# I'm Proud of My Church **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [August 4, 2003, 1:57am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/im-proud-of-my-church/192807 "2003-08-04T01:57:33Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 8
**Author:** ![wonky](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/wonky/32/393_2.png) [@wonky](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/wonky)\ **Post date:** [August 7, 2003, 4:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/im-proud-of-my-church/192807/141 "2003-08-07T16:14:36Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Skammer \* > \*\*What we _deserve_ is for God to say, “OK, have it your way. Thy will be done.” \*\* So, you mean God works at Burger King? “You want fries with that?” puts hell in a whole new light. Julie ---
**Author:** ![Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e99b99/32.png) [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diogenes_the_Cynic)\ **Post date:** [August 7, 2003, 4:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/im-proud-of-my-church/192807/142 "2003-08-07T16:16:57Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Skammer \* > \*\*Well, that would be a hole 'nother thread. In a nutshell, as sinners (and **Polycarp** provides a good definition of sinfulness at the top of this page) we continually turn away from God. What we _deserve_ is for God to say, “OK, have it your way. Thy will be done.” The result would be our eternal separation from God. > > However, God doesn’t say that, he has through Christ provided for our redemption. And the offer of redemption is made to all people, gay and straight, I should add. The fact that we’ve been redeemed does not give us license to continue to live in sin (though of course we do). \*\* Wouldn’t it make more sense just to say that people are born innocent and deserve salvation until they do something really evil? I just don’t buy this notion that humans are inherently bad and that we have to constantly abase ourselves to be “saved.” How is being gay “turning against God,” btw? Is gene Robinson bound for hell in your opinion? Will he DESERVE it? ---
**Author:** ![FriarTed](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/friarted/32/1052_2.png) [@FriarTed](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/FriarTed)\ **Post date:** [August 7, 2003, 4:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/im-proud-of-my-church/192807/143 "2003-08-07T16:17:17Z")
while on the gay issue, I’m traditionalist, on the Hell issue, I’m not- so as to what we all deserve, I’m with Skammer in that God could well abandon us to ourselves & be perfectly good & fair. I’d add that resignation to let us go our own way would eventually lead to our dissolution, our cessation to exist. Believing that God’s goodness however exceeds mere fairness, I also trust that in Jesus, God gives sufficient opportunity to every being to be reconciled, if not in this life then in the afterlife, perhaps even infinite opportunity, and the only damnation which anyone will incur will be in resisting those opportunities. Jesus said that “The Judgement” is that His Light comes & that people prefer their darkness to that Light, but the Light keeps coming and glaring & yep, even burning. Paul said that we all shall be tried by His Fire & I also expect some radical singeing. ---
**Author:** ![RTFirefly](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/c77e96/32.png) [@RTFirefly](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RTFirefly)\ **Post date:** [August 7, 2003, 4:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/im-proud-of-my-church/192807/144 "2003-08-07T16:26:59Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Zoe \* > I am in full agreement that conservatives should also be treated with love and compassion. _How_ are the traditionalists being trampled? How will this affect them personally? Are traditions more important than principles? How could this have been handled better? Help me to understand your point of view. I’ll do my best. Traditions aren’t more important than principles, but people are. People, unlike things, aren’t good at instantaneous changes. I change a line of code in a computer program to have it do something different, and neither the program nor the computer is bothered. People aren’t like that; as a rule, they need time to absorb major changes. Up until this week, the more conservative members of the Episcopal Church have had reason to believe their church still regarded homosexual conduct and desires as sinful. As of yesterday (not the day before), that is no longer the case, as the Episcopal Church [has given each diocese the freedom](http://gc2003.episcopalchurch.org/ens/3577_18451_ENG_HTML.htm?menu=undefined) to explore informal liturgical expressions blessing gay unions, saying: > [@](#): > > We recognize that local faith communities are operating within the bounds of our common life as they explore and experience liturgies celebrating and blessing same-sex unions. What a reasonable sort of church would do at this point, recognizing that people, being people, are going to have to adapt to this change of thinking, is to give them some time to get used to the new reality, and accept its implications, before moving on to the next steps. With some of these next steps, they are doing so: it will be some years, for instance, before there is a formal, Church-wide liturgy for blessing gay unions: > [@](#): > > More reflection and study is needed on how the church incorporates gay and lesbian members, said Bishop Herbert Thompson of Southern Ohio. He noted the “wonderful pastoral way” both sides of the issue had agreed to the compromise. The message today, he said, is that the church is not yet ready develop rites for blessing same-sex unions. “Maybe down the road but we need a conversation and they are allowing that to happen.” But with another ‘next step,’ that of elevating active gays to positions of spiritual authority, they’ve jumped the gun. The day before yesterday, homosexuality was still a sin; now we’re supposed to look up to an active homosexual. That’s too much change to ask people to absorb at once; you can’t just push a button and turn a knob, and have them be where you believe they should be - even if you’re right about what they should ultimately come to believe and accept. On preview, **Poly** , I see where you said: > [@](#): > > those of us who fought for the inclusion of gay people on an equal basis in the church because we saw it as a part of Christ’s call to love all our fellow men and women as ourselves, and were vilified for it, are now supposed to show compassion to the people who fought us and demonized gay people, so they won’t feel like they’re being driven out of their church. No, absolutely not. Those who vilified and demonized do **not** deserve to be let off the hook. If they have been the shepherds, it is time they repented - and took a place among the flock, rather than among its leaders. But most of the traditionalists were not vilifying anyone, or even speaking out. Most of them were in the pews, not the pulpits. They were just attending church, and believing what they believed, which was what their church said it believed. _They_ are the ones on whose behalf I believe I’m speaking. **Zoe** , you had another question I’ll try to answer: > [@](#): > > For those who consider homosexuality a sin, why does it seem to be considered such a hideous sin as to preclude someone from serving as called to do by God and the people? Part of it is obviously, and unfortunately, the visceral reaction that many people have to the thought of homosexual acts. But theologically, they had a legitimate point, **if** homosexuality was a sin. (I most certainly don’t believe it is; I’m just making the devil’s-advocate argument here.) We are all sinners, Christianity holds, but we aren’t supposed to just acquiesce to our sinful nature; we’re supposed to actively seek God’s help in letting go of our attachments to sin. But if homosexuality were a sin, gay Christians who were determined to remain gay would have decided to remain in sin rather than trying to cleanse their lives of that sin. That would be exactly the wrong example, which is why persons identifying as gay would have no business being priests, in that alternative reality. ---
**Author:** ![TVAA](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/c57346/32.png) [@TVAA](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/TVAA)\ **Post date:** [August 7, 2003, 4:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/im-proud-of-my-church/192807/145 "2003-08-07T16:29:13Z")
Why isn’t being unable (or to put it less kindly, unwilling) to change to a correct standard considered a sin? ---
**Author:** ![RTFirefly](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/c77e96/32.png) [@RTFirefly](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RTFirefly)\ **Post date:** [August 7, 2003, 5:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/im-proud-of-my-church/192807/146 "2003-08-07T17:13:47Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by FriarTed \* > \*\*why is splitting the church considered such a bad thing? \*\* In general, I’d say it’s because if we who love and serve the Lord can’t work out our differences in peace and harmony, then who can? I’m unequivocally a Protestant, but I’ve got to say that one of Christianity’s greatest embarrassments is the willingness of Protestants to schism seemingly at the drop of a hat, resulting in literally thousands of distinct Protestant denominations. I agree that sometimes the differences really _are_ irreconcilable. But I think that it frequently happens that some are a bit too eager to shake the dust off their sandals, so to speak: a dramatic exit gives one a real adrenaline rush, especially when things are already heated between the opposing sides. But there’s a lot to be said for waiting until the flash point has passed and receded to determine whether those differences are irreconcilable; to see what message prayer and reflection yields before taking extreme action. That’s all in general. In the present instance, I would add that we know what the fruits of the Spirit are. As I’ve said already, I think that those considering schism would do well to see what the results are of this week’s decisions, and what sort of fruits they produce. In a couple years’ time, we should be able to discern whether Bishop Robinson’s ministry is a positive thing for the people of God. We should be able to discern the same of the blessing of gay unions in the Episcopal Church. I think it behooves the potential schismatics to stay long enough to see up close what the fruits of this week’s decisions turn out to be, and use that to add to their discernment of whether they were right or wrong. If they leave now, they will avoid (evade) having to deal with the possibility of being wrong. Or they may be right. I doubt it, but if they are, there’s plenty of time to act on that later. One final word: I am ignorant of the degree to which vilification and demonization of gays and their friends has taken place within the Episcopal Church itself. But plenty of it has certainly occurred across Christianity in general. If we are to know them by their fruits, there’s a case to be made that opposition to acceptance of gays within Christendom has produced the bad fruit, and should be found wanting on that account. ---
**Author:** ![Skammer](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/skammer/32/143_2.png) [@Skammer](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Skammer)\ **Post date:** [August 7, 2003, 5:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/im-proud-of-my-church/192807/147 "2003-08-07T17:49:04Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Diogenes the Cynic \* > \*\*Wouldn’t it make more sense just to say that people are born innocent and deserve salvation until they do something really evil? I just don’t buy this notion that humans are inherently bad and that we have to constantly abase ourselves to be “saved.” > > How is being gay “turning against God,” btw? Is gene Robinson bound for hell in your opinion? Will he DESERVE it? \*\* I don’t want to turn this into too much of a highjack about salvation doctrine, but I’ll give you my thoughts on your questions. As too whether people are born innocent and remain so until they do something “really evil” – I like to believe that babies are born innocent, although Christians do not all agree. The problem, that I think most Christians would agree, is that they don’t stay that way for long. Even (especially) as children we put our own needs ahead of others, and do what we want instead of what we should. I’m not talking about natural things like crying when you’re hungry, but acts of will like disobeying your parents or hitting your sister. I think most Christians would agree that the bible is clear on this – “all have sinned… there is none righteous; no, not one.” How is being gay “turning against God”? Well that’s the crux of the debate we’re having. First let me clarify that we are talking about actions, not feelings or desires. I don’t know of any mainstream Christians who believe that being attracted to the same sex is itself a sin. **Poly, Siege** and others would say that homosexual sex itself is morally neutral, and is fine in the proper context of a loving relationship (but can be misused outside of that, just like hetero sex). Traditionalists argue that homosexual sex (the act) is a sin, a misuse of sexual desire, similar to other extra- or pre-marital sex. Where you fall on that issue is the biggest factor in your resonse to Dean Robinson’s confirmation. Is Gene Robinson bound for hell? Well [leaving my concept of Hell out of it], God only know for sure. But I’m pretty sure he isn’t. I believe he has experienced the same saving grace that I have through Jesus. I do think he is continuing to sin by being in a homosexual relationship, and therefore not an appropriate choice for Bishop, but I have never questioned his salvation. ---
**Author:** ![Skammer](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/skammer/32/143_2.png) [@Skammer](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Skammer)\ **Post date:** [August 7, 2003, 5:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/im-proud-of-my-church/192807/148 "2003-08-07T17:53:28Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by TVAA \* > \*\*Why isn’t being unable (or to put it less kindly, unwilling) to change to a correct standard considered a sin? \*\* Could you elaborate on your question? I think you’re saying, “Why isn’t the fact that traditionalists can’t (or won’t) accept this new standard of sexuality considered a sin?” But before I try to answer, I want to make sure I understand the question. ---
**Author:** ![The\_Ryan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/7feea3/32.png) [@The\_Ryan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/The_Ryan)\ **Post date:** [August 7, 2003, 6:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/im-proud-of-my-church/192807/149 "2003-08-07T18:09:22Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by iampunha \* > Have you forgotten every single post I have ever submitted on this board on that topic, or are you half-raising an issue that neither answers the original questions nor contributes anything worthwhile to the discussion? For me to forget every post you have submitted, I would first have to read all of them. Are you really so conceited that you take it for granted that I have read all of your posts? I don’t know what you mean by “the original questions”, seeing as how the OP contained no questions, nor do I see how it’s relevant, as it is widely accepted in GD to respond to previous posts even if they do not directly relate to the OP (and if your post was not sufficiently on topic for you, then that’s not my fault). I would think that once one considers the fact that the Bible was not written in English, the absurdity of the sentences that I quoted from you and Marley23 would become apparent, and I did think that pointing out the flaw in your statements would contribute something worthwhile to the discussion. I do not think the same of this post by you. ---
**Author:** ![Eve](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/9e8a1a/32.png) [@Eve](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Eve)\ **Post date:** [August 7, 2003, 6:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/im-proud-of-my-church/192807/150 "2003-08-07T18:30:41Z")
I can’t believe I feel like Pitting **James Lileks** , one of my favorite humorists . . . But he has a very mean-spirited and ill-informed [Bleat](http://lileks.com/bleats/index.html) today about Rev. Gene Robinson. Lileks does not seem to understand the difference between “cheating on your wife” and “no longer living a hypocritical lie of a life.” [The Robinson section is after the opening “Ah-nold” section] ---
**Author:** ![Guinastasia](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/guinastasia/32/5751_2.png) [@Guinastasia](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Guinastasia)\ **Post date:** [August 7, 2003, 6:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/im-proud-of-my-church/192807/151 "2003-08-07T18:49:12Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by jsgoddess \* > \*\*So, you mean God works at Burger King? > > “You want fries with that?” puts hell in a whole new light. > > Julie \*\* Well, hey, they do say their burgers are “flame-broiled.” 😛 ---
**Author:** ![Triskadecamus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/b19c9b/32.png) [@Triskadecamus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Triskadecamus)\ **Post date:** [August 7, 2003, 7:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/im-proud-of-my-church/192807/152 "2003-08-07T19:13:41Z")
**Poly** , Forgive me, if my words have spoken a condemnation of you. I do not “expect” you to begin healing the breach right now, or open your heart immediately to those from whom you have felt heartache. But I pray for it. And, in fact, I know you will do it before twenty eight years. I have seen your heart at work before. I pray for it, because I love your heart, and want it to be made free of this pain. I know that I should be praying just as hard for those who still accuse you, and despise you, and despise our brothers and sisters. It is a failing of mine to pray most for the ones whom I love most, and not, as the Lord bid me, to pray for my enemies. I am not an Episcopalian. The church next door to my home is an Episcopalian Church. Truro Church, in fact. A fact with a tiny irony attached. It was here, just two weeks ago, that the “conservative” bishops met to prepare for the issue we are now discussing. I should have been praying then, I suppose, for the love of those brothers as well. I join my voice to those who encourage my Episcopalian brothers in Christ to abandon anger, and embrace love. It is our duty from our Lord to love one another. God bless you all, and comfort you in this time of trial. Tris ---
**Author:** ![Polycarp](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/82dd89/32.png) [@Polycarp](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Polycarp)\ **Post date:** [August 7, 2003, 8:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/im-proud-of-my-church/192807/153 "2003-08-07T20:02:47Z")
Thanks, **Tris**. I have no doubt that I’ll come to forgiveness and acceptance, and soon, not in 28 years. **RT** started the process, in fact, by pointing out to me that most of those hurt are not the active campaigners but the men and women in the pews. Certainly **Skammer** , whom I’ve come to cherish as a dear friend the past month or so, is one of those whom I would have described as “a compassionate conservative” before GWB coopted the term for his own political gain. Mini-hijack: I was vaguely aware you lived in Fairfax. But back in the mid 1980s Barb and I made it a point to attend Truro when we came down to the DC area. The present Bishop of Central Florida, John Howe, who has been a leader in the opposition to Gene Robinson, and whose cathedral dean has much to do with **Mars Horizon** ’s having turned away from Christianity ( :mad: ), was rector there then. We probably parked in front of your house! (And I must say that of all the Episcopal churches we’ve ever attended, they did the least to make us feel welcome of any. If Episcopalians are, in the old catch-phrase, “God’s frozen chosen,” they are the _cryonic charismatics_.) ---
**Author:** ![Eggerhaus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/d2c977/32.png) [@Eggerhaus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Eggerhaus)\ **Post date:** [August 7, 2003, 8:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/im-proud-of-my-church/192807/154 "2003-08-07T20:36:56Z")
Goodness **Polycarp** , I just noticed that you are in North Carolina. It was an honor and true joy to hear your diocesan, +Curry, preach at last Saturday’s Eucharist at General Convention. He is an awesome preacher…and had 2500-plus people on their feet when he was finished! ---
**Author:** ![Skammer](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/skammer/32/143_2.png) [@Skammer](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Skammer)\ **Post date:** [August 7, 2003, 9:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/im-proud-of-my-church/192807/155 "2003-08-07T21:36:27Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Polycarp \* > **Certainly Skammer, whom I’ve come to cherish as a dear friend the past month or so** Awww… hugs for everyone! > [@](#): > > \*\*If Episcopalians are, in the old catch-phrase, “God’s frozen chosen,” \*\* Oops. Never mind then. _sits up straight_ ---
**Author:** ![Edlyn](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8797f3/32.png) [@Edlyn](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Edlyn)\ **Post date:** [August 8, 2003, 2:44am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/im-proud-of-my-church/192807/156 "2003-08-08T02:44:57Z")
**Skammer** > [@](#): > > I think your confusion lies in thinking that, by implication, conservatives condemn and do not love certain people (gays), which is a faulty foundation to build your argument on. As I said in a related thread, I (and like-minded Anglicans) are not condemning anyone for anything. A person’s spiritual state is between them and God. > > As I said above, you can often find your self loving people and having compassion for them while disapproving of their behavior. I have gay friends too, and I love them. > > First, I believe that any individual who is consecrated Bishop is there by the will and sovereignty of God. That doesn’t mean the person will be a good or bad Bishop, but I recognize that God is in control. (It wouldn’t be the first time God did something I didn’t like.) So as for me, personally, I would “accept” the Bishop in the sense that I would recognize his authority within the church and within the diocese. I would not accept his teaching and direction inasmuch as I felt it conflicted with Scripture or church doctrine in the area of human sexuality. I wasn’t confused in the least. As I pointed out in my comments to you, just days ago I stood exactly where you are with the same feelings and position. The difference now is that I saw the inconsistency in that position and in light of what Jesus teaches, it was in conflict also. Something had to give. Above you stated that you love and have compassion for those who are gay and you believe that their spiritual state is between them and God. I believe you were being honest, so why don’t you carry through on that? I faced that question myself. I understand that your judgment is against an act and not the individual, but is it really? In view of your response to a gay Bishop it is equivalent to shutting the door on him, isn’t it? And in spite of your acknowledgement that God is in control? **Gold Dragon** provided: > [@](#): > > However, I think Jesus gave us a great example of what it means to obey the greatest commandments, prevent condemnation, yet still recognize sin. It is understandable that the scripture provided could be viewed as the right and justification for the church and individuals to condemn the act, but not the person, yes? The answer is no and the reason why is because the authority to do so belongs _to Jesus_. It is for Him to say _Go, and sin no more_. We are the crowd who should discard our stones and walk away, leaving it to Him. That is what I realized. That’s what freed me from a burden I need not carry. And in understanding this in a new light I also realized the harm being done to those who would have the door closed on them by other Christians. It is not for us to build walls depriving them of having a close relationship with Him. **MrVisible** , I was very touched by your post. I hope, too, that you will find the acceptance you deserve to have. ---
**Author:** ![Polycarp](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/82dd89/32.png) [@Polycarp](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Polycarp)\ **Post date:** [August 8, 2003, 4:57am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/im-proud-of-my-church/192807/157 "2003-08-08T04:57:06Z")
Thre tims now, I’ve wanted to say how proud I am that we have people like **Eggeraus** doing that badly needed ministry of service. Thank you, sir, from someone you’ll probably nevr meet in this life, for what you do in all our behalfs. > [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Zoe \* > We’ve survived changes that were potentially more devisive than this – including adopting an updated version of _The Book of Common Prayer_… **Zoe** , the matriarch of the church in my home town where Barb and I spent 20 years in Purgatory was 95 when we met her, shortly after the '79 BCP was adopted, and died a few years later at just over 100. And she was fond of giving perspective when people were talking about the fight over the new Prayer Book: “You think this is a fight? You should have heard them when they adopted the 1928 book!” **Mr Visible** , it would be the poorest of form to do any evangelizing here and now, particularly in view of some of what you’ve said in the past about treatment by Christians. All I will say, given what your mother told you, is, when you feel inside that it’s time to come home, the door will always be open for you, and inside will be arms outstretched in unquestioning love. ---
**Author:** ![Skammer](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/skammer/32/143_2.png) [@Skammer](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Skammer)\ **Post date:** [August 8, 2003, 12:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/im-proud-of-my-church/192807/158 "2003-08-08T12:36:10Z")
**Edlyn** , I badly want to understand your argument. I don’t think I know what you mean by this > [@](#): > > I stood exactly where you are with the same feelings and position. The difference now is that I saw the inconsistency in that position or this > [@](#): > > you love and have compassion for those who are gay and you believe that their spiritual state is between them and God. […] so why don’t you carry through on that? Could you please point out more specifically how I’m being inconsistent? > [@](#): > > In view of your response to a gay Bishop it is equivalent to shutting the door on him, isn’t it? I don’t think so. Certainly I don’t think he is an appropriate choice for Bishop, given that he his best known for a doctrine he holds that is contrary to scripture and church teaching. However, I’m certainly not saying he doesn’t belong in the church. All are (or should be) welcome. If you think I’m “shutting the door” of the church; the answer is no. If you mean “shutting the door” regarding the Bishopric, I don’t have that power (thankfully). If you mean “shutting the door” of my mind to his teaching or wisdom or pastoral care, I would say that it is more of a filter than a door. ---
**Author:** ![RTFirefly](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/c77e96/32.png) [@RTFirefly](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RTFirefly)\ **Post date:** [August 8, 2003, 1:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/im-proud-of-my-church/192807/159 "2003-08-08T13:53:09Z")
**Skammer** , what doctrine does Bishop Robinson hold that is contrary to the teachings of the Episcopal Church? If you had said that a week ago, I would have understood you to mean his acceptance of the legitimacy of gay sexuality and gay unions. But that is no longer contrary to the teachings of the Church, given Wednesday’s vote on blessing gay unions. So I’m confused. ---
**Author:** ![Skammer](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/skammer/32/143_2.png) [@Skammer](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Skammer)\ **Post date:** [August 8, 2003, 2:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/im-proud-of-my-church/192807/160 "2003-08-08T14:26:21Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by RTFirefly \* > \*\ ***Skammer** , what doctrine does Bishop Robinson hold that is contrary to the teachings of the Episcopal Church? If you had said that a week ago, I would have understood you to mean his acceptance of the legitimacy of gay sexuality and gay unions. But that is no longer contrary to the teachings of the Church, given Wednesday’s vote on blessing gay unions. So I’m confused. \*\* “D’oh! They got me with their legal mumbo-jumbo!”[/Homer Simpson] I guess now I’ll have to start distinguishing between the current Episcopal approach to same-sex unions and traditional Christian teaching about sexuality. The Bishop-elect is right in line with the former but at odds with the latter. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/im-proud-of-my-church/192807.md?page=7) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/im-proud-of-my-church/192807.md?page=9)