From here:
Jesus looked at the book of Leviticus—a confusing tangle of ancient legal codes and taboos, mixing primitive superstitions together with enduring ethical insights—and what did he find there? He found laws in Leviticus forbidding a disabled person from being a priest, branding lepers as outcasts from the community, stigmatizing a woman as unclean during her menstrual period or after giving birth. Leviticus forbids same-sex relations, eating lobster, tattoos, wearing clothes made of two different kinds of fabric, and planting a field with two different kinds of seed.
That settles it: the fact that there are Anglicans who persist in eating lobster and no-one seems to care must mean that no-one should care if they also engage in sodomy. I had no idea it was that simple.
If only it had occurred to Rev. Dr. Gary Nicolosi to point that out before now, we could have avoided all the recent Anglican unpleasantness.
Anyway, as Rev. Nicolosi goes on to point out, all you really need is love – particularly when you love lobsters.
Did Nicolosi get his ordination in a Cracker Jack box, or is he really that dim?
I think, if you read the article in full, it is more a case of loving the sinner, not necessarily approving of the sin. The dietary restrictions, Jesus pointed out, were of no effect. (Mark 7:14-15,18-19).
Of all the things in His Ministry, the only thing that I am able to say that he “changed” was the “law” forbiding the eating of shellfish, as Pietro points out in Mark 7. Everything else that has the appearance of change was really only better revealed, resulting in us having a better understanding. Thus, what was a sin, is still a sin, and will forever be a sin (including those things listed in Romans 1:18-32).