Religion Forum posters: for your zotting pleasure.
Posted on 06/11/2008 9:22:38 PM PDT by SmithL
California's Episcopal bishop has praised the state Supreme Court ruling that gives same-sex couples the right to marry and is calling on the faithful to defeat a November ballot measure that would restrict marriage to unions of one man and one woman.
"For far too long the onus has fallen on marginalized people to bear the burden of inequalities that exist within the Church, and the decision by our state's Supreme Court has given us the opportunity to level the playing field," Right Rev. Mark Andrus wrote in a pastoral letter dated June 9. The letter appeared on the Diocese of California Web site, episcopalbayarea.org.
Beginning Tuesday, the diocese will publish advertisements celebrating the ruling and inviting same-sex couples to Episcopal churches for pre-marital counseling.
Andrus encouraged all couples to marry first in a secular service, then to partake in a church blessing, as is the Episcopal pattern.
A rift over same-sex marriage and ordination has rocked the church in some regions, particularly in Africa.
In his pastoral letter, Andrus said the diocese's leaders will combat the November ballot initiative, which "will attempt to take away the rights recently recognized by the California Supreme Court." He urged all Episcopals to volunteer as deputy marriage commissioners.
"There are over 4,000 civil same-sex marriages planned in a short period of time in the city of San Francisco alone and the city is asking for help in meeting demand," his letter says. "I intend to volunteer for this at my earliest opportunity."
(Excerpt) Read more at contracostatimes.com ...
Makes me think of the Archbishop of Panderbury, who made noise about bringing in sharia law for the fuzzy mundies.
The farther the episcopal church gets from the Bible and Jesus, the less and less successful it will be.
The same people praising this are also spending nights trying to think of programs to keep their “churches” from bleeding to death.
Morality is not a requirement for today’s bishops. The churches must be really hard up for clergy. They are unravelling scripture and church doctine. Clergy trying to be “with it” are a big part of the problem, surely not beacons of morality. They are leading the churches to oblivion. According to the Episcopalian Website, Marriage Encounter is explicityly defined as between a man and a woman. http://www.episcopalme.com/
“Worldwide Marriage Encounter Episcopal Expression is founded in Judeo-Christian beliefs and traditions. Marriage Encounter invites and encourages married couples (COMPRISED OF A MAN AND A WOMAN (capitalized for emphasis), regardless of faith or religious affiliation to share in this experience and to become an integral part of this worldwide movement in support of marriage
If it's such a great idea, why doesn't his own church marry them instead of this "blessing" ruse?
I attend an Episcopal church and we just had a very large new member class this year.
I did an informal poll and most were evangelicals and Catholics who had left their previous church tradition for what they considered un-Christian intolerance.
I’m not insider enough to know if our church is gaining or losing in the long run but I can say for sure — we are gaining a number of new members because of this issue.
A question: the Bible and the Tradition of the Church plainly condemns homosexuality. How does the Episcopal Church get around this? Do they just say that they will no longer follow the Bible? Very dangerous.
our Episcopal church has some modest gain, but it is definitely a conservative congregation aspiring to hold onto the traditions and faith passed on from the previous generation - as does the priest.
Other than that, if you find somebody who is of age, not of the same sex, not already married to somebody else, not a blood relative, AND is willing to marry you -- well, my friend, it's a considerably narrowed field, but it's that way for everybody. There you go.
Does this Episcopal bishop want to assert that everybody has a right to marry anybody?
Of course not.
But to gay advocates, "wanna" trumps all.
Hey, why can’t a 60 year old man marry a 6 year old girl (look up Mo and Aisha)...? Let’s ask the Bish about this....
>> A question: the Bible and the Tradition of the Church plainly condemns homosexuality.
I don’t think there is an official position on this but I think many Episcopalians would say that this is one of those moral issues that has changed over time, like head covering for women, tolerance for slavery, polygamy, or the stoning of rebellious children.
The moral context has simply changed to the point where those issues mean completely different things now. They would also point out that Jesus’ silence on the issue may have been his recognition that homosexuality is not some eternal moral issue.
I am old enough that I remember when a re-married person was banned from any sort of church leadership or completely banished altogether as an adulterer. The bible is pretty clear about that. But now most churches — even very conservatives ones — realize that the times have simply changed. Certainly, those on the Religious Right have embraced leaders who are serial divorcees and seem to have no qualms about it. Even a few short years ago, this was unthinkable but times change or morality with it.
I’m sure many Episcopalians think that conservative Christians will come around on the gay issue, the same way they have come around on divorce or allowing women to speak in church. (also clearly banned in the bible)
The Bible is not silent on the abomination that is the sexual degeneracy called homosexuality. You ought to read the book before making stupid proclamations.
Jesus was very explicit about marriage being between one man and one woman - remember that 'whom God hath joined together' part? As for your other arguments regarding the Levitical law, you need to think about Peter's vision at Joppa. There is a distinction between ritual law and universal law, and it should be plain to anyone who reads the Bible with attention. (At least you're honest enough to point out that the Bible merely tolerates slavery and never approved of it. The same is true of polygamy of course, although in that case Scripture demonstrates the evil that arises from it (e.g. Sarah and Hagar.))
"The times have simply changed" or "the Holy Spirit is doing a new thing" are simply excuses for "I am tired of swimming against the tide of popular thinking and I want to be Well Liked and invited to all the Right Parties." Episcopalians, thinking of themselves as social blue bloods, were the first to succumb to this temptation.
The incremental abandonment of Scripture that you cite as justification is simply a demonstration of this sort of thinking and where it leads. The Anglicans were the first to adopt contraception at Lambeth, around 1930, and upon that followed tolerance of divorce, remarriage, and concubinage, the ordination of women, the revision of the Prayer Book to take out inconvenient references, and now of course the approval of a deviant and destructive practice. Because of the old social cachet of the Episcopalians, far too many denominations followed their lead . . . but they have become so far out there, and so many of the old families have left, that thankfully they don't have the leadership and influence they used to.
Once you open the door to reinterpretation of Scripture on the basis of "times have changed" - anything goes. And 'anything goes' becomes steadily more radical and anti-Christian, because that basis can be used to justify any excess. That's how the Episcopalians find themselves in this mess.
I was a fifth or sixth-generation Episcopalian (depending on whether you count an intervening convert to Enthusiasm (what we now call Methodism)) and did not take the decision to leave the ECUSA lightly. But it is now long past time to shake the dust of that denomination from your sandals.
>>The Bible is not silent on the abomination that is the sexual degeneracy called homosexuality. You ought to read the book before making stupid proclamations.
JESUS was silent on homosexuality. (I won’t make any crack about you not reading the bible but I have to wonder how you missed that.)
I know my position is probably too complex for most people, so I’ll put it more simply:
YOU look at my Episcopalian gay priest and wonder why we don’t kick him out.
I look your your 300 lb Baptist pastor and wonder why YOU don’t kick him out. I look at your multi-millionaire deacon and wonder why you don’t kick him out. I look your youth groups where most of the kids are committing fornicating and wonder why you don’t kick them out. I look at your leaders who are so divisive of the church over secular politics and wonder why you don’t kick them out. I see the women speaking in your churches and wonder why you don’t kick them out.
After all, the bible CLEARLY TEACHES that all those things are sin.
If you were serious about kicking out unrepentant sinners, you send about 95% of you congregation and 80% of your clergy packing.
Our churches don’t single out homosexuals because of any biblical principle, it’s from bigotry. Excuse me if I don’t respect that.
Religion Forum posters: for your zotting pleasure.
Cast the movie contest!
The Priest....Spencer Tracy
The Groom ....
The Bride ....
Fill in the blanks but only with same sex couples.
************************
LOLOLOL!
Just when we were getting warmed up! < g >
"A live mouse," said the cat to her kittens, "is an interesting and instructive plaything."
(. . . anyhow, he wasn't an Episcopalian - I can spot 'em from a country mile away . . . )
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.