Posted on 10/21/2003 4:35:11 AM PDT by governsleastgovernsbest
Gay US bishop mocks critics
By David Bamford BBC correspondent in Manchester, New Hampshire
"Live free or die" is the motto of the state of New Hampshire. The phrase captures the passionately liberal spirit of this corner of New England, just an hour's drive from where the first shots of the American revolution began.
Now a new revolution of sorts could be underway here - with worldwide ramifications for the Anglican movement - to the backdrop of a stunning explosion of autumn colours for which this part of the world is famed. Local Episcopalians - belonging to the American wing of the Anglican community - gathered on Sunday in the draughty hall of Grace Church in this picture postcard town on the swirling Merrimack River.
They were there to take part in a question and answer session offered by New Hampshire's controversial Anglican Bishop-elect, Gene Robinson - a declared homosexual.
If his consecration goes ahead as planned on 2 November, the first openly gay bishop in the global Anglican community.
"You can ask me anything you want," he told his audience with a grin, "and believe me, I've been asked it all, so you won't embarrass me."
But this was a friendly gathering, fully supportive of his election as bishop in August by the New Hampshire Episcopal clergy and laity.
Among those looking on at the gathering was Canon Robinson's partner.
Schism looms
A lone objector stood outside the hall. "I want the world to know that New Hampshire did not vote for this man," said Edna Swank.
"The convention was fixed by the clergy," she said. "As a small child I was taught that sexual activity outside of marriage was a sin. I'm not judging him as a person, but what he does is the same as adultery."
Mrs Swank's view that Canon Robinson should not be installed is one that is shared by a sizeable minority in more conservative parts of the US.
You can't elevate a piece of historical scripture to give it a modern significance it does not have Canon Robinson on the Bible and gays She conceded that as a human being, it was hard not to like Canon Robinson. But that was not the issue, she insisted. "What bothers me most is that a schism is occurring and that breaks my heart," she said.
Canon Robinson, plastic coffee cup in hand, was meanwhile warming the crowd inside the church hall, with slightly irreverent humour on the origins of the Anglican Church.
He said that Queen Elizabeth I - when asked whether people should continue to cross themselves as the Catholics did - declared that "all may, none must, but some ought".
"That's kind of how we Anglicans in this country look at the world," he said.
Shellfish
He took issue with those who quoted the Book of Leviticus to him and claimed that through the Bible, God forbade homosexuality.
The Bishop-elect, winning himself a ripple of laughter, said Leviticus also forbids the consumption of shellfish, but we still eat it.
"You can't elevate a piece of historical scripture to give it a modern significance it does not have," he said. "The Bible is the story written by us about our love affair with God," he said.
A majority of US bishops of the Episcopal Church endorsed Canon Robinson's election, saying what mattered was the content of his character, not his sexual orientation.
Since then, Anglican primates from the around the world have met in London and warned the US branch that its stance will be seen by many as out of step with the mainstream of the Church.
Rather than being a bold progressive statement, they say, it is the consequence of a parochial selfishness.
The American bishops see it as an opportunity for the Anglican Church to be honest with itself - and with its God.
Story from BBC NEWS: http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/pr/fr/-/2/hi/americas/3206532.stm
Published: 2003/10/20 09:05:15 GMT
© BBC MMIII
Uh . . .
You are correct. In fact, Jesus had much to say about homosexuality, and He affirmed their eternal damnation in Luke 17: 28-29.
"Likewise as it was in the days of Lot--they ate, they drank, they bought, they sold, they planted, they built, but on the day when Lot went out from Sodom fire and sulphur rained from heaven and destroyed them all--" Luke 17: 28-29.
Saint Jude's letter in the New Testament affirms the precise nature of the sin of Sodom, and also affirms thier punishment.
"just as Sodom and Gomorrah and the surrounding cities, which likewise acted immorally and indulged in unnatural lust, serve as an example by undergoing a punishment of eternal fire." (Jude 7)
I am sure you are right if you intended to say that God does not want His Church torn apart.
It's not just in the Old Testament.
Maybe he does indeed. As destructive is it seems, the blasphemers and apostates will be reveiled for what they are and the true believes will be left stronger.
slow poke
eeeewwww!
I think you have identified the bigger issue. They have rejected the Word and the Lordship of Christ -- everything follows from this.
The mainliners have been Biblical relativists to one degree or another since the early 19th century, with the development of philology and the 'higher criticism'. Their clergy gave up on King James before the end of the 19th Century with the American Standard revision and continued with the Revised Standard by the mid-20th century. Many mainliners, the more conservative ones, believe the Bible to have been divinely inspired, but subject to the ministrations of human scribes, and hence not possibly inerrant. Others just think the Bible is how the Jews and early Christians decided (quite consiously as humans) to tell their stories, and given the machinations in the first four centuries AD over what would and would not make the final cut of the Canon, quite subject to error and politics.
In mainstream educated thought, the view of the Bible as literally true has not been respectable since 1925, when Clarence Darrow made such a fool of William Jennings Bryan.
If it was, she most likely said what she did and then left before anyone could question her or oppose her.... ;
sizeable minority = majority
I thought gay men didn't like "fish."
There it is. THAT's the problem but the gay bishop is making it all about him. Sheeeeeesh. (God must be puking up there.)
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.