I'm not quite sure why I think the ongoing travails between the increasingly reactionary Anglican Communion vs. the (predominantly) inclusive-leaning U.S. Episcopal Church are of so much importance. But, as Theo Hobson blogs, the struggle between inclusiveness and naked bigotry seems to encapsulate the ongoing tension between corrupt religious institutions and the essential Gospel message. He puts it nicely:
An institution that discriminates against homosexuals is without moral credibility-and moral credibility is rather important in religion. Furthermore, it contravenes the spirit of Jesus's teaching. His commandment "Judge not" could almost have been invented for the problem of homosexuality, which most straight people find challenging on some level, but must learn not to condemn. Tolerance seems the only moral response, and a rule against gay priests obviously falls short of tolerance. It institutionalises prejudice....
In my opinion, the gay crisis shakes the foundations of ecclesiology. Organised religion has always been authoritarian, in calling certain moral rules God's will, in saying that moral and doctrinal orthodoxy must be upheld. As I see it, Christianity rejects this; it dispenses with the moral "law". It claims, scandalously, that God wills a new freedom-from "holy morality", from the bossy legalism inherent in religious institutionalism.
I agree, which is why I'm appalled by those who would turn their backs on the Gospel of Love for the sake maintaining the "unity" of the Anglican Communion, at any cost.
5 Comments for “Anglicanism’s Moment of Truth”
posted by Ashpenaz on
I left the Roman Catholic church for the Episcopal Church because I thought the Episcopal Church would be more supportive of my decision to be and out, self-accepting gay. I thought it would be a place to help me integrate my faith with my sexuality. It hasn’t turned out to be that easy. There are many supportive people, but there are many conservatives. My goal is to remain in the Church and explain my sexuality and my values and my desire to live in a lifelong, sexually exclusive relationship blessed by God in the presence of my family, friends, and congregations. Most of my fellow parishioners have no idea that any gay, anywhere would want to do that. I’m always having to break through stereotypes created by gays who think their hedonistic values are the only ones gays should have. Being an out gay man in a rural, Episcopalian church is sometimes a struggle, but there is more support than I expected, and I think I’m doing a lot for other gays who want to live with small town, tradional values.
One thing I point out to people–I believe Jesus welcomed gays into the Kingdom when He welcomed eunuchs. People often read what Jesus said about marriage as proof marriage is man/woman. They never seem to go on to the next part where Jesus talks about those who were born eunuchs, or, as correctly translated, born without the capacity for traditional marriage. I don’t think anyone at this time thought of homosexuality as an inborn, biological orientation–I think they realized that some men just weren’t interested in traditional marriage for whatever reason and called them “eunuchs.” There is no evidence that eunuchs were celibate or castrated–they were simply men who showed no inclination toward heterosexuality. Here’s a link for more information:
http://www.gaychristian101.com/Same-Sex-Attracted-Eunuchs.html
I try to use this, and the story of the Centurion and his beloved slave, as images which show Jesus weloming gays. Many are open to the idea; many obviously aren’t. I think that today, we try to change Nebraska, tomorrow, Nigeria. One step at a time.
posted by bls on
Ashpenaz, the position the Episcopal Church takes on homosexual partnerships is the very epitome of “traditional.” Here it is, in the form of Resolution 2003-C051 of General Convention 2003, Point 4: “That we reaffirm Resolution D039 of the 73rd General Convention (2000), that “We expect such relationships will be characterized by fidelity, monogamy, mutual affection and respect, careful, honest communication, and the holy love which enables those in such relationships to see in each other the image of God,” and that such relationships exist throughout the church.”
IOW, all you need to do, to persuade your fellow parishioners about “gay traditional values” is point to the Church’s own understanding of what same-sex relationships should be about. Why are you so worried about what gay people thousands of miles away do?
Steven, you are right about “Unity at any cost” – but I know very few who argue that. Trying to keep as many Anglicans all over the world as possible in the conversation could be important if we want to have some influence in regards to this issue in the future – but I don’t think there are many who think this should be “at any cost.” Life for gay people in Nigeria is orders of magnitude worse than it is in our part of the world, and for that reason alone I think it’s worth it to keep talking. Anyway, there will always be anti-gay prejudice; it’s not going to be stamped out tomorrow or ever.
posted by Brian Miller on
Anglicanism, like most other organized religions, is a multinational corporation that profits off of its membership.
Right now, they’re making the gamble that their backwards third-world base is a “growth opportunity,” and they’re willing to sacrifice their tiny and shrinking (yet wealthy) North American branch to go for the growth.
The sooner their members dispense with the idea that “morality” and “values” have anything to do with it, the sooner they can wake up and start claiming control of their own identity — rather than preserving “unity” with an institution that wants nothing to do with them (except gaining access to their wallets).
posted by bls on
Who’s “they,” Brian? Who’s in charge of this “multinational corporation”? Who benefits from this corporate “gamble”? As a matter of fact, it’s the “backwards third-world base” (or, rather, certain particular archbishops) that wants the Episcopal Church kicked out of the Anglican Communion; nobody else is pushing for it.
But there’s no way to do this, since there aren’t any laws or rules that control the Anglican Communion, which barely exists. Many people have called it “more of a mood than an organization.” The Archbishop of Canterbury has basically no power outside of Canterbury. He’s not a Pope, and neither is anybody else.
And you seem to be talking about “them” in two different ways: one “them” is the group that wants TEC kicked out; the other “them” is TEC and other gay-friendly churches in the Communion. So to whom are you referring? Please clarify.
What’s happening here is a simple clash of cultures, along with a splash of anti-Americanism, a hefty serving of American conservative Episcopal resentment at having chafed under liberal rule for 40 years, plus an attempt to create that more centralized governance that at the moment doesn’t exist. But Anglicanism has always been a marriage of convenience, between parties who don’t agree on many issues – something that’s worth preserving in this polarized world, if you ask me. If this particular version of it fails, somebody will start it up again.
Anyway, all religion concerns itself with “morality” and “values,” I would have thought it would have gone without saying.
posted by North Dallas Thirty on
I would imagine the problem here is because the Anglican Communion knows what gays and lesbians want to do about Christianity.
…the bible and the Koran are an incitement to violence which is against the law in most civilized countries. The only reason publishers of both aren’t prosecuted is the legal system refuses to follow its own clear cut laws on incitement and do so…..Because Christians and muslims have undue influence they’ve been excepted from the law that applies to everyone else. The bible and the Koran contain hate speech and are in violzation of many western nations’ laws but prosecutors don’t have the guts to do the right thing and prosecute.
For US Anglicans, their diversity quotas are more important than the Bible is, and they are fully willing to accept gays and lesbians who believe what was expressed above.