The Finch Formerly Known As Gold

3 November 2003

The Anglican rift

Christopher Johnson has been covering the Episcopalian schism in the making almost from day one, and in reviewing his most recent posts, I really can't blame him for wanting to cut his ties to the American church.

Generally I don't gnash my teeth over the elevation of gay folk into positions of power, but for the life of me, I can't understand why it was so important to make Gene Robinson a bishop when, as Greg Hlatky puts it:


[H]e left his wife and children, not to follow Christ as James and John did, but to follow his own carnal desires. It would have been enough to sink a heterosexual minister; why should Bishop Robinson have been treated differently?

Why, indeed? Scriptural justification for homosexuality is nebulous at best, but Scriptural justification for adultery is nonexistent.

Posted at 6:55 PM to Dyssynergy

Linking to this item:

Oh, but according to some other Piscops, getting all in a lather over his leaving of his wife is just people being big ol' hypocrites, since, you know, it's not like he beheaded his wife or anything like that.

No really, Jeff Jarvis used the example of Henry VIII that way. I am afraid I waxed rather sarcastic after that.

Posted by: Andrea Harris at 7:19 PM on 3 November 2003

I guess a link to what I am talking about would help.

Posted by: Andrea Harris at 7:21 PM on 3 November 2003

Chaz, you're forgetting the words of Jesus himself: "If it feels good, do it."

Jesus did say that, right?

Wait, that was Robin Meyers. nevermind.

Posted by: Cam at 10:29 PM on 3 November 2003

Does the Episcopal church refuse to ordain heterosexual Bishops who have divorced and remarried?

Posted by: Kathy K at 7:31 AM on 4 November 2003

As I understand things, they used to, but don't anymore. (Corrections welcomed.)

Posted by: CGHill at 7:52 AM on 4 November 2003