Posted on 05/18/2008 8:54:07 PM PDT by hiho hiho
Preachers give sermons. They ponder morality and seek to divine the will of God. They see stories not as narratives from which readers may draw their own conclusions, but as parables, useful for illustrating life lessons.
In the Eye of the Storm, the new book by Gene Robinson, the Episcopal bishop of New Hampshire, is not the memoir it appears to be. It is not Robinson telling his story but Robinson expounding his opinions.
How does a Christian deal with the Bible's harsh judgments, contradictory messages and archaic views? What does God have to say about sexuality? How has the Christian right's flawed reading of God's will harmed society? What are the consequences of a male-dominated society?
For answering such questions, Robinson's ordination as the first openly gay Episcopal bishop and the furor surrounding it have enlarged his pulpit. This book is his microphone.
Robinson's parishioners and those who have read about him in the Monitor will recognize the "I won't back down" candor in these pages. He does not duck personal issues or shy away from his leadership on gay rights.
For example, he cites a request from an unnamed "fellow bishop" that he and his partner, Mark Andrew, cancel their June civil union ceremony in Concord rather than "embarrass" the church so shortly before the Anglican Church's annual Lambeth Conference. No way, Robinson replies.
"There is no time when our civil union will be acceptable to many in the Anglican Communion," he writes. "But I will not be irresponsible to the partner and love of my life just to avoid giving offense."
One thing that surely maddens Robinson's detractors is his insistence that he is God's instrument, that God is acting through him. He makes this assertion in the subtitle of his book, "Swept to the Center By God," and returns to it often in the text.
Just as God called upon him to be true to himself and pursue high office in the church as an openly gay man, God challenges all people to question the status quo. "God just won't stay put," he writes. "And he won't let us stay put, content to believe what we've always believed, what we've always been taught, what we've always assumed."
Change is "something God requires of us." It is "the work of God's Spirit, blowing through us like wind." We hear God's voice "above the noisy din of the church's condemnation." It is, in other words, the earthly institution of the church that resists the changes that God desires.
This interpretation of Christianity is bound to upset many people who view themselves as Christians. Robinson does not see Christianity as a rigid moral force spelled out in a timeless and infallible text which is to be interpreted by an authoritative clergy. He sees people growing over time in their understanding of what God and the Bible really mean.
This schism in Christian views is similar to the split in the American body politic over the Constitution. Conservatives think the Constitution means what the founders intended when they adopted it. Liberals see it as a living document whose meaning can change with the times.
But, of course, the debate is full of contradictions and cross-currents in either realm. Robinson actually argues that he is a theological conservative. Gay marriage entails a vow of faithful monogamy. Its availability means fewer gay people entering into unhappy heterosexual marriages. Why, he asks, would conservatives not applaud those ends? Why should inclusion and equality trouble conservatives?
'A grace-filled gift'
Robinson does not seek to confine his polemic within the church's walls. He wants no less than "the dismantling of the system that rewards heterosexuals at the expense of homosexuals." He
cites the litany of rights denied gay and lesbian couples. He describes the pain inflicted by the military's don't ask, don't tell policy. This policy, he writes, is one of many constant reminders that society con siders gay men and lesbians to be second-class citizens.
Presumably, though only implicitly, this includes New Hampshire's choice to legalize civil unions but not gay marriage. Explicitly, Robinson's preference is for a clear division of state and church. For both homosexual and heterosexual couples, he writes, the state's duty is the official joining in marriage. The church's role is bless such unions.
To Robinson, sex is "a grace-filled gift from God." He rejects "Just say no" sex-education campaign. When young people are told that sex is dirty and they should save it for the marriage bed, he writes, they get a contradictory message. If it's dirty, why save it for the one you love?
"The spiritual and physical union between two people mirrors the relationship God desires with humankind," he writes. ". . . When lovemaking is really right, it's perhaps as close as we can come to knowing the kind of desire and love God holds for us."
In pondering what constitutes moral sex, Robinson concludes that it is males who most often violate his idea of sex as a godly act. For example, he makes this observation: "We've seen more promiscuity among gay men, not because both men are gay but because both men are men. Studies of lesbian women show almost no interest in promiscuity."
One-dimensional?
In the Eye of the Storm touches on some aspects of Robinson's ministry that have nothing to do with sexuality. Yet sexuality is his main subject and the one on which his views are the most provocative. This raises a question of perspective.
Robinson makes two statements in his introduction. First, he says that in the same way that Jesus reached out to prostitutes, tax collectors and other marginalized people, God called upon one of his gay children to be a bishop. But then he complains that the press, the public and the Anglican Communion see him as "a single-issue, one-dimensional person."
Had he written an actual memoir in which he put his elevation to bishop in the larger context of his life and ministry, he might well have broadened the public's perception of him. Instead, he has used his position, and written this book, to advance the cause of gay rights and to make a case for healthier attitudes toward sexual orientation, gender differences and sexuality itself.
Many readers will applaud these aims, but Robinson turned a wide-open field into a narrow one. A reader of his book might easily conclude that the way the press and the public see him is the way he sees himself.
As much as part of him would like to be the parish priest he once was, those days are gone. In the Eye of the Storm includes vestiges of the old Gene Robinson, but the book's clear aim is to make his case as the first openly gay Episcopal bishop.
It took courage to pursue and achieve this distinction and to stand up to the protest that persists even today, nearly five years after his ordination. Courage is something Robinson understands in gradations and in everyday contexts. In encouraging gay men and lesbians to come out, he notes that telling gay friends you are a person of faith may be more difficult than telling straight friends you are gay.
If it was indeed God who swept Robinson to the center, he did not have to strain himself. Readers of In the Eye of the Storm will find in Robinson equal measures of chutzpah and defiance, two qualities as important as courage to any modern pioneer.
Eugene Robinson trash
Gene Robinson is a drunk and a degenerate. He is disease.
“The wicked freely strut about when what is vile is honored among men.”
- Psalms 12:8
I quit reading after this.
< snip >
Change is "something God requires of us."
Of every one of us, or just some of us?
Perfectly appropriate passage.
You forgot the “gag” alert.
Robinson has no idea what it is to follow Christ. His changing god is one of his own making.
“although they knew God, they did not glorify Him as God, nor were thankful, but became futile in their thoughts, and their foolish hearts were darkened. 22 Professing to be wise, they became fools, 23 and changed the glory of the incorruptible God into an image made like corruptible man—and birds and four-footed animals and creeping things.
24 Therefore God also gave them up to uncleanness, in the lusts of their hearts, to dishonor their bodies among themselves, 25 who exchanged the truth of God for the lie, and worshiped and served the creature rather than the Creator, who is blessed forever. Amen.
26 For this reason God gave them up to vile passions. For even their women exchanged the natural use for what is against nature. 27 Likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust for one another, men with men committing what is shameful, and receiving in themselves the penalty of their error which was due.
28 And even as they did not like to retain God in their knowledge, God gave them over to a debased mind, to do those things which are not fitting;” (Romans 1:21-28)
I’m ashamed to be an Episcopalian with disgusting filth like this among the higher ranks of clergy. I also have no use for presiding Bishop Schori-Jefferts.
I can’t win. Both my church and my party have left me.
At least I know I’m not alone. I hope.
He’s right; God demands change. He commands us to cast off our sinful nature.
This “bishop” needs to awaken spiritually before he can minister to others.
Harsh judgements? Archaic views? This guy has serious problems with the fact that God is a god of absolute justice as well as warm and fuzzy love.
Archaic views? This guy wants to argue with God over the natural order God specified in the Bible. Good luck with that.
Freep-mail me to get on or off my pro-life and Catholic List:
Please ping me to note-worthy Pro-Life or Catholic threads, or other threads of interest.
For the Anglican ping list... GAG ALERT!
I literally thought I was going to vomit reading that. And the blasphemy in his statements is frightening. I will pray that his eyes are opened before he dies and it’s too late, and he’s standing before God giving an account of his perversion of the Word of God in order to follow his desires. Even though God Himself called those desires an abomination.
But you and I may be part of a minority (political and christian conservative American patriots).
Vicky Gene Robinson has no fear of the living God, he's just trying to use the God of the Bible to promote his own preferred sex life. The Bible says that God is not mocked, and V(ia)GR(a) is really asking for trouble. Not from any human source, but he will have to answer to God one day for his totally reprobate mind.
Romans 1:25-27 tells us that same-sex sexual relationships are a consequence of idolatry. In other words, such relationships are a consequence of disobeying the 1ST COMMANDMENT, a major aspect of the GREATEST COMMANDMENT, to love the jealous God with all your being.
Homosexuals need to keep in mind, however, that the good news of the gospel is not about how God despises same-sex sexual relationships. In fact, 1 Corinthians 6:9-11 indicates that certain members of that church had been slaves to such relationships but had been cleansed in Jesus' name. So these former homosexuals had evidently repented and accepted God's grace to straighten their lives out.
John 3:16
Revelation 3:20
Mr Robinson needs Prayers to save himself first and Lighten his heart with Grace to extinguish the Darness that he is raging in NOW with all his abuses!
Robinson, in typical liberal fashion, believes that his actions constitute a rebellion against "The Man" (in other words, God).
When young people are told that sex is dirty and they should save it for the marriage bed, he writes, they get a contradictory message. If it's dirty, why save it for the one you love?
That's a bold-faced lie. The Biblical teaching is that sex is only acceptable within a monogamous heterosexual marriage. Fornication, adultery, lust, divorce, and sexual deviancies such as homosexuality are explicitly forbidden.
"The spiritual and physical union between two people mirrors the relationship God desires with humankind," he writes.
Did he just imply that God is sexually confused?
One thing that surely maddens Robinson's detractors is his insistence that he is God's instrument, that God is acting through him. He makes this assertion in the subtitle of his book, "Swept to the Center By God," and returns to it often in the text.
Mr. Robinson's actions have caused destruction and chaos within the worldwide Anglican family...results that are not of God. Compare God in James 1:17 ("Every good thing given and every perfect gift is from above, coming down from the Father of lights, with whom there is no variation or shifting shadow") to the "thief" in John 10:10 ("A thief comes to steal, kill, and destroy").
Interesting, the bishop is not the only one making bold statements about theology (and by "bold", I mean arrogant, irrational, and reckless).
Yet.
That is a very Christian attitude. I've prayed for him, but not as often as I have scorned him. Thanks for your post.
"You will not surely die," the serpent said to the woman. "For God knows that when you eat of it your eyes will be opened, and you will be like God, knowing good and evil."
-- Genesis 3:4-5 NIV
Children don't always understand all the rules their parents have for them. Some they find frustrating. Sometimes teenagers rebel. All too often the results are disastrous. Robinson seems to have missed the whole point of Genesis 3. And there is nothing archaic about the point, he is unwittingly demonstrating how timeless it is.
Robinson has not just rejected the authority of the Bible. He has rejected the authority of the God revealed in the Bible and set up an idol god with views more to his liking.
May God have mercy on the whole Anglican church, and heal and strengthen her.
Not everybody, just those who disagree with Robinson.</satire>
P.S. Good point!
Got a kid to donate?
How does a Christian deal with the Bible's harsh judgments, contradictory messages and archaic views?
I'd like to see this guy write that about the Koran. But we all know he won't.
What does God have to say about sexuality?
Well, for one thing He clearly condemns homosexual acts.
How has the Christian right's flawed reading of God's will harmed society?
Does he give us an example of such a flawed reading and any harm it's done to society? No, for obvious reasons.
What are the consequences of a male-dominated society?
Well, Western Civilization is one consequence. Are there any examples of civilizations that arose without being male dominated? I didn't think so.
One thing that surely maddens Robinson's detractors is his insistence that he is God's instrument, that God is acting through him. He makes this assertion in the subtitle of his book, "Swept to the Center By God," and returns to it often in the text.
When someone tells a flat-out lie, it usually angers their detractors.
Just as God called upon him to be true to himself and pursue high office in the church as an openly gay man, God challenges all people to question the status quo. "God just won't stay put," he writes. "And he won't let us stay put, content to believe what we've always believed, what we've always been taught, what we've always assumed."
Excellent, Gene. Then you should have no problem with us saying that what you're teaching us is a total lie and we're not going to sit still for it. We're going to grow beyond it.
But, of course, the debate is full of contradictions and cross-currents in either realm. Robinson actually argues that he is a theological conservative. Gay marriage entails a vow of faithful monogamy. Its availability means fewer gay people entering into unhappy heterosexual marriages. Why, he asks, would conservatives not applaud those ends? Why should inclusion and equality trouble conservatives?
This is like arguing that Christians should support Satanism because Satanists would never be happy and true to themselves worshiping God. So we should welcome satan worship and treat it with "inclusion" and "equality" and "respect". This way, Satanists don't have to hypocritically pretend to be followers of Christ to remain active in the church. They can be more honest and forthright. They can even say, "Hey, look at meeeeeee, I'm a Satanist!"
Robinson does not seek to confine his polemic within the church's walls. He wants no less than "the dismantling of the system that rewards heterosexuals at the expense of homosexuals."
He wants to repeal the laws of nature? I knew the guy had an ego, but this is ridiculous.
To Robinson, sex is "a grace-filled gift from God." He rejects "Just say no" sex-education campaign. When young people are told that sex is dirty and they should save it for the marriage bed, he writes, they get a contradictory message. If it's dirty, why save it for the one you love?
Anyone who doubts that Robinson is a self-absorbed fool need only read that quote. The Christian position is not that sex is dirty, but that it's a gift from God that is not to be abused by casually engaging in it with just anybody. It's something for two people of the opposite sex who have been joined together by God.
"The spiritual and physical union between two people mirrors the relationship God desires with humankind," he writes. ". . . When lovemaking is really right, it's perhaps as close as we can come to knowing the kind of desire and love God holds for us."
God created a man. The man was alone, but had an emptiness inside. No other creature on earth could fill that emptiness. Certainly another man couldn't. And so God created woman. And He saw that it was good. Homosexuality is an attack on this very premise. It's the way evil men like Robinson tell God that His creation was not good. That the woman was not really necessary to complete the human race. That she is not the sexual and spiritual soulmate of the man. That there's nothing special about her. That men can instead lust after one another, and abuse the God-given life instinct in a dead-end form of sexuality that goes nowhere and can't produce the next generation. These are the evil fruits of Gene Robinson.
Yeah I have been working on it.. an abomination is an abomination..
I wonder if it ever occured to his congregation that Robinson used the opportunity to lie before God and Man when he married his wife to further his career?
Traditional Anglican ping, continued in memory of its founder Arlin Adams.
FReepmail Huber or sionnsar if you want on or off this moderately high-volume ping list (sometimes 3-9 pings/day).
This list is pinged by Huber and sionnsar.
Resource for Traditional Anglicans: http://trad-anglican.faithweb.com
Humor: The Anglican Blue
Speak the truth in love. Eph 4:15
[In case anyone had any doubts regarding Robinson's agenda. --Huber]
Dear Lord God and Father, convert and control. Convert those who are still to become children and members of your kingdom, that together we may serve you in your kingdom in the right faith and true love and pass from this kingdom begun here to your everlasting kingdom. Control those who would not withdraw their might and means from disturbing your kingdom. May they be dethroned and in humiliation stop molesting your kingdom.
And under "control" I would included sudden cardiac arrest.
I Just don’t get how he can rationalize this?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.