The Scarier "Religion & Homosexuality" Thread

[Gatito Grande]

GLBT Thread? Or "Scary Religion" Thread? GLBT Thread? Or "Scary Religion" Thread? I've been going back and forth like this w/ great regularity since at least the time the Religion thread was created (I think God/dess is trying to tell me something).



So here's the thread where these topics collide. It will be of special interest, I believe, where the religions in question have been traditionally (or allegedly traditionally) *homophobic*, but experiences/issues of consistently gay-poz religions are welcome, too.



Be aware, that frequently the news/issues/horror stories will be distressing---but there will be moments of great celebration, too. May the Divine spread More Light, until *all* know that Gay is Good!



We'll start w/ my tradition, Anglicanism, which the 'phobes are threatening to rip apart unless we queers cower back into the closet, as in the following story:

Quote:

---

Gay clergyman gives up bishop post



Associated Press



An openly gay clergyman whose appointment as a bishop divided the Anglican church has decided not to take up his post, the Church of England said Sunday.



The church's spiritual leader, Archbishop of Canterbury Rowan Williams, said the decision by Rev. Jeffrey John should give Anglicans "pause for thought."



"This has been a time of open and painful confrontation, in which some of our bonds of mutual trust have been severely strained," Archbishop Williams said. "We need now to give ourselves the proper opportunities honestly to think through what has happened and to find what God has been teaching us in these difficult days."



A spokesman for Bishop of Oxford Richard Harries said Canon John planned to seek permission from the Queen to withdraw acceptance of his appointment as Bishop of Reading in the diocese of Oxford.



Several Anglican bishops from around the world wrote to oppose Canon John's selection by Bishop Harries in May, saying the appointment violated church teaching that gay sex is "incompatible with Scripture." Canon John had been due to be ordained in Westminster Abbey on Oct. 9.



In his letter, released by Bishop Harries' office, Canon John said he had decided to decline the post because of "the damage my consecration might cause to the unity of the Church, including the Anglican Communion."



Bishop Harries wrote in reply that he accepted the decision, "made in the interest of wider Church unity."



"However, I would like you to know that not only did you have my unswerving support, but also that of a great many others in the diocese," he added.



Canon John has said he is in a long-term relationship with another man but that he has been celibate since the 1990s and would uphold church policy on sexuality.



Archbishop Williams said last month that Canon John's appointment did not violate Church of England teachings. But his predecessor as archbishop, George Carey, said he would not have approved Canon John's selection.



"I'm very distressed by the situation. I would have followed the rule book," he said Sunday. "Jeffrey John is a good man. He's a fine thinker, but I would not have allowed his name to go forward.



"If someone said to me, 'I had a relationship,' I would stop the ordination, then I would satisfy myself that the person had repented of his lifestyle," he added.



The Sunday Times newspaper reported the former archbishop as saying he had ordained two gay bishops in the 1990s after they assured him they were celibate.



But on Sunday, he said he had "never knowingly ordained a practising homosexual. I am a traditionalist and I believe that sex should be restricted to monogamous heterosexual marriages."



He was spiritual leader of the world's 70 million Anglicans from 1991 to 2002.



The issue of homosexuality has recently flared elsewhere in the worldwide Anglican Communion: with the election last month of a gay priest, Rev. Canon Gene Robinson, as bishop in New Hampshire in the United States, and the decision in May by the diocese of New Westminster, B.C., to sanction the blessing of gay relationships.



Speaking to reporters outside his Lambeth Palace office, Archbishop Williams said Canon John's withdrawal "should not be taken to mean that the Church can now stop being concerned about how it discerns the will of God in this area of ethics."



He said some of the opposition to Canon John's appointment had been "very unsavoury indeed."



"Our official policies and resolutions as Anglicans commit us to listening to the experience of homosexuals and recognizing that they are full and welcome members of the Church loved by God," he said.

---

www.globeandmail.com/serv...rnational/



As I'm typing these words, I'm hearing a homophobic bishop on the BBC, praising John's decision (resignation), saying that otherwise (and I quote) "there would be division in the Church." What the good bishop is really saying, is "If you consecrate the faggot, we will take our marbles and Go Home." But of course, the Real Dividers will never own up to their schism (because schism is officially a sin, and it's for their log-filled eyes to call *others* "sinners", and always ignore their own).



GG Former Archbishop Carey and his ilk can all Bite Me. Hypocrites! Out



This is all the more reason to please pray (as you are spiritually/ideologically able) for the American branch of the Anglican Communion, the Episcopal Church. With the withdrawal of Canon Johns in the UK, there will be more pressure than ever for gay Canon Gene Robinson, Bishop-Elect of New Hampshire, to do the same---or be voted down in the General Convention next month. Pray that Robinson and all LGBTs (and allies) in the Episcopal Church Stay Strong, and speak Gospel Truth to (Homophobic, Temporary) Power.



***************************

ETA: As is usual in this kind of story, the more you know, the uglier it gets . . .

Quote:

---

'This stinks to high heaven. He is in agony'



Extreme pressure was exerted by group of Carey-appointed staff



Stephen Bates, religious affairs correspondent

Monday July 7, 2003

The Guardian



As the Church of England battled to close down the row over what would have been its first openly gay bishop, accusing fingers were last night pointed at a coterie of Lambeth Palace staff appointed by the evangelical former Archbishop of Canterbury George Carey.



All the signs were that Canon Jeffrey John did not resign voluntarily. "You can take it he was bounced. This stinks to high heaven. There is no way that he has resigned voluntarily. He is in agony," said one senior cleric who spoke to the canon on Saturday night.



Dr John's decision followed a six-hour meeting to which he was summoned at Lambeth Palace, the Archbishop of Canterbury's official London residence, on Saturday at which extreme pressure was exerted on him by senior officials of the archbishop's staff - all of them appointees of Rowan Williams's predecessor, George Carey.



Richard Harries, the Bishop of Oxford and the man who appointed Dr John to the suffragan bishopric, who was summoned to the meeting, was also bounced into accepting the decision. He was said yesterday to be "devastated".



Lambeth Palace denied that a clique of bishops had been consulted on Friday about the appointment. One bishop, who was not invited to take part, said a number of senior clergy sympathetic to Dr John, including the Archbishop of York - Dr John's principal at theological college in Oxford in the 1970s - were also not invited to give their views.



Friends of the canon, who would have been the first openly gay bishop in the Church of England, were furious. One said: "He is completely battered, devastated, bewildered. This has come out of the blue for him as much as for any of the rest of us."



The campaign has been virulent since Dr John's appointment was announced and some - by no means all - evangelicals within the church had belatedly learnt of his past vocal opposition to the church's policy on homosexuality.



Once the largely evangelical groups mobilised though, the campaign was both thorough and noisy. Nine diocesan bishops signed an open letter opposing the appointment - though eight others subsequently signed another letter supporting it.



African bishops denounced homosexuality as an abomination, with the Archbishop of Nigeria, Peter Akinola, claiming that such conduct was lower than that of beasts - a clear breach of the 1998 Lambeth conference of bishops' call for tolerance and understanding to be shown towards gays.



It was the concern of some within the worldwide communion and fears that the appointment of an openly gay bishop would provoke a split that prompted the archbishop to bow to such belligerent sentiments.



Evangelicals across the world fear a hidden liberal agenda to promote gay marriage. They feared the appointment of Dr John - a 50-year-old Oxford-educated theologian who had previously kept his quarter-century-long relationship with another clergyman to himself - was symptomatic, coming as it did in the wake of decisions by a diocese in Vancouver to allow same-sex church blessings and a vote by church members in New Hampshire to elect an openly gay bishop who was in a sexual relationship.



Dr John's acknowledgement that, although he was in a relationship he was now celibate and would not campaign for a change in church policy, did not win over opponents who demanded that he should also openly "repent" of his past.



But recently it appeared that most had accepted imminent defeat. The appointment, sanctioned by the archbishop and formally approved by the Queen, could only be rescinded if Dr John himself backed down.



His letter to the bishop of Oxford stated: "It has become clear to me that in view of the damage my consecration might cause to the unity of the church, including the Anglican communion, I must seek the consent of the crown to withdraw."



The diocese of Oxford expressed itself baffled by the decision. Its spokesman claimed that extensive consultation with parishes and area deans had shown growing acceptance of the canon's appointment, with only isolated parishes continuing to express concern. Friends of Dr John insisted that he had held many meetings within the diocese and had won over doubters.



It is believed that pressure on the canon was exerted by Lambeth Palace because of concerns about the reaction to his appointment by the Anglican communion, particularly in the developing world, and fears that it would precipitate a split, with primates like Mr Akinola - leader of the largest church in the communion, 17.5m strong in Nigeria - leading a breakaway move.



While Africa has burgeoning numbers, it is the church in the west's money which has helped to support them. Liberals are exasperated that their churches should defer to bishops operating in vastly different societies.



Sources close to Dr John were pointing fingers at senior staff at Lambeth Palace, particularly the chief of staff, Jeremy Harris, a former BBC journalist, who was at Saturday's meeting.



Dr Williams was not allowed to bring any staff with him from his previous post and has inherited all his predecessor's officials.



Among those most vehemently against the canon has been the former archbishop's son, Andrew, a journalist on the main evangelical church newspaper, who has talked of evangelicals being stabbed in the back by the appointment.



Ironically, Dr Carey himself admitted yesterday that he had knowingly appointed two gays to suffragan bishoprics in the 1990s, though he maintained that - like Canon John - they were celibate.



"This is George Carey and his supporters trying to run his successor. This is a disaster for Rowan - if he buckles like this and alienates the liberals within the Church of England he will find he has no support from anyone because the evangelicals certainly won't give him the time of day," said the disaffected senior cleric.



"Rowan obstinately believes that everyone has good in them but unfortunately that's not always the case."

---

www.guardian.co.uk/religi...16,00.html

Edited by: Gatito Grande at: 7/7/03 9:57 pm

[sprhrgrl]

i had a womens' studies class last year where we talked about religion a lot - it was "philosphy of women in world cultures" and since many cultures hold the faith, judeo-christianity came up a lot.



in the class we came around to the same conclusion many times - that the bible can be used to support anything you want. it can support pages like this, but it can also tear those same pages down.



there have been many responses, like this one and this one.

sprhrgrl.com

she's my everything

Sweetie, I'm a fag. I been there. - Tara

The truth shall set you free, but first it will piss you off. - Gloria Steinem

[BBOvenGuy]

Quote:

---

Again this morning my email inbox was full of warnings of impending schism. The drum beats of division that have been pounding as the Claiming the Blessing initiative gained momentum and support have risen to a crescendo with the election June 7th of the Reverend Canon Gene Robinson as Bishop Coadjutor in the Diocese of New Hampshire. “Grave concern over a great crisis” write the bishops of South Carolina. “Never before has the church faced such a challenge,” wrote a General Convention Deputy. “Schism is inevitable,” say the leaders of the American Anglican Council.



“Or not,” is my reply.



What it takes to create schism is for someone to leave – and I am sick unto death with the unity of this church being placed on the shoulders of those of us who have committed to stay.

---

That's from the blog of the Reverend Susan Russell, Executive Director of Claiming the Blessing, a coalition of GLBT organizations working for full inclusion in the Episcopal Church. Their current efforts are focused on obtaining an approval at the July 30-August 8 National Episcopal Convention to bless same-sex unions throughout the entire church. Check out their site if you'd like to know more.

"The first task of anyone, lest you get canceled, is to entertain people, because they ain't there for message." - Dick Wolf

Edited by: BBOvenGuy  at: 7/8/03 3:54 pm

[Gatito Grande]

As many of you may know about me, I'm a, well, victim of divorce. I hate divorce (that is, where one partner is distinctly unwilling, and at the same time, fairly blameless) w/ a purple passion.



In stories about Canon V. Gene Robinson, elected to be the first gay bishop in the Episcopal Church, I have continually heard the line "he left his wife for a man." Intuitively, I knew it couldn't be true, yet it bothered me all the same.



Now I know explicitly that the line is a lie. Because the issue matters to me, it's possible it might matter to others. Here's the Real Story:

Quote:

---

Canon Robinson didn't leave his wife for a male partner. This scurrilous myth won't die, having been born in the British tabloids and carried, like the children's game of Chinese whispers [American: Operator], round the world. Here is the correct chronology, written by Canon Gene Robison, which we have received permission to publish:



August, 1972 V. Gene Robinson and Isabella 'Boo' Martin are married, All Saints Church, Peterborough, New Hampshire, USA.



May, 1986 Gene and Boo separate; Gene moves to Wilton, New Hampshire (five miles away), sharing joint custody of daughters Jamee and Ella.



March, 1987 Boo meets Robert McDaniel, by May they are engaged to be married; Gene moves to Concord, NH, where he is now employed as Canon to the Ordinary.



August, 1987 Boo and Gene's divorce is final; the Rector of Grace Church, Manchester, accompanies them to the judge's chambers for the final decree, and then they return to Grace Church, where they mark the ending of their marriage, the mutual release from their wedding vows (symbolized by the return of their wedding rings), and the pledging of themselves to the joint nurture and care of their children—all within the context of the eucharist.



October, 1987 Boo and Robert are married (within a couple of years, they have two sons).



November, 1987 Gene meets Mark Andrew while on vacation.



February, 1989 Mark leaves his career with the Peace Corps and moves to New Hampshire to be with Gene, Jamee, and Ella.



July, 1989 Gene, Mark, Jamee and Ella host a 'Celebration of a Home' from the Book of Occasional Services.



Please feel free to share this chronology with anyone else who seems to be under the wrong impression about the ending of Canon Robinson's marriage.

---

morgue.anglicansonline.or...index.html



The General Convention of the Episcopal Church begins on July 29. At it will be the vote on whether Bishop-Elect Robinson's consecration as bishop is to proceed. Please pray (as you are able) for sanity and Christian love to prevail.



GG Or merely the wit and wisdom of Dorothy Parker Out



[paraphrased]:

"The more that I grow older

And totter towards the tomb,

I find that I care less and less

Who goes to bed with whom."

[Gatito Grande]

[Mods: in a couple of weeks, the Episcopal General Convention will be over (for good or ill). At that time, I trust I will not so dominate this new thread w/ "me and my church." For the time being though, please indulge me. ]



The following is a neutral summation of where things stand in the Episcopal Church, and the Anglican Communion at large. Your prayers are gratefully accepted!

Quote:

---

Homosexuality Issue Threatens to Break Anglicanism in Two

By LAURIE GOODSTEIN



The election last month of an openly gay bishop in the Episcopal diocese of New Hampshire is now threatening to crack open the long-existing fault line over homosexuality in the worldwide Anglican Communion, a global association of churches in 164 countries.



In an open letter released yesterday, 24 conservative American bishops warned that they would join conservative leaders in Africa, Asia and South America and break ties with the Episcopal Church USA if it votes to confirm New Hampshire's chosen bishop, V. Gene Robinson, or if it endorses a separate resolution to create a blessing for same-sex unions. There are about 300 active and retired American bishops.



Episcopalians in the United States are set to vote on both issues at their convention in Minneapolis, which begins on July 30. Episcopal conventions are usually as brazenly political as a presidential primary, with lobbying and last-minute alliances. But this time the American bishops, priests and laypeople who will vote say the pressure on them is exceptionally intense.



Conservatives suggested in interviews that if the Americans vote yes on either Bishop-elect Robinson or same-sex blessings, traditionalists around the world may join together, form a separate communion and try to claim the mantle of true Anglicanism.



It is unclear whether an affirmative vote in Minneapolis would actually cause a permanent schism in the the Anglican Communion, or whether the conservatives are making a last-ditch effort to influence the upcoming American convention. However, both sides acknowledge that the gay issue has opened a potentially irreconcilable divide — one that also emerged recently in the church in Canada and Britain.



"Obviously, God's will for the church is unity, and the breakdown of that communion is a devastating thing," said the Most Rev. Greg Venables, one of the top church leaders, or primates, who has vowed to back a split. "But it's clear that there will be a breakdown in communion."



Bishop Venables is the presiding bishop of the Province of the Southern Cone, which includes all of South America, except Brazil.



The Anglican Communion, according to religion scholars, is the second largest international body of churches after the Roman Catholic Church, with 79 million members in 38 regional churches that trace their heritage to the Church of England.



While the conservatives on homosexuality are a minority in the church in the United States, they are a majority where the Anglican church is growing most quickly, in Africa and Asia.



At the Lambeth Conference in 1998, a once-a-decade meeting of Anglican leaders, a resounding majority endorsed a resolution declaring homosexuality to be "incompatible with scripture," but the resolution was non-binding.



Bishop-elect Robinson said in a telephone interview from New Hampshire on Thursday: "It breaks my heart if any of them choose to leave. But if they leave it's because they are choosing to leave, and they are choosing to divide this communion, not me.



"I am not willing to take responsibility for the future of the Anglican Church," he said.



The debate over homosexuality has been simmering among Episcopalians for nearly 30 years, but only recently boiled over with recent decisions in Canada and England.



The Canadian diocese of New Westminster, which covers greater Vancouver, declared in May that it would formally bless same-sex unions. In response, 16 primates in Africa, India, South America the West Indies, the Philippines and Southeast Asia severed ecclesiastical relations with the Vancouver diocese and its bishop.



In addition, nine parishes in the Vancouver area broke away from their own diocese, and said they would change their allegiance and redirect their funds to the bishop of the Yukon, who is a conservative on homosexuality.



Then, in a watershed moment on June 6, a gay man selected as a bishop in the Church of England withdrew before taking his seat.





Dr.Jeffrey John had been appointed bishop of Reading in the Oxford Diocese, where diocesan bishops are appointed by the bishop of their province, not elected as in the United States. After his selection, a newspaper revealed that Dr. John had had a long-term gay relationship. But Dr. John said that he and his partner, also a priest, had become celibates after the church in 1991 explicitly forbade priests from having gay sex.



Conservative primates from around the world argued that Dr. John was nonetheless unacceptable as a bishop, and appealed to the Archbishop of Canterbury, the Most Rev. Rowan Williams, who spent six hours on a Saturday meeting privately with Dr. John. The next day, Dr. John stepped down, "in view of the damage my consecration might cause to the unity of the church," he said.



The archbishop of Canterbury, the senior bishop and titular leader of the Anglican Communion, has not spoken publicly on the American elections. And while many conservatives are looking to him to intervene, a spokesman for the Anglican Communion in London said he would not attend the convention in Minneapolis.



However, several primates from other countries are planning to go to Minneapolis to reassert the view that the only permissible sexual relationships that are between husband and wife, said Bishop Venables, who lives in Argentina.



"Nobody has consulted with us," he said. "That is the most alarming thing."



In New Hampshire, Bishop-elect Robinson said that every morning, in his screened-in porch or den, he asks during his prayers whether he should step down, like Dr. John.



"If there came a point where I felt like that's what God was calling me to do, absolutely, I would do it," he said. "But I do not feel that that is what God is calling me to do. On the contrary, I feel that God is calling me to move deliberately forward," he said. "I work very hard to make sure that the voice I hear in my head is God's and not my own ego doing a fabulous rendition of God's voice."



Mr. Robinson, who is 56, has served as canon, or assistant to the bishop, of New Hampshire, for 16 years. He was married for thirteen years, and has two daughters.



He says he underwent years of therapy, sometimes twice a week sessions, that he had hoped would "cure" him of his homosexuality. But he and his wife divorced in 1987. He says they gave back their rings in a church ceremony and agreed to share in the the raising of their daughters, now 21 and 25. A few months later, his wife remarried and he met the man who is now his partner, he said. He says he remains close with his ex-wife and his daughters.



Both opponents and supporters of Bishop-elect Robinson agreed in interviews this week that he appeared to be headed for a victory. About 200 of the bishops and delegates who will vote at the convention have agreed to wear buttons saying, "Ask Me About Gene," and to offer testimony about his worthiness. Altogether, there are about 300 bishops in the United States, but not all of them can vote on him.



The New Hampshire diocese elected him decisively on the second ballot in June. Episcopalians traditionally are loath to interfere with a diocese's choice of bishop. The only other time a bishop was rejected at general convention was in the 1870's, church officials say.



The Rev. Dr. Kendall S. Harmon, canon theologian of the diocese of South Carolina, a conservative, said, "This is the most serious crisis Anglicanism has faced since it's founding. You've never had a situation where half of the Anglican communion is threatening to be out of communion with the other half."



The practical effect, church officials said, could be that bishops refuse to meet together, to offer one another the sacraments, or to recognize one another's legitimacy at gatherings like the Lambeth Conference, which takes place every 10 years. There could be massive confusion if a rival communion arises in the United States and competes for members, resources and property.



Church liberals insist that the Episcopal Church will eventually come to accept gay bishops just as it came to accept women priests and divorcees remarrying. Three of 109 dioceses in the United States still refuse to ordain women, and in the Church of England it is still not universally accepted, which proves, according to the liberals, that Anglicans can tolerate diversity.



"I never knew that the Anglican Communion was together," said the Rev. Canon Edward W. Rodman, professor of pastoral theology and urban ministry at the Episcopal Divinity School, in Cambridge, and an advisor to a consortium of liberal Episcopal groups. "That's one of the problems with the conservatives' rhetoric. All the provinces of the Anglican Communion are autonomous, so what is there to fracture?"



But the Very Rev. Canon David C. Anderson president of the American Anglican Council, which issued the letter from the 24 American bishops, said, "We've kept the Anglican family together through thick and through thin, and the hope is that we can continue, but realistically families come to a point where there's so much strife and stress going on that you don't know how things will work out."

---

www.nytimes.com/2003/07/1...9BISH.html



(Must be registered to view)



GG I believe that I will be attending the General Convention in Minneapolis, for a day or two. I'll report on all actions that I see, demonic or angelic, when I return Out

[BBOvenGuy]

It's been said that homosexuality is the most divisive issue to hit the American Christian church since slavery. If I'd been alive back in the mid-1800s, I promise you I wouldn't have been saying that church leaders should support slavery for the sake of keeping the church unified. Likewise, neither do I think church leaders should exclude gay people now for the sake of keeping the church unified. The people who are against inclusion are the ones threatening to leave. If there's a split, let it be on their heads.



The Rev. Susan Russell was on NPR's "Morning Edition" this morning. You may be able to find the story on NPR's website.

"The first task of anyone, lest you get canceled, is to entertain people, because they ain't there for message." - Dick Wolf

[Gatito Grande]

Speaking of NPR: Gene Robinson will interviewed on "Fresh Air" today (Thursday, 7/24). Check your local listings, or go here, to listen online:



freshair.npr.org/



The thumbnail sketch: "Episcopal priest Gene Robinson of New Hampshire. He is on the brink of becoming the world's first openly gay bishop of the Episcopal Church. He was elected by the Diocese of New Hampshire, but the appointment must be approved at the [church's] national general convention next week. His nomination has divided the church. Robinson, who is 56 years old, was married for 13 years. He continues to be close to his ex-wife and two daughters. For the last 15 years he has been in a relationship with another man."



GG Really looking forward to hearing the man Out



ETA: Back from having heard him---in the first 15 minutes or so of the interview, I could really hear the strain in his voice. He's been asked---called---to bear a burden no one shoud have to (even though he says that he refuses to be held responsible for breaking up the church. Rightly, that's on any schismatic 'phobes' heads).



I didn't learn a lot new here (then again, I'm a Queer Anglican News Junkie! ), but I hadn't known just how conflicted he was at the time he married his wife (she knew that he was unsure about his orientation, but they went ahead anyway). I really feel sorry for him, that he had gone the whole "reparative" (BS!) trip for awhile. But given his age and rural Southern upbringing, I guess it's not surprising that he bought the lie ("you can change!" ). He also reiterated what I mentioned a few posts above: he did not leave his wife for his lover---she was re-married before he even met him! It really pains Gene and his family to see this bullsh*t lie spread again and again.



Finally, the simplicity w/ which he stated, at the end of the interview, that regardless of this controversy "whether I become bishop or not" that he's "going to Heaven": just moved me to tears. The true question is not whether Gene should be bishop, the question is, why can't all Anglican bishops be like him?

Edited by: Gatito Grande at: 7/24/03 10:17 am

[Shadow]

I don' t think that religion has issues with homosexuality. Just as religion isn't responsible for holly inquisition.



It was always about people. Just people. When you don't understand something you get scared of it. You can't help it, it's deep in your nature.



And that's were all the bad things come from- FEAR. Fear created worst things in our history. Racism, intolerance, wars...



Remember there were times when woman had no right to vote, read, choose who to marry...



When it comes to Bible, many people understand it completely wrong. Original Bible is the real Bible and it holds different meaning then the one of the translated editions. People, not holly people just regular translators, thought they could not only translate Bible but interpret it. Which leads to referring the God as Him and many other misconceptions.



And if you want to read something great read Holly Blood Holly Grail. It gives you great insight in scrolls found in Northern sea that church hid from the public.



Vladimira

____________________________________________

Seduce my mind and you can have my body... find my soul and I'm yours forever.

[borgqueen]

On the whole, religion and homosexuality topic...the general impression that I seem to get from the church is that they disapprove of homosexuality, but don't publicly say anything against it because todays society is accepting it more. I read one site where it likened homosexuality to bestiality, which is disgusting and very degrading. .

I'm not trying to get at the Church for what they believe, just telling you what I've heard

So, as yet, I've never heard anything positive from the Church of England or any other Christinan organisation. Thought you might like to know.

Lauren.

[Kalita]

You won't hear much that's good from the organized church offices, because they have to hold the majority party line. It's too bad, really, because any organization will have a wide spectrum of opinion among its members.



Those people will often have to keep quiet when on official business, another bad side of things. But they do have and keep opinions we would find favourable.



In short, don't necessarily judge a person by their organization(s).

[BBOvenGuy]

GG, Gene Robinson's path sounds very much like the one taken by Mel White, author of the groundbreaking book Stranger at the Gate. Mel got married because he thought it would "cure" his homosexual impulses. He remained on good terms with his ex-wife and kids. His ex-wife Lyla ran the development office at my church for a while.



And for the benefit of borgqueen and other newbies to the discussion, I shall now trot out my handy list of links again:



Claiming the Blessing - Home page of the organization campaigning for full GLBT inclusion in the Episcopal Church. Meanwhile, a recording of the NPR segment I mentioned can be found here.



The Church With the Radical Welcome - An address given at All Saints Church of Pasadena CA by Rector Emeritus George Regas, in which he talks about the spiritual journey that led him to start blessing same-sex unions.



SoulForce - An organization founded and run by the Rev. Mel White (see above), who was a conservative Christian and ghost-writer for Jerry Falwell, Pat Robertson, etc. until he came out and was rejected by all of them. SoulForce seeks to win social justice for the GLBT community through nonviolent means.



The Metropolitan Community Church - Home page for a Christian denomination specifically founded as an outreach ministry to the GLBT community.



Check 'em out...

"The first task of anyone, lest you get canceled, is to entertain people, because they ain't there for message." - Dick Wolf

Edited by: BBOvenGuy  at: 7/24/03 4:42 pm

[Gatito Grande]

Thanks again, Bob, for your handy list o' links.



It really looks like these will be the times that try a faithful Episcopalian's soul. A homophobic, international group of retrograde Anglican primates, and Episcopal (American) reactionaries, is apparently planning to "spring" something on the Episcopal Church, if it should persist in it's abominable democracy. If General Convention votes either to confirm Gene Robinson's election to bishop, or authorize same-sex blessings, they are planning on splitting---and no doubt taking (read: stealing) as much of the Church as they can, as they leave.



Here's the link to the Episcopal News Service story: www.episcopalchurch.org/e...3-167.html (which can then take you to the 'phobes own press release. I can't bring myself to link to that tragedy)



We Queers and Allies, who foolishly try to instead follow the Gospel of Christ, will have to be prepared to respond in love---and, if 2000 years of history have taught us anything---suffer for it.



GG Thank heaven our God is gracious unto us fools! Out

[borgqueen]

Thankyou for the sites that you listed. I hope you don't think that I was mouthing off against the Church, I was just saying what I had heard. I don't think that everyone within it is homophobic, but merely saying that some are.

I hope you don't think I'm prejudiced or anything- I was just trying to fit into the discussion.

Sorry.

[BBOvenGuy]

Oh, not to worry, borgqueen. You said you hadn't heard anything from a church that was accepting of homosexuality, so I thought I would point you toward a few spots. Just trying to be helpful, that's all.

"The first task of anyone, lest you get canceled, is to entertain people, because they ain't there for message." - Dick Wolf

[3peanuts]

Is not that Roman Cath Church is against homos, homos are against RCC.



*the "right" perspective*



I hate those religions that put themselves at the center of the world. Religion should be open.

"I like Amber Benson 'cause she's a proletarian" Sarabiga

Keynes was right

[Gatito Grande]

Speaking of which, 3p:



[NB: this thread isn't the place to debate the relative merits of "open" or "center of the world": that belongs on the "Scary Religion" thread]



You gotta remember, the train for tolerance and equality is leaving the station, and the 'phobes are only freaking because they know they can't stop it!

Quote:

---

Vatican Issues Offensive on Gay Marriages



VATICAN CITY (AP) - Alarmed by growing legal acceptance of gay marriages, the Vatican is issuing new instructions to bishops and Catholic politicians in an effort to halt the trend.



The instructions, which call on politicians to oppose extending rights granted to traditional couples, are in a document prepared by the Church's guardian of orthodoxy, the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith.



The document - ``Considerations Regarding Proposals to Give Legal Recognition to Unions Between Homosexual Persons'' - will be released Thursday, the Vatican said.



Pope John Paul II and top Vatican officials have been speaking out for months against legislative proposals to legalize same-sex marriages in Europe, North America and elsewhere.



In January, the pope approved guidelines for Catholic politicians that said church opposition to abortion, euthanasia and same-sex marriage was not up for negotiation.



It said laws safeguarding marriage between man and woman must be promoted and that ``in no way can other forms of cohabitation be placed on same level as marriage, nor can they receive legal recognition as such.''



But legal acceptance is growing.



Two Canadian provinces - Ontario and British Columbia - have legalized homosexual marriage under recent court rulings, a move that has attracted gays from across the border in the United States.



Earlier this month, a top German cardinal condemned Germany's same-sex marriage law after it was upheld by the country's supreme court, calling it a blow to the family.



``Now the associations of homosexuals have a potent arm to obtain further concessions on the road toward full equality with married couples, including the right to adoption,'' Cardinal Karl Lehman complained in a Vatican Radio interview.



The Vatican is particularly worried about the waning influence of the church in Europe. Drafters of a proposed constitution for the European Union ignored Vatican requests to include explicit mention of Europe's Christian roots.



On Sunday, the pope lamented that the church's message was being watered down in Europe.



Vatican officials said the document - 12 pages long and available in seven languages - is devoted entirely to the issue of same-sex marriages.

---

my.aol.com/news/news_stor...0000128261



GG The 'phobes can huff and puff all they want, but it is we Queer Christians (and allies) who are following Jesus Out

[BBOvenGuy]

At All Saints yesterday, we learned that someone has made up a "hit list" deck of cards similar to the one the US Military made for its "wanted list" in Iraq. It contains all the high-profile people who have spoken out in favor of blessing same-sex unions, including retired Archbishop Desmond Tutu and presiding Episcopal Bishop Frank Griswold.



Our Rector, Ed Bacon, was in the deck, but we at All Saints were very disappointed to learn that he was only the Six of Hearts. And Susan Russell, executive director for Claiming the Blessing, wasn't in the deck at all. So someone in the office made our own card for her - she's the Joker.

"The first task of anyone, lest you get canceled, is to entertain people, because they ain't there for message." - Dick Wolf

[Gatito Grande]

Except for the fact that the 'phobes are trying to kick me and millions like me, or who believe what I do, out of our own church, they really crack me up sometimes.



Listen to part of a resolution to be offered at the Episcopal General Convention (starting this Wednesday) from the Diocese of Central Florida:

Quote:

---

We, therefore, continue to affirm that the Biblical standard for sexual expression is faithful, monogamous, lifelong, heterosexual marriage.

---

Yeah, that was certainly the "Biblical standard" King David lived by!



www.integrityusa.org/gc20...urpose.htm



This just goes to show, once again, how the so-called "orthodox," "traditionalist," or "Biblical" Christians merely use the Bible as a weapon, w/ no real understanding of what it actually says (much less what it means).



Perhaps worse, Queer/Allied Episcopalians can expect to be lectured on how we're "culturally imperialist" or even "racist" merely because the 'phobes (overwhelmingly white and mainly from the southern U.S.) have gotten past their own racism enough (?) to have recruited a bunch of African (and Asian) bishops to their homophobic cause. Yeah, like some Nigerian woman dying of AIDS really gives a damn whom the Diocese of New Hampshire chooses as their bishop?? Give me a break! Anyway, thanks to capitalism/imperialism, many Two-Thirds World countries are controlled by an (Euro-American dominated) elite oligarchy, and the EuroAmerican-planted Christian churches in those countries are no different. Those bishops (whom, I believe, lay people have no voice in electing, nor do they share in the running of their Church, as we do via the Episcopal GC) do not speak for the people, in their White Evangelical-inculcated (and funded) homophobia.



GG The "True Church" is the one that cares for (maybe---Please Dear Lord!---*cures*? ) that woman w/ AIDS. I honestly believe that, one way or another, w/ these "Are fags really Children of God?" questions behind us, the Church will be free to reach out to those who suffer more powerfully than *ever* before. Out



ETA: the new NPR show "Day-to-Day" will have a feature tomorrow on the Episcopal GC and the gay issue(s). Check http://www.npr.org for your local listings.

[3peanuts]

You know RCC evolves: in eons but it evolves...



And I say that as an ex cath, so be patient with me

"I like Amber Benson 'cause she's a proletarian" Sarabiga

Keynes was right

[StopMadCowboyDisease]

Ooh. Are the hitlist cards available anywhere online?

Edited by: BytrSuite at: 7/31/03 10:09 am

[Gatito Grande]

Hey, just want to welcome you to the Kitten, SMCD---great handle! (and graphic)



GG Ever notice how Dubya combines "Shoot first, ask questions later" Cowboy, and "I deserve my inheritance" Rich Kid? Talk about Worst of the Worst! Out



Oh, to be on topic, and "God talks to Me (alone)" Deluded Zealot :"No marriage for you, you Sinners!"

[Urn of Osiris]

For years I have struggled with what I have been taught and what I have felt. Certainly finding the kitten and meeting and knowing so many of the fantastice people here I have gained a wider view of the world.



Then today I watch the news. I hear the vomitous prejudice coming from two places of power. I expect it from both I just can't believe that either can make a single statement about sin or devience.



This is the Catholic church and The American government. Two "organizations" that have violated every commandment that they so casually profess to be protecting. It's making me sick. I'm fairly certain when god said to love my neighbor that he didn't ammend it with a checklist of behavioral prerequisites.



I've witnessed some amazing loving relationships and some horribly negative ones both gay and straight. All of which had less to do with sexuality and more to do with humanity. If you find love hold on to it for dear life.



The rest is just bullshit. Little by little it is coming, it's here and both organizations know it. As far as protecting the "family" definition. That money and time could be better spent on protecting humanity. America can no longer fit into nice little check boxes on government forms. Let me take care of my own definitions.



Love who you love, just do it with your whole heart.



Remember that tonight president Bush when you use your power to get your children off the hook for their law violations, and Pope john whatever when you turn a blind eye to a child's accusations of sexual abuse. Clean your own house and I'll clean mine.



eta - sorry I think I should have posted in the angry rant thread instead.

Urn of Osiris

Peace is not the absence of conflict; it's the absence of inner conflict. Unknown
When we stand up, we are standing up for everybody. Each of us needs to know, in fact, that we are rainbows in the clouds... for everybody. MAYA ANGELOU

Edited by: Urn of Osiris  at: 7/31/03 2:12 pm

[Gatito Grande]

Welcome to the thread, Urn: it has been a really tough day. I think the nadir was reached in hearing that the Pope sez that when LGBT couples adopt kids it "does real violence to them." I kid you not, that's what it says! This, from the head of the organization which has perpetrated more child sexual abuse than any other, anywhere, any time.



Y'know, I always try to present a brave front, and in my head, I feel brave: we are winning, the best evidence of which is that when Old Sh*theads like the Pope die off, they're replaced by . . . the child of two mommies (or daddies)!! Every day, and in every way, more and more people are getting to know their queer co-workers, neighbors, children and yes, church (synogogue, etc.) members. There's no going back.



And yet, and yet: I keep fearing we will---slip back. That somehow, tolerance (acceptance? celebration?) of LGBTs will become---like poodleskirts, or hula hoops . . . or bra burning---"something we used to do." The fear is completely irrational but it's there. Particularly so, I guess, in a religious context, which frequently is irrational (and I say that in an approving way).



In the Bible, the "prophetic tradition" is always to Call the People Back. Now, you and I know that what "Israel" (understood as "we who are being addressed") is being called back to, is God's Shalom: to do justice, and love mercy---i.e., the Perfect Environment for we (at our best) Justice-Doin', Mercy (as well as boy-boy, and grrl-grrl)-Lovin' Queers.



Yet the 'phobes are always getting that wrong (calling people back to their Same Ol' Nauseating Prejudices, instead), and they tend to *scream the loudest.* (And yet when they do, they're never tarred-n-feathered for being "militant," the way we are).



So where are we? Two steps forward, one step back? Or one step forward, two steps back? Yes. But that's only at any given moment. Seen from the long and broad perspective (i.e. the God's Eye-View!), it's Ever Onward, Ever Upward: We Queers will have our well-earned (or at least God blessed!) Shalom of Justice and Mercy (and sizzling sex---of both the Hot Monkey and Sarah MacLachlan varieties! ), and No One Can Keep Us Out (for long anyway!).



GG MLK said it best: "The arc is long, but the universe bends towards justice." May Justice for Queers Come Soon! Out

[3peanuts]

I know this isn't going to be the most articulate post I'll ever write for "kitten", but I feel a so damn huge rage building in my stomach so that I would really like to rip Ratzinger's gutts off his body...that's not much buddhist of me, I guess, but that's what I'm feeling right now.



And the thing I fear most is that here in Italy religion and politics have a lot to do one with the other (and all mix in hypocrisy), we have parties "inspired" by Cath principles: Vatican's words will be a weapon in homophobic politics' hands to stop every proposal to recognize LGBT people rights.



*need a hug*

"I like Amber Benson 'cause she's a proletarian" Sarabiga

Keynes was right

[AmbersSecretAdmirer]

Okay, straight guy here. That first statement really doesn't matter, but there it is, a statement of fact. I am angry. I count several lesbian friends as amongst my closest friends. They are my closest friends not because they are lesbians, but because they are lovely people whom I trust.



Here isan interesting thought to really pour oil on the fire.



One thousand years ago we thought the Earth was flat. Not so long ago black people couldnt vote in certain states in America (I'm Scottish, by the way, so I apologise if my facts regarding American history of law is somewhat flawed) and certainly they were treated as second class citizens in so-called "white" countries. At the start of the 20th century women couldn't vote. My mother used to tell me that in the 1950's & 60's if she was caught using her left-hand to right she was hit over that hand with a hard ruler and told to use her right hand, as it was wrong to use the abnormal hand. Indeed, left-handed people were once called "perverts" because their "abnormality" went against the "Right Order".



So what happened? Why did these things change? The answer is of course simple. Over the years, we became more knowledgable about the world and the people within it. We began to see the injustices around us and showed ourselves to be better as a society because we tore down once thought of "facts" and "truths" as we saw through more enlightened eyes that we were wrong and sought to correct those wrongs. Time and again we have seen what we thought to be sound principles, both in science and law, to be flawed and with better knowledge we have amended these laws of science and man as our enlightenment grows.



However, and at this point I beg the forgiveness for anyone of any denomination who may take offence at my words here, for some strange reason which eludes me, religious books and texts remain immune from re-evaluation. Why? What makes religious text immune from re-evaluation? My point is, can we HONESTLY, take a 2000-year old SUBJECTIVE text and still consider it to be 100% relevant in today's society. Worst still, It is being used to segregate against individuals who, far from being a danger to society, are a necessary thriving part of that society.



I believe that President Bush and the Catholic Church should hold their heads in absolute shame over these thoughts.



Equality is not a privilege, it is a right and GLBT couples should be given these rights.



Gay marriage does not threaten the sanctity of marriage, it certifies and strengthens it.



Sorry for the long post, but I am angry.

TARA AND WILLOW 2GETHER 4EVER!!! BLESSED BE ETERNALLY!!!

Edited by: AmbersSecretAdmirer at: 8/1/03 5:29 am

[BBOvenGuy]

Quote:

---

What makes religious text immune from re-evaluation? My point is, can we HONESTLY, take a 2000-year old SUBJECTIVE text and still consider it to be 100% relevant in today's society.

---

Actually, the Bible gets reevaluated all the time. There are all sorts of translations available, as people try to find the most historically accurate copies in the original languages and translate them into the most appropriate modern terms. And then there are endless "Bible commentaries" being written. You can find them in any Christian bookstore.



And the thing is, I would say that the Bible still is 100% relevant in today's society. But that depends on what you mean by "relevant." Do I think that every single word of the Bible holds exactly the same literal meaning for our society as it did for the society in which it was written? No. In fact, using that definition, the older sections of the Bible aren't even "relevant" to the newer sections of the Bible, and the Bible itself testifies to that fact.



However, the moral principles set down in the Bible are every bit as relevant today as they were the day they were written. When George Regas made the decision to bless same-sex unions at my church, he was moved to do so by the words of the Old Testament prophet Amos:

Quote:

---

These are the words of the Lord, the God of Hosts... I hate, I despise your festivals and I take no delight in your solemn assemblies ... Take away from me the noise of your songs. I will not listen to the melody of your harps. But let justice roll down like a river and righteousness like a never failing stream.

---

The trouble is that those who oppose homosexual inclusion are just as capable of drawing on the Bible to support their point of view. Personally, I think they're wrong, but they're able to do it just the same. What you're able to draw from the Bible depends very much on your own spiritual state - how much you listen to what you're being called to hear, and how much you try to block it out and listen to yourself instead. But that's how it should be, really. Free will makes the struggle for justice more difficult, but I think having free will is worth the struggle.

"The first task of anyone, lest you get canceled, is to entertain people, because they ain't there for message." - Dick Wolf

[Gatito Grande]

Quote:

---

Committee approves ratification of Robinson

Episcopal News Service

Posted: 8/1/2003



After listening to two hours of testimony from bishops, deputies and visitors Friday morning, the legislative committee on the Consecration of Bishops endorsed the ratification of the Rev. V. Gene Robinson, as bishop-coadjutor of New Hampshire. The measure now heads to the House of Deputies for a vote.



Robinson is the first openly gay priest to be elected bishop in the Episcopal Church.



“The committee has made its decision,” committee co-chair, the Rev. Karolyn Keil-Kuhr of the Diocese of Montana, told the ballroom packed with at least 500 attendees; some 200 more were in the lobby, and 100 more were in an overflow room.



Keil-Kuhr asked that the decision be “received with grace” by those in attendance. “We would appreciate no applause, no cheering. I remind you this is not the final action,” she said, announcing that the committee has “voted to adopt resolution C045.”



Bishops with jurisdiction in geographic areas of the church will also vote on the measure.



More on this story will be posted soon.

---

gc2003.episcopalchurch.or...=undefined



GG So far, so good! Out



Update:

Quote:

---

Robinson consent sent to House of Deputies



David Skidmore

Episcopal News Service

Posted: 8/1/2003

Corrected: 8/1/2003 (view corrections)



The election of the church’s first openly gay bishop may be decided Sunday afternoon in the House of Deputies.

In the aftermath of an intense marathon hearing at the Hyatt Hotel Friday morning, the Committee on the Consecration of Bishops recommended the consent resolution (C045) on Gene Robinson, bishop-elect and current canon to the ordinary of New Hampshire, be adopted by convention.



Adhering to instructions from the Rev. Carolyn Keil-Kuhr, co-chair of the committee, the crowd of bishops and deputies and reporters packing the hotel ballroom refrained from applauding or cheering the announcement. The committee’s hope is that their decision “is received with grace,” said Keil-Kuhr.



The measure is expected to be reported out to the House of Deputies for action on Sunday afternoon and, if adopted, go to the House of Bishops as early as Monday morning.



The two-hour hearing held in the Hyatt’s Nicollet Ballroom drew more than 300 bishops, deputies, reporters and supporters of Robinson and the Diocese of New Hampshire. Nearly equal numbers of speakers signed up to speak for and against consent. When the allotted time ran out, 19 had spoken for Robinson and 18 against. Most major papers and national news programs were present. CNN carried coverage of the consent at the top of its broadcast throughout the day.



Robinson elected for his gifts, say supporters



The Rev. Randolph Dales, deputy from New Hampshire and one of five diocesan representatives invited to speak before the general testimony period, said his diocese had chosen to call someone who they knew had the talents to be a bishop. His status as a gay man was not part of the decision, he said.



“The choice was a person, it was about the ministry, not an issue. We called Gene Robinson for his humanity, not his sexuality,” said Dales who also serves on the diocese’s Standing Committee.



His point was echoed by other New Hampshire representatives who talked about Robinson’s gift as a leader and his teaching and pastoral skills. “Never in my life have I worked with a person in whom I have more confidence than I do of Gene Robinson,” said New Hampshire’s current diocesan bishop, Douglas Theuner. Throughout his 17 years as bishop, Theuner, who will be retiring in March 2004, has known Robinson, first as a consultant to the diocese and for the past 15 years as his canon to the ordinary.



Describing him as a man of uncommon ability and proven worth, Theuner said Robinson had always conducted himself “with the greatest integrity.”



The delegation’s youngest member, 15-year-old Jenny Lombardo of St. Paul’s, Concord, talked about how Robinson had inspired her to greater involvement in the church. “He respects youth and he simply cares,” she said.



Also speaking was Robinson’s daughter Ella who shared a statement from Robinson’s former wife, Isabella (Boo) McDaniel. In her statement, McDaniel took pains to correct a British newspaper story widely circulated that claimed her former husband had abandoned her and their daughters to take up a relationship with a gay man. The truth is they chose to end their relationship after years of dialogue and reflection, she said, and eventually chose to release each other from marital vows in a private service conducted by a close friend.



She maintains close connections to Robinson and his partner, Mark Andrews, she said, and they continue “to cherish each other’s families, heritages, and values.”



As for Robinson’s suitability for the episcopate, McDaniel praised his strength of character, his intellect and organizational ability, pastoral sensitivity and charisma, which she said “will draw more people to the church than will leave due to his sexuality.”



Marriage affirmed as sacrament



During questioning by the committee, Robinson said he was making an effort to reach out to members of his diocese opposed to his election. He has appeared at several forums and has been making unannounced Sunday visits to congregations for the past few weeks. Noting that there are three or four people in virtually every parish troubled by his election, Robinson said he was asking clergy to join him in reaching out to them, “just as on the international level it will be all of our jobs to reach out to the Anglican Communion.”



Taking issue with New Hampshire’s emphasis on the personal qualities of Robinson as opposed to his sexual orientation was committee member Dean Mark Lawrence of San Joaquin who stressed that sexuality cannot be divorced from the matter.



Asked by Lawrence about God’s purpose in creating sexual beings, male and female, Robinson said he believed that God gave humanity sexual nature so “we might express with our love the love that is in our hearts” and which is lived out in marriage. The mutual desire between two humans “is just a glimpse of the desire that God has to be in relationship with us,” he said, and why this love, as expressed in marriage, is a sacrament.



Robinson said that he experiences this same love in his relationship with his partner and through it “experiences, just a little bit, for the kind of never ending, never failing love that God has for me.”



Church’s teaching threatened, claim critics



Most of Robinson’s critics, particularly the bishops, distinguished their appreciation for Robinson as a gifted leader and Christian from his suitability to be a bishop of the church. Bishop John Howe of Central Florida, disputing Presiding Bishop Frank Griswold’s position in a recent letter to the church’s bishops that the election did not change church teaching, said past statements, studies and resolutions have “unambiguously” affirmed the church’s teaching that sexual intimacy must be confined to heterosexual marriage. “In commending to the church as a wholesome example a person who is sexually intimate in a relationship other than holy matrimony is a massive repudiation of that teaching,” said Howe.



Bishop David Bena, suffragan of Albany, said a Robinson consent separates the church from traditional teaching and “threatens to shatter the Episcopal Church as we know it.” He justified his statement citing the overwhelming vote at the 1998 Lambeth Conference upholding traditional teaching on marriage, the House of Bishops Theology Committee report urging the church to avoid legislative action on same-sex unions, recent statements from the primates of the communion, and British priest Jeffrey Johns standing down from his appointment as bishop of Reading.



Said Bena: “We will lose vast numbers of congregations, members and revenue, and this act will show us not to be the prophets of the Anglican Communion but American mavericks going our own way.”



Stating he was “humbly” asking Robinson to step down as bishop-elect, Bena warned that proceeding to a vote, up or down, “will simply rupture the Episcopal Church family.”



Ominous warnings were also given by Bishop Robert Duncan of Pittsburgh and Bishop Edward Little of Northern Indiana. “The departure from the Christian consensus will separate us from the one holy catholic and apostolic Church,” said Duncan, “and in the matter of the historic faith we will separate ourselves from the teaching about apostolicity.”



Given the church’s fourth-century ruling that a council erring on one matter of faith invalidated all other actions of that council, Duncan warned that chaos created by a consent adoption would free many church members to “disregard all actions of this convention: its resolutions, its canons, and its budget.”



An adoption by convention, he said, “will invite intervention precisely because the council has erred and the only court of appeal is outside this nation,” referring to the primates and other provinces of the Anglican Communion.



Noting the difficulty in offering pastoral care to gays and lesbians and still remaining faithful to scripture, Bishop Little warned that confirming Robinson’s election would effectively end dialogue on the issue. “We will have set aside the moral consensus of the Christian church throughout the ages, and there will no turning back,” he said. “It will be a definitive moment.”



The tragedy of that action, he added, will be the likelihood of fostering “deeper and more disastrous conflicts” over the church’s faith and order.



Fear of schism overstated, supporters say



Warnings of schism and impaired communion were countered by Robinson’s supporters who pointed out that the Episcopal Church’s vote in 1976 admitting women to the priesthood and the Massuchusetts diocese’s 1989 election of Barbara Harris as the first woman bishop in the Anglican Communion had not resulted in a lasting break with other Anglican provinces. “Instead it has made us stronger and a more vibrant church with the full inclusion of women in ministry,” said Massachusett’s Bishop Thomas Shaw, arguing the same could hold true for extending the church’s full ministry to gays and lesbians.



At the 1998 Lambeth Conference, Harris and the other 10 women bishops were warmly welcomed, he said. “Far from being spurned, far from causing schism, they were the toast of the town.”



The potential for experience to transform people’s understanding of scripture and tradition was also shared by the Rev. Mariann Budde of Minneapolis. When she was called to her first parish, Trinity Church in Toledo, Ohio, in 1988 the members had never experienced a woman priest. Some were confused and stayed away, but after several months they came back and told her they believed she was called to the ministry. The same could hold true for Robinson, she said.



It is not the Episcopal Church that is abandoning the historic catholic and apostolic faith, argued the Rev. Howard Anderson of Minnesota. In keeping with its 20/20 mission, the Episcopal Church is at a place where it could spread its doors wide open to welcome all people into its ministry, he said, and the confirmation of Robinson would be one sign of that.



The Episcopal Church, unlike the Roman Catholic Church, is known for its unique charism of inclusivity, he said. “We ordain women. We know the primary sacrament is baptism, not ordination.” The committee needs to think hard about this charism, he said, “and decide whether we will be the last catholics — big ‘c’ or little ‘c’ — or whether we will be watered down Roman Catholics trying to defend some moral like the Pharisees, or dressed up Presbyterians.”



Issue moves to deputies, bishops



At the end of the testimony the committee withdrew to an adjacent room for a closed-door discussion lasting 15 minutes. In her report on the committee’s decision, Keil-Kuhr did not indicate whether the committee’s vote was unanimous, saying only that it was taken by secret ballot. She also reminded their action is not a final decision. It will be up to both houses to approve the consent, she said.



The plan, confirmed at this morning’s news briefing, is for the resolution to be placed on the House of Deputies' daily legislative calendar for Sunday afternoon. If adopted there, the measure goes to the House of Bishops for action, possibly as early as the Monday morning legislative session.



In his remarks following the committees vote, Bishop Chester Talton, Los Angeles, bishops chair, said the six bishops on the committee found the hearing to be fair and the groundwork laid for a full discussion in the House of Bishops.



With 106 bishops with jurisdiction in the church, the consent may require up to 54 affirmative votes to pass. In the consent votes on two other bishops-elect yesterday, the votes totaled 99 and 102 in the house. The bishops customarily have voted after the consent to seat the new bishops and give them voice during the sessions.

---

gc2003.episcopalchurch.or...=undefined

Edited by: Gatito Grande at: 8/1/03 10:36 pm

[BBOvenGuy]

Gene Robinson has made it through the second of three votes needed to confirm his election as bishop of New Hampshire. The vote in the House of Deputies was 128 delegations voting yes, 63 voting no and 25 unable to reach a consensus on how to vote.



The case now goes to the House of Bishops for a final vote tomorrow.

"The first task of anyone, lest you get canceled, is to entertain people, because they ain't there for message." - Dick Wolf

[Gatito Grande]

I should have figured something like this would happen---while I understand that every allegation of harrassment or abuse has to be investigated, I think this story stinks to high heaven.

Quote:

---

Episcopalians delay vote on gay bishop candidate



E-mail from Vermont man alleges inappropriate touching



Monday, August 4, 2003 Posted: 5:43 PM EDT (2143 GMT)

MINNEAPOLIS, Minnesota (CNN) -- The vote on whether to approve the Rev. Gene Robinson as the Episcopal Church's first openly gay bishop was postponed Monday afternoon because of 11th-hour allegations of inappropriate conduct.



"Questions have been raised and brought to my attention regarding the bishop-elect of the Diocese of New Hampshire," said Presiding Bishop Frank T. Griswold, leader of the Episcopal Church USA, in a statement given to reporters.



"The Standing Committee and bishop of New Hampshire, together with the bishop-elect, Canon Robinson, have asked that a thorough investigation be undertaken before we proceed with seeking the consent of the bishops with jurisdiction," Griswold said.



"The investigation will be overseen by the bishop of Western Massachusetts, the Right Rev. Gordon P. Scruton. I will advise the bishops with jurisdiction as to when we might proceed."



Discussions leading to the vote in the House of Bishops were to have begun at 2:30 p.m. [3:30 p.m. EDT]. The vote is the final step on the road to the consecration of a bishop.



The delay was called after allegations of inappropriate conduct were leveled against Robinson. One has to do with an e-mail message received Sunday night from a man in Manchester, Vermont, accusing Robinson of having touched him inappropriately a few years ago at a church convocation. The man's e-mail asked the church to look into his allegation, church officials said.



The e-mail was sent from David Lewis, a church member, to Bishop Thomas Ely of Vermont, Ely said.



"My personal experience of him is that he ... does not maintain appropriate boundaries with men," the e-mail said. "I believe this is an alarming weakness of character that alone makes Gene unsuitable for the office of bishop.



"When I first encountered Gene at a ... convocation a couple of years ago he put his hands on me inappropriately every time I engaged him in conversation. NO GAY MAN HAS EVER BEHAVED TOWARDS ME THIS WAY [capitals in original] -- and I have had over 25 years of associations with gay male colleagues in the Boston, New York, Los Angeles, and San Diego show business communities.



"If I were a straight woman reporting heterosexual harassment by a straight male priest, would you hesitate to take the matter seriously? Well, I am a straight man reporting homosexual harassment by a gay male priest from another diocese."



CNN was not able to reach Lewis. Ely said he had spoken with the man and confirmed that he wrote the e-mail.



No immediate response was available from Robinson.



The second allegation contends that a Web site Robinson founded several years ago that counsels gay and lesbian youths contains a link to a Web site with erotic photographs, the church officials said.



Robinson previously told CNN he has had no connection to the Web site for several years and was not aware of any link it might have had to any such outside site.

---

Edited, from www.cnn.com/2003/US/08/04...index.html



Behold the putrid lameness: the person making the allegation is not a child (and wasn't when said "incidents" occurred). Robinson was elected almost 3 months ago, and this just comes up now? Before the last chance the 'phobes have to stop his confirmation? Puh-leez. Even if the the story is true, it sounds more like the guy never encountered a pastorally touchy-feely priest before (like maybe the full-bodied hug of a gay man made him freak?). Note the phrases "convocation" and "every time I engaged him in conversation": doesn't this suggest that all this happened in public? And that no one else present saw a problem w/ it? And what's w/ the "does not maintain appropriate boundaries with men" (plural)? Does this guy know about Robinson's encounters w/ other (unwilling) men, or doesn't he?



(And the pornography charge is even weaker: like no one before ever posted a link that ended up somewhere unexpected?)



This is what GG's Smell Test reads: the 'phobes were unable to win the debate by their "arts of persuasion" , or even their threats of schism, so they resort to character-smearing sh*t.



GG If I had any lingering angst about our 'phobic brethren leaving us, it is rapidly disappearing. As Buffy once said "Let the screendoor hit you in the ass on the way out" Out





ETA: Here's a little more on the story:

Quote:

---

Episcopalian Vote on Gay Bishop Postponed



By Sarah Tippit



MINNEAPOLIS (Reuters) - Episcopal bishops postponed a vote at the last minute on Monday on the church's first openly gay bishop to investigate charges of sexual misconduct.



"We have two concerns: one, his relationship to the Web site of Outright.org, and two, an e-mail accusation of inappropriate conduct circulated to a group of bishops," New Hampshire Bishop Douglas Theuner told his fellow bishops after the vote was called off.



"We have full confidence in the presiding bishops' commitment to fully investigate these matters," Theuner said in reference to the Rev. Gene Robinson, who was set to succeed him as Bishop of New Hampshire.



It was not clear if bishops would take up the issue of Robinson's installation -- which threatens to trigger a schism in the 77-million-member global Anglican community -- before the end of the church's convention on Friday.



"Questions have been raised and brought to my attention regarding the bishop-elect of the diocese of New Hampshire," prompting the investigation, the presiding bishop, Rev. Frank Griswold, said in a curt statement.



The statement, issued just two hours before the scheduled vote, said Robinson supported the investigation. A highly visible figure during the church's convention over the past week, Robinson was not available to comment.



Church officials gave reporters copies of a recent e-mail sent to bishops by a man identified as David Lewis of Manchester, Vermont, claiming that Robinson touched him improperly "a couple of years ago" and calling him a "grab-assing skirt-chaser."



"My personal experience with him is he does not maintain appropriate boundaries with men. I believe this is an alarming weakness of character that alone makes Gene unsuitable for the office of bishop," the note, dated Sunday, said.



QUESTIONS ABOUT WEB SITE LINKS



A Robinson supporter, Michael Hopkins, head of a gay and lesbian church group, said he questioned the timing of the accusations and said questions about Robinson's fitness had been answered before his June election to head the diocese.



"It's frustrating and disappointing," Hopkins said.



The church will also look into a Web site for Outright, a group Robinson co-founded to help gay teens, that both his supporters and opponents say recently had links to pornographic Web sites.



A check of the Web site on Monday, outright.org, revealed no links. A Robinson supporter, Rev. Susan Russell, said the links showed up six months ago without Robinson's knowledge and had been removed.



Conservative church member David Anderson said Robinson should have been aware of the links.

---

story.news.yahoo.com/news...iscopal_dc



A "grab-assing skirt-chaser"??? A highly-unusual description of a gay man, dontcha think? (Was the accuser in drag at the time? not that this is really funny)



Here's a link to a statement by the owner of the website in question:



www.integrityusa.org/gc20...tright.htm



(This charge is utterly -worthy. The only thing notable is the readiness of a 'phobe to jump on it in a desperate ploy to stop the Convention---to say nothing of the Holy Spirit!---from confirming Robinson)

Edited by: Gatito Grande at: 8/4/03 7:11 pm

[BBOvenGuy]

Anyone with half a brain can see this for the desperation ploy it is. They'll do a proper investigation just for the books and then the confirmation will go on.



Besides, whatever happens with Gene Robinson won't affect the plan to vote on authorizing the blessing of same-sex unions, which is also something people are saying will cause a schism.



In other words, this is just an annoying bump in the road. Nothing more.

"The first task of anyone, lest you get canceled, is to entertain people, because they ain't there for message." - Dick Wolf

Edited by: BBOvenGuy  at: 8/4/03 7:06 pm