on Monday, 27 July 2009 at 7.53 am by Simon Sarmiento
categorised as ECUSA
The Bishop of Rochester wrote about it, in the Washington Times, a rather odd place for a CofE bishop to write, you might think. His article is titled Episcopal gay moves risk schism.
(This provoked Adrian Worsfold into a spoof version.)
A much more useful article, by somebody who was actually there, can by found at Anglicans Online. See Pierre Whalon What Didn’t Happen at General Convention 2009—and What Did?
One must wonder if the article subtitle was “Archbishop of Canterbury unable to mince and do the splits at the same time”. What on earth is an episcopal gay move? The cakewalk?
Is there any American Bishop who is as obsessed with the Church of England as + Rochester is with the Episcopal Church?
What on earth is an episcopal gay move? The cakewalk?
No – the moon walk!
Thank you for you continuing posting of articles to help us make some sense of our situation – pro and con. My greatest concern is that TEC seems unwilling to accept that being a Christian sometimes means you have to stand over against the secular culture. That’s part of the job. To those who want slavery: Slavery is wrong. To those who say Jesus never rose form the dead: He is risen. And quite possibly to those who want to make ‘marriages’ out of same sex relationships: It can’t be done. ‘Marriage’ is between a man and a woman. This… Read more »
No, I’m not surprised to see +Rochester publishing an essay in the Reverend Moon owned Washington Times.
The readership of this right wing newspapers is a readership likely to share his views and the vehemence of the comments made in support of the article confirm this view. +Rochester is departing his see, presumably, fore something he sees as better…I posit GAFCON or FCA leadership or both. He has few opportunities left to vent, with an audience, before departing. This is one. He is credible for those who share his views but, with exception of Sydney, there aren’t that many more above the equator and ACNA’s ability to maintain cohesion in spite of its many centripetal cracks seems,… Read more »
“My greatest concern is that TEC seems unwilling to accept that being a Christian sometimes means you have to stand over against the secular culture.”
Indeed. For most of Western history, the secular culture treated homosexuality as, in Wilde’s phrase, “the love that dare not speak its name.” How then is accepting it as being as God-given as heterosexuality NOT “standing over against” the secular culture?
“Our job is not to be conformed to the world, but to stand loose to it and its sinful ways. It may be ok to eat flesh offered to idols, but not if it offends your brother or sister, or causes them to stumble.” Allan K, I agree absolutely with your last statement, and it is a great concern for me in the actions of TEC. It seems to be the idea now that it is my brother’s responsibility not to stumble over the block I have put in his way. So why is it that I am not opposing… Read more »
Sorry, but this bishop’s ignorance is pathetic and embarrassing — his words are undercutting the credibility of both Christianity and Islam. “Pluralist”‘s spoof is too oblique and too kind to a man who seems to be acting out his own identity disturbance in public — at the expense of church, gospel and his gay victims whom he alleges to love.
To be a Christian supportive of the fully acceptable humanity of LGBT persons before God, just as they are, is truly to take a stand against the culture. I like to think that my consistent belief and practice of full acceptance and appreciation of the gifts of LGBT persons for the church and the world has played a part in bringing the culture along, so that with a handful of states in the U.S.A., for instance, making full marriage legal for gay and lesbian persons, we now have the appearance of supporting the culture, when actually it is still the… Read more »
This whole facile trope that inclusion caves in to the culture – a knee jerk lack of backbone when it comes to our believer ethics, theology, witness, practice; while telling queer folks they must repent by ceasing to be themselves – a categorically firm yet closed iteration – is good hearty traditional Christ Against Culture backbone? Goodness sakes, pure and utter nonsense. It is spin, simply. Rightwing spin. If you think accepting queer folks and supporting them is such an easy fad, just try doing it in your local parish. Better yet, pick nearly any particular church program – a… Read more »
It never ceases to amaze me when people argue, with a perfectly straight face, that being down on gay people is countercultural.
In what strange world do these people live?
“To be a Christian supportive of the fully acceptable humanity of LGBT persons before God, just as they are, is truly to take a stand against the culture.” Lois and JPM, you really need to see these people’s paranoid worldview. For them, the surrounding culture has has vehemently rejected Christianity and is now actively oppressing Christians. This will only get worse as time goes by, and eventually we will get to a point where it is illegal to be Christian. If the militant “secular humanists” don’t do it, the militant Muslims will. The Evil Hell Bound Liberals in the Church… Read more »
Causing your brother to stumble?
How many gay “brothers” have the “traditionalists” caused to stumble, to turn from God, humanity and life? Yet, no concern there, apparently.
That’s real stumbling, as opposed to “traditionalists” who, with nothing actually forced on them, given broad leeway and understanding, do a little skip and say “Teacher! They tripped me!”
That’s the reality of the situation.
Doctor Ali states: “In all this, those who remain orthodox in faith and morals will need to remember that any disruption of fellowship is for the sake of discipline and the eventual restoration of those who have chosen to go their own way to the common faith and life of the church. It is for this that we must work and pray.” Please note that orthodox means anti-homosexual agenda, as the “orthodox” cannot agree as to the actual meaning of the Gospel, the sacraments and the 39 articles. Furthermore as for orthodox in morals he of course conveniently papers over… Read more »
Actually, it didn’t provoke me into a spoof version. I just wrote something in general. I’m just going to read the Nazir-Ali’s latest now. Now I am intrigued.
OK, I’ve just read his piece. Either he read my spoof first for the relevant bits or I just did my research well enough and this is always his style!
Exactly who is this ‘Nazir-Ali’?