Posted on 05/08/2006 5:18:11 PM PDT by sionnsar
Let’s say you discover that your husband or wife has been having an affair. You demand that the affair come to an end and you give a certain time period for that to take place. Before the deadline you find out that your spouse is not only not planning to dump the first lover, but, unbelievably, planning to add a second. This addition, of course, would swiftly end all possibility of future reconciliation, making an already horrible situation intractable. You tell your spouse the same.
The day before the deadline, you learn your spouse has decided not to enter into the second affair.
Is this good news?
Yes.
Does this change anything?
No, not really. If the second affair had continued it would have made things impossible. Now things go back to merely horrible. That’s good I guess. But if the original affair continues past the deadline, the result will be just as intractable. The marriage will end.
In the same way it is good, I guess, that the diocese of California refrained from electing a non-celibate homosexual to the office of bishop.
But it changes nothing.
It is not, as some revisionist and even some orthodox commenters have suggested, a “hopeful” sign. It signals nothing. If you think that the convention delegates in diocese of California elected +Andrus out of a sense of obedience and submission to the rest of the Communion, well, I’ve got a bridge in San Francisco to sell you. +Andrus is as committed to advancing the Integrity line as any of the non-celibate homosexual candidates.
Nothing has happened. The situation today is the same as it was a week ago.
The Episcopal Church’s non-compliance with Windsor continues unabated and the June deadline looms.
Revisionist suggestions to the contrary are pure spin and the orthodox who buy into it are naïve.
Traditional Anglican ping, continued in memory of its founder Arlin Adams. To make the analogy complete, we should add: She nonetheless claims that she will still have many more affairs in the future.
. . . good Lord, that stuff rolls off by the yard. Now I know what C.S. Lewis meant when he said that writing The Screwtape Letters gave him "spiritual cramp."
Why isn't there a policy of "don't ask, don't tell" like the military (and Roman Church) has in effect (why must gay or lesbian priests rub their sexuality in our faces)?
Why is there not more effort to address African Church concerns (i.e. more meetings).
Why are alcoholic impaired leaders (such as Gene Robinson) not removed from their posts and forced to go through a review process by a panel of bishops before continuing his bishopric ministry?
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.