Loading ...Lesbian appears likely to be approved as bishop
flockwoodAt least 45 dioceses (through their so-called “standing committees) have consented to the election of Mary Douglas Glasspool as suffragin bishop of the Episcopal Diocese of Los Angeles, the LA diocese reports. Glasspool will need the backing of 56 dioceses (plus a majority of “bishops with jurisdiction”) in order to become the first openly-lesbian bishop in the Anglican Communion.
February 18th, 2010 at 4:21 pm
Well, I suppose I’m the only one on here who sees this as progress, but I do. Our society has discriminated against gays and lesbians for thousands of years, and it’s time for it to end. One would think that Christians, who presumably want to do the right thing, would be in the lead on this, but we’re about the last group in society to end our discriminatory practices. No doubt the grass eaters will go apoplectic over this, which is a good enough reason for approving her election in the first place.
February 18th, 2010 at 6:15 pm
What troubles me on this and maybe its just the way it was presented to the press, “Lesbian appears likely to be approved as bishop”. What has her sexual orientation have to do with her ability to be a bishop. I think the way its presented takes away from the level of achievement that she has accomplished. I wonder who does this, the media or Bishop to be Glasspool.
February 18th, 2010 at 6:44 pm
The media report whatever they think will interest the public. In this case they are correct. That’s unfortunate but nonetheless true.
February 18th, 2010 at 10:59 pm
It is not a big deal for Episcopal Church that a lesbian become a Bishop, unless they do not practice what they preach. In 2003 General Convention Church adopted the policy of ordaining Church leaders irrespective of sexual orientation. But what I dislike Church’s two phase policies on sexual behavior, one is closed and other one is open. Church ordained many closely gay priests and bishops before 2003 General Convention by concealing the truth from communicant members of Church. Though adultery is sin as per Church doctrine but it remains under cover.
Our society has not discriminated against gays and lesbians for thousands of years. If we have to lay blame to somebody, then we have to blame Holy God who forbidden same sex activities through Holy Bible. By majority vote in General Convention God’s forbidden command can not be overturned, that’s what I believe as a Christian. You can call me whatever name you like conservative or grass eater as you please.
February 19th, 2010 at 12:26 pm
Well, Julian, if you don’t believe that society has discriminated against gays and lesbians for thousands of years, I suppose ostrich would be a better name than grass-eater, because you don’t appear to be looking at reality. Just as every society from the beginning of time has discriminated against people who were not of the dominant race, creed, or color, they have also discriminated against gays and lesbians. And this includes societies that were not Christian, and societies that predated Christianity for centuries.
You want to blame that discrimination on God, but Julian, the other breed of grass eater, the old-fashioned kind who were racists as well as bigots, said for generations that the Bible authorized segregation and discrimination against blacks. Now it’s gays and lesbians. I’ve never understood what it is in the conservative mindset that always looks for someone to exclude. I thought Jesus taught the gospel of inclusion, not exclusion. And, btw, there is not a single instance in the Bible in which Jesus is quoted as saying anything concerning gays or lesbians, perhaps because the type of long-term gay and lesbian relationships we have today were unknown at the time.
As far as the Episcopal Church ordaining gays who remained in the closet, Julian, buddy, I hate to break it to you, but every organization in the history of the world has included closeted gays and lesbians. These groups make up about 10% of the population, and as far as we can tell, always have. Frank linked some months ago to an article in a British newspaper that accused the Church of England of hypocrisy for having ordained so many closeted gays, but refusing to do so openly. At least, Julian, we are open and above board about what we believe. The grass eaters could take note.
February 20th, 2010 at 5:09 pm
Caleb, you know that empty vessel sounds much. Those who say they now clearly understand God’s love for sinners and redefine sins of same sex activities and believe that Jesus is a gay and thousands of years Church Fathers misled people, are actually fooling themselves. They do not know or believe any more that the wages of sin is death. They are unaware that they are playing with life and death of eternal soul.
God fearing people and holy Church could easily identify who is serving the will of God and who is politically motivated and serve the will of a distorted group of people in a society, who have little or no faith on Holy Bible, miraculous resurrection of Christ and forgiveness of sins thru passions at cross. Your writings and activities of reformist groups actually depicted the world arrogance of personality where God is not glorified, rather glorification of history making personnel of “1st gay bishop“, “1st lesbian bishop”, “progressive church” etc. etc. And it is obvious, because you do not believe the Holy Bible a word of God even though you say after each Scripture reading in Church services, as word of God and thanks God for His word. Thus you have little or no knowledge about whom you are worshiping. It is my intention to bring derailed people on track again, as you are life long Episcopal like me who continue to have faith on word of God and apostolic succession as “Episcopal” stands for salvation of my soul.
How in the world you understood I blame God for leveling same sex activities as sins. If you have fear of God you would know that righteous God does not make any mistake. One day Abraham also raised the question to God on this issue for His judgment and God showed him sinful nature of people by taking him in Sodom and Gomorra. You know later part, the consequences of those people who disobeyed Him. It may happen to you that one day you may realize truth about word of God and eternal condemnation, but at that time it may be too late to get oil from outside to welcome the master.
Conventional wisdom reveals that the Bible does not teach act of slavery (employer/employee relationship) as sinful nature like that of homosexuality. Through out time and space upper class people of society exploited lower class to fulfill their greedy nature and misinterpretation of the Bible is one of their tools. But in the case of homosexuality motive is not of that nature that God fearing and meaningful family loving people would exploit callous lustful sex loving people as you tried to present analogy with slavery. Holy Church always welcome gay lesbian like all other sinners in the church. But interestingly no other sinners demanded their sins to be legalized like gay lesbian group. This is matter of perception about God and His word in the Bible. If you like you can read James chapter 1 and know how to overcome trial and temptation by listening and doing as per word of God in Scriptures and tell me as per Bible my conception is right or wrong.
Don’t you know a Holy Church can not stand on false, unless it repents? You must be forgotten that Holy Church founded by Christ Himself, is not like any other worldly organization where 10% closeted sins would be acceptable. If you would read Bible regularly you would know that Church can not serve both master Holy God as well as evil and also you would know that the Church is a hospital for all sinners, and no sinner left behind for spiritual recovery including gay and lesbian. Where is discrimination against gay you found? Rather gay people unwittingly want favoritism from Church overturning their sins.
Roman Catholic Church at least realized this fact before too late that by coverage of sin they can not be servants of Christ. They repented and took necessary actions to keep sanctities of the Church by firing those priests and Bishops involved in adultery and learnt from mistake. On the contrary Episcopal Church embraced those sins and be proud being open. Truth can not be covered forcefully; it would come out in time.
Last week the arrest of a former 82-year old Episcopal priest in the Diocese of Central New York and the possible cover-up of the priest’s sexual activities by Episcopal Bishop proved this principle once again that truth can not be concealed. You must be forgotten that your pioneer for this reformation Gay Bishop Robinson concealed his adulterous sex until 1982 when he opened up the truth to public without remorse. What a marvelous way of turning sin into virtue and blaming the society and the Bible! Ironically, Episcopal Church believes traditional Church teaching and apostolic succession, which means that the succession of bishops in uninterrupted lines is historically traceable back to the original Twelve Apostles. How much hypocrisy is too much, that now Episcopal believe historical Church misled them. Only God knows how far it can go based on hypocrisy. I am sure the day would come when you have to change not only stories of the Bible but also the name “Episcopal” itself to be consistence to your Church philosophy. This is not a political game but about a Holy Church founded by Christ, the redeemer.
February 21st, 2010 at 2:54 pm
Julian, this is going to be my last post on this subject. I know I tend to run a subject into the ground, and so I’ll make my point and stop.
You say: “Episcopal Church believes traditional Church teaching and apostolic succession, which means that the succession of bishops in uninterrupted lines is historically traceable back to the original Twelve Apostles.”
Yes, we do, and we take that authority seriously. Think about this logically just for a second; that amount of logic won’t hurt you. The doctrine of the apostolic succession is what makes us Christian. Our bishops are in a direct line from the apostles. That means they have the authority to make doctrine. And, given that the twelve apostles were given their authority before even one word of the New Testament was written, that authority was used to canonize the books of the NT, and if the bishops have the authority to canonize or de-canonize scripture (which the Church of England did when it relegated the books of the Apocrypha, seen as holy for centuries, to second class status), they have the authority to make new doctrine. Otherwise, why do they exist? Seriously protestant churches, which really believe that the Bible has all the rules, don’t have bishops, and don’t claim to make doctrine at meetings of clerics.
When Jesus taught in the temple, scripture says, he taught as one with authority. He changed the scriptural rules of his day to fit the changing circumstances of the times, famously noting that Sabbath was made for man, not man for the Sabbath, and abolishing the old Jewish dietary laws. Now don’t get me wrong; I don’t have any particular reason to believe that Jesus said or did either of those things, but scripture records it, and one figures that those who included it did so for a reason, the reason being to show that the church, not a dead book written centuries earlier, was to make the rules.
This is only logical, because only a person alive today knows the challenges and problems of today, and is in a position to solve those problems. Julian, in reading your posts, I wonder how much contact you have with gays and lesbians. I have quite a bit; many of my closest friends are gay or lesbian, and I have to say, Julian, that as friends, as parents, as couples, as citizens, and yes, as church members, I’d take them over most of the heterosexuals I know.
People unfamiliar with Anglican theology wonder why we cling so to the three-legged stool of the Bible, church teaching, and reason, and they particularly wonder why we add a leg called reason or experience. This issue illustrates that perfectly. We have learned through reason and experience that gays and lesbians are not Satan personified, as conservatives seem to think. I am no biologist, and I don’t know why their sexual orientation is different from mine, but my experience teaches that it is, and I mean that on a high level. I have talked to enough gays and lesbians, and watched enough of them in social situations to fully believe that, whatever the source of their sexual orientation, that orientation is a built-in to them as my heterosexual orientation is to me. And today, we live in a society that allows gays and lesbians to have the same type of committed, monogamous relationships that heterosexuals so often don’t have.
And that experience teaches me that God didn’t intend for us to exclude gays and lesbians from full participation in Her church. I realize, Julian, that it’s hard to get your mind around the idea that you can read something in the Bible that is simply not applicable any longer, but that’s what that whole concept of becoming an adult Christian is all about: You’ve got to be mature enough to know when the rules need to be change.
I say this to you, Julian, only for your edification, because, whatever you or any group of grass eaters thinks, this is the direction the Episcopal Church is going, and we’re not going to stop, even if it means that we’ll have to leave the Anglican Communion. I suspect that thirty years from now, people will think this argument was as silly as the one we used to have over race, and before that, over gender.
February 21st, 2010 at 11:30 pm
Caleb, after reading your above posting it seems to me that your 3rd leg (reason/experience) of the three-legged stool is taller than other two, the Bible and church teaching. It is not equilibrium, because reasoning supersedes canonical doctrine found in the Bible and Church teaching which have been practicing for thousands of years as you acknowledged earlier. I know for sure if one leg is taller than other two, the stool must fall down because of gravitational force (other political or social reason coming in futures) of earth. To be stable it must be like “TRINITY” and knowledge of Trinity must come from other two legs, the bible and ancient Church teaching. Sabbath day law, Christ reasoned it very simple way even a child of 1st grade would understand that saving of a life from a well is more important than resting at home. But in case of gay lesbian, people have to be a biologist or have to mix with gay lesbian to understand the reason. Thanks anyway for sharing views and let me conclude also by saying like Saint Paul said in the Bible, as long Resurrected Christ is glorified schism is OK.
February 22nd, 2010 at 1:20 pm
I don’t know how you can say that, Julian, when one of the other legs is church teaching and authority, and our church clearly teaches, by its ordination of Gene Robinson, and now this candidate, that it has adopted a different standard than in the past. I see you’ve tried to fudge this by suggesting that it is only “ancient” church teachings that count, but that’s not the definition: The church teaches today just as it did in ancient times.
What you really mean is that you have only a one-legged stool, and that leg is the Bible. How stable is that stool?
And, really, that leaves you without a leg, because the leg of scripture is inextricably linked with the leg of church teaching, because the only reason we believe that certain books are canonical is because the church teaches they are. They could change the canon tomorrow. As I pointed out, the Anglican Communion has already changed the composition of the canon at least once, and is probably going to recognize the canonicity of the Gospel of Thomas at some point; we already read from it in some services.
It seems, Julian, that your beliefs are not consistent with those of the Episcopal Church, and my suggestion is to find some type of evangelical church that believes in the doctrines of sola scriptura and homophobia; that’s not the direction in which our church is going.
February 22nd, 2010 at 11:21 pm
Caleb, I have no second opinion on three-leg-stool concepts (The Bible, Church teaching and reasoning). Three legs of the stool do not contradict each other in any form but compliment in spiritual growth of sheep to get internal life. It is like Holy Trinity, three in one. You misunderstood that by virtue of Church authority, governing body of the Church can change any time any doctrine to meet the demand of current need. Reasoning is not open end, it must be reasonable within biblical boundary. Like Supreme Court who elaborate any law within constitution. Responsibility of Church is to elaborate biblical teaching to make it understandable to sheep of the Church, help growing spiritually and achieve internal life. Crossing the boundary by reason only, allowed Episcopal Church to grow people like you who have little faith in the Bible, no believe on eternal life, believe in multiple faiths and ordain people like bishop Sponge, who do not believe resurrection and crucifixion of Jesus Christ. If Church has no boundary to protect, wolf would come and eat up sheep one by one. I am sorry to criticize a Church in this way but it is real.