The Literalists

I am often bemused by the discussions that break out on the HoBD listserv where those on the "right" argue for adherence to "the plain meaning of Scripture," but then draw a thousand exceptions and exemptions. You know the arguments. Like how they agree with the literal reading of Leviticus that it is an "abomination" for a "man to lie with a man as with a woman," but then weenie-out on doing what God commanded to the offenders: namely, stoning them to death. And how they declare Paul's statements on same-sex sex in Romans is part of "God's unchanging word," but Jesus' own words on divorce are timebound and subject to change as part of a pastoral provision.

Several members of the HoBD list have often begged the "reasserters" for a definitive guide as to how they decide what's to be interpreted literally and what they can "fudge." Of course, they still haven't provided any such key for us struggling Episcopalians. It seems to be locked up in the Chamber of Secrets.

So I was amused recently when I noticed this quotation used in the "sig line" by Father Nigel Taber-Hamilton, one of the Deputies:

A literalist interpretation of Scripture tells us that God is a rock that sent a bird to cause a virgin to give birth to a loaf of bread. And this is supposed to be an improvement on obtaining a chiseled code of conduct from a flaming shrubbery in a cloud. If a literal understanding is all that is required for faith, then I'm a yellow ducky.
-- Rabbi Ben Sylva

So much for the literalists and fundamentalists.