The Independent News Source
Twitter - Facebook - Email Alerts - RSS
Episcopalians forge uncertain future
Bold step for inclusion of gays and lesbians sets benchmark for all churches
Aug. 14, 2009
(M Scott)
Printer-friendly version
Send to friend
PDF versionAnalysis
The Episcopal General Convention last month bit the bullet. By a two-thirds majority, it officially admitted gays and lesbians to the office of bishop and approved the blessing of same-sex couples. Was it the wave of the future or beginning of the end?
Those who forecast disaster say the 2 million-member Episcopal church, now a tenuous part of the worldwide Anglican Communion because of its action, has doomed itself by condoning homosexuality. Many of these critics have already bolted the church for schismatic alternatives, such as the Anglican Church of North America. They claim the “orthodox” high ground, denouncing the practice of homosexuality as contrary to God’s sexual ethics. To go that route, many of the resistors say, is to imperil salvation.
One of the opponents’ staunchest defenders, David Virtue, declared in a recent VirtueOnline Web site posting, “The orthodox will never give ground on that if the church survives 1,000 years.” The newly named archbishop of the American breakaway group, Robert Duncan, said there had been “a new reformation in the Christian West.” The underlying message was that July’s General Convention would eventually mark the grave of a heresy.
Various on-the-scene reports made clear that the convention reached its landmark decision firmly but not triumphantly. The overwhelming final votes by bishops and deputies were greeted by flat acceptance of an outcome that was all but inevitable, rather than a victory celebration.
Decades of study, talk and dispute had preceded it, of course. Episcopalians were in the vanguard of reexamining the morality of homosexuality itself; biblical scholars, theologians and scientists raised serious doubts about Christianity’s insistence that same-sex love was divinely condemned. Minds changed, acceptance grew and, of course, a small but steady flow of dismayed conservatives left the church.
The issue of gays in the Episcopal clergy has been on the front burner of the denomination since 1991. At that year’s convention, discussion of gay ordination grew so heated that the presiding bishop, Edmund Browning, ordered six closed-door sessions to hash things out.
As open homosexuals were accepted into the priesthood, the question realistically was when, not whether, to accept gay bishops. The first was V. Gene Robinson, endorsed by the 2006 convention as the bishop of New Hampshire, with the proviso that such consecrations should be put on hold to satisfy the traditional elements here and abroad.
Last month’s scrapping of that restriction came, therefore, after lots and lots of haggling, passion, sober study and deliberation. After the vote, some delegates were quoted as less than ecstatic, but realistic. They saw the decision as an accurate marker of the mind of the church and accepted it as such. Reason rather than radicalism emerged as the justification. Things had found their way over the years and it appeared to sufficient numbers to be God’s will, whether or not it made delegates jump for joy. This moment had arrived, after all, at tremendous cost in defections from the church, lost income and the agony of conflict.
Clearly, this is new ground. The Episcopalians, aristocrats of American church life, have advanced the ball to a place no other mainstream church has gone. Not only does it further the cause of gays and lesbians, it sets a benchmark for all churches, even Catholicism, which officially appears at the farthest remove from reform on this front.
Though the Episcopal church’s action looks precipitous, it is better seen as a product of an organic process that has grown through most churches that have engaged the issue of homosexuality in recent decades. All of them had a hand in prompting the Episcopal boldness, whether they acknowledge it or not, in part because the cause crossed over from society. The morality of same-sex relationships and the place of gays and lesbians in leadership have been broached by nearly every party to the wider ecumenical conversation, whatever the results of those investigations have been. Gay and lesbian advocacy and caucus groups have become significant players in those denominations. Though their accomplishments have been modest, they have established a broad, largely informal coalition that has represented a point of view previously unknown in those churches and through them a consensus has built that helped sustain Episcopalian advocates of change.
Meanwhile, biologists and behavioral scientists have added heft to the arguments for acceptance, advancing evidence that homosexuality is a naturally occurring form of conduct.
Negative examples also appear to have played a part. United Methodist and Presbyterian strictures against gay clergy, Roman Catholic denunciation of homosexuality as “intrinsically disordered,” and sordid exposures of repressed gay preachers have struck more Christians as illogical and shortsighted.
The Episcopal church, therefore, didn’t act alone but took a bold step nonetheless. In the long history of church battles, this is the first caused by sex itself. A ton of other issues have triggered fights, from the nature of the Trinity to the authority of the Bible to women in the clergy (which for Episcopalians fomented a similar clash), but the division over homosexuality has broken new ground. If the dissenters are right, the convention broke with tradition and will wither on the vine. If the proponents of the new teaching are right, they will prosper spiritually by having responded to a divine mandate.
Everyone wants to be on God’s side on such matter; everyone might be to some extent or other. The test case here is an imperative that stemmed from the Enlightenment: egalitarianism. The forces have lined up against each other over what the limits of that might be. The movement has sparked the acknowledgment of human rights for African Americans, women and sexual minorities, among others. It inspired the Declaration of Independence’s claim that “all men are created equal,” a promise not yet fulfilled. Some believe these concepts are embedded in scripture and Christian teaching. Assuming they are, institutional Christianity did little to translate them into movements to end slavery, anti-Semitism and other gross human rights abuses. Those movements largely came to the church from the outside.
A corollary to egalitarianism provided the key to the Episcopal outcome: the representative, electoral process that included laity, priests and bishops. The church was, in that sense, a democracy.
The wider cause of human rights has led a growing number of gays and lesbians to seek full inclusion in the churches as persons of equal standing. The Episcopal church has vowed to pursue that promise in a new way -- their willingness may encourage others to follow suit. If enthusiasts are right, it’s the providential wave of the future. For many conservatives, it’s a frightening illusion.
Ken Briggs, author of Double Crossed: Uncovering the Catholic Church’s Betrayal of American Nuns and The Power of Forgiveness: Based on a Film by Martin Doblmeier, reported on religion for Newsday and The New York Times.
Mr. Briggs accurately and
Mr. Briggs accurately and succinctly describes a future many of NCR's readers fervently wish for, and actively work for, in American Roman Catholicism.
I, for one, say no.
Ken Briggs, author of Double
Ken Briggs, author of Double Crossed: Uncovering the Catholic Church’s Betrayal of American Nuns and The Power of Forgiveness: Based on a Film by Martin Doblmeier, reported on religion for Newsday and The New York Times.
...now there's an author who's sure to be fair and balanced...LOL.
He states this as a matter of fact...
"Meanwhile, biologists and behavioral scientists have added heft to the arguments for acceptance, advancing evidence that homosexuality is a naturally occurring form of conduct."
...well, DUH....of course it's a naturally occurring form of conduct, it's a behavior that occurs in nature. So is fornication, murder, prevarication, etc. etc. so on and do forth. It's also been defined as morally wrong by the Christian church for 2000 years.
Congratulations and God bless
Congratulations and God bless this inclusive faith community! I pray that Roman Catholics may have the loving hearts needed to follow your courageous example.
I see the Episcopal Church as
I see the Episcopal Church as a prophetic witness. Others will see just the opposite. I have come to the point where I don't think a schism is always bad, perhaps it is best. There will always be areas of disagreements, we need to find a way to live with these differences in a way that reflects the love of neighbor that scripture dictates. Some will quote the condemning the sin, but not the sinner as justification for repression of a Gay lifestyle. But, I believe that the Holy Spirit moves in ways that we cannot know and will often give credence to those whom we may see as sinners. God's love is greater and broader than we can imagine. I think Jesus's life reflects that. For me, it is this love which makes Christianity so appealing. I know that there will be those who disagree with me,I have acepted that. Many of us are seperated by this issue, there really is no way around that. This saddens me, but I find great comfort that, thru Christ, we remain united none-the-less.
As I grow even older, I begin
As I grow even older, I begin to realize that to be in a Church in which all are not welcome is that sin Simone Weil warned of. Simone (a saint by any count) believed in Christ's divinity, but refused baptism because her fellow Jews would not be welcome to the table. For me, the answer is as complex as it is pointed. The Church, which increasingly reveres its homosexual members,though in the Roman Catholic tradition requires they attempt to adhere to a life of sexual abstinence. Yet, in the Episcopal and other denominations, they are welcome with no stipulations set on their same-sex relationships, which sometimes includes marriage and the rearing of children. For any parish to welcome gays and straights alike is certainly a giant step forward in the struggle for a rekindled humanity.
Given that the true meaning of a universal Church appears to keynote a communion of saints in which we all are, the living and the dead, in all and of each other. The CHURCH, in what some see as in its mysterious ways stretches forward, even if only by inches, to a greater inclusivity.
In my dotage, I see the Church that manifestation (both seen and unseen) as needing to incline itself to ALL. What eventual form that inclusiveness will take rests with, and transcends, each person's vision and imagination. In my own reveries, redemption reawakens the hearts of the all: people considered "in the norm," those seen as psychotic, all shades of colors and ethnicities, as well as those who proclaim a prescribed "belief" and those who have other divinations or behold other critical conclusions. In order to be all-embracing, catholocism needs every seed.
I have come to feel as comfortable in an Episcopal or Lutheran Church as I do in the Roman Catholic parish that I attend. Wheresoever a spirit of compassion and sonorousness prevails, that place is holy. As a Roman Catholic, I am also Hindu, Moslem, Jew, Buddhist - skeptic and believer. This is in the spirit of Gandhi who, in his autobiography proclaimed that being one-in-all expressed universality. When I recite the Apostle's Creed, I proclaim a belief in a catholic church, For me this means that I must look beyond the provincialism of any single denomination and perhaps, beyond its current governance. It matters most to me that institutionalized Christianity accepts people for who they are. At the moment, the current emphasis on responding to the needs of women and married men who are/or are called to ordination and to gay men and women looking for full acceptance in worshipping community.
this is exactly the type of
this is exactly the type of moral relativism infecting the world today.
The hypocrisy of the far
The hypocrisy of the far right wing mind when it comes to women and gay people is proving to be helpful for the inclusion of people of all sexual orientations. The far right wing fundamentalist argument against this inclusion and equal treatment of these brothers and sisters in Christ, (as well as women in general, when it comes to equal status regarding ordination to the priesthood and office of bishop) comes across as hateful, violent and phony. Everything Christ stands for regarding the way we treat each other is NOT reflected in the narrow, puritanical and immature thinking of the far right. People of good will have had enough of this hatred. Yes, the Episcopal Church is leading the way as Ken Briggs has so beautifully written in this article and yes, for many if not most conservatives, it frightens them to think gay people and women might be treated as equals. They are on the losing side of the future regarding the issue of human sexuality and equal treatment of all people male and female in the Catholic Church. History will not judge them well. Their narrow minds and urge to devalue others works against them.
Standing off on the side
Standing off on the side lines, being neither Episcopalian nor Lutheran, but rather a practicing R.Catholic after 35 years in a religious order, 25 years officiating as an ordained priest and now 28 years of happy life in an ecclesiatically legitimate mariage graced with two wonderful daughters, meanwhile living in the third world since 54 years ago, I make bold to throw in my two cents worth of opinion. I see the hand writting on the wall also for the R.Catholic Church, so I dare direct my opinion neither to Episcopalians, Lutherans nor R.Catholics, but rather to “Fellow Christians.”
Let’s go back to the year 1943. Those were the days of the Second World War, when Pope Pius XII, surely not historically recognized as a liberal pontiff, chose the feast of St. Jerome, Sep. 30 patron saint of biblical scholars, to publish his encyclical letter “Divini Afflante Spiritu” encouraging Catholic biblical scholars to use all the means that modern scientific “investigation in the domain of archaeology or history or philology have made available for the solution of new questions.” In my humble opinion this is when the Pope, as he wrote, “Divini afflante spiritu” [“breathed upon by the holy spirit”] really opened up Pandora’s box, something I doubt very much that Pius ever dreamed of doing. Nevertheless de facto he did it. The past 66 years of modern biblical studies tend to throw many modern Christians into a dither.
Today scholars recognize the Bible as extremely limited temporaly and culturaly. Trying to find in the Bible a basis for history, science, morality, politics, human rights, world planning, respect for our planet earth, etc., etc. is a quixotic adventure. Even our “Christ of Faith” is loaded down with the cross of 2.000 years of cultural and temporal barnacles, still limited by archaic language and philosofical adquisitions struggling to find meaning for our modern world.
As Jesus prayed to his Daddy, “abbá-Father”, and taught us: “OUR Father ...THY KINGDOM COME” we find out who we are before God and what’s our purpose in life as followers of Jesus of Nazareth. Since we are all (Chinese, Indians, United State’ers of North America, Canadians, Africans, Brazilians, Esquimos, Argentenians, Tutsis, Aymayras, Quetchuas, and hundreds of more nations and cultures) each and every human person, we are also made to the “image of God”, no lines are drawn between genders, life styles and “who’s who”. The very idea that there might be an absolute “God’s sexual ethics” results rather far fetched. The so called Christian Religion today (a little less that 25% of the world population) has had roughly 2,000 years trying to convince the world of the correctness of its moral vision, and it seems as though it still has a long road ahead.
The second part of the prayer that Jesus left with us is the reason for his life and death and for the lives of those of us who believe that he is still alive among us. “Thy kingdom come.”
According to Jesus this means loving the excluded persons, the poor, the abandoned, the hungry, those suffering from abuse and injustice, the marginal “slobs”, etc. etc.
As a friend of mine wrote:
What should we think about the twenty centuries of christianity? One gets the tremendous temptation to speak about a failure, about an inmense forgetfullness of the most essencial, not so much on a personal but rather on a colective level. The world has become organized against the poor and the church has not denonced it -- worse still, much too often it has even gotten around to blessing it.
We christians have thought it more important to love God than to love the poor. And that is false.
We have considered it more necessary and more urgent to build great houses for God than to build small houses for the poor. And that is false.
We have convinced ourselves that it was more important to make known the passion and suffering of Christ than to make known the sufferings of our fellow human beings. And that is false.
So, the upshot is: Let’s get on with the essencial, working for that “other possible world” which Jesus called the kingdom of his Daddiy “abbá Father”. The details of customs, times, places and cultures is not really of the essence.
Peace fellow Christians,
Justiniano de Managua
Maybe the RCC should do the
Maybe the RCC should do the same, there is already a lot gay priests and lesbian nuns already, they just live closeted lives.
Post new comment