Gay Angelican Bishop?


#1

“The U.S. Episcopal Church on Tuesday defended its decision to ordain an openly gay bishop, refusing to back down from a confrontation that threatens to split the 77 million-strong Anglican Communion”.

I’m not sure what this says about mankind in general and Christians in particular.

I guess this is what happens when you stop following the teachings of Jesus.


#2

I don’t think the new word “gay” is the “gay” in “happy and gay.”

I think “gay” is “GEI” . . . . . .as in “GEIshia”


#3

If I were an Episcopaleon…I would be extremely upset.

Does openly gay mean in some sort of relationship that will be allowed to continue??


#4

[quote=Lillith]If I were an Episcopaleon…I would be extremely upset.

Does openly gay mean in some sort of relationship that will be allowed to continue??
[/quote]

Consider one mad Episcopalian right here! :mad:

Openly Gay…yes, left his wife and now lives with his partner…hey…he was even a keynote speaker at a Planned Parenthood breakfast…saying some Episcopalians are off the “deep end” when it comes to Choice…

One great gay bishop for us to have…makes me so proud…yeah right!

Now…be ready Catholics…you just may find a few more Episcopalians knocking on the doors…I for one have thought about it numerous times. :banghead:


#5

[quote=DJgang]Consider one mad Episcopalian right here! :mad:

Openly Gay…yes, left his wife and now lives with his partner…hey…he was even a keynote speaker at a Planned Parenthood breakfast…saying some Episcopalians are off the “deep end” when it comes to Choice…

One great gay bishop for us to have…makes me so proud…yeah right!

Now…be ready Catholics…you just may find a few more Episcopalians knocking on the doors…I for one have thought about it numerous times. :banghead:
[/quote]

I feel so sorry for you…you must be heartbroken and frustrated! Maybe this will lead to some of the unity that Christ prayed for, and Episcopalians will come to realize that while their Church has some truth…they NEED a magesterium to keep Liberals in line.

I am praying for you:blessyou:


#6

I’m really starting to think that this could be the issue bringing most American Christians to the Church. It seems like the leadership of a lot of Protestant groups are trying to force their followers down the path of accecpting homosexuality and/or gay marriage.

Take the ELCA, for example. Check out their official web site (elca.org/) tell me whether or not they’ll condem gay marriage. All you’ll find is a 30+ page document that uses the phrase “whereas” over and over.

It’s SO nice to see that the Catholic Church will not usually give in to the political correctness of the times.


#7

[quote=DJgang]Consider one mad Episcopalian right here! :mad:

Openly Gay…yes, left his wife and now lives with his partner…hey…he was even a keynote speaker at a Planned Parenthood breakfast…saying some Episcopalians are off the “deep end” when it comes to Choice…

One great gay bishop for us to have…makes me so proud…yeah right!

Now…be ready Catholics…you just may find a few more Episcopalians knocking on the doors…I for one have thought about it numerous times. :banghead:
[/quote]

Not that we are not without our warts DJ but I think we Catholics will hold the line. It would be very nice to have your extra strength helping us!!:smiley:


#8

Remember that no magisterium or code can prevent anyone from any sort of sinful behavior. There are no sinless bishops. So what is the difference in ordaining an openly gay bishop and one who “identifies himself” as same-sex attracted but claims to be celibate (which is how Rome chooses to handle it, by the way)?
If a bishop can be a liar, a blasphemer, a thief, or an adulterer/fornicator, then it would seem that banishing someone from God’s service for any one other sin is hypocritical. I believe this is the position of the ECUSA at least. But to say that the gay man who feels he has been called to God’s service should not be allowed to serve because of his sin is to say that no one can serve.


#9

[quote=Cherub]Remember that no magisterium or code can prevent anyone from any sort of sinful behavior. There are no sinless bishops. So what is the difference in ordaining an openly gay bishop and one who “identifies himself” as same-sex attracted but claims to be celibate (which is how Rome chooses to handle it, by the way)?
If a bishop can be a liar, a blasphemer, a thief, or an adulterer/fornicator, then it would seem that banishing someone from God’s service for any one other sin is hypocritical. I believe this is the position of the ECUSA at least. But to say that the gay man who feels he has been called to God’s service should not be allowed to serve because of his sin is to say that no one can serve.
[/quote]

Cherub,

The difference is first and foremost in whether you identify the behavior as sinful. Gene Robinson and his part of the Episcopal Church are identifying homosexual activity (not just the orientation, but the activity) as not being sinful. It is this statement that what he is doing is perfectly all right that has so many people up in arms.

A secondary matter is the degree of the sin. I would much rather have a bishop whose sin was driving five miles per hour over the speed limit than one whose sin was armed robbery.

DJgang, I’d love for you to swim the Tiber. The water on this side is beautiful (and holy).

  • Liberian

(disclaimer) who left the Episcopal Church in 1989


#10

It will be interesting to see how the worldwide Anglican Communion reacts to this, especially the churches in Africa. They had harsh words for the Episcopal Church, USA after Robinson was ordained.

P.S. I left the Episcopal Church in 1988.


#11

[quote=WBB]It will be interesting to see how the worldwide Anglican Communion reacts to this, especially the churches in Africa. They had harsh words for the Episcopal Church, USA after Robinson was ordained.

P.S. I left the Episcopal Church in 1988.
[/quote]

Without starting a whole new topic, are Episcopal and Anglican the same?


#12

The Episcopal Church U.S.A. is the official United States branch of the Church of England/Worldwide Anglican Communion. Anglicans are called by different church names according to what country they are in, but all those under the See of Canterbury are Anglicans regardless of what their branch is called.


#13

[quote=DJgang]Consider one mad Episcopalian right here! :mad:

Openly Gay…yes, left his wife and now lives with his partner…hey…he was even a keynote speaker at a Planned Parenthood breakfast…saying some Episcopalians are off the “deep end” when it comes to Choice…

One great gay bishop for us to have…makes me so proud…yeah right!

Now…be ready Catholics…you just may find a few more Episcopalians knocking on the doors…I for one have thought about it numerous times. :banghead:
[/quote]

C’mon over! The culture shock is something awful but you just have to stand it. I still miss the Palestrina, the Latin (right, guys – in the Episcopal Church we sang Mass in Latin), the reverence . . . But the peace is indescribable . . . Absolutely indescribable.


#14

[quote=Cherub]Remember that no magisterium or code can prevent anyone from any sort of sinful behavior. There are no sinless bishops. So what is the difference in ordaining an openly gay bishop and one who “identifies himself” as same-sex attracted but claims to be celibate (which is how Rome chooses to handle it, by the way)?
If a bishop can be a liar, a blasphemer, a thief, or an adulterer/fornicator, then it would seem that banishing someone from God’s service for any one other sin is hypocritical. I believe this is the position of the ECUSA at least. But to say that the gay man who feels he has been called to God’s service should not be allowed to serve because of his sin is to say that no one can serve.
[/quote]

Cherub - this act of allowing an openly gay bishop opens doors the many other things within the Episcopal church…like I said, this man has already taken a FIRM stand on Choice…says what he loves about the church is that it actually trusts adults to be adults…duh? aren’t most abortions performed on very young girls? Then compared his story of “coming out of the closet” so to speak, to the Passover story!
There are many many ways that God can call you to service…but I think Gene Robinson has a personal agenda and is using his position as Bishop for personal gain…not to serve God. IMO!

Then you must ask…okay…if Gene Robinson was just living with a woman…had children by her (thus making obvious they are having sexual relations) would the Episcopal Church allow him to be Bishop then? I would think not, because the Episcopal chuch believes in the sacrament of marriage between a man and woman…but it is okay for him to be “openly” gay? Is this not the same thing?

Yes, sin is sin. But knowly and openly letting everyone know that you are living a life of sin and then adminster the sacraments anyway…


DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit www.catholic.com.