their evangelical take on the Bible.

Dear Steve of Other Sheep:

I am a vocal anti-homosexual activist. I am a Bible teacher from Nairobi, Kenya. I am able to show you from scripture why I believe you are wrong, and everyone like you. I can show you, from the Bible, what is the natural divine intention that God purposed in human sexuality. I do not support the execution of homosexuals anywhere in the world (a reference to the Ugandan Anti-Homosexuality bill of 2009). But I do believe this problem has a spiritual solution.

It was great knowing you, but I am sorry that our friendship cannot continue. I have removed you as a friend on Facebook. I will pray for your salvation. Our relationship must be an impersonal relationship. Please unsubscribe me from the Other Sheep eNews.

Pastor and Bible Teacher [name withheld], Nairobi, Kenya
Email dated Tuesday, October 27, 2009


Dear Pastor of Nairobi:

I believe we must build a society where my understanding of the Bible and your understanding of the Bible does not mean that I infringe upon your civil liberties, and that you infringe upon mine. Regarding the question of policing same-sex relationships (as in the Ugandan Anti-Homosexuality Bill of 2009 and as in the amending of state constitutions in America), it is my opinion that evangelicals have become the new inquisition, the new archbishop that all must follow, the new state regime where the laws of the evangelical Bible are to be written into state constitutions. This is obviously true in America where the civil liberties of sexual minorities have been limited by amending state constitutions, won, in large part, by the efforts of evangelicals. The same can be demonstrated now in Uganda where evangelicals play a significant role in society and where the Ugandan Anti-Homosexuality Bill of 2009 has been recently introduced.

The basic human right to believe according to the dictates of one's conscience without harassment from any religious or secular body, state or church, is being challenged today in America and Africa by the intersecting of the Bible, homosexuality, and society. In civil society, the citizen chooses freely to submit, or not submit, to the evangelical understanding of the Bible, or whatever the sectarian view. In a free society, the state does not impose upon its citizens an evangelical understanding of “the natural divine intention” of God.

Marriage is a civil institution. Not a religious institution. My civil right to a same-sex marriage does not infringe upon anyone’s civil right to an opposite-sex marriage. Why do evangelicals need to limit my civil rights in order for them to freely enjoy their civil rights? Why do evangelicals ask the state to restrict my options in marriage to that which is unnatural (that is, it is unnatural for me to marry the opposite-sex), while heterosexual evangelicals enjoy the state’s protection in marriage to what is natural for them? Should I not, naturally, be given the same right to marry according to my nature, too?

No homosexual, in order to enjoy the rights and privileges of marriage, should have to marry the opposite sex. That would be contrary to his or her nature and would serve only to disrupt the order of society where unnatural unions (homosexuals with heterosexuals) result in broken lives due to unfilled emotional and physical needs. How unnatural, therefore, for a homosexual to be joined in marriage with a heterosexual. How unnatural for intellectual society to reject a homosexual who would naturally refuse to marry a heterosexual.

The Reformation taught us this: The state must forever be the state. And the church must forever be the church. The one should not rule the other, directly or indirectly. What evangelicals may call unnatural in context of its own code of morality, the state may rightly call natural in terms of its moral responsibility to uphold the civil liberties of all, i.e., marriage between two consenting adults for all, not for some. The state and the church must be free to function without bowing to the other. Same-sex marriage is a civil question. Consenting same-sex adults, therefore, are not “worse than beasts” as Nigerian evangelical Yusufu Turaki gives credence to in his article on “Homosexuality” (page 1355, Africa Bible Commentary). Same-sex couples do naturally what opposite-sex couples do naturally: they make a life together. Both should be granted marriage and protection from the state.

At the very core of my being I am same-sex oriented, just like most evangelicals are opposite-sex oriented. I believe God smiles upon the joining together of two individuals who complete and complement one another. For a heterosexual evangelical to marry the opposite sex completes and complements him or her. For me to be married to my same-sex husband (August 25, 2008) completes and complements me. Ironically, in terms of sexual orientation, it is not opposites that attract, but sameness: heterosexuals attract heterosexuals and homosexuals attract homosexuals.

Evangelicals need to stop and back off and be the church again, allowing the state to be the state, both in Africa and in America. The evangelical church will actually win laurels from society, and rightly so, when they realize that same-sex marriage is a civil question and not a religious question and that LGBT people are a valid minority that need the same rights and protection under the law like any two heterosexual adults who consent to marriage.

Sincerely,

Rev. Steve Parelli
Other Sheep Executive Director
Metropolitan Community Church clergy
October 27, 2009. Bronx, NY