Skammer, the hearing on blessing same sex unions (not marriages, mind you, just a simple church blessing…) was interesting. The room was packed. Pro and Con speakers (deputies and bishops first, then those who’d signed up to speak) each had two minutes to speak, alternating Pro and Con. There was prayer before, during and after the hearing. For the prayer during the hearing (half way through…the hearing lasted from 7pm until 10pm) we all sang Ubi Caritas …very moving.
What I found interesting (and disturbing, too) was that, to a person, all the Con speakers talked about the law and polity and the law and what Scripture says about homosexuality and the law.
I’d rather err on the side of love than with the Pharisees…
I guess my point is that we are all broken and reaching out to each other in our brokenness is where healing starts. That’s the message I want my congregation to hear when we talk about this on Sunday. We are a welcoming congregation with several g/l members, some in leadership roles, but I know others will be upset with what has happened in Mpls.
Skammer, roughly thirty-six hours ago I was pretty much standing in your shoes and had been wearing those same shoes all my life. With heartfelt prayer, meditation, and sharing the contradictions I felt with Libertarian and God, I was able to discard those shoes. My bare feet are now planted on the same ground that Jesus walked on. A burden I was carrying is now lifted from me.
Remember that Jesus would deny no one, loves everyone and condemns not. He asked us to be like Him. Poly, Libertarian, and Eggerhaus are on that walk with Him. It’s where I want to be which caused me to reconsider my position that gay is okay, but don’t be sexually active. In Jesus’ teaching of love and by His example, never once did He provide an exception to homosexuals. Not once in any scenario. In Him Who is Perfect, there are no contradictions, so if I am struggling with one, then my position is incorrect.
The Episcopal Church is taking the correct path. I am a baptized and confirmed Episcopalian, but first of all a Follower of Christ. I treasure His Teachings above historical teaching or traditions or even “The Church”. I think you probably do too.
Jodi – It isn’t about tolerance and justice, it’s about Love.
I’m not ‘not sure’ of the decision on Robinson; I strongly believe it’s a mistake at this time. But while I blame the liberals for doing an end-around on the question of the legitimacy of gay relationships by promoting Robinson to a bishop, I blame only the conservatives who threaten schism for potentially setting off a schism.
Love must walk in truth, not in stratagem. And conservatives in the pews, as well as gays, deserve to be treated with love and compassion as the Church reaches out to accept gays as gays, which is what it must do. This radical step, I believe, is trampling the traditionalists in the name of principle. That is not something to be proud of.
Actually, RT, I didn’t have you in mind at all when I wrote that…I had the more adamant traditionalists in mind.
Truthfully, I shouldn’t even be in this debate. I have no dogs in this race, in any way, shape or form. I’m not Episcopal or Anglican, I wasn’t raised in that Church…I’m not even Christian. So at this point, I should probably just shut up and let the legitimate debaters on the subject take over.
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.
If a bishop refuses to embrace her or his colleague in Christian love, then is that not living in sin?
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?
why is splitting the church considered such a bad thing?
If gay sexual relationships are all right then denying rites of blessing & ordination are acts of monumental injustice and conscientious liberals should consider leaving church institutions which perpetrate that injustice. If they are sinful. then conscientious conservatives should consider leaving church institutions which give tacit or open approval to them. Perhaps a middle ground could be worked out and no one has to leave, but if it can’t, then there is no crime in leaving- just a sadness it had to come to this, much like irreconcilable differences over a divorce. I know that if my denomination made the decision to ordain sexually-active gays, I’d have to leave (just as if it had decided to require all members to openly expose and personally harass gays, I would also have to leave). Then again, I’d have left if my church had elevated someone with Spongian doctrinal views. I do wonder how the AAC & friends who are now considering seeking another Anglican avenue of fellowship managed to stay after his elevation.
Incidentally, I attend the Assembly of God, so approving of gay sex isn’t a big possibility (neither is harassing of gays). However, if the AoG had did get hyper-dogmatic on something it’s already conservative on, I could see having to leave.
EDLYN, I say this with all due respect – Maybe it’s about love to you, but IME if you do away with tolerance and justice, whatever you have left sure as heck ain’t Love.
I’d like to thank the Episcopal Church for taking this step forward. I’ve followed this controversy from afar, believing it was none of my business, but being excited about the implications of the decision being made. I was happy to see the Church vote as it did, and reassured, once again, that underneath it all, humans are fundamentally good.
Then I got an email from my Mom. It said, “I knew there was a reason I had you christened as an Episcopalian!!!”
I’d forgotten I’d ever been christened at all. Up until now, it made no difference to me whether I had been; most religions have made it pretty clear that I’m unwelcome.
It’s nice to know that, should I find a need for spiritual solace, the place that received me as a baby might be able to find a place for me as an adult.
FriarTed, I take no consolation in a comparison of a split in the church with a divorce. Imagine the pain and confusion of a divorce multiplied by a million. It would involve hurt, anger, grief and eventually battles over who owns what. That is the very opposite of what a church is supposed to be. Not many sheep get fed while the farm house is burning.
Well, before I can attempt to explain it, I need to know why it confuses you. It seems pretty self-evident to me. Are you saying that loving and caring for all people should mean approving or tolerating any type of behavior?
Edlyn:
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. What we take a stand against is the church endorsing behavior that is contrary to historical church teaching, doctrine, and scripture. 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.
I’ve finally figured out where I stand on the “be kind to those with moral objections to homosexuality” issue. In short, 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.
Well, yeah. It is what Jesus expects us to do. But pardon me if I say I find it a bit tough and distasteful to start work on that right now. Maybe they’d be willing to wait the 28 years that they expected gay people to. :rolleyes:
Here are some comments from Church leaders around the world who would not describe themselves as proud of the Episcopal church today, in contrast to several posters in this thread. My point in posting these is that the “conservative element” in the US is in fact aligned with mainstream Anglicanism throughout the world.
Archbishop Peter Akinola (Primate of Nigeria) We are astonished that such a high level convention of ECUSA should conspire to turn their back on the clear teaching of the Bible on the matter of human sexuality. Even more shocking is the violation of their own constitution in which they claim to be in fellowship with churches “upholding and propagating the historic Faith and Order as set forth in the Book of Common Prayer.” Yet at the time of testing, this has proved to be, for the present generation, no more than mere rhetoric. They have chosen the path of deviation from the “historic faith” once delivered to the saints.full text
Archbishop Drexel Gomez (Primate - West Indies) It now seems inevitable that, the convergence of the absence of a central executive authority in our Communion coupled with the militant advance of revisionist attacks on the historic faith and practice of the Church, will definitely create some realignment within Anglicanism. There are many across our Communion who remain convinced that the revisionist presentation of the Gospel does not represent the “truth as found in Jesus”.full text
Most Rev. Benjamin Nzimbi (Primate - Kenya) The decision of the General Convention of the Episcopal Church in America to elect and confirm an active homosexual man as a bishop is wrong. It is against Biblical teaching, it is sin and it damages the Body of Christ and leads people astray. It makes it difficult for people to understand what “family” means. This convention has ignored our calls for unity and caution. In acting
alone, they have brought a great wound to the Anglican Communion and have separated themselves form us.full text
Archbishop Peter Jensen (Sydney, Australia) *I note with profound regret the confirmation of the election of Canon Gene Robinson to be a Bishop in the diocese of New Hampshire. By affirming his election the Houses of Bishops and Deputies in the Episcopal Church in the United States have turned away from the traditional teaching of the Christian Church, which is based on the clear teaching of the Scripture. * full text
My profound thanks to RTFirefly, Skammer, Friar Ted, et. al. for presenting thoughtful arguments for why the ECUSA might have been better served by not installing Bishop Robinson.
I will point out though, Skammer, that being in the mainstream does not make one correct - yes? I believe Jesus made that point on several occasions.
Technically, I think we all ‘deserve’ the same thing. But gay people are not excluded from God’s gift of grace. I’m sorry you can’t wrap your head around the fact that most of us don’t hate them at all. I know it doesn’t fit what you want to be true – it’s much easier to dismiss us as ‘hate-filled homophobes’.
I do not consider homosexuality any worse or more condemnable than any other sin that I have of lying, laziness, lust, etc. I do condemn those hate-filled people who Eggerhaus encountered and those who tried to smear Bishop Robinson.
However, I think Jesus gave us a great example of what it means to obey the greatest commandments, prevent condemnation, yet still recognize sin.
I think the Episcopalian view hinges on this point and I will prayerfully study the relevant passages invovled with an open mind.
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).
